Thankfully, I was able to sign a lease just this week with a more reasonable landlord, and a much better square foot rate.

Watch for Mission: Comics & Art to open in the near future at 3520 20th St #2, right between Rogers Coffee and Her Majesty’s Secret Beekeeper, one of the coolest new stores in the Mission.

And to truth, I’d actually much prefer 988 Valencia to sit vacant a quite a bit longer, before I’d ever want AA in the neighborhood. I grew up in this lovely City, and it really saddens me to see a few neighborhood that used to have a funky SF feel, now reduced to outdoor malls serving predominately tourists, and Bridge-and-Tunnelers. John right, we need to use whatever tools we can to keep in a people sized City, and not just a money sink for corporate America.

If AA can’t get a permit because I’m a loudmouth with a mailing list, then they don’t get to be an ingredient to the aggregate of “the market”. This idea is kinda new to me, and although I’ve thought around it I haven’t really let it rest in my mind yet so I reserve the right to wiggle but it’s sounds off somehow but I can’t tell how. But if the market will bear X, and someone ‘can’ pay XX… but can’t get a permit because they can pay XX… if the market is blind to whatever isn’t the market then since it’s not part of the market it can not be incorporated into the manufacture of the metric of “market”.

Second guessing stuff is hard. I mean, who knows when we get into this minutia what is obsessing and what is prudent. Really. I remind you that when we called AA to ask questions, the first response they gave us was that it was in the bag and they were only talking to us because they were so nice. When I told them I was going to send them crying home to their mother they just chuckled. I report this now not to show that they are assholes or whatever… just to show how much a difference this communication will make in the future. We now hold the power. We, the people, can assemble and force issues. With this power comes great responsibility. I am doing my diligence here discussing so we can sharpen our swords so next time this happens we can hopefully come up with a better solution that is less divisive….

chicken

because he was able to rally public outcry and prevent AA from acting on the lease that they cut with the landlord….

the terms of that lease are in fact NOT “what the market will bear”.

Isn’t the idea that we are going to exclude a subset of tenants from the market to protect others from competition exactly the “special treatment” you deride? I’m just not understanding the position. Maybe it is that the anti-AA crowd is just a coalition of different voices, many of which are inconsistent. (But that is not meant as a criticism; that’s how most political movements are.)

but i appreciate your response.

But to claim that Ritual displaced a Latino mom and pop and is paying more rent then they could have and has embraced the same ‘advantage’ or however you explain that is an interesting point. It’s not one I wholly disagree with. In the case of Ritual, it’s not true but that is the only store I have intimate details about. Ritual moved into to a failed clothing store and paid a fixture fee to buy the lease. The rent has gone up 30% in the last 10 years or so. But I can see how the point you are trying to make is valid in other cases, although I’m not aware of an example I’m sure it’s out there.

Look, we all despise hipsters and crave people who are super effective zeightgiests who are artistic innovators and artists that crate stunning work and restaurants that use local food and green energy to create delicious and cheap food… bla bla bla… we wanna co-create the world we wanna live in. We all wanna live in a great city. It ‘aint gonna be easy and it’s never gonna be perfect. We can, however, do the best we can.

We can do better than formula retail. If it is true that some Latino business’ got displaced that is unfortunate. But that by no means is any encouragement to keep that cycle moving on down the line. We create a dialog about it, so we can document how the complex animal works. Then, when this starts happening next in the Bayview, the stores that are similar to the ‘Latino’ shops can be saved. No one is applauding any displacement at any time. And no one is looking for an advantage that is unfair or greedy.

We can do this work and be fair and smart and learn to not take advantage of this situation in the future and not have formula retail that will ruin the current thing that is working. We can have it all. And we are going to get there by doing this thing that we are doing right now: talking about it so it’s not such a mystery.

that’s what I got today…

chicken

“We dont’ want AA on Valencia street because it would raise the market rate rents by 200% within 3 years. We get this information from watching it happen before. it’s well documented.”

didn’t this exact thing happen – isnt the “documentation” – or one example of it – when ritual, paxton, luna park, slanted door, etc moved in 5 – 10 years ago?

or am i wrong about that? aren’t they paying more than the latino / mom & pop stores they displaced back then?

i’m 100% supportive of vying for one’s own commercial advantage – believe me i’m all for it – but isnt that what this is?

essentially a push to create advantage – ie static or low rent – for the current crop of businesses?

a push to avoid the exact same forces that allowed these businesses to exist on valencia in the first place?

am i wrong? explain it to me, i would love to know.

cause if that’s what it is…let’s just call it that. that would be ok, normal, the american way: trying to get over. like it or not.

but couching it as some “fragile ecosystem” or some “delicate flower” when it’s really just plain old lovable capitalism and vying for advantage, well, that’s what’s kind of sad. but very, very sf.

so there ya go. sorry, i’m a blabbermouth.

We dont’ want AA on Valencia street because it would raise the market rate rents by 200% within 3 years. We get this information from watching it happen before. it’s well documented. Although we don’t have slam dunk answers to how to ‘do it right’, we can certainly see the way that is ‘wrong’. But in a democracy, such as we have, we elect councils or have them appointed by elected officials who rule on how to shepherd the assets and the ways and means of a city. The Zoning Board decided that AA wasn’t a good fit for the Mission because people want to learn from history and co-create the city they live in. I think we have a really good opportunity here to do some good.

No one is talking about the products that AA sells. No one is talking about AA hiring policies or where the money goes or whatever. No one is confused by the fact that AA signed a lease for over $10,000 a month while a cafe down the block is paying $2,200.

The math is right there. Landlords are warehousing storefronts. These are all facts. The idea of SF is slowly becoming antique.

How sad.

chicken

1. AA is bad because it’s a chain, and we don’t want chains. While chains do take money out of an area, in this case the chain is still headquartered in the state. So that’s a silly argument. The idea that chains can afford higher rents is also kind of absurd, it’s not like a neighborhood can thrive on empty storefronts and nonprofit political art collectives. I think the real problem is the aesthetic of formula retail, which most of us find ugly.

2. AA represents luxury rather than “authentic” local goods. This is pure idiocy, especially considering what else we have on Valencia Street: expensive food and boutiques that sell useless shit. People who use this are the same people who yell about “hipsters” and then ride off on a fixed gear bike to buy skinny jeans.

Of course, there’s a third kind of argument, the nonsense from the person who just likes causing trouble for fun. To me that makes the most sense. Causing mischief is fun.

But first I’d like to thank everyone for their civility and their diligence. This discussion is important and I’ve actually learned a few things here.

We may not all agree with how the AA thing was handled or indeed the outcome of the situation. But there is a fact I’d like to point out that many people don’t reliase. Now I’m not saying it’s true or not, I’m just saying it’s an unknown. It’s important to factor it in. Here is goes:

A landlord can ‘warehouse’ a storefront while it’s occupied. Lets say you sign a 5 +5 year lease. After 10 years, it’s the landlords option to re-new. Lets say the landlord doesn’t. On the completion of the lease term, the tenannt goes to a month-by-month lease. The landlord can give 30 day notice to vacate. Stores don’t have rights like house tennants. Warehouseing, by definition, is landlords waiting to rent stuff out until the prices go up. But just because something is occupied, doesn’t mean there is a lease connected to it. I just wanted to throw this out there.

And I’d also like to encourage you to visit Craigslist.com and peek at the stores that are for sale and what they are selling for and what the rents are. It’s pretty fascinating. Its tell-all…

There is a very fragile eco-system here. I don’t have a clear path to victory here, nor am I saying that I even understand all the variables. But before we rush into things, we should all take some time to take stock. It’s all super fragile.

chicken