why did the board fire you? w, lesley, i wish i could answer the question: why did the board fire me? i can't. they never had a conversation with me. >> it was just--[claps hands] out the door? >> that's right. >> it was that cold? >> that's exactly what happened. >> devastated. you had to have been. >> of course i was devastated. i was hurt. >> one reason she was so blindsided, she says, is because after five years of her leadership, the company was on a roll. >> a company that went from not being in the top 25 innovators in the world to leaping up to number three, a company that was profitable in every business line, a company whose brand had gone from stodgy, white, male-- honestly, that's what the research said--to leading edge, relevant: this was a company transformed from a laggard to a leader. >> and transformed, she says, because of her strategies, her vision, and her management skills. so when the board of directors showed her the door, she hadn't seen it coming. >> none of the normal business reasons ap

she is sitting to my left and will provide the board with any legal advice. we also have our legal assistant. we're joined by representatives from the city departments that had cases before the board this evening. we have this in your building inspector representing the department of building inspection and we have the representation for a taxi services. we will conduct the swearing-in process. >> the board requests you turn off all phones and pagers so they will not disturb proceedings. carry on conversations in the hallway. the rules of presentation are as follows, permit holders and department representatives each have seven minutes to present their cases and three minutes for rebuttals. people affiliated with these parties must include their comments with and those periods. members of the public not affiliated with the parties have up to two minutes each to address the board and no rebuttals. to assist the board in the accurate preparation of minutes, members of the public who wish to speak are asked but not required to submit a speaker card or business ca

the board did know obviously. were you telling the general public, were you telling investors or credit rating agencies? >> part of that time, within the $2 billion number in my opinion because the risks were controlled and positions were controlled and maturity buckets in three months or six months or 12 months period it did not come close to material risk. >> i asked were you telling credit rating agencies? were you in forming your investors that you hit that number? >> i am not aware of myself notifying answering questions to rating agencies and i am not aware as possible that others had notified them. but again, we have to count the materiality of the position. >> basically you think there was nothing wrong going on until $4 billion were approved to 4.755 reading this correctly. >> my comfort level and the board's risk appetites started getting exceeded around the approved risk advertising at that time i should clarify. that was around $2 billion and fat required to go back >> around $2 billion you and the boar

the board welcomes your comments and suggestions. there are customer satisfaction or on the left side of the podium as well. if you have questions about requesting a rehearing, please speak to staff during the break. or call the office tomorrow morning. the office is located at 1650 mission street. this meeting is broadcast live on san francisco government in television, cable channel 78, and a dvd of this meeting is available for purchase directly from asset dtb. had you for your attention. at this point in time, we will conduct our swearing in processing. if you intend to testify in any of our hearings, he's stand, raise your right hand, and say "i do have" after you have been sworn in or offered. any member of the public may speed without taking this both pursuant to the sunshine ordinance in the administrative code. thank you. if you intend to speak, please stand and raise your right hand. do you solemnly swear and affirm the testimony you're about to give will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? >> thank you

all references to the landmarks advisory board have been removed. subsequent changes are proposed for a number of specific processes, designation and review of applications, applicability, and economic hardship and fee waivers for certificates of appropriateness. the local interpretation of the secretary of interior standards and the guidelines for historic property. at yesterday's hearing, the hpc past two resolutions in response to the amendments passed by supervisor weiner. those resolutions represent months of work by the hpc. at the hearing, expressed regret that no commissioners were available to come to today's hearing to provide a more nuanced explanation of their proposed on petitions to the amendments. they also noted that they will follow these resolutions with a more detailed letter that i will distribute both to you and to the board of supervisors at a later date. i will begin with resolution 672, which addresses article 10. i believe he should have copies of the draft ordinance as well. for section 1001.1, the amendment would require th

the mayor should appear before the board. we will leave it to the legislators to work out the details. we have taken very much the same approach of this charter amendment, and we can't forecast what the best process would be. we can't forecast if this step should come before this that, it is hard to predict those things. we wanted to take a step back and say that in the charter, what we're asking for your support, is requiring the board of supervisors to wait 60 days before adopting an ordinance that may result in significant net loss for jobs in san francisco. simply saying that sometime in the year 2012, 2013, 2012, that the board of supervisors should do what we did at question time, talk about details, work out a process, and that would be through the ordinance. if we set up a process in the charter, we can never change it except for another charter amendment. what if we find out that we need to reorder two steps in the process, we don't have the legislative flexibility to be able to do that. why don't we do this whole thi

