<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Floating a fair housing bond</title>
	<atom:link href="http://futureoaklandblog.com/2007/10/floating-a-fair-housing-bond/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://futureoaklandblog.com/2007/10/floating-a-fair-housing-bond/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 28 Apr 2012 20:45:34 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: Ryan</title>
		<link>http://futureoaklandblog.com/2007/10/floating-a-fair-housing-bond/#comment-284</link>
		<dc:creator>Ryan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 12 Nov 2007 22:56:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://futureoakland.wordpress.com/2007/10/31/floating-a-fair-housing-bond/#comment-284</guid>
		<description>I see. What you&#039;re talking about is not unlike the investment the city made in Uptown, where is effectively pumped money into the project by helping finance infrastructure improvements and environmental cleanup (can&#039;t remember if that&#039;s all the city funded), and the result is 700 units of rental housing.

In the early days of the city&#039;s decision to support the project, there was grumbling the site could have been conveyed to condo developers, who would have needed less subsidy (if any). But based on the rental threshold for affordability you discussed in your other post (~$1800 per month) it could very well be a large block of affordable housing.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I see. What you&#8217;re talking about is not unlike the investment the city made in Uptown, where is effectively pumped money into the project by helping finance infrastructure improvements and environmental cleanup (can&#8217;t remember if that&#8217;s all the city funded), and the result is 700 units of rental housing.</p>
<p>In the early days of the city&#8217;s decision to support the project, there was grumbling the site could have been conveyed to condo developers, who would have needed less subsidy (if any). But based on the rental threshold for affordability you discussed in your other post (~$1800 per month) it could very well be a large block of affordable housing.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: dto510</title>
		<link>http://futureoaklandblog.com/2007/10/floating-a-fair-housing-bond/#comment-283</link>
		<dc:creator>dto510</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 12 Nov 2007 18:07:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://futureoakland.wordpress.com/2007/10/31/floating-a-fair-housing-bond/#comment-283</guid>
		<description>The bond shouldn&#039;t be used for operating subsidies, but land purchases would be a good use of the funds. I said that &lt;i&gt;land&lt;/i&gt; could be conveyed to developers, not the money. Because non-profit developers are now completely wedded to the BMR model, they are no longer offering much of value to Oakland. The city should figure out how to direct money to the needy, not people making $90k/yr.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The bond shouldn&#8217;t be used for operating subsidies, but land purchases would be a good use of the funds. I said that <i>land</i> could be conveyed to developers, not the money. Because non-profit developers are now completely wedded to the BMR model, they are no longer offering much of value to Oakland. The city should figure out how to direct money to the needy, not people making $90k/yr.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Ryan</title>
		<link>http://futureoaklandblog.com/2007/10/floating-a-fair-housing-bond/#comment-282</link>
		<dc:creator>Ryan</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 12 Nov 2007 05:43:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://futureoakland.wordpress.com/2007/10/31/floating-a-fair-housing-bond/#comment-282</guid>
		<description>You imply in the last paragraph that you don&#039;t want a housing bond &quot;subsidizing non-profit developers instead of helping the poor.&quot; But then earlier you say the money from a housing bond &quot;could then be conveyed to affordable or market-rate developers.&quot;

So do you support directing some housing bond money to nonprofit affordable housing developers? And if so, what did you mean when you said you did not want to &quot;subsidize&quot; nonprofit developers, in your last paragraph? Do you mean excessive funding for nonprofit developers or something?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You imply in the last paragraph that you don&#8217;t want a housing bond &#8220;subsidizing non-profit developers instead of helping the poor.&#8221; But then earlier you say the money from a housing bond &#8220;could then be conveyed to affordable or market-rate developers.&#8221;</p>
<p>So do you support directing some housing bond money to nonprofit affordable housing developers? And if so, what did you mean when you said you did not want to &#8220;subsidize&#8221; nonprofit developers, in your last paragraph? Do you mean excessive funding for nonprofit developers or something?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Affordable housing trust fund - a dedicated revenue stream &#124; A Better Oakland</title>
		<link>http://futureoaklandblog.com/2007/10/floating-a-fair-housing-bond/#comment-281</link>
		<dc:creator>Affordable housing trust fund - a dedicated revenue stream &#124; A Better Oakland</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 31 Oct 2007 22:11:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://futureoakland.wordpress.com/2007/10/31/floating-a-fair-housing-bond/#comment-281</guid>
		<description>[...] dto510 discusses the idea of floating a bond to fund affordable housing and rehabilitation. A bond is a good idea, and we should do it. But we [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] dto510 discusses the idea of floating a bond to fund affordable housing and rehabilitation. A bond is a good idea, and we should do it. But we [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

