in the rad units. many were at the end of their useful lives. we have preserved many units that were otherwise lost and not habitable because there was no funding to operate them and operate them as habit there was a political compromise but we brought units that were sitting vacant, unused because of lack of funding back into circulation and housing for our most vulnerable population. thank you. >> on that point, i agree the rehab of public housing is of outmost important.

i thought it would be a deduction had we lost it rather than the maintenance. i agree it would have been lost in the count if we didn't spend the money to keep them affordable. mrs. hartley, i have a one question for the mayor's office of housing. do we take into -- and i want to state i redshirt members of the pub will lick speaking to how we don't just want this annual record to happen. we want the planning commission and housing to take into account the accumulative balance. otherwise it doesn't hold it accountable to the numbers. when we look at the geographic data and where we had the largest loss of units and production, do we have an acquisition plan that looks like

at the geography in district 4 where we have a high level of wasp and low production. can we look to prioritize sites in those discretions to ensure affordable housing production. >> we would love to build more houses. in d4 we have a teachers site -- a combination of low and middle income housing. we are looking forward to form sf. i don't have the large sites to bring tax corrode its to bear officially. have be in thes that don't have

sites. that contrains us. we would love to do more sites and we talked with the supervisor in district s and we have constraints of developers looking in the neighborhoods. >> i with was not careful enough in my question. i specifically meant site acquisition not necessarily development. and i'm not picking on supervisor tang. >> acquisition strategy is to take advantage of opportunities that arise. we need to build a minimum of 75

units. if we go much over 150 units we have a gap funding need that becomes difficult to fill. we have a couple sources of funds great for site acquisitions and we're always on the look out and we have been fortunate enough to have had some site acquisitions recently that we're looking forward to building. so it's really about the incomes of a particular site. >> supervisor: i appreciate that response and this is not my district, but regardless of opportunities and where there are opportunities i hope we can invest. i want to thank the mayor's housing committee for working on this and we've had small acquisition sites in our district. i do want to encourage the supervisors to develop a strategy for site acquisition on the west side to look for opportunities there given we we

have a housing balance in the district and there could be a faster way to preserve affordable housing in our city. thank you. >> supervisor peskin: and relative to the earlier conversation, is there a reason we can't display the data with and without rad? >> i think that's a good way to do that. >> the numbers are the numbers. it's just good to see what it is with rad. whatever the political decision was in 2015 we can do it legislative it will show it with and without the rad units and people can see the data however they want to see the desert.

>> supervisor: i have one more question, do we take into account the mar units which have been foreclosed on which is tragic but has happened a few times in our history. were they moved from protected status? >> i'll defer to the planning department. >> just a few but they should be counted. we can add that too. >> i'll make sure we add that as well. i just want to make a couple points. supervisor do you have a couple questions? first, i want to thank members of the pub will -- public for coming out for the report and interested in how we're faring and holding us accountable to the goal as the city stated in terms of fordable

housing production in the city. i look forward to some of the work we're doing. particularly i want to thank the tenants union for moving forward for the right to counsel on evictions on the june ballot. that there be an incredible resource for so many who feel they're at their minds end and you see a medical student saying it has impacts on people we don't talk about besides losing your physical and mental health and i think housing is a good to be heavily regulated. if you want to make tons of money don't go into housing. it should be regulated and i'm proud to be part of a city that has often been on the end of

making sure we're protecting and keep people in place in their homes. i hope we bring the speculator tax back. it's a proposal that deserves another look buy vote and perhaps we can move forward in learning what people didn't like about the original one because we should be discouraging the behavior by taxing it and let speculators know that activity is not the business activity we want in san francisco. my final comment and it's a comment because i'm not sure if this is truly addressable but it's frusting to see the 2010 units of entitled housing in the three major proj area and treasure island and park merced. it matches almost the 25,000

