down and fin them with criminal penalties. >> i missed that amendment i think that's helpful so i brought up when i served on the board of education we got containments whistle blowers here in san francisco and sometimes families would i will actually would tell on other families they thought didn't live in san francisco because ann it's a sought after playing place so sometimes families will call unanimously this student lives in oakland their unfairly taking a spot from a san franciscan so we actually spent a lot of money investigating those ten to 17 families and i know there are questions about privacy and

security and those investigations really infringe on that we followed kids home we walked out of school with them i was stupid when i heard about the investigates post investigates we'd get on the bus and they get off at daily city we caught you or knock randomly at 6 o'clock in the morning to see if the families are living there if we move in that direction and we get a call they don't live there i'm afraid of the planning department right leg to do this type of investigation but it's far more infringing on someone's privacy than simply understanding the number of nights that is recorded i don't know if planning department has a response to that but i imagine this is the

path we're going to have to walk down if we move to a hosted and non-hosted kind of pathway and unlimited nights of hosted pathway. >> thank you scott sanchez planning staff it's clear the legislation will have it's challenges as we do with legislation do our best to enforce it the legislation has a few proportions that helps us in the forest but first in order to be tasered as a short-term rental they having they have to get a registry number and demonstrate they're a resident of that unit for us to determine their navigate a permanent resident and we see one person's names popping in the registry two or three times they're in

violation that's one test and the self-reporting aspect of having to report back the number of days and perjury is the other option it will have it's challenges and at times if we get a complaint and people think it's no longer rented out by a permanent resident we will request the information they document they're a permanent resident. >> thank you. >> and emily has more to add. >> emily rogers planning staff i want to add that the residency thing is described well but that's one key issue that supported by the reporting back by the host a key question we've been struggling would be though if there's one set of rules for people that live there while the hosting is occurring and that's

permissive than a standard for those not there whether or not they're on vacation we have a case not only need to determine whether there's a permanent resident by grant them a more permissive controls while the hosting is happening that's one of the controls that's difficult and obviously more valuable federal or state to the potential host so in the past we've talked about with that means we have to ask the individual if their sleeping there during the nights and how many nights they're in their own unit. >> thank you. i think that's really again, the crux of the issue i'm concerned i'm open to flexibility on the hosted the nights i get the benefit it was made clear to me, i'm still

struggling about how to differentiate with those lks living in their unit and again you know it's heartbreaking in tenants and their landlords are now a full airbnb i want to stop that activity i want to make sure we have the legislation that the city can regulate. >> thank you, supervisor kim so i have a couple of points and questions so terms of the last point in terms of the challenges in determining did you really extending spend 2 add and 17 nights in your home supervisor jane kim's questions made clear that's not a challenge that's unique to short-term rentals obviously the full-time system when you are relying own people's truthful innocence in terms of where they live not

only in in terms of being a san francisco but their school say we see it with people indication of where are their.com acids for the tax law people have to say what their residents is for getting car insurance f that has a significant impact on the rate of insurance and people allow about their retains for car insurance those are difficult issues to enforce we know that people are required to make those statements under penalty of perjury and when caught there's severe consequences and under the penalty of perjury they're spending 2 hundred and 75 days a year so the evidence

is not - it's understanding that the important snarnz there's a challenge whether auto insurance or taxes many, many people are very truthful or school assignments most people take those firmer shuns honestly and don't lie about their car insurance and some people will their commenting perjury and can be prosecuted so it's not new i have a question for mr. huey in terms of going to get conditional use to convert our home into some sort of airbnb or hotel putting aside single-family homes if you're a condo owner where cc&rs allow

the short-term rental and you live in one bedroom and rent out another one and when you go through wruf it's not as simple as people think but let's say you're able to go through the fund planning department use for the conditional use and what are the building code implementations of doing that are inform a condo. >> similar first of all, the way i hear our question is you have two bedrooms condo or apartment and then you rent out one room out but that's you know a matter he long term or short time your room sharing for us it's still an apartment or condo

the only thing it's a short term you need to register with planning and make sure those all those things the use is still the same no change expect proposed by cohen to up to the time put what we call a plan to make sure they know where they can run to get exit to the building but from the department standpoint it's. >> usage not a classification chance. >> so you'll not have a comply with the hotel rules. >> no. >> so mr. sanchez having one of the things that you do when our a supervisor you hear from all of our computes with a lot of city departments concluding the

