we invite all the stakeholders, try to publicize that to the media, let people know what to expect. ben, go to construction. in construction, obviously, we come to the commission for an award of contract. again, that goes through the notification process of the commission. we also send a notice to the people who attended the conceptual design meeting, some of the 500-foot radius, but the people who actually participate in the process gave us their e- mail addresses. we usually talk to supervisors' offices throughout this project, but we always reach out to them and ask for a reward and to make sure anyone they know who is interested is aware and that they are aware of it. we try to. this is an area we need to improve on. cause actual signs at the site as to what is happening. and then, similar to the ground breaking, we have a ribbon cutting. there is usually public out redrawn that. we engage with community organizations to put that on and the sorts of things. -- there is usually public outreach are around that. hopefully then we have a facility that opens and makes people happy. t

everybody was talking about stakeholders and how we wanted a team player. i think the culture makes the player. now you hire somebody that is going to be a team player. we need independents. i am not sure i would go with the reelection everywhere. in san francisco, you have got an intelligent electorate, but i think independence is very important. also, you have to be independent of the judges. we found they were intimately involved in selecting the people who would appear before them. we found 90% of public defenders reported judicial pressure to expedite cases. that means when you are under one staff -- understaffed and overworked, the judge says, you have enough time. we need to move things along. this train that has to be speeding -- i think that is a real problem. judges are implicit when public defender offices are not given the resources to do an adequate investigation, so i think those are big problems we see. >> you raise an interesting point about whether a public defender should be elected or appointed. let me ask you this. you are appointed comm

we were told they met with stakeholders while deciding what to do. we were never consulted. we learned that staff considered it a great turnout, and they did not feel a second meeting was necessary. we were not asked what should be done. we heard on june 15 that he would be meeting to days later. that is not enough public notice. it was hard to know if we should oppose the plan or not. we have expressed concerns about the plan. we would like them to guarantee that when they tear down retaining walls, the replacement will hold it as well. we want them to guarantee the primary consideration will be what will hold them in place best, and we love the trees and want them protected. there is talk about living trees, but we have not been told how much pruning will be done. the devil is in the details, but there is no way to find out the details before it is approved. we want them to tell us in advance what pruning will be done and give us a chance to comment on it. there's never any feedback to neighborhood groups about what they are doing or not doing in response to our concerns.

we first met with supervisor avalos about who are the stakeholders around crocker. we have never done that. i probably attended three or four different community meetings on a with the police. we actually met with the fire department's well to make sure we were reaching out to the stakeholders. we got tremendous support, actually, for this event. i was actually down there this past saturday when they have roped off the whole park. they actually were giving fliers to the neighborhood, and one of the comments i heard back from the community who was doing the volunteering was that there were not enough flyers. so you are right about that follow up and making sure. they wished there had been more. that is something we have learned. but those were the comments we got. when i was down there, there were people going, "what is this event?" but it is a judgment call, and we do our best to balance those different concerns. i have been to washington square three times and look forward to creating year but aren't -- look forward to giving a report on that. >> on a couple of our

it's in your pocket as well as notes that we've compiled from the business community and other stakeholders. >> i think the letter we sent on august 3 still is relevant. the points that we make there, we'd kind of like to send those back out again. and then, commissioners, there's some additional notes in terms of discussions that have been had. that, again, to reiterate what commissioner clyde had noted is that the controller's economic impact report does not include the cost, which the wholesalers have said publicly that they will be passing on the costs, between 10% and 20%. then for the business, that means then that will then increase as commissioner clyde had said, this amount of sales tax, and then there's additional impact fees that businesses will be incurring such as increased credit card charges. so, those kinds of costs calculated into the total cost of what the drink is actually not calculated in the economic impact report. >> neither is the standard allowance that's given at the state board of equalization for spillage and service. there's actually, you know, we don't sell or

