concerns about attending meetings in the short-term. >> in the short-term, no pun intended. >> i am leaving for vacation tomorrow. >> next meeting is july 10th. >> i will fly back july 10th, but i won't be here on time. if the 17th works, that will be good for me. >> c'mon up to the microphone. >> i'm not quite understanding on what you have ruled on. >> we haven't. let me be a little clear here. if anybody wants to help me out. >> i don't understand why you want to take a tree --

>> if we are talking process, merits are a separate question. you don't have extra time to argue those. do you have a question about the process here? >> yes >> the process is that three have indicated to go with your inclination to go with your ruling. i'm not. it's not personal. the commissioner who is absent then could make a deciding vote in your favor or against you depending on what she reviews. after she reviews the record and the merits and she will attend the hearing on july 17. she will have an opportunity to ask questions. at that point in time we will deliberate once again and take a vote if the motion is made to

go one way or another. it requires four to over turn a department's decision. okay? >> we have a motion then from the president to continue this matter to july 17th, the public hearing has been held and this continuance is to allow commissioner hurtado to participate in the final vote. on that motion, commissioner fung? aye, lazarus? aye, honda? aye. thank you, this vote is 4-0. this matter will continue on july 17th. no additional briefing. >> so we are ready to call item no. 9. is miss cold well st ill

in the room? >> all right. let me just call the item first and then i will ask you to please stay an we can address the board. this is the property 162 west portal avenue protesting the issuance april 11, 2013, to bay area gold and silver buyers. secondhand dealer permit. i asked if the permit holder was in the room. >> i'm captain -- i represent the police department in this matter. she notified me that she is withdrawing the permit application because the police department no longer supports her decision. she's left the

building. >> is there something that happens when a permit is withdrawn. is there a process with a notification or documentation? >> we would send a confirmation on it and go from there and she is not here and we are not supporting granting the permit at this time. >> okay. all right. thank you. >> it's a little bit of a change. >> yeah. so commissioners -- >> didn't the police department issue the permit? >> we did issue it. >> i don't understand the process. >> they couldn't even do that because it's before the board. >> have you issued a permit that you can't support? >> yes. i can explain. >> if you give me the readers digest version. >> the process was that the permit was granted, the west

portal merchants association an appealed that. it came to my desk and i just represented the police department and prepared the brief in support of the permit. the captain at the station never got all the letters in opposition for this permit and because of that he didn't get a chance to review the record completely. had he gotten those letters he would have not recommended granting the permit. based on that, the police department no longer supports the granting of that permit. miss cold well said if the police department is not going to support me i'm not going to challenge the appeal and she left. >> it's interesting. it's her permit. if she's not here to defend it. okay. >> she's not. >> so commissioners in the building context, the building permit context someone can ask

the build department to -- the appeal of that permit becomes moot because there is no subject matter for that appeal. >> we should have never let joe leave. >> are you asking the police department send you a similar letter? >> obviously the matter is here before you. you can take whatever action you wish. you can continue it or decide it or uphold or return. in my view, basing this on a canceling that we have -- obviously we have the officer here that that is what miss cold well has asked for but we haven't seen this documented. >> i'm uncomfortable process wise. >> may i make a suggestion. we have the west portal

association make their presentation because they are the appellant and i'm as a respondent to tell you she's withdrawn her position. she's not here. >> i think we can continue it, but can i get -- since you already gave us a description of what took place in terms of the chronology, i would like to know a little bit more about why the communications of the west portal or whoever objected to this permit did not get to the presiding officer in your department. captain? okay. what was the timing? did it come in after? that would be helpful for me. >> thank you, commissioners. i'm captain curtis, the

commanding officer for the police district. one of the duties that i do is review permits and make recommendationed to approve it. in this case there is a process. we have to post it for ten days and we did not and that did not give the concerned people enough time to make their views known. subsequently when it was approved at the hearing t west portal merchants association was not able to make their concerns known and i did not realize the opposition towards it. the next step was the board of appeals and the attorney for the west portal association sent the information to the permit bureau and they gave it to captain osuna. i never saw

this information until recently. i didn't realize there was over 80 letters of opposition until monday. so that's why our position changed. >> right. it was after the issuance. i'm sorry to cut you off. i'm trying to follow the timeline. are you saying that the department didn't provide sufficient notice for objection for the 10 day period? how many days notice? >> two days. >> okay. it's the issuance of the permit was defective. okay. i see. thank you. >> i think we should continue. if for nothing else is the fact that the permit holder is not here. >> please don't speak unless you are invited to speak or

unless it's your turn. please don't. i don't want to be harsh. i agree with commissioner fun's suggestion here to continue it. in the meantime if we are provided with information that the permit holder is withdrawn and that notice is provided then we don't need to have that hearing. why don't we do it that way? >> [inaudible] >> who are you? >> i'm a member of the public. >> not yet. >> you have not been asked or loud allowed to speak yet. >> you may want to allow the appellant to speak. >> the representative for the appellant. is that you. if you would like the person from the

