it's new world and old worlds. we need new approaches to make new world technology work in today's environment. the biggest problem, you for this over and over again-the short-term rentals are causing less housing. it trickles downhill in your seeing more homeless people. that's really the big problem. all these homeless people. so, yay for the legislation. it's a start and i look forward to seeing the next pieces of legislation to make registration easier. >> supervisor peskin: thank you. after that, [calling names] >> testifier: good morning, supervisor name is charlie work on government affairs for the san francisco apartment association. thank you for hearing us today. we represent about 3000 property owners from the immense about 70,000 rent-controlled apartments citywide. we ask that you

support the legislation here before you today and also the full board of supervisors. the main thing the legislation does is all the platforms themselves accountable for registration. the same weight hurts is allowed to make sure the card about a register with the dmv. we believe this to be the smartest, easiest and effective way of cracking down on the bad actors were both landlords and tenants while allowing home sharing to continue in the framework of the existing law. the requirement told by forms and honorable to only list registered units was a primary recommendation of the planning department staff last year. the planning commissioner has called it the linchpin of successful enforcement. successful enforcement is really important. with nobody really registering no to incentive to register even the office of short-term rentals has stated there's no real way to go after some of the worst actors. this is extremely problematic because the underlying policy goals of the legislation that it make sense to allow short-term rentals on a limited basis, that people should only be able to conduct short-term rentals in the home in which they live, that they must allow and the building on

the phone owner before starting they should not be able to do with no subletting clause, all the enforcement mechanisms you built it over the past three years into 107 on the enforcement on the registration prospect without registration, none of these other mechanisms and checks and balances are able to start. we've heard loud and clear from our membership that some of them will opt out of the rent-controlled ordinance without proper enforcement. what that means is, do not offer their tenants to people who live and work it will without enforcement of those motives to enforcement of the water there tends to short-term rental guests to air b&b services. we ask you for your support today and a couple board and i think of your time. >> supervisor peskin: thank you. next speaker, please. >> testifier: gentlemen my name is dale carlson here for share better san francisco. i would talk about the legal indemnification that air b&b claims it has for many

municipal regulation. we do not allow walgreens to sell prescription drugs without a prescription. we don't allow safely to sell alcohol or tobacco two young adults who can prove they are over 21. we don't let hertz rent vehicles to unlicensed drivers. we don't allow uber to put unlicensed drivers in unregistered vehicles on its platform. you talk about the same sort of standard applying to hosting platforms. you can't list it. you can't rent it. you can't ever ties it does not properly registered with the city. we are not talking about passively user generated content. not talking about a company that is protected by the communications decency act because unlike yelp or sf gate using his posting inflammatory and incendiary comments. were top-notch hosting five forms that are aggressively pursuing and

recruiting you host. my wife and i received an invitation from b rbl. rent your home for $5000 a week during outside lands. we received a notice through next-door, come to a seminar at air dnd headquarters and learn how to become a host. and how to get around san francisco regulations. and how to get around your landlord. there is no indemnification for aiding and abetting, and that's what he sows in platforms are doing. they are aiding and abetting illegal activity. the >> supervisor campos: >> supervisor peskin: legislation will make that stop and i urge you to pass the legislation. the best and thank you and thank you for your work. if i'm not called your name will call a few more speaker cards. [calling names]

>> testifier: my name is ian winkler and other than the district 6 resident like most when he is mean my boyfriend were content to just kind of party or the world burns until friday and got a notice from our landlord saying that they're trying to do back to reduction of him and put in an electronic key card system are 46 unit building. ostensibly, to try to do more interview be stuff i want to remind you guys that you are the only line between the millionaires and billionaires and us. you don't stand up for us, nobody else will. this is those to be a democracy. never got involved before. but now i feel committed to be a people for progressive politics. i stood in line for five hours on monday to go see bernie sanders. i volunteered for jane kim for two years on tuesday. this morning i'm here and this evening i'm been a volunteer for bernie sanders again. we

are scared of orlando. if you give them an inch of they come out. of those out on the street. we live in the only department in san francisco that we can afford. i ask you to remember the average people when you make these decisions. please, support this resolution. thank you. >> supervisor peskin: thank you. ms. >> supervisor cohen: >> testifier: good morning. still morning. >> testifier: get market is still one. i'm patina >> i'm in support of the legislation it is been money or other speakers that have already spoken in support of it who said what i would like to say more eloquently than i would be able to say so all i can say is, i'm glad that it's been put for. i hope that has the full support of the board of supervisors. thank you. >> supervisor peskin: thank you ms. cohen. there's fred. >> testifier: [inaudible] i'm

here to support the bill. our organization does. as you know, they're still thousands of apartments on your b&b. if i that is the website and what people sell drugs illegal prostitution, whatever my more police on those things were, the website would get shut down and we be held liable somehow with letting people list their apartments. illegally breaking the law and what were seeing is tons of apartments that had been rented out to a not been able to soit's really

disturbing and you need to put a stop to. thank you all for taking this up. >> supervisor peskin: thank you. next speaker, please. >> testifier: i could on teresa and perry all of those was housing program and we are here to support this legislation. it's been long overdue. the should of been in the legislation from the very beginning. our number a year ago when there are questions about enforcement it seems to be unenforceable. so, it should've been done in the first place. also, there are programs, our office in the their people seen in our program looking for affordable housing live in sros and saying that their hotels are being rented for air b&b. also, along

that the much along that sixth street, you can see some forests coming out of srl like hotels and you're wondering what is going, what happened while people who just used to live there. so this legislation is just pretty much what much enforcement into the legislation but should of been happening before and the fact that will go to small site acquisition. it's a great idea. >> supervisor peskin: thank you. next speaker, please. >> file name is robert-i live in apartment building in the marina.after a lot of denials,

