tv Government Access Programming SFGTV December 9, 2019 5:00pm-6:01pm PST
which provided for the residential hotel status report. which you sponsored i believe, right? >> true. i sponsored the 2017 ordinance as well. but please proceed. >> so the hotel status report ensures that owners for selling residential hotels columbus police dysclose information about the status and -- disclose information about the status prior to the completion of sales. the definition of tourist or transient use was changed to any use that is less than 30-day term of tenancy. and finally, the plaintiff challenging the 2017 amendments prevailed, and we were returned to the 2016 version, which is basically the 1981 version of the ordinance.
i want to end up with a few of the challenges that we are faced with when enforcing this. and the first and biggest being our inability to determine the truth since we rely on self-reported data from hotel owners. we encounter cooked books and second sets of books where there's the books for me and the books for the real use of being recorded. i've already mentioned the misuse of the temporary conversion exception where hotel owners consider an entitlement. another challenge is the limit on d.b.i.'s authority to initiate enforcement proceedings. we are not considered an interested party. and therefore we cannot initiate complaints. and we do have the ability to
assess penalties for record-keeping violations but not for conversions, which is the main violation of the ordinance. we encounter vacancies in room warehousing, which i can talk more about later, but there's no law that requires hotel owners to rent out their guest rooms. >> my colleagues are about to leave me so there's not going to be a much later, but please proceed. >> okay. that's it. >> what we are dealing with here really is about creating a buffer and amortization period. the reason i've held this hearing today is really to hear from the affected community about what the numbers are so we can figure out what the appropriate amortization period is. and this will not be the only opportunity for this. there will be other opportunities. but i thought it to be important as the sponsor of the 2017
legislation, to figure this out. and i think mr. luten put his finger on it about what the public interests and public policy was in 1981 as amended in 2017. so before i ask a number of questions, is there anybody here from the mayor's office of housing? mr. lee who would like to say anything for the record. please come on up. >> from the mayor's office of housing and community development. we reviewed this really in the context of our small sites program. the small sites program was established in 2014. and is the city's main program
for acquiring and preserving at-risk rental housing with 3 to 25 units although we do on a case by case basis consider large buildings including s.r. o.s. the program was created to create housing in neighborhoods that are vulnerable to market pressure that results in increased evictions, rises rents. the small site program helps san franciscos avoid evictions by providing loans to successfully remove these sites from the market and restrict them as permanently affordable housing. since 2014 when the program was initiated, the city's investment has grown from a pilot program of $3 million to over $86 million in total funding. the funding ranges from
approximately 175 to $300,000 per unit in subordinate funds depending on the building size. to date, we have preserved approximately 35 buildings with 290 units and 27 commercial spaces. we have a robust pipeline of approximately 15 buildings and approximately 137 units. and have stabilized over 500 individuals to date. in those numbers that i just stated, two of the buildings with 38 units and four commercial spaces were in sros. and the small site funding of the $86 million that's been committed, approximately $9.5 million relates to the preservation of sros. those funding sources include
inclusionary fee, funding from housing bonds as well as several geographically-restricted sources. >> thank you. is there anybody here from the department of housing -- dhsh. ma'am, the floor is yours. >> i'm trying to figure that out too. i'm the manager for the housing for the department of homelessness and supportive housing. good afternoon. so we are master leasing many of the sro units in the city. we started doing that when we were still two different departments, hsa and dph, before the mayor lee started the department on homelessness and supportive housing. so we started doing this at the
end of 1980, beginning of 1990. and the way that we master lease hotels is that we -- either the city, but more often a nonprofit provider will develop a master lease with a sro hotel owner and then we as a city will develop the contract with the provider to pay them the rent that will go to the master lease but to also pay for support services and to pay for the operating of property management in the building. we started with about 1,000 units. and by now we are up to almost 3800 units. this is almost half of the 8,000 units that the department of homelessness and supportive housing has for supportive housing. the other units are usually nonprofit-owned and operated, many of them are affordable
housing that we collaborate on with the mayor's office on housing and community development. you had a variety of sessions. and i'm trying to speak directly to those. the way it usually works is when we master lease a build, we have to provider to develop a lease, and it is for the entire building. there are legacy units in the building, which means there are already tenants in the units, those are, of course, preserved. we will only utilize the units that are vacant. and we will refer to those who are coordinated, so it's for people who are the most vulnerable out on the streets. the master leases are usually -- well, they have been in the past, often for ten years, and at times also had extension opportunities for ten years, usually times two.