units of housing in the last ten years. the city has entitled a ton more than gets built. there has to be accountability on the developer and funding to get them done. i know they're complex because page three involved a ton of infrastructure investment and housing and that's when the most affordable housing is as well. i see mr. skiski wants to get up and we fund projects and they don't get built and the city gets blamed for not building enough. >> some of the large master plans like shipyard and mark merced and if you're 70 and

others see things complex to take many years to built out. some 20 plus and they have major construction murd als and that's one of the biggest sticking point and getting the treat work and few wore work in that up front. hopefully once they are, we've bun calculations and they should be producing over 2,000 units a year in total across all income levels once they start producing. but your concerns in getting the u units built as fast as possible and through the mayor's directive are not tied up in the big master plans and how can we improve the interagencies

interagency processes to make sure they come online faster. >> supervisor: i believe we should scale up our acquisition programs focussing on neighborhoods with high rates of eviction. finally, really support supervisor's repeal of cost of hawkins and hand it over on that note. >> thank you. >> thank you. i concur on many things you said supervisor kim and thank you for bringing the housing balance for discussion. i'd like to echo come things we just heard. i also want to thank everyone for coming out, the public speakers and city departments in educating me about what is happening around the housing.

as you know i'm a fairly new supervisor but a first-generation san franciscan and i've never anything like this so it's so interesting to learn more about and the causes and factors to what is going on in the housing market. i'm in agreement you can show one chart that has rad and one that doesn't and the units that are been rehabilitated and they were affordable and it was fully housed and i think these people have a better standard of living. i also concur there should be more site acquisitions on the west side. it's the only way to keep affordable housing as we're losing so much protected

affordable housing stock is to buy and invest in more small site acquisitions that have a fordable housing built in because they're older buildings. most house long-term tenants. most tornadoes. if we're add i'd like to see more demographic info and wonder if that can be included. i want to see how it's affected san francisco as a whole and impacted san francisco as a whole. that means what is the racial displacement and how are we changing racially and ethically and income diversity. that's at stake. when we lose our economic diversity we lose a little bit of who we are in san francisco because we'll lose our racial and ethnic diversity and our employment diversity of people

who live here in san france. we also lose a bit more. we want to be known also as the city of innovation and want to remember our roots that made us this way and we have a diversity of thought. great ideas come from san francisco. many an intersection of humanity and that's because they want to make the world a better place. not all those people make a zillion dollars and we've also want to give them a place and i'd ask for the demographic info and then i'd like to request all future reports provide updated data and each district's housing cost for rental and ownership

units. i understand the existing systems allow with up to date and accurate information regarding housing sales data. rental data is another matter. since no city department currently tracks this information this is unfortunate when other bay area cities like berkeley, are able to provide real-time information about the rental stock. i'd like to understand how to better help the planning department to track rental rate data with the goal of making such information part of the balanced report. also from the two reports combined we can see we have an overproduction of market-rate housing and what it shows me and i'm an untrained eye reading this but what it shows me from the simple charts is that

building market-rate housing is only making the problem worse been -- because when we look at the units we are producing, the rents have gone up considerably. i know that we are saying there's an up take in the amount of income that people are making but not everybody is making more money than they were. not everybody is making 10%, 20%, 30%, 90% more than they were making a couple years ago. i think we just got a raise with 2%. i think police officers and other city departments that we couldn't operate without them i don't think they're wages have

increased. whom are we building for? that's my question here around the whole conversation. whom are we building for? yes, we can blame oh, the wages have gone up and new people have come in. they need places to live and so we're building market-rate housing for them. we see the rents are incredible. we're looking at teachers. when we're looking at special ed professionals which frankly, children with special needs couldn't even go to school or access education unless they have housing, they're not included in this. i get we have a booming economy and we're building tons of office buildings but what we are doing is we are importing help and people that make the wages displacing people who we need to live here to serve the people of san francisco.

