>> clerk: -- and we will receive public comment for each item on today's agenda. comments or opportunities to speak are available by calling 415-655-0001 and entering access code 2495-518-6567. when we reach the item you are interested in speaking to, please press star, three to be added to the queue. when you hear that your line

has been unmuted, that is your indication to begin speaking. each speaker will be allowed up to three minutes, and when you have 30 seconds remaining, you will hear a chime, indicating your time is almost up. when your time is up, i will mute your mic and take the next person lined up to speak. best practices are to call from a quiet location, speak slowly and clearly, and mute all speakers on your television or computer. i'd like to take roll at this time. [roll call] >> clerk: thank you, commissioners. first on your agenda is general public comment. at this time, members of the public may address the commission on items of interest to the public that are within the subject matter jurisdiction of the commission except agenda items. with respect to agenda items, your opportunity to address the

commission will be afforded when the item is reached in the meeting. each member of the public may address the commission for up to three minutes. again, when you hear your line has been unmuted, that's your indication to begin speaking. >> good afternoon, commissioners. this is woody labounte from san francisco heritage. i just want to make you aware that san francisco heritage has a new president and c.e.o., carolyn monte, who is going to be introduced to the public next week at our semiannual meeting. so please go to sfheritage.org where you can meet carolyn and see what the organization has been up to. thanks so much. >> clerk: thank you. last call for general public comment. you need to press star, three.

okay. seeing no requests to speak from the public, public comment is closed, and we can move onto other matters. item b is department matters, department announcements. do we have any department announcements? >> hi, jonas. rick sucre, and i did want to follow up. we did receive a statement from supervisor peskin, encouraging the planning department to move ahead with the north beach historic [inaudible] statement and survey. as you know, with all of our community sponsored surveys, the planning department have to do additional work with that, so we're trying to work with the project sponsor and see how this work fits in with your larger citywide surveys. so we're trying to fit our response, and we'll have an

update for you at a future meeting. and that's all i have. >> clerk: thank you, mr. sucre. if we have no questions, we can move onto commission matters. item 2, president's report and announcements. >> i don't have any announcements at this time. >> clerk: thank you. item 3, consideration of adoption of draft minutes for january 5, 2022. members of the public, this is your opportunity to address the commission on item 3, the draft minutes for january 5, 2022. >> so moved. >> second. >> thank you. on that motion and second to adopt the minutes -- [roll call] >> clerk: so moved, commissioners. that motion passes unanimously, 7-0, placing us on item 4, commission comments and

questions. okay. seeing no requests to speak from members of the commission, we can move onto item 5, election of officers. so in accordance with your rules and regulations, you've designated today as the date to hold an election. you can make your nominations. it does not require a second, and we'll just simply vote on those nominated in the order that they have been nominated. >> i nominate president matsuda has president and vice president ruchira has vice president. >> second. >> clerk: i see commissioner johns would like to speak. >> well, that's what i was going to do. >> clerk: okay. very good. if there are no additional nominations, commissioners, we should take public comment. members of the public, this is your opportunity to address the

commission on the election of officers. you need to press star, three. seeing no members of the public requesting to speak, public comment on this matter is closed, and the nomination of commissioner matsuda as president and commissioner nageswaran as vice president -- [roll call] >> clerk: so moved, commissioners. that motion passes unanimously, 7-0, and congratulations, president matsuda and vice president nageswaran and your duties as officers. that will place us on

consideration of items proposed for continuance. there are no items proposed for continuance. that puts us on item e, our consent calendar. all matters listed hereunder constitute a consent calendar, are considered to be routine by the historic preservation commission, and may be acted upon by a single roll call vote of the commission. there will be no separate discussion of these items unless a member of the commission, the public or staff so requests, why which event the matter should be removed from the consent calendar and considered as a separate item at this or a future hearing. item 6, 2016, 007303-psa-02 at 5 third street, and item 7,

