California’s affordable housing stock is not keeping up with its population growth.
“It all boils down to this,” Thornberg said. “Taxes and regulations are a problem for state businesses, but it’s not what defines California. In the end, this California growth story is a lack-of-housing story.”
California is in the midst of a severe and growing housing crisis, and the Legislative leadership in Sacramento appears to not have the faintest understanding about the causes and possible real solutions to the problem.
Sheila Dey, Executive Director of the Western Manufactured Housing Communities Association.April 3, 2016
WMA’s executive director, Sheila Dey writes, “Instead of addressing the root cause, some policymakers are championing rent control, despite the fact that it has never effectively preserved or expanded affordable housing stocks.”
Slow-growth policies have indeed reduced suburban sprawl, but there’s little doubt that they have also put upward pressure on housing prices. So have the increasing costs of building permits, environmental impact studies and a whole host of other regulations now required of developers.
The housing market in the region and the rest of the state will continue to be influenced by trends among the two largest generations: baby-boomers and millennials. In simplest terms, the boomers aren’t moving, and the millennials are – out of the state – driven in part by high home prices in California, said Leslie Appleton-Young, chief economist for the California Association of Realtors.
Three new studies commissioned by Next 10 — a San Francisco think tank that focuses on quality of life in California — make a powerful case that extreme housing costs threaten to make much of the state like Malibu and Santa Barbara, where only the wealthy can afford to live and most of the workers who support them have long commutes from cheaper inland areas. The analyses — prepared by Beacon Economics, a respected Los Angeles-based consultant — make a powerful case that the focus of state anti-poverty efforts should be bringing down housing costs.
Three new studies show that although California has one of the highest rates of job growth in the country, its cost of housing and high-wage jobs could push lower earners out of the state as they seek someplace more affordable.
The problem with inclusionary policies and other coercive approaches to housing, such as rent control ordinances, is that while they may be politically gratifying, they divert attention from the real problem of housing in California, which is that we have way too little of it.
California’s boom in high-wage jobs, such as those in the tech sector, has shoved housing prices skyward and threatens to squeeze low- and middle-income wage earners out of the Golden State, a report released Wednesday warned.
New data has brought a new urgency to the souring fortunes of California’s middle class. “Not only are Californians leaving the state in large numbers, but the people heading for the exits are disproportionately middle class working families — the demographic backbone of American society,” the American Interest recently noted.
During a marathon meeting Tuesday, the council approved a new policy to encourage preserving the city’s 59 mobile home parks — one of San Jose’s last affordable housing options amid soaring rents — and setting guidelines for closing a park. The policy also enhanced tenant protections, including giving residents a fair price for their homes and relocation benefits, and specified the City Council must approve closures.
Debate about California’s housing crisis typically revolves around low-income households. The rule of thumb is that people shouldn’t spend more than 30 percent of their income on housing. But more than 90 percent of California families earning less than $35,000 per year spend more than 30 percent of their income on housing.
This isn’t new; that percentage has been stubbornly high for years. Nor is this an exclusively Californian problem — the comparable figure for the United States overall is 83 percent.
The final SAFE Act regulations appear to exempt seller carry back loans if the individual is not engaged in the “business” of a Mortgage Loan Originator. In the appendix, page 146, (b) the regulations say:
Not Engaged in the Business of a Mortgage Loan Originator. The following examples illustrate when an individual generally does not “engage in the business of loan originator”:
WMA is committed to protecting information disclosed through this website. Your use of this website, or any inquiry or comment you send, may be disclosed to WMA members and authorized entities solely to advance the mission and purpose of CAHHS/CHA.