Blogging Bayport Alameda

July 22, 2016

It’s complicated, continued

Filed under: Alameda — Lauren Do @ 6:02 am

Continued from yesterday, this study is a really good glimpse into how affordable housing is built, the funding is cobbled together, and how ongoing expenses are handled.

So even though we like our black and white characterizations like “all developers are greedy” and “it’s so easy to build affordable housing if developers just reduce the amount of profits they make” one of the things that the study suggests is that while non profit developers are seen in a more positive light, because of the whole “non profit” thing, there are different types of for profit development companies like mac and cheese brands. While technically the end product of a standard mac and cheese box is a gloopy mac and cheese, Kraft is not necessarily the same company as some artisanal boxed mac and cheese company.

Anyway, there are different types of for profit housing developers, the one selected to be studied was a mission driven for profit developer, here was what the CEO said about where developers would go if they were simply trying to maximize profits, essentially, not areas like Alameda:

Screen Shot 2016-07-07 at 5.49.43 AM

And then even when for profit developers want to do the “right thing” red tape and the development process made it infeasible to continue attempting to develop even mixed income housing and not an affordable exclusive housing development:

Screen Shot 2016-07-07 at 6.00.46 AM

Further it’s unclear if zero net income developments, even with healthy reserves will be able to be viable in the long term:

Screen Shot 2016-07-07 at 6.04.09 AM

Screen Shot 2016-07-07 at 6.04.24 AM

These are all things that folks who dismiss affordable housing as “easy” either don’t know about, don’t take into consideration, or don’t care about because then it would require a much more nuanced argument than “no more market rate housing until we build all affordable housing.”


  1. “red tape and the development process made it infeasible to continue attempting to develop even mixed income housing…”

    You ain’t seen nothing yet. Give us another 8 years of Hillary Obama and the apocalypse will be upon us.

    Comment by Jack — July 22, 2016 @ 8:11 am

    • I’ll take the 4 or 8 years. Trump’s talking like he’s ready to light it up on January 20.

      Comment by MP — July 22, 2016 @ 6:19 pm

      • Of course you would.

        As do most who have no understanding of the history of the (so called) Democratic Party. The Party that masks their history of slavery, segregation, klu klux clan, black lynching and the list goes on and on, and they mask it by trying to buy off their own abisimal record by putting and keeping the underclass on Government pittance while blaming everything that goes haywire on the other party.

        As far as the danger of being “lit up”. The Democrat Party has “lit up” every foreign military fire from WW I, WW II, Korean and Vietnam. Total US killed = 636 + thousand. Conversely the Republican Party has lit it up twice thus far, the Gulf war and the war on terror. Total US killed, slightly over 5 thousand. So, based on the history of the two Parties, which one would the odds makers bet on the one more likely to “light it up”?

        Comment by Jack — July 22, 2016 @ 7:21 pm

        • Woodrow Wilson (D): WWI: “By virtue of the slogan “he kept us out of war,” Wilson narrowly won re-election…But after the election Wilson concluded that America could not remain neutral in the World War. On April 2, 1917, he asked Congress for a declaration of war on Germany.” to “make the world safe for democracy”.
          FD Roosevelt (D): WWII: Declared war on Japan & Germany after Pearl Harbor Dec 7, 1941.
          Harry Truman (D): Korean conflict. June 27, 1950, President Harry S. Truman announces that he is ordering U.S. air and naval forces to South Korea to aid the democratic nation in repulsing an invasion by communist North Korea.
          JFK (D):In May 1961, JFK authorized sending an additional 500 Special Forces troops and military advisors to assist the pro-Western government of South Vietnam. By the end of 1962, there were approximately 11,500 military advisors in South Vietnam; that year, 52 soldiers had been killed.
          LBJ (D); we must “escalate” the war in Vietnam. Unparalleled escalation turned the country against the Dems and finally elected a Republican…who finally ended the nation-building in the Asian Pacific.

          How am I doing, Jack?

          One of Trump’s salient points is that while he opposed entry into Iraq, Hillary voted for it. Judge the 2 parties by their deeds, not by their words.

          Comment by vigi — July 24, 2016 @ 3:01 pm

      • I wasn’t around at the time, but if I were looking to place blame for WWII, the Democratic Party is not the first place I would look.

        Comment by MP — July 26, 2016 @ 6:51 am

  2. I don’t have any data to back this up, but just because a company is “non”-profit doesn’t mean they are not paying their executives or staff a lot of money. Sometimes they use cheap materials, and cut corners which a for profit company can’t afford to do. Most for profit companies are responsible to those outside their company whether it be stockholder, or owners, where as a non-profit may not be. The bottom is you get what you pay for. One of my neighbors got an “affordable house”, the first thing they did was replace the floors with hardwood, upgrade the appliances, put in new cabinets. They are required to hold on to it for 9 more years before they can sell it for 100% of the profit.

    They qualified when only one was working and after they qualified they both started working again. They now have a vacation house now, and 2 fairly new cars. We have a friend who qualified when he was a medical resident, but he now makes 1/4 million a year his wife is a nurse pulling in a very good salary also, they lives in a very nice huge house in Lodi, and they rent out their affordable house which is not suppose to happen. People play the system. I not saying it is right or wrong but it is out there. Non-profit or for profit? you have to look at the details, because assumptions are not always correct. The people who get the houses are not actually the people who need them.

    Comment by Jake — July 22, 2016 @ 8:35 am

  3. It is most def complicated:

    Comment by Jack — July 24, 2016 @ 6:01 pm

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

Create a free website or blog at