dogma
Premium
join:2002-08-15
Boulder City, NV
| reply to No_Strings
Re: SoCal & The Economy ~ Financial Markets ~ Housing ~ Etc
said by No_Strings  :Why not reward low-income people more directly? Give them a home. No reason they should have to work/save like the rest of us. Or just give them cash. Better yet, give them a Prius and a Fastrak transponder. I hear there are some sweet deals on houses in Riverside & San Bernardino counties. Well that's a good question. However from the little research I did, I am willing to bet there will not be 35,000 "low income" homes built based on the States definition of "low Income".
Would it be reasonable to postulate that the gub'ment, assumes not all jobs in a high-income area are high salary. Therefore the lower paid workers (Home Depot, KFC, 7-11, etc) would need to commute into communities like Irvine on already over crowded freeways long distances from low-rent places like Fontana. Thus, putting more of burden on gub'ment supported resources?
That would be perhaps one of many reasons for such a policy. More importantly, and what I am not articulating well it seems, it's not "low income" housing at all. That's just one of those code words for homeless/minority/white trash/drug heads/illegals/etc. It's "Affordable housing", which I quoted from the legal definition. ( »www.washingtonct.org/housingrationale.html ) So it's not really a "reward" for low-income (if, like I said, you consider $70K/year to be low income) people.
The media knows we all relate "low income housing" to a mental graphic of the Cabrini-Green high-rise projects shown in the intro of the 70's TV show Good Times. It's just another Bogeyman to scare us into looking at the ads.
I would like to see documentation that the "shitholes" Jack and Kibbles spoke of are actually gub'ment "mandated". I would make a second bet that they are simply slums, run by slum-lords. |
|
No_Strings
Premium,Mod
join:2001-11-22
The OC | My objection to subsidizing housing for someone earning $70K is the same as for someone earning $10 or even less.
Affordable housing should be defined by market rates for income and property values, not by some government entity. |
|
Kibbles
Premium
join:1999-07-31
Mission Viejo, CA
| reply to dogma
= dogma I would like to see documentation that the "shitholes" Jack and Kibbles spoke of are actually gub'ment "mandated". I would make a second bet that they are simply slums, run by slum-lords.
"The one-bedroom homes could sell for about $375,000 and the two- and three-bedroom homes for about $650,000, said Ralph Deppisch of Steadfast. The townhomes set aside for lower-income people could sell for about $113,000 and those for very-low income households could go for about $70,000."
I used to take care of the pools at Alicia Plaza and Alicia Village and have done a few spa repairs at the housing tract nearby...when I was younger I looked into buying one...but I made over 20k which was the max income.
»cbs2.com/local/local_story_117104457.html |
|
CurtesyFlush
Bababooey, fafafooey, tatatoothy.
Premium
join:2002-08-23
Fontana, CA
| reply to dogma
said by dogma :I would like to see documentation that the "shitholes" Jack and Kibbles spoke of are actually gub'ment "mandated". I finally remembered what the neighborhood was called: "The Cordobas" (nearly all MV developments save for the first section, known as the Deane Homes, are named after something in Spain).
I can't provide docs, but I'm sure the city could. It was simply a well known fact that the new neighborhood of ticky-tacky, plain Jane ugly-assed little homes going in on that flat piece of ground across from the new high school, surrounded by the hilly neighborhoods of already established single family detatched homes, was going to be another "HUD development" of low income housing, just like the one before it across the freeway at Alicia and Moulton Pkwy.
Then one of my newlywed young firemen moved into a rental in the Cordobas, and he too referred to them as "HUD homes". HUD, for those not familiar, is a federal agency: The Bureau of Housing and Urban Development. Gub'ment.
said by dogma :I would make a second bet that they are simply slums, run by slum-lords. There have always been a lot of rentals in that development. However, it's been a shithole for years, long before changing demographics saw a sea change in the level of skin melatonin and the amount of Spanish vs English being spoke.
--
"I intend to go in harm's way.... I have a fighting ship and I will never retreat from an enemy force..."
CDR E. E. Evans, USN; CMOH (posthumously), NC, BSM
Commanding Officer
USS Johnston (DD 557) |
|
Kibbles
Premium
join:1999-07-31
Mission Viejo, CA
| reply to aztecnology
»www.ocregister.com/ocregister/ne···0487.php
Click on the picture to see the developments....and yes I am looking into buying one....can't beat 3-6% interest,35-40 year mortgage and up to a 100% LTV  |
|
dogma
Premium
join:2002-08-15
Boulder City, NV
| reply to No_Strings
OK. Take a look at this:
»www.ocregister.com/ocregister/ne···9383.php
This I found as a link off of one of kibbles supporting websites.
