and that employers will under that we are able to do our jobs and that we have our brains intact and despite that, it's very challenging because we have disabilities. it doesn't matter. at this point i'm living off 10 hours a week of work that i can luckily to do at home. paid at $14 an hour. i have to live off that because if i earn $1,000 a month they cut me completely off my benefits which i cannot live without a caregiver. i cannot. i'm completely paerlzed. with

my situation they basically said it was just an economic hardship, but it's much more than that. it's being disabled and i feel maybe the law missed that some of the tenants were in tic and some tenants might be disabled and having an up the -- tough time of finding offeredable housing in the city. my appeal is to appeal to your hearts and to understand that yeah, my economic hardship it's not something out of choice. it's purely based on my disability and it's my reality right now and i find completely

it's my opinion, right? so i find completely contradictory that i have to pay at this point $8,000 that i don't have. i have to lend it from my family which i have to payback for future low income housing that i might go when i'm not planning to leave that home when it took me 3 years to find anytime, maybe when i'm dying, maybe i will leave my home. that's it. it took me 3 years to find it. i want you to know that i feel and i don't think i can speak for every disabled person but at least the people with the disability that they are bound to a wheelchair, that it's almost impossible to find accessible housing. we are left a lot of us are left leaving in

shelters, living in nursing homes. i am proud to have worked to find this house, the present reality is a present reality and not a future low income person. that's what i am. i am a low income person. the impact fees for a future case and i feel i'm talking about a present situation. so, if not merely an economic hardship, it's based on my disability and everything that comes with it. so, in i way, if anybody has any questions, i will be happy to answer. >> thank you for your statements. supervisor wiener? >> thank you, i just have a few questions. miss castillo, thank you for being here today. so i just want to clarify a few

things that you did submit. you are currently living primarily on ssdi? about $7200 a year. about $9,000 a year? >> yes. >> and you make another 7,000 a year part-time? so you are making under $20,000 a year? >> yeah. >> and now your unit is accessible which is challenging to find in this town, right? >> yes. it's completely accessible. it's basically at the level of the sidewalk. >> and you are quadriplegic? >> quadriplegic means i have

paralysis of my four limbs and i have paralysis in my fingers. >> okay. now, despite your low income, your unit is affordable to you. i understand that you have roommates living with you? >> yes. the way pay for my house is i have two roommates. they help me pay for the mortgage and the hoa and plus some months i can pay for it depending on how much i make with my other job, but it leaves me with nothing so my mother helps me pay for the remaining. >> okay. and in terms of your life, i think you mentioned that the chances of you leaving this unit seem pretty -- >> 0 to none.

>> yeah. okay. and in addition i know there was a -- we'll have some questions about this later. you do not have the option of just staying in the lottery and avoiding the fee that way because of the version of the legislation passed by the board? >> yes. the lottery is over so this is the last chance. >> great. thank you so much. i appreciate your answers. >> any more questions, colleagues? thank you very much for your presentation. let me ask if there are members who wish to speak on behalf of the appellant. please lineup. >> members of the board, director san francisco open government. i think what we have here after i reviewed online what was available with regards to this case and also listen together appellant is

the law of unintended consequences. it's a situation where you pass a law of achieving some good social purpose and end up hurting a member of the group you are trying to help. i think this is something which should have been as part of the law an exemption that if this was done for the purpose of helping people, then someone in that very same class is going to be harmed by the law, there should be an exemption for it. i don't know if this was an oversight, but it sounds like from reviewing the documents and looking at the law and what it was intended to do and listen together appellant, it's exactly what we have here. it really makes absolutely no sense to say theoretically we are going to do this, we are going to pass this law, we are going to have a fee to help an unnamed person at some undetermined time in the future and do so at the expense of

someone in that very same group by harming them. i think that would be exactly what would happen here if this was allowed to go forward. the appellant would be harmed and shhh e would be the very person. i this i the rational might be, if this was intended to help someone and they are a member of this group, why not an abate the fee and use that as justification for saying we are helping the very person by an abating this fee, but the fee was intended to help. >> thank you, next speaker. >> my name is joseph armenia. i'm one of the cohost with christina and i have been living above her close to 6 years. christina's life is not an easy one. when i first read this, i'm the one doing most of the accounting. we kind of misread what the waiver

condition was. when you read it you put it together. we were very positive about it. it was later on that it was pointed out that the legal bases, the nexus. it was it doesn't look too good now. i find it very hard for a city like san francisco especially how progressive and wanting to help those in need will make somebody like christina pay $8,000 which she has used inform are a multiple of other things. i find it very hard that we are doing that to her and again i think like my previous person said a law of unintended consequences. it's not giving her much of a leg to stand on and as' nexus to talk about some people will not be able to afford it but the

chance of the lottery and the people paying the fee. however this ordinance did not provide for the lottery. it's suspended from the lottery so it gave no outcome for the people in need economically and with disabilities. the ordinance just left that out entirely. i think not all home owners are rich millionaires. i work for the city and i had the occasion of having to get a call to send and ambulance for christina herself because she has many medical needs. >> supervisor kim do you have a question in >> i don't know if i can address the question to the member who addressed this board. i want to know why this person is applying for the

