>> commissioner benetti. commissioner joseph. commissioner meko. president newlin. we have a quorum. staff was contacted by commissioner perez saying he will not be able to attend and i think we expect commissioner cavellini and commissioner roja. >> ok. item number one, public comment. members of the public may address the commission on items of interest to the public that are within the subject matter jurisdiction of the commission. with respect to the agenda items, members of the public may address the commission for up to three minutes at the time such items are called. is there any member of the public that would like to make a public comment? seeing none, item number two, review and approve the minutes of september 28, october 9, and october 26.

>> i would like to move and bifurcate the minutes separating out september 28. and october 26 in the hope that commissioner cavellini will show up and leave it until the end of the meeting and vote on the minutes of november 9. >> i second that motion. >> commissioner, do we need discussion? >> same. >> same calm? >> right. -- i'm call? >> right. >> item number three. report from the acting director. >> so let the minutes reflect that commissioner roja joined the meeting. commissioner roja: here.

>> commissioners, good evening. are we good? so let me -- let me just give you a quick update under legislative and policy regarding the promoter registration legislation that we've been following along closely. it was heard on november 15 at the public safety committee of the board of supervisors. although it was passed out to the full board, a few amendments that were made post hearing were considered substantive. and is therefore i believe going to go back to the public safety committee for a rehearing on december 6.

i was in a meeting in supervisor chu's office. and although the city attorney considers the amendment substantive, i'm not sure that i would characterize them as such. and i'm happy to send the commission the revised version once i get my hands on it. but in any event, it goes back to the public safety committee on december 6. and will likely move for quickly beyond calendar for the full board december 7. and nen a second read -- and then a second read on december 14. based on that schedule, implementation will likely be late january if all goes as planned. i have been working with -- i asked staff here in city hall

to put together a proposal for the city in order to estimate a cost for the creation of this online system that we've been discussing. and once i get an estimate of cost, i'm going to take that back to the president of the board and make sure that those costs can be covered so that development can begin immediately. and hopefully not slow up any online implementation because this registration relies heavily on that being accessible. and online, you know, and not to walk into our office during office hours for. so that's going to be really important and i will keep the commission apprised of that. staff would like to request again that each commissioner get in touch with crystal via email regarding a short list of

preferred dates for a commission retreat in january of 2011. i really would like to secure a location outside city hall. that requires a lot of lead time in terms of public notice. and so i can't do that until i know when you guys are likely to be available in january or even early february for just a half day. so if you would get in touch with crystal, i would appreciate it. i wanted to give the commission a little bit of background. and i'm not going to read my whole text in my memo. but you have that in terms of what the staff has been doing relative to the revision of the sound ordinance. in 2008, the board of supervisors made some changes, substantial changes to the -- basically article 29, i think,

of the police code, that relates to noise or all of the sound issues that happened in san francisco, in 2008, in that revision, it created this thing called the noise task force. i prefer to call it a sound ordinance task force. because "noise" just doesn't sound very good. that noise task force meets op a quarterly basis to -- on a quarterly basis to talk about noise abatement matters and runs the gamut of not just this commission handles but motor vehicle noise, animal noise, building code, stuff like that. and it is something that we take very seriously. it is something that was really involved with in the earlier years. and i've started to go to those as they relate obviously to issues that we're dealing with. and so i wanted to let you know

that we will continue to update you and we will be spending some time on it. because amendments going ford may in fact be substantial -- going forward may in fact be substantial and need to come to you. the noise ordinance is a living document and changes all the time. we're going to request as a task force that the board of supervisors keep it alive. it's supposed to sunset after three years. which would be in 2011. and we feel that it's important enough of an issue overall to continue to have all of these departments and there's probably eight or nine departments that work on noise issues to keep coming together, you know, four times a year which isn't very much to really coordinate what we do as it relates to sound and noise in san francisco. ok. so a quick reminder that mr.

