in this specific case, it is a little different.he department, based upon the late-night request for the applicant for an evaluation. we were not able to get a response from the police department and we wound the receiving correspondence to the permit officer with a recommendation for denial of the sperm that. the station capt. does not want her, specifically, the food court to have extended hours. therefore, they directed us to deny the permit. they changed her time based on disinformation. we correspond with the police department once again. and we were informed by the permit officer that the capt. does not want the facility there at all, specifically. based upon this recommendation, we deny this permit. we corresponded with the applicant specifically. this is a decision for the police department, we will comply with this. this is what the appellant in this case what request. again, these are processes that the department can follow. we tried working with the applicant to determine if it is available because a search for a seconda

>> in this specific case, it was very telling. it is starting to make sense. what happened was, the individual that initially started the process left. that was one of those situations where things were less well documented. as were we to investigation and follow-up on this. one of the challenges that we continue to face is that this came at the beginning of the program. it started in march, when the notice that we sent out was in june of the same year that was almost immediately at the time of the application. we contacted the police department, and they knew specifically what the intent was. the language that was in the new legislation came directly from the police. again, as it relates to ours, there were objections as it relates to the hours of operation. we contacted the police department, the continued to say that it was not appropriate. in the meantime, we did the notification and we received injections. but it was in the situation, given that the police department had recommended strongly to denied a permit that we did not take that next step, which wo

>> i cannot address that specific one. i would be pleased to research this further and get a response back to you on this particular question. i understand its importance. >> thank you. next member of the public would like to speak on this item, please come forward. >> i am the new ceo of the california association of california nonprofits working to support communities by sponsoring nonprofit organizations. we're moving our headquarters to san francisco, but not because we are getting a tax benefit. i am here to present our strong opposition to the discount ordnance on the grounds that without any evidence it would provide a benefit to san francisco, it gives a unwarranted privileges to a special class of private business interests and at its expense of complexity to an already extensive, complex system we have family san francisco. there has never been a finding these corporations are disadvantaged in any way as might be the case with minority-owned businesses, women-owned businesses, and other businesses that receive pa

but this is clearly not a case for specific performance.ubject matter of the contract is not unique like a unique parcel of real estate or the mona lisa, where a money value is very difficult to assign. there are hundreds of residential swimming pools of all different dimensions, and we are used to assigning money values to them. money damages are clearly adequate in this case. >> well, this pool was specifically designed for the johnson's backyard, and they feel that they are entitled to specific performance and will urge that unless the contractor agrees to fair compensation. now in this case the johnsons have lost 80 square feet of swimming pool. and at 30 dollars per square foot they are entitled to be compensated $2,400. >> but the contractor saved only eleven dollars a square foot by not completing the pool, for a total of $880. if the johnsons receive essentially the swimming pool they contracted for, plus a cash payment of $2,400, they will really be getting windfall. >> but the johnsons did not receive the swimming pool they bargai

the hearing was very specific as it relates to that. the applicant was pacific they do not want to provide true coffee region was specific they did not want to provide region the applicant was specific they did not want to provide brew coffee. the continued argument was that we did not follow the process. the department continues to maintain we did evaluate what they were proposing selling, and there are many similar foods being sold at a burger king and various locations. the applicant says coffee is being sold. they are selling sweets, and she is suggesting coffee beans, which were not part of this permit, so i am not sure of the nature of her objection. have the department known the applicant was planning on selling coffee and tea bags, we would not have approved a permit, and we would have sent her away at this point. >> thank you, sir. good >> do you have that? >> you have to speak up here, if you would. >> i apologize. they had me take everything off my computer. i would have to take it off my computer to get it to you. it is a ca

most specifically have been focused on the transportation work. we have the slides, i am not sure -- the transportation work has focused on engineering reviews of complex intersections. there has been a desire on the part of the community to look at options, so we have evaluated those options. the we have looked at several complex configurations and options to ensure good transit performance as well as traffic operations and bicycle facility development through the area the ordination of the better streets market is ongoing. the larger part of the delay is in that portion of the route near market street. the design concepts have been analyzed in-depth and we are developing those outreach for spring. our partnership project is a small reference here because this project is a citywide effort but we're working with groups of employers and the notable sets are the medical institutions. we have mentioned this in the district 1 summary as well. the idea is to help the employers there collaborate in ways to reduce trip making by car and increase the oppo

