Breakfast at st. Anthem chej in manchester, new hampshire, live over on cspan 2. You can watch online at cspan. Org or listen live on the free cspan radio app. Next, a discussion on the political situation in afghanistan, and the role that taliban and other power brokers like the u. S. , china, russia and pakistan may play in future peace arrangements. From the Brookings Institution earlier this week, this is just over an hour and a half. Welcome. Im mike owe han lon briefly playing the role of mc to say hello and welcome you before i hand it over to tom bowman. Tom is a very distinguished and accomplished npr reporter. Thrilled that he would join us. He spent time in the field in afghanistan, embedded with u. S. Combat units and other parts of the broader effort there that no of course is approaching the end of its second decade. Before i hand the baton to him ill introduce laura miller, who was the acting special representative for afghanistan and pakistan at the state department, ha
A turnout in Santa Clara County of 24. 7 they are expected 35 to 45 voter turnout for the primary. It is low, but expected because it is not a june primary. This is part of the big across the country on march 5th. They think it may be one of the reasons why the turnout may be a little low. They will count your ballot if you mailed it today and is postmarked by today and then receive it by march 12th. There hoping by that time, that voter turn out in this community should be between 35 and 45 . May be the same across the state. Lower than what they hoped for. 50 to 60 is what they were hoping for. For the presence still Primary School it will be a much higher turnout. For now, a pleasant surprise on the east side of san jose. A lot of measures on the ballot. A council race nearby in evergreen. Also, a big race for county supervisor. Of course, you have the big u. S. Senate race as well. They do not have the big congressional race of some of the other candidates. They do not have to worr
Any questions. Weve tried to be transparent with the department of dbi and planning to move this forward. I think the issue before you is actually a very, very simple issue. As i understand it, this is an appeal from the categorical exemption of seekwa, it is not a rereview of everything that went on before the board of appeals and Planning Department. There is a lot that has gone on that you are not privy to. I will address the two questions by the supervisors just recently as i go through this, but the log does not support the appellant, the law says if they have done proper analysis and there is substantial evidence that supports them, and there is no new construction or major changed condition, then theyre findings are supposed to be affirmed and thats what the law says. The facts of this case actually support irving that the planning everything that the Planning Department has said and that this is categorically exempt. This hearing is about the categorical exemption, not everythi
Any questions. Weve tried to be transparent with the department of dbi and planning to move this forward. I think the issue before you is actually a very, very simple issue. As i understand it, this is an appeal from the categorical exemption of seekwa, it is not a rereview of everything that went on before the board of appeals and Planning Department. There is a lot that has gone on that you are not privy to. I will address the two questions by the supervisors just recently as i go through this, but the log does not support the appellant, the law says if they have done proper analysis and there is substantial evidence that supports them, and there is no new construction or major changed condition, then theyre findings are supposed to be affirmed and thats what the law says. The facts of this case actually support irving that the planning everything that the Planning Department has said and that this is categorically exempt. This hearing is about the categorical exemption, not everythi
1985, you brought forth the original notice of violation . The reason is, nobody was able to use the garages. As roger was talking about the back door and photographs here prove, it was impossible to use the garages. They were built in 1997. There is no proof they were built at separate moments in time. Do you have something on the projector . I apologize. Can you show tv what is on the projector. And can you step back, please, thank you. Thank you, president breed. So basically, the people who built the garage just after the yes sold it, talked to about the permit. What year was this . Fall of 1997 approximately. And they were building them together. They were not built separately, they were built together. Yeah. And when they finished them, i asked them if they had a permit, nothing ever came through, nothing was done. And then it was clear to them, the owners themselves, it was impossible to use the garages. Like all of us in small spaces, we go on with our lives when nothing is bot