again, i just want to say, untrained eye, just learning this stuff here but from the charts i think it's very clear who are we building for. if we continue to build office buildings without requiring companies to invest in housing we will always be here. we can build a lot of affordable housing and do small site acquisitions but unless we get a handle on who we're building for and prioritizing the building of housing for, we as a city, i don't know who is going to teach your children or be the clerk here or protect the streets? who are the people that are going to make san francisco run because we're not going to be able to live here.

it's also an issue of priorities. i also think as supervisor kim said it's an issue of regulating. i want to say i'm a homeowner and landlord too. i have units that are rent controlled and i'm fine with that. i think when i see where there's a shortage is affordable housing but yet we continue to over build in market rates in order to meet meager goals -- we're supposed to be building 57% of affordable housing and it's reverse of what we're doing in order to meet goals and what we need to retain ourselves as san

franciscans we're going in the wrong direction. how many units have built between 1997 and 2017 because those are not rent-controlled. it's a whole group of housing not under rent control. i also think how it's used in housing balance to approve or disapprove projects. are you using it at all? i don't mean it to be critical or jack you up but i'm wondering as we look at the numbers are you even looking at the housing balance when you're approving projects because it is disproportionately market rate. it's been like this a while. tell me, are you using it or looking at it and saying wow, we have a problem and why are we approving this. explain to me, please. >> emery rodgers from the planning department. we could not agree more.

the need is great for even moderate income housing who can no longer afford rents or ownership opportunities. so many cannot afford the housing here. it's a crisis. we we also agree increasing population if with don't see more housing we'll see more displacement. we need to see the need for low-income housing is going to be there regardless. if we stop building housing it doesn't satisfy the need for people who can't afford things today. >> what if we stopped in a time of building office space to

high-wage earners? what if we said you can't build the tower because you're not investing in housing. san francisco's a cool place. people want to live here. you can attract the best and brightest in the world to work for you. my question is what has he said in building office space where you import people from all over the world and not higher our own people here because what if we just said that? i know it sounds simplistic.

>> thank you for your plan. >> supervisor: i want them to have a business here but housing too. they just can't rely on us to take away the housing of people who have lived here for 44 years and i'm in agreement with supervisor kim, human greed needs to be regulated. that's the job of the legislative branch and government of sfrans -- san francisco it's our job to people can thrive. we have an economy threatening the very health of people, the livelihood and threatening the very legacy of san francisco. i think, as i said, it's been an

educational process. as i look and understand i think san francisco is doing what they knead to do. i think they need to go and do something and i don't know how we'll make them doing but we need to make them build their share of housing. a mayor said we had one high rise they wanted to build near the bart station and people flipped out and they said you have to do your share because we're doing our share. what has happened is human greed has not been regulated. we have heard from people who are victims and about speculators and human greed has nod been speculated. there's enough money to go around. i think we have reached the point where we need to put

controls up or we will not recognize ourselves as a city and county of san francisco. having said that i'll also want to emphasize how important a report like this is. it gives us something to really look at and hold ourselves accountable to. i want to say i don't think this build, build, build more housing actually brings down the prices of housing just from looking at the data you gave me. after all the housing we built the rents have gone up crazy. that formula isn't working for folks. it's not working for the working-class folks of san francisco. thank you. >> thank you, supervisor.

did you want to speak on two items? >> i just want to thank the supervisor for her comments and i hope people go down to where their proposing new projects and if you talk about asking other counties to build we should be looking at our neighbors counties building for jobs but not enough for housing. second, the one thing i'd add to the supervisor how we're building for folks of higher income. one of the hardest part is it's not even going to those workers. they're getting bought up for real estate investment and sit empty. it would be great the market-race market-rate housing was going to workers but the supervisors have

been looking for ways to control the vacancy rate issues and we're building housing that is not housing anybody. that's a larger discussion and nice to be continued. i do want to make a motion to file this item. supervisor i look forward to working with your staff as you enumerated in your comments prior. i want to thank all of our community advocates for coming out today on the informational hearing. it's great to continue to see at our third hearing there's such an interest from community and you're holding our feet to the fire and making sure we're building housing at all income levels. thank you. >> the clerk: there's a motion to file both hearings. if we can do that without objection and we need to do a roll call because the house has changed.

