. >> good morning supervisors, jim lazarus san francisco chamber of commerce.have a robust process of outreach working with a variety of businesses. the chamber did its best to reach out throughout the business community where we thought we were identifying the attention of businesses that would be impacted. we think back to your legislation, working very hard with the restaurant industry and retail grocers using the product in their food service areas and really as you said got almost 100% compliance. --- we are a special location with water on three sides. we all have that cloth bag with us at the office or back of the car. we look forward to the amendment that supervisor reed included, and looking for a way that businesses can comply in a timely way and ways where exceptions are required. we appreciate that. our businesses will be working with you to see that this is implement it. thank you very much. >> chair peskin: and i may add that the real success of the program a decade ago is that we achieved that compliance without ever issuing a fine. we issued a f

. >> supervisor jim lazarus san francisco chamber of commerce. certainly no one in the room disagrees with the given that the tuition in california never met the master plan on education from the pat brown era and should have tuition free university at every level of university and college in california. the problem is we picked a tax that's been raised twice in the last five years. seems to be an easy target because it's a tax on commercial building transfers. it's a tax that's volatile and it's trying to raise money for a good purpose, a purpose that this board of supervisors could fund from its current 9.6 billion dollars budget. there's half dozen tax measures pending. you have to choose i assume -- maybe you will choose them all but i don't think the voters will. over $400 million a year of new tax revenue on the table for placement on the ballot. which has the priority for this board and the voters? is this tax going to be a priority? certainly the purpose that you would like to see funded through an ordinance is probably a priority and lik

jim lazarus san francisco chamber of commerce. taking homes and units off the market for short-term rentals is illegal. it's illegal today. it was illegal five years ago. the city's planning department, building inspection department, rent control offices need to use the tools they already have to enforce zoning laws in san francisco to attain our housing stock it that's not what is before you today. what is before you today is an effort to pass through a variety of private businesses located, who knows where, through the worldwide internet, and obligation to police and edit content on the internet. this would be it as if this board of supervisors tried to enforce its business licensing laws by having the examiner call everybody that's advertised in here with a 650 number for a roofing contractor, a painting contractor, a hauling company, and assure they had eight san francisco business license before the examiner could take the ad. that's not how it works. that is and how it works under federal law or the first amendment. but the

. >> supervisor, jim lazarus san francisco chamber of commerce. i think it's clear what with the lack of transparency is the drafting of this charter amendment. we don't need to a three city departments. i see no evidence of a need for new commission and hundreds of thousands of dollars of cost that come with commission forms of government. the commission secretaries two additional staff to the process of holding the meetings televised in. i assume you for some reports from the budget analyst with the controller's office what the cost of the rotation in management this new of two new departments and a new commission will be. if there is a lack of transparency, and there have been questions raised by members of the board of supervisors here, the 1995 charter gives this board authority to enact ordinance affecting the operation to city departments that use your authority to create advisory bodies. use your authority to create an outreach and transparency set of laws. if you're concerned that the current board of supervisors planning commissions with

jim lazarus san francisco chamber of commerce. taking homes and units off the market for short-term rentals is illegal. it's illegal today. it was illegal five years ago. the city's planning department, building inspection department, rent control offices need to use the tools they already have to enforce zoning laws in san francisco to attain our housing stock it that's not what is before you today. what is before you today is an effort to pass through a variety of private businesses located, who knows where, through the worldwide internet, and obligation to police and edit content on the internet. this would be it as if this board of supervisors tried to enforce its business licensing laws by having the examiner call everybody that's advertised in here with a 650 number for a roofing contractor, a painting contractor, a hauling company, and assure they had eight san francisco business license before the examiner could take the ad. that's not how it works. that is and how it works under federal law or the first amendment. but the

jim lazarus san francisco chamber of commerce.taking homes and units off the market for short-term rentals is illegal. it's illegal today. it was illegal five years ago. the city's planning department, building inspection department, rent control offices need to use the tools they already have to enforce zoning laws in san francisco to attain our housing stock it that's not what is before you today. what is before you today is an effort to pass through a variety of private businesses located, who knows where, through the worldwide internet, and obligation to police and edit content on the internet. this would be it as if this board of supervisors tried to enforce its business licensing laws by having the examiner call everybody that's advertised in here with a 650 number for a roofing contractor, a painting contractor, a hauling company, and assure they had eight san francisco business license before the examiner could take the ad. that's not how it works. that is and how it works under federal law or the first amendment. but the

as jim lazarus said, you have over $400 million that you're seeking in this budget. you can even balance your budget without taxing us further. so, i think you are headed for a big problem here as voters try to fall off because they're paying too much and being asked to pay too much. your causes are worthy. there's no problem with them. it's just you're asking for too much and you ask for too much in proposition b and you just keep piling and piling it on and it's too much. thank you >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> i been broken. this is a resident district for resident to combine homeless housing and transportation funding in the same charter amendment makes absolutely no sense. the two are different issues. while constituents might support funding for homeless housing the mighty adamantly opposed funding mta and projects such as new being for. combining these two set-asides under similar charter amendment could have a negative outcome. i would urge the sponsors to sever the two issues into two separate charter amendment. also, at the small business commissio

jim lazarus san francisco chamber of commerce. taking homes and units off the market for short-term rentals is illegal. it's illegal today. it was illegal five years ago. the city's planning department, building inspection department, rent control offices need to use the tools they already have to enforce zoning laws in san francisco to attain our housing stock it that's not what is before you today. what is before you today is an effort to pass through a variety of private businesses located, who knows where, through the worldwide internet, and obligation to police and edit content on the internet. this would be it as if this board of supervisors tried to enforce its business licensing laws by having the examiner call everybody that's advertised in here with a 650 number for a roofing contractor, a painting contractor, a hauling company, and assure they had eight san francisco business license before the examiner could take the ad. that's not how it works. that is and how it works under federal law or the first amendment. but the

. >> good afternoon, supervisors jim lazarus chamber of commerce as i've said before this problem inan francisco is back decades we down zoned our neighborhood and make it difficult to build within the zoning let alone we can't pass out felt board legislation to allow a slight as as trade off for more forecast and point to our neighbors rightfully around the bayview and the state they're part of problem when the affordable housing on an old industrial sites next to go 101 the neighbors 4 problems and don't see the appropriate paths to create affordable housing throughout the 9 bay area counties every permit effecting housing is subject to an appeal which is not the case i building in any others city and county in the state of california we're not part of solution we have to change maybe we have the guts to look at our zoning district are lose and look at it what is appealable or not how do we fast track in every neighborhood in san francisco the governor's proposal is a small step to deal with it on a statewide basis appreciate supervisor peskin amendment and hopefully between now an

. >> supervisor jim lazarus san francisco chamber of commerce.oom disagrees with the given that the tuition in california never met the master plan on education from the pat brown era and should have tuition free university at every level of university and college in california. the problem is we picked a tax that's been raised twice in the last five years. seems to be an easy target because it's a tax on commercial building transfers. it's a tax that's volatile and it's trying to raise money for a good purpose, a purpose that this board of supervisors could fund from its current 9.6 billion dollars budget. there's half dozen tax measures pending. you have to choose i assume -- maybe you will choose them all but i don't think the voters will. over $400 million a year of new tax revenue on the table for placement on the ballot. which has the priority for this board and the voters? is this tax going to be a priority? certainly the purpose that you would like to see funded through an ordinance is probably a priority and like ammiano some years ago u