sure, consideration. sphthere is something in here you are not interested in supporting let me know. the proposed findings read as, march 17, 2015 the california legislative analyst office published a study of high housing cost in the state. according to the analyst office for a 30 year period starting in 1980 san francisco produced 16.6 of the cities estimated housing needs. among the factors sited by the analysts office as to why san francisco and other coastal cities haven't built enough housing a flow and cumbersome project approval process. the use of seek wucompicate #d procedural requirement tooz delay an

approved project from starting construction and the use of citizen initiative tooz delay or halt new housing. >> supervisor co00 cohen is that the only amendment to proprose this language? >> i would like to respond to that. i did read that language and know thiz doesn't ocome from you and comes from the housing action coalition. i disagree with that finding. i would hope to not be forced to vote against my own legislation because i don't agree with the set of findings that came from the group. hack and i disagree ochb what it take tooz build affordable housing and their pain is we build as much as possible and supply will become affordable. i don't know if that is true. the problem is we are not building enough

affordable housing. we met 200 percent of the need of luxiary housing. i konet have the numbers before me, but if we were supposed to build a thousand luxiary units we built 2 thousand. that is what free market supply does. it doesn't build more affordable housing, it helps build more luxiary housing in a city where that demand exists. i can't support this finding and think it is controversial and has balt mexers memberoffs the board are on both sides of. i want to clarify i don't think this comes from you, i go you bring this on behalf of hack, i just can't support this finding and the legislation >> sfr visor cohen you have falloy up? >> i was looking to have a good conver saigdssation and better understander of supervisor kims position as to what part of the language made

you feel uncomfortable? what part were you unable to support and i think your articulated that >> supervisor campose >> >> i think it is important to have debate and discussion, but i think if it is the language the housing coalition is circulated i do scr a different perspective from them and think there is a difference of opinion as to what should drive housing policy and i think that hack has a specific perspective and it is a valid perspective, it is just a different perspective and it is a idea that somehow seek wuis a problem that gets in the way of development. i actually think that seek wucan be a tool that actually has allowed for community input and certain projects tobe better and i also

don't believe in the supplied side view of the world and all you do is build and doesn't matter what you build. even if all you do build market rate housing the benefit will trickle to the middle and working class and i don't meet that and believe the type of housing you build matters and the solution to the lack of affordable housing is to actually build more affordable housing. so, i also will be in opposition to the language that is being discussed >> thank you supervisor campose, supervisor kim. supervisor wiener >> thank you very much. i don't know if a motion is made yet >> a motion hasn't been made >> i appreciate this debate and think the answer in terms of howing production is all of the above. we have to produce affordable housing and need to aggressively invest in it.

[inaudible] voted unanimously to put the housing trust on the-this november and i think we want to all build afortable housing, but any contention that government invested in the housing is the global solution and think it will solve the housing problem, i don't that is the case. if we have stronger support from the government and commitment that would be 1 think, but that isn't happening. affordable housing investment is critically important and have to do it and do more. overall housing production matters and the fact is that it is not possible to make an argument that the amount of housing

production isn't a impact on housing prices because we never produced enough housing to keep up with the population grouth have so if you look that population growth over the last decade and the amount of housing we are producing it doesn't come close to keep up. to make a argument that you can't say supply doesn't matter, i don't know how you support that because we never tested that by producing enough housing. i also have to say and have a respectful disagreement with supervisor compose, when one argues supply z kmd actually is a factor that impacts housing prices to then switch it to if you advocate supply z demand is a factor that means you advocate for supply side economics or trickle down economics, that is i believe a very cynical

argument. supply economic and supply z dmentd are different things. just because they have the word supply in them don't mean they are the same thing. supply z demand is a factor inl housing prices. even though some in san francisco contend ortwise. even though you say housing matters and prices that means you advocate for a different concept called supply side economic which i doubt anyone in the room is advocateing for. i view that as a cynical argument. it is good political rhetoric rsh but very cynical argument >> supervisor kim >> thank you. just to address a couple comment. i want to clarify, i think development is important as well, but i think that in particular we have to look at the development of affordable housing and not just any housing by any means. i think that is what the findings here before us say and in fact they