2019-014356-coa, at 888 tennessee street. members of the public, this is your opportunity to enter public comment. seeing no members of the public wishing to speak, this is the time that commissioners nageswaran and commissioner wright should be excused. >> so moved. >> second. >> clerk: on the motion that commissioners nageswaran and commissioner wright should be excused -- [roll call] >> clerk: so moved, commissioners. that motion passes unanimously, 7-0, and i will remind commissioners wright and nageswaran that you need to fill out the form and have it

posted on the ethics commission website within ten days listing why you need to be recused. so if you would please turnoff your video cameras and mute your microphones, commissioners, we have -- should call up items 6 and 7 separately, so we should take up the matter of item 6 under your consent calendar. >> motion to approve. >> second. >> clerk: thank you, commissioners. on that motion, then, to approve item 6 with conditions for 5 third street -- [roll call] >> clerk: so moved, commissioners. that motion passes unanimously, 5-0. commissioners wright and

nageswaran, you may now sort of reenter our virtual hearing room, and we can consider item 7 under your consent calendar for 888 tennessee, a certificate of appropriateness. >> i move that that be continued. >> second. >> [indiscernible] -- i move that we can put it on the consent calendar. >> clerk: to be approved with conditions? >> yes. >> clerk: do i hear a second? >> second. >> clerk: thank you, commissioners. on that motion, then, to approve item 7 under your consent calendar with conditions -- [roll call]

>> clerk: so moved, commissioners. that motion passes unanimously, 7-0, placing us under your regular calendar for item 8, case 2021-009311-des at 2261 fillmore street, also known as the clay theater, for landmark designation. >> hello, jonas. pilar lavalley, planning department staff. before i make my presentation, i would like to inquire if domenica from supervisor stefani's office is present to make some comments.

>> clerk: domenica, you should be able to unmute your mic now. >> thank you, jonas. good afternoon, president matsuda and commissioners. today, i'm speaking on behalf of supervisor stefani to express her strong support on behalf of the clay theater. the clay theater is one of the oldest theaters in san francisco. for over 100 years, it has been one of the most successful cultural institutions in the neighborhood, and sadly, like many single stream institutions before it, the clay closed in january 2020, just before the pandemic. [inaudible] through the landmarking process, the supervisor hopes that we will be able to preserve the historic and irreplaceable

value of the clay theater. so thank you to planning department staff, and especially pilar lavalley for the incredible effort that's gone into the matter before you today. thank you very much. >> clerk: commission president matsuda, i don't know the time restriction for commissioner foley, if he wanted to submit any comments related to this before he had to leave. >> commissioner foley, did you want to share some of your comments about the -- >> i would love to. i actually love this theater, and i think the building itself is amazing, and it's hard to renovate these buildings. i did renovate a church once, i think, that people know about, but when you do keep that peace of history and a fabric of the community, it really means something, so i am really excited about this project, and i'm really excited about it

being on the -- nominated, so thank you very much for the time today. >> thank you. >> clerk: pilar, the floor is yours. >> okay. let me just share my screen. all right. thank you. good afternoon, commissioners. pilar lavalley, planning department staff. before you is a landmark designation for the clay theater, at 2261 fillmore street. on june 15, 2021, supervisor stefani introduced a resolution to initiate preservation of the clay theater. both the commission and the full board voted unanimously to approve this resolution on august 4, which became effective with the mayor's

signature. the former clay theater, which closed in january 2020, i believe, was constructed in 1913 on the south corner of fillmore and clay streets as a double height one-story building, housing a nickelodeon theater and stores. the building was designed by architects arthur and oliver russo. although this photo that you're seeing here dates from 1940, we believe that this is basically the original appearance of the theater. in march -- in 1935, film distributor and exhibitor herbert rosner, the west coast major distributor of art films at that time completed a deal to operate what was described at the time as the existing clay theater under a new name, the clay-international, and to show foreign made films.

although other theaters in san francisco had also shown international films by that period, this appears to have been the first theater dedicated to the showing of foreign films, which started, then, in 1935, and then rosner continued to operate the theater until the late 1960s. in 1943, ownership of the property passed to an ownership group, including the nasser brothers, richard and henry. the nasser brothers were prominent theater developers and owners who were responsible for the construction of the castro and alhambra theaters, among others in san francisco and california. under the ownership of the nasser brothers, the clay theater was remodelled by a prominent theater architect vincent rainey in 1946 who

reconfigured the front entrance and ticket booth and enclosed the front to create a second floor office, skm some of the terazzo was also done in 1946, as shown in this screen. and then, on the interior photo of the theater, the crown molding and rosettes were the original features. i haven't been able to figure out when the -- the mural may date from. it's not shown in any of the historic photographs or on any of the plans. in 1958, additional alterations were made, including a new storefront system closer to the sidewalk, removal of the southern storefront that originally existed adjacent to the theater storefront, and then remodelling of that former commercial space to create new

