At a heated community meeting in January about the imminent arrival of a PETCO at 5411 Geary (a former Walgreens), Supervisor Mar was asked to register his opinion on the issue.
At the time Mar was neutral on the topic, not indicating whether he favored PETCO moving into the vacant storefront, or whether he wanted to block them and take sides with the small pet shop owners in the neighborhood whose businesses felt threatened by the chain store.
Supervisor Mar was decidedly more forthright in Tuesday’s Board of Supervisors meeting when he introduced legislation that would prohibit all chain pet-supply stores from opening along Geary Boulevard between 14th and 28th avenues.
The legislation, Mar told the SF Examiner, is “to protect the several small mom-and-pop pet-supply businesses already in the neighborhood.”
On February 15, PETCO applied for their conditional use permit to open up an Unleashed by PETCO location at 5411 Geary Street near 18th Avenue. Mar told the SF Examiner that he was disappointed they applied and now wants to shut them out completely.
According to the article, PETCO denies the charge that their store opening would have an adverse impact on the other pet stores and maintains it would also help turn around “a distressed retail district,” said PETCO spokesman Kevin Whalen, who called Mar’s legislation “surprising.”
The Richmond District is already carrying the burden of a 25% commercial vacancy rate. That’s one of the highest among city neighborhoods where the average retail vacancy rate is 4%.
Mar’s legislation is very specific, and it’s unclear what would happen if PETCO or another large pet retailer tried to open a store on a block not included in the Supervisor’s proposal.
Despite opponents not wanting a large retailer to move into the space, it’s unlikely a mom-and-pop operation would be able to rent – and prosper – in the 5,000 square foot retail space at 5411 Geary.
Expect more fireworks on this issue when PETCO’s permit review comes before the Planning Department for review (TBD).
Sarah B.
Another soon to be vacant spot: Blockbuster video on Geary between 16th and 17th.
REALLY PETCO? Really? A large pet store chain store will not have an adverse effect on the many existing pet store businesses who are co-existing in the Richmond? Really?
Better to keep the store vacant to keep the smaller stores alive, and wait for a better deal than that. Go Eric Mar!
let me propose a rider to the legislation: No Mean People Between 14th and 28th Avenues.
what a joke. Hey mar, why don’t you ban deli’s, banks, coffee shops. What about banning national grocery stores because there are local grocery stores? Did the local pet stores ask existing local stores in the richmond district if they could open? no wonder our neighborhood is dying on the vine. wake up richmond, we need business, all kinds of business…….this is protectionism at its best.
I feel so privileged to live in a nanny state where businesses can’t even open. Vote with your wallet people. I hope this legislation fails miserably. I love how people would rather have an empty eye sore of a store than something with some life.
I second what Paul said. The introduction of this legislation guarantees that I will never vote for Mar for any public office.
what about the Fresh and Easy that’s about to open on 32nd? won’t that put a lot of mom and pop grocers out of business?
this is a really tough issue. most people don’t want to be overrun with big chains. i certainly don’t. but at the same time, legislating against not just big stores but a specific kind of big store seems like it’s begging for unintended consequences.
I grew up in this neighborhood and when I come home to visit family from LA it makes me very sad that there are so many empty storefronts. The former resident of this site was a Walgreens which is/was a national chain and other chains are in the neighborhood as well. I think any businesses would be good and if you have one bigger store maybe more will come in to the neighborhood as well. I have to say that I don’t even know where there is a local pet store in that area that would be in walking distance to this sight. If you have pets you know that bags or cans of dog or cat food, etc. is heavy and even going a bit farther is maybe not feasible for someone without transportation.
yeah we get to have an empty behemoth sized store front on greay for the next 5 years along with Craigen, Delanos, big heart and now block buster.
All of us barbers, and coffee bistro’s and locksmiths, and small restaurants in the neighborhood love you eric for all the wonderful work your doing for us on our behalf. thanks for looking out for us too.
if anyone is interested we are starting a new democratic hopefully rational democratic club here in the richmond. We plan to meet on the 27th of march. call me at my shop if interested. We haven’t set up a location yet maybe a pizza place for first meeting. Thanks. Brian 415-751-2087.
Stupidvisor Mar – thanks for the empty storefronts, you putz.
Of all the ill conceived legistlations! I feel sorry for the property owner. He’s paying taxes and he can’t lease the property. Sorry but no “local” store will want to lease this huge store front.
