Under through december 31, 2020, as the office of cannabis works do their permitting backlog and processes permanent license for these operators. Finally, because were getting all of the deadlines done at once, this ordinance will amend the health code to allow for additional 120day extensions through december 31, 2020, of existing medical cannabis dispensary permits. These extensions are necessary to successfully transition our medical dispensaries to recreational adult youth sales and allows them to continue operation and remain in compliance while supporting our broader equity goals. As part of their permit, we are committed to supporting the citys equity goals and our temporary authorization is a condition of their successful support for the equity program. Commissioners, this ordinance will allow existing Small Businesses operating on these temporary cannabis permits to continue operating through 2020. We hope to have your support. I hope to be joined by our colleagues from the office of cannabis for any questions you might have about this ordinance. Do we have any commissioner comments . I think this is another good cleanup ordinance that we need. I just want to echo that. Firsthand, ive been helping a lot of Small Businesses go through the process. You hand hold them and make this easier. We appreciate that in the neighborhoods. Its helping get it out of the darkness and into a legitimate business. I want to echo that, im hearing a lot of good things. Any other commissioner comments before we go to Public Comments . Okay. Lets open up item number 5 to Public Comment. Do we have any members of the comment who would like to make comment on item number 5. Seeing none, Public Comment is closed. Commissioners. I second. Clerk motion to support the legislation, roll call vote. [ roll call ] vote. Clerk motion passes 60 with one absent. Keep up the good work. Thank you. Next item, please. Clerk item 6, office of Small Business staff presentations, San Francisco massage regulations. Discussion item. Presenter is dominicadon van, senior policy analyst. While dominicadon is getting set up to present her powerpoint, i want to extend a great amount of appreciation for the amount of policy work shes done. Shes sent you the document. You may not have had a chance to fully read it, but because of it supervisor brown is utilizing this policy document to do the framework to amend the current massage regulations. And of course much of it follows the recommendations that the commission made when the first legislation or last set of substantive legislation was passed in 2015. So i will now turn that over to dominica. Commissioners, thank you for having me. Its always a little weird being on this side of the podium. Sfgov tv, i have a powerpoint. Today im going to provide you with a very highlevel, as brief as possible, overview of the legislative history affecting massage regulations, existing law and regulations, issues and considerations, and the policy options which were all covered in the massage topic paper which you should have received a little less than a week ago. So to go over the legislative history, as you may be aware in 2003 the regulation of massage businesses moved from s. F. Police department over to the department of Public Health. This was pretty significant for a number of reasons, but most importantly it legitimatized massage as a Health Service and established the linkage between Massage Therapy and healthcare and the department of Public Health would now be overseeing administration of regulations related to massage. It had been regulated through the police code prior to that because it was considered to be an Adult Service by city regulators. In 2006, a fairly comprehensive overhaul of land use regulations relating to massage was implemented and mandated, and it required that massage establishments be subject to conditional use authorizations in most commercial districts. This was responses to challenges that emerged to you to variations in businesses and land use across the city, which led to an overconcentration of massage businesses, both legitimate and illegitimate in certain areas of the city. Most significantly in 2008 a state law passed which set the stage for how we see massage regulated as it is today. The state law limited local land use controls relative to local businesses as you may remember hearing about back in 2015. Because of this localities across california started experiencing much higher volumes of complaints related to illegal commercial sex activity and human and sex trafficking, which was a very unfortunate, unintended consequence of that 2008 state law. In 2009, the city attempted to control for this in modifying certain land use controls with regard to massage, but it was extremely administratively challenging for the city to provide adequate oversight and regulation over both legitimate and illegitimate massage establishments. In 2014, the state recognized this and returned local land use controls to cities and countries, which is why in 2015 you saw two very significant pieces of legislation which were passed which regulated massage in San Francisco, which this commission did hear, both pieces of legislation and had significant commentary for. Some of you were here during that time and may remember that. One ordinance significantly regulated where massage can be operated in the city and significantly limited where it can be operated. It also defined massage establishment as its own land use very distinct from other Health Services and other medical services. I do recall that one recommendation from this commission was that massage continued to be considered a health use for those purposes, but it wasnt. It