3 ms·
> And all that to raise a paltry $300 million a year, enough to build ~700 subsidized housing units You cite no source and are grossly misinformed about prop C
by abalone 8y ago
> And all that to raise a paltry $300 million a year, enough to build ~700 subsidized housing units
You cite no source and are grossly misinformed about prop C. It will build housing for 4k homeless with just half the budget and the rest goes to services specifically targeted at homelessness.[1]
[1] https://www.ourcityourhomesf.org/ https://www.ourcityourhomesf.org/
- closeparen 8y ago$300m/year: https://ballotpedia.org/San_Francisco,_California,_Proposition_C,_Gross_Receipts_Tax_for_Homelessness_Services_(November_2018) https://ballotpedia.org/San_Francisco,_California,_Propositi... Cost per subsidized housing unit: https://ternercenter.berkeley.edu/construction-costs-series https://ternercenter.berkeley.edu/construction-costs-series I presented a more optimistic view of what it could accomplish (produce 700 units a year), where your link indicates it will house 4,000 people in perpetuity. After 6 years, my “grossly misinformed” interpretation would have been a lot more bang for buck. There are so many more than 4,000 people who struggle with housing that the framing of Prop C as some kind of victory is just bizarre. It’s like winning an increase of $5 per retiree in the pension system.
- abalone 8y agoNope, it’s less optimistic. The 4K of permanent units are funded by 50% the budget over 8 years; you’re suggesting 100% allocated to 5.6K units over the same time, a 30% worse bang for buck. And you’ve cut the homeless out of the picture. The other half of funds is dedicated to mental health, addiction and other needed services for the homeless population. You’ve completely misunderstood the aims of Prop C.