be? i know that you can use that to pay towards your condominium conversion bypass fee? >> john from the city attorneys office. maybe i can address some of the questions, because this is a 3-unit condominium subdivision, it's not one of the maps. the final map approval is granted administratively by the count is is you surveyor. it's when the fee is made when they qualified for deferral. once that map is approved, then it can be reported at the county recorders office and that officially makes it a condominium in legal terms. there is then sort of

transactional things. this is lined up in advance with a title company and a mortgage company. it's really up to the property owners. oftentimes, there is a transition very quickly when you become an official condominium after it's recorded to change the mortgage product that you have from a sort of a joint mortgage with all the tic owners to individual mortgages that each condominium owner has. it's up to the property owners to go figure out that process and to line it up and see how quickly they can do it. but, within a short period of time you will be in a situation where you can arguably have a new individual mortgage at a lower rate on a higher value piece of property.

>> thank you. my next question is, is there, i know there are situations where maybe not all owners agree to condominium conversion maybe because they don't want to pay the fee but there are other owners who have other greater incentives to sell. is there anything that mandates that the owner itself must pay the $8,000 fee or is this a payment per unit but can be divided differently among unit owners? >> supervisor, that's correct. the fee is calculated on a per unit basis but applicable to the building. there is no -- requirement for the owners to pay the fee. the owners can decide amongst themselves how to pay the fee. they can even

structure it as a loan to maybe one owner who couldn't afford the fee at the time or until a far future date by making it part of the deny knxv -- making it part of the home owners from the loan of the hoa to the individual when that individual sold their unit. there are a lot of options potentially among owners that the legislation doesn't speak to. >> thank you, in your memo you related that you have done a quick survey of the property. what do you estimate it's current value -- at? >> we did have a quick turned to do the analysis. i later checked the assessor's records and the value was estimated over $1.9 million. i don't have a number for what a per unit

value would be once it's converted into condominium, but maybe dpw has more information on that. >> thank you. i think the larger requests -- question for me is what sort of services or counseling do we provide for middle income or low income home owners like this and i'm really sympathetic to this homeowner as to a fee waiver and to examine what resources the city has in terms of home ownership that may have enough means to get there may be through the help of family and friends and quite challenging to sustain that home ownership. i know that several of us would like to learn more and perhaps that will be a later discussion. my question, i

would like to go back to dpw. so president chiu brought this up, this is also brought up to our office as well which is on the history of the property itself. and we actually did go to the assessor recorders office there is an ellis act eviction on file in 2005. i don't want to go into detail for what that means, but i have questions about the overall process. what was the process that dpw in planning thatten insures that units applying for this are available? >> city and county is survey or. we have a standard referral letter that ask if there has

been evictions and if there have if they can give us the details. the rent board says they have there have been evictions they can give us that information. >> you are aware of that history? >> yes. >> great. i think some of us want to know there was a process in place to ensure the bypass that we wanted to go through are an allowable under our ordinances. >> we get all eviction information after 2000 from the rent board. >> after 2000. okay. thank you very much. >> if i can just follow up on that. the question i asked about supervisor kim was the impact if we have records from the assessor's office from the

2004-2005 process, can you a pine us as to the eligibility of this? >> it was after that. it it was date after the ellis act. this was in november of 2004. it was before the date that that legislation affected it. >> okay. >> and then one other follow up to also supervisor kim's question and to mayor's office in housing. are there programs that could assist rather than granting a fee deferral in this circumstance for you to help this particular appellant with the $8,000 circumstance that she has either with a loan or some sort of dispensation with your office with the prop c funds that you have and programs that could assist her

here rather than what i think that many are concerned about that undermining this legislation? >> mr. supervisor, the mayor's office of housing currently doesn't have a program that provides this assistance. in terms of our single family programs we have provided loans for initial first time home buyers. we have provided rehab loans for low income residents. we don't have a current program to provide the payment of fees due to the city at this point. this is a voluntary fee. there is a benefit being conferred to the appellant and we don't have a program for this at this

time. >> thank you very much. >> supervisor avalos? >> thank you, mr. president. earlier you said that the present value of the property as you assessed it is estimated to be $1.9 million? >> that was based on the assessor's record for the 3-unit building. >> do you know how much the building was bought for when it was bought? >> i don't have that information readily available, supervisor? >> okay. but presumably, all things being equal, if you condominium convert, that it would be easier to refinance a property once it's condominium converted prior to that, right? so presumably by an allowing

