review the g attack -- the geotech reports. that is still going through review. if it was a problem later on, obviously we would look into it. but it is a dispute obviously between two geotech reports. we are going to review it as part of the approval process. vice president garcia: mean staff at -- you mean staff at dbi? >> we would be looking at all the geotech plans and calculations. all of that should be reviewed thoroughly and then built accordingly. it should be designed not to have any problems with water. commissioner fung: -- vice president garcia: thank you.

>> i think we should call for public comment since we have heard from various speakers. is there any public comment on this item? seeing none, the matter is yours. if we move into deliberation, i need to tell the folks who are standing up the need to have you take a seat or move to the overflow room across the hall. the cannot have that door with blocked. thank you. commissioner fung: i can start. the issue before us, i think the request from the last hearing was whether to accept this appeal. the reason why we would even debate that is the issue of whether the permits were as a

result of the conditional use that was granted for this particular property. our efforts to request additional information was to see if there were potentially components of the permit that were not related to the conditional use that was found. in my opinion, after reviewing the entitlements package, the geotechnical report, the environmental report, and the three sets of drawings, it is my opinion that all three permit applications are directly tied to the cu. the relationship of the cottages to the large addition to their rear, the retaining

wall that is required to support the rear, and its relationship to be a higher properties above it -- to the higher properties above it are clearly reflective of the cu, and i do not think we have jurisdiction over this particular matter. commissioner hwang: i reviewed by television the hearing on march 9, 2011. a very interesting case, complicated. the issue before us i thought was relatively limited. unfortunately, the additional evidence from the requestor did not convince me we had jurisdiction. i think there are interesting issues in this.

but i think in terms of a pure jurisdictional review of this that we do not have jurisdiction and that these permits are indeed tied to the cu. -- commissioner peterson: commissioner hwang: i think the jurisdiction requestor made a very compelling case. i think it was troubling to learn there is no further level of review for permits of this -- for additional permits that are not part of the original permits. but i think after reviewing the submission by the project sponsor, i felt persuaded that the issues raised by the request your with respect to the retaining wall and the water are part of the cu project.

i feel prepared to uphold. vice president garcia: i agree with everything that has been said. it was an interesting mental exercise to determine whether there is a level of review. it would seem the charter must of anticipated, or the writer of the charter must have anticipated that plans could change after a cu was issued and have decided that review level should reside with either dbi or planning. i would move that will not grant jurisdiction. >> we have a motion to deny jurisdiction. on that motion -- commissioner fung: aye. commissioner peterson: aye. commissioner hwang: aye. >> thank you. the vote is 4-0. the jurisdiction requests are denied.

moving on to item 4c, hearings report related to the property on taraval street. greg schoepp book in a rehearing. the board voted 4-1 to revoke the permit and then 5-0 to adopt findings. the project is a new medical cannabis dispensary with minor interior alterations. we can start with the requestor or his attorney. you will have three minutes. >> good evening, commissioners.

i am here on hot -- on behalf of bay area compression at health centers. thank you for your time and consideration. the issue i want to address about safe and equal access to medication. since the original hearing in november on this matter and the subsequent adoption of findings in february, the facts on which the board of appeals based their decision have changed. the primary factor will change with the deletion of any reference to the letter from captain schmidt, suggesting that mcds are attractive to criminals. it was the basis for the board of appeals concluding that the safety risks posed a unique threat because of the large number of children who frequent the programs and services in the immediate vicinity of the property. during the adoption of the

findings, the board struck all references to the letter and then issued the decision. where does that leave us? all the testimony was offered by members of the community that expressed concern regarding their children, there was no evidence offered on several issues, and that is what i have come here to address, the absence of evidence on a host of issues. there is no evidence regarding the safety risks associated with medical cannabis dispensaries or existing problems with the proposed of richter. there is no evidence regarding problems with dispensaries operating in a commercial corridor. finally, there is no evidence regarding what makes the taraval commercial corridor so unique. the safety issues and need for protection of children raised regarding my client are no different than a host of other

businesses already operating in the city, bars, convenience stores, pharmacies, banks, and even atms. all dispense items which may be attractive to criminals. the first three also distribute items which may appeal to vulnerable children in the area. despite this fact, that are located in every neighborhood of the city. these businesses also tend to appear on commercial corridors to facilitate access to them. as has been noted by the supreme court of the united states, the private biases of individuals may be outside of the regional law, it -- the reach of the law, but and you are upholding the unfunded years of the neighbors,

