I am joined by a member of the board of supervisors, supervisor aaron peskin as well as doctor grant coa colfax, police chief t and fire chief nicholson as well as other officials. We are definitely practicing social distancing by having at least six feet apart from one another in this location, but also this Virtual Press conference is an opportunity to demonstrate the kind of behavior we want to see happening all over the city. We want to thank members of the press for their patience and for accommodating the change in order to help protect and keep them safe as well. We also want to thank members of the public because we know for the most part so many in San Francisco have really stepped up and really focused on social distancing and also helping to support and educate neighbors and other people as to what is most appropriate to do during this time. I know that we often times refer to social distancing as saving lives. I want to be clear that it will save lives. If we continue to pr
Child Care Planning and advisory council. I am here to speak in favor of the child care facilities because there is a huge requirement in the city. We have currently just on the citys low income list 3,000 children who we have no space for. We have no facilities for. It is one of the Biggest Challenges that the city is facing in terms of being able to provide adequate child care. One of the things that is especially desirable about this facility that it is on the ground floor. That means we would be our people would be able to serve infants and young toddlers who would be about three months probably to 18 months. Currently in two of our facilities and we are opening up another one in the fall, but we cannot serve infants and toddlers because they are not on the ground floor. There is a very big need just within our program. We have 110 children on the wait list for infants and young toddlers. You can see that there is a great need and kind of one of my mottos we can never do enough for
Able to get folks downtown quickly on the t, then the need for parking wouldnt be there. We understand that the lots there are full. Like many San Francisco neighborhoods to get a parking spot in this area you need to drive around. I have that situation. I had a car until three years ago when i said it is a pain in the butt. Finding parking is hard. I was fortunate to be in a situation to get rid of the car. A lot of folks dont have that. We are also looking at a situation that goes what do we want to prioritize . Parking spots are homes for people. At the end of the day it does frankly suck that is a tradeoff we have to figure out because parking does take up space. When trying to figure out these crazy priorities in the city, there is a lot of give and take. We absolutely understand that the desire for more parking at the site, but when looking at everything and looking at the big picture, we would argue building more homes should take priority over those requests. We ask that you do
The subpoena last april. We will show you the oral argument from july. It is a little more than an hour. , may it please the court indulge me for a moment. Are counsels. Questions. To get i wanted to start out by saying i dont get to say this very is one of and this those instances when the District Courts opinion is extremely strong, especially when combined with the Supreme Court, and it answers a lot of the arguments. The District Courts statement that there is deference to congress here is wrong. Those come from cases where the president is not a party. Here we have a dispute between two equal coordinates. Keep anyould we different . Why wouldnt we look objectively as a court to determine if congress is pursuing a legitimate i dont think it would change the standard and it does not change because of the behavior. Cases thathe articulate the deferential tondard our cases which go two branches of government. Why. T dont understand dont understand why we would adopt the standard peer
For most, in many cases really helps, statutes, house signals authority reaches that office. Ournd, whether constitutional gaps there are constitutional gaps raises questions. Did you state the house itself has the power . Power to issue a subpoena, the house itself . Mr. Consovoy not the constitutional power. The house itself because your argument to me sounded like it was all about the delegation of the committee not being explicit. I have no i find no argument that the house itself he said that house had to be explicit that it was giving what he had to the committee. Mr. Consovoy im sorry, im not getting the house rules state j. Millett including subpoena power . The vast majority, which is whether a subpoena is constitutional. Your first just on constitutional argument given your issues about legislative just to understand, i am understanding trying to understand what your argument is. The house itself would issue a subpoena and we would be over on the rest of the brief oral argume