forgot to note to the percentage of families with children, people that are pregnant that would also be on the street. based on evictions and displacements. >> [speaking spanish] >> i would also like to remind you that we have been fighting displacement in the mission for 10 years. that has been an incredibly hard battle. >> [speaking spanish] >> we need to ensure that we do not lose any more battles. we have lost enough. or that we do not lose any more rent-controlled housing which is -- would be a result of the

plan and these proposals. >> [speaking spanish] >> rent-controlled -- the rent control ordinance protections have been slowly picked away in san francisco. there was a proposition that was beaten down to completely get rid of rent control and san francisco voters showed they did not want to get rid of rent control and we need to stop picking away at rent-controlled ordinances. >> [speaking spanish]

>> this is a solution that will need all of you supervisors and we need to ensure that people in san francisco who continue to work hard, who live here and work here continue to be housed. >> [speaking spanish]

>> the last thing i want to remind you is that you all a surprise represent everyone in san francisco, not just an elite few. we all have the right to dignified housing that we can afford. >> [speaking spanish] >> one final thing i would suggest that u.s. -- expand rent-controlled protections to all units and that would be the solution. supervisor wiener: thank you. next speaker. >> [speaking spanish]

>> good evening. my name is moorad and i have been living in my apartment for 22 years. >> [speaking spanish]

>> curiously enough, i was always told i lived in rent- controlled housing. recently our property owner told me that was not true. my question to you all is, if you all had not been able to figure on how to stop one large from abusing their tenants who live in a rent-controlled housing or live in private housing, how are you going to start thinking or planning a new housing option for new plans? i think it is important to ensure that the group of people in this country and the city who maintain this economy, whose economy is built on -- can stay in housing is not taken out into the streets. i said, i lived in my apartment for 22 years and i am very close to being on the streets.

supervisor wiener: thank you for it much. -- very much. >> good evening, supervisors. i made tenet counselor with just cause in the mission district. -- i am a tenet counselor with just cause in the mission district. many have already been displaced out of the mission. many are struggling to stay, like maria. the majority of the work that i do is helping tenants fight eviction and ensuring they are able to keep their home. if they are evicted, the likelihood of them being able to find housing in a similar neighborhood and the same neighborhood near the price or the community resources they rely on are awfully slim as we saw from the data. san francisco is in a crate -- housing crisis and before we begin to address the housing, options of this segment of our residents to have greater access to housing, we need to ensure that the needs of san

franciscans -- needy san franciscans are house. it is important to note that the goals for developing below market rate housing has gone under managed. while under market managing has a -- housing has already -- always out strip its goals, we need to make sure our housing historically met. to continue to incentivize the conversion of rent-controlled housing into condos or other market rate housing would be incredibly irresponsible as it would result in the eviction of tenants from those units who would be not able to incur -- pay the increased market rate rents for those units. these tenants will be pushed out into a housing market with very few affordable housing options and a diminishing stack of rent- controlled units. we need to strengthen the procedures we have for more affordable housing, develop more

of it, and protect poor -- rent- controlled units instead of creating more ways around it and make sure our residents are housed. thank you. supervisor wiener: thank you. >> thank you. i wanted to appreciate the idea, the notion that we want to pet low-income people against high- income earners. there is a lot of basic things that can be done, some principles that could be followed to make sure that does not happen. you can make sure that we continue to prioritize people who are extremely low income. as we all know, the rent burden for someone who is earning less than $1,000 a month who is paying more than 30% at having to each top ramen and having their children experience hunger is different from someone

earning $80,000. we can also ensure that they are not pitted against each other by not pushing for policies that would displace or hurt the very low income people. that would be another way that would end up pitting those populations against each other. we can make sure that no resources that would be potentially able to go toward housing, the most lowest income people are not used to subsidize people of higher income that are not facing that struggle. in the housing element process which is a plan that is developed every five years, we grappled with the same issue and there is a diverse body that works on this. different representatives that sit on that. that happens every four years. what they did is they said -- the required direct -- to not require a direct public subsidy to move forward on that housing between 120% and 150% of median

income and have a lot of ideas to have less expensive unit types that are affordable. i suggest looking at that as a way to address this issue. thank you. supervisor wiener: thank you. neck speaker. -- next speaker. >> i am a developer for berkeley. i'm going to projects in san francisco now. i would like to encourage you to address the problem of general housing supply by focusing and encouraging high-density, car- free, a small unit development in the south of market area, specifically the mid-market area. that would have benefits -- the following benefits. 40,000 students are in san francisco who are not in university affiliated housing. they are competing in the open market.