Please pay close attention to the answers for these questions:
Q. How is the state involved?
Q. How does the state determine the number of affordable housing units?
said by No_Strings :My objection to subsidizing housing for someone earning $70K is the same as for someone earning $10 or even less. Affordable housing should be defined by market rates for income and property values, not by some government entity. From you're statement, are you suggesting that the government should have zero involvement with respect to how communities are developed (AKA zoned)? If so, then perhaps you wouldn't mind a large scale chemical manufacturing facility to be built behind your house...as long as DuPont can "afford" to pay "market rates" for the property.
Or, are you being selective when "government involvement" doesn't suit your desires?
Furthermore, the government is not "subsidizing" (another bogeyman code-word) anything with respect to the plan for affordable housing in Irvine that you cited. What they are doing is re-zoning areas. Just like an area zoned for C-1A, the land value will be much much less than if zoned for R1.
I failed to see where these homes are to be government managed & owned (like the HUD housing Jack spoke of), or Section 8, or Project based subsidies to the developers. It's just a change in zoning from what I can tell.
The re-zoning simply devalues the land. This may be news to a lot of people, but there is almost no difference in the construction cost of a $Million home in Laguna, and an equivalent $100K home in Camden Arkansas. So a developer pays less for the raw land, spends exactly the same $ per square foot to build, sells the finished product at 20% to 30% less than market, and still makes a profit.
said by CurtesyFlush :...was going to be another "HUD development" of low income housing, just like the one before it across the freeway at Alicia and Moulton Pkwy. Then one of my newlywed young firemen moved into a rental in the Cordobas, and he too referred to them as "HUD homes". HUD, for those not familiar, is a federal agency: The Bureau of Housing and Urban Development. Gub'ment. FYI, HUD hasn't built any of those type properties for almost 30 years: "HUD programs have ceased producing large numbers of units since the 1980s." [ »en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Affordable_housing (good, informative read BTW)] |
|
CurtesyFlush
Bababooey, fafafooey, tatatoothy.
Premium
join:2002-08-23
Fontana, CA | These units date back to the early to mid eighties. |
|
No_Strings
Premium,Mod
join:2001-11-22
The OC
Host:
Wireless Networking
All Things Unix
Cox HSI
Qwest
Efficient
| reply to dogma
said by dogma :Please pay close attention to the answers for these questions: Q. How is the state involved? Q. How does the state determine the number of affordable housing units A formula is used, based on many factors, including the 2000 Census, fertility, mortality and migration rates for the entire population and various ethnic groups. The typical sizes of households for different age groups and ethnic groups are also taken into onsideration.
Since when does any of that qualify one for a handout?
said by dogma :From you're statement, are you suggesting that the government should have zero involvement with respect to how communities are developed (AKA zoned)? If so, then perhaps you wouldn't mind a large scale chemical manufacturing facility to be built behind your house...as long as DuPont can "afford" to pay "market rates" for the property. Using extreme, unrealistic examples to make your point? You're better than that. This isn't simply zoning. It's using tax dollars to pay for projects that would not otherwise exist because the market does not support them.
said by dogma :Or, are you being selective when "government involvement" doesn't suit your desires? I thought I was clear. I'll try to be more so.
said by dogma :Furthermore, the government is not "subsidizing" (another bogeyman code-word) anything with respect to the plan for affordable housing in Irvine that you cited. What they are doing is re-zoning areas. Just like an area zoned for C-1A, the land value will be much much less than if zoned for R1. The hell it's not subsidizing them. From one of the related Register articles:
The council did not discuss whether a portion of its redevelopment funds could be put toward Aliso Ridge and the Townhomes on Los Alisos, a housing project approved in September.
The money would cover the difference between what the affordable units sold for and their full market price.
The city has about $3 million in redevelopment money that must be used for affordable housing, said Irwin Bornstein, the assistant city manager and director of administrative services. Where'd that redevelopment money come from? It didn't fall from the sky. It came from my pocket and the state is forcing (in this example) the city of Mission Viejo to use it to fund (is that a better word for you?) an artificially low-cost housing development. |
|
dogma
Premium
join:2002-08-15
Boulder City, NV
| said by No_Strings :The hell it's not subsidizing them. From one of the related Register articles: The council did not discuss whether a portion of its redevelopment funds could be put toward Aliso Ridge and the Townhomes on Los Alisos, a housing project approved in September.
The money would cover the difference between what the affordable units sold for and their full market price.
The city has about $3 million in redevelopment money that must be used for affordable housing, said Irwin Bornstein, the assistant city manager and director of administrative services. Where'd that redevelopment money come from? It didn't fall from the sky. It came from my pocket and the state is forcing (in this example) the city of Mission Viejo to use it to fund (is that a better word for you?) an artificially low-cost housing development. The way I see it, it is simply re-zoning:
"Most of the coming population growth stems from land rezoned from industrial or commercial development to residential. Developers cite three main reasons for that land-use change..." »www.ocregister.com/ocregister/ne···6496.php
[note: You may want to pre-read the facts linked below before you continue on.]
