abc licenses within a sub area of the mission alcoholic beverage use special use and to make the appropriate findings. >> president cohen: can we take this same house same call? all right. finally passed. next item. >> clerk: item 12 to permit affordable housing projects on undeveloped lots from the ceqa determination and make the appropriate findings. >> president cohen: can we take this same house, same call? passes. next item. >> clerk: item 13, ordinance to amend 171-00, sets aside real property in the margaret s. haywood playground for the combined emergency communications center at 10 1011 turk street. and to restore to the park department property to the east of the cecc, previously allocated dem, setting aside for dem, additional portions of the playground that is occupied by two tennis courts for proposed new dem, subject to certain conditions to confirm the ceqa determination and make the appropriate findings. >> president cohen: thank you. supervisor brown? >> supervisor brown: thank you. i we have worked with the parks department to assure recreational equality. it's important th

but also the likely next chairman of the judiciary committee in the house the end of the year appropriation bill might be the right vehicle but today to ask for unanimous consent to say we could do this right now today there is no need to risk the functioning of the government of the united states i would be willing to consider. >> i am not the appropriate are but when it comes to votes on the floor. i explained today i have committed not to advance any more nominees to the judiciary committee. we have had hearings for 21 awaiting action, some of them tomorrow and they will not receive my vote and with the margin that we have in the judiciary committee that means they will not move forward also i will not vote that come to the floor there are 32 awaiting action on the floor. theoretically at the vice president comes to break a tie they would still pass so that's not my leverage but i will use my hat. . >> but your criticism is that you don't act on it just like kavanaugh. is there any sense you could waver on that? . >> i have use this leverage once with regard to judges to receive a vote o

like the appropriation process. what's the likelihood you can get enough people on board to use appropriations process to protect mueller? senator flake: i'm an appropriator, i've discussed this with other appropriators, we're not there yet but jerry nadler who is likely the next chairman of the judiciary committee in the house has suggested an end of year appropriation bill may be the right vehicle. i think we've done what we can right now, saying we could have a floor vote today. we'll crs that bridge when we get toyota. i'd be willing to consider it as a vehicle. >> senator flake would you be willing to consider that? senator flake: i'm not an appropriator but then it comes to a vote ton the floor. >> is there any other way you think you have? senator flake: i committed not to advance any more nominees through the judiciary committee. we had hearings for 21. they're awaiting action, some of them tomorrow. and they will not receive my vote and with the margins we have in the judiciary committee it means they will n

the it likely you can get enough people on board to protect mu mueller? >> i'm an appropriator. i've discuss wd with several others. we're not there yet. december 7th is the date. but jerry nad lehr, the likely next chairman of the committee in the house has suggested an interview appropriation bill might be the right vehicle. i think what senator flake and i have done today is right for today. we can do this right now. we could have a four-vote today. no need to put at risk the ongoing funding and functioning of the government of the united states. we'll cross that bridge when we get to it. >> senator flake, would you be willing to r consider that? >> oh, sure. ooip not an appropriator, but when it comes to votes o tn floor for the appropriations bill. >> is there any other leverage that you think you have? >> i have explained today, i have committed not to advance any more nominees through the judiciary committee. we've had hearings for 21. they're awaiting action. some of them tomorrow and they will not receive my vote. and with the margins we have in the judiciary committee,

ways to control that is when you do the original allocations is to appropriately ized the projects or the programs are the level at which the control is exercised so you can avoid that as much as possible. we are happy to take a look at the m.t.a. bond and make sure that those things are done appropriately so the lease burden is presented. i'm just saying both issues are going on. >> let me follow up and clarify a little bit. monique, correct me if i misrepresent what the situation is but what you are looking to do in moving funds around is not necessarily to make a permanent change in the allocation, but just if one set of projects is moving more quickly than another set from a different subcategory , you just want to

