i've been working with mitch wilson, the executive director of the bay area women's and children's center about 7 or 8 years. most of that time at the tenderloin community school. they couldn't be here today, but she wanted me to come and read this letter from her. dear planning commissioners, i'm speaking on behalf of the children's center to assure you of the building next to the tenderloin community elementary school at 600 van ness. we are a nonprofit to led the 8 year effort to establish the elementary school and has offered many programs at the school for the past 20 years, our director, board members, and staff have met with the representative of the owner and her team of architects numerous times over the past couple of years. we worked deliberately with them from the beginning on such issues as safety, shadows, and wind corns. they've taken us seriously. we support the changes they've made. again, we give our wholehearted and enthusiastic endorsement to this project. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen of the commission. my name is steve. i

former democratic congresswoman jane harman director of the woodrow wilson center and josh holmes, mitchll's former chief of staff and now a g.o.p. strategist. first anniversary of the special counsel investigation. what do you think of the effort by the few increasingly aggressive effort by his team to try and ended on what to make of this controversy about an apparent fbi informant who was asking questions of trump campaign officials? >> the aggressive approach is probably worth a try. i'm not sure it's going to work because the truth is for all the talk about there being some real accountability to higher authorities by the special counsel, they effectively have a roving commission. no matter what you call them, what legal authority they are operating under. it seems to me that as a practical matter the special counsel is free to rope in any direction he wants. >> chris: and the fbi informant? >> it's an interesting question in a question to me is this, did they actually have a basis in law to create this investigation in the first place? was it sufficient? is it sufficient to go to a