Seemingly a lack of concern for the bars patrons, as well as the community as large. Furthermore, this complaint is not defective. The respondent can reasonably understand and respond to each charge as prescribed by the Entertainment Commissions rules and procedures. I have not claimed, as the respondent said in their submission to the commission that the permitee violated california penal section 12020. I have shown that an employer agent. Permitee has engaged in conduct that would result in violation of the following laws. The felony complaint, a court record, supports these claims. The respondent admits hes not fully complied with the revised security plan because the Security Guard have not applied for a state issued guard card. From a quick internet search, the process to obtain a guard card can be obtained in one day, and cost as little as 18. 95. Failure to comply with the revised security plan is grounded for suspension alone by this commission. The main issue with the permitee is the safe of the community and the premises. By rn complying with the security plan itself should be enough to result in suspension. The loss of Entertainment Permit does not mean that the premises is shutdown. It may continue to operate, and considerations such as adverse neighborhood impact and health and safety are not unusual reasons for taking further course of actions. Finally, even if you dont feel theres enough evidence in regard to the shooting on may 2e8, there is firsthand witness testimony that the permitee failed to comply with permit conditions and failed to comply with the revised security plan, both of which are grounds for suspension on their own. I respectfully request a suspension for the maximum allowable time permitted within the police code for la oficinas place of Entertainment Permit. Thank you. President tan thank you. Miss reyes, you can now present your closing argument. The director has not met her burden of proving all the alleged violations of la oficina to warrant a suspension of the entertainment license. First of all, allegations are allegations. Theyre not facts. The only way she could have proved any of the allegations is if she provided direct evidence. There was no direct evidence here. Weve had people come the parties for your presentations tonight, for the witnesses for coming forward. Evidentiary portion of this hearing is now concluded, and the commission will take this case and submission under submission for deliberations and possible decision, so commissioners, i think the first order is do we feel like we are willing and able to make a decision this evening . If i see some head nods, well move forward. So i think the question, just to the burden was really on miss weiland to determine if or prove with the evidence that the permit holderany employee or agent of the permit holder engaged in conduct that violated one or more of the criminal laws referenced in their complaint, so the assault and battery, discharging a firearm, unlawful weapons, drug offenses. We can discuss. Are there any thoughts . So i mean, basically, my opinion is any time you hire a whether theyre outside security or inhouse security, you kind of, like, give them a certain amount of leverage to take to protect your building, and what im seeing here, even though the owner of the building was working, its the Security Guard is still the front door of the premise, and and the actions sometimes warrant even though he wasnt directly responsible i know on the abc site, you know, it goes up the food chain. Your employees are your extension because youre supposed to discuss policy, and to have an Entertainment Permit, theres conditions, theres policies that need to be instructed, and even if its an outside Security Guard working on your premise, those conditions should be at least brought forward to that person watching their front door. So even though theres no proof in the sense that the owner was working, but the manager on duty was already gone, and he already said that its his responsibility to take care of the premise. So in my opinion, i just think and again, hes had the permit since 2014. Plenty of opportunity to really know and understand the conditions on this permit. And not to be in compliance because youre pushed against the wall, then, you have to be then all of a sudden youre in compliance, and even then, youre not fully in compliance because, okay, you know, theyre booked up, and they only have one class, but thats not the point. The situation, if he took the condition seriously, maybe there wouldnt have been a homicide on the 28th, maybe. Who knows . But the thing is, theres conditions, and the permit has conditions for a reason to protect the public, protect the employees, and protect the city, and so my thing is my opinion is i just think, as an operator, he just took it for granted, and im not very supportive of that because a lot of other permit holders out there do take seriously their permits, and they work hard to keep it secure, and this place is only a 49 capacity. Theres clubs that have five or 600 people. So i just have a problem of of continuing a permit that obviously had plenty of opportunities to correct itself. But thats my opinion, and, i mean, thats what im putting on the record. President tan all right. Any other thoughts from commissioners . Commissioner thomas . Vice president thomas i think this is a question for our City Attorney