the project required an approval of a certificate appropriate nesbitt historic preservation commission because washington square is designated as a san francisco landmark under article 10 of the planning code. the project also required an approval of the project's concept plan by the recreation in parks commission. the decision before the board today is whether to up hold the department's decision to issue a categoric alex 'emion and deny the appeal or to return the project to the department for additional environmental review. our responses to the appeal generally deal with two different types of issues. the procedural and substantive. they relate to whether the project is exempt from see q for my presentation, i will highlight the issues that the appellant brought up that relate to whether we go adequate noticing, and did not interfere with the appellant's ability to appeal the exemption. the first procedural issue has to do with noticing to the public. the department complied with the requirements of chapter 31 of the administrative code by posting a paper copy of the exemption at t

the original intent of the appropriation. >> they are not being used for tenant vouchers? >> and to protect the tenant -based vouchers, yes. but without this allocation of funds to us, the projects cannot cover their december 2018 payments either. >> yeah,. i will take it off-line with your department and the controller in the city attorney 's office and we will read the language and decide. my larger point is, you have to keep the appropriators in the loop as a matter of practice and policy and good government. and that is part of the reason i i'm having this hearing today. i don't know if there are any other questions from this board. you want to have lunch and get on with your day instead of a three and half our special meeting and there are people here from the public would like to comment. i believe we have one really important question for the controller. i want to thank the budget and legislative analyst for being here. i don't know if she is still here but i don't think we need to rehash your 2013 report at this point. i do think there may be a role for the b.l.a. a

and the leadership in the senate squarely sides with the appropriator party. skpf the house did nothing under paul ryan to counter that. that's one of the sources really of frustration that republican voters saw government grow with this congress and wanted to see a change. >> david mechanic acintosh, how have you been president of the club for growth? >> this is my fourth year. so two election cycles zp cycle. >> and what is it? >> we are a free market, small government, political group. we're organized as a nonprofit to advocate for positions. but the main way we do that is through our political groups, our pac and super pac, to elect champions for limited government, free markets. our view is that most problems can be solved in private society. and that when you have economic growth, a lot of other problems end up being easier to solved and fall way. so we look for republican candidates who not only say that, but you can tell from their life and their voting records in the past, their experience, that they'll stand up and they'll fight for it. >> we'll talk

if it needs work on it, this is the appropriate venue to work on it. so, i've made a motion to continue this item to november 29th, is there a second? >> can i just say something on that point? part of the reason why i would like the process to go forward, i feel like we are 99% of the way there, i think we are going to continue the conversation around -- there could be some fundamental disagreement. we have been working with the mayor's office, different departments. we are coming on a deadline on this board and the holiday and it would be, i know there is a lot of pieces of legislation, i know you are leaving the board, i know there is legislation that you have and others have that are working our way through other committees. facilitating. we want to allow those to go forward. [please stand by] . (roll call). >> thank you very much. this item will be continued to november 29th. thank you. any other business? >> no further business. >> all right. thank you.go. >> shop and dine the 49 promotes local businesses and changes san franciscans to do their sh

[reporter question inaudible] >> we will make a statement at the appropriate time. i do focus on the economy but you people don't like to cover that. we have the greatest economy in the history of our country. the jobs report came out on friday, 250,000 added jobs. and just october. wasn't credible. wages going up. 3.1 percent. you look at every single element of that report. it was a 10.

he would like for the wall as the year-end funding discussion which is ongoing not only among the appropriators and we are hoping one of the many things to wrap up here at the end of the year. >> and with that fundraising arm to senator smith and given her comments? . >> there is no discussion to that campaign with anyone it is certainly my hope that senator hyde smith will be elected today in mississippi. >> i have no discussions regarding anything of the campaign. . >> i don't have any observations to make about that or make any judgment today about who they would like to represent them in the senate. that's the way it works in this country senators are from states all of these issues have been fully discussed all over the state of mississippi and we will have an outcome tonight. >> okay obviously our republican friends are not ready yet so we will go first. i am proud to be joined by senator feinstein and

