|
| Lopez Island | Orcas Island | Visitor's Guide |
            
        
|
|
|
LETTERS ABOUT REAL ESTATE EXCISE TAX FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING |
|
Email this page to a friend Related pages |
Supporting the REET for Affordable HousingDear Editor, posted 05/09/2006
Now 15 years later there are still two very good practical solutions for addressing affordable housing and easing the pressure on working families, 1) guest houses and 2) a real estate excise tax. Please vote yes prior to May 16th for the affordable housing ballot measure. The greater good of our community will be served by this measure which will help affordable housing providers throughout the County.
Sandy Bishop Dear Editor, posted 05/01/2006
Also troubling is the assertion that the new tax would harm young working families. Young families can almost certainly no longer afford to buy a home in San Juan County with working wages alone. They are the ones this program is aimed to help most, particularly as it could be used to extend the dwindling support of the federal government for low income persons, to those earning a "moderate" income. The whole purpose of a locally controlled source of funds is to create the possibility that working families will be able to stay in our community, and have the security of a home. San Juan County voters are known to be well educated, politically savvy and community minded. Let's hope they'll question these misleading, last minute statements made on a flyer that does not have any persons name on it. A viable solution for the housing crisis is now before the voters. Please vote "Yes" to support our existing efforts. Nancy DeVaux Dear Editor, posted 05/01/2006
Who is it? None other than John Evans, our very own chairman of the San Juan County Republican Party and paid consultant to at least one special interest group. I know that not all island builders (who John is a paid consultant for) agree with Johns desire to have this tax fail in the upcoming referendum. Please join me in voting for this important housing bank tax, which will help to keep our island a viable alternative to a wider and more inclusive community of citizens. Thank you. Steve Porten Dear Editor, posted 04/27/2006
And love is a word that defies economic analysis and the diatribe of debate. It is a feeling. It is the feeling we have when we gaze upon a landscape that still reflects the integrity of an island. We have the Land Bank to thank for the preservation of much of what we love about our islands. The deeper truth is that we have the generous spirit of those who voted for the Land Bank and those who buy real estate here to thank for participating in the ongoing cherishing of this place. The Housing Bank, in turn, cherishes the idea of island community. It will help preserve people who live here year-round. People who contribute year-round. People who love it here year-round. Our county has shown great vision and leadership in protecting it's geographic integrity as an island. Let's show the same vision and leadership in protecting the integrity of our community. We all need each other. It's this, not divisive debate, that's at the heart of the Housing Bank. Janet Thomas Not in support of the REET for Affordable HousingDear Editor, posted 04/27/2006
As a result, I have decided to vote against the Housing Bank tax. I would be more in favor of creating a County housing authority. A housing authority could control and invest our tax money as a long term investment for the community as a whole, rather than giving tax funds out as grants to select groups and individuals who are already operating successfully. A housing authority could also guarantee visibility and accountability of the tax dollars. I also do not like being asked to approve a new tax without seeing a copy of the ordinance and plan for how the money will be spent. Frank M. Penwell REET is tax on fellow behind the treeDear Editor, posted 04/21/2006
Throughout my childhood, my Dad instilled a strong work ethic in all of his children. He often said, "He would insure that we had a roof over our heads, food on the table, and clothes on our backs. Everything else was optional and if we wanted more, we better get a job!" Through the grace of God, hard work, perseverance, and the support of a loving wife, my family has managed to claw its way up the social ladder whereby we can proudly say we are part of the middle income families in San Juan County!!! Do you know who the middle-income families are in your neighborhood? HUD defines a family of four in San Juan County, with an annual income of $57K to $72K, as middle-income. Because of the wage structure in San Juan County a middle-income family probably has two-wage earners and 1 or 2 children. They are teachers, sheriff officers, nurses, firefighters, infrastructure workers, shopkeepers, and returning veterans - the sort of people anyone would be happy to call a neighbor. A middle-income family could qualify for a home mortgage of $205,000 - $245,000 at a 6% interest rate. Currently the MLS for all of San Juan County has only one listing that a middle-income family could qualify for - a 3-bedroom double wide manufactured home for $249,000. That's it! So the middle-income family soldiers on dreaming about homeownership until the reality of their circumstances wears down their resolve. The family eventually moves back to the mainland. I don't know about the rest of the community, but I think we need our teachers, sheriff officers, nurses, firefighters, and all of the other middle-income families that call San Juan County home. I believe The Housing Bank legislation was crafted with the