i do not know that i want to be specific about the complaint. i am not sure if you have seen either the complete or the letter. because of the nature of the thing, it may have been dismissed by staff and an early stage, such that it did not get to you. i am not clear how those complaints work. in any event, the issue as i understand it -- the matter was terminated because t evidence te individual was personally and substantially involved in the specific matter. my concern is the understanding of the terms "personally" and "substantially." my idea was different about what that meant, that it was more broadly involved in a matter, get personally and substantially -- my new understanding is that staff of use it in a different way, as relates to the rights and obligations of parties more in a legal or contractual cents. i am not sure that is the only way to interpret it, nor am i sure that is what the original intent was about personally and substantially involved in a specific matter. i think it is difficult to talk about these things in the abstra

specific to hear, san francisco is leading that trend. roughly in the 1990's, the san francisco juvenile justice system was the subject of harsh criticism. it was two decades of harsh criticism for its monolithic practice that week -- kids would get arrested, police officers would take them into the youth guidance center and take them to the youth guidance center. they would be detained for some time and were released onto the street with you services and little follow-up. in the mid-1990s, it was decided that was not such a good approach. we needed to diversify our juvenile justice services and that came on the heels of a number of reports, a number of actions by the board of supervisors and various commissions. with the passage of children's fund in 1992, a new pot of money was created for the establishment of innovative services. services that up to that point did not exist. it is the department of children and youth, and families. when that department was launched, what we saw is an unprecedented level of innovation and creativity. in

>> i don't know i have the experience to say specifically. based in the experience i do have, i would give them a b plus to an a minus. it's a program that is only five years old in totality. >> i would just remind you that your agency has agreed that performance measures need to be developed for the viper teams so there could be such measured results and quantifiable data and we will develop that as we move forward. one last question that i would have for you. have viper teams ever pulled over cars, suvs or vans? >> i'm not aware of a tsa asset ever pulling over a car or van but i can take that question for the record. >> i would love to have that answer because to my knowledge there is no terrorist that has ever driven a semi-truck. so we find it very curious, the method that was being played with the viper teams and their presence. you can go look at the examples and those were cars and suvs. they were not semi-trucks. i yield back. >> thank you very much. we'll now start our second round of questioning. i'll give it a go for five minutes

that's very specific. and he t and then the collaborative work amongst teachers i would say is a huge part of the collaborative problem solving that teachers are doinging about instructal practice and individual strategies to support individual students has been hugely powerful. >> hi, my name's amanda cusick. my question is about parent involvement and if that was part of your strategy. you mentioned the family engagement night.d wondering what those looked like. >> we've used culturally specific service organizations that already very relationships with families as a way of linking families with the school. we've got a broad definition of what it means to be engaged as a parent, both what you're doing with your student at home to support them academically in school as well as participating in what's going on at school. we've had a wednesday morning parent volunteer morning where parents show up in force at the school and are just a presence at the school. and we've got, again, an outstanding individual w

specific provisions of, of, of the bill.scored. that's what our estimates are based upon. >> yeah. >> before we finish this, but it just -- it would be, i think useful for us alllitt bit here.t there are, on the order of magnitude of 56 billion in outlays that are anticipated for 2013. that these are already legally binding -- in - transportation and that, it was beyond the highway trust fund. there is a series of things. that -- contracts. no salaries. no new these agencies would committed to billions in commitments made in prior yearsy how -- executing a situation where height w of transportatio. they're bound they can't spend more than is available. executed. we don't know how that will happen. series of players. states. federal government, so forth. >> want to that there are in the department of transportation, therecommitn'tmy program. you are allocating as i understand it $50 billion. there are $56 billion of that are scheduled. so that if you down -- no new programs. you are not paying people. you don't have enough to satisf

>> i didn't say that specifically. i was looking for that kind of work. i am seeking full-time work with a city agency still and i'm seeking contract work if i can find it, that might include representing clients to the media, and might include representing them to the city. it would be the kind of public affairs work where people need to understand how city functions in a particular way and what the rules and procedures are and sort of what outreach is necessaries to get things into the right place and give them the context for a project going before city hall or a set of ideas or businesses or goals they may have. so, a particular subject matter area is not really particularly -- i'm not seeking a particular subject matter area. i mentioned in my letter that i had potential for work, potential for contract work for the fort mason center which has in mind an effort to try to extend the f-line, the historic f-line train from the center of fisherman's wharf down to fort mason because there's track and a long history of a desire to do that so the fort mason

and they're request specific. but a while back, and in the '80s, i believe, there was a case called payne enterprises versus secretary of the navy, and in payne, the judge actually came down and the circuit judge actually came down and said that you can use foia policies, patterns or practices that are in violation of foia, and it was along of the roe v. wade standard of capable of repetition yet evading review, because what would happen would b -- in payn foia officials would deny information, and the people reversed on appeal and then file another request and the analyst would deny the information, they'd appeal and it would be reversed oppthis over and over again, and so the idea was, if you have evidence that an agency something that is against foia, the court has unlimited equitable authority to stop that, and so a client of mine, greg mudded, who was an author in the uk, was writing a book about the u.s. and uk's involvement in the development of the iraqi oil law, for how oil contracts would whatnot. and on

