Whether a home loan program for San Mateo city employees could have a meaningful impact on their home-buying prospects was up for debate among city officials last month as they took a closer look at measures aimed at assisting employees in a pricey housing market.
The City Council’s Oct. 15 discussion of a pilot down payment assistance program and changes to its relocation benefits followed a December 2017 survey of city employees indicating mounting interest in housing ownership programs and several challenging months of recruiting city employees to a city with rising housing costs, said City Manager Larry Patterson.
Though officials got a first glimpse of housing assistance measures in May when the employee survey results were available, the question of how employees will find affordable housing continues to loom over hiring processes at all levels, said Patterson.
“For every recruitment we have, and every distinct department head or senior employee that we have, the housing issue remains challenging for us,” he said, according to a video of the meeting.
Councilmembers considered a $1 million pilot program providing some 10 full-time employees a $100,000 loan to assist in their down payments for San Mateo County homes priced under $1.5 million. Because employees who would likely be eligible for the program could earn more than 120 percent average median income, officials would use funds from the city’s General Fund with no income restriction to back the pilot, said city housing specialist Scott Prowse.
In the proposed pilot, interested employees would be required to attend a workshop and would be chosen by a lottery, which would be followed by a set timeframe in which selected employees would purchase their homes, said Prowse. Whether officials opted for a program that deferred repayment for five years and required employees to pay some $500 a month or a deferred loan for 30 years to be paid back at resale with an appreciation share would determine how quickly the funds could be made available again in the city’s housing fund, said Prowse.
For Councilman Eric Rodriguez, whether other cities in the county had implemented and been successful with a similar pilot program and what the goals would be loomed large. Acknowledging the interest among employees for housing assistance and the high cost of housing in the area, Rodriguez voiced concern about whether the pilot would adequately address the needs indicated by employees in the December 2017 survey.
“Do we really think we’re going to be able to make a significant dent for all the people who want this?” he asked.
Recommended for you
City Housing Manager Sandy Council said San Mateo County has launched a program for its employees and South San Francisco officials are currently considering a program as well. She added Foster City officials have also discussed it but have put the conversations on hold. Based on the county’s experience with its program, Council expected a niche group of employees to be eligible for the program given the combined household incomes needed to come up with a down payment and the challenge of purchasing a property. Though the pilot program may not entirely lift the pressure on employees as they search for housing, it may help a subset find housing, said Council.
In response to Councilman Joe Goethals’ question about whether new multi-unit housing developments include more apartments for rent or for-sale condominiums, Council said developers have been favoring rental units over condominium units in recent years. As the housing units planned for the massive, mixed-use Bay Meadows development take shape, some 30 below-market-rate, for-sale units have become available, she said.
Though Council and Patterson noted developers have largely been focused on rental units recently to be able to make the financing of projects work, Goethals wondered how officials could encourage them to explore including affordable condominiums in their projects.
“I would like to see more condo units that could fit into this program that would serve city employees who could get our matching funds and get into an affordable unit and have that equity piece to it,” he said.
Also up for review were changes to a loan program officials authorized in 1997 to assist employees with relocation, move-in or purchase closing costs for a rental or owned homes within the city limits. Though a maximum loan of $7,500 is currently available to employees, staff proposed increasing the maximum loan to $10,000 to account for the rise in housing costs in the city. Staff also proposed expanding the geographic limits for the loan program to homes in San Mateo County to include more affordable areas for employees to live.
For Mayor Rick Bonilla, implementing a survey aimed at a gauging how many employees would be interested in a specific form of housing assistance, such as the county’s down payment assistance, could be helpful in determining whether it’s worth it for officials to focus on one or two programs. Given the challenges that many face with regard to finding housing, Bonilla voiced concern the number of employees interested in a down payment assistance program could only help a small subset of eligible employees.
“I really don’t like the idea of offering this pilot and maybe that one size doesn’t fit that many so it looks like you’re just helping out a few,” he said.
any thoughts on assisting long time citizens who are not government employees or is the just more of government leaders taking care of their own. It is unbelievable who this is looking to help and who it isn't.
San Mateo needs to kill measure P and legalize more housing for everyone. Then we wouldn't have to make special carveouts for employees. If the citizens choose to not legalize housing they should not get quality employees who would prefer live somewhere they can afford inland.
Keep the discussion civilized. Absolutely NO
personal attacks or insults directed toward writers, nor others who
make comments. Keep it clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd,
racist or sexually-oriented language. Don't threaten. Threats of harming another
person will not be tolerated. Be truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone
or anything. Be proactive. Use the 'Report' link on
each comment to let us know of abusive posts. PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK. Anyone violating these rules will be issued a
warning. After the warning, comment privileges can be
revoked.
Please purchase a Premium Subscription to continue reading.
To continue, please log in, or sign up for a new account.
We offer one free story view per month. If you register for an account, you will get two additional story views. After those three total views, we ask that you support us with a subscription.
A subscription to our digital content is so much more than just access to our valuable content. It means you’re helping to support a local community institution that has, from its very start, supported the betterment of our society. Thank you very much!
(4) comments
any thoughts on assisting long time citizens who are not government employees or is the just more of government leaders taking care of their own. It is unbelievable who this is looking to help and who it isn't.
Yep, fully agree. Micro managing a "select" group. Typical of California.
San Mateo needs to kill measure P and legalize more housing for everyone. Then we wouldn't have to make special carveouts for employees. If the citizens choose to not legalize housing they should not get quality employees who would prefer live somewhere they can afford inland.
Interestingly, City Employees prefer single family, according to the study session video.
Welcome to the discussion.
Log In
Keep the discussion civilized. Absolutely NO personal attacks or insults directed toward writers, nor others who make comments.
Keep it clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
Don't threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK.
Anyone violating these rules will be issued a warning. After the warning, comment privileges can be revoked.