>> well, basically what happened is this is a new commission. >> and it does have, you know, seats with the particular qualifications and the one that i served in was for a architect with a background in historic preservation and so it does have particular qualifications and you know before i agreed to be on the commission i did have a conversation with marlina about the ethics aspect of this position and whether or not i would be able to continue to work and you know to what extent i would be able to have dealings with both the planning commission and the hpc and it was my understanding, from that conversation, and i may have misunderstood her. but that the waiver was more or less automatic and they did not actually have to come to this body. and so, you know, it was four years ago and i don't really remember the details of the conversation, but you know frankly i would not have taken the position if i knew that my work was going to be... that i would not be able to work. so, you know, if i had known, i would have come to you four years ago for both waiver during and after that i am go

it's a commission where people aren't asking are you a board pick or a mayoral pick? we are extremely different with different backgrounds but we generally come to consensus what is best for the city and the police department. that's what makes me proud to be on the commission. dr. marshall. commissioner kingsley. >> i was going to say i am glad to turn this over to you. first of all i want to say about president mazzucco -- i mean i'm glad you're going to do it one more time. i know you had talk to your wife about this. >> i maybe in trouble when i get home. >>i know. but thanks for doing it one more time. as for me i have been president and vice president three times so i think it's time for me to commissioner truman to take it over and run with it. last year we were in the same position so i am glad to yield to you this time around. i think it will be watching two of you sit next to each other in the commission for the next year and i want to thank all of the commissioners for the many times i have been asked to serve and the capacity of one of the two offices. than

and that's going to be a very hard thing for the commission to control. i hear different things from different people. i hear they think they're going to get -- even if they don't get 120, they'll get enough to have a robust auction. i think there are a couple things that go into that. i think some of the smaller group owners may be more willing to participate. i think also the noncommercial stations could help drive a higher yield of spectrum. but, again, you know, it's an unknown, and i think it's one of the big unknowns that tom's going to face going forward. >> couple key issues in the auction is do you limit the eligibility of verizon, a, at&t, and that's part of a separate proceeding, and license. republicans are concerned they feel the fcc will violate the spectrum act by using that for unlicensed spectrum that would not be auctioned. blair, fist, i wanted to get your, i guess, your quick views on those two. >> guest: well, i think you've identified the two most potent political issues. there are a lot of technical issue, but those are the two ones

then in that case there would be a delegation from the port to the commission and in that case, if the delegation was effective, which once again we believe it is not and that is our position, then in that case it would have been a permit issued under the jurisdiction of the entertainment commission. examine if that is the case, then there would be appellate jurisdiction. so, once again, two-step process -- >> i think that's your time. i'm sorry. >> two-step process which in the first place there is no permit that could have been issued. but if this board disagrees and that there was effective delegation, which we dispute, then that permit would have been issued by the entertainment commission, not the port under the entertainment commission dell gaythed jurisdiction meaning that this board would not have jurisdiction. thank you. >> your contention is that the m-o-u had to be in place? >> yes, commissioner. >> is that a legal opinion? >> excuse me? >> is that a legal opinion? >> that is our opinion on behalf of our client. and one that we are prepared to pursue. >> what's your authorit

one is the action that the commission took at the last meeting in the form of a letter addressed to live nation with bullet points regarding those conditions that were approved by the commission as conditions to the conditional grant. you will also see then a letter sent to the office i think dated april 10 -- requesting additional action by the commission, and then lastly we have given you our best effort at language if you were to consider adopting any additional conditions based on the letter of april 10. they relate to four categories and why i had you read the item more carefully because they're pretty much related to those areas and curfews and parking and traffic issues and site restoration and number of shows and capacity and with that there are a number of people that are here i want to speak to and you obviously there is public comment you may want to take. in addition for the knowledge of the commission an appeal was filed at the board of appeals based on the last action and the commission did and right now the agenda is may 8 for that appeal, so that item will be heard at the

that then a department came to the commission and a announced they were discontinuing the practice in the commission. and they had net file that wouldn't rebuild the system because it was going to cost a lot of money >> we don't have any additional. if the commission decided i didn't want to go in this decision staff would very quickly have to come up with an alternate and we wouldn't know what to do. >> we could say this isn't working for us but it is. >> what about the cost? >> for the first time we've maintained costs for 6 years static. in this it's going to go up. i think that net file has been for bearing to ask for more because the city has made

