Read on Twitter
I can’t believe I have to write this in the middle of a pandemic when people are struggling but here we are.
Tuesday night 4/14, Berkeley will consider the following item https://www.cityofberkeley.info/Clerk/City_Council/2020/04_Apr/Documents/2020-04-14_Item_39__Inclusionary_Units_in_Qualified_Opportunity_Zones.aspx which has been opposed by affordable housing reps (SAHA & @BRIDGEhousing).
Tuesday night 4/14, Berkeley will consider the following item https://www.cityofberkeley.info/Clerk/City_Council/2020/04_Apr/Documents/2020-04-14_Item_39__Inclusionary_Units_in_Qualified_Opportunity_Zones.aspx which has been opposed by affordable housing reps (SAHA & @BRIDGEhousing).
Carpenters & building trades are also expressing serious concerns. Attorneys for multi-unit properties for students & others have also said this is an overall home killer. It was a bad policy before COVID-19 & it’s catastrophic policy now. Here is a LONG thread...
...of why I didn’t vote for it at the land use committee. A majority of Council has supported it by sponsorship or in committee. I’m hopeful that some will do the right thing and reverse their vote but I need you to continue your *polite* help.
This proposal mandates *only* building affordable housing within projects within opportunity zones (OZ) instead of paying into an Affordable Housing Trust Fund (HTF).
Look, Trump sucks and I hate his tax relief proposals. That’s not what this is about. This is more nuanced than that. Stick with me while I explain.
First, you have to understand how affordable housing works. Affordable [subsidized] housing is not the same thing as housing affordability. Anyway, I want them both.
When I was first elected, I was 100% in favor of mandating only affordable (subsidized) units in projects (IZ). I liked the integration component & the immediacy of this. I still do!
I soon learned that paying the fee is also a great option as well. Developers pay a fee into the Housing Trust Fund which non-profit affordable housing developers can leverage for other funding to create MORE affordable housing for very low-income or targeted populations.
You get more bang for your buck. $$ into the Housing Trust Fund can also help with preserving & preventing the loss of affordable housing. I now think including affordable units in projects (IZ) AND getting the HTF affordable fees are both good ideas.
THIS ITEM KILLS AFFORDABLE HOMES: This proposal mandates *only* IZ along all of Shattuck into the Downtown & parts of West Berkeley. Why is this problematic? We kiss goodbye to true majorly affordable housing because those fees are gone.
Guess what one of the main sources of affordable housing is? You guessed it! The Affordable Housing Trust Fund! That’s why affordable housing experts are against it.
THIS ITEM KILLS STUDENT AND YOUNG PROFESSIONAL HOMES: It also would prohibit other housing construction. I spoke to the law firm that represents multi-unit projects in Berkeley & they confirm this.
Their opportunity zone expert said those investments aren’t even occurring in Berkeley (& certainly are unlikely to now). They said, “Aside from the horrible optics, it will prevent investment in Berkeley [and] why is there a rush to advance this?”
Even if they want to build in this horrific environment, the IZ % is too high it will kill any projects.
Remember this? https://www.berkeleyside.com/2017/06/09/opinion-sounding-alarm-berkeleys-housing-proposals
I asked for a feasibility study which is currently underway. Why not wait until we hear from EXPERTS before implementing this?
Remember this? https://www.berkeleyside.com/2017/06/09/opinion-sounding-alarm-berkeleys-housing-proposals
I asked for a feasibility study which is currently underway. Why not wait until we hear from EXPERTS before implementing this?
THIS ITEM KILLS MISSING MIDDLE HOMES (~11-40 units): Missing middle homes will not happen in these areas because the legislation doesn’t JUST apply to projects/parcels that use OZ investors but the entire tract…
That means that off the corridors, smaller, more naturally affordable housing will die because it is financially infeasible to build subsidized units in smaller projects.
I’ve offered ways to amend this proposal with no such luck (and also I’m not clear whether they are good solutions). For instance, I thought we could allow fees but then direct that those fees only be used to create housing in those areas within the opportunity zone.
That could address gentrification (pro) but also exacerbate segregation because wealthy areas would remain exclusive with no affordable housing (con). Let me be clear, this proposal wouldn’t shift development to other areas because the majority of zoning doesn’t allow this.
So, why is this going forward when affordable housing experts, housing providers, policy experts & union leaders are against? Why is this going forward when so many people are struggling?
As reps from BRIDGE & SAHA said, this will lead to LESS affordable housing.
As reps from BRIDGE & SAHA said, this will lead to LESS affordable housing.
Many familiar faces showed up at the land use committee & this is what I heard. “We need affordable housing now (yes!).” “It takes too long to create affordable housing (yes)!” "We don't need market rate housing (well...)"
So... why did many of these same exact people fight
1) my measures to create a mini-streamlining effort for affordable housing?
2) oppose SB35 which has created more affordable housing in Berkeley than anything in the recent past?
1) my measures to create a mini-streamlining effort for affordable housing?
2) oppose SB35 which has created more affordable housing in Berkeley than anything in the recent past?
3) fight our plan to *STUDY* missing middle housing & change zoning so wealthy areas couldn’t restrict affordable housing?
4) demand 100% affordable housing at BART stations when taking away $ from Housing Trust Fund fees would ensure that wouldn't happen?!?
4) demand 100% affordable housing at BART stations when taking away $ from Housing Trust Fund fees would ensure that wouldn't happen?!?
5) oppose the Downtown Plan (which this threatens to undermine)?
6) sue a project that would have given the City $10.5 million dollars in affordable housing?
7) fight to landmark view corridors and air space?
6) sue a project that would have given the City $10.5 million dollars in affordable housing?
7) fight to landmark view corridors and air space?
8) fight against asking for a feasibility study to make sure we can get the most amount of money for affordable housing and allow projects to remain feasible?
9) fight against AB2923--housing on BART parking lots?
10) fight against SB1227--affordable student housing?
9) fight against AB2923--housing on BART parking lots?
10) fight against SB1227--affordable student housing?
11) fight against making it easier to build backyard cottages?
12) fight against adding an extra affordable unit in a project because it would create shadows?
Honestly, this list goes on and on and on.
12) fight against adding an extra affordable unit in a project because it would create shadows?
Honestly, this list goes on and on and on.
I truly believe in the good intentions and assume goodwill of people but I’m so beyond scratching my head that I’m pulling my hair out. I truly don’t get it. If we ALL want affordable housing, why aren’t we pursuing ways to create affordable housing?
So, please write to [email protected] or join us late Tuesday night at https://zoom.us/j/724407089 & ask them to vote no on 39 & say “Don’t kill affordable homes, especially in a crisis.” I have faith that people will do the right thing.
Let's stop this nonsense.
Let's stop this nonsense.
