properties so by that we don't want to draw sweeping conclusions but those that are selected the results are as state. >> would it have been improbable to do a more statistically another thing i don't know when i see a establishment that's not meant to be representative could it have been representative. >> yes. it could have been representative with more data we selected one hundred properties initially. the records weren't available on the prior sale. however, because there are randomly selected they chachd

the market and the phenomenon of sales and post eviction we're not stating the specification as a categorical - >> you - the range was negative 278 or 4.8 million so you did the average was 1.5 million can you talk about how you got that number. >> oh, sure the difference in the profit amaze is simple the prior purchase price the last time it was purchased before the eviction and the price after the evictions for the building. and that's an important thing to point out. most of those buildings are multi tenants so, so a 10 unit buildings was purchased at the single price prior to the eviction and solid like

condominiums so we got the prices of each unit and that value tends to be much higher in aggregates >> so did you circulate an additional to the average property amount the mean. >> we can do that we provide that the high-end and the low end. >> why didn't you include owner expenses for improvements. >> we don't have that information. that would request getting permits from the records and the estimates would be expensive. so some of the money could be used for that purpose but we don't have the information >> i appreciate that thank you.

supervisor >> thank you very much mr. chairman and again through thirty this analysis we wanted to provide a snapshot. you know, it's not as extensive as it could be but i think it provides an idea of sort of what's happening out there and with respect to those one hundred properties 15 gives us a sense of the kind of profit from the properties that's being made points the budget analysis can provided additional information. i want to acknowledge we heard from the rent board thanks to the rent board for their assistance with respect to this legislation. i know they're happy to provide any information we think it needed. i also want to ask mr. gibner who had a response to the

question that was asked about tenants and sub tenants so mr. gibner >> john gibner. the rent ordinance currently defines the tenants that's the term that's used 80 so it's divided equally among tenants the tenant is by an oral agreement or sub tenants to come up a residential opt so it includes sub tenants that have been proved by landlord >> since a lease is technically required so if the sub tenant is not paying rent to the landlord they're paying is to the master tenant their included. okay. supervisor campos >> i'm going to turn it over to. i know there are a number of people who came out to speak on

this item. i know many are here i know that one of the individuals may have to leave >> ongoing thank you companionships we'll open this up for public comment when you have 30 seconds left you'll hear a soft bell and a harder billion when your time it up. i'll call the names and we'll start with (calling names) also i'll say if there's anyone because of a health or physical irrational or childcare issue if

you need special consideration please let the clerk know and we'll accommodate that >> go ahead. >> good afternoon, supervisors thanks for having me i go nearby i'll the director of the ma'am, project and that's the data project that housed by the san francisco housing unit. i'll submit those for public record. so we have a multiple ongoing prongs with the mapping project one is a survey we've been administering for the last year we've posted online, etc. and we've been collecting the data we're the only organization

that's collected relocation data and i'd like to present some of the finding so one hundred and 70 respondents that have erected >> what's the total. >> 1 hundred and 71. and significantly of those their rents has increased by $882 to $1,006 plus per month. so 20 percent have left san francisco altogether and their rents have significantly increased 47 percent of those how responded indicated making less than thirty grand a year

and 29.8 percent were disabled and 9 percent lgbt. that's the data i'd like to present it shows that marginal communities are being evicted and more privileged community their rents have increased significantly >> supervisor campos. >> a quick question. so only less than a majority are relocating what happens to the rest >> so all the many are relocating to the west bay and many are currently looking for housing and some people are living in cars and some homeless and your lived is altogether drake increased if you're looking for housing. your outreach for health care

and other things are effected >> thank you. >> supervisor kim. >> thank you so much could you give us the summary of all the numbers. thank you. i'm with san francisco - thank you for the prospective of reviewing the prospective cost of the inflation. it's the prospect not the past district to 90 percent of our residents can't afford housing under the standard criteria. to 90 percent we in question require some form of long-term subsidy no housing pace its way

for the public housing fatalities and infrastructure they don't pay. the big problem is the public goods under health and welfare and safety under the common law we have an authority way to deadly weapon with the goods that are dealing with the pricing we've neglected to do that justice detailed justice denied. i'll recommend to attach as a matter of public policy one is the underpinning of our general plan housing element that flexibility ration is building more high income housing will somehow filter do you think that's a midget composed at the

