think that the main point of concern i have there are some neighbors we're not seeing that level of affordable housing development and that is something that separately i'm working on since coming into officer as i speak i'll ask my aid to place on the projector for you the map that shows the upcoming pipeline up through 2020 of the affordable housing in san francisco so sfgovtv if you could show this a lot of the left side in district 4 we have 7 units of below-market-rate housing coming online in the next year and prolonged up up to 2020 so to i appreciate what the supervisors are doing to make sure that the residence are staying in their homes in baufrts there are many, many neighborhoods including all of district 4 if their displaced they will see 60 percent the

affordable housing taken away from their preference and so what does is say about other neighborhoods that residents come from and get evicted they'll be pushed at the very bottom the waiting list i agree with the supervisors we're citywide supervisors need to help everyone that gets displaced no matter what neighborhood that's indicative of the dilemmas that some of the neighborhoods face including my own milestone working on trying to get the support more affordable housing to be built in the neighborhoods despite the neighborhood option so really i think i'd like to propose 3 separates amendments we it can take 3 separate votes one of them is the mayor's office of housing to do some annual reporting the reason i'll propose i want to have a better

sense of what is going on there and how many even planners are applying under the cop, o m i ellis and what are the district where the affordable housing is located where are they selected from the lottery and if they were were they able to operate in the bmr units and mount other pertinent information that the mayor's office of housing that can inform our efforts moving forward to better help the various communities that should be assessing those affordable units this is the first amendment i can go through the other two first. >> commissioner walker why not you're showcasing motions you want to make as a whole and entertain conversations to have a discussion around others

amendments and take them one at a time. >> the second amendment to add to the second category the definition of displaced tenants educate 2 a tenant in san francisco after january 10th received a meows notice that his or her landlords gets the units under the section of the rent ordinance to create or adding in the o m i eviction into the second educate keeping in lien with the ellis act evictions at 20 percent and as well as the ellis act provisions of the 10 year retainedcy and the 100 percent if so being considered whether you're showcasing ellis act evicted or being displaced because of a owner move-in eviction our someone that needs the help from the city there shouldn't be a dimension between

the two types i'd like to see us add in the o m i for the displaced tenant and thirdly, speaking to my main point earlier the amendment to decrease the neighborhood preference down to thirty percent i was supportive of the original version with the 25 percent i know that absolutely is something we can include as a preference but if we're going to increase it to 40 percent on top of the displaced category of 80 percent and on top of the cops we're effectively shutting out and taking away the 60 percent of affordable units that is open in for any of the other displaced tenants so those are the 3 amendments i'm proposing and we can take all 3 amendments separately with separate vote. >> thank you supervisor katie tang we'll do that lets keep

going with comments supervisor yee. >> thank you very much i'm also want to show my appreciation to supervisor cowen and supervisor breed and bringing this issue up this basically due time and basically several people have mentioned this is the perfect solution i agree with several the commenters this is not the perfect solution, however, when we if we're looking at correcting the wrong that was done this solution is better than doing nothing i 80 want to make that statement thank you for at least pushing us in the right direction we need to continue looking at better solutions in the future but we cannot wait for that that to come we need to move now i'll not be supporting some of the supervisor tang's amendments that she introduced i also wanted to say that i won't push

this discussion today since there is a duplicate file sitting at committee right now if we truly building in the neighborhood preference we need to focus on what the neighborhood is and not get confused with the district i'll take this as an for example, i take one end of district 7 and then basically have some affordable housing like possible near city college and 3 miles away is still my district and the people living 3 miles away don't consider the other area their neighborhood so it dans sdnt making make sense to improve this supporting the

neighborhood preference and the way i'll start the discussion to say wherever a project is built let's provide a radius that make sense in which people will consider that area is their neighborhood not something that is three or four miles away maybe other district make sense to have a district it is much smaller and several large district not fair for something in my district to happen and a few plain clothes away they can't move into the same neighborhood that's my concern and hoping we'll have acknowledge open discussion in the future otherwise as we discuss this i'm hoping to support the original amendments today. >> supervisor mar. >> i know this item is in the context of other large items that are on our agenda and i'm

