board of appeals, but the requirements for sitting on the boards are in the charter, and i would be happy to speak to him or whoever else who would like to have more information about those requirements. >> -- commissioner garcia: but everyone who is sitting on the sport is qualified by the charter to sit on this board? commissioner hwang: i certainly feel that way myself, and they could read the charter, but, yes. >> can i get -- commissioner garcia: can i hear from the attorney on that? >> under public comment, that would not be a good time, but, yes, i can. if you would like. commissioner garcia: it seems to me that it is left hanging in the public that there could be people who are not qualified, and i thought we could deal with that, but if we cannot, then i guess we have to put it on the agenda. >> there were some references to the building code provisions that i hoped were qualified when people have come to me to explain that the building code provisions do not relate to the board of appeals members, and i would happy to work with him on that, as well. but that has been done

the staff, but also work with the mayor and the board of supervisors. i think we have done that. i want to thank john rahaim, first, for staying. you don't have to stay and hopefully the commissioners appreciate you like i appreciate you. finally, i want to thank the city attorney's office who has given us legal support, very good, either opened or closed section. and then finally, people don't realize that linda avery has been very good to me, very good to the commission and has actually geared us, sometimes we get out of line, to bring us back and focus on what really matters. with that, in my last meeting, i want to thank my fellow commissioners. i have had a good time, even though vice president olague is not here for me to ring her neck, so thank all of you, and especially the public. [applause] president miguel: commissioner antonini? commissioner antonini: and i will way in on my sorrow in bill no longer being with us on the commission. his presence has, in fact, left san francisco a better place during the eight years he was here. and he plight,

questions were posed to the board. for commissioner kim in particular, if you want to weigh in on those, you should do that. but i think that the staff's recommendation is based on the belief that adoption of the policy, the elementary attendance areas and the question of a phase-in of the middle school feeder pattern, that needs to be done first before the transportation policy. so the committee was in support of that delay until november 8th, and also i just want to end by repeating for the public that we can make such a delay without affecting the attendance process for next year. so this will be -- we will have a new transportation policy. those questions such as are we going to have transportation to after-school programs? are we going to grandfather things? which routes might go away? which stops might go away. that will be known by the public well in advance of when they need to make their applications for school next year. i think that's the end of the report. we will continue to meet monthly. can i say the nex

this monday, the board president voted to recommend this to the full board of supervisors. on tuesday, they finally passed the reading that would amend the castro controls to allow most russia wants to be permitted with a conditional use authorization. the board also gave the city authorization to apply for a grant focusing on the gaming and storm water features for the cesar chavez redesign project. this is a grant we are pursuing. we have been extremely successful in augmenting our services. the department has applied for and received funding for more than four million dollars worth of grants. the full board herridge that the development a key stimulation -- the development legislation. we are going to study the infrastructure districts. the other resolution would apply to the committee facility districts and at this july hearing, you recommended approval. to date, only the maximum resolution as been heard at the full board. we ask for the committee and the long-term effects from the general fund. the committee should analyze the potential fiscal impact to the general fun

the president of the board, executive director, the secretary of the board, the vice president of the board, and one of the need artists of the wonderful installation, which i will talk abou last week, i have the honor speaking at a presentation in the southeast corner of my district. the blackrock arts organization was the organization behind bringing this great project to one of our spaces. they have been pioneering a very exciting new model for public arts in which they partner with neighborhoods and communities and city governments to temporarily placed city art project. the products that are facilitated by it as collaborative one have generated tremendous social but as a patient brought the process of both the installation and participation. since the first installation that they assisted with several years ago, we have now had several major installations in various major public spaces throughout the city, which have been extremely well received from every neighborhood that has been in. most of the neighborhoods have come, what is known internationally known festival, which was b

the board of appeals. much of the evidence that he put together in his brief has already been argued, discussed, and submitted. much of the rationale he has complained of has already been decided by the hearing officer as well as the board of appeals. mr. hollis during his hearing did not dispute the coverage. he simply tried to rationalize why he did not have workers' compensation coverage. it appears he is now saying he did have the coverage. i think his credibility is in question on these issues. again, these are issues that have already come up. they have already been discussed, decided, and argued. there is no new evidence. no new evidence should be submitted. the rehearing requests should be denied. >> is there any public comment on this item? commissioners, the matter is before you. commissioner fung: commissioners, i do see two forms of new information. the question is whether this new information is germane to the case. mr. hollis has presented information regarding difficulty in procuring the pri

