the committee has. before you today are the findings of the adjudicatory subcommittee in the matter of representative charles rangel. that subcommittee found that 11 counts in the statement of alleged violations were proven by clear and convincing evidence. the 11 counts relate to four general areas of misconduct. the improper solicitation of individuals and entities with the business and interests before the house to find the charles rangel center for public service at the city college of new york. and his misuses of official resources to make those solicitations. fileesponded's failure to a full and complete financial disclosure statements for the years 1998-2008. the respondents acceptance of a benefit from his landlord related to his use of a residential rent stabilized apartment as a campaign office under circumstances that created an appearance of impropriety. also the respondents failure to report and pay taxes on his dominican village. the said committee found that the respondent's actions and a

you will hear the entire ethics committee hearing in its entirety. >> the committee, the standards committee, will come to order. i would like the record to reflect that all 10 members of the committee are present. and to note also that the chair is authorized to recess the committee at any time. this hearing of the committee on standards of official conduct in the matter of representative charles b. rangel will come to order. when i designated the members of the judetory subcommittee to consider the statement of alleged violations in this matter, i noted that the code of government ethics states clearly that a public office is a public trust. it was our responsibility to determine whether representative rangel's conduct met that standard. it was our obligation to act impartially as finders of fact and law. and the members of the subcommittee fulfilled that responsibility and met that obligation. we did so fairly, honestly and without bias. the subcommittee did not prejudice the allegations against representative, prejudge the allegations against representative rangel, and indeed, the subcom

is the only bipartisan committee, five members surveyed committee. they have come to an agreement on. i wholeheartedly support this bill i believe mr. charlie rangel wanted a faster process then was supportive. it is in the best interest of the institution. quite some republicans are saying you are reluctant to have the results. is there any truth to this? >> we have a meeting scheduled with the president on november 30. we are of looking forward to it. >> house signal everyone see a vote on repealing health care? >> we think that obamacare will ruin the country. it will bankrupt our nation. we believe it needs to be replaced with common sense reforms to bring down the cost. you will see us move quickly. >> i've wondered if anyone believes the government actions saved any jobs? >> the government's reaction to the general motors bailout could have been handed in a more orderly way by a bankruptcy judge. if you look at the people who lost, because of the government actions, we are talking about tens of thousands of americans who were punished as a resu

the committee has. before you today are the findings of the judicatories subcommittee in the matter of representative charles b. rangel. that subcommittee found that 11 counts in a statement of alleged violation were proven by a clear and convincing evidence. the 11 counts relate to four general areas of misconduct. responded's improper solicitation of individuals and entities with business and interest before the house to fund at the charles b. rangel center for public service at the city college of new york and the use of official sources. responses refusal to file full and complete disclosure statements for the years 1998 and 2008. respondents acceptance of a favor or benefit from his land or related to his use of a residential rents stabilized apartment as a campaign office under circumstances that created an appearance of impropriety, and respondents felt a report and pay taxes on his dominican villa. the subcommittee found that respondent's actions and accumulations of actions reflected poorly on

hsa has a seat on the committee. they hold the majority of the contracts for the shelter for writers. their relationship is the -- that we provide information about the concerns and the data we have collected to all agencies. some of the information the committee has provided around access issues have been part of the change in policies around reservations days and changes locations as part of another process, so hsa has the information from the shelter monitoring committee, the service providers themselves, and my understanding is they use that information in making some of their decisions. supervisor campos: is the shelter monitoring committee under hsa? >> no, it is not. as far as i understand, it is under the legislative branch. it is under the board of supervisors that created the administrative code. the staff is a department of public health staff, but the shelter monitoring committee is not under the department of public health. supervisor campos: the committee staff its staff of hsa? >> of dph. i am employed