at the end of 2010 board meeting, at the end of november 2010 board meeting, i presented a new request along with a detailed analysis, according risk stress scenarios, margin requirements price changes securities and as well as potential initial margin calls from the repo counter-parties. these were presented at sovereign levels as well as coordinated levels across all sovereigns and repo counter-parties, an analysis of cbs market and highlighted significant risk given sovereign default risk associated with unresolved issues in europe. during this meeting all the risks were debated. in particular liquidity scenarios were debated and challenged by some members of the board as not being plausible. ultimately the board approved the request conditioned on limits evaluated again in 2011, which is when i left the company. i'd be happy to answer the committee's questions. >> thank you. you're recognized. >> thank you, sir. chairman, ranking member, distinguished members of the subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to make this brief statement. i am deeply saddened by the bankruptcy of m

the board are closed up and sealed until the time of the end. we are at the time of the in. -- of the end. i speculate the judgment day will be 1335 days into the new sabbatical cycle, based on daniel chapter 12, which talks about the blessing to the elect that will come after 1335 days. that ended at the end of the sabbaticals let go. if i had an hour, i could explain logically, consistently, mathematically to you. president chiu: thank you very much. next speaker. >> good afternoon. my name is paul. i come to the board of supervisors this afternoon with a simple request. i would like to have the san francisco board of supervisors facilitate the televising of the san francisco housing authority commission meetings that affect so many of us in san francisco. i live at the jfk tower, which is for seniors and disabled people. people affected by the housing commission do not have access to what is going on. it puts us at a disability. the tenants' association is not conducting monthly meetings of the tenants' associations. they are out of the loop.

the board has been clear at the outset on where we areo

wu to the planning commission and send it to the full board. supervisor kim: thank you. we have a motion to approve the nomination of cindy wu to the planning commission. we can do that without opposition. prior to us finalizing that motion, i want to thank cindy for your service to the community over the past a number of years. in chinatown and the overall city, it has been a pleasure to watch you and the amazing community outreach and planning work you have done two while we work for the same organization, we did not overlap. i did not work with you in that capacity, but i am very excited about you serving our city at this level. it is an incredible amount of work and dedication, so we appreciate your service in advance. supervisor campos: thank you. let me simply note that i am happy to be supportive of the motion, and i was very impressed with ms. wu. the fact that so many people came out and spoke on her behalf illustrates the level of support that she has and respect that she has. i personally was not so sure about the uc berkeley thing. [laughter] but i can deal --

during a break or after the meeting or call the board office in the morning. this meeting is to broadcast live on sentences go government to television, -- san francisco government television. these are available for purchase. we will conduct our swearing in process. if you intend to testify and wish to have the committee give your testimony wait, please stand, raise your right hand, and say, i do. any member of the public ney speak -- may speak pursuant to the ordinance. do you solemnly swear the testimony you are about to give will be the truth, whole truth, and nothing but the truth. >> we have two housekeeping items. the parties have jointly requested this be continued on august 15. they are continuing to undergo efforts to resolve the matter of side of the board. good we do need a motion to move this matter. >> so moved. >> is there any public comment on this item? if you could call our role. >> we have a motion to continue item seven on august 15. [calling votes] the vote is 4-0. this is continued on august 15. >> the other item has to do with item #8 fr

out of respect for the board, i will keep the speech short. leadership hash supporting this recommendation. president yee: commissioner maufas? commissioner maufas: we went over together to see leadership and it knocked my socks off. i always ask when i'm going to visit a school, please don't dress it up, let me come quietly, please, please, please, i just want to see you as you are and i truly believe i saw leadership just as you are and it was wonderful. it was just wonderful. i can't tell you how impressed i was with your a.p. classes. i'm sorry, they were just kids of color in there doing a level of work that i saw was college level and i was blown away. i was like, oh, my gosh, thank goodness i graduated high school when i did and college when i did because i don't think i could do this work now. it was so impressive. it was impressive. and to think that you were doing that for our students, that may not do well in a traditional setting and i said it to elizabeth then, i wish more of our families knew about leadership and what it offers t

