The Bay Area’s housing finance agency will meet Tuesday night to discuss a bond that would fund 72,000 affordable housing units around the region.
The Bay Area Housing Finance Authority, which aims to create enough safe and affordable housing for all Bay Area residents, will put a $20 billion general obligation bond on the November ballot.
Tuesday’s meeting will allow the community to learn more about the potential bond that, if passed, is expected to create 72,000 new affordable homes in the Bay Area’s nine counties, while also funding efforts to preserve existing affordable housing and protections for tenants.
Funded by property taxes, the $20 billion bond would require an estimated tax of $19 per $100,000 in assessed value, or about $190 per year for a $1 million home.
BAHFA’s webinar presentation materials from last August explained that 80% of the funding would go back to the counties from which they were generated and 20% would be retained by BAHFA for a regional investment program.
The virtual meeting is set for July 16, at 6 p.m. at https://cccounty-us.zoom.us/j/86885426838.
23 comments
A fool and his money are soon parted. If you vote for this you’re a fool.
Enough of this BS already!
$20 billion to construct 72,000 units? You gotta be joking.
Back in 2019 the average cost to build a BMR unit in Bay Area was $660K.
https://www.bayareaeconomy.org/how-much-does-it-cost-to-produce-one-unit-of-below-market-housing-in-the-bay-area/
Can you guess what happened with construction costs since 2019? Right…
So even if the entire $20 billion is spent on new construction, it can fund no more than 30,000 units. But in reality only half of the money is earmarked for new construction, with the rest to be “invested” in whatever.
And the kicker? How long would you have to pay those $19 per $100K assessed value? Which is only an estimate, and may end up a lot higher? Try to find an answer here:
https://mtc.ca.gov/sites/default/files/documents/2024-06/BAHFA_Bond_Explainer_06-27-2024.pdf
A hint – you won’t.
Vote “No” on any measures for new bonds and taxes!
And 20% for a “regional investment program.
Continuing with the lack of accountability.
Absolutely NOT!
No! there would be more – this can only be stopped by votes! vote NO!
Why isn’t this a business venture? Why do taxpayers fund this? I don’t think local governments funded the building of houses around the towns. I guess they hope you forgot. Perhaps we should have politicians wear spandex outfits with capes and a P emblazon on the front for “Super Politician.” Should fit their egos.
It’s not a business venture because no rational bank or investment firm would put up the money needed for this proposal. Unfortunately, neither of the main political parties have the stomach to rein in the cost of the government we are electing them to oversee. Both parties are focused on short term results which you get from spending more money to keep various sectors of voters and political donors happy.
Give an inch…they’ll take a mile ~~~ The BAHFA🐙 Board, is comprised of the SAME🐙 MEMBERS as the MTC🐙 Commission, and the ABAG🐙 Executive Board. 🐙 long and far-reaching tentacles feeding off OPM💸….never satisfied!
Property Bonds, like School Bonds… one way around the prop 13 tax restrictions. Once they get a bond…they just keep re-financing and stretching it out longer and longer…. We’re still paying for “re-fi’ed” school bonds from the 1980’s.
On top of the other 50 bonds!!! Vote no, no matter how they label it!
An when bonds are paid off what will be the final price tag for tax payers ? ?
An what is duration of bonds 40 years ? ? ?
Why not just set up a sidewalk stand like Lucy did and instead of it saying”the doctor is real in” it should just say”free money”
Don’t be fools people. VOTE NO!!!!
Taxed Enough Already…. remember that?
Vote NO on this UNELECTED and UNACCOUNTABLE regional government Bay Area Housing Finance Agency BOND MEASURE. There are also 3 other statewide bond propositions on the November general election ballot, two of which deal with housing for the homeless and veterans. Be aware that this bond measure currently needs 66.67% of the vote to pass, but Proposition 5, which is on the November ballot, would lower the thres hold for future local bond measures to fund housing projects and public infrastructure to 55%, and if Proposition 5 passes in November, then this regional bond measure passes with only 55% of the vote, and not the current 66.67% needed to pass.
Thank you for your very informative comment!! So voting NO on 5 and NO on Affordable housing bond.
Why would anyone give the government in this state more money to spend after Newsom vetoed a bill that hold them accountable for money spent on the homeless? Why is the government asking for $20 billion dollars to build housing when that is a function of the private sector? Absolutely not.
Nope. That is the only acceptable answer to the governments request for more money.
The government in the housing industry, what could go wrong. This bond is only for the initial investment, they don’t talk about future maintenance where they will ask for another bond. Vote No. The government does not belong in the housing development business.
I vote NO on every bond measure these days.
Smart, my dad always said, unless they can convince you they absolutely can’t live without it, vote no.
California elected officials seem to be of single minded purpose:
Financially penalize to the fullest extent possible, those people who have the audacity to work for a living and pay taxes.
Democrats never miss a chance for any kind of tax increase. I bet this will pass overwhelmingly.
Big surprise, an avalanche of one-sided comments on this issue… 😄
Comments are closed.