the committee recommended a reprimand.e also found violations for misuse of official resources in the matter of james traffic kant. among other numerous violations found against him, they found had he directed members of his congressional staff to perform personal labor and services related to his boat and his farm. taking into account all of representative trafficant's violations, including bribery, they recommended that he be expelled. respondent has been found to have violated tax laws. the committee also found violations for tax related conduct in the matter of representative newt gingrich. he failed to seek and failed to follow legal advice, thus failing to ensure that the activities were in accordance with the internal revenue code. the committee also found that representative gingrich should have known that information transmitted to the committee was inaccurate, incomplete and unreliable. based on that conduct, the committee recommended that representative gingrich be reprimanded. they also found that representativ

to the committee. at this time i would like to introduce evidence number one through 549 for the record. >> any questions? >> with all due respect, i am not in a position to pass judgment on what counsel is about to do. i have never known that this proceeding even existed in summary judgment if that is what he is about to do. any lawr that i have talked to said that the commiee -- >> if i may interrupt mr. rangel, just to clarify, we weren't notified, as were you come out of this motion. -- as were you, of this motion. we will hear the motion, the argument from the committee counsel and whatever argument you may choose to make, but if you wish to be heard, in an opening statement, we will hold any ruling on that motion in abeyance so that if you wish to be heard, we will hear you. >> i appreciate the chair. would that include the right for me to have a lawyer? >> you may hire whomever you wish as a lawyer. that is up to you. >> you have seen the record. two million dollars already, and i have been advi

the tax writing committee. this is one of the most important committee posts in congress. all of the fallout from these ethics -- these alleged ethics violations. and here we heard earlier from an ethics subcommittee that he is guilty on 11 of 12 of those counts of violating house rules. so what are we waiting for now? if you were to call -- if this were to be like a court proceeding, this would be the sentencing phase. they call it a sanctions hearing. and charlie rangel is there by himself without a lawyer. representing himself. the worst thing that could happen would be this committee saying he should be expelled from the house of representatives. we're thinking that's unlikely. that's normally reserved for a member of congress who has been convicted in criminal proceedings. rangel certainly has not been. but then there's other varying degrees whether censure, when reprimand, maybe he could face a pine. but this is really going to be the moment where we hear him speak and we get to see the situation unfold. >> brianna, i have to tell you, i can't take my eyes off this s

i would turn out to the committee for guidance. the democrats have been noticed that we have a recorded vote. so that has been postponed. i retract the statement. are recorded vote has now been rolled, so we will now go to the time in our proceedings when members may, under the five minute rule, as questions that they may have. i will turn first to the ranking member for his five minutes. >> madam chair, i will defer questions to my colleagues, but i want to respond directly to mr. rangel about two matters that he raised in his statement. mr. lewis referenced the fact that as a young man mr. rangel volunteered in came and marched with him and sell, alabama, to rightsing civil and justice for all. i was born in slema before -- in selma before the march, and i wanted to know that is one of many proud part of your legacy. as someone that is born in selma, i am glad that you came and did what you did to make america a better place. i want to make it perfectly clear, though, that in my statement and i just read checked the facts, i did

barton, the committee has a broad jurisdiction. what were those telecom issues follow on the priority is? >> guest: the number one immediate priority is going to be health care because of the emphasis on appealing obama cared and then replacing it with something that is much more in tune with what the american people want. telecommunications is going to be a high priority, especially preventing the fcc for regulating the internet. and as i said earlier, if we can put together a bipartisan reform package in the universal service fund, i think i would be something that we could move. so health care would be number one. i would cite energy and telco would be kind of co-equal number two. and then, oversight -- where one of the committees that has a specific oversight subcommittee. and it's going to be very, very busy just having oversight over the various agencies and the obama administration and the jurisdiction of the energy commerce committee. >> you recently said privacy was an issue of importance to you. we'll be right in a privac

