tv [untitled] July 27, 2014 9:00am-9:31am PDT
typically give that permit i can't say yes or no the person i spoke with today, the plumbing inspector didn't seem to think it was a problem but if the i would like to speak to someone at a higher level to get that answered. >> okay. >> but time wise probably a month would be enough and let them know it's part of the process and do our research a little bit quicker. >> i don't know if the housing inspection services i'm not sure where their coming up with their information. >> we can put heat. >> especially, if increase a deadline i can definitely tell them that. >> perfect. >> director. >> do you want to propose it. >> i'll suggest a date in
october perhaps the second or third meeting in the month. perhaps the 15th. it's easy for chris to say and why not do it a little bit sooner >> october 8th. >> okay. i'm not sure who's motion. >> okay. i'll make the motion to continue to october 8th for the housing inspectors to continue and conclude its investigation as well as the department of the building inspection to explore whether or not the permit at issue should have a building permit. would you want any additional briefing? no >> no.
>> she wants lots. >> i'm leaving this for everyone else mr. pacheco. >> we have a motion then from commissioner hwang to continue this to october's 8 any public comment? 2014 the public hearing has been held to allow the dbi time to conclude it's analysis. on that motion and no additional briefing is allowed. commissioner fung. no. the vice president is absent. commissioner president lazarus. commissioner honda. thank you. the vote is 3 to one the matter is continued actually october 8th >> we'll take a 5 minute break.
>> welcome back to the wednesday, july 23, 2014, board of appeals there is an overflow room available for people not able to find space in this room room 421. so i want everyone to know we're calling item 8 greg vs. the department of health on the issuance of may 23rd to the wellness health center for the medical cannabis dispensary hearing i want to swear in the individuals that want to testify at tonight hamburger that were not here previously i'm
>> some people are coming in office of the city administrator not all are going to speak act at this time we're to conduct a second swearing in process if you wish to have the board tell our testify explain stand and raise your right hand after you've been sworn under please note any member of the public may take this without oath
according to the sunset ordinance. >> no one worries about to take the oath. >> dvd dvd. >> thank you. thank you >> so we'll start with mr. robert for the appellant that has 7 minutes. >> good evening chair and the members of the board of appeals we're here tonight an, an nc d permit that was issued to waterfall wellness to operate an mc d the board need only consider the simple facts not get imbroiltd with a lot of
extraneous stuff decide the litigation too the permit and the commission and really don't need to entertain a dispute between the parties. the motivations don't matter what we have a simple case should the city entrust the gentleman and it's stepdaughter with an mc d permit they are the urban relieve before mr. shep came in and began operating the waterfall wellness at the location. i'm sorry, i have a couple of things for the overhead.
and, of course, >> you had it correct the first time. >> now again, you don't need to get into the disputes between the parties are those issues that are being litigated between them we know in 2011 shortly after the location had a fire caused by unpermitted i uninspected electrical work throughout the building and an, anlogically grow specific to conditions the planning commission placed on the permit the upstairs unit was to remain an residential unit the d b.a. staff mr. larry who ran the mc d
program made a recommendation as the doctor that this operator you can see should be barred from operatidispensary they fou they were stealing power and bypassed the pg&e meter and had installed the grow contrary to the grow permissions in state law and caused the fire that endargd obviously everyone in the neighborhood he essentially and the building burnt so it was red-tagged by the dbi. to my understanding and from there the place was closed down and dbi issued the notice and
post fines and dph thought they addressed the issue to water wellness and mr. shep and the permit from north cal was revoked in the initial attachment to our brief. so we know about that history that's not stuff you need to obtain from newspapers or need to look at unscrub i cannot obligations only from the staff stay and the dph and city police department and i guess those are those 3. now you is well, that was several years ago why should we take away the permit now mr.
will there are a number of reasons the first this is is an overwhelming need to treat that as a business as the city attorney put it a lack active business because of personal income tax those are personal debt that create a need for a potentially great amount of money those taxes have been taking care of by the way, in fact, the documents submitted to this board clearly shouz shows we are talking two different tax more than 1/3rd of a million dollars a substantial amount balloons to the city was unpaid
by the time he burned down the building and now he summits a document showing a zero balance owed on a different sales account don't be fooled there's a liability but at the time waterfall was run by mr. shep it was more than a 3rd of a million dollars there's a compelling reason you shouldn't trust it as a nonprofit that the state requires and the city's own owners we know this operator and he's on the permit so the fact he had his stepdaughter sign the operation at the hearing fwrts d b h he wasn't an applicant and
it was issued. to both mr. mendez and at that time, hearing they referred to it as a family business it was not a family business it was about a nonprofit that helped patient we're happy to answer our esquires questions if you have questions about the litigation all of the history behind it but i don't think you need to go there when he was entrusted with the permittee stole the pg&e so if you have any questions, i'll be happy to answer them >> okay. we can hear if the permit holder now. >> permit holder first then the
department. >> the permit holder will speak first then the department thank you. >> good evening. i'm paul, i represent the permit holder who's present. i'm not going to address the points in my brief i assume the panel has read it i want to add one point there are a vantage point in the presentation this evening. a lot of misty and muddy waters i don't know which documents are claimed to be forged and you've not been apprised it seems like there's a lot of lose allegations i want you to keep in mind there's a situation we're going to through everything against the wall and
see what sticks he know that mr. shep was an insiderer of waterfall at some point he had access to very imitate financial information regarding the company he presented in his opening brief and he was structural he was an officer and director which is what the background for that litigation and that litigation is still that pending where those issues will be worked out and not done here they should addressed in the proper forum we have the permit issued by department of health ancient history is ancient history four months ago might be ancient history the
