registry paying an annual fee and putting a sign in the window public space for information the legislation to have the program requirements for the properties undergoing the process for the staff the process goes through and limited in the prosper in the bait for no longer two years this helps o people noticing a difficult time and thank you i'll be happy to answer any questions you may have. >> >> thank you, colleagues any question from mr. law. >> madam chair to mr. law for a period not to exceed two years if so it a good public policy change why not exist for fever and but want to include those properties undergoing a complicated case for more than two years the probate from 6 to 12 months. >> understood. >> okay all right. seeing no other questions go ahead and take public comment everyone has two minutes a 30-second soft chimney thirty seconds left seeing no public comment on item one public comment is closed. >> mr. law. >> i have staff from dbi an update about this program. >> go fantastic let's take the staff. >> good afternoon, supervisors bill strong with the building inspection

ladies and gentlemen, let's take the vote again, a piece of legislation as was taken as amended we'll take that without objection. that item passes unanimously. >> thank you let's move on ladies and gentlemen, to item number 2. >> technical 2 an ordinance amending the administrative code for the eviction regarding the affordable housing program. >> okay supervisor tang is the author and today affordable unit in a from the supervisors office to present thank you pa madam chair we're - i'm here to talk about the tenants notification legislation we in discussions throughout the city we're working hard to add affordable housing stock to our portfolio in san francisco and find this is important we educate the residents about the programs and instead of reinventing the wheel but add the former which was required by supervisor kim to notify the attendance that are going through the eviction process and adding a requirement that we invite them of the affordable housing programs available through the city adding one additional sentence or line to the current notification i've provided copies o

last year i brought before the board of supervisors legislation to require the city of san francisco to have individual water meters so that it would be easier and more efficient for people to be able to understand their water use. primarily the fact that if they are responsible for the bill they will pay more attention to the fact of how much water they use. the mayor wants 30,000 new housing units by 2020..in affordable nature. another 30 to 40,000 market rate units will be built. almost all of them will be multiunit buildings. having water meters for each of those units means that there would literally be hundreds of millions of gallons of water saved by doing this. this would also provide a basic level of service metering and this could also help on the revenue side. i ask you to consult with the board of supervisors because this meeting is already in the process. thank you. any public comment? we will move on to public comment. we will move on to communications. commissioners, any comment on communications? >> i would like a memo from staff to develop what the plan is to execute

the legislation that we're considering here is the most comprehensive north korea sanctions legislation to come before this body. importantly, what this bill does is use targeted financial and economic pressure to isolate kim jung un and his top officials from the assets they maintain in foreign banks and from the hard currency that sustains their rule. these assets are derived primarily from illicit activities such as counter fitting, u.s. currency, something north korea has been caught doing, such as selling their missile systems around the world. contraband in cigarettes, drugs and other illicit activities. and all of that is used to advance north korea's nuclear program. hey also pay for the luxurious lifestyle of the ruling elites. and it's use to repress the people. the money from that hard currency pays for the generals, pays for the secret police, pays for the missile program and the nuclear weapons program. a strategy of financial pressure is the approach we took a decade ago when the previous administration targeted banko w-based bank. moca they were targeted for their role in

ask for your support with this legislation today. would also like to thank the great jim mercasio who i haven't seen be today and our district 5 appointee to the gab, melora green, who is a great advocate. we are launching new more humane efforts to combat graffiti in san francisco and i'm thankful for your support and i'm happy to answer any questions. >> thank you very much, seems pretty self-explanatory, especially how legislating is often renewing old laws. i appreciate that remark. we can go right to public comment. any member of the public who would like to comment? >> i'm jim mercasio, would like to thank connor, president breed and yourself, connor and president breed for introducing this ordinance that is much needed and thank you for taking it into consideration. the board is fully in support of this revision. they feel that this additional one seat, the revision to this one seat, will help members who are not eligible for any of the other seats but would like to take part in this graffiti advisory board. this would be a pe

russell, author of this legislation. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from oklahoma is recognized for three minutes. mr. russell: thank you, mr. speaker. thank you, mr. chairman, for your leadership on this bill. there's been a lot of accusations about what is in this bill and the content. but the fact of the matter is what is being quoted is simply not in the bill. . it said it would deprive the authority of the president to make decisions. that's not the case. the president may lift, spelled out, if he meets the certain certification criteria. what's that criteria? that they are no longer conducting activity and they have justification for that relief. where this language never at any time is being quoted, mr. speaker, by my esteemed and caring colleagues on this issue, i know how they feel about this issue personally, and i commend them for it, because we're on common ground here, but they are quoting something that is simply not in the bill, when they say never at any time, that's not there. the president may l

