if the applicant wants to answer them directly. >> president mazzucco: sergeant, the applicant is currentlyployed with department of homeland security in another position, is that correct? >> yes. >> president mazzucco: is that a position where he carries a firearm? >> yes. >> president mazzucco: did he go through a full background check for that. >> i believe so. i spoke to him about it as well as the private investigator who did the background on him. >> president mazzucco: commissioners, any further questions? >> vice president marshall: if i read this correctly, based on your i guess research and the answers it says here the department is recommending, is that correct? >> yes. >> vice president marshall: that's what it says here. okay. >> so if there aren't further questions for the sergeant i wanted to ask if the applicant, mr. romero could come up and ask your permission to ask you these questions and of course you can say no. >>7ljç yes, the applicant does t have to disclose this information publicly, as we've discussedjpp÷ before, the application file and the background information

are third applicant is mr. scott spertzel. >> i am reapplying for alternate member for board 1, which is served for the past three years. i have 15 years of experience as a certified public accountant doing both public, accounting work and litigation matters as expert testimony. during the past three years i had the opportunity to work as a hearing officer. i am also a certified fraud examiner. any questions? >> seeing none, thank you very much. [indiscernible] and last but not least we do have ms. donna crowder. >> hi my name is donna crowder. thank you. supervisor yee, nice to see you. i live in your district. my work experience as it relates to this alternate position for board 1, i have been a real estate broker since 1977, and independent for 20 years now with -- coldwell banker. during my tenure i sold or manner of commercial, and business properties. i specialize in high-end residential sales at this time of my career and development. i have been very active in the san francisco association of realtors a

six applicants. for me personally, it's hard when you have so many qualified applicants. i was impressed with mr. hershkowitz as well; i would like to point you for a seat not just because of your background but because of your enthusiasm. and making it easier for many of our homeowners. i would like to see you go forward and one of those seats as well. i was equally impressed by all the other candidates; it is nice to have female candidates. it's great to see so many women opposite the last committee. especially in real estate property here in san francisco. i was impressed by diana, daniel, joyce lewis, luisa mendoza. unfortunately i do not get to speak with -- a land-use attorney. typically we ask that candidates come before us but ms. crisp made a particular outreach to our office knowing that she could not be here today and i appreciate that. with the permanent alternate seats, i would like to ask the candidates if you have a preference between permanent and temporary so that we don't put you on places where you might have a slight not preference for. with joyce it w

>> 6 artist a year, and we receive about 108 applications.ry competitive. >> but everyone should be encouraged to apply. thank you again for hosting us. >> thank you for including us in "culturewire." ♪

should the applicant intended to have empty lot the application would have stated none or vacant and does not and i believe you have the application as evidence. on page two of the same application the statement that the plan show the removal of part of existing warehouse no other work. this wasn't part of existing warehouse as mentioned in the applicant's own letter in 2012 to the planning department. these were two buildings in his words 3,000, and 4,000 square feet and two buildings that were delollished and under the planning code requires any demo in one of these district tosi -- to be replaced and no mention the building was compromised. however in the process this was compromised as evidence of by the photographs in your file. mounds of dirt and soil. was there encroachment sidewalk permit for blacking the pedestrian area? no. were there dust controls for the workers and the general public and the neighbors and san francisco driving by? no. contrary to the late response of my brief that they state two horses were tapped into the building only one garden horse was used to contr

as i said, every application. increasingly, what has happened is highly specialized applications. i will give you one example of that. dealer track. they actually do loan origination software for automotive loans. today, basically 80% of all the loans in the united states are processed through their software. we will see much more of this. we want to talk about not as public companies, tons of this. all of these guys uses the original cloud service. a lot of people have asked me why we call it a cloud. what does this come from? it is pretty simple. in the old days of client-server computing -- some of us were around them -- we would draw a picture of a pc, a picture of a unix server, and then a picture of a little clout in between. mostly because none of us understood how networks work. for the old folks in the room, you may remember certain words. this is all communication technology developed for corporations to build their own networks. that sounds like crazy talk today, right? nobody does that anymore. everybody is using ip, mpls- based networks. that is the network cloud. the

we have a motion to continue to the call of the chair, until applicants complete their applications. we have that motions. we will second that, i can do that without objection. (gavel) before we enter a emotion to convene in closed sessions, is there any member that wants to make a comment? seeing none. at this time we asked members of the public to please exit the room >> during the close session the committee voted to forward item 6-11 the full board with recommendations. >> thank you cannot entertain the motion to close to close session. we can do that without opposition. anything else on the agenda? >> no madam chair. >> seeing none, meeting is adjourned. test >> january at this time we ask that everybody turn off your cell phone. thank you for city halls support. (taking roll). mr. president, we have quorum >> item two the explanationy documents draft 2012 minutes. >> we have a motion to approve the minutes. >> a second. >> all in favor. >> any opposed? next item >> now the draft 26th draft. motion to approve? any opposed. next item >> approval the 2010 draft minutes. >> all in

