i would have to check. you would then modify the order of abatement to allow the six months to complete the work, is that when you are saying? >> yes. >> if it came to you within six months, the question would be then, could you re-modify it? i think you can but i'm not positive. i would want to take some time to get that answer. >> given the fact that the goal is to do this wall, i would say a six month continuance for us to come back -- neither the wong's or my intentions client is to have the wall not being done. it is in the intention of both parties. you have to understand we are doing this as fast as possible. our hands are tied because of the process, arbitration, because of what is going on there. i would plead that we did the six months continuance. we would give you a progress reports in the meanwhile so you know where we are going with this, and then come back. >> i might give maybe a two months continuance. maybe then we would have more information in order to actually make a final decision. rig

bart line we would align to. this is an area that has three people so the line would move west from bayshore to the freeway, between 280 and depaul to confirm to the bike district. we're going to highlight this right now. >> i'm going to put the bart district layer up as well so i'm sure to highlight the correct area. so the highlighted area represents three people and this population is moving from nine to ten. the deviation of district 10 would become negative 0.78 pirs% and district 9, 4.8%. >> district 9 becomes 4.8, is that correct? >> yes. >> from the current 4.81. ok. d-10 would become with this change negative .87. d-9 would become 4.80 by moving this population of three. any questions? mr. alanso? >> sure. >> mr. leigh? >> yes. >> miss melara? >> yes. >> miss lam? >> yes. >> miss mondejar? >> yes. >> miss pilpel? >> yes. >> mr. schreiber? >> yes. miss tidwell? >> yes. >> please make the change. >> we have one more population move that we wanted to bring to you. this one is between the district seven and

would be about $68 million. in sum, this ordinance would bolster the consensus reached through the housing trust fund. the potential loss in revenue is absorbed by the housing trust fund, and the potential gain is significant. for these reasons, the department recommends that you recommend approval to the board of supervisors. i also wanted to add that since the public has heard our report, it has come to our attention that two amendments should be made. two sections mention that the threshold for exclusionary requirement is five or more units. therefore, we would recommend modifying these two sections to be consistent with this proposed ordinance. i would like also to mention that there was a typo in the resolution that mentioned that the ordinance would be effective as of january 1, 2012. that should be as of january 1, 2013. lastly, i would like to introduce down from the mayor's office and board of supervisors who are here and have some comments about this ordinance. first, the director of the mayor's office

president hwang: and the supplemental permit would be appealable? >> that would be correct. them as would be the building permit. >> correct. vice president fung: before you leave, or my conditions clear to you? >> yes, it was, building permits required, keys be provided to all units within both buildings by the applicant, and any adjustments required to be made on the gate would be needing additional permits as appropriate to satisfy the access. vice president fung: right. president hwang: i have a friendly amendment to the motion, and its conditions would be pending the perfecting of the permit and applying for and getting them issued, etc., pending the hours of the gate to be open from 7:30 until 6:00 p.m., rather than 8:00 until 4:00 p.m., and that must be complied with. it is currently eight until 5:00. i like to extend the hours. vice president fung: until the permit is issued. president hwang: correct. vice president fung: i accept that. >> until the permits are final? vice president fung: yes. everybody has their options for further appeal. >> ok, so there are i thin

if you would see the need f

that would be interested -- i would be interested in seeing. and whether you think which way that cuts for you. >> what do you mean by the issue raised in mazzola? >> in the muzzle case, a it does adopt -- mazzola case, ithe charter adopts the stand that was in the mazzola case that leads to the first prong. i would like briefing on which we that would cut. >> the mayor does not necessarily agree with you. the mazzola case cites a number of legal authorities. the charter language comes from one of the authorities. it is not a holding in mazzola. >> that is the issue i am struggling with and that is why would like briefing on is what i am saying. >> i would have -- address mazzola and how it impacts option 1 or option two. >> anything else? 15 pages? >> there are additional issues and we have never had an opportunity to brief our understanding of the elements of the case. even if regardless of whether you split into option 1 or option to, there are elements within a or b that i would brief and put before the commission. it is not clear with the

