it's a work in progress. we get everybody to work together i think it will improve. >> there are no questions of the director, i want to open it up to public comment. any members of the public who would like to tell us what they think. >> mr. winier. >> i'd like to speak in support of what is being presented. for one thing, you need safe public transportation because it guarantees revenue. people will be deter fro deterrm taking public transportation if it's not safe. there's more than one ugly incident occurring in public transportation. that's one thing. i'd like to make a radical proposal. that is, that the security system be expanded to include violators of vehicles on the sidewalk. they could work and random basis and they could be assigned to

randomly. it may only take one person, but that would deter people from riding on the sidewalk because they could be cited. and basically, there has to be safety around public transit stations and also on the sidewalk. now the police have a different priority. m.t.a. right now has a different priority. i know the bicycle coalition will throw a hissy fit but at the same time, people have to be safe on the sidewalks. and i would like to see the security services expanded for this. otherwise, i completely agree with what is proposed. we really need a safe public transportation system. >> thank you. any additional public commenters on the security contract? >> no one has turned in a speaker card. ma'am -- seeing none, public comment is closed. directors, it's back to us. any additional comments? >> all in favor.

aye. item passes. moving on to our final item. item 15, approving the fiscal year 2019-2030 short-range transit plan. >> steve poen will present this item. >> >> this is an alternate item. >> all right. good afternoon board members. happy holidays. i'm here to talk to you briefly about that the latest update to the agency short range transit plan. also known as the srtp.

so, what is an srtp. my apologies if you already know this. it's a required document and every public transit agency in the bay area has to provide an update of its srtp to mtc every two years. as for content, srtp are summaries of plans, policies, programs, projects and they include important financial information. on their most basic level, they are funding and on policy and performance all under one cover. if done right, they can make clear the connection between major policies such as the transit first policy, the

service equity strategy, vision zero and the way those policies are reflected in the action's actions. as such, it's helping to hold the agency com pot able and act as a resource. and by the way, i should just note while this is a short range transit plan, as we are a multi motellal agency rsrtp includes information on agency finances as well as brief summaries of non transit programs. i wanted to call to your attention a future notable changes this includes updated financial and today you are

being asked to adopt the srtp. following that, we will satisfied our obligation and we'll turn our attention to the next cycle. we are actually pretty excited about this. as this was the first srtp produced by the transit division. i know it's odd. the srtp was produced by the planning group of insustainability streets but as i said, this is relatively minor for the last one and we're hoping however to introduce fairly major changes in the next one and information on some of the subjects you see here. one of which the public transportation agency safety plan update is coming to you soon and they are here to talk about that. >> good afternoon. members of the board. my name is mike and i'm one of

the managers in the safety division and this is my colleague robin courtney. for the past three years, we've been we've been pass with the public transportation safety. this is a project that's been longstanding going back years and it's the largest and major change in safety regulations over the past 25 years. it falls under federal regulation title 49 go to fed regulations part 673. it documents our safety management system. or s.m.s. this replaces the document we've

been using since 1996, which is our systems safety program plan and in this case, it adopted -- it was adopted only for rail but this new document applies to all our remotes, both our rail systems, our trolley bus systems and our diesel bus systems. unlike the previous system safety program plan, it must be approved by you, the board of directors and it will be signed by the director of transportation. and when we have the package done, it will be effective next july 20th for a system safety plan and the former regulation having said that, let me turn this over to robin and give you

an update. >> i wanted to walk through the timeline for completing both the public transportation agency safety plan. as of november 1st, we did complete the draft ptas which is this document here. we have submitted copies to our city attorney and also the divisions from their reviews. michael and i have been having a series of one-on-one meetings with all of the subject matter experts to get their feedback and we expect all of the comments to be returned to us by december 10th. we will then accumulate those

comments, incorporate them into an updated draft and have a completed second draft available december 31st. to have a draft of the puc and and we have and we have been communicating with them through the process about our ptasp. we'll give them time to review and get back to us. we will expect to have a copy to the board of directors by apri april 2020. it will be signed off by our director of transportation, both of which are requirements and they'll be some time after that

is certified by july of 2020. there's no requirement to send this document to the fta although it's their regulation mandate it and we will submit it for the rail but we do not currently have an oversight agency for the bus to be sending it to. >> any questions? >> directors, any questions? >> thank you for your time. we're going to open to public comment. any members of the public would would like to comment on this item? >> mr. wiener. >> good afternoon, david pillpel, i happened to be down here for the memorial service and it's very nice. >> mr. wiener is nice. apologies. >> thank you. i was saying that i was here for the buck delvin memorial. it was a very nice service.