conditional use process it is not an easy or a smooth or predi predictal one in terms of time and comprehend and conditional uses are non-controversial i've not seen a cu rocket kind of cu with no controversy i've not seen one take less than 4 months macro maybe i'm wrong but i've seen plenty of cruz take 6 to 9 months longer it came back challenging to get a hearing from the planning commission and takes time to get a planner assigned they might have a huge logan backlog this is not a criticism of the planning department but the massive number of cruz in the city we

add more and more cruz and takes longer and longer for the cruz to move through so one can support or opposite the ideas of requiring a proportion of the conditional use to go through the process to become a airbnb whatever the person's view it's important to understand the reality it means a probability lengthy conditional use process and means a significant number of cruz added to the planning department's workload so i want to stress that realty i don't know that a cu is a simple permit to get a cumbersome process. >> okay supervisor chiu. >> thank you. i want to comment on some of the comments that colleagues have made you

first of all, thank the members of the committee for wrestling with the policy i know there is not an easy issue to table i want to appreciate all the comments and at the outset the contemplates by supervisor wiener and supervisor cohen i'm happy to support and supervisor kim mentioned addressing the safety concerns of the potential emergencies and supervisor cohen mentioned that that what supervisor cohen mentioned a host to post an evasion notice specific to that unit it's appropriate and every unit has a different set of situations for the fire extinguisher and the electrical where it's is and it's a good idea and appropriate supervisor wiener has asked to amend the legislation to make

sure that we have a good and public process by which we calculate the fees every year on the record to make sure it's been estimated 11, 12, $15 million a year some fees go to adequate enrollment that captures the cost to the dbi and the city attorney and other agencies obviously i've said for a number of months to address the insurance provisions they're correct and so supervisor wiener's amendments are welcome in that area i know since we've gotten them i'm reviewing them but review the insurance provision to capture i want to say to supervisor kim you mentioned our preliminary concerns to make sure we're not losing housing opportunities for san franciscans living here i

stated in the outset motives exactly any concern when you have landlords that are ellis acting the entire building and tenants using empty apartments as year round bed-and-breakfast the fact of the matter is we have no rules and requiring everyone who wants to engage in the activity to register for the city that's not happening right now and when you add the under penalty of perjury let the city know they're living in their place at least 9 months out of the year and provided information under the penalty of perjury i think that goes a long way so the situation a tenant

who has mulply leases will not be permitted under our proposal you are only able to register on one address and the landlord could evict the entire building that is not acceptable so i said the concerns and fears but compare it to the status quo we have to do something i want to appreciate the suggestion of the amendments that the colleagues have added. >> thank you supervisor cohen. >> i actually have a question to the sponsor of the legislation that comes to the this committee by one of any constituents that is in the audience ms. glass so the question stems the money we're going to be collecting the impacts is there a way to begin to i'm getting a signal from the

the city attorney's office saying no let me finish is there a way to direct those into our affordable housing our quest to make san francisco more affordable so i'm going to turn to the city attorney indicating some initial thoughts. >> john gibner, deputy city attorney earmarking the hotel review it requires voter approval you can't do it in this ordinance the boards could do this in the future. >> i'll say supervisor cohen if we get $100 million a year from this activity i'll support you to make sure that money goes to affordable housing. >> we've got something coming to the voters next year.

>> or the board can allocate it. >> more to come on that topic. >> supervisor kim. >> thank you i just want to appreciate some of the amendments that came in and i have copies of scott wiener's amendments and could get copies of supervisor cohen's amendments as well arrest i want to reiterate i want to pass legislation i agree that what's happening is not working for the city and not working for our host as well they don't want to be conducting illegal activity we need to pass something we're moving in the right direction by actually legal listing the activity but under a set of regulations i think the perjury will be helpful if we're going to investigate against an individual that has signed an

agreement that investigation is going to be more intrusive than a hosting approach than letting us know on a quarterly basis how many nights and we'll keep that information within the city that's the simple lit way to deal with the enforcement issue i'd hate to see the planners hiring investigators and i know there were doing that in new york city and coming into people's homes and making the notes and using that as evidence when we prosecutor people i know we can do it that's far more intrusive than a simple proposal so we won't have to do the intrusive work that's where

i am today but at the end of the day i'm to pass something and have the flexibility for the san franciscans that are participating in that. >> thank you, supervisor kim so at this point we have we're ready to move to public comment i'll let you know how we're going to 0 precede with the complicated agenda i need to step out and supervisor kim the vice chair will take the public comment we're going to move through the public comment on item 3 at 1 o'clock we'll take a recess from one to 1:30 for lunch and if public comment is not completed that will resume in the afternoon if it's completed the city will recess upon the end of.

