Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Affordable Housing Fund topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee backs charter amendment to dedicate one-third of surplus to affordable housing with 15-year sunset
Summary
Supervisors forwarded a charter amendment that would dedicate 33% of an identified year‑end surplus to affordable housing and require annual affordable‑housing planning, with a 15‑year sunset; supporters said it offers a long‑term funding stream, while critics raised priority and distribution questions.
Get email alerts on the Affordable Housing Fund topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Rules Committee voted July 1 to forward a charter amendment to the full Board that would create a dedicated mechanism to fund affordable housing. Introduced by Supervisor Chris Daly, the measure instructs the Controller to identify year‑end surpluses and program one‑third (33%) of that surplus for affordable‑housing purposes, sets baseline appropriation language, requires an annual affordable‑housing plan and budget from the mayor’s housing office, and includes a 15‑year sunset.
Daly said the city lacks a stable long‑term funding source for multi‑year affordable‑housing projects and noted prior ballot efforts and supplemental appropriations that fell short of a steady stream. "Having some certainty in terms of long‑term resources is something that's very beneficial to those developers," Daly said, adding that the proposal is structured to avoid automatic cuts to baseline services because the underlying mechanism uses year‑end surplus determinations and allows a supermajority on the Board to undo mandated appropriations in extraordinary circumstances.
Public testimony was broadly supportive from tenants, SRO advocates and community organizers who described growing displacement pressures, unaffordable rents and demand for permanent housing. Speakers asked about income targeting (e.g., the measure references funding for units at 80% of area median income and lower) and urged the Board to ensure funding favors the lowest‑income households.
Opponents cautioned that dedicating surplus funds constrains future budget flexibility during economic downturns. Committee members discussed income bands, the 33% figure and the 15‑year sunset as negotiable terms that could be adjusted in Board debates prior to final action. The item was forwarded with a positive committee recommendation for consideration by the full Board.
