[gavel]. >> chair mandelman: the meeting will come to order. welcome to the january 23, 2019 regular meeting of the public safety and neighborhood services committee. i'm supervisor raphael mandelman, the chair of the committee. to my right is supervisor ronen, to my left is supervisor peskin. the clerk is john carol. i'd like to to thank the group at sfgovtv for televising this meeting. mr. clerk, do you have any

announcements? [agenda item read]. >> chair mandelman: thank you. call the first item. [agenda item read]. >> chair mandelman: thank you, and we'll hear first from the department. >> good morning, supervisors. i'm sergeant gigi george wash before you, sfpd. you have before you a type 21 license. if approved, this would allow cvs to sell off-sail distilled beer, wine, and spirits. they are located in plot 164, which is considered a high

crime area. they are in census tract 117, which is a high saturation condition. sales of alcoholic beverages should be permitted between the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. daily. number two, the following alcoholic beverages should not be sold in quantities of three individual containers per sale. a, beer included malt beverages and multidrinks in containers of 40 ounces or less. next, premixed alcoholic beverages known as wine coolers, and three, spirits-based cocktails. number three is no wine shall be sold with an alcohol content of greater than 15% by volume. number four, no distilled spirits shall be sold in

bottles or containers smaller than 600 mls. and number five, petitioners shall actively monitor the area under their control in order to prevent the loitering of persons on any property adjacent to the licensed promise as depicted on the most recently certificate fight ab 253. it should be noted that the applicant has greed with all the above listed conditions. >> chair mandelman: looks like we have no questions, and we will hear from the applicant. >> good morning, supervisors, jodi knight on behalf of junius, rubius, and rose.

the cvs at pine would sell a wide variety of products. over the counter drugs, photographs, seasonal merchandise, greeting cards, groceries, and a small quantity of in a small dedication ded -- section dedicated to liquor sales that we're seeing today. they want to benefit the community and really be a part of the community and to that end really control the sale of the liquor proposed, which is why they have offer today have additional restrictions on those sales that we've -- we'll hear about today. and the sales are supported by the san francisco police department. to hear more about the project, i want to introduce stephen labonge, and he will tell you more about cvs's plans, and we

are all here for questions. thank you. >> hi. good morning. steven labonge. i work for cvs. i'm the real estate director. i handle the bay area, pacific northwest, basically, west coast. not southern california. i live in the east bay. i live in contra costa county. i'm here today obviously for our type 21 license request at 500 pine and kearny. this store opened in june of this year, so it's actually an open store already. store's about 8800 square feet. we're actually asking for 85 square feet of shelf line, which is one little gondola of shelf space, so this is a minor part of an operating drugstore. and i -- i bring that out because i know in the past not too far from here, there was a bevmo that was highly

contested, and obviously, bevmo beverages, it's a different -- our store -- this is a small supplement to a wide variety of things, and you know, we have approximately 18 stores in the city, and i'm sure you're aware of some of them, spread throughout the city. we get -- frequently, we get requests from customers, hey, why don't you have this, why don't you have that. that might be because they've been in a bigger suburban store, and we don't have that. this is a convenience for our customers. it's by no means our core offering, but it's to -- you know, for the convenience of the customer. we've -- we've been -- tried to be extremely proactive, working with the police department, working with the nature of being in san francisco, the density of people in tailoring

or offering to be a nonnuisance offering, and i think that was highlighted with the conditions that sergeant george outlined earlier to be not a nuisance sales, and that's an evolving thing that we're always trying to be proactive. so if you can think of anything that would enhance that, we're always open to that. we were notified of the protests to the 11 store operators. we always reached out to have discussions directly through hand delivered requests. we have not had direct discussions, but would like to

have. i also have with me, just by way of -- in case you have more detailed operational questions, mat ludwig who's our district leader. he's responsible for actually running the stores. i handle our real estate, so my operational knowledge kind of goes only so deep. so if you have more in-depth questions, certainly, matt can come up and answers. that's all i have. so if you have any other questions, i appreciate your time today. >> chair mandelman: thank you. i don't see any questions from my colleagues. okay. great. well, then, we do have public comment on this item. i have some cards here. michael, steven, aaron, dan, and kevin, and if folks could lineup line up on the -- your right.