davis' retirement party is set for monday, next monday, november 29, at soluna which is at 272 mccallister. and i wanted to say that to the small audience in the room as well as the commission. but also anyone else that's watching as we know on public tv. so the public is certainly invited to that event if they would like to come by. the staff made a quarterly report to the board of supervisors on entertainment activities. and violence in night clubs on november 15. and that same public saist committee, staff reported our activities. and i put a copy of the report right behind my -- so another memorandum here just to the public safety committee. that outlines essentially what we've been doing.

we changed the way the report was issued to the members of the board on that committee. as they had let it be known that they were not happy with all of the raw data we were giving them. so we gave them a different kind of outline. and you can take a look at that if you want to. i think that they were pleased to see that change and we're going to try to even do better using some technology, possibly, to do more reporting out. the board president indicated he wanted more like comstat. that's a pretty high bar to meet based on the little amount of resources we have, we'll do what week -- what we can to make sure we get the information out there. so the report again is behind this one. it includes the club -- the club staff has been expending resources on and none are a surprise to you. as you the commission have been

hearing about these clubs from mr. granelli for, you know, a little bit of time here and there, depending on if we are as successful the first time out for the second time out. and those clubs that got citations, anyone who got warnings, as well as anyone who had major and minor incidents that resulted in police reports that have been submitted to us. so take a look at that. and i'm happy to answer any questions. and happily there are no corrective actions to report to the commission on permits since last meeting. >> yes. >> hi. i have one comment and a couple of questions. my first comment is your -- going to public safety committee was great. i just needed to compliment you on that. i thought it was straightforward and you hit all the right points. and you told them exactly what we could do. i just thought it was great.

so that was that. my questions are could you summarize really quickly in a sentence or two what the substantive changes were to the promoter legislation. and my second question is, if we do not get the money in a timely fashion to do the data base, what is plan b or do we simply not implement it in a timely fashion? >> to answer your question about the changes to the promoter, i didn't bring that with me but i can send you the notes that were given to us. i think from supervisor chu's office that indicated what those issues were. if that's ok with you. >> yes. >> and some time. and again, just going back to the committee, there is obviously ample opportunity at committee level for any kind of comments that you -- anybody would think is appropriate at that point. but i'm happy to send the whole

commission the revisions. >> great. thank you. >> and then -- so ask me again. what was the second question? >> if we don't get -- >> if we don't get the money. >> the data base up, do you have a plan b or do we postpone the implementation of this? >> i think -- plan b is always simply analog. paper. registration. and it's not great. i think that potentially what we could do is certainly put a simple form on our website so at least we have somebody accessible 24-7 on the internet even if it's not something that would create a data base automatically. maybe that's plan b. plan c is paper. so it's simple enough to have a form again, like a p.d.f. form, that we do all of our permits on, on our web site, on sfgov. if that database behind it is

not ready to go, the legislation itself does not require the department to have it implemented by a date certain. it says after -- it gives -- there's a lot of latitude. i guess what i'm saying. but frankly, and poetically speaking, i don't believe we're going to have time ad infet mitum putting a database together, i don't think we have that luxury. so we'll have to have plan b ready to rock. >> ok. thank you. >> go ahead. >> first i wanted to second those comments regarding your presentation to the public safety committee. i thought you did great. i thought you did a great job on behalf of yourself and the commission. i have a question regarding the watch list and part of your report. i saw -- the list of major

incidents that the police have provided you, there was incidents -- two instances with the tecal bar on mission street. and both were aggravated assaults. one with a knife. and they didn't make the watch list. and to me, i just -- i see a lot of incidents and a lot of club names. how does somebody get on the watch list and how did they not get on it? i'm curious. >> well, you're going to have to help me out here. but the tea cup doesn't have a place of entertainment permit. so that in part is why i'm hesitant to put it on a list like this. again, i've said this before. and i'm happy to hammer this home. is that we have to be very careful right now if -- with respect to our resources. i have one, one inspector, one enforcement officer, same person, i have to watch very

