business in our district in paul at 1520 nine. the demonstrators were out there todemolish this business . when i came to, even before i came to live on mount hill in the 1960s i use to take the polk bus up to galileo and i was floored by the gorgeous neighborhood commercial district, the most beautiful i ever saw. i didn't realize at the time it was a lgbtq district before polk street and when i did live here i thought you are so lucky and we would go to the state which was a lgbtq mecca but also the one where the other neighborhood peoplecould go like the ladies did not really go into the gay bar . now it's to be demolished. why? because the people who bought it, a development company decided they would manage to

eliminate it by going around to lgbtq rooms and claiming that it was feasible to operate a restaurant there . this is ridiculous, you know. i've heard their wholestring of allies at the neighborhood meetings and planning commission . there's a 50 percent base their that's completely unused except for a carand of the end where they could expand therestaurant if theywanted . they could , they were already very successful beforethe shutdown . there is absolutely no reason why this cannot be landmarked . backbefore 1915 , already there was the antique lunch car that was incorporated into the grub state together with now dining room addedin the 70s . >> clerk: thank you. next speaker please. we have one more color in two. keep in mind to keep your

comments to theitem on the agenda . thank you so much . >> caller: how are you doing? my name is daniel howardperez . and i come up from los angeles. i'm part of the letter community in los angeles and vice chair of the los angeles leather coalition and i support the measure making this and official landmark. i've been coming here for the greater portion of like 30 years and i have seen the changes especially recently with how the eagle has been an epicenter for the leather community and i feel that as an out-of-town or that comes in and comes to san francisco to relish in the community that i here , it is really important for me to see that this is a

designated landmark and people from all over the world come here to visit and it is, it is truly appreciated and it is what i would say a prototype to what other cities shouldfollow . and i am really happy to be voicing my opinion. thank you very much. >> clerk: i think that was the last caller into you, madam chair. >> chair: public comment for thisitem is now closed . can we have a motion colleagues to the full board with a positive recommendation? >> so moved.

>> chair: madam clerk, call the role. >> clerk: motion by supervisor peskin to recommend the item supervisor peskin .>> aye. >> clerk: supervisor preston. >> aye. >> clerk: supervisor melgar. >> chair: aye. the motion passes unanimously please call item number five . >> clerk: item 5 is a hearing on reinforcement activity policy and programming studies. they're requesting the office of short-term rentaland enforcement, planning department and rents board to report. members who wish to provide public comment call the item number on the screen . that is 415-655-0001 . the meeting id is 2497 312 0703 . then press pound, pound.

if you have not done so already rests star 3 to line up to speak. the system prompt willindicate you have raised your hand . >> chair: supervisor peskin thank you for calling this important hearing. will you make remarks before we call up the presenter. >> thank you to the planning department for preparing this hearing . these are two important pieces of public policy that short-term rental piece of the public policy was the result of some rather contentious legislation that then supervisor david compos was the chief operator that i cosponsored and passed in 2016. that resulted in litigation from airbnb and others that was

settled in 2017 that led to the current scheme and i think the last time the board checked in on the status of that legislation was at the beginning of 2018 so i think we aredue for an update on that . and in the interim we passed intermediately occupancy legislation. commonly known as corporate rental legislation which i wanted to hear about but even the pandemic and the dearth of information andexit time , that vote made it what i wanted to do was here briefly about the status of where the intermediate occupancy members and information are at and continue the hearing to a later date when planning and the rents board already. so maybe we can hear some

seminary information on ils and the meat will be short-term rentals and they do have a powerpoint presentation which is really an update of the 2018 presentation so with that i'll turn it over back to you but i think we need to hear on ilo's from planning and briefly from the rents board and get into the meat of the matter on short-term rentals. >> chair: thank you supervisor peskin . we have sent us here who manages the short-term rental department at san francisco planning and also our administrator. after we hear from them we will also hear from robert collins, chief executive director of th rents board . so now corey, i will turn it over to you for your presentation .>> thank you

chair.i'm 40 representing the planning department. thank you for having us here today to discuss the intermediate length occupancy controls or ilo'sand the city's short-term rental program . as was discussed i'm going to be brief and give an overview of the ilo program today and the planningdepartment and i think a little bit out of order there , give the board colleagues a chance to touch on what they're doing related to ilo's and that ordinance and as was mentioned the presentation will focus on the city's short-term rental program which was given by diego sanchez. moving on to the ilo program i will provide a detailed overview of the specific parameters but i'm happy to

