33 replies to this topic

[bordercolliefan]

Apparently there is a new controversy surrounding Folsom's affordable housing. The affordable housing rules specify that new home developers may meet their affordable housing requirements by providing units in the development they are building, OR they can simply buy other units elsewhere in Folsom and make them available as affordable housing units (thus keeping their new development "pristine"). It appears that many developers have chosen the latter route, and for the most part they are locating their affordable housing in the area around City Hall.

I believe the Bee stated that Steve Miklos defended this practice, stating that it would be too expensive for developers to devote new housing to meet affordable housing requirements. However, both Andy Morin and Kerry expressed concerns that all of the low-income housing was being located in one area.

Any comments or reaction??

I have mixed feelings about the affordable housing rules, but if we are going to have them, it seems preferable to spread the low income housing around Folsom rather than concentrate it in one area. Otherwise, one or two schools will end up with a disproportionate burden of educating disadvantaged kids. (Well, on second thought, we already have that situation in Folsom).

[Cloud9]

They should put all the affordable housing right at the steps of City Hall to remind them of their screw up.

[john]

It's already there! It's not like they are displacing anyone, they are just re-classifying older units, which they should have been able to do in the first place.

It's one of the few times I have agreed with the mayor... we shouldn't be making new low income housing if there already are places in Folsom that fill the need.

[Steve Heard]

They should put all the affordable housing right at the steps of City Hall to remind them of their screw up. 

What screw up?

[Terry]

What screw up?

Agreed! What screw up are you talking about? Keep in mind that no city in Sacramento County (Citrus Heights, Rancho Cordova, Elk Grove, Galt, Isleton) meets the state's affordable housing requirements. Folsom started working on meeting its affordable housing goals in the late 80s, then development all over the state waned for a while, so the urgency wasn't there and it was given a lower priority. The topic came forward again in the mid-90s when development picked up again and the city then worked on guidelines for multi-unit housing that would encourage affordable units within new developments. In the midst of this, the lawsuit was filed against the city. The city continued to work on its guidelines during its settlement process on the lawsuit.

And John is correct, a good number of affordable housing units are within 1 to 5 blocks of City Hall.

Cloud9 - do you have specific information as to a failure of the City to work on this subject?

[bishmasterb]

Cloud9 - do you have specific information as to a failure of the City to work on this subject?

I'm not speaking for cloud, but I think he was referring to the fact that if the state is going to force developers to produce low-income housing (a screw up), he thinks it's ironic that the developers have found a loophole allowing them to fulfill the requirement by using the already "affordable" housing right outside city hall.

I know, the affordable housing may be state, not city; but its all government.

[camay2327]

I have talked about this during the open forum and at other times at a few of the city council meetings.

The property on Bidwell between Blue Ravine and Oak Avenue where all he horses are. Leaving the intersection of Blue Ravine and Bidwell and heading towards US 50 it is about 1/2 a mile up and on the right side of the road. Schn...deker...(spelling) Property. They are going to develop that land into housing and instead of putting affordable housing there they were given permission by the city to convert the Natoma Arms (across from city hall) into affordable housing units.

Now these units will not be forsale units and will be rentals. This in itself does not give people a chance to purchase affordable homes. It goes give them a cut in their rent, I guess.

I thought that the idea of affordable housing was to put affordable units in with the other housing being built, much like they are going to do near the Folsom High School. (That property will be developed soon)

I think that the reason the city is giving them a break is that some of these units are so expensive that the builders can not afford to sell 15 percent of them at the affordable price so they are given permission to do just like they did at Natoma Arms.

Now I think that other builders are doing the same thing. This does not give the people a chance to purchase a home (as affordable). Sure they can rent but ???

The mayor seems to be all for this process. Andy and Kerri are not. We can only hope that Jeff Starsky and/or Eric King will see the light and get this process changed.

By the way, the city code was changed some time ago to allow this to happen.

Note: The only reason I even discuss this is that I believe that this process is being abused. I have no other reason. I have no money involved in this and have no political motives.

Hope this gets cleared up......

Andy and Kerri, go for it....

I hope that the city gets behind this too.

