911 when the shooting occurred. inspector burke, do you recall inspecting la oficina again on october 26, 2017 to check on their compliance with the revised security plan. >>inspector burke: i do. >>director weiland: can you tell us about your inspection on october 26th, 2017, and did you witness the permitee in violation of any conditions of their revised security plan during that inspection? >>inspector burke: i did witness multiple violations on -- during that inspection. i arrived on-site at approximately 6:00 p.m. at that time, no security guards were on-site, which is a violation of the revised security plan. it states two guards should be on-site at 6:00 p.m. i noticed as i was there and continued to discuss with management about security's arrival, that one guard arrived at 6:15 and the other at 6:30. the manager stated to me that

the guard cards still were not in hand, and no training had been scheduled as of that date for guard card certification. no lead training certification had been completed, and no training had been scheduled, and i was also told that -- that metal detecting wands had not yet been obtained. >>director weiland: okay. so in summary, you will find evidence from this testimony that the permitee was in violation of agreed upon conditions from the revised security plan chl. i don't have any further questions for you. >>president tan: do you have any cross-examination? >> mr. burke, you stated that you actually inspected la oficina twice, is that correct.

>>inspector burke: that's correct. >> and the last inspection was october 6th, 2017, is that correct? >>inspector burke: my most recent inspection was october 6th, 2017. >> did you -- were you aware that the last hearing was continued? >>inspector burke: i was. >> and you didn't think about going and doing another inspection of la oficina. >>inspector burke: my motivation to inspect on that date was that it was close to the deadline for adhering to the revised security plan. >> did you think that maybe if you went and did another inspection that maybe you could find that la oficina had complied with all the requirements? >>inspector burke: i think that if la oficina had come into compliance after the deadline had occurred, that i would have been notified by a representative of la oficina or

an operator or manager. >> do you recall me calling your office and telling you that the -- mr. ramirez had gotten the two wands, and the latd training had been scheduled. >>inspector burke: i do recall that, yeah. >> in terms of your e-mail, regarding your inspection of october 6th, the top of the e-mail has existing conditions. the bottom of the e-mail states updated security plan. there, you state that both of the security guards had valid ca guard cards; is that correct? >>inspector burke: the -- i don't have that e-mail in front of me. >> in fact, it appears that, according to your e-mail regarding your inspection on october 6th, la oficina had

practically complied with everything. the only thing they had not complied with was led training. other than that, it appears that they had complied. >>inspector burke: okay. >> am i correct? >>inspector burke: i know that there were things that were still not in compliance, and those are the things that i took note of. >> okay. let's go over this e-mail. updated security plan. security was wearing distinctive clothing. no outside promoters were being used. all security had ca guard and copies sent to entertainment commission; no staff had led train, which was the only thing missing. they were aware of antiloitering, they were aware of intoxicated persons, so

according to this e-mail, this contradicts your earlier testimony, isn't that right? >>inspector burke: how so? >> well, you stated that they were not in compliance of all these things, and they actually were in compliance on october 6th. >>inspector burke: i state they were not in compliance with four pieces: the guard card training for the -- and the lead training, and they were not in compliance with the updated security plan's arrival time for 6:00 p.m., and they were not in compliance with the updated security plan that stated that metal did -- metal detectors should be on-site.

>> are you now aware that they were in full compliance? >>inspector burke: i do not know that; i have not witnessed that. i have been told that over the phone. >> and you didn't make an additional inspection in order to find out if they were in compliance before this hearing, is that correct? >>inspector burke: my most recent inspection occurred on october 6th. >> thank you. that's all i have. >>president tan: thank you. is there any cross-examination -- follow up examination? no. all right -- all right. miss weiland, you can call, i believe, your third and final witness, is that correct? >>director weiland: yes. okay, so i would like to call up -- and i believe he's coming in right now -- supervisor safai member of the board of supervisors representing district 11 where la oficina is

