. >> my name is ted olson. it was an honour, it is an honour to serve on the board for this project. i, obviously ask your approval of it, but i am here today to commend the director on the way he conducted and chose all of the participants for this, particularly his collegial work with the other partner departments which means that this is aniform intelligence of all of your infrastructure departments. i also want to commend susan, and the entire team for leading our see wg through this process of understanding all of the technicalities that went into this decision. finally i say, about the importance, and as john said, the differences between airports and roads versus railroad, by the time high-speed rail comes to san francisco, and the importance of this is it is a regional plan that we have proposed, by the time it arrives in san francisco, we will have 1 million residents. i urge your approval. >> supervisor peskin: thank you. >> mr chairman, members of the commission, our interest is really in getting cal

and i just felt like it was -- >> david: barbara's best friend, ted olson's late wife was on one of therbara comstock felt 9/11 just like every other american, may be more so. so to do this ad is outrageous. it's despicable. and this guy, who has no shame. >> harris: can i just asked the question, who does this appeal to? i'm trying to imagine. let's put opinions aside and think of the person who goes to the polls and who does this appeal to? >> marie: so for full disclosure on him, he is an army veteran, he served in iraq and afghanistan. i just want to put that out there. >> harris: how could that excuse the ad? >> marie: it doesn't, i am just putting out more information. it is a stupid ad. no democratic voters i know would appeal to this ad. >> harris: i just don't know why you would bring in the military. >> marie: i'm just giving it -- i didn't say that. i am just giving more context. >> harris: adds cost money. generally speaking, not to just one person would make that decision. so who else? >> melissa: i think it does appeal to the far left. they think that the president should

mr olson, we. >> my name is ted olson. it was an honour, it is an honour to serve on the board for this project. i, obviously ask your approval of it, but

and long before ted olson teamed up with david boyce. the southern pacific railroad dream team included a former chief justice of the california supreme court a former candidate for the presidential nomination. one of the nation's leading law professors but none of them could really compare at the end of the day to roscoe conklin. he had been a leader of the republican party in congress at a time when they controlled congress in the 1870s and early 1880s. he had even been nominated and confirmed to sit on the supreme court himself. he turned down the appointment after having been confirmed and becoming the last person ever to turn down a supreme court seat after winning a confirmation vote in the senate. they would simply refuse to pay the tax. a half-century before the famous campaign against racial segregation the southern pacific railroad. they had test cases and more than 60 of them in all. is seeking expansive new rights for corporations. the date the supreme court heard argument in roscoe conklin's case. in 1882. a newspaper headli

similar to the article written by ted olson three weeks ago, "weekly standard," saying almost the same thing. maybe adding more to it in terms of they're not making the proper record. the special counsel. this is what most constitutional lawyers who tend to try to protect the presidency would say. >> let's dig into the specifics. it makes it clear you don't think the president can be compelled to testify. cannot be subpoenaed here. does that mean the president won't sit for an interview? >> that doesn't mean that completely. it means there has to be a high bar they have to reach in terms of convincing us they're fair. that we're going to get to things we need. i want to see the spy gate report, haven't gotten it. i want to see what they gave judge ellis. the judge hasn't written an opinion yet. it convinces me there's a real problem with it. otherwise, the judge would have said, oh, yeah, you're authorized. that's the manafort case. a couple of outstanding, critical, we just can't do it without that. i would have every lawyer you put on the show ripping my head off if i let him be inte

olson, the floor is yours. >> thank you mr president. my name is ted olsen and i'm a third generation san franciscan and sit on the division zero task force. -- sit on the division zero task force. i want to support the approval of this. we've made such progress with vision zero. i think what's really impressive about it is how the departments of the city have come together, acting on such and an important thing. especially how they've been using surveys, media, to conduct such a survey and gather community impressions.i ok the survey and i'm sure many others did. there's much discussion in the community, i know it certainly has been on the market. it has been discussed about removing freeways and stuff like that. i commend division zero team and command your approval. >> supervisor peskin: thank you mr olson. seeing no other public comment, i will close public comment, i think you have one more commissioner thacommissioner tho solicit a vote from on the consent agenda. if you could please ask commissioner kim how she would like to vote on items 4-9? >