New York City's public housing system faces a capital repair backlog estimated at $78.3 billion. In response, NYCHA has pursued two preservation strategies: PACT, which converts properties to Section 8 through partnerships with private developers, and the Preservation Trust, which similarly converts to Section 8 while retaining public management and excluding private developer equity. This paper compares the two models through a case study of Linden Houses (PACT) and Nostrand Houses (Preservation Trust), evaluating each along three dimensions of publicness: affordability, ownership and accountability, and fiscal resilience. The analysis finds that both models share much of the same financing infrastructure, as debt markets impose the same structural requirements on all borrowers. The models diverge in who controls the project entity, who bears financial risk, and what institutional form publicness takes. This divergence reflects two distinct interpretations of what it means for public housing to remain public.