Home > Humboldt County > Housing workshops

Housing workshops

[Notice from the Healthy Humboldt Coalition]

Humboldt County has fallen behind on meeting affordable housing needs. Only 30% of people living here can afford to buy a house, and rental costs keep rising. Young families, seniors, and most of the County’s workforce needs more affordable housing options, whether they want to buy or rent a home.

The County is considering possible locations for developers to build multi-family housing, which can include apartments, duplexes, or a “live/work” mix of residential, office and retail space. Of the 150 candidate parcels in the unincorporated communities of Myrtletown, McKinleyville, Cutten, Manila, Garberville, Redway, and Humboldt Hill, the County will need to choose which areas to reserve for multi-family housing.

The County will be holding a series of workshops as an opportunity for community involvement in how best to provide a wider range of housing options for people who already live and work in our communities.

Monday, February 14
Azalea Hall, McKinleyville
6:00-8:00pm

Tuesday, February 15
Wharfinger Bldg., Eureka
6:00-8:00pm

Thursday, February 17
Supervisors Chambers, County Courthouse, Eureka
6:00-9:00pm

View maps of possible sites.

Read the Public Notice.

View zoning definitions.

Healthy Humboldt is a coalition of organizations and individuals working for a County General Plan that provides healthy housing and transportation choices while protecting our farms, forests and watersheds.

To learn more, visit us at: www.healthyhumboldt.org
If you have any questions or comments you can get in touch with us at: info@healthyhumboldt.org.

  1. Anonymous
    February 14, 2011 at 12:20 am

    I believe that the 30% figure is a typo, please check! Just last year it was 75%!?

  2. Anonymous
    February 14, 2011 at 12:22 am

    Nearly 30% of people living here cannot afford to buy a house

    So what? Is it a goal for every citizen to BUY a HOUSE? By all means, institute rent control, but complaining because 30% of the population can’t buy a house is absurd. Our goal now is everything for everybody?

    The workshops are a formality. The county is moving ahead with its plan to convert communities to high density zoning, and the appropriate groups will sue in an attempt to stop it.

  3. Rockhouse
    February 14, 2011 at 2:24 am

    I’m curious why there are no proposed sites in Arcata. Insufficient space or infrastructure? Are they already compliant? Too expensive or too difficult to work with?

  4. Ponder z
    February 14, 2011 at 6:13 am

    So the county planing fools want to bring high crime rates and blight to my neighborhood. How about a substation of the sheriff department? Did you fucktards think of that? Hell no, because your heads are up your butts. Some of these land owners have been trying for years to get approval. I see them on the map. Those locations are appropriate for dense population. For anyone who thinks this is a good idea, spend some time in the Vally West housing unit. Or in Mckinleyville at any of the multi family projects. I dare you to park your car there for the weekend.

  5. Quick Question
    February 14, 2011 at 6:42 am

    Rockhouse, I believe this is just for the unincorporated areas. Eureka and Arcata have their own housing elements as part of their general plans.

  6. Thomas Paine Jr
    February 14, 2011 at 7:38 am

    First, only 30% can afford to buy a home, not 30 % CAN NOT afford a home.
    Second, Humboldt residents need to understand that the shit shack they live in would only sell for 50 grand outside of the county, not 300K. Price the houses at what they would be worth in say Kansas and 90% of the people here could afford a home.

  7. Anonymous
    February 14, 2011 at 7:38 am

    I believe it should read that only 30% COULD afford to buy a house.

  8. Ben
    February 14, 2011 at 7:51 am

    Healthy Humboldt is certainly out of step with our neighborhoods on this one. There is significant opposition to placing high density housing in low density neighborhoods. Humboldt County has messed this up big time by using its top down approach rather than working with communities to achieve an acceptable result. I believe this plan will go down in flames.

  9. Anonymous
    February 14, 2011 at 7:56 am

    HH is in lock-step with the county. As per usual, they shred the McKinleyville Area Plan. Why would you ever place high density low incoming housing in areas where there are no services? Oh, yeah, look where the planning commissioners live.

  10. Ben
    February 14, 2011 at 8:04 am

    This process started as the traditional Neely/Girard way. Quickly and quietly let the public know of your plans, rush it to hearing, and slam dunk, DONE. But, when the public found out and let other people know, that fell apart and now they have had to send out, lets see know, four different Notice of Intent notices, each different, maps changing weekly, don’t let neighbors know what is going on, etc. The notices in the paper are full of APN’s and information that most people won’t understand. Well the public knows now and I hope that they will be heard!

  11. "HENCHMAN OF JUSTICE"
    February 14, 2011 at 8:11 am

    Affordability = Does not mean jack schit cuz just as soon as you think you got a place that is affordable, other prices in life that the renter or owner is forced too pay will go-up….. and your right back at square one, worrying about finances and such. Kinda sux if all your money is already spent, now doesn’t it? As I have said for years, the scam is to set society-up where people are all forced into economic slavery because living off the grid and not supplying nada to the GDP or any other gubbamint figure or calculation or variable or whatever is looked upon with great evil by those who want to profit of of every humanoid alive by forcing away liberties, freedoms, opportunities, desires, etc…. The human spirit does not live like this for long, so this housing problem is gonna be around a very long time without a cure.

    Why?

    Answer = Overpopulation is perpetuated by the pyramid schemers and the greeds they push upon societies weakest links (which happens to be a whole hell-of-a-lot of folks).

    Jeffrey Lytle
    McKinleyville – 5th District

  12. Anonymous
    February 14, 2011 at 8:14 am

    Thomas Paine makes up facts to suit his agenda. He says only 30% of Humboldters can afford to buy a home? Then explain sir, why over 60% here own their own homes !

    12.22am is right. It is not the goal of the government to make sure everybody owns everything. It was that misguided goal that was at the root of the housing bubble and the resulting crash that will affect our economy for at least another decade.

  13. Azalea Ave Resident
    February 14, 2011 at 8:19 am

    Great job on scheduling the McK meeting this evening when many folks probably want to spend Valentine’s evening with family. If they were hoping for low attendance, I hope a lot of people show up. We have a rental on Babler Rd and we’ll be there since two parcels listed are on Babler.

