Eleanor Roosevelt: Well-intentioned project has become a fiasco

Share:

On July 7, 2005 the Davis Enterprise reported on the ground breaking ceremony for Eleanor Roosevelt Circle — described as an affordable housing project for senior citizens. This was the result of years of planning and work. It was an idea that was needed—senior housing that was affordable for middle income people. It was a 60-unit project, with 21 units set aside for disabled and homeless or “at-risk-of-homelessness” seniors.

The projected was funded through a mixture of federal and state funding.

By April of 2006, it was already clear that there were unforeseen problems.

The Davis Enterprise quotes Cindy Unger, vice chairwoman of the Davis Senior Housing Cooperative, which oversees Eleanor Roosevelt Circle,

“The definitions in that HCD grant are a little more than I think we bargained for…. It talks about homeless people. Originally, we were talking about low-income. Now they have to meet a disabled, homeless and elderly requirement… The HUD (Housing and Urban Development) requirement was specifically for seniors, but the HCD did not specify age… Housing and Community Development told me (the developers) were walking a very fine line.”

Developer David Thompson countered:

The project is being built exactly as it was planned and approved. “ERC was intended to be for low- and very low-income seniors. However, funding for senior housing is very difficult to obtain and very competitive. We were asked to find as much funding from external sources as possible.”

Councilmember Don Saylor said: “These are Davis people already here. There will be on site case management and they will receive services needed in the places they normally get them.”

But in fact, the project is not required to provide services, as Thompson stated in April.

Councilmember Stephen Souza said at the meeting that he was excited to get the project under way. While Saylor added: “This project will provide a housing source in the community for the people who have little option and who need it.”

Unfortunately instead of being a decent but imperfect solution to the problem of affordable senior housing, this is turning quickly into a fiasco. For the second time in two months, Mayor Sue Greenwald reported at the last City Council Meeting that there are massive numbers of vacancies in Eleanor Roosevelt Circle. And that if they are not filled by current Davis Residents, they will open them up to the entire state.

The project is beset by numerous problems including problems of an undesirable location and distance from public transportation. In addition, there is no assisted living. And while it is classified as “affordable,” it is classified for a high end of affordability and provides a relatively small dwelling for what is still a decent chunk of money.

Moreover, as disabled advocate Anne Evans suggests, the requirements imposed in order to gain the grants are so restrictive that they cut off a large group of people who might otherwise be interested in taking advantage of the system.

“I have been interested in affordable senior housing – since I became disabled several years ago with breast cancer. I was not allowed to put in an application for the senior units because most places required seniors to be at least 62 years of age.”

Many other cities have units available for disabled seniors 55 and older. However, the Eleanor Roosevelt Circle complex was set up to feature different income levels—but not younger disabled seniors. And most of the units are available to seniors with higher incomes. So while Davis is now having to draw from outside of the area, there are a group of Davis residents not served by the project.

The problem here is that you are talking about only a small number of units for truly low income people and once you get up to the upper end, you are talking about nearly $1000 for a ~ 600 foot one bedroom apartment. That is a very small dwelling. You can get other apartments in Davis that are considerably larger than that for not much more than $1000.

So we now have a facility that received a tremendous amount of state and local funding, that remains nearly vacant. The proposal was supposed to help people within this community stay in our community as they age, and now city government are having to go statewide with their advertising efforts to recruit prospective tenants to fill the vacancies.

The City Council needs to order an audit on this project and evaluate exactly what went wrong. As we have reported in recent weeks, there is a great and expanding need for affordable housing. The housing market is rapidly pricing many lower and middle income people out of the area. This project should have been a boon for the senior community, serving a vital niche and instead it has become an absolute fiasco.

It seems clear that future project approvals need to look more carefully at a number of factors. First, they need to look at the people who will be serviced by the project to ascertain if the requirements are serving the people who actually need them.

Second they need to look at the location of the project. This location is problematic at best in terms of desirability of living but also availability of transportation.

Third, they need to look at what services are provided in the project. There are no assisted living services. So that generally closes off people with special needs. There is limited disabled facilities. So another group of seniors is closed off too.

—Doug Paul Davis reporting
Share:

About The Author

David Greenwald is the founder, editor, and executive director of the Davis Vanguard. He founded the Vanguard in 2006. David Greenwald moved to Davis in 1996 to attend Graduate School at UC Davis in Political Science. He lives in South Davis with his wife Cecilia Escamilla Greenwald and three children.

