[Mpls] Boulevard development loses committee vote
The southwest Minneapolis project has been seen as a way to increase affordable housing in a less-affordable part of the city, but a city council committee decided a subsidy was too rich on a 3-2 vote. The developer said the subsidy - $542,000 for 15 subsidized units - was in the middle range of city proposals. Robert Lilligren and Dean Zimmermann voted yes; Paul Ostrow, Lisa Goodman, Scott Benson voted no. http://www.startribune.com/stories/462/3243590.html David Brauer List manager ___ Minneapolis Issues Forum - A Civil City Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest option, and more: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
Re: [Mpls] Boulevard development loses committee vote
List; Thanks to Listmember S. Brandt for writing the story. Thanks to David to linking the strib story. The housing development in question was to receive 542K for 15 units. Equals $36,130 per unit subsidy. Not the cost, but grab bag money. The project is being subsidized in other fashions. Housing tax credits are as good as cash if not better. Sometimes they get you investors with limited knowledge of real estate, thus minimum interference for the managing entity. Deferred loans are great also. It allows you to pile up net revenue with out paying debt. Picture not having to pay your house loan for a couple of years. You could do something stupid and spend the cash, or you can stick it in the bank at a fixed rate for the pre-determined time. You make serious interest money on the taxpayers dime. 'other assistance from the MCDA'. I wonder what that amounts to. $36,130 plus X is what the subsidy amounts to. Is there county,MHFA (State) or other agencies involved. Not a bad deal when you start adding it all up. 3 cheers for the three who said no. One hiss for the private sector landlord who said yes. I also hope that the private sector developer who pursued this passes the word to the rest of their sistren and brethren. Mpls isn't such a cheap/easy date anymore. Craig Miller Man with a conscious who could never start a non-profit. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Former Fultonite - Original Message - From: List Manager [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Mpls list [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, September 20, 2002 5:42 AM Subject: [Mpls] Boulevard development loses committee vote The southwest Minneapolis project has been seen as a way to increase affordable housing in a less-affordable part of the city, but a city council committee decided a subsidy was too rich on a 3-2 vote. The developer said the subsidy - $542,000 for 15 subsidized units - was in the middle range of city proposals. Robert Lilligren and Dean Zimmermann voted yes; Paul Ostrow, Lisa Goodman, Scott Benson voted no. http://www.startribune.com/stories/462/3243590.html David Brauer List manager ___ Minneapolis Issues Forum - A Civil City Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest option, and more: http://e-democracy.org/mpls ___ Minneapolis Issues Forum - A Civil City Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest option, and more: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
RE: [Mpls] Boulevard development loses committee vote
-Original Message- From: Craig Miller [SMTP:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Friday, September 20, 2002 7:17 AM To: Mpls list Subject:Re: [Mpls] Boulevard development loses committee vote Craig Miller is correct. Mpls needs to stop giving money away for development, the marketplace works best if left alone. Subsidizing developers causes everyones rent and taxes to increase. This in turn makes more apartments and homes unaffordable. The cost to the taxpayer for an debt of $36,130 at 7% payable over 25 years is $255.36 per month. Another example why rents are high in Mpls. Mel Gregerson South Mpls For Profit Affordable Housing Provider and unpaid tax collector. List; Thanks to Listmember S. Brandt for writing the story. Thanks to David to linking the strib story. The housing development in question was to receive 542K for 15 units. Equals $36,130 per unit subsidy. Not the cost, but grab bag money. The project is being subsidized in other fashions. Housing tax credits are as good as cash if not better. Sometimes they get you investors with limited knowledge of real estate, thus minimum interference for the managing entity. Deferred loans are great also. It allows you to pile up net revenue with out paying debt. Picture not having to pay your house loan for a couple of years. You could do something stupid and spend the cash, or you can stick it in the bank at a fixed rate for the pre-determined time. You make serious interest money on the taxpayers dime. 'other assistance from the MCDA'. I wonder what that amounts to. $36,130 plus X is what the subsidy amounts to. Is there county,MHFA (State) or other agencies involved. Not a bad deal when you start adding it all up. 3 cheers for the three who said no. One hiss for the private sector landlord who said yes. I also hope that the private sector developer who pursued this passes the word to the rest of their sistren and brethren. Mpls isn't such a cheap/easy date anymore. Craig Miller Man with a conscious who could never start a non-profit. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Former Fultonite - Original Message - From: List Manager [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Mpls list [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, September 20, 2002 5:42 AM Subject: [Mpls] Boulevard development loses committee vote The southwest Minneapolis project has been seen as a way to increase affordable housing in a less-affordable part of the city, but a city council committee decided a subsidy was too rich on a 3-2 vote. The developer said the subsidy - $542,000 for 15 subsidized units - was in the middle range of city proposals. Robert Lilligren and Dean Zimmermann voted yes; Paul Ostrow, Lisa Goodman, Scott Benson voted no. http://www.startribune.com/stories/462/3243590.html David Brauer List manager ___ Minneapolis Issues Forum - A Civil City Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest option, and more: http://e-democracy.org/mpls ___ Minneapolis Issues Forum - A Civil City Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest option, and more: http://e-democracy.org/mpls ___ Minneapolis Issues Forum - A Civil City Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest option, and more: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
Re: [Mpls] Boulevard development loses committee vote
The whole problem from the very beginning with this project is that the developer did not have funds to invest. Although the project was admirable, a developer cannot expect to only have public subsidy just for the sake of affordable housing. I had hoped that the developer would have been able to find the necessary funds for their portion of the investment, but obviously that did not happen. I guess it's a good lesson for people to learn. Karen Collier Linden Hills
[Mpls] Boulevard development loses committee vote
Here's a different way of looking at public subsidies for housing. Can anyone produce evidence that shows that these subsidies ACTUALLY REDUCE the amount of rent that the developer charges? In the case of Seven Corners apartments ($20 million plus in subsidies) the rents (for studio apartment) were $630, compared to $525 across the street at my building (indoor pool, private balconies, no subsidies.) In the case of Riverside Plaza, the rents were actually HIGHER than market rent (studios $650) - but no one noticed because the Federal government paid most of it. Were all of the subsidized riverfront developments sold and rented at below market rates? Not the ones that I know about. It seems to me that, in an effort to help those in need, we're giving all the money to the wrong party - the developer who ends up with a multi-million dollar asset (at no cost to himself.) First, decide WHO you are trying to help. Then, decide HOW MUCH you are willing to subsidize on their behalf. $10,000 per family? $20,000? $100,000. How much for an able bodied person who would rather drink than work? For example: A 4 person family might need an extra $300 each month to pay rent in the apartment of their choice (there are lots of them available.) It makes no sense to give Mr. X $2 million to build an apartment that the family may or may not have access to. How do we know WHO will be living in the 10 or 15 subsidized units for the next 10, 20, 30 years? Investors (as opposed to developers) would be eager to build houses and apartments IF they knew that they could attract buyers/renters who could actually afford to buy/rent at market rates. More jobs at higher wages would have the same effect. Lots of developers have become multi-millionaires by helping the poor. Vicky Heller North Oaks ___ Minneapolis Issues Forum - A Civil City Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest option, and more: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
RE: [Mpls] Boulevard development loses committee vote
Victoria Heller asked, Can anyone produce evidence that shows that these subsidies ACTUALLY REDUCE the amount of rent that the developer charges? Rents at tax credit developments are restricted, usually for 30 years. HUD sets the maximum allowable rents each year based on 1) the area's median income; 2) the income restriction of the units (i.e., 30% of area median income (AMI)); and 3) the number of bedrooms. Because the maximum allowable rents are based on the countys or regions median income, the allowable rents sometimes exceed the achievable market rents in a neighborhood. Therefore most lenders and state housing finance agencies require that projects be underwritten at rents at least 10% below comparable market rate rents. With apologies to those without HTML email or receiving the digest version of this, the 2002 maximum allowable tax credit gross rents (including all utilities) in Minneapolis are: Bedrooms 60% AMI 50% AMI 40% AMI 30% AMI Studio $ 805 $ 671 $ 537 $ 403 1 Bedroom 863 719 575 431 2 Bedroom 1,035 862 690 517 3 Bedroom 1,196 996 797 598 4 Bedroom 1,335 1,112 890 667 5 Bedroom 1,472 1,226 981 736 The 2002 maximum income levels vary by household size and are as follows: % AMI 1-person 2-person 3-person 4-person 5-person 60% $32,220 $36,840 $41,400 $46,020 $49,680 50% $26,850 $30,700 $34,500 $38,350 $41,400 40% $21,480 $24,560 $27,600 $30,680 $33,120 45% $24,165 $27,630 $31,050 $34,515 $37,260 30% $16,110 $18,420 $20,700 $23,010 $24,840 John Rocker Calhoun
Re: [Mpls] Boulevard development loses committee vote
If I am reading Mr. Rocker's charts correctly, I could receive several million dollars in subsidies, and then rent one of my studio apartments to someone who makes $32,220 for $805 per month. That's a hefty rent! Why again would we subsidize this project? It seems like the renter is getting the shaft - and the taxpayers too! Vicky Heller North Oaks
