within 300 feet of grumopy's during the 15-day period before it expired -- within 300 feet of grumpy's./ you can have it in the 50 days, and that food truck was there, and grumpy's very well could have appealed. no malice was attended here. you just heard that the client purposely located 300 feet away from grumpy's and the others to avoid notice. that is one way to look at it, but the reason that off the grin has a fantastic record of notice is that they do the research to find locations that are three a hundred feet away from other businesses with similar food. why? it is not to avoid an appeal, is

to make sure the other businesses feel comfortable that their customers will go to their place. the client wants to make sure that it does not give the competitors, potential competitors, a feeling that this will be so close as to interrupt their business. by the way, we do not feel it in trust their business. that is an impression other businesses have, but you will hear later that they are entirely different services. three seconds. would you come up, please? this is the owner of off the grid.

>> i have a permit, and you can see the permit is from september 2011. this is proof that we were out on september 9, 2011. i am happy to answer any more questions. president hwang: was the date? you were there seven days later? >> yes. vice president fung: did you handle the discussions of the department? >> yes, that is correct.

vice president fung: and you were told by dpw that you did not have to have a new permit? >> that is correct. president hwang: far away is the truck at this point? >> the current distance is approximately 250 feet at the closest and 427 feet away from subway. at its closest, we moved 30 feet from our initial location, at its farthest 100 feet.

president hwang: you highlighted the day. >> the group permit was issued at a later date. they were submitted at the same time. commissioner: those dates do not

coincide? >> it is a little bit complicated. that permit i have a copy of that. this is what i am referring to. president hwang: this is rather than the 2012 issuance date? >> when we went in to renew the permit, the reissued it as that 35 number. i do not know why they did it -- they reissued it.

president hwang: when was it? february? march >> i think the february 1 was a renewal, and the march 1 was the first issuance of the approval. president hwang: this is where the was a single drop permit? the one located within the 300 feet of grumpy's? this was issued initially in september 2011, and there was no protest, no objection? >> there were rejections that we've worked very hard to resolve. this was well outside of the 300 foot radius, and we contacted them.

grumpy's existed. when we went to use the multi- truck permit, which we thought was ok, starting in april, and we actually did not, we do not serve hamburgers in this location because we were trying to make an accommodation with grumpy's. we thought there would be no objections. that is when this opposition came out. president hwang: maybe i am

confused. you started selling food out of that truck. this was on september 9, 2011? >> that is correct. president hwang: and you served four times, but after september, did you continue serving, or did you suspend operations? >> that truck is only used for promotional purposes. they paid us to go out there and to sell food. in september. that is the reason why we have not had another client that utilizes that service. president hwang: ok. and then in april, you opened services on the second permit that is at issue? >> that is correct. president hwang: when was that

issued? >> i believe in march. the permits were both submitted at the exact same time. the notice or both went out at the exact same time. if grumpy's some other business had seen a truck parked out there, they could have contacted dpw, and they would have been advised of other permits. president hwang: related to the dpw issuance, they are issued at the same time? >> i actually did not realize. i thought everyone had been noticed. it is not our business practice to surprise people. when grumpy's, attacked me, i

told him that it was my belief that we had issued a notice, but we had gone out before in september. we went out and contacted them and head of time. we thought we had done due diligence. i personally feel that more diversity is better. we chose this location because it is so far from other food options. i am not sure you can make it out there, but other than grumpy's which is sort of on the threshold of 300 feet away, and i can tell you where we could be in this location where we are permitted, but other than that

single location, all of the other locations are well, well outside of 300 feet. president hwang: in your efforts to reach out, what was the response? >> i sent some of my managers. one time, asked to speak to the manager, and they were asked to speak with the owner. one of my managers is sitting there over there. they went back a second time, and at that time, they made contact with one of the employees, where we initiated email contact, and we have a legal background for this location, but it was a porta- potti, and we were trying to find something more accommodating, and we actually asked grumpy's if we could use their restroom as our restroom of record, because we thought they were supportive, only to

realize that they had objections. president hwang: and those conversations you are talking about took place in september? >> no, those occurred in march. president hwang: thank you. director goldstein: a kid, we will hear from the department now. mr. choy? -- ok, we will hear from the department. >> hello, a junior engineer for dpw. we did do a 300 notice with off the grid, and once we send out the notification, we noticed that their location -- at dpw, we cannot issue a permit on the jurisdiction, so we moved them around the corner on to the dpw jurisdiction.

let me show you where we move them on the map here. the yellow is port jurisdiction right here, and this x, that is where the wanted to get their proposed location. we sent out a mailing, recognizing that, so we move them right around the corner, which is the dpw jurisdiction. we made the changes to our notice, and then we uploaded that information to our website.

after that, we did not receive any objections to this location. the application did have objections, but that one was withdrawn. president hwang: i am sorry to interrupt you. would be helpful to understand the chronology. the process? >> i do not have a notice dates with me, but the application i believe was in march, and the notification takes 30 days, and right around april is when we sent out the notification for that application. president hwang: but when you discovered that it was on port property, how soon after your

initial notice did you do a separate notice? >> we discovered this, i believe, within one week, and then we changed it. the mailing for that was pretty great, so what we did was change it, the area of the corner is very minor, so we decided to leave the information on our website. president hwang: ok. continue. sorry to interrupt you. >> it's ok. so we basically issued all of the permits for them when they got their health and fire business license, and there are several permit numbers, which

is, the single truck is 11mff- 0024 from 2011, and the renewal on that, because it is an annual permit, and the annual permits for mobile food, they expire on march 15 of every year, so this one was a renewed in march 200012, march 8, and that is for the single track. president hwang: did you say 0024? that was renewed? director goldstein: that was with 0035.

