my name is douglas yepp. i'd like to oppose this item, basically for the same reason, it is a brand new liquor license. in that area, i think we have plenty of places for patrons to buy liquor. i am kind of surprised that business owners do not oppose this because of a certain sense, if you're going to sell liquor at the theater, that means you're not going to get new business from the surrounding merchants. i am doing it more as a theoretical idea that this area has too many liquor licenses already. in a certain sense, it is kind of relevant to draw out of the city basically opposes cigarette sales aggressively all over the city, and then why, in a certain sense, it is not as aggressive when it comes to selling liquor all over the city. you kind of wonder which is more harmful, cigarette smoking or people drinking and of using lacquer all over the city? i just bring that up more as a general idea to compare how in one instance, one type of item is aggressively prohibited and the other item, in a certain sens

douglas yepp, a native san franciscan, living here 59 years. i would like to speak in support of this nomination. it makes me feel good when you see people with real ability get appointed here in city hall. i would also like to thank everyone sitting here, because i think when there is full participation in whatever happens in city hall, there will be an eventual end of nepotism and true evil administrators will take over here at city hall, so this is a perfect example where there are so many watchful eyes here at city hall that only the besable will be appointed. i do thank mayor lee for this nomination. i also think he should follow up by doing the right thing and staying neutral in this sheriff debate. people must be judged fairly on their abilities, and please, no more cronyism. the only way to is he going to end is when we have full hearings, like today, and like for gao across the hallway. this way there will be no more nepotism in san francisco and everybody, and i mean everybody, will be treated fairly. thank you. supervisor kim: thank

my name is douglas yepp. as a concept, i am in support of this resolution. with the disclosure of no funding source, at least in my opinion, it is like putting up a skyscraper without having a finite source to pay for it. if you were in private industry, one would see very prudently, if you did not know your funding source, and that comparison is accurate, maybe we should proceed very cautiously. in this resolution, it mentions a term of 12 years. i would suggest maybe there is a mandatory yearly review to make sure everything is proceeding according to plan. also, i would like to thank all three members of this committee for aggressively asking questions. from my experience at city hall for the last five years and in the past, i have seen too many instances where budget items were very passably discussed. it always crossed my mind why common sense questions were not being asked for those items. i would like to thank the three supervisors today for aggressively questioning what is involved here. i think we ought to consider maybe asking a private company wha