public that stood up to be part of your presentation. >> we would just ask that you not continue the hearing. >> would you state your name? >> my name is dan kramer and i represent the west portal association. i represent the newest process. the notice was for two days and not for 10. this is a violation of the rule no. 7. that's initially the process. also we feel that the applicant did not provide complete information on the application which is a revocable issue. so, furthermore, it sounds like the police department believes that the permit shouldn't have been issued. there is many members of the public who agree with that and the applicant has left and indicated her decision to

withdraw the permit. so, we respectfully request that you make a decision this evening on this matter. >> thank you. >> in the past when boards have been confronted with permit holders that don't show, boards have revoked the permit. we would issue a know show letter to them analyzed -- and they would have 10 days to request a rehearing. >> there has been a number of ways. but i need to say something madam president to the people in the audience and the appellant's representative. in the same way that you have made predominantly a procedural and policy base appeal regarding your rights for process at the hearing, in the same way the permit holder has certain rights and by not being

here, i'm not comfortable with hearing anything including public testimony related to this case. i don't think it's fair to the process or to the permit holder. >> [inaudible] >> no you may not. i'm sorry you have a representative. excuse me, you are out of order. please sit down. you are not helping yourself right now. you have not been asked to speak either. >> anyone else have anything? >> i would support a continuance. >> okay. >> are you suggesting to revoke the permit? is that a viable option? >> it is. >> there is no permit holder so there is no hearing without a permit holder. >> here is what was suggested

by the captain is we can have a hearing based on what they have and we can make a ruling today. i have deep respect for his view here and we could do it the way that we would have a hearing without the permit holder and revoke. but we have a problem with the process. we have a police department that had a flawed process and it's probably not going to be in dispute. this permit is going to be withdrawn. we expect that. it's not withdrawn, there is a problem with the process. we have to go through that process to make that process right. but in any event. we are not going to have, to the extend we have a motion on continuance or we discuss a continuance, we will allow everyone that really needs to speak on this subject to have an opportunity to speak on the subject of the continuance. but

we are trying to understand what happened here because the permit holder left according to the captain spoke. i'm sorry, i don't know your name. we have many options. we are not going to make a decision without having an actual process here. i hope that's clear for everyone in the room. okay. so if we wanted to talk about a continuance which is not, we've heard objection from the representative of the appellant, i think it's time for people who want to speak to that to address that issue. >> with a show of hand how many people want to speak to the issue of the continuance and not the merits? >> you've already spoken. you are not a member of the public. >> anyone part of the organization that -- is not a

member of the public for this purpose. >> okay. >> i too greatly respect commissioner fung's opinion. however, the applicant is not a party to this issue. it's the respondent is the police department. so technically there is no due process issue with the applicant. >> it's the interested party. she has a stake in this process. >> she was here and chose to leave. >> so under the board's rules people who are officers of the west portal merchants association are not allowed to speak under public comment because they are represented by mr. kramer, but general members arrest -- are allowed to

participate under public comment. if there is anyone in those categories who would like to speak please come forward. can you raise your hand so i can determine how much time to let you have. this is only on the subject of continuance. i would like two minutes each. >> my name is caroline johnson, the reason why i would object to a continuance or at the minimum allow the people who are here, members of the neighborhood who have been waiting around for 3 1/2 hours to speak, to just be able to get up and say what they think or at least demonstrate by the standing, their interest in this process. so they don't have to come back and do this again. we spent 3 1/2 hours waiting around and the person who is affected by this chose

to leave. and all of us chose to stay. >> that means you win. >> well, it seems that we should at least be heard and not have to come back for this again. so i won't speak to the merits but i will ask [inaudible] >> speak into the microphone, please. >> speak about this opposition in support of this -- members of the neighborhood who objected and came specifically for this hearing. >> i recognize your view. i am sympathetic. i hope that trying to keep order in this room does not suggest to anyone that i'm unsympathetic to anyone here. >> i'm mr. perkins from the neighborhood here. i'm a portal resident. i just want to clarify one thing. if we have couples to that the permit has

been withdrawn or denied by the police department, is there any need to have a continued hearing particularly when i'm sure this board has a lot on its plate that it could better more productively spend it's time. >> i believe if the director, if our office if the board of appeals office has been provided of sufficient notice of the withdrawal of the permit, we will have no need for hearing on the merits. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> my name is miller and i'm a resident at west portal and speaking to the continuance i think it's unfair that i took time out of my workday and the woman who represents the other side chose to leave and then there is the possibility that all of us are going to have to

come back and sit for another three 1/2 hours because she chose to leave. >> thank you. next speaker. >> my name is shepherd and i i have lived in the west portal neighborhood for about 40 years. i was born in san francisco. i would object to your providing aid and assistance to somebody who has tried to subvert the process that you are so ableey trying to protect. she did not pick up her notice that she was supposed to post in the window

