>> thank you, good afternoon, this meeting will come to order, welcome to the november 15th, regular meeting. did i go too soon? .i'm supervisor safai, and to me is supervisor fewer and joining me is supervisor yee who is not here and my clerk is lisa wang and i thank charles kriminac from sfgov-tv for staffing this meeting. >> clerk: please silence all cellphones and complete speaker cards and documents to be part of the files to be submitted to the court and items will appear on a november 28th board of supervisors agenda unless otherwise stated. >> super safai: i think that -- supervisor safai: i think that item number one is going to be continued. so actually why don't we take item number two, please. >> clerk: yp two, ordinance of money to require parties to pay a refundable deposit when requesting written findings when the assessment appeals board has established procedures concerning the waiver and renewal of requests for written findings. >> unless there's any comments from my colleague here why don't we hear from supervisor peskins and aide lee hel heppner. >> the proposed legislation before you today is an amendment to chapter 2b of the administrative code with policies and procedures for requesting findings of the assessment appeals board prior to an assessment hearing. as i understand it and this was sort of urged to our office at the request of the assessment appeals board, these amendments codify the policies and the procedures that have been developed by the assessment appeals board with the cooperation of the assessor recorders office. relative to requests that the board prepare findings pursuant to california revenue and taxation code 1611.5 and the property tax rules 308 and 325. and i'm happy to go into details and either the applicant or the assessor may make a written request for findings before commencement of an assessment hearing and there's a $215 ddeposit to cover the first hour of those finds and to the requesting party is billed for the preparation of those findings up to 30 hours. there's also a procedure established for the abandonment of a request for findings and if the deposit is not paid before the conclusion of the hearing itself, if the requesting party fails to pay the total assessed amount or if the requesting party either explicitly or through neglect abandons their request for findings. if the request is abandoned, the requesting party is entitled to a full refund of deposit or fees paid unless the city has already spent more than an hour preparing those findings and for the appeals board to notify all parties that the request for findings has been abandoned. again, this is to codify the existing procedures that the assessment appeals board already uses and in doing so to fill a gap in state law that was left there for us to be able to develop these procedures. one non-subsanative declaration, on page 2, line 4, i believe that it should read, "finding fees shall be waived" instead of just "findings shall be waived," and so it should be waived if any of the following occur. so i request that slight modification be made and don duran from the appeals board is here to address any details that i left out. >> i have a quick question. so this is designed and so this is prior to having a hearing that you'd get essentially a written response. is this prior to having the hear something. >> i think that is the case. >> okay, great. please come forward, mr. duran. >> good afternoon, supervisors. in answer to your question, the request for findings of fact must be made prior to the commencement of the hearing and the deposit is due either before or at the conclusion of the hearing. once the hearing is held, when the board has the hearings, both parties are present, and the board can choose to render its decision prior to issuing those findings, or they can choose to issue its decision in conjunction with the findings. if the board releases their decision, if they choose to release their decision prior to issuing the findings or writing up the findings of fact, the parties -- both parties will be notified of the board's decision. the requesting party is then given the original requesting party is then given 10 business days to confirm whether they still want those findings to be issued by the board. (please stand by)one. >> commons 3rd thursdays is a monthly event series really activate service center and un plaza food and music and other social activities oil stephanie the vice president of operations for this. >> in 2016 an initiative called the service center launched an effort by a bunch of the city agencies along with institutional stakeholder and community partners to have a program that is how to get people out here on a monthly and weekly and daily basis. >> my name is a - i'm with the program manager and also commons 3rd thursdays will have live music important in the. >> the city approached us to provide food and beverages at the event kind of the core anchor to encourage attendees to food gives people a reason to stay i really like this like it is really nice like everybody is having a good time. >> our