Therefore, it has no merit as opposed to see the potential for good restoration. I think this is a critical piece. When people talk about were losing San Francisco, theyre talking about not that we dont want anything new, but they see too much of the beautiful things that define our character being lost. We can marry both. This is an important priority. And it needs to be a priority of our next director. Thank you very much. President melgar thank you, commissioner. Next speaker, please. Good afternoon, commissioners and, thank you, president melgar, for allowing us to come and speak to the commission about this item. Im anastasia, im a tenant and housing advocate. In my view, a new director has to recognize and respect San Franciscos history, architecture and its people and acknowledge that our city is not for sale. A new director must not be cow towed by big money. The arena numbers show too much marketrate housing as opposed to too little new housing for lowincome residents is being
This is not just the inability of so many workers to find housing in our city today, but also how the income inequality that we have created in the city , is affecting every decision that we make. We keep acting as though the housing crisis is entirely separate from the growth of income inequality. Going back to that research that the Directors Team produce. In 1990, folks that made over 200,000 made up 9 of the city residents. Today they make over 27 of city residents, adjusted for inflation. That is a dramatic change that affects how housing crisis are affected. It affects displacement, it affects land costs, a city that sees land costs going up by 23 every year. That is where i would put my money. It affects the rate of construction. Right now, we build for that top 27 . We built actually for the top 10 earn more than 200,000. When that limit is reached, if you look at all of the newspaper articles right now, building slows down. Until we address that, we are not going to solve this