representative, but obviously, the individual, mr. Sanchez, is currently facing charges but has not been convicted of those charges, but i also havent heard anyone saying that the incident didnt i mean, theres been no objection to the fact that the incident happened, and that he shot someone. Does it make any difference whether or not the individual is there a different standard, i guess, in terms of the fact that the individual has not been convicted in a criminal court . The standard amicabpplicabla criminal court would be guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Here, the respondent is determined to present her evidence based on the police record, so has there been evidence occurred based on the preponderate standard . Thank you. Thats helpful. I think im trying to sift between our difference, so that was very helpful, thank you. To me, nobodys disputing there was a homicide outside of this establishment. The doorman was accused. Hes not been convicted of that. Seems to be fairly universally held that the doorman was involved in this in a serious way. I also think that there was a compelling case, that there was a history of issues with this establishment. Some of them may be, you know, somebody has an axe to grind, some of them may be a random call that got prescribed to the bar, but it seems that theres been a number of issues of this bar over the years, so that brings me to our job. We regulate Entertainment Permits. Its just the permit to have a d. J. Or live band. Not to it looks like commissioner thomas wanted to say something, though, so. Vice president thomas well, my comment, and then, i think we do need to get moving forward with the motions. I mean, my comment is that i appreciate that there was all of this activity to get people signed up for the lead trainings, and all of that thats happened in the last couple of weeks. Thats great, but those are criteria from the 2014 conditions, not those were not new conditions, so its actually been many years of not being in compliance. This isnt a new condition that wasnt being followed, so i think that, you know, weve got evidence of years of being out of compliance, as well as years of calls and activity, as well as this incident, so it all i mean, i feel like all of them together any one of those things on their own might not be too bad, but i feel like, yeah. Another thing, calls for service is relative, you know . And again, this has been an industry thing, where calls for service has always been kind of misleading, and for me, im not going based on my opinion on calls for service, im going based on responsibility of the owner, okay . Calls for service is relative. I dont i dont my basis is not for calls for service, my basis is when you have a permit, you need to know exactly what you signed up for and what you signed your name to, and he had four years or three years to do that, and thats why im kind of, like, you know, upset about it, so. President tan commissioner caminong . Commissioner caminong party has upheld the section that regards the that requires a permit holder not to allow these crimes to occur on their premises, the permit holder or its agent, then the motion would be to find them in violation of that code section, and identify which section of the penal code you believe that the charging party has proven. And then, to the extent that you also found that find any other of the sections subsections of 1060. 20. 1 have violated the motion could also include those, as well. I think the ones that the charging party has mentioned are section 4 regarding conditions, and they also charged subsection 7, which is the one regarding calling Emergency Medical Services. And also, subsection 6, regarding the approved security plan, compliance with that. So that motion has to contain the specific language and the specific code that were using. Thats right, and the commission could take these separately, if you i mean, you could make a motion that includes all the violations at once, or you can do them separately. I guess it just depends on whether you believe you have the votes for it to carry the motions. And then, secondly, after you consider the ryition las, if the motion passes, then, the commission could consider the amount of the suspension. President tan so i do want to advise commissioners, the grounds for suspension say the commission may suspend any permission under this article under any of the following circumstances, so it doesnt my interpretation of that is that if it meets any one of these allegations, then we are fine, so we dont adding more does not necessarily lead to any sort of proportional greater amount of suspension, it just sort of you know, we just need one. So i feel like if miss weiland has met one thats clear to all of us, then, lets figure that out. Commissioner thomas . Vice president thomas well, ill start with one. I move that the charging party has proved by a preponderance of the evidence that the permit holder failed to comply with an approved security plan as required by section 1060. 31, and the revised security plan, as required by section 1060. 