the federal government moves very, very slowly. so there were -- it was taken away from them. -- so if they were, it was taken away from them. vmac does medical research. it is 95% of the medical research is under the auspices of ucsf who is already in mission bay. it could be pretty much of a great deal there. the only thing i would add to that press back to when i started my comments -- goes back to when i started my comments on this. the design concept that sales force -- salesforce 1/4 is not the concept of a medical century

-- put forth is not the concept of a medical facility. it might be an idea for them to come into the 21st century and it might be a better use -- not a better use but a good use for the property. i am very disappointed with what has happened. commissioner antonini: thank you. i want to mention as most of you know, this is a business decision on the part of salesforce. there is nothing i can see and anyone can see other than the entitlement process and everything moving forward expeditiously. i can understand as a publicly traded company and the fact that they are growing rapidly, and as i speculated earlier and i do not know that this is necessarily true. it may be the kind of firm that more -- maybe more readily house in more vertical office space

that is the case with many of the existing tech companies. they have acquired some considerable amount of square footage in one office building already, and they have an opportunity to get more. we are going to be developing new office space in the transbay area and that would be an excellent place if it were to fit their business model. that perhaps could be one thing. and hopefully, the design and mission bay is a great design and it is one that will either fit for them or for some other company because unlike almost all the tech campuses in other parts of the peninsula, this is a campus that would be integrated into the city, which is very important. as we discussed a couple of weeks ago when we saw the plans, they would not have interior cafeterias where people were

virtually locked in if not actually locked in during the day where they would be part of that community and build -- avail themselves of what is available. perhaps you could let me know, but there is a district that exists and as owners of the property, salesforce and anyone else who owns property in mission bay is still obliged to pay into the melrose district even before any business base is improved. >> it is correct but is also based on the land and buildings. the contribution would be greater if there were boat -- there were buildings. >commissioner antonini: certainly that continues and

let's hope that there is a campus similar to the one we have seen in the plans in the near future. commissioner moore: i may be seeing -- saying the obvious. the disappointment resonates through all parts of the city. to all trades and everyone who launch of a new energy not only in mission bay, but generally, the future of the city, a new designer identified real-estate. it is hard to pull back. the presenters, the applicants were very enduring and the fairness by which they presented and the honesty they displayed,

we are going to start right away. we ask the question to which we got an honest answer. all the sudden, this is unexpected and concerned -- of concern to me. that makes it difficult during the type of -- doing the type of work we do and being sometimes disappointed about it. that is all want to say. >> because i know that we asked for public comment at the beginning of the calendar when we first announced this, because we asked, i did ask that you consider the request and the item itself and the call the item. i would suggest you call for public comment. president fong: is there public comment? >> i move to continue indefinitely. commissioner moore: could i ask

if the packages should be retained or should we return them to the department, or should we just toss them? >> the motion on the floor is for indefinite continuance of this item. on that motion, commissioner antonini, aye, commissioner borden, at aye, commissioner moore, aye, commissioner wu, at bottom. -- aye. the item has been continued indefinitely. you're on items six -- item d. >> this is a request for a mandatory discretionary review to develop the medical cannabis

dispensary between market and mission street within the c3o district. it would allow been pressing but not smoking. the site would be the first dispensary location for the project sponsor. it is not within 1,000 feet of any elementary or secondary school or a center that serves persons under 18. it is located in the few areas where the location can meet the spacing requirements. some businesses offering bonds -- instructional services in music and other arts are located in the area but they're not elementary or secondary schools and are not community centers. the yerba buena center cannot meet the definition of community service centers serving youths under 18. while there is concern about

concentration, there is only one other mcd and one other facility and one approved but not open within half a mile. the department has received a petition with 18 signatures in support and 11 phone calls, its letters, and a petition with 53 signatures. opponents of the project believe there are currently an overconcentration of medical cannabis uses in the financial district and the use will degrade their properties, leading to crime and blighted area. concerns were expressed about traffic and youth walking on the sidewalks near the area. the department recommends discretionary review and approve with conditions as the mcd complies with code and advances the objectives and policies of the general plan. the project site will be fully renovated to provide a safe, well lit and firman for medical

marijuana patients with proper identification cards. commissioners, in addition, i would like to add one thing to one of the proposed conditions of approval. the condition that relates to the need for a minor permit to alter. if you could add to that where we mentioned the wind is cannot be obscured more than 25%. if that could mention that, that would include any kind of obstruction whether it be fillmore curtains or any other mechanism. i am available for any questions. thank you very much. president fong: project sponsor? >> hi, thank you very much. is that beter? -- better? i am a native of san francisco.

