i'm convinced the judge would not have -- if he heard a request, he would have honored that request for a vote. so we are where we are. i would urge the members -- clearly i will stipulate to the fact that almost all of you would have voted against the motion if a vote had been taken. you can put that in the record. and i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. pursuant to clause 12-a of rule 1, the chair declares the who -- the house in reces unanimous consent to speak out of order for one minute. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. hoyer: mr. speaker, from time to time, for whatever reasons, people want to vote either because they don't get down the aisle or they don't request a vote. do not get the opportunity to vote on issues that they think are important to them. from time to time frankly on our side we've been felt we've been shut out, when the majority was in the hands of the republicans. we would want fairness. in return, we ought to extend fairness. given the fact that there are obviou

i have requested that before. i want to see the impact on my foundation in having this tall building next to my residents. there is no detail in the drawings. i would like to see an environmental study. they are going to be building on this part of the city on the sandy soil, i believe that can create a problem if it is not done right. i would like to see an environmental study. in the past i have tried to contact the owner. i have never been able to deal with him directly, but only to his representative. we don't even know where he is right now. in blocking my two windows, by law, my understanding is in case of fire hazard i have to have a window and access space in case of a fire escape. i know my time is up. i want to show you the damage for the flooding to if basement -- to the basement. in one of the pictures and this is the second picture. the representative they haven't removed the door or done anything about the drainage system. thank you so much. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> i am glenn rogers, i

or the request. on that motion, president fung. >> aye. >> commissioner honda. >> no. >> commissioner tanner. >> no. >> vice president swig. >> no. >> okay. that motion fails. >> have to make another motion or else it sticks. >> do you want to make a motion to grant jurisdiction? >> need a moment. >> it seems like part of the issue is that it is unclear that the city has proper notification requirements for tenants on such matters. and in that way, perhaps city did inadvertently cause the tenant to not be able to file a timely appeal because we do not require her to be notified of such plans in a time which she could be able to file the appeal. i don't know. does that sound like something? >> sure. >> i would move that we -- see how it goes. i would move we grant the appeal on the basis that the city does not have proper notification requirements for tenants in such matters and thus, caused the appellant to inadvertently be unable to file a timely appeal. >> so we have a motion from commissioner tann

nothing about the legitimacy of either the requests or the grounds for the request. and there is and there should be some ongoing disagreement about the appropriate scopeof the request . this is an area where some action is not only healthy, actually productive and it's going to present inevitably because your views about the upper bristol of these requests. but there's also a number of areas with respect to grad rates and law enforcement issuance of requests to providers where there is unnecessary friction and some of the reduction can support privacy and security at the same time some of the things that can be helpful in this regard are better to date law-enforcement guys, resourcing of law enforcement teams by the providers, better training and dissemination of that training to date and the local law enforcement officers. better training of judges that review and approve the range of requests subject to court order or warrants and these have obvious security benefits that provide law enforcement more streamlined ability to access data of interest but it also has p

us, this is our request. as i mentioned, we have hundreds of millions of dollars in deferred maintenance and repairs that are needed at our facilities. the intent of these projects being proposed are that they fall outside of the current scope of any projects that are designed to be completed under eser, so there's a whole scope of portfolio projects under the eser project and these fall outside of it, but just because they fall outside of it doesn't mean they're not a good project and they don't need to be addressed. they're roof replacement, exterior envelope and painting, window repair, shower replacement, mechanical and hvac, emergency generators, exhaust extractors, those are mainly ongoing maintenance. electrical infrastructure. just the age of our facilities, and infrastructure needs to be updated just to be able to handle the electrical load of today's equipment, things of that nature. sidewalk side work, sidewalk, those potentially form a liability for the city if they're not addressed. kitchens, as

the speaker pro tempore: the chair did not hear the request, nor was it a timely request. mr. scalise: can we make a motion to reconsider this the speaker pro tempore: as i recall, mr. scalise, the motion onreconsider is already laid the table. mr. scalise: is the speaker saying that that motion would not be in order? the speaker pro tempore: the motion is not in order. it has been laid on the table. does the court reporter have a record of mr. guthrie's statement? could we have it read back, please. the speaker pro tempore: do you ask for recognition. >> i would like to know if the court reporter has taken a transcript and recorded mr. guthrie's asking for a recorded vote the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is able to consult the record during your regular course of work. mr. yoho: is this vote no. the speaker pro tempore: the chair has ruled on this matter and again i was awaiting a request for a recorded vote and did not hear one and if one was made, it was not timely. mr. meadows: i appeal the ruling of the chair. the speaker pro tempore: the appeal is not in order at t