located. here he is. you're going to go right up there. thank you for being here this evening. >>president tan: i'll swear him in before you get started. mr. safai, could you raise your right hand, please. do you solemnly state under penalty of perjury or affirm that the testimony you give here will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. >> i do. >>director weiland: the commission has before them public comment in protest of the permitted place of

entertainment, la oficina, can you please let the commission know, in had your experience, what the concerns of the community are in regard to this venue? >>supervisor safai: so essentially, as a resident of the district for the past 14 years, someone that's been very active in the community, even prior to being a supervisor of the district, someone that's been very well aware from neighborhood leaders, neighbors in the immediate area, and now, as supervisor receiving e-mails from constituents about the general operation and overall complaints toward this particular location, let me just start by saying, i thank president tan and the commissioners for agendaizing this issue. i want to pay my deep respects for the alvaro family for their deep loss. regardless of the out come, a life was taken at this location, and this is something

that deeply concerns me as a supervisor and deeply concerns residents of the area, so my heart goes out to the family that lost a life that night. on top of that, just to finish answering your question, it's been my responsibility as supervisor to ensure that we have a good quality of businesses in the area, and as i spoke to over 7,000 households, one of the things that was of very deep concern was the revitalization of that commercial corridor. we have the highest rate of vacancies and empty storefronts. we have a lot of illegal uses that are nonconforming uses based on the planning code, and then, we have a string of businesses that have not been good operators, and this is one that calls under that category based on the murder that happened at that location that night, along with the multitude of complaints that i've heard over the course of the last decade-plus. >>director weiland: as we've heard tonight, in my case, the

permitee was not in compliance with the revised security plan. >>supervisor safai: right. >>director weiland: this is after the incident occurred. what does that mean to the community? >>supervisor safai: i mean, we have a number of operators that are required to have good neighbor and security policies. we currently have three medical cannabis dispensaries that are also required to have a good neighbor, and security management plan that's done in conjunction with the local police captain, along with now the office of cannabis, so they are required to perform that function. we're working with a couple of them to update that, so to hear that an existing business, a bar with an entertainment license after a murder occurred did not follow up on that is deeply concerning to us, and to me in particular. >>director weiland: okay. that's all the questions that i

have. >>president tan: thank you. >> supervisor safai, you live close to la oficina? >>supervisor safai: i did for the first five years of living in the neighborhood, and then, i moved around the corner a little bit farther away, but i pass by the venue at least once a day. >> how long ago was that? >>supervisor safai: how long ago did i pass by the venues? >> how long ago was the five years? >>supervisor safai: the first four years was 2004 to 200 #, a#, -- 2008, and then, my sister had the location, so i'm about a block away from this location for four years, and then, my sister after that. >> the -- the constituents of that area are regular folk,

businesses, bars, aren't they? >>supervisor safai: i don't understand your question. >> your constituents -- >>supervisor safai: yes. >> in district 11, are they regular folks? >>supervisor safai: absolutely. >> bars? >>supervisor safai: absolutely. the majority of the residents, they live in the neighborhoods. one of the ones that comes to mind is pissed off pete. he's a resident of the district, and he's opened up a bar and been in business for years at that location. >> so the owner of la oficina is one of your constituents, 12345r9. >>supervisor safai: i don't know. i've never met the man. >> so you have no idea of what's going on at la oficina, do you not? >>supervisor safai: i actually do. i met the previous owner

and met with her and talked about her and her family about how she ran the business. >> well, we're not here about the previous owner. >>supervisor safai: well, you asked me if i had personal interaction with the -- about what was going on in that bar. >> no, i didn't. i asked you if you had personal experience with that bar. >>supervisor safai: i've had personal sfeerns with that bar, as well as the hundred plus people that are there that are immediate neighbors and live in the area that were part of the family that lost their life that night, so i've talked to hundreds of people about this location, both directly and indirectly. >> have you ever visited la oficina? >>supervisor safai: yes, i said that already, i have. >> how many times have you visited la oficina?