thinking a lot about development projects that have a displacing impacts and long term creative multi strategies to mr. chair the lower-income communities of color to xhooez points i don't want to do something that is better than nothing and to supervisor breed question of who is winning in this lottery for extremely limited affordable housing slots i'm not sure and who is losing yes african-americans are losing but also chicanos and latinos from the mission lower-income filipinos from south of market and many, many others groups too i guess i worry when we create a preference system that is based on a couple of spiritually districts we're losing out on the strategies of fighting displacement and unfortunately, the solution to displacement is

to stop displacement not to rebuilding department paifrg as a number of groups have said i worry that fighting over the crumbles of affordable housing and giving me preferences to different categories it is not neighborhood but district we're talking about and if only 4 major spiritually districts we're talking about right now and in the near future as projects in the pipeline 4 districts of setting up a system that pits people of lower-income people of color and supervisor tang said a lot of considerations needs to be made on the west side i represent as well as i want to say when i looked did affordable housing on geary the core net theatre i asked about 10 preferences can be given to district 5 and district one close to the area

the response from the mayor's office of housing was fair housing laws and is hud's and others low prevent that i know that as legal question from the memo i want more findings of that as we receive the cautionary memo i know in this legislation some of that is still up in the air if federal funding vofdz or states housing laws say for example, a district 8 not all district 8 are affluent or white people but i'll say from the preference is given for district 8 and not to other stlaerl displaced and other areas that makes me question the 25 and 40 percent i guess we have a danger of san francisco as foreheads blackwell on the foundation convened a meeting a couple of days ago

thai showed you that san francisco has ground grown to the majority off people is now going down so that it is a total reversal of the diversity that's groin grown in the city we'll see because of different housing policies and cost of living that change in the demographics of the people not only color but a rapid desegregation i fear that the proposal like this without carefully and thoughtful approaches like chinatown and other neighborhoods that we may be adding to a rapid desegregation of housing and fooufr u fooufr that push out of people of color i support of racial justice i have serious concerns and hopefully slow down and perhaps continue to discuss

a lot of the different items supervisor tang's amendments i'm supportive of the first and third but carving out noting another preference for owner move-ins i see that for the west side but wondering how it this impacts on the people that have been evicted in others i think we need more time to understand the implications i appreciate the approach from sxhoepd and supervisor cowen but i support the multi racial in the broader context of building more housing for the displaced community that are all around us that's my $0.02 in the context of this displacement and development right now. >> supervisor campos. >> thank you very much mr. chair and all the members of the community for this item i

guess this is not a simple issue i have a lot of mixed feelings and thoughts maybe none will be happy with what i have to say let me say this i've come to this board asking the board for help at different times in my district in the mission and so i am very much aware of why supervisor president london breed and supervisor cowen have working hard on this issue and let me say it is not entirely clear when you accountability the neighborhood preference in terms of the specific impact that it may have on one district and neighborhood and part of challenge we have with the neighborhood preference legally we have limit onyx from my district in the mission which

is what i generally lands on this issue i think that the con seis sews people want to see a better preference people affiliate neighborhood say 40 percent neighborhood preference is not enough for the mission i actually think that important purposes of the project in the mission that is not enough is it should be higher i think that 40 percent is probably at this point as high as we can go in a way that is legally defenseable and if i could sit here and say i could defend 60 or 70 percent or 80 percent i would like make that motion i'm not in a place to do that i recognize what many of the advocates have said which is that in some respect make a

maybe a better approach or bitter way to look at this not a one-size-fits-all but perhaps variations for each neighborhood and within the district perhaps a neighborhood with a within each district i recognize that with that said, i want to speak to members of the public of my community working on that issue for the last few weeks i was disturbed to read the paper today and the way that issue has come across it seems like that there is different groups within san francisco that are being pit against each other and as a gay latino man it has been especially difficult to see that if you read that art it comes across as members of the latino

community coming out against something that is beneficial to the african-american community that is problematic for me and real concern and i'm not sure what the right policy outreach is i'm going or i'm not sure how far we can go in terms of neighborhood preference and i think that at some point procedurally this is done and duplicating the file so we have we'll remain something p to work on moving forward make sense and i would urge both supervisor president london breed and supervisor cowen and the folks that or who are on the other side of that issue to figure out how to work together on that piece what bothers me about some of the way that comes across i don't know what will work i also

