goohaving heard both sides, i tk my inclination would be to have the party's brief the legal issues, because i think we can get that more expeditiously. i think it will help us potentially narrow the issues, but more importantly ensure that we have the appropriate procedure in place to have died during -- to have a hearing. my concern with the tell a factual testimony in the brief is while i think it may be helpful, i do have some concerns the timing may be not worth the added benefit, so i think that is where i am sitting right now. it seems the party are in agreement, and we could provide summary of testimony relatively soon, which would be advantageous to both sides, so i think we should strongly consider requiring them to do so. thoughts by other commissioners on what this should look like? >> it makes more sense for the commission to take public comment before reaching any decision, since is an agenda item. good >> my thought was that we would deliberate a public comment to the extent we need final determinations, we would do so after. >> i did not want the commission to make a

medical marijuana for a number of years sixteen states of legalized it is almost a million legal medical marijuana patients united states but still congress is not the only thing in the white house is not showing leadership when it comes to the full legalization of marijuana really like alcohol there's a chance that one of these initiatives to legally regulate marijuana either in colorado or washington state and this year on election day both are leading in the polls right now there's little question that the federal government whether it's obama or romney are going to come. there through them if they do but i think it's more that public opinion supports this the more states that say we're leading the way get out of the way federal government we want to do is responsible and what you are federal prosecutors are doing had nothing to do with protecting public safety public health i think we'll get it tipping point when sixty percent of americans you know say that and we see more and more states legalizing it in a state where you're asking the feds to support them rather than to undermine t

yes, we could brief the legal issues, i would say, and the ones that we referenced before we could read immediately, meeting the standard of proof and the procedures for the hearing. the other issues, we are capable of briefing them, all of the issues on the bullet list, but i question about them coming before the commission, and there are how the facts interact with the law. there is an allegation that before the sheriff was an office, he told his wife he was very powerful. it is our contention that he was referring to the power a share. that occurred before he was in office, and if that has been alleged, the argument goes that it is not quite so simple to say that anything you do before january 8 cannot be construed as before office, so i think that these issues are better dealt with based on the factual record and the abstract, but we can deal with them essentially based on the allegations and the charges if the commission wishes to, but the point that i want to make is that the commission has a responsibility under the charter to collect a full record, and making preliminary legal r

>> we legalize alcohol thanks be to god is legal in this country but it's much word than marijuana. >we're talking about heroin. >> so marijuana, i think, legalizing it, descrimmagizing and it is a no-brainer >> that i think you definitely need drastic reform. i saw a number today that a thousand people a week are dying in mexico because of drug violence. >> so you want -- >> maintain the penalties against -- >> no, [overlapping speakers] >> you have to change -- >> represents the younger generation, and i think he probably represents the future on. >> they're all potheads! >> i mean we were very hard- line on drugs, and it's not working. >> it's not working at all. >> you're not going to destroy any more people. >> who want to -- [overlapping speakers] >> who wants to go -- >> every time put to a vote, it gets more support. especially legalizing marijuana for medicinal use. >> the district of columbia permit that within the district. >> step by step. i know, i can run through the states if you want. but the fact is step by step, we're moving in that direction. we'll see legalization

commissioner hillis: 1 not try to legalize that unit? -- why not try to legalize that unit? >> two units. i am sorry. it is a four unit illegal building with a fifth illegal units. commissioner hillis: why not legalize it? >> it is not possible because of the zoning, as far as i know. in fact, it would be a windfall to us if we could. then we have an extra unit. but we do not know it would be possible. >> thank you. scott sanchez, planning department. just to confirm, the property is located in an rh-2 zoning district. we have the authorized use as a for family dwelling. a fifth unit would not be allowed under the density requirements in the code. there is no way to legalize the unit of this property. it is already over density for the zone. >> mr. duffy? >> joe duffy, dbi. it started back in 2009. we got a complaint. actually, housing went up on a routine inspection, and noticed there was an illegal units. we sent a notice of violation. there was a subsequent permit obtained. that building permit never got signed off. there is no history after that time of an electric probl

