Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Certificate Of Preference topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
OCII reviews Certificate of Preference survey; staff recommends outreach, predevelopment funding and targeted subsidies
Summary
Staff presented final results from a Certificate of Preference (COP) holder survey and recommended a suite of outreach and program measures — including targeted senior units, income tiering, continued use of DAHLIA, nonprofit partnerships and predevelopment funding — while commissioners pressed for more rental-subsidy resources to increase housing placement.
OCII staff on June 5 presented final results and recommendations from a Certificate of Preference (COP) holder survey and outlined next steps to connect COP holders with affordable housing opportunities.
Pam Sims, senior development specialist in the housing division, summarized survey results (earlier outreach had mailed postcards to COP holders and the initial survey returned 114 responses). Staff said the COP population is largely older, female and African American, and that many holders are interested in both rental and homeownership opportunities but may need assistance to navigate application processes and, in some cases, rental subsidies to qualify for units.
Staff reported several operational findings and recommendations: COP holders are eligible for over 98% of units in OCII’s current pipeline; staff recommended prioritizing one- and two-bedroom units that meet senior demand, including income tiering (projects may include units in a range of AMI tiers while meeting overall project affordability limits), increased outreach (DAHLIA platform, email blasts, social media and a COP newsletter), developer-required early outreach plans, partnerships with community-based organizations, and predevelopment funding for Transbay/Hunters Point Shipyard blocks (Blocks 52 and 54) to support unit plans at targeted AMI levels. Pam Sims said staff had implemented many of the commissioners’ earlier suggestions and noted specific nonprofit partners who conduct outreach to COP holders.
Commissioners raised concerns about placement rates and subsidy availability. Staff said there are roughly 900 active COP holders (staff referenced previous mailing counts of 891 and said the number fluctuates), that about 26 households had been housed in the last fiscal year, and that perhaps 200 COP holders were actively applying for current opportunities. Staff said many COP holders withdraw late in the process because of unit suitability or affordability constraints; staff also said the city has limited rental-subsidy resources (Section 8 vouchers and a local operating subsidy targeted to formerly homeless households) and recommended continued advocacy for additional voucher capacity and nonprofit partnerships to fill gaps.
Public commenters praised outreach staff for their work; Oscar James complimented staff and suggested exploring whether grandchildren might be eligible for preferences in some cases. Ace Washington again raised historical grievances and asked for audit documents; staff did not resolve those requests during the COP discussion.
No formal vote was required for the presentation; commissioners thanked staff and asked for continued focus on outreach, matching strategies and exploring additional subsidy sources to increase housing placements for COP holders.