i heard two things of interest. one, the updated srtp which has not had a chance to review by read document like 40 years ago and it's just been evolving since then. i think it's important to look at the facilities portion, not just the potrero rebuild but the other facility needs of the agency. particularly as it relates to the fleet needs in the future and ultimately it goes back to the service plan if ridership is flat, and in some cases decreasing, and other cases increasing, i really question whether the fleet needs to be expanded overtime and whether the facilities need to be increased or simply renovated or remodeled. it's a large question to think about. as relates to the safety piece that was just presented, i didn't see anything in the slide

about public outreach whether the citizens advisory council is being consulted and what other public outreach is being done relative to safety. it's important clearly to review internally with staff but the public has great concerns about safety on vehicles at stations, et cetera, and that needs to be addressed just as an example, over the weekend, the lights were out at westportal station for three days straight. it took that long to get the electrical work addressed. those are the kind of day-to-day safety concerns the passengers experience and should be incorporated into this? i did hear the staff say at end just now, although the state puc overseas with regaroversees, tht oversees them on bus. it's the chp that does safety inspections on bus and perhaps that could be incorporated.

>> it's safety and increasing our funding relate today our facilities facility in the tunnels so we just approved an item that will address that issue substantially and then again, generally safety will be brought up both in the transit working group and also in our workshop. >> any additional comments? >> all in favor. aye. the item moved and approved. director, next item. approving a contract approval delegation and requirements policy which delegates to the director of transportation the authority to approve and execute an expenditure and revenue contracts amendments and other agreements within certain limits. and since i am presenting, i'm going to go over to the podium. >> if it's on speaker card. >> directors, i will keep this

brief. the mta board has approved about four different contract delegations approval policies in the last 20 or so years. what we are doing today is we are consolidating them no one document. the last time the board adopted revisions to contracting policy was nine years ago. contracting costs have increased since then. and staff has recognized the agency enters into a lot of different kinds of contracts. some are relatively low value that are not within the directors erup' current delegatd approved authority. today we want to do is ask for your approval for our consolidated delegation and requirement policy. the biggest change in this policy is that we are increasing

the directs or of transportation approval contracts from $500,000 to a million dollars. again, in the past years, contracts have increased and taking the time to bring relatively small amount documents contracts to the board results in delays in approval and it can stop construction contracts, construction from moving forward. so, we are trying to re-assign the approval authority so the director can sign documents that will keep projects moving forward. also, the document also allows the director of transportation to redelegate to certain establishmented individuals and within the organization and all of this is under the scrutiny of the board, as you would continue as you have for the past 20

years, gotten a quarterly report on contracts. also, it is under the scrutiny of auditors and the controllers and a lot of checks and balances. right now, his delegation authority of $500,000 is under what other city departments have and so we're just looking to make an adjustment because we don't expect to bring a revision back to you for a number of years. so, we don't want this change to make them have to change their path at the last minute. so, we're con if dent that by

having an effective date of january 15th, 2020, this will allow those contracts to complete their process. with that, i think i will pause for questions. >> directors. >> these all look reasonable to me. the person to whom we'll delegate these authorities will change in a couple of weeks. >> yes. >> and has he been consulted? >> yes, he has. and he supports the documents. the policy. >> any other additional questions from director? my only question is, you mentioned the 500k increase to a million, it's also a section on redelegation authority. which grants to several division officers authority to approval contracts and amendments up to

