Two separate motions, is to vote on whether to disclose any or all discussions held in closed session. So for item e . I would move that we do disclose the action taken. Second. Moved and seconded. All those in favor . Clerk and commissioner buell, will you please comment on the action taken. The action taken is to retain the director of the commission, ashley summers. Clerk and then, item 13 is a vote to disclose any or all discussion held in closed session. I need a motion and a second. I would move that we not disclose any of the conversation taken. Seconded. Moved and seconded. All those in favor . So moved. Clerk okay. We are now under item 14, which are commissioners matters. Are there any commissioners matters . I just wanted to clarify, its all right, i wanted to clarify discussing jackson park . We had discussed that in a bond presentation for you. Jackson is one of many parks and many park communities that are interested in investment, so i think we can provide a general overview for you. And that will be next meeting . I think we had it slated for september. September . Okay. Thank you. I dont see any other comments. Clerk is there any Public Comment on this item . Seeing none, Public Comment is closed. Item 15 is new business agenda setting. Commissioners, Public Comment . No Public Comment. This item is closed. Communications, is there any Public Comment . Seeing none, this item is closed, and item 17 is oh, im sorry. No, im moving slow, so it wasnt you at all. Ill talk to him offline. Clerk are you sure . Yes. Go. Clerk and item 17 is adjournment, and commissioner buell, you requested that we adjourn in memory of dan carlin. Yes, and i would like that motion and second. So moved. Second. Move that we adjourn in memory of dan carlin. All those in favor . So moved. Okay. Good evening, and welcome to the july 17th, 2019 meeting at the San Francisco board of appeals. To my left is as the deputy City Attorney who will provide the board and then he needed legal advice this evening. At the controls is the boards legal assistant and i am julie rosenberg, the boards executive director. We will also be joined by representatives from the city departments that have cases before the board this evening. In the front we have scott sanchez, the acting deputy building minister. We expect joseph duffy, senior building inspector representing the department of building inspection. We also have jacob, senior planner, special projects and policies for though working for the Planning Department. Dan adams, Deputy Director of housing from the Mayors Office of housing and community development, and we expect chris buck, urban forest or from the San FranciscoPublic Works Bureau of urban forestry. The board request that you turn off or silence all phones and other Electronic Devices so theyll not disturb the proceedings. Please carry on conversations in the hallway. The rules of presentation are as follows. Appellants, permit holders and apartment respondents each are given seven minutes four to present their case in two minutes for rebuttal. People affiliated with these parties must include the comments within the seven or three minute period. Members of the public were not affiliated with the parties have up to three minutes each to address the board and no rebuttal. Please speak into the microphone for rehearing and jurisdiction request, the parties have three minutes each with no rebuttal. To assist the board and accurate preparation of minutes, your aspen are required to submit a speaker carter Business Card or Business Card to staff when you come up to speak. Speaker cards are available on the left side of the podium. Given that we have a vacancy on the board, only three votes are required to grant an appeal, jurisdiction request or rehearing request. If you have questions about requesting a rehearing or anything else, please speak to board staff during a break or after the meeting, or call or visit the board office. This meeting is broadcast live on San Francisco government t. V. , cable channel 78, and will be rebroadcast on fridays at 4 00 p. M. On channel 26. The video is available on our website and can be downloaded online. Now we will swear in or affirm all those who attend to testify. Please note that any member of the public may speak without taking an oath pursuant to the rights under the sunshine ordinance. If you intend to testify at any of tonights proceedings and wish to have the board give your testimony evidentiary wait, stand if you are able, raise your right hand and say, i do after you have been sworn in or affirmed. Do swear or affirm that the testimony youre about to give will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth thank you. Please be seated. Okay. We will now move on to item number 1. This is an general Public Comment. This is an opportunity for anyone who like to speak on the matter of the boards jurisdiction but is not on tonights calendar. As you anyone here for general Public Comment . Okay. Please approach the microphone. You are not here for an item on the calendar . Okay. That is fine. When your item comes up, there will be an opportunity to give Public Comment on the item. So you will get a speaker card, you can fill it out after you speak and give it to gary. Thank you. So since there is no Public Comment, we will move on to item number 2, which is the election of officers. Former president frank fung moved to the Planning Commission , so we have a vacant seat for the position of president. Vice president s wake has been acting president since mr. Funk left and i would like to thank him for his service. So we will start with the office of the president. Are there any members of the board would like to know make a colleague or themselves for the office of the president . I like to nominate our acting president , rick swig for the office. Okay. Are there any other nominations . Okay. Are you willing to serve . I am willing to serve, thank you very much. Is there any Public Comment . Okay, so we have a motion from commissioner honda to elect rick swig to the position of president. On that motion. [roll call] [laughter] that motion carries. Now that mr. Swig is the president , we have a vacant seat in the Vice President seat so we will move on to that election. Are there any members of the board would like to nominate a colleague or themselves for the office of Vice President . I would like to nominate and lazarus for the position of Vice President , please. Okay. We have a motion to nominate and lazarus. Any other motion . Okay. Is there any Public Comment on that motion . Okay. Seeing none, on the motion to elect are you going to ask me if im willing to serve . I know you are. She has only done this twice. [laughter]. For the record, are you willing to serve . I did have a question. [laughter]. I am assuming yes. On that motion,. [roll call] that motion carries 40. Congratulations. Okay, we will now move on to item number 3, commissioner comments and questions. Commissioners, anything . It seems like we havent been hearing quite a while. We are back. We are back. Two things. Thank you very much for electing me to finish out this term as president. I deeply appreciate it and consider it an honor, and i just one piece of business that i have is we sent a note to the department of health on the subject of an update on their position on the safety of current technologies. Can we ask them for a response as to whether they are going to the timeframe for a response . Yes, i will reach out. I think we should go on the record that we sent the letter and we would also i would like to go on the record to request a response to our request. Okay. Thank you. Are there any other commissioner comments . Is there any Public Comment on this item . Okay. We will move on to item number 4 , the adoption of the minutes before you for discussion the possible adoption are the minutes of the june 26 th, 2019 board meeting. Any comments or changes . Moved to adopt as submitted. Okay. On the motion to adopt, is there any Public Comment on that motion . Seeing none, on the motion to adopt the june 26th minutes from commissioner lazarus. [roll call] that motion carries 40. Okay, we are now moving on to item number 5. This is a jurisdiction request. The subject property on the sidewalk adjacent to the premises of folsom street and Second Street at revenue as folsom street from Second Street to beal street. Joshua clip is the requester and asking the board take jurisdiction over tree removal permit number 778941, which was issued on july 11th, 2017 by the San Francisco public works, bureau of urban forestry, with a revision date of june 26th, 2019. The appeal period ended on july 26, 2017 and the jurisdiction request was filed at the board office on june 28 th, 2019. The permit holders the office of Community Investment in infrastructure. The project description, per San Francisco public works order 186056, approval of request to remove 25 trees. Replacement shall be permitted under Tree Planting permit number 778940. Revision notes, permit renewed as of june 26, 2019, courtesy postings were posted on june 20 th, 2019. Madame director, i dont see chris in the audience yet, so maybe we should first of all, on this item i have to recuse myself. There was an interest i have a 633 folsom. However, do we have the appellant in the audience . The requester is present. At this point, you should probably recuse yourself, and then we will call you when the item is over. Thats why we elected the Vice President. [laughter]. Are we going to hear the next case if the department is not here . Okay. , i see, the bureau of urban forestry is not here and no one is here from o. C. I. I. Correct. I guess we could do that. The requester is here. Would you like to delay it and go into the next item. Why dont we go into the next item. I appreciate the requesters patients. But you shouldnt be involved in deciding whether or not the case arms adjusting the Vice President in the two other commissioners do you want to hear in our given opportunity for the other departments to be present . I am of two mines because there is no response from the department in the material, so i wonder if they are going to be present or not. They know it was the first item on the agenda, i mean. It is 5 12 p. M. Frankly i think we should go ahead and here it. Okay. Would you like me to text chris back . He generally lets me know if he is going to be late. Okay. We will go ahead and here it. President swig will let you know when it is finished. Okay. We will hear from the requester. Good evening. Again, hello. Article 16 governs the permits for how tree removal is permitted. It is good for six months. Article 16 only addresses extensions. The extension of [indiscernible] here, this is not an extended permit, it says on the face of its permit that it is revised and there is no provision for revising a permit under article 16. In plain language, plain meaning of the word revision is something that is changed from a previous iteration then that is simply not the case here. My understanding is the citys position is these sorts of things just happen all the time, but number 1, that is not what the law states, a number 2, if that is true, that is not how the city consistently behaves. Specifically, i am going to reference a decision that came out on the tree removal hearing today, effective today, the public works order 201535, permit number 72905, issued effective today, and i believe it involves the same city office doing a project down on third street. The removal of several trees that were previously approved and in fact, the decision stacys trees had already been approved for removal, for the permit had expired. As a result, it went through the removal