three students can always be a single family with a wage earner and yet they would be glad to live in student housing in south of market. the second benefit is high density car-free housing would put the 16,000 new workers that are coming to san francisco close to their jobs and also keep them from competing for the single-family homes and the two- and 3-bedroom apartments in the avenues and elsewhere. focusing developments in the south of market area would bring the housing closer to the jobs, improve transit, and with the inclusion very -- inclusionary would provide a storage units -- sro units. the thing about that -- a policy is it would not cost the city and the best thing because it could be done with market

refinancing and a set aside for the low-income units. it could happen right away and without any city or state funds. thank you. supervisor wiener: i will note -- i have been working on student housing legislation that is coming through the planning commission and we will be at the land use committee in a few weeks. a lot of us agree on that in terms of reducing that. the competition. i would think you for bringing out affordability by design. some of our zoning changes sometimes discourage small units and that can be a problem. in terms of car-free, a parking spot and $50,000 to the cost of a unit. thank you for raising the issue. >> i might add i build 500 units in berkeley and created 90 low- income units and became a larger landlord of low-income residents than the city of berkeley housing authority. at no cost to the city. it is possible. thank you.

supervisor mar: hold large are those units? -- how large are those units? >> between 203 hundred square feet apiece. we have lots of built-ins and lots of a fission aspects. supervisor wiener: thank you. >> i am a housing attorney. i am a member of the mtc working group. i wanted to address -- two issues which were not directly addressed by the previous presentations. i think is -- one is the question of the regional needs analysis. there has been some discussion of how it would appear from the data that san francisco has not done a very good job of producing moderate income housing relative to other low

and very little -- low-income housing. that is technically correct with respect to the regional housing needs analysis but i think it is mischaracterizing -- what the rena tells us. it does not speak to existing in that need. a lot of that testimony today graphically represents there is this tremendous amount of on that need in san francisco. the rena address is need for future growth. to address the regional needs and allocate to share that but it does not speak to on that needs in san francisco. the relative on that need - unmet needs exceeds the percentage that is reflected in the performance. the other point is the testimony -- presentation before fails to address the fair housing implications of

redefining middle income populations. i think the next analysis from the standpoint of in order to comply with the city's obligations under the consolidated plan and fair housing law is you have to look at the percentage allocation of moderate and medium income. the data is hard to read on the chart. the white population which is over 84,000 and for african- americans, it is 30,000. asians is 61, hispanics 56. if you are going to move moderate income or median income up that way, you will leave a lot of folks out.

that analysis needs to be done when we're looking at redefining what we mean by median income in san francisco. supervisor mar: that runs counter to the fair housing or potential civil rights policies? >> the failure to analyze that would violate the fair housing act. the city is under an obligation to affirm the housing act. the analysis that looks at adjusting these programs, the consolidated planning requirements requires that analysis before you change affordable housing programs. smart analysis. lgbt is included so i would love to talk to about that as well. i am brand -- brian basinger. i am a low income person with

aids who happens to scrape into a modern and come unit by partnering with a city employe. i am not against moderate income and mixed in come housing. if it is done right it could be better. i am conscious of that we're in the last couple of weeks i had one of my members with a limp, down the sidewalks in a doorstep of a neighborhood business. i also had the transgendered woman friend of mine raped in her hotel which is what low- income housing is. i also had a member of mine who is also a volunteer brutally murdered in his hotel as well. this stuff is real to me. it is not a spreadsheet and it is not academic. when we look at this disparity of who we are serving and why, for those of us on the ground, it is real and it is brutal. it gets us a little bit emotional.

rent control is the largest and most successful program for low- income and moderate-income households. 90% of lgbt people are renters who need to be protected by rent control. also, when we are targeting subsidies at this range in really is a surrogate for an employer subsidy. currently, employers are picking up the housing costs of the people they employ. when wind -- invest resources we're leaving employers of that -- we are relieving employers of that. do not give it away. make the people pay. there are tax rental income, tax commercial rents, all kinds of stuff. supervisor wiener: thank you. next speaker. >> good evening. i am johnny oliver. i am a housing counselor working

with people interested in homeownership. last year, we saw 309 people come through interested in homeownership. in 2011 only 35 were able to buy. all of them were between 80% and 120%. the story that we hear from people using the program is there or not any houses they can -- they're not being outbid on by high cash down investors or higher income families who can afford to put down a higher payment. by raising the ami it will create more competition for our limited housing stock as it is. that is the pre-purchase side. i work with a much larger portion of our clients, our

foreclosure clients. their loan modifications are denied time and time again. servicers, investors are not willing to cooperate. many of them are falling prey to modification scams happening in san francisco. the average client comes in spending anywhere from $5,000 to $10,000 to have their -- loan modified just to be denied. i cannot see as a community we can continue or allow expansion of a current inclusion very housing program and not do anything to preserve home ownership for our struggling low- to moderate income families. supervisor wiener: thank you. if there are other speakers, please line up. we are at the end of public comment. >> as someone who has been with the planning department

