Legislation i see stationss t is core and central thats no brainer and insurance for anyone that could be affected by behavior in my units this legislation does not peers the vail of the existing leases or the agreements already in place a huge thing from my constituents i have a lot of people that are home sharers and not around the enforcement so if theres an issue or complaint if someone is looking at this we dont leave to the nuisance laws and quite frankly people dont have their faith so permitting this behavior our Planning Department is on board i know theyre to work on this is incredibly important and supervisor wiener thanksgiving thanks to him Going Forward with a mechanism that will go along with that i like like supervisor breed have two minor amendments right now i know theres a lot of discussion around private right of action in the current form of the lvenlths theres a limited scope to some of the ideas ive heard flooded around with that a Interested Party on page 12 id like to include in that definition a Building Owner and also to clarify that the homeowners the definition the Homeowner Association of the building in which a tourist of trinity use to our it applies to not only the unit by a neighborhood hoa that has jurisdiction or participation with that unit or home that be included as well those are my two meddles i look forward to resuming that conversation. Thank you merlin from our City Attorneys office. Supervisor farrell has an amendment on the floor is there a second supervisor wiener and supervisor yee. Thank you, colleagues today, i maybe introducing two different amendments and i have to say weve had long discussions about that have involved many members of any district and ran into a discussion that touches apple fundamental tops like what cities will do what a city should be doing in terms of how we want to live in that whats itself legacy of our city zoning lauded and rights that Property Owners have in their own home its been an extensive conversation that has involved many different people from different areas of the city with very different opinions on this matter many districts residents have written to me and called and come out to testify as the mrabs and the Land Use Commission i have similar concerns as those expressed by some of the constituents that you have all heard from id like to propose as many of my constituents have requested that we exclude shortterm rentals in rh1 and rhd d Zoning Districts so thats any first request for amendment and. Supervisor yee would i like us to move on that first. So supervisor yee has a motion that on the floor of rh1 and rhd seeing none, that amendment will not be adapted necklaces motion. So this Second Amendment im asking for would be again trying to address some of the issues of any compluts at the same time providing compromises so that we can move forward with the legislation in an effort to will this singlefamily home neighborhoods id like to see colleagues if you could support an amendment that limits shortterm rentals in rh1 d neighborhood to 90 days of hosted rentals only for 50 percent of the bedrooms with the 90 cap applying to the entire property and not single bedrooms this is a sensible compromise that guarantees that the Property Owners be also present in case of the shortterm rentals limiting the singlefamily homes in the neighborhood i hope you vote for that. U this supervisor yee to limit shortterm rentals and rh1 d neighborhoods is there a second supervisor mar seconded all right. Any further amendments supervisor yee. That will be all for today. Supervisor wiener. Thank you, madam chair and i too want to thank president chiu and his staff particularly Amy Katie Tang for mayor numerous memoriam of work this is in a lot of ways one of the thank less are issues the views around it have insdenl technology there are ships passing in the night not only to make everyone happy not to make really some people extremely unhappy no matter what you do so i want to thank president chiu in his work for taking on this issue its an important initial or issue to take on i said this at land use at our 12 or 13 hours of work the status quo is not working right now we know the entire system of home sharing it happening in the shadows theres this or no o oversight no perimeters its technically all illegal but there is little enforcement because of the lack the resources and its time to bring it out of the shadows even some would like it to remain entirely illegal the jean i didnt say out of the bottle in terms of this happening in our city and thousands of people are participating in home sharing and many are relying on it in terms of their economic wellbeing and survival it would not be good to freehand its not there when in reality it is i think its an important step to bring it into the daylight and put perimeters around it and no matter what kind of regulatory scheme it would not go far enough and too far for some it strikes a reasonable balance number one that we dont want to have those unite that are used just four shortterm rentals that can only implies the Housing Stock whether its an rental unit theres been a shortterm rental or kept vacant or more and more investors are purchasing singlefamily homes with the intent of using them for shortterm rentals that is a problem we dont want that to happen we want people to have neighbors and we dont want blocks to be turning into Hotel District but we also, if you clamp down too much youll be hurting a lot of people so the legislation i think smartly gishdz between the non hosted rentals where the owner is not there and host when the owner is there you have to live in our home 9 months out of the year and as long as your living there you can rent out a bedroom and if youre away you can rent it out there as well one can argue in the morning two months or more than 4 months theres no magic to my of this but in my view the balance this president chiu has struck is a reasonable one and worthy of support i know theres been discussion