>> good morning. today is wednesday, march 20, 2019. this is the regular meeting of the abatement appeals board. i would like to remind everyone to please turnoff all electronic devices. the first item on the agenda is roll call. [ro [roll cal [roll call] >> clerk: we have a quorum. the next item is item b, the oath. will all parties giving testimony today please stand and raise your right hand.

do you answer that the testimony you are about to give will be the best to your knowledge? okay. i just want to announce for the record that case 2359 has submitted a request for continuance and that request has been granted so that case won't be heard today. are there any members of the public wanting to comment on that item? okay. our next item is item c, election of officers. president and vice president. discussion and possible action to elect president and vice president of the abatement appeals board? >> commissioner walker? >> i nominate commissioner warshell. >> second.

>> okay. there is a motion and a second to nominate commissioners warshell and lee again. are all commissioners in favor -- or i'm sorry. is there public comment on this item? okay. seeing none, are all the commissioners in favor? any opposed. okay. thank you. then congratulations. you guys are reelected as officers. >> okay. thank you very much. >> okay. our next item is d, possible adoption of the minutes for the meeting held on february 19, 2019. >> okay. are there any corrections to the minutes? okay. seeing none, is there any public comment correction? okay. seeing none, move to approve? >> is there a motion? >> i move to approve. >> second. >> there is a motion and a second. all commissioners in favor? any opposed?

the minutes are approved. our next item is e, new appeals, order of abatement. [agenda item read]. >> also for the record, the department will present its case and the appellant has seven minutes to present its case. the public comment, has three minutes, and rebuttal has three minutes. >> the case was withdrawn by the appellant's representative. >> oh, okay. >> okay. >> very good. >> it appears we will be

hearing one case today. just a moment. are there any members of the public to speak on that case for 344 bowdoin? >> good morning. i'm shoshana raphael representing -- i'm not sure what pat buskovich did in terms of withdrawing the appeal, but we're here to go forward with it. >> okay. we'll have our d.b.i. staff present first, and then, we'll have you come forward. >> okay. point of clarification to the city attorney. once it's removed, do we still hear the case? >> brad russey from the city attorney's office. it sounds like there's a dispute as to whether the case was withdrawn. the secretary is saying if it wasn't actually withdrawn in

writing, then i think we can actually hear the case. >> the other party isn't present? >> can you speak into the microphone, please. >> when i originally went to file this appeal, i wasn't expecting -- even though it was within the deadline, mr. buskovich was there, as well, and he didn't get it filed the next day and dated correctly, so i believe we have two other file and that may be the source of the confusion here. >> speak into the microphone. >> that might be the source of the confusion here. you might see in the packet that our peals should be accepted. we're within the deadline, so i think that could be the issue. >> okay. perhaps we can get clarification. we have an issue to find her in this filing, and i'm trying to

just understand -- >> i think secretary sweeney said we can go ahead and go forward because one party requested that it be withdrawn, but it wasn't in writing. >> this is the same party. >> they're working together. >> they're working together. >> correct. >> okay. fine. then we'll proceed. >> for clarification, you mean, there was two appellants? >> one appellant. >> one appellant, and we had an attorney -- a representative positi for the appellant. the representative rescinded, but the attorney did not. is that what i'm understanding? [inaudible] >> okay. >> all right. >> is the appellant here? >> i'm the attorney -- >> you're shoshana? >> yes. >> okay. let's proceed. did you finish your presentation? >> we'll have the staff go first. >> okay. >> that's fine.

>> good morning. the notice of violation for this case was written 2016. we have a leak on the property. you got a packet that's got 65 pages in it. rather than take up all your time going through all these 65 pages about this leak, we'll just say the owner had plenty of opportunities to fix this problem. they seem a little disorganized. not sure exactly what the reason for the appeal was. we did everything we were supposed to do exactly the way we were supposed to do it, so i'm just going to go ahead and let them explain why they're appealing. >> okay. >> good morning. so i'm shoshana raphael with zacks, freedman, and larry,

limited partnership. they need just a little more time to continue the repairs. we ask that you allow the abatement to continue 30 days to get the repaired completed. when the tenant complains that it leaks, the owners try to fix it, but leaks are notoriously difficult to diagnose and remedy. while this was reported in 2016, a lot of action has been under taken by the owners. they haven't just been sitting on their hands. they received a notice in december 2014. in february 2015, they had a licensed professional working on this. in december 2015, further repairs are done the same month. then in january 2016, they had a complaint. they had some issues getting

