sites that will market themselves to essentially other there will be a particular type of the traveler from a country and sites offered in various languages this is challenging because we will not necessarily know the address of the property we don't have any way to shift all of the hosting platforms. >> thank you and i apologize because this is a small piece of the legislation and there's several versions if we finally include having the hosting platform registration that they'll operator in the program and make sure you know there's going to encourage their users to use registration number we're not asking the platforms

to - i guess having a list of registered hosting platforms that the planning department will understand is you don't understand i don't think we're not asking for information they'll participate in the legislation so all the other sites not on the list we know those liz are not legal we'll enforce against them. >> deputy city attorney the current version pending before the board is no the requirement on hosting platforms requirement. >> so i guessed i'll ask the authors or the author sorry. >> actually, if i could consist that i have circulated amendments on the part of hosts on the number of days their engaged in and another aspect you said that the hosting

platforms are two things not reporting days. >> what? >> there's no registry for hosting platforms the registry is for the hosts the residents engaging in their activities with the owner unit no registry for the hosting platform. >> every host who is registered will have to take the registration number and attach it to the advertising on their site and. >> i think so it would be helpful to have the list of universal hosting agents to report to planning we don't have my question it didn't makes sense to have this request i imagine it's easier for the enforcement side if they know which vitals are coordinating so

if we find one site they're not working with the city we can go after those sites not working with the city so that's just starting a conversation. >> okay. so colleagues i know that supervisor chiu has submitted all the times as described at the beginning and distributed those amendments in addition i've proposed two small amendments a tweak to one i'll read orally and supervisor cohen do you have an amendment as well i can't recall. >> yes. i know it's been a long day i believe the attorney is drafting that.

>> we can do it as an oral. >> no, i've not been draftin but as a oral amendment the action you give us is sufficient to draft the language that's precise. >> supervisor wiener i can do that. >> so why not restate our oral amendments and doing to that one first. >> okay one minute. >> if you want we can defer it. >> why not take president chiu's proposed naements amendments first. >> thank you, everyone who is here at the moment and has been part of this is now the third major hearing on this matter and as well as everyone a that's been working with any office close to several years colleagues thank you for your patience and your amendments legislation always gets stronger

through the public process as members of the public and the stakeholders and colleagues propose ways to strengthen it i've circulated a number of amendments that the planning department and dbi and the city of attorney's office have offend i want to highlight a couple of key amendments that address some of the concerns around enforcement first and foremost i have promoted language that requires the reporting of the number of days of short term stays to the planning department this is we've been goinglack and white how much to do this you i propose we do this once a year it be recorded every year on adjoin first, the number of days that are residential unit or portion has been represented as a short-term rental residential rental we have amendments to direct the

planning department to receive any civil or administrative native penalties for out of spirit to be pro-active in the enforcement and not be stimuli any idea by a lack of resources and to address as we engage in this regulatory program will be clanks and improvements to make the protective language i've submitted will require annual reporting to the board of supervisors every year of the experience of the planning department had he their administration and enforcement of our program as well as recommendations regarding proposed amendments to chapter four 1 a to help address any diverse effects of short-term rentals as we learn what we're doing the current status quo is broken and i certainly building and

hopefully colleagues you'll agree this is a legislation that addresses the situation a but in case this didn't get done make sure the departments have the regular opportunity to connect in with the board and it's far spoiler to a ballot approach we'll not be able to make the changes to regulate those if are they're passed at the ballot so colleagues, i hope i support those i know of supervisor cohen's amendments and supervisor wiener i'm supportive of the insurance and the departments have the research they need and addressing the life safety issues with the supervisor cohen noticeed. >> can you have a motion to

adapt president chiu's duped amendment we'll take that without objection. okay. the amendments are adapted supervisor cohen. >> thank you very much the amendments especially i'm prototyping they post a notice inside their unit that details the location of fire extinguishers in the unit and inuding r where fire exits and he fire alarms. >> that's an oral amendment if adapted written by the city attorney's office i'll take that motion we'll take that without objection. go that motion is that amenment is adapted. >> thank you i have two amendments which i distributed the first is indicating win 6 months of the date of the ordinance after

holding a dually nose with the planning commission the corral is see and the second one increasing the insurance required to $500,000 and specifically covering the both excuse me. the landlord and the other tenants there are is one tweak to the language which i distributed adding in the second to the last line after it says name the additional insurance and shall provide the coverage i have this in writing i'll give it to the clerk and city attorney i move we adapt those two amendments colleagues any objection to the amendments supervisor cowen and

