On July 15th, San Francisco’s Zoning Administrator, Larry Badiner, held a hearing to consider revocation of the Green Cross’ building permit. Reed says he went to Badiner’s office the day before to make copies of letters detailing complaints against the dispensary submitted as part of the record for the hearing. Reed says he found a memo dated June 8, two days after the second neighborhood meeting to discuss neighborhood concerns. City planner Dan Sider, who wrote the memo, sought immediate revocation of the Green Cross permit because city supervisor Bevan Dufty had requested that the dispensary be shut down.

“We need to revoke the Green Cross’ permit. I know that this doesn’t follow our typical procedures or policies, but this is a unique case, a unique land use and we’ve been specifically asked by a supervisor,” wrote Sider in the memo. “The most likely grounds for revocation would be Code Section 202 c which states that – essentially – no noxious use shall be allowed for operator. Should the operator appeal this decision to the Board of Appeals so bit it, but we have been asked to take immediate action. “

“The memo shows that city offices may act on petty politics, disregarding their internal policies and making decisions even before the hearing designed to get input from neighbors,” wrote Reed who has appealed the suspension of the permit.

Reed says the zoning administrator’s office has agreed to receive written comments on the dispute until July 26 in preparation for a Board of Appeals hearing on August 17. The hearing will take place at San Francisco City Hall in Room 400 at 5 pm. E-mail can be sent up to July 25 to Larry.Badiner@sfgov.org

Residents of the neighborhood surrounding the dispensary are being urged by Reed to write letters in support of maintaining the dispensary’s permit. Reed is also asking that those in Dufty’s district call and write letters to Dufty because “his actions make a mockery of the public hearing process.”

Dufty did not return calls for comment on the dispute. His aid, Amanda Kahn, said the planning department changed their action on the permit from revocation to suspension to allow community discussions to take place.

Both Dispensary and Its Neighbors Fret About Crime

Eighty-five percent of the Noe Valley neighborhood where the Green Cross dispensary is located voted for California’s Compassionate Use Act (Prop. 214) which allowed the use of medical cannabis. But in the smaller sub-neighborhood of Fair Oaks adjacent to the dispensary, both neighbors and dispensary operators continue to make serious allegations of harassment and bad judgment.
Neighbors have complained that the Green Cross has attracted crime to the neighborhood that suffered a rash of burglaries this spring. To help address security concerns, Reed says the dispensary invested in $50,000 worth of upgrades installing 16 surveillance cameras to monitor the adjacent street and alley.

Reed says the dispensary has itself been targeted by criminals. On May 22nd , the morning after the nearby Liberties bar held an Irish music festival, Reed says he arrived at his dispensary to find the locks super glued and the light bulbs removed from the front of the building.

After entering through the back and reviewing his security videos, Reed says he saw one man repeatedly exit and enter Liberties, is located at the corner of 22nd and Guerrero Streets. The man began his activity starting at 2:44 am and continued for an hour and a half. Reed said the man used a bar stool from Liberties to reach the light bulbs and remove them. The man also tampered with the locks and pounded on the windows.

Reed said he called the police who reviewed the security video. The police then went to Liberties and informed the owners that damages should be paid to the Green Cross so the dispensary would not press charges. Later that evening, Reed said the owner called him to say that the bar would pay the damages.

The following day, May 23rd, neighbors of the Green Cross met at the Liberties bar to discuss what they said was the escalating crime in the neighborhood – allegedly brought on by the opening of the Green Cross in July 2004. Neighbors said they were concerned about increased burglaries and thefts, hostile and intimidating behavior from nuisance drivers/parkers and drug dealing.

Residents also complained about loud music and the smell of marijuana smoke. They asked police to look at crime records to determine if the dispensary was attracting crime. Supervisor Dufty and San Francisco Police Captain John Goldberg from the Mission Police Station were invited to the meeting – the Green Cross was not.

