You are suggesting this is not the case as follows. There is a Detailed Design process as the project is closer to construction. Something that we learned when the train makes a turn from teravol, as the train turns to 15th, it swings over into the what would be the passenger loading area and makes it difficult to have a bold stop at a 90 degree angle turn like that. We looked at having a stop further back before the intersection. But then you run into driveway conflicts at a location. Because of that and we can definitely provide more information on that. Basically, the train swing would essentially be where passengers are. So if you would explain why we call it a transit. Up until earlier, a week ago, that was the intention was to use it as a transit. The findings have ruled it out. Exactly. Around the corner. I want to talk about 19th avenue. I did not here about the improvements talked a lot about today. From what i understand crossing 19th avenue when it is said and done will be d
Well, it is before the Budget Committee now, anything you input back goes to the clerk and back to the Budget Committee. That is where it is at now. What they want to do with this proposal to meet with you, i dont know. I will say one thing, and that is that i have attended joint Commission Meetings like planning and other meetings on common interest issues such as seismic. This is done not routinely but has been done with some degree of frequency. Thank you. Commissioners open government. Again, i understand your comments, however, for the public, i would like to point out what we end up having is going from a year and a half, two years whatever the length of time commissioner keen said the staff worked on this and put out to the public what was considered for adoption for the ballot measure and furthermore sent to the board of supervisorses now we are going with some sort of thing, yes, in the package as proposal from supervisor peskin. Now we have this amalgamation that we are creat
Ordinance identified as 2017 wpo ballot measure, attachment one, and have it placed on the june ballot. I have a clarifying question for staff. I understand that the ballot measure and the ordinance as drafted there are slight differences as between the two. Could you give a summary of that to make sure i understand what is what would be miss from the version that would go on the ballot . Due to the jurisdiction of the authority we had to slightly scale back and narrow what would be in the full legislative proposal. It is 4. 105 to govern the overall scope of complaints whichca raise other can raise other concerns. Those were removed. The other big category were the proposed edits to 4. 107. That would have addressed the Whistleblower Program outsides of the Ethics Commission as well. The bulk and i will let the staff speak to the policy impact. The bulk of the amendments are still there in the ballot measure version. For those provisions excluded from the ballot measure provision, wha
Act to incorporate those or do they just disappear forever . I think if the Ethics Commission were to move forward i am not sure supervisor breed would want to introduce the remainder that is a different Decision Point for her. Comments or questions . Let me express myself. One of the problems voters face is too many ballot measures to figure out. That is why i would just prefer an ordinance especially when apparently ms. Breed is committed to this and president of the board. She ought to be able to get enough votes to get it passed. The other matter is a question. Why is the controller involved in whistleblower complaints . Anybody give me the rationale . The charter designates the Controller Office with the authority to run the whistleblower hot line that is how it is set up. What is the rationale . I cant speak to that. It is versus 311 or the Ethics Commission. Or the Ethics Commission. Or the City Attorney. My understanding from the whistleblower director because of the controller
Is what would be miss from the version that would go on the ballot . Due to the jurisdiction of the authority we had to slightly scale back and narrow what would be in the full legislative proposal. It is 4. 105 to govern the overall scope of complaints whichca raise other can raise other concerns. Those were removed. The other big category were the proposed edits to 4. 107. That would have addressed the Whistleblower Program outsides of the Ethics Commission as well. The bulk and i will let the staff speak to the policy impact. The bulk of the amendments are still there in the ballot measure version. For those provisions excluded from the ballot measure provision, what could the board act to incorporate those or do they just disappear forever . I think if the Ethics Commission were to move forward i am not sure supervisor breed would want to introduce the remainder that is a different Decision Point for her. Comments or questions . Let me express myself. One of the problems voters fac