meetsç secretary -- their criteria. they will coverç all areas, as well as the rear. exterior lightingq will eliminae the front of the building at ñrçnight, at dusk. the lighting will remain on. there is an intrusion award -- alarm system whicht( will triggr at the front door or glass breakage, as well as motion sensors which will be monitored by adt on a 24-hour basis. if the alarm is triggered, the police and store managerç wille called. we feel confident that these security measures will deter potential crime activity. thank you.

>> good evening. my name is philip schwartz. i am a patient that benefits from medical marijuana. çi am a resident of los angele, california, and a member of sunset organic center. i am here in support of the mission organic center application. i will tell you from a patient perspective why the team may be sunset organic center so different from many other mcd's. t(i will also share the thoughts of other members who could not be here. as a patient who suffered from chronic joint pain, i chose this center for a variety of reasons. sunset organic center is clean and professionally run. the staff are friendly and the medicine is safe. the have a higher quality than many other dispensaries in los angeles. this is strong proof that the

management team truly cares about the health and well-being of their patients. doing it right, as you said. although the sunset organic center is not located in this if this neighborhood, i have always felt secure there. r>and the outside observer woud see the managementç has made every effort to ensure that patients can safely access their medicine. this includes a screening process that was just described for patients, and security control around the site by security professionals. in addition to providing safe and affordable medicine, sunset organic madison alsoxd provides health and wellness services to the community which are complementary to members, okincluding acupuncture treatmes and yoga. unlike many other mcd's, that are committed to assisting veterans or patience that live with chronic diseases, and

offers a discount. in addition, they donate to local charities and volunteer their time to clean the neighborhood. the members of thei] sunset organic center are actively involved and participate inç te collective democratically. i would like to share a couple of brief messages from people who would not be here. one member said they love the atmosphere. there is interaction with the staffç to make sure you get the right medicine for what you are being treated for. these managers understand how to make a community-based medical canvas dispensary that will support and improve the area around it. we strongly support this

project. presidentç miguel: are there additionalçó speakers in favorie -- in favor? fif not, d.r. requestor, you hae a two-minute rebuttal. >> i will pass on my comment. president miguel: each of the project's sponsors have two minutes, if you wish. >> there was one specific bit of information i wanted to clarify, in regards to the point that(tie executive director of tree med is not experienced in this particular business. çourw3 client in the second row founded a charter tour bus

company in san francisco, and built it into one of the largest charter bus companies in san francisco. currently pays over $120 thousand in payroll taxes yearly in san francisco, with 50 employees. she is more than capable in her business experience. i think it speaks for itself. the transition to this type of operation will not be a problem for her. in addition, the property where treemed t(çis located is a fam- owned building. during two years when it was a vacant storefront, much like mission organics, there was a large graffiti problem. we have to go out several times to paint over graffiti on the storefront. i guarantee you onceç the

security is put in and the building is renovated, there will no longer be any typemy of graffitiç on the building or ay type of i sort of the neighborhood, but in fact a sb]ewel of a building which is family-owned and treated as such. president miguel: thank you. >> i would just like to reiterate a few things. i will not take much of your time. i know everyone is getting very tired. my primary concern here really is making sure that dispensaries operate in a way that is going to continue toç make this movement move forward. the people that i choose to work with are people who i think will live up to that. i left a much more lucrative industry in order to work in a nonprofit industry, helping people, because i saw patients

who really needed this. and i feel the mission organics team, based on what they have done in losç angeles, and based on the work i have done with them here in san francisco and the outer mission district, will really provide a great dispensary that will help push the movement forward. i also look forward to working together with the other team on toe sure we work together and coordinate to better improve the neighborhood, since we would be sharing it, ifç you grant us bh permits. thank you. xdpresident miguel: thank you. the public hearing is closed. commissioner fong? commissioner fong: i have been a supporter of medical cannabis clubs thus far. i think i share the frustration we all do, a littleç bitç, a

concern these two areç on the same block. i share the same concern supervisor avalos does about clustering. i dot( think these fit into the code that exists. but i am going toç ask that the board of supervisors or a higher body we examine the clustering aspect of these clubs. i am still not convinced of the benefit of having more than one on the same block. commissioner antonini:ç i am a little concerned also, because it was pointedç out that we are closer to the san mateo county line. i think while the clustering is not an issue we are supposed to look at, we certainly can look at other factors. there are, as mentioned, no medical marijuana dispensaries in i am concerned we may be servicing a population that is

not part of san francisco here. i think we certainly have to, at the very least, make a choice. i think having two on the same block, in my estimation, is not necessary. president miguel: without repeating myself in my basic thoughts on this, i do have to comment on commissioner antonini's statement. if we were talking not about a cannabisi] dispensary, but an ao parts storeç, and that type of business had been banned in san t(mateo county, we would welcome the taxes, the trade, and everything that would come into a legitimate san francisco business. çi have a difficultyç not loog çat it in that manner. whether i like it or not.

