Help with a question posed by my Professor,

[GiveMeFreedom]

Help with a question posed by my Professor,

“One of the criticisms leveled by those U. S. Senators who are attempting to get the Senate involved in start-up financing to aid those who cannot currently afford to buy a home, is that municipalities do not include in land-use plans 'affordable home areas'. First, do you believe this is feasible, and next, how do you feel this can/must be accomplished? Or, should Government(s) be allowed to mandate such efforts?”

This question was posed in a class about construction documents, i.e., plans and specifications. This and other questions of recent note are political in nature and really have nothing to do with documentation of construction projects. This has made me hesitate in writing a response, because I feel that it has nothing to do with the subject matter of the class and want to say so. My ability for argumentation and rhetoric is at best crude and I feel inadequate to respond in a way that would point this fact out.
I am currently unemployed and will be for some time, construction workers have been hard hit by the economy in general. Because of this, I have returned to school to earn that degree I have wanted for 30 years in hope that it will open the doors for future employment opportunity.

As far as my response to the question, I believe that affordable housing should be made available to economically deprived families, who through no fault of their own, have been forced to take ever decreasing wages that corporations have forced upon the working family. The redistribution of wealth in this country from the poor to the rich is creating a “caste system” and killing the middle class. The wealthy corporations have bombarded the masses with commercialism and debt solutions to living the American dream. This socio-engineering for wealth transfer is now showing its true function and our nation is in jeopardy of becoming insolvent. This insolvency will only affect those in the working classes who will be straddle with paying for this financial imbalance with ever increasing burdens on taxes and lower wages to maintain the corporate mandate of “profit first, humans second”. Until the disproportional transfer of wealth is decreased, to help the working poor, there really is no solution to equal housing for citizens. The local municipalities who have engaged in,”low cost housing” or “affordable housing” legislation and land use, can best be called “corporate controlled cowboys” who herd the masses like cattle, creating enclaves of poor people , whom they can control by segregation, policing and subjugation to corporate control maintained through unfair access to our representatives.

[Venceremos]

1. Your third paragraph

is the best response, as far as I can tell. I couldn't articulate/argue it any better. You sell yourself short by thinking "My ability for argumentation and rhetoric is at best crude...".

[GiveMeFreedom]

11. Thank you, revsion to my response posted.

[HillbillyBob]

2. Your response is good. I am a now disabled heavy industrial construction electrician

I worked in Fl and Al, both 'right to work' states, never making enough to get a decent place without having a second or third job, which kept me from going to school for something better. I was a trained Air Traffic Controler who thanks Ronnyraygun got outted in the navy. I would be fired repeatedly when found out that I was gay. I never ever came out at the construction site, I mined my own and dis a good job, mostly it had to be conjecture because I did not act like a dog when a pretty woman walked by the site and did not have a girl friend.
That aside lower income housing opportuntites should not be segregated, but mixed in with the other housing. Habitat for Humnanity is a really good group.
Look into their site.
It is well past time to break the corporate control of our governments and our labor laws. Labor laws need to actually help those of us who do actual work.
The right to work laws need to be stripped or re modeled to represent the labor sector not the corporate sector. As i learned the 'right to work' really mean the right to fire you for any reason whatsoever.

[GiveMeFreedom]

12. Thank you, revsion to my response posted.

[hwmnbn]

3. I agree with Venceremos....

you expressed your response clearly and eloquently. It is a well thought out argument that I could not improve.

[GiveMeFreedom]

13. Thank you, revsion to my response posted.

[HereSince1628]

4. As a college prof I suggest using an I.R.A.C. approach for essay questions

I=identify the issue(s) that the question is about (avoid departing this topic)
R=consider what set of rules or principles are related to the issue
A=analyze how the rules fit the circumstance/issue
C=choose a course of action that allows the issue to be addressed within the rules or principles that govern it.

Again, write an answer appropriate to the course. Getting into the politics of wealth transfer might be fine in a political science class. It probably would be less fine in a course on urban management/planning.

[GiveMeFreedom]

14. Thank you, revsion to my response posted.

[pinto]

5. I think you make your point well in what you've written here. fwiw, I favor "mixed use" planning

ordinances. It's used around here to stipulate that development include some commercial use, fair market housing, a percent of housing geared to be affordable to low income buyers and some rental housing.

