emissions, i strongly believe that senate bill 827 is going to give cleaner communities for people of color and improve walkability and our access to come to democratic events like this, to come and be a part of decisions and feel enfranchised in our home state. >> hi, laura. the executive director of nimby action. a pro-housing organization with over 1200 members. we launched membership about a year ago. we're growing fast. we're growing fast because people are desperate and the policies outlined as so wonderful for affordability are so obviously failing. we're failing to make san francisco affordable for the midding class, for low-income people, for everyone.

this bill offers the opportunity to create a genuinely vibrant affordable city for so many people. i've heard about how people are worried about how many people would join the community and we're seeing an amazing opportunity here to add a lot more people to our communities. and people who don't want to see new people [bell ringing] >> supervisor tang: thank you, please respect each other. we might have different opinions, but when you're speaking, i'm going to tell everyone to respect when you're speaking. so stop the hissing and use your spirit fingers if you like. >> hello, i live in district 8. i've lived in san francisco for about five years. the central soma plan that the planning department is probably

going to put into law is going to add 50,000 jobs to the central soma district in the city. and that is the equivalent of adding amazon headquarters with workers, with no additional housing or marginal amount of additional housing. we need the housing. 827 is the answer to the soma plan for san francisco. that's why i support 827 and why i oppose the resolution to oppose 827. thank you. >> hello. would you reset the time? i'm here, i'm here as individual, i wasn't going to speak, but i feel compelled to speak about the elephant in the room. it was fuched by other people. in the pipeline currently we have 60,000 units under

construction, 5875 approved on individual sites but not being construggled. 17,000. a lot of those being approved in the after market. pending application, existing zoning past 67,600 units. adu in there. 16450. those are developments 5% of less of the development potential. add this up, 145,,000 units, 60,000 entitled. nobody mentions this. why are we rezoning the city? >> supervisor tang: i'm going to have to ask that you hold your applause. thank you. i'm going to call more cards. paul. victor.

george, bobek, jeff and gen. >> i'm from housing rights committee of san francisco where tenants fighting to stop rising rent and eviction, mostly of low-income communities. i love apartments in diverse neighborhoods. it's why i live in san francisco and i fight for stronger rent protection and that's why i oppose this bill. we don't need more empty luxury housing owned by speculators. we need housing that is affordable to folks who live in san francisco. we welcome people who san francisco. we fight for their rights to have affordable rent and live here. why is no one demanding white wealthy cities that want to put in headquarters of high end jobs and white wealthy neighborhoods?

maybe they should do their part, instead of keep asking the density city in the country to push out more of our elders and our neighbors and the people we love [bell ringing] >> hello. my name is connor. i'm here as individual. i am here to support the resolution to oppose this bill. simply put, many people have already stated many reasons that this thing is a cookie cutter from hell. it's a monster. it's scott wiener's monster. and if this thing is allowed to live, it's going to turn san francisco into san francisco mar-a-lago.

you can always find people to pay $200,000 to be part of your country club, but it does not address affordability and it has a lot of contra indications and it's completely ill thought out. so i support the resolution to oppose this bill. thank you. >> documents for the record. can i have the projector, please? hi, may name is steven. i live in the mission. everybody is talking about

affordability. we know that the most affordable living is apartment living. on this red area, apartments are illegal. 827 changes that and brings zoning equity to the city. we can see where apartments will be legal to build after it passes. here we have a delta. how many floors will be added? you can see very little effect in the mission because it's already very dense. where the biggest effect will happen is on the west side, opening this neighborhood and the north side, opening these neighborhoods -- [gavel] please hold your hissing. thank you. let's respect all the public comments or we'll stop the meeting. let's continue and actually hear from the public. >> todd david. short-te

there is a number of reasons to support or oppose this measure. there is not going be a lot of mind changing. i want to talk facts about this bill. just facts. so, we are hearing that it totally takes away local control. that's actually not quite true. it preserves setbacks, it preserves design standards. it's maintains demolition control. and inclusion restrictions. the planning department's report stated that this bill will result in more affordable housing units. more affordable housing units. let's see. the other things that -- then i want 0 say one thing. the number one contributor to greenhouse gas in the state of california is from exhaust, drivers, people commuting. getting more people to be able to take transit [bell ringing]

