Council moves forward with 51 affordable studios Other Issues, posted by Editor, Mountain View Voice Online, on Jun 18, 2012 at 10:54 am
Members of the City Council voted to continue the planning of a $9.3 million affordable housing project Tuesday that will displace 48 low-income residents and two popular taquerias at the corner of Rengstorff Avenue and Old Middlefield Way.
Read the full story here Web Link posted Monday, June 18, 2012, 10:40 AM
Posted by O-Be-One, a resident of the Rex Manor neighborhood, on Jun 18, 2012 at 2:11 pm
Welcome the imaginery world of government where what is "up" is called "progress" and "down" is also called "progress" so that no one knows what's really going on except the lucky few who get subsidized housing by the rest of us paying just that much more. This is the "Hope and Change" at work in our backyard while I struggle...
Posted by George, a resident of the Rex Manor neighborhood, on Jun 18, 2012 at 2:34 pm
I could almost just say "DITTO" to the above two comments... OMG, $75,000 EACH,just to move 48 "poor" people.Once again, "YOUR" City Council at work... How friggen disconnected from the real world can they be ?
Check the Campaign Contributions to the City Fathers/Mothers.
Posted by Nick, a resident of the Cuesta Park neighborhood, on Jun 18, 2012 at 8:07 pm
Ok, glad to see I'm not alone -- I thought I must have miscalculated.
Does anyone know what the $74.4k per unit for "moving expenses" is used for? It should cost less than $1,000 to move such a small apartment. (ignoring the question of why the City should even pay to move people at all; if the building is in terrible disrepair and not up to code, the landlord should be responsible, not the city)
Posted by Observer, a resident of the Old Mountain View neighborhood, on Jun 19, 2012 at 6:54 am
$750,000 in moving costs comes to approximately $10 per resident of Mountain View, children NOT excluded! My family of 4 will have to pony up $40!
What if one of these apartments is made up of two adult parents with three minor children with very little furniture? The city still counts them as five separate tenants and not one?
Instead, the city should give these 50 residents six months notice to move and to submit their receipts for moving expenses for reimbursement not to exceed $500-1000. This would be based on per unit (10 units) so the cost would not exceed $10,000 at most. BTW proof of legal immigration status should be required for reimbursements.
My bet is that there will be 100 people living there by the time checks are written.
But all this begs the question why the owner of the building should not have to pay for the 50 people to move given he or she has been collecting rent from them while they live in apartments full of code violations.
Oh wait... I'm making too much sense and using too much logic here....
Posted by Hmmm..., a resident of another community, on Jun 19, 2012 at 11:28 am
Hmmm...I don't think the voice is providing all the facts about this situation. I would imagine the owner has been fined over and over again over for years of multiple code violations. That money has gone into some redevelopment fund which the city is making a modest amount of interest on. With that being said, I believe $744,000 is to much regardless of what fines or additional monies the owner has paid. If the owner was flipping the entire bill ( which he obviously is not ) it is to much. Socialism is going to kill this city and this country! "As long as the government is willing to give, people will take regardless of the need."
Posted by Sydl, a resident of the Waverly Park neighborhood, on Jun 20, 2012 at 12:17 pm
This is absolutely ridiculous. If I get kicked out of my house, no one is going to pay for my relocation.
Instead of simply writing comments on this site, people should email the council members with their complaints and then vote the next time these people come up for re-election. The only thing politicians really care about is getting re-elected. The councils will hear from me. I hope they will hear from you too. That's the only way things will change.
Posted by Garrett, a resident of another community, on Jun 21, 2012 at 1:03 pm
I like getting my fix of burritos, tacos and the yummy food at this corner. While I'm at low income level which I don't seek a free ride or live off the public dime. I don't anything wrong with building which people like me could afford. Who am I, was born, rasied in Mtn View, native of Ca. Went to your schools, worked in your businesses, got married to local girl. Would love to retire in the area but mostly will not happen.
Posted by Burrito lover, a resident of the Cuesta Park neighborhood, on Jun 21, 2012 at 9:57 pm
What a shame. The business that exist there today are popular and successful. It seems like such a waste of money and effort. Since this is just at the planning phase, is there any good way to oppose this? It's pathetic for successful businesses to be punished like this.
Posted by Frank, a resident of the North Whisman neighborhood, on Jun 22, 2012 at 10:34 am
La Bamba knew this was coming. You all do know they opened a new location a block or so down the street at Rengstorff and Middle field a few months ago? So, La Bam a is not hurting. I surmise they had (have) several code violations that were too costly to repair. They've been hanging in there, just playing the City until the City finally had enough. I surmise La Castena is in the same boat....as are the apartments. Come on, it's the same building owner, right?
That being said, I also agree with the other comments about the exuberant cost to relocate the units that are there. Wow! Totally absurd! What makes it sting even more is the fact that it was just thrown out there at us. What's the rationale for paying relocation expenses? As several people wrote, they were forced to move and had to pay their own moving expenses.
This is not good. :( I will do as one person suggested and complain to City Council about this issue. Just sad,
Posted by John, a resident of the Monta Loma neighborhood, on Jun 22, 2012 at 8:51 pm
Does this mean the city attorney's office will lay off staff now that there won't be "violations" to enforce.
Don't think so.
Staff will just look around for some more "violations" and regrettably force other businesses out for "affordable" housing.
Why is the government in the business of affordable housing anyway?
Ask yourselves that as you sit in traffic around the Central slowway, Moffet, El Camino. And of course all these council people will be re elected. The middle class neighborhoods are powerless and unrepresented.