and so our goal was really just to enhance the store and enhance the experience, our wine bar is going to be very small, it will be totally inside, and it won't be outside, there is a patio but we are not going to use it. we are going to keep the minimal hours and probably no later than 9:00 p.m. so it is not going to be a big, loud, rucus venue. i think that i passed out some of the information we started a petition a few months ago and we had tremendous support from the neighborhood people were kind of at the snotty end, a16 and two doors down and the meat market and the coffee roasty. and it is going to be a nice neighborhood event basically, we... i have a letter that

broadly explains our goal and intent and then the petition, and the diagram of the floor plan, that is what we are hoping to do. >> for those of you in the audience, there are a lot of things that effect, and why don't we hear from the policement, i understand that expecter fong and darcey keller are here. >> okay. >> thank you very much, sir. >> good morning, inspector, (inaudible) with the san francisco police department, avc, the liaison unit. >> on behalf of ferdon olive oil has filed an application with the department of beverage control speaking a type 42 on

sale beer and wine license, located on the south side of chest nut street. >> the police calls for service, from december, 2007 and 2012 is one, and there are no police reports in that same time period. notification, dates and the 500, first mailer was on january 28th, 2013 and the notice to the public was posted on january 29th, 2013. >> san francisco plot information this premise is located on plot 507, the applicant location is located in a high crime area. the census track, the premise is located in census track, 128, on sale license authorized on the track 14. and the premise is currently located in an undo concentration area. and there are two letters of

protest and they are reported with the california beverage control the abc and no records of any support letters of the california department of alcohol beverage control, the san francisco police department recommendation, there is no opposition from northern police station, if the applicant agrees to the recommended conditions. the alcohol abc, liaison unit recommends approval with the below conditions. the sale and service and consumption of alcoholic beverages shall be permitted between the hours of 10 p.m. and 9 p.m. daily. for off sale consumption sales is prohibited. they shall be responsible for maintaining the area free of litter over which they have control. >> thank you very much. >> director. colleagues, do we have any questions and supervisor yee? >> i just wanted to thank mr.

ferdon for being here and i do appreciate wanting... and i also am very happy that you reached out to the community and have reached the neighborhood support for this investment for this committee to know that, and i understand that the supervisor in your district has already met with you. yeah. so that is a good thing, i would like to see this move forward. >> thank you, supervisor yee and i do want to echo those comments, and one of the things that we make it clear any time that someone wants to apply for a liquor license is to make sure that when they come to this committee that they have done the out reach to the community, that there is community support and that they have met with the district

supervisor. and you have done that and that is a good sign in terms of how you are going to run this business. and we understand also that the district supervisor is supportive of this. so, without any other comments, why don't we open it up to public comment, if there is any member of the public who would like to speak on this item? please come forward. >> seeing none, public comment is closed. so if we could have a motion to send this item forward with a recommendation as a committee report to the board of supervisor? s >> moved. >> so we have a motion by supervisor yee and if we could take that without objection. >> thank you to the police department for the work on this. congratulations. >> mr. clerk, if you could please call item two? >> item number two is an ordinance amending the police codes replace the existing 8 foot bubble zone for

individuals entering and accessing... >> before we begin, do i want to acknowledge the presence of a number of our friends from united educators of san francisco. thank you for being here and it is good to have you in the chambers. i would like to begin by thanking my colleagues on the board of supervisor whose have already signed on as co-sponsors of this legislation, supervisor avalos, kim, mar, weiner, cohen, breed, and mr. david chiu and norman yee and so there are nine that have signed on as co-sponsors of this piece of legislation. i also want to thank my staff who have been working on this

for quite some time. hillary who started working on this for more than a year ago before they went on maternity leave and stephanie ashley who has picked up the work and i can tell you that many, many hours have gone into this. i especially want to thank the staff and the women, and the men who go to planned parenthood who have been so patient and dealing with this situation. and have actually been more patient than i think is probably expected or should be expected of anyone. and i want to thank them for the very responsible measured, way in which they have approached this issue. i also want to thank the city attorney office who has given a lot of advice on this matter as well as the police department including not only the chief of police but also the district

captain and we have representatives from the police department here and i want to thank other city agencies including the department of public works who have also worked with us on this matter. >> i would like to provide the context as to how it is that we got here. just we have had a bubble ordinance in san francisco since 1994. and to provide some context as to how that ordinance came into being, in 1993, dr. david gun was shot and killed on his way to work to the pensicola woman's medical clinic it occurred in the anti-abortion protests that was aimed at the patients and also the staff. dr. george tiller that same year who was serving as the director was shot in both arms by an anti-protester.

