Taking questions from members of the Senate Homeland security and Governmental Affairs committee taking questions from members of the Senate Homeland security and Governmental Affairs committee. [inaudible conversations] the hearing will come to order. Thank you to the inspector and his team to be here i know you had to raise your hand to identify yourself all those who did this excellent work. Thank you for all your hard work and efforts as the main subject of our hearing today the what you have received for your efforts is already deserved and to share those sentiments this is an important step to provide the answers to many questions that have festered for far too long. That the scope is narrow and most non more important questions remain unanswered. Much attention has been paid to the inclusion the hurricane investigation did have adequate predicate yesterdays order by the presiding judge is a dramatic rebuke how serious those are. And then to ask more fundamental questions at what
This is two hours. I want toen. Johnson thank all of the people who did all of this excellent work. I appreciate that. I want to thank you for your hard work and efforts preparing the report that is the main subject of our hearing. The bipartisan praise you have received is well deserved and i share the sentiments. The release of this report is an important step to answer the questions that have festered for far too long. But as the oral as this report is but as thorough as this report is, it is also narrow and many questions remain unanswered. Much attention has been paid to the reports conclusion that the crossfire hurricane investigation did have adequate predicate. But that inaccuracies and omissions in the fisa application and renewals call into question the integrity of that process. Yesterdays order by the presiding judge is a dramatic rebuke and underscores how serious a fisa warrant abuse is. I would argue that based on what the report reveals about early knowledge within the
Representatives from the City Departments that have cases before the board this even. We expect Scott Sanchez, also representing the Planning Department and valley lopez, deputy City Attorney representing the department of Public Health. The meeting guidelines are as follows. Turn off or silence phone and other Electronic Devices so they will not disturb the proceedings. Carry on conversations in the hallway. The rules of presentation are as follows. Appellants, permit holders and department responders are each given 7 minutes to present the case and 3 minutes for rebuttal. People affiliated with the parties must include the comments within the seven or three minute periods. Members of the public who are not affiliated have three minutes and no rebuttal. Please speak into the microphone. For continued cases, they get 3 minutes each with no rebuttal. To i assist in the board accurate presentation, you are asked but not required to submit a speaker card. Speaker cards are available on th
I am julie rosenberg, the boards executive director. We will be joined by representatives from the City Departments that have cases before the board this even. We expect Scott Sanchez, also representing the Planning Department and valley lopez, deputy City Attorney representing the department of Public Health. The meeting guidelines are as follows. Turn off or silence phone and other Electronic Devices so they will not disturb the proceedings. Carry on conversations in the hallway. The rules of presentation are as follows. Appellants, permit holders and department responders are each given 7 minutes to present the case and 3 minutes for rebuttal. People affiliated with the parties must include the comments within the seven or three minute periods. Members of the public who are not affiliated have three minutes and no rebuttal. Please speak into the microphone. For continued cases, they get 3 minutes each with no rebuttal. To i assist in the board accurate presentation, you are asked bu
Secondly the letter of approval is usually included by, excuse me by the permit holder. I didnt see that either. Lastly in the last page of their submission they show various sites that they attempted to look out, i presume, but they provide very Little Information there. The code says something about good faith efforts. When so many puts on the table that there was no interest. I have no idea whether that is a good faith effort, or not. I need to see these things before i make a final decision. I would be happy to respond. My understanding, the first item you brought up was our compliance with the Design Guidelines and preservation review. Did i understand that correctly . Historical review. I can respond to that. This is not within the webster street historic district. It is immediately adjacent to the district which was established in 1981. This property was not included. It is a category d building for our preservation standards. Included in the report is a ceqa exemption which is