Collier Commissioner Jim Coletta is tired of double speak when it comes to affordable housing. Everybody seemingly wants it and recognizes the need for it, but nobody wants it in their backyard, Coletta says.

He thinks it may be time to put the issue to voters. A mandate from voters in the form of a referendum would give commissioners the political backbone to stand up to the not-in-my-back-yard crowd, he said.

“Just about everyone is in favor of affordable housing, but ... when it gets close to you people start to panic,” Coletta said. “They don’t want it.”

A referendum could ask voters any number of questions including if they’d approve of a property tax increase of $1 per $1,000 of property value to be used to address the county’s shortage of affordable housing, Coletta said. He hasn’t worked out all the details about how the money might be used, and he said he’d prefer it if a grassroots group would take it on and shepherd an affordable housing referendum to the November ballot.

Based on the county’s current tax base, a tax increase of $1 per $1,000 of property value would generate around $61.4 million a year, according to the county’s budget office. That would amount to a tax increase of roughly $492 a year for a typical homeowner based on the median price of a single-family home in Collier.

A referendum could ask other questions about affordable housing including if developers should be allowed zoning-by-right, which would speed up approvals, for affordable housing projects, Coletta said.

“We’ve got people who talk out of both sides of their mouths,” Coletta said. “I think the only solution here in Collier County is to throw it to the voters in a referendum.”

Residents of Riviera Golf Estates have come out in force in recent weeks against a developer who wants to convert their golf course to an affordable housing development with as many as 1,300 affordable housing units. Commissioner Donna Fiala, who has championed incentives for middle-income workers who’ve been priced out of Collier’s high-cost housing market — has come out against affordable housing at Riviera Golf Estates.

Fiala said she’d be concerned about a referendum’s wording, adding that each affordable housing development proposed should be judged on its own merits.

“If it was strictly a referendum to float money to buy land, that would be good,” said Fiala, who has criticized the county’s assessment of the need for affordable housing as inflated based on what’s not counted.

She said the county has to be responsible and sensible when it comes to affordable housing. “I think it’s wrong to just put it any place willy nilly,” Fiala said.

Meanwhile, Commissioner Fred Coyle said full details about how taxpayer money would be spent on affordable housing must be spelled out before any such plan goes to voters.

“You’ve got to have a plan before you run off and start spending taxpayers’ money,” Coyle said.

For example, the county has to address how it will prevent investors from buying and flipping affordable housing to the point it’s no longer affordable. He said other questions that need to be addressed are how the county could control turnover of units and also make sure that only existing Collier residents who are employed here get to qualify for affordable housing.

Both Coyle and Coletta agree that the private sector needs to get involved in solutions.

“It’s not the government’s fault we have a shortage of affordable housing here,” Coyle said. “I believe the private sector has an overwhelming responsibility here.”

In a similar vein, Coletta said, employers have to make their pay attractive and offer housing incentives. “I don’t think Collier County government should bear the burden of the whole enchilada,” Coletta said.

Very much at issue is in which basket Collier County should put most of its eggs: Should the county encourage more affordable housing for low-income residents or more gap housing for moderate-income residents who don’t qualify for other government subsidies but can no longer afford to live here.

Late Wednesday evening, commissioners debated for more than an hour and a half a technical definition of affordable housing and whether “gap housing” should have a completely separate definition. The debate came during hearings on the county’s land development code.

The issue must come back before commissioners at a second hearing so no decision Wednesday evening was final. But Fiala did persuade Coyle and Commissioner Frank Halas that a definition that gives a distinct identity to “gap housing” is preferable to one that lumps it in with an expanded definition of affordable housing. Both definitions included housing incentives for residents making up to 150 percent of the area’s median income.

That translates to $100,000 a year for a family of four. Low-income residents who qualify for affordable housing are those making $56,000 a year for a family of four.

“I’m totally opposed to the tenth degree on this,” Coletta said after the straw vote, saying he preferred that all-inclusive definition.

Fiala said she worried that affordable housing for low-income workers will take precedent over gap housing. Coletta said he feared the opposite.

Also on the table is a proposal that would amend the county’s land-development code to include a sliding scale of density bonuses for gap housing that serves middle-income workers and increases incentives for those who build affordable units for low-income workers.

To get the gap housing density bonus, a developer also must devote at least 10 percent of a qualifying development to affordable housing units for low-income workers.

For example, a developer who agrees to devote 50 percent of his project to gap housing and 10 percent to affordable housing could get a density bonus of five additional housing units per acre, bringing the total to a possible nine units per acre after accounting for the county’s base density of four units per acre. A developer who sets aside half his project for low-income housing could get a bonus of six units more per acre, to bring the total possible units to 10 units per acre.

No decision was made Wednesday on the density bonuses, which will have to come back to commissioners again at a second hearing.

Naples Daily News
Naples Sun Times
The Banner

Collier Citizen
Vista Semanal
PrepZone

Coastalbeat
Set Anchor
SWFLMoms