about the request or the grounds for rejecting the request. there is and should be some ongoing disagreement about the appropriate scope of a request. this is an area where some friction is not only healthy, it's actually productive and going to persist because there's different views about the appropriate scopes of these requests. there's also a number of areas with respect to grant rates and law enforcement issuance of request to providers where there is unnecessary friction and some of the reduction in that friction can bolt privacy and security at the same time. some of the things that can be helpful in this regard are better up-to-date law enforcement guides provided by the providers, resourcing of law enforcement teams by the providers, better training and dissemination of that training to state and local law enforcement officers, better training of judges that review and approve the range of requests subject to court order or warrants, and these have obvious security benefits in the sense that it provides law enforcement more streamline

requester's project request in 2012. even though his project was less than a 400 square foot addition, the department required a geotechnical report. the cover sheet for that is on the overhead. the report stated a slope of five and a half ratio and recommended appearing to be used in the expansion. it also noted sandy soil with bedrock 30 feet below. on the overhead to, the first photo is a project site taken from the back alley. it is looking up hill. it shows the slope. the second photo shows the slope from the end of the block. the d.r. hearing was originally scheduled for october 11th. the project sponsor requested the continuance and a revised hearing date of september 20th the d.r. requester agreed to both of these, however, the project sponsor only contacted the d.r. requester on september 12th, after 5:00 pm, to schedule a meeting. based on the timing and other factors, the offer to meet was perceived to be disingenuous. trying to rush the last minute negotiations when the owners and neighbors needed to come to

he has a request -- requested to move out. i think we will always be a resource. the beauty about the members of the stress unit, or the behavioural health unit -- >> peer support. >> is that even though they may not be assigned to that position , they always remain as great resources. as does captain dan griffin who has also been on the unit with dan christie. he will be tapped into often times. we lose the full-time work of dan, but he will continue to be a resource for us. we will advertise for his replacement. believe that that general order is on our desk. >> i think i saw it on an e-mail it went out a couple of weeks ago. dan and captain griffith do an amazing job. i encouraged that we try to get that unit up. i know the peer support unit measured that the commission passed, and they know they're supposed to be an update to the commission mid february or late february are really looking forward to that update and i think that is an important part of the health and wellness of this department, in addition to the cancer awareness stuff that we are doing. thank

on their request. so this is an interesting case that is still unfolding and we will let you know how that one unfolds. so we were able to come up with some recommendations based on all of these examples, based on the best case examples of how foia has successfully led to information that is been critical in advocacy campaigns and raise public awareness. and so we come up with some fundamental tips and recommendations on what makes, what composes successful foia work. so doing the background research is one where understanding what else is happening out there in the landscape, who else is filing similar request? and what successes have a hat and what obstacles have a run into and how to craft her own request accordingly, obviously you not duplicating request and bogging down records. regarding specific records and get in as much detail as you can to identify the specific documents you're looking for. also using other means like mandatory prosecution reviews, if you're able to use that as a pathway to g

vastly more than the $5.7 billion we have requested from congress. the wall will also be paid for indirectly by the great new trade deal we have made with mexico. senator chuck schumer, who you will be hearing from later tonight, has repeatedly supported a physical barrier in the past, along with many other democrats. they change their mind only after i was elected president. democrats in congress have refused to acknowledge the crisis. and they have refused to provide our brave border agents with the tools they desperately need to protect our families and our nation. the federal government remains shut down for one reason, and one reason only, because democrats will not fund border security. my administration is doing everything in our power to help those impacted by the situation. but the only solution is for democrats to pass a spending bill that defends our borders and reopens the government. this situation could be solved in a 45 minute meeting. i have invited congressional leadership to the white house tomorrow to get this done. hopefully we ca

please speak into the microphone for rehearing and jurisdiction requests, the requesters and responding departments are given three minutes to present testimony and evidence and no rebuttal. to assist the board and accurate preparation of minutes, you are asked but not required to submit a speaker card or business card to board staff when you come up to speak. cards are available on the left side of the podium. if you have questions about requesting a rehearing, the board rules or hearing schedules , speak to board staff during the break or after the meeting or call or visit the board office. this meeting is broadcast live on san francisco government t.v. , cable channel 78, and will be rebroadcast on fridays at 4:00 pm on channel 26. the video is available on our website, and can be down lighted toast downloaded from san francisco government t.v. org. now we will swear in or -- we will swear in all those who intend to testify. if you intend to testify at any of the proceedings tonight, and wish to have the board give your testimony evidentiary weight, please stand if you are able, rais