no medallions, you are not legal. they now cost million dollars. >> very expensive. >> so expensive that only big companies can afford them. so these drivers are not entrepreneurs, they are employees. >> it's because of the medallion. >> the purpose of these licenses is to keep outsiders out the purpose of a license so they can charge higher prices. >> john: one of the few remaining places you can start a taxi business is washington, d.c. >> it's the last bastion of free entrepreneurs in america. >> john: this lobbyist wants to end that freedom. >> you have to regulate. >> john: he wants to bring the medallion rules to the washington, d.c. he wants to cut the taxi cars in half. >> there is too many taxicabs. >> they don't think so. >> they like be allowed to work but the lobbyists convinced the d.c. councilman to sponsor his bill. >> we want to professionalize our taxicab system? >> we wanted want to make sure the customer has a good riding experience. >> john: that sounds good but regulations are in the books subject

what if drugs were legal. one country tried that. >> i think it's working. >> john: but not in america. americans keep passing more rules. >> what are we going to find illegal tomorrow? >> show me in the man and i'll show you the crime. you followed me around you would find three felonies? >> that is under statement. >> john: in america these days everything is illegal. what is more american than opening an lemonade stand? who is first? thank you very much. >> for years, kids that set up stands like this but today watch out. the police may bust you. >> i was like really scared because i didn't know what was going to happen. we had lemonade in front yard for three days and third day they shut us down. >> i could hear them from inside at my house, girls you have to shut the lemonade stand down. >> john: it made me want to open my stand. will the police bust me? >> there are so many vague laws that everybody arguably could be caught up in it. >> john: he says the avalanche of new laws, this is just what the feds

commissioner hillis: 1 not try to legalize that unit? -- why not try to legalize that unit? >> two units. i am sorry. it is a four unit illegal building with a fifth illegal units. commissioner hillis: why not legalize it? >> it is not possible because of the zoning, as far as i know. in fact, it would be a windfall to us if we could. then we have an extra unit. but we do not know it would be possible.

taylor's legal costs. but mr. silverleaf was saying any level from 250 to 250,000 or possibly even more, although i think it's extremely unlikely. now, my question to you was that that must have been communicate today you. >> not the gist of the likelihood of that. >> well, wasn't that the whole point of the waiting for legal counsel's view, to know what value he placed on the claim? >> yes. and i was told that leading counsel's view was that it was -- i think they gave it to me with cost, and i remember that it would be in that range. >> this just confuses it. i don't -- it would have been, frankly, ridiculous to have said, given you a global figure. they would have said, look, he's saying really worst case, 250k plus costs. they must have told you that, mr. murdoch. >> not, that's not what i recall. >> did you, did you not ask them why has the sum of 350,000 been offered without my -- that's your -- authority? >> they, the management of this, of this litigation, of this legal affair was something that i think, y

chair hur: obviously, to brief that, we would want the factual and legal basis behind that. any other questions? commissioner renne: i have questions. first, i want to understand about the city attorney's internal investigation on behalf of the mayor. putting aside the question of whether the sheriff has any obligation to cooperate in it, putting that question aside, is it your position that having filed the charges and preparing for a hearing before the ethics commission that the city attorney does not have a right to do an internal investigation? >> not at all, sir. we think that if the commission promulgates rules and procedures that are fair to both sides, we would be happy to have them investigate to the cows come home, because, quite honestly, there is nothing to fear here. we just want to make sure that a lot is followed, and the authority that we have been given, they are doing this on behalf of the mayor, they say that they are authorized, the city attorney is authorized to investigate under provisions of the san francisco campaign and governmental conduct code. com

i would not say that in many instances, legalizing -- "legal" is a strong term. in our business and sales business, we try to avoid that term. it has many implications. to say something illegal is -- to say something is legal or illegal has a lot of implications. we cannot really say. we can say it does permit it or not permit it. what is or is not authorized is a different statement. we have to be mindful. one thing i wanted to say about jeremy pose a question was, there are quite a few very good people in san francisco to go to if you want to legalize something that had been done without a permit in the past, or you want to get a permit for every model that was done or a bathroom that was added downstairs without a permit, and you feel like your uncle maybe was -- may have done it properly. oftentimes, it is no big deal. it is a good thing to do. there are many companies that specialize in doing just that. you can do that. it depends on your goal. if your goal is to sell the property or to avoid neighbor complete -- there could be two different goals with two d

and drugs, should they be legalized? with prodding by me, the president of columbia suggest that we should take a look or take the profit out of the drug running to starve the terrorists. and we all remember how offended ann was over hillary rosen's stay at home comments last week. thanks to that that tape last night, we now know what ann romney really thought when she heard that remark, she thought she just haefrd the lottery. let me finish with great news, things are looking up south of here. we start with the secret service sex scandal. ron kessler, and ron was assigned to protect president obama, he is running for the united states state as a republican from the state of maryland. let's start right now, the secret service continuing to investigate one of the most alarming scandals in history involving prostitutes ahead of the president's arrival this weekend. the congressional investigators are looking into the possibility that as much as 20 secret service agents were involved. that's nine more than the secret servic

