Wednesday, December 26, 2007

HUD Demolition in New Orleans

The New Orleans, LA low income housing demolitions: ONE OF 'GREATEST CRIMES IN U.S. URBAN PLANNING'
HUD's arguments for the demolition of thousands of public housing units in New Orleans echoes the worst of the "tabula rasa" approach to urban renewal of the 1960s, writes Nicolai Ouroussoff in the Dec 21 2007 New York Times. To view the full article, CLICK HERE.

Sunday, December 23, 2007

New Tent City in LA

    Tent City in Suburbs Is Cost of Home Crisis
    By Dana Ford  Reuters  Thursday 20 December 2007

    Between railroad tracks and beneath the roar of departing planes sits "tent city," a terminus for homeless people. It is not, as might be expected, in a blighted city center, but in the once-booming suburbia of Southern California.

    The noisy, dusty camp sprang up in July with 20 residents and now numbers 200 people, including several children, growing as this region east of Los Angeles has been hit by the U.S. housing crisis.

    The unraveling of the region known as the Inland Empire reads like a 21st century version of "The Grapes of Wrath," John Steinbeck's novel about families driven from their lands by the Great Depression.

    As more families throw in the towel and head to foreclosure here and across the nation, the social costs of collapse are adding up in the form of higher rates of homelessness, crime and even disease.

    While no current residents claim to be victims of foreclosure, all agree that tent city is a symptom of the wider economic downturn. And it's just a matter of time before foreclosed families end up at tent city, local housing experts say.

    "They don't hit the streets immediately," said activist Jane Mercer. Most families can find transitional housing in a motel or with friends before turning to charity or the streets. "They only hit tent city when they really bottom out."

    Steve, 50, who declined to give his last name, moved to tent city four months ago. He gets social security payments, but cannot work and said rents are too high.

    "House prices are going down, but the rentals are sky-high," said Steve. "If it wasn't for here, I wouldn't have a place to go."

    "Squatting in Vacant Houses"

    Nationally, foreclosures are at an all-time high. Filings are up nearly 100 percent from a year ago, according to the data firm RealtyTrac. Officials say that as many as half a million people could lose their homes as adjustable mortgage rates rise over the next two years.

    California ranks second in the nation for foreclosure filings - one per 88 households last quarter. Within California, San Bernardino county in the Inland Empire is worse - one filing for every 43 households, according to RealtyTrac.

    Maryanne Hernandez bought her dream house in San Bernardino in 2003 and now risks losing it after falling four months behind on mortgage payments.

    "It's not just us. It's all over," said Hernandez, who lives in a neighborhood where most families are struggling to meet payments and many have lost their homes.

    She has noticed an increase in crime since the foreclosures started. Her house was robbed, her kids' bikes were stolen and she worries about what type of message empty houses send.

    The pattern is cropping up in communities across the country, like Cleveland, Ohio, where Mark Wiseman, director of the Cuyahoga County Foreclosure Prevention Program, said there are entire blocks of homes in Cleveland where 60 or 70 percent of houses are boarded up.

    "I don't think there are enough police to go after criminals holed up in those houses, squatting or doing drug deals or whatever," Wiseman said.

    "And it's not just a problem of a neighborhood filled with people squatting in the vacant houses, it's the people left behind, who have to worry about people taking siding off your home or breaking into your house while you're sleeping."

    Health risks are also on the rise. All those empty swimming pools in California's Inland Empire have become breeding grounds for mosquitoes, which can transmit the sometimes deadly West Nile virus, Riverside County officials say.

    "Trickle-Down Effect"

    But it is not just homeowners who are hit by the foreclosure wave. People who rent now find themselves in a tighter, more expensive market as demand rises from families who lost homes, said Jean Beil, senior vice president for programs and services at Catholic Charities USA.

    "Folks who would have been in a house before are now in an apartment and folks that would have been in an apartment, now can't afford it," said Beil. "It has a trickle-down effect."

    For cities, foreclosures can trigger a range of short-term costs, like added policing, inspection and code enforcement. These expenses can be significant, said Lt. Scott Patterson with the San Bernardino Police Department, but the larger concern is that vacant properties lower home values and in the long-run, decrease tax revenues.

    And it all comes at a time when municipalities are ill-equipped to respond. High foreclosure rates and declining home values are sapping property tax revenues, a key source of local funding to tackle such problems.

    Earlier this month, U.S. President George W. Bush rolled out a plan to slow foreclosures by freezing the interest rates on some loans. But for many in these parts, the intervention is too little and too late.

    Ken Sawa, CEO of Catholic Charities in San Bernardino and Riverside counties, said his organization is overwhelmed and ill-equipped to handle the volume of people seeking help.

    "We feel helpless," said Sawa. "Obviously, it's a local problem because it's in our backyard, but the solution is not local."

  -------




Monday, December 3, 2007

Housing Element Updates

All jurisdictions in the San Francisco Bay Area (and parts of the rest of the state) are gearing up to revise the housing elements of their general plans for the upcoming 5-year planning period. All cities and counties have these general plan housing elements, and there are a whole range of state requirements which the plans must meet. They have to identify specific sites where multi-family housing can be built by right; they have to address special housing needs of seniors, farmworkers, homeless persons and persons with disabilities; and they have to set out programs to facilitate development of affordable housing. The housing element gets reviewed by a state agency - the Department of Housing and Community Development - to determine if it complies with state mandates. Persons and groups interested in promoting more affordable housing in their areas should consider getting involved in the housing element update process. It can make a huge difference in whether any affordable housing will be built. Contact the person in charge of your local planning departments. Ask to be put on mailing lists and e-mail lists to get notice of local public hearings on the housing element update. Consider sending a letter to your local planning department urging them to adopt programs such as inclusionary zoning ordinances, commercial linkage fees, reasonable accommodation ordinances, and other programs to meet the jurisdiction's need for various kinds of affordable housing. CLICK HERE to see a letter that HAG recently sent to the City of Santa Rosa about its housing element update process.

Wednesday, November 14, 2007

Grey Panthers on Affordable Housing

Admiring their strong advocacy efforts in Sacramento on behalf of not just seniors but everyone getting screwed by the system these days, I recently joined the Grey Panthers (ok, I lied and told 'em I was over 50).  Here's an article from their upcoming newsletter that's of interest to Hagsters... - DG
__________________________

The Elephant in the Corner....

The press, the airwaves and the internet are full of the very serious mortgage crisis and the rising tide of foreclosures. When it comes to getting keeping a home, the credit crunch is hitting Middle America hard.

But after proper attention goes to predatory lending practices, spiking monthly payments, foreclosures and loss of property, is anyone paying attention to our fellow Americans who don't earn enough to have a mortgage to foreclose?  That's the `elephant' in the room that no one wants to talk about!

The housing crisis goes beyond the battering of Middle America; blue collar America is getting stomped by sky-high rent increases and growing shortages of even remotely affordable apartments. The Center for Housing Policy (go to http://www.nhc.org) lays out the facts:

* The number of working family renters paying more than half of their income for housing has doubled (103%) since 1997.

* This is an even sharper increase than among working family homeowners, who showed a 75% increase.

* The Center for Housing Policy working family households as those with at least one full time job paying at the least minimum wage but no more than 120% of the local average (median) income.

* In all, the number of working families who paid more than half their income for housing and/or lived in severely dilapidated conditions rose from 3,000,000 in 1997 to 5,200,000 in 2005.

* The affordable housing crunch is a national problem, not limited-for instance-to well-known high cost areas such as New York, Boston and San Francisco. Large numbers of working people in places like Denver, Kansas City, Pittsburgh and Indianapolis are also paying more than half of their incomes for housing, and often that housing that is in bad repair and otherwise neglected.

Gray Panthers have always called for policies and programs to address these needs. Our voices have not been heard, particularly at the national level.

It is time try again-this time, it's not only seniors and the very poor who are hurting: more and more, the problem is engulfing the middle class, who are not used to being ignored. We can:

* Start the conversation about affordable housing in our home towns.  Local policies-zoning, redevelopment of rental units into condominiums, etc-affect the ability of teachers, nurses, firefighters, police, technicians, service employees and many other voters to find and keep homes for their families.  They have a reason to work for policies which protect their homes.  We can work together.

* Make sure that local government addresses the whole problem-it's not just the credit crunch.  Helping stressed home OWNERS is not enough; RENTERS must be at the table, too.

* Don't accept the untruth that "nothing can be done."  Point to communities which are grappling with this problem and succeeding.  If our current crop of officeholders can't do anything, find some who can and will.