so we have leases that are just now running out that started in the late 1990s. sorry, i'm going back. i'm dating myself. i started in the late 1980s. so we are actually right now in the process of helping providers renegotiate leases that started a very long time ago. in a master lease, usually the building owner holds responsibility for the major systems, that would be the roofs, elevators, electrical system. everything else gets paid by the master lessee, though most often the nonprofit provider who is funded by the department to pay for the building as a whole. you had some questions about stabilization units as well. would you like me to comment on those? >> please. >> okay.
and you were actually earlier on, you were commenting on what kelly mentioned several years ago. yes, there used to be over 300 stabilization units in the city. currently the department of homelessness and supportive housing, we have about 88 stabilization units left. the difference between stabilization units and master lease units is that we basically rent a block of units from a pilot operator. and just like with the master lease unit, we do usually pay for them, and the utilizeation is up to us in terms of stabilization unit and the homeless outreach team. the only time we won't pay for them is if we can't utilize them because of negligence by the owner or if the owner is not turning them over in the way they need to. but we don't have a master lease agreement with them, so therefore if the units are, for
example, pest-infested, we will stop paying for the rent. so the master leases are a specific period of time. the block is a stabilization unit so the owner gets paid as they deliver. the utilizeation is up to the homeless outreach team, and they don't usually have a problem utilizing the units. so in general, the owner gets paid. again, there's a responsibility for them to have the units in working conditions. when it's a master lease, once we take the building over or the nonprofit provider takes it over, we are responsible in general, for the running and operating of the hotel. the city funds -- >> bless you. >> -- funds the nonprofit provider to do that. you were wondering what is interesting to us in terms of
sro hotels. these days, honestly, it's not like we have a lot to choose from anymore. we have quite a few -- >> after our last settlement, we will. but go ahead. >> i'm looking forward to that. so usually what we are looking for is amenities. and so that means there's an elevator, that it's wonderful if the units have a private bathroom. though that is not typical in the old sro hotels. in general, the conditions of the building, of course, and then also what the location is, what the unit size is. whether or not there is some community space to create some space for people experiencing homelessness or formerly homeless that will be living in those buildings so we can create community space, possibly a community kitchen and also office space.
and then, of course, one projection-of-cost and trying to bring health and safety standards, we usually put that on the owner during the association of the letter of agreement. but it does tell us how long it's going to take us for all the people that don't have a place to go. it comes down to unit negotiations as well. many of the owners are definitely interested and very motivated to continue working with us. most owners that we are working with have several hotels with us. however, they're also business people. and this is a very hot market, which affects the sro hotels, so finding new hotels has been a challenge at times, finding hotels that we will be able to
afford, people definitely look at the market, and they consider what they might be getting if somebody else was to lease the building. that was not the case when we started master leasing almost 30 years ago. there was nobody that was interested in those buildings. and many of the units that we are now utilizing were empty. before we take a building or even going into a letter of agreement, we usually ask for capital needs assessment so we know not only what needs to be fixed immediately in order for us or our providers to be interested in developing a lease, but also to know what the projections are in terms of the building. how much longer will the elevator be lasting? how much longer will the roof be lasting? because even those things that the owner has to pay for, it affects people in our building,
