i think that should be dph who is receiving these forms. third, counsel did not bring the law for you. i have a copy -- unfortunately it's very marked up and i don't feel comfortable providing it to a deciding board. i have no secrets, but it would just be inappropriate to share my attorney work product with you, but i can tell you this much: the section that he is referring to is "business and profession code section 46-12." and it provides that massage establishments that only employee california-licensed massage practitioners. it goes on to provide however that even for those establishments, a city/county may still adopt reasonable health and safety requirements including requirements in regard to reasonable attire. that is subsection 6. or b-6. and subsection c continues, "that nothing about the state regulatory section shall preclude a local ordinance from authorizing suspension, revocation or other restriction of a license or performance for violation of this chapter or of the local ordinance that occurred at the business premise." i

well, no. 1 the dph did not comply with their own code section. it is clear as a bell and it's been on the books for nine years and it routinely ignored. i checked my records, three or four years ago, they always guyed complied with this notice requirement, but now there is there trend that it's really, really short and i wonder why they are doing that. because the law is clear. before any hearing is conducted under this section, section 19-{^21} you shall provide permitee at least 20 days written notice. permitee only got 12 days. back to this document, you will see again, she was cited under section 19-21. let's keep looking at this document. failure -- down here in red ink says, "failure to appear may result in -- they have two boxes here. the second box is suspension, revocation of your permit to operate the above referenced site. the box is unchecked. you may have read in the respondent's supplemental brief. secondly, you will look at allowing illegal activity to occur on the premises. no reference. usually they might incorporate by reference

could affect how quickly we can release building permits because those would have to be certified by dph because we can issue the building permit. i don't expect that to move through the legislature until january or february. but with that, that's about it. state wise, nothing is going on. as you know the state legislature is in recess and will be until january. >> sorry, bill. commissioner lee has a question. >> the shared housing ordinance, will that come before the code advisory committee before it becomes --. >> i am assuming, yes, it will go to cac for review once we actually have the legislation. right now we don't have the legislation. >> my other concern there, bill, is this, you know, the drilling. have you read the legislation in detail? >> on shared housing? on the toxic -- yeah, i've had a look at the current draft. it doesn't look too onerous at this point. it does rely on dph and planning updating the existing kind of ma-her hot spots and a lot of it i think is going to be more affecting dph and puc, which may have infrastructure projects going on in different parts of the

but i also looked in dph records and looks more like it was 2006. they don't suspend that often. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> in addressing the severity of the penalty, in fact, under the law, under both the ordinance and the regulations, the only penaltis that require a showing of prior violations in order to increase are the administrative fines. from the very first infraction the department of public health has the discretion to revoke a massage permit. the fact it hasn't in this case despite repeated violations, discovered both by the public health inspectors and in operations with the police is a gift. it is a gift from the department of public health that that permit will still exist after this hearing, if the decision here is upheld. i really don't think there is any ground to reduce the penalty. i think if anything, the penalty is still quite gracious. you have a repeat violator in front of you. she is unpreentent and keeps doing it. the attempts to nit pick with the hearings and was everything that we did absolutely perfect? no, but that

so, we're happy to have thomas aragon here from dph. (applause) >> good morning. thank you for being here. one of the ways that i think about this is that pedestrian safety is an important public health issue. and the way i think about it is that i'm raising three children here in the city. i have a 16-year-old, a 15 year old, and a 12-year-old. and what we want -- we want the city to be safer than whether they're biking, walking, going to school. and so that when we invest in pedestrian safety, we're really investing in the future of our city in our children. and, so, from our perspective, pedestrian safety is a public health issue and it's really important for us to invest in making sure that it's safe. the other thing to think about when we think about pedestrian safety is that there's really a multiplier effect. when we have walkable communities, when people are able to walk, not only is it healthy for them -- not only is it healthy for them, but we also have less people that are driving. it helps to protect the environment. so, it really helps to protect ever

she certainly had an opportunity to present her case to dph and if she didn't, she certainly had that unt opportunity and more before you. i don't think there is any grounds to overturn the hearing officer's decision and i hope you agree. >> thank you >> are you aware of any other suspensions? how often do these type of establishments have violations and is there a normal standard of suspension or track record? >> i'm not prepared to talk about all of dph's massage cases. i am prepared to talk about this one. i can have ed walsh talk about that one. he is the inspector. >> okay. >> would you like him to? >> if he is able to answer that question. >> are you? >> yes. >> good evening commissioners. i'm ed walsh, i'm the senior environmental health inspector of the massage program for about 8.5 years. i have 28 years' experience as being a city employee with the city and county of san francisco, as a health inspector. regarding penalties for violations, we have a number of violations that we look for, and we fine people or suspend permits. most common violations are practitioners without

