Fears About Public Housing Show City Hall’s Disconnect

by Sara Shortt, 2007-02-13

Rumors abound about the fate of San Francisco’s public housing developments. In a recent rant on Indybay.org, activist Francisco Da Costa claims that the City’s plan is to “slowly board up all of Public Housing at Potrero Hill, bring in the SF Redevelopment Agency and build high rise buildings for the filthy rich.” As reported in Beyond Chron on February 12th, angry residents of the Alice Griffith housing development marched on the Mayor’s “town hall” meeting protesting the City’s plans to demolish the Alice Griffith Homes. “Under this proposal,” said the article, “ the City would give the land to the Florida-based Lennar Corporation.”

It is more than understandable that residents and community members would be worried about what the future might hold in store for places like Potrero and Alice Griffith. The combination of local history, national reality and the lack of clear communication from and opportunities for community participation from the City have created a climate ripe for the fomentation of fear, anger and distrust.

It is true that low-income, African-American residents were displaced from the Fillmore district by racist government policies in the sixties. And it is true that after promises were made to “phase-in” development at North Beach public housing during the HOPE VI rebuilding, many residents were both temporarily and permanently displaced from the project.

And there are former residents of Valencia Gardens that were unable to return to their homes after the demolition and reconstruction of the buildings. It is also an unfortunate reality, as a result of past HOPE VI development projects, that hundreds of public housing units have been lost in San Francisco. And we have all had experiences that prove that government has a less than clean track record when it comes to keeping promises.

At the same time, residents have likely heard stories from friends and family in other cities. Since HUD has all but eliminated the HOPE VI program (which provided funds to revitalize distressed public housing projects) and has significantly reduced its commitment to ongoing funding for public housing operations and capital improvements, cities have turned to demolition and sale of public housing units.

St Paul, Minnesota, Salt Lake City and San Diego all have announced plans to sell some of their public housing (with plans to provide Section 8 vouchers or other alternatives to residents). In St Petersburg, Florida a scenario exists which comes frightfully close to Acosta’s imagined nightmare. The Housing Authority is considering plans to sell a 486 unit public housing development for conversion to 300 condos.

In addition to past government action resulting in displacement, false promises and real horror stories from other cities, there is one more element which has worked to sound the alarms among public housing residents and their advocates: the lack of clear, consistent information about current city plans regarding public housing. People have heard rumblings about a “Hope SF” plan which would utilize a city bond to fund the demolition and rebuilding of the “Big 5” developments in Bayview-Hunters Point. Years earlier, there was also a plan to apply for federal HOPE VI funding for the Hunter’s View project which would involve relocation of residents, demolition and a potential loss of units.

There is also a new Redevelopment plan for the Bayview which has many community members worried about issues of “eminent domain,” another form of forced government relocation, and gentrification. There is the planned Hunters Point shipyard development contracted to the national private developer, Lennar Corporation which had promised to provide new rental units in the Bayview -- but was recently announced would in fact bring market rate condominiums to the area. And there are the 49ers Ballpark plans which had waved promises of new jobs and housing for the community -- and now seem slated for a quick death.

So when the San Francisco Board of Supervisors heard a resolution that few in the community had heard word of until days before its introduction, and it involved Lennar, the Redevelopment Agency, and Alice Griffith, it is no wonder panic ensued. Given all of the aforementioned factors, the general lack of control over one’s housing in government housing programs – adding in the perpetually hot San Francisco real estate market – the writing was on the wall.

Except there are no City plans to sell Alice Griffith to Lennar. Just as there are no plans to demolish the Potrero projects and build high-rises. (In fact, the Board of Supervisors really has no jurisdiction over these properties. They are owned by the Housing Authority, which is an independent federally-funded government entity).

What there is happening is a discussion between the San Francisco Housing Authority and the City to explore the leveraging of financing to make the revitalization of eight severely distressed Housing Authority properties in Bayview-Hunters Point, Potrero Hill and Visitacion Valley (including Alice Griffith and Potrero) possible.

This conversation does include plans to demolish the units (while replacing them one–for-one with new public housing). But this is as far as it’s gone so far. The whole plan is contingent on having the money to finance the project and we haven’t even come close to passing that hurdle. The Mayor has proposed that the project could be funded, in part, by a bond measure, but he has left the thinking through of this to a Task Force created by the Mayor’s Office on Housing and Supervisor Sophie Maxwell.

The Task Force -- comprised of residents, community groups, commissioners and city agency representatives -- has come to consensus on some basic principles, has endorsed the general concept and will most likely recommend that a method of securing financing (which may include a bond) be pursued. All members have agreed that if the idea does move forward, resident participation in the process is crucial.

While the Task Force continues to meet and plans are hatched to bring the rebuilding of our public housing to fruition, the City needs to be meticulous about how information is provided to the community and especially to public housing residents. As illustrated, there is no good reason for residents of Alice Griffith or Potrero or any of the other housing authority properties to trust that their homes are safe from the bulldozer. The recent outcry from Alice Griffith residents points to the lack of outreach, education and meaningful opportunities for participation from the city to the residents.

Of course people are confused. There are a number of overlapping and ever-changing plans coming out of City Hall that involve public housing and/or development in Bayview-Hunters Point in some way or another. It is essential that the sun shines in on all of these plans, and that resident input is not only allowed for but encouraged, facilitated and taken seriously.

If there continues to be only rumblings -- and no clear, cohesive, understandable message sent to residents of communities undergoing these grand plans for change, and no strong attempt to incorporate resident voices, the Mayor should expect a much larger crowd of angry residents at any future “town hall” meetings in the area.