buying her application on your bmd, i was able to find out through somebody in tampa florida at area be issued rented the unit out in 2015 and made $43,000 on her unit. when we caught her this year she had made $12,000. a couple things that i support the legislation, one of the things is ridiculous if you. give 30 days notice is absolutely stated. something like this. because people will go up to the 29th day, collect the money, and then hold tight for a while and go back to. also the taxes of defendant i talk to the tax collector

people. what happens is the legitimate people the money people for my unit the money goes in. they match up with the legitimate people could they have the other money is from the people that are not registered. they cash the check. there's no incentive. the got their money this nonsense and do anything and i do not understand why somebody, does not check out all the addresses that coming with this tax money. involved without. you'll find out who the legal people are. i support the legislation and i firmly believe that this legislation will hopefully get people working towards getting of city back to work. the past can think. i welcome all the schoolkids who just joined us. good morning, everybody. >> good morning. >> supervisor peskin: >> testifier: i do not know they want to speak. my name is marie swanson. i don't think i

can really add on to what everybody is saying, but i think that since we know the objections equal new care b&b that we should just stop letting people rent entire traces out. all the new constructions that's not an air bmd because it's too expensive so what are they doing? they're demolishing housing stock. it's all existing housing that's turning into air b&b. i just think that's wrong. housing is for people. i'd also like to add that when out rosenthal came up and spoke, she is a lobbyist for air b&b. so, so much for the word transparency. really, i don't

think-i think the great start, but i don't think it's going to go far enough. then, i read how much air b&b donated to supervisors. i'm not optimistic on this vote for the full board because he clearly knows how to buy his vote. thank you. good luck. >> supervisor peskin: thank you. after the next speaker, [calling names] >> testifier: actually stepped up in the wrong one. i'm a reader comment. is that okay. >> supervisor peskin: that's okay >> testifier: my name is maria, in and out in the san francisco resident for over 20 years in attendance. i'm here to speak in support of the legislation for the short-term rentals. i've seen in the past several years greed take over the city. the bar displaced it is just wrong when seniors of becoming homeless and living on the streets where i see things about an 80-year-old woman

that's been affected. rents are so high, they are completely out of control, even for people making a good income. it's challenging could be challenging to find a place to live. it's an epidemic gets not only i think the problem is it's not only in san francisco that these companies are doing this. this is an international epidemic. this become a problem around the world in big cities where they're causing displacement and it's time for them to be corporate responsible and if they're not a do it in the city needs to do it for them to all these companies accountable and we need to san francisco represent is a letter know the cities not for sale. i've never been afraid to be evicted before now. i'm a good tenant, would've my landlord decides to sell the place and become an air b&b or whatever platform. how would i find a place to live? it so difficult to find a place to live these days. so,

we just need you to stand up for the people that san francisco not the wealthy and not the corporations but for the people so we can stay here and have the city be diverse, culturally, economically, thank you. be peskin thank you. next speaker, please. >> testifier: hello. i'm julianna arras. i just want to say my husband and i are one of the first 100 people pose the register last year with the new law and i want to say, since then, from day one that other departments do not know where the office was so the neighboring offices did not know where the office was to register. since then, we have got duplicate notices and threatening notices about taxes and inventories, about mention everything. i think that legislation is good, but if the

city does not get together and having the department talk to each other and do actual planning it'll be totally inefficient. the other part i want to say is given my age that on the senior citizen and lived in the area in san francisco well i work in san francisco for 30 years, i lived in the city for 29 and the reason why was because in the 80s, it was impossible for professionals like myself and my husband,, myself as a social worker to buy property in san francisco at the time. i think to go only under a b&b and any other platform is hypocritical diving we should go after the academy of arts which are finally doing it and the investors, the chinese which in the article published in the new york times have the majority of their investment here in the city. we should prevent foreign investment to do that because we are the ones really causing the crisis market. it is not one single agency or one single corporation. thank you. >> supervisor peskin: >> testifier: hi my name is

jane cohen am also host and the landlord in the city for many years. i registered onto the tedious process this woman is talked about and i'm going to the tax office. that but these notices i've not pass my taxes and i had good i think it is good that the city is i think people should be required to be registered and on the size. there's good in bad in this world and a lot of seniors and others get caught in the process crossroads of some these bad actors. but there are those of us that have always operated within the law and the

reason were all trying to keep our heads above water. that's why some of us, when we legally have vacancies have chosen to go this route. we are not targeting seniors. we are not targeting hispanics or anybody else. we are trying to get our own heads above water because of the restrictions of rent control. so i want to say to you they should require what is the listing number. i also think you need to clean up your own house before you can ask others to. >> supervisor peskin: thanks. >> testifier: i want to dispense with this nonsense the short-term rental platforms are internet could there hotel

commission marriott is the second largest hotel franchisor in san francisco after air dmv. if you go on marriott.com, you can rent from thousands of hotel operations around the world in the huge majority of them are neither owned or managed by the marriott corporation that's no different from what air b&b and the rpo do. holding these giant corporations accountable is common sense and as someone said before, a no-brainer. i do want to acknowledge supervisor breed and many commentators said that when he to go a lot further than this legislation. absolutely there's widespread violation of law because as the law was written as the planning department told the board of supervisors, when the two ordinance was that this is unenforceable. the city does

not have the tools to enforce the law. we need to put our focus on that, but right now, this piece of legislation focusing on the corporations is where we need to start. i made resident of district 8. just my block alone there are six full-time whole units at your pmb operations there. they would be rent-controlled. they will be housing for people who need housing and san francisco said they're been rising full-time which i would estimate is $3500 a month. we can't compete with that on the rental market. we needed away the incentives in all these counties are accountable. the best and thank you. next speaker, please. any other members of the public >> supervisor peskin: thank you. next speaker, please. any other members of the public alike to testify these line up behind the specter. >> testifier: i'm a small