also required that all new general massage establishments, so thats any business that employees massage practitiones s undergo a conditional use authorization practice in sole practitioner massage establishments. Those that are occupied by only one practitioner would have to participate in a neighborhood notification process. So both are fairly onerous and the conditional use authorization process, as we all know, is fairly costly. Ordinance 7215 was also passed, and this ordinance comprehensively amended article 29 of the health code, which regulates how massage establishments themselves are licensed and how they operate and provided the department of Public Health with much more authority into oversight responsibilities with regard to massage establishments, including how and when fees and fines would be administered to those establishments. The ordinance also requires three types of licensing for specific massage permits. One is for a general massage establishment, the second is for a sole practitioner massage practice, and the other is for outcall massage practices. Finally, the last significant regulations that were passed were around this time last year in 2018. That ordinance added further requirements to obtaining massage establishment permits and significantly limited how many full practitioners could share a physical space and provided the director of the department of Public Health with more authority for accessing criminal histories of massage permit applications. When i was going through my research and looking at all of the prior legislation thats affected massage establishments and the Background Information for the last piece of legislation, it was noted that one purpose of article 29 is to ensure that massage establishments do not become elements of the sex trade and engage in other human rights violations. And the amendments that were made would close enforcement loopholes and discourage that conduct that puts worker and client safety at risk, which as well see, arguably this has been very successful in that regard. So currently massage is regulated through the department of Public Health and its regulated through the Planning Department, through the health and planning codes. Briefly, as briefly as i can do this, before a permit to operate a general massage establishment or a sole practitioner massage establishment is issued, the applicant must satisfy two major requirements. The first being an 18 to 19page application and for general massage establishments and an 892 application fee. For sole practitioner massage establishments, that fee is 5 635. [ please stand by ] for general massage establishment listed as 1,389, per year, which is modified depending on what month the individuals applying for the annual license fee and for soul practitioner massage establishments it is listed as when 86 we had 186 read i am seeing all of this to show you how detailed this process can be for an applicant. For an alcohol massage business permit submit a standard application to operate, written operational procedures with background checks, a declaration of a health and safety workplace, 471dollar application fee in their annual license fee is three and 50. For brickandmortar 350, for brickandmortar they must ensure that there location is allowed as a massage use under the plan code. Where general info practitioner massage establishments may operate is regulated through the planning code, as you can see. Out of approximately 224 commercial zoning districts, massage is allowed in 91 of them, or about 40 . Only 62 of those 91 on the first story only. That makes it extremely difficult to find a commercial base for you can legally operate massage, but also for sole practitioners, where most of the areas where you can operate are only on the first worry. That is also extremely limiting where you can operate area where first for a ground floor is much more expensive than the higher floors. Practitioner massage establishment are principally permitted, except that they have to go through neighborhood notification processes, and all general massage establishment again have to go through this process. Any questions . Issues and considerations. Its really important to understand who massage practitioners are, and also who owners typically are of these establishments. We are talking about the legitimate one. 88 of most massage practitioners are women, and that is from the american Massage Therapy association and that is using federal data to determine that. They are likely to be sole practitioners. In San Francisco they are about 180 permit to operate, either general establishment, or a sole practitioner establishment. Only 28 of them are so practitioners. Which is significant if the data tells us that most practitioners are supposed to be sole practitioners had practitioners. Flexibility is really important to them, and their success is dependent upon repeat clients. If you cant find a stable brickandmortar space to operate out of, which is what we keep hearing from the community here in San Francisco, it is pretty hard to rely on repeat clients if youre moving constantly. Their Median Income is about 43,000, which in San Francisco is far below living wage. According to the bureau of labor statistics there are about 2,116 massage practitioners in the local area. We estimate that about 1900 of them are probably in San Francisco. The bureau of labor statistics also projects that the industry is growing faster than others, through 2026 it will increase by about 26 . We want to make sure that our city regulations are providing those individuals with a pathway to establish legitimate businesses, if the data is telling us that the industry is going to grow