  14. Azalea Ave Resident
    February 14, 2011 at 8:24 am

    HH:
    Thanks for posting the parcel maps – all three parcels between Babler and Central are also at least partially in the Widow White Creek wetlands area – not sure if these are developable lots. One lot even straddles the creek.

  15. "HENCHMAN OF JUSTICE"
    February 14, 2011 at 8:26 am

    Noticing through the paper = becoming old news and archaic.

    Why?

    Answer = The times Standard or any other hard print for local news is falling in market share. Political Insiders have known this and have also known the effectiveness of public noticing is not as good as it once used to be becauise society is morphing over to the internet for its news.

    Yes, even today, the government code sections on public noticing say nothing about the internet (IOW, politicians have with aggravated and malicious intentions, decided not to amend or update their own responsibilities and requirements to match the skill-sets of the citizens of the 21st Century); then again, what skill-sets are worthy in the eyes of elected officials is the question deserving a realistic answer and approach to understand.

    Why?

    Answer = All one needs to do is look at who is cutting deals as elitist individuals and political insider groupees. Humboldt County messed up the housing market locally decades ago, seriously.

    Now, to be fair, so too did the State regulators and lobbyists screw up housing.

    Why?

    Answer = Tax collections that equate to higher valuations unsustainable, followed by endless measures to “prop-up” valuations to cover and hide those political dark secrets that most citizens are STILL in the dark on AND will suffer greatly for being out of the information loop. Sorry, but suckers lose in life too often.

    Thomas Paine Jr. = Cold hard facts on housing, but look at the cost side of the equation and understand profit is based on higher costs too that allow valuations to be over-assesed for short sales periods only….up until the bottom opens up wide and dumps many peoples lives into the abyss – the same people that forked over big time buck-a-roonies to those who profited short term to make a better lifestyle knowing that the LOSER would pay for it all….such the cozy job career.

    JL

  16. "HENCHMAN OF JUSTICE"
    February 14, 2011 at 8:36 am

    Anonymous
    February 14, 2011 at 8:14 am
    Thomas Paine makes up facts to suit his agenda. He says only 30% of Humboldters can afford to buy a home? Then explain sir, why over 60% here own their own homes !

    12.22am is right. It is not the goal of the government to make sure everybody owns everything. It was that misguided goal that was at the root of the housing bubble and the resulting crash that will affect our economy for at least another decade.

    Response: Hmmmm, statistics is as statistics does. Where do ya think the figures come from?

    Answer = not people not searching for a home or rental, that’s for sure. It is like employment – if you are self-employed, no government paperwork will include you in their totals. No mortgage, no paper trail to know whether or not someone is in need or not. Income levels set by gubbamint proper-uppers only care to candy coat figures to fit agendas that are corruptive and only steal the life and conforts away from others. Any fair-minded person can look at crunched numbers and read local gubbamint letters to prove how pissed off gubbamint employees get when they can’t pad their work efforts to a higher valuation cuz it makes the whole department look stupid and fraudulant…..and, there are many departments looking stupid right about now too. These public employees will get what they all deserve – balance!

    JL

  17. Ben
    February 14, 2011 at 8:37 am

    Azalea,
    You would think the County Staff would get out of the courthouse and actually go and see the proposed lots! Even with 60 people in “Community Development” they hired LACO to the tune of $115,000 to come up with their lots!!!!! Oh what a mess we have!

  18. "HENCHMAN OF JUSTICE"
    February 14, 2011 at 8:46 am

    Ben, the real mess is high societal costs and valuations that have increased to warp speed ahead of and beyond the capacity of bottom-up wealth building practices and even top down as you say. Escalating costs destroys all societies. As a former educator, you know this. The number of units here or there means nothing when the problem is wealth, greed and costs derived from over-populations. Anyhow, there are some nice vacant cookie cutter homes all along I-5 where freeway noise is prime time and the view is all agriculture….and for predatory bird lovers, so many hawks and eagles stalking its prey. Then again, it ain’t Humboldt County.

    As old Jedi Warrior Yoda said, “Fear leads to anger, anger leads to hate, hate leads to suffering.” Now, for whom economically hates whom is an important question to answer.

    JL

  19. Jen
    February 14, 2011 at 9:26 am

    Yep, that is a typo: Healthy Humboldt’s message should say only 30% CAN afford to buy a home. The number is from Humboldt Association of Realtors. It’s their housing affordability index, which you can view trends and the formula from which it is derived here:
    http://harealtors.com/statistics

  20. Anonymous
    February 14, 2011 at 9:32 am

    The State mandates that Humboldt County address the shortage of affordable housing throughout the County. The incorporated areas (including Arcata, Eureka and Fortuna) have their own General Plans and associated housing requirements. Up for discussion is where to accommodate various housing types for the unincorporated areas.

    Regardless of how the County has handled these (and other) issues in the past, they are holding these workshops to get input from the public. Looking at the maps provided in the link above, there is a range of locations to choose from. Some of the sites may not be appropriate for multi-family zoning. However, some look like decent candidates.

    The workshops can be an opportunity to have a meaningful discussion in order to reach an outcome that is favorable for the entire community. Or they can be another venue where disruptive voices dominate and we are left where we started…with no more affordable housing, and out of compliance with the State.

  21. McKinleyvillan
    February 14, 2011 at 9:34 am

    The Board of Supervisors needs to appoint the Municipal Advisory Committee that the McK Community Plan called for in 2002. Not sure why it never happened, but it’s long past time.

    A lot is said about the McK Community Plan, much of it inaccurate. You can download it (and all the other community plans) at http://co.humboldt.ca.us/planning/complans.asp

  22. Anonymous
    February 14, 2011 at 9:35 am

    If an organization is going to claim not enough people can afford to buy a house, it should answer the following question: What percentage of people should be able to afford to buy a house?

    If it says everyone, it loses all credibility.

  23. Anonymous
    February 14, 2011 at 9:46 am

    No one is saying “everyone” should be able to afford a house. Saying that 30% of HumCo residents can afford to buy a house in this region is just a number to demonstrate how imbalanced housing opportunities are.

