>> welcome to the tuesday, february 7, 2023, hybrid in person and virtual meeting of the san francisco entertainment commission. i'm the president and we'll start with announcements. i'm ben bleiman. >> we would start with the land acknowledgement. [land acknowledgement] this meeting is held in a hybrid format with the meeting occurring in person at city hall, room 416, broadcast on sfgovtv and available to view on zoom or to listen to by calling 669-900-6833. using meeting id87440503159. we welcome the public's participation during public comment periods. there will be an opportunity for general public comment at the beginning of the meeting. and there will be an opportunity to comment on each discussion or action item on the agenda. each comment is limited to three minutes. public comment will be taken both in person and remotely by video or call in. for each item, the commission will take public comment first from people attending the meeting in person. and then from people attending the meeting remotely. for those attending in person, please fill out a speaker card located at the side table or podium, come up to the podium during public comment, state your name and affiliations and your comment. you'll have three minutes. once finished, hand your speaker card to the commission staff behind the podium. if using zoom, select the raise hand options. if calling by phone, dial star nine to be added to the speaker line. when your item of interest comes up. when asked to speak, unmute yourself by hitting star six. please call from a quiet location, speak clearly and slowly and turn down your television and radio. if viewing on sfgovtv, mute before speaking. while we recommend you use zoom audio or telephone for public comment, you may submit a written comment through the chat function on zoom. please note commissioners and staff are not allowed to respond to comments or questions during public comment. thank you, sfgovtv and media services for sharing this meeting with the public. >> all right. mr. rice, let's do the roll call. >> i'll be doing that tonight. okay. [roll call] i like to note that vice-chair caminong is absent. commissioner perez? >> here. >> commissioner thomas? >> here. >> commissioner wong? >> here. >> commissioner torres. >> here. >> commissioner falzon? >> here. >> all right. thank you. the first order of business is consideration and possible action to adopt a resolution making findings to allow teleconferenced meetings under california government code section 54953(e). do we have a motion to adopt that resolution? >> so moved. >> second. >> thank you. is there any public comment on that agenda item? >> yes! >> public comment on this. which is -- >> all right. please speak into the microphone if you can, thank you. >> please state your name and you have three minutes. >> hi. is this being broadcast live? >> it is. that's the feed. >> terrific. hi. my name is michael batrelis and i'm here to talk about public comment and teleconferencing. i'm asking this body to take a stand to retain remote public comment. unfortunately, there is an effort by a supervisor to end remote public comment. this motion that he's made before the rules committee would require handicap people, working people, a lot of people with health challenges to force them to come here to city hall. i have just rushed into this meeting room because muni is not reliable. and i think this panel needs to say that you will continue to take remote public comment from people who cannot attend the meetings. it is really important that every commission take a stand in favor of allowing everyone to make comment on telephone. the other thing that's related to this is i would like for this body to consider calling for sfgovtv, the board of sups and all the responsibility parties to allow the public to make remote public comment via zoom. we live in tech america and it's a shame that it took hundreds of deaths from covid and this pandemic of the coronavirus before the board of sups and the mayor finally allowed telephone remote public comment. before that, people would have to spend a good hour or so to get to city hall and then we have to sit around and wait for the public comment and it's a real burden on us. >> 30 seconds. >> so, if we were able to, not only call in on telephone, but also to use new technology like zoom to show our beautiful faces, i think that would be terrific and i hope this panel will be the first to support all of that. thank you. >> thank you very much. is there further public comment on this agenda item? >> there's none. >> all right. we'll close public comment and we can vote. [gavel] >> okay. president bleiman? >> aye. >> commissioner perez? >> aye. >> commissioner thomas? >> aye. >> commissioner wong? >> aye. >> commissioner torres >> aye. >> commissioner falzon. >> the next agenda item are general public. does anybody want to speak on items not listed on tonight's agenda. >> i would -- >> i would like to show an image on tv. is that possible here to use this computer? >> ask our tech staff. >> you know what's better, is it -- >> no. it's -- it's a still image on you tube. >> i need to get that ready. it's going to take me time to get that set up. >> well, you're doing that, i'll see about turning this on and showing something on the overhead, if i may. >> yeah. you have -- the timer started. let me switch to -- >> there's not an on or off button. >> i'm working on this right now called document camera. >> there you go. >> you have the magic touch, my friend. let me try zooming, ah. there we go. can you stop the clock and i will begin my public comment. please stop the clock of and i want to have my three minutes. >> all right. so it's starting now. ready. >> okay. hi. any name is michael again. -- my name is michael again. what i'm showing on the overhead is a letter, an e-mail that steven torres used in his capacity as head of the castro lgbt cultural district. he used city infrastructure to dehumanize me. he is complaining in this e-mail about activities i took to save the castro theater. and torres, in this e-mail, which was sent to a lot of people is complaining that there were going to be teleconferences about saving the castro and at the very end, he talks about a rally that i was organized, the proposed demonstration on the 28th, also feels similarly unfocused and a waste of resources and momentum. okay. sfgovtv, please come back to me and leave that letter. what i'm here to complain about is, what we call in the gay community, control queens. sfgovtv, come back to me, please. steven torres here needs to be called out. because my