XPost: ba.politics, talk.politics.guns, alt.politics.usa.republican   
   XPost: alt.fan.rush-limbaugh, sac.politics   
   From: democrat-criminals@mail.house.gov   
      
   https://thatsviralnow.com/san-francisco-is-considering-a-bill-that-will-   
   make-it-illegal-for-stores-to-close/   
      
   The San Francisco Board of Supervisors is deliberating a potential policy   
   that would allow individuals to take legal action against grocery stores   
   that shut down abruptly. This proposed ordinance was introduced by   
   Supervisors Dean Preston and Aaron Peskin, and mandates that grocery   
   stores must give the city six months’ notice before closing.   
      
   Genuine Efforts   
   In addition, Additionally,   
      
   The stores are obligated to make genuine attempts to ensure continued   
   access to grocery stores in the area after they close, whether it is by   
   finding an alternative store, assisting residents in forming a   
   cooperative, or coming up with other solutions with the city for the local   
   community.   
      
   Notice Required   
   If the grocery store chooses to shut down without giving the required   
   notice,   
      
   People who are negatively impacted by the closure could have the right to   
   file legal action against the store for compensation.   
      
   Ordinance Emphasizes   
   Despite these, the provisions, the ordinance stresses that store owners   
   right to close their businesses,   
      
   Within this there are also exceptions to the six-month notice rule, such   
   as unforeseen circumstances like natural disasters.   
      
   City Authorities   
   Supervisor Preston has been advocating for this ordinance since January,   
   emphasizing the recent situation with Safeway in Fillmore that had planned   
   to close until city authorities inserted themselves to delay the closure.   
      
   The policy has been in existence for many years.   
      
   Policy   
   The board of supervisors passed a policy that was identical to this one In   
   1984, but it was vetoed by then-Mayor Dianne Feinstein.   
      
   At the time, Feinstein described the policy as “an unnecessary intrusion   
   of governmental regulatory authority.”   
      
   Ease   
   Preston has expressed that he his more at ease with the involvement of   
   this policy.   
      
   Executives Of Stores   
   During the 1980s,   
      
   Executives from grocery stores argued that imposing more procedures on   
   stores that are closing could deter them from opening to begin with.   
      
   Input From The Community   
   He told the San Francisco Chronicle in January,   
      
   “It was a good idea then, and it’s an even better idea now,” “We need   
   notice, we need transparency, community input, and a transition plan when   
   major neighborhood grocery stores plan to shut their doors.”   
      
   Flexibility   
   The exceptions outlined in the ordinance seemed to provide grocery stores   
   with enough flexibility to be able to comply with the law, even if they   
   don’t adhere to the six-month notice prior to closing.   
      
   It raises questions regarding the possibility of compensation individuals   
   could receive by suing a closed store.   
      
   Thorough Regulation   
   While the repercussions of this policy are still unknown,   
      
   It gives insight on the level of thorough regulation that San Francisco   
   politicians believe is necessary for their city.   
      
   Sources For Food   
   Likewise, residents impacted by grocery stores that are closing could   
   probably find alternative sources for food fairly quickly.   
      
   Competing grocery chains would independently make their own decisions on   
   whether they want to take over failed stores or not.   
      
   Store Owners   
   One might be under the assumption that grocery store owners could keep   
   their businesses open as long as they are continue to make a profit,   
      
   And not close the doors without a justified reason.   
      
   San Francisco   
   Preston and Peskin question the capability of San Franciscans to organize   
   themselves independently.   
      
   Their proposal is grounded in the belief that notable changes should   
   involve a significant amount of time for public process, and be backed up   
   with the threat of legal action. Ultimately to help avoid anyone making   
   impulsive decisions.   
      
   Challenging   
   The stringent procedures and regulations at the onset make it challenging   
   for businesses to launch and create a more significant impact when they   
   shut down.   
      
   New ventures   
   This approach mirrors how San Francisco typically regulates new ventures,   
   whether they are businesses, technologies, or residences. This is not a   
   coincidence.   
      
   Multiple Approvals   
   Regardless,   
      
   If initiating any activity requires multiple approvals and permits,   
   numerous approvals and permits, is it not equally reasonable for the city   
   to impose similar regulations on closures?   
      
      
   --   
   We live in a time where intelligent people are being silenced so that   
   stupid people won't be offended.   
      
   Durham Report: The FBI has an integrity problem.  It has none.   
      
   No collusion - Special Counsel Robert Swan Mueller III, March 2019.   
   Officially made Nancy Pelosi a two-time impeachment loser.   
      
   Thank you for cleaning up the disaster of the 2008-2017 Obama / Biden   
   fiasco, President Trump.   
      
   Under Barack Obama's leadership, the United States of America became the   
   The World According To Garp.  Obama sold out heterosexuals for Hollywood   
   queer liberal democrat donors.   
      
   President Trump boosted the economy, reduced illegal invasions, appointed   
   dozens of judges and three SCOTUS justices.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)