10 million. so i just wonder if you can speak to that update? >> up to 10 million. >> there's a whole list of not exceeding 10 million of different authority granted to different division managers. >> ok, do you know where that is? >> ok, good. >> ok. >> rob stone, city attorney worked on the drafting of this document and knows the contracting process of the mta inside and out. great, thank you. >> you set a high bar. rob stone, deputy city attorney. the 10 million-dollar element is for the purpose of general goods, things like uniforms, fuel, tires, things that are generally consumable and some non professional service contracts, they're not construction contracts, they're not engineering contracts, they're the general day-to-day

purchases of the city. the current practice of the agency, although it's not been captured in a board policy, is to follow the city purchasers' requirements and that's what is memorialized in this policy and made formal that the director and the directors' delegates, which are the director of purchasing for the sfmta will have the same power as the city purchaser but are required to follow the city purchaser's regulations and procedures will are generally advertising competitive bidding using the city's contract forms. amended as is appropriate for a particular contract but basically following those general procedures. >> is there any language in

there around -- just in terms of accountability purposes with consistency with the existing adopting budgets or anything like that? any language that con strains that authority? >> the city's contracting process would not allow a contract to be served by it if the funds were not already budgeted. i don't know how deeply you want to get into the weeds on that. the processes is that when a contract is certified, the city controller, first through the m.t.a.'s own budget process but the city's

>> mr. wiener. >> one of my concerns about this proposal is the concentration of power in the executive authority where there should be checks and balances. includes a boards of supervisors, it includes this board, it includes advocacy groups. and, i am unsure right now about

this proposal. it seems harmless. it seems like conducting the routine day-to-day affairs but it could be expanded. it could be widened. it could be a loophole that you could drive a truck through. so, i would be very cautious in evaluating this proposal. i think that we've seen, right now, i see a centralization of power because this board routinely a proves everything that is proposed. i've never seen -- very rarely do i see a proposal denied by this board. basically this board has to be a watchdog with teeth. right now, it's a fury pet that cuddles up to the executive director. i feel that we should have checks and balances and that is why i question the proposal. thank you. >> thank you.

i do want to say that we have a policy in governance committee that addresses or discusses a lot of these topics. traditionally that's why a lot of things aren't voted down because the board is not supportive, staff doesn't present it to us for us to vote it down. it doesn't mean that there are things that staff proposes that we support everything that staff does it means that staff doesn't waste our time entertaining items that we're not going to support. >> madam chair, in anticipation of a question so much of that, we did take a look back at the last 18 months, actually the last three years to see how many contracts that this change in delegation would apply and for the last 18 months, it was zero and for the prior 18 months it was two contracts. so, it does not have big effect. really the big issue here is the authority of the director of transportation to delegate a

contract authority to his direct report so he doesn't -- the former direct are of transportation commented he adds no value but signing hundreds of poll license agreements for antennas so this is really to streamline the work that staff does. >> the fact that people can't spend unallocated money and the controller's office and so many other people are involved provides the necessary check and balances. so unless director have any further questions or comments -- i will entertain a motion. >> a motion to amend the -- >> to january 15th, 2020. >> i'll move the amendment. >> second. >> all in favor. aye. as we voted for the amendment and now the original motion. >> i'll move that. >> i'll second it. >> all in favor, aye. >> madam chair, that concludes the business before you today. >> wonderful. happy holidays and we'll see everyone -- i guess the workshop

the first meeting. january 7th. we'll see you all january 7th. the meeting is adjourned.

shop and dine on the 49 promotes local businesses and challenges residents to do shopping and dining within the 49 square miles of san francisco by

supporting local services within neighborhood. we help san francisco remain unique, successful and vibrant. where will you shop and dine in the 49? san francisco owes the charm to the unique character of the neighborhood comer hall district. each corridor has its own personality. our neighborhoods are the engine of the city. >> you are putting money and support back to the community you live in and you are helping small businesses grow. >> it is more environmentally friendly. >> shopping local is very important. i have had relationships with my local growers for 30 years. by shopping here and supporting us locally, you are also supporting the growers of the

flowers, they are fresh and they have a price point that is not imported. it is really good for everybody. >> shopping locally is crucial. without that support, small business can't survive, and if we lose small business, that diversity goes away, and, you know, it would be a shame to see that become a thing of the past. >> it is important to dine and shop locally. it allows us to maintain traditions. it makes the neighborhood. >> i think san francisco should shop local as much as they can. the retail marketplace is changes. we are trying to have people on the floor who can talk to you and help you with products you are interested in buying, and

help you with exploration to try things you have never had before. >> the fish business, you think it is a piece of fish and fisherman. there are a lot of people working in the fish business, between wholesalers and fishermen and bait and tackle. at the retail end, we about a lot of people and it is good for everybody. >> shopping and dining locally is so important to the community because it brings a tighter fabric to the community and allows the business owners to thrive in the community. we see more small businesses going away. we need to shop locally to keep the small business alive in san francisco.

