past numbers of years and just tell you a couple of those specifics, sort of historical facts. our department worked long and hard at implementing composting prior to the passage of the mandatory ordinance. park merced is a leader in getting these programs into difficult multi-family settings. they have worked with us and they have continued to work with us since the implementation to see that we get the program right, not just for the individual towers and the garden apartments but for all the individual residents that live there. the other pleas that we have worked closely with them is on the sustainability committee. we have been participating in those meetings for three or four years and found them to be a good place to provide a resource for the development company to

understand how sustainability works as we go forward. park merced's support of recycling was important in helping large settings understand it can be done when we approach the mandatory ordinance. i want to give you those little bits of information. we provide as well teams that work with them. we worked with park merced on a lot of other programs, and we look forward to working closely with them on this project and other projects. chair maxwell: well, your work looks good so far. and we have a long way to go, but this part of it looks good, the suss tannability, the environmental -- the sustainability, the environmental part, it looks good. >> fa you. -- thank you.

chair maxwell: any other comments? >> good afternoon. i'm with the affordable housing ordinance. i think one point we need to pay attention to, i have had discussions with the management at park merced and burt polochi, and it is unfortunate to me we are having the conversation with what is for me mid-conversation with them. we are particularly concerned with what these owners have with the past. i think that is particularly true. i have no reason to doubt that. i think what we have to do here is figure out what's going to happen. landlords come and go, as do tenants. we'll be back with a leona helmsly in 10 years, or maybe not, but if has -- it has to be about the project, not who is in

charge. we are talking about demolishing these apartments. we believe they are irreplaceable. we believe they are irreplaceable because they are rent controlled. there is going to be a big problem because of the costas -hawkins act and another act. both have language and it gets pretty tricky. we believe pretty strongly we will not be able to control the rent of the new units or even assure that they are going to remain rental units. that's not a question about these particular owners. it is about if we demolish them and rebuild them. palmer, they redid the city's inclusion ri housing policy, and the case of sant monica's ability to enforce certain rent

restrictions. in its settlement agreement, which is about a month old, makes that very clear. you will not be able to control the rents on the new units, unless you subsidize them with a direct financial contribution. that's the language that the drafters of those pieces of legislation, ellis scompsm costas-hawkins. you won't be able to assure they remain rental units, also, unless they are subsidized with a direct financial contribution. i don't think we are planning on doing this. the analysis here is complicated. i'm not going to pack it all in to these two minutes. i'm willing to continue the conversations with the management and hear what they have to sayment but i also want to say to them, i have receive veer doubts. given the case law we believe it is uncertain a government code will be capable of over coming

these acts. i believe we need to look at the development agreement. that should be part of the i.r. process. here is a copy of the four letters for the four of you that was written on this topic. chair maxwell: we also need to make sure in some way we can do that. the buildings should not have to fall down, because then they would be gone. so we have to work on making sure that this can happen. >> i think we need to see if there is a way we can maintain them as rent-controlled, eviction controlled units. unless we decide that we don't care about that and the rest of the whole thing is so great, and we want to throw that away. chair maxwell: no, i think that is one of our most important -- that is what we usually do. certainly in the past, that's what we've done, and i don't see that changing. what we're going to work on is how we can do this.

>> the city doesn't do very many government code agreements, as i understand it, and the law has gotten worse since we dealt with trinity plaza. chair maxwell: well, we have good people like you who can help us come up with some creative ways of making sure that happens. >> we'll see. chair maxwell: next speaker, please. thank you. >> i want to reiterate what mitchell said without being too redid you understandant. one way would be an amendment to costa-hawkins. i met with burt he said he would talk with that development about supporting that, and that might be something that developers across the board in san francisco would get behind. we will keep running into this problem where tenants are going to have to oppose new very well ment.

-- new development. the promise of rent control is more dubious than it was at that time. we're talking about 1,500 units vs. 300. it is also important to note that without a change in costa hawkins, we are simply talking about the tenans who move getting rent control until they move on. we are not talking about permanent rent control. this is units that may have rent control for another two years but will eventually be 1,500 units lolvet with rent control, and if you brought a picture of costa-hawkins, we are only losing rent-control units. we cannot add a single new rent control unit in san francisco today because of state law.

between democrat missions and evictions and all of that, the number of rental units being lost, the number one loss is in the thousands every year. it is difficult to swallow another 1,500 all at one fell swoop unless we can really address that issue. i think that moving forward, we have to look at a very severe challenge of how do we ensure that those rent-controlled units will in fact be replaced in a way that's both fool-proof and permanent. it is good that the developers are starting at the sort of trinity model, and that's our starting point these days, but we need to move fwr there. that can't be good enough, especially because of the recent changes and law addressed in costa-hawkins. thank you.