carefully in terms of his -- you know, time management on places where we have very little leverage. and so someone like that where i think -- there isn't a place of entertainment permit so i have very little tools to work with to fix this place. and i have to be careful of using my resources on those. that's i think part of the deal. a watch list to me, and maybe it's a loaded word or maybe it's something we shouldn't have maybe just -- maybe it's some sort of stigma that i didn't intend. but it's where the staff intends to put resources toward as much as necessary to make them -- make those problems and those worries that we have about potential problems go away. >> i love the watch list designation. my followup question is since

the tecal bar is not a licensee, why are they even in the bar report? >> i can answer that. just -- it's just to go with what deputy director or acting director is talking about. they do have a permit form from us for a pool table. but because they have a permit from us for a pool table, again, just to reiterate, what she had said, the actual tools that we can bring to bear on them is much more restricted. it's not like a place of entertainment where there's a security plan, there's sound abatement, there's other agency inspections, building, electrical. whereas for a puyol table, they -- for a pool table, they don't have a to have a security plan for a pool table and don't have to have these items. a place like this just as the deputy director cane had said, we're in a funny spot. we would -- it's definitely there's something going on there. but as far as our resources, we really try to bring our resources much to focus -- to

focus much more on plachese with a place of entertainment -- on places with a place of ent attempt because we get a lot -- of entertainment because we get a lot more accomplished. and what we end up doing in that situation is we work with the relative police station, s.f. politician in that district. police station in that district. and we work in a support position with them and we work on it more together where something on the watch list we take more of a lead role on. >> with the tecal bar, our only recourse would be to suspend their pool table permit? >> we could do that. but the time and effort it would take to do that is probably not worth the outcome. i think that was -- on your point. >> we can get much more done and much more accomplished working with the a.l.u. unit, the a.b.c. unit and sfpd in

helping them do that kind of stuff. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> and i have one question on the earlier presentation on the promoter legislation. and did any type of citation get discussed or put into that or enforcement against promoters that don't comply? clubs that don't -- >> well, there wasn't a discussion of any kind of citation issuance. there is in it some manner of recourse or regulatory sort of enforcement or punishment if you will. there is things in the current legislation for that. but nothing citation related. >> ok. i'll rereview it. i must have missed that. >> so if i might. >> yeah. >> if i might. just let you know that my mother's here in the audience. i just wanted to welcome my mother and say hi. >> there you go. >> welcome.

>> is she a spectator or complainant? >> she might get up for public comment. we'll see. [laughter] >> commissioners, you'll see my report as well in your books. and your binders tonight. and just go over it through the point. el rincon was issued an administrative citation for violation of their security plan. that happened -- i have a list here somewhere. that happened about a week and a half ago. so once again, they're working toward something. but i'm not quite sure what. but we will keep you apprised of what is going on there. and we're keeping our eye on them. the report for the city supervisors that director cane, deputy director cane told you

about, we ended up doubling up your information a little bit. i put in the whole memo and our part of it, just the facts and figures. so if you wanted to read it again, you're welcome to. i'm still working with the city attorney and sfpd on the complaint law out on the mission. i'm working with both departments on that particular complaint. we're moving slowly but i've done one or two site visits and both agencies ask that we visit and we will do so. i put it in my report so we have an idea what i'm spending my time on. met with the city that again, with what jocelyn had talked about, about the noise task force. and just as she had said about it, i think it's important to really acknowledge that this is an important group. and some of the stuff that's

being discussed is, you know, it's everything from believe it or not wind chimes to all the way up to tour buses and places of entertainment. and it's great that we have an opportunity that -- for us from the staff and the entertainment commission along with other city agencies, and even -- we had a sound engineer, we had someone from salters and associates there. and it's really a great group. it's a task force that's really doing a lot of good. and i think in the future, we'll be able to really change the sound ordinance here in the city which has some problems. and i think it's a real positive step. i'll be meeting with the city controller's office about our citation process in december. we'll be dr. kind of discussing more of the back end of that process. we'll be meeting -- it will be myself, the controller's office and then a few other agencies that are also now have the ability to issue the demitch citations -- administrative citations.

