this forward as a committee report with a positive recommendation? and item passes. >> thank you, congratulations. >> if we could now go to item three?hearing to consider that the issuance of a type 42 on-sale beer and wine public premises license to larry livingston for the basement, located at 222 hyde street (district 6), will serve the public convenience or necessity of the city and county of san francisco >> great, if we could hear from the applicant? larry livingston. >> good morning, supervisors so the point is to house the world famous in the 30s to the 60s and the great likes miles davis and many others, adopted into what was the 3 deuces for the vip treatment at 222 hyde street. currently it is empty since much of last year, the previous club closed after five years of operations and i would like to follow the tradition by

providing music and entertainment to the location, and i have reached out to the communities including the building neighbor and the ministry and some of our building tenants and i received a positive encouragement for our plan and i also have attended alliance for the better district six meeting and have a lot of positive effects for the attendees and they asked to approve the application and i am confident that i can comply most of their demands. i don't understand the neighbors concern because i had lead the corner of market and golf in the restaurant and the jbar and a corner liquor store in the same building as my apartment and that is why i will have outside street camera and two trained security guards at the peak times and they will be present until 2:30 a.m. to control the crowd outside and i have a couple of comments to make regarding alu conditions. first condition is i have negotiated a time restriction

with alu, and abc, for three months. my understanding was that the officer will accept abc's counter proposal for 2:00 a.m. closing from thursday to saturday and i thought that i had a verbal equipment with the officer and that is why i put all of my savings into the base foment remodel and applying equipment and rents and etc.. first i thought that there was a typo sinces it said sunday to wednesday, eleven a.m. to 12 a.m. and repeats the same schedule from thursday to friday again. from eleven a.m. to 12 a.m.. so, i'm just wondering why, you know he put everything instead of just put every day and you know put it into 12 a.m.. there is a bar, half a block away and open to 2 a.m. every day and i feel strongly that it is unfair to compete with the existing bars with this condition and not to mention the financial burden for the next six months. also, on number two, i think it

should be removed after six months because i may want to transfer an on sale general license in the future. so i believe that it should be decided on the future hearing. and the previous clock had on sale general license, and we are down grading and complying all other conditions to build the trust with our community and so that is my thought here, thank you. >> so can i ask you before you move, thank you very much. for being here for your presentation. so, just for the record, are you against, the conditions that are being recommended by the alu? >> yeah, i am against the one and two. condition one and two, because, conditions one we had negotiated three months with abc and alu and the officer and myself and we went back and forth and my understanding was that the officer would accept the abc counter proposal to

have us opened friday to saturday until two a.m. and other days until 12 a.m. and that is the reason so i am asking supervisors to look into this number one and number two, and i believe i feel that it is unconditioned for the moment but later on, if i want to bring on the sale general application later on, i think that should be decided of the later hearing. do you intend to sell hard liquor here? >> not at the moment but i would like to have options in the later point in the future, if necessary. >> without the condition, though, i guess that one question you know is that with this question does it mean that you could sell hard liquor now? >> no. i think that, no, unless we transfer and go through the

hearing and you know, approve the supervisors and i was not able to sell any way, but this is only for 42 license, which is only beer and wine license right now. >> i guess my understanding was that supervisor kim was open to this request, with the understanding that there would be no hard liquor being sold and, so if what you ever saying is that you want to keep the option of hard liquor and then that is certainly disstubering to me. >> okay, supervisor mar? >> yeah, i was just going to say there has to be something to help you be in touch with the community and especially supervisor kim's office as well and i think that the police conditions make a lot of sense to me, making it a pilot, to see how it goes, and i am just

hoping that you work with supervisor office and really think about that, the recommendations from the abc, or the alcohol licensing unit, seemed reasonable to me. >> okay. >> now i want to hear from the officer and one of the things that is disturbing about this is that what we are hearing from the applicant is different from what the supervisor's office heard from the applicant and that is never a good sign, officer? >> and i can either read from the report or we can go to the questions if you like, it is a very simple process for us and we look at the consideration points and when we are issuing recommendations for an alcohol license, in this particular case, less than 600 feet from a couple of one of them being a playground right across the street. >> and i was involved with him

directly from the on set of the initial investigation. and what occurred from that point, and what we like to do we like to reach out to the supervisor's office and also you know, for us we like to reach out to the permit officer and the captain and the matter was taken over by the permit and the captain and they issued in the higher crime rates in san francisco. and having said that, the department and it was an understanding and the means that there was understanding and that he would be applying for a type two, beer and wine only. as you may know, there is a state moratorium on the state and the only one to bring one in is to find one that is for sale in the state, to bring it