The sad thing is that i actually live and work and vote in this neighborhood. of course when my lease runs out I’m moving to El Camino real in milbrae or Burlingame. it’s stupid to do business in sf and if anyone is considering it take it from me, don’t. San Mateo county is much better to do business in. i heard that the guy who owned cals actually lived in Marin county. what about the folks at b and b do they live in the Richmond. i do.
hey i know. we’ll get apple to move here. They can move into all the big empty store fronts. We’ll have the apple i pod store at the old walgreens, the apple software store where block buster is, the apple i pad store where big heart use to be and the apple note book computer store where dalanos was. That only leaves Kragen sitting empty for the next 5 years.
“Better to keep the store vacant to keep the smaller stores alive, and wait for a better deal than that. Go Eric Mar!”
Seriously?
So you want to sacrifice sales tax revenue, punish the landlord who pays property taxes, and play favorites to “protect” the smaller stores.
If the smaller stores are only currently in business because they are a “default” and will immediately die when a competitor moves in, then they deserve to die. If their customers are willing to go to a soulless “big box” then their customers are choosing to put them out of business.
Be a compelling alternative and people will shop with you instead.
Case in point? I buy my ice cream at Joe’s Ice Cream not Safeway. I shopped at Delano even though it was more expensive than Safeway because the employees were nicer and seemed to live in the neighborhood.
What’s next? Demanding a single screen theater go in to the old Alexandria? Tear down the On Lok center to bring the Coronet back?
I totally agree with Bruce, Paul, & Mandy…WE NEED BUSINESS PEOPLE!! As Paul said “Vote with your wallet” Just because there is a PETCO in your neighborhood doesn’t mean you have to go there. Plus I have a dog and to be completey honest, these mom and pop pet supply stores in our area are a bit pricey…I end up going cross town to get my supplies anyway because they are too expensive here
Those bigger spaces were meant for bigger business and these bigger company’s who are interested in these larger spaces will probably bring more business into the neighborhood anyway especially when people from other parts of the city come to shop there and see all the unique restuarants and shops the Richmond has to offer. What mom and pop could handle & afford that space to begin with?! Why don’t we shut down Office Max on Geary and Arguello or Starbucks and Peets while we’re at it SMH…
I’m all about supporting local business but we have enough empty store fronts. Such a prominent neighborhood in SF should not look this deserted. I’m sorry but Eric Mar your an idiot…isn’t he the same guy who spent time trying to stop the segue tours in GG Park…why? Not to mention trying to ban McDonalds from giving away toys in their Happy Meals (We don’t even have a McDonalds in the Richmond District)?! Stop trying so hard to impress the people and maybe you will. I respect the fact that you are at least taking a stance and standing up for local business owners but I hope you realize that you are making the people of the Richmond Distirct look like a bunch a arrogant contridicting snobs who don’t know whats good for them…especially in this economy
Eric mar please pass legitimation to ban Safeway and Costco and Smart and final from selling pet food. They have an unfair advantage over the independent pet stores in the neighborhood and if they are allowed to continue to sell pet food they may put the small pet stores out of business. And while your at it could you please ban the pet food sales at the corner stores. They sell liquor, cigarettes and candy all in one location and are setting a bad example for our kids. thank you for protecting us from our selves without you i don’t think we would even be alive.
@brian jones – I think your feelings on this topic are well known by now with all your comments. 😉 Please refrain from leaving additional comments on this post unless you have new information to share. Thanks, Brian.
Sarah B.
Good lord. One would think that after making himself a national laughingstock after that ridiculous Happy Meal legislation episode that Mar would put more thought behind his actions to avoid looking like a complete dumb-ass once again. He is little more than Chris Daly on mood-stabilizers – he doesn’t govern, he doesn’t help, he only impedes. I look forward to voting for anyone who runs against him in the next election cycle.
Mar is very misguided on this. That part of Geary is really looking run-down because of the lack of business and shoppers. I think there is a direct correlation with the increase of crime in that area. Central Richmond needs more businesses. And while I support small “mom and pop” shops I think a bigger retail pet shop would bring in shoppers from other neighborhoods who would, in turn, shop at the surrounding stores.
We live off 19th Ave, and have three cats and no car. Ever since Pet Source moved up to Collins, we have not had a convenient pet store on Geary. I can’t carry 20 lb bags of cat litter and cat food. So every two months, I have to treat a friend to lunch in exchange for taking me to the pet store. None of the local stores work for us. They don’t have the selection I want, charge way too much money, only carry smaller bags that are much more expensive, and often don’t have the two-month supply that I need in stock. So we drive to Petco!
