Transcripts For SFGTV BOS Land Use And Transportation Committee 20240712

That they have no control over. I strongly encourage you to pass this bill, and thats it. Thank you so much. Clerk thank you. Next caller, please. Youll have two minutes. Hello, caller . Hello, caller . Next speaker, please. Hello, caller . Hello . Clerk hi. You have two minutes to speak. Hello. I am a resident of San Francisco living in district 1 examine would like to express and would like to express my full support of this ordinance. The opposition to this ordinance from landlords we have heard who supposedly oppose eviction demonstrate their lack of integrity to hold their fellow Property Owners accountable to value human life over the finances. I want to make it absolutely clear, the potential life or death situation for these disadvantaged communities is in no way similar to the financial discomfort to the several landlords that we have heard from. Housing is a human right, and i urge you to support this ordinance. Thank you. Clerk thank you for your comments. Next speaker, please. You have two minutes, and youll be notified that your line has been unmuted. Hello, caller. You have two minutes. Next speaker, please. Hello, caller. You have two minutes. Yes. I am a San Francisco resident and ownermanager of 40 Apartment Units here in San Francisco. And because of covid19, i have five vacancies and im not sure if i should rerent these vacancies because of this ordinance. Thank you for your time. Clerk thank you for your comments. Next speaker, please. Youll have two minutes. Youll be notified that your line has been unmuted. Hello, supervisors. My name is chelsea wight, and im a renter who has been impacted by the covid19 emergency. I moved to San Francisco six months ago and because of this unprecedented pandemic, i cannot get out of my lease. I am also being threatened by my property manager that they will be coming after me for money owed once the emergency is lifted. I am now in a position unlike ever before in that i am simply defaulting on my payments because i cannot afford them. I simply will not be able to catch up on my rent. The cost of living in San Francisco was exponential before this crisis, and now i, like many others, are in a position pigeonholing themselves because they cannot afford to live in San Francisco. I do not deserve to have these financial implications because of a pandemic that was out of everyones control. This city needs to focus on caring for its residents and making sure that every person has a roof over their heads and to feel safe in their homes. I strongly ask that you pass this ordinance in solidarity with the publics best interest, not for landlords to continue to take advantage of their tenants. Their position has been clearly stated on this call, working individuals dont matter or referring to tenants as leeches of society. They agreed to take on these costs when they agreed to become landlords, and we as tenants did not bring on covid19, and they need to put Public Opinion over profit. Thank you for your time. Clerk thank you, caller. We have 86 listeners with 12 in queue. Again, press starthree if you have not already, and you will be notified that your hand has been raised to speak in Public Comment. For those still waiting, we appreciate your patience, and well get to your soon. Next caller, please. Youll have two minutes, and youll be prompted that your line has been unmuted. Hello, caller . Next speaker, please. Hello, caller . Yes, im here. Good afternoon. My name is robert link, and i am a native san franciscan. I grew up in district 4 and currently reside in district 7. Im a Property Owner and a property manager and responsible for approximately 275 Apartment Units in the, most of which are rent controlled. I am calling today because i am opposed to the ordinance on the grounds that it is overreaching and violates the Governors Office by precluding a landlords ability to recover rent from a tenant through an unlawful detainer process effectively rendering the value down to zero. I think the landlord community sympathizes with hardship that many of our tenants are experiencing right now, and i see, and i feel like many of my colleagues too do, too, see the relationship between landlord and tenant as complementary, and its something that many other callers this afternoon have not displayed. We as a company have responded to a number of hardship requests. I personally have written 25 to 30 forebearance requests for our tenants and commercial tenants, which only about 10 to 15 weve granted rent forgiveness, 25 to 50 for almost all of them, so theres a huge outreach thats being missed, the outreach of the landlord community to the tenants. And i fear that this legislation is overreaching and could cause a bigger problem than what we have now. I think possibly an unintended consequence here, if this happens, people could otherwise withhold payment of rent, thus creating a larger problem clerk thank you. Thank you for your comments. Next speaker, please. Youll have two minutes to speak. Hi. Well, im here to let the board now that im opposed to the ordinance. First, pandemic is actually affecting everyone one way or other. He believ second, theres so many assistance programs for people that lost their jobs, such as e. D. D. And employment, as well. Second, theres assistance for Small Businesses, but landlords, i have nothing. We can get s. F. Water if we apply for, but landlords do not get a break from paying property taxes. Tenants are already paying under fair market value, but still, the city want to put the burden onto landlords. I dont think this is fair. Some people would say forebearance helps the landlord, but its only temporary. Its not a solution because the landlord still has to payback the interest with a higher rate. And with this action in the courts, it further divides the relationship between tenant and landlord and the landlord has to assume all the burden. And again, this is not the landlords responsibility to make sure everyone has a roof over their head. Tenants have to Work Together to build a relationship, and this is also what we have to do, not dividing them. Again, i ask the board to oppose this argument. Thank you. Clerk thank you for your comments. Again, press starthree to be added to the queue. For those waiting, please continue to hold. Next caller, please. Youll have two minutes. Hello. My name is andy, and im calling in enthusiastic support for this legislation. Evictions can mean death in the best of times, and this time of global pandemic, evictions will mean death for many people in an unprecedented way, and so this legislation has to be passed to help save lives literally, and to save our community. So i am so thankful to supervisor preston and his staff for introducing this, and i encourage this committee to support this legislation and for the board of supervisors to pass it unanimously because its the right thing to do, its the necessary thing to do. And then, i encourage the entire board of supervisors to take the spirit of this legislation and demand it of our national leaders, as well. In San Francisco, we can lead the country in this. We should be pressuring our representatives in congress, speaker pelosi, to be caring, supporting on ilhan omars rent cancellation ask and we can save many lives respond San Francisco, as well. Clerk thank you. We have 87 listeners and 12 in queue. Next caller, please. Youll have two minutes to speak. Hello, caller . Next speaker, please. Hello, caller . Next speaker, please. Hi, good afternoon. Id like to state my opinion. I strongly oppose this bill since its not fair and its not representing everyone in the Current Situation in San Francisco. It kind of represents one side. [inaudible] taking care of the situation, you know, the human right for everybody. The lessor and lessee have their human rights. You know, if one side has problem, you need to step in, helping in those situations, not just for the problem on one side. Its not fair. You know [inaudible] to get help by somebody, so then, they help the lessor directly and for wider assistance to the landlord, and then helping the tenant. No one wants to evict everybody, so as long as they get fair help from the city hall, theyre going to really help the tenant to stay, so just do a balanced, you know, action, please. So consider, you know, put more fair condition. If this bill pass, you know, add the condition helping of landlord to not evict anyone. No landlord want to evict anybody, okay . Thank you so much. Clerk thank you for your comments. Again, the public call in number is 4156550001. The access code is 1454836716. Press pound, and pound again. Press starthree to be added to the queue to speak, and you will be notified by the system when its your turn to speak. We have 85 listeners and ten in queue. Next caller, please. Youll have two minutes to speak. Hi. My name is maria, and im a renter in the 8. I support this ordinance because housing is a human right. It is not incumbent upon the city to bail out Property Owners or to not owe the return on their investment. However, the city must do everything to protect our most vulnerable, which is really working class residents, to protect them from the pandemic. Clerk thank you for your comments. Next speaker, please. Youll have two minutes. Again, youll be notified that your line has been unmuted. Hello. I can you hear me . Clerk yes, we can hear you. Hi. Im a Property Owner and manager of 60 units across three buildings, and i strongly oppose this legislation. We have been lucky that the majority of our tenants that have continued to pay rent, but we do have some tenants who have admittedly refused to pay rent because of the virus. They say their income has not suffered because of the pandemic, but they refuse to pay rent because they say theres nothing we can do. Regardless of what some people think, we are not raking in cash. We would never turn out someone who is struggling, but we are working with several who need rent reduction and forebearance, but i think an ordinance who fore that forbids rent is unfair. Despite what some people say, we are not monsters, and we are a family run business. We pay taxes, pay sizeable mortgages, by extensive building repairs, trash, new roofs, and weve also completed the city mandated seismic retrofits. Were good landlords, and we do this because this allows us to live in the city. This is a hard job, and it is not a lot of income. We are not rich. We drive cars that are 15 years old, toyotas, not ferraris. I am not a predatory investor. I dont own diamonds, i do not travel to europe. Clerk thank you for your comments. Next caller. My name is barbara dwyer. I am a small Property Owner, three rent controlled units, and i am also a renter. I vehemently oppose this ordinance. I am a retired r. N. , and my rent is my income. In 30 years of ownership, ive never evicted anybody. Id like to make a few points. If housing is a human right, so is food, water, heat, and medicine. All cost money. This ordinance asks small owners to be the bank and to make substantial interest free loans with low likelihood of repavement. Small owners cannot spread their rosters across 50 or 100 units. One unit lost means 25 to 50 loss of income. My building was not rent controlled when i bought it, but supervisors have changed the rules in the middle of the game. I worked with it, but this legislation really makes me want to rethink owning property in San Francisco. I cannot even occupy one of my units if the need arises. If more small owners exit the businesses, our properties will be bought by corporations and developers. This bodes ill for the future of Affordable Housing in San Francisco. Thank you. Clerk thank you for your comments. Next speaker, please. You have two minutes. Youll be prompted that your line is unmuted. Hello. This is salman. Im a Property Owner as well as property manager for several units in San Francisco. Ive been on this call for several hours. Id just like to say that we should all look to ourselves and to not look to divide. We see whats happening with that on the National Level with a divisive leader and administration. First and foremost, this legislation, my biggest concern with it, its not helping the constituents. Some of the other areas, specifically, san jose and others, they say its not constitutional to enact Something Like this. If it does go through, were looking at itll be repealed in the courts in six months, and a lot of tenants will not have saved up for that rent that they owe, and i dont want to do that in the city of San Francisco unless its absolutely the last option. What i think this board of supervisors is theyre kind of creating a plan to make the landlords look bad within a few months, and thats maybe a year, eight months. Thats something we dont need. It doesnt direct the service to the constituents and the people in these homes. The threeday notice is something that keeps policies in structure. By removing that ability for a landlord to do you know, a lot of landlords arent going to do that, but youre undermining the legislative system. Its bad government. Going to get redone, and youre going to have a lot of evictions after something we need to avoid clerk thank you. Thank you for your comments. Next speaker, please. You all have two minutes to speak. Youll all be notified that your phone is unmuted. Hello. I am a landlord, and i own a property in San Francisco. I rent at a price so people can stay in this people. I wanted to be as a landlord to stop the pushing out thats going on. These laws are going to be the norm of the future. We cant be talking about opposing this legislation without thinking about we are going to have to change the whole system of how landlords and tenants and the banks relate to this whole issue. Something has got to change. We have to come together to figure out how we can make housing as a human right and for landowners and landlortena be able to come to a solution together. I am in support of all this. Its not calling for a whole lot, its just calling to stop the