  24. Anonymous
    February 14, 2011 at 9:48 am

    Right, so tell us, if not enough people can afford to buy a house, what percentage of people should be able to?

  25. Anonymous
    February 14, 2011 at 9:51 am

    How bout aiming for at least 50% affordability?

  26. Anonymous
    February 14, 2011 at 9:57 am

    The problem I have with this idea is that we’ve an economically depressed area. It makes sense that if you don’t have a good paying job, you cannot afford to buy a house. Attract better jobs to the area. Don’t turn our communities to **** with high density housing.

  27. Plain Jane
    February 14, 2011 at 10:10 am

    Apparently Anonymous hasn’t noticed that a large percentage of “home owners” can’t afford their homes. Millions bought more than they could afford, betting that their incomes would increase (still waiting for that promised trickle down?) and that their home values would appreciate to allow them to continue using their “equity” to bridge the income gap. Millions of people have underwater mortgages who are still clinging to the hope that prices will rebound. I know a family who borrowed on their equity to buy expensive toys like jet skis, a fancy motor home, SUV, etc. When their home value submerged they walked away from it and now rent an identical house in the same subdivision for less than half their old mortgage payment and still have the toys.

  28. Not an Expert
    February 14, 2011 at 10:21 am

    Just calling for more jobs is overly simplistic. Many people here with good-paying jobs can barely afford rent, especially young families who have to choose between 2 incomes + day care costs or 1 income + 1 stay at home parent. (Don’t get me started on how little day care workers make!)

    Here’s the math: median rent is over $1300/month. At 1/3 of the household income, that means $46,800/year income to be able to afford the other expenses of life (food, transportation, health care, utilities, etc.). Then try saving money for your kids’ college funds.

    If people want their kids to be able to live here as adults, we need more housing options for young adults and young families, as well as better-paying jobs.

  29. Anonymous
    February 14, 2011 at 10:39 am

    Just calling for zoning for high density low income housing is overly simplistic. Worse, it’s against the wishes of the community, even established community plans.

  30. Anonymous
    February 14, 2011 at 10:56 am

    Just calling for higher density low income housing is overly simplistic. A ton of associated government costs skyrocket. If you want to bankrupt the county, by all means, go right ahead.

  31. humboldturtle
    February 14, 2011 at 11:02 am

    I wonder if local landlords object because they don’t want competition. Makes sense from their perspective…

  32. Anonymous
    February 14, 2011 at 11:22 am

    The Bd of Realtors likes to hype that 30% figure to encourage more homes to be built. That would lower prices, they would sell more homes & make more money.

    However they are playing loose with the statistics. The latest figures from the Census Bureau is for the year 2000. The percentage of home ownership in Humboldt County was 57.6% which was actually a little bit higher than in California in general.

    This proves beyond any shadow of a doubt, the 30% figure is hogwash.

    http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/06/06023.html

  33. Goldie
    February 14, 2011 at 11:23 am

    Affordable housing seems to be a cart and horse and chicken and egg sort of situation. If wages were higher more housing could be afforded by more people. If jobs were more available more folks could still hold the idea of moving up the pay scale and affording higher priced housing.
    Overbuilding any neighborhood without skillful planning creates problems.

  34. how to lie with statistics
    February 14, 2011 at 11:30 am

    According to posts on this topic, 30% of (all) residents can not afford to buy a house. However, as pointed out, more than 60% already do own a house.

    That means only 30% of the remaining 40%, or approximately 12% of residents can not afford to buy a house. Is this so unusual? Is this really a problem that needs to be fixed?

    I agree with observation that many houses are over-priced. There needs to be an adjustment, and it will happen. Like it or not.

  35. Azalea Ave Resident
    February 14, 2011 at 11:34 am

    Ben:
    FYI, I just looked at the county map for east McK and same thing as the Babler parcels – the parcel ending in #1028 extends way into the Mill Creek riparian area and straddles the creek. My understanding from the McK plan is this non-developable land, which limited recent developments on parcels located to the south side of Mill Creek off of Cochran Road. Seems like the County should have pre-screened the selected parcels before releasing the maps to the public.

  36. skippy
    February 14, 2011 at 11:34 am

    Let’s get this discussion rolling, shall we?

    Healthy Humboldt are big players in this GPU game: the agency is a project of the NEC’s Sustainable Communities Program, funded by members and the California Endowment.

    From their website’s mission statement Healthy Humboldt “is a coalition of organizations and individuals working for a County General Plan that provides healthy housing and transportation choices while protecting our farms, forests and watersheds.” Their vision statement? In part, ” the decisions we make in the General Plan will shape Humboldt County’s economy, environment, and public health well into the future.”

    Healthy Humboldt’s informative website shows taking an active role working on policy planning, advocacy, and coordination of Humboldt County’s General Plan Update (GPU).

    Who is Healthy Humboldt affiliated with? The Northcoast Environmental Center, Green Wheels, Humboldt Baykeeper, Sierra Club, and the Humboldt Watershed Council. Yes; all environmental organizations, well funded, and all with a strong voice. On the same page.

    One of the key members of Healthy Humboldt is Jennifer Kalt, a community mover and shaker. Ms. Kalt recently provided the Samoa Softball site with the comprehensively detailed 2002 Master Plan for the Town of Samoa prepared by RNL design for the Samoa Pacific Group/Danco Builders Company– a delightfully inspired if long read here for those interested.

    Ms. Kalt knows her stuff– and she’s certainly connected. But does she and Healthy Humboldt have their own naysaying nabobs of negative detractors?

    Last July, ‘Rose’ scathingly noted in the North Coast Journal comments:

    “… Jennifer is offended by balance on the Planning Commission, offended that it is not stacked with her kind… (she) represents the manipulative, petty, vindictive, intolerant “progressive” BS orgs – the kind of people who loves to impose rules and restrictions on others, but do not follow them themselves. The little tiny group of people, pretending to be so many different groups – is the same old same old 5 or 6 people.”