I always prefer to shop local over chains, but this is one area where it makes no sense. I was very excited when I heard about the Petco proposal. It would mean a lot to be able to grab one 20-lb bag and walk home with it when we need it. My sense is that most of the opposition is coming from the competing stores, not the customers.
There’s a few things that have been missed (in my opinion). First, It is the large chains that encouraged developers to design space to suit them. If these vacant places had originally been scaled to small family businesses there would not be giant locations that little guys could not fill. Second, It is the large chains up and leaving the neighborhood that have caused the large buildings to be vacant. Encourage that to happen again and again? Simply to have the space occupied? Why the animosity towards small businesses? They have lower operating costs and can be flexible instead of being driven by a corporate profit model. Protecting and looking out for the neighborhood is cool, we are not just a strip mall. I am no Eric Mar fan, believe me, but he is doing something in the interest of the neighborhood. Kudos for that. BRT is ahead of us, now lets talk about a real business killer for Geary St.
“First, It is the large chains that encouraged developers to design space to suit them.”
So why isn’t Mar legislating that large space be rebuilt to hold smaller businesses?
@David H – do you know which large chain originally “built” the storefront being discussed here? Or the Delano’s location? Or the site that Blockbuster is about to vacate? Or the old Kragen?
I’m genuinely curious, but I have my doubts that these (aside from perhaps the Blockbuster and Kragen locations) spots were originally built to hold large chain stores, since the buildings are decades old.
Of course I think this entire thing is ridiculous, but here are some ideas that could work if we’re willing to go full nanny state here.
Ban all chain stores from the Richmond, period. No case-by-case or segment-by-segment splintering or dither-dathering. We can possibly look at grandfathering in current locations, but there needs to be something concrete in place in order for the market to clear. As it exists now, landlords clearly are pricing their buildings with the expectation that all businesses have a chance at leasing their spaces, when that is not actually the case. A full ban would devalue the properties and force the rents to drop, since that would essentially eliminate a large portion of the potential market.
This probably wouldn’t pass muster in the courts, as it would be a seizure of property rights, but it’s about the only thing I can think of that might help reduce the vacancies that we now see. Otherwise we’ll never see the price of large spaces come down enough for local places to be able to afford it, and we’ll have to suffer through the “lottery” system that we have now, where eventually a chain will pay off the right people or somehow slip through the cracks and be allowed into our neighborhood.
The anti-business attitude, from politicians like Eric Mar, is ruining the neighborhood. He should be banned. What an idiot! The height of stupidity is to spend political capital and energy blocking progress that the voters want, to protect a few special interests. Empty stores bring graffiti, trash and crime. That doesn’t help anyone. If we had a vibrant retail corridor, we’d actually have more small businesses that would benefit from the traffic the larger stores attract.
I am a dog owner and I drive over to Petco on the other side of the city and from the comments above, so do many others. So, keeping Petco out doesn’t help the mom and pop stores, it only forces us to take our business to another neighborhood. If Eric Mar really wants to represent the people that elected him, he should do a poll of the neighborhoods and ask us what we want, rather than protecting a couple of lame mom and pop businesses.
Hey MarStaff- time for a response in these comments to explain the supervisor’s reason for taking this position? It is clear that most readers disagree with this policy. I include myself among them.
banning chain stores outright seems draconian and too strict.
we should:
1. create incentives for small businesses to set up shop. instead of using a stick against large corporations, maybe we can use a carrot with small businesses. or both – but not an outright ban.
2. figure out how to parcel out the large retail lots into smaller pieces. maybe Mar should help design arrangements between a real-estate developer and a few small businesses to convert a few of these large lots into smaller parcel lots. i imagine the rental income from 3 small lots might actually even be higher than that of one large lot.
3. probably let a few big chains occupy some of the big lots in the mean time as this plan would take a while.
4. look at why more small businesses aren’t starting up in the area.
just brainstorming – i’m sure this is harder than it sounds.
i have to say, though, there are plenty of small retail lots that are vacant in the Richmond as well. i think there are some other issues out here for small businesses. maybe the demographic in the Richmond doesn’t spend as freely as other parts of the city. maybe rents are too high to support the market out here. i don’t know.
@davidh: TFirst, It is the large chains that encouraged developers to design space to suit them. If these vacant places had originally been scaled to small family businesses there would not be giant locations that little guys could not fill. Second, It is the large chains up and leaving the neighborhood that have caused the large buildings to be vacant. Encourage that to happen again and again?
