warfield was going to speak. >> mr. warfield, were you going to speak? >> peter warfield, executive director of library users, i have had a long history with the library and unfortunately i can say that the new commissioner is mistaken. the job of the minutes is not necessarily to include anything that the commissioners say. or anything that their officials might say,vy been to a lot with the library commission. let me tell you they have it on frid which they wanted to put into the library and which we and the aclu at the chronic foundation thought or it was the technology that was highly privacy funding and so they had a forum and a fixed time went for two hours, and they had all kinds of invited people. and minutes, you know what they said? at the library commission for that meeting for the presenters and their two hours of discussion? nothing. not one word. and the library commission has also discussed on again, off again, over the years how about we just have action minutes, meaning we will only discuss or put into the minutes, the actual motions and

warfield. so we learned something in this process and have adopted accordingly, so that the individuals righted to privacy will be protected should they want to participate in a public meeting that they even though they might not be aware that whatever they produce, at that public meeting is public record as we can safe guard that i privacy, thank you. >> question? >> could we take questions for miss patterson? >> yes. >> miss patterson? questions for you. >> what was the purpose of requesting the address in the first place? >> you know, there was no, i don't think that there was a lot of thought put into it, we just thought that we just might want to, i don't know, i can't say, i don't think that there was a lot of thought into it, it was just of like putting a return address on something if they did provide information and maybe we would if there was an issue we could follow up with that person. that might have been the rationale, i honestly don't think that it was thought through. >> okay. >

warfield. commissioners? >> commissioner studley? >> is there a rebuttal? >> there is a rebuttal. >> there is and i was going to say, i would like to speak to the procedural matter if you want to take the rebuttal first that is fine >> just quickly. >> i think that mr. warfield makes a good point and it appears to me that the sunshine referal does frame the case as the library users association against the san francisco arts commission. to the extent that does carry consequences i would be interested to hear from the staff whether there is why it is different from the way that it came from us. we may want to consider sending it back to track the task force referal. >> at the bottom of it, the enclosure it says peter warfield, kate patterson respondent. >> could you tell us, which document? >> the referal letter from the task force that says march 7, 2013. >> are you referring to the cclisting? >> correct, because this letter is to us. and the task force is ccing what presumably the people who a

warfield. and you know, she did so, in consultation with myself and the director of the public art program and the director at the time, cd and so the conversations were basically, we all looked at each other and decided to conduct the city attorney on guidance on what to do with the private information and i would say that the deciding factor was the advice of the city attorney on what to do with the private information rather than it being a decision made by the dekter specifically or the director of the public art program specifically. we just acted on the advice of the city attorney. and so, i did fail to respond to the order of determination in a timely fashion. so that is mea copa and so does that... >> does the commission know about it, were you reporting on a... >> yeah. >> on a basis of where you were with it. >> yeah, i mean, it was not that complex, i think that there were some e-mails that went back and forth about what to do and i think that there was a request made about the direc

warfield's account about what happened on december 20th? >> okay. >> so, i have miss rich yes's response indicating that we had prepared speaker cards for him to pick up and in the e-mail response she does not site the california constitution article 1 section one. however. in her response to the sunshine task force she does say that essentially that she did explain that there were no speaker cards for any of the other meetings and to protect the individual's right of privacy, so she did verbally explain it to him which is consistent with what he has put in his e-mail. and yeah. so... >> okay. >> does that help? >> that does not answer my question. but thank you. >> so, we are looking at what 67-26? >> and 67.34? no? eyes. >> yes. >> agree with with that >> shall we. >> if you read 67.26 specifically, clearly technically they did not comply with what was required. that is when you make them redact it and it says that you have to note it and it gives your justification. and 67.27, says what or how is the justification must be spelled out. ne

croix goes on and on in the letter about the complainant was peter warfield and then he goes on and defines, and so he talks about on page 2 of the letter, they referred it as a willful violation under section 67 hour miss patterson is not a elected official and will be held under chapter two. if you look at the order of determination and all of the documents, over and over and over again, mr. st. croix has overlooked the fact that it was the library users association against the arts commission which is headed by a department head who out to be responsible if not maybe the city attorney or the mayor. >> thank you you will have additional time to speak on this. >> i would prefer not to have this go forward, thank you. >> any additional public comment at this time we are going to look at violations of the sunshine ordinance, and the first one, mr. st. croix? >> okay. >> inform us on this? >> you have the staff memo with the details before you. neither nigh of the complainant will be here, they can resolve the case without them. as this has been continued a few times. if you prefer not to you

of companies moving in to markets where you have twitter two blocks up, spotify moving into the warfield just announced. >> reporter: $5 billion worth of rental units about 8,000 of them. >> so this is a junior one bedroom. >> reporter: trinity has a been that doesn't seem ready to open in five weeks but promises a july 1 move-in. 420 apartments on mission street and 8th. >> bedroom can be closed off with the sliding panel. >> reporter: 650 square feet upwards of $3,000 a month. san francisco law forces such buildings to provide affordable apartments and there are 65 of them a third of the normal rent. 65 places that received 3500 applications. it's hard to tamp down enthusiasm and there seems to be no stop to it right now. so we're adding all this housing but couldn't that be a bubble? and after a bubble the inevitable burst? should we be worried about that? >> i heard that the 2 million people want to move here, 8,000 apartments doesn't seem like very many. >> reporter: kevin wallace has owned wallace remodeling for 40 years. >> i think it's about time they built some more units becaus

the former king edward viii married american divorcee wallis warfield simpson in france.is daughter elizabeth still reigns over britain. the relationship between edward and wallis was highlighted in the film "the king's speech." >>> one of the most beloved characters in television history. the 90-year-old actress died friday. millions of americans will remember her as edith bunker on cbs's "all in the family." ♪ on the hit parade ♪ >> reporter: it has been 42 years since audiences first heard jean stapleton's shrill voice alongside carroll o'connor's archie bunker. using the social turbulence as a back backdrop, the show made history with its candid portrayal of american life. rob reiner co-starred as the left-leaning son-in-law. >> as the women's movement grew and gained strength, she gained strength. and we saw her assert herself more and more as the series progressed. and i think that was what was great about the show. it was an evolving show. it was a real family in a real situation, and it wasn't stagnant, you know. we grew with the times. >> archie for your informat