have two of our cards, nancy, jennifer, and tony. >> good afternoon, supervisors, my name is denise. i live in the haight neighborhood. for years, we've been hearing about housing crisis and feeling it, but instead of this -- this bill doesn't point to the culprit which is the speculation and high cost of living. and they try to call it a problem with the permit system. but in fact, it's really just an affordable crisis. i mean i know units in my neighborhood that have been empty for months. so there is housing but people can't afford it. this is a boondoggle as far as i'm concerned and i urge you to send oppose -- support the

resolution to oppose this bill that is only going to help the speculators and remove a good populous of the city that can't afford to live here then. >> i'm lorraine, a voter for 50 years. district 5. i support item 2. i vehemently oppose 827 along with 828. i believe together, those two senate bills would establish a state housing dictatorship of profit-taking. just as the federal government is trying to dictate to san francisco how we accommodate our immigrants, 827 and 828 attempt to let the state dictate how we accommodate the needs of the residents. i believe it should not be amended, it should just be thrown out all together. i think you can put pink ribbons

around a hydrogen bomb, but it still will blow san francisco to bits. >> supervisor tang: i know everyone is spirited, but i have to remind everyone there is no applause, shouting, booing, screaming in the chamber. use spirit fingers. >> i urge you to support this ordinance to oppose 828, the planning department put it this way. the bill provides additional value to property owners throughout the state without concurring the value capture. this bill wouldn't allow local planning to take place or give a pass for necessary studies and implement programs to capture appropriate levels of the increased value for public benefits and impact mitigation at the same time the zoning is implemented. 827 is a speculators' dream and tenants nightmare. we'll get more market rate

housing that is too expensive for us that live and work here. this will intensify displacement and incentivize speck laying. my home -- [bell ringing] >> supervisor tang: i wanted to announce there is overflow room that is open in 263, so that is an option in case anyone wants to watch the hearing from there and come in when they're called to speak. >> hi, my name is chelsea, i'm a longtime resident of the district, i'm an artist and tech worker. i just want to come here today and say i'm opposed to the bill. it says it's supposed to solve the housing crisis and i want to ask what housing crisis? and who is going to solve? i think the housing crisis is for working class people. there are on craigslist 193

units of 1-bedroom apartments in the mission district. the cheapest studio in the mission is $295 a month. i'm a renter and i'm one of the people that if i were to be evicted, there no way i would be able to afford a market race house. >> hi, renee, 25 year resident of san francisco. i support the resolution to oppose 827. scott wiener is a smart man and knows how to write legislation that would protect vulnerable residents from displacement while accommodating new residents, yet he has written this developer giveaway instead. they've been spreading pop prop grand that -- propaganda that

zoning is racist. i want the supervisors to consider we're at a crossroads. you can choose the already cleared path for speculation -- i can't read my own writing -- or carve a new path leading to greater equity in san francisco. >> good afternoon, lori from the inner sunset. please support this resolution opposing 827. 827 will not compel any more density. that means vast swaths of suburbs will not be -- for wholesale city wide rezoning with total disregard for planning department work to accommodate growth within a farm

framework that values green space. it so favors unrestrained development as to silence all other voices. disproves any alleged concern for the environment and further drives up land cost undermining affordable housing. the amendments offered by wiener are as telling as they are disingenuous. on their face -- [bell ringing] >> jennifer, we are opposed to 827 for the displacement effect it's going to have on low-income tenants across the state. park has a right to return for tenants but it's not working. we're seeing hundreds of

eviction petitions before the demolition occurs. i ask that you push this resolution onto the full board. we deserve to get everybody on record for something so radical am. >> supervisor tang: more name cards, peter, rick. peter, marilyn. supervisors, in terms of the affordable crisis, 827 is self-defeating. accord to a study by the firm commissioned by the city, market rate housing creates a demand for additional affordable housing. and so that may be up to about 30% according to that study.