most of the requests were blocked but ford did get through and as a result almost eighty one million dollars was sent to accounts at a bank called our c.p.c. thousands of miles away in the philippines i couldn't believe it. because nothing like that even a smaller thing like that never happened so i was dumb and act for a while. man was the governor of the bank when its systems were compromised and the money was stolen you know i'm not blaming swift i'm not. fip i'm not blaming bangladesh but and this was not strong enough to really we stand but end of it. all institutions touched by the highest have denied they were to fault for the losses they have however taken steps to improve security. in the. police headquarters in downtown dhaka detectives here are working with all sorts he's in other countries in what has become an international investigation they've yet to confirm how the hackers got into the system or we will fit all the data and helping us into helping us and we are trying to find out. about cancun theme. maybe some investigators are sifting through ten terabytes of data i

so there's actually a different number of highest request from legal process request. so our content quest is based on content. trends over time are a little bit misleading here because sometimes we see really high spikes based on a certain piece of content. we have restricted multiple times. so for example when you see july 2015 that huge spike was a result of a single content being restricted over 36,000 times. however you take out some of those unusual incidents we do see the governments requesting us to take down content based on local law and it creasing rate has over half. internet risk disruptions. so as i said, this is when states were products or services are blocked in certain countries. trends over time aren't very happy helpful because these are designed for specific countries which fluctuate. for the first half of 2018 we saw eight countries blocking content eight times. 83 of those were in india. restricting access to facebook products and services for just 11 weeks where people can access them. interestingly, although india locked our services more times

at the request of democrats, it will be a steel barrier rather than a concrete wall. this barrier is absolutely critical to border security. it is also what our professionals at the border want and need. this is just common sense. the border wall would very quickly pay for itself. the cost of illegal drugs exceeds $500 billion a year, vastly more than the $5.7 billion we have requested from congress. the wall will always be paid for indirectly by the great new trade deal we have made with mexico. senator chuck schumer, who you will be hearing from later onight, has repeatedly supported a physical barrier in the past, along with many other democrats. they changed their mind only after i was elected president. democrats in congress have refused to acknowledge the crisis, and they have refused to provide our brave border agents with the tools they desperately need to protect our families and our nation. the federal government remains shut down for one reason and one reason only. because democrats will not fund border security. my administration is doing everything in our

the dr request, i met with the project sponsor. to request modification of the excessive glazing on the eastern facade of the project. based on the discussions that took place, i was expecting some accommodation. that has not been forthcoming. i respectfully ask the planning commission take discretionary review and address the excessive glazing and coming to a favourable solution. i urge you to continue this case until mr. winslow is here and he can answer questions about it. thank you. >> thank you. >> good evening. i am chris bigelow. i will submit a petition in support for your consideration. the petition has been signed by 28 neighbourhood residents who are in agreement that the issues delivered by the previous -- who represent the extraordinary and unusual circumstances of justifying a discretionary review of the project. how many copies should be provided >> as many as you like. >> additional comments? none. project sponsor. >> good evening. the project sponsors. jimmy and renee have been reviewing the property. the project w

on their request. so this is an interesting case that's still unfolding and we willlet you know how that one enfolds . so in the guide we were able to come up with some recommendations on all of these examples, based on the best case examples of how employee work has led to the disclosure of important information, that's been critical in addressing a campaign and raising public awareness we come up with some fundamental tips and recommendations on what makes , what composes successful foia work. doing the background research is one where understanding what else is happening out there in the landscape, who else is filing similar requests and what successes have they had or what obstacles they run into so you're not duplicating efforts and bogging down foia offices. his fighting civic records, getting as much detail as we can to identify civic documents. also using other means like mandatory application reviews if you're able to identify a specific enough document using that, it's a way to get informatio

once the request come in, they will be -- some of the request are quite large and it's going to require lot of resources. we're evaluating how we're going to move forward with that. with regards to the i.d., the family code is at family code. how we're going to work around identifying individuals, there's various methed methods we can u. we're required to identify the individuals who we are releasing the reports to. >> it doesn't say it requires driver's license. you need to verify the i.d. correct? >> it says that here. >> there's several ways to get to solution. sticking point is requiring the idea up front versus requiring i.d. when they pick it up. i can still get the i.d. the officer is vouch say this was the victim this case. that's pretty simple. i responded to the scene and here's the individual. >> my point. this is much larger robust discussion and conversation. i want to make sure we didn't lose sight of adopting the d.g.o. as amended. i did hear that all parties were okay with the d.g.o. as it is amended. commissioner dejesus brought up some additional amendments. what i don

