at&t went through permit application process for two 203 kinetic with -- quintara, when quintara objected at&t contacted her and there was correspondence between ms. moreno and at&t and she spoke several times with individuals from at&t including mr. blake man who is here this evening. at&t offered to meet with ms. moreno and her neighborhood to look for an alternate site. she client to -- declined to do that. this hearing went before a hearing officer. there's no evidence presented at the hearing that the propose is location would have a right-of-way. mr. -- ms. moreno objected. she argues that the wooded lot that's in between her home and the home on the other side of this wooded lot is an open space. it's not a city designated open space. the planning department maintains that an open space matt for the city of san francisco. that we would be required to notify the planning. they worked in the community to locate a location for the last few years. the at&t application met all the the requirements for the order. there's no evidence presented this evening or at the hearing that at&t's pr

why at&t picked 203 quintara is hard to understand. they were permitted to put the box in down the block. they had the ability. they that had resources to put the box down the block on the original subject that this man just talked about. at&t has been a little bit misleading. they put flyers in our mailboxes that weren't very truthfully accurate as to their intent. they did not seek to work with our neighborhood or at least with my portion of the neighborhood in their choosing of the spot though they claim. they did not get the community input. i claim they made this decision on their own with over 40 signatures from the immediate neighborhood with letters from everyone who lives around 201 quintara. i struggle. plus golden heights neighborhood association against the box also. at&t did not work with the immediate community. the neighborhood. they did not vet the process properly. who will pay for the upkeep of the cost of this at&t new proposed spot? not at&t. who will be liable if someone is hurt carrying for this site? not at&t. th