. there has to be a decision made that you're either for supporting people -- people are projecting in 20505 that there are not going to be very many children in san francisco. then that means that there is a plot in the plan to make sure that those projections stange, and so we know that that train is moving superfast, but it is us as people who can put a chink in those wheels and say, "wait a minute." when you drive out the poor and drive up the children, and, again, if you poison the poor and poison the children, i have to put that in there, it is not

a good outcome. there are some signs out there directing us to paying attention to the disaster. we had this fire last week were the first responders and the other people, no follow-up. we have to close this gap and make some choices. thank you. >> espinola jackson, bayview hunters point. i agree with what you're saying. that this only deals with city properties. well, you are at the entity. as they agreed in the 1970's. to have the child care area in

bayview hunters point, because we knew that they would be coming in with children, and there be a place for them. just because it is a private developer does not mean that they cannot be mandated for the people who are going to be coming into that building in order to do business, and i do not think that you should give up for that, because they have a responsibility to the city. i am tired of seeing developers come in here and build and make their money, and they are gone, and we are the ones in san francisco that have taken the burden of all of the traffic and everything that has come into the city, and i remember, i think it was alioto who brought this up, and it was discussed about the offices where people work, and they could have a daycare center, and they had something for the children. they could play right out there.

supervisor mar: at the courthouse. they have child care. they have an award winning programming note -- an award winning program for children. we have child care downstairs, and the play area is there. >> this is nothing new. this has been going on and discussed for many years, and i think it to make sure that it happens, because they have to have a place for the city children. thank you. supervisor maxwell: anymore further comment on this item? seeing none, public comment is closed. supervisor chiu had some comments. supervisor chiu: i want to thank

all of you. there is the need to expand werber we can opportunities for child care. i want to thank dcyf and others, including supervisor dufty, for their work in this area, and there are things we can use to expand child care opportunities, so i would like to add my name as co-sponsor. supervisor mar: can i add my name, as well? supervisor maxwell: and my name. haute supervisor dufty -- supervisor dufty: one of our

supervisors as just had a baby, and he will be at home, looking for child care. i promise i try to take her to more museums. my daughter does go to a lot. i have to admit that she gets a lot of miles, but i want to thank my colleagues and those who spoke here. piss separate from this legislation, there is a need for more resources -- i want to mention that separate from this legislation, there is a need for more resources. to see a great child care facility that has received investment and support and to see the we have of the facilities. and the band is a part of our

unfinished agenda supervisor -- and then there is another part of our unfinished agenda. supervisor mar: and i want to say that i appreciate walter's song. maybe he could've done one from justin. supervisor maxwell: the plants are so remarkable. if they are that great, and then what is the difference about having a new facility?

folks, let's get with it. >> if we have stated they are high-speed rail, we should have the opportunity haute which we have state-of-the-art high-speed rail. we should have the opportunity. i hope that part of the vision as well as the beautiful art and architecture and the gardens and the air is about having children safe and happy. supervisor maxwell: all right, colleagues, on the amendments, except for number one? and then, as amended? with an objection, so moved. all right, then item number 6. madam clerk: i no. 6, an

ordinance amending the residential inclusionary affordable housing program. supervisor maxwell: you have been busy. supervisor? supervisor: we have a goal of 50% of the student housing be provided by the institution, and a thing that does contribute to the greatness of that city. -- and i think that does contribute. it is essential that we look at learning in higher education as a part of our economy and the identity of san francisco as a city. these institutions really a

defined what san francisco is and what we can be -- really have defined what san francisco is. students and hands the urban character. they support the arts, restaurants, entertainment venues -- students enhance the urban character. students by far and large use craigslist as a mechanism, and what we can do is maintain a significant portion of our family housing stock for families rather than simply being passive and expecting that students split up apartments.

we want to make this feasible through the process, and what we want to try to do is recognize that students in and of themselves are basically low- income generally and to recognize that we can create incentive and look at commercial buildings that have not been successful or dynamic in looking at ways that we can do this while protecting our existing housing stock, so with that, i will recognize miss sullivan. i want to thank the housing coalition. this has been issue that is before them and a high priority, and with help, we have got this piece of legislation before us. >> thank you, supervisor. ms. sullivan, planning department.

some specific sections, as you know, you have passed and have been working on the package and updating it. this is going to make a few additional tweaks to the package. it is going to have four new oat areas, including for qualified student housing. .-- for new areas. it will apply to any area in the city that has five or more units. they will be exempt from having to participate in the affordable housing fee, so in one section, the criteria for those are laid

out, and i will go through them quickly. there is the institutional master plan on file with the planning department. in that, it has to describe the type and location of housing used by the city. it has to state the number of students that will receive some aid. once we have received those, we will be recording notices of restrictions on the property and will outline these requirements, and there will be a monitoring program. on november four, we recommended some modifications.