if there are other folks that want to speak, just lineup. it's great if you could fill out a card and give it to the clerk so we can keep track of folks, although you're not required to do that. speakers will have two minutes. please state your first and last names clearly and leave a card. those who submit documents, they will be left with the clerk. no applause or booing is permitted after statements. with that, i'll call the first speaker. >> hello. my name's dan galvan. i'm a resident of bush and mason. i don't think it's a convenience to anybody. it's so close to portsmouth square and between the sores and ploughshares building.

if they're going to start selling liquor at 7:00 in the morning, there's not a single on license that's open at this time. it's really just detrimental to the whole neighborhood. i don't see why -- i have to go home sometimes at four in the morning from work, and there's a lot of people with problems wandering the streets at that point. if they could -- if they've got bei access to liquor that early in the morning, i don't think that really is a boon to the wheel community at all. that's just my opinion. i've been on bush street over 20 years, and i've seen it kind of get -- especially the parking garage there, the -- where the -- the -- there's a lot of homeless people, a lot

of people with problems that hangout on that street, and it's getting to a little dodgy, so i'd prefer that we didn't have another one. thank you. >> chair mandelman: thank you. next speaker. >> hello, supervisors. my name is aaron evans. i live at stockton and california. it's maybe, well, 1.5 blocks from the park there. i challenge the people that are in favor of this to walk upstairs from the cvs and go in the back corner of that park and see if you feel safe. that park has gotten worse and worse and worse, and i used to go and sit there, and there's some really scary people hanging out. the bevmo argument is irrelevant. it is a nonnuisance. any alcohol is a nuisance to

the addicted person that's just looking for more alcohol. the ways to make the neighborhood better is less booze and less availability to it. we need to keep from making this homeless and threatening problem worse. the neighborhood is getting scary, and i don't like it. also, the soares-ploughshares is a recovery center. it's within a block. i'll tell you, we all know what's going on. go walk the streets, go walk the stairwell around stockton and california. go walk around the stairwell at bush and sutter, and those stairwells with people. it's horrific. it's horrific. we shouldn't make it worse.

thank you. >> chair mandelman: thank you. next speaker. >> good morning. my name is michael hughes, and i live at 250 kearny. i'm obviously a veteran. pretty much the gentleman prior to me said everything i would want to see. another establishment providing liquor in the area would generally -- there's already a plethora of establishments that offer alcoholic beverages, whether re-taylor bars. there was a -- retail or bars. there was an argument about having alcohol available at 7:00 in the morning just lengthens the day, which is probably not good for the neighborhood as a whole. basically, i think there's already enough alcoholic establishments in the area. another one isn't really -- it's not going to contribute to the goodness of the neighborhood at all.

thank you. >> chair mandelman: thank you. next speaker. >> hello. my name is stephen tillish, and i also live at 250 kearny street, and there's a lot of people in that building that are recovering from various addictions, and i really don't think we need another establishment, like mike said, especially opening up at 7:00 a.m. in the morning to offer booze for the, you know, addicted persons. it's hard enough to recover. people pretty much said everything i was going to say, too, so thank you very much. >> chair mandelman: thank you. next speaker. >> how you guys doing? i'm kevin seneca, and i live at 250. i've been there in the

neighborhood a while, and it's getting worse and worse. my room is actually right on the street, so i can hear everything that's going on. and 3:00, 4:00 in the morning, it's outrageous. as they say, we have a lot of people in our building with mental issues. to wake up at 7:00 in the morning and have a liquor store there for them is definitely the wrong thing to do. that's all i have to say. >> chair mandelman: thank you. next speaker. >> hi. my name is momana, and i own the liquor store a block away from them at 300 kearny street. i've been there six years. if you would have asked me if i would be competing with a cvs or big corporate stores, i wouldn't even think about it. the reason i purchased -- made a big investment in san francisco is because of you guys, and the city of san francisco helping the, you know