as such. Issues and considerations that have arisen from feedback from the community, feedback from you in prior years, feedback from my own research is that massage is not regulated like other Health Services we had planned controls are too restrictive and zoning structure and permit Fee Structure is a significant barrier. Policy options, with regard to that. This topic paper, suggesting that Massage Service fee included in the definition of Health Service we had in this regard it would open up in the planning code where massage can be practiced across francisco. This is important because a lot of where its often in buildings that cater better to being client like a physician like room. Particularly for so practitioners, who are looking for affordable ways that is not on the ground floor commercial. Im also suggesting that the health will be amended to establish a healthy massage program. It would primarily focus on Public Education outreach around massage, and its relation to the medical community, and the Health Benefits of massage, it would also have a component where it would emphasize the health and safety of massage practitioners, would also educate again Human Trafficking and sex trafficking. Thats an issue we have seen in massage businesses, but one that is also in other areas as well. Theres also a suggestion to reassess the Fee Structure, as we have heard the application process is very onerous in the Fee Structure is a significant barrier for prospective massage Business Owners. One small, but very important suggest, to remove massage parlor from respective city code and to encourage city employees, and city appointees from using massage parlor interchangeably with massage establishment. Massage parlor is associated with nefarious activities, and we really want to distinguish the bad actors from legitimate massage establishment. With that all being said, any questions . Any commissioner question . Do we have any members of the public that would like to comment on item number six in the dozen tatian . Seeing on. Public comment is closed. Very good presentation. Very informative. Thank you. Next. Give her a minute. Good job. Next item, please get. Item seven, approval of draft meeting minutes. Action item. Any question on the minutes . Do we have any members of the public that would like to make comments on the minute . Item number seven. Seeing none. Public comment is closed. We have a motion . Moved to approve the minutes as amended. Second. All in favor . Motion passes. I promise by october 28 it will be appropriate item eight, directors report update and report of the office of Small Business on the Small Business assistance center, department program, policy and legislative matters, announcements from the mayor, and announced once regarding Small Business activities. Discussion item. I do not have a written report for you today, it is a verbal report. He highlight is key highlights, on september 11 the mayor signed the legislation, i think you heard it back december of 2018, i did submit to you a copy of a one page summary through the email. If you did not receive it, let me know. Some of the highlights are focusing on food and entertainment establishments, a good portion of the streamlining was reducing repetitive fees, duplicative referral fees. One important thing for a cafes or businesses that just take out business, the department of Public Health how adopted a code specific to San Francisco that required a restroom. An accessible restroom. This, of course, those kinds of businesses operate in very small places read the state code does not require restaurants so we took away that requirement. An administrative outcome that wasnt in the legislation but was developed to this asset was that a business that has to go through a change of use, which is a neighborhood notification, once the neighborhood notification is complete there is no complaint. The business is able to take their permit application and walk it around and get sign offs. Over sign off after that. Before the process was it state internal. It got routed through the different agencies. That has taken off about them to3 month worth of time for these businesses that have to go through a change of use. So, there are a few other things in their, but i will not go into everything. Dot the legislation accomplished, just to refresh your memory. The department of Building Inspections for the accessible building Entrance Program mailed out 9,000 letters a couple of weeks ago to Property Owners who have yet to submit their checklist. In this letter it did state that there will be a notice of violation issued if the Property Owner did not get their check list in by december. So, just in case you do here from businesses, it was sent to the Property Owner. Property owners who are also businesses will have received it. That has definitely garnished the attention. We have noticed there was definitely, as we kept sending notices, you know, this is your compliance deadline, over the last two years there has been a slow uptick. Since december is the final deadline for tear 4 entryways to have their checklist submitted, we just said that that is it for all Property Owners area and then as presented to you, we are working with supervisor Browns Office on developing legislation to have regulation for massage, and then we will be starting the tobacco mitigation in october. And then with your binder is a project timeline of some of the key projects that are before the commission. We are working through the backlog for the request of presentations. If i sent an email to you asking some questions just to ensure that the presentation that we are requesting from the department is the prese