dr. tiller, unfortunately would survive that shooting but then would be shot and killed 16 years later by another anti-activity. that same year that all of that was happening. this board of sburps has the access to healthcare facilities ordinance in an attempt to insure that the men, women and families that walked through the doors of the productive health facilities are saved from threats, violence, intimidation and harassment and it has been more than 20 years and much has happened, unfortunately in some respects not much has changed. last year we saw the bombing of two representative healthcare facilitis in a third that was burned to the ground over night. must has been said about the war on women, but we believe those of us who have been

seeing these events unfold that the war on women is alive and well and we are seeing it here in san francisco. over the past year, we have been working with planned parenthood who approached my office and started telling us about the harassment that the workers at planned parenthood and the men and women and families that were trying to access the clinic were being subjected to. what they described to us and what we subsequently saw the many times that we have visited has been very disturbing. you have a number of incidents of harassment, a number of incidents of intimidation and people who have gone into the clinic. and i think that you will hear from some of the staff and some of the women who are here tonight and today who can more eloquently speak to their experiences in terms of the

level of intimidation that we are talking about. when you heard that, we wanted to be measured in our response, we met with planned parenthood and police department and we met with the city attorney and we met with our various city agencies to see what was the most responsible and measured way to respond to these incidents. and the key question for us was what are the laws that are currently in place and how do we enforce those laws to make sure that these workers and these women are protected and that is when we started talking about forcing on enforcement of the bubble ordinance and something that we have tried and did for a while and quite frankly, the bubble ordinance has not worked. it has not given the tools for the city agencies that are involved to protect these women and these workers. and it is at that time that we

started thinking about different options after trying that kind of implementation, if you will, for a few months. and we talked about the creation of a white zone ordinance. and and again the goal here was to strike a balance between the protection of people's right to free speech. and the right of women and men and families to access healthcare at these clinics and an ordinance was crafted and interview and passed by this board of supervisor and we tried to enforce that white zone ordinance in conjunction with the bubble ordinance and yet the intimidation and the harassment has continued and there has been a continued effort to find loopholes in these laws to figure out how they can still engage in intimidation and still, and you know, in some little sense be

in compliance with these ordinances, and so we have finally reached a point where enough and enough. that what we respect the right to free speech that the right to free speech is not absolute but it ends when it turned into intimidation and harassment and when it actually has the effect of infringing on the right of men, women and families to access healthcare in these clinics that is why we are here today talking about a buffer zone ordinance. >> to be honest, for me, this is one of those pieces of legislation that i wish thative never had to introduce. the fact is that women have had the right to choose for many, many years, and it is really hard for me to understand how it is that in this day and age and in san francisco, of all places, we have a situation where women are indeed being prevented from exercising that right. the bubble ordinance, the buffer ordinance that we are

introducing today, is a buffer ordinance that was carefully drafted following the guideness, that federal courts have provided with respect to this matter. this piece of legislation is consistent with the ruling in the first circle in the kolen v, oakly, where it basically talked about how a buffer zone ordinance is a valid time, place, and manner regulation that truly strikes the right balance between the free speech and the right of people in our community to access healthcare in the stand alone klin i objects. this ordinance is contra neutral because it protects the rights of perspective patients, to these clinics, a perspective of what the message is. people, who have opposed buffer zones in the past have argued before courts that because

