tv [untitled] August 5, 2014 8:00am-8:31am PDT
8:00 am
going on and i knew there were lying they were calling me on the phone and barging me to be their patient and where i was before they didn't take care of me not only with that but your personal needs make you feel like our at home and everything like i said, i got letters saying things that were not true about the former people working there. thank you. >> thank you. >> thank you any other speakers step forward please. okay >> hello. my name is robert ricci guess
8:01 am
the only point i was coming up here to make it seems like on the application that you have one person saying they're the main party to the permit and the operations the collective it appears very evident and mr. mendez will be involved and if you see fit when you hear that's the case and i still - that wasn't what was represented in the first hearing i believe that needs to be take into account and at least clarified that's not been the case of what's been prepared but it seems like it is the fact so you thank you >> is there any additional public comment? >> hello, i'm larry blnt we are
8:02 am
at washington, d.c. this is a staff pompom in the first world series the defense ramps city college is on the ocean and i'm here because i was asked to be at the police meeting they've rescheduled that but the acts of love they're here advocating for us san francisco sometimes, i feel like berkley colorado everyone has left us behind. you know, washington and cannabis is something we need and should be known for cannabis if that's where it started 215 started here and the crown on my head see the crown i got this at the aids walk on sunday i'm a
8:03 am
person that's undid he terrible cannabis is the reason i'm here today it is like eviction this is someone know that americans need and god made cannabis all over the world like sea we'd it's important that i'm supporting people that i know need cannabis i need cannabis, you know, and the president was in town today. the - our climb will be step we may not get there in one year ever one term but america i've never been more hopefully than i am 20e79 we as a people will get there >> he was in town on howard. >> we can't have a 5 wall
8:04 am
street. >> we'll asking you. >> the support i've yet to earn i may not have earned your vote tonight but you tell need our help. >> so today like i voted for him the last two years, yes we can cannabis was part of my spirit so i know today in san francisco i am a person that used to be a in a medical marijuana americans safe access and access of love we need to let the leaders 125u7d and we're not the laughing stock of american. >> thank you is there any public comment? >> i'll leave my card up here.
8:05 am
>> so we will take rebuttal now there if there's no accountability public comment mr. shep you can spank or it will go to our lawyer. >> hello just a couple of facts to you know what was heard tonight and in the briefs. i never 92 knew danny mendez before the fire. the union was we were going to sign with the union as waterfall wellness and as danny menu suicides and people started to come back people were asking what was going on they chose to
8:06 am
go a ways. when i got my permit present with larry kessler and the doctor we were in a hearing given the permit and it was told it if danny mendez came back into waterfall my permit would be revoked i tried to get ahold of the doctor they couldn't find the tape in the meeting we had so. i decided to get a spot that was city legal and federally legal which is a thousand feet away from the school and the waterfall is not i found a spot up the street that's when they
8:07 am
tried to take over to keep me from largely itself found a spot and in japan they came in and actually took over, you know, the misunderstood and all this stuff it's internal but they took my lease went to the family i negotiated the 17 lease for 15 years and he went to howard jew and the rent should have been 2 thousand and mendez was paying 11 thousand for a nonprofit and took my lease the jews took my name avenue and he paid over 12
8:08 am
thousand a month the lease went into his name i never asked to take my name off the permit they pushed the paperwork. the spot up the street was 4 a much larger location he skroonl of waterfall is 8 hundred and this spot is 22 hundred square feet for our compassion. the last thing i wanted to say about, you know, our dispensary waterfall wellness i built with christine we ran a compassion driven dispensary giving back to our collective members that's what i'm about the vets and our aids patients and the low income patients i work with mr. magee
8:09 am
working to get the medicine to the people that need it >> sir your time is - >> we can hear the rebuttal from the permit holder. >> thank you it's been a long day and the hour is getting late i'll be brief i'll ask you to take a look at exhibit h there's two sides to every story there's the premium on time and the premium open our time for consideration of the different views but again, the focus should be is there a problem was on a error made in the orients e issuance of the permit i've heard different things nothing nor current it seem like if
8:10 am
there were such everyday you would have heard about it thank you unless there's any questions. thank you very much >> i have a question who's our client. >> waterfall wellness the corporation there's the permit holder a corporation and whose it's a nonprofit; right? >> it's a in the. >> is there an executive director? >> it's t r mitchell and is daniel on the board. >> i'm not corporate attorney. >> your representing the corporation but - >> i represent the corporate's. >> you don't know who's on the board of directors. >> i'm - i don't know.
