Truck and Barter: Wow

November 22, 2004

Wow

By Bob

Daniel Weintraub says he's "trying get his mind around this story". Frankly, I don't have much of one left after reading it. What they are going to do is create a leftist cocoon and then wonder why surrounding communties vote the wrong way. I suppose they won't mind much not having to come into contact with red county people. They'll call them stupid:

Hoping to get a leg up on rising home prices, Davis is climbing the economic ladder to reach the next rung of families who need help finding affordable housing: those earning nearly $100,000.

The City Council has approved a plan requiring builders to make 25 percent of homes in new developments affordable for middle-income buyers, defined as families of four who earn $72,240 to $96,320 annually. The rule is on top of an existing 25 percent requirement for low-and moderate-income buyers, who earn $30,100 to $72,240 for a four-member household.

In addition, officials want folks who work in Davis to get first dibs on the affordable homes. Some who don't work, however - including retirees and those with disabilities - also would get preferences. Meanwhile, the city is studying a cap that would limit residential growth to 250 units annually.

There is also a need to keep out the undesirables:

"We're very excited about it," Mayor Ruth Asmundson said. "This council has been saying we want the people who work in Davis to be able to live in Davis to maintain the quality of life we have. They have to have a vested interest in the community."

Appearantly, only the right people are allowed:

"We're talking about folks like nurses, police officers, firefighters, teachers and administrative personnel at UC Davis," Emlen said. "Some professors even fall into that category, depending on where they're at in their tenure."

On the plus side, members of my extended family will benefit from this since they are business, property owners in one of the surrounding exurbs of Sacramento. If the city wanted make housing affordable, they would increase supply. Something that the counties to the north, and my relatives, will be happy to give people.

Edit: I should add what this means. Up to half of all new housing built in Davis will be non-market with restrictions on who may buy these units. The proponents have particular people in mind as to who could get them. What this means is that the non-controlled housing will be high-end and affordable only to the well off. This is a form of a tax and some recent studies have shown to be significant. The other housing may end up being market priced, but of lower quality and restricted on who may purchase beyond income requirements. In other words, the middle will end up being squeezed out with only high end housing and lower quality housing being built. What surprises me is how blatantly discriminatory the preference is.

Posted at November 22, 2004 10:14 PM

Comments

Regardless of their stated reasons, I think city councils know what they are doing with these new building restrictions. 'Affordable housing' is just a fig leaf, when all they want to do is keep property values up.

Comment by Hee Hate Me at November 23, 2004 12:09 PM | Permalink

I can't think of a better way to regulate housing than to let some poorly informed builder oversupply some at a certain level. That has a tendency to keep prices down.

Comment by Rob at November 23, 2004 09:20 PM | Permalink

Isn't it amazing that on the one hand, they zone and regulate to keep supply low (and thus prices way up), while on the other hand they subsidize "affordable housing" for selected groups?

Comment by Lugo at November 24, 2004 12:43 AM | Permalink

I looked into affordable housing here in the Bay Area when I thought I might want to stay in California for a while. When I discovered that affordable housing units aren't permitted to appreciate at market rates, I dropped the whole idea. It amounts to buying a shack for an outrageous amount of money, living in it for a decade or so and selling it for peanuts.

Comment by Justin at November 25, 2004 10:48 PM | Permalink