we work directly for the board. the way that we address the audit topic and approached the question may very well differ from the mandate that the comptroller's office has. supervisor mar: thank you. supervisor maxwell: just to make sure that everybody at home -- just so that we cannot hear it come back to us. the two programs that you thought were duplicative, you took out. you discussed them and decided not to do them? >> that is correct. supervisor mar: ms. stevenson. >> there are two lines that i want to call your attention to, just for your thought process. in healthy san francisco, there is a good size valuation calling under way. she could speak to where the city is spending money on some of those same the valuation questions. if i were in your shoes, i would probably decide not to make that a priority because there are meat -- near term outcomes from the evaluation. on premium pay, questions listed on the bottom of the box, we have standard reports that we run on those things often. most of the analytical qu

members of the board? >> well, we put the stimulus money to good use here. >> i have to thank the board. if you recall, when there was first discussions regarding the economic stimulus package, you know, one of the key activities was to make sure that this money -- you know, projects identified, which we had plenty of projects that needed fudgeding. but then also the procurement process. if you recall, you made some administrative changes that helped streamline the process in terms of, one, the staff's ability to get these contracts out on the street, or the r.f.p.'s out on the street. then to get at wards back to this board and through the board of supervisors in a streamlined process. so the economic stimulus helped us through a capital stand point. but i think it helped from an administrative standpoint also. it's showing in the results in terms of how we rank nationally in terms of this funding and expenditures and things of that nature. we are in the process. we've just been informed that we will be a

in july, in conjunction with the mayor's office and the board of supervisors this board voted to restore service reductions that took place on may 8, due possible through a one-time funding plan from the metropolitan transportation commission, m.t.c., as well as the san francisco county transportation authority. so we were able to make that commitment of 50% service restoration on september 4. however, we went a little bit further and looked at our schedules and looked at opportunities to implement some efficiencies regarding our scheduling, reducing some of the standby time and some of the scheduled runs for our operators. and enhancing some of the driving time for those scheduled runs also so we looked at opportunities to really look at our schedules, using the information and optimizing those runs. with that being said, we were able to exceed the 50% and actually reach 61% this september 4 in terms of service restoration. part of this process was a signup that was conducted in august for all of our divisions and the operators. we had 1,907 transit operators participate in that signup.

board of appeals, but wanted the board of appeals, based upon the definition of the exempt categories as a grocery store, that he was able to continue to sell. now this legislation that supervisor mora has introduced is closing those exemptions and removing the exemption for large, big box and grocery stores. so it's removing any -- its intent is to remove any ability for a business to sell both pharmaceuticals and tobacco. so we do have one small business that is definitely going to be impacted by this, and so we've invited nick shoman from charlies drug store to present to you what this impact is going to be. >> thank you for your time. my family has been at this location 1101 fillmore for 23 years now. when we first opened 23 years ago, we told the community we weren't going to just be another corner store. the last thing they needed was another corner store, so we said, we're going to put in a pharmacy so the community went for that. as part of my licensing process, we got a liquor license. as part of the liquor license, we had a couple of conditions, one was the pharmacy and that

board request the board of supervisors amend the planning code to require a finding by us at the m.t.a. as the impact of transportation -- impact on transportation. particularly transit of any additional parking supply being created within the city. sometimes, of course, the creation of new parking supply in the city is pretty benign in its impact on transportation or transit. but we think that when such supply is created that it should stop here first on the way so that the sfmta can review it for any potential impacts on transportation including transit. this is something that recognizes that a lot of different agencies have their -- have a hand in transportation planning in san francisco. and we want as much as possible for the m.t.a. to be part of that discussion whenever new parking is created. especially when it's created on some kind of meaningful scale. i also have a recommendation regarding clipper. we're seeing a lot of clipper cards, of course, on the muni vehicles. and the rollout of that seems to be going at pace. we do want to call your attention to a potential issue with

my concerns about the board, are there representatives on the board. there's a substantial amount of population of youth that uses the services of muni for going to recreation but mainly to get to and from school safely. they have a voice. i don't mean a token youth. something that's equal to the population that they have in san francisco. so i would really advocate for that, supervisors, and for the chair to look into that and look into the community and young people to be on that. and also will the board support community youth training and employment through its systems throughout the city? will they also support community events with their manpower and also they are just coming out with their clout and helping us raise money. and also i think that i have known muni all my life, too. i took it to school. so the youth is needed and should be on that board. thank you. supervisor campos: thank you very much. is there any other member of the public who would like to speak? why don't we hear from commissioner oka. thank you for being here, commissioner.

