we know that it is an interactive process and so what did we do, knowing that there is an impact. we said that let's sit down and talk about it, let's see what we can do mitigate the problems. do you know what the response was? >> no, we will not meet with you, i don't think that is an interactive process and i don't think that is what formula retail is about, and i don't think that you ought to make a recommendation and i think that you should defer the decision, thank you. >> thank you. >> any other public comment? >> seeing none, public comment is closed. >> commissioners? >> dooley? >> i think that really what we are looking at today sort of a little more narrow than all of these things that we have heard. we are really looking at the criteria for formula retail. and another was the availability of the similar tail in the district and the

last time the same project came in front of the planning commission that was the reason that it was denied, what i am saying is really nothing has changed except that there is another pet food express closer now than when this went in front of it before. i think that it is very come mendable what they do with the adoption, but that is not really what we are looking at right here. that is an accessory use, this is not a part of deciding whether to grant a cu and this should not be brought in as a part of it. and for example, when they were denied before, our commission recommended that they look into opening in under served neighborhoods and they have not done that. we have refused to go into any under served neighborhoods and they have chosen to be as close to established neighborhood areas with established stores

because that is, there is already a clientele there. i just think that there is some debate here, but the marina community and association and merchants are long time neighborhood associations these folks have gathered thousands of neighborhood signatures. you know, i think that the new lombard street association was just recently founded by someone who is actually working with pet food express. and so, i suggest that we just, you know, we said it before, several years ago, and i believe that we should echo those same sentiments we are here to represent small business. not large chains. we all know that the city is under attack by large chains,

trying to change the nature of our city and our job as commissioners is to look after our small businesses. >> director? >> yeah. i just wanted to make sure that commissioners you are very clear that the planning commission can consider, you know, the neighborhood, the feedback, and various things. and as commissioner dooley said, as your role and responsibility is about the foster and promotion and the preservation of small businesses and policies that effect small businesses. and so your, what decision you make tonight, is it a decision say to the planning commission, we are suggesting that you make this recommendation, we are recommending that you make this decision based upon you know, a

very small, or but a very distinct sort of set of criteria in relationship to the things that they have to make a decision on, and to small business. and now that does not mean that the planning commission can't consider other factors that is in their purview, but just as other entities might want to come and advocate for the pet food express, or not advocate, and what you are doing is saying, we are taking a look at this particular, we have had a request from the small businesses to this formula retail continual use that will be coming before the planning commission, and as a small business commission, for our small businesses, we are suggesting xyz to the planning commission to take into consideration. >> i would like to make some comments here because this one is a tough one.

>> normally, i would be like against this. although, the thing about pet food express, is that they started out as a small business here in san francisco on west portal avenue, as a small business commission in the office of small business, don't we encourage our small businesses to grow and to thrive and here we have a local san francisco business who grew and thrived. and yes, he is one of the largest pet food stores in northern california, they are not national. and this one is tough, because they did everything that a small business is supposed to do and they became successful and now i am feeling like they are being punished because they are successful. that is just, you know, my opinion. and although, as one who had a dog and i did go to small pet

food store, i went to jeffrey's she does a great job and gives to paws and i love it, and thatwise was a place i used to go to. but this one is tough because here is a san francisco small business who made it and tlield i almost feel like they are being punished for it now and that is just my opinion. >> >> commissioner dwight? >> sorry >> first i want to thank michael and your team for coming out and this is very inspirational and for many small businesses aspirational and i am not here to begrudge at your success or in any way as i said before. villify your organization. and i think that you know, it

is already well proven that you do a lot of good for our community here as well as for the pet community at large. so, we are though, here as an advocate for small business and so our bias, if you will, or our proclivity is to listen to what the local small businesses have to say. and we have an ordinance that has been passed by the city to help address the issues like this. so we would not be here today if this were not a real issue and so clearly we all have our perspectives on it and i think that certainly we as the small business commissioners and as residents and business owners in san francisco, are very concerned about all of our commercial corridors, i drove on lum barred this weekend