obviously. it might mean that we potentially will have to leave some units empty. in terms of suck other questions that you have -- in terms of other questions that you have, i'm here to answer them. >> that was a fantastic presentation. i really appreciate it. in the interest of time, what i would like to do, i have a huge number of questions for you. and we can continue this, because i know that folks need to move onto a number of things. but in the interest of time, why don't we open this up to public comment. and let's hear from the public. i'm particularly interested in hearing from the affected community as we are thinking about amortization over time. so with that, if you will line up to my left, your right, first
speaker, please. i do have actually pages of questions for mr. luten but we may continue this to our meeting next monday. first speaker, please. tommy, come on up. >> okay. from the housing rights committee. as you know, sros have always been housing for our poorest residents. in recent years we know that hotels are illegally renting rooms to tourists at weekly and biweekly rates. we know that some hotels aderer ties all of their rooms as tourist even though only 25 percent of them can be. these practices are illegal, yes, and they contribute to our housing crisis, which is removing housing by removing housing, rent-controlled housing, unless it's a master lease unit, in which case it's
not under rent control, but if it's not, it is rent-controlled housing that is being removed from the market to even temporarily to do these tourist rooms. we cannot afford to lose any of these units, special not rent controlled ones. sro rooms should be for residents of san francisco, not tourists, people over profits. we need a prohibition on tourist room, period. we need stronger language to enforce the law that we have if we are going to stick with the law that we have. we need stronger language in the law to enforce it, because it sounds like it can't be enforced or there's problems with it. we need the city of san francisco to take a stand that housing should be for housing and for our residents and that poor and working class people should take priority. our housing stock is for housing people, not for making money from tourists. can we keep it that way?
and just real quickly, i don't know if you are going to do number 9 but the but housing rights committee is in support of 24 hours per day, tenants having access to heating. >> thank you. i said this was the last item. i neglected to say i skipped over item number 9. we are going to circle back to that. your comment has been heard. the 2017 amendments were precisely for the public policy goals that you articulated. we have been subject to litigation. we are trying to figure out an amortization rate to resolve that litigation. next speaker, please. >> good afternoon. my name is dan jordan. i work for the central city collaborative as a housing peer counselor. i live on sixth street. it's a private sro hotel.
and it's one of the most expensive ones in the city. this hotel has, with most of the private hotels, your facilities are located in a hallway. you have no kitchen, not in your room, not in the hallway, not in the building. and all they really want is that rent. they do very little to keep the building in repair. so you are at the mercy of the landlord. and they know this. and unfortunately for people on social security or very low income, these hotels are the last stop. we need to keep them as sro hotels and not allow them to be converted to tourist hotels. i know some of them are doing it anyway. but they need to be stopped.
and made to convert back, because they haven't done it legally to begin with. thank you. >> thank you, sir. next speaker, please. >> senior and disability action. i work there on mission between ninth and tenth streets. and seeing the sro that was called the rams right along ninth street, suddenly having a very new bright-colored sign that says rams hotel usa, it's an owner who has owned that property for a very long time. further more, he also has the whole corner, which is where counter pulse had been he convicted in 2016. then there's a diner, i forget, but also a chinese restaurant right there. so there is a plan now to turn this sro into a 166-unit luxury
hotel. and you can see at the occupancy records that there was this diminishing number of permanent residential folks in there until it then became one or two left. and now it is a full-on hotel. we've lost a little chinese restaurant. there are many sros around there. there are many workers all around there. the diner as well as this chinese restaurant is where you can get affordable housing, where people in sros who couldn't cook could get good food at a reasonable price. so it's not just about losing the sros. it's this domino effect around that area. but we are losing then a 28-room sro hotel that was allowed to do six tourists rooms. and now what's going to happen?