evictions. I could not live with myself if i had to eviction a young person. The rent pays for my mothers care in a nursing home, so i have a lot at stake. But we have to change the way we are looking because the world is changing around us. Thank you. Clerk thank you. Thank you for your comments. Next speaker, please. Youll have two minutes to speak. Youll be notified that your line is unmuted. Hello. My name is lisa, and i am a strong small Building Owner in district number 2 in the marina, and i strongly oppose 200375. I take pride in the fourunit building i own, and i always keep it in tiptop shape for my renters. I pay all my utility bills, mortgage bills, property taxes, and maintenance bills on time. This bill will make it nearly impossible for small Property Owners like myself to recoup the rent, and it places the financial burden of covid19 on Small Business owners who have fixed mortgages, employees, property taxes, and maintenance expenses. It is not fair and equitable to the Property Owner and puts the burden of this pandemic solely on the owners. The Water Company is not supplying water without taking payment. The Mortgage Company is not foregoing payments. Owners of rental properties are providing a much needed safe home for so many residents, and this proposal is putting them in jeopardy if it passes. This, along with the closure of the court system, would allow tenants to live rent free till possibly september 2020 and beyond. To me, this seems to unfair and punishes the owners of properties. I think the board of supervisors could not and should not prohibit Housing Providers who have been financially impacted from covid from using California Law to enforce our rights. Thank you. Clerk thank you for your comments. Next speaker, please. Youll have two minutes. Good afternoon. This is pahan. I am 76 years old. My wife and i had retired, and all we have is Social Security income, and we used all our savings to buy three condos in the city. They provide us our daytoday living expenses. Now, if the tenants stop paying rent, we cannot afford to be in our house. In fact, well have to move out, and we will be homeless. So my question really, to all of you two questions. Is it right and is it fair to throw me out of my own house for making an honest living, paying all of my bills . And then, i would ask, the solution i think would be, one, for the city to either come in and help tenants and i want to help them. And the second the most important question is if all these people who are proposing that the landlords pay for the rent, why dont they forego their salaries and house the tenants, instead of making some landlord, old people like me, suffer the burden . Thank you. Clerk thank you for your comments. We have 83 listeners and nine in queue. Next speaker, please. Youll have two minutes to speak. Hello, caller . Next speaker, please . Hello . Clerk oh, hi. Hello. You have two minutes to speak. Hello, caller . Hello . Clerk you have two minutes to speak for Public Comment, maam. Next speaker, please. Can you hear me . Can you hear me . Clerk yes. Im the owner of a rental in San Francisco. I am the first generation who squirrelled away funds for a down payment. I made sure i upheld all of my objections, and i make sure that im up to date on all the rentals and maintain the building in the standard that i would live in, which is a high standard, by the way. When the moratorium on evictions passed, i made sure that i didnt put anyone in a bad way, on account of a tenant not paying their rent. This deferral, by the way, did not require any auditable proof or documentation to verify the tenant actually had a need. The tenant was not required to claim their need under penalty of perjury. For these people, this is a freebie, a no brainer. Its an openended delay or forgiveness of rent. As long as im paying all the bills and personally putting in all the efforts to maintain and carry the building, i should have a say in whether i forgive or delay rent payments. Let me work it out with the tenant if they should need more time to pay their back rent, as i have done in the past. This ordinance is beyond an overreach. I cant imagine how this ordinance has any legal basis to pass, but at a minimum, you should put in that they are required to put in a reasonable for deferred rent under penalty of perjury and make it a definable time limit. I respectfully ask that you vote know as 200375, and for the commenter who called landlords grubby owners, we provide a service. Should Small Business owners who provide another service also be called grubby owners, as well . Clerk thank you for your comments. Next caller, please. You have two minutes. Hi. Im a tenant in San Francisco. My landlord is essentially licking their chops because double rent will come due if this ordinance is not passed. I thank supervisors preston and peskin for authoring this, and i support this 100 . As everyone has mentioned, it does not at all say that rent never comes due. It is just a way so that we dont get a slew of evictions that would cause the city much greater harm in terms of financial costs in the courts and the cost in the pandemic. Personally, i lost both of my jobs due to covid19, one in tourism, and one at ucsf, and i dont know when they will return. So i strongly urge the board of supervisors to pass this actually wholeheartedly. I just wish i had a landlord like some of these folks that have spoken up that are willing to work things out with people. Thank you very much for your time. Clerk thank you for your comments. Again, the Public Comment is 4156550001. The access code is 1454836716. Press pound, and pound again. Press starthree to be added to the queue. Next speaker, please. Good evening. My name is michelle, and im the owner of Property Management systems, which is a boutique property Residential Management company here in San Francisco. As a property manager for over 20 years here in San Francisco, i have often found myself as mediator between landlord and resident during challenging time. No landlord that i work with ever wants to evict a resident, and no resident wants to be evicted for nonpayment of rent especially during times of a pandemic that was not caused by the owner or tenant. This legislation is not the answer. My personal experience over the past ten weeks, we have received a handful of requests from tenants who were unable to pay the rent, and in every situation, a compromise between the parties was made where a portion or all of the rent was waived. I am opposed to this legislation for a number of reasons, but at the core, we can all Work Together. I have a question for supervisor preston. If this passes, and there are no more evictions, will you be defunding all of the evictions Defense Group from our tax dollars that they receive to assist residents in an eviction actions . If there wont be any evictions, why dont you divert those funds to help owners and residents pay their rent . Good evening. Clerk thank you for your comments. Next speaker, please. You have two minutes. Hi. My name is ren. Im a renter in district 3, and im calling to voice my strong support of these protections. I want to thank supervisor dean preston for his compassion and leadership on this issue and this measured proposal, and i want to urge the rest of the board to recognize what many other callers have stressed, that what could stave off a huge wave of evictions and that will protect lowincome and communities of color. Clerk thank you. Next speaker, please. Youll have two minutes. Hello. My name is scott shane. Can you hear me . Hello . Clerk yes. You have two minutes to speak. Can you hear me . Yes. Im a small apartment owner. I own a duplex in mission district, and ive owned it for a few years, and my wife lost her job, i lost my job, and and then, i just found out this weekend one of the renters cannot pay their rent. So Everyone Needs to pay 50 of the rent, which is very low, and im really having a difficult time paying my mortgage, my property taxes, and my expenses to run that building, and pay my electrical bills and my other bills in my personal life. Im scared now that im over 65 years old, and i am scared that i will lose my building because i cannot pay , i wil not be able to pay my mortgage and my taxes, and ive worked a long time, saved my money for many, many years to acquire that building, and i think its unfa unfair. That im opposed to this bill, and i think it should not pass because its unjust to the landlords. We dont want anybody to be evicted, but we dont want the landlords to have to pay for all of this, and theres no end in sight. It could go on forever, and there would be a bigger problem down the road. Any way, i oppose this bill, and i think you should think seriously on it. Thank you, and i hope you have a wonderful day. Clerk thank you for your comments. Next speaker, please. Hi. Hello, supervisors. My name is camille. Im a sixyear s. F. Renter and bay area native currently living in district 9. Thank you, supervisor preston for the offer of this covid19 tenant protection ordinance. Im speaking today in enthusiastic support of this legislation. I jeecho all the other comment of this bill. This is the difference between life and death for all of our most vulnerable. The he dictieviction pipeline issue that affects us all. It is about saving lives today. I ask you to put tenants over profits, and i urge you to pass this issue. I understand that the greater u. S. Financial system has failed landlords, as well, however, they have relief with the c. A. R. E. S. Act and further relief. To my understanding, most homeowners affected by the coronavirus pandemic are able to ask for relief, as well. Meanwhile, for renters, there are no rent discount programs. There is no interest only equivalent between national banks, state chartered banks, credit unions, mortgage lenders. There are over 400 banks and mortgage lenders who are already providing assistance to landlords. Im hard pressed to believe that there is no one willing to work with these landlords with the financial difficulty that theyre experiencing today. Many landlords and associations already, you never evict, youre a rare breed. We must acknowledge that most landlords will provide no such empathy clerk your times expired. Thank you for your time. Again, the Public Comment is 4156550001. The access code is 1454836716. Press pound, and then pound again to be again. To be added to the queue, press starthree. Youll be added to the queue, and when its your turn to speak, youll be unmuted and prompted. Hello, caller. Hi, everybody. This is mitchell from the Affordable Housing alliance. Im assuming you can hear me. I think this might be a good time to stop and take a deep breath and step back a little more and try to view this proposal from a Public Health policy and a Public Health perspective. This choice was already made when the city decided to have a moratorium on evictions or nonpayment of rent during the pandemic. The die was already cast. The legislation provides a soft landing after the moratorium, and the board of supervisors already passed virtually identical legislation for s. R. O. Units. That provides a soft landing also after the moratorium, but renters would be in nearly the same position as they were at the start, and it would have been mostly pointless. If we thought it was a good idea for them to be evicted, we wouldnt have needed a mo moratorium in the first place. Tenants will still owe the back rent but wouldnt face eviction for that. The landlords ability to collect the rent as opposed to evicting is not significantly changed by this proposal. The chances of getting that back rent is really became. This right handing legislation is not really transformative, i would say, its just a common sense method to step down from the moratorium on evictions and providing a soft landing on that policy in a way that would help prevent mass evictions with minimal impact on landlords, so we would urge you to support this measure. Thank you for your comment. Clerk we have 75 listeners and six in queue to speak. Dear supervisors, my name is michael. Im a longtime resident of San Francisco, a property manager, and a small businesproperty ow. Im calling to oppose the ordinance because, again, you are taking a very simplistic approach to this and using logic that all tenants are good and poor, and all landlords are rich and ugly, and its just the wrong approach. I think that most people that own property are compassionate and live here and want the city to progress. If you are proposing a Citywide Program where everybody paid into it and had a means test and made sure that the tenants who ask for help really need it, that would be something that i think citywide everybody could support, instead of dividing with this overreaching proposal. Thank you for giving me the opportunity. Clerk thank you for your comments. Next speaker, please. Again, youll have two minutes to speak. Youll be prompted that your line is unmuted. Hi. Can you hear me, please . Clerk yes, thank you. Hello . Can you hear me . Clerk yes, you may speak. Hi, thank you so much. My name is nancy levins, and im in district 7, and im a small Property Owner. I listened to this about 45 minutes. You poor people have been listening to it all day, but i think one of the things thats been very clear is this is a nuanced situation. Im a small Property Owner, and i fall into that category of people that are penalized if i dont get my rent. So how about this how about going back and rethinking this . How about carving out some provisions for small Property Owners, say people who own six or less units because were the bread and butter owners of property here in San Francisco. Its true that there are o outofstate people that own properties that may allow their tenants not to pay rent, but that brings up that whole other issue. Youve got to step back and make this not available to all tenants. I agree with means testing or some proof that people actually are in a situation where they cannot pay their rent. So these are my comments. Im just asking you