Seems an even handed way to promote in-fill, rather than sprawl and a mixed income viability rather than the old low income housing "projects" of the 60's.

[GiveMeFreedom]

15. Thank you, revsion to my response posted.

[EFerrari]

20. Here's a link to the mixed use project on Treasure Island:

http://www.sfgov.org/site/treasureisland_page.asp?id=96594

[izquierdista]

6. Something to consider

Real estate is the ultimate depository of excess wealth in the United States. Rich people tire of stuffing cash under the mattress or keeping gold in a vault as these tangible things can be stolen or in the case of cash, destroyed in a fire. And the last year has shown what too much exposure to the stock market can do. But by bidding up the price of real estate, above its value as cropland, they can put the money they don't need for everyday expenses to work bringing them rents. What is the first thing that people budget for? The rent on their house or business, which generally runs at some percentage of the market value of the property, which is bid up by rich people who own the property.

Now comes the big question: how do you withdraw a piece of land from that market and decide to let poor people use it for less than the 'market value' in the American pay-to-be-heard political system? Not gonna happen.

[GiveMeFreedom]

16. Thank you, revsion to my response posted.

[BR_Parkway]

7. It's a great answer - but not for the question asked

If governments start designating areas as "affordable home" areas - they would be devaluing property while creating areas of perceived poverty - which would lead to services and shopping not locating there - which puts a further strain on the low income residents to obtain food and necessities.

Better to zone for mixed uses and provide things like tax credits to developers to incorporate that housing into other areas with established services while keeping transportation costs down.

From a financial standpoint, the developer could build X or Y - mainly they're going to choose which makes them the most money. Financial incentives would be the offset in that case to make the desired affordable housing outcome happen.

[GiveMeFreedom]

17. Thank you, revsion to my response posted.

[jobycom]

8. That's a pretty good response, actually. Some things I'd think about...

Since it's a contruction course, maybe he wants an answer more related to cost. For instance, who pays for the "affordable housing." The biggest complaint about such projects is that it violates the laws of supply and demand, so someone loses money. If a city orders landlords to charge lower rent, the landlord still has to pay a mortgage on the property and won't be able to collect enough to cover his costs, including taxes owed the city. If the city buys the property, the city is out the value of the land and the taxes they would collect on the land.

Here in Austin they closed down a city-owned airport and have recently been converting it to mixed-price housing. That's a solution, since the government owns the property and since no one was paying taxes on it before. But even so, the government could make more money, thus requiring (in theory) lower taxes of the rest of the citizens (property or sales taxes). So in essence, the city would be requiring all taxpayers to help pay the housing for those who move into the lower-priced housing. People are already up in arms about tax rates, so the city is more hesitant to do it. (I haven't followed the whole issue too closely, so I don't know all the details.)

And barring the city already owning the property, who takes the loss selling reduced-priced houses? The landowners? The city--meaning the taxpayers? Land is always owned by someone. And once the land is designated so, who will build on it? The greatest cost of most housing is the property it sits on, and that value is based on location, so we're talking, probably, about prime real estate. A regular contractor may not be able to afford the property and the money to build on spec, so who buys the property? A contractor wants to make a profit, not break even. And voters will only allow so much in costs to themselves, so there is the practical matter of changing minds in a democracy where brave politicians are soon former politicians.

Then there's the problem of enforcement. Can a city demand a certain price on a house? That would obviously terrify all homeowners, and it would be difficult to enforce, so you'd wind up with people buying the property at a low price and selling it as soon as possible at a high profit. If the residents aren't allowed to sell, or are forced to sell at a controlled price, that's going to trap some of them in these houses after they want to move.

Those are some problems, so solutions to those might be what your professor is after. None of that contradicts anything you said, they are just practical considerations when applying your ideas.

