Larger entities are coming in to take advantage of that land use space because its a fairly premium commodity, so the portable permits will allow the owner to be able to transport that permit to another location. There, of course, are a whole set of criteria to ensure that it isnt a new owneroperator during that process, and they have 18 months to find a new location. Also, consumption, so the definition of consumption was changed, so now, consumption does mean smoking and edible consuming or other ways of consuming drinking and will allow the retailers the ability to add that on. There are going to be specific criteria. Right now its being proposed as you have to have a separate consumption room, so again, this is going to be, you know, a bit of a challenge because there are some mcds that are small, and if when they transfer into a Cannabis Retailer, they wont have the room to create that space, so itll be interesting to see what the director comes with in terms of how the portable permits may be able to be used if a current operator wants to relocate to be able to allow onsite consumption. And there will be, of course, a whole set of Building Code and Health Code Regulations to be able to ensure. President dwight and any mcd should be affordable operator, right . The retailers, as i understand it, but i will clarify if it extends beyond the retailers. President dwight okay. Does that sound good . And then, there is a local hire requirement that has been established by supervisor safai. Unfortunately, it was not he initially he initially submitted the amendment to a 30 local hire requirement but then, it got amended at committee to 50 . For all operators . For all operators. Thats outrageous. We cannot be mandating the hiring practices of Small Businesses, any businesses, to that level of specificity. There may not be that many qualified applicants in this city, and youre going to hamper the city before you even get to that point. Commissioner ortizcartagena oaklands having that problem right now. Who can live in this city anymore, and so youre going to youre going to hamstring this industry right out of the gate, and any i cant support any frankly, i cant support any local hiring requirements, because businesses i have tried to hire people in a retail space. I cant find candidates. People cant afford to live near here. They dont want to commute four hours from livermore, where they can afford to live, so to make that a requirement on anybodys business, whether theyre in cannabis or sewing or any kind of retail, i think, is an absurd requirement. We have the lowest employment rate in the entire country. This is a nonstarter. Commissioner ortizcartagena and if i could just shed light is because people thinks its going to be a bonanza. Once it becomes illegal, its not. Thats why prohibition happened. So, like, im just president dwight well, i dont see why this industry should have its own hiring requirement that is not foisted on any other industry in this city that im aware of. If you have a local hiring requirement for a city and county funded project, thats entirely different. One, its a job, you know, its a defined job. Its not an industry, its not a business. It is a contract, right . Thats totally different, having requirements like that for contracts, but to subject a business owner, an entrepreneur any Small Business owner, our equity owners, to subject them to this requirement, it is commissioner toursarkissian it is failure right out of the block. And if i may, i think it was sort of pushing toward the hiring of the harder to employ, but that is better done through very specific workforce programs. They have workforce programs that channel people into this industry, not make a mandate on the otherwise that said we must hire thus. We dont run those programs. So that may be something that you might want to take some action on, so those are the core elements of that i think, the highlights from commissioner toursarkissian how do we take action on this very specific requirement tonight . You could say that because of this local hire is currently in the legislation that is before you, on page 48, and so you could take specific action on that item. And then, let me just quickly say additional so staff president dwight pardon me, commissioner adams need to leave because he has i have a 9 00 flight. So what i just proposed to you is going to the board of supervisors to take action on. They divided the file so they can keep this document in committee to the call of the chair, and so theyre going to be continuing to work on adding a section on compassionate Compassionate Program for medical, allowing patients to have access to those products, and that items sold in the cannabis for or medical cannabis is its the patient is able to access the product in a loose form, so what that sounds like to me is in the regular retail environment, i was not able to hear this first section, but because of that section, what this says to me is then all items sold in Cannabis Retail is prepackaged. So and then there is, again, sort of developments on criteria to develop more criteria around delivery, the commissary and commercial kitchens, and then, there was much discussion, commissioner toursarkissian around the percentages of ownership, and so that is being continued to to be worked on. And then, for land use so there were two files that were created, and i had to agendaize both of them to be able to talk to it. So summary is they whittled it down to one file, so the file was continued to the call of the chair, but where things are landing with land use is 600 feet initially in the legislation and zero in file 170141, 600 feet was the orbit. It was amended in committee today with 600 feet for the radius, and then 600 feet for a buffer zone. So i anticipate that there will be much discussion amongst many supervisors tomorrow, and thats not that may not be a final outcome. Again, brittni talked about the small retailers colocating and not subject to individual use or clustering codes. What was proposed