these buffer zones arguably prevent the close personal contact between the speaker and the patient, that somehow that violates the first amendment. the fact is that the courts have made it very clear that the right to the first amendment to free speech is not absolute and it is not absolute even in a public forum, that the government has every right to actually impose reasonable regulations as long as there are other alternatives for the individuals to engage in free speech. in this case, the individuals who want to engage in free speech in this area, will still have the ability to do that outside of the buffer zone. and if, and i would add from my own personal experience, having been to planned parenthood many times that if the goal is truly to engage in speed and not in intimidation and so there is no need to have that close personal contact that we have

seen because the only reason to have that close personal contact in my view, would be to entim intimidate these women. the courts have said this and this is what the courts have said in that case. as long as the speaker has an opportunity to reach the intended audience, the constitution does not insure that the speaker always will be able to employ the preferred method of communication. clearly some of these protesters would like to be close and personal, would like to have no distance between them and the women and men who are active in these clinics but they don't have the right to do that under the constitution. there is an interest that we in government have in protecting the women who are accessing these clinics and then in protecting the people who work there and i personally do not believe that we in san

francisco government have to wait until there is a tragic incident for us to take action. and lastly, i would say, that if we cannot protect the right of women, men and families to access these clinics here in san francisco, then what does that say for the rest of the country? that is why we are here today. >> so, with that, i would like to call upon, actually supervisor yee, i don't know if you want to say anything? >> i will save my remarks. >> okay. >> so with that, i would like to call up on a couple of folks who are here to present, i see captain dennis oleary but i know that lieutenant from the angle side station is here so if i could ask him to please

come up. >> and again, lieutenant as i noted in my remarks, one of the challenges that we have faced is the fact that it has been enforce a bubble ordinance. one of the questions that i have is always, you know, how do you know the bubble ordinance provides protective space for eight feet around the individual. but how do you know what is eight feet? what is 7, what is 6 feet? but i am wondering if you talk a little bit about your experience and the experience of the police department in terms of the enforcement. >> good morning, i'm lieutenant wering with the police department and i work out of engleside, i am here representing the district station captain and just to answer your questions about the bubble ordinance, where the challenge has been for us, is the way that the ordinance is

written, the language can be a little confusing in terms of where the actual eight feet began, is it with them standing in front of or once they walk, you know, once they walk to a position if they are leaning in in that point or if they are, you know, or if they are walking in the distance or blocking. and you can come out and enforce one of these things that usually the misdemeanors that are committed not in our presence but you know, or they are committed not in our presence or usually required of what is to see and usually what happens once we come out there, and whatever the protestors may have been doing prior to us getting there, they are usually not doing it once we are on the scene and once we are there and

physically watching them, they are usually not creating a violation while we are there observing what is happening, so what we are being told from some of the callers when they call in to initiate their complaint is that the folks are standing out there and putting the signs on the sidewalk, and blocking the sidewalk and the entrance and exit for the people getting in and are challenging the client, if you will, that are actually using the services of the facility. and so, upon us arriving and we come out there and start talking to the workers, a lot of times, out of the fear that they have, for you know, being retaliated against or anything for filing complaints against the protestors, a lot of times they are afraid to participate in an investigation with us or actually commit to signing a citizen's arrest and that is why we went out with the captain myself and captain given and we went out to meet

with planned parenthood to explain what our process is in order to see what we need and explaining to both sides and we have actually talked to some of the protestors to let you know that you have a right to protest and the thing is that you have to do it within a means where it is providing people and entrance and exits to the facility and you are not causing them harm or stress or you are not getting people space, or blocking them or the means to get the services that they need. and so, we pretty much have been working on that with them and i know that we have gone out and done a few citation and written things and police report and each time that we have to company out there and since i have been at the station this has an ongoing thing with the previous captain when he was there and have to meet with the directors as well when captain mahoney was with the station and so we are aware

that the protestors are out there and they usually show up on thursdays and depending on the time of month, sometimes you will other protest organizations that will join in to be out front as well. so we usually have gone out to explain to them about the bubble ordinance and again as you said it gets confusing in terms of where the actual eight feet began. because for example if they are walking with the signs on them, you know, they can do that and if they have the signs on the sidewalk then it is not a violation and if they put the sign on their feet. then it is technically not a violation because it is not on the sidewalk. so we were wanting to have something where the language was clear that everyone on both sides understand and so the buffer zone would be a great idea to implement in the city because at least that way would be a visual marker for everyone on both sides for those actively protesting and once they cross that line and that visual line to everyone, they

