be much discussion amongst many supervisors tomorrow, and that's not -- that may not be a final outcome. again, brittni talked about the small retailers colocating and not subject to individual use or clustering codes. what was proposed today or amended today was to require a mandatory 312 notice citywide for any mcd converting to article 16, cannabis retailer, and to delete a mandatory dr for districts 4 and 7. supervisor tang expanded, allowing cannabis retailers in the mc-1 district for district 4, but is limiting one mcd for the neighborhood commercial districts for district 4. and supervisor safai has limited his number of districts

for district 11. and then, the land use changes were to mirror the -- allowing the conversion -- excuse me -- the conversion of mcd's into cannabis retailers. those changes are reflected in the land use, in addition to the pipeline -- businesses in the pipeline. and with clarification that the grandfathered mcd's are not subject to locational restrictions should there be any change, and cannabis may be smoked at retail locations. so those were the changes at the -- as of today, though, subject to change tomorrow at the board of supervisors. >>president dwight: yeah. okay. well at least they're talking about some of the right things. >>commissioner zouzounis: is that 600 feet mcd to mcd or retail to retail or does it

also include the distributors to retail. >> i'm sorry. the first 600 feet is from a school. >>commissioner zouzounis: and then, the second -- the clustering one. >> the clustering one would be 600 feet from cannabis retail from cannabis retail. >>commissioner zouzounis: okay. my question is if you have a cannabis distributor, can that be closer than 600 fe 600 feet from a cannabis retailer, or manufacturing to retailer? >> i don't know right now without seeing how that language was specifically written. >>commissioner zouzounis: i haven't seen anything specifying that. >> i mean that -- because certain things, like a distributor, to be a distributor, you are likely having to be zoned in locations that are not close to mc districts. >>commissioner ortiz-cartagena: at this just -- i know this is not part of the first phases, but for restaurants, this is not going to make sense. i'm just, you know, small

businesses. i just want to keep reiterating and reiterating it, so, like, in north beach, all the commercial corridors, we have our amazing fine dining, where it's mom and pop, good restaurants, so if i want to do cannabis infused cuisines, i cannot. i can only do a monopoly if i own the whole block. that's not right. >> i think this is where the supervisors can provide some clarification, or would a restaurant be considered a cannabis retailer? those questions have not been fully answered. i think, you know, there's definitely the need for continued refinement, but we do -- the -- we do need to get some rules and regs in place because at least for the current mcd operators, for them

to be able to get into compliance locally, and then be able to apply with their license at the state and be a cannabis retailer january 1. >>commissioner ortiz-cartagena: i'm just throwing pebbles slowly but surely, slowly but surely. >> and i think it's pebble that the commission can continue to address and bring up. >>commissioner zouzounis: and there's no confirming definition for a nonconforming cannabis operate jog yet? >> a nonconforming? yes. it's in the preexisting. it's under section 1605k on page 21. >>commissioner riley: the thousand feet or 600 feet from school or child care facility, what is the latest? i know some communities feel very strongly about the thousand feet. >> right. so as i understand,

this happened not too long before our meeting started, the final land use recommendations was that what moved forward was the 600 feet. again, that still could be debated more at the board of supervisors, but the 600 feet, in terms of the radius from schools, i don't know, and the daycare could have been amended in committee today, but i would -- because of my meeting schedules and and ma man -- maneka would have been the one to see it, but -- >> okay. we'll wait. >>commissioner zouzounis: and

my reference to that nonconforming cannabis definition if that was going to include -- it says engaging commercial cannabis activities related to medical cannabis activitied in the city. so if you were a distributor, like, that -- you were an accessory distributor or you provided the equipment and the raw material that, you know, created these things, that was -- besides the cannabis, is that considered a preexisting -- >> so, like, if you are selling the instruments that you make the pens to -- to -- i -- that will need to be clarified, but my understanding, you're not really selling a product that has cannabis in it. >>president dwight: i suspect if you do not have cannabis in your product, you're not subject to any of these regulations, so you can be selling equipment, you can be selling accessories, you can be selling paraphernalia, and there's a whole industry in