access to the property, but ultimately, they did in march 2016. their contractors continued to tlie and make repairs and did make repairs through 2017 and into 2018. each time, it appeared the situation had been resolved until the following rainy season. all of the complaints have come in midwinter, in the midst of rainy season, and despite substantial efforts including rebuilding the front staircase of this house at a cost of over $100,000, these leaks seem to resurface. now we're at the end of a long rainy season, and they believe they've discovered the ultimate cause of this leak and are currently undergoing repairs to remedy that situation. we anticipate that the repairs will be completed within the next ten days, weather permitting. so i'd now like to discuss that -- in order to discuss that a little further, i'd like to introduce lewis bueller, who who's been working on this off

and on since 2015 and some of the repairs we've made and why they haven't been completed today. >> good morning. lewis bueller, bueller construction company. we've been working on the project here off and on for several years. it's an old house as we've just talked about. it's been multiple leak positio positions throughout the house, stucco and woodsiding. this has been an ongoing issue that we've been addressing as the issues have been coming up, and trying our best to mediate and work with the tenant and the department of building inspection to make sure that we get this solidified. >> okay. thank you. >> so just lastly, i wanted to

point out that the appellant didn't appear at the director's hearing on this issue and that's because they didn't receive notice. they've been active participants in this process. they've been in touch with d.b.i. as you can see from the packet there, they've been in contact with their contractors, they've been in contact through -- all of the licensed contractors that they've hired have been in touch, but they happened to move in right at the time that the notice was served and didn't receive any notice. nor did the tenant alert them to any posting of the notice to the director's hearing, i suspect in part because of issues between the landlord and tenant in this case pertaining to this work and construction and access and so on. had they been there, they would have asked for another 30 days to complete this work and we wouldn't be here. so i would just, again, ask 30 days, and we won't be back here. >> okay. thank you very much. >> and i'm available for any

questions should you have any. >> okay. any questions or -- public comment? >> is there public comment? >> hello. good morning. thank you to the commission for allowing me to speak. my name is dr. eric cabral. i've been the tenant since june 2013 where i started paying $3,495 on rent every time. i've been fully compliant. there have been months and months of construction over the last five years. i've been completely compliant of any construction company. i've listed several complaints by e-mail to the management company as well as to the owner. they've delayed. it's been five years now. i have an e-mail dated 2014. i have several photos that show

that and videos that show that the leaking and intrusions are actually worse than when i first moved in. i have those on an ipad today. i've always been compliant, always paid rent. i've been fully compliant, my father's a contractor, and with all due respect, i had to hire a separate building contractor that has 42 photos and a report, showing that the work has been shoddy, neglectful, several areas of repair over the last five years. in the meantime, my rent has been raised from 3,495 to $3,775 all the time that this has been going on. i feel like this is my only recourse to make the owner and the construction company finally fulfill several promises by e-mail that this would fix the leak, and with all due respect to all parties involved, i would like to

request that this appeal be denied because as you know, it's still raining, it's still leaking, and i don't see this being resolved any time soon, so i would like to ask this appeal be denied. i know i only have three minutes, but i have videos and photos that show the situation from 2014 to now is actually worse. i have them on ipad here. >> the file was very, very kpleex, so i think unless anyone else needs to see them, i think we're fine. >> i think i may have a minute left or 30 seconds. >> you have 30 second. go ahead. >> okay. could you give that to us? >> the report?

sure. >> yeah, to mr. sweeney. >> i have a second copy i can read from. i think i have 15 seconds left. >> unit shows signs of decay, neglect, last of preventative maintenance for a prolonged period of time, remodelling and repair unprofessional without proper permits. >> go ahead. >> conditions are long-standing. >> okay. thank you. >> you'll have a chance for rebuttal in just a moment. >> you'll have a chance to comment. >> any further comment? >> thank you, commissioners. so the n.o.v. was issued in 2016. the president of the united states was barack obama, so

we've been very patient. we've given them opportunity after opportunity for the work to be completed. we tried to mediate, as well, every step of the way, but we are requesting that the board deny the appeal and uphold the order of abatement with all fees incurred and without abeyance. thank you. >> question. >> question. >> on page two of the report, the very last bullet item says that the appeal -- it says was filed february 27, 2015. is that correct or is that a typo? last bullet item. >> it is a >> 19. >> 19. >> okay. >> thanks. >> any other questions? okay. thank you. >> thank you. >> appellant's rebuttal. >> i can't say i've seen the report that mr. cabral -- i'm

