it was an honor to serve the commission and this commission for over 35 years. during the rest rise asian -- during the -- [indiscernible] mission bay, such key icons as a giant stadium,. [indiscernible] before that, i was there for 24 years in this commission. before that, i was a former general of the parking commission. it was 1988. i said okay, i will be year commissioner and he said i want you to chair that commission. i said don't appoint me chair of that and he said, why not, and i said, i cannot speak good english, so nobody is going to understand me. he said, bull shipped -- bullshit. [laughter] it was a really enterprising commission. thank you for the honor. >> thank you. i'm sure people understood you. >> please call your name -- please answer when i call your name. [roll call] mr. chair, the vote is four aye. >> mr. singh? [indiscernible] [laughter] >> thank you, members of the public for allowing us to do that. madam secretary, please announce the next item. >> the next order of business is agenda item five c., update on the california department o

the commissions rationale, mr. heng is precluded from ever challenging, or trying to have an extension like this in his terrace. if somebody were to purchase the property from mr. heng, they would be able to, does it make sense. that's why we think it is important for an analysis, whether that be conducted by the mission -- commission, to look at the merit of the project. i think it was included in the briefing materials. this right here is how circumstances have changed. this is the plague court. it poses a health and safety risk. he needs to be resolved. the reason mr. heng seems to have this terrace installed is to solve this water issue. >> thank you. counselor, you have time in rebuttal. what happened at the planning commission, this is an open hearing, whatever happened there has no bearing at the body. you should just present your case. >> i appreciate that. in light of the briefing -- >> thank you. we will now hear from mr. shan iger. >> welcome counselor. >> important policy issue here with respect to this

i can say for the staff at the commission, for the members who i've served with on the commission, both past and present, they're all genuine public servants. i don't think folks come in with an agenda. they may come in with a world view, a philosophical legal or otherwise, but i don't think they come in for-- with an agenda. i think they genuinely hope to do good. i know for me, i think what i am motivated by-- you know, there's a couple. i'm currently serving as chairman of the commission not by choice, but by circumstance. my predecessor, my dear friend and mentor, the late chairman kevin macintyre passed away, but he is really a role model, an example to me of what a public servant should be. he truly cared about the public interest and every day woke up wanting to do what was right by the public interest. and i think many of the ideas that we are currently addressing at the commission were things that he put into motion. and i think if we can execute on the vision that he laid out, that will not just secure his legacy. i think it will accrue to all of our benefits. because i think

commission meetings. discussion and action. >> this was president with commissioner julius. it took awhile to get on the calendar, but it is something we talked about. we have gone to the youth commission over the years for many real sin significant issue. they would come to us with issues as well. we had talked about perhaps giving them a voice here and bringing in issues to our attention that we may not be aware of. i also took into account some of our sitting commissioners and the city attorney. we talked about making changes. initially i wanted him apartment every meeting. we talked about starting off with one meeting. we changed it so they can nominate pay designated youth representative and they can decide if they want the same person or rotating person. it is important to be visible and to be avissible place and have access. i wouldn't mind sharing my microphone if that is an issue. i would like to read the resolution i have here. i would like to take the word draft off and it starts off whereas th

the planning commission. the planning commission's role is to evaluate whether or not this project is compliant with municipal ordinance, building rules and of course the residential design guidelines. [please stand by] [please stand by] alternatives of fuzz on the future for a terrace. this is not something he was precluded from doing. most importantly, if we are to follow their commissions logic here, if we reach an absurd result, under the commissions rationale, mr. heng is precluded from ever challenging, or trying to have an extension like this in his terrace. if somebody were to purchase the property from mr. heng, they would be able to, does it make sense. that's why we think it is important for an analysis, whether that be conducted by the mission -- commission, to look at the merit of the project. i think it was included in the briefing materials. this right here is how circumstances have changed. this is the plague court. it poses a health and safety risk. he needs to be resolved. the reason mr. hen

and everyone commission there, i was here, president brandon, commission kunalokis and commission katz, we had this discussion and it was tough. i can't see this putting this out to bid -- i mean, we have to own this. we signed off on it. i'm going to vote in favour because i agreed to do that. but to stop everything and then you want it back out to bid, i can't support that. we have to live with that and i hope we've learned something from this process. but i tell you where i'm at and if you're worried it's no good, you can't stand up to show who you are, if you support something, you need to show it then and i support it now. i agree with you, maybe the ordinance, skirting around this, so i will be voting support this. >> thank you, any other comments? >> i'm just curious, won't happen if we just to have more fumtime for discussion, won't happen if we don't vote today >> we're not doing anything illegal here, not about awarding a contract, so it is conforming. if it is illegal, i would not be voting for or in support of this. i think this is not necessarily deliberately si sir circum