so after that meeting i'll be able to give more information. i'll be testifying at a planning department hearing on trigger and also in december. so once that hearing and the results of that hearing happen, i will be able to give this commission kind of those results which will be -- should be interesting. finally, i would just -- i'll read this verbatim. it's important to note that in some of the following incidents listed below the venue mentioned at-bats acted responsibly by calling the sfpd. these instances are noticed with a star. this is important because it shows the positive results that can occur when the e.c. is able to do ongoing education with permit holders and security and best business practices. officer mathias is here from central station and when he talks during the police section of this meeting, he's actually going to go into a little bit more detail on two of those incidents. so i'll let him do that. it's good. it shows that with continued education, with spending the time to kind of further the

knowledge base of our permit holders, we get results. and i think it's a very positive thing from both education done by this commission, and by the summit that we had done in the past. and we'll do again in the future. some of the venues that we're looking at, you can see that list. the club, golden boy pizza, the 3000 block of the fillmore area which we issued a citation in and a few warnings to venues in that area, el rincon, bar and church, and you'll see the list of -- who received notices of violation. and then for the citations, really, you're looking at the matrix and the fillmore area, heights, el rincon and lime. the two that i want to draw your attention to are both el rincon and lime being as both have now been cited twice.

so those citations are starting to go up as far as cost. the el rincon whereas before, they were cited for one particular violation of thrae security plan. where -- of their security plan. where in the past it was $100, now $200 and $300 and so on. and the list of incidents, both minor and major. i would like to ask a question of this commission and the report that we gave to the city supervisors, you'll notice that on our incident list, we had them separated by plachese that we do permit and -- places that we do permit and places that we don't permit. and is that something the commission would also like or do you mind if they're all grouped together such as they are or would you like to see them divided up? >> well, if you're asking, i would like to see them divided. >> yeah, me, too. >> ok.

that's why i asked. thank you very much. unless there are any questions. >> i have two small questions for you. one, are you aware whether or not p.d. is actively educating nightclub owners in their districts? i know that we have like nightclub officers in some districts. becoming friendly with them. educating them. so people feel more likely to call 911 when they have a problem instead of staying away from that? because they're afraid it's going to penalize them? so would you know if p.e.d. is doing any education that way? >> so this is going to be kind of a convoluted answer. but yes and no. yes, that there are situations like that going on. being that i know of being done by individuals, nighttime liaison officers and permit officers, officer mathias is here, officer dalton and also -- and both i know for -- i can

positively say that these are two permit officers that are doing outreach that are educating permit holders in that -- in their districts. not every permit officer is doing that. some have more. some have less in their district. so as far as priorities, it rates accordingly. but there's no formal education system or outreach system going on. i know one of the things that e.c. staff and the sfpd are working on is we're actually with the aalu unit is we'll be probably in january, starting the "nightline"up education. meaning that a.l.u. unit members and myself, e.c. staff, will be meeting with the lineups of shifts of officers before they hit -- right before they hit the streets to give them crash courses in a.b.c. and entertainment permit information. >> so to staff, is there a way that within the next few months

we can talk to p.d. and not necessarily with the permit officers during the day, but with the nighttime liaisons, the entertainment industry, which i think most stations have now, that we can have a meeting with them so that they actually get out there and meet the club owners and let them know that they're there so that they feel more confident that they can call 911 instead of being penalized for calling 911? because that is still out there. in people's heads. that they're going to be penalized. >> if i can answer, i think that when we get that list of entertainment liaisons which we don't have yet, we can absolutely do what you're saying. but part of what was mentioned, that won't happen probably until after the first of the year at this point. there was an intention to start it sooner. and then got totally derailed with the giants winning the world series unfortunately.

because resources were changed all around. in this city for the month of october essentially. but yeah. absolutely. when those liaisons are identified, we are absolutely -- we would very much like to do that. i think the point roj trying to make, in advance of that, we're still seeing the results in specific examples where we get police reports. and when you actually read the narrative, we're surprised and pleased to find that in fact it's saying that nighttime venues are doing exactly what we've been asking them to do. in a general way, not each -- with their liaison. but specific cases. they must have heard about the summit or here or coming under cain shaw and a meeting -- under crenshaw and a m