so help me answer those questions. >> sure. >> i think, mr. beck, you are coming back to both the infrastructure committee with some housing reports. certainly in our next w meetinas the board and commsi awell. >> yeah, no, definitely this will continue to be a hot topic r the next decade. i will incorporate a break down, a road map how we intend to accomplish as well as where we are with a funding update. >> thank you. >> i'm glad we are moving forward with housing development. i think we are making a big giant step in both the market rate and affordable housing in the planning that's going into it. we don't have all of the subsidy dollars yet for all of the affordable units but we are working towards that. i know that the non-profit groups are also looking at savings through modular technology and production. so i ththey are working hard on it. >> yeah, mo in particular has been doing a lot of work. looking at the regulatory and cost framework the city imposes on projects as a way of to make sure the city is not making, putting additional hurdles

. >> thank you very much, mr. beck. it's great we have some streets named after artists and architects. i think that's terrific. are there any questions by the board? are there any questions from the public? hearing none. next item, please. >> item 9, thrr resident consultation update. >> thank you, directors. to touch a little on the advisory services but also the planning for homeownership and premarketing as well as planning for our continuing discussion about planning for our two first affordable housing projects. the directors had requested that we keep a log of our outreach to residents. it's included in your binder but also this is just our log of our public meetings and workshops as well as email and direct correspondence with households, keeping it as part of our record. at this point, a.r.w.s. has met with 170 of our 202 households, 84%. again as we have discussed before, there's great interest in homeownership opportunities for more than 50% of those households. with some interest in -- option. the team is co

yes, mr. beck? >> i just wanted to suggest one change to the resolution. page 4, further resolve clause. line 2 currently picks up from prior line, authorizing the san francisco arts commission director of cultural affairs to enter into agreements with selected artists for conceptual design and then further resolve. wanted to suggest that it says enter into agreements small a, with recommended artists for revised design proposals for the waterfront plaza and building one plaza and for conceptual design, sorry, for design, fabrication, transportation and consultation for the yerba buena hilltop site. >> we could incorporate into the motion. i just want make sure, mr. beck, this is coming back to the steering committee? the arts steering committee before it goes forward? i'm talking about, not the resolution but the results of the conceptual design. >> oh, absolutely. the conceptual designs will go back to both the selection committee for their input as well as the steering committee. >> the steering committee. >> i think the selection committee has done the

. >> president tsen: thank you very much, mr. beck, for that report. there was an existing community at treasure island before the dda was signed and before the master plan. so we do have a policy or want to make sure they will be helped, they will get the opportunity, sh the choose, it is their choice, as the new housing is being built at levels of affordability, depending on their incomes. so i think that it's excellent that you've taken a great deal of care for doing this process and makin sure that existing tenants on the island know what that process is and that they are educated about the next step. so i really appreciate this report. mr. dunlop? >> director dunlop: thank you. as a resident of the island, i would just like to testify to arws', their care, their courtesy, their professionally and i know there were residents that were difficult to get ahold of, but they kept at it and they finally got me. and my experience has been just, i think you know, the staff found the right fit forot the island and our needs for the future. so i just wanted

i have a question of mr. beck. what next are the steps? when will it be coming back to the board? and will it go to b.c.d.c. before or after? >> we are in the process of reviewing the original lease with t.i.e. and making changes reflecting the change and scope of the marina. we anticipate bringing that back to the board of supervisors before it goes to b.c.d.c. >> president fei tsen: okay, great. thank you very much. anybody else? hearing none, next item, please. >> item three, report by treasure island director. >> thank you, directors. i was going to lead with the marina discussion but we just touched on that through public comment. the may treasure fest flee market ontreasure island drew big crowds being a holiday weekend. but the traffic was well managed and there weren't siant ictraffic impacts despite the many detours and roadway closures we have on the island. last week, last friday, deloitte consulting hosted a stewardship day on y.b.i. working with peter summerville from our staff and peter brastow and other members of the department of environment. on the night of june

yes, mr. beck? >> i just wanted to clarify a comment i made in response to director lai's question as it relates to tetra tech's work at treasure island, when i said there were no concerns raised or identified, i'm eaking by dtsc, navy and the oversight division. there have been some advocates who have raised concerns, advocates that have been involved at hunters point have questioned whether tetra tech's island and other locations means that there could be a wider spread problem. so we're acknowledging that question has been raised in the press and the community. and i know there is a hearing scheduled at the board of supervisors, i believe it's land use next week, on the issues at hunters point. so we'll continue to mon they are that as we go forward. >> president tsen: i whie have to have confidence in the regulatory agencies that are overseeing the testing, so it would be helpful for us to understand what the issues are. we look forward to that memo from you. thank you. ok. so, next item, please

mr. franklin: i don't know that it would, your honor. you know, the abood case, the keller case, beck, ellis, all of them justice kennedy: then -- then it seems -- then it seems to me your argument doesn't have much weight. mr. franklin: well, first of all, we don't know what percentage of the union's activities are wrapped up with grievances. if you -- you know, we don't have a record here. we're on a motion to dismiss. but if you look at publicly available hudson notices that do break out categories of chargeable expenses in this way, which ours in the record doesn't happen to do, you'll find that in many cases, especially in the out-years when the cba is not being renegotiated, charges for field representatives -- those are the people in -- day in and day out who are doing workplace grievance work, advising employees, et cetera -- can be three times, six times, seven times as much on the chargeable expenses line than the line for collective bargaining. so to decide this case in an evidentiary vacuum on the basis of assumptions about how that speech breaks down or how those expenses

beck institute or jewish american historical society. they started thinking about how to present this story. it was incredibly difficult for survivors in these communities to agree what that story was. mr. rubenstein: so if somebody ,anted to go to their museum you don't think they have to go to washington? mr. glickman: i think you have a different experience in these institutions. washington sets out to tell a different story than we do. from us, you are looking at the perspective of teaching holocaust education from individual narratives. mr. rubenstein: what is your budget now? mr. glickman: about $15 million. mr. rubenstein: do you get that from ticket sales, philanthropy, food sales? mr. glickman: not quite yet. mr. rubenstein: are you looking for more donors? mr. glickman: no, we are looking for donors. i am here after the program if anybody is interested. >> [laughter] mr. glickman: we are wholly dependent on philanthropy. we have been quite fortunate that the generosity of the new york community and elsewhere has jumped in to support this institution. philanthropy will continue to be a major source of our operation. mr. bunch: on mr. rubenstein: the so-called final solution, h

mr. patterson's exposer to him and certainly expressed in the president's own behavior and speeches. >> woodruff: is it possible to get people to think diferentl about politicians, ramesh? >> i think it will beck tr i think james patterson was getting at the institution of the job or the instuon of the presidency and our fixation on the personality and pageantri of the pncy. the presidency has gotten more and more powerful in american government and we depend much more than we used to on the professionalism and competence of the president fulfilling the job, but, at the same time, the cultural footprint's gotten biggish, too, and made us moreed interen all to have the drama of presidency. that's what presidents are rewarded these days for playing to. >> woodruff: speaking of presidents and drama and ramesh's point, president trump has kicked up a lot dust going into this g7 summit talking about trade as he was leaving the white house this morning, he said th.s. is essentially being taken to the cleaners by it's allies, by other members of the g7, and cited character andverse on how these other countries are imposing tariffs on the u.s. that are unfair. does he have a point? >> i think h he has