highest level and two the planning commission be directed to enforce the housing element as mandated it's refused to take the orders of the high court of appeals it's needed for the housing needs. this is not a new problem it's one we're collected and sustained. thank you >> thank you. next speaker (clapping.) and if i may note we have a board rule at the full board of supervisors in committee we can people not to clap or beau if you want to express support do a thump or thump down we want to make sure that all speakers with afforded the opportunity to

speak. >> (laughter). >> good afternoon my name is richard i'm a real estate attorney. born here in san francisco and graduated from golden gate law school. this is a poorly drafted legislation that will make landlords prius into charging new tenants. i can see tomorrow that represent will go up 5 to 10 percent based on this alone. the only clear beneficiary are the big downtown developers that are going to use this as an excuse to raise their rents. this is going to hurt mom and pop landlords and this extreme shift will make the city more

sews acceptable to the boon. more study is needed mr. rue is so information is completely useful without taking into consideration construction costs. for all we know all of those small samples that he's taken is didn't account for construction costs 0 could be millions and millions of dollars probably not but the data is useful without take into consideration. without regard to the proposed amendment it t if it was fair it should taking a look at the tenants means. a tenant if a tenant is a hedge fund manager or a doctor or lawyer we should take into account their means as well when weighing hardship. thank you >> thank you very much. next

speaker. next speaker. go ahead >> barbara i ran for office i'm enthusiastically delighted to be here. and i'm saying this as a san francisco landlady that will benefit economically if i fall on your face. i have 4 points. first in the political arena there's a political issue of the dividend between the have and have nots what you're doing that addresses closing the gap. secondly, you know, psychiatrist base that's an act of abuse to debrief people from food and

other things. third on a economic basis the st. louis puts out a philosophy money. economic activities improves with money is placed in the hands of those who are on the lower straight a we take a thousand dollars and give it to a homeless person and the money will be spent faster. and fourth point as a point of affordability it's true we're the largest global city in san francisco worldwide we're behind hong kong and the less affordable placing place to be in the world. i want to ask you consider the flight of the foster children that can't afford to be housed

in san francisco by the virtual there is no consideration given to that situation to make the housing affordable >> thank you. i've lived in mission for 40 years and renting most of my life and still renting as an old lady. i didn't realize how lucky we were being evicted in the 30s and 40s because it was more affordable. i meet more people ail the time who are being evicted. it's been heartbreaking and infoirt many of the families are being evicted and service workers who have taken to taking

care of others. as a newer i worry about people's health living are constant fear and stress we're all worried about this and it's not going good for the health. homelessness is already a problem in san francisco it will only become 0 worse. the staircase differences between rich and poor the martin luther king's are facing us evidence it's painful and please do something quickly. every week that goes by people are suffering a losing their homes >> thank you. next speaker and. >> i'm patricia caring man, i moved to san francisco in 1970.

i've been living at any current flat in the mission for 2 seven years. i have no idea what's going to happen to me in august i'm a senior i get a year and then i have to be out. i don't sleep at night. i have a had a right time eating because my sum is in a knotty have been having panic attacks. talking to others it's something that is good morning with all of us. the previous speaker talking about the ill effects of this it's true. i love this city when i first moved here i felt at home. i've been here ever since.

when i first moved her i lived added 16th and market i got my film developed at harvey milk store. i have never miss an election i've always participateed in the elections of the city. i hope i can stay here and i hope this is just the beginning because i know it's better than it was as far as the pay out goes it's not going to stop the problem. when you're trying to find housing they don't even have waiting lists anymore. i look at shopping carts i think that will be my next home