Blockbuster did not demand that the developer create the Geary Mall for them. If you looked, it is a mall. The PetCo location was formerly occupied by Walgreen’s. Walgreen’s moved into the Geary Mall when they bought out Merrill’s or whatever incarnation that pharmacy was. What the former Walgreen’s location was is anyone’s guess but I doubt people “built” that location to benefit a large chain. Most likely in those days, government made sense and didn’t discourage businesses from setting up shop and generating much needed revenue. Also mom and pop stores have a higher chance of failing than big chains so I doubt large stores will move in and move out as your scenario suggests.
@Chris = What you are proposing is definitely illegal. Unless the City declares imminent domain on the whole of Richmond, you cannot tell people what to do with their property. I think it is unfair to persecute the landlords by telling them how to remodel their property and who they can rent to. Just because they are landlords doesn’t mean they are automatically wealthy.
I have no problem with chains and local stores. I have a problem with people (Stuidvisor Mar) trying to tell me what’s “good for me.” Sorry I don’t need the govt to dictate to me. Especially in this economy where my money is tight, the high unemployment, high CITY taxes. I take my business where I can afford it. Sometimes the mom/pops are priced out of my range.
I live in another district, but work in D1. Eric Mar does not impress me, but unfortunately I have no vote in the matter.
Ban happy meals. Ban segways. Ban chain stores. Mar is a single note incompetent. The Richmond deserves better.
Competition is the basis for the US economic system. Big stores usually have lower prices. Small stores offer personalized customer service and specialty products to fill a niche market. Let the consumer decide what buying experience they want. Geary will have another vacant store for a long time because of Eric Mar. It seems to me that he is trying hard to be a one term Supervisor.
Here’s how another neighborhood solved the chain problem.
When Round Table Pizza opened a place on Haight Street in the mid-1980s, NOBODY WENT THERE. There were no protests, no pickets — just, NO CUSTOMERS for their pizza. They were closed up and gone within a few months. They never got enough business for Round Table to even consider carrying them til they got established, because it was plain very soon that they weren’t going to get established. Let PetCo open and allow the market to decide. Isn’t that what “the market” is supposed to be about?
Re the stores being built big to accommodate big companies — that’s interesting but does not actually help with the fact that the big stores are there now and if one is empty, it’s better for it to have a tenant than not.
Clearly a heated issue for all of us, but from my point of view, it’s pretty clear that Supervisor Mar is expending his efforts in the wrong direction, and without really effective communication from his constituents (us). With a 25% vacancy rate, he should be doing everything within his power to attract and maintain businesses for the neighborhood — small and otherwise.
Perhaps if more direct action were taken to counter problems like the attacks against Big Heart and Thidwick’s and the other stores targeted for extortion under the guise of the ADA and Unruh acts, and to find ways to promote new business, and lower the bar to entrepreneurship in the neighborhood, we could see a better-thriving business community in the Richmond, which I think is the goal we are all seeking — not only the people here on the blog, but Supervisor Mar and his staff, and the community as a whole.
But legislation banning specific business types, with its innate undertone of nanny-ism, and the high potential for countering legal action (and thus unnecessary cost to the city) is not the way to make that happen. We don’t need to be highlighted on the Daily Show again as the bozos of the universe. We are better than that.
Mar staff here: Supervisor Mar introduced this ordinance with the intention of preserving the character and diversity of businesses in the neighborhood. Supervisor Mar ran for office on a pro-small business platform, which is consistent with the introduction of this legislation. @Bob, I am sorry you disagree with the Supervisor’s actions. Hundreds of Richmond District residents expressed the opposite sentiments at community meetings and in emails and phone calls to our office. Supervisor Mar is very concerned with the vacancy rates along the Geary Boulevard and intends to introduce legislation in the coming weeks to change the planning code and incentivize businesses to move in and landlords to maximize the use of their property. Our office is working with the Planning Association for the Richmond, and Livable City to make that happen. The Supervisor does not believe, however, that the way to fill the vacant storefronts is by allowing businesses like PETCO to fundamentally change the character of the neighborhood, while also imperiling the existence of small businesses. There are currently 5 small pet supply businesses in this small area. A budget analyst report last year found that small businesses, on average redirect 73 cents on the dollar to the locality, while large national chains do not.
