Los Angeles Housing Bonds

I take issue with your endorsement of Prop. K, the $100-million general obligation housing bond issue on Tuesday’s ballot (editorial, Oct. 26).

The solution to the costly social problems of homelessness and the lack of affordable housing is within the domain of the state and federal governments. These programs have always been funded with state and federal revenues and never, until now, through Prop. K, have homeowners been asked to take this burden upon their backs.

Prop. K proposes to tax city homeowners to assist low- and moderate-income first-time home buyers, to provide shelters for the homeless and to help nonprofit organizations bring buildings up to earthquake standards. All of this is already available through the California Housing Finance Agency, which was created by legislation I co-authored in the state Senate in 1975, and by new and increased funding available through the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.

Just this week, Congress--being fully aware of the housing problem in this country and being equally aware of its responsibility in this regard--passed the first major overhaul of federal housing policy in 10 years and allocated $57.4 billion to help low- and moderate-income families obtain decent housing. The bill includes nearly $8 billion in renewed subsidized housing, more than $3 billion in increased block grants to local governments to provide affordable housing programs (including earthquake renovation), $772 million to help first-time home buyers finance their homes and much, much more.

Why should city homeowners pay for these programs twice? I agree that the lack of affordable housing in this city is a problem, but I believe Prop. K is an inappropriate method of solving it.

NATE HOLDEN

Councilman, 10th District