. >> and then i'm so happy this legislation came if i'm if i'm not mistaken an intent for this legislation to prioritize small business that are not affiliateed with change a business in a certain area for thirty or 40 years doing one particular an ice cream shop the financial incentives that are available for a part of a chance even though a small chance for capital or capacity to stay around versus a smaller within person or family type of business i'm wondering if this may be considered as part of criteria in terms of the point spread i think that is proposed not sure i thought that might be something to consider and some of the others i'm not sure i should be looking this and to shelly about the points proposed seems like again, the tint or intent of the legislation this legislation hopefully given priority to overseeing businesses under recommended or has the capability or the vulnerability more than others i saw some probability shouldn't be considered or a lesser protrude as others i don't know if we look at this page by page by specific comments and thank you a couple of things in

so you cannot legislate integration but you can certainly legs -- legislate desegregation. >> dr. king, in your reply to the letter of the alabama clergymen. criticized the attitude of white moderates and the church. todayid if the church of did not recapture the secretary's a spirit of the early church it would lose its -- it would forfeit to the loyalty and be dismissed as irrelevant. a social club with no meaning for the 20th century. could you expand on this in light of the role played by the judge as moral or persuasive authority in the negro movement toward equality russian mark >> i think i would have to honestly admit that in the past, the church has not stood up in this area as it should stand up. at this point, i think that the church has failed christ miserably. the church has so often been the taillight instead of the face the and we must tragic fact that 11:00 on a sunday morning when thousands of christians all over the united states stand to sing in christ there is no east or west, we stand in the most segregated hour of america. yetink it is appalling and we must f

i understand the legislation and eight years but the legislation doesn't say how you do it. as a business guy the biggest challenge is figuring out how you do it. i would rather work with the you and the chairman to figure out how to do it. >> i am not advocating arbitrary deadlines. but at some point, if this problem is not alleviated that kind of approach is going to be necessary. to go back to the private sector days, if you could not get projects to the shelf you were penalized. nobody said we will keep the stores closed until png has products ready to go on the shelf. so there is a burden of proof, a burden of going forward, a burden of proceeding, a burden of fulfilling the government's obligation here. i don't want to go on at great lakes but i am suggesting the remedy for delay may well be the veteran receives what his claim is because he is the prejudice one. delay isn't. delay works in the government's favor like in the criminal context because the criminal defendant was kept without bail or bail that could not be made or under the great burden of charges pending.

so i'd ask my colleagues to oppose this legislation because it is not legislation that enhances our place. it takes away from the president's authority. and it makes it very difficult to interact with iran. let me be very clear. iran has its troubles. it is a bad actor, but i will tell you there are better ways to handle this situation. i ask my colleagues to vote no. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady's time has expired. the gentleman from new york reserves. the gentleman from california is recognized. mr. royce: i yield two minutes to the gentleman from new jersey, mr. lance, who is a co-sponsor of this legislation. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new jersey is recognized for two minutes. mr. lance: thank you, mr. speaker. my thanks to chairman royce and mr. russell for their tremendous leadership on this issue. i rise today in strong support terror the hands of the h.r. n finance transparency act. the detention and interrogation of 10 american sailors near the straight of who are muzz is the latest in a significant list of iranian acts of aggression against american in

but this is not serious leng slating -- legislating. i'm going to say to my colleagues again, i know you're going on your retreat this week, maybe there ought to be a side meeting that some of my friends have about what it is that they think we ought to be doing here in this chamber, and what it is that they think their job ought tofpblet i would suggest that it has -- ought to be. i would suggest it has to be more than just political sound bites and messaging bills. there's a lot we need to get done. that requires us working together. and i won't get everything i want. you may not get everything you want. but we need to figure out a way to make this place work because it is not working. there is a reason why the approval rating of congress is like in the negative numbers. and it is because people see consistently nothing but political sound bites and messaging bills come to the floor and get voted on and we debate them passionately, but they go nowhere. i think people would like us all better, democrats and republicans, if we actually

