Too Many Tourists In Colorado

[summit]

I know locals who want to buy the deed restricted places they are renting from the owners who don't even live in the state anymore, but the owners would rather rent it to them. What a fucked up system.

[Danno]

Boulder's deed restricted affordable housing program does not allow the property to be rented (they may have a 1 year exception, not 100% positive). Do these other deed restricted programs allow rentals? Because that's effed up.

And shredgnar, there's nothing about it that keeps the poor in their place. You just build equity the old fashioned way, by paying down your mortgage and small incremental increase in value. As for PMI, that has nothing to do with it. If you don't have 20% to put down, yes you pay it (unless you do a 2nd mortgage, which maybe isn't allowed for these, dunno). But once you reach 20%, you can get rid of it.

Yes, they don't get any astronomical gains in property value, but the point of deed restricted housing isn't to make people wealthy, it's to allow home ownership for working class folks in expensive communities.

[Foggy_Goggles]

I know locals who want to buy the deed restricted places they are renting from the owners who don't even live in the state anymore, but the owners would rather rent it to them. What a fucked up system.

I'm guessing that renting is some type of violation. Also, doesn't the housing authority determine who the next buyer is? I think they actually get to determine the purchase price and pocket any difference between the max gain and the new price.

In the last market downturn, the the Town of Winter Park purchased the units back from the owners then resold them at a loss.

[dunfree]

In your context, it does read like there's more pressing needs for money for basic stuff like schools, libraries, etc.

While I love librarys, there is currently a substantial change in library usage in the US and they are often functioning more as de facto homeless shelters and lending clubs for a select few residents. This is, ime, even prevalent in the big well used urban library systems. It's worth asking "why"? I love the subsidy and access thousands of dollars of books for free, but question the why for this when most people don't care to use one.

Similarly if the community is to be funding adult education the question is for why and for whom? what jobs are there for locals that they need more skills for? is this retraining a crop of ski bums so they can move somewhere else for work? And that's adult education, not the implicit redistribution/subsidization dynamic in primary and high school education in the US these days - all those community's in the MidWest/East paid lots of money ($10K+ per year per student) for all of those people that moved to Colorado/Washington from somewhere else.

Public Transportation - for whom, where, and at what cost? Everyone wants to have it, nobody wants to use it.

I happen to be for all of the above, but good ones cost money. You don't get them by "trimming fat". They cost tax dollars, people's incomes, and ski towns are by nature a high cost environment to do business in.

Deed restricted housing is a great way to keep the poor in their place. Never gain any equity, oh and pay a shitload in pmi too!

Your other choice is for a sprawling increase in supply. Sprawling on purpose, because recent research suggests that's the current way to increase supply on the low end. It does "keep them in there place" - the community. As opposed to exporting the poor to some crappier labor ghetto.

[Danno]

While I love librarys, there is currently a substantial change in library usage in the US and they are often functioning more as de facto homeless shelters and lending clubs for a select few residents. This is, ime, even prevalent in the big well used urban library systems. It's worth asking "why"? I love the subsidy and access thousands of dollars of books for free, but question the why for this when most people don't care to use one.

I used to feel the same way about libraries until I had a kid. They are awesome for parents.

[dunfree]

I used to feel the same way about libraries until I had a kid. They are awesome for parents.

You used to use them intensely for their varied collection of rare books you couldn't afford until you had a kid? That's my feeling - a great subsidy for me personally, but not something that needs to be paid for by the community. I'd be extraordinarily sad to see it go but there's other things in life.

If you use the community programs at the library and the childrens books - maybe that's what the library should concentrate on? And not the free computers for the homeless to facebook?

[Name Redacted]

Boulder's deed restricted affordable housing program does not allow the property to be rented (they may have a 1 year exception, not 100% positive). Do these other deed restricted programs allow rentals? Because that's effed up.

And shredgnar, there's nothing about it that keeps the poor in their place. You just build equity the old fashioned way, by paying down your mortgage and small incremental increase in value. As for PMI, that has nothing to do with it. If you don't have 20% to put down, yes you pay it (unless you do a 2nd mortgage, which maybe isn't allowed for these, dunno). But once you reach 20%, you can get rid of it.

Yes, they don't get any astronomical gains in property value, but the point of deed restricted housing isn't to make people wealthy, it's to allow home ownership for working class folks in expensive communities.

Under current market conditions, if you are only gaining equity from what you pay down on your mortgage, you are losing money. If you ever try to get out of your deed restricted home, you won't be able to afford anything else on the market. And yes, you can get out of pmi someday, but paying hundreds of dollars towards a loan that you will never see again is not ok ever in my book. FHA loans are just another scam.

[summit]

I'm guessing that renting is some type of violation. Also, doesn't the housing authority determine who the next buyer is? I think they actually get to determine the purchase price and pocket any difference between the max gain and the new price.

In the last market downturn, the the Town of Winter Park purchased the units back from the owners then resold them at a loss.

It doesn't appear to be a violation because it is a common story.

You can sell deed restricted on the open market to someone who qualifies for the deed restriction.

[Danno]

Under current market conditions, if you are only gaining equity from what you pay down on your mortgage, you are losing money. If you ever try to get out of your deed restricted home, you won't be able to afford anything else on the market. And yes, you can get out of pmi someday, but paying hundreds of dollars towards a loan that you will never see again is not ok ever in my book. FHA loans are just another scam.

