Skip to main content

tv   [untitled]    June 9, 2013 9:30pm-10:01pm PDT

9:30 pm
and i just wanted to just read a bit of a statement based on my biggest southern with the existing legislation and my session in terms of what i'd like to propose in an effort to move this item forward >> currently the legislation protects tenants living until ti c's sz by providing them with lifetime leases and renter buy outs by stopping the conversion lottery for 10 years. it says the buildings are not cannibalizing larger building
9:31 pm
that raises affordable housing to help san franciscans find housing in san francisco. and it helps the middle class to keep their homes. this is the current amended legislation as a matter of public policy. i'm truly impressed with the bill before us. specifically section 7 the last part of the bill in one oman files a lawsuit someone could file a lawsuit the day after this law there would be no way to reduce mortgage rates and the thousands even if folks will face another 10 years of hardship. the tic owners are not wealthy.
9:32 pm
we all agreed to help the tic owners. we created legislation to achieve that goal but in the event of a lawsuit it makes the situation when i believe is far 0 worse. some have argued we need not worry about this because no one is going to sue but i oversee lawsuits all the time. when in doubt people sue. i'm not comfortable leaving this on the assumes that no one will sue. this is california and we should prepare as though someone is going to sue. we have a 1 hundred and 80 wait and i appreciate this wait but i
9:33 pm
can't say that the 1 hundred and 80
9:34 pm
have a bone disease which leaves them vulnerable to breaking a bone. their parents have middle medically coverage and every broken bone is thousands of dollars. their left with paying the medical bills or the mortgage. they've been in the lottery 5 times. their locked in a mortgage that continues to climb.
9:35 pm
veterans to the gay kouchdz those folks will lose their home. this legislation can't help them unless there's a lawsuit. how can i tell those folks they're losing their homes with no policy. i'm guaranteeing this will help this legislation. my amendment simply creates a one year period where the tic owners will have a year to file. the city will accept applications for one year then have an additional 1 hundred and 80 days to process the legislation that way even if someone sues a day after then they will be able to convert.
9:36 pm
we'll insure that the first eligible class of tic owners will have the opportunity to keep their facilities for in broad terms the city attorney said it could take about 1 hundred and 80 days for the lawsuit to go to court. then it could go to the supreme court. this is an enpermissible process. i want to say while it is unfolding we stand by the original goals of protecting the renters. the city attorney advises that my amendment is not substance active and i enthusiasticly support the goals of this bill and the specific policies. this support is what brings me here today. we have to protect ourselves
9:37 pm
from the lawsuits. i look forward to hearing from my colleagues on this matter >> president chiu. >> thank you and let me first start by thanking all sides of this prospective. i have spent quite a few time listening to everyone. i sympathize with the folks who have been e evicted and the tics who have been stuck in this lottery. i think everyone has been involved. obviously we don't have an alternate today but i think this does address the original goals. the intent of the original legislation was to address the thousands of tic owners who are
9:38 pm
stuck in the conversion lottery and could give them an opportunity to get a fee to bypass the lottery. the current amended
9:39 pm
supervisor wiener's 81 intent. i would allow this but i'm not perpetrated to support item 7 because i don't think we ought to be creating tics to be solid between spectators. there's a way to look at the amended legislation regarding what happens if there's lawsuits after this passes. the real estate has been
9:40 pm
concerned that the tenants could sue. let me first make it clear that they don't have any intent to sue but i do you understand this doesn't make the other side comfortable. if the real estate can suggest ways if you're side of the equation how do we say the bargain didn't continue as well. i do look forward to reviewing what supervisor reed talks about. but we've been discussing this and i intend to support item 6
9:41 pm
and not 7. >> supervisor kim. >> thank you. i think just reiterating what everyone has said this proposed ordinance has gone through most and most. it's pretty amazing we've arrived at the place we have today would what we're looking at in the land use committee. about 6 months ago there was more discussion it wasn't going to happen. there wasn't any quote/unquote by by a pass. we've had a fruitful discussion. i think what had been unfortunate in this has been through public comment and a thereto e-mails there has been
9:42 pm
in which ways the battle of the stories of the tic owners who are everyday folks who are struggling to own a home in san francisco and, of course, the everyday stories of our tenants similar in background their struggling to stay here in san francisco. i'd sad for me to hear that folks are being priced out of san francisco. i hear stories all the time. in my church service three of the families that were getting e evicted here in san francisco. this is becoming a hot topic. i think the issue here, of course, is we're talking about the same housing stock the
9:43 pm
conversion. that shouldn't be the solution homeownership. if we're not building now homes for those families and residents they should come out and tell the developers. if one bedrooms are not away what you want we should insure are multiple production family units are happening throughout the city and not in just the southeast sector. i think this is elegant is not the right word but to dealing with current tic owners who want to become home individualized
9:44 pm
homeowners. i think perhaps this is not the case so we'll allow them to pay a fee. but it is narrowly tentative to tic homeowners. it was never about fire chief tic homeowners. it is uncertain to me because it was really just a way to us to kind of accelerate the real estate market. this is not the place for to push folks to buy homes. i hope we can continue to have is a productive discussion. what was termed a poison pill
9:45 pm