cain. >> good evening, jocelyn cain, entertainment commission. just a little tiny history about the entertainment commission. we were created in 2003 after a charter amendment. there are 7 commissioners that represent all the stakeholders, impacting entertainment and nighttime business. even include neighbors, law enforcement public health planning and the industry itself. staff is currently 4,000 people. we oversee a thousand fixed place permits including places of entertainment, late night food establishments, bars, we even regulate a few dance halls that are still around. we talk a lot about the port delegated authority to the entertainment commission and that was we believe based on our expertise and our public process that we have been doing for 10 years. the commissioners created a focus specifically on issues in entertainment. that's why we're good at what we do. the port beginning in 2004 has relied on the entertainment commission for its expertise and our robust public process that includes public notice. a duly noticed hearing at the hall and

my name is hulda garfolo and i am also a candidate for the vacant seat on the ethics commission. in 2010-2011 i chaired the civil grand jury committee that published a report, the sleeping watchdog, which was a focus on the san francisco ethics commission. our grand jury's thorough investigation revealed the 1993 proposition k established an agency which failed in its mandated mission. it is not taking care of the citizens as far as regulating transparency. the commission, in fact, was created for san franciscans that are losing -- that were losing faith in their government. my committee's grand jury report raised important issues surrounding the ethics commission that were not being addressed elsewhere. issues such as refusal to televise those commission meetings which we strongly recommended, and today are being televised. the failure to enforce violations of the sunshine ordinance, and they still are not doing -- meeting that mandated mission. the failure to investigate complaints of whistle blower retaliation, there are a number of other issues that today's ethics commission i

quinn said, a small business and a commission on status of women and a contract monitoring division and a contract administrator who believes in your business, so i think with that if we all start working together this is our time. i think it has come and we should cease it and cease it with happiness and enthusiasm. >> commissioner rodriquez. >> my very quick question is just we have this great data for the percents by service categories of the wbe's. does the obe and the other one mirror that? >> no. i would say that the obe's take up almost half of the 1110 businesses. >> right. but what i am wondering is what do they provide -- do they provide services in and mirror the 52% professional -- >> yes. >> 25 general. >> exactly. >> so that mirrors the city -- 14% is contracts -- construction sorry. i am just trying to understand what they're getting contracts for too. >> the non women businesses -- they somewhat mirror for some of the other offerings but they really, really provide a huge great deal of numbers and a larger percentage for construction and construction related so we have m

that will be a hard thing for the commission to control. i hear different things from different people. they think they're going to get -- even if they don't get hundred 20, they will get enough to have a robust auction. some of the smaller group of owners may be more to participate. the noncommercial stations are an unknown that could help drive higher yield of spectrum. , one of the big unknowns that tom is going to face. >> a couple of the key issues in the auction, do you limit the liability of at&t verizon? house republicans are concerned the the fcctc will violate spectrum act. blair, i want to get your quick views on those two. >> you have identified the two most bullepotent lyrical issues. -- political issues. there is always been a tradition that there are limitations on what any single buyer can buy in an auction. i spent the commission to do that again, whether at&t and verizon think those are the right rules, it would be a mistake. most the experts think it would be a mistake to have an auction in which at&t or verizon can buy ev

at&t have a petition penning with the commission for some trials. my guess is, if tom is probably going to be spending a lot of time on other issues inch addition to broadcast incentive auction, there's a decent possibility that net neutrality comes back to the commission. i think the dc circuit will probably hear oral argument on the fc c's net neutrality rules, and i think' in the fall they're expecting. so earliest we be a ruling out of the dc circuit enof this year, good evening of next year, and if the court were to vacate the rule order remand the rules, that's going to raise a very important question, which is partly legal and partly political. and that is, does the obama administration appeal to the supreme court or send it back to the commission? tom will have a front-row seat in that decision in conjunction with the white house. that going to be a very sensitive decision. of course there's always the possibility that the rules are upheld, and there's less probably to decide at that point, although industry may decide to appeal to the suprem

commission. there will be no separate discussion of these items unless a member of the commission, the public, or staff so requests, in which event the matter shall be removed from the consent calendar and considered as a separate item at this or a future hearing. item 4, case no. 2013.0476t - planning code text amendment concerning mixed use-office district. >> is there any public comment? >>> [inaudible]. >> commissioners, place that at the beginning of the regular calendar? >> correct, thank you. is there any additional public comment? commissioner moore. >> i was planning to ask for removal from the consent calendar, it is an important item and should be discussed [speaker not understood]. >> thank you. >> all right, commissioners, places you under commission matters, item 5, consideration of adoption of draft minutes for april 18, 2013. >> is there any public comment on the draft minutes? seeing none, public comment is closed. commissioner antonini. >> move to approve draft minutes april 18th. >> second. >> on that motion to adopt minutes from april 18th, 2013, commissioner antonini? >> aye.

