estate still being litigated, which he mentioned, the property should be preserved as a possible archeological site, the property is under developed, and should remain so and the property should be a public park. i believe we can all agree that most of those are pretty ludicrous claims with no basis in code requirements as a developer of a private property. the appellant are not applicable to the project and he has been provided evidence otherwise. finally addressing the long litigation with the estate. we understand that bringing this issue into the discussion is speculation on our part but the appeal ant's pattern of behavior is clear. we believe it's a motivation for his a people has filed lawsuits and appeals and court actions getagainst the estate and lost every time. he requested this case be heard by the california supreme court which was denied. he appealed the sale of the land the he is indicate sold and we

purchased and his appeal was denied and court approved. he has apparently, by court documents, spent $750,000 in legal fees. he contested the sale of the property as well as ever action the estate has attempted. he appears to be willing to anything to deny anyone associated with this project to undermine the estate. i'll try to be brief. two things that jumped out is the first page he claims to be the legal owner of the subject property and does not work to be permitted. as he suggested of th. he states has been informed and believes in the circumstances seeking a court injunction halting construction may not be in a remedy because he claims yet to be established retroactive in the subject property and he cannot show he has an establishment. >> you have three more minutes in rebuttles. >> thank you. >> mr. sanchez.

>> thank you, scott sanchez. i agree with the comments of the permit holder. the appeal ant has raised no valid planning issues that would call into question the proper issuesance of the permit. there have been site permits issued for construction of two separate buildings on the lot. that was appealed to this court and the appellant did not show up to that hearing. those permits are final. construction can again on those permits and even the permit before you as a revision to an already issued shoring permit. we don't see any grounds for granting the appeal in this case. thank you. >> thank you. mr. duffy. >> president fung: mr. duffy, i have a question. how come planning is answering for a shoring permit? >> because we do. >> president fung: what does the department do to verify who is the owner on the permits?

>> i believe we use the assessor records. >> president fung: assessor? is there a check on every permit? >> i believe so, yes. sometimes when a property is sold, there's sometimes a lapse between the owners and not those that they ask for documents. or if you are claim you are the owner, but it's not consistent with the assessor records you have to prove when you bought the property. basically we go off the assessor records. it's the property tax bill. that's my understanding. >> president fung: are those new requirements for zachary view in place already? >> i believe they haven't been officially but they can be using them -- i believe it's still going through but they're using them anyway. if you know what i mean. there will be.

yeah. >> president fung: thank you. >> thank you. is there any public comment on this item? we'll move on to rebuttle. you have three minutes. >> thank you. i really don't have much to add. i would just like to reiterate that what i would like you to do is to maintain the status quo until the courts have finished doing their work. thank you. >> thank you. >> just to continue my final thought for my discussion, is that based on what he just said, he is asking you to rule on a matter that has been through the court system much higher level of judicial overview than an appeals board and he is asking you to rule in a what if? what if a future court rules that he may be the legal owner? he is currently not the illegal owner. we have the right. i had the right to apply for the

permits and the current owner has the right to build the project. please approve the permit. thank you. >> mr. sanchez, anything to add? mr. duffy? >> commissioners this matter is >> president fung: commissioners >> anybody need discussion? if not i'll make a motion. >> move to deny the appeal on the basis of the permit was properly issued. >> so we have a motion from commissioner lazarus to deny the appeal and pull the permit. president fung. >> aye. >> wilson. >> aye. >> swig. >> aye. >> that motion carries. the appeal is denied. we will now move on to item number 7. i don't see a representative from the department here. let me just read for the record. this is appeal number 18-082

subject property 1650 to 1700 owen street mission bay commercial corporation versus san francisco public works bureau of urban force street. appealing on june 5th, 2018 public works order regarding an application in public works order number 187544 to remove 24th vote trees with replacement adjacent to the subject property. denial of the request to remove 14 of the trees with replacement. approval request to remove 10 additional street trees with replacement. it's order number 187811. and we will hear from the appellants. >> good evening, my name is pam louis and i'm the appellant for mission bay commercial corporation. i'd like to introduce sam from arbor well who has presented or given you a a arborous to rept our case.

