Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Health Tobacco Regulation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board upholds 25‑day suspension of Assad Market’s tobacco permit for sale to minor
Summary
The Board of Appeals denied an appeal by Assad Market's owner challenging a 25‑day suspension imposed by the Department of Public Health for a tobacco sale to a 16‑year‑old decoy; the board upheld the department’s penalty by unanimous vote of attending members.
The San Francisco Board of Appeals on April 6 voted to uphold a 25‑day suspension of a tobacco‑product sales permit for Assad Market (229 Ninth Street) after the Department of Public Health presented evidence that a clerk sold cigarettes to a 16‑year‑old decoy.
Appellant counsel Sherry Gettleman asked the board to continue the matter until a later date when all five board members could attend; the Department of Public Health (represented by Johnson Ojo) objected to another continuance, noting this was the second request and that the department had already granted previous continuances. The board proceeded to hear the matter.
The department said the clerk reviewed the decoy’s identification, but nonetheless sold the cigarettes; it cited San Francisco Health Code section 1009.66 and California Penal Code section 308 and explained the department's current practice uses discretion (first offense reduced from possible 90‑day maximum to 25 days in many first‑offense cases) while emphasizing the owner’s responsibility for agents’ conduct. The department noted the incident’s date discrepancy in initial documents (citation dated September 18 vs. police narrative September 19) but supplied a supplemental incident report confirming the September 19 date.
Counsel for the appellant argued the suspension would cause severe financial harm to a 37‑year family business and raised questions about consistency in how penalties were applied when multiple matters were heard the same day. The owner and family members testified they routinely check IDs and had not been shown written material indicating the exact penalty during prior inspections.
After deliberation, President Goh moved to deny the appeal and uphold the department’s 25‑day suspension. The roll call recorded four Ayes among attending commissioners (vice president absent), and the board upheld the suspension.
Next steps: The department’s 25‑day suspension stands as of the board’s April 6 decision. The owner may pursue any further remedies available under applicable administrative or judicial procedures.
