suggestions on some other festivals, to look at different parking and traffic methods, and then i think commissioner sandy fewer made mention to pay attention to a key transit difficult areas, especially as the events stop and begin. >> thank you for that opportunity, a supervisor. i think the idea of a residential parking zone for the areas surrounding the park for events, i think that is an interesting one. my first thought on it is that it might require legislation, something that may be outside the jurisdiction of the recreation and parks department. i think we would have to do a thorough analysis on what the impacts would be, people parking in their driveways,

coming slightly over. it is a very interesting idea, and there are questions for accessibility. the reason why it is illegal to block the sidewalk is to make sure there is an accessible route for travel. perhaps we can look into that. supervisor mar: i will make sure that my staff and i follow up with you. >> we do monitor the sound levels throughout the neighborhood. we do monitor sounds at the mixing board, basically at this stage, and then, in 2009, we did have an independent consultant to review the sound effects of that particular of such a concert and has informed us as we move forward with each event, each festival, the findings.

supervisor mar: and i know that a number of people said that there is staff that can monitor the decibel levels, and the recommendation is that the general manager give out the cell phone. i am wondering, how do you think we can improve the quick response if there is legitimate questions about the decibels being too loud, especially in spots that are too close to the park? >> it is working with people to make sure that their voices have been heard. i think the outreach process that we undertook was very much a two-way street. a lot of the ideas that have been implemented have frankly been ideas that the community have developed and that we have incorporated at their suggestion, and i think it is continuing each year that we go forward with these big festivals. we get more data about the sound impacts, and is not just looking

at today. we have 12 event days of data, and it is how we coordinate that in today's 13, 14, and 15 next year. supervisor mar: i know that the sound study that was done in 2009 can be incorporated, and i know others are here, so i will do my best to make sure that we are following up. if there are complaints, we could check the decibel at key spots, like in 2010. >> yes, we do check those. i would say, having the entertainment commission permit these demons or be sort of the regulatory authority, i imagine that would actually require a charter amendment, aimed mandated power that is given to the recreation and parks department. supervisor mar: thank you.

ms. cat jumped -- ms. ketchum? >> living adjacent to the park. it is not big enough to accommodate these events, but, for instance, we have taken like the mission creek art festival, and they are now down there, so our eyes are out, and we have some ideas on how to have it work a little bit better, and i would love to talk to you about it at some time. >> i would enjoy that conversation, and really my purpose in mentioning that is expanding people's minds when thinking about the live music. the overall tenor of the conversation is that people are in favor of it. you are right, it is a much smaller venue, but hardly strictly bluegrass started off

small and then group. maybe we will get to a point where it will no longer be able to be held at mclaren park. thank you. supervisor mar: and i know one other issue was about better notification about traffic flows and also just better noticing, so i will make sure we are working with redskins park -- with recreation and park. there is something they have done that is very effective. the emails to concertgoers and recommend alternative transportation and the different shuttles that you have used, really tremendous models that i think other festivals can take advantage of. i will say that this has been an eyeopening hearing. a lot of the issues were brought up to to 2.5 years ago. we will continue to work with the departments to look at the

concerns and mitigating them but also in encouraging them to work with neighborhood groups, like you have done, but even improving on that as we move forward. thank you for being here. any wrap-up comments? colleagues? supervisor wiener? supervisor wiener: it seems that people are in support, and it is just a manner of doing it and a certain way. we are as a city so grateful for his gifts to the city of hardly strictly, and i remember when i met with him early in my campaign, he only had one question. he said, "are you going to mess with my festival?" absolutely not. we all cherish it as a city, so thank you.

supervisor mar: ok, colleagues, let's continue this to the call of the chair. madam clerk, mentioned earlier that we will take no. 5 before a number four, so please call item no. 5. clerk miller: item number five, a hearing on the moderate and middle income housing project with the retention of jobs in san francisco. supervisor mar: we will give people a couple of minutes to walk out as quietly as you can.

thank you, everyone, for exiting as quickly as you can so we can get started. and if we could have the door closed, we could begin our next hearing.

supervisor wiener? supervisor wiener: ok, now we are ready to go. thank you, mr. chairman. i called for this hearing with mind co-sponsor, supervisor carmen chu, though her assistant, katy tang, is here. talking about the state of middle-income housing in san francisco, what we are doing to encourage housing that is affordable to our middle class, and what we should be doing in the future. there are some issues that come before us than have an easier or relatively easy and straightforward step. this is not one of them. this is without a doubt one of

the hardest issues that we grapple with as a city, how to insure that we're able to have a thriving and growing middle class that can live here. having in middle-class society, this is one of the things that has made united states says stable for many years. now, preserving the middle class. of course, to have a middle class in any city, you have to have housing that folks in the middle class are able to access, and once you have middle-class people living and being able to be housed in the city, the jobs will follow. when you do not have housing for your middle class, and your middle class is not living here and not able to live here, it is

