section i'd like to move the amendment and respectfully accepted this forward as a committee report to get this park open for people moving into many part of town. >> did you read into - and i read it was that simple. >> thank you for those comments which seem very reasonable and appropriated to make i appreciate that clarification. >> all right. thank you supervisor wiener and supervisor peskin let's go forward and open up for public comment at this time if you like to come up i have one card from corinne woods join us for 2 minutes at the podium. >> good afternoon chair cohen and supervisor wiener and supervisor peskin

my name is corinne woods i chair the corinne woods chair of the san francisco redevelopment agency's mission bay citizens advisory committee and have been working very hard for a 4r07b9 with the community to get this park open and want to thank supervisor kim's office and the ocii staff and barbara mirrors infrastructure task force for pulling this altogether nothing in mission bay is simple there are 17 agencies that have to sign off on everything it is extremely frustrating as is every acceptance in anybody to watch hundreds of children looking at park from the outdoor i really appreciate your waving the waiting period on this and i don't quite understand supervisor peskin amendment does that mean 2 will wave the thirty

day after enaction time and open by i up by the end of july i'm having a party you're invited we've planted it waiting to get the park open on a larger issue of park management the community has some definite opinion about the future and very much like to speak to you all or any that are inrested in hearing how we feel about this transition thank you. >> if i could ask thank you for your advocacy and incredible work in mission bay is there any supervisor peskin reverend brown a concern about whether rec and park has the resources to care for the parks has that been a discussion about who is ultimately managing.

>> there's been a significant discussion where we've been working with ocii for a couple of years the communities facilities district that funds the mission bay park is the money actively is controlled by office of citizen complaints has to defervesced itself by the order of state department of finance we're hoping that we can workout something like the yerba buena gardens is not going to go to reply workplace r rec and park we don't want the money entering 34igd and putting together a nonprofit that has community stakeholder involvement in the management of the parks we're happy with the m j m management they do an excellent job with

the janitorial security and park maintenance in general and we want to be sure this doesn't get - become an ugly sanborn map child mission bay has a very vetted interest to insure that works well, after ocii goes away the community is very engaged and would be happy to speak you to about that. >> thank you, ms. woods. >> any other members that want to speak on this item seeing none, public comment is closed. at this time thank you >> all right. supervisor wiener >> i spoke from before. >> thank you to supervisor kim's office for bringing this before us to the corin thank you for being an advocate on this item colleagues a motion agenda

ed. >> ultimately move the amendment. >> without objection the amendments are accepted thank you. >> and ms. woods it does exactly what you asked. >> and so this item moved as a committee report forward to the full board as amended. >> can i comment first of all, thank you supervisor peskin for answering some of the questions and ms. woods for answering some questions as well obviously this a terrific project and i think i'll support moving forward with a with a positive recommendation i'm glad there are conversations going on long term health manage those parks relative to what supervisor peskin said about questions whether rec and park has the resources to manage those parks for the other 200 and 20 park properties it manages that is

really a statement about how we as a - how this building has starved our park system and really, really frankly even with the copies it passes our rec and park is valve under resources and a sad state of affairs how they'll have the resources to take care of additional parks it is just that shouldn't be are factor we need to make sure our parks have the support they need and that includes expanded parks i know that conversation will continue and obviously is a broader policy discussion around the whole set of parks thanks. >> all right. thank you very much so madam clerk the motion is made and with a positive recommendation a committee

report. >> as recommended by supervisor wiener. >> that's correct without objection thank you. >> any other items before us. >> >> there's no further business. >> thank you this meeting is adjourned

>> at the san francisco recreation and parks department we offer good quality day care of your child will love, including outdoor adventures, aquatics, and programs for children on the optimism -- autism

>>[gavel] >> supervisor peskin: good morning and welcome to the government audit and oversight committee of the san francisco board of supervisors. i'm the chairman, supervisor peskin board and i like to thank the folks at sfgtv for live streaming this meeting. mdm. clerk, any announcements >> clerk: yes be sure to sound all cell phones and electric device. complete speaker cards to be included as part of the file should be submitted to the court. items after the will be on the june 14 board of supervisors agenda unless otherwise stated. >> supervisor peskin: thank you

. please read the first item >> clerk: yes, item number one resolution approving sfmta eight 2016-17 paratransit broker in operating agreement with-services incorporated >> supervisor peskin: thank you. is there a representative hear from the mta to address this item? >> staff: annette williams. before you today is a new contact or paratransit services will provide door-to-door transportation for people with disabilities unable to use muni. for the past 35 years, and i note you been here for many of those years, and contacting san francisco paratransit services and we went through a competitive bid for this new contact. when out in november with drs p and we had an evaluation made up of

panel of disabilities and seniors and experts and paratransit that a valuate of the proposal. were their recommendation, mpa staff negotiated a contract with-for a five-year period and five-year option. some of the new things in this contract are mobility management activities. we are going to revenue information and referral center for seniors and people disabilities to tell them about all the transportation options that there are in san francisco. we are also going to expand the travel training program for people who may not have use the system before and could benefit from that. we also have some new technology related projects in the contract. one is the integration of the debit card. this is the taxi debit card with flywheel so customers will be able to call a cab using electronic technology, which we think will be a huge benefit,

especially to wheelchair users who can differentiate between accessible and non-accessible vehicles. in addition, we will have software that allowed the band customers to do their scheduling, canceling, tracking of rides using technology as well. so, we can both of those are going to be new and good additions. i'm happy to answer any questions you have. i'm glad to be here before you again. >> supervisor peskin: it's good to see you here i'm amazed mark soto is still running the program and you're still doing it for the mta. all these many years later. ms. newman, on behalf of the budget analyst, you recommend approval of this item. any comments >> staff: through the chair, supervisors, yes, debra newman from the legislative i would just note that the mta did issue a request for causal in november 2015, and then in december 2015. the board

approved a ordinance require the sfmta eight to include prevailing wages and worker retention provisions in the new agreement. so if you look on table 1, on page 4, of our report, it doesn't show the various funding sources that will be used to fund the 142 million dollar agreement over the next five years. we would also note the proposed agreement for the first year for fiscal year 16-17 will cost approximately 25 $20 million, which is about 2 million, or eight 8.6% higher than the fiscal. about 22.7 million, and we just note the primary reason for the cost increase is related to the higher salaries associated with the prevailing wage provision that we do

recommend approval. >> supervisor peskin: thank you ms. newman can supervisor breed >> president breed: thank you. ms. williams, i just had a question you during the process, can you provide me with information of who did it on the contract as well as who was on the selection committee and tell us a little bit about the process? >> staff: sure. we had three firms that came to the pre-bid for the rfp selection process and that was zapt, first transit, and secure transportation. we had two options that the firms granted under option a or b. one was doing administrative services get the other one was administrative and some of the transportation services. so any from the bit on both options. we had two calls from one firm, so only one of the three firms transbay, elected to bid on the trunk contract and they did under both options amd. the