>> adopted without objection. >> the clerk: we'll do that without objection. >> the items are heard and filed with member tang and member kim voting aye and member peskin being absent at this time. >> the clerk: thank you, mr. clerk. >> supervisor tang: if we can call item seven. >> the clerk: we need item six. >> supervisor: a motion for the resolution. motion to move forward item six to the board with recommendation without objection. >> the clerk: without objection with the member peskin being accent. >> supervisor tang: item seven, please. >> the clerk: [reading item seven]

>> supervisor tang: thank you very much. i wanted to make one note because we may have a quorum issue i have speaker cards for number seven but we heard loud and clear all the comments with you made during the previous hearing items. i want to make note of that. i want to make sure we can get tie vote on item seven and i don't know if we have an appointment for supervisor on the committee yet. with that colleagues do you have opening remarks about item seven? >> i do. so sorry. as we have heard during the previous two items we've been struggling to make afford ability in our housing stock. our city is becoming one for only the wealthy and we heard about increasing affordability and securing more development

and identifying a permanent funding source for new investment and acquisition of new housing and a call to p preserve our housing. we face the costa-hawkins act pre-empts control of rent. costa-hawkins prevents us in san san francisco to adequately

address our housing issue. it's tied our hands in crafting rent control regulations to adequately dress our own housing crisis. members chui introduced the proposed bill to repeal the costa-hawkins rental housing act and get sacramento out of the way when it comes to making our communities more affordable by repealing costa-hawkins we'll immediately change our rent control laws and will not immediately be changing the rent control laws but gives an opportunity to have discussion with the tenant and landlord communities about what makes sense in moving san francisco forward. i hope my colleagues will join me for ab1506. once passed we'll join cities like santa monica and berkeley to say now is the time to repeal

costa-hawkins. >> supervisor tang: thank you. supervisor kim? >> i want to concur. i know i was brought in but i have a meeting in 15 minutes and i don't know if there'll be quorum issues. i wanted to give public advance notice but i'll be supporting the resolution. >> supervisor: thank you for that. i'll echo that as well. again, if we heard from you earlier -- i won't prohibit you from coming up but i want to let you know we want to get to the vote and i'm sure you do too. with that said i have a stack here. if you still want to come up and speak and you haven't done so already please come on up now. >> excuse me, when does supervisor kim have to leave? >> in about 15 minutes. >> all right. please come on up if you'd like

to speak and let's begin. >> good afternoon. jordan davis once again speaking for myself and i'm a tenant and district 6 residents that think costa-hawkins should be tossed into history. i have to hear about screaming about raising rents and we call for safety improvements. i have to deal with my tenant advocates for blaming me for rents on 6th street yet they'll raise them any way because the awful law hobbles the ability for rent control. we can't do anything about the conversion of low-end residential unless we have vacancy control. about a month ago i traveled to sacramento and heard small property owners whining how vacancy control is allowed they'll go out of business due

to property tax increases. stop the lies. calling all california state legislators, we want our vacancy control. if landlords are raising rates for profit they're getting money for nothing with no less fees. if you like costa-hawkins then you hate san francisco. that's cities decide. repeal costa-hawkins. >> i'm colet pricher. i'll be brief. i want to thank the supervisor for her impassioned words. i said it for me. like many here i'm one of the lucky ones and a homeowner and live in vernal heights and i'm

not affected by the situation but i from friends that give to make it a community and these are the people we're losing every day. >> supervisor: thank you very much. next speaker, please. >> it seems repetitive but still important, i'm a nurse and senior and lived in the mission over 40 years. in 1995 my partner and i were evicted. after 11 years in the mission and the landlord told us we were being evicted and then rescinded it. he hated living on the block but said it would be an owner moving eviction which never happened. one motivation was that once he got rid of us in our rent control, our affordable rent he could raise the rent any amount.

