>> sure. >> i think that it is outrageous and the lack of predictbility and that there are new random requirements and fees that are put on, and i don't think that, you know, the no, and there should not be a fee for putting up a no parking signs and the whole, barricade issue and it is just like one thing after another and sometimes it seems like some of the departments are just looking for ways to generate more fees. and so i, i just don't think that it is appropriate to level the fees that we are charging on these events to the smaller, you know the community based events in particular. so, yeah, i would like to maybe put together that data for the non-ticketed. >> sure. >> thank you. >> thanks. >> and so, colleagues, thanks, thanks for hearing this, item today and you know i think that it is clear that these events are really important for the

city, culturally and economically, and i think that it is also clear that the city is not doing enough and i agree that i do believe that the city agencies want these events to happen to succeed and there is some really terrific people in the city government who are working to help make these events succeed and so this is not about the city not caring, it is about the way that we structure the system where there are too many departments that are involved or too many fees, involved, and there is not enough centralized coordination, and i mean that you go through the scott process to get your street closure which is supposed to be the departments working together and after that permit you have a bunch of individual departments to deal with who can charge fees and put different requirements on. and so it is not centralized enough and i would like to see first of all, a we used to have a staff position, someone who is responsibility it was to

really provide that kind of portal and the help and for the entertainment commission for the street festivals and i think that it makes sense to reentait that position so that the people who have existing fairs or starting up a fair have someone that they can go to who understands how these things work. and can tell you the path and help you out, and help you when you are having permitting issues and so forth. i would like to see better centralization, and where, and as i think that someone called it a one stop shop for permits and i know that say real challenge and we still have not really achieved those businesses who have to go to multiple place and pay things and i don't understand why that has been fully centralized and i think that this should be fully centralized and i think that the city should be providing a level of financial

support to the permit cost to defray and it is just does not make sense to especially for the events that we are supporting financially and have to turn around and pay us back with permits fees and then in terms of i know that we had issues of events where the people move into the neighborhood and complain about the noise. i know that we recently passed that the board under the leadership of breed which i co-sponsored and around the place of entertainment and live music and requiring disclosure to people and that would be interesting to know if that will be expanded to the outdoor events, and that is trickier because it is clear where those

permits are. it seems that we should be addressing this issue especially in the south market where we have more and more housing being built and the people move in and then the shop that there are there one day a year outside of the house and they get very upset. we will explore some of those issues and interested to know what the data is around the permit fees and i want to thank, ted and the controller's office for putting together a useful report and to the entertainment commission and everyone who helped to engage the community and get the surveys out there and the good data and i think that this is a long lasting policy tool that will help us achieve positive change and so w that, chairman i notice that supervisor mar and tang are on the roster. >> yes, mar? >> yeah. >> thank you.

supervisor weiner for the report. i wanted to say that it is eye opening that people spend $330 per person even outside of eat event not just at the event but hopefully with the small business and community businesses that are benefiting as well. i think that ted also identified the food consumption as the cultural event and the non-profit and the big forprofit events is pulling the people together and it is benefiting a lot of our economy and businesses as well and i wanted to say too, that i heard very loudly from some of the public speakers to that, the hardship on smaller non-profits and smaller producers of cultural events are a big burden and i want to try to make sure that we are not only helping the larger events, that i know that the study focused

on but also, smaller as mr. hernandez called them legacy event, and so how we define it is important. and i also wanted to say too that i think that staffing if the entertainment commission has additional staffing my hope is that it helps as the entertainment commissioners themselves are dealing with the conflicts between the neighbors that the staffing also addresses some of those neighborhood concerns that supervisor weiner brought up. with the recent event that was at civic center the asian heritage and i know that they scaled down this year and this tremendous challenges with capacity but hopefully the staffing within the entertainment commission could help struggling festivals and the smaller no*fn profits and others address the different needs and as mr. steven mentioned i think that the changing conditions in the city, with density and noise and other things and hopefully the entertainment commission can be looking at ways to

insure that the neighborhoods are or have their voices heard and also that we are as a city, we are benefiting for so much amazing cultural and arts events in our city thank you so much to supervisor weiner for opening up this conversation and i know that there are a lot of conversation and thank you for testifying as well. >> supervisor tang. >> thank you i just wanted to add on to supervisor mar's comments about the smaller street fair type of events, and our office for example this year we are going to be taking over the hosting of two community events in our district the auto moon, and well as the sunset xhunlt festival and that is because many of our organizations strug toll try to put these events on but our comment is interested in having them continue. our office is going through and knowing how to navigate the system and applying for the permit and we are really truly understanding the difficulties and that is why we are doing it i cannot imagine having a non-profit or one person trying