my family has been in the neighborhood since the 1940's and that -- at this location since the 1960's. i have seen neighbors and businesses come and go and have been part of the development of the area attending neighborhood planning meetings with my mother. i have watched tremendous improvement over the years. the transformation is quite remarkable. i have burned two -- earned two bachelor's and an m.a. and an mfa at uc-berkeley. i have attended the cannabis career institutes. i have studied numerous healing modalities, herbology, and chi gong. i have been president of a small nonprofit college in san francisco and successfully ran

another business. in the 1980's when the aids epidemic broke out, my friends and community became gravely ill. i volunteered going to homes and hospitals, including the medical center and have had the enormous privilege and gift of helping friends through their death process. i have seen how cannabis has changed their lives, aiding in their functioning. i have learned the importance of making patients as comfortable as possible, allowing the body and mind to rest and to heal. i feel incredible compassion, understanding the pain and fear of -- that these patients face every day and have always felt what it takes to help them feel better is most important. this has been my inspiration for this endeavor. the proposed mcd will be a hard-

based century providing safe, kind, and compassionate access with commitment to patients' needs. patients -- staff will be all knowledgeable -- knowledgeable of patients' needs. the majority of patients are business professionals. the mcd will be esthetically pleasing in a quiet, contemporary way. no loitering will be allowed. the exterior and sidewalks will be kept clean drop the day. we will work with the san francisco police department with our security plan and video surveillance system to be approved by their video forensics unit. we will have a full-time security guard, and the interior and exterior will be well lit. many neighbors were enthusiastic about this location, feeling it is a perfect fit away from their

homes and children. vaporizing was and greatly requested to assist with their conditions during working hours to no longer risk medicating on the street or their workplace restroom as the financial district is too far to go home to medicate. i am -- have tried to your concerns and have been able to respond to one letter and called the planning department to respond to others'. names and contacts were not available. we have a liaisoo maintaining a collaborative, positive, ongoing, open relationship with the community. the collective will offer psychotherapy for terminally ill and severely ill patients and will donate to homeless food programs and hospice. being in the center of the transportation hub, a connecting through the entire city and bay area, we hope to bring much

needed taxes and revenue to the city. there are many parking meters, parking lots, and taxis nearby. we will be a good neighbor and i feel confident the mcd will be a positive contribution to the financial district. i look forward to continue being part of our neighborhoods evolution and a beneficial member of our community and the city of san francisco. as a long time neighbor and business owner including two generations of family proceeding me at this location, i sincerely look forward to continuing coexisting happily with everyone in this diverse, innovative neighborhood that makes san francisco such an inspiring city. thank you. sorry for my nervousness. president fong: public comment on this item? i have one card here. steve rogers. you can queue up if you want there.

>> i am steve rogers with coast counties pretty manage -- property management. we managed to buildings on mission street within a 1,000 ft radius. did any of you have the opportunity to read the letter i sent out? good. ok. so, we ask the commission to oppose this project based on exceptional and extraordinary circumstances. also to note the discretionary review that was done omitted important information and distorted other information. some key points are that it define the area as retail and high rise office and omitted the

high density of schools. the academy of arts serves 20,000 students a week through that area, from my address standing. it is a huge amount of students. during the summer they dedicate their program, i am told, to students under 18. that is a key point on here as well. in the letter i went through point by point comparing -- pointing out omissions and discretions in the discretionary review. if i do not have time to get through the mall now, you have the letter. -- through them all now, you have the letter. the high density of schools, not only the academy of arts in the area, the kaplan school, converse international, there is another important school on the

border, so that would be within the 1,000 foot radius. that is a secondary school, not considered appropriate. in our building recreation center -- in our building, recreation center wise, that could be considered a community area. it serves many students because of the density -- people under 18 as well. as far as the changing of character, we're concerned with clustering occurring as well, and also there is specific testimony in the letter from a san francisco police officer stating it does change the character in negative ways as well. traffic issues we went through a

long period of intense negotiations with the academy to clear of issues. there's a lot of issues, double parking could become a problem. i will say -- >> thank you. >> you could look at the pictures i handed out. president fong: thank you. >> i am jim patrick, with patrick and company. we have been here 35 years. we have two stores within 1,000 feet and 30 employees who work within 1,000 feet. we have a seven-story building and 300 and tenants -- 300 tenants and employees.

i do not want them -- our employees or our tenant employees going out for a smoke break and doing things like that. i do not think that is healthy or conducive to what we want to accomplish. i want the neighborhood to improve. i have been working on this for years and years. i do not want to -- this to go down. the general plan goes for -- calls for the neighborhood to go up. there are a number of schools in the neighborhood. fed has already been talked about. parking, big problem. congestion, big problem. you have worked hard on this problem and get to that and you have a big mess. financially, publicly, practically, and legally, this is not a good idea. thank you. >> good afternoon,