>> shop and dine in the 49 is a cool initiative. you can see the banners in the streets around town. it is great. anything that can showcase and legitimize small businesses is a wonderful thing. >> shortly we will be joined by martin and our clerk is victor young. i would like to thank sfgov for

staffing this meeting. mr. clerk, do you have any announcements? >> yes, please silence all cell phones and electronic devices. items will appear on the board of supervisors agenda unless otherwise stated. >> thank you. can you please read item number 1. >> yes. >> supervisor walton, do you have any opening remark? >> definitely excited that we have our working group almost completely full. we are working to make sure we have the youth represented on the work group and just looking to making appointments. i don't know if anybody else has any comments or anything.

>> nope. >> okay, great. we have three applicants. it's julia, danielle, and kandy. sorry if i mispro announced your name. if you're here, please feel free to come up and address the committee. anybody here? i don't see anyone. okay. well then i will now open this item for public comment. if any member of the public wishes to speak on this idea, this is your chance to come forward. seeing none, public comment is closed. [gavel] >> like i said, i'm excited that we have an opportunity to select the youth to serve on the work group. what i want to do today, if it's okay with you, supervisor ronen. i would like to appoint kandy to

seat four and i would like to wait until the rules committee to make the last appointment. >> supervisor walton made a motion that is accepted without recommendation. we're not back from thanksgiving break. accepted without objection. [laughter] >> that motion passes unanimous unanimously. that's good, right? >> yes. >> okay, great, can you please read item number 2? too much turkey. >> item number two is an ordinance amending the administrative code to apply eviction controls to units that are exempt from rent increases limitation because they received a certification occupancy after

june 13, 1979. >> thank you so much. we are joined by supervisor haney, the lead author of this legislation. would you like to make any opening remarks? >> sorry, i'm not signed in here. >> your microphone is on, i'll sign you in shortly. >> great, thank you chair ronen and committee members. i'm here today to ask for the committee's support for our universal eviction protection legislation that will bring thousands of units under the protection of the rent board and the eviction protections. despite some of the strongest tenant evictions in the country, they continue to contribute to the housing crisis. the rent ordinance, the city's set of laws that govern tenants

rights. if your building was constructed before 1979, you have the benefit of rent control. if your building is newer, you don't. we have little data on what happens to tenants in these post 1979 buildings. in 2018, over 1,500 eviction notices were filed with the rent board, but this doesn't include with post 1979 buildings, because those landlords are not required to file anything with the city. 15% of renters reported they were threatened we -- with eviction. eviction is the primary cause of homelessness has doubled. it's harmful for our communities. now is the time to correct this inequity and treat all units the same when immaterial -- it comes to eviction.

the act establishes just cause in eviction protections in every california city starting on january 1st, as well as implement a state-wide rent cap. this is a huge win for tenants statewide. there are loopholes that continue to leave tenants without protection. the california apartment association recently boasted about winning exemptions for buildings construct in the last 15 years and buildings where a tenant has lived there less than a year. that means tenants that fall into those categories won't be protected by the state law. it also does not explicitly bringing it under the rent board, making it harder to enforce. this will close the gaps in the state law and build on the rent ordinance to ensure tenants in buildings constructed after 1979, including those that just moved in are protected by strong eviction protections. i will also say this will also

offer protections for tenants who may be facing evictions right now and once this goes into effect, they will immediately be able to assert this as a defense. there are -- you know, i heard from many tenants and tenants rights activists, and tenants attorneys who have told me how critical these protections are and how they will provide for tenants to speak out. when they're treated unfairly and there's retaliation, these protections will be able to be asserted in courts. i would like to thank the organizations in the antidisplacement coalition and housing rights committee for bringing this proposal forward and partnering with my office to expand tenant protections. i would like to thank supervisors ronen, fewer, and

