Blog Post < Previous | Next >
Kirsch 4 Supervisor
Golden Gate Village: Risky Gamble with CVR's Recommendations for Revitalization
Most people agree the status quo in Marin City is untenable. Golden Gate Village provides 296 units of low-income public housing distributed between 8 high-rise buildings with 168 units and 20 low-rise buildings with another 128 units. The property sits on 32.3 acres of prime real estate and shares a zip code with Sausalito.
The Golden Gate Village Resident Council is sanctioned to work in collaboration with Marin Housing Authority, which manages the HUD-funded housing project. The relationship between GGVRC and the MHA is often strained and needs maintenance, almost as much as the buildings themselves.
$16 Million was the 2015 MHA housing assessment estimate for the cost of deferred maintenance. But, HUD doesn’t even provide enough money for monthly upkeep and the MHA/BOS has been unable to find funding to repair leaky roofs, broken heaters, etc. (although it somehow found $8.8M to buy the San Geronimo Golf Course).
In the first quarter of 2017, The Marin Housing Authority hired CVR, a Florida-based consulting firm. For a reported fee of $250K CVR was to analyze the feasibility of various options for the Golden Gate Village site.
After inspecting the site in June, July and September, the result was the release of CVR’s “Revitalization Feasibility Assessment-Draft: Prepared for Golden Gate Village, a Marin County Public Housing Community.” The report wasn’t released for public comment until Friday, 12/22, just before the Christmas holiday.
After wading through 135 pages of narrative and nine appendices that lack a Table of Contents and page numbers, one finds that CVR reports MHA’s 2015 estimate of $16M for repairs has exploded to $50M or $169,000 per unit for project “revitalization.” Unfortunately, CVR never makes clear what revitalization includes or its measurable outcomes.
The report encourages the Board of Supervisors/Marin Housing Authority to accept the CVR recommendation to “revitalize” Golden Gate Village by adopting “Scenario B: Partial Redevelopment and Green Rehabilitation with RAD Conversion.”
The report fails to explain exactly what that means. The report doesn’t clearly define “partial redevelopment” or “green rehabilitation” or “RAD conversion,” or provide adequate financial details. Of those, RAD conversion is the most vexing.[1]
In the CVR report itself (Appendix p 11-12), the authors write,
While these programs (referring to RAD Conversion and others) have helped many housing authorities, . . . they are highly competitive, cost prohibitive, and require high thresholds for participation. In most instances, these grants are not widely accessible to smaller housing authorities (like Marin) with limited resources.
The fact is competition for RAD funds is ferocious. The HUD website reports there are already 76,558 projects on the RAD waitlist, and Marin isn't one of them. https://www.hud.gov/rad/. RAD funding is capped at 225,000 units and HUD’s future is uncertain under the Trump administration.
When the Board of Supervisors meets about the CVR report, on Tuesday January 9th, they’ll have to consider the prudence of accepting recommendations that are extremely vague, lacking adequate financial analysis, have little support from the Resident Council or the GGV community, and have a low probability of success because they depend on the unlikely and uncertain RAD federal funding program.
Keep in mind that Golden Gate Village sits on 32.3 acres of prime land. With creative thinking and genuine community engagement it is likely we could find solutions that protect existing residents, preserve historic heritage, maintain open space, and promote trust, transparency and collaboration.
ACTION:
When the BOS/MHA meets on January 9, challenge them to explain “RAD Conversion,” show how it would work for Golden Gate Village, present a timeline and budget, and offer an assessment of the probability of success.
If you care about preserving affordable housing in Marin, send a short email to the Board of Supervisors/Marin Housing Authority (bos@marincounty.org with a cc to Lewis Jordan LJordan@marinhousing.org).
Encourage the BOS to set a higher bar for the quality of the data and analysis in the feasibility report. Encourage them to reject CRV’s recommendation to pursue an option that, by their own admission, has little likelihood to succeed.
[1] RAD funds are Rental Assistance Demonstration funds provided by HUD for the renovations of public housing projects