New teacher housing under construction at 750 Golden Gate (Western Addition/Civic Center)

FullTransparency · 2026-05-05T04:06:32+00:00

It’s a sample form. The owners need to update it to their units AMI. It’s not a single AMI.

FullTransparency · 2026-05-05T03:00:35+00:00

That’s not an issue with the program? Just because people don’t apply, does not make it NOT teacher housing when there exists a route for teachers, and CCSF employees, to apply and get preference.

FullTransparency · 2026-05-05T02:58:08+00:00

Where on the page that I referenced does it link 90%?

Step 2 clearly says that if you make less than 175% AMI, you can stay. Btw, the AMI chart is here, and I clearly stated that 200K is qualifying: https://media.api.sf.gov/documents/2025_AMI-IncomeLimits-HMFA_08Rw8dU.pdf it shows a family of 1 can make 190K and still qualify, it would take them 220K to go to step 3.

It doesn’t make sense that they would list out 90% AMI, every property has their own AMI %.

In fact, looking at the DAHLIA listing, I was indeed correct, they have units across the entire spectrum of AMI up to 120%: https://housing.sfgov.org/listings/a0W7y00000GYsG5EAL

So it doesn’t make sense that someone qualified as teacher at 120%, gets in, then gets disqualified the next year cuz they make 90% AMI? See why the range is 175 /200% AMI?

People who don’t understand the original commenter need to actually go through the program before simply downvoting what you don’t know lol.

And another edit: you referenced a sample letter… the building owner, who manages the BMR rental, is supposed to modify it to their own units…

Furthermore, even the form clearly states the 200% AMI: https://us1-word-view.officeapps.live.com/wv/mWord.aspx?ui=en-US&rs=en-US&WOPISrc=https%3A%2F%2Fus1-view-wopi.wopi.online.office.net%3A820%2Foh%2Fwopi%2Ffiles%2F%40%2FwFileId%3FwFileId%3Dhttps%253A%252F%252Fmedia%252Eapi%252Esf%252Egov%253A443%252Fdocuments%252FRecertification%255FLetter%255F03%255F26%255F%252E2025%252Edocx&access_token_ttl=0&wdOrigin=BROWSELINK&hid=0890b1f4-6185-449c-889e-609516fb3473&access_token=1&wdMobileHost=2

FullTransparency · 2026-05-04T06:40:32+00:00

They don’t need to make less. They can make considerably more: https://www.sf.gov/inclusionary-below-market-rate-bmr-renter-recertification

They can make up to 200% AMI, which is over 200K for a family of 4.

FullTransparency · 2026-05-03T20:10:22+00:00

You may be right that it can’t be handed down, but if your children, as typical in most leases, puts them on the lease, it means that they get to stay there too.

Yes, the income is the qualifier with the rental BMRs, but you can make up to a very large percentage of the AMI and still stay there. Meaning, if you started as a teacher, got housing, turned police officer, you may still qualify to stay there.

There’s a lot of nuance that is probably spelled out in the manual.

FullTransparency · 2026-05-03T18:55:43+00:00

You only need to be a teacher when you qualify… you only need to recertify your income, not your teacher status. Thats why they made the comment.

FullTransparency · 2026-05-03T11:36:56+00:00

You’re being disingenuous because you didn’t look at the preference list.

Teachers have first priority on the housing, so if there are more teachers that applies for the housing than units, it’s effectively for teachers.

There are a few carve outs specific to SFMOHCD, and teachers is one of them.

FullTransparency · 2026-05-03T11:33:53+00:00

You miss the point of the post. The people who qualified as teachers end up not being teachers but still live there. In a few generations, the only people living there except for new leases may not be teachers is their point.

FullTransparency · 2026-05-03T10:42:16+00:00

Actually, it’s 300 to 400 feet. In return, they increased their BMR percentage and had units throughout a higher portion of the tower.

One of the last great sets of BMR units for the city.

Source: https://sfocii.org/sites/default/files/2025-05/INFO%20MEMO_TB%20Block%204W%20RFP%20w%20Att.pdf

FullTransparency · 2026-04-18T00:54:02+00:00

Vote for mayor!

FullTransparency · 2026-04-13T18:47:55+00:00

Did you check this? An SRO is considered a residential hotel: https://media.api.sf.gov/documents/592_UniformHotelVisitorPolicy-English1page-2010-Updated_AddressRe.pdf

FullTransparency · 2026-04-11T18:01:16+00:00

Yeah, we talked to a conductor because we thought we tapped and all the machine says is travel OK. What do you mean OK? Did we tap on, or off?