he determined the masonic is currently a legal nonconforming use, a legal commercial and assembly venue. the notion that somehow the masonic is a private lodge, that it is not a nonconforming use, that it is not entitled as an entertainment venue, is simply wrong. the legal determination by the zoning demonstrator, board of appeals, and a superior court have all approve that. the neighborhood association did not appeal the airport -- the court of appeals decision. the planning department did a fine job of explaining to you the nature of this conditional use and the conditions imposed by the planning commission. we request to uphold the commission, with the modification discussed earlier that five of the six opponents agreed to. i am available to answer any questions. president chiu: any questions to the project sponsor? at this time, members of the public who wish to support the project sponsor, with regards to the subtle agreement -- the settlement agreement before us today. >> president chiu, if i may address the board in this time slot, i want to make it clear i do not support the pr

that is what it was legally permitted as. nonprofits like the cathedral are allowed to rent their assemblies base and put on events. but when it goes into a for- profit business, it intensified it. it has a different impact on the neighborhood. that is why in residential neighborhoods, non-profit clubs and churches are allowed. it makes a completely different used to turn it into a a profit menu. when there were large events, the whole of nob hill was affected by the traffic. there was very little parking. all the way down to van ness, it was blocked. but those were in frequent events. also, alcohol was not being served. to say there are no conditions on it -- the condition was that it was a nonprofit. they ran in violation. violations were not stopped. the fact that there were operating as an illegal nonconforming use does not mean they can then be legalized, or they can be extended if there is a legal non conforming use. what you are asking is going to be extremely disruptive. i have sent data on what kind of muni service i

to establish the legal number of units in the building. a report was prepared last year as part of the transfer of the property to the current owner. they have established this as two units treat you can petition to the department of building inspection to correct that if you have additional information that establishes a historic use of the property. i am not aware of any information that establishes historic uses. commissioner hillis: can i just ask how this works? if you want to avail yourself of the rent board process, do we stop the planning permitting? how do they work together? >> this board has a tradition of how to handle illegal units. there are separate processes. the board does offer processes for relocation. when it is an illegal unit, i cannot exactly comment on how it plays with a unit that is illegal, which appears to be the case with this. >> mr. duffy. >> good evening, commissioners. joseph duffey, dbi. the permit was applied for and properly obtained under -- over the counter. two dwelling units. the only thing i see, it

now, my beef with legalizing prostitution is basically the same thing about legalizing marijuana.ends a message that this is okay. i know you represent some of these ladies, i think that selling your body is -- diminishes a human being. it diminishes that person. it dozen harm to -- does harm to them. in my reporting over 35 years. i have seen that almost a hundred% of the time in this industry and i'm sure you have too. do you really want to say it's okay to do this and that's what you would be doing by legalizing it? >> i think what we would also be doing though is you would be reducing all of the farm that sex workers currently face. >> bill: there would be harm reduction. i can't disagree. there would be harm reduction. because it could be policed, pardon the pun. you could have standards and set. but you would always have a segment of drug addicted prostitutes who couldn't get jobs in legitimate brothels who would be legalized on the street undercutting what you are trying to do. the message to society is, hey, look, if you want to be a hooker, go ahead, and we the society in

to have legal status to be here with his family. the consequence of a drug offense is that someone will be put into a mandatory detention. that means no bail. white they are fighting their immigration change, that could be from a couple of months. this could be for an offense. even convictions for at the first time simple possessions and the this was part of the state rehabilitative programs. this would carry over under immigration law. even though someone conclude probation, they participated in a program and wanted to get interest from the record, that it no longer exists. in san francisco, on the public defender's office often works with the district attorney's office to try to negotiate pleas that would protect an immigrant from these gross consequences. there are not a lot of alternatives available for immigrants when it comes to convictions for drug offenses. what we recommend is exploring options where a non psittacine does not have to enter a plea of guilty to participate in the program. some are pre arrest diversion program