coming home from going up north to visit my parents and i was actually quite shocked by what i saw on lumbard, i am very familiar with it being a thorough fair but i was actually, i took note of how many vacantcies there are and how blieted that area is and how it looks and continues to look. and so, i think that the activation or the revitalization of lum barred street is a bigger issue and i think that we are not here to preclude all chains and we agree that they can play a vital role in revitalizing the areas and what they provide is under served. apple did not put a bunch of small computer stores out of business and it is a fantastic retailer as are you. and i think that this is always on a case by case, category, by

category basis. and so, you know, what we are unfortunately faced with a black and white decision, it is yesterday, or no, ultimately and it is not us it is the planning commission, we are here to make our recommendation based on the community that we are here to serve the small businesses and i hope that you will appreciate, you know, kind of where we come at the issue. that being said, i'm new to the commission, and i was not here four years ago. i am a sane, rational person willing to listen to input and i am listening to you in three minutes and 30 second sound bytes tonight and that is not the best form to make your case. and so i am not opposed to learning more personally and i speak just as myself, personally. so, i am willing to dig down into this issue more because it comes up all over the city.

and i would also submit to you that the city has not shuned you generally. you have stores here, and you were born here and it is a fantastic san francisco success story. and i think that we ought to do what we can to continue to enable you, both in our city and wherever else you choose to do business. so, but i do think that we are also we have a responsibility to evaluate each of these on a neighborhood by neighborhood basis and listen to all of the constituents and so we are hearing from some tonight. and we by the way do not have a permitting subcommittee, so if you are referring to something that might have happened here on our committee, behind... >> we have a permitting committee. >> we have heard this in subcommittee? >> yes. >> my apologies, i did not know about that. but i think that you know, you are entitled to make your case as well. so i am all ears literally and figuratively and so i will look

forward to learning more >> commissioner o'brien? >> thank you, president. yes, it is one of those situations that you are damned if you do and you are damned if you don't. but that is the invitation that we have accepted to serve on the commission. and formula retail it is a tough one that i have always found difficult. >> it becomes a chain store where everything is mcdonalds or whatever it is and i understand that and i understand too much power being concentrated among lesser and lesser entities and so that motivation i understand and so with that comes the responsibility of administering programs sensably and there are

no absolutes as a few speakers mentioned, we need successful stories that will sometimes ininvolve bigger companies and they have to be in the mix, and otherwise, they will be failures in communities, shattered stores will exist for longer, talk to anybody in the business of running businesses, and starting up a new neighborhood community they have to have a big box store to get things off the ground there is no denying that. secondly, it is not absolute that big businesses destroy small businesses that is simply not true. quite a lot of big businesses, boost economic activity and provide activity for smaller business to exist around that business. so, we have an obligation on this commission to look at the impact across the board.

all of the impacts. and for me, that is very important that we don't blindly exclude opportunities, wise decisions, on the prevace that it is not a small business and we cannot have it on board. and i am also quite surprised tonight, because when this issue came up the last time before this commission, one of the comments that i made was how impressed i was with the coalition for pet food stores because they came on mass. they were well organized, they were very eloquent and they were very represented, and tonight i am very surprised that that representation is not

as cohesive. i was part of a political organization as i am today and i wanted to send some of the directors on the board it go over and talk to this coalition to find out how to start up a coalition and make it active because they were so effective. tonight i find it interesting that they are not here at this level. i just got the feeling from the testimony that i have got, there is no unnimity here and there is a mixed bag of feelings, speaker from the marine times thought that we were a bunch of liberal left or whatever and they don't want to hear it when she did not realize that she was not speaking for everybody, and we tried to be neutral up here as much as we can. and also there has been some... i have heard the articles lately that the theory that a small business delivers more money back into the community

than a local representative of a big business, there is some, there is some question marks about that statement now, if it is true or not. and it really does not matter here because this is a local story, it is not a national franchise, or an international franchise, it is a local story providing a lot of local economic activity. and the other point that i would like to make is that i don't like having you know, i worry about the government intervening and saying, how many businesses is too many businesses? you know? and i am going to tell you, i think that some of the store, and i think that they have multiple stores and they have spoke and had multiple stores and that is the desire that i guess most people have. you know, to expand and to do better and to add to their

