than the regents matter and that's why i went for full revocation. but the fine -- commissioner fung: but commissioners, you are mick -- mixing things up. what was brought forward was revocation. commissioner garcia: yeah, i meant suspension. commissioner fung: and they're talking about a fine in lieu of anything else. >> it's not necessary. so you're adding on to the revocation? commissioner garcia: right. the acceptance of an offer to pay a $1,425 fine bit appellant. commissioner goh: i think commissioner fung's point is that that is not an actual offer. it was to pay that in lieu of the revocation or suspension. we could get clarification. i think thts it the -- that is the a little bit of a sticky wicket to get into. commissioner hwang: she's nodding. commissioner goh: i would support the revocation of the color scheme. commissioner fung: i'd like to ask mr. murray one or two questions related to that. mr. murray? if a color scheme is revoked, can the -- can any citizen reapply for a new color scheme in one year? >> can -- well, first off if a co

the legal basis for revocation is, as i understand, a charging official may file a complaint for revocation for 1060-20 if the committee has knowingly made false or misleading or fraudulent statements of the material fact in the application for the permit. now, there is a significant difference between this permit holder's application for entertainment and the reality of what they are doing today, a significant difference. the summary of the difference are -- no current approved security plan for the existing or current entertainment venue, a different manager, a different name, a different target age group, a different type of entertainment, different business hours, and a different occupancy. as it relates to a 30-day suspension, which i think is minimal they're eligible for, from just one of the incidents that i outlined, the shooting of the san francisco police officer, there's a legal basis for suspension in this case. and frankly, i think this commission know what is the legal basis is. and i'm not going to read the code to you. now, in fairness to the permit holder, she did reach out

if you disagree with a verification -- with the revocation of his medallion, we believe the revocation of his color scheme permit our monetary fine is important and should be done. thank you. commissioner fung: mr. murray, part of the reasons why we continue this case, it was not clearly stated, at least for myself, we understood the fact that you brought ford -- that you brought forward with this particular medallion holder. what i was looking for was some type of nexus between the penalties that you have written a new statute verses what you have traditionally done in similar instances related to not only the workman's comp, but the other issues. and what you have proposed in your brief. i don't see that nexus. i have given you an opportunity, if you like to respond to that. >> >> so, i mean the way that i'm understanding the question is why were things done a certain way before and being done a certain way today? is that correct? commissioner fung: no. let me be more specific then. the statutes call for, there are some monetary penalties, up to $500 for a major infraction. i don't k

the second round for revocation would be if a public nuisance was being created where the permitee's persistent action or inaction was continuing to cause serious problems that amounted to a public nuisance. this ordinance does not restrict the entertainment commission's suspension options nor require revocation in any particular instance. it simply provides another enforcement tool in compelling cases, and for these types of permit revocations, permitees would be ineligible to apply for year. i want to thank both the entertainment commission as well as other industry organizations for their support in is because everyone from law enforcement and neighborhood groups to the entertainment industry understand that it is important for the city to have revocation tools at its disposal. not to say that they will always be used, but to give them an option in certain more difficult cases to be the right thing. i would like to ask ms. kane if you have any comments on this from the perspective of the entertainment commission. i know you provided a letter of support earlier, but if you have any

the revocation of the color scheme is upheld. the revocation of the medallion is upheld for one year. president peterson: let us take a short break. president peterson: welcome back to the meeting of the board of appeals. we did not administer the oath early in the meeting. i will ask to do that again, since people may have come in since that was done. >> please stand if you were not sworn in at 5:00 and intend to testify in any further hearing. thank you. do you solemnly swear or affirm that the testimony you are about to give will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? thank you. president peterson: thank you. please call item no. 8. >> : item eight, appeal no. 10- 042, arza trust versus the department of building inspection. it is protesting the issuance to bille cayrot trustee, permit to alter a building. president peterson: if you would like to step forward. you have seven minutes. >> president peterson and commissioners, i and the trustee for arza trust. this balcony is about 5.5 feet from our property li

and -- i brought this up with supervisor chiu when he was before us on revocation, and he seemed to just pass it off with comments like, the more we crack down on clubs, the less necessary suspension or revocation hearings are going to be known, unfortunately the more we crack down on club, the more we're going to need advice from the city attorney in order to give everyone their due process. so, staff, if you could pass on a request for -- from at least one commissioner, i'm sure it is probably all of the commissioners that they're going to have to take into account the fact that we need more city attorney time, if we're going to do our job right. i think i resolved that problem. i want to direct the acting director to buy an eight ball, you ask questions to. >> you mean a hanl i think eight ball? >> yeah. >> there are other kinds of eight balls. to answer all of our questions. >> that it would. so just really quickly, i wasn't here at the last meeting because i was in preproduction for -- i'm going, i'm going to shut up real quick here. about the preproduction for main stage pride, i w