against the rights of those who need access to their medicine. i respectfully ask a rehearing to reevaluate the evidence without the shadow of the fear cast by the letter that was previously part of this. thank you very much. >> thank you. mr. davis? we will hear from the agent for caanan tutoring. >> ross moody. i would just initially note that the letter was not stricken from the record. there was a deletion of one paragraph of the findings. the letter from the captain used by the board to justify its decision. the argument that is often advanced that there are lots of things that are dangerous to children, when bars and other operations, is an interesting

one. but the policy of this city is that you will not open 8 dispensary within a certain number of feet that -- a certain number of feet of businesses that provide services to children. what we are here to decide is whether there has been a change sufficient to justify reconsideration. i do not think there has been one. these arguments were advanced before. they were carefully considered by the board and rejected. on that basis, i will submit my short paper. thank you. >> is there anyone here on behalf of chinese gospel church? mr. sanchez? >> thank you. scott sanchez, planning department. the department strongly supports the planning commission's

approval of this dispensary and finds it is inappropriate use and would not have a negative impact on the community. the department did not find any evidence in the rehearing request that will support granting the rehearing request. i am available for any questions. >> can i see a show of hands how many people are interested in speaking under this item? ok. vice president garcia: one minute. but if i may, i am going to play with you. this is not about whether or not marijuana ought to be legal or it is good for that never good to have this. this hearing is about one issue only. and has something new been presented that would cause us to grant a rehearing? anything else, you arsay, but wu

to respect the fact that we have a long meeting tonight. thank you. >> we will start with public comment. i would ask that people line up, starting to my left. also, if you would please fill out the speaker card. it will help us in the proportion of minutes. if you have not done so by the time you come up to speak, you can fill it out afterwards and give it to me at that time, when you are finished. i would ask people to come forward. please lineup. >> i am an advocate of the medical canada's taskforce.

pardon my interruption, but we are prepared to speak on the adoption of the findings. i briefly spoke with supervisor campos. we have legislation that would have been entered prior to this hearing had we not had other world catastrophes. the legislative fix would change the findings a to f. that brings about new issues to be reviewed, and included in the review package would be the information from the planning commission, the health department, on the record of any incidences of the already present dispensaries. this is also a civil rights issue. this is discrimination when we encounter the blockage of access to health care. thank you for your time. >> do you have a card?

>> i actually put it up. >> could you hand that to me? commissioner peterson: before you sit down, would you mind elaborating a little bit on the legislation that would have been proposed but for the current state of disaster in other parts of the world? >> there is a typo in the current medical can of this legislation -- cannabis legislation. we cannot just administratively change it. we have sponsorship from supervisors campos and mirkarimi. that would significantly change one of the three components you are looking at, the letter, the actual finding, and i would state that the intention of the any neighbod

can find an excuse to say something falls under the care for children. we have never had any reports of abuse of children, but we do have laws to repeal the permits if it becomes a problem. state law is 600 feet from a child care facility. i really believe this body needs to look at the entirety of the fact and understand the law would also be changed by the next sitting. commissioner peterson: the new legislation has not been drafted? >> it has been drafted. it will be introduced next week. it was not introduced before this hearing because supervisor campos was in washington, d.c. with feinstein and pelosi discussing obviously more pressing matters.

>> thank you ahead of time for your time. i was pleasantly surprised with this morning's newspaper. the board of supervisors completely reversed on something as simple as restaurant restrictions. if they had only in certain medical -- inserted medical cannabis dispensaries. they found that there was a stagnant seen -- scene and they are now more willing to seek food and drink places as integral parts of a thriving neighborhood. if you just insert to dispensaries, like you would a laundry, i think it is really welcome that they were able to completely reverse themselves, 8-0, on something that has been in law for 20 years.

thank you. >> did you submit a speaker card? next speaker, please. >> i am denise dory. i support this project wholeheartedly. the health department has not had any complaints lodged against any dispensaries in the last two years. it is more of a civil-rights issue. in view of the fact that the police commission and public safety supported the plan, it does seem that is all there is left to think whether would oppose it here. opposing the project on the basis of the nature of a business will cost the city money in litigation, lots of money. thank you. >> my name is timothy joseph hopkins. i am a disabled veteran of the marine corps, representing the disabled, the elderly, and the

people of the sunset for whom having a dispensary for disabled people and elderly people who have a hard time using the transit systems -- it seems it is an awful hard ship from them -- for them. having a center closer to where they live would be much better for them. some of the centers that i know go out and take the patience to the car or the bus station to make sure that are safe. delivery services work as well, but these centers do not just operate as dispensaries. that operate as community centers, where the disabled, the elderly, and the homeless have a place to commune with other people who are like them, suffering from the same illnesses. thank you very much. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> my name is gregory ledbetter.

i am a patient advocate speaking on behalf of medical cannabis patience of the sunset -- patients of the sunset. we hear this case. this has resulted in here and misunderstood policies. the legislative fix that is proposed by the supervisors was postponed only due to an emergency, but will be introduced at their next meeting. supervisor carmen chiu has used this issue as a way to advance her political career at the expense of city taxpayers and the rights of medical cannabis patience -- patients. please review the facts from all

agencies involved. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> my name is theresa cooper. i am a medical campus activist. i want to represent people living in the sunset district. i am really shocked about the police commission hearing. i was there. it was pretty shocking than the chief of police did not know about the letter. there was definitely some strange things going on with this letter from carmen chiu. some of the things that went on behind the scenes in the neighborhoods and in the churches and community centers to rise up of against people who need their medicine -- we need to support people in having medicine. it is only fair to the disabled people in this community. it is a sanctuary city.

this will be a civil rights issue. the was also something i heard in the news. you cannot really prejudice and do these kind of tactics and keep different businesses out. >> thank you. do you want to submit a speaker card? >> my name is maury burns. i just want to say that a typographical error almost kept this from being brought before the board. i just think we should review it again. i think the sense that needs a medical dispensary. there are enough patients out there that qualify for it that it should be heard again. thank you. >> my name is michael goldman. i would like to know whether disabled patients are welcome to live in the sunset district, or

whether that can be redlined because of a tissue of lies and religious bigotry things to testimony from the police department that you excluded from their evidence. consider the civil rights of the people of san francisco and not preclude people from living in a certain neighborhood. >> i would ask the speakers to please step closer to the podium. >> good evening. my name is nancy wuerful. i live in the parkside. my neighbors raise families. i can speak on behalf of the people who are not here. there are lots of kids. this is where families choose to raise their families and because of single-family and double

family homes. i would like to say thank you for focusing on what is here today, not a debate on cannabis. what has already come before the board -- i was here in november. is there new information? i have not heard anything that would suggest you should reverse yourself. should something else come in the future, people will come back. but for the time being, i think the community rose up in order to express themselves in november. i do not see that anything has changed. thank you. >> thank you. next speaker. >> my name is henry jw. we are fighting for our civil rights because it is necessary in this sanctuary city. when will people stop building their careers through the suffering and persecution of the

medical community? thank you. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> i have taken bus rides for a long time in a wheelchair. i think just as any kind of pharmacy that can dispense medication -- i think that marijuana clubs are even safer than most of them due to the fact that a lot of times they have security guards up front, off-duty police officers watching the front door. i think this should be taken into consideration on this matter. thank you very much.

>> there was a lot of discussion amongst parishioners of the diocese of different churches. the dean decided he would try to form an opinion. they invited what they thought would be a neutral party to come and address them to help them make their decision. they invited supervisor carmen chiu. she spoke to them. they decided there were going to oppose the project. i found out about this and approached them. they invited me to come to a luncheon and speak to them. they decided after a spoke to them, because they had not heard one thing about the dispensary -- everything was negative they were told. the have not heard any of the positive aspects. they decided not to take a position. as far as the delivery mentioned in their findings, safeway has a

delivery service to. i would rather go to the store. thank you. >> hello, board members. i am a patient advocate here on behalf of the sunset medical cannabis patience -- patients. the planning department and the police commission have been favorable to us. i want you to review a letter which gives dubious information regarding criminal activity outside of clubs. also, i want to remind the board that the city health department has no complaints regarding the dispensaries. please reopen the hearing regarding this permit with respect to sanctuary status law. thank you. >> if there are people in the overflow room who wish to speak, i would invite you to come into

the room now and get in line. >> my name is stephen crane. san francisco needs to think about being fair to each community and each area, and know that transportation is a real problem for people who are seriously ill. most people who are on medical marijuana i believe are seriously ill. it costs them money. they need to be able to localize their participation in this because of the access and the safety problems of people may be getting on the subway who have had to go downtown to get their medicine and then get on the subway and there is a problem. i think the city needs to be concerned. i think they need to really think about that. thank you. >> thank you. >> my name is michel amos. i am a medical marijuana

advocates. i had back surgery about a year ago, so i can relate to some of the touchdowns people have referred to about the difficulties. my only other alternative is opiates. the whole physical addiction thing is not where i want to go. the point is i also liked what the other individual stated a second ago about the community aspects and getting to the places and being within reach. we as a community actually network and build with each other, not just within the medical marijuana community, but including everybody else. in that respect, i would like to to reopen this. thank you.