S.F. blasts proposal to limit federal housing aid

San Francisco leaders slammed a proposed rule change by the Trump administration that would bar federal housing aid to families with at least one undocumented immigrant.

The change, proposed by the Department of Housing and Urban Development in April, has been framed by the agency as essential to ensuring that federal housing aid goes only to verified citizens.

But in a searing letter sent to HUD last week, Mayor London Breed and City Attorney Dennis Herrera castigated the proposal as a “heartless”

maneuver that would break up families, force people onto the streets and cost the city and the federal government millions of dollars.

“This administration’s seemingly callous willingness to deprive families of a roof over their head and to separate family members from one another — whether at the border, in communities across the country — is an unconscionable policy,” Breed and Herrera said.

HUD did not respond to a request for comment.

Existing regulations already prevent undocumented immigrants from receiving federal housing subsidies. But families with varying immigration status — what HUD calls “mixed” households — are currently allowed to live together, provided that at least one member of the household is a legal U.S. resident. Federal housing aid is based in part on the number of eligible people living in a subsidized unit. Undocumented immigrants don’t receive any subsidy, so they don’t factor into that calculation.

But under the proposed changes any member of a mixedstatus household would be forced out of subsidized units. That, Breed and Herrera said, would break up families, forcing households to choose between ousting their undocumented family members or keeping their housing.

Faced with the wrenching choice of splintering their families, “HUD assumes that most mixed households will leave HUD’s assisted housing as a result of this rule,” the agency said in an April staff report on the proposal.

Replacing mixedstatus households with eligible residents would also cost the agency at least $193 million annually, since HUD would be forced to provide full subsidies to each member of the household, the report found. In what the agency called the “likeliest scenario,” the added costs would “reduce the quantity and quality of assisted housing.”

There are approximately 164 households in San Francisco that would be affected by the rule change, according to the City Attorney’s Office. Of those, 104 are headed by ineligible adults, which means the entire household could be at risk of displacement and homelessness. There are 60 mixedstatus households in the city.

“The proposed rule does not effectively address any legitimate purpose for HUD, yet will cost taxpayers millions (if not billions) of dollars, tear apart families, force people into homelessness and job countless children of their wellbeing and potential,” Breed and Herrera said. “For all these reasons, San Francisco opposes the proposed rule and submits it must be retracted in its entirety.”

— Dominic Fracassa

Bag fees going up: Forgetting your reusable bag at the grocery store will cost you 15 cents more starting next year.

The Board of Supervisors voted unanimously Tuesday to increase the minimum mandatory bag charge to 25 cents by July 1, 2020. Supervisor Vallie Brown, author of the ordinance, hopes that the slightly higher fee will further encourage shoppers to bring their own bags to the store and lower waste in the city.

“It is time for us as a city, as a leader on the environment, to step up,” Brown said.

San Francisco was the first city in the country to outlaw plastic bags at large supermarkets in 2007. That move initially received some pushback over concerns about how paper bags would be more expensive. The city later expanded the law in 2012 to include all retail establishments, and placed a 10 cent fee on all carryout bags — whether they were paper, plastic or reusable.

Brown’s ordinance would take the existing laws further by also requiring singleuse produce bags to be recyclable or compostable.

While the Small Business Commission supports the legislation, it was concerned about how the increased charge would be enforced and how compliance would be measured. In response, the city will conduct a study on how many people currently bring their own bags to the store and, if possible, provide a demographic breakdown of those customers before the ordinance goes into effect.

— Trisha Thadani