>>supervisor safai: i probably -- inside the bar? >> yes. >>supervisor safai: twice. >> and when that was the previous owner was there? >>supervisor safai: it was sfwl so you did not visit la oficina with the new owner. >>supervisor safai: i did not. >> so you have no personal knowledge of what happened on may 28, 20 -- >>supervisor safai: i do not, no. >> thank you. >>president tan: supervisor safai, can i ask how you heard about the incident on may 2828, and what your response was as an office? >>supervisor safai: so we received calls, e-mails, and were immediately alerted from the police captain. any time there is a homicide or even a shooting in my district, i'm notified by the police department immediately, so i was immediately notified by the police captain. i was -- i've been very -- i mean, i guess, unfortunate as supervisor, and i know a couple of commissioners live in the neighborhood, as well. we've had a string of homicides since i became supervisor and

was sworn in january 8th. we've had vehicular deaths along with shootings, and this was one of the incidents that occurred while i was supervisor, so it's been very troubling to me, and i'm -- i was immediately notified of that, and then, we went down the following day when the family came together to mourn the loss at the location. >>president tan: and have you heard, just continuing feedback from community members about this venue, and if so, what? >>supervisor safai: yeah. we've gotten e-mails, we've gotten phone calls. there's been some frustration with some of the neighborhood leaders that they said they testified back in 2014 about this location, so this has been an ongoing location that's caused problems in the neighborhood. and i would just say from talking to people in the industry that run bars, that the amount of calls for

service, the amount of issues at this location has been under scrutiny for is highly unusual, at least from those that are in the field, and i know you have commissioners here that are in the industry. i mean, you get noise complaints, and often times, you'll have, you know, signs posted to say please respect neighbors, but you know, drug dealing, fights, and now, homicide, it's just extraordinary for one small bar. i think the capacity is 50 something or 70 -- between 50 and 75. i mean, it just seems inordinate for a small local neighborhood bar, so -- i mean, i would not be here in front of this commission. i know it's unusual to have a district supervisor come and testify. i know that suspension is before you. i know that it would take extreme and extraordinary circumstances to consider revocation. that's not before

you tonight, but this -- this bar is presenting an extreme situation in our neighborhood, and i -- and i find that very, very disturbing; particularly after a homicide and the opportunity to sit down and engage on a good neighbor and a management and security policy, and then, failure to follow up on that. and i just find that -- i find that extremely disturbing. >>president tan: all right. i'm going to hand it back to the charging party. do you have cross-examine -- i'm sorry, redirect examination. all right. >>supervisor safai: thank you for the opportunity to come and speak to you, commissioners. i appreciate the opportunity. i really would not want the opportunity to speak to you under these circumstances, and i hope to come back and work with you on something more beneficial to the community. thank you. >>president tan: thank you. so miss weiland, have you

completed your presentation for your case-in-chief, or do you have other witnesses to come? >>director weiland: i have more witnesses and more evidence. >>president tan: please present your next evidence or please take the microphone and present. >>director weiland: okay. i just wanted to close out my case-in-chief, so just to reiterate what you've heard through witness testimony, the entertainment commission visited the premises of la oficina on september 1st, 2017 and found the venue in violation of several of its permit conditions. i then determined there were grounded for suspension under public safety under 1060.20.3, and 1070.17.3 of the police code. after learning about the may 28th shooting and subsequently finding the permitee in violation of several permit conditions. this suspension was noted earlier by the counsel fore the permitee, but

it only occurred or was set to occur as a limited suspension for 72-hours, from september 15th, 2017 at 5:00 p.m. to september 18th, 2017 at 5:00 p.m. i then asked mr. escolero and investigator burke to discuss the shooting that happened at the venue. we also discussed inspector burke's enforcement activity timeline at that time, and at the meeting we discussed that the permit's original conditions must be adhered to effective immediately, and we discussed revisions to the security plan that must be adhered to by way of director's order under san francisco police code sections 1060.32, and 1070.29. that afternoon, i issued a director's order to the permitee requiring compliance with the revised security plan