Cal



Yes it is a headbanger....

[benning]

"I think that the reason the city is giving them a break is that some of these units are so expensive that the builders can not afford to sell 15 percent of them at the affordable price so they are given permission to do just like they did at Natoma Arms." camay

Geez, maybe the developers could pony up a tiny fraction of the windfall profit they've received due to the phenomenal increase in housing prices. It's not the city's responsibility to make sure developers maximize their profit. It's their responsibility to maintain quality standards within the community.

I strongly believe that the affordable should be mixed in with the new. Otherwise we're just insuring the ghetto-ization of Folsom.

[Steve Heard]

"I think that the reason the city is giving them a break is that some of these units are so expensive that the builders can not afford to sell 15 percent of them at the affordable price so they are given permission to do just like they did at Natoma Arms." camay

Geez, maybe the developers could pony up a tiny fraction of the windfall profit they've received due to the phenomenal increase in housing prices.  It's not the city's responsibility to make sure developers maximize their profit.  It's their responsibility to maintain quality standards within the community.

I strongly believe that the affordable should be mixed in with the new.  Otherwise we're just insuring the ghetto-ization of Folsom.

Opinions are divided as to whether we keep affordable housing in the area that has become affordable due to the age of homes, the proliferation of rentals and lack of maintenance by owners, or if we sprinkle the affordable housing in the midst of brand new homes.

I'm inclined to go with the feeling that we live where we can afford to, and that communities and builders should not be forced to set aside homes for people who can't afford to live in the area.

I can't afford to live in Los Lagos, but I'd like to. Maybe they can set aside one of those palaces for a guy like me.

[camay2327]

Steve, in other words you agree with the mayor. I understand what you are saying though. When my wife and I moved into Folsom we purchased where we thought we could afford it and we love our area of Folsom.

But, I still feel like the city should try and enforce the 15% rule and and when possible. Instead of having one or two areas with people that are in affordable housing we should try and work them in in the larger tracts of houses. The idea was, at least I thought, to try and mingle these affordable units in with the others without anyone really knowing what they were.

Am I wrong in my thinking?

[Terry]

[quote=camay2327,Jan 14 2005, 08:23 AM]

The property on Bidwell between Blue Ravine and Oak Avenue where all he horses are. Leaving the intersection of Blue Ravine and Bidwell and heading towards US 50 it is about 1/2 a mile up and on the right side of the road. Schn...deker...(spelling) Property. They are going to develop that land into housing and instead of putting affordable housing there they were given permission by the city to convert the Natoma Arms (across from city hall) into affordable housing units.

Now these units will not be forsale units and will be rentals. This in itself does not give people a chance to purchase affordable homes. It goes give them a cut in their rent, I guess.

I thought that the idea of affordable housing was to put affordable units in with the other housing being built, much like they are going to do near the Folsom High School. (That property will be developed soon)

I think that the reason the city is giving them a break is that some of these units are so expensive that the builders can not afford to sell 15 percent of them at the affordable price so they are given permission to do just like they did at Natoma Arms.

Now I think that other builders are doing the same thing. This does not give the people a chance to purchase a home (as affordable). Sure they can rent but ???

The mayor seems to be all for this process. Andy and Kerri are not. We can only hope that Jeff Starsky and/or Eric King will see the light and get this process changed.

By the way, the city code was changed some time ago to allow this to happen.

Note: The only reason I even discuss this is that I believe that this process is being abused. I have no other reason. I have no money involved in this and have no political motives.

------------------------------------------------


It's EAST BIDWELL, EAST BIDWELL, EAST BIDWELL!!!! Bidwell is a totally different street!

Secondly, the City did not "give permission" to have any units converted to affordable housing units. The City did a survey a couple years ago of EXISTING housing units (whether rental or purchase) meeting the criteria and definition of being "affordable" under the terms of the state law. Existing housing units that met this criteria were counted towards the City's affordable housing stock, which put a specific number on what we had at that point in time. The City got credit for that number of units and now has to come up with the remaining affordable housing units (whether rental or purchase) required to meet the state requirements. You can't take a unit already identified as affordable in this survey, sell it to a developer and have it counted again. So your suggestion that developers are buying existing affordable housing and offering them as a way to come into compliance with the affordable housing goals for the city is incorrect.