that alone. i don't -- sorry. for example. if i start making stash bags, i am not now subjected to the requirements of the cannabis industry, i'm pretty sure that's -- >> i mean, that's how i would interpret it because you do not have any of the cannabis product, so if you're making pipes or bongs or what have you... all right. so any other questions? all right. so that's it. i do -- the last thing i do want to say is i want to extend my appreciation to director elliott, to aaron starr, dan sider, and the city attorney's office, and of course all the supervisor's offices skm thean aides, because things have been changing and they've been doing a terrific job keeping up, still trying to keep track and

understand all the nuances, which is very complex when you're talking about four to five significant different types of industries that, you know, make one big industry, so i just want to give them a shout out for the great work that they're doing. >>commissioner ortiz-cartagena: and our office, too. >> yeah, and our office. >>commissioner ortiz-cartagena: they've been killing it. >> and your recommendation is very clear, so the supervisors took those very seriously. >>president dwight: good. so we've kind of got -- were those your -- director -- was that your director's report? >> no, that was not the director's report. that was the final wrap up of just giving you an update on items. >>president dwight: okay. i'll call for public comment on that. do we have any members of the public that would like to comment on the director's wrap up on items 5 and 6? seeing non, public comment is closed. that means we can move onto item number 6.

>> was there a motion? >>president dwight: okay. >>commissioner tour-sarkissian: i would like to -- regarding the proposed amendments as to requiring 50% local hiring, i would like to make a motion that that be stricken from the proposed legislation. >>president dwight: yeah, i'm fine with that. anybody want to second that motion? >> may i just make one recommendation, in case the number got modified a little bit down in committee? >>president dwight: i don't think there should be any local hiring requirement? >>commissioner tour-sarkissian: i believe that the local hiring requirement, first of all, is in -- frankly, in this environment is not realistic, and second, would hinder the growth of the industry, would cause a major problem in hiring. there's no way that the business could be held to that

standard in the city and county of san francisco. >>president dwight: and furthermore, if you had to revalidate that every year, if you had employees that said screw this, i'm not commuting like this anymore, and next year, you're noncompliant, you cannot manage your workforce anymore. that's absurd. >> and if they move out of the city. if you do think if this local hire is included, dow think it has the potential of affect being any future noncannabis related small businesses? >>president dwight: well, i think it should be objected to the subject of no other business have been imposed these kind of penalties. >>commissioner tour-sarkissian: i think it's really causing major damage to the growth of these businesses, and frankly, if they can't hire in san francisco, then they cannot grow, they cannot open their

doors. 50% is a huge number. >> and do you think that they might pull away employees from other noncannabis related -- >>president dwight: well, it just creates a competition, an unnatural local competition of hiring. people should want and be allowed to work in the industry that they're interested in. we shouldn't create an artificial market for those people, because what you will do is in fact create a bounty on those local hires, and you will artificially inflate their incomes, and you may argue that that's a good thing for those people, but you're going to get people migrating to an industry that they may or may not not want to be because they're seduced by a piece of legislation that is solely focused on one industry and i think that represents just the -- the fundamental

flaw in the legislation. >>commissioner ortiz-cartagena: president dwight, you said earlier, this is not a public -- public works kind of project, this is provide sector industry, and this is capitalism, you know. >>president dwight: this is outside the bounds of our le s legislative bodies to be mandating this. >>commissioner ortiz-cartagena: i think there's a misconception. we're business people. that's why we're in this commission. i think there's a misconception that there's going to be a bunch of billionaires and stuff like that. >>president dwight: it's going to be a competitive business, just like any other. >>commissioner ortiz-cartagena: correct, and it's an agriculture business. >>commissioner riley: director, if i remember correctly, there was such a requirement for the construction business, is it? >> and from what i understand, there has been challenges with that, but understand from the

construction industry, a project goes up -- >>president dwight: that's a contract by contract basis. that doesn't require that the employees of the contracting company, because they employ -- they employ temporary workers on a project by project basis, so they're required on a project basis. nobody says that construction company ayz in san francisco has to have this composition of employees, because these are purchasing agents, those are all the full-time employees that you keep in place. >>commissioner riley: and again, they didn't come here and explain to us that they can meet that requirement because they don't always find -- >>president dwight: yeah, that that's an unnatural requirement for contracts. >> right, so even in an industry where you have a pool of workers, and let's just say you can't meet or get close, they're working, and when that project's done, they're available for another project. in an ongoing industry, it just doesn't work that way.

