item six, motion rejecting the reappointment of clotting cheng to the treasure island about authority board of directors. item seven, motion approving the appointment of john elberling to the treasure island development authority board of directors. item eight, motion rejecting the reappointment of john elberling to the treasure island development board of directors. item nine, motion approving the appointment of linder richardson to the treasure island development authority board of directors. item 10, motion rejecting the mayor's appointment of linder richardson to the treasure island development authority board of directors. item 11, motion approving the mayor's reappointment of jean- paul samaha to the treasure island relevant authority board of directors. item 12, motion rejecting the reappointment of jean-paul samaha. item 13, motion confirming the appointments of larry del carlo for term ending february 26, 2013, and larry mazzola jr. term ending april 20, 2014, to the treasure island development authority board of directors. supervisor campos: as these items deal with appointments t

according to our code, the authority board must provide for the director. the original date or deadline for compensation was june 30. at the september meeting of the board, the board chose of every year. while anticipating a complicated month in september, scheduling board and committee meetings, i figured that i would bring this to you now so that we would comply with the deadline. the last board meeting was the 15th. this seems like a timely moment to consider this. what i brought you, in the spirit of full disclosure, normally this is taken up in the same meeting where you evaluate my performance. but because there was a change requested by the board in the time line for making the determination, you already have done my performance evaluation on june 29. at this time the committee gave a score of 4.5, which is between good and outstanding in our rankings system. at the time the committee chose to defer action compensation given that the budget was still going on. so, it really is not my intent, and i do not think it would be appropriate, to rehash the p

mayors of women of clotting -- the mayor's reappointment of claudine cheng to the treasure island development authority board. supervisor chiu: colleagues, if we could call item 30, 31, and 32 together. >> item 30 is a motion approving the mayor's reappointment of john elberling to the treasure island development authority board. item 31 is a motion approving the mayor's reappointment of linda richardson to the treasure island development authority board of directors. item 32 is a motion approving the mayor's reappointment of jean-paul samaha to the treasure island development authority board of directors. supervisor daly: thank you, mr. president and colleagues. let me say there is at least one director here who i have supported several times, who has done excellent work on tida and who deserves to be reappointed, and i think that there is some merit to some of the other appointments as well, but representing treasure island here on the board of supervisors, having in the rules committee gone to some lengths to block commission appointment in order to get actual representation from residents of treasure isl

and as part of the grant procedure, we are required to obtain authorization from the board of commissioners before entering into these grants. we have had a limited time to execute the grants. we have before you a request to continue authorizing the executive director to execute all master agreements, and anything related to the grants so the authority can begin spending and working on projects. all we had was previously approved by the board last june. in terms of fiscal impact we will be bringing before you all the grants by mid year by amendment in february of 2011. the ccac has not yet been briefed, but will be on the next meeting on december 8, 2010. with that i am seeking authorization to renew the authorization to allow the executive director to enter all grants awarted from the caltrans -- awarded from the caltrans organization. if you have any questions, i would be happy to answer them. >> are there any members of the member who would like to be heard on this item? seeing none, i would like to close public cox. colleagues, can we move this forward with recommendation? yes. of next

determines the best interest, delegating to the general manager authorization to reward bonds to the highest manager and also authorizing the resolution to the board of supervisors, of addressing the issue cannot expand the principal amount, provided that such bonds shall be subject to the terms and adopting findings for the quality act. also providing a 3% threshold. >> i am before you again as part of what we're doing for the water system improvement program. in your packet is a great deal of information. we have sold $2 billion in loans. this would be doing another a up to $600 million in your packet. a continuation of existing strategies. we always try to go to market with the cheapest debt. the assets we are funding have 65 or 70 years. sometimes more. savings of 1% under our 5% planning. the reason i should say we are timing this in december as opposed to january -- congress has not removed the 35% interest rate, so this would allow them to capture more savings, and that is significant for our customers. the saving is about $10 million. the overview financing authorities -- what is before you is consistent with ordinance 189. we will be goin

the appeals process section 342.6 has an appeal either to the board of supervisors if the board of supervisors has authority over the entitlement, or if the board of supervisors does not have authority, it would go to the board of appeals. >> "authority over entitlement" means potential use permit needs to be approved? >> i think the entitlement refers to the actual approval, like a conditional use permit legislation. the ceqa process is a separate process not directly addressed in this legislation. >> to appeal something with conditional use, there is one standard to appeal the environmental determination. what is the standard to appeal this consistency determination? four signatures? one signature? how do you get it to board? >> it is within 30 days of the issuance or denial of the consistency. any person may file an appeal. it may be one person. >> it mirrors the ceqa appeal route instead of the conditional use route, which means a certain percentage of the people within a radius, correct? >> that is correct. it is more like the ceqa appeal process where one person could appeal within that 30 days. >> so

the work of my fellow board members to make the best decision. if appointed, i would look forward to hearing from constituents and residents about the issues that come before the authority. i care about san francisco, its residents, and its workers, and therefore, would value being part of such a large-scale project that would provide tremendous opportunity for this great city. i'm honored that mayor newsom has put my name forward for this rule on the authority board, and ask for your support. supervisor campos: thank you very much. any comments or questions? seeing none, before we turn it over -- open it up to public comment, i see that the director of operations is here. did you want to say anything? >> [inaudible] just assurances in reviewing what mr. daly commented on. the mayor has set forth an application process that will result in at least one tenet being appointed to the board. i also remind the committee at this time that there are four residents that serve on the community advisory board -- supervisor campos: if i may, a supervisor mar -- if i may, supervisor mar. supervisor mar: do you know when that appointment what happened? >> no, not at this time. we hop

the controller's reserve pending issuance. >> good afternoon. this is an administrative process the board authorized the issuance of the 48 million certificates of participation to do the street improvements as well as the access improvements. also, we have the issuance of resolution supporting the supplemental appropriation but in this case, the project improvement was already in the budget so there was not an accompanying supplemental so we missed at in the delivery costs which would fund the reserve fund, catalyze interest them -- capitalized interest. we also are looking for changes in market rate conditions. this would be specific and adjustments would be made by the comptroller's office to change projected numbers this is the administrative process and i apologize for not having it come with a package. >> thank you. >> let's hear from the budget analyst. >> mr. chairman, supervisor elsbernd, as indicated on october 26th, the board approved an ordinance authorizing the issuance of $48 million of the certificates of participation to finance various street improvements as well as the disability a

the planning commission is vested with the original authority to decide these matters. the board of appeals is to review and make sure the planning commission did not abuse this discretion. i am standing before you, let you know that the discretionary review which i believe mr. sanchez will respect and speak to you about, speaks to each and every concern, including the police report brought up by the appellants. effectively, the appellants do not understand the municipal code. each of the clients as well as the other child care-related entities cited by them do not qualify under the applicable statute. section 1789.50 is qualified, and let me read it directly into the record. the public to private, profit, or nonprofit use, including -- excluding hospitals or medical centers, which meets the provisions of section 3045. that refers to items that qualify on the master plan. it does not cover any of the institutions referred to by the appellant. again, the concerns raised by the appellant regarding child safety, regarding holistic resale, regarding any of the other allegations being