>> i'm sam. i'm representing mission bay commercial corporation. the issue is there was a permit submitted for the 1650-1700 owen street property. the city staff originally counted four eucalyptus and approved 10, denying four. they cited that they used online images to determine that the health of the trees was good and that they were showing previous decline but they were producing new leaves and in good condition. that pruning would mitigate the defects. when i went out for my inspection last month, i found there were 13 eucalyptus along the street frontage.

nine trees were permitted with signage. if you look at the overhead, it would be tree one, four, seven, 12, 13, 15, 16, 21 and 22. trees six and 14 along the frontage, this is going from 16th street towards the new kaiser hospital. six and 14. six was likely permitted. it was the worst of the two. but there was no signage present on those two. 13 trees were denied. when i do an assessment, i look at over all health and condition. the site foleyage, structural

treatment. whether the tree is leaning. i give the tree a condition rating. i have found that the trees range from fair to poor. fair is a higher level or incidents of deficiencies noted in health and restructure including possible hazardous conditions, signed, symptoms observed with higher corrective measures in input required to improve the condition and where applicable mitigate the risk with the removal. poor is significant deficiencies in health and structure that may include hazardous require immediate action some individuals may require removal as well. so from the table you see i found two were fair and -- two

of the 13 and then there were 1. my math is off. there's 10 that are in poor condition. two with no markings but they both were assigned with a poor condition. the goal of this tree removal permit application was to mitigate hazardous ask declining trees while bringing the facade, anesthetic of the building to harmonic unity with the street. by approving only 10 of the trees, it will leave the property front age with a disorganized and chaotic look. because i would never suggest to put eucalyptus back as street

trees. this is not the goal of the property owner. the species of tree are not commonly planted anymore. especially along a roadway with high pedestrian and vehicular traffic. the property owner would like to mitigate these risks to busy city business center next to a major hospital with a lot of traffic and a lot of people walking by. and i recommend that the trees were removed and replaced with a more suitable tree for the urban environment such as a tree that is more up right and it has more of a column presentation of its

foal age and structure. i really respect the boroug burf urban forestry and the decisions they make. i just think they made their assessment based on google images and not being on site. it's pretty much all i have to say. >> are you folks finished? with your presentation? >> i think so. >> president fung: do you have a question? >> how old were these trees? >> they seemed to be fairly new. less than 10-years-old. >> the area is really less than 10-years-old and this redevelopment. i mean, i was on the redevelopment commission and that was warehouses and garbage out there and i wasn't on it that long ago. it generally the --

>> president fung: who planted these trees? did mission bay plant these? >> come to the microphone, please. >> there were several master developers. the first one was katellas and mission bay development group. i don't really know who actually planted them but i'm sure it was one of the faster developers throughout the whole course of developing. >> president fung: who was to maintain these? >> mission day commercial maintenance corporation. >> president fung: was supposed to maintain them? >> yep. we were maintaining what we were given. >> were these trees planted before, given the turnover of developers, were these trees planted before buildings were built or were they as kind of props of what could be or were

they built after the buildings were designed and built? they planted after the buildings were designed and built? >> right. so the standard policy, if you will, was for the master developer to get the infrastructure in meaning, the sidewalks and the trees before buildings were installed. so i can only say what i've seen throughout community. >> that's what i recall is that there was a lot of street scape and a lot of streets and street scape and then the buildings were designed. these trees had no context for what was going to be built behind them. >> correct, yeah. >> can i add something? i just wanted to show a picture on the overhead of a tree permitted for removal.

it has a trunk and very poor structure. >> president fung: was his time up? >> he has one minute. >> the tree right next to it with the same structure this type of lean and the bode nature of the tiki and it's just going to compound. it gets worse and worse. i don't think browning will mitigate the defect associated with the poor nursery style. >> president fung: one further correction. are these trees are not on private property anymore. they now are the responsibility of the city to maintain under the new legislation?