>>commissioner riley: yeah, agree. >>president dwight: so the answer to your question is yes, i think it will have an adverse effect on all businesses in san francisco because it creates an unnatural market, and around one specific industry which is in its infancy, and so as you say, we don't know how this is going to play out, and to hamstring this industry at this point in its development, that's just not the place of our legislators. >>commissioner zouzounis: the supervisor has good intent, but it doesn't make sense. >>commissioner riley: how about if we have a motion? >>president dwight: well, i think the motion should be to reject any local hiring requirement, yeah. >>supervisor fewer: i think the -- >>president dwight: regardless of the number. >>commissioner tour-sarkissian: i think the requirement for 50% or any san francisco workforce in the proposition should be

stricken. >>president dwight: yeah. >>commissioner tour-sarkissian: should be stricken. there ought not be any requirement that the workforce be all san francisco residents, and all definitions relating there to should be stricken from the proposed, you know, legislation as amended in committee. >> so that includes both just the standard local hire for all cannabis businesses and under the equity incubator, is that what you're proposing? >>commissioner tour-sarkissian: i mean, the equity incubator, it does not talk about the understanding of what was presented to us, at any 15 percent percent, 20 percent percent, 25 percentage. >> it is under -- on page 16, it does say -- >>president dwight: it should be stricken from all legislation. >>commissioner tour-sarkissian: let me make my motion. i would say that any reference

to the workforce be hired in san francisco be stricken from the proposed legislation. >>commissioner ortiz-cartagena: and just also to reference construction, going back to construction first, so the equity component in construction is the lbe or the acde component, and they don't have those requirements. i know this well, and even the prime on a -- on a public or on a private project, there's not requirements, 50%. >>commissioner tour-sarkissian: it doesn't serve anybody. >>president dwight: i think we can go on record that we are in agreement that we are absolutely opposed. >>commissioner ortiz-cartagena: but i think it's essential for them to understand, we need to give them a detail, because we're business people. we make payroll. a lot of the people that we're explaining this to, they've never had to make a payroll. >>president dwight: well, more importantly, they've never had to hire anybody, and so before you even get to the payroll, we would be unable to construct a payroll. we wouldn't have

anybody on it. it would be impossible to comply, and it would be impossible to continue to maintain that because your workforce is -- people are free to work where they want to work, and they're going to leave -- and you know, imagine them holding you hostage. you know what? i'm thinking of quitting, and you're not going to meet your local hire requirement if i quit. i think it's time for me to get a raise. that is crazy. that is absolutely crazy. >>commissioner tour-sarkissian: i don't dare going over the definition, but as to what it means to be a resident of san francisco and so forth, so it's so restrictive, that would -- it's not good for the city, it's not good for the workforce, it's not good for the businesses. >>president dwight: shouldn't matter. >>commissioner tour-sarkissian: for businesses and general, and specifically for the very business that we're talking about. >>president dwight: that we're trying to enable. >>commissioner tour-sarkissian: i renew my motion that any reference to local hiring

requirement be stricken from the proposed -- >>commissioner ortiz-cartagena: i'll second that, and now -- 'cause we explained why. we explained why in great detail. >>president dwight: yeah. or the oer. >>commissioner ortiz-cartagena: i second the motion. >>president dwight: do we have any mobile home berz of the public that would like to comment on this outrageous proposal? seeing none, public comment is closed. . >> clerk: okay. roll call. [ roll call. ] motion passes, 5 to zero. >> clerk: item #, director's report, update on the small business and the small business