robert collins, as well as courtney mcdonald from my office who has been working hard on this for months. i also just want to make sure everyone knows that if you are a tenant and has received a notice for eviction, you should immediately seek help from an organization like the housing rights committee or the eviction defense collaborative. this is a critical step forward. it will be the largest expansion of people protected under our san francisco rent ordinance in 40 years. it's something that people, activists, advocates have been fighting for for decades. this, the board of supervisors passed a similar version of this 10 years ago and it was vetoed. i am hopeful that doesn't happen this time and the momentum and the understanding of how critical these protections are has reached a level that this will be signed into law in the near future in san francisco. i want to thank everyone who came out today. we had a rally on the steps of

city hall and there's incredible excitement for this and also a huge need. >> thank you so much. i just wanted to chime in a bit and express my excitement for this legislation. thank you for bringing this forward supervisor haney. i hope the second try is the charm. i grew up in a rent controlled apartment in los angeles. i just went back for the thanksgiving holiday to visit my parents there, and i always say that if it wasn't for that rent control department and for my mom's pension as a lifelong teacher with the los angeles unified school district, then my parents would be living with me. i am incredibly, incredibly, as much as i love them, thankful for these laws that keep people in place and allow them to

retire on their own terms, in their own homes, and with dignity. the thing about living in san francisco as a renter is that you're always nervous you're going to be thrown out on the street. you never get to rest easy and it didn't use to be this way. i remember a decade ago, but definitely 15 to 16 years ago, you knew that yeah, you could be evicted, but you would easily find another place you could afford and while it would be an inconvenience and awful, it wouldn't mean that your entire life would be turned upside down and you would have to leave the region. that is what it means nowadays, to be evicted from your home in san francisco. so this legislation, any legislation that makes sure ten gnats are not arbitrarily pushed out of their homes without any

good reason, without having broken any laws, without having done anything wrong. it's to me a no brainer, especially today in san francisco. so i wanted to again thank supervisor haney for bringing this forward. i'm proud to be a cosponsor, and i'm looking forward to public comment unless any of my other colleagues want to make an opening remark. now we will open this item for public comment. anyone who likes to speak, you will have 2 minutes. you can line up to your right, my left. that would be great. we can take one speaker right after the other. good morning, please feel free to start us off. hi. >> good morning, thank you. i'm a tenants right attorney in san francisco. i'm here to support the legislation that would extend just cause protections to buildings that were built after

1979. my only criticism would be that potentially it does not go far enough. since my time is limited at 2 minutes, i'm just going to share one antidote that i think reflects what it's like to live in a building that does not have just cause eviction protections, but i also want to add thank you supervisor haney about the housing rights committee. some people know and you know, the landlord lobby complains about the right to counsel now. i get calls everyday by tenants that spent all their money on their rent, and don't know that they have this right and don't know where to go. so, even though this legislation, as well as this proposed legislation, if it's enacted, is there protecting tenants in theory, many tenants still do not know about their rights and often get taken advantage of based on their

ignorance. so, i want to share an antidote from my time. i was living in daily city, and i was living beneath -- so i was a few blocks south of the san francisco border and there was no just cause protections there. due to my landlord's negligence, the ceiling collapsed several feet from my head and my landlord who was a realtor at the time, licensed by the department of real estate saw this as an opportunity to turn around and hand my upstairs neighborhoods an eviction notice without cause, along with a rent increase notice giving them an option of either. those students moved further. they were unable to live -- thank you.

>> i'm one of those lucky ones that has had apartments for the last 45 years built before 1979. little did we know how lucky we were at the time. we were evicted twice, but they were legitimate. the arbitrary decision not to protect tenants in buildings before 1979 was shortsighted. we now see the great harm that's been done, harm that's been accelerated with gentrification and displacement in the last 10 to 20 years. it dramatically affected families. a few facts that i'm sure you already know. the number of people that are homeless increased 30% from 2017. 70% of people that are homeless had housing in the last several years.

