In response to John Ebneter’s guest perspective (“Affordable housing in my backyard” in the Jan. 23 edition of the Daily Journal), Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) in backyards is an interesting solution to the county’s growing housing crisis, but to suggest that multi-million-dollar-homeowners should receive government funding for what is ultimately a personal source of income is irresponsible.
Using public funds for this project would be a kickback for those who already have the most housing security, and would do more for existing homeowners than low-income renters or first-time buyers, who should be the only priority when it comes to affordable housing. The millions in funds Ebneter is suggesting be spent on this project would be better suited and more efficiently spent directly on the construction of affordable apartments and condominiums, with adequate parking and safety measures, unlike the suggested backyard units. If a homeowner in San Mateo County wishes to invest in an ADU on their own property, that should be their initial cost to bear because they will be the ones profiting from rental income.
As for families and individuals looking to rent or buy in San Mateo County, ADUs are not sustainable in the long term. If a tenant never becomes a property owner, their child will also live their life as a renter, but a landlord’s child will automatically become a owner through inheritance. This property gap continues generation after generation, but ideally would be lessened if low-income renters could eventually become homeowners themselves, which the ADUs would only inhibit.
(1) comment
Thanks for pointing out that government should not interfere with private property.
The same could be said for the many millions of public funds that we have already spent on low cost housing. This all reeks of growing government intrusion into the private sector.
There is no need to worry about any ADUs being built and rented out at all. Between the exorbitant cost to build and the housing--strangling regulations being pushed by the Bay Area Regional compact, being a housing provider is a fool's game. No one will want to take on heavy debt to have strangers on their property while giving up their property rights.
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.