before item 8. it's speaking of authorizing mayor housing $28 million infrastructure loan with sunnydale infrastructure l.l.c. this will allow the development time to move forward on the compliment--committed made ten o the community to provide safe and affordable homes for everyone. it reverse long-term investment of infrastructure resources in the sunnydale community. i won't go into the background. i will provide context to the site in the first infrastructure phase. sunnydale hope s.f. site is located in visitation valley. it's bounded to the north. the first infrastructure phase

shown here included moving 120 households within the infrastructure footprint to rehab units on site. demolition of 16 buildings across the 5.5-acre site so limit squatting and security issues. the new infrastructure will include realignment of the street grid. once completed the infrastructure will support the first vertical affordable housing development. which is 167 units. as well as sale of market rate price known as bloc 5 which will cross subsidize next sunnydale affordable housing project. this work will support 284 future phases on site. demolition has started and expected to be completed shortly. when work for bloc 6 affordable

housing development will start. we will be glad to answer any questions you may have. on behalf of hope s.f. and project developer we like to thank you for your consideration today and your continued support. >> chair fewer: thank you very much. item 8 does not have a b.l.a. report, item 9 does. can we hear from the b.l.a. please. >> item tim is a resolution that approve gap funding $28.5 million for infrastructure development. summarized. sunnydale hope s.f. is a 58-acre project. this is infrastructure development for about five acres street and some other improvements for the initial part of the project. i think there was a map shown to

gives that picture. block 5 is the market rate housing development. the $28 million that is being requested in gap financing would pay for this initiate phase of the infrastructure work. sources of funds included. we summarized those on page 31 of the report. comes from 2015g.o. bond, housing trust funds, moneys from the california specific medical centre and low moderate income housing asset fund. we summarized funds there. $11 million is allocated to block 6 of the vacant leverage some tax credit equity for that project. i think the one thing we do point out as policy consideration is the extent to which these public moneys are

used to benefit a portion of the market rate housing. we had discussions with the department about that. there's an expectation when the block 5 parcels are sold, it would add to the value of the land. those money will come back to the mayor's office of housing. block 5 is also under the jurisdiction of the housing authority and it does not come under the city requirement either for appraisals under the administrative code or any kind of board of supervisors' approval of the sale of that property. it does not come under the city's jurisdiction. because of that, we want to add to our report. we want to add an amendment to the resolution. we have discussed with the mayor's office of housing. basically what we want to say is to amend the proposed resolution to submit a written report to the board of supervisors on the sale of block 5 once it is

finalized. because we want it see how this infrastructure project -- what value that brings back to the city. then that report should include the process where advertising the availability of that property the selection of the purchaser and the criteria for selecting the purchaser. >> chair fewer: would you actually add a at the end of that sentence and the repayment of the loan? >> for the block 5. this is direct sales proceeds to the city. it would go to the housing authority >> chair fewer: it was my understanding that this is actually borrowing some money from the affordable housing block 6 to actually help to pay for some of the infrastructure

for the market rate housing on block 5. is that correct? >> the entire site is for the $28 million. the infrastructure portion that is attributed to block 5 accountings for 6% of the entire amount. because that's the only -- that's the square footage block 5. it's not borrowing from the affordable housing. if anything, the amount of money that affordable housing component considers aside from the right-of-way is about $12 million. we can only leverage $11 million with tax credit allocation committee. it's not actually borrowing from the affordable. it's actually part of the bigger picture of infrastructure work with the streets and everything else. it's not taking from there. >> chair fewer: colleagues, any questions or comments on this? let's open up for public comment. any members of the public that

like to comment on items 8 or 9? seeing none. public comment is closed. actually, i was under the understanding that actually this was a loan and sort of a loan to help to pay for the infrastructure cost for block 6 and block 5. block 5 had, i think about $1.6 million gap. what i heard from the b.l.a. it was funding this gap. that's not what this is? >> the way that the d.a. has taken the infrastructure is to do the whole site, the 5.5-acre, right-of-way account for about 53%, block 6 is about 43%.