i would have to check. you would then modify the order of abatement to allow the six months to complete the work, is that when you are saying? >> yes. >> if it came to you within six months, the question would be then, could you re-modify it? i think you can but i'm not positive. i would want to take some time to get that answer. >> given the fact that the goal is to do this wall, i would say a six month continuance for us to come back -- neither the

i would beg her to do it again, she would say, no, go to bed, now. i grew up listening to dunbar who wrote in dialect, little brown baby. he wrote beautiful things in standard english. an angel robed in spotless white. the spirit was gone, men saw the blush and called it [inaudible]. i fell in love with that beautiful black angel. i could visualize it the way my mother would resite it. i know why the cage bird sings, it would be free. it is not a carol of joy or pray upward to heaven he fling. i know why the cage bird sings. mia angelou knew of it. i like dunbar, my grandfather used words the way he described him. good morning mr. james, how are you feeling this morning. he would say i am stepping, but not high. isn't that wonderful? okay. okay. i go play down by the creek. he would say yes, tkarlg, but be particular. that meant be careful because i love you and don't want anything to happen to you. it was coded in the be protected. he often said be careful now. that meant one thing, be particular, there was stuff down by the creek and he wanted me t

i would except three months. good >> with the intent -- and with the intent be to take formal action in the three month time frame -- would the intent be to take formal action in the three month time frame? i could see this dragging on. >> i would be prepared to take action at the conclusion of that period. but i think of some point the notice of violation will take up with the permit and force us to make a decision. >> if it is under the jurisdiction of the board permit, i would say the department could probably hold the enforcement action, but eventually expanding the permit would not last, and when if you would up hold a permit, we could not use that, but while it is under jurisdiction of the board, i would say the director would not want to go ahead with enforcements, so we do have some time. >> thanks. >> i do not think it would be the intent of this board to put a permit holder in jeopardy with the notice of violation and possible penalties, and because he is trying to accomplish something, so that is rathe

cut that would be up to you to decide -- >> that would be up to you to decide. i do not know if there is anyone else. supervisor campos: as part of accpeting, lafco staff can work with the chair? is that ok? one of the things we should also notes, there may be additional work that is done and additional information provided. , as we have any other comments or thoughts, can we take that motion without objection? i want to thank mr. fried for the workin. the work continues. i also want to thank mr. hill. and the other speakers. the last time we did a report on something, we had a report on the issue of garbage collection. that was also an ongoing effort. we put out a report and there was additional information provided. the hope here is that lafco can add to the ongoing discussion. i think it is important to get something out there with the understanding that it is not the end of the analysis. if you could please call item number 5. >> item #5 is public comment. supervisor campos: this is an opportunity for any member of the public to speak on any item that is not

it would bring the population of district 8 to 3.22%. deviation for district 8 would be 3.22%. deviation for district 7 would be -0.48%. population, 135. >> i would like to see the current boundaries. thank you. >> may i point out that the map the sunnyside neighbors association provided us is very helpful. the neighbors association and the sunnyside neighbors association. if you look at that map, the ones north orf naples is not part of the sunnyside neighborhood. this is between the congo. i would look at the population and nancy if we could maintain the glen park boundaries. >> and the discussion on this block? >> it is arguable how it affects glen park. to the extent this moves population from 8 to 7. 7 to 8, then it is going the wrong direction. i am not with this. >> any other discussion? mr. shriver. commissioner schreiber: it moves population from 7 to 8 to keep the population together. i would be interested to know the population of the section of the glen park neighborhood that is not currently on our map. >> any other discussion on this block that is highlighted. let

i thought it would be great to have a presentation. since it involves so much entertainment it would be good to hear what they have in mind for that. with more information coming out about how to better modify sound, i was wondering if there was any way we could talk about preserving an outdoor patio is and making sound, talk about sound on outdoor patios. even if there are ways to return it without destroying the neighbors since we do live in a city that has patio's -- patios. i am wondering if we cannot revisit some of that or at least hear about mitigation. the sisters of perpetual indulgence run the pink saturday, and they are and not for profit who have been running a major, major event. i know for fact they often feel that they cannot be heard and a now we do offer sound permits but i think it would -- i know we do offer sound permits but i think it would be interesting hearing the issues they have running this event. to see if there is not some way we can direct them to get better responses from the city. it is an outdoor event

