this is vital regardless if they're under rent control, we must prevent vulnerable populations such as seniors, low-income and working class families from being evicted. this is the most crucial step in san francisco to stop displacement and evictions at the state of emergency. say yes and prevent the further displacement of further tenants in sanfrancisco. >> thank you for your comments. if you wish to speak, press star 3. you will be un-muted when it is your turn to speak and next caller, please, two minutes. >> hello, supervisors. this is ken tray, representing

the united educators of san francisco, the over 6,000 teachers and school staff who work in our schools everyday. this thursday, uesf is hosting an emergency town hall on how the pandemic, the crisis of the pandemic is going to affect the work of educators and the lives of our students. it's clear to educators that the last thing that our students who are now suffering through the pandemic need is to be put in a situation of housing insecurity and potentially homelessness due to the economic duress of the pandemic. so when educators get together this thursday, they'll be brain-storming ways to help our students get through this both economic and health crisis. on top of this, we also recognise that the students most

vulnerable to the pain and suffering of the pandemic and the economic insecurity are a te black and brown students. while we're marching in the streets to find justice for george floyd and to make sure that black lives matter, the least we can do is to provide housing security to our most vulnerable students. we enthusiastically endorse supervisor preston's legislation and we open that the board of supervisors follows suit. thank you. >> next speaker, please. you'll hear your line is un-beautied anun-muted and you'o minutes to speak. >> i'm a district 7 resident and a san francisco native in favour of helping landlords and tenants work together.

most landlords are good and most tenants are good. we have to make sure the majority are not penalized for the minority. i do noii have worked with tenao set up a payment plan on case-by-case victims. they have committed to damage. wilthe first step is forebearane when appropriate. not all hardships are the same and not all are in the same financial position. so are capable of paying rent

and not every landlord is in the position to shoulder that burden. during the shutdown, although it's tough for everyone, renters still enjoy the apartment and landlords have to pay the bills and don't forgive on their obligations. not all landlords are wealthy and some live on that money and need it month to month. what are the suggestions? put in place a mein's testing. landlords need to have a way to get it back if and when it's time to collect. thank you for your time partnership appreciate it.

>> hello, can you hear me? i live in district 5 and i'm in support of dean preston's bill. we need to protect our renters. i have a good renned tha friends in san francisco. he got laid off due to covid-19 and he's not able to pay his rent for the next three month. i communicate with him and he's terrified of losing his rent-controlled apartment he's been in for 15 years and for the money-grubbing hungry landlords that want to evict these people, it's ridiculous. we need to make sure they don't evict. shame on you if you don't and we will vote you out of office. i'm in support of this and thank

you so much for district 5 and i wasn't a big supporter of dean preston but i'm hoping he's pushing this through and thank you so much. >> thank you to for your commen. next speaker. you'll have two minutes. hello, caller? >> we have workers struggling to feed their families and pay rent and many airport workers who work two or three jobs struggling to get by on unemployment which is not enough to afford that high cost of ren. rent. we have many who don't qualify and when this crisis is over, workers won't be able to pay

back month and months of rents, even when they get wanting to b. thank you. >> thank you, next speaker, please. (indiscernible).

>> this is a reasonable proposal and i think there's a lot of information promoted to individual property owners, perhaps by people who testified by earlier. let's be clear, they did not refuse payment of rent. this is not an invitation to not pay rent. this requires establishing substantial loss as a result of the emergency. it doesn't prevent tenants and owners to make an amicable plan.

this is only about evicting tenants who don't have the means to pay. they need to work together with supervisor preston to pass a programme to help address your needs. (indiscernible). >> thank you for your comments and we have 113 listeners with 33 in queue. next speaker, please. >> my husband and i are small property owners of a two-property house, a neighborhood we love for

friendly neighbors and hard-working citizens. we both work and rely on the rent we get to pay our bills. currently my tenant lost his job and we are working together as we figure out a way to keep ourselves financially afloat. without recourse to collect the rent in the months ahead, we will be unable to pay mortgages, property taxes which will put the house we provide in jeopardy. if he's allowed to stay in the apartment longer without my ability to recoupe payment, it will impact my finances and likely cause us to have to sell our property causing hardship to both us and our tenant. please vote for 200375. thank you. >> next speaker, please. you'll have two minutes and you'll hear your line has been

un-muted. >> am i able to be heard? >> yes, you have two minutes. >> thank you so much. i'm a resident of district 8 and i have the incredible privilege of living in a home that was bit by my great grandfather. i am a disabled person and i'm not able to work a traditional job and so i've seen this impossible privilege as my way to give back to my san francisco community by maintaining these buildings and taking care of the properties. and i want to urge everyone who is listening and the supervisors to remember that there are two types of landlords in this city. there are mean live in the city, often living in the homes they are taking care of and who are essential to providing the service of property management.

specifically, that is the job of the landlord. there are landlords who own buildings who are not owned by a single person but owned by conglomerates and investors. these people do not care about their buildings and their neighborhood. and they are not subject to rent control. that is the most vital and glaring issue. and i think to protect diversity in the city and to protect buildings that have people who own the building and people renting and work out things together and have amicable relationships and to support the smaller renters, we don't want to replace, quote, mom and pop shops with giant groups of investors who do not care about the city and have the resources for tonights of lawyers to make sure they are not subject to loss protecting tenants and our city like rent control perform.

i want to thank everyone who shared because i think it's important they listen to each other's concerns and see where each other is coming from and most importantly, making sure that the quality of the city and the humans that live here are -- >> thank you to for your commen.