the -- the small businesses, basically. this is a pharmacy that sells prescription pills, and that's how they make their money. they don't care if they get their liquor license, sell or not sell liquor license. it's just an addition to their store. they buy in bulk because they're cvs, and they own a lot of stores, and they sell it for a tiny little margins, which drives all of the stores out of the san francisco area. you know once they get their license, every corporate store that wants to apply for a liquor license, every block is going to be a copy of the ones previous to it. it's walgreens and cvs and the 7-elevens of the world. if you want to help small businesses, this is the time to do it. thank you very much. >> chair mandelman: thank you. next speaker. >> i'd like to hand this in to

the clerk. my name is michael nolte. i happen to be one of the litigants or protestants for this liquor license. you know, when somebody here sees a posting, and they don't exactly know what the outreach was going to be, like, there was no outreach to community groups. when you see there's no litter supports in the packet, then you're concerned about that. i'm handing in that this is the -- the -- the bevmo's -- what happened already for the neighborhood so you can see it's been signed by the mayor. i also want to point out that cvs will be providing cheaper alcohol than any of the other corner stores which has hurt in the past many of these small businesses. there was again, no outreach

done, which the person is misleading in his testimony saying he did outreach. i'm here representing another protest, my brother, we specifically neither got any outreach for this hearing by them. and the next issue has always been when these businesses come into the neighborhood, they don't realize the impact to the neighborhood the empty containers. that causes a big problem, not only just the alcohol itself. also have the concern, again, a cvs, a walgreens, a target, they all come into the neighborhood and don't realize the impacts they have on the commerce in the community. and i do represent small businesses in some dealings i have in the community, and they always hurt when these kinds of larger businesses come in. and this is not the first time i've been in front of this,

asking -- dealing with walgreens, cvs. >> chair mandelman: thank you. are there any other members of the public that would like to comment on this before public comment is closed? seeing none, public comment is now closed. [gavel]. >> chair mandelman: supervisor peskin? >> supervisor peskin: thank you, chair mandelman. i want to thank my constituents coming to talk about that area of the city. i live actually a few blocks north of this and was very involved and passed the legislation that allowed that building at 500 pine to be built, for those of you that remember. for decades, it was an empty hole in the ground. it had to do with an old tearing down actually of an s.r.o. further down pine street, a sordid tale that we don't do in san francisco anymore, thank

god. but i know that expansion. it's obviously in very close proximity to that chinatown park. for the reasons that this board of supervisors found unanimously in the bevmo case, given the large amount of liquor licenses in the vicinity and the testimony of tenants with 250 kearny, with all respect to the applicant and the recommendations from the police department, i would respectfully suggest that we forward this to the full board with a recommendation to deny. >> clerk: that could take the form that finds that the public necessity would not be served by the application. >> supervisor peskin: that would be excellent. if we could prepare that in committee and forward that to the full board out for hearing on the 29 that would be excellent. >> clerk: that is a motion

from supervisor peskin. >> supervisor ronen: without objection. >> chair mandelman: and we'll take that without objection. thank you. [gavel]. >> chair mandelman: all right. mr. clerk, please call the next item. >> clerk: agenda item 2 is the issuance to consider an on sale liquor license, 1and8 doing business as museum of ice cream. >> my name's officer patri-- creablicense. >> they are located in plot 104, which is located in a prime area. they're in census tract 117, which is considered a high

saturation area, and central station has no opposition to this license. sales, service, and consumption of alcoholic beverages shall be permitted only between the hours of 9:00 a.m. and 12:00 a.m. sunday through wednesday, and 9:00 a.m. and 1:00 a.m. on thursday, friday, and saturday. petitioners shall actively monitor the area under their control in order to prevent the loitering of any persons on the adjacent licensed premises as depicted on the most recent ab 253 form. and lastly, consumption of alcoholic beverages off the premises is not permitted. and i'd like to note on january 14, 2019, the applicant agreed to the above conditions. >> chair mandelman: thank you. it looks like we have no questions. all right. is the applicant here?