business owner in san francisco and i went out on my own about a year and half ago and i am a host. and air b&b has allowed me to pursue my dreams of owning a small business because san francisco is such an expensive city to live in and to start a small business. i need to be able-it's challenging to start a small business in the first day. so i did register and the process takes time out of my schedule to go to city hall and the planning department and i think process just needs to be streamlined better so that it will allow people to register by the registration process. i just feel like they've help me and it will does help small business owners, people who have a dream they want to

pursue it so that's my take on it. >> supervisor peskin: thank you. next speaker, please. >> testifier:i'm a little noticed. my name is silly smith. i been here for many times already. i live a building with six units. i'm going to through investment she dated five things. first she offered the market then she accused me of violations. then she made me a settlement, then the today's gimme a settlement she gamy [inaudible] that's not the problem. the problem is that. she gives three people [inaudible] and the other ones are coming in and out so i think those are the issues

today. so, please do some and i hope when my broken images can understand. the past can we understand this on. >> testifier: i been here so may times. mussina does it. i went up and down hills in every type of weather. on the disabled i don't get help from nobody. i'm going to share this with you guys. i sent all my money writing to all of you guys writing to jerry brown, obama, name it. i was so desperate federal to the pope, who answered me he's the only one that answered me. he gimme his blessing and good luck for me. [inaudible]

>> supervisor peskin: next speaker, please. >> testifier: we've been fighting for for the housing and rigid license our reception in 1981. we supported many many projects for new affordable housing in san francisco over a number of years. but it's almost a futile effort when were losing a photo units at the same time. with this legislation does is give us a tool to try to fix that perhaps the biggest problem of a short-term rental may not the only one but the biggest. which is the wholesale loss of rental units to the new hotel industry. thomas like we have a

forest fire going on to recall the fire department but meanwhile, their arsonists are still out there setting fires. it's almost pointless. we can do something to stop the cannibalization of our existing rental stock all these efforts are almost totally futile. i plot this legislation and i hope we move towards stopping once again the wholesale loss of portable rental units in san francisco. thank you. >> supervisor peskin: thank you. thank you for your 35 years of service. >> testifier: good afternoon my name is stuart, born and raised stands san francisco that generated currently the founder of san francisco native source. when megan refers not to the coalition 1800s was a lot more room in san francisco. but for some, take up all that space. until we can appropriately and regulations to allow other people to live in the city during the urban migration in the 1990s and 2000, we are going to displaced

families living here for generations. i grew up in the city of one of most diverse cities in the united states and now it's when the least diverse cities. i hope we can come together to put in the appropriate regulations so that i can have other families for generations to continue to live in san francisco. thank you for your time and thank you for being you. >> supervisor peskin: thank you, subject seeing no other members of the public we will close public comments. thank you all for staying through this long hearing good i want to not only think supervisor campos and all the supporters on this legislation. i also want to point out that this legislation is very consistent with the recommendations that came from the city administrator and the opposite short-term rentals actually got in january in early january to

the office of short-term rentals wrote a letter to brian chesky, ceo of air b&b, as was to other platforms craigslist, home away, brd oh, suggesting a number of of improvements, including that the websites have some sort process for acknowledging registration compliance. so, i want to say we are finally getting it to implement that here today, and i'm hopeful-this is an evolving area of law. this is not just happening in san francisco. it's happening in cities across the country and everybody is trying to figure their way to get the right regulatory system in place that on the one hand, allows people to make ends meet and on the other hand does not lead to the loss of thousands of units of affordable housing

that are meant to be occupied residence of a vibrant city and a vibrant city. so, i think we are evolving this legislation here today and with that, i would like to turn it over to committee member campos and ask vice chairman yee if he has any comments. >> supervisor campos: i'll defer to supervisor tammy. >> supervisor peskin: supervisor yee the floor is yours >> supervisor yee: i would think a public for coming out and giving their comments today. it was very enlightening. some of the things i've heard before, but certainly stories like jennifer's and ms. lees and ms. müller race, from sunnyside,it's not unique. my eye this deceived many calls with some type stories.there seems to be some confusion from people that came today in terms ofthose who voice their

opposition to the legislation in what it does and does not do. they did bring up some concerns. the office of short-term rentals can improve their system so people could actually get registered a little easier. this is a question that begs an answer for a future hearing. the penalty charge, again, as supervisor peskin noted, is certainly on the books already and letting the platforms know you're responsible as well as everyone else and was also confusion my think this was only for air b&b and it's for all the hosting platforms. so, given that, for me, i don't understand the opposition that

much because it mainly i think this is so straightforward to me. it's peacefully asking our hosting platforms to work with us to stop the poor for a should of unregistered posts that are out there basically, doing a lot of damage to our rental stock, but also what am hearing for my district is that it's really changing the unique character of neighborhoods and what it's doing as this marlins was describing, and the sunnyside area. so, because of all this, i also agree with supervisor peskin that this is not the end of the legislation around this. this is evil in. we need to see what works and what doesn't work. what can be better for the city in general. it's less about the individuals

and less about the platforms themselves. it's really about what is our city to be in the future. so, i will be supporting this legislation and i want to thank supervisor campos and peskin and mar and avalos for sponsoring this legislation is thank you for much >> supervisor peskin: thank you supervisor yee. let me just that, i've heard loud and clear and look forward to working with members of the board and mr. died in the short-term rental office about process improvement rotor to registration. before that loud and clear and thank you to those of you can put that message to us. then, relative to ms. halpern's situation, we should also examine the law to make sure that when a landlord has a tenant who is causing the violation that is accounted for