then for block 5 it's about 5%. in the grant of $28 million, $11 million is assigned to block 6 as a loan. the rest of it was to be initially forgiven once the city has accepted the new righ right-of-way street improvement. >> just to add to the broader context of this. i understand the focus the market rate. there's no such thing as a market rate street and affordable street. the entire development is a mixed income development. it is very important for the long-term sustainability of the entire neighborhood development for us no to disaggregate the

market rate. it's it is part of the hope s.f. model to ensure that the mixed income model stays in tact. we have various folks who can speak to that model. we've come before the board and d.a. to talk about that mixed income model. i'm very reticence to try to incouple ber any of the market rate parcel so it will limit our ability. this is an infrastructure that we're coming to the board for the entire development. these parcels are mixed in, sunnydale, hahn, these are one street. it's not like a market rate street and affordable street. >> chair fewer: what i believed it to be was a parcel 5 that was -- there's a parcel 6. parcel 5 is market rate and the parcel 6 is affordable housing. what i thought these funds were

used for is not for the street but actually for the foundation of both of these blocks. that there is a gap of $1.6 million on block 5. that actually needs to be closed. using some of these funds to actually close $1.6 million gap. i wasn't aware that it's for streets, for things like that. i thought it was actually for the foundational work only the actual blocks. >> it is for the foundational work. >> chair fewer: is if for the foundational work for the block 5? >> it is for the foundational work of block 6, 5 and 284 future units as well. >> chair fewer: what you're asking for today is for -- you're saying it's not a loan? you're saying that actually that all of this is one big project so all the funding, any funding

that goes into block 5 or block 6, actually just is part of the whole development? >> correct. >> chair fewer: i'm not comfortable passing this out of committee today. i like to continue this item to the next meeting please. if i can take that without objection, i like to make a motion. >> supervisor mandelman: i want to hope s.f. folks is there timing constraint issues or deadlines? >> yes. the next item actually -- this infrastructure work is supposed to start around the end beginning of may and it will be completed by september. block 6 cannot actually start

construction until infrastructure work is completed. >> chair fewer: i would be happy next week to hear this in committee. if need be, pass it out of committee if we would have to. i like to continue both of these items, item number 8 and 9 until the next budget and finance committee meeting. can i thaek that without objection. call items 10 and 11 together. [agenda item read]

>> chair fewer: williamson and christine from the san francisco board. >> good morning i'm here representing the port as the project manager to talk about reimbursement resolutions for both the pier 70 and mission rock projects. first pier 70 in fall of 2017 the board authorized pier 70 mixed used project. it provides for approximately 1600 to 3000 residential units up to $1.75 million gross in office uses and nine acres of

open space. the project has public benefits package it includes more than 470 affordable housing units, historic rehab of buildings 2, 12 and 21 and new arts building just to name a few. next, mission rock project in 2018, the board authorized mission rock project. it provides for approximately 1400 to 1900 residential units up to 1.4 million commercial and 8 acres of open space. the project has robust public benefits package including 40% on sight afford ability, sea level rise protection and new arts building. both projects have a similar financing structure. under which developer capital, port capital, land proceeds and

public financing can be used to pay for the public infrastructure cost for these projects. the goal for each project is to limit the use of the developer capital and accrue developer return by using public financing whenever possible and when public financing not available, advancing land proceeds or port capital to fund public infrastructure. the items before you for consideration today are reimbursement resolutions which allow for reimbursement of land proceed advances and port capital with tax-exempt bonds when available. these resolutions are requirement of federal tax law have no budget impact and are consistent with prior approvals for both projects. that concludes the presentation. myself a as well as phil williamson the project manager, bridgare all available to answey

questions may have. >> chair fewer: thank you very much. there's no b.l.a. report on these two items. i do have a question about the mission rock project. is there somebody here to answer questions for me? >> good morning. phil williamson, port project manager for the mission rock project. >> chair fewer: when we had this conversation, i brought the issue of public schools in that area. do you have an update on that? >> i know the project team has members that are working your office and others in the office of school district to talk about and help plan and implement a school site in the mission bay

neighborhood. it's not on this project site. but it's several blocks away in the mission bay community. i do not have an update at this time. i can get one later today or this week. >> chair fewer: that would be great. you have not had an update from any of the project sponsors? >> not in the last several weeks. >> chair fewer: i would request actually an update from the project sponsor on this. colleagues, any comments or question about this item? seeing none. let's open up for public comment. are there any members of the public that would like to comment on items 10 and 11? seeing none, public comment is closed. like to move this to the board with a positive recommendation. thank you very much. please call item number 12. [agenda item read]