know that even if you don't agree with it for elected leaders in the african-american community and many members of the african-american communities this is something that the priority for them and just like the mission came here and said whether you agree with the cost or the moratorium or not give us the benefit of the dough and have us have some say over our own destiny i think consistent with that approach to me it make sense that even though this is not clear how this will cut into the the ends have members of the african-american community including the elected leadership we want to try this we'll support that it is in that spirits that i will be supporting this i think that it

make sense that we would give this a shot and it does bother me actually that some of us came here and required support what we minded in the mission yet not seemed like we're doing that here this is the problem for me and i think that if whatever happens out of this i hope what happens every group the african-american are is chinese-american or the latino community the an low communities you all of us figure out how to move together collectively so it didn't come across as divided i know that is a real problem and i know that the folks that are coming from the mission and chinatown to advocate a different approach are doing so in the interest of everyone's interest but i think that right

now that is not how it has come across i'm committed with working with with supervisor president london breed and supervisor cowen to move forward in a way that allows us to not only you know be united but come cross as united i don't think we're there the second point i will make this is where i have to be honest to members of the public that are coming here to support this i will be voting for this but let's be realistic about what this means if you really care about what is happening to the african-american community in san francisco and all you do is supported this policy and push for this then we have failed the african-american community this is a small percentage of a much large problem that could potentially be impacted and it

is significant but if you care about san francisco making a priority of keeping african-americans in san francisco and all we do is this policy i, i have to tell you the outcome will not be different than that we have right now and anyone respectfully anyone that tells us otherwise in my humble opinion is not giving you the full picture of what's happening if you want to keep african-americans it is not enough in this city not enough to do what we're doing here you have to do something about most of developments being approved by this board of supervisors and this mayor are not building housing for low income people and working-class and

middle-income the fact that the inclusionary rules that the developer building the luxurious projects are asked to pay for 10 to 15 percent affordable and what that number is higher it is not clear when those will be built if you care about the african-american community you have to address the fact that san francisco and this mayor are talking about spending hundreds of million dollars dollars on a new jail and one millions for each cell and that new jail which will make that cell more expensive than a affordable unit for working-class families in the city all of that has to be addressed if you care about the future of the african-american community (clapping.) so i will be supporting this effort but i will i have to tell

you this i will be coming back to this issue of how we're helping african-american stay i have a year two months left in any term and i'm committing myself doing everything we can to make sure we have not just african-americans we have latinos and asian-americans we have working-class people we be ann loss and teachers and every single person who wants to stay in san francisco it is not just about this vote i'll be voting to support this but reminding us as we move forward if he care do do the right thing by this african-american community and other communities that it didn't end up with this the on the thick i'll say and ask all the folks who have been lobbying and advocating for this is that i

would encourage eir receptionist of the confines appreciable within the brown act and the laws and i will ask supervisor cowen and supervisor president london breed and a to reach out to the community the folks who are on the od's today so we can have an inclusive discussion going forward to the extents i can be involved i'm committed to doing that i think we need everyone such as as soon as possible to be on the on the same page. >> supervisor christensen. >> so our housing situation is an steel complex we've looked at maps with the affordable housing is planned at any office studying i know where displacement is occurring in high concentration where there

are concentrations of qualifying residents issues like transit and jobs and schools a lot of complex abashes a at the heart is a simple sidewalks that is losing one home is stressful and difficult but losing ones neighborhood a correction to friends, schools, shopping, cultural activities and familiar environment is devastating combining this measure with the opportunities of the housing bonds we've just passed give us a chance to more carefully consider the fair and equal dispercent of affordable housing around the city and help disperse the facilities with the housing projects the good news is that as a city we will build more housing

we've just passed the largest effort to date in this direction never enough but. >> huge step forward we need to locate the housing equally across the city so displaced residents regardless of neighborhood can stay home and for that reason i'll be supporting the legislation as well. >> supervisor breed. >> thank you i appreciate the comments of many of my colleagues here today and i just wanted to talk about supervisor tang's amendments i am supportive of annual reporting i think this is really important i know for certainty that annual reporting exists with the mayor's office of housing and the current system we definitely could provide language in the resolution that

could make sure that they do a better job as it relates to neighborhoods preference and ellis act evictions we can have a better understanding of how who is taking advantage of this housing and how to make the legislation better as far as adding a category i'm not poster of that without a lengthy discussions in the land use commission talk of adding o m i did was in the language and removed for more lengthy discussion at a later date i'm not closing the door to including o m ii want to make sure that that discussion takes place we can include the predicament language as it relates to owner move-in evictions so and won't be