>> good afternoon, supervisors. eric burks representing the green party and our city. as written we are opposed to this project. sorry, i left my muzzle at home. just start with transit and parking. one-to-one parking is a 20th century dinosaur. it shouldn't be part of the project. the transit aspects of the project should be more robust. the m line to daly city should be guaranteed and not a possibility. i want to strongly agree with all the museum that spoke on the rent control issue. that's huge. we're not going to be able to guarantee that these units stay rent controled, and once the current 10 apts leave it will be -- once the current tenants leave it will be impossible. to dovetail on to that, something i haven't heard in

response to e.i.r. or on this yet the carbon emigs factor needs to be -- emissions factor needs to be understood in all this demolition and reconstruction. you may have over time a carbon neutral project over several decades or over more than a century, but right now, as you know, i follow global warming very closely and the planet is already reaching tipping points where we could get melting permafrost in the arctic and in siberia and have a very severe problem on our hands. if you do a lot of democrat in addition and construction on this project, you are adding to the burden of fossil fuel use and carbon dioxide uses. that's heading us toward odd tipping points. the units, we should try to receipt fit them. the components that can be receipt fitted, that's where you

get an energy savings without having to do the reconstruction. it is not easy, but it is what needs to happen. another big factor, especially that the green party is concerned about is that we keep going forward with projects like this where a large segment of the community that the project is going into does not agree with it. we need more consensus on this project it moves forward. overall for the whole thing, both for community consensus, for protecting rent control and for dealing with the c.o. 2rks budget that will be higher at the front if we don't go this better, as was said at the planning commissions, we need this not to be a 30-year monster, we need this to be phased in so development can be done in more sensible ways so we can save the rent control so we can avoid demolishing stuff so we can receipt fit it instead.

so we can receipt fit it instead. -- so we can retrofit it instead. chair maxwell: next speaker. >> we have been following this project for a couple of years. we are very excited about what we have seen so far. in particular, there are a few things that stand out, and that is increased use of land density on the web site. not something we are familiar with. we know there are strong cultural biases against this. on that basis alone we would like to see a project like this move forward. we've never had a project come to us and talk about net zero

emissions and net zero twaumplet -- water. as a founding member of the lake merced task force, we saw this project back when, and we very much support what they are talking about with the old streams that have long since been covered over. this, again, is a terrific idea. we have to admit, it is an enormous service. what was done with the traffic and transit studies are enormous service to this part of town to give us an understanding of what the situation was. i would suspect the neighborhoods on the west side will strongly advocate for parking. i would think that given the community's push for unit and bikes and ped and muni and all

of that, we would love to have a project that is one to one. that would be a real landmark. something that would be a great example for the future. more broadly, we would like projects like this on the west side. successful projects that you can look to, you can have a successful and desireable project, and it sets the bar higher and makes it possible to do more of them. we are excited about where this is going and we hope you will track it also. thank you. chair maxwell: public comment is closed. supervisor alford, do you have any closing comments? >> i would like to thank everyone for coming forward. i would like to particularly thank the committee for taking the time today to get the intro, get the beginning information,

and i look forward to being back here over the next few months as we look to the project. chair maxwell: supervisor mar. supervisor mar: i did have a question about the impact to hawkins, expeaningspangs, demolition of rent-controlled units and how we hold the developer to its commitment to maintain those units. hopefully indefinitely. and the second question i have came from a chronicle article that was reforwarded to many of us and it is regarding stellar management's reported details on defaults to loans. >> i think mr. johnson was quoted for speaking for stellar management, saying that it is common among give different lenders.

is stellyr -- is stellar manage many on firm financial footing? >> i will let them address that, supervisor mar, but we are of course, on the city side, working closely with the city attorney on the latest very wellments affecting rent control -- latest developments affecting rent control law. if you recall, the primary method for allowing rent control in new rental inclusion ri units was -- inclusionary units was through a rent controled community. the mechanism proposed would actually allow us to have rent

controled units in perpetuity. that is the city's goal and we will monitor that situation. if there are developments we hear about, we will have to find an opponent way to talk about it. >> good question. >> the ownership group reached out to park merced for a -- for help. we reached out to that servicer as a way to deal with our issues. we have loans coming due in october. we are working to extend those and work onward with the property.

we expect we will be making positive steps in that respect. mark miller sed is different than any other community that stellar is involved in. chair maxwell: ok we will continue the items to the call of the chair. we're going to take a five-minute break. [at 3:18 p.m. a break was taken]