who maintains them? who is responsible? who owns them? >> the city owns them but mission bay commercial maintainance is tasked to maintain them? >> even under the new legislation that was passed by the voters? >> that is my understanding. >> president fung: new legislation pending funding. there's no guarantee? >> right. >> i'll just add that mission bay commercial maintenance corporation is a large h.o.a. and we're tasks to maintain these trees. >> thank you. >> president fung: mr. sanchez you want -- public comment? >> is there any public comment on this matter? being none, you are entitled to three minutes of a rebuttle. the department is not present. do you have anything further to

add? >> not at all. >> president fung: thank you. >> thank you. commissioners, this matter is submitted. >> i was asking our city attorney, is the hearing valid without a departmental representative? i think so. >> i've had hearings and reached decisions without one party or the other being present. >> president fung: well usually that's an appellant that doesn't show up. >> i don't know about departmental. >> president fung: ok. >> i think you vote with your -- >> president fung: discussion? >> i prefer to make a motion. >> i would -- >> president fung: i would move to grant the appeal and allow

them to overturn the denial of the 12? >> overturn the public works order. >> president fung: and that the new species for all of the trees and size to be determined and approved by bureau of urban forestry. >> ok. >> well, yeah, the replacement is allowed as 10 already. and that condition would apply to that also. >> yeah. >> ok, so we have a motion from president fung to grant the appeal and overturn the public works order and direct the bureau of urban forestry to issue the tree removal permit for the 14 trees and so a total replacement and removal of 24

trees with approval of the new species, size and specifications approved by the bureau of urban forestry. [ please stand by ]

>> when i open up the paper every day, i'm just amazed at how many different environmental issues keep popping up. when i think about what planet i want to leave for my children and other generations, i think about what kind of contribution i can make on a personal level to the environment. >> it was really easy to sign up for the program. i just went online to cleanpowersf.org, i signed up and then started getting pieces in the mail letting me know i was going switch over and poof it happened. now when i want to pay my bill, i go to pg&e and i don't see any difference in paying now. if you're a family on the budget, if you sign up for the regular green program, it's not going to change your bill at all. you can sign up online or call. you'll have the peace of mind knowing you're doing your part

in your household to help the environment. >> i have been living in san francisco since 1957. i live in this area for 42 years. my name is shirley jackson, and i am a retirement teacher for san francisco unified school district, and i work with early childhood education and after school programs. i have light upstairs and down stairs. it's been remodelled and i like it. some of my floors upstairs was there from the time i built the

place, so they were very horrible and dark. but we've got lighting. the room seems lighter. they painted the place, they cemented my back yard, so i won't be worried about landscaping too much. we have central heating, and i like the new countertops they put in. up to date -- oh, and we have venetian blinds. we never had venetian blinds before, and it's just cozy for me. it meant a lot to me because i didn't drive, and i wanted to be in the area where i can do my shopping, go to work, take the kids to school. i like the way they introduced the move-in. i went to quite a bit of the meetings. they showed us blueprints of the materials that they were

going to use in here, and they gave us the opportunity to choose where we would like to stay while they was renovating. it means a lot. it's just that i've been here so long. most people that enjoyed their life would love to always retain that life and keep that lifestyle, so it was a peaceful neighborhood. the park was always peaceful, and -- i don't know. i just loved it. i wanted to be here, and i stayed. - >> shop & dine in the 49 promotes local businesses and

challenges resident to do their showing up and dining within the 49 square miles of san francisco by supporting local services within the neighborhood we help san francisco remain unique successful and vibrant so where will you shop & dine in the 49 san francisco owes must of the charm to the unique characterization of each corridor has a distinction permanent our neighbors are the economic engine of the city. >> if we could a afford the lot by these we'll not to have the kind of store in the future the kids will eat from some restaurants chinatown has phobia one of the best the most unique neighborhood shopping areas of san francisco.

>> chinatown is one of the oldest chinatown in the state we need to be able allergies the people and that's the reason chinatown is showing more of the people will the traditional thepg. >> north beach is i know one of the last little italian community. >> one of the last neighborhood that hadn't changed a whole lot and san francisco community so strong and the sense of partnership with businesses as well and i just love north beach community old school italian comfort and love that is what italians are all about we need people to come here and shop here so we can keep this

going not only us but, of course, everything else in the community i think local businesses the small ones and coffee shops are unique in their own way that is the characteristic of the neighborhood i peace officer prefer it is local character you have to support them. >> really notice the port this community we really need to kind of really shop locally and support the communityly live in it is more economic for people to survive here. >> i came down to treasure island to look for a we've got a long ways to go. ring i just got married and didn't want something on line

i've met artists and local business owners they need money to go out and shop this is important to short them i think you get better things. >> definitely supporting the local community always good is it interesting to find things i never knew existed or see that that way. >> i think that is really great that san francisco seize the vails of small business and creates the shop & dine in the 49 to support businesses make people all the residents and visitors realize had cool things visitors realize had cool things