>> chair fewer: thank you very much. i believe we have a representative here from the district attorney's office. >> good morning. or almost supervisors. happy to be here to request your support of the grant we received from the macarthur foundation back in november of last year we've been winding our ways through the process to come before you today. as you maybe aware, it was a $2 million grant that was awarded to the district attorney office last year to help us find new strategies to approach new jail. multiple strategies for achieving that don't intend into here unless there are questions. it allows you to hire five f.t.e.s across the criminal

justice agency. there's a point person within each agency to help us stay focused on safely reducing our jail population through the strategies we've identified. it will help us with data, there's some travel cost that covered by as well as community engagement opportunities for us through the grant. it has been retroactive because the grant requirement did ask us to participate in two efforts prior to today's hearing. one was travel just in advance of the announcements being made which jurisdictioners were -- jurisdictions were selected. as well asal stresas well as a . macarthur identified the site agency. each go through a stress test where they go through the cases. one the big areas for improvement here in san francisco, trying to understand why case processing leads to so much jail population.

we can move cases quickly through the process. those were the two expenditures that have been made in advance of today. >> chair fewer: there's no b.l.a. report on this. any comments or questions from my colleagues? seeing none. let's open up for public comment. any members of the public that like to comment on item number 12? seeing it none. public comment is closed. you like to move this to the board with a positive recommendation that we can take that without objection. thank you very much. please call item number 13. [agenda item read]

>> chair fewer: thank you very much. before we begin, i like to make some comments. colleagues, i'm thrilled to authored this legislation that has been many years in the making. i'm proud that it has 10 co-sponsors. the committee community to purchase actin acting is an a py designed to stabilize diverse communities in san francisco by preserving affordable housing. the legislation accomplishes this goal by granting qualified affordable housing nonprofits a first right to purchase multifamily residential building in vacant lots for preserving permanent affordable housing by giving qualified men profit first right to purchase and stabilize rent controlled

buildings as affordable housing. we have the opportunity to challenge the notion that homeownership is the only secure form of housing. once nonprofit purchases a building, the building will be removed from the market. according to the planning department's latest housing balance support, less than 18% of net new units benefit in san francisco in the past 10 years have been affordable. for every two new affordable units the city built it lost one rent controlled unit to evictioningsevictionings -- evir condo conversion. this is a win-win for landlords and tenants.

it also combats the speculative model by positive way for property owners to sell their property and preserve the existing residents rather than resort to speculator. it is a win for san francisco as it will help the city better meet its housing balance needs by preventing loss of affordable housing and increasing its stock permanently affordable housing. up front investment in keeping people housed is more cost effective than rehousing homeless folks who have been displaced. it will give us a chance to preserve not only small sites but i s.r. o.s. this body secured $40 million for small site acquisitions for the last eraf funds i want to introduce legislation that will

create affordable housing production from future eraf funds that the city receive. it is critical that we invest if both new construction of affordable housing as well as preservation of existing affordable housing. i would like to thank all the stakeholderrer groups who have worked closely with my office in crafting this critical legislation including the housing right committee, san francisco community land trust, town and country, 46 housing development corporation, tender neighborhood and others. thank you to a amy chan and thak you staff for reviewing this legislation and voting unanimously to give it a positive recommendation. i like to thank supervisors ronen, haney, mar safai.

