It's a cinch with Chinch: Tired of wading through the city's "wasteful and painful" process for winning approval of development projects? Your prayers have been answered with Hector Chinchilla's Millennium Group. So promises the Web site (www.migrp.com) of the company headed up by the embattled former planning commissioner. The site's blatant claims certainly won't be any help in his defense against charges that he violated San Francisco's conflict-of-interest laws by taking money for advising on projects that required city approval while serving on the Planning Commission. City hall sources tell us Chinchilla thought he'd avoid the problem by not showing up for key votes on those proposals. But according to city law, it doesn't matter whether he voted or not. What matters is whether he was paid to provide assistance in a "matter related to the governmental processes of the city."

Featuring a picture of a gorgeous sunset skyline over still water, the site gets into some interesting territory when it says the outfit "can save you money and months of delay." Chinchilla lost his position on the commission, as did all the other members last month, because voters had approved a proposition in March that changed the way appointments to the land-use body are made. (Now the mayor only gets to appoint four members, instead of all seven. The Board of Supervisors' president appoints the other three, and all appointments require the full board's approval.) The Web site does not mention Chinchilla's role on the commission. But certainly the position gave him connections, and that's exactly what investigators will be looking at.

Chinchilla did not return a phone call placed to the Millennium Group.

We wonder whether the Millennium Group will tone down its boasts now that Chinchilla has no way of getting back on the commission. The San Francisco Chronicle reported Aug. 2 that Mayor Willie Brown has changed his mind and decided not to nominate him. (Savannah Blackwell)

Sunshine victory: In a hearing that sheds light on problems patients face when requesting records from the Department of Public Health, the Sunshine Ordinance Task Force voted July 23 that a DPH staff member violated the Sunshine Ordinance when he provided a patient with incomplete records in an untimely manner.

Jason Grant Garza, who is unemployed and receives social security disability insurance, told the task force he requested medical and treatment records from the DPH May 9 to use as evidence in a state medical board hearing May 30, where he planned to criticize the department for failing to provide him and his deceased partner proper medical care.

He said he was routed to numerous DPH staff members before he finally reached Community Mental Health Services quality management planner James T. Gildav. But he said Gildav didn't provide him with the records until a few days before his hearing. Gildav appeared at the hearing and conceded that he did not provide the records in a timely manner.

Garza said he was appalled to find out in the middle of his medical hearing that the records were missing a crucial piece of evidence: a telephone log of a conversation held between a DPH doctor and a city attorney about his medical treatment, which he claimed caused him to lose his case.

"I went to represent myself in the proper appeal procedure without all the necessary information," Garza said. "Now I know why people give up. The process is a farce."

The next meeting of the Sunshine Ordinance Task Force will be held Aug. 27, 4 p.m., City Hall, Room 408, 1 Dr. Carlton B. Goodlett Place, S.F. Call (415) 554-7724 to file a complaint. (Shadi Rahimi)

Homeless politics: Things have changed since the old days when Sup. Tom Ammiano's strategy in dealing with poverty issues closely mirrored that of homeless activists. Case in point: the question of whether to put a measure on the November ballot challenging Sup. Gavin Newsom's notorious Care Not Cash plan, which would cut welfare payments to a paltry $59.

Homeless advocates were looking to combat Newsom's plan with an alternative ballot measure that would tie any cut in cash payments to a guarantee that the city was offering a certain level of services (affordable housing, drug treatment, etc.; see Hall Monitor, 7/31/02). Ammiano decided to craft his own version. And during initial discussions, Ammiano now acknowledges, a milder version of Newsom's plan was on the table. Word of that plan floated out July 29 in Frank Gallagher's San Francisco Examiner column, and Ammiano insisted to us at the time that he was not going to back any proposal that would cut cash payments.

The final version isn't exactly what you would call "Newsom lite." But it also stops short of what the coalition wanted: it doesn't include a sweeping ban on welfare cuts linked to a requirement that the city provide services.