it would allow for transfers of up to 50% to be done via permit amendment so long as the permittees agree to 15 months of equity incubation. it further states that no ownership interest of 50% or more can be transferred. there is also at the end of that an amendment to section 331022 that will allow existing medical cannabis dispensaries to change their form from a corporate form to another form so long as they provide notice to the director of the office of khanna kbis. happy to answer any questions. >> supervisor safai: -- cannabis. happy to answer any questions. >> supervisor safai: that was quite a bit. so it's on here? >> so the first three amendments to article 16 amendments are all on one sheet, and the article 33 amendments are on a different set. >> supervis >> president cohen: mr. chair? >> supervisor safai: yes. >> president cohen: may i be recognized? >> supervisor safai: sure. >> president cohen: i'm not a voting member on this body, but i do have a couple of questions on the amendments that are being introduced. my understanding is we're looking for diversity and ownership -

. >> if we calendar an item, the permittee has to come back, and then, we kind of rehash all this again. >> so maybe there's a more creative way -- >> well, i think definitely respect the idea that there is an appeal. i don't actually know the full content of the appeal, but i imagine that it's questioning the actual number decibel limit and how we measure that? i don't know -- is that -- >> so we haven't received miss milano's submission yet because it's due on friday. it is very much pending -- in terms of the current status, in terms of my prehearing statement, it's in the director's report. so the appeal is specifically around the citation that we gave on october 13 when she was peaking around 123.7, which is above her db limit of 116. but since i haven't received her response yet, i don't know what her arguments are. >> sure. i think it's fair to talk about a limiter because we're not talking about the decibel level, we're not talking about how we measure that -- but we're not talking about our own equipment. i think she's going to make an argument that our equipment sucks. what sh

where there was errors in the mailings from these companies, and the question is is that if the permittee is supposed to send out notification, and it's a third party, and they don't send out that notification, in my eyes, that would make it deficient. >> i can't speak to that. the department relies on the affidavit of the subcontractor under penalty of perjury. >> commissioner honda: so that was my question. so what happens if you're relied on the contract subcontractor, and the subcontractor has not performed. so what's the next process for the city at that point? >> i believe that, you know, i would have to get back to you on the answer -- that's a process question, generally, that we would have to i think respond to subsequently on that. but my understanding is what we rely on is procedure that's consistent under the planning code and by the department of building inspections. it's the same process that all of the other agencies use in their notifications. >> commissioner honda: okay. thank you. >> commissioner lazarus: i have one other question, and i can't remember if this is for yo

so it's clear, and the permittee signs off on this. regarding the issue whether or not it's a retail food establishment, that's not an issue here. because article 19-h is clear, a new permit shall not be issued if it's within 500 feet of a school or an existing tobacco -- permitted tobacco establishment. the exception one applies to retail food establishments and/or a tobacco smoke shop, cigar smoke shop, which is unapplicable here. appellant is correct, the previous owners were in the business of selling tobacco products, however, it changed ownership over a course of time, and therefore, the exception that they are referencing, again, applies to retail food establishments also requires a duration of the original permit holder, and the original permit holder did not sell the business to appellants nor as a retail food establishment. >> commissioner honda: i'm sorry, can you repeat that again? >> the original -- we've heard testimony that there was at least -- there was a change from the original owner to i believe flyers before it wen