00:00:12 GOOD MORNING MEDIA EXCUSE ME. GOOD MORNING.
00:00:16 MEETING WILL COME TO ORDER WELCOME TO THE JULY 2ND 2026
00:00:19 REGULAR MEETING OF THE GOVERNMENT AUDIT AND OVERSIGHT
00:00:23 COMMITTEE OF THE SAN FRANCISCO BOARD OF SUPERVISORS.
00:00:24 I'M SUPERVISOR STEPHEN SHERYL CHAIR OF THE COMMITTEE JOINED
00:00:27 BY VICE CHAIR SUPERVISOR BALA MAHMUD AND MOMENTARILY
00:00:30 SUPERVISOR FIELDER OUR CLERK TODAY IS MONIQUE CREIGHTON.
00:00:35 THANKS TO CLEANING MENDOZA OF S.F. GOV TV.
00:00:39 >> MADAM CLERK, DO YOU HAVE ANY ANNOUNCEMENTS?
00:00:40 YES. PUBLIC COMMENT WILL BE TAKEN ON
00:00:44 EACH ITEM ON THIS AGENDA. WHEN I LOSE INTEREST COMES UP
00:00:47 IN PUBLIC COMMENT IS CALLED PLEASE LINE UP TO SPEAK ON YOUR
00:00:49 RIGHT. ALTERNATIVELY YOU MAY SUBMIT
00:00:52 PUBLIC COMMENT IN WRITING IN EITHER OF THE FOLLOWING WAYS
00:00:55 EMAIL THEM TO ME. THE GOVERNMENT ORDERED AN
00:00:56 OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE CLERK AT EMOTICON IQ U.S. DOT C R HIIT
00:01:03 OR IN AT ESF G O V ORG IF YOU SUBMIT PUBLIC COMMENT VIA EMAIL
00:01:07 IT WILL BE FORWARDED TO THE SUPERVISORS AND ALSO INCLUDED
00:01:10 AS PART OF THE OFFICIAL FILE. >> YOU MAY ALSO SEND YOUR
00:01:12 WRITTEN COMMENTS VIA U.S. POSTAL SERVICE TO OUR OFFICES.
00:01:15 CITY HALL NUMBER ONE DR. CARLTON B GOOD PLACE FROM 244
00:01:20 SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA 94102.
00:01:24 IF YOU HAVE DOCUMENTS THAT YOU WOULD LIKE TO BE INCLUDED AS
00:01:25 PART OF THE FILE PLEASE SUBMIT THEM TO ME BEFORE THE END OF
00:01:27 THE MEETING. PLEASE MAKE SURE TO SILENCE ALL
00:01:31 CELL PHONES AND ELECTRONIC DEVICES TO PREVENT ANY
00:01:32 INTERRUPTIONS TO TODAY'S PROCEEDINGS.
00:01:35 FINALLY, ITEMS ACTED UPON TODAY ARE EXPECTED TO APPEAR ON THE
00:01:39 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AT AGENDA OF JULY 14TH 2026 UNLESS
00:01:42 OTHERWISE STATED. >> THANK YOU.
00:01:43 COULD YOU PLEASE CONSIDER NUMBER ONE?
00:01:46 >> YES. ITEM NUMBER ONE IS A HEARING TO
00:01:47 CONSIDER THE CITY AND COUNTY'S COMPLIANCE WITH ASSEMBLY BILL
00:01:51 NUMBER 2561 AND GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 3502.3 REGARDING
00:01:55 VACANCIES RECRUITMENT AND RETENTION EFFORTS.
00:01:59 >> THANK YOU. TODAY WE ARE JOINED BY GIGI
00:02:03 WHITLEY, DIRECTOR OF POLICY AND EXTERNAL AFFAIRS AT
00:02:04 DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES. WE CONTINUED THIS ITEM FOR THE
00:02:08 LAST MEETING AND I'M NOT READY TO FILE THIS ITEM AS MY
00:02:14 QUESTIONS HAVE BEEN ANSWERED BUT COLLEAGUES DO YOU HAVE ANY
00:02:19 QUESTIONS ON THIS ITEM BEFORE WE DO THAT?
00:02:22 >> OKAY. UM MADAM CLERK LET'S TAKE
00:02:26 PUBLIC COMMENT AND TODAY I THINK WE WANT TO KEEP PUBLIC
00:02:28 COMMENT AT ONE MINUTE. >> OKAY?
00:02:31 YES. MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC WHO WISH
00:02:32 TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM SHALL LINE UP NOW ALONG THE SIDE BY
00:02:34 THE WINDOWS. >> ALL SPEAKERS WILL HAVE ONE
00:02:35 MINUTE. >> MR. CHAIR, IT APPEARS WE
00:02:42 HAVE NO PUBLIC COMMENT FOR THIS ITEM.
00:02:43 >> GREAT SEEING NO ONE ELSE MAKE A PUBLIC COMMENT.
00:02:45 >> PUBLIC COMMENTS NOW CLOSED. >> AND I'D LIKE TO MOVE TO FILE
00:02:49 THIS HEARING. YES, I'M ON THE MOTION THAT
00:02:52 THIS HEARING BE HEARD AND FILED.
00:02:53 MEMBER FIELDER AMBER FIELDER I FISCHER MAHMOOD FISCHER.
00:02:58 >> MAHMOOD I CHAIR CHERYL I CHAIR CHERYL I HAVE THREE EYES.
00:03:03 >> THANK YOU. THE MOTION PASSES.
00:03:04 MADAM CLERK PLEASE CALL ITEM NUMBER TWO.
00:03:08 YES. ITEM NUMBER TWO IS AN ORDINANCE
00:03:10 AMENDING THE PLANNING CALL TO NUMBER ONE REDUCE INCLUSIONARY
00:03:13 AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROGRAM REQUIREMENTS FOR PROJECTS OF 25
00:03:17 UNITS OR MORE TO DELETE INCLUSION AREA AFFORDABLE
00:03:21 HOUSING PROGRAM REQUIREMENTS FOR PROJECTS UNDER 25 UNITS
00:03:24 THREE ALLOW ALL PROJECTS TO DIP TO DEDICATE LAND TO THE CITY AS
00:03:29 AN ALTERNATIVE TO PAYMENT OF THE INCLUSIONARY AFFORDABLE
00:03:32 HOUSING PROGRAM FEE FOR. ADOPT A PROCESS FOR PROJECTS TO
00:03:36 REQUEST A MODIFICATION TO CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL RELATED
00:03:39 TO AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES.
00:03:44 OH I'M SORRY FIVE DELETE CERTAIN ARTICLE FOUR AFFORDABLE
00:03:48 INCLUSIONARY AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROGRAM REQUIREMENTS YES.
00:03:52 >> CERTAIN. I'M SORRY.
00:03:56 >> IT'S OKAY. IT'S FIVE IT'S A LONG ONE FIVE.
00:03:57 DELETE CERTAIN ARTICLE FOUR AMENDMENTS TO VARIOUS SECTIONS
00:04:00 OF THE PLANNING CODE AFFORDABLE HOUSING TO DEVELOPER IMPACT
00:04:03 FEES AND SIX ADOPT CONFORMING AMENDMENTS TO VARIOUS SECTIONS
00:04:11 OF THE PLANNING CODE AND MANY OF THE BUILDING CODE TO REDUCE
00:04:12 PLANNING CODE ARTICLE FOUR DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES
00:04:16 AND ALLOW DEFERRAL OF PAYMENT OF SUCH FEES AND AMENDING THE
00:04:20 ADMINISTRATIVE CODE TO ADOPT CONFORMING AMENDMENTS.
00:04:23 THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE CITYWIDE AFFORDABLE HOUSING
00:04:24 FUND AFFIRMING THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT'S DETERMINATION
00:04:27 UNDER THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT
00:04:30 MAKING PUBLIC NECESSITY, CONVENIENCE AND WELFARE
00:04:32 FINDINGS UNDER PLANNING CODE SECTION 302 AND MAKING FINDINGS
00:04:35 OF CONSISTENCY WITH THE GENERAL PLAN AND THE EIGHT PRIORITY
00:04:38 POLICIES OF PLANNING CODE SECTION 101.1.
00:04:45 >> GREAT. THANK YOU.
00:04:49 >> SO BEFORE COLLEAGUES WE JUMP INTO THE POLICY DISCUSSION I'M
00:04:53 JUST GOING TO LAY OUT A ROADMAP FOR WHAT TO EXPECT HERE.
00:04:55 THIS CAN BE KIND OF COMPLICATED IF THAT'S OKAY, I'M GOING TO
00:04:58 MAKE SOME INTRODUCTORY REMARKS THEN I'LL TURN THE MICROPHONE
00:05:01 OVER TO EITHER OF YOU TO MAKE INTRODUCTORY REMARKS.
00:05:04 AS I KNOW THIS HAS BEEN A YEAR LONG PROCESS.
00:05:08 THEN WE'RE GOING TO HEAR FROM JACOB WITTLIFF AND ADA TAN FROM
00:05:10 THE OFFICE OF ECONOMIC AND WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT WHO'S
00:05:13 IN THE CHAMBERS WITH US TODAY. THEY WILL PROVIDE THE STAFF
00:05:16 PRESENTATION. AFTER THAT PRESENTATION I'M
00:05:17 GOING TO ASK NICHOLAS MAYNARD FROM THE BUDGET AND LEGISLATIVE
00:05:20 ANALYST TO PROVIDE A BILL REPORT ON THE FISCAL IMPACT
00:05:24 BEFORE WE DO OUR QUESTIONS FOR IWD AND BELA LIKE TO OPEN THIS
00:05:28 TO PUBLIC COMMENT ON THIS ITEM. MADAM CLERK WE'RE GOING TO
00:05:32 LIMIT PUBLIC COMMENT TO ONE MINUTE TODAY AFTER PUBLIC
00:05:35 COMMENT I HAVE SOME NON SUBSTANTIVE TECHNICAL
00:05:38 AMENDMENTS TO REVIEW AND THEN I'LL SEE YOU THEN WE DIVE INTO
00:05:42 QUESTIONS SUBSTANTIVE POLICY DISCUSSION DOES THAT FRAMEWORK
00:05:46 MAKE SENSE? GET THE BASICS OUT OF THE WAY
00:05:50 FIRST SPEND THE BULK OF THE TIME ON THE SUBSTANTIVE POLICY
00:05:53 DISCUSSION. >> FAIR OKAY, GREAT.
00:05:57 LET'S JUMP INTO IT FIRST FOREMOST I WANT TO THANK ALL
00:06:02 BWT STAFF NAMELY LILA TESKEY, JACOB WITTLIFF AMONG MANY
00:06:07 OTHERS WHO WORKED ALONGSIDE THE INCLUSIONARY HOUSING TAC TO
00:06:09 DEVELOP THE RECOMMENDATIONS THAT LED TO THIS ORDINANCE
00:06:12 TODAY SAN FRANCISCO IS THE FASTEST AGING CITY WITH THE
00:06:16 FEWEST CHILDREN PER CAPITA IN THE COUNTRY AND IT IS NOT
00:06:19 ROCKET SCIENCE AS TO WHY THE COST OF LIVING IS SIMPLY TOO
00:06:23 HIGH. >> LAST YEAR WE PASSED THE
00:06:24 FAMILY ZONING PLAN WHICH IS A MONUMENTAL REFORM TO OUR CITY
00:06:27 ZONING. WE PASSED THAT PLAN BECAUSE WE
00:06:31 ACKNOWLEDGED A CLEAR FACT WE ARE IN A HOUSING CRISIS BUT AS
00:06:35 WE KNOW ZONING ONLY CREATES THE OPPORTUNITY FOR NEW HOUSING.
00:06:36 WE NEED MORE WORK TO ACTUALLY GET SHOVELS IN THE GROUND
00:06:40 AND TO GET MORE HOMES ACTUALLY BUILT FOR ALL SAN FRANCISCANS,
00:06:43 CONSTRUCTION COSTS TODAY ARE 50% HIGHER THAN PRE-PANDEMIC
00:06:46 AND GOING UP EVERY DAY. WE CANNOT WAIT FOR A
00:06:50 HYPOTHETICAL POLICY DISCUSSION. WE NEED TO START BUILDING
00:06:53 AND GET SHOVELS IN THE GROUND TODAY AND I'M CONFIDENT THAT
00:06:56 THIS ORDINANCE WILL GET US CLOSER TO MORE HOMES BEING
00:06:57 ACTUALLY BUILT AND NOT JUST TALKED ABOUT IN SAN FRANCISCO.
00:07:01 I'M PROUD TO SUPPORT THIS ORDINANCE AND TO DELIVER ON THE
00:07:05 COST OF LIVING CRISIS IN THIS CITY.
00:07:08 AND NOW I'D LIKE TO COLLEAGUES ANY REMARKS YOU WOULD LIKE TO
00:07:12 MAKE ON THIS ITEM? >> I'LL WAIT.
00:07:15 OKAY, GREAT. >> I'D LIKE TO HEAR FROM JACOB
00:07:20 ADLER FOR READABILITY. >> THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE
00:07:23 TODAY. THANK YOU.
00:07:24 GOOD MORNING, CHAIR CHERYL SUPERVISORS JACOB BENTLEY FOR
00:07:27 THE OFFICE OF ECONOMIC AND WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT HERE
00:07:30 ON BEHALF OF THE MAYOR'S OFFICE AS CHAIR CHERYL SAID THE ITEM
00:07:32 BEFORE YOU IS AN ORDINANCE TO REDUCE THE CITY'S INCLUSIONARY
00:07:35 HOUSING AND IMPACT FEE REQUIREMENTS FOLLOWING THE
00:07:38 CONTROLLERS LATEST TRIENNIAL ECONOMIC FEASIBILITY STUDY
00:07:42 SINCE 2017 EVERY THREE YEARS THE COMPTROLLER HAS CONVENED
00:07:46 THE INCLUSIONARY HOUSING TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE OR
00:07:47 TAC TO GUIDE A DATA DRIVEN PROCESS SUPPORTED BY ECONOMIC
00:07:50 CONSULTANTS AND RECOMMEND A LEVEL OF INCLUSIONARY HOUSING
00:07:54 THAT MAXIMIZES AFFORDABLE HOUSING PRODUCTION WITHOUT
00:07:57 PREVENTING THE FEASIBILITY OF MARKET RATE, HOUSING
00:07:58 DEVELOPMENT IN 2023 FOLLOWING THE TAC RECOMMENDATIONS, THE
00:08:01 CITY TEMPORARY LEE LOWERED THE INCLUSIONARY HOUSING AND IMPACT
00:08:06 FEE REQUIREMENTS BY 33%. THESE REDUCTIONS ARE SET TO
00:08:08 EXPIRE ON NOVEMBER FIRST OF THIS YEAR AFTER WHICH THE
00:08:12 REQUIREMENTS WILL INCREASE SIGNIFICANTLY.
00:08:16 THE TAC BEGAN MEETING LAST YEAR LATE LAST YEAR AND THE
00:08:20 COMPTROLLER ISSUED THEIR REPORT TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ON
00:08:23 APRIL 30TH THIS YEAR. THE STUDY FOUND THAT THERE IS
00:08:24 NO RATE OF INCLUSIONARY HOUSING THAT IS ECONOMICALLY FEASIBLE
00:08:28 UNDER MARKET CONDITIONS AND THAT THE FEASIBILITY GAP
00:08:31 FOR PROJECTS HAS ACTUALLY GROWN WORSE SINCE THE 2023 STUDY DUE
00:08:34 TO INCREASING CONSTRUCTION AND FINANCING COSTS.
00:08:38 GIVEN THIS, THE TAC UNANIMOUSLY RECOMMENDED A SIGNIFICANT
00:08:41 REDUCTION IN THE ONSITE INCLUSIONARY REQUIREMENT TO 5%
00:08:44 CITYWIDE AND A PROPORTIONAL REDUCTION TO OTHER DEVELOPMENT
00:08:48 IMPACT FEES. I WANT TO BE CLEAR THAT THE TAC
00:08:49 RECOGNIZE THAT THESE REQUIREMENTS ARE STILL ABOVE
00:08:53 WHAT IS FINANCIALLY FEASIBLE FOR MOST PROJECTS BUT WANTED TO
00:08:57 PRESERVE SOME LEVEL OF REQUIREMENT TO GAIN ON SITE
00:09:00 AFFORDABLE UNITS AND FEE REVENUE FOR THOSE PROJECTS THAT
00:09:04 ARE ABLE TO MOVE FORWARD OR IF CONDITIONS IMPROVE OVER THE
00:09:06 NEXT THREE YEARS BEFORE THE TAC RECONVENES.
00:09:09 IMPORTANTLY, THE TAC ALSO DISCUSSED THE CRITICAL NEED FOR
00:09:12 FUNDING TO SUPPORT DEVELOPMENT OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING
00:09:15 AND RECOMMENDED THAT THIS REDUCTION IN INCLUSIONARY
00:09:17 REQUIREMENTS BE PAIRED WITH AN ADDITIONAL SOURCE OF RECURRING
00:09:20 LOCAL FUNDING FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING PRODUCTION
00:09:23 AND PRESERVATION. AS YOU ALL KNOW SUPERVISORS THE
00:09:24 CITY IS NOW MOVING FORWARD WITH JUST SUCH A MEASURE THAT IS THE
00:09:27 COMPANION CHARTER AMENDMENT TO RENEW AND EXPAND THE HOUSING
00:09:31 TRUST FUND THAT SUPERVISOR MELGAR INTRODUCED WITH YOUR
00:09:33 CO-SPONSORSHIP. THAT MEASURE WOULD MOVE TO MORE
00:09:36 THAN DOUBLE THE CITY'S ANNUAL BASELINE FUNDING FOR AFFORDABLE
00:09:40 HOUSING FROM ABOUT $50 MILLION TO $125 MILLION PER YEAR USING
00:09:46 A FORMULA BASED ON THE GROWTH OF THE CITY'S OVERALL PROPERTY
00:09:48 TAX BASE. THIS WILL RESULT IN AN
00:09:49 ADDITIONAL $3 BILLION FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING FUNDING OVER
00:09:54 THE NEXT 30 YEARS. THAT MEASURE WAS RECOMMENDED
00:09:55 OUT OF THE RULES COMMITTEE ON MONDAY AND WILL BE BEFORE THE
00:09:58 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ON JULY 14TH FOR A VOTE.