i am -- i currently serve on the van ness and brt. i served on boards and the yerba buena cvt and in my neighborhood. i understand how the commissioner on this planning commission affects the quality of life of people like me who live in san francisco, as well as the community. i also understand how land use policy is necessary to deal with the impending ecological disasters. i know ms. wu, of her background. for advocacy on behalf of the committee and for her deep knowledge in all of the important issues. personally, i cannot think of any more qualified person to represent my needs as well as the community needs. thank you. supervisor kim: thank you. is there any other public comment on item number three? public comment is now closed. colleagues, is there any discussion? we do currently have a motion. the motion is to approve or reject the president of the board of supervisors nomination of cindy wu. so we do need to make an amendment to that motion . supervisor farrell: i would like to amended to approve ms. wu to the planning commission and send it t

>> madame chair, if the board makes an amendment to the legislation that is approving the dda, the board is setting the level of authority that it is giving the department to enter into the agreement. that agreement still needs to be reached and signed. you are giving advance authority come in a sense. it would then be up to the parties to be able to reach that agreement. commissioner chu: ok. if we make this amendment in negotiations with -- about the dda, if both parties do not come to an agreement on a transfer fee at the second sale, then there is no authority to enter into that agreement. >> that is right. commissioner chu: just a question to mike martin or whoever is adequate to speak to it, will you give us an indication of conversations about this? >> as we discussed during the hearing, we have had many conversations about this. there has not been an expression of agreement to the second sale from our partners at this point. from staff's perspective, i think we would appreciate the opportunity to try to negotiate this approach. obviously, this is in the hands of the committee. co

in more detail on the next slide, the board members and the clerk of the board, the assessment appeals board, sunshine, youth commission, advertising, budget and legislative analysis board a ides, and the clerks,. the discretionary spending is administered of support, things that are necessary to run the organization, but not required in any code or in the charter. supervisor chu: can you remind me it the official advertising budget, the $48,000, we had changes in the requirements that were supposed to reduce to reduced costs and advertising? is this reflective of that? remind me where it was and how much we have reduced it? >> essentially what happened is the board change the requirement for the clerk's office to publish in the newspaper, and indicated with a post that information on our website. we are no longer paying for those notices. there are certain notices that still require some noticing in the newspaper, according to state law which we abide by. supervisor chu: what was the value had budgeted in? >> approximately $190,000 the past couple years. down to 48,000 others. supervi

to me, the board of supervisors number is well reported by the data. what we have seen, the male role number certainly could escalate to the level of the cap proposed historic fleet and has not been that high. and the winner is a well-under the proposed cap. we're looking at an election four years from now and then four years after that. as i supported the last time around, i think 1.75 is more precarious. obviously, we're trying to submit something that meets our goals and would find support at the board. is there procedure for providing a choice? we think 1.75 should be the number, 1.975 would be acceptable. >> not like that, no. you cou staff has recommended and adopted again with the different numbers and send them both. >> is that a serious complication? >> i would prefer you do it that way, because we have lots of numbers, lots of races under our belts. we don't have the kind of data that we need to make a decision. it might be that the next mayoral race with a non- incumbent takes place, it is quite a distance down the road. the last time we had

and the college board. on the rest of the legislation, starting on page 3 of the legislation, i certainly support the 10,000 contributors and would not necessarily leave this at -70, and this is the deadline for filing the nomination papers. this would give somewhat more time but this depends on the filing deadline. >> did you say more time -- which way? >> the idea is that if the deadline is e -88, someone can file until the end of august, the e-70 deadline to get sufficient, qualified contributions from this number of contributors may be as short as 18 days if they file at the last minute. and there have been instances of that recently. my thought was that if the filing deadline remains this way, giving this to 60 or 28 days to gather significant contributions for the number in value would offer more level playing field to the extent that the deadline is moved back by 58 days and this will change up the whole thing. >> i think he is still using this any way. a question for you. >> i have some other things

we are advising the board of supervisors, in effect. would be voting not to continue it and go for commissioner sugaya's motion. commissioner moore: i would also support commissioner sugagya's motion. in this case, the abbreviated bullet points i have in front of me are not of substance and don't have enough transparency of what you really need. the devil is in it details -- what you really mean. together, with comparing it, this is the way it was, this is the way we will be. it is that type of clarity we need. and it is that type of clarity that needs to be delivered to the public. commissioner antonini: the discussion was to ask what are specific recommendations were and i thought i said what is it -- what needed to be put in of legislation. some of these might deal with areas that might be severed, but there were a number of comments that dealt with part of the present legislation that i felt needed to be modified. given the fact that two were given to us as a package, it is clear what is coming in and what is coming out, but it is a

