Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Medical Cannabis Permits topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board revokes Haight Street medical cannabis permit after neighbors, police say problems persist
Summary
The San Francisco Board of Appeals voted 4'to— to revoke the Planning Commission permit for Alternative Herbal Health Services at 442 Haight Street after neighbors and Northern Station officers testified the club failed to follow agreed security measures and was linked to street'level drug activity. The owner and counsel denied the allegations and said the club has security cameras, off'duty officers and a compassion program.
San Francisco ' The Board of Appeals voted 4'to— to revoke the Planning Commission'issued permit for Alternative Herbal Health Services (AHHS), the medical cannabis dispensary at 442 Haight Street, after a lengthy, contested hearing on Oct. 1, 2008.
Neighbors and a Northern Station officer told the board AHHS repeatedly failed to follow conditions and neighborhood requests, allowing double parking, loitering and, they said, street'level resale of cannabis. "They have not worked with the police," activist Thea Selby told commissioners, adding that merchants and residents reported intimidation and threats tied to the club. Officer Antron Baron, who patrols the beat, said his unit supplied a list of five individuals the club agreed to ban but that AHHS did not enforce that ban; he said one person arrested subsequently told officers he got marijuana from the club.
AHHS's counsel, Brian Soriano, and owner Jason Beck denied that the club fomented crime and said the operation has installed security cameras, outdoor lighting and hires off'duty uniformed officers. Soriano said the club has voluntarily prohibited on'site consumption, installed a carbon filtration system and runs a compassion program to serve lower'income patients. "We've installed security cameras outside of the MCD and I believe it's the only merchant on the block that does that," Soriano said in rebuttal.
Planning staff told the board the site is grandfathered for some uses and that the Planning Commission'level review had included conditions such as a prohibition on smoking on site and encouragement of neighborhood outreach. Planning and building staff said enforcement and any DPH permit decisions remain separate processes.
Commissioners weighing the testimony expressed concern about the pattern of complaints and the community's fear of retaliation. After deliberation Vice President Fung moved to revoke the Planning Commission'issued permit; the motion carried 4'to—. The board scheduled formal adoption of findings at a later date.
The revocation removes the club's locally authorized permit; it may affect the Department of Public Health'issued provisional licensing process but does not itself determine any criminal or civil enforcement outcomes. AHHS representatives said they will review the board's findings when issued and consider next steps.
The Board of Appeals also heard many other items at the Oct. 1 meeting, including hotel conversion queue disputes and adoption of multiple findings on unrelated appeal items.