>> next caller, please. you have two minutes. >> i've been listening to this phone call for an hour and a half, and so, supervisors, why don't we just -- (indiscernible).

>> they go to 16% of incomes for the landlords. and they didn't put that in. and supervisor really want to help, they take a pay cut of 15% and the landlords can keep two month's rent and everybody is happy. otherwise it's just wasting everybody's time. it's not doing any good. i don't think the supervisor has any intention of passing the bill or helping the small -- (indiscernible).

if they ca cannot pay their ren, maybe they should rent a smaller place and they cannot get employment, they should look for help. >> you have two minutes to speak and you may begin.

>> we believe there will be a cruel hoax of renters hit with more rent payments because of the court decision rendering it unconstitutional. we know you as a board have been given this opinion and we ask that you consider it. this is also disappointing to hear the demonization of all landlords by many of the participants of this hearing. most of our community have spent the last month working to help our tenants stay in place, forgiving some and postponing others, but working to keep people where they are. we, too, are people from san francisco and we love the city as much as anybody else and we

want to work to help displaced tenants because of the covid crisis and have been working with a number in your office to do just that. i want to thank show thank those supervisors who have reached out to us and express or concern that the sponsor of this legislation did not bother to reach out and discuss how we could come to some kind of compromise that will hold up in court. and we urge that you consider that alternative. thank you. >> thank you tor you for your c. you'll have two minutes to speak and next caller, please. your line has been un-muted. >> thank you. i'm racquel fox. i'm a native sanfranciscans, born and raised here and i've

seen the displacement of tenants rampant for decades. and now people need to come together and stop further deterioration and homelessness. the people that i represent currently, there's a handful of people thatless their jobs and thethat lost their jobs andtheye cleaners, janitors and some undocumented or unqualified in other areas and they can't go back to work until something changes. some of them, these people are now in a position that they currently cannot pay the rent and if something is not done to prevent enough eviction, there will be more people homeless,

more people infected with the virus that's still rampant in the entire united states and anyone who doesn't believe there's a problem with homelessness, i welcome you to go down hide street writ where e a look out the window at work and i see more and more people there and more and more homeless people, teac people that need h. i fully support them and i think everyone involved in this, thank you. >> we have 110 listeners with 30 people in queue. you'll be notified when your line is un-muted. you have two minutes. >> i'm mohen and i would say my heart goes out to all of the tenants who are affected by the covid-19, but i hope the tenants also think about the difficulty that the landlords are facing. i'm a landlord in san francisco

and i'm against the proposed policy. this is something we have all suffered during the covid-19. we have worried that if we are laid off, we will suffer like the tenants. there is all different kinds of help for them. we can delay payment. however, landlords are not exempt from paying mortgage and prompt tax, not to mention the utilities. how do you expect them to pay all of these when we cannot pay rent? (indiscernible).

>> please consider a way to help landlords. this goes hand in hand and should responsible to help all equally. this could put the burden on the landlords who have suffered huge financial distress during this kuhn. kuhn. covid-19. if we can't pay property tax and mortgage, we will lose our property, too. it may take years and years to collect the debt.

the landlord should step in and help tenants during these tough times. thank you so much. >> next speaker, please. you'll have two minutes. >> hello. >> hi. >> i live and work in san francisco in district 11 and i'm with the unfair housing legislation with over 3500 members and i'm calling on behalf of the 1100 people who have signed letters in opposition of this bill, many who are immigrants and unable to call in. i oppose this and implore you to say no. a lot of people have said that property owners have making a ton of monies and it's often enough to just coverage maintenance.

you hear about forebearance programmes but that doesn't mean the mortgage is forgiven. the money is still owed and due to the beijin bank. if a property owner does not receive rent, the property owner may not be able to pay the mortgage and this will lead to foreclosure and bankruptcy. as a property owner, i am working with my tenants unable to pay. everyone needs help but not just on the backs of property owners. there should be a fund the tenants can access to pay the rent. this needs to be more balanced and the government can reimburse the lost income or the city should stop charging property owners property tax and get banks to forgive our mortgage. this will prevent property owners from losing their home. i urge you to oppose 20075, the

preston conviction bill, thank you. >> thank you for your comments. next speaker. we have 111 listeners with 30 in cue. queue. >> hello, caller. >> i'm teresa wall and i'm opposing this bill. a lot of tenants will informed they would be convicted after the covid orders but the rent was due after six months after the order was expired. in general general eviction cast takes one year. so many would call in and why are they are not informing the tenants it will take up to one year? i was just receiving a letter this morning and my rent is one-third of the mortgage.