>> good morning. i'm chamma lester, and i'm a consultant representing the applicant. i also have the general manager of the museum of ice cream here if you have any specific questions. mostly what is included in my letter is what i would want to bring up today. it's really innovative, creative business model. it's bringing a lot of attention to this area of san francisco. the owners are young females. i think the neighborhood is an important one to be engaging. the owners are millennials, young moms. generally, we'll be closing earlier than the conditions will allow, but we might have some events from time to time. so i'll invite the general

manager, danica, to come up and give you more information. >> hello. i'm the general manager of museum of ice cream. i've been with the business since we started building it in july 2017. we opened it, and we thought we'd only be around for four months, but after seeing thousands of people daily, over 500,000 people now, 1.5 years in, we decided to stay permanently. and we are right now the only permanent location for the company in the united states. with that, we wanted to enhance the experience for our visitors, for tourists in the area, and we believe that through a bar, through a cafe, we will be -- we'll be able to achieve that. i'm also privy to all the operational workings of the museum, so if there are any detailed questions about that, i'm happy to respond. >> chair mandelman: great. thank you. i believe that mr. nolte wanted to speak on this, but i do not

see him here. are there any other members of the public -- mr. clerk? there he is. mr. nolte, did you want to make public comment on museum of ice cream? okay. come on up. [inaudible] >> chair mandelman: no worries. okay. again, i just want to remind people of the good neighbor policies, and this goes -- four copies. so i'm a little confused about how the packet is put together. if they're seeking a 42, and when you look at the a.l.u.s statement, they mention a type 21. they're not seeking a type 21, so i'm not clear which is

correct in the assessment of the packet. then again, there's no letters of support and no protests, which is fine, i guess, but -- and i'm -- i will just stay neutral on this one. but i just want to point out some discrepancies in the board packet. if you read the conditions on page three, it says here -- it says here -- do i have no overhead? overhead -- conditions, it's a type 21, when it's a 42. i'm a little puzzled. we're seeking a 42 here. a and -- and -- so -- and they're putting in a wine bar, so i -- again, i did do the -- read

everything, and so we are -- i am neutral on this, but i just want a clarification on what it is that's actually happening as far as with the police department conditions and so forth. so if you can make the corrections to pass it on as a packet, yeah. thank you. >> chair mandelman: thank you. are there any other members of the public who would like to speak before we close public comment on this item? seeing none, we're going to close public comment. i'm going to ask the representative of the department to come back up and explain to us what kind of permit we're dealing with and -- yeah. >> that was just clearly a typo and error on my point. that should be a type 42 license. if you look every where else in my packet, it says 42. but that was an error on my part, and i take responsibility

for that. >> chair mandelman: thank you for the clarification. i'm assuming the city attorney is all right? all right. supervisor peskin? >> supervisor peskin: thank you, chair mandelman. i think i have recommended the 90% of the liquor licenses that have come before me on the board of supervisors, so it's odd that there's two before me today that i'm troubled by. while the museum of ice cream has been a hit, it's a hit for kids and families in large part. and i just don't really understand why a type 42 license is necessary to what is already a successful business model. it just seems like a weird fit. to my knowledge, even though this is in district three, there's been no contact between the applicant and my office. i checked with my staff, checked my e-mails. but i'm having trouble finding

public convenience or necessity in this case. i wish the applicant all the success in the world, but i just don't understand why a type 42 is necessary for what's already been a successful business model, and why beer and wine have to be served from 9:00 in the morning till midnight seems pretty bizarre to me, too. for the same reasons, we're just two blocks away from the last location. granted, that was an off-sale, but it gives me no pleasure, but i would actually, subject to hearing from my colleagues, make the same motion for a resolution as i did in the previous matter. >> chair mandelman: thank you, supervisor peskin. >> supervisor peskin: and i will say, the reason these come to us is because these are areas that are saturated. this corner of the city has the most on-sale and off-sale liquor licenses in any part of the city. they're all in high-crime census tracts.