Related posts

20 thoughts on “Eleanor Roosevelt: Well-intentioned project has become a fiasco”

  1. Luke Watkins

    Unfortunately this article is full of inaccuracies that may cause some people to miss out on looking into a good opportunity. For example, the author refers to the project’s “massive vacancies”; given that the project is still under construction, how can it have massive vacancies? He states that the project is in a location that has poor access to public transportation; in fact the project is located adjacent to 5th Street and has a bus stop immediately across the street for one of the most frequent bus lines in town. Then he says it is not really affordable; the truth is that the project serves a wide range of income levels, with rents from about $225 to $975 per month. He also says that there will be no services available to the residents; in reality there will be a full-time services coordinator located on-site who will work to arrange both on and off-site services for residents. I assume that the author Doug Paul Davis was well-intentioned when he wrote this article, but unfortunately his atrociously sloppy effort at journalism turned into a “fiasco”.

  2. Luke Watkins

    Unfortunately this article is full of inaccuracies that may cause some people to miss out on looking into a good opportunity. For example, the author refers to the project’s “massive vacancies”; given that the project is still under construction, how can it have massive vacancies? He states that the project is in a location that has poor access to public transportation; in fact the project is located adjacent to 5th Street and has a bus stop immediately across the street for one of the most frequent bus lines in town. Then he says it is not really affordable; the truth is that the project serves a wide range of income levels, with rents from about $225 to $975 per month. He also says that there will be no services available to the residents; in reality there will be a full-time services coordinator located on-site who will work to arrange both on and off-site services for residents. I assume that the author Doug Paul Davis was well-intentioned when he wrote this article, but unfortunately his atrociously sloppy effort at journalism turned into a “fiasco”.

  3. Luke Watkins

    Unfortunately this article is full of inaccuracies that may cause some people to miss out on looking into a good opportunity. For example, the author refers to the project’s “massive vacancies”; given that the project is still under construction, how can it have massive vacancies? He states that the project is in a location that has poor access to public transportation; in fact the project is located adjacent to 5th Street and has a bus stop immediately across the street for one of the most frequent bus lines in town. Then he says it is not really affordable; the truth is that the project serves a wide range of income levels, with rents from about $225 to $975 per month. He also says that there will be no services available to the residents; in reality there will be a full-time services coordinator located on-site who will work to arrange both on and off-site services for residents. I assume that the author Doug Paul Davis was well-intentioned when he wrote this article, but unfortunately his atrociously sloppy effort at journalism turned into a “fiasco”.

  4. Luke Watkins

    Unfortunately this article is full of inaccuracies that may cause some people to miss out on looking into a good opportunity. For example, the author refers to the project’s “massive vacancies”; given that the project is still under construction, how can it have massive vacancies? He states that the project is in a location that has poor access to public transportation; in fact the project is located adjacent to 5th Street and has a bus stop immediately across the street for one of the most frequent bus lines in town. Then he says it is not really affordable; the truth is that the project serves a wide range of income levels, with rents from about $225 to $975 per month. He also says that there will be no services available to the residents; in reality there will be a full-time services coordinator located on-site who will work to arrange both on and off-site services for residents. I assume that the author Doug Paul Davis was well-intentioned when he wrote this article, but unfortunately his atrociously sloppy effort at journalism turned into a “fiasco”.

  5. Doug Paul Davis

    Mr. Watkins:

    Let me address the vacancy issue because the mayor has twice spoken at the city council meeting pleading for applicants. Perhaps vacancy is not the correct term, but there is a lack of applicants–to the extent that the mayor has twice now suggested at public meetings that they would open up to the state.

    I agree that there is a range, there is a graphic that shows that range and the percentage of housing that falls under that range. Again that is posted in the article.

    I was given the impression that transportation was a problem, I will admit I may have been misinformed.

    But I stand by the characterization that this is to date a fiasco.

  6. Doug Paul Davis

    Mr. Watkins:

    Let me address the vacancy issue because the mayor has twice spoken at the city council meeting pleading for applicants. Perhaps vacancy is not the correct term, but there is a lack of applicants–to the extent that the mayor has twice now suggested at public meetings that they would open up to the state.