those concerns were addressed with the commission. it was brief to the commission come at the time.didn't have information available at the time. not much has changed and we request you uphold the denial. if they want to go forward with a new project, they can reapply. [inaudible] >> the issue of the tenant situation is important and critical for a variety of reasons whether emotionally, or illegal. i want to put that aside for a moment, and go back to the issuance of the permit based on if this did not have the time issue, as part of it. what are the biggest issues in the issuance of this permit beyond that of the ten issue? i'm going to have him join my club, you're my resident rabbi on these issues, and quite often you come up with an opinion as to the conditions for a denial, one way or the other. the tenant issue aside, which is incredibly, and clearly was. [inaudible] what other building related issues here should we be considering which would be a condition for denial of this permit? >> the other main issue that the commission has was the density. three units would be allowed

i can see why they would want to be on the commission and would add a great deal of value for the commission. i strongly support them. i urge you to support them as well. thank you very much. >> good morning, supervisor ronen, mar and walton. my name is andrew sun. a privilege to speak with you today. i'm here to fully endorse and support the nomination of lydia sow, as one of the first chinese-american architects to ever serve on the historic preservation commission. she's demonstrated that she's fully qualified and experienced 378 she's demonstrated the fact that he's really engaged with our community. as an exceptional designer and architect. the presentation by heritage is appalling. there is no person that's more qualified, that's demonstrated her technical capacity to be involved with this commission and to give the board sensibilities that are necessary in san francisco. just because one isn't part of your special club, does not mean that you don't meet the qualifications. every one of you have known, as a woman, as an african-american, as a native american, when we apply for jobs in

the commission. two of which were picked up by the full board of supervisors and both of those passed through the full board unanimously. one of which is actually since becoming california state law. in addition to my current commission experience, the combination of my education, work and volunteer experience makes me precisely the type of san franciscan one wants on the animal welfare commission. i have a master's degree in applied ethics with an emphasis on animal rights and welfare. i was the director of communications and the program coordinator for the guardian campaign at indefensive animals. my responsibilities included attending countless animal control and welfare meetings in san francisco and berkeley, which gave me great insight as to how the commission operated and functioned. my efforts included introducing the guardian language that was codified in both san francisco and berkeley official city language. and is still in use today. my volunteer experience, however, that i'm most proud of

future commission meetings. commission president's report, and the commissioner's. >> i do not have a report at this time, do any commissioners have a report? >> yes, i would like to report that commissioner mazzucco and myself, this week, had the final 1421 workgroup meeting, it was beneficial. we received several brief, letters and memos from the working group and the community regarding the 1421 and the suggestions on that will guide both the police department, dpa on the commission. we are thankful for all of the hard work. we have taken it under submission. we will continue to work on it and hopefully have a finished product to present to the commission for a vote establishing procedures. it was a very, i think, great experience having a lot of individuals in the room that normally would not be in the room together and allowing them the opportunity to have conversations that would further everyone's interest in getting these documents out to the public, and getting these procedures nailed down. >> when you

>> no, not the commission. the filing responsibility is on the commissioner who did the recuse recusal. >> right. i'm thinking would there be some accountability that this person has recused him or herself and they filed this form. so should the actual department of the commission be notified? >> they would be aware of the actual recusal because it occurred -- that it occurred prior to the filing requirement. the filing requirement is a requirement imposed by the ethics commission. so i don't know that that would be something that they would be looking to ensure that it's -- because the responsibility is actually on the commissioner who recused themselves. but there is -- again, in the public environment, you know, a department could -- they wouldn't actually receive notice from this process, but if they wanted to check that it happened, they could do that. or implement another process where the commissioner had to bring a copy. but i think that would be a protocol that would have to be enforced at the commissi