00:10:00 THE ITEM BEFORE YOU TODAY IS THE ORDINANCE IMPLEMENTING THE
00:10:03 TAX RECOMMENDATIONS REGARDING THE INCLUSIONARY AND IMPACT FEE
00:10:07 REQUIREMENT REDUCTIONS AND IS INTENDED TO ADVANCE THREE KEY
00:10:10 GOALS. FIRSTLY TO MEET OUR HOUSING
00:10:11 GOALS BY MAKING HOUSING WHERE FEASIBLE TO BUILD AT THE SCALE
00:10:15 THAT WE NEED TO ADDRESS OUR HOUSING CRISIS.
00:10:17 SECONDLY, THIS IS INTENDED TO INCENTIVIZE DEVELOPMENT
00:10:21 SPECIFICALLY THROUGH OUR FAMILY ZONING PLAN AND OUR LOCAL
00:10:22 ZONING THAT YOU ALL WORKED SO HARD ON LAST YEAR.
00:10:26 THE ORDINANCE WOULD DO THIS IN A COUPLE OF WAYS.
00:10:28 FIRSTLY, BY EXEMPTING SMALL PROJECTS OF FEWER THAN 25 UNITS
00:10:31 FROM INCLUSIONARY REQUIREMENTS, THE ORDINANCE WOULD MAKE IT
00:10:33 EASIER TO BUILD EXACTLY THE KIND OF SMALL MID-SCALE INFILL
00:10:35 DEVELOPMENT AND THE WELL-RESOURCED NEIGHBORHOODS
00:10:39 THAT FAMILY ZONING ENVISIONED. IN FACT THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT
00:10:41 ESTIMATES THAT HALF OF ALL THE FAMILY ZONING SITES THAT WERE
00:10:44 ZONED HAVE A CAPACITY OF 25 OR FEWER UNITS.
00:10:47 AT THE SAME TIME, THESE PROJECTS HAVE ONLY PROVIDED
00:10:50 LESS THAN 2% OF INCLUSIONARY UNITS OVER THE PAST TEN YEARS.
00:10:54 SECONDLY, BY SETTING THE LOCAL INCLUSIONARY REQUIREMENTS TO BE
00:10:58 LOWER THAN THE AMOUNTS THAT ARE REQUIRED TO QUALIFY FOR THE
00:11:02 STATE DENSITY BONUS PROGRAM OR THE VARIOUS STATEMENTS SERIAL
00:11:05 APPROVAL PROGRAMS, WE WILL BE PROVIDING A STRONG INCENTIVE TO
00:11:09 USE OUR LOCAL ZONING AND OUR FAMILY ZONING PROGRAM
00:11:10 AND APPROVAL PROCESS. PROJECTS CAN CERTAINLY STILL
00:11:14 USE THESE STATE PROGRAMS BUT THEY WOULD HAVE TO PROVIDE
00:11:15 SIGNIFICANTLY MORE AFFORDABLE HOUSING TO BE ABLE TO ACCESS
00:11:18 THOSE PROGRAMS PER STATE LAW. FINALLY, THE ORDINANCE IS
00:11:21 INTENDED TO SIGNIFICANTLY SIMPLIFY AND STREAMLINE THE
00:11:24 OVERALL PROCESS BY WHICH PLANNING AND BUILDING
00:11:25 DEPARTMENTS IMPLEMENT THESE FEE PROGRAMS TO PROVIDE GREATER
00:11:29 TRANSPARENCY AND PREDICTABILITY ABOUT HOW THESE PROGRAMS ARE
00:11:33 APPLIED. FINALLY, SUPERVISORS AS YOU
00:11:34 CONSIDER THIS ITEM TODAY I ASK THAT YOU KEEP IN MIND THE
00:11:38 BROADER CONTEXT OF THIS PROGRAM .
00:11:40 THE INCLUSIONARY HOUSING PROGRAM HAS BEEN A MEANINGFUL
00:11:41 BUT SMALL PORTION OF OUR OVERALL AFFORDABLE HOUSING
00:11:45 SUPPLY OF MOST 35,000 AFFORDABLE UNITS SUBSIDIZED
00:11:48 AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNITS IN THEIR PORTFOLIO.
00:11:52 FEWER THAN 9% HAVE COME FROM THE INCLUSIONARY PROGRAM SINCE
00:11:55 2002 AND SINCE 2020 THAT HAS ACTUALLY BEEN LESS THAN 6% OF
00:11:59 OUR TOTAL AFFORDABLE HOUSING SUPPLY COMING FROM THIS
00:12:02 PROGRAM. THE FEE REVENUE WE GET FROM
00:12:05 INCLUSIONARY HAS HAD A SIMILAR TRAJECTORY.
00:12:06 WE USED TO GET ABOUT $20 MILLION A YEAR IN BETTER
00:12:10 ECONOMIC TIMES AND SINCE THE PANDEMIC THAT HAS BEEN LESS
00:12:14 THAN 2 MILLION PER YEAR IN INCLUSIONARY FEE REVENUE
00:12:17 AND THERE WAS ACTUALLY A NEGATIVE BALANCE FOR THAT
00:12:18 PROGRAM DUE TO REFUNDING PROJECTS THAT CANCELED THEIR
00:12:21 BUILDING PERMITS LAST YEAR. WE'VE SEEN A SIMILAR PATTERN ON
00:12:25 THE OVERALL DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES WHICH IN THE LAST TWO
00:12:28 YEARS HAVE BROUGHT IN ONLY ABOUT $3 MILLION ON AVERAGE FOR
00:12:29 ALL CITYWIDE DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES IN TOTAL.
00:12:32 THIS TRACKS THE MARKET CONDITIONS THAT WE'VE SEEN
00:12:36 WHERE WE'VE SEEN A 70% REDUCTION IN MARKET RATE
00:12:37 HOUSING SINCE THE PANDEMIC. AT THE SAME TIME PROVIDING
00:12:40 THESE INCLUSIONARY UNITS DOES IMPOSE COSTS ON HOUSING
00:12:44 DEVELOPMENT OF AN ADDITIONAL 50 TO $90,000 PER UNIT.
00:12:47 THE COST OF OTHER DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES CAN INCREASE THIS
00:12:53 TO BE OVER $150,000 PER UNIT AN ADDITIONAL COST THAT ARE
00:12:57 ULTIMATELY PAID BY THE RENTERS OF THESE UNITS OR BUYERS IF
00:12:58 THEY CAN BE BUILT AT ALL. SO WE STAND LITTLE TO LOSE FROM
00:13:04 THESE REDUCTIONS GIVEN THAT CONTEXT BUT A LOT TO GAIN
00:13:05 IN TERMS OF OVERALL HOUSING PRODUCTION.
00:13:08 IN SUMMARY SUPERVISORS WE BELIEVE THIS IS A LEGISLATION
00:13:11 STRIKES AN APPROPRIATE BALANCE AND ACCOMPLISHES WHAT THE TAC
00:13:13 RECOMMENDED. THANK YOU VERY MUCH SUPERVISORS
00:13:16 MITCHELL GARTON CHERYL FOR YOUR CO-SPONSORSHIP AND TO JEN LO
00:13:19 AND LAWRENCE DEROSA ON YOUR STAFF.
00:13:23 WITH THAT I'LL HAND IT OVER TO EIGHT A TEN WITH THE PLANNING
00:13:24 DEPARTMENT TO GO OVER THE DETAILS OF THE ORDINANCE
00:13:27 AND WE'LL BE HERE FOR QUESTIONS ALONG WITH THAT CITY
00:13:28 AND CONTROLLER STAFF. THANK YOU.
00:13:31 >> THANK YOU. >> GOOD MORNING, COMMITTEE
00:13:38 MEMBERS. MY NAME IS ADA TAN WITH
00:13:39 PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF. I'LL PROVIDE AN OVERVIEW OF THE
00:13:42 PROPOSED ORDINANCE ON MAY 19TH 2026.
00:13:46 >> MAYOR LAURIE AND SUPERVISORS MELGAR, DORSEY, CHERYL
00:13:50 AND SOUDER INTRODUCE LEGISLATION TO AMEND THE
00:13:52 INCLUSIONARY REQUIREMENTS AND REDUCE DEVELOPMENT IMPACT
00:13:54 FEES AND THEIR BOARD FILE NUMBER 2605 THREE EIGHT.
00:13:57 >> ON JUNE 2ND A SUBSTITUTE ORDINANCE WAS INTRODUCED UNDER
00:14:00 THE SAME BOARD FILE NUMBER. >> MANY OF THE KEY CHANGES
00:14:06 PROPOSED UNDER THE ORDINANCE ARE CONSISTENT WITH THE TAC
00:14:11 RECOMMENDATIONS. >> THE APPLICABILITY THRESHOLD
00:14:12 WOULD INCREASE FROM PROJECTS WITH TEN OR MORE UNITS TO
00:14:16 PROJECTS WITH 25 OR MORE UNITS RATHER THAN HAVING THE ONSITE
00:14:20 RATES SPRING BACK UP TO 18% OR 20%.
00:14:22 >> ON NOVEMBER FIRST THE RATE WOULD BE 5%.
00:14:24 >> THE THREE INCOME TIERS THAT ARE CURRENTLY REQUIRED WOULD
00:14:28 INSTEAD BE SPLIT BETWEEN THE TWO LOWER TIERS WITH FOUR
00:14:31 PERCENT AT LOW INCOME AND 1% AT MODERATE INCOME.
00:14:34 >> ADDITIONALLY, THE FEE AND OFF SITE RATES WOULD BE SET
00:14:39 TO 10%. >> THE AREAS SHOWN ON THIS MAP
00:14:44 CURRENTLY HAVE HIGHER RATES THAN CITYWIDE RATES.
00:14:48 THE ORDINANCE PROPOSES THAT PROJECTS IN THESE AREAS BE
00:14:49 SUBJECT TO THE CITYWIDE ONSITE RATE OF 5% WITH FEE AND OFFSITE
00:14:52 RATES SET TO 15%. >> THE PROPOSED ORDINANCE
00:14:58 EXPANDS THE LAND DEDICATION OPTION CITYWIDE PROJECTS IN THE
00:15:02 SPECIFIC AREAS SHOWN ON THE PREVIOUS MAP WOULD STILL BE
00:15:06 ABLE TO DEDICATE LAND WITH ENOUGH CAPACITY FOR AFFORDABLE
00:15:07 HOUSING EQUAL TO 15% OF UNITS ON THE PRINCIPAL SITE.
00:15:10 MOST PROJECTS CITYWIDE INCLUDING THOSE IN THE HOUSING
00:15:14 CHOICE ARE SAFE AREA AND WHILE WE SOURCE NEIGHBORHOODS WOULD
00:15:18 NEED TO DEDICATE LAND EQUAL TO 10% OF THE UNITS, THE MINIMUM
00:15:21 SITE CAPACITY WOULD BE 70 UNITS AND MOST MUST APPROVE THAT
00:15:27 SITE. >> DEDICATED SITES WOULD NEED
00:15:28 TO BE LOCATED WITHIN ONE MILE OF THE PRINCIPAL PROJECT.
00:15:31 HOWEVER PROJECTS LOCATED IN THE SPECIFIC AREAS OR WITHIN A WELL
00:15:35 WE SOURCE NEIGHBORHOOD DEDICATE LAND ANYWHERE WITHIN THOSE
00:15:39 AREAS. THE SAME LOCATION STANDARDS
00:15:40 WOULD APPLY TO PROJECTS PROVIDING UNITS OFFSITE.
00:15:46 THE ORDINANCE ALSO ESTABLISHES ADMINISTRATIVE PROCESSES FOR
00:15:51 HOW PROJECTS CAN TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THE NEW RATES REQUEST
00:15:52 EXTENSIONS TO THEIR PERFORMANCE PERIOD OR MODIFY THE METHOD OF
00:15:56 INCLUSIONARY COMPLIANCE AND PROJECT TENURE.
00:16:01 >> UNDER THE PROPOSED ORDINANCE ALL ARTICLE FOUR IMPACT FEES
00:16:05 UNDER THE PLANNING CODE EXCEPT FOR THE INCLUSIONARY AFFORDABLE
00:16:07 HOUSING FEE WOULD BE REDUCED BY 67%.
00:16:09 >> THIS REDUCTION WOULD NOT APPLY TO OTHER FEES SUCH AS
00:16:14 SCHOOL FEES OR HOOKUP CAPACITY CHARGES.
00:16:17 >> THIS REDUCTION WOULD APPLY TO ALL PROJECTS INCLUDING NON
00:16:20 RESIDENTIAL PROJECTS THAT SUBMIT A COMPLETE DEVELOPMENT
00:16:22 APPLICATION AND TWO PIPELINE PROJECTS THAT HAVE BEEN FINALLY
00:16:26 APPROVED BUT HAVE NOT BEEN ISSUED A FIRST CONSTRUCTION
00:16:29 DOCUMENT. >> THE FEED DEFERRAL PROGRAM
00:16:33 THAT WAS ESTABLISHED OR REINSTATED I SHOULD SAY IN THE
00:16:36 2023 ORDINANCE WOULD REMAIN IN PLACE AND WOULD BE AMENDED
00:16:39 TO ALLOW ALL PROJECTS TO DEFER 85% OF FEES TO THE FIRST
00:16:43 CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY INCLUDING INCLUDING
00:16:44 INCLUSIONARY FEES. CURRENTLY PROJECTS IN AREA
00:16:47 PLANS MAY ONLY DEFER 80% OF FEES.
00:16:52 >> THE AREAS SHOWN ON THIS MAP ARE REQUIRED TO PAY ADDITIONAL
00:16:56 AFFORDABLE HOUSING FEES ON TOP OF THE INCLUSIONARY FEE.
00:16:57 THIS ORDINANCE WOULD ELIMINATE THE ADDITIONAL HOUSING FEES
00:17:01 FROM THESE AREAS WHEN IMPACT FEES ARE REDUCED OR ELIMINATED
00:17:08 BY LEGISLATION AS PROPOSED UNDER THIS ORDINANCE.
00:17:09 >> PIPELINE PROJECTS WOULD BE ABLE TO MODIFY THEIR
00:17:12 REQUIREMENTS TO INCORPORATE THE REDUCTIONS ANY AMOUNT THAT'S
00:17:16 ALREADY BEEN PAID AT BUILDING PERMIT ISSUANCE WOULD NOT BE
00:17:19 REFUNDED AND THE REDUCTION WOULD ONLY APPLY TO THE
00:17:21 REMAINING DEFERRED BALANCE. >> DUET OCCUPANCY FOR PROJECTS
00:17:27 PROPOSING A 20% OR LESS INCREASE IN GROSS FLOOR AREA.
00:17:28 >> THOSE PROJECTS WILL KEEP THEIR ORIGINAL FEE TYPES
00:17:32 AND THE RATES WILL BE LOCKED IN AT FINAL APPROVAL.
00:17:35 MODIFICATIONS OF OVER 20% IN SIZE OR ENTITLEMENT
00:17:38 EXTENSIONS WILL BE FULLY REASSESSED USING THE FEE TYPES
00:17:42 AND RATES IN EFFECT AT THE TIME OF THE REQUEST.
00:17:45 >> PROJECTS MUST OBTAIN FIRST CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENT WITHIN
00:17:49 THREE YEARS OF FINAL PLANNING APPROVAL AND PROJECTS THAT
00:17:52 EXPIRE OR THAT REQUEST MODIFICATIONS OF 20% OR MORE
00:17:55 ARE SUBJECT TO THE REQUIREMENTS IN EFFECT AT THE TIME THE
00:17:59 SPONSOR SUBMITS A COMPLETE APPLICATION FOR THE REVISED
00:18:00 PROJECT. >> SO AS JACOB MENTIONED
00:18:09 EARLIER, THE TAC DID CONVENE THEY STARTING IN DECEMBER 2025
00:18:12 AND MET FOUR TIMES THROUGH APRIL.
00:18:13 >> THE COMPTROLLER THEN PUBLISHED THE ECONOMIC
00:18:17 FEASIBILITY REPORT WITH THE TAX RECOMMENDATIONS ON APRIL 30TH
00:18:20 OF THIS YEAR. >> AS FOR THE LEGISLATIVE
00:18:23 TIMELINE, THIS ORDINANCE AND THE ORDINANCE INITIATING
00:18:24 THE HOUSING TRUST FUND EXPANSION WERE INTRODUCED ON
00:18:28 MAY 19TH. >> THE INCLUSIONARY AND IMPACT
00:18:31 FEE ORDINANCE WAS PRESENTED TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION FOR AN
00:18:35 INFORMATIONAL HEARING ON MAY 28TH AND TO THE PLANNING
00:18:36 DEPARTMENT'S EQUITY ADVISORY COUNCIL ON JUNE 9TH.
00:18:39 >> CITY STAFF ALSO PRESENTED TO THE BUILDING INSPECTION
00:18:43 COMMISSION ON JUNE 17TH WHERE THE UNANIMOUSLY APPROVED THE
00:18:46 PROPOSED CHANGES UNDER THE ORDINANCE THAT PERTAIN TO THE
00:18:49 BUILDING CODE WHICH RELATE TO IMPACT FEE ADMINISTRATION.
00:18:53 ON JUNE 18TH THE PLANNING COMMISSION HEARD THIS ITEM
00:18:54 AND APPROVED THE PLANNING CODE AMENDMENTS.