the planning department and not the board -- submitted a brief to the planning department and not the board of appeals. sorry, i was out of the office until today and i did not realize this mistake was made. i have the copies that we receive, if the board would like to receive them. i believe the board's requirements are very clear. i am not sure why this happened, but i apologize that this was not recognized. commissioner garcia: at the very least, if we decide to hear it tonight, due to this error, whoever is here this was -- whoever's error this was, like to hold this over so we have a chance to look at it? president peterson: is there any proof of mailing or address on it? >> it was hand delivered to the planning department. commissioner fung: commissioners -- hold one second. commissioner fung: you cannot tell from the information there. >> let me know who you are. >> they told me they hand- delivered this. i dropped off 10 copies and an original and i left it. he told me to do that. >> it is now up to you whether you want to go forward with oral argument. the u.s. agreed we are

to the board. [applause] commissioner wynns: before we begin to take testimony on this subject, i want to ask four questions first. commissioner norton: if i am hearing you correctly, it is likely are erasing all of the feeder patterns from august 18. we may use them as a basis for redrawing feeder patterns, but we are starting with a blank slate? >> definitely, there were some things we discovered from the draft we put out and the conversation from the community. a lot of the evaluation and analysis we did, we will bring back into the conversation once it restarts. it is a positive step back and focus on the quality of schools initiative and then revisit the feeders. the draft feeder patterns were just a draft. commissioner wynns: there are still conversations up here, so could you please organize yourselves quietly? thank you. >> thank you, commissioner. we are taking that draft. it was always a draft. the only thing we knew for sure was there was something wrong with it and that we would have to

but the board's action is necessary to proceed. once the board authorizes this, if they choose to do so, we will be authorized to execute agreements with the lenders and the buyers and sellers will be fill filling out the appropriate documents. currently we have about 18 transactions that are pretty much ready to go. that is as many as we know will go forward. >> perhaps i am missing something. i will try to make it as simple as we can. what is before us today, would we ever be in a situation we would be asked to pay $250,000 for a medallion that we, the m.t.a., never realized $250,000 in revenue? >> yes. >> ok. what is that situation? >> if an individual sells their medallion, we would get a transfer fee. and the balance would go to the seller. that medallion would be a transferable medallion. if we were to remove the bundle of property rights we would have to compensate the owner. >> that is if we did not allow them to sell it. >> an individual would gain the right to sell the medallion as to us selling it directly. is that essen

we're real excited that the district worked so hard and the school board to kind of smooth a lot of the budget issues and so i think there is a sense of relief in a lot of the schools although there are some issues out there and we're very excited about what's happening around that. >> this year on the p.a.c., there are a few priority issues that i just wanted to highlight in the report that we sent. we wanted to make sure that we know a lot of wonderful things are happening in many schools but there are still some places that are broken. and we want to make sure that high standards are set across the schools in the district. i know we sound kind of like a broken record because we've said this over and over again, but it's true. we want to make sure that teachers and administrators are held accountable to make sure all the kids are getting the education they deserve. and i wanted to share a quick story with you of what happened in a conversation that i had this week. there's a woman that's a friend of mine who has spent a lot of time on her elac and she's an immigrant and she's learning

i know a lot of the board wants to get rid of me as mayor. i will not go until they make their chamber accessible to people with disabilities. that will be the final big effort we will engage in. [applause] thank you. keep up the good work. [applause] ♪ >> thank you. ms.aufas. ms. mendoza. >> here. >> ms. norton? >> here. >> ms. wynns. mr. yee. ms. kim? >> yes. ms. chan >> yes. >> ms. fan >> yes. please join me in the plenl of allegiance. please join me in the pledge of allegiance. if you'd like. [no audio] >> we usually end our meeting in memory of staff members who have been a part of our family who have passed away. so we do have many members of some of the schools here today presently, so i'm going to actually pull this up to the beginning. and so i want to ask the principal of mission high school to come up first. >> thank you very much. thank you, demigsers -- commissioners. on behalf of the mission high school community, i want to read a bit about kathleen cecil. sadly she passed away on wednesday evening after suffering a brain aneu

this authorization might be made to the board of supervisors but the board might not be appealed to any government body. with respect to the notices special restrictions, the appellant them brings up paragraph two which is what we have been discussing. the aircraft nine states in support of the decision that the minor modifications determined by the zoning administrator might be permitted if it is determined that such modifications are necessary in order to comply with the department of building inspections. this is what occurred during those few years. that gives the planning department broad discretion to order the permit holder to make modifications and to give the permit holder at the time to make those changes requested. we are hearing about historical preservation. i would like to make an argument that the three-year period was in 2008. the permit holders did not receive the deed for the recording in the assessment office until 2008 and it was immediately reported. in addition, i think we have to understand that the state law trumps everything here. historical building code states