we didn't know it then but we were lucky to be evicted in 1995 when there was still real affordable housing to be found. those days are gone. costa-hawkins including the know have a - has played a huge role in gentrification. many people i know mostly latino and african american families and seniors and people with disabilities would still be in the city if not for costa hawkins. some accepted buyouts, some just left after being pressured by landlords and were to stressed or sick to fight. as a nurse i have to talk as a medical student did about a crucial concern. evictions and the threat of evictions lead to serious conditions, high blood pressure and high and low blood sugars and increased parkinson's

disease and poor nutrition and insomnia and sometimes death. thank you very much. >> supervisor: thank you. next speaker, please. >> we're here from the eviction defense collaborative and we're here to show our support for the repeal of the costa-hawkins act. as employees, we're in a unique position to be on the ground and respond to people who are receiving notices either a rent increase notice for costa-hawkins or the following uds. costa-hawkins is a huge more than a thorn in the side of rent control and there's some tactics landlords can use to avert rent control with costa-hawkins and just a quick example, situations

where a tenant moves into a multi-unit building with maybe a shared kitchen or bathroom and the landlord scares the other tenants and when there's one left the building magically becomes a single-family home. there's either a 500% to 300% rent increase. the other situation i want to call attention to is where the landlord alleges the tenant is no longer an original occupant and it's a height battle the tenant has to face and make the decision to undergo litigation and risk having the judgment on their record. they shouldn't have to go through that process. >> supervisor: i wanted to ask

you a question about the situation you just described. next speaker, please. >> hi, i'm lena malbalm. i'm proud to support the resolution and fight for the repeal of the costa-hawkins housing act. my family was here and had to leave for the bay area due to high rising rents. i'm holding down our roots. my mother told me i can come to concord but i choose to stay and fight. san francisco should be a city of investors and repealing costa-hawkins will help us move towards that vision again. thank you. >> i'm vanessa wagner. i have lived in san francisco eight years and i live in a building owned by veritas investment and i support the

resolution. we have been the subject to lack of ventilation, pesticides, rodents, the list goes on. we demand stronger protections for the rent-control tenants for sure and i would like to repeal costa-hawkins. thank you. >> my name is amina and i'm here speaking on behalf of all the t tenants facing issues which she spoke about. also, for our elderly facing rent increases because of costa-hawkins that are sometimes 300% beyond what they can afford. i would ask for to you kindly

protect our children and our elderly and this is a moral issue and if you're not low or medium income the dollars only stretch so far to please repeal costa-hawkins. thank you. >> hi. my name is kate lase. supervisor, i want to thank you for your passion. i feel there's somebody here who gets it. i lost my home. it wasn't a house, it was my home. i lost my rental home. i had to move out january 31 after a huge -- everything i had fight to keep my home. my landlord got us out of our apartment by taking the rent

which was $3,591 to $8,500 that's almost triple and there no regulation to prevent her from doing that. there was no regulation to prevent her from telling me if you can't afford $8500 i have the legal right to kick you out and she did and i the city allowed her to do it. there was nothing in place to hold her to that number. by that i mean, to get me out with the $8500 number and then once i moved out to rent it less than that. if she could have made it reasonable i could have got enough people in there to keep the apartment because it a four-bedroom so we were each paying about $900. we were providing that flat provided affordable housing for four people that one flat.

