Zuma Dogg Fair and Impartial Ballot Review: Prop B -- Affordable Housing Measure (I HATE IT!)

With the local elections less than a month away, people are becoming more interested in Prop B, the City of Los Angeles' Affordable Housing measure.

This is going to pass because it doesn't ask for any money and is worded in a way that makes people feel all warm and fuzzy inside. HOW CAN YOU SAY NO TO AFFORDABLE HOUSING FOR WORKING FAMILIES? But ZD has maintained this is not what it is all about. And I have said the city is in B-I-G trouble and is gonna have the biggest lawsuit they have ever seen over this.

HERE IS ZUMA DOGG'S BLOG POSTS ON PROP B: (It's NO on B, even though it's gonna pass.)

ZUMA DOGG IS HERE TO SAY: Although Villaraigosa is portraying this as a measure to remove those mean old Federal restrictions that prevent the City from building affordable housing for working families...this is really about the same thing everything else in this City is about: The Broadfather (Aka: Eli Broad) Now he has his puppet Mayor Antonio putting measures on the ballot that will change the law, just so that Eli, Related and the Arab Emirate Family of Dubai can get their Prop 1c money for their cement commercial zone (they are calling it a "park".) You may have heard that voters approved money for Prop 1c, which voters were somehow lead to believe was to go to Emergency Shelter for battered women and their children; and to help elderly and disabled become get into homes.

The problem with this ballot proposition is the same problem with many propositions that you hear about: Voters think they are getting "one thing"; then we find later that the City politicians ended up using the money for something else! And they always use good sounding, compassionate causes to try and persuade you into a "yes" vote. This time they are using the issue of "affordable housing" to try and persuade you into a "yes" vote. Leading you to believe this is needed to provide affordable housing for working families. However, according to Mayor Villaraigosa's memo to City Council relating to this vote, it says, ""Most notably, the city's projects will not be able to apply for their fair share of funds available through voter-approved $1.2 billion Prop 1C -- Housing and Emergency Shelter Trust Fund." Voters expected this "Housing and Emergency Shelter" money to be used for "battered women and their children" and to help provide housing for the elderly and disabled. However, LA Weekly has revealed that money from this "Emergency" fund for battered women, children, elderly and disabled will be going to help pay for the highly subsidized park that is part of Related Cos (and Arab Emirate Family of Dubai) "Grand Avenue Project". This park, part of the luxury Grand Avenue Project, subsidized with tax breaks, was able to apply for -- and received the money from this fund to pay for this park tied to this luxury commercial project. So there is an example of the City leading voters to think that this must be passed in order to provide affordable housing for working families. And no one can argue with that. Except if THIS proposition passes, the money for "Emergency Housing and Shelter" will really be going to the park at the Grand Avenue Project. A park that is already heavily subsidized and is backed by the Arab Emirate Royal Family of Dubai. NOTE: The other problems include this will increase density; is based merely on City "opinion" not "fact" and will end up pushing the elderly out of the way, which is the exact reason these laws (which they now want to change) were created to protect against.


The City of Los Angeles argues that because "working families cannot afford to live near their jobs" laws must be changed to allow for mulit-family housing. Sounds good, right? But part of this proposition says "the housing does not have to be built"; AND wants Federal "impediments" removed to allow for "unrestricted permission for unfettered construction." First of all, obviously this would allow for a huge density problem to occur at a time when the City is already suffering from traffic gridlock on the freeways and side streets; not enough mass transit; plus all the other infrastructure strains that "unrestricted and unfettered" would only compound. Secondly, the city has just added a "density bonus" for developers that allows them to expand their projects when they include this type of affordable housing. And, the city requires most commercial housing projects to include 20%-30% affordable housing of this type. And although it sounds good to provide "affordable housing for working families" the housing covered under this voter approved article is supposed to be for the elderly. That is why the City is restricted to two-story buildings with no more than 30 units. (It's not supposed to be for big families. Other programs handle that.) This was created for the elderly who had no where else to go. And this demand will be increasing as baby-boomers move into this age group. AND REMEMBER...EVEN IF YOU FAVOR THIS HOUSING TO GO TO FAMILIES INSTEAD OF ELDERLY...WE HAVE LEARNED THE BIG REASON THIS IS ON THE BALLOT IS SO THAT RELATED COS & DUBAI ROYAL FAMILY (ARAB EMIRATES) DO NOT MISS OUT ON THEIR SHARE OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS OF THIS MONEY FOR THEIR LUXURY, UPSCALE, CEMENT COMMERCIAL PARK AT GRAND AVENUE PROJECT.

ZumaTube.com