* Get commitments from local officials to maintain the rental housing stock.  Don't allow condominium conversions unless the renters have somewhere to go in the same area.

* Don't stop with local government. Continue to besiege Congress and the White House and all State officials about affordable housing.  Displaced renters and housing-stressed families should not be the only ones who are unhappy about this situation.

* Enlist allies.  In some areas, communities of faith have taken on the affordable housing issue and have forced politicians to pay attention.  Unions, neighborhood associations and others also have a stake-moral and/or financial-in this fight.

* Be an ally.  Support those who are working for affordable housing by joining in their campaigns.

Peace,

Susan Murany
Executive Director
Gray Panthers

Tuesday, October 9, 2007

The Building's Green, But What About The Commute?

Here's excerpts from an article in Environmental Building News, which discusses how energy required to get workers from home to work often far surpasses that of the workplace itself.  So building affordable housing close to employment centers (i.e. in the SAP and  the area along Airport Boulevard) makes eminent sense environmentally.  - DG
___________________________________

"Designers and builders expend significant effort to ensure that our buildings use as little energy as possible. This is a good thing—and very obvious to anyone who has been involved with green building for any length of time. What is not so obvious is that many buildings are responsible for much more energy use getting people to and from those buildings. That's right—for an average office building in the United States, calculations done by Environmental Building News (EBN) show that commuting by office workers accounts for 30% more energy than the building itself uses. For an average new office building built to code, transportation accounts for more than twice as much energy use as building operation."

"'Transportation energy intensity' is a metric that has long been used to measure such things as how efficiently freight is transported. We're proposing it here as a metric of building performance. The transportation energy intensity of a building is the amount of energy associated with getting people to and from that building, whether they are commuters, shoppers, vendors, or homeowners. The transportation energy intensity of buildings has a lot to do with location. An urban office building that workers can reach by public transit or a hardware store in a dense town center will likely have a significantly lower transportation energy intensity than a suburban office park or a retail establishment in a suburban strip mall."

"In addition to these direct emissions from transportation, there are many other environmental impacts associated with the infrastructure needed to support transportation and with development patterns. Our roadways create impervious surfaces that result in significant pollutant runoff into waterways—in fact, non-point source water pollution from stormwater runoff is now the nation's leading source of water pollution to estuaries and the third largest to lakes. Highways fragment ecosystems and wildlife habitat. Paved areas, including roadways and parking lots, absorb solar energy, contributing to localized heat islands that exacerbate smog and increase air-conditioning requirements in urbanized areas. And stormwater runoff from these surfaces creates thermal pollution that makes many waterways unsuitable for trout and other cold-water fish."

Source: Environmental Building News, Sep 01, 2007

Monday, September 24, 2007

A Big Push for Affordable Housing

   
A decades-old proposal is getting a new lease on life.
              By Kent Garber  US News & World Report Saturday 22 September 2007
    For more than a decade, Georgia Johnson has watched the human exodus: the steady trickle outward of longtime friends who sold their homes to developers and to the newcomers who came amid the housing boom of the 1990s. 
    Now in her 70s, Johnson still lives in Lynwood Park, a historically black neighborhood on the north side of Atlanta. Her one-story bungalow dates from the 1940s, but the rest of the neighborhood now is characterized by pricey brick houses with two-car garages. A new subdivision with potted trees and manicured lawns boasts designer homes for $1 million plus. 
    But the old neighborhood hasn't bowed out quietly, and of its many efforts to preserve its affordability, one in particular underscores the renewed debate in Congress over how to fix or contain the country's expanding housing crisis. 
    It has supported a housing bill first proposed in 1987 and re-energized this fall that would create a national housing trust fund: a dedicated source of money to build affordable new houses and rehabilitate old ones. Unlike existing housing programs, which are subject to the whims of congressional appropriations, the trust fund would be politically immune. It would be financed, in part, by diverting revenue from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the government-sponsored mortgage giants. 
    Condos 
    Supporters of the trust fund say that it is a much-needed wedge against a troubling national motif: the destruction of affordable in-town housing, often at the hands of high-rise condominium and luxury home developers. (Chicago alone lost nearly 100,000 apartment units from 1989 to 2004, while gaining roughly an equal number of condos.) For the first time, the bill passed out of a House committee with significant bipartisan support, and it is expected to be introduced on the House floor this month. 
    Not since 1992 has Congress approved a major overhaul of housing laws. The renewed interest reflects not only the new Democratic leadership but also two unsettling trends: Housing costs are growing, and federal funding isn't. According to a study published by the Joint Center for Housing Studies, nearly 1 in 7 American households is "severely housing cost-burdened," spending more than half of its income on housing. 
    The other issue is that annual appropriations for federal housing programs have stalled, or decreased, since the 1990s, despite the swelling slice of Americans who qualify for assistance. Last year, annual federal spending on housing programs fell 2.3 percent thanks to inflation and defense priorities. 
    One model that proponents of the national trust fund hope to emulate is that of the local trust fund. In Washington, D.C., a tax-exempt trust fund has helped build and rehabilitate more than 5,000 units since 2001. Many of the recipients make less than $30,000 annually, compared with the city's mean household income of $94,500. Among the beneficiaries is Jeffrey Allen, 50, who lives in a complex called Freedom House. "I was at a shelter for six months and then on the streets before that," Allen says. "I don't know what I would have done without this place." 
    But as legislation goes, housing bills aren't sexy, and philosophical squabbles intervene. To many Republicans, "trust fund" equals "slush fund," and the Bush administration opposes the bill, claiming it would siphon money from existing programs. 
    It helps the effort that Democrats now control Congress. But the real push could be the public outcry over housing. With "subprime mortgages" and "predatory lending" now colloquial expressions, lawmakers on both sides are under pressure to assuage constituent concerns. "Certainly, the subprime mortgage crisis highlights the fact that low- to moderate-income folks are struggling to maintain or purchase a home," says West Virginia Rep. Shelley Moore Capito, a Republican who voted for the bill in committee. "I think the trust fund is part of an attempt to address that sort of overarching issue."




See what's new at AOL.com and Make AOL Your Homepage.

Tuesday, September 11, 2007

AB1542 PASSES!

A bill sponsored by HAG and its allies - AB1542 - was all but given up for dead when the state Senate failed to approve it in a vote taken Friday, 9/7. The bill gives greater protections to mobilehome residents where the park owner wants to convert the park to condominiums, and was hotly opposed by the Realtors, the park owners association, and property rights groups (the "Prop 90 crowd").
But the bill's sponsors, Assemblymember Noreen Evans and Senator Ellen Corbett, refused to give up. With the help of hundreds of mobilehome park residents around the state who called their senators to urge a yes vote, and help from organizations like the Western Center, CRLA, CMRRA, CARA, the League of Cities (!), organized labor, and GSMOL, two more senators voted for the bill and it passed today 21-14.
But we're not there yet... the bill needs the Governor's signature to become law. He's got a couple weeks to decide whether to sign or veto it. We need to show the gov that thousands of mobilehome residents and housing advocates around the state want him to sign this bill. Please fax a letter to Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger urging him to sign AB1542 into law. Here's the address and fax number:

Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger
State Capitol Building
Sacramento, CA 95814
Phone: 916-445-2841
Fax: 916-445-4633

Special thanks go to Noreen Evans and Ellen Corbett and their staffs for really going the extra mile to get this important but controversial bill passed.

Wednesday, August 29, 2007

NIMBY Notebook: Habitat For Hypocrisy

From: Mother Jones, July-August, 2007
http:///

News: Housing advocates say Marin County's Bill Duane exemplifies a vexing irony: People support affordable housing with their labor, money, and votes--just so long as it's nowhere near them.

July 17, 2007

Bill Duane knows most people can't afford homes like his $1 million bungalow on a hill overlooking San Francisco Bay. That's why the Marin County attorney volunteered for Habitat for Humanity. Until recently, that is, when the group announced plans to build two affordable duplexes just down the street from him. "Habitat usually goes into a blighted neighborhood and enhances it," Duane says. "Here, they are coming into an enhanced neighborhood and blighting it." Housing advocates say Duane exemplifies a vexing irony: People support affordable housing with their labor, money, and votes--just so long as it's nowhere near them.

Standing beside his garden of coastal succulents, Duane, who looks like a cashmere-clad Rodney Dangerfield, spoke in nervous bursts. He fretted about a note that a retired schoolteacher had sent him inside a Monet greeting card, which began, "You are a disgrace to the human race and should be ashamed of yourself." His research revealed that the teacher's home is worth almost as much as his own. "And it's surrounded by vacant lots," he exclaimed, "so why don't you build it there?"

