A November affordable housing measure almost lost the high-polling term “affordable housing” in the digest that will be printed in San Francisco’s Voter Information Pamphlet.
Its supporters rallied on Friday and got the phrase restored. The episode, however, may foreshadow more opposition from the mayor’s office and some labor unions ahead of the November election.
The measure, the Affordable Housing Guarantee Act, would require the city to use revenue from the existing “transfer tax” on real estate deals worth more than $10 million to fund only affordable housing developments and housing assistance.
At least 60 percent of the funds would be allocated for affordable housing production, including at least half on social housing developments.
Social housing is a form of affordable housing that is “democratically controlled by residents” and “for everyone,” including people who may be too poor for some affordable housing or earn too much to qualify for it while still being rent-burdened, said Scott Feeney, a proponent of the measure.
Representatives from the Mayor’s Budget Office and the Office of Economic and Workforce Development argued that including the words “affordable housing” in the Voter Information Pamphlet would be misleading because much of the money would fund social housing, which is not the conventional city-funded affordable housing that voters would assume.
They sought the term “alternative housing” instead. This was adopted on Thursday by the Ballot Simplification Council, which prepares impartial digests for voters.
Supporters of the measure were shocked that the term “affordable housing” was replaced and went to work to restore it. “It was really befuddling to see the mayor’s office twist themselves into a pretzel trying to redefine, redirect, regenerate what the realities of their own programs are,” said City Hall veteran Sunny Angulo, executive director of the new progressive advocacy group Propel. “It was bananas.”
A flood of letters asking for reconsideration poured in before a hearing on Friday of the Ballot Simplification Council. Supervisors Shamann Walton and Jackie Fielder complained that the removal of “affordable housing” was itself confusing to voters.
City Hall officials and labor also sent letters to demand using “social housing” instead of “affordable housing.”
After a two-hour Friday hearing and following multiple rounds of public comments, the Ballot Simplification Council voted 4-0 to restore the words “affordable housing” in the digest, which also mentions “social housing.” One member was absent.
The measure’s backers consider the result a win. Losing “affordable housing” in the digest would have figured to be a major blow to the measure’s chances.
A June poll by the ballot measure’s supporters showed early, strong support: 67 percent of respondents said they backed the measure, which would only require a simple majority to pass.
“I think once you say affordable housing without raising taxes, you’re in a good place with the voters of San Francisco,” said political consultant Jim Stearns, who is also a donor to the measure.
Though the measure does not have any official opposition yet, according to Angulo, that could change: The measure would keep in place a tax on sellers of big real estate that Lurie and Supervisor Bilal Mahmood had moved earlier this year to eliminate. The San Francisco Building and Construction Trades Council and Laborers Local 261 recommended removing “affordable housing” last week.
It also would siphon money away from the city’s general fund — affecting the flexibility of the mayor and the board of supervisors in spending.
Voters will also weigh in on another housing measure this November, this one backed by Lurie to increase San Francisco’s annual affordable housing fund from $52 million to $125 million. Those funds would come from future property tax growth.
The mayor’s office said the presence of two housing measures on the same ballot motivated its intervention at the Ballot Simplification Council.
Lurie’s deputy press secretary Shelby Weiss wrote in a statement, “Our office has asked the Ballot Simplification Committee to reduce the risk of voter confusion stemming from the measure’s current phrasing, by making clear that this measure is for the purpose of funding social housing.”
When asked about Lurie’s stance on the measure, Weiss responded by saying “Shared what we can for now.”
Angulo said, “I invite the mayor to be a part of the solution. He has said he cares about affordable housing.”
I think people might understand affordable housing. Not so sure they understand “social housing”. Let’s use the words people understand. That is the job of the Ballot Simplification Committee.
City&County “affordable housing” programming (it should be termed Affordable Housing) is not an effort that’s promoting housing for the tax paying public at large. It is social housing, and well should be called that. As it stands, this is designed to mislead a public that’s not picking through language with a magnifying glass.