them to condominium convert that it was before it was converted? >> if you are not going to sell the condominium, one of the financial benefits of this process is to refinance for the period of ownership that banks look at as less risky and at some point in time you resell your unit on your own without consultation with your home owners for a clear value. >> in terms of the amount of fee that we are talking about in a $2 million property, what is the amount that folks are asked to pay. too amount of the fee is $24,000. there are other

fees required by the city in terms of the condominium conversion in terms of the application fee. you may have to hire, there is a survey fee and you may have to get your property up to code in order to complete the process. >> i see. but the condominium conversion fee is $24,000 for the 1.9 million? okay. thank you. >> a few questions for mr. lee. actually a follow up on some comments that you made. first, you had noted and i think your intention was probably to show that there are some financial options for this applicant. you noted she had the option of a fee deferral and received a 60 percent reduction in the condominium bypass fee. in terms of the fee, i think it's important that is not in my mind any kind of a significant

benefit. maybe it gives you a 9 months delay, for some people it can be significant in terms of putting money together. but i think this is important to acknowledge that this is not helpful. this is probably a brief delay. the 60 percent reduction, may sound like wow, she got a 60 percent reduction. that's because under the ordinance this building has been in the lottery for a number of years and the reduction happens. am i right about that? >> you are correct. actually all the things that you mentioned in terms of how the fee was set and the question about the deferral, those are all from the ordinance. they are not administrative rules from the mayor's office of housing. they are all from the

ordinance. >> right. there was a reason for it because it had been in the lottery for some time and would have prevailed had this legislation not gone into effect. you also referred to as a voluntary fee. i think it's important to put that into context. the legislation supervisor federal -- ferrel and i introduced, you can go to the bypass and stay in the lottery. and they offered the option for those who can not afford the fee to stay in the lottery and pay the fee. but your option of not participating in the bypass is getting put in a 10-year

moratorium and go back in the lottery under different rules that existed at the time you purchased the tic. did i state that correctly? >> supervisor, you did characterize it correctly. and again, the appellant that is option both for this year and next year to reap the expedited process. that's what's in the current ordinance. >> and the option if you don't do it, if you don't spin the bypass you get put in the 10-year moratorium? thank you. >> supervisor yee? >> it's been mentioned by several supervisors that there is a possibility that the mayor's office could be helpful in these types of situations in

regards to making available some funding that can help with the fees. and there is a response that as of now, we don't have such a program, is that correct? >> supervisor, that's correct. >> so, the question i have then is if the mayor's office were to go in that direction, to want to implement such a program, how long would it take to do that? >> supervisor, it's true that our programs aren't constructed particularly for this case. it's a very specialized case around what is a voluntary

albeit maybe necessary action for the tic owner to convert. most of our funding is targeted for first time home buyers or first home buyers at risk of losing their homes. that's why the mayor's office of housing has applied our current funding. i don't think we have a program at this time and we want to have additional conversations with board members to talk about what programs would like like and other tradeoffs would involve to supplement or subsidize tic owners fees and with programs that we support through this office. >> i appreciate your answer that you don't have the program, but just because i'm relatively new to this process and i'm trying to get a better understanding that if you are talking to supervisors and if the mayor's office would be

willing to do this, would it take 10 years, 5 years, 2 years, 1 year? what is it? i just don't know. >> i would say, we are outside the bounds of the budget process. normally a new program creation would happen through budget process if we had existing resources that we could redirect from other programs and that was the direction of the board i think we can implement prior to the next year's budget. it's really for the board to determine how quickly they would want us to implement. our experience so far with prop c it's taken us 6-9 months to roll out the new programming. >> thank you for your answer. if it were going with the speed that's 6-9 months if and there

is a lot of if's here, if this program were to support people like the appellant, then it wouldn't be too late for this particular individual to wait for that time because did you say that they have another year in this program to do the conversion? this year and next year? >> john from the city attorneys office. i don't know the exact circumstances of this building, but the way the expedited conversion process if they can set up, if they convert this year they can take advantage of the conversion program that begins on april 15th and goes for about 9 months. i believe they can also take advantage of any of the subsequent years of

the expedited conversions process as long as they remain eligible. the entire program extends for 8 or 9 years. if they didn't choose to convert this year, they can convert through this process paying the fee in subsequent years. >> thank you. >> supervisor campos. thank you, just a quick questions, just reading the memo that we have in the packet from the mayor's office of housing. so you said earlier this property was the total value of the property is about $1.9 million. it says here the property was bought in 2006 at $645,000 is that correct? >> because of the quick turn around, supervisor's analysis, we did a quick review of what was on zillow at the time that

