CM Brewer Q&A: Mangin on HDFCs and on-site vs off-site affordable housing

HDFCs, I think we talked about them a little bit.

How do you at all figure into what BSA does or will do?

And HDFCs, if at all.

Thank you for the question.

So HDFCs, or Housing Development Fund companies, those are the state laws.

I was there when they started with Phillips St.

George.

I know what they are.

Right.

So, you know, you and I, when we hear HDFCs,

We may think most immediately of limited equity co-ops in places like the Upper West Side or Lower East Side where I live or North Brooklyn or Northern Manhattan.

HDFCs are actually a much broader category, however.

that encompasses basically all newly created affordable housing, whether it's rental or homeownership.

In order to qualify for the BSA Fast Track for Affordable Housing, you have to be an HDFC.

That's, again, the vehicle for publicly sponsored affordable housing.

That requirement in the BSA Fast Track ensures that only projects under public control can go through that process as opposed to a formal rezoning.

Okay.

Off-site, on-site.

Now, we've had a lot of discussions today about community-based agreements, CBAs.

The question I have is, when you have a situation with a developer who's building, do you support only on-site in terms of his contribution of affordable housing, or do you support off-site?

This is a big issue right now in Community Board No.

7.

My position is very clear, but I want to hear yours.

Thank you for the question.

I mean, I've had a hand in creating various citywide affordable housing programs over the years, starting with MIH.

MIH does include an off-site option.

It was seen as crucial to provide as many compliance opportunities as we could in the context of a mandatory program to make sure that we were creating affordable housing and enabling housing to be produced.

While avoiding any kind of legal

More recently, we created universal affordability preference as part of City of Yes for Housing Opportunity.

In that, we shifted towards a primarily on-site program.

In order to comply with universal affordability preference, you need to have your affordable units on the same zoning lot.

With the limited exception of if you had an off-site option before under the old inclusionary housing programs, then you retained an off-site option.

We didn't want to take that away from folks.

But in the main, that shift in housing policy away from a program with an off-site option towards one that's

you know, overwhelmingly on site is in line, it sounds like, with your views on the matter.

Okay, I mean, I support on-site because I think otherwise you're supporting basically a racist agenda in the sense that you're sending the poor people elsewhere and letting the rich people be in one location.

That's a Manhattan situation.

Because, so I would like to hear people say on-site only is the way to go.

Just to add, if I may, when off-site options are available, there is a geographic nexus within a half mile or the same community district.

I know, but it's not.

So that you can't ship your affordable units, you know, to some distant land.

But in Manhattan, that ends up being in a lower income community 100% of the time.

I've seen it 100% of the time.

So even though half a mile sounds like not so far, it actually is a different location.

So you're still supporting.

off-site if necessary.

Is that what you're saying?

Well, as I mentioned, we've shifted away from, you know, MIH model towards UAP, which is overwhelmingly an on-site.

Would this come up at all at a BSA situation, this type of situation?

I can't imagine offhand a situation where it would, but I can't answer definitively.

All right.

Thank you.

Thank you, Council Member.

Okay, thank you.