the way they would be moved is you would constructed new windows first and you would lead the old ones there. once the new ones were finished, you would close the old one off. that could be done without any serious interruption. that is generally what i'm thinking but there are other commissioners who may have some ideas. in terms of their earlier, we are fairly clear on that if i'm not mistaken. it would continue to a certain degree. it would step down and it would be three floors for part of the distance and then be one floor at the rear. can you describe that to mention that you're talking about? >> thank you, commissioner. it would be exactly as shown on the plans before you without modification that we had proposed earlier. the existing -- is 17 feet high. we are going to go one story here, the second floor. and it would set this as the top floor. >> i think you have two different setbacks. >> this is on the second floor. it hasn't 8 foot extension beyond word makes the corner. then, there would be a one floor 10 foot section that would let a lot of light back into that building.

would be ok. well, help didn't get a single vote from democrats or republicans. so it's not my fault that it didn't pass. he wasn't supported by his own party. say with the jobs bill. as i've listened to the president come out and talk, he's talked more about the -- than anything else. i understand you said and i take it at your word that his tax bill is coming to the house. i assume we will have his total language and you said it will generate somewhere in the range of $850 billion over 10 years. >> yes. >> we spend approximately $ -- the rule generated $47 million, so the last 18 months i've listened to my president propose corporate jet tax increases and a buffett rule if funds for 10 or 11 hours. the bottom line is this, the tax code we're living under today generated $2.567 trillion in 2007. it generates less than that today, part of it is global recession, but part of it with due respect to the president, part of it is the class warfare that he is perpetuating, and with due respect, there's

what would -- what were they and how would the effect the economy? >> one is current law, and one as current policy. it looked at what congress has done in the past, and typically they have extended the bush era tax cuts. they have avoided this year -- severe drop in medicare payments that was scheduled to take effect, and they catch the alternative minimum tax. otherwise this tax would bite into the middle class. we would seek tepid one place 7% growth. the deficit will continue on are really unsustainable path. we would be at a trillion dollar deficit next year. over 10 years, 10 trillion dollars in deficits compared to the current law, about three trillion. >> here is the language, it will lead to economic conditions in 2013. we uncover this of it before. is that out of the norm for press conferences? >> it is this exact language that they do not declare, more of an agency decision. sometimes they have to be two quarters of consecutive negative growth, and perhaps this recession would take place with one very deep quarter. basically he is saying i

i th would be something that i certainly would find useful. and i think it is something that actually would provide some -- a higher level of certainty any way as we are moving forward so that developers also know how the exceptions would be applied. supervisor kim: we do have jeff buckley here as well from the mayor's office, as well as a member of the mayor's office of housing. >> just in terms of the 8 washington project, one of the things that a project in which the city has a proprietary interest is also exempt from the cap. in that case, the port property went towards the 8 washington so they would have been exempt. >> so 8 washington would definitely exempt -- and definitely be exempt? >> yes. supervisor campos: ok, that is a good thing to know. i want to ask about one of the planning exemptions, the 40 acre plan area, is there a possibility going forward that you could have a planning area that is smaller than 40 acres? how does that work? >> it certainly is possible. i do not think the plan department is under any limitation in terms

and we also discussed the invitation, that we would submit our own lessons learned and they would be characterized by each individual members, lessons learned and recommendations should they choose to share them in the report. so the last separate handout, with the language member tidwell submitted and how we didn't get but we will try to get now, the recommendations or lessons learned that three of us contributed. so if there is anyone who else has contributed or has lightning now that doesn't appear here, aside from member tidwell, then it would be good to -- to clarify that. >> is this on -- what's the topic? >> well t. has to do with some of the lessons learned, individual members. because my recollection of our understanding was that it was not against the rules or against any policy to -- for anybody to write whatever they wanted to write and attach it. the question i thought was that we never really voted that we would do it or not do it. and my concerns is that because -- for me, i didn't understand that we would all submit something separately. i didn't write anything. and t