00:18:57 >> OVERALL THIS HAS BEEN A VERY THOROUGH AND ROBUST PROCESS
00:19:00 WITH OPPORTUNITIES FOR THE PUBLIC TO PROVIDE THEIR
00:19:02 COMMENTS. >> AFTER TODAY'S COMMITTEE
00:19:05 HEARING THE GOAL IS TO GET THIS ITEM BEFORE THE FULL BOARD
00:19:07 PRIOR TO THE AUGUST RECESS. >> SO DURING THE PLANNING
00:19:13 COMMISSION HEARING THE COMMISSION APPROVED TWO ACTION
00:19:16 ITEMS. THE FIRST WAS THE
00:19:17 RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL OF THE PROPOSED ORDINANCE WITH
00:19:20 MODIFICATIONS THAT ARE ADMINISTRATIVE AND NON
00:19:22 SUBSTANTIVE OF WHICH INCLUDE AMENDING THE NORTH OF MARKET
00:19:25 RESIDENTIAL SPECIAL USE DISTRICT TO ACCOUNT FOR A
00:19:28 CONDITIONAL USE APPROVAL PROCESS.
00:19:29 >> A HIGH INCREASE IS ALREADY ALLOWED IN THIS STUDY THROUGH
00:19:33 A.K.A. THE CLEAN UP LANGUAGE IS TO
00:19:36 CLARIFY THAT THE HEIGHT INCREASE MAY STILL BE GRANTED
00:19:37 THROUGH THAT PROCESS BUT WITHOUT HAVING TO PAY THE
00:19:40 ADDITIONAL AFFORDABLE HOUSING FEE WHICH IS PROPOSED TO BE
00:19:44 REMOVED THROUGH THIS ORDINANCE AS WAS SHOWN ON A PRIOR SLIDE.
00:19:45 >> THE SECOND MODIFICATION IS TO UPDATE SECTION FOUR 15.10 E
00:19:51 TO CORRECT A TYPO AND STATE THE CORRECT CODE REFERENCE AND THE
00:19:54 THIRD IS TO CORRECT THE DEFINITION OF DEVELOPMENT
00:19:58 APPLICATION SPECIFICALLY FOR PROJECTS THAT ARE SUBJECT TO
00:20:00 DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT. THE DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION
00:20:03 SHALL MEAN THE AND IN INDIVIDUAL BUILDINGS FOR SITE
00:20:06 OR BUILDING PERMIT. WE UNDERSTAND THAT CHAIR CHERYL
00:20:08 INTENDS TO MOVE THESE AMENDMENTS TODAY.
00:20:10 >> THE PLANNING COMMISSION ALSO ADOPTED A RECOMMENDATION TO
00:20:14 DELEGATE AUTHORITY TO THE PLANNING DIRECTOR OR THEIR
00:20:15 DESIGNEE TO ADMINISTRATIVELY APPROVE REQUESTS FOR PROJECTS
00:20:19 SEEKING TO AMEND CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL RELATED TO
00:20:23 INCLUSIONARY INVESTING. >> THIS CONCLUDES STAFF
00:20:26 PRESENTATION. >> MYSELF ALONG WITH OTHER CITY
00:20:30 STAFF ARE AVAILABLE TO RESPOND TO ANY QUESTIONS.
00:20:31 THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU.
00:20:34 WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A BUNCH OF QUESTIONS FOR YOU IN A BIT.
00:20:35 NICHOLAS MINARD FROM THE BALLET .
00:20:40 >> GOOD MORNING SUPERVISORS. NICK MONAGHAN FROM THE PLAY.
00:20:44 ITEM TWO IS AN ORDINANCE THAT WOULD REDUCE INCLUSIONARY FEES
00:20:48 AND DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES. WE SUMMARIZE THE CHANGES ON
00:20:51 EXHIBIT TWO ONE, TWO AND THREE OF OUR REPORT.
00:20:52 AND THEN IN TERMS OF FISCAL IMPACT, WE LOOKED AT THE
00:20:55 AFFORDABLE HOUSING FEES THAT HAVE BEEN COLLECTED BY THE CITY
00:20:59 IN 2324. CAN YOU HEAR ME NOW?
00:21:02 >> YES. OKAY, GREAT.
00:21:05 IN TERMS OF FISCAL IMPACT IN FISCAL YEAR 2324, THE CITY
00:21:12 COLLECTED $1.5 MILLION OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING FEES
00:21:15 AND $2.6 MILLION OF DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES.
00:21:16 THESE ARE THE KIND OF FEES THAT THIS ORDINANCE WOULD REDUCE THE
00:21:20 SCOPE OF THE REDUCTIONS ABOUT 50%.
00:21:23 SO THAT'S BASICALLY THE FISCAL IMPACT IS ABOUT $3 MILLION A
00:21:29 YEAR BASED ON DEVELOPMENT FEES THAT THE CITY IS COLLECTING
00:21:33 RIGHT NOW. THE CITY USED TO COLLECT A MUCH
00:21:34 MORE DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES WHEN THERE WAS MORE MARKET RATE
00:21:37 DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITY IN SAN FRANCISCO.
00:21:40 THE FEE LOSSES WOULD BE OFFSET BY FEES FOR NEW NEW
00:21:45 CONSTRUCTION THAT THIS THAT THESE FEE REDUCTIONS UNLOCK.
00:21:49 SO AS MORE BUILDINGS GET BUILT THEY WILL PAY MORE FEES
00:21:53 AND THAT WILL OFFSET SOME OF THE FEE LOSS AND THEY WILL ALSO
00:21:57 TO THE EXTENT THAT THEIR MARKET RATE DEVELOPMENTS ALSO PROVIDE
00:22:00 PROPERTY TAX AND OTHER TAX PAYING RESIDENTS IN SAN
00:22:02 FRANCISCO THAT WILL OFFSET SOME OF THESE FEE LOSSES.
00:22:05 >> HOWEVER, GIVEN THAT THE THE FEASIBILITY CAP FOR RESIDENTIAL
00:22:12 DEVELOPMENT IN SAN FRANCISCO IS SO LARGE THAT WAIVING ALL OF
00:22:16 THESE FEES EVEN TO ZERO WOULD NOT CLOSE THAT GAP, I DON'T
00:22:23 THINK LOWERING THE LOW IN THESE FEES AS THE ORDINANCE DOES NOW
00:22:27 WOULD UNLOCK ENOUGH RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT TO FULLY OFFSET THE
00:22:31 FEE LOSS. SO THAT'S WHY YOU KNOW, WE
00:22:37 ISSUED A REPORT A COUPLE OF WEEKS AGO ABOUT MECHANISMS FOR
00:22:41 FUNDING AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND THAT WAS SORT OF THE LAND
00:22:42 USE COMMITTEE ON GIANT ON JUNE 5TH.
00:22:46 >> BUT WE JUST TAKE THE LAST PART.
00:22:47 YEAH. SO WE HAVE WE HAVE A SEPARATE
00:22:49 REPORT ON THIS ITEM THAT WAS ISSUED JUNE FIFTH AND THEN
00:22:52 HEARD AT THE LAND USE COMMITTEE THAT HAS MANY DIFFERENT OPTIONS
00:22:56 FOR THE CITY. WE JUST COULDN'T HEAR YOU.
00:22:57 OH, THAT HAS MANY DIFFERENT OPTIONS FOR THE CITY TO
00:23:00 CONSIDER OPTIONS FOR FUNDING AFFORDABLE HOUSING.
00:23:07 >> I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY OTHER QUESTIONS.
00:23:09 GREAT. THANK YOU.
00:23:11 >> CAN WE QUICKLY DIVE INTO PUBLIC COMMENT AND ONCE AGAIN,
00:23:16 MADAM CLERK, LET'S LIMIT PUBLIC COMMENT TO ONE MINUTE.
00:23:19 >> YES. MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC WHO WISH
00:23:20 TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM SHALL LINE THEM NOW ALONG THE SIDE BY
00:23:23 THE WINDOWS. >> ALL SPEAKERS WILL HAVE ONE
00:23:25 MINUTE. >> GOOD MORNING GOVERNMENT
00:23:36 AND AUDIT OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE GRIFFIN LEE HERE REPRESENTING
00:23:41 CONNECTED S.F.. >> OUR MEMBERS EXPRESSED
00:23:44 SUPPORT IN BOTH OUR THIS ENTIRE FILE SO WE DO SUPPORT REDUCING
00:23:51 INCLUSIONARY FEES AND ALSO ELIMINATING ALL THE IMPACT
00:23:55 FEES. >> THE ONE QUESTION WE HAVE
00:23:59 THOUGH IS BASED ON THE BIELA REPORT IT'S STILL SAYS THAT
00:24:06 THERE'S STILL NOT FINANCIALLY FEASIBLE WITH THESE REDUCTIONS.
00:24:10 SO WHY AREN'T WE GOING FURTHER ?
00:24:13 >> I THINK THAT'S A QUESTION THAT SHOULD BE ASKED HERE TODAY
00:24:17 AND TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION. >> BUT WE DO SUPPORT THE
00:24:19 OVERALL REFORMS HERE. >> THANKS SO MUCH.
00:24:23 THANK YOU. >> NEXT WEEK PLEASE.
00:24:28 >> GOOD AFTERNOON CHAIR AND SUPERVISORS.
00:24:33 MY NAME IS TREVOR LONG AND I'M HERE WITH GLAZERS LOCAL 718
00:24:35 AND A PART OF SAN FRANCISCO. THE SAN FRANCISCO'S BUILDING
00:24:37 TRADES UNIONS. I WANT TO FOCUS ON PROCESS THE
00:24:40 INCLUSIONARY REQUIRE MENT WAS NOT CREATED CASUALLY AND SHOULD
00:24:44 NOT BE CHANGED CASUALLY BUT THAT'S NOT WHAT'S HAPPENING
00:24:47 HERE. THE TAC EXISTS FOR THIS EXACT
00:24:51 PURPOSE TO BRING TECHNICAL EXPERTISE HOUSING FINANCE
00:24:52 EXPERIENCE AT AFFORDABLE HOUSING VOICES, MARKET RATE,
00:24:56 HOUSING EXPERIENCE AND CITY STAFF ANALYSIS TOGETHER.
00:25:00 SO SAN FRANCISCO CAN SET A REQUIREMENT THAT IS AMBITIOUS
00:25:03 BUT REALISTIC. THAT PROCESS JUST HAPPENS.
00:25:06 THE CONCLUSION IS CLEAR UNDER TODAY'S CONDITIONS MANY
00:25:08 PROJECTS ARE INFEASIBLE AND LOWERING THEIR REQUIREMENT
00:25:11 IMPROVES FEASIBILITY FOR WORKERS DELAYS HAS REAL
00:25:14 CONSEQUENCES WHEN HOUSING PROJECT IS STALLED A GLAZER IS
00:25:18 NOT WORKING. AN APPRENTICE IS NOT GETTING
00:25:20 HOURS AND A PAINTER IS NOT URGING EARNING WAGES AND A
00:25:22 FAMILY IS NOT GETTING A HOME IN THE CITY IS NOT RECEIVING
00:25:26 THE PUBLIC RENT OF YOU FOR ONE OF THAT COMES FROM COMPLETING.
00:25:29 THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENTS. PLEASE PLEASE CONSIDER
00:25:32 APPROVING. >> THANK YOU.
00:25:33 NEXT SPEAKER PLEASE. >> GOOD MORNING SUPERVISORS
00:25:37 AND STAFF. MY NAME IS GREG HARDIMAN WITH
00:25:40 THE ELEVATOR CONSTRUCTORS LOCAL EIGHT PROUD AFFILIATE OF THE
00:25:42 SAN FRANCISCO BUILDING TRADES. OUR MEMBERS BUILD THE CITY, WE
00:25:45 BUILD THE HOMES, THE INFRASTRUCTURE BUT RIGHT NOW
00:25:48 TOO MANY PROJECTS AREN'T PENCILING OUT BECAUSE OF THE
00:25:52 CURRENT WAY THINGS ARE. THIS MEASURE THIS MEANS NO NEW
00:25:56 HOMES, NO AFFORDABLE UNITS. IT MEANS NO IMPACT FEES.
00:25:59 AND FOR OUR MEMBERS IT MEANS FEWER PAYCHECKS AND FEWER
00:26:03 APPRENTICE HOURS. THIS ORDINANCE IS NOT WORKING.
00:26:06 THIS IMPORTANT IS NOT WALKING AWAY FROM AFFORDABLE HOUSING IS
00:26:11 KEEPING AND CLOSING REQUIREMENTS FOR LARGER
00:26:13 PROJECTS WHILE RIGHT SIZING FOR THE TODAY'S MARKET THE TAC DID
00:26:17 THEIR TECHNICAL WORK. THE CONTROLLERS PROCESS LOOKED
00:26:21 AT THE NUMBERS. THE PLANNING COMMISSION
00:26:23 APPROVED IT AND THE BUDGET AND LEGISLATIVE AND ANALYSTS
00:26:26 CONFIRMS THAT THIS HELPS PROJECTS MOVE THE CITY CAN SEE
00:26:29 OFFSETTING REVENUE FROM FEES AND PROPERTY TAXES THAT
00:26:33 OTHERWISE WOULD NOT EXIST. WE URGE WE URGE YOU TO SUPPORT
00:26:37 THE TAC. >> THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENTS
00:26:40 . >> NEXT SPEAKER PLEASE.
00:26:44 >> HELLO DAVID WU WITH SOMEONE PILIPINAS WE ARE OPPOSED TO
00:26:48 THESE CUTS THAT REDUCE RATES DRAMATICALLY.
00:26:49 WE ARE ALSO OPPOSED TO THE PERMANENT REMOVAL OF HIGHER
00:26:53 INCLUSIONARY RATES THAT WERE DETERMINED THROUGH A COMMUNITY
00:26:57 PROCESS AS PART OF THE INCREASE INCREASED ZONING IN AREA PLANS
00:27:00 INCLUDING IN THE SOMA YOUTH AND FAMILY STUDY IN WESTERN
00:27:04 SOMA THERE IS NOT A PROPORTIONAL REDUCTION OR TIME
00:27:08 LIMIT TO THESE CHANGES BUT A COMPLETE REMOVAL.
00:27:11 THESE ARE AREA SPECIFIC HIGHER INCLUSIONARY RATES THAT WERE
00:27:12 SUPPOSED TO REPRESENT A TRADEOFF BETWEEN INCREASED
00:27:16 DEVELOPMENT CAPACITY MEANING MORE PROFIT FOR PRIVATE
00:27:19 DEVELOPERS AND MITIGATION OF IMPACTS TO THE COMMUNITY.
00:27:23 THE AREA PLAN TRADEOFFS WERE ALREADY HEAVILY IN FAVOR OF
00:27:27 PRIVATE DEVELOPERS WITH THE COMMUNITY HAVING TO CARRY THE
00:27:30 BURDEN OF INCREASED GENTRIFICATION AND DISPLACEMENT
00:27:32 PRESSURES. THIS REMOVAL SIGNALS THAT SOMA
00:27:34 WILL NOT HAVE LAND USE AGREEMENTS HONORED AND IT WILL
00:27:39 BE HARD TO TAKE ANY FUTURE COMMUNITY BENEFITS TIED TO UP
00:27:42 ZONING SERIOUSLY WHEN THEY CAN BE SO EASILY REMOVED.
00:27:45 >> THANK YOU. NEXT SPEAKER GOOD MORNING CHAIR
00:27:49 SUPERVISORS I'M REBECCA FOSTER, CEO OF THE HOUSING ACCELERATOR
00:27:54 FUND AND A MEMBER OF THE INCLUSIONARY TAC AT THE TAC AS
00:28:01 AS WE'VE HEARD SPENT MONTHS REVIEWING THE DATA AND REACHED
00:28:03 A UNANIMOUS CONCLUSION THAT UNDER TODAY'S ECONOMIC
00:28:06 CONDITIONS CURRENT INCLUSIONARY REQUIREMENTS ARE UNFORTUNATELY
00:28:10 PREVENTING NEW HOUSING FROM BEING BUILT AND THAT'S WHY WE
00:28:13 RECOMMENDED A VERY IMPORTANT TWO PART PACKAGE LOWERING THE
00:28:17 ONSITE RATE TO 5% PAIRED WITH A RENEWED AND EXPANDED HOUSING
00:28:21 TRUST FUND. THESE ARE REALLY DESIGNED TO
00:28:24 WORK TOGETHER. WE'VE MADE REAL PROGRESS
00:28:27 STREAMLINING HOUSING APPROVALS BUT ONE OF THE BIGGEST BARRIERS
00:28:29 THAT REMAINS IS FINANCING CERTAINTY FOR AFFORDABLE
00:28:32 HOUSING THE HOUSING TRUST FUND CREATES THAT STABLE,
00:28:36 PREDICTABLE SOURCE OF FUNDING FOR MARKET RATE HOUSING
00:28:39 CERTAINTY OVER A THREE YEAR PERIOD WHEN THE TAC WOULD MEET
00:28:43 AGAIN CREATES THAT CERTAINTY TO BE ABLE TO PLAN THROUGH
00:28:46 ENTITLEMENTS AND CONSTRUCTION SO THAT WE CAN GROW THE OVERALL
00:28:50 FUNDING BASE FOR THE CITY TOGETHER WE NEED BOTH
00:28:52 AFFORDABLE AND HUMANE HOUSING. >> THANK YOU.
00:28:55 NEXT SPEAKER PLEASE. >> GOOD MORNING CHAIR
00:29:02 AND SUPERVISORS. MY NAME IS LILY LOU HAYLER.
00:29:03 I'M THE CEO OF MERCY HOUSING CALIFORNIA MERCY IS A NONPROFIT
00:29:06 AFFORDABLE HOUSING DEVELOPER AND HERE IN SAN FRANCISCO WE
00:29:10 OWN MANAGE AND PROVIDE SERVICES TO 58 AFFORDABLE APARTMENT
00:29:13 COMMUNITIES AND HAVE JUST UNDER 3000 ADDITIONAL HOMES IN OUR
00:29:16 SAN FRANCISCO DEVELOPMENT PIPELINE HOMES WE ARE EAGER TO
00:29:20 BUILD AS A MISSION DRIVEN DEVELOPER.
