Is Bellingham Home Fund Deeply FlawedPermalink +
Fri, Sep 28, 2012, 8:45 am // Guest writer
Guest writer Jack Petree presents why the Bellingham Proposition 1 - the Home Fund - is flawed and should be voted down. Jack is a long time local political activist and often writes on housing and development issues.
The Low-income Housing Levy is an ill-conceived tax increase with the undesirable consequence of bringing more harm to the poor than any other part of our population.
Those who want you to vote to increase your taxes to allegedly “help” the poor are basing their plea on appeals to your emotions. Paraphrased, they claim, “You are heartless and cruel if you don’t vote for this tax increase.” Buzzwords are liberally used. If you don’t vote for this tax you are rejecting “seniors,” “veterans,” “the homeless,” and, worse, “children,” especially “homeless children.”
But if you really want to help the poorest among us, you will vote “No” on Proposition #1. The proposition will increase the tax load on nearly 1/3 of Bellingham’s homeowners who are also low income, as well as on the 13,000 low income householders who rent and will see the tax applied to their apartments.
In short, you are being asked to increase the financial burden on about 16,000 low income households in order to provide home fix ups, rental assistance and a few homes for less than 1,300 households. That means about 12 low income people will have to pay more in taxes for every single low income person helped.
The unintended harm to the poor was brought about because the so-called “Low Income Housing Levy” was rushed to the ballot prematurely. As a result:
• The study meant to tell us whether the money is actually needed and where it should actually be spent will not be sent to the council until after you have already voted on Proposition #1. The proposition was put on the ballot before accurate data was available.
• Proponents provide you with all sorts of pretty charts and promises about where the money will be spent but there is no plan for spending the money.
According to the city’s ballot language, “Funding priorities would be set forth in an Administrative and Financing Plan adopted by the City Council following recommendations by a citizen advisory committee to the Mayor and Council;”
• You will not find out how the money will actually be spent until after you have voted.
• Proponents indicate all the money will be spent on affordable housing. The council was more honest in pointing out $1,260,000 will be spent on administration. That is money to be spent on administering programs already existing and already being administered with existing funds.
• Does a family of four making $54,000 per year really need housing assistance? That is the HUD baseline for determining eligibility for subsidized housing in Bellingham.
• Perhaps most offensive, inappropriately shifting some tax money away from residents designated as “very low income” and “extremely low income” to citizens with somewhat higher incomes has already been openly discussed before council (the discussion is on video). The council has been assured there are “strategic ways” to shift federal funds to, in effect, shift spending away from the very poorest among us and allow that money to be spent on less poor citizens.
If you are not yet convinced Proposition #1 is an ill-conceived tax increase, ask yourself these questions:
• Our plan for serving the poor in recent years has included city recommendations that builders be offered opportunities to build more homes per acre in return for commitments to build affordable housing. In recent years, hundreds of “free” (homes built at developer expense without the need for a tax increase) affordable homes have been offered, only to be rejected by the city. Why?
• Draft proposals for spending the new tax money target areas where the city’s own studies demonstrate housing cannot be built affordably. That means we are really planning to spend the money to further city planning policy at the expense of the poor. Why?
You cannot make housing more affordable by making it more expensive. Homelessness is emotional for all. However, appeals to emotion cannot help when government has already begun to “strategize” inappropriate funding shifts away from the most needy. $21 million in new taxes will inequitably raise rents on low income wage earners and stifle job growth. Those most in need must be helped, but we need an effective spending plan before we write a blank check.
Publisher note: I would like to post a guest article from an advocate for the Home Fund, but they must address the issues raised by Jack.
Fri, Sep 28, 2012, 8:45 am // Guest writerJack Petree, guest writer, points out serious flaws in Bellingham Prop 1, the Home Fund, that is intended to help the poor get housing.
18 comments; last on Dec 02, 2012
Fri, Sep 21, 2012, 8:53 am // John ServaisBellingham Business Journal breaking story - Lummi's to hold meeting today at noon to speak against the Cherry Point project.
7 comments; last on Nov 04, 2012
Thu, Sep 20, 2012, 9:04 pm // Wendy HarrisA proposal to zone slaugherhouses on agricultural land will have negative consequences for farmers and residents.
12 comments; last on Sep 30, 2012
Mon, Sep 17, 2012, 9:45 am // John ServaisPrecedent is plentiful of the Feds censoring free speech and videos - but double standard is protecting anti-Islam film.
6 comments; last on Sep 20, 2012
Wed, Sep 12, 2012, 2:22 pm // Wendy HarrisIrrational and uninformed last minute opposition derails 5+ year effort to protect Lake Whatcom.
5 comments; last on Sep 18, 2012
Sun, Sep 09, 2012, 4:24 pm // John ServaisVoting intelligently seems too hard for many Americans. But in other countries they wish self government was so easy.
9 comments; last on Sep 12, 2012
Wed, Sep 05, 2012, 10:18 pm // Wendy HarrisThe City has released its letter, but not its poor policy determination regarding exemption from the Public Records Act.
1 comments; last on Sep 06, 2012
Wed, Sep 05, 2012, 9:37 pm // John ServaisThe Bellingham city attorney today released the full letter from mayor Kelli Linville to Costco in June.
Wed, Sep 05, 2012, 11:00 am // Riley SweeneyRiley patiently explains to the Whatcom Excavator what a flowchart should look like
Tue, Sep 04, 2012, 1:11 pm // Paul deArmondMarian Beddill will be reading from and signing copies of her recent autobiography. Expect thrills, danger, lust and adventure.
2 comments; last on Sep 05, 2012
Election InfoAuditor Election page
State Results - Nov 3
Whatcom Results - Nov 3
Coal, Oil & TrainsCoal Stop
Community Wise Bham
Powder River Basin R. C.
Local Blogs & NewsBellingham Herald
Bham Business Journal
Bham Politics & Econ
Friends of Whatcom
Get Whatcom Planning
League of Women Voters
Western Front - WWU
Local CausesChuckanut C. Forest
City Club of Bellingham
Futurewise - Whatcom
Lummi Island Quarry
N. Cascades Audubon
NW Holocaust Center
Salish Sea Org.
Save the Granary
WA Conservation Voters
Whatcom Peace & Justice
Governments- Whatcom County
Port of Bellingham
State Results - Nov 3
US Supreme Court
US The White House
NWCitizen 1995-2007Early Northwest Citizen
Weather & ClimateCliff Mass Weather Blog
Nat Hurricane Center
Two day forecast
Watts Up With That?
Edge of Sports
Famous Internet Skiers
Good Web SitesAl-Jazeera online
Change The Mascot
Foreign Policy in Focus
Julia Ioffe/New Republic
Middle East Times
New American Century
Personal bio info
Portland Indy Media
Project Vote Smart
Stand for the Troops
Talking Points Memo
The Crisis Papers
War and Piece
Quiet, Offline or DeadBellingham Register
Bhm Herald Politics Blog
Citizens of Bellingham
Cordata & Meridian
Facebook Port Reform
Intrnational Herald Tribune
N. Sound Conservancy
No Leaky Buckets
Protect Bellingham Parks
The American Telegraph