On 1/24/04 11:05 AM, "Bill Cullen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> 
> Margaret wrote:  Vacancy increasing does not equal affordability.
> 
> Is $599 affordable?  Well, according to HUD, 30% of the area median income
> is $22,590.  That means (using the 30% of income can go towards housing
> rule) this household can afford $564.75.  A tad under what I am charging
> right now.

This suggests to me that HUD may be part of the problem. If 30% of the area
median income (I'm assuming this is for a household) is $22,590, then that
would mean that the area median income for a household is about $75,000.
It's been a long time since I took statistics, but that number seems skewed
a bit high to me. 

I have to wonder if it's the same kind of fuzzy math that allows our federal
government to claim the "average household" saved thousands of dollars from
the 2001 tax cuts when most people in my income range ($40K) got maybe a
hundred bucks back, tops.

> The points I want to make is this:
> 
> - Rental housing is AVAILABLE and landlords are HUNGRY.

Then I would suggest lowering rents a bit further. I recognize that all
landlords have expenses to pay that go into determining rental rates, but
getting part of your investment back seems a better strategy than getting
none of it back by holding an empty unit.
 
> - Affordable housing advocates seem to focus on BUILDING more homes when we
> already have 17,770 empty now.
> 
> - What we need is a small subsidy to make EXISTING apartments affordable.
> 
> - AND we need more readily available social services for the homeless with
> personal challenges.

This I would agree with, but at the same time, we also need to be replacing
substandard housing with better facilities and continue to maintain some
competition on the low end of the price range with landlords who are not
investing in their properties to keep them up to snuff (not you, Bill.)

We also need to get a jump on making sure we will have housing available for
the additional million people that will be moving to the metro area over the
next 30 years. Given current interest rates, now is the time.

Mark Snyder
Windom Park

REMINDERS:
1. Think a member has violated the rules? Email the list manager at [EMAIL PROTECTED] 
before continuing it on the list. 
2. Don't feed the troll! Ignore obvious flame-bait.

For state and national discussions see: http://e-democracy.org/discuss.html
For external forums, see: http://e-democracy.org/mninteract
________________________________

Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy
Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls

Reply via email to