Reed says he learned about the meeting from neighbors who were distraught that the Green Cross had been excluded from the gathering. Nevertheless, Reed says he took the neighbor’s complaints seriously and responded by sealing doors and installing ionizers and an air filtration system. He also added phone lines to quickly answer calls from neighbors and a new lock system to make sure the dispensary’s door would open and close as quickly as possible. The dispensary banned on-site cannabis smoking by customers and later forbid patient staff members from cannabis smoking as well.

A second neighborhood meeting was held on June 6 at a nearby church. The Green Cross was invited to speak on a panel. The meeting was attended by almost 200 people and went on for two hours. According to minutes of the meeting, the police determined that there was no correlation between the opening of the Green Cross and an increase in crime in the neighborhood. Capt. Goldberg reported that the overall crime rate for the neighborhood had actually decreased slightly from last year and the increase in burglaries did not appear to be sparked by the club or the people who buy cannabis there.

Residents expressed concern at the meeting about dispensary patrons allegedly smoking cannabis outside the club and reselling their cannabis in the neighborhood. Goldberg said at the meeting that on one weekend evening, dispensary customers were seen blocking driveways, crosswalks and fire hydrants. Goldberg also alleged that officers saw people distributing marijuana in their cars after returning from the club - but never saw money changing hands. He said sixty to seventy people were observed going in and out of the club.

According to the minutes, neighbors complained that “this business does not benefit the neighborhood”, creates “the potential for drug dealing and theft” and does not “foster a spirit of local community.” Residents also charge that although at least one neighbor requested a hearing when the dispensary applied for its permit, none was granted.

"It seemed like things were getting out of control," Fair Oaks Street resident Veronica Gaynor told the Noe Valley Voice. "People felt like they were losing their neighborhood."

Karen Saux, who with Gaynor helped organize the meeting, told the Noe Valley Voice that dispensary patrons were upsetting residents. "Some of their customers are intimidating," said Saux. "Anyone who dares to ask someone not to park in their driveway gets verbally abused."
Among the people commenting at the June 6th meeting was Craig Morton who ran the Shear Delight hair salon next door to the Green Cross for more than ten years. Morton said the noise and smell of marijuana from the club forced him to sell his business.

"It reached the point where I felt I was run out," Morton told the Noe Valley Voice. "I did vote for Proposition 215 because I am a person with HIV and I thought I might need it someday. But I had a very negative experience with the whole thing. There were no regulations in place to protect me.”
Reed counters that the hair salon, which moved into Morton’s former location, has benefited from dispensary patrons and is thriving. He says he purchased the business a television as gift to help block any residual sound from the dispensary.

Many of the complaints by neighbors at the meeting seem to indicate a discomfort with medical cannabis patients in general and lack of regulations. Residents note that there are two schools and a youth center within 1,000 feet of the dispensary. Despite the fact that the city issued patient ID cards on the recommendation of doctors as provided for by state law, neighbors claim that the city has provided “no oversight to ensure the legitimacy of who is and who is not a medical cannabis patient.”

Neighborhood resident and medical cannabis patient Jason Coben, who says he suffers from chronic neve and cartilage deterioration, sent a June 16th message to a neighborhood e-mail list which read, "I am one of those people that many of you like to refer to as 'not looking very sick.' All this talk of shutting [the Green Cross] down is an extreme overreaction, and smacks of politicians pandering to a vocal minority. They are providing a valuable service in a professional manner, and it would be to the detriment of a lot of us if they were to close.”

But most of the neighbors attending the meeting said they want they dispensary gone. “The Green Cross has made superficial improvements to its operations, but it has not addressed the ethical issues,” concludes the minutes of the meeting. “The majority of neighbors who have voiced their concerns asks that the Green Cross behave as a responsible neighbor and move out of this neighborhood to a more appropriate location.”

Green Cross Adjustments Deemed Insufficient

After the June 6 meeting, the Green Cross says it made more changes to its policies. A full-time security guard was hired to patrol outside the dispensary during the business day and deny access to customers who are double parked, parked illegally or blast loud music. To address concerns that out-of-town patients were crowding the neighborhood, the Green Cross also limited entry to patients who carry Green Cross patient ID cards or those issued by the San Francisco Health Department.