dbi permits represent 60% of the board's workload, then the surcharge is placed on dbi permits should generate 60% of our revenues from surcharges. the law does allow the controller to increase the surcharges each year by applying the rate of inflation. if a larger increase is required in order to allow us to cover operating expenses, then we need to go through the legislative process. the of the revenue stream that we have comes from filings. that is comprised of the fees people pay when they come into our office to file for a new appeal. on the expense side, i wanted to give you a brief breakdown of where our money goes. 2/3 goes to cover personal expenses, salaries, and fringe benefits. about 1/4 pace for the services of other departments. that is primarily the attorney's office as well as the department of technology, which provides for the broadcasting and web hosting and closed captioning of our board meetings, as well as providing the department some support for our computer systems and phones. about 4% of our budget goes toward infrastructure costs, like our rent. 3% toward th

the final speaker. >> good afternoon, members of the board of supervisors. h the laborers' international union local 261, on behalf of ramon hernandez and those we represent in the community. i am here to talk about the america's cup. because we have excellent relationships with each of you, we are not here to cast blame. but we are prepared to have hundreds of workers on the steps of city hall this very day to celebrate jobs for the community. we commend the efforts of the america's cup authority. we commend the mayor's office and all of you who worked hard on the original plan. we had a private sector agreement on the table that was going to voluntarily engage in local hiring. we are going to hire people in the private sector with contractors that are signatories to our agreements. that is not going to happen now. i represent awesome men and women. the labor movement in san francisco has an awesome reputation. the america's cup was on its way to be an awesome party that was going to benefit not just the workers, but all of san francisco. we have lost that n

that is going to be a consultation with the port commission and the board of supervisors. supervisor avalos: we have requested this bump up of the time we couldrelend these bases. you're saying it is a positive change. we will see a difference. >> yes. we think it is a direct general fund benefit to shorten the period of time the city is subsidizing lost back rent to the port. we are looking forward to the discussion about what these piers can be after the event. >> if i could ask mo'niqonique moyer, how are we able to get tenants back in? we asked about the space needs back there. so if you could elaborate. >> thank you. right now what is happening in the bay area is there is an increasingly narrowing supply with -- of warehouse space on the peninsula that affects subsidy burlingame. there is a large demand of unmet space. if you have been to pier 80, you have seen the improvements they have done at pier 80 and is our expectation with the improvements that will make to be in those piers we will release them quickly but at rates that are more market rate than what we are ac

i do not want it at the board. i am prepared to do a host of amendments to the resolution, if need be. but i would like to hear more from my colleagues on the committee. chairperson chu: thank you. i did want to ask mike martin, with regards to timeline, can you tell me more? >> based on the construction schedules before us, we have been advised by the event authority of the need to have the board approvals by next week, every 28. -- february 28. the discussion needs to continue in the committee as a whole. we will try to address whatever comes out of this. chairperson chu: thank you. supervisor campos: i want to reiterate what has been said about thinking staff not only at the mayor's office, not only the folks at the event committee, but all the organizing work that has gone into this. i want to think the budget and legislative panelists for this report, as well as the city attorney's office. one of the things i think is important for us to consider is that i have yet to experience with any major project where som

approval to the full board. the committee also heard an ordinance introduced by a mayor lee that would introduce the city process for white knight -- lightning's sidewalks. and-- widening sidewalks. the current process is lengthy and involves review by several city agencies, and even action by the board of supervisors. and now that the city has adopted guidance on how to widen sidewalks, it seems appropriate to make it easier to do so. this ordinance would not change or review the process for narrowing sidewalks, only for widening sidewalks that meet city law and are recommended for approval by city agencies. all other changes would go through the current process, and the committee recommended approval of this process for the board. and the india park introduced by supervisor cohen was before the committee. you unanimously approved this last year. it would amend the plan as it extends across third street to allow a multi-use health care service at 53rd street. the legislation would enable a medical clinic up to 1

