dwelling units there's a main level and two illegal ground floor units. >> let's see here yeah. one dwelling and single that's what the notice of violation reads i've not been to the site that's what the inspector is alleging i imagine we got a complaint of the remodeling of the kitchen the legal part of house and the inspector went there and i guess he saw the illegal dwelling units he knows this is a single-family and wrote up the work with the main floor garage level are included in this notice of violation. >> yes. yes and and probably came with the 40 thousand penalty and built without a permit i saw a permit in the 8 that adds storage room and basement completed in 1990 the area we're talking about that may have been converted to the illegal dwelling units so maybe the property owner can tells you what's going on this sometimes is you know probably plumbing put in the building and stuff like this so that may have been the conversion plus the work done on the second-story so it can add up penalties add up you go into you know in the scheme of things it can be excessive we

but nothing in the planning code for that case for an illegal unit under the mayors directive we'll require a hearing at the planning commission that will be renoticed but given the number of unit in this building exclusive directive didn't apply i'll agree if you make a place our home for a number ever years it seems fair to get a no say it is being taken away to inform you have your appeal right seems 0 fair and you don't get noticed after the 15 day notice appeal has inspired and think that is a better process to have implemented by the building inspection and this could trigger a hearing but inspector duffey will address that but it transitions many appeals so why that didn't employ to illegal units the city needs to look at that and we'll address that. >> hearing the vublthd vulnerable ability to get familiar with what this body does he utilized cases and just to get into the context of alive and it seems like a lot of illegal unit and people living in a lot of these o those illegal unit their vulnerable to be kicked out in an arrest warrant tray fashion await notice again they

was one in 2004 for roofing that is unreliable and the permit which is before you to remove the illegal unit that notes the number of units as two, that said the san born records to indicate two units the building construction date in our database says 19 hundred it is unknown because probable constructed around the earthquake and those records may have been lost in under the code certainly up to 3 twnlz of it was at the maximum decency it allows for the process code requirements can be waived so information i wanted to provide for the board no open enforcement case for this property i'll be happy to answer any questions. >> photo of the kitchen it looks like it was in the 60s or 70s. >> yes. and the current zoning density allows that unit - >> we're not sure how many unit are there. >> of there were three or four under the provisions they could legalize one unit and the other unit potentially under the program we have. >> mr. sanchez did you come across the square footage of the property that's a good indication of how much space with legal in the building. >> we have in your records here b

dwelling units there's a main level and two illegal ground floor units. >> let's see here yeah. one dwelling and single that's what the notice of violation reads i've not been to the site that's what the inspector is alleging i imagine we got a complaint of the remodeling of the kitchen the legal part of house and the inspector went there and i guess he saw the illegal dwelling units he knows this is a single-family and wrote up the work with the main floor garage level are included in this notice of violation. >> yes. yes and and probably came with the 40 thousand penalty and built without a permit i saw a permit in the 8 that adds storage

have a problem with that being a landlord i also have a problem with - because if this was an illegal unit and a it is not necessary has claims to the rent the tenants shouldn't be there there's lots of cases that come before us this is a garage you can rent it for cars not people boom no people allowed so the tenant is on the street so to me i think this is good that the tenant has recourse but again looking at the landlord with the recourse but you pay the way i rent it you can't rent it to me i feel like if we make a mistake and by the we i'm saying the big we not just you and i sometimes we have to pay i know it didn't happen very often by sometimes the city should pay and i feel for the tax question and the rent question for all the questions but i feel like whoops we said it was 3 unit it should stay 3 units you know my main concern i'm glad the inspector dealt with that we send an inspector back is that place liveable? should that place be habitual a for human beings not a garage i appreciate inspector reardon's update that is important that place is a legal unit it is habitable pro

are positions that have been taken by the department of health that give the same strength to illegal units and legal unit and provide the opportunity to legalize them i ask you to do this if the planning department or a building inspection needs better decision this is a good process for them instructed as to notification and going forward any plans to change the required notification and i actually other our litigation month to month without disclosing anything confidential i've made a request to the district attorney's office to ask to notify tenants when there's a demolition for illegal or legal the group is looking at percentage but our derivatives from the planning department allow for this jurisdictional review thank you. >> is there any additional public comment. >> please use the microphone. >> i'm john with the housing rights community for 24 years i've seen too many cases like this and it seems like the city is taking a position to address the consequences of being prosperous and having new tenant coming in the city if there is a way to facilitate that it is one small step and we