all to step back and rethink this. We are not all evil, we want our tenants in place, we like them, and we want to work with them. Thank you very much for listening to me. Clerk thank you for your comments. Next speaker, please. Youll have two minutes. Hi. First of all, i wanted to translate for the speaker who spoke in spanish. She was saying that, you know, while people lost their jobs and are worried about homelessness, she expressed her support for the ordinance. I speak spanish, so there it is. I want to thank all the sfusd teachers, and all the teachers have done an amazing job during the pandemic. We all agree that housing is a crisis. We all want people to stay in their homes. What people really need is rental assistance. It is clear from every single call that people are feeling fear, insecurity, and stress. As a preschoolteacher, i know that in order to reduce conflict, we need to reduce stress. Many people have mentioned how stressful this city is. There is a lot of hostility on this call. People need help, and this is not the way to help and will not reduce stress because debt will be building on both sides. This ordinance not only is not the only way we can prevent evictions, there are many other possibilities like San Francisco paying rent or offering tax relief. I heard the gentleman hours ago that is working with housing and rent assistance and says they are in dire need for the government help. Having Consumer Debt is not reducing stress. Going to Small Claims Court is not reducing stress for all the tenants that have not been able to work. People need their rents paid. Tenants will never get out of debt. As mentioned, this will likely end up in court, and instead, we should be paying rental fees instead of paying for legal fees. Give direct payment to tenants. Tenants should not lose their homes and they should not have to build up debt. I want to read a statement about community. When we talk about helping community to the breakdown of community, something changes. Holding onto the view that community is a set of problems to be solved holds itself in the grip of retribution. At every level of community, we live at a level of retribution. Clerk thank you for your comments. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Youll have two minutes. Hi. Can you hear me . Clerk yes. Hello . Hello . Can you hear me . Clerk yes, you may begin. Hello. My name is simon. Im a small Property Management company representing small mom and pop owners, none of whom own more than one to four small buildings in San Francisco in different districts. In representing over 1500 units in San Francisco, we strongly oppose this bill. None of the owners that i spoke to want to evict their tenants. The ability of a landlord to never recover rent, this is not a good or make sense policy right now. Theres a simbiotic relationship between tenants and landlords. Operating expenses are already outpacing the cost of living and rent increases. Mind you, assistance are already available to tenants, Small Business owners, and those out of work, but no help is available to Property Owners. This legislation is basically punishing landlords and basically putting them out of work. If all tenants refuse to pay rent, and there is no recourse and recourse is protected, how does that help anyone . I think we should reexamine common sense and come up with a situation that helps all. A simple compromise should this ordinance be passed and not work ad planns planned is to s any loss by the landlords is somehow recoverable from the city. Clerk thank you for your comments. Next speaker, please. Youll have two minutes. Hello, caller . You have two minutes. Hi. My name is garrett, and id just like to say that the landlord has never evicted anyone, and i dont intend to evict anyone. First of all, if we were to evict someone, we would have to pay 500, 600 an hour for attorneys fees while the tenant gets free attorneys fees. Thats one reason why, but i also like all my tenants, and i work with all my tenants, and i think most landlords do. No one likes to evict, and it seems like most landlords are working with tenants right now, whether its a forebearance or forgiving rent or partial payment. This is odd this is what most landlords do, and there are good landlords and bad landlords, and theres good tenants and theres bad tenants. But this ordinance would allow all bad tenants to abuse landlords, many of whom are mom and pop. We are not rich. We have to pay tremendous taxes. We have to conform with retrofits, get a loan to pay a retrofits. We have to pay for alarm services, tremendous taxes. Theres a lot of cost in becoming a landlord. [inaudible] many of my tenants, they own property, too, but they stay in the units because its rent controlled. One of my tenants has seven properties. Another tenant, he kept their apartment for 30 years. She owns several properties. I understand that, but this law is terrible. Its just it just theres no common sense in this law. You cant just say hey, no evictions at all. No one likes to evict, but this will just allow tenants to abuse the system. I understand that more renters are hoarders, and i understand thats why the politicians are just doing that. Were just constantly banging the landlords, trashing them. I urge you to vote no on this ordinance. Thank you. Clerk thank you. Next speaker, please. You have two minutes. Again, your line will be unmuted, and youll be notified. Hello, caller . Next speaker, please. Hello . Clerk hi, you have two minutes. Hi. My name is lola. I live in district 10, and ive been here all my life, over 60 years. I am a small Property Owner, which sounds like a terrible thing to be these days. I actually own one singlefamily home that i rent out, and im not in a situation where my tenant is in pain, but there is a huge disparity here among the small Property Owners, really small, especially singlefamily homeowners that live in the bayview, black and brown, that are not being recognized, and this ordinance needs to be a twopart ordinance for smaller rental owners for four or less units or singlefamily homes and not for the huge conglomerate units that were talking about in prestons district. Were just not talking about the city as a whole. This is absolutely a terrible, horrible disparity to the brown and black people in the bayview. As a matter of fact, were so unrepresented im not in the situation. Im getting on this line for the poor seniors that i know that live in this district that are not being represented, that know nothing of this meeting, have no way to get on this call, do not have email. It is so unfair, and the division that is being created amongst tenants and landlords is so intentional and so horrible for our government. I think its terrible what youre doing. Were so unrepresented in this neighborhood, as usual. Im going to go around and put papers in peoples mailboxes because they have no idea what youre doing to our seniors that are on fixed income and have no money, just like the tenants, as they claim, to take care of tenants. I yield my time. [please stand by] the one everybody has a point and i think that i do like the idea that there is something for the landlords because my best friend is a landlord lady in oakland and she is shes not going to be able to get rent because of the legislation there for the next few months. And shes not happy about it. But she feels that its the right thing and she has a small amount of savings that shes kept it in for this short amount of time. So i thank you for this thoughtful legislation. Good evening. Clerk thank you. Next caller, please. We have 80 listeners and 60 in queue. Im sorry, six in queue. Caller hello. Clerk hi, you have two minutes. Caller is it my turn . Clerk yes, sir. You have two minutes to speak. Caller hello, my name is jim hurley and im a fourth generation san franciscan and a Property Owner and theres been many good speakers on both sides. Im not a great speaker but i would like to weigh in on the side of owners and argue that we need a more balanced solution to the problem that considers owners as well as renters. Thank you. Clerk thank you. Next speaker, please. Youll have two minutes to speak and youll be prompted that your line is unmuted and you may begin. Caller hello. Thank you for staying so late and being so thoughtful in listening to our comments. My name is evie commandteer and a volunteer counselor at the Housing Advocacy committee and im here to just to add my support and gratitude to supervisor preston and to all three of you for hearing us. I am like a deer in the headlights, caught in the headlights. I keep thinking of this situation and i was in this situation and i was a kid, i would have been out on the street. High father would have lost his business and we would have lost our rent controlled apartments, the end. Now if the Apartment Association has found that nearly 97 of residential tenants paid their represent in may, so were just talking about a tiny thing, but, still, because i know that having grown up with Small Business that im there too and everybody hurts. Im feeling all of this pain. I was on hold a whole bunch of time but thank you again so very much. Thats all. Clerk thank you. Thank you for holding. We appreciate your patience. Next speaker, please. You have two minutes. Caller hello, hi. Can you hear me . Clerk yes, maam, yes, two minutes. Caller hi. I strongly oppose this ordinance. And so many people that i know, they want to call in to oppose this ordinance but they couldnt because they couldnt be, you know, understood very well. And so we will have a chinese translator and they could call, and where people call in chinese they could call in to kind of protest, please. And another thing that you said is that your system of indiscernible , and again you are kind of not drop the lie. So i say that you drop the lie indiscernible and you say pound 3 and Something Else and then people wouldnt miss up, right . So, here, my frustration for the meeting because many people are unrepresented and theyre very angry. Yeah, and that another thing is that so indiscernible they are really bad. They will firstly its very difficult to get. Second, is that is that second is that you hurt indiscernible and especially when you get a job, and not many people out there have jobs. indiscernible many people couldnt go back to their indiscernible and get another job. Its really bad. So they shouldnt do that. Thats what i wanted to say. Thank you. Clerk thank you. Thank you for your comments. And, yes, if you have already pressed star, 3, you only need to press it once and you will be on hold. If you press star, 3, youll be taken out of queue. So thank you for bringing that to our attention. So if you have already pressed star, 3, you dont need to press it again. Youre already on hold. So next speaker, please. Youll have two minutes and youll be prompted that your line has been unmuted. Caller hello, i am speaking. Hello . Clerk yes, you have two minutes. Caller okay, im sharman king and been in San Francisco for 40 years. Im a mentor of the better housing policy. Okay, im opposing i cannot support the measure or the ordinance at this time. Because it is really indiscernible and you cannot evict tenants. You can say you can raise the rent, and that means that they dont pay the rent and you have no way to go after this. indiscernible so i cannot support the ordinance at this portion. If you put a time limit on it like one year or two years, i think that as an owner we would support it. Because i need the rent to support my family. I dont have anything else. I dont have indiscernible but most tenants, if they lose their job they can apply for eidl and the government support. And as an owner we only collect rent and we cannot qualify for those government aid. So we need to have a solution and we need to also protect the tenant and the owners too. So the indiscernible with the permanent eviction is not right. So we need to modify it to a time limit. So currently i encourage all of you supervisors to vote no on this ordinance. Thank you. Clerk thank you for your comments. Next speaker, please. We have 77 listening and eight in the queue. Caller so this is amy. Im a small landlord. I dont think that anyone wants to go through the eviction process. Its the only enforceable tool that a landlord would have to collect and pay rent. And the things happened and the effect of the ordinance will be a lot of Housing Providers will not be able to collect rent that is owed. Tenants paying what they can without the ordinance, that is not clear it is not a lot of evictions. You should have the authority to to, you know, to enforce, you know, to under the governance order permanently to restrict the landlords ability to cover rent. So you should not it would not prohibit Housing Providers, well have financially been hurt by covid19 and from using california state law to enforce our right. No, no on this ordinance. Clerk thank you, thank you for your comments. Next speaker, please. Youll have two minutes and youll be notified when your line is unmuted. Caller hi. My name is kate tager and im a resident. And i work as an engineering major and im fortunate enough to be fully employed during this time. On the other hand, at a previous time in my life i have experienced homelessness myself and i have a firsthand understanding of the impact that housing instability can have on secure employment for ones self. And i support supervisor prestons ordinance. We have a crisis of people unable to pay their rent because of a crisis of unemployment. And housing and employ cent is linked. Theres barriers for people without housing when they seek employment. If we evict people who have lost employment due to the pandemic its harder to regain employment once the economy begins to recover. This would not own put hardship on our san franciscans but put down the recovery of all, landlords included. Landlords, yes. Even the smaller owners are asking to continue to forcibly pull water from a well that has already gone dry. San francisco, like all cities, is experiencing