in the legislation it seems to be a catch 22 the short-term rental has done something no other issue could do for the city. it has brought landlord's and tenant leaders together it but tenants union and the san francisco association together. this brought the hotel employees and restaurant employees local two together with hotel counsel so obviously, this is an issue that needs more addressing by that process will here today supervisor yee said this evolving area of law. no one has been down and were

making the tweaks necessary to make and will continue so as we learn more about how this phenomenon partially works to make the process improvements relative to registration and the like. with that, supervisor campos >> supervisor campos: again come i want to thank my colleagues who are supporting this and i was proud to be working on this legislation with supervisor peskin and his staff. in also supervisor avalos and mar and thank supervisor yee for his comments and for his support as well as pres. breed. i do want to go back to the comments that we heard from a number of posts about improvement process a registration in the me say this, like supervisor peskin, i'm fully committed to doing whatever we can to improve that

process and to that end, i remain open to any specific ideas, suggestions, people have to improve the registration. that said, the comments that i have heard from air b&b, the industry, have not focused on improving the experience of the hosts when it comes to registration. i actually think that the industry in air b&b particularly would be wise to focus its energy on back instead of what we have seen in the past, which is to oppose any effort to regulate and with that in mind, i want to say that i understand why your b&b and the industry spend the millions of dollars that it did on the opposition of

proposition f. i supported proposition f i know there's many things in there that people could understandably raise issues with. i honestly -i'm scratching my head on why air b&b or the industry would have any problem with this piece of legislation. i actually think that having been on the board of supervisors for now, most eight years, i still don't understand why they would take the time and spend the energy to post something that is so commonsensical, so modest , and what is interesting about the comments of people came here just to speak against this piece of legislation is how the comments actually focused on

general issues of concern, but not the specifics of this legislation because this legislation really doesn't do any of the things that people who will oppose it claim it does. i actually think that the more people find out about how modest proposal this is the more i think the opposition will just go away. with that in mind, i encourage your b&b, i encourage the industry, to join our efforts to come on board because this is one of those things that is such a no-brainer , you know. enforcing the most basic fundamental element of regulation, which is the registration system, endorsing that, i mean that is a given. that should be a no-brainer and it's one of those things that i

hope that your b&b and the industry sees the light just like i think they eventually saw the light on the simplicity and the basic nature doing something like paying your taxes. this is up there with paying your taxes. this is something that is sort of-this should not be a debatable issue. so that's the hope that i have,, you know, and i think that as this goes forward to the board of supervisors, i think that there's an opportunity for the city family, the elective family as the mayor calls it, to come together on something that's just simple and just basic. so, with that for action is taken or asked the committee to please adopt the amended version i stipulate. >> supervisor peskin: i'll take that as a motion by supervisor campos. to adopt the amendment that are before. can

we do that without objection? the amendment are adopted >>[gavel] >> supervisor peskin: i just want to thank carolyn guseman and supervisor campos's office for her work on this in also a shutout dale carlson for his stewardship of this issue over now the last couple of years. with that, colleagues, can we send this to the full board as amended with recommendation without objection, that will be-this is as a committee report or not is a committee report-as a committee report >>[gavel] >> supervisor campos: if we can actually excuse pres. breed >> supervisor peskin: a motion to excuse pres. breed from that vote. okay. smooth without objection pres. breed is excused and without objection was in the item as amended with recommendation as a committee report for a hearing on

tuesday, june 7 at the board of supervisors. thank you all for your testimony. >>[gavel] >> supervisor peskin: mdm. clerk, please read the next item >> clerk: item number four hearing on the implementation of the legacy business registry and historic reservation grants. the peskin thank you. i'll give a moment for folks to clear out. >> supervisor peskin: thank you. alter the moment for folks to clear out.thank you. two weeks ago, nvidia item, yes, you did. two weeks ago we held a hearing on the status of the legacy business per gram and we heard from the director of

the office of the economic and workforce development, todd with oh, as was his deputy director joachim torres, in the cities pledge director, ms. melissa whitehouse and i think them for their participation and we were very pleased that the announcement was made that same day at about $2.5 million would be allocated over the next two years to advance and administer the legacy business registry and program. we continued the hearing to today to allow for further updates regarding the status of the nominations. it was represented to us within a week of the hearing we would have a conference of list of those properties were businesses that were nominated and today we are joined by the director of the office of small business, regina

dick-andrew c in or think oewd and marian thompson, in particular, for working with my staff. last week, i received a memorandum from dick-tendency to cause a little bit concerned in either one of quibble about the 39 or 40 businesses but actually got the fact that supervisor campos's staff had done a survey just likely down the hallway and asking of the supervisors how many they nominated and indeed, we believe that about 54 businesses were nominated to. then, i have a series of questions both of the letter from last week which i responded to a letter earlier this week which mitch which ms. dick-injuries he responded to the relative to the status of a number of these projects many which have been nominated or submitted as much as five months ago. with that,

colleagues, when we turn this over to ms. dick-in jersey. she is a presentation to us i guess this afternoon. >> staff: todd rufo. thanks for the opportunity to come out before you today. as you mentioned supervisor, when i was here two weeks ago, we stated that we would take to immediate action steps. the first was greater, the list of all nominated businesses and provide what the status is of each of those nominations to you within seven days. which were transmitted that through e-mail on may 26 and the second piece was to conduct all nominate businesses provide them a status update whether applications were at both need to be there five. today what we want to do is provide an overview of the steps taken over the last two weeks to talk to the details of the lists