rest rooms for the theater. during this 1958 renovation, the lobby and the auditorium were altered, with the auditorium refigured and screen installed. in 1963, surf theaters began operating the theater, and they operated it until the late 1980s, pushing the clay into further adventurous themes and art films. as detailed in your fact sheet, which i sent an amended version earlier today with some additional photos and some corrections, the clay theater is culturally and historically significant as one of the oldest single screen movie theaters, an important and unique cultural institution in

san francisco. originally constructed as a nickelodeon, the clay theater is significant with the initial development of neighborhood theaters during the pioneering movement of the moving pictures and art picture industry in san francisco. further, it's one of the first foreign film theaters in san francisco through the late 1980s. clay theater is also architecturally historically significant as it embodies both the characteristics of an early 20 century nickelodeon and a single screen theater. proposed period of significance is 1913 through the late 1980s. since your packets were issued, staff has received 13 additional public comments on this designation, including

from the property owner and from the san francisco neighborhood theater foundation. the theater foundation and other commenters were all in support of this designation. the property owner letter raises concerns about the designation, locking the building in the past while also acknowledging its history. the department believes the theater meets the established eligibility requirements and that landmark status is warranted. the department recommends that the h.p.c. approve the recommendation for landmark designation of the clay theater, also known as 2261 fillmore street, which will then be forwarded to the board of supervisors. the draft ordinance before you was slightly amended to address a couple of nonsubstantive typos. one was on page 4, line 9, removing a comma at the end of a sentence, and the other was on page 4, line 16, to add in a period at the end of the landmark designation report,

and we would ask that you adopt these minor changes when you vote to approve the ordinance. thank you, and that concludes my presentation. also, i believe that property owner's representative, architect david marlatt, is also on the line to provide public comment. >> clerk: pilar, did mr. marlatt have a presentation? >> he does not, no. >> clerk: okay. very good. commissioners, we should open up public comment. you need to press star, three to enter the queue. through the chair, you'll each have three minutes, and when you hear that your line has been unmuted, that's your indication to begin speaking. >> good afternoon, commissioners. my name is stephanie peak, and i have lived in san francisco 60 years. i ask you to designation the clay theater as a landmark

[inaudible] i'm sorry the owner doesn't understand what a treasure the clay theater is. let's just save the clay and bring back more life to the upper fillmore. the owner also owns the adjacent property on fillmore street, and that could be a restaurant for theater goers. like the vogue theater on sacramento street, one-room theaters are the most pleasant way to enjoy films. the clay's program of independent and foreign films was wonderful. it was at the clay that i was introduced to agatha christie's inspector poirot and other films. we must protect our cultural institutions. thank you. >> good afternoon,

commissioners. this is woody labounte with the san francisco heritage again. beyond architecture and design, the clay has been an important cultural destination for the city, and we here at heritage hope the landmark designation can preserve it to thrive once more in the role in the future. our thanks to supervisor stefani for her leadership on this initiation, and to the many efforts for this designation. we strongly urge your approval. thank you so much. >> hello. my name is t.j. fisher. i'm a san francisco resident, and i'd also like to speak in

strong support of the landmark designation for all the reasons already mentioned and more. i think its aesthetic features and beauty are unlike any other theaters in the city. i'd like to highlight its importance for the lgbtq community as it was the long time home of rocky horror in the city, and i also want to highlight a point of its accessibility and cultural institution relative to all other venues. i think it's so important to maintain all of these landmarks that are really accessible to everyone and also drives business to restaurants, stores, and other surrounding merchants. to me, the clay is really a

part of the fabric of the city and will make it more of a wonderful place to life, and i want to thank the commission and supervisor stefani for their leadership on this. thank you very much. >> good afternoon, commissioners. this is kathrin pechin. i'm calling on behalf of the san francisco neighborhood theater foundation. we are a 501-c-3, dedicated to keeping the city's theaters alive and vibrant, and i'm happy to say we've been pretty successful in doing that. i'm calling in support of the nomination of the clay theater. i first of all should thank planning department staff, especially miss lavalley and supervisor stefani's office for their support and leadership. this building really merits designation as a local landmark. not only does it meet the

criteria, but it is in every way a city of san francisco landmark visually and has played a role in the development of san francisco and the history of fillmore street, like so many others that had their neighborhood theaters. i just want to say that san francisco neighborhood theater foundation has been closely tracking the ups and downs of the clay for more than ten years, and we very much support its potential come back as a vibrant movie theater in the near future. thank you. >> clerk: okay. last call for public comment, and i do believe that the representative of the owner did want to make a comment.