into san francisco or in san francisco itself. and there is no moratorium on the type of 42s, these are all original. and in our point of view, to issue an unconditional license is some what detrimental to the community. and our purpose here is to protect the citizens and the residents and just as much to protect his customers and also because to place it on unconditional licenses to be done and having said that, he once again is placing a new bar, if we will, in plot, 48, and we can consider anything with 86 or more calls to the police service to be a high crime area. >> for the year of 2012. >> there were 262 police

reports. located in 124 census track and that population is condense and there are 9,000 according to the track down in 2012, and there is an authorized limit of 30 on sale which is what he is seeking which is 39 active, so we have 9 licenses that are over at the authorized amount. and i did reamend the report, i hope that you have that amended report because we contacted abc and we were notified that on january 28th of this year. the department of alcoholic beverage did verify and validate one conditional letter of protest. as far as that, they do support and recommend with the conditions that were attached here these were written at the station level and handed to us at the station level. and they put them on the report

for you and once again going back to the alu recommends approves with the following conditions. number one, sales of alcoholic beverages shall be permitted between the hours of eleven a.m. to 12 a.m. sunday through wednesday and eleven a.m. to 12 a.m. on thursday through saturday for the first six months beginning the first day that the license is issued. and number two, this license shall not be on sale for a general license and number three, no noise shall be audible beyond the area of the control of the license and number four, loit tering it is defined as to stand eyedly about and linger without lawful business and it is prohibited on any sidewalk or property, adjacent to the license premise under the control of the licensee, as depicted on this form, and no person, number five, no person under the age of 21 shall sell or deliver alcohol being beverages number

six, all sales and service staff within 90 days of hire shall complete the abc slas in response of the service and the copy of the certificate shall be kept on the premises and presented on request, number seven, the business shall be contacted that will allow them to easily, and excuse me, the business will be conducted at all times in a manner that will allow them to be easily identified as employees by law enforcement and employee clothing shall be prominently featured the name of the business, number eight, the sale of alcoholic beverages for the off sale consumption is prohibited and number nine, shall provide a minimum of one security personnel on the exterior of the premises and staffed appropriately in order to control the patrons and prevent the disturbances in and near the premises and special events shall be staffed at a one security guard per 70s and

the honor request for the law enforcement if the additional security becomes necessary. number ten. there shall be no advertising signs of any kind on or visible from the exterior promoting the availability of alcoholic beverages, number eleven was one that i also amended and i also believe that supervisor campos prefers to have language that does not include the word active monitored so the amended version here is that the petitioners will utilize electronic survey ens that is able to be viewed from the outside and include all entrances and exits this will be utilized during the operating hours. and the electronic recording shall be kept at least 30 days. and to the department and police department upon request and a valid search warrant, thank you. >> thank you very much, supervisor mar. >> and i wanted to encourage

him to work with, again, the community and supervisor kim's office and i am just reading and there is such a historic opportunity there for the parking lot that used to be the black hawk where billy holladay and miles and there is so much history and your site which is the former reduces where miles and coal train hung out and i think that it is such a good opportunity for telling the history in the corner of the block and not just in the fillmore district but uptown and the community is trying to rebrand it as it is so critical and i encourage to you work with the supervisor office and the surrounding community and i think that it is good that you have reached out to the ministry who i have a lot of respect for but i think that there is a lot of different groups, but especially the supervisor's office, because i want to see you successful and i want to have drinks at your place as well and i want the history of san francisco to

emerge from a great business like you are trying to create as well. >> thank you. >> do you want to add anything? >> no. i mean, that i am fine with that and i just wanted to make sure that i have told supervisor's office and also, i have told that when i am at the tender loin, police officer with the captain and there, i would like to have an option to bring in 48 licenses in the future, and i do not have any intent to bring it, you know, this year, or i don't even know if i have all of the ability to bring it and so i just want to have that option that is all and i just want to add that. >> thank you. >> why don't we open it up to public comment? is there any other member of the public that would like to speak? >> seeing none, yes? >> thank you, supervisors, i'm officer tores and i am the permit officer for the tender loin police district and we concur with the alu unit with placing the conditions that he