to put these events on and hosting them. so certainly understand your challenges, and looking for ward to working with supervisor weiner and the rest of the colleagues to try to make it easier for all of you because we do certainly enjoy all of the events that are happen ining san francisco and it makes it you know, why our city is so great. thank you for all that you do. >> thanks, supervisor tang and just before kicking back over to close out the hearing i just want to also, thank you everyone for coming out today and all of the public speakers and the commissioners and i share my comments and the thoughts of my colleagues about making this a stream line process for those putting on events i am a big belief their this adds to the quality of life and makes this an exciting place to live and for all of the neighborhood issues that we have and i worked with the number of you that are here and you know, this is part of living in a city and this is part of really making our city incredibly exciting and dynamic

place to live and i love it and the attention to this process. and i look forward to working together on it. >> supervisor weiner? >> thank you, for the support. and okay, so i would request that the committee file this item, and we will continue working and moving forward. >> all right. >> i will make that motion on behalf of weiner to file this. >> we have motion by tang and take that without objection. >> thank you. we are going to move on to item four. >> ordinance amending the health code to retro actively increase the patient rates and charged for concern mental health services delivered from july 1, 2014, through june 30, 2016. >> >> good morning, the department of public health we are requesting approval of the

health rates and the reason is that the current rates are below our medical reimbursement rates and so we want to maximize the amount that we are reimbursed if you have questions. >> thank you. >> why don't we move on to mr. rose's report. >> mr. chairman will you give me one >> why don't we move on to public comment, for item four? anybody wish to comment on this item? >> okay tha, was quick. we will close public comment. >> mr. rose, i think that i bought you about 15 seconds. >> mr. chairman and supervisor tang on page 8 of our report, we note that as shown in the table three, the proposed ordinance will result in

additional estimated reimbursements of 108,191 and we recommend that you approve this. >> thank you, if no questions send it forward? >> all right. >> through the chair, and so i think that it would be great for us to be able to be reimbursed up to the maximum amount that we can get, i like to make a motion to forward out the ordinance to a positive recommendation to the full board. >> we have a motion of supervisor board. >> and the motion is passed. >> and i want to note that supervisor mar was absent for this vote. >> okay. >> clerk could you call item five? >> ordinance amending ordinance, 107-14, for a state revolving loans, for the full

amount not-to-exceed, $819 million to besinger finance the costs of various projects benefiting the waste water enterprise. >> okay. thank you. >> welcome back. >> hello, supervisors charles with the cfo in the sfpuc and this item before you today is related to the capitol program for the waste water enterprise and it, and it requests your consideration for expand already existing authorizations to include the state resolving fund loan program. and which has the opportunity to afford quite a bit of savings for our waste water rate payers as we begin to rebuild our sewer system over the next 20 or so years and if you like i have a few slides that i can walk you through if that is helpful. or i could take your questions, at your preference? >> i think that we will be okay at this point. any highlights that you want to communicate to the public as well? >> only that this is not new

authorization, it is delegating authority to the commission to enter into these loan agreements rather than coming to the commission that is the only change. >> okay. >> supervisor tang? >> thank you, i don't actually have any particular questions i was a co-sponsor on this item and i think that it was a great program that was going to be able to participate in. and so perhaps if you could share with us or the budget analyst will share us with the cost saving because we are entering into this kind of a loan program. >> i would be happy to and i would refer to mr. rose to speak further. we have the opportunity to issue loans at approximately half of the cost, that we would enter into for a revenue bond issuance, which at the present rates would be approximately 2 percent and what that means for the rate payer will be if we issued 100 million in bonds that will be approximately 1.9 million dollars in savings, each year for our rate payers and so it is a significant amount of savings, and we have

had these loans in the past, supervisors and back in the 90s during the last larger waste water and capitol program, so we have or two do have a track record to enter into these and pay them off, we paid them all off a couple of years ago. >> defer to mr. rose to speak further. >> mr. rose? >> yes mr, chairman and sperp tang on page 11, we know that based on the current conditions for every 100 million of the loans puc expects to say, 1 million 900 annually in interest payments relative to these bonds. and so clearly we recommend that you approve this ordinance. >> okay. >> thank you mr. rose. >> why don't we move on to public comment for item five? anybody? for public comment? >> all right. seeing none, public comment is closed. >> thanks for being back mr. pearl supervisor tang? >> would i like to make a motion to forward this out to a

