Last week, I visited the Rules committee to present a memo that Councilmember Constant and I wrote asking that the Council hold off on adopting a citywide Inclusionary Housing policy.
I first blogged on this topic on December 17, 2007 in a post titled ”Coming Soon: Affordable Housing Citywide.” The Council is set to vote on Inclusionary Housing on Dec 9. The proposed policy would mandate that 20-25 percent of all new housing in San Jose be priced below market rate. If the Council adopts such a policy it may raise the price on the market-rate units, which squeezes the middle class. It also may affect the home resale values down the road. There were two other councilmembers (besides myself and Constant) who opposed pursuing this policy during our current housing meltdown.
As you may know, San Jose is and has been the leader in affordable housing. While other cities have done little for affordable housing, San Jose has gone above and beyond. San Jose continues to build housing while falling behind in funding for our basic services. Affordable housing does not pay property tax, park fees or building fees.
The San Jose/Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) goal was to build 26,114 units of housing in San Jose between 1996-2006. We actually built (drum roll) 30,572! (Plus we converted our tax base away by converting industrial land for housing.) Overall San Jose built 30,572 units of housing, of which more than a third are affordable—10,451 to be exact.
The Council has been led to believe that ABAG has authority in mandating that San Jose build housing. ABAG has no legal authority over San Jose’s land use. I am not quite sure why San Jose takes marching orders from ABAG. One would think that San Jose would instead do what is right for San Jose.
At the Rules Committee last week, we asked that Council have the opportunity to check in regarding this topic before there is a final vote so we can see what staff has compiled so far. The last time the Council discussed this issue was in June. I am appreciative that the Rules Committee supported having a special meeting on Nov. 10 at 1PM so that our memo could be heard by the Council.
The Rules Committee also discussed how the Housing Department chose to conduct outreach. The Housing Department spent the past four months having one-on-one meetings with affordable housing advocates and affordable housing developers. A few of these stakeholder meetings were open to the public—for those who knew about them. The outreach seems a bit backwards because the biggest stakeholders are the San Jose residents, but not much outreach has been done for them. Only now, after all the stakeholders have had input, is the Housing Department holding community meetings.
Last Tuesday night, I heard in passing that a community meeting was scheduled for residents feedback. This meeting is scheduled a mile from my home and was going to occur in less then a week. However, as the elected representative, I was not notified in advance and neither was Councilmember Constant. City staff shared that they sent the notice out to staff and others. This person missed my point which was that all councilmembers should be included with all outreach. I carry my BlackBerry so that I can be instantly notified. Not including Councilmembers on a simple e-mail builds distrust.
On October 31, I received a memo via email from City Manager Debra Figone that shared that moving forward, notices of all community meetings will be sent out via email or by a phone call to the councilperson. In addition, all community meetings will be listed on the city managers weekly report which is delivered via email to Councilmembers. Bravo to the City Manager on improving the process!
Meeting dates and times are as follows:
Nov. 3, Willow Glen Library, 6-8pm
Nov. 6, Edenvale Library, 6-8pm
Nov. 10, City Hall, 1-3pm & 6-8pm
Nov. 12, Berryessa Library, 6-8pm
Residents from Almaden Valley, Alum Rock, Cambrian, Evergreen and West San Jose will unfortunately need to drive across town.
Pierluigi,
“the biggest stakeholders are the residents”.
How true!
There are many San Jose homeowners who have been double-crossed by the City. Our tax dollars go toward programs that have the effect of suppressing the value of our own homes. More tax dollars are then spent on services that are used by the type of people who are inclined to accept handouts. Then there isn’t enough money left over to pay for the basic services that the taxpayers deserve.
Enough with the affordable housing.
Pierluigi-I share your frustration relative to the lack of notification to stakeholders before positions on various issues are determined. Frequently, as a retiree, city administration has failed to notify us while issues are being discussed, and we often find out, as you did, through “passing comments”. As you indicated, lack of notification leads to mistrust. Mistrust leads to reaction, rather than pro-action. We all too often find ourselves reacting to postions already established; “battle lines” being drawn; and little effective problem solving occurring.