That, too, might be easier said than done: Marin is among the most liberal (and expensive) counties in the nation, but Duane says all of his neighbors back him. Indeed, opposition to affordable housing in the county was so fierce in the 1990s that a Marin chapter of Habitat disbanded, former members say, after finding itself unable to get a single project built in five years. On the opposite coast, in wealthy, liberal Martha's Vineyard, 10 homeowners sued earlier this year--on environmental grounds--to block construction of an affordable house for a fisherman who'd been living with his wife and children in a tent. In Boulder, Colorado, affordable-housing advocate Joni Lynch says her most strident foes were button-wearing progressives. And in the gentrifying Edgewood neighborhood of Washington, D.C., one resident who fought the construction of the low-income St. Martin's apartments nearby actually worked for a company that builds low-income apartments.

But few development projects have been more enigmatically unpopular than the Marin project, where three luxury houses will be clumped onto a 17.5-acre hill in a way that preserves most of the land as open space. In accordance with county rules, the developer set aside an acre for low-income housing. There, Habitat will build four units, two melded together to look like one Craftsman-style home, which will be sold at below-market rates to families making $40,000 to $56,000 a year (a teacher in Marin earns on average $47,000).

Duane and I climbed into his Mercedes station wagon and drove to the project site, a hillside of chaparral and grass. He'd promised me it would be obvious that congestion was already bad. A lone Toyota Prius with a "Save Tibet" sticker silently cruised by. "Usually this whole area is packed with cars," he insisted. And if I researched the matter, he hinted, I might learn that the endangered Tiburon mariposa lily grows here (naturalists doubt it), and that an Indian burial spear discovered nearby might have belonged to the county's namesake, Chief Marin (a Marin anthropologist says Duane is "reporting things that are not there"). Duane next raised an environmental justice concern: Placing the affordable housing in the shadow of million-dollar homes fosters "a slave kind of mentality."

He restarted his car and pulled up the slope of Eagle Rock Drive, past gardens of salvia, agave, and bird-of-paradise, pointing out houses already owned by minorities; as if making a point, he waved to an Asian man checking his mail. "It's a very diverse community here," he said.

Too diverse for some. Duane's neighbor, 83-year-old Edward Sotelo, who bought his $1 million property for $3,000 long before Marin real estate boomed, still laments the construction of the nearby Krueger Pines senior citizens' home. "The characters in those units are not the best kind of people," he said as he glanced in the direction of its parking lot, home to a late-model bmw and a Porsche. "People say some of them go down to the street and beg."

The multiplicity of neighborly concerns raised by nimbyists can leave housing advocates guessing what the real issue is. A recent poll by the Citizens Housing and Planning Association in Massachusetts suggests that, across party lines, most opposition to affordable housing boils down to homeowner fear of lowered property values and higher school costs.

At any rate, Duane believes that housing working-class people in high-income areas goes beyond Habitat's mandate. "There seems to be a change in the idea of what Habitat is," he says. "It reminds me of what's happened with the American Civil Liberties Union, which used to be a great institution in the '30s, '40s, and '50s. But now the aclu is saying, 'Well, we're going to represent the Mexicans and illegal aliens, rather than Americans.' They've overstepped." Duane would rather see a new group build visionary, ecofriendly communes in Marin where low-income people can share appliances such as refrigerators. "They should be creating wireless areas of tribal habitats," he says. Not in his neighborhood, though. He recommends a spot owned by the Catholic Church, several exits down the freeway.


Tuesday, August 21, 2007

HAG's Affordable Housing Strategies

Jurisdictions throughout northern California are beginning the process of updating their General Plan Housing Elements (due 7/1/09). The Housing Advocacy Group has a list of housing element programs which have been shown to be effective in generating affordable housing and housing for special needs populations such as seniors, farmworkers and persons with disabilities. Click Here to see the list. Please leave us a comment here or send us an e-mail (to hagster@gmail.com) if you have suggestions for changes or additions to this list.

Thursday, August 2, 2007

Sacramento lawsuit targets city homeless policy

From the 8/2/07 Sacramento Bee
By Denny Walsh - Bee Staff
The way the city of Sacramento and Sacramento County treat homeless people is unconstitutional, according to a lawsuit to be filed today in federal court.
Attorney Mark Merin is seeking to have his lawsuit certified as a class action on behalf of people living "without fixed nighttime shelter" -- as well as homeless people who have had personal property confiscated and destroyed.
Merin said the city and county have historically recognized that there aren't enough beds for the homeless, yet have failed to produce long-term remedies.
Merin said Wednesday he would like local government to follow the city of San Diego's example by imposing a moratorium on the arrest of homeless people, allowing them to sleep in public places between 9 p.m. and 6 a.m. Those arrangements were negotiated to settle a number of lawsuits, he said.
According to Merin's lawsuit, local ordinances prohibiting homeless people from sleeping outside violate the Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution because they punish people for being homeless.
It also claims the practice of taking and destroying personal property, "including necessary survival gear, as well as irreplaceable prescription medication, paperwork, memorabilia, valuables and tools," violates their rights.
The suit seeks an injunction barring the city and county from continuing policies and practices alleged to be unconstitutional. It also seeks damages of no less than $4,000 for each time a homeless person who qualifies as a class member was cited for sleeping outdoors or had personal property seized and destroyed.
Sacramento City Attorney Eileen Teichert said the city is "looking into these allegations."
"I'm surprised and shocked at them," Teichert said. "During my year and a half in this job, I've been very impressed by the humane outreach efforts to the homeless by the city. It is one of the few cities in the state that has an element in its housing plan for low and very low income people.
"This city is exemplary in its treatment of the homeless."
Sacramento County Counsel Bob Ryan, Sheriff John McGinness and Police Department spokesman Sgt. Matt Young declined to comment Wednesday.
Last year, a sweep of homeless camps in northern Sacramento County was preceded by posting of information about where the homeless could receive help if they were interested in getting off the streets.
Sheriff's officials said they were trying to do more than just move the homeless from one part of the community to the other.
During the winter, the county provides 140 beds at Cal Expo, as overflow from the 20-bed Volunteers of America Shelter on North A Street and the 32-bed Salvation Army women's shelter on North B Street.
Plaintiff Anthony Lehr, 49, said Wednesday that everything he owned was confiscated during a cold spell last winter when he was homeless.
Lehr said he was camping on the Sacramento River bank when authorities took his tent, flannel shirts, sleeping bag and food. "It was the basic things you needed to live," Lehr said.
Wednesday afternoon, Lehr brought Merin out on the levee to show him the spot where he often took refuge -- and where he lost his belongings.
The suit's plaintiffs are 11 individuals, who are representative of the homeless; Loaves & Fishes, a nonprofit organization that provides services to the homeless; Sacramento Homeless Organizing Committee, an unincorporated association of homeless and formerly homeless people; and Francis House, a nonprofit organization that provides counseling to the poor.
Besides the city and county, defendants include Sacramento Police Chief Albert Nájera and McGinness.
"The solution to homelessness is housing," Merin said in an interview. "It is not harassing homeless people until they go away. On any given night, there are about 1,000 people out on the street because the shelters are full. Many of them camp on the riverbanks, but they are regularly rousted by law enforcement."
"They are cited for camping illegally or possessing a shopping cart," Merin said. "They don't show up in court and a warrant is issued for failure to appear. They are arrested, processed through the jail and prosecuted. Then the cycle starts all over again."
"If the city and county spent a fraction of what this is costing to deal with the homeless in a humane and just manner," he said, "it would go a long way toward eliminating the problem."
In the early hours of Jan. 30, according to the suit, an official count of homeless people in the city and county totaled 2,452. Of this total, 709 were in emergency shelters, 738 in transitional shelters, and 1,005 -- including four children and 17 seniors -- were "sleeping in the streets." The number of unsheltered had increased nearly 10 percent since 2005, the suit says.
The county estimates that 11,000 people in the area will be homeless sometime during a calendar year, according to Merin.
Merin has had extraordinary success pursuing legal actions on behalf of jail inmates and juvenile wards subjected to strip searches in Sacramento County.
"Through this lawsuit, we hope we can develop a more enlightened policy rather than just sweep them under the rug," Merin said.
Basics such as secure storage for their belongings, strategically located portable toilets and Dumpsters where they can dispose of their trash would be a start, Merin said.
After he lost his belongings, Lehr sought help from Loaves & Fishes in rebuilding his inventory. He now is taking advantage of a federal housing program and works at Loaves & Fishes checking belongings into daily storage for homeless. They are allowed to leave their things for the day while they run errands, go to job interviews or go to court.
Lehr, who regularly stores clothing and court documents, understands the value of a safe harbor for their possessions.
"It's all they have," he said.
Merin said San Diego is not the only place where litigation has forced a change in the treatment of homeless persons. A federal judge in Fresno issued an injunction in December prohibiting that city from citing homeless for sleeping outdoors and seizing personal property without prior notice and storage of the property until the owner can recover it.
In a challenge to a Los Angeles ordinance, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals last year ruled that, as long as there are a greater number of homeless than beds for them, a city cannot keep the unsheltered from "sitting, lying or sleeping" on skid row sidewalks.

