The Right to Housing is on the Ballot in Los Angeles

OfTheCross

Veteran
Joined
Mar 17, 2013
Messages
43,522
Reputation
4,969
Daps
98,980
Reppin
Keeping my overhead low, and my understand high
This November, voters in the United States city of Los Angeles will have the opportunity to promote the human right to housing in a city where over 41,000 people, among the highest number in the nation, are currently unhoused, and many more face housing insecurity. Measure ULA seeks to address this crisis by taxing high-dollar real estate transactions to fund desperately needed affordable housing. Human Rights Watch strongly endorses this rational approach to address houselessness.

Service providers, affordable housing nonprofits, and renters’ rights groups collaborated to draft Measure ULA, drawing from their learned experiences of what it takes to make an impact on the houselessness crisis. Since then, over 200 additional organizations have joined the call to endorse this initiative.

Measure ULA would create a 4 to 5.5 percent tax on the sale of property worth over US$5 million. The money generated by this tax would be used immediately to buy and build more permanent affordable housing, provide rental or cash subsidies to low-income older people and people living with disabilities, and offer legal resources for those facing evictions.

Los Angeles’ housing crisis stems from a government failure at all levels to take the right to housing seriously and is discriminatory in its origins. California’s constitution requires a local referendum before public housing projects can be built in a community, the result of alarmist fears around property values and integration. This hurdle has helped to cement decades of racially discriminatory housing policies in the state. Los Angeles itself has a history of racist housing discrimination, which has contributed to making the city metro area one of the country’s least affordable and most racially segregated.

Housing is a human right. All levels of government have a responsibility to ensure universal access to affordable permanent housing and to prevent houselessness. Measure ULA is a community-led effort that, if approved, would make Los Angeles better, safer, and more equitable.

 

dora_da_destroyer

Master Baker
Joined
May 1, 2012
Messages
65,870
Reputation
16,488
Daps
271,084
Reppin
Oakland
Nope, that’s not how it should be funded, and if that’s how it’s funded, it needs to be a higher transaction threshold and only on commercial/investor transactions. Someone buying or selling a primary residence shouldn’t be taxed to fund housing the homeless, primary residential buyers aren’t causing this crisis. But maybe they did that just so it can fail and they can hit people with the “we tried :troll:” “told you so :ld:
 

Secure Da Bag

Veteran
Joined
Dec 20, 2017
Messages
42,405
Reputation
21,753
Daps
131,946
Frankly, everyone should be taxed. Add an extra 1% across the board, a higher tax on properties over $5M, and a slightly higher tax on commercial/industrial properties.

Homelessness affects everyone.
 

WTFisWallace?

All Star
Joined
May 24, 2022
Messages
1,479
Reputation
278
Daps
4,730
Reppin
Dade County
and if that’s how it’s funded, it needs to be a higher transaction threshold and only on commercial/investor transactions. Someone buying or selling a primary residence shouldn’t be taxed to fund housing the homeless, primary residential buyers aren’t causing this crisis.

I agree with primary residence part….

And I can see how 5 mil would be too low of a threshold if you’re trying to sell apartment complexes (20-units or so) or other mid level commercial properties in hot markets.


But how much higher would you make the threshold for SFH or multis?
 

dora_da_destroyer

Master Baker
Joined
May 1, 2012
Messages
65,870
Reputation
16,488
Daps
271,084
Reppin
Oakland
I agree with primary residence part….

And I can see how 5 mil would be too low of a threshold if you’re trying to sell apartment complexes (20-units or so) or other mid level commercial properties in hot markets.


But how much higher would you make the threshold for SFH or multis?
I wouldn’t tax sales being done as primary residences at all. This is LA, homes in the hood are $400k+ and easily over $5 mil in ritzy areas and that’s not even getting into the mega mansions in the $10M+ range. I simply don’t believe people buying a residence should be the footing the bill for this, even if they clearly have the money to afford $5M+ homes. Seems like an easy way for the government to pass on their responsibility because “rich people” are an easy target.

That said, if you’re buying an investment property or 2nd, 3rd home, that’s where I see this being applied, that’s where housing availability is manipulated. but our housing crisis is not the fault of the average buyer or even small investor, this is bullshyt making it their burden to fund housing for the homeless while the people building these high rises luxury developments or investors who bought up whole neighborhoods are chillin
 

Mowgli

Veteran
Joined
May 1, 2012
Messages
103,972
Reputation
13,880
Daps
245,435
Pathetic. This was supposed to have been done with money we already gave them. There's a moneypit downtown and no one knows who's on the other side collecting.

A trillion dollar economy in l.a county and they're still creating new taxes to jget in people's pockets. I imagine that too many people sit on their properties they'll just raise property tax as well
 

ExodusNirvana

Change is inevitable...
Joined
Jun 6, 2012
Messages
41,809
Reputation
9,445
Daps
152,916
Reppin
Brooklyn, NY
Affordable housing for whom???

Will the people living on the streets or in shelters get priority? NOPE

It will go to young white folks and trust fund babies who want to be in the proximity of LA
 

WTFisWallace?

All Star
Joined
May 24, 2022
Messages
1,479
Reputation
278
Daps
4,730
Reppin
Dade County
That said, if you’re buying an investment property or 2nd, 3rd home, that’s where I see this being applied, that’s where housing availability is manipulated. but our housing crisis is not the fault of the average buyer or even small investor, this is bullshyt making it their burden to fund housing for the homeless while the people building these high rises luxury developments or investors who bought up whole neighborhoods are chillin
I was thinking this was moreso trying to target these type of folks. But you’re right, I was viewing it from the lens of Miami’s market instead of LA’s….but even in that case, a 5 mil threshold could still be fukking over ‘small investors’.

Agree with your general point that this is passing the buck and not addressing the real issues.

Local government across the board should coming up with and enforcing better policies as far as promoting/insuring better mixed developments (income wise and capacity/structure wise)….I feel like Montreal provides a decent example of that.
 

Serious

Veteran
Supporter
Joined
Apr 30, 2012
Messages
80,599
Reputation
14,588
Daps
192,010
Reppin
1st Round Playoff Exits
I'm not against it if we can put them up in these things:
107134872-Unlocked_Thumb_Template_3.jpg

 

Serious

Veteran
Supporter
Joined
Apr 30, 2012
Messages
80,599
Reputation
14,588
Daps
192,010
Reppin
1st Round Playoff Exits
Pathetic. This was supposed to have been done with money we already gave them. There's a moneypit downtown and no one knows who's on the other side collecting.

A trillion dollar economy in l.a county and they're still creating new taxes to jget in people's pockets. I imagine that too many people sit on their properties they'll just raise property tax as well
The housing situation in LA is a bit more complicated than that.

The city has funding for housing, the problem is landlords don't want to take the vouchers.

 

Mowgli

Veteran
Joined
May 1, 2012
Messages
103,972
Reputation
13,880
Daps
245,435
The housing situation in LA is a bit more complicated than that.

The city has funding for housing, the problem is landlords don't want to take the vouchers.


Is it because the homeless don't want to live in a dangerous neighborhood and instead want to go where property values are high ?
 
Top