barton, did the committee -- if you're chairman, the committee has a broad jurisdiction. where will tech and telecom issues fall on the committee's priorities? >> guest: the number one, immediate priority is going to be health care because of the emphasis on repealing obamacare. and then replacing it with something that's much more in tune with what the american people want. telecommunications is going to be a high priority, especially preventing the fcc from regulating the internet. and as i said earlier, if we can put together a bipartisan reform package on the universal service fund, i think that'd be something that we could, that we could move. so health care will be number one, i'd say energy and telco would be kind of co-equal, number two, and then oversight. we're one of the committees that has a specific oversight subcommittee, and it's going to be very, very busy just having oversight over the various agencies in the obama administration that are within the jurisdiction of the energy and commerce committee. >> host: you recently said that privacy was an issue of

or took it to the committee chairs, members of the committee, i testified before committees to move that policy forward, mr. speaker. and there was an ear for a policy discussion. that ear was there on the part of the committee chairs, the members of the committee to a certain degree with the leadership that would he seek to accommodate those concerns that i would bring forward. and i'm convinced most of the members were in the same condition. there was an ear there and the system was set up so that the wisdom of the american people could be poured into the 435 members of congress and we would sort those issues out and raise the priorities of them and as we brought those issues here and those priorities came to the top, this congress acted upon those priorities, at least the process and the system was wired to do that. sometime in 2007 perhaps that began to evolve. sometimes we did have a legitimate appropriations process where an open rule and an amendment was brought down to the floor and introduced and if it met the rules of the parliamentarian, it would be deemed in order and on

and have the committee make a recommendation to the board or hear it in committee and use that recommendation? president yee riley: i'm okay with the committee to recommend. secretary schulmann: if that's the direction the commission would like to go, staff can send an invitation following this meeting to the supervisor staff for the next legislation and policy committee. president yee riley: we'll ask that question at the committee meeting. do i have a motion to table this? director dick-endrizzi: we don't want to table it. we want to continue it to the call of the chair, being reassigned to the legislation and policy committee to be heard and depending upon the timing of the schedule, if the board of supervisors, either the legislation and policy committee is responsible, will be permitted or heard again at the full commission for a full commission comment. secretary schulmann: is that a motion? or does this go back to committee? do we need to make a motion? i don't believe so. thank you, commissioners, that will be referred back to committee. commissioners, would you like items 8 and 9 tog

the rules committee. you have a set of rules for which your responsible for interpreting. the president or supervisors can send the legislation to committee. those are about the only roles that you have. everything else is by your own rules. >> for me, the point have been making is that we need to have an open and transparent process. i don't read this as requiring an amendment of the rules. i would have a problem with the motion if that is what it was interpreted to mean. i think that we can act on both without having to meet the threshold so but the process can go forward. we can do that and still comply with the rules and we can do this and still comply with what the state law has. >> the board of supervisors is responsible for interpreting the rules and ordinarily you have relied upon the clerk to help you. the reason why this has become a question is because the political reform act will play a much more significant process. this will not be the situation if this is voted upon. this will influence th

for as long as i am in the ethics committee, that will be my attitude and that of the committee. we will have a zero tolerance policy for all violations of the standards. we are in favor of a healthy football. in favor of football as something positive in our lives. we don't want cheaters. we don't want doping. we don't want any type of abuses to be tolerated in terms of respecting the rules. we don't want any illicit advantages to take place. this is a personal experience for me. when i decided to become a part of fifa, and to take on this responsibility, i didn't think i would have to face these types of cases. however, here i am. i took on this responsibility and all the members of the ethics committee have taken on this responsibility. and we need to face these problems. we can't ignore them. these from my introductory comments. speaking from the heart. >> as usually all decisions will be available to you just after the press conference. >> well, that was the chair of fifa's ethics committee spelling out the the penalties delivered to a hand full of committee members there. b

he it is chairman on the energy committee and was active on the judiciary committee. a very bright person, very flexible, and somebody that was willing to work across i'll. i had the privilege when i was subcommittee chairman to have him as my ranking member on the energy subcommittee. he was just very, very good person to work with. on the political side, i welcome his successor as a part of the republican new majority. take the politics out of it, and rick boucher is one of the good folks and is an example of what being a good congressman is. he will be missed as a person, but again, on the political side of it, the bigger the republican majority, the better. i am certainly pleased that we have a new republican in that district. >> another big issue is this need for spectrum for mobile broadband and lots of other uses. there are various schools -- feelings on dealing with spectrum. one calls for reallocating a chunk of spectrum known as the d-block for a communications network. reduce stand on that issue? >> that is a very vexing issue, a very technical issue. depen