    I agree that there is a range, there is a graphic that shows that range and the percentage of housing that falls under that range. Again that is posted in the article.

    I was given the impression that transportation was a problem, I will admit I may have been misinformed.

    But I stand by the characterization that this is to date a fiasco.

  7. Doug Paul Davis

    Mr. Watkins:

    Let me address the vacancy issue because the mayor has twice spoken at the city council meeting pleading for applicants. Perhaps vacancy is not the correct term, but there is a lack of applicants–to the extent that the mayor has twice now suggested at public meetings that they would open up to the state.

    I agree that there is a range, there is a graphic that shows that range and the percentage of housing that falls under that range. Again that is posted in the article.

    I was given the impression that transportation was a problem, I will admit I may have been misinformed.

    But I stand by the characterization that this is to date a fiasco.

  8. Doug Paul Davis

    Mr. Watkins:

    Let me address the vacancy issue because the mayor has twice spoken at the city council meeting pleading for applicants. Perhaps vacancy is not the correct term, but there is a lack of applicants–to the extent that the mayor has twice now suggested at public meetings that they would open up to the state.

    I agree that there is a range, there is a graphic that shows that range and the percentage of housing that falls under that range. Again that is posted in the article.

    I was given the impression that transportation was a problem, I will admit I may have been misinformed.

    But I stand by the characterization that this is to date a fiasco.

  9. Luke Watkins

    Mr. Davis:

    In the interest of making accurate information available to the public, I want to offer a few additional comments on the resident selection process at Eleanor Roosevelt Circle. Like all housing, the project must conform with federal fair housing laws, which is of course good. These laws do not allow us to restrict occupancy to only Davis residents, because this practice might result in the exclusion of households whose ethnicity is not well represented in Davis. And of course we do not want to unlawfully exclude low-income racial and ethnic minorities who we know have been priced out of the Davis housing market. In fact, I have spent 21 years working on affordable housing issues in Davis in an effort to do my little part to address that injustice.

    However, in an effort to be responsive to Sue Greenwald’s desire that we only serve existing Davis residents, we received legal advice that it is OK to give a preference to households that work in Davis (or live in Davis, in the case of disabled and senior households). Applications were accepted and a lottery was held to ensure that there would be no perception that some “well connected” people had their applications processed ahead of the other applicants. From these lottery results, two lists were generated, one for those that met the local preference, and one for all others. After that lottery date, additional applications would be added to the bottom of the list, after those on the first two lists.

    After processing the applicants in the lottery lists, and applications that have come in since then, we have potential residents for the majority of the units.

    Recently, we broadened our advertising/outreach efforts to all of Yolo County, after only focusing on Davis initially. There has been no effort to advertise elsewhere in the state.

    One of the things that we have been reminded of in marketing this senior housing project is that seniors really want to see their actual completed unit before signing a lease, since they will likely be living there for a very long time. This has slowed the rent-up process somewhat. But we expect the project to be fully occupied within a few months time. Other senior projects developed in Davis in recent years, including the University Retirement Community and Shasta Point, have had a similar experience.

    Despite our friendly banter back and forth about whose effort is a fiasco, I would urge you to take the opportunity to ask more about this project. I would be quite happy to give you a tour of the nearly completed buildings and discuss the services component a bit more. Developing affordable housing is a very long difficult process, which is why there is not enough of it; I would be very interested to learn more about how you would have dealt differently with some of the challenges that we faced.

    Mariko Yamada has been a key supporter in the creation of this project, since it is in her district. We have worked closely together with county staff to identify services that are available to low-income households. Perhaps Mariko’s perspective would give you some insight into in our efforts.

    If you would like a tour, I can be contacted at 756-1899.

    Luke

  10. Luke Watkins

    Mr. Davis:

    In the interest of making accurate information available to the public, I want to offer a few additional comments on the resident selection process at Eleanor Roosevelt Circle. Like all housing, the project must conform with federal fair housing laws, which is of course good. These laws do not allow us to restrict occupancy to only Davis residents, because this practice might result in the exclusion of households whose ethnicity is not well represented in Davis. And of course we do not want to unlawfully exclude low-income racial and ethnic minorities who we know have been priced out of the Davis housing market. In fact, I have spent 21 years working on affordable housing issues in Davis in an effort to do my little part to address that injustice.