(indiscernible). >> preston, you've done nothing about this. how dare some of you saying the owner was not good at their business. the owner was being able to pay for their down payment and caused generations of saving. the housing is not only the human right to tenant. this is to the landlord and everybody have to go to work. i am a 1099 person working at the court. (indiscernible). >> i won't pay the upcoming tax. this will be a longer time than

anyone to get my job back. please, do not just think about yourself. think about all of the small property owners. we sell the house, but even we sell the house -- we are the housing protecter and the protecter for most of the tenants. >> thank you. thank you for your comments. next speaker, please. two minutes and you'll be notified your life is un-muted and you may begin. >> i am an accountant and have been a resident of san francisco and renter for 37 years here in north beach. i'm calling to express my view

opposing this legislation about the ordinance 200375. i think this ordinance penalizes the landlord for this pandemic, not all of the landlords have deep pockets. so are some business operators. i personally know three landlords who are elderly widows and collecting their rent for livelihood and to maintain their property. they do not own the property outright and so they have to pay their mortgage. if the landlord does not pay the mortgage, she will lose her own house and their own livelihood. if the tenant does not have to pay the rent during this pandemic, the landlord still have to come up with the money for the mortgage, for the property taxes and utilities and where that come from if the landlord is not paid?

they depend on their rent and some people that have called say they can collect back rent after this pandemic is over but if this pandemic will last more than one years as suspected, the loors anlandlords and the tenand be evicted together. the banks will foreclose on the landlords. thank you very much for your time. have a good day. >> thank you. next speaker, please, two minutes. >> can you hear me? i'm jose, a renter in district 8 and i'm speaking in support of this measure. san francisco politicians left to tout themselves as champions of progressive action and as we face the greatest economic disaster in history, now is the

time for drastic and compassionate action. i have heard many landlords speak to the unintended consequences of this ordinance but none of us know for certain what the so-called unintended consequences will look like. we know what mass evictions will look like. it will look like more squaller and devastation on our streets and erasure of our black and brown communities and people who are barely making ends meet. we are all feeling the devastation of covid-19 and landlords are not exempt because of their wealth. buying a home to rent is an investment and investments come with risk. we have heard from so-called mom and pop landlords who believe they will fail into unrecoverable financial ruin if they are unable to collect rent. they are forget this forcibly removes then from their home through no fault of their home.

let's not forget the multi-dollars hedge funds are the biggest landlords in the bay area. $10,000 of back-rent or whatever the case is nothing to the predatory investors or even to the owner of a single million dollars house but an insurmountable economic burden for some people. now, in this climate, where they're advocating the stop violence against black and brown people, we must remember eviction is violence. forcibly removing people from homes is violence and black and brown people will be the victim. vote yes on to proposal. thank you. >> thank you for your comments. next speaker. caller, you have two minutes. hello, is there someone on the

line? (speaking foreign language). >> thank you, caller, unfortunately our interpreter for spanish had to leave 30

minutes ago and we don't have anybody to interpret those comments but we appreciate them. next caller. >> you can hear me? >> yes, please proceed. >> i'm a small landlord in district 2, 5 and 8, 40 years, business other than and employer city-wide and 40 year resident of district 8. as a tenant while complying with san francisco soft-story requirements, i'm not pro eventingioeviction, i'm opposeds bill. this has caused a financial crisis for all citizens. the community embraced consequences with a slogan and attitude. as employers and landlords we have kept employees to the payroll working out goodwill

concession with tenants. this mirrors the position of every landlord we represent. the mutual good will was not mandated by the government. when the government pulls together, we allow supply and demand to find balance and equilibrium. there are higher vacancies and rental rates are decreasing upwards of 25%. the community will find solutions if you let them. landlords and tenants need each other. this proposal makes the assumption that only tenants are impacted by covid-19. it is wrong for our mutually elected supervisor to consider a law that addresses only a fraction of its constituents and not all. you have making the assumption the property owners have deep pockets and unless you propose legislation to address mortgage payments, insurance, homeowner, dues, maintenance repairs, property taxes and property owner's income, this law will not serve all constituents

unless relief is provided to landlords as part of this proposal and not by a separate legislation. where does your ordinance address small property owners from foreclosure? they're showing most tenants are receiving financial aid related to covid-19 and amounts that are greater or equal to the earnings prior to covid-19 and have been able to pay rent as agreed. approximately 5% of tenants have received forebearances and rent furloughs. >> next caller, two minutes. >> hi, i am a shaw small landloa mom and pop organization if district 10 and i oppose this. i have been opposed to the humanity behind it and i do think that we're on the right track. people should not be evicted and

families not thrown on the street, especially underserved. but this particular legislation is putting the landlord against the tenant and i don't want to go after a tenant and garnish their wages for however long. the government is usurping and expecting us to be a bank and government. there's got to be a middle ground and i really hope that we work together for the humanity of everybody. mine, landlords are not bad guys. some of them are, but majority of the people you're hearing from are people who are scared to death of losing their house. don't make us the bad guy.