there's a problem when i ask what she'll do without our rent she'll rent airbnb she built the an illegal unit airbnb i don't know if strangers as i share my brashgd a intruders she lives in the building and makes our life hell it may seem like i'm young and can find another place to live i worked for the nonprofit and government i can't for the record the medium rent of 44 so a month others have been evicted and you or your family and friends could be next you could put your life on hold for years and not visit family out of town because the landlords says an eviction will come soon if you allow airbnb for one hundred and 20 days a year more people like me will get evicted even for full-time respecter for 60 days when rent control was removed the housing supply doesn't increase but the rent did i would love to know how many of you are tenant and what would you say yes to supervisor campos this is not an entire home thank you. >> thank you. next speaker. >> good afternoon possibly good evening, commissioners david owen with airbnb this is a lengthy might want year with countless hours i want t

reviewed the facts and at the hearing decided to granted dr and deny the permit to remove the illegal unit that's the decision we're seeking to support that it was issued in error because the proper notice was not done that give them the ability to have the real outcome reflected here we should have row revoked the permit last year but instead suspended it and tried to go through the simple process with the planning department maybe expect a different decision from the planning commission but the decision they made we'll abide by so if you have any questions, i'll be happy to answer them. >> so mr. sanchez understand how we got here so if we uphold the denial of the permit than it goes back and what we're making the assumption it will be foiled for again and that lets make the summaries go their filing again in their wisdom or lack therefore denies the permit and the boil- we will assume at this point, i hate the words assume but based on the circumstances we'll assume the denial of that permit will be appealed and we're right back here again ; right? >> correct. >> so we're now in that si

present a period of time when there were people living there 58 to 75 it explicit mean it's an illegal unit that's not an issue and the height is allowed 32 feet it compiles with the eastern neighborhood privacy screen is 5 feet in height from what i understand and it appears to be such that some light about come through and of there's something growing on there it will not be a huge entirely o pack period it casts a little bit of shade and most importantly provides some privacy for both sides and if yoga is to be taught on the outside of that deck i don't know how noisy most of the time, i think it is pretty quiet so i don't think it is that disruptive and the distances from the window in questioning from 35 to 50 feet away didn't seemed like it is an invasion of privacy and messing neon is not considered a second-story address they've provided a matching lightwell i don't really see the depth of the project is similar to the other giant neighbors maybe a little bit deeper so i don't see something that support the dr and commissioner richards. >> a question for staff just trying to underst

the growth or the gentleman earlier who gave a great information that allowed us to pursue the illegal unit in his building so - >> i'll say generally had this is recommendation 13 i'm struggling ear a little bit early in the game if there was more information how do you prove that someone is violating the law i would be okay with having a private right of action to anyone if they bring it but i think it i'm not seeing how i'm going to vote but the city needs to be the one to figure out how you prove that someone is break the law and allow others to bring subsequent private rights of action for the first sort of wave i don't know how to say that that's my comment. >> commissioner hillis. >> so on this you know i'm generally supportive can you walk me through it it is kind of getting into the recommendation i'm at 3 unit building i live there i think the upstairs folks moved to oregon and they're representing their airbnb out more than 60 days the city is to the doing anything how does that work actually, i take them to court. >> for this recommendation first, it is only for the nonprofits s

yet they knew all along that it was an illegal unit. so i think if you see through the smoke and mirrors of the establishment here, the owners, they are trying to capitalize on the increase in rent and throw him out after they already rented to him to live there. so i don't think you should reward their intentional bad behavior in that regard. with respect to the appeal, sometimes the supreme court rules on cases that they have which are under appeal and under consideration by lower courts and that overturns those decisions. thank you. >> thank you. >> thank you, next speaker, please. >> hey, i'm jonathan stoker, i live at 1049 market street for about 4 1/2 years. i was asked today to read a letter on behalf of the tenants that did leave the building after the eviction notices were lodged from the tobner law center and it reads, to whom it may concern, our office represents victor areola, justin barker, chris crevitt, robert castleberg and melissa walker. these individual residential tenants at the property of 1049 market, san francisco

out to john chow the partner to try to work something out first of all, we're not aware the unit a one illegal the no notice of violation the ceilings are high everything shows the unit is legal the concern what was happening if you're trying to do capital improvements great we're not in favor of the preventing owners from making improvements but the question if you're claiming to legalize a unit that's not designated as legal by removing the kitchen and converting it into a laundry facility that's illegal the tenants can agree to save living without a kitchen or move out that was one of her comments to courtney brown we ask - fill a permit application that is consistent but right now this permit will result in the removal of that from housing no kitchen they want to take the kitchen out and convert it to laundry facilities i think that if you have any questions - i asked mr. garcia he's been there since 1995 with his two sisters. >> (speaking spanish.) >> >> one sister left in the 7 and the second sister left in december of 2014 and that's when the problems started that they wanted them out.

