The lunatics running once-great/now-grotesque San Francisco are not through destroying the city. One of them has found a new way to do so.
From Eric Revell’s article from Fox Busines, via msn.com, we have this:
A San Francisco lawmaker introduced a proposal that would require grocery stores in the city to provide six months of notice before closing a store and to explore a replacement supermarket at the vacated location.
Dean Preston, a member of the San Francisco Board of Supervisors, introduced what he calls the Grocery Protection Act – which is based on a proposal the board approved in 1984 that was vetoed by then-San Francisco Mayor Dianne Feinstein.
Preston’s proposal would require grocery store owners to provide six months written notice to the Board of Supervisors as well as the Office of Economic and Workforce Development (OEWD). The store would also be required to post notices at all entries and exits as a means of informing customers and the general public. The rule wouldn’t preclude closures due to a store being unprofitable.
“It was a good idea in 1984, and it’s an even better idea now,” Preston said in a press release. “Our communities need notice, an opportunity to be heard, and a transition plan when major neighborhood grocery stores plan to shut their doors. Meeting the food security needs of our seniors and families cannot be left to unilateral backroom decisions by massive corporate entities.”
Fascinating. If a grocery store is closing – regardless of why – force it to stay open another 6 months…AND to find someone else to replace it.
Let’s think about this.
If a major grocery store is closing, the most likely reason is that it is not making enough money to justify stayingopen – and, given that San Francisco (along with the rest of California) allows people to shoplift/steal at will up to $950 per incident, a very likely reason is that theft has made the store’s existence somewhere between unrealistic and impossible.
But if Dean Preston gets his way – and don’t doubt there will be at least some level of support for this nuthouse idea – even if owners of grocery stores are losing their shirts they’ll have to continue doing so for 6 months longer…while trying to find someone else to take over and experience the same conditions (lots of luck with that).
And that’s before we talk about the very real fear that if shoplifting is ignored by the law, maybe robbery (unaccountably, some customers do pay), or worse, could also occur.
Then there is the possibility that a store might have to close due to a tragic circumstance. If, for example, the owner and operator of a small grocery store suddenly dies, is the store legally bound to stay open for the next half-year? Even with no one to run it? What will Dean Preston do? Force the next of kin to open it each morning and hang around while the shoplifters have fun? Be forced to restock what they’re stealing?
San Francisco is a once-great city that is well on its way to committing suicide. And if this proposal is enacted into law, consider it another nail – maybe another few of them- in it’s self-created coffin.