dated september 19th, to take effect at 5:00 p.m. on october 3rd. however, as you heard on tem testimony from inspector burke, he witnessed, three days past the date, he observed violations of the security plan. i actually want to call your attention, just in response to all of this, to the respondent's prehearing filing. on page 4, if you take a look at that, letter e, the counsel states that respondent has come plied with most of the items on the security plan. the only pending item issue on the pending security plan is the fact that the security guards have not applied for a state

issued card. this is an admission of this fact. just wanted to call your attention to that. the respondent admits that he has not fully complied with the security plan, and failure to comply with a revised security plan is grounds, just on its own, for suspension. >>president tan: all right. thank you very much. miss reyes, you may now present your case. you can call your first -- fits witnessrst witne believe you have two. >> i'm going to address that issue regarding what the director just stated. >>president tan: can you speak into the microphone. >> my voice is kind of soft. sorry. in fact, there was some misunderstanding because after i've spoke to mr. burke, he stated to me that the security guards did not have state issued california i.d.'s, and that was a misunderstanding

because if you look at october 6th e-mail, he states that they complied, so i just wanted to verify that. i'm going to call mr. escolero to the stand, and we're going to use the interpreter. >>president tan: great. all right. mr. escolero, can you please raise your right hand. do you solemnly state or affirm under penalty of perjury that the evidence you give in this matter shall be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but

the truth? [ speaking foreign language ] >> yes. >>president tan: great. thank you. >> mr. escolero, can you please state your full name for the record. >> my name is jose antonio escolero. >> are you the person who applied for the entertainment license in question? [ speaking foreign language ] >> yes. >> was that entertainment license suspended on september 15, 2017. [ speaking foreign language ] >> yes. >> do you know the reason why it was suspended? [ speaking foreign language ] >> no, i don't know. >> could it have been because of the incident of may 28,

2017? [ speaking foreign language ] >> yes, i think it's because of that. >> can you tell me the details of the incident? [ speaking foreign language ] >> i didn't hear anything because i was working. >> you -- were you inside la oficina on the day of the incident? [ speaking foreign language ] >> yes. >> what time did you arrive at la oficina on may 28, 2017? [ speaking foreign language ] >> i got there at seven at night. >> what was your duties on that day? [ speaking foreign language ] >> i was a bartender. >> who was working security on

that day? [ speaking foreign language ] >> the -- mr. sanchez. >> was mr. sanchez your employee? [ speaking foreign language ] >> no. >> who employed him? [ speaking foreign language ] >> mr. mejivar. >> did you arrange with mr. menjivar to provide for security services to la oficina? [ speaking foreign language ] >> yes. >> do you know if mr. sanchez carried a gun while working as a security guard on may 28th, 2017? [ speaking foreign language ]

>> no. >> in your arrangement with mr. menjivar, did you ask him to provide you with security guards that were carrying guns? [ speaking foreign language ] >> no. >> on may 28th, 2017, kwh did you beco -- when did you become aware that there was an incident outside la oficina? [ speaking foreign language ] >> i -- i became aware when the police arrived. >> did you witness the incident? [ speaking foreign language ] >> no. >> i'm going to show you

exhibit number 4. [ speaking foreign language ] >> can you take a look at that document? [ speaking foreign language ] >> yes. >> do you recognize that document? [ speaking foreign language ] >> yes. >> can you tell me what it is? [ speaking foreign language ] >> they're the signatures of all my clients and neighbors. >> are those signatures of the people that are supporting the license? [ speaking foreign language ] >> yes, they are. >> thank you. that's a

that's all i have. >>president tan: miss weiland, do you have cross-examination? i also likely will have some questions, but i will wait for your cross-examination. please stay seated. >>director weiland: hello, mr. escolero. [ speaking foreign language ] >>director weiland: one of the items i stated this evening or asked the police department about was whether or not you send a monthly calendar of events. [ speaking foreign language ] >>director weiland: have you been sending a monthly calendar of events to the police department? [ speaking foreign language ] >> no, i haven't sent them.