tough to create jobs, particularly middle-income jobs, because businesses may be hesitant to do business in an area where the work force is not able to be housed, so there is a strong link between housing and jobs. the middle class in san francisco is on the small side. about 28% of the population of our households in san francisco burn between 80% and 150% of area median income, and that number is more than 10% lower than it was 20 years ago, so far middle class has shrunk in the last 20 years. we need to be pro-active in keeping our middle class and growing our middle class in san francisco. for too long, we just sort of sat back and hoped. we cannot do that. there are many factors that go

into keeping middle-income people in the city, from schools to parks to playgrounds, to wall of the different amenities that people need to be able to thrive in the city. but one of the most important things that we can do is to provide that housing. i also want to be clear that middle-income housing and providing middle-income housing and providing low-income housing are not mutually exclusive. too often, some folks picked the two against each other, that if you're actually creating housing for your middle class, somehow you must not be treating housing for lower income people. i support, and i know just about everyone supports -- maybe not just about everyone, but many people support, myself included, our continuing commitment to providing housing for low-income people. but both are important, and we

need to focus on the middle- class, as well. mayor lee has a working group to look at a proposal and how we stabilize affordable housing, and i have been very clear that middle-income housing needs to be a part of that solution. of course, we know about subsidies, but it is not just limited to financial subsidies from the government. it also has to do with the supply of housing. we have a constricted supply of housing in san francisco for a long time. we do not tended to meet our regional targets in terms of creating new housing, and that artificially increases prices and makes it more expensive. we do not always encourage developers to design house and in such a way as to create more

moderately priced housing, and so sometimes housing is designed so that it can only be priced at luxury housing. the development phase in san francisco, and we impose a lot of very worthy fees for a lot of different things, from affordable housing to transit to infrastructure. housing fees, development fees, go right into the cost, which goes right into the price of the unit, and at some point, you end up with a situation where the only thing that is penciled out is high and luxury housing, so you have those developers paying to create low-income housing, and you are not creating any market middle-income housing. i also wanted to stress that this is not just about home ownership. it is also about rentals. we do not produce a lot of new

rentals, and rents in the city and very frequently are off of the charge -- charts, and it makes it very hard for people to stay here, so is a tough issue, and i know we are going to have some good presentations today. after i asked for comments from supervisor chu's office and my colleagues, i would like to proceed by having comments from the mayor's office on housing and then to have several presentations, first from our city economist, ted, and then from office on the work force development, mr. yarney, and

then the budget analyst. so, mr. olson, would you like to start with some introductory remarks? is the planning department going to be -- >> he was year earlier. supervisor wiener: a kick, when he comes, we will give him the opportunity. supervisor mar: update, before we go, supervisor wiener, maybe we can ask if supervisor cohen has any comments. i appreciate the work that has gone into this. i had an interest in a statement about not putting the low-income housing against the immediate income housing. something shown to me shows that the highest rent burden still falls on the lower incomes, who have to pay a huge percentage of their income on rent, as much as 7%, and for me, housing for the

lowest income residents also includes much lower living conditions and habitability, as well, so in some ways, the lack of heat or rodents and roaches to lots of other issues are really key, and sometimes when we look at middle-income housing, it depends on how we define it, so i am looking forward to see the data today as we try to balance the needs of the lowest income residents against the middle-income residents. as we try to build housing for teachers and other middle-income aspects of the population, and i hope it does not come with pitting the lower income people against them. >> -- supervisor wiener: as i

said at the beginning, this is not about pitting one against the other. i never said that. there are very few people who believe that. it is about making sure that we are talking about those and prioritizing the as and increasing both because they are both extremely important. ms. tang, on behalf of supervisor chu? >> katy tang, on behalf of supervisor chu, who regrets not being able to be here today, and to export to attending hearings on this topic. since she could not attend today, i just wanted to share some of forethought. for some time, the city has directed its resources and a very limited way, between 80%

and 150%, and the city has done little to encouraging the is. today, she is interested in hearing about the state of the housing supply in the city and to begin a conversation to promote housing for moderate income levels. her hope is that we go beyond offering downpayment assistance programs. we would like to hear from the mayor's office on housing to encourage the moderate income range in the city and also some of what the best practices are in some of the other jurisdictions, so those are just some of the supervisors' slots, and, again, she looks forward to continued participation in this as it goes forward. supervisor wiener: . -- thank you. any other comments? mr. olson, why did you not make a brief introduction, and then we will go to the presentation? >> good afternoon.