glaim the high cost of housing to cumbersome and slow project, seek wucomicated requirements and citizen delay for a92 housing. i don't believe these reasons alone ask why san francisco is so expensive. a lot of people want to move here. the city experiences a renaissance, not just san francisco, but portland, seattle, new york. there is no planning regulation and they are still displaying latino neighborhoods in that city and they don't have the reg ylshzs we have in san francisco. i just don't believe hat is a reason to why san francisco housing is expensive. i want to clireify that is why i can't support this finding. i know we have examples of where seek wuslowed down affordable housing. edward the second and booker t washington is a example of that. i argue that prop b which mandated all water

front proposal going to the voreter insures 30 percent of the developments are affordable housing. developers used to say they can't build 30 percent affordable housing. now that they have to go to the voters they don't walk into my office without saying they will build with a minimum of 30 percent. citizens play a role using mechanisms. i understand it is a double edged sword and used both ways, but i don't want there to be a finding in the legislation that says this sh the only reason why housing is expensive in san francisco. i don't agree with that. second, i think in some cases it made san francisco more affordable >> thank you, supervisor compose >> welcome debate and think that it is good to have debate and i don't think that calling one side cynical is helpful. i do believe though that this

notion that if you have an unregulated market which you build market rate housing thatd is the answer to anything. that is notion i disagree with but it also consistent with policies pert forward before and believe it is supply side economics. that is what reganomics is about so calling it what it is is calling it what it is. i think this debate is important, but the bottom line is this, that what is happening in san francisco is that we have produced but what we produced isn't affordable to most san franciscan and you take as a example what supervisor kim was saying about the mission. 7 percent of the units that are in the pipe line now in the neighborhood are affordable. 7 percent. that's after looking

at the numbers that show that the mission economic development agency noted in the last few years you have 8 thousand latino families that are pushed out of that neighborhood. for those families what you build does matter. it is relevant and significant because housing is not like any other commodity. housing insuch especially doesn't happen in a vacuum. the fact is we don't have unlimited supply of land and for aench market rate development that you build, that land that could have been used for afford blg housing that isn't used for affordable housing. so, i understand that there is the different perspective and where think we can have disagreement without being disagrubl and the realty is that this goes to a lot of what happened here today because it is all connected to

this direction in which san francisco is headed right now. housing is probably the clearest manifestation of that because we have the highest housing costs in the country. we have the highest rent in the country, but at the root of the problem is the fact that san francisco has the fastest growing inequality in the u.s. of american and whou have that level of inequality at some point you hear from people a sense och dest operation which i think is what is happening in communities throughout the city. i think the reason why this montering and reporting is so critical is that unless you actually have information and unless you actually hold government accountable things won't change. whatever you think is happening in san

francisco, it is clear the status quo is pushing working people and middle income people out and many are people of color. that is the realty and so i think supervisor kim for what she is doing and i think we should proceed and make this happen >> thank you, supervisor cohen >> thank you. i want to make sure i understand, you said 7 percent f of a project is only affordable housing? that is table. how is that possible? i thought the projeblths in san francisco when they go through a process have to have 13 percent affordable housing >> it is just the way the projects that in the pipeline-that is how-maybe they paid >> sthai paid the fee. got it. here is something else i want to throw out there for you to consider. in [inaudible] hill we have a project being

built and it is a controversial project and has the opportunity to have 20 percent more of the affordable housing. you talk about holding government accountable i think that is correct. some of the-the reason i bring this conversation is because i have constituents that are uninterested in the project itself and look toog keep the project small thus compromiseing the developing ability to build affordable housing and using these tools i described earlierment i haven't taken a position on this particular project you see what i'm dribeing at? we agree we need more affordable housing. that is as in the room and we go to the constituents that don't want affordable housing and not interested and looking to kill or hamper or dumb down a particular project. that is

the reason i'm trying to bring the conversation round to present from my perspective of the challenges in the south east. same type of discussions happening in visitation vam valee. we want affordsable housing and if you go on the street you get the same concept, however there are peep people that are powerful and wealthy and use the tools available to them to prevent the affordable housing projects from going forward. that is why i have this discussion. that is why i am just interested a little to learn more about your perspective. >> supervisor avalos >> thank you. i am really learning a lot about economics right now and i really appreciate discussion especially supervisor wieners