intent of complying with The Washington Growth Management Act and State Housing Policy Act that, "requires state and local governments to promote a variety of residential densities and housing types to serve state and local residents, encourage the availability of affordable housing to all economic segments of the population of the state, and encourage the preservation of existing housing stock." Unfortunately state and federal law restricts the funding component of the initiative, the .05% REET, to the use by non-profit organizations to address the affordable housing needs of the very low, low, and moderate income families and the homeless. Middle-income families are left out. Life is about choices. Everyone in San Juan County made a conscience choice to live here. The only choice in life we do not get to make is who are parents are. That's it. We all are unique individuals with unique gifts and abilities. It is what we choose to do with these gifts and abilities that matters. We cannot all be the president of Starbucks, or drive in NASCAR, or develop the next computer operating system. And you know what - it's okay! We all cannot be homeowners - and that is okay, too. Martin Coles, Casey Kane, and Linus Torvalds invested their entire lives, made choices and sacrifices to achieve their dreams. My first wife and I worked two jobs and moved back home with my parents (lived in what used to be my sisters' bedroom), in order to save up enough money to buy our first home. A choice we made because we did not want to be renters. Homeownership is not easy. It takes hard work and sacrifices. That is why it is called the Great American Dream! To create programs and levy taxes that unfairly benefit one segment of society without corresponding programs that will benefit other segments in need is unjust. Why is there no viable program for the middle-income families of San Juan County? Why are they denied homeownership? Why have their choices made them renters while the low-income families' choices have made them homeowners? Why do very low, low, and moderate income families, get the joy of homeownership, the associated tax benefits, and profit on sale (although capped) over the middle-income family? My employees, who are part of the middle-income citizenry, have voiced their frustration as well by saying, "The harder we work to get ahead, the farther behind we are! It is just not right!" I agree. . . In May, you will have the choice of voting for or against the Housing Bank Initiative. Take the time now to completely understand the initiative, how the program will work, who it benefits, and who is left out. Ask yourself if there could be a better solution that would benefit a larger segment of the community. Brian P. Logan Dear Editor, posted 04/20/2006
Some say there is there a better type of funding mechanism for affordable housing. They are right in that there are other ways to get funding, but better or worse are subjective terms for each individual. I've heard many say they support affordable housing, but insist that it must be funded with their choice of a best/fairest tax. Fully pleasing everybody means nothing will ever get a majority vote. The REET is the choice we have NOW. Any other option could take YEARS to develop. It took 6 years before the Washington State Legislature passed the enabling legislation for our excise tax. Will the REET solve the housing crunch in San Juan County? NO. But it is an important, if not critical, part of the multiple solutions that we need. A common cliche is that many of us come to the San Juans for the natural beauty but we stay because of the wonderful people. When the REET passes it will enable many of those wonderful people stay in our community. When your ballot arrives in the mail please vote YES on Propisition 1. Thank You. Bob Gamble and Winnie Adams Dear Editor, posted 04/20/2006
Here's a suggestion I haven't seen posted anywhere that might make the idea of yet another tax (albeit one most of us already here won't feel) a bit more palatable--- is this 1/2 of 1% tax one that is tax- deductible on your income taxes??? Or perhaps if people are opposed to this tax as it is written, what if we could divide the tax already being collected for the Land Bank between these two entities?? Just a thought! John Boyd The Real Estate Excise Tax proposal reminds me of an old ditty:
The REET is indeed a tax on that fellow behind the tree. Most of the people I know who have written in support of this tax already own their homes here. By voting for the tax they will get to feel good about supporting affordable housing while making sure that they don't actually have to pay out anything themselves. Pretty neat trick. This isn't the first time San Juan voters have used this little trick. The Land Bank is also financed by the fellow behind the tree -- those already here who voted it in get to enjoy the benefits at somebody else's expense. Hey, it worked once, why not hit those same folks again? Of course, these taxes also hurt the very folks they're supposed to help, since they make housing even more expensive to purchase, but when tax policy is at stake, who worries about logic? And since many, or even most, of the people who will actually pay this tax aren't voters here, they can't complain. (Of course, it sort of smacks of taxation without representation, but when there's money at stake, principles can be glossed over easily enough.) The supporters of tax support for affordable housing are smart enough not to ask the voters to put their own money where their mouths are. Much smarter to just get us to put the other fellow's money where our mouths are. That's easy.
Christopher Hodgkin In Support of the REETDear Editor, posted 04/16/2006
These statements ignore some facts about this community that have kept our family here for over 30 years, and others for far longer than that. This place is filled with sophisticated voters who work to keep local government tuned in to local solutions. Hating the government (and all taxes) has not been a popular island tradition. The islands are also filled with caring people who don't want to live in a monoculture of only the very rich. Many have worked long years in support of programs like the Home Trust, Opal, Homes for Islanders, and the Lopez Community Land Trust. These are programs I believe the Housing Bank can strengthen. It can also work with local builders and architects, local banks and mortgage companies to help alleviate the growing island housing crisis. We'll vote yes for the REET when we receive our ballots because it offers an island solution that makes sense.
John and Louise Dustrude Dear Editor, posted 04/16/2006
The words of my great-grandfather, Theodore Bliss Cunningham, seem to speak directly to our happiness as a community:
Would those who can afford $475,000 (the median home price) to live in the San Juan Islands really begrudge the one half of one percent Real Estate Excise Tax to help make home ownership possible for those less financially fortunate than they are? Looking below the surface, I would guess not, for in their hearts people love to give. After all, we "spend" our lives on Earth, we don't hoard them. As a senior citizen, many of my friends and family have died or are close to death, and not one has ever said that they wish they had been less generous. Where are we going as human beings? It would make sense to evolve toward our greatest happiness - which, my great-grandfather suggests, resides in an ever-increasing generosity of spirit. This May, let's vote yes for the Housing Bank and make the days brighter for many of our fellows - and watch our own happiness grow.
Wendy E. Shepard Support the REET -Invest in Our CommunityDear Editor, posted 04/10/2006
What does this mean in real terms? 1. Increased prices for things we buy. Because housing costs are so much higher here, employers must pay a premium to retain a workforce. Prices must be increased to pay for these costs. 2. Unavailability of services and products. As this crisis deepens, employers can no longer compensate workers enough without raising prices to an unacceptable level. Then we are all forced to purchase goods and services off-island, incurring increasing ferry costs and inconvenience. This is a self-reinforcing cycle. As more people spend money off-island, more stores and services providers close. Also sales tax revenues decrease and must be replaced by higher property taxes, another added cost. People in this age group are the ones who start new businesses and the fact that there are less of them means the business that closes won't be replaced. 3. Paid workers must replace volunteers. Our volunteer fire departments are having a difficult time recruiting new members. Soon we will have to hire professional firefighters. This has hidden as well as obvious cost implications. Clearly taxes will increase. Last year, our insurance company refused to extend fire insurance on our island home after the fire chief informed them of these recruiting difficulties. We were able to secure coverage but only after agreeing to pay substantially increased premiums. 4. Increased Educational Costs. The State of Washington provides funding to school districts based on the number of students enrolled. As our school population decreases, income falls but fixed costs remain unaffected. To make up this difference we will have to increase our M&O levies, another added cost. Also 50% of the current teachers on San Juan Island will retire within the next five years. These individuals have lived here for a long time and secured housing when costs were low. Their replacements will not be as fortunate. Either we prepare to pay significantly higher salaries or find a way to subsidize their housing. I have focused on economic factors but the less tangible factors should not be forgotten. How much "richer" are we from having farmers' markets here on the islands? And what about live theatre, musical performances and wonderful restaurants? These depend on the energy of young people and the San Juan Islands would be sterile indeed without them. Please consider your own self-interest and what having a diverse population here means for you and vote for the REET.
Dr. Larry Soll Dear Editor, posted 04/10/2006
Everyone has seen the figures about home ownership in the San Juans-low median income and high real estate prices. The numbers tell us that if you are a construction worker, schoolteacher, secretary, or grocery clerk, your family cannot afford to buy into housing in San Juan County. This situation is very unlikely to improve. In fact, it is getting worse all the time, as housing prices continue to spiral upward, and median income remains stagnant. Young people hoping to start families see that they must leave the islands in order to move ahead. As they leave, the population grows older and less varied. Without the diverse populace required for smoothly running communities, those who stay behind will find themselves in an increasingly barren society, one with fewer young people and fewer people to perform necessary jobs. Our situation should be a matter of concern for everyone who values residing in these islands. In the East, daily commuters, sometimes travelling by air, work in island retreats where workers have been priced out of the housing market. This expensive solution is not one that we should plan to adopt in solving the problem. It is also mistaken to imagine that healthy communities can exist without these essential workers. The residents of this county deserve stable diverse communities as much as anyone elsewhere. The entire county will benefit from the affordable housing that the REET will help support. William and Karin Agosta |
||
|
SAN JUAN ISLANDER © 2008 |
|||