subsidize here and now; do not force out, then scramble, then work to find subsidize housing
-posted in comment section of san jose spotlight article: san jose rent hike could push out tenants
*****
As someone with a lot of experience renting, a lot of experience living paycheck to paycheck, and a lot of experience with being forced to move; I ache to read about this rent hike; and can easily see the terrible consequences the low income renters (individuals, couples, parents, children, grandparents) will have to face.
But those terrible consequences are not exclusive to the
people forced to move; those consequences impact everyone who calls San Jose
home.
As someone with fresh and new experience researching, studying,
learning about the homelessness crisis in general, and as a leading member of
NOTonNOBLE; vehemently opposing tiny
homes being built near ANY school, library, daycare, park or nature reserve
I am inspired to slow down here and take a deeper look at what
is contributing to the crisis and what can, realistically, be done.
I want to discuss exclusively, low income citizens; people
who are healthy, who are working and contributing, living hand to mouth, so to
speak, paycheck to paycheck, -the people
for whom a rent increase will force a move -to a different location; to the streets..
When you are already facing a homelessness crisis; why on
earth would you contribute even more to it?
This failing tiny home trend started as a result of this
very crisis. I asked then, and ask again
now: Doesn’t it make much more sense to
exercise rent control policies, than to force another population of human
beings on to the streets, and then scramble for what to do with them? And then try and solve by spending millions
upon millions building these densely populated caged tiny home sites; -that no one wants or trusts, that are
researchably failing in cities/states across the U.S., and that encroach incrementally upon very
precious and sacred land space.
Rent increases are the most counterproductive thing we could
possibly do during this crisis. And if
we are going to do something
-temporarily; to address the crisis, I highly recommend you take the
millions you would use to build densely populated caged tiny home sites, and
instead -subsidize the rent for these
tenants.
Now, I hope everyone realizes, this can’t remain a
practice. If every time rent increases,
and low income people are no longer able to afford their rent; of course law abiding, hard working, tax
payers are not suddenly and permanently responsible for picking up the
slack. That results in an entirely
different disaster.
And I hope everyone realizes, ‘rent control’ or ‘rent restrictions’ are not synonymous
with never increasing rent. Of course rent
will increase; of course the people who own, invest in and rent property have
their own bills/financial responsibilities; they also have to respond to
inflation, higher taxes, etc.
But, from everything I’ve read and researched so far, -smaller rent increases, with greater notice
to the tenants would help significantly in addressing our homelessness crisis. And a halt on any increase during this time
of crisis, is highly suggested.
And from everything I’ve read and researched so far, the
destiny for tiny home tenants is to move them into subsidized housing. Why wouldn’t we just subsidize here and now
vs. force them out, pay millions, encroach on land space, only to land them
back into a subsidized situation?
Especially where we have low-income (vs. no income),
working, contributing, citizens, with a track record of paying rent; but unable
to afford an increase.. -Let’s do
everything we can to help them remain in the place they currently call home.
Hello Ms. Kay. Thank you for your thoughtful letter about affordable housing.
Your points about rent control and rent increases certainly strike a chord with many people. In fact, the City of San José limits rent increases on many homes.
- Nearly 40,000 apartments in San José are covered by the Apartment Rent Ordinance, which limits how much and how often landlords can increase rents. More than 120,000 people live in these rent-stabilized apartments.
- Nearly 20,000 apartments are deed-restricted affordable housing. This means there are legal limits on the rents that can be charged. The rent limits vary based on the number of bedrooms in each apartment. More than 60,000 people live in these apartments.
- Nearly 11,000 mobilehome parking spaces are covered by the Mobilehome Rent Ordinance, which places rent control on these parking spaces. Over 30,000 people live in these mobilehomes.
It is important to note the City of San José doesn’t own any of these properties. Private landlords own and operate them. While many rent increases were prohibited for nearly two years during the pandemic, it is illegal for the City to simply bar landlords from ever increasing rent. And whenever a rent increase occurs, it will unfortunately cause pain for some of those impacted.
Also, many San José residents receive rental subsidies today. I don’t know the exact number off the top of my head, but thousands of tenants receive some type of federal, state or local subsidy to help them pay rent and remain housed.
Regards,
Jeffrey Scott
City of San José Housing Department
*********************************************************************
"Thank You!" for this information Jeff. I will update my blog accordingly. If you are willing and able to provide direct link(s) validating this information, that would be awesome!! Blessings, -sandra
posted by SANDRA HARRISON KAY @ 9:10 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home