it just doesn't seem to make sense to me. >> chair mandelman: thank you. vice chair ronen? >> supervisor ronen: yeah. i have a lot of respect for your opinion especially since it's in your districts, but i'm wondering if we can continue this item so the museum of ice cream can meet with your office and discuss. as a parent, i've been trying to get tickets to this museum. it is sold out on a regular basis. you know, i would say that i would love sometimes to grab a glass of wine when i'm at a museum with my kid. i just want to chill out, so i would actually think that it would be kind of lovely to combine both the adult experience with the rare opportunity where there's a -- an opportunity for kids to really tactile-y get excited about a museum. i see it differently, but this is supervisor peskin's

district, and i do feel like he deserves the respect to have that discussion with him and discuss the concerns and perhaps change the hours? and so i was wondering if he'd be open to continuing. >> supervisor peskin: so here would be my question of the clerk, which is we have a limited time to act in these matters or they are, i believe, deemed to be approved. so the question is, what is our drop-dead date. >> clerk: the board has 90 days in which to respond to the applicant's request for public convenience for necessity. the 90th day is january 24 of 2019, being tomorrow. after that time expires, i believe that the state agency has the privilege to decide themselves based on a did i determination. the city attorney may have something to say about that.

>> supervisor ronen: so are we able to -- i agree that 9:00 a.m. probably doesn't make sense. is there a way to change the hours, the conditions on the -- on the license? >> mr. givner: deputy city attorney jon givner. the board doesn't have the authority to place conditions on the permit. the state does, and so, the board could, if you were going to find public convenience and necessity here, the board could urge the state to adopt conditions of different hours. >> chair mandelman: looks like my colleagues do not object. >> thank you. i just wanted to say, my apologies for not consulting your office prior? i don't handle a lot of p.c.n. hearings, and i didn't realize that was the protocol. and i would have. i meant no disrespect by it.

i appreciate any ability to work with us on this because it is a successful business model, but they're an innovative company, and they've taken a huge expense to operate out of 1 grant avenue. the intent is not to have a bustling bar up there all day. it's a separate area of the mezzanine. i'm not sure if diagrams were included in your packet. it's more of an additional experience to the piece, to your point. it's not going to replace what the current attraction of the museum is. so we're certainly willing to discuss hours. i would appreciate any wiggle room here on not denying it. >> chair mandelman: all right. well, if i could put myself into the queue, just so i understand procedurally what's going on, we're making a

recommendation to the full board. when would this be heard by the full board? >> clerk: 29. >> chair mandelman: 29. so assuming this committee is inclined to do -- will it be heard on the 29th? [inaudible] >> chair mandelman: okay. so assuming this committee is inclined to do what supervisor peskin is suggesting, there's ample time between now and that board meeting to be further conversations with supervisor peskin's office, and if he's persuaded that there's something that would work, you can come to us and urge us to change that recommendation, right? >> supervisor peskin: thank you, chair mandelman for those comments. don't worry about the protocol. i'm happy to meet with you folks in the interim, but let me just clarify something with the clerk. we just -- this is kind of a recommendation any way because tomorrow is the last day for the full board to have acted.

