September 29, 2005
AND REDDER:
Cut-Rate Homes For Middle Class Are Catching On (DEAN E. MURPHY, 9/29/05, NY Times)
Some middle-class families are buying homes at budget prices made possible by government agencies, private developers, not-for-profit groups and employers.Affordable housing, once shorthand for low rents for the poor, is being stretched like never before to include homeownership for people who are more likely to have Starbucks cash cards than food stamps in their wallets. These middle-income earners, priced out of homes from Burlington, Vt., to Santa Fe, N.M., are being offered financial breaks to live in hot real-estate markets and near their jobs.
"Our thinking is that a healthy middle class is important to the city," said Geoffrey Lewis, assistant director of policy at the Boston Redevelopment Authority, which has overseen the building of hundreds of units reserved for middle-income earners. "We want to keep these people in Boston; they are the glue in the neighborhoods and the glue in the economy as well."
Sometimes called low-cost, work force or inclusionary housing, the cut-price units are most popular in places "suffering from success," as one study described the cities where real estate costs outpaced incomes and where government officials, businesses and housing advocates were struggling to increase homeownership for all but the rich.
Unlike traditional government programs intended for the most disadvantaged, the emphasis is on people with full-time jobs who earn too much to qualify for federal assistance but too little to obtain a conventional mortgage, at least not in the cities or neighborhoods where they want to live.
Typically, those household incomes are 80 percent to 120 percent of the median income, which, in expensive metropolitan areas like San Francisco, Boston and New York, can extend into six figures for a family of four.
Nicolas P. Retsinas, director of the Joint Center for Housing Studies at Harvard, said, "In many places where housing costs have escalated, that historical social contract appears to have been voided, the contract that if you work you can find a decent place to live."
The price breaks are usually not achieved through direct subsidies but a range of cost-cutting programs, including cities making zoning changes for developers, providing land at reduced cost, expediting approvals of building plans and allowing the construction of bigger and more expensive homes elsewhere. [...]
"By creating ownership, you are giving moderate income residents a financial stake in their neighborhoods, so they benefit from the improvement rather than be hurt by it," said Shaun Donovan, the housing commissioner in New York.
The spread of the phenomenon is too new and dispersed to be quantified, government officials and housing advocates say, and so far it occupies only a small piece of the nation's affordable housing pie. Still, it is catching the attention of home builders, city planners, educators and business people across the nation, leading to workshops and seminars on the subject as well as a spate of local laws that make it simpler for developers to offer the units.
This is the kind of cycle of virtue that warms the cockles of a conservative heart.
MORE:
Norwich Selectboard Backs Affordable Homes (Mark Davis, 9/29/05, Valley News)
The selectboard formally urged the town's planning commission last night to move more quickly to pave the way for an affordable housing development.Posted by Orrin Judd at September 29, 2005 2:23 PMAfter a lengthy discussion, selectmen decided that despite some concern about the propriety of meddling with another committee, they needed to nudge commissioners to approve a boundary line change needed to make it possible for developers to bring an affordable housing project to a gentrified community that has long discussed the need for such homes.
“For many any years, we've said, ‘Oh, we must have affordable housing in the town',” Selectboard Chairwoman Alison May said. “A selectboard has never taken a real lead on this. Here is an opportunity. I think this is a chance for us to take some real leadership.
The selectboard's decision comes at a crucial time for affordable housing in Norwich.
Twin Pines Housing Trust of White River Junction and the Burlington-based Housing Vermont want to build 28 single-family homes and apartments on the old Agway property off Route 5, about a half mile from downtown. But before the project can move forward, the planning commission must vote to extend the boundary line of the town's designated residential area to include the Agway property.
Twin Pines' board recently told the commission that the approval must come soon, because the property will surely attract other bidders.
I'd have to see the specifics (NY Times registration required, no thanks), but this doesn't seem to make sense economically.
If you limit costs for developers, that doesn't have anything to do with what they sell the units for (much as the cost of extraction doesn't have much to do with the price of oil on the world market). So they are either restricting the pool of buyers, or capping the allowable selling price, or both. In which case the new owners don't stand to gain much from neighborhood improvements, as least as far as real estate appreciation goes.
There is also the question of how property taxes are to be assessed in the future. For those of us who don't move every year, the higher assessed value of our real estate does nothing but bring a higher annual tax bill. Will it be any different for these "special" families?
Posted by: HT at September 29, 2005 2:55 PMThis study seems to take into account a relatively small section of the housing and job market, and is only making very short term observations.
What about the small cities in the northeast that have suffered through outsourcing for the past few decades?
And I don't see how this has to do with conservatism; allowing the developers to rape and pillage would be conservatism. This is responsive government.
