weeks at the ordinance moves thereto process the supervisor is happy to help with the implementation for vivifying oernz and i have already had several conversations with deputy district attorney how the planning department can verify the structure. the department could require some evidence from the pleasant such as articles of corporates corporation and there's an existing process for code violations for the board of appeals. if a third party shows evidence the department can initiate the process and if the department finds they're in violation they could deny the application.

there are a variety of procedural means and the fact that those procedures are not defined means the procedures should be redefined. it already states that if something is a city formula use. the burden is on the formula stores. it should be - of the 10 finding for section 603 of the planning code 4 deal with the size and structure of the company and one deals with the aesthetics. finding two, that san francisco meditates to protect small

businesses and it stays within the local committee without going to local offices and item 6 is for businesses for better capital businesses. and the planning code already focuses on business structure. and since the affiliate of a or a subsidy is better originated the planning code already defines the codes in the valley. supervisor breed is committed to this legislation. the departments concern of verifying the structure should be reidentified. again supervisor breeds respects

the citywide conversation about formula detail. and she believe that hayes valley has already been a test issue. the hayes valley wants the definition made as soon as possible and we respect this wish. it's endorsed by the small business commission and i know it's fair to say it, it's brought to the xhgs so i'm happy to answer any questions >> opening it up to public comment. i have some speaker cards. sorry >> thank you connor. so as you recall they have the

two districts in the city that has a prohibition it will include stashtsd that l have las vegas or more establishments in the world not just within the united states and it will include 50 percent of the stock ownership is owned by a formula retail use or affiliate or an establishment has fewer than 11 establishments throughout of the world. the departments recommendations is that supervisor breed hold off on the ordinance so a more comprehensive package of the retail controls and adopt the

resolution to that site. however, if she feels a need to proceed the department recommendation that they formula changes be done citywide and not on an individual basis. and to remove the provision that would tie the formula to neighborhood structure. the first remedies is tied to the recommendation about the formula retail definition last week. we would like to have a more comprehensive policy. regarding the other modifications and we want to avoid the patchwork of other definitions around the city our code is a very complicated code. there's lots of definitions.

we try not to have speculate definitions it makes it difficult to implement. and finally, awhile we understand the definitions to be expand as members of the jury, we don't have the expertise in our department to look at how to implement that and if we can't implement it effectively it's probably not going to work. we're happy to work with the supervisor to find a way to implement it but not at this time. and then finally the proposed ordinance would add a business ordinance for additional for about for overview and oversight. yeah, the findings in the code

talk about the ownership factor but we're concerned about basing the ownership factor as a reason for additional oversight and what that could lead to. we're not rooektd e rejecting this out right of. that concludes my presentation >> opening it up to public comment. i have some speaker cards (calling names) >> good afternoon. i'm russel's i'm president of the merchant association and on the board of the neighborhood association and also on the council of district merchants. i'm pleased that the planning

department wants to develop a concrete plan citywide it's important for the businesses and for the continuous of the vital community. it's absolutely crucial we address this. with the opening of the arrogant store on the 552 hayes street recently and soon the opening of the pap pa bubble it's a spanish corporation it's marketing the erosion of our small business community from an economic standpoint and from our merchant community we've worked hard to progress. i've lived in hayes valley for 23 years and i'll u i'd

appreciate this if we do the citywide study. i know we're going to be providing input and working with the planning department. and a >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> commissioner and commissioner thank you very much for letting e let me speak i've lived here 90 inform 43 years. i've been responsible for helping start up businesses to get into business. i sincerely request that you had a fuller study on the effects of the amendment proposed and that you look at this more carefully. i believe in balance and i believe some chains are great

and other chains are not good at all. i feel there are a lot of miss achieved ideas whether it has to do with the volume. i think you know that good merchant do far better business than chances. there's a lot of wishes them taking real estate from locals. in fact, many of the times you'll get higher rent from locals than you do chains. i honestly feel like trends change and there's been a acid decreases in the locals looking for space. i guarantee don't know to see

blighted areas. i feel like we're a world-class city and we should be representative of what's around the world. i was at a cocktail party and it was asked why is there merchandise on a local area. i think which one neighborhood stops being unique another one starts. customers ultimately make the decisions of the success of a tenant and we can't artifically do that. i sincerely hope you'll do a full study on the effects. i feel like if we put those restrictions on one neighborhood they'll role into the next.

thank you >> thank you. >> good afternoon. i'm dee dee workman from the san francisco chamber of commerce. the san francisco chamber of commerce representing over 15 hundred businesses urges you to poison the rough of the formula retail use of the hayes goes ordinance. this ordinance speaks to fundamentally modify this formula retail to stop establishment where 50 percent of the establishment has fewer than 11 locations around the world. it will expand the definition without data or analysis to support them and it creates a

confusing patchwork across the city. the better approach is to wait until the study is completed and the department has development a expensive packet of changes pr the san francisco chamber of commerce urges you to continue until that time. thank you. >> thank you. >> good afternoon, commissioners. i'm daniel i'm born and raised in hayes valley. and i've had the future to own a business we do guided bike tours around the city. i have the that, of course, of not only a hayes resident but who brings tours into the

valley. and one of the things we get to showcase is the authenticity of san francisco. we've taken - we've been in hayes valley since june and we've taken roughly 6 thousand 8 hundred and 6 people into the valley and they've been ecstatic of what's been going on. i'm proud to have a business within hayes valley and been born here and it's something i think t is important to maintaining the benefit of the neighborhood >> any speakers. >> i want to give some insight

in the last three weeks we've lost 5 businesses because formula retail has gone in and misrepresented facts to this floor and held the permits and passed the permit appeal period, started building and the neighborhood and merchants didn't have a chance to do anything because we were told the project has already started. my question is for hayes valley and for all of us where can we - how can we start working towards having a better legislation that protects people all over the city. one of our rentals corporations moved down the street and we

lost 2 businesses there. this is a citywide issue. all right. and we should get a handle on it but the fact is the first floor is not being recommended and they're coming and? the third time in a year we've had this happen and how do we stop human thank you from infamous i falling down the hill. we need to study this and find a solution to it. okay. thank you >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> good afternoon supervisors i'm ben.