with each other to expedite the removal of their own citizens across through mexico and illegally enter the united states. central americans from coming benefits the united states greatly. >> i agree with that. >> but they're pier mittsermits for them to have trans it into mcallen texas. i call that contravening. are they talking out of both sides of their mouths or is there something i'm missing through the translation in the agreement? >> i can't say that. >> what i saw in honduras were sincere efforts to get the people back. first lady of gooduatemala looked at me closely and said please until we do, take care of our children. i took that to heart. because i think it was a sincere comment. that's what we try to do. >> we are taking care of their children. we're flying them from places like guatemala city into the united states now completing the human trafficking. i find it eye ronnic that just a year and a half ago as december of 2013 when judge wrote an opinion that there was a coyote who had smuggled a 10-year-old girl into the united states. they were interdikted. they prosecuted the coyote

united states. when weem come to you what have you told them? >> i have discouraged it. there's nothing illegal about it. it's not wrong to come to the united states to have a child. for a lot of people it doesn't sit well. it's a little distasteful and contributes to stories like this, people that appear to by criminal conduct. so i try to discourage it unless there's a reason of family members of the united states. most people are looking for an escape hatch. lots of countries where there's instability and problems people want to know their kids will have a safe place to go. >> let's make a distinction between someone that sneaks across the border, versus someone that comes with a fesa allowed in in the country. >> if someone from border control says hello ms chang. why are you here i'll coming to have a kid. >> that will be a level of that is lacking when people are doing that. it could lead to a turn around. the boarder inspector could say that you intend to live and work in the united states and that the visa is inval i had. we heard from a federal agent saying it's not illegal to have a c

2015, this year, found 19% of respondents say the president isn't a legal citizen of the united states. he's an illegal immigrant. the president of the united states is an illegal immigrant snuck into this country and got himself presumed to be in the newspapers, somehow announce he was born so that his mother, this white woman from kansas would somehow figure out this is the way to get her little bitty unborn yet baby to be made president. >> this is in favor of the common core. >> why we need a common core. the craziness of this argument. >> somebody should call the authorities or file a lawsuit or something. shouldn't the supreme court be above this? it's insane. >> maybe we should bring back literacy tests just for this. >> no. you have to be politically correct. thank you. we'll be right back. you want i fix this mess? a mess? i don't think -- what's that? snapshot from progressive. plug it in and you can save on car insurance based on your good driving. you sell to me? no, it's free. you want to try? i try this if you try... not this. okay. da! the conference call. the ultimate arena for business

with each other to expedite the removal of their own citizens across through mexico and illegally enter the united states? >> actually, sir, the mexican authorities stopping central americans from coming benefits the united states greatly. >> i agree with that. they're giving permits for them to have 72 hours as long as they're in transit to mcallen, texas. i don't call that cooperating with our policy. i call it contravening. are they talking out of both sides of their mouths, or is there something i'm missing? >> i can't say that. i can't say that they're talking -- what i saw were sincere efforts to try to help get their people back. the first lady looked at me very closely and said please until we do take care of our children. i took that to heart. i think it was a sincere comment. >> we are taking care of the children. we're flying them from places like guatemala city into the united states now, completing the human trafficking. i find it ironic just a year and a half ago. december of 2013, when judge wrote an opinion, that there was a coyote who had smuggled a 10-year-old girl into the unite

trendy and cheap is renting out an air b & b unit illegal? this week on "america tonight". >> in "america tonight's" extensive reporting on campus sex crime, we have seen case after case in which victims said the system both on campus and off, failed to protect them. hoping federal scrutiny could force change where they could not. at the university of montana in mis missoula. sex crimes in sports. >> the university of montana in missoula. home to the famous grizzlies. filling the stadium beyond mt. sentinel. >> growing up we came here for griz games. i loved coming here for football games. there was no option for me. i was going to live in missoula, mont. >> for kelsey belmont, that all changed when she said four university of montana students raped her. off campus apartment they played a drinking game. >> the next thing i know i'm in a bedroom. don't know why i'm in a bedroom. and then someone walked into the room. and there was a crotch in my face. and i was like, i don't want to. and i pushed him away. and he grabbed me by my jaw and i bla

