mr. mic caffe, he is not here. the contract between the mayor's office and your company is that an annual contract, is there an r.f.p., is it bid out? >> it was rp originally. we emerged as the chosen firm. it was rped again, i believe. give me a second. i want to say 2017. i don't want to answer incorrectly. 2017. >> it is for a term of years, annual renewal. >> initial term and options to extend. >> who is that worth on an annual basis. we have never changed the price in seven years. i owe it to my partners to note that. maybe i shouldn't have. moving on. it is 2 $76,000 a year and as i

said that is the price since its inception. >> thank you for not raising it. chair mar, do you have questions? >> chair mar: thank you. this is very helpful for me inning how this all works as far as our city weighing in on important state legislation and the role that you play. i have a few questions more for my understanding. i want to understand the kind of work that happens conveying our position as the city and county of san francisco on a specific bill. for example, at our board

meeting a couple weeks ago, the board of supervisors adopted a resolution in support of senate bill 233 by senator wiener creating stronger protections for sex workers when reporting a crime what happened after that once you are aware of our position on a bill like that. >> i was actually hoping this morning it would happen. i got the notification from the clerk this morning on 233. i could show you my e-mail to say, hey, the system works. we get that notification. the clerk's office is good enough to not only send it to myself and karen wang and our assistant erica. when the assistant is included

things happen. erica is the one responsible forgetting that resolution to the appropriate committees of the legislature and tracking it in the internal system. that all happens. at some point i want to talk to you both there is a quantity issue every year for the city. i don't want to call it quality issue but highest and best use. if i could briefly. the legislature, the new legislature introduced 2600 new bills. we have flagged based on historical understanding what the city might be interested in, your department, 600 of the 2600. that is a lot. that is probably at least double than for any of our other clients. that is a quantity issue. in terms of highest and best use what the city wants to prioritize in any given year and what should be prioritized legislatively and what should be

prioritized through the state budget process, that is very dynamic and something we try to be at tuned to because of the return on investment we want to produce. so if ab123 is supported we make sure every committee knows you support it but it will go on its own way. payment if the big cities in california are asking for half a billion dollars out of nowhere to address homelessness in california that is a large effort that takes a lot of time and energy. i want to be clear. there are only so many hours in the day. we do have to judge for ourselves because we know we are going to be judged. we have to judge for ourselves how to expend the time and energy on the city's behalf so if that helps. if the board takes a position that isn't just moving along as i described earlier and it needs

a push, then that is where the actual lobbying happens, talking to members, talking to staff, trying to count noses to get the votes for the city's position. in where to put your focus on bills is that something that you are in communication with the mayor's office about? >> yeah, it is pretty clear, and i want to believe that really to almost all of us, maybe all of us, depending on the issue that certain issues have to be prioritized. i haven't mentioned funding for the seawall. that is obviously a budget issue. with the climate and the king

tides and there is senate bill 45 that could be amended to include more money for the seawall. we have $5 million to study and move it further along. that would be an example where i think. i don't know anybody in the city that wouldn't say that shouldn't be a priority of the city and for our firm, but i go back to, mr. chairman the 600 bills. the hierarchy for the 600 bills, i want to be clear just because our firm tracks something doesn't mean the city has a position on it. we want to be aware and not lose site of it. when the slc takes a position that is prioritized because there is a official position on it. that is the way things shake out during the course of the year. >> a few more questions. we received the memo or i

received the memo i think this morning or yesterday the slc adopted a position on it looks like 20 billings. these would be priority bills. >> they would. >> that sounds good. when was the slc created? >> 3 section five point three, five point one how old is that john. >> that pre-dates us representing the city. it was in existence when we came on board. obviously i defer to the city attorney. >> that is something we can change if we want and we can count our own noses.