work together as a community to make sure people aren't evicted, that landlords don't lose their houses and that we can work together as a community. so i just hope you consider that landlords don't have the deep pockets most tenant advocates think they do and the truth of the matter is, people should not be evicted, so please find a better solution but let's find a solution because nobody wants to see people on the streets. i personally couldn't sleep at night but at the same time, this whole conversations frightens me to think i could lose my house because they don't want to pay rent any more. >> thank you, speaker. next caller, two minutes.

>> i'm lou and i am opposed to preston's ordinance because it is unreasonable. if the tenants reduce their income due to covid-19 or lost their job, that is not the homeowner's responsibility but the government's responsibility. if the homeowner has to bear the responsibility, then the government, in turn, should assume the homeowner's responsibility -- government should assume for the losses that the homeowner will have to bear. in other words, the government is to be responsible for the homeowner's bank loan payment, mortgages, land taxes and utility bills.

or cancel them all together. and, also, help homeowners pay for home insurance. we homeowners are providing a service to tenants and we have to pay for the house we're living in. we have, out of the goodness of our hearts, to rent our rooms out to tenants. if the tenants cannot pay, how are we going to pay for the house that we're legitimate them rent? that would be the reasonable thing. so the tenants have the right to rent rooms, but what about the homeowner's right to live in their house? where is the fairness in that? >> thank you for your comment.

comments. next speaker, please. you have two minutes to speak. next speaker, please. hello, you have two minutes to speak. >> hi. can you hear me? >> yes. >> thank you, supervisors. i strongly support this ordinance. i moved to the city over three years ago to attend sanfrancisco state university and have since been in district 4 is currently road in district 6. i'm a board member and a member of gsa. i have had the privilege to

remain employed during this pandemic and, unfortunately, my seven other roommates have not. as of now, we owe $24,000 in back-rent. thankfulfully our landlord is sympathetic to the situation. he isn't rich by any means and thankfully, he seiz sees the cut crisis as tenant and landlord issue. we are not divided. i carry about the city and constituents and to me, it does not matter if they are renters, homeowners or landlords. we need to protect everyone regardless and i know that supervisor preston's proposed ordinance is a step in the right direction. thank you. >> thank you. next speaker, please. you have two minutes.

next speaker, please. you have two minutes to speak. >> hi. my name is sarah didn't i live in the district 4 as a renter. and i oppose this legislation. i believe as many people have said, it's partial and i do not support eviction. however, it's also just now equitable. like, when i had to get government cheese and food stamps as a child, the government supported us to have food, also a human right. but it also paid the store owners and at the same time they provided the service.

and i think that if we can come up with a legislation where the burden is taken by the entire community, via the government, with some sort of program like that, it could be acceptable. but as written, it m negates the rights for some and so, i really hope that we can find a better solution, not evict people and not put an unfair burden on owners. thank you. >> thank you for your comments. again, the caller number is (415)655-0001 and the access code is (145)483-6716. press pound and pound to join. you'll need to press star 3 to be added to the queue to speak and you'll be notified that your hand is rised and muted until we

call on you and you will be prompted that your line will be un-muted and you'll be ready to speak. thank you. >> hi, supervisors. i urge to reconsider this legislation. i'm a native person in san francisco, a district 3 resident and homeowner. i'm also on the board of the san francisco apartment association. my family owns 35 apartments in san francisco. six apartments with covid deferred residents. evacuee all been through a lot these last ten weeks and none of us are responsible for the pandemic, not even property owners. you're asking a certain sector of the city to pay for this.

if the city thinks the rent should be forgiven, deferred, turned into consumer debt, the city should find a way to pay the rent or take on the financial burden. the san francisco water department is not waiving any of my water bill. the elevator service bill aren't saying, skip a few monthly bills and we'll provide service even if you don't pay. the tax collector only deferred property tax for 30 days. housing is not free. the bills are due whether or not tenants pay rent. you say the bill will turn the deferred rent into consumer debt if a property owner goes to court next fall and then the property owners will get paid. consumer debt that goes to collection through court judgment has an average collection rate of just 20%. this is not an equitable

solution. what about contract law? you have the right to do this? san jose voted down similar legislation, as did the colorado legislation. oregon has given a 12-month repayment period after the emergency is lifted which is a much better proposal. wouldn't it be more reasonable to have a way for tenants and property owners to work together on repayment plans. i ago tha agree eviction is note answer. we're a co compassionate city bt this is not the solution. >> next caller, please. >> hello. i'm a san francisco resident and