a legislative support is critical to achieve.on behalf of the vast majority of employees who work hard and do the right thing everyday, thank you for this opportunity. we look forward to working together to solve one of the most important national issues, the capability and determination to make a difference veterans lives, to make the department the best it can be so that any veteran experience with va is world-class. >> we will open to as many rounds of questions. if sen. tillis,senator tillis, as soon as the vote is called the wind go vote and come back so that we can keep it going. when the bell rings if you will show us your north carolina sprint. do your best carolina panthers run. sec.secretary mcdonald, thank you for your testimony. your 1st saw the specific suggestions i want to talk about two of those to start with. one on the cultural change, you need help to make the cultural change within the va, and we want to help you make that change. as much as you can coordinate with us on decisions that you made before the prov

every time legislation is passed to enable a fair election system, there seems to be ways that legislators who oppose these things try to find barriers to make it more difficult for groups to have an effect. it's not just being able to vote. voting,ring people from stopping people from voting is the most egregious. difficult is not what you want to be happening in a democracy. peoplet to be convincing that your policies are the ones that are the best and they should be voting for them. that's the long way around of talking about it. fromne sent me a list texas of about 52 specific things in the courts going on now. the voter id is the one we are most aware of. congress needs to step up. the court has ruled and found something to be unconstitutional. congress, as the legislative body elected has the right and needs to step up and say we want to follow the spirit of the voting rights act and enable all aople to be able to have meaningful vote, not just a vote. issueally, it becomes an politicians are no longer willing to resist the notion and that there is a problem. the second is of politic

activities of the legislative branch. that's not transparency. that's a waste of agency resources. with that, mr. speaker, i urge members to vote against this bill and i yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from utah is recognized. mr. chaffetz: in conclusion here, with all due respect, to suggest it would be overwhelming to produce cost estimates and put them on the internet on a monthly basis, we are asking for transparency. but imagine the burden that's also butt on the american people. some of these may be really good ones. they might be really good regulations. but there may be some that they haven't quite researched and that other companies, organizations, individuals, have toprofits suddenly reconfigure for. and that takes some time. they need to know that things are coming. that's, i think, a reasonable thing to do. i again appreciate what mr. radcliffe has been championing. i urge the passage of this bill, the underlying bill as well. and with that i yield back. the chair: the gentleman

picking up energy legislation, reform legislation. there were you born? one little girl says 2007. well, not the last time we had energy legislation on the floor. and i said look at what happened to you. you have grown, gotten smarter: been exposed to a lot of things. sometimes it helps to put passage of time in relation to our kids because we can see that. the process we have built some about a bipartisan bill, and should enjoy the respect of the debate as we move forward to attempt to modernize our energy policy. at the beginning i want to acknowledge the good work, strong work from the state of washington and just think her for helping me craft's bill because it was truly a joint effort, very collaborative effort. i also want to say the other members of the senate energy and natural resources committee in 2016, but, but i think it is worthwhile to talk about how we got here because that in and of itself is a little bit unusual nowadays. and i need to segue a moment because last year at this time senator on i were managing the floor only had the keystone xl debate. the 1st time w

acts so that you cannot legislate integration, but you can certainly legislate desegregation and theres a difference between the two. >> mr. enninful. >> dr. king, in your letter you criticized the attitudes of the white moderates and also the church. you said if the church of today did not recapture the sacrificial of the early church, it would lose its authentic ring, forfeit the loyalty, and be dismissed as irrelevant as a social club with no meaning for the 20th century. can you expand on in the light of the role played by the church or explain the church as a moral and persuasive authority in the negro movement towards equality? >> i think i would to honestly admit in the past the church has not stood up in this area as it should stand up. at this point, i think the church has failed christ miserably. the church has so often be the taillight instead of the headlight. we must face the tragic fact 11:00 on sunday morning when thousands of christians all over the united states stand to sing. we stand in the most segregated hour of america. i think this is appalling and yet we must fa