that the united states is now safer because we are allowing more people to come into the united states illegally, is that what you're saying? >> i disagree with the premise. >> that's what you just said worried about the safety of the community. i'm worried about the safety of the community. one last point, you have said several times that congress has to extend a due process to the people here without documentation, is that correct? >> yes. >> you're aware ina, 238, 241 explicitly state when we should have expedited removal of people here without documentation, are you aware of that? >> yes. >> so that's what you should be doing. one last question >> it's really important. i keep hearing about these stories about what's happening in all of these detention facilities. would you not agree, if we did expedited removal and took care of the law and actually were enforcing the law, that these families would not be held in the attention for a long time? we would be able to expedite their cases and figure out who should be here and who shouldn't be here and they could go back to their home countries an

it's illegal. the united nations says the attacks are illegal.they say they are legal. hundreds of civilians have been killed. anti-american is deeply embedded now in pakistan, in yemen, and other places. yes, technically they're effective. but the question is you have also to balance the legal and the political and long-term effects of such attacks. yet really to me it's very surprising that the president stood up and took responsibility. one has to respect this president for doing so. yet i mean many people in the world where i am and other places in the world, they say the administration has been basically buried its head in the sand when it comes to civilian casualties worldwide. in fact, this will reinforce cynicism about the administration's strategy. i think i'm glad now all of us are beginning to have a debate to have a debate not only about the legal and moral dimensionentions of this particular war but also about the midterm and long-term effectiveness of this particular tool. it's called really assassination. you're assassinating peopl

is it also true that border crossers who came to the united states after january 1st 2014, illegally, those who overstayed the terms of their visas and are fugitives from that law are not required to be processed for removal through the program? >> the gentleman's time has expired, if you could just answer the question. >> 2c addresses recent border crossers, sir, 2c. aliens' apprehended anywhere in the u.s. after entering the united states and who cannot establish to the satisfaction of an immigration officer that they have been physically present in the united states continuously since january 1st 2014 -- and i also want to remind this committee that there's a general provision with respect to these priorities that give an officer flexibility in making a decision whether someone fits within the priorities and should not be removed -- should not be put in removal proceedings or does not fit and should be because of their public safety concerns. >> thank you mr. chairman. >> thank you. >> thank you. i will now recognize the gentle laid fri gentlelady from california, miss chu. >> than

. >> the real danger is the fact that half of the illegal immigration in the united states is an overstaycame here legally and continues to stay here illegally. >> reporter: one of the bombers was here on an expired permit. >> terrorists are not going to go to mexico and sneak across. they are going to get a legal visa. what is the easiest one they can get? the student visa. >> any time you have a system that allows opportunities for students and criminal organizations to exploit it, they will. >> reporter: lou ferrell holds up homeland security's student program monitoring schools with international students. >> there are all kinds of red flags in the system. that alert us to schools that are not reporting properly. >> reporter: say for example if a school which according to your own numbers had nearly 3,000 people, but any time we have gone to visit it, it is empty, would that be a red flag? >> absolutely. >> reporter: he says his agency is cracking down. just last month, ice agents arrested the operator of a chain of schools in los angeles alleging they were a front for a pay to stay i

it is technically still illegal under united states law.nesses are looking to use the laws to their advantage, including the food industry. cnn's an in a cabrera has more. >> reporter: pot brown is and cannabis cookies? old school. new today. >> buttery goodness. >> baklava baked with cannabis butter, and mints, sodas and gourmet candy bars. >> this is the ridiculously sophisticated toasted rooster, a 70% cow dark chocolate coupled with papita and sea salt so it is truly a gourmet chocolate bar delivering quite the punch. >> reporter: marijuana edibles have become a multimillion dollar industry. >> we're in about 150 stores and we are in all corners of the state. and everywhere in between. >> reporter: companies capitalizing on the cannabis craze aren't just expanding kitchens or laboratories, they're expanding their offerings. >> one patch is $16, and this is one serving or one dose of the thc. or just the cbcs if you're going that route. >> reporter: patches and creams for pain relief. battery charged vaporizes with thc-infused oils and b

in my case, i helped my family to come to my desk to come to the united states illegally and they have to wait eight years. -- my family come to the united states legally and they have to wait eight years. >> president has his own sense of authority, which is oversized, took it upon himself to create a law which under our system he has no wonder that no authority to do so. -- he has no authority to do so. >> we can't help but mixed people, not just exchanging products, we are exchanging people. >> give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free. i gaze at lady liberty, it begins for millions of immigrants who pass through ellis island. -- ap can for millions of immigrants who pass through ellis island. >> to watch all of the winning videos and to learn more about our competition, go to c-span.org and click on student cam. also tell us what you think about the issue this student addressed on facebook and twitter. >> a dedication ceremony was held in boston for the edward m kennedy institute for the u.s. senate. president obama, vice president biden, and other