i am a property owner that is in hear for my grandmother who worked as a janitoress who worked for 32 years to my my lie house. i was pushed out and i cannot financially assume responsibility for adult people and take on their financial burdens. it's unfair and not the right answer and absolutely an extreme answer that is very one sided. i don't agree with it and i do not believe that the supervisor sitting there proposing these items would take on the burden themselves. it's definitely not something that i believe is anyone's responsibility to take over

someone else's financial responsibility. why would we be responsible for all of their financial debt? it's not fair. >> next speaker, please. you'll have two minutes. >> hi. i'm tory and i'm a tenant in the sunset and i'm calling in full support of this ordinance. i am not at risk for eviction and understand this is a privilege that so many do not have at this time. like many others have said before, this will be instrumental in protecting tenants from eviction. it's wholly necessary, especially since it affects low income, people of colour and documented and disabled folks.

this can be a death circumstance under these circumstances. i urge you to pass legislations in order to protect those most impacted by the community. thank you. >> thank you, next speaker, please. >> hi. my name is pauline marshall. i'm a formal member of the housing alliance and i support this. it is a rational and smart followup to the moratorium and . thank you and please vote for the legislation.

>> thank you, for your comment and next speaker, please. again, you'll have two minutes and prompted your line has been un-muted and you may begin. >> hi. i am a single woman, sole proprietor, first generation san francisco, and i have been making a living for the last 15 years managing an airbnb and have had low business since march and continues has no one is buying or traveling. i'm at 5% occupancy for the units i manage and if my guests do not pay rent, i cannot pay the mortgage and i will lose my mortgage. to ithere is hud or the governmt can take my property by imminent toe main and give it away for free to whomever they want.

i bought my property in 1989 and they changed it. i had to reinvent my rental into a short-term rental to stay away from rent control. my retirement plan is all real estate and luckily not all in san francisco. if you want subsidized rent, pay it to the landlord. now you want to take away our rent? i have no new business and the owners whose properties i message are hurting, trying to pay mortgage to properties while renters eat like kings and the owners have to beg mortgage companiecompanies and they haveg and they continue to pay wi-fi, landscaping, taxes and more. please vote no on 200375. >> thank you for your comments. next speaker, please. you'll have two minutes and you'll be notify ed this your line has been un- >>: ed.

un-muted. >> this is becky in district 4. can you hear me? hello? >> yes, we can hear you. you can begin. >> yes, yes. i'm a small property owner and i strongly oppose no ordinance to 00375. i think, you know, this pandemic is affecting everyone, not only tenants, but everybody, tenants and landlords. so the policy should be more balance so there is -- so the landlord can pay the mortgage. there are property taxes also quite a lot. and so this i i strongly opposet

i hope the supervisor can come up with a more balancing idea. thank you. >> thank you for your comments. next speaker, please. two minutes. >> my name is carol and i am a third-generation property owner in district 3. my grandparents bought the building back in the '40s. my mother ran it and now the next generation is a care-taking of this property. i am opposed to eviction, and i oppose this bill, 200375. i'm not sending in money.

my sister is not sending in money. this is her income. if rents are deferred, that's fine, but at some point, the piper has to be paid. we're not running a free house. we have overhead. the city of san francisco has demanded special fire equipment be put into our buildings. we had do a retrofit which has a tremendous loan on our building, which needs to be paid off. these are all things that the rental money goes towards, the overhead, the taxes, the gas electric and the water. those things are not going to stop. yes, it would take a substantial number of our tenants to not pay

in order to -- not be able to pay these things but we're paying them anything. i have to problem in rental plans, payment-back plans and we have already worked out things with some of our tenants, but this is a business. evacuewe've survived the afforde housing act. we have tenants that have lived in our building for 30 and 40 years still paying rent from that long ago. it's not fair for us to have the burden of supporting -- >> speaker's time has expired. thank you for your comment. if you would like to speak press star 3 and for the folks waitig

in line, thank you. you'll have two minutes and you'll be notified your phone has been un-muted. >> hi, i'm john, a rentener renn district 8. i support this, it's essential. i urge the supervisors to act on this to save lives by preventing eviction. thank you. >> thank you for your comments. we have 95 listeners with 25 folks in queue. next speaker, you'll have two minutes to speak. >> hello? can you hear me? i'm a life-long san francisco resident and i've been a tenant

for most of my life. currently i'm lucky to be living in a house my mom bought in the 1990's when things were still affordable-ish. i was evicted my mom and pop landlord to flip our building and i'm not unfamiliar that evictions do happen and happened before this pandemic. when i hear landlords talking about how they're not against the evictions, i hear them saying i'm not against them, but i will do it to you. and so, i think that listening to all of these comments, tenants should be at the center of this conversation. we're having all lives matter and the landlord comments today and it's like we've emphasized to protect the most vulnerable members of our community and those who don't open real estate assets and have been told in reply that landlord lives matter. and i think you should read the room, people. i don't want to see anyone evicted, including small

homeowners, but i'm highly suspicious of their landlord narratives being 25 plus years of tenants evicted at every turn. i wonder where they all were when people were displaced. (please stand by).