supporting that amendment and definitely not decreasing the percentage if to thirty percent so colleagues, i again, i will support the first amendment but the other two are amendments that i actually can't support today. >> thank you. >> supervisor kim. >> thank you. i know that quite a bit of dialogue and efforts have down or impound into this for neighborhood preference i want to say he support some of the overall concept of why we put neighborhoods preference in avenue, i get that people want to stay in the neighborhoods and communities their part of familiar routine and friendship and social services and patterns that is disruptive which one moves from one part of the city to another, in fact, one of the things i've learned around the displacement of

housing in chinatown i one by one replacement housing was not enough when we offered the replacement housing the attendance tells us i'm part of a community i know if i don't get out of bed my neighbor will check on me to see how i'm doing those are the concrete things that people have when they're part of a community that go beyond the replacement housing i had concerns around the preferences because i know that the district i represent is building a disprompt of the affordable housing in san francisco and, in fact, our last housing balance report in september that was compiled and accustomed by the planning department 50 percent of the affordable housing is in the district in the south of market and tenderloin that is a boon and

benefit to the residents of my district we'll sure up to 40 percent of units in the neighborhood go to the residents i know that residents in the tenderloin and south of market and treasure island support this for that reason i just want to make sure that there ashlt unnecessary impacts in other districts for mother not as much support housing is produced one district is not more deferring as another and hopefully, this encourages our supervisors to make sure that more of is built in their district looking at the numbers of the residents you know our ratio is large represent of the rest of the city 34 asian and 167 percent latino if we are concerned with assuring a diversity of residents that are getting priority more affordable

housing in our district we working hard to make sure that our residents apply more affordable housing i like many of the colleagues will be supporting this i supported this out of land use commission for the respect that both supervisor cohen and supervisor president london breed's did i certainly understand the outcome and we have a vast under representation of african-american and latino and our 100 percent affordable housing not run by the city i want to see that increase i'm worried about the legislation won't would have the impact that is deserved it didn't matter if you have preference if you're not applying the city needs to being able be sure that residents building if they apply they'll get it i've heard from residents they don't apply they've lack faith in the lowest system if your name is not in

the pool you'll not get picked; right? two we've invested in the application progression when i worked at chinatown cdc we were door knocking and buying newspapers and opening our doors those applications are very complicated i can fill it out for myself without a ton of guidance but we need to make sure that we invest in those type of infrastructure so for every single community and neighborhood south of market unfortunately an organization that helps many of the south of market and tenderloin residents and many residents want affordable housing because of that kind of support and it is important that we look at the system and what is disadvantageousing certain folks do we need to work on the history and taking care of the

conviction and supervisor cowen and i co-authored and what type of work for the residents to make them giggle and building more affordable housing clearly not enough if folks feel they don't have the opportunities of housing in the city i think that is important to allow this to move forward to have the outcomes we want to see and whether it will achieve those but which is why i'll be supporting supervisor tang's third amendment to make sure we get the data to make sure we we're getting the outcomes i had one question to supervisor tang on the addition of the organization m i to the second category to the second preference and i just time to clarify that this is up to 20

percent? >> of the displaced your excluding the o m i along with the tenants. >> that's correct not changing the overall but including the 20 percent that i know that looking at the data we have a tremendous amount of owner move-ins revocations on the west side of the city that bring more equality to the perch system. >> thank you, supervisor kim supervisor campos. >> thank you madam president on the amendments by supervisor tang i will be supportive of the amendment on reporting but i will not be supportive of the other amendments as i noted for place like mission for us lower the percentage from 40 to to in my verify is the wrong approach

for us and weren't to the owner move-ins evictions he appreciate the spirit and intent but a large discussion that needs to be had around that issue i know there is a framework in place with that discussion because it may be that in the end what commissioner chung is proposing is something that is included but i think there needs to be a larger strategy and quite frankly a large strategy that addresses the metabolic evictions the one thing i forgot to mention it is important i'll ask especially supervisor president london breed and supervisor cowen as we move forward and sort of working on this what you look at what is happening in places like the mission you have and the latino communities in particular you