commissioners. i am the director of the corporate work study program at immaculate conception high school. we have been working continuously in the mission district since 1883. four years ago, we were accepted to a national network of high schools that incorporate a work study program as part of the curriculum of the school. since we were accepted in the program, all the students i see, we have 240 girls practice a bit in this work study program. our students come from low- income families. -- we have to under 40 girls participating in this work study program. 32 work with corporate sponsors within 1,000 feet of the proposed site. 67 work within 2000 square feet. the one day a week these students are in this area from 8 to 5. our girls come from low-income

backgrounds. many are in neighborhoods and in some cat -- instances families where drug use is prevalent. we're trying to teach them how to become confident, productive, and responsible members of society. we do not believe that additional exposure to marijuana and availability for there's this goal. we would ask the commission to consider citing this -- siting this facility at a more appropriate location. thank you very much. >> good afternoon. imad 44 second street. i have a small business there. -- i am at 44 second street. this is a heck of a commitment at noon that you are going here and thanks for doing all you do for the city of san francisco.

i wanted to mention, not in my backyard is not considered a good citizen stance. i am not going to take that stance. after -- a few items. we have a lot of tourists. if we are trying to attract san francisco as being one of the wonderful cities to visit, i want to question the wisdom of putting it where it is and maybe not a few blocks -- maybe a few blocks back. i want to have you think about the location when it comes to downtown and interaction with the public. the federal government and state governments are going through all sorts of review's right now as you are well aware. the laws are changing. we have a number of permits out there and operations, club's going on right now. would it not be wise to consider holding off on the additional permits until we learn what is

going to happen with these laws? as we know, these cards are easy to get. you can ask any college kid. i talked to 12 days ago on venice beach. they give out medical cards for $10. it is easy to get access. you arewe are fooling ourselvest these kids are not going to get in there. lastly, i want to go back to these college kids. these kids hang around on the block, on the side alley. these benches are there. the smoke cigarettes. there are hundreds of these kids all day, hanging out there. they are 18 and older, but i am concerned about our youth in san francisco. these medical cards are so available. these kids are going to be able to have such easy access. to me, it is like cracking a beer and giving it to them.

we say "do not drink that." is that available. why should we do that for our youth in san francisco, and have it so close to such a large school? thank you very much for all of your time. president fong: is there additional public comment on this item? commissioner miguel: i am not going to bore anyone with my usual comments on the laws regarding medical cannabis. but there was a comment early on that there was the thought that this leads to crime and polite. -- and blight. it is a comment we have heard many times. no one, including the police department, has ever brought before this commission any factual evidence of that statement. therefore i have to disagree with you. it has not been proven.

if any of you who have spoken today or anyone else can actually bring some facts to us and not just words, i believe certainly i and the rest of the commissioners would consider actual facts. statistics. some evidence of the statements to make. we did not -- this commission did not define what a school is, primary or secondary. that was not up to us. we have to abide by those definitions. nothing that has been brought to us on this or the other issues on medical cannabis dispensaries have had any import to those on the board of supervisors who make those decisions. we still have to abide by it.

this is the wrong body to bring it to, changing definitions. it is not up to us. the fact that immaculate conception has students that work in businesses it is fantastic. that is what high schools, in my mind, should do and do not. however, it is not a high school campus, and therefore it does not fall in the definition. there is nothing we can do about it. the fact that the economy are is there -- academy art is there and many students are young -- it is not a primary or secondary school. there is nothing we can do about it. i want to express to you that our reasons to deny in this or many other instances are very, very, very small.

i do not find the arguments presented to me to fall within the legal requirements i would need to deny this permit. commissioner antonini: i agree with commissioner mighel. -- mighel. -- miguel. we do have discretion and can vote no. i view these as pharmacies. because of conflict between federal and local laws, we are not able to have state-run pharmacies to dispense medical cannabis, as should be the case, or pharmacies in general. but i use it as an analogous situation. if you go into a pharmacy and have a prescription for a drug that is move or performance

altering, you usually get your prescription and safely get home, and then take your prescription in a safe place. you do not take your prescription at the pharmacy and then go out and try to perform either driving or other things while you are under the influence of a drug. i do not know any reason why a patient cannot get a large enough supply to take care of them for a day or two days, or whatever time it is until they can get back and get the next supply. i do not see any reason why anyone has to consume the drug on site, be it smoked, vaporized, or interested. i do not agree with that and have never voted for any of the dispensaries that allow on-site consumption of the medical cannabis. a couple other reasons have been brought up about the school nearby and things like that. but technically these do not fit the definition.

that are not primary or secondary schools, which are the ones that are prohibited within 1,000 feet. technically, it does not fit that requirement. however, i know clustering is not something we are supposed to look at. i got a map staff sent us. i counted 12 dispensaries in district 6. that was only part of district 6. it does not even show the area closer to where this is. there are probably even more. the case was made a few weeks ago, when we were asked to approve an and cd -- an mcd in the outer excelsior district. there were a couple of miles between that and the nearest existing site. you could make a case it is difficult for anyone to travel and long distance to get medication, particularly people who may be elderly or have problems wit