[Vision2020] Affordable Housing Crisis Bearing Fruit

[Bev Bafus]

Thanks for a rather insightful letter Donovan.  I like your divisions of
types of persons needing low income housing.  It's a fact that $500 per
month would be difficult for my kids, working at or near minimum wage.

I've been concerned about affordable housing, and I, too, think that the
current government regulations do not work.  Years ago (I'm afraid to say
how many) I was a manager for a local low income apartment complex.  The
income guidelines and "fair-market" rent were ludicrous.  What the feds
determined was "fair-market" was actually two to three times the going rate
in Moscow.  I don't know what the rules are exactly today, but I doubt it
has improved much from then.

I'll be watching this topic.  Please Donovan or Mark - e-mail me offlist if
something develops on this line.  I don't read all vision posts!

Thanks
Bev Bafus
  -----Original Message-----
  From: vision2020-bounces at moscow.com
[mailto:vision2020-bounces at moscow.com]On Behalf Of Donovan Arnold
  Sent: Thursday, December 04, 2008 5:18 PM
  To: mark seman
  Cc: vision2020 at moscow.com
  Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Affordable Housing Crisis Bearing Fruit


        Mark,

        Thanks for the insightful response. My perspective is a little bit
different then the current structuring of low income housing. I think the
government and financial powers that be are more about trying to get what
they want rather than focusing on the actual needs of the people they are
supposedly trying to help.

        I do believe, in all honesty, the biggest problem with low income
housing is the policies that they use for qualifications. They are simply
unrealistic, unfair, and discriminatory. Most of the people I talked to in
low income housing would be kicked out if they answered every question 100%
honestly, and the building would be mostly empty.

        But to more directly address your questions, Mark, the problem with
most low income is that it fails to realize that there are different types
of poor people. Obviously stereotyping and pigeon holing but, here are the
basic 5 groups in representing Moscow's low income.

        1) Single men and woman that do not make that much money. Usually,
the working poor, many college students, and some former students that are
just working a local job. Their stay is usually for a short period of time.

        2) The elderly. Mostly older woman, over 65 living on social
security and in poor health. Their stay is usually for a long period of
time, or until death.

        3) Single parents. These are mostly woman living with one of two
children trying to make ends meet and low cost housing is one of those cost
cutting areas. Their stay is for a moderate about of time.

        4) Persons with a disability. These are usually people that have a
hard time holding full time employment and usually get some type of
government assisted housing. Their stay is usually for a longer period of
time.

        5) Young families. These are usually a family that is just starting
out, have some young children, not much money yet. Their stay is usually for
a limited time until both parents can work or one gets a better paying job.

        Each of these groups has different needs and wants from their
housing situation. Many times their needs and wants contradict or conflict
with each other. So trying to devise a plan that will work equally and
fairly for everybody in one complex is bound to failure and the socially
engineer is ignoring that people are different.

        Second, you will find that most individuals do not want to pay more
in rent for services they cannot use, especially when it prevents them from
getting what they need, such as safer sidewalks for their wheelchair over
that of a new playground for the children. Or new carpets versus carports.

        Trying to be all things to all people, or fairly distributing very
limited funds for each groups needs is a monstrous task which usually
results in nobody being happy.

        As to the physically properties themselves, I would suggest each
place have the following things. Phone, Refrigerator, a very large freezer,
storage, microwave, oven, stove, bathtub and shower, laundry, garbage
disposal and dishwasher, large open kitchen and dining room, two medium
equally sized bedrooms with walk in closets. They should have at least 600
sq. ft. of space. Some units should have a garage, others carports, and
others no parking. It should mostly be built on one level, and the units
should be noise resistant. They should have access to the Internet and basic
television. There should be units that mostly carpeted and some units that
are mostly not carpeted. There should be some units with a yard, and some
with just a small outdoor patio. The units should also be near a bus route.
The units should have one side for pets, one side without; one half of each
side should be for quiet of noisier tenants. Utilities, cable, Internet,
water, garbage and rent should just be one bill.

        Police should patrol the area frequently, know most of the
residents, and offer assistance when needed.
        Sex offenders and convicted criminals, especially those that
committed moral crimes against persons, should be in separate complexes from
other tenants.

        Finally, I would reiterate that the laws governing what people can
make to afford an apartment and who can qualify for an apartment is the
biggest problem. I think focusing on the government trying to socially
engineer the complexes and meet everyone's needs is the WRONG approach and
will not work.

        Best Regards,

        Donovan

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20081205/17c6f96d/attachment.html