>> commission thanks sfgovtv which can be viewed on sfgovtv2, or live streamed. members of the public, please take this opportunity to silence your phones and other electronic devices. public comment during the meeting is limited to three minutes unless otherwise established by the presiding officer of the meeting. speakers are requesting but not required to state their names. completion of a speaker card, while optional, will help ensure proper spelling of speaker names in the written record of the meeting. please place speaker cards in the basket to the right of the. they will be card in the order they are placed in the basket. there's a sign-in sheet on the front table. sfgov tv show the office of small business slide.

and before i welcome everybody, i just want to open up for the record, i want to congratulate mayor london for our 45th mayor on july 11th. i also want to congratulate district date supervisor rah ral mandelman and i would like to congratulate supervisor valley brown, district 5 supervisor who appointed last week. congratulate her and everyone in your new positions. and, it is our custom to begin and end each small business commission meeting with a reminder that the office of small business is the only place to start your new business in san francisco. it's the best place to get answers inform your questions

about doing business in san francisco. the office of small business should be your first stop. when you have questions about what to do next, you can find us online or in-person here at city hall. all of our services fre servicef charge. it's the public forum to voice your concerns about policies that affect the economic vitality of the small businesses in san francisco. if you need assistance with small business matters, start here at the office of small business. >> item 1, call to order and roll call. commissioner stephen adams. >> here. >> commissioner matthew corvi. >> here. >> kathleen dooley. >> here. >> mark dwight. >> here. >> william ortiz-cartagena is not here.

iran riley. >> mr. president, you have a quorum. >> next item. >> item 2, general public comments. public comment for items that are not on today's agenda. discussion item. >> do we have any members of the public who would like to make a comment on items not on today's agenda? seeing none. public comment is closed. next item, please. >> item 3, presentation. update on the cannabis equity program and possible recommendations to the planning commission to include the cannabis equity program in the community, business priority processing program. discussion and action item. the presenter is nicole elliott director opposite cannabis. >> one moment. commissioner dooley. >> i'm going to need to recuse myself from this item. i am involved with the cannabis industry. >> do we have a motion to recuse commissioner dooley. >> >> second. >> all in favor. >> aye. >> you are recused.

>> motion passes 5-0. >> ok. so it was 5-0. >> 5-0. ok. >> and we're including commissioner dooley. >> she can vote in that? >> ok. >> 5-0. >> welcome. >> thank you, commissioners. nicole elliott director of the office of cannabis. thank you for having us here today and for agreeing to hear and weigh in on this item. i am joined by my deputy director eugene hillsman, he is right behind me. he will also be presenting on components of the equity program as well. last time i was here was before

we had, in place, a final regulatory structure. it was less than a year ago. since then, the city has issued an equity report that was done by my office in collaboration with the human rights commission in the controllers office. supervisor cohen led the charge in implementing or incrafting an equity program incorporated into the regular la tosh regulatory . so before we get into the over all request, i wanted to familiarize you all with that program so you can better understand the program and the population that we're targeting with this request. so just starting at the very beginning, looking at what supervisor cohen put in article 16 of the police code. this is a requirement to do an equity program. you will recall when i brought this before you before the

equity program was established, there was a plate holder for this program. it acknowledged would we put in place a program, we didn't know what it would look like at the time. in that program it would take priority in the over all regulatory scheme. you can see here the over all mandate that was vested with our office in consultation with the human rights commission. and then the establishment of the program itself. this program has two buckets, if you will. it has equity applicant. they are required to meet in our offices reviewing applicants and determining whether or not they do meet that criteria. there's an as set test and one of the most interesting components is the criteria they must met. three of the six before you having household that earns no more than 80% a.m.i., having some involvement with a

criminal-justice system between 71 and 2016 for cannabis relate reasons. same with a member of your immediate family, number four right there. housing insecurity post 1995. attendance at the san francisco unified school district for no less than five years between 1971 and 2016. and or living in a census tract where 17% of the households had incomes at or below federal poverty from 1971 to 2016. it's one of the main components of the equity program for applicants. what we are looking at now is the ownership criteria. which is the last component of the being an equity applicant ex it's ensuring that you have an ownership stake in that operation in a very real ownership stake in the operation. this gives you sort of the options that an equity applicant

would have when applying and serving as 40% interest holder in c.e.o., 51% sole pro pry to bproprietorso on and so second. >> qualifying criteria you can see a serious commitment to local hire to employing workers who have -- who do meet the equity applicant criteria who have experienced consequence of the war on drugs and then a community investment plan as well as really the meat of this picket, which is an equity plan for on site or off site incubation. it's technical assistance if you don't have a location or if the applicant does not need a location, which to be incubated and that technical assistance must be the same amount as the provision of space and security for no less than three years.