32. President tan all right. Theres a motion. Is there a second . I second. President tan theres a second. Is there any further discussion from commissioners or additional evidence that you want to say was proven . Starting with one . President tan yeah, just starting with one. Procedurally, do we need to take Public Comment on this one . Weve already taken Public Comment on the item. President tan all right, commissioners, why dont we take a vote. Can you repeat it . Were going one by one, right . Vice president thomas yeah, i was just starting. Other people can add on. That the charging party proved by a preponderance of the evidence that the permit holder violated its number six, we need to say, section 1060. 20. 1, number a6; specifically, that the permitee failed to comply with an approved security plan as required by section 1060. 31, and the revised security plan, as required by section 1060. 32. President tan all right. Crystal, could you take the vote . Just go through each of the commissioners and do the roll call. Clerk [ roll call. ] president tan all right. The motion passes. Lets is there additional motion about the evidence before we decide on what the penalty would be . You dont have to so youre forming one, so go ahead. Commissioners, i would say that the department has brought charges based on something in the complaint, so you do have to decide whether shes proven those charges or not. The one regarding the criminal the two that were specifically called out were the were the charge regarding whether the under lying crimes occurred, and the charge regarding whether the Emergency Services were called. President tan thank you. So clarification, so even though i feel that hiring an outside service is a connection as being an extension of the arm of the owner, i can say that its been proven i mean, in my opinion, because i really, truly believe, based on what my experience, if you hire an outside security to hold your fort, and he shoots somebody, youre ultimately responsible because theres supposed to be some communication, so whether they did it directly or indirectly, its still he paid the security company, so and i motion that charges section 1060. 21. 1a 3 and a, violated assault and battery, discharging a firearm, unlawful weapon, and drug offenses. I mean president tan im sorry. I did not catch that motion as a motion, so could you restate that. So the charges, section 1060. 21. 1 yes. What about that . What are you doing . So i feel that theres been a proven, by the what . Oh, okay. Sorry. Looking at this one. Well, anyway okay. Here. Ill just read it. Okay. That the preponderance of the evidence that on may the 28th, 2017, the permit holder or any employee or agent of the permit holder engaged in conduct that violated the following, okay . Assault and battery, discharging a firearm, unlawful weapons, and drug offenses. All right. That is a motion. Is there a second . You can debate it. I second. All right. I would suggest i didnt actually hear anything about drug offenses. I know that that was part of the charge, but there wasnt evidence provided. Im not saying you modify okay. Lets take the yeah, lets just go with the assault and battery, discharging a firearm, and unlawful weapon. Drug offense has not been proven. Ill second that. All right. Theres a motion and a second. Crystal, could you take a vote, please. Can i just restate the motion for the record so that were call clear on what the motion is. Yes. So commissioner lee made a motion that there was a preponderance of the evidence that the respondent violate when the employer or agent committed the crime of assault and battery discharging a kwie firearm, and unlawful weapons. Is that correct . Right. All right. On that motion, miss stewart, could you please take a vote . Clerk [ roll call. ] president tan all right. That motion passes. We are advised to also speak to the second charge, which is about the permitees negligence or failure to request Emergency Medical Services. Do we feel like theres evidence to yeah, that we accept the evidence to prove that . I do not believe there was evidence to prove that. I believe there was some smoke around that area, but i it i would need a lot more information and to actually hear from people that were there and to hear how loud the gun shot was, as he was claiming he didnt hear it; and then, to hear more time about the time between the gun shot and when the ambulance came, and etcetera, etcetera, so to me, that was not filled out enough for me to feel comfortable motioning on this. All right. Is there a differing opinion . I mean, its clear that he didnt call 911. Thats clear, but whether or not he should have been expected to, i think, was the question. Right. So yeah. Do you want to make a motion . Yeah, do you want to start a motion. So the motion would be to say that there was not a preponderance of the evidence. That the charging party has failed to prove. Ill make a motion that the charging party failed to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that the permit holder or any agent or employee of the permit holder failed to do the following failed to request Emergency Medical Services for someplace in need of Emergency Medical Services. All right. Any discussion at this time oh, yeah, actually, was there a second . No. There was not a second. Is there a second for that motion . Secretary. All right. No further discussion, crystal . Clerk [ roll call. ] all right. That motion passes. All right, commissioners, now, we do have to motion. We did feel that there was findings that they violated the conditions on the security plan; they also violated the charge that there was assault and battery, dits charge schar firearm, unlawful weapons onsite, so the charging party, miss weiland, had asked for the maximum amount of suspension. Can you clarify what that is . Director weiland 30 days. 30days. So would someone like to make a motion . I move that we suspend the permit for this first violation for 30 days. First violation being which violation . All of the above . Mmhmm, all of the above. Okay. For 30 days. Is that. Just want to check with our City Attorney. Is that enough language or do we have to cite the specific code that were suspending for. It doesnt hurt to say the code. So the motion from commissioner thomas is to find to suspend the placed Entertainment Permit and the hours permit for 30 days under section 1060. 