    “Ever the master of self promotion: Jennifer Kalt represents Healthy Humboldt, … is also a director of the Northcoast Environmental Center. (In other words, she wants “infill” ie: apartment buildings, wall to wall houses and skyscrapers, no room for a garden, for horses, or other livestock, no room to live off the land, why that would be “s-p-r-a-w-l.”) She’s also Water quality coordinator Jen Kalt…Humboldt Baykeeper representative Jennifer Kalt…Jennifer Kalt, EPIC/Resource Protection Associate,/California Indian Basketweavers Association/Native Plant Society/TPZ “expert” Jennifer Kalt. So many nice titles.”

    “Pretty funny to see Jennifer Kalt pretending to care about avoiding bias. She represents the “balls to the wall” cabal trying to force their will on the people of Humboldt County by attempting to steer the planning process. They are a very, very small group, despite their efforts to look big.”

    Whew. Now tell us how you really feel, Rose.

    I suspect they’re much more benign than this? Yours truly personally feels Healthy Humboldt– and the robust Ms. Katz– are making Humboldt a better place and preparing for our additional 24,500 residents over the next 40 yearsby planning now. Rose, I’m sure, might disagree.

    And you?

  37. A-Nony-Mouse
    February 14, 2011 at 11:37 am

    Housing affordability and home ownership rates are NOT the same thing. Many homes were purchased years ago when prices were much lower. I couldn’t afford the house I own at today’s rates.

  38. Anonymous
    February 14, 2011 at 11:38 am

    Not An Expert claimed that the median price for rent here was $1,300 per month. Not correct.

    The median rental price is actually only $1,145. But if you wanted to rent a one bedroom that median is only $600.

    Housing prices have fallen dramatically in the last few years. The median two bedroom house is now $189,000. The median three bedroom is only $250,000.

    http://hotpads.com/search/county/CA/Humboldt

  39. anonymous
    February 14, 2011 at 11:43 am

    In Eureka affordable housing means multi-family apartments and transitional housing. Is the county any different?

  40. Anonymous
    February 14, 2011 at 11:44 am

    Which is how people lie with statistics A-Nony-Mouse. The 30% figured is tossed out to give people the impression that 70% of the people cannot buy their own home, which is a lie.

    How To Lie at 11.30am pointed out the true statistics. Put another way, it is only 70% of the 43% of the people who don’t own homes already and cannot afford to buy a home. That works out to only 30% of the people who CANNOT BUY A HOME.

    Out of that 30% not all even want to buy a home at all. This figure includes all the college students and young 20 somethings who are just starting out.

  41. how to lie with statistics
    February 14, 2011 at 11:47 am

    A-Nony Mouse observes that “Housing affordability and home ownership rates are NOT the same thing. ”

    Has anyone claimed they ARE the same thing?

    Point is, when discussing what percentage of residents can not afford to buy a house (now), it should be made clear that you’re talking about the percentage of people who currently do not own. It makes a huge difference.

    Fact is, most who bought their houses before the bubble could not afford to by them at today’s prices. But that is another topic.

  42. Ben
    February 14, 2011 at 11:56 am

    Azalea,
    There are many people who have told the County Staff that there are many identified parcels that have serious constraints, but the consultant who identified the lots was told not to consider constraints and that would happen “later”. Look what we get for $115,000!

  43. retired guy
    February 14, 2011 at 11:57 am

    It used to be only 13% t0 15% here in the county could afford a home. Why is it now 30%? I guess it’s because the home prices have come down, right? If 57% of residents currently own homes, I’m sure that is because they have owned them over a period of time. I, for instance, bought mine 39 years ago when it sold for $18,500 with a double lot. That surely doesn’t mean I could afford this house in todays market. So, just because homes are currently owned doesn’t mean that current owners could afford them in todays market. Any comments on this?

  44. Anonymous
    February 14, 2011 at 12:40 pm

    I get it!

    It’s “different” when the development community harvests massive public infrastructure subsidies from 70% of residents who can’t afford to buy high-profit sprawl….but when that same 70% begins demanding that public wealth be used to generate affordable housing, it becomes an evil “socialist conspiracy”.

    This only “makes sense” because not ONE reporter has ventured into a Housing Element meeting since 2008 when I began attending. Local residents have NO CLUE HOW OR WHY the same cabal of development interests dominate all the GP Elements, Commission and Board meetings, or why they dominate campaign financing, winning candidates and their appointees who are attune to the same agenda.

    The most successful tyrannies are unnoticed.

    Developers have saturated countless communities in poverty-wage national retailers and the remote housing few can afford…they are publicly subsidized, then bailed out nationally by the victims!!!

    Without pause for a “thank you”, they’ll be at the Warfinger Tuesday night, lips fully clenched to the public teet demanding MORE MORE MORE! No matter that they’ve already built beyond infrastructure capacity….when a moratorium is imposed…they take their winnings to the next community of fools .

  45. Ben
    February 14, 2011 at 12:45 pm

    I don’t get your source for public subsidy? Please explain.

  46. Fence
    February 14, 2011 at 12:53 pm

    The rezone sites are already in the housing element it is table z3 which consist of 14 parcels that are 113.5 acres. This new rezoning has nothing to do with housing element compliance it is so there will be no need to complete the GP update. None of the proposed sites for rezone are supposed to be multifamily in alternatives A,B, C, or D. This is an end run by staff!!!

  47. "HENCHMAN OF JUSTICE"
    February 14, 2011 at 1:07 pm

    I sure as heck HOPE locals don’t think that affordable housing will only help the local homeless and houseless or those locals looking to pay less rent.

    Question: What percentage of NEW UNITS (called affordable but really PROJECT HOUSING) will be taken by outsiders emmigrating to this area from the dirty city after-the-fact AND NOT those current local residents looking to take that unit now? See, it ain’t all that easy when costs sky-rocket and people are expanding population totals. SFR’s should be the least expensive per square foot construction there is when adjusting for the unnecessary large homes that are really wastes of lifestyles for so many who think that they can afford that lifestyle in perpetuity. Multi Family gets more expensive per square foot to build.

    Now, state regulators are making sprinkler fire suppression systems a requirement for SFR’s.

    WHY?