to me,ç i cannot consider that argument. -- commissioner -- if -- commissioner wu? commissioner wu: i think it is important to equally or fairly applied planning code to all applications. çi am concerned about the fact that these locations are within i believe 150 feet of one another. for me, it borders on exceptional. w3q individually as projects that it meets the planning code. commissioner moore: is there -- a president miguel: is there a motion? commissioner sugaya: i think one of the difficulties for me is that in the previous case we have had experienceok with the

project sponsor. and this is probably not a good reason to vote for or against. but it does influence you a little bit, i think. and here we have two entities. one is from the dreaded l.a., but that should not be a factor. i am añr little concerned that they abandoned their operation in the face of supposed regulation. i do not know what the situation was down there. and then we have another project sponsor who has no experience, and is using a set of experienced consultants -- and a law firm that has dealt with a cpdlot of dispensaries, etc.ç it presents a slightly different pictureç.

i do not think it is a reason to deny them particularly. but it is a little difference to ration, for me anyway. -- different situation, for me anyway. commissioner antonini: iç think your chargeç as commissioners s to try to meet the needsç of medical marijuana patience -- patientsw3 in san frcé reasonable manner. having a dispensary that is geographically in this area, i think, given the number of patients and the prospect timothy -- and the proximity,çt would be like anything else. if you have a hospital that is fairly close, or medical facilities or doctors' offices, that is reasonable.

i can see this as a medical-type facility. it is not like you are favoring one over the other. but i think you have to look at the ones with thenb most experience. that is my feeling on this issue. çç>> if i might chime in, i wd çto stick to the commission tht this particular situation -- they are clustering. çbut this particular land use, you are going to most likely increase that likelihood due to the limitations that may have. there are specific districts where they can locate. they have to be a certain distance from public school facilities. it is most likely going to increase the chance that you're going to end up with a cluster like this. commissioner moore: the problems do exist because it is, in many

people's mind, a controversial use. it has an effect on the cohesiveness of how and neighborhood commercial district functions. and given the opposition or implied fear of people, people will try to look at this particular use not as a complementary, sympathetic use, but as something you are suspicious of. you are alwaysç looking around out of the corner of your eye. i am concerned, because ofç the 150 foot distance,ç that everybody in between, which is about four or five properties, will be stuck with having toi] o with that. it is for that reason, because we have not had something quite as similar as this, that it becomes, at least for this group, an extraordinary and exceptional situation to judge. we have, over time, expressed our concern, looking ahead, that

we would be wanting some support for not clustering, but we have not found tools not to do that. i am not making any conclusive statement here. i am basically speaking to a very bigw3 problem i have. because for me it becomes exceptional and extraordinary because of the nature of the use, and voiced opposition of the use as part of a neighborhood commercial corridor. for that very reason, i am concerned that the local affect could be neighbor -- could be negative. -- the local effect could be negative. in other situations, i have supported to products -- two projects. ! difficult. commissioner borden: i would say -- i mean, i agree.

the challenge is how you choose. we do not have the tools and our tool kit to say this one gets it and this one does not. that is where the challenges. on the one hand, you canw3 say e is from l.a. and not from here. but they have the actual experience. ççi do not know what this commission is thinking about. but we may want to consider -- i know everyone hates continuance s. it might be worth a conversation. even if we were -- granted, the problem is that it is not a conditional use. this is a discretionary review. it is not the same as a conditional use application. in a conditional use application, you would consider there already were two full- service restaurants, or what ever you were looking at. we do not have the tools to discriminate against one or the other.

but i feel like there is definitely a possible impact, just because people -- there is definitely that residual activity on one side of the street. if theyç were even on different sides of theç street, you know? that is the only thing. i actually really understand that. içó have a lot aroundç me, buty are atçó least blocks away from each other. i think that, you know -- i guess i do not know what continuing would help solve. i do not know that we will get any new tools decision. but there is a concern. and i just do not know how we adequately deal with that, because our toolkit does not really allow us to.

