Amazing that San Francisco can't do this (Palo Alto, Nice: section 8, apartments)

[Independentthinking]

I'm in Austin looking at apartments with my wife (we're leaving the Bay Area and renting out our house). We accidentally went to the wrong complex (the one we were looking for was right next door). As we waited for the leasing agent to get off the phone, we noticed a sign with income requirements for anyone trying to rent there. At first I thought it was section 8. But then, doing a quick calculation for the COL, I realized these apartments were for Middle Class families. What a novel concept. Something for the group that typically gets screwed by government policies. Way to go Austin!

[BurnInTheMil]

Originally Posted by Independentthinking

I'm in Austin looking at apartments with my wife (we're leaving the Bay Area and renting out our house). We accidentally went to the wrong complex (the one we were looking for was right next door). As we waited for the leasing agent to get off the phone, we noticed a sign with income requirements for anyone trying to rent there. At first I thought it was section 8. But then, doing a quick calculation for the COL, I realized these apartments were for Middle Class families. What a novel concept. Something for the group that typically gets screwed by government policies. Way to go Austin!

There are multiple cities that do this, when we lived & were looking at places a ew years back around Nashville, TN, it was the same concept. It’s rather nice to know some places don’t completely try to make you broke

Also, congrats on getting out. I will be out of here around Summer/Fall of 2018

[Independentthinking]

Originally Posted by Greg10556

There are multiple cities that do this, when we lived & were looking at places a ew years back around Nashville, TN, it was the same concept. It’s rather nice to know some places don’t completely try to make you broke

Also, congrats on getting out. I will be out of here around Summer/Fall of 2018

Nice.

[HockeyMac18]

Originally Posted by Independentthinking

I'm in Austin looking at apartments with my wife (we're leaving the Bay Area and renting out our house). We accidentally went to the wrong complex (the one we were looking for was right next door). As we waited for the leasing agent to get off the phone, we noticed a sign with income requirements for anyone trying to rent there. At first I thought it was section 8. But then, doing a quick calculation for the COL, I realized these apartments were for Middle Class families. What a novel concept. Something for the group that typically gets screwed by government policies. Way to go Austin!

San Francisco DOES do that. It's called BMR (Below Market Rate). There are BMR programs for renting and buying. The ones for buying are quite generous, they usually allow people earning over 100% median income to qualify.

Mayor's Office of Housing and Community Development |


Other cities in the Bay Area also do this. A few off the top of my head (I know there are more):

https://www.cityofberkeley.info/BMRr...ymanagers.aspx
https://www.cityofsanmateo.org/1095/...ionary-Program
https://www.menlopark.org/369/Below-...ousing-program
BMR Administration - Palo Alto Housing


Enjoy the move to Austin.

[Independentthinking]

Originally Posted by HockeyMac18

San Francisco DOES do that. It's called BMR (Below Market Rate). There are BMR programs for renting and buying. The ones for buying are quite generous, they usually allow people earning over 100% median income to qualify.

Mayor's Office of Housing and Community Development |


Other cities in the Bay Area also do this. A few off the top of my head (I know there are more):

https://www.cityofberkeley.info/BMRr...ymanagers.aspx
https://www.cityofsanmateo.org/1095/...ionary-Program
https://www.menlopark.org/369/Below-...ousing-program
BMR Administration - Palo Alto Housing


Enjoy the move to Austin.

I just looked at the charts and it doesn't look remotely close to what I saw in Austin. Keep in mind Hockey, when I say Middle Class, I am not talking about median income (I don't think a couple gets by on that in San Francisco). I think the last I checked it was around $90k. I look at the Middle Class across the country in the $50k-$75k range. And then if I adjust for the COL in San Francisco, that family is in the $100k-$150k income range. The city we'll be moving to (Austin) is 53% on COL compared to San Francisco (so pretty close to what I listed). The maximum a couple could earn to qualify for these apartments (and they were quite nice) is $74,760 (so $141k in San Francisco income). To me, that really capture that "sweet spot" of a Middle Class family (a group that never seems to get a break).

[HockeyMac18]

Originally Posted by Independentthinking

I just looked at the charts and it doesn't look remotely close to what I saw in Austin. Keep in mind Hockey, when I say Middle Class, I am not talking about median income (I don't think a couple gets by on that in San Francisco). I think the last I checked it was around $90k. I look at the Middle Class across the country in the $50k-$75k range. And then if I adjust for the COL in San Francisco, that family is in the $100k-$150k income range. The city we'll be moving to (Austin) is 53% on COL compared to San Francisco (so pretty close to what I listed). The maximum a couple could earn to qualify for these apartments (and they were quite nice) is $74,760 (so $141k in San Francisco income). To me, that really capture that "sweet spot" of a Middle Class family (a group that never seems to get a break).