>>director weiland: okay. on the eepg vening of may 28th, 2 we discussed that incident in my office on september 19th. do you recall this meeting? [ speaking foreign language ] >> yes. >>director weiland: do you recall me asking you whether or not you called 911 when this incident occurred? [ speaking foreign language ] >> yes, but i don't remember who called. >>director weiland: okay. that's it.

>>president tan: do you have redirect examination? >> i know this is not a court of law, i understand that. >>president tan: it's a pseudo court, yes. >> hovwever, you cannot examin a witness that goes beyond direct, and you're supposed to cross-examine a witness according to direct, and this was not according to direct. this was totally questions that were not asked of the witness essentially, so i'd just like to object. >>president tan: so you'd like to object. you can object and should object when you feel like the objection occurs, so that he doesn't have to answer, and then, i get to determine whether he answers or not, so just so that we know the right procedures. i have several questions. [ speaking foreign language ] >>president tan: so can you describe your relationship with

mr. menjivar, your security business partner, or what is that relationship? [ speaking foreign language ] >> he came to me, asking for work, saying that he provided security to various bars. >>president tan: and does he pay mr. menjivar or does he pay the security guards directly. [ speaking foreign language ] >> i paid mr. menjivar. >>president tan: and does he meet the security guards before they arrive for duty? [ speaking foreign language ]

>> i just, you know, see -- make sure that they don't go outside, you know, with -- let people outside because i'm inside, taking care of things. >>president tan: so had he met mr. sanchez that night on may 28th before he started working? [ speaking foreign language ] >>president tan: and just to be clear, did he meet with mr. sanchez before mr. sanchez worked that night? [ speaking foreign language ] >> no.

>>president tan: was he aware that mr. sanchez was the security guard for that night? [ speaking foreign language ] >> yes. >>president tan: okay. so he was aware, and he was present for that. [ speaking foreign language ] >> yes. >>president tan: and just to be clear, it sounds like he was aware that the shooting and the murder had taken place that night; is that correct? [ speaking foreign language ] >> i object. are you stating that he found out about it after the incident? >>president tan: no, i'm simply asking if he was aware that a shooting had taken place

that night at la oficina. [ speaking foreign language ] >> no, no. >>president tan: so he was -- that -- i'm hearing conflicting information. earlier, he said he heard it, and a call was made to 911, and now, he's saying he did not hear it. let me clarify. was he saying that he heard someone was shoot at la oficina? [ speaking foreign language ] >> i wasn't aware. i was busy

working. >>president tan: at some point, he became aware; is that correct? [ speaking foreign language ] >> yes, when the police got there. >>president tan: how long did it take for the police to get there? [ speaking foreign language ] about 20 or maybe 15 minutes. >>president tan: after what? 20 or 15 minutes after what? [ speaking foreign language ] >> after the accident. >>president tan: okay. thank you. oh, commissioner lee has a question. [ inaudible ]

>>president tan: yeah, is your mic on? >> yeah, does he know what conditions are? [ speaking foreign language ] >> yes. >> okay, so when he gets a permit, and there's conditions, he knows that he has to follow conditions; is that correct? [ speaking foreign language ] >> yes. >> does the -- does he believe that we have conditions for a reason of public safety? [ speaking foreign language ] >> i don't understand your question. >> so public safety, we have conditions for the public use, so there's rules to help protect himself, his employees,

and the public. does he understand that? [ speaking foreign language ] >> yes. >> so he had a permit issued in 2014. [ speaking foreign language ] >> yes. >> so if he understands there are these conditions that are important for the public safety -- [ speaking foreign language ] >> -- why is he continuing to violate, even up to now, not -- every condition, even on the new security plan, that he hasn't complied yet? [ speaking foreign language ]