have latinos making up 15 percent of population and yet only benefiting from 5.4 percent of city units and 11 percent in privately development unit i think that one of the challenges that i see is not just the rules in terms of preferences but also how it is that members of that communities and other communities are figuring out what is available and the outreach that needs to be done i actually think one the things that necessarily has to happen the city needs to invest resources for better outreach in theirselves communities and especially in the latino communities, the african-american and the chinese community we need to figure out how we reach out and make sure as those rules change that members of the neighborhoods in those communities said they can

benefit from those policy changes thank you. >> thank you supervisor cohen. >> thank you very much and thank you for the support colleagues looks like we're in a fairly good position a couple of things i want to acknowledge questions and issues and also want to speak to the audience members we want to acknowledge people that came out to the land use commission twice to hear this item and focus on this item and joined us in the chamber today stand up and give us the board of supervisors an opportunity to acknowledge you thank you for being here those folks that came out to champion this issue our incredible and very much an international part of this movement to move forward thank

you very much for being here (clapping.) the other next set of folks we need to recognize are my legislative aide to me and supervisor president london breed's office and conner johnson and others are incredible in move people here and educate them and fighting back the lies and is rumors that are out there as well supervisor kim through the chair to supervisor kim i want to pub u talk about the issues their quit on point and i want to also educate the folks that are here about what we are already doing in terms of tirz i got a couple of hundred thousand dollars to go to an advertising campaign and a media market okay to reach people that grew up in san francisco and are no longer here

or are here struggling and advertising in a meaningful way and in multiple languages so we're not excluding everyone that is the first time we as a body have taken our money and put it in allocated in such a way to help with the outreach you talk about the outcome we've benefit working on the mayor's office of housing is codifying how those developers advertise now as you're showcasing advertising in sf magazine i don't know how many people reads sf magazine i'm using that as an example we're not doing going to reach the urban market how to you put together rules those personalities we'll come and go but in the codification the malice a set number of wards words and pictures whatever it maybe we're actually working on

that to make sure we getting the advertising where we need to be advertising and no one gets left behind and the application process we've done a tremendous job i want to acknowledge one of the my champions kathy davis and kathy didn't say but she is the executive directors of the george b davis senior center we're building thousands of units of senior housing which is not enough we need more but the thousands we have she's single-handed collected 4 thousand applications for 2 thousand units so my point is when you puts diligent work and a little bit of dollars together but will reach people you will get them to turnout and fill out the application and can change the tide we've spent time talking about ousted migration

and what it comes to in migration retention that is just as important as speaking to the makers of this policy as we continue to talk about housing for all and for every person in the chamber that voted for prop a thank you very much you've significantly helped us to build public housing part of the affordable housing and inside of san francisco noted directly related to this particular piece of policy but we talk about the housing we can't forgot billion those people in housing and prop a is second to none daily and police chief both irs that are open and so as we continue to talk about supervisor campos about housing and in the mission and the dimes we're most certainly to make sure we are talking about those in all kinds

of housing whether subsidize and section 8 and market rate housing not market-rate but below-market-rate housing inclusionary, however, we want to category no one gets left behind now could you don't i think so supervisor tang's prospective i don't supports the neighborhoods decrease in the neighborhood preference he agree with many of the folks that came out in public comment and if we could get more maybe we'll do it and looking for a way to get a higher percentage one-half not found that so it is i think goes against the desire of not only this body but the general public to decrease the percentage for for neighborhoods preference and also during to the hearings hearings we heard in land use commission i chair we heard from

dozens of people that wanted a neighborhood preference one the key components to reward neighborhoods that have accepted the development and affordable housing in other neighborhoods so hey, you want to put people into in action go talk to the developers and get this moving over west side it is not fair the district have to share the shoulder responsibility we all must share that responsibility for decades the west side of the city has had a adopted a not in my backyard but now we're changing it approximately will on this board on the west side to begin to see the see change and it is you know if you talk about anyone that grew up in san francisco none thought we'll be developing in the shipyard toxic

maybe property but here we are buildings 12 thousand 5 hundred units on the west side those developers find. >> way and this legislation is going to insure hopefully b be in place the folks on the west side that may not benefit as wild as we want today but in a position to benefit from it in the future that's why we're making the decisions that has the best interests of people in the city we can't make a decision now to limit you have the future we can't see those units didn't mean they are not in our future i believe this legislation is significant and will fairly benefit all of san francisco i do support the third amendment that requires the mayor's office of housing to report yearly the number of migration and preferences

