That bell being running, then i believe that as youre doing this in terms of leadership function, we run the risk of really losing an enterprise is that the United States essentially pioneered. In terms of another priority that i think youre starting to hear a little bit about, we have to put patients at the center of this. So if you look at the statistics we have 7,000 diseases. Yet, we have treatments for, i believe, dr. Collins, 500 of those. The system is doing its work. Its churning through the science and getting the outcomes to the doors of the fda. The fda is doing its work and then we get some approvals and we put that out into the system. But at the rate were going, i dont think that any of the diseases that were all going to be afflicted with at some point in time really stand a chance of being covered in the near term. So i think the speed issue thats been articulated by many of you is of critical importance. So i think as this group does its work, figuring out what are tho
Debate that. You know, weve had the for 52 Consecutive Years and this is going to be the 5rd consecutive 53rd Consecutive Year weve been able to pass it. But it seems each year its always hard to do. Because at the last minute, there are always other people that want to get things in the bill that were not there. But you have to keep in mind, and i want to say in defense to the bigfour approach to this, we came down we passed this bill. We passed it out of the Senate Armed Services committee on may the 23rd. And weve been wanting to get it on the floor since may the 23rd. Senator levin and i have come down countless times and begged our colleagues on the democrat side and the republican side to get their amendments down so we can consider their amendments. And we had a lot of amendments that did come down. And of the amendments that came down, im very proud to say that we incorporated almost all of those, 47 of those amendments are a part of this bill. So its not as if the amendments w
Far as them telling you its like false advisement you, your telling me that is available and i know this is not like this is a model then thrills up front the apartment that youre applying is similar to this not going to have closets or you know certain things youre not going to have theyre not be honest and up front and two the parking im like who going to who got 300 or 350 to pay parking every month i remember whats protecting housing i mean didnt that fall under low Income Housing why have we been mislead thinking this is the picture over here and all of a sudden they take it away and is we already picked what we want you to have thats my biggest issue. Thank you. Next speaker. Hello, im carolyn i work to the veterans Quality Center at as Outreach Coordinator and i want to make sure there are bmr procedures that are amend we want to reduce the amount of barriers for the applicants we prepare for we talk about the language assess all the printed and online materials should be traine
Utilities if they paid their utilities on time but because a lot of people dont have good credit so it is good this was brought and the idea of different we have transgender that used an old name urging theyre new name but complications because they have old names youre going they are different names maybe adding another question of that and the rerentals we felt we notice new developments like one or two years old but a big taller than we helped one that didnt get evicted but he was a person with a Mental Illness so for the developers is really hire someone that is cultural sensiti sensitive. Thank you. Im here to speak on being selected as a preference holder as a certificate of preference holder and when we go through the walk through before your selected you know they thrills those are the apartments that are available for us and then they wait until you get selected and do another walk through to see exactly if their giving you the same place and come to find out thats not the cas
Again, goes through the analysis that they have done and concluded that they have here that theres no significant impact. Substantial evidence you have been told and know from previous appeals is really the linchpin of your decision here. Substantial evidence is facts, reasonable assumptions predicated on facts and Expert Opinions supported by facts. You see the common theme here is there must be facts. What substantial evidence is not is argument, speculations un substantiated opinion or inaccurate or Economic Impacts which do not contribute to to the environment. I would argue that the appellants have put no substantial evidence in the record nothing there they havent provided any today to use as an example as a result of the height lift first of all that was addressed in in the 2012 categorical exemption. It is the impact on the house not people so the issue here what has been done to the house the Planning Department concludes twice there is nothing and particularly with respect to