we'll take that without objection. those are adapted any additional amendments supervisor kim. >> the only other amendment i want to add within our code i wanted to explicitly make it clear the dignifies of the concluding 0 home sharing either state or local the rehab construction an amendment that i talked about with the city attorney's office and i know currently if you live in public housing or if you live in affordable housing your prohibited from subletting already so i know it is within our code but but purpose of putting it into the legislation is one the protective is pushed and publicized members of the public won't be confused we're also legalizing it for

affordable housing unit that wouldn't be chained but merely for notice purposes doovpt marilyn if i ska can add a clarifying question you did mention when you first said affordable housing but housing for acquisitions i think you said rehab i want to clarify rehab you could be catching like and fema earthquake grant are you talking about housing designated as affordable housing. >> one hundred percent affordable this is not for affordable like under the mayor's office of housing and supervisor cohen. >> thank you very much

supervisor kim so you're talking about section 8 voucher holders. >> yeah. it is already prohibit by federal law foyer public housing section 8 vouchers but in the legislation has been publicized and it's not legalized this activity i don't want confusion amongst tenants living in public housing n and are one hundred percent affordable housing we've not legalized it for them we're not changing the codes or realize it's more for notice and educational purposes than anything it's substantive. >> thank you so this is the motion city of attorney's office - >> actually i'm not sure supervisor kim can you be specific about the language.

>> i might ask the city attorney to specify how that language will look. >> deputy city attorney marilyn as supervisor kim cascaded indicated the ordinance includes the general language that states this legislation will not legalize subletting for example, things like any program under our inclusionary program so to legislation will not legalize that as i understand you want to make the language clear that the money to be affordable from sfvl is preclude from engaging with a short-term rental. >> i'm fin with that. >> supervisor kim as amended as

described we'll take that without objection. colleagues any additional amendments to item 3 human resources okay. so no additional amendments are being promoted today president chiu i see our name on the roster. >> i want to thank the colleagues for their hard work and thinking and given the work that's everyone's done i hope you can move this out to the full board with recommendation i think we have to take a major step forward and i also want to thank the planning department and the department of building inspection and our city attorney that's been working on this a year and a half thank you colleagues let's move this out to the full board a week from tuesday. >> okay. so colleagues then supervisor kim. >> are you going to make the

motion. >> anyone can make the motion. >> why don't we - supervisor cohen would you like to make a motion just put it out. >> i'd like to make a motion to move this out of committee with a with a positive recommendation and move item 3 to the full board with with a positive recommendation heard a week from tomorrow. >> supervisor kim. >> i will be happy to vote this out of committee unanimously if we do it with a positive recommendation i was going to make some closing comments but i said the direction of islamic so i'm fin with supporting this without unanimous

recommendations. >> president chiu did did i have feedback and i hope i ask for you to consider it out with a with a positive recommendation if you're able to as some indication we've done work that move forward i understand supervisor kim has additional concerns we'll likely are a have a conversation on at the full board i know those conversations have started today and happy to gave me further but to have some recommendation i'd like to ask that's something the committee will consider. >> i'll be fine with putting this out with a with a positive recommendation this is one of those issues where everyone come away with things they like and don't like this has begun

through an enormous process and decisions in the community we know what the issues are and you know we've made a number of amendments into two weeks ago and today, i know the two issues that were highest in my mind were the issue of tightening up and tightening up the automatically notification to landlord-tenant when the tenant relations in order for the landlord to know what's going on because of her building and making sure that the tenant didn't envertically get evicted because they didn't tell their landlord the landlord finds out it is better for the landlord to know up front and tell the tenant up front rather than the tenant fought with an eviction notice comes those are the two issues that need to be tightened

up we've done that supervisor kim as mentioned the possibility of extending the 90 day maximum to hosted rentals even though you're living in our own house being limited to 90 days of short-term rentals i think i mentioned the last time i didn't support speak when we're talking about someone's own home a spare bedroom it across the line to say we're going to limit the number ever days you can do that when i talk about the problems we hear brown about the short-term rentals my censured or experience is when the ho is not there are and people are doing whatever they're doing when the host is there those issues anything can happening happen but when the host is there it's better the

impoverishment issue 0 that's going to exist and we have you numerous situations he rely on people signing things under penalty of perjury and be truthful and i also on sensitive to the concerns expressed by some of the folks particularly the rh1 d the in-law unit legalization units and sympathetic to their concerns was on the non prevailing side of the particular amendment to try to address that situation but i think here given what we're doing and saying you have to list everyone whether a condo you have to live 9 months out of the year it dramatically reduce