so -- is that correct? >> clerk: this is correct. >> supervisor peskin: so the weird thing is this is kind of like sending a.b.c. a letter that they may or may not adhere to. >> clerk: at every point through the proceedings while we're receiving recommendations from the planning department and the police department, when i'm distributing those recommendations, i'm keeping the state agency in the loop to know that we're continuing to care for and preen for this request for p.c.n. the state agency knows that we're having this hearing today, and knows that we will hear it on the 29th. >> supervisor peskin: thank you for that. let me just say a couple of other things. i believe, if my memory serves me correctly, and if i'm not, shut me up. that the city of san francisco gave a grant to the museum of ice cream business attraction grant i believe came out of the office of economic and workforce development to help

get the business off the ground. that may or may not be relevant to the p.c.n., but it does say there's a relationship between the city and this business, which -- and i'm not pointing fingers at you, but there are other people involved in the museum. there was a little kerfuffle in the beginning, with plastic items entering the landfill between the business and my staff. i believe -- not you, but there's another person involved who knows my office well, miss berg, and there's been no outreach. i'm happy to meet with you in the intervening five days, is to send out a resolution recommending denial. if we can get something done between now and tuesday, keep

your fingers crossed. >> chair mandelman: great, and i'm taking that as a motion, and i'm not seeing any objections, so we'll take that without objection. [gavel]. >> chair mandelman: mr. clerk, can you call the next item. >> clerk: agenda item number three is a hearing to consider the issuance of a type 20 off-sale beer and wine liquor license to porky's palace, l.l.c., doing business as tank18, will do the business of serving the city and county. >> hello, supervisors. you have before you an application for tank18. they have applied to add a type 20 license, and if that is approved, that will allow them to sell offline beer and liquor only. they are zero letters of protest and zero letters of

support. southern station has no opposition. l.u. is approved with the following conditions. full and complete meals must be offered and made available at all times at the premises exercising the privileges of this alcohol beverage license with the exception of a half hour before closing each day. two. sales of alcoholic beverages shall be permitted between the hours of 10:00 a.m. to 12:00 a.m. daily. number three, petitioners shall actively monitor the area under their control to prevent loitering of persons on any adjacent premise as depicted on the most recent certified abc 253. number four, no noise should be audible at any outside points.

the petitioner shall be responsible for maintaining the area free of litter over the area which they have control as depicted on most recent certified abc 257 and 253. any graffiti within control of the license o'shall be removed within 72 hours of being applied. it should be noted that the applicant has agreed with all the above recommended conditions. >> chair mandelman: i don't see any speakers, so we'll hear from the applicant -- i don't see the applicant, so are there any members of the public that would like to speak on this item? mr. nolte. >> first, oh, you want to give

me the overhead? yes. i want to point out that these are already existing conditions with their existing licenses they have, and so you not providing any new conditions on their license, if they get what they're requesting today, which is -- i'm not sure if it is type 20, the same problem. it says here type 21, when it is actually a type 20. i'm sorry, this is kind of funny, so that's wrong again. and what i handed in is a -- i don't understand this either. they, on page four, and i've outlined it. they -- if they have the current conditions, how can

they have off-sale beer and wine going out the door or wine going out the door, having people fill up the bottles of wine, and it does this on the 19th? so they are not -- not -- not adhering to the conditions that are on their license currently. so how can you recommend them to -- in other words, they're being bad. i don't know a word to use. so you can't reward them for doing something that they've already done wrong. again, going back to the conditions that you can pull off on a.b.c. that currently exist. so this is off their website, and you can download it. that's why i gave you all copies it. this shows, on the 19th of january , they were having people come in with --

[inaudible] >> chair mandelman: thank you. are there any other members of the public who would like to speak on this item before public comment is closed? then public comment is now closed. and supervisor ronen -- vice chair ronen? >> supervisor ronen: yeah. i really appreciate you, mr. nolte, bringing this to our attention. we're having a very strange day with liquor licenses. but the fact that the sponsor is not here, and that it does appear that they've already been serving wine and beer without a license, i'm not inclined to support that. >> chair mandelman: maybe the a -- well, i'll let you finish, and then, we'll have the a.l.u. come up. >> that's the first we knew to our knowledge. they are a distillery, but they don't have the off-sale component with that type 75. on the conditions, i had to add