As for what you have written, that's good. It gives specific details and puts it in the context of the bigger picture. Its focus is specificly on a certain type of family, while using that example to make a bigger point. The only objections I can see are lack of definition and some cases where obvious objections should probably be addressed. For instance, "rich" and "poor" are relative terms. "Redistribution of wealth" needs explanation on how you see it distributed, and how that is causing a "caste system," and what that "caste system" is. Obviously it's not a real caste system where a person is locked by law and tradition into a specific cultural class. You mean economic stratification with little chance of advancement, I think. And what "socio-engineering for wealth transfer" do you see, and what "colors" is it showing? Do you mean our entire capitalist system of economics, which has been in place since the Constitution, or arguably at least since the later 19th century, or what has happened since Reagan, or since W? If you are criticizing the whole system, you need to account for eras like the 90s, when Clinton had poverty at almost unprecedented low rates. Taking a shorter time period would shorten having to worry about that. :)

Just stuff like that. Not saying you have to give an essay on each term you use. Just make your points specific, and don't use general, undefined terms without defining them as you mean them. A college professor isn't going to want an opinion piece, but rather an argument using facts and logic to support it. You've got a strong argument there. Many students, myself included when I was one, try so hard to not say anything the professor might disagree with that they wind up with no argument at all, but just a dry discussion of the problem. You've taken a good, solid, strong stance, and just need to flesh it out and maybe anticipate a few objections in a way that heads off the objection.

Sorry so long, I just found your topic interesting. :)

[GiveMeFreedom]

18. Thank you, revsion to my response posted.

[On the Road]

9. Before Writing an Answer,

It would be worth coming to an understanding of the question: Would the plans use existing zoning, or are they separate? Are these plans for new development only or do they involve rezoning land with buildings currently on it? Would the afforable housing be publicly constructed or would it place limits on private construction?

I am assuming what is meant is that governments would impose rules on certain areas of the city. It would make sense to at least have some assumptions and state them in the answer. If there is an opportunity to ask before the answer is due that would help and might even get you points for clear thinking.

There are several parts to the question:

"(D)o you believe (requiring cities to include affordable home areas in their land use plans) is feasible?" ?

Feasibility can involve:

Tems: How would the municipality mandate affordable housing? Would it set price limits for new construction and/or for renovated buildings? How would be prices be set? Would it be by square foot, by room, by total sale price? Are there foreseeable ways of avoiding those limits, such as making tiny apartments to fit under a fixed-dollar cap?

Ability to Attract Builders: Will developers actually build in the areas, or ignore them and choose areas with no controls on price? Will it require incentives or tax breaks? Will it require direct government ownership of the buildings?

Administration: Would a new agency be required to oversee the land use? Would employees be hired to scan real estate sales? To work with builders?

Rights: If a city rezones a piece of privately held land for affordable housing, can the owner claim a constructive taking because the market value of the land is reduced?

Buyers: Are there enough qualified buyers for the property? Everyone wants affordable housingm, but the areas are in dangerous and dirty neighborhoods, will enough prospective buyers be able to get mortgages? Is there reason to believe many of the properties will end up being foreclosed and shuttered?

Local Politics: Can an affordable housing proposal be passed into law? Is a majority of the city council supportive of such efforts, or is it dominated by areas which may not have the same concerns? What kind of budget will be necessary, would the funding fit in the city budget, and would there be enough support for it? The answers will vary by city.

National Politics: How will Senators control the municipalities under their plan? Are there standards for an acceptable fair housing zone? Could a city implement toothless legislation simply to comply with the federal law? Will an individual home buyer be penalized because their city of residence does not meet the conditions of the federal law? Does it still hold if the individual is buying property in another city? Would the federal government need HUD or some other agency to begin a new regulatory regime to ensure compliance?

"(H)ow do you feel this can/must be accomplished?"

I supposed this refers to some of the practical question of administration above.

"(S)hould Government(s) be allowed to mandate such efforts?”

Partly a philosophical question dealing with balancing public good (lower housing prices) against greater government control and ownership rights. Partly a question of jurisdiction -- should the federal government be attempting to dictate to cities how their land is used and what prices their real estate sells for?

[GiveMeFreedom]

19. Thank you, revsion to my response posted.

[GiveMeFreedom]

10. Revision of my response

Although the “Senators” who are in favor of affordable housing are not identified in the opening statement of the question posed, I can imagine that the States they represent have a disproportionate number of low income families within geographical areas they represent, as compared to more affluent States. The need to help these low income families secure housing is becoming more urgent as the economy seeks to right itself.
What is affordable housing? This question brings many interpretations of affordable housing and specifically singles out lower income earners. With an accepted ratio of 30% of gross income applied to housing costs, (and rent for that matter), including utility bills, insurance payments and taxes, this is considered the maximum formula for affordable housing.

