“Heck” No To Sacramento’s Measure U


Image result for no on measure u

In the fall of 2012, citizens approved Measure U a temporary half cent sales tax increase. Sacramento ,like the rest of the country was hit hard by Financial Crises of 2007-2008 .  Fire Stations, Libraries, Community centers closed all over the city.   There were layoffs in every department including Fire and police. Income from this tax hike would used to shore up police, libraries and other services throughout the city. A temporary tax increase that would end in March 2019

The tax increased concerned business leaders back in 2012.

The Sacramento Metro Chamber reminded city council couldn’t resolve its budget’s structural imbalance even when it had healthy coffers, pre-2008, so why should it be entrusted with millions now, especially during a struggling economy?

I don’t have confidence that the money will necessarily be spent wisely,” The sales-tax boost will take leaders’ “eyes off the ball” when it comes to making government more efficient and effective.

Sacramento Developer, Mike Heller

2018

Sacramento’s and tax based has grown significantly and Sacramento still cant manage its finances. Somethings wrong in City Hall

During the lean years, hundred of thousands was spent on Consultants to Retain the Sacramento Kings.

The City has recently issued $240 million dollars in bonds towards an unprofitable Convention Center which has been a drain on the city for more than twenty years.

Darrell Steinberg wants a tax increase that will have a negative impact on the city’s poor.  Business may suffer as the Sacramento will have the highest Sales Tax in the region.

While City leaders say the money will go towards Police, other core departments. The language isn’t there. There isn’t a mandate that says how the money is to be spent.

Don’t give Darrell Steinberg and city leaders A Blank Check.

Insist they live as we do, within our means !

SAY HECK NO TO MEASURE U

Advertisements

Rent Control Sacramento: The City offers a Bandaid to slow the bleeding


Related image

Sacramento is the fastest growing big city in the State of California.  The capital city has seen a 9.4 increase in rent, three times higher than the national average and double the states average.

With rents averaging $1700, the Capital city has become an attractive and lower cost alternative to renters in the San Francisco Bay Area and Los Angeles County.  The city has become popular with Millennials.  Sacramento, is the third most popular destination after Seattle and Nashville.

The new arrivals aren’t challenged by the rent prices

In Sacramento, fewer landlord are offering yearly leases ,opting for month to month agreements where they can increase rents with a 30 notice.     Many long term renters have experienced several rent increases this year.    After 16 years in a South Land Park Apartment, one tenant received 3 rent increases in less then seven months. Her dishwasher and disposal hasn’t worked in more than two year.  Today her rent is 62% of her income and she is not alone.    Sacramento’s eviction rate is more than twice the state average.

Fast Facts 

Don’t believe the Hype, not everyone is leaving California for Texas, Nevada, Oregon and Arizona, the state’s population continues to grow.  Nearly 40 million people call the Golden State Home.    There is a housing shortage in most population centers in state with Sacramento being one of the worst in the nation. According to Yardi matrix , Sacramento ranked 90 of the 96 markets. While Sacramento needs 2700 units annually to meet demand, only 593 apartments were completed in 2017.

While there has always been a need for affordable housing, the city eased requirements shortly after the Real Estate bubble burst and reduced funding for the program.

The Basic Myth 

Rent control will stop construction on new housing units……..

In most cities in California, (including Sacramento) apartment construction are at record levels.   Even in cities with existing rent control laws.  Developers set the rent on new developments,  once occupied, the cities rent controls would apply.   

Passage of Proposition 10 in November would allow California cities to place rent controls on new development. 

 (If the developer cant make a viable profit they may choose not to build.)

Tenants will not leave their rent control apartments, resulting in an shortages.  

The objective data, doesn’t support this.

 

Sacramento’s 

Image result for band aid

It very clear, Sacramento’s Mayor Darrell Steinberg’s and some members of the city council do not support any form of rent control.   His support of temporary measures disappointed many attending the rent control workshop last night.

Steinberg: “I do not favor permanent rent control in our city,” “I believe building more affordable housing is the best way to stabilize rents. 

  Funding for affordable housing may take 7 to 10 years. The reality for his constituents is they needed rent relief yesterday. They needed relief the first hour he took office.

(Government:   I want you to know we understand what your going through, needing shelter from the rain.  Currently there isn’t funding for umbrellas.   I have instructed my  has been instructed to locate funding.   Finding a source may take some time, but I assure you we will make this a top Priority. After a few necessary meetings with governmental agencies,  we should get funding for that umbrella you clearly need in two years, nine years tops! )  

Mayor Steinberg, supports a cap of 5% on annual rent increases that would expire after three years. The cap, would apply to apartments older than 20 years.

This is a slap in the face for renters in the city.  He has excluding more than a few thousand apartments units, built during Sacramento’s last building boom between the late nineties to 2007. What happens to rents after the cap expires? 

Council members Steve Hansen, Eric Guerra and Rick Jennings suggested mediation be available to tenants if a landlord attempted to raise the rent by more than 6 percent.  Their plan would also make it mandatory for landlords with more than five units to offer 18-month leases, which Jennings said isn’t as extreme as rent control and would help stabilize rental rates.“  According to their proposal, if a tenant who receives a rent increase of more than 6 percent within a 12-month period requests mediation, they must still pay rent, plus the 6 percent increase, until the dispute is resolved.

Mediation?  Rent control let talk about it?  This proposal is completely absurd! 