so i support more discussion on this. i really hope we can hold onto our sro hotels. >> i see he is taking copious notes about the alleged violations. next speaker, please. >> i'm a research analyst at unite here local 2, representing hotel and food service workers across the city. many of our members and some of our staff live in sros. when sros are converted to tourist hotels, working people lose access to affordable housing. i've been reviewing sro owners annual unit usage reports and weekly reports submitted to d.b.i. under current regulations, the records are self-resorted. the reports leave a lot of unanswered questions. what are the actual rent and room rates at any given sro? in the midst of a city-wide affordable housing crisis, why
are any residential hotel units left vacant. why are explanations required only when more than 50 percent of the units are vacant. are vacant rooms being illegally converted for tourist use? hotels report rents at weekly rates that don't add up. hotels cite vague reasons such as slow periods. how is this information verified? does this information reflect what's taking place? these questions beg the larger question, why is the city allowing a trade off of more tourist hotel rooms at the expense of affordable housing units. thank you. >> thank you. and thank you to unite leer local 2 for your interest in this area of public policy. next speaker, please. >> research analyst also from unite leer local 2. so i'm heavily involved in working on new hotel development
in san francisco. our members and staff live in sro hotels, so they benefit from having this housing stock available as affordable housing stock subject to rent control. housing that is subject to rent control is finite in this city and more cannot be created. so it's very important for us to protect this. our members and staff who live in these hotels as well as everyone else who lives in them benefit from strong protections against musical rooms where managers shuffle tenants around to avoid having them qualify for their legal rights as tenants. i wanted to spell out a few key ways in which they are different. concierge service, hotel spa, bell service, multiple bars, that's what you would see in a hotel, not what you would see in a hotel that provides affordable housing. even more bare bones hotel have
services that differ drastically from the business model of a residential hotel, art in the lobby, reservation departments. these are not things that you find in a residential hotel. no sro hotel i can think of has one employee for every room the way a very high end tourist hotel can. because of these very different types of land use patterns, it's a good thing the city has a conditional use process for the creation of hotels. and what we are seeing is that many of these hotels that are extensively somewhat tourist and somewhat residential are skirting this process and illegally converting to a tourist hotel. i can think of four within a mile of here. there must be more. and when this process is allowed to continue without punishment, our members lose and the city loses. thank you. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> hello. i'm a housing organizer at senior and disability action.
we support stronger and more tenant protections and also stopping the tourist conversions. i recently visited an sro on sixth street. and met with the gentleman who is over 75 years old, two years ago a little bit over two years ago, his rent was less than 40 percent of his monthly income. when i visited him last week, he said that he is now paying over 80 percent of his fixed income for rent. and over two years ago, there were mostly long-term residents living there. now he is the only one left. it cannot continue to be profit over people. it must be people over profit. >> thank you, mr. martin. next speaker, please.
>> i'm an on the parter of a hotel here that's a mixed-use license, both tourist and residential. i'm seeing that it makes it harder for people to get into the hotel. if you are making me a landlord, then i have every right to protect the building and property for the tenants that are there. that means their deposits, credit check, background check, all the things a regular landlord has to protect their property are the things i should be able to do. it makes it more difficult for the people that you are trying to help get into the building in my opinion. do you understand? >> i don't want to interrupt you but when you are done i would like to ask you a couple questions. >> ask your question now. >> great. if you want to stop the time in case you would like to continue speaking. what i'm trying to figure out, and i super appreciate that you are here and would actually like to hear from other members of
the affected community. i know mr. patterson is here who is part of the class that is litigating this. what i'm trying to get my hands around is amortization. to do that, i need to understand what the fiscal impacts are. >> the fiscal impact is a lot. i have a mixed use like i said. and some of those i can convert for the summer but i never kicked anyone out of my hotel. this was a property that was bought six years ago that needed a year's worth of construction. it was rundown. they hadn't turned paperwork in for eight years. and then i feel like i'm being punished for all the people who are not doing the correct things. my first meeting before it opened was before the housing department to find out the things i needed to do. we had a good relationship in the beginning, now not so much but i think there's a different attitude towards the owners like we are greedy people. i employ sf residents, single mothers, immigrants at my hotel