mr. marlatt, are you with us? >> yes. >> clerk: okay. you have three minutes, as well. mr. marlatt, you may want to mute your -- well, i've unmuted your computer, but it sounds like [indiscernible]. you also have a phone line open? >> yes. [indiscernible]. >> clerk: yeah. if you hang up your phone, then there won't be any echo. >> thank you. is that better? >> clerk: yes, it is. >> okay. i'm sorry for that. >> clerk: okay. thank you, commissioners. good afternoon. my name is marlatt, d&m architecture, speaking on behalf of the owner, [inaudible], who is also on the call with me. this afternoon, you are

discussing the clay theater's past and present. staff has presented to you the theater's 100 or so history and described the features which indeed merit preservation, but we would ask you to consider the building's future. we know how the building got here, but where does it go? it needs preservation and restoration. will it do so as a single-screen movie theater? well, we can't prove a negative, but we all agree it's difficult for single-screen theaters in a pandemic environment to have a viable business model. in order to save the clay, we believe that we must leave open at least the possibility of adaptive reuse and not inadvertently, while the building is still closed, not

inadvertently shutdown some of the very paths which may lead to its success. specifically, we would like to draw your attention to the [inaudible] floor and the lobby, which are noted by the staff in the report as significant interior features. indeed, these are common to this specific building type, but in the case of the clay theater, the lobby is featureless. over time, it has been altered and doesn't have any distinctive ornamental detail to it, unlike the other features like the molding of the neon arch and the marquee that is often associated with this type of building's use. it's as though we're landmarking the memory type rather than its tangible and

distinctive elements. it's important that we note these because it will severely limit the possible business as a positive contributor to the community. we ask that the commission not inadvertently endanger the clay's tangible and unique features by associating inunique building features. we agree that the exterior of the clay and preserving the [indiscernible] in san francisco's past [indiscernible] sorry.

for all passersby, in the lobby and entryway, are significant and should be restored. >> clerk: thank you, mr. marlatt. that is your time, but the commission may have question. >> thank you. i'll stay on the line in case there are questions. >> clerk: thank you. we should reopen public comment. there was a late request for public comment. >> yeah, go ahead. >> yeah, my name is salary maruja, and i am calling in support of the clay theater. i live about six blocks to the theater, and i believe that there are a lot of unique details to the theater that merit preservation. i also believe that if it returns to use as a theater, it will drive a lot of foot traffic to the fillmore and to the area, and i greatly appreciate that the city is

considering preserving the building. this doesn't happen in a lot of cities, and again, we'll -- there are a lot of unique architectural details about the inside and outside that are special, so i want to just add my support, and thank you for considering it. >> clerk: okay. last call for public comment on this item? you need to press star, three. seeing no additional requests to speak, public comment is now closed, and this item for designation is now before you. >> thank you. do i have any commissioners -- commissioner nageswaran. >> so, you know, just -- this

is at the forefront of this conversation, the owner's concerns for the rate floor and i believe it was the lobby. you know, i want to understand from the planners, you know, this building is currently a category a historic resource, and even with a category a historic resource, when a project is done on a building, it still has to follow the secretary of the interior standards, and i want to understand is, you know, the previous study done on this building also contain the same elements? certainly, the facade expresses the characteristics of a theater and conveys its

significance. the way it's written, it's more than just the space itself, so that people coming in can say oh, this is an entryway, and then, when you go into the main space, there's a double height volume that says this was a theater. and then, in the double height spaces that are left, i believe that the owner is supportive of retaining. so i want to understand from the planners whether, even if it wasn't landmarked and it was just a category a building, that these -- the same sort of conditions would exist for adaptive reuse. >> thank you, commissioner nageswaran. i am just looking through the -- you're correct. it was previously identified as a historic resource in a

historic resource evaluation that was done in 2014, and at that time, it was identified as individually eligible undercyte -- under criterion one and four. it was also identified as a contributor to a historic district or a discontinuous historic with a period of significance from 1900 to 1915. and then, the character defining features that were identified then -- let me see -- they were less detailed than what's outlined in the ordinance for the proposed

landmark designation, but i'm reading from the 2014 historic resource evaluation response right now. the character defining features were those that expressed the building's identity as a neighborhood theater, tall one-story form and massing, the recessed entryway, shaped parapet and entryway on the facade, raked floor and arch, and rectangular plan divided into principal spaces of lobby and auditorium. >> okay. and that also contained, interestingly enough, that h.r.a. had a period of significance until 1913 to 1915, which is the earlier design of the russos, rather than the rainey design, which is dominant now, but i think you included that in the landmark designation.