eligible for the demographic because if you're not counting it and not keeping track we need to do a better due diligence of how to keep tracking track alcohol, tobacco & firearms units like the police officer how many times they're stopping people the same rational notice the po a will write me gary in the examiner will write me changing brurndz this is interesting go changing the neighborhood boundary from the supervisorial to neighborhood it looks good this is one the most sounds data driven piece of policy this body has seen in a long time thank you charlie he has a fantastic model if we narrow and make that legislation and i applicable to not only the baby community that excludes

people in our best interests to stick with the supervisorial indict and i want to remind the folks their made up of folks and keep them intact folks take a moment and shed light on a couple of misconceptions thank you for listening and thank you, colleagues i'm grateful for your partnership we can't do it without you. >> thank you supervisor cowen (clapping.) and supervisor wiener. >> i'm not sure how to follow that i'll do my very best i wanted to i spoke with supervisor tang and i'll be supporting this amendment and be supporting the owner move-in amendment we adapted i don't know if it was last year or the year before the legislation for

people evicted in the ellis act that was important but people that are evicted many owner move-ins solemnly swear are not at fault and they deserve preference as well in addition he appreciate what supervisor tang did in including that permission for the people lived in the united for at least 10 years so a longer-term tenants will probably be protected if from the rent control and the preference they deserve i'll be supporting that not supporting the amendment to reduce the percent from thirty to 40. >> thank you, supervisor wiener supervisor kim. >> thank you. i you just want probation officer reiterate that i as will that will supporting the two amendments that supervisor tang has movtd on o m i and at recording i want to give the neighborhoods preference category at 40 percent a chance and will be

that concludes my report that as say, i think that would be helpful for the board to hear the comparison of evictions over the last 10 years one thousand plus ellis act and owner move-ins sleeksz looking at the district particularly along the west side and saets suicides 2 to 3 times the number of o m is as ellis act 2 hss hundred mrs. but more owner move-ins and 62 over the last 200 and 24 owner move-ins evictions and district 740 ellis act eviction but one and 32 owner move-ins and district 10 only 35 ellis act

evictions. >> many more owner move-ins on this 42 and one and 60 owner move-in evicts and the other districts their intended to be more o m i given the nature there is more disparities continue the two i think that particular on the west side and the saets sector you will see two to three times more move-ins no, not at all evictions not a reason to put them into categories some of the concerns from the vehicles there are so many they're worried about that flooding i think that category so with that said, i don't see a policy reason to differentiate it was an the two evicts and i appreciate supervisor tang including the 10 year requirement because i think that you know we really want to help the long terms tenants that will be much more anxious if they get

evictions verse one that has been living in the units for one to two years we should be supporting that amendment. >> thank you, supervisor kim. >> supervisor tang thank you, very much for the discussion i said to one more thing that is not you know solution for everything i wanted to mention we've our office drafted legislative legislation we're waiting for the legislation we're going to require that when someone is filing paperwork notifying the city about an eviction the city sends that individual a notice about the affordable housing that is available through the city's malice program we feel this is one way to reach the tenants if they don't know about the program they're not obviously going to apply that is one basic step up to the plate step we can take to require the

city to provide the notifications to see people getting evicted so again, i think this legislation go passes we're eager to layer that on top of this and so again colleagues, i do want to thank you for your condominiums ii think we have pend on deck the affordable housing bonus program that i've a co-sponsor of and so to speak status quo to the comments and hoping to accommodate more residents on the west side and on deck and look forward to working with each the supervisors to make that happen thank you very much. >> thank you supervisor tang supervisor campos. >> thank you madam president i want to note on the owner move-in eviction i'll not be supporting that but something to

consider director borden's my hope if we're willing to look at the issue of providing a preference through this program that another thing we want to consider is whether or not we need to revisit the rules and provide additional protection around o m i did is a problem in some parts of district essential that is a large section i hope that happens. >> thank you supervisor mar. >> to supervisor tang's points about the o m i perch i guess i appreciate the attempt to certify the tenants that will help residents that new district as well given the san francisco transportation authority plans & programs committee staff that supervisor kim gave residents that have been displaced as a

result of the organization m i evictions i guess my concern is that this is all giving a false hope por favor 0 people that are displaced and forced from their home the lottery system within a lottery system when there is inadequate amounts of affordable housing coming online we move forward as a city but creates that people fighting over crumbles and not a real solution i think we need a careful study of the different groups of people evicted and giving an alleged apprehensive how it impacts other groups as well that's example i'll be voting no, i'm going to stick my neck out for the african-american and displacement of whole ethic and rational or racial communities that one-size-fits-all didn't