are citable or arrest able and when the clients are going in and out of the facility they have a safety zone for where the protestors can stand and being able to go into this facility. >> thank you very much lieutenant. and i had the opportunity to meet with some members of 40 days for life and one of the things that i wanted to make clear is that point that you illustrated in your presentation that this is something that we do lightly, and we have tried to avoid having to introduce this legislation, and not only after trying this for many, many months. >> right. >> more than a year that we find ourselves in this predicament and the second point which i think is a very important one is that i do think that the buffer zone provides clarity for both sides and in that sense it is something that i think can be a positive for not only the protester who will have a

better sense of whether or not they are engaging in something that is in violation of the law but also for the women, the workers of the clinic, that have this 25 feet protection. supervisor yee. >> so i have a question here. if you do have this 25 feet buffer zone. >> would the protestors take a different strategy and stand 25 feet away from a just outside of the buffer zone on the sidewalk in which someone has to walk through to get to that buffer zone. and so the way that the buffer zone would work is that it would be marked and there would be an actual line that would be painted on the side by dcw and

they would know that they have to stay outside of that buffer zone. >> right. >> so, i am being a little cautious with this. if you put a line there and there is only a sidewalk where you have to go through, to get to that line. what prevents the protester from standing outside of the line and actually causing a the same issues. why you are on the bath way from your car to the sidewalk to that line. okay if i am understanding your question that you are asking, once if we were to put this line in place and now the protestors are standing on their designated side of the line would this be presenting an optical for the clients to get in and out of the facility is that what you are asking me? >> yeah, the question is they don't just appear into the buffer zone and that they go

through the area to get to the buffer zone. so. there might be a tragedy for the protestors to do the same type of harassments, i guess. outside of the buffer zone because somebody has to go through them to get to the buffer zone. okay. >> well,... >> i think that i understand the question. and the way that i would explain it supervisor, is that even though you are outside of the buffer zone you are still not allowed to obstruct someone who is going to pass through. you know, to go in. that still is... they would not be able to have instruct passage. and but the idea is that by creating this 25 feet area, you are making it easier for patients to access. >> to access the clinic because what is happening right now is

there is obstruction as the people are trying to come in. and one thing that i would note is that the buffer zone that was upheld in the first circuit was much larger and was actually 25 feet and so we are trying to be cautious in balancing the right of free speech here. but i think that it is a very good question, you know, that you still have to come from outside of the buffer but you are not allowed to obstruct outside either. okay. >> so something to be cautious about. >> okay. >> and then something else that my staff notes is that the crosswalk is within the 25 feet. so that the patients would have a clear path to the entrance. >> yes. >> thank you. why don't we know hear from the department of public health and again, thank you lieutenant and captain for being here from the department of public health.

>> good morning supervisors i'm pleased to say that the department of public health supports this legislation and as you know the department of public health operates a dozen community based primary care clinics and hospitalized constitutions and we use them as a key member of the committees where they are located and strive to create a welcoming and person alien vierment and these are relatively small facilities about 15,000 square feet on average. they are constructed largely with the waiting room at the front of the facility with the exam rooms in the back. creating a buffer zone for these clinics would allow the patients and staff a greater feeling of security and emotional well-being. in fact our clinics have previously received calls aimed to intimidate and frighten our staff and worry for themself and for their clients. so we understand why this is important. >> we also understand that the

ordinance does not apply to hospitals. and this makes sense to us because hospitals are very different entities. why we try to create the same welcoming and person alien vierment within the hospital, it is just a very different facility. san francisco general hospital, for example, is more than 500,000 square feet, almost 35 times the size of an average clinic and there are a number of buildings spread across the 15 acre campus there are dozens of entrances to the campuses and multiple buildings and we see more than 100,000 clients each year that are on the campus for a wide variety of reasons and they are picking up prescription and visiting the doctor and accessing emergency care and this makes it more difficult for demonstrater to address their messages to the patients, seeking specific types of services so we understand the difference between the clinics and the