positive recommendation. >> mr. chairman there might be a proposed amendment. >> yeah. sme. supervisors the believe that the clerk's office made a recommended change to the legislation, and the department is fine with this recommended change if that is the will of this committee. and my only comment would be that we have had these loans in the past, and i believe that the change of the clerks office and recommending that when the commission takes action on these loans that we actually file those loan agreement with the clerks office. we are happy to do that, those loan documents and we are happy to respond to any request for these documents and we are happy to agree with that change. >> thank you. >> i think that would. >> so through the chair, would i like to make a motion to amend the document as was highlighted by the staff and take the amended ordinance with a positive recommendation to the full board. >> okay, that motion by supervisor tang and take that

without objection. >> thank you very much. >> and mr. clerk, could you call item 6 and 7 together. >> just to note on that previous item the matter was amended pursuant to the amendment with the whole and passed without objection and wanted to note that supervisor mar was absent. >> yes. >> next on the agenda, six and 7. >> societying, please. >> resolution urging mayor lee to form an interagency working group with the participation from the mayor's office of housing and community development and the rent board and coordination with the board of supervisor to create an eviction early warning system. >> item 7, hearing to review housing resource and programs for retention of rent controlled housing and request the mayor's office of housing rent board, and council of community housing organization and the various other agency to report. >> okay, thank you mr, clerk and so colleagues, these items

were called forward and sponsored by commissioner christensen and we will turn it over to her to run the show. >> thank you. >> the purpose of this hearing today is to focus on the challenge of identifying and preserving the existing affordable housing. ellis act evictions are impacting district three and neighborhoods all over the city and we are finding a lot of the long term residents being moved out and these eviction and buy outs are disproportionately impacting senior and low income residents who have been finding it very difficult to find equivalent and or appropriate housing for their current needs. speculation, has upset the balance of our neighborhoods, and it is displaced land lords, and it has displaced residents and land lords content with modest returns over longer terms cannot complete financially and have been priced out of the market. a lot of our buildings have been hoteled, purchasing, and

combined with the short term rentals. >> may i --. >> we have lost our quorum. >> okay. >> pause the meeting? >> yes. >> hoteling, and speculative purchasing of the real estate in the district, plus the

income possible with the sort term rentals has created a work around to the restrictions that prop g intended to impose. making me believe that short term rental enforcement is critical to the retention of housing stock in district three. but a lot of the problems come from simple transition. many of the buy outs and the evictions have been the result of children or other heirs to former property owners, who are drawn in by the prospect of higher returns, and we are doing a number of things about this we need to build more, both with public and with private funds, and the mayor's office of housing has projects in the pipeline include ining our district and i am looking for ward to the passaging of the housing bond in november and i was delighted to hear about governor brown's budget proposal that will allow san francisco to m some ways restart the city's redevelopment efforts and we have also been encouraging the

private development and the civic pressure and the incentives have upped the affordable in many development and my office is working on dwelling unit legislation that will allow the addition of rent controlled unit to existing buildings and we are looking at other zoning adjustment to encourage the small scale, infill development in what is a fully developed district. and we also are working to preserve the housing that we have. and so that the rad program is going to rehab tait more than 500 units of housing in china town. but, in fully developed areas of the city, with aging, which is traditionally meant affordable housing, we face unique challenge and so the purpose of the hearing today is to focus on how we can identify and preserve existing affordable housing, and i hope that we can highlight the enters to the following questions. what programs and efforts exist

to preserve the existing affordable housing? what are the challenges and the stumbling blocks to these effort and how can we remove them and what additional things can we do to retain affordable house and our neighbors who live there? ideally we want to identify and protect buildings before they are at risk, in the meantime, we are also trying to cope with ongoing displacement in researching the housing situation, and in speaking to housing advocates and one of the things that we heard repeatedly is that we are not getting ahead of the systematically clearing out of long term tenants and so we have created a resolution to create a earn warning system that is designed to help us identify the at risk buildings and to connect them with the valuable resources, and at the early stage this is a simple, short term fix and the rent board is going to add eviction and buy out notices to their data base and when we see the

multiple notices, filed on a building the mayor's office of housing and the district supervisor will then be contacted in an effort to put the tenants, in contact with these resources at an earlier stage. and so i want to thank you, supervisor farrell and i know that we have darlene from the rent board here and representatives of the mayor's office of housing, and we have reached out to a number ever community housing advocate and hope that some of them will appear today, as well as others familiar with the real estate industry. and so at this point, darlene are you here? >> we have got it.