permit has bun issued i don't see anything in the brief this was a rehash of what happened before and it's against a backdrop of a rivalry a business rifley it's apparent from the litigation and the documents that have been submitted to you. so unless there's questions we're ready to summit the matters there's litigations that have to go to the bona fide of the appeal itself why is it being done. my submission it's being done that to take away the permit under from the permit hordes so mr. shep casca get his own permit this is not a benign member of the public he has his
own permit and unless there's questions i'll summit open the briefing thank you very much >> we can hear from the department now. >> good evening, commissioners madam chair i'm on behalf of the respondent of department of health so this started with the directors hearing so that means the director of health has designated that essentially the health officer of the department to hear those permit appeal matters and that's because article 33 is in the health code this is the health issue. and the remits in article 33 are
pretty state your name for the record and the majority of those concerns health issues for example, does the dispensary operate a growth on site do they intend to allow smoking within the facility do they summit american people accurate security plan those are all health related concerned that can be traced back to the state law the com pack at act you have the director that heard in this matter from both appellant here today as well as the party of interest you've heard from the members of the public he had
before him the paperwork submitted by ms. michelle who was seeking to become the sole owner on the permit and he granted the change of ownership. this demands of commentary papers and forged signatures there's no dlagsdz before you that anything was forged the whole discussion about the suspension of the permit as a result of the fire in the discovery of load firearm back in 2007 that is indeed old history. the suspension was issued for
thirty days and there were no conditions attached. during that time period appellant had a relationship with the real parties trustee he was involved. where was he when all this was going on you don't even need to ask that. the entire focus should be on the directors decision to grant the appeal which was to i'm sorry to grant the request to the change of ownership. if you have any questions? >> commissioner president lazarus i understand the zoning administer wants an opportunity to speak directly to the board.
>> thank you scott sanchez planning department i want to be available if there's any questions based on the arguments that have been put forward i didn't hear any questions but to be available for any questions that come up. >> okay. we can take public comment i want to see a show of hands how many people want to speak the blood public comment can you line up on that side of the room that will be helpful in moving forward the process. the first person can come to the microphone >> mrandz i do have a question. maybe i can wait until after the public - i'm just kidding. i'm thinking on the permitting some of the questions the challenge raised by the appellant relate to non-payment
of taxes would that ever b be a consideration from our department >> excellent question no. under the land use regulations the planning department and planning commission responsible for that the medical cannabis dispensary the department is responsible for the permits so that's what's before you is the permitting of the land use an mc d can operate under the planning code under the pressure view of the public health >> that's not before the public health. >> if they to tinform public hh
then in violation of the permit. >> one moment we're determining if there are other people. >> the city attorney is going to ask but we're okay if you want to start. >> 3 minutes. >> okay first speaker come to the. if you would fill out a card and hand to mr. pacheco it is not required by helps in the preparation of minutes >> good evening appeals committee i'm a representative with the united food commercial union local 5 we represent $27,000 spanning from king city to oregon we represent companies like safeway all the major food employers we were doing a card
check at that location on ocean we stepped up to the plate away because they were having the illegal grow and stealing of electrical we didn't want a part of we firmly building in living wage pension and health and welfare contributions and giving back to the community a that's why we stepped up to the plate away from mission avenue we have other cannabis under the contract that provides for everything i've spoken about and i have one question do i currently have a financial relationship with the appellant? >> with whom. >> greg. >> yes. we have a contract if vallejo he was a cannabis there. >> when you stepped away and
trying to do your card check neutrality or campaign effort was that in 2006 or - >> yeah. i'm not sure of the timing but. >> when you were making the effort to organize the shop and at this time was it possible that state is something euyou might consider. >> sure if the code ethic is followed we're not going to break the rules and regulations. >> thank you. next speaker. step forward. >> good evening madam speaker and board members i'm ed, i submit to you well over 35 speaker cards in opposition to
the granting of the license to have the permit to daniel mendez. i ask those in opposition please stand at this point. those ladies and gentlemen, are san francisco residents looking for safe access and not going to find it today at the wellness will i'm a member of the united local 5. and i'm also the committee chair of the california soon to be apprentice program i too am a collective member anothers waterfall wellness i've never received a notification of any type of board of directors meeting or voting for the new membership we're to be invited and no notification to my of the members hence to this date so i
ask you to look at article 33 of the department of health and i believe in the department of health article 33 it does not talk about nutrition in the clause and roberts showed that larry kessler in charge of the permitting was clear daniel mendez was to be barred with plain and simple and at the dph hearing rob added daniel mendez onto the permit it was not - he thought added on and rob was new to the organization not new to the organization but new to the complexity of cannabis that's an industry we're going elapsing
about so i ask you to look at this the fact is you've got an illegal grow and a stolen power and firearm did attrition allow someone a second chance i don't understand. the department of public heartache record and i ask you revoke this issuance >> we can't have people standing by the door you need to find a seat or go into the overflow. >> we have an access issue if people on this side of the room go to the other side of the room but find a seat or go to the overflow room. >> can i ask you a question and
yes. >> other than the prior bad acts let's call them that what specifically would be hypothetical new potential bad acts are you basing our position on. is there anything specific to date that's more current than things that occurred a couple years ago >> it would be definite. >> well, i could send you to we'd maps it's essentially the yellow packages where to find a cannabis clause if you look at the hostile takeover in january
you'll notice the refunds have diminished and there's a thulg mentality so it's available. >> we'd maps and we'd maps. >> okay. thank you. >> >> next speaker. >> people standing by that door need to find a seat please or move away from the door. >> okay. good evening board of appeals i'm a policymaker for over a decade i want to say in article 33 there's more broad government than just checking boxed so i