We already have tens of thousands of unused affordable housing units in this city that regulations won’t let us bring to market. If we got rid of all the class- and race-based exlusionary zoning rules and let people simply rent out their unused bedrooms (or better yet build economical granny units in their back yards and rent those) our affordable housing issues could be solved in a flash. The idea that we have to build new units and regulate the new building is a classic case of an unholy alliance between Big Government and Big Money. Government wants to control Rich people want environmentally-unfriendly big houses and big yards all to themselves. Put ‘em together and you get more regulations that don’t fix the problem.
ABAG should not tell San Jose what to do. Other cities blow off regional government quotas all the time like Alameda and Marin. Thanks for standing up for San Jose.
I hope our council proceeds with caution regarding affordable housing ideas and policies.
We’ve seen the consequences of the federal government’s policies in our current housing problems. Let’s not make the mistake at a local level.
In decades past, large cities across the country subsidized “housing projects” which over time became slums. Again, let’s not make the same mistake in San Jose under the guise of “affordable housing.”
I raise the question every time the subject is mentioned…Why isn’t affordable housing managed at the county level? Every city could pay into the system and accept projects on an equal basis. And, San Jose residents (especially seniors) should be given priority for San Jose projects.
pete campbell
I know ‘affordable housing’ is yet another means for politicians to pander to minorities. An added bonus is it makes politicians and the self-loathing feel good about themselves.
But what’s the fiscal impact of affordable housing on the city?
Does the city really have the fiscal resources to spend on feel-good social engineering given all the other structural budget problems and unfunded liabilities?
Here are the two web links that were omitted from my post:
The Memo:
http://www.sanjoseca.gov/district6/documents/10-24-08InclusionaryHousingMemo_000.pdf
Dec 17, 2007 Blog:
http://www.sanjoseinside.com/sji/blog/entries/coming_soon_affordable_housing_citywide/
PO:
San Jose has plenty of affordable housing, its called foreclosures. The San Jose State IZ study pretty much proved it would be a bad policy for SJ. http://www.reason.org/ps318.pdf
Sunnyvale has had an IZ policy for about 30 years. Theirs was filled with corruption for the participants and also lack of oversight from their housing department.
#3
If we got rid of all the class- and race-based exlusionary zoning rules and let people simply rent out their unused bedrooms (or better yet build economical granny units in their back yards and rent those) our affordable housing issues could be solved in a flash.
This is one of the worst ideas ever presented on this site.
Your idea would absolutely ruin neighborhoods as garages are converted to housing, backyard shacks are created for housing, and neighborhoods become overcrowded with people and cars.
If you want to see the results of not enforcing code standards, along with unfettered, and unrestricted conversions for housing then please visit East San Jose.
Rather than question the concept of affordable housing, how about expanding the underlying philosophy into other areas of commerce?
If government authority can make residential developers sell one-quarter of their inventory below market rates, then why can’t it make luxury car dealers, jewelry stores, electronics outlets, and gourmet grocers do the same. I have no doubt that for every person who wants to own a home he or she can’t afford there is at least one short on cash consumer ready to take advantage of a discount on a Mercedes, string of pearls, big screen plasma, or deli platter from Cosentino’s.
Certainly there are folks in need of below market rate gardening services, housecleaning, and manual labor, so why shouldn’t the government compel the workforce of illegals to cut their wages on 25% of their jobs. And let’s not forget to get a contribution from cosmetic surgeons, hookers, and the Hair Club for Men, as there are no doubt women who are both underfunded and underdeveloped, blue-collar guys lusting for high-class call girls, and bald men on tight budgets.
Come to think of it, if we can get the government to dictate the value of everything, including our own labor, then we can kill capitalism outright and reach Obama’s glory land of redistribution the same way the Lenin did it, by redistributing the want.
‘Below market rate’ is a hilarious idea when you are talking about 20% of all new units. Heisenburg’s Principle applies here—BY BUILDING ALL THESE UNITS AT BELOW MARKET RATE, YOU ARE MANIPULATING MARKET RATE.
I am sick of politicians placating to certain groups of people…and affordable housing is just another one of those issues. Whether its race, gender, religion, income level, the industry you work in, etc. It makes me sick to my stomach to see how we are all now part of a specific group(s).
Liberals and conservative politicians alike are simply in the business of favoring certain groups over others; they just disagree on which ones. After all, it’s in their best interest to separate us by whatever category happens to sell in that election cycle.
