over one hundred thousand incidents and while current law didn't permit this activity there's confusion about the law and enforcement has been extremely difficult i was told by the department of building inspector optional saw 21 complaints i think everyone involved knows we need a better approach so today i'd like to have a discussion bans most of feedback from the community. a clear distinction within unacceptable activity and acceptable activity, and, secondly, the direct regulation of online hosting platforms and third real and strengthened enforcement and then fourth the collection of all taxes relevant

to this activity that is a source of new revenue for the city as well as enforcement itself. now our proposal the genesis of the legislation the underlying value of the legislation to address the city's affordability crisis how can we live in our city of 7 by 7 miles it addresses it in two receptors first of all, we know that the status quo of what we see with sharing housing is pushing san franciscans out of your city we've seen instances of landowner ellis act the full building for rental i want to agree with the city attorney those are situations that need to be pursued under the law. but on the other hand, i note we know there are xrirg tenant that

have entered into multiple units and they lease out other units for a bed people's 3 and breakfast those are not doing activity i that support that will establish an enforcement structure if you're using a shareable housing to allow housing to be used aren't year as vacation rentals or bed-and-breakfast i could be fined that's one of the portion. on the other hand, it's any prospective and i think it's shared by as follows that home sharing has allowed struggling residents to live in our expensive city whether it be seniors or students out of town or whether it be working families that are visiting

families whether workers traveling foyer they jobs and artists that have an extra that is a our legislation says loans you are a that time resident in san francisco and playing by the rules we'll allow a level of this it's. but permanent resident i've proposed we deny that as a san franciscan that has lived no our city for at least 89 most out of the year we selected that to coincide the time of a season what a student is away from the summer or a traif family. you'll likely hear from members of the public who want a 6 month time period or think that missouri one month is okay. we tried to balance the feedback. what's the rules. the major rules are 3 first everyone that engages will have

to register with the city so if there's any issues in an neighborhood we know how to address them. secondly, we would require that anyone engaged in this economic activity b.a. will have to pay their fill takes that will account for millions of additional dollars and that's a fundamental part of what we need to do if this activity is permitted in our city and thirdly, every permanent resident get lishlt insurance. there's one more rule that was suggested by landlord and tenants and included to protect rent 0 control. the idea there have been tenant that have made more in a particular month then owed to their landlord no tenant can make more than in a particular month in rent control not

undermining those laws we require that all apartment in 2 or more units be subject to regulation and if they've been found to be renting in a short term they'll be subject to penalties and also in a resident is no idea found in violation they're on a black list so that person has to come to compliance or subject to penalties and i'll mention that under our proposal every hosting platform will be required to notify the yourselves of applicable you city laws and hopefully, before the posting is allowed to collect and remit various hotel and transit occupancies. i'll talk about the planning staff analysis thank our

planning staff for their recommendations and start by saying i one hundred percent agree with the planning staff recommendation they need to be regulated to reduce the impacts on avenue and protect the neighborhoods. our cities regulations are no longer sufficient to address the technology if this industry remains our own regulated the department buildings the city will lose permanent housing the department thought to create an avenue for people to rent out their premises while balancing their concerns of neighborhood affordability i agree what the staff analysis and the good

activity we want to support as well as the other activity and not open the door to unat the end consequence. as we go through the 9 remedies i'll stay state i agree with the planning department they should be in charge of enforcement i appreciate all the thinking of the planning staff i agree with the idea if you post online without registering the registration number should be required to occupy the postings and grant the authority for the authority and increased penalties for aviators. now other recommendations that require more data from hosts and putting that on a stay map whether the holocaust rent should have the same 90 day

enforcement. i think those are interesting ideas i know there are diverse opinions i'm to hear the feedback from the public and planning commission. there's been a number of categories from strrldz i recently submitted a letter asking for your feedback on are you aware landowner permission for register to expedite the right for action or xutsz certain types of housing or address complaints dealing with nuisance. i have not made a collection in closing, i want to thank everyone for the many opinions we have on home sharing i expect it will be there be a difference in opinions i want to balance