goal to enjoy the space and eat and drink and listen to music we wanted to inspire people with the un plaza as a place to hold they're community events. >> it is a great way to get people to know about global music and cuisine a great way to bring people together. >> a natural beautiful backdrop the asian art museum and . >> it is welcoming. >> two more events left in the series so, please come and enjoy and check it out we're having a great time. >> we love our city being a san francisco based on company it was important to engage request san franciscans and tourists alike. >> we want to inspire people and everyone interested in providing and coming out for a large or small-scale event reach out to the commons 3rd thursdays and we'll direct you're seeing to the right people to get to. >> neighborhood in san francisco are also diverse and fascist as the people that inhabitable them we're in north beach about supervisor peskin will give us a tour and introduce is to what think of i i his favorite district 5 e 3 is in the northwest surrounded by the san francisco bay the district is the boosting chinatown oar embarcadero financial district fisherman's wharf exhibit no. north beach telegraph hill and part of union square. >> all of san francisco districts are remarkable i'm honored and delighted to represent really whereas with an the most intact district got chinatown, north beach fisherman's wharf russian hill and knob hill and the northwest waterfront some of the most wealthier and inning e impoverished people in san francisco obgyn siding it is ethically exists a bunch of tight-knit neighborhoods people know he each other by name a wonderful placed physically and socially to be all of the neighborhoods north beach and chinatown the i try to be out in the community as much as and i think, being a the cafe eating at the neighborhood lunch place people come up and talk to you, you never have time alone but really it is fun hi, i'm one the owners and is ceo of cafe trespassing in north beach many people refer to cafe trees as a the living room of north beach most of the clients are local and living up the hill come and meet with each other just the way the united states been since 1956 opposed by the grandfather a big people person people had people coming since the day we opened. >> it is of is first place on the west that that exposito 6 years ago but anyone was doing that starbuck's exists and it created a really welcoming pot. it is truly a legacy business but more importantly it really at the take care of their community my father from it was formally italy a fisherman and that town very rich in culture and music was a big part of it guitars and sank and combart in the evening that tradition they brought this to the cafe so many characters around here everything has incredible stories by famous folks last week the cafe that paul carr tennessee take care from the jefferson starship hung out the cafe are the famous poet lawrence william getty and jack herb man go hung out. >> they work worked at a play with the god fathers and photos he had his typewriter i wish i were here back there it there's a lot of moving parts the meeting spot rich in culture and artists and musicians epic people would talk with you and you'd get >> 5, 4, 3, 2 , 1. cut. >> we are here to celebrate the opening of this community garden. a place that used to look a lot darker and today is sun is shining and it's beautiful and it's been completely redone and been a gathering place for this community. >> i have been waiting for this garden for 3 decades. that is not a joke. i live in an apartment building three floors up and i have potted plants and have dreamt the whole time i have lived there to have some ability to build this dirt. >> let me tell you handout you -- how to build a community garden. you start with a really good idea and add community support from echo media and levis and take management and water and sun and this is what we have. this is great. it's about environment and stewardship. it's also for the -- we implemented several practices in our successes of the site. that is made up of the pockets like wool but they are made of recycled plastic bottles. i don't know how they do it. >> there is acres and acres of parkland throughout golden gate park, but not necessarily through golden community garden. we have it right in the middle of >> ok. good afternoon, everybody. welcome to the san francisco board of supervisors land use and transportation committee meeting for monday, november 13, 2017. my name is mark farrell, i'll be chairing this confirm i'm joined by our supervisor and committee vice chair aaron peskin as well as katie tang. i want to thank jim and charls from sfgov tv for covering the meeting as well as the clerk of our committee. i want to make a few announcements. for item number one only we'll have spanish interpreters here so if anyone needs an interpreter, please feel tree to let our staff now. -- know. as well as we'll have chinese interpreters for items number three and four. lastly i want to wish my own father a happy birthday today