we need to repeal costa-hawkins because if we don't we'll have more people homeless. i don't have a home yet. a month after i lost it my father died and two weeks later my father died and then i had to put my home in a nursing home. i have no children and no husband and nowhere to go. i've been here 25 years and this is my city. this is my home. >> supervisor: thank you very much. next speaker, please. >> my name is tim i work with a collaborative for community services. today's actually my birthday and only thing i want for my birthday is for you all to give a good recommendation to do the right thing nor -- for the

community. the thing costa-hawkins is gives a lot of incentive and reason to evict a lot of people whether by legal means or by harassment or other means. just think about it this way, imagine if there was no rent control starting today. what would happen to our city? i ask you keep that in mind and it's not the end all, be all but with other laws like vacancy control you can create a san francisco for the people, by the people. thank you. >> supervisor: thank you very much and happy birthday. next speaker, please. >> good afternoon. my name is guillaume bradley and i'm a tenant. i live in the sro. one of the better ones but i'm

on ssi. okay. we haven't had a raise in four years for cost of or nothing. if we don't have rent control and our rent keeps going up but we keep the same money. i've been thinking about that and thinking about that. my landlord said there's nothing i can do about that. you're a good tenant but every time you look around i'm giving out more and more money. we need that rent control. i hope and pray i'm speakering speaking for a lot of good people in there and i hope i speak for them when i say repealing that costa-hawkins act, that's a no-brainer. do what's right. okay. thank you. >> supervisor: thank you very much. next speaker, please. >> good afternoon, supervisor.

first thank you, supervisor. you also made my day so thank you. it's about time we repeal costa-hawkins. i work with low-income families. i'm part of the action community network. the majority of families are low-income families and as a tena tenant organizer i've been through cases of costa-hawkins and lots of other forms of eviction. it's about time we repeal costa-hawkins because to be honest i don't want to see another low-income family harass to make a decision of getting evicted or paying a high amount of rent but they have to be forced to work to get another job to afford their housing for a small box.

we're already displaced from our homeland now is the time to really lets work together and push the state to repeal costa-hawkins. thank you. >> supervisor: next speaker, please. >> costa-hawkins license to steal. repeal. >> and right now with costa-hawkins landlords have incentive to harass and evict to

flip the room. it happens for women who don't respond to the sexual advances of the owners and we've seen bed bugs, bad building conditions. it's extremely important costa-hawkins is repeal and we can have real vacancy control. >> supervisor: next speaker, please. >> i'm william johnson. i'm a vietnam vet. my fiancee was up here earlier. they tried to raise my rent $270. i'm set income. i'm a vietnam vet. i don't get no money or work on the side. i'm fighting it now. it's out of my budget. they haven't contacted me but i

have 20 grandkids. none of them can come to my building overnight. it's rat infested, mice infested. all kinds of bugs in the food. we may $1700 a month for what? might as well live on the street. i was doing better on the street until i got hooked up with section 8. i watched hundreds of vietnam vets come home and had nothing to do and killed themselves. couldn't get housing. i hung in there for 20 years and they finally gave me something. 40 years after the war was over and here i am. i'm not happy. costa-hawkins is no good. >> supervisor: thank you, sir. thank you for your service. i just want to thank everyone

for coming out and sharing your stories and the work you're doing to help other tenants as well and helping consolidate your comments. any other members of the public who want to speak. seeing none, the public comment is closed. supervisors we have a motion. >> i'd like to move it forward with positive recommend to the full board. >> we'll do that without objection. happy birthday. [cheering] >> supervisor: any other items today? >> the clerk: that completes the agenda. >> supervisor: thank you, we are adjourned.

bayview. >> a lot discussion how residents in san francisco are displaced how businesses are displaced and there's not as much discussion how many nonprofits are displaced

i think a general concern in the arts community is the testimony loss of performance spaces and venues no renderings for establishes when our lease is up you have to deal with what the market bears in terms of of rent. >> nonprofits can't afford to operate here. >> my name is bill henry the executive director of aids passage l lp provides services for people with hispanics and aids and 9 advertising that fight for the clients in housing insurance and migration in the last two years we negotiated a lease that saw 0 rent more than doubled. >> my name is ross the executive directors of current pulls for the last 10 years at 9 and mission we were known for the projection of sfwrath with

