The state’s Article 34 is a relic of the past and should be eliminated. It states that additional affordable housing units can only be built with public funds if passed through a voter initiative. The original intent of the legislation was to provide a way for voters to approve since such housing could be considered infrastructure, yet, it limited the ability to provide low-income housing.
There is a movement to eliminate it at the state level, however, Measure AA in South San Francisco is using the legislation to see if voters would be interested in creating publicly-funded affordable housing.
Currently, there is a system in place for cities to assist with such developments. They can contribute money or land to nonprofits that combine it with other sources of money to make developments happen. It works.
But this measure would also provide the flexibility for the city to do some of the work itself or even purchase buildings for conversion to permanently affordable homes. Other cities have done variations of this either through considering a special district or providing loans for rehabilitation in exchange for assurances the rent will remain low for certain periods of time. There is a very real opportunity for the city to use its affordable housing money from commercial linkage fees to purchase and rehabilitate naturally occurring affordable housing in aging apartment buildings and keep the rents low.
Recommended for you
However, the primary purpose of this measure is to provide the city flexibility in creating its own low-income housing. It’s also important to note that someone can make up to $104,400 a year and be eligible for certain types of below-market units. That’s an indication putting another tool in the toolbox is necessary.
The city has $120 million in its special housing fund. While not all may be used for this, it has that potential.
Measure AA aims to build 1% of the existing housing units in the city, which equates to 250 per year and around 2,000 in the next eight years. This is a modest amount to start, and it is possible for it to build from there if this policy is effective.
Considering the need for new affordable housing units, this is a good measure to add for its flexibility and limited cost to the average resident.
Vote NO on AA as its passage will result in a government-run housing effort. Now how often has a government-run program been fiscally responsible or efficient? Think of the train-to-nowhere or the $7 billion wasted on half a bridge, the majority of which is a giant on-ramp.
Or Terence, one can think of the hundreds of thousands of efficiently run and safe public housing units in the United States that allow 1.2 million American households to survive and have a chance to get out of poverty. One can also think of the more than 80 public housing units already in South San Francisco that are a stone's throw from SSF's proposed public housing and allow families to live and work in the expensive Bay Area. Or, as Terence seems to think, we can let those families wither away with no help.
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!
(2) comments
Vote NO on AA as its passage will result in a government-run housing effort. Now how often has a government-run program been fiscally responsible or efficient? Think of the train-to-nowhere or the $7 billion wasted on half a bridge, the majority of which is a giant on-ramp.
Or Terence, one can think of the hundreds of thousands of efficiently run and safe public housing units in the United States that allow 1.2 million American households to survive and have a chance to get out of poverty. One can also think of the more than 80 public housing units already in South San Francisco that are a stone's throw from SSF's proposed public housing and allow families to live and work in the expensive Bay Area. Or, as Terence seems to think, we can let those families wither away with no help.
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.