commissioner sugaya: i would like to welcome mr. hillis. we have had some previous encounters and i have always found him to be bright and generous and will serve the community very well. so welcome. welcome to the other two commissioners to have been reappointed. >> commissioner hillis was sworn in this morning and is legally able to sit and take action today. commissioner wu: i believe for the record i will not be at the swearing in ceremony. i also want to congratulate commissioner antonini and commissioner hillis. i got to have lunch with him and it was very nice. this friday is the 35th anniversary of the i hotel. 35 years ago, that was the night of the eviction and there will be a program starting at 6:00 tomorrow and it will go until 2:00 mimicking what happened that night when activists and tenants' rights, folks are from the city and region. that will go until 2:00 when there will be a march and a ceremony. commissioner sugaya: there is an excellent novel by a japanese professor which -- it is a novel, not a historical account, but

would. that is why i urge we add this phrase. >> it is on the screens for those of you waiting for it. you see the suggested amendment. >> moved and seconded. >> i will say, i understand wehre thhere the delegate is cog from. i don't see where this is an appropriate spot. this should be a discussion we had in the previous discussion. i think it's in the long section. i urge a vote "no.' >> i" >> my feeling is we talk about u.n. conventions in a group. and it seems to me there would be controlling influence over our managed fisheries. >> mrs. chairman. phyllis schafly. this is one of the busybody u.n. organizations that wants to control everyting in the sea. 8 10ths of the earth's surface. their commissions like to rule against us. it belongs in this section, talking about american sovereignty. you shouldn't let the u.n. treaties interfere with that. >> from the virgin islands? >> i totally agree with the mover and phyllis schafy. we have water our local fisherman cannot fish due to various r

for me, it would be more appropriate rec and park would be more involved and i would like to see that conversation take place. >> thank you. i think we had some ongoing conversations with fed -- with the tjpa. it is something that very important to us as well and we would ask that day and the successor redevelopment agency as it continues to serve and a coordinating role that we be at table for those discussions as they proceed. >> if i can add to that, the tjpa is going to issue an rp ane department to respond to that. >> thank you. i do think the identification of park opportunities -- i'm not sure if mission square is a park opportunity, but that should be clarified -- it's just an informational hearing. i apologize. to clarify what that means to the department and what role the department would be playing, and my short tenure of the commission, i have learned nothing happens quickly and if there is an intention to make it part of the department parks, that should be clarified as it comes back to us. regarding the shadows, this is he going to be a much longer conversation that i wo

the amendments i would like to propose to the director posey thoughtful proposal, i would like to bring the economics of this in line with the pilot program which wd approve an economic model. and when we need to be mindful for -- mindful of. amending the provisions related to the amount of money going to existing medallion holders who turn in their medallions. this would not affect people down the road who will sell medallions or people who have already bought medallions. this is this transition where people would turn in medallions. there is no obligation for them to do so. the proposal has it with them getting $150,000 and the mta getting $150,000. i propose we amend it to the medallion holder getting two- thirds of the sale price subject to a cap of $200,000. we know that the $200,000 figure has proven a valuable incentive for people to do this under the pilot program and brings the number in line with the pilot program. if we do that with the cap it will stay. the remainder of the money would go to the mta as previously proposed. >> let's get a second on that one. is there a second

i would like you to restate years. >> the only thing that would change about my amendment is changing the time frame from up to 10 minutes to up to 20 minutes. the rest would remain the same. >> that is only pertaining to the ethics information, correct? >> just to be clear, that is only pertaining to the ethics commission. both the mayor and the sheriff would continue to have their opportunity to make presentations up to 20 minutes. >> this is a question to our counsel. we are talking about 20 minutes versus 10 minutes. that could be extended. what would they be saying if bay are not going to spend a ton of time arguing? >> i do not know who would be making the presentation. i would anticipate that if the ethics commission made findings and they had written explanations as to why they found that and they transmitted that to you, if you asked a represent-representative of the ethics committee, what is really meant by x, this is the way they want to transmit their findings to you, the representative might say we cannot really tell you anything more about that. that doesn't mean there a

