house ways, and means committee many things contribute but a factor here because of the contra costa crisis we're facing and the completely lack of enforcement up to now of the existing laws we need a coherent and strong response first of all, i really want to thank the authors of both of the pieces of legislation we're taking a voted on to today i mean there is evidences that an existing law needs tweaking and i believe it will continue to need adjustments as we learn more and more about what works and what don't work as we move forward and i'm glad it is not just us in this chamber that are concerned about those things people are trying to find solutions people are trying to find balance and compromises

and, in fact seems like some groups outside of this chamber are working harder to compromise more than we do in the chachldz for instance the merging home sharers of i met with and i believe we'll be meeting with as many supervisors as possible i was listening to some of their suggestions and to me they're very logical and i wish we had more time to digest their suggestions incorporating the legislation as moving forward but at this point it is rather late and i'm hoping we look at those suggestions in the future so i don't believe the one-size-fits-all approach and the confusion will rezoning the

whole city - i believe this work for neighbors as well as short-term rental hosts and therefore much of this i want to offer on amendment from my own district in terms of what people want from a district seeing the opportunity as people see preventive rather than waiting for someone to get a permit and start exclaiming about the neighbors finding out that oh no, this person is going short-term rental and start complaining so i want to introduce a modest amendment for the 3 hundred feet of neighborhood associations in rh1 and rh2 district for the short-term hosts applies to the

regulatory the application would be on hold for 45 days for people to printed in the record provide resist information the specific requirements laid out in a supervisor chosen ordinance i strongly believe that the proposal issuance and i'm offering this amendment to item no. 7 supervisor farrell's legislation i strongly believe that the proposed ordinance for this modest amendment it will be difficult to enforce but i do believe we should allow the residents and neighborhood in the organized associations to be part of the process that can be radically changing neighborhood 90 in san francisco that's the amendment i'd like to make. >> thank you supervisor yee before we entertain our amendment i know that supervisor

farrell had amendments to his legislation so i want to stack his amendment first supervisor farrell. >> thank you supervisor president london breed and colleagues they were distributeed i want to make a motion to. >> supervisor farrell made another motion to amend item 7 with a proposed suggestions from the planning department that were circulated to the members of the board and seconded by supervisor wiener colleagues we'll take that without objection. we'll take that without objection. those amendments pass and supervisor yee has made a motion to amend item no. 7 - was there a - >> did you circulate any amendments supervisor yee. >> yes. it was circulated. >> okay. so is there a second for supervisor yee's meantime.

>> seconded by supervisor mar supervisor farrell. >> sorry wherever it is appropriate to speak on the amendment i'd like to although my name is third on the roster. >> i too want to. >> before we take supervisor yee's amendment i need to call on supervisor mar at this point. >> thank you supervisor president london breed i'm supportive of supervisor yee's amendment i want to thank supervisor campos and commissioner avalos for the legislation i think that critical is critical in that is an effective line of action people are received a letter from a number of attorneys from steve collier to jason that emphasiss the right of action the chronicle to the airbnb effect gives example of the need

for the private right of action the expediting pieces of legislation the big issues are enforcement enforcement enforcement and i think the paroled by supervisor campos is the much stronger and effective one that will insure that enforcement is effective i also said to see i'm not gist casual hosts and the use of the airbnb and b rb o efforts for small homeowners additional renters and others what i'm give this what i see from the housing balance report to other impacts of the unchecked unregulated industry that many fear is creating the hotelization of neighborhoods i understand the

philosophy but not about profit marking and in some ways hand in hand of the flipping speculation of the economy that is leading to much of the housing crisis i want to say with the recent analysis from our housing balance report and information about how the city needs to build so much more affordable housing and middle-income housing housing and work on the rapid loss of affordable and below market rate housing that up or think that issue of short-term rentals is in this broader concept of the displacement for the building of low income housing i'm supportive of the efforts of share better sf.org and appreciative of the supervisor campos commissioner avalos measure and in support of that.

>> thank you supervisor farrell. >> thank you supervisor president breed to the maker the motion item 7 if this is passed are you voting in favor of item no. 7? >> when i wanted to do i'm anticipating it may pass and i wanted to strengthen your legislation to be the district 7 i still may not support it. >> to clarify it your proposing a motion on prevention that i drafted but going to not vote for the underlying legislation. >> yes. >> okay. >> so then to be clear on my end i will not be supporting this motion from any prospective i appreciate some of the concerns and met with a number of residents in district 78 but

this proposal holding application for another 45 days from my prospective we need to incentivize home sharers to file we've seen details within the planning department to get people into the registry the ones complaining not enough people are registered are complaining. >> supervisor cohen. >> good afternoon supervisor yee a quick question about our proposal you're asking for a 45 day hold is that just a one-time hold for a potential host once they go through the filing application is the application is held for 45 days; is that correct. >> so the idea here is rather than just allowing people to get a permit without a doubt questions and have issues after

