to page 16, which is subsection -- i believe it is small d2. this added a 15-day staff review period for supplemental materials provided and also clarified what type of application materials should be included when the project sponsor actually moves forward with design for specific buildings in the project. the next amendments are on the following page. section small d3. this regard to the timing of the planning department's staff review of the project, that they must do the review the 60 days after the project is complete and also that they need to deliver a staff report to the planning -- rather to the applicant no less than 10 days prior to planning director are planning commission action on a specific building proposal. additionally, the next subsection, d4, capital a, there was an edition of the general plan in the planning director's review sow the planning director would have to make sure that any codes, project conform not only to the parkmerced design standards and guidelines, but also to the general plan. clarifying that. in the same

in the same subsection, this also provides for a notice provision once the planning director has made his determination on a minor projects, that the planning director within send out notice within a 300-foot radius, and also to anyone who requested such notice. in the next subsection, for public hearings for large projects, this clarifies that if the planning commission is required to have a hearing both for a large project approval and for a major modification, that that be done at the same hearing so we do not have duplication of hearings. the next change is on the following page. which regards notice of hearing. this provides that notice be made for any hearings for the planning commission for either major modifications or large projects with the 300 feet of the exterior boundaries of the properties and also that it be posted on site. previously, notice was also required to be made -- or currently in the draft that is before the board, notice is required to be made in a newspaper of general circulation 20 days prior to the hearing. that has been removed. the only place that occurs

code, section 6.22, public work construction contract terms and working conditions, by amending subsection 6.22(e)(8) to further delineate due process procedures for administrative hearings on appeals by public work contractors and/or subcontractors from a certification of forfeiture made by the city's labor standards enforcement officer or responsible department head for non-compliance with prevailing wage requirements;

under the subsection dealing with appeals and decisions on appeals, we also wanted to add an amendment clarifying that although most appeals of any decision of either the planning director or planning commission would go to the board of appeals, if it were conditional use under these approvals, that would still come to the board of supervisors under the regular conditional use appeals process, although i think that would have been the case regardless, it is good to have the clarifying language in here. i believe that is the last change, but let me make sure. yes, that is the final proposed amendment. supervisor mar: could you explain or define what a major modification is compared to a non-major modification? >> certainly. it is defined in the ordinance -- let's see, it is actually discussed both in subsection c2 and also in the table immediately following it, provides descriptions of different types of major modifications. these types of modifications would need to be approved by the planning commission -- yes, by the planning commission at a public hearing. and these essentially deal

this is under section four, subsection e. the director of planning is authorized to return any additional amendments and modifications to the d.a. i wondered if this was common and what the range was. he could give me some examples of what the parameters of this might be a substantive changes that could be made to the plan. >> they tend to be more technical, but they could be design changes. the earlier sections basically locked in the general entitlement. for example, building 8000 units. that is a maximum of 8000 units. or the parking ratios or locked in the dna in that entitlement being provided now, but to the extent there are modifications around design, for instance, those are the types of changes that could be made by planning. and planning has to interpret when someone comes forward, a developer comes forward with a project on treasure island. it will be planning's job for the housing, at least on treasure island, to interpret that it is consistent with the zoning. supervisor kim: the other question i had is i was won

one, by redesignated subsection c of subsection d. and, two, by inserting after subsection b the following new subsection c. c, health assessment report. not later than 180 days after notice is due under subsection a-2, the secretary shall submit to the committees on armed forces of the senate and house of representatives a health assessment report on each open air burn pit at a location where at least 100 personnel have been employed for 90 consecutive days or more. each such report shall include each of the following -- one, an epidemiological health risk posed to personnel in the area where the burn pit is located because of exposure to the open air burn pit. two, a copy of the methodology used to describe the health risk described in paragraph 1. three, the operational risk and health risk when making the determination pursuant to subsection a that no alternative disposal method is feasible for the open air burn pit. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from utah is recognized. mr. bishop: mr. speaker, i yield back the balance o

