An entire committee of non-profit and market-Rate developers studied that issue for a year and found that 25%, which was an arbitrary number she picked because it sounded good, wasn’t actually feasible. http://sfcontroller.org/sites/default/files/Documents/Economic%20Analysis/Final%20Inclusionary%20Housing%20Report%20February%202017.pdf …
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
-
Replying to @kimmaicutler @daniscoville and
The proposal, in addition to rising construction costs, contributed to new proposals falling to a six-year low so now that production is going to fall to half of what it was in the last few years, rents will probably be rising again barring a recessionhttp://www.socketsite.com/archives/2018/05/proposed-development-in-san-francisco-tracking-a-six-year-low.html …
2 replies 5 retweets 58 likes -
Replying to @kimmaicutler @daniscoville and
Breed also tried to skew sub-quotas of the overall percentage away from low-income levels and toward moderate ones, basically robbing Peter to pay Paul.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @uhshanti @daniscoville and
low-income and very low-income subsidies come from dedicated federal programs. There are no such programs that subsidize moderate income, so it falls to the city to take it upon itself, if it wants to do that.
2 replies 1 retweet 24 likes -
Replying to @kimmaicutler @uhshanti and
If you only want a city of VLI, LI and market-rate, then go do that. That's been prog standard for decades. So *shruggie*
2 replies 0 retweets 20 likes -
Replying to @kimmaicutler @uhshanti and
Maybe we shouldn't have the legislative branch arbitrarily raising or lowering inclusionary rates for political theater, just like we don't have Congress raising or lowering interest rates whenever it's electorally convenient. Maybe minimum wage should also be indexed to CPI!pic.twitter.com/AfrVNxkaN7
3 replies 1 retweet 37 likes -
Replying to @kimmaicutler @uhshanti and
June 2016’s Prop C initially set the rate at 25%, but remember how it also created a technical advisory committee to study the issue for months and led to a bipartisan compromise on lowering the rates to 20-22% with gradual, predictable increases through 2027? Not so arbitrary.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @JspiderSF @uhshanti and
Kim-Mai Cutler Retweeted 🇧🇧 🇹🇹 🇺🇸 👨👩👧👦 🐕 🌉
Hm, someone who actually builds affordable housing commenting on the outcome of Prop C:https://twitter.com/eparillon/status/1000792319086411776?s=21 …
Kim-Mai Cutler added,
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @kimmaicutler @uhshanti and
Above you imply that the Technical Advisory Committee study was a rebuke of Jane's Prop C. But Prop C created the TAC for that exact purpose of refining the numbers of Prop C. The initial 25% was always a temporary rate. The way you use it to attack Jane seems disingenuous.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
There was an entire over-the-top political fight after the TAC recommendations. Should be given to the controller without some BOS back and forth theatrics.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.