>> good afternoon. my name is paul. i want to thank supervisor peskin for introducing legislation or opposing this bill, 82 #. this is a bad bill for san francisco and california. i note people have talked about the importance of density and more housing. they talk about a whole bunch of things related to that and transit. all this talks about is transit. none of the other supporting features for good walkable neighborhoods are a requirement. if you're doing low-income housing, you can be creating low-income ghettos with no services. more to the point, i've looked at this bill, i cannot find anywhere where it says you must meet a certain density. you can use all that to do large units, in 9-union buildings

which doesn't trigger inclusionary, and wow a height bonus -- [bell ringing] >> hello. my name is bob -- i am a resident and a citizen of the city like everyone else is here, no matter how long i've lived here or not, i have a very simple story. i thought i'd have two minutes, but one. when i was in college i was evicted going into my senior year from the home i was currently living in, paying $4,000 a month. with five other gentlemen and evicted because we were complaining about black mold that was in the house that the landlord didn't want to do anything out, so she tossed us out. tenant protections are

important. but the biggest tenant protection we can have is the ability for me to move to another unit that was the same rent, which is what i was able to do. we need to lower the market rate rent for everyone. >> supervisor tang: going to call more names, jane, aaron, sara, phillip, joseph, wai. >> good afternoon, i'm a renter in the richmond district and here to oppose the 827. the housing crisis makes me fear the ability to stay in san francisco, to live near my family and friends and to keep calling the city my home. in california, we've not been building enough housing to keep up with the growing population and the status quo is not working. the result has been devastating displacement, loss of

opportunity for young people and surging population in homelessness. by failing to recognize the damage that underbuilding and exclusion housing policies have inflicted, we're failing to live up to our values. 827 would result in more homes being built, including subsidized affordable homes. it does not change housing requirements and demolition controls. >> my name is jerry. i'm a transportation engineer. i just a few things to add. i agree with all of the people here who support supervisor peskin's resolution and oppose 827. to be successful in the long run, a city has to stay balanced. in recent decades, because of the excess of development, it's already gotten out of balance, this bill from wiener would make

it a lot worse. so as far as transportation is concerned, there are only 15% of total trips are commute trips. the thing that has not been looked at by those who say this will reduce congestion is the fact that we make most of our non-commute trips, even in san francisco, by automobile or tnc, so that's a myth. that this will somehow improve transportation. san francisco is in danger of becoming a [bell ringing]. >> i have a letter signed by seven other organizations, affordable housing, tenant rights organizations opposing sb 827 and urging passing of the

resolution. i want to address two issues. there has been testimony about how problematic this legislation is. two things i want to add. one to be clear, this legislation undermines the city's affordable housing programs. as planning department has indicated. because of the density bonus provision which is mandated in here, we're going to have 13% inclusionary. it undermines home sf which requires 30% affordable housing, and we want our san francisco affordable housing programs protected. this legislation undermines it. thank you. >> hi, i'm jeff hodges, i live over in the mission. i'm one of the action numbers. i support sb 827 and oppose the resolution. i've lost count of the friends who have fled the housing cost.

827 would build the beautiful scale density that we need to bring down to the rent. i'm going to ask folks to stand up here today. i want to ask those folks working and those who rent, but still manage to come out here in support of 827 to stand up. thank you very much. i'm tired of losing friends like these. i'm tired of losing friends who want to start a family. i'm tired of losing senior citizens. tired of losing oarcidiacono twists. san francisco policy has failed residents. we can build beautiful density in the city. i'm a renter in district 6.