    However, in an effort to be responsive to Sue Greenwald’s desire that we only serve existing Davis residents, we received legal advice that it is OK to give a preference to households that work in Davis (or live in Davis, in the case of disabled and senior households). Applications were accepted and a lottery was held to ensure that there would be no perception that some “well connected” people had their applications processed ahead of the other applicants. From these lottery results, two lists were generated, one for those that met the local preference, and one for all others. After that lottery date, additional applications would be added to the bottom of the list, after those on the first two lists.

    After processing the applicants in the lottery lists, and applications that have come in since then, we have potential residents for the majority of the units.

    Recently, we broadened our advertising/outreach efforts to all of Yolo County, after only focusing on Davis initially. There has been no effort to advertise elsewhere in the state.

    One of the things that we have been reminded of in marketing this senior housing project is that seniors really want to see their actual completed unit before signing a lease, since they will likely be living there for a very long time. This has slowed the rent-up process somewhat. But we expect the project to be fully occupied within a few months time. Other senior projects developed in Davis in recent years, including the University Retirement Community and Shasta Point, have had a similar experience.

    Despite our friendly banter back and forth about whose effort is a fiasco, I would urge you to take the opportunity to ask more about this project. I would be quite happy to give you a tour of the nearly completed buildings and discuss the services component a bit more. Developing affordable housing is a very long difficult process, which is why there is not enough of it; I would be very interested to learn more about how you would have dealt differently with some of the challenges that we faced.

    Mariko Yamada has been a key supporter in the creation of this project, since it is in her district. We have worked closely together with county staff to identify services that are available to low-income households. Perhaps Mariko’s perspective would give you some insight into in our efforts.

    If you would like a tour, I can be contacted at 756-1899.

    Luke

  11. Luke Watkins

    Mr. Davis:

    In the interest of making accurate information available to the public, I want to offer a few additional comments on the resident selection process at Eleanor Roosevelt Circle. Like all housing, the project must conform with federal fair housing laws, which is of course good. These laws do not allow us to restrict occupancy to only Davis residents, because this practice might result in the exclusion of households whose ethnicity is not well represented in Davis. And of course we do not want to unlawfully exclude low-income racial and ethnic minorities who we know have been priced out of the Davis housing market. In fact, I have spent 21 years working on affordable housing issues in Davis in an effort to do my little part to address that injustice.

    However, in an effort to be responsive to Sue Greenwald’s desire that we only serve existing Davis residents, we received legal advice that it is OK to give a preference to households that work in Davis (or live in Davis, in the case of disabled and senior households). Applications were accepted and a lottery was held to ensure that there would be no perception that some “well connected” people had their applications processed ahead of the other applicants. From these lottery results, two lists were generated, one for those that met the local preference, and one for all others. After that lottery date, additional applications would be added to the bottom of the list, after those on the first two lists.

    After processing the applicants in the lottery lists, and applications that have come in since then, we have potential residents for the majority of the units.

    Recently, we broadened our advertising/outreach efforts to all of Yolo County, after only focusing on Davis initially. There has been no effort to advertise elsewhere in the state.

    One of the things that we have been reminded of in marketing this senior housing project is that seniors really want to see their actual completed unit before signing a lease, since they will likely be living there for a very long time. This has slowed the rent-up process somewhat. But we expect the project to be fully occupied within a few months time. Other senior projects developed in Davis in recent years, including the University Retirement Community and Shasta Point, have had a similar experience.

    Despite our friendly banter back and forth about whose effort is a fiasco, I would urge you to take the opportunity to ask more about this project. I would be quite happy to give you a tour of the nearly completed buildings and discuss the services component a bit more. Developing affordable housing is a very long difficult process, which is why there is not enough of it; I would be very interested to learn more about how you would have dealt differently with some of the challenges that we faced.

    Mariko Yamada has been a key supporter in the creation of this project, since it is in her district. We have worked closely together with county staff to identify services that are available to low-income households. Perhaps Mariko’s perspective would give you some insight into in our efforts.

    If you would like a tour, I can be contacted at 756-1899.

