Halting Haight Head Shops

At Monday’s Land Use and Economic Development Committee meeting, Supervisors Sophie Maxwell, Eric Mar and David Chiu voted to send to the full Board an ordinance that would more severely curtail the sale of tobacco paraphernalia in the Haight.  (Here's the proposal: Download Tobacco Paraphernalia.)

Fed up with the number of “head shops” along Haight Street, last October Supervisor Ross Mirkarimi passed legislation requiring any new “tobacco paraphernalia establishment” along that street to get a Conditional Use permit - an arduous and public process whereby retailers have to prove to the Planning Commission that there’s a need for their particular shop.

One problem: the law defines “tobacco paraphernalia establishment” as any place that dedicates more than 15 percent of retail floor space to tobacco-related wares. (Planning Code sec. 790.123.) Why 15 percent? Why focus on floor space? Arbitrary rules like this are as good as a sign that says: “Let the Skirting Begin!”

And sure enough, hilarity ensued. Recently, some enterprising head shop retailer started selling tobacco tackle on Haight Street without a Conditional Use permit. How? The shelf where the tobacco doohickeys are sold only takes up 12 percent of the floor space - but stretches all the way to the ceiling. (This situation was explained at Monday's hearing.)

Mirkarimi’s new proposal does away with the 15 percent rule and now says that any new store that wants to sell any tobacco paraphernalia along Haight Street (upper and lower) has to get a permit. It will be heard by the full Board of Supervisors in the coming weeks where it will likely get 100 percent support.

Note: The (supremely dumb) 15 percent rule applies to all Commercial and Industrial districts in the City thanks to a law spearheaded by former Supervisor Sandoval. (Here's the law - it's almost 300 pages long: Download Tobacco Shop Limits.)

Comments

[Josh Wolf]

Can I store get around this law by saying that their bongs and vaporizers are for marijuana only and not meant for tobacco use?

I've yet to meet anyone that smokes tobacco through a water pipe, and if medical marijuana is legal, then can't we sell these things as what they are instead of the ridiculous code-speak that dominates discussion of smoking accoutrements.

[sfpeg11]

Why do they care? Do we need another Gap or Starbucks? Leave um alone Supes, there are more important things to address.