condominium conversion. what is the rational behind it? >> would you like to answer the question. if you can go e to the microphone so we can all hear you. >> my rational is the same as in our case for example, we do not qualify for, we were not able to qualify for refinance. she would be able to get her own mortgage at a much better rate and she'll be able to have a better life and have ownership on her own and also it's pretty much when you buy into this it's one of the conditions that we are all going to separate as soon as possible in the apartment. >> i just want to rearticulate, the motivation for applying for the bypass thereby paying the fee is financial. if you are able to do this bypass your interest rates will potentially go down because you have divided mortgages and you could

potentially sell at a higher value because they have divided? >> she put 40 or 50 percent down. the other neighbor 10 percent down. she would be the one to get the most out of it because her mortgage would be 50 percent of the value of her unit. she had to put that much down because of her situation. very few people were willing to get into a tac with her. >> do you believe that by being able to obtain this bypass that there will be a potential of real dollars by your ability to convert to condominiums? >> yes. to everybody who is in that condominium conversion. >> thank you. >> supervisor campos? >> thank you mr. president, this is a question for the appellant if i may through

chair. it is my understanding from the record that we have here that the law does allow a tic owner to request a fee deferral based on demonstrated economic hardship? >> if i can ask the appellant if you would please come up to the microphone? >> thank you very much. so it's my understanding that the law does allow at the offset at the beginning of the process for a tic owner to request the fee deferral based on economic hardship and what we have here in the notes is that at least cord together department of public works that you did not pursue the option of asking for a fee deferral based on economic hardship. i was wondering if you can speak to that if that is true and why? >> it is true. the reason why i

didn't apply for the deferral is because the whether it's now or later, it's the same. i cannot afford such an amount of money. so it doesn't matter whether it's now or later. >> well, i guess that's precisely the question that if you cannot afford it, the law allows you to file for a deferral economic hardship. so why not file for it early on? >> because i will be in this situation permanently. i'm not going to walk anytime soon. >> that's not the question. did you know that you can actually apply for a fee deferral so that you didn't have to pay based on the economic hardship that you are facing and why didn't you do that? >> i know, but like i said, the deferral means like eventually you will to have pay for it.

what i'm trying to explain is that, if this is or an impact fee for future low income owners such as me, like i was before and i am still now, it's contradictory why would i have to pay for that even if it's deferred to later on. why would i have to pay for something a low income owner in the future when right now i'm facing so many such similar difficulties. >> did you have that conversation with the city to sort of ask exactly what it means to get the deferral and sort of what it would mean in terms of how long before you had to pay? >> no. i didn't. >> that's what i'm trying to understand if there is the possibility for that fee to be deferred, why based on hardship, why that did not happen since the law actually

allows for that. >> to be very honest with you, i didn't feel like these two things, like what i told you that the $8,000 is an impact fee for future low income for what i'm going to cost to a future low income person looking for a house. but i'm one of those people whether now or in the future. no. 2, it's money that i don't have right now because of my current situation and this situation won't change anytime soon. won't change ever. i'm paralyzed forever. i have this condition forever. i have a difficult time finding a job forever. it's nothing that will change. and for a deferral to be put in places for me to pay it eventually. so, this money i put together with my family 's

help and i will have to pay it back. so there is the deferral right there. >> thank you for that. that's a question to follow up with city in terms of when you would have to pay because if the payment happens when you sell and you are not selling, then the payment doesn't have to happen. >> supervisor cohen? >> okay. i want to pick up a little bit i think supervisor campos was trying to go. maybe we'll direct the question to the city attorney's office. could you define for us or layout the deferral plan? thank you. >> john from the city attorneys office. the deferral program that's recognized in this law

allows an applicant to request that dpw defer or hold off on collection of payment of the fee between the time of application and the time that the map is finally approved by the city which is, the approval of the map by the city allows it to be recorded and that allows the refinancing and the creation of the condominium process. so lend to that process depends on the city's processing time and the submissions of survey materials from the applicant. maybe the county is survey or can speak to that whether it's 6-9 months gap. it doesn't allow for the reduction of the amount. you still need to pay the fee. it

just allows you more time to get your financial resources together to pay it. >> does this deferment policy have a fee structure? is there a way to break up the payments? >> i think that it would be up to dpw would have the discretion. so, for example, i think it would arguably allow someone to pay a little bit upfront when they apply. they can pay the other half or two-thirds that are due at the time of file map approval. the full fee still would need to be paid before the department approves the map which allows the condominium process to go forward. >> thank you. i just want to make sure i understand correctly. you are saying i don't have the money today nor will i have any plans to have it in the future, is that

