someone said they're on unemployment and looks like the benefits aren't going to get extended. i think that's real. that's real stuff. the foreclosure crisis. that's real stuff. i want to see these kinds of things, high -- high up on the next mayor's agenda. i don't know that we need to to have multiple hearings right now. i want to have at least one. i would like the opportunity to hear from my colleagues about what they want to see in the next mayor of san francisco. i think it is -- we're all not going to agree. the previous conversations -- makes that -- that -- that very clear if folks watching didn't already know. we're not going to all agree. we're not all going to agree on

a fame, we're for the all going to agree on the values or what reasonable doubt basis of the decision that we're about to make. we might not agree on any of it. i think we owe it to the public and we owe it to this city to discuss it and have it in the open. so they know where the decision comes from and what the motivations are. thank you supervisor daly and president chiu. >> i want to start off by saying, i actually agree with supervisor daly that today is probably not that time to have that public hearing. i do think it makes sense for us to hold a hearing and hear from the public on criteria that the public believes ought to be considered in our decision as

well as if colleagues want to discuss that happening. we have a motion whether we should convene as a city as a whole to discuss taking nominations and appointing a successor mayor, i think the fact it is given the tuesday before thanksgiving and we don't have consensus and there are concerns about -- about whether we can make a binding sdegs before january 4th, it probably doesn't make sense for us to move forward as a committee as a whole, i support supervisor daly's point about needing to have that conversation out of the spirit of engaging the public in a traps parent way for guest input. with that, back to the chair. >> thank you. mr. had president, supervisor daly. no. okay.

colleagues, we have a motion in front of us that we set as a committee as a whole. any discussion on the motion or vote? we'll vote on the motion. roll call vote. >> on item 34, supervisor avalos. >> before i vote on it, could i make a statement? i'm actually >> under the board rules we don't interrupt roll call as i've been advised. >> well -- >> unless we want to vote and then you want to make a statement afterward, i think that would be appropriate. unless we want to suspend. why don't we move to suspend? the roll call vote. no objection, back to the debate. supervisor avalos? >> to continue with my shakespeare theme, it is called on sick of heart and -- i would

like to continue there discussion to next time we meet. i'm really in the in the mood to continue at this -- at this time right now. i have an interest in coming to a decision but i don't think we're going to come to it today. is it possible to amend the motion to have a -- it brought back on december 7th? >> you're making a motion to amend the motion? >> amend, continue -- >> can i move to continue these items until the next meeting on december 7th? supervisor daly made a motion to continue this item to december 7th and any additional discussion, supervisor elsbernd? >> i move to table the item. >> excuse me? supervisor campos? >> motion to table it

undebatable. >> any roll call vote on the motion to table? >> supervisor elsbernd who was the second? elliot. on the motion to table, avalos? no campos no. chiu no supervisor chu aye daly no dufty aye elsbernd aye. commissioner mar: no maxwell no mirkarimi no el al yote toe pier

eye. four eyes and seven nos. motion to table failed. now to take the motion. >> the motion to continue this item to the 7th. any discussion? any discussion. supervisor campos. commissioner campos: i voted no against the motion to table but i believe we need to come back to the item later. i know that most of us feel exaste i do -- exhausted about -- i mean, give it everything -- given everything that happened today i don't think it makes sense for us to go down the road today of taking nominations. . yeah. so i think that. that makes sense to do that. >> supervisorance bernd. >> okay. the motion to continue this item, supervisor alioto pier. >> can we continue this item, it does have a date on it. about >> it was amended to.

>> i don't remember it being amended. >> supervisor daly would you like to restate your motion to amend motion? >> then i will move to amend the item for december 7th date and continue to that date. >> i'll restate my second. >> motion has been -- manages to continue. okay. the clerk is reminding me we haven't called item 34. why don't we call item 34. >> we haven't called 26 and 27. >> excuse me, 25 -- >> we can't call them until we decide what to do on this motion. so first thing, you call item 34. okay. and sprf daly first made a motion to aamend the motion and sit as a committee as a whole on

december 7th potentially. colleagues with can he take that without observe objection. without objection that is amended. to continue to december 7th, why don't we take a roll call vote? >> avalos aye campos aye chiu aye chu aye daly aye dufty aye elsbernd aye mar aye maxwell aye mirkarimi aye pier aye. there are 11 eyes. this will be continued until december 7th. madam clerk -- any items for today? >> we have three memories. the meeting will be adjourned on behalf of supervisor dufty,

francis coleman, and jerome and fred bowlharper. >> any business in front of the board. sn >> that concludes our business. >> at this time we're adjourned, happy thanksgiving, everyone.

>> 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