i support 827 and oppose the resolution and i think it's important that the people that come out in favor of opposing 827 are homeowners. and some of them say they're speaking for renters. but if you want to hear what renters think, listen to what renters say and i support 827. i want to talk about geographic equity. district 6 is outlined here. this is map of the delta. how much would a lot be up zoned? district 6 is already upzoned. we build 60% of the housing in the last ten years. we have to spread that housing growth all over the city. it's a matter of equity. so, please upzone the west side. this is a place where we can build a lot more housing. thank you. i'm a renter in district 11.

i would like to speak for people who couldn't make it. my wife is watching my son and our house maids kelsi, june, anton, zella, all at work. between us, we managed to make enough to rent in san francisco. we don't manage to put away any savings. because there isn't enough housing in san francisco and so the market rates just keep going up and up. in particular, we would love to be able to live in places where we could commute to our jobs. my house mate has to drive down to the south, instead of being able to take cal train. the kind of housing that would allow us to do that is not getting built. and we want that to happen. thank you. >> overhead, please.

i'm a tenderloin resident and community organizer and volunteer for campaign. everybody knows -- >> madame chair, i'm going to pause the speaker to remind them, this is not a forum for election for any candidates for any positions. >> you still have 53 seconds. speak to your leaf on the resolution without the flyer. >> whether you support or oppose it, you know that this is just a gift to speculators and developers. and the only question is what side are you on? developers have already begun the process of destroying our city by deplacing its poor

residents and people of color. we need to know that -- i do not place hope in a legislative system that bows to the people of the city, but i have hope that the people behind me in the power of our collective voice to stand up. i want to say to everyone who has is outraged about the way our city is being sold out, we need to stand up together, connect with each other and protect each other, no matter what the actions of these politicians are. hello, thank you for your time. i'm a renter in richmond. i just wanted to say that i heard a lot of people so far talk about they've lived here

25, 35, 50 years. i want to be able to say that some day, too, but it's a tenuous position for me to be in as a renter. we need to address the fact we need more homes. we have chronically underbuilt for decades and we're currently seeing the fruit of that situation. unfortunately, so many of my friends can't be here today, because they're at work. many of my other friends can't be here, because they no longer live in san francisco, they live in brooklyn, minneapolis, wherever. i want to see those people stay. i think we can do that. i'm here to ask you to oppose the opposition to 827. thank you. >> good afternoon. thanks for the opportunity to speak to you. my name is aaron. i live in russian hill. in district 3. we need more housing. we need 827.

we need more housing. where is everyone going to live? people who are living in tents on the street, we need more housing. people are getting displaced. need more housing. people can't afford the rent. more housing. tenants have no options. we need more housing options. families can't find any housing. we have an abundance of opportunity, but scarcity of housing. we need more housing. the city is not a museum. the buildings should serve the needs of the people who live here today, not those who were here 100 years ago. the status quo is starvation and death. we need progress, we need housing, we need 827. >> supervisor tang: thank you, i'm going to call up other names.

i'm a renter in the city of san francisco. i suspect we're underrepresented here because they have to go to work to make income to afford the rent here. so i don't think this is discussion is actually about us, this bill, sb 827 is not going to effect us on either side as much as the next generation. we have a responsibility toward the next generation to build the infrastructure they need to live in the city. and right now, we're failing to do that. so, i hope my children will be able to live in the city and not just parents who have a house here around 1970. >> supervisor tang: let's respect everyone's comments. thank you very much. next speaker, please. >> my name is joe, i'm a renter

in soma. i lived in sf now for four years. i really do love it here, but again, it's really hard to find places to have an affordable rent. i've heard arguments against 827 and i was surprised that there was a lot of people speaking up against displacement and keeping it affordable for everyone. i think what we can do is with 827, all i hear is a math problem. we're just trying to solve the math problem. we need more housing for everyone. we don't want to his at you, we want to live with you. we don't want to ruin the quality of your life, we want to be part of your community. i think both sides want to a good quality of living. >> thank you for your time. i'm representing the latino