>> slc plays an important role to bring together the mayor's office and key departments to i'd fithe priority bills and what our position should be. >> yes. >> just getting back to supervisor mar's question. it looks like the committee has been around since at least 1978. there are some sections of this code that were adopted in 1939. maybe it goes as far back as 1939. >> we no, i thinks at the end of the session move quickly when you see a bill that has profound implications for our ability to

continue as local legislators do you sound the alarm? who do you call? >> what happens in our firm technologically we subscribe to a service that lets us see amended bills every morning. we have nine lobbyists and four legislative aids. we wake up every morning and go through the day's amendments. if it is important for san francisco we refer it to the mayors office. i am trying to think of a hypothetical. it might not be the best thing to do, but we certainly know it when we see it, being in the seventh year of representing the city. we make the mayor's office aware of it, frankly, most days before 8:00 a.m. so they get to the desk and might have three, four, 10 e-mails from us. it is the bill. i actually want t to go to the

people working in the city. we don't have to give context like we do in other instances. you might want to look at this because. we refer the bill in the amended form and people here understand why they are looking at it, which is nice. >> i do want to thank you for your help in the last session getting the 1148 passed to allow us to have a transportation network company tax per ride vehicles. >> thank you. i thought today was a commondation for that. >> ab1184 and that was not easy. it was a pleasure working with your staff. >> that was a great team effort. i don't have any more questions for mr. yoder.

i thank you from coming down from sacramento. i am disappointed that the mayor's office are not here. i will get to the bottom of that. i would like to continue this to the call of the chair so mr. m.c.a. ffree can tell us how this works. >> thank you, paul. >> why don't we go to public comment. are there any members of the public who wish to testify on this item? seeing none, public testimony is now closed. any additional comments? >> no. >> can we recommend this item? can we continue this item to the call of the chair without objection. thank you. that completes the agenda for today. we are adjourned. thank you.

>> everything is done in-house. i think it is done. i have always been passionate about gelato. every single slaver has its own recipe. we have our own -- we move on from there. so you have every time a unique experience because that slaver is the flavored we want to make. union street is unique because of the neighbors and the location itself. the people that live around here i love to see when the street is full of people. it is a little bit of italy that is happening around you can walk around and enjoy shopping with gelato in your hand. this is the move we are happy to

provide to the people. i always love union street because it's not like another commercial street where you have big chains. here you have the neighbors. there is a lot of stories and the neighborhoods are essential. people have -- they enjoy having their daily or weekly gelato. i love this street itself. >> we created a move of an area where we will be visiting. we want to make sure that the area has the gelato that you like. what we give back as a shop owner is creating an ambient lifestyle. if you do it in your area and if you like it, then you can do it on the streets you like.

>> i am going to get started here. hello, and welcome to the tuesday, march 5th, 2019 commission meeting at the san francisco entertainment commission meeting. i'm the commission president. if you are a member of the public and you would like to speak, there are speaker forms. you can hand them to our staff or come to the microphone when i call you for public comment. we ask that everyone turns off their cell phones are puts them on silent, including commissioners and staff. i want to thank san francisco government t.v. media services for sharing this meeting with the public. we will start with a roll call. [roll call] >> i think we should note that commissioner thomas is running late and commissioner faust on has been excused.

>> before we get started with our first order of business, we were talking about this and we like to dedicate this meeting in memory of jeff adachi, the public defender of san francisco. he is a fearsome advocate for the underdog, and an incredible presence in city hall, and i think his influence was evidenced by how many people, the outpouring of love and emotion that came after his passing, this meeting will be in his honor. all right, the first order of business is public comment, and this is for any cactuses comments from the public on any item that isn't on the agenda. does anybody have any public comment? seeing none, public comment is closed. the next agenda item is item number 2, which is the approval of our minutes. we will give you a chance to look at them and then we will ask if we have a motion for the approval of the minutes of february 19th, 2019. >> i have a minor clarification on page 12.

it says commissioner lee stated that the fire department works in two hands, it should say works in two sections. is anyone writing it down? it should say they work in two sections, one for building construction, sign offs and one for public assembly sign offs, and the rumour has it that they are trying to combine the two departments, the two inspectors together to save time on expedited permits, so that was what it should say. >> all right. >> i'm not sure if it matters, but it doesn't make sense the way it is written. >> one typo that i noticed on page 2, it says 8 cents, rather than absent. make sure to spell check in the

future. >> we did three rounds of edits, apologies. >> no, it is minor. i wait -- i wish that was the word. >> totally. >> all right, do we have a motion to approve the minutes. >> so moved. >> second. >> all right, we will do public comment on this. does anyone want to public -- publicly comment on the minutes? seeing none, public comment is closed. [roll call] >> the minutes are approved. the next order of business, agenda item is our report from the executive director. >> thank you, president, and that evening commissioners. i can't believe it is already march. this year is flying by, i have a