but i like the framing this is not about serve ability. there are two pieces of this legislation that must go hand in hand and if we allow bypass we can't quote/unquote cannibalize our stocks. i'm going to send this forward to the full board today and not ready to support the second >> thank you so colleagues i think many of us share the goal of helping tic homeowners who need help and protecting the tenants. i want to thank supervisor reed for her remarks and i want to
9:46 pm
take a look at the poison pill. twoorgdz when we heard this and duplicate the file i indicated that i was open to supporting the legislation with one amendment. when the original amendment by president chiu and supervisor were placed into the legislation that supervisor farrell and i had introduced i was always very open to a number of the provisions and the legislation. i was never as negative about the 10 year moratorium as others because i thought in the - peop
9:47 pm
9:48 pm
financial hardships and have to sell it's pretty rare you would see a building over a extended period of time you would see the challenge of ownership. but the people who i've met over the years that should changes in ownership it's usually because someone had to move for whatever reason and that's just liver u life. my take is if we're going to have the changes in ownership we
9:49 pm
should have some limited ownership without having to go back to the end of the line and sabotage those units. i say it shouldn't have - i'm sure there are are variations on some sort flexibility in the process. i know that the tenants at some point was open to some version of attacking a taking amendment for the future lottery apparently not at the moment but i think it is a significant issue. i don't agree it's about future ti c. particularly with the poison pill if someone files a lawsuit
9:50 pm
and indian of the legislation - if someone files a lawsuit and the lazy are struck down instead of going back to the statue quo and the lottery we continue with the moratorium. so if you're a three or four or 5 unit building the moratorium can't convert unless you're able to do that in the six months period. and once the lottery comes back you're out of luck if you're three or four owner building you're at the higher threshold with no seniority. so it does effect the current
9:51 pm
homeowners. let's not pretend this is about the future tics of the poison pill. this very much effects the current tics are i think there is a very, very strong agreement for the attacking amendment. i'm hopeful over the next week we're going to have negotiation and we'll come to some sort of consensus. i'm not prepared to support item 6 but i am perpetrated to support 7. we'll be offering an amendment on the poison pill. and that's
9:52 pm
minority on this one. >> i make a motion we move 6 with full recommendation if you
9:53 pm
want to move with the motion to continue item 7 as well. >> it there any discussion on the motion? madam clerk can you call the role please. do you want me to call them both together or separately. >> together. >> on the motion to continue item 7 for one week until june 10th (calling names) >> okay. so the motion passes. madam clerk any other business before the committee. no there are no further matters >> then we're adjourned
9:54 pm
>> hello. welcome to "culturewire." we are here today with bay area artist jody chanel, and we are here to see the plaza where your piece has just been installed. >> i have been doing large-scale paintings in the galleries and museums, and the idea that in the future, i could do something that would hang out a little bit longer than the duration of the
9:55 pm
installation the kind of appeal to me. i quickly found out about the san francisco arts commission school and realized there was a pre-qualified school you had to apply to, so i applied to the. >> how long did it take you to develop this work for the plaza? >> this was a fast track project. design development was about a month. >> let's look at the beautiful mural. i have never seen a mural created on asphalt. >> the heat of the asphalt, a new layer of asphalt. then, these wire rope templates that were fabricated for the line work get laid down and literally stamped into the asphalt, and then everything was hand-painted.
9:56 pm
>> maybe you could talk about some of the symbolism, maybe starting in the middle and working out. >> [inaudible] the flower of industry. >> it is like a compass. there's an arrow pointing north. >> within the great bear consolation, there are two pointed stars here. they typically lead one to the northstar, otherwise known as polaris. so i thought it has a layer of theme. >> let's talk about some of the other elements in the peace. we are walking along, and there is a weather vane. there's a sweet little bird hanging on the side. what kind of bird is that? >> [inaudible] the smallest of the gulf species, and it lives around the bay area. >> you want to talk about the types of flour patterns that you send?
9:57 pm
>> [inaudible] around 1926 or so by the dahlia society. >> what is this bird here? >> that is the california quail. >> coming up here, we had a little blustery theme. what is this area here? >> this is supposed to be the side view, the expense of the golden gate bridge. >> there it is. >> there are really beautiful elements of architecture still around, i would say that it gives that feeling over to the work. >> what are your hopes for it? >> that in a way it just becomes part of the area. i think it is starting to have that feeling. people utilize it.
9:58 pm
they sit and, and have their lunch and play on -- they sit and, and have their lunch and play on that -- they sit and come and have their lunch and play on it. just for it to be part of the neighborhood. that is my hope. >> is such a beautiful addition to our public art in san francisco. thank you for joining us. it was nice to meet you. and thank you for telling us about your beautiful mural. thanks for watching "culturewire."
9:59 pm
>> call to order this meeting, on june fourth, would you like to cal roll? >> director brinkman? >> present. >> heineke is expected. ed >> ramos fp >> present. >> rubke >> director. privileges and nolan will be not at this meeting you do have a quorum. >> because of the fire codes,
10:00 pm
if people could find a seat. thank you. >> if you could please find a seat. ? thank you. >> announcement of prohibition of sound producing devices, the ringing off of pagers and other similar devices are prohibited at the meeting. they person responsible for the ringing or the use of a cell phone or pager etc. may be removed from the meeting. please be advised that cell phones that are set on vibrate do cause the interference and so the board requests that they be placed in the off position. approval of the may, 21st meeting minutes. >> all