30% of homeless are seniors. the number of people citing eviction as a cause of homeless spiked after 2009 and about 2,500 children at unified school districts are homeless. there are also devastating health effects, including death that has happened because of evictions and the threat of evictions. my friend jay has been a tenant all her life and long time nurse and caregiver, working with the most vulnerable people in san francisco. since retirement, she's been taking care of her husband 24/7, but was recently diagnosed with metastatic cancer. i got a panicked call from her, thinking it was about her cancer. no, she is absolutely terrified of being evicted because she has cancer and her daughter moved in to take care of her and her husband. so she is terrified while she goes through treatment of cancer, she's terrified about eviction. i also thought about the

teachers in san francisco who -- okay. >> thank you. >> excuse me if i started this wrong, it's my first time. my name is russell. we're not talking a position on supervisor haney's position, but we're concerned that the board of supervisors contorts itself to create legislation to san francisco's affordability that ignores the underlying issue of the crisis, which is the under production of housing. they nibble around the edges and san francisco has under produced. this under production is a root cause of the affordability and displacement crisis. thank you.

>> good morning supervisors. my name is kathy and i'm a tenant. i'm active in the tenants rights movement and i'm a member of seniors dability -- seniors disability action. they are trying to untie this knot for protecting buildings built after 1979. what an arbitrary cruel way of doing business. this has contributed to poverty, homelessness, speculation, and gentrification. who else has benefitted from this but the real estate industry? this move is long overdue and will bring a semblance of housing justice to our city. the no fault vicks from 1994 to 2016 are shocking and these numbers of 16,000 people, according to the antieviction

mapping project spell misery and pain that we will never fully know about since no stats are taken on what happened to those who lost or are losing their homes. so supervisors, this is a big step forward and thanks in advance for voting this bill out of committee and fighting for it before the whole board. thank you very much. >> hello. as we all know, buildings built after 1979 currently do not have just cause. in january, under 1482, i think up to 2,000 more units will be under just cause. it's great to know that if this bill passes, we will be including all the other buildings not covered by the refere rent control or 1482. i believe that means single family homes and condos that are

not included in 1482. this is great. i mean this is long overdue. in my almost 20 years at housing rights committee, as a counsellor there, i seen a lot of people displaced from units that were not under rent control. i think one of the ways we see most often is that if you live in a building that's being sold and you don't have just cause, and you can be evicted because of selling it. it's, you know, there is no just cause. i think it's great that those tenants in those buildings will have some protection, even though there is pressure to take buyouts and all that. there will be some form of protection against evictions. i assume these units will be under the rent board's jurisdiction. if that's the case, i also want to raise the question of the units under 1482, and the fact that at this point, my understanding that they won't be

under the rent board's jurisdiction and i urge you to address that issue. housing rights committee does support this legislation and i hope it sails through the board of supervisors. thanks. >> good morning supervisors. i'm anastasia. i'm a district 8 tenant and member of the san francisco tenants union. i'm grateful to supervisor haney for introducing this legislation. it's long overdue. san franciscans deserve a way to enforce their rights under state and local law. the legislation introduced to expand just cause protections to buildings built after 1979 is estimated to bring an additional 35,000 units under eviction controls. when people get evicted, either

for cause or without just cause, they have no place to go. we have an affordability crisis, so this will stem the bleeding, as such. thank you so much. >> good morning supervisors. i'm with the san francisco land use coalition. i just wanted to thank supervisor haney for introducing this much needed legislation and all the supervisors who are in support. this is a city that comes with rent control, but no vacant sit control. this is a city that gives instruments such as owner move in, eviction rights to owners to get rid of their tenants. we do have just cause.

i think this is a huge improvement and that's why i'm grateful for you supervisor haney and fellow supervisors that support this because every time you go through, especially the east side of the city and you see those cranes who are building these new apartments, those are the ones that are going to be having residents, potentially ten in and aboants e the beneficiaries of this. these new buildings need protection for the tenants. if the action is pushing for more units, well, this is exactly what we'll be protecting, the tenants that are going to be renting those new apartments and those new units. so, i wish they would be here to actually voice their support, but we are here.

