Citizen Portal
Sign In

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

Get email alerts on the Public Health topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Board reduces King Market tobacco‑sales suspension to 20 days after owner’s testimony

San Francisco Board of Appeals · June 8, 2011
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 reduced a 25‑day suspension of King Market’s tobacco sales permit to 20 days after the owner described illness and brief absence during an alleged sale to a minor; DPH evidence showed a minor decoy purchase and other violations.

The San Francisco Board of Appeals on June 9 trimmed a Department of Public Health suspension of the King Market tobacco‑sales permit (94 Turk Street) from 25 to 20 days.

Department witness Johnson Ojo told the board that a police decoy on January 29, 2011 purchased cigarettes from a clerk and that multiple DPH inspections on January 14 and February 23 found health‑code problems including no hot water for sterilization and lack of approved sterilization equipment. "It is very apparent that the sale of cigarette was offered to a minor," Ojo said during his presentation and recommended upholding a 25‑day suspension; he noted the health code allows up to 90 days for a first offense and characterized the department’s 25‑day penalty as reasonable.

Owner Mohammed Hamud Hamran told the board he had been working a long overnight shift, suffered shortness of breath and left a trusted clerk, Maher Al Ghazali, in charge; he said he did not know the clerk sold cigarettes to a minor and described the potential financial hardship of a suspension on his small business. "If I get the suspension for 25 days, I'm gonna lose a lot of customers," Hamran said in rebuttal.

Commissioners questioned whether DPH sought sales‑percentage records to assess economic impact; Ojo said such data was not presented but might be considered. During deliberations, DPH offered — and later confirmed — a willingness to reduce its request; the board voted to grant the appeal in part and reduce the suspension to 20 days (4–0). The Board noted it lacks authority to impose a monetary fine in this forum and that any scheduling of the suspension’s consecutive days would be enforced by DPH.