Would have been working. Im here to fight for ase that will prevent people from reckless speeding in our streets. Thank you. [applause] thank you. That concludes todays press conference that i want to thank the members of the media were here good i think rather than taking questions i like to give all you view an opportunity to individual interviews with all of the many voices who are here and what effect are two great mayors. Why think all the community and elected officials who are here vertically think our families and just and with one thought. From numbers of the public were wondering if this is the right policy, think about your family members. Think about what you would do if you came home and one of them wasnt home. And that was something we could do to prevent it. We are here for alvin son, for julie sun, for jennys mother, and for elizabeths daughter. We have to get this done. Thank you. [applause] all right. Good afternoon everybody. Welcome to the San Francisco board of Sup
Further commissioners under the discretionary review receive calendar a request for item 17443 everson street discretionary review for continuance to april 6, 2017, no other items proposed for continuance and i have no speaker cards. Okay. Thank you any Public Comment on the items proposed for continuance seeing none, Public Comment is closed. Open up to commissioner comments proposed to continue item one as noticed and item 17 for april of. Second. Second. Thank you, commissioner on that position to continue commissioner fong commissioner koppel commissioner melgar commissioner moore and commissioner president hillis so moved, commissioners, that motion passes unanimously 5 to zero and commissioners that places us under our consent calendar all matters listed hereunder constitute a consent calendar, are considered to be routine and may be acted upon by a single roll call vote of the commission. There will be no separate discussion of these items unless a member of the commission, the
City. The question i believe is, ret row active from day one. The first date of misrepresentation and fraud the city can require reimbursement of the grant. I think existing law allows for that. That is going after people guilty of prod. From day one, correct . That is the question. You can pro pouse from day one. Fwraum the time you break the law you are libel to reemburse the city for fund they gave under false pretense. I dont think it should be asked. I think may be require today return the grant fund. Maybe be. May be meaning only if the City Attorney is successful prosecuting. You will be required to the extentrequired is may be required if you are bank rupt we may choose not to prosecute. Will be required. They still may not well get our City Attorney i think absolutely if they falsify their application and get a grant they shouldnt have gotten we will go after thaem from the the first dollar distributed. I think that is the spirit. That conclude the first round of input from th
Funds. If this is done fraujiantly then yes, of coursefelt if they dopet they will get sued by the city. The question i believe is, ret row active from day one. The first date of misrepresentation and fraud the city can require reimbursement of the grant. I think existing law allows for that. That is going after people guilty of prod. From day one, correct . That is the question. You can pro pouse from day one. Fwraum the time you break the law you are libel to reemburse the city for fund they gave under false pretense. I dont think it should be asked. I think may be require today return the grant fund. Maybe be. May be meaning only if the City Attorney is successful prosecuting. You will be required to the extentrequired is may be required if you are bank rupt we may choose not to prosecute. Will be required. They still may not well get our City Attorney i think absolutely if they falsify their application and get a grant they shouldnt have gotten we will go after thaem from the the f