>> by the way i'm glad to see the representatives of airbnb if they're in the room part of the challenge is that at&t park has been missing in action this is the crux all too that is said and done the planning department has said a complaint driven engrossment is not going to work some skin in the game for the host platforms airbnb is by far the most important in san francisco with 5 thousand listing on their site a multiple million dollars company so successful that cities across

the world is trying to get them to comply with local laws the airbnb has the data to enforce the law he make money off every night a room is booked this company that has been and continues to be the reason why this data has not been shared with the city and county of san francisco i'm here to submit a radical proposition it is not the job of the planning department the board of supervisors or the mayor to write legislation that protects the business practices of a corporation simply base this is worst a lot of money and has a lot of political influence that is the job of our city government to ultimately protect the public including the housing stock hesitate put at risk by

the unexorbitantly of a counter law for those reasons i'm urging this department and commission to put forward recommendations that follow what your staff until recently has said i'll submittal to you if this commission and our board of supervisors failed to do what they should about done most actress ago i think the voter of city and county of san francisco to decide for themselves whether corporates should follow the rules i'll talk about the amendments i'm prototyping in my legislation first lemoncy is amends the defines for neighbors between 5 homicide feet outline people negatively impacted by a short-term rental in their communities have a right to go to court this includes the

neighbors a permanent resident of the building i want to be clear i've o middle absentee landowner they're already act in and protect their interests by evicting the taunt e tenant for a breach of a lease if they choose to do so i'm trying to actually get people in the neighborhood in san francisco the right to protect their rights the second part enabling san francisco to have civil penalties at any time my protective allows the host penalty against them a right to be able to institute those penalties without the penalty not proper enforcement the third item important allowing the parties to take did hosting

parties to court and allow them to collect civil penalty we need to give people the right to go to court and protect themselves we're using all the resources to protect the folks and no matter how many - it is mr. sanchez who had a hearing noted that if doesn't matter how many people will have working televised unless you have the information enforcement is noticing not going to happen i'll talk about limiting short-term rentals to 60 days a year we believe a hard cap has to be established the reason we've established the 60 days because after many discussions with tenant

landowner and people in the distribute that have been impacted by short-term rentals we have heard is that 60 dazed it the threshold beyond which if you allow more than that you're giving an incentive to people to actually engage in the short-term rental arithmetic instead of what the need is the housing market so we believe that the facts that have 34r5i9d out through san francisco has demonstrated and fifth the unit list not recommended with the city it is exonerating if the rules are going to be followed then we have to make sure that hosting platforms like airbnb only listed those units if are registered if they under my legislation list the unit not registered they'll be fined up to one thousand dollars a day it

is critical in any experience with airbnb if any doubt ho how they operate taxes they pay back the millions in back taxes they owe the city and county of san francisco not because the city scald politely they asked because they have to they knew that we had legislation pend before the board of supervisors and that legislation had the 6 votes to pass asking nicely is not going to work now platforms have to priority i provide data to the platt they've stolen as to why it is enforceable to have enforcement without that information and the idea that somehow you can backtrack after saying the same thing is not credible and 7th having the

planning department redact the private information we recognize there is a privacy concern that is legitimate in terms of the data and information we're talking about but the fact is every and every one of us taxpayers provide information to the 71 and the san francisco general and there are legal protections that insure that information we many the city and county of san francisco to make sure that privacy is will find and to that end i'll be asking that there is a redaction of numbers of folks in the registry i'm a happy to have a implication with airbnb about must not to protect this information the eight is the criminal penalties against hosting platforms under the

curiosity allow and we're amending this to allow for the penalty to be against platforms as well and let me close by saying i'm greatly disappointed by some of the recommendations of your staff which again recommendations that essentially led to a different position the staff is recommending against hosting platforms of data i don't know how you can talk to that and change our tune they've asked for the removal of the abdomen at the landlord this is a mistake they have interests and the staff is recommending a expedited right of action for interested parties again, that is a mistake enforcement requires the individual have the right to pursue the right of

action and staff extorts a hundred 20 day cap that goes too far but i'll close with that what happens or doesn't happen it send a clear message how we do business in city and county of san francisco i believe that home sharers have a place in san francisco but didn't have a place in san francisco is the idea that a corporation can write a law then ignore the very law it wrote and then refuse to provide the basic information that is needed to enforce that law mr. conway and others who have invested heavy in airbnb may think they can dictate what happens ♪ building i hope that through our action this commission the board of supervisors will keep in mind that that is not corp is run san

francisco that run the planning department but this department and the policy of this city is ultimately driven by what is right for san francisco and not by what is right for the bottom line of a major political contributor (clapping) thank you >> i'd like to invite supervisor farrell up. >> good afternoon, commissioners commissioner president fong thank you for having me here today for a second i thought that supervisor campos was looking for airbnb employees i thought he was looking me proud to be representing folks in the second district and talking about the

