Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Health Enforcement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board upholds NOV against WellCare Acupuncture for operating as unauthorized massage establishment
Summary
The Board of Appeals unanimously upheld a notice of violation that found WellCare operating predominantly as a massage business without a full-time on-site acupuncturist and in excess of the accessory-use limits set by a prior decision; the board voted 5–0 to sustain the NOV.
Get email alerts on the Public Health Enforcement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The San Francisco Board of Appeals on Oct. 15 upheld a notice of violation against WellCare Acupuncture, concluding the facility was operating as an unauthorized massage establishment rather than as an acupuncture office with accessory massage. Planning staff and the Department of Public Health presented inspection reports indicating multiple treatment rooms in use for massage, frequent appearance of more than two massage therapists on site and an absence of a regularly on-site licensed acupuncturist as required for accessory-use status.
Ed Walsh, Senior Environmental Health Inspector (DPH), testified he had inspected the premises repeatedly over several years and never observed a full-time acupuncturist on duty; he also described repeated re-inspections that documented multiple massage therapists present at the same time. Planning staff displayed the floor plan and noted 9–13 treatment rooms on the second floor and cited prior Board conditions limiting accessory massage to 300 square feet and no more than two therapists concurrently.
Appellant counsel submitted declarations from the clinic’s acupuncturists and argued licensed practitioners did serve the site and that the operation was legitimate; however, the board concluded inspection records demonstrated the accessory-use limitations were being exceeded and that an on-site licensed acupuncturist was not consistently present. On a motion to uphold the NOV, the board voted 5–0 in favor of enforcement. The board instructed staff to proceed to enforce the NOV consistent with code requirements and prior board conditions.
Next steps: Planning and DPH enforcement staff will pursue compliance steps required under the NOV and may require the clinic to align operations with the conditions previously set by the Board of Appeals.
