Hes on the show today. And its jam packed. Varney company starts right now. First, of course, we take a look at the dow futures, up there a little bit. Earnings began last night, not too great. Alcoa was something of a dud. Were in the shadow of 18,000, what will it take to get there . Well talk about it, the opening bell is 9 30. The alcoa shares i talked about are lower after reporting a big bottom line, but top line miss wall street no longer accepts and thats why the stock is under pressure now. Oil, around that 40 a barrel number. And youve got a big opec number with russia. We could have big news there. Donald trump taking on Hillary Clinton, roll tape. Hillary clinton does not have the judgment to be president. Her decisions, they have been so baden a theyve been so wrong, i so look forward to running against, getting rid of these guys, and running against hillary. Her whole life has been a big fat beautiful lie. Lets see how she does, we dont want to waste a lot of time, a lot
Out. Im looking the fee of the appellants brief it says the notice it hereby given that your client intends to apply for the permit to demolish or audits permanently remove this unit from houshgs use is that the intent of your client to apply for that permit. To permanently remove. But to apply for the permit. Yes. Maybe a little bit classification that language is for per verbatim from the section. Okay. And its placed in there. Theres some legal agreement whether or not in some circumstances a permit is necessary to remove a unit period, however, if a permanent is do required then to get the necessary permits removing the unit pursuant to a plumbing unit and its our good faith intent to remove this from the housing use its appropriated under the circumstances so its your clients position if theres a debate to the Planning Department its required is it your appellants position not required. Its my position now, its not determined given the testimony given here today particularly by th
Tenant if youre intending to demolish but youre taking it out of use giving notice to the tenant thats coming it also cards with that a possibly statutory fine of 2,500 to the Property Owner so in the caution its been our policy to issue those to protect your client from the possible fine. Much has been made about the intent of that permit but the real intent in this circumstances is the intent to exercise our rights under the Administration Code 379810 which allows us to permanently rove a unit from the house use as well as we have the good faith intent and comply with the statutory provision of money help. Whether or not a stove is pulled out pursuant to a plumbing permit and the building that unit is reconfigured to a planning permit or either way the landlord has to have the unit empty the removal of that unit renders it unhabitualable. So i guess my final point is whichever procedure it determined the actual intent of my client is to remove that unit from housing use question why
And its our good faith intent to remove this from the housing use its appropriated under the circumstances so its your clients position if theres a debate to the Planning Department its required is it your appellants position not required. Its my position now, its not determined given the testimony given here today particularly by the representatives of the city its not been determined whether or not a further permit is needed if the city says yes, thats exactly what well do. Okay. Thank you thank you. Anything further from the department. Mr. Duffy ill say the attorney wanted to hear from the city a permit will be required ill say yes, a Building Permit is required we see the documents where the area has been remodeled and i dont see any permits so weve got that issue and the plumbing permit we need a Building Permit in my opinion to show what the true intent is in the area and if you want to keep it as a legal use or whatever you need a Building Permit to show that and that will fore
October perhaps the second or third meeting in the month. Perhaps the 15th. Its easy for chris to say and why not do it a little bit sooner october 8th. Okay. Im not sure whos motion. Okay. Ill make the motion to continue to october 8th for the housing inspectors to continue and conclude its investigation as well as the department of the building inspection to explore whether or not the permit at issue should have a building permit. Would you want any additional briefing . No no. She wants lots. Im leaving this for everyone else mr. Pacheco. We have a motion then from commissioner hwang to continue this to octobers 8 any Public Comment . 2014 the public hearing has been held to allow the dbi time to conclude its analysis. On that motion and no additional briefing is allowed. Commissioner fung. No. The Vice President is absent. Commissioner president lazarus. Commissioner honda. Thank you. The vote is 3 to one the matter is continued actually october 8th well take a 5 minute break. Welc