Number one, all housing is needed. Utilizing the Department of Commerce's HAPT tool, it will reveal to you that housing over 80% AMI is as much a need as under 80% AMI. Real world example, myself. I would move up into my forever home, if the supply was available and I could afford current prices. A couple of years ago, at my current level of income, this could have been possible. However, because of varying factors including lack of supply, inflation, and increasing rates I am stuck in a starter home that someone could occupy. Second, the argument of the author assumes projects would get built regardless of incentives. Simply untrue. The revenue to the jurisdiction isn't a guarantee and no argument based in reality would assume that to be true. Simply look at the Multi-Family boom down the road in Portland to get your examples of how the MFTE attracts builders. And one more thing, the MFTE does attract builders, specifically local builders who couldn't make the project pencil otherwise. It eases the up front expense for these small local builders and allows them to compete in their own community with the multi-national conglomerates that are eating up housing in many areas. Pricing out the competition isn't how you build community. Ensuring local businesses and contractors have a chance to do these projects puts the local residents in the driver seat. And spreading the tax burden among as many people as possible eases that burden. It's ethical and sustainable, because everyone benefits from new development.
Please explain the inappropriate content below.
