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