>> i'm a resident in district 9. hello. can you hear me? >> clerk: yes, you may begin. >> hi, hi, hi. i'm annie b. i'm a resident of district 9 in the mission district. i'm calling on behalf of myself, my roommate, and my neighbors who do not feel safe enough to push back against tenants rights and for tenants

rights. i just want to talk about the simple bottom line that we're talking about taking eviction off the table. that will give us time to talk about a solution that's best for tenants and landlords. it's completely psychotic and inhumane to consider putting people out on the street during a global pandemic for reasons that they have no control over. i strongly encourage you to pass this bill, and that's it. thank you so much. >> clerk: thank you. next caller, please. you'll have two minutes. hello, caller? hello, caller? next speaker, please. hello, caller?

>> hello? >> clerk: hi. you have two minutes to speak. >> hello. i am a resident of san francisco living in district 1 examine would like to express -- and would like to express my full support of this ordinance. the opposition to this ordinance from landlords we have heard who supposedly oppose eviction demonstrate their lack of integrity to hold their fellow property owners accountable to value human life over the finances. i want to make it absolutely clear, the potential life or death situation for these disadvantaged communities is in no way similar to the financial discomfort to the several landlords that we have heard from. housing is a human right, and i

urge you to support this ordinance. thank you. >> clerk: thank you for your comments. next speaker, please. you have two minutes, and you'll be notified that your line has been unmuted. hello, caller. you have two minutes. next speaker, please. hello, caller. you have two minutes. >> yes. i am a san francisco resident and owner-manager of 40 apartment units here in san francisco. and because of covid-19, i have five vacancies and i'm not sure if i should rerent these vacancies because of this ordinance. thank you for your time. >> clerk: thank you for your comments. next speaker, please. you'll have two minutes. you'll be notified that your line has been unmuted.

>> hello, supervisors. my name is chelsea wight, and i'm a renter who has been impacted by the covid-19 emergency. i moved to san francisco six months ago and because of this unprecedented pandemic, i cannot get out of my lease. i am also being threatened by my property manager that they will be coming after me for money owed once the emergency is lifted. i am now in a position unlike ever before in that i am simply defaulting on my payments because i cannot afford them. i simply will not be able to

catch up on my rent. the cost of living in san francisco was exponential before this crisis, and now i, like many others, are in a position pigeonholing themselves because they cannot afford to live in san francisco. i do not deserve to have these financial implications because of a pandemic that was out of everyone's control. this city needs to focus on caring for its residents and making sure that every person has a roof over their heads and to feel safe in their homes. i strongly ask that you pass this ordinance in solidarity with the public's best interest, not for landlords to continue to take advantage of their tenants. their position has been clearly stated on this call, working individuals don't matter or referring to tenants as leeches of society. they agreed to take on these

costs when they agreed to become landlords, and we as tenants did not bring on covid-19, and they need to put public opinion over profit. thank you for your time. >> clerk: thank you, caller. we have 86 listeners with 12 in queue. again, press star-three if you have not already, and you will be notified that your hand has been raised to speak in public comment. for those still waiting, we appreciate your patience, and we'll get to your soon. next caller, please. you'll have two minutes, and you'll be prompted that your line has been unmuted. hello, caller? next speaker, please. hello, caller? >> yes, i'm here.

good afternoon. my name is robert link, and i am a native san franciscan. i grew up in district 4 and currently reside in district 7. i'm a property owner and a property manager and responsible for approximately 275 apartment units in the, most of which are rent controlled. i am calling today because i am opposed to the ordinance on the grounds that it is overreaching and violates the governor's office by precluding a landlord's ability to recover rent from a tenant through an unlawful detainer process effectively rendering the value down to zero. i think the landlord community sympathizes with hardship that many of our tenants are experiencing right now, and i see, and i feel like many of my

colleagues too -- do, too, see the relationship between landlord and tenant as complementary, and it's something that many other callers this afternoon have not displayed. we as a company have responded to a number of hardship requests. i personally have written 25 to 30 forebearance requests for our tenants and commercial tenants, which only about 10 to 15 we've granted rent forgiveness, 25 to 50% for almost all of them, so there's a huge outreach that's being missed, the outreach of the landlord community to the tenants. and i fear that this legislation is overreaching and could cause a bigger problem

than what we have now. i think possibly an unintended consequence here, if this happens, people could otherwise withhold payment of rent, thus creating a larger problem -- >> clerk: thank you. thank you for your comments. next speaker, please. you'll have two minutes to speak. >> hi. well, i'm here to let the board now that i'm opposed to the ordinance. first, pandemic is actually affecting everyone one way or other. he believ second, there's so many assistance programs for people that lost their jobs, such as e.d.d. and employment, as well. second, there's assistance for small businesses, but landlords, i have nothing. we can get s.f. water if we

apply for, but landlords do not get a break from paying property taxes. tenants are already paying under fair market value, but still, the city want to put the burden onto landlords. i don't think this is fair. some people would say forebearance helps the landlord, but it's only temporary. it's not a solution because the landlord still has to payback the interest with a higher rate. and with this action in the courts, it further divides the relationship between tenant and landlord and the landlord has to assume all the burden. and again, this is not the landlord's responsibility to make sure everyone has a roof over their head. tenants have to work together to build a relationship, and this is also what we have to do, not dividing them.