. >> the first hearing in committee for the revocation legislation is next monday. but as was stated, there will be at least one committee hearing, and then it has to be moved to the full board for two hearings. so it will take some time -- two readings at the board. so revocation is probably not viable in the time frame that it seems the commission wants to move. however, i also want to remind the commission that any 30-day suspension requests from you to staff requires a 30-day notice to the permit holder. so if we were to notice the permit holder as soon as tomorrow, there's a 30-day notice period before we can hold a suspension hearing in this room. >> let me ask you this question because i may amend my motion. do i have to make a motion for us to consider suspension? because that is what i just did in my motion. in my motion, i moved to not approve the amended permit and to continue this to the next meeting, where we would consider a suspension motion. is that a correct motion, or do i not have to make that motion? can we considering a suspension without it bei

those two actions need to be taken for us to lift the revocation and release it from the title. if someone fails to pay the assessment costs, we have many orders of abatement still on properties. on a manual basis we do this annually, replacing those costs with reporting and interest charges on the tax bill according to the board of supervisors occurring within the next two weeks of august 3. generally that is the way that the process works right now. the timing and volume of cases in which we did the referral varies quite a lot, there is a lot of history from old cases the new cases. the priority is generally gauge of on safety issues, which are of paramount importance. immediate public safety and any other criteria used to get compliance. if there are specific questions you might have all? >> medstar? it is my understanding that an inspector goes out on a complaint, saying something like he issues a letter, the need to correct this within 30 days and if you do not stop correcting it, 10 days afterwards, 40 days from now, the notice of violation becomes valid. >> not entirely c

item five, ordinance amending the san francisco police could to expand a grounds for revocation of place of entertainment permits, extended hours premises permits, and onetime event permits to include public safety considerations were operation of the permit poses a substantial risk of physical harm or injury to individuals and where the pretty's persistent action or inaction causes serious or continued problems that amount to a public nuisance -- the permitee's persisted action. supervisor chiu: we have two items in front of us that have to do it public safety issues. the first is the regular quarterly update from the entertainment commission, having to do with statistics surrounding public safety incidences' related to nighttime violence. this quarterly report came out of the legislation that we passed last year concerning entertainment where we had heard from numerous members of the public that there had been many complaints brought by neighbors and by the san francisco police department that appeared to be going into a black hole where there was no follow-up by the entertainment comm

it is not that we are opposed to a revocation, it is just in those places or anchored the farmers could be quickly recruited into the insurgent forces. >> i am glad we got both sides on that thing. >> if we are spending about $100 billion per year right now on the afghanistan problem and a farmer's income is about half a billion dollars, what are the implications that the united states said we would buy all of this from but farmers which is heavily are spending, how does that play out? we are targeting certain farmers or of some kinds of intelligence, would there be a way that we could more effectively control the markets and create a monopoly using our own economic power directly? >> two different issues here. there is a proposal on the table. to buy all the poppy in afghanistan and make more people for medicine and all the parts of the third world that do not have enough. i think that is wrong that they do not have been of more feed because they do that heaven of regulation. 4% of the arable land in afghanistan is used for pop before me. what would happen if we bought all the cropp ta

he said that he welcomed a full public airing of his revocation. is that really his position? caller: they do welcome it to an extent. the thought is that a lot of that is was sought in the sense of increasing his own bargaining position here. that he would like to go forward with this. this puts pressure on the democrats, who would like to avoid the whole thing because we are facing reelection on the house side. no one wants this hanging around from there and go. republicans would, of course, like to keep this going and have a public airing of the charges. what is worse than for the democrats if this goes forward, september 13 would be what amounts to a public trial for mr. rangel on this. again, closer to november would give the republicans the corruption issue. there is pressure on mr. rangel from both sides. the republicans, are they so dug in that they will not go along with an agreement if one can be reached? there we are. we are looking at 1:00. a lot of abuzz yesterday was that mr. rangel might go ahead and latest out through today. and then you have further negotiatio

it is not that we are opposed to eradication, it is opposed to the revocation in those places where -- opposed to the eradication in those places could berngry farmsers recruited. >> i am glad we got both sides. >> i am from the criminal justice policy foundation. if we are spending about $100 billion a year right now on the afghanistan problem and the farmer's income is about 1/2 billion, what are the implications if the united states were to say, let's by all that from the farmers? how does that play out? to the extent that what we are doing now envisions that we are targeting certain farmers or we have certain kinds of intelligence, would there be a way that we could work effectively control the market and affect the monopoly in using our own economic power directly? >> two different issues here. there is a proposal on the table to buy all the poppy in afghanistan and make morphine for madisoedicine. they have regulations. 4% of the airable land is now used for poppy farming. what would happen? they would grow two poppy crops. there is a couple of years of production already in inv