income housing families are equally taken care of. >> i will keep it just a bit short because the last couple of months i have been looking for affordable housing for myself and my son. i have been looking around, there are some ideal ones. there is a long waiting list, or the family housing is nonexistent at all. i hope that we can find a solution to this problem. >> good afternoon, supervisors. thank you for the opportunity to speak here today. it is no news to everyone in this room that we have an

affordable housing crisis. we have seen the displacement of low-income and working families from soma, mission, western addition, and they view. we have low-income families getting by without access to dignified homes whether it be living in garages, or the ever-present threat of eviction. my partner is one of the first lines of defense for low-income san franciscans at risk of eviction. the work she does is exhausting but doesn't come close to the experiences of many of the people that are fighting to save their homes and fighting against evictions. often she can't go to sleep and struggles with how to piece together what ever support her organization can provide that makes the difference between people being able to stay in

their homes or be evicted. my children go the public schools, and every year, two or three children have withdrawn and have left the city. there are 15 clauses in the school. that means they're forced out of the city. they don't have the choice to move to the suburbs, but low- income families that can't make ends meet. i wanted to speak to some of the community planning effort that the organization i am part of has been helping to lead i together. there is a publicly undecided with the transit station and is in the heart of a working-class neighborhood next to open space, schools, and the site is currently maintained as a half- empty parking lot. they refuse to respect the

planning process. >> thank you. i will call ten more names. if you want to live up after these speakers. these are all the cards. >> i have an activist -- the need is even more pressing there

are thousands of units being converted over this city. and it is all being done surreptitiously, and i am glad that the supervisors are finally waking up about this. the average couple walking through the tenderloin looking for a place to live isn't looking for a $1,700 furnished studio apartment. not only is this and diminishing the tenth rental stock - - tenant rental stock, they're not voting. they're looking for their condo somewhere else and they will go to that district in the vote. think about that as well. thank you for all your work.

>> i am of the council of community housing organizations. of wanted to thank you for providing us with this reporting in the data. i wanted to echo what others are saying about the need to have real time reporting with each new project whether it is washington, cpmc, whatever it is. to know how that particular project is helping us meet our goals for moderate and astronomical housing. second, in terms of our low and very low incom production targets, i wanted to echo with the before -- what was said before. whether we're talking about a gross receipts tax, some are

attaching revenue neutral to that. we need to make a real commitment to local sources of funding for affordable housing. and to echo what turley said before me, the city needs to take a lead in looking at surplus properties that the city owns, and that the city allied agency and the school district alone, and how those can be used for affordable housing. to the city's inclusion area housing program, the only real program will have to meet our moderate income needs. part of the technical committee of around inclusion very housing, we have heard a lot about the desire for developers to pull back.

we have also heard and saw a representative who designed the feed deferral program that cost the city $10 million. we need to make sure we don't keep doing that. >> i am a representative of the low-income family. most of the family lives in sro and can't afford to rent even a small studio because of the economy right now. some of our family are forced to live in a shelter because they don't have enough money.

please held our family have affordable housing for the family. >> for us, affordable housing has been echoed through years of me working there even before my time. even affordable housing is really a must. we're seeing a san francisco production pattern out of balance with the real needs of every day working class people. we hear that with over 200 families that we work here.

we are seeing that with thousands of condominiums in the neighborhood, still in the pipeline, there for the city really needs to put a cap on market rate housing and prioritize affordable housing. we are seeing a lot of families being displaced from other neighborhoods, starting to live south of market and tenderloin which isn't a problem to us. therefore, the fight for affordable housing is within the low-income community. we hope you consider the dashboard idea and protect the existing residence by making sure -- he also wants to rent as

well as on their own units. we really hope that affordable housing will be your priority. >> on behalf of the san francisco housing action coalition, to correct a small misperception, the washington project kicked in $9 million to the mayor's office of housing that goes to very low at a low- income housing. it is also leveraged water to times for that segment. -- one or two times for that segment. however, going back to the legislative analyst's report, i wanted to commend the excellent