again, i ask the board to oppose this argument. thank you. >> clerk: thank you for your comments. again, press star-three to be added to the queue. for those waiting, please continue to hold. next caller, please. you'll have two minutes. >> hello. my name is andy, and i'm calling in enthusiastic support for this legislation. evictions can mean death in the "best of times," and this time of global pandemic, evictions will mean death for many people in an unprecedented way, and so this legislation has to be passed to help save lives literally, and to save our

community. so i am so thankful to supervisor preston and his staff for introducing this, and i encourage this committee to support this legislation and for the board of supervisors to pass it unanimously because it's the right thing to do, it's the necessary thing to do. and then, i encourage the entire board of supervisors to take the spirit of this legislation and demand it of our national leaders, as well. in san francisco, we can lead the country in this. we should be pressuring our representatives in congress, speaker pelosi, to be caring, supporting on ilhan omar's rent cancellation ask and we can save many lives respond san francisco, as well.

>> clerk: thank you. we have 87 listeners and 12 in queue. next caller, please. you'll have two minutes to speak. hello, caller? next speaker, please. hello, caller? next speaker, please. >> hi, good afternoon. i'd like to state my opinion. i strongly oppose this bill since it's not fair and it's

not representing everyone in the current situation in san francisco. it kind of represents one side. [inaudible] >> -- taking care of the situation, you know, the human right for everybody. the lessor and lessee have their human rights. you know, if one side has problem, you need to step in, helping in those situations, not just for the problem on one side. it's not fair. you know -- [inaudible] >> -- to get help by somebody, so then, they help the lessor directly and for wider assistance to the landlord, and

then helping the tenant. no one wants to evict everybody, so as long as they get fair help from the city hall, they're going to really help the tenant to stay, so just do a balanced, you know, action, please. so consider, you know, put more fair condition. if this bill pass, you know, add the condition helping of landlord to not evict anyone. no landlord want to evict anybody, okay? thank you so much. >> clerk: thank you for your comments. again, the public call in number is 415-655-0001. the access code is 1454836716. press pound, and pound again. press star-three to be added to the queue to speak, and you

will be notified by the system when it's your turn to speak. we have 85 listeners and ten in queue. next caller, please. you'll have two minutes to speak. >> hi. my name is maria, and i'm a renter in the 8. i support this ordinance because housing is a human right. it is not incumbent upon the city to bail out property owners or to not owe the return on their investment. however, the city must do everything to protect our most vulnerable, which is really working class residents, to protect them from the pandemic.

>> clerk: thank you for your comments. next speaker, please. you'll have two minutes. again, you'll be notified that your line has been unmuted. >> hello. i -- can you hear me? >> clerk: yes, we can hear you. >> hi. i'm a property owner and manager of 60 units across three buildings, and i strongly oppose this legislation. we have been lucky that the majority of our tenants that have continued to pay rent, but we do have some tenants who have admittedly refused to pay rent because of the virus. they say their income has not suffered because of the

pandemic, but they refuse to pay rent because they say there's nothing we can do. regardless of what some people think, we are not raking in cash. we would never turn out someone who is struggling, but we are working with several who need rent reduction and forebearance, but i think an ordinance who fore -- that forbids rent is unfair. despite what some people say, we are not monsters, and we are a family run business. we pay taxes, pay sizeable mortgages, by extensive building repairs, trash, new roofs, and we've also completed the city mandated seismic

retrofits. we're good landlords, and we do this because this allows us to live in the city. this is a hard job, and it is not a lot of income. we are not rich. we drive cars that are 15 years old, toyotas, not ferraris. i am not a predatory investor. i don't own diamonds, i do not travel to europe. >> clerk: thank you for your comments. next caller. >> my name is barbara dwyer. i am a small property owner, three rent controlled units, and i am also a renter. i vehemently oppose this ordinance. i am a retired r.n., and my rent is my income. in 30 years of ownership, i've never evicted anybody. i'd like to make a few points.