Sarah – thanks for having a place for this dialog to continue! I’m in the “don’t ban chain stores” group…. I live off of Clement…. and where do I go for coffee? Usually I leave the immediate neightboorhood to go to Peets, because they are open the hours I’m looking to buy coffee during, they have consisten quality, and value for my money. When I need kitchen supplies, I first head to Kaimai – an excellent, local, shop. Hardware items? The wonderful hardware store on Clement. When I need to stock up on household stuff? I drive out of SF to go to Target! We live in a free market, and I’d much rather have the variety, and open stores, then ban certain types of stores because some other owners don’t want the competition. I would much rather have a chain store to shop in on Clement, then the empty furniture storefront that has been sitting there for 4+ years! Mr Mar – you serve ALL the citizens of your district, not just the far left. Please listen to us all.
@Myrna M – Thanks for the promotional info from STUPIDvisor Mar’s office. I don’t know who he’s talking to – maybe the owners of the little pet stores but as you can see on this board, there are people who do not agree with his position (what am I talking about? He’s been dead wrong on so many levels – Banning JROTC = and chastising us for not know what we are doing = the stupid Happy Meal incident, the Segeway debacle. I can go on and on). I know your office did not call my house to ask for my opinion. So do you actually have a head count of the “hundreds” that support this?
You can’t give incentives to make people start up a business in the neighborhood. With so much NIMBYism by a certain few who are afraid of competition a lot of people are turned off about setting up shop in SF. Plus it is illegal to make landlords “maximize,” e.g., most likely cut up their massive properties so they can turn the whole property into a stalled flea market their property, at their own expense.
As for the “character” of Geary, do you mean as the current eyesore and dump it is? So you are suggesting we should keep it as and eyesore and dump until the well wished for Apple store moves in? Or should we have a law and make big property owners cut up their stores at their own expense and set up flea markets for the small time owner.
Yes we are aware that small businesses suffer when a giant moves in but they should also question their business model if they are not succeeding. The common taxpayer is not obligated to prop these businesses up. Some mom/pop stores do amazingly well because they know how to adapt to the changing environment. Obviously those small, EXPENSIVE pet shops do not know how to do this so STUPIDvisor Mar is acting as King and Savior and will grant us another empty store front.
Your boss should go back to law school (is he even a practicing attorney) because there is a freedom of choice and you just effectively took that choice away from me by running a big business out of town. I guess I will just have to rev up my car, guzzle some gas and drive to Daly City’s Petco and give them my tax dollars…
For the record I did not vote for your Boss either. I was horrified he got elected in the first place.
@Myrna – do you have a way for us to take a look at that report? 73 cents seems extraordinarily high for a business that doesn’t own the means of production (a la a coffee shop or something similar), but is merely reselling finished goods, unless their margin is ridiculously high (which I would doubt should be the case for pet supply companies).
Also, you fail to mention what the comparable number is for national chains – is it 50 cents? 60 cents? 20 cents? 73 cents doesn’t mean much without a comparison.
I’d be happy to help someone out with a petition campaign to sign up several thousand folks that I’m sure would feel opposite from the view that Mar has chosen, though I’m out of town for the next couple weeks. I would prefer to hear that Mar made this decision based on careful analysis and not the cries of a few hundred constituents though – I want my representative to represent me (because I don’t have time to call or comment on every issue that concerns me), not bend to the wills of an extremely whatever current interest group is the most noisy – even “hundreds” of people is a very, very small fraction of Mar’s constituents.
@Myrna Melgar – thank you for trying to clarify Eric Mar’s rationale for this ordinance. I think there is nothing wrong with being pro-small business. But this excessive nanny-ism is helping nobody, except perhaps a handful of small shop owners. Eric Mar needs to serve the interests of the majority, not the vocal minority. I have no doubt there are some very vocal dog and cat freaks and progressive activists screaming out there. The squeaky wheel gets the grease. But, if you were able to survey the residents of the neighborhood (ever consider trying that?), I would be shocked if most wouldn’t support a lower vacancy rate and a few chain stores that could serve as anchors to drive foot traffic to the neighborhood small businesses. Regarding “businesses like PETCO fundamentally changing the character of the neighborhood”, have you strolled down Geary Blvd between 14th and 28th lately? Not much character there….just a increasingly sleepy and deserted shopping district that in years past was vibrant. None of us want to live in ‘strip mall America’ which is what we love about San Francisco, but some common sense and balance must be applied here.