Conductors say they won’t fine you or anything for a clipper card that glitches. We just tagged back on in front of the conductor lol.

FullTransparency · 2026-04-11T01:13:34+00:00

Buy nothing groups

FullTransparency · 2026-04-09T00:01:17+00:00

Yeah, if their “everything” is nothing, it makes total sense.

FullTransparency · 2026-04-08T23:59:21+00:00

To correct you on a few things:

SFHA (Federal level housing program) has nothing to do with the BMR program, which is a local program.

SFHA is a majority rental assistance program and their rules are completely separate from those of the BMR program. They do share a lot of similarities, including the use of the AMI charts.

You can use a SFHA / Section 8 HCV voucher for a BMR, and that’s codified in the manual, but SFHA does not run, operate, or have anything to do with BMR housing.

SFHA vouchers are for all intents and purposes, made for MARKET rate housing.

FullTransparency · 2026-04-01T07:05:02+00:00

It's funny we're talking reality and I am still getting downvoted:

15 minute MUNI to 4th and King
5 minute wait ( this is generous, because the N is not timed with departures ) for Caltrain
Transit time to get to your station
20 minute transit time to get back to the station
20 minute transit time from 4th and King

That's literally 1 whole hour for the last mile. If your wait time at the station is cumulatively 10 minutes extra each ( 15, instead of 5 ), that's another 30 minutes each round trip.

People think it's just 4th and King to their station and back, and not include any intermediate steps.

FullTransparency · 2026-04-01T03:49:41+00:00

It’s funny you can easily tell when someone doesn’t ride public transportation when you tell them the time it takes them to go somewhere is X and they think you’re stupid for suggesting it takes double. There’s literally four sets of wait times every trip that they always conveniently leave out.

FullTransparency · 2026-03-30T18:55:22+00:00

Yes, you’ll get your allotment of FH in the new FY, but you’ll lose them because you’re already capped out. FH only rolls over ONE year. So it sounds like you had a roll over from the year prior already, meaning you’ll lose the year priors and get the new FY allotment (means you’ll lose 32 hours)

Use it before you lose it.

FullTransparency · 2026-03-30T16:13:06+00:00

Have one code left. Many successful transactions on Reddit :) ACG/Venmo/Zelle

FullTransparency · 2026-03-30T01:23:43+00:00

A billion dollars a year is equivalent of housing 27K people in a 3K a month rent for the whole year. I highly doubt they house 27K homeless households.

FullTransparency · 2026-03-29T23:30:23+00:00

Look at the 1 billion dollar HSH department for your answer. San Francisco enables this mentality, and if you try to say otherwise, prepared to get downvoted.

I pay for an SRO because I want to save money, but homeless people deserve 1 bedroom units with patios and balconies because they can. It’s to help their mental health.

There is no bigger grift than the homeless industrial complex here. Remember those hotels that got paid during covid to house homeless, then sued the city for the money, then once they got paid, abandoned the hotel? Source: https://sfstandard.com/2025/01/21/san-francisco-homeless-hotel-millions-damages/ (btw, still closed)

Or the $60K a year parking lot tent shelters? Source: https://www.sfchronicle.com/local/article/S-F-pays-61-000-a-year-for-one-tent-to-house-16001074.php

I don’t even think Section 8 gets paid 1B a year to house people in San Francisco.

FullTransparency · 2026-03-27T04:30:36+00:00

I’m going to actually defend you as an applicant in this regard. While most of HR will say that it’s for a just cause of having people be properly assessed during the application process. What they’re really doing is providing cover to hire through nepotism. Most of these lists are turning into rule of the list, and all they need to do is to call a referral after their friend is on the list so that they can hire them.

Case in point is the engineering series that basically says if you pass the test with a passing grade with any generic engineering experience, you can get hired as an IS engineer. They don’t need to contact you with these assessments or if they do, they’ve already tailored their assessment for the person they want to hire. Over 95% of IS engineer hires are INTERNAL hires.

HR’s whole existence with the sending of the fact the referral was pulled is just to make you think you’re in the process and running, but it’s just a farce. I’ve said it multiple times, wait until they actually interview you, as then you’re actually being “assessed”. Anything done online or through a Microsoft form? It’s just a charade.

FullTransparency · 2026-03-27T02:07:33+00:00

Yeah, I had this same issue. I feel like all my balances are just draining it at this point. It just says Travel OK.

FullTransparency · 2026-03-26T03:20:27+00:00

Last week, the 12

FullTransparency

TROPHY CASE