Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Tefra Bond Review topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Supervisors Hear Community Concerns as Committee Advances TEFRA Bond Review Amendment
Summary
The Budget and Finance Committee opened a hearing on an ordinance to require additional city review and contracting conditions for housing projects financed by TEFRA revenue bonds; the sponsor introduced an amendment of the whole and the item was continued for one week for further community engagement and budget-analyst follow-up.
The Budget and Finance Committee considered an ordinance to add Chapter 43.9 to the San Francisco Administrative Code requiring housing project sponsors who use revenue bonds issued through joint exercise of powers authorities to comply with certain city contracting programs and other conditions. The committee read the ordinance into the record, and the sponsor introduced an amendment of the whole that would add reimbursement language, clarify enforcement, and incorporate budget analyst recommendations.
Supporters and tenants urged more community input. Francisco De Costa told the committee the amendments affect a population “in dire need of affordable housing” and asked for meaningful multilingual outreach and tenant-organization input (Francisco De Costa). Dorothy Peterson, president of the Shoreview Residents Association, said she opposed the TEFRA process as written and cited AIMCO and the Lincoln Place case as reasons the board should require a people-impact review before approving financing that could lead to displacement (Dorothy Peterson). Esquanella Jackson, a longtime Southeast resident, asked supervisors not to amend the legislation now while litigation and concerns about backdoor redevelopment deals remain (Esquanella Jackson).
Redevelopment Agency staff (Olsen Lee) told the committee the ordinance applies citywide and is not restricted to the Southeast sector. The sponsor said the measure was prompted by prior TEFRA hearings and projects that, in his view, proceeded without sufficient Office of Public Finance or agency review; the amendment would seek reimbursement to the redevelopment agency for staff time when the agency is involved in a TEFRA resolution and clarify compliance and penalties. The budget analyst recommended specifying enforcement responsibilities and urged additional scrutiny of any substantive changes.
Chair and committee members agreed to take the amendment of the whole under consideration, solicit community input in the intervening week, and return the item to the committee next week for further action. The committee took no final vote on policy; the item will be revisited after the one-week continuance.
