Bill allows San Francisco residents to sue grocery stores that shutter without giving six months’ notice

Two progressive San Francisco legislators are advancing a bill aimed at providing recourse for residents in the city when grocery stores shutter without adequate notice.

San Francisco Board of Supervisors members Dean Preston and Aaron Peskin proposed legislation requiring businesses to either secure a successor grocer or collaborate with local residents to ensure continued access to supermarket options.

Named the Grocery Protection Act, this initiative draws from a 1984 proposal that the board previously endorsed but was vetoed by then-Mayor Dianne Feinstein. It emerges amid a surge in retail theft, fueled by the city’s drug and homelessness crisis, resulting in numerous businesses shutting down without sufficient notice for the communities they served.

The closure of the Whole Foods Market Street location last year underscores the urgent need for such measures, with 568 emergency calls logged over 13 months due to disruptive incidents. Preston initially floated the proposal in response to the impending closure of a Safeway supermarket in the Fillmore District. (Related: Rite Aid to close up to 500 stores in BANKRUPTCY proposal.)

Safeway’s decision to sell the land for a mixed-use development prompted the Board of Supervisors’ legislative push. The proposed ordinance mandates six months’ notice for store closures, with exemptions for closures due to unforeseeable circumstances or natural disasters. Failure to comply could result in legal action by affected residents.

Furthermore, the bill requires grocery stores to engage in good faith negotiations with neighborhood residents and the city’s Office of Economic and Workforce Development to explore viable solutions for maintaining access to essential goods.

Preston emphasized the importance of community involvement in decision-making regarding essential services, emphasizing the need for transparency and planning in store closures.

Crimes are not the only reason why stores are shuttering in San Francisco

The proposed legislation comes amid the improving crime incidence in San Francisco.

Early this month, Mayor London N. Breed unveiled the latest crime statistics for San Francisco, demonstrating a sustained decrease in crime throughout February. This decline is attributed to enhanced collaboration among local, state and federal agencies.

Highlights from the crime trends in February 2024 include a 29 percent reduction in property crime and a 17 percent decrease in violent crime compared to February 2023.

These reductions are evident across various crime categories, encompassing declines in robbery, motor vehicle theft, larceny-theft (including car break-ins), and assaults. Notably, there were no reported homicides in San Francisco for February.

These trends reflect a broader reduction in crime over the past six months. Since September 1, compared to the same period in the previous year, San Francisco claims that property crime has decreased by 30 percent and violent crime has decreased by four percent.

However, businesses have other reasons to leave the City by the Bay, including the high cost of living there and the high tax rate in California.

Watch this clip from the “Timcast IRL” discussing the crime wave sweeping San Francisco and the rest of the United States.

This video is from the GalacticStorm channel on Brighteon.com.

More related stories:

Once-posh Beverly Hills now littered with CLOSED STORES amid California crime wave.

Group of Organized Retail Crime (ORC) thieves targeting luxury retail stores in California.

Major retailers cite RETAIL THEFT as justification for using AI-powered surveillance in stores.

Sources include:

NYPost.com

SF.gov

Brighteon.com