kim and are those substancess amendments. >> i thought we were going to do i think it's helpful we're doing them piece by pie my false imprisonment meantime is substantive we duplicate the file and send to the planning commission and it will come back to the full board of supervisors i'm hoping to pass the amendment that are not substantive first to be in both files thank you. we'll be seeking the advice of our city attorney to figure out what procedural implementations and we'll precede based on that and thanks i appreciate our amendment and want to know more about them i want to take a moment to thank etch that has orchid that the legislation

thank you, president chiu for bringing it that's is an interesting pope piece it's gal knitted aloof people it's critically complex issue but beginning to address a very critical step in combating san francisco affordability issue i've spent many hours in committee hearings and gotten thousands thank you thousands of e-mails plus phone numbers on phone calls on this topic it's been interesting to have conversations around the city of san francisco people are will definitely paying attention and are concerned or dialed in on the issue i believe we need to step forward and regulate this activity to protect our city rent control housing stock awhile afforded hosts that need

the money that many others are in need of and continue the short-term rentals under a limited circumstance i believe that the legislation is really come a very long way after many amendments and i'm grateful that the committee accepted the amendments addressing the safety issues the san francisco affordability is complicated and my two priorities during it this debate to make sure we prevent the wholesale can onlytion for short-term rentals that take unit out of the rental market and to develop a framework that allows responsible hosts in certain six an opportunity to use short-term rentals to diesel with their affordability issues

so i don't think we have the lushths of waiting to deal with this owner we need regulation and in place right now and i'm prepared to support what come out of the discussion today so i'm looking forward to the amendment discuss. >> thank you supervisor avalos. >> thank you. this has been quite a long journey we've been on third year on this piece of legislation i want to acknowledge the work of president chiu and his office in putting this together it's a great deal of work in all sides to craft something like this we need regulation of the rental market it's been actually apparent to me especially with the amount of advocacy offer the past several weeks i've actually he heard from any daughters friends parent about this and

people so many people i know very well in the district who have been running short-term rentals out of their homes not to you know generally, the whole time throughout the year but given the several weeks to rent the spates for people to come in as tourist there's great benefits themselves in terms of having nor flexibility in their pocketbook to actually bring in people to show parts of the excelsior district 11 to people that wouldn't see this part of san francisco and people contributing to the local economy that are from all parts of the world and people talked about the great experience of meeting people and their families from all over the world as well and playing host those are racket examiners that people have in the new economy but i also see there are huge needs we

have in san francisco that remain unaddressed that continue to widther away for people feel like san francisco could be mayor home, i think it's important that we can maximize our housing stock and residential housing stock to itself utmost and building when a lot of those you know unit or rooms of residence are going for people in short-term stays or a great length of time those places in the city are given of u up for tourist we're losing people that are desperate of housing in san francisco losing out on valuable stock that helps with our affordability crisis and our resident crisis as well i'd like to propose that we are we able to limit the actual time that can be used for providing

for space in retains whether the entire retains or a portion for tourist to sty 2, 3, 4 place a 90 day cap i've actually passed out on amendment to everyone saying that it is it's referencing section 41 organization .5 this is actually very consistent with what i've been talking about in terms of how we looked the rental stock or single-family homes i live in a district like that that we passed a volunteer program to create incomes and the need to do that is great especially with a lot of working class and middle-class properties in

district 11 they're actually able to pay the mortgage by having and unit that has a tenant to help bring in fund to pay the rent and mortgage this go legislation is is supported i supported even though idea of you know enabling households to be able to do that through short-term rentals but there should be american people option to provide permanent that is a force a tenant to live in san francisco i believe in providing a cap limits the short terms and perhaps the ability to have a long term stay that could be right for a tenant in the city that helps to provide some relief to our affordability crisis i'm offering that amendment to apply the 90 day cap to short-term rentals both hosted and unhosted rentals that's in a document i've passed

out here (clapping.) all right. thank you just like to remind every one of our board rules and respect everyone's opinion the supervisor has a cap on hosted or non-hovered will seconded by supervisor mar. >> thank you, very much madam chair i want to start but also thanking consulting and all the people that have worked on the issue i want to start out by saying clearly i support the principle of allowing short-term rentals here in san francisco i personally have spoken to many people and understand and recognize how short-term rentals benefit many individual i know that it is something that many people in my district rely upon and the benefit is not only to these individuals renter but to

homeowners and visitors to our city i want to recognize the innovation behind one of the shortest short-term rentals companies airbnb i'm proud that airbnb started here in san francisco you seeing air mattresses on living rooms floors and now a company that evaluated at $10 billion according cots new york times that evaluation makes airbnb worth more than hotel changes and the hyatt they pay their taxes and it is not able that airbnb has recently started to pay their hotel taxes it start as of last week, we thank them for that this payment is long overdue