you discuss the current conditions, that there is at least one elective course and then the first subsection says elective courses are determined by -- choice patterns and demands. i do not accept that as a reason to continue being that way. that is one of the main things that we have to address, getting off of the clarifying issue obviously and also that we need to talk about in the context of the next issue, which is feared patterns. because so what i'm asking you in this context, is what are we doing to try to address that? it isn't ok that some middle schools have a rich array of elective options because they have had them and they were left over from when we had resources and others in my view still mostly don't have that because even with -- in relatively better times, we have invested in those schools but most of those resources have been invested in -- in compensatory -- let's make up what is the mattered with these communities rather than giving them equally rich learning environments. i want to see that in the plan. some reference at least, to how we're thinking about that and are

code section 6.22 public works construction contract terms and working conditions, by amending subsection 6.22e8, to further delineate due process procedures for administrative hearings on appeals by public works contractors and/or subcontractors. we have presentations by donna levitt, office of labor standards enforcement, and monique zmuda, controller's office. >> i and the deputy comptroller. the comptroller's office, and we have been working with the city attorney as well as with the office of labor standards to recommend these amendments that are before you today. the point of the amendments is to facilitate the appeals process for both the department of labor standards as well as for the appellant. the procedures are also recommended to clarify the appeals process, and, hopefully, we will expedite the appeals process and also will encourage settlement and agreement of us sitting issues when there is opportunity to agree. and, therefore, i would just like to walk you very quickly through some of the changes. there are not a lot of them, but we do hope they will expedite the appeals p

bonds prior to the conversion date in subsection 2.8 c for each c.f.d., if prior to the c.f.d. conversion date sea levels and the water surrounding the project area rise by more than 16 inches from the levels in existence on the reference date, as defined in the infrastructure plan -- this is what we would propose to add -- the city agrees to finance the future sea level rise improvements from first c.f.d. bonds of such c.f.d. >> do i have the commitment of your office that if the commission does act tonight that you will work with me to address remaining issues that we haven't even talked about yet? >> absolutely. >> and that would involve both -- as i read it, it's the development agreement and the infrastructure -- or the interagency cooperation agreement as well as the financing plan. did i miss one? those are the three. ok. let's open it up to public comment, then. thank you very much. >> thank you. >> mr. brooks. >> good afternoon, commissioners. eric brooks representing san francisco green party and the local grass-roots organization of our city. i would strongly urge yo

code, section 6.22, public work construction contract terms and working conditions, by amending subsection 6.22(e)(8) to further delineate due process procedures for administrative hearings on appeals by public work contractors and/or subcontractors from a certification of forfeiture made by the city's labor standards enforcement officer or responsible department head for non-compliance with prevailing wage requirements; and to additionally conform distribution of forfeiture provisions to state law. supervisor chu: thank you. we have the comptroller's office for this item. >> good morning. the comptroller's office is the hearing entity for any appeal that comes before the city related to the office of labor standards enforcement of penalties and their findings that wages have not been paid in accordance to the city's requirements. we have been acting as the appeals office for a number of years and have noted, in some instances, there are delays within the hearing process that we believe these amendments will expedite. first, the amendment before you proposes that a meet and confer process

democracy you need laws that can safeguard pretty and clear elections then you need a call to the head subsects and balances between different institutions we have excellent worldwide recognized expert keith that can assist these countries in doing so and that is why we have more deployed events commission in tunisia which is being used all over the world for that kind of nor making and writing a constitution it's so this is a starting point for any democratic development also soulful and economic development and then we have. conventions that are or when for non comes for your members which could be very important for them to do or in port au prince the caller mentioned partly corruption which is a huge problem in communities as well as in egypt all these conference. so we have instruments that can be helpful for these countries in order to develop. their economy on this optional others. so there's a thought of your own yeah and the secretary general of the council talk you talk like we'll do that shortly after the break so stay with us we'll continue from four years in the us from. the book.