that have jobs that you are going to make not have jobs because i won't be able to afford to pay them. the minimum wage goes up, the insurance goes up, it's not like i'm raking in profits. i'm just paying all the bills. so that you have to take it also from owners, you are taking private property that the city if they want to buy the building that is one thing. but you are taking a private person who invested their time money to bring everything up to code and provide a nice place, and you are frying trying to make it do something else. if you want to be a landlord situation, it's a big difference because as soon as they hit 32 days it's rent controlled and it's like being every other apartment in san francisco. you have this amount of rent, it's a 1906 building. so that means whatever they get in on, immediately they are permanent residents. >> so you are saying that relative to individuals that say they are for seven days as opposed to a month or longer,
that you charge more for -- >> hotel taxes, first of all. if it's a seven-day versus a monthly there's hotel taxes on top of it so it's already cheaper that way. i had a monthly guest that started off weekly but they get to see if we like each other, but they have to go through the background credit checks that some of the people you are trying to help are not going to be able to pass. >> when those people become monthly residents, i assume at that point they are subject to rent control and they can stay as long as they want? >> yes. i have some for two years now. one is a student from brazil and one is a san francisco resident that has health issues. >> and they are designated as tourist? >> no, they are sro, permanent residents. >> so by the way, i'm happy to have this conversation with you offline. so i'm trying to understand more about the amortization issue
that i'm trying to get my hands around. >> if you add up my bills and go to where i can only take monthly guests, i'm not going to be able to afford the guests. i would have to close down. i'm already looking at it now, because we are worried about what's going to happen. i have staff i have to pay, insurance, mortgage. >> i get all that. there are real structural costs and that's true and correct whether it's janitors and maintenance and sinking funds. but are you saying that you are charging more per day for a one-week resident than you would be charging for a 30-day resident? >> yes. because it's a weekly -- yes, i pay hotel taxes, it's already more per day. maybe like $40 difference or something. >> so the hotel tax is 14 percent >> no, with everything, with the t.i. d., it's 15.2 something or
3 something. >> so you are in the tourist improvement district so you are adding that. >> it's just how far you are. i pay a lesser percent than the center but i'm in the mission. >> this is very helpful. i will give you my card. i would love to talk to you more. next speaker, please. >> all right, thank you. >> good evening, supervisors. my name is andrew. i'm the attorney for the san francisco sro hotel coalition. i represent the hotel coalition in the legal challenges to the 2017 and 2019 amendments. thank you, supervisor peskin, for giving us the opportunity to bring you information about amortization: regrettably, when you have a hearing scheduled at 1:30 and we get called after 5:00 there were a large number of hotel owners who have had to leave and this will not come out of your time, i am going to
continue this until next monday so all of those individuals have the opportunity to actually testify and supervisor safai and supervisor haney are very excited about that. please proceed. >> thank you. i need to correct the record with respect to the history here. the 1981 hotel conversion ordinance as enacted strikes a careful balance between the need for san francisco to preserve existing affordable residential housing and san francisco's need to have affordable tourist transient rentals. there are specific findings in the 1981 ordinance to that effect that have never been changed. and i believe those need to be considered to this day in your analysis. there have been significant changes since 1981. the original 1981 version provided that when a residential unit was vacant in the summer
months, all those residential units could be rented by the day. it was not a 25 percent number originally. that was a major change going back to around 2000 -- forgive me if i don't get the exact here. and there have been other significant changes through the years. the problem with the amortization provisions that are before you under the amendments that are here today that we are considering in terms of the information that's been provided, the problem is, and may i have a few more minutes, please? >> yes, i did not mean that to come out of your time. the bottom line that i'm trying to get our hands around as a decision-making body, is how wrong your -- long your clients would need to recoop their investments to rent to long-term tenants. that is the question. >> understood. and i think that's obviously critical from the court's perspective in the case that we handled. the problem with coming into a