some numbers you were mentioning chairman peskin type for next up were really domestic at this point or turn it over to director dick-visit from the opposite small business. >> supervisor peskin: thank you. good afternoon. >> director: deductive. on the stand here since we have the powerpoint. so, i just first want to say good afternoon chairman peskin supervisor campos and supervisor yee. i apologize for not being able to attend the may 19 g ao meeting as a was out of town for a family vacation. i do want to acknowledge the challenges and to medications that your offices and businesses have had with our office and with me and while there has been legitimate events that have taken place, that resulted in these challenges from the registry properly being launched and i think it's important that we now look forward and move forward and significant

movement has taken place since the may 19 meeting. i also want to thank you for your support for the legacy business program manager job position. with at, the job position has been posted and will be able to fill that position in the next-before the next fiscal year. i do want to thank the mayor's office, particularly melissa whitehead for working with you on the grant amount and to talk with oh, marian thompson, lisa begun, chlorine chan and joachim torres, were the last couple months with their assistance as well. so, immediately upon my return from vacation, i received the informal list of the 54 that you have spoken about supervisor peskin, and cross-reference that with what was my official list. so, there were businesses on that list

that i had determine if we have not received official nominations for. my apologies. on how to work the powerpoint here. well, you have the powerpoint in front of you, so i will just walk through that. were talk through it i should say. so, following the g ao hearing, understanding there was some concern around the -hardly move it-so, following the gal hearing them understand it was the concern but the discrepancy in terms of what i had calculated has officially nominated and was on the list

provided by supervisor campos's office, but with marian thompson to reach out to each of the supervisors offices to confirm those who i had determined was not officially had not been officially nominated, and to clarify,. so, since that time, we have worked with each of the supervisors offices. there were businesses that are not been officially nominated, and i do want to report that all that 54, all have now been deemed officially nominated to our-officially nominate to our office did we receive the written notification from the supervisors either via letter or confirmation in e-mail. >> supervisor peskin: what constitutes an official nominations? >> testifier: an official nomination is nomination in

writing stating you are nominated nominate me the business for consideration for the historical legacy business registry. >> supervisor peskin: i don't be argumentative, but today is june 2, and on may second, my office e-mailed you relative, confirming that you are in receipt of a number of letters, all of which were attached to the e-mail nominating various businesses in district 3, including brownies hardware, the café trieste, swans oyster depot, pure 23 café, a whole slew of them did most of which show up on your letter of may

26 as not having been formally nominated. so, how does that work. >> director: with them a second e-mail your first as i interpreted and ready e-mail, it was asking for a cross reference letters not that were officially sent versus the list. so, there were businesses listed in that may second e-mail where actually, we had not received the letter, and so my understanding was he was a cross reference of trying to get an assessment of letters that had been submitted for nomination and to verify whether letters had not been sent. so, for the follow-up memo that i provided you last week the mud in terms of that

list, again, marian thompson had been reaching out to the various offices. so, at that particular point in time we still have businesses on the list that i had deemed not yet officially nominated. so, in terms of moving forward to today, within that additional week number since i've submitted the memo, and marianne's communication with the office we have now received official nominations for those businesses on the list. so, now everyone is classified as officially nominated. i'm hoping i make my software >> supervisor peskin: on the labor the point, but i'm just looking at a series of e-mails dating back to january 11.

there are e-mails in every month nominating-these are all e-mails from-and this is just one supervisor. the vast majority of supervisors have nominated but to you, nominating various businesses and there's not a response to a single one of these e-mails until yesterday, june 1. so, i mean, it is my position that all of these businesses, and this is water under the bridge because were moving this forward in all these businesses were officially nominated over a month ago. they still, as of last week show as not having been officially nominate. let's move past that and figure out how were going to move forward to implementing this fairly and expeditiously. >> director: thank you. so, right now, i have a list of 63

businesses that of an officially nominated. 20 of those businesses have cemented an application excuse me. 20 those businesses have submitted an application. 43 of those businesses we are still waiting for the application to be submitted. of the 20 applications that have been submitted and this number has changed because of recent, well let me just-nine businesses nine applications are now being complete. i know in my memo and even a letter or e-mail from tim sly from the planning department, we have been working with the number seven, but a couple businesses that we've reached out to to provide some additional supplemental information for the application have turned it in, and so now

we are up to the number nine. so there is 11 applications that need some additional information and average out to those applicants to provide that information. >> supervisor peskin: these are the ones that- >> director: in your list i provided you here, the very first page because these are one that they need additional information for hpc requirements? >> director: yes because can make that determination? mr. five? speed >> director: yes. and the feedback they viewed it back from the commissioners. so i've been working with them because you put in the board of poop so board of supervisors put in proposition j of the applications are preferred to hpc to provide some input to

provide historical context and i think it's important that we have the hpc provide that for office of small business, we don't necessarily have the look and lens of history. so, i have been working with their office to make some refinements on what they're looking for and what they,, the hpc commission has determined they need to help them provide some, to provide the comments they would like to provide for the small business commission consideration in the final hearing for the legacy business application. >> supervisor peskin: sorry if this seems i'm confused that maybe i'm confused. am i incorrect in stating that the toric preservation commission has hereto for had

none of these on their agenda we pick >> director: correct, officially. >> supervisor peskin: so, how -you stated that my question was these digital applications and make a determination. what agc has said is that they want interior and exterior photos to help them take a look at which

is one of the criteria the physical attribute of the business. so, there are, while we have provided in the application instructions, list of supplemental documents to include within historical narrative, not all applications have submitted internal an extra no external photographs of the business. >> supervisor peskin: but this is getting kind of kafkaesque because either this application is nothing on medication that says that you have to submit photographs. so, i mean i would make up the rules as we go along? >> director: we are refining them doubt be refined on the application. going for. >> supervisor peskin: just seems patently unfair that after this many months may we look down here at businesses that were nominated in january and march and february and what have you that we are not changing the rules after people