>> good morning supervisors. that was a perfect pronunciation of my last name. i'm with the planning department staff. just to give you a brief summary, the planning commission considered this. ordinance at a february 14th hearing. recommended approval of the ordinance in con concept. the concept proposed ordinance aligns with some key recommendations that came out of our department's work on the map 2020 project. the department and commission are very appreciative of your leadership on this issue.

the commission did offer a couple of recommendup recommendations on the ordinance. the first commission full support of creating as many strategies to preserve affordable housing as possible. urges the board to work with other agencies to ensure ordinance results in strategy that preserves the maximum number of affordable units. second, the commission recommended that the board continue to explore additional incentives for property owners would be subject to the ordinance. that concludes my presentation. i'm available for any questions. thank you. >> chair fewer: thank you very much. >> supervisor stefani: would like to add my name as co-sponsor. >> chair fewer: thank you very much. that makes it unanimous. fabulous. the amendments that distributed address feedback from the planning commission and stakeholders. change the right of first refusal so only applies to properties where qualified nonprofit has exercised their

right first offer and was rejected. brought in the criteria for qualified nonprofits so that more affordable housing nonprofits can qualify. grant additional protections to tenants by ensuring they cannot be evicted from building purchase without just cause and provide a partial transfer tax exemption to property owner who accept offer $5 million or more from qualify nonprofit. this parcel transfer tax exemption amounts to 66% tax discount. property owners are free to reject nonprofit that exercises their right of first offer. i hope i can count on your support for these amendments today.

do we have a b.l.a. report on this? no, there's none. let's open up for public comment now. i have a few cards here. let me call out the names. curtis bradford, mary mcnamar mcnamara, jonny oliver, bruce wolf, alexander goldman, joseph smook, cynthia fong and keith cooley. >> good morning. almost afternoon. i came in support of copa. i believe this is a great act. thank you for bringing this to us and all the work that everybody done on it. we need to access every tool possible to try and stabilize the housing and ensure affordable housing in san francisco going forward. we've seen some real destabilization. we lost units in tenderloins.

this isn't a fix all and it's not going to change the whole big picture, it's one tool in whole list of tools we need to implement to address this crisis. i also want to say thank you for the amendment. i appreciate the additional tenant protection. i'm glad to hear that everybody is supporting it. >> chair fewer: next speaker please. >> my name is mary mcnamara i'm here on behalf of the outer sunset working group which is actually a coalition of homeowners and renters. i want to thank supervisor mar for co-sponsoring this legislation. speculators and evicttors have invaded our neighborhood. there's no doubt longtime renters will be forced out. many of these people have

devoted themselves to the betterment of our community. you may have noticed the gardens at the end of judah near the beach, many renters led the effort to improve the area and they also volunteered their time to maintain it. one the most urksome myths about renters is they don't care about their community. nothing can be further from the truth. many of them are out of state are exploiting our housing resources and shredding the fabric of our community. all the while walking ought with enormous profit. this legislation is the first step is stopping this tragedy. i thank you all from the bottom of my heart for your effort in preserving this.

>> thank you supervisors for hearing this ordinance. i want to say that united way mission we advocate for the health, education, financial stability of everyone -- every person in our community. without preservation and protection measures, low income renters and vulnerable renters are at risk of displacement. for all these reasons, united way barrier supports copa and ask the budgets and finance committee recommend that the board of supervisors approve it.

thank you. >> my name is johnny oliver with mission economic development agency. we have through partnerships with both mayor's office of housing, 46 housing accelerated opportunity. we've been able to purchase 22 buildings. 23 of those are commercial and 154 those are residential. we believe copa will help ensure every building has an opportunity to be review bid nonprofit like ourselves. one the challenges we face, when we're competing against a cash buyer, they are able to move quickly. we're not able to compete without a time line to certify 6, 10 or 15 units. this would give us an opportunity to offer the same market rates offer but give us the time needed to qualify the residents in the building. thank you for your support.