even with our inclusionary zoning requirements in place, we are not gaining ground on the affordability crisis, in fact, it's getting worse. so for every market rate housing development, we have a greater problem with affordability. so contrary to trickle-down economics, more market rate housing means a worse problem for our affordability issue. thank you. >> nancy. i support the resolution from the board of supervisors to oppose 827 and 828. these bills are like imminent domain confiscation of developers. these bills support the destruction of affordable housing without any montéreg

montéregielation regul regularlation. people will be forced to sell out. this is a great city because of the neighborhoods and the diversity. not because of its density. i think you need to make sure that we preserve what we have already and the quality of our life. also, would like to make sure that my beautiful historic house is preserved in the future for generations to enjoy, because if we don't do this know, it will be torn down for the land value. >> hello, supervisors. i'm losing my voice, but thought it was important to come here today and speak. thank you for having. supervisors, latinos have been displaced from the mission. thousands of latinos have moved to bayview. our new neighbors are looking at

3rd street and saying hell know for the luxury development. that is happening today. 827 makes this problem worse. for 827, adding value to land is far more important than recognizing the value of our people and parts of the city with lower land values like bayview, visitation valley, these neighborhoods will be hurt first and worst by the law. 827 claims to demolition at that reward speculation. that will lead to more of the same problems, illegal and legal evictio evictions. oppose 827. it's the wrong planning for district 10. >> good afternoon. my name is marilyn, i live in north beach. i urge support resolution

opposing 827. combined with president trump's opportunity zones will further displace low-income residents seeking affordable housing because developers could eliminate the capital gain taxes on any projects and opportunity zones in san francisco. those include chinatown, soma and mid market tenderloin. what this means is developers will receive large tax incentives build luxury house, further gentry phiing those neighborhoods. i would ask that we work with senator wiener to modify his bill to incorporate these concerns. thank you. >> good afternoon. i'm robert. i urge you not to pass this resolution. we've heard a lot about

neighborhood character concerns. the character of a place is truly defined by the people who live in it. people cannot afford the bay area. what is our character as we stand by and watch our neighbors leave because we're more concerned about architecture and buildings than the young people and families leaving our city? i left work to point out the obvious. not building housing has not worked. the plain fact is that san francisco is unaffordable. where will the children of our city live? what will the character of the city look like when only the wealth kri can live here? will we have children in the future? none of these are answered by the rz lieutenant-governors. i urge you not to pass it. thank you. in i urge you to stop the

resolution that senator wiener has put forward. that we need to discuss it in the committee first is astonishing. i have three points to make and i hope i can make them in one minute. one is this is a proposal that changes san francisco for generations. we have an irresponsibility toward future generations to preserve san francisco. we're the caretakers of the land. we don't own property. the property will be here for hundreds of years and the hills have been here and people have tried to raise them before, and the earthquake has stopped it, or money has stopped it. we need to stop these hills in the city get destroyed. the second one [bell ringing]

>> good afternoon, supervisors. i'm karen, appearing as individual in opposition to 827. i've been working for over a decade to preserve japan town. one of the products of that effort is the j. chess, the cultural heritage and economic sustainability strategy. this document has been adopted by the planning department and the board of supervisors as a model that will help our neighborhoods continue to be able to accommodate growth while preserving our cultural and economic growth. this legislation will undo that, override it. oppose it anyway you can. i've seen what follows. and it is not going to help our neighborhoods.

>> i'm leslie with housing rights committee. we support your opposition to sb 827. i've been evicted twice in two years and this is what happens when we build luxury only housing. if we don't repeal costs and put in anti-displacement measures and instead just build, build, build, we're going to lose our working class low-income poc populations. so we need to put in those measures before we consider any developer giveaways. we need 100% affordable housing before we think of doing anything like this. thank you, peskin, for moving this forward. >> hi, i'm peter with the mission economic development agency. and i'm here to speak in support of this resolution to oppose sb

827. in agreement with many of the points made so far, we want to touch on a few particulars about how this is not an equitable bill. proponents i want to say that the bill will disproportionately effect our neighborhoods of colors, because those areas already have comparable zoning. additionally there is no value recapture which doesn't take into account all sorts of things, including what is going to happen with traffic on those corridors? if we think that people are going take transit, upscale people, that's mistaken from the data. and finally, it does penalize communities of color and our low-income communities that have [bell ringing]