mentioned earlier, and our experience at this location in previous years when it was open for business, is that we have problems with noise complaints, since there were residential units up right above, we had problems with fights in front of this establishment. we had problems with overcrowding at this location, this location is a very small little bar that you could only fit no more than probably 49 people inside of this place. so if, mr. living ston wants to open up this place and add entertainment, it will be pretty crowded inside. so we ask that you keep the conditions that the alu has asked for. >> thank you. >> good afternoon, supervisors, i was not anticipating coming

today and i had a meeting and sorry if we are duplicating some of the messages. we met with him before this meeting, and we discussed the conditions, and we were met with kind of a passive aggressive e-mail in regards to the conditions, we thought that they were reasonable and our understanding in walking away from the meeting was that the applicant had not done his due diligence in reaching out to the community and getting an understanding of what the tender loin is all about, and their feelings about alcohol in the district. the fact that we are discussing a type of 48 at this juncture suggested that he does not have his finger on the pulse of the community, if we are cautious about these conditions and holding the them accountable we will have a dog fight when there is overcrowding issues

and public intoxication and people victims of crime and so it is important that i don't think that supervisor mar you said it best when you talked about, you know, applicants working cooperatively with the community and the supervisor's office and also the police. because, we are establishing a relationship now so that when we come out in the middle of the night and there is an incident the people have a relationship with us and they are accountible to us but to the community and the supervisor's office. and i can't over state the fact that the tender loin is over saturated with alcohol licenses right now. so the people need to think, long and hard about it and thank you for your time. >> supervisor yee do you have a question. >> yeah, i have a question, and i am not sure who address this. but i want to say that i want to echo supervisor mar's sentiments and he is working out to continue to work with

the community to get this pass today and i am just curious the six month and i guess, what it seems to say to me, for the condition number one, for the six months is that what would happen after six months? >> i think that the alu to speak more intelligently about how that works. in 6 months that we review and we take a look and audit the operation and see if we would recommend as the district station, representatives for public safety, and that the abc through the alu reconsider the six months moratorium on closing at closing after hours, or closing after midnight. >> actually, you are the right person to answer my next question, then. >> i am? >> yeah. >> which is what would you be

looking for when you do, you know, after six months, you would be evaluating it? >> so we would be looking for compliance with all of the previous conditions, the basic abc laws and then seeing what type of calls for service we have at that location and ongoing relationship with the community. his out reach, to the community and he reached out to an alliance for a better district six just last week and my thought is that his community out reach was not timely, nor was it, or was it broad enough. >> okay. >> i guess that i am wondering if mr. living ston were to not follow the other recommendations or the other

conditions. because of these breaking under these conditions and that seems like that is enough to revoke his license. >> that is the thing, it is very difficult to revoke these licenses. oh,. >> and you know, the... >> thank you. >> i got to know. and for the record, i would like to see mr. living ston in that location, it is better to have someone in there with positive flow, it is just that we need to make sure that we establish a good working relationship from the beginning and we are not there yet. >> thank you very much. >> officer do you want to's anything? >> yes, only that the statute currently, the condition modifications would be for the abc can be done after one year, i think that in terms is being very generous, and the station is generous in saying that we would condition in six months if we needed to. and what we are trying to do once again is to safe guard the residents who are in the building, and the community itself. and at that point, the conditions can be looked at

closely, the abc would have to agree to that but once again the 6 months it a stronger term than the one year that is recommended or that is on the statute now. >> thank you. >> and is there any other member of the public who has not spoken who would like to speak? come forward. >> hi, my name is peter and i am with supervisor kim's office regarding the hyde issue and we agree and we would like a continuance. >> thank you. >> anyone else? seeing none, public comment is closed. let me say that i want to thank, mr. living ston for, you know, the presentation and his willingness to make this investment in the neighborhood and i think that it is great and i do echo the comments that we want you to be successful. i have to say, though, that if i were to vote on this, application today, i would vote to reject it. because, i do think that when

there are and there is a different understanding from the applicant, presented to this committee, than what was presented to the supervisor, that raises a red flag to me. and that said, i do think that it would be helpful to give you an opportunity, to get this right. and so, out of deferance to the supervisor i am willing to entertain a continuance to give you an opportunity to follow up with supervisor kim in her office and to follow up with the community, and to follow up with our police, and i think that you have a number of people here who want to work with you and who want to make sure that you are successful. but, that requires cooperation on your part, and a willingness to engage them in that way. and so, with that, i, and my preference would be to do a continuance to the call of the chair and let, this item you know, be worked out, a little

