the policy about redlining clients, you hinted that there was a time where a particular style of eventcalled a "rave" was a red lines, and the mechanism that was used to keep those was increasing pricing, so it was not an outright denial. >> no. that is a definition that companies use, but that is no longer a legal situation. price increase. commissioner: so the follow-up would be, are there any kind of loosely defined entertainment events that fall within that policy now that you could stay from have the experience in recent past? >> i have not, nor have i seen a specific situation. because the raves were the ones that were accumulating a lot of losses. we decided we cannot charge $400. it is not cost-effective. so not in my experience. it does not mean we would not in the future, but as of now, there is not anything that is considered excessive pricing. commissioner: right, because if this commission were to require it, and it was considered excessive, it would be a denial, and i think that is important to get out in the public. thank you. >> yes, absolutely. >> thank you again. pres

they have declared that they're actually planning on redlining any jurisdiction that does any type of properties trust alone, so one of the basises for the lawsuit asks them why they are doing this because this is an age-old practice of local governments for a box of purposes, sidewalks, power utilities which in for lots of purposes. so i think that will go on for a long time compaq -- because this is an age-old practice of local governments for lots of purposes, sidewalks, power utilities. as a result, the department of energy world just a couple of weeks ago that they're going to allow us to continue to have our grant. we're going forward with this despite the current setback, and they have said just to devote the resources to try to find alternative financing, so we are using both are block grant funds, we are redirecting those, we are coordinating and staying in touch with the statewide efforts on finding alternative financing, renewable funding being the major contractor for the state, and we have weekly meetings with renewable funding on that topic. supervisor mar: does this kor

element which we agreed could be issued even though was a draft in june to avoid issues, to have redline. the difficulty is that spur, which i happen to think highly of in general, has generally been conceived as far too pro- growth to be healthy enough for the neighborhood characterization, as part of the 2009 housing element. my goal is simple -- to avoid another round of litigation, find a compromise of words, and avoid a citizen's initiative that would trump the work that has been done by so many people find a compromise. the changes that i believe that are referred to as a part of smart growth, just an educated guess, would be putting the words maintained the neighborhood character as opposed to respect neighborhood character, things of that level. just a general statement of policy, there is sufficient concern by at least 14 of the neighborhood groups which stepped up to object to the 2004 housing element. unless we have something that gives more lip service -- not too smart growth, because we are beyond that idea at -- the real problem is in the early draft, the idea was not only

element which we agreed could be issued even though was a draft in june to avoid issues, to have redline. the difficulty is that