this is a complex issue we need to get the policy details as right as we can sequoa and this is why my office spent over two years to research and refine and work and hear from an incredible variety of stakeholders sequoa unlike a ballot initiative it allows to incorporate the comments from the public and i will talk about the amendments we've made several amendments i hope to be made in committee and additional conversations to be had i have said to everyone i continue to work with everyone as we try to move forward and crafted the best solution around home sharing there are significant differences in prospective i've tried to do with the legislation is balance the perspectives with the underlying affordability crisis

i will mention from the timeline of working on this legislation we've introduced it about 6 months ago in the spring i over the course of the summer the planning staff has analyzed this before their recommendations to move it forward with recommendations and here we are in the fall we can agree on the status quo is not working we need a regulatey fraction for the so-called home sharing sequoa i want everyone to know that the genius of our legislation the underlying valuation is how we address affordable housing and the context of the affordability crisis we're in right now given the new phenomena involving home sharing there are two aspects

that it addresses to really insure we're shutting down activity that threatens access to affordable housing and assisting hopefully thousands of san franciscans struggling to survive and afford to live in our city two halves to our legislation the first addresses the fact right now there are many practitioners of short-term rentals that are pushing san franciscans out of our city i know of landlords that have vks the rentals and they have entered into multiple leases and rent one unit and living into the other one as bed-and-breakfast it will organ a structure if you're using my

home sharing platform like a b b to be used around the clock as full-time bed-and-breakfast they'll face one thousand dollars a day fines and pro-active enforcement on the other hand, we've heard he r and i think everyone in the room has heard from 0 thousand thousand of san franciscans who are struggling seniors on a fixed income and student away from the sum and another wanting to visit their families and workers and artists our legislation says if you are a permanent san franciscan you should be allowed to gadget in a limit format of activity by permanent you need to live in the city i prove you

live here 9 months you thought u out of the year for families away r away and travrlz who are out of the town sequoa i'll tell you we've heard from home sharing that .6 months or more and landlords that thought another period of time was good what this legislation requires for the first time anyone engaged in home sharing needs to recommendation with the city so if there's quality of life issues you need to pay our taxes it's been estimate by some the city has lost tens of millions of dollars you'll need liability insurance we don't want this to

undermine the rent control laws my tenant can't persist more than rent control sequoa we were at the planning commission in early august and the planning commission i want to thank director ram and commissioners for not only our analysis of the legislation but for making recommendations we did at the beginning of this month we introduced legislation that included the recommendations out of planning commission they include the regulation to require the resident to register with the city and comply with the rules we've laid occult here we've include many provocations to strengthen enforcement from two agrees into one to remove the responsibility to the planning department if the department of department of building inspection sequoa our new amendments includes the

penalties doubling fines for second offers and tripling fines for third offices required the regulation will have the numbers in online posting for online documents we've heard loudly and clearly about how we don't want to cancel implies so we've got alleged policies to submit the affordable housing for the rental activity bmr units in the inclusionary affordable housing programming as well as single room occupancy we've heard about building code issues we've specifically said if you have

any outstanding building electrical, plunging are mechanic, fire, health or housing e.r. violations any notice of violations for the notice of boiment access and deist orders you'll be denied sequoa i want to ask we make additional amendments to our legislation today so first continue to strengthen enforcement to require the posting of online adds without registration with a violation subject to penalty and to have a hosting platform for the violations we've also continued to hear from neighborhood associations and neighborhood activists we need to look at new neighborhood nuance u nuisance so we'll ask for amendments if

you've been provided is a registration with the city and somehow you subsequentially violate the police health or noise or ordinances your registration could be scald 80 so clarify only a permanent resident that has we want to clarify only a permanent resident can have one primary retains and one per unit sequoa i understand there recent another issues raised i look forward to the conversation and colleagues hearing our issues around for example, whether there ought to be a level of notification to property owners if there's a tenant involved whether or not the planning department has enough resources to gave me in proactive enforcement i know there are issues around insurance and others the point of today's