the chair of the committee was going to be here this morning.nfortunately, he is ill and he extends his apologies and has asked me to follow up on some of the points that he wanted to stress that after meeting with supervisor campos earlier this month. you will find three reports in front of you. they cover three different areas, standard of care report, an analysis and overview of all standard of care complaints received for the fiscal year 09/10. august quarterly reports cover the last quarter of 2009, 2010. the newest report was just approved at yesterday's meeting. it covers the site inspection, the number of complaints received from july 1 to september 30. the chair also wanted to use the opportunity to talk more about the policy recommendations the committee has made in the past and wants to focus on in this upcoming fiscal year. there are four things the committee would like to see the city and county look back, explore, and hopefully put into practice. one is the ability for the system that currently exists, the changes reservation syste

we at the budget committee said we would ask the curriculum committee to take this up, but i really want the board to be involved in a discussion about the process that we are now using, how we assess the effectiveness, how week -- for instance, one of the things i learned at the committee, years ago, was that there was a pop -- and i should say at least that there is a lot of -- you know, these are services many school districts did not think for a very effective way to spend these federal dollars to help students. it was a process or an opportunity that was presumed to, or known to, largely be the result of lobbying by private providers to the federal government when no child left behind was passed. we were setting up some rules for our own providers and our own schools that seemed logical to me. we asked that services have to be provided at the school site. many other districts were prohibiting providing days of the school site. we thought there was an opportunity to have alignment between these tutoring students as -- is to trim services and instruction at the schools. we thought tha

but i really want to thank you for being part of this committee. i know that i still have one more point, but everyone i have asked to be on this -- my other appointee has said this is so much work i cannot do it. when i see you here tonight and know all the other nights you have been at these meetings, i really want to extend our heartfelt appreciation and gratitude for all your time and service to the children of this district. thank you. commissioner wynns: actually, some of my comments will follow and be in line with some of the things that commissioner fewer said. i want to thank all of you. a particularly thank you young men for testifying this evening. i think it is a difficult thing to do. we thank you very much for that. this is what i have been thinking. i appreciate that we have -- we are evaluating the individual program funded through prope h, to the public in richmond fund, as much as we can. but i do not know and am interested in the staff meeting representation to us about how we actually can look at the -- the goals we have set for

to the committee. at this time i would like to introduce evidence number one through 549 for the record. >> any questions? >> with all due respect, i am not in a position to pass judgment on what counsel is about to do. i have never known that this proceeding even existed in summary judgment if that is what he is about to do. any lawye tomittee -- >> if i may interrupt mr. rangel, just to clarify, we weren't notified, as were you come out of this motion. -- as were you, of this motion. we will hear the motion, the argument from the committee counsel and whatever argument you may choose to make, but if you wish to be heard, in an opening statement, we will hold any ruling on that motion in abeyance so that if you wish to be heard, we will hear you. >> i appreciate the chair. would that include the right for me to have a lawyer? >> you may hire whomever you wish as a lawyer. that is up to you. >> you have seen the record. two million dollars already, and i have been advised that this hearing could cost a

seeing none, we move on to item k, the advisory committee reports and appointments to the advisory committees, and we have won tonight, and i would like to call up our staff, chris and cathy. -- in we have -- and we have one. >> good evening, commissioners. tonight, we have a presentation from our community advisory committee. we have two cochairs and two students presenting, so that is the bulk of our presentation, and they have filed a report to the superintendent based on their role as conduits to and from the community, to go out to the community, and inform the community about the impact and gather information and feedback from the community in terms of what they see as impactful and the priorities moving forward, and they put these base recommendations on the findings and put them in their report, which you have before you come to the superintendent, and they are ready to present to you tonight. >> good evening. commissioners, my name is -- i am the parents of twin girls in seventh grade at hoover middle school. i am the co-chair of the community advisory committee, the public education