00:29:21 >> WE KNOW THAT RELIABLE LOCAL FUNDING IS CRITICAL TO
00:29:25 PRESERVING AND PRODUCING AFFORDABLE HOMES AND THAT
00:29:28 PREDICTABILITY INCREASES OUR ABILITY TO MOVE HOUSING
00:29:29 FORWARD. WE SUPPORT THE UNANIMOUS
00:29:32 RECOMMENDATIONS MADE BY THE TAC TO IMPROVE SAN FRANCISCO'S
00:29:36 HOUSING ECOSYSTEM NAMELY THOSE RECOMMENDATIONS WERE TO PLACE
00:29:40 THE HOUSING TRUST FUND CHARTER AMENDMENT ON THE BALLOT
00:29:41 IN NOVEMBER AND TO MODIFY THE INCLUSIONARY HOUSING
00:29:44 REQUIREMENTS AND DEVELOPMENT FEES TO ENCOURAGE THE
00:29:47 PRODUCTION OF HOUSING IN THE CITY.
00:29:48 WE HOPE YOU WILL ADVANCE THESE WELL-CONSIDERED AND UNANIMOUS
00:29:51 RECOMMENDATIONS. >> THANK YOU.
00:29:54 >> THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENTS. NEXT SPEAKER PLEASE SUPERVISORS
00:29:58 MY NAME IS JESSE BLAUT WITH STRATA INVESTMENT GROUP AND I
00:30:03 HAVE BEEN A MEMBER OF THE TAC FOR THE LAST SINCE ITS
00:30:06 INCEPTION FOR THE LAST THREE CYCLES HERE.
00:30:09 PROUD OF THE WORK WE'VE DONE. I WANT TO REITERATE THAT THIS
00:30:10 IS A SORT OF GLOBAL SOLUTION TIED TO THE HOUSING TRUST FUND
00:30:16 BUT THAT THESE INCLUSIONARY CHANGES WILL MAKE A
00:30:20 MATERIAL IMPACT ON FEASIBILITY. WE'VE BUILT OVER 1000 UNITS
00:30:23 IN SAN FRANCISCO. I THINK WE'RE THE MOST ACTIVE
00:30:27 DEVELOPER RIGHT NOW IN THE LAST FIVE, SIX, FIVE, SIX YEARS WE
00:30:30 BUILT OVER 1000 UNITS. WE HAVE 1500 UNITS IN THE
00:30:31 PIPELINE AND THIS WILL MAKE A HUGE IMPACT ON OUR ABILITY TO
00:30:35 START CONSTRUCTION. >> SO THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
00:30:39 THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENTS. NEXT SPEAKER PLEASE.
00:30:46 >> GOOD MORNING SUPERVISORS. MY NAME IS EDDIE REYES AND I
00:30:49 LIVE HERE IN SAN FRANCISCO AND REPRESENT IRONWORKERS 377
00:30:51 THE BUILDING TRADES OUR MEMBERS UNDERSTAND THE AFFORDABLE
00:30:54 HOUSING CRISIS PERSONALLY THE PEOPLE WHO WIRE PLUMB FRAME
00:30:58 OPERATE FINISHED AND MAINTAIN THE CITY ARE ALSO THE PEOPLE
00:31:02 WHO RAISE FAMILIES HERE WE WANT AFFORDABLE HOUSING.
00:31:05 WE WANT MIXED INCOME COMMUNITIES AND WE WANT A CITY
00:31:09 WHERE WORKING PEOPLE CAN STAY. BUT THE CURRENT MATH IS NOT
00:31:12 PRODUCING THE RESULTS. >> SAN FRANCISCO NEEDS THE
00:31:13 PROPOSAL BEFORE YOU IS A BALANCED APPROACH.
00:31:17 IT LOWERS THE INCLUSIONARY REQUIREMENT AT THIS TIME BASED
00:31:21 ON THE TAX TECHNICAL ANALYSIS WHILE THE CITY ALSO PURSUES A
00:31:25 STRONGER HOUSING TRUST FUND TO CREATE A MORE STABLE SOURCE OF
00:31:29 AFFORDABLE HOUSING DOLLARS. THAT IS EXACTLY THE KIND OF
00:31:32 BALANCED POLICY SAN FRANCISCO NEEDS KEEP THE REQUIREMENT
00:31:36 IN PLACE, MAKES AFFORDABLE, MAKES PROJECTS FEASIBLE AND THE
00:31:40 FUND AFFORDABLE HOUSING IN A WAY THAT DOES DEPEND ON STYLE
00:31:46 STALLED PERFORMANCE PLEASE SUPPORT TAX RECOMMENDATION.
00:31:51 >> THANK YOU. NEXT SPEAKER PLEE.
00:31:54 >> GOOD MORNING SUPERVISORS. MY NAME IS JUGAL PATEL RESIDENT
00:31:58 OF D8 HERE WITH ABUNDANT C FRANCISCO IN SUPPORT OF THE
00:32:01 PROPOSED CHANGES TO THE INCLUSIONARY REQUIREMENT
00:32:03 AND DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES. AZIZ OVER THE LAST 15 YEARS I
00:32:08 HAVE LOVED EVERY FACET OF HOUSING INSECURITY IN THIS CITY
00:32:11 FROM SLEEPING ON ITS STREETS TO SHELTERS, REHABS, RELYING ON
00:32:13 HOUSING SUBSIDIES AND NOW SUPPORTING MYSELF IN A RENT
00:32:16 CONTROLLED APARTMENT AS I WORK MY WAY UP THE LINE TO SUPPORT
00:32:20 MYSELF IN THE CITY KEPT MOVING FURTHER AND FURTHER AWAY.
00:32:23 >> I TRIED TO APPLY FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING BUT WITH SO
00:32:24 FEW UNITS AND SO MUCH NEED I GAVE UP AFTER A WHILE.
00:32:27 NOW I MAKE TOO MUCH FOR AN AFFORDABLE UNIT AND I STILL
00:32:31 CAN'T AFFORD TO LIVE OUTSIDE OF RENT CONTROL.
00:32:32 I'M A CHAMPION FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING.
00:32:35 I UNDERSTAND HOW ESSENTIAL IT IS FOR OUR MOST VULNERABLE
00:32:38 NEIGHBORS TO BUILD A STABLE LIFE BUT WHEN AFFORDABLE
00:32:42 HOUSING IS TIED TO MARKET RATE DEVELOPMENT AND NO MARKET RATE
00:32:43 HOUSING IS GETTING BUILT, NO AFFORDABLE HOUSING GETS BUILT
00:32:46 EITHER. WE NEED TO PULL EVERY LEVER WE
00:32:49 HAVE FROM REDUCING INCLUSIONARY RATES REDUCING IMPACT FEES
00:32:53 AND INCREASING STABLE AFFORDABLE HOUSING FINANCING.
00:32:54 >> THANK YOU ALL. >> THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENTS
00:32:57 NEXT WEEK SPEAKER GOOD MORNING. >> MY NAME IS TWO HOURS AWAY AS
00:33:04 A PARTNER AT MARCH CAPITAL MANAGEMENT.
00:33:05 I'M HERE TO SPEAK IN SUPPORT OF THE INCLUSIONARY ORDINANCE AS
00:33:07 PROPOSED WITH NO AMENDMENTS. WE'VE BEEN REAL ESTATE
00:33:12 INVESTORS IN SAN FRANCISCO FOR 20 YEARS.
00:33:13 WE'VE BUILT MORE THAN 40 PROJECTS HERE.
00:33:16 WE'RE SMALL DEVELOPERS AND IN FACT MANY OF THESE BUILDINGS
00:33:19 HAVE BUILT THAT WE'VE BUILT FALL WITHIN THAT 10 TO 24 UNIT
00:33:22 RANGE FOR THE LAST SIX YEARS WE HAVE NOT BEEN ABLE TO MAKE ANY
00:33:26 SINGLE PROJECT PENCIL HERE AS MR. BLOOM MENTIONED, THESE
00:33:30 REQUIREMENTS ARE STILL ABOVE WHAT'S CONSIDERED FEASIBLE BUT
00:33:31 IT PROVIDES A GREAT RELIEF. WE ALL AGREE WE NEED MORE
00:33:34 HOUSING. MOST OF THE HOUSING PRODUCTION
00:33:37 COMES FROM PRIVATE INVESTMENT. IF PROJECTS ARE INFEASIBLE TO
00:33:39 BUILD, NO ONE BUILDS. THERE'S NO AFFORDABLE HOUSING.
00:33:41 IF WE CANNOT BUILD ANY HOUSING, THE CITY HAS ESSENTIALLY ONE
00:33:45 TOOL TO FIX HOUSING PRODUCTION AND THAT IS REASSURING THE
00:33:48 PRIVATE MARKETS THAT SAN FRANCISCO IS OPEN FOR BUSINESS
00:33:50 AGAIN, LET'S BE CLEAR THERE IS NO OTHER WAY FOR A CITY TO
00:33:53 PRODUCE HOUSING. WE NEED FOR THE LAST FIVE YEARS
00:33:56 THIS CITY HAS EFFECTIVELY BEEN REDLINED BY THE PRIVATE
00:33:59 MARKETS. THERE'S STILL A RISK PREMIUM
00:34:00 IN SAN FRANCISCO AND IT WILL NOT GO AWAY UNTIL LOCAL
00:34:03 REQUIREMENTS ARE REASONABLE. AGAIN, THESE ARE THE EXACTLY
00:34:04 THE SIGNAL THE NEXT PLEASE PASS THIS ORDINANCE HAS PROPOSED HI
00:34:15 SUPERVISORS MY NAME IS BEN EWING AND I'M A D5 RESIDENT
00:34:18 AND VOLUNTEER WITH SFE AND B AND I URGE YOU TO PLEASE PASS
00:34:19 THIS LEGISLATION. >> I'VE LIVED IN S.F. FOR OVER
00:34:22 EIGHT YEARS AND I LOVE IT HERE BUT AS I THINK ABOUT STARTING A
00:34:26 FAMILY, STAYING HERE IS PRETTY DAUNTING.
00:34:29 THE RENT IS THE HIGHEST IT'S EVER BEEN AND IT KEEPS
00:34:30 CLIMBING. CLIMBING AS YOU KNOW ENOUGH
00:34:33 HOUSING IS NOT BEING BUILT RIGHT NOW AND WE NEED IT MORE
00:34:36 THAN EVER. PLEASE PASS THIS LEGISLATION TO
00:34:37 MAKE BUILDING HOUSING MORE FEASIBLE SO THAT FAMILIES CAN
00:34:41 AFFORD TO LIVE HERE. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME.
00:34:43 >> THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENTS. NEXT SPEAKER PLEASE.
00:34:48 HI ERIC HOUSING DEVELOPER IN SAN FRANCISCO.
00:34:49 I STARTED MY DEVELOPMENT CAREER IN 2002 WHEN THE INCLUSIONARY
00:34:55 ORDINANCE FIRST PASSED. BUILT MY FIRST PROJECT WITH 12%
00:34:58 ON SITE AND IT WORKED AND IT WORKED FOR A WHILE.
00:34:59 WE'VE BUILT OVER 100 ON SITE INCLUSIONARY HOUSING UNITS PART
00:35:02 OF OUR PROJECTS. THEN IN 2008 THE GREAT
00:35:05 RECESSION HIT AND THEN THIS BOARD AND THE MAYOR WORKED
00:35:08 TOGETHER WITH DEVELOPERS TO REDUCE THE INCLUSIONARY HOUSING
00:35:12 AND CREATE THE HOUSING TRUST FUND.
00:35:13 THAT'S THE FIRST TIME WE DID IT AND IT WORKED.
00:35:16 >> WE WERE ABLE TO BUILD MORE HOUSING AFTER GETTING STUCK BY
00:35:18 THE GREAT RECESSION AND THAT HOUSING AND THAT INCREMENT TAX
00:35:20 WAS CREATED BY WAS ABLE TO FUND THE HOUSING TRUST FUND.
00:35:26 WE HAVEN'T BUILT SINCE 2020 SINCE THE PANDEMIC I SAY THE
00:35:28 IMPACTS OF PANDEMIC ARE FAR REACHING AND FAR WORSE THAN THE
00:35:31 GREAT RECESSION. I AM GLAD TO SEE THIS BOARD
00:35:34 AND THE MAYOR WORKING AGAIN TO DO THE SAME ACT TO REDUCE
00:35:37 INCLUSIONARY TO PERMIT MARKET RATE HOUSING AND ALSO
00:35:39 IN CONJUNCTION TO EXPAND THE HOUSING TRUST FUND TO ALLOW
00:35:43 MARKET HOUSING TO SUPPORT ADDITIONAL AFFORDABLE HOUSING
00:35:47 BY USING INCREASED PROPERTY TAXES TO FUND IT.
00:35:50 SIMILAR IN THEORY AS THE SPIRIT OF INCLUSIONARY HOUSING.
00:35:54 >> THANK YOU. THANK YOU.
00:35:54 A BRIEF REMINDER WE ARE ALLOWING ONE MINUTE PER SPEAKER
00:35:57 PLEASE. >> GOOD MORNING, SUPERVISORS
00:36:00 AND STAFF. MY NAME IS CLAYTON SANFORD
00:36:01 AND I'M A RESIDENT OF DISTRICT SIX.
00:36:02 I'M HERE TODAY WITH ABUNDANT ASF AND SFE AND B TO SPEAK
00:36:06 IN FAVOR OF THE AMENDMENTS. I GREW UP IN THE BAY AREA WHICH
00:36:09 MEANS THE HOUSING CRISIS IS PERSONAL TO ME.
00:36:11 MOST OF MY PEERS AND FRIENDS GROWING UP WOULD LIKE TO SET
00:36:13 DOWN ROOTS HERE BUT SIMPLY CAN'T BECAUSE OF BECAUSE OF THE
00:36:16 INABILITY TO SECURE ADEQUATE HOUSING.
00:36:19 I'VE SEEN PEOPLE WHO HAVE TO MAKE WRENCHING DECISIONS
00:36:20 AND HAVE TO LEAVE THE AREA BECAUSE OF THIS.
00:36:23 >> IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE THIS WAY.
00:36:24 HOWEVER, THIS AMENDMENT IS A GOOD STEP IN THE RIGHT
00:36:27 DIRECTION. LET'S EXPAND THE CITY'S
00:36:30 AFFORDABLE HOUSING TRUST FUND WITHOUT WITHOUT DISCOURAGING
00:36:34 THE HOUSING SUPPLY THAT WE BADLY NEED AS WELL.
00:36:38 ALSO AS SOMEONE WHO LIVES NEAR VENICE MARKET I'D REALLY LIKE
00:36:39 TO SEE SOME SOME MORE HOUSING COME UP IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD
00:36:43 SPECIFICALLY SO I'M EXCITED ABOUT THE PROVISIONS RELATED TO
00:36:45 THAT. >> THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME.
00:36:46 THANK YOU. >> NEXT SPEAKER PLEASE.
00:36:50 GOOD MORNING SUPERVISORS. MY NAME IS MICHAEL HANDLER.
00:36:54 I'M A RESIDENT OF DISTRICT NINE IN THE MISSION.
00:36:55 I'M A HOMEOWNER OF 15 YEARS AND I'M HERE WITH ABUNDANT SFR
00:36:58 AND RELATED ORGANIZATIONS IN SUPPORT OF THE PROPOSED
00:37:01 AMENDMENTS WITHOUT CHANGES. I'VE BEEN LIVING RESIDENT OF
00:37:05 SAN FRANCISCO SINCE 27 AND FORTUNATE HOMEOWNERS SINCE
00:37:08 2011 AND THE OVERALL OVERWHELMING EXPERIENCE HAS
00:37:09 BEEN MY FRIENDS AND EVERYONE ELSE I KNOW WHO CANNOT WHO
00:37:16 DOESN'T ALREADY HAVE A SALARY OR FORTUNATE ENOUGH TO HAVE A
00:37:19 LOT OF MONEY ALREADY CAN'T AFFORD INTO THE HOUSING AND HAS
00:37:21 RELOCATED THEMSELVES OUT OF THE CITY AND THAT'S NOT THE CITY I
00:37:24 WANT TO LIVE IN OR THE THE OPPORTUNITY COSTS ARE VERY
00:37:28 REAL. WE NEED TO REFLECT OUR CHANGES
00:37:31 ON THEM AND WE ADOPT THE UNANIMOUS RECOMMENDATIONS OF
00:37:35 THE TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE TO MEET THE SITUATION
00:37:36 ON THE GROUND WHERE IT IS AND GET MORE HOUSING BUILT.
00:37:40 >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU.
00:37:43 >> GOOD MORNING SUPERVISORS TIM KARP NORTH COAST STATE'S
00:37:46 CARPENTERS UNION THE CARPENTERS ARE IN SUPPORT OF THIS
00:37:47 LEGISLATION TO UPDATE SAN FRANCISCO'S INCLUSIONARY
00:37:51 HOUSING PROGRAM AND REDUCE DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES.
00:37:54 OUR MEMBERS KNOW ALL TOO WELL THE BURDENS OF SAN FRANCISCO'S
00:37:58 AFFORDABILITY CRISIS. WE KNOW THAT TO SOLVE THIS
00:38:00 AFFORDABLE CITY CRISIS WE NEED TO BUILD MORE HOMES ACROSS THE
00:38:04 CITY. BUT UNFORTUNATELY FOR TOO LONG
00:38:07 WE HAVE WATCHED RESIDENTIAL PROJECTS LANGUISH FOR YEARS
00:38:10 PROJECTS THAT WOULD HAVE PUT THOUSANDS OF UNION CARPENTERS
00:38:12 TO WORK RIGHT HERE IN SAN FRANCISCO.
