there is a rec center at another school. there is st. paul's which is 1540 sanches. st. paul's at 1690 church. 1604 -- three blocks away. and 16 fifth the sanches. -- 1650 sanches. >> you mentioned you have gone to shops such as this and spoken to people to for warn them about the severity of punishment, it should not happen again. did you go back to this? >> we did to everybody. i do not want to see these people -- >> you had a conversation with the owner prior to the second offense. >> 1 aye poes i usually see the same thing.

do not do it again. -- when i post i usually see the same thing. >> the matter is submitted. >> this is the first case we have had where someone was in violation within a period of a year. the proprietor of this tobacco shop sold cigarettes in august -- june 2011. the first time august 2010 and this time june 2011. it is the first time we have ever action had that situation. we have been lenient with that in that the pressure is on the page in order to enforce this very serious prohibition against selling tobacco to minors. usually what prevents them of catching someone, you're trying

to enforce the law. the pressure is on them to be able to go out and hit another store and it is difficult. there are lots of individuals in san francisco that sell tobacco. in the -- the other aspect, and has been the store owner himself who was sold tobacco products. it is usually an agency issue. it is someone who has paid -- been paid their little to man the store. -- very little to man the star. it is an unfortunate situation for the owner. this is the owner. the papers and his representative paint a picture of this particular individual might not have the faculties, to coast -- and go work somewhere

else and this is a fallback for him to be on his own and i think i am sure i speak for the board when i say we are sympathetic to that situation. but that should call for a heightened sense of diligence to make sure the opportunity does not exist or at least the opportunity is not taken to sell tobacco to minors especially given who lives how close services are that provide for children. schools and recreation centers. i feel bad. this is the longest penalty we have had come before us but i can remember. my intention is to uphold it. i find the department was somewhat generous in giving some days and my intention is to uphold the penalty. >> i would echo those sentiments.

pending the comments of my commissioners, i would move to uphold. president goh: would like to state findings with your motion? the sale occurred [unintelligible] >> this occurred within a 12- month period. the individual was council directly. and the location is in close proximity to many neighborhood schools. >> any other commissioner comments? >>[gavel]

vice president garcia: i would love to see a monetary fund that might not end up putting someone out of business. as of now there is no provision for monetary sanction. >> the motion is to uphold the 70 day suspension with several findings that a second sale occurred during a 12-month period. that the store is in close proximity to various schools and the owner was counseled by dp age. on that motion, commissioner fung, aye.

commissioner goh, aye. commissioner garcia, aye. the 70 day suspension is upheld with those findings. >> thank you. item 5a. the appelants are aristo investment group. there is

locations for a mobile food facility permit, no. 11 [unintelligible] issued to docks of the bay. the dpw president of would like to speak first. >> good evening, commissioners. the department is requesting a short continuance for these appeals because the department did not receive briefings from the appellate bodies. it was not until we contacted the director last friday that we received documentation. we did not have sufficient time to reveal the briefing. we are requesting a sure continuance. >> is it a one week continuance you are requesting? >> as soon as possible. >> are you interested in submitting briefs? >> that is the intent, yes.

>> i recommend that we hear from the other parties on this issue. we can start with the appellants. do you want to set a time limit? >> on the continuance question? >> we have a full house. why do we wer-- don't we wait. how about two minutes. >> they can speak on the issue of continuance. >> this is on whether or not you object or agreed to the proposal to continue the matter for one week. >> that is fine. the board has another scheduled mobile food trucks coming up next wednesday.

that is permit 0027. we are going to be speaking again on 0029 and 0027 so next week is fine. >> is next week the same facility? >> is there an appellate here that would like to speak? >> hello. i am debra sellers. i am fine with next week if we can schedule at the same time. if we have to schedule two different times on two different days, it is difficult for us to

always appear. and here we are today and it is after 5:00 p.m., it is going on 6:00 p.m. if you are going to schedule a you can schedule it during business hours, that would be appreciated. >> the board only meet starting at 5:00 p.m. >> if we can do them both at the same time that would be preferred. i also have something at would like to submit. can i do now or later for your review? >> the time for some middle is passed. -- past. is that on the merits? perhaps that should happen when the merits are heard. >> thank you. for this appeal,. >> i am the lawyer for 101

california which is one of the locations that is subject to this appeal. there are several other people who are appealing here on the same permit which raises the question, do we have seven minutes apiece or do we have to do by the time among the appellants. there is several others that are on appeal. the one week extension is not a problem. i would like from a procedural point of view to have a better idea of how we're going to handle that. there are several other people here today who want to speak on this permit. because of their separate locations. could you give us some guidance on that? >> would be happy to speak with you after this item and i can explain that in detail. >> ok. one other thing. if the department is going to put in some additional briefing,

his widow to have an opportunity to respond to that and we can do it orally or in writing but it is a lot having served on boards like this one myself, it is always better if you can get it in writing ahead of time. >> the board's rules do not allow for a rebuttal brief. the brief is being submitted by the department is the board -- if the board allows it would be the initial brief which is only late because it did not receive the appellant or they permit holder brief on time. you can address it during your testimony at the hearing. >> thank you. i want to make sure. we do not have an objection to the continuance as long as we understand the ground rules. >> for appeal 11-117.

>> hello, i am here on behalf of the appellant najmabadi. we don't disagree with the issue of continuing this matter because there are additional matters going to be heard next week on similar locations and similar permits, we do have one person who is here tonight who cannot be here next week. if you wanted to allow some time for that. i wanted to echo the comments that we would like an opportunity to respond to the brief or at least get it early prior to next week's meeting so we can respond to it at the hearing. so some arrangements to be made for that. but it is a serious matter and we're concerned with having heard completely so we really want to make sure that we have

all the opportunities to speak. i am afraid only one of our people can be your next week. thank you. >> the person who cannot be here is part of the appellant? is that the appellate and not someone who would speak in public comment? >> no. we included her to be part of our palin team to speak. -- appellant team to speak. within my seven minutes. >> the permit holder? >> good evening, commissioners, jermemy paul. the permit holder for appeals -- this legislation was completed

by the board of supervisors on unanimous vote year ago. the issues are pretty clear to the agencies and to the community which was very involved in the process of creating this ordinance. i believe that it is time to hear this matter. i do not believe that there is going to be a significant new evidence or new arguments coming out in the coming week that would change that. i believe this permit holder has a right to their hearing and i would encourage you to hear it. if not for that reason, then for the reason on tonight with four appellants, i would have 28 minutes at this podium and next week, with nine appellants who would be 63 minutes for a combined total of 91 minutes of

jeremy paul at this microphone and you do not want to do that. i would encourage you to hear this tonight. [gavel] vice president garcia:>> we ture office. as the permit holder, we submit to the board office. the appellants are the ones who are required to serve. >> have you been in touch -- is that not correct? each party has obligation to deliver the race to the respondent which is the department. >> hours has been handled -- handed over as well as electronically on the following business day. >> have you not been in touch

with the department? >> i have been in touch. i spoke with him. >> you feel they have nothing to add. >> i cannot predict what he might have to add. i just feel that this permit holder has a right to move forward. >> is there any public comment on the topic of the possible continuance? please step forward. you will have one minute. >> i have a question because i am not next week. with that and push forward because if so, i am out of town. >> we would not reschedule any other matters. >> thank you. >> any other public comment?

seeing none, commissioners, the question of the continuances before you. >> comments, commissioners? >> vice president garcia: i hate to go against that department but i do not feel that it is that phony an issue. we do have other cases coming next week. i guess it does make some sense to do with them all the once -- all at once. i am open. >> we have been consistent in providing opportunity to submit a brief or place the position. for some reason it did not quite occur procedurally at this time. i would be supportive of allowing the department to submit a brief. i would also allow or would

support the allowing of air bubble brief as well as they can be electronically handled before next friday. >> i would support a continuance even though i am disappointed not to have this matter heard tonight. on the procedure i think we need to allow the department to have an opportunity since it was -- the department was not properly served in accordance with the procedures. >> i agree. our rules do not allow for a rebuttal brief. even in a situation like this were my be useful. i do not think we can order one against their rules. i would be disinclined to order against the rules. >> is there motion on the floor

to continue? is there a motion? >> move to continue. the 20 to know when dpw will submit its brief. >> i would be fine with monday. >> we have an agreement that that would work. please call the roll. >> one thing before several people made mention of some sort of requirement that there be a restaurant permit or something like that. i looked through the submissions. maybe it is there and i can missing it. i looked pretty hard for. there are two having to do with all the locations that are before us in the same place. i want to find out if that is

adequate. and where to find between now and next week, where to find the requirement that be submitted. >> you want to have that included in the dpw some middle. -- some middle -- submittal. >> the motion is tho reschedule all four of these appeals to december 14, one week with a respondent brief due monday, next monday, december 12. ok. on the motion, commissioner fung, aye. >> i am sorry to interrupt. was there a question about the

submission or the timing for the submission? >> i was handed what i was looking for. commissioner fong, aye, president goh, aye, commissioner garcia, aye. these matters are rescheduled to december 14. to be clear, the brief is due monday, december 12. and the department is responsible for delivering copies either hard or electronic to each and every appellant and the permit holder. >> thank you. the meeting will be here. >> we keep that secret. >> shot call last item on our calendar? >> let's give it a minute in case any of these people are here -- to clear the room.

>> let's take a five minute break.