process all over again, including notice, the hearing, and a decision, and an opportunity to appeal. So regardless of what the city says about this being an extension, that is not how they behave in all cases, and that is certainly not what the law states on its face. As a practical matter, if we imagine all permits could be revived on an ad hoc basis, this would throw City Management into chaos. And effectively negate any requirement that work be completed within a certain amount of time. Just to be clear, i realize there is a lot of at stake here. Theres a project that has been a decade in the making and im not trying to throw a wrench in the works for the sake of it. What im asking and what ive asked of urban forestry is there be a serious discussion about the relocation of the viable trees that exist there rather than simply cutting them down. Ten years ago when this all started, there was no Climate Crisis that we were at least acknowledging and there is today were scrabbling as a city to find ways to sequester carbon and rather than cutting down the instruments that do that, we should be doing everything that we can to preserve those. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. I understand the permit holder and the bureau of urban forestry is not present so im going to ask if there is any Public Comment on this matter. Okay. Seeing none, commissioners, this matter is submitted. Thank you. So, going over the brief, the concern is that the permit was issued july 11th, 2017, at which point it says that if an extension is provided prior to the expiration, it would be okay , but there was no extension prior to their permit expiring, so i see that the city has no grounds to extend it. Also, i am happy in my opinion, we can take the appeal. Can i ask the attorney, i corresponded with you earlier and it says to cite the relevant part of article 16. Do you mind sharing that are what the relevant part was . I have a meeting a reading here that all has to do with a street permit that has to be completed within six month and a lesson extension has been granted by the department. I think that is kind of the subject of whether or not there was an extension, having no brief from the department and having no representatives from the department that holds a permit or issue the permit, it is not clear to me whether or not that extension was granted. To be have any education or new orleans knowledge . I have no information that an extension was granted before the expiration of the appellant. They have contended that it is not. That is probably why the department didnt show up. I think there is a distinction between extended and revised and i think that is important. I think there is no way to answer those questions right now because we dont have the information to even no. I think it was pretty clear that if no extension was given within six months i and i am not sure what extension process is. I dont know if theyre publicized, again, i dont know what that process is. I have not gone through it so i dont know what we should seek to find. Since her as no one here from the department, how would we know . In that regard, i think i would be supportive of granting jurisdiction. I think we would maybe have to reschedule the time because theres no department here to speak to it. That is just my plein air thoughts of it. What happens if theres three commissioners . You could because thats fine, we would just need three to grant or deny. You are saying you want to continue this . I am just saying that i think my assumption, again, i dont know the information, and is maybe the department did grant an exemption. I dont know what that process is like. I dont know how one would know if it is extended. The Department Said that the permit was revised. I didnt have any indication from brad that there was a revision process in article 16, so if that is indeed what the department did, that would seem to fall out of line with the code. That is my understanding of that , which would incline me to grant the appeal, however, if we grant it today, would we hear the case and would we hear it without the way the process would work is if you grant jurisdiction, the jurisdiction requester has five days to go down to the department and actually file an appeal. Okay. Which is then separately heard. So thats my thoughts. I dont know what you are thinking. Dont get carried away. If im understanding, you would vote to grant the jurisdiction request . I am fine with that. Okay. Okay. I make a motion to grant the jurisdiction request on the basis that the permit was it is not valid. The permit is not valid or that the permit is subject to appeal. Yeah, this is a really odd case, actually. The basis could be that the departments decision to revise the permit and reinstate the permit would amount to a new permit being issued by the department. The revision could be an error, right . I dont thank you have to find that there was an error. I think what they have done here , arguably, is issue a new apartment because the other one expired. And they might say that new permit is subject to appeal. I moved to grant the appeal to grant the jurisdiction request on the basis that the revised permit is subject to appeal to this body. Okay. We have a motion from commissioner tanner to grant the jurisdiction request on the basis that the revised permit is tantamount to a new permit and subject to appeal. On that motion. [roll call] that motion carries. The jurisdiction request is granted and you have until next monday to come in and file an appeal of the permit. Thank you. We will now wait for president swig. All hail. [laughter]. Sorry, i have been on vacation. Now you are loopy. I have not quite caught up yet. We are now on item number 6. This is a rehearing request for the subject property at 3529 sacramento street. Cheryl hogan, the appellant, is requesting