another 1:30 items four and five will be called where their specifically designated so at 1:30 handle items four and five after those items are completed webb we'll resume the short-term rental item and complete public comment if it has not already been implemented and typed after items 4r5e the committee will resume the possible action on item 3 human resources i hope that makes sense i'm sorry about the complexity but with that i'll turn it over to supervisor kim and i'll be back shortly >> we do want to ask the folks respect the speaker cards i know the chair got e-mails of folks that partially waited for their names were called and a lot of

folks got up in advance so i'm going to call 10 names at a time and we'll try to maintain the order (calling names) i apologize if i can't read our handwringing. >> thank you. the first speaker please. good afternoon, supervisors i'm jay jay i'm a member of the board of directors for the san francisco perimeter association a professional property manager and owner i agree we need the short-term rental to be punished nevertheless, we're focusing on them and need to focus on an

essential point of fairness this is y where rent control people make it an unfair profit and thereby stealing the affordable housing tint if they offer their spare rooms to the sf residents they can only charge an artificial charge and in listening to portland is a good one, if you truly care about preserving affordable housing you need to have this in your legislation some others important thanks include the comprehensive public registration as recommended by itself planning department and requiring the tenants to require permission from project sponsors

prior to listing and requiring insurance to indemnify and the notification of all property owners and in a manner that's consistent with conditional use in the planning code and the certification by the planning department in guidance with applicable building codes including the department of building inspection commission that have not been addressed a hard cap of 90 days per year for hosting and non-hosted for subletting clauses i hope you'll consider those modifications in our changes to the legislation. >> thank you, sir. >> i'm john w i'm on the list i want to speak to two primary issues as those a homeowner my

concerns about the registry and the cap on 90 days i'm concerned about my name and address and private information on a public registry i have no problem you, you keeping that but it doesn't makes sense to give out my information when you asked about why is there low registration in portland perhaps that's an issue there you have to set back and see how am i able to do this it didn't makes sense to drive things underground which this do did it say better to have the registration but a privacy issue is the concern the other issue on the 90 day limit again, i hope i'm not in

perjury by leaving my home 90 days a year but i go on vacationed to europe and gone more than that time it didn't makes sense to not been able to use my home when i want to rent it out for more days let's say a hundred and 80 days is more reasonable. >> mr. w. >> it did turn to afternoon i'm nancy i'm a retired social worker and lived on katrero hill for 40 years i bought a building i couldn't afford to buy i rent it and contribute to the short-term rental charging well blow market n i'm in favor of home sharing i've offered rooms only when i'm present and the

income makes a huge difference in my standard of living it allows me to remain in my home and in san francisco i'm delegating my savings i couldn't postpone selling my home as you citizen and someone that votes and works in the public sector for more than 20 years i recognize the needs terror the recollections that are needed and enforceable i support of the insurance requirement i for one wouldn't have been involved without proper insurance before i went life i changed my carry and policy and packing pga significantly more per year for mire liability insurance i heard even though skeshs about hosted and non-hosted activity those of us hosting our

residence it is simple to prove we list a room if we list a shareholders or private room it's hosted and also it would be nice to have the platforms be able to report i would be fine proving only airbnb has h that capacity so unfortunately, i don't see that as an option but i want to say even a tenant activist at the hearing last week - >> thank you. i had a question you brought up we didn't talk about insurance that much so no one of us - you're able to call up on insurance companies. >> yes. i actually have a memo if you want to see it, it's state farm.

>> no, that's great to hear that insurance companies are actually involved. >> if you own the home. >> okay. thank you. >> i'm bob planet hold did questions comments concerns i revised last time i'm going to repeat i'm iron of the san francisco neighborhood affordable housing and employment coalition with regards to codes we've heard some all the times suggested their responsive and interesting and worthwhile but in discussion people need to listen i heard those unites will be considered - but the airbnb is subject to the hotel codes there's enough difference to say that needs to

be clarified two weeks ago we heard no topic on the department of building inspection meeting yet the item itself is open number 3 for joint procures and i think the text of the amendments the public has not seen is something that should be available for thursday meetings so the commissioners and public can know i wanted to go firefighter there's been so many amendments published but the public doesn't have the text it is hard to make a positive recommendation for the board to go forward it's thwarted when we don't know the text we heard the staff say on a different item it would be a small change and

generated additional problems custom tiflg there are amendments suggested today, i think custom 86 those are subject and it should be made to the public to analyze as well as the commissioners before you take additional action. >> thank you, mr. plant hold. >> good morning supervisors i'm david the former president of the twin peaks council supervisors if you approve that plan with the redefinition of the affordable housing you'll be destroying go a hundred years of mr. haney and zoning and what affordable housing means in san francisco west of twin peaks council district 7 over 70 percent through their representatives