finding for the ethics commission is neutral on. elected officials appoint the ethics commission. obviously the elected are the representatives of the people. if the voters choose to make this change, the ethics commission will switch up the case. finding no. 5, the ethics commission has already acted on prior to this report. two members of the ethics commission had to request that i am become entered for dismissal or settlement. the ethics commission has adopted a new regulation that a single member of the commission can cause these to be countered for consideration by the full commission. finding number six, we take seriously our ability to track issues efficiently. we're always upgrading our system, trying to make it interactive and user friendly. we certainly continue to do that. we do have a system in place to track records and record request that we think is working, but we are talking with that to ensure request for documents of information are handled properly. finally, on the television issue, the ethics commission has decided to endorse televising its meetings. in the pas

commission. why he has taken no action on the ethics commission recommendation to remove her from the library. that is long overdue. supervisor campos: thank you, sir. next speaker, please. >> walter folsom. ♪ find a slot of sfgovtv. and when the day is cloudy, there is still a sunshine task force that shines on me. shine down on the ethics won't you please. ♪ whisper words of wisdom and find a slot on sfgovtv. and when the day is cloudy, sunshine task force shines down on me. ♪ supervisor campos: thank you, mr. paulson. next speaker, please. >> that was hot from better of humor -- was one of the better ones. i think you very much for the comments you have made here today. televising the ethics commission is a crucial element. people of san francisco would really like to see that. they are concerned about it and want to know what is going on in city government. change is not easy. if you read the original report from mr. st. croix it was not very nice. in fact, it was very derogatory towards the circle grand jury. he has changed over the past couple of months, he has changed because of public

the commission in your perspective would be supportive of that? >> sure. what the mayor's office brought up is something that i am already working on is that we work the second monday of every month. there is not a slot available in the current meeting time that would offer a stability to be televised, because you're only meeting at that time. we will have to find another slot where that is available. i have not been able to go through every single agency's monthly calendar and find where the slots are. supervisor campos: may be between now and tuesday you could work with my staff and we could work with the good folks from sfgtv to make this happen, but i think that the importance of this is such that i think we need to move expeditiously -- whether you agree or disagree with the specific findings or recommendations, the one thing that is clear to me is we can all benefit from that added transparency. maybe we can work together between now and tuesday so we can introduce something at the next board meeting to move quickly to make that happen. >> we intend t

the commission agrees with the civil grand jury's recommendation of an additional staff person for the civil service commission. i do however, want to assure this committee that our office is ensuring that any concerns or issues brought to the civil service commission is being handled in a timely manner. we would be able to expedite our analysis and review the concerns that are brought to us in terms of the appeal or whether there is an appeal process available to the employees or whether this can be handled through what we call and inspection service which we look into matters that are not appealable to the commission. however, we would discuss with the department in the department of human resources whether merit system principles, rules and policies have been followed by and that employment transaction. and an additional staff person would expedite our analysis and also give us an opportunity to review the department's analysis or reports that they present to the commission, and we can advise the commission whether merit system principles and policies have been followed. supervisor

for the past six years, i've worked closely with the commission. the office of pacific engagement and immigrant affairs, the board of supervisors, the mayor's office, and with our immigrant advocates and community organizations. together we have build a lot of momentum and solved a lot of issues. i believe we have been very effective as a good commission. i would really like to be considered again and look forward to working on at the commission as the chair and as a commissioner. thank you. supervisor kim: thank you. and thank you for your two years as president of the commission. i know it is a lot of work and volunteer hours. i appreciated. speaking of which, to talk about the accomplishments, what were you most proud of in terms of your time at the immigrant rights commission? >> obviously, by a big focus that drew me to the commission was the comprehensive immigration reform. that was a big one for me. i went back to washington at that time when the bill was on the table, along with other things. the dream act was another one i really believed