>> got it. >> okay. >> thank you. thank you, chairs and supervisors i am dalene wolf, the executive direct and her this is not my usual committee and so it is nice to see you all. i have come to depress you and that is what do i and my colleagues at the mayor's office of housing will try and kind of lighten things up with some of the measures that are being taken. and when supervisor christensen office reached out to us, we believe that it was important to provide a context for this issue, and there is a lot of hyperbaly that is going around the displacement and evictions for obvious and understandable reasons. and depending on who you are talking to the only thing that both sides can agree on is that there is not enough affordable housing, that is quite obvious. and so wha, we did is take a look at the extent of the

problem who is getting evicted and why, and looking longer back, the last ten years s what everybody tends to look at, but we thought that it was actually very interesting historically, to take a look at ten years, 20 years, and because we have been here before. we have, and we are rapidly approach thating state at this point in time. >> and so excuse me for the wanting, nature of this presentation and we of course, find it endlessly fascinating but we hope that it is useful for you. and we have provided you with a copy of this slide show, and unfortunately your copies are not in color, and so it is a little hard to follow, but we are happy to provide that to you, if you would like it and think that it is helpful. >> and so the first slide that you are seeing here, are realize that the way that the rent board tracks it is through the filing of the eviction notices in our office, the landlords are required to file any eviction notice except for non-payment of rent within ten days of serving it on the

tenant, that is where the numbers come from and all of the numbers that the people use from the office, how many eviction notices are being filed and what are they being filed for? >> and that does not necessarily mean that those land lords proceed with an unlawful detain and her that those tenants are actually evicted in court and that is what is being tracked here, if you will see on this first slide, during the most recent ten years, we have received an average of 16, 18, eviction notices per year and i am not going to tell you the numbers what i will tell you because that is too boring, is that our data is for the year ending march. and we are pretty current and we are one month behind in this data, but the most recent year, represents 32 percent more filings, than the average for the last ten years. and because that is a very, significant increase. if you look and this is the second slide, if you look at the last 20 years, which

includes, the, dot com era and in 2010, we were in a recession and we all remember that and a high in 1999. and so, actually, dot com was worse than the situation than it was right knew at its peak and however, the most recent year, represents 14 percent more eviction notices filed than the average for the last 20 years. and so we are still significantly above historical averages and trending in the wrong direction. >> we thought that it would be interesting to show you why our people are getting evicted in san francisco? >> we think that what cause reason and a lot of the attention goes into ellis and owner move in eviction and those are significant, and ellis numbers may be relatively low in terms of actual numbers, but of course, there is always real people behind all of these numbers which you are well

aware and, the problem is that those units are the least likely to return to the market. but, for all of the evictions during the last ten years, the most significant changes have been an increase for breach of rental agreement and a lesser extent for nuisance. and so, while everybody focus actually on ellis and owner move in, the real uptick has been in breach and nuisance and we think that that is obvious why? in a down market where the units are going begging the land lords will put up with behavior that they are not going to come up with as much in the hot rental market that we are experiencing right now. >> the next slide shows all eviction notices over the last 20 years. and what you really see is a significant reduction in owner move in eviction notices. we think that is because in 1998, proposition g passed which made it much more restrictive to move in for owner or relative occupancy, which of course, led to an

uptick in ellis. >> and the next slide, shows the big four, which is really breach, nuisance, and owner move in and ellis for the last ten years, and as we said, in 2010, owner move in notices have declined for the middle of a decade but they have begun to rise in the past three years to the highest number in the past ten years, and the ellis notices have shown a general decline, followed by a recent increase in the past three years and a significant reduction in the last year and we think that was because of the presence of proposition g on the ballot which had a squelching effect and also in the increase of expenses as you know is currently tied up in court. >> the, last 20 years, basically, the most significant change is a reduction in owner move-in notices and the people

will debate the reason for that, which i think actually leads us in to what i considered the most significant of our slides, and it is the most boring and it is not very pretty, but it traps, buy-out agreement and the buy out agreements are under the radar and it is only recently that they tracked the buy out agreement and that the land lords have to file the buy out agreements with the sxofs if you look at these numbers, this requirement has only been in effect since march 7th of this year and we already have 14 recorded buy out agreements but 96 disclosures by landlords to tenants of their rights, if they should engage in a buy out and, so i really think that it is important when you look at any of the numbers in these slides realize that a lot of this activity was not recorded and it is not reflected in any of the data that anyone has because it was under the radar for basically the dominant period that we are talking

about. >> we are as i said, happy to provide this in color, because it is a lot more, and i am happy to answer any questions, and we are happy to participate in an eviction early warning system to help hook the tenants up with resources at an earlier stage. >> thanks. >> it is good to see these things in this easy to read form. >> thank you. >> sorry, supervisor, tang? >> thank you, just really quick, i appreciate this information and the tracking that additional information, and just really quick if we could get this sent to us via e-mail in color i think that would be great, thank you. >> good morning, supervisors i am from at mayor's office of housing and i am here to follow up