on november 13. with that, madame clerk, item number one. >> yes. item number one is a ordinance amending the fire housing codes to require sprinklers in residential and hotels. supervisor? >> thank you. i appreciate your takinging this up again and i also want to thank the many community representives who have come out in support of this language overdue legislation, including the community tenants association, the san francisco apartment association, the mission s.r.o. collaborative, chinatown s.r.o. collaborative and the people's tenderloin congress to name a few. this morning, the "san francisco chronicle" editorial board also weighed in and i want to thank them for their support of this legislation. i think there's widespread agreement that this legislation is a measured approach to addressing fire safety requirements and disclosures in some of our city's oldest buildings with lots of affordable housing. indeed, since our last meeting, a fire originated in the ground floor lan droe mat of a residential building in my district, temporarily displacing 30 individuals. luckily, the fire department arrived within minutes of the call and no one was hurt. but it was another reminder of the urgency of implementing systems that could delay or help contain fire damage and potentially save lives. in advance of the last meeting, i did receive some feedback and concerns that commercial tenants who were enjoying the benefits of affordable commercial rent through long-term leases might be adversity impacted by the potential for construction costs pass-throughs. this is not the intent of the legislation, and while we're not entirely sure who would actually be impacted by this, given that the legislation triggered by sale and purchase of an s.r.o., i have amendments which i've passed out to you in an attempt to address these concerns. i want to thank the city attorney for the language, which you can find on page 5 at lines 14 through 22. and on page 6, lines one through 10. which indicate that 10 days prior to submitting building permit application, an owner of a residential hotel will provide written notice to any tenant of the nonresidential areas subject to the upgrade requirement of the tenant's right to apply to the departments of building inspection for a deferment of the upgrade requirement. tenants of nonresidential areas impacted by the upgrade requirement will apply to d.b.i. for a deferment of the upgrade if, one, they have a written lease that was in effect as the effective date of the ordinance and, two, the lease explicitly requires tenant pay for the cost of building upgrades or updates and that language is before you. i would like the thank the widespread community support and thank you, colleagues, for listening to this a second time. >> ok. thank you, supervisor peskin. colleagues, i have a number of speaker cards for item number one. cookie howard. candy jordan davis and tim huang. if there is anyone else, please feel free to come forward and line up against the far wall. you'll have two minutes to speak, everybody. thank you for being here. [clearing throat] >> good afternoon. my name is jordan davis and i serve as the tenant representive on the single . -- single-room occupancy task force. i'm supporting sprinkler ordinance 2.0 and here are the reasons. the graywood hotel burned down in 2016. 57 displaced. the park hotel at 1040 fullsome, burned down in 2011. 41 displaced. and 801 pacific, burned down in 2017. 19 displaced. and, of course, there's 199 mason and i believe that was where 30 were displaced as supervisor peskin said. there were smaller fires in the francis and mission hotels recently that displaced several tenants. mission s.r.o. collaborative is in support today because the mission is burning and although this legislation doesn't go far enough, it is still necessary to make sure that these -- there is less of a chance that people living in these hotels end up on the streets due to these blazes and when it comes to senior disabled and immigrants, homelessness can be even harder and possibly even deadly. i am a fire safety fundamentalist. there is no reason -- there is no measure that is too complex, too expensive or too redundant to preventing these conflagrations. we all have a duty to prevent fire, but the hotel owners have an even bigger responsibility and sprinkler ordinance 2.0 will play a huge role in that. for all the hotels in the mission, tenderloin, soma, chinatown, north beach, knob hill and even the richmond and elsewhere, it is imperative that this gets passed. thank you very much. >> thank you, jordan. next speaker, please. >> my name is candy crawford and i live at the mission hoement and i'm also part of the mission collaborative. i'm in support of these upgrades because we live in fear of having fires all the time. we have smokers in our hotel, but we've had many fires and none of the sprinklers have turned on. we've had fires in the kitchen area where there is no sprinkler. we've had fires in the laundry room where the lint gets trapped in the wall. and no sprinkler. we barely have alarms. so, we are