unprecedented unemployment levels. I put this question to the landlord whose want to evict their tenants. Where do you think that youll find People Better able to pay rent than your current tenants anyway . I feel for the smaller landlords that are personally impacted by this and i hope that we as a city can find a way to help them as well. But i do not think that it should be a blocker for the clear legislation that is a clearly needed next step among the many steps that we need to take. We need to increase stability for housing and employment stability as you cant have one without the other. The ability of Unemployed People to regain employment affects everyone and its a critical ingredient in that recovery. Thank you, i yield my time. Clerk thank you. Next speaker, please. Youll have two minutes to speak. Youll be prompted that your line is unmuted. We have 79 listeners with nine now in queue. Caller hi, i am aaron dean. Im a resident of San Francisco. And im calling to weigh in with support for supervisor preston and supervisor haneys ordinance. I think that were in dire times. And unprecedented times to say the least, and that requires unprecedented measures. I very much agree with the previous caller, you know, housing instability definitely weighs in on peoples minds and what have you, and ill cut it short. And i encourage all supervisors to weigh in, to vote yes on this ordinance. I yield my time. Thank you. Clerk thank you for your comments. Next speaker, please. Youll have two minutes to speak. Youll be notified that your line is unmuted. Caller hello . Clerk hi, caller, you have two minutes. Caller my name is noni richmond, im the president of the small Property Owners and an owner of five small rental units here in San Francisco in the western edition. I vigorously oppose the legislation, but i want to agree with something that one of the previous callers said. She said why would we want to evict good tenants . We dont want to evict good tenants. We want a chance to make arrangements with our tenants to repay the rent. Not to have them permanently not have to pay the rent. We want a chance to be good owners and Good Business people and this totally prevents it. In addition, the city doesnt have the Legal Authority to make this kind of restriction. Its violates the governments orders the governors order, and its illegal. Why are you doing this . We polled our members and we did not get one letter that said that we dont we want to evict our tenants. Some have worked with tenants and some have forgiven rent and lowered rent. We want to keep our good tenants but we want a chance to lift out some kind of a rental payment agreement because we have expenses too. Thank you very much. Clerk thank you for your comments. Next speaker, please. Youll have two minutes to speak and you will be prompted that your line is unmuted. Caller hello. Clerk hello, two minutes. Caller yes. My name is francis and im from San Francisco and i have a rental unit for elderly family members. We would like to have strict opposition to this proposal. It is a wrong assumption that the landlords must be financially more viable while tenants must be poor. Due to the pandemic the federal and the State Government are helping. A typical tenant owes over 4,000 for unemploy blunt and in a twofamily family its 9,000. If any tenant can prove that they cannot receive a subsidy, should the city should verify their financial needs and to provide assistance on a casebycase basis. Providing housing is a Serious Business and a profession. And forcing landlords to pay for the housing costs while tenants can live there for free is discrimination. If you dont want someone to live at your house for free, lets not indiscernible and everyone, landlords and tenants the city should make housing possible, not just the landlords. So please vote no to the proposal. We cannot afford to let anyone to stay at your house for free. The tenants should pay. This proposal is not helping the economy. It does not provide stable housing to anyone. So Housing Providers would not owe housing if no represent. They pay property taxes and if they have no income and no salary, indiscernible and the landlords are doing the same thing. Thank you so much for your time. Clerk we have 78 listeners and five in queue. Next speaker, please. Youll have two minutes and youll be notified that your line is unmuted and you may begin Public Comment. Caller hello. Clerk hello. You pay begin Public Comment. Caller i think so. Im Courtney Clarks hello, this is Courtney Clarkson. And i own a small fiveunit building in north beach which i have owned for about 25 years. I have great tenants, its not a fancy building. So far everybody is paying the rent. And i have do have a major problem with this proposed legislation and havinglinned to a number of listened to the number of callers over the last few hours its that all of the landlords are being pointed out as the bad guys. I have owned my building 25 years. All ive done is pour money into the building. I should be making so much money, but thats not the case between seismic and upgrades and things that the city says to do. If i had a problem with my tenants unable to pay the rent, i would work something out with them because i have great tenants and i get along with them very well. My problems are not with the people that i have rented to over the decades. My problems are with the city. It just never, ever stops. And i think that what you supervisors have to realize is that the way things are going, those of us who are very involved in our small buildings, were getting tired of all of this all of the hassles with the legislation and the city. And pretty soon youre going to have a city thats going to be these Huge Companies that own huge numbers of units. And could care less. So i really think that you need to reconsider how you are going about this. Not every tenant really should have a test, just like we have one for rent control. Not every person clerk the speakers time is expired. Thank you. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Youll have two minutes to speak. Youll be prompted that you have been unmuted. Caller hello. My name is peter rice and im the executive director of small Property Owners. No i also own rental property in the city. No landlord wants to go through the eviction process and landlords, particularly small Property Owners that live in the same building with their tenants, work out arrangements so that the tenant can pay half rent or whatever, and they can repay later on what they cant pay now. This with this measure, it makes it nearly impossible for small Property Owners to recoup unpaid rent because youre talking about living rent free in some cases if you want to game the system from march 2020 to potentially through september and beyond. And once youre four or five months behind on rent payment youll never make that up. So what youre really doing is youre setting up a system where people will default on rent payments and at some point there will be massive evictions. So might be able to sustain a 50 loss for one or two months and forfeit that rent but if you havent had rent paid for four months and the tenant said that the amount that i owe is so big, that i cant make that up, what youll do is evict. So, please, think about what youre doing here and remember that small Property Owners are working with their tenants, they live in the same building. They know their tenants, they want to keep them. Thank you very much. Clerk thank you. Next speaker, please. Caller hello. Clerk hello. You have two minutes. Caller hi. My name is carey and im a small Property Owner in district 3. I would like to voice my opposition to the legislation. I am empathetic to my renters and i have been working with the ones who have had trouble paying. But in a broader sense, if the tenants stop paying rent for an extended period of time i will e to pay mortgage and property taxes and maintenance and my family has been saving and sacrificing for many years. I understand covid and unemployment causes an inability to pay rent i for some but why this this be supported by landlords . Were covid affected too. And housing should be a human right and we should help renters to stay in their homes and it should be society as a whole who support those in need and its spread broadly and not just a small number of owners. Please, oppose this legislation. Clerk thank you, next speaker, please. You have two minutes and youll be prompted that your line is unmuted and you may begin. Caller hi, this is indiscernible in district 5. I would like to express extreme frustration with this system as i have been in and out of queue due to incomprehensible communications. I would like to have support for the ordinance. 100,000 San Francisco people are out of work. Thats incredible. We cant afford to lose all of the neighbors and the people that work in the places that we enjoy. And our friends and neighbors. The only reason that this legislation is at the board of supervisors is because the buck stops here. There are failures at the federal lest, and failures at the state level. San francisco has to take steps to protect our renters. Now this legislation only stops evictions and it does leave open the legislation that i know that they want to do which is to have some assistance for the small Property Owners. The big landlords and many of the small landlords have an option to get at least mortgage deferment. Hey, this is an international emergency. Its not a crime for landlords who want to make money, but it is a crime if you dont have any sensibility about everybody is going through this. And legislation works slowly, but lets say that the federal government and the state had failed and San Francisco doing its best right now with a series of legislations. Please support this legislation. Thank you. Clerk thank you for your comments. Next speaker, please. Youll have two minutes. Caller hi, thank you for letting me comment on this. My name is benjamin laird, a resident of district 5. A fourth generation san franciscan. I care deeply about this issue. As a family who does own a number of rental properties here in the city, i want to recognize that we do have some access to mortgage forbearance and deferment and being in a position of being a Property Owner and we also do have we do have some access to some national scaled programs that are there to support homeowners. Maybe not necessarily enough because we are all struggling this time. Im currently unemployed myself. I do not rely on rental income to live. But i want to say that i support this legislation and i think that this is also something that is going to significantly benefit longterm san franciscans and i agree with the previous callers who recognize that this disproportionately affects longterm residents of color in San Francisco. I think that its very, very important to support our residents of color here in San Francisco, given the disproportionate effect of displacement that they have experienced. Also i want to recognize too a lot of the small Property Owners speaking up against this and saying they dont want to evict their tenants. So i think that in this case there should be widespread support for this for the passage of this legislation too, because we do not want to evict people and we do want these protections in place against the larger landowners. The larger landlords that might make use of these tactics in the future to turn over clerk your time is over. Thank you. Thank you for your comments. We have 77 listeners and five now in queue. Next speaker, please. Caller my name is carlos kwan. Im a former executive director for the homeownership program. And im also the former chairman of the Chinese Real Estate Association and also have been living in San Francisco for 45 years. And i just want to point out really clearly that this legislation is extremely unfair to small Property Owners. We i have a unit in chinatown that i leased out to the Chinese Community indiscernible center and it helped out a family for the past three years. And you guys here are trying to take away our Property Rights and put the burden of all of this housing crisis on private Property Owners which is extremely unfair. And ill point out one thing and ill keep it clear and direct and short i strongly oppose this legislation. And i urge the board of supervisors to not approve it. Im done. Clerk thank you for your comments. Next speaker, please. Youll be notified that your land is unmuted and you may begin. You have two minutes to speak. Caller my name is andrew zachs and im an attorney here in San Francisco. I represent a number of Property Owner groups and individual Property Owners that have concerns about this legislation. In 1976, when California Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of rent control, it drew a very careful distinction between local ordinances that regulate substantively and those in the area of procedure. The ordinance that is before the committee today is a procedural device designed to block access to the unlawful detainer statutes for Property Owners who are not receiving rent. It is procedural. Therefore, the board of supervisors does not have authority to enact the ordinance which will deprive Property Owners the ability to access the unlawful detainer statutes and the court system. To the extent that the ordinance relies on the Emergency Services act and the emergency that we are all facing here in the world and in particularly in california, that authority is derived from the Emergency Services act and the governors order. The governors order provides authority to the board of supervisors and to the city to suspend the payment of rent during the period of emergency. It does not allow the city to pass an ordinance which deprives the Property Owners of rent and deprives the Property Owners of the procedure of the unlawful detainer statute. If it is enacted it will promptly be declared invalid and the city will paying the attorney fees. They should not enact this law and this community should make a negative recommendation to