correct? >> yes. >> i was going to ask to clarify, the deferral, maybe if the is survey or was for a specific amount of time. >> bruce city and county survey or. we have a map waiting to record this. so it's three 1/2 months for this particular project. anything from 3 months to a year. >> okay. thank you very much. >> supervisor breed? >> yes. i just wanted some clarity to make sure that i understand the property in general. it's my understanding that of course the interest rates will go down from refinancing, but doesn't converting lead to a higher

value in terms of the condominium in general so it will be worth more and the ability to take out quit and support impact fee is what basically many of the supporters of this particular conversion. this is from my understanding what is supported in the first place because the property values would increase and they would be able to take out equity? i'm just asking because i want to be clear that it's my understanding? >> director of mayor's office of housing. it is our understanding that the conversion would allow for as the supporter say separate financing for this particular this unit and the other units within the building as condominiums financing is at lower rates than tic financing

therefore for the same payment and an individual should be able to support a slightly higher mortgage which could incorporate some of the fees that are anticipated including this particular fee. >> also, what is the percentage increase in terms of the value on average of the property. i don't know if anyone knows that a comparison of tic versus condominium? >> our understanding it's somewhere between 10-20 percent increase in value. >> and my understanding and almost all or the majority of the tic's, the biggest concern of why there was an affordable housing impact fee had to do with the fact that once converted, these particular units which are very rare in terms of being rent controlled

units will no longer be on the market ever again in that same capacity which is why, the impact fee was developed in the first place. i just wanted to make sure that point was clear as well. >> yes. the nexus phase speaks of the impact in terms of the need for affordable housing based upon not only the current conversion but also the future conversion of units from tic's to condominiums. so it's both a current and future impact. >> thank you. >> supervisor avalos? >> thank you, just a question for mayor's office housing director. follow up on the question that supervisor breed made about being able to

refinance and certainly with the equity that you have in your property after conversion refinancing is possible, but someone who is on ssi and mentions having difficulty finding work because of a disability does that person face hardship even refinancing a home? is that someone in your office with expertise would be easily able to accomplish? >> supervisor my answer earlier was spoken in generality about the tic's conversion and across the board. we looked at this particular case within the four correspondence -- corners of the ordinance and looking at the question whether the appeal rose to the level of upsetting

the nexus study per say which was what we are obligated to do under the ordinance. we looked at that issue and it did not rise to that level where her appeal had a basis under the study. >> i'm not sure that answered my question. will she be able to refinance was my question? >> i don't have the information with regard to her personal financial situation related to her income and assets and the existing loan on the term of the loan and the interest rate on the building per say. we looked at the question of the appeal as it related to the nexus study. >> does the mayor's of housing in anyway analyze or measure the difficulties that people who are very low income have in refinancing homes or people who

have disabilities in refinancing homes? >> we work with a variety of households across the city as it relates to trying to get refinancing. we did not look at this particular issue as it relates to this appeal. >> the bigger issues about the mayor's office on housing and how it's able to help folks in san francisco. the other question i have is i do see it really difficult to be able to uphold this appeal and but i wonder if there is any other services that the mayor's office of housing might have that support home owners that could be struggling with their property. last year we passed the voters passed propc which including the housing stabilization fund which provides resources or could

provide resources that the mayor's housing on design and wondering if you see any flexibility in your office hands to create a program to support people who are maybe on ssi to be able to do things to support their homes getting restored or getting energy efficiency or ways that they can alleviate some of the burdens on people who are very low income to making the property affordable? >> as part of prop c, one of the futures that we hope to implement in the future is housing preservation program that we talked to your office about as well as the voters during the lead up to the election. the mayor's office has a set of programs that related to home buyers to rehab

loans to other sources such as single family loans. at this time we don't have any programs to address this particular situation. we clearly could explore that in the future, but that at this time we don't have anything in place that would address this. >> i think it would be good, i understand that's the case. i think it would be good to be able to use this experience in a way that might inform future programs and services relative to people on disabilities and on fixed incomes and on the housing fund. i don't think there has been that in this program, i think it would help a lot of people in san francisco. >> supervisor kim? >> thank you. are we jumping the gun. my questions are for the city. >> if there are any other

questions, we have one more individual for public comment and then we will go to the city's presentation. sir, if you would like to make your presentation now. >> tom gilberte. bravo. for 400 units plus in south beach marina, the only way i got in was take the bathroom door off. no other unit in a different style can get my wheelchair in. we may get very territorial. we are lucky when we can find something. i believe initiative is called for. i would like to see the initiative have a wave. this is what we are trying to do. this is what she's trying to say. is economic, 10 percent

of people in wheelchairs work, 90 percent are unemployed. you lose your benefits. it's a disaster. you know, we can get it done here in san francisco. there should be an initiative, there should be an amendment. amendment makes things better. it's what we are after. let's get it done. >> thank you, next speaker. >> hello, my name is edmond jessie. i used to stay at 12 b sanchez. i know it was taken far out. i'm now the beginning to become an organizer instead of an activist. what we learned yesterday is that san francisco has in the city to the blight, which means from central valley