have complied with the rules as we set them forth on the application. supervisor campos >> supervisor campos: thank you mr. chairman. once again i would think supervisor peskin and his staff. as well as hilary rhoda, my chief of staff and my officer been working on this and i see the point supervisor peskin is making. i see the points that he makes in his letter. let me just sort of leave it this way. i feel-i am happy that there is now the kind of response that we were hoping to get from the mayor's office generally. i'm happy that you have, maryann thompson was involved and she's very capable. i think there's a lot

of specific questions that remain. i'm not to get into the weeds. the only thing i would say is that there is hope and optimism, but there's so much catching up to do that i sort of feel like i want to come back to where we are in a month just to see how much progress can be made because i think that we are so far behind that i just think that it remains to be seen what is delivered and i would rather kind of do that and sort of give you the opportunity to make this right, to catch up on all the funds at the level that we have to catch up. what i would simply say,

generally to the point that supervisor peskin is making, is that given that the city, on our end has been the problem am i think that we need to be flexible and we need to be as accommodating to these businesses are still need the letter and spirit of the law, but look, we are the ones, we collectively as the city that dropped the ball, and so, let's make it easier, not harder and where there is room for flexibility let's make our job harder, not the job of the small business or the historic preservation commission. >> director: correct. at seven reaching out to the businesses many of them, they have the pictures and i would just say that i think i reviewed the application instructions with

historical preservation staff and so they are coming back with a request for revision and i think working with the fact that it is in proposition and juliet to have eight historic preservation review and for them to have on the legacy of the legacy business, their comments relationship to what they deem is important to make their comments on, i am respecting that and want to support them on that. so, i would happily come back in a month and provide information for you and we are making it a priority to get these 20 applications through the process , as marianne is reaching out to the additional 43 that are not yet submitted nominations,

were making sure that were clearly communicating what the supplemental information to provide. so though we are not having it back and forth. >> supervisor peskin: so relative to the document you just omitted i just want to clarify one thing, which is economic china put words in your mouth, but on the second and third pages all of those are all nominated? >> director: all nominated >> supervisor peskin: okay. as compared to last week's letter, now everything has been- >> director: everything has been reconciled at the ditch additional actual nominations and other supervisors offices have provided. >> supervisor peskin: okay >> director: so there from that list, we have moved everybody on that list too officially nominated.

>> supervisor peskin: supervisor yee speak >> supervisor yee: i have a question. in regards to the item-i don't know what page the number three committing to maintain this copy jurors or traditional features including craft and art forms, some photos might make sense in terms of physical features. but i am just curious at this point, it seems like hpc needs to look at the goal. appearances and see if it makes any sense. it's not about the physical aspect something like traditions and the type of food that might be serving, who's making those judgments? >> director:- >> supervisor yee: it says,

or, here. so it's not like you have some special feature in the building. >> director: i think, if we talk about what say bars or restaurants that serve food, some elements-i can't specifically answer for the hpc in terms of one interior and est but we do encourage additional photos if there is a particularly: verye food that they can provide either menu or pictures of that and businesses have been-so i do a businesses that have submitted copies of their menus over a period of time to show, to demonstrate, their history and legacy and the conary foods they provide.

we do have businesses cementing pictures of important people from san francisco's history or stars or sports people who have evening and attended visited their business. so there's different ways in which businesses are showing those different: gary craft we have-a visual history not everything old nero, but visual history over it period of time of their mural is one particular example. so, does that answer your question? >> supervisor yee: yes. i guess i'm a little concerned not knowing the legislation as well as i should, but this can be some things i think maybe hpc has no expertise and an unjust wondering if it is

something like food, whether it's the addition of the menu or certain taste of the food, i mean, i grew up and it's been there forever in supervisor peskin's district eating friday's sandwiches and how deep-rooted that the sandwiches , the same salami that type of thing. that's what i'm asking. who makes the judgment whether or not this business would be a legacy business or not we. >> director: to clarify the hpc is providing that they do not make an affirmation whether it's deemed a legacy biscuit that's a small business commission's responsibility. so, my understanding is within proposition j within the referral to the store preservation commission is the historical preservation

commission, i think, they are taking a look at beyond the building structure cultural legacy, cultural components of the city and so they have an understanding of some of our restaurants with different types of businesses about how they relate to those cultural identities and while i can't really speak to the specifics of their request for interior and next are your photos, that they will have to do what their input is to provide the mayor historical lens of san francisco some additional commentary and additional commentary that goes into the file of the registry

to marketand implement those businesses. speak >> supervisor yee: thank you. >> director: so, any other additional questions? >> supervisor peskin: i feel a sense of urgency because three of the businesses that we have nominated having been dealt with timely might still exist. fargo market. gypsy rosalie. -these are businesses that are hanging on and so i don't want to keep repeating the story about the last five months, but we had given them leave earlier as intended by the proposition is adopted by the voters, they might still be here. i'm looking-i want you to finish your presentation but i'm looking at the timeline where

really want is when are they going to get relief? i mean, as at least as to the 11 that are deemed to be nominated and applications complete, when can they get the grant that the voters said they can get? >> director: let me get through the presentation and then i will address those questions at the end because that involves the next steps. as i noted earlier, the position the legacy business program manager has been posted yesterday that yesterday was the end of the posting deadline. we will immediately be moving forward to doing the interviews and getting the positions hired. i have scheduled a training and we sending out an invitation after hearing your legislative aides to go through--we go through the registry application process with them and let them know the next steps with the