sorry, dr. cabral, but i suspect this is an ongoing issue between the landlords and dr. cabral and a finite ongoing situation here. i would suggest this is a financial interest that he has in having this order of abatement recorded in addition to impeding the repairs one way or another. they've been -- there's been discussions about the appropriate level of rent concessions and lawsuits threatened and so on over the course of this -- these repairs and this dispute, so i suspect that that's part of why this report was generated, but as i said, i have not seen it. it hasn't been given to his landlords to review, so i won't say anything as to those points, but i would also add that on more than were you not

occasion, efforts have been under taken to remedy these leaks. i want to be clear, it's not one leak that's reoccurred. this is an old house, and various leaks have occurred over time. these owners are doing their best to remedy these leaks are aware of that, considering these are not tenants of the property and they do their best to remedy them once dr. cabral or the property manager alerts them there is a problem. they are doing their best it remedy the situation as soon as they can using licensed professionals to get the work done over the last at this .5 years. thank you very much. >> thank you. >> the commission should give the representative for the landlord the opportunity to review that report and make any

comments if you are going to consider it in connection with this case. >> okay. would you like to have a quick look at this? i mean it's rather difficult to do that. i rather feel the back up file was enough for me to make a decision if we choose to go with the information that was submitted in the file and provided to all parties. >> well, the commission accepted the report and some of you looked at it, so she should have an opportunity to look at it and respond to anything that's in there if she wants to. >> well, i will say it's a precedence report and it's 30 pages long, so it's a quick look if i'm to respond to it. i can't say it speaks to much

of the detail in the report, having just been handed it. >> okay. is it a practical solution that we go to the -- hold this in abeyance, go to the second case, allow the attorney to review it and return to this after she's had an opportunity to at least review it in a more timely -- >> well, i can say this about report. i don't think there's a dispute that there's an active leak right there right now, but neither did they dispute that there's ongoing repairs to remedy the situation. so if this report -- it looks like by the date of the report it may not be with regards to this particular leak and this particular incident, but even if it were so, i wouldn't doubt it's not going to show there's leaks. it's not going to show what actions were taken to remedy

the situation nor how long they would take. we'll have to do some water testing to determine whether that's the correct remedy and whether another leak will show up. >> i would just say that if you should ask the representative for the landlord whether they have any objection to the commission moving forward with the decision at this time. >> okay. we are asking you if you have any problem with our moving forward. >> no objection. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> council, mr. bueller to have another moment of my remaining time to comment. >> sure. >> one thing that everybody i'm sure is aware of is we are talking about a leak in a garage space. we're not talking about a leak in a bedroom or a bathroom or a kitchen or an inhabitable sleeping area. it's a garage space. so in no way shape or form am i

trying to discredit the leak. it's there, and we are working on it. but the leak where it is, as of now, is in a storm area where tenant has miscellaneous things stored. and just wanted to point that out. >> all right. thank you. >> the commissioners have any discussion? >> yes, any comments? >> i'll -- i'll -- mr. president, i'll just -- you know, when we have these situations, look, as a property owner, leaks in the last couple of years have been huge, and a lot of these buildings that would have never leaked -- and even talking to my contractor associates, they're having buildings leak now that have never leaked before.

it's an ongoing problem, and i think it has a lot to do with the weather combined with the winds. i do feel for this property owner getting to the leak. i've got one leak going on three years. i'm back to the leak every time it stops raining. it's the worst problem sometimes and it can go on and go on and go on, and it's very difficult. i have tenants upset with me that it keeps going on, but all i can do is keep showing up and get the fix for the leak started. what they're asking here, i don't find it difficult. i think giving them another 30 days and coming back here -- and if it's done by then -- and i'm not encouraged that you're going to find the start of the leak. i am encouraged by the -- that

it's not in the kitchen or the bedroom or the bathroom. in the spirit of it -- and i also like the fact that both parties are here and the ownership is here to say that we want to do the right thing, and i think you need to be respectful of that. so i'm probably alone in this, but i'm more inclined to ask for -- let the continuance for 30 days and see if we can get to the bottom of this leak. obviously, you're at a real cross roads with the leak. you're trying to get to the bottom of this. i think the landlord is here, saying he's doing his best. that's my take, and i'm more than happy to hear what other commissioners think. >> commissioner walker? >> i also sort of understand the challenges of leaky buildings in this weather