of the prospective business until two days before the hearing. i don't believe that she didn't know the rules or the process before she picked up the notice because she's been, i'm sure she's been represented by able council in her attempts to establish a business in san francisco. and i don't think that the rules in san francisco are so different than in other parts of the country. her organization does business in texas, oklahoma and mexico. she does business all over the place. she has several outlets in southern california. i think what you are doing by delaying the process rather than completing it tonight, you would be adding

to the subject -- subversion of the process that she's already done. >> thank you. any other public comment? please step forward and other people please step forward so we can continue this, thank you. >> hi, my name is craig shiler, i lived in the west portal neighborhood since 1988. i know it's a nice neighborhood and becoming more of a magnet as it became more of a better developed commercial area. when i heard some facts about the two day posting, i was shocked at the notice that this was an issue. that's such a red flag to me. what's the purpose of the notice? so people can look at the business. you have a trial and you don't invite the prosecutor or defendant. it made no sense to me. it was a

slam dunk that it was not going to approve the permit. this is a place to comment to find out what other people know about the business in case that business is for someone that is very damaging to the neighborhood. that opportunity wasn't given. that could be a bad apple who never got looked at because they didn't post a notice that people needed to know what to say. the comments of course came late. more importantly, is the fact that what does it mean when somebody doesn't post a notice. you can presume that it wasn't intentional, but in all probability, you have to assume if the presumption in this case that they knew the rules and may have had a reason not to. in this case, because of the type of business this would be

and who it would bring in the neighborhood, it's more important that this person is outstanding with a high degree of integrity. i know this is not appropriate but i have seen articles about some of prior things said about the couple when they had other businesses in texas in fact that is a serious concern. >> thank you. so we are asking for public comment on the question of the continuance. not the merits. >> my name is stacy lawrence. i live on 15th avenue. i will spare my thoughts about why i think it's an unsuitable business. this case has not been properly noticed and therefore the neighborhood got up in arms and came to fight to say a permit shouldn't be granted when we haven't had our

opportunity. given that, the fact she chose to leave under fire is really a moot point. i would suggest that you rule on that this evening. >> thank you. any other public comment? okay. seeing none, then commissioners, you can decide. >> i have a question for captain lum? just to clarify the sequence of events leading up to this evening and what might happen prospectively. you made a determination that you wish to revoke the issuance of this permit, is that correct? >> yes. >> you informed the person when you saw her this evening? >> yes. >> just as an aside i would assume she left because she thought it was going to be a

moot point. regardless our director indicated that upon receipt of a letter from the issuing body which you say is typically dbi that would moot the case and it would be withdrawn, is that correct? >> that is correct and it based on the permit holder to cancel the permit. not on the department's position but their interest in withdrawing the permit. >> they are not going revoke unless the permit goes to them. >> you are not to revoke this ? >> would you see that letter is going to be sent. would you be based on this conversation that that letter would be forth coming. >> when she told me she was going to withdraw the

application. >> she said i'm going to withdraw the application, please tell the board. >> she stated to you please tell the board i'm withdrawing my application. >> what would the board need from her? >> a letter. >> you couldn't state that the appellant, could you on your own make an affidavit stating that and then on that basis? would that be sufficient rather than call her up to say can you send me a letter? >> i'm not sure because this would be handled by the permit bureau, not by the station. >> i might have a simpler solution, mr. kramer and the appellant can withdraw the appeal, that would give the police department freehand to revoke their decision. >> i have a simpler solution.

i'm going to move that we revoke this permit on the basis of lack of notice and due process and if the permit holder wants to request a rehearing, i will seriously consider it >> i would support that motion. >> okay. >> we would send out a 10 day no show notice. >> let's get this over with. [ applause ] >> quiet, you guys. commissioner has made a motion. >> okay. so the motion then is to revoke the permit commissioner fung with the finding of insufficient notice? >> no, with the fact that there was insufficient notice community notice on the initial permit issuance. >> insufficient notice at time of issuance?

>> defective notice >> i think that's correct. >> with the finding of defective annoys -- notices at the time of issuance. again to repeat we have a motion from commissioner fung to revoke this notice with defective notice at the time of issuance and the permit holder is not in the room. we would send out a no show letter to her. on that motion, president wang, lazarus, honda? aye. the vote is 4-0. this permit is revoked with that finding. >> we are going to move on. if everyone could leave the room quietly we would appreciate it. we are moving to item no. 10.

>> jason perkins, bricks brik and mortar versus the entertainment commission. this feeling approval of may 21, 2013 of additional conditions against the existing place of entertainment permit. you have seven minutes. >> i just want to say thank you to the board for your patience this evening. this is my first appearance. any other name is jason perkins. i started my first business in 1985. i know that i can expect as a business person