The dispensary also attempted to get supervisor Dufty to mediate. After the June 6th meeting, Dufty handed a note to Green Cross representative Paige Mullins indicating that Dufty wanted to meet with her. But Reed says repeated calls to the supervisor have been ignored.

“Did you honestly mean anything you wrote in that note,?” asked Reed’s attorney Arcolina Panto in a letter to Dufty. “Did you know that Liberties was involved in the crime of vandalizing the Green Cross? Do you have any evidence whatsoever that the unverified complains of neighbors are true? What have you seen with your own eyes?”

Dufty has not returned phone calls for comment on the dispute. But he told the Noe Valley Voice that “The Planning Department did not do its due diligence. The Green Cross has an inordinate impact. I don’t think any business with that kind of intense activity could exist in that location.”
After the June 6 meeting, Dufty asked city zoning administrator Larry Badiner to suspend or revoke the dispensary’s permit. Badiner forwarded the request to the Department of Building Inspection which suspended the permit on June 10.

The dispensary’s permit was suspended due to violation of the Planning Code section that forbids “A use that creates conditions that are hazardous, noxious or offensive through emission of odor, fumes, smoke, cinders, gas, vibrations, glare, refuse, water-carried waste or excessive noise.”

The Green Cross appealed the suspension on June 22. Reed says the suspension violated his due process rights and refused to close. He says his successful business is being held to an unfair standard by neighbors who simply don’t like his customers and have few new complaints aside from the parking concerns.

According to Reed, some people who disapprove of the Green Cross continue to harass the dispensary and its employees. While neighborhood meetings have been respectful, Reed says some opposition has sometimes been hateful and racist. Some of the objections seem to echo fears of hippies that the city’s conservative residents had back in the 1960’s.

"You have ruined the neighborhood with your little marijuana nightclub, posing as a health care clinic," reads an anonymous e-mail message received by Reed on June 16th. "Most of your customers fit the same profile: male, under 30, non-white, skater punk/home boy/gang-banger aesthetic. Since when do so many members of this demographic have such serious medical conditions?"

"The truth, as I see it from 22nd and Guerrero, is that the patients, young and old, come and go without posing a threat to anyone here, and I fear that the main offense they have committed is embodying a look that we are conditioned to believe is threatening," long time neighborhood resident Charlie Pizarro told the Noe Valley Voice. "With the Green Cross, we have a locally owned small business that is filling a need in our community, and is doing so in a way that I believe is respectful of all of us who live here….Unlike the patrons of the bars and restaurants around here, the patients of the Green Cross do not scream through the neighborhood drunk at 2 a.m. They do not urinate on my house or turn over garbage cans.”

Reed says patrons of the Liberties bar continue to be abusive. On June 26th, Reed says a man drove by the Green Cross several times in a black Range Rover and made incomprehensible comments to the security guard outside the dispensary. Eventually, the man parked and entered the Liberties bar. When he exited, the man allegedly began to yell at the security guard and accused the guard of attacking him. He told the guard that he was calling police and said into his cell phone, “an African American just shot me.”

Reed said the Green Cross guard did not respond to the man who went back into Liberties. About an hour later, the man left Liberties and approached the security officer again. When another Green Cross employee left the dispensary to assist the guard, the man saw a black woman sitting at a table outside Liberties. According to Reed, the man began screaming at her, using profanity and the word “nigger” several times. The man allegedly had his arm raised above her as if he was about to hit her.

A neighbor, who lives across the street from the Green Cross, ran outside to assist the woman. Reed says the man swung at the neighbor throwing him to the ground. The police arrived shortly and arrested the man.

The July 15th public hearing held by the San Francisco Planning Department and the Department of Building Inspection considered passionate arguments for and against the dispensary - and reviewed how the club has changed its operations to address neighborhood concerns. Each person got two minutes to speak and people were asked to submit suggestions for what the Green Cross could do to further address neighborhood concerns short of closing down. Badiner declined to have Sider’s memo read aloud at the meeting insisting it was already part of the record.