i'm the chief counsel for the committee, to my right is debra morris, counsel to the committee and toleeft is donald sherman, also counsel to the committee. that the time i would move to introduce exhibits 1 through 549 into the record. >> is there objection? >> well, madame chair, if it pleases with all due respect, i'm not in a position to pass judgment on what counsel is about to do. i've never known that this proceeding even existed, a summary judgment if that's what he's about to do. any lawyer that i've talked with have said that this committee has no -- >> if i may interrupt, mr. rangel. just to clarify this. there is, we were noticed as were you of the -- this motion. i would like to make clear, however, that we will hear the motion, the argument from the committee counsel and whatever argument you may choose to make, but that if you wish to be heard in an opening statement, if you wish to proceed with witnesses, we will hold any ruling on that motion in abeyance so that if you wish to be heard we will hear you. >> i appreciate the chance. would that include the right for me t

i am the chair of the committee. we have been joined by david chu, bevan dufty, carmen chu is in route. the clerk of the committee is erica cheng. we want to thank the s.f.gtv personnel covering this meeting. please call item two. >> item 2. approve the minutes of the october 19, 2010 meeting. this is an action item. supervisor campos: we have a motion. is there any member of the public that would like to speak on this item? seeing none, public comment is closed. colleagues, can we take that without objection? please call item three. >> item 3. citizens advisory committee report. this is an information item. supervisor campos: good morning. >> good morning. this morning, there are two items on your agenda from the cac. the first is action items 6, allocating prop k funds to the mta for the central subway utility relocation contract 2. cac members had quite a few questions on this item, and they were all answered by authority and sfmta staff. i will mention a couple of concerns. one member was concerned that the prop

i always felt that san francisco should have three committees. you need the people's committee. you need the board of supervisors. you need the mayor, you know, and his committee. this would have -- we would already have this ironed out. it is really important that you know the next mayor. just take time and relax. there is no set in law for anyone. he will be sitting as lieutenant governor. you must go back and do the things that have been done. it seems he has been the wrong politician for the people. you have the chance to weigh in on this. i have been telling people we are going to have two chinese mayors in oakland and san francisco. one thing i like about asian government -- the execute and put politicians away when they do that. i was thinking maybe some of this is a joy to come to us here in the bay area. so i am looking forward to embrace all of my culture. [speaking multiple languages] president chiu: thank you. next speaker. >> i am a person who firmly believes that we should have america for the people, by the people. and i feel that we need to bring spirituality to

the commitment that was made on committee and has been made publicly outside of committee and in the newspapers is that right now, currently, mr. shoemaker's position will be filled by a resident. what we did discuss in committee is the fact that it had -- that the post had been advertised. we were seeking applications -- actively seeking applications from residents. had been going on two weeks before we actually met in committee. i believe one person had filed an application. the process will be open for another two weeks, but the spot is designated for a resident, and i feel very confident that a resident will be placed in that position. it does not seem to me that the thing for us to do right now is to hold up appointments of members of tida who have been sitting on tida and doing a very good job. there is nothing, in my opinion, that should prevent us from moving forward on the appointments we currently have, particularly because we are the ones who will be approving the resident, and i think we can all feel very secure in knowing that ultimately a resident will be appointed to t

have the same value as being the chairman of the committee. think that is a valid discussion we should have looking forward. but the rules of the conference everybody knew what they were at this point and i would be surprised if the conference votes to change those rules. >> let me pick up on the of the minority scheme. by dent of having been here and seeing a few transitions in congress it seals that what -- it seals that what goes around comes around and every frustrated minority leads to the majority where there are rules changes. what is your philosophy of respecting the rights of the minority knowing some day you may be in it? >> i invited the chair of the transition in 1994 and he gave as you couple of really good points, i thaought. one is sweat the small stuff. at the ends of the day that is what matters most because we now own the operation of the house, we are responsible for it and we will be held accountable for it. so, how the house functions is our responsibility. it is like taking over a business, you are now in charge, you get