and those are -- we've crafted some big rules on that that you can find on our website. he will hand it over for interesting incubators and talk about the permit applications pending before us. >> thank you. in the next slide, we just have a brief analysis of some of the numbers we've received so far. on the left, what you see are a list of some of the people who have been interested in applying to become an equity applicant. so in the blue category, you see the number of people who have actually started the process. so this just includes essentially the draft application.

so they have not been submitted successfully, of which case the red group is what you see there. we've had about 256 applications to date that have been submitted. that means they've started the process, they provided documents, that's the first step to be verified as an equity applicant. in the orange category on the left, you see the verified numbers so that's people the office has conferred the status of approval t the approval to. they receive identification number. on the right, you see the number of the ways that people are verified. director elliott just described to you the conditions associated with the equity program and here you can see a rough break out of the specific catagories, right. up in the top right-hand corner you see sfusd so if you attended an sfusd school for five years, it does not have to be consecutive. you see income below 80% and medium income at 80%.

the category to the left of income bucket is the census group which is if you lived in a census track below 17% poverty in san francisco for five years, that also does not need to be consecutive, and then the one to the left of that is criminal justice involvement and this is specifically for cannabis-related crime. arrested or convicted or judged to be a ward of the state. those are the four major catagories that individual use to be terrifie verified. two other catagories. one is criminal justice involvement of a family member. it has to be specifically for cannabis-related crimes. but it's ro restricted to beinga parent, siblings or child and next to that is housing or security. ren sented by foreclosure, eviction or housing subsidy.

>> here you can see, based on incubation and people who are looking to become incubated. on the left we see activities to incubate so these people are stressing some additional support from the industry and on the left you see the permit types associated with the activity. the graph describes what activities people with are looking to be incubated for and essentially a description of the demand for equity applicants. so below it you see cultivation delivery manufacturing testing labs, distribution and store front retail and on the right you see cultivation delivery manufacturing testing, distribution and store front retail. this is merely an expression of interest so there's really no cost to describing your interest to the office of cannabis. we use it as a way to connect applicants in incubators.

you come to our website and say you are interesting so there's no cost selecting as many options you would like and incubators could do the same thing to equity applicants starting as a signal o of their interest. in the final slide, just a description of the current activity is our permanent application process which opened up on may 22nd. essentially on the left, you see based on the two catagories we just described, in the blue group it's equity applicants. right now we have about 65 applications from them and equity incubators at 18. you can submit multiple applications. that's why, especially when you look at the right, the permit-type group essentially you can apply for multiple permit types. this is the way of describing the interest and application process so far.

on the left, equity incubate oars and on the right the permit activity people are interested in. as you can see, the vast majority of those activities are retail, which makes up a significant portion of that graph on the right. and then the left is the interest in cultivation and manufacturing with demands in distribution and delivery. with that i'll turn it back over to director elliott. >> so when crafting the equity report prior to the program being put in place, the controllers' office took the lead on benchmarking other jurisdictions and outlining key barriers to entry for potential equity applicants. those barriers included access to capital and financing, access to real estate, licensing and regulatory fees, legal and regulatory compliance and geography. this request is seeking to try and address some of those

barriers. you are all familiar with cb3p and i worked on it and so with that, the goal of the program was included in the report as a recommendation for implementation of the city. and the goal of the request is to allow those who are participating in our equity program to receive the benefits of cb3p if they opt into that. with that i'm happy to answer questions. thank you for hearing this item today. >> great. >> first o. i want t off, i wany great presentation. yes, you are involved with that cb3p program. and this is, in m in my opiniont it was put into place for. we should absolutely get behind this. i'm going to see what my other fellow commissioners have to say. any questions?