we are voicing our support. we are the ones that want to have equity and justice for all. thank you very much. >> good morning supervisors. my name is gayle and i'm a tenderloin tenant, resident. i can't tell you how many protests i been to for evictions so i'm very, very happy to see this. thank you for writing it and all of you for supporting it. i'm just here to say i support it and i really hope that it passes because the last thing we need is more people being kicked out of their house and on the streets. we're trying to house people. thank you so much. >> good morning, my name is susan marsh.

i'm a volunteer member with the san francisco tenants union and housing rights. i regret to have to start with something that's secondary and negative, but i must point out that the individual was misrepresenting the situation in that both the housing jobs balance report shows san francisco is not in fact massively under producing new build -- i'm sorry, market rate housing. it's quite the contrary. i could go on with this, but i don't wish to be negative today. the fact is that this legislation will help protect tenants in the new build construction that we are seeing all around us and all buildings built after 1979. in doing so, it will also correct a truly fundamental injustice, which is the

injustice of tenants not being protected from arbitrary evictions at the whim of landlords. it will provide all tenants with the ability. and i urge you to pass this. thank you. >> good morning supervisors. my name is curtain and i'm the co-chair of the tenderloin people's congress. i'm here to speak in favor of this measure. i hope you will pass it with unanimous consent and send it to the board. we're going to fight hard and pass it there. this isn't going to solve our crisis, but this is one tool in a tool belt. we've been passing a number of measures and we still have work to do. this is one important piece. it's hard to measure the impact of the current system, the way it's set up. it's hard to measure that impact in terms of how many of the

people we see out on the streets were directly related to what we're talking about today. we know that some of them were. some of those folks ended out there because they didn't have the appropriate protections to keep them in their housing. we also know that it cost a lot more to help get those people back into housing than to keep them in their housing. so we know who's benefitting from the system the way it is currently. the landlords, the developers, if profiteers, but who's paying for it? all the rest of us. we have to pay to rehouse those people. we're paying with the suffering that we have to endure on our streets. i mean just the inhumanity of it. anything that we can do to keep people in their homes and protect them in this city needs to be done. it's a crisis. so, i appreciate your support and i'll be there when we get to the board and thank you.

>> good morning supervisor, thank you so much for having us this morning and for your work on this legislation. my name is cynthia, and my role primarily is to support renters inrichment. what i'm here to say today is housing rights is supportive of this common sense eviction protection legislation. whether or not someone stays in their home should not depend on when that home is built. too often i can tell you every interaction begins with what year was your home built? that should not be the way that it is. however, today, we expand the just cause protections. tomorrow, we will need to expand real rent control. that absolutely means price control that absolutely means vacancy control. that means enforcing eviction

protections and price control. if housing is a human right, tenants should not have to go to court in order to enforce it. if any of this is a right, you should not need a lawyer and you should not have to fight for it in the courts that way. too many of our renters are not able to do that. it is inaccessible and in fact, we need the rent board to be able to support us in both ways. we need components of both. more than anything else, we are in an affordability crisis. it's not about development. it's not about the supply. it's about whether or not you can be working class in this city and right now it is not possible. it's very difficult. thank you supervisor fewer -- super visor haney and fewer. we hope to fight for renters in

the future. thank you. >> how are you doing supervisors. my name is brian. i live in district 5 and i have been doing outreach for homeless encampment for a few years. i noticed a few years ago, if i was talking to someone that was born and raised in san francisco, there was a high likelihood i was having that conversation through the flap of the tent. i started seeing more and more families and time and time again, the way they ended up on the streets is from some b.s. eviction. i told her i would say arbitrary instead of b.s. i apologize. it would make just as much sense to base your eviction protections on what year you were born, as it does what year your building was born. i was hoping that someone would

come and make public comment to argue against this. i wanted to hear what they would possibly come up with. that's the great thing about this. there's no argument. it's the most common sense, easiest thing to pass and i hope i'm talking to friendly faces here. i hope you pass this unanimously. i hope the board passes it unanimous, and i look forward to fight with the mayor if need be. cheers. >> thank you all for hearing this. i'm the director at the housing rights committee. i wish we didn't need bills like this and i wish this was much more than it is. thank you all for doing this step. we seen a number of buildings emptied out when usually they were up for sale. there was a building on 40th avenue a few years ago, that many people that lived there