In the News: 1/25/07

While Ben Cardin has been doing his thing in the Senate, Michael Steele has returned to a job that he knows well, running a political organization. Steele has been named head of GOPAC. GOPAC trains Republican activists and recruits candidates around the country. I hope the training doesn't include any of Mr. Steele's recent election antics.

Personally, I think this is a stupid move for GOPAC and for the national GOP as a whole. Though I find his politics reprehensible, Mr. Steele is one of the most interesting and dare I say vibrant Republicans in the country. As a Democrat, I am glad to have Steele heading up GOPAC, seeing as he has proven his inability to win elections, particularly at the grassroots level. I must assume that he couldn't even round up enough volunteers in Baltimore to hand out his literature on election day.

If Republicans were smart, they would call up Mr. Murdoch and get Steele a pundit job at Fox news where he can do what he does best, which is to be a pretty face and a slick voice for the GOP.

-------------------------------------

Through inaction, Maryland lawmakers can put lethal injections and the death penalty on hold indefinitely. That is not enough for Delegate Samuel Rosenberg and Senator Lisa Gladden, who both introduced legislation this Tuesday that would abolish capital punishment in the state.

Good for them.

-------------------------------------
The unemployment in rate in Maryland has dropped to an amazing 3.8%. This is good news, but simply having a job doesn't always translate into having the buying power to make the big moves in life. By big moves, I mean things such as buying a home, paying off school loans, and starting a family. I still have all of these things ahead of me, and to be honest, they are completely out of reach, despite having what I consider a "good job".

This brings me to an recent Sun article on affordable housing. This bit in particular depressed the hell out of me:

In the Baltimore metro area, the annual income needed to purchase a median-priced home of $275,000 (based on third-quarter data) was $94,206, according to the study -- well above the $60,000 that is the going rate for registered nurses, and slightly less than the $50,000 that is the prevailing wage for experienced elementary school teachers and police officers. (The study assumed one-income households. With two-income households, the gap is less daunting, but that's another story.)

Yet the key phrase here is "metro area." With a median sales price of about $170,000, homes in the city are in reach to those workers, though not to lower-paid workers such as nursing aides and housekeepers.

Ouch. Lets just say my salary falls far below the lowest amount mentioned above. Even with houses in Baltimore being generally lower priced than around the state, I feel that I will remain a perpetual renter.

Realtors are making the argument that the City Council shouldn't intervene, because the issue is regional, not city based. I am inclined to agree. If affordable housing is not being created all over the state, it would be unfair to basically force those who want affordable housing to live in the city. Many issues arise here, including school and neighborhood quality. Low income families should have at least and opportunity to compete for affordable housing in the suburbs around the state.

So I think the City Council should still consider raising the affordable unit requirement to 20%, as one proposal has suggested. However, Governor O'Malley and the State legislature, as well as county governments need to step up as well. Maryland is made stronger by our economic diversity. We cannot risk losing such diversity by forcing out our low income population. Heck, as a person who considers himself middle class, I am worried about being squeezed out too. The state needs to work together to change the affordable housing situation.

Councilwoman Clarke Declares her Support for "Strong" Affordable Housing Bill

I have gotten word by email that Baltimore City Councilwoman Mary Pat Clarke is both a co-sponsor and big supporter of the "strong" version of the recently discussed Affordable Housing Bill.

Good to know my Councilwoman is on the ball!

By they way, here is another article about the housing bill. It makes it seem like the bill has a good chance of passing. I only hope that its the "strong" version that passes and not the watered down, developer friendly, "weak" version.

Community Supported Affordable Housing Bill Faces Challenges

Someone is undercutting the public interest as it relates to an affordable housing bill in the city.

The leaders of some city agencies are pushing to significantly restrict legislation that would require developers to include affordable units in all Baltimore residential projects, but the City Council sponsors of the bill are sticking by their original plan.

The bill, in its original form, the form community advocates refer to as the "strong" bill, is a progressive piece of legislation.

The bill - formally introduced last night - would require residential developers who get major subsidies or who benefit from significant rezoning to reserve as much as 20 percent of the units in a project for low- or moderate-income people. Developers working without subsidies or rezoning would have to offer 10 percent of their project for affordable use.

The legislation would also create a funding stream for an inclusionary housing trust that voters endorsed on the Nov. 7 ballot. Twenty percent of the city's transfer taxes and recordation fees could fill the fund with $10 million or more a year.

The bill also would set up an inclusionary housing board to consider exceptions to the law and measure its effectiveness.

I like this bill because it gives the city a stronger hand when it comes to development deals. If the city is going to go out of its way to give a developer subsidies and the luxury of relaxed zoning rules, that developer needs to be compelled to give something back. 20% of their units seems appropriate, if not a little low.

Its also nice to see the will of the voters expressed with the "inclusionary housing trust".

None of this will matter however, if several city departements have their way.

Late last week, the agencies drafted a substitute ordinance that, among other things, eliminated the funding for the trust fund and the housing board. It also would let developers who do not get subsidies or rezonings off the hook for affordable units.

First, why even have a ballot initiative if the policy behind that initiative is going to be eliminated? I don't even know how to address that.

When it comes to letting "independent" developers off the hook, I am ambivalent. It would be nice to require all new development in the city to provide affordable housing. I am not sure the difference between the amount of subsidized and unsubsidized development in the city. If most development is subsidized, then we shouldn't worry about getting the unsubsidized developers to include affordable units. However, if the majority of development is unsubsidized, it will be necessary to require these developers to include affordable housing.

Advocates of the original "strong" bill will accept nothing less than a bill that targets all development.

"There are too many people working in this city who cannot afford to live in this city, and that injustice cannot continue," he said. "This bill is justice."

The crowd insisted that not just any bill would do. Only a "strong" one.

And by that, said the Rev. Karen Brau, pastor of Amazing Grace in East Baltimore, they mean a bill that includes both a trust fund and a board and targets all residential development.

Supporters of the "strong" bill have been emailing their council members. You can do the same.