had -- either revoked a permit and people wanted it to be 3 years. we will propose if something had a suspension or revocation of any health permit with grounds for denial that a business could not locate in that area for 3 years instead of 12 months. those are major changes right now. when we spoke of it last month with the planning commission that we would have a permitting system for all massage establishments is what we moved forward with. those are the only changes. i also can answer a little bit about the accessory and principal use if you want. >> yes. >> normally the principal use is the first use of business and the accessory use is the use that support the same kurms and the accessory use is determined by the bulk size and density. so the planning

department would have criteria. if that were to become based on that criteria and maybe parking, floor space, if that becomes bigger then the principal use, then it switches and that becomes the principal use. that's how they are defined within the planning code. >> okay. that clarifies it for me. >> the one other thing that i would like to talk about is the implementation of the permitting process. one thing we heard that the massage community thought it was very cumbersome that we have to get the referrals from the fire and police department. i did speak to those departments and unfortunately they are not willing to wave those inspections. it's when they go to the facility and inspect safety and fire and with respect to electrical and plumbing and the police department does want

that background check. unfortunately we are not able to wave those deferrals or fees. if we had a business that was previously permitted by dph and tax exempt and now coming back into system that we would try to reduce the fee it would be nominal because we would have to recover our cost by 10-15% to help them out a little bit. >> okay, has there been any further discussion of this notion of the door being unlocked or locked for security purposes. single family house --? >> there has not. we have changed the rules to the doors. >> some conversation whether the police have a means to communicate through a locked door for security reasons because obviously there are

neighborhoods where someone whose there alone with a client is going to feel at risk. that's a totally different. >> if they are -- alone with a client they are permitted to lock the doors. if they are there with one client they are allowed to close the exterior doors. >> okay, if there is no other questions, thank you very much. >> thank you very much. city clerk: shall i call for public comment? >> now we have public comment. city clerk: public comment is 3 minutes. i will call the first three names. so there is sasha cardenas, corey howe's, and amanda lightner. come

up, but i need to get the timer going. okay. my name is sasha card no response, a cmatc massage therapist and owner of in line body establishment for other practitioners. i have dedicated my adult life to the legitimate body work and treat chronic and acute pain disorders, many of them referred to me by physicians and surgeons. i have invested thousands of dollars and thousands of hours to my training and certification and on going education and study. yet because i

provide hands-on therapy, city officials that despite going through background checks and certification, i'm a prostitute otherwise and it can seem to have a negative impact on the community. i have witnessed firsthand the laborious process can be for a business. i went into business myself 5 years ago after the place i worked with struggled to get a conditional use permit. it forced to assume the burden of hours and to obtain this permit. i will most certainly lose my business and livelihood and as more legitimate establishments follow suit.

although i don't condone illegal businesses. i should be able to operate my legitimate business. it's discriminatory and wrong. i asked the small business commission's assistance to protect my livelihood and my community for what i have worked so hard to work. i ask for the grandfathered program for established businesses. >> thank you. >> good evening commission. i stand before you today to say my piece about the current ordinance being

discussed and how i feel it will affect the massage profession. currently i'm a student at the institute. i'm also a u.s. veteran who served in the marine corp for the past 8 years and looking for another career. i have a strong passion for this career and for medicinal purposes is more evident and it will be seen in the rank with other businesses in the future. i don't see a significance and established massage therapy businesses in maintaining a business. most students wishing to start a business have to come out of pocket and who already have an accumulation debt to their name and now

for the amount of time the puc will take the process to be used for entrepreneurship caused by those that cheat the system already not to only generate the profit that they can take aside from massage parlors. believes the problem well intact. this is an aside to prostitution rings. please don't add hardship to becoming or becoming successful in this career. i asked that the process, excuse me, i ask in the process of creating this ordinance that you take into consideration the effects on those in the practice, those that are beginning their practice and last but not least, those that last but not least

consider the effects on the future of massage therapy. >> thank you, awesome by the way. that's two great public comments. you both have scripts even when you tripped you got back on track. way to go. next up. >> hello, my name is amanda. you may remember me from the last commission i spoke as well. i don't have an exact script because this is the first time we've heard the amendments that have been proposed on these two legislations. i will do my best to stay on point with you. i really appreciate hearing that there have been some exemptions that the planning commission and supervisor tang's office and the health commission everybody is taking into account especially the sole provider exemption from the cup

process that allows someone in my position a small business to be able to continue practicing. i don't think that the legislation as proposed is ready for approval yet. there is still certain things that really prohibit legitimate businesses from being able to practice. one i appreciate that there are still four providers allowed to be exempt from the cup process. however if each one has to go through solo establishment permit process that is actually a really large process in and of itself. i know that because i have gotten my building inspection permit recently and it took over 5 months, it took a lot of money and it took providing architectural drawings,