definitely in support of this because we live in fear for our lives all the time. thank you. >> thank you. >> next speaker, please. >> i'm tim huang with the mission collaborative and i'm here in support of the proposed changes to the sprinkler ordinance. so, first i want to thank supervisor peskin and his team for spearheading this bill. so i lead fire and earthquake prevention workshops in the mission. and the stuff i see there is just kind of blind blowing. you know, there's actually some people who live in s.r.o. hotels with no elevator, just stairs. and they are wheelchair users. so imagine if their building caught on fire, how would they escape? and also with buildings like the graywood, with the fire displacing them, they have the right to come back. but in reality, who's -- you know, who's going to follow up on all this. who's going to make sure that they have a home? and you have to ask yourself, what is going to end up with these rooms that get renovated, you know, due to the fires and then who are going to be the new residents that are going to be staying there? so, i hope you all support this bill and thank you for listening. >> thank you. next speaker. >> buenos tardes. [speaking in spanish]. >> interpreter: good afternoon. my name is maria and i live in the hotel de mission. >> [speaking in spanish]. >> interpreter: i'm afraid that it is going to be a fire there at some point. >> [speaking in spanish]. trep because it is a very old building. >> [speaking in spanish]. >> interpreter: and there is a lot of children that live there. >> [speaking in spanish]. >> interpreter: and other people smoke in the rooms. >> [speaking in spanish]. >> interpreter: i wouldn't want anything horrible to happen like what happened in pacific hotel in chinatown. >> [speaking in spanish]. >> interpreter: so i ask you here to please help us enact this law. >> muchas gracias. >> interpreter: thank you. >> hi, i'm cheryl cookie howard and i live in the mission hotel. i'm a member of the s.r.o. collaborative. and we've had several fires in the building since i've been there. i've been livinging there for 10 years. i'm also trained in nert training with the fire department. i have been a safety monitor. in my building. but recently, due to whatever they want to say in my building, management says that we don't need safety monitors in my building and this is all part of the fire safety issues. and, you know, like i said, we've had -- i don't know how many fires in my building, 10 years i've been there. the sprinklers have not gone off one time. you know, thank god we have a very responsive fire department. you know? and for whatever reason, i talked to the fire marshalls the other day. they said that the sprinklers work. i have to talk their word for it because that is their job. but we're still not sure. so it is very, very very, very important to us. thank you. >> thank you. next speaker. >> good afternoon. i think that residents, both this week and two weeks ago, spoke very eloquently why we need these protections on top of what we already have. what we're also here in support of today is a provision for those small businesses that serve the neighborhood that have been long in existence sometimes in the ground floor of these s.r.o.s. and we really want to see those thrive and stay in place so we're in full support of the amendment as described by supervisor peskin, that will protect those with long-term leases and pass-through for capital improvements, which we thought was a very important, very narrow exemption to what we're working on. so, i think -- i want to thank supervisor peskin and his staff for all the work that he's put in to this issue and hopefully we can get all of your support. thank you. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> hello. my name is denise dorie and i'm president of the central city democrats. and i'd like to thank supervisor peskin. for his legislation. i'd like to endorse jordan davis also, her comments were spot-on. i live on eddie and taylor. and i've lived in s.r.o.s most of my life, really. i'm 62 so it is like four decades of living in s.r.o.s and this time i was in the franciscan towers when they burned. the franciscan tower over on eddie and taylor and there were no sprinklers there. was no fire alarm. we sat there and just burned and burned and burned. the building burned all night. and the only reason we got out was because there were people on the street saying -- look, come out, come out because we had a streetside view. without having a streetside view we might not have, you know there were people who got really sick from smoke inhalation. so, that's a good example. that we do need fire alarms. so, because i rescued like two cats out of there. it wasn't -- ha. this is real, you know? and these buildings are like tinder boxes. so i appreciate your time. thank you. >> thank you very much. any other members of the public who wish to comment on item number one? seeing none, public comment is closed. [gavel sounds] supervisor peskin? >> thank you, chair farrell. i would like to move the amendments that