schooling us of what supply and demand and supply side are all about. it is my understanding that what we have is supply and demand sets prices and when it isn't regulated we create a condition for supply side economics and supply side economics is removing a lot of the barriers to profit our production and that is what we have in san francisco inwe let the market decide what the price and supply of demand of housing is going to be. we don't do that in san francisco thankfully. we create a condition to actually promote public dollars for housing construction, which i try to maximize and right now and all of us are trying to do that. we also have a very strange way and it is what the law of the land is now of increasing dollars for affordable housing and hat is the inclusionary

housing policy which i at some level support. it means we build our increasing dollars for affordable housing and have to have a much more rapid rate of production for luxiary and marblth rate housing to get a small amount of diminishing by growing housing that is affordable. we have nothing like real unregulated free market, but we dehave a supply side that is actually built in. supply side economics iltd beinto how we do inclusionary housing because we rely on affordable housing chblt that is my schooling for economics. i'm not sure if is correct, but it seems to be what my impression is are and i want to vote on this >> supervisor wiener >> thank you very much madam president and supervisor avalos for your tutorial. we can have

the dialogue after all that is what we are sent to do. first i think there was a reference to advocacy for unregulated housing. housing in san francisco is many many things, but unregulated is not one of them and no one is advocateing for unregulated housing. there are a lot of people in the city that advocate for more house frg the growing #35u7ulation and if we look at what is causing housing to be so expensive in the city, one significant factor is we haven't created enough housing. we need more housing and that is why we are in the situation we are in today because for many many years we significantly surepress adding new housing in the city of all different varieties including affordable and non subsidized and between. now that we have a growing population we are

paying the piper and need to fix that and it caept be done overnight, but zee to produce more housing. >> see no other names on the roster, colleagues can we take this item same house cacall >> without objection this is passed >> item 26 is a ordinance to [inaudible] department of buildsing inspection may use multiple data sources to [inaudible] for permit issue fees >> same house, same call. without objection this ordinance is passedue man mississippily on the first reading >> item 27 ordinance to amend the helt code to exist wild or exotic animals. >> supervisor tank >> thank you very much i know today we are celebrating equal pay day and this legislation seek tooz address inequality

for a population we cannot speak for themselves. i would like to thank cosponsors supervisor wiener and yee. i wanted to thank alson stanley from the [inaudible] bring this to our attentionism san francisco we are fot first in doing this, we are one of a dozen across california that decided to institute a similar type of ban and regulation and also today during introduction we'll have a companion piece that addresses senate bim 16 preventing abusive behavior toward elephants. as we talk about equality and justice there is a population that cannot speak for themselves so we hope that not only san francisco but throughout california and the rest of the world that they will take notice and take similar action

on this. thank you colleagues for your hopeful smoret on this >> thank you supervisor tang, supervisor wiener >> thank you, i want to thank supervisor tank for her leadership and herb office for the work it has done to move this legislation forward. this is issue of the humane or inhumane of treatment of animals in san francisco this is the city of saint francis and among many other things we are stand for the humane treatment of animals. when you look at how these an 348s are treated ands they are trained it isn't a exageeration to say these animals are being tochered. whether it is the bull hook used to train elephants literally stabbing them and causing them pain so they obey the commands and the training or whether it is

animals literally being tied down to the ground with rope or animals being transported in tinny containers for long periods of time so they can barely move around t. is inhumane kwr has no place in san francisco. this is very good legislation and no we got push back on it and respect the views of those who don't support the legislation and we are not implying anyone working with animals is abusing them, but we know it is app happening and happening with far too much reg yaelt. this is important ledgeilation and hope it moves forward >> without ubjeckds this ordnen is passed. >> supervisor avalos you are first up to introduce new business >> thank you madam clerk. i have a few items for