portfolio and i really worry about any government official who comes along and decides you know, we have ten tapiocas across the country so we are not going to have eleven, or 8 or 7 is too many. and i have been more comfortable to rely on business to make that decision and let the community decide who can be successful rather than any sort of politicians doing it and another observation that i will make i live in the valley, and starbucks come in there quite a few years ago and they were like the poster child of everybody, and form the retail and i have seen more coffee shops being added on 24th street in the last few years where they are trying to stop for the other means because there is too many, but they

have not given out and they have not driven out, and the marvelous coffee shop and you have gone on to expand, and are still expanding and not driven out of business and so, certainly, i'm real reluctant to sign on to any legislation tonight that sort of sabotages this process, and i do not feel comfortable that i have all of the views and the facts and that this is a real so easily understood black and white situation that i know how to act on this tonight. i certainly do not feel that right now. >> commissioner riley? >> yes. >> it has been really well said by my fellow commissioners. i agree with you. and you made great points. and i am also in the position, and i am willing to learn more about a situation, and i am not comfortable to make any recommendation, just listening

to one side of the presentation. and i think that the pet foods deserves more than 3 minutes to state their case. >> commissioner white? >> yes. it has been interesting like commissioner dwight i was not here four years ago and so i don't know the past history. it is a little tough for me to decide tonight as well. only because you know i have a dog and i know that i go to a small business owner my community and it is about the relationship and no disrespect to pet express and you could be a block away and i am still going to go to my small pet store. also, as i live nearby lum barred street and i have issued with vacantcies in san francisco, and particularly lum barred street which is really just gone down hill and when

you have space that is so large, like that particular space, you want to get a business in there to activate that street, because as a small business commissioner, i actually represent all small business and i am concerned about the other small businesses on lum barred street as well. that i know that this would increase the traffic for them and also maybe other businesses to come. but really would like to look at that a little bit more if we can. >> i would agree. i'm in the same position, i cannot make a decision at this time this evening. and this is a tough one for me, normally it would be a black and white issue. but on this one it is not for me right now. so. >> is this an action item? >> >> possible action. >> it is an action item. >> and so it is an action item of which commissioners you can choose not to take action on it. and you do not have to, you can

decide that, it is an action item to make a recommendation to the planning commission, and you can make a determination on, i mean that you can continue it and to make a continuation or you can say, you know, we are not going to take any action tonight, or we are moving forward, we don't have to rehear this again and you are not obliged to take any action, but i just want to remind you that the continual use criteria that the planning commission uses is on page 2 of the section of your binder and i think that chris had it in your materials. >> is this not... is this being heard at planning any time soon? >> the soonest this will be heard is mid july. >> all right. >> august. >> what was the... what did

the... and so the planner has told us mid july. >> the soonest. >> so that was last week. >> you may have heard later. >> okay. >> certainly, you can entertain. >> would i like to hear it again just to hear more. >> so i think that since commissioners what i would like to do is i would like to get some specific lists of criteria of what the staff needs to prepare for you if you want to continue this and hear it more, again, you don't have to take any action tonight. you don't have to take any action moving, you know, what action that you can take is to not make a recommendation at all. >> commissioner dwight? >> so, i'm not an advocate of... and i am not here to say whether or not we take a position. i prefer that we can learn everything that we can learn

and to allow us to take a position or not to take a position. from my perspective i don't know enough and i want to hear more, i want to hear more from both sides of the story. i agree with you commissioner that it is some what, that the opposition to this is some what anemic tonight and what happens this is a good opportunity for you to go back and regroup. and understand how you might make your case a little more convincing because clearly we have got a great number of commissioners here who are not convinced. i also think that in the spirit of due process, and in the spirit of us being commission that is here to learn about things, that we provide a forum for mr. levy to present his side of story and his colleagues. and so i am the one who wants to learn more. in the spirit of wanting to be

a knowledgeable commissioner as well as for this commission to be able to assess these, and this is not the only time that this comes up. and in fact it will probably come up in an increasing basis. and i don't view it as, the city being under assault from outside influences, i mean, we are in an affluent city, and it is natural for businesses big and small to want to locate here and to take advantage of the purchasing power of the citizens of san francisco. and who are we to begrudge of that of america and that is free enterprise and i think that we are not here in the way to stand in the way of free enterprise. we are here to try and make a determination that is in the best interest of small business, but also in the best interest of the city of san francisco. so, i for one would like to learn more. >> commissioner o'brien?