that's been accelerated examan magnified. there's a lot of wind coming from different directions. i understand it's difficult to locate a leak in this process, and that seems to be sort of what's going on. i just want to remind folks that this has been going on for many years, and even though maybe now it's positioned over the storage area, it's been throughout the building, so what i -- what i -- i'm interested in and encouraging this getting fixed. it seems like there's some tension around this on both sides of the argument or the issue, so i think that i would tend to uphold this order any way, even if there is a fix in the works because it he been courag

-- encourages you to understand there is a serious issue. this needs to be fixed to make the building habitable. the concern i always have in these cases is this is being used as a leverage to get a new tenant, and even if that's not apparent, it's -- it's something that i look at and happens in this city. this is a serious issue, it needs to fixed. in the issue of supporting a solution, i would support a continuance for 30 days, but this needs to get fixed. >> okay. and what are the extents of the financial implications of this upholding it or not? i mean, are there any implications? if we -- yeah, if we uphold, do fees and fines go into effect? >> i don't know what the

assessment of cost is for the department. [inaudible] >> one quick question. >> how much is the charge? >> i see. >> $3500. >> okay. all right. any other questions? comments? okay. do we have a motion? >> i make a motion to continue it for another 30 days, not uphold. we're going to defer the upholdment on 30 days. >> yeah. if we were to uphold it, i would do it without anymore

time. >> it's fixed and set aside until the tenant is happy. i see you nodding your head no. >> we're just going to continue it -- >> so you're continuing this case until april 17, the next meeting of the board. >> okay. just continuing it. >> as requested by the -- >> and you expect by the -- at the next meeting, the appellant will come forward with an update on the progress of the repairs. and would you like an inspection? >> in the interest of the tenant, i think that's important. >> okay. >> there's a motion to continue the case for -- until april 17, and was there a second? >> i'll second. >> thank you. >> okay. do a roll call vote on the motion.

[roll call] >> motion carries unanimously. our next item is case number 6858, 5122 third street. owner of record juty wu, action requested by appellant, needs more time. would the department like to come forward regarding this case? >> good morning. my name's mauricio hernandez.

[inaudible] >> -- in 2011, under a previous owner. the new owner obtained a permit to correct the fire damage, but the permit was expired with no inspections. therefore, d.b.i. issued a notice of violation to obtain a new permit to complete the repairs. the owner failed to comply with the notice of violation and he went to a director's hearing in april 2016. the case was actually -- it was referred back. it seems the owner was working with did the with d.b.i., with the new permit, but unfortunately, the owner failed to comply and get any updates whatever, so it was

referred to code enforcement and a new hearing was setup in february 2018. the owner has failed to comply with that order, and an order of abatement was issued. i do want to point out that we have multiple allegations against the property for fail to comply with vacant buildings, also, not maintaining the property and not correcting the fire damage, and yet, all the permits are either expired -- i do know that the owner obtained a permit to demolish the building, but it's still not issued, so yeah, the permit is not issued yet. they still have to take it up and pay. so the violation's still there, and the code enforcement still

gets every two weeks, we get complaints. why does the building have plywood on the front, and yet, the owner hasn't complied with any orders of abatement that we have. >> okay. on the order to demolish, you mentioned that was not issued yet. >> yeah, it was approved. >> they could have picked it up last year. they could have picked it up last year. they have not picked it up. they have a permit for demolition, and they have a permit to replace the building. >> they have a permit now? >> it's approved. they don't have it on their hand. >> that's interesting. >> approved on march 8, 2018. >> thank you, mr. sweeney. okay. any other questions?