have had an opportunity to work together for a number of years, when we were both on the appropriations committee. she had the foreign operations subcommittee and so did i. we are not unfamiliar with each other. we will probably have more dealings with each other in the future. in looking at the race, i want to thank the president. uswas extremely helpful to in states where he is a next launch a. -- where he is in excellent shape. they clearly had a positive impact on the outcome. let me throw it open. yes, ma'am. >> do you agree with the president's campaign rhetoric that the caravan is an invasion and birthright citizenship should be dealt with at the presidential level? >> i will be happy to give you my own views on whatever you would like to talk about. i generally do not do running commentary on the president's observations on the campaign trail. it is an interesting legal question, that ultimately would be solved in the courts. president said he would be willing to work with and compromise with nancy pelosi. what do you believe are the top legislative priorities with the divided r

the best appropriations process in 20 years. airport infrastructure. fda authorization, i mean, on, and on, and on. are plenty of things that we work together on. i always have to tell constituents that the senate's a pretty collegial place. even though we had big differences over things like taxes and judges, there were plenty of other things we did together and there is no reason that would stop simply because a house becomes democratic. reporter: what big issues are there? sen. mcconnell: we will see. it will all be discussed. reporter: will you insist on getting $5 billion for the president's border wall in this upcoming spending bill? sen. mcconnell: we will try to help the president achieve what he wants to do in regards to the wall and border security. that will obviously have to be done on some kind of bipartisan discussion. reporter: senator mcconnell, any observations on the kavanaugh effect? sen. mcconnell: i think the republican sort of core voters in the states that are critical to us were highly offended by the questioning of the presumpti

some -- have had an opportunity to work together for a number of years when we were both on the appropriations committee. she had the foreign operations subcommittee and so did i. so we're not unfamiliar with each other and we'll probably have a lot more dealings with each other in the future. in looking at the race, i want to thank the president. he was extremely helpful to us in states where he is in excellent shape. he worked very hard and drew large crowds and i think it clearly had a positive impact on the outcome. so with that let me throw it open and see what you would like to talk about. yes, ma'am. >> do you agree with the president's campaign rhetoric that the caravan is an invasion and birthright citizenship should be dealt with at the presidential level? >> i'll be happy to give you my own views on whatever you would like to talk about. i generally don't do a running commentary of the presidents observation on the campaign trail. it is an interesting legal question and it would be solved in the courts ultimately. >> the president said in the white house driveway last week he would

are the courts the appropriate one, or is congress the appropriate one? it is the individual court's discretion. 23e meanuling something. this court has previously called disproportionate benefits and abuse, and it is very clear it is not the case that everything goes under role 23e. this is her such as and is andmade, possibly determine whether every action class member or most of the action class members regard at entitiesaries for which they would like to make a contribution? >> it is very possible to establish a claims process where box and saysks the instead of sending me a check for $10, send it to the american cancer society. nobody does that, or at least we haven't seen settlements do that. reality is if class members want to send their money to chair the, they can do it without class counsel. >> who decides who these beneficiaries are going to be? >> it varies from settlement to settlement. in this case counsel and google negotiated and it led to six beneficiaries. the process was ok. we don't understand which beneficiaries didn't make the cut an

>> is it the individual court's discretion appropriate until congress looks at this and decides? > i think ruling 23e rule something in this court has previously called disproportionate benefits and abuse and it's very clear the it's not the case that everything goes under rule 23e as long as the district court forever stamps it. >> in a case such as this is there any effort made and what he possible to determine whether every action class member or most of the action class members regard the beneficiaries of cy-prÉs award at entities for which they would like to make a contribution? >> it's very possible to establish a claims process where somebody checks us -- check the box and says instead of sending me a check for $10 send it to the american cancer society. nobody does that or at least we haven't seen settlement to do that and the reality is if class members want to send their money to charity they can do it without class counsel. >> who decides who these beneficiaries are going to be? >> it varies from settlement to settlement. in this case class counsel and google negotiated

time that the appropriate time at the appropriate place to have their hearing. in the majority of them were rejected and they were sent home. there was the problem of the separation of the children. that remains a problem today. >> harris: when you have 11,000 people, you want to talk about a choke point, there's no way those people can go all through points of entry so my question is, some of them come across or there waiting for the processing, what would you have the president and this administration do? to be tents, detention centers are overrun, children that are going to be let go after 20 days, these people are coming and it is putting pressure on our system and it may be weeks, maybe it's december and maybe it's not all about tuesday, but it's not like they're turning around. >> we are a very capable competent country. >> harris: we currently have 11 to 13 million people here illegally already. can we handle it if it comes to our border? >> absolutely we can if we are competent in the ministry of processes. will the military be part of this? it already is