the board. Thank you. Clerk thank you. Next speaker. Caller hi. My name is michelle chan. I am a member indiscernible and we vote no to this bill. That is unfair to the landlord. We also have it really difficult to pay for the house loan. Subsidy pay, indiscernible house repairs, you know, the house repair is not cheap. So we need help also. So please vote no for this. Thank you. Clerk thank you, thank you for your comments. Next speaker, please. Youll have two minutes and you will be prompted that your line has been unmuted and you pay begin. Caller hello, my name is chuck hadamer and im the coowner of a Property Management company in San Francisco. I want to thank everyone on both sides for their comments and for the board of supervisors to stay to hear the comments. I have been a residence of bay area and we manage 1,500 Properties Across the bay area and including 200 in San Francisco. Our owners have one or two properties and many are firsttime landlords. This legislation is really just addressing a symptom and not the root cause of the issue. Its true that these are indeed dire times and 100,000 people are out of work in San Francisco. But through the pandemic we have maintained at least a 90 rent collection rate. For those residents financially impacted with covid we have went to rent dedeferment programs and many have reached out how to help. Theres zero evictions pending. People are working together and the resounding thing that we hear from our owners and those that have spoken today is how can we help our tenants so they stay in their home. Because they need that income. In june we had 85 of tenants renew their leases in a time of year that usually only sees 30 renewals. Smalltime owners represent the majority of the landlords in San Francisco and this legislation adds further stress on the landlord tenant relationship and it creates barriers for smalltime owners to own and operate properties in San Francisco. So i call upon the board of supervisors to at least consider small Property Owners in the legislation. These owners are a critical part of our community and the economy. Theyre not monsters. They are our neighbors, our community. 70 of our owners live within 10 miles of their properties and theyre an essential piece of the economic machine and Many Community services, residents, providers, rely on the income downstream. And, you know, i think that this is really just not addressing the root cause of the issue. And the legislation should be targeted more towards employment and helping people to get back on their feet. Clerk thank you for your comments. Operator, do we have any other callers in the queue . Chair, that completes the queue. Supervisor peskin thank you, madam clerk. And Public Comment is now closed. Thank you to all of the members of the public who have been with us since 1 30 this afternoon commenting on this first four items. In item number one. And i believe that supervisor safai indicated that he had some questions for mr. Collins prior to the opening of Public Comment. Supervisor safai, the floor is yours. Supervisor safai thank you, mr. Chair. Actually i didnt really have any questions for mr. Collins. I just said that id hold my comments until after Public Comment. So, please im going to just jump in and give my comments if thats okay. Supervisor peskin please. Supervisor safai i want to say that i appreciate all of the people that came out today. I know that this was an unusually long hearing but i think theres a lot of passion on both sides of the aisle. On both sides of the debate. And on both sides of the conversation. This is not an easy conversation to have right now. I think theres a lot of anxiety from both tenants and from landlords, particularly small Property Owners. And i think that theres a lot of confusion too. The emails that ive gotten from people had a lot of misinformation. And some of that misinformation included that people would just be living for free and just choosing not to pay rent. I had some really good conversations with mr. Zachs and i know that he represents the Apartment Association. I had good conversations with those representing tenants. And i think that the burden of proof in a situation of claiming a hardship will still be on the tenant. Someone is not going to just be able to walk in and say, thats it, i dont feel like paying rent. Lets be really clear if they did that, theyre jeopardizing their credit. Theyre jeopardizing being taken to court for breach of contract. So lets also be clear that the governor and the mayor of our city have been very clear about the requirement to not evict anyone during this pandemic. This is a real pandemic. I would never vilify a landlord, particularly a small Property Owner. My colleague on the board here, chair peskin, is a small Property Owner. He is a landlord. He has multiple tenants. We have other people on this body that have multiple tenants. I am currently a tenant. And i but i have also owned property. And thats okay to have those honest conversations. I think that whats going to happen in most situations is what ive heard from most responsible people is that payment plans will get worked out. And in the cases where someone has really lost their job and really able to produce documents, they will do that. And for anyone that tries to take advantage of the situation and mr. Zachs admitted this when i had a conversation with him, they will be taken to court. And they will be taken to court for breach of contract. And they will jep die jeopardizg their credit ruined if by some chance theyre not able to produce. And they were someone that was trying to take advantage. I also understand people that have called and said that they put their entire life savings into these properties and theyre worried that they may not have the ability to keep their mortgage going. And so thats a real concern. Thats why as supervisors stated that we talked months ago about the need to create a fund that would support both landlords that need it and tenants that might need some assistance. Los angeles put 100 million of their recovery money into this. We have put the majority of our recovery money into dealing with this pandemic and this homeless crisis that we have in our city. There will be another round of money coming from the federal government. And i am committed, i support the amendment that was made here, but i am committed to ensuring and working with our mayor and working with the leadership on this board that there is a robust fund to ensure that landlords can tap into this money, particularly small Property Owners. And tenants that need it. But lets be clear also that the governor extended the noneviction until the end of july. The courts have stated that they will not process any evictions for an additional 90 days until after the end of the emergency order. So what were talking about is theres going to be an extended period of time when no evictions will be happening, with or without this legislation. This legislation is coming forward to say when the emergency order is over and our crisis is over and we move back to a more stable economy and the emergency order is removed, that people cant be evicted for the nonpayment of rent during the time that this emergency order was in place. As stated by supervisor preston. And that time i believe that most landlords most tenants will work out payment plans and will have the ability or a pa payment will be adjusted during this time. I think that is an appropriate solution thats going to happen. So we also have our give to s. F. Fund. I know that funds have been given to that for housing security. I have made it clear to the administration and i made it clear to colleagues on the board that we need to prioritize ensuring that people can pay their rent and that landlords can get access to money during this time. Theres a small amount in there, 3 million or 4 million, but we have the ability to raise more and put more money in there. And we have ability in the next round of stimulus money to have this fund. And so i appreciate the robust debate today. I really appreciate all of the people that called in. And so i think that its time that we move this forward and i know that this is a hard conversation to have. But i thank everyone for their input today. Thank you, chair. Supervisor peskin thank you, supervisor safai. I actually had a number of things that i want to say, i wanted to say, but in the interest of time i will associate myself with the comments that supervisor safai just made. Which i thought that were pretty right on relative to what remedies still exist for landlords like myself, big or small. And with that, ill turn it over to supervisor preston. We have the amendments that are before this committee that the committee needs to adopt. So with that, supervisor preston. Supervisor preston thank you, chair peskin. And i want to thank everyone, everyone who called in on both sides of this issue and also to the chair and to supervisor safai for for this hearing and for listening to folks, to everyone. And i want to also recognize for the clerk and our staff who make all of this possible, i appreciate the extended period of time here. And i also appreciate chair peskin that she didnt shorten Public Comment and when we have to have a lengthy comment that is sometimes appropriate. But i think that its important for people to be heard on this. I think that as we can tell from some of 9 calls that the potential of, viblghtio evictioe issue for everyone. The potential revenue issues. And the situation facing small Property Owners. I think that folks needed to be heard and i appreciate you allowing us the time for that. I wont add much or comment much beyond but i did want to recognize that as one caller pointed out that right now the overwhelming majority close to 97 of tenants are paying their rent. And so this will there are certainly people who are not, who are in that 3 or by other estimates, you know, it can be 4 or 5 . But the reality right now is that even with an Eviction Moratorium that is temporary, that most tenants are continuing to pay their rent. They are working with landlords. And so, you know, theres nothing about this ordinance i just wanted to emphasize again that theres nothing about this ordinance that interferes with or prevents the payment plans from being worked out, that forgives the debt. What it does is take evictions off the table which is absolutely essential right now for those who are unable to pay rent. So with that, i would like to make a motion, chair peskin, to refer the item as amended to the full board as a Committee Report with recommendation for consideration tomorrow. Supervisor peskin thank you, supervisor peskin and we have to vote on the amendments themselves. Before we do that, let me also to add the following thing. That the words in this legislation are almost verbatim the words that were in a previous piece of legislation that i actually authored that went to the same committee and went to the full board and passed unanimously on two readings. And it is now law. As it relates to evictions and the use of unlawful detainers in single residence occupancy hotels. So it would be really impossible for this supervisor to vote against legislation that is virtually identical to the exact legislation that i brought to this committee a few weeks ago. With that on the motion to adopt the amendments earlier offered by supervisor preston, madam clerk, a roll call, please. Clerk on the motion to amend the legislation as stated by supervisor peskin, supervisor preston . Aye. Preston, aye. Supervisor safai . Aye. Safai, aye. Supervisor peskin . Peskin, aye. You have three ayes. Supervisor peskin and now we take up the second motion to send the item as amended with recommendation as a Committee Report to the full board of supervisors for hearing tomorrow, june 9, 2020. On that motion a roll call please, madam clerk. Clerk on the motion as stated, supervisor preston . Aye. Preston, aye. Supervisor safai. Safai, aye. Supervisor peskin. Peskin, aye. Supervisor peskin the item is approved. Subjecsent with recommendation a Committee Report. Next item, please. Clerk item 2 a resolution to approve the First Amendment to the freeway Maintenance Agreement between the city and county of california and the department of transportation to include the citys maintenance of bicycle lanes and paths and cycle tracks along alemany blfl at the freeway interchange at state routes 101 and 280. Members who wish to provide comment should call 14156550001, the access code is 415, 483, 6716 and press pound and pound again. If you havent done so, press star, 3, to line up to speak. If youre on hold, please do not press star 3, and continue to hold. Thank you. Supervisor peskin thank you. Any Public Comment on this item number 2 . Clerk mr. Chair, operations are checking to see if theres callers in queue. Clerk you have callers in the queue. Caller my name is paula and i have owned two buildings im sorry, maam. This is about a caltrans, this is a freeway Maintenance Agreement and this is not item number 1. This is about the freeway Maintenance Agreement with caltrans. Caller thats too bad because i have been waiting for five hours and 48 minutes. Thats really a shame. I would like to speak. I am very sorry. I am very sorry. We waited for the last Public Comment. I apologize. Next speaker, please. Caller i have been sitting on this call since clerk hello, caller, you have two minutes to speak. This is item number 2 about the freeway Maintenance Agreement. Caller i meant to call for the first item. And i am against the ordinance. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Caller indiscernible . Clerk hello, caller. You have two minutes to speak. Next speaker, please. This is the freeway Maintenance Agreement with caltrans at alemany boulevard. Clerk next caller, please. Thank you, chair, that completes the queue. Supervisor peskin seeing no other members of the public for comment on item 2, Public Comment is now closed. Supervisors preston and safai, do you have any questions or comments about this quite straightforward freeway Maintenance Agreement . If so ill call on mr. Spitz or mr. Laske. If not, one of you can make a motion to send this item with recommendation as a Committee Report to the full board of supervisors. Supervisor, i have one small amendment. Supervisor peskin okay. And that would be who is that . Jeremy spitz, public works. Supervisor peskin mr. Spitz, this is the first that i have heard about it. But tell us what the amendment is. Im sorry, supervisor, i emailed it last week. Supervisor peskin no, we have probably in the last 48 hours, each of us received i would say colleagues challenge me if i say at least 2,000 emails each. So problem. Page 1 and its to remove a blank for the caltrains encroachment supervisor peskin okay. So to say under state encroachment permit number and remove the blank . Under a state encroachment permit. Supervisor peskin so insert a umhmm. Supervisor peskin and then delete permit number and the blank and keep the semicolon and the and. Correct. And the clerk has a calm o copye amendment as well. Supervisor peskin okay, when will you make that future state encroachment permit that is not named or numbered a part of the file . I think that we and matt can jump in if were wrong, we should get it within a week or two. Supervisor peskin madam deputy City Attorney jepson, should we say which shall be incorporated subsequently. Miss jenson . Yes. Im sorry, my camera doesnt want to turn on. Supervisor peskin dont worry. But my microphone will. Supervisor peskin all we need is your brain and your voice. Well, you have both of those. Supervisor peskin do you think that that is worthwhile language . Yes, i think that works perfectly. Supervisor peskin okay. All right, well, then i will make that motion to include to strike the permit number blank and insert the word a under a state encroachment permit. And then add the language that i just mentioned which was which permit shall be made a part of the file by you can write it between now and tomorrow, kristen, when it goes to the full board. Yes, thats fine. Supervisor peskin i mean madam City Attorney jenson. So i make that motion and a roll call please, madam clerk. Clerk on the motion to amend as stated supervisor preston. Aye. Preston, aye. Supervisor safai. Aye. Safai, aye. Supervisor peskin. Aye. We have three ayes. Supervisor peskin and on the motion as amended we will send it as a Committee Report to the full board of supervisors with recommendation on that item. A roll call please. Clerk for the motion, supervisor peskin . Aye. Clerk preston, aye. Supervisor safai. Safai, aye. Supervisor peskin. Aye. Peskin aye. You have three ayes. Supervisor peskin next item please. Clerk item 3 is a resolution to adopt the hazards and Climate Resilience plan as the San Franciscos update to the 2014 local hazard mittgation plan. The members of the public who wish to provide Public Comment on this item should call 4156550001. And the code is 1454836716. And press pound and pound again. If you would like to be added to the queue to speak press star, 3, if you have already pressed star, 3, continue to hold and we will get to your Public Comment. Thank you. Supervisor peskin any Public Comment on item number 3 . Well open up the public comme comment. Clerk operations, are there any callers in the queue . Mr. Chair, there are no callers to wish to speak. Supervisor peskin Public Comment is now closed. And given the late hour let me commend to you colleagues and to members of the public this really incredible piece of work by the City Administrators Office. And the department of Emergency Management in collaboration with a number of departments. Let me thank our chief resiliency officer brian strong. This is nothing short of a horror story that ranges from earthquakes to tsunamis to Hazardous Materials to, yes, even pandemics, droughts, wildfires, urban fires and climate change, air quality, heat waves and im only naming a few, but more importantly it talks about our capacity and our strategies and it really is a brilliant piece of work. Mr. Strong, if you would like to or miss Mary Ellen Carol or miss kelly, if you would like to add to that in a handful of words, please do so. Yes, thank you very much, supervisor peskin. Supervisor peskin or miss johnston there too. I see miss johnston there. Her camera was pointed to the ceiling for the entire meeting for the last five hours. Go ahead, mr. Strong. Im happy to defer to miss johnston who is going to kick us off, but i think that we will be very judicious given the day that you guys have had so far. Supervisor peskin ive got 36 minutes to get to the store for dinner because they shut everything down at 8 00. So go ahead. I will make this quick, thank you chair peskin and safai and preston. Theres not much that i can add to that remark from chair peskin. I apologize, i am trying to conquer my indiscernible tendencies, but with respect to the plan itself, i would request on behalf of the city administrator kelly and the director Mary Ellen Carol and the resilience officer brian strong approval or recommendation on a recommendation to approve the hazard and Climate Resilience plan which is comprehensive update for 2014 local hazard miltgation plan. I think that supervisor peskin i did actually did read it. I actually did read it and i really like that picture of those people on the side of telegraph hill. But, go ahead. I want to highlight that this is impartial with some of our local state and federal requirements. And it really is focused on it demonstrates our support of creating a support of resilience and for our infrastructure and our communities and the face of increasing hazards and climate dangers. This is as you know much more comprehensive than the last plan and in that equity was a key principle and guiding principle in the development plan. Which also meant that we involved more stakeholders with the department of public hit and the Community Organizations and representatives of our most vulnerable populations. With that ill keep it short because i know that its a late evening and you have 36 minutes now so ill go ahead and defer to brian strong and director carol for responses. Director carol, did you want to say a couple words because you were instrumental in this effort . Yeah, thank you. And thank you, supervisors. I will be brief. So that the supervisor can get his dinner. But i do want to thank brian and team and the City Administrators Office for their leadership in taking this over. This is the first time that weve done these two documents together. And so, you know, we in addition it carries forward a lot of work that is already ongoing and the seismic safety plan, the Hazard Mitigation plan from 2014. The sea rise level plan and other efforts. And it really gives us a kind of a bunch of strategies to move forward. And i will say that we need this so that we can get federal reimbursements in the case that we experience an emergency. It just so happens that were in one right now and we spend a lot of money that we hope to recoup. So it is the reason that we all waited patiently for almost six hours for the opportunity to present this to you today. It is very important that we move it forward in a timely manner. And i could say that if we werent in the disaster that were in and if it wasnt so late i would talk a lot more about Climate Adaptation which is part of this. Before the current pandemic situation that we are in really the last two years that i have been in my position its been Climate Adaptation management that we have been dealing with nonstop. And i fully expect that will be another layer to our ongoing response over the summer and into the fall on top of all of the other things that were dealing with. So put your seatbelts on for that. Finally, i do want to, you know, my final comment is just about the equity component and also the focus on vulnerable populations. If weve learned nothing else over the last three months, we have learned that our assumptions were correct and our focus is and our focus is righteous on the most vulnerable and on equity because that is where we see the most impacts on these of these disasters, and certainly, what weve been experiencing under the situation of this pandemic, so i just want to thank all the effort that went into it. Well continue to do our work. We still have really, there was a lot of work that went into this, but this is a workbook. This was set of sorti of setting us for the record of wh forward of what we need to do. We could have an earthquake at any time. And Climate Adaptation management is going to continue to be a challenge for us no matter what else is going on. So i just want to thank everyone and, you know, appreciate your support of the work moving forward. Chair peskin thank you, miss carroll, and i really didnt want to give this short shrift, but i want to acknowledge the incredible work thats been done in the last six years since the previous plan was adopted, and i really do commend this to my colleagues and members of the public. This is a plan that were going to work with and evolve over the years ahead, not just to keep fema happy for reimbursements, but it is about resiliency as we experienced as unprecedented heat wave in 2017, as we are experiencing Sea Level Rise as the voters in San Francisco pass a 425 million seawall bond, so and all of that and more is set forth in the report, and it really is a sign of a sophisticated city, that we are looking at all those potential threats, figuring out our longterm strategies so that San Francisco is viable for another 100 years. Mr. Strong, anything you would like to add, sir . Yeah, no, just thank you for the comments. I think you were saying it better than i could. Just to add and we have a presentation that we could submit for the record. We dont have to go over it. I would just say this is a real collaborative event collaborative effort. We had 25 departments that participated. Lisa higby is on the line with me, lisa fisher is here from planning, as well, and Public Health, they couldnt be here today because of other circumstances, but they were also really great partners, and this sort of human side was a real first in doing this. We considered people as an asset. We were looking at how hazards and vulnerabilities would affect people and communities and this plan would reflect that. We also have created a dashboard where you can go online, and you can look at the 98 different strategies, and you can sort them whether its by community resilience, infrastructure resilient resilient infrastructure or resilient buildings, you can look at it by department, you with look at the type you can look at it by the type of activities that governments are doing. We spent time with organizations that represent vulnerable communities in San Francisco and stakeholders. A lot of what we heard was a desire for communities to have all this information. They dont expect us to have all the answers, but they want to have this information. They want to be aware of the types of hazards that theyre facing, and certainly, they want to make sure that the city is doing something about this, as well, so certainly, this is the first step in making a more resilie resilient San Francisco. Chair peskin thank you, mr. Strong. This document has knitted all sorts of things that have been out there for a long time. The climate stratly actually started evolving in the 1990s through the department of the environment. The Tall Building initiative which lived for a while and was actually put on the shelf i think i can blame mayor brown for that but actually came off the shelf from mayorly, and got a lot of attention after the Millennium Tower started sinking and tilting. As you can tell, this is the kind of stuff that i really like and get into, and ive obviously really sunk my teeth into. I apologize that we dont have time to do the slide deck, but this is work that is going very fully noticed by this supervisor and hopefully the public and other members of this committee and the board of supervisors. With that, supervisors preston or safai, any comments or questions . Seeing none, supervisor preston, would you like to make a motion to send this to the full board with positive recommendation . Supervisor preston so moved. Chair peskin on that item, madam clerk, a roll call, please. Clerk on the motion as moved by supervisor preston [roll call] clerk you have three ayes. Chair peskin okay. The motion passes. Thank you for your participation and sorry for your presentations trunkated. Madam clerk, can you call item 4 . Clerk yes. [agenda item read]. Clerk members of the public who wish to provide comment on this item should call 4156550001. Enter the access code, and press pound, and pound again. Please press star and then three to be added to the queue for item number 4. Chair peskin supervisor safai . Supervisor safai thank you, jesus i mean, thank you, supervisor peskin, for calling the item. I was trying to sneak before you, but supervisor preston, you owe me dinner on another day. Im excited to speak in support of the recommendation for the Historic Preservation of the royal baking. Many consider the building a remnant of a strong italian heritage, tracing its roots back to the 30s, when the sorrento macaroni factory moved in. Although the times have changed, the Strong Community remains. The original founders of the Royal Baking Company and i met the individual that married into the family, i gave him a certificate, the gentleman. He turned 100 years old last spring, and so its our board of supervisors commendation right next to a commendation from the fopope, from the vatican. And i man did not look like he was the man did you look like he was over the age of 70. As a matter of fact, he says, my son lives down stairs. I said, how old is your son . He said hes 75. The Royal Baking Company, supervisor, has its roots in your district, and it moved to the excelsior in the 70s, and so were super excited. We dont often have the opportunity to landmark buildings. This is a beautiful example of art deco, and were excited to