number two because they don't have the off-sale component, so that's why i said sale of alcohol beverages, so that was a new condition that was added to that license, but we had no knowledge on january 19 that they were selling. >> supervisor ronen: well, i guess i'm a little confused. it says on the website, it says, the basics. and they have pictures of a bottle carrier, which would indicate that they are selling the wine for off-sale purposes. >> i would need to read it. >> supervisor ronen: but the problem is we can't ask these questions because the owner isn't here. so given that, i would make a motion that we -- or after

hearing from my colleagues, i would make a motion that we sign that this doesn't meet the convenience and necessity. >> supervisor peskin: i was just going to ask, have you heard from district six supervisor? >> chair mandelman: we -- i do not believe we've heard any objection to it, and we usually do a check around to make sure people are okay. >> supervisor peskin: it does say, whether you're looking for a glass, bottle, or raucous good time, bring a friend, so that does seem to indicate -- >> supervisor ronen: on-site. it's just so odd that the person isn't here so we can ask these questions. and i'm assuming we're under the exact same conditions. >> clerk: it's january 24, tomorrow. >> supervisor ronen: i would appreciate we hear these items where we actually have some time to consider them and continue them and ask -- reach

out, you know, to the owner. because i -- generally, i'm very positive -- you know, i -- i believe that, you know, under the right circumstances, we should grant these licenses, and we shouldn't deal with delay, but now, we're stuck between a rock and a hard place because the owner didn't come. mr. nolte brought some really inviting evidence to hear that they're already violating their contract. so given all the circumstances, i don't like to do that, but there's enough questions that i have that i also don't feel comfortable moving this forward if i can't get those questions answered. so i -- i stand by my motion, even though i don't like making those motions. >> supervisor peskin: no objection from this supervisor. >> chair mandelman: and it sounds like this is a situation where if this committee is operating under a

misunderstanding of what's going on, the applicant can come to us between now and the board meeting and get one of us to change the recommendation. >> supervisor ronen: true point. >> chair mandelman: so the motion is to direct our clerk to prepare a resolution finding that the granting -- that granting of the license -- issuance of the license would not meet the public necessity and convenience for the city and county of san franciscos and forward that to the board of supervisors. we'll take that -- that's a motion from vice chair ronen, and we will take that without objection. mr. clerk, can you please call -- let's see what further adventures are ahead of us. can you please call the next item. >> clerk: agenda item number four -- [inaudible] >> chair mandelman: all right. let's see if we can't get through one of these.

>> they have applied for a type 21, if approved, it would allow them to sell off-sale beer, wine, and distilled spirits. they are in plot 310, which is considered low crime. they are in census tract 227.04, which is considered low saturation. bayview station has no opposition to this license, and a.l.u. approves with the following recommended conditions. that the petitioner shall actively monitor the area in the event to prevent any person fromming on the premises, and number two, sales and consumption of alcoholic beverages shall be permitted between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and 12 midnight. the applicant signed these

conditions on january 13, 2019. >> chair mandelman: is the applicant here? >> yeah. >> chair mandelman: oh, very good. >> i didn't prepare anything because i've never been before you guys today. >> chair mandelman: very good you're here. >> we just sustained a pretty big rent increase in our last lease negotiation. we've had the business for 12 years with no problem. we're just trying to generate more income. we're only going to sell large bottles, not small containers. it's also a deli, not a neighborhood pub. that's it. >> chair mandelman: okay. >> okay. thanks. >> chair mandelman: are there any members of the public who want to speak on this item? seeing none -- nope -- seeing none, mr. nolte.