This was clearly written by individuals who a have close ties with developers or own property in the city.  Rent control isn’t a new language, there isn’t a code to crack.  Not only is there several resources available members of their staff could make calls to cities along I-80 as  Richmond, Berkeley and San Francisco have rent control legislation in place. There is nothing ambiguous in those cities agreements.  In San Francisco, rent increases are limited to 6% a year*  no meetings, the landowner would need to get permission from the city to increase rents beyond the cap.   (* The landlord can exceed the cap if capital improvements are required) 

 

Image result for REALITY GIF

 

Sacramento currently needs 2700 units of new housing annually.  In time, the demand  will only increase.  The city’s homeless population is growing by the hour. Sacramento has joined, San Jose, San Francisco and many other cities with employed individuals living in their cars, camping in our parks, because they cant afford housing.   According to the Sacramento County Coroner’s office, in 2016, 78 homeless people died within the county. But in 2017, 124 people died: an increase of more than 150%. One homeless person dies every three days.

This issue of housing and homelessness isn’t just a Sacramento problem its a national problem.  Its a national disgrace.  Ignored until it overwhelms.

The primary issue isn’t rent in the the new developments in Sacramento.  It is the exorbitant rent increases renters are experiencing all over the city.    Long term tenants are facing rent increases because the landlord can.   Resulting in fear, insecurity, and helplessness.

Proposition 10, may not be the answer to the state’s housing shortage. It is an reaction, to the inaction of local government .  The noise generated by the  renters of Sacramento have forced Mayor Steinberg and company to look at rent control.  Their proposed fixes won’t slow the bleeding Sacramento.

A genuine approach would be an ordinance that would immediately cap all rent increases to 6% city wide.   An ordinance that would prevent evictions without cause. (which would prevent landowner from evicting tenants to circumventing the law)

Tax incentives to those developers that include market rate housing in their projects.  Incentives to developers who add housing to their projects throughout these adding additional intensives for developer to build near light rail stations.  These projects could be managed thorough  Sacramento’s Housing Authority.   Returning to reality, none of these are likely to happen.

Renters of Sacramento,will have to make rent control a part of law.   There is no need to   have to re-invent the wheel as several templates   There are rent control advocates in the State that will participate in penning the law.

Image result for rent control in the united states

 

CityFella

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Street Cars: Trump Delays funding on Sacramento’s next White Elephant


Image result for white elephant

white elephant (def)  a possession that is useless or troublesome, especially one that is expensive to maintain or difficult to dispose of.

 

 2015, Supporters of  Sacramento’s measure B told us.  Sacramento would  benefit all our neighborhoods by improving mobility between midtown, downtown, and West Sacramento with an affordable transit system that is authentically Sacramento.   Measure B would improve our economy. Streetcars create a vibrant local economy, which means more small businesses and more jobs in downtown and midtown.  The streetcar project will help create 12,000 jobs and $2.5 billion in economic development over 20 years and will allow seniors, students, visitors, workers, and central city residents to go car-free.

Those opposed to Measure B said, the streetcar project would operate at an enormous annual loss. Ticket sales are expected to cover about 20% of cost of operation; the other 80% will require a subsidy.  The shortfall will likely come from the City’s General Fund, reducing local services such as parks, bike lanes, street repairs, the homeless, and police.  It runs on, or near, the same Streets served by existing light rail and buses.

November 2015: Measure B, didn’t receive the required ( two thirds) required to pass the tax increase.

Despite its failure, Mayor Steinberg and other city leaders continued to press on. The voter rejected project received funding from the state and a 100 million dollar  commitment from Congress.  The Riverfront streetcar project grew in size, from 3.3 miles to 4.4 miles ending at West Sacramento’s City Hall.

The arguments against the project in 2015, continues to be true in 2018.  The proposed route continue to be served by buses and light rail.   While there are more housing along the routes, no one has identified need.

What we do know!

If completed, the route will require a subsidy.   Regional Transit, is looking for riders.

In the last 12 months, Regional Transit has seen more than 2 million fewer bus and light-rail trips compared to the year before, a 10 percent loss. That adds up to a more than $800,000 deficit in fare revenue.  The hope was the Golden 1 Center would attract more customers, but a year after opening and a year after rate hikes, RT just isn’t seeing the impact (CBS Sacramento January 2018)

Nearly four years ago, Regional Transit opened the Green Line from Downtown to Richards Boulevard (Township 9)   Today the line carries fewer than estimated 200 passengers a day is a drain on RT.

Sacramento along with Albuquerque, Dallas, El Paso, Jacksonville, Los Angeles, Minneapolis, New York City, Orange County, Reno, Seattle, Gary,Indiana, St. Petersburg ,Florida and Tempe Arizona.  Recently learned, the funds approved by Congress in March is being held up by President Trump’s Federal Transit Administration.

Thank you, Donald?

It isn’t clear why the Trump’s administration halted transportation funding. If his administration re evaluated the methods used for cities to qualify for funding, then this is a positive move for tax payers.   If the project is completely funded, Sacramento’s Riverfront  street car line will be a financial drain on Sacramento and the cities served by RT on day one.

Its only taxpayer money, the project doesn’t have to make fiscal sense.  Fiscal independent studies aren’t important, history or profitability isn’t important (Sacramento Convention Center) If Des Moines have one, well our city should have one too.

CityFella