selection committee reviewed both of those proposals i made up of three people with disabilities, to organizations that serve people with disabilities, a paratransit expert from outside of san francisco and a paratransit expert from san francisco. >> president breed: thanks. >> supervisor peskin: i want to welcome vice chair the committee supervisor norman yee was joined us that other any members of the public would like to testify on item number one? seeing none,, we will close public almonds. >>[gavel] >> supervisor peskin: supervisor yee any questions for ms. williams relative to the the contact with zepp? >> supervisor yee: i reviewed it and it seems fine to me. >> supervisor peskin: that we have a motion to send this item to the full board with a recommendation? dylan do want to add anything? okay. moved by supervisor breed without

objection will send this item to the full board with a recommendation. thank you ms. williams. good to see you again. >>[gavel] >> supervisor peskin: please read the next item >> clerk: item number two, resolution retroactively authorizing san francisco business commission to accept and expand increase the grant from the united states department of education. >> supervisor peskin: thank you. supervisor yee this is your item >> supervisor yee: this is always nice for the city to be the seed funding from the federal government. particularly, with this type of funding for [inaudible] and i believe tracy-is here to present >> staff: i'm tracy-phone for the commission. this is a additional $300,000 for a grant that began in july 2012. this is the federal dollars passed through to the california department of education for our

early learning quality improvement system which is also called quality rating and improvement system. what this fund is, not only assesses the prequel classroom, but also workshops, training, technical assistance, and other developmental support. like mental health and inclusion. >> supervisor peskin: thank you ms. long. ms. newman, any comments? you recommend approval i noticed. any questions from committee members? are there any members of the public would like to testify on item number two? seeing none,, public comment is closed. >>[gavel] >> supervisor peskin: is there a motion to send this to the board? >> supervisor peskin: i the motion to send this to the board >> supervisor peskin: motion to the send this to the full board with a recommendation. without objection, that will be the order. >>[gavel] >> supervisor peskin: please read the next item >> clerk: item number three 81

examining the administrative codes require housing platform to residential unit is on the city registry prior to listing. >> supervisor peskin: thank you. we've been joined by the chief sponsor of this orbix david campos and i want to thank supervisor campos for his leadership on this issue as well as the coalition of housing advocates, homeowners, tenants, public safety advocates, hotel workers, the hotel council, the apartment association, the tenants union, for lending their support to this very reasonable and long-overdue piece of legislation intended to fix some of the loopholes in my predecessors well intended but yet evolving and still flawed legislation around short-term rentals. with that, but he turned it over to supervisor campos >> supervisor campos: thank

you. much mr. chairman. i want to thank you and your staff for working so closely with us on this item. i am proud to be cosponsor of this piece of legislation with you. colleagues, i want to thank the committee fir or thetention to this matter. i am handing out a amendment that we would be introducing to the legislation, but essentially, where we are and what is before you today-i want to thank all the members of the public on both sides of this issue who have come out-for this item -what is before you today is a very modest and very simple proposal that is aimed at helping here in san francisco reserve the very precious housing stock that we have them and we know that we have a housing crisis, and what we are

doing through this very modest amendment is simply closing a loophole in our current short-term rental law. i would like to once again, thank supervisor peskin" which and that is been working on this for quite some time. i also want to thank for their cosponsorship supervisor mar and supervisor avalos. this legislation mandates that web platforms support, not hinder, the enforcement of our current short-term law here in san francisco. let me be very clear. this is not about changing the existing law. it simply about making sure that this lot that has been in effect for 18 months or so, that this little lot is actually enforced. it's ultimately about corporate responsibility., about an industry that has made and continues to make tens of millions of dollars in this

business, in this line of work, taking responsibility for the negative impact that they're having on the housing stock. why is that important? it's important because we have been facing for the last 2-3 years, a housing crisis unlike anything that san francisco has seen. again, this proposal is about enforcement and the proposal specifically mandates that have housing platforms like b&b verify that a host has actually registered with the city and county before they actually advertise their short-term rental on their website. it's that simple. if a hosting platform fails to do so, we believe that hosting platform has a responsibility to be a good citizen. that hosting platform under this

amendment would be penalized up to $1000 a day. while the current law has set rules for hosts stipulating that all posts must register with the city and county and post-registration number, as of today, more than 75% of the 7000 , plus bmd house 7000 with bmd alone, have not registered, and yet, what we see is platforms like b&b allowing those folks knowing they are breaking the law to advertise on the platform. to budget and legislative analyst reports as well as extensive reporting by the san francisco chronicle of all entities, show this industry continues to exacerbate our worsening housing crisis by taking even more units off the market. last year, the budget analyst did report that found that bmd alone is responsible for taking up to

2000 entire units completely off the housing market for the purpose of engaging in commercial short-term rentals. this is why we need to bring the hosting platforms into the regulatory scheme by making sure that they have a role in helping enforcement. this is something that planning department staff, as much as the maid tried to walk away from this comments, planning department staff when asked about how to enforce this law have recommended in the past and will also-have made it very clear as has the budget and legislative analyst, that the changes we are making is consistent with what is required for proper enforcement.

the weakness of the current law is the fact that corporate accountability is nonexistent. corporate accountability is not part of the equation. we believe that when, after two years, we still have 75% of folks out of compliance, that it shows the law is simply not working. again, i law, this amendment does not change anything about the rules that are in place. it simply ensures that hosting platforms follow the law and help the city not hinder compliance. let me say this. i met with many in the home share and community. i support hosted i support the mom and pop goo are using this as a way to make ends meet. we have no problem with that and we made a very clear them and there is nothing in this law that actually places any burden on those hosts. but, left unregulated, this industry will

continue to exacerbate the housing crisis and as much is bmd and platforms may try to hide behind the mom-and-pop castle host, those are not the target of this legislation. at the end of the day, this about enforcement and compliance. some have claimed this legislation would force platforms to please short-term rentals. let me just say, that is a ridiculous notion. if you are a rental car agency and you make sure that a person has a license before you let them rent a car from you, does that somehow turn you into policing the folks who rent cars from those entities, those companies? i don't think it does. likewise, it doesn't do that with these platforms. i'm a huge supporter of internet freedom and we work carefully with the city attorney's office to make sure that we follow the

very letter and spirit of the law and what the law provides. as mark rosenberg, executive director of the la privacy information center has said, if you're operating a business on the internet and providing business related information, pursuant to a license activity, it seems entirely reasonable that you comply with those obligations. this law, once again was carefully written so that it does not come into conflict with federal law that we are not forcing web platforms to edit hosted content in any way. we are simply saying that with a platforms must be that they have to be responsible actors and not facilitate unregulated activity which is the very problem that we have here. that facilitation is happening. unscrupulous whammo seven abusing the loopholes in our law robbing san francisco's

residence of the affordable housing they need, and bmd from our perspective to take the analyses further, poke seven robbing residents of that housing and bmd has essentially been driving the getaway car could this is government stepping in and saying, enough is enough. this has to stop. again, want to think the broad range of people worked with my office on this legislation. supervisor peskin, his chief of staff sunny and cool, san francisco tenets unit, local two, choo-choo, tenants together the san francisco apartment association, you can see it's a very interesting gathering of people were not usually on the same page. senior and disability action. share better, housing rights committee, and many more good i also want to thank the city attorney's office, especially rob catholic for his phenomenal

work on this legislation. i also know that kevin guy, the director of the office of short-term rentals is here and we want to thank him and his staff for the input they have provided, but before i turn it over to rg cosponsor supervisor peskin i do have a question that i want to to the chair asked the city attorney. people have been raising concerns in the past about the communications decency act, and there's a lot of posing on the part of bmd and others that they have a winning legal case, and as an attorney and someone who's litigated many cases before, i know that people tend to do that, tend to say that and boast about those things. but i want to just directly asked the city attorney, if you can address that issue because this is not any layperson

simply saying this is a legally defensible. we want to be are directly from the city attorney. >> city attorney: good morning. at your direction supervisor, we drafted this ordinance in a way that minimizes any issues under the communications decency act. the law that you mentioned. this ordinance does not regulate the content of any posted information on the website, the hosting platform. rather, it relates to business activities as you said, supervisor, of the hosting platform. so, essentially, it extends the type of information that they must collect in order to engage in booking services and doesn't regulate the content of the website.

>> supervisor campos: thank you much mr. gibner and we want to thank our city attorney. this is an office that has a stellar track record of event defending challenges to city law and a successful record and that will continue should've the litigation here. i will just close with an expiration of the amendment that i ended out. and at some point i'll ask the committee to amend the legislation along with those lines but the amendment does the following. one, it clarifies the definition of a hosting platform. second, it clarifies what happens the first day the law goes into effect just to have as much clarity as possible. did it clarifies privacy protections for people registered with the city, and finally, it actually streamlines the compliance process. this is actually a

amendment those made at the request of the office of short-term rentals. with that, colleagues, i look forward to the discussion and respectfully ask for your support. again, thank you supervisor peskin to you and your office and to carolyn guzman in my office whose been work on this long time. the peskin thank you supervisor campos. i know there's many individuals here there would like to testify. i got huge stack of speaker cards so we are going to limit testimony to 2 min. to that everybody will have a chance to testify. i also want to thank the office of short-term rental in the city administrator for offering the opportunity for anyone in this chamber coming this building today, might want to register. there is a table outside that is being staffed by li mei lu and anybody who would like to fill out an application to register a short-term rental can do so. out this door my right, your left, so feel free to avail yourself of that opportunity, if you wish to do so. with that, i want to start by

acknowledging that we have two members of the planning commission here and would like to give them an opportunity to address this body. the planning commission actually did a very conference of review of the short-term rental regimen in san francisco and made a large list of recommendations, some of which the board talk in 2014 in october, when the original short-term rental legislation was passed, and some of which were not taken among including the legislation that is before us today. so, i want to welcome commissioners dennis richard and catherine mar. he like to address this panel and after that, we'll go to members of the public. don't be shy. >> commissioner richards: i think i've been on record as saying i'm everybody in the

room and supervisors, there's a definite benefit in the city short-term rentals. i think from a cultural exchange point of view, from a business point of view, in terms of additional business for local businesses, local small businesses, especially my and for the people who are trying to make ends meet in san francisco. so, i don't think short-term rentals is anything evil. things actually kind of nifty interesting right that folks naturally use their asset. their extra bedroom went on vacation, their flat, for reasonable period of time. i remember the morning that i was on the planning commission in the september of 2014, i remember making a couple calls to a couple of board of supervisors that i knew, a

couple of the board of supervisors and i said to them that morning, you know, the way the law is written as is, you need some type of a better enforcement mechanism. you need the ability to actually figure out who is renting and who is not and was renting towards the time of and who is not writing about the time limit. i made this case. i made that case in the planning commission. when this was heard i believe twice the horror the force even a staff report indicated that requiring the registration number was a linchpin and i quote in the report, of actually making this law work and make it effective. i sat through a hearing here before but was supervisor weiner chaired it in entertainment such as, hey let's let this law work and i think enough time has gone by good we are now in june of 2016, 15 months afterward. the law went into place with 75% compliance rate i think everybody can agree that it's really not working. i know there'd been playing around but it's too slow to get

registered, is too complicated, but i'll be honest with you. the office of short-term rentals streamline the prospect i support streamlining the process, how. however, let me make an analogy. the compliance rate of about 25%, i likened that to greece, the country of tax agrees etiquette can you imagine if the homeowner tax and self that combined rate here was only 25%. within a real deep hurt. i think it's a fair this issue to get that too many many host. host web and following the law and actually was supporting a ballot initiative last year that did not win, but in my conversation with every host, everybody largely registered said this is a fairness issue. why do i have to go through registering through the process and do the reporting a lot of people

don't. i likened that to jumping turnstiles on the subway. a buddy starts jumping turnstiles on the job subway the what is going to be. the other thing i want to talk about was the loss of tax revenue. that is yet to come up in this discussion. it's great d&d this company and entity has an agreement with san francisco to remit taxes on behalf of its host. however, all the other platforms don't. if you're not registered as a host and your platform does not remit taxes, were losing that tax money. so, that's by the equation is that nobody is talking about is the elephant in the room is probably in the millions of dollars. as to the spurious argument about d&d our the coasting platform becoming a police entity, let me remind you when i opened up my checking account yesterday at the bank, they asked me for a social security card. was nobody from the iris there at the bank. the bank legally had to require me to pull out a social security number. no different than a registration number. the other thing that i was asked yesterday when i went

out for a drink and the bar asked me for my drivers license because they can want to lose their license. they were carding everybody because they serve minors they get punished by getting suspension of the license and they could go out of business. so what's the difference between that and what were asking for today? the other thing yesterday when it went to safeway i gave them my credit card and asked me for my license to verify it was actually me making the charge. again, it wasn't these or mastercard standing there. it was equally. acting as the agent. lastly, the whole issue around any privacy concerns around a registration number, let me remind you of this. i drive around in my car with a license plate on it. it doesn't tell people who im. it doesn't tell them where i live. it identifies me and for appropriate law-enforcement agency, that's exactly what we need. can you imagine folks with 75% of people do not drive around the car with drivers licenses. it would not make any

sense. i believe this is a common sense that the government piece of legislation in a 1% supported and asked the supervisors vote unanimously to approve it. thanks. >> supervisor peskin: thank you, commissioner. >>[applause] >> supervisor peskin: commissioner moore anything like that animal go to public comment? >> commissioner moore: since commissioner richards took more than 2 min. oh make it simple get my position about this is quite clear. i'm in support of where you are and my simple comment would be without the ability to enforce the laws and we've come to that point. >> supervisor peskin: thanks. with that, we'll go to public comments. i will call sets of speakers in the water i received them. [calling names]. >> testifier: good morning.