for over 30 years, that they do not track what they are approving. some of us have been asking to track that, oh, four or five years and it keeps showing up in the housing elements as goals and always going to be implemented sooner or later. so if the board of supervisors wants the planning department to pay attention to this introduced legislation, tell them they have to do it. put it in their budget, if nefment because what i've seen over the past couple of years is as we've added great swaths of land for housing, areas in the mission, what comes in is extraordinarily high-end housing. in particular, ring con hill. and we -- rein conn hill. and we do not have low-income housing integrated with it. people buy out or just don't do it. we had massive amounts of quote/unquote live works which didn't have one units of affordability for five years in the late 1990's. so we keep building in our

problem by blowing out our extraordinarily limited housing area. the most limited thing we've got in san francisco is land, and if we keep giving more and more land to very high-end housing, with the exception of redevelopment area, which did a better job than anyone else for getting low-income housing in its areas and redevelopment is no more, the planning department is it. they have got to start saying that we are going to have a serious goal and seriously approve 61% of the new housing in these housing goals much instead of having a lot of $2 million condos, because that was what the developer wants and what the planning department will approve. thank you. >> thank you. next speaker. >> edward mason. i'm new to this and the one thing that i felt was missing

in a lot of the presentation was the fact that it appears that san francisco is becoming a bedroom community, and i see that if i drive from san jose along 280 at 5:00 or 6:00 in the evening. you see an awful lot of residential parking permits. and then you have the commuter buses that traverse our city. so i just can't help but think that as the previous speaker said, we're geographically restricted. so whether you stack and pack or, you know, something's got to give somewhere. and it seems that we're going out. this is an article from "the mountain view" newspaper at the end of december and the essence of it is that there was a piece of property that was 25 years ago zoned commercial, so they put in printing shops, machine shops and everything else. but part of that zoning then was 25 years later, which is

now. it was supposed to be converted to housing. so now the big controversy in mountain view is, well, are we going to displace all these workers, or are we going to build housing? so that's what's going on there. and we need to look at it from a regional point of view. from all the stories that i've heard here, i think we really have a problem. so if we go forthwith what we did with proposition m that restricted the amount of commercial space, maybe we should extend that to restricting the amount of housing in order to fulfill our other obligations. so those are my comments and i see all these commuter buses going, and it's going up. even in this paper, google has bought 15 pieces of property in mountain view for another $225 million that they're expanding. so we can expect to be more of a bedroom community. thank you very much. >> thank you very much. is there any additional public

comment? ok. seeing none, mr. chairman, may we close comments? >> thank you. supervisor wiener, did you have any concluding remarks? >> i just wanted to, first of all, thank you to the departments. i don't know if you had any final words. ok. thank you to the departments for the really great presentations, appreciate it. obviously, as i said at the beginning, this is housing our middle classes, one of the hardest things we can do. we know lower income, we know what a lot of the solution is. we knead more money. we need funding. the federal government has fallen down on us, the state government has fallen down owes and i know we're trying to be resourceful in coming up with funding to house the very poorest, and that's critical public investment that i support. i know a lot of us support. it becomes harder for our

middle class, because, as i think mr. yarne or eagan said before, trying to use hub money to house our middle class, it becomes one of the unending kinds of things, so we have to pursue other strategies and has to do with housing supply, has to do with design, has to do with a lot of different things. i know as a city we need to really start grappling with that in an even greater way than we have been, so that we make sure that we're building housing for everyone. so colleagues, are there any additional comments? >> i just wanted to thank the staff for mr. chiu, mr. lee, mr. rem for being here and the budget analysts' office as well. i appreciate supervisor wiener's acknowledgements of the need to not pit different economic groups against each

other but to look for the interests of all. i think the information that was given to us sheds light on the tremendous needs at the lower level, but also huge needs for the middle and moderate-income folks as well. i'm hoping that some of the suggestions made by people from the various organizations to the developers and others can be taken into consideration as we try to hopefully get through this terrible economic crisis and hopefully start to build more of the goals that the regional body set for all of our housing, transportation and jobs needs. so thank you very much to supervisor wiener. >> thank you. i would then move to continue this to the call of the chair. >> without objections, colleagues. and i'd like to thank supervisor olague with her expertise on the planning commission for being with us. ms. miller, can you please call item number four, which i hope to continue. >> item number four, hearing on the impact of fees deferred under the program on affordable housing. >> colleagues, i urge us to continue this item to the call of the chair to a later date.

>> we have top to open it up to public comments. any member of the public wish to speak on item number four? seeing none, public comments is closed. colleagues, can we continue this to the call of the chire without objection? thank you. miss miller, could you -- is there any other business for us? >> no. >> then meeting adjourned, thank you, everyone. >> thanks. . >> meeting adjourned.] >> hello.

you're watching the show that explores san francisco's love affair with food. there are at least 18 farmers markets in san francisco alone, providing fresh and affordable to year-round. this is a great resource that does not break the bank. to show just how easy it can be to do just that, we have come up with something called the farmers' market challenge. we find someone who loves to cook, give them $20, and challenge them to create a delicious meal from ingredients found right here in the farmer's market. who did we find for today's challenge?