really brief update this evening, i just wanted to let all of you know about our recent trip to philadelphia, both myself, the president, and ben van helton who is here in the audience tonight. we attended the rhi annual sociable city summit in philadelphia from february 23rd through to the 26th. we not only had a blast hanging out and checking out these city -- the city of philadelphia, going out, hearing the nightlife, eating all the food, hearing live music, tricking gears, of course, but we also attended the conference. [laughter] the conference was great. i just wanted to report back on the fact that all three of us felt that san francisco is

really a head of the game in how we regulate and enforce entertainment activity in municipalities. we are hearing stories from folks who do this work across the united states, in small to large cities, and in a lot of ways, they are ten touch 15 years behind where we are at right now and how we are enforcing entertainment. so we often times had conversations just on best practices. this is how we do it, and a lot of people were learning from s., so i think that is a lot in credit to my predecessor, jocelyn kane, and two commissioners who came before all of you as well. we have been laying the groundwork for a long time and we should be really proud of the work that we are doing here because i think we will continue to set the bar here in san francisco. ben, did you have anything to add? >> i think you're absolutely

right. the opportunity to talk with other cities and tear of how it wretchedly poorly they regulate their nightlife, really made me feel really proud of how we do things here. this is fantastic. it was worth all the plane flights just to hear that, it was fantastic. >> definitely. i will just add, it was a great opportunity for us to get out of here and brainstorm around ideas for this year and beyond, and we were able to really hone in on what we want to discuss at our summit as well, so again, that is happening april 1st. you will get an official invite tomorrow. commissioner perez has been working diligently on creating the website for it and all the marketing materials that will go into that. we are excited to share what topics we have come up with. that's about it.

>> thank you, very much. is there any public comment on the executive director charge a report? seeing none, public comment is closed. the next agenda item is item number 4, a report from our senior inspector, sean burke. >> thank you, good evening, commissioners i am inspector sean burke. i change things up a little bit this week. he will notice that there's an orange line above anything that is new since the notes were sent out last friday. a couple of new complaints i wanted to mention, one at the rusted mule, we got a complaint, in general about weekend nights, and then we followed up and threw a little research, realized that there was a permit that was -- an application process was started but never

finished. we're in the process of bringing them into compliance. you will notice a complaint on the first page four gestalt. this is also a complaint that came in via 311, and also after-the-fact, the complaint was addressed in realtime, but we realized after research that the establishment was operating after the operation hours of an l.l.p. pick the field inspector assumes that they had the proper permit, but after some digging, we find out they didn't. we want to bring them into compliance as well. you will notice, since friday, a complaint about jolene his was added. in realtime, and inspector was able to visit, forgive me, i did

not put an action in the description of the entry for jolene his. the action taken there by the inspector was that he visited and found it to be in compliance, i noticed there was a residential party down the street. you will notice the field guys continued to drop off the new good neighbor policy, and when appropriate, we will be discussing with management security and ownership some of the changes. please excuse on the following page, i left out the type of permit for quite a few of these establishments. if there were any questions on what kind of permits these places have, please let me know.

i will try to avoid that. i think that happened last time as well, just trying to get used to this new formatting. i did want to mention the inspection at the fillmore harris -- heritage centre in response to a complaint that came in. this was a follow-up inspection or -- inspection. they spoke with her management about the good neighbor policy, as it seems the complaint is actually coming from people outside the venue and not necessarily the music, but the patrons gathering outside at closing. we will keep a close eye there and make sure they are on top of the crowd after the events. we have had a couple of complaints come in about the independent over the last few months, this past weekend, the

inspector visited the independent after the complaint in realtime and noticed that the emporium seems to be a little bit louder. they are next to each other, and it turns out that emporium was out of compliance with their internal sound limit. we issued the emporium a notice of violation. some good work by the inspectors in the field. no updates to ongoing complaints since friday. complaints about sunday brunch at jones continue to come in. we have a new complainant, and two complaints on existing complainant. we will be sending our inspector out this sunday to take measurements during that event,

and our longest time complainant has now been in touch with myself and the inspector. this is something that we are definitely on top of and we will continue to investigate. i believe that is it. if you have any questions, please let me know. >> okay. so charmaine, ever since we gave them their permit for the rooftop, it seems like they're on our report almost every week. so my question, my question is, they do have indoors on the rooftop, so are they playing their music with the doors open, because i know that they have outdoor speakers as well, so if the level on the inside raises,

