CA Liberals Blocking Housing for Poor

MARCH 21, 2012

By WAYNE LUSVARDI

We are hearing a lot about how California cannot close a $10 billion budget gap.  But California has allowed 400 redevelopment agencies to retain about $2 billion in funds set aside for so-called “affordable housing.”

Note: We’re not talking here about “public housing,” which is properties owned by the government.

Affordable housing is where the government promotes the development and use of private properties at below-market costs to low-income people.

Question: Should the government eliminate affordable housing when:

* The median home price in California for February 2012 was $239,000, or 67.4 percent below the 2006 peak price in the real estate cycle.

* Mortgage interest rates are at an all time low?

* The typical state mortgage payment in February 2012 was $901 per month, while 30 percent of the median household income was $1,522 per month? Thirty percent of median household income is the conventionally accepted definition of affordable housing by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.

* The state’s definition of “affordable housing” is new housing often with luxury amenities? The traditional definition of affordable housing has been older, obsolescent housing not located near public services.

How vital is the role of state-mandated affordable housing quotas that siphon local property taxes from public safety and schools?

Liberal Cities Block New Housing Permits

A new study by urban economist Matthew Kahn at the UCLA Institute of the Environment has found that communities with a “liberal political ideology” block new housing construction compared to similarly located cities.   Kahn’s study adjusted for such variable as income, education and housing density.  So his findings do not reflect NIMBY-ism — Not-In-My-Back-Yard — opposition to affordable housing.

Kahn’s study was of 317 California cities within 35 miles of a central business district. The cities represented 73.5 percent of the state’s population.

Kahn found that “liberal political ideology” was the most determinant factor in predicting “slow growth” policies.  “Liberal ideology” was measured by the percentage of “liberal voters” registered in the Democratic Party, Green Party and Peace and Freedom Party.  Also associated with a “liberal ideology” was the percentage of “green product” purchases such as Toyota Prius ownership.

Kahn’s major finding: A 10 percent increase in those with a liberal ideology in a city is associated with a 30 percent decline in new building permits.

Can we continue to afford siphoning scarce property taxes to build new affordable housing in liberal cities that block new housing permits? Do statewide affordable housing mandates do more harm than good?

Currently, those relatively wealthier cities in California that do not comply with their state-mandated affordable housing quotas forfeit their share of HUD Community Development Block Grant funds.  Those forfeited funds are, in turn, diverted to low-income communities. So state affordable housing quotas are another wealth redistribution scheme.

List of cities and counties with Green Party office holders in California:

1. Los Angeles
2. Fairfax, Marin County
3. Crest/Harrison Canyon/Granite Hill, San Diego County
4. Oak Tree, Nevada County
5. Granada, San Mateo County
6. Humboldt Countgy
7. City of Alameda, Alameda County
8. Lake County
9. Montara, San Mateo County
10. Santa Barbara County
11. Mendocino County
12. Richmond, Contra Costa County
13. Arcata, Humboldt County
14. Canyon Township, Contra Costa County
15. Berkeley, Alameda County
16. San Pedro, Los Angeles County

Ten Most Ideologically Liberal Cities in California:

1. San Francisco
2. Oakland
3. Berkeley
4. Richmond
5. Inglewood
6. Compton
7. Emeryville
8. Albany
9. San Pablo
10. Fairfax

No comments

Write a comment
  1. JOHN WALSH
    JOHN WALSH 22 March, 2012, 00:07

    THE TEN COMMANDMENTS CONTAINS ONE COMMANDMENT REGARDING MURDER:THOU SHALT NOT KILL.

    THE TEN COMMANDMENTS COMTAINS TWO COMMANDMENTS REGARDING PROPERTY RIGHTS: THOU SHALT NOT STEAL & THOU SHALT NOT COVET THY NEIGHBOR’S GOODS.

    THAT’S WHY I HAVE FOUGHT THE CRA FOR 40 YEARS IN L.A. AND BERKLEY.
    HOLLYWOODHIGHLANDS.ORG
    JOHN WALSH

    Reply this comment
  2. Bring Back Redevelopment Agencies
    Bring Back Redevelopment Agencies 23 March, 2012, 14:53

    The California government has always advocated for affordable housing but can’t effectively generate the funds to promote it. Liberal policies in Sacramento is a big part of this problem, where competing social programs suck up a big percentage of our budget. Redevelopment agencies have been one source of subsidy for affordable housing. Because of to their closure, the Sacramento folks will now have to find another way to channel affordable housing funds. Nice going Sacramento. With a budget crisis and no RA’s to subsidize affordable homes, you guys are doing nothing but creating a bigger mess. What’s next? Enforcing penalties for RHNA non-compliant cities? Goodluck!

    Reply this comment

Write a Comment

Leave a Reply



Related Articles

Space: Next California frontier

May 18, 2012 By Joseph Perkins The dawning of the commercial space age begins Tuesday. That’s when SpaceX is expected

CA Green Elites Block Economic Recovery

JULY 21, 2011 By WAYNE LUSVARDI In 1970, Tom Wolfe wrote a non-fiction book titled “Radical Chic and Mau-Mauing the

CA not enjoying TX-sized boom in revenues from oil

  California increased its revenues last year by $8 billion a year, through passing the Proposition 30 and Proposition 39