business center, policies and legislative matters, announcements from the mayor and announcements regarding small business activities. discussion item. >> so commissioners, thank you. i will be very quick. just want our commission to -- our policy analysts has been very sick for a week, so just want to make sure wish her a speedy recovery. so last week, the small business round table had its regular meeting with the mayor, and items on the discussion were around housing for small business workforce, discussion around beat cops, and having a -- you know, continuing to sustain beat cops. there's -- the mayor and chief scott have made it -- and the board of supervisors made it a priority

to increase the number of beat cops in neighborhood commercial districts. also, an update on the meetings that members of that group have been having with the department of homelessness, sfpd, and the department of public health and dpw, so those four organizations are meeting on -- on pretty much on a daily basis to deal with a unified sort of command response to homelessness, so it was a pretty good discussion, and the mayor talked about a few of the things he wanted to accomplish through the end of his term which is, of course, bringing on more affordable housing and, of course, continue to work on the homeless issue that he's been working on. we have signed a contract

with -- for the -- under legacy business, we have signed the contract for the osaki creative group. we have also received a letter from -- of determination from our city attorney that we no longer need to require our businesses that are going to be receiving a grant or the landlords to be 12-b compliant. this'll make the process for getting businesses registered as a city which no, we're no longer saying is a vendor, but is a supplier, which will help speed it up, which will make it much easier for us to get the grant money out the door. and rick and rhea are getting close to finalizing all of the grant applications, the 73 grant applications that we have received. this week, on friday, i'm not sure if you are aware, but they've already started

demolition of the old goodwill site as mission and south vanness intersection and 11th, so this is now called 1550 mission street, which is going to have housing, some down stairs retail, but then, there will be dpw, dbi planning, and a few other smaller departments are moving over to 1550. the second floor will be a permit center that will have dbi, all of dbi, the mechanical, all of that broken out. planning, dph, all the regulatory agencies that a business needs to go through or anybody needs to go through, including the police department's permitting center will be over there, which is great. people don't have to go over there to 3rd street to dale with their permits. there'll be hearing rooms, rooms -- areas for people to be working on things while they're

waiting, so our office, it -- we have a small section there, so katey sharping, who is doing the open in sf who is dealing with the food related businesses will be there, next to the entertainment commission, so really excited, and we're starting the official process of meeting to sort of define that particular space, and the projected opening date is 2020. and those, i think, are the just key things i want to highlight of activities that are taking place right now. >>president dwight: okay. commissioners, any questions? do we have any members of the public that would like to comment on the director's report? seeing none, public comment is closed. next item, please. >> clerk: item 8, allows president, vice president and commissioners to report on recently small business

activities and make announcements that are of interest to the small business committee. >> i attended the meeting last week with the mayor. i was there. i don't have anything else to put forward myself. any other commissioner reports? i'm engaged. i gotten gaug en paris a few weeks ago. shout out to my fiance, juliette, if she's watching sfgovtv. sometimes she does. >>commissioner ortiz-cartagena: i attended opportunity funded ga gala, and want to give a shout

out to odwd, and the mission district corridor. now that it's not such a popular topic, 'cause it's not negative, they've been still working on this day, almost every week, in trying to help small businesses in that corridor survive, so i just want to give a shout out. >>president dwight: great. not to out myself as using myeelectric tronn my electronic device in a commission meeting, but i just got a text from juliette. she is watching. all right. do we have any other commissioners wishing to comment on commissioner reports? all right. seeing none, commissioner reports is closed. future items. do we have any new business items to propose? >>commissioner zouzounis: i'd like to hear an update on the

retrofit. >>president dwight: office story retrofit? okay. any others? >>commissioner zouzounis: i know the quark of where that city funding is coming from or how it's distributed. >>president dwight: we'll get an update. any other new business? okay. any members of the public like to comment on new business? seeing none, new business is closed. >>president dwight: so before we close out the meeting, i'd like to give a little statement here in memoriam of someone who was not here too long ago, accepting a legacy business award, and that is steven parr who passed recently. he was a film activist who was the founder and director of odd ball films. he had been a collector of rare and unusual historical films since the early 1980's and often screened visuals and curated films for

live events around the city. in 19 # 4 his innovation for films caught the attention of director ridley scott. having secured his first client, and a well known one at that, his business grew into a full-time occupation that required a commercial space, he located his space at 275 cap street in the mission district and began to build his film archive, officially registering odd ball films as a business in 1984. it gradually accumulated thousands of 16 millimeter, 35 millimeter and small gauge films. the collection is rumored to contain 35,000 cans of film. it has provided rare and critical footage available from no other sources.

