what that provision actually meant, mr. maher would stand up and he's alive and well, would agree.hat was supposed to happen one time. what that provision did not mean was that it could be changed again and again and again through joint meetings of the planning commission and the rec and park commission. interestingly enough, in the first one, which we've heard hours of testimony about, those two commissions met with one fifth of shadow. they said, actually, that that shadow was, this is the operative term in section 295, substantial. you remember that? then the project sponsor came back. this is shades of eight washington. the sponsor came back with five times more shadow. the question for us is, is that a ceqa issue in the first part? we'll get to the c.u. issue later. i think that is the fundamental question which is a body which is, an expert body by the way we have testimony from one of its commissioners who sent us all email which is part of the record, which is an email from former rec and park commissioners who served for 12 years on that body. who said that that body, whic