>> good morning. alexandria goldman. i want to first thank interview fewer and staff and all the community activist who really worked hard on making this legislation possible. we were founded on the idea that the best way to stop displacement is removing housing from the speculative housing market. our housing stock is different than the tenderloin. it's been harder for us to have the opportunity to purchase buildings. we were able to purchase one few week ago. we're excited that legislation like copa and hopefully some funding sources that will be evolving. we'll make it possible for us to purchase more buildings ander sure that tenderloin can rest of the city can remain a welcoming

place for renting. thank you all for your support. >> good morning supervisors. my name is keith cooley. i'm here today with the san francisco community land trust. we purchased residential buildings and take buildings off of the speculative market and transfer them to community ownership. stabilizing housing and preventing displacement. we're proud to be involved in developing this legislation and we support this legislation. it will provide us with an important tool to prevent displacement by enabling nonprofit developers to compete on more equal terms in the open market with buyers who speculate with people's homes.

we urge the budget committee to pass this measure. thank you. >> good afternoon. chair fewer, supervisors. thank you so much. this is excellent, fabulous, fantastic, amazing. my name is bruce wolf, i'm president of the board of directors of the san francisco community land trust. i'm here to represent our membership, our residents and staff and the board of directors and urging your support. it seems like almost everybody is supporting this. it is important that we find solutions for all areas of housing on the spectrum in the middle is sorely needed.

this is where we can provide the most impact, prevent, displacement, especially for people with disabilities and people who are approaching senior age to age in place. really appreciate it. thank you so much. >> chair fewer: thank you. next speaker please. >> good morning supervisors. i'm jesse oliver sanford. i'm a longtime renter in the castro. since 1990 according to the american university survey, san francisco lost approximately one in four of lgbt people. 94114 my zip code has declined from same sex cohabiting adults from 60%. one third to one-half to home legacy san franciscans identify as lgbt despite point in time count methodology undercounts

our population. the community opportunity purchase act represents an important opportunity to bring housing to lgbt stronghold neighborhood such as mine lgbt individuals are much more likely to be below the median income and our community faces a playing field when competing for san francisco limited housing supply. i do urge you to support this legislation. i would urge an additional amendment. as drafted, the legislation defines with three residential as more. i urge you to include builds that has two residential units. those buildings are really critical to the fabric of neighborhoods like the castro which as you know, is one the world's most unique recognizable neighborhoods. thank you. >> chair fewer: next speaker.

hi kathy. >> i didn't hear my name. i did turn in a card. my name is kathy. i'm here to lend support. this sounds like -- it's been developed with lot of community input over a long time. it's urgently needed now especially with that sb50 walking around sacramento. it scares me to death. more than half our teachers live out of town. few of us who are left here are worried about being displaced. i it's hard for young teacher to come in on starting salary and pay their rent. so far, our school and faculty we need it and d1 resident for 40 years, avery been luck -- i have been lucky to evicted once. it was an owner move-in. i was lucky enough to move into four unit place from seventh

avenue to eighth avenue. i never thought i would be afraid as i approached retirement that you have to leave town. i am. i think this will help to ensure that i won't have to. thank you for all endorsing it. >> chair fewer: next speaker please. >> good afternoon. thank you for supporting copa. my name is raymond i'm the tenant organizer for the community action network. i work a lot with tenants in the community around rec service all wait to helping them through eviction. i started 2019 helping poor families move out due to

evictions. i'm helping families in other side with foreclosure. we've had the privilege of working with different nonprofit to purchase those properties. we've been having a hard time. the property we're helping now keep putting the building into a bidding website. they're ignoring the nonprofits. thank you for supporting copa. all this time i've been helping all the tenants. that's one of the issues they are being ignored. we want to protect event -- tenants and resident, it's hard. thank you from the bottom of my heart for supporting copa and this is a big step forward. thank you. >> chair fewer: thank you very much. i have a lot of cards here i will not call names. come up if you like to speak. next speaker please.

>> hello. i'm a curator and organizer from soma. i thank you for the opportunity to support copa legislation. i have witnessed an archive of existence of filipino american who have experienced exclusion acts and landlords that prevented them like many other non-white immigrants of the privileges of being a regular land-owning citizen. these men formed a brotherhood which enabled them to strategically purchase land for their community up until now those buildings still stand and few years ago, some came with other nonprofits were able to mobilize the purchase of one of their buildings to be bought by a nonprofit. these events have led to the fact that the community is

assured these properties will remain by and for the community. thinking about the human rights afford housing. we cannot lose any more families and rent-controlled housing toker market rate or high-rise housing. copa represents a huge step forward in protecting vulnerable communities. i like to thank you for your efforts on the preservation and the human rights for housing and in supporting copa. >> good afternoon. i'm the workforce program coordinator. i'm in full support of the community opportunity to purchase act legislation currently, it is hard for nonprofits to compete with private market that can pay cash. by allowing qualified nonprofit organizations to more easily purchase multiunit residential buildings in san francisco,

we're striving towards equity. by preserving affordable housing, tenants will have more protection from eviction and displacement and ensuring more vulnerable communities and families can stay in soma and across the city. we have an established filipino heritage community. this community is connected to this place and in order for this country and culture to continue to thrive, we need to stay in soma. we must be prioritizing solutions so that displacement crises that are proven to work and i believe that the community opportunity to purchase act is a big step forward in the right direction. once again u i support copa. thank you. >> chair fewer: thank you very much. >> david woo. we're fully support of this in our-thinking it legislationing thathink -- forward-thinkingleg.

one the largest issues face bid -- faced by organizations of existing houses is there's no mechanism in place tone sure that residential buildings that go up for sale on the private market that are nonprofit is interested in purchasing. it's actually sold to the nonprofit. as it is now, community can do the work of organizing tenants in the building that are many causes direct risk of displacement. they can secure financing to purchase a building and make offer purchase to the owner that is look to sale. there's nothing that exist to give nonprofits a leg up in the private market. many times all that work ends es with evictions. with the copa legislation this would change representing huge stem forward protecting and preserving communities in the south of market and across the

entire city by allowing nonprofits right of first offer and right of first refusal. it will contribute to the efforts of purchasing these buildings citywide. the land trust model that the acquisition program is based off is proven to be effective against displacement and evictions by protecting tenants in their homes. this is also a chance to demand that the city provide a continuous secure funding source for these efforts to show the city's commitment to improve anti-displacement strategy. we fully stereotyp support this legislation. thank you so much. >> good afternoon. i'm the tenant rep on the s.r.o. task force. i'm supporting copa because i'm sick and tired -- sick and tired of prop c being in legal limbo

because wealthy man children who don't want to pay taxes. sick and tired my friends being displaced and i'm sick and tired of s.r.o.s being flipped into tech dorms. copa is a good piece of legislation that will help so many tenants. goes upstream and would not take away rights. it needs to be funded. it needs a stable funding stream. as the city has the capacity to do. there will be a lot more wealthy moving to the city so we need to preserve what we have and i'm so glad that every member of this board now is actually co-sponsoring this. this never happens for housing justice.

thank you so much supervisor fewer. >> good afternoon. i want to take a moment to really think back at the efforts that as a legislative aid and others had taken into think about this and maybe we could set up a system and we're like no, that will never happen. i want to celebrate supervisor fewer for all the work that they've been doing. i literally didn't think that would come. i didn't think they would come, we would be here and really

offer a vision for what community opportunities and affordable housing could look like on the west side. it's a great moment to be here and to see with all the things that we still need to figure out and what the program is going to look like. today we celebrate this moment. we celebrate the effort. >> good morning. i wanted to extend my thanks to all your continuous efforts in

endorsing copa and ensure passing. i've seen lot of family member and friend and return to home that is no longer affordable. community members who have experienced harassment, threats and manipulation by landlords and developers, pushing them to move outside the bay area. it really is an everyday struggle. especially for families in the south of market who are at the mercy of hot real estate market. i speak in support of copa because my colleagues and i in this room today have dedicated ourselves to be public servants, organizers and direct service providers to the city. it's important to recognize that the direct services outside of housing have not been meeting primary standards of residents. new immigrant families and clients live below the poverty

line. as important as naturalization, child care and employment development are important. we need copa and other organizations and other districts in san francisco to level the playing field for us ton competitive for buildings up for sale. this is a much needed step in achieving our mission and the capacity to do this is ideal as there has been allocation of surplus property tax revenue for preserving apartment buildings.