steven parr's contribution is a legacy worthy of recognition. he drew from the considerable strengths and talents of the community and gave back to innovators, independent thinkers, directors, producers and documentaryans in numerous ways. we close the meeting today in his honor. >> sfgovtv please show the office business line. >> it is our kust on om to begin and end each meeting with a reminder that the small business commission is the only place to start -- the office of small business should be your first stop when you have a question about what to do next. you can find us on-line or in person here at city hall. best of all, all of our services are free of charge. it is the

official forum to voice your concerns about policies that affect the economic vitality of small businesses in san francisco. if you need assistance with small business matters, start here at the office of small business and the small business commission. thank you. all right. >> clerk: item 10, adjournment action item. >> i move. >> i second. >> clerk: there's a motion by commissioner ortiz-cartagena, seconded by riley. all in favor? all opposed? meeting adjourned at 8:05 p.m.

>> good morning everyone. this meeting will come to order. welcome to the november 13th special meeting. i'm ahsha safai to my right is sandra lee fewer and to my right, norman yee. mr. clerk, do you have initial announcements before we begin? >> clerk: please silence cell

phones and electronic devices. all documents should be submitted to the clerk. items will be appear on the november 28th supervisors board agenda unless otherwise stated. >> before we begin, i want to give focus to the conversation -- >> clerk: may i read the first item. item one, administrative business tax regulation, health and police code to regulate commercial activities related to cultivated testing sale and delivery of medical and adult use cannibis.

i. >> for those here last week, we continued this item. this is not the beginning as -- this is not the end of the conversation moving this legislation forward but there's still going to be both in the land use and on the rules side, there's going to be continuing conversation over the next year. i think the goal that we're trying to achieve is to move the process forward to be prepared by january 1st to begin to have adult use along with medical use cannibis in san francisco. to focus the conversation, i know supervisor jeff sheehy has joined us with amendments. we haven't spent a lot of time talking about delivery in this committee and in general as the conversation has moved forward. i know we have 30 cannibis permits that are brick and

mortar and about 16 that are delivery only. we haven't spent a lot of time talking about delivery and the delivery process. i know there are those in the audience who have experience with delivery. there's been the conversation about not predictable delivery but essentially internet based and working with brick and mortars. i want to have conversation about that. there's been concerns and ideas brought forward and then i want to talk about the idea of moving from the process of being mcd and having a temporary permit to operate as in adult use. let's start there. one of the things i want to make sure and supervisor sheehy has amendments but i want to start with this part of the conversation.

we've had some conversations about this. essentially the idea is that existing operators have a good neighbor policy. they have an existing management and security plan and the way it has worked in the past, management security plan has been submitted to the department of public health and reviewed by the area police captain and those plans were approved. i want to ensure that in this process to transition to adult use, the management and security plan along with the good neighbor policy will have to be resubmitted and reviewed by your office and approved by your office and reviewed by the police captain and our offices, meaning the supervisors can weigh in and review in the

process and consultation with you. does it say that? >> to your question, currently the legislation page 88 says it has to under article 17 of the police code, this is amendment into article 33. so this would be for the department of public health to enforce until that retailer holds an article 16 permit. so that's not currently reflected in the legislation supervisor. >> would that be an amendment.