hearing to continue vet and hear all the perspectives and at the end of the day i hope to move forward building consensus around something that is far better than the status quo i know there are perspectives in the room but we need to do in the board chamber in the past we've tabled difficult topics and bring those forward and take the ideas and incorporate them sfwho the protective thank you, colleagues. i look forward to our dialog >> thank you president chiu sequoa i also want i know this has been an incredibly contentious issue i learned with with when president chiu took this on i knew he would be in for a protective ride poem have

used this spanning the entire supreme it's an important issue this is a reality facing our city in terms of the existence of short time rentals not a - no one is going to put the jenny back in the bottle the reality is in the world the current situation it is technically illegal under the planning code and happening all over the city and at some want it becomes a farce to say this the illegal and it's going to keep going under the radar i want to thank president chiu for taking the issue on its one of the issues no matter what you do there are people going to disagree with this and that and there's no way

to craft this into to have a broad consensus but make the best policy possible there are a number of the pieces of this legislation i'll controvertible with there are few issues i have issues with and you know, i building it will require amendments and i'm looking forward to the discussion i want to outline a few of the issues sequoa one it the issue of insurance sequoa and i know there are $150,000 and discussion whether or not that number is too low i personally think it's too low i understand that so long as i know that are currently not existing a policy to purchase to satisfy this

requirement the assumption is that the insurance market will meet the demand and interested in the home sharing she ever see are doing perhaps purchasing larger umbrella policies sequoa another issue has to do with the ability of loordz to know whether or not the units are being rent out i have no entire in having the city rewrite the leases for the tenant they are what they are they sub let or not mined the overall majority contain that and the city should not be stepping in and rewriting the leases, however, landowner

should know about the leases and there's a good argument about notification of the landowner whether or not it has the provision or some kind of notice to the landowner in terms of the are short-term rentals and like to have a discussion about the i guess the fee that's paid every year in terms of the registration of the short term rentals it's too low i want to assure the planning department has to be able to enforce the program one of the worse case scenario is to go through the process and not have the plaintiff to carry out the mandate so those are a few issues i'm interested i look

forward to a discussion i don't want to say anything microorganism with that, supervisor kim. >> thank you chair wiener sequoa i want to thank you supervisor david chiu for this complex issue when i first heard of air b and b i couldn't fathom the regulations of the new legislation it was first kind of a great way to visit other cities and who wants to make additional revenue in the city that is expensive i'm dissolving into the multiple layers i definitely support recollecting this activity it is something that has been happening to a great step up to the plate in

san francisco and will certainly continue on we should grapple it as a city and make sure it's something that works for our neighborhoods and landowners as well sequoa kind of reviewing the planning commission and hearing from the multiple stakeholders i've identified 12 to 13 issuance that i think have questions on or have not come to a position on the way i feel sequoa i'll say one i'm disappointed it the short term vacation rental sites have not collected tax this is not something that needs to be implemented before the legislation today they don't need to wait for the board of supervisors to pass the legislation they should do it now i know that i hope that the host sites start committing to

doing that sequoa a number of different things i believe in a property owner i want to hear about a thirty day notification how it works for other types of predicaments the percentage i guess of responses that we get is this the right way to invite landlord-tenant and interested in the hosted vs. non-hosted 90 days is a good implementation on the summer if you're a student a vacation a sabato california if you like to host you can do is 7 nights once a month and get the

the amount that the code enforcement will be able to handle that we should have hotel tax i'm not sure you have to go to the voters that's a question for the city attorney whether we can set aside tax for the city improvement john gibner, deputy city attorney is saying no, but we have to fund and have a discussion on how we will be able to fined this the legislation only works if we enforce the policy we need to know where the dollars are coming from i want to figure out that in advance i want to make sure the planning department can have a robust team like the

quadrants, please plus someone to oversee the budget sequoa the final issue i'll bring up there's a number of other issues but the concept is standing sequoa in terms of who can complain ii not to know who they would go to and who can file the complaint and that kind of questions the beginning of some of the questions i have i want to say i think we've made headway in the legislation before us a couple months ago i

