. >> does the committee advisory board, all of these folks have been invited already. >> they would like to come. >> terrific. >> thank you for that update. >> is there any relationship on that side? >> this could be as easy as the person trying to be conscientious who was going to do the suicide or the firearm, he wanted it right by police station. we don't know. >> thank you. >> are there any academy classes in the budget for next year. if there is none this year or next year? >> the supervisor is it the exigency of the circumstances. they were finding some way to do and backs. they are very genuine and they appreciate the reality of the circumstance. >> -- if they don't find any academy classes. i'm glad they are sincere and i hope that they act on that. there putting the city in potential risk of losing officers. how many recruits have we sent in and how many do we get out of a class, something like 30. >> laterals, we have a better graduation rate. there are a lot of police officers right now because the cities have not renegotiated. they are out there to be had. >> you talked about

of this bill was discussed through three committees, when this was debated two years ago, this was not in the house version of the bill. this house advisory board did not exist. when it passed through three committees and here debated on the house floor, went to the senate, we knew the bill couldn't pass so they brought one out that didn't go through a single committee hearing with this in it. and we have here the letter that many members, bipartisan members, dr. fleming, dr. beginning re-- dr. gingrey, myself, many others, bob filner, dr. mcdermott, jim mcgovern. on and on and on. that think this is a bad idea. why do we think it's a bad idea? we believe the people's representative, that would be us, if there's going to be a cut medicare some nameless, faceless board shouldn't have

the advisory boards were set up to make sure that before any land would be transferred from the shipyard, that it could be approved by the board. because there were two other committees that had been set up, dealing with the shipyard, the citizens advisory committee, you had the redevelopment agency that came later, the board spoke to whether or not that land would be transferred. in 2000, the year 2000, the voters voted and it was 87% of the voters who said, if any of the land is to be transferred from the shipyard to the city -- [tone] supervisor campos: thank you very much, ms. jackson. let me call more names. [reading names] >> good afternoon, supervisors. linda richardson. i have over 25 years of environmental justice. i am a land use expert. i want to bring to your attention something the new members of the board need to know once and for all. the most comprehensive health assessment of any resident of san francisco was conducted in thebayview. -- the bayview. they got together with the department of public health. three people conducted the most comprehensive study. indicators had not been identified before. you should ask the department of public health. they

advisory committee. >> i just wanted to say that at the last board meeting, ortiz vice, and director -- vice chair ortiz and director kim asked that we do a little more outreach, and we did. with the further out -- it, we have some new members to recommend to the board, and bob will give more information on that -- with the further out reach we did. >> we do have eight positions on our cac up for appointment or reappointment. we have 15 total members of our citizens advisory committee. as maria mentioned, after bringing an initial slate for recommendation to the board, we did go back and do additional outreach , including advertising to a number of different publications, and re- circulation to our partners. the solicitation resulted in an additional six applications. after reviewing all of the applications, the various constituencies that they represented, we have incorporated three of those additional applications in the group that is being brought forward for recommendation, so with the current recommendations, we have five new members coming to the cac and three members of for reappointment. i can a

i was co-founder of the board of supervisors libraries advisory committee. i am a huge supporter of libraries. but this one, brought a blank. i don't have time to go into them. the issue is that the library originally planned and to renovate the current site. the current plan will cost $8 million or more. the renovation of the existing library. i wanted to talk also about the eir. it is not adequate and the hope you send it back for revision. it fails to assume that they try and go plot as open space. it was taken by eminent domain to be open space. and under the neighborhood park bond and open space program, it is required the use that for any other purpose. the library is a non- recreational facility. the open space element defines libraries as non-recreational facilities. i hope you will remember that when new vote on this matter. the discussion is also totally wrong and inadequate when it talks about general plan consistency. it is also wrong when it talks about mandatory land use. these things must be corrected. i hope you send it back for revision. the

advisory committee. the authority is an 11-member citizen advisory committee. authority staff nor cac make recommendations as to appointments to that body. that is done to the plans and programs committee and ultimately the authority board. two requirements for cac members is that they beat san francisco residents and that they appear before this committee to talk to bet their interest and qualifications to serve on the committee. the two vacancies we have right now are both from term expectations. first from rosie west and another, jackie sacks. miss saxby is here to speak to her reappointment. i understand ms. west is also interested in being reappointed. she was planning to be here today, but i do not see her. commissioner campos: thank you. why don't we hear from this sex -miss sacks. good morning. >> good morning, commissioners. my name is jackie sacks. i have been involved with the transportation authority since the passage of prop. b in 1989. i was once of 56 individuals tht brought it. i was appointed to the cac in 1997. i am up for my eight reappointment. i have gone this far and i want to continue serving. i feel, with the background that i have, with what has been going on in the city, being disabled, i can d

