Home › Blogs › Larsen on everything
« 'Indiana Jones and the Vinyl Artifact' | Main | Don't let the words get twisted »
March 29, 2005
Who's the housing obstacle?
An online response to my latest Star essay "Why hide affordability?" from someone who shall remain anonymous because he or she preferred to be identified only as "Anonymous," noted: "Demand 50/70% be affordable. How does that get paid for? More taxes I assume."
I must ask, what part of "buying" an affordable home don't Anonymous and other people understand?
When only 20 percent of the people in the county can afford a home priced at $500,000 or $600,000 or more, does it make sense to have 80 percent of the housing built here starting at those prices? Hardly.
Affordable housing is the kind that people earning the median income in Ventura County currently pegged at $77,400 a year for a family of four can buy, securing a mortgage from a bank that fits in with the amount they want to budget for a home. And the only taxes involved are those the new homeowners pay, the same kind of taxes all other homeowners pays.
Is there a need for housing subsidized by the government? Yes, but that type of housing is not what the debate over affordable housing is about. This is a battle being waged to let those who consider themselves the middle class live in the area in which they work and to buy what should be a long-term investment. In addition, affordable housing is needed to meet the expected growth this county faces. No amount of whining by those who would have theirs and don't want others to get theirs will blunt the fact that growth will occur.
Providing affordable housing can be done. Affordable means foregoing a few amenities no vaulted ceilings, medium-priced appliances, living room but no family room, eating at the table in the kitchen rather than in a formal dining room, a small size on a smaller lot, a condominium rather than a single-family detached unit. Affordable means letting people who buy the house decide when and how they want to upgrade or add on.
Granted, developers like to build the bigger houses with more amenities because they can take a bigger profit on each unit sold. But who should city governments cater to most: The people in the community elected officials serve; or the interests of a business that most likely isn't even located in the county?
To those who continue to equate "affordable" with a "burden on society": Take off the blinders and look in the mirror. You'll see one of the greatest obstacles to ensuring Ventura County remains a wonderful place to live, one in which all needs including the need to preserve some open space are balanced.



The price of housing here is a bigger problem than most people realize. For example, if the cost of living here is only a little less than that in Santa Barbara, and about the same as Los Angeles, why are people going to remain here, when they can enjoy a more cosmopolitan lifestyle in either of those two locales?
Ventura is a good place to live, and (I assume, not being a parent) a good place to raise children. But if people cannot afford to do these things here, then they'll be glad to move elsewhere. Why do you think there's currently an exodus of people from the Central Coast to the Central Valley?
It's because you can still buy a comfortable home in Bakersfield for $250,000. Here, that might get you a studio townhouse. Maybe.
Posted by: Devin Rambo at March 29, 2005 11:53 AM