answer any specific questions, and i encourage anyone learning more about the program and specific details to visit the ilo page on the planning departments website. it's a great resource for all that information . the controls were adopted last year in 2020 in two parts, one being planning code and the other being amendments to the rent ordinance so the former designation in the planning code is a residential use characteristic that applies to the dwelling unit offered by occupancy to a natural person for any initial state of greater than 30 consecutive days, that's less than one year and the ilo program sets the maximum units to be permitted in the city within existing buildings or those buildings that the permit is issued prior to july 2020 and eligible units within such buildings have 2 years through june of next year to file for such applications and after that date to the extent that the 1000 limit is not meant , units may be approved new projects going forward. today the department has

received fewer than 10 applications representing less than 100 dwelling units which is likely due to the two-year application period afforded to the program was the impact of covid over the past year so i suspect we will see more applications coming in the door between now and next june and when applications move forward and ilo'sreceived final approval they are required to submit monitoring reports regarding the nature and context of how those units are used on the property . butthis typically to the previous calendar year so considering the lag in preventing , it's likely no significant monitoring data would be available for emitted until march 2023 at the earliest so once there is more robust data on those approved ilo's and how their operating department would be happy to attend a future hearing to discuss that in further detail . from an enforcement perspective regarding ilo's the department has received 10 ilo related

complaints and four of those foreclosed due to no violation andthe six remaining are still under review . just a very quick update on the program from running department side and again i'm happy to provide more information and more data and information is available but now i would just specifically, we can pass it over to our rents board to give their update beforewe move on to the short-term rental review . >> thank you corey.good afternoon chair melgar, supervisors preston and peskin. i'm director of the rents boar . thank you forinviting us to appear before you .with you today we also have the stena partner whose our deputy director and julie cumis is ou senior administrative law judge . christina will be making a recommendation on behalf of the rents board and senior

administrator joey and myself will be available for any questions that may come up so quick that i'll turn it over to youchristina if you would . >> good afternoon chair melgar and supervisors preston and peskin. i'm deputy director of the rents board, thank you for inviting us here today. just as an introduction i like to get the committee in brief summary of the amendments to san francisco's rent control ordinance that were part of the boards intermediate length occupancy or ilo. i wanted to update this committee on the terms included in the rent ordinance in regards to the ilo ordinance . firstly the rent ordinance was amended to state there is a prohibition on six term rental agreements and that no lease or rental agreement provision that requires a tenant to vacate a

rental unit at the expiration of a specific term is valid nor does the landlord have a just cause to detect if the tenant fails to vacate the end of this fixed term. this language was declarative of existing law is the rent ordinance as required just cause to terminatedependency in the expiration of a fixed term lease has never been a just cause regardless of what a tenant might agree to in a lease . in addition the ilo ordinance added section 37.9 f to our ordinance titled circumvention of tenant protections.this section was intended to help her rentals by prohibiting non-tenant uses of rent-controlled property so for example renting a unit to a corporate entity or other non-natural person or using a unit as housing for one's employees or licensees. the ordinance goes on to provide any agreement that purports to allow the unit to be used for unauthorized non-tenants use is void as

contrary to public policy and that the occupants will instead be deemed tenantsunder the ordinance with all the rights and protections of a rent-controlled tenant . the section ensures all occupants in rent-controlled units have the right to long-term occupancy regardless of what's written in the lease or whether the unitwas advertised as a corporate rental. finally a new requirement was added to the rent ordinance specifically related to disclosures that must appear on rental listings . this typically the ilo ordinance requires all online listings must indicate the listed unit is subject to the san franciscorent ordinance limits evictions without just cause and which states any waiver by a tenant of their rights under the rent ordinance is void as being contrary to public policy . with regards to your first question supervisors , what is the rents board's current role

in enforcing this provision on fixed term rentals in san francisco, the rents board has various remedies available to tenants who have entered intermediate lengthreleases . these include reports of alleged wrongful conviction, decrease in housing services, unlawful rent increase petitions and other conditions which tenants can accessand be afforded their rights under the rent ordinance . i tenants could file a report of alleged wrongful conviction indicating they have received notice with no permitted just cause listed . our staff would conduct an investigationwhich would include contacting the landlord . many times this process yields the result it seeks to achieve when the landlord sees it there unlawful behavior. i will enroll in enforcing the ordinance also includes potentialpublic education . staff include information about the ilo ordinance in counseling about the public and we will be including it as we extend our community outreachthis year .