What about the small cities in the northeast that have suffered through outsourcing for the past few decades?
Past few decades? The only outsourcing that goes back a few decades is outsourcing to Sun Belt states with lower taxes and right-to-work. Is that what you mean?
And I don't see how this has to do with conservatism; allowing the developers to rape and pillage would be conservatism.
Well, from the article: "including cities making zoning changes for developers, providing land at reduced cost, expediting approvals of building plans and allowing the construction of bigger and more expensive homes elsewhere." Hard to call that liberalism, and it includes a lot of things that conservatives call for.
Hey, if liberals are for easier zoning and expediting approval of building plans too, that's great and good for the country. But you don't get to define what conservatism is when you're not one.
Posted by: John Thacker![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://brothersjuddblog.com/nav-commenters.gif)
at September 29, 2005 3:36 PM
Cockled warmed by criminals being pardoned, kids?
Justice Department Releases List of Pardons Granted by President Bush
9/28/2005 4:23:00 PM
To: National Desk
Contact: U.S. Department of Justice, Office Public Affairs, 202-514-2008 or 202-514-1888, Web: http://www.USDOJ.gov
WASHINGTON, Sept. 28 /U.S. Newswire/ -- President George W. Bush granted pardons to the following 14 individuals:
-- Gene Armand Bridger, Elkhart, Ind.
Offense: Conspiracy to commit mail fraud, and mail fraud; 18 U.S.C. 2, 371, and 1341.
Sentence: May 29, 1963; Western District of Michigan; five years probation
-- Cathryn Iline Clasen-Gage, Rockwall, Texas
Offense: Misprision of a felony; 18 U.S.C. 4.
Sentence: Aug. 21, 1992; Northern District of Texas; 18 months imprisonment and one year of supervised release.
-- Thomas Kimble Collinsworth, Buckner, Ark.
Offense: Receipt of a stolen motor vehicle that had been transported in interstate commerce; 18 U.S.C. 2313.
Sentence: Aug. 22, 1989; Western District of Arkansas; three years probation and a $5,000 fine.
-- Morris F. Cranmer, Jr., Little Rock, Ark.
Offense: Making materially false statements to a federally-insured institution; 18 U.S.C. 1014.
Sentence: March 30, 1988; Eastern District of Arkansas; Nine months incarceration in a community correctional facility, with the condition that he work for the Arkansas Department of Health.
-- Rusty Lawrence Elliott, Mount Pleasant, Tenn.
Offense: Making counterfeit Federal Reserve notes; 18 U.S.C. 471.
Sentence: April 26, 1991; Western District of Missouri; 12 months and one day imprisonment; two years supervised release, and a $500 fine.
-- Adam Wade Graham, Salt Lake City, Utah
Offense: Conspiracy to deliver 10 or more grams of LSD; 21 U.S.C. 841(a)(1), 841(b)(1)(A)(v), and 846.
Sentence: Nov. 23, 1992; District of Wyoming; 30 months imprisonment, later reduced to 11 months and 21 days of imprisonment, and five years supervised release conditioned upon performance of 250 hours community service.
-- Rufus Edward Harris, Canon, Ga.
Offenses: 1.) Possession of tax-unpaid whiskey; 26 U.S.C. 5205 and 2604. 2.) Possession and selling tax-unpaid whiskey; 26 U.S.C. 5601, 5604, and 5205.
Sentence: 1.) June 17, 1963; Middle District of Georgia; two years imprisonment. 2.) May 28, 1970, amended July 24, 1973; Northern District of Georgia; five years incarceration subsequently reduced to two years probation.
-- Jesse Ray Harvey, Scarbro, W.Va.
Offense: Property damage by use of explosives and destruction of an energy facility; 18 U.S.C. 844(i) and 1366(a).
Sentence: April 17, 1990; Southern District of West Virginia; 25 months imprisonment and three years supervised release.
-- Larry Paul Lenius, Moorhead, Minn.
Offense: Conspiracy to distribute cocaine; 21 U.S.C. 846.
Sentence: Sept. 29, 1989, District of North Dakota; 36 months probation conditioned upon three months service in community confinement and payment of $2,500 in restitution.
-- Larry Lee Lopez, Bokeelia, Fla.
Offense: Conspiracy to import marijuana; 21 U.S.C. 952 and 953.
Sentence: July 19, 1985; Middle District of Florida; three years probation.
-- Bobbie Archie Maxwell, Lansing, Mich.
Offense: Mailing a threatening letter; 18 U.S.C. 876.
Sentence: Sept. 6, 1962; Middle District of Georgia; 12 months probation.