Saturday, June 30, 2007

More small houses...

Here's a link to an article in today's SF Chronicle about a fellow who lives in a 250 square foot house in Pacifica: http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2007/06/30/HOG5IQMK6I1.DTL.  It's not an apartment, a condo, a trailer or a pre-fab unit.  It's not a second unit, it sits on its own lot and there are no shared walls.  It's cozy, but well designed and functional.  
 
This is a great example of what can be done with a small lot.  It shows that an SRO (single resident occupancy) unit doesn't have to be an apartment.  It also demonstrates the relationship between size and affordability, as the owner bought the house for $101,000 in 1999 -- an amazing price for Pacifica, or anywhere in the Bay Area for that matter.




See what's free at AOL.com.

Monday, June 11, 2007

Home Dreams Fading

- Sonoma Index-Tribune 5/22/07

Sonoma Valley homes out of reach

This is the second in a three-part series on the Valley's housing crisis.

The numbers tell the story.

As of the 2000 census, approximately 64 out of every 100 Sonoma County households owned their home. At today's prices, only seven out of 100 families could afford to make the same purchase, according to Jim Leddy, president of the Sonoma County Housing Coalition.

"What's unique about our era right now is moderate-income buyers are put in same position as low-income were a decade ago," said John Lowry of Burbank Housing Development Corp., a company that specializes in low-income housing.

The much-publicized downturn in Northern California real estate prices may not offer much local relief. According to the bulletin Sonoma County Real Estate Trends, the median price for a single-family home declined in 2006 but only to $580,000. There was a similar drop in the price of a condominium unit - to $363,000.

Real estate statistics compiled for the Valley by Sonoma's Trinity Episcopal Church pegged the median housing price in the City of Sonoma at $689,000 and the price in the Springs at $575,000 in 2004. The city's Web site reports a median price of $618,000 for the whole Valley in 2005.

Today's current multiple listings for the Valley, posted online by Frank Howard Allen Realtors, show only two homes priced at less than $395,000, an older home in El Verano and a fixer-upper in Agua Caliente. Another six cost just under $400,000. Eight more are priced between $400,000 and $475,000. The rest range from $475,000 into the millions.

Of the condominium units, three range between $259,000 and $299,999; another six between $319,000 and $399,900. The rest begin at $409,000 and go up from there.

"Who can buy?" Leddy asked. "You're not making $15 an hour if you're able to afford that kind of house."

One local solution has been sweat equity housing, a concept in which low- or moderate- income owners substitute 30 hours of building labor a week for a cash down payment and qualify for 30-year loans from the California Housing Financial Agency of 3 to 5.5 percent, depending on income. Additional financing comes from city and county partnerships with private developers, who oversee the building process.

"Wild Flower is the latest one. It was finished about a month and a half ago," said City Councilmember Ken Brown. "It's absolutely, totally awesome. If somebody wasn't going to swing a hammer they could order paint, or order materials, or go for deliveries. There's a job for everybody."

Lowry, who worked on the partnership between Burbank and the city, agreed.

"They do a lot of the work: carpentry, concrete, windows, doors, cabinets, landscaping, cleanup ... It can take a year to build a house. They work as a group, not just on their own home. It's mutual self-help housing."

Even the disabled, Lowry said, have jobs to do or arrange to have their hours filled by volunteer friends and family members. Over the past few years, Burbank has organized construction of three sweat-equity housing developments: Wild Flower in the city with 34 units on Napa Road, Via Hermosa in the Springs north of Verano Avenue with 27 small stucco detached houses or duplexes and Encinas Del Verano in El Verano with 12 units on El Niño Court. Those 73 homes, however, don't begin to resolve the housing shortage.

"We do a little advertising and typically get three times as many interested (as there are houses)," Lowry said. After determining who is truly eligible and able to put in what amounts to a second job, the company holds a lottery to determine who will have the opportunity.

"We could build three times what we've done," he said. "The demand is tremendous for it. I'll bet we could do 6,000 in the county; 300 in the Valley over time. People want to own a home and they'll work hard to get it."

There are also long waiting lists for more conventional housing reserved for low- and moderate-income buyers. The 13 houses at Casa Primera are gone. So are the 16 homes at Marcy Court, the 18 at Palm Court, and the 34 homes at the Sonoma Commons. City ordinances require a certain percentage of the units in a major housing development be reserved for low- or moderate-income buyers, but those homes, too, disappear almost as fast as they're built.

"It's seems like there's definitely more demand than there is product," said one city staffer. "Two or three times a week somebody comes in looking for units."

The best ownership hope for many lower-income residents is still a mobile unit in a trailer park. So far, however, there is nothing preventing a park owner from subdividing the property into for-sale spaces. While mobile owners can't be forced to move, only low-income tenants remain under rent control protection after subdivision. So far, there is no law preventing market-rate increases for moderate income tenants.

Similarly, low-income - but not moderate-income - renters may qualify for help in purchasing the land under their mobile homes through the state's Mobile Home Park Resident Ownership Program. The program can finance from 50 to 95 percent of the purchase cost through a 30-year 3 percent loan and sometimes offers no-down-payment and deferred-payment options.

Another possibility, offered by Resident Owned Parks Inc., involves purchase of the entire park by the nonprofit company, which would then own and operate it. Space rentals would be kept low, the company promises, and used to pay off the purchase loans. After the loans are paid off in full, both ownership and management responsibility would be transferred to a "nonprofit homeowners association."

There appears to be nothing guaranteeing the homes eventually sold would be reserved for low- or moderate-income people. A moratorium on mobile-home park conversion is on the June agenda of the Sonoma City Council.






See what's free at AOL.com.

Friday, May 25, 2007

Low-income housing urged for SR Station Area Plan

By GEORGE LAUER
THE SANTA ROSA PRESS DEMOCRAT

Article published - May 25, 2007
Santa Rosa's "extreme makeover" plans for downtown drew sharp criticism Thursday, almost all of it from people urging the Planning Commission to add affordable housing and green building standards to the 20-year plan.
Close to 100 people, many of them wearing green stickers saying "Housing for All" and Build It Green," raised hands in agreement with calls to add specific numbers for affordable housing units and to adopt environmentally friendly building requirements.
Organized by the Accountable Development Coalition, a group of 13 organizations, speaker after speaker urged the commission to require 20 percent low-income housing, 20 percent low- to moderate-income housing and 60 percent market-value housing.
"Our concerns in this plan are aroused not by what's in the plan, but what isn't in it," said Julia Prange, representing the coalition.
In addition to affordable housing and green building standards, she urged the commission to add pedestrian and bicycle accommodations and to pay attention to mass transit needs.
Several other special interest groups -- from the Council on Aging to a member of the city school board -- called for affordable housing requirements.
Among the approximately 70 speakers was Bill Kortum, the dean of Sonoma County environmental activists. He called the downtown plan an opportunity to develop "a model of transit-oriented development."
"I urge you to listen to the suggestions you're hearing tonight," he said.
After listening to about three hours of testimony, commissioners asked planning staff to examine possible amendments to deal with affordable housing, green building and other issues raised at the hearing, among them parks, parking and bicycle accommodations.
The meeting was the final public hearing for the Santa Rosa Downtown Station Area Plan, a mammoth proposal to create a denser, more urban downtown centered around a proposed commuter rail line.
The plan calls for taller, denser buildings than allowed elsewhere in the city, with businesses on the ground floor and living quarters above, all built around a commuter rail line known as SMART, for Sonoma-Marin Area Rail Transit.
The Santa Rosa station in Railroad Square is expected to be the busiest of 14 stops on the line that would run between Cloverdale and Larkspur.
The 70-mile rail system is still a proposal, not a reality. Marin and Sonoma voters failed to come up with enough votes in November. The issue probably will be on a ballot again next year.
The Planning Commission plans to certify the plan's environmental impact report at an upcoming meeting. The commission then will make a recommendation to the City Council.
The Downtown Station Area Plan calls for 3,249 residential units, nearly 2,300 of them within a mile-wide circle extending from a train station proposed for Railroad Square.
City planner Ken MacNab said the downtown development study, funded by a $450,000 grant from the Metropolitan Transportation Commission, is part of an attempt "to create a transit-supported environment" by building up instead of allowing Santa Rosa to sprawl at its edges.
The development envisioned in the downtown plan would accommodate an estimated 6,000 residents above the 210,000 now expected to call Santa Rosa home by 2020.
Although the plan was developed with the commuter train in mind, city officials said it can be pursued even if the tax is never approved.
The underlying idea is to de-emphasize reliance on automobiles by developing high-density residential, commercial and office buildings along major rail and transit corridors.
Most of that development would be concentrated in two areas, downtown west of E Street and in mostly industrial areas along Cleveland Avenue, Wilson Street and Sebastopol Road that are bisected by the railroad tracks.
You can reach Staff Writer George Lauer at 521-5220 or george.lauer@pressdemocrat.com





See what's free at AOL.com.