so that you cannot legislate integration but you can legislate deseinauguration and there is a differenceetween the two. >> dr. ennenful? >> dr. king, in your reply of letter of the april 16th or so, you will i think criticized the attitude of the white moderates as you put it and also the church. and you said that if the church of today did not recapture the sacrificial spirit of the early church or it will lose its authentic ring, forfeit the loyalty of its -- and be dismissed as irrelevant and social club with no meaning for the 20th century. could you expand on this in the light of the role played by the church or of the church as moral and persuasive authority in the negro movement towards equality? >> i think i would have to honestly admit that in the past the church has not stood up in this area as it should stand up. at this point, i think the church has failed christ miserably. the church has so often been the taillight instead of the headlight and we must face the tragic fact that 11:00 on sunday morning when thousands of christians all over the united states stand to sing in ch

russell, the author of this legislation. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for five minutes. mr. russell: thank you, mr. chairman. 19 august 2015, and i quote, the president of the united states, i made sure that the united states reserved its right to maintain and enforce existing sanctions and deploy new sanctions to address those continuing concerns. which we fully intend to do when circumstances warrant. i'm confident that in the days it is imperative that we take steps to deal with iran's destabilizing activities for support of terrorism. involves continued enforcement of international and united states law, including sanctions related to iran's nonnuclear activities. we will maintain, and i'm quoting the president, powerful sanctions targeting iran's support for groups such as hezbollah, its destabilizing role in yemen, backing of the asat regime. -- assad program, and rights at home, end quote. this is in direct response, mr. speaker, to the gentleman who s saying that he's not for upholding these t

we happen to disagree on this specific legislation. mr. speaker, the nuclear greament that the administration made with iran is still a bad deal for america. as a former judge down in texas, i know when the bad guys do bad things, you don't reward bad conduct. at a time when the administration needs to be strong and firm they are showing wobbly knees. the largest world upon sore of terrorism is a few steps away from a nuclear bomb. it is conceding than more what is required in the deal. the administration is making this bad deal even worse. the president says this allows nonnuclear related. and iran, not to the shock of any us,ville violated some of the rules they are supposed to abide by. they restricted ballistic missile tests. so the treasury department told congress it would levy new sanctions on iran. that would support the president's promise to america. but at the last minute, the state department said whoa, no sanctions, not so fast. more shaky knees. why does the administration call irninge out for violations. they seem to take a

russell, author of this legislation. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from oklahoma is recognized for three minutes. mr. russell: thank you, mr. speaker. thank you, mr. chairman, for your leadership on this bill. there's been a lot of accusations about what is in this bill and the content. but the fact of the matter is what is being quoted is simply not in the bill. . it said it would deprive the authority of the president to make decisions. that's not the case. the president may lift, spelled out, if he meets the certain certification criteria. what's that criteria? that they are no longer conducting activity and they have justification for that relief. where this language never at any time is being quoted, mr. speaker, by my esteemed and caring colleagues on this issue, i know how they feel about this issue personally, and i commend them for it, because we're on common ground here, but they are quoting something that is simply not in the bill, when they say never at any time, that's not there. the president may l

i was in hayes valley at the time and seen as landmark legislation as you may know san francisco is is he top of the heap in formula retail nationwide and updated in 2014 and supervisor mar took the lead in strengthening the legislation with modern times and one piece was trailing legislation this is a trend if we can't create policy and think the world around use it staves this is a real issue important what strikes me folks claim wait until there's a problem when did we band-aid our policies in anticipating the trends and problems and smartly protecting for those and managing at the front end that's why san francisco is seen as a leader in policy whether it is land use or otherwise as a as proposed to a follower it is for this will in the effect homegrown businesses super duper will not be affected if they hit the chance 11 at 25 stores and start a new chance with 4 stores the fourth is a subsidiary that takes that much precreation, if you will, of the enterprise to get there that's not star billing in fact, the recommendations of the working group were reasonable some folks want

priorities and make it clear as draft legislation or legislation that needs to be drafted that puts this on the critical path. >> it's a great idea. >> it is important we talked about that we get to the dso. some are interested, some are concerned. they have to find the stakeholder plan. >> we have been doing that. i have a breakfast every month and we have sent out our team to meet. >> i am hearing feedback. i don't know what level it rises to, but i would like to know the major stakeholders that are an integral part of what we are doing. >> if you hear of someone let us know. >> i also want to underscore your point about training. when it is on the hundred dollar per perfect -- per person basis we need to emphasize that they look like a big number. with counsel i would like to see a matrix of many infrastructure technical decisions. i would like to see a running list, and you know that you better have a good reason. >> you know our prejudice. >> i wish to see it in writing. scheduling systems, the private sector has a down. the last thing would be to extend into the other areas su