presidentç miguel: i do not thk personally, after this length of time, continuances going to achieve anything. commissioner fong: if a continuance would help bring more information to the table or bring us more tools, i would suggest that might be a possibility. i just do not know what that would be, unless you have ideas about additional information. i do not know what that would be, is my only concern. çcommissioner sugaya: i think e have been -- because these came in exactly, more or less, at the same time, and are on the agenda at the same time, it makes it doubly difficult for the commission. in other cases, if you look at theç map we have of for the otr dispensaries are, there are a lot of them that are close together. there appear to be some that may be as close as these, although

the scale of the map is such that you cannot tell that. but there are definitely more existing mcd's clustered in certain areas of the city. but those all did not come in to gather at the same time. so we were able to consider them çseparately, you might say, one on one. i do not know if we have ever denied one. ççcommissioner antonini: 0 yee have. commissionerq not know if we denied them because they were close. çfor the audience, it just maks the decision a little bit strange. that is why we are having in the problem here. at least with these two. the previous one was down the

road a little bit. it is a little bit difference attrition. that said, i don't think i added anything. commissioner fong: just a technical question. i am not necessarily suggesting it. this is not a conditional use. but we have the ability to control hours and days of operation. for example, rather than picking one over the other, if you let them go alternate days a week of operation. i am just curious. ç>> i do not seeç why not, ife commission chose to take discretionary review and approve for certain dates of operation. it is not usually done. i do not know of any restrictions. you can put a condition on any type of business operation. commissioner fong:ç i would not dare to think to do that if it was a restaurant, controlling

their business in that way. commissioner moore:ç i am not going to suggest days. but in the past, when we started doing this a number of years back, there used to be a large number of users. it was always quite touching and quite supportive to feel that the users themselves were here speaking about why this one particular application. and we do not have that much anymore. those were people who repeatedly came, that talked about the compassionate part of the operations, etc. j always very strong, supportive testimony. i did not quite hear that in the last two cases, to be honest. they looked like well-planned business enterprises, in that the experts were there with various degrees and their

success in other parts of the economy. it did not speak as much to the personal caring part. çi paused, thinking i did not have the strong resonance i have with other cases. commissioner antonini: we have denied two mcd's, and another that went far into the night was approved, but was denied at permit appeals. on another subject, because of the depth of neighborhood disapproval, we did take d.r. and not approved a starbucks on

judah many years ago. although i use might be approved, if there is overwhelming neighborhood opposition, we have in the past not approved. i am impressed with the attempts for security, particularly with the treemed dispensary. i am concerned not only the closeness to the san mateo line, but to balboa high school. this location is right at the center of mission and geneva. huge numbers of young people in their teenage years. while everything may be done completely well at the dispensaries, anyone patient but felt they might want to sell -- any one patient that might want toq i think it is more possible for that to happen and further north on mission street, which is a

little more isolated from secondary and middle schools, i think, even though they are technically beyond 1,000 feet. that is my problem with these two. zvçñr>> i will move to -- i wie to take d.r. and çdisapprove both. çpresident miguel: is there a second? xdcommissionerçç sugaya: the difficulty i have with the nile is coming up with findings. -- denainial is coming up with findings.

if the night, i am sure there will immediately appeal to the board of appeals. having sat on the board of appeals, mr. reed came before us manyç years ago. the board charge is to lookxd at the people and the code and try to apply what is in the code. from that standpoint, i think commissioner wut( is right. thereç is a set of standards tt these have met. if we cannot come up with a good reason, i think it may be likely that the board of appealsç will go against us, so to speak. i am not saying that what happened. but just in terms of having to make findings as to why we are denying it, i think is the rub for me.

president miguel: i cannot make aç motion from the chair. i would second the motion. we are stuck. t(çóapproval with the same conditions that we put on the calendar. but we just heard. if anyone wishes to make that motion. commissioner antonini: there is the difficulty with security concerns, particularly the proximity to middle and secondary schools, and distinct from the earlier approval. çcommissioner fong: i am goingo

make a motion to approve the ççproject with theñr same thre condition supervisor avalos laid out and we imparted in our last boat. -- vote. çthe same conditions. both projects with the same conditions. adequate lighting, parking, contributions to safety and security of the block, contributions to civic appeal by addingok greenery, clean and we- painted facades, and the fourth, which we are going to try to make overarching, is video surveillance systems, actual hardware, is looked over. >> there is also the condition for a community liaison. commissioner fong: correct. thank you very much. president miguel: there is a motion and a second. >> the motion is to take d.r.

and approve the project, based on the conditions imposed on the project at 4218 mission street,d outlined in supervisor avalos's note, çwith the added requiremt for a community liaison. çthe police department will be able to inspect for compliance. on that motion -- commissioner antonini: no. commissioner borden: aye. commissioner fong: aye. commissioner moore: aye. commissioner sugaya: no. commissioner wu: aye. president miguel: aye. >> the motion passes 5-2. [applause] president miguel: i hope both of your organizations and their

supporters fullyç understand t, what should i say, conundrum we have to serve under. i hope if any of the board of supervisors or staff listens or looks at this hearing that they willç understandç that we're asking themçç to deal with th, if they can. >>ç thank you. commissioners, you are now at general public comment. president miguel: is there any public the agenda? if not, public comment is closed and this hearing is finally over. çç5a