00:38:15 WE HAVE LONG SUPPORTED INCLUSIONARY HOUSING AS A TOOL
00:38:18 TO BUILD MORE AFFORDABLE UNITS BUT WE ALSO KNOW THAT IF AN
00:38:22 INCLUSIONARY RATE IS SET TOO HIGH THE PROJECTS WON'T BE
00:38:25 BUILT, NO AFFORDABLE UNITS WILL BE BUILT AND OUR MEMBERS WILL
00:38:29 REMAIN OUT OF WORK. AND UNFORTUNATELY RIGHT NOW TOO
00:38:30 FEW PROJECTS ARE BEING BUILT. SO WE COMMEND THE CITY FOR THE
00:38:34 THOUGHTFUL FACT BASED APPROACH TO SETTING AN INCLUSIONARY RATE
00:38:37 THAT WORKS FOR SAN FRANCISCO TODAY WE LOOK FORWARD TO
00:38:41 CONTINUE TO WORK WITH THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS.
00:38:43 THE MAYOR AND ALL STAKEHOLDERS AS WE IMPLEMENT THIS NEW POLICY
00:38:46 TO INCREASE SUPPORT FOR THE HOUSING TRUST FUND AND MEMBERS
00:38:50 OF OUR UNION BUILD NEW HOMES ACROSS THE CITY NEXT YEAR.
00:38:52 >> PLEASE. DEAR SUPERVISORS MY NAME IS
00:38:57 JULES. I'M A RESIDENT OF 85 SAN
00:38:59 FRANCISCO. VALUES OF WELCOMING DIVERSITY
00:39:00 AND BEING A HAVEN TO IMMIGRANTS LIKE MYSELF AND TO THE LGBTQ
00:39:03 COMMUNITY DEEPLY RESONATES WITH ME AS I BELIEVE IT DOES WITH
00:39:07 YOU BUT IS UNARGUABLE THAT WE FAILED THESE VALUES WHEN
00:39:10 RENTING A ONE BEDROOM COST $4,000 WHERE SANCTUARY TO NO
00:39:13 ONE AND OUR CITY CANNOT STRIVE WHEN IT'S ONLY AFFORDABLE TO
00:39:14 THE RICHEST. MY ALMOST TEN YEARS HERE HAVE
00:39:18 HAD CLOSE FRIENDS WHO WORK IN THE ARTS OR EDUCATION BE
00:39:21 FORCED TO LEAVE THE CITY BECAUSE OF COST OF LIVING TO
00:39:23 FIGURE OUR ESSENTIAL WORKERS CANNOT AFFORD TO LIVE HERE IS A
00:39:26 TRAGEDY THAT WE NEED TO SOLVE. >> THIS IS WHY I'M URGING YOU
00:39:29 TO ADOPT AS IS THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE ATTACK TO
00:39:32 LOWER INCLUSIVE INCLUSIONARY RATE TO 5% AND ACCEPT EXEMPT
00:39:34 PROJECTS WHICH FEWER THAN 25 UNITS JUST WOULD BE A STEP
00:39:37 IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION OF UNBLOCKING OUR MARKET RATE
00:39:41 HOUSING PIPELINE WHICH IS NECESSARY TO BRING DOWN HOUSING
00:39:44 COSTS IN OUR CITY AND MAKE IT LIVABLE AGAIN.
00:39:45 >> THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENTS.
00:39:48 NEXT SPEAKER PLEASE. GOOD MORNING SUPERVISORS.
00:39:51 MY NAME IS ALEX LIBERAL. I LIVE IN DISTRICT FIVE
00:39:54 AND I'VE LIVED IN SAN FRANCISCO FOR 12 YEARS.
00:39:55 I'M HERE IN SUPPORT OF THIS PROPOSAL.
00:39:58 OVER THE PAST FIVE YEARS I'VE ALREADY SEEN TWO PAIRS OF
00:40:01 FRIENDS MOVE OUT OF THE CITY TO THE EAST BAY IN ORDER TO START
00:40:02 A FAMILY. THE MAIN REASON THEY DID THAT
00:40:05 WAS FOR CHEAPER HOUSING. NONE OF MY CURRENT FRIEND GROUP
00:40:07 CAN SEE THEMSELVES STAYING IN THE CITY TO RAISE A FAMILY.
00:40:10 THAT'S ANOTHER FIVE COUPLES. WE LOVE LIVING IN S.F. AND WE
00:40:12 WANT TO STAY BUT IT'S JUST TOO EXPENSIVE.
00:40:15 IT'S REALLY FRUSTRATING TO SEE THAT AND THEN LOOK AROUND
00:40:18 AND LOOK AT THE DATA AND SEE HOW LITTLE HOUSING IS GETTING
00:40:20 BUILT HERE. I'M REALLY HAPPY THAT S.F.
00:40:23 PRIORITIZES SUBSIDIZED HOUSING BUT WE SHOULDN'T BE DOING THAT
00:40:25 BY PUTTING THE COST BURDEN ON NEW HOUSING.
00:40:27 I LOVE THAT THESE CHANGES ARE PAIRED WITH A LARGER HOUSING
00:40:31 TRUST FUND. WE SHOULD BE BUILDING A LOT
00:40:32 MORE HOUSING AND I HOPE IF WE DO MYSELF AND MY FRIENDS CAN
00:40:35 STAY IN THE CITY TO RAISE OUR FAMILIES HERE.
00:40:38 >> THANK YOU. THANK YOU.
00:40:39 NEXT WEEK PLEASE. HI.
00:40:42 GOOD MORNING. MY NAME IS LILY AND I'M A PROUD
00:40:46 RESIDENT OF DISTRICT SEVEN, A HOMEOWNER AND A PARENT.
00:40:48 I'M HERE WITH ABUNDANT S.F. IN SUPPORT OF THE PROPOSED
00:40:50 AMENDMENTS TO THE INCLUSIONARY AFFORDABLE HOUSING PROGRAM.
00:40:54 SO I'M RAISING MY KIDS HERE AND THEY'RE QUITE YOUNG.
00:40:57 THREE YEARS OLD AND SIX MONTHS OLD SAN FRANCISCO IS THEIR
00:41:01 WHOLE WORLD. I WANT THAT TO STAY THAT WAY.
00:41:02 BUT I LOOK AT THE CITY THAT THEY'RE GROWING UP IN AND I'M
00:41:06 DOING THE MATH AND WHETHER THEY'LL BE ABLE TO STAY.
00:41:09 >> I HAVE MY HOME AND I'M VERY GRATEFUL FOR IT.
00:41:10 SO I'M NOT HERE FOR MYSELF. >> I SEE THAT EMPTY LOTS
00:41:14 AND PROJECTS APPROVED ON PAPER FOR YEARS NEVER BREAK GROUND.
00:41:18 THAT'S NOT SCARCITY BY ACCIDENT.
00:41:19 IT'S A SYSTEM THAT'S MADE HOUSING TOO EXPENSIVE AND TOO
00:41:21 UNCERTAIN TO ACTUALLY BUILD. >> TODAY'S REQUIREMENTS
00:41:25 AND FEES ARE BLOCKING THE VERY PROJECTS THAT WOULD FUND
00:41:28 AFFORDABLE HOMES. NO PROJECT MEANS NO.
00:41:29 NO PROJECT BUILT MEANS NO AFFORDABLE HOMES EITHER.
00:41:33 I WANT MY KIDS TO BE ABLE TO STAY IN THE CITY THAT RAISED
00:41:36 THEM. THAT TAKES HOMES AT EVERY
00:41:37 INCOME LEVEL. >> I URGE THE COMMITTEE TO
00:41:40 SUPPORT THESE AMENDMENTS BEFORE HOMES FOR A CITY EVERYONE CAN
00:41:44 AFFORD. >> THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENTS.
00:41:45 NEXT SPEAKER PLEASE. >> GOOD MORNING SUPERVISORS
00:41:49 MARK BABSON. I'M A 30 YEAR RESIDENT OF THE
00:41:51 MISSION AND PRESIDENT OF EMERALD FUND.
00:41:52 WE ARE LONGTIME SAN FRANCISCO HOUSING DEVELOPERS BUILT OVER
00:41:55 3000 UNITS. I COMMEND YOU ON LEGISLATION
00:41:58 THAT ACTUALLY IS GOING TO MAKE A DIFFERENCE.
00:42:00 THIS WILL RESULT IN MORE HOUSING.
00:42:02 IN PARTICULAR I ENCOURAGE YOU TO PASS THIS AS SOON AS
00:42:06 POSSIBLE FOR PROJECTS OF LESS THAN 25 UNITS.
00:42:07 WE HAVE A REAL PROJECT 1900 DIAMOND UP OR NO DIAMOND
00:42:12 HEIGHTS 24 FAMILY SIZE HOMES. THIS LEGISLATION MAKES IT
00:42:16 PENCIL AND MAKES IT WORK. IF WE HAVE TO WAIT UNTIL AFTER
00:42:17 LEGISLATION AFTER THE ELECTION IS CERTIFIED IN NOVEMBER THAT
00:42:24 SIX MONTHS OF CONSTRUCTION CROSS CONSTRUCTION COST
00:42:25 INCREASES THE PROJECT WOULD BE IN JEOPARDY.
00:42:28 I COMMEND YOU ENCOURAGE YOU TO PASS THIS TODAY.
00:42:29 THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENTS.
00:42:32 NEXT SPEAKER PLEASE. >> HI, MY NAME'S MARIE
00:42:36 SORENSON. I'M A RESIDENT OF D9 AND I'M
00:42:39 FLABBERGASTED AT THE MEAN SPIRITEDNESS OF THIS PROPOSAL.
00:42:44 >> IT WASN'T ENOUGH WHEN THE WIENER HAD THE STATE CUT
00:42:47 AFFORDABILITY SEVERAL YEARS AGO FROM 22 TO 20 5 TO 17.
00:42:53 NOW YOU WANT FIVE. >> WHY?
00:42:54 BECAUSE YOU HAVE FOUR. BECAUSE THE DEVELOPERS CAN'T
00:42:58 AFFORD IT. IT'S GREED.
00:43:01 THERE ARE 40 TO 60,000 EMPTY UNITS IN SAN FRANCISCO RIGHT
00:43:05 NOW. >> WHAT WE NEED TO BUILD IS
00:43:08 AFFORDABLE HOUSING. >> BUT THE REAL MESSAGE BEHIND
00:43:10 THIS IS SAN FRANCISCO DOESN'T WANT POOR AND WORKING CLASS ANY
00:43:16 WAR ANYMORE. THE TRUMP IFICATION UNDER HAIR
00:43:17 LAURIE NEEDS TO STOP. >> TRICKLE DOWN DIDN'T WORK
00:43:21 WITH REAGAN AND IT CERTAINLY ISN'T GOING TO WORK HERE.
00:43:25 PLEASE REJECT THE WHOLE THING. >> THANK YOU.
00:43:29 THANK YOU. >> NEXT SPEAKER.
00:43:36 GOOD MORNING SUPERVISORS. MY NAME IS LORI DROST AND I'M
00:43:37 THE HOUSING AND PLANNING DIRECTOR AT SPUR.
00:43:40 I URGE YOU TO SUPPORT THE FULL INCLUSIONARY HOUSING REFORM
00:43:44 PACKAGE. THE CONTROLLER FEASIBILITY
00:43:45 ANALYSIS SHOWED THAT RECALIBRATING LOCAL
00:43:48 REQUIREMENTS IS AN ESSENTIAL PART OF MAKING HOUSING FEASIBLE
00:43:52 TO BUILD AGAIN AND THIS PACKAGE IS A THOUGHTFUL RECALIBRATION
00:43:55 THAT WILL HELP RESTORE FEASIBILITY.
00:43:56 >> WE ESPECIALLY ENCOURAGE YOU TO RETAIN THE FULL EXEMPTION
00:44:00 FOR SMALLER SCALE HOUSING PROJECTS.
00:44:03 SAN FRANCISCO HAS ALREADY LEGALIZED SMALL MULTIFAMILY
00:44:04 HOMES THROUGH THE FAMILY ZONING PLAN.
00:44:08 NOW WE HAVE TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY ACTUALLY CAN GET BUILT.
00:44:11 REMOVING THESE FEES FOR SMALL PROJECTS GIVES HOMEOWNERS
00:44:15 AND SMALL BUILDERS A REAL CHANCE OF OUT ADDING HOUSING
00:44:16 AND HIGH OPPORTUNITY AREAS. HELPING IMPLEMENT THE FAMILY
00:44:19 ZONING PLAN AND AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING.
00:44:23 PLEASE SUPPORT THE FULL PACKAGE AND KEEP THE SMALL PROJECT
00:44:27 EXEMPTION. >> THANK YOU SO MUCH.
00:44:30 THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENTS. >> NEXT SPEAKER PLEASE.
00:44:32 HELLO SUPERVISORS. MY NAME IS PROTON.
00:44:35 I AM WITH SFB AND I'M ALSO ON THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE
00:44:39 SIERRA CLUB FOR THE FOR FOR THE SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA CHAPTER.
00:44:43 I'VE BEEN A RENTER FOR SEVEN YEARS AND I LIVE NOW IN D-10.
00:44:45 I URGE YOU TO SUPPORT THE FULL PACKAGE AND ALSO TO FOLLOW THE
00:44:52 TAX RECOMMENDATIONS TO FURTHER REDUCE THE FEES DOWN TO OR THE
00:44:57 INCLUSIONARY REQUIREMENT TO ZERO AND TO LOOK AT OTHER
00:44:58 OPTIONS TO INCREASE THE HOUSING SUPPLY IN SAN FRANCISCO LIKE
00:45:01 REMOVING TRANSFER FEES AND OTHER REQUIREMENTS THAT
00:45:06 MAKE HOUSING PRODUCTION EXPENSIVE IN THE CITY.
00:45:09 I HAVE LIVED HERE FOR SEVEN YEARS AND THIS IS THE FIRST
00:45:13 YEAR WHERE I MIGHT HAVE TO CONSIDER LEAVING THE CITY
00:45:15 BECAUSE OF THE RENT INCREASE THAT MY LANDLORD IS PROPOSING.
00:45:20 HE'S NOT PROPOSING THAT BECAUSE OF CRETE.
00:45:21 HE'S PROPOSING IT BECAUSE THERE'S MANY PEOPLE THAT WANT
00:45:24 TO LIVE IN THE CITY. WE HAVE NOT BUILT ENOUGH
00:45:26 HOUSING IN HOMES FOR THOSE PEOPLE TO BE ABLE TO AFFORD
00:45:29 HERE. I URGE YOU TO ACCEPT TO TO GO
00:45:33 FORWARD WITH THIS PACKAGE AND TO CONSIDER OTHER OPTIONS
00:45:37 AS WELL. >> THANK YOU SO MUCH.
00:45:38 NEXT SPEAKER PLEASE. >> GOOD MORNING SUPERVISORS
00:45:42 WITH TURNER ON BEHALF OF THE HOUSING ACTION COALITION.
00:45:46 WE ARE A MEMBER SUPPORTED NONPROFIT THAT ADVOCATES FOR
00:45:48 MORE HOMES AT ALL INCOME LEVELS .
00:45:50 >> THE REALITY HERE IS THAT 15% OF ZERO IS ZERO AND THAT'S WHAT
00:45:53 THE DATA SHOWING AT THE CURRENT RATE WE ARE NOT PRODUCING MORE
00:45:57 AFFORDABLE HOMES SADLY WE'RE JUST PRODUCING FEWER HOMES THAN
00:46:00 NECESSARY OF EVERY KIND THAT THIS LEGISLATION GIVES US PATH
00:46:04 FORWARD. THIS REQUIREMENT APPLIED TO
00:46:05 REAL HOUSING STARTS PAIRED WITH IMPACT REDUCTIONS AND MORE WILL
00:46:09 DELIVER FAR MORE AFFORDABLE UNITS THAN THE CURRENT RATE
00:46:13 IN THE BUILDING ENVIRONMENT WE ARE IN.
00:46:14 NOW IS THE TIME TO START SEEING SOME CRANES IN THE SKY, SOME
00:46:17 HOMES BEING BUILT FOR ALL SAN FRANCISCANS.
00:46:20 SO WE ASK FOR YOUR SUPPORT TODAY ON THIS BECAUSE IT'S
00:46:21 CRITICAL WE START GETTING SHOVELS IN THE GROUND.
00:46:24 I ALSO WANT TO THANK THE TECH AND EWG TEAM FOR THEIR WORK ON
00:46:27 BRINGING THIS RECOMMENDATION FORWARD AND PUTTING IT ALL
00:46:28 TOGETHER. >> THANK YOU.
00:46:31 THANK YOU. NEXT SPEAKER.
00:46:34 >> GOOD AFTERNOON SUPERVISORS. MY NAME IS PAUL WORMER.
00:46:38 I HAVE ONE CONCERN THAT I HOPE YOU WILL FIND A WAY TO ADDRESS.
00:46:42 >> THERE MAY INDEED BE GOOD REASONS FOR CUTTING THE
00:46:46 INCLUSIONARY HOUSING BECAUSE YOU'RE FINDING ANOTHER WAY TO
00:46:49 PROVIDE MONEY TO DO THAT TO THE HOUSING TRUST FUND.
00:46:50 HOWEVER, THE HOUSING TRUST FUND IS NOT A SURE THING AND I SEEM
00:46:57 TO RECALL SOME LEGISLATION INTRODUCED BY IN THE ASSEMBLY
00:47:00 AS WELL AS ANOTHER BALLOT MEASURE ON THE STATE LEVEL THAT
00:47:04 WILL SIGNIFICANTLY RESTRICT TAXES, TRANSFER TAXES THAT CAN
00:47:09 BE CHARGED WHICH MEANS YOU'RE COUNTING ON THREE THINGS NOT
00:47:16 TWO THINGS NOT HAPPENING AND ONE THING HAPPENING WHEN
00:47:20 THE ODDS ARE POSSIBLY GOOD THAT IT GOES THE OTHER WAY.
00:47:23 >> SO MY QUESTION IS ONCE YOU REMOVE THE INCLUSIONARY
00:47:27 HOUSING, WHERE DOES THE MONEY COME FROM IF THE HOUSING TRUST
00:47:31 FUND DOESN'T PASSED? >> AND LOOKING AT FED DATA
00:47:35 WELL, MY COMMENTS NEXT SPEAKER .