today or amended today was to require a mandatory 312 notice citywide for any mcd converting to article 16, Cannabis Retailer, and to delete a mandatory dr for districts 4 and 7. Supervisor tang expanded, allowing Cannabis Retailers in the mc1 district for district 4, but is limiting one mcd for the neighborhood commercial districts for district 4. And supervisor safai has limited his number of districts for district 11. And then, the land use changes were to mirror the allowing the conversion excuse me the conversion of mcds into Cannabis Retailers. Those changes are reflected in the land use, in addition to the pipeline businesses in the pipeline. And with clarification that the grandfathered mcds are not subject to locational restrictions should there be any change, and cannabis may be smoked at retail locations. So those were the changes at the as of today, though, subject to change tomorrow at the board of supervisors. President dwight yeah. Okay. Well at least theyre talking about some of the right things. Commissioner zouzounis is that 600 feet mcd to mcd or retail to retail or does it also include the distributors to retail. Im sorry. The first 600 feet is from a school. Commissioner zouzounis and then, the second the clustering one. The clustering one would be 600 feet from Cannabis Retail from Cannabis Retail. Commissioner zouzounis okay. My question is if you have a cannabis distributor, can that be closer than 600 fe 600 feet from a Cannabis Retailer, or manufacturing to retailer . I dont know right now without seeing how that language was specifically written. Commissioner zouzounis i havent seen anything specifying that. I mean that because certain things, like a distributor, to be a distributor, you are likely having to be zoned in locations that are not close to mc districts. Commissioner ortizcartagena at this just i know this is not part of the first phases, but for restaurants, this is not going to make sense. Im just, you know, Small Businesses. I just want to keep reiterating and reiterating it, so, like, in north beach, all the commercial corridors, we have our amazing fine dining, where its mom and pop, good restaurants, so if i want to do cannabis infused cuisines, i cannot. I can only do a monopoly if i own the whole block. Thats not right. I think this is where the supervisors can provide some clarification, or would a restaurant be considered a Cannabis Retailer . Those questions have not been fully answered. I think, you know, theres definitely the need for continued refinement, but we do the we do need to get some rules and regs in place because at least for the current mcd operators, for them to be able to get into compliance locally, and then be able to apply with their license at the state and be a Cannabis Retailer january 1. Commissioner ortizcartagena im just throwing pebbles slowly but surely, slowly but surely. And i think its pebble that the commission can continue to address and bring up. Commissioner zouzounis and theres no confirming definition for a nonconforming cannabis operate jog yet . A nonconforming . Yes. Its in the preexisting. Its under section 1605k on page 21. Commissioner riley the thousand feet or 600 feet from school or child care facility, what is the latest . I know some communities feel very strongly about the thousand feet. Right. So as i understand, this happened not too long before our meeting started, the final land use recommendations was that what moved forward was the 600 feet. Again, that still could be debated more at the board of supervisors, but the 600 feet, in terms of the radius from schools, i dont know, and the daycare could have been amended in committee today, but i would because of my meeting schedules and and ma man maneka would have been the one to see it, but okay. Well wait. Commissioner zouzounis and my reference to that nonconforming cannabis definition if that was going to include it says engaging commercial cannabis activities related to medical cannabis activitied in the city. So if you were a distributor, like, that you were an accessory distributor or you provided the equipment and the raw material that, you know, created these things, that was besides the cannabis, is that considered a preexisting so, like, if you are selling the instruments that you make the pens to to i that will need to be clarified, but my understanding, youre not really selling a product that has cannabis in it. President dwight i suspect if you do not have cannabis in your product, youre not subject to any of these regulations, so you can be selling equipment, you can be selling accessories, you can be selling paraphernalia, and theres a whole industry in that alone. I dont sorry. For example. If i start making stash bags, i am not now subjected to the requirements of the cannabis industry, im pretty sure thats i mean, thats how i would interpret it because you do not have any of the cannabis product, so if youre making pipes or bongs or what have you. All right. So any other questions . All right. So thats it. I do the last thing i do want to say is i want to extend my appreciation to director elliott, to aaron starr, dan sider, and the City Attorneys office, and of course all the supervisors offices skm thean aides, because things have been changing and theyve been doing a terrific job keeping up, still trying to keep track and understand all the nuances, which is very complex when youre talking about four to five significant different types of industries that, you know, make one big industry, so i just want to give them a shout out for the great work that theyre doing. Commissioner ortizcartagena and our office, too. Yeah, and our office. Commissioner ortizcartagena theyve been killing it. And your recommendation is very clear, so the supervisors took those very seriously. President dwight good. So weve kind of got were those your director was that your directors report . No, that was not the directors report. That was the final wrap up of just giving you an update on items. President dwight okay. Ill call for Public