services, interpreters who come to the board to help members of the public who have limited english speaking ability. the remaining 2% pace for materials and supplies. our postage and office papers, things like that. this year, we are experiencing another in a series of years of revenue shortfalls. very much aligned with the economic situation in the country. while, of course, it is never good news, it is smaller than in years past. i am optimistic about it. in 2009, we saw a year-and 16% revenue shortfall, 2010, 9%. last year, it was 6%. if we continue as projected, we will have a 3% shortfall by the end of this year. it is getting more manageable. i think we will end the year with about $27,000 short of revenue. i do think we will be able to cover that with reductions in our expenses. our budget should come in with a significant amount of money left over at the end of the year, largely associated with the city attorney work order. so far, we have only spent -- the first half of the year, 14% of that allocation. i suspect that trend will continue to some degree throughout rest of the year.

important appointment to the board of supervisors. as no, i have worked hard to set a new tone of civility, and i said yesterday that ever decision that i make will be in the best interest of all the people of san francisco. that has been my standard and i expect that of any one that i appointed the board of supervisors to also have. that is why i am extremely excited and proud to announce today might appointment of christina olague as district 5 is supervisor. [jurors and applause] -- [cheers and applause] i have talked to her quite a bit, and i know that she shares my vision of job creation and economic development in putting san francisco back to work. and i know that is also shared by all of the members of our board of supervisors as well. i know she cares about our neighborhoods and smart economic development, and certainly public safety for our neighborhoods. we also share the same values. in our past, a week -- for both came from backgrounds, fighting for the rights of tenants and immigrants. cristina will work every day for the

at this present moment, we do have allies sitting in the board of supervisors. but at the present moment, you guys have chosen to be silent. please take a stand. let the federal government know that the city and county of san francisco stands behind their medical cannabis patience and are willing to put in place laws that will govern our community. we are a public entity that you guys are supposed to help. i ask you urgently, speak out before it is too late. thank you. >> good afternoon, members of the board. i am here representing the green cross. i am here to ask will the real san francisco please stand up and defend safe access? the u.s. federal government continues to undermine our local laws, resulting in the closure of some of san francisco's oldest and best-regulated dispensaries, with more warnings that "nobody is immune from federal prosecution." while resolutions and press statements are welcome, patients and providers deserve concrete and specific action from this board to send a clear message to federal officials that medical marijuana is medicine, an

anyone else wish to address the board? secretary boomer: no one else has turned in a card under the directors' report. chairman nolan: ok. secretary boomer: moving on said that members of a publicly address the board members within the board jurisdiction that are not on today's calendar. chairman nolan: good afternoon. >> good afternoon. members of the board, thank you for your time today. my name is david sayle, and i am out of vancouver, washington. i intentionally drove here last night to attend this meeting in regards to bring attention to driver behavior with the transit agencies. on april 24, 2010, my daughter and four for friends were in a crosswalk in portland, oregon. all five of them work mode over in the crosswalk during a green light, and they are in the crosswalk, meant to be seen. my daughter, as a result of that crash, my daughter passed away, as well as one of her friends that were with her. her boyfriend was seriously injured, and two others who were the sister of another girl passed away. i am here today t

ççthe appellant at the board s the first slavic baptist church of san francisco.on, the siding on educational facility and a lack of independent analysis on capacity and coverage as provided by at&t. department staff it now requires independent analysis as part of the applications of metal. while we ask the project sponsor to pursue the analysis, they were unable to do that and pursue the hearing. the department explained this location isç one location -- ad we were finally joined by the department of public health and describe to the publicç how the site would be safe according to science. two supervisors requested the process and the way we review çthese antennas be updated in e future. thecu was up held and supervisor març cast the dissenting vote. ççthere were three introductii wanted to share with you this week. there was a resolution establishing the community advisory committee. this was an update that provides specificity about the various departments roles. an ordinance was introduced to amend the planning code to -- we will find out more about this

and that will go to the full board and hopefully on the ballot. we would ask for your support as we move through the process. >> commissioners, i wanted to thank the mayor's office for bringing this forward, i think it is an important step for the business community. i am sure we would be able to work out the details, but i think it is a very positive step for supporting an important part of our city. >commissioner riley: this is an excellent idea to give us the time. we did not have the opportunity to see the report, and we have to make a recommendation prior to outbreak of the small business. i think it is great and i support it. >> i would agree with what -- commissioner adams: i would agree with what commissioner riley said. seeing the analytics after. it is a very important piece of legislation and i support it. president o'brien: i would like to say that when i first heard about this, i was absolutely delighted about it. today, i went back and looked over. we hold the retreat once a year where we hold that somewhere that we are not going to