have this before us today. Just as a side note, the building did go up for sale recently, and we were able to get into the disclosures prior to prior to the sale that this process was moving forward, so anyone that was going to buy this property would know that we were proceeding with this without prejudice, and whoever would buy the property would have the idea that we thought that this was an important part. And then finally, we believe that the Royal Baking Company we want to give them legacy status, and were moving forward on that process, as well. So we certainly hope that you would support this. Theres only currently three Historic Sites in district 11, and id be honored for the Royal Baking Company to be the fourth. Thank you. Chair peskin thank you, supervisor safai, and i was very pleased to be a cosponsor precisely because of the link between the communities of north beach and excelsior that are very nicely set forth in the case report, which is worth reading. Is there anybody who wants to make a brief presentation from the department of city planning . Ms. Mcmillan mr. Sucre, or mr. Starr . I would like to make a brief presentation. Chair peskin ms. Mcmillan, please proceed. The building is located on Mission Street in the excelsior neighborhood, and the h. P. C. Unanimously voted to support designation on may 6, 2020. The Royal Baking Company building is significant for its relationship with the Italian American community, and its significant for its association with San Franciscos important 20th century macaroni and bread pakking city. The period of significance for the building is 1935, and this is encompassed in the buildings construction. The date also reflects the establishment of both the sorren sorre sorrento Macaroni Company and the breed baking industry. H. P. C. Recommends landmark designation. That concludes my presentation, and im happy to answer any questions. Chair peskin thank you so much, ms. Mcmillan. If theres no comments on this item, why dont we see if theres any Public Comment on item number 4. Clerk mr. Chair, operations is checking to see if theres any callers in the queue. Operator yes, i have one caller in the queue. Chair peskin please proceed. Thank you. Hello. I wanted to say thank you chair peskin im sorry, maam. That was item number 1 on the calendar. This is item number 4, landmark designation, so im sorry, but Public Comment on item number 1 is closed. Are there any other speakers on item number 4 . Operator mr. Chair, that completes the queue. Chair peskin Public Comment is now closed. Supervisor safai, would you like to make a motion to send this item with positive recommendation to the full board . Supervisor safai what you just said. Chair peskin roll call, please. Clerk on the motion as stated by supervisor peskin [roll call] clerk you have three ayes. Chair peskin okay. The motion passes, and the Land Use Committee is adjourned, and ive got 18 minutes to get dinner. Supervisor safai me, too. Good luck. Chair peskin okay. Good night, everybody. Now in t of essential workers and whats available. What we plan to have this summer and what people can do to either sign up or what other programs to do to prepare under the new guideline for the programs that they want to make available to people. So, lets get started. Phil, you we hit the ball running, both you and maria su got together because we knew the schools were going to close. But we also knew that there was an essential workforce out there. People who were driving muni, people who were working at hospitals. They had children. They needed child care. They were concerned about taking their children to their elderly parents. They couldnt leave them at home. Tell us a little bit about the program that you established that is available currently and will potentially be extended once programming starts for june 15 during the summer. Thank you, mayor. Yeah. You asked us as soon as the schools closed to start thinking about our kids and working families, particularly our Health Care Workers and First Responders and people who were needed to help in the citys response. And so the department of children, youth and family and Recreation Park Department are working closely together under the guidance of department of Public Health, set up an emergency child care system that is now in its 12th week. We, over time, served over 475 kids, 19,000 hours of child care offered during that time and we served over 4,000 meals at over 25 different sites. The program runs between 6 30 in the morning and 7 30 p. M. And kids have been involved in Distance Learning and a little bit of recreation and its really been, you know, wasnt what we were used to doing and we had to stand it up pretty quickly, but it has been an amazing experience and im really grateful for my partner in runing this thing, maria, and the department of youth and family who have been terrific. And i want to just add because i know that, you know, sadly, you had these kids and these pods with limited number of social distancing. These are kids coming together on a regular basis. Something similar to what were going to be doing this summer. And, unfortunately, there have been people who have made nasty comments or complained or even yelled at, you know, the kids. And so what i want to say to people is to back off and mind your own business and to leave kids alone. Because at the end of the day, these are kids whose family members are putting their lives on the line to help support this city. So, i cant reiterate enough that its important that folks really just stay in their lane, mind your own business. Were providing essential service. And we want to extend this and make this available to more kids. So, lets talk a little bit about phil, can you just talk a little bit about june 15 . Sure. Were going start programming and were going to extend the number of kids that were able to serve. Not just in our park system, but our overall Summer Program so i want you, phil, to touch on what will be available for our park system, both for our young people and our teenagers and then were going to jump into maria su to talk about programming in general. Sure. So, our child care operation its summer, and child care was intended to operate while during the school year while the School System when the School System was closed and what families and kids are used to during the summer is camp. Youre right. The truth of the matter, it will look somewhat similar in that were going to have pods of 12, but beginning june 15, rec and park between rec and park t private sector camp providers and our nonprofit providers we expect that there will be over 200 different camps available to kids can. We are going to prioritize. Kids of parents who are working in essential businesses, who are part of the citys response, who are, you know, in allowable businesses and, frankly t kids who need us the most right now. Many of our kids in the city have been without their coaches and mentors for going on 10 weeks and we want to reengage and make sure that these kids, above all else, have something to do this summer. So, starting june 15, camp providers will be allowed to operate. Theyre going to need to certify that theyre going to comply with the health order and guidance coming out of Public Health, which means kids still need to be in pods of 12 for older kids. The minimum session for camp providers will be three weeks and the boll rationale behind that is to keep kids from normally during a normal summer kids go to one week of this camp and one week of another camp and the health and our Public Health officials have asked us to keep kids together in a consistent pod. So well have three threeweek sessions beginning june 15. At rec and park, were planning over 25 different camps. We expect there to be another 40 to 50 private camp providers operating in our park system. I believe that maria is estimating nearly 100 nonprofit camp providers will operate around the city and then there are some other muscle private providers that will be operating on, you know, nonpark property in different spaces. Were going to start working with camp providers as quickly as possible, right after were done speaking with you. And for our camps, for rec and park camps, well begin priority registration on may 26 for all of the participants that are currently in our Emergency Child Care Program and our kids in our Scholarship Program who are a little bit more vulnerable and who really, really need us. Were going reach out to those populations first and then citywide, registration for rec and park camps will begin on june 6. All of this information will be laid out on the department of children, youth and familys website, dcyf cares. Org. And ill turn it over to maria to talk about the other providers and program staffing. Thank you, phil. Thank you, mayor, for this opportunity to share with our residents of the work that were doing right now. So, like the mayor shared, we are in the process of expanding the opportunities for families, particularly for summer. Were really excited about this because, as a parent myself who has two children, this is going to be great opportunity for our young our young people to go out there and engage with others and just really address the social isolation issues that we know is happening in our families right now. So dcyf is really excited to be partnering with rec and parks and the rest of our summer providers in the city to stand up all of these programs for the dcyfspecific agencies, which are the nonprofit agencies, that our department provides supports to, we are going to be working with them to open up camps and programs that they will then be made available for all of our families. We are looking at around 100 programs that will be available for families starting june 15. We are asking all of our nonprofit agencies to follow Health Guidelines, which still has shared, restrictive groups of young people in consistent threeweek programming at a minimum. We will also put on our website, dcyf. Org care. More information around the health order, around the drexives and the guidelines, with how private camps are also fulfill all of those requirements and then document that they are going to open up. So look for that website to go live actually the website is live now. But look for the forms to go live soon. Great. And over time, mayor, i think were going to try to inventory try to provide parents with as much information as we can about all of the camp opportunities because we have to think about it as a network this summer because of the Health Guidelines. So, we hope to be able to have a list and some reference materials for not just rec and park camps, but all of the private camps happening around the city, too. Yeah. And i want to touch a little bit because, you know, child care has been important because we have allowed that to continue for essential workers. Can you talk a little bit, maria, what we can expect as it relates to the 0 to 5 age group and what might be available during the summer . Yes. So, were really excited that this new health order that you have authorized with our Health Department to allow the expansion of Child Care Services for more families. So, there are child care programs for children 0 to 5 right now that are providing services for our essential workers and other allowable businesses. Under this new health order, we are now opening that opportunity for more families. We have hear that there are families out there who are working, who need care, who really, really need care for their children. And for children to need to need opportunities to be with their friends. So, this health order will allow more families to have access to these slots, these child care slots. I do want to caution folks that we are still following Health Guidelines and so the slots are going to be limited. We are restricted to a Smaller Group of children per site. So i just want to set expectations for everyone that its not just usual child care as we remember how it was a year ago. Yeah. And i do think its great that, you know, this is providing an opportunity for kids to come together. So were talking about pods of 12 within the course of a summer camp or preschool or in other arenas so that not only can kids can parents get to work, but also it gives these children an tounlts interact with one another because im sure, especially if it is a child who doesnt have any siblings, to be able to play with another kid was like i know everything for me as a kid and i just feel so awful that these kids cant go out there and enjoy one another. This is an opportunity and a great opportunity. But i also, sadly, know it is a very limited opportunity. But do want to touch on, you know, teenagers because i know one of things that happens often times they are always left out. So i am commited to making sure that opportunities for all is available so that we have paid internships for kids during the summer. And that we make that available, especially for our teenagers. Because, you know, already theyre missing their graduations and activities and events. And we want to make sure that they have a productive summer as well and theyre not left out. So, maria, make you can touch on what might be happening with opportunities for all and i know that with rec and park, we have a number of teens that are going to be working and helping with these camps during summer. Lets talk a little bit about, you know, how kids who are teenagers can sign up for some of the programs. Thank you, mayor. So actually a lot of our programs are doing a lot of connections to young people now but theyre doing it remotely. Theyre doing a lot of wellness checks and followup on what academic support these young people need. So, once again with this health order, were now allowed to have facetoface and inperson connections with these young people. So, were going to work closely with our nonprofit agencies to help young people connect to internship opportunities or actual Job Opportunities at some of these Summer Programs or at offices that are slowly opening up. So, theres great