and the name of the board of commission, i'm pickings on the planning commission today. then the work number and work email. and i'm just going to -- the recusal information is required in section 3, the date the recusal occurred, ten days eight, so that was august 6th. i believe this is date validated, so you'll be want to enter the date -- as you see here, it gives you a tool kit as to how the date should be entered. if i were to enter this incorrectly, it would tell me to do it again. agenda item -- >> would it give you an error message not within the time frame that you need to >> in this case it's a permit matter. explain the financial interest costs and the recusal. >> in this case i would just say that i have a 20% ownership in r.g. development. and again in this situation, it's a one-step process. the member who recuses himself or herself is also the filer and the signer. so that can all be done in one step. oh, excuse me, one more thing before i get to the signing. it's also required that the agenda be attached. so that's a required field. so you click here, upl

the federal energy commission, discuss u.s. energy market, policy, and climate change, and unfit hosted by the group resources for the future, this is an hour. (applause) >> just a preview, we will have a conversation and then towards the end of the hour we will open it up for questions and answers from the audience, so chairman eu grew up and kentucky, you served as a key adviser to senator mitch mcconnell, gave us a sense of how that background informs or doesn't inform you or approach more generally. >> thank you for having me and the opportunity, it's a pleasure to be here today, yes i did spend a good chunk of my youth and kentucky and also the opportunity to serve the senior center and party leader from kentuckian in the united states senate and sent mcconnell in terms of how that and firms my work at the commission, i can't quantify how much i learned from senator mcconnell just about in his work ethic and his discipline and his leadership style, his approach to governance, his approach to bipartisanship. and my working

now is not what the planning commission saw before, so i can't speak to what the planning commission might say on the revised project or with the additional information provided. but with the information that the commission had at the time of the hearing and the design of the project at the time, it's not one they could support so they denied the application. i reviewed the improvised plans with our staff architect. we noted a couple of issues. [please stand by] having this go back to the planning commission. for review, and hearing. i'm available for questions. >> it is interesting, i agree, it is denoble hearing, the project we are saying is not the project that the whole concept that we are upholding or denying a planning positions commission, it's a mute point anyway, because it's not the same project. if, let's say, we were hearing that project, and that was in fact, put in front of planning, i am conjecturing that we would have supported your position and we would said to the project sponsor, forget the variance can you adjust the deck? and the size and the scope. can you do th

the ethics commission is back in session. so we're going to go to agenda item number 11, discussion and possible action on monthly staff policy report, including the policy prioritization plan. mr. ford. >> thank you, chair, commissioners. i'm pat ford, senior policy analyst. for the benefit of our newest commissioner, this is the monthly report that i bring to the commission and about once a quarter in addition it contains the policy prioritization plan. it's a two-part thing and you'll see that roughly four times a year. we'll see the updates on the policy prioritization plan, which are the big-ticket items, usually legislation, program review type things. but the monthly update also contains information about other kinds of projects. if you look at page 3, i included a pie chart that gives a rough breakdown of what is done. typically it's two people, but for now it's one. you can see that policy projects are about a third of where the bandwidth is devoted, otherwise, there isn't general device to staff and members of the r

in fact, the commission's decision explicitly states, on the overhead here, "the commission found exceptional and extra ordinary circumstances with respect to the project sponsor, and the project use as means of dislodging existing tenants on a road control and hereby takes to be clear, there is no landlord tenant issue here. the applicant acted lawfully, under the rent ordinance, as was acknowledged by the commissioners. the former tenants received well over six figures, as far as a settlement, settlement agreements are not required to be reported or filed. even if there had been a landlord/tenant issue. the rental lord is the appropriate form to hear that issue, and to enforce the rent ordinance. planning commission is not to hand out punishments for. particularly where the conduct is most lawful and unrelated to the design of the project. moreover, state law requires that the project be approved. housing accountability act, 655.895 limits the city's discretion to deny permits for code compliant projects to provide housing, such as this project which adds two bedrooms. the city does not hav

it is much different than appeals to the entertainment commission or by way of entertainment commission decision to the board of appeals. it is handled administratively. you will see the pre-hearing statement we developed to support our citation and issuance of it as well as response to the appellant. we had the hearing last week. we are waiting on a decision from the controller. it is over a minor infraction of $100, but, you know, we will keep you appraised where that appeal process goes and whether or not we win. do you have any questions? okay. >> one comment on the previous item and just pointing out that in the executive directive from the mayor the actions are taken by the entertainment commission and staff. i just wanted to take some -- i want the entertainment commission taking credit for moving forward and laying the groundwork for the special events work being done. i am glad you are representing us in that process, and i hope it makes things easier for all of our applicants and people looking for permits. i am glad you are involved. >> as we all know, our department as well