i offered earlier and, again, thank you colleagues and members of the public as well as my staff sonny angulo who has been working on this legislation for many months and would like to send the item as amended to the full board with recommendation. >> ok. we have a motion by supervisor peskin and we can take that without objection. madame clerk, call item number two, please. >> item number two is an ordinance amending the planning code 2731 to 2735 fullsome street as landmark under article 10 and making appropriate findings. >> ok. colleagues, this item is sponsored here and we have our planning department to speak on this item. >> good afternoon, supervisor. shannon ferguson, planning department staff. the item before you today is a community sponsored article 10 landmark nomination for the goffren house located at 2731 fullsome street in the mission district. the landmark nomination was submitted by the property owners in february of 2017. 2731 fullsome street was constructed for james goffren in 1900, likely as a rental property. the goffren house is significant for its association with the development of the mission development as a streetcar suburb in the 19th century. the streetcars that ran along howard mission and fullsome street helped spur development in the mission district like the gaughren house. it's also significant as a local -- as a work of master architect james francis dunne. and it is a fine example of those residential bozart architecture. it is clearly identifiable, especially with its intricate balcony with an lab wrought iron railing. one of those building 1298 sacramento street completed after his death is designated as landmark 106. his other signature design features are also present, including a rusticated ground floor and arched openings. these features are also hallmarks of the style. the preservation commission initiated landmark designation on march 15, 2017 and unanimously recommended landmark designation on july 19, 2017. the department believes the building meets the established eligibility requirements and landmark status is warranted. on behalf of the historic preservation commission, they recommend designation of the crawford house. this concludes my friendsing. -- presentation. i'm happy to answer any questions. the homeowner was not able to be here because his daughter passed away suddenly last week. he is very supportive of this designation. >> ok. thank you very much. colleagues, any questions or comments. ok. we'll open this up to public comment. anybody wish to comment on item number two? please step forward. seeing none, public comment is closed. [gavel sounds] again, sorry. just a quick question to make clear. supervisor whose district this is in -- >> yes. >> have they -- are they supporting this item? >> yes. >> ok. just want to double-check. thank you. ok, colleagues. >> mr. chairman, i would be to move this item to the full board with recommendation and want to thank mr. lundy for the incredible work they have done rehabilitating this place and planning department staff for the very lovely case report and i'd be happy to affix my name as a sponsor. >> ok. by supervisor -- did you make a motion? >> so moved. >> ok. supervisor peskin has moved to move this item forward. we can take that without objection. madame clerk, items three and four together, please. >> yes. items number three and four are ordinances amending the planning code to recommend cannabis land uses, allow m.c.d.s in additional zoning districts, establish a land use process for the conversion of c.d. and repeal ordinance 816-17 and enable candice and certain m.c.d.s and making the appropriate findings. >> ok. thank you very much. so, colleagues, the item of the hour here and why everyone is, i think, joining us in chambers today. we have these items in front of us. i know there was work done last week. there was work done on this topic at our rules committee. or some of my colleagues who are here with us today spent their time this morning. i would invite my colleagues if they want to make any comments right now. otherwise what i would suggest we also do is move obvious to public comment since i think the substance of what we'll be discussing will be handled afterwards. but colleagues, if you would like to speak, i want to open that up. supervisor sheehy? >> yes. i just want to -- i think we have the outlines of something that might work out. we want to have the actual language, as i understand, from the city attorney until tomorrow. and really the goal of the amendments that we'll be proposing tomorrow is to make sure that we have something in place on january 1. and the way in which we're lining this up so that the existing m.c.d.s, the existing supply chain will be able to do adult use on january 1. and maybe if planning or the city attorney can talk broadly about what we want to do and where it is going to be and hopefully that's something we can get some consensus on while we take time to really rangel out the details of the remaining details as a board so we can satisfy as many of our interests as possible. >> to the