importantly the nonprofit tenants rights organization made action for violation of ordinance action 37.9 and the city attorney may also file the suit in courtagainst a party who has not complied with 37.9 f . you also had an additional question about how many complaints the rents board has responded to since the corporate rental legislation took effect and more explicitly emphasizesprohibition thank you for your question . since the legislation took affect the rents board has received one complaint specific to the legislation. the complainant inquestion was related to what is now rent ordinance section 37.9 f little b . this section is related to disclosures that must appear on rental listings including rental listings but more

predominantly indicating the listed unit is subject to the san francisco rent ordinance which limits evictions without just causeand which states any waiver by a tenant of their rights under the rent ordinance is void as being contrary to publicpolicy . that complaint was resolved as the landlord corrected their violation immediately upon receipt of notification of their violation . thank you. >>thank you . >> thank you very much ms. garner. were we going to have another presentation by mister sanchez about the short-term rental? >> i want to check.that was the end of the presentation regarding ilo. i don't know if you would prefer to pause therefore any questions specifically or move on to mistersanchez . >> chair: supervisor peskin has a burning question.

>> what would be helpful is given the dearth of applications albeit everybody still has time under the 20/20 law and we did have covid in the intervening period, it would be helpful if you could explain for us and anybody watchingwhat the application process consists of ? isthere a template for an application ? how has the ilo world been notified of this? obviously a huge amount of interest when this legislation was passed by the board of supervisors and corporate rental companies from literally around the country weighed in presumably they are knowledgeable. the apartment association weighedin . many others. is there an application proces ? where can somebody find? i think that would be a good way to conclude this segment of the hearing.

>> absolutely. so the ordinance didn't create any new or special type of approval process for application . it basically clarified that for certain types of projects generally in buildings that have less than 10units , the only thing required is the building permit to establish this residential use to respect in association with an existing dwelling unit and for buildings that are 10 units are larger it's required a conditional use authorization, just a standard like any other process. so we did again build out our webpage on the website which kind of details that specifically in terms of what the process is. ifyou want to establish one or more on your property , there's also a number of exemptions and prohibitions in terms of what kind of property either does not require approval or are

prohibited from establishing ilo and all that information is also on our website so if you go to sfplanning.org andpull up ilo it should be easy tofind that information . you are correct . the original ordinance has a six-month window for the planning department to basically build up a website and provide this information to folks and in that time we did receive information from various community stakeholders who were interested in that information and when the website went live we posted that out to the stakeholders that we were aware of and have received some questions and correspondence from different groups. we were applied to those but there hasn't been a lot of communication and as stated has been a lot of applications yet todate . >> butthere is an application for because there were three buckets if my memory serves me .

>> there is anactual application form that presumably i will find that , thank you for letting us know on the planning departments website but there is an actual application form for legalization. >> there is not a specific application for ilo because there's no special process that wascreated for them. it's the same process we would use to establish any residential use characteristic . if you are a smaller project it's just the filing building permit application to establish that characteristic and we call that out as required process on the website and if it's a larger building of 10 or more units the process it's simply file and it can be specific to whatyour proposal is whether establishing one or more ilo's . there's not a lot more detail to it other than that and not a lot more information is

required on the funding for the applicationpursuant to the amendments that were adopted lastyear . >> i'm looking at your webpage now . thank you for that and i look forward to continuing this and we will do a little off-line visiting between my office and your office in the interim when you're ready to present on this we will get to that and madam chair,i'm happy to move on to short-term rentals and mister sanchez . >> chair: thank yousupervisor peskin .i had questions about this being the hospitality industry basically has been planning during the pandemic, it'sintermediate-term and even for a little long-term rentals . i don't know if we have anydata to compare it to . and i am really interested in seeing whether or not we got it right and whether we need to regulatefurther , but you know, i don't know if you guys kept data before this legislation