are the speakers on the outside also being raised? >> they have a permit from us to do outdoor. >> yeah, but is there a certain sound restriction? they can't plate as loud as they want, can they? >> they have a sound limit for outdoor, but you guys were not restrictive in hours, for the outdoor. >> these are coming in at 8:26 p.m., it is still nighttime, it is afternoon, i could understand,. >> one of the difficulties here, i think for charmaine his, it has been fairly intermittent, it is not as frequent as some of the other persistent ongoing complaints that i have listed, in one of the issues that we are having with really trying to address the issue that with charmaine his is the fact that the complainant his anonymous, so we don't have the ability to

address do you seen realtime, we don't have -- the complaints are not coming in on the weekend, they're not coming in when staff is out on the street, so we can't even get an alert from 311 and go and visit. if it was anonymous and it was coming in on the weekend, then we could. we cannot follow up during the week to get more detail because we don't have access to the information. i have been out two times now to charmaine his and done sound tests. they know where to point the speakers, they know the levels to keep them at. they have a sound test that was conducted by charles salter, and i think -- i hope we get some information from the complainant so we can address this thing. i am planning on sending up and inspector this weekend to try to

take a lesson. >> i think the insight is pretty well incident -- insulated. if they keep the door shut, it should keep the sound in, i just don't know how much they crank the speakers on the outside. i'm just curious. on the fillmore heritage, these are private parties or rentals, it would seem. do they have enough security when the inspector goes out to let these people, on their way, get to their cars, or are they just open the door and say good night? >> they do know they had a presence on sight. the inspector mistakenly was printed. he was on sight to talk to management to outside upon arrival. i can take a look and see how many inspectors they had on site in just a moment, but i do

believe, based on the conversation i had with the inspector, addressing patrons as they leave, that process could be vastly improved. >> right, okay. thank you. >> thanks. >> a question about old town tattoo and the new complaints. >> yes. >> i see there are two issues, one at 8:00 p.m. on saturday, february 23rd, and another one at midnight pick on the notes here it says the inspector visited the music and it was turned off. that is at 8:00 p.m., but there is another complaint at 12. i was wondering if, can you talk about delaying and turning it off and turning it back on again after the inspector left? what are the circumstances? >> the original complaint came in friday night, saturday

morning, and the inspector spoke to them about the permanent -- permitting process, and asked them to go through that process before going to another event. that second complaint came in the next night, saturday night. both complaints came in via 311. the inspector visited the second time, and after a conversation with the proprietor, it was determined that the best course of action was to have them turned down -- >> thank you, i understand now. >> hello. >> hello. >> i like how robust this is, so thank you for the extra time that everyone is putting into it. just a few questions.

in terms of inspections, i think it is greatly you are also sharing the good neighbor policy. are you hearing any feedback from folks that you think any of us should know up here about that? i know we generally try to clean it up and make it more simple. >> i think what -- i haven't gotten a lot of feedback from the field inspectors about conversations they've had with operators. i think it's difficult during the busy nights, friday and saturday, to be out there and having in-depth conversations with operators about the policy. what i have encouraged them to do is leave their business cards and make sure that they are encouraging operators or heads of security or managers to follow-up with them or me or any member of staff to discuss it in more detail if they have questions or if they have comments. i haven't gotten any feedback yet and we are planning on

disseminating this wider and further on facebook and with e-mail, and on the blog coming up here real soon. i hope to work with our data-gathering expert senior analyst and try to get feedback from the public. >> great, this could be a case of no news is good news, or no feedback is good feedback. one other question, i just noticed in some of the use, not the inspections, of course, because they are there, but there are new complaints. there is a couple of times where there is no staff available to go check it out. which makes sense, i'm just curious, now that we have two inspectors in the field and yourself, how you feel about coverage, are we good on that, do we need more?

what is your take. >> i think our goal right now is to make sure that if we have repetitive complaints on an off night, say wednesday, thursday, sunday, that the inspectors have been responsive to heading out on a different night, and i think because we have the coverage that we do to pull one inspector off of a weekend night and put them on a weekday, it has minimum -- minimal coverage on the impact to the city. i think we are good, this looks like a lot, even putting it together, just taking a look at it myself, we are getting out there quite a bit, but i still think that it is tough to address the anonymous complaints on weekdays, that is the big gap that we have. there is no way for us to follow-up.

outside of having a few more inspectors for every night of the week, i think we are stuck waiting for someone to complain. >> i think this all might just be to better empower the police department, and it is something that we are working on, just so the random complaints that are coming in on weekdays, if the police department officers understand our process and our rules and all that, they maybe able to assist, i think we are doing pretty well. >> yes great, thinking. >> thanks. >> can i ask a clarifying question? i am seeing venues that have appeared before and i'm wondering what the distinction is and why they're not on ongoing complaints, but listed as new complaints, like charmaine his -- like charmaine's.