>> rarely do i see only two conditions for a type 21. you've got to have longer arms. okay. so normally just the standard conditions i usually ask for when i'm talking about a 21 is no little bottles, no malt liquor. see, what i'm having a problem with is when the -- when the owner wrote a request for a p.c.n. hearing, she'd mentioned that no more than 15% of the store frontage would be f alcoholic beverages. the reason i bring this up,

once i give somebody an alcohol license, and they sell the store, if you don't do these things at the very beginning, the community is stuck with something that could be out of hand. this is why with restaurants and everything else, we see turnover, and the license is the most valuable thing they have, whether it's the cigarette license or a liquor license. they all are part of the business. this one's been around a long time, but it doesn't mean -- so i'm neutral on this, but i just want to bring up some of these points, when you're looking at a license, there's got to be -- the -- the police are only recommending two conditions. the hours are just standard, and prevent loitering. well, that's it. that's not much of a condition

for operating a type 21. there is no safety issues, there's no operating a camera, nothing more than that. >> chair mandelman: okay. thank you. are there any other members of the public that would like to speak on the item before the item is closed? seeing none, public comment is now closed, and the matter is before us. i actually would love to have the representative from the a.l.u. come back up and sort of explain a little bit about what conditions get applied when and how and why. >> sure. so we take a lot of things into consideration when applying certain conditions to the applicant that we would like to see on their liquor license. this one in particular, they've been around, like she said, in business for a long time. we look up crime, calls to that area, crime in that particular area, police reports at that specific address. in this case, there was zero police reports, zero calls for service in that particular

area, it's a nice community. they're an active member of the community, and we feel given their business model that we would need to impose a ton of conditions on this liquor license. and when he brings up the point of, you know, getting ahead of these things and putting a ton of conditions on because when someone else takes over the business, they have the same conditions, that there actually isn't -- there's some truth to that, but it actually opens the door any time a liquor license is transferred from a person-to-person sale, we go through this whole process again. we look at all the stats again, we take everything into consideration again, and then, at that point, decide, do we need to impose any conditions at that point, so that's what goes into it on our end. >> chair mandelman: okay. thank you. are there any comments or discussion up here? seeing none -- although vice chair ronen would -- >> supervisor ronen: i'm just happy to make a motion to find

this or make a motion that the application meets the publicness see. >> chair mandelman: forward that to the full board with a -- >> supervisor ronen: positive recommendation. >> chair mandelman: thank you. we'll do that without objection. thank you for giving us a winner this morning. mr. clerk, do we have any other items before us this morning? >> clerk: there's no further business. >> chair mandelman: all right. then we are adjourned. thank you.

- working for the city and county of san francisco will immerse you in a vibrant and dynamic city that's on the forefront of economic growth, the arts, and social change. our city has always been on the edge of progress and innovation. after all, we're at the meeting of land and sea. - our city is famous for its iconic scenery, historic designs, and world-class style. it's the birthplace of blue jeans,

and where "the rock" holds court over the largest natural harbor on the west coast. - our 28,000 city and county employees play an important role in making san francisco what it is today. - we provide residents and visitors with a wide array of services, such as improving city streets and parks, keeping communities safe, and driving buses and cable cars. - our employees enjoy competitive salaries, as well as generous benefits programs. but most importantly, working for the city and county of san francisco gives employees an opportunity to contribute their ideas, energy, and commitment to shape the city's future. - thank you for considering a career with the city and county of san francisco.

>> we take a lot of pride in what we do. the electric shop covers all of waste water, so out of this location here, we cover everything from oceanside to southeast plant and all the computations including treasure island and yerba buena. we have all the preventative responsibility, maintaining maintenance and also keeping up with work orders from operations. i would say one of the things fortunately for me is the staff is incredibleably motivated. the staff here knows what to do, how to do the job safely, and it makes my job incredibly easy. >> they know the job, and they know the challenges, and i think it's all about personal pride. they want to do a good job.

from our maintenance group to our i.n.c., dedication to the people. when they're going home, and they're crossing the bay bridge, and they get a call that there's a problem with a pump station on treasure island, they return to work. they turnaround in westbound traffic and get back to work and get this pump back in line, and i can't tell you how much that means to me as a boss and the city and county of san francisco. >> as a group, if they didn't do what they do, the streets would be flooded with waste and gray water, and it could become a health hazard. we take a lot of pride in what we do, and we do the jobs right, and you walk away fulfilled that you've done the city a