Ken Mauldin: Housing subsidy misguided
October 17, 2017
The Yampa Valley Housing Authority should place defined, contractual limits on the amount of time a healthy, employable person can receive basic housing subsidy from taxpayers. Otherwise, the workforce housing problem in our community will only get worse, never better.
While it’s a noble endeavor to provide temporary, taxpayer-funded housing assistance to healthy adults that are unable to provide basic housing for themselves, a permanent model of housing subsidy can never be the solution. Healthy, employable adults in need of taxpayer subsidy for basic housing should be afforded a reasonable amount of time to remedy the personal conditions that led to the need for taxpayer subsidy of basic housing.
However, a model of permanent housing subsidy only ensures that once the personal conditions that led to the need for taxpayer subsidy are remedied, the individual will continue to indefinitely receive taxpayer subsidy for basic housing anyway.
In addition, while the taxpayer-subsidized housing unit is occupied by a person that no longer requires taxpayer subsidy for basic housing, a person that does need taxpayer assistance for basic housing may be denied a place to live until even more subsidized housing is built.
Hence, people that move into permanent subsidized housing rarely move out, and the predictable result is the never-ending need to build more and more taxpayer-subsidized housing.
Although I would support taxpayer subsidies for temporary housing assistance, I will be voting “no” on Referendum 5A and the permanent, taxpayer-provided housing subsidy it proposes.
Recommended Stories For You