john gibbner. >> i think this is amendment you're suggesting to the -- to article 16 if i'm not mistaken. that would not be subsensitive, you could make the amendment tomorrow and pass it on first reading tomorrow. >> we'll do that. what we're trying to do deputy city attorney pearson essentially is there currently is a process they have to submit -- all existing mcd's have to submit a management and security

plan and good neighbor policy. that's something they're familiar with. we want the plan to be resubmitted as part of the temporary permitting process so that the police captain would have the opportunity to review that, along with the department of public health as well? or just the police captain and your office. >> under the existing language on page 88 it would be the department of public health enforcement. i would defer to the city attorneys if you could include my office. >> i want the office of cannibis to have that review. we're trying to shift a lot of the responsibility to the office, right? we want them to be the ones to review the final management and

security plan. >> my question is, are you recommending a process that is similar to the permitting of alcohol licences where it comes to a committee, it goes through, we have a formal report on it. >> not necessarily. there is review. not in terms of having it go to the public service and neighborhood safety. this is more of on the administrative side, we're having it be the process where the office of cannibis -- and essentially what i'm reiterating, the process currently happens, the police captain in the past has given recommendations or reviewed the management security plan, so that's not anything new. and the good neighbor policy is something that they're familiar with, that's not new. what would be new is that the office of cannibis, because we created this new office will

have the authority to approve that plan in consultation with our offices along with input from the police captain. i think that's important because there have been really good actors out there currently and there's ones that have some room to grow. so we want this to be based on a merit system on terms of how they're operating and give them something to look forward to in terms of improving overall. >> so we have this plan in place and still there are some bad actors who have fallen through the cracks. it seems you would have to address enforcement. >> that's why the final approval would be with this office and so in consultation with the police department along with the members of the board. and i think that that -- i'm getting looks from you guys. >> excuse me so you're speaking about new permits that might be permitted.

but renewal of permits then would also be evaluated whether or not they have adhered to the management plan and whether or not they have abided by the management plan and so for review process of these places, which i think in your district quite frankly, they fell through the loop hole. how does you close that loophole. >> that's a good question. the other thing, i know that even the temporary permits, there's the ability to appeal temporary permit from the neighbors and discretionary review. oh, that's the final permit. okay. some supervisors have put in the additional layer of review or proposed that.

deputy city attorney pearson. >> maybe i can say a couple of words about the amendment last week with respect to medical dispensaries and ability to sell adult use on january 1st. the amendment last week would amend article 33 of the health code that currently regulates these businesses and it amends it to allow them to start selling medical use cannibis under the article. they would not apply for temporary permit. it would be immediate expansion of the existing permit. we can amend the amendment to include some of the additional language you have talked about today, to say that that expansion can happen on the condition that they also submit for review by the police department and office of cannibis a good neighbor policy and -- >> management and security plan. >> and a security plan. we could do that, it would be

helpful to know if you want them to be able to operate while the plans are being reviewed or they need to submit them and have them reviewed while they operate. >> i think for the good operators it will be easy. i think for the ones with work to do, i think there will be a review period. no, i don't think it's the will of the body to handout permits without some level of review. >> okay. i think that would slow down the process quite frankly for dispensaries to switch to adult use. we are nearing december. >> right. let's hear what miss elliot has to say. we're talking about 30 dispensaries and i know

supervisor sheehy had ideas for permit. do you think it would slow things down tremendously? or for good operators it would be pretty pro forma. these are plans they have in place, i'm not trying to create a log jam. i have heard from other supervisors they want a level of review and not temporary permits just handed out without something being submitted. >> i think then yes miss elliot you could give us a timeline since the supervisor is recommending it would go through your office for approval and what your timeline is and what it might look like, if there would be a log jam or delay the permitting. i think it's -- the ball is sort of in your court and also public health. we're asking them to review it,

too. >> and the police department. outside of reviewing the security plans is the registration process of the non retail delivery side to get the operations inspected and getting ready for temporary permits as well. i can't say because i have never reviewed that security plan. i haven't reviewed a good neighborhood policy in coordination with operators and supervisors, however we have published quite a bit in the last two months, so -- let's just keep plowing forward. >> i know your name was on the -- do you want to add something supervisor yee? >> i'm trying to clarify in my head what we're talking about. i never had these discussions. so basically, are you offering amendments -- talking as if