. >> or on how to treat workers, say, who entered the united states illegally. >> what becomes of the 12 million undocumented workers in the united states? my plan is very simple. it will include work veisas for those who are here. i do not support amnesty. millions are crossing our border without our knowledge and causing a clear threat to our national security. >> he got testy a few times, robert, with people saying that he's been inconsistent. that's not the biggest issue. whether you can sell that to reporters, but when you're out there reporting in iowa and new hampshire, places even he conceded this week, he has to win early. rand paul to prove he's not ron paul, to prove he's a nominee. do conservatives see him as pure, as one of theirs, or does he have issues? >> his father's supporters, ron paul libertarians, they're skeptical about rand paul. is he running as a movement or confining a new centrist conservative, moderate conservative. people aren't sure where he's going. if he doesn't have that hard base of 20% that his father had in iowa and new hampshire, it will be a strug

the problem with this is we're practically begging illegal immigrants to come to the united states. we're rolling out the red carpet for illegal immigrants and it's sticking pax payers with the bill and it's wrong. >> economists predict they're going to contribute $1 trillion to the economy. also, these are not all border jumpers who did on their own. a lot of people came here when they had no choice. their parents may have broken the law but they didn't. >> what about the issue of fairness? this is not fair. >> wayne there are five states in the union that not only will give illegals instate tuition, they'll give them financial aid. >> this is a state issue. they should change it. it's as simple as that. when you start a sentence with the word illegal you've got nowhere to go. an illegal is illegal. we have some sort of policy for immigrants or we don't. now, that's up to the legislator legislators in the various states. if they don't want to fix it they don't want to fix it. i guess people don't want to fix it. it's crazy. >> legal or illegal, it's res residency in a particular sta

my first question is if an alien was illegally present in the united states, but did not fall within the enforcement priorities would that alien still be subject to removal? >> it could be because as i pointed out earlier, there's a provision in here that says even if someone doesn't meet the priorities, and but you believe they are a threat to public safety, you're permitted to go forward with that to speak to your supervisor and see if that decision -- different decision should be made in that instance. that's on a case-by-case basis. >> if somebody is not in one of the criteria, you obviously would need some affirmative evidence that they were a threat to public safety. i mean, there are people who are threats that we may not have evidence for so the absence of evidence doesn't mean that they are a threat. in that situation, if there's no evidence, then under these enforcement priorities, there would be no action whatsoever against that individual who was here illegally, correct? >> no evidence of a threat, that's correct. >> how many aliens who did not fall within the priorities

uncooperative countries to expedite the removal of their own citizens across mexico and illegally enter the unitedom coming benefits the united states greatly. >> i agree with that. they're giving permits for them to have 72 hours as long as they're in transit to mcallen texas. i don't call that cooperating with our policy. i call it contravening. are they talking out of both sides of their mouth, or is there something i'm missing? >> i can't say that. what i saw were sincere efforts to try to help get their people back if first lady of guatemala looked at me very closely and said please take care of our children. i took that to heart. i think it was a sincere comment. >> we are taking care of the the children. we're flying them from places like guatemala city into the united states now, completing the human0? trafficking. i find it ironic just a year and pb&b&f ago. december of 2013, when judge wrote an opinion, that there was a coyote who had smuggled a 10-year-old girl into the united states. they prosecuted the coyote for human trafficking. and ice delivered the girl and the quote from the opi

. >> ivory is illegal technically in the united states. state by state, there are different regulations. in the state of california there's a loophole in the law that allows the sale of antique ivory. the problem is how do you show that it's antique? it's very, very difficult. you really have to take the word of the salesperson. to be honest that's not good enough anymore. too much of a demand for ivory. >> reporter: she says it would tighten up the loophole but also benefit hippos and whales whose products are sold as ivory, even when they're not. it would eliminate a decades-old exemption and establish state enforcement and be similar to a law passed in new york city. reporting live in san francisco, christie smith, nbc bay area news. >> thank you so much. >>> san francisco sheriffs may be heading to court tomorrow, lawyers are expected to try to expunge the record. a controversial figure in san francisco after a new year's eve altercation with his wife in 20011. he was charged with domestic violence and child endangerment. he pleaded gu