Opinion: San Jose Council Should Vote Yes on Program to Finance More Affordable Housing

The City of San José has the opportunity to preserve and create workforce housing using no new taxes or taxpayer dollars.

No, it’s not too good to be true; it’s a relatively new concept that the state of California established to allow for joint powers authorities (JPAs) to raise money from private investors to help finance low- and moderate-income housing. So far, there are two organizations in the state working to buy and build desperately needed workforce housing: California Community Housing Agency (CalCHA) and California Statewide Communities Development Authority (CSCDA).

Those two have been buying and managing Class A rental units with no expenses to the municipalities where the developments are located. Once purchased, the units are deed restricted to an affordable rental level for new tenants who earn 80% to 120% of the area median income (AMI). This is a gradual process that does not displace the current residents.

These organizations need permission to operate in each city, and San Jose has the opportunity to work with both. Once it does, it allows private investment to flow into San José to preserve and develop housing for the “missing middle,” workforce housing, and creates a win for taxpayers, a win for workers, and a win for the city. The city of San Jose is poised to vote on this item May 11.

By all measures, the city of San Jose is falling short in the production of affordable workforce housing.

The pace of construction on extremely low- and very low-income housing has picked up slightly with an influx of taxpayer dollars and development fees, like Santa Clara County’s Measure A Affordable Housing Bond, San Jose Measure E Real Property Transfer Tax, Residential Impact Fee, Inclusive Housing In-Lieu Fee, and the Commercial Impact Fee.

Meanwhile, market rate units continue to outpace moderate- and low-income production, and housing for the “missing middle” has been forgotten. The city’s own Housing Element Annual Report from 2019 showed zero units of deed restricted moderate-income housing completed or in the pipeline for the 2015–2023-time horizon.

We have an opportunity to begin to quickly change this with zero taxpayer dollars and zero financial risk to the city by having the city become an additional member of the joint power authorities.

How it Works  

CalCHA and CSCDA issue tax-exempt revenue bonds they use to purchase market rate developments and convert them to deed restricted, affordable housing. After the bonds are paid off (typically over 15 to 30 years) the property goes to the city or its designated agent, while the deed restrictions continue to keep the units affordable.

These organizations are already operating in many cities all over California including Glendale, Hayward, Livermore and Mountain View. Furthermore, because the city will not control or manage the JPA, there is zero liability for taxpayers and there is no recourse to the city if any particular investment fails.

CalCHA and CSDA benefits include:

  •       Preventing displacement
  •       Expanding housing affordability
  •       Requiring no new taxes or fees
  •       Available to us immediately
  •       No property management responsibilities for the life of the bonds
  •       City gains assets once bonds are paid off
  •       Excess proceeds go back to the City for housing the unhoused or other priorities

Membership in these organizations is a win for our workforce, who will gain access to affordable housing units; a win for taxpayers, who won’t be burdened with yet another tax or fee; and a win for the city, which can focus our limited housing dollars on helping the most vulnerable and meeting its Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) goals.

The program also enhances the whole housing ecosystem, since the property owners who sell to CalCHA- and CSCDA-funded projects will have freed up their funds to reinvest and create new housing supply.

Unfortunately, because this is a relatively new concept, San Jose staff is not recommending going forward because of the unknowns and the loss of property tax revenues, as these units would be exempt—like all the other low-income projects in the city.

What can be done is to allow a pilot program allowing a limited number of projects to go through so we do not take on more risk than the city is willing to take.

Please join me, other cities, the Santa Clara County Association of Realtors (SCCAOR), Silicon Valley Leadership Group (SVLG), Eden Housing, SV@Home, The Bay Area Council, Stronger Foundations, the California Apartment Association (CAA) and others in supporting this win-win-win idea.

Residents can attend the next San Jose City Council meeting on May 11 after 1:30pm or send letters to elected representatives asking them to support workforce housing.

Johnny Khamis is a former San Jose councilman who is currently running for the Santa Clara County Board of Supervisors District 1 seat. Opinions are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect those of San Jose Inside. Send op-ed pitches to [email protected].


  1. please

    this is a scam, a boondoggle for NGOs, consultants, and CEQA lawyers

    how many times are these people gonna play you chumps

  2. i do something constructive, my wealth houses over 100 people at 20% median household income in the markets they live, all while generating public revenue in the form of property and income taxes instead of being a public cost center like social or affordable housing

    its call market rate housing in political environments that dont constraint development out of envy and resentment, which motivates you and the rest of the dominate ideology in blue populations

    price is powerful information only to be ignored by land use tyrants. build build build until the price is commodity level, not investment level

  3. baaaahaha

    says the tool hiding behind single mothers to not pay rent

    not paying rent is not constructive, but destructive, so you should shut your mouth about whats constructive

    not building market rate homes is destructive as well

    as much as your narcissism wants to believe California is special, its not. when a 1000 sqft house in Sunnyvale goes for 2M, the solution is obvious and time tested, build houses and widen the roads, not build 500 free units to look like somethings getting done, that obviously is not solving any problems

  4. In a way this reminds me of private activity bonds for Brightline West (in this state’s case, and Nevada’s) and Fiona Ma’s airhead bubbling about how wonderful it is, but for public housing. Mr. Khamis is not so air-headed, but still, it’s like Slow Food: Slow Public Housing featuring one of today’s fads, actually fascist, as the Left has often been since the 1930s: featuring a Public-Private Partnership.

    (Nobody dared reach that far with the high-speed rail project, especially when failing to find the private parties the suckers were told would come to fund it!)

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *