sort of recognition of business type that we loosely refer to as a promoter and there were to be by this commission a requirement of insurance, would their promoters that do regular promotions at a venue on a monthly basis -- i can think of several gay events that happen at various events around the city. they happen every month. they've been happening for years. those would differ or not from events that would be popping up as more one-time unknown commodity, not regular occurring. is there any differentiation between those two? and would the cost be annualized and therefore rused if it were -- reduced if it were a monthly event? >> if you have a promoter that does monthly events, i recommend having them do an annual policy. those policies can range from $1,200 to $1,500 a year. so with that, they can choose to

do a per event policy. >> also, the security, they bear most of the responsibility. when you have somebody that promotes it, they pretty much have a liability on paper, not as much hands on as security in clubs. so it's cost effective annually, if they want to do per event. absolutely. >> thank you. that's the extent of my questions. >> this is actually directed more to the acting director. it's correct that we could not

impose this retroactively as a condition, but the new language in 1060 would allow you to call any venue and amend the security plans to add this as a requirement. is that correct? >> that's correct. >> thank you. thank you very much for your presentation. >> i'm sorry, you had a question? >> i had one question. incidents that have happened at certain clubs -- do you think it's the best type of thing to basically have the clubs put their promoters on their insurance liability, or is that possible to do? or is it the promoters have to do it separately? >> i would recommend promoters

to do it separately. when you have a club policy, all policieswhen you have a club po both sit -- basically the m1 that is insured -- the only one that is insured, that is the only name on the policy. nobody else unless you name them as an additional insured is covered, so if you have a venue, and you have a promoter, that is my recommendation. just like when they are having an event as a promoter, i was asked earlier, as far as the insurance company is concerned, you can come to me and tell me who you are andi"i what you wano do, gand we do not do a background check on you. as far as claims and everything else. there is definitely a recommendation to keep them all separate. there cut across the board for

everybody. ócommissioner: may ask a commission? this was exactly the x[ ])ut events, but i am wondering, what is in your request when somebody comes to you as a promoter or whatever? the you need, like, driver's license? what are the things that you ask for? separating the wheat from the chaff, as it were, to use this to make sure that promoters who do not have their stuff together of do not promote in venue and do not bring problems, and we

theoretically would have those, so we do not want to run the other way. i am wondering what it is you ask for? do they have to have a driver's? >> as far as the insurance company is concerned, we do need to know who is protected, basically the insured. it is just the basic underwriting, is what it is, and as far as the driver's license, we sometimes, when it gets in depth, we ask for it a social security number, but it does require a signature. so this is additional limits, because there are events then

they will go away from, and raves were considered redlines, and if they did, they were charged $5,000, so it is just basic underwriting information, and visa, mastercard, discover, we do not take checks. yes, because the check may come back to us, and then we have nothing, so -- commissioner: cash or credit card. ok. i get it. president roja: ok, i think vajra has a question. commissioner granelli: if an

incident does occur, does the insurance pay? as far as protecting venues or those to get the policy? >> yes, absolutely. i have seen several event policies and club policies pay, so someone who has an event policy, it deters them from going deeper than necessary, because the insurance company would rather pay than dragging out, so they are pretty correct, because the less money they spend, the more money they make, so i have seen them pay quite a few times. president roja: ok, and i think commissioner meko as a question again. commissioner meko: have you deny

the policy? >> i have not denied a policy. i have given them a premium which is absolutely ridiculous. this will basically ensure anything. -- insure anything. being in the industry, you can recognize when a venue or a club is not being forthcoming with the information, but it is pretty much a gut, institutional thing. commissioner meko: so you have a lot of flexibility. we do not need to go further. a lot of insurance agents offer this coverage, it is not just you, right? >> if you meet up with agents, agents are the ones who are more restricted as to what they can and cannot do, but they do have the ability. president roja: i have one

follow-up question. it is a fascinating question, and i think it is one that we are going to be focusing on in the future, so as much information we can gather, the better. the policy about redlining clients, you hinted that there was a time where a particular style of event called a "rave" was a red lines, and the mechanism that was used to keep those was increasing pricing, so it was not an outright denial. >> no. that is a definition that companies use, but that is no longer a legal situation. price increase. commissioner: so the follow-up would be, are there any kind of loosely defined entertainment events that fall within that policy now that you could stay

from have the experience in recent past? >> i have not, nor have i seen a specific situation. because the raves were the ones that were accumulating a lot of losses. we decided we cannot charge $400. it is not cost-effective. so not in my experience. it does not mean we would not in the future, but as of now, there is not anything that is considered excessive pricing. commissioner: right, because if this commission were to require it, and it was considered excessive, it would be a denial, and i think that is important to get out in the public. thank you. >> yes, absolutely. >> thank you again. president roja: all right, item

number seven, police department comments and questions. >> good evening. i did want to speak on a couple of topics, and we were talking about the entertainment task force, and we will try to move forward with coming up with some core elements to a security plan. that is moving along well. we are having a follow-up thursday, and that is moving forward. the other thing i wanted to briefly talk about was the incidents that occurred over the weekend, and i think you touched on it a little bit, and i was

only going to speak on one of them because i know it has come up in the past about what type of resources are utilized, and i thought it would be informative for you to hear about this. the incident that occurred on august 8, and this was the initial response up until we close the crime scene, absorb in excess of 150 police hours, and required equus -- require dozens upon dozens of officers bought. yes, it looks like it is about 70 or so officers and command staff that also responded, so that kind of gives you the scope of the resources that it takes when these incidents occur. the other thing i just wanted to touch on, and what happened that night is, and standing is that

one of the commissioners, commissioner alnan, there was talk of a permit. is that correct? commissioner alan: yes, that it was a youth event, it would require a dance permit or a special permit, which would have alerted people at leóisy its existence. >> yes, it is very early in the investigation, but i think this stage, it is fair to say that on a broad brush with you on this, they should have come before you guys. it would have triggered notifications, and it would have allowed a better communication. interestingly enough, there was another event but÷ occurring by an abc license establishment, and is kind of interesting that

we are discussing this today with some of your staff, that within one block of where this event took place, and abc licensed establishment had a similar event, and to my knowledge, there is absolutely no problems. yet again, we have an event that no one knew about, that was occurring at a location that no one knew about, and that seems to be a contributor to ultimately what was a very tragic event. commissioner: how do we as a city fix this problem where there are events in the city that requi8pádq vacation and, hence, will become less of a nuisance? jz the police department, everyone is limited in their resources and outreach. the reaction method could be a high cost way of doing business.

i am wondering if in your experience if there is anything that you might suggest that either as commissioners or as a department we might do in getting that word out, or as an industry, for that matter. >> you know, i would just put this out to all of you. i gave this comparison about department of consumer affairs with those people who are wrote required to be regulated by the state to protect property. coming year, the department of consumer affairs is going to require that businesses hiring those employees also be registered. i think we're going to continue to urge you guys, and i know you look a lot of this legislation, /ebut with that concept in mind what we think it really be beneficial is if we are tracking

two people. people who employ, because we do not always know that, and secondly the promoters themselves, and this is a policy issue for you guys to discuss with the impacts and the pros and cons, because we are keenly sensitive to the fact that it is reviewed -- the view that this is a huge part of the city's success. we want to be part of that challenge, because we want to bring a balance where we are recognizing notified nonprofits, where revenue is going to the non-profit, et -- bona fides nonprofits. or somewhere between those areas. that is the one -- i really think that the sooner we can start some version of a promoter legislation, the sooner we can start tracking the bad actors

and dealing with them. and, frankly, not interfering with a good, responsible operators. commissioner: so one of the mechanisms you would use to get the information that would be a more substantial scheme him to identify people, whether it be on that level of all the way up to a venue of honor? >> this is very much in the talking stage, but if one of you would note -- how many are employing security guards? we can tell you how many people have a liquor license, a bar license, but does that really mean that they are employing security, and i think when you are employing security, you are raising the bar. i do not want to get into policy issues, but i am not looking to

burden the industry with fees, but there should be a way to streamline the system that allows us to maintain the important information that we can all share. president roja: commissioner meko. commissioner meko: one of the establishments and did not have a permit, and it is not within our jurisdiction if it does not have a permit, so what would you suggest? to move those responsibilities of enforcing operating without a permit at the entertainment commission level? >> from a department policy perspective, i certainly -- i cannot answer on behalf.

c[g with this one a little bit. c[g with this one a today's meeting. not a lot, but there are venues  and we 5 said no, and we were candidly asked why we would ever say no, and that is because there have ñr when these were not license the boat license able spaces. does that kind of -- commissioner meko: there are probably hundreds of events where they do not have a permit,

óso it would probably be an department to be searching out those that do not have a permit and issue a citation. there is a tragedy, like occurred this past weekend, then that is one place that is operating without a permit. it is hard to do that after the fact. >> i agree with you. all in all, when we have owner operated establishments in san francisco, we can control of most. 95% of the problems -- which consistently of a problem when one of two things occurs. a business operator gives up his business to a promoter, and i guess the decision on a try to make is the group that we met with today is a group of responsible business operators.

they have the track record, the work experience to, for the most part, do this. when you have checked every box possible, and something still happens, i think you can sleep well at night, knowing you have done the best you can do. on the other hand, we have promoters' coming into the area that has but obscure space that is not on anyone's radar, -- we are not going to have the resources to check everything, but i will tell you this. if we had something in place, having come upon that that night, my first question would have been -- commissioner meko: 6:çóñishow mr permit. >> exactly. is this a licensed authorized

hirer of security? commissioner meko: we are 1060. we are already seeing some serious gaps, so i hope we can continue that process. i have already added this question to the=p bottom of a lt of quite a few things that i think should be addressed. >> thank you. how will that information be available to the commission and shared so that it can benhñú, so the best of the security plans can be used to educate and mediate and bring the standards up at venues that may be falling behind?

>> well, i think at minimum, in the very near future, i hope to bring you a document that is going togu be collaborative of r óñi the. they are worki's side of it, the private side, and they can do things that we cannot do. >> exactly. >> and some were suggesting signage and things along those lines, so the police department is very much striving towards this, and i know it came up in our entertainment summit, there is a true effort to collaborate with everyone. i think what happens is because of this act, we are not transmitting information, so it is misinterpretedgnlyññi that me

are leading people out, and certainly this tragedy that happened this weekend through everyone for a loop, so -- president roja: my follow-up to that would be how can we influence the narrative when there is a tragedy, and that narrative seems to be to look around and find the nearest entertainment venue and hang

and yet, that became of the headline. the incident had nothing to do with the nightclub, and this gave the night club community an extraordinary sense of mistrust with the police department, and that 70 needs to be addressed somewhere along the way if we're going to truly have a partnership. the fingers down and say, we are working together. we are not poking figures and blame. >> i cannot agree with you more. we brought this up when we talked about calling the police for services. that actually can help show the situation versus contributing to a problem. similarly, and i have to say i am a the law tumor to buy this. we do work very hard at actually clearing the initial finger- pointing, and i do not know who initiated that. i, certainly, -- what we are trying to do, and i think the industry would know this, i agree with you. there is a very high profile

club. but my earlier comments or action, those are usually the good actors. this obscure location,dx[)m found that, and i would suggest, perhaps, the police department may have kept tabs onñbcd guys in the neighborhood, but nonetheless, there are other clubs going on in that area. there was another successful event that night with a similar crowd it, again, a licensed business, but we worked really hard to overcome it, and i cannot speak to where they came from. i actually did not know they came from the department. i am not saying they did come of -- commissioner: that staff

understands what we're trying to do through the community policing model, it would be helpful if through some of the police department, there could be a statement to the industry, and we are not going to stick around and do that same kind of finger-pointing. having owners and managers reach out to the police department, if they are not afraid that their reputations are going to be brought down. i know there is concern that the headlines around the country has attached ruby skye to that event, and they were not even there. >> we obviously have an ongoing homicide investigation. i am trying to determine where

all of this came from, so i am looking at more the venue component, and that is what we are getting further away from the reports. and, i would make is i a seen a lot of articles about this story. it is amazing how inaccurate they are, and they are not always talking to a reliable source. but we have a different route with this one. we are trying to backtrack to what brought this behavior to this area, and it may be that it is none of the above. commissioner: i really think that is the way we are going to solve this violence. president roja: i have a teenage

niece who lives in the city, and these parties, i am sure there is a lot more investigation to be done, but it seems to me the stories i have heard from her and her mother, it is the promoter that is selling all of these tickets, knowing that he cannot possibly put the people in the venue, and if the people had been in there and under control, we cannot anticipate what it -- what may or may not happen. but i get. is standing from talking to my knees that this is a real sham that goes on quite a bit. selling as many tickets, though they know they cannot possibly handle these people. i just wanted to throw that out there. you said you had another item that you wanted to discuss? >> talking about the cost recovery and then note the security plan that we have been working on. president roja: