(calling names). >> go ahead, sir speak. >> first of all, i want to obtain to ththis descriptionsy practice and claiming affordable housing for people in the city and county of san francisco this is been going on for years every brand new apartment building context is put together by the mayor's office of housing and also every brand new apartment building that comes to the before supervisors they as set the requirement of affordable medium as 50 and 60 percent of hud income scale earlier the spokesman for the housing said the 50 percent is $4,000 per year it is $37,000 per year you use

a low income hard working low income person as your pitch point by using a house cleaner a house cleaner makes that much money that's not true they did with a proposition d a female living in aa in-home care position and act like she is qualified to move into a building at mac that 50 percent of the medium is a discriminatesy practice by excluding low income people at 40 and thirty and 25 and 20 percent of overall scale for incomes that is used to calculate people that are inevitable for building complexes now the board of supervisors and the mayor's office of housing attendance mr. olsen does that

repeatedly even when you have a brand new building complex and advertise that it blaefrtd you make the requirements at 60 to 70 percent of medium so with that that means is that people who is income below the 45 thus plus is being worked out excluded from even politically and putting in applications to be a candidate in those building too much discrimination each one of the supervisors and mayor's office of housing is deeply involved in their sdrimthdz you discriminate against people with the same income as yourselves but you can get you, your in violation of the equal protection under the law providing opportunity for high income people will you not for low income and in violation of the americans with disabilities act

because the majority of people that are on street have physical and mental health and don't have the opportunity to apply for those buildings that you acting like our helping - thank you, sir, your time is up. >> thank you very much. >> next speaker, please. >> good afternoon, commissioners mark are teamsters joint council 7 our organizations representatives thousands of working men and women in san francisco but i'll say that even thousand more by manyfold who work here and are moving farther and farther out but findings their employment being worked out really shut out in a way we're aware of workers who are as far out we saw the zip codes moving further and further east they're taking

catnaps before they go to work on the freeways and in the stretches of the students about they go to their service jobs we fully port the inclusionary ordinance as proposed by supervisor ahsha safai and supervisor president london breed we believe that this is going to allow for closings now and it is so, so important that we achieve this because very soon workers who work in service industries in hospitalities in the commercial office building and automotive industries bus drivers you know about public and private sectors will not be able to do those they'll not be able to do that they'll find other employment and has an effect not only on their livelihood but the city we strongly urge you will look to find a solution for as the slides

talked about those that are at least everyday our sister crafts to find find economic improvement and continue to achieve our mission to find economic improvements for working people and find them also within the inability to afford to move into the city of san francisco is unintelligible we hope as you make our decision you'll consider what working people need to stay here really if i could echo on everything that commissioner london breed talked about earlier it was so utterly important and you'll thank you for your time and consideration this matter. >> thank you, mr. dbe son. >> next speaker, please. >>

>> peter cohen, san francisco council of community housing organizations. i think the brother spoke mad good points and you know there is a troublesome narrative in city hall i was there in 2002 when the original ordinance was passed now it seems like we're using inclusionary housing one tool to create this very diversity class conflict it is very, very troubling what i'm handing out to you a statement of principles on inclusionary housing that didn't prop the policy solutions but addresses the conversation that is happening about who deserves affordable housing we need it it calls for un1100 grant avenue it is how we'll find a solutions that works for everybody we have a un1100 grant avenue narrative 25 signatory organizations a

number than the california how nurses association and you community tenants and many will speak safe the action and homeownership san francisco the community services and mission and economic development and (calling names) the list goes on we have a labor community coalition opportunity to figure out it out but as a device to pit folks against each other that is a terrible environment we have a couple of highlight we shouldn't be pitting low income san franciscans there are as commissioner peskin's a lot of them workers no reason to be pitting themselves against each other and there is no question a lot of us agree no question that the affordable housing expansion to it workers that's a new realty we don't a solve

it by taking resources away from others we think this in terms of the pie the immediate political conversation how do we cutup this thing in front of us one of the key pieces the staff talked about is the ishgsz we can grow the inclusionary resources over time and set that as aggressively the controllers novels one percent increase 50 percent is an arrest - i can decide when to start that to supply it starts in 2020 you can start 2018 think about the dimension or growing our pie and spreading to the folks in this room that's how we goad to the end of low and middle not quibbling over and pitting one

against the other thank you >> thank you, mr. cowen. >> next speaker, please. >> good morning, commissioners i'm lauren a senior and i'm one the legions that voted for prop c i feel like we set the inclusionary housing goals we wanted to see in the large development 15 percent available for low income and 10 percent for middle-income both i think we voters clearly wanted more of the unit to be volleyball to low income ramp the higher income i can clearly see which one the plans prosecute you today keeps faith

pace with iowa we intended 9 supervisor kim and supervisor peskin proposal the closings for all it in a meet intention of prop c because it allows be developers to build with a lesser amount of affordable housing and give those fewer unit to hire income people please keep in mind low income people as supervisor malia cohen's and mr. cowen noted are working people i'm one of them and working families will benefit much more highly in the supervisor kim supervisor peskin proposal than the alternative please let's not pit malcolm x housing against locating housing we need both thank you. >> tu nepthank you.

>> next speaker, please. >> (speaking foreign language.) >> good afternoon,

commissioners i am representing the association one the largest grassroots tenant organizations in the city today, we have brought over 40 members with us today 0 who are most of which of low income resident and seniors because we're here to have some concerns about the inclusionary housing proposal that is currently by supervisor safai and supervisor president london breed and supervisor tang. >> (speaking foreign language.) >> affordable housing

shortage in san francisco is no secret to anyone and prop c that was passed by voters in last june improved that voters agree that developers need to have the higher inclusionary percentage when they're developing their projects

but now this proposal that is being worked out put are forward will potentially put away the proposition that was passed housing shortage is not something that effect one level of income but effects all income levels of residents in the city but at the same time those are hit the highest of the lowest income of families and seniors and so the city shouldn't be - it dpoong that the city is taking away resources from families of the lowest income but rather to figure out how to expand opportunity for people of all income levels. >> (speaking foreign language.) >> just keeping on building

now private investment without including any affordable housing units in the projects did not do anything for the community and in fact, reducing the below-market rate requirement to 18 percent will actually hurt both sides of party weird strongly here to

to reallocating the requirement to 18 percent and strongly maintain that we should be kept at the 24 or 25 percent levels thank you very much. >> while the next speaker is couple of i'll call additional names (calling names) . >> good afternoon, commissioners welcome my name is rodney co-founder the social community-based organizations in the heart of hunters point i'm a member of the hunters point host community and a department of a local extortion for local partnerships we turn goals both outcomes i'm a lifetime resident of the city and county of san francisco and more importantly hunters point in san francisco the work noncustodial

parents the single working women the single working fathers no children we all deserve a fair and inclusive housing now, when it comes time for those of us in the income bracket between 60 and 65 or 95 or one hundred we need this policy like the janitor and the teamsters and carpenters the nonprofit community those workers as well myself we deserve that and it should be inclusive again, the current policy has put other the working hard people the african-americans remove the city because we can't afford to stay

here unfair definitely when we are working in the city you have city departments like dpw and the mta that is doing major recruitment for local hiring and doing a great deed for the city those folks have permanent jobs yet the backlash they got to move to la jolla or richmond or oakland had i had to travel over two bridges to get here unfair to the city unfair to the people that i've serving unfair to the community that i was born and raised in bayview hunters point now again, we the middle-income the hard working minority the african-americans the single working women and men all the noncustodial parent we're asking for a better inclusionary

housing policy and in conclusion we know that whatever you preventing occupy your thoughts will magnify in our life i want to home and working hard to make that happen i need you guys to help ousted thank you very much. >> thank you, mr. hamilton. >> next speaker, please. >> (clapping.) >> >> good afternoon my name is gail and i like to say i'd like to see my children and others live and work here okay important and so, please make housing policies be fair thank you. >> thank you. >> next speaker, please. >> (clapping.) >> >> excuse me - folks please refrain from the clapping. >> good afternoon,

commissioners thank you forfor thank you for the opportunity to come before and thank supervisor safai, commissioner london breed and supervisor tang this is a conversation that we have had in silos only too long in the city we have bleed people of color and bleed simple be mothers of children and bleed the franchisees population that once thought that was an opportunity here we we have watched that bleed our labors brothers and sisters that built the city and continue to keep the city running they had to leave they come here to work they pay an extra amount of money to get to san francisco to work and not to mention childcare and then they have to go back home all of us that call san francisco home what we see here is not what the vision held are for us many years ago even

20 years ago we redevelopment was mr. glover through the city we thought we had an opportunity the opportunity began to diminish please understand that behind all the languages and culture lie people community much like yourselves everyone in the audience would love their children to grow up and choose to work and live in san francisco as we did as it stands now that simply is not possible ami of one and one thousand dollars a dollars you believe a two family household is with only person leafs we have another person that becomes homeless and many have my daughter once she got on they are feet she is in the medical profession doing well

but makes too much to benefit from the program to afford a home in san francisco it takes an annual salary actions from the people that actually have had to endure the policy and culture of lack of housing within san francisco i think that worth moving forward and working on i want to thank you for your time and i'm implore you to keep in mind we have done many things this the city we've never followed through - just like the african-americans out migrates panel came up with reasonable and solid sluktsdz housing amongst them nothing was done i implore you to keep in mind and toe listen carefully you here pleas of passion and pain and hurting thank you. >> thank you. >> next speaker, please.

>> hello how you doing (microphone feedback). >> once again how you doing i'd like to ask you guys to please make san francisco housing policy inclusive i'd like to continue to be able to work and live in san francisco. current programs that in effect right now seem like they're for the rich or struggling black poor you know when i was working for the labor union you know i'm a long-term lifetime of hunters point you know, i thought it would be great to tell my

daughter the place we live in is where we build but the principled were not kept i make enough not to get accountable income but not buy matters of i'd like to see that change will about the middle-income that is disappearing and really no more middle-income so you guys in the meeting please think about us and let this be a real thing thank you >> thank you. >> next speaker, please. >> commissioners dan policy director at neighborhood commercial district cd chinatown people from the light court downstairs they got carries a hopefully, the next time we're

able to accommodate for osthose - we'll be attending the next meeting on this matter i don't want to mix word but be contrary from our perspective the proposal that supervisor safai and commissioner london breed and supervisor tang are put forward a step backwards from the stand point of inclusionary housing program that has expanded opportunity and tricks the amount of calling for a conclusion i agree with what people said about the housing crisis but we shouldn't do it on the backs of poor i think we can move in that direction with supervisor peskin and supervisor kim's proposal and i hope we have a conversation for those who are maybe on the other side of the #0i8 let's come together

in the coming weeks we need to make our policies strongly we absolutely agree for inclusionary housing and so i again with without repeating some of the things the speakers said the line we draw the voters have a maid that clear expand the affordable housing for people and not go backwards and defeated a promotion overwhelmingly that was a measure that basically was similar rhetoric about the housing crisis the problem that our affordable housing program didn't set income levels high 90 enough if so not causing the shortage of housing in san francisco but if we move forward when people follow-up with more detailed letter with respect to it let's across the board there are specific items troubling in the legislation if

supervisor safai and all for example, we are concerned on the projects the 25 units and below that they're raising the income ami level to percent and many neighborhoods that is gentrifying our community those rents we the existing resident can't afford let's not move backwards let's make sure that we - let's have a use it or lose that the developers shouldn't be given 3 years to sit on those and see what happens to the market they should build foe let's build now and up to include the middle-income and include everyone. >> thank you, sir, your time is up. >> >> tu nepthank you. >> next speaker, please. >> hello commissioners my

name is jones i'm the executive director of arts band i represented e represent 12 hundred artists trying to make a living no inform i i don't envy you we're one community and if every plan - the controllers data speaks for itself that the proposal put forward by supervisor president london breed is more and more tenable we're using federal standards to decide what happens here from the sunset and it is important to think about san francisco has been a unique place and have a great economy in many, many ways and if we think of new voices and new ways of solving our problems that will rep help you have

respect for supervisor kim and supervisor peskin he has been around for 20 years we're in a situation we vote in prop c and then don't hit the goals in that and proposal a from supervisor kim and supervisor peskin is not looking at a 5 percent that divide more housing this is incredible we vote and it didn't work and make legislation bans hopes and dreams didn't work i think that the prop b or the proposal b is realtime real now i find it to be the memoranda and middle-income class my husband and i were evicted last year with office of economic workforce development m ii serve the san francisco and the artists it is difficult as an artist

and not to fall blow but well, well below-market rate the $1,200 are from even if ethic, possibilities from immigrants all over the world and many, many of the artists fall between this underserved and the market-rate we ask you to please again think about those proposals and look at the controllers information and note that we really do need to solve the middle gap that is happening in san francisco and please make sure that it happens quick and expediting and the law la serve us for two, 5 years not come back again and again and look at the hopes and dreams but look at the real numbers that serve everyone, everyone deserves to have a home thank you. >> thank you. >> next speaker, please.

>> hello thanks for thank you for your time for comments i appreciate it i have a new found respect for listening to everybody so i'll be quick i'm an artist living in the city i'm relatively do well, for myself and answer supervisor peskin question he said what do you want this town or city to look like in 10 years if you drive auto the artists that are doing okay. it will be gray it burglary be boring so as an artist working here i'll say i go against the #34ig9 not all artists are out of work i have a family and a wife that works for an education organization and a 7-year-old the boy i

moved here 15 years ago i'm not good at any time i can make art i turned it in a business with the arts organization that are here i was here talking and today is actually, my third year of doing that as a full-time job now want to own a house i make too much to qualify for low income housing and in that dark forgettable spot i think if any wife was not working for a nonprofit we would be okay but we're just scraping but we're scraping by a in a town that is constantly pushing more and more challenges and more and more things we'll not be able to own something i'm speaking for the f a example ii and commissioner london

breed proposal that is a respite in a dark place i don't feel it robs peter to pay paul thank you. >> next speaker, please. >> good afternoon, commissioners this is fernando i'm an artist first point we want to reiterate we can't be pitting one workforce against another when you talk away from some to give to the on that is simply not fair it is the this similar to prop u the voters rejected it looks like a skunk and smell likes and skunk it might be a skunk i think that there's a possibility here to move to towards something that really tries to address different workers needs but are in order to get that we have to understand who wore talking about

so here's some general numbers i might be a little bit off hotel workers eastern $38,000 permit holders in the unified school district $34,000 and just a few minutes downtown 34 thousand labor oh, somebody correct me so i'd like to hear where that is hiring or lower per laborers 348 to 50 thousand who earn to 50 percent of area medium income for a one to 2-person household one person earn who earns from 60 to 90 percent the question facing you all and the supervisors as approach a and b are you going to be able to look at

those union members in the face and say i'll vote for a proposal that takes away half of the unit so with, build for unit at a higher level this is a possibility to do both to continue to serve the workforce that is represented by hotel workers and janitor and paraprofessionals in our schools and add it that additional leveled for the teachers and nurses the way you do that is by inviting the density bonus program saying this is how we'll do that and i think jabbing correct me if i am wrong when i understood from the controllers report that the feasible what they if you know had a hard time figure out how to do that supervisor peskin it assumes are your faced with density bonus program proposal you raised the question how can it be our

hands are tied what can we do you've not be the only city west hollywood and western edition a density bonus program is going to be taken that is the right way to serve the entire workforce thank you thank you. >> next speaker, please. >> commissioners joseph commissioner president dwight with the human rights committee no question that market-rate housing is affordable inform people that make at least one and 50 percent the area medium income we see that problem paying out every day the question is whether we should hold the vendors to participating in solving the problem of providing housing at all income levels the voters heard a number of policies but it is important to remember about the housing balance ballot measure passed a couples years ago when the voters said to at

least 33 percent of housing to be affordable to low income and 50 percent to be below-market rate the it supervisor safai commissioner london breed proposal does exactly the opposite it requires the below-market rate requirements 80 be shifted so that the affordability moves away from the most in need and the affordability to middle-income rather than southern california the problem of housing balance i'm not saying either proposal goes far enough but the supervisor peskin and supervisor kim proposal actually pushes the envelope of what might be feasible this will not solve the how to hold the market-rate vendors petting those against with the moderate income but in order to chip

away at the issues we need to push the envelope what the developers can provide supervisor kim said we need to increase the pie and the amount of percentage that we're holding developers to provide for low income workers and the lower income taxes families. >> i'll call additional speakers (calling names). >> commissioner i'm betty i'm with senior be disability action we represent low income seniors and people with disabilities and this is a group that is being worked out evicted at the highest rates in san francisco why? because the seniors are aging in place and in units that are low income and speculators comes in and

wants them out to the point that is reaching elder abuse you heard compassionately about a man in his 90s facing evictions that literally after stress of it died in his bed at home one hundred-year-old women being worked out evicted and two proposals before you one for inclusionary housing one of them at 18 percent maximum, and then divided into 3 parts makes the lower one of percent while the voters you've heard numerous times through prop c at least 15 percent for the low income i think that is plan before you that we need to keep at any time 15 percent for the low income people and also, if these developers as supervisor

kim said can be pushed i perching think that if they are can build millions of plus condos they can add in the one to two had had thousand to those and give us the inclusionary we need in san francisco thank you. >> tu nepthank you>> next speaker, please. >> (speaking foreign language.) >> good afternoon. >> my name is gloriaes pens >> (speaking foreign language.) >> i'm a member of local 87. >> (speaking foreign language.) >> the work i had a very hard. >> (speaking foreign language.) >> as well as the lose.

>> ma'am, i'm sorry to interrupt you would you use the other mike. >> with all the existing laws i can't live here. >> (speaking foreign language.) >> so the majority of my colleagues and other just a few minutes like myself are pushed out to oakland or richmond. >> richmond. >> (speaking foreign language.) >> and that's something i had to recently experience personally. >> (speaking foreign language.) >> it's really go incredibly

difficult to work only to pay rent. >> (speaking foreign language.) >> it is to o so unfair we don't qualify for low income housing. >> (speaking foreign language.) >> we need a pathway an opportunity or access to be able to have that type of housing as much as not just for adjournment ambassador carpenters and other construction workers and other industries to have that

pathway. >> (speaking foreign language.) >> to qualify for those types of programs. >> (speaking foreign language.) >> i support commissioner london breed and supervisor safai. >> (speaking foreign language.) >> it is in you're hands whatever it should be. >> (speaking foreign language.) >> so we can have a home here in san francisco. >> thank you thank you very much. >> next speaker, please. >> good evening 37 years old i grew up in san francisco and recently had to move out i work 3 jobs i'm a janitor i work for a tech company and work part time at a

nonprofit living here is really hard and expensive if you're low income your bar is here but don't qualify for housing we're in a gray area we can't live here but we can't afford it working 3 jobs i shouldn't have to cross the bridge i have coworkers and 0 others who don't live close by in sacramento someone lives in modesto and commutes here i understand that they're saying yungs we're taking from the low income we're not consider us and think about us

i support workforce housing i support commissioner london breed and supervisor safai proposal i worry about you guys will consider it. >> thank you very much. >> next speaker, please. >> hello, everybody i'll keep it quick i wanted to start off quoting matthew poverty two freedoms to profit for rent and the freedom to live in a safe and affordable home my concerns with supervisor president london breed and supervisor safai proposal sorry (microphone feedback) thanks my concerns with supervisor safai and mr. reid's legislation as shared by the

labor council the prioritization of the affordability first, i'm concerned with the calculating fees based on the developer costs instead the market-rate housing favors the developers over real market conditions second affordable housing based on the ami proposal as specified proposal a effecting marginalized the working families and crowds them out of affordable housing since developers can successes the average from a small ami unit in the majority of high ami units so some have raised that supervisor safai and supervisor breed robs peter to pay paul i don't believe so this forces peter and paul to fight each other over the pie i don't want to live in a city that makes they step over others.

>> thank you very much. >> next speaker, please. >> good afternoon, commissioners i'm jeffrey i'm a full-time janitor and i work part time at the flee market i'm the guardian of my 11-year-old sister and we live in a small studio unfortunately i don't make enough money to afford a house but i don't - i make too much money for to be able to apply for low income i feel shamed i can't provide a house or place where my sister and i

can call home and i hope this commission gives the support to supervisor president london breed and the supervisor ahsha safai because i believe this this proposal will be a solution for me for working families and for san francisco san francisco needs thank you for your time. >> next speaker, please. >> good afternoon commissioners my name is tony rodriquez represent the local and a native of san francisco my parents came in the last informing working hard one a warehouse man in the city and the other one worked at schlage and raised the four of us i

will 32 years ago bought a home in san francisco and raised four girls in the city you know, i said a representative a workforce of skill trade they get paid a living wage with benefits but they can't afford to live in the city to give you an example like bernal heights houses are sold for 9 had thousand their gutted and put on the market for 1.5 and people without three $300,000 your pachldz are 7 or 8 hundred with taxed what i've hearing for years and i've been in the trade for about 35 years hearing about workers forced out of san francisco because we can't buy a house their rates here and have to move out someone said having to leave homes at

45 clock and get home at the 8 o'clock at night this is wrong so epic that people are you're taking away from peter to pay that all my thought i've not heard anything done for the middle-income and when i hear from supervisor president breed and supervisor safai at some legislation that will help the disappearing middle-income stay in to i hear if supervisor kim and supervisor peskin is depends on density and that's not guaranteed this is a thing for the middle-income i ask you to consider this this is a set up a positive thing for them and the alternative is what our hearing people having to move out and spend outs u hours on the freeway and have an opportunity they go away they can't do it anymore thank

you au. >> good afternoon you commissioners here to point out a minor issue that has smasz for projects of 21 units or less a few years ago prop c went on the ballot and was passed the discussion around praublg there were supporting document and data to suggest that those smaller projects can stay at status quo a few years later supervisor safai and supervisor president breed legislation which directions the benefits of the inclusionary program to hire ami levels when you combine the two together you have a lowering of the burden

for those projects i i didn't believe that was the intent of anybody i'm here to say we're dedicated and committed to working with the shareholders and the elected officials and that once this dust settle and once we know what the final ami levels will be we'll action quantify this difference and then b establish a mechanism to contribute that to the small site program thank you au . >> good afternoon commissioners my name is ken i'm here representing the units educators of san francisco we are the teachers and the par educators of this city we've heard a number of folks speak for the trust of

teachers i want to give you a little bit of background where the educators that is teachers and par educators of stand on housing in san francisco and the issue of affordable housing years before the battle over inclusionary housing appeared on the landscape just as the housing crisis was breaking and sf was dragged into the housing fight with my decided back then we'll all in this together. >> within tsthe - the main thing i've named them their par educators we were refused to have teachers and other professionals in the schools pitted against the interest of our lower interest brothers and sisters working alongside those in the classrooms of san francisco and further the

meaning we're all in this together in way no morale foundation for the brothers and sisters and the teachers in the city can abide we'll pit clamor teachers against the very low income students and their families that sit in our classrooms the idea of 15 percent inclusionary housing for low income people for us and none ca can speak in the name of teachers again, after this discussion is over will lower housing for teachers and at the same time lower the ability of locating san franciscans to find a place in our fair city everyone is intensely involved in the initial or issue it cares again san

francisco we're here a sweet spot between the inadmissibility and finding that sweet spot but an example people talk about teachers in the schools we have a member nora who was won the human rights teacher educator of year award she's a par educator i don't know what she is making but in the thirty thousand the teachers at galileo high school were certainly do not want their housing needs and what a lose to lose her or others par educators you guys are a tough. >> thank you, sir, your time is up. >> and good afternoon

carpenters local 22 we're not here to take a position but want to bring up a couple of points i hope you'll consider and the board of supervisors will consider first of all, the great unspoken thing maybe mentioned we simply need for housing part of what the supervisor kim the numbers are based on is oh, worry about full thinking is prospective and hopeful the resistance that my developer in the town gets generally speaking layer a density bonus program we know what will happen this commission seize what happens when any project and the fight to model

legislation and outcome bans one 100 percent is not the way to go but have a sensitivity analysis if only a quarter of developers or analysis to see what that looks like if we look corridors and or try to be more thoughtful and second of all i've noticed amongst the proposals it the 10 to 25 units is pretty much hands off this is the thing the larger projects we're tagging those higher impact fees they hire the union workers and stay healthcare and training and develop those people and working with citibuild to make sure that the people that are our desire workforce is trying to get opportunities while those 10 to 25 units projects pay less for car

and storage and pay way below area standards and contribute into the health and puts that cost back on the city but we're keeping our hands off p of this so i think that as we focus on the various projects 5 00 units in the pipeline that are basically you know that are escaping for lack of a better word and rodney hamg to that your citibuild is designed to take people from the southeast from low income community to skilled construction trades to get middle-income careers a carpenter a second period carpenter will not qualify for housing we're talking about rob peter to pay paul and

give one hand and taking from another we're pitting people in a situation they can't stay and i hope that is a. >> thank you, sir, your time is up. >> thank you. >> next speaker, please. >> good afternoon commissioners i'm abraham i'm a father of 5 kids i'm a husband a full-time student seeking to be a affirm maker i used to live here in san francisco but having 5 kids living in nine hundred 900 square feet was a nightmare we tried to get affordable housing but they rejected me i had two or three jobs and wish to come back to live in the city where i grew up on market street to ts

the embarcadero i miss being worked out close to my work not crossing the bay bridge everyday my kids going to golden gate park every weekend i wish i could be soufrnd with the great 0 society we need workforce housing a solution to my family i support supervisor president breed and supervisor safai proposal. >> tuhank you. >> next speaker, please. >> good afternoon hello, i'm 25 years old i'm a full-time janitor and i'm a member of local 87 it is hard to stand here and share what my any man my age would be shamentd i'm homeless and have been living

in my car for the past month i current come from la too i choose san francisco to work here hard because i know there is a lot of potential in san francisco than in louisiana is pretty much dead now i have i have a difficult life i struggle not to good job but hard when you don't have a place to call home i earn to much more affordable housing but the to pay 4000 in rent i know that workforce housing will be a good solution for young people that are trying to work with dedicated in a spiritual we're pushed into everyday i hope you'll consider a solution that helps workers like myself and a cancer

survive and support supervisor breed and supervisor safai thank you thank you. >> next speaker, please. >> good afternoon commissioners i'm tray i work at senior disabilities action and live in north beach what i know is that we voted for prop c what i know as a city that is what we voted inform as a city we voted done proposition u i'm sorry by supervisor safai, mayor tilly chang proposal sounds like you what i know is also living in north beach i see that the workforce there on the wharf is now traveling from the east bay and beyond to get to their minimum wage jobs many of them

and that the wharf is having a hard time hiring people people can't afford to live here we're talking about a workforce those people that live in my neighborhood with a 10-minute commute commute for a much, much longer time and paying the additional fees that involves i know that the seniors continue to be displaced to be evicted because their long term tenant is there is no where to go they want to live in buildings mixed income include their income being worked out although the retired construction people the retires carpenters the retired janitor are low income we need to think about in the future those same people that are here today as teamsters as

carpenters as etc. that when our time comes that retirement we need to be sure the same housing for you and make sure the housing for those who are retired again, i'm very concerned and support the supervisor peskin supervisor kim legislation and don't want to pit one group against another so, please please think carefully thank you thank you >> next speaker, please. >> good afternoon commissioners corey smith on behalf of the housing coalition. we're reviewing both pieces of finds legislation don't have an opinion at this time in the conversation of feasibility the projects that were brought up we want to clarify a number of things that supervisor kim that mission rock project is one and 50 percent ami 15 hundred 00-unit

it is a significant up donning for that the one and folsom used public subsidies one project and 5 m has land dedicated important free religious are not apples to apples comparisons what we are talking to be perfectly that honest frustrating when we dive into the numbers. >> talk about the differences neither one hits 4 hundred total subsidized units and neither one hits 1800 units per year we talked about how 60 percent of san franciscans qualify for bmr 60 percent is 4 hundred and 80 thousand people 4 00 units for 4 hundred and 80 thousand people in need that's so far from reasonable and should be

talking about the total dpfs between the proposals are 72 bmr unit between every year supervisor kim and supervisor peskin 72 total bmr unit per year that's what we are arguing about what are we trying to get to audit outing of all of that we circled the unit 5,000 units the data says that housing crisis will go up and same rate as inflation we need to build 5,000 units per year consistent production is addicting i'd like to get to a point to have a reasonable extension how much labor and 2011 we built 4 hundred huge, huge impact on job is that will building all the city and making sure that everyone is pare and contributed or put

all the housing in one part of city i think we need to be tracking this stuff and quantifying what success looks like one of the ways to look at how p pa and quarterly updating to the make a prediction to get ahead of that thing and be as smart as possible at the end really, really, really when this comes to creating shelter for people and providing that basic right we have to stop arguing bayshore crumble and figure out a better way to build a pie thank you. >> tu nepthank you. >> next speaker, please. >> a bigger pie i'm laura clark and i represent the members of the jury the pro housing people neither one of those

addresses the real fundamentally underlying problem we're not building enough housing that is arguing over the crumbs left on the table and deciding whether that will be for middle-income people a few crumbs or crumbs for the low income income and get to address the underlying problem that is a third of the city is zoned it single-family homes only and is untouchable, of course, we can't address those problems as long as we're a playing this game we prevent that inclusionary zoning can address the need we need a lot more housing everywhere we can getting into the weeds if you had a full density bonus program under the supervisor kim supervisor peskin resolution all the 24 percent has to be at 50 percent ami this is a small technicality not going to workout it

will be used for misrepresent income with the density bonus program the point we're waste of time arguing over peanuts those are peanuts and the faster through other argument the better we need to address the undermining crisis underbuilding housing for decades decades every time we spent a lot of time at the hearings arguing with each other before the three or four units on any given project another will months we are adding to the housing crisis people need homes they need them now 9 entire process needs to be speed up up dramatically i want every single one to take that as you do everything you can to speed up the production of housing not just in you, you know community already dealing with a lot of gentrification and changing but

your job to demand that our wealth it neighborhood pare and see physical changes that wewe purposing create neighborhoods thank you. >> next speaker, please. >> i'll read more names (calling names) please. my name is brad i'm on the board of harvey milk lgbt democratic not is an official position but one thing i want to ask quickly before i say all the things i want to say what do you mean to be a pro housing organization and which is not pro housing here this don't make sense to me

it is housing for who london breed said quote we can't keep on failing people by selling a false narrative but who pays for the money and the real estate speculators the money that is poured into many ftof the candidates campaigns where is the money they pay come from san franciscans that is x trademark from is this city and the middle-income and low income people in the city so if we don't want to promote a false narrative talk about supply and demand and stop promoting the idea of promoting more supply will decrease the demand if we provide more supply we create more people to live here and kids and more people will keep

on living here who do we want to protect we can't put middle-income and poor people against one another but the idea that we do that it is sort of interesting no one is talking about the fact we need to sort of be 0 not necessarily having unity but a critical conversation about those who are benefiting from quote/unquote middle-income and low income earns a single teacher is a low income earn so many people who the motors or the people describe as middle-income have actually low income earns and i think with when we in the supervisor peskin and supervisor kim legislation the idea that we are protecting more of the middle and low

income earns and the city we're protecting diversity and people that who have been solid out by real estate speculation in the city so a long time i want people to be critical of the idea we need unity over critique people say we need to have un1100 grant avenue they're asking for compliance with the money interests of the speculators and then please, please, please fight for middle-income and lower class and don't put those people at odds with one another. >> thank you he. >> next hank you. >> next speaker, please. >> hello commissioners, i work for local 87 i used to live in the

city 4 years ago and for us it is like - unfortunately in a couple of years the family needs a three bedrooms we can't afford that we went totto the low income housing and was told the income is too high we tried to rent a three bedrooms we can't afford that we drove owe we are drove out from the city because of problems i live in oakland i traffic one and a half and traffic back home to see the family to do the homework with the kids i'm here today to support the

proposal of the workforce that proposed by supervisor president breed and supervisor safai so the community can live and work in the city thank you very much thank you, thank you very much. >> next speaker, please. >> hello my name is olga the president of the y i u and the secretary of the council we sent a letter to the supervisors with both initiative and the board members to come to a arrangement i appreciate folks that have spoken today, there is initiative although different not too far apart and supervisor peskin

himself said here about here and said (laughter) they're not too far apart can work on something together it is key to the initiative to want to work on something as a daughter of a single mother with the children i representatives 4000 just a few minutes the crisis of not just the contract were negotiating and the obligates of organized labor railroad obligation not ending and bargaining table but the crisis is how to represent our members one the worse examples was we were fighting a building owner that evokedicted one of the members he recently had a heart attack and the person his mother was in low income housing senior housing in chinatown we if you do that offense that somebody who was a

millionaire that can own reports in san francisco has the auditions to have access to low income housing we're not saying that we are opposed to low income i want to be able to ask can you are members please stand. >> (speaking not one is a millionaire not one thank you i'm not here standing a millionaire all the brothers and sisters within labor we're not going to plan to pitting one community go another we're working families whether we are meet a threshold we're all we own property unless we won the lottery i don't see anyone that stood that forts the proposals is a millionaire otherwise they'll not have the problems we have for all of us this is near and

dear and face it everyday the jobs we're asking you and pushing our supervisor to not pit us against each other i'll not play into that game a letter sent out by coalitions and community organizations i invite them to sit at the table to understand the stories and the experienced the members have been pushed out of and again, i ask everyone here today to understand we're not trying to play into that game but workforce housing is necessary in san francisco. >> thank you, ma'am, your time is up. >> thank you. >> next speaker, please. >> commissioners michael building and construction tradable right off the bat thank you, supervisor kim and done this this in the past for bringing this in the 5 m and want to thank

supervisor breed and supervisor safai for bring it to the board on inclusionary housing we in the trades for a decades literally have complained about the process of taking in apprenticeships from under privileged places and see them pushed out of the city with a buck in the pocket and want real homes for that themselves and families with that said, i know that while we grossly under build we under build low income housing as well and the as prior speakers noted the good that the inclusionary housing policy can limit the harm of poorly crafted housing is considerable and so i'll urge about sides in the beat to sit down and workout

the inclusionary housing policy not damaging and also urge them to and everyone to begin to focus on the nitty-gritty of the policy on a whole set of particular issues that i might run down here would take a while that might bulge the dial thank you. >> tuff. >> next speaker, please. >> good afternoon my name is gina and i'm the executive director other bernal heights we're in the bernal heights district 9 in the enjoying in district 11 your board of directors has not taking a position regarding the proposal we have some concerns and felt needs to be part of discussion

today we agree there is a need more affordable housing and affordable housing solution for middle-income families and what is described as a missing middle we're challenged and don't argue it should be at the expense of our other working group which is also low income families yes low income families work there are our neighbors and community members living in one home where you can anticipate maybe three or four or more families in the excelsior that didn't seem for part of this discussion it is not uncommon that that occurs while they're waiting to quality for the low income housing for sustainable lives i'll challenge everyone what do we say to those families i've

heard a lot about the families of the working class but low income families have the same issues we want all families to stay and live sustainable lives in san francisco i think we have a good discussion and an opportunity to do that without minimizing the mingle opportunity that our families have here in san francisco thank you. >> thank you. >> next speaker, please. >> and i'll call more cards (calling names) i imagine going through those some people have spoken (calling names) wait a minute please. please. >> okay. thank you. >> (speaking foreign language.) >> hi, everyone.

>> go ahead. >> hi, i'm angela i'm one of the working families in san francisco i'm a part of worker committee at a chinese progressive association they include the low income workers and families in chinatown. >> (speaking foreign language.) >> whether you're a restaurant worker adjacent or teacher a nurse or a supervisor every workers wants a roof over their head and wants to stay in san francisco. >> (speaking foreign language.) >> the proposal by supervisor

safai has been pitting working families in different income levels and creates division and didn't help that the san francisco housing crisis is hurts the community. >> (speaking foreign language.) >> so earlier supervisor safai and supervisor president breed talked about workforce housing you know the workforce those teachers and nurses and also restaurant worker and minimum wage workers our work to work part

time jobs making 50 thousand a year that needs affordable units. >> (speaking foreign language.) >> so our city should have better solutions to really solve that housing crisis that impacts every single worker like prop c that was approved by the voters in june asking developers to pare so that we know working families can stay in san francisco. >> (speaking foreign language.) >> as part of city i hope the

planning commission is a listen to us and hear our voices and support the proposal by supervisor kim and supervisor cowen is low income families can have access to 50 percent the unit and all working people have a chance to stay in san francisco. >> (speaking foreign language.) >> so today there's a lot of of us from chinatown that overflow room are here to support . >> is looks like we don't have speakers i'll call cards (calling names) good afternoon, commissioners. >> my name is charley i'm here to demand economic rights and

i'm here to express in my deep frustration of the proposals by supervisor safai supervisor tang and supervisor president london breed i see that as not a bold vision is reduces the pie and divisive for the san franciscans and workers i'm sad i feel like the same politics of division is what we see in the neighborhoods let me tell you why last month we were appalled by the sobering reality that thirty individuals made a home in the basement in the landlord been living there 10 years no windows and ventilation but makeshift pharynx when the city learned the housing situation the tenants were appreciative evicted the city asked the community agencies to provide assistance a navigating the affordable housing resources but

neither the 71 nor the community agencies were able to find affordable housing for those residents now they're in shelters but no permanent affordable housing but the story didn't end to add insult to injure down the street is a proposed development where two preschools are displaced and the market-rate housing project is proposed this master project on 675 ocean avenue is out of character with the surrounding working-class community and is the exact opposite for the kind of developments solutions we would like to see in response to the housing crisis we're putting hard working people one block way we're reducing the requirements for of the developers to create affordable units it don't make sense to me this proposal waters down the inclusionary housing we lose the

qualities that make our city's and a place for families and working people and proud san franciscans and a safe haven for folks i'd like to speak to the proposal the second proposal supervisor safai commissioner london breed why are we settling for the loss it common denominator a bolder rate for league of women voters inclusionary housing and why arey pitting san franciscans and workers against each other we should be expanding the pie to meet all the fundamental needs on the spectrum and in addition higher considerations for sensitive and working-class communities that are on the front lines and making sure that the community benefits is greater in those communities facing higher development pressures thank you. >> thank you very much.

>> next speaker, please. >> of this commissioners osie with the noah neighborhood council we're in full support of supervisor kim and supervisor peskin's proposal while we're against what supervisor safai, commissioner london breed and supervisor tang have proposed the reasons are observe first of all, the citizens of san francisco overwhelmingly passed prop c last june and the proposal that supervisor safai, commissioner london breed and supervisor tang especially will hijack this and another way to look at it is that what supervisor kim and supervisor peskin are proposing 15 percent for the low income and 10 percent for the middle-income aggressive government are protecting the vulnerable citizens who is more vulnerable low

income people or middle-class it is observe that low income need more protection another way to look at it is this the difference between this supervisor kim and supervisor peskin are proposing versus supervisor safai is 80 percent ami for ownership versus one and 20 ami i have the numbers for the one and 20 percent 90 thousand plus for one person, one and $3,000 for two, that people those are the families obviously this is more skew for middle-income while you leaving listened the low income working families more vulnerable today you saw many people coming here testifying a lot of them immigrants of different places on a personal note, i want to

mention like myself supervisor safai is first adjudicator iran american and no doubt people coming here starting from zero upon arrival and so you'll think he would be more sensitive to the needs of low income families so i'm here before you asking you please give supervisor kim and supervisor peskin's proposal more consideration that is what is the right thing thank you very much. >> thank you. >> next speaker, please. >> good afternoon, commissioners it's a long afternoon i'll be brief i'm doctor lee the president of the liberty hill association our association supports the inclusionary housing proposal that was put

forward by supervisor kim and supervisor peskin an overwhelmingly port when voters passed prop c requiring developers to commit 25 percent affordable housing onsite it is not perfect it does more to demand the developers provide more housing for our city's workforce and low income earns does more than competing and very divisive proposal by the mayor as supervisor safai and supervisor tang and we've over built high-end luxury units the city policy needs to focus on those who live and work not give away to the developers the mayor's proposals reduces the number of units for low income people we urge you and the board

of supervisors to stand with supervisor kim and supervisor peskin and support real housing diversity for those who live and work this maximize it for low income and middle-income residents thank you thank you very much. >> if there are any persons left in the overflow room make our way to room 4 and submit your testimony. >> good afternoon anastasia from the noah valley council prop c inclusionary housing for all passed in june requires the developers to commit to 25 percent affordable housing units onsite the inclusionary a law has been improved as supervisor kim told us with the analysis by

technical experts and community shareholders the mayors supervisor president london breed and supervisor safai have a separate policy proposal the facts housing was crafted with the community to maximize middle affordable housing the mayor's legislation was written by developers to maximize their profits the mayors measure reduces the amount of affordable housing overall here are the numbers 5 thousand 8 hundred plus units of affordable housing unit is cut back to 4000 plus that that is more than one thousand units the nuke number of unit for low income decreases to one thousand 60 units developers can build 25 percent affordable housing it

has been proven it is happening housing for all incentivizes by raising in lui fees versus waiting for the mayor's office to piece together packets of funds director dodd housing for all maximize for low and middle-income residents that need it now thank you thank you good afternoon, commissioners my name is jesse i'm a community organizer for folks in district 11 that is increasing the final refuge for the low income and immigrant that families that remain in san francisco on behalf of the janitors and teachers or security guards who are union laborers we say not to delay reductions in the inclusionary housing this is a sentiment shared by 55 percent of voters

that gave us 25 percent inclusionary with the passage of prop c and a sentiment doubled down when they voted down prop u not pitting community against each other for much, much needed housing in san francisco yes, we need to be visionary and be a pro-active in finding solutions the city itself has brokered inclusionary deals as high as 55 at mission bay and reservoir so we need to continue to be adding rather than taking away if low income or working-class folks that are hit the hard it. >> thank you. >> next speaker, please. >> if there are others that want to speak here or in the

overflow room feel free to please line up on the screen side of the room. next go ahead. >> (speaking foreign language.) >> hi commissioners i'm a member of the collaborative their 5 hundred and 50 families by us in sro buildings in the city and 4 hundred and 50 of the families i actually in chinatown we're families with young children 18 and under i myself

and my husband we are working family he's a sales person i work in a small hotel >> (speaking foreign language.) >> okay there is well little affordable housing in the city i like other families have tried to apply more affordable housing but we didn't get it that's really little chance

>> (speaking foreign language.) >> thank you. >> so the proposal from supervisor safai and supervisor president breed will only cut down the number of affordable housing everyone in the city i urge you to support supervisor peskin and supervisor kims proposal thank you and keep the 10 percent for the 35 percent ami thank you. >> thank you very much. >> next speaker, please. >> hi there before i start the

words on the screen are not popping up in case those hard of hearing the words are not popping up. >> thank you for letting us know i'm a community organizer with the people organizing to demand economic rights i am 26 live in the mission i wanted to thanks a lot of the community members that are here addressing this issue of not having a place to live or afford san francisco we heard from am brackets if 20 to our elders and parents folks in their mid you know, etc. we have many people coming out obviously that is a very sensitive important issue to all of us here in san francisco so i'll also disheartened that the supervisors are putting this forward and we're kind of fighting which is better for each other and voters

overwhelmingly voted for prop c saying we want housing for middle-income and don't want to pit housing against each other we know we need it and folks living in cars and people traveling from oakland and antioch to work here and not trying to pit this against each other we see the developers proprietor riggs low income and prioritizing and middle-income and are victims of the greed of developers and they're only goes to prioritize profit over people we're trying to prioritize people ero profit we need a higher percentage for low income and middle-income because the developers - whoops who that i'm passionate developers will not prioritize that for us we know that lets give a higher percentage we're not arguing

offer crumbs but we should be requiring them to build for low income and middle-income and not arguing how much do you make and i have this job and who that makes more than what we're desiring of housing and deserving of roof over our heads and i support increasing the percentage to what prop c requires i know that kim and supervisor peskin do 24 i hope we can get to 25 percent he support this as possible 25 percent 24 percent i'm sorry yeah. i want to support making sure we raise it search for supervisor kim and supervisor peskin and really want to further talk about this further with the communities thank you very much for your time. >> thank you very much. >> next speaker, please. >> good afternoon,

commissioners director rahaim peter and here on behalf of the mission inconsistencies development agency you've gotten a lot of testimony i'll keep my comments to specification but want to i think will add a discussion i hope that all neighborhoods are not the same keep in mind as we're looking at this there are neighborhoods like the mission and others certainly that have different needs than other neighborhoods that is a sensitive idea makes sense in terms of the numbers and i think that as you heard earlier today there are already developers in the mission doing 25 percent so the discussion of feasibility should include what is happening on the ground and what is possible in certainly neighborhoods in terms of the overall picture, of course, we would like to see the higher numbers that are

possible we're seeing them in the mission already and the market will adjust as supervisor peskin said that does that will evaluate upwards and changes possibly based on that require but once that is 235shgd them we'll move forward together and obviously don't want to see the very low income piece of pie taken away from the mission numbers like other neighborhoods speak to the reason that the mission promised that 7 percent of mission families are earning right now less than $35,000 dollars taken into the survey a certain very large working-class latino basis is there and in each the neighborhoods you'll have very critical cultural fabrics that is what we're talking about we certainly like

to see those protected in the legislation when you look at the homeownership moving those numbers will decrease opportunities for that portion of the community by listing that number much larger and again, we're certain this is true in other neighborhoods so as we go forward i think that a solution can be found the market can adjust and taking a look at the difference of each of those neighborhoods thank you. >> next speaker, please. >> good afternoon, everyone my name is chiu i'm a community organizer we are concerned there, there a proposal to change the ami more affordable housing requirements we think this is a backwards move versus moving forward out of crisis itself city should be

focused on helping everyone to have stable homes not pitting income against each other peter and paul are purchasers don't make that so we can't afford to live here thank you. >> thank you >> next speaker, please. >> good afternoon, commissioners my name is t g or j with south of market addition network i want to make sure the message is heard we're concerned this proposal will change the inclusionary percentage of ami for the affordable housing requirement we think this is a backgrounds move versus helping mofus out of affordable housing crisis the city should be focusing on helping everyone have homes and not pit incomes against each

other yes more opportunity for hard-working middle-income folks but not on the backs of hard working low income folks thank you for your time. >> next speaker, please. >> hi good afternoon. i'm kathy a 40 year resident of district one apartment teacher at u.s. health and city college for 37 our board didn't read the e-mail fast enough to get this on low income but we did it by this morning i think was i want to make sure you know that and this is not an a f t statement just i think that is debobble to pit people against housing everyone is struggling to live here the big question why is the mayor not the first

time show clearly with the jornt the san franciscans want and in the mayor's office comes up with some other plan and one that from my perspective is often much more divisive i think the big question is who has the mayors area more than the people that live in san francisco and that is the only question i have other questions listing all of this and no answers but that's the top line i'm old enough to live in ohio and watching the developers saying you should move to the suburbs and now i'll old enough to live in san francisco everyone used to be welcome and who has decided everyone that can afford it can live here while the

people that live and work i'm in the category of people that are working by i'll be in low income in a few years and i'm a city and county of san francisco employee for 37 years i'm thinking i'm not welcome here no more i'm looking at where do we go from here i know the - i wa

supportive of supervisor kim supervisor peskin resolution this is something we've been struggling as a service provider for people applying for the bmr the range of 55 but 0 to 80 and starved up higher for moderate income so that's is an important change in the bureaucracy that makes it on for people we need

you as partners to hold the line when you allow the grandfathering to move out those unite good get built with that goal in mind when you look at the changes to the bmr's thousands of people we serve that apply for the housing units they will - they'll- your cutting it down to less than 10 unit to compete against different times in the year we worked very hard with our coalition to have prop c passed with the understanding of 50 percent a bacon and all else to the moderate ideal that bacon is very, very hard discussion to have over the past year and it is a reasonable discussion to have now not to kind of get it and have a different proposal

with no discussion and didn't include any of the clients that are looking for housing and no market study of unit in the unit members are represent in our clients a let's be clear $40,000 is a dignified middle-income salary thousands of people get good salaries and excited about being able to pay their builds bills and get into the reality i can't afford to pay for transportation i can't afford childcare and that's the thing we're talking about i get that one and thousand dollars salaries are suffering but not for people to ton suffer in san

francisco. >> thank you. >> next speaker, please. >> hi, i'm carolina i work for the veterans equity center my job there is so actually help people to apply for inclusionary housing he drop off the proclamations of abhorring applicant for the regional office or help them online to help them complete an application in this fiscal year we've helped file over 16 hundred applications and so over thirty advertisements take into account from thirty ami to one and 20 percent ami if you've never had to apply for concluding or assistant none in applying i recommended you look at the local 104y results because the lottery results talk about how many people are applying they tell you how many people are in mediate of when is

accountable it is hard the recent bmr development 62 units at the 55 percent ami over 41 hundred people applied and rentals for two bedroom unit one two bedrooms at thirty percent e-mail over 5 hundred and 60 applicants one at twinkie it 50 are percent ami three hundred and 11 applications received and most recently 660 king 3 studio had one and 9 applicants; right? this is according to the lottery results that is posted on our system and so while the numbers may not necessarily representatives the number of qualified applicants it speaks volumes for people that are looking for the level of affordability we have clients with us for years not successful

state penitentiary lottery but simply not enough affordable housing for low income to middle-income and to not advocate for more low income housing is a disservice to our clients we support supervisor kim and supervisor peskin proposal it provides an occupant for mode people to own and at the same time not taking away there the thousands of people that have been applying for the development and not turning away from communities who have been fighting more affordable housing for decades thank you. >> thanks very much. >> next speaker, please. >> buenas dias. >> (speaking spanish.) >> good afternoon. i'm a member of the community of with meta and with the other

organization. >> (speaking spanish.) >> i'm here because i believe in dignified housing a right and necessity for all families. >> (speaking spanish.) >> this kind of housing is necessary so our chancellor can deputy and not have emotional problems and have a stable place to live. >> (speaking spanish.) >> having to live with our parent in a single room and lack of affordable housing creates a situation that creates emotional problems for children and

difficulty in learning. >> (speaking spanish.) >> so we want you to support anywhere units of affordable housing that given the rents many parents are having to work two jobs in order to pay their rent and not spend time with their children. >> (speaking spanish.) >> affordable housing shouldn't be a luxury but a right and necessity so all of us

can live well. >> thank you >> next speaker, please. >> bups buns. >> (speaking spanish.) >> i'm a member of the organization and meta in the mission district. >> (speaking spanish.) >> we are here we fight for human rights. >> (speaking spanish.) >> and one of the human rights is the right to a dignified home. >> (speaking spanish.) >> and we can all pay for it.

>> (speaking spanish.) >> these proposals are just creating confrontations and not solutions if you look at outside half of people of san francisco living on the streets. >> (speaking spanish.) >> so it is difficult for us to find housing that is available for us who are middle-aged in the community. >> (speaking spanish.) >> i think we're all in agreement we all deserve dignified housing that is