carve out the neighborhoods most in need and have two broad of a stroke including the districts not having the displacements that the mission district and the african-american and the bayview hunters point and placed like uc berkleyist displacement reach studies it show that many of the advanced stages of gentrification and the south of market we'll be talking about in a couple of minutes i know of of feel that a one-size-fits-all approach is not the right one it has the danger of pitting communities of color against each other though i'm supportive of the african-american efforts to maintain their communities this is not the rights approach i'll be casting a no vote. >> thank you seeing no other names on the rosters we'll take commissioner sanchez amendments one by one and the city attorney has comments regarding the owner

move-in represents so recommendation so schaung has made a motion to do annual reporting is there a second seconded by supervisor cowen madam clerk call the roll on the amendment. >> schoolz supervisor avalos. >> just a point of clarification. >> each supervisor tang has proposed 3 amendments. >> right what's the first amendment. >> providing annual reporting. >> it is it was moved by supervisor tang and sect by supervisor cowen. >> madam clerk call the roll. >> and madam president for classification when supervisor tang read those items they read them backwards. >> i'm confused. >> okay. please call the

roll. >> commissioner avalos. >> reporting way on annual report. >> correct. >> commissioner avalos supervisor breed supervisor campos. >> supervisor christensen supervisor cowen supervisor farrell supervisor kim supervisor mar supervisor tang supervisor wiener supervisor yee there are 11 i's. >> okay. this amendment is adopted unanimously on the next amendment which will be the doctor from 40 percent to thirty percent it was moved by supervisor tang and is there a second. >> seeing none, the motion fails and on the o m i our deputy city

attorney john gibner, deputy city attorney can you provide us with an explanation avenue what you're suggesting regarding o m i evictions. >> john gibner, deputy city attorney speaking with supervisor tang on the does the substituteed is the changing to the tenants displacement and findings the sections of the ordinance overseeing facts is the number of evictions citywide and increasing into 2010 to 2014 housing is dmrrg unaffordable to the majority of san franciscans so displacement through evictions leads to san franciscans not in the city and one the public purposes of the tenants preference is to enable residents to stay in the city if possible we'll recommend that the board add in those finding

as part of the proposed amendment. >> okay. before we move on this we need language i need language before i make a decision about this. >> i'm happy to read the language in the initial substitute ordinance. >> just to be clear does that mean this will not count as the first reading or have to go back to committee? >> the two the amendment that the board has voted on does not require a continuance so the board could adopt the ordinance on first reading with that the o m i meant supervisor tang proposed with or without the language i'm suggesting the board could denouncement today and pass the ordinance on first reading nun of the ordinances that were proposed so for will

go back to the planning commission. >> supervisor tang have you passed the language for you're showcasing proposed amendment. >> yes. i wanted earlier. >> i'm sorry, i don't have it in my possession oh, this. >> okay. and can you read the ifktd bordering and sure john gibner, deputy city attorney again so the first efktd 3 understanding were removed in committee that would be at back in as part of supervisor tang's proposal the first finding is that from 2010 to 2014 the

eviction notices with the rent board increased 45 percent and in specific neighbors the mission and the outer richmond and on the percent were significantly higher than the city average and the second proposed finding read san francisco tenants are bag displaced through eviction and current market-rate rents are not affordable thus when the displacements occurs rhyming in san francisco is not a viable option for more residents especially protecting and moderate income hours and the next for the affordable housing is necessary to achieve the purpose of increasing the opportunities for those residents to continue to live in san francisco even as market rate housing rents rise. >> okay. >> so supervisor tang has made

a motion to move this amendment forward seconded by supervisor yee madam clerk madam clerk, please call the roll. >> commissioner avalos supervisor breed no supervisor campos no supervisor christensen supervisor cowen no supervisor farrell no supervisor kim supervisor mar no supervisor tang supervisor wiener supervisor yee there are 6 i's and 5 notice with sxhooemd supervisor campos supervisor cowen and supervisor mar in the dissent the amendment passes on the pamphlet as amended. >> schoomz supervisor campos supervisor president london breed supervisor campos supervisor christensen