    ANSWER: To force higher costs onto the eventual consumer so as to continue fraudulantly raising valuations that equate into tax dollars collected. So, gubbamint commits fraud and extortion in a malicious and aggravated form to rip-off the very people it asks to vote for them. Kinda works out really, really nice.

    JL

  48. "HENCHMAN OF JUSTICE"
    February 14, 2011 at 1:13 pm

    Azalea Ave Resident
    February 14, 2011 at 11:34 am
    Ben:
    FYI, I just looked at the county map for east McK and same thing as the Babler parcels – the parcel ending in #1028 extends way into the Mill Creek riparian area and straddles the creek. My understanding from the McK plan is this non-developable land, which limited recent developments on parcels located to the south side of Mill Creek off of Cochran Road. Seems like the County should have pre-screened the selected parcels before releasing the maps to the public.

    Response: It will be interesting to use State Fish And Games own paperwork against its agency if they try to flip-flop politically on any future developments along the Mill Creek Riparian Zones due to past restrictions political. So, will DFR flip-flop on its stances with respect to water quality issues and impacts to habitat areas within those designated areas in order to appease state laws and local politicians who want to now allow development even further into the Riparian areas. This county is a scam job when it comes to private property rights because one day it is not ok, so the owner is forced out; then, anbother day in the future, it is ok – for the owner who previously bought out the former owner. Now, question is, who is the newest owner and are they connected politically :-).

    JL

  49. "HENCHMAN OF JUSTICE"
    February 14, 2011 at 1:24 pm

    Fence
    February 14, 2011 at 12:53 pm
    The rezone sites are already in the housing element it is table z3 which consist of 14 parcels that are 113.5 acres. This new rezoning has nothing to do with housing element compliance it is so there will be no need to complete the GP update. None of the proposed sites for rezone are supposed to be multifamily in alternatives A,B, C, or D. This is an end run by staff!!!

    Response: Don’t forget that many applications have been in the process prior to the affordable housing/housing element failures…..meaning that retroactive application of A.H. standards to already in the process projects can’t occur unless the project applicant decides to change course outta the goodness of their heart. So, just more pressure to locate “Project Housing”.

    JL

  50. Not an Expert
    February 14, 2011 at 1:36 pm

    More houses does not mean lower prices. At least not in this state. Maybe in Kansas it does, but not here.

  51. Not an Expert
    February 14, 2011 at 1:39 pm

    Also the realtors make less money when housing prices are lower, since they get 6% from every sale. Bigger lots and bigger houses = more profits for developers and realtors.

    I know plenty of realtors who disagree with their groups’ lobbyists, wish they’d stop letting the few who want unlimited development represent all realtors. It makes all realtors seem, well, unseemly, and I know that’s not the case.

  52. Just the facts
    February 14, 2011 at 2:44 pm

    Around 40% of all homes in the USA are paid for. No mortgage owed.
    For the folks that bought a home, then refinanced to take advantage of the artifically high appraised values, then bought boats, ATVs, big screen TVs, trip to Hawaii or whatever, they had their fun, party’s over. Pay the bill on the way out. You say they walked, but they ruined their credit.

  53. Ben
    February 14, 2011 at 3:30 pm

    I find that the rezone mess is most interesting because those who are accused of “unlimited” development are against it and the eco folks are for it! Unlimited development in our neighborhoods is just fine to some, but not those living there.

  54. TimH
    February 14, 2011 at 3:40 pm

    I think these #’s are getting confused. The realtors have been using an affordability index, not the rate of home ownership.

    “To interpret the indices, a value of 100 means that a family with the median income has exactly enough income to qualify for a mortgage on a median-priced home. An index above 100 signifies that family earning the median income has more than enough income to qualify for a mortgage loan on a median-priced home, assuming a 20 percent down payment. For example, a composite HAI of 120.0 means a family earning the median family income has 120% of the income necessary to qualify for a conventional loan covering 80 percent of a median-priced existing single-family home. An increase in the HAI, then, shows that this family is more able to afford the median priced home.”

    http://harealtors.com/statistics

    It’s just a way to measure things in a relative way.

  55. Anonymous
    February 14, 2011 at 5:42 pm

    Just the Facts is wrong again. The percentage of homes paid off is somewhere between 30-33% not 40%.

    Do you know how to google ?

    http://wiki.answers.com/Q/What_percentage_of_homes_in_America_are_fully_paid

  56. Thomas Paine Jr
    February 14, 2011 at 8:20 pm

    “Thomas Paine makes up facts to suit his agenda. He says only 30% of Humboldters can afford to buy a home? Then explain sir, why over 60% here own their own homes !”

    They bought when you could get a stated income loan, as well as a no money down loan. Those days are over, and I dare you to point to 60% of the population of Humboldt county that can show on paper, to a bank that they have LEGAL income high enough to purchase a home………
    PS
    The only “agenda” I have is to bring living wage jobs to our county, along with affordable housing choices.

  57. Thomas Paine Jr
    February 14, 2011 at 8:25 pm

    “The Bd of Realtors likes to hype that 30% figure to encourage more homes to be built. That would lower prices, they would sell more homes & make more money.

    However they are playing loose with the statistics. The latest figures from the Census Bureau is for the year 2000. The percentage of home ownership in Humboldt County was 57.6% which was actually a little bit higher than in California in general.

    This proves beyond any shadow of a doubt, the 30% figure is hogwash.”

    OK for the last time, legitimate income is different than illegitimate income.
    A shack in the woods that is not up to code is not a home and should not be being lived in. ON PAPER only about 30% of the county can afford to buy a house.

  58. "HENCHMAN OF JUSTICE"
    February 14, 2011 at 8:29 pm

    Not an Expert
    February 14, 2011 at 1:36 pm
    More houses does not mean lower prices. At least not in this state. Maybe in Kansas it does, but not here.

    Response: True because one thing is for sure, those with wealth can pay the yearly tax base and mortgage (if they have one worth worrying about), even if the home they have up for sale must sit a long, long time; and, if others LOSE their home, those auction sales for those financially set are a great way to further profit on another’s loss (even if the previous losers of such assets were duped by gubbamint/fascist over-valuation schemes). Then, another’s loss becomes inflated again by the auction sale “new” owner that prop-up sales prices back again to previous levels (as much as possible to keep the politicians and agency types happy because of tax collections on high valuations of property and the exchange of profit mark-ups).