20c1 of the police code on the basis of the two violations that the Commission Already determined occurred. All right. Does that sound reasonable . I see some head nods, so is there a second for that motion . Ill second it. Seconded by commissioner perez. Miss stewart, could you take a vote in. Clerk [ roll call. ] all right. The decision has been made. La oficina is under suspension for 30 days i would commissioners, i would advise you, under your rules, i believe you are required to make written findings to support these violations, and president tan right, and so the suspension does not begin until the findings are completed. Yeah, i would recommend that when when is the next meeting, crystal, of this commission . C. Stewart november 17th . President tan 21st, oh, i think were cancelling that meeting, so december 5th. Okay. I would recommend, commissioners, that the department prepare written findings that support the commissions decision; that the Department Exchange those findings with the permit holder two weeks before the december 5th meeting, and that the permit holder have an opportunity to respond to those findings, and that the commissions decision in terms of the actual suspension not be final until those findings are adopted by the commission. Do feel theres no so theres no confusion as to when the decision is actually app l appealable to the board of appeals, because it is appealable to another board. So those findings would state a date by which a suspension would start. Director weiland may i approach . I have one question. Okay. Yes. Wi director weiland i just wanted to call out that you did miss one of my charges as you were going through, permit c, any agent of the permitee failed to comply with the placement of the permit. Just wanted to note that. So youre saying that we ignored one charge . Director weiland yes. I see. We had addressed the security plan, which is part of which is a condition, but thats separate from the fact that it they just violated conditions in general. All right. We can commissioners, we have one more motion, then, on that charge. Do we find that there was a preponderance of the evidence to prove that la oficina has violated not meeting their conditions generally . I believe by saying that they didnt meet their security plan, youre implying that, but lets just do it for the record. Somebody like to make a motion . Yes. I make a motion that the charging party has proved by a preponderance of the evidence that the permitee violated conditions of their permit. Is that sufficient . Okay. Yeah. Ill second that. All right. Theres a motion and a second. Miss stewart, could you. Clerk [ roll call. ] clerk motion passes. All right. That motion passes. So back to the penalty, we have approved a 30day suspension. Do we need to do another vote or is it just more administrative how we the Effective Date and the findings . I think the Department Position is that the maximum suspension is 30 days, and youve already imposed that, so i dont think you need to take another vote on the suspension, unless youre going to reduce it. So the suspension holds. Administratively, it does mean that the we will ask our staff to prepare findings, share that with the permit holder, and then, with those findings, well have a start date that says the start date when the suspension would begin. And so the matters continued to the meeting of december 15th for the adoption of written findings. Is that oh, so we have to right. Okay. You might want to i think you should probably make a motion on that, as well. Right. So the motion would be to continue this matter to december 5th, where the adoption of written fiebdings will eventually be prepared by the department, and exchanged with the permit holder, two weeks from close of business, two weeks before the meeting. Is that during thanksgiving or something it was during the thanksgiving recess. December 5th, i just dont want to make them do it on thanksgiving day or Something Like that. It would be by november 21st. Okay, so by november 21st, the department can make findings, share it with the permit holder and commission secretary, and the permit holder may provide a minute responminute written response to the commission within one week of the Commission Meeting on december 5th. Someone want to make that motion . So moved. Can i say so moved . Is that sufficient . I was taking notes, but i trust your language better than mine. So moved, so we will continue this until december 5th, with the details as provided in terms of providing notice to the permitee and the written findings. Great. Is there a second . Ill second it. Commissioner perez seconds the motion. Miss securitewart, will you tae vote . Clerk [ roll call. ] all right. The