sit going to be a kad ek and eir, the very low, low income, the affordable projects are lagging behind in meeting our goals. this is seemingly to me a simple fast tracking. it not even a larger tracking but even just making that initial determination within 60 days. >> commissioner moore? >> for openers, i like to just state that the road for supervisor's wiener legislation and i vote against it is more or less 99 percent a draft and supervisor kim's legislation and the organization has thoroughly examined those issues which are important for the process of sequel ceqa and what is happening and that is an underlying process and the suggestions by the president of the board adds a level of discussion which we can perhaps make some decisions today but that we can take some arguments here but move it forward and let it be discussed at the next level. i am surprised at some of the comments and push backs the department is giving. it's something that is halfheartedly supporting something but immediately falling it back. i allow for modification but then i don't. i appreciate the department

then the ceqa determination and kad ek determination would have been appealed and as a result the ceqa exemption could have been appealed. but i will go over how the -- unless you have another question. >> in dolores park that was approved at some point. >> dolores park, the planning department issued a negative declaration which has a 20 day circulation period which at any time any individual can comment on the negative declaration and request that it be heard before the planning commission which is also an appeal. it's a different animal to the board of supervisors and that process would not be affected under any legislation. do you want know continue on beach l.a.? >> sure. >> okay. very quickly under supervisor kim's legislation, there would have been notification to interested parties when the exemption was originally issued and that would occur by mail and online an appeal could be filed after issuance of that exemption but would not be scheduled after the parks and recreation. and then the appeal window on the project would stay until the last building permit issue which will be

sit going to be a kad ek and eir, the very low, low income, the affordable projects are lagging behind in meeting our goals. this is seemingly to me a simple fast tracking. it not even a larger tracking but even ju

environmental process an we want to do it as quickly as possible to make the determination between kad ek, nag deck and eir, but as you start to point out the position could have too much review and not enough review. we had a couple projects which was 100 percent affordable and within a block of each other and the same wind effect on both projects and no discussion about the affordable project and hours of discussion about the wind effects on the market rate. obviously, i'm not saying, i think we have to -- the impact is the same no matter what's there for those around there, those who are affected by traffic, sidewalks and other things that a project has. i think codifying this is not a place to put it. if you want to fast track affordable housing project do it in other ways. but to try to cut short on the necessary environmental reviews is saying let's do a quickie mr. because it's such a beneficial thing. couple things i wanted to ask for miss rogers. i notice in the memo, i don't want to go into too much detail today but as we move forward and try to make a motion to forward, we said