resources were used to have this rally that was outside the castro theater and i wanted to show you an image of hundreds of people exiting the castro theater on that day and my message of save the seats. there was only one person who on theed to a rally i organized to save the seats and torres needs to be called out about this. he says that my action was unfocused. here's the message he found unfocused. save the seats. it is not okay that torres wants to serve as a gate keeper. both with the cultural district and as head of the friends of the castro theater stakeholders coalition of friends of the stakeholder coalition. he wears two hats in this role and he's wearing a third hat on this commission. it is not okay what he has done to undermined cultural activism in the castro to save the castro theater. i'm asking this body to debate saving the castro theater. let's have a discussion at this commission about saving the castro theater and having a multiplicities of approaches. >> that's your time. >> thank you very much. >> it is important to say save the seats regardless of what torres has to say. >> please have a seat. >> i know my time is up but i have waited almost a month to call him out. >> -- sir, i'm going to ask you to please sit down. thank you. >> i'll sit down if you'll tell me you'll hold torres accountable and schedule a seating at the castro. >> this isn't give and take. this is general public comment. i'm going to ask you to sit down or call the sheriff out. >> you're going to call the law out. >> sit down. >> i'm here to demand accountability of steven torres. >> thank you very much. >> i have -- >> thank you. >> is there any more, are there any more general public comment items for tonight? >> yeah. i will be back. now that i know where to hold steven accountable, i'll be back. >> is there any more public comment senior analyst rice? >> there is none. >> all right. we'll close general public comment and we'll move onto item number four which is approval of the january 17, 2023, minutes. do we have a motion on to approve january 17, 2023, minutes for the commission hearing. >> so moved. >> second it. >> is there any, do we want to make changes to the minute, is there public comment on the meeting minutes? >> i'm checking and there is none. >> we'll close public comment on the meeting minutes and we can vote. [gavel] >> okay. [roll call] >> all right. the meeting minutes are approved and we'll onto number five which is a report from director wyland, i believe. >> yes, thank you president bleiman. good evening, commissioners. it's a shame michael left early because i'm going to be updating on our new public policy body meetings rules beginning march 1, 2023. so, this is my only update for tonight and i just wanted to do this in a public setting. we're going to be sending this to, if we haven't already, i believe may have sent it your way. the mayor is ending the declaration of the emergency on february 28th. this is following the governor's announcement that the statewide emergency is ending on that same date. therefore, all orders regarding the conduct the meetings of policy bodies during this time will also end. so, this new memo sets forth general legal rules that will govern meetings of policy bodies and they will be going back to do where we were in place pre-pandemic. there are a few distinctions to that, so generally in person, physical presence is now required for all commission members to attend meetings. there are narrow exceptions to the physical requirement as stipulated in the new "brown act" teleconference previsions enacted in 2022. they are as follows, subcommittees of the larger policy body can still teleconference. members taking parental leave or certain childcare responsibilities may be excused. members with a disability subject to a reasonable accommodation. so, when a member of a policy body attends meeting remotely under this rule with the above exceptions, the policy body must allow members of the public to attend remotely and offer public comment remotely. otherwise, there is neither a requirement for no near -- nor a prohibition on allowing members of the public to attend meetings of a policy body remotely. essentially, the only thing that's going to change is that all of us have to now be here, but members of the public, those that are in our ada community can certainly attend online and our hybrid format bill, so we'll keep that going. obviously, there's no mechanism for enforcement there, so anybody that does join remotely, we would have to allow them to present public comment to us in that format. because we're obviously not going to be asking. we may just have a disclaimer in the chat each time at the beginning to note that this is specifically for these reasons that you can be joining remotely. so, you'll be seeing everybody in person but luckily, i think we're already at that place so this shouldn't be a huge leap. let me know if you have any questions. >> questions? >> yeah. >> i may have missed it but any exceptions for commissioners to appear remotely >> not as previously used, so -- yep. >> anymore questions? >> just a comment in the vain of transparency, folks -- if you didn't know already, i sit on the cultural district advisory board and we'll continue to have public comment and the ability to attend our meetings virtually as we have throughout so that will continue as well. >> great. no further questions here, is there any public comment on this agenda item? >> there's none. >> all right. we will move onto number six which is report from deputy director azevedo. >> thanks, president bleiman. and commissioners. we received 24 311 complaints since our last hearing and updates for you and ask questions if you have any. my first update it this evening is about adobe books at 2130 30 street. it holds an lpp permit from our office. friday january 13th, the business hosted events called total (indiscernible) chaos. after reviewing e-mails i spoke with santiago from supervisor ronen's office, captain and officer ortiz from mission station and the manager of adobe books to learn about the incident and in reviewing the reports from the business and sfpd, the parties may have been attending the event at the bookstore that night but there was no nexus for us to take enforcement on the entertainment permit. since they hold an llp permit, a security plan is not a requirement of the permit conditions and further, the event on january 13th did not include entertainment so their llp permit was not activated and we didn't have grounds to take enforcement because there was no enterment and because llp