the real question is, why should be in the be allowed to lift unregistered units on the platform. the current system of enforcement that relies on neighborhoods to turn in neighbors. i'm the president of the coalition for san francisco neighborhoods. i often hear stories about things like this with air b&b. i think one thing to look at with the platform is first you are asking for an arbitrary number of $1000. i say, why not 10,000 , one not 50? they are breaking the law. they're breaking the law legally. the neighborhoods believe that the

[inaudible] siphoned units from the unit driving up prices and tightening availability. the existing system is ruining the character of our neighborhoods throughout the city and creating many empty units as stated earlier. all air and b&b rentals should have a valid san francisco registration number before posting them online. from the city rentals would seem illegitimate to listing services would be required to respond with details about these properties within one business day or face big signs. thank you very much. >> supervisor peskin: thank you. next speaker, please. >> testifier: hello. my name

is ed bell. i live in san francisco for almost 60 years and have lived in my own home for over a third. my home is a very special place to me. it's where my only child was born, where i raise my child, where my mother spent the final weeks of her life before passing on sushi to be surrounded by people do love to. in short, my home has a life [inaudible]. as with many seniors my income has decreased substantially over the last few years and about a year ago i told my wife got him very happy to tell you my house is not pursuing the only reason it's not for sale is because the income i generate through air b&b. instead of two old people tottering around the house reminiscing about the good old days, unfortunately share mine with interesting adventures, were getting satisfaction from seeing the city my wife and i have love for a lifetime. i've been fortunate in anyways. i'm very

familiar with computers that use computers at work i can tell you i'm completely air b&b compliance. however, many of the air b&b hosts are seniors like myself and are intimidated by computers. i know many of my senior friends would really like to become air b&b hosts and share their homes but they do not because they cannot deal with the computer requirements. i don't mind paying taxes. i make money on air b&b and i think i should pay taxes on that money. however, i am upset about all the forms i have to file them in computer-generated forms, it really cost more to figure out then the income generated. so, in short, please take my wife, my friends, other seniors like me into account when you make these decisions. thank you for your time >> supervisor peskin: thank you. next speaker, please. and after [calling names]. >> testifier: good morning. my

name is jordan davis in the material from from the tenderloin and i urge you to support 1604 23. which would actually hold short-term rental houses and platforms responsible for gentrifying our neighborhoods. this care if the need was machined has been scared passing new regulation has been saying that is fine too job i took it and apocalyptic propaganda [inaudible]. as lgbt primark has just begun let's reflect this new pride in gentrification let's think about the disabled transgender woman who needs double and the black payment among any of these others and how they could end up homeless and possibly incarcerated were dead because of rich techie man children and then go to think becoming and

innkeeper is more profitable. i do not know how many lgbt people have been displaced by these but [inaudible] in our former homes as we support air b&b's lies and you're no better than her lgbt people than donald trump or pat mccord. please, go vote yes on this important bill. it's very reasonable and we depend on it. >> supervisor peskin: thank you. next speaker, please. >> testifier: good morning. i'm doug nielsen. i'm a home share host with one bedroom one bath private unit in my permanent residence. which i live full-time. i'm one of the approximately 3000 people registered. i think we all agree in the fact that this number is too low. i'm an unacceptable. it's also known the process is very cumbersome. it can be as long as three months, it takes up to three

months or more to get registered in some cases. this is also unacceptable. the city must find a way to simple five this prospect there's no question about it. by now, there's another obstacle that has surfaced that makes the registration process and legalization of a business and issue. that is, as one whose registered and the other 1300 that have have received a 571 r that was sent to already starts asking them to submit a list of all the furniture, all equipment, everything they have in their units. the date they purchased it, the price they paid, the specific items and for me, i did this. turn it in, the total came to about $3000. i've items in my house in that room that i acquired back in 1984. items that have been

gifted to me. so, the value came to about $3000. now, i am trying this and in with the depreciation this inmate get that saves was about $1000 in a garage sale. they're going to get $10 out of me and if you put that apply that to the other 1300 registered and get $13,000 for the city. this is not spending the resources and time and energy that made the city should do. so what i am suggesting is taking a money applying to the registration process to improve it make it better but don't spend the money and resources on sending out these types of forms. thank you. >> supervisor peskin: thank you for your comments. next speaker, please. >> testifier: good morning. my name is kathy. i may san

francisco voter and a member of the debtor housing policy. as an organization need up of both renters and homeowners, we are tired of the political games that do nothing to address the housing crisis. this amendment is not the solution we need. they only create more red tape for the renters and homeowners who want to do the right thing. the city permit process needs to be streamlined to adopt 12 people are using online services like eight air b&b. if the average processing time is at least a month the current system is too burdensome for huge amounts of people rent a room in their house for two weeks or two weekends a year. that's what's fixed the process first. if you want to see more registration. thank you. >> supervisor peskin: thank you. next speaker, please. and after, [calling names]

>> testifier: good morning, chairman peskin president breed and supervisor tammy and 10 cameras that my name is kelly powers and him representing the hotel counsel san francisco. the hotel council is a nonprofit trade association that represents the hotel industry in san francisco. the hotel council supports the short-term rental legislation that is being discussed today. we believe required hosting platforms to verify that each of the units that listing on the site have a valid registration the city and county of san francisco. it is reasonable and necessary. it is reported that most unregistered short-term rentals are not renting their primary residences as the existing

relations require. renting units in condominium buildings for homeowner associations do not allow short-term rentals tenants renting apartments without owner permission. the regulation being proposed were hoping sure that only legal short-term rentals will be included on hosting platforms. again, the hotel council supports the short-term rental legislation that is being discussed today and we encourage your support as well. thank you. >> supervisor peskin: thank you ms. powers. next speaker, please. >> testifier: good morning cannot major in manila. either or both days with illegally operating twist hotel and this amendment would've avoided this situation by requiring them to register the most they cannot do because they're not eligible. i stayed there. on air b&b they offered to-i went

back in and abstain for more than a year. i problems with hotel management or consulate trying to turn over rooms in order to rent them to torres and not taking care of their other responsibility to the resident tenants that were there. one of the issues they use the hotel management system with key cards, so you're automatically logged out if you didn't pay your bill every weekend 11 am which is against the rental code in san francisco. also, they charge me 15% hotel tax i paid more than $4200 over the course of a year in tax on what is supposed to be rent and i still have not been refunded that money. requiring air b&b to check their registration would've avoided this for me and other people. in addition to reserving those units which were supposed to be sro units and not poorest units for people needed them. thank you. >> supervisor peskin: thank you. next speaker, please. >> testifier: thank you my

name is angel sanders. a couple points i see beneficial to this. first of all, where i live, one of my neighbors is renting out his units and without him registering there's no way for me to bring up to the board that he is not doing so. so having this in place would help a lot of people like this could also, another benefit would be having people register if i'm looking for a place to move into, i can at least find out how many of the units around the are doing so. what i currently have come, like is that people are doing it on unlawfully and it changes the dynamic of a community. so, i think having this register would benefit everybody. also, used to do uber and i was in uber driver you can't just slap a u on a window and go drive around. this apostate i think this is kind of the same thing were you get a processing unit was doing what. thank you. >> supervisor peskin: thank you mr. santa cruz. next

speaker, please. >> testifier: good morning. mine is karen casino and i'm a registered host. there are two reasons i think not to pass the legislation now. that we don't make the same mistake that we did last year, before there's time to assess the results of the current law, and the second, i think it is scares many host again to not register out of fear of what is to come. just like last year. in the meantime, the board could set up a short-term rental task force with major players coming up with recommendations for the board to consider. such as, differentiating between different types of short-term rentals. low use. for those hosts that only maybe do like someone said, a couple of weekends were maybe two weeks a year, they are not registering because that the registration

cost a lot of money and they're not using it very much. also, there are people who are going sabbaticals were going extensive volunteering events and they may be old weight more than 90 days but san francisco is still the primary residence. there is also people who are work related absences like drivers, airline host, performers, and they may be a weight more than the 90 days due to their job hours, but there were still residence of san francisco. these categories could be created and legislation simple five bringing in more register house and also beef 14% hotel tax. i know that those with little faith in city bureaucracy are in very early thinking way too complicated for staff. well, i think san francisco could show

the rest of the country how to do it right. thank you. >> supervisor peskin: thank you. next speaker, please. >> testifier: my name is-and we registered very early taken there was a right thing to do. i still think it's the right thing to do, but i think that the city is making the process tremendously intimidating in so many ways good most recent move by the assessor's office on 571- r having to itemize every item in the room or in the house, and the value and audit and one was obtained, etc., seems a bit ridiculous added to all the other things that the city has done up to now. to discourage

people from listing. again, i repeat we were amongst the first to list and we were encouraging people to register, and i'll be damned if i would tell anybody to register now. i'll be damned if i registered under the current information that i have about the city requirements. criminal penalties supposedly [inaudible] $1000 a day, etc. seems a bit exorbitant and again, intimidating. having to for seniors having to deal with computers, i'm semiliterate computer wise, but even that in itself is difficult for a lot of seniors who are involved in this air b&b or other platforms. it seems that picking on air b&b platforms were other platforms are being ignored,, other platforms that are ready

to sue rather than comply is very unfair. i believe there is too much hate being made out of politics rather than well-thought-out policy by too many of the supervisors. >> supervisor peskin: thank you, sir. next, [calling names] >> testifier: good morning. my name is eric and [inaudible]. my husband and i are hosts and register. but we feel very strongly that the registration as many as many on unintended consequences and [inaudible] to be prescribed. we believe in

strong legislation for housing residents and to those that abuse the system from causing harm. we want to see other forms step forward to do more to help the city. there needs to be more time to make that happen. we also believe the city should simplify the process for hosts who rent that space just a few days a week a year. we encourage the city to develop a one step online registration process for hosts. the ever-changing rules and perform only confuse the process of more. including the newest tool that hosts must create an inventory of all their belongings right down to sheets, silverware, [inaudible]. i filled out my online form for my business license, which

was due on may 31. [inaudible] license was issued in favorite. the form did not contain a phone number to answer questions of which i had several. i worry about the future of sharing and the proposal is passed. we fear it will only be to only more confusion for host. [inaudible]. it tramples critical online attraction and conflicts conflict with important federal laws. thank you. >> supervisor peskin: thank you. next speaker, please. >> testifier: good morning. thank you for lending your effect on kevin craigie district for voter and redshirt host and we have a new law and her in-laws stay out when they visit and the rest of the we

host and really enjoying the experience i believe like others everybody should get registered and they should agree with a lot of your intent of what your time to compost. you know, threatening imprisonment in the county jail to move the housing crisis from our homes to the jail, that's one point. i think it just basically extreme in my opinion i think when he to work on solutions were the high-tech innovation and social tech capital of the. let's work with us which look for solutions i welcome to talk with anybody from vegas two, gated a issued a think this is just a bit extreme and were kind of the top tier industry of san francisco our hospitality and information communication technologies. i think some of this legislation is basically attacking the top-tier industries of our city. i could

go on and on but i'll leave it at that. i would appreciate your peers and hope we can find solutions working together. thank you. >> supervisor peskin: thank you. i just want to point out to folks the section of the law with regard to criminal penalties to my that is actually been on the books since supervisor chiu, my predecessor, past the law. that is not in any way changing the legislation. that is the force. the legislation that is before us only adds hosting platforms to that provision in law could so, in addition to holding hosts accountable what supervisor campos legislation does, is also hold opposing platforms accountable. the civil and criminal penalty statute is the same statute that supervisor chiu introduced in 2014. thank you. next speaker, please. >> testifier: hi. my name is

esther ricci. i'm district for voter. i'm one of the many who went through the painful and time-consuming process of registration to be in compliance with the city. i read this legislation and i find it very disturbing and highly punitive. it is basically and intends to implement proposition f which was defeated by san francisco voters last november. i don't see how somebody who has more than one listing because is renting more than one room in the house into going to jail regardless of its david chu were a new one, is going to encourage anyone to register. were demanding to have public

information. there's many hosts, a single woman or retirees, or divorced that they don't like to have their information to anyone public. this legislation doesn't offer any solution to solve the housing problem. san francisco is known for being progressive and open minded, this legislation is very regressive and conservative jerk we should be a model of innovation and [inaudible]. please, do not pass this legislation. it is going to hurt many decent people who could not be in the city if it were not for renting out empty spaces. the of the actions have been going down since short-term rentals are up. i never heard any direct

you to get person in these two years i have been coming here for the short-term rentals. thank you. >> supervisor peskin: thank you. [calling names]. >> testifier: hi. my name is jessica mullen. thank you for your time this morning. i live in sunny side and supervisor yee's district with my family. the law as written let us down. we need this legislation to address the problem weeks. personally. moved to sunny side several years ago and her neighbors were longtime san francisco family could overnight they were forced out by the landlord we found our selves living next-door to an illegal hostile wizard on air b&b. even imagine living next-door to someplace renting out room beds, individual beds at $30 a night 4-6 is a room in 1000 ft.2 house, with key goes