opportunities for private sector folks who are now interested who are opening up and would be interested in being a mentor for a young person this summer. That would be amazing. However, if that is not available, our young people are actually engaging in projectbased learning right now. So a lot of our young people in our Workforce Program will be doing Small Projects that are that is remote for the agencis that theyre assigned to. There will be engagement but it is so much better if the engagement is in person and not remote. I do how do they sign up . Like a teenager that wants to participate and have access to a paid internship . For now, were directing everyone to go to dcyf. Org care so they can find out whats available in the community and make sections there. I also do want to say that, for young people and for families who are struggling right now because there are young people and familis who are struggling right now we do have a website that is available and under the mayors leadership, she wanted to Prioritize Mental Health services for families and for our essential workers and other service providers. For those who are struggling and who need support, please go to fieldSan Francisco. Org to learn more about different resources for parents, for young people and for adults and service providers. And also can we call 311 and be referred if we dont have access to the internet . Yes. Well definitely make sure that thats possible. Great. Great. We want to make it as easy for people as possible because i know sometimes you jump on a website and trying to figure it out or if you dont have Internet Access but want to ma you are that your friend knows that this might be available for their family. Talk about what some of the teens are going to be doing in your program this summer. Sure. For the last 607 years, San Francisco has had a program called workreation, where we actually fund teenagers, kids between the ages of 14 and 17 to work in our camps. And because of your leadership and focus on getting these camps opened safely and getting kids an experience, were hiring approximately 200 kid this is summer that will be counselors in the camps that we just talked about. I also think there is an amazing opportunity, mayor, for those private camp providers that want to operate this summer to hire teenagers. Heres why. The health order and the Health Guidance requires a minimum of two staff for every pod of 12 kids. And for private camp providers used to operating with a ton of kids and a few staff, you wont able to do that this year and staff wont be able to move around between pods during the camp session. For private camps to operate, they need to be very wellstaffed and we highly, highly recommend that private camp providers hire teenagers to help and provide some support in making sure that your camps operate safely and smoothly and gives these kids a great experience and opportunity to make some money. I want to provide an example because, for example, we have been providing a camp at well, i guess it is called a camp, i dont know what it is called, but we have been providing support for young people whose families are essential workers at Hamilton Rec Center. So Hamilton Rec Center has several rooms that could be used. So, i know that the plan is there is going to be probably two or three pods of 12. And each of those pods have their own rooms and their own activities around their rooms and they are also able to go outside and enjoy the field but not in the same pod, although they have their workers that are assigned to their pods. So, it provides for more opportunity to support more young people. So, the good news is even when theyre in these situations, theyre social distancing, but you know how it is when youre a kid and youre out playing, most likely youre going to somehow have some interaction where you might touch or be next to each other. So that is really why the importance of keeping these pods to what they are is significant in preventing the spread of the virus and giving these kids a chance to have their community of people to hang out with. Yeah. I think that is what were going for. It is super important for kids to first of all get outside and reengage and, yes, there will be indoor spaces. But a lot more emphasis on being outside this summer for children. And as you know, mayor, for them to be together and hang out and a under the Health Guidance to your very early point for those who are concerned about the health of our children, under the Health Guidance, kids within the same pod can play sports. They can do certain activities. So, k they play basketball together . Can they together, within the same pod. They can do those activities. And that is why this whole pod concept is very important. Our Public Health officials have been focused on minimizing risk. It is impossible to eliminate it 100 . But minimizing it. And that is the whole premise of these long threeweek sessions and these pods of 12. Depending upon which spaces a camp uses a camp may be able to have only one pod of 12 kids but may be able to have two pods or even three pods. As you know in hamilton or season seth rec center where the richmond or jolie, some of our buildings have multiple spaces, some schools where camps might operate have have multiple spaces. And then weve got the best park system in the country. So, we have plenty of outdoor spaces as well. For each pod, each pod requires a minimum of two staff people and staff cannot circulate between pods. So, again, for all you private camp providers out there, hire kids to help you this summer. All right. Well thank you all so much for the insight. Im sure a lot of parents are excited about this. I am hopeful that, you know, some of the in addition to the private the public camps that well provide with rec and park and a number of rec centers and nonprofit partners will be able to provide a sufficient number of locations within the Public Sector and hopefully in combination with the private sector, many of our kids can have an enjoyable, effective, fun summer. So, we appreciate that and for more information, make sure that we reach out to department of children youth and families on the website or call 311 and before we wrap it up, i do want to talk a little bit about this weekend because its memorial day weekend and typically everyone first of all, the weather in San Francisco, even today, is gorgeous. And most of the time people want to go out and have barbecues and hang out with friends and family and i really like the idea of what you did in terms of circles in park to make it clear like you have to stay away from each other. We want to be next to each other so bad. But at the same time, were doing so well. We still see the numbers of infections going up. But we see the number of hospitalizations going down, the number of those who are in i. C. U. Going down. San francisco is doing well. And the last thing we want to do is get too comfortable and all of a sudden go backwards so we still need people to keep their distance. We still need people to wear masks. We still need people to wash their hands regularly wash your hands but phil, tell us a little bit about what we can expect with the parks this weekend because we are, as much as we know people would want to use the parks, well be out in force regulating during memorial day weekend. Again, we dont want to shut down any parks but if it comes down to that point where things are out of control and arent following the guidelines, we wont have a choice. We really need people to be on their absolute best behavior. So, tell us about what we can expect with our parks this weekend. Sure. I mean, mayor, you covered it perfectly, which is that, look, our parks are super important right now. They are the one place where people can get outside, get some exercise, connect with nature and you have been amazing at making sure that these spaces are open and accessible. But for them to stay open and accessible, people need to do the right thing and over the last 10, 11 weeks, most people have been. But we need to focus and not ease up so you can be outside but you have to socially distance. We still recommend that you wear a mask. No partying, you know, no big events, no big picnics. Just enjoy nature and enjoy a little time with your own immediate family or your own roommates. We will have park ranger, San Francisco police department, police officers. Well have sheriffs cadets, fire cadets, Police Cadets and the neighborhood Emergency Response team, all doing education and outreach. There are over 1500 signs in all of our parks indicating what you can and cant do. Just do the right thing so we dont put the mayor in a position where she needs to take more drastic action. It is amazing, mayor, in a lot of cities just threw their hands up and say, oh, parks closed because we dont want to deal with it. You havent done that. Youve kept parks open for people. So, you know, were all asking the public to do the right thing this weekend. The weather will be nice. You will want to get outside. If you have to get in a car, its too far. So go to your neighborhood park, enjoy it. But socially distance. If youre deloris or jackson or the marina green or washington square, weve offered a little bit of popup behavioral art to inspire you to claim your own space. That is the circles that are in some of the parks. And, you know, theyre intended to be joyous and inspirational, but intended to remind everyone that we need to be mindful as we continue to fight this virus. And i just want to say that please dont get offended if, you know, our park rangers or someone walks up to you and asks you, you know, are you guys in the same household just to, you know, make sure that people are following these orders. We have a responsibility. And the other thing is, if youre not the police, then please dont act like youre the police. We dont need you to walk and regulate and tell other people what to do because that creates more drama. It creates more tension. So we are doing the very best we can. We want to make this park and open Space Available to you because we know how challenging this has been. For the most part, san franciscans have followed the order and we are so fortunate that we have amazing residents in the city who are taking this seriously, even though not everyone is complying which has made life difficult in some respects. But please let us deal with that. Were doing our very best to try and reduce this curve to the point of it being nonexistence because i know how badly we want to get back to being out there, to going to work and allowing kids to play. But the fact is coronavirus is with us for some time. It is not about getting back completely to normal. Its about adjusting to our new normal in a responsible way. It is going to take time. Its going to take ai, patience. We appreciate everyone for what you continue to do to help San Francisco be a leader in this effort. Thank you, phil ginsburg, thank you, maria su for your insight. For more information call 311. I know there might be a lot of questions also about the schools and other things. Were happy to continue these conversations based on your feedback. Based on your questions. Because many of us are doing the very best we can. This is not like anything any of us have ever expected. So, were all in this together. Were going to get through this together and that requires us to continue to be patient, get information to you as soon as it is available and just really try to come together, lift one another up, enjoy the memorial day weekend. And thank you all so much for your cooperation. Have a great weekend and well see you next week. Hi. My name is carmen chiu, San Franciscos elected assessor. When i meet with seniors in the community, theyre thinking about the future. Some want to down size or move to a new neighborhood thats closer to family, but they also worry that making such a change will increase their property taxes. Thats why i want to share with you a property tax saving program called proposition 60. So how does this work . Prop 60 was passed in 1986 to allow seniors who are 55 years and older to keep their prop 13 value, even when they move into a new home. Under prop 13 law, property growth is limited to 2 growth a year. But when ownership changes the law requires that we reassess the value to new market value. Compared to your existing home, which was benefited from the which has benefited from the prop 13 growth limit on taxable value, the new limit on the replacement home would likely be higher. Thats where prop 60 comes in. Prop 60 recognizes that seniors on fixed income may not be able to afford higher taxes so it allows them to carryover their existing prop 13 value to their new home which means seniors can continue to pay their prop 13 tax values as if they had never moved. Remember, the prop 60 is a one time tax benefit, and the Property Value must be equal to or below around your replacement home. If you plan to purchase your new home before selling your existing home, please make sure that your new home is at the same price or cheaper than your existing home. This means that if your existing home is worth 1 million in market value, your new home must be 1 million or below. If youre looking to purchase and sell within a year, were you nur home must not be at a value that is worth more than 105 of your exist egging home. Which means if you sell your old home for 1 million, and you buy a home within one year, your new home should not be worth more than 1. 15 million. If you sell your existing home at 1 million and buy a replacement between year one and two, it should be no more than 1. 1 million. Know that your ability to participate in this Program Expires after two years. You will not be able to receive prop 60 tax benefits if you cannot make the purchase within two years. So benefit from this tax savings program, you have to apply. Just download the prop 60 form from our website and submit it to our office. For more, visit our website, sfassessor. Org, announcer sfgov tv. San francisco government television