>> it is tough. i think that when we have a period of time where there aren't complaints about a particular venue, i think that there is maybe a? that resets somewhere up here. >> based on what criteria? >> based on the time in between complaints that are received. i don't have a formula, necessarily, i think it is more of a judgement call, i think a complaint being anonymous versus a complaint having a complainant attached to it probably has an effect on that too. if we have the ability to actually communicate with a complainant and get an idea that maybe they didn't complain every week, but maybe it is not a problem every week, the charmaine's complaint, in my opinion, i think it has been intermittent, i don't -- i know they have appeared to, but i

haven't felt like it was an ongoing complaint like some of the others. >> okay. , because like revolution café, it seems to be the same issue regarding their door being wide open. i am wondering if that is the same person making the complaint and maybe they close the door for a period, but then it seems to come back up, but it is almost like the same text from the past. and it sounds like something similar. >> so royale i think is a new one. it is very fresh. revolution revolution i agree with you that the door is a constant issue with them. this is an existing complainant and someone we have spoken to before, and i think it all comes down to, has there been a significant period of time between complaints where we can consider this a new case.

>> got it. >> a case that we are not continually addressing every weekend. >> got it. and then we have our main stage here. the original complaint came in and september of 2018, and i feel like they have almost a standing agenda item on your report, and i know that in the beginning of your report you mentioned that practically everyone on staff is in conversation with them around bringing them into compliance, but i would like to recommend that we actually consider bringing them to a hearing at this point. i think, is it nine months at this point, it is like they gave birth to a baby since we have been getting complaints. >> probably about six. >> yeah,. >> so is that an official request from the commission that you would like to me to send them a notice to appear?

>> that is my recommendation. do we have a conversation about it? >> i feel like unless staff feels like it is a substantive process -- progress is being made with them, then, yeah,. >> i will add that i think for friday and saturday evenings, we were getting complaints when we have been out there addressing when we do have staff, i think that those issues have subsided, and we have yet to go out and address their sunday party. i would love to see what happens after this weekend and be able to report back to you. i hope that once we address the sunday and set sound limits that we can brett -- bring that under

control as well. but it has been going on for a very long time. >> do they think, because it is a sunday afternoon party that they can play at whatever level? >> they have sound limits. >> no matter what time, whether it is 1:00 p.m. in the afternoon >> yeah, it might be a good opportunity to bring them in just because this has been going on for quite some time, and we have heard from the owner for about two minutes of public comment and we weren't able to engage, and it might be an opportunity to actually look at the conditions on their permit. they're very limited as it is in terms of when they can do outdoor sound at this point, and i think that they want to expand that, i don't know, it might be worth looking at the conditions. >> yeah, thank you.

>> i just want to say thank you for the expanded format, and i appreciate all the different formatting things that you are trying, and it's really giving me a much better sense of what all the inspectors are doing, i wanted to say thank you. i know it looks like it is taking up a fairmount of time and energy to put it together, so i wanted to say i am appreciating it. it makes our job easier. >> thank you. >> yeah, i just want to echo that, not just the format here, but the expanded enforcement. i think our tentacles are all over the city right now. it is really giving us a little bit of street credit. i can't tell you how many calls i'm getting from people i know who owned bars and i have to say, i'm very sorry, thank you very much for calling, refer your inquiry to the office right now. and you guys came by at my bar and saturday night and it turned out to be a band nearby playing on the street, it wasn't us.