thank you. >> the appellant like to come forward? >> okay. good morning. >> my name is trent zu. i'm the homeowner. >> property owner. >> property owners. >> we brought the property at the end of 2012. it's already fire damaged, so we filed permit to repair kitchen, to remodel kitchen and bathroom and repair fire damage in the apartment, and -- and then, later, we realized, it's -- it's -- it's too difficult to repair this, and the plan change, so we -- over the years, we -- we hired the architect to -- to design the

project to make a -- to build a seven-unit condominium building, about 8,000 square feet. we never had a project that magnitude. it required a lot of financial end and that experience. we're trying to -- it just expire that we no longer intend to finish that permit, that remodelling kitchen -- those permit. so for the abatement that caused by that, we trying to be a good neighbor, so we try to maintain the property, clean. i have pictured back in 2014, '15. also, this month, it shows very clean, very clean. occasionally, we have some

graffiti. once we find that, we paint it over or we'll clean it. and so far, there's no breaking locks. and this project, we have been having two difficulties, financially and emotionally. they drain a lot of energy and finance in different area, so we -- so we put it in the back burner. now -- but we always complying with the. we filed -- we registered -- the most recent one is january of this year. i paid it -- i have the receipt

showing that. and we got approval for the demolition and -- and the building, and we're trying to get the -- trying to get the money enough to build. and we -- this month, we're getting some quotes for the building, the demolition. we're waiting for one more quote. hopefully, we can start doing that demolition part. for the building part, i don't know, financially, it require a lot, so at least we can demolish it first. that's all go in the next few months. we just need more time.

>> any questions? >> when do you plan to demo it? >> i got a quote for this month -- two quote earlier this month, and the other one is just last week. we want to get together one more bid, and then, we would just start doing that. so we'll probably need three or four months -- three months, at least, yeah. it's a lot of money, and we don't know whether there's any -- any hazardous material yet. we don't know that. all the bids are contingent upon the hazardous material, so it takes time. we are not that sophisticated in building this kind of building, so -- but we are trying to finish it, yeah. just need more time. >> okay.

any other questions? okay. >> thank you. you may be seated -- >> oh, by the way, i want to mention, trying to be a good neighborhood, even the next door, when they opened the new coffee shop, they asked whether we can do some painting. even though that's to be demolished, we still contribute the painting of $600 to paint on their side of the wall, just to make the neighbor happy. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> is there any public comment on this item? you can come forward. >> commissioners, my name is cat anderson. i am the property of 5114-5116

third street to the right of this pretty avocado building here. i bought the building in september of 2016, i believe, and i would like to confirm what mr. zu said. he was a tough negotiator. i needed more money, but he was a tough negotiator. i would just like to put this in the context that this is the one -- this is a double wide lot, or wide and a half, and it is blight. we are trying very hard to revitalize the third street corridor. my building experienced two burglaries in february, and there's no doubt in my mind that part of the reason why is because there's this dead zone in the middle of the block that's caused by this shiloh

church. this is a hull beik of a vacan rubble. i attended the planning meeting where they were given entitlements to build a condo building about two years ago, and they were supposed to demo. i thought they were supposed to demo in october 2017, but i may have that wrong. i hope in your deliberations, that if this doesn't get demoed right away, i would ask that you ask them to repair the facade and to paint. these posters were recently put here. it's constantly being graffitied, postered. it collects garbage. i sometimes feel like there may be somebody inside there, and i'm not sure who they are. there's strange smells emanate, dust and debris from the fire. it's a real problem, and i think that, you know, given the efforts of the people around who want to make third street beautiful, this needs to be

taken care of sooner rather than later. with all due respect to mr. zu who has absolutely been responsive when i've called him, i just want to say it's time. thank you. >> thank you. any other public comment? >> is there rebuttal for the staff? >> so the building had multiple complaints for vacant building, and one of the requirements to maintain a property or even register the building, you have to maintain the building. as you can see, he's not

maintained any opening. i think he needs to repair that. some or all of the permit history on this, there's no permit history. they just came in, pulled the permit, walked away, and they ever did anything. any time we wrote a notice of violation for open building, they say we have an open permit, which is actually under the vacant building. if you have an open permit, you're exempt from registering the building. so these conditions have been going on since 2011, when the building caught on fire. and like mr. sweeney said, the building permit was ready to be picked up last year. >> just a quick question there, inspector. so this was approved -- the site permit was approved 5-17-18. >> yes. >> so just to be clear, i just want to be clear for the record. >> sorry. >> at that point, the site permit allowed them to do the

demolition, is that correct? >> yes. >> at that point, they also had approval for the units. >> yes. >> so with 18-19, now, where we've had almost 2.5 years of where that building could have been knocked. >> yes. it could have been picked up for the demolition march 13, 2018. it's been a year. >> so just for the record, we don't have a situation where we're waiting on plan check or plans already. that's -- so when you do apply for a site permit, your whole goal here is to demo, correct? >> that's correct. >> all right. thank you. >> okay. commissioner walker? >> and it's -- i mean, even before then, we've been dealing with this because i think we've seen this before, as i recall. i think mine is more a comment