public hearing and providing that information is that that's going to involve highly confidential, private financial information. and i doubt that any hotel owner is going to want to stand here on television before a committee and reveal their personal financial information to the city. that's something that's protected under rights of privacy. and we would not recommend that. we are committed to engaging the board and yourself, supervisor peskin, in as broad a way as possible, and i would suggest we do that. but where we are today is we have an ordinance invalidated by the court that to this day is still on the books. the ordinance before you today suggests that there's still a 30-day rule according to the 2019 amendment. we have requested the city attorney schedule hearings to invalidate those ordinances, and then we should sit down, and i would suggest we sit down as a stakeholder here. my clients are not on any of the lists that your office is sending out in terms of being stakeholders. they are one of the critical
stakeholders on these questions. we are talking about ultimately whether the city is going to be taking their property for public use or not. amortization schedule is here to protect against that taking. the manner in which the proposed ordinance attempts to do that is clearly insufficient at this point and we would like to be heard on that in a way where my clients' interest can be given serious consideration. >> to my fellow santa cruz alum, mr. dack zachs, i look forward o doing that. maybe there are ways that we can have that conversation. so i don't have to guess but can actually figure it out in a way that is legally sound and policy-sound. and with that, are there any other members of the public that
would like to testify on this item number 10? seeing none, we will close public comment. and colleagues, i'm sure you would like to object, but you cannot. we will continue this item one week to next monday. we will do that without objection. thank you, council, for being here. madame clerk, can you call item 9? >> item 9 is an ordinance amending the housing code to revise the requirements for heating in residential units and affirming the planning department's determination under the california environmental quality act. >> i will make this fast. are there any other members other than the one who inappropriately testified on item number 9? public comment is closed. this is a no-brainer piece of legislation that says that if you have heat, you got to keep the heat on all night for your tenants. and if there's no objection, we will send this to the full board with recommendation as a committee report for
consideration tomorrow, decembe. and we are adjourned. ... legacy of the name. all four businesses received positive recommendations from the historic preservation commission. after reviewing the applications and the recommendation staff finds businesses have met the three criteria to qualify for listing on the business
registry. there are four draft resolutions for consideration by the sbc. one for each of the applicants. your support of the businesses should be as in favor of the resolutions. the resolutions please play close attention to the core physical features. once approved by the sbc, the businesses must maintain the physical features or traditions in order to remain on the legacy business registry. for the end up it's bar and for horizons up -- unlimited it's for the latinex opportunity and for mums it's restaurant for japanese cuisine. this concludes my presentation and happy to answer any questions. there are business representives in attendness that would like to speak and possibly stories from
commissioner laguana and we'll find out. thank you very much. >> commissioner: do you want to go to public comment first? >> clerk: i have speaker cards here. ben nakazo, followed by elena nielson followed by sarah kim and followed by salina lucino. >> thank you very much, i'm a 60 year resident of japan town in the western addition and a member of the japan town task force. it's with great pride i stand before you to speak in support in favor of cafe mums in the hotel brew bucannon.
i'd like to recognize the support of the president of the board and the executive director of the japan town task force. cafe mums has been a gathering place over 40 years. not only for visitors staying at the hotel and other tourists, family and friends and community people from the neighborhood and beyond. it is an ideal place centrally located. i often go to get my breakfast or lunch and the menu offers not only japanese food but american dishes as well. as their signature plate of shabu shabu. my favorite breakfast is grilled salmon with rice with nori and my lunch is rice wrapped in an omelette and yakisoba which is
fried into the noodles. i often meet with colleagues to discuss items of the day and to snack and have a drink it. offers comfort food and an ideal too recoup one's thoughts. in my mind, cafe mums obviously means chrysanthemum blossom but my own interpretation means mums more like moms. it offers wonderful food, aattentive service, a full stomach, warmth and comfort. and i thank you for consideration of the legacy business registration for cafe mums. >> commissioner: thank you.