inspection, so many different minutia. 13 different visits. if each person of those four have to go through that process, that's causing the city a lot of excess work and it's causing each practitioner access work. so i really propose that the four people could actually share a solo establishment permit to cut down on just excess labor and excess inefficiency. as well i think it's important to consider that not everybody knew that they had to have this piece of paper signed for camtc exemption. it's not clear. if you have a certification you do not have to get extra permitting. people didn't get

their businesses signed off on. we need to take that into account and how do we actually define an existing establishment that we really need to broaden that definition. so i really thank you for considering all of these points and considering that the cup process is not a way to wheed out actors in the beginning. >> all right the next set of speakers is beverly may, stacy degoir and london louis. >> i will try not to repeat. i'm beverly may from the massage

therapy council. i will try no the to repeat my prior comments. i'm pleased to see the on going conversations regarding this ordinance and at least with the few massage therapist and business owners who are aware that this is even going on. most massage therapist and business owners in the city, i have a feeling are not even aware that anything is being considered. i was involved when sb 731 was passed and most of all anger and humiliation rebellion at the anger and humiliation of being subject to regulations they were only drafted for the sex industry, not for professional massage which much was made during the sunset hearings last year of our law that unintended consequences of the law. yet

the bill authors in both business and professional communities were aware of respected consequences of onerous regulations and fees putting certified massage therapist and most sole proprietors for know more than 4-5 clients a day and fierce competition. there is little room in san francisco for businesses and establishments for conditional use permit. los angeles county is amending their ordinance and afc next year will require certification of anyone practicing massage. their planning department decided they don't want conditional use permits. the city attorney for modesto has referred to a 20th century

solution to a 21st century problem. i think that's true for a san francisco demand. a bill drafted into the bill with stakeholders work together to being mindful to the needs of the profession and business owners especially the sole providers. i hope san francisco considers this especially i have only seen two sole providers engage in this process. thank you. >> thank you, beverly. >> good evening commissioners and everyone. i'm stacy degoir, a small business owner as a sole provider in

the city. i was very happy and thank you supervisor tang for that layout of the different establishments. part of what's been mentioned is this is a very complex issue. i had a handout describing the four different establishments. the first one being general, the second one is this category of declaration of exemption group and then we have the sole fix or out call establishment and out call only establishment. this currently exist in the code right now. what i would like to propose so that this regulation will not just address human trafficking but will address compliance of massage therapist who are being treated as professionals. this category the declaration exemption group

become certified establishment category. they will be zoned as medical and only for those that are camtc owners and providers. this is what other cities are doing and it creates that, takes care of some of the zoning issues, a lot of what impedes massage professionals from wanting to step forward. right now the group of people that are willing to step forward and speak at these meetings is shrinking because everybody is afraid if they stick their head out they are going to get slammed with a puc which is like a moratorium because it takes from 6 months to a year to get this. as you heard from amanda, has to cross many desks. on the provider part that currently gpa is general

practitioner permit is only 100 -hour criteria and advanced is 200 -hour criteria. right now the bar is very low in san francisco. perhaps that's part of the problem why we've had a proliferation problem. the san francisco council of certificate holders are considered division two health care providers and should be treated as such. thank you very much. >> you have 23 more seconds. >> okay, so i really look forward to more collaboration where the supervisors offices can work with the massage industry to improve this legislation so that we can support it. thank you. >> thank you very much.

>> take a deep breath. >> hi, i'm london alice. thanks for having us here today. i want to touch on a touch things i heard today. people are terrified. they are walking away. their plan is not to come forward and not to tell anyone what they are doing. that's really sad because i would like to see everyone coming forward and to support our businesses and be recognized by the city. so, i have e-mails coming through our group continuously, we are not coming forward, we are not signing letters. we want nothing to do with this. keep that in mind. the second thing is a volunteer exemption. i didn't send for an exemption for cmtc for my skin care business because it said it was volunteer. it did not say

anywhere in the website that i had to. you are going to have people with that problem. under what supervisor tang is saying to us today is great she's going to have a grandfather but it doesn't apply to anyone like myself because we didn't sent in that paperwork. it was voluntary. i say conditional use permit is really awesome if someone is already busted for something. it would be great for an environment for the public to say yes, we would like these bad actors out of our neighborhood. forcing people through them is making them hide and second, people are not going to get through it. my building won't. not just me, but i have three other small businesses that don't go through conditional use but will be hit by department of building inspectors because we are all under one