but what they have done is they have evaluated the risk and appropriately designed the infrastructure, gotten the expertise, the help, at times, it will be the help. and they've gotten the capabilities to defend themselves. as you try to figure out how to be defended, you can look at an industry like the financial sector. they are constantly under attack. they are constantly seeing people trying to exploit them and take the assets they have. why? because that's where the money is, right? for the most part, the banks are doing an outstanding job. they've looked at the threat environment. they've matched resources to it. their leadership to the ceos to the board and investors have said we're under threat. we need to invest properly in the cyber security to protect our assets. when you lock at the government agencies, i don't know we've had that same attention to what are we trying to protect and where are we trying to defend? nsa is part of the department of defense. in the department, there's a phrase that rolls off the lips. everybody talks about equip mission of services. i would ask

or is the individual district court's discretion appropriate until congress looks at this decides? >> i think we'll 23e means something. this court has called it an abuse. it is clear -- it's not the case that everything goes under rule 23e so long as the district court rubberstamps it. >> in a case such as this, is in the effort made, and would it even be possible, to determine whether every absent class member or even most of the absent class members regard the beneficiaries of the cy pres award as entities to which they would like to make a contribution? even be possible, to determine >> it is ray possible to establish a claims process where so many checks a box and said, instead of sending me a check for six dollars, send it to the american cancer society. nobody does that, or at least we haven't seen settlements that do that. and the reality is, if class members want to send their money to charity, they can do it without the intermediary of class counsel. >> so who decides who these beneficiaries are going to be? >> in various from settlement to settlement. in this case, class

and controller for the apportionment of the funds to the appropriate entities. so when our three organizations started to work together, we thought it was an opportune time to come together to talk about how to move the legacy system onto a modern platform to secure this property tax revenue. i think from both of our systems, we have had a legacy system in place for over 20-plus years. there are significant challenges associated with operations, but also potentially unsupported technology going into the forward. so joe say will speak to, so we're excited to bring this forward. it's culmination of a lot of work between the three office to get to this point. a bid, solicitation process and development of business rules and requirements of what is to come. i'd like to invite our tax collector, jose to say a few words about the process. >> president cohen: real quick, how old is the system that you're currently using? >> so i could speak to our system. the assessor system was put into place in the 1980s, so a long time, 20-30 years. >> president cohen: thank you. >>

the trach could be removed at any time that medical people determine it's appropriate to do so. i don't think they can move out the case because if the trach is removed all of the problems return. as for what would happen if the trach was moved i think most of the competitions that we need to be investigated. it's a completely different set of circumstances. it is certainly true -- >> we may be issuing a decision in, and advisory decision because if the trach states it's a totally different case than if it is removed. >> i don't think it is an advisory decision. i think the problem is you have judgment this has this is misso ahead and execute mr. bucklew according to the protocol that the happen place. and we don't at this point we cannot say he certainly is in imminent danger if the protocol is used. yet there is an opinion execution date. if the protocol issues in the future, i don't know whether the bleeding problems complicate the trach for him. that's never been investigated. i don't know if the trach is even going to be there. >> how long has he had no? >> it was put in in

the trach. there is no indication how long he will continue and if appropriate to do so. i don't think it can rule out the case because if it is removed all of the problems as for what would happen if it wasn't removed there would still be complications that would need to be investigated with a different set of circumstances. >> so we may be issuing a decision on the advisory decision if the trach stays that it's a totally different case than if it is removed. >> i don't think it is an advisory decision your honor. the problem is you have a judgment that says missouri can go ahead to execute mister bucklew with that protocol they have in place. but at this point we cannot say he is in imminent danger if that protocol is used because there is no pending execution date if it was used in the future i don't know if those bleeding problems complicate the trach for him that has never been investigated but also if it will not be there. >> how long? . >> it was put in june. >> is and that your job to find out if that can be removed? . >> it certainly can be but he has a progressiv