the risk of those rooms being hotel listed that's a word people use the neighbors are going to have to be there 9 months out of the is year i'm sympathetic to the neighborhood and the homes are rented out all the time without a host that has a dramatic impact of the character of the neighborhood bus because they have to live there are 9 months you thought year it is reduced the concerns i know people have concerns this is a reasonable attempt to regulate an area that right now is completely and not regulated is a major step forwardo i'm comfortable moving that out with positive recommendation. >> supervisor kim if we're going to move it out with a positive recommendation i won't

be voting for it and clearly two years of work has begun going into it supervisor wiener talked about this this is one the complex pieces of legislation we've seen at land use commission this is definitely on the list i want to proficient interests an incredible balance we're trying to put forward here you know i don't want to belabor the point but my commitment to 90 days host or not hosted comes down to the fact i don't think the city can enforce hosted days i don't think how we can have people prove that they slept in they were home two-hundred and 75 days in our home without an investigation i appreciate the statement of the prejudice it will defer the

real good folks that don't want to dye lie i just know we have this group of actors everyone should be anger at in those room is the landlords but tenant not living in their units and taking those off the market and it's heartbreaking for people that have been evicted so landlord can full-time ellis act their units but i'll noted go there given the scale of the profit i can do making short-term rentals it is frankly people are hifrg other folks to take care of their hosting airbnb through cleaning and the platforms too so i that's why i'm stuck on the

90 hosted or non-hosted i'd love for people dodo this but i can't differentiated between the bad and good actors i guess the argument you own your own home you can do whatever you want to that's not the occurred case it's actually illegal but i'm okay with the legal listing activity along the lines for single-family homes owners are exempt but apartment owners will have totick to the policies to protect our homeowner stock we don't have this power in the land use committee but i'll proveer it for the future i'll make a statement we're about to push this out of the committee i'm glad the airbnb

has maiden their taxes and i encourage them to work with the treasurers office with the back tax issues i like the registry with the note having the names but having a numerical registration that's helpful with enforcement the landlord we know that ultimately a lot of the liability something goes wrong goes to the prove or disprove and the landlord notification addresses that it's not as strong as landlord a consent but i'm happy to support that measure i mean, i'm glad we're excluding below market rates to be affordable i should be able to live in the units without average and i'm glad we've

discussed the airbnb code and the insurance i'm happy to stick with the amendments that commissioner lee as proffered i'm not sure about the insurance to come up with a dollar amount but a 90 day hosted or non-hosted is a nice balance people continue to get the short-term rentals and the city can enforce against the good and bad actors i think that's a good balance i don't see that as two restrictive and if you want for e rent for more than 90 cases i'll work with the planning department object the exceeded process for people that are going to 3 hundred and 75 days a week it's a business you, your camp mather guests and welcoming them in that's a hotel business

i get that sunset and the excelsior and you u the bay area doesn't have the options for tourist there should be another pathway for others folks that are doing if full-time and if the cu i've never seen you reject those they go through but if it's h that had a right if the real owners burden is the waste time but for my understanding once the schedule is in 38 they all pass so that's were any policy preference is but i do really want to be able to make that feedback but still give full respect to the work we've not fully vetted out all the

recommendations but i prefer to send this out without recommendations but those are the things i'm looking at i'm glad we're able to table this complicated issue here at land use. >> okay supervisor kim with that, there's a motion on the table - did you want supervisor cohen. >> it's okay. it's been a long day supervisor kim said something i heard echoed in the comments from public comment i've been sharing in the concern of short-term rentals being taken off the market and airbnb that's real i spoke with a sponsor a little bit earlier in the legislation sponsor earlier in the day about bringing out is way to distinguish between a person

that owns their own home and airbnb out an additional room it makes sense and is reasonable i believe as you own our own home there should not be a 90 day cap on that and another issue point of concern what in - if you have a 5 bedroom and renting out had in a large home could have cumulative impacts on the neighborhood the other thing talking about good and bad actors that's hard to mitigate and regulate we have a law on the books in the statistic you must carry car insurance we know that people drive and operate vehicles not only without a license but without car

insurance that is trying to regulate the airbnb market is going to be a challenge as much as in the state of california to regulate those bad actors that doesn't carry car insurance i want to give a voice to in-law units do we legalize them should they be part of airbnb or not airbnb i kind of look at this through an economic lens we're saying people that can afford to own property in san francisco yes that's okay for you to b and b airbnb a new phrase by the way, okay for you to do it but if you're a renter in a legalized in-law unit it's not okay for

them? i don't know if you're a property owner you have no more flexibility those are the 3 points i'm comfortable with not being behogan if the host is on site then they should have no more flexibility and not a 90 day cap and when it comes to the point of insurance company i'm not clear in 5 how does is the minimum or maximum we're not requesting them to stay in san francisco that are going through the motions just to be able to live here those are my comments thank you very much and