>> i'm no longer violating the conditions. i comply now. >> i understand if that's the case, but we're talking about between 2014 and the time of the incident, he still had violations. [ speaking foreign language ] >> when the inspector came to let us know that the sound was too loud, i had to fire the

deejay because i knew i was in violation. >> okay. but there's other conditions on the permit that you should know, not just sound, and not when somebody comes and talks to you. [ speaking foreign language ] >> we have lowered the sound, we have fixed the cameras, we're taking care of things. >> okay. so let me ask you a question: if somebody -- if somebody -- if a patron fell or tripped in your business -- [ speaking foreign language ]

>> -- do you feel that it's your responsibility for that patron? [ speaking foreign language ] >> yes. >> so even if a security guard -- whether they were hired by -- whether they were hired by you directly or not, but you hired a security company -- [ speaking foreign language ] >> -- do you feel that the company who supposedly represents your business is your responsibility or not? [ speaking foreign language ] >> yes. >> that's all i have. >>president tan: all right. thank you. is there any redirecting? it

sounds like there wasn't. okay. thank you very much, mr. escolero. miss reyes, you are welcome to bring your other witness. >> i'm going to call mr. ramiro estrada. >>president tan: all right, mr. estrada, can you please raise your right hand. do you solemnly state or affirm under penalty of perjury that the evidence you give in this matter should sha matt matter shall be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth. >> yes, i do. >> can you please state your name. >> ramoiro estrada. >> can you please tell me what

your position is with la oficina. >> well, i've been managing la oficina. >> can you briefly explain your duties. >> well, i make sure that everybody works properly there. >> you manage the employees? >> yes. >> do you know the reason why the license was suspended -- the entertainment license of la oficina was suspended? >> i think it was because of the incident. >> is that the incident of may 28th, 2017? >> yes. >> when did you first hear of the incident? >> well, that night, i was not there. i left earlier, and my sister, who was working there, she called me. >> so you were working on may 28th, 2017. >> earlier, yes. >> what time were you working at la oficina? >> normally, i open and i leave

around 7:00, 8:00. >> and what time do you open? >> on the weekends, 11:00 a.m.. >> so you were not at work at the time of the incident, were you? >> no, no. >> did you look at the list of calls that were exhibit a for the director? did you look at those calls? >> yes. >> and they were calls from the police -- to the police department? >> i'm not sure. >> you're not sure about those calls? >> i don't think so, no. >> okay. so can you tell me if all those calls were related to la oficina? >> no. >> our exhibit 1 had a summary of calls, and some of the calls

were about suspicious people, intoxicated people, a vehicle accident in front of la oficina, drunk driver. do you recall, as manager of la oficina, if you ever were notified of any of those calls? >> no. >> so is it your testimony that most of those calls were not really related to la oficina? >> no. >> so is your answer that those calls were not related to la oficina or -- >> yes. >>president tan: okay. can you state that as a full sentence, yes? what are you saying yes to. >> well, sometimes i don't really understand the question. >>president tan: well, she asked if the incidents on the reports were connected to la oficina. do you think so or do you not think so? >> they're not.

>>president tan: okay. >> did you receive a copy of the safety plan from the director dated september 19th, 2017? >> yes. >> did you comply with all of the requirements regarding that safety plan? >> yes, all of them. >> did you -- are you and the employees of la oficina registered for led classes? >> yes, all of them. >> the confirmations that you -- that we provided on exhibit number 3, are those the true and correct copies of the confirmations for the led classes? >> yes. >> when are you -- when are you registered to take those classes? >> on the -- i think it's

november the 14th. >> is that november 14th, 2017? >> yes, this month. >> was -- when you tried to renal f register for those classes, was that the earliest date that you could actually relate to those classes. >> yes, the only one. >> do you -- do the security guards now have some kind of closing th closing -- clothing that identifies them as security guards? >> yes. >> did you purchase the two security wands, and metal detectors. >> yes. >> so you have two of them now? >> yes. >> are those two wands being used by the security officers? >> yes. >> can you tell me how many of