the permit i've had people come to me and say look there are a houses across the street from me people coming out of there for years and parties and there is nobody that actually lives there that is the type of information that neighbors can give to city planning when they apply for the permit so only when they apply for the permit we're asking for you know to notify the neighbors so they have information we can give it to city planners take that information take into consideration to not you know give that permit and so it is not for later but right to apply response is yeah, we would love it not to delay but it's been three or four months and people

haven't applied to 45 days more to me is worth the delay to preventive headaches. >> is there a hold list of addresses that are kind of holding are in the holding pattern for the 45 days to expire will that list be public. >> in the idea from the neighbor next door applies for a permit then we automatically go in rh1 district and the city planning will give us a notice. >> give the neighbors. >> the way we do you know construction or something to give us notice and we have 45 days to give information that we

have if we have none then the person that is applying will get the permit. >> so this is just a - the notification to the neighbors is a one time transaction neighbors will not be notified every time a neighbor has a guest. >> no only one time and then again really a preventive thing. >> so what happens i'm a new host; right? and i have never hosted before applied for my permit the notification goes out and the neighbors prophet on what grounds will they protest other than their fundamental belief they don't want me as a host to be renting my property. >> to me that's not grounds to give somebody a permit.

>> i see what's the criteria to determine who gets a permit and not. >> itch is determined by the city planning oh, the permit to get as much information as they can to figure out whether or not it should be lout or not. >> when you were thinking of the amendment did you have something in mind some kind of criteria to suggest to the planning department as to what would be valid and what you know valid one can evaluate the mrnlts permit. >> i think the problem is if you start giving one example i'm trusting that people would be logical and could figure out that the example would be a

prudent reason for denying someone a permit. >> the person that is hosting if they have their permit. >> no, no i'm talking about people they've been doing this for years without permits so over the last two years people in my district people come in some of my neighbors have the short-term rentals and we had the first piece of legislation passed that assemblyman david chiu offend what i'm bagging any amendment is on comments experience that i've gotten for the last two years from residents. >> thank you. >> supervisor christensen. >> thank you i've been spending a lot of time talking to the people that live

in now district in the last month fear the daytime is a frequent theme the number of people evicted or brought out from their homes in district 3 is an epidemic they feel they're one notice away from logging their existing home the lack of sufficient housing especially housing affordable to long term tenants and the resulting economic and personal harding park has made us look at all transporting causes and remedies there is then deep concern about the proliferation of short-term rentals in san francisco specifically those that remove permanent housing from the market value in particularly that are many including many residents in my district 2005 who's ability to remain in san

francisco is dependent on the home sharers money seniors and sdablgd smument their pensions a mother taking on a expend matt territory leave and congest students on finishing their education it is a difficult balance and i'm grateful to my predecessor now sxhooumd for the long and torch religious effort to pass the first city's ordinances for the short-term rentals supervisor campos spoke of it as broken i think i perceive it as more not yet implemented as supervisor farrell mentioned it is a constance half year since this ordinance came into effect we assume that passing legislation automatically waves the magic wound that causes the action but, in fact anyone that started a business knows is it

takes a while to establish the processes and put staff in place one of the happiest things for me in the last few months that concrete steps have been taken to create an office of short-term rentals to fund it adequately to put people in charge of it how to lead those efforts we're all ready in this stage beginning to see movement in the right direction i completely semiemphasize with people in the city i have been among them but i sure you many at city hall have been urging our administration to take those steps and grateful for supervisor farrell's resolution that would add additional emphasis on that administrative direction it is important at in juncture to look at those we're

trying to enforce short-term rentals are not allowed by people who do not live in the unit as their primary residents and short-term rentals are not allowed by companies, llc you're not allowed to do short-term rentals on below market rate unit on sro units or buildings with code violations supervisor farrell addition of a 5 year limit on short-term rentals for ellis acted units also is a tool i can use in my district to discourage evicts additional requirements of registration and of adequate insurance make short-term rentals register sharing the small business it is but there are steps that need to be taken and a lot i've struggled with in the existing legislation caps i think have been the most difficult challenge for many the split cap was intended to

focus on the greatest fear the loss of full rentable units yet the spilling split e split cap of the presence or non-presence of the host is not to think proeven and the hard cap that treats full and partial units the same seems your honor fair and not consistent with our intention and net e yet the idea of a hard cap and how great or small t is difficult to get coincidence on i've tried to retain the split cap that is rational and enforceable it is difficult to do that since the introduction of those ordinances but i continue to try to do that reporting is another issue we've focused on a single platform on airbnb and making that entity

