vokat plump she has a boyfriend. hello bad date. really bad. what is he howling? she doesn't find it strange. what did we showcase flew in? hot car? of course not, every day lights up, then comes here. your work good coffee here's an example so everyone settled around the perimeter. well colleagues who is there to investigate? i see it. and where is his moth? according to the numbers, the owner of the car was struck by a certain grigory goretsky, who is speaking, his last name is 40 years old, a businessman, relatives have a wife, now they are going to her, you are going with me. we looked at the house, there were no traces of interest in the house. burglary on the door there are no traces of a blood fight the same interesting thing in the garage. this is no longer funny, another corpse, well, rather a suspect. yes, i see, bones are broken. and why so much blood next to him lay an ax? you think it's the killer that was more correct to call him a suspect, but they just have no doubts in my mind. so i have a version of sexual harassment based on starvation, by the w

that friends, is add vokation to all of those future san franciscoians who need us to do a work of planning for sensor san francisco, now today here. if sb9 is any indication to rely on the state will look like, it will not be good and i don't imagine that the votes are going to change but i would love for us to be able to override this veto. thank you. >> thank you supervisor. supervisor milgaard. >> thank you, you actually took all of my technical talking points and i could not say it better so thank you very much for that precise overview. i would just like to add two more points. one there is a lot of misinformation about what this legislation does and does not do. one of the things that has been out there is that the planning department considered this not feasible. and that is just not true. folks are getting it mixed up with a couple of other legislation that the planning department analyzed. the other one is that it just will not be doable for folks. it will not produce any housing. our committee went through a lot of conversation and deliberations into what we eventually ended up w

that friends, is add vokation to all of those future san franciscoians who need us to do a work of planning for sensor san francisco, now today here. if sb9 is any indication to rely on the state will look like, it will not be good and i don't imagine that the votes are going to change but i would love for us to be able to override this veto. thank you. >> thank you supervisor. supervisor milgaard. >> thank you, you actually took all of my technical talking points and i could not say it better so thank you very much for that precise overview. i would just like to add two more points. one there is a lot of misinformation about what this legislation does and does not do. one of the things that has been out there is that the planning department considered this not feasible. and that is just not true. folks are getting it mixed up with a couple of other legislation that the planning department analyzed. the other one is that it just will not be doable for folks. it will not produce any housing. our committee went through a lot of conversation and deliberations into what we eventually ended up w