commission's. commissioner robert, j jackson junior who served since 2018, commissioner jackson came to the commission from new york university school of law, the commissioner has stir who was also served on the commission since 2018. at george mason university. commissioner, served on the commission since september 2018 and who prior to joining the commission served as chief counsel for the u.s. senate commission committee on banking housing and urban affairs. commissioner alison aaron lee, served since 2017. she served on various roles and the sec, and most recently has written, lectured and taught classes on financial regulation and corporate law, internationally. finally, chairman jay clayton,

commission. i would like to welcome our human rights of commissioners. thank you for joining us this evening, on behalf of my colleagues we are delighted to be cohosting this hearing with you. we look forward to a good, and open conversation this evening. we have some excellent speaker testimony that we are looking forward to gathering. we very much look forward to hearing from members of the community on the issue of the border crisis, our first order of business to -- are there any announcements? >> thank you. office of civic engagement and veterans affairs. to members of the public, this is special joint meeting at the san francisco immigrant rights commandant -- commission on the human rights commission cosponsored by yee and ronan. please silence all cell phones so speakers are commissioners maybe be had. members of the public who wish to make comments should fill out a green comment card, and return the card to commission staff, spanish interpretation is available, headsets are available at

the commission? have you any interaction with the commission at all directly? >> directly i don't have to go in front to testify on the cases. for san francisco what i am always able to do is to -- just knowing what we have to work with. we look context and i was able to convince my client -- because it's a complex solution. it's schedule, time and money and also the ability and the willingness to be patient, right. so a lot of my clients they're smaller project sponsors. so usually we take an alternative interpretation approach to just to do the right thing and without needing to actually testify and deviate away from what we have to do for the project. >> supervisor ronen: yeah. in addition to, you know, the research work that you had done for the adobe project, and the work -- the amazing work for the cultural districts, which as you know, i was the sponsor of the legislation. so i can not tell you how important that so to me and how much i appreciate that work. in terms of sort of the technical w

s that fall under the commission, i cannot sign them until the commission approves. they cannot be executed until the commission approves. >> it is subject to interpretation, but that's okay. i would like tighter language in their. i don't want some other chief saying that i did not have to come before i signed it. >> the problem with the time limit though, if the time limit lapses, do they start over? it's creating an unnecessary bureaucratic problem, i think. before effective, we could say. >> guess my issue, to -- >> i am sorry, you don't? >> yes, i am done. >> the wording in terms of who can agendized and item, we can request that an item be agendized. the way that it reads, i understood it to be that only the president can place it on the agenda, when all of us have the ability to request that something is agendized. i think the wording is a little -- >> i don't think this is intended to change any policy we currently have in place. members request agenda items, they go on as i am able to put them on. this is no different. if you can come up with better wording,

commission, the board of appeals , the historic preservation commission, where the mayor does not appoint, the mayor nominates. in the same way that the president of the united states nominates somebody for the supreme court and united states senate may affirm or deny that nomination by a simple majority vote. this is one of those. the story i want to tell, sorry for being long-winded, because it is seldom or rare that the legislative body rejects the nominee, is the story that before the summer recess, we approved an individual that the mayor nominated for the board of appeals. i am sure many of you sat with that individual. we voted for that individual in and use -- unanimously. we made a mistake. the board of appeals is a body that is there to correct manifest injustices by other decision-making bodies in the city. there was a case in the northeast corner of san francisco where a family that had lived there for 27 years, a monolingual, cantonese family, was constructively evicted. they were threatened with eviction, they ultimately took a buy out. they consulted with the chinatown comm

the proposal would be on occasion, the commission secretary may miss a meeting at which time the commission secretary with the concurrents of the port director will attend the meeting in his or her place. we will delegate to another staffer if necessary. we request approval of the resolution attached to your staff report and director forbes legal counsel are available to answer questions. >> thank you. >> is there any public comment on in item? seeing none, public comment is closed. commissioner? >> yes, thank you for the proposal and i think it's probably time for tos us to revt the rule. i think limiting alternates is not a good governance procedure but it gives us all continuity that you have mentioned in your report and that's my position. thank you. >> thank you gillman? >> thank you. amy, can you just enlighten me, i know in the staff report you talked that most commissions don't have term limits. >> most commissioners, that's correct. the only ones that do have them because i called around and found out, so at the moment, the san francisco municipal transportation agency and the plan