HomeMy WebLinkAbout08-13-24 Public Comment - N. ten Broek - CDB Public Comment for Monday August 12th.From:Noah ten Broek
To:Bozeman Public Comment
Subject:[EXTERNAL]CDB Public Comment for Monday August 12th.
Date:Saturday, August 10, 2024 5:36:30 PM
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you
recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
Dear Community Development Board Member,
Thank you for considering the following thoughts in your deliberations regardingthe evaluation of the Affordable Housing Ordinance (AHO). I’ve divided my
commentary into two sections.
The first section presents a more radical perspective, arguing that the ordinance is
invalid due to what can be seen as practically negligent community engagement.This resulted from an outdated public notification system and the challenges posedby the Coronavirus emergency. While the city may have met state minimums for
public noticing, the importance of this ordinance demands that those standards be
exceeded.
The second section assumes that city board members may choose to overlook theaforementioned concerns and instead focus on applying corrective measures—
essentially adding cosmetic fixes to a deeply flawed process and ordinance.
As a member of the community, my initial reaction to the AHO was one of utterdisbelief. It is troubling that an ordinance of such significance, intended to provideshelter for the unhoused by incentivizing developers with the communal and
cultural wealth of our commonwealth, was so hastily and irresponsibly advanced
without proper input from the public. The benefits being negotiated belong to the
community, yet our neighborhoods were taken from us without our consent orparticipation, leaving them vulnerable to exploitation. While the city may have
technically met the state’s minimum requirements for public noticing, the reality is
that many of us were not truly aware or able to engage. The world was in chaos, and
our lives were upended. Many residents were experiencing displacement due to thetransient nature of our housing inventory.
Moreover, the city’s minimum noticing standards have created a significant barrier
between city notices and the residents they are intended to inform. The primary
methods for tracking city meeting agendas—through the Bozeman Daily Chronicleand online—are not only exclusive but also effectively hidden behind a paywall,
requiring costly subscriptions and a level of digital competence that not all residents
possess. For instance, on my block alone, there are four households with elderly
residents who lack internet access and live on fixed incomes, making it difficult forthem to afford the increasingly expensive Chronicle subscription. As a result, it is
my firm belief that the codification of the AHO should be considered invalid, as itdoes not represent the public from whom these benefits are being taken and
exchanged. Furthermore, the AHO effectively functions as an up-zoning document
wherever it is applied, raising concerns that the notification standards used by the
city may not have met the stricter requirements typically associated with re-zoning.
What is more, I must express my deep concern with the current approach ofincentivizing developers to solve our community’s housing needs. The assumption
that simply increasing housing inventory will create a "trickle-down" effect, where
people will naturally secure housing suited to their economic standing and open upmore affordable options for lower economic demographics, is not only simplisticbut fundamentally flawed. This approach consistently fails to address the needs of
our most vulnerable residents. To truly resolve the housing crisis, we must prioritize
the income groups most neglected by the market and build housing specifically
designed for them.
Communities that have invested in social, city-owned, and publicly funded housing
have proven that these strategies are far more effective in ensuring equitable access
to housing. It is therefore essential that we abandon this laissez-faire, developer-
centric model in favor of a targeted, proactive strategy that directly and effectivelytackles the housing vulnerabilities in our community.
Bozeman's Department of Economic Development has aggressively promoted the
surge of new “affordable” housing units as evidence of the AHO ordinance's
success and validation. However, these units fail to meet the actual housing needsof our community. According to data provided by Heather Grenier of HRDC, for
every 100 residents at 80% AMI, the Bozeman community now has 105 units
available. Yet, for every 100 residents at 60% AMI, there are only 67 units. This
imbalance highlights a critical shortfall: we have compromised neighborhoodcharacter, quality materials, and adequate parking to increase market-rate housing,
not truly financially inclusive options. We cannot pat ourselves on the back when
the AHO has failed to deliver meaningful benefits to those who need them most.
Instead, it has allowed developers to sidestep the cultural and functional protectionsin our code that are vital to our community's safety and well-being.
If, for any reason, your board lacks the humility to correct the errors of this
ordinance by recommending its repeal, and instead chooses to wield your positions
of privilege against public opposition without proper city wide engagement, Istrongly urge you to consider the following emergency amendments to address the
most critical flaws in this deeply dysfunctional ordinance:
Comprehensive Recommendations for Amending the Affordable HousingOrdinance (AHO):
1. Implement a Flexible AMI: Establish an adjustable Area Median Income(AMI) that is reviewed and updated annually to better target unmet housing
needs.
2. Prioritize Ownership: The AHO should primarily incentivize
homeownership to create more long-term stability within the community.
3. Ensure Public Oversight: Given that the AHO exchanges community
benefits for other community gains, all decisions should be subject to public
oversight, with no administrative approvals.
4. Involve Neighbors: Neighbors of any proposed AHO project should beactively involved in the decision-making process, as these projects impacttheir communal resources.
5. Parking Variances: Allow variances on parking requirements only for
affordable units, not for market-rate units, ensuring that incentives areappropriately balanced.
6. Voluntary Tax Contribution: Add a voluntary tax option on the annual
property tax invoice, allowing residents who wish to support affordable
housing to contribute. This ensures that voluntary funding continues even if atax levy fails.
7. Cash-in-Lieu System: Implement a cash-in-lieu system for projects that do
not include affordable housing, using these funds to build city-owned housing.
8. Establish Clear Affordability Targets: Define specific affordability targetsfor different income levels, particularly for households below 60% AMI, toensure that the ordinance meets the needs of the most vulnerable populations.
9. Incentivize Green Building Practices: Encourage or require developers to
incorporate sustainable and energy-efficient building practices in affordablehousing projects to reduce long-term costs for residents and minimizeenvironmental impact.
10. Set Minimum Standards for Quality: Establish minimum standards for the
quality of materials and design in affordable housing projects to ensure thatthey are not only affordable but also durable, safe, and visually appealing,maintaining neighborhood character.
11. Long-Term Affordability Guarantees: Require developers to maintain the
affordability of units for an extended period (e.g., 30-50 years) to prevent therapid conversion of affordable units to market-rate housing.
12. Community Land Trusts: Explore the creation or expansion of Community
Land Trusts (CLTs) to hold land in perpetuity for affordable housing, ensuring
long-term affordability and community control over development.
13. Strengthen Anti-Displacement Measures: Include provisions that protect
existing residents from displacement due to new developments, such as
offering relocation assistance or priority placement in new affordable units.
14. Regular Impact Assessments: Mandate regular assessments of the AHO’simpact on housing affordability and neighborhood demographics, allowing fordata-driven adjustments to the ordinance as needed.
15. Expand Public Engagement: Increase efforts to engage a broader segment of
the community in the development and revision of the AHO, using accessibleand inclusive methods to gather input from underrepresented groups.
16. Provide Developer Incentives for Lower AMI Units: Offer greater
incentives, such as expedited permitting, to developers who build units for
households below 50% AMI, addressing the critical shortage at this incomelevel.
17. Mixed-Use Development Focus: Encourage mixed-use developments that
combine affordable housing with commercial and community spaces,
promoting vibrant, walkable neighborhoods that meet diverse communityneeds.
Thank you for your hard work and dedication to this community we each call
home.
Best,
Noah ten Broek