Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Tobacco Permits topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Board denies three appeals for retail tobacco permits; Department of Public Health rules upheld

San Francisco Board of Appeals · December 5, 2018
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The Board of Appeals on Dec. 5, 2018 denied three appeals by SASC Stores Inc. seeking new retail tobacco-sales permits at three locations. Department of Public Health staff said Article 19H (effective 2015) prohibits issuing new permits within 500 feet of permitted tobacco retailers or schools and enforces a supervisorial‑district density cap; commissioners voted to uphold the department’s denials.

The San Francisco Board of Appeals on Dec. 5, 2018 denied three appeals by SASC Stores Inc. seeking retail tobacco‑sales permits at three gas/service stations (2301 Nineteenth Ave; 2000 Nineteenth Ave; 3300 Cesar Chavez Street). The Department of Public Health explained Article 19H, effective 2015, generally prohibits issuing new tobacco permits for locations within 500 feet of an existing permitted tobacco retailer or a school and also restricts issuance in supervisorial districts that have reached a density cap.

Appellants argued some locations had sold tobacco historically and that prior practices in transactions created expectations that new owners could continue sales. The department and its inspector, Uziel Prado, explained exceptions are narrow—limited to certain categories (retail food establishments, tobacco shops, cigar bars or owners’ children under specific conditions) and require continuity of operation and other qualifying facts. DPH staff and the city attorney’s office reiterated the ordinance leaves little discretion to issue a new permit where the statute prohibits it.

Commissioners discussed grandfathering of pre‑2015 permits and the need for buyer due diligence. Given the statutory constraints, the board voted to deny the appeals and uphold DPH’s denials; the denials were grounded in Article 19H’s buffer rules, the no‑transfer principle for new permits in restricted categories, and district density caps.