i am the director of the mayor's office on housing, and we thank you for the opportunity to present the materials that you will see this afternoon. based upon the hearing requested that was found, the committee started to look at the inclusionary review process and increasing moderate-income housing. there is the production and the city's ability to attract and retain jobs and the production of moderate and middle-income housing, and we took the various departments which could be speaking, seeking to contribute to the discussion about this issue. this is an issue, as the supervisor has stated, an issue that affects a lot in san francisco. it is at times controversial, but what we thought we could do

as that to the city is provide data on which the policymakers can guide staff and changing policies. if it is deemed necessary to do that. so on behalf of the various departments, we see this as the beginning of a discussion, a discussion that is also working in parallel with the results of the house an audit, the housing and trust fund discussions, and the work on the inclusionary program. we see these working in parallel through this process. in terms of the departments, john could not make it here today, and the department of planning and billmeyer zappers -- office on housing are working very closely on this and all the

other studies since it has obviously impacts on both the planning department ordnance programs as well as the board of supervisors ordinances. in addition, we will have michael from the mayor's office of work force and economic development talking about the implications of the high cost, and after that, we will have to read from the office of the comptroller and the office of economic analysis top about his view of housing in san francisco and, again, to put some background on this particular issue, the relationship between affordable housing and jobs. from there, brian from the mayor's office on housing will go into some of the data crunching that we did to, again, look at the question of what is being produced, what is affordable, and who are the people that we seek to support in terms of the various income

groups and how we have supported them through both housing production as well as through our regulatory efforts, and we will look at the question of leveraging, in terms of past production, and how we have sought as a city to leverage up the resources and producing affordable housing in san francisco. and at the end of the presentation, all of the presenters, all of the staff that have worked on the presentations and i will be able to answer any questions that the supervisors may have. as i said earlier, this is part of a multiple parallel -- policies. we are reviewing this as required by ordinance every five years, and as a part of that, we sought to do a study of the

state of the housing market and what effect any change in the inclusion ordinance might be a response to what the current market might be. we have that study already in place, and we are happy to provide an early presentation on that, and that study, which is the background study for this presentation will inform us in the discussion has been in any possible changes in the inclusionary ordinance and also as we look at what our goals might be as part of the housing trust fund, and again, the mayor has stated repeatedly that he supports housing for the 100%, and part of his mission is to make sure that everybody in san francisco is served in some way. he sees a housing trust fund as a means to try to achieve that

goal of providing a wealth of housing opportunities for all san francisco and, because as the economists will say, affordable housing is an important part of creating jobs in san francisco and keeping the economy of san francisco strong and therefore allowing us to than produce also are deeply affordable, 100% affordable housing. i would like to give thanks to the staff of the planning department, and others, for their work on this presentation, and thank you to the supervisors, both the committee here and the supervisor for their comments on this particular presentation, so at this time, i would like to turn it over to michael. supervisor wiener: what do we not start with the city economists, and then we will go to michael and then go to mode

-- me? >> ted egan, the comptroller's office. as they have been working on this issue, we have and try to contribute some analysis with regard to housing affects the economy in san francisco. in particular, however affects job creation. i just want to share some of the analysis that i have done. thank you. supervisor cohen? do we have a powerpoint? supervisor wiener: 4 sfgtv? >> yes, we do. looking at this in san francisco, this is a chart. the blue line over the past 40 years in contrast with the area as a whole, the red line, and

this has been a fairly slow growing jobs center. we have added about 30,000 jobs in the 40 years between 1969 and 2009, and the rest of the bay area during the time added about 1.5 million jobs. now, one of the main reasons for that is that there is population growth in the rest of the bay area, and employment in the retail trade and services was needed to serve that population, but san francisco has also lost its share of an appointment in the bay area around a set of industries that are not tied to population and were part of the core economy, transportation and manufacturing and financial- services and insurance is and back offices and headquartered operations. the growth of these industries or this employment across the rest of the bay area is basically the outcome of businesses looking at a san francisco location versus other

locations in the bay area and finding many of those other locations favorable in many circumstances, so what we have seen is the growth of perhaps 10 or 15 viable office and. centers across the bay area that are, in effect, competing with san francisco for the types of jobs that have been the core of the san francisco economy for the decades prior. the immediate question is why would that be. what is it about san francisco? it is part of the same economic region. many people who live in san francisco war and other places or work and other places and live in san francisco. why would there be employers trying to grow jobs outside of the city? when i looked at this issue, one of the most important is the price of labor in san francisco. if you compare the average wage that an employer pays in san francisco with an employee in the east bay, and you adjusted for the fact that the industries

in the east bay are slightly different, san francisco wages are about 20% higher than the east bay, and they are set to begin in lower than that in the north bay. only in santa clara county are wages higher than san francisco, and that is an unusual county that has added a lot of jobs as well as having high wages. san francisco has had high wages compared to other places in the region and has had slower employment growth, so the question is, why might that be? we're talking on an industry basis. in one city, you have to pay higher wages than another. one of the reasons is that much of the labor that is available in san francisco, the workers in san francisco, lived in the city and pay san francisco housing prices. san francisco housing prices are very high by the regional standard. in ,