about the hosted rentals to place a limit when the owner are resident of the home is present and running renting out a Spare Bedroom ive not been a supporter of the non hosted rentals and i think unfortunately, weve had those hearings a lot of people that are engaging and dismissed them as youre being put up by one the home sharers home sharing companies but apart from the discussions colleagues ive had many, many conversations with the residents of any district over the past several years and many people that absolutely rely on the income that they derive from the hosted rentals in order to make the end meet i cant tell you people that live in the neighborhood or long time residents or retired on fixed incomes that allows them to put a new roof or single parent to pay the mortgage or send their kids to college it is easy to be submittal off those claims but theyre real a lot of people in the city are struggling right now despite our connective boom struggling to make end meet we need to are careful in terms of effort to deprive the people of the ability to make ends meet and i think this is a reasonable approach i also want to what like to putdown two amendments on the table and i want to briefly say one is a technical clear up legislation suggested by the Planning Department around the annual or the first adjustment to fees that will happen in 6 months we made a few different amendments to clean up this in committee and my department has requested one more minor tweak to give them some flexibility in terms of the annual adjustment and the second im very sensitive to some of the concerns that supervisor yee has raised that apply to his district and the rh1 d and i wanted to sort add on an additional idea in the form man amendment we have a number of the Homeland Security associations with cc rs and in Committee Supervisor farrell and i put an amendment the landlord will receive automatic notification for homeowners associations in rh1 d district theyll receive automatic noevenths when a registry occurs so an additional idea around rh1 d district i appreciate that supervisor yee is working with the constituents and taxing their needs taking that into account. Supervisor wiener has two amendments one is a technical adjustment for feeds seshthd by supervisor farrell on the second requiring an automatic notification for landlord and supervisor mar. Thank you, mr. Chair colleagues, i said to introduce to simply amendments before i do i want to say meetings with people from my district and others around the city has been and opening and meeting are airbnb as the company was started to explode now a 10 billion Company Airbnb had my interests from several years ago im appreciative that supervisor chiu and others in the Land Use Commission and the Planning Department and the Planning Commission have at an on im yes, maam authentic towards the shortterm rental tourist rental advocates trying to subsidize being pushed out with displacement and the explosion of housing costs in the city i have empathy for people whether or not you call users shortterm rentals or i like to say short time rental hosts if or in that way at times, i of the followed around by Farmers Market in my district by people advocating for really open market use of this kind tourist rentals like cult like in their approach i was uncomfortable by that level of advocacy and pushness so im mixed in how im addressing this any overarching concern as a policymaker as president chiu raised another colleagues is the impact of how how much regulation we should have and how much government regulation we should have i see on over oracle relationship with the marketing having a potentially horrible stock of Housing Stock and even our housing costs i see a potential floodgate opening up of hotel uses in residential areas in many parts of city im sensitive to issues that others will bring up in a moment i feel strongly like the Broad Coalition of neighborhood and community, tenants and labor that are advocating for a 90 day cap thats for host and unhosted i feel Stock Exchange about that cap should be placed otherwise wooik well see more of the floodgate opened for residential units used as hotel unit and strongly has others have raised that we need a strong right of action thats competed this new quote home sharing is opening up more hotel unit to flush in areas without enough regulation and monitoring as well lastly i worry if were not careful and i know david chiu has done his best with the hours and hours of meeting i worry if were not stronger in the city to hold account the airbnb to pay its back taxed of two years and other efforts to hold them account recalling well see another erosion of our Housing Stock and see the community and neighborhoods we love change before our eyes even more than that getting that off any chest im going to give my two amendments the first involves city subsidized housing i know exclude from airbnb and b o sharing and f o and the low market rate units id like to propose that and is that the legislation as currently written despite the proposed amendments ive benedictions or mentioned it allows san franciscans receiving the benefits for permanent Affordable Housing or subsidized first time homeowners to cash northbound on those benefits by using them as shortterm rentals for their profit it leafs the on news for protecting those units to the landlord or the agency providing the funding im proposing a clear prohibition to chewed unit from continuallying of those subsidies with like projectss are the city fund like 1950 the project by the city the Affordable Housing or the shortterm erect units like the small sized acquisition unit im proposing to excused the down Payment Loan Program it is equitable to allow this group of homeowners to participate in home sharing, however, if theres not a 90 day limit open the home sharing the city will face a crisis they will be used yearround for their gain and ill ask the Mayors Office of housing to look at this to be sure our down