it's our understanding that he did make that request. the speaker pro tempore: for if the pose does -- speaker didn't hear the gentleman make the request but

and last request, if we do have to continue, we request that we continue it to the nearest possible date, which is january 10. thank you so much for your response. >> thank you. any other public comment? go ahead, sir. you can speak. >> president hill, commissioners, thank you very much. i'm francisco montos t architect of 447 broadway. i also would like the project to continue. i'm here, you know, defending my clients and the -- my license that this project is consistent with the building and fire department. you know, as soon as we get into the details. but it's very clear. there's some confusion about whether we were on -- or part of the above tenant. we are not. there is a nightclub above us that has, you know, had a long reputation in that neighborhood. that is not it is 10 feet above us and has access to a different alley. we're here to hopefully get these guys their business up and rung. thank you. >> thank you. >> good afternoon, commissioners. i would also suggest that you continue as proposed for another meeting. mainly because we are the immediate neighbor to this project and

and there were other reasons to transfer requests could have a. suspicion they were different to most payments made by a bangladesh bank they would form a should properly and these were large payments to individuals rather than organizations. but largely because the requests appeared to be authentic aided by swift eighty one million dollars was sent. when i use my card in a foreign country for example or for a sudden large purchase it can trigger a simple fraud inquiry from my bank real time monitoring the technology is quite straightforward but in the case of the heist nothing like that happened at the fed the vast majority of the use payment requests that arrive on the doorstep of the new york fed are automatically executed you know they come to the swift network they have all the boxes ticked they're swift authenticated and so they automatically go out the door but fred stuff we're concerned enough about some of the payments to try to contact bangladesh bank at the end of sirs day they sent a message using swift and two more on friday but hacke

is either not responded to or if that request is denied we fully intend to produce a report and give our. comments on the best available evidence the likelihood in the veracity of these claims. in answer to your question the the numbers are. not exact because the issue is a lot of people have been arrested and it's sometimes difficult to say which detainees go which with which case right that's that's probably the reason for some of the confusion our count is ten women. currently in detention which we whom we would associate together as well as one man at least one man associated with the same case the. as far as i'm aware the last arrest of this group would have been in july. we've been we've named eight women activists and for that mal supporters and all less of the saudi authorities and it's those cases that we're seeking to pursue we don't have the capacity to review the in. saudi society justice system. i might add that you have personally i regret the fact that the british ministry of justice was engaged in a war with the side you'll foresees systemically to try and improve tha

i am here to request for jurisdiction on our request for appeal that needs to be heard. the airport van is opposed by seven supervisors, and i have brought two copies for this. 259 cabs would be banned out of the airport, and over 500 will be treated as second-class drivers, and this would throw thousands of drivers out of jobs they would be leaving the workforce, they need to put food on their table, and pay their rent, and they would rather drive for a meal, which is what one of my drivers did. let's not experiment on their jobs. if you kill the taxi drivers' income, there is no taxi industry. if there is no taxi industry, san francisco does not look good if we don't have cabs, in a premier city like san francisco should have, we are losing an essential part of our transportation business. let me tell you the domino effect of what will happen. for us, cab companies, with no drivers, the cars will sit on the yards. we are paying for the cabs and the insurance expenses and all their maintenance. what will happen to us while we will crumble and fold up. it will open more

request. so although things do change quickly, when i heard the admiral say, you know, it's hard to get priorities when you were asked that question about our activities in the southern border versus what's in that defense strategy document. or we have to be creative. that creates problems for us doing our job and using that. for instance, mr. rood, that whole development, was the term "southern border" ever -- were those words ever in that document? secretary rood: i don't recall that in the classified version. mr. keating: was the word "caravan" ever used? secretary rood: not that i can recall. mr. keating: so here's our dilemma as a committee and a congress. we have to have priorities. money is finite, and we have to make decisions on funding. so i think we have a -- this is an important hearing as a discussion point to go from going forward because things aren't in sync in terms of the way i view them. we have to make those decisions. we have to assess priorities. this committee has a hist