I think we should all say enough is enough. How about a new idea? From now on, every law/rule/regulation/tax that gets passed has to apply equally to every citizen of the jurisdiction.
Enough is enough! No more manufactured race baiting, class warfare, segregation politics.
Basic services are going unfunded so we can run the Hayes Mansion and redistribute the wealth by providing housing with taxpayer $$.When will this B.S. end, and when will govt. provide the basic services all taxpayers deserve?
As one example—Alma/Minnesota between DMV and Bird Ave. is literally falling apart.
P.O.—what is the scheduled date (if any) for handling this real problem?
Post #9 is right. In San Jose there are tons of condos and houses available cheap, right now, as bank-owned properties. The City should not be involved in an Inclusionary Housing Policy, it’s insane.
If the goal is to generally help people afford homes, then subsidized housing doesn’t work.
It may make people feel better about the fact that poor people are being forced out of town. And it definitely gives politicians a chance to look like they are doing something.
But, no matter how many BMR units you designate, the real question is overall supply and demand. If you have one million families and 800,000 homes, you’re short 200,000 homes.
Even if you designate 90% as “affordable”, you’re still short the same number of homes, and the same number of families will be left out.
Its well put by FFF. Its preposterous that a city can mandate price levels on a piece of private property and not on other pieces of private property….why not regulate the affordability of gas, bread, internet prices, cell phone rates, Sharks Tickets, cars, etc…. The list is endless.
#6
Hi Pete,
Would be nice if other cities did more.
The argument that “if SJ does not build it no one else will” does not jive with me.
#14
Hi JMO,
please email me on this offline and I will get you an update. It is a long stretch from Meridian to First Street, I do know that Minnesota from Meridian to Hicks will have work done in mid-November.
Pier,
Given the unreasonable, unaffordable rents here in Santa Clara County, where do you think the working class poor should live?
Sorry, but I have watched Council closely since 1990, and don’t believe the motivations here, even if some facts are true. Developers want Inclusionary statutes removed to increase their profits and market attraction, period. They also want the least contribution to parks, roads, or anything else. Actually San Jose has exceeded other established Cities in the Bay Area with ALL HOUSING CATEGORIES! Until we limit development that can achieve local access to daily service and amenities we should stop all. Sustainable is the word of the day, remember? Sorry, my trust went out with Dando and Pandori long ago. JOBS.
Kathleen #21:
This issue isn’t where working class poor should live. That begs the question. The primary reasons rents or home costs are so high here are the price of land and the fact that there are more people who want to live here than there are dwellings to house them. It’s quite simple, actually—the entire Bay Area needs more homes if values/rents are to become more “reasonable”.
However, it is not the job of taxpayers to subsidize anyone’s home/rental costs.
Greg # 19 put it nicely. If you don’t have enough homes for the number of people who want to live in an area, you can call the homes whatever you want (affordable, market rate, BMR), but you’ll still be short of homes.
#22-JMO,
I disagree. Last year, rents were much, much lower than they are now. Landlords were practically begging renters to move in. It wasn’t until shortly after the mortgage melt down that rents soared out of sight. I think GREED is why. You can debate the issue of affordable housing all you want, but elderly, disabled, and low income people can’t live on the streets simply because supply and demand, and capitalism is the American way.
I’d like Pier to answer the question of where poor working class people are supposed to live.
FinFan is my hero.
pgp3- San Jose does not own enough vacant land to make a dent in the housing shortage. We’re short about 150,000 homes. That’s 13,000 acres of trailer park, or about 20 square miles.
Kathleen- I’m not saying we should turn people out onto the street.
I’m saying we are already turning people out onto the street, and that housing subsidies don’t help a bit.
#24 blustered from The Peoples’ Republic of Santa Cruz: “Find a side street or alternate route in better condition.” And so, Chairman pgp3, when all the roads are allowed to crumble, then what? Your sterling idea is to just keep using alternate routes and let everything crumble? That’s sharp, Einstein.
Do you work here in the flatlands on this side of the hill, then retreat to your haven over the hill? Earn here, use our infrastructure, but pay no taxes towards its maintenance? Put a sock in it, ppg3, unless you’re paying the freight over here.