motion is continued until december 5th. The findings will be presented by the 21st to the permit holder. Thank you, everyone, for coming out today, if you did come out for this hearing, and thank you for your counsel. Can i just yes. I appreciate everyone from the community who came out on both sides. I know a decision like this cant bring back a loved one, a friend, a family member, but it, you know, we on the Entertainment Commission take very seriously the role that bars and places of entertainment play in our community, and we want them to be safe and welcoming places for all of us, so i hope that, you know, what we can do is a 30day suspension, but i hope that this inspires significant change in the operation of the bar and its relationship to the community, and thank you all for staying with us through this whole process. Thank you; and you know, mr. Escolero, and miss reyes, i do appreciate that you have been making the effort to come into compliance. I think thats a good sign. We dont want to see you here. We dont want to hear or see calls for service. By the time it reaches us, it becomes a problem, and and we have some tools to address that. As our acting director said, you are still able to play an ipod. Were not revociking president tan all right. Hello, again. We have a majority of our meeting still to go through, so thank you for sitting through that, those of you who did. Item number 3, Police Department comments and questions, i dont see anyone from the police here, so we will move onto item number 4, which is hearing possible actions for permits. The first is a consent item, and ill hand it to miss weiland to present it to us. Director weiland thank you, so this one is for elite cafe at 2041 fillmore. Theyre just going for a life performance permit. I had nothing bad from the community, and the Police Department approved this permit. So did planning, and so its just a basic consent item. President tan all right. Is there a motion to approve . I motion to approve the limited live music permit at the elite cafe. Second. President tan all right. Theres a motion and a second. Any Public Comment . Seeing no Public Comment, comment is closed. All right. Well take a vote. Clerk [ roll call. ] president tan the motion passes for the elite cafe, and moving onto the consent agenda. Director weiland we have were moving onto two51, and ill just be brief because rick haynes is also here to tell you all about it. These guys are hoping to have live music, d. J. s, small jazz groups, playing music in the venue, so ill let them take it away. My name is mark rennick shall along with rick haynes, the sponsor. There theres, in your packet, an amended permit clucapplication because we ran into a snag, were opening as the art gallery, weve joint ventured with the San Francisco art gallery, so were going to put on some shows, sell some alcohol. We have already brought in henry carnilowitz, whos an event promoter. This night Time Entertainment is a principally permitted use in the district. This has had an entertainment license since 2004, so i think its an indication of city planning tightening up a little bit on existent places of entertainment. That said, there are no residences within 300 feet; however, the landlord was pretty tight on our proposed lease, which is why i believe this was attached to the if i could have the overhead for a second the questionnaire. We brought charles saultry in to do extensive testing to make sure there was no sound bleed into the building, so that said, there wont be any sound bleed anywhere. The recommendations are in our lease, and there are 16 tenants in this particular building, including ticketmaster, live nation, Cameron Hughes wine. We contacted all 16 tenants, in terms of our outreach, takahashi is a big warehouse across the street the street. Weve talked to the tenants a couple doors down, and weve join the potrero and dogpatch business association. We tried to join the potrero boosters, also. Their emails are bouncing back, so after 40 years, they may be out of business, but we its our intention to be a good neighbor, do a good job down there. This was this place was built the latest inkarnation was build by sean manchester, who also built mighty and wish, and who does a good job. So i guess my client is here to answer any questions you might have, and were asking the commission to grant give us a conditional grant on this application tonight. President tan did you want to say anything or we can go with questions commissioners, any questions . Are you going to be open every night of the week or is it have you thought of that . Closed sundays, mondays, open from i think its 11 well, well really be open from 4 00 to midnight on wednesdays, and then, thursdays until 1 30, fridays until 1 30, and saturdays until 1 30. And theres not many residential neighbors now, but i think there are plans to have many more. How do you plan to address new neighbors that might come your way in the future . We had some discussion about that. Theres i dont really believe they can build within 300 feet of us, but theres a lot of building going on around that area, and thats why we want this. Its going to be like a neighborhood bar. Its the bar that were doing, its were video mapping the whole inside of the place. Were putting 60 projectors inside, so you can do video art displays, video art gallery, or change the whole inside of your place