bit more than where we are today, and i don't know if you have any thoughts? >> yeah, i support that and i will second the motion. >> okay, so we have a motion, to continue to the call of the chair. without objection. >> next item, please? >> item number 4, is an ordinance amending the administrative code to expand the category of the jail inmates eligible for the home detention program and authorizing the sheriff to implement a program to pretrial being held in lieu of bail. >> thank you very much. and we are here and now we are going to hear from former supervisor and now, sheriff, and now welcome to the chamber, thank you. >> and thank you, mr. chair and good morning, supervisors. and before that, it is an amendment to the administrative code that updates, current law, so that we are consistent with

the state law as it stands, it is the sheriff's department of every county, that is enabled to be the administrator of the electronic monitoring. for an incus and prerelease population and. the law as it it is current reflects, penal code, 1203.016 which is provides for the placing and sentence the inmates and voluntary and involuntariary and the home detention in lieu of confinement and it is the subsection is the correctional administrator will have the sole authority to admit program participation as alternative to physical custody and other subsection is no public agency or entity may operate a home detention program in any county without a written contract with the county's correctional administrator. the new law that is within this

state the 1203.018, we had introduced this legislation, to the city attorney's office and to the adult probation department, many, many months ago and so that we can remain consistent and that we can form and comport with the state law. 018 which is not in books currently and we are proposing that it does to this legislation, provides for the inmates to participate in a monitoring program, if specified conditions are met, no holes or warrants in custody for 30 days in the misdemeanor be 60 days or a felony, consistent with public safety concerns of the community. it also through thize of this body the board of supervisors, requires us to cult with the district attorney and so that we may prescribe reasonable rules and regulations for the electronic monitoring program and no agency or entity may

operate a home detention program in any county without written contract with the county correctional administrator. which is us. >> and if the goal is to everything that we can while enhancing the public safety to provide alternatives to incarceration, electronic monitoring is one of the safest and the most effective alternatives that i believe that we have. and in that, has been well practiced over the last few years, in 2010, the sheriff's department had 280 people in the electronic monitoring and 2011 it was 231 and 2012 it dropped considerably to under 150. 2013, the largest in five years of 359. people were put on electronic

monitoring, and what that translates to in savings is 24,362 days of custody we are saved from county expense because of the 359 that we put on electronic monitoring, over 24,000 days of custody, and then were spared and that translates into consideration costs, as well. what this also does is it fosters what is unspoken and what has been practiced for quite some time, is that the sheriff's department has a very strict criteria of who goes on electronic monitoring very rigid in its past and when we have rejected the courts or the district attorneys, the suggestion that the people go on the electronic monitoring we have that right of refusal to put the people on the monitoring and for years now, is that the courts and independent of the county administrator that is

recognized by the state penal code. would certainly go ahead and encourage electronic monitoring to its own independent means. even though the sheriff's department had recommended against it. what this legislation does is it fosters, a level of consultation with the courts and the da that does not normally exist now, in a more formalized way so that any time that the sheriff's department, would recognize that we do not go with the idea of electronic monitoring or the reevaluation of people that we think should be monitored because they have demonstrated the kind of behavior that merits this amendment to their incarceration and then we will go back to the courts and to the district attorney in seeking that modification, but

as it stands now, there has been not this practice, and i think that it is time, that we bring the criminal justice partners together, in making sure that we are consistent, with the changes of state law, and that is exactly what this legislation prepares to do today. more than happy to answer any questions. >> colleagues, any questions, supervisor yee? >> thank you, sheriff for your presentation. and you have existing programs right now, and i am just curious, like, who is doing the monitoring, at this point. if we are put on the electronic monitoring it is the sheriffs that do the monitoring and what concerns us is that anybody independent of us, in a

presentence population would be put on electronic monitoring then that raises questions about the liability of the city should they not be monitored by the deputy sheriffs. >> for some reason, i thought that i read in the legislation that for the write up, that this possibility that the monitoring will be done by the private company or something? >> i am sorry, we contract out and so we contract out so they... >> to a vendor, that, we contract out to a vendor who supplies us the equipment for the electronic monitoring, and that equipment is then administered on the individual. >> okay. >> and that... zme. so we go through the normal considering procedures and rfp, where the companies bid and we have just now concluded what have been a five year contract, and in anticipation of a new vendor. and that would be