that's how long it's been and it's a huge disregard for me personally and for the whole commission because we've been asking about this. furthermore, it's a disregard for our rate payers, because some of those lands do have value which could be passed along to our rate payers. some of the lands would make wonderful gardens. some of the lands would make wonderful parks, and we are denying our rate payers that. now, a very specific point was in the chronicle on april 12th, which was a friday, there was a two-page piece on the francisco reservoir, which i know we're going to discuss later. but i want to make this point. it goes on and on about the different groups banding together. they want the reservoir, they want the [speaker not understood] as a free church, they want it as a park. why weren't they told years ago that this is impossible, we cannot give them this land? that land belongs to bayview hunters point. it belongs to pacific heights. it belongs to everyone, not just telegraph hill -- excuse me, russian hill. so, i really feel there was a huge lapse of proper -- of discipline in te

paralleling man a left hand architect on the historic preservation commission >> thank you i'm jonathan i'm a practicing architect here in san francisco and now serving on the prehistoric commission. >> i'm quite honored by mayor lee selecting me to position to be able to serve the supply in a a captain that i both love and care about historic buildings in san francisco. and in my practice over the last 18 or 19 years i continue to work on projects throughout san francisco. they do account for about 70 percent of my business is in san francisco or projects in san francisco. so given the fact the seat that i sit on in the prehistoric preservation commissions has is credentials that i hold. there is is clearly a conflict with section 225 will 4 with presenting my work to - continuing my work or the plan checkers in the planning and building inspection. i have a small firm i had since 1995 in the city and i was up to about 7 people in the 2000 these now we're up to four for the most part my projects don't are not credit card before the administration. one project in a particular the alexan

a quorum. >> thank you. i am julie and the commission of status of woman. i would like to introduce andrea and we r we expect rebecca soon and next to that is alisa and kay. we have a quorum. >> well thank you very much commissioner and thank you very much inspector monroe. ladies and gentlemen, welcome to the wednesday december 5, 2012 meeting and it's a joint meeting with the status of women. this is a mo mentus meeting and this is the third time we did a joint meeting and this one is a very important meeting tonight and a lot of work has gone into it and i would like to thank the commissioner on the status of women and thank commissioner loftus. she has been proactive. we had several meetings. before we go on we have different types of meetings in the community we introduce the commissioners and who they are during the day jobs and if that is possible i would like to start with dr. marshall. >> dr. joe marshall. i have been on the police commission for eight years, three terms. i am the cofounding executive director of make a boys club. i just want to men

i think after having a full understanding of the complaint, caucusing and meeting with the commission to have a better understanding if it has merit, full merit and if indeed it does, then engaging the proper parties individually, collectively, in order to gain other sides of the story. i suspect there's probably more than even two sides of the story. so they have a full understanding of it. and then pursuing it to its end. and if it means engaging other bodies and other authoritative bodies, we would seek to do that as well. >> okay. and i think also you mentioned in your comments that you don't have a legal background either. >> i don't have a legal background. >> okay. a lot of times a lot of the discussion ~ around ethics really is centered around an interpretation of the law. so, and for full disclosure i don't have a law background either. so, i would like to know how you would approach answering some legal questions without necessarily that training. >>> well, i think i would do what any good manager does or any good executive director does, or any good commissioner or supervis

commission. there will be no separate discussion of these item unless a member of the commission, the public or staff so requests, in which event the matter shall be removed from the consent calendar and considered as a separate item at this or a future hearing. item 4, case no. 2012.1341c - 2320 sutter street, conditional use authorization. item 5, case no. 2013.0025c - 1946 fillmore street request for conditional use authorization and item 6, case no. 2012.0231c - 758 divisadero street request for conditional use authorization. i have no speaker cards, commissioners. >> is there any public comment on those three item on the consent calendar? >>> my name is doug martin. i'm a resident of 760 divisadero and i'm here in opposition to the plan to place a cell tower on the roof of my building -- >> okay, sir, this is just a request to remove it from the continuance calendar thev if you'd like to speak to the item. if you'd like to remove it from the continuance -- >>> it's being continued again? >> i'm sorry, from the consent calendar. you just request that and we'll take it off the consent calendar and