the employees have been registered for the led class. >> all of them; everybody. >> everybody that -- >> yeah. >> -- that you employ right now. >> yeah, even me and jose. >> is your testimony today that you have complied with the security plan that the director imposed on la oficina? >> yes. >> thank you. >>president tan: how many security guards do you have? >> we have now three. >>president tan: you have three, and they're all getting training -- >> yeah. >> and november 14th is the date or something like that. >> oh, no, the security guard, they have a permit, and they got all of that. >>president tan: okay. miss weiland, do you have

cross-examination? >>director weiland: hello. >> hi. >>director weiland: i just have one question. what date did you register for these trainings? >> dates? >>director weiland: i'm just looking at the exhibit right now, where this is entered. >> well, the class will be on november 14th. >>director weiland: dow recall the date you registered-- do y date you registered? >> no, i don't. >>director weiland: okay. i'm just seeing an exhibit 3 submitted by the respondent, and it looks like october 12th. it says registration confirmation for led class. >> yes. i didn't know that i

had to keep dates and time. >>director weiland: i just wanted to know because this revised security plan needed to be in compliance by october 3rd. >> well, we have some mis -- misinformation. first, they have somebody that we approach to -- they tell us that -- that abc -- that class was only for owners, and then, i find out through everything that it was for everybody, so we did it. >>director weiland: okay. thank you. that's all i had. >>president tan: miss reyes, do you have any redirect? commissioner lee? >> how long have you been a director at this location? >> very short time. >> can you give us some

numbers? >> eight months. >> you've been working there for eight months. >> no, i've been working there since they opened, 2014. >> so you're the manager now, so if you got off early that day, who's the manager in charge after you leave? >> jose zwl jose's the manager in charge? >> yes. >> meaning any -- anything that happens to the premise, he would have to take care of. >> that's right. >> right? well, i can't say only you've been a manager a short time, but i -- well, i can say only you've been a manager a short time, but a -- led training, and there's a certain kwiemp , requirement, why wasn't that imposed when you became manager eight months ago? >> imposed what? >> led card training, anything

that's pertaining to the permit. most dw-- i would assume that my opinion, that my manager should know what the conditions are on a permit. have you -- have the owner -- have they showed you the conditions of the facility, of the permit of the bar? >> well, we have the different counts that i thought they were the correct -- >> well, i mean, the guards are the guards. >> well, not for the guards, the girls who work in the bar, too. >> but i'm saying as a manager, you need to know what the conditions of the premise -- did the owner of the bar ever go over these conditions with you that's supposed to help the public and the safety of your own people that you supervise? >> yes -- yeah, we discussed

most of the times that -- >> so they went over this with you? >> yes. >> and it takes to now, to now to get to led training and the security plan after all these months. you've been there eight months as a manager. >> well, we didn't do that before until they ask us for it, and there is only one class a month, i think, in san francisco. >> that's true, that there's not that many classes, but i'm just trying to say, do you recall that -- again, i'm going to bring up the question, that if anybody's hurt or injured in your facility, as a manager, you would -- >> we would be responsible, yes. >> and would that be calling -- would that be calling 911? >> no, we for sure -- that is from this. >> and when you have these security guards under this company, do you have ask them

for proof, i.d. -- like, if they have i.d. -- like, they usually get a guard card. do you ever ask the incoming security guards for this document to know that they were actually certified? is. >> i think jose did that. >> jose did that? >> yeah. >> but jose's saying -- >> well, but -- all i know is i didn't. >>president tan: okay. commissioner perez. >> commissioner perez: i have three questions for you. i'm a little bit confused. did you say that as of right now, you are in compliance with the led training for your training security guard? >> oh, the security guard, they don't need the lead training. yeah, they have that cards.