i want to make sure everybody knows that. [laughter] >> i had a question about jones. it looks like we get a lot of calls on this one day,. do you know if this is the same person or multiple people? >> i do know, two, sorry, two of the three are the same person, a known complainant that we have been in touch with. we have been working with her to schedule a sunday visit, and the third is a new complainant who is not anonymous, so we don't have follow-up with that complainant. >> so multiple people. >> yeah,. >> and there have been two additional complainants over the course of the last six months or so. >> got it. but you did say -- because it seemed we kind of put them

red-handed operating past the hours of their l.l.p., that has subsided as far as you know? >> as far as i know, yes. >> okay. so you are thinking their internal decibel level might be higher than it should be? >> i think their external limit is very low on their permanent. i think that there's probably a middleground that they can operate outside, but i have yet to visit on a sunday, so i am not maybe the best person to ask i think the inspector can enlighten us. >> i think a lot of what we have been hearing from the inspector is just that when they do operate indoor entertainment to keep their windows and doors open -- they keep their windows

and doors open, and that is super loud, and it sounds like outdoors, it sounds like they are using their outdoor permits during hours when they are not allowed to. i think it is a compliance thing. i think they just need to hear from all of you. >> questions? thank you very much for that enlightening reports report. is there any public comment on the report? seeing none, public comment is closed. next agenda item is number 5, which is report from our senior analyst. >> good evening, commissioners. i'm the senior element just analyst for community cultural events. i have a legislative update and some education updates for you. i wanted to circle back about the proposed legislation to let the office of cannabis create a cannabis event permit for both indoor and outdoor events. it was first heard by the

finance and budget committee last wednesday, and it was basically, there was an amendment that was created which is actually in your binder, and the amendment speaks to the challenges associated with smoking in public, especially, so this new amended legislation creates a waiver process for the health department and for parks to temporarily waive the ban of public outdoor smoking, not just outdoor, public smoking, as well as in some cases, consumption of cannabis within the footprint and the duration of the event. does that make sense? so it is another layer of approval that has to happen, but i think it's pretty remarkable

that that was the only change that they came back with. there were some people from the outdoor event industry. they are voicing their support. they were people from folsom street fair, and how weird, especially there to support this, and just a reminder, this is a pilot program. so this was something that supervisor fewer really wanted to see a evaluation done on, so she asked for a valuation report the office of cannabis after the pilot program went into effect. there wasn't a specific time that she had said, but at some point, when it is in full effect, she wanted to hear, what is working, what is not, how can we look at security and enforcement and improve it, what are the stakeholders saying?

obviously the city workers, with the event producers, and the community. so that was something that was not codified, but that is something that supervisor fewer really wanted to see, so that was agreed upon, and then it was sent to planning to make sure that it didn't fall under a guidelines project, which it didn't, and then it went to small business commission and they voted in favour of it. they were pleased with the legislation. tomorrow, it will go back to the finance budget committee again for -- first on the agenda, and it will go for -- based on the responses from planning and the business commission. i will keep you guys apprised as this works its way through the process. it is moving forward, just taking time.

and then the other piece of this, i just wanted to update you on a couple of educational things. you will see in your binder the latest winter industry bulletin is out. i plugged the summit, i plugged the can't -- the cannabis legislation and grant opportunities, and then for the summit, there's going to be an outdoor event piece like there has been the past two years, and we have been talking a lot with the president and director weiland has been a part of this. we want to do another how to discussion on how you plan a successful and safe cannabis event, especially with the changing policies at the local level, and i think that this will be not what happens another

event, but it will talk to you more about consumer demands as well, which we didn't talk about on the panel, and it is going to get deeper into their operations and infrastructure for events. just big picture again for this panel, it is really about showing that cannabis is a viable new opportunity for the entertainment industry in terms of enhancing it and sustaining it or supporting it, and we want to show people what are the legal pathways to getting permit, how do you get a stake cannabis event permit, what does it look like? and of course, the best practices and possible models for revenue streams. we are focusing mainly on sales and consumption of cannabis because we think those are the most relevant types of

activities for cannabis, and then we already have terrence allen, the founding president of the commission and we have a confirmation from the acting director of the office of cannabis, and we are putting out asks to some other people in government, as well as the producers. i will have those confirmed by tomorrow with any luck. so that is exciting. it will be great because this will be a broader audience too, not just for the outdoor event community, but i am hoping we can get some venue operators to join the conversation too, in terms of being in the audience and asking questions. so that is it. any questions? >> thank you for this report.