taking art and moving both a experiment art our lease expired our rent went from 5 thousand dollars to $10,000 a most. >> and chad of the arts project pursue. >> the evolution of the orientation the focus on art education between children and patrol officer artist we offer a full range of rhythms and dance and theatre music theatre about in the last few years it is more and more difficult to find space for the program that we run. >> i'm the nonprofit manager for the mayor's office of economic workforce development one of the reasons why the mayor has invested in nonprofit displacement is because of the challenge and because nonprofits often commute technical assistance to understand the

negotiate for a commercial lease. >> snooechlz is rob the executive director and co-founder of at the crossroads we want to reach the disconnected young people not streets of san francisco for young adults are kicked out of the services our building was sold no 2015 they let us know they'll not renew our lease the last year's the city with the nonprofit displacement litigation program held over 75 nonprofits financial sanction and technical assistance. >> fortunate the city hesitate set aside funds for businesses facing increased rent we believable to get some relief in the form of a grant that helped us to cover the increase in rent

our rent had been around $40,000 a year now $87,000 taylor's dollars a year we got a grant that covered 22 thousands of that but and came to the minnesota street project in two people that development in the better streets plan project they saved us space for a nonprofit organization national anthem and turned out the northern california fund they accepted us into the real estate program to see if we could withstand the stress and after the program was in full swinging skinning they brought up the litigation fund and the grants were made we applied for that we received a one thousand dollars granted and that grant allowed us to move in to the space to finish the space as we needed it to furniture is

for classes the building opened on schedule on march 18, 2016 and by july we were teaching classed here. >> which we found out we were going to have to leave it was overwhelm didn't know anything about commercial real estate we suggested to a bunch of people to look at the nonprofits displacement mitigation program you have access to commercial real estate either city owned or city leased and a city lease space become available there is a $946,000 grant that is provided through the mayor's office of economic workforce development and that's going to go towards boulder the space covers a little bit less than half the cost it is critical. >> the purpose of the organization trust to stabilize the arts in san francisco

working with local agency i go like the northern california platoon fund that helped to establish documents of our long track record of stvent and working to find the right partner with the organization of our size and budget the opportunity with the purchase of property we're sitting in the former disposal house theatre that expired 5 to 10 years ago we get to operate under the old lease and not receive a rent increase for the next 5 to 7 years we'll renting $10,000 square feet for the next 5 to seven years we pay off the balance of the purpose of this and the cost of the renovation. >> the loophole will that is unfortunate fortunate we have buy out a reserve our organization not reduce the

services found a way to send some of the reserves to be able to continue the serves we know our clients need them we were able to get relief when was needed the most as we were fortunate to arrive that he location at the time, we did in that regard the city has been - we've had tremendous support from the mayor's office of economic workforce development and apg and helped to roommate the facade of the building and complete the renovation inside of the building without the sport support. >> our lease is for 5 years with a 5 year onyx by the city has an 86 year lease that made that clear as long as we're doing the work we've been we should be able to stay there for decades and decades.

>> the single most important thing we know that is that meaningful. >> it has been here 5 months and even better than that we could image. >> with the economic development have announced an initiative if ours is a nonprofit or know of a nonprofit looking for more resources they can go to the office of economic workforce development oewd.com slashing nonprofit and found out about the mayors nonprofit mitigation program and the sustainability initiative and find their information through technical assistance as much as how to get started with more fundraising or the real estate assistance and they can find my contact and reach out to me through the circles of the city through the

>> good morning, everyone. my name is todd rufto of the workforce development program. it's great to be here at the san francisco museum of ice cream. i want to thank the entire team here for hosting us for this event. this is a special day. we are doing the fourth annual launch of the mayor's shop and dine in the 49 local shopping campaign. this is a really big deal because it is a partnership between a great many members of the small business community and the neighborhood throughout the city focused on helping san franciscans spend more money in our local commercial corridors and at small businesses in san francisco. but it is also an opportunity to celebrate the entrepreneurs that are making -- that keep san francisco strong, that are keeping the city thriving and vie brand. one of the