3 ms·

It’s $5k per tent per month - you can rent 2-3 studios for that, even in SF. A similar program in LA is coming in at $2100 per rent per month, definitely enough

It’s $5k per tent per month - you can rent 2-3 studios for that, even in SF. A similar program in LA is coming in at $2100 per rent per month, definitely enough for at least one apartment: https://ktla.com/news/local-news/east-hollywood-tent-village-meant-to-be-pathway-to-housing-at-cost-of-2140-per-person-each-month/ https://ktla.com/news/local-news/east-hollywood-tent-village... That’s the point the original article made - they were throwing money at short-term shelters and other things, just like everyone else and the problem got worse not better. Instead, doing stable housing first and applying conditions later allowed people to adapt. I suspect that they also get to re-use units the NGOs bought to house next set of people once the initial occupants have improved their situation enough. If one were to use the $2100 for mortgage payment as well, with taxes/hoa/insurance included, that would finance over $400k worth of unit.

s5300 5y ago
Landlords aren't going to be so keen on letting the homeless be shoved in their rentals when they'll likely be filled by non-homeless soon enough.
- sologoub 5y ago
  Have you heard of Section 8? There are landlords who specialize in such programs - the benefits are quite compelling for the right cashflow setup, taking the Finnish model as the example: you rent to the NGO that has government backing (e.g. risk of nonpayment goes to near zero), the NGO assumes all risk and is responsible for the unit. That’s a pretty great deal compared to the Landlord being responsible for vacancy, individual tenant management, etc.
  - s5300 5y ago
    Sorry, I was speaking specifically with regards to San Francisco w/the parent. And yes, I believe there is some Sec 8 in SF, but not exactly the point of the current issue.
    - sologoub 5y ago
      We have to structure the incentives to drive the outcome. Sec 8 is one program that (for all its faults) has shown effective and manageable. The door swings both ways - need to ensure good landlords want to provide housing and the “slumlords” are identified and punished/removed from programs. SF also has the BMR program that’s designed to provide ownership opportunities for low income people. If NGOs with State backing could be involved, BMR inventory could be an interesting starting point. Then you could provide additional incentives to developers to include even more BMR units, etc.
  - maqp 5y ago
    Plus here in Finland the city owned apartments etc. are distributed around the city (not the Manhattans but the rest). Thus there are no slums in Finland and thus there's practically zero gang problems: there's exactly two city districts in the entire Finland I would not feel safe walking at night. So individuals renting to NGOs, city buying apartments etc. benefit both the community as well as the individual who gets out of the crayfish trap.* *There's a popular analogy with crayfish traps here in Finland wrt. one individual finding their way out of the trap, only to have the other crabs pull them back in.

s5300 5y ago

Landlords aren't going to be so keen on letting the homeless be shoved in their rentals when they'll likely be filled by non-homeless soon enough.

sologoub 5y ago
Have you heard of Section 8? There are landlords who specialize in such programs - the benefits are quite compelling for the right cashflow setup, taking the Finnish model as the example: you rent to the NGO that has government backing (e.g. risk of nonpayment goes to near zero), the NGO assumes all risk and is responsible for the unit. That’s a pretty great deal compared to the Landlord being responsible for vacancy, individual tenant management, etc.
- s5300 5y ago
  Sorry, I was speaking specifically with regards to San Francisco w/the parent. And yes, I believe there is some Sec 8 in SF, but not exactly the point of the current issue.
  - sologoub 5y ago
    We have to structure the incentives to drive the outcome. Sec 8 is one program that (for all its faults) has shown effective and manageable. The door swings both ways - need to ensure good landlords want to provide housing and the “slumlords” are identified and punished/removed from programs. SF also has the BMR program that’s designed to provide ownership opportunities for low income people. If NGOs with State backing could be involved, BMR inventory could be an interesting starting point. Then you could provide additional incentives to developers to include even more BMR units, etc.
- maqp 5y ago
  Plus here in Finland the city owned apartments etc. are distributed around the city (not the Manhattans but the rest). Thus there are no slums in Finland and thus there's practically zero gang problems: there's exactly two city districts in the entire Finland I would not feel safe walking at night. So individuals renting to NGOs, city buying apartments etc. benefit both the community as well as the individual who gets out of the crayfish trap.* *There's a popular analogy with crayfish traps here in Finland wrt. one individual finding their way out of the trap, only to have the other crabs pull them back in.