-- Denise Bitters Mendelkow, Salt Lake City, Utah
Offense: Embezzlement by a bank employee; 18 U.S.C. 656.
Sentence: May 21, 1981; District of Utah; two years probation conditioned upon payment of restitution.
-- Michael John Pozorski, Schofield, Wis.
Offense: Unlawful possession of an unregistered firearm; 26 U.S.C. 5861(d) and 5871.
Sentence: Sept. 14, 1988; Western District of Wisconsin; four years probation conditioned upon 90 days residence in a community treatment center and payment of a $750 fine.
-- Mark Lewis Weber, Sherwood, Ark.
Offense: Selling Quaalude tablets (one specification), selling, using, and possessing marijuana (three specifications), U.C.M.J., Articles 92 and 134.
Sentence: Aug. 20, 1981; United States Air Force general court-martial convened at Little Rock Air Force Base, Little Rock, Arkansas; 30 months confinement at hard labor, forfeiture of $334 pay per month for 30 months, reduction to the rank of airman basic, and a dishonorable discharge.
Posted by: Rick Perlsein at September 29, 2005 4:38 PMhey Rick -
Either comment on the relevant topic or get your own blog please. And no one reads comments that are so long as to require a scroll down.
Posted by: Shelton at September 29, 2005 4:48 PMWhat, pardons of 14 people who have already served their sentences, according to what you've posted? And without any sort of full discussion of the cases involved and why they were pardoned? Several of whom seem to be in for petty drug charges, and one who was a moonshiner from the '70s? Seems like all of them served their sentences years ago, have had good behavior since, and got their names cleared so that they no longer have to be felons.
I'm supposed to be upset by this?
Posted by: John Thacker at September 29, 2005 4:53 PM
Rick:
I agree that he's been far too reluctant to pardon folks because of the Clinton dust-up. This parsimonious list is unbecoming a Christian, but I'd think even you'd favor pardoning mine workers, no?
Posted by: oj at September 29, 2005 5:06 PMRick: Have you ever actually had a conversation with a conservative?
Posted by: David Cohen at September 29, 2005 5:48 PMDavid:
He interviewed me by phone for a story he was writing about how religious conservatives believe George W. Bush to be the second coming of Christ.
http://www.villagevoice.com/news/0429,perlstein,55202,1.html
Posted by: oj at September 29, 2005 6:10 PMWhat's that got to do with David's question?
Posted by: joe shropshire at September 29, 2005 6:13 PMOJ: I guess I am just too cynical. I figured the developers knew going in that they couldn't sell all of the units at their projected retail price. This program gave them a chance to unload some units for less than list, look public spirited and maybe pick up a few bucks from the govt.
If the county govt. If Marin wanted to make housing more affordable, they would reduce restrictions on land development and mandates on the builders. Until then, they are unserious.
P.S. the interest of existing householders will always be to pull up the ladder on the life-boat so that their houses will appreciate. When families with $100K+ incomes cannot afford to live in the community, it is overpriced.
Posted by: Robert Schwartz at September 29, 2005 6:20 PMWhat point is Rick trying to make. The president pardoned a few people. I recognize none of the names and as near as I can make out their crimes were not especially heinous. So what is the point?
Posted by: Robert Schwartz at September 29, 2005 6:26 PMRobert:
Pardons are now intolerable to the Left because issued by W, even if to ordinary rehabilitated citizens.
Posted by: oj at September 29, 2005 6:48 PMAnd the obvious rejoinder is two words: Marc Rich.
You know, I'm not a huge believer in Bush Derangement Syndrome, but when a political professional such as Rick starts to lead with his chin like this, you sort of have to wonder.
Posted by: joe shropshire at September 29, 2005 7:00 PMDid you edit out all the pardons of big money donors and influence peddlers?
Posted by: Rick T. at September 29, 2005 7:18 PMNo, no, no, no. You're all wrong. Rick is annoyed that Bush didn't wait until the last few hours of his presidency to pardon these people.
Posted by: Timothy at September 29, 2005 7:39 PM-- Rick Perlstein, Nowhere, U.S.
Offense: Conspiracy to act intelligent.
Sentence: Lifetime of irrelevancy.
Pardon: Denied.
Posted by: AllenS at September 30, 2005 7:31 AM
Thanks, Joe, I owe you one.
Posted by: David Cohen at September 30, 2005 8:19 AMAnyone remember the rule that when building a development 20% had to be put aside for low income?
Except for those 2 towers near the Chicago River that Rosty got an exception for.....
Rick cares about the poor, but never wanted to talk to my mom who lived in a 20x20 garage and used an outhouse for the 1st 12 years of her life.....