The San Francisco Entertainment Commission convened on July 4, 2025, to address the potential revocation of the entertainment permit for Stratos Nightclub, located at 358 Ocean Avenue. This hearing was initiated following a complaint filed against permit holder Jose Montesinos, alleging violations of the San Francisco Police Code.

The meeting began with an overview of the legal framework governing the permit's revocation, referencing specific sections of the administrative code and police code that outline the conditions under which a permit may be suspended or revoked. The commission emphasized its commitment to conducting the hearing fairly and impartially, allowing both the charging party and the permit holder to present their cases.

Maggie Weiland, the director of the entertainment commission, represented the city as the charging official, supported by Deputy Director Caitlin Azevedo and General Counsel Sarah Crowley. Alejo Iskandari appeared on behalf of the permit holder, Jose Montesinos.

Public comments were solicited, revealing a mix of community concerns and support for the nightclub. Several residents voiced complaints about noise disturbances and safety issues associated with the venue, citing incidents of violence and ongoing disturbances that have persisted over the years. One resident expressed frustration over the lack of change despite numerous complaints, suggesting that if the nightclub were located in a different neighborhood, it would have lost its permit long ago.

Community representatives, including District 11's public safety liaison, highlighted the nightclub's history of violence and management issues, urging the commission to consider public safety in their decision. They pointed out that the nightclub had received multiple warnings and had failed to implement adequate safety measures, such as proper security wanding.

Conversely, several supporters of Stratos Nightclub defended its role as a community gathering place, emphasizing its importance for cultural celebrations and social interactions. They argued that the nightclub has made efforts to improve safety and that the actions of a few individuals should not reflect on the establishment as a whole.

The commission concluded the public comment period after hearing from various stakeholders, including long-time patrons who described the nightclub as a vital part of their community life. The hearing will continue as the commission deliberates on the evidence presented and considers the implications of their decision on both public safety and community culture.