a break before hand. >> good evening, members of the commission and chief sir. instead of repeat activity, i will move directly to the annual report. we have a powerpoint presentation. this evening i will discuss the annual report for 2012. it was prepared by members of my staff including chris news skooe our information systems analyst and eric our acting deputy director chief investigators and franco, one of our attorneys, garm an, former chief vekt investigator who is now retired. dipole -- diana salazar our attorney who is an outreach coordinator and my executive assistant pam thompson. i would like to give special recognition to chris since he is the one that prepared the statistics for the report and maintains the data base. this evening i will discuss the history admission of the occ, organizational and budget matters, investigations, state and national trend in law enforcement, policy analysis, immediate mediation and outreach. the occ was created by a board of supervisors initiate charter amendment but did not become operational since 1983. the occ is un

we haven't had a joint meeting with the small business commission so we're excite body today r tonight. i want to thank your director regina dick-endrizzi and others that were a pleasure to work with and they put in many hours to see that tonight worked smoothly so i'm going to give a few slides based on our annual report what it is that we do. the commission of status of women was established by the board of supervisors in 1975 and was a permanent in the charter in 1994 so the focus areas are gender equity in the work place and anti-violence and gender analysis and what is the over arching umblellia is the ordinance and the elimination of discrimination against all women. that was a un convention and signed by then president jimmy carter. anybody remember jimmy carter? it's never been ratifyed in the u.s. senate and states have ratified it, signed it with the exception of the united states, so in 1998 women of san francisco said that is not good enough. we're going to create our own ordinance reflecting this international bill of rights for women. next slide. so in terms of work place

>> maybe my suggestion president is that in your role as president of the police commission, we might want to consider a letter from the president of the police commission to public safety with findings and analysis where we hope that the facts matter. >> thank you. >> commissioner terman? commissioner kingsley was talking. >> no, i just sort of jumped in. >> go ahead. >> thank you for the very thorough report. would you like to take a moment and introduce the rest of the folks in your staff here, it might be helpful for us. >> thank you commissioner terman it was on my list to do at the conclusion of all my remarks. i'm going ask you each to stand up as i announce your names. first eric, our acting chief investigator, donna, our chief coordinator, sam our attorney, sherrie hall who is an acting senior investigator, dennis max on who is a senior investigator, inez vargz who as you know is the chief trial attorney. there are two missing members of the management team including ed mcman who is on, he's a senior investigator. he's on a leave of absence and manny foert who is also on a leave. i want to than

our chairperson >> hello again so when the chief said early this year announced a proposal san francisco youth commission thought it was not the best idea for the youth with mental health issues. i spoke at a panel on the tenderloin they felt the need for more community based integration. there's 09-1-1 operators are not trained or not enough of them are trained to like police officers that are trained to deal with people in mental crisis and not enough police officers. we felt it was better to get training then putting tazer in the hands of 89 trained folks. we hope they fully implement this model and just thinking that the fact there's been issues about putting weapons in the hands of sfd we don't think this is the best thing for san francisco. i would you're going to stop the proposal in the future. and next up we have angel again >> sorry our committee has a lot of priorities this year. so on march 7th of last year the youth commission held our joint hearing. we heard steroids about go youth interactions. the youth committee provided the police committee that requested the police department implement

test as a condition of the permit. and the commission will be allowed to site violaters who don't have mer mitts and right now if you set up a nightclub and you don't bother to get a permit. the entertainment commission has not power to go after you only the police can. that will allow the commission and the police to go after someone who operates without a permit. it will allow the city to pursue civil violations through the city attorney's office against businesses that are in violation of their place of entertainment or place of business after hours. >> and the department of public health for noise violate ors in the streets and public places, currently the police can cite them but the police cannot over stretch and it will allow the department of public health to enforce but the noise ordinance. the legislation remanufactures a session on a perspective moratorium of extended hours permit so that the entertainment commission can continue to bring late night businesses into compliance, currently it kicks in if the commission grants ext

>> commissioner, the request initially in the letter was for the commission to consider a condition of the permit to require the permittee to work with the sfpd and the neighborhood steering committee to allow extensions. however, the commission can't desolve that type of responsibility to a neighborhood group, so therefore it had to translate into the commission directing the applicant to work with another city department and then encouraging that city department to work with the neighborhood groups. however, it's vague because there isn't a standard per se for what is -- you know, working with our outreach. it's just important that we reiterate how we feel about that process. does that make sense? did that help you? >> we also believe that the san francisco police department will use their best effort and their best practices to resolve any dispute about any 30 minute extension that live nation might want to apply for. now they might apply for them. they might not apply. but they will apply to sfpd and sfpd will work with the neighbors about that particular extension. >> so that does