those perspectives with the premise and the value we need to do an address and tackle our affordability crisis with that, i thank you. thank you. >> thank you supervisor chiu. so the proposed ordinance primarily modifies chapter 45 of administrative code to permit permanent takes inform rent short term up to 90 days single families could be rented out for a number of unlimited dazed. the host is present will not be subject to the 90 day limit and have an unlimited number of days it has requirement for the permanent resident to participate and some limited requirements for holocaust platforms including the short

term platforms remit city transit occupancy taxed the building inspection will be in charge and the enforcement is through the microphoadministrat review hearing and it added language to the work unit saying the use of a short time rental with the administrative code shall not alter the rental use it recommendations approval with enforcement the recommended modifications are place short term rental controls to the planning department will enforce the she remember rentals and modify the rentals to the

registry tracks the number of units and require my short time approach or company doorknob in san francisco talk about the number of days and report back to the city on a quarterly minimum and identify the units on the short term registry and the map and amend the mapping without first rernl with the city constituents a violation and amend the ordinance so require the registration number from a city run register to accompany the recommendy and provided for increased penalties for repeat aviators and subject them to the 90 day limit and limit single families homes to

the multiple units. this creates a legal host for those who want to rent on a short term basis while balancing the neighborhood character. as current drafted we find the ordinance is urban enforceable and this seeks to address that by tracking the number of properties presented. the ordinance shall be suktd to the 90 day limit and that single families homes or hovered units will allow anyone to operate a hotel without notification or conditions or permits this requires a conditional use authorization from the planning commission and some conversation in the department fourth recommendation that identifies on the property map if the

property is a short term rental to be clear every city issues them on the map to remodel our home all appear on pen we're recommending this property is listed on the property and the register map not identify the residents name and who stayed there only listed on the registry and thereby to be used as a short time rental we're recommending with an approval for people who want to rent obtain a short term basis, however, draft the department without their recommendation we believe that allowing short term rentals will come at the housing affordability of the housing

stock. that concludes my presentation. and i appreciate our tension >> so let's open up for public comment. >> we argued to organize a group a block of time so the affordable housing and housing stock have a block of time and commissioners i'm doug i represent san francisco for affordable housing and jobs. as you all know i'm a former planning commissioner api i've been sending you the facts we want you to consider. i'm sure you're aware of and sxhooup and i probably agree with that the proliferation of short term relents it effecting the affordability of housing in

san francisco which is why we collected over 4 thousand signatures that go on the ballot in 2015 but we decided to deter pitting that on the 2015 ballot so we can see if the protective process might be able to work quite honestly this piece of legislation doesn't do it x baits the problems while rezoning the entire city to that every permanent resident can rent out to tourists for 2 hundred and 75 days when they're not there and furthermore, the department said the ordinance didn't provide a meaningful metabolism without the registry with names so people in the

neighborhood can complaint like they do at the front desk which a hotel with names and some requirement for the holocaust platforms to coordinate with the city and let us u know how many days there's no way we can control the impacts furthermore, it's not drafted will. well by changing the indemnification of residential use to include residential use it causes all sorts of problems how you're going to be able to regulate this going forward. i you're going to look at the other issues the city of is a have an take into account how to look at the problems. we do applaud the departments

remedies on the enforcements one through 7 tdr a great step forward to if you're going to allow short term rentals number 890 days is too much financial incentive for people to rent out inform tourist and permanent residents and number 9 recommendations of 9 i don't think the registration allows for single-family homes to allow that they talk about two unit buildings there's confusion the planning department thinks maybe it does i urge you to top that question and it doesn't talk about the commercial insurance not requiring landowner permission and no collection of

back taxes over 50 millions from the hotel taxes that die over the years and didn't deal with the ada accomodation and the requirements that smab somebody has to meet. we urge you to disapprove the legislation and direct the department to go back and deal with short time rentals if we're going to allow them in the city and allow the language to implement the recommendations it is too important to pass this parolee drafted legislation thank you >> kahn vin san francisco clearing house other than being unenforceable they have drafted key affordability

characteristics of san francisco housing stock we're requesting the planning commission band the conversion to short term rentals of any sro or any residential hotel room currently you can't lease 13 thousand residential hotel rooms this ordinance will allow the leasing of those short time rentals. b m r it's excited to me the amount of time we've created an inclusionary program who's point to over below market rate rentals to be to the matthews rentals and finally the supervisor has urged we adapted in-law unit legal shuns in order