i think those are going to be the committee priorities. frankly, they're the committee priorities for the republicans are in charge or democrats are in charge. so i think it also certainly is regardless of who's in charge of the committee, those are the sort of hot button issues. those are likely to be the priorities moving forward. >> host: just to follow up really quickly, what should we expect is the upton, was widely believed to be the firm running for the full committee, what should we expect to see on that front in terms of a telecom rewrite? what kind of things do you think upton led full committee might look to? >> guest: well, he's hardly been talked about. his op-ed in the "washington times" talking about is terms of regulation and engagement oversight. both a lot of oversight both to the fcc, of the btop program, everything sort of within jurisdiction. but you know, but didn't participate -- but didn't barton participated in the last attempt at a comprehensive rewrite, which was in 96 and dingell and markey participated as

the energy and commerce committee is a terrific committee with incredible jurisdiction. i am one of the few members from the northwest on it. there is not a bad subcommittee there. i know i will have some other responsibilities to attend to. we have to sort of all-out and see the chairman is. the steering committee will be making those decisions and whether or not there is a waiver on the six-year term limits. i don't know, and i am kind of dodging you on that one for now. >> you just mentioned briefly the other responsibilities. what might those be in republican leadership? >> i was not anticipating being named gop transition chairman, so i don't know what the leadership may have in mind. i think -- i have been at the leadership table for about a year and a half and have really enjoyed the work. i think i accomplished the tax -- the tasks that were given to me in a successful way, and i look forward to staying involved at the leadership table. i hope to stay on as the chairman of the gop leadership, but that decision will be made by the speaker to be, john boehner. the

the committee will come to order. i'd like to record to reflect that all eight members of the subcommittee are present. this hearing of the adjudicatory subcommittee of the committee on standards of official conduct in the matter of representative charles b. rangel will come to order. the constitution authorizes the house of representatives to discipline its members. in the house, the committee on standards of the official conduct discharge with recommending and enforcing ethical standards and ensure that members and staff act in a manner befitting the public trust. it's under that authority that we are meeting here today. this hearing is authorized by house rule 11, clause three and committee rule 23. the purpose of this hearing is to determine whether any of the 13 counts included in the alleged violation in the matter of representative charles b. rangel have been proved by clear and convincing evidence. on june 17, 2010, a bipartisan investigation subcommittee of the committee on standards of official conduct adopt

may we have a committee report from commissioner norton who chaired this committee? >> yes, this is actually a change item. find the change. is very small. we are just simply changing the ability in the board agenda, according to the rolls. present -- according to the rules. president kim: did you approve this? could we have a reading by someone or the designee? >> madam chair, i would like to have one change. p-20. this is the modification of one section in the following manner. section10.1 -- section 10.1 reads a certain way. this would add the following language. alternatively, the board president would be after the business begins as deemed appropriate, and a temporary order can be agreed to in advance by the president and superintended for an individual meeting or for a specified period of time. the remainder of this remains as previously written. president kim: i do not have any public speakers for this item. are there any public speakers? seeing none, members from the board? roll call, please. secretary: [reading roll] six ayes. president kim: the next item is

that committee. this is a process that we can lead forward with. if we can have the asian which you are concerned about in terms of asking the clerk to prepare for a narrower process, we can have those issues building needed more and we can delineate them through and more open process and having the committee as a whole and the nomination. >> one lydgate the progress on which she has asked the consul just in order to get everyone on the same page. the mind? this is a good time for you to update the body. >> i think what we have is an opportunity to marry the two processes to get there. the work we have done in anticipation, we started a process already which is what you have in your hand. what i will deal with outside counsel is to further delineate which authorities are responsible? >> i think that we can marry the two. you have a document in front of you which has the board rules and the political reform act delineated as well. >> if it is ok, i will turn back to the roster. >> i think what i would

