i was only tangentially involved with the parkmerced project but that project involved a development agreement, which is a recognized process in the california governmental code that allows seaptionzl essentiay and the developer to negotiate a deal without necessarily having fees be justified by a nexus study. so the agreement, which it sounds like you're mentioning, is something that we could ask for as part of a negotiated contract with the developer. in this particular case, the nexus analysis only supported the base fee that we were discussing about having moneys go into one of the city's affordable housing programs. >> supervisor chiu: okay. and one final question, again probably to the author of the legislation. i think there's no one here who doesn't have sympathy for the challenging financial situation facing current t.i.c. owners. i think a concern that's been raised and one that i have, and would like to get an initial sense from supervisor farrell and others, i think even if we were to allow the current generation of t.i.c. owners to allow them to condoize, the concern is

regarding parkmerced, if people, who -- if the people who crafted the deal to make the garden apartmentsntrolled in perpetuity or at least for the duration of the current tenant had not been so worried about the illegal weaknesses of the parkmerced deal there would have been no need to create the 200 million backup fund to protect tenants in case of court challenges and i imagine that 200 fund itself is probably on legal shaky ground. that could be challenged. so if the parkmerced development is on shaky legal ground i can only imagine this legislation is on equally shaky legal ground. there needs to be affordable -- there certainly is an affordable housing crisis and i understand people want to own homes, et cetera. but condo conversions are not the answers. and somebody earlier talked about the banks. i think that's a good place to start looking. thank you. >> chair wiener: thank you very much. next speaker. >> hi. i'm here to ask you to forward this proposal to the full board of supervisors for a vote. i was unemployed for most of 2011 and part of 2012. being on unemployment the state

developers around the loss of rent control units, something that we saw both at trinity plazas and parkmercedi'm curious with this, i understand that in some way there's a consideration in a sense because there's a reduction that we give in the fee but i'm curious as to the city attorney's thinking around the lifetime leases and also whether the city has the capacity to enforce these lifetime leases as well. >> city attorney: john malamut from the city attorney's office. we think that the legislation that's before you today, including the amendments, is something that would satisfy the requirements of both the ellis act and costa hawkins. in terms of enforceability, one of the things that's been added today, as part of an amendment, is that to take advantage of this program, the property owners would need to enter into a binding agreement with the city that goes to the this this -- into the enforceability of the lifetime requirements. there is a program in the eastern neighborhoods that was part of the eastern neighborhoods zoning that addressed a similar issue to encourage property owners to

here it's a little different than parkmerced because we have to deal with a different provision of costa home exemption which i believe raises serious problems for lifetime leases going forward. that deserves more discussion and more work. the second thing is what kind of perspective i think you should be taking on this. i'm a tenant advocate i helped pass the original ban, i singlele handedly defeated prop r, and prop n and worked with a lot of people to defeat prop r in 2002 but you need to look at the big picture, moving beyond the interest of the tenants and t.i.c. owners and you will see two things. one, t.i.c. ownership is inferior form of ownership and they need assistance and it's probably not good for the city to have people hanging around with this cumbersome bad ownership. number two the city needs affordable rental housing, we need to maintain the existing stock. >> chair wiener: thank you. thank you.