a quick question about working with cannabis and outdoor events. can i get the permit to be flexing for the entire footprint of the festival and event, or do i have to designate specific area within the footprint? >> it is the latter. it will be a specific zone or area that will be submitted to both the office of cannabis and the state chapter bureau of cannabis control. the state has the final sign off and just a reminder, unlike getting a special event liquor license where the nonprofit can actually get the license to procure and serve the liquor, this license is different, you have to work with a state licensed cannabis event organizer, and it is an annual license that gets renewed, and then the business model is if --

you are not allowed to share revenue streams with the cannabis sales. so the other ways that you can make money on from sponsorships, vendor fees, and in some cases, it is a gated event, they could take part of a gate admission price. it is a different way of thinking about it, and a different way of doing business with it. >> okay. be combined with your garden or do they have to be separate. >> capacity to completely separate zones where -- there has to be two completely separate zones where it happens, and they're careful that they say that you can't even have a member of the public, regardless if they are 21 or over, you can't have them accidentally go from one zone to the next. they have to be completely separated, a neutral pathway between both where if someone doesn't want to go into either

zone, they don't have to. >> all right. thank you. >> since we are on the topic of cannabis, i wanted to point out that a ready headline in the san francisco chronicle last week -- that i read a headline in the san francisco chronicle last week that they want to -- i think about where i was as a kid, smoking pot, thinking i was going to go to jail for doing that. and the sentences and all the people have had to take to get us here to where we are today. i just want to thank the dea for that work, and code for america, who has done a lot of coding and scouring of all the records to figure out who these cases were. and san francisco is at the forefront of many things,

entertainment, vis-à-vis responsible hospitality institute, but also this work. i want to thank the dea and thank all the community folks who have put so much time and effort into this. i'm really clear to see where this to go -- where this will go. there were lots of headlines exploring magic mushrooms a something to legalize. this is an exciting time that we are all in. >> thanks to the voters of california for passing a retroactive marijuana legalization initiative. it was the first time to clear up the records. i enormously appreciate the district attorney's leadership and i want to give a shout out to the public defender's office who went through all of their cases and hope people -- help people expunge their canvas convictions. i know the defender's office is

on our minds these days, but it takes all of them to really move it forward. if we move forward into the cannabis space, one of the things i wanted to keep an eye on is the racial justice implications and aspects of it and making sure that the people who have been harmed by the war on drugs from getting these permits and being able to profit from legalization and the family that they are harmed by legalization. i know it is on our minds. as the entertainment commission -- as we have a role in the cannabis conversation, to keep that friend of mind. >> and you didn't think the robot they used, they used artificial intelligence programs to scan the programs. >> you're right, they didn't.

>> i have one clarifying question. just so i get this straight, if this continues on and we will not have any net new cannabis events, it will just allow existing events -- >> there is a sunset date. >> for the pilot program. >> for the year, i meant. >> they have the right to extend it. >> okay. , thank you. thank you very much. is there any public comment on that report? seeing none, the public -- the comment is closed. moving along, number 6. they are not here. we will move along to number 7. item number 7 is hearing and possible action regarding

permits within the jurisdiction of the entertainment commission. there is no consent agenda today i will just turn things over to the deputy director to introduce the applicants. >> good evening, commissioners. we have one permit application on the agenda this evening and it is for a place of entertainment permit for hotel san francisco located at 653 commercial street. just to clarify, it is not a hotel, but a bar and restaurant that was given its name as homage to the song. the premises is all tight level, and the applicants have various types of entertainment options upstairs and downstairs. they would like to bring in live music, comedy, trivia, and open mic nights. in your file, you will see the file that they had distributed 250 copies of, as well as signature for support for neighboring businesses and residents.

they approved it with no added can it -- conditions. here to tell you more is the owner. >> hello. so hotel san francisco is in the financial district. we have been going for 12 months now. it is a small bar and restaurant with a capacity of about 93 at the moment. we are building downstairs capacity of about 49. here we are looking to apply for an entertainment license. we are not looking at any live or huge d.j. shows or anything like that, just more intimate shows which will allow us to reactivate our stage. >> hello. i've been here many times, it is

one of an undiscovered places near chinatown. i have a question. i have not been into your basement yet, but when you do your entertainment upstairs, you have a lot of glass in the front. there is an s.r.o. across the street. are you planning to have a d.j. upstairs all the time? or entertainment downstairs? >> there may have been some confusion there. all of the entertainment will be downstairs. upstairs definitely isn't fitted for that kind of environment, restaurant, bar, food, et cetera. there will be no entertainment upstairs. >> we have a pretty good business already. i was wondering where you were going to put that. >> we wouldn't do anything upstairs. we wanted to activate anything upstairs, we would love to activate