do you want to hear from the public? let's go with the public. we'll open this up for general public comment right now. do we have any members of the public who would like. >> i have speaker cards. adel followed by chris callow way. >> welcome. >> thank you for allowing me time to be here. i'm here today to ask for a level playing field. most of the equity applicants like myself, i was awarded a permit. we're struggle to go meet and compete with the big boys and there's some really big boys in this industry. we don't have all the tools and the mechanisms that they have so our process that is simple for them and a lot of these folks have done this before many times before and they come with the

architects and the contractors and their advisors and their lawyers and we don't have a lot of their baggage. so you may ask why should you do this and i asked back why wouldn't you not do this. i mean, we've already start aid fair process and i would like to see this campaign continue to be a fair progress. there's a rap singer named drake that started as a tv show actor now he is the sixth richest rapper in the united states and he has a song called "starting from the bottom now bee we're h" most of us would like to say we're starting from the bottom. so this year is your opportunity now to help some of the people that didn't have all the incentives and the equity that some of our competitors have and did have so this is your chance and i hope you take it

favorably. thank you for the opportunity to speak with you. >> thank you. >> next speaker, please. >> my name is chris and i'm qualified as an individual applicant in the cannabis equity program. i can tell you from my experience, looking for retail locations throughout the city, that it's challenging to find one landlord that will approve the use but to find a retail place that hasn't been already applied for an existing location or also within 600 feet of a cool. so when you do find a location, that meets the criteria, you kind of face other challenges as well. as far as income so we have income restrictions to qualify for the program and then our landlords want to see income obviously that would allow us to move forward and create a business there. so, i will ask that you make these resources, whatever resources are available within this program that would help expedite the process within the

planning department. for someone that doesn't have a lot of resources that's trying to open a cannabis business, going through agoing through ayd pros would be challenges for someone like me. so i just ask you take into consideration when you consider us, thank you. >> thank you. next speaker martin and brandon brown followed by edward brown. >> welcome. >> hi, thank you commissioners, for the opportunity. i'm here in support of inclusion for equity cannabis applicants to participate in the program. small and mid size businesses to chase a lot of challenges in the cannabis space. i've been in the medical cannabis movement since 2002 and in recent years i've -- i'm shocked to see the amount of huge business that's just forcing its way into what was originally a movement to help desperately ill and sick people so, i think the inclusion to this program would go a really

long way to helping local community-minded organizations and applicants participate on a level playing field. thank you. >> thank you. >> next speaker, please. >> brandon brown. >> welcome. >> hello, my name is brandon brown. i am an equity partner in business called cdxx we're trying to open up on bay view. we have a place called my art gallery where the last year we've opened our space up to the community as a community art gallery. we have local artists where they hang their art and we do paint nights which are really popular right now. all for free as a way tone gage in the community. and so, with that, i also worked, i was on the working group for human rights. to help create the program to help make recommendations to help push along from a business stand point and i've always gone through the application last year and years before so i'm familiar with the planning

process. like you said, i really thank you for letting me talk and i like what you said earlier that it makes sense that this is when i read this cb3p, it makes sense that this is the last step to, already what we see is the successful program. which i feel like a lot of times we implement these types of things and they don't workout that well. like in other cities but our equity programming is working really well. so this is the last step that the c.u. process right now it will take up a year to two years and we've been waiting a year and a half and paying rent like this other guy was saying about real estate. imagine that rent burden, on top of that the people that are the equity businesses are community-based already due to that fact that we have someone that is from the community like my equity applicant rodney

c.e.o. 40% owner. he is a pillar of his community. he doesn't have cannabis experience. we can train him to do that. the point is that he brings in the community and it allows -- it's already giving back in that sense. it's a program that is giving back and giving people opportunities that we're doing nothing and sitting on the couch looking down at this great opportunity to make millions of dollars and that's something they wouldn't have had last year. so, this is kind of a big deal and i don't mean to get on a soap box here but, i feel like a lot of times that equity program it's a first social equity program that i've seen like this. and especially in an industry that can do so much good. i feel like you guys are someone who already agrees that this is a good idea so i don't want to

