“ONE SIZE DOESN’T FIT ALL,” keeps coming up in our small county and city.
Take, for example, the current Housing Element recently reported on by Planning Director Brandon Pangman. This establishes programs to improve housing. The previous cost for the County portion was $30-$35,000 and was conducted using State grant funding yet no grant funding has been determined available for this housing element update project. This update is now called “much more complicated, challenging and costly” and initial estimates were at $200,000. Cutting out public workshops and discussion ended up with double what it cost in years past - $65,000 for the County’s housing element using $15,000 from Sierra Buttes/Lakes Basin Recreation Masterplan Update.
Brandon also spoke to the City with no better news. The City is experiencing negative growth and there’s a minimum of just two affordable housing numbers. Yet the City’s portion is $55,000. Pangman offered three options which included one to ask the City’s Planning Director, Gary Price for a proposal on the Housing Element. The subject was again on a Special Meeting agenda Monday night where Council member Joy Markum stated the City doesn’t have “any extra money.” She stated a cost of $55,707.45 for limited bills every month and told of the need of an $8,100 surge protector installed. In 2012 the City’s Housing Element cost $35,000 with a grant.
The Housing Element is one of seven State mandated elements that comprise the General Plan, a policy document that provides an assessment of housing characteristics and needs in the community and establishes programs to improve housing to meet those needs. To stay in compliance, it must be updated every five years.
* * * * *
IF THE STATE CARED anything about the City’s housing, it would allow funds to exercise the abatement process to clear several of the despicable messes left around town, particularly near Smithneck Creek where old vehicles are most likely leaking fluids. It will require legal counsel which is costly but well worth the trouble to see such unsightly areas cleaned up.
That would be a much better investment for both the City and the public.
Take, for example, the current Housing Element recently reported on by Planning Director Brandon Pangman. This establishes programs to improve housing. The previous cost for the County portion was $30-$35,000 and was conducted using State grant funding yet no grant funding has been determined available for this housing element update project. This update is now called “much more complicated, challenging and costly” and initial estimates were at $200,000. Cutting out public workshops and discussion ended up with double what it cost in years past - $65,000 for the County’s housing element using $15,000 from Sierra Buttes/Lakes Basin Recreation Masterplan Update.
Brandon also spoke to the City with no better news. The City is experiencing negative growth and there’s a minimum of just two affordable housing numbers. Yet the City’s portion is $55,000. Pangman offered three options which included one to ask the City’s Planning Director, Gary Price for a proposal on the Housing Element. The subject was again on a Special Meeting agenda Monday night where Council member Joy Markum stated the City doesn’t have “any extra money.” She stated a cost of $55,707.45 for limited bills every month and told of the need of an $8,100 surge protector installed. In 2012 the City’s Housing Element cost $35,000 with a grant.
The Housing Element is one of seven State mandated elements that comprise the General Plan, a policy document that provides an assessment of housing characteristics and needs in the community and establishes programs to improve housing to meet those needs. To stay in compliance, it must be updated every five years.
* * * * *
IF THE STATE CARED anything about the City’s housing, it would allow funds to exercise the abatement process to clear several of the despicable messes left around town, particularly near Smithneck Creek where old vehicles are most likely leaking fluids. It will require legal counsel which is costly but well worth the trouble to see such unsightly areas cleaned up.
That would be a much better investment for both the City and the public.