But what is the problem that connects all this need in the first place? Wages. Warren Buffet said “There’s class warfare, all right but it’s my class, the rich class, that’s making war, and we’re winning,” he is/was? the third richest man in the United States.
So as wages decline in America, affordable housing becomes more inaccessible to these workers and more costly to purchase land on which to build, construct and maintain, on ever declining wages. If the low income earner is given the opportunity to purchase an affordable home at his current wage, any downward trend in his/her wages will have a detrimental effect on maintaining home ownership.

There are not for profit private and corporate entities, born in the 50’s and 60’s, out of the need for giving access to land use for disadvantaged groups here in America called CLT’s or “community land trusts”. CLT’s have their advantages, 501(c) (3) designation, local control and minimal government intervention, to name a few, but can have disadvantages of maintaining private donations in tough economic times, ever increasing financial responsibility due to tax increases on titled land they own and land acquisition due to increasing real estate costs. CLT’s often use a model of “mixed use” and steer away from congregating low income wage earners into concentrated areas and often work to help a whole community achieve renewal and pride in community.

Still, this does not answer the question posed on whether local municipalities and government should be involved or not. The attempt at affordable housing in the past brings memories to many from the era of the failed “Projects” tenements of the 60’s which led to increased crime, isolation of the poor and an erosion of community concern by the inhabitants themselves.

The U.S. Government, State and local municipalities have since then rewritten the rules to avoid this social disaster, The United States Department of Housing and Urban Development or HUD, being one government agency that was formed in 1965 to deal with urban planning and fair access to land use.
Zoning laws, which are enacted by local municipalities, are used to control community growth, segregating land use to insure the character of communities, i.e., industrial areas versus residential areas.

Zoning still does not answer the question of affordable housing, per se; instead municipalities use planning departments that control issuance of “permits” for land use. So, if builder “A” wants to build a 10,000 unit residential single family home community, builder “A” must include infrastructure,( roads, sewer, storm, water), Schools, Fire Stations, Police Stations, etc. and then give these lands and buildings to the municipalities in exchange for the “permit” or right to build. Planning can take several years of negotiation and tradeoffs, between builders and municipalities before a project begins.

Including affordable housing within this planning stage may include multi residential apartment units, low cost single family residents, community centers, etc. Of all the models used in planning community availability for affordable housing, the Performance zoning or “effects-based planning” model seems to work best in my opinion.
The application of performance zoning creates a high level of flexibility, rationality, transparency and accountability. Performance zoning uses performance-based or goal-oriented criteria to establish review parameters for proposed development projects in any area of a municipality. Performance zoning often utilizes a "points-based" system whereby a property developer can apply credits toward meeting established zoning goals through selecting from a 'menu' of compliance options (some examples include: mitigation of environmental impacts, providing public amenities, building affordable housing units, etc. Additional discretionary criteria may also be established as part of the review process, (Wikipedia, 2009).

The National Low Income Housing Coalition, established in 1974 by Cushing N. Dolbeare, is an advocate agency for affordable housing, with offices located in Washington, D.C. Their release, (in 2007), of a PDF document, titled sevenmaps.pdf correlates the average wages of workers at the low income spectrum by state regions and details the affordability of housing based on those wages. The imbalance of affordable housing versus wages is very apparent after looking at the data that is presented in this document.
Is there a solution to affordable housing? Staying within the constraints of established business practices concerning development of residential communities, I would say no. Real estate has long been the investment vehicle of safe returns for affluent individuals and corporations. The reality is that “wages” are deflating while rent or mortgages are inflating and the disparity of income between the rich and poor is exacerbating the problem. Until low income earners wages are raised to a “living wage” the problem will persist and solutions for affordable housing will become harder to implement and sustain.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zoning
http://www.nlihc.org/template/index.cfm
http://www.nlihc.org/oor/oor2006/sevenmaps.pdf

[harun]

21. Some items about the use of "government"

Freep's use this to mean some "other" group of people who do crazy things to "us". The government is us. I think using terms such as "federal legislation", "state regulations", "local zoning", etc. instead of "government" is more clear and less biased.

Great stuff though, this is an important question I think about a lot. While all these houses were being built that no one could really afford I was disappointed we NEVER heard anyone talk about getting some housing built that actually reflected peoples incomes. People here at DU talked about it, but I never heard it discussed anywhere else.