the real process is, is that the appropriations committees ignore authorizing committees. $380 billion a year in discretionary funds are appropriated every year that are unauthorized. and with that rebuff to the authorizing committees, they also put in any earmarks that they want or any other member wants. esit's time that stops. it's time we reearn the trust of the american people. with that i'd yield to my colleague, the senator from arizona, senator mccain. mr. mccain: mr. president? the presiding officer: the senator from arizona. mr. mccain: mr. president, i want to thank senator coburn and i also would like to express my appreciation to senator mccaskill and senator udall for joining in this very important amendment. and as the senator from oklahoma mentioned, this issue has been debated many times on the floor of the senate. there has been efforts to repeal certain most egregious earmarks. the bridge to nowhere in alaska was one of those that became more famous than others. and i have to say to my colleagues, i have seen with my own eyes -- and i say this with great regret -- th

the rules committee considered these appointments, and the reason why we forwarded the item as a committee report is because we have a deadline that requires that we act at this board meeting either to reject or to approve. with respect to the various appointments, my understanding is that commissioners cheng, elberling and samaha have been serving on the tida board, and with respect to commissioner richardson -- she is serving right now, but she was recently appointed to that position. there were two additional appointments made to the tida board. those appointments were not forwarded to this meeting because the timeline to act for those appointments is actually different. in terms of what transpired at the rules committee, there was a motion to move this forward without a recommendation. i can only speak for myself to say that my preference was to continue these items because of the concerns that were raised by residents of treasure island, who were very worried about the fact that there is no island resident that has been nominated and that the one person who lives on the island who is

i am going to ask the steering committee to clarify the rules. i am fine on having a term limit rule for chairman. i would not have gotten to be chairman when i did if we had not have had term limits on chairman, because the prior chairman would have a petition to continue to be chairman. i am an advocate of term limits, but i think you apply its in your majority time, and i don't think it is a consecutive minority pejorative. i think i am eligible for two more terms. i am going to petition on that process. that is not successful, then i will ask for a waiver, and i think will be successful. the process is we have a transition team that put so rules package together, try to get the rule clarified in the transition, and if necessary, put it before the conference to have zero vote, and then whatever the rule is, led by that rule. >> joining us this week is our guest reporter, at the editor of national journal, buhle on a grunwald -- giuliano grunwald. >> i am getting very positive feedback in terms of support feedback in terms of support for

president kim: this will be referred to curriculum committee and budget committee. the next is board members' proposals, item r, for first reading. it is in support of denouncing the deportation of shing ma "steve" li, a dream at student at city college of san francisco. we need a movement to suspend rules. [roll call vote] >> five ayes. president kim: may we have a motion and second for a formal introduction? i will do the reading of the resolution. our resolution is in support of denouncing the deportation of shing ma steve li, a dream at student at city college of san francisco. this is bipartisan legislation addresses the plight of young people brought to the united states as immigrant children, who have since kept out of trouble. each year, 65,000 united states- raised students to qualify for the been -- who qualify for the dream act frederick from high school. assistant senate majority leader dick durbin asked the u.s. department of homeland security secretary, janet napolitano, to halt the deportation of immigrants students who could earn legal status under t

. >> president kim, i believe there other members of the committee in the audience. if you could recognize them, i would appreciate it. president kim: a recognized those in the audience. -- i recognize those. >> we appreciate the opportunity to report to you and present to your annual report to the superintendent. i am joined by other members of our community, and they will rise to be recognized. [laughter] [applause] i want to also acknowledge and recognize our school district staff people out. cathy, who was here just a minute ago, who does a great job of supporting our work. [applause] and we have walter, who is our program evaluator. [applause] both have provided a tremendous support to our committee, made up of parents, community members, school district principleals. prop h, the enrichment funds, was approved by the majority of voters in san francisco. our school district -- some resources. these funds in which the 55,000 students at every grade level, every public school in san francisco -- these funds enrich the 55,000 students. together, feedback from the co