00:47:39 >> GOOD MORNING SUPERVISORS. BILL BARNES ON BEHALF OF THE
00:47:43 VARIOUS PROUD VOICES OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING WE WANT TO
00:47:44 THANK MAYOR LURIE. WE WANT TO THANK SUPERVISOR
00:47:47 MELGAR WANNATAKE SUPERVISOR MAHMUD FOR BRINGING A ROOM
00:47:50 TOGETHER OF PEOPLE WHO TALKED ABOUT HOW WE COULD MAKE A
00:47:52 DIFFERENCE AND BUILD AFFORDABLE HOUSING.
00:47:54 PART OF THAT IS INCREASING OUR PROPERTY TAX BASE AND THAT
00:47:58 MEANS MARKET RATE HOUSING NEEDS TO HAPPEN.
00:47:59 WE HAVE PROP 13 SO EVERY TIME THERE'S A NEW DEVELOPMENT,
00:48:02 EVERY TIME A BLIGHTED LOT IS TURNED TO DO A NEW PROJECT WE
00:48:04 GET MORE MONEY INTO THE OVERALL CITIES FUND.
00:48:06 AND THE INCLUSIONARY IS TOO HIGH.
00:48:10 THERE'S A TAX OF DIVERSE PEOPLE AND THEY CONCLUDED UNANIMOUSLY
00:48:12 ACROSS ALL IDEOLOGICAL LINES, ACROSS ALL BACKGROUNDS THAT
00:48:15 THIS IS THE RECOMMENDATION AND SO WE WOULD STRONGLY
00:48:18 SUPPORT THE LEGISLATION AS IS AND ENCOURAGE YOU TO PASS IT.
00:48:22 >> THANK YOU. THANK YOU.
00:48:25 >> NEXT WEEK PLEASE. GOOD MORNING, SUPERVISOR ZACH
00:48:28 EISENBERGER WITH YOUNG COMMUNITY DEVELOPERS.
00:48:29 THE IMPACTS OF MARKET RATE HOUSING DEVELOPMENT ARE NOT
00:48:32 UNIFORM ACROSS NEIGHBORHOODS IN THE CITY'S PRIORITY EQUITY
00:48:34 GEOGRAPHIES MARKET RATE DEVELOPMENT DISPROPORTIONATELY
00:48:36 INCREASES DISPLACEMENT AND SPECULATION.
00:48:39 AS AN ORGANIZATION THAT WORKS IN BAYVIEW, WE ARE DEEPLY
00:48:41 CONCERNED ABOUT EXEMPTING PROJECTS WITH FEWER THAN 25
00:48:44 UNITS. THE THIRD STREET CORRIDOR IS
00:48:45 CHARACTERIZED BY HISTORICALLY LOWER LAND VALUES.
00:48:47 DECADES OF PUBLIC AND PRIVATE DISINVESTMENT AND PREDOMINANTLY
00:48:51 SMALL SCALE DEVELOPMENT. THESE CONDITIONS HAVE CREATED A
00:48:52 SUBSTANTIAL GAP BETWEEN CURRENT PROPERTY VALUES AND THE
00:48:56 REDEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL. ATTRACTING SPECULATIVE
00:48:57 INVESTMENT AS MARKET CONDITIONS IMPROVE.
00:49:00 BECAUSE THE VAST MAJORITY OF PROJECTS ALONG THE THIRD STREET
00:49:03 CORRIDOR CONSIST OF PROJECTS WITH FEWER THAN 20 FIVE UNITS.
00:49:04 >> THIS PROPOSAL WOULD EFFECTIVELY ELIMINATE
00:49:06 INCLUSIONARY HOUSING REQUIREMENTS ALLOWING MARKET
00:49:07 RATE PROJECTS TO MOVE FORWARD WITHOUT ANY MEANINGFUL
00:49:10 COMMUNITY BENEFITS. THE STAKES ARE ESPECIALLY HIGH
00:49:12 BECAUSE BAYVIEW IS HOME TO SAN FRANCISCO'S HIGHEST
00:49:14 CONCENTRATION OF BLACK RESIDENTS AND ONE OF ITS LAST
00:49:18 HISTORICALLY BLACK NEIGHBORHOODS AND CULTURAL
00:49:19 CENTERS. WITH THE CITY'S BLACK
00:49:20 POPULATION ALREADY WELL BELOW 4%.
00:49:21 WEAKENING AFFORDABILITY REQUIREMENTS RISKS ACCELERATING
00:49:26 THE DISPLACEMENT OF BLACK FAMILIES AND SMALL BUSINESSES
00:49:27 AND FURTHER ERODING THIS VITAL COMMUNITIES.
00:49:29 >> NEXT SPEAKER, PLEASE. >> GOOD MORNING.
00:49:34 SUPERVISOR IS PETER PAPADOPOULOS TODAY SPEAKING ON
00:49:37 BEHALF OF UNITED SAVE THE MISSION COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
00:49:41 COMMITTEE AND WELCOME BACK SUPERVISOR FIELDER.
00:49:42 IT'S GREAT TO SEE YOU. ALL NEIGHBORHOODS ARE NOT THE
00:49:46 SAME AS YOU JUST HEARD, THE MISSION HAS LOST 12,000 LATINOS
00:49:51 IN THE LAST 25 YEARS. MARKET RATE HOUSING IS NOW, AS
00:49:55 YOU JUST HEARD DIRECTLY LINKED BY KAREN CHAPEL TO DISPLACEMENT
00:49:59 UNLESS DIRECTLY TIED TO AFFORDABLE HOUSING.
00:50:03 SO WE NEED TO DIRECTLY TIE THESE TWO TOGETHER EASILY DONE
00:50:06 WITH SIMPLY INSTITUTING A CLAUSE THAT SAYS WE'RE
00:50:10 REAUTHORIZING TODAY AND WHEN IT PASSES IN NOVEMBER THEN THE 5%
00:50:13 COMES INTO EFFECT. BUT IN THE MEANTIME, WE THINK
00:50:18 IT'S IMPORTANT TO SAY THAT THOSE NEIGHBORHOODS THAT HAD
00:50:21 HIGHER INCLUSIONARY RETAIN AN 8% HIGHER INCLUSIONARY.
00:50:25 WE ALSO THINK THAT WE NEED TO KEEP THE 10 TO 25 UNITS UNLESS
00:50:29 THE HOUSING TRUST FUND PASSES AS WELL.
00:50:32 >> THANK YOU. THANK YOU.
00:50:33 THANK YOU. >> NEXT SPEAKER, PLEASE.
00:50:36 GOOD MORNING, SUPERVISOR ZACHARY FRIEL SANKIN.
00:50:39 ACCORDING TO BILL A REPORT PRESENTED AT LAND USE LAST
00:50:43 MONTH THE REDUCTION OF INCLUSIONARY HOUSING
00:50:45 REQUIREMENTS THREE YEARS AGO HAD NO IMPACT ON JUMPSTARTING
00:50:47 MARKET RATE DEVELOPMENT. A SEPARATE BILL A REPORT
00:50:50 PRESENTED TO THE BUDGET COMMITTEE IN MAY REVEALED THAT
00:50:53 FEE REDUCTIONS DECREASE POTENTIAL CITY REVENUES BY $34
00:50:57 MILLION. FURTHER REDUCTIONS WOULD RESULT
00:51:00 IN THE LOSS OF EVEN MORE POTENTIAL REVENUE.
00:51:01 >> I SPOKE WITH A MARKET RATE DEVELOPER AT GM DEVELOPMENT
00:51:04 LAST MONTH ON THEIR ASSESSMENT OF THE HOUSING MARKET.
00:51:08 >> THEY TOLD ME WITH UTMOST CONFIDENCE THEY BELIEVE THE
00:51:09 MARKET WILL BOUNCE BACK SOON WHEREAS THE HIGH COST OF
00:51:12 CONSTRUCTION HAS INHIBITED MARKET DEVELOPMENT OVER THE
00:51:15 LAST COUPLE OF YEARS. RENTS ARE NOW RISEN TO A POINT
00:51:17 WHERE PROJECTS CAN PENCIL. >> IF WE ARE TO TAKE THIS
00:51:20 DEVELOPER AT HIS WORD THE CITY WILL SEE A SURGE OF NEW HOUSING
00:51:23 PROJECTS IN THE NEXT THREE YEARS.
00:51:24 THIS WOULD MEAN THAT MANY PROJECTS WILL BE BUILT WITH
00:51:27 LITTLE TO NO INCLUSIONARY HOUSING.
00:51:29 WITH THAT SAID WE ENCOURAGE THIS COMMITTEE TO VOTE DOWN
00:51:32 THESE RECOMMENDATIONS AND MAINTAIN INCLUSIONARY
00:51:35 HOUSING REQUIREMENTS AT THEIR CURRENT RATES.
00:51:36 >> THANK YOU. THANK YOU.
00:51:39 NICK SPEAKER GOOD MORNING SUPERVISORS LLOYD SARANG
00:51:43 AND SOM CAN AND AGAIN WE REJECT THESE PROPOSALS.
00:51:46 ONLY YESTERDAY I SPOKE WITH MULTIPLE MEMBERS OF THE
00:51:47 COMMUNITY AND ARE CLEAR THAT THE HOUSING THAT IS BUILT
00:51:50 AND WILL BE BUILT WILL NOT BE AFFORDABLE FOR WORKING CLASS
00:51:54 FAMILIES. MANY HERE TODAY HAVE TOLD YOU
00:51:55 THAT THE ONLY WAY TO SOLVE OUR HOUSING CRISIS IS TO SIMPLY
00:51:58 INCREASE THEIR SUPPLY OF HOUSING.
00:51:59 I'M STANDING HERE TODAY REPRESENTING AN ORGANIZATION
00:52:02 THAT COMPRISED OF WORKING CLASS FAMILIES, HAS WORKED WITH
00:52:05 WORKING CLASS FAMILIES AND HAS FOUGHT WITH DEVELOPERS TO
00:52:06 PROTECT WORKING CLASS AND IMMIGRANT FAMILIES.
00:52:09 THIS IS ACTIVELY GUTTING A SOURCE OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING
00:52:13 UNITS. I URGE YOU TO THINK ABOUT THE
00:52:14 FAMILIES WHO ARE WAITING FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND HOW THIS
00:52:17 IS AFFECTING THEM. I URGE YOU TO RECONSIDER
00:52:19 AND LOOK ELSEWHERE. >> THANK YOU.
00:52:22 THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENTS. >> NEXT SPEAKER, PLEASE.
00:52:25 MORNING, GEORGE. A SHOOTER?
00:52:28 THERE ARE TWO FEASIBILITY STUDIES THAT CONSIDERED LOT
00:52:29 SIZE BUT THE STUDY FOR THIS ITEM DID NOT CONSIDER LOT SIZE
00:52:33 SHOULDN'T LOT SIZE ALWAYS BE CONSIDERED A FACTOR IN FIGURING
00:52:37 OUT FINANCIAL FEASIBILITY? >> BASED ON RISING SALES PRICES
00:52:41 AND RISING RENTS, THE MARKET IS IMPROVING WHICH SHOULDN'T BOOST
00:52:44 WHICH SHOULD BOOST FINANCIAL FEASIBILITY.
00:52:48 >> DUE TO THE BOOM THE CITY WILL WIND UP WITH A LOTS OF
00:52:52 LUXURY HOUSING AND LITTLE AFFORDABLE HOUSING STREAMLINING
00:52:55 TO FACILITATE LUXURY HOUSING AND BUILD BABY BUILD.
00:52:59 >> HAS WON. THIS VICTORY SHOULD BE USED TO
00:53:03 GET RID OF THE LSAT. >> THIS SHOULD BE THE GOAL OF
00:53:05 ALL THE DECISION MAKERS RESIDING IN THIS CHAMBER
00:53:08 AND ROOM 200 AS JOHN KING FROM THE CHRONICLE WROTE IN HIS
00:53:12 RETIREMENT COLUMN. BLURRING OF THE BLURRING OF THE
00:53:15 OLD BOUNDARIES BETWEEN SAN FRANCISCO AND SILICON VALLEY
00:53:19 UNLEASHED DEMAND PRESSURES ON HOUSING THAT BY 2019 HAD ALL
00:53:22 BUT UNDERMINED ONE OF THE MOST IMPORTANT ATTRIBUTES THAT
00:53:25 ALLOWS CITIES TO TRULY PROSPER. >> ROOM FOR ALL BACKGROUNDS
00:53:29 AND INCOME LEVELS TO PURSUE THE DREAMS.
00:53:33 >> SAN FRANCISCO IS LUCKY THIS WON'T BE THE CASE WHEN THE NEXT
00:53:37 SPEAKER PLEASE. >> HI MY NAME IS DANE WILLETTE.
00:53:45 I'M A COAL VALLEY RESIDENT AND I'M A VOLUNTEER LEAD WITH
00:53:48 SFE AND ME. MY WIFE AND I MOVED TO SAN
00:53:49 FRANCISCO A LITTLE OVER A YEAR AGO.
00:53:53 WE CAME HERE FROM TEXAS. TEXAS IS NOT THE SAFEST OR BEST
00:53:56 PLACE TO BE RAISING A FAMILY RIGHT NOW.
00:53:57 AND SO WE CAME TO SAN FRANCISCO BECAUSE WE KNOW THE CITY
00:54:01 REPRESENTS THE KINDS OF VALUES AND ENVIRONMENT THAT WE WANT TO
00:54:02 RAISE OUR FAMILY IN. AND WE ALREADY HAD FAMILY WHO
00:54:05 WAS LIVING HERE THAT WE KNEW COULD BE A SUPPORT STRUCTURE
00:54:08 WITH US. >> WITH THE RISING HOUSING
00:54:09 PRICES, IT IS VERY DIFFICULT FOR US TO IMAGINE BEING ABLE TO
00:54:12 RAISE THAT FAMILY IN A KIND OF NICE LIVABLE SPACE.
00:54:16 BUT THESE AMENDMENTS, THESE PROPOSALS I STRONGLY SUPPORT
00:54:22 YOU GUYS PASSING FORWARD BECAUSE I THINK AS WAS
00:54:23 MENTIONED, THE FAMILY ZONING PLAN UNLOCK THE CAPACITY.
00:54:27 AND THESE PROPOSALS WILL MAKE SURE THAT THEY CAN ACTUALLY GET
00:54:30 BUILT SO THAT HOPEFULLY IN THE NEXT FEW YEARS WE'LL BE ABLE TO
00:54:34 HAVE THE KINDS OF AFFORDABLE UNITS FOR FAMILIES LIKE MY WIFE
00:54:35 AND I WHO ARE BOTH ABLE TO NOW STAY HERE AND COME HERE TO
00:54:38 ESCAPE PLACES LIKE TEXAS. >> THANK YOU.
00:54:42 THANK YOU. ALL NEXT SPEAKER SUPERVISORS.
00:54:46 >> MY NAME IS ENRIQUE LAND. I'M A DEVELOPER IN THE CITY
00:54:50 AND I WAS A MEMBER OF THE TAC. WHAT WE HAVE TODAY IS NOT AN
00:54:53 ISSUE OF VALUES. IT'S AN ISSUE OF NUMBERS.
00:54:56 I'M PREPARING TO BREAK GROUND NEXT YEAR ON 300 UNITS OF
00:54:58 MARKET RATE HOUSING AND 300 UNITS OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING
00:55:01 BOTH HAND-IN-HAND. I CAN TELL YOU THAT TASK IS
00:55:05 NEXT TO IMPOSSIBLE. THE 100 UNITS THAT WE BUILT
00:55:08 AND OPENED LAST YEAR OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING WAS ONE OF
00:55:10 THE HARDEST THINGS I'VE EVER DONE.
00:55:11 THE ISSUE HERE IS NOT ONE OF SAN FRANCISCO NOT WANTING MORE
00:55:14 HOUSING OR AFFORDABLE HOUSING. >> IT'S THAT THE MATH DOESN'T
00:55:17 WORK. OUR CONSTRUCTION COSTS ARE SOME
00:55:18 OF THE HIGHEST IN THE COUNTRY AND IT MAKES IT ALMOST
00:55:21 IMPOSSIBLE TO BUILD. SO THE RECOMMENDATION OF THE
00:55:24 TAC WAS A REFLECTION OF THE REALITY.
00:55:25 IT'S NOT A REALITY. I WISH I COULD TELL YOU I WISH
00:55:28 WE COULD BUILD HOUSING FOR EVERYONE.
00:55:29 DEVELOPERS ALWAYS WANT TO BUILD AND THIS ONE WANTS TO BUILD A
00:55:33 LOT OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING. BUT RIGHT NOW THE NUMBERS DON'T
00:55:36 WORK AND WE'RE HOPING TO GET TO A POINT THAT THEY DO.
00:55:38 THIS IS AN INTERIM MEASURE TO HOPEFULLY GET US TO A BETTER
00:55:41 SPOT. >> THANK YOU.
00:55:42 THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENTS. DO WE HAVE ANY ADDITIONAL
00:55:46 PUBLIC COMMENT FOR THIS ITEM? >> MR. CHAIR, THAT CONCLUDES
00:55:52 PUBLIC COMMENT. SEEING AS NO ONE ELSE MAKING
00:55:56 PUBLIC COMMENT, PUBLIC COMMENTS NOW CLOSED.
00:55:57 COLLEAGUES I WANT TO MOVE TO MAKE THE DEED NON SUBSTANTIVE.
00:56:03 THEY'VE BEEN CONFIRMED TO BE NON SUBSTANTIVE TECHNICAL
00:56:04 AMENDMENTS THAT WERE DESCRIBED BY IWD IN THEIR PRESENTATION.
00:56:10 WERE THERE ANY COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS ON THOSE NON
00:56:11 SUBSTANTIVE TECHNICAL AMENDMENTS?
00:56:14 >> I'D JUST LIKE TO DUPLICATE THE FILE WITHOUT THOSE
00:56:17 AMENDMENTS. >> IS THAT POSSIBLE?
