did have discussions with the city attorney for the owner occupancy requirement considering the lookback provision as well but they weren't able to include that in my amendment so i'm glad supervisor preston was able to do that. >> chairman: supervisor preston, did you want to say something? >> supervisor preston: i did since it's briefly come up. so just for clarity, there's not only a distinction between the looking forward and the looking back which chair melgar, you have explained, but i also just want to clarify the provision, the amendment that i've proposed as you accurately characterized it is a period of ownership it's not about residence. so supervisor mar's proposal in terms of looking forward is about owner occupancy going forward. but just to be really clear that our five year period regardless of the residency. if they've owned the property for five years, it doesn't come back on the resty requirement. >> chairman: thank you, supervisor. with that, let's go to supervisor safai who wants to amend his own legislation. >> supervisor safai: thank you, chair. i'll just add my na