>> i agree with commissioner dwight. >> the real temptation is to just to do nothing. right? >> and we could just avoid everything. and just avoid the controversy and just do nothing. and i agree with you commissioner and that is not what we are about and we got to take on the debate head on. and listen to the arguments and make an informed choice and i move that we move to continue this and if it is at all possible director, to hear this before it goes before the planning commission and to give the opportunity for both sides to be able to come back again, if they so choose. and we could have an informed debate and make an informed decision at that time. i would like to make that move if that is possible. >> i think that a couple of things need to happen and one is that we would need a commitment from the project

sponsor that if they are able to hear it at the planning commission before this small business commission is able to hear it that the project sponsor would make a commitment not to hear it at the planning commission before the small business commission hears it. so, otherwise i don't, what is the purpose of having the commission rehear it. >> we can schedule it for july some time. >> but that is... that is not affirm schedule. so it could move up. >> i just... i want to be mindful, but if it goes before the planning commission i am not spending staff time in doing a preparation for you when it might be heard at the planning commission before it comes back before you. >> our next meeting is june 24th, right? >> that is june 24th. >> so, and i need to hear also from you what else, what did

you not get tonight? and what did you need to hear so that staff, i am going to be gone for three weeks. and staff is going to need to work, you know, staff chris, is going to need to work on this and get the information and be able to have you have time to read it and so i don't think that the, you know,... >> now, i don't think that you... i mean, for me, it is not about putting out a template of here are the questions that we need answered, for me it is about both sides presenting their case, based on what they want to argue. >> right. >> but i think that what i am kind of sensing is perhaps we need to do better education to you around the criteria of which formula retail is decided. and so, that you are making that decision based upon that criteria. and i kind of get a sense that we need to do some better

education to you in relationship to that. >> i think that logically that the planning, commission that would make that decision. >> we just want to hear both sides. >> but your recommendation to just as we did the last two times, that this came before the commission and the recommendation to the planning commission was making a recommendation based upon the criteria that they have to use. >> so there are five sets of criteria that they look at to evaluate their determination around whether to grant or deny a conditional use permit. >> but we do have those criterias but we are not going to make a decision. >> and i don't think that there is a problem with continuing it until either two weeks or the next week. >> i just want to make sure that you know, i mean, because i am hearing that you... i just want to make sure that staff has time and has adequate time

to prepare for you what you need to be prepared for. and if it isn't staff does not need to do anything but just reschedule it and have everybody come back in that is fine. >> but i also don't want to spend time with this at this meeting if it is going to be heard at the planning commission before we reschedule it. >> that sounds totally fair to me that we would not be holding this off to give people a chance to address this commission and then find out that the whole reason for doing that is kind of hijacked so kind of a tough one to put back on this project, mr. levy but i do think that is certainly i don't want the staff exercising valuable resources on something that may not be required. so is it, you know, just to keep it in perspective, i kind of would feel that this should

not be too much work that needs to be done. i am interested in finding out a little bit more about the formula retail and i welcome any communication on that. and i don't want to fall into the trap of having that make the decision for us as opposed to us using that as a tool for good public policy. i want to be sure that it is there as a policy and as a guide and not an absolute and i would be interested in finding out about that. and so i think that we should be able to do a little bit of work on that and if something happens to leap frog this thing with we will just back away from it. >> and so then my question to you commissioner o'brien, would you like in the next meeting maybe a presentation from the planning department around form law retail criteria, how the commission is to use this criteria? because the recommendation that you know, the recommendation in

terms of if you are going to make a specific recommendation to support or to deny does have to fall your recommendation has to fall within the criteria that the planning commission can use. and you can then because you are sort of like a member of the public, so to speak, you could, add any additional things that the commission may want to say, but, in terms of making a recommendation to the planning commission, it has to be based upon that criteria. am i making any sense? >> yeah. if i may? >> commissioner dwight? >> yes, so thank you, that criteria by which we are to judge is the very criteria that the planning commission is to judge and i would appeal to both parties here to use that criteria has guidance for your presentations to us. you may present other materials as well.