Comment on that. Do we have any members of the public that would like to comment on the directors wrap up on items 5 and 6 . Seeing non, Public Comment is closed. That means we can move onto item number 6. Was there a motion . President dwight okay. Commissioner toursarkissian i would like to regarding the proposed amendments as to requiring 50 local hiring, i would like to make a motion that that be stricken from the proposed legislation. President dwight yeah, im fine with that. Anybody want to second that motion . May i just make one recommendation, in case the number got modified a little bit down in committee . President dwight i dont think there should be any local hiring requirement . Commissioner toursarkissian i believe that the local hiring requirement, first of all, is in frankly, in this environment is not realistic, and second, would hinder the growth of the industry, would cause a major problem in hiring. Theres no way that the business could be held to that standard in the city and county of San Francisco. President dwight and furthermore, if you had to revalidate that every year, if you had employees that said screw this, im not commuting like this anymore, and next year, youre noncompliant, you cannot manage your workforce anymore. Thats absurd. And if they move out of the city. If you do think if this local hire is included, dow think it has the potential of affect being any future noncannabis related Small Businesses . President dwight well, i think it should be objected to the subject of no other business have been imposed these kind of penalties. Commissioner toursarkissian i think its really causing major damage to the growth of these businesses, and frankly, if they cant hire in San Francisco, then they cannot grow, they cannot open their doors. 50 is a huge number. And do you think that they might pull away employees from other noncannabis related president dwight well, it just creates a competition, an unnatural local competition of hiring. People should want and be allowed to work in the industry that theyre interested in. We shouldnt create an artificial market for those people, because what you will do is in fact create a bounty on those local hires, and you will artificially inflate their incomes, and you may argue that thats a good thing for those people, but youre going to get people migrating to an industry that they may or may not not want to be because theyre seduced by a piece of legislation that is solely focused on one industry and i think that represents just the the fundamental flaw in the legislation. Commissioner ortizcartagena president dwight, you said earlier, this is not a Public Public works kind of project, this is provide sector industry, and this is capitalism, you know. President dwight this is outside the bounds of our le s legislative bodies to be mandating this. Commissioner ortizcartagena i think theres a misconception. Were business people. Thats why were in this commission. I think theres a misconception that theres going to be a bunch of billionaires and stuff like that. President dwight its going to be a competitive business, just like any other. Commissioner ortizcartagena correct, and its an agriculture business. Commissioner riley director, if i remember correctly, there was such a requirement for the construction business, is it . And from what i understand, there has been challenges with that, but understand from the construction industry, a project goes up president dwight thats a contract by contract basis. That doesnt require that the employees of the contracting company, because they employ they employ temporary workers on a project by project basis, so theyre required on a project basis. Nobody says that Construction Company ayz in San Francisco has to have this composition of employees, because these are purchasing agents, those are all the fulltime employees that you keep in place. Commissioner riley and again, they didnt come here and explain to us that they can meet that requirement because they dont always find president dwight yeah, that thats an unnatural requirement for contracts. Right, so even in an industry where you have a pool of workers, and lets just say you cant meet or get close, theyre working, and when that projects done, theyre available for another project. In an ongoing industry, it just doesnt work that way. Commissioner riley yeah, agree. President dwight so the answer to your question is yes, i think it will have an adverse effect on all businesses in San Francisco because it creates an unnatural market, and around one specific industry which is in its infancy, and so as you say, we dont know how this is going to play out, and to hamstring this industry at this point in its development, thats just not the place of our legislators. Commissioner zouzounis the supervisor has good intent, but it doesnt make sense. Commissioner riley how about if we have a motion . President dwight well, i think the motion should be to reject any local hiring requirement, yeah. Supervisor fewer i think the president dwight regardless of the number. Commissioner toursarkissian i think the requirement for 50 or any San Francisco workforce in the proposition should be stricken. President dwight yeah. Commissioner toursarkissian should be stricken. There ought not be any requirement that the workforce be all San Francisco residents, and all definitions relating there to should be stricken from the proposed, you know, legislation as amended in committee. So that includes both just the standard local hire for all cannabis businesses and under the equity incubator, is that what youre proposing . Commissioner toursarkissian i mean, the equity incubator, it does not talk about the understanding of what was presented to us, at any 15 percent percent, 20 percent percent, 25 percentage. It is under on page 16, it does say president dwight it should be stricken from all legislation. Commissioner toursarkissian let me make my motion. I would say that any reference to the workforce be hired in San Francisco be stricken from the