According to an account by Green Cross member Madge Van Orden, both sides in the dispute made emotional arguments in the dispute. One angry neighborhood resident focused on the alleged negative impact of the dispensary on her grandchildren and displayed one of her children at the podium, while Green Cross supporters offered “drawn-out tales of their suffering and pain.”

Van Orden notes that San Francisco police “appear suspiciously unresponsive to the neighborhood problems” and such lack of enforcement on issues such as illegal parking “allows quality-of-life crimes to force closure of medical cannabis dispensaries.” She further notes that “ineffective attention from legal administrators who supposedly support medical marijuana has had a large hand in the problems for which the Green Cross is being held responsible. The club is under fire because it attracts excessive traffic due in part to stranded customers from other area clubs shut down by public annoyance issues.”

Reed said there were no new complaints aired against the dispensary and bought up the ongoing harassment by Liberties patrons. While he has responded to community concerns, Reed says Liberties is not held to the same high standards. “I think it was a fair hearing of thoughts!” writes Reed.

Reed also noted that crimes against the dispensaries continue. The same week that the hearing took place, Reed noted that a dispensary at 10th and Mission Streets was held up by three armed robbers. Some of the other forty some dispensaries in the city who are following the Green Cross dispute, fear that even if they secure permits like the Green Cross has done, they could still be targeted for shut down by a group of neighbors and a sympathetic supervisor.
The patients group Americans for Safe Access described the permit revocation process as a “witch hunt” and pointed out that the timing corresponded with federal raids and court decisions against medical cannabis supporters.

Badiner said at the hearing that his decision to revoke the permit came down to whether the club is located in an appropriate neighborhood and whether it can be run in a way that addresses concerns of residents. According to Van Orden, Badiner was especially concerned about how many customers the Green Cross attracted from outside the neighborhood.

“Badiner agreed that the character of the neighborhood has changed, but acknowledged that Reed is working hard to address concerns,” writes Van Orden. “He claimed Reed has some amount of responsibility for the actions of his cliental, but wasn’t sure how much. He expressed doubt that any amount of effort could satisfy the problems, but claimed to be open to suggestions for constructive solutions, at least until Monday’s deadline for fact-gathering and comments.

In her account of the hearing, Saux said via e-mail that, “it was clear by the presence of the patients that the Green Cross does provide a great service to people with illnesses. They emphasized that they need a safe dispensary in a safe neighborhood, and I completely understand and sympathize with that.”

But Saux added that the address ongoing nuisances created by the dispensary. She said several people in the building above the Green Cross wrote letters documenting their continuing problems with odors “So on the smoking issue, I don’t think that the Green Cross has adequately addressed the problem,” wrote Saux. “Staff continue to smoke on the premises, which is affecting upstairs neighbors, pedestrians on 22nd Street, and clients seated outdoors at the Liberties.”

Saux said problems in front of the dispensary have abated, but traffic problems have moved to other parts of the neighborhood. She said that she and her fellow neighborhood activists get e-mails every day with additional complaints and observations about the club. “The parking issue has been addressed by the presence of the security guard on 22nd Street,” writes Saux. “The guard does not patrol Fair Oaks, however, which is where the problem has moved.

Saux says neighbors also testified to drug dealing and other crime on Fair Oaks Street and Guerrero Street. According to Saux, neighbors provided their police report numbers and verified that these incidents were directly related to Green Cross patrons. “I don’t believe that these events would be happening on Fair Oaks Street if the Green Cross were not in its present location,” wrote Saux. “This is not to say that we do not have crime, we do. But there is a constant level of activity: people smoking pot in parked cars, people doling out what they’ve just purchased at the Green Cross, and the more serious incidences that were relayed at the meeting.”

Saux says that both sides are still angry and upset with the City for allowing a situation like this to develop. “I would have to say that we acknowledge that an effort has been made to address the issues since the June 6 neighborhood meeting,” wrote Saux. “But the neighbors are not satisfied with the results.”