amendments last year our board of supervisors came together with input from the planning commission thank you to planning staff and everyone involved last year and this year at looking at the issues to pass a recommendation 40 for airbnb it is extremely complicated but ultimately we derived a fraction for a start since that time many of those interested on those topics and many outside of city hall have continued to look at the issue in terms of it's legislation and logistics from when i prospective i believe we should fully support home sharers in san francisco number one to create a law that is without a doubt improbable number two to create a law that protects affordable housing and 3 to create a law it streamlines

the process and didn't create bureaucratic red tape for those who want ta to their their homes given the crisis of housing we must protect our city from short-term rentals and strike the balance nell necessary to the residents can delivery in the city and make end meet with all eyes on san francisco how we approach short-term rentals it is extremely important in their opinion to streamline our current framework and processes i believe that that mayor ed lee and is proposal does exactly that i'm going to be brief in my comments about exactly what those proposals are and the details they contain 3 component first of all, a hundred and 20

day hard cap on the unable number of days for short-term rentals by treating outline short-term rentals hosts by host and non-hosted days i know that supervisor campos a friend happened to disagree we both have listened to the planning department and that was the number one thing we heard if we're going to create an enforceable law the distinctions within hosted and non-hosted days is not enforceable we've corrected that and even if companies proposed a harding cap it is reasonable and second of all we've created american people enforcement that is staffed by our deniable and our treasurer and tax clerk's office and in speaking with mayor ed

lee enforceability continues to be a major priority and by creating a separate office demonstrates the departments to making sure that this law is passed and impersonable enforceable and we're adequately staffed to make sure that our departments are enforcing the law i'll say i have great discussions over the last few weeks that the planning department together where the department of building inspection together with the treasurers and tax collectors office to set up the law and streamline the process for home sharers by create a enforceable department thank you to all the department in dealing with that issue and thirdly with the right of action that will allow property owners and others within one hundred feet to be

able to use the private right of action prior to the protection again, our goal i'll say is again and again to protect our housing stock to streamline the short-term rentals host process and clarify elements of the law to make sure it is enforceable. >> i do want to thank the planning staff for recommending those 3 proposals and that mayor ed lee and i have come down with as well as recommendations i want to take a moment to focus on one recommendation on its face i feel will have unintended consequences and recommendations that prohibit hosting platforms for listing a unit without a registration number i feel serious about the entire issues that this recommendation should not staples to be clear this

recommendation only target one company airbnb and i understand in the past and even today, there are an easy target in you look at the number of listings has gone down you awhile all the others home sharing platforms have gone up and from my prospective we want to address the entire issue not only one company i think there are serious questions whether those other platforms or individuals that run their own sites would be able to apply with the siberia requirement i have questions of the invocations whether the city made a mistake and building that the unintended consequences quite frankly we've seen of pushing people that are doing home sharers in san francisco

off at&t park and on the 09 platforms we're not irregularity one of the goals as a city to incentivize people to track and able to endorse the law bad acres making this more difficult for this specific represents if it's approved commissioners thank you for your time and i do want to thank the staff and all the departments dbi and a our tax collectors to talk about the prelims of that so we can start endorsing and thank you to the mayor for dealing with that issue. >> thank you very much. >> thank you. >> it's me again

so thank you supervisor farrell supervisor campos and supervisor kim for your introduction i'll be giving you a brief overview of the summary of staff's recommendation and ems to alex who will speak about the research he's done on short-term rentals and memo he drafted included in your case report before your ordinances sponsored empty supervisor kim i'll be referring to as the kim orntdz or ordinances i'll be referring to another supervisor campos ordinance and one i'll speak about all 3 ordinance all the time the charter code important the short-term rental program together these will do the following they go from 90 to 60

or h and 20 days remove the definition of hosted and non-hosted and unit as short-term rental for 5 years and amended the interested party and prohibited hosted with not registry number and report quarterly to the city with the number of nights and creating a separate agency by the zoning administrator, what say you? office and dbi to administrator the short-term rental program generally, the department supports the law of short-term rentals and now the elimination implementation short-term rental program has begun we believe that sheriff's should have a structure and many of the proposed all the times add -

while seek to protect the public on neighborhoods and the housing stock a proposed amendments increase the city capacity to enforce it by adding resources and data for checks and balances more easily verified, however the department buildings this undermines the rights the following recommendations for the major items in each ordinances individually open those to be voted on and any other amendments 3 you'd like lee to make the first thing remove the distinction between hosted and unhosted the supervisor campos and other and prohibit the units subject to the ellis act from registering in the short-term rental respiratory and allow the city to institute the hosting platform owner for all 3

ordinances allow the private action for nonprofits in the kim action and within one hundred hundred feet for the supervisor campos ordinance and mayor ordinance and prohibit the performance from listing you units not having a good business and adding the short-term rental to have the mayor to have a department staffed by the tax collectors office and make maximum number of nights it can be used a ass a hosted or inhosted one hundred and 20 days and if should use sensitized the illegal conversion to tourist and remove the provision in the administrative code for the hearing of violation of s