bottom to the july 20 at board of supervisors rules committee. -- welcome to the july 20 board of supervisors will committee. the clerk of the committee is linda wong. covering the meeting for sf tv argonne gardner and kenny alevia. >> please turn off all public -- cellphone and pagers. if you wish to present documents, please provide donna -- copies for the file. >> thank you very much. supervisor campos: please call item no. 1. >> item number one,motion ordering submitted to the voters an ordinance at annovember 2, 2010 establishing the community policing policyprogram and supplanting any city the november 2, 2010 election that bans lying or -- charter amendment (second draft) and county of san 8a.105, 8a.106, repealing section agency (mta) board of directors; allocate a share of property taxtransportation fund; require the if its budget is rejected by the board of of the mta inspector general; and, eliminate formulas governing operator wages andthese matters instead to collective bargaining. supervisor campos: if there is any member of the public that would like to speak, please come forwa

22nd meeting of the board of appeals. we are joined by representatives from city departments. we are torn and by representatives from the planning department and the planning commission. at this time, and will go over them meeting guidelines. the board request that you turn off all funds and pagers so they will not disturb the proceedings. the board's rules of presentation are as follows. you each have seven minutes to present the case and to 3 minutes for rebuttal. people in the affiliated with these parties must conclude their comments within this time. . people who are not affiliated with the parties set up to three minutes each to address the board. to assist the board and accurate preparation of bennett's you are asked but not required to submit a speaker card or a business card when you come up to speak. they are available on the left side of the podium. we welcome your comments and suggestions. if you have any questions about requesting a rehearing, board rules, or hearing scheduled, please speak to me during the b

to me during the break or after the meeting or at the board office. this meeting is broadcast on sfgtv cable channel 78. now we will swell or -- swear or affirm in all those who wish to testify. please stand, raise your right hand after you have been sworn in court affirmed. do you solemnly swear or affirm that the testimony will be the truth, the whole truth, or nothing but the truth? thank you. we have one housekeeping item. item number6 regarding the property at 2514 23rd avenue has been a ministry to flee dismissed. -- administratively dismissed. is there any member of the public which is to speak on an item that is not on the agenda? please step forward. >> good afternoon. commissioner goh, i did not ask for a copy of this resume because i believe you are an asset. at the december 8th hearing, the commissioners asked you to find out if they are or are not qualified. you said you would look into it and left them no. you did not mention a word at another hearing. i did send you a request and you said that this is attorney client privilege. the pres

at the san francisco school board meeting on november 12, 2008, the school board voted on 811-12 fp 3, creation of an oversight committee. i've emailed the president of the school board a number of times asking for the names of the oversight committee. i've also looked at the school site and have not been able to find those. would you guys like to talk or would you like to listen? thank you. is there an oversight committee and if so war the names of committee? also contained, government code 50075.1 complain of the following. the members of the board, the superintendent of the district, the office of the district, are hereby requested and directed individually and collectively to provide accountability procedures pursuant to government code 50075.1 that include, but are not limited to, all of the following -- statements indicating the specific purpose of the qualified special tax, a requirement that the procedures be applied only to specific purposes identified pursuant to the subsection, creation of a separate special account into which procedures from this taxes shall be deposited a

of the rest of the board. i don't think the person should be higher than the rest of us. be that as it may, what i am interested in is how do we make the entire chamber accessible. beyond the practicality which is important, there is a symbolism that comes with making every area accessible, whether it is used by the president or an area that is used by the mayor. i think that accessibility is important, whether you have a member of the board that will benefit from that or not, i can see how the community -- that symbolism is something that is very meaningful. i am not interested in beginning a process, even after the end. i can see how maybe it would result in a happier one. i would want to make this accessible as quickly as possible. i understand the points that are being made by my colleagues. supervisor daly: just on the design process, did one design say -- let me ask this to the folks who have some building and engineering background. how do you come up with a design and not have options that we want, and

