Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Jobs Housing Linkage topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning Commission backs updated jobs‑housing linkage fee after marathon public hearing
Summary
After hours of testimony from labor, tenant groups and developers, the Planning Commission approved Supervisor Matt Haney’s update to the jobs‑housing linkage fee that raises the office fee and dedicates shares for preservation and supportive housing, sending the measure on to the Board with staff‑recommended refinements.
The San Francisco Planning Commission on Thursday voted to support legislation that updates the city’s jobs‑housing linkage fee, a move sponsors said would generate hundreds of millions of dollars for affordable housing over the next decade.
Supervisor Matt Haney told the commission the existing fee — last substantially updated in 1997 — does not reflect current office densities, construction costs and the city’s affordable‑housing needs. The proposed ordinance raises the office rate to $69.60 per square foot and the laboratory rate to $46.43 per square foot, indexes the fee to inflation and allocates 30 percent of revenue to permanent supportive housing and 10 percent to acquisition and preservation. Sponsor materials cite a nexus study calculating a maximum legally justified fee of approximately $193.33/sf, and Haney described the $69.60 figure as a policy judgment grounded in precedent and feasibility analyses.
Planning staff and the Office of Economic and Workforce Development presented a feasibility analysis that recommended a lower initial increase (roughly $38.57/sf) based on development prototypes and current market conditions. Staff urged further study of lab feasibility and asked for clearer pipeline rules for projects in construction.
Public comment consumed much of the hearing. Labor unions, tenant advocates, community organizations and neighborhood groups argued the fee is long overdue and urged commissioners to press for the highest practicable amount. Speakers described homelessness and rising displacement and said dedicated funding for supportive housing and preservation is necessary. Dozens of residents and advocacy groups urged support for Supervisor Haney’s item; some developers and the Central SoMa Association urged caution and suggested phased or site‑specific approaches and potential grandfathering for projects already in the pipeline.
After questions and extended debate, the commission voted to approve the proposed ordinance and forward it to the Board of Supervisors with staff modifications and a commitment to continue negotiations on implementation details. The motion passed unanimously on the recorded roll call vote (5–0). The ordinance moves next to the Board for further hearings and final action.
The commission’s approval does not change the details of projects already in active pipelines — staff noted that pipeline rules and land‑dedication parameters remain subjects of follow‑on amendments.
Supporters said the updated fee will provide a predictable revenue stream for affordable housing, including a first‑time dedicated source for permanent supportive housing and a new emphasis on acquisition and preservation to prevent further displacement.
Opponents cautioned that setting the fee above demonstrated feasibility for some office prototypes could reduce development on marginal sites; supporters countered that the city’s offices are outperforming national averages and that deficit funding has driven displacement for decades.