so even if this was a category a building, they would still have to address those ceqa issues, so the current status doesn't change with landmarking in terms of adaptive reuse. and i had -- i had kind of had these other thoughts about the building. in the executive summary, it noted that it wasn't necessarily one of the underrepresented buildings, but the reading -- reading through the nasser family history from lebanon, i thought that was interesting and possibly an underrepresented group. although not the original owners, they're certainly significant because of their association with other theaters and with this theater.

and my question also, was, with the nassers would be significant enough to be in criterion b, as association with persons? >> i certainly considered that, as well. nasser brothers were considered significant theater developers in san francisco as well as northern california at least, and so i think that they would certainly be considered significant persons under criterion b potentially, but in putting together this designation, it didn't seem like they would rise to the level of significance for their level of association with this particular property. it was not one that they

developed or constructed. you know, i think a better example is the castro theater. it's a specific example of a theater that they not only developed but also operated? here, you have them becoming sort of part of an ownership group that had a long history

of theaters, so i think that was why i didn't feel it was a justified finding under b with the nasser brothers. >> okay. and then, let's see...i think i had a couple other questions. i did appreciate in your report that you called it a one story. i almost wanted to call it two stories because the initial design had the arch way that sort of made it a one-story element, but then, the later rainey alteration seemed to make it a two-story, but i

think double-height one story is more accurate because of its history as a one story initially, so that was appreciated. and then, going back to the owner, in their letter, i thought that it was commendable that they had offered the tenant, the theater tenant to have some funding, but even then, that was not enough to keep it going. but it sounds like there's so much community support for this building that, you know, and with the theater foundation, that maybe there's some hope with that. but in any event, i appreciate your efforts, miss lavalley, and the ownership, and the comments, and i'll move onto

the next person. >> thank you. commissioner black? >> well, you know, at the outset, this is a no-brainer. it's really a really wonderful resource. i love the history of it. i never understood were nickelodeons were called nickelodeons, and so i certainly appreciate that. with regards to community support, there is a lot of community support. i am open to a discussion about the owner's concerns about the raked front and the lobby. i of course would prefer that the interior be preserved as it exists now, even though that's not the way it was initially designed, but i've been around long enough to know that it's

not a good thing to have a single-use building that cannot be easily adapted to another use. it doesn't bode well for the preservation of the structure because people can't afford to just keep repairing roofs and facades and everything else if there isn't a functional use, so i'm open to that discussion about possibly removing some of the character designing features. to that end, miss lavalley, what would be the process -- if this were to be approved today, and the supes approved it with all the character defining features intact, what would be the steps that the applicant would need to take to make modifications for a new use -- a nontheater use? >> so the steps would be as

with any designated landmark, assuming the board acts to approve the designation, would be to -- any proposed changes that would require a building permit would require a certificate of appropriateness, and the proposal would be reviewed against the character defining features for conformance to the secretary of interior standards, which we know with adaptive use projects, the character defining features are there to sort of provide us with a guide, but that doesn't necessarily mean they could never be altered in a manner that was -- they could find a way to alter them that was in conformance with the secretary of interior standards. that's how the certificate of

appropriateness provides. >> thank you for that answer. would it trigger an e.i.r. or a mitigated [indiscernible] and would it -- is there realistically a way that a raked floor could be easily adapted to a new use other than just, you know, raising the back of the theater floor level? >> so if the project, whatever it was, was found to be in conformance with the standards and the certificate of appropriateness was supported and appeared to be granted, that would generally mean that there was no significant impact to the historical research such that you would need a [inaudible] or an e.i.r., so i -- i can't speak to it beyond that. but i think also -- i haven't been involved, but i know that

the department has reviewed a number of adaptive reuse projects for theaters, both of this size and larger, and the raked floors are often an issue. but i think in general, you know, we've managed to find a middle ground solution where you might install a new floor above without completely removing the existing floor level, so at least at some point in the -- you know, in the future, you could, you know, sort of find that feature again. >> okay. all right. i really appreciate that. that's just the level of information i was looking for. go ahead. >> sorry. can i just -- just to the lobby. the intent of identifying the lobby was, again, as a whole new metric space and again, as a progression of the plan, it

