Where is the Public Housing Model Really Going?

News of Trump’s election, and the appointment of Dr. Ben Carson to run the Housing and Urban Development Department, brought cringes through housing agencies and rights groups in San Francisco.  Concerns over what will be cut first, and how to ensure that projects entitled or initiated are moved on quickly to prevent any last minute shut-downs, are the order of the day.

Various facets of the RAD (Rental Assistance Demonstration, a public-private enterprise under HUD) rehabilitation of multiple sites and units, and the transfer to private managing entities, are now in progress.  The HOPE SF (a local RAD manifestation) projects at Alice Griffith and Hunter’s View continue at a slow, plodding rate; meanwhile two larger-scale projects, Sunnydale and Potrero, are about to take off, initiating parcels and projects that will transform a good deal of the city’s remaining public housing space.

One unfortunate aspect of the RAD projects is that they have resulted in attrition of SFHA and other unionized workers, who were previously residents as well as employees.  But a bigger issue is where all this privatization is taking us in general.  The cost of rentals and market rate units continues to pass all sensibility, at the same time that alarms about “housing bubbles” are being heard.  Meanwhile, former ways of providing affordability, such as co-ops and garden rental apartment communities, are going by the boards.  Why is the city selling off properties instead of purchasing more land and buildings that can be held in the public trust for the sake of affordability?

In other cities, public housing agencies like the NYCHA are busy expanding publicly-owned developments and acquiring more properties. Yet the SFHA seems to be in a perpetual downward spiral of selling off parcels and managerial functions, reducing staff instead of viewing the job-creative aspect of housing initiation, management, and maintenance as a positive.  In whose interest would we be selling off public land sites, like Balboa Reservoir, and Ruth Asawa School of the Arts, when these could be redeveloped by the SFHA into bastions of low-cost housing through collective approaches to financing and philanthropic donations?

There seems to be a disconnect downtown with the reality that land is the key ingredient we are quickly losing control of citywide, as developers and private institutions are savvily snapping up parcels whenever the city or its agencies are willing to sell, with little negotiation in the public’s interest.  Potrero and Sunnydale both passed easily through the Dec 2016 and Jan 2017 Board of Supervisors hearings, with few challenges from opponents. However, concern should be had for the future of affordability when we see our public agencies so willing to sell off public lands quickly and without any iron-clad guarantees of large-scale public housing opportunities.  The jobs created during these development build-outs will likely not generate salaries high enough to buy into future housing prices, creating a recipe for more displacement and gentrification.

Driving through the public housing projects in D10, we see remodeled developments that are “shining-stars” of well-designed, clean, and safe housing. But the promises of long-term jobs, and of fulfilling transit and infrastructure needs, are looking sadly under-planned and under-funded, and the promised right-of-return for former tenants may not prove set in stone.  Only time will tell if the redevelopments will provide the housing opportunities, public amenities, and infrastructure promised for the future housing needs of a rapidly changing city, and those most needing housing stability.