couldn't see how to regulate this but has negative consequences the top one being people if the unit that take the rooms off the market with the housing is expensive in california i've met residents that have been ellis act evicted and they rented out their units and that is the type of activity we need to regulate and have the funding to enforce it a a regulation the city can enforce thank you. >> thank you supervisor kim sequoa supervisor cohen. >> thank you very much good afternoon, everyone this is a very important policy discussion sequoa i have a set of concerns i'm going to briefly touch on they were outlined from the previous speaker i have questions about the dbi and the

code issue as a department they've had i've done a lot of work with them over the enforcement and i do question the capacity that they my potentially have on the enforcement arm of the legislation should this legislation be housed in this particular department i'd like to see exactly our thinking and i don't have a background in insurance so i will be interested in our ideas what is an acceptable insurance level i've done my due diligence and i want to see exactly as suggested the insurance people should be carrying another concern is data collection how much is too much

on the age of online life as well as transparency one thing i'm sensitive to say representing the southeast neighborhood is people olsen lee presence how much of their personal data if they're a host or guest would be shared in a public domain like a regulatory address sequoa the registration fee how do we settle on 75 why not 50 i think the proposal is 75 i'm curious to know where and how this number was determined and d will it be enough to satisfy the planning that the full time positions their regulating with the legislation sequoa i know one thing is interesting also i want to point out we're having a discussion

amongst during a time when there is a housing crisis and i want to make sure we said there are both parties effected by this piece of legislation with the ellis act and evicted and people that are struggling to stay in their homes and you're going this as a way to make extra cash people from 9 across the city tyler compelling reasons on both sides one thing is universal there's a need for a piece of legislation so thank you david chiu for bringing this to us. >> thank you very much president chiu. >> one thing i'll suggest colleagues you've raised a number of issues we have the director of planning i can you and your staff have pit in a lot

of work and i understand that there are representatives from air b and b i've heard from colleagues a they might very specific questions around insurance and taxation why that hadn't been collected i tlbls a representative from air b and b and other platforms but irrational questions we may do that or up to the committee for public comment. >> i'll suggest we hear from planning and if air b and b and other planners i'd like to hear from them. >> director ram. >> thank you, john ram from the planning department just to you know scott sanchez the zoning administrator and over the enforcement and christen the

manager of the code enforcement program and audrey has done a lot of research in what other cities have done i want to thank president chiu and for working closely with the department and commission is this is a complicated issue sequoa i think there's basic agreement the planning commission meeting was held on august 7th this is primarily to set a path for making this activity legal in a reasonable way for people to share their homes and aiding the issue of the not having their housing taken off the housing u housing authority this balance is the right thing to do sequoa the commission believes it is time to update the law to allow for accomodation sequoa i also

think that our best guess based on the research there are about 5 thousand units in the city that are being advertise is and it's difficult to know how many of those are unit not lived in on a if not for the truth of the matter asserted basis the primary complaints 2, 3, 4 from the neighbors are from the units not a if not for the truth of the matter asserted home and that's what we respond to unit off the market that appear to be off the market as a full-time residence i want to thank the supervisor and incorporating the recommendations you've gone over the hosted posted registration number requiring the units can, only offered by the permanent resident and having a registry i'll talk about the private e

privacy issue there's miss consumptions and the issue of taxation and the insurance sequoa the issue of single-family units we recommended it be the planning department since it is a land use issue i totally thank the supervisors for recognizing the demands on our time and the resource issues i'm happy to talk about that as well sequoa i'll say there are 3 other issues worthy of your discussion one is on how we address the issue of the number of days we clearly agree that the most important way to talk about a short term unit held off the market assail addressing the number of days rented sequoa the planning commission recommended that the host actually reports this on an annual basis after

the fact basis the host says here the number of days we'll rent and the second thing is the dedicated enforcement staff a higher 2350e would be appropriate but we concur there's a disincentive if it becomes too high to register another is the fine rather than having it come from the general fund for consideration to move forward sequoa on the issue of hosted vs. non-hosted the commission recommended the limits apply to both we think first of all, it makes it easier for us to enforce but we royals it was related to the issue of privacy because essentially we'll be trying to find out how