that they would be able to articulate that there written document would not reflect. their written document would not necessarily reflect. i would be interesting to -- interested to hear from the ethics commission. >> i raised this issue because, as i noted, we have a process. what we are dealing with is something that is very unique. i don't know that the same process applies. maybe this is a question for our

but i would like to ask if anyone would like to approve this as worded. taiex i would move to approve. >> do we have a second? >> i second. >> any objections? seeing none, the motion is approved as is. >> that motion passes, 5-0. >> next item. >> item 7, directors report, update and report on the office of small business and small business center, updates on the apartment programs, update on legislative matters, and make an announcement regarding small business activities. >> good evening, commissioners. we have had a busy couple weeks. good i am sure you are aware of the fire that took place on ocean avenue last week, and a total of nine businesses have been affected. three businesses were housed in the building where the fire started, and that building needs to be demolished, so they will need to be relocated. since the mayor launched the initiative, he is asking all the city departments and would assist in this matter to come together and work out plans to help the property owners ease the burden of having experienced due to the fire. jane has gone out

>> where you would put it would be, i talked to john arnts while we're on the subject and he agreed to be the archivist of all of the files. they will be there in a month. probably i have everything turned over to them. so some reference to the department of elections. >> you got that? >> yes. very good. miss mondejar and -- i'm sorry, mr. pilpel. >> i would just like to go back to the individual submissions. that we -- i would just like the chair to ask members to vote because she submitted comments, i think and i remember seeing that. >> i did submit but i -- i think it was one of my was due politic tive of the community outreach component and the other one was just a process point about responding to public comment during meetings. >> i think i remember seeing it. and i think we were copied that. thank you. >> so i don't have a particular concern oz to whether i need to include for purposes of moving quicker, sooner rather. >> thank you. anyone else? mr. leigh? >> so just a couple of other things. first of all, member alanso's asking me a question which i think is a good question of

it would be cut by about $3 billion. what would that mean for dod? that is a good question to ask the department. i suspect if sequestration actually happened, i think they would come back to congress very quickly with a reprogramming request to restore the funding. they would have to take that $3 billion from somewhere else in the budget or congress would have to appropriated separately. there are a lot of ways that could happen. i do not know how that would play out exactly. the defense held program is subject to sequestration. >> -- the defense health program is subject to sequestration. >> is there an annual cap? >> there is a section in the law that gives them a one time reprogramming request. they could come back with a $56 billion reprogramming request and move all that money around. it still requires congress to approve it, though. dod cannot do it on their own. the president cannot do it on his own. >> it does not go through all of congress? >> i need to go back to the law. i can get back to one that. >> that would be the way to resolve the

i would hope that our share of would comply with the letter of the law and would follow the instructionsof the court to ensure that the weapons were turned over to police. but i do not think that, whether the guns were with the sheriff or with the police could amount to something of official misconduct. there were not in the share of's custody and control so i do not think that the fact that the sheriff's office had the guns rather than the police department can support a charge of official misconduct. >> i would agree with that. i think the testimony was inconclusive and actually pretty confusing on that point. there was some testimony about whether he was supposed to turn it over to his attorneys and who was present when that conversation -- when that conversation took place. at the end of the day, the attorneys are correct that the mayor testified that he did not think that, in and of itself, could sustain a charge of official misconduct. >> i agree with your result and i also agree with your comment about a way of acting that i find it uncomfortable. i had not thought about childish,

the dynamics were you would be confronted with the resisting subjects, if you would resort to a taser in that situation whether mental help was an issue or not. i would ask you to consider this pilot program. >> thank you. >> how long have you served in the police department? >> 22 years. for years with the sheriff's department. >> you have been involved in risk-management? and the aftereffects? >> yes. >> it is no easy task. the officers had asked you for another tool. have they come to you and ask for another tool before using their firearms? >> yes. the officers have mentioned at the scene of a shooting, i wish i had a taser or an option other than lethal force. >> you do not take this lightly. you are a paper way from your ph.d. in psychology from stanford? >> yes. >> thank you for your presentation. >> i asked a number of questions in terms of how we would structure a policy in san francisco. one of the issues that i had a concern about was whether or not a taser is a less lethal option which would reduce the number of fatal officer-involved shootings, which would certainly be a