it was not at the commission hearing. president chiu: why don't we now hear from a representative from the project sponsor? you will have up to 10 minutes for your presentation. >> i will be using the light board. i am outside counsel for verizon wireless. it is a pleasure to appear before you. i have been representing horizon for 20 years. i was part of the preparation of the guidelines in 1996. there was no adverse industry input or attempt to skew the document, which was primarily driven by important and historic figures in san francisco. i appreciate the fact that the neighborhood has brought up most of our exhibits already. we respect their opinions and concerns about wireless service. wireless service has become ubiquitous. there are more cellular subscriptions in the united states than there are people. it has become important to our daily lives. i want to enlighten you about two issues. one is coverage versus capacity. the one you may not have focused on is the necessary, desirable, incompatible standard, versus a

our work and supporting the arts commission-based community arts programming in accordance with section 3.19 of the san francisco administrative code. hold on. sorry. there. >> hello, commissioners. general managers for external affairs. i can be brief. this item came before you all at the june 28 commission meeting. at that meeting, you gave us feedback, both on the resolution and ask us to bring the mou back to you and give direction for the general manager to move forward with that mou. since that meeting in june, the mou has been developed but with the puc staff as well as staff from the arts commission does death internally have begun to meet across the enterprise to begin to identify priorities for arts enrichment spending based on places having impact. i am happy to answer any questions that you may have today. it is pretty straightforward. commissioner torres: there was a commissioner -- there was an issue was supportive of. making sure the whatever arts works better commissioner given at least some priority to local artists.

the time. secretary avery: commission is taking a 30-minute break. >> the planning commission is back in session. i would like to remind all of us to remember to turn off a self phones and electronic devices. commissioners, we are now on item 10. planning code controls for historic preservation, including but not limited to articles 10 and 11. >> i want to remind you we have been working on this for quite some time with stuff of the historic preservation commission. just to remind us all, this started as part of a package of cleanup amendments to years ago we proposed with the code. articles 10 and 11 were added to that. because of the ongoing discussion, we recommended and the commission agreed that the rest of the cleanup package proceed to the board. the board has approved those other amendments. what you will hear today from sophie is the package of recommended changes to the articles that the historic preservation commission have suggested. i wanted to just let you know that they're often so many versions of articles 10 and 11 of the last couple of years that it is too confusing and very cu

if the arts commission and planning staff have agreed on recommendation number three, then i think we would agree as well. we would like to note it and have the board consider that issue at land user to full board at some point just to note it, but we were unclear that that consensus had been reached and glad to hear that happened and if that consensus is reached, we would go along with that. i will allow cat to add anything. >> i don't have that much to add. i know jason summarized it, but supervisor chiu is open to the recommendation about expanding this and he was very interested in what the planning commission has to sayn't an it and very interested in doing appropriate outreach if that is your direction. >> if you have any questions, we would be happy to answer. president olague: commissioner antonini. commissioner antonini: thank you for a very interesting presentation. i am pretty much on board with many of the things and the flexibility on how the 1% is spent is a good thing. and i think that the expanding of the requirement seems to be outreach or a lot of people spoken in fa

the ethics commission. the public. now we have to take a position with respect to findings 2, 4 and 7. supervisor farrell -- president chu. supervisor chiiu. supervisor chiu: thank you. i think we had a good discussion. colleagues, my perspective on these recommendations, as i stated before, i am comfortable with the board supporting recommendations 2 and 7 with regard to time the hearings and the enforcement action recommendations as well as moving forward around broadcasting meetings on sfgov tv, although a hope we can figure out how to do that with regards to the budget unsettling. with regards to item four, i am not prepared to support specific recommendations that a laid out in the proposed recommendations. what i might suggest is that of language that states with regards to item number four, we did not take a position with regards to the specific legislation, but we would be open to considering other options to think about the ethics commission could continue to not involve any appearances of impropriety and leav

the duties of the commission that arise out of the charter, the administrative code, the police commission rules and regulations, as well as the other resolutions that the commission has passed in former years, bringing it all together in one document and mapping that out so when we are deciding on priorities and when to schedule them, they are a backdrop to all these other duties and responsibilities we have. we would like to get the input of the full commission before moving ahead with more detail. the draft of that we propose to have to you before november 2 to discuss at the november 2 meeting. president mazzucco: we're back to what to entitled this document. you are working on our list of priorities. this backdrop of the rules and procedures and charter and all that, i think those are divens that we understand and we know what our role is and we know we need to do. the ultimate issue is, what are our priorities? it is a moving target because it changes frequently. i am not sure about the second half of what you're asking for. commissioner dejesus: i have not been here but i am not sur