>> good afternoon, supervisors. there is a lot of enthusiasm in this chamber for transit oriented development and unequivocally affordable housing developers and advocates have been supporting it. that's how our housing works best. the studies are clear about the environmental and social benefits of tod. that is not on trial here. the question you're hearing is, how does transit oriented development get facilitated? i would argue that san francisco has been a leader for years, if not decades in very smart and creative upzoning, whether it's rincon hill, eastern neighborhoods, home sf, supervisors tang which got through unanimously, we know the examples that the department planning makes that clear. the other thing, this may make it harder to get affordable

housing sites because of the competition for sites. i ask you to look at that issue and go slowly, please. >> supervisor tang: i'm going to call more speaker cards. john, marley, john, stephen, cory, laura and norma. >> good afternoon, supervisors, particularly katy. i voted for you and i'm asking you to please vote for san francisco and oppose senate bill 827. i'll cut to the chase. it's not a housing bill, it's a real estate industry gift. neighborhoods, small businesses will be driven out by high rise rents and national chains will win. 96% of the city can and illin s illinois -- will be laid waste

to maintain, not accommodate the growth anticipated. with 143,000 units in the pipeline, why do we need this bludgeon? please oppose 827. my children are the 6th generation in california. i prefer they have a place [bell ringing]. >> i came to san francisco because bay area is the center of the renewable energy revolution in america. people who agree that density is better for the environment, the department of earth system science, the university of california, california center for population research, ucla, energy resources group and university of environmental law schools, california berkeley,

sierra club, i could go on for hours. international people have seen density leads to more sustainability. support 827. anything else is climate denialism. >> blah, blah, blah. i've been to several hearings over the years, through different departments and the thing that really strikes me is this is san francisco coming out. this is the mission. this is hunters point. this is cal hollow. these are san franciscans that are really coming out to support this. this is a terrible, terrible bill and it's going to ko us. you have to oppose it. but one thing i'd like to say, if san francisco was a woman,

i'd call scott wiener a misogynist. >> good afternoon, i'm karen. dues paying members to support the resolution opposing senate bill 827. for us, we've been strong on zoning conservation, but the issue here is state overreach into local municipalities, areas of governance and it could be a really destructive precedent for all of the localities in california. so please support the resolution. thank you very much. >> supervisor tang: i've been calling up people who turned in speaker cards. tom, dennis, sarah, connor.

>> good afternoon. i want to thank the two supervisors who are still listening to the public. i want to thank aaron peskin for bring this forward. we do support the opposition to this sba 827 and some people are menging the cousin 828 coming up alongside it. i just want to deal with the fact that there is no effort to stop speculative behavior which is causing the housing crisis and particularly the affordability crisis. i think they should deal with the real problem, which is the speculative behavior which is increasing the valve the land.

i'm going to write a more detailed letter. i have a short one here for the supervisors who haven't gotten it yet. please support peskin's resolution. >> i'm john, i wanted to commend the resolution to oppose senate bill 827. i think it's an attempt to rezone san francisco and i think it would incentivize speculative behavior. and as founder of a district, i would like to emphasize the impact on historic structures. these are old transit corridors. the impact the pressure would put on old buildings would be unbelievable. >> good afternoon. my name is jon cooper. live lived in cal hollow for 45

years. one of the things that makes san francisco a wonderful experience is the variety of communities. and sectors. and this bill in my opinion will kill it. this is one size fits all. it's the state legislating zoning and planning for the city. and that is based on the assumption that the same zoning and planning concepts apply for santa barbara, that would al -- apply to san francisco. i believe it will increase prices and density in san francisco and decrease the participation by citizens in san francisco of zoning and planning. i have been before the planning commission and i am very much aware that these talented people take into consideration the unique elements of [bell ringing]

>> hello, i'm a life long brown woman and born and raised in california's farming communities. and to many of my fellow brown family members who suffer from asthma and other effects of dirty air that come from co2 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.