Remarks by Robin Abad Ocubillo
71 remarks on the record, newest first · Page 3 of 3
- Play at 5:00:57
“It's submitted as Exhibit G. It's one of the two videos submitted. Thank you.”
Board of Appeals · Sep 16, 2026
- Play at 5:08:44
“Commissioner Soroyan, I'll yield to you. I've spoken a lot already.”
Board of Appeals · Sep 16, 2026
- Play at 5:10:03
“Commissioner Abad. Thank you. Right. What distinguishes this case from the others for me is that we do have evidence it aligns. And there's alignment across different stakeholders in the situation. Certainly, the Arts Commission's statement, I guess, is the basis for their suspension is the verbal threat. But we're seeing more. We're hearing more. That's part of our packet. That's part of the body of material that we are charged to consider. So all those taken together really do distinguish this case from the two prior. The commission also made recommendations for much higher penalties for…”
Board of Appeals · Sep 16, 2026
- Play at 5:12:08
“Correct. And I think echoing what I think Commissioner Lopez had mentioned, it does seem appropriate to send an enforcement message to a vendor whose family, whose associates, you know, are a party to creating an atmosphere of intimidation and abuse in our public realm.”
Board of Appeals · Sep 16, 2026
- Play at 5:18:18
“Thank you, President Trasvigna. It's my understanding, and maybe the department can correct me if I'm wrong, that we weren't in possession of the video at the prior hearing. It was shown during testimony, but it was untranslated, and it was sort of, you know, it was like an iPhone under... Projector kind of situation so it is fresh and new material in this packet and it was as as I think everyone can tell was something that was very compelling to me in the way that I Looking at and considering this case so in that way It is a free fresh there is something new and again that distinguishes this…”
Board of Appeals · Sep 16, 2026
- Play at 5:34:45
“I would like to propose an alternate motion, not to step ahead of you, Commissioner Wong. I would just like to make a motion to deny the appeal and uphold the suspension.”
Board of Appeals · Sep 16, 2026
- Play at 5:35:48
“Do I need to further clarify the basis, or is the motion itself complete enough?”
Board of Appeals · Sep 16, 2026
- Play at 5:35:55
“That the behaviors violated sections 2, 3, and 20 of the artist's code of conduct.”
Board of Appeals · Sep 16, 2026
- Play at 15:17
“And on the basis... Commissioner Vaughn, do you have any comments? None, just concurrence. Thank you.”
Board of Appeals · Aug 12, 2026
- Play at 29:06
“COMMISSIONER ABBOTT. THANK YOU, PRESIDENT TRANSVIGNA. I'M ALSO INCLINED TO HEAR THE MATTER TONIGHT AS SCHEDULED.”
Board of Appeals · Aug 12, 2026
- Play at 1:15:05
“Yeah. We granted the rehearing request to hear this once more. I don't see anything, even in the fresh material that was submitted this evening, which I'm not sure how precisely we treat that if it wasn't part of the packet, but in any case, that supports the idea that there was any collusion or misconduct it's quite it's quite common for the public to reach out to department staff when there's a hearing coming up to understand what procedure is going to look like how they could conduct themselves that's all that I see here is that the department was acting responsibly to help members of the…”
Board of Appeals · Aug 12, 2026
- Play at 1:24:39
“Thank you, President Transvenia, for recapping a little bit. What transpired in our last hearing, you did remind us that many of us on the board did have concerns about how the investigation itself was conducted, questions about follow-up regarding potential trafficking. But at this time, I'm inclined to deny the rehearing request, and I'm prepared to make a motion.”
Board of Appeals · Aug 12, 2026
- Play at 1:25:13
“Make a motion to deny the rehearing request on the basis that there is no new evidence to be examined and that the arguments made tonight by the appellants that there was a miscarriage on the part of the departments is unsubstantiated.”
Board of Appeals · Aug 12, 2026
- Play at 2:03:56
Not quoted here: it may name a member of the public. Hear it at the meeting.
Board of Appeals · Aug 12, 2026
- Play at 2:05:20
“And would you kindly remind us again, I know you made brief reference to this, but Public Works Section 808 and what the implications of that are specific to this case. Could you just detail that?”
Board of Appeals · Aug 12, 2026
- Play at 2:22:59
“Thank you. Yes, question for PG&E. Thank you for being here available for technical questions. The president of the Board of Supervisors office was here and made reference to rate payers needing to pay twice if this overhead infrastructure upgrade were implemented. And then somewhere along the road, down the line, we got an assessment district together to pay for underground in Can you help us understand how the enterprise, what are the finances of this for the neighborhood for both of these implementations? Could you speak to that at all?”
Board of Appeals · Aug 12, 2026
- Play at 2:25:07
“Thank you for clarifying that the current project associated with the current excavation permit This upgrade, I guess, in capacity, this increase is paid for by that project applicant and not borne by those generally in the vicinity of what would be a future assessment district for undergrounding. That's good to know when we say that someone's paying twice who precisely that would be. In this case, it's the applicant for the current Upgrade. Can you talk to us a little bit about what the life cycle is for your putting in new transformers? They have higher capacity. Is this infrastructure that…”
Board of Appeals · Aug 12, 2026
- Play at 2:27:02
“One final question, and then I know President Trasvina also has his hand up, which is that the current project is associated with an increase in capacity. I'm assuming maybe to serve a new development or a project in the neighborhood. Can you help us understand the scale of what this new addition of capacity? Is it 20% more? energy available to the geography? Or what are we talking about? And what would happen if the upgrade associated with the excavation permit were not implemented? Does that imperil safe operation of a new development nearby? Or what are the implications?”
Board of Appeals · Aug 12, 2026
- Play at 2:37:43
“Thank you, President Transmigna. Yes, starting broadly and then getting to the narrow parameters of what we're here to contemplate, yes to undergrounding. And the elected official for this district and his colleagues on the board have, as you mentioned, acknowledged that and are looking beyond Homestead and really at 20B, which has implications for the entire city, So formulating a framework for other neighborhoods beginning to. So I guess we can thank Homestead for helping the whole city get started. But it's evident that that is a really complex technical project. It requires financing. And…”
Board of Appeals · Aug 12, 2026
- Play at 2:47:33
“I was just going to suggest, I mean, why can't we do both? The three of us can take a vote or make a statement, and then that closes off the hearing that our colleagues will then be reviewing asynchronously. And I also wanted to express my support for our continuance not including a whole other round of presentations. I think our absent colleagues can see, can review what happened tonight and see everything and we can move directly into public comment and just a vote at the time of continuance.”
Board of Appeals · Aug 12, 2026
- Play at 2:49:26
“Yes. Thank you, DCA and Minardi. I agree. Yeah.”
Board of Appeals · Aug 12, 2026