Supervisors approve health and planning code changes to tighten oversight of massage establishments

The Board of Supervisors on Tuesday passed, on first reading, two ordinances to tighten local oversight of massage practitioners and establishments aimed at preventing illicit activity while preserving legitimate businesses.

Supervisor Katie Tang, the lead sponsor, said the measures would give city departments additional tools to regulate establishments where some activity may not be legitimate massage services.

"We're really trying to give our city departments the additional tools that they need to properly regulate activities happening in our massage establishments," Supervisor Tang said during the discussion.

What the ordinances would do: The first ordinance amends the health code to revise regulation of massage practitioners, establishments and out-call services. It eliminates an exemption that previously allowed businesses staffed only by massage practitioners certified by the California Massage Therapy Council to avoid local permitting and regulatory oversight; increases instructional-hour requirements for practitioner permits; authorizes denial of permits for applicants convicted of crimes related to human trafficking; and incorporates state trafficking-posting requirements into local enforcement.

The second ordinance amends the planning code to require conditional use permits for many massage establishments (with specified exceptions), makes conforming amendments, and affirms the Planning Department’s California Environmental Quality Act determination.

Supporters emphasized enforcement against trafficking while preserving legitimate small businesses. Supervisor Wiener, who worked with Tang after committee review, thanked the sponsor and pledged to pursue follow-up legislation seeking exemptions and procedural changes to reduce burdens on small and solo practitioners.

"We are going to work on trailing legislation...and see if we can make them succeed," Supervisor Wiener said, while noting committee-level amendments that will seek to clarify exemptions for solo practitioners and co-locations with other health professionals.

Key clarifications raised during debate: Supervisors described amendments to grandfather existing lawfully operating businesses if they meet specified criteria, exempt solo practitioners from conditional use requirements, and allow up to four solo practitioners to co-locate without triggering a conditional use. Wiener said his office will pursue amendments to extend some of those exemptions in co-location cases and asked the Planning Commission to study whether an expedited conditional-use process could apply to massage practitioners.

Vote and next steps: The two ordinances were taken together and passed unanimously on first reading without objection. Several supervisors said they expect additional “trailing” legislation to refine exemptions, grandfathering rules and procedural timelines before second reading.

Context: Supporters and opponents agreed the city must balance enforcement against human trafficking fronts with preserving legitimate massage therapy businesses and minimizing burdens on small proprietors. The bills reference state human-trafficking rules and aim to close a regulatory gap that emerged after state law changes in 2009.

Implementation: City departments — the Department of Public Health and Planning Department — will implement the permitting and enforcement changes; supervisors signaled continued collaboration to adjust exemptions and the conditional-use process.

Provenance: The ordinances were introduced in the agenda at the board meeting and were discussed and passed on first reading during the same session. The board recorded no roll-call opposition at first reading.