planning departments. >> yes. if you wanded to move forward without the cannabis retail regulations in the ordinance but allow sort of the temporary sale of adult-use cannabis on january 1, what we proposed is creating cannabis retail as a temporary use and amending section 205 which deals with temporary uses in the planning code. that would run for a year but would be contingent upon the office of cannabis issuing their sort of temporary adult use permit for that time period. and then the board would go through the legislative process to hammer out the details for how permanent controls for cannabis retails would work and at that point, everybody operating with an m.c.d. with a temporary cannabis retail permit would have to go through whatever land-use process you all developed for that. we'd also like to see the nonretail portion move forward. it clarifis the codes so that the zoning minister doesn't have to make interpretations about what use fits in what with. and it also deals with some agricultural growing issues that may arise if those aren't moved forward. thank you. >> thank you. just for clarification sake here, i think for people in the public who are wondering what is going to happen. so, essentially this idea, if it moves forward and moves forward tomorrow, the full board will essentially allow existing m.c.d.s to concert to recreational use through the office of cannabis on january 1. and then have -- and that would be essentially a one-year temporary permit, if you will, while we iron out the permanent details. is that correct? >> correct. >> if there are any details, please. i just want to lay it out. >> purchase saounlts to amendments made, supervisors nicole elliott, office of cannabis, pursuant to some amendments maded to the operating maintenance which allow for article 33 permit hollers to temporarily do cannabis retail, including adult use, that is an amendment to the article 33 of the health code. so, that would be -- well, my office would be reviewing security plans, potentially, pending amendments made to the board. security plans and good neighbor policies until they have an article 16 permit. they are in d.p.h.'s per view. so, there is a provision in the operating ordinance that requires operators to apply article 33 permit holders to apply for a permit within 30 days of my office making that application available next year. so, there is a moment in time where they have to seek an article 16 permit. but january 1, if they're doing adult use activity, that will be through their article 33 permit and thus under the regulatory authority of the departments of public health. >> reporter: and for everyone's clarification, can you clarify what article 16 is and article 33. >> sure. article 16 is the new article within the police code where we are housing the regulatory structure for commercial cannabis activity moving forward. and permits are created within the police code to allow the office of cannabis to regulate that activity moving forward. article 33 is what is currently allows medicinal cannabis to allow to do collective activity under the health code. >> reporter: got it. thank you very much. ok. >> thank you, chair farrell. just add to a little bit of clarity. we talked about in the rules committee this morning, there is a transition -- there was this transition that was intended to provide for the temporary operation of adult use along with medicinal use and just to clarify for the public, anyone that would be operating and doing adult use would still have to do medicinal use. so, that is a requirement. you could continue to just be purely medicinal. if you do do adult use, you have to have medicinal component. the second thing is, and director elliott refered to, this we asked and will be proposing amendments tomorrow to require those two things that current operators have to submit as part of their process to be medicinal cannabis dispensary. that is a good neighbor policy and the other is a manage 78 and security plan. we heard both from this committee as well as the rules committee and other individuals that there was a -- there was a requirement -- a desire that moving from medicinal to adult use, that there would be some level of review if there were operators throughout that weren't necessarily interacting with their commercial corridor or their neighbors well. everyone would resubmit their good neighbor policy along with their management and security plan that would then be reviewed by the local police captain with suggestions offered along with a final approval by the office of cannabis director and their department. and in consultation with the district supervisor, they can't write that into the code because of the separation of powers. but we were clear on the record that we would want some interaction with our offices. that is the amendment that will be proposed tomorrow. in the full bore. >> thank you for that clarification. that makes sense. i want to make sure we get the general gist out there of one of the potential ideas that's being discussed as to, again, allow under certain conditions, let's