payment assistance Promissory Note Program is not abused the second is on inlaw units legislation that recently passed the board of supervisors both by supervisor wiener and to legalize inlaw units and promote the construction of inlaw units or secondly, inlaw units is to provide for housing supply for the residents not to create more Smaller Hotel unit the legislation as written where airbnb f t r legislation is currently written to hold out those types of inlaw units and the exist ones from the permanent market to use as lucrative shortterm hotel theyve been hidden and difficult to monitor so any meantime as handed out and its on there section 41 a definition for those you if you it is page 13 line 10 to 6 ive gone through the city subsidized housing and the other portion in bold states that the residential unit is not subject to the inclusionary or after mentioning excluding the units from the down payment Avoidance Program continuing is not a dwelling created pursuant to section 207. 3 or 715 point one is the secondly, or inlaw unit references those are my two amendments pare the supervisor as two amendments seconded by supervisor yee and the second has to do with the further restrictions on inlaw unit seconded by supervisor campos thank you supervisor mar supervisor kim. Madam chair. Oh, yes deputy City Attorney. John gibner, deputy City Attorney for clarification on supervisor mars amendment those amendments were not drafted by yourself our offices but understanding there are tweaks we want to make for example, the current language on the word inclusionary the Inclusionary Housing Program we get probably delete now, its covered as part of our new language about all induced housing the reference to middleincome housing well delete ways that is not a term defined in our Affordable Housing program but low and moderate is appropriate. Thank you supervisor kim. Thank you, madam chair wow. As if we dont have enough amendments ill be interrogating an amendment and this is specifically on the around the issue of the private right of action just to give this amendment a little bit of context it is important to state some of the statistics right now currently 12 hundred complaints filed rewarding shortterm rentals in San Francisco and two legal actions by the City Attorney thats a state of enforcement around shortterm rentals in San Francisco ive also made it clear i know the public has heard from me numerous times that preserving our finest and rapidly that diminishing Housing Stock our rent control issues is a Public Interest and for the board and mayor, we have not thus far been to demonstrate we have the resources to effectively enforce that legislation in other cases we have set enforcement around the planning code the City Attorney said that the no points in particular need to get on board and help out theyve been an effective means and cheaper means to help with the negotiations an example that we have giving of which our amendment is bans is the Hotel Conversion in 1990 we gave an competed action to nonprofits and the Mission Statement or bylaws states that their mission so protect and preserve Affordable Housing during this time tenderloin housing clinic one nonprofit get a primer junction and after that our City Attorney only had a few owners that refused obey the law this shouldnt be a reason to go after the shortterm rentals and typically 5 thousand or less so what were im introducing today is a concept around of putting it into this particular legislation i shared from the beginning of the debate around the shortterm rentals debated im concerned this legislation is not enforceable unless we add effective and enforcement tools in particular ive raised questions about how the city will sure 3 hundred and 65 days of hosted rentals without a doubt a hard cap on 90 days how it is difficult to prove where one person slept last night or for 2 hundred and 70 nights a year as i mentioned protecting our affordable Housing Stock we dont 0 need to look at the statistics we know that limited Housing Stock is naikd housing i want to insure we pass that legislation that encourages the Property Owners from permanently taking the unit offline and provided nonprofit with the a tool that has protecting Affordable Housing in their Mission Statement to go over the limited group of egregious bad actors we know theyre most effective when the government and officials are encounter to Work Together but your amendment as oriental drafted will encourage lawsuits so to encourage those weve made changes to narrow the scope one the nonprofit must have preserved protection in their bylaws two the nonprofit must be in existence from 5 years of the braigs refrigeration of the ordinance so stop someone from stating a nonprofit today 3 the nonprofit cant seek Civil Penalties no way to go over a right they can soak an injunction if theyre able to win the case in court and only use the competeed and seek American People scombrungs against the pretender we quell the fear that were opening up the city to neighbor against neighbor litigation or maybe opening a loophole for frivolous litigation this will sure a a small group of nonprofit to pursue those bad actors have an competed route to deal with the actors and support our city in one obligation to make sure were protecting our Housing Stock and in particular our 0 rental Housing Stock thats the amendment ill introduce i have made copies for each member of the board of supervisors to look at. Is there a motion to approve this amendment. Supervisor campos any further amendment supervisor kim and are those substancess amendments. I thought we were going to do i think its helpful were doing them piece by pie my false imprisonment meantime is substantive we duplicate the file and send to the Planning Commission and it will come back to the full board of supervisors im hoping to pass the amendment that are not substantive first to be in both files thank you. Well be seeking the advice of our City Attorney to figure out what procedural