what i would say is this. i think whoever is nominated for president should serve at least one year on the board so they have some seasoning. that way -- i see new commissioners when they come in. they're good people, but there is a learning curve to this. i would say that whoever wants to be president, they have to least serve one-year on the board because -- before they're eligible for that position. that is all. >> thank you. all right. item number six. hearing and possible action regarding applications for permits under the jurisdiction of the entertainment commission. we do have the consent calendar. that involves two items. 1865 post street. limited live performance. another limited live performance at cava 22. is anyone in the audience objecting to those two permits? it is usually our procedure to just approve them with the call of the chair. we allow people that are here in support of that to come forward and speak. we would like to know ahead of time if there's anybody objecting. c. non -- seeing none

i would like to thank mr. fried for his awesome work on this. i would ask that the lafco give mr. fried's some time to continue to do his work. supervisor campos: thank you. any other member of the public who would like to speak on this? public comment is closed. colleagues, do we have any questions? i am wondering if you can respond to some of the points that were made in terms of adding more work to this report, whether or not he is think that is necessary. i'm wondering if you have any thoughts. >> i will start off with mr.

debate itself would be moved by a minimum of 3 feet -- the gate itself would be moved back 3 feet. they would maintain the location but shifted back 3 feet. >> what do we do pending in getting the thing in compliance? take it down altogether? get it in place? >> i think the board is faced with a slightly different question as to the appropriateness of the gate, because the department of public works and building inspection recognizes there is an additional issue as it relates to a accessibility that needs to be adjusted, and if we know about it today, we go back to the applicant, saying this adjustment needs to be made. you need to make provisions moving forward. the question is the appropriateness rather than the design, because we can require the applicant to adjust to the design to satisfy requirements. >> can i ask the clarification question? there is a permit issued for your requirement, which sounds separate from needing to go to the building to get

i would expect that would happen here as well. commissioner antonini: i agree with the supervisors about making sure what is seen through the windows is attractive. also, i think the visibility brings good features in, especially after dark. it is a lighted area. activity is there. you look out as well as look in. it is a good security measure. i think it can make a more inviting environment. in terms of form and the retail along eighth street -- along haight street, this is lower haight. i am not familiar with many of them. there would not be a huge concentration. there was a gap, which may not be there anymore. i do not remember a lot. we could get a staff report to show what is there, even if it is almost nothing. it is certainly not a factor in this case. commissioner sugaya: we have talked about this about this before. the majority of stuff that goes on in the stores is the selling a product. increasingly now food and drinks and that sort of thing. walgreen's in my neighborhood has bananas and apples. you might as well not go

say they would give them a letter, but ethics would not enforce it, so then they would tell them that they had better go to court. they would not give it to you until after the election. >> ok, commissioners. larry. i just want to set and the notion that there should be a timeline when these things should go off on a public access database. what i was looking at form 700 filed by officials for those i was doing a report on, i would find that weeks would go by after the deadline, and they would not be available, so i began calling people who i knew were in elective office, and i would ask them why they had not file the form, and they said that they did file, and they had a date, and they would come back to epics, who said they had a large stack and that they had not gotten from them. there needs to be a timeline. i do not know if immediate still works, because so far they are still paper, but if you go to what was suggested about them being electronic, there is no reason they should not be available in 10 days. so i urge you to adopt a standard pork -- for performance about when these

what exactly would it mean?itish soldiers or police moving into the embassy and extracting julian assange? >> it is not clear exactly what it would mean. it would be an unprecedented action if the u.k. were to take that action. i suspect if they were to withdraw the status of the british embassy, i know recently the british government has distanced themselves from that statement, but if they would do that, it would be a huge step. after that, police [unintelligible] and take julian assange under arrest. [unintelligible] >> we are losing your a little bit, jennifer. >> at this stage, the british government has taken a massive step back from that threat to into the embassy. they would have to withdraw the status before they could do so. that an of itself would be a huge step. i don't think that will happen. >> jennifer robinson, ecuador's foreign minister has said that his country sought assurances from sweden and the united states that julian assange would not be extradited from sweden to the united states before