the efforts of our board members, in addition to the monthly board meetings which they reflect, there was absolutely no recognition or acknowledgement of the fact that our board, but the board of supervisors, has a huge committee structure resulting in probably double the amount of meetings on top of board meetings. there was no reflection of any of theÑi work or efforts at the committee's undertake doing the board's work as well, and we wanted to point that out to you. supervisor mar: okay, thank you. anything else on the findings? colleagues? we have a number of recommendations. i would just read off the board of supervisorsçó response. we are required to respond to a1, b1, b2,ñr b3, c1, c2, e1, f, f2. i'm wondering if we need to go one by one or just call generally for the department's responses for the specific recommendations on the reports? colleagues, is that ok? so from the recommendations, maybe i could just go through the first several. a1, b1, b2, b3, there are a number of recommendations made by the civil grand jury. i would ask if any of the department heads would lik

i am the board executive director. in the front row, we have representatives from the department of building inspection. the acting zoning director is also here representing the planning department and the planning commission. we also have with us commanding officer of the san francisco police department permit sector and a representative of the municipal transportation agency division of taxis and accessible services. i cannot see if anyone else is here. we will also have a representative of the department of public health. i will go over the meeting guidelines and the swearing in process. the board requests you turn off all phones in pages -- pager so there will not disturb the proceeding. please carry on conversations in the hallway. appellants, permit holders, and permit responders each have seven minutes to present their cases and three minutes for rebuttals. people affiliated with these parties must include the comments within that period. members who are not affiliated with the parties have up to three minutes t

>> the evening and welcome to the august 18, 2010 meeting of the san francisco board of appeals. the presiding officer is a board president peterson. joining her is vice-president commissioner goh, commissioner fung, commissioner garcia, and commissioner hwang. our board's legal assistant -- i am the executive director. tonight, we will be resent -- have the senior building inspector. it in the front row, we have someone representing the department of public and health. [unintelligible] at this time, i would like to ask you to please go over the meeting guidelines and conduct the swearing in process. >> we request you turn off all phones, beepers, and pagers. please carry on conversations in the hallway. the rules of presentation are as follows. they each have seven minutes to present their cases, and three minutes for a bottle. people affiliated with these parties must include their comments within the 7 or 3 minute periods. those not in conjunction with a party may have up to three minutes to address the board. they are asked but not required to submit a speaker card or a busin

the principle of a public board. the society has decided that we should show the respect to the minority for two reasons, this might be the truth and we might benefit, each of us might hold the minority opinion ourselves. if so, we are really protecting ourselves. the only people who know that they will ever be in the position of minority are hypocrites. if this was explained, the president might get corp. but he is not 1 operation or to show respect or promote democracy, the corporate accreditation of our society depends on the -- of the people whenever possible. the fact that you are a superficial, corrupt, inhumane, there is a tremor of instability to the rest of city hall. have a nice to vacations. >> good afternoon, everyone. i'm here if ask the president of the board to create an ordinance that says you should not approve any proposal of any change in design of this sitting and land without proper and adequate about reached including advertising, etc., as rising all parties, especially those affected by the cha

amelia said about the pension board, that the board represents the beneficiaries of the city pension. there is no question who they work for. they work for the board, and mr. amulius spoke for, representing the best interests of the retirees, the police and fire and so forth, all the people who are beneficiaries of this. but they are not representing the best interests of the taxpayers and the city of san francisco. who does speak for the taxpayers of san francisco? san francisco is a very political town, as we all know. we read as recently as this morning with the former mayor, willie brown, says, has said repeatedly about the way the elected in san francisco, don't mess with the police and fire department and the people who carried a wooden signs. the board of supervisors, unfortunately, in 2002, when they approved proposition h -- and i think one or two of you may have been on the board of supervisors at that time. it was slippery. a proposition h, and i have a copy of it, was with the many testimonials in favor of it would increase the pensions and make it possible for safety offi

board and the public. i begin by recognizing our staff for the contributions they have made to the agency for the month of august. under our transit division we have two awards that are very, very special. as you know, our civic center station is one of the busiest stations within our transit system and it serves as a transfer point for many of our riders within the san francisco bay area transit network. on two separate occasions m.t.a. employees that we are recognizing, the two m.t.a. employees that we are recognizing today responded courageously in preventing harm or life-threatening injuries to two of our patrons who had fell into our mini train tracks. our first award goings to aramedes rivera. could you please step up to the podium? come right up here. arcamedes has been with the agency for over 12 years. on june 12 he witnessed a visually impaired man fall into the tracks as his train was approaching the civic center. because of his quick reaction he was able to stop the train and avoid any harm to