it's in here and we're arguing about it. but what are we really talking about. are you amending something? or you want to add language to something? >> so at the last -- no, i'm talking about adding it. at the last meeting we had a conversation regarding this process of transition from temporary to -- i mean from mcd to adult use, there were clarifying questions asked on the record last week. versus this being an administrative process or writing it into the legislation, that's where we are right now. there's a reference to the good neighborhood plan and the process has been in the past for this to happen, i want to see if we can make an amendment that wouldn't slow the legislation down but to clarify how we move from -- into the temporary adult use process. >> and then, it's -- you

mentioned that city attorney gibbner that this is not substance and we could make the amendment either today or tomorrow. >> you should make it tomorrow if you plan to make it. we'll take direction from you today if it's the -- will of the committee or any individual member, we can draft it for tomorrow. >> that would be helpful for me. i don't know what i'm really voting on in this case. >> i can ask him to draft it and you can review it. >> that would make me more comfortable. >> okay. >> the question i have about it, once you go through the process to a law for existing mcd's to adult use, is that what we're

doing? okay. this review process deems a particular retail business that they have not been doing what they're supposed to do. is there -- is there an appeal process to this or is it just final word -- >> so i was not clear on that myself and i just asked that question. what they said is the way it is currently written -- >> they is who? >> the deputy city attorneys. sorry. just a lot of moving pieces very quickly on this. what they said is currently the way it is written, there is no appeal of review, this would just be affectual. i think if we're ready, by

december 1st, the office of cannibis could start issuing cannibis retail permits for the existing mcd's and delivery businesses. what i was trying to say is there should be some level of this type of review, for the good actors i think would be pretty easy but for the ones that have work to do it would slow them down a little bit. >> what i'm saying, i understand the review process that you're suggesting, but at some point it seems like miss elliot is going to make a decision on her own to say yes or no and then -- which is giving her a lot of power. you don't have a condition right now, just you? >> there is no commission. >> if there's disagreement

between one person and one business, is that it? >> i don't know the answer to that. i mean, if there's -- i think that the way that a lot of the administrative process works for the office of cannibis, there would be formalized approval of terms of an application. so this is a piece of that. we're talking about pieces of an application. this is the application for temporary, so if they have met that in satisfaction of that office, then that would happen. but there are certain things -- i think this is some discretionary review for sure, that's why i said in consultation with supervisors and input from the police captain. that's the practice in the past. >> i will add that article 16 permits that create permanent use for adult use for that operator is appealable to the board of appeals. >> okay. that clarifies everything. thank you very much.

>> supervisor sheehy did you want to talk about -- >> i want to know the piece of existing businesses, it's not like something is going to happen, people are still going in every day and purchasing cannibis. so it's not like we're introducing a new business, we're just adding a use. and then -- if you're looking for where this is, it's on page -- i think probably going in on page 88 there is a process and i'm assuming adding some things. >> yeah. particularly the management of security plan because i know there's varying degrees of ways

in which businesses are securing themselves. some have armed guards, some don't, some have bars ton windows, some don't. there's all types of things like that. so i think it would be good to have a level of review in the transition. >> you want to have a second look before -- >> yes. >> yeah. the decision maker would be the office of cannibis, but -- when you say supervisor, i assume you're eluding to the supervisor of the district. >> district. >> and the captain, which will know if there are disputes. that seems reasonable. >> for instance for our district, we have in engelside we have three in district 11 and i don't know how many are on the border of district nine. that's the other part. i don't think there's anything on the southern part and the 1 on ocean avenue.

i know in the past they are familiar with mcd's. >> i want to be crystal clear. when the city attorney shakes her head it makes me nervous. the decision of my office to review and approve a security plan and good neighbor policy is not appealable. however, once my office makes applications available, they have a duty to apply for the application within 30 days of becoming available and the article 16 permit is appealable to the board of appeals. i want to be crystal clear about that. >> supervisor. >> i'm assuming we have been having this discussion, many discussions, that we're preparing ourselves for the transition to adult use january 1st.