Every deed restricted housing program I have seen has a small appreciation factor. They aren't losing money. Moreover, even if there was no appreciation built in (something I have never seen in these types of programs), having some money go towards equity sure beats paying rent. Again, not losing money when you compare it to rent.

And what's the alternative for working class folks who cannot afford to buy in the current market? Sell them discounted non-deed restricted housing? So they get a windfall when they sell? And housing that was once affordable quickly turns into just more non-affordable housing stock?

[Danno]

It doesn't appear to be a violation because it is a common story.

Not sure about that. The people in a position to turn them in -- the renters -- have little incentive to do so, because they'd lose their rental.

Maybe it isn't a violation there, but if so, that's a poorly written program. I know it is a violation in Boulder's program to turn your place into a permanent rental.

[Foggy_Goggles]

It doesn't appear to be a violation because it is a common story.

You can sell deed restricted on the open market to someone who qualifies for the deed restriction.

Does the Authority then control the rent level? If not you are saying that you can qualify for a unit at below market cost & then charge a market rent which you most likely won't declare on your tax return? Your tax dollars at work.

If you sell deed restricted on the open market, does sales price = purchase price + max appreciation? I thought that the authority always got to determine the sale price and pocket any excess appreciation.

[Foggy_Goggles]

And what's the alternative for working class folks who cannot afford to buy in the current market? Sell them discounted non-deed restricted housing? So they get a windfall when they sell? And housing that was once affordable quickly turns into just more non-affordable housing stock?

Rent, qualify for down payment assistance, move to somewhere more affordable, get a second job, take less vacations, buy an expensive house and hope if works out. You know...the things that 99% of the applicants that didn't win the affordable housing lottery would do.

[summit]

Does the Authority then control the rent level? If not you are saying that you can qualify for a unit at below market cost & then charge a market rent which you most likely won't declare on your tax return? Your tax dollars at work.

I am less clear on if there are rental rate restrictions, but effectively there do not seem to be any since there appears to be no enforcement.

If you sell deed restricted on the open market, does sales price = purchase price + max appreciation?

That is my understanding of it...

There is a new person in charge of it for the county... maybe she will crack down, but I seriously doubt it.. at least up until now the affordable housing people here seem 1000x more interested in getting a few dozen more affordable units built than regulating the existing units owned by locals or ex-locals renting to locals.

[Name Redacted]

Max appreciation is generally 3% from what I have seen, just enough to keep up with inflation. Otoh, other houses in our area have gained upwards of 20-30% in the last few years. Oh, and the people who didnt buy deed restricted can rent out thier homes if they want.

[Benny Profane]

Max appreciation is generally 3% from what I have seen, just enough to keep up with inflation. Otoh, other houses in our area have gained upwards of 20-30% in the last few years. Oh, and the people who didnt buy deed restricted can rent out thier homes if they want.

So, which direction do you want this? Do you want taxpayers to subsidize a first time home buyer to get on the gravy train of rapid mountain housing appreciation, no obligations or "profit sharing", or no subsidized housing at all. Or, maybe, projects. You know, government subsidized rentals. It's either/or.

Can't believe they allow these things to be rented. That is seriously fucked up. Should be a whistleblower number for that one. I have heard that AirB&B rentals have been cracked down on, just for how brazen that is.

[Conundrum]

I wish I could move to a mountain town for the lifestyle, make good money, have very few tourists to worry about, good transportation, low taxes, get free education if I want a different good job, be able to check out books at my leisure, no lift lines, at least three un-tracked pow days a week, and get 20% appreciation on a house that was purchased at a subsidized low cost. Sign me up. Just a bunch of suckers living in the flat lands...

Oh, if there is also a good looking, cool female to me ratio, that helps.

[Buster Highmen]

one resort one love lets get together and have chair 6 running weekdays.

fifm

[funkendrenchman]

It doesn't appear to be a violation because it is a common story.

You can sell deed restricted on the open market to someone who qualifies for the deed restriction.

In general, in Aspen, you cannot rent a deed restricted property you own, even to a qualified renter. It still happens, but it is a violation. There is a "whistlerblower" process, but it is rarely used because 1. Your name is public. 2. There aren't enough resources for enforcement.

In Aspen, you can earn 0 - 4% year on deed restricted properties, but 99.9% of the time you will not take a loss when you go to sell. Yea, it's not as lucrative as owning in the free market can be, but it's the price you pay to live here. If you don't like it, you can live 40 miles away or pay $2 million.

[jvskinn]

I am less clear on if there are rental rate restrictions, but effectively there do not seem to be any since there appears to be no enforcement.


That is my understanding of it...

It depends, there are deed restrictions in Summit ranging from "no short term rentals" to strict appreciation caps/resale regulated by the SCHA.

Most of the heavier deed restricted properties that allow rentals require the rate to be set by the SCHA. This is also common with legal lock offs.

Others just require that you rent to someone who qualifies.

It's rare to see a deed restriction that doesn't allow you to rent to a qualified renter.

And yes, it's super easy to get away with breaking the rules, for some you just get a letter each year asking you to verify in writing that whoever is living in your rental qualifies.

It's a mess.

[digitaldeath]

It's basically legal already and has been for the past several years. The consumer impact wouldn't be all that different (I'm sure there'd be some and it would be slightly more open), it's more about the farming.

Moar tourists