about the long-term intermediate rental. >> the shortanswer is no because intermediate length occupancy was not a defined or regulated category . i think that was part of the challenge in the legislative process is that it's hard to know what that universe is of course you would expectit's a universe that fluctuates over time. just by the nature of what it is as well . and the many different reasons why there may be units from the specific corporate rental of ilo's to the more mom and pop and everything in between the short answer is no,we don't have a lot of information . unfortunately even when we get to the end of the two-year filing period going to have a certain number of properties and buildings and units we are going to be aware of but there's still going to be a

non-universe that either stopped operating as ilo's or are continuing to operate but not going through the process and it's hard to know that it's it's based on the leasing arrangement whichis not super tangible and maybe easy to understand from the outside world . there will always be some challenge to understand fully the universe that exists for ilo's but we will continue to implement the program and get as much implementation as we can goingforward . >> chair: i was going to say that it would help for this and every other category if we had a vice chair. >> obviously we will go through that in short-term rentals and is my recollection serves me from a coupleyears back , the budget and the legislative analyst did prepare a report and did have some baseline information certainly as to the larger ilo's. some of theuniverse is indeed met .

>> there was a report able to identify a certain universe and i think also address the level of uncertainty that existed as well and to the point we are making that the change that has happened since that time i'm sure it's a bit challengingto know what extent universe is still intact . >> presumably we will come roaring back at some point. >> and we willbe ready because we have these systems set up . you. mister sanchez. welcome. you are on mute, mister sanche . >> let me know when i can see the screen and i'll start the presentation. >> chair: did you have

somethingyou want to get into ? >> there's two ways of doing this and it may be more helpful if along the way because i pulled up to january 2018 slide deck and have questions that probably would be best if we did that in real time rather than waiting until the end when diego, mister sanchez is on those particular slides but if you want i can wait until the end. that would bemore productive if we did them along the way . >> chair: do you want to raise yourhand when we have questions ? that'sfine by me . >> perfect. >> just use the chat. go ahead mister sanchez. >> let me know when you see th shared slides and i'll go ahead and start and ask away . can you see it now?okay,

great. thank you very muchsupervisor . with me i also have a few team members from the ost are, erika jackson and peter burke. i would like to break the discussion up intothree parts. the first would be to provide a program overview . we can discuss theregulatory history as well as staffing and budget . the second portion we talked about the programs functions and enforcement andcompliance and last i want to talk about the committee response to the program to date so let's talk about program overview . ask some background principle regulations are in an administrative code chapter 41 a . these regulations became effectivefebruary 1 . these regulations essentially allow permanent residents orlando homes for guests stays up 39 these regulations

prohibit the conversion of residential units to tourist uses. the primary requirements for activity include the following. filing an application with the ost are, residing in the same dwelling unit 270 nights a year. a valid registration certificate from the tax collector and having a property and dwelling unit consistent with code enforcement actions. there are no limits on guests stays and these are the instances when the host and guest are in the dwelling unit for the same number of nights. there is however a limit on whole home or on hosted guests stays needed to 99 per year. this is aninstance where the gas has complete access to the property or i should say to the dwelling unit and the host is not within the dwelling unit . you want tomake a note

affordable housing units are ineligible to participate as they are nonresidential and non-habitable spaces . supervisors in 2016 the originalshort-term rental was amended requiring hosting platforms to ensure all hosts are properly registered . in september of that year airbnb filed today in federal court. all parties found themselves in mediation in federal court from january to april 2017. as a result of that deviation came a settlementagreement in may 2017 . thesettlement agreement provides further regulatory guidance . >> it's worth mentioning that part of that august 2016 legislation also held platforms as compared to folks accountable for fines and enforcement. >> yes, that's right.

as part of the settlement agreement for hosting platforms must inform us of registration requirements, cannot allow bookings for non-ost are registered host and must provide ostare with rosters with short-term rental listings on the site and must provide sgr with monthly affidavits as compliance . oh sgr must provide applicants with fundingapplications to host guests and provide an appeals process for denied applications . supervisors, as a result of the settlement agreement osgr has seen that platforms provided increased response in data sharing creating a fair playing field for noncompliant hosts for issues such asnon-residency which would be the host not living in the same unit . unit habitability which would include posting guests in garages orwarehouses or sheds or the use of fake registration numbers supervisors ,