00:56:18 IT'S POSSIBLE. I'M NOT SURE I RECOMMENDED I
00:56:25 THINK IT MIGHT BE SIMPLER TO DUPLICATE IT AFTER BUT I
00:56:26 UNDERSTAND IF YOU WISH TO DO THAT.
00:56:29 >> MADAM CLERK CAN I DUPLICATE THE FILE?
00:56:33 >> YES, YOU CAN DUPLICATE THE FILE.
00:56:34 THANK YOU. >> GREAT.
00:56:37 THEN I'M GOING TO MOVE TO AMEND THE FILE AS DESCRIBED BY IWD.
00:56:44 >> MADAM CLERK, CAN YOU PLEASE CALL THE ROLL?
00:56:45 YES. ON ON THE MOTION TO AMEND THE
00:56:48 FILE AS DESCRIBED BY O W D MEMBER FIELDER.
00:56:55 I REMEMBER FIELDER I FISCHER MAHMOOD FISCHER MOOD I CHAIR
00:57:00 CHERYL CHAIR CHERYL I HAVE THREE EYES THANK YOU.
00:57:03 >> THE MOTION PASSES NOW I KNOW MY COLLEAGUES HAVE A LOT OF
00:57:07 QUESTIONS. >> THANK YOU FOR JUMPING UP TO
00:57:11 THE ROSTRUM IN ADVANCE. >> SUPERVISOR FIELDER I MADE
00:57:15 SURE CHERYL I JUST WANT TO CONFIRM THOSE AMENDMENTS ON THE
00:57:18 ORIGINAL FILE OR ON THE DUPLICATE SO THOSE THOSE
00:57:20 AMENDMENTS SHOULD BE ON THE ORIGINAL.
00:57:23 >> YES, THOSE AMENDMENTS ARE ON THE ORIGINAL.
00:57:24 THANK YOU. YOU PROBABLY CAN STAY UP THERE
00:57:25 THOUGH. >> I'LL STAY RIGHT.
00:57:29 GO AHEAD. SUPERVISOR FIELDER THANK YOU.
00:57:30 THANKS FOR YOUR PATIENCE. YOU KNOW MACROECONOMICS IS THE
00:57:33 CULPRIT. >> WHY ARE WE REDUCING OR
00:57:37 ELIMINATING INCLUSIONARY REQUIREMENTS IS MY IS MY
00:57:40 QUESTION. THE CENTURY URBAN PROTOTYPES
00:57:43 SHOW MARKET RATE HOUSING DOESN'T PENCIL EVEN AT ZERO
00:57:47 INCLUSIONARY AND THE CONTROLLERS MEMO IDENTIFIED
00:57:48 LABOR MATERIALS FINANCING COSTS AS A DRIVERS.
00:57:52 SO MY QUESTION IS WHAT EVIDENCE SUPPORTS CUTTING INCLUSIONARY
00:57:57 AS THE WAY TO UNLOCK STALLED PROJECTS?
00:58:00 >> THANK YOU. SUPERVISOR YEAH THE.
00:58:03 THE TAX REPORT DOES RECOGNIZE THOSE MACROECONOMIC CONDITIONS
00:58:05 WHERE CONSTRUCTION COSTS HAVE INCREASED BY 50% SINCE THE
00:58:08 PANDEMIC. INTEREST RATES HAVE ALSO
00:58:12 INCREASED BY A SIMILAR SHARE. AS SOMEONE MENTIONED, RENTS
00:58:16 HAVE GONE BACK UP ALTHOUGH OUR CHIEF ECONOMIST HAS NOTED THAT
00:58:19 WHEN ADJUSTED FOR INFLATION RENTS ARE STILL 18% BELOW
00:58:22 PRE-PANDEMIC LEVELS. SO THOSE CONDITIONS ARE ALL
00:58:26 REAL AND THEY ARE ALL AFFECTING THE FEASIBILITY OF PROJECTS.
00:58:27 WHAT THE REPORT INDICATED WAS THAT THE INCLUSIONARY
00:58:30 REQUIREMENT ALONE ADDS BETWEEN 40 AND $90,000 OF COST PER UNIT
00:58:37 . IMPACT FEES CITYWIDE IMPACT
00:58:38 FEES ADD ANOTHER $20,000 PER UNIT IN CERTAIN AREAS OF THE
00:58:41 CITY WHERE THERE ARE ADDITIONAL FEES THAT CAN ADD ANOTHER
00:58:47 $80,000 PER UNIT. SO IN SOME CASES THERE ARE
00:58:48 PROJECTS WHERE THERE IS $170,000 OF COST PER UNIT THAT
00:58:51 COSTS 700 TO $1 MILLION TO BUILD $73,002 MILLION TO BUILD
00:58:57 COMING JUST FROM THESE FEE PROGRAMS.
00:58:58 THAT IS A SIGNIFI AGAINST SHARE OF THAT FEASIBILITY GAP THAT
00:59:02 THE REPORT INDICATES TO TRANSLATE THAT IF YOU LOOK AT
00:59:05 THE GAPS IN THE FEASIBILITY GAP IN THE TECH REPORT THESE
00:59:12 PROGRAMS TOGETHER THESE REQUIREMENTS ACCOUNT FOR
00:59:15 BETWEEN 20 AND OVER 100% OF THE FEASIBILITY GAP.
00:59:19 SO THERE ARE SOME PROTOTYPES THAT THEY STUDY MID-RISE CONDO
00:59:22 PROJECT WHERE ACTUALLY THESE REDUCTIONS WOULD BRING THE
00:59:26 PROJECT INTO FEASIBILITY JUST BY MAKING THESE REDUCTIONS.
00:59:28 THERE ARE OTHERS WHERE WE MIGHT BE ONLY ABLE TO REDUCE HALF OF
00:59:31 THE FEASIBILITY GAP BUT THAT'S A SIGNIFICANT INCREASE
00:59:34 IN FEASIBILITY WHICH MEANS THAT AS OTHER CONDITIONS IF THEY
00:59:38 COME INTO ALIGNMENT WE WILL GET TO A POINT MUCH SOONER WHERE
00:59:42 THE PROJECTS ARE ABLE TO BE BUILT.
00:59:45 THANK YOU. AND THEN HAVING READ THE TAX
00:59:49 RECOMMENDATIONS IN THE CONTROLLER'S MEMO I WANT TO
00:59:51 FLAG THAT THEIR RECOMMENDATION WAS CONDITIONAL.
00:59:54 THEY RECOMMENDED REDUCING THE ONSITE INCLUSIONARY PERMIT TO
00:59:58 5% ONLY IF IT WAS PAIRED WITH A RECURRING AFFORDABLE HOUSING
01:00:02 FUNDING SOURCE SPECIFICALLY THE HOUSING TRUST FUND PROPOSED FOR
01:00:06 THE NOVEMBER BALLOT. BUT THERE'S NOTHING IN THIS
01:00:07 LEGISLATION AND ACTUALLY TYING THE PASSAGE OF THE HOUSING
01:00:11 TRUST FUND TO THESE RATES. SO WITHOUT THAT RECURRING
01:00:15 FUNDING SOURCE SECURED THE TAX RECOMMENDATION WAS TEN PERCENT,
01:00:21 NOT 5% GIVEN THAT THE TAC THE BODY SPECIFICALLY TASKED WITH
01:00:25 THE FEASIBILITY ANALYSIS RECOMMENDED 10% ABSENT SECURED
01:00:29 RECURRING FUNDING. WHY DOES THE ORDINANCE SET THE
01:00:33 RATE AT 5% NOW INSTEAD OF STARTING AT THE TAX FALL BACK
01:00:36 RATE OF 10% AND STEPPING DOWN ONLY IF THE HOUSING TRUST FUND
01:00:40 MEASURE PASSES? >> THANK YOU SUPERVISOR YES THE
01:00:43 TAC DID LINK THE TWO ITEMS AS WE DISCUSSED THE VERY SPECIFIC
01:00:48 EARLY THOUGH RECOMMENDED THAT THE 5% INCLUSIONARY ORDINANCE
01:00:51 WHICH IS THE ITEM BEFORE YOU SHOULD MOVE AHEAD IF THE
01:00:55 HOUSING TRUST FUND IS PLACED ON THE BALLOT IN JULY.
01:00:58 SO THAT IS AN ACTION TAKEN BY THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS TO
01:01:00 PLACE THE ITEM ON THE BALLOT. AS I MENTIONED, THAT ITEM IS
01:01:03 SCHEDULED TO GO BEFORE THE FULL BOARD ON JULY 14TH IF THIS ITEM
01:01:07 PASSES OUT OF THIS COMMITTEE TODAY, IT WOULD ALSO GO TO THE
01:01:11 FULL BOARD ON JULY 14TH AND THOSE ITEMS WOULD BE VOTED
01:01:14 ON ON THE SAME DATE WHICH IS EXACTLY WHAT THE TAC
01:01:15 RECOMMENDED THAT AS FAR AS THE ACTIONS THAT WE CAN TAKE HERE
01:01:18 IN CITY HALL THAT THOSE THINGS BE LINKED.
01:01:21 THEY DID NOT RECOMMEND THAT IT BE LINKED TO THE OUTCOME OF THE
01:01:23 ELECTION IN NOVEMBER. AT THE SAME TIME THIS TOPIC HAS
01:01:26 COME UP THROUGHOUT THIS PROCESS AND A FEW THINGS TO KEEP
01:01:33 IN MIND ABOUT THE DIFFICULTIES OF TRYING TO LINK THESE ITEMS
01:01:34 DIRECTLY. FIRST OF ALL ALL OF THE
01:01:38 TEMPORARY REDUCTIONS THAT WE CURRENTLY HAVE FROM 2023 ARE
01:01:40 SET TO EXPIRE ON NOVEMBER 1ST OR THE ELECTION.
01:01:42 I BELIEVE IS ON NOVEMBER 4TH. THIS YEAR TAKES A FEW WEEKS TO
01:01:45 GET CERTIFIED SO IF WE WERE TO WAIT AND SEE WHAT HAPPENS WITH
01:01:49 THE ELECTION, YOU KNOW WE WOULDN'T BE IN A POSITION TO
01:01:52 UPDATE THESE FEES UNTIL TOWARD THE END OF THE YEAR.
01:01:56 SO ANOTHER SIX MONTHS OUT FROM WHERE WE ARE TODAY AND THAT
01:01:57 COMES IN THE CONTEXT WHERE AS I MENTIONED THE TAX REPORTING
01:02:01 CONTROLLER ACTUALLY FOUND THAT THREE YEARS AGO PROJECTS WERE
01:02:04 GENERALLY NOT FEASIBLE. WE MADE A MODEST REDUCTION AT
01:02:08 THAT TIME. WE'RE MAKING A LARGER REDUCTION
01:02:11 THIS TIME BECAUSE THEY FOUND THAT THE FEASIBILITY HAS
01:02:12 ACTUALLY GOTTEN WORSE. SO IN OTHER WORDS WE'RE ALREADY
01:02:17 REALLY AT LEAST THREE YEARS OVERDUE FOR TACKLING THIS ISSUE
01:02:21 AND WE DON'T SEE ANY REASON TO WAIT ANY FURTHER.
01:02:25 THANK YOU. DOESN'T REALLY MAKE SENSE TO
01:02:26 ME. WHY IT WOULD BE RECOMMENDED TO
01:02:29 SIMPLY BE PLACED AS SUFFICIENT IF THEY'RE RECOGNIZING THAT AN
01:02:36 AFFORDABLE HOUSING FUNDING FORDABLE HOUSING FUNDING STREAM
01:02:41 IS NECESSARY TO ACTUALLY MOVE DEVELOPMENT.
01:02:45 BUT IN ANY CASE YEAH THAT'S WHY I REQUESTED TO DUPLICATE THE
01:02:55 FILE BECAUSE IT'S BEEN TALKED ABOUT AS A PACKAGE THAT MOVES
01:02:59 FORWARD BOTH THE HOUSING TRUST FUND AND THESE INCLUSIONARY
01:03:00 CHANGES BUT THAT'S NOT WHAT'S IN THIS LEGISLATION.
01:03:04 I CERTAINLY HOPE THAT THE HOUSING TRUST FUND PASSES.
01:03:07 I'M A CO-SPONSOR BUT IF IT DOESN'T IT'S IMPORTANT FOR THIS
01:03:11 COMMITTEE TO REVISIT ANY INCLUSIONARY PROGRAM CHANGES.
01:03:14 >> I HAVE QUESTIONS SPECIFICALLY AROUND THE MISSION
01:03:19 AREA PLAN AS WELL. >> SO JUST TO BEGIN, I'M
01:03:22 CONCERNED THAT THIS ORDINANCE ONLY PARTIALLY ACCOUNTS FOR
01:03:26 AREAS LIKE THE MISSION THAT WERE PLANNED DISTINCTLY WITH
01:03:30 GREATER PROTECTIONS BUILT IN SPECIFICALLY TO ADDRESS
01:03:34 DISPLACEMENT. THE CITY HAS REPEATEDLY
01:03:35 AFFIRMED THESE PROTECTIONS THROUGH THE EASTERN
01:03:38 NEIGHBORHOODS REZONING THE MISSION AREA PLAN ITSELF THE
01:03:42 MISSION ACTION PLAN MOST RECENTLY UPDATED AS MAP 2030
01:03:45 AND THE MISSION REMAINS ONE OF THE HIGHEST DISPLACEMENT RISK
01:03:48 NEIGHBORHOODS IN SAN FRANCISCO BY THE CITY'S OWN EQUITY
01:03:52 MAPPING. WE'RE TALKING A LOT RIGHT NOW
01:03:55 ABOUT HIGH OPPORTUNITY AREAS. WELL, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT ALSO
01:03:59 HIGH DISPLACEMENT AREAS TOO. WE HAVE LOST 12,000 LATINO
01:04:03 RESIDENTS IN THE MISSION SINCE 2000, REDUCING THE ONSITE
01:04:07 REQUIREMENT HERE MEANS FEWER AFFORDABLE UNITS GET BUILT
01:04:11 IN THE EXACT NEIGHBORHOOD WHERE THE NEED TO KEEP LONG TERM
01:04:15 RESIDENTS IN PLACE IS MOST URGENT.
01:04:19 AT THE SAME TIME THAT NEW MARKET REDEVELOPMENT CONTINUES
01:04:22 TO ADD PRESSURE ON HOUSING COSTS AND THE MISSIONARY PLAN
01:04:23 DISTRICT WAS BUILT ON A CLEAR BARGAIN INCREASED HEIGHT
01:04:28 AND DENSITY IN EXCHANGE FOR DEEP AFFORDABILITY COMMITMENTS.
01:04:31 THEY WERE DEVELOPED THROUGH YEARS OF COMMUNITY PROCESS
01:04:35 SPECIFICALLY TO COUNTER DISPLACEMENT PRESSURE ON THE
01:04:39 MISSIONS LATINO RESIDENTS AND SMALL BUSINESSES.
01:04:42 >> SO LOWERING THE ONSITE RATE TO A GENERIC CITYWIDE 5% BREAKS
01:04:46 THAT BARGAIN WHILE THE ADDED DENSITY AND HEIGHT DEVELOPERS
01:04:50 RECEIVED STAYS FULLY IN PLACE AND MY QUESTIONS AS FAR AS THE
01:04:57 MISSION AREA THAT'S AFFECTED UNDER THIS LEGISLATION DID THE
01:05:02 CENTURY URBAN MODEL USE MISSION AND UM USE SPECIFIC DATA TO
01:05:06 ARRIVE AT THE 5% ON SITE RATE FOR THOSE SENSITIVE AREAS OR
01:05:10 WAS THAT THE NUMBER BASED ON BROADER CITYWIDE PROTOTYPES?
01:05:14 >> THANK YOU. THE TECH RECOMMENDED NUMBERS
01:05:16 THAT WERE BASED ON CITYWIDE AVERAGES THOUGH THEY DID LOOK
01:05:21 AT 80 DIFFERENT PROTOTYPES SO THERE WAS A LOT OF VARIABILITY
01:05:25 SMALL, LARGE DIFFERENT TYPES OF CONSTRUCTION RENTAL CONDO DID
01:05:29 IT YOU SAY DENSITY BONUS DID IT NOT?
01:05:30 SO THEY DID LOOK AT A FULL SUITE OF COST AND RENTS
01:05:33 AND OTHER INPUTS TO ARRIVE AT THAT AND WHAT THEY FOUND IS
01:05:37 THAT PROJECTS ARE NOT FEASIBLE AT THE CURRENT RATES
01:05:41 AND THEY'RE ALSO NOT FEASIBLE EVEN AT ZERO.
01:05:42 SO THERE'S NO REASON TO BELIEVE THAT THINGS THAT WOULD BE ANY
01:05:45 MORE FEASIBLE THAN THAT IN ANY PARTICULAR SUBMARKET WHERE THEY
01:05:48 DID TAKE THAT INTO ACCOUNT. YEAH THAT WAS THAT WAS WHAT THE
01:05:52 TECH ANALYSIS INDICATED AND THAT'S WHY THEY DIDN'T
01:05:56 COMMENT ON THESE AREAS BECAUSE IT WAS SIMPLY CLEAR THAT
01:05:59 IN TERMS OF THE ENTIRE CITY 5% IS ALREADY ABOVE WHAT'S
01:06:04 FEASIBLE AND THEN DID THE TACK WAY DISPLACEMENT RISK WHEN
01:06:10 SETTING THE RATE FOR THE MISSION AREA PLAN IT HAS ONE OF
01:06:14 THE HIGHEST DISPLACEMENT SCORES IN THE CITY'S OWN EQUITY
01:06:18 MAPPING. SO DID THE TAC WAY DISPLACEMENT
01:06:21 RISK AS A FACTOR IN SETTING THE RATE FOR THIS SPECIFIC DISTRICT
01:06:25 OR WAS THE 5% DERIVED PURELY FROM THE CITYWIDE FINANCIAL
01:06:30 FEASIBILITY MODELING WITH NO ADJUSTMENT FOR PARTY EQUITY
01:06:34 GEOGRAPHIES? >> THAT'S RIGHT.