submit that the board should deny the request for rehearing. vice president goh: i have a question. the july 2010 allegations or complaints of prostitution came in as a rebuttal to the appellants insisting there had not been any complaints? is that the argument? >> yes. vice president goh: is there reason, then, it cannot appear? because your office was aware of it, that it did not appear in the original briefing? >> because i did not think it was relevant and necessarily appropriate for this board to be looking at the conduct subsequent, the conduct that was the basis of the revocation. i specifically mentioned i thought the board should focus its attention on the overwhelming conduct that supported the revocation, and the findings that the board made do only reference those of the prostitution, the practitioners without the licenses, the hiding of folks without licenses in the storage rooms. those are the things referenced in the findings. vice president goh: i thought i just heard you argue we had the power to look it that subsequent to that

the mayor's office doesn't agree. the board of supervisors doesn't agree. i don't know how you can not agree with a very simple statement. five years ago, we contributed $0. even in the best case scenario, three years or four years from now, we will be contributing to the pension system as we do to operate general hospitals. i don't care what we think we might pass, i don't care if proposition b passes. all the various taxes in front of this board, if you put all of that together, you are still not going to do it without job cuts and cuts to city services. how we can not agree with that statement is beyond me. there is are a number of points that i think have been ignored. this is a report that is going to be like so many other grand jury reports. it gets thrown up on a shelf and gets -- never gets heard from again. if you can point to one thing as to why our budget continues to be in short fall, i am not pointing fingers. but the numbers don't lie. the benefits far exceed the revenue coming in. this is maybe a characterization of pension tsunami or politic

the board cannot review this project. i think mr. sanchez is correct that one option would be that if the appellate does not want to wait until the 22nd he can withdraw his permit. i think that if the board were to deny the permit that we would face the want-year bar problem. -- the one-year bar problem. the recommended process absent a withdrawal on the part of the appellant would be to continue this. otherwise, we need the board of supervisors determination on the ceqa issue. president peterson: if we deny, we cannot grant a new project? vice president goh: he has to reapply. president peterson: can we give him a permit? >> i am not sure i understand the question. president peterson: i mean on the foundation. vice president goh: we could carve out the foundation and deny all the permit but for the foundation work. >> the foundation report is part of the overall project, and ceqa applies to the project over all. it is not up to the board to decide whether that applies to the foundation work. i do not think you can per se it out that

he lost before the board of supervisors. he lost in front of the superior court. he lost in front of the court of appeal. he kealed all the way to the california supreme court and lost there. he went to the court of last resort, and that was the united states supreme court. he had the courage, the stamina and the belief to bring his case all the way to the united states supreme court, and he won. his name was yip wo. pluzz >> if there is any one thing we can learn from his example, it is that we have to stand up for what we believe, and that is what he did. of course we have an elementary school named after him in san francisco, but i think it is people like him that we really owe the legacy and the great accomplishment that we are celebrating today with three members of the board of supervisors and our president. thank you. [applause] >> thank you, jeff. he added a little substance to this day. let's continue on and get to the good stuff here. let me tell you something about our next performer. he is a 17-year-old senior at sara togethera high school. for -- four

the board of education expects the board of supervisors to include any and all possible safeguard preventing the use of noncitizens information in a manner that could jeopardize their status and apply for citizenship. if it is passed by the voters and found to be constitutional. the board of education would consider futures merchandise to allow all citizens to vote in future elections. i have no public speakers for this item. any comments -- i didn't get a card, but you can speak. >> again, dennis kelly, united educators of san francisco. we are ballot argument folks on this. we are putting money behind this, and it is really because what changes a school is the participation of the parents. if immigrant parents, and these are legal immigrant parents. people come up to us and say this is about illegal immigrants. it is not. it is people who are legally here in the country but have not yet received their citizenship papers. if we cannot allow their participation in the schools in this way, we freeze them out. we slam the door on them and tell them that we are not interested in them. we cannot

the board? director hannity? >> who are we asking, you? >> you can ask me. i will work hard. >> $32 million to rebuild seven lrv's over six years. what does anyone cost? >> it depends on how many you are buying at the time. >> like a blue light discount? >> you got it. >> what about seven new ones at one time? >> over 5 million apiece. recently a contract was awarded in minneapolis for roughly 41 vehicles and some extra, coming out to just that, 4 million vehicles. it goes to your comparison, seven vehicles were needed for repair. three of them were getting repairs under this contract. staff was left with taking a look at the four remaining vehicles, trying to figure out if it would be worth a competitive approach, plus the value that we owe the fda, as we did not advertise for a fully. staff came to the conclusion that there was no way we could put a contract out for such a small number of vehicles, changing of price and value. >> i am comforted to hear that this was all a lot of and does not s