and the other key piece is dph is an immediate back up to that with the ability to use our clinics and our other partners to stand up potentially alternate care centers and other types of, depeplding on the situation, other types of areas where people can be triaged or get information or get care if necessary. so those plans are in place, we're constantly developing them because we have to really look and we don't have the ability to predesignate every site, after an earthquake we need to make sure each and every site we announce to the public is safe before it's announced so it's a complex type of situation with constant situational awareness that has to be included. >> i just wanted to add on to that, that dph has a great resource of clinics. we are working with our clinics to take on those potentially minor trauma victims that they can treat and offload the hospitals. it would be a matter of triaging them at the hospital level and get them over there. >> just one other key point on that. we would also be working very closely with our partners in dem and the communications sector to

continued violation of the san francisco health code and california labor code would jeopardize the dph permits that they held for their facility. in the 2011 decision, the decision letter ordered the owners to immediately cease and desist smoking within the enclosed areas of the restaurant. it also required them to immediately remove all the smoking equipment and devices from the restaurant. so in response to the 2011 decision letter, marrakech has sent an email stating that they stopped serving the hooka and we found out later that was not true. we started to receive complaints in may and june of 2012 and i went out july 21st and basically conducted another unannounced investigation and i saw one employee was attempted to hide two group of patrons smoking hooka in a private area of the restaurant. i also saw an employee carrying a hooka pipe and when he saw me he turned around and headed down a flight of stairs located in the back of the dining area. then i did go down to the basement level, where they have the hooka pipes and hoses in the storage rooms. and were also open tobacco con

conversation among the departments to make sure that applicants who are come intion through either hsa or dph will qualify for medi-cal or who qualify for food stamps may likewise see whether or not they're eligible for some of the other programs? >> it is especially part of the conversation we're having with the affordable care act that goes in next january. yes, so, we are having the conversations, but so far i will say it's been compartment alliesed. >> but the vision is to get there? >> yes, absolutely. * >> thank you. i believe that the budget analyst has a report on this item. >> madam chair, members of the committee, as shown in table 1 on page 3 of our report, the proposed 105,000 code for america grant would provide 29% of the total project costs of $363,000. it is also reflected in that table the city would provide the balance of 255,000 or 71% of matching funds with 75,000 as the committee has pointed out of general fund revenues from hsa's fiscal year 2012-13 budget. and then 180,000 of revenues allocated to the department of technology's 12-13 budget and that's through work order

if that ends up exceeding levels that dph deems appropriate or healthy for the people who may be living there. >> any way it remains under discussion and we will be having more information on this probably in the next month or two. >> i don't really have much to add on the state legislation, i am waiting for... to go through some of the new bills. a lot of the bills that did not get signed here in september, died, some of them may be reintroduced. it will effect our jurisdiction as well as others throughout the state and i hope to have more on that next month. >> commissioner walker? >> i think that the seismic retrofitting, i actually spoke to mr. odalini, and there are anticipating introducing this the first meeting in february. and i think that it is wonderful. i think that anybody in our department who has had anything to do with it and the seismic and the mandatory process deserves a pat on the back, this is an important thing that will help to bring the oldest buildings in the city up to safety code. hopefully, so, i just would like to say that any of us who can help with getting

management coordinators from each of the hospitals throughout san francisco who mead regularly with dph and dem to plan and prepare for our medical response. >> as rob mentioned earlier, one of the primary reasons for the medical exchange is to get an understanding of the capabilities, what can the military bring and what are some of the challenges that we as civilians are going to face when we have this large number of casualties. so what i'd like to hear from our civilian panelists is what were some of our observations about the capabilities the military demonstrated down at moffatt >> i think one of the challenges the city faces in a big medical surge event is if patients have to be evacuated and the bridges were out and how would we do that? yesterday we saw a wide range of patient movement vehicles, basically, and it was great to see all those resources and be aware of them. we saw the dual use vehicle from the va that there was one in san francisco and there's one in palo alto and those can take litters of patients. we saw multiple helicopters and we saw the c130j all of those wer