The Daily Post had a piece this week that I have not seen elsewhere. Yesterday the County Supes were set to vote on a new "fee" for development on County land--meaning the unincorporated parts of the county. I believe that would include a good sized chunk of the hills that we call B'game. The rates proposed are:
-- $15 per square foot for houses (that's $60K on a 4,000 sf house)
-- $10 per square foot for hotels
-- $25 per square foot for offices
These "housing impact fees" would supposedly go to "low-income housing". The $15 per sf housing fee was particularly asked about. County manager John Maltbie is quoted in the piece saying, "Yes, market rate homes address some of the housing need, but they create a need for new workers in the community: house cleaners, painters, landscapers, maintenance workers, service workers, teachers, mechanics....these workers are typically at wage levels too low to afford market-rate housing". Ugh. Econ 101 grade: F. Summer school reading recommendation: Adam Smith.
Does sixty grand still qualify as a fee?
Posted by: Local Motion | May 25, 2016 at 08:06 AM
Joe, this county manager sounds like he needs an elementary school level education on how to make a cogent argument. So is he saying that if you create low income housing, which draws LOWER income people, that cannot afford the low income housing that was originally designed to help those with low incomes? So what is the solution and what problem is it searching for exactly? Makes zero sense.
I swear Bruce Dickinson with the help of my infinitely more talented staff could probably do a better job running the City and County with minimal, part-time dedication. Dumb decision making only begets doing unneeded, extraneous work and covering up past mistakes.
We deserve MUCH better!
Posted by: Bruce Dickinson | May 25, 2016 at 07:12 PM
I'm not sure about that claim sir, but look at the twisted logic. You make the new housing more expensive with the tax ("fee" is a joke). That raises the price umbrella for all of the other housing including the lowest rungs. Then you somehow use an agency to try to dole out money to the lowest rung at an inflated government cost.
Reagan said it best--I paraphrase. "Tax it until it stops moving then subsidize it when it can't move."
Posted by: Joe | May 25, 2016 at 10:08 PM
can you post a link to the article? much appreciated...
Posted by: lenj | May 25, 2016 at 10:30 PM
Sorry but the Post is a paper-only paper so no link is available.
Posted by: Joe | May 25, 2016 at 11:38 PM
http://qz.com/698096/california-governor-jerry-browns-plan-for-cheaper-rent-is-going-to-make-people-upset/
Posted by: Occasional contributor | June 04, 2016 at 01:37 AM