This open forum. If you want to participate, to a 27488000 four democrats, free democratststext us at 202. Democrats line starts us off in minnesota. This is darrell. Caller yes, thanks for taking my call, pedro. I would like for programs like yourself and other Media Outlets to start articulating the primary votes of the democratic side. You keep showing, for example, trump is up by so many points on his other opponents, but joe biden is up by more points on the other of the ledger pertaining to his lead. I think what happens in that case, you show trump is a winner. You are not showing biden as a winner and has it more substantially compared to the primary of the republicans. Host hen you say primaries, at do you mean by that . Caller for a simple in one poll is up 62 to 68 points over his closest opponent, which would be kennedy at 14 and seven in some cases. It is a higher number than trump is showing over desantis, for example, but the notion is that trump is this winter over his
That commissioner safai has expressed. Our office funds and oversees compliance of a number of programs that serve households at 60 of ami and above that sara mentioned before. This includes funding new construction, Affordable Housing rental projects, preserving existing rentcontrolled housing through our smallsites program and Home Ownership loan assistance to middleincome households and we oversee the citys inclusionary program. So before i go into the specifics of these programs, i want to give you an overview of what Funding Sources our office has in serving middle income household and constraints for expanding what we can do. So the primary forces of funding we rely on to serve households 60 above ami, Housing Trust fund and 2015 housing bond. The Housing Trust fund allows us to serve households up to 120 of ami for production and rehab of Affordable Housing. We do set aside 10 of those funds for small site preservation. We also fund downpayment home assistance for firsttime home
Housing. We still have a lot more work to do, but relative to many parts of california and probably most cities in california, weve done exceedingly well, but we still have a significant amount of work to do. In the area of households between 55 and 150 to 175 a. M. I. , or socalled work force, middle class housing, weve done extremely, extremely poor. And one reasons why is that we, our market in San Francisco, has always taken care of that Housing Stock in the housing sector on its own, the richmond, sunset, always been areas and many more of San Francisco that took care of working and middle class families, but and this in many ways, this hearing is a continuation of the c conovversations that we had to talk about the housing and the focus is what are we doing to expand and fill in the gaps where the socalled missing middle or middle and working class families and low income are being left out of the conovversatio conversation. When homes are going far north of 1 million, we know we
4to1 raich yo. And creates this uncertainty that is going to lead to, you know, each of these projects being debated again at the planning commission, which doesnt seem very helpful to us. I would urge you to just eliminate the exemption for Affordable Housing and clear up this process for all of us and save us all a lot of time. Thank you for your leadership on this, supervisor breed. I really appreciate your comments. Thank you. Next speaker, please. Good afternoon. Supervisors andy thornly, speaking for myself. Thank you, president breed, for bringing this. Thank you, supervisor peskin and kim for cosponsoring. I wanted to voice my support for the interim controls. I do want to echo what tom and jeremy and others have said. I really do think it is important to not bring the loophole for onsite inclusionary forward. Onsite inclusionary, very important. I would not argue against that. More b. M. R. , absolutely. To the extend that the city has existing policy and is found a junction b
San francisco that our city is polarizing. Many would argue that weve done a significant job of building enough marketrate housing, but statistics would say theres still a lot of demand out there for that housing. Same with regard to lowIncome Housing. We still have a lot more work to do, but relative to many parts of california and probably most cities in california, weve done exceedingly well, but we still have a significant amount of work to do. In the area of households between 55 and 150 to 175 a. M. I. , or socalled work force, middle class housing, weve done extremely, extremely poor. And one reasons why is that we, our market in San Francisco, has always taken care of that Housing Stock in the housing sector on its own, the richmond, sunset, always been areas and many more of San Francisco that took care of working and middle class families, but and this in many ways, this hearing is a continuation of the c conovversations that we had to talk about the housing and the focus is