democratic club, born and raised in the city, second generation. let's get back to the point, currently as it stands, 827 is dangerous to neighborhoods with major transit or public transit within a half mile or quarter mile. as the bill stands, all of san francisco will be enveloped by development. residents making $150,000 have increased by 50%. what middle class are you building for? according to the regional needs housing assessment, sf has built 2000% of housing, but 40% of affordable housing. what we need is affordable housing. giving a buyout to more investors, speculators and real estate lobby to build density in neighborhoods decimated by [bell

ringing] good afternoon, i'm renter in district 3, i hope to raise my family here. and i think to do that we need more housing. unfortunately, we built very little over the past year. i'm here to support to support of bill 827. i think it is a math problem. we built 2000 units or fewer over the last 30 years. i'd like to see my friends stay and see san francisco build a lot more units. >> supervisor tang: i'm going call out more names. >> i've has friends that have a

harder time with rents than i have. i moved to san jose and was lucky to rent at $1850 a month. my wife started a job in san francisco in the fall and i followed her. we're excited to be working in the city, but i knew we couldn't live in the city, so we didn't even spend time looking here. i'm paying $3,000 a month in oakland which is twice what my rent was before. again, i'm lucky i can afford it, but that does mean i'm doing the commute. i'm living in a place that is basically would what would be built on a five-storey, four unit building with affordable units. i hope there is more opportunities for buildings like that in san francisco. >> my name is noah. i'm a resident, and i'm speaking in opposition to the resolution, in support of 827.

the fact of the matter is, there are more people who want to live in san francisco than there are homes they can afford in san francisco. and if we want, we can build more homes to enable that. if you don't want, what we want is to not have more people moving to san francisco, that's fine too. china has an amazing system where they have municipal citizenship and they don't let new people come unless they've passed an admission test. but i think we should welcome new people to the city because i like new people and i like the city. thank you. >> eric. san francisco green party. our city grassroots organization. i have lived in the city as a tenant for 24 years. in that 24 years, i witnessed the demolition of the city. which is now becoming

unrecognizable. and the reason that it is being demolished and becoming recognizable is that bills like this come up and at the state and local level every couple of years. when we oppose them, we stop the destruction, but all too often, we negotiate and talk about amendments to bills like this. that is not a solution. the things -- the situation has become so bad in san francisco that we can no longer negotiate over bad bills like 827 and 828. strongly support supervisor peskin's resolution. we've got to stop this jugular bleeding before it destroys the city.

what we do is fight to keep the diversity, the dense diverse, vitality of the neighborhoods. the thing is that this bill is not about affordability, it's about money. if you want to help bring down rents, help us strengthen rent control. help us beat the that cost. don't do this. this doesn't help. what it does is takes the power away from cities an give is it to the state. it takes power away from the communities, especially those of color and give is it to developers. it does nothing to help with affordability. we know that housing doesn't trickle down [bell ringing]. >> good afternoon.

i'm a mission resident. i'm here to speak in support of sb 827. i think it's telling seeing that people who are speaking in opposition that they tend to be older folks. they tend to be wealthy forecasts. these are folks who probably bought their houses -- little respect -- probably bought their houses in the 60s and 70s and you don't want anyone to touch the snow globe. i ask that everyone take a step back tonight and think about how do we include more people, people of color and different income levels into our communities? how do we hold out our values to the world? how do we become inclusionary? by inviting people in and housing. i would ask all of to you think about that. ceqa, historic preservation, those are things that can clog the process, and that's why the state had to step in.

mr. peskin is a landlord -- [bell ringing] >> supervisor tang: thank you. let's direct our comments to the general public not to individual supervisors, thank you. >> hello, i'm a condo owner in the west side of the city. and why it's actually affordable is because it's high density and older and predates the zoning laws. i would like to see many more apartments like that in the west side so other people, young families like me can live in the city. because of that, i support 827. when i moved to the city 12 years ago, the city council was a leader in environmental policy and i can see this is no longer the case. this is early in the democratic process and uniformly coming against something -- that hasn't gotten through the process. it's something that we agree -- we all hate in national politics right now. when it comes to the argument of