>> that's effective of that legislation which was may of 2014. >> thank you commissioner lee please. i think the proposal is the intent of the proposal i think we can do all we can to keep the affordable units in san francisco but i have one question about the depiction definition of what qualifies and how our department is involved and the second is about prelims the first question about the legalization how will we determine where we going do let planning determine whether or not the unit is possible or not what about the technical aspects felt unit for example, if the unauthorized unit has the ceiling of 17 feet tall we know it needs to be more than 10 feet is planning going to determine whether the building will raise the ceiling or will they need our departments help. >> the definition of the unauthorized unit it in is in the planning department so the planning determines whether or not it is an unauthorized removing it go to the cu process, however, whether or not they're eligible for the legalization they'll duo come to dbi and dbi does the screening. >> the second question is

ask for your support with this legislation today. would also like to thank the great jim mercasio who i haven't seen be today and our district 5 appointee to the gab, melora green, who is a great advocate. we are launching new more humane efforts to combat graffiti in san francisco and i'm thankful for your support and i'm happy to answer any questions. >> thank you very much, seems pretty self-explanatory, especially how legislating is often renewing old laws. i appreciate that remark. we can go right to public comment. any member of the public who would like to comment? >> i'm jim mercasio, would like to thank connor, president breed and yourself, connor and president breed for introducing this ordinance that is much needed and thank you for taking it into consideration. the board is fully in support of this revision. they feel that this additional one seat, the revision to this one seat, will help members who are not eligible for any of the other seats but would like to take part in this graffiti advisory board. this would be a pe

we are -- we are beginning the debate on energy legislation, energy reform legislation, a bill, senatedernization act. mr. president, this is the first time that the united states senate has debated energy policy reform in more than eight years. more than eight years that we've had this kind of debate. i was here yesterday morning. we had an opportunity to open the floor up. i opened. senator collins was in the chair. it was one of those interesting mornings where everybody else seemed to be female around the floor and the press has taken note of that. but that's not my point. i left here and i went out in the hallway, and there was a group of about eight or nine young kids with a fellow who works on the house side. i think he was giving them a little bit of a field trip, but actually i think he had kid duty because school was closed. we had a fabulous conversation, as you can have with kids of that age that are excited about being in the capitol and understanding the difference between a house member and a senate member. they said what are you working on? i said it's really exciting b

i am very much in favor of these two pieces of legislation. and i want to say that my amendment to title ii of hr 712, the alert act, would require agencies to include in their monthly report, where the rules in the pipeline impose unfunded mandates on state or local governments or on the private sector. you know, 1995, the congress passed was strong bipartisan support, the unfund eed mandate bill, but the bureaucrats you talked about have found many ways to get around those. that also requires to include in its annual cumulative assessment of new regulations, the total cost of unfunded mandates. and as you point out, the cost of the regulations coming out of not just this president, but certainly, really agree jous under this president, but of any administration. is burdensome. but particularly burdensome when we put them on other, when state and local governments, even on the private sector, so, i want to say i support this legislation very much. and i hope that the committee will support my two amendments. and with that, i would yield back

use some help with legislation. what we found is there were 1500 new graduate medical education spots given to v.a. through the legislation. we've only filled 372 of those spots. and the reason is what we learned is that v.a. needs the ability to actually help the private hospitals in paying for these spots. they're over their caps so they get no reimbursement. and that's been the limitation. that the hospitals want to and the foundations want to increase training. we want to increase training. but we could use some legislative fixes. >> thank you. and just if i may one other quick, just a commitment from the leadership here. i was back home recently and once again heard about the issue of providers not getting paid and therefore dropping out, which i think has been a problem in alaska. and then doctor you remember and i've heard about it again which is veterans who get commitments from the v.a. to go to providers and then to have their medical procedures completed don't get paid -- the providers don't pay. and thes