i work in the retail destroy representing local and natural retailers. i strongly urge the planning commission to hold-off on any action to present facts that's not based on opinions or protection itching of small businesses at the expense of the shows of neighborhoods and the residents of those neighborhoods. i noticed in supervisor breeze comments she called us a retail economy and i think that's ironic that shows a lack of an understanding of what a retailer is. i think that formula retailer

ownership is an incredible reach and it's going to be hard to verify the ownership stakes. it's why we have not seen this across the country. last planning commission san francisco was the largest city by a for about of 15 that has those types of restrictions rails one in connecticut that has 35 thousand people. i think that many of those proposals by the supervisors need our reaction and they're based on un230u7b9d fear at the choice of the public. when we're talking about the community input it's important that it's not just the vocal neighborhood groups but you

should hear from other folks in the community so it's truly a community voice. lastly if i don't like a retailer you don't shop there. if the business is in viable and people don't want to shop there the businesses won't exist. i strongly ask you to let planning do their job based on facts not special interests and you do not move forward with any of this legislation. thank you >> thank you. >> good afternoon, commissioners my name is erick i'm a resident of san francisco for the last 15 years. like the two who spoke before i'm in the real estate. not only here in san francisco but throughout the united states. i've been fortunate to work on

wonderful streets that have fabrics. whether we deal with corporate guests or folks from other states they mafrl at the unique nature of santa fe san francisco. they shop local and national. i've been fortunate to lease all of fourth street and berkley you also know as a chain and also in downtown san - we have the locals and we know the importance of the local chain

stores. it's interesting because flt under the definition a gentleman which went from a local independent to a chain. i urge the counsel to look at this. there's a balance that comes with nationals and locals and international retailers because there are draws that local merchants can do that retailers or or national can't do. and it seems shortsighted to make a rash decision relative to something that's got an impact not only on hayes valley but the general san francisco city. so i request you study this more thoroughly and i appreciate your

time. thank you >> thank you. any additional public comment? public comment is closed. commissioner >> well, to the speakers who have spoken today, i think we've had good conversation. one speaker more than one speaker spoke about the choices that consumers make. if consumers don't buy it here they'll buy it somewhere else or maybe online. the biggest threat is to online purchasing and nobody wins so far as i'm concerned we don't get the sale within san

francisco or the employment behind the counter for san francisco or the tax revenue out of the sale. again, the sample there are people who know what that is but there are people who know and seek it and if we get too strict in banning making it so difficult for companies to come here they'll go somewhere else. so i think we have to be very careful and i and i thought the speaker who thought we should study this. there's a place for formula retail done with the right sicken and that's one of the things i have against hayes. they have an out right ban.

but in a neighborhood this has a ban already it makes it even more recycle active and if it were conditional use i would consider it and policy citywide that's nor 50u6r78 but i think the analysis should be done first. we're hearing how our local money should be kept here locally and i know there are many companies i've gone to and i found out that the owners of a business only located in san francisco don't live in san francisco and don't employ people here so to generalize that local firms only are going to be better off is not the case. i think conditioning this would

be the best if not it's a no vote for me and so i think that we'll see what the other commissioners have to say but i'm repetitive we have to have some policy that's more citywide and to penaltylize only the american companies but not the foreign companies make sense but but the second part is all kinds of ownership which companies have ties that exceed 50 percent is an extremely burdensome thing even if it's only on the particular sponsor it will be another reason they will try to relocate here from being two restrictive.

those are my feelings >> i'm looking forward to the study and i know we have a lot of time i understand the supervisors wanting to move forward quickly. if you have foreign retailers it's important to expend it. there's more of a finer conversation to be had when we look at the larger issues citywide and i said the legislation out of fairness if you argue about the costs and the burden of being a formula retailer and whether to relocate into a community or not. i know that when this legislation was competed though

going back to the earlier conversation about aesthetics people didn't call it this but it was the wall greens and there's around the marketing signs and the awningings. there's two sides the issues there was the inflexible ability of having it on the street and the second thing about the competition and the impact on the environment. that's where we need to have a better understanding that we don't we have an understanding about the physical impacts. for me it's a diverse range of

issues. does that multiple the fact that they hire people locally or not. i also look at a place like target and i see a lot of people from the communities with jobs and i don't see the diverse workforce. i know there are impacts we need to look at with regards to diversity. we see a lot of people employed along hayes and i think we need to get a better understanding. by in the context of this legislation i am going to support it because of the fact that's a fairness and equality issue. and i want to be supportive are

on the second issue related to how do you determine ownership. i'm supportive of the affidavit having the structure but in the planning code we can't put that language but if someone is - i remember that at one point one company had a interest in mcdonald. 50 percent isn't a magic number but to put something in the find a that specifics this is not part of the global but i think that's the place for it not in the planning code. i don't know that 50 is the

right fun. i'm for the legislation including the global retailers because of the fairness issue and i'm supportive of something in the affidavit but not in the code >> commissioner. >> so i'm supportive also. i think we've already set the bar hierarchical for formula retailers for observe reasons the voters passed that initiative. this is defining the retailers more it make sense. i think it should be defined citywide. those changes make sense to define it citywide. but i'm hoping that they can't recall being be considered citywide.