democracy you need laws that can safeguard free and clear elections then you need a call to the set subsects and balances between different institutions we have excellent worldwide recognized expert police that can assist these companies in doing so and that is why we have all deployed to venice commission in tunisia which is being used all over the world for that kind of law making and writing or constitutions so this is a starting point for any democratic development also social and economic development. and then we have a lot of conventions that are opened for non comms for your members which could be very important for them to join. the cold metal pipeline corruption which is a huge problem in pinochet as well as in egypt but in all these conference. so we have instruments that can be helpful for these countries in order to develop. their economy on the social structures says yaverland the secretary general of the council get spotlight will get up shortly after the break so stay with us we'll continue the interview in a letter from. place to. place . repairing a broken nation. highway co

sorry, this is under section four again, subsection d. >> under the development agreement ordinance, the planning director would provide an update about whether we are in compliance with the plan before the planning commission. this kind of mirrors our language in the ordinance that allows us to enter into a development agreement. supervisor kim: how often with these periodic reviews take place? >> we are proposing annually. supervisor kim: last question i had was a clarification question. i noticed that under section one in e, it said the project will include -- and i noticed that the new 400-but marina was taken out, but it is still included in item 12 -- the new 400-foot marina. i was just wondering why that was taken out. it was just to allow flexibility under the plan. >> we still intend to make the marina improvements, but it would be under a separate lease and development agreement with a separate developer. so when the developers were selected, there was a selection for this development here, and a separate solicitation to select a developer for the marina. so it will be comi

. >> subsection 1, it makes it a little stronger. >> great. >> it had the word suggested. this makes it clear in the ordinary case, they will be an hour and a half each side. >> great. thank you. i'm glad that is already in there. i will continue to emphasize it. then on page 14 on the discovery piece, i noticed there was a shift from 14 days to seven days. i just wanted to know the reasoning behind it. >> again, i think we're all seeing cases rather late in the case. somebody saying they don't have discovery. the department in my view is going to seek to terminate a police officer, they should have all of their ducks in a row. certainly within a week of filing those charges, everybody ought to -- that's the idea to try to make it tighter. part of the problem, commissioner chan, we haven't really reached that 90-day and 120-day resolution. that has been our goal. every week we -- makes it much more likely we will hit that. that's why we try to make the timelines tighter. commissioner chan: that's what i figured. i wrote down good in a lot of places. i appreciate that the d

this is under section four, subsection e. the director of planning is authorized to return any additional amendments and modifications to the d.a. i wondered if this was common and what the range was. he could give me some examples of what the parameters of this might be a substantive changes that could be made to the plan. >> they tend to be more technical, but they could be design changes. the earlier sections basically locked in the general entitlement. for example, building 8000 units. that is a maximum of 8000 units. or the parking ratios or locked in the dna in that entitlement being provided now

specifically, subsection d entitled drilling permits. under that subsection, the secretary -- it states the secretary offer us an approved exploration plan to drilling any well in accordance with such plan. what the amendments are proposing here today and what my amendment is addresses is what is set forth as page four and i propose that it amends after line 6 and includes a subsection three, which addresses the worst case discharge scenario certification this amendment requires the secretary shall not issue a permit without certifying that the applicant first has calculated a worst case discharge scenario for the proposed drilling operations and b has demonstrated to the satisfaction of the secretary that the applicant possesses the capability and technology to respond immediately and effectively to such worst case discharge scenario. mr. chairman, we are talking here to the people. the people across this nation and the world who watched the worst case scenario. what happened in the b.p. oil spill. what we are simply saying is that befo