bang too hard on this so the 90 day period would be huge for us when you look at a possible two years. i mean you do the math on it, it's a lot of money. and yeah, the equity portion is already, we have to give up half, 40% or half of the company equity applicant has to be. it's not like it's easy to find funding where you can give up percentages of the company overtime and so, the dynamics of it and so on and so fourth, the time frames are huge. >> never get off your soap box. [laughter] >> seriously. never get off it. edward brown and that's the last speaker card i have. >> hello members of the public and commissioner. we have a unique set of circumstances here. the office of cannabis has identified and verified hundreds of individuals who by definition are among the most economically and socially vulnerable. who make up the business class,

otherwise known as equity applicants. on may 27th, part one of the application opened and the with in the cold and eugene and ray have worked to provide opportunities and resources to the business class during this part of the application. the second part is the applicant to obtain a building permit. navigating this process will ultimately will determine the success and failure of this equity business class. the cb3p program was crafted out of a small business priority processing pilot program and the intent was to assist and streamline the conditional use authorization which require a commissioner hearing. currently the planning department has a goal of holding these hearings within 120 days of filing. in light of this vulnerable business class, a typical four-month processing time when viewed in the light of market

rents and the licensing required for cannabis permits, the cost are over anywhere from 12 to $34,000, potentially higher. again, i urge you to allow this equity business class and the cannabis uses to be allowed to participate in cb3p by continuing to have cannabis on the list of prohibited uses to the cb3p program, you will continue the harm imposed on them from the war on drugs and you will act as a barrier for them to participate in the cannabis industry. as eugene has shown, this business class are mostly people that went to san francisco unified school district and they're also our lowest income small businesspeople. so i urge you to vote for in conclusion and i thank you for your time. >> thank you. >> one more speaker. >> rudy c. >> how are you guys doing today. thank you for allowing me to

speak. it's late. we were in the wrong room. someone just text us. so, first of all, we want to just say what the brother was just sharing about this is native san francisco. we are about supporting the equity program. we're from all different parts of san francisco. we have different nationalities and also, we have over 300 years of community service or 300 years of serving the community. i run an organization here in san francisco called united players, a violence prevention organization that was serving the city and county of san francisco for the last 24 years. you see, we have gentleman and women who have been incarcerated for many years. my brother right here did 45 years straight. he is backout. we have brothers who have came off and did over 30 years. but we're here to support this

project and we hope that you guys take this request seriously because we are the equity people that they're referring to. we got the champ right here of san francisco. from where the mayor's at. we got hunters point in the house. we have the excelshare. i lived down a block and we weral effects on the war on drugs. our families, our children, our parents and so we encourage you guys to support this proposal that you guys have in front of you because we're here and we know that cannabis is actually helping out health wise and it also can help out the community for us to go ahead and get some equity for our community and our people. thank you for your time. >> thank you. >> any other speakers? seeing none. public comment is closed. do we have any commissioner comments? >> commissioner. >> i want to thank everybody that came out.

a lot of familiar faces. i too was part of that human rights commission think-tank. not to take credit but i put that out there the cb3p. thank you for campaigning for the industry. i know that uphill challenge. i know a lot of people think it's a money grab. thank you for all those local people keeping san francisco real and keeping the culture real and our industry ours. thank you for coming out. >> any other commissioner comments? >> i just want to say thank you for coming out today and speaking. the cb3p program is exactly what this program was intended for and you know, you guys are the natives. i know what that is like. a lot of you were here early on and dennis perone would be very

proud of you. helping a lot of sick individuals. i'm from the castro and i got to tell you, i know a lot of people whose lives were extended because of people like you. and you guys should be the ones benefiting the most from the legalization of recreational cannabis in california. you are right, we're seeing the big people come in, they're getting their spaces and they can afford to wait. but the equity applicants, i'm a firm believer you guys should be at the front of the line so i'm in motion to support equity applicants being part of the cb3p program. >> do we have a motion? >> i i hav do we have a motion. >> commissioners, i want to make sure we might want to say the equity program because can you

explain, there might be tie inns for equity incubators. >> thinking about the concept, keep in mind that incubators are incubators that they are pairing with a verified applicant and supporting them for no less than three years. having them move together through the process is beneficial to tractor-trailer equity applicant as well. it allows for their financial assistance or the location at which they could potentially be incubated to move at the same time. when we approach this, we think of it as sort of equity program participants. >> ok. >> so i move to include equity participants in the cb3p program. >> i second. >> second. >> so we have a motion by commissioner ortiz-cartagena and