r acted ensue other pieces of legislation having to do with drug and alcohol testing you're aware of based on previous conversations with the board the last item oh, under 6 to make sure we work cooperating with the city partners when we do go to the city, state, legislation committee which we do when we have a proposal for bills that fit within the pharynx with other city departments the last and it will be brief under federal legislative priorities we are happy to report that we have a federal multi year transportation reauthorization dubbed the fast act it is a 5 year bill and it grows the program sort of modestly but transportation interests are very pleased with a multi program and really what happens after that we look for opportunities to weigh in an transportation that effects the agencies priorities the second item on here is making sure that we keep on track with the federal fund infunctions for the central subway and van ness brt the subway has to years left with the federal funds the next one is van ness brt to make sure those funds are commented and the number 3 is looki

legislation. if this legislation is enacted , we will go a making theway toward american dream a reality. i do not think civil rights will solve all the problems that we now face and it certainly not bring about integration in all of its dimensions. but i think it will solve many problems and bring about many of we seek in this struggle. >> dr. king, will you spell out conception of civil rights which to me means rights prescribed by statute or and not those that go to the social conduct or ommerce of the ordinary marketplace? dr. king: well, i would think of as those basic rights that are guaranteed by on the basis of he first and the 14th amendments. i think there is a distinction social privilege on the one hand and civil rights on the other. thing to say who will a in my living room as friend and as a guest. it is another thing to say who beside me on the bus or in a public place. i think at that point a is a violation of civil rights. i think in the first instance i choice to democrat who ill

r acted ensue other pieces of legislation having to do with drug and alcohol testing you're aware of based on previous conversations with the board the last item oh, under 6 to make sure we work cooperating with the city partners when we do go to the city, state, legislation committee which we do when we have a proposal for bills that fit within the pharynx with other city departments the last and it will be brief under federal legislative priorities we are happy to report that we have a federal multi year transportation reauthorization dubbed the fast act it is a 5 year bill and it grows the program sort of modestly but transportation interests are very pleased with a multi program and really what happens after that we look for opportunities to weigh in an transportation that effects the agencies priorities the second item on here is making sure that we keep on track with the federal fund infunctions for the central subway and van ness brt the subway has to years left with the federal funds the next one is van ness brt to make sure those funds are commented and the number 3 is looki

legislators and local officials, the core and his key agency people. it's a collective responsibility. long term, we need to look at do we put homes and schools gas. >> that's a great question. i hope that you'll be asking. here is a question. that is it's been wide by reporting that socal's parent company spent $2.5 million on lobbying financial campaigns in california. did that have an impact forcing members of your own party to look the other way at infrastructure problems. >> you know, it's been interesting. on this issue, bipartisan support. i don't know of any legislature that is not supporting the package. what is happening is unacceptable. i had good cooperation with other legislators, i, myself, don't have any and never had ties to sa call gas or sempora. i try to monitor carefully and shine a light on operations. we went back into session. i spent two months with the home owners on the field. this is in my district now after oversight, attendanteding meetings and -- attending meetings and hearings, to introduce legislation, because what i'm w

congress can legislate. assuresidential veto such legislation is appropriate.e elections are the amendment process. the 13th amendment accomplished lincoln's goal of preserving the fundamental structure while bringing it closer to the ideals of the declaration of independence. thank you. [applause] >> i would like to invite professor green it to the podium to share her remarks. professor green: good morning and welcome. i have an here several times and i always learned some new. i always enjoy being here. i will just after talk more loudly. i like to think the commission and the lincoln cottage this invitation and opportunity to speak with you for a few minutes this morning. in february 1865, days after the ,doption of the third amendment alfred green of the 127th regiment of the united states colored troops address the convention of african-americans in pennsylvania. the soldier was concerned the status of the accorded the black and women with the war was over. he did not hesitate to share his views of the slavery america. and asked when the color returns with

can you not use legislation to punish a single organization without any evidence or fair legislative process simply because you don't like it. while the legislation never mentions the word planned parenthood, we have heard and will hear today planned parenthood's name over and over from my colleagues on the other side of the aisle during this debate. no one can say this bill is not aimed directly at one organization. of course if the republicans in congress had any evidence of planned parenthood broke the law, they would have taken it to the attorney general or the f.b.i., but they didn't. if they had any faith in the extremists who made these accusations against planned parent hoo, they would have brought them before congress to testify, but they didn't. the truth is, this attack on planned parenthood is knowingly based on a whole series of lies. the longer the republicans keep up this pretense in order to stokes the blames flamse with their rhetoric, the longer they put patients and providers at risk of unstable people committing murder as we have seen. bulletproof class and safe r