the board of supervisors, six other city boards, and the two community advisory groups with jurisdiction over the site, and the citizen committee, the same old, and become a dead rhetoric is what we have been hearing all this time. [tone] supervisor campos: if there is any other member of the public would like to speak, please come forward. good afternoon. >> mr. campos, supervisors, real briefly, the health department may have employee issues. i don't know. i am not in the health department. but certainly, we should absolutely not allow that to be a backdoor way of undoing what the citizens of this city overwhelmingly supported in the shipyards and the board of supervisors support it, also. someone has said, let the chips fall where they may. the chips have fallen. this project was overwhelmingly support it. it needs to go forward. the thing that disturbs me the most, on this issue and a lot of other things, i have -- i am representing the san francisco naacp and our church -- the thing that kind of really gets me is that we love to talk about the environment, but somehow, those who seem so concerned by the environment never a

board, without opposition. thank you so much. madam clerk, call item number four. >> hearing to consider appointing one member, a term ending october 19, 2013, to the eastern neighborhood citizens advisory committee. there is one seat and one applicant. supervisor kim: thank you. ms. kristian ongoco is here today. same format, spend a couple minutes describing your background, your interest in serving on eastern neighborhood's citizen advisory committee. >> i am and urban planner and a soma resident. i have been involved with the community and with many of the neighborhood groups. i hold a master's degree in public administration, as well as in urban planning. so i do have the experience and the familiarity with the land use and to the development issues. and since i do live in the neighborhood, , i would definitely love to be a part of the planning process, of managing the growth and the development of the eastern neighborhoods. my primary interest in this whole process would be transit access and pedestrian safety. supervisor kim: thank you. are there any questions for our nominee? i know that we have both met. you're one of my nominations for district 6, and thank you so much for being interes

board of supervisors, there's office, and everybody in here. i worked in the community youth center as the project manager. i wanted to express my appreciation for the citizens advisory committee staff for really engaging the community and all the community-based organizations to really get their idea of what is important in terms of servicing our youth and families. i want to thank brian for his leadership. for all these years, he has been a community activist, putting community first. second, i want to really thank the department for understanding the needs for a population of traditional asian youth. their understanding of financial literacy and the importance of education in the future. on the other hand, it is also about

of this bill was discussed through three committees, when this was debated two years ago, this was not in the house version of the bill. this house advisory board did not exist. when it passed through three committees and here debated on the house floor, went to the senate, we knew the bill couldn't pass so they brought one out that didn't go through a single committee hearing with this in it. and we have here the letter that many members, bipartisan members, dr. fleming, dr. beginning re-- dr. gingrey, myself, many others, bob filner, dr. mcdermott, jim mcgovern. on and on and on. that think this is a bad idea. why do we think it's a bad idea? we believe the people's representative, that would be us, if there's going to be a cut medicare some nameless, faceless board shouldn't have the right to do that and congress would abdicate its constitutional right to control spending, so that's the reason that this -- we're having this debate now. this never should have been in the health care bill. just right here before i yield to my friend from louisiana. president obama said on medicare reform, now we believe the reforms we propose strengthen medica

advisory board for the federal government. and then there are the federal financial disclosures. there is the white house questionnaire. and of course the questions from the confirming senate committee. all these are different, and the definitions they ask for are different, and an unsuspecting nominee, as i mentioned earlier, might actually fill out a form that says what is your income in the same way each time, but the question might have been different each time. it's easy to make a mistake, and then when you finally appeared before the confirming committee, you are innocent until nominated. washington, d.c., has become the only place where you could hire -- where you should hire a lawyer, an accountant and an ethics officer before you find a house and put your child in school. the motto around here has become innocent until nominated. every legal counsel since president nixon of the white house agrees with what i have just said. in the name of effective government, this process ought to be changed. there are some limits on what we can do in the senate. we have to respect separation of powers. in the end, the president has to conduct his own vetting process, and in the end, the s

advisory committee made up of cfos, and senior real property officers, and mr. peck and i both sit on the committee as well. one of the main objectives of the committee is to provide the board with a set of analytics and a set of information that allows them to hit the ground running. they don't have to take any of it because they're independent but we didn't want them showing up to an empty office. we wanted them showing up to as many months and as many blood, sweat and tears that week we can put into the analytics. if you approach it this way, that way, a lot of slicing and dicing or i think that will help accelerate. >> mr. peck. >> that's probably right% of the poor. i think given all the things we're doing now though, that if we knew we are getting legislation or if the legislation were passed, essentially we would be able to prevent the board it almost its first organizational meeting with a first cut of the property. so if it's 18 months to get them going on that, i think shortly after they need to be able to start making the decisions that i think we would all like to make. we could start moving properties through the pipeline. >> okay. the last question i would pro

committees they go to for evaluation. but here's the deal. at the end of the day, congress either votes up or down on this menu of cuts that's provided by the independent payment advisory board. yes, we can vote no. yes, we can turn down the recommendation of the independent payment advisory board. what happens then? according to statute we're not finished. congress then is required to produce the same level of cuts that was recommended by the board. maybe taking us some different places but still the same amount of money has to come out of the same federal program. that is the medicare program. well, what if congress gets together and says we don't like what the board has delivered to us, we're going to produce a different menu of cuts? but then wouldn't you know it, congress can't agree what those cuts will be. i know, i know, madam speaker, find it hard to believe where congress wouldn't agree with itself very much but it could happen at some point in the future that things would be so contentious in washington and so contentious in the house and the senate that we couldn't agree with each other on what bills cut would be. what happens then? what happens then is the cuts