@Chris: I will try to get my hands on the report to share it. @Bob, and yes, I think the Supervisor would actually agree with you – the ordinance that was introduced is actually very narrow and specific on purpose – it does not prohibit formula retail, or variety stores, or large stores or anything else. The changes the Supervisor is considering include increasing the height limits – adding just 5 feet would address the problem of the low ceiling heights for the new commercial spaces that have been build which make them really unattractive, and incentivize building for some of the property owners that have one story buildings, many of which currently don’t pencil out. Other things that can be done is just general clean up of the code, which currently has much that makes no sense and requires businesses to jump through unecessary hoops to get a permit. Any of you who are interested in these ideas, or have other positive ideas for changes that could improve the health of our Geary Blvd commercial corridor, please email me at myrna.melgar@sfgov.org.
Small businesses are what make the Richmond a desirable place to live. Chain stores come and go based on a decision in corporate headquarters far away (e.g. Albertson’s closing the store at Clement & 30th). Small store owners invest everything they have in their business, and they usually live in the community. Ergo, they have a stake in the well-being of our community. Preventing these chains stores from opening means stability for the neighborhood. Some landlords keep large stores vacant, holding out for the big bucks that a chain store lease might bring, no matter how much of an eyesore the empty storefront becomes. I think Supervisor Mar is doing what is best for our neighborhood. Its the chains that are bailing out on our community and leaving big retail spaces vacant. Fine, let the chains stay out.
I see a lot of what appears to be pro chain store avoid a vacant store front comments, some claiming they are in the majority. What I do not see is lotsa comments from pet owners themselves PETCO could be viewed as harmful to their customers. No one has mentioned the pet deaths and price fixing lawsuit settlements, they are why PeTCO does not sell animals any more in SF. It’s not just about a big chain movin in.
I am no Mar fan but can we comment on the issue not personally attack him continually>it seems a waste of time.
Our neighborhood is also in better shape than many places and towns in America, its called recession.
If Mar wants to keep large chain stores out then he needs to step up and clean up the graffiti and homeless problem out front of these empty buildings. After all, if he wants to attract business he needs to clean up Geary to entice new business.
Thank you, Paul!
I am a pet owner in the Richmond and a home owner in the Richmond. I want rapid transit on Geary and a petco on Geary. All others that feel the same way, please send notes to Eric Mar, so we can counter the “hundreds” that apparently wrote to him about blocking petco. You can contact him here: http://www.sfbos.org/index.aspx?page=2101
As far as protecting the “character” of Geary…the “character” long ago left the building. Anyway, I don’t think that chain store Pet Food Express has ruined the character of Laurel Heights or the Castro.
Myrna @39 – but the specificity of the proposed legislation is what makes it so silly. It’s like one of those really old, ridiculous laws that late-night comedians joke about. Like “you can’t walk a duck after 6pm”. Do we really need a law on the books that says a big pet store can’t open between 14th and 28th or whatever? Won’t that just cause them to open up outside of the prohibited area? And then when THOSE residents in that area raise a fuss what do we do then?
This is a very reactive, “band-aid” approach to legislation, IMHO, that will simply be gamed anyway because it’s not addressing the real issue which is NOT “what can we do to protect small pet shops” but “why do we have 25% retail vacancy and what can we do to attract a broad mix of businesses”?
Attention all Unleashed supporters:
Please email us at UnleashedByPETCO@gmail.com if you support Unleashed OR if you oppose Mar’s legislation in general.
Your help is critical!
TARGET! TARGET! TARGET! TARGET!
“…government prohibitions do always more mischief than had been calculated; and it is not without much hesitation that a statesman should hazard to regulate the concerns of individuals as if he could do it better than themselves.” — Albert Gallatin, Thomas Jefferson’s Secretary of the Treasury
I’m not a total free marketer; I generally agree with keeping out big fast food chains which stink up the place and peddle unhealthy trash food (yes, even if people want it!). And yes I love the funky feel of Geary Street with its unique businesses. But this is really pushing it too far. There’s nothing offensive about a big pet supply store, and it seems very useful and economical to a lot of people. To a great extent you just have to let the market do its thing. What does supervisor Mar propose to go into the empty space. Shouldn’t he have a better idea if he is so adamant about nixing this one? It is this kind of meddlesome unpredictability that makes business owners not want to deal with SF, and regardless of your politics it is in the long run extremely detrimental to create an environment where people don’t want to do business because they don’t know what some self-righteous politico will do.
Myrna:
As you can see, there’s a lot of interest in improving Geary Blvd. Any chance you could organize a community meeting with Supervisor Mar, with plenty of advance notice, so everyone could have a voice in this issue? Geary is the main artery in the Richmond, but, sadly right now it’s badly sclerosed.
Thanks for your help.