01:06:35 YES. THEY DID NOT SPECIFICALLY
01:06:36 RECOMMEND DIFFERENTIATED RATES FOR DIFFERENT AREAS.
01:06:39 THEY RECOMMENDED A CITYWIDE RATE.
01:06:42 WE LOOKED AT THAT RECOMMENDATION AND WE LOOKED AT
01:06:46 WHAT THE CURRENT RATES ARE IN THE MISSION AREA PLAN
01:06:47 AND THESE OTHER AREAS WHERE THERE ARE SPECIFIC RATES THE
01:06:50 RATES CURRENTLY ARE GENERALLY 15% WHICH IS EXACTLY THE SAME
01:06:55 AS THE CITYWIDE RATE. SO THEY HAVE TRADITIONALLY BEEN
01:06:58 SIGNIFICANTLY HIGHER THAN THE CITYWIDE RATE WHEN WE DID THE
01:07:02 TEMPORARY 2023 REDUCTIONS LAST TIME AROUND THEY ACTUALLY WERE
01:07:05 REDUCED IN A WAY THAT BROUGHT THEM TO BE CURRENTLY AT PARITY
01:07:09 WITH THE CITY. SO THIS IS THE STATUS QUO.
01:07:12 WE APPLIED THE SAME PRINCIPLE HERE TO REDUCE CITYWIDE RATES
01:07:16 FROM 15 TO 5 AND IN THESE AREAS FROM 15% TO 5%.
01:07:19 HOWEVER, IN RECOGNITION OF THE CONCERN AS YOU MENTIONED
01:07:24 SUPERVISOR OF REALLY HAVING A PRIORITIZATION IN THESE AREAS
01:07:28 OF GETTING THE ONSITE UNITS RATHER THAN THE FEE THE
01:07:30 ORDINANCE PROPOSES A HIGHER FEE OUT RATE IN THESE AREAS OF 15%
01:07:35 COMPARED TO THE CITYWIDE 10%. THIS IS TO ENCOURAGE FURTHER
01:07:38 ENCOURAGE ONSITE UNITS BEING DEVELOPED IN THESE AREAS.
01:07:45 INDEED IT DOES CARVE OUT A HIGHER OFFSITE AND IN LIEU RATE
01:07:49 FOR THE MISSION PROOF THAT PLANNING IN THE CITY ALREADY
01:07:52 TREAT THIS AREA AS DISTINCT WHEN IT COMES TO VALUE CAPTURE
01:07:56 AND THE ONSITE RATE SHOULD REFLECT THAT SAME DISTINCTION
01:08:00 NOT DEFAULT TO THE CITYWIDE NUMBER.
01:08:04 AGAIN, THE MISSION REMAINS ONE OF THE HIGHEST DISPLACEMENT
01:08:07 RISK NEIGHBORHOODS IN SAN FRANCISCO BY THE CITY'S OWN
01:08:11 EQUITY MAPPING AND SO LOWERING THE ONSITE REQUIREMENT TO A
01:08:15 CITY WIDE GENERIC 5% BREAKS THAT BARGAIN IN MY VIEW WITHOUT
01:08:21 REVISITING THE DENSITY AND HEIGHT BENEFITS DEVELOPERS
01:08:22 WILL RECEIVE AND IF ANYTHING CONTINUED DEVELOPMENT PRESSURE
01:08:25 ON THE MISSION STRENGTHENS THE CASE FOR HOLDING THE LINE ON
01:08:29 THAT COMMITMENT NOT WEAKENING IT.
01:08:32 >> SO I'VE BEEN WORKING ON AMENDMENTS TO ADDRESS CONCERNS
01:08:36 ABOUT THE MISSION'S ONSITE INCLUSIONARY RATE.
01:08:37 HOWEVER, DUE TO TIME RESTRICTIONS, THE CITY
01:08:41 ATTORNEY'S OFFICE IS NOT READY TO SUBMIT THESE FOR
01:08:42 INTRODUCTION TODAY I'VE BEEN INFORMED THAT THEY WILL BE
01:08:45 READY BY THE TIME THIS ITEM IS AT THE FULL BOARD ON JULY 14TH
01:08:51 AND I LOOK FORWARD TO CONTINUING THIS DISCUSSION AT
01:08:54 THAT TIME GIVEN MY CONCERNS OVER THIS LEGISLATION THAT I
01:08:59 HOPE TO ADDRESS WITH AMENDMENTS AT THE FULL BOARD I AM TODAY
01:09:01 VOTING NO ON RECOMMENDING THIS TO THE FULL BOARD AT THIS TIME
01:09:04 I AM OPEN TO SUPPORTING THIS LEGISLATION PENDING THOSE
01:09:07 ADDITIONAL CONVERSATIONS BUT THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR
01:09:11 QUESTIONS. >> THANK YOU.
01:09:11 SUPERVISOR VICE CHAIRMAN BUT I THINK AGAIN FOR THE
01:09:15 PRESENTATION AND I HAVE A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS BEFORE I'LL
01:09:19 KIND OF RENDERING DECISION THE FOLLOW UP FROM SUPERVISOR
01:09:25 FIELDER'S QUESTION COMING FROM MY MIND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING THAT
01:09:31 WHILE THIS WAS INTENDED TO BE COUPLED WITH THE HOUSING TRUST
01:09:34 FUND GIVEN THE TIME THAT IT WILL TAKE TO PASS AND THIS
01:09:41 PROJECT'S PENDING IN THAT CONTEXT YOU DIDN'T WANT TO FACE
01:09:44 THAT DELAY. THERE WAS A PART OF YOUR
01:09:45 QUESTION THAT I DON'T BELIEVE WAS ANSWERED THOUGH, WHICH WAS
01:09:48 THAT IF THE HOUSING TRUST FUND DOESN'T PASS THE TAX SAID THE
01:09:52 RATE SHOULD BE 10%. WHAT IS STILL THE PLAN FOR THAT
01:09:56 CONTINGENCY IF THAT HAPPENS? >> THANK YOU.
01:09:57 SUPERVISOR YES, THAT'S CORRECT. AND AS THIS ITEM IS AN
01:10:00 ORDINANCE AND IS NOT PART OF THE CHARTER MEASURE
01:10:04 SPECIFICALLY THIS OBVIOUSLY COULD BE ADJUSTED BY THE BOARD
01:10:07 OF SUPERVISORS LEGISLATIVELY IF THAT NEEDED TO HAPPEN DEPENDING
01:10:11 ON THE RESULTS OF THAT BALLOT MEASURE AND IS YOUR OFFICE
01:10:14 AND THE MAYOR'S OFFICE SUPPORTIVE OF IF THE HOUSING
01:10:18 TRUST FUND DOESN'T PASS THAT YOU WILL BRING FORTH
01:10:19 LEGISLATION TO INCREASE THE INCLUSIONARY BACK UP BACK UP TO
01:10:24 10% IN THAT CONTEXT, YES WE WILL WORK WITH THE BOARD OF
01:10:25 SUPERVISORS TO ADJUST THE REQUIREMENTS ACCORDINGLY BACK
01:10:28 TO 10% IF THE HOUSING TRUST FUND DOESN'T PASS OR ANY OTHER
01:10:33 NUMBER THAT WE CAN ALL AGREE ON.
01:10:34 >> OKAY. GOOD TO KNOW.
01:10:35 THANK YOU. I'M GLAD WE HAVE THAT ON THE
01:10:37 RECORD. AND THEN SECOND, JUST FROM A
01:10:40 EDIFICATION PERSPECTIVE, YOU MENTIONED SO WANT TO BETTER
01:10:44 UNDERSTAND WHY THE RATE OF 5% WAS CHOSEN.
01:10:47 THE WHAT YOU ALSO SAID EARLIER WAS THAT I MOST CITY CURRENTLY
01:10:51 9% OF THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNITS CAME FROM INCLUSIONARY I
01:10:56 UNDERSTAND IT'S AN AGGREGATE AND NOT A PER SITE COMPONENT.
01:10:59 >> SO HOW WAS THE NUMBER OF 5% CHOSEN IF AND AGGREGATE
01:11:03 TECHNICALLY 9% OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNITS ARE COMING FROM
01:11:06 INCLUSIONARY FEES, RIGHT. >> WELL THE THE TASK BEFORE THE
01:11:10 TASK IS TO FIGURE OUT WHAT IS WORKABLE WITH RESPECT TO THIS
01:11:15 SPECIFIC TOOL. SO TALKING ABOUT THE CONTEXT OF
01:11:16 INCLUSIONARY PROVIDING 9% AND IN RECENT YEARS ONLY 6% OF
01:11:19 THE TOTAL PORTFOLIO IS TO PUT IT IN CONTEXT THAT IT'S A SMALL
01:11:23 PIECE OF ALL THE DIFFERENT TOOLS THAT WE HAVE TO PROVIDE
01:11:26 AFFORDABLE HOUSING THE TAX AND TIRE CHARGE IS WITH RESPECT
01:11:30 TO THAT ONE PIECE OF THE PUZZLE WHAT CAN WE ACTUALLY CHARGE
01:11:34 IN A WAY THAT WILL WORK AND PROVIDE AFFORDABLE HOUSING
01:11:35 FROM THESE PROJECTS GETTING BUILT AND NOT BE SO HIGH THAT
01:11:39 WE DON'T GET EITHER THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING OR THE
01:11:40 MARKET RATE SO THE 5% IS A FEASIBILITY CONVERSATION.
01:11:42 THE FEASIBILITY RESULT WAS FRANKLY THAT 0% AS THE
01:11:46 COMPTROLLER INDICATED IS THE ONLY FEASIBLE NUMBER FOR THESE
01:11:50 REQUIREMENTS. HOWEVER, THE TAC ALSO TALKED
01:11:51 ABOUT THE POLICY GOALS THAT WE HAVE AND WANTED TO HAVE SOME
01:11:54 RATE THAT'S THERE TO CAPTURE PROJECTS THAT ARE ABLE TO MOVE
01:11:58 FORWARD. THERE'S ALWAYS PROJECTS THAT
01:12:01 ARE ON THE MARGIN THAT ARE ABLE TO MOVE FORWARD WHEN THE
01:12:03 AVERAGE PROJECT IS NOT. IT'S ALSO MEANT TO KIND OF
01:12:06 HEDGE AGAINST YOU KNOW, IF CONDITIONS BEGIN TO IMPROVE
01:12:09 FASTER THAN WE EXPECT OVER THE NEXT THREE YEARS BEFORE THE TAC
01:12:10 RECONVENES THAT AT LEAST THERE IS SOME LEVEL OF INCLUSIONARY
01:12:14 REQUIREMENT THERE TO APPLY TO SOME OF THOSE PROJECTS.
01:12:17 BUT THEY TRIED TO SET SOMETHING AS CLOSE AS POSSIBLE TO THE
01:12:21 FEASIBLE LEVEL OF 0% TO REALLY TRY TO GET THE PROJECTS OUT THE
01:12:24 GROUND. I THINK SEEING THAT THINGS HAVE
01:12:27 GOTTEN WORSE SINCE 2023 WHEN WE ONLY MADE A 33% REDUCTION
01:12:31 REALLY FOCUSED IN THAT CONVERSATION THERE THAT WE
01:12:34 NEEDED TO GO FURTHER THIS TIME BUT WE FIVE THAT SPECIFIC
01:12:38 NUMBER THAT WAS THE SUBJECT OF DEBATE OVER THE COURSE OF MANY
01:12:42 MEETINGS THERE WERE DIFFERENT NUMBERS THAT WERE THROWN OUT
01:12:46 ZERO WAS SUGGESTED, 10% WAS SUGGESTED, FIVE WAS YOU KNOW
01:12:49 THERE WERE OTHER NUMBERS THAT ARE BETWEEN 0 AND 10 AND THEY
01:12:51 LANDED AT 5% AS A NUMBER THAT WOULD GENERATE A MEANINGFUL
01:12:54 NUMBER OF INCLUSIONARY UNITS FOR PROJECTS THAT ARE OVER 25
01:12:58 WHILE BEING AS CLOSE TO WHAT'S FEASIBLE AS POSSIBLE DOESN'T
01:13:04 EXACTLY ANSWER THE METHODOLOGY BUT APPRECIATE IT.
01:13:08 YEAH, SURE. I THINK BASED ON ALL THIS I
01:13:12 JUST WANT TO THINK JACOB YOU KNOW THIS WAS A YEAR LONG
01:13:16 PROCESS OF GOING THROUGH THIS WORK THE INCLUSIONARY HOUSING
01:13:19 TASK AS WELL THE MAYOR'S OFFICE AND THE STAFF PLANNING
01:13:23 DEPARTMENT. I THINK A LOT OF FOLKS WERE
01:13:24 DIFFERENT INVOLVED AND I RECOGNIZE THAT WE HAVE A
01:13:27 SERIOUS HOUSING CRISIS IN OUR CITY AND WE NEED TO DO ALL THAT
01:13:31 WE CAN TO GET HOMES BUILT. I KNOW WE'VE HEARD MANY TIMES
01:13:35 TODAY THAT THE TASK FORCE SAID THAT EVEN 0% WOULDN'T MOVE US
01:13:39 FORWARD AND WE NEED TO MOVE DO WHATEVER WE CAN TO MAKE SURE
01:13:43 THAT WE'RE MOVING THE NEEDLE ON AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND HOUSING
01:13:46 IN GENERAL AND I THINK WE HEARD A LOT IN PUBLIC COMMENT TODAY
01:13:50 ABOUT PEOPLE WHO ARE TRYING TO LIVE HERE AND ARE NOT ABLE TO
01:13:53 FIND THE HOMES THAT THEY CAN LIVE IN AT AT ANY LEVEL.
01:13:57 AND SO I THINK COMBINATION OF INCREASING SUPPLY WHICH WE DID
01:14:01 LAST YEAR WITH THE FAMILY ZONING PLAN AND THE HOUSING
01:14:04 ELEMENT AND WITH THE HOUSING TRUST FUND FOR AFFORDABLE
01:14:05 HOUSING THAT IS IMPORTANT AS WELL.
01:14:09 AND BUT WE ALSO HAVE TO MAKE ROOM FOR MARKET RATE HOUSING TO
01:14:12 ABSORB ALL THE NEW PEOPLE WHO ARE COMING TO SAN FRANCISCO TO
01:14:16 MAKE SURE THEY DON'T PRICE OUT PEOPLE WHO NEED AFFORDABLE
01:14:19 HOUSING AS WELL. AND I THINK WE ALL AGREE THAT
01:14:22 INCLUSIONARY HOLISTICALLY IS IMPERFECT AND THE REVENUE
01:14:26 STREAM IS UNEVEN AND OFTEN DRIED UP TO TRICKLE UP OVER THE
01:14:30 LAST PAST FEW YEARS. >> BUT I DO I APPRECIATE THE
01:14:34 HOUSING TRUST FUND MOVING OVER .
01:14:37 I THINK LIKE SUPERVISOR FIELDER I DO WISH THAT THIS WAS COUPLED
01:14:40 . I FEEL THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN
01:14:41 MORE INTELLECTUALLY HONEST AND CONSISTENT WITH WHAT THE
01:14:44 PUBLIC'S PERCEPTION IS. WHEN YOU SAY TWO THINGS GO
01:14:48 TOGETHER AND BUT I APPRECIATE THAT THERE'S A COMMITMENT THAT
01:14:52 IF THE HOUSING TRUST FUND DOES NOT PASS THAT WE WILL REVISIT
01:14:56 THIS AND GO TO 10% AS THE TAC RECOMMENDED IF THE ENTIRE BASIS
01:14:59 OF THIS IS A TAC RECOMMENDATION.
01:15:02 SO WITH THAT CONTEXT AND HOPEFULLY THAT COMMITMENT I
01:15:06 WILL BE SUPPORTING TODAY'S MEASURE AS IT IS TODAY.
01:15:08 THANK YOU. GREAT.
01:15:12 THANK YOU COLLEAGUES, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS?
01:15:13 OKAY, GREAT. >> I'D LIKE TO MAKE TWO
01:15:18 MOTIONS. FIRST IS TO CONTINUE THE
01:15:22 DUPLICATE FILE TO THE CALL OF THE CHAIR.
01:15:25 CAN WE TAKE CONTROL IN THAT MOTION?
01:15:31 REPEAT THAT. I'M SORRY.
01:15:34 >> CAN WE CONTINUE TO DUPLICATE FILE TO THE CALL OF THE CHAIR?
01:15:35 YES. AND ON THE MOTION TO CONTINUE
01:15:38 THE DUPLICATE FILE TO THE CALL OF THE CHAIR NUMBER FILTER
01:15:41 NUMBER FILTER I FISCHER MAHMUD FISCHER.
01:15:45 MAHMUD I CHERYL I CHAIR CHERYL I HAVE THREE EYES.
01:15:51 >> THANK YOU. THE MOTION PASSES AND I'D LIKE
01:15:54 TO MOVE THE ORIGINAL FILE AS AMENDED TO THE FULL BOARD WITH
01:15:58 A POSITIVE RECOMMENDATION. >> YES.
01:16:02 AND ON THAT MOTION TO FORWARD THE ORIGINAL FILE AS AMENDED TO
01:16:06 THE FULL BOARD WITH A POSITIVE RECOMMENDATION A MEMBER MEMBER
01:16:10 FILTER THE FILTER NO FISCHER MAHMOOD FISCHER MAHMUD I CHAIR.
01:16:15 CHAIR CHERYL I CHAIR CHERYL I. I HAVE TWO EYES AND ONE NO WITH
01:16:20 MEMBER FILTER VOTING NO MOTION PASSES MADAM CLERK IS THERE ANY
01:16:27 OTHER BUSINESS BEFORE US TODAY THAT CONCLUDES OUR MEETING
01:16:29 AGENDA FOR THE DAY. >> THANK YOU.
01:16:32 SO YOU KNOW THE BUSINESS. WE ARE ADJOURNED