on the door, no keys, no host anywhere to be found. they rang the doorbell in our house at all hours of the night waking up our young son which all parents know is really the worst. i called dbi, they cannot help it they told me they could not help me. i contacted ospf. they tried but they said they could not help me because they could not catch the host in the act. those were pulled on the listing during the day so city staff cannot find him and i be able to observe it again at night. my spirits is exactly why this legislation is needed. air b&b shopping list illegal units especially illegal hospitals cramming an individual residents in residential neighborhoods in the first place to complex permitting is a red herring. i appreciate all the legally redshirt host were here today, but frankly, this legislation is nothing to do with you. section 230 of the cba is a post and scared sat there at the city attorney pointed out at the beginning of this hearing. i also want to point out that any proposal from

other supervisors to add provisions that apply to hosts a poison pills and i urge everyone to reject them. this legislation is great as is. it's needed. i urge you to support it. it's fair. it's practical. it's a minimum we should ask our citizens here in san francisco, including and i think especially, most bondable corporate citizens two bye-bye. please stand up for regular san francisco like me. >> supervisor peskin: thank you ms. malone. >>[applause] >> supervisor peskin: i want to it knowledge your bravery and leadership in appearing on the nbc bay area investigative units exposé on the abuses of short-term rental such as you experience. that was a i think, a helpful piece of public information and you did a public service in doing that. next speaker, please. >> testifier: jennifer-i think you know we are very supportive

of this legislation already. i've even become friends with the apartment association staff while crafting this legislation. so, i think that is significant and shows the broad support we have. i know that air b&b set up an e-mail generator to expand and it was a very bizarre e-mail that said hosts would have to count all the forks in their houses and was no mention that this legislation is retargeted at the platforms themselves. it also didn't state the we know changes for current hosts. so if b&b continues to feed us lies and hide behind it hosts and this legislation will actually be good for the legitimate house is oh, cut out the bad actors. help more hosts will rise up and told the company to stop using them like ponds. i have a anecdote. we posted on our facebook page of a picture of a flyer that was posted in san francisco's

chinatown those critical of air b&b. we normally get like 3000 views if were lucky. this 1.6 million views. there's 10,000 comments on it. went around the work it was all the comments were negative against air b&b ready my point is, the whole world is watching you guys today. i hope you use your discretion and finally pass meaningful enforcement. >> supervisor peskin: thanks. i'm delighted this matter brought the tenants and landlords and the hotel owners and hotel workers together. next speaker, please. >> testifier: good morning. thank you for this legislation did my name is tessa wilborn long-term san francisco resident. we love our visitors, but we need to have taxes paid by appropriate parties. websites sold merchandise for a long time before state sales taxes were imposed on them.

it's not fair to brick-and-mortar businesses to have sales taxes apply to them but not to where businesses. this analogy here. the san francisco can use all the money it can get and i would also like to point out this legislation only affects website host platforms, not individual hosts. who managed to find on their way to use the computer to put on their listing all kinds of photos and other things. but another key issue for me is the loss of rentals. three fourths of the affordable housing that-well let me start over. so, we have an a for the housing crisis. we build units, but we are seeing housing units to the addictions, to no-fault evictions, to use by short-term rentals. three fourths, if we

can never build our way out of the afford the housing crisis if people continue to remove housing that could be rentals did so, please, support this legislation and get the income for our city that we need an police the web. thank you. >> supervisor peskin: thanks. after the next speaker, [calling names] >> testifier: good morning. teresa philanderer. thank you so much supervisor campos and supervisor peskin for bringing this to my for creating this. it sounds like we can finally say, if you want to do business here in san francisco any and all platforms, you have to follow the law. you cannot do false advertising of it illegal units if people have not registered. as a staff member

of senior disability action, i also speak for the seniors who i know have lost their homes in those homes have indeed become short-term rentals. i've only to think of the 22 units that are still being used as vacation rentals in my neighborhood. we are actually talking about one block, 22 units, and those are free of the buildings were there had been [inaudible] seven years ago and this is a way to bring in the platform to hold them accountable and to stop our seniors from being evicted for greed and so, i want to really support this and i hope everyone will support this. this is so important to our communities, to our city, to maintain neighbors and neighborhoods. thank you. >> supervisor peskin: thank you.

>> testifier: good morning, supervise. i'm marla night. i'm cochair of north beach tenants committed to living in north beach i have seen firsthand what's happening in our neighborhoods. being converted from residential that would into a commercial neighborhood, without any change in zoning. units as ms.-said, are being used entirely for short-term rentals. 75% of these are illegal, and very big money is being made we urge the committee to support this wonderful legislation can i am so happy it's been put forth. we need to enforce our current legislation and air b&b and other platforms need to stop hiding behind registered hosts who are doing the right thing. thank you. >> supervisor peskin: thank you. next speaker, please. >> testifier: mr. chairman,

members of the committee, my name is alex rosenthal. and second vice chair of the san francisco democratic party. and registered hosts. i agree that commercial landlords using the hosting site illegally are a problem the city and home share in committee need to do more to work together to stop the abuses and to get folks to register. but it also needs to become much easier to register now to share my experience with you to illustrate. my job at a technology company became unstable run august of last year so i thought about ways to make sure i could pay my mortgage in september. i thought about renting out my extra room. i knew there was a registration process and i looked into it and i saw required a lot of work. got to make an appointment to meet with the opposite short-term rental housing, present with

several documents to show your listing is a primary residence and you also did a business license. before i did any of this stuff, though, i didn't know if i would like doing it if i want to rent out my room has some insight about inviting strangers into my house did so i spent a few weeks cleaning and organizing and i posted the room and i two different guests were lovely people. was a positive experience for me so i made my appointment with the opposite short-term rental housing in order to register. it took two months to get my permits. there was a problem with the treasurer's office website so i could not get my business license. personally met with to give all my documentation with the office could not get in touch with her. it was relatively onerous. i think this is fair to say that an extension is fairly common. folks are not to go through this process until they try using the service once or twice. requiring registration from day one will affect what killed the service in san francisco. if the registration remains as difficult as it is today. unless-so i've also a

third of the entire homes is on air b&b are rented out for 14 nights over the last year. if you're only renting out your place within two weeks a year, you not understand two months registered. i'd urge you to consider a grace period for house and registered. >> supervisor peskin: supervisor campos >> supervisor campos: at the beginning of your comments you a device so as the democratic party get are you speak on behalf of the san francisco democratic party as an individual or capacity? i want make sure this is the party speaking >> testifier: i'm speaking as an individual but i ran out of time to say that san francisco democratic party did pass a resolution supporting the concept of this legislation last week. however, they can recommend to be a three-month grace period for hosts the buses become easier to register. thank you. >> supervisor peskin: thank you. next speaker, please. >> testifier: good morning. my name is pam we. i'm speaking here in support of the legislation. i'm speaking here because we feel very strongly

that it's important to be able to keep my neighbors, my friends, my peers who are teachers in san francisco. i feel that this legislation will be able to protect them from being pushed out because of the practices of air b&b. this is very personal to me. i live in the richmond district, where the rates of eviction is going up, and have investigated this, and i want to thank the legislative analysis that verified for me that the rates of reduction has been correlated about were corresponding, to the listing of air b&b in our neighborhood. so, i feel that

with 82% of these listings not following the law, not being registered, is really important in terms of leveling the playing field. but this is very personal for me because my possessions in my parents garage of two-my friends so possessions are there. being stored because they been pushed out. they used to live in rooms that they could rent because they had previously been pushed out by gentrification. the air b&b trends, they were pushed out of those rental units. one now is living with her mother out of state. the other person is still looking for a place, but this is real stories. did the bill just go off? okay. for me, this is -okay. i'm in favor of the

legislation and let everybody played by the law in him here to fight to protect rental units. >>[applause] >> supervisor peskin: next speaker, please. then, [calling names] >> testifier: hello. my name is sun to help one. i'm a property owner in san francisco and him leasing my property to a tenant. i had left san francisco to take care of my mother in pennsylvania. about a year ago, without my permission, my tenant began renting that property on air b&b and i returned to san francisco to take care of the issue. as the

owner of the property, i have been found in violation and being signed for $85 a day while concurrently spending money on costly eviction process. meanwhile, my tenant is earning twice what he pays him rent from the air b&b rentals and faces no consequences from the current short-term rental law. item being held accountable and find for the illegal acts of my tenants. yet, i am doing everything i can to [inaudible]. the city is put me in an untenable situation. supervisor breed, i been in contact with samantha rojas in your office regarding my situation. i need your help. i need it now. thank you. >> supervisor peskin: thank you next speaker, please. >> testifier: hi. laura clark. i think i don't like your b&b.

but i don't like hotels either. if i never have to state that another best western ever again in my entire life, but kevin, thank you. but if we hate hotels, if we hate air b&b, then let's do the straightforward thing and raise the taxes on those facilities could if we think that the city is swamped with too many taurus then let's just do the street thing and raise taxes on those things. i think that what we have done here is created a cumbersome process for getting registered and then yelling at people for not getting registered. if we want people to actually register, if we want the system to function, we need to make the process for becoming legal easier, seamless, and not the kind of long story there were hearing from people were trying to get legal, people running for office and are trying to get

legal are struggling through this bureaucratic nightmare that is frankly clearly designed to this incentivize their b&b. we all know why we made this process cumbersome. it's because we don't actually want people to be registered. additionally, the more difficult you make this process of getting registered, the more you are selecting for individuals who are doing this as their main source of income. not people who are doing this for one or two nights a week. you are doing this for people decided that this is their main source of income that is why they're going to devote months to the process of getting registered. so, streamline this process. don't just drop the hammer on the people who are struggling to get registered. i agree that we need to address the problem that this woman brought up her she's the landlord and she's getting punished for the bad actions of her tenant. that is terrible. we need to fix that, but this legislation doesn't really solve a problem. this just adds another hammer to the problem. thank you. >> supervisor peskin: thank you. next speaker, please.

>> testifier: hi. my name is cynthia funk with housing rights committee of san francisco. i live in district 9. i'm very grateful for the work that my supervisor is doing. my landlord is in him. i actually really love my landlord wow. my work is primarily interested one and i want to share some of the response expenses were having in that district. we need the city to be able to enforce existing law when you got to happen now. it's urgent. in the communicating process by engaging in in the richmond, we are hearing all types of stories about folks just walking with her committee moves up and down. and comments and folks can actually point out that unit was of this is easily a no being used six units of them are short-term rentals folks know it and it's

destroying the fabric in our community. it's really problematic. that's what we need house hosting platforms like your b&b. that's only limited to air b&b. it's my understanding it's for all hosting platforms. we need corporate responsibility now. was actually looking at air b&b listings of this morning. i saw couple in the richmond. $675 per night for two bedroom, one bath at $3500 for luxury house rental. $7000 for a gorgeous single-family home. i'm looking at these rentals that are instant bookable and think about all the family second attribute in those units. we are in housing prices. it's time for common sense legislation. this only allows the city to enforce existing legislation. this does not impact when boards for folks trying to rent out their units. so homeowners in san francisco were already following this lot were nothing to worry about. we need to fix the burdensome

process that folks are expensive, that is true but we also need to make the existing desertion enforceable. thank you. >> supervisor peskin: thank you. next speaker, please. >> testifier: my name is jan felt it on the redshirt house in district 8 and reading a letter from a host in district 11. please, oppose supervisor campos on sharing order to bring all the parties to the table to find rational legal sounding solutions. this year supervisor elections may well have much to do with the direction of the city over the next years and many vital issues of its future is a great place to get one of those is affordable housing. differences of opinion on how to make san francisco housing more affordable are evident among members of the current board. whatever the effect of the proposed law short-term rentals it appears obvious the timing of the proposal recognizes

wishes to circumvent the possibilities that the next word they do things differently from campos and others on the board. there's much more at stake here than a few hundred units that could arguably be returned to the long-term housing market at the cost of increased bureaucracy, increase it would akamai, increased confusion and increase her rosman of homeowners. except if the moment the purpose of supervisor campos's proposal at the study, i support strong regulation that protects housing for residents and hold real estate speculators for using the system. i believe all platforms can step forward and do more 12 the city. while believing adequate affordable housing the city will require changes in june with supply and demand that far exceeds the life of any platform to significantly affect. and i firmly believe the city needs to simplify the process. particularly for those who rent space out just a few days or weeks are you. i greatly welcome attempt by the city develop a one-stop online registration process for host.

the ever-changing rules and new regulatory requirement only confuse the process more including the newest rule that hosts create an inventory write-down to silverware reported to yet another city agency could nobody seems to agree on the details of this latest bit of complexity. the legally questionable proposal will only lead to more confusion and frustration. post residents and regulators. it needlessly tramples online protection act conflicts with federal law. >> supervisor peskin: thank you for your comments. [calling names] >> testifier: i am being mauled and i am with 10 years in the city. this is the first, speaking. i have [inaudible] in bayview now in district 5. i'm a registered host and it was quite difficult to register. i

have a foreign name that is not part of the english alphabet and i had to go several times back and forth with the registration to dbi, before i was eventually successful in registering. regarding the unruly guests that have been mentioned now more than one time, i feel that the long-term tenants in our building, in the next-door building, there sometimes also the out-of-town guests and some of them don't understand the concept why only people who can afford to help them, [inaudible] can come to this town would not be low

rentals. i think the legislation is if enacted [inaudible] it was confirmed november of last year. by majority of the citizens here in san francisco. when as an argument by supervisor campos corporate responsibility and good citizenship as mentioned which i highly support, at least your b&b is paying taxes. i think before they're forced to do that. >> supervisor peskin: thank you. >> testifier: don't overdo eight >> supervisor peskin: thank you, sir. thank you for your comments. next speaker, please.