there were some stakeholders who said what ever you guys do, i wanted to raise $40 million, and there were people who said, what ever you do, i do not want to raise another dollar, because we are taxed enough in san francisco. that was deferred until the end of the process, and everybody recognized that we need to have a conversation about the tax structure. , how much we taxed. then everybody agreed that the payroll tax would be a job killer, and then you could move to a payroll tax or not rely on the payroll tax at all. that could conceivably create a lot more jobs at the revenue level, or it could create a lot more revenue at a jobs neutral level. in other words, my office has a research task, to find a better task which was -- a better tax. that is a decision for the policymakers, but i think the feeling of the group was there was value in having a research effort identifying a better business tax structure. our report identified proposals that generated more revenue and jobs, but we were very clear in that report that we were not taking sides prepared in millie. were not taking s

planning process to coordinate with the other agencies, as i just referred to them, coordinate the stakeholders, including the use of our existing advisory committees, catalog the existing conditions, review the best practices from other waterfronts around the world, develop process for open spaces, develop standards for with finding, develop cost estimates and prioritization, and hopefully identify all the sources of funding to help us complete the projects, and what we have on the bottom is we just finished the second phase and concluded the third phase. we concluded the second phase with the third workshop in may. as part of covering the existing conditions, as a document, we wanted to review existing plans and policies that are in place. there are three categories along the blue green light. there are existing plans and policies that affect the entire system. there are existing plans and policies that were developed through neighborhood plans, and then, there are existing community plans that were developed throughout the length of the system, so we reviewed all of those documents, summariz

we had stakeholder sessions with special interest groups and a round table, followed by 30 city-wide workshops, helping different communities go through the different parts of the project. following this extensive outreach, we released the first draft of the 2009 housing element update. we also held a hearing here on parts 1 and 2. during that time, after we released the document, or received a number of comments from community advisory body, yourself, and other members of the public. based on those comments, we made a revision and released a second draft of the 2009 housing element last june. that draft is available on our website, as well as a summary of the changes for people who want to read the memo. this is covered in the draft e.i.r. in july, we also formally submitted this draft to the department of housing and community development, which is the state agency that we are required to submit this document to, and we informed them of our schedule, which is drafting the environmental impact report right now, then report by the end of this year on the adoption. we have continued t

>> we're meeting with stakeholders now. because we understand the pain and anguish throughout the country within the polls that are represented out there. we want to build bridges. we don't want to create conflict. this is not where we were coming from. this is an opportunity for us to really turn this around and make this into something very, very positive. we'll meet. we'll do what is right for everyone. >> do you have a plan to specifically meet with the governor who has offered state land for this? and do you think that you'll decide to move it? >> we first want to meet with all the stakeholders who matter. who are the new yorkers. the community board has supported this. so have all the politicians. and we have to be cognizant that we have a constitutional right. we have the muslim community around the nation that we have to be concerned about. we have to worry about the extremists as well. they're seizing this moment. we have to be careful and deliberate. >> so, is moving on the table still? >> we, right now, it's not,

has been a lot of discussion about how the fee would be applied, discussion in my office and in stakeholders across san francisco. originally, applied directly at the retail level. i have concerns about that based on the experience of recent -- recent fees like the tobacco fee that was enacted last year. the paper works through the remission of building in the treasurer's office. to me it made sense all so it to be able to apply and directly as part of the responsibility that we were able to apply. i believe that we should be subject to the feed, not so much the ones that are subject directly to the city and county of san francisco. the intention behind this is that every year the department of public health is forced to, with our budget crisis, is forced to make cuts to services, cuts that the board tries to restore but never entirely. they go through the cut and reverse of cuts every year. losing services. important services for treatment on demand. services that san franciscans need to maintain sobriety and make changes in their lives. because we have continuously been fighting this fight

i want to thank the stakeholders, particularly, the liberal community who got their hands, rolled up their sleeves, and said that we don't want to stand on the sidelines. we want to honor the working class families that we have lost in san francisco and particularly in the african- american community. i don't think that we will ever see that restored. i want to really think a lot of people. commissioner lee roy king is here who has been on the commission four years. there is leadership in this city. time after time again, challenging those of us in positions of elected office and a point of office to move forward and to make things happen. i think about someone that i watched as a board aid of a shot . there should be a vibrant reuse plan in san francisco. as with most things, there is division, controversy, and i appreciate that. that is part of the process and that gives us the opportunity to make things better. i want to thank sophie and say that she has been steadfast for over a decade in getting us to this point. >> i mentioned it late at night but i will mention it more briefly