Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Certificate Of Preference topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Mayor—s office outlines Certificate of Preference outreach and placement results; program faces deadlines and process questions
Summary
MOHCD staff described the Certificate of Preference program history, eligibility, outreach and recent placements: since taking over in April 2012 MOHCD issued 98 certificates and helped 19 certificate holders move into affordable housing; program project‑area expirations are currently set for Jan. 2016 with two possible five‑year extensions.
The Mayor's Office of Housing and Community Development (MOHCD) briefed the commission on Oct. 15 about the Certificate of Preference (COP) program, the decades‑old preference right for households displaced by past redevelopment activities.
Brian Chu of MOHCD summarized the program history (origin 1963; expansion to household members in 1999), the current administration of the COP program by MOHCD since April 2012, and the mechanics: certificate holders are prioritized in lotteries for OCII‑funded, MOHCD below‑market‑rate and 100% affordable projects and must still meet project eligibility criteria (income, credit, other underwriting). "The certificate holder... is put at the very top of the lottery list," Chu said, but he emphasized that certificate holders still must qualify for units.
Chu reported that MOHCD has an active mailing list of about 656 COP holders and has issued 98 new certificates since April 2012. He said 19 certificate holders have successfully been placed into affordable housing since that time (11 Western Addition holders, 8 Hunters Point holders) and 91 applications were received from COP holders on recently advertised projects. MOHCD described efforts to recontact a previously compiled list of approximately 1,320 potential certificate holders (work performed by a third party) and planned outreach and credit‑readiness services to improve certificate holders— success in lotteries.
Commissioners asked detailed operational questions: how eligibility is verified (site occupancy records and microfiche, school records and other corroboration), what happens when program project‑area extensions expire (current expirations for the Western Addition A2 and Hunters Point project areas were cited as Jan. 2016, with two five‑year extension options created by a 2008 commission resolution), and whether MOHCD can centralize or streamline the process (online applications, reusing a single, generic application as a proxy for interest across multiple projects). MOHCD said it is working on an online application interface and outreach practices; MOHCD also explained that some affordable developers run their own application processes and financing sources vary across projects, complicating full centralization.
Public commenters reiterated historical harm and urged stronger and faster outreach to lost certificate holders; they also asked for more local preference and ZIP‑code‑level prioritization for affected neighborhoods. Commissioners suggested technological improvements and closer coordination between OCII and MOHCD going forward. No vote was required for this informational item; commissioners asked staff to provide written follow‑up and to return with proposals for implementation improvements and discussion of possible program extensions.