than a question, so i'll wait until we have rebuttal. >> okay. you can complete. rebuttal -- do you have -- >> is there anything else you'd like to say? [inaudible] >> okay. thank you. >> okay. then it's commissioner discussion. >> okay. commissioner walker? >> yeah. i mean, these vacant properties and the blight that ensues is really problematic everywhere, and i think our department has really gone out of its way to make it tenable in the short-term while property owners figure out a path forward. they totally destroy neighborhoods. i mean, just in spite of our best efforts to ensure that there's a protocol for the

storefronts. usually, they're not lit, but in this case, i think we have been trying to help the situation forward for many years. there is a path forward, and if you can't take it, then someone else needs to, because it is really important for the neighborhood that these things be moved along, so i would make a motion to uphold the arresorf abatement and all fines associated. >> second. >> okay. >> the information presented to us justified our -- the order of abatement. we've -- again, there's violations for several years that there's a path forward that hasn't been taken. >> absolutely. we have a motion and a second. the only thing, you know, just

as comment that i'd add to it, it will be better if this property is demolished in my opinion. the commercial district here is struggling to get on its feet, and we have to do everything to support them. and while we know that properties can be entitled for quite a while and not built on, and it's a problem we face throughout the city. here, we have something where it's really creating some harm to a struggling corridor, so i think that the motion is absolutely correct. i'd just add a reminder to the owner, even if you demolish, your responsibility to maintain

this in good condition remains, and we suspect your neighbors will be vigilant. that's just a moment. basically, the motion as offered is perfectly fine and seconded. >> just to restate commissioner walker's motion, uphold the abatement and impose assessment and costs on the basis that the notice establishes that the order of abatement was properly issued and the department in issuing did not abuse its discretion? >> yes. >> we'll deal with a roll call

vote. [inaudible] >> -- and that would be -- it would be bad to leave the existing building in a damaged condition, so that's why i'm voting yes. >> thank you. commission [roll call] >> okay. the motion carries unanimously. our next item is item f, general public comment. seeing none, item g, adjournment. is there a motion to adjourn? >> move to adjourn. >> and a second? >> second. >> all commissioners in favor? okay. we are now adjourned. it is 10:00 a.m. we'll take about a ten-minute recess and reconvene as the building inspection commission. thank you.

>> in november of 2016, california voters passed proposition 64. the adult use of marijuana act. san franciscans overwhelmingly approved it by nearly 75%. and the law went into effect in january of 2018. [♪]

>> under california's new law, adults age 21 and over can legally possess up to 1 ounce of cannabis and grow up to six plants at home. adults in california can legally give up to 1 ounce to other adults. >> in the state of california, we passed a law that said adult consumption is legal. if you are an adult and in possession of certain amounts, you will no longer be tried. you will not be arrested or prosecuted for that. that is changing the landscape dramatically. [♪] >> to legalization of cannabis could bring tremendous economic and social benefits to cities like san francisco. >> this industry is projected to reach $22 billion by the year 2020. and that is just a few years away. >> it can be a huge legal industry in california. i think very shortly, the actual

growing of marijuana may become the biggest cash crop in the state and so you want that to be a legal tax paying cash crop, all the way down the line to a sales tax on the retail level. >> the california medical industry is a 3 billion-dollar industry last year. anticipating that multiplier as 20, 30, 50 times in the consumer marketplace once adult use is really in place, you could go ahead and apply that multiplier to revenue. it will be huge. >> when that underground economy becomes part of the regular tax paying employment economy of the bay area, it not only has a direct impact, that money has a ripple impact through the economy as well. >> it is not just about retail. it is not just about the sensor. is about manufacturing pick a

lot of innovative manufacturing is happening here in san francisco in addition to other parts of the state as well as the cultivation. we should be encouraging that. >> there is a vast array of jobs that are going to be available in the newly regulated cannabis industry. you can start at the top tier which a scientist working in testing labs. scientists working at extraction companies. and you work towards agricultural jobs. you have ones that will require less education and you look towards cannabis retail and see traditional retail jobs and you see general management jobs. those things that are similar to working at a bar restaurant or working at a retail store. >> we are offering, essentially, high paid manufacturing jobs. typical starting wage of 18-$20 an hour, almost no barrier to entry, you do not need an education. >> that means that people who do not have college educations, working-class people, will have an opportunity to have a job at