the document was party appealed before the planning commission and the planning commission upheld the ceqa document before it adopted or even considered enabling legislation in the project. due process has been served. but what about the procedures for the enabling legislation, and this case the special use district. the appellate argues that the commission cannot approve the hottest initial use of a prior to the board approving the sud. again, this is not the case. for all normal procedures, the commission recommended approval of enabling legislation to this body. and the commission approved the cu and engine on your approval. should do not approve the sud today, there is no cu opposition -- authorization. this is outside the department's jurisdiction. if there are no questions, i will end by remarks to set all public noticing and procedures have been followed. let's consider the project itself. is the project prudent? clearly, the answer is no. as entitled by the commission, this project would allow 24 occupants to reside in a building based upon single occupancy units. this is eigh

at the commission unanimously passed this resolution. you adopted this with a couple of modifications. with the additional exception, allowing them to serve beer and wine. and the chemical modification. we amended the ordinance to accommodate both of the recommendations. she received word from supervisor campos that there would be a need to allow the single screen theaters to sell alcohol but also multi-screen theaters. this would cause them to send the ordinance back to you for your consideration. they did consider this for the future. supervisor weiner also mentioned he has concerns that the controls are not achieving their desired effect. this may be something that we hear about more in the future. at the full board of supervisors, they heard the appeal for 4141 gary boulevard. this was for wireless internet, actually nine of them. two people had opposition, but it was approved unanimously. it was a different story this week at the board with a two- hour hearing or the majority of the comments were in opposition to the antennas. a writ

members of the public may address the commission on subjects that are within the jurisdiction of the commission. you may address the commission for up to three minutes. public comment? yes, sir. >> there was a great attendance and the police department and the industry representatives which is one more step which shows the communication. i i am really positive on the future of the hospitality in june -- industry. >> i get your comments. that is a stellar job. >> item number 80, review and approve the minutes of july 26th. the minister now ready for review. -- item number2. the minutes are now ready for review. >> i will try to be short about this. if you were at the summit today, you heard me talk about the permit. i brought this up to you a few times because this is had a long road to travel. we were pretty proud of it. at this point, legislation passed its first rate on the board of supervisors and you have a second read when they come back from recess in september. this more or less stayed intact. there were some their relatives in the neighborhoods. by and large, it pretty much st

definitely the commission decided something. we would all appreciate something. >> thank you, commissioners. we can move forward on your calendar to item number nine, the first item on your regular calendar. case number 2006.085tm. japantown community planning process and a national -- and initial recommendations. >> get afternoon. my name is paul lord from the department of staff. before i get started, i would like to apologize to the commissioners, because, for the first time since perhaps 1977, i have got speaking notes in front of me. typically i am familiar enough with projects that i can address you directly and maintain eye contact to see how you're responding to various points that i may. it has not been since 1977 when they presented the 16th street revitalization plan and wrote my notes out in ink and was so nervous presenting to you that my perspiration bled all my notes and i cannot read them anyway. so i am back to notes again, and i hope this is not a sign of things to come for me. but nonetheless, i am happy to be

some of the people that are not so great, the ethics commission. e will never live long enough to see some of the end of their investigations. san francisco government at some of its citizens are losing out, too. let me tell you who i am really disappointed in. the mayor. he was the first investigator for this program, and his responses lacked anything. he had a chance to be strong, to be ethical, to move forward with this program and he did not. the last thing. president chiu: can you finish your thought? >> i love associate brandise. sunshine is the best disinfectant and hopefully the civil grand jury brought some sunshine to this very important topic. president chiu: any other member of the public a supervisor campos: -- any other member of the public that would like to speak? public comment is closed. one of the important functions that we have in city government, i don't think you could have to transparency and accountability unless you have the most effective whistleblower program that you can have. i think it is really critical. i think this

to the commission. -- with the nsr, they would have to come to the commission.