seemed indicative of how this building was used as a theater, that you would come to this vestibule from the sidewalk and then to the auditorium. it wasn't intended to identify actual finishes or features of that space, so if you would prefer, we can amend that ordinance to make that clear. >> okay. i appreciate that. i feel better. i just don't want this building to just languish without a new use because it's just not possible or it's too expensive to be able to adapt it to another use that would be of benefit to the city. >> thank you. commissioner johns? >> thank you. you know, the questions and

point that commissioner nageswaran brought up, and later, the other ones that commissioner black brought up really helped satisfy the questions and concerns that i had, so i really don't have anything more to say on that. but on the question of the volume, you know, this has come up several times when there has been a desire to include interior spaces in a landmark. i really think there should be a better description so that people aren't misled as to what is being covered. i know that i was, several times, before i was educated about what's covered by volume, but many people aren't, so that would be something that, moving

forward -- well, we could move forward with this from this point onto just make it more clear what volume. thank you. >> thank you. commissioner so? >> well, thank you for the presentation by pilar, and also, thank you for domenica speaking on behalf of supervisor stefani's office speaking for the support and the recommendation. i appreciate the report. it has been a really detailed studies and actually have no further comments on anything for this. i would like to motion to approve the recommendation to the landmark designation. >> thank you. we have a couple more comments from the commission.

commissioner wright? >> yes, thank you. i just wanted to also say that i think the points that commissioner black brought up and the discussion with the department answered some of the questions that i think were kind of out there and some points that i was kind of thinks in my own head about that, and the landmark designation on the raked floor might draw the attention in hopes of preserving features to in place, maybe concealed or otherwise rather than maybe removing them and just draw

attention to them. there [indiscernible] so i support moving forward with the designation as proposed, so i guess that would second commissioner so's motion. >> thank you. commissioner nageswaran. >> just one other comment. i think on the clarity issue for the owner and also everyone, you know, in areas of alteration, where there's

flexibility to change things, and i think the photo of the theater shows that the seats are gone, and that there's only the raked floor, so that -- you wouldn't have -- you know, wouldn't have to foot for a new raked floor, maybe something so that it is somewhat reversible in the future, so i think that would adhere to the standards. and moving forward, the

landmark designation, i would urge the organization to work with the planning department to highlight the areas of alteration so that it's clear to everyone where there's room for modifications so that it's clear, but i support the motion. >> thank you. jonas, i believe we have a motion and a second as to what has been proposed by staff. >> clerk: very good, then, commissioners. if there's no further deliberation, there's a motion that has been seconded to adopt a recommendation for approval with the amendments that were previously submitted by staff and mentioned in the presentation. on that motion -- [roll call]

>> clerk: so moved, commissioners. that motion passes unanimously, 6-0, and concludes your agenda today. another short one. >> thank you, jonas. >> clerk: thank you. another short one. >> thank you. >> thank you. >> thank you, jonas.

>> shop and dine in the 49 promotes local businesses and challenges residents to do their business in the 49 square files of san francisco. we help san francisco remain unique, successful and right vi. so where will you shop and dine in the 49? >> i'm one of three owners here in san francisco and we provide mostly live music entertainment and we have food, the type of food that we have a mexican food

and it's not a big menu, but we did it with love. like ribeye tacos and quesadillas and fries. for latinos, it brings families together and if we can bring that family to your business, you're gold. tonight we have russelling for e community. >> we have a ten-person limb elimination match. we have a full-size ring with barside food and drink. we ended up getting wrestling here with puoillo del mar. we're hope og get families to join us. we've done a drag queen bingo

and we're trying to be a diverse kind of club, trying different things. this is a great part of town and there's a bunch of shops, a variety of stores and ethnic restaurants. there's a popular little shop that all of the kids like to hang out at. we have a great breakfast spot call brick fast at tiffanies. some of the older businesses are refurbished and newer businesses are coming in and it's exciting. >> we even have our own brewery for fdr, ferment, drink repeat. it's in the san francisco garden district and four beautiful murals. >> it's important to shop local because it's kind of like a circle of life, if you will. we hire local people. local people spend their money at our businesses and those local people will spend their

money as well. i hope people shop locally. [ ♪♪♪ ] . ♪♪ ] >> clerk: this is the regular meeting of the small business commission held on january 10th, 2022. held to order at 4:30 p.m. it can be vieweded on sfgov tv 2 or live streamed at sfgovtv.org. members of the public who will be calling in, the number is (415) 655-0001. access code is