should they be legalized? the president of columbia suggested to president obama that we should take a look at taking the profit out of the drug running to starve the narco terrorists. romney was over hillary rosen's stay-at-home mom comment last week. thanks to that tape we got last night, we now know what anne romney really thought when she heard that remark. she thought they just won the lottery. >>> things are looking up economically south of here. we start with the secret service sex scandal -- a lot of s's there -- ron cassler is the investigative journalist and author of "in the secret service." this was a secret service man himself. he is currently running for the united states senate from the state of maryland. that's where i live. one of the largest scandals in the agency's history involving prostitutes and a night of partying ahead of the president's trip to the summit of the meramericas this weekend. the congressional investigators are looking into the possibility that as many as 20 secret service

for legal or legal settlements. i was briefed on that, and left it for them to negotiate. >> were you concerned that the 350,000 pounds being offered -- that was probably a slightly lower figure. without the council's opinion, it's fair to say that they offered 350,000 on the sixth of june. i think the evidence was that the 350 was the postdated council's opinion. but earlier sums have been offered without the council's opinion. did that happen? >> i don't remember what i knew exactly about the previous numbers of settlement attempts. but i do know that it seems to be when it came to my attention, i thought that they should wait for the council's opinion. >> did anybody tell you that the meeting to this effect, this guy is trying to blackmail us? >> i don't recall those words. >> or anything like them? mr. murdoch? >> i don't remember those words or words like that. it was a short meeting. >> although the case is mirth worth much less, he knows that we know that the reputational harm to the company would be so great

we know we will be heard from from our experts on a legal side. a lot of them can really add up here this gentleman again had heard about a situation where someone had already racked up $40,000 with of legal fees. became an issue. we are not talking about what it costs to fix up which in itself would be excess of, but also the legal component. your word of mouth and the people you know will really help. and, of course, to our media folks, people will read your articles and understand that they can really do a lot to protect their businesses early on. >> i just want to add one comment about getting our association involved. we put together a really great training. we have a panel available to you. it is only going to cost you $35 for a 30-minute conversation, and that might be the best $35 you have already spent to avoid something that will be happening in the future. that is just part of the collaborative process with supervisor chu's office, and i am very grateful to her. there is a panel of lawyers that have all attended training and know-how to

now, according to the law, if a legal immigrant chose any -- this legal immigrant, not illegal -- shows any of these 45 other valid documents to police -- this is according to your law -- they have to be taken to an i.c.e. facility to have their immigration status determined by a federal government official or wait on the side of the road for an i.c.e. official, a federal official, to come before they can be released, is that correct? that's what the law says, right? >> it's not quite correct, mr. chairman. there is a 24/7 hotline that i.c.e. has set up and also 287 g-trained officers who are trained, cross certified as federal agents can make determination for those purposes. it's usually a five-minute phone call on the phone to an i.c.e. agent or to an 8746 g trained agent. there are 200 and something trained in maricopa county alone, deputies. so it's a five-minute conversation usually on the telephone. >> well, i just want to submit for the record a statute of the police training manual, arizona state police. if reasonable suspicion of unlawful presence exists and is practice cabell

i thing we set forth the legal issues sufficiently pure good i want to make sure council can respond. >> what i understand is that it was a request for a legal opinion that was more inquisitive than stating a position, but we are happy to state our position on whether the procedures need to happen before the city attorney can investigate possible misconduct. good >> you have any thoughts procedure wireless -- procedurewise. what is the commission's role? >> the opinion comes from the commissioners. they can act on their behalf and make a judgment accordingly. >> would the staff to provide a memo of some sort? >> no, that is counsel. gooi did try to identify the provision that says in a person can request an opinion and the commission is required to issue that opinion within a certain amount of time. i think it is 21 days, but that can be extended period of -- that can be extended. >> if a response were to be submitted under this by the mayor, and you are saying we would need our counsel to advise us? we would come to our viewers, but when the council be responsible? >> no, you would b

activity -- as compared with legal immigrants. i don't think that's complicated. [overlapping dialogue] >> hold on, here. if you disagree with the law, then shouldn't you work to change it, rather than try to prohibit a word and compare a precise word that describes something accurately as a compare it to violence. >> australia calls them potential tax contributors -- >> we are not in australia. >> but we are talking about people who are coming here to work. they are coming here, wanting to build our country, to build our roads and roofs and feed their family. >> some of them are and some of them are not. >> you have to be able to differentiate between those who are here legally, that have gone through our legal system, versus those who have come here -- illegally. >> i would agree with you -- >> why would that be a bullet or a hate crime isn't word illegal differentiates between those who are here legally and those who aren't. it's not complicated. >> i think you would agree, if there were a process whereby these folks could appl