    Significant to the macro-economic problems is that when less people are involved economically, we all are worse off – it is not safe or healthy to have droves of population centers where it’s core is jobless. People with nothing to do is kinda sketchy because most people go crazy when they can’t do what they want to do in life with the skills that they have. There are so many skilled people, but without something to do, a direction in life, something to feel proud of, that human being will not be the best they can be as a human being. I can’t imagine total economic collapse where people are wanderers anywhere but that everywhere there is nothing for the wanderers to do.

    This country needs small businesses and entrepenuers, not slave labor to the mass corporate model. More individual bosses and less human borgs is a good thing IF we also demand as a citizenry that responsibility be a mandate again.

    JL

  59. Just the facts
    February 14, 2011 at 8:39 pm

    Wikpedia is only as good where they get their numbers. Approximately 40% is a fact for paid off homes. Research it yourself.

  60. Just the facts
    February 14, 2011 at 8:55 pm

    70%+ for those over 65
    There are numbers out there that say 5% to 50%+ The older folks are the ones who have the homes free and clear because they bought them morethan 30 years ago. Go figure, a 30 year mortgage, 65 years old, humm. For the most part, the folks in the 20-30 age bracket are the ones losing the house. I stand by 40%. And I am not wrong again.

  61. Anonymous
    February 14, 2011 at 9:46 pm

    mckinleyville doesn’t want it. we’ll see what they do with this ‘new’ info.

  62. Anon
    February 14, 2011 at 10:49 pm

    I went to the workshop tonight, and it was filled with people who’ve owned their homes for years angry at the thought of new apartments. Except one lady, who told the crowd to take a good long look at her, because she is one of “them”–a senior living in low-income housing, and lucky enough to be able to pay the $630/month rent on an apartment in McKinleyville. She said they ought to be ashamed of themselves, calling low-income residents criminal drug-addicts, when most are just like her, good people who want a good life in a pleasant neighborhood. Most people were uncomfortable, but a handful of people applauded her courage to stand up to the angry mob. I was proud of her but a little embarrassed that I didn’t have the courage to stand up to the angry crowd. It made me sad that this is the town I have chosen to call home. People who say they want their kids to be able to live here but don’t realize that housing is too expensive for most people under 40. I think there was only 1 person under 40 at this meeting. I hope the county doesn’t view these comments as the general sentiment of McKinleyville.

  63. Anonymous
    February 15, 2011 at 7:07 am

    you forgot to mention most of the people talking about the crime these low income units bring to town were in law enforcement. they said this is where all the calls are. do you really think high density low income projects will give young families and seniors a good life in a pleasant neighborhood?

    i felt bad for that lady too, but i do not agree with her at all. if the county would open up the areas they are looking to the whole county and spread it around a bit, it would be much better. sticking it all in mckinleyville is lame.

  64. Fence
    February 15, 2011 at 7:37 am

    This rezone program is unneeded as HIM 17 already exists, 14 parcels that is 113.5 acres, read the letter from HCD. Staff is pulling one over on everyone.

  65. Fence
    February 15, 2011 at 7:41 am

    People will have a taking claim if the county rezones parcels that are not part of HIM 17. Here comes Pacific Legal Foundation to file suit against the county again.

  66. "HENCHMAN OF JUSTICE"
    February 15, 2011 at 7:49 am

    Anon
    February 14, 2011 at 10:49 pm
    I went to the workshop tonight, and it was filled with people who’ve owned their homes for years angry at the thought of new apartments. Except one lady, who told the crowd to take a good long look at her, because she is one of “them”–a senior living in low-income housing, and lucky enough to be able to pay the $630/month rent on an apartment in McKinleyville. She said they ought to be ashamed of themselves, calling low-income residents criminal drug-addicts, when most are just like her, good people who want a good life in a pleasant neighborhood. Most people were uncomfortable, but a handful of people applauded her courage to stand up to the angry mob. I was proud of her but a little embarrassed that I didn’t have the courage to stand up to the angry crowd. It made me sad that this is the town I have chosen to call home. People who say they want their kids to be able to live here but don’t realize that housing is too expensive for most people under 40. I think there was only 1 person under 40 at this meeting. I hope the county doesn’t view these comments as the general sentiment of McKinleyville.

    Response: Now, that senior citizen has a right to say what is on the mind; but, it also presented a perfect opportunity to reason that the senior citizen would not have been living in such a rip-off scenario had that senior citizen not been brainwashed economically or made poor previous financial life choices, etc… Ya see, something does not sit right when it is wrong for senior citizens to put on the rosey colored hat to dejustify their own ageless inclusions to over-valuation pyramid schemes and individual greeds that have carried on and on for many decades. So, in a way, the senior citizen you mention definately deserves the $630.00 per month rent cuz that senior did not want to be human enough to discuss and admit the probable disasters that the senior was helping to perpetrate that made living standards, low and expensive standards. Now, of course, bad things happen to good seniors too. I am just pointing out that many of those who are young in life that make financial mistakes become seniors at some point over-paying for living – kinda like the HealthCare sector and nursing where as over-populations are seeking jobs created by the wealth of those retired folks with pension plans and retirement plans (Humboldt’s fake housing valuations main supplier of money), etc… for whom are brain-fed rubbish information about extending their life through the healthcare system. Now, it is also true that the dubiousness of the healthcare system is geared at prying away family wealth before it gets inherited by that family’s successor. So, now we have the old argument of where the money goes and for whom it better serves. It is no secret the Pyramid schemers use mass population, age and adjustible variables/limits/base lines to slowly continue over a long period of time the scam job. Schemers know time runs out though with respect to age growths……..and THAT IS the explosive reality of the societal failures occuring today and tomorrow and the next day and so on.

