LA met its market rate housing goal in 2016 but won't hit its low income goal 'til 2040. This project would add 200 units, only 10 affordable. That ratio should be flipped. How can anyone scoff at demanding more, including a radically different way to finance affordable housing?https://twitter.com/DavidZahniser/status/1162089967645941760 …
-
Show this thread
-
Replying to @LeeHepner
Pretty much all the current ways that CA cities have to raise $ for affordable housing are structurally dependent on a parallel 10-1000X increase in the value of the existing housing market. Bonds only grows larger w/ more property tax revenues to bond against, inclusionary, etc.
2 replies 0 retweets 9 likes -
Replying to @kimmaicutler
Well, at least Prop 13 reform is beginning to look like more than a mere pipe dream...
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @LeeHepner @kimmaicutler
really? Did I hear that the ballot measure is going to be postponed but improved?
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @markasaurus @LeeHepner
it's polling well and at the same time, the re-filing was expected and planned for.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
that said split roll in and of itself doesn't solve the housing crisis and it may aggravate things in the medium term because it will make it even *more* attractive for CA cities to build office and not housing.
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
Right, it's a revenue play -- it only impacts housing insofar as the resulting $ get ploughed back into affordable housing. But a success would almost certainly prompt serious campaigns to whittle away at the other parts of prop 13, no?
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Cautious of the “revenue play” characterization in light of fundamental fairness motive, but yeah. Curious, how does it incent office dev in the mid-term? Most criticism characterizes it as a threat to industry growth, but maybe I’m missing the galaxy brain implications.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
The theory is that if local government gets more net tax from office space than residential, it will have an incentive to zone for more office space than residential.
2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
they already do that. Look at what San Mateo County did. And SF effectively did that this past decade.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
it may not be a conscious choice by a single premeditated actor, but it's just waaaaay easier to get office through process than housing.
-
-
Replying to @kimmaicutler @bedwardstiek and
Like Dennis Richards being super excited about this office project that would contain 5,000 workers. Can you imagine Dennis being excited about any handful of projects that would house those workers? No. They'll just gentrify Oakland or Sunnyside.https://www.sfchronicle.com/business/article/SF-approves-massive-office-project-first-in-13952756.php …
0 replies 0 retweets 2 likesThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
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.