Folks,
Everyone should be happy to have a housing crisis, not enough homes or apartments, too many workers, long commutes, too many immigrants.
The USA is a dynamic country! People are ready and willing to move to places offering better opportunities to advance. Apparently San Jose and Silicon Valley is such a place.
You’ll never have enough housing stock to satisfy all the newcomers seeking gainful employment (and pleasant weather). Long, miserable commutes are part of the deal.
As long as Silicon Valley is able to attract highly educated outsiders to remain in the forefront of innovation this affordable housing crisis will remain. Where would SV be without Chinese, Indians (from India), Chinese, Brits, Bechtolsheimers of Germany, Israelis, Russians, a Hungarian or two, and a few hard working imports from Iowa, Nebraska, Indiana, etc.?
If you want low priced housing, go ahead and move to Detroit! If you’re lucky you might get a job at Ford, GM, or what used to be #3.
The best thing that ever happened here in Calif is Prop 13. With fixed retirement income I could never afford to remain in my house paying property taxes based on current value. Whenever property is sold taxes go up to current value. My mom is not complaining living in a Section 8 studio in a newer, well maintained apartment complex for about $300/month.
The problem is commercial property that seldom changes owners, huge parcels taken over by land trusts (then sold to State Parks and Rec), government owned housing or non-profits, churches, etc. that pay little or no property taxes.
The simplest way to expand San Jose housing is to take surplus city land and open trailer parks. The city only provides utilites, outside fencing, access roads, meeting room, laundry, park area if there are kids: tenants buy their own mobile home.
Politician promising no tax increases while handing out subsidies to large corporations, financial institutions, large insurance companies, while waging wars in unsustainable areas around the world won’t help our economy in the long term.
#14 JMO is crying in the milk about road conditions on Alma Ave. You have choices! Find a side street or alternate route in better condition.
Rich lawyer JMO could pay to have Alma Ave. repaved. Surely the city would put up a sign similiar to those on freeways being delittered, “Repaved, courtesy of JMO” ha ha
(Still waiting for JMO response #33 of earlier topic)
PGP3
I just got the new ‘Real Yellow Pages”. It is at least 20% smalkler than last years edition. What’s that tell you about the state of the economy?
The Housing Department needs to answer our questions.
Outreach meetings held by the Housing Departmentduring the day or at 6PM make it difficult for residents to attend meetings.
Where is the Money?
Why is the Housing Department`s reports that we need being delivered November 12th,well after the last outreach meeting.
It`s what they don`t tell us that can hurt us!
#26 JMO,
Sorry, I never worked in San Jose, only attended SJSU for umpteen semesters. For 3 years commuted to Sunnyvale and Mtn. some 30 years ago when gas was cheap and before center barriers on #17. Santa Cruz to Maude Ave. never took more than 45 minutes.
I replied to your post earlier but it was excised.
Problem with you people on SJInside living in San Jose is you can’t see the forest for the trees. Us outsiders often have clearer visions.
For a million plus city, San Jose posesses a most provincial mindset. You got a long way to go before it’s “World Class”.
You JMO seem to be #1 when it comes to “Not in MY Neighborhood” and “I got mine, hell with you”.
Every time I posted I mentioned good things about San Jose: The Tech, Rosicrucian, Winchester, Great AM, Intel, Children’s, Comp History museums, Old Town, and Fry’s. Also great transport hub with buses (17Express), trolleys, Caltrain, Amtrak. My only bitch was that in all of Silicon Valley there’s no large urban youth hostel that would attract young well-educated international tourists.
You moan about some lousy potholes on Alma Ave. You should complain to SJ City Public Works. TMcE ain’t going to go and fill these holes. He’s having a good time with family at his SC beach condo.
As a top lawyer and former mover and shaker you might set your sights a little higher.
Rather doubt this will be posted.
From now on I got better things to do with my time than read and post to this blog.
pgp3
#29- pqp3,
From time to time SJI has had technical trouble and posts have not appeared. It happened to my fiancé last week. I don’t think your posts were deliberately “excised.”
I very much enjoy your comments and I hope you continue to blog here. The difference of opinion is something I value, and it certainly makes me think about the views I hold to.
pgp 3—why don’t you start a Santa Cruz Inside if you don’t like SJI or its contributors?