next speaker please. >> hello. i'm a former employee of japan town task force and the japan town community business direct and active member and was a point person for compiling mum's application to the legacy business program. when i first stat down with the owner of the business and what his business meant to him he presented me with a binder this thick with all his photos from when he first came to america and came as a dishwasher and was work at mums. and all the way to the present where he has four daughters and they're all involved in his business and he's the owner of mums now. he is so proud of his business
and has so much reason to be and talked for hours about mums and how it was started by japanese from sf's former sit ter city of -- sister city of osaka and how he worked his way up as right-hand man and all his relationship with the community members in japan town past and present and how he fought to preserve the dignity of his business despite three changes in ownership of the building to which they pay rent. mums means so much to our community. it is our decade's old lasting hub and whenever i go there there's always someone that i see. there's always someone that i know. it has been a pleasure getting to know more about the history of a business that is older than myself and there isn't a business i can more recommend to
the legacy business program. thank you. >> thank you. next speaker, please. >> good evening president adams, commissioners and staff members. i'm julie steinberg and the executive director of community music center and so pleased to stand before you today to ask for your support of our legacy business registry application and the applications of our fellow applicants and long-standing business who's are making an impact and keeping san francisco the rich and vibrant city it is today. it's 99 years young growing from a small volunteer run school founded in the settlement tradition serving a handful of immigrant families to today where it provides free and
low-cost class to 3100 students of all ages and stages providing more than $2.4 million in direct tuition assistance to all who qualify. our concert hall is also home to more than 100 free and low-cost performances attended by more than 18,000 people each year. our faculty members and leaders and musical genres and styles and hope to keep them here for years to come. though we're historic we rely on innovation and evolution creating responsive programs for older adults, young children and their families, immigrant community and the transgender communities to name a few. as we enter our second century of service in the city of san francisco, we appreciate your support of our application which will allow us to remain vibrant, socially relevant, engaged up our community and making a difference around the city.
thank you. >> commissioner: thank you. >> i'm sarah. i'm the youngest of the four daughters for mums. i asked my dad what he wanted to say in front of you all and he wanted to say that he was very lucky to have so much community support. very lucky to be include in japan's cultural heritage and economic sustainability strategy and very lucky to be here towards the end of the application process. he also wanted to mention that we and other legacy business out here today have been through at least three major hurdles. the economic crisis and '89 earthquake and 9/11 he saw a lot of places shut down but we're all here and alive and kicking
and all the stories were touching so i'm emotional right now. sorry. it's an honor to be here in front of you all and honestly i would not be here without japan town task force. the community of japan town has been supportive of hi father's establishment and hope i can continue to do what i can for the community and knowing me i would have failed in filling out the application so i'm thankful for them helping me out over there. thanks. >> commissioner: thank you. next speaker, please. >> hi, i'm sarah samuel and i am the point person who help for the legacy business applicants. on behalf of many we're grateful and honored to be given as an
opportunity as a legacy business. we are thankful that you will consider their application. to tell a little bit about me and why i'm doing this because not that i'm a huge clubgoer and i got to know the owners and i decided to give it a visit and it is to say something that's iconic and sustain the nightlife of san francisco. it's existence since 1973 and the owners want to revive it and continue its legacy in the community of san francisco and what it's done for the nightlife and house music and the nightclub scene. they just celebrated the 46th anniversary several weeks ago. their hopes is to continue to
celebrate another 46 to 50 more. so again we thank you again for your consideration of this application and thank you for the opportunity. >> >> commissioner: thank you. next speaker, please. >> good evening commissioners and staff here. my name is salena lucero being considered for the legacy business registry. i think more so of being proud of being the executive director i think my legacy with horizons is much more important because i started there as a youth many years ago a couple decades ago if i'm going to day myself but in a nutshell horizons means so
much to so many in the community. when we went through the application process a few years ago we celebrated our 50th anniversary and then through the process of the application we realized we were incorporated in 1970 so we were like do we have to celebrate the 50th anniversary again because we were off by five years but we were actually founded in 1965 so i think we're on track with that. but horizons again though it's housed in a building on 17th and potrero it represents family and stability and represents leadership and empowerment to so many people. if you walk through the mission on any given day and talk about what the -- is going on and what the community means, so many have benefitted and generations of families who have been here. i'm the youngest of nine and all my family members have also
benefitted from horizons. it's beautiful to see grandparents bring in their grandchildren to programs and stop by and see the organization still going and doing well. so i think being able to get this recognition would validate all the work and the heart and soul that people have put into the organization for five decades. i thank you so much and want to echo the sentiment that we wish all the best to our partners that are here also in consideration for the legacy business registry. we know they are also deserving and thank you so much. it's an honor and privilege to be in front of you. have a good evening. >> commissioner: thank you. any other speakers? okay. public comment is closed. commissioners.