»www.cityofirvine.org/civica/file···bID=6931
»cityofirvine.org/civica/filebank···bID=5705
Are you sure you want to lump "redevelopment" money with welfare (or subsidies)?
All of us are beneficiaries of city "redevelopment" money. You are correct, it didn't fall from the sky, it's our tax dollars (actually it's our kids tax dollars) being socially redistributed. The lion's share of redevelopment money goes to "subsidizing" the more wealthy of the population.
An example is the "Great Park" project. Old El Toro AFB. If you take the time to read the redevelopment plan, you will find the city will spend $100's of millions of dollars purchasing, fixing up, and then selling some the land at a fraction of the purchase & improvement cost to very wealthy developers...who will...develop "non-affordable housing" residential properties, and sell to the likes of you and me.
Why don't these same developers purchase the property directly and do all the work?? {rhetorical} Because they would not be able to make a profit, thus the property would remain vacant and in shambles.
The city's rationale is more tax income down the road using welfare subsidies, um...investment today.
The same thing is true for big malls, major entertainment complexes, Professional sports stadiums, and big box stores. Of which we all patronize. All underwritten on welfare subsidies, um...redevelopment funds and municipal bonds.
Yep, you are the direct recipient of a govenment sponsored "handout" (which is my main point). We all are.
At the end of the day, you actually have nothing to worry about. The so-called "affordable housing" units, if they are in an upscale neighborhood, are only temporary at best.
In my experience, the developer who was "forced" to make X units affordable, generally sold them to his friends 20-something kids (who could qualify), and after 5 years or so, the kids sell them back to the developer at a predetermined price. Or the "low-income" folks who are lucky enough to snag one of the few units, wind up selling after the mandated period at full market values to the same Yuppies that the community deems "desirable". |
|
No_Strings
Premium,Mod
join:2001-11-22
The OC
Host:
Wireless Networking
All Things Unix
Cox HSI
Qwest
Efficient
| I'm well aware of the Great Park project. Whatever they do there is better than the great airport plan than the well-to-do residents of Newport Beach were trying for.
I'm not lumping all redevelopment efforts together and agree that some municipal investments make sense.
Rezoning, however, is a stroke of the pen. No checks required. Paying money to enable the construction of homes for certain incomes is a subsidy no matter how you want to color it. |
|
Kibbles
Premium
join:1999-07-31
Mission Viejo, CA
1 edit | reply to dogma
From another article..so is it really rezoning ?
"Q. What are the consequences of not being in compliance?
A. If the state deemed the city was not in compliance, the city could be subject to third-party lawsuits and would not receive some state funding that it normally would"
»www.ocregister.com/ocregister/ne···9383.php
BTW as far as I know if you resell one of those low income units...you have to resell it as and priced as a low income unit....then again the city could tear it down because it is a blighted area. |
|
dogma
Premium
join:2002-08-15
Boulder City, NV
| reply to No_Strings
The bottom line is City Planning.
The city (Gub'ment), in it's infinite wisdom, makes decisions on how best to "invest" our tax dollars to further the long term prosperity of it's citizens. Many of these decisions are based on recommendations from "city Planners". Whose job it is to understand how communities evolve, and engineer solutions that help the mission.
We all enjoy the big, beautiful parks, and the nice shopping malls, and the great entertainment many communities have. Many of these projects were seeded with taxpayer money driven from redevelopment resources. These same planners have agreed that "affordable housing", is an important component to a communities long term well being. They reward the mega-millionaire developers and corporations with $Millions in funds, as well as underwrite a few families that make 20% less than the average community income.
Also, since it was brought up, I take it you never fly out or into LAX? |
|
No_Strings
Premium,Mod
join:2001-11-22
The OC
Host:
Wireless Networking
All Things Unix
Cox HSI
Qwest
Efficient
| I fly out of LAX and LGB as needed. If we could lift the curfews at SNA and pour some more concrete, I wouldn't need to. Unfortunately, there are folks who built houses at the end of that runway who are much richer and have far more influence than I.
Local officials have been fighting that battle for a long time.
I disagree that the city planners think that affordable housing is an important component of their well being. All of the articles I read showed cities in strong opposition to a state mandate. Imagine that - Sacramento being out of touch with the local communities.  |
|
dogma
Premium
join:2002-08-15
Boulder City, NV
| said by No_Strings :I fly out of LAX and LGB as needed. If we could lift the curfews at SNA and pour some more concrete, I wouldn't need to. Unfortunately, there are folks who built houses at the end of that runway who are much richer and have far more influence than I. Local officials have been fighting that battle for a long time. There is a lot of existing concrete at El Toro. But redevelopment funds are going to completely demolish the old AFB...which should have been a re-tasked as new International Airport.