Friday, April 27, 2007

Humboldt County HAG Formed

New housing group says action needed
James Faulk The Times-Standard
04/27/2007

EUREKA -- Housing for All, a new housing advocacy group, is asking the county Board of Supervisors to put into action concepts that they believe will help address the lack of affordable housing in Humboldt County.
The group held a press conference at the Humboldt County Courthouse Thursday to announce its mission to bring solutions to the table in the ongoing debate over how to provide housing for all income levels, but especially the poor.
Citing figures from the U.S. Census Bureau, the group pointed out that Humboldt County has the highest percentage in the state of people paying more than 29 percent of their income for housing, at 57.5 percent of renters.
”These people are living more on the edge,” said Kermit Thobaben, a Housing for All spokesman.
A broad range of housing is necessary, he said, including homes and apartments for low- and very-low income households.
”The market has been able to provide housing for people in the higher incomes range, but not for moderate, low- and very-low incomes,” said Rebecca Price-Hall.
Nearly everyone rents at some point in their lives, and it's pivotal that those choices are available, Thobaben said.
Housing for All wants to ensure that the Board of Supervisors takes action soon to make sure there are housing choices for everyone in the county over the next 20 years, Thobaben said.
The press release announcing Thursday's event seemed to take on the recently filed Humboldt Sunshine lawsuit against the county.
But during the press conference, organizers said they weren't against anyone -- rather they're fighting to give a voice to people normally outside the process -- the poor, the people who are living on the edge and paying too much of their income for housing, Thobaben said.
The group is not in a position to question motivations for that suit, he said.
”We're not against anybody, but we're for movement and action,” said Thobaben. “I would hope that these parties could look at our points and find some common ground.”
The most important of these, the group says in its press release, is a strong and effective inclusionary zoning policy.
”If we in Humboldt County are serious about providing affordable housing, then all new developments must include a variety of housing types to meet the needs of all income levels,” the release states.
The group said it intends to speak for those who often don't or can't speak for themselves in the Humboldt County General Plan update process.
Box:
Recommendations
* Establish strong inclusionary zoning policies to require that new residential developments include a percentage of housing for moderate, low- and very-low incomes.
* Identify a greater supply of buildable sites with appropriate infrastructure for higher-density housing that is affordable to moderate, low- and very-low income families.
* Identify sites available for homeless shelters and transitional housing.
* Create overlay zones with higher density allowances and provide incentives for providing low- and very-low income housing.
* Encourage mixed-use zoning, mixed-income developments and a broader variety of housing types.
* Reduce or eliminate minimum house size requirements, allow smaller lot sizes, and revise setbacks, lot coverages, parking requirements and solar shading ordinances to accommodate higher density developments.
* Ensure that lots appropriated and reserved for low-income housing are not used for any other kind of development.
* Provide regulatory clarity and public support for
those developers who are willing to take on the difficult task of providing low- and very-low income housing.
James Faulk can be reached at 441-0511 or
jfaulk@times-standard.com.

Friday, April 6, 2007

Linking Social Equity and Smart Growth

WorldChanging TeamMarch 31, 2007
by Worldchanging SF local blogger, Holly Pearson:
Peter Cohen has witnessed the unnoticed darker side of the Smart Growth movement as much as anyone in the Bay Area has.
As Director of the Community Planning Program at the non-profit organization
Asian Neighborhood Design (AND), which works with community groups, neighbors and residents of San Francisco in the development and revitalization of their communities, Peter is one of a handful of urban planning professionals in the Bay Area who are working to create mechanisms for linking new public benefits, such as affordable housing and community facilities, to urban infill development projects. The aim is to minimize and mitigate the unintended negative socio-economic impacts of the kind of development promoted by progressive models of urban planning like Smart Growth, New Urbanism, and Transit-Oriented Development (TOD).
Although the driving objectives of these movements are to curb sprawl and build compact, environmentally sustainable communities, promoting densification and encouraging a high concentration of new development in older city neighborhoods can unintentionally result in gentrification. Many neighborhoods that are located near city centers and have vacant or underutilized land that’s suitable for relatively dense new development have historically been home to lower-income, working-class populations. When policy frameworks and economic incentives are enacted to attract new development in these areas, they often have the inadvertent effect of driving up housing costs and changing the demographics of communities, sometimes to the point of pushing long-time working-class residents out of the neighborhood.
It’s a phenomenon that Peter Cohen has observed increasingly during the recent development boom years in San Francisco. AND’s Community Planning Program focuses its efforts on the city’s lower-income eastern neighborhoods, including Chinatown, the Tenderloin, South of Market, the Mission, Bayview Hunter’s Point, and Visitacion Valley. Each of these neighborhoods has experienced the pressures of new development to some extent -- some have already undergone widespread gentrification while others are just starting to deal with these issues.
According to Peter, most advocates of Smart Growth and other current models of sustainable urban development don’t pay much attention to the sociological impacts on existing neighborhoods. He explains, "There’s an attitude among a lot of the planning community in San Francisco that density is good for density’s sake -- that a denser city is inevitably a better urban environment. My response is that density is not necessarily inherently good. You also have to look at issues of diversity, accessibility, and livability." Even if new development patterns bring about positive physical changes to an urban landscape, like better access to public transportation and greater energy efficiency, if factors like ethnic diversity and affordability are sacrificed, then has sustainability really been achieved?
But the Smart Growth and TOD models and encouragement of new urban infill development don’t have to be at odds with social equity. A new approach that’s being tested in San Francisco is to create and codify mechanisms that redistribute wealth directly from development profits to those sectors of the community that have historically lived in central city neighborhoods and older city suburbs. It’s about meeting community needs. It’s about respecting and benefiting the existing residents of a community and maintaining diversity while accommodating growth, increasing density, and creating compact, transit-accessible neighborhoods.
So how can these more holistic objectives be achieved on the ground? What possible new approaches might allow new infill development while ensuring the continued socio-economic vitality of existing neighborhoods? That’s what Peter Cohen’s Community Planning Program and other like-minded groups in the Bay Area have been trying to answer.
Peter Cohen was instrumental in drafting the proposed "Better Neighborhoods Plus" legislation—an enhanced version of the City of San Francisco’s
Better Neighborhoods program. One of the ideas that Better Neighborhoods Plus sought to accomplish was to link the impact of new development with mitigation measures which benefit the community, and ensure that these mitigations are financed as part of a neighborhood plan. The proposed legislation was designed to apply to six designated areas for which the City has already initiated neighborhood planning processes: Mission, Showplace/Lower Potrero Hill, East SoMa, Central Waterfront, Upper Market/Octavia, and Inner Geary Boulevard. But it was also intended to establish more general standards to be used for all long-range planning initiatives.
As part of the neighborhood planning and implementation process, Better Neighborhoods Plus called for:
Preparation of a Neighborhood Baseline Conditions and Needs Analysis, which would identify existing shortfalls in infrastructure and community amenities that are lacking in a neighborhood, such as transit, open space, housing, neighborhood-serving businesses, and community facilities and other key amenities.
Preparation of a New Development Impacts Analysis. The topics addressed through this analysis could include a much wider array than is conventionally done in planning studies which typically focus on urban design, transportation and public service infrastructure, thereby allowing for a more comprehensive assessment of the impacts of new development on a community.
Recommendation of a Public Improvements Plan and Funding Strategy, including proposed funding mechanisms. Examples of the types of public improvements that could be funded under Better Neighborhoods Plus include affordable housing, economic development and employment training, community facilities and services, open space, and historic and cultural resources protection. Suggested strategies for paying for and mitigating the impacts include new development impacts fees, utilization of existing funding sources, and other funding from special benefits districts.
Although the Better Neighborhoods Plus legislation did not pass, the important result of this initiative is that the ideas have been articulated and framed as a methodology, and the issue of integrating social equity and community development goals with new urban development projects has entered the local planning dialogue.
A related initiative with a successful outcome is a recently adopted City ordinance, which was a piece of that sweeping Better Neighborhoods Plus proposal, which requires closer interaction between agencies in implementing public improvements that are promised in new area plans for the City’s eastern neighborhoods. Peter Cohen and AND’s Community Planning Program were involved in the crafting of this relatively simple ordinance, the purpose of which is to enhance the participation of various City departments and agencies (e.g. the Municipal Transportation Agency, Department of Public Works, Redevelopment Agency, Mayor’s Office of Community Development, Department of Recreation and Parks, etc) in the preparation and implementation of community benefits plans. It’s also intended to provide a means by which the various parties interested in neighborhood improvement programs can stay informed and provide input and support. The ordinance provides a mechanism for coordination between the departments and for dialogue with the community, in the hopes that these relationships will streamline the delivery of community benefits for those areas of the city that are most in need of improvements.
This past fall the City also strengthened its inclusionary housing ordinance, now one of the most progressive in the state, and AND’s Community Planning Program was involved in the technical analysis behind drafting the ordinance and advocating for its passage. One of the studies being produced by an interdisciplinary working group brought together by the city was a Residential Nexus Analysis. A draft of that study shows that the development of market-rate housing does generate significant demand for affordable housing, a finding which supports the City’s inclusionary policies and provides a foundation for future actions towards affordable housing. So public benefits mechanisms to further increase affordable housing are still needed, and are in the works. One mechanism that is being explored as a part of various planning proposals is the recapture of benefits conferred by the private sector on properties, through rezoning or other City actions. The City is exploring strategies of securing a portion of that benefit so that it can be rededicated back into the community, in the form of needed low-cost housing, open space, or other amenities for the community.
Another victory for Peter and AND in the effort to promote more equitable development was a resolution recently passed unanimously by the Board of Supervisors which articulates a public policy framework for preparing and evaluating new neighborhood plans for the city’s eastern neighborhoods. The policies outlined apply to the Mission, East SoMa, Potrero Hill and the Central Waterfront, though the policy sentiment is really applicable citywide, and they relate to objectives such as the development of new affordable housing, the retention and expansion of industrial and other working-class jobs, and the promotion of arts venues as well as work spaces and affordable housing for artists.
"All these initiatives are pieces of a puzzle that I think is moving the policy framework towards more of an equitable development outcome," says Peter.
In order to further advance these efforts, Peter and other planning experts who are concerned about social sustainability agree that urban and regional planning needs to become more proactive, addressing not only land use considerations from a regulatory standpoint, but also looking at the relationship between the physical form and socio-economic conditions of cities and actively seeking to promote sound community development principles. Understanding that new development, and specifically more compact forms of urban development, are necessary in order to accommodate future growth, reduce traffic and sprawl, protect open space and air and water quality, and preserve our high standard of living in the Bay Area, Peter would like to see developers become "enlightened capitalists." This means developers who fully consider and understand the range of impacts that arise when new development is introduced into existing neighborhoods, and who recognize the importance of preserving affordability, enhancing community assets, and protecting less tangible qualities like neighborhood character

Tuesday, April 3, 2007

Want a mix of housing? Require it!

Article published - Apr 2, 2007 by Chris Coursey
The Santa Rosa Press Democrat
It makes sense to concentrate new development downtown, as city officials envision with the Station Area Plan that was reviewed last week by the Santa Rosa Planning Commission.It's a positive step to plan for 3,249housing units and 6,000 extra residents close to the city's core. It's a wise move to pair that residential development with 300,000 square feet of shops and restaurants and 200,000 square feet of office space.But there's a big hole in this plan, and it flies in the face of its theme of "transit-oriented development."Nowhere does it require affordable housing.Some city officials take issue with that statement. The plan, after all, includes as part of its "vision" a statement that it will "provide for a range of housing choices and support a diverse population." There's even a line that states, "Housing is affordable ... "But having a vision of affordable housing is a lot different than having a requirement for it.Santa Rosa Mayor Bob Blanchard says affordable housing "is a valid issue" and it will be "a subject of discussion and review.""You've got to have it," he said.But he and other city officials have said in the past that affordable hous- ing already exists downtown. They also have said that by allowing higher densities and a mix of housing types downtown there will be a mix of housing prices.Both of those statements are true. But the affordable housing that exists downtown is a tiny fraction of the amount of new housing proposed in this plan. And unless developers are required to produce affordable units, does anyone really believe that a single new home will be sold or rented for a penny less than what the market will bear?Santa Rosa's inclusionary zoning ordinance requires developers either to include below-market-rate housing in their projects or pay an "in-lieu" fee to a fund the city uses to subsidize housing elsewhere.The 650 downtown acres included in the Station Area Plan aren't exempt from that ordinance.The problem is builders only are required to include affordable hous- ing if the project is larger than 15acres - and none of the properties within the plan area is that big, said city planner Ken MacNab.Further, the city exempts "mixed- use" projects from the ordinance, based on the expectation that multi-story projects with ground-floor retail or office space will include a mix of sizes and styles of housing, thereby creating a mix of prices.But the "mix" created so far ranges from high-priced to higher- priced. Developers predict condos in three high-rise buildings approved along Third Street will sell for $400,000 to $1 million. Monthly rents in a new mixed-use building off of College Avenue range from more than $1,300 for a one-bedroom apartment to almost $2,400 for some two-bedrooms.No doubt the developers will be able to charge those prices, but at what cost? Who are the people who will be able to pay them?The key priority of the Station Area Plan is to create "transit- oriented development" downtown. It is designed to provide more places to live close to a future commuter railroad, and place residential development closer to jobs.But empty-nest retirees living in downtown penthouses aren't going to fill the seats on a commuter train, and the waiters and baristas and clerks who work in all those new downtown businesses aren't going to live in $600,000 condos.If city officials truly want variety downtown - young and old, singles and families, retirees and office workers, shoppers and sales clerks - then they need to create housing that is affordable to people with a variety of incomes.And the only sure way to get that is to require it.

Monday, March 19, 2007

Roseland redevelopment should not be for the rich

By MAGDALENA RIDLEY - ROSELAND RESIDENT
Santa Rosa Press Democrat - Mar 18, 2007

Now that development in Roseland is on hold until we have an annexation plan, governmental officials sure seem serious about helping out. After years of neglect, it's suddenly all about fixing it up over here.
Toxic waste will be cleaned up and parks will finally appear, paid for with tax revenue from the redevelopment to come. It sounds beautiful.
Instead of people getting drunk in front of the boarded-up grocery store, I can see families strolling around a spacious plaza. Alongside the Joe Rodota Trail, storefronts and apartments could replace old warehouses and truck-storage yards. Where there are empty lots, we could have playgrounds or mixed-use buildings. I can imagine all of us Roseland residents smiling ear to ear as we walk around our clean, reinvested community.
Except redevelopment isn't that warm and fuzzy. Go to any recently redeveloped area and you can see how the original residents are excluded. In the beginning it is all about helping the neighborhood, but developers are interested in profits. Affordable housing and broad sidewalks are not nearly as profitable as expensive condos and luxury retail spaces.
When a place is driven by "economic feasibility" and "market demands," it gradually becomes too expensive for the very residents who were to benefit from the increased services and improved infrastructure in the first place. Which is why affordable housing is so important.
People live in second-rate neighborhoods because they are cheaper. Roseland is special because it has found ways to thrive in spite of that second-rate status. What has flourished here is a multicultural bastion of locally owned businesses and working-class residents. We should embrace that. The very idea of this unique community disappearing into a fog of high rents and chic stores makes me want to hold on tight to the dilapidated buildings, crummy roads and occasional shady characters.
Developers certainly won't mandate preservation of Roseland's working-class character. Sadly, it seems the city won't either. Santa Rosa requires only that 15 percent of any new housing development be affordable, and even that is easily waived. In mixed-use projects, there is no requirement. Citywide, new developments have been geared to the wealthy for just that reason - it is too easy to not bother with affordable housing.
But somebody has got to work in the grocery stores and do oil changes and teach school, and they deserve to live in nice places too. The Accountable Development Coalition, a broad group of local organizations that advocate for policy on developmental issues, has made an affordable housing recommendation for the Downtown Station Area Plan: 40 percent affordable units - 20 percent for individuals making under $42,000 a year, and 20 percent for individuals making under $63,000 a year.
These recommendations would be a good starting point for affordable policy in Roseland, and, really, they should be applied citywide. If we want our kids and workers to live here, we cannot just build luxury units in all the convenient spots and leave Burbank Housing to pick up the slack wherever it can.
Redevelopment in Roseland should include parks and a plaza and a community center. Existing occupied structures and our small businesses should be preserved. We should have police who are on foot. Most importantly, we must push for affordable housing. Redevelopment here could be amazing. It could be a chance to revitalize what is downtrodden and at the same time reinforce what is great. It could be a chance to sow hope instead of despair. Roseland and its residents, especially the kids, could finally get some acknowledgment and respect.
People talk about wanting to end the gang problem and stop crime and lower dropout rates, but they still want to treat the lower half of the economic spectrum like we are disposable. Redevelopment cannot magically erase the problems associated with not having money, but neither should it chase off everyone but the affluent. It should not be just another way in which the lower half is told they don't matter - especially here in Roseland, because we've already heard it enough.