roof with the same landlord. if you are a business, how many businesses would you like to get hit with fines and/or who else has to send in more architectural maps. this is not going to affect one small business under one roof. my landlord doesn't want to renew my lease now. i have been in business for 10 years. i have contractors working for me, not even employees. single women trying to survive in this city. what about them? i don't think it applies to the small businesses trying to make it here. i just don't think that the cup, i think it going to decimate us especially if building is involved. i appreciate you asking if we can go through a fire inspection. i think it's

onerous and not realistic and it's going to decimate us. people are running scared already. the legislation needs a lot of work still. that's my opinion. thanks, you guys. >> thank you. >> do we have more public comment? is there anyone else that would like to provide public comment who hasn't submitted a card? seeing none, public comment is closed thank you all. i appreciate it. you are the leaders of your community so thank you for being here. all right. so, commissioner riley? >> yes, i want to mention that -- [inaudible] the petition on this establishment. [inaudible] >>

>> can i put up a diagram to show you the process? i just want to clarify that before sb 731 went in place and before people went through the dph process they all went through this process. this is something we've been doing since the health department took over since the police department. basically what happens when you come in to get an application from the department of public health and there are certain conditions you need to meet. you need to have a business license and then we ask you for

referrals. you can see the referrals are going to the planning department for a referral and that will determine making sure the location that if you open your business that it abides by the zoning code and if you need to go through a different process. the building department would have to fill out a referral form and they go in and do an inspection to look at making sure the electricity and plumbing and structure of the building is safe. this is not unique to massage businesses, this is every business. i don't want people to think this is a punitive measure. this is supposed to be a protective measure for our residents and our visitors and businesses. likewise, the fire department comes in to look at ingres and regress and safety and spring sprinklers.

we go through and verify it and check it and make sure you have no additional outstanding health violations of your business or any other business. if everything looks well, the permit would be issued. you know, from what i have been told, it's usually about a 60-day process. you know, if paperwork is not filled out correctly or if there is different things going on, i understand it could be a longer process. right now there is a couple of things we are doing to change this. we understand all of these buildings are in different places. i understand you have to go to the building and health department. we are opening up a coordinated permit center in 2017 in 1 van ness. we are working toward this process to make it easy eefrment it will be a one

stop shop. we are going to get there. >> okay. commissioner dooley? >> i wanted to say that i appreciate supervisor tang's agreement to increase to 500 hours. i think that's very important and i wanted to clarify that will apply to general establishment also? >> the 500 hours applies to the practitioner license, not to the business. so when the department of public health like cmtc issues licenses for practitioners, we will have one practitioner license for cmtc and 500 hours in addition we require a test that are offered in multiple languages. you have to have 500 hours and pass a proficiency test and then you will be issued a practitioner license. anyone can own a business. they don't have to be a certified massage

practitioner. just those certified practitioners do. >> i'm still concerned about this kind of lumping everyone together and i inside that's just to make it a set thing. but i do hear what everyone is saying and i think we are lumping true health care providers in with perhaps some more questionable people, and i do feel that they need more consideration. >> is this division 2 classification which applies to health care providers does that apply to san francisco? >> that's a state code, a state business profession code. >> so if there was a move to include a class of massage practitioners in this division to classification that would

have to be done at the state level? >> correct. >> that's another complication. does the city have any authority to designate a division to classification independent of the state? >> we do not. >> traditionally for most of our environmental health programs we can make more specific classifications but we don't have the ability to preempt. >> you can restrict but not extend oovment i just wanted to clarify understate division code, massage therapy is under there but cmat is underneath that. >> i don't understand the distinction of that. so cmtc was created underneath the division too? >> that's from our

understanding. >> i don't know what that means. division two is a classification. >> the cmtc corporation is under the division code, but it's massage therapist isn't recognized as a helts care worker. it list out health care workers specific to medical doctors and acupuncturist and the division 2 establishes the cmtc as being able to provide voluntary practitioner license. >> so they empowered the cmtc but they did not empower them to ordain the people who pass their certification as division 2 practitioners? >> that's correct. >> understood.

okay. i never thought i would know this much. commissioner riley? >> yes, when does the speaker have for the practitioner to have the same permit. if they operate under the same premises can it be done? >> first of all it's incredibly difficult not only on the permitting side. we had to convince the planning to let us have this permit for people sharing the permit. for the actual implementation is very difficult. >> that's too bad. >> commissioners, any other questions? >> i have a question. >> commissioner sarkissian? >> i wanted to go back to the amnesty program and it's a little bit fuzzy in my