. -- under this subsection. i know we've had a lot of debate today about with money, but the fact of the matter is that the $50 million per year doesn't actually cover the costs of all of the schools that have requested and applied for construction or renovation funds. and so that's why i would like to have this amendment passed and hopefully accepted by the other side so that we can find out exactly how many more of these clinics are in need of funding. or centers are in need of funding. i guess i have to yield back. the chair: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. for what purpose does the gentleman from texas rise? mr. burgess: mr. chairman, i'd move to strike the requisite number of words. the chair: the gentleman is recognizesed for five minutes. mr. burgess: i rise in support of the amendment. the amendment requires the general accountability office to conduct a study to determine the school districts in the united states most in need of constructing or renovating school-based health centers.

in this subsection's definition, school-based health centers and sponsor facilities have been given those terms under such and such and such and such. we are trying to repeal $a million a year for four fiscal year, 2010, 2011, 2012, and 2013, for these school-based health clinics. i support school-based health clinics. dr. burgess supports school-based health clinics. we both represent part of tarrant county. the public hospital is john peter smith, there are a number of school-based health clinics in my district, his district, congresswoman granger's district, but we believe the state and county should provide the facilities, the federal government should provide the funds to staff it. we don't believe when we have a $1.5 trillion deficit each year that we need to be spending another $a million or $200 million over four years to actually provide the facility, to provide construction. so it's not in opposition to the health clinic itself, school based, i've gone to openings, i support them, i think they do excellent work, but until we get our budget balanced, mr. speaker, i think it's pru

it was the subsection of race at a time we were not thinking about it, but turns out we were thinking a lot about it, and the thing that i did for that and relates to this and made me think a lot about this when i started to write about then senator obama. the one i looked at was three people making a television miniseries. it was actually david simon making the corner in baltimore, the white writer, and then there was the black director, charles dunan and a second generational writer, david mills, who is no longer alive. david talked to me from the perspective of someone who is multiracial and didn't feel race was a big issue in his life, and yet he was always perceived as we'll bring in a black writer or whatever, and so i came to understand what a little bit about that funny middle ground that or that middle territory that he described to me, and that is the experience of someone with a, you know, a mixed racial background, and it's just a whole -- it was a whole new thing that broke out of the kind of frame that we were thinking about when we approached that project, that the pict

b, after reassembling pursuant to section a, subsection a when the house adjourns on a motion offered pursuant to this subsection, by its majority leader or his designee, the house shall again stand adjourned pursuant to the first section of this concurrent resolution. the speaker pro tempore: the question is on the concurrent resolution. all those in favor say aye. those opposed, no. the ayes have it. the ayes have it. mr. hastings: mr. speaker. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from florida. mr. hastings: mr. speaker, i ask for the yeas and nays. the speaker pro tempore: the yeas and nays have been requested. those favoring a vote of the yeas and nays will rise. a sufficient number having arisen, the yeas and nays are ordered. pursuant to clause 8 of rule 20 , further proceedings on this question will be postponed. pursuant to house resolution 257 and rule 18, the chair declares the house in the committee of the whole house on the state of the union for further consideration of h.r. 1231. will the gentleman from colorado, mr. gardner, kindly take the chair. the chair: the house

there were three major subsections of the south that they would come from. there were three decades i was looking for, looking for a variety of socioeconomic situations through all of that and yet when it came down to making the decision, i really needed to make sure that there was a connection somehow. none of the places that i actually went led me to directly the people that i ended up with but they were all necessary to through the process. and i went to so many places in los angeles for example. there are all kinds of louisiana clubs in los angeles where people maintain their connection to their experiences and hometowns. there are places where many people who are of creole descent will gather together and it's covered all of these entire underground of people who had re-created their experiences in louisiana's and texas in los angeles and it seemed as if the more discovered, the more i went to them the more i found. i went to so many of them that i went to this one place and a woman recognized me from one of the other places i have been. she said, i hav