8:11 am
>>. i can find out if it's critical thank you very much. >> we can hear from the department if there's rebuttal. >> i would simple is that much has been made about the one time incident involving the fire and the gun. this is not the first time that's happened with the dispensary and, in fact, no one was bard mr. mendez was not barred from further participation at any level rather the permit was suspended
8:12 am
for thirty days while all the conditions were abated in the variety of departments that are typically involved which is the police and fire, etc. confirmed that indeed the conditions had been abated so that's a one-time incident. since that time mr. - the gentleman has been involved in one capacity or another in operating this dispensary. he is currently on the permit with mitchell and has been since 2011. what you're hearing is really a spit between two business owners and it's been heard over in superior court and heard before the director of health and it's
8:13 am
also here now before you. so i would respectfully request that you uphold the directors decision that mr. mitchell submitted all the necessary paperwork that's attached i believe as exhibit b signed under penalty of perjury and that she is, in fact, the permit holder. >> i have a couple of. >> i'm sorry as a final note i'm going to say that he's sued the city before based on this board decision to deny him a permit to open a dispensary and this board - is that it.
8:14 am
>> this board decision was based on it's not in the best interests of the community. >> go ahead. >> i have a couple of questions is that the standard procedure if the permit is initialed or issued and there's language regarding no grow that it is a thirty days suspension. so what i mean is when this incident happened we'll talk about the first incident they're not supposed to have the second level not a grow area so since they've violated that is health department to give a thirty day suspension >> maybe the gentleman will
8:15 am
know. >> can you introduce. >> i'm ryan it's mapped that article 33 gives a few enforcement options so their sited to a hearing and the director choose to give a thirty days suspension. if the incident happens again, the order is a revocation >> then the other one was there was a loaded fiefrm was it combined. >> during the investigation the fire department correct me if i am wrong there was a firearm found the same situation. >> at the same time since they were stealing electrical it was also combined. >> there was a fire around december it was all combined and the investigation from the fire department they found the steering wheel of the power and a firearm on site my lawyer
8:16 am
asked because of the hearing they gave thirty days and subsequent they did a change of ownership and mr. shep was brought into the permit now, mr. mendez was taken off the permit. >> as other mc ds had violations and what was the actions. >> i have been managing the program in two years and not seen situations i know the program goes back several years i can't think of any other situations. >> this is the only mc d that had this problem in san francisco. >> in my last two years no. >> so what was given testimony this evening was mr. mendezs name was put it in and the
8:17 am
department doesn't have a problem. >> it wasn't put in at the last minute and speaking to the lady when i posted the notice i'm sorry the health directors hearing i let them, you know, during the submittal of the paperwork mr. mendez what about the the structure so i told him you're not an owner but i'm going to introduce you, you're going to be described as being an applicant. >> okay. thank you. >> questions. >> yeah. i'm confused about the applicant piece. because i think i've heard council state i - are you an attorney >> no. >> the applicant mitchell it was relevant to the public mr.
8:18 am
mendez his involvement here with the application seems like the problematic piece and i'm confused about the rfrls it's treated at a nonissue from your departments prospective can you help me understand that clarify why this is an issue if it's not an issue from an application prospective from the director but for the community. >> he - it is true and i believe the paperwork was submitted to the director and robert mendez was identified as being an
8:19 am
officer of the although not holding the permit. >> the applicant was originally ms. mitchell correct. >> correct. >> originally yes. >> at the directors hearing at the point the paperwork and everything was summit mr. mendez comes into the picture and then put into the record as an additional applicant or co- that applicant is that what happened i'm trying to understand. >> that's part of the packet of information that is submitted along with the articles of incorporation of the different forms that are signed. i do know that for example, mr. shep at one point agreed to keep mr. mendez on as an employee e.r. consultant so the two
8:20 am
relationships have flip flopped to a certain extent over the past year and again, i would say that's why and who's the applicant it's ms. mitchell; right? >> right i why are you saying anything about the employer versus the employee. >> i'm not sdrurg employer and employee i'm saying that mr. mendez had already been part of the cooperative. >> okay. but right they're both involved but at issue the permit at issue relates to whether or not it should have been providential permit issued the applicant for the permit was ms. mitchell.