>> testifier: >> testifier: good morning. my name is elizabeth frommer. here we go again. a decimal little tired of, down to city hall. but, it's clear when enforcement of an short-term rental laws are not working. 8/10 are not registered. that's kind of wholesale disregard for laws is sort of rivals probation. you must have to wonder why that is. probably, the externally high cost of rents and housing. but, i was the first person to register in this process. i've a certificate number one. >> supervisor peskin: we saw you on the nbc piece. >> testifier: thank you. did you like the dog? he was the

homey touch. i continue to comply with this ever-growing list of requirements, and now, three city agencies are involved in this is just to rent a spare room that i have to supplement my social security which of course leads to more stable neighborhoods in aging in place for a lot of seniors. i would like to support these proposals because short-term rentals have completely gotten out of hand. the majority are legal and american shooting to a housing shortage, but i like the idea of corporate responsibility. without them we have no environment protections we would have to continue to fight every day for those. but i also agreed a lot of people spoken to this, the process needs to be made easier. registration should be easier.

a sort of question the 571-r, personal business property tax requirements. perhaps you could create an agency like a citizens advisory council and task force. we've got people in the texas initiative we can do something about this. >> testifier: thank you. next speaker, please. and afterward, public comment [calling name >> testifier: good morning. peter: >> supervisor cohen: here to strongly support the legislation. good to see it coming for. i was almost like misnomer. we would then have total one & compliance in this whole enforcement fiasco would not be good for us. the budget was later analyst report made

clear that we do have a lack of compliance and have very weak enforcement system. it was another report that came out almost in the same breath from our planning department called a housing balance report, i don't want to be lost on us. this is a continuous track of how much affordable and market rate housing we are producing but also how many existing portable units we are losing. the control unit being taken out of print control to various speculative means. what's fascinating to boil down, but every four units affordable housing the we've been building, we lose three units of rent-controlled housing. that's not quite standing in place. if not a terribly impressive track record. not one we should accept as a continuing trend. why those units are being taken off the market is of course because of a number of speculative forces but we know the short-term rentals being so unenforceable such a lack of compliance is a right opportunity for speculation removal of those units we have to but not all. this legislation is a very simple step forward what puts accountability on the businesses were making a nice any profit office as well as the clients to ensure the simply complying with local laws. if everybody was like

misnomer we would not have the kind of housing affordable to crisis with this industry that we do. so, please, supervisor this is really low hanging fruit. they should've been and are legislation in the first place asking the businesses to take responsibility for only listing registered host is a very simple step. they should be accountable and frankly should be happy to show their corporate responsibility to protect her housing supply. thank you. >> supervisor peskin: thank you, sir. next speaker, please. >> testifier: i am deeper, san francisco tenants union and i was canvassing in district 5 last weekend and i had the chance to speak of a bunch of folks on the street and everyone wanted to know how the cities going to regulate air b&b's and other candidates in that district are going to have a feel about your b&b and other

correctly short-term rentals generally. they told me their concerns were what is happening in their neighborhood. i told him i'd see the same thing in my neighborhood in district 9. the neighbors are being replaced by forests. were experiencing is a community hollowing out and when that happens is not a community anymore. i do respect the need of six income folks lovely folks people that cannot use computers but i want to point out the number those people are tenants they have-the kind of burden that are tenants face and pushed out when there's increased pressures to find new housing are so much worse for the elderly for the fixed income for the folks who can't use computers. i also want to point out that there is, while i feel for some of the concerns of the host, i don't believe that the issues that were raised

is in the legislation before you today. this is really just about holding air b&b itself accountable they're not here right now to tell you why you should not pass this legislation it that's because there's no good reason. thank you. >> supervisor peskin: thank you. next speaker, please. >> testifier: very concerned about the short-term rental. person might name is tony what was and i represent senior disability action. i'm very concerned about this business model short-term rentals how to impacted up to the degree it impacted seniors in particular have lost homes because of speculators that have taken entire buildings of the market to pursue air b&b. and other short-term platforms and other short-term online platforms. you know, the numbers speak for themselves. i think something like 7000 unregistered hosts.

it seems to me a matter of wanting to have your path and eat it too. we are cannibalizing a lot of housing stock in san francisco i would liken this to what i call homicide we take somebody's home, degree of senior that's been there for many many years and they get evicted. they end up house less than we've seen at least in our organization, many horror stories seniors would've ended up homeless or in substandard housing and that comes with many many ramifications. so, i would've strongly suggest or strongly support the legislation that is before you today. thank you. >> supervisor peskin: thank you, tony. next speaker, please. >> testifier: thank you mr. chairman and thank you board of supervisors for letting us all speak today in favor of the legislation to have regulation

and corporate responsibility requirements for those large companies that are in fact making money from short-term rentals. i want to address an issue my name is mark bruno-i apologize i work with [inaudible] in north beach and have done for 15 years although not speaking on behalf of the society, we do is work with the poor and homeless and many those who come to our society for help people have in fact lost their places, the rentals, because of short-term rentals. i want to address a slightly different issue that's very specific to our neighborhood in one incident. at 525, 535 -street which the city itself is determined-i've no letters from short term rental office-city has determined that this is an illegal short-term rental of five unit building. it's never been properly registered. so what on november 13, up with this. you can show this to everybody on the screen, we had a fire on the building and we had a fire because it turns out,-is a better-you can

see the date and incident number infected 10 copies to leave with a bottle board of supervisors with all the fire people came out men and women that we had today as taxpayers because this area the building short-term rental being denied proper permits, number one to do the work in the top of the building which i could see from two blocks away have started the fire. well, somebody had been living in the building where the tenants or residents, anybody living next-door who own their own property, it wouldn't much care about a fire on the roof of the building was nobody to care because i'm a particular date nobody was there. you can see in this last display here, to do this work is in fact three days later and three days later. would've cost of fire and a lot of damage to the neighborhood had in fact somebody, me in this case just by coincidence not seen this fire. the point is when you don't have people living in building took about the neighborhood you are inviting is unsafe, on habitable and

inhumane ways of affecting the neighborhood. so i think were doing more than asking them to pay their fair share as ruskin to be good neighbors and i appreciate you doing that supervisor peskin. thank u so much >> supervisor peskin: i do, sir and just by way of background because i know that building. the famous [inaudible] in what beach, actually was being advertised on a different platform not air b&b but was we should remember there are other hosting platforms and that one actually come after doing some research was not listed on your b&b. was listed on a different site. >> testifier: >> supervisor peskin: ms. lederman and after the next speaker, [calling names] >> testifier: