marijuana. if it is a medicalically dispensed drug, you should be able to get it at walgreens, as far as i'm concerned, on a standard doctor's prescription. until that law is changed, however, and it doesn't seem like anyone's paying any attention to me, then we deal with what we have. we have to deal with the code as it presently is. as far as crime is concerned, i very much appreciated the officer from the ingleside station being here, and i took note of what he and other officers have not said. we have never, in my mind, or my memory at this commission or at any other time, been shown any statistics to show that medical cannabis dispensary increase crime in a neighborhood. i mean, if there's crime -- and

i'm sure the officer would be the first one to second me on this. report it to them. do it. that's exactly what should be done. that's what all the stations in san francisco and all over expect you to do. but no one has ever presented to us actual factual material on which we could make a decision of saying this is going to increase crime. i haven't seen it at all. the comment on the signs on 1,000-foot drug-free zones are for illegal drugs. they are not for anything from prescription drugs, basically. whether i like it or not, the manner of which the prescriptions are held in medical cannabis, this has to be considered a prescription drug. you get it because you get it on the basis of a doctor's prescription.

and so it is not covered in that. and on that basis, it becomes very difficult for me to make a decision based on the arguments that have come forward. president olague: commissioner sog so sugaya? commissioner sugaya: yes. i would like to echo the commissioner's comments. going on from there, i have a question for project sponsor. on the plans and drawings that were given to us, there's a layout of your facility. and there's a room in the back called the work room. can you describe to me what takes place in that room? >> the work room? it's described as a work room, but it's actually going to be an office. that's the way it was written by

the architect. commissioner sugaya: and then there's another office sort of in the middle of the space. >> that's correct. that's where we plan on providing some of the therapies. i also have a licensed health care facility here in san francisco, in the richmond district. because of the project and the agreement with the heights alliance, we had to cut down about 360 to 400 square feet to provide the cafe in the front so we had to take out some offices. so we're working to, you know, somehow provide health care to the patients. once, you know, we feel that the patients have outgrown the facility, we look to open something next to this dispensary. there's a few more storefronts that are vacant on mission street. that's our intent. commissioner sugaya: ok.

thank you. i think following up with commissioner's comments with respect to changing the ordinance is actually through the board of supervisors. however, there was another marijuana sentencery that this -- dispensary that this board approved which was appealed at the board of appeals because this is a discretionary review. and the board of appeals voted to overturn our decision. and that kind of decision -- i was a member of the board of appeals at that time. that kind of decision is very rare, i think in terms of the board. and it points out, i think, that in the board of appeals, it's not a body that sets policy. this board can vote on various policy issues through the general plan and other planning mechanisms. the board of appeals is really there to uphold city law. and for them to step outside the

boundaries in my opinion, in this case, is pointing a direction. and i don't know, along with commissioner miguel, if anybody's listening. but somebody should be listening. i think each time we get one of these, there's an increasing number -- not increasing number. there are concerns that are being expressed that the current ordinance as commissioner miguel said does not give us much leadway to address. so something, i assume, at some point, will begin to happen. i feel that in this case i'm quite supportive of the current application. if we include -- i think there were -- mr. sanchez, i think we are already including conditions of approval with respect to

security. i don't know how the other commissioners feel. but if we could include what the police officer had testified to in terms of working with them on security cameras and other aspects of the security plan? >> i think they're added to the three conditions. we could add a fourth, i believe, work with the san francisco police department and particularly that station on a security plan. sog sog ok. commissioner sugaya: ok. commissioner miguel: i would second. is that a motion? i would second. president olague: commissioner moore followed by commissioner sugaya for the commission to remind ourselves we continued an application on 952 mission street with the very same question pending that we were looking for further definition on what it meant by youth

serving services. i think as we -- definitions which further highlight which uses are or are not included within the 1,000-foot area. it is just coming to a head. we are respective and supportive of the neighbors. however, i think commissioner miguel very clearly described what we know and what we're judging by. another point in response to the officer who kindly offered his advice, the planning staff does

a follow-up on complaints or description of the individual in front of us. and there are at least one or two cases within the last five years where there were questionable reports about an individual who was applying for a license, and we denied it. because what was in front of us did not make any of us totally convinced that that was the right thing to do. we do not have that here. indeed, we have a very positive description about an individual who is in the medical field, who is running a responsible practice. so there is no reason for us to add other questions or concerns that really do not apply to describing the individual asking for a business license to run a medical marijuana facility. so having said that, i'll summarize for myself of what the criteria are, i am in support of this. and i urge supervisors, listening to what we're saying

here that the board steps together, together with the planning commission as a department, to further elaborate on what we need to know in order to avoid over saturation and clarity on definitions. president olague: commissioner fong? commissioner fong: thank you. it seems like this project complies with the code. and so, therefore, i'm going to support our policy. but this next question has nothing to do with the plat operation -- to the operation. it sounds like you run a great operation. but to my fellow commissioners, i think it's time for a review. i know it's not solely our decision, but that maybe we ask from the police department some sort of recap of what the implications are, maybe reaching out to the supervisors on this matter. and it's really a question that's been asked, how much is too much? but we would ask, and we do ask the same questions, how many cvs pharmacies are too much, how many starbucks are too much? how many taco bells are too much?

not taco bell, but. but we ask the questions. i think it's fair to maybe -- i don't even know. does anybody even know how many m.c.d.'s we have in san francisco? but -- [inaudible] commissioner fong: thank you. it's clearly a concentration because of this 1,000-foot radius. maybe it's time to review that. i'm hearing that pretty strongly amongst the six of us here today. but if we can get that ball rolling, i think it's better. in the previous one on mission street, and this one as well, i can't continue an item or not approve it unless we've changed the policy on it. so otherwise, it's within the rules. congratulations. but. president olague: and i wanted to make a comment that while it sounds like there's a lot of existing issues with graffiti

and all of these other issues that are already in existence in this neighborhood that probably deserves some attention, but i'm not sure it's within the purview of this medical cannabis or this health facility, whatever. i don't see a nexus between the two, as has been spoken, a nexus between hasn't been established. we've asked for it. and it hasn't been provided. so i think as it relates to activities, maybe that's even a question for the school board. it's beyond this issue. it's beyond this body, obviously. maybe discuss families, a lot of different issue that are related come up here a lot. and if opportunities aren't being provided for certain us use -- youth, then unfortunately they gravitate towards

activities that aren't so constructive. so i think that's an issue that the city needs to be taking up outside of this realm. but, you know, certainly the school board, the board of supervisors, maybe there's some kind of way of looking at ways of remedying this where youth are provided with something that would help them to create more productive activities with their time. i think it is an issue that's unfortunate. but sometimes i think what happens is that the law gets projected on to certain types of uses, and maybe -- i'm not sure if it's within the realm of the land uses. also medical cannabis patients, i'm not convinced, are necessarily contributing to certain types of activity. i don't think there's any evidence of that either. the medical use. i'm not sure it's necessarily contributing to an increase in

certain, you know, activity in certain areas. so i think what i do like about this project is -- one of the things that's unfortunate about many of these facilities is that it deadens the activity on the street. it doesn't activate the street use. so because there's a cafe that's being set up there, i think that's good. and if you can look at ways to acts rate is this -- activate this type of use, that's a good thing. there's a separate entrance, i guess, for the other uses. and it sounds like it's more like a health center than not. so i think that could be positive. then if you have the security -- you discussed with the police force or whatever -- then there's ways of increasing security on the street in that respect, too. and to continue to engage with the neighbors on some productive

level to see how maybe some of their concerns can be addressed through this project rather than exacerbated, which i don't think is necessarily the case although there's a lot of miss understanding -- miss understanding about that. so i think it might be time to relook at this. if anything, we might need to lift the restrictions on 1,000 feet rather than tighten them. because of the restriction, it really limits where these go. so i think what we're finding is that it's creating a certain saturation or clustering which we support initially because there were, at that point, a lot of places being grandfathered in that were adjacent to each other for whatever reason. so i think because we have such restricted rules around the 1,000-foot whatever it just limits where these places can be. so there's a lot that the board

of supervisors might need to consider. it's been a couple of years since this has been in place. and maybe it's time to just review it. they have a task force there, i know. there are some that -- some districts that might have more than others, like d-6, i know. d-9 probably on some level. so maybe something that the supervisors just want to reflect on or just have some kind of a status report on how things have moved. there's one not too far from where i live it doesn't seem to have caused any increase in certain types of crimes. that i'm aware of. >> commissioners, just to clarify, there are 26 in operation right now approved. five are in the pipeline. president olague: and also, i do want to -- in some -- there have been at least i think -- there's at least once instance that i

can remember where we approved it and it was closed down because they didn't comply by the conditions that we set for them. so there's been -- they have to be good operators. they have to be responsive to the concern that are raised here, and the neighbors, and the staff and all of that. so i want to thank mr. sanchez for his work on this. i know it's not easy. ok. >> commissioners, the motion on the floor is to, i assume, approve this project with the added condition offered by the police department that project sponsor continue working with them, work with them, on their security plan. on that motion, commissioner gordon? [roll call] >> thank you, commissioners. that motion passed unanimously.

president olague: we're going to take a 10-minute recess at this time. >> thank you.

please stand by. [10-minute recess]