Wednesday, March 14, 2007

Santa Rosa Settles Fair Housing Lawsuit

Halfway house, council reach agreement
By MIKE MCCOYTHE PRESS DEMOCRAT 3/14/07
Saying the city could ill afford to lose a costly lawsuit, the Santa Rosa City Council agreed Tuesday to pay $66,500 in damages and legal fees and to allow more people to live in a clean-and-sober halfway house.
"This is something we are being forced to do," Councilman Mike Martini said of the decision to allow The Living Place to house 12 people at its facility on Franklin Avenue.The group home opened in 2003. Within a few months, its operator, Jonathon Fong, became embroiled in a dispute with the city over whether he needed a use permit to operate the facility. While the city won that round, Fong sought to house 13 people in the home.
Two years ago, both the Planning Commission and council granted the facility permission to house up to 10 people, a combination of clients and staff. Fong filed a lawsuit in U.S. District Court in San Francisco, alleging that the limit violated the federal Fair Housing Act and the Americans with Disabilities Act as it applied to recovering alcoholics and drug addicts.
City Attorney Brien Farrell said Tuesday that rather than spending an estimated $300,000 on a lawsuit it could lose, the city reached an out-of-court settlement to allow Fong to boost his occupancy to 12 people. The settlement, unanimously approved by the council Tuesday, requires the city to pay Fong and his attorneys $32,500 in damages and $34,000 in legal fees. It also restricts the number of cars owned by residents of the house to nine, requires the addition of two parking spaces on-site and requires the operators to provide a hot-line phone number for neighbors to use if problems arise.
City planner Noah Housh said neighbors who attended a recent meeting said their primary issue is the "overall number" who will be living in the seven-bedroom home, near the corner of Lewis Road." Otherwise, they said the people there have been operating in a pretty respectful way," Housh said.
No neighbor showed up to speak against the settlement. David Grabill, a local attorney, said the settlement will provide additional space for those seeking recovery from alcohol and drug addictions. He urged the council to approve the settlement, which he said would allow the clientele "to be treated, not criminalized."

In Miami, a tangled tale of lost public housing

from the Christian Science Monitor
March 08, 2007
By Richard Luscombe

The feds are set to take control of a local agency amid charges that millions in public money were wasted or stolen.
MIAMI
When Caprice Brown and her three children were evicted six years ago from their rundown apartment in one of the most depressed areas of Miami, they were promised a sparkling new housing development that would revitalize the community.
Instead, they ended up in a single room of her aunt's already crowded house nearby. With little money for food and stripped of housing benefit vouchers, she slept on the floor while her sons aged 13 and 10, and her 11-year-old daughter shared the room's only bed. Then in January, she and her children moved into a private rental apartment.
Six years after the evictions, the 42-acre site in Liberty City that used to be their home remains demolished, fenced off, and abandoned.
Ms. Brown is among thousands of victims of one of the nation's biggest housing scandals, which saw millions of dollars of public money lost, squandered, or stolen while the Miami-Dade Housing Agency failed to deliver on promises of affordable new accommodations for its poorest citizens.
Hundreds of families were made homeless or simply disappeared from the system. They were waiting for help from an agency riddled by mismanagement and corruption, which is now the subject of a federal investigation that could have implications for low-income housing policy nationwide.
Meanwhile, the waiting list for public housing in one of America's most expensive cities for real estate has grown to more than 41,000 names.
"I'm angry about the lies that were told to us," says Brown. Her family was one of more than 850 uprooted when the agency pulled down the crumbling Scott Carver public housing project to make way for a partly government-funded revitalization project that was never built.
The stalled Scott Carver Homes project, for which the local authority accepted $35 million of government money, is the worst of many missteps dating back to 1998 that brought the agency to the attention of the US Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD).
An audit released last week confirmed massive misuse of public funds, tax irregularities, and countless incidents of sloppy or suspicious recordkeeping. The agency, for example, employs only about 690 workers, yet 1,811 appeared on payroll records, 115 of them with Social Security numbers belonging to deceased individuals.
Another criticism was that at least $12 million was paid to developers, through a nonprofit corporation set up by the agency, for housing projects that were never started or were delayed. One developer, Oscar Rivero, faces criminal charges of taking $740,000 meant for 54 low-income houses in Little Havana to buy himself a luxury home in south Miami.
A second, Raul Masvidal, was arrested last Friday on charges of grand theft and organized fraud. Among his alleged crimes? Skimming $150,000 from public money to buy himself a sculpture of a watermelon.
HUD secretary Alphonso Jackson's response was to send a "hit squad" of seven investigators to Miami, and he announced last week that he intends to take the rare step of ordering a federal takeover of the agency's finances and services. Miami-Dade Mayor Carlos Alvarez is resisting, claiming that the county had turned a corner by replacing the agency's leadership with a new director of housing and team of experienced advisers.
"We've taken the most aggressive steps we possibly can, and I don't believe the federal government can do a better job," Mr. Alvarez said in a statement.
Those steps include new plans for the Scott Carver site that would see all 850 of the demolished units replaced. The original plan was to rebuild less than half that number.
The tug of war, however, goes far beyond local authority complacency and cuts to the heart of government policy toward public housing for the nation's poorest residents, experts say.
When it was set up in 1993, the Hope VI program was designed to inject federal funds into areas where public housing was "severely distressed," such as Liberty City, and build new developments mixing private and public accommodation.
But only 60 of the 237 projects funded with about $5.7 billion of government money nationwide have been completed. Meanwhile, many displaced families who were given vouchers to help them pay rent in the private sector lost their benefits through complications in the system.
Voucher problems exacerbated delays to Hope VI projects, says Chuck Elsesser, a board member of the National Low Income Housing Coalition and an attorney with more than 30 years' experience in affordable housing legislation. "When you look at the projects around the country, you ask two questions: Did it get built, and did the people come back?" he says. "A few do, but a lot get lost. In a short space of time families who had been living without any problems for decades were losing their subsidies and becoming homeless.
"Even with vouchers, you've got to have a landlord that will accept them. In Miami, they were sending people out into one of the hottest housing markets in the country. It didn't work here, and it did work in other areas," Mr. Elsesser adds.
Now some are urging Congress to do away with the program altogether. "Neither the housing agency nor HUD has done right by the people when it comes to Hope VI," says Tony Romano, organizing director of the Miami Workers Center, which is supporting displaced families. "The plan from the beginning was a failure. It's not about finishing what they started. It's time for a whole new plan."
Mr. Romano cites a study by the Research Institute for Social and Economic Policy at Miami's Florida International University that shows that more than half of 187 former Scott Homes residents interviewed lost their benefits, known as Section 8 vouchers.
Donna White, a spokeswoman for HUD, acknowledges problems but says it is unfair to judge the program by what happened in Miami. She points to Atlanta, Chicago, and Tampa, Fla., as areas where projects have been successful. "In some cities it hasn't been a nightmare. In some it has," she says. "I wouldn't like to paint a broad stroke on the program."
The program was never intended as an instant fix, says Susan Popkin of the Urban Institute's Metropolitan Housing and Communities Center, who has studied five Hope VI projects nationwide. "In Chicago, it started out a mess but over time it began working. But it took a strong support system and a lot of oversight to get there," she says.
Full HTML version of this story which may include photos, graphics, and related links