before the launch of large-scale processing of iraqi applicants in 2007. in order to mitigate the risk of exploitation, while offering resettlement opportunities to thousands of iraqi refugees in need of protection, uscis developed two key partnerships. first, we established a relationship with the department of defense to augment our biometrics screening check against a dod database. that includes fingerprint records captured in theatre in iraq and elsewhere, so it is a valuable resource to identify a wide array of relevant information. for example, it includes data ranging from individuals who had been detained by u.s. forces to those who had been employed by u.s. forces. in addition, we reached out to dhs's office of intelligence and analysis to take advantage of their expertise and their knowledge of the broader intelligence community. working with them has enabled us to identify potential screening capabilities to obtain critical intelligence information and to enlist their services in our enhanced officer training. as a result, we have been able to e

is the applicant here on this one? sir. >> (inaudible). >> only if you have something you would like to share with us. >> it all sounds good to me. i did receive a call from ken on friday explaining the license. we currently have a club right around the corner where we had a beer and wine license for the half two years. no issues there and we had a number of conditions on that one so we're used to that and my understanding this one is no conditions and just asking for your support. >> thank you very much. any public comment on this one? seeing none public comment is closed. colleague any questions? seeing none we will move forward with recommendation. mr. clerk item number three please. >> item three is a hearing to consider the transfer of 64 type on site theater license from 533 sutter street to 450 post street. susi damilano for the san francisco playhouse. >> good morning supervisors. i am mr. cole from the san francisco police department. the applicant filed with the california department of alcohol beverage contr

so, any member of the public wish to address this application? >> okay. seeing none, the matter is with the commission. >> motion? >> i move to approve. >> i second. >> the conditions commissioners? >> sorry. that is the police conditions. >> yeah. >> second that. >> commissioner akers? >> aye. >> perez >> aye. >> hyde. >> aye. >> joseph. >> aye. >> lee. >> aye. >> newlin >> aye. >> approved and good luck. >> robert patterson, dba, ken, ken ramen, 3376, 18th street, place of entertainment permit application. >> a complaint with this address, and once that complaint has been resolved, this item can be calendared again. >> so we are continuing this item? wonderful. >> now is there a public comment or a motion to continue? >> do we need a motion to continue? >> okay. well do we have a motion to continue? >> any public comment on the continuation of this issue? >> none? >> all right. then how about a motion to continue? >> i move to continue the item. >> second. >> item has been continued. >> now i notice that the next four items are all extended permits for

applicant is true to the notification that was given? >> at the initial notification, it was correct. >> thank you. >> we'll take public comment now. can i see a show of hands of how many people will speak to this item. keep in mind any owners of the business listed as 2nd street merchants should not be participating at this time. if you could please line up on the far wall and if you have not already filled out a speaker card, you are not required to, but it helps us in the preparation of minutes. >> i will limit testimony to two minutes. >> okay. first speaker can begin. >> good evening commissioners. ken cleveland, representing the building owners and managers association. i would just like to go back to the starbucks objection. the applicant seems to feel that starbucks does not continue to object. i talked to kim winston, who is the senior manager for government affairs for starbucks, and starbucks is loath to be publicly opposed to small independents, of course. they are 17,000 nationwide/world wide operation and they are not going

the project sponsor began with the application in 2003 with submittal of environmental review application. it was consequently heard by the planning commission in 2005 and in may and the planning commission heard appeal of the mitigation and environmental determination for the project as well as the conditional use authorization for the planned use development, pud. it's something that is allowed under the planning code and section 304 where if you have a large property more than a quaker acre then you can go through this process. the pud allows for density increase. it allows you to go up to the next allowable zoning density district minus one and allows for other mot ifzs to rear yard so the project was approved for 122 lots with up to 182 dwelling units. i will note while there were exemptions from the area and rear yard requirements of the planning code the project didn't require variances and handled the pud process and under the limits of the planning code. they didn't seek the ability to go up to the next highest district. based on the lot size they are allowed up to 408 units and

i don't think that's fair to the applicant and what we said before so that's my only caveat here unless somebody objects to that. >> no. i think the process we put in place was put in place for a reason. i want the record to reflect commissioner loftus spoke to the applicant personally and here and came back up so i don't know if that discussion will be given to us secondhand or not. i'm uncomfortable because i don't know what was asked. i think if we want to put it over get it out on paper. this poor guy is trying to get their jobs and we agreed on a process and we're dragging this process out and i just want to get it completed. >> president mazzucco: commissioner loftus. >> yeah. i was trying to respect the privacy rights of the officer that he wouldn't be pulled up here to answer a question and a question that a fellow commissioner had. so i'm happy to -- i'll take the advice of the city attorney, my fellow commissioner had a question in a she felt would be helpful and be dispositive is this. >> if the information will be helpful and dispositive it's something all commissioners shou

