For those who haven’t had the opportunity to review the communication, I would like to highlight some of the more meaningful portions of the research.
“The employer with the largest number of employees using the program is the St. Vrain Valley School District, followed by persons who are self-employed, the University of Colorado, IBM, Boulder County, the Daily Times-Call and Longmont United Hospital. Folks are primarily employed in administrative positions, the education field, computer/technology, accounting, medical/dentistry, carpentry/construction/home trades, customer service and the food industries.”
“306 of the City of Longmont’s 813 active, regular, benefitted employees (or 37% of the workforce) could qualify for the Community Housing Program.”
“The 2010-2014 Consolidated Plan for the Boulder/Broomfield Regional Consortium estimated the total home ownership need through 2014 for the consortium area at about 11,453 units, assuming an annual growth rate of 1.5%. Longmont’s percentage of the total consortium owner-occupied housing units is about 29%. Applying this percentage would translate to a total housing need of 3,322 for Longmont. Using 2009 American Community Survey data from the US Census Bureau for Longmont, there are 2,320 current homeowners that meet the CHP income limits and that are cost burdened by their current housing payment but that have sufficient income to be able to afford an affordably priced home. There are 1,064 renters that are cost burdened by their rent payment, but that have sufficient incomes to purchase an affordable home, and there are 594 renters that are not cost burdened, but have sufficient incomes to afford an affordable home. Thus the current need for affordable homes is 3,978.”
“It would take over 15 years to provide enough affordably priced homes offered by the housing market (not including the CHP homes or program) just to meet current need.”
Clearly there is a critical need for Longmont’s Community Housing Program and Inclusionary Zoning.
Given this information, there is no reason to remove the Inclusionary Zoning/Affordable Housing issue from the table. No moratorium is justified.
If a majority seeks to remove it from the table, it will be solely for ideological opposition to Longmont’s Community Housing Program and to increase the profits of the developers and builders who also oppose the program. The slogan that Longmont is “open for business” should not mean “Longmont, for sale to the lowest bidder.”