president hwang: ok. >> and then 11mff-0021 was the m;ulti -- multi-truck, and that was issued february 21 of this year.

so all of our updates are on our web page, and then for all our renewals, those can be appealed, as well, so if they have any questions on that one, they can give us a call or email us if they have any questions at dpw.org. vice president fung: i am finished. -- are you finished? i have a couple of questions. when they make the request for multiple truck locations, your diagram shows all three trucks in the same location. they are allowed to be either in one location or several locations with multiple trucks? >> for multiple, it is one location, and one truck, it can

be multiple locations. vice president fung: if that was not multiple trucks at that location, then it would be in excess of 300 feet. from grumpy's. >> meeting this one right here? the multiple truck or the single truck? vice president fung: i am going by the diagram, which shows that the specific situation. i think this was prepared by the permit holder. it shows three trucks in line at that location on front street. therefore, with three trucks, it is 250 feet away.

>> that is correct. vice president fung: if it is a single truck, it would be in excess of 300 feet? >> that is correct. vice president fung: that is really not the point i would be interested in. earlier, you indicated that you folks made the determination that they could continue with the same application with no further notice requirement. that was a department determination. >> yes, with the determination. vice president fung: did you share that with the permit holder? or -- >> yes. vice president fung: thank you. director goldstein: ok, if there

are no further questions, we can move into public comment. thank you. of the members of the public who would like to speak on this item? please raise your hands. ok, if you could please line up for us on the fall wall -- far wall, that would expedite things if you're able to do that. people who are employed by the pri older are not allowed to speak at this time. i just want to make that clear. the first speaker can please step forward. that would be you, and we do ask that you do give our clerk a copy of the speaker card or business card so we can actually refer to your name in our minutes. thank you. you have three minutes. go ahead. >> thanks. my name is chris.

i work downtown at battery st. for link tv, satellite media. i just want to spoke in favor of off the grid. i notice someone come to speak about the other restaurants. i have been there. there are a lot of people work in my intense industry, where we only a five or 10 minutes to run out and get something, and this is needed in this location. there are not great options. there are places across the street for coffee.

some of the elements are about that, but we enjoy it. off the grid. director goldstein: thank you. next speaker, please. >> good evening, and thank you for allowing me to speak tonight. my name is mike. i am a manager at a family and small business located in san francisco where we a point about 25 people to operate a restaurant and two food trucks. allowing them to continue to sell. there is a demand for us to be in this area. we have been received so well in this area along with the other food trucks. when we ask people what they love so much, their answer is unique style of indian food. our food is the exact opposite

of what would be a classic american pb -- pub fare. we serve puff pastry. director goldstein: i am sorry to interrupt you. i am looking at the permit, and it seems that you would be one to benefit from this permit, so i do not think it would be inappropriate. but i can definitely see both sides of the argument. director goldstein: it is not the that your comments are not important. the board rules are that people affiliated need to speak under the time allotted to the party, and since you are a beneficiary of one of those listed under the permit, you would need to speak on the time allotted to the party. president hwang: those are our rules. thank you.

director goldstein: it is up to the president. >> may i speak to the rule? director goldstein: yes. >> the person who made the appeal, you are not supposed to speak. neither of these vendors are employed by them. they are not under contract, where their employees or subcontractors are from off the grid, which is an entirely separate company, so there is no real affiliation other than that they are a consultant. they benefit, sure. they are benefiting, sure. and if it is benefit, then you are right, they are benefiting. president hwang: thank you. director goldstein: so we will hear from anybody else who is not a food truck operator falling under this permit. any other members of the public who wish to speak?

ok, seeing none -- >> one of the vendors wanted to hand in this petition of hundreds of signatures. i do not know if you allow it. president hwang: there were signatures submitted with part of the brief. thank you. director goldstein: so, commissioners, the matter is submitted. president hwang: i do have a question i did not ask of the appellants. grumpy's -- thinking. one of the points made by the permit holder's attorney is that grumpy's is a member of the golden gate restaurant association. is that true? >> i believe that is correct. president hwang: and we have

received notice. >> actually, i misspoke. i do not know that they are a member or not, and i'm glad you asked the question, because the rules make it easy for you. there is no question here that they did not get notice, and they were required to be noticed, and the reason for that is while there may be many other ways to get notice -- president hwang: counsel, you are not answering the question, and you are making for their arguments. >> i do not know the answer. president hwang: the second question might be addressed by the answer you are given me -- giving me. i think you are going to the point that that is neither here nor there. that is not part of what we need to do today. was there actual notice by your

client? >> there was no actual notice, and i think part of the reason is what you heard today. while it might be in neighborly act to try to talk to the competitors, and even while a california street may be super vigilant at looking at the website, the reason the statute requires action on notice is said that when you are here, you do not have to parse through the veracity of what is being said here tonight, begin to really do not know what happened, but what we do know is that the rules required the actual notice, and it was not given. had it been given, we would not be here tonight. the reason it was not given and a middle-age not by the city, it was due to the city, which is what the statute says. president hwang: i understand your argument. i just wanted the facts. your position is that your client actually did not have any

notice of the trucks existence within 300 feet from your client's property. >> that is correct. president hwang: thank you. vice president fung: who is going to start? commissioner: go ahead. vice president fung: i will start. i believe the department erred without providing notice within their own guidelines, and therefore i am in suppo o