commissioner antonini: specifically about the bikes. on the face, it does not seem it would drive the cost of expansion or building a new building and creating a new business up to the point where it would be prohibited. it seems like it would be able to be accommodated. commissioner moore: i did not know that a bicycle parking lot was included in the car collisions of area, because parking is not. are you carving out the two parking spaces which take 10 bicycles to add that to the f.a.r. calculations? i am in support of not doing that. i was wondering why the planning department wants to take on any additional enforcement actions, to figure out whether they are there or not. you enforce the bike parking regulations, but it is checked by sfmta, correct? scott sanchez: the enforcement process currently allows $50 a day to the office of the summit administrator. we recommend it changing to section 176, which allows up to $250 a day. at the time the parking legislation was introduced, we did not have as robust a parking system as we do now

relationships carry on once the students go onto college, and actually there is a bunch of really specific but they have taken different shapes of just figuring out where does the what the community organization or individual have to offer with what the school needs and really focused on what the school is trying to achieve. they're not random partnership. they're all focused and aligned on what roesz velt is trying to accomplish with their students. >> thank you. good morning, alice, thompson, detroit, michigan. my question is to ms. smith. can you identify for us three or four of your specific and salient changes that create a transformation in your school? >> so i will draw you back to bob's presentation because we have done some things as roosevelt we're also doing as a district. one of those is identifying what we call academic priority students as students that are coming out of eighth grade and moving into ninth grade and putting a special kind of emphasis on tracking kids in ninth grade. we have i aninth grade axd and students being on track to 2k3wr5ds wait as they enter tenth fwr

the law is very specific as it relates to this. once the department of public works has gotten through this process and there is no issues as it relates to food or other facilities, the department will wait for approval. the applicant has 90 days to work with the health department. the city's business tax group would require a certificate. the department would then finalize of permits. this was to provide an opportunity for an applicant to secure a location prior to the purchase of any equipment that would be needed to run their business. i have been informed by staff suspect there remains outstanding fees that have yet to be paid -- by staff that there remains outstanding fees and have to be paid. we will collect one half of the total amount of fraud. we will collect the rest of the fees at the conclusion of the decision. good further, that the applicant was required to provide cost. there are current back fees associated with this. we will continue to work on these, but at this point the applicant has not paid those. from a prosp

it is usually helpful to target specific academies. it does not sound like there is an actual plan. >> there is in a plan. why don't you give the plan. >> in working with the sacramento unified school district, they -- san francisco unified school district, they provide candidates who are interested. obviously the teachers' work directly with the students. the candidates are interviewed, and they interestingly enough, they go through a hiring process -- supervisor kim: i am curious about this today even gets there. the interview point. clearly you have a selection process laid out. and >> >> we do. the program has three different elements to it. reaching out to the ninth graders, we do not try to get them interested in math and science, because 10th and 11th grade will be the times when that will come math will come i. the presentations are part of the process. i did have a note on that. athis summer interns is the second part i just described to you. we have them for six weeks on the job. then we have office and job site tours for the

we have to target to demonstrate positive outcomes and be more specific on the types of results we would like to see. the target population is 10 to 25 year olds. we defined the three main at risk populations impacted by the juvenile justice system. we defined them as at risk, highly at risk, and in risk. the difference is at risk refers to a population that might be demonstrating some risk factors or testing the waters a around alcohol and drug abuse or aggressive behavior but are not touching the juvenile justice system. next is the highly at risk population which targets the use that are more involved with- street associations or more serious substance abuse, dealing with a higher level of health issues and what not. the last target population we are looking into is the in-risk population that targets youth and young adults in custody or exiting the juvenile justice or criminal justice system. that is the target population of our local action plan. it's important to be targeted since we're looking at this plan and informing some of the dollar's weak and up with. in terms of the framew

many of these provisions are extremely specific with very specific -- >> but they would apply even if the rule is not jurisdictional. the only difference would be that the court could enforce it or not enforce it in particular cases. which brings me to the davis case which i think is injure biggest hurdle. a case quite similar to this in which the constitutionality of the social security act was at issue, and the government waived its right to insist upon the application of this act. of course, if it's jurisdictional, you can't waive it. so are you asking us to overrule the davis case? >> the davis case was decided during a period when this court interpreted the anti-injunction act as simply codifying the prestatutory equitable principles that usually but not always prohibited a court from enjoining the assessment or collection of taxes. so that understanding, which is what was the basis for the davis decision was rejected by the court in williams packing and a series of subsequent cases, bob jones, and so i would say effectively the davis case has been overruled by subsequent decisio