how much housing is enough, this is a regional problem. we need regional leadership and san francisco should step back and be that regional leader to build more housing, to show what does that mean us because that is a regional problem [bell ringing]. >> hello. my name is isaac. it really doesn't take someone niall hor niall horwh who has lived here at all to realize that 82 is a logical solution to the problem. when the supreme court ruled that red lining was illegal, that the u.s. government recommended that we switch to zoning laws and now we're continuing that practice today, and that is a shame, so i urge

you to support sba 27 and not -- 827 and not oppose it, thank you. >> hi, i'm a renter. i am not even middle income. i am here on behalf of the red stone temple associating. i just like to say that i think we need to make it easier for nonprofit developers to help build for poor and working class people and this bill goes in the opposite direct and doesn't address that. i've been hearing the rising tide since the 80s and have seen no evidence of that whatsoever. i think the mass problem has to do with speculative capital and the rich getting richer and the poor getting poorer. thank you.

>> good afternoon. i'm a renter in the richmond district. i'm able to live in san francisco because i live in a four-storey multifamily apartment building built in the 1920s when apartment buildings were legal in the west side of san francisco. today, my building is illegal to build because the parcel is r h2. and 72% of the city is zoned rh 1 or 2, which means only expensive homes can be built in the districts. i want to welcome more neighbors, more friends and immigrant like myself into the city, but we can't do that if the west side is only providing 1% of the inclusion units in the city. 827 will increase affordable housing because we need more market rate housing for the inclusion requirements to kick

in. please vote no on the resolution. >> i'm a homeowner in cal hollow. we opened up our homes for many years, renting out rooms in our house to students. we've never raised the rent. we've taken this year a homeless student from columbia and refused to charge rent. >> you spoke earlier on this same item. everyone has one opportunity.

>> neighborhood coalition. venice neighborhoods are in favor of housing and we're building a lot of housing. the height limits go from who 240 feet. in cathedral hill in the last three years we've approved over one thousand units of housing, half have been built. those built are primarily market rate and rest of them cannot be built because they can't get the financing. so it's not just the question of permitting, it's a question of actually having affordable housing getting built. i oppose 827. and 828. >> good afternoon. cory on behalf of san francisco housing. i want to point out that according to "the chronicle". top three candidates have looked to directive for 5,000 new home.

that's three times the current housing production. the city is going through a lot of changes. local control is a conservative land use policy. it has created what my generation is dealing with. we're facing the realities of the decisions. so when we advocate for the status quo and not any sort of change, why would we think the results would be different? as the planning department said, this will result in more capital, lower case a, more housing that is affordable and with all that is going on in the world, the politics of no, which is really captured the country, i ask you to not say no to a solution. let's work with the senator to get this bill in a great placement thank you.

i'm daniel, i'm part of castra for housing and part of the action. so displacement is guaranteed if we don't building housing. that's how it works. 75% of residents who move into new housing which is is found by a study done by the city are people who come from the city. it's not new residents, it's people moving out of closets. please support 827, that will lower rents for people in the city. the people speaking tore the bill are younger class renters and a lot of those people can't come here because it's a work day. there is going to be misrepresentation here. thank you for your time. >> hi, supervisors, thank you for your time. i live in district 10. what we're experiencing here is a national housing crisis.

about ten years ago a large generation, my generation, left home and entered the workforce. and as a result, we're trying to house the 21st century population in the housing of only the 20th century. what we've experienced as a result is mass price increases and displacement. when i first moved here, quite some time ago, it was easy to find a studio for $900. that's not the case anymore. that's because the population has grown and jobs have grown. please oppose this resolution and support 827. thank you. >> hello. supervisors, i just wanted to point out a generational divide that is apparent here. 99% of the people supporting the resolution are 50 years old and older. everyone that opposes the resolution and supports 827 is

of the younger generation. the older generation doesn't want change. they don't want their views blocked. they don't want new people here. i will continue to live here far in the future. please don't stand in the way of the future and oppose this resolution. thank you. >> i'm going to call more speakers up. mark, daniel, eric, mark, please come on up. >> hi, my name is ben liberalby. it's a good example of