How would you define "middle", if not by middle (median) income?

What you're thinking of is "upper middle class" - which often does get mixed in with "middle class".


And really, this is an expectation thing you're talking about. People think they're making some amount of money, and think they should have a certain QOL to go with that income. I don't fault that thinking, by the way - but it's not the same thing as defining the "middle class".

It's no secrete that money doesn't go as far here...and what would traditionally be "upper middle class" income, does not give you much power to rent/buy here (if you're looking to get into housing at current market rate prices). But if you're going to define "the middle", I can't think of another way to get there if not by income level brackets.



I'd be curious to see the charts for Austin - I have my doubts that they're using formulas that are that different from what is being used in the Bay Area for the various BMR programs. I"d be surprised if they're going above 120% of median income (which is generally the top end of BMR assistance in the Bay Area).

From some quick searching, here's what I found:

https://www.austintexas.gov/departme...ter-assistance

http://austintexas.gov/department/return-on-investment

http://austintexas.gov/department/ro...est-mfi-served
30%, 50%, 80% AMI...

Looks very similar to SF's program. SF's program possibly looks more exhaustive considering the "to buy" program has more lenient requirements than what I'm seeing on Austin's site.

Wait lists in SF's programs are probably more extreme, however. That wouldn't surprise me at all.

[bmw335xi]

Isn't this what BMR is?

Personally I'm against income caps etc, but I'd be open to having non-owner occupied properties taxed at a higher rate or something along those lines. My issue with BMR is that it squeezes out the people on the border who didn't make the limits and then makes the rest of the properties more expensive.

[sav858]

Yeah the Bay Area has middle class oriented BMR programs already but they're all wait listed or have a lottery so good luck.

[Independentthinking]

Originally Posted by HockeyMac18

How would you define "middle", if not by middle (median) income?

What you're thinking of is "upper middle class" - which often does get mixed in with "middle class".


And really, this is an expectation thing you're talking about. People think they're making some amount of money, and think they should have a certain QOL to go with that income. I don't fault that thinking, by the way - but it's not the same thing as defining the "middle class".

It's no secrete that money doesn't go as far here...and what would traditionally be "upper middle class" income, does not give you much power to rent/buy here (if you're looking to get into housing at current market rate prices). But if you're going to define "the middle", I can't think of another way to get there if not by income level brackets.



I'd be curious to see the charts for Austin - I have my doubts that they're using formulas that are that different from what is being used in the Bay Area for the various BMR programs. I"d be surprised if they're going above 120% of median income (which is generally the top end of BMR assistance in the Bay Area).

From some quick searching, here's what I found:

https://www.austintexas.gov/departme...ter-assistance

Return on Investment | Housing | AustinTexas.gov - The Official Website of the City of Austin

ROI Developments sorted by Lowest MFI Served | Housing | AustinTexas.gov - The Official Website of the City of Austin
30%, 50%, 80% AMI...

Looks very similar to SF's program. SF's program possibly looks more exhaustive considering the "to buy" program has more lenient requirements than what I'm seeing on Austin's site.

Wait lists in SF's programs are probably more extreme, however. That wouldn't surprise me at all.

What can I tell you. I saw it with my own eyes in black in white this morning (even wrote it down). And the lady told me that there were a certain percentage of upper income people allowed (they had already filled that quota so they were only allowed to rent the rest of the units at the income maximum I stated)

Most definitions I've seen to describe the Middle Class puts people in the range I stated. The problem is, there is no adjustment for COL. I believe it's grossly inaccurate to not take that into account, and especially when it comes to taxation. It doesn't appear to me that SF treats it's community as fairly as Austin and other areas around the country does. And that group never seems to catch a break on anything. And now, it looks like they"ll be screwed over by the proposed tax plan.

[likealady]

Originally Posted by bmw335xi

Isn't this what BMR is?

Personally I'm against income caps etc, but I'd be open to having non-owner occupied properties taxed at a higher rate or something along those lines. My issue with BMR is that it squeezes out the people on the border who didn't make the limits and then makes the rest of the properties more expensive.

And then people also take advantage of their situation.
San Francisco’s Below Market Rate Homes Illegally Up For Rent « CBS San Francisco