Tuesday, March 6, 2007

The Housing Bubble Starts to Burst

[Here's an article by Dean Baker, an economist and columnist for Truthout Online Magazine]
Is there anything as beautiful as the sound of surprised economists in the springtime? I haven't had this much fun since the NASDAQ started to deflate seven years ago.
Okay, enough of the gloating; while the collapse of the housing bubble was both predictable and inevitable, it is not pretty. Tens of millions of people will be hurt as they see much of the equity in their homes - money that most had counted on to support their retirement - disappear. Millions more will be forced out of their homes as they find that they are unable to meet the payments on adjustable rate mortgages that reset at higher rates. People who had worked hard and saved in order to become homeowners will see their dream disappear.
The timing and process of the unwinding of the bubble cannot be known, but the basic story is clear. Investors are finally realizing that the high-risk mortgages they have been holding are high-risk.
Mortgage brokers, who make their money on issuing mortgages, not holding them, had been anxious to get as many people as possible to buy mortgages. While old-fashioned bankers would demand large down payments and good credit histories, many mortgage brokers were happy to issue mortgages that they knew buyers could not pay off. Since the brokers dump their mortgages in the secondary market almost immediately after they are issued, they have little reason to be concerned about whether the buyer can actually meet the payments.
Mortgage brokers were able to entice more people into the housing market with low "teaser rates" that were often several percentage points below the market rate to which the loan would eventually reset. Many homebuyers who could meet their monthly payment on a mortgage with a 1.5 percent interest rate would be hopelessly over their heads when the mortgage reset to a 6.5 percent rate.
But, everything was fine, as long as home prices continued their rapid appreciation. If a homebuyer's income wasn't high enough to make the mortgage payment, the homebuyer could draw on the new equity created by a rising home price. As a result, delinquency and foreclosure rates remained low through 2004 and 2005, even as the number of high-risk mortgages soared.
However, the party began to end last year as house prices started to fall. The fall thus far has been relatively modest (around 3 percent nationwide), but with prices going in the wrong direction, most new homebuyers have no equity that they could rely upon to meet their monthly payments. As a result, delinquency rates began to soar in 2006. More than 10 percent of the subprime adjustable rate mortgages issued last year (the most risky category) were already seriously delinquent or foreclosed within 10 months of issuance. This is even before any of these mortgages reset to a higher interest rate.
With foreclosure rates soaring, the music is about to stop. The investors who bought up these mortgages in the secondary market are now refusing to lend more money. Credit is drying up for both the subprime and the Alt-A market, which is a notch above subprime in creditworthiness. These two segments of the housing market together accounted for 40 percent of the mortgages issued in the last two years.
If 40 percent of potential homebuyers suddenly have problems getting credit, it has to have a large impact on the housing market. Throw into the mix that the inventory of unsold homes is 25 percent higher than at the same time last year. And, the number of vacant units up for sale (normally an indication of a highly motivated seller) is up more than 40 percent compared to last year. Since house prices fell by three percent last year (six percent in real terms), it looks like we have the beginnings of a serious slide in house prices. And, a sharp fall in house prices will lead to more problems in the mortgage market.
That is the story of a collapsing housing bubble. It is not pretty. It was predictable. However, the experts either looked the other way or said everything was fine. And, the politicians pushed policies that persuaded many moderate-income families to buy overvalued homes that they could not afford. And the mortgage brokers made a fortune selling bad mortgages.
That is the way the US economy works these days. Those who mess up the economy do well, while their victims - in this case millions of moderate-income homebuyers who will lose their homes - pay the price for the experts' mistakes.
Dean Baker is the co-director of the Center for Economic and Policy Research (CEPR). He is the author of The Conservative Nanny State: How the Wealthy Use the Government to Stay Rich and Get Richer (http://www.conservativenannystate.org/). He also has a blog, "Beat the Press," where he discusses the media's coverage of economic issues. You can find it at the American Prospect's web site.

Sunday, February 25, 2007

Older seniors being forced out of housing...

Check out C. W. Nevius' excellent article in the 2/25 San Francisco Chronicle:
At first it sounds hilarious. A generation gap at the retirement village between the 60-year-old Baby Boomers and the 80-plus old timers? What's the conflict? Frank Zappa versus Frank Sinatra?
But beneath the surface a nasty little battle of demographics is brewing. Sprawling retirement communities are attempting to spruce up facilities to appeal to the onslaught of Baby Boomers, while the longtime residents worry that they are subtly being nudged out the gate.
Out in Walnut Creek, where the "active retirement" community of Rossmoor is experiencing growing pains, resident Dick Hayes, 71, a former president of the Residents Association, speaks for many retirees.
"I think there is an attempt, and it may be subtle and unconscious, to get rid of the 80- and 90-year-olds,'' says Hayes.
See the full article at: http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=df7q7cfm_31ff67t8

Wednesday, February 21, 2007

Wouldn't it be nice to see this kind of reception everywhere...

Welcome committee welcomes homeless to their neighborhood
Monday, June 12, 2006DEBORAH FELDMAN / KING 5 News

SEATTLE - Pramila Jayapal says she'd rather have a building on an undeveloped corner south of the Columbia City neighborhood than an overgrown lot.

KING

The facility would ultimately host people with histories of living in emergency shelters.

So when she learned of a proposal to turn the spot into a facility to house 60 mentally ill and chronically homeless people, she says she was thrilled.

"Columbia City really has a history of welcoming diversity of all sorts into our neighborhood and I think that for that reason I think, I hope that we as a neighborhood will be really welcoming to people who need homes," she said.

So Jayapal and about two dozen of her neighbors formed a group called "Rainier Home" to help smooth the way for the construction of a sister facility to this one, created by the nonprofit group Downtown Emergency Service Center or DESC.

The group plans to volunteer with the buildings' residents after they move in, teaching art classes and gardening.

"If they have enough people to help to watch it and take care of it and people volunteer to help it will be helpful. I hate to see people living on the street," said Carol Phillips.

The facility proposed for this location would ultimately host people with histories of living in emergency shelters. The agency says it will screen out people who have been convicted of violent felonies or sex offenses.

But not everyone is thrilled. Some residents worry it will damage the progress this community has made in recent years.

"This will be nothing but an attraction to bring the drugs, the violence, the gangs and whatever else into the neighborhood," said Jon Daykin.

Despite detractors, the executive director of DESC says a welcoming group for the homeless is new, and humbling experience.

"If we're going to end homelessness, it requires the development of housing and when we develop housing they have to be in some neighborhood. and its really heartening to see more and more people in Columbia City open up and very pridefully accept this project," said Bill Hobson.

There are still numerous hurdles to be jumped, but groundbreaking for the facility is scheduled to take place next fall.

[ For another article about this amazing neighborhood, Click here: The Seattle Times: Local News: Neighbors welcome housing project for mentally ill homeless people ]

Thursday, February 15, 2007

Santa Rosa Downtown Station Area Plan

Santa Rosa is developing a "Station Area Plan" for the downtown area. It will include 3,200+ units of new housing, along with 300,000 sq.ft. of commercial and retail space and 200,000 sq.ft. of "civic" space. But the plan has some serious shortcomings. There's no mention of affordable housing. There's no mention of "green design" or other environmental concerns. While the plan's purpose is supposedly to encourage a walkable downtown, they want to take out the sidewalk on the south side of 3rd Street under the mall.
The plan has lots of nice drawings of "streetscapes" and "pocket parks," but main goal seems to be to tear down the existing City Hall and build a large "Performing Arts Center" in its place. Then they want to build a new, bigger City Hall nearby... all with public money. As with most of the "plans" coming out of City Hall these days, the people of Santa Rosa don't get much benefit. HAG has submitted a letter to the City Design Review Board expressing concerns about the new plan. Please take a look at the draft plan on the City of Santa Rosa Website -- and let the City Council know that downtown should be for everyone to enjoy, and the 3,000 units of new housing shouldn't be just for the wealthy. We'd like to see at least 20% of these new units be affordable to moderate income households, and 20% be affordable to lower income households.

Monday, February 5, 2007

REAL mixed use development

Here's a new Albertson's supermarket (along with a bank and other stores) with housing above and parking below in a mixed income neighborhood ( Fulton and Masonic ) in San Francisco... this should be the norm not the exception for commercial development in urban areas. Click on the photo to see a larger view...







Here's a new Albertson's supermarket with housing above and parking below at Fulton and Masonic in San Francisco... this should be the norm not the exception for commercial development in urban areas...