cultivating cannabis plants. there's a whole wide array of job opportunities from the seedling to the sale of the cannabis. [♪] >> last year, they said 26 million people came to san francisco. >> the tourism industry continues to be very robust here and the city and county of san francisco is about a billion-dollar industry. >> if we use a conservative cannabis user adoption rate to 15% that means 4 million tourists want that means 4 million tourists want to purchase cannabis. and we need to be ready for th them. >> in 2015, as adult use legalization efforts gained momentum in california, the supervisors created the san francisco cannabis state legalization task force. this task force offered to research and advice to the supervisors, the mayor and other city departments. >> we knew that adult use legalization was coming to the ballot and stat that would bring

with it a number of decisions that the city would have to make about zoning and regulation and so forth. and i decided at that time, at a know it was a great, that rather than have a fire drill after the ballot measure passes, as suspected it would, we should plan an event. so i authored a task force to spend a year studying it and we made it a broad-based task force. >> we prepared ourselves by developing a health impact assessment and partnered that with key stakeholder discussions with washington, oregon, colorado, to really learn lessons from their experience rolling out both adult and medicinal cannabis. >> within days of the passing of the proposition, ed lee called on agencies to act decisively. >> he issued an executive order asking the department of public health, along with planning and

other city departments to think through an internal working group around what we needed to do to consider writing this law. >> we collectively, i would say that was representatives from g.s.a., as well as the mayor's office, met with a lot of departments to talk through what prop 64 and the implementation of prop 64 it meant to them. >> the mayor proposed an office of cannabis, a one-stop shop for permits allowing operators to grow and sell cannabis. >> he wanted a smart structure. he wanted a regulatory structure that ensured that kids didn't have access and community's were safe and that consumers were safe. and he wanted to ensure, more importantly, it was a regulatory structure that encouraged diversity and inclusivity. >> this is an office that will be solely charged with a duty of wanting not only the policies

that we create, implementing and enforcing them, but also executing the licenses that are needed. we're talking about 20 different licenses that will put us into compliance with what is happening on the state level. >> this is a highly, highly regulated industry now, at this point. we have anywhere from 7-10 departments that will be working with these industry participants as they go through the permitting process. that is a lot of work at a loss of coordination. we are creating a permitting process that is smart and is digital. it is much easier for the user and for community input, and is less mired in bureaucracy. >> for the first time ever in san francisco history, standalone licenses are available for all aspects of the nonretail side of the cannabis industry. now, a cultivator can go in to the department of building inspection and to the department of health and say, with this

first registered and temporary license, and then what will eventually be a permanent license, this is the project, this is what i am going to do. >> very rarely in city government do we interact with industries that are asking to be regulated. these guys want to be regulated. they want to be compliant. they want to work with the city. that is rare. >> san francisco has created a temporary licensing process so that the pre-existing operators here in san francisco can apply for a temporary state licensed. >> we have taken teams of up to 12 inspectors to inspect the facility twice a day. we have been doing that with the department of building inspection and the department of public health. and the fire department. >> it is really important for the industry to know that we are treating them like industry. like manufacturing. like coworkers pick so that is the way we are approaching this from a health and safety and a

consumer protection network. this is just the way practice happens with restaurants or manufacturing facilities. >> because there are so many pieces of industry that people haven't even thought about. there are different permits for each piece. you have to set up a permitting system for growing, for manufacturing, for testing. for delivery. for retail. you have to make sure that there is an appropriate health code. certainly the regulation of alcohol in terms of restaurants and retail it's probably a model for how this industry will be regulated as well, both on sale and consumption. >> it is completely uncharted territory. there is a blessing and a curse with that. it is exciting because we are on a new frontier, but it is very nerve-racking because there's a lot at stake. and quite frankly, being san francisco, being the state of california, people are looking to us. >> we hope that cannabis does

become more of an accepted part of society in the same way that alcohol is, the same way coffee is. >> it is a very innovative fear, particularly around manufacturing. san francisco could be an epicenter. >> san francisco can be a leader here. a global leader in the cannabis movement and set a bar just to other communities and cities and states and this nation how it is done. [♪]