    Luke

  12. Luke Watkins

    Mr. Davis:

    In the interest of making accurate information available to the public, I want to offer a few additional comments on the resident selection process at Eleanor Roosevelt Circle. Like all housing, the project must conform with federal fair housing laws, which is of course good. These laws do not allow us to restrict occupancy to only Davis residents, because this practice might result in the exclusion of households whose ethnicity is not well represented in Davis. And of course we do not want to unlawfully exclude low-income racial and ethnic minorities who we know have been priced out of the Davis housing market. In fact, I have spent 21 years working on affordable housing issues in Davis in an effort to do my little part to address that injustice.

    However, in an effort to be responsive to Sue Greenwald’s desire that we only serve existing Davis residents, we received legal advice that it is OK to give a preference to households that work in Davis (or live in Davis, in the case of disabled and senior households). Applications were accepted and a lottery was held to ensure that there would be no perception that some “well connected” people had their applications processed ahead of the other applicants. From these lottery results, two lists were generated, one for those that met the local preference, and one for all others. After that lottery date, additional applications would be added to the bottom of the list, after those on the first two lists.

    After processing the applicants in the lottery lists, and applications that have come in since then, we have potential residents for the majority of the units.

    Recently, we broadened our advertising/outreach efforts to all of Yolo County, after only focusing on Davis initially. There has been no effort to advertise elsewhere in the state.

    One of the things that we have been reminded of in marketing this senior housing project is that seniors really want to see their actual completed unit before signing a lease, since they will likely be living there for a very long time. This has slowed the rent-up process somewhat. But we expect the project to be fully occupied within a few months time. Other senior projects developed in Davis in recent years, including the University Retirement Community and Shasta Point, have had a similar experience.

    Despite our friendly banter back and forth about whose effort is a fiasco, I would urge you to take the opportunity to ask more about this project. I would be quite happy to give you a tour of the nearly completed buildings and discuss the services component a bit more. Developing affordable housing is a very long difficult process, which is why there is not enough of it; I would be very interested to learn more about how you would have dealt differently with some of the challenges that we faced.

    Mariko Yamada has been a key supporter in the creation of this project, since it is in her district. We have worked closely together with county staff to identify services that are available to low-income households. Perhaps Mariko’s perspective would give you some insight into in our efforts.

    If you would like a tour, I can be contacted at 756-1899.

    Luke

  13. Anonymous

    Architecturally the thing is atrocious. Low Income does not have to mean Ugly.
    There are plenty of ways to have made these places affordable, accessible and attractive. Why didn’t they?

  14. Anonymous

    Architecturally the thing is atrocious. Low Income does not have to mean Ugly.
    There are plenty of ways to have made these places affordable, accessible and attractive. Why didn’t they?

  15. Anonymous

    Architecturally the thing is atrocious. Low Income does not have to mean Ugly.
    There are plenty of ways to have made these places affordable, accessible and attractive. Why didn’t they?

  16. Anonymous

    Architecturally the thing is atrocious. Low Income does not have to mean Ugly.
    There are plenty of ways to have made these places affordable, accessible and attractive. Why didn’t they?

  17. Anonymous

    About Luke Watkins comment… Luke, why don’t you take a little time to learn about the concept “honesty.”
    First…the low income housing project is a scam and a myth. The rents that range from $225 are only kept to a bare minimum. You keep it to the least amount of units allowed by law. Also about this “resident services coordinator”
    Let’s look into that a bit more. What kind of services are you claiming that these residents will be receiving. I’ve lived in “affordable housing” for years. They do nothing but discriminate and retaliate against residents who complain about the substandard conditions. They all proclaim to have “resident service coordinators” but in fact, that coordinaters are part time students who are being utilized for free labor. The affordable housing complex gets to keep their grant money in the name of providing these “services”, and the residents never get services that they ask for. In fact, take for instance Sacramento Mutual Housing Association which is managed by Jon Berkeley Management. For years, the residents services coordinator was an intern who did zilch for the residents. When the residents asked for money to be spent towards projects designed by the residents, they were put off by management and ignored. Truth be told, SMHA and other companies that Luke Watkins belongs to, loves to manage these types of “affordable housing complexes.”
    They get huge tax credits, forgivable loans, grants and an exhorbitant amount of rent money from the poor. They bully the residents that complain and rule with a fascistic like iron fist. The less complaints and the more compliance means less money on maintenance, resident services and the like, and more money in the pockets of management companies and low income housing cartels.