the trach could be removed at any time that medical people determine it's appropriate to do so. i don't think it can moot out the case because without -- if the trach is removed, all the problems return. as for what would happen if the trach wasn't removed, i think there would still be complications that would need to be investigated. it's a completely different set of circumstances. >> so we may be issuing a decision on -- an advisory decision -- if the trach stay, it's a totally different case than if it is removed. >> i don't think it's an advisory decision, your honor. i think the problem is you have a judgment right now that says missouri can go ahead and execute mr. bucklew according to the protocol they have in place. we don't -- at this point we cannot say he certainly is in imminent danger if that protocol is used, there is no pending execution date, if that protocol is used in the future, i don't know whether the bleeding problems complicate the trach for him. that's just never been investigated, and i also don't know if the trach isn't even going to be there. >> how lo

as well, for important to remember about the appropriate ors that oversee our ages these. they put provisions in appropriations laws that made it clear what their expectations were for the agencies to s so you haveh ig' the speaking as the head of ig. you have been in the unusual position of having both the head and the president himself referring things to you. do you take all the cases, because you are an executive branch agency even though you are -- even though you report to congress? and how to figure out whether you will or will not sort follow those orders? insp. general horowitz: so we have at that. we had that actually previously when attorney general holder referred the fast and first -- the fast and furious matter to our office, which for those who follow was no, we did as well, and it isn't something that regularly happens but it is something that he thinks are all -- t ag's need to have the kind of dialogue with their relationship , in the same way that we need to that dialogue with congress and your agencies. it is helpful to

the border wall? ms. pelosi: you know, i am an appropriator. that's one of the places where i was forged there, and intelligence committee. and left to their own devices i said to you before, democrats and republicans can come to their own conclusion -- to their agreements because they know hat they're doing. they understand the issues. it's just when some of these poison pills come from that the problem is created. so what we would like to see -- we're making good progress on the bills on the individual bills. we would not like to see a continuing resolution. we'd like to see the bills passed, have it done, move on to the -- to what's new in the new ongress. congresswoman nita lowey our ranking member, soon to be chair of the appropriations committee, chairwoman lowey, music to my ears, she and the ranking members and soon to be chairs of the subcommittees on appropriations have done a remarkable job. they have beaten back over 150 poison pills this year alone and probably more to come that they have to -- hopefully not, but we have to be prepa

rankingwoman -- our members, soon to be the chair of the appropriations committee, music to my ears. she and the ranking members and soon to be chairs of the subcommittees on appropriations have done remarkable job. they have beaten back over 150 alone andls this year probably more to come that they but to -- hopefully not -- we have to be prepared for that. we do not know what they will come up with, but so far, we are on a good track. >> is your asked to fund the bills? rep. pelosi: do not want that. we want to get it done. we can do it. it is possible to do it now. when the president weighs in, the rest -- we will see. >> what do you think of them trying to challenge it? rep. pelosi:, on in. the water is warm. yes, ma'am. [laughter] >> i want to ask you about the role of gender in the speakership race. representative ryan said yesterday that there are plenty of women who can replace you, and he named, among others, marcia fudge. is he playing the gender card? rep. pelosi: i have not engaged in that. i had 137,000 ads against me in the campaign. say,put some, shall we pressure on ou

someone like the flower mart that has the appropriate level of staffing, and this is -- that this is the analysis and the review that the department of environment will do. they will be able to come in and see, because they are already operating, doing a really good job, might just be the day it happened or the person in the position. it's not going to be part of the director's orders. but if you are talking about for instance the embarcadero center, it's five large class a buildings, five distinct. and i don't know what the level is today, but if they had ten waste facilitator for that entire universe of 60 story buildings, or 50 story buildings, it's not the right level. >> an at the director's discretion. >> analysis to come up with the appropriate level response. >> yes, yes, absolutely. >> but the reason i gave the example of the flower mart, i think there's been some concern for those on this list, but on the smaller scale. the reason the flower mart is on this list, it's 40 vendors collectively on one garbage account. if they were separately on separate garbage accounts, they w