after all this is not a company that is sleeping on air mattresses anywhere this is a company that is worth $10 billion how long overdue is this well on april 3rd, 2012, the cities tax clerk issued a memo that a website company that receives rent that the occupancy of a transaction is an operator responsible for collecting the transit occupancy tax associated with that rental and remitting it to the city it's good that airbnb has started to pay their takes as required by the tax clerk their approximately two and a half years overdue in paying the tax that are owed to the city airbnb stated at the lack of foundation that the trinity occupancy tax they've begun to

pay on the existing airbnb rentals will be approximately $11 million a year therefore based on the calculation their lack of payment over the last thirty months is $25 million in unpaid back taxed to the city and county of san francisco as we consider legislation that will finally legalize the activities of airbnb and others in san francisco i believe it is only right that airbnb make good on its overdue taxes before this legislation become law (clapping.) i'd like to remind everyone respect the discussion. >> every business in this city must pay their taxed or be at odds with their permits being

revoked it's inincredibly unfair to allow this ordinance further enriching this corporation but at the same time saying that they don't have to follow the rules that every other small business owners has to fellow in san francisco (clapping.) therefore i'm introducing an amendment to this legislation i want to thank the san francisco santa fe for their assistance in putting this together and closing also to the tax collector this amendment to this legislation makes it so this law did not go into effect until thirty days after the treasurer of the san francisco ethics commission certifies that all

platforms businesses doing taxes pay all outstanding taxes including previously owed trinity taxes my amendment is about fairness assuring a mutilate billion dollar cop company has it to pay in their taxes it's about our bifrthd budgetary priorities recognizing the significant of $25 million for a city like san francisco this is not which you imagine change $25 million could improve or prevent cut to serviced in san francisco i'll give you a few works if prop b passes it caused significant controversy in city

hall and increases the population it is estimated that to there muni budget by $2 million that means that having airbnb pay the taxes that it owes for the last thirty months will actually cover that shortage we have heard in the last few days about the cities ambulance shortage that has been a problem for quite sometime if each ambulance based on that the estimates we've been given cost approximately $200,000 we in the city if those taxes that are owed were paid today would purchase one hundred and 25 now ambulances (clapping.) i have recently introduced a budget supplemental to insure that all san franciscans that wants to protect himself or

herself from airbnb will have access to the drug and my public health is for 8 hundred a fraction of the amount that airbnb owes the city in taxes seniors and others have been advocating for a free muni for strarlz and one it is model in the low income the mp a mooning u muni says this will cost $400 million for the sdrabld adults and seniors we could pay for this program for 5 years with the $25 million that are owed in taxes to the city the estimated cost for a full police academy that will include 50 recruits with $5.4 million that money could be used inform

fund 4 please academy classes having the training for 4 hundred new officers in city of san francisco so far the next few years the $25 million that is owed could be used for pay for one hundred officers at a salary rate of $160,000 but the question we need to ask ourself colleagues do we give special treatment to a multi billion dollars company but allowing them to do something in san francisco that no business has done to allow them to operate without paying the taxes to the city do we allow them or sure that hosting platforms by airbnb play by the same rules that as follows and

businesses must follow f this is similar that was championed audio supervisor wiener that was passed national anthem by board of directors at the time that provided amputee to people that had been renting out parking spaces but not been paying takes because they were unaware of the tax obligations supervisor wiener's protective legalized those parking spaces if the owners a pay the taxes in the future between us they've paid up to two years bank takes that they owe the city and agree to follow the law similarly my legislation likewise around to move forward once the back taxes they owe the city are paid second amendment i have involves an important issue we have been

dealing with in the last more than a year that that is the crisis of evictions that the city and county is facing many of the folks evicted interest under the ellis act are long term residents seniors that disregarded and people that have lived in san francisco and helped to make san francisco what it is today i believe that it is unconscious able to evict long term folks through the ellis act and allow those unite to be used as short-term rentals in recent most this board of supervisors has supported self several piece of legislation for tenants that are ellis act evicted to allow people the opportunity to have a fighting chance to stay in san francisco because of that there is no

justifiable reason that the unit subject to the ellis act being rented at short-term rentals we have stooped for you for our cities tenants to stay here when evicted we must preserve the character of our amazing city by making that possible for people of all protect levels not be reader by troufrt i'm proposing an amendment to prohibit short-term rentals in unit there has on ellis act evictions by where it is standing behind the principles in the need to protect our communities converting residential apartment into short-term rentals only exacerbates the housing crisis prohibiting short-term rentals in a unit for 5 years following an ellis act veeths support our

long-standing policy to preserve the limited housing resources we have the amendment i'm introducing specifically says that a unit that has been subjected to a ellis act eviction within a 5 year period would not quality if the eviction occurred on november 1st, 2012, i've got copies of any amendment with respect to the unpaid taxes and with respect to the second item i'm going to ask the city attorney the best way to proceed i've suggested language what is the advise. >> city attorney and john gibner, deputy city attorney. >> so i believe at some point in the discussion probably makes