leave it at that, existing m.c.d.s to convert to recreational use on january 1 and prescribing at some potential future date permanent retail use, land use regulations. but with that, colleagues, unless no other comments are right now, i suggest we open this up to public comment. everyone is going to have two minutes to speak. we do have interpreters here. in chinese if people would like them. i'm going to call off some speaker cards and line up against the far wall. we have doug block, kina middleton, david goldman, aaron ashe, michael cohen, jesse stout, brandon brown, david hooper, harold smith, jen garcia. >> thank you. doug block teamsters joint council 7. i'm going to echo the comments that i made in the rules committee earlier this morning, first by starting to thank you all for going above and beyond the state standards on the employee threshhold for the labor piece agreement and to reiterate that our goal as a union has been that as this industry comes out of shadows that workers have the right to freely choose union representation. to that end, we've worked very hard to shape the delivery model for this industry. including an independent distributor between wholesale and retail. and also the requirements that deliveries be done by employees, not independent contractors, of a dispensary with a manifest for delivery. i'm encouraged to hear that there may be a solution in the works so that we will have recreational cannabis on january 1 in the city and county of san francisco. i want to thank you for your hard work in pushing for that. and i would punishmentably suggest that if a dispensary applies for one of these temporary use permits for adult use that they should actually be required to demonstrate that they have a signed labor peace agreement at the time of the application. not on january 1 it is required by state law. an and i would actually wonder of the 46 that are currently operating how many would meet that standard if they were asked to do so today. thank you again. >> reporter: thank you. next speaker, please. >> good afternoon. my name is david goldman. i'm the president of the san francisco chapter of the democratic club. i'm also a long-term homeowner and resident dating back to 1973 in san francisco. i'd like to speak about the proposed zoning issues that have been discussed in the two parallel track pieces of legislation on cannabis. i think the 600-state-foot minimum is more than adequate. when you use 1,000 feet and especially if you're considering adding daycare centers as sensitive use, you will make virtually impossible to be any dispensaries in the city, any new ones. it is a mistake to give geographical exemptions to neighborhoods like chinatown and west portal for not having any cannabis dispensing. 80% of us, according to research, use cannabis to get off prescription drugs and it would be absurd to think that a neighborhood would not have a drugstore nearby within a few blocks. likewise, for people replacing cannabis instead of prescription drugs to not have a dispensing place, a store or medical dispensary nearby is an affront. i urge you not to set these restrictions in place and further i hope that you will not deny permits -- excuse me, pipeline applicants from opening or equity applicants from opening for adult use in 2018. thank you. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> good afternoon. my name is kina middleton a san francisco native and cultivator and i want to sneak favor of the 600 feet so that we all get a chance. it is not going to be possible for any of us to get into the business. and it is just going to carry on for the people that are already there. and also we need consumption lounges so that there are places to go. when people get here, they will just go straight to the street and then we're creating another war on a drug that we're trying to legalize, which doesn't make sense. so, thank you. >> supervisors, my name is david hooper and i'm here on behalf of the new mission terrace improvement association. one of the groups in the outter mission, excelsior district. and i'm also a member of district arts and council and i've also been working on the effort by the san francisco planning commission and the mayor's office of workforce and economic development. in order to breathe life into mission street. i'm here to say that the present limit on three cannabis dispensaries in the mission district, in the excelsior district on mission street more than adequate. as late as july a year ago before the momentary moratorium was in place, then supervisor avalos and the two candidates for the board of supervisors all spoke on the necessity of maintaining that limit for the sake of our economic health and development on mission street. we are working hard for a bettpl

Related Keywords

Mission District , California , United States , Tennessee , China , North Beach , Spain , Telegraph Hill , San Francisco , Spanish , Chinese , Harold Smith , Katie Tang , Jordan Davis , David Goldman , William Getty , Shannon Ferguson , Brandon Brown , Tim Huang , James Francis Dunne , Michael Cohen ,