8:21 am
>> right. >> the entity includes mr. shep and mr. mendez. >> right and the various members. >> and that's what is before you so mr. shep is shaking his head when i see that i'm needing clarification. >> i'm not at the directors hearing. >> i'd like someone to clarify. if you're finished with our rebuttal >> i won last question. >> i have a question too. >> we can skip over that. >> during the directors hearing for example, this evening we have a lot of public against mr. mendez. during - and i don't see anything for mr. mendez wellness clinic 33 at the directors meeting when was the audience
8:22 am
there >> there were supporters in opposition and a hearing with the same turnout as well. >> thank you. >> that's one of my questions. >> you do background checks an applicant. >> correct. >> and on this case who is the background done and what's the scope. >> in this instance it was only on terry are a mitchell and again what's the dependent e stent of the background it's criminal. >> the defenders and if a life scan had been done on mr. - >> anything there's a subsequent arrest i'm getting
8:23 am
the information and nothing that bars him from the application. >> are you folks out of questions. >> is the directors hearing televised? and it is not >> is it recorded. >> it's recorded. >> if what form. >> the reason i pause is because i have a convicting but it's recorded. >> i have the convicting. >> thank you. any questions commissioner moore >> you have questions for the attorney. >> i'd like further clarification on the issue of who's the applicant to the extent that has my materiality with respect to the requirements
8:24 am
for the issuance of the permit. >> so the applicant is the individual seeking the change of ownership in this case it's - >> a change from what to what. >> terry are a mitchell seeking to remove appellant from the permit. >> okay. >> permit holder. >> so the applicant is within who is the applicant question and it includes mr. mendez does that include mr. mendez as an applicant i heard our colleague state that. >> yes. >> at the directors hearing it it was represented that mr. mendez with an was an applicant. >> it was represented. >> i think you said applicant. there is a difference i want to
8:25 am
know the definition >> ms. mitchell is the only applicant i added mr. mendez at the time he was the ceo of the wellness incorporated. >> macro him and but taking care of are a is the applicant she prepared to want director but she was standing with her. >> earlier today within the last 15 minutes you stated he was an applicant i want to know if there's rfrls for issuing the permit if mr. mendez was an applicant without having impact of the legitimacy of the impact. >> i assume there would be if, in fact, he has neglected to
8:26 am
identify himself as such because if he goes through the initial documents do we provide workers' compensation insurance do we comply with agent provisions of article 3 the applicant signs all those under penalty of prejudice. >> okay. thank you. did you have further clarification on this question i'd like to have that >> this is the cds it's 17 minutes is clarifies this issue dph seems to clearly add mr. mendez as an applicant the relevance is even if they met the requirements of article
8:27 am
33 your jurisdiction is broader with respect to who controls the entity. >> i'm trying to figure out if there's a deficiency in the permitting itself it you could put up that cds i'll be interested. >> i don't have my computer here. >> i'd like rather not hear it for two hours. >> i'd like to have that hearing on and played and the other relevant part the permit was issued to the wellness center for the co-op and mr.
8:28 am
mendez litigations himself as the cfo and ceo clearly he was in control of it and signed the lease subsequent to mr. shep that increased the rent you don't need to decide whether or not this was correct or incorrect he is in control and he was listed by dph as along with terry are a mitchell as the agent. >> commissioner it is additional testimony and i understand that i do too i suggest we go into the discussion and because i post a different scenario if i may. >> okay.
8:29 am
>> you know it's quite clear all 3 parties are telling us whatnot to look at, however, they've not provided what we should be looking at and it's not provided going through the materials exactly what occurred on the resolution of all the criteria for the directors decision so my suggestion i want to hear or see the recording of that and start from that as a point and place the pieces of the paperwork into a proper format. >> i'm not quite following. >> there's a cds recording i'm going to lints to 2 hours and something. >> you want to continue? >> okay. >> i'm comfortable i feel similarly. >> there's only one position.
8:30 am
>> i'm comfortable i ago that many of the requirements that i would otherwise expect to see it comes down through. >> and it was not clear. >> i agree. >> so you going to make a motion. >> maybe folks disagree. >> i believe - i feel strong with the public shows up here but there's gray material on board of directors if i made a decision now it would think is mr. mendez what have to be an applicant not just anyone on the side. i think the public has indicated that by i would go along with commissioner fung's recommendation to continue that >> so you want to go about the city says
34 Views
IN COLLECTIONS
SFGTV: San Francisco Government Television Television Archive Television Archive News Search ServiceUploaded by TV Archive on