originally put forward their application, but we review it again before that applicant actually enters the united states in case any derogatory information has arisen. we believe the interagency process drawing on more intelligence and data than before as well as the retroactive checks greatly enhance our ability to identify individuals of concern, thank you. my time has expired. i will follow up with some questions. i recognize the ranking member for whatever questions she may have. >> thank you, i talked about the arrest of the iraqi refugees and how there was information available earlier that might have led us to believe that they could cause some trouble in our country. how did we miss that initial information? could you speak to what we are doing -- i hear vague comments about information sharing but we know that is key as we move forward. that was a lesson we learn from the 9/11. without divulging any classified information, how did we miss that information the first time around? what can you tell us that would give us some confidence that we really are able to look at all the d

project sponsors were advised of this and filed the required conditional use application and dr applications were canceled and the associated fees were refunded. notification for the conditional use hearing was completed and here we are today. on behalf of staff i would like to apologize for the staff error and the ensuing confusion. the project before you is a is one-story vertical addition to a 11-unit apartment building located at 1856 pacific on and off mid-block on the north side of the street between franklin and gough streets. the property is located in the

project sponsors were advised of this and filed the required conditional use application and dr applications were canceled and the associated fees were refunded. notification for the conditional use hearing was completed and here we are today. on behalf of staff i would like to apologize for the staff error and the ensuing confusion. the project before you is a is one-story vertical addition to a 11-unit apartment building located at 1856 pacific on and off mid-block on the north side of the street between franklin and gough streets. the property is located in the rm-3 zoning district ada heightented bulk district. the immediate neighborhood comprised of the subject block face and opposite block face is characterized by tall buildings ranging from 4-11 stories and subject block face with the exception of subject property and the adjacent lot to the east contains tall multi-unit buildings of 7-11 buildings. the property proposed a one-story vertical addition that would increase the building's height from approximately 42' to approximately 56'. which is well within the property's 80' height li

alteration permit and a requirement that the applicant file a full form six demolition permit. the applicant will attempt to cloud the reality with plans from the building of 1963, water bills, claims of water soils which do not exist. they will blame the zoning administrator, his travel schedule and various other things. i ask you to focus on the issues here. i do concede that your decision maybe influenced by that the buildings are destroyed and removed from the site but the questions are valid and they justify your action to revoke the permit. there is a letter of determination by scott sanchez of april 2012 and the intended use for the property. the same applicant through the attorneys outline the buildings in question "3,000 of accessory space exists above a loading dock adjacent to the space there is 4,000 square foot building period. the cooler maybe removed. a warehouse is adjacent to the cooler". clear. three structures on the site. there is no mention of the building demolition with the planning department with the existing structures on the property. exhibit two in t

)x nuo needs to0ú move we will work with the applicant alternative location..tht atth"d/u the hearing --;m::nÑ to what degree doesc department, when they review these, look at existing sidewalk?6:z41ñ seating, withi::ñzy respect to your4jpb clearances sidewalkr(b!>!rñ9k, 0j furniture -- in other words in termso other things? >>Ñrb)z1ij u in:e5-5úq this31!ál specific case,h u is very6( #-e comparabl cafezc the edge of#%( ," the cafe tableh"c chairs top maintains a sixóé of travel. similarly we look at the exact!kr same thing related tovc foods when they set up. and that we aska p t.2ix.ñ a diagram specifically, and alsor layout -- this wassvp7 also previously discussed onçg4 i other food3 to this board in the where the the be+innju food facility wouldññ3flb ensure that theqide9y people line up inr?kç such path of travelg!t ! @ñng,, >> thankajçj< gt you.nn we willlmnnle take public comment nowc6 ix on this0!,qvÑ it]!ñh and as was1#xk-5+-k-4 noted, please stept#:zqÑ forward. if you cabñ noted if you're affiliated to the parties on this appeal you are note! entitl

we urgerpeople to get that application in early. we really want to review the application. we want to help you make the best business case in being accepted. it's very competitive and we would love to see all of our clients get in. and very altruistic at the same time. absolutely. good to have you on the show. that's liz gardner of wbdc. thank you so much for having me. just ahead a trader gives us a preview of how he's setting up for this week's tech earnings .... chart talk is next andrew keene president of keeneonthemarket.com joins us for a busy segment. let's get down to it. we'll start with google. what do you expect with earnings from this stock? google google google. so i think that the last eight quarters google has sold off five of the last eight quarters. since its 740 top it is down to 705 so you can rationalize a lower high on the daily chart. it looked very strong and then facebook had their announcement. they said they were going to have search but they were going to have search in facebook only. it was good for google---friday and thursday it sold back off s