sense for my colleagues merlin or myself to talk about the amendments to refer to planning are which which have them requires another hearing at the board the amendment you'll proposed supervisor avalos will not be referred back to planning i'll just supervisor breed has duplicate the file at some point during the hearing when the items come up for a vote i would just say you would have a voted on this amendment as you've circulated it in either of the duplicate files or both. >> thank you. >> thank you so supervisor campos. >> i make a motion for both. >> sure so just asking for a second on supervisor campos first amendment regarding the trinity taxes seconded 3wi supervisor avalos and permitting the shortfalls subject to the

ellis act evictions a second supervisor breed supervisor chiu. >> thank you colleagues let me first start by asking are there any other amendment you i think i need to ask the deputy city attorney he has amendments. >> john gibner, deputy city attorney stepping back to supervisor campos amendment i'm sure you're aware of there's been litigation go challenging various ordinances in the city involving the ellis act so as i mentioned supervisor campos amendment will require a revel to another k34e hearing and at or before that committee hearing provided the advice regarding the issue we suggest during the last two weeks we've looked electro the ordinances that is

preponderance of the evidence and worked with supervisors office particularly supervisor chiu's office and had clean up amendments we'll ask the board to adapt may be the first amendment you'll vote on supervisor chiu has a copy of the amendment but essentially they've fixed the number one issues that came up in the past amendment they clarify that hosting platforms can be liable for violations of the notice requirement in the ordinance and in the administrative hearing and one of the amendments that supervisor farrell proposed today requiring the finally the homeowners association to my unit covered by the homeowners

association including the that neighborhood homeowners association. >> with that, colleagues a motion. >> i'll move the technical amendment and great supervisor wiener with that, do we need a roefrlt that was supervisor chiu. >> i was going to give me perspectives but move the technical amendment first. >> colleagues any discussion on the technical amendment perhaps you can came back take that one first. >> a roll call vote madam chair and roll call vote. >> supervisor cowen about when you say the technical amendments which author. >> the one offered by the deputy city attorney. >> we'll take that without objection. those amendments are accepted supervisor chiu. >> thank you colleagues and all

serious neuronsness thank you for your good ideas let me say those are amendments i'm happy to support but i'd like to go quickly electro the amendments as i've heard them to give a few exemptions some i'm not prepared to support from my read and i'm just reading those amendments for the first time there are 8 colleagues introduced amendments supervisor breed toward is a off with technical amendments and many particular she has proposed that we include a private right of actions specifically ash any cases involving ellis act that's something i'm prepared to support and supervisor kim has offered i know that either or both will require going back to land use and trailing legislation hopefully, we'll work those out i'm happy to

support what supervisor breed has suggested as well as supervisor kim is suggesting supervisor farrell has asked for an inclusion of the couple of property owners i'm happy to support supervisor yee i do understand has some challenges with the feedback that he's received from the district and neighborhood in his district i'll say i have certainly harder from many resident in district 7 in the rh1 areas there's a desire to do some level of hosting activities that's comparable to what we're doing in part of the city the idea of carving that out and essentially saying that resident in supervisor yee's is neighborhood even if under no circumstances if they go away can they engagement in

short-term rentals or have a 90 day cap feels onerous to me but i understand the spirit by which supervisor yee has made that i want to thank supervisor wiener for his various amendments and in particular with the land use committee he was the first supervisor to indicate his support of the structure of what we've done and offered any p many amendments i'm happy to support his fees adjustments to make sure they've worked with the expansion of the requirement to the rh1 areas that's akin for landowner and others supervisor mar's amendments i do said and agree with the sentiment for publicly induced housing we don't want to include that in the legislation i understand from the city

attorney there maybe some clean up to that is that right and supervisor mar if you want to clarifying what our asking for . >> if i could read the language after coming out u consulting with the city attorney under section d the residential unit it strikes is not subject to the inclusionary housing program so forth in section 415 but it strikes that first line and continues with at keeping in the language is not a residential hotel unit subject to the provisions of chapter 41tolysis unless they've been subject to conversion semicolon is not adding the word organization designating at a blow market rate under the city, state, or federal law and adding this

language is not the rehabbed to financial evaluate to restrict low and moderate it strikes the words middle-income and the rest is included. >> thank you, supervisor ms. balboa park is there additional clarification to what supervisor mar said. >> adopting marilyn burns i'll told clarify the language is cultural drafted the language is regarding is not housing developed or rehabbed with the financial assistance with the city and county of san francisco we will definitely want further classification in committee ideally or here as to what that indicates right now i believe that includes such things as the million dollars contract and potentially open the building

loans there's many types of loans and grant that falls into the description of financial assistance so we want clarification on those terms so let me try to that about this for example, prop c has the trust fund on mission as i mentioned or small site acquisition and erect types of small buildings we were considering not the broader expansion of massy or different types of earthquake preparedness type of improvements to home i'm wondering if you can recommend the language that captures the residential language and not have it as expansive as i said. >>