>> thank you. next speaker. >> good afternoon, supervisors i'm charley i didn't i've representing the san francisco's apartment association. we find this legislation problematic the first is the market rate for apartments changes everyday. to establish market rate and use that has a as a rate for two years is problematic and to have a market rate for the whole city is problematic and in the excelsior it's different. one of the other issues i want to talk about is hardship that came up before. i want to point out a fundamental difference between landlord and tenant hardship that's the consideration of assets. if the landlord is filing an petition the property is

considered if a tenant is nil i filing a hardship the tenants assets are not considered and then to help low income tenant to relocation we're asking this testing of the amendment. if the stated goal is for the higher location goal money needed then we ask for the testing. thank you >> thank you. next speaker. >> after that supervisors. i'm stephen vincent i've lived in san francisco since 1962 and been an artist and writer and publish i've made contributions to the city and the state. i've lived in any residence on

23 reading street for 23 years. the building was acquired and i was immediately threatened with the ellis act the owner said he was going to do some improvements and if i didn't move he inevitably said he'd blow me out of the water he knew nothing of my history. this should be addressed the only reason the ellis act is pled is for reasons to raise the rent and to a raise increase the value of the building. i think we're looking a major cultural rain train in this town. i'm not alone among afrtdz and teachers who are facing eviction

this is a major loss to the city. we've created the capital that makes the city attractive and it it harsh to realize that this will be flattened line manhattan where my friend can't live my friends have moved to east bay or los angeles. what's questioned for the good it's time to ask the human stock who live here and see what we can do to protect us >> thank you very much. next speaker. before i get to the next speaker i'll call more names. i apologize if i mispronounce

anyone's name (calling names) go ahead, sir >> i'm john i'm a thirty year plus resident of san francisco i'm a senior and a volunteer rights council. i've heard so many heartbreaking stories. i want to point out that the housing rights committee started the rent control and that was in 1979 we're back where we started from here we go again. i'd like to say that the evicting the most vulnerable part of our community is a mark of a civilization that's lost it's sense of cult. we needed to look at those

formulas and look at the results of what we do and that's my major point look at the outcome. if we are trying to preserve those people then do it. it fact is a culpability should be based on the number of balconies the real estate people are aware of and understand the value and that's the comparability can it should be >> thank you. next speaker. >> good afternoon. my name is a kathy. first of all, weld like to thank ace for the empowerment who work with the tenants so thank

supervisor campos and supervisor kim and supervisor mar and supervisor campos for claund this item. memoranda rent are around $3,400 a month and 2013 data collected by the anti eviction map project makes use of ellis increased 1 hundred and 76 percent in comparison with other years. everyone except the splarlts say they want people to stay in the city this will allow them to stay long-range we're in an emergency situation. form for a flipperer to have to face a payment of the subsidy for two years might give persons

because of whether or not to engage in harmful general welfare of the city. the feature of our time is the widening gap between the rich and the rest of us. this rent attempts to push back against the tide of the greed we salute >> i'm rosemary a second-generation san franciscan. any family has been evicted and we have no more to go and my question is: i grew up in san francisco i was not allowed to speak spanish so i learned english and landlord the pledge of allegiance and other people a good american and this is how i get treated there where are is

values. that is what hurts me not the money issue where am i supposed to go i don't drive my family is here. where do they want us to go change sometimes is go and i've lived many decades her in san francisco i've seen many changes. however, it wasn't to humiliate people and throw people out and make people feel like they're less of a person. this is my final thing which has it become a sin to be poor. thank you >> thank you. next speaker. >> hello, i'm sarah filling in for tom of the housing rights committee. first, i wanted to address the issue people bringing up mom and pop and the small landlord. we see almost no small landlord

using the ellis act. the vast majority have brought buildings and flipped them in the first 5 years. they're not even landlords. they don't keep buildings and rent them out but resell the building as soon as they get out the tenants the majority are buying much u up buildings with elderly it's a huge percent of splarlts. they have folks taking advantage of the will that that lets them make a quick buck off our community. so see i feel like we need to separate that minor minor exception the small landlord and be careful i see jeremy

michael's is the only building that the landlords own in san francisco they own lots of of buildings in south bay they immediately ellised that and this is true throughout the city. roadway relocation isn't enough and the money isn't enough but maybe in a few years the seniors can move into low income housing. we're subsidizing this greed when we have 80 put those people into affordable housing we pay for that we choose to make it so that folks had proper housing and instead we have housing for second larts >> supervisor kim. >> i was hoping someone