program manager will be doing for them, just to clarify the confusion that has been out there. then, as todd mentioned, we established the generic legacy business e-mail address this is now something that multiple individuals have access to so we can keep on top of any questions from businesses , questions and submittals from businesses. i do think-i do want to take a moment to sort of talk about the registry process because the registry process is actually the first process before, that a business needs to go through, before the ability to apply for the grant program. within the application process, and why it may take time between your nomination and a business submitting an

application is that the business needs to write their historical narrative as it relates to the three key categories of what you established in the ordinance. also, the other thing is, any application cover sheet, they are required to-excuse me-they are required to attest their current with all their san francisco taxes, business registrations, licenses and labor laws. so there could be a delay in the business if they're not current needing to take time to bring those things up to-to make them current. then, they also do need to sign , their sign all information they are providing this for

public information. the next slide is just so that you can see the exact language that is in the application cover sheet, that they are checking off and attesting to. so, before getting into the next steps, i do want to make a note that while the intention was to have submittals of applications last friday, he used oracle preservation commission has asked for a delay in this and because their ability to be able to hear their first set of applications is now july 20 because they are not having their early july meeting. so, with the next step,

>> supervisor peskin: what about a late june meeting? >> director: i can reach out to him and asked if he can confer with his commissioners to have that hearing. >> supervisor peskin: thank you. >> director: next up, marion thompson in the office of economic and workforce of almost continue to work with me in the case management of newly nominated businesses until we have the legacy business program manager on board. i will continue to work with those that submitted their application to make sure we get them moving forward, which is the 11 remaining applications. 6-20, this is working backward the 7-20 date of the hpc hearing. they will transfer the completed applications to the historical preservation commission. on 6-30 because were doing some revisions based upon this oracle preservation

commission's request, making the modifications to the application we will have the translated application instructions and cover sheet on our website no later than june 30. >> supervisor peskin: it seems to me maybe we need to have mr. fry in here because i mean, this is not been before the historical preservation commission and this is all happening at a staff level without any input to my knowledge from the duly appointed commissioners. so, i really feel like this is not very-may you maybe mr. buehler -mr. buehler could you, peer? this is not public comment. this is a question of someone following this might what is the commission directed his staff to do relative to the hpc on proposition j?

>> staff: the commissioners had this on their agenda twice now to discuss the criteria for the review of nominations and applications with their submitted. i think what regina was referring to is that the guidance to team and staff are what information should be included was provided by the h pc during one of those hearings. one, there's also been discussion about whether or not the hpc, whether not the application should be on the agenda every time her on the consent calendar. the hpc has great interest in this program and its access and they've insisted on having public hearings for all of the applications submitted rather than just as a consent item. that's what unaware. so far. >> supervisor peskin: and to the commission directed staff to include photographs? do you remember that? >> staff: i was not there with

that was discussed that although during the discussion this morning to review the application. a range of voters are required already in the current application. however, there is not photos required of interior and exterior photos in the current application. i was not present if that was discussed and hpc. >> supervisor peskin: do you know when the second of these 2 hearings took pl. at the hpc? >> staff: there was a hearing just 3-4 weeks ago where the hpc resolve to draft a letter, which i think my attention with this committee. that was the most recent time it was discussed. >> supervisor peskin: thank you. >> director: if i may, to follow-up, subsequent from that meeting i did receive an e-mail from the staff clarifying some of those points and which is where we had the discussion of

the internal and external photographs. then, by 730 will complete the survey to it assess additional legacy business is for program development. by 7-30 will have a webpage up so we can have a start listing our research legacy businesses, and then by august 1, we will have the preservation grant applications available for businesses to be able to apply. so, we will be, as director todd with oh had noted that the last meeting, that we will be working with your staff to develop those grant application guidelines >> supervisor peskin: in other words there's a whole other process. so first, this nomination application, hpc hearing, and then once you run that gauntlet, you can apply? the director correct

>> supervisor peskin: supervisor >> supervisor campos: i appreciate all the work. if i can just speak for myself, i don't feel like the timeline is aggressive enough. i don't know why it takes until july 30 12 a webpage. i mean, it's not brain surgery. i sort of feel like the response based on the presentation from the small business commission doesn't really reflect the sense of urgency that i think all of us have tried to convey and i sort of feel like there's a way that we can live up to the letter and spirit of the law, whether

it's compliance with the registry requirements, but at the same time, expedite this thing could you know, i just don't get that sense of urgency to be honest with you. today is what, june 2. how many weeks does it take to put up a webpage? i don't know. i hope that more happens and that more happens more quickly than what i'm seeing. >> supervisor peskin: >> director: thank you. i've heard that supervisor campos. then, so that is it for this the historical preservation-legacy business process. i did want to do one other note that you have brought up to proviso campos

good excuse me supervisor peskin at the last meeting regarding the small business commission and the minutes and so it had been on her plan with bringing on the commission policy person and secretary to complete those minutes and we are working with the transcription company. the commission will approve the timeline of getting those minutes up, completed and up, on the website, but we do have it noted on the commissions landing page and onto public notice page that all meetings can be viewed via sf.tvsfgtv so anybody can view or hear the meetings, passed meeting minutes through the live stream through sfgov tv. >> supervisor peskin: i was in

a recent issue. i was just looking on the internet at the last meeting relative to looking for the application and other things and literally in the meeting i discovered that. first of all, one comment, which is while i appreciate the fact that people can go and look at a tape, the purpose of minutes is entirely different. it is a tool that gives members of the public knowledge in a succinct fashion about the actions of a public body, in this case the small business commission, and viewing three hours of tape is not a adequate substitute for that. the question is, what i discovered because it was

stated by mr. truffaut there've been a vacancy of the commission secretary for a period abatements that hiring was slow and difficult and what have you, all of which i believe to be true, but that does not explain away the fact that minutes been done sporadically if at all for 2.5 years, which is a period of time is a lot longer than eight months. so, how is it-i mean, look, try to pick on you but when i see a program like this that not been implemented at all up until mr. truffaut i'm here two weeks ago, which we are delighted is finally moving forward that a supervisor campos be a lot of catching up to do and i marry that with the fact that one of the most basic functions of a public body and its staff is to post the minutes, i started to worry that things are not working at the office of small business. i'm not trying to personally