i think when we -- so what we're asking is for current operators of mcd's to actually submit a good management plan, a safety plan, good neighbor plan, goes through the police department for review, public health and your office also. those are the steps. is that correct? is that what i'm hearing supervisor? >> yes. >> so my question is would this delay at all the opening or allowable adult used to existing dispensaries because you must review them all and we are now going into a short month of november and short month of december quite frankly and it has to go through the police department. and i also feel that these dispensaries that have work to

do still, it is a little unfair to say to do this without assistance on how to write a very good safety management plan and -- because we have never formalized an office before, there's nowhere a place to get assistance for making them good actors in this business. are we willing to say those who are not good actors, we'll just get rid of them, or not be able to transition to adult use or will we say that we will actually extend an olive branch and say you've been operating for a while, your dispensary is having some issues and this is how you fix it. i don't know if they have had the assistance to be a successful mcd that is safe for

the neighborhood and has a safety and good neighbor plan. i'm hearing there are fences or people are not acting properly, but where is the vehicle in which for people to get this assistance to help to get them up to speed or are we willing to say, i'm asking my colleagues this, you've had a business for a couple of years, sorry, the last couple of years you have not been good so we're saying you may not be able -- i think my questions are two pronged. one, again, will it delay the ability of existing mcd's to transition to adult use now that there's a new process and we're nearing the middle of november. secondly, that what is the assistance that we will be offering -- i would assume it would be the office of cannibis that would give this type of assistance to mcd's that either

want to perfect their business or come in compliance with a good neighbor policy or safety management plan. i'm hoping that your office would be the -- i mean, i would just assume that it would be your office in which the mcd's would be able to assist with this type of assistance because who else has that knowledge. quite frankly. so not only -- i guess i'm saying not to just say sorry, not in business anymore, but to say this is where you need help and this is the areas where we would like you to strengthen instead of on their own resources to become a responsible small business owner. >> can i respond to that? >> sure. >> what i did in our instance, i

brought in all three of the mcd's physically located in my district and asked them for their management and security plans and the couple that needed additional assistance, we started giving them direction and pointed them to the office of small business. they felt they were comfortable enough and the cannibis task force. there's a lot of resources there, a lot of individuals with experience there, they have started to make significant process in terms of where they are, i think they see the motivation because they want to be a good neighbor. they have expressed that. they want to do a better job of managing their businesses and they want to be prepared to do adult use. and so, i think it's both the carrot and the stick and at least in the last few months, i have seen significant progress. but i would say once the finalized plan is put in place, once i see it written and

submitted and have an opportunity for review, then you see the changes on the ground. but i think there are a couple of different offices along with the office of cannibis, small business, cannibis task force. i think it's a good point, what you're bringing up. but miss elliot, for the businesses -- i mean these are things that the businesses have had to do. it's not new to them. and it's not unique to this particular industry either. last week we were at the entertainment commission and a local bar had been asked to resubmit their good neighbor policy and asked to put in management and security plan and had not followed through on a number of things they were asked to do so the entertainment commission was reviewing their entertainment permit. there were significant offences there. it's not -- we're not asking for anything unique for the industry and i think the reason i felt comfortable in terms of

-- i heard supervisor yee and supervisor tang and some others on the land use discussion bring up mandatory dr reviews for permits on adult use, there were questions about transition. we had these conversations last week and we're trying to formalize them. i focused on this because this is something that has been done. i felt like for the ones that were -- they were all familiar with it, there's just a matter of there might be work that needs to be done in some cases. if it slows down the few that needs work to do a little bit, but the ones currently operating at a high level in terms of management, security and good neighbor, it will be a quick resubmittal of the plan and review. the police department -- the police captain does not have to weigh in. it's recommendations from the police department and so --

it's not their final approval. it's the office of cannibis. >> so, i'm not saying that i'm not -- i would expect a very thorough review quite frankly. i would expect a very thorough review, we're asking them to submit a new safe management plan and a new good neighbor plan, i would expect your office to do a thorough exam of every application. we're entering a new arena. i just don't know. how would this affect your office and would you be able to process the dispensary applications for adult use in the -- before january 1st in order for them to open? >> all good