>> commissioner perez: they have guard cards, but they're going to get their lead training on november 14th? >> no, only the people that work in the bar. >> commissioner perez: okay. my question is, so you're the manager. are you responsible -- do you know that part of your permit, you're supposed to send a monthly calendar to the police department? >> yes. >> commissioner perez: and have you been doing that? >> well, incompetedeed, i was through my e-mail, but i probably did it improperly, but i did send them. >> commissioner perez: how many times did you send them? >> only one, because we told the commission that we were not going to be using any d.j. or anything until we -- >> commissioner perez: when did you send the calendar? >> on -- i cannot say the exact

date. >> commissioner perez: okay. >> but i have the proof in my e-mails. >> commissioner perez: but you do know it's supposed to be monthly. >> yes. >> commissioner perez: but you don't know when. >> no, but i know it was probably two months ago. >> commissioner perez: so it was probably september, august -- >> it was a very short time. i wanted to inform them that we are not having any events this month. >> commissioner perez: okay. >> because we're not having any d.j.'s or live music or anything, and i told them verbally, too. >> commissioner perez: okay. and you know that part of your condition, you're supposed to have a video -- electronic surveillance? >> we do have it. >> commissioner perez: and do you have it now? >> it's working. >> commissioner perez: as of

when? >> i don't remember exactly when that is. just a few days after they asked us to have it. >> commissioner perez: okay. thank you. >>president tan: all right. miss reyes, does this rest your case? >> yes. >>president tan: it does? okay. thank you for your witness. sorry. i'm going to go over final portions of this proceeding. miss weiland, as the charging party, do you wish to present any rebuttal evidence and rebuttal witnesses? >>director weiland: does this also include my closing? >>president tan: it does not, so i will go into closing right after that, if you don't. >>director weiland: okay. >>president tan: if there's no rebuttal, we can go straight into closing. >>director weiland: okay. >>president tan: so you may

know present your -- >> would the parties -- all the exhibits that were submitted by both parties, are they submitted without objection or are you objecting? >> i objected -- i objected to exhibit a, which was the complaint of that -- that is unsigned. i object to that exhibit. i also object to the exhibit on the -- on the article regarding the internet, that we don't have anything about. i also objected on my prehearing statement regarding the list of calls because we cannot authenticate. we didn't have a witness who came in from the -- from that department to state how those calls were made, who received them, how they were compiled, so it's not an authentic exhibit, and those are the exhibits that i objected to. >>president tan: does the department object to any exhibits by the permit holder?

>>director weiland: no. >>president tan: okay. all right. we're going to hold on making a ruling on the objections until the commission deliberates, so with that, thank you for reminding us what those objections were. we're now ready for closing argument, so miss weiland, you may now give your closing argument. >>director weiland: thank you fore beari for bearing with all of us tonight, commissioners. so the respondent argues that there are no specific facts to support any of these alleged violations. the first fact is there was a shooting and murder at la oficina. the second fact is that i have submitted a felony complaint, which is a court record, stating that an

employee or agent of the permitee engaged in conduct that would constitute the violation of the following laws: assault and battery, discharging a firearm, unlawful weapon, and drug offenses. the third fact is that the permitee failed to comply with permit conditions, and we found that from inspector burke's inspection on september 1st. this was a good neighbor policy, numbers 2, 7, and 12; also, that no employees had lead training certification, and no scheduled. no security guard kawas assign to the sidewalk. a monthly calendar was not being sent to sfpd ingleside station. fourth was that the permitee failed to comply with they

revised security plan. this inspection was from october 6th, 2017. at that time, no employees had lead training certification and no training was scheduled. inspector burke said he was on-site and that both the manager romero estrada, as well as the owner, did not have california guard cards, and were not scheduled at that time. the guards arrived late that evening, past the specified time of 6:00 p.m. one arrived at 6:15, the other at 6:30 p.m. wands were not being utilized, and no metal detector was not on-site. i just want to say this really shows a history of noncompliance, not only with the violations that they received in 2014, but the revised securpl