And for someone who doesn’t know me, to call me a NIMBY is way ignorant.
I did the hostel thing in Europe over four decades ago. It is no longer my desire (roughing it to me is a Hilton Garden Inn or a Holiday Inn Express), but I have zero objections to such sites. They perform a necessary function, and help the financially challenged see the world.
Just ‘cuz I won’t stay in one as a 60-something person doesn’t mean I’m against them.
Too much sensimilla cloud your reasoning ability???
I don`t see any hostels named after TMcE,Minetta or Diridon. There is talk of statues of our civic leaders though.
pgp3 raises a valid question about whether city zoning policies prevent hostels.
It’s certainly true that cities bend over backward to allow daily accomodations for the wealthy. (Fairmont, for example.)
If the city strictly enforces rules for hostels, but rewrites the rules and gives giant subsidies for hotels, then there is a clear double standard: Daily accomodations for the rich get much more favorable treatment that daily accomodations for the poor.
Dear JMO, #31
Never slept in a Hilton or Holiday Inn, wouldn’t know how rough that could be.
Never suggested that you stay at hostels since you now can afford much better.
Having stayed in hostels long ago I hoped you would not just have “zero objections” to Silicon Valley Hostel but would actively support establishing one in San Jose.
As a long established attorney with many highly placed connections you could get the ball rolling.
Some time ago one of Barry’s boys offered an empty frat house behind SJSU for hostel use. With 30 rooms and easy to clean multi-stall bathrooms, commercial kitchen, large dining and living rooms, manager apartment, plenty parking, fire alarm, near busses, this would make a perfect hostel. But the City turned me down since it’s in a Frat zone. Must be paid by the week or month, not daily. B&B is five rooms max. No variances allowed.
Other place was next to SPSQ, above Starbucks, but was very dumpy and would require many modifications for HI-affiliated hostel.
There are plenty of high-priced business hotels in Silicon Valley, but where are any low priced accommodations for young international tourists like you were some 40 years ago? Where are school groups that wish to visit the Tech, Comp History, Intel, Rosicrucian museums, or Winchester staying?
Who puts up visiting sports teams? Where do company interns and trainees stay? What about Norcal vets here more than a day at PA VA hospital?
TMcE got his name on a building, Mineta on an airport, Diridon on a rail station, all are still alive. Where’s your name on a building??
pgp3
pgp3 #32.
First and foremost, I don’t know how you got my cell phone #, but stop calling it and leaving me voicemails. I don’t need to be annoyed by an anonymous stranger.
Second, I have ZERO highly placed connections. Indeed, to my knowledge, I have no connections at all.
The San Jose area saw the third-largest drop in rental prices in the nation during the fourth quarter of 2008, according to a report released Thursday by RealFacts Inc.
Novato-based RealFacts said rents declined in nearly every metropolitan statistical area in the country between September and December of 2008. The year‐end survey found the highest rate of decline in Miami‐Ft. Lauderdale, Fla. (2.4 percent in the 4th quarter), Riverside‐San Bernardino (2.4 percent), San Jose (2 percent) and Oxnard‐Thousand Oaks‐Ventura (1.8 percent).
In the San Jose-Sunnyvale-Santa Clara area the average rent was $1,674, the most expensive of the MSAs tabulated in the state. The occupancy rate was 94.8 percent. Coming in second in price was Santa Cruz-Watsonville at $1,637.The occupancy rate there led the state at 96.5 percent.
Nationally, the average rent for an apartment once again dropped below $1,000, declining from $1002 in September to $993 in December.
The decline in rents was matched by a decline in occupancy. The occupancy rate for apartments in the United States dropped to 92.2 percent in December, down from 92.9 percent in September. That decline in occupancy meant that 10,000 apartment units were vacant as the year closed.
The RealFacts survey covers an inventory of nearly 3.2 million units of rental housing in 60 MSAs. In 2008, only 9,248 units were added to the supply. This compares to an average for the previous 10 years of about 65,000 units per year of new construction.
#36- Rents drop in SJ,
So what, they are still off the charts. I work with affordable housing groups. More and more people are leaving this area, or moving in together because $1300.00 a month for a one bedroom, or STUDIO is still unaffordable.
ghjgssruy7 ghjgssruy7 http://jkhjfsfww.com ghjgssruy7