in other words, to take the c.u. by the planning commission, reject it, and impose a new c.u. with all the conditions of the planning commission plus the additional condition i indicated before, i.e., the independent outside evaluator. that is my motion. president chiu: supervisor weiner has made the motion as he's described to amend the c.u., second to that -- seconded by supervisor farrell. roll call vote. supervisor campos would like to comment on that motion. supervisor campos: thank you, mr. president. given that our effort, my effort to deny the c.u. failed, i want to thank supervisor weiner for the motion and i will be supporting that motion so i would ask colleagues for your support. thank you. president chiu: on supervisor wiener's motion, roll call clerk supervisor elsbernd, aye, supervisor farrell, aye, supervisor kim, aye. supervisor mar, aye. supervisor mirkarimi, aye, supervisor weiner, aye, supervisor avalos, aye, supervisor campos, aye, president chiu, aye. supervisor chu, aye. supervisor cohen, aye. there are 11 aye's. president chiu: the motion passes. i want

or not there is a significant gap in coverage, is that -- with the appellant be able to support the c.u. with that condition and live with the result that either there is or is not? it should be independently verifiable. if it is done by an independent reviewer, would that be something that is -- that would satisfy the appellant? given that that is the core of your appeal? president chiu: if you could speak into the microphone. >> certainly. my name is donald david. i would like to address that there are actually two issues that i was going to do in public comment. it is not only question of the gap in coverage, but the least intrusive. as a compromise, if there is a truly independent entity that will be given access to all of the underlying data and given the opportunity to make that evaluation, the answer to your question is yes. let me be clear -- an independent party, an independent entity is not somebody who derives a substantial amount of income from doing expert testimony for at&t. i think that the community would be prepared to suggest three proposed independent parties to at&t,

we're recommending it is a c.u. instead. recommendation no. 11, the ordinance makes changes to section 132, which covers improvements to the public right of way when certain things are done to a building. the department recommends removing existing regulations were there is a change of use that involves more than half of the building floor area. we found this difficult to enforce, especially since a lot of the projects can be approved over the counter and do not have any of their review process. it is not a very effective way to do this. we're also recommended other changes to the section that clarify certain provisions and allow for exceptions when required improvements are in feasible. these have come about through implementation of this section and recommended by the city wide department. a list of them is in the ordinance. recommendation no. 12, we would just like the board of supervisors to consider in the implications that adding the embarcadero to the scene extreme districts would have an effect on the waterfront. it

should do that, but approach it the other way around, that the burden should be on at&t to show that a c.u. is appropriate and that we should approve it once and if that finding is made. but not before. so it's a different take on what supervisor weiner is proposing and so i would speak against the motion to amend, and my hope is that out of this deliberation, that what can happen, if we do reject the conditional use, is that it will prompt a more cohesive and more systemic approach that actually provides the planning department the additional tools and, quite frankly, the additional resources it needs to verify a lot of this technical information. and that's what i hope comes out of this deliberation. president chiu: colleagues. any further discussion on the various motions that we have? if not, why don't we take roll call votes on the motions in the orders in which they were made, first on supervisor campos' motion to reverse the certification. >> the other way around. caller:.o amend first. president chiu: motion to amend first. madam clerk, please call the roll. clerk: supervisor elsbe

. >> there is one action you are saying on the c.u. and one action you are saying where there would be correspondence to the boan a separate process which was the application for the liquor license and. president olague: right. i wanted to be clear that what we are proving today is the project as it is currently proposed. to request anything more would be outside of our for you, basically. that is it. >> do you want to make a motion of intent and we can come back? president olague: i am good with it. commissioner sugaya, you have something to add? commissioner sugaya: i am going to vote against the motion because these things are bundled together and we cannot seem to separate the two. i do not have a problem with one. that is my frustration at this point. president olague: i do not want to continue to see a vacant space there for. -- there . we have heard from enough of the neighborhood and my sense is that people who want to see trader joe's there -- that is the sense i get. the cbs issue -- the cvs issue with the liquor license i do

and in the existing article 10, the projects that require a c.u. and a c.o.a. and would be heard by the landmarks preservation board and this body would have notices combined and would only be heard by the planning commission. that is no longer possible with the passage of prop j and when there are multiple entitlements the historic preservation commission will first hear the certificate of appropriateness and the planning commission may modify the determination of the certificate by a 2/3 vote only for projects that are located within historic districts. and again, this is language that is outlined in the charter. supervisor weiner's proposed amendment would require when the planning commission considers or modifies the c. of a. they explicitly consider the general planning and all planning code policies in the findings. and then this is the first place where supervisor weiner also establishes a new section that creates permit and fee waivers that i'll get into in a moment. commissioner miguel: commissioner antonini? commissioner antonini: i guess the supervis

from new york he is the associate professor of sociology at new york city college of technology of at c.u. n.y. and author of the book remaking scarcity from capitalism inefficiency to democrat to economic democracy professor welcome. thank you for having me on your show thank you so much greece is literally the cradle of democracy do you think any greek citizen alive would have thought a year ago that today their democratically elected prime minister would have been replaced by an unelected banks or with ties to goldman sachs. no i think it's a very disturbing development it shows the magnitude of the crisis in greece as things have deteriorated. very rapidly traditional the traditional political establishment because some lost legitimacy and now all of the major parties of the basically right center right even the socialists in a sense are part of the center right of sort of aligned themselves behind the. policy and they have to unite because there is a growing opposition among the greek population and they're basically trying to. push and support these failing policies even against the