    The words that I think would best sum up the “affordable housing” industrial complex is: “every republican’s wet dream”

    Like private non profits, they provide lucrative tax shelters with little oversight or accountability. They get to rake in cash from the government and the peoeple they proclaim to serve. With Bush’s dismantling of the public oversight government programs, true affordable housing was the first thing to tank, before the economy.
    I invite every citizen to go to these industrial complexes and find out exactly how many of these places are truly low income. Truth be told, it does nothing to combat homelessness. 90% of the truly low income people in this county or any other county, can’t afford to live in these places.And every year, they raise the rent. They raise the rent to people on fixed incomes such as disabled and seniors. It’s unconscionable. Of course they’re are desperate to go to other counties to bring in more people to house. The truth is, they are building way more than they are claiming the need.

    Follow the money people, and you will uncover the lies and deceit and corruption. Looks like Luke is part of the lie. Look in the mirror Luke. Have you tried a little honesty lately? I’d recomend the same to SMHA, JBM and all the other “affordable” housing industrial complexes. Just another scam, where the poor are slaves, there to serve the rights of the rich.
    Get it? Got it? Good.

  18. Anonymous

    About Luke Watkins comment… Luke, why don’t you take a little time to learn about the concept “honesty.”
    First…the low income housing project is a scam and a myth. The rents that range from $225 are only kept to a bare minimum. You keep it to the least amount of units allowed by law. Also about this “resident services coordinator”
    Let’s look into that a bit more. What kind of services are you claiming that these residents will be receiving. I’ve lived in “affordable housing” for years. They do nothing but discriminate and retaliate against residents who complain about the substandard conditions. They all proclaim to have “resident service coordinators” but in fact, that coordinaters are part time students who are being utilized for free labor. The affordable housing complex gets to keep their grant money in the name of providing these “services”, and the residents never get services that they ask for. In fact, take for instance Sacramento Mutual Housing Association which is managed by Jon Berkeley Management. For years, the residents services coordinator was an intern who did zilch for the residents. When the residents asked for money to be spent towards projects designed by the residents, they were put off by management and ignored. Truth be told, SMHA and other companies that Luke Watkins belongs to, loves to manage these types of “affordable housing complexes.”
    They get huge tax credits, forgivable loans, grants and an exhorbitant amount of rent money from the poor. They bully the residents that complain and rule with a fascistic like iron fist. The less complaints and the more compliance means less money on maintenance, resident services and the like, and more money in the pockets of management companies and low income housing cartels.

    The words that I think would best sum up the “affordable housing” industrial complex is: “every republican’s wet dream”

    Like private non profits, they provide lucrative tax shelters with little oversight or accountability. They get to rake in cash from the government and the peoeple they proclaim to serve. With Bush’s dismantling of the public oversight government programs, true affordable housing was the first thing to tank, before the economy.
    I invite every citizen to go to these industrial complexes and find out exactly how many of these places are truly low income. Truth be told, it does nothing to combat homelessness. 90% of the truly low income people in this county or any other county, can’t afford to live in these places.And every year, they raise the rent. They raise the rent to people on fixed incomes such as disabled and seniors. It’s unconscionable. Of course they’re are desperate to go to other counties to bring in more people to house. The truth is, they are building way more than they are claiming the need.

    Follow the money people, and you will uncover the lies and deceit and corruption. Looks like Luke is part of the lie. Look in the mirror Luke. Have you tried a little honesty lately? I’d recomend the same to SMHA, JBM and all the other “affordable” housing industrial complexes. Just another scam, where the poor are slaves, there to serve the rights of the rich.
    Get it? Got it? Good.

  19. Anonymous

    About Luke Watkins comment… Luke, why don’t you take a little time to learn about the concept “honesty.”
    First…the low income housing project is a scam and a myth. The rents that range from $225 are only kept to a bare minimum. You keep it to the least amount of units allowed by law. Also about this “resident services coordinator”
    Let’s look into that a bit more. What kind of services are you claiming that these residents will be receiving. I’ve lived in “affordable housing” for years. They do nothing but discriminate and retaliate against residents who complain about the substandard conditions. They all proclaim to have “resident service coordinators” but in fact, that coordinaters are part time students who are being utilized for free labor. The affordable housing complex gets to keep their grant money in the name of providing these “services”, and the residents never get services that they ask for. In fact, take for instance Sacramento Mutual Housing Association which is managed by Jon Berkeley Management. For years, the residents services coordinator was an intern who did zilch for the residents. When the residents asked for money to be spent towards projects designed by the residents, they were put off by management and ignored. Truth be told, SMHA and other companies that Luke Watkins belongs to, loves to manage these types of “affordable housing complexes.”
    They get huge tax credits, forgivable loans, grants and an exhorbitant amount of rent money from the poor. They bully the residents that complain and rule with a fascistic like iron fist. The less complaints and the more compliance means less money on maintenance, resident services and the like, and more money in the pockets of management companies and low income housing cartels.

    The words that I think would best sum up the “affordable housing” industrial complex is: “every republican’s wet dream”

    Like private non profits, they provide lucrative tax shelters with little oversight or accountability. They get to rake in cash from the government and the peoeple they proclaim to serve. With Bush’s dismantling of the public oversight government programs, true affordable housing was the first thing to tank, before the economy.
    I invite every citizen to go to these industrial complexes and find out exactly how many of these places are truly low income. Truth be told, it does nothing to combat homelessness. 90% of the truly low income people in this county or any other county, can’t afford to live in these places.And every year, they raise the rent. They raise the rent to people on fixed incomes such as disabled and seniors. It’s unconscionable. Of course they’re are desperate to go to other counties to bring in more people to house. The truth is, they are building way more than they are claiming the need.

    Follow the money people, and you will uncover the lies and deceit and corruption. Looks like Luke is part of the lie. Look in the mirror Luke. Have you tried a little honesty lately? I’d recomend the same to SMHA, JBM and all the other “affordable” housing industrial complexes. Just another scam, where the poor are slaves, there to serve the rights of the rich.
    Get it? Got it? Good.

  20. Anonymous

    About Luke Watkins comment… Luke, why don’t you take a little time to learn about the concept “honesty.”
    First…the low income housing project is a scam and a myth. The rents that range from $225 are only kept to a bare minimum. You keep it to the least amount of units allowed by law. Also about this “resident services coordinator”
    Let’s look into that a bit more. What kind of services are you claiming that these residents will be receiving. I’ve lived in “affordable housing” for years. They do nothing but discriminate and retaliate against residents who complain about the substandard conditions. They all proclaim to have “resident service coordinators” but in fact, that coordinaters are part time students who are being utilized for free labor. The affordable housing complex gets to keep their grant money in the name of providing these “services”, and the residents never get services that they ask for. In fact, take for instance Sacramento Mutual Housing Association which is managed by Jon Berkeley Management. For years, the residents services coordinator was an intern who did zilch for the residents. When the residents asked for money to be spent towards projects designed by the residents, they were put off by management and ignored. Truth be told, SMHA and other companies that Luke Watkins belongs to, loves to manage these types of “affordable housing complexes.”
    They get huge tax credits, forgivable loans, grants and an exhorbitant amount of rent money from the poor. They bully the residents that complain and rule with a fascistic like iron fist. The less complaints and the more compliance means less money on maintenance, resident services and the like, and more money in the pockets of management companies and low income housing cartels.

    The words that I think would best sum up the “affordable housing” industrial complex is: “every republican’s wet dream”

    Like private non profits, they provide lucrative tax shelters with little oversight or accountability. They get to rake in cash from the government and the peoeple they proclaim to serve. With Bush’s dismantling of the public oversight government programs, true affordable housing was the first thing to tank, before the economy.
    I invite every citizen to go to these industrial complexes and find out exactly how many of these places are truly low income. Truth be told, it does nothing to combat homelessness. 90% of the truly low income people in this county or any other county, can’t afford to live in these places.And every year, they raise the rent. They raise the rent to people on fixed incomes such as disabled and seniors. It’s unconscionable. Of course they’re are desperate to go to other counties to bring in more people to house. The truth is, they are building way more than they are claiming the need.

    Follow the money people, and you will uncover the lies and deceit and corruption. Looks like Luke is part of the lie. Look in the mirror Luke. Have you tried a little honesty lately? I’d recomend the same to SMHA, JBM and all the other “affordable” housing industrial complexes. Just another scam, where the poor are slaves, there to serve the rights of the rich.
    Get it? Got it? Good.

Leave a Reply

X Close

Newsletter Sign-Up

X Close

Monthly Subscriber Sign-Up

Enter the maximum amount you want to pay each month
$ USD
Sign up for