-it's not personal. it's a problem. when i look at the history of e-mails on this legacy business registration and see that my staff who i have been writing because i've got constituents who having a tough time and very expensive city, hanging on these are truly legacy businesses that have been there as we are from creative design for three generations and they're having a tough time, in a book and i asked myself what's going on and they can produce for me e-mails for the last five months , not one of which even got the courtesy of her sons to say, we are swamped. we can deal with. get us some more staff. give us supplement the prohibition which supervisor campos assured through the board a couple months ago, it is been radio silence in your shop. i'm just really want this program to succeed, but everything that i'm looking at this and giving a lot of confidence.

>> director: i understand and i hear that. i'm equally frustrated because with the commission position it's been with the last set of vacancy was eight months we've had two periods of vacancy and so well on that on a get into the challenges symbols of service hiring and some of the process, but it is equally frustrating for me to deal with the challenge of having to have extended vacancies in my office. so, i am hopeful that this is done and over with the new hire, feeling the commission position, and we can just move forward now. >> supervisor peskin: supervisor campos. does that include your presentation? san diego that concludes my presentation. >> supervisor peskin: i went up e supervisor campos comments

that leader is not greater. when we open this up to public comment. welcome, good afternoon. >> testifier: i'm bob planter could i've got no dog, no stake in this. i'm here just out of questions concerns about process in first, would you folks have passed said he indicated about lack of minutes , well what you're not seeing is the clear how long violation of the sunshine ordinance. lacking a secretary is not an excuse for not providing minutes. some commissions have their own internal secretary and sometimes other staff should have done it but when

the no secretary sasso e, that's not adequate. that's not professional. beyond that in listening to this hearing today, it just seems like there's nobody that designated as the task master to bring everybody together in a quick timely efficient response of way. small business seems to be the most responsive and maybe a lead agency, but they are not cracking the whip figuratively, nobody is doing that and that's why this is just dragged on, dragged on because there's no one person that you supervisors that the mayor, the comedic can go to and say what is going on. it scattered too much. at the lake am i think harms the integrity of the program, the image. it impairs the credibility of the ballot measure we citizens past that this thing is just dithering on good i'm glad you have this hearing can i ask you to keep pushing for. thank you. >> supervisor peskin: thank you. mr. buhler because the fire >> testifier: good afternoon commissioners mike buhler san francisco heritage. i just want to report that we are helping things grow with her application thanks to supervisor peskin's nomination.

i want to report says that hearing to easier we've heard from maryann thompson, and i spoke with her by phone and e-mail and she was helpful in telling us what is required so that's an encouraging time from our perspective. i did want to address some of the questions raised by supervisor yee earlier regarding who decides,, which intentional aspects of a business heritage should be protected and the application form is quite detailed and actually, asks applicants to self identify those aspects of the business with its menu items were traditions or whatever it might be, that they are committing to maintain going forward. but i should also note, the hpc for the last two years has had a cultural kurdish asset subcommittee which is specifically focused on intangible aspects of the city's heritage and that's why they're so engaged in this

process are so interested. further note regarding the hpc process, as i mentioned it at least two hearings on this and the planning department has classroom presented the format for the draft staff report that they will receive when applications are submitted to them for processing so i do firmly believe hpc is geared up and ready to per stop process things expeditiously. so that's also encouraging. but thank you again for your attention to this matter and we look forward to helping in any way possible. >> supervisor peskin: thank you mr. buhler for your advocacy on the issue for continued to dog it. are there any other members of the public would like to testify on item number four? seeing none, public comment is closed >>[gavel] b peskin colleagues, when we continue this item 1 month and we will hopefully have lots of good news and i want to thank mr. rufo and ms. dick-and as he and ms. thompson for slowly actually quickly turning the ship around after a

long period of the late. thank you so will continue this item for one month and mr. clerk, if you could please read the last item >> clerk: item number five is doing on below market rate housing policies and procedures utilized throughout the city is even requesting the mayor's office of housing a community devoted to report. >> supervisor peskin: colleagues, supervisor kim as we continue this item to the next meeting. any members of the public would like to testify on item number five? seeing none,, public comment is closed >>[gavel] >> supervisor peskin: without objection, we will continue this item for two weeks to our next regular scheduled meeting. that includes business before the government audit and oversight committee. we are adjourned. >>[gavel] >>[adjournment] >>

ok, well, remember last week when you hit vinny in the head with a shovel? [chuckling] i do not recall that. of course not. well, it was too graphic for the kids, so i'm going to have to block you. you know, i got to make this up to you. this is vinny's watch. impossible. announcer: when you open a book, you can explore new lands... [bird screeches] meet new friends,

and discover new adventures. there are amazing possibilities when you open your mind to reading. [roar] you can log onto he library of congress website and let the journey begin. >> your name and item and pass to to the staff i'll call you during public comment and thank you to sfgovtv and the media services for producing this live every time we meet go ahead and start with the roll call. >> commissioner joseph commissioner lee commissioner frost president tan here. >> all right. that's a quorum none taking any bathroom breaks otherwise thank you all right. so the first item is general public comment this is public comment on any item