Supervisors advance mayor's nominees to oversight board as city races to meet AB 26 deadline

The San Francisco Rules Committee on Jan. 19 voted to forward four mayoral nominees to a successor agency oversight board created under state law AB 26, while members grappled with how quickly the city must act to protect affordable housing assets.

Malcolm Young of the mayor's office told the committee the California Supreme Court's recent rulings left the city with little time: "On 02/01/2012, our local redevelopment agency will be dissolved," Young said, explaining the successor structure and the oversight board's role in approving enforceable-obligation payment schedules and overseeing certain land-use authority.

Why it matters: AB 26 transfers many redevelopment duties and assets to successor entities. Committee members and public speakers said they fear the speed of the process has limited public notice and input on who will exercise authority over large projects in Mission Bay, the Hunters Point shipyard and Transbay.

City attorney staff explained the timing. Jesse Smith of the City Attorney's Office told supervisors the court had reset deadlines, moving the dissolution date to Feb. 1 and leaving little opportunity for a legislative extension: "Unless the city makes an active election to acquire affordable housing assets, the city will not get those assets," Smith said, describing the statutory opt-in that protects those housing holdings.

The mayor nominated four individuals for mayoral appointments: Nadia Sasse (director of the Office of Public Finance, Comptroller's Office), Olsen (Lisonbee) Lee (director, Mayor's Office of Housing), John Ram (planning department), and Bob Muscat (executive director, Local 21). Each nominee spoke to their qualifications: Sasse emphasized debt-management experience; Lee described 15 years working on housing at the redevelopment agency; Ram stressed planning and land-use expertise; Muscat highlighted labor and personnel experience and the statutory seat for the largest special taxing-entity representative.

Public commenters pressed for slower, broader public engagement. Ace Walsh Washington alleged the process ignored redevelopment's historical harms to Black communities and urged legal action, saying the process felt "unconstitutional" and urging community representation on the oversight board. Eric Brooks of the San Francisco Green Party and the grassroots group Our City criticized late public noticing and asked that project-area stakeholders receive direct notice and that the board include community representatives from impacted neighborhoods.

Supervisors debated procedure and authority. Supervisor Campos asked whether appointments should be made before the subordinate body exists; Young and City Attorney staff said the mayor's office had added an amendment clarifying the appointments would commence only when the subordinate body is established. Campos expressed preference to continue the item for more public discussion; Supervisor Farrell moved to forward the nominations without recommendation to the full Board, a course other supervisors supported to ensure readiness by the Feb. 1 deadline.

Formal action taken: the committee adopted an amendment clarifying that appointments become effective only upon establishment of the subordinate body and voted to forward the nominations to the full board without recommendation.

What's next: The nominations and companion resolution establishing the oversight board will go to the Board of Supervisors for consideration on Tuesday, Jan. 31. Supervisors signaled they expect more public discussion and full-board questions on the oversight board's authority and its membership.

Sources and on-the-record comments in this report come from statements to the Rules Committee (Malcolm Young, Jesse Smith, Nadia Sasse, Olsen Lee, John Ram, Bob Muscat), and public commenters (Ace Walsh Washington, Eric Brooks).