Glenwood Meadows affordable housing project fizzles

Despite two and a half years of planning and support from both the City of Glenwood Springs (deferred payment of $800,000 in development fees and construction of a park on the property) and Garfield County ($1.5 million in cash), a proposed 120-unit lower-income apartment project at Glenwood Meadows is dead.

The Colorado Housing and Finance Authority turned down a request from the Aspen-based Dunrene Group for $8.9 million in tax credits.

Arny Porath, the project’s developer, is hoping to build the project on another property, but finding that property could be a challenge.

CHFA previously had awarded the project the tax credits, but developers couldn’t meet the deadline to use them. They reapplied once they had put together a package that included the city and county assistance, but CHFA worried about continuing increases in construction expenses for the project.

While the developers can reapply for the tax credits later this year, but Dunrene Group's Robert MacGregor said he couldn't afford to losing another construction season and the prospoect of even higher construction costs.

Macgregor said he expects he will look to partner with a developer of more traditional middle-class housing on his property. Such a project would have to comply with Glenwood Springs requirement to provide 15 percent affordable housing, or contribute an equivalent amount to an affordable housing fund.

Read Dennis Webb's full article . . .

Eagle County voters head to decide on charter proposal - again

Eagle County residents are considering their second proposed home rule charter in six months. Voters rejected the last charter proposal in November 2006. The ballots are due back to the County Clerk's Office by May 1.

The biggest changes proposed in the new charter would be the addition of two county commissioners, the re-districting of the county for elections, the ability for citizens to put their own proposed laws on election ballots and the removal of the county surveyors position.

Article Seven of the proposed charter calls for the ability of citizens of Eagle County to have the right to petition initiatives and referendums onto the election ballots. Citizens would be able to create or repeal laws through this process on everything except land use and budget issues. To start a citizen-led initiative in an election, 15 percent of the total number of registered voters in the county would have to sign a petition in order to introduce the question on to the ballot.

More info is available at www.homerulefacts.com

The confusing directives of CO school financing

Mark Counch's article "Poorest pay more school taxes," in the April 9th Denver Post is a facsinating analysis of the impacts of competing constitutional ammendents on school financing in Colorado.

The article discusses how state goals of equilizing per student funding across the state combined with the constitutional amendments such as TABOR, Gallagher, and Amendment 23 have created an odd financing equation that ironically eases school spending demands on wealthier communities more than poorer ones.

As the article illustrates, since at least1993, "Colorado taxpayers have picked up an increasing share of the cost of educating children in some of the state's wealthiest school districts. Although the state's share of school bills in poorer districts has also grown, homeowners in those districts are paying higher property-tax bills than they used to pay."

Although the amendments all seemed like good ideas at the time, their combination and location in the state constitution will continue to create headaches for legislators, the Governor, and taxpayers for the forseeable future.

Read the full article . . .

Read Ten Years of Tabor by The Bell Policy Center (PDF)


Click for larger image

TOD can save the planet

Transit oriented development is gaining traction around the U.S. (it's already popular in many other countries) because it can address many community issues -- provide affordable housing, increase transit service, prevent loss of open space, create public places -- at the same time.

And now, in case you needed another reason to support TOD, it can also save the planet. As San Mateo County Supervisior Adrienne Tissier writes,

The solutions to global warming are found in modern urban planning and zoning and three little words: Transit Oriented Development. Build well-designed, affordable housing within walking distance of efficient mass transit, and the air-fouling traffic jams will unclog themselves. Better yet, build well-designed, affordable housing within walking distance of jobs, schools and retail, and car use will plummet.

It is nice to know that something good for a community has a global benefit as well.

Green buildings get preference in Saanich

Saanich, BC wants residential builders to build "green" by cutting "red" tape. It is giving priority to applications for housing projects using energy-efficient components and provide those builders rebates of up to 30 per cent on building-permit fees.

Read the full article . . .

Lack of affordable housing on both coasts

Seattle and Boston are on opposite coasts but they share a common concern -- a lack of affordable housing. And not just a lack of affordable housing for lower income residents. Each city is facing a severe affordable housing shortage for low and middle income residents.

As the Post-Intelligencer reports, the median prices for a house in Seattle was about $450,000 and $290,000 for a condo, while the typical single person in Seattle earned enough to buy a home for just under $200,000. Many median-income workers choose to buy and commute rather than rent and hour commutes each are becoming more and more common and today, only 49 percent of Seattle's workforce lives in the city.

Boston is looking for ways to build affordable housing lost to the free market. Robert Kuttner writes in the Boston Globe, that the $60 billion of federal money spent between 1965 and 1990 to subsidize private developers to build affordable housing in Boston is now being squandered since there were no requirements to keep the units affordable in perpetuity. Once the initial federal loan is paid off, developers/owners are free to sell or rent the housing to the highest bidder. Consequently, the affordable housing built with at taxpayer support is now becoming a windfall profit for the developer/owner.