Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Workforce Housing topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Hearing: Officials say San Francisco faces ~9,000 'missing middle' unit shortfall; local funding and tax‑credit limits constrain remedies
Summary
A multi‑agency hearing heard that the city has greatly under‑produced housing serving households between roughly 50–120% AMI, with staff citing a current RHNA shortfall of about 9,000 units; speakers urged new revenue sources and state/federal policy changes to expand middle‑income production.
The Land Use & Transportation Committee on Dec. 4 held a multi‑agency hearing on workforce and middle‑income housing needs. Sponsor Supervisor Safaie said the city has done well producing market‑rate housing but poorly on housing aimed at households between roughly 55%–175% area median income and called for policy and programmatic solutions.
Sarah Dennis Phillips (Office of Economic & Workforce Development) defined 'workforce' or 'middle‑income' households as those above 60% AMI who are nonetheless cost‑burdened in San Francisco; she cited Zillow’s October 2017 asking rent of about $4,200 for a two‑bedroom apartment and used that figure to show why households at high fractions of AMI remain housing burdened.
Ted Egan (Comptroller) summarized trend data showing the middle‑income band (roughly 60–140% AMI) has stagnated or declined as higher‑income households have grown and highlighted labor‑market consequences if middle‑income workers cannot afford to live in the region. Planning staff reported an unprecedented pipeline of about 60,000 units but said it is too early to determine income distribution across that pipeline; staff estimated a current RHNA shortfall of about 9,000 units for the 50–120% AMI bands in the current cycle.
Amy Chan (Mayor’s Office of Housing & Community Development) summarized local tools (Housing Trust Fund, 2015 Prop A bond, small sites program, down‑payment assistance and the Teacher Next Door forgivable loans) and noted constraints: federal low‑income tax credits generally target ≤60% AMI so state/federal changes would be needed to deploy tax credits for middle‑income units and reduce the city's per‑unit funding gap, which staff estimated is roughly $100,000 higher for middle‑income units than for low‑income units without new leverage.
Public commenters — labor representatives, housing groups and neighborhood advocates — urged more funding, upzoning, vacancy and luxury taxes, and targeted acquisition/preservation strategies. Supervisors asked departments for more pipeline detail and clearer breakdowns of existing local resources and planned issuances of Prop A funds. The committee moved to file the hearing and requested follow‑up materials.