But locals there didn't want the noise, pollution, traffic, ect., and forced it off the planners table. Yet these same locals have zero compunction to drive up here, to add to my noise, pollution, traffic, ect.
Instead of having a (real) local airport that services Orange County, we, the area residents of LAX, are giving OC air travelers a "handout", welfare, & subsidies in the form of our lower quality of living, and lower property values. Where's the outrage there?
I am not hammering on you in particular, but this whole handout/welfare/subsidy knife cuts both ways. |
|
No_Strings
Premium,Mod
join:2001-11-22
The OC
Host:
Wireless Networking
All Things Unix
Cox HSI
Qwest
Efficient
| There were innumerable problems with using El Toro as a commercial field. If only it were as simple as you suggest.
The issues, risks and benefits were debated for years and are well-documented. It would have been damned convenient for me.
Improving SNA is the real answer, not building a new one. I'd be happy to see my tax dollars go into that (some major work has/is being done, but the two biggest obstacles are not even on the table).
Meanwhile, you're more than welcome to use our snooty, little airport any time you need to. Let me know ahead of time and I'll buy you a coffee that you'll have to dump out before going through the Mensa security team. Wait, that's another thread. |
|
major marco
Res Firma Mitescere Nescit
Premium
join:2003-02-13
Stepford, CA
clubs:
| reply to nightdesigns
said by nightdesigns :Rancho Santa Margarita So yer one of those folks, eh. The Coto wannabes. 
I live right down the street from RSM but not because I like it here.
--
The Toll
|
|
Kibbles
Premium
join:1999-07-31
Mission Viejo, CA
| reply to aztecnology
Yay...more good news 
»www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=···CBB5fqZQ
I also read Countrywide may have a few problems next year....today I read that a large mortgage company is closing tomorrow...and another may in a few days.
Who should I believe....by Monday I have to decide if I want to buy my sisters portions of the house we inherited.
With my current savings I could support myself financially for a year without working....but from several articles I have read...if we did go into a recession...it could be 2+ years before we come out of it. |
|
dogma
Premium
join:2002-08-15
Boulder City, NV
1 edit | 
Fountain Predictor |
Impac Funding & World Savings are next in the belly-up line.
Wall Street has been dogged by concerns that deteriorating lending conditions could hurt the economy and a rash of disappointing economic data, including weaker-than-expected jobs growth and slower service sector growth...
The Fountain Predictor shows California is entering a economic downturn. Unemployment is predicted to rise by at least a full percent over the next 12 Months.
But other than that, everything is rosy. |
|
Kibbles
Premium
join:1999-07-31
Mission Viejo, CA
| said by dogma :The Fountain Predictor shows California is entering a economic downturn. Unemployment is predicted to rise by at least a full percent over the next 12 Months. But other than that, everything is rosy. I heard one mortgage company's stock was selling around a low $7.00 a share...the company that was going to buy it...did...at $15.00 a share...to bad I did not buy a few thousand shares.
I have seen in Dove Canyon/Coto...sale prices drop 10-20% off the asking price...but in Three Arch Bay...people are getting multiple bids on 5+ million dollar homes.
I wonder has anyone seen a chart that shows how the houses in different cities were financed...in San Francisco I read that 70% of the homes purchased in the past few years were financed with ARM's...I can't imagine what would happen if a lot of those have to be refinanced. |
|
dogma
Premium
join:2002-08-15
Boulder City, NV
| said by Kibbles :...people are getting multiple bids on 5+ million dollar homes. There is no Economic crisis for most of those that can afford a $ multi-million Home.
Lets deduce:
"A total of 53,943 default notices were sent statewide from April through June (Q207), a 15.4 percent jump over the previous quarter and a 158 percent jump from the second quarter of 2006, according to DataQuick."
"In Los Angeles County, 10,393 default notices were sent in the second quarter of the year, a 126.6 percent jump from the 2006 second-quarter total of 4,586, according to La Jolla-based DataQuick Information Systems. In Orange County, 2,984 notices were sent, a 137.8 percent jump over last year’s 1,255."
Looks like SoCal has it's proportional share of Defaults per population. Therefore, NorCal probably is seeing the same defaults.
“A lot of the loans that went bad last quarter were made at or just beyond the cycle’s peak, between summer ‘05 and summer ‘06,” said DataQuick..."
Because the majority of this batch of defaults are "late model Sub-Primes", I think it's safe to bet NorCal's homes were funded by ARM/Option and other exotic products as well.
We still have the early Sub-Primes, the Alt-A's, and a good chunk of the A-paper to go. Will take 4-6 years for the shake out, so the 40% drop in RE values will be slow and painful until 2013. |
|
