um in part because of the hra regulations. uh, the way the law applies as the previous caller so eloquently laid out, i'm not going to repeat what he said, but i 100% agree with it. i would also point out that that, um, mr. teague and the sf planning are not entirely consistent in how they apply the law to projects that they think are in violation. um, i do think it's interesting that this is this is something that is a home that is being actively encouraged by california state law, while at the same time here in d6, sf planning has had add a illegal office conversion in an area that's zoned for housing. by the way, um, clearly in violation in that they've had on hold for over a year. no enforcement because according to sf planning, if the supervisors are thinking about changing a law, they don't enforce planning . well, we're not talking about supervisors and supervisors. uh, uh, city law here. we're talking about state law with the hra, which applies. we're talking about hcd coming in. so i think if, if, um, planning is goin