have requested more agents, immigrationjudges and bed space have requested more agents, immigratione to process the sharp rise in unlawful migration fuelled by our very strong economy. our plan also contains an urgent request for humanitarian assistance and medical support. furthermore, we have asked congress to close border security loopholes so to close border security loopholes so that illegal immigrant children can be safely and humanely returned back home. finally, as part of an overall approach to border security, law enforcement professionals have requested $5.7 billion for a physical barrier at the request of democrats, it will be a steel barrier rather than a concrete wall. this barrier is absolutely critical to border security. it is also what oui’ to border security. it is also what our professionals at the border want and need. this isjust commonsense. the border wall would very quickly paper itself. the cost of illegal drugs exceeds $500 billion a year. lastly more than the $5.7 billion we have requested from congress. the wall will also be paid for indirectly by the gr

about 400,000 requests to the six u.s.based providers. by december 2017, the previous six months before that, almost doubled or least increased by significant amount to about six hundred 50,000, almost 700,000 requests in the prior six-month period. what's interesting about this chart is that the grant rates have hovered more or less at about the same rate, at about 80%. they had been consistent over time in terms of the percentage of request or demand that providers complies with, but that also means that the number, the absolute number -- >> you can see the last few minutes of this program on our website c-span.org. just type surveys in the search bar. taking the next use u.s. senate which today is considering legislation authorizing military assistance to israel, establishing new sanctions on the syrian government, and encouraging state and local governments to oppose efforts to put economic sanctions on israel. senate democrats plan to vote against moving toward a vote on this bill. not necessarily because they oppose

. >> since there is no request i will close public comment. now, i turn to my commission members for comments and questions. do i have a motion to apbrief the minutes? moved by commissioner bustos seconded by commissioner scott. roll call. >> please announce your vote. (roll call). >> it is four ayes and one absent. >> the item carries. >> next is item 5b election of chair and vice chair for discussion and action. >> fellow commissioners, we have before us election of chair and vice chair. first we will elect the chair. do we have any nominations for chair? yes, commissioner bustos. >> i would like to nominate our current chair, commissioner mondejar. >> i would like to nominate our chair as well. >> i would like to nominate our chair as well. >> thank you. any other nominations for chair? nominations for the chair is closed. any members of the public who would like to comment on nominations for the chair. public comment is closed. any oppositions or abtentions? please call the roll call for chair. >> commission members please announce your vo

you'll see a request in about a year designs from the m.t.a. for this request. the next request is from the m.t.a., the bike-to-workday 2019 event. we have a long-standing of funding this day of activity as well as the events leading up to it. there are a lot of outreach to normalizing bike transportation. we will be requesting on receiving before, during, and after counts to enhance the effectiveness on the ridership on the day of, and how that compares to the prior years, as well. with that, i can take any questions, and project leaders are here, as well. >> chair peskin: thank you. colleagues, are there any questions of staff? seeing none, is there any public comment on this item? okay. public comment is closed. [gavel]. >> chair peskin: and is there a motion to allocate the afore mentioned $3.48 million? motion by commissioner fewer. is there a second? seconded by commissioner mandelman. colleagues, can we do that same house, same call. the motion is approved on first reading. [gavel]. >> chair peskin: next item, please. >> clerk: [agenda item read]. >> chai

they requested $1.6 billion. i serve on the senate appropriations committee, and the senate appropriations committee provided that request. provided that request for strengthening barriers. we did say that you can't use that money to build that sort of new, huge wall the president used to talk about. but we provided $1.6 billion. and that was going to work out fine in the long run. and then of course in december the president said, oh, i need this $5.7 billion for a big wall. mr. president, i think all of us know who, you know, follow these closely that even before president trump was elected, we had 700 miles of barriers and fencing along certain strategic parts of the border. and we have provided funds to reinforce and strengthen some of those barriers. and so this is a totally manufactured issue by the president of the united states in terms of all of a sudden demanding more funds than the president himself -- himself in his budget requested. so we should have a serious conversation on border security and immi

taking up the president's request and acting on the president's request. either unanimous or near unanimous vote in the committee. i am impressed by how we work at dealing with request but let's be clear the president changed his mind after midterm elections, after we had already passed the appropriation bills out of our committees and changed it a second time after he got a reaction from a support group that he felt he could not deal with. so understand what we are doing . that makes things a little more challenging for us but we want to get government open, we want to do of border security and we want to do it in a broad bipartisan basis for. >> is it accurate to say that this the amendment does not have money in it for a while? >> it does have money in it for a while, never will it has money and if her home and security. senator mansion set on the floor a few minutes ago, we have a continuing resolution for the homeland security budget so there is money available for the homeland security budget for whatever it was previously approved. i don't think the