we had a meeting last week with supervisor dufty's office and the housing coalition, and planning commission wants to propose something that has been introduced, that this will only apply to new construction. there will be no conversion of any residential units. that was very important. as supervisor dufty mentions, wrote we want to also provide for -- we want to also provide for student housing. thank you. >> thank you, with the mayor's office on housing. we would like to also collect information on the events being

charged and the type of living situation the student has. is it a single room or a double room. we would like to have permission to charge a nominal fee to cover the cost of monitoring. >> susan has helped to address amendments along these lines, and i think it is important we want to look at what happens with this legislation. we are not looking to cram six students in a two-room suite. perhaps you can walk us through some of the changes the mayor's office wanted. >> i am the deputy city

attorney. i am having the clerks pass out the proposed amendments from the planning commission. that is the larger page, and the mayor's office of housing is the flip of a vote. sean dre egan unmentioned there would be a modification to the section, which would clarify the mayor's office would be the regulator staying agency and that they would have the ability to request the educational institution to give them certain information so they could verify that 30% of the students are receiving need- based assistance and that they are being housed in a way consistent with the definitions

and the ordinance, and as she mentioned, they would pay authorized to collect and monitoring fees. the you want me to walk through the other items as well? >> if you are comfortable, i am in support. supervisor maxwell: does this go back to the planning department or anyone else in the first year and at half so that otherwise would be on it. >> i do not think it is in there, but i will the firm. we did have language and request the planning department review it. >> i think the planning

department or a committee. >> the mayor's office is going to generate data. they are going to look at it, so i would be happy to have that. >> they would be able to monitor for the planning department and the board. >> the language states that the annual monitoring report should be presented to the planning department and the board. supervisor maxwell: i think that could be up to the president, but i think to a committee of the board.

>> colleagues -- >> if we open public comment, i want to welcome to him, since housing coalition with the organization sponsoring. if we could just welcome him up as part of public comment if that would be all right. just to thank him and his colleagues for their work curator >> thank you very much. thank you for this opportunity. am very pleased to have had the support and guidance in providing this. the art institute of california, and what they have demonstrated is how much this is based on

need, and this came out of a roundtable we had two years ago with about 10 schools, and in particular, one small college. the american college of medicine -- they convene day by saying if this is a school with an enrollment of 300, we simply cannot compete with schools of side of the bay area that have lower cost of living and housing. when we need some -- schools outside of the bay area that have lower cost of living and housing. we have about 120,000 institutions of higher learning in said francisco with an estimated shortfall of the dead of about 52,000 they -- in san francisco with an estimated shortfall of about 52,000 deathbeds -- beds.

they would consider it one unit, which seems plausible, so it cannot possibly be less than 10,000 units of housing. do not forget education is one of the top factors and the city. the defacto policy is craigslist. we essentially say, go find your own housing. if it is going to house 900 students, and i think what has been lacking is some uncertainty to the process. i have been approached half a dozen times by groups who are interested, but they always stop

and say, what is the inclusion mary going to be? how does that play out? -- the inclusion going to be? how does that play out? some of the schools that have helped me put this together have said, we have got 60% to 80% of student enrollment, and a significant fraction is low income students. that is already there. >> i think what also houses we also delineated suited housing -- student housing so this is really perfect in that we have already done that in the planning process. you mentioned in boston. boston is similar in a number of

ways. housing prices are higher. they have managed a way to do its. >> you could think of them as a city of neighborhoods also identified as a college town. the mayor said, why are we bringing all these students and throwing them into the neighborhood? i think there were possibly cultural issues as well, but they explosively took inclusionary off and certain other impact fees of about $8, and you will never guess what happened. they started building about 1000 units a year for the next decade. they require it go through a decision-making bodies, but they got behind a policy that is going to deliver that, and i think that would be a terrific outcome. >> it has been important, so

having them integrated in the city is did as well, because they have been a part of our entertainment. that is important, and we need to do that. next speaker please. >> student housing has come up. other institutions were trying to find places to build student housing and looked at is a -- look at it as a good place. this has been ignored by the

city. the redevelopment agency took the position they should not be involved. the city is going to have a new attitude. i did not give to commend him, because the commission gave me one minute tuesday. i wrote a year and a half ago because i was frustrated the city did take such a disinterest in the matter and education is such an important issue to the economy. i want to make four points to better clarify and hopefully make sure the new law will take those into account. the first is that they can build

housing on their own. we are talking about the smaller institutions public and private and proprietary, which do not have a build in infrastructure of planning officers. we are relying on the private sector, and that could be a private developer or a nonprofit organization, but it would be independent of the university. we do not have to be in agreement to build this. my experiences they do not wish to put a credit on the line, so the arrangement is going to be a little looser, and the risk factor is going to be on the developer's shoulders common and not the universities.

-- the developers shoulders, and not on universities. the rules need to be flexible enough that they can put together a joint venture. it is not going to be one institution. the rules need to be flexible enough so that student amenities can be built into the buildings such as a building that is going to hold students mainly to have young faculty in the building and now, too, so the rules cannot be drawn to tightly. this is a huge step forward, and i urge you to pass it. >> thank you. >> madame chair, members of the

committee. i am speaking on support of the amendment that came before the planning commission. when i first heard about this, i thought, this sounds great as long as it does not apply to the academy, but on reflection i realized, it needs to apply, because we are going to need a combination of regulations and penalties and fees to get them to change their behavior, and i think this would be in that category. i want to show you a couple of things. this is the map that shows the 17 areas they are planning to expand to. this is the problem. they are too scattered. we are submitting a proposal for a compact transit-oriented

campus of relief focuses on the mid-market area. they have whole bus lines to serve one building materials offices for the star motel. this goes out to two buildings they have been fisherman's wharf and north beach. they can get rid of those. they clogged traffic. they are crazy. i think what this does is get this back doing some of the innovative things. there are several important clarifying amendments that clearly defined what student housing is and is not. they have been playing a game where they think they are housing units, but if you leave

the school, you have to leave the housing. this clarifies the. the one situation -- the one point i made is that we include the right of private action to enforce this. we do it like a residential hotel where we define who has that right, and you say it is a non-profit fed has in their mission preservation of affordable housing. -- that has in their mission the preservation of affordable housing. you want there be a way to make sure they stay on the straight and narrow. i would be happy to answer any questions, but i support the legislation. >> is that in there at all.