$645,000 was the last sale of the one of the units in 2006. we looked at the assessors record with the property value is $1.9 million. it's not necessarily supervisors, i think the memo and third that there was a large jump in appreciation between $645,000 and $1.8 million price. >> do we know what was paid for and for the units? please step up to the mic. >> yes, zillow only list my unit value. we came into the building after the other person. the entire building was

about $1.8 million. >> what was paid for? >> yeah. >> okay. all right. thank you. >> can i say one more thing also? our building has already been, the approval has already been granted neeng meaning the review from the board has already happened where the history prior years it's. >> colleagues, any final question. i had one final question around the ellis impact act. if the eviction occurred during the conversion, it would be pre -- have you heard anything on that? the ellis

act eviction doesn't have any ability to convert. i want to understand that a little bit better. >> john from the city attorneys office. the ellis act primarily comes into play with this current ordinance in two different ways because there is two different kinds of buildings that can't take advantage of the expedited conversion process. one trigger date is november 16, 2004. if a property owner who is currently trying to convert actually evicted somebody through ellis actor other eviction proceedings and served the tenant on or after november 16, 2004, they can't take advantage

of the expedited conversion process. ellis act would come into play. the other situation is the pes skin ordinance and that has a different trigger date. that doesn't look at the current owner. it looks at the building history. if you as the current owner or prior owner it affects the building. that is the property owner serving the tenant with the eviction notice, that trigger dates in may 1, 2005. and those again could be ellis act evictions or other kinds of evictions. so those items are considered and that's part of the information that is forwarded to the department of public works to the rent board. >> thank you. i had a question.

if it's a case, what date in 2004 was it? >> november 16, 2004. >> and through pass skin's legislation in 2005. why do we look at eviction history from 2000 on wards? >> jonelle al ner from the city attorneys office. i don't remember now from those years that those pieces of legislation were created but i think out of an abundance of caution wanted a longer history as it pertained to a particular building to catch potential evictions. so as our supervisor chiu mentioned there are other provisions in the subdivision code that do apply to

condominium. so there is sort of a question that is out there which is was this building, did this building go through an eviction process to clear it out strictly for purposes of a condominium. so that is part of the history. the experience that the city has had is when they receive applications from property owners in most situations, these property owners have bought from a prior owner who was the one that did the evictions. so when they are asked about any eviction history that they were involved in, the typical response was that information was not available because it was something the prior owner had done and it is considered in the application process. >> because i'm not familiar with the ordinance regarding the date of the 16. is it the date of the eviction, what is the actual black line rule?

>> give me a second. i have to look it up. >> just related to that, i was wondering what the controlling date is in terms of the ordinances is. i think supervisor kim was asking was it when the tenant moves out? >> no. so eviction is defined in subdivisions code 19.2. as an issuance note pursuant to code provisions. we discussed this with the rent board and dpw and that particular notice that this refers to is when the property owner is required

bylaw to serve particularly to ellis act evictions they need to serve on the tenant in the building the notice to terminate which is also called the notice to quit to get out of the rental business. bylaw, once that notice is filed, that person has 10 days, they have to go to the rent board and give notice. the notice of this, the issuance of this notice is unrelated to when the tenant moves out. in many cases when the tenant is eligible ora loud to stay in the unit for additional a year beyond that, but the notice, we look at when the notice was first served

upon the tenant rather than when the tenant actually leaves the unit. is that your interpretation or is that exactly how it's written into the ordinance? because i mean, the eviction was recorded in 2005. the notice was given on november 4th of 2004. it's only a couple of days before when the ordinance going into effect. so does it specifically outline that that is the point at which we decide whether the eviction pertains to condominium conversion or not? >> john from the city attorneys office. i guess while technically there might be some ability to interpret this

language this notice to the board when the tenant is given notice to vacate. it is true in this particular case, these notices were served probably within days of the november 16th, 2004, cutoff. i believe there is a circulation where one of the tenants was elderly and continued to reside for a year beyond that time. but this refers to the issuance of the notice. i will say i think as i recall because i worked on this back in 2004, before it was adopted. i think the november 16th date was a day where the piece of legislation was being heard at the board of supervisors and the amendment

was made and to give everyone notice they created that date whiches the hearing date which was the land use committee or full board. >> i think it's important to have some clarity if this is an interpretation of that ordinance and that is date that we choose. there is a number of buildings i'm sure that we are considering for the bypass that may or may not interpret this ordinance be eligible for condominium conversion bypass. i have a lot of questions particularly if it's somewhat clear that they quickly tried to give notice of eviction before the november 16, 2004, date. whether we should be an allowing this sort of bypass for those types of actions. i think it's separate from the appeal before us today. but i think it raises a question