with the artwork, or if you do a corporate event, were targeting the Tech Community for this and doing Corporate Events, art events, and these types of things, and then, being a happy hour type of bar, as well, for that community. We realize its going to take sometime for it to build up as a neighborhood bar because, you know, i mean, whats the the in place new place on the corner . One henry adams . Yeah, that place is finished, and theres a lot of places for ucsf being built right on the other side of the dogpatch there, and we looked around where other bars are and stuff like that, and we decided wed like to take a shot at it. President tan okay. Great. And are you having inhouse promoters or people who will be promoting separately and working with you all . No. We will only be doing one one event weekly. That is what you would call a club event, and its a 70s, 80s, 90s themed event, and its more towards gamers and that kind of stuff, and were going to artwork, and you know, do it around that. Besides that, we will be doing Corporate Events and just be open as a bar or lounge for that building. President tan thats really coal. Look forward to seeing that. Commissioner perez. Commissioner perez so with security, will you be having your own or will you be hiring a Third Party Vendor . I will be my own, and ive been a security provider before. Ive had my own card before. Ive had a team of guys that have worked for me throughout the years that have been operating with me. Weve confident of our security plan, and we do know our security plan. Commissioner perez all right, man. Yeah. Commissioner perez thank you. Vice president thomas just wanted to say we appreciate your security plan. Its more detailed than a lot of the ones we got, so thank you. And i have read it several times. Vice president thomas the appreciate the more Security Guard. President tan well, hopefully, we wont have to see you for a suspension hearing, ever. Just to let you guys know, i have made holograms in las vegas. Im very versed in the video access side of things, and im trying to bring to this place anything thats different thats currently in San Francisco. President tan youre going to have holo grams in San Francisco . Im not going to say that, but there may be some smaller holo grams of different kinds of things. President tan really cool. Have a seat. I will call for Public Comment before we make a motion. Is there Public Comment on two51 . Seeing none, Public Comments closed. All right. Commissioners, someone make a motion. I motion to approve the permit. President tan all right. Is there a second . Vice president thomas second. President tan lets take a vote. Clerk [ roll call. ] president tan the motion passes. Good luck. Look forward to seeing the projections and other good stuff from there. All right. Our next next permit applicant is hermitage banquet hall. This is fore a venue that i located in the rich manned district, which is great because we dont see a lot of permits into this area, and the owner, boris, is here this evening. Hes essentially opening this up as sort of like a community hall, and hes going to have live music happening at the venue. I just also want to call attention to the fact that we did not receive any negative feedback from the community. In fact, we received a letter of support from supervisor fewer, who i know her legislative aide wanted to be here tonight, but it might be a little too late, and the Police Department submitted their conditions that it would like to suggest that any and all Security Guards working in the venue should be fully licensed Security Guards with current and active guard cards, so that is it. W come on up, boris. President tan tan continue can you speak into the microphone. President tan and members of Entertainment Commission. Im here to represent hermitage banquet hall, so we are opening this place for community that as our customers, our community, and that we would like to provide a place for entertainment, and to that people can get their events birthdays, banquets, small weddings, that will allow them to celebrate their events in our places. So we invited District Supervisor sandra fewer. She visited the place. She likes a lot of it. I got a recommendation from member of our community, which is rabbi peele, who submitted the recommendation to Entertainment Commission offices, as well, and were asking for a permit to operate and provide entertainment. Its our intention to have this entertainment normally, it would be friday, saturday, and sunday. Thats when the entertainment will be provided. President tan great. Thank you. Commissioners, any questions . Commissioner perez . Commissioner perez hello. Thamp tham thanks for coming in. Is this a new building or an old building . This is an old building. We renovated the building from the ground up, and we installed in the neighbors businesses a sound wall to allow us to contain the music, and the member of Entertainment Office come in and measured the requirements, whatever required, and we understood that, and were happy that they would provide the recommendation for us. Commissioner perez okay. So you feel satisfied with the sound proofing thats been done . Okay. Thank you very much. President tan commissioner lee . So the people that use your space, are you going to rent to them lets say, for example, that somebody wanted to have a fundraiser, but theyre kind of in the early