. >> and the standards are the same and in the subsection that we of the affirmative defense. >> so you think that you are in the state will? >> to the extent that you should be home free and have the benefit of that good faith -- >> it's an affirmative defense under both. >> yes, your honor. >> deneen point -- i will check that. i think maybe i was mistaken perhaps looking at the other section but then we are still stuck with this enormous discrepancy. i'm characterizing it as an enormous, but it seems like it's even on discrimination versus under the federal law it's not even your business out to lunch gone. >> i think, your honor, that is the natural consequence of the savings clause that congress -- >> i did look at the legislative history, and when you look at that paragraph on page 39 of the red green it seems to me that that paragraph says that what it means this is precisely what it is. it says the first thing it says is look if you are found to have violated this supposed somebody's been found to have violated the sanctions provision in the federal legislation it's been found b

to actually outline on subsection a, b, c, and d specific sections that have to occur, that must occur before the general provision can occur. in other words, this is not -- this provision is not something that says -- it's okay to move forward if you don't certify. it's a provision that says you have to finish the cmrr or you have to have two laps, you have to have 80 a year, if you do not have those, then you cannot move forward on the actual implementation -- >> would the gentleman yield? >> of the new s.t.a.r.t. treaty. and that's the way it reads. i'll yield for a question. >> yeah. >> mr. -- >> would the gentleman yield? >> i would yield. >> i'm sorry. it's mr. smith's time. >> the provision that you are reading does not apply to the provisions that affect the new s.t.a.r.t. treaty. these are outside. they apply to the hedge portion of the stockpile which does not fall within it. that's why it has provisions that are not just affected by the certification process. those that are within new s.t.a.r.t. are -- can be affected and implemented soully based upon the certification. so i

expend funds referred to in the second sentence of subsection a shall be based on merit-based selection procedures in accord answer and comply with all applicable provisions of the law. and if we find any member pressuring the department of defense to use any funds other than the complied with competitive merit-based solutions, we will go after them. we have a strong committee that will do this. mr. flake: i appreciate them accepting the amendments later which would set up a process whereby we can see these grants or funds are disposed of and will help a great deal and i appreciate the chairman working on that. i would say in closing, this amendment is specifically is to save the money that is still left in that account. if the concern is not to give the president the ability to direct all these funds or the secretary of defense, then this accomplishes it. there are 350 million left in this account. let's apply that to pay down the debt and the deficit and that's what this amendment does. takes the remaining money that has not been designated in that fund and apply it to deficit reducti

written certification, that, and then it goes through on pages -- page 6, 1-22, outlined under subsections a, b, c, and d, specific actions that have to occur, but that must occur before the provision can occur. in other words, this is not -- this provision is not something that says -- it's okay to move forward if you don't certify. it's a provision that says you have to finish the cmr or have the two leps, and if you do not have those, then you cannot move forward on the actual implementation. >> will the gentleman yield? >> of the new s.t.a.r.t. treaty, and that's the way it reads. i'll yield for a question to mr.-- >> yes, mr. smith. >> the provision you are reading does not apply to the new s.t.a.r.t. treaty. these apply to the hedge portion of the stockpile which is not falling within it. that's why it has provisions that are not just affected by the certification process. those within new s.t.a.r.t. can be affected and implemented solely based upon the certifications so it is a different section. >> declining my time and yielding again. >> waiting for the yielding process to work it

.-553.22 subsection 1 of the code of federal relations that governs the monuments at arlington cemeteryve been involved in this process. i want to particularly recognize david and rafael engel, the sons of meyer engel and their sons who are with us today as well as veiera silverberg, daughter of morton singer. i want to say they will properly be honored. there can be no better way to celebrate jewish hair tanel month. i look forward to the ceremony at arlington cemetery that will follow this vote. mr. chairman and my colleagues, if it would be appropriate, i'd like to list the names of all of the chap lanes that will be honored on this memorial. captain armoff of the united states army. mr. walz: i yield two minutes. mr. weiner: i'll list the chaplains that will be honored, the 13 fallen chaplains that we will be honoring. captain arnoff of the u.s. army, lieutenant colonel meyer engel of the united states army, first lieutenant frank goldenberg of the united states army. lieutenant alexander goode of the united states army. lieutenant henry goodie of the united states army. major samue