Land Use Committee hears hours of public testimony, continues inclusionary-housing amendments for one week

The San Francisco Board of Supervisors Land Use Committee on May 16 took extensive public testimony on two related ordinances that would change the city's inclusionary-affordable-housing rules and then continued both items for one week.

Clerk read the measures (items 2 and 3): both are ordinances amending the planning code—one would revise the inclusionary affordable housing fee and the on-site/off-site affordable housing alternatives and require a minimum dwelling-unit mix in all residential districts; the other would add reporting requirements for density-bonus projects. Committee leaders and multiple witnesses repeatedly referenced last year's Proposition C (voter-authorized changes) and warned that the sponsors' draft would reduce the share of housing dedicated to lower-income households.

Supervisor Aaron Peskin, who said authors had held "productive discussions," told the committee he was optimistic authors could produce a consensual package in time for the May 23 full board hearing. Supervisor Ahsha Safaí said negotiations had been "aggressive" and that a one-week continuance would allow final conversations with stakeholders.

Dozens of speakers addressed items 2 and 3 during the public-comment period. Broad themes included: demand to preserve the 25% inclusionary level residents sought in Proposition C; opposition to lowering the low-income share (several witnesses flagged an apparent drop toward 18% for some low-income set-asides); calls to protect long-time low-income residents, seniors and people with disabilities; and appeals for neighborhood- or sensitive-area adjustments rather than a blanket reduction. Speakers from organized groups included United Neighbors, Senior and Disability Action, CTA (a labor organization), Mission Economic Development Agency (MEDA) and Tenderloin People's Congress; several speakers said they would return the following week to continue pressure.

Representative quotes from public testimony included: "It's robbing Peter to pay Paul," said Rufus Watkins of United Neighbors; Dennis Moskofian, describing analysis he said shows a drop from 25% to 18% for lower-tier set-asides, said the change "doesn't do it" for affordability; Teresa Flandrich of Senior and Disability Action said she supported the Peskin–Kim approach because it "gives the best and closest numbers to Prop C." Peter Papadopoulos of the Mission Economic Development Agency urged considering a "sensitive neighborhoods" option tied to neighborhood AMI rather than a citywide rollback.

After public comment, Supervisor Peskin moved to continue items 2 and 3 for one week; the chair said the motion passed without objection. No final votes were taken; sponsors said they expect to present a consensus package to the full board on May 23.

Next steps: items 2 and 3 are continued to the Land Use Committee and/or calendared for the May 23 Board of Supervisors agenda pending further drafting and stakeholder meetings.