permits do not require submit and security plans but i want to bring their to your attention because you have the ability to call the permit holder into a future hearing date for possible reconditioning of their permit to include security conditions. a couple of our concerns are the fact that the coopt does not have paid staff for their events and they use volunteers to oversee the bookstore. also, their events are well attended and likely exceed their 49 -- 49 person capacity. we believe they can benefit from security while holding enterment events with entertainment. advise if you would like them to come to our next hear and i'll follow protocol to sent the permit holder a former request to appear. the next update is about the lookout at 3600 16th street and the lookout holds a poe permit from our office and we have received 12 complaints. from july to october, we received nine complaints and then things quieted down until january. when the complaints have started wrapping up again. in response to the complaints in sectors found that sound was leaking from their balcony, as their sliding gloor door was open and they had an outdated sound limit. in august they purchased new retractable sliding glass doors for the balcony and sound meter and they were set a new sound arena. we have received six more complaints and visited the business six times and they have been operating in full compliant. sound measurements showed the business operating under their approved sound limit and their balcony doors were closed and staff are recommending that the commission direct inspectors to deprioritize complaints at the lookout as they have demonstrated on going compliance. the last this evening is about 2443 mission street. they were approved for a permit in july of 2022 and i issued the permit in july '22 after they finished inspections and for their poe permit there were strong opposition from next door and they had complaints to abc about big bob sound. between september 28, 2022, and february 7, 2023, we have received 12 311 sound complaints and in response to the 12 complaints, our inspectors visited the business ten times and all site visits, they have been in compliance with permits and sound limits and i want to go on the record to state this information and give you an update. >> i also want to note for the record that vice-president caminong arrived during your item. >> questions? >> i like to propose that we have a discussion about the coopt store. i pass a motion we have them come in. >> it's not an agenda item so we're limiting in what we can say but you feel like -- we can direct staff. got it. [multiple voices] >> it still needs to be agreed by everybody? >> no. >> i can just make that? [laughter] >> any other thoughts while you're at it. [laughter] >> i think they should come before us. that's my recommendation to staff. thank you. >> i just had a question about adobe. this is not the first incident that has been reported to us there, is that correct or -- >> that's correct. of this magnitude but there's been other incidents during other entertainment agreements. >> agree with commissioner falzon. due to the kind of loose volunteer in nature of how things are going that certainly when they are having entertainment, we need to make sure they are buttoned up and we're doing our part. i second that, not officially second it. i just say that. >> i appreciate -- the full support. [laughter] >> great. i just had a question about the lookout. was there, these complaints, you may have said it, are there anonymous? >> they are anonymous. i didn't mention that. thanks for pointing that out. we received three in january that were responded to virtually in realtime and compliance is demonstrated. >> yeah. i'm also very content with de-prioritizing that. >> great. >> from our inspectors, they have enough to do. >> this is past practice? >> correct. >> all right. anymore questions? is there public comment on the deputy director's report? >> there's none. >> okay. i'll close public comment. we'll onto number seven which is discussion and possible action to adopt criteria for the entertainment commission staff review and agenda setting of permit applications for eligible businesses transitioning from just add music and permit to brick-and-mortar. >> the jam permit was created on the 27 supplemental to the mayoral -- dated february 25, 2020. the jam permit created -- the program created a streamline process for businesses -- for businesses to administratively obtain a permit to host outdoor entertainment and or amplified sound under the shared spaces. on march 31, 2023, the jam permit will sunset and under the supplemental, there's a wind down period for businesses to operate under their jam permit before the program officially terminated. once the emergency program concludes, businesses that wish to continue operating outdoor sound and or entertainment must apply for a brick-and-mortar permit for the activity and businesses may apply for a new brick-and-mortar permit or if they hold an indoor permit, they may attend to include indoor. this is call jack to bam or add music to brick-and-mortar permit. before the pandemic, brick-and-mortar pandemic permits which was outdoor sound was uncommonly but as we transition, we anticipate anticipate a volume. business owners will go through our codified process to ensure that current outdoor programming continues to follow city's requirements. commission staff are seeking feedback from the commission tonight regarding adopting criteria for agenda setting of permit applications for businesses, transitioning from jam to band. as with all brick-and-mortar permit applications, jam to band will require the submission of a new application, attending an intake meeting and posting to the public for 30 days, conducting neighborhood outreach and attending an ec hearing. the existing staff protocol is to reflect any permit application without directivity on the permit during a commission hearing but moving forward, staff are proposing that jam to band permit applications to meet certain criteria be reflected on the permit agenda. during, excuse me, the change in protocol will not override the commission's ability to vote to move a permit application off the consent agenda and to the regular agenda nor would it remove the opportunity for public comment. it would be, it would be allowing for streamlining applications and commission hearings as we anticipate high volume of applications and staff are recommending that the commission adopt criteria that aid staff in distinguishing between -- staff are proposing that permit app