    Just saying seniors are as guilty as any age group with why America is flawed big time. Believe me when I say I have said this to my own elderly kin as well. Did they like hearing it, NO. Did they deserve hesring it, YES. Just because someone is a senior citizen does not mean that the senior is absolved from their own misconducts and social treasons, nor do they get an easy life in retirement years when they did not do that which was needed during the younger years to reign in high societal costs and greeds. When society lets things get out-of-control, then things like $630.00 per month rent to seniors is a reality that is blinding when it gets broken down to the why’s.

    JL

  67. Ben
    February 15, 2011 at 8:01 am

    About 100 people turned out last evening, in spite of it being Valentines Day to tell the County to NOT rezone much of McKinleyville.

  68. skippy
    February 15, 2011 at 8:09 am

    How did the first meeting attended by 100 residents in McKinleyville go?
    “The county planning department didn’t receive much love on Valentine’s Day — just a lot of dismay and frustration. Dozens of McKinleyville residents expressed their outrage at the county planning department Monday night, telling county staff that residents are unhappy …”

    The full article in today’s Times-Standard by by the talented reporter Donna Tam is here for readers.

    Eureka’s meeting is tonight:
    Tuesday, February 15
    Wharfinger Bldg., Eureka
    6:00-8:00pm

    Followed by another on Thursday:

    Thursday, February 17
    Supervisors Chambers, County Courthouse, Eureka
    6:00-9:00pm

    Healthy Humboldt and it’s environmental connections noted here, sentiment against building affordable housing and low income apartments are going hand-in-hand. Are they all the same peas in the same NIMBY pod?

  69. Anonymous
    February 15, 2011 at 8:14 am

    Jesus, Just The Facts 8.39pm, do you EVER research anything before you spout off “facts”?

    From MSNBC “The good news is about 30 percent of homeowners have no mortgage at all.”

    From Marketwatch; “Among the 75.6 million homes in the country that were owner-occupied, 24.9 million units were owned free and clear in 2007. That means about one in three homes had no mortgage at all.”

    From Bloomberg; “There were 111.7 million occupied housing units in the US in the third quarter, 68 percent used by owners and the remainder leased by renters, according to the Census Bureau. One in three US homes has no mortgage, the bureau said.”

    http://njhelocheaven.blogspot.com/2009/01/home-ownership-without-mortgages.html

  70. Curious
    February 15, 2011 at 8:21 am

    Fence,
    What is HIM 17 and where are the 14 parcels you are talking about?
    Can you cite the pertinent portion of the HCD letter that people are neglecting to read?

  71. "HENCHMAN OF JUSTICE"
    February 15, 2011 at 8:22 am

    Skippy,

    kudos for the Donna Tam piece – she does do a good job :-). She also has an excellent voice for media purposes. She is, as well, a kind hearted human being too. Thanks for the link.

    JL

  72. "HENCHMAN OF JUSTICE"
    February 15, 2011 at 8:24 am

    Statistics – somewhere two weeks ago, I heard that of the 111 million, that over 50% was outright owned without a mortgage. So, I don’t fully trust figures, obviously.

    JL

  73. skippy
    February 15, 2011 at 9:32 am

    Thank you, JL.
    Donna Tam also noted in her T-S article today the following schedule for concerned citizens:
    Multifamily Rezoning Timeline:
    Thursday: Humboldt County Planning Commission reviews property owner surveys
    March/April: circulation of SEIR
    April: public hearing
    May: Humboldt County Board of Supervisors reviews final parcel list.

    (skippy’s note: the upcoming Humboldt County Planning Commission meeting is this Thursday, February 17, 6-9:30 pm at the Board of Supervisors chambers, County Courthouse, 825 5th Street, Eureka. Their study session is an hour beforehand. Access Humboldt will broadcast this meeting on channel 10 starting at 6pm this day for citizen’s awareness and convenience. The broadcast will be repeated; please refer to their link)

  74. TimH
    February 15, 2011 at 10:22 am

    Over 100 people showed up. The county took public comment and the only person who spoke out in favor was Ms. Pritchard. The county staff took notes and there were numerous questions asked. Here’s what I got out of the questions and answers. This is the what I remember:

    How did they arrive at these sites?
    statistical analysis. more work to come.
    Have the sites been analyzed for water & sewer capacity?
    Not yet
    Why did they use a top-down rather than bottom up approach?
    tried to get volunteers two years ago, not enough response
    What happens to the Town Center concept if it gets rezoned?
    Not rezoning the entire Pierson Property
    Can the county rezone your property without your permission?
    Yes
    Have they taken schools, police, and fire protection into account?
    Not yet.
    Why doesn’t the county reconvene the Citizens Advisory Committee?
    no answer
    Why can’t they look beyond the developed areas for housing?
    HCD Guidelines
    Why can’t they just allow more 2nd units?
    HCD Guidelines
    Is this grant driven?
    No
    Why are they deviating from the McK Plan?
    Base information has changed, general plan amendment coming.
    When was the meeting where they decided not to look outside of the urbanized areas and who decided that?
    No answer

    Michael Richardson did a pretty good job with an upset crowd. Kirk Girard was cool under fire as always and noted they were going to slow it down and do it right . Supervisor Sundberg was there, making it at least two people under 40. I suspect there were a few more, judging by the number of people there who looked younger than me. There were people from across the political spectrum and a general sense of distrust of the county was conveyed.

    I had a lengthy discussion with Ron Coffman in the parking lot and his take was that if him and Ben Shepherd were on the same side of this, the county does not have community support. I have to agree. The CAC spent literally hundreds of hours agonizing over “shoulds” and “shalls”, the Awahnee principles, trail maps, urban boundaries, etc. and to have much of that tossed out less than 10 years after it was approved is painful to those who were involved in the process.

  75. Fence
    February 15, 2011 at 12:51 pm

    https://humboldtherald.files.wordpress.com/2011/02/hcd-to-humboldt-2-7-11.pdf

    please Read HIM 17 is referred to 4 times in a one page letter from HCD.

  76. Anonymous
    February 15, 2011 at 12:57 pm

    In the ’70’s there was one rental agency/property management company serving Eureka/Arcata.

    Now, every other Realtor office is also a rental agency/property management office! They know damn-well that 70% of local incomes don’t qualify to buy.