regulatory capture. instead advances the commercial or political concerns of the sectors tasked at regulating. if we're serious about making this an equitable city, we need to support 827 and a more generous housing policy. i have seen friends leave because of the high who'sing costs. -- housing costs. when i moved in 2016. i know how the less fortunate experience the housing crisis. unable to drive or use stairs, my brother's search was long and difficult and he paid a high

price for a new unit. for him and many he fights for, san francisco's old walkup housing stock is inaccessible and the sprawl is isolating. the modern transit housing is not just preferable for people with disabilities, it's necessary. i urge you to vote against opposing it. >> there is a false dichotomy i've been hearing where it's more housing or tenant protection, but we can have boeing. this bill has lots of protection already. there is demolition controls, there is right to return. that just came out and we can strengthen them and make it only single family owner occupied

buildings. how many people have a home and can think of four families that would be happy to live on top of them. it would be great to build those spaces. and some people said that more housing makes unaffordability, but higher wages cause unaffordability, so we're enjoying the higher wages, we can harness them to build more units and with the units, more bmr. so i think the people [bell ringing] >> thank you. i'm going to call the remaining cards, brian, michael, henry, charles, kevin, and eric. and if there are any other members who want to speak and are in room 263, overflow. >> hi, my name is mark. i'm here to speak favor of the

bill. in the eight years i've been lucky enough to be in san francisco, i've seen many friends and colleagues leave the city and some refuse to come. they all leave because of the housing costs and the housing cost is due to not having enough housing. this gives an opportunity to build more housing and that's why i support it. thank you. >> hi, supervisors, my name is mark. i'm a resident of telegraph hill. and i'm a renter. i'm not a native san franciscan, and apparently in that city, that makes me a second class citizen. i work for a nonprofit that fights for immigration reform, i don't make a ton of money, i don't work for a corporation and it's hard to live in the city with the rents the way they are today. i think a lot of the other folks out here of my generation have expressed those same sentiments. i want to keep living here. i want our health care workers

to work here, firefighters, police officers and they're having to leave the city because the city has done nothing while we're in urgent housing crisis. people can barely afford to live here. local control has failed. it's time to give the state a chance. oppose this resolution, support 827. >> hi, i'm eric, from district 3. sb 827 would never have been drafted had neighborhoods evaluated proposed development on the merits for the good of the city, rather than gaining the system by using ceqa and other means to thwart the obvious means. assertions should not be used as basis of legislative administration. when it's a good problem to

have, the alternative is detroit of san francisco. balance the onslaught of people in the city. >> thank you for your time today. i urge you to support 827. it's time to start enacting policies that are progressive and help deal with the housing crisis in california so that people like me can afford to stay and contribute understand energy to making the bay place a great place to live. the situation where it's illegal to build apartments in over 80% of the city. people like to talk about hong kong, a constrained metropolis,

but what about beijing, or seoul. making sure that people like the folks in had room will not lose their homes because there is not enough areas or units to go around.

sb8 contains defensive measures to protect vulnerable members and it allows sf to become the city it should be. environmentally ly and more affordable to all residents. please support it instead of opposing it. thank you. >> rick hall here. san francisco must oppose 827. it's a gentrification machine on steroids. we got protection for low-income communities of color. we had no leverage because the city had -- our own city had already supported it. at least formal opposition could provide measures to improve the

bill. i don't think the build could be amended to be acceptable. it's outlandishly broad and the basis is unsound. one size fits all it impacts california neighborhoods across the straight is impract cal -- i am impractical. i have a picture of a bus that says i'm your bus not your city planner. >> are there any other members who wish to speak and a didn't call your name, come on up. >> i'm here to support the resolution to oppose the bill. one thing we have not talked about is what's going to happen to the low income communities of color. there's talk about communities of color but there are no

protections in place for us here and throughout the city and we haven't talked about the small businesses it's going to affect. the latino community will be coming out and expressing our feelings. we've not been invite to the table and you'll hear from us shortly. thank you. >> good afternoon, supervisors. contrary so the claims of the lower park given as have you already have heard, san francisco is built moreover and it's met the quota of market rate housing and has under built low-income housing. what has not worked is the failure to ability to build affordable housing and it will

not work and what it will do is it make it far harder to build subsidized affordable housing by driving up land values and encoura encourage getting tenants out. >> hi, i'm jill roy. it doesn't give any thought to solve the house crisis. this has resulted in luxury mcmansion and paved the way for market rate housing. please keep local control not state control. please oppose this bill. thank you.

>> hi, my name is natalia and i work for eviction defense in the fillmore region and here to speak about sb827 and in favor of the peskin bill. and i want to point out there should be a protocol in the chambers for comments coming. i think it's really inappropriate to not be tolerated in the same way that other types of biassed comments should be tolerated. there is a homogenous population among supporters that could also be called out very easily. and i just want to say that the housing crisis is an affordability crisis and it will be solved not by building more luxury-rate condos but by

expanding rent control, filling vacancies and -- >> thank you very much. are there any other members of the public who wish to comment on item two? no one from the overflow room? okay. seeing none, public comment is closed. thank you all for coming out. supervisor peskin did you want to make remarks first? >> first of all -- >> sorry, you have now replaced supervisor safai so he is now a member of this committee. >> i want to thank all the speakers and i understand it's not just an intergenerational issue. the bay area the state of california and san francisco in particular, clearly, clearly has a profound affordability crisis. there's no question about that. you don't need to read the latest poll to know that's on everybody's mind.

it's real. there's many ways to solve it. as i spoke to you earlier we have collectively over time whether it's affordable housing bonds, excessive dwelling policy, tenant protections, home sf have been chipping away at it and everybody is entitle to their opinions but as my former supervisor wiener said you're not entitled to your own facts. it is true that san francisco has actually been albeit though we can do better at the forefront of creating luxury rate markets and more affordable units than our counterparts. and i appreciate the notion that

senator wiener is coming forthwith which is that there should be housing equity around the region and around the state. but as that map shows, this doesn't quite do that. this actually rezones a very small part of the bay area. i was part of the movement as were many of my colleagues to encourage our neighbors to the south to use the bay lands for thousand of units of new affordable house starts. that was something where the board of supervisors all agreed and i associate myself with the individuals who indicated this is not a one-size fits all solution. i want to say to senator wiener and his colleagues in the state legislature the simple notion which is show this money. you want to help, get us state resources. we weren't around when we used

the redevelopment agency -- the old redevelopment agency was the history of displacement but the agency that was dissolve was an affordable housing agency. give us those tools. give us state resources so that we can use the properties that we have for 100% affordable housing projects. i think the older generation can all support that. i can say as a district 3 supervisor, virtually every piece of vacant land whether it was broadway and battery or broadway and phantom we are looking to legislation at 530 phantom street with a mezzanine with a fire station where we could build 200 feet of

affordable house. we're looking at those opportunities all over the city. there are tens of thousands of units in the pipeline. to the individual who said this takes time, that is a true fact. much has been made of the planning commission's memo. there are actually two of them. the most recent dated march 8 that addresses the senate bill as revised and there's a lot in there for everybody but i want to call out a few top-line highlights and then want to go actually into the language of legislation pirp legislation. i know this is a highly emotionally charged issue. i don't know how many have read the legislation as amended but to the planning department, senate bill 827 may preclude the city from rezoning property to

p.d.r., production, distribution and repair to protect industrial uses and districts in san francisco. that's important because planning has to be done holistically it provides zoning intensity without time or resources for cities to concurrently adopt measures -- the transit richness bill is broad for corridors and speaks to that. i don't think anyone would say our department is not pro growth.

this is a reminder to silence all electronic devices. fire commission meeting february 28th. the time is 5:02 p.m. roll call. (roll call)