host: a piece of bipartisan legislation. charles from north carolina. you're on was senator richard lugar. caller: is a pleasure to speak with you. i just got back from washington. i spent a week up there and i saw the construction cranes. i think i counted like 32 cranes around washington. i think they do not make anything, so that means the government is a lucrative business. clintons from "the washington post" are pulling in of hundreds of millions dollars. a former congressman is now lobbying for turkey. these guys have to have a business when they get out of congress. and i think the rule roots of partisanship comes down to just money. number 2 -- you talk about statesmanship in congress. i just want to have a quick memory on air for senator dale bumpers of arkansas, who i think was the ultimate statement. you may be correct that a good number of members of congress do find employment in washington as lobbyists or members of corporations that are doing business and what have you. that is not true, however, for all of us. let me just say for the rec

r acted ensue other pieces of legislation having to do with drug and alcohol testing you're aware of based on previous conversations with the board the last item oh, under 6 to make sure we work cooperating with the city partners when we do go to the city, state, legislation committee which we do when we have a proposal for bills that fit within the pharynx with other city departments the last and it will be brief under federal legislative priorities we are happy to report that we have a federal multi year transportation reauthorization dubbed the fast act it is a 5 year bill and it grows the program sort of modestly but transportation interests are very pleased with a multi program and really what happens after that we look for opportunities to weigh in an transportation that effects the agencies priorities the second item on here is making sure that we keep on track with the federal fund infunctions for the central subway and van ness brt the subway has to years left with the federal funds the next one is van ness brt to make sure those funds are commented and the number 3 is looki

i was in hayes valley at the time and seen as landmark legislation as you may know san francisco is is he top of the heap in formula retail nationwide and updated in 2014 and supervisor mar took the lead in strengthening the legislation with modern times and one piece was trailing legislation this is a trend if we can't create policy and think the world around use it staves this is a real issue important what strikes me folks claim wait until there's a problem when did we band-aid our policies in anticipating the trends and problems and smartly protecting for those and managing at the front end that's why san francisco is seen as a leader in policy whether it is land use or otherwise as a as proposed to a follower it is for this will in the effect homegrown businesses super duper will not be affected if they hit the chance 11 at 25 stores and start a new chance with 4 stores the fourth is a subsidiary that takes that much precreation, if you will, of the enterprise to get there that's not star billing in fact, the recommendations of the working group were reasonable some folks want

and influence legislative activity. not about the organization's own internal work and the work they do on a day-to-day basis. i think that one bright line can be part of what you direct that will be a significant relief and will speak to the kind of world we operate in. it's not the only concern. the other other 2.2 and are sure to credit set for bringing this up tonight, the revised proposal to you, which is counting expenditure should be around specific legislation activity. much is the aggregate of nickels and dimes is always 2500. clearly this is about spending large amounts of money on specific legislative activity i think of that intimidation is what you embrace along with excluding internal and focusing on external payments tries to get out what i think is the heart of proposition c. we want to work with you come back work with you and come back and every >> let me say it was never contemplated when this item was on the agenda. that we adopt the regulations. with staffs understand derrida do a first draft that s

they are united in opposition to the legislation. when it passed the senate in november only two republicans didn't vote for it. all democratics voted against it. >> ready much united on the democratic front. >> exactly. >> what about president obama's veto? would he go back to the house and senate? can they overturn that veto? >> it is not looking like the house would be able to overturn the veto. president obama has delivered his to do the union address next week. it is possible he would issue his veto threat before the state of the union. or it could be after the state of the union. he has 10 days before it would become law. >> you can read your article and cq roll call and follow you on twitter. thank you. >> thank you for having me. >> president obama outlined new executive actions aimed at reducing gun violence pre-proposals include more gun sellers conducting background checks, improving gun safety technology, increasing funding for mental health and making it easier for doctors to report mental illness to the fbi background c

