i think mr. mead operated in the shadows in some regard, and it was -- and it's difficult to see if he was the owner of that llc. >> further questions, commissioners? no? thank you. >> okay. thank you. >> mr. teague? >> good evening, president fung, commissioners. cory teague for planning department staff. again, the p.o. is for the property at 518 taylor street which is located in the rc-4 zoning district. i think it's important to understand that this letter of determination that's the subject of the appeal is kind of two separate but connected processes, and so the first was the current public health process. so to that end, in december of 2016, and once again in march of 2017, public health staff inspected the subject property and found numerous violations under article 29 of the health code. the property manager, jeffrey polk was present during both inspections and received the inspection reports. on march 13th of 2017, public health and massage establishment owner reached a settlement agreeing -

and at the time, both the owner of the massage establishment, mr. mead, timothy mead, and the property manager came down to greet us during the inspection. and then, following the march 2nd of 2017, i was there, conducting a follow up inspection with a team of inspectors, and again, mr. polk, he came down. and at that time, the massage establishment owner wasn't present, so he was the one who signed the actual inspection report. and we were giving him the inspection report and the notice of violation at the same time, yeah. >> okay. >> that's it. >> questions? thank you. well. >> mr. polk was present. >> yeah, i think -- i think the process was flawed. they've corrected it, but at the same time, there's no clean hands that the property owner was aware of it and is looking for a loophole here. i'm not willing to give him that, myself. >> why -- that -- i'm confused. the -- the -- the property owner became aware of the situation when their own property manager came down and signed the notice of violation. >> yeah. >> so -- >> he was there twice. >> he was

meade about this situation. so i will leave it at that. i think he was a very important guy, and on the first day, clearly. thank you very much. [applause] mr. bretzger: if anybody has any questions, i will be glad to take them. i do not know if we need a microphone. anybody have any questions? >> can you talk about why it was so important to howard that he would have been in command? mr. bretzger: i can, i think. good question. the question was, why would it be so important to general howard that he be thought of, at least, as in command? he was having reputation problems, especially after chancellorsville. he had some reputation problems i think since bull run. but he had a terrible showing at chancellorsville. stonewall jackson's famous flank march landed on howard's corps, the 11th, in the woods. stonewall jackson snuck around and attacked roughly at dusk and sent howard's men reeling. it was a stampede and i think it was -- sometimes people come o hard on howard, but i think it was a stampede. and so howard was still reeling from this and he did not want then it to be known that he was superseded in command by a junior. ok? so i think