work from planning that has done the city proud on this. god willing, this will change the conversation around are very difficult issues that the family is facing. i agree with the testimony we have heard today. it is vivid and incontrovertible. we are making san francisco very unaffordable. i will say that insufficient attention has been aimed at the production of housing. and in particular, virtually none of the arena and goals. it took two or three decades to get to the point where we are now by consistently, year after year, for decades, under- reducing the amount of housing that we are told again and again that we should be building to address employment, transportation, and growth. it is hard to imagine that we will address the fundamental san francisco affordability if we don't change the amount of

housing we are producing. you hear the need for it, but we can see that the funding for it, that the federal, state, and local levels, are collapsing. i can't imagine how it turns around if we don't start building lots and lots of housing for along time. >> i have a couple specific requests. please ask the planning department to provide for the last 10 conditional uses that have come before the planning commission the housing analysis done on those projects as well as the generic description of the project. i think it will be helpful to see the real world. no. 2 is the planning department giving automatic renewals and extension for projects approved

that haven't started construction. they should do in analysis of the existing need whenever there is an extension, because we of the project on three and four extensions already, particularly on the hill. the-ford needs to be done not only for the planning commission, but when it comes to the board of supervisors, you should see the dashboard. there has been a boom hall last couple of decades. hi and housing is what we have been producing. we are still not really focusing on what we have got. one of the things we have this terrible tracking and computers,

unless something has happened dramatically in the last couple of months. the planning department does not have the ability to track through to sail on a project from permit application to permit to subdivision because they are all condos, to sell price. there is no excuse for us as a city to be so far out of whack on our ability to track on computers. it is an embarrassment cantonese to be remedied. >> supervisors, i have been a resident in san francisco since 1969. i was homeless myself, rehabilitated, and retired. in looking through the report, thank you for commissioning it.

the numbers are useful, and adjust to underline one. , it says here that the marketing of affordable housing units should begin no later than 60 days from the certificate of occupancy, and that in several cases, the marketing did not start until 5-16 months after. we have been talking about affordable housing and we have a long delay now until it is actually in place. there should be some kind of -- how to keep them accountable. >> good afternoon, supervisors.

peter cohen, a long afternoon, and we have heard some tremendous public testimony that tells the story, a very human story that the data earlier reinforces. i want to punctuate a few things that we think really are the contacts for why we are facing a difficult task, but we're willing to face the analyst's office report again. very insightful and very well done, pushing this not to be too comfortable with just doing fairly well. it shows us that in all of our categories of very low, and moderate-income housing we have hit 50% of our need. if he took the tax credit, we did about 83%. i know we are not just excluding moderate and middle income for

that. our need for market rate housing is only barely half that. the projections for the pipelines, we have maybe 30% that is again, below market rate. we have a structural problem here that we need to face. fundamentally, we need restore that tax increment financing. i can tell you we're not stopping to get back to where rework. it gives us a great opportunity to think big and about how we can go beyond restoring low- income housing funding. i wanted to show you just one graph, if i may. it shows a projection where we will be in 2014 based on current trends in the pipeline. every category below market rate we won't even get close to what

our need is. even if we spliced that out, whatever portion that might be, i would assume that will also not be met. through a continuum of housing, we have a great need to fill. >> hello, supervisors. i have lived in the height ashbury coalition. i've had a home there for 30 years. we have a beautiful setting, a lot of beautiful people. we know that you will do your very best because you are beautiful people, too. you want all kinds of people to live here. not everybody has been through

the same with money. it is good, it is not quite great, but money is good. we have one big, huge family. i hope you will do your best. supervisor kim: if there is no more public comment at this time, can we close public comment? i know that my colleagues actually have held off on their questions. i want to call back of the planning department and the mayor's office of housing. perhaps even a budget analyst as well. i know that many of the public, and jurors have left at this point. we had over 60 individuals that spoke today and it speaks to the pressing need of how we in the

city have developed housing in the city. when we look at 0-120% emi, that is what the hearing was about. we see an incredible range of folks in the city. we are living in overcrowded housing to the working class individuals. our public school teachers are well below the 120% of median income. the developments don't meet the needs of current residents. both for more diversity of housing and figuring out what tools we have.