introduction. first a couple of hearing requests. last year i visited the department of public-san francisco general hospital recollect their emergency department and other departments aant to the maurjs department and saw sth staffic levels and it was remarkable to see the amoubt of tension not just because it was the trauma center but because there is a lot of overlap in nursing possessions and there were not enough nurses to happen the work load. i went back again this year and learned that we really haven't-there is still some of the same conditions that exist there. last year i had done a hearing looking at how the city was moving forward on increasing staffing to meet the demand. there was actually it took about a year for someone to put their name into the system to actually get

hired and in the mean time a lot of people applied for jobs and decidesed to move on to other place tooz practice nursing. i think that is a loss for the sate that we are not being able to maximize the level of staffing we could have and the skilled nursing we could have at the general hospital. it seems like we are still suffering from the length of time it takes for someone to get hired. calling for another hearing e. hopefully can hear it during the budget process and schedule it when the department of public health comes bebefore us in a couple weeks to look at how we are getting ready fl it the new general hospital opening and what the impact is not just for it againeral hospital but all primary care system including the community clinics. one area i heard of a lag in staffing is the clerks that sign up people for accessing

affordable care dollar that brings fundsing are understaffed as well and they are turning people away. there isn't enough staff to sign people up to receive affordable care act dollars in the system and their own care and think that is limiting what our department of #3ublic health should be. looking to hold a hearing before we approve the budget for the next fiscal year. i know sheriff farrell last year helped with the hearing as well so i want to see if we can move that forward so we knowe are redfry the new hospital opening up and the impact on the primary care system and department of public helths. i also have a resolution i'm drafting for next week for adoption without [inaudible] this is the transpacific partnership. it is a another free trade agreement that congress is

about to perhaps or perhaps not fast track for the president to negotiate directly with transnation corporations in other countries. the problem with the free trade agreement for the north american free straight gement is we are give away local, state and federal standard for work place safety, work-environmental protections for traenz paerns. these have impacts on peoples every day lives. we actually had resolutions passed at the board of supervisor in the past that opposed free trade policy and many of the california congressional opposed fast tracking as well so we hope to be able to send a message with a resolution for next weeks vote to ask fast tract isn't given and there is a

transapparent process to negotiate fair trade. free trade is free for transnational corp raigs to take advantage of gibbing away our powers so hopefully we can support that when it come tooz full board. the rest i submit >> supervisor christensen >> small and happy. i would like to propose a resolution for a accept and expend of 480 thousand dollar for the friends of the library for the furniture finish and equipment for the digital center. the dinltle center will serve 13-18 year olds. the program will be connected through programs at the cities brarch libraries. plan frg the facilities was made possible by the institute of museum and library services and the mac arthur foundation.

the program is done in conduction with the bay area coalition, the california academy of sciences and kqad. at a time when we ask if libraries are relevant we biltd a main libery. the programs are expanded and hours extended. this program is aimed at the teens who we want to see more of and we'll offer them to and training in state of the art technology and fun and socially engaging activities to connect the teens to the liberies >> supervisor cohen sfr visor farrell jrktss thank madam clerk y. one item. last year this board came together and pass adregulatory framework for short term rental in the city. a topic that is complicated with a thousand point of view. we derived a framework as a starting point.

since that time the city departments as well as those other parties outside city hall and many inside look at the legislation impact and logistics. i believe we should support home sharing in san francisco, but in a way that protect affordable housing, creates a regulatory environment that is simp and enforceable and remove red tape for people looking to share residences. we need to insure the law is clear, enforceable and hold those accountable for vilailgzs so we minimize disruption for the quality of life in san francisco. we also need to be aware and work to mitigate the impact short term rentals have on the stock. we need to be mindful to those using short term housing to keep windup the rising cost in the city. we must insure we

product our city from turning into a city of solely owned short term rental and strike the balance to so so so the residence can opportunity to live and thrive and make ends meet. with all eyes on san francisco and how the city approaches short term rental it is important to strengthen and stream line the process and framework. that is wie i introduce a number of straight forward amendments in partnership with mayor lee to do exactly that thmpt amendments we are introducing today to the short term rental lay will protect the city housing stock, milwaukee the law easily enforceable and stream line the rezstration process. thoferb past few month mayor lee and i met with home shares, housing and tenet advoicate, private sector and labor to hear the concerns. specifically these amendments include, a 120 day hard cap on the amount