the board's chairman tells us quote there are cases where the board has dropped the ball. >> the board has limited resources. we have to prioritize and if we find a case that warrants urgent action we prioritize that and go forward with it. >> reporter: while the cases are reviewed we found doctors are treating patients. even when the allegations are disturbing. take doctor donald, in the thousand 4, a patient said he was trading oral sex for medication. his license was suspended 6 years later and later revoked for sexual misconduct with that woman and a teenage patient. or look at dr. mark geyer, his first complaint was filed more than 4 years ago, but it wasn't until last year the board suspended his license for quote, experimental treatment of autistic children. geyer referred to the treatments as chemical castration and ordered to seize and aassist practicing medicine what is more frightening is that doctors who lose licenses can pack up and move to another state. >> they are able to compete a practice until the second state takes action against their license. >> janet's doctor, he

other items before the full board -- i think that was the only thing before the full board. there were a few things introduced i would like to share with you. and the first is the ordinance you work on, the restaurant ordinance, which has simplified controls for restaurants. the changes you have and you're hearing were numerous, so what happened is instead of revising that in committee, a full new ordinance that incorporates your modifications has been introduced come and that is currently under the 30-day hold. i should mention supervisor wiener and a lotolgaue for supervisors of that. supervisor kim supervise legislation for [inaudible] . president chu introduces nomination for some thcindy wu. this item will be heard at 1:30 today, along with a nomination for board of appeals. moving on, i have the board of appeals report. they did not meet last night, but the board president has dominatenominated mr. zaoto. both of those nominations in the charter of them it will be heard later on today. that concludes my report unless there are any questions. >> thank you. commissioner a

were the board members -- i mean, it's one thing to raise an issue. it's another to be told by the chairman of the board, that's implausible. i'm trying to reconcile those two. >> within the room there's certainly differences of opinions within the board members on the positions themselves. so they were certainly discussed. >> one last question. you noted the strategy pursued by mr. corzine didn't match the resources of mfg. can you expand a little bit about what you mean by that? what specifically caused the failure of mf global, in your opinion? >> since i wasn't there, i'm not really familiar with all the specific positions that they added to the company subsequent to my departure. >> uh-huh. >> so i'm probably not in the best position to respond to that. >> then how about to this? you noted that the strategy pursued by mr. corzine did not match the resources of mfg. what did you mean by that? >> you certainly need sufficient capital globally. we were operating in a number of different companies around the globe, which causes some challenges to movi

the friends. think about it. >> good afternoon, board. i am the patient advocates seat of the can of this task force. -- cannabis task force. it was encouraging to see the mayor in attendance of the board meeting. we are hoping to create some dialogue. i write to alert you to an -- an impending health care crisis. hundreds of thousands of disabled americans, who i represent in the patient advocacy seat, are facing a federal block in needed and physician-recommended medical supplies. this embargo is unconstitutional, as well as a backslide with regard to united nations resolve for health care. i asked that our city officials of hold city laws regarding our sanctuary status. our city has two decades of laws on our books in support and project support of safe and legal access to cannabis, evolving from the aids crisis. 16 states have fallen in our footsteps. our city has a medical cannabis task force comprised of legal experts. this major media attention and concern, as this also affects a leading contributor to the general fund. we asked the

but that is one of the rules that the board codified as to the mechanisms of the fund. supervisor kim: thank you. i apologize for all the questions. this is a new to me. i appreciate that the city is proactive about gaining revenue but i am is appreciative to ms. boroughs for donating to our homeless services here in san francisco. supervisor chu: thank you. why don't i open this up for public comments. there is no budget analyst report for this item. if there are any members of the public who would wish to speak on item number one, please come forward. seeing none, public comment is closed. to supervisor avalos's question -- >> the answer is that the one- time and nonrecurring revenue speaks to general fund revenues. it specifically excludes from the revenues that are otherwise restricted for other legal reasons, state, federal, or local laws, to a different purpose. in this case, we have a legal request. it is binding upon the city on how we can use these funds. it is physically requires us to use it in a certain way. that means it does not flow through the general fu