>> thank you supervisors. i want to thank supervisor fewer for pushing this thing language and getting through a lot of meetings and lot of discussions. thank you for getting this whole thing together. thank you for the 11 co-sponsors. thank you especially supervisor stefani for coming on board. i think understanding that this legislation is as critical and districts that are not seeing the same kind of development pressures that are also seeing evictions and transformation is very important it legislation

raises questions. whether we pass laws that promote speculation, we pass laws that promote housing stability at all levels. it creates a pathways both for small site and larger buildings. those s.r.o.s being converted into tech dormitory. it provides incentives for sellers and it ensures just cause protections for all existing and new tenants. again, thank you, one last thing i want to thank supervisor fewer for raising the important point this. this legislation is nothing without the funding to go with it. ongoing work beyond the next few weeks is going to be defined, deadedicated funding.

thank you very much. >> last one. thank you supervisor fewer for your leadership and courage on this. thank you all of the supervisors for supporting it. it really is a marvelous opportunity to really celebrate the wisdom of all these speakers around so many issues. the only other point i wanted to make is lot these nonprofit developers are moving in metropolitan only preserving pr- not only preserving existing properties and opportunities there to developing new housing. thank you. >> chair fewer: next speaker. >> good afternoon supervisors. charlie goss.

violations of property owners. we ask that you reject this. >> i want to recognize people that had to leave early. there was about a dozen people that were in support. i want to say recognize them and thank you for all of the co-sponsors. >> chair fewer: public comment is closed. i like to clarify what this legislation will not do. this legislation will not force property owners to sell their property to a nonprofit. property owners are free to accept or reject any offer made by a nonprofit. the partial transfer tax offer to sell. they are not forced to accept an offer. nonprofit will only be able to purchase a building if they can make or match an offer that the seller is willing to accept.

this legislation will not prevent property owners from selling their building at market rate. if nonprofit makes an offer, that property owner is not received -- satisfied with, they are free to reject. this is a win-win as it protects landlord ability to sell their building at market rate and providing a positive option for them to sell to a nonprofit who will protect the tenants. i would like to thank my co-sponsors and i can make a motion. supervisor mandelman. so sorry. >> supervisor mandelman: expresk you have done. it's in san francisco right now solutional to think that market

solutions are going to solve our affordable housing houses in any reasonable time frame. it's imperative to be as much land and property as we can to public and nonprofit ownership. i think this is a very important measure. i want to thank you for your leadership on this and eraf and getting more funding in terms of pass eraf as well as future eraf to ensure we have funding to make develop on -- make develop on the promise of copa. i think you done great job building support for this. >> chair fewer: thank you. i really have to say, thank you to my legislative aid who actually when public commenters said all the multiple meetings, it's ian that went to all the multiple meetings. it was ian who was the backbone behind this. i want to transfer every thank you to ian and for a job well

done. is there a motion to accept the amendment? thank you very much. take that without objection. is there a motion? [applause] is there a motion to move this to the board? >> supervisor mandelman: i would move we forward this. >> chair fewer: i forgot. i like to make a motion to continue this item. since these amendments are substantive to the next meeting of the budget and finance committee. we can take that without objection. thank you very much. is there any more business before us today? >> there's nor business. >> chair fewer: thank you very much, meeting adjourned. the

treasure island developmente authority infrastructure and transportation committee meeting. item number 1, call to order. director, riched ardson. >> here iny , director tsen? >> here. >> director lai? >> director dunlop? >> here. >> we do have a quorum. >> ok. thank you all for being here and i also wanted to thank those that are watching remotely. with us today we have treasure island commissioners, fei tsen who is the commission president and we have commissioner mark dunlop and i see our partners in development and staff in the audience. and mr. bob beck is also here. again good morning. thank you all for watching.