    Rental agencies join the plethora of predatory industries blossoming in Eureka. Higher rents are extorted as clean and safe units are less available.

    According to the 2009, Brown and Caldwell Report, Eureka needs $100 million to replace a waste water system of which 25% was built prior to 1920!
    The development community is fighting to continue its harvest of huge profits from developing Granddaddy’s cheaper land outside of town, subdivisions requiring additional tens of millions of public subsidies for a Martin Slough Interceptor, and millions more to expand the Elk River Treatment Plant.

    They made a fortune dependent upon infrastructure subsidies the public will eventually pay for…the same public who cannot buy those home, yet, whose water bill is doubling, traffic increasing , and illegal sewage discharges fouling their neighborhood, are paying the FULL SHARE of unbridled greed.

  77. Anonymous
    February 15, 2011 at 1:07 pm

    Sorry you’re so bitter. Being both a property owner-landlord as well as manager, I can tell you that some owners and landlords do not make a killing. How would people find a nice place to live if we didn’t provide it? Many can’t afford to buy and some have chosen it as the easier choice- renting makes it possible not to worry about your building’s upkeep. I look forward to the day when I can be a renter.

    If you are so bitter about this, perhaps you are a renter who needs a good landlord. Keep looking; we are out there.

  78. RT
    February 15, 2011 at 1:37 pm

    TimH:
    Your recap is about what my wife had to say about the meeting. I was at a dog obediance class and had to miss the fireworks – sounds like the dogs were better behaved though! I don’t why I’m continually surprised when the County keeps coming off as totally out of touch with the community and are totally ill prepared to present their case/work/plans at a public meeting. It’s mind blowing that they had no prior meetings with MCSD or the CAC before moving forward. I hope Ryan Sundberg took note of the mood and the desire of McK residents in having the McK General Plan’s concepts utilized in future developments.

  79. Anonymous
    February 15, 2011 at 2:13 pm

    If the opinion of the NIMBY’s were the only concern or consideration, nothing would ever be built in this county. Not no where, not no how.

  80. "HENCHMAN OF JUSTICE"
    February 15, 2011 at 3:11 pm

    TRUST – there is very little to zero trust with government at any level, point blank, period – end-of-story!

    Why?

    Answer: More people are communicating their victimizations.

    Tim H. – The write-up is very explanatory of what has occurred for many years now……no real answers that are pre-meditated based upon feeler contacts that staff has received in various forms about any given subject matter. Unfortunately, it appears that “real nasty” is how it is gonna be until MORE people figure out local government scams too.

    A problem is that too many people are not in control of their own life and thus, could never understand that which they never become part of politically. SO many people rfuse to discuss politics, and shall suffer for it greatly because they won’t understand reality. It is a dirty game.

    JL

  81. Anon.
    February 15, 2011 at 3:13 pm

    And again, no So.Hum.?

  82. Plain Jane
    February 15, 2011 at 3:35 pm

    There might be a problem with water availability in So. Hum, Anon.

  83. Anonymous
    February 16, 2011 at 4:19 pm

    It’s always amusing to read a professed landlord’s post (1:07) about how they don’t make much money and provide a “service” to “voluntary” customers. However, in order to honestly make that argument, there would have to be ample affordable homes that people simply are not “chosing” to buy!

    Imagine that.

    This is the ancient “logic” of oppressors, reminding us of the “security” slaves used to receive, or the “employment” provided desperate children by benevolent U.S. corporations, or the “services” offered by pawn shops, check cashing, storage units, job scalpers, bail bonds, furniture rentals and the hidden fees, penalties and usurious interest rates…all perfectly legal, all subsidized by citizens unaware of the social, welfare and police services it costs us.

    Clearly, there are degrees of predatory exploitation, but ignoring that fat chunk of owner’s capital that’s available after a house is paid for by renters, is yet another example of disingenuous exploiter’s logic.

  84. Anonymous
    February 16, 2011 at 5:24 pm

    C’mon Mack-town. New units would be a step up for a lot of you.

  85. Anonymous
    February 16, 2011 at 5:52 pm

    4:19 doesn’t get it. Someday, maybe.

  86. Anonymous
    February 16, 2011 at 5:56 pm

    4:19 we all make money somehow, or we all hope to make enough to live, and we do what we can. Having your property worth the same as the mortgage after breaking even for years doesn’t make one much of an oppressor. The properties that are above water are the result of taking a big chance. I guess you don’t get the risk factor. Some properties will lose money, and some will bring some.

  87. Anonymous
    February 17, 2011 at 12:50 am

    If rentals were such a big risk I’d be the first to agree with you. Right now, everybody and their mother is in on the gravy train, i.e., a county where 70% can’t qualify for an average home loan.

    The degree that you deny our primitive, predatory culture, betrays the level of your complicity in it.

  88. High Finance
    February 17, 2011 at 7:22 pm

    If you think rentals aren’t a risk, you have never owned a rental.

  89. skippy
    February 18, 2011 at 3:51 pm

    “Residents from throughout the county expressed their continuing concern about the county planning department’s approach to multifamily zoning at Thursday night’s Humboldt County Planning Commission meeting. Concerns were so grave for At-Large Commissioner Emad that he requested staff figure out what other repercussions there would be if the county decided to not to the rezone at all.”

    Today’s Times-Standard’s steady reporter Donna Tam carried last night’s Planning Commission meeting in the rest of her story here.

    Sorry to butt in here, just reporting the updated news.
    Carry on.

  90. Anonymous
    February 19, 2011 at 10:10 pm

    You’d have to find a different media source to read about the guy who got up at that meeting to calmly thank the staff for trying to get affordable housing, while the room was filled with Bozo’s fighting for their “principally permitted” right to begin the next housing bubble!

    7:22 THINKS the rental business is risky, (statistically, much less risky than owner-occupied mortgages), definitely not as risky as homelessness or hunger.

  91. Anonymous
    February 20, 2011 at 12:44 pm

    Careful, they are the “job creation Bozos”…your “betters” according to “Hi-Liar”….who disappeared again after getting his clock-cleaned…yet loves accusing others of being non-responsive.

  1. No trackbacks yet.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s