was introduced as emergency interim legislation.d it been introduced in routine way, it would have taken the routine process and a year later or so it would've been back of the board of supervisors in the normal course to amend the planning code. had that been the case, and had it been done in a routine way, our permits would have been approved. work, the planning department and the building permit would've had to hold them for a year or more waiting for this change in the code. so, i'm just saying, it's not credible to tell you that. that's not what happened. supervisor wiener was also the single supervisor-and he is a friend or least he was-maybe after he sees as he won't be-but with a single supervisor taken most interest in this agreement, he called me 10 times at night when i was at dinner with my family about that sign on center street and i told him we would take it down. he was the one that was more interested in the settlement than anyone else and he's the one that introduced the interim legislation on emergency basis on th

be included in the mta's legislative program.we have asked organizers like mtc to include vision zero initiative such as this as well and we're building what i characterize as a campaign. with that as background, i will turn it over to claire phillips who has a loss of information a lot of information to share with you. good afternoon i'm claire phillips with the cellulars office. as kate mentioned our office issued this report last month, november 12th and surveyed six jurisdictions and their implementation techniques on automated safety enforcement. which is the overview that i will be giving you today. the objectives were to identify how other jurisdictions around the country implemented automated safety enforcement and how to use that to support san francisco's advance of ase authorization to vision zero action strategy as kate mentioned? so we're all very familiar with this visual. again, speeding is a major factor in whether a person will survive a collision with a vehicle. so a person who is struck by a car going 40 miles

we are not asking this board to legislate.were asking the board to force the city to stick by his word. this board has broad authority to overrule the planning and building department's denial of permit. you do it all the time. were not asking the board to take an exceptional or extraordinary legislative action. specific, were asking the board to find for planning department actions are against the public interest, which is exactly as it stated for your jurisdiction in the san francisco charter. turning to some other merits, as i mentioned before, they are straightforward. 1st, facing the prospect of losing that lawsuit the city invited contest promotions to settle at the table. next after more than one year of hard negotiations, the city baited contest promotions into an agreement what is a business i'm and communicated that to contest promotions in a manner that would protect contest promotions existing inventory, which is still up ending the completion of the ministry to proceedings that are before you now. lying on this as

r acted ensue other pieces of legislation having to do with drug and alcohol testing you're aware ofh the board the last item oh, under 6 to make sure we work cooperating with the city partners when we do go to the city, state, legislation committee which we do when we have a proposal for bills that fit within the pharynx with other city departments the last and it will be brief under federal legislative priorities we are happy to report that we have a federal multi year transportation reauthorization dubbed the fast act it is a 5 year bill and it grows the program sort of modestly but transportation interests are very pleased with a multi program and really what happens after that we look for opportunities to weigh in an transportation that effects the agencies priorities the second item on here is making sure that we keep on track with the federal fund infunctions for the central subway and van ness brt the subway has to years left with the federal funds the next one is van ness brt to make sure those funds are commented and the number 3 is looking for other competitive grant we've

i want to give you two reasons why we think this legislation will be good for protecting tenants and stopping eviction in san francisco one part of the legislation that has not been discussed the part that with in case of a commercial unit this is rent as residential to be years and this landlords want to turning into commercial requires the cu process we have tenants that will be testifying because they live in a building which for many, many years was in mid block and a unit anyone wanted to rent commercially for a long, long time so the landlords were renting them out as work loss or as residential and now that the tech boom as happened it is viable financing to rent those and the tech spaces the landlords wants to convert back into commercial and forces the landlords into the cu process which is fair there are currently just one block of market street there are let's see ton 04 buildings over 200 units that where the landlords definitely want to do that and in one case fighting for two in favor years fighting we've been successful to help the tenants avoid the eviction but it wil

i was in hayes valley at the time and seen as landmark legislation as you may know san francisco is is he top of the heap in formula retail nationwide and updated in 2014 and supervisor mar took the lead in strengthening the legislation with modern times and one piece was trailing legislation this is a trend if we can't create policy and think the world around use it staves this is a real issue important what strikes me folks claim wait until there's a problem when did we band-aid our policies in anticipating the trends and problems and smartly protecting for those and managing at the front end that's why san francisco is seen as a leader in policy whether it is land use or otherwise as a as proposed to a follower it is for this will in the effect homegrown businesses super duper will not be affected if they hit the chance 11 at 25 stores and start a new chance with 4 stores the fourth is a subsidiary that takes that much precreation, if you will, of the enterprise to get there that's not star billing in fact, the recommendations of the working group were reasonable some folks want