i do not know that we would require, that the law would require him to encourage witnesses to come forward against himself in the criminal process where he is the defendant. i think that would be an awkward president to set. -- precedent to set. >> i agree that it is a higher bar and that an individual has a right to mount a defense. that said, this element was not explored as early as some others. -- as thoroughly as some others. what i'm wondering is how much more aggressive public campaign of criticism was doing so at the direction of the indication of the "i cannot do it, but would you do it" guidance of the sheriff. it was not a pretty picture, but it has led the public to see this in a much more political and aggressive light. then it would have been had commentary about witnesses not taken place. the press has its own attraction to certain stories that you cannot lay at the feet of any of the participants either. but i do not see the steps to the -- to be able to support it rising to the level of either a failure to perform a duty and joined on the sheriff or falling beneath the sta

would a taser have made a difference? i honestly believe in that instance as with other instances, having a less lethal option would have made a difference. in canvassing all the other police departments, they all have tasers. memphis, tenn., as of 2011, has gone to tasers. i believe out of respect for the commission to make policy for the police department, that at least the discussion should be made. i referenced the discussion of the police commission meeting, but out of respect for the public, and having suffered 10 homicides in june, and knowing this would be a heavily debated topic, i did not want to call it a taser, to add to that discussion. however it goes, i will respect of discussion, community input, however it goes, but i think it would be irresponsible for me to not ask for something that would allow the officers something short of using the taser. i volunteered to be tased and suffered no lasting effects. there was no desire to do anything less than promote a public conversation with regard to the issue, be

and they would still have some input about when they would improve this construction? >> this commission would have the review approval of those designs. the unique aspects of this district, is that each of these buildings is designated, so the borders of the district are just the perimeter of the footprint of each building. as a new building requires the entitlement, we will have this in your packet at this time. >> they will have a comment on those buildings. my thought is that they could be as contextual as possible. to bring in some continuous nature. >> that is the intention. all of these are exemplary buildings that were identified as part of the market plan. >> thank you. commissioner moore: i thank you for your update. the owner -- >> there is no intent at this time but they're trying to provide life safety upgrades for the assembly use. there was discussion about the bank teller counter. the planning staff has come up with a compromise to keep portions of that so that they can provide a large assembly space, and they felt that this was a very reasonable compro

i would reconsider. if it is possible, i certainly would like to hear from him directly. >> i like that idea. any other agenda items for future meetings? >> i meant to say this earlier. in the various draft minutes in the various draft minutes related to the special meetings

i would be happy to come back at that time. i hope everybody as well and i welcome the new commissioners since i have been here to the commission. >> the next item on the agenda is consideration of amendments to cfro. mr. st. croix, would you like to introduce this matter. >> cfro? >> yes. >> these are amendments to section 1.112. there is a staff memo that i would be happy to answer any questions. >> can you introduce yourself for the record and can you introduce the issue and summarize it. >> steven massey, i'm the information technology officer. under state law, local committees are required to file campaign finance statements with the ethics commission and they're required to use state paper forms. committees are required to file two paper copies of every statement and then state law requires state committees to file with the secretary of state to file electronic copies of the statements in addition to paper forms, but state law does not require electronic copies of statements for local committees. cfro section 1.112 requir

so i would like to know what is the department's position in terms of what would have to change? >> we express these concerns to your aide a week ago, and these were the sentiments from the department. i checked in with the chief, and he asked me to reiterate these concerns. supervisor wiener: i think the concern that was expressed was about businesses that were getting cash over the counter -- in other words, somebody walks in and says here is a jacket, give me cash for it, as opposed to people who are purchasing items through the stream of commerce. that was my recollection. >> i am not sure what your question is. supervisor wiener: that was the concern -- that was a concern that the department had expressed. but today, i am not hearing any kind of specific thing other than we have a concern about this and are willing to work with you. my question is, what is the department, in terms of what changes would have to happen, what is the department saying? >> the meeting we had last week, i interested the concerns to be in the fees. we're willing to work on the fees. we recently rai