any comments? commissioner ortiz. >> this is the best part of the jobs. mums, i always go there. i didn't even know the history so just learning the history is amazing and makes me want to go there even more. man, wow, safe nights over there. that's one of the key things. you know you're in good hands. you could let your hair down and cmc and horizons from the mission i learned to sing over the rainbow in the '80s. off key of course but i learn it and horizons being there i walked down potrero. they're all exciting times and i'm honored to be a part of your nominations. >> commissioner: commissioner laguana. >> it's amazing to come here and hear the stories and i just want to ratify on behalf of the commission it's so uplifting to us to hear all the passion and
energy that you've put and the travails you have suffered through to survive in a city when it's uncommonly difficult for a small business to make it through so i commend all of you in particular i was moved by the family's passion ash -- around mums and i can relate to seeing how the years in front of you and your family and how it builds up over time. growing up i grew up with two a good foster parents and i remember reading tales of the city but speaking as a former professional musician i actually lived on capp street when i first moved here to san francisco and i didn't even know cmc was there to be honest. i'm astounded to discover that
not only was it there but it's been there almost 100 years. what a remarkable extraordinary accomplishment to have an organization going like that so long and commissioner ortiz, i'd be happy to help you work in getting in key. but i can't imagine how many lives have been benefitted by that and music is really i think for me and i'm sure many of you will agree as are where our humanity resides and that's some of the most important work we can do culturally. it's a tremendous honor to be here and a want to thank all of you for coming. >> commissioner: commissioner dooley. >> i just wanted to say thank you so much for all of you going through the laborious process of
applying. we hear how deserving and how important the businesses are to the real san francisco. the small businesses. we want to do everything we can to help you guys continue on, do what you do so amazingly. congratulations all of. -- all of you. >> commissioner: any other commissioner comments? okay. i just want to say to each and every one of these businesses congratulations. it's not an easy process but you learned the history and everything. community music center 100 years and you're going to be another 100 years. i love that. and horizons, i knew about you because i have a lot of friends that grew up in the mission and a lot of them said about their
experienc experiences with horizons and mums, when i lived in pacific heights i did frequent mums quite a bit but it's the end up. i'm so proud of tonight. and the lgbtq community and started with the legacy business and the lone star legacy business and the endup i spent a lot of nights in the endup when i first moved here and then some. and my a good family, we all met, there were five of us and we're all still close today. none of us knew each other and we all met at the endup after leaving club universe. after that was over we went to the endup and we all met at the endup and all became friends that night. it was october 13, 1997.
august 13. the endup has a special place in my heart. i've gotten up at 4:00 in the morning to go dancing at 5:00 in the morning. you guys know what i'm talking about on sunday mornings but hey, that's part of our culture. and i'm not ashamed of that. so i am kind of emotional here. what the endup means to the lgbt community and what you mean to the south and market community you keep the community alive and i tell people i live in the castro and a keep telling the people it's not just the castro, it's south of market and polk street. it's all over. we're everywhere. i just want to say thank you. commissioner riley. >> yes, i would love to go to
mums for shabu shabu. now is the perfect weather for it and i'd love to see the big binder of yours. thank you. >> commissioner: any others? do we have a motion. >> i move to approve all four resolution to induct all fine businesses into the legacy business registry. >> second. >> clerk: commotion by commissioner dwight to approve all four resolutions seconded by commissioner dooley. roll call vote. [roll call] motion passes 7-0 with no one absent. >> congratulations. >> commissioner: we have certificates for everybody and if we can get a quick picture.