if housing is a human right, so is food, water, heat, and medicine. all cost money. this ordinance asks small owners to be the bank and to make substantial interest free loans with low likelihood of repavement. small owners cannot spread their rosters across 50 or 100 units. one unit lost means 25 to 50% loss of income. my building was not rent controlled when i bought it, but supervisors have changed the rules in the middle of the game. i worked with it, but this legislation really makes me want to rethink owning property in san francisco. i cannot even occupy one of my

units if the need arises. if more small owners exit the businesses, our properties will be bought by corporations and developers. this bodes ill for the future of affordable housing in san francisco. thank you. >> clerk: thank you for your comments. next speaker, please. you have two minutes. you'll be prompted that your line is unmuted. >> hello. this is salman. i'm a property owner as well as property manager for several units in san francisco. i've been on this call for several hours. i'd just like to say that we should all look to ourselves and to not look to divide. we see what's happening with that on the national level with a divisive leader and

administration. first and foremost, this legislation, my biggest concern with it, it's not helping the constituents. some of the other areas, specifically, san jose and others, they say it's not constitutional to enact something like this. if it does go through, we're looking at it'll be repealed in the courts in six months, and a lot of tenants will not have saved up for that rent that they owe, and i don't want to do that in the city of san francisco unless it's absolutely the last option. what i think this board of supervisors is they're kind of creating a plan to make the landlords look bad within a few months, and that's maybe a year, eight months. that's something we don't need. it doesn't direct the service

to the constituents and the people in these homes. the three-day notice is something that keeps policies in structure. by removing that ability for a landlord to do -- you know, a lot of landlords aren't going to do that, but you're undermining the legislative system. it's bad government. going to get redone, and you're going to have a lot of evictions after something we need to avoid -- >> clerk: thank you. thank you for your comments. next speaker, please. you all have two minutes to speak. you'll all be notified that your phone is unmuted. >> hello. i am a landlord, and i own a

property in san francisco. i rent at a price so people can stay in this people. i wanted to be as a landlord to stop the pushing out that's going on. these laws are going to be the norm of the future. we can't be talking about opposing this legislation without thinking about we are going to have to change the whole system of how landlords and tenants and the banks relate to this whole issue. something has got to change. we have to come together to figure out how we can make housing as a human right and for landowners and landlortena be able to come to a solution together. i am in support of all this. it's not calling for a whole

lot, it's just calling to stop the evictions. i could not live with myself if i had to eviction a young person. the rent pays for my mother's care in a nursing home, so i have a lot at stake. but we have to change the way we are looking because the world is changing around us. thank you. >> clerk: thank you. thank you for your comments. next speaker, please. you'll have two minutes to speak. you'll be notified that your line is unmuted. >> hello. my name is lisa, and i am a strong -- small building owner in district number 2 in the marina, and i strongly oppose 200375. i take pride in the four-unit building i own, and i always keep it in tip-top shape for my renters. i pay all my utility bills, mortgage bills, property taxes,

and maintenance bills on time. this bill will make it nearly impossible for small property owners like myself to recoup the rent, and it places the financial burden of covid-19 on small business owners who have fixed mortgages, employees, property taxes, and maintenance expenses. it is not fair and equitable to the property owner and puts the burden of this pandemic solely on the owners. the water company is not supplying water without taking payment. the mortgage company is not foregoing payments. owners of rental properties are providing a much needed safe home for so many residents, and this proposal is putting them in jeopardy if it passes. this, along with the closure of the court system, would allow tenants to live rent free till

possibly september 2020 and beyond. to me, this seems to unfair and punishes the owners of properties. i think the board of supervisors could not and should not prohibit housing providers who have been financially impacted from covid from using california law to enforce our rights. thank you. >> clerk: thank you for your comments. next speaker, please. you'll have two minutes. >> good afternoon. this is pahan. i am 76 years old. my wife and i had retired, and all we have is social security income, and we used all our savings to buy three condos in the city. they provide us our day-to-day living expenses. now, if the tenants stop paying

rent, we cannot afford to be in our house. in fact, we'll have to move out, and we will be homeless. so my question really, to all of you -- two questions. is it right and is it fair to throw me out of my own house for making an honest living, paying all of my bills? and then, i would ask, the solution i think would be, one, for the city to either come in and help tenants -- and i want to help them. and the second -- the most important question is if all these people who are proposing that the landlords pay for the rent, why don't they forego

their salaries and house the tenants, instead of making some landlord, old people like me, suffer the burden? thank you. >> clerk: thank you for your comments. we have 83 listeners and nine in queue. next speaker, please. you'll have two minutes to speak. hello, caller? next speaker, please? >> hello? >> clerk: oh, hi. hello. you have two minutes to speak. hello, caller? >> hello? >> clerk: you have two minutes

to speak for public comment, ma'am. next speaker, please. >> can you hear me? can you hear me? >> clerk: yes. >> i'm the owner of a rental in san francisco. i am the first generation who squirrelled away funds for a down payment. i made sure i upheld all of my objections, and i make sure that i'm up to date on all the rentals and maintain the building in the standard that i would live in, which is a high standard, by the way. when the moratorium on evictions passed, i made sure that i didn't put anyone in a bad wa