it gets approved and posted there is a thirty or 60 day sequa appeal from the time >> the sequa appeal period is thirty days from project or under the ordinance that is passed the first reading the sequa appeal period is extends to thirty days after the approval action. and that is to allow the project to go forward. the way the ordinance is structured when the equipment's is structured it is issued sentiments months before it's approved. so the exemption is posted and an appeal of the indemnification maybe filed tattoo during the exemption it's final list so it maybe filed starting with the exemption is posted and ending thirty days after the approval of the project >> i guess i'm not following you. so the projects posting of on exemption is that - >> that doesn't start the thirty day clock. the approval starts the clock >> the building permit is the start. the equipment's and the approval are issued open the same day. at any time done edify the counter. it's by - >> i want to clarify that. if you submit the project for the environmental determination it maybe 3 months later before yo

appeal as you've heard. if the public believes it's based on a sequa permit that would be appealable. it is for improperly issued permits. this is a substantial new process with balance and need. we've reviewed the last 10 years and found that modified issues were not present. the appeals received a discretionary review hearing. those projects were known to neighbors and were of concern. since the primarily i primary goal is to provide certainty of the appeals. this appeal could undermine this goal. adding process is something it that happens all the time. in this case, the department believes that this would be too high a need await benefit. in conclusion the department values the oversight apparently, this would allow

we took the beach project and the board of appeals said they wouldn't deal with sequa it's on the tape. the brvlz cost money for each appeal i think there's an economic injustice hero. the board of appeals don't have a background in environmental or historic issues. the chance of them being to value issues it's so far from happening just as on sequa issues they'll defer to the e r os opinion pr and in terms of costs you have a hearing there and here it's the same costs it's on tv and that's not a good option. the public needs a public hearing from the e r o payroll it's an inclusive public process. if a tree falls in a effort and no one's around does it make a sound and the analogy is what happens if - i can't tell you the number of times people learned l about issues i had insomnia and i watched sftv and that's where i learned about. i assume that's why you guys are on tv now. it's about time people need to see and hear i and hear the message. because it is vital the public should be able to understand the various components. this can be done easily in a media wide way >> any other pu

appeal are different. our planning commissions review under the california quality act sequa announced the adequacy and completeness of the examinations. this is a legislation hearing and to over turn needs 6 votes of this board. our consideration of the appeal of the use authorization involves an analysis whether the planning commissions determination was appropriate. the second hearing is quasi and we're required to afford the project sponsor due process to over turn the authorization of the continual condition 8 votes of the board are required. while into need the consideration and the members of the public who wish to speak and the consideration of the patents my suggestion is we condolences hearings. the public planning department and sponsor each receive a fair opportunity to address the appeals. first, the pales will have up to fourteen minutes to peel and next the members of the public meaning i request the board to regret the project may speak up to 2 minutes. we ask the speakers address the progress. we'll have 15 minutes to address the analysis and for first year it's authorization of the plan unit devel

and in fact it has been continued from earlier in the year when it was at the full board on a sequa appeal and so there is a lot of public discussion around the issues. and i myself talked about it in front of public groups for months, afterwards. but, we strongly believe that the development agreement, and the disscreption of it in the resolution was covered by the agenda and that the changes were that made to it, only so to speak to use my med fore, decreased the cost of the fine and therefore did not require an additional continuance and i do want to say to commissioner renne's point that i will take back to president chiu and some of another supervisors the point around the amendment and changes that were made. it is part of the administrative process and i think that the supervisors try hard to get their changes out there, and you know, in a way that provides a full debate as possible. but we do take seriously these rules around public comment if there are subnative changes. >> i have a follow up question, it was brought up in the public comment something that will refer to a narrow s

and in fact it has been continued from earlier in the year when it was at the full board on a sequa appeal and so there is a lot of public discussion around the issues. and i myself talked about it in front of public groups for months, afterwards. but, we strongly believe that the development agreement, and the disscreption of it in the resolution

appeal. mayor read said they were trying to use sequa.e maintains his concerns are le lit mat, and he would not do done anything different. >> then governor ronald reagan sighed sequw into the law. senate president says the law has been beneficial but got to be amended to stop special interest from taking advantage of it. >> i've been trying all year to find that elusive grujd ground between those who say it's perfect and those who say it needs to be rewritten. >> supporters and critics say sequa's power and. >> the bill is winding its way through the legislature now. >>> well, imagine seeing a black bear walking down the street what would you do? if you had a brain, you'd get away. people in tennessee decided to chase the little bear to take his picture. you can see the bear running up and down the stairs obviously frightened. seemed more nervous than the people surrounding it. the bear eventually went back into the woods. >> you've got to wonder. where's the little baby bear. >> where's mom. >> there might be a mama somewhere close oefr

branch library they received the sequa determination but the sequa determination deemed there were no changes to the project. and this kind of appeal process would have helped it was an unfortunate process and the ortega library was that demolished and the other library was small and it was extensively altered. so i'm no support >> thank you. i've been inclined to adopt the staffs remedies here. what really has changed my mind is one of the argument made by staff is this is a substantial new process without any need. and i think they maybe correct in that. but there's another aspect to it which is that if, in fact, these - there isn't a need for this particular process the only harm that can come of it will be at the hands of nasty people who wish to obstruct other perfectly proper and desirable projects. i don't think there will be many of them. the climate in san francisco seems to have changed over the recent years and the people are not somewhat less than inclined to support obstruction of projects. when the obstruction is not based on something that is really to do with the project itself and is motivated by ill will or a poli