to produce below mandatory permanent housing that is rental controlled. it's legislation, however, would allow such units to become short term rentals to the matters heralds serve the populations that supervisor chiu championed when we pushed the legalization program. financial there's a lot of talk about affordability those 3 items must be done if we're to take that seriously and on the actress of affordability which is income every short term unit causes a hotel erica job i want to introduce ian lewis from local 2. thank you, commissioners from local hotel union i'm sharing with you a posting on the business times commercial listing sites this is a hotel

for sale at 23rd and vacenta a one-room bungalow the seller advertised takes in $6,000 a month in income that's a treat those short term rentals are to homes in san francisco we're facing our greatest housing crisis since our city burdened in 190 of this is one swoop green lights the short time rentals like this one and x baits the housing crisis at the worst possible moment no one is anymore effected than the hotel workers we welcome tourists into our city the hospitality is the biggest source what this of living jobs in our city when tourists don't stay in hotels

workers do work and tomorrow morning 4 hundred housekeepers will not be working in san francisco because tourists are staying in short time housing this shifts at the same time it is driving up housing. now i'm obligated the planning staff has brought a critical lens but you need to go further in the potentially dangerous sdolg practices we've seen in years. it the defining the way to the important definition in our code that of residential clearly we need more robust and rigorous tools we need tight constraint to protect affordable housing and put a spotlight on the

visitor patterns and the demographics of our city that the ordinance what provoke if ever a piece of legislation that calls for environmental review this is it i know you don't have the ultimate say but take 89 minimal time to understand the complex issues so our city know very well what it's getting into and the alternatives it has. thank you. >> okay opening for. if i call our name, please line up on the screen side of the room. we're limiting it to two minutes we want to hear from everyone if i find user repeating what ours

have said my align yours with mayor comments (calling names) >> i'm bob planet hold i opposition this legislation i shant should not be considering it is i think complete and ignores the fact as a public consumptions in the american disabilities act those home sharing companies violate the ada not everybody can access their communication services. a person that is blind tried to list a united couldn't. there's incapable software between the software for the blind it goes combrond that it didn't indicate whether the

units are assessable it's important for you the visitors beyond that you don't see anything in hear had here whether the sponsor or the planning staff or the city attorney did they do any questioning did this comply with the federal housing act is there a violation under the california sitters how it t the implementation it conforms but integration in the fact that the people with sdabldz and protected classes were not able to participate in this so many in this room have benefited

civil rights that effect the youth and lgbt community and many have benefited but noticing nobody has said what about the disabled why can't they be concluded and why about the constituency send it back >> thank you. next speaker. >> commissioners good to see i'm a native san franciscan that has been practicing in the hotel business and in that spirit hotel news now recognized trade in the hotel business asked me to write an article i'll share with you and regarding the legislation is it so seriously

flawed but this isn't about getting rid of alternative lodging companies or providers because that horse is out of the barn let's face it let's coral the horses to get the businesses to comply and legislate the fees and assure the residential districts and housing are not commercialized enroll. as a past person in the san francisco and board member of the traditional district we're all about stimulating tourism it enhances the tax from the hotel sector by over 2 med million dollars a year taxes have notary

republic not been collected $50 million of taxes not collected. additionally the alternative housing is not licensed not proper safety security and outcomes standards. as of a former redevelopment agency commissioner, i share i appreciate our service so i thinks your responsibility is to protect the interests of the san francisco >> sir, your time is up. >> thank you. thank you >> good afternoon commissioners my name is george. i'm representing the midtown

homeowners association and i am against david carmen chu's legislation we feel our neighborhood is 18 to nine hundred homes are rh1 was founded in 1950 as a residential one unit. what happens is we take care of our neighborhood through our homeowners association and we feel that this completely vicinities and destroys our homeowners association it overrides our cc&rs. i think the biggest problem is we all moving move through to have a commercial neighborhood and following it we now what's happening is our neighborhood

going to become commercialized this causes concern among the neighborhood. we really building in terry of our neighborhood and feel it's a situation where if it becomes commercialized we could not control what happens to the traffic, tenant issues, the quality of life in our neighborhood. i ask you to strongly to not support in legislation and i want to thank you very much for listening. thank you. >> thank you. as the next gentleman approaches the podium i'll call for names and commissionepr