i am glad to see it, hopefully we can try to bring some of the steps together. sueprvisor campos: i apologize that i have to leave the hearing shortly. i have a meeting that i have to go to. i wanted to ask the mayor's office of housing and, if i may, through the chair, to ask about the agreements with support of housing operators and i am wondering why the agreements are currently for nine years. i think it was a convenient term -- we are in agreement that

they should be longer. the terms suggested was 15 years that will coincide with the tax credit. not it will reflect the 15-year period, there is transparency around these issues. it was a quick question for the mayor's office of housing. it is something that one of the speakers said, and there are a couple of issues that i hope they follow up on and they provide a more detailed attention to.

how that works and what impact it has had on the construction of affordable housing, i know that there is an interesting to follow up on that. and the development of housing and around public transit, and transit oriented development, it is page 19 of the report.

>> the need is of 5,545 units and we're only projected to build around 470. so that's a 16% -- it's only 16% of the actual need. and we have to do better than that. if you compare that to where other jurisdictions also in the bay area are. san francisco which usually prides itself of being at the forefront of these issues is well behind these jurisdictions like san jose. 79% of area median income. san jose has met, by the year 2006 had met 180% of the need. we had only met 52% of the need in that population. we're also lagging behind the

city of oakland which had met 64%. i think we have to ask ours what are the other jurisdictions doing that we're not doing. is it an issue of commitment? unless we do something drastic, i think that trend will only get worse. i really think it's imperative upon us to make sure that we do something here. the last thing i would say is when you're talking about making san francisco more affordable where different people can live, it isn't just housing that has to look at. housing and public transportation are the two biggest expenses that families have to face in san francisco. in my view you can't talk about affordability in terms of allowing people to stay in san francisco if the only focus is on housing. you have to look at public transit as well. it's not just about creating

affordable housing and middle income families. it's all about creating accessible public transit for middle income and low income families. we have to do both. if you look at the region, some of the plans that are being proposed and some of the scenarios that are being looked at include that a low income family is going to have to spend about 85% of income on both housing and trance por -- transportation. how is a family supposed to survive in those conditions. it also looks at transportation. there are other issues that are important. i hope that we go down that road. and again i want to thank supervisor kim and her staff for calling for this hearing. and i look forward to working with all of my colleagues on all these issue. >> thank you, supervisor

campos. supervisor o laly? >> i would like to thank the members of the public for this hearing. it must be hard to take time out of work to come here. so just wanted to thank you for having patience and sticking it out. i'd also like to thank the mayor's office in housing and the legislative department because i think this is an excellent report. i'll probably need more time with it. i did have a couple of questions based on some of the information provided here. your recommendations i think are really spot on actually. >> but i think some of my comments or questions might be directed towards the planning department staff. so i guess with transit oriented development, one of the recommendations that i

really appreciated was the suggestion that better coordination occur with the transportation agencies. and i think that's starting to happen now. is that right? where planning is engaging in those discussions? yeah. >> supervisor o laggy, yeah, it is. -- supervisor olague, yeah. one strong thing that came out of the eastern neighborhood is a memorandum of understanding where we signed all the structure heads what each department was going do for the plan. a good example is the central quarter plan which is partially, i would say 30% of the work there is being done by the staff. so we're getting better. there's always work to be done, but yes, absolutely. >> that's great.

and the other concern i've always had as it relates to this, i think it sort of touches on it. because when you go to page -- let me see if i can find it here, 29, and you look at the housing element, statements regarding transit oriented development, none of them really of the four that are mentioned here, at least none of them really emphasize affordability. and some of the -- sustainbility community strategies, i think is something where affordability is implied but not stated. that's something that, i don't know. you know, if there is even language that could be added somehow to some of these policy statements that would include the issue of equity, sustainable equity, something strategy, or affordability. more references to that because when you see some of the