responsible for reporting but we all need to realize there are a number of platforms in the city some of them operate on a different business model the model is not engaged go in the agreement between the sharer and renter and has no number of days involved we have the fact that many shareers advertise on many platforms 0 so the information available to any single platform didn't give a complete picture of the days rents or the activity therefore i believe that platform is fraud and not likely to give us the information that we require so i believe that direct reporting the direct responsibility of a home sharer to the city government in reporting the number of days recorded maybe the best ways for

the shares to be reliable for obtaining cap enforcement is another issue and a lot of emphasize on private right of action i don't discount that but i don't think as a day to day method of enforcing an ordinance the most practical or the most best option i'm glad to see administrative options a workable over of short-term rentals with the staff assigned to people that know how to monitor and enforce the short-term rental recollections and look at this administration solution as a way to manage short-term rentals in the city currently the planning department without adequate staff has 73 violations in the administering and going through an additional 78 complaints i'm confident with the people that

are now charged with setting up the office and their ability to register people and to enforce the regulations we're on the right path so to that end i'm going to make that a little bit complicated i don't wish to slow the process today i believe we need to pass something that our city both shareers and owe own e people hurt by home sharing are ready for progress i'd like supervisor farrell proposal to move ahead today but at the same time i'd like the opportunity to investigate in detail some of the aspects of that ordinance and see if we can't make it stronger still so first, i microwave to amend section 41 act and g to require the hosts to submit quarterly reports to

the city about their short-term rental rental activities that requires the hosts to submit yearly reports on january 1st my amendment makes it quarrel, and secondly i move to amend 41 a 5 g to remove the hundred 20 day cap my amendment keeps the exist law for host to occupy the unit for 2 hundred 75 days a year but not cap the number of days as a short-term rental for partial units the reason for this is not to less edge the strength but give us an opportunity to go back and fine-tune this difficult part of the ordinance for the responsible tension related to that i move to amend section 41

action and 1-b to add the requirements the hosts keep the records for the calendar year they occupy the unit and keep the existing law as is and lastly i move to remove the duplicate file unall the time back to the land use commission and transportation committee to allow our board my staff myself and that committee to continue to consider the issue of appropriate cap on short-term rentals rentals. >> okay supervisor christensen has made a motion is there a second? seconded by supervisor farrell supervisor cowen it on the amendment? >> it's on supervisor yee's amendment. >> okay. >> okay supervisor cowen.

>> thank you through the chair i'd like to direct my question to supervisor yee real quick supervisor for what reason are you including rh1 and rh2 in the zoning why not rh1 d. >> in our amendment you name rh1, rh1 b and rh2. >> uh-huh as it is trying to capture this okay. >> through the chair reason why i put all three of those that's pretty much the vast majority of where my housing stock is in district 7 and much is included for instance rh1 d and yet there is

rh1 and rh2 willing to the labor association within my own district that's why i committed them. >> thank you thank you madam president. >> thank you supervisor campos. >> thank you very much madam president and again, i want to thank supervisor farrell and mayor ed lee for the proposal they have put forward and let me say that i appreciate the comments that supervisor christensen provided i will certainly vote against those amendments what is remarkable about the amendments they manage to do something i didn't think was possible that is actually they've made the ordinance that has been presented by the mayor and supervisor farrell much worse and what is remarkable is that

there's a very interesting choice which to me flies a different view of the world it is one i actually caution against planning department has made it clear that the staff until recently made it clear that you can't enforce this lay without booking data and while i appreciate that more resources are going to be given to this new agency unless the people hired have some supernatural power that the staff didn't possess those individuals will needed booking data but what is interesting about what supervisor christensen is saying is it this it is actually walking away from a fundamental principle that was present by

planning department staff which is that enforcement will not be effective unless the platforms have some skin in the game unless there's actually responsibility placed on the hosting platforms and what is remarkable will the amendment that is essentially shifts away the responsibility from the hosting platforms to the hosts i hope the hosts as a community understand the significance of what is being done here this amendment is placing on you as hosts a responsibility that airbnb has been unwilling to take upon itself

it is saying we're not going to make airbnb responsible but we're going to make you as individual hosts responsible if you look at the hotel industry that would be like local government saying the individual hoot has no rocket in terms of the hotel tax it is the individual who stays at the owe ho hotel that has that responsibility how r remarkable is that that you walk away from placing responsibility on the corporate players that not only have the resources to actually carry out this responsibility but corporate players that are

making a lot of money you're talking about turning your back on the hosting community to protect a $23 billion corporation and saying you individual hosts have to do what airbnb until this point has refused to do that is remarkable it is truly remarkable and it is truly a sign of the times if this passes today we have done not only the incredible job of making the mayors legislation worse but we have actually taken the unprecedented step o