A Room With A Nurse: The Finance Commission’s Bizarre Answer to $500K Units

Some things still surprise me. I guess I should be happy. Here’s the email I sent to members of the State House of Representative’s House Community Development, Housing & Tribal Affairs Committee. I testified in opposition to giving the Washington State Housing Finance Commission an increase on their debt limit without requiring more accountability. There is a link to the video of the  hearing below. 

Hello members of the Committee,

I think I look pretty good for my age and I have to say, it doesn’t feel like 25 years that I’ve been doing this kind of thing. But it’s been about that long.

In all that time, I don’t think I have heard a more, well, strange and obfuscating response than the one that Mr. Herman gave yesterday after I rattled off the costs of the projects I mentioned, about $165 million for roughly 350 housing units in Seattle.

I took the time to transcribe what he said from the TVW video which is now available.

The problem with the per unit cost limit division, it’s very easy to take the cost of a project and just simply divide it by the number of units; what it doesn’t do, is it doesn’t look at what kind of community rooms there are in the building, what kind of certain types of supportive housing. There may be rooms for nurses to come in twice a week to look at people and provide those kind of services. There may be meeting rooms with counselors. All of those are usually not housing but when you do the division of housing units into the total cost you come up with a much higher cost than if you had taken out those service or other types of facilities that are inside a housing project and then made the division.

The emphasis is mine of course.

As I mentioned in a previous note, how much do rooms for nurses cost?

Let’s take 12th Avenue Arts, a project in Speaker Chopp’s district, that cost $47 million for 88 units, or about $534,090.91 per unit.

Let’s reduce or “take out” some of that cost for the theater and non-profit office space, and since Mr. Herman did not offer a discount factor I’ll just suggest $10,000,000, or about 20 percent. So let’s do the math again, $37,000,000 divided by 88 is $420,454.55 per unit.

As I’ve pointed out, based on data from Zillow, “the median price of homes currently listed in Seattle is $688,000 while the median price of homes that sold is $647,200.”

I am a philosophy major, so I might be missing something. But that is the average house price in Seattle. Which means there are houses priced between $400,000 and $500,000; so even with a discount for a room for a nurse and counselor, these projects are so expensive we’d be better off buying houses for the 88 people living in that project for the same price. That’s outrageous! 

One obvious answer to reducing the per unit cost (again, I’m just a philosophy major here) is to build more units. It’s stunning that Capitol Hill Housing did not ask for a significant upzone of this project while they spent years getting the land transferred to them by the City. I’m not sure that the $47 even includes land costs. Commerce and the Commission could be forced to require better return for their investment by demanding a different scale: we do support more housing, including subsidized housing when it’s needed.

Here’s another way to think about this. If a person making minimum wage earns $31,200 per year and is paying 40 percent of her income on housing, she’s paying $1,040 or about $260 more than she should per month. That is her cost burden. For about $46,800,000, we could pay that difference for 5000 people for three years ($260 X 5000 X 36 months). We’d even have $200,000 left over to pay for a nurse and counselor. 

Please, consider amending this bill on the floor or proposing legislation for next session that will require the Commission to report regularly to the legislature on these costs and what they are doing to lower them. If you don’t, it appears that Mr. Herman will continue to hand wave these costs and, I’m sure, the JLARC study of which he likely supported a veto.

As the public becomes more aware of the cost of these projects, and as they continue to rise, they’re going to ask you why didn’t the legislature step in and do something. In California, Governor Jerry Brown said this: “We’ve got to bring down the cost structure of housing and not just find ways to subsidize it.

Do we have to wait until things get as bad as they are in California?

Thank you for your consideration.

Roger–

watch

Comments are closed.