[benning]

I suggest we all go to Roseville and try to find the areas designated as affordable housing within the last 5 years. They're intermixed in the newer areas -- it's practically impossible to tell.

Affordable housing can be done in a stealth way and can be done right. It's not rocket science. We're not talking about Los Lagos vs Willow Creek, we're talking about renting an apartment where wealth cannot be accumulated vs a condo or small home where it can. Or we're talking about just being able to live near the community where we work. As you know, home equity is the basis of much of the wealth amongst the middle class.

From what've I've read, designating larger areas as low income has always led to a concentration of rental housing, neglect in upkeep, crime, gangs, etc. Let's sprinkle all types of housing throughout the city and we'll have a much more stable, more inclusive community.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but this 15% affordable housing is a requirement, not an option. Whether we agree with it in principle or not, we should do what serves our community best. And if that doesn't line up with what the developers want, that's too bad. Folsom is too hot a market for them to ignore.

[benning]

Terry -
Based on your earlier comments, I have a couple of questions for clarification....

How is it that developers are allowed to purchase existing units? Were these units not counted in the original affordable housing inventory? If so, why not?

[Terry]

Terry -
Based on your earlier comments, I have a couple of questions for clarification....

How is it that developers are allowed to purchase existing units? Were these units not counted in the original affordable housing inventory?  If so, why not?

Developers are not allowed to purchase units that are already included in the affordable housing count and use them as "credit" towards their requirement. The city is looking for affordable units that are ADDING to the current count to meet the city's affordable housing requirement.

As I explained, the City did a survey and identified all the units a couple years back that were considered "affordable". If they change hands and then are rented or sold at a current market rate that's not considered "affordable" then they come off the list and the count because they no longer qualify as affordable.

I suppose developers could buy market rate properties and then offer them at "affordable" rates, and that also ADDS to the city's supply of affordable units. Mercy Foundation has done this in the past. They've purchased properties in town and rehabbed them and offered them as affordable housing with subsidies and grants obtained/offered by Mercy Foundation. I don't know that you'd consider Mercy Foundation a "developer" in that sense though.

I'm not sure developers "get away" with much. The parties that brought the suit against the city are monitoring this very closely and they'll be the first to point out abuses if they were to occur.

I also have no personal interest in advocating for or against either developers or affordable housing. I've been here 50+ years, long enough to remember when all of Folsom was affordable. I'm concerned that families who've been here for several generations won't be able to continue to see future family generations stay here because of the cost of housing.

[Steve Heard]

I also have no personal interest in advocating for or against either developers or affordable housing.  I've been here 50+ years, long enough to remember when all of Folsom was affordable.  I'm concerned that families who've been here for several generations won't be able to continue to see future family generations stay here because of the cost of housing.

Terry

I understand your position. I was raised in around San Francisco, absolutely love the area (except for the traffic) and moved here because I couldn't afford to buy a home there, and compared to the Bay Area, Folsom IS affordable housing, or at least it was when I moved here.

I bought my house for $327,000, in 2001, compared to the median price of over $600,000 in the area I left. I wanted to move to a place where my kids could afford to live when they get older. Now, they both want to move elsewhere. One back to San Francisco, and the other, to LA!

I feel for those at the lower end of the economic scale. That's where I come from. I grew up in the inner city, and have many friends and relatives who still live paycheck to paycheck. Should the house next to me, which is worth over half a million dollars, be sold to one of the low income families for $130,000?

It doesn't make sense. I'd like to see more focus on bringing better income opportunities and proserity to the poor, so that they can AFFORD to live wherever they want to.

By the way, I believe the developers have an option of building, buying or contributing money to a city fund for purchasing affordable housing.

Would we like the city to be in charge of buying affordable housing? Do you think they'd buy properties in the Parkway? Empire Ranch?

Cal, I don't know exactly what the Mayor's position is on this, other than that the city has to obey the state law, so I don't know if I agree with him or not.