This is a naive question, but after moving back to this state six years ago and moving into the family house, I've watched house prices spiral so far out of control that even making 100k a year won't guarantee you being able to afford living outside of Lewiston or Caribou.
How do we as Mainers convince our political representatives and make our voices heard that living in this state is unsustainable? Are there any other ways? This clearly can't go on much longer.
My mum has a house in San Diego. It’s worth over a million.
The house is a shitty little 800sf from like the 60s… it’s the land.
Zoning and density is the number one issue. It’ll still be expensive though. Material and labor prices are high. But ten story buildings with hundreds of units be far more efficient.
I think we should poll who wants to live in a 10 story building. Amenities, functions, sizes, and other features need to be met or it’s just a developers wet dream and does nothing to help people.
You want affordable housing that’s what it will ultimately be.
Needs > wants and are often far less lavish.
Part of me still thinks we’re a couple generations from UBI… part of me thinks I’ll see it in my lifetime once the boomers die off.
There are hundreds of examples of states with high density, low income housing. Market forces abound, it’s in the rental industries best interest to keep supply just below demand. They also don’t want regular housing, condos, or upward mobility reducing their share of the market. Guaranteed housing, like guaranteed UBI may be the future, but it’s going to be four walls, a ceiling, and a door. That may be fine for some but it will drive others insane.
The lack of housing currently isn’t like it’s always been, controlled by the rental industry.
2008 crash left a multimillion unit hole that was never filled.
Combined with a lot of people leaving the building industry and never returning back then and a shortage of new blood entering the industry there isn’t enough labor power to keep up, let alone catch up.
I'm hoping the 3d printed neighborhood Penquis and UMaine will be working on catches on and spreads like wildfire through the state
Sorry to say that UMaine projects don’t have a strong track record, especially when good existing solutions for the root cause already exist.
This has potential. Millions of Americans can't afford houses right now and if you can 3d print one with lessan hours needed and using wood residuals rather than premo lumber than I bet this could be done much cheaper than a typical house build
Currently advocating for these very things in Rockland, along with eliminating parking minimums and setback reqs. There's a very big code rewrite currently underway, hopefully should see some of this stuff start to come into effect this fall [fingers crossed].
Have you thought about ice bergs?
I have said this very same thing.
There's not only not enough housing, there's not enough multifamily housing.
Multi family housing is the easiest way that a first time buyer can qualify for a house.
Build more multifamily housing and you also get more apartments which will lead to a stabilization of rents, and a decrease in the rental value of apartments that are not well maintained.
With regards to to NIMBYism, reporters need to start showing up at town meetings and city council meetings and publicly shame NIMBYists.
The Governor could start the ball rolling with a carrot; more state funds to cities and towns that provide zoning ONLY for 2-3 family homes on 5000-10000 sf lots.
> With regards to to NIMBYism, reporters need to start showing up at town meetings and city council meetings and publicly shame NIMBYists.
That's not a reporters job. If you want people to distrust journalists, and reporters, more than they already do encourage this. If you want us to ever get back to a sense of normalcy than they shouldn't.
Reporting on the root cause of the housing/apartment shortage is very much a reporter’s job.
Publicly shaming people that are expressing their opinion peacefully at a municipal meeting is not the way to win them over to your cause. I certainly may not agree with their NIMBYism, but I will defend their right to express their opinions. If I want to disagree, that's what my three minutes at the microphone are for.
If I want to disagree, that's what my three minutes at the microphone are for. —————————————————— Look, if your expressed opinion was to zone in such a way as to racially exclude someone, then the media would happily report it. What I mean by shaming is simply reporting it.
Let people see for themselves who is causing the housing crisis. Reporting on it isn’t preventing you from expressing your opinion.
If you believe that expressing your opinion and having it appear on the 6pm news is bad, then there’s a flaw with your opinion.
We publicly shame people all the time for their opinions by simply showing it in broad daylight.
The good news is that the Legislature is very focused on housing this year. It was one of the highest priority issues in the campaign, and the legislature took all of two days to pass their first housing legislation this session. Hopefully that continues.
What was the legislation?
LD3. It gave emergency funding for heat assistance, warming shelters, and hotel rooms.
Bingo.
How many houses are sitting out there that are bank owned and unoccupied? We have one next door to us in PORTLAND, and the fellow from the bank said there are thousands of these in Maine that he takes pictures of. Political pressure could possibly motivate these banks to place these properties on the market in a faster timeframe.
France and Britain are giving a TEDtalk on this right now.
Lol. Have YOU tried finding housing in France or Britain?!
The only meaningful way that comes to mind would be to pass laws limiting Airbnb and corporate ownership of single family homes.
Oh and as has been mentioned… building more
The 1% and corporate overlords are almost unstoppable. Unless they are stopped, we're all screwed. They buy senators and congressmen/women for pennies on the dollar. The US is everymuch as corrupt as any central American puppet government.
I'm not an expert, and honestly I think a lot of this would need to be federal because this is a problem everywhere, not just in Maine. But some things that I think we could do:
More hardcore/probably harder to accomplish:
The rent v mortgage thing is understandable in that the bank is going to most likely require insurance and taxes to be paid in escrow. So the mortgage might be $1,500, but the bank needs $2,300 monthly or whatever because they don't trust most people to keep up with insurance and taxes on their own. And that's without getting into long term maintenance costs
> So the mortgage might be $1,500, but the bank needs $2,300 monthly or whatever because they don't trust most people to keep up with insurance and taxes on their own.
Guys.
Both of these things are part of a mortgage payment in almost all cases. Property taxes are paid on your behalf by the lender, and is included as part of your mortgage payment. You're almost always required to hold homeowners insurance (and not just the minimum policy) while you have a loan.
I know how it works. I have owned multiple houses (not at the same time, so put down your pitchforks)
I'm just trying to draw a distinction between the home loan part (what you get preapproved to spend) and the rest of the fees you're expected to pay monthly. The home loan part is traditionally a fixed payment, whereas the taxes/insurance can vary over time.
My last home was 860/month for the mortgage to pay principle and interest. Over 6 years the taxes/insurance went from about 300 to 400 a month.
By mortgage I meant the whole payment to the bank (i.e., including taxes and insurance). My full monthly payment, taxes and insurance included, is over $1,000 less than my house would cost to rent.
That’s literally what it always means. It’s never “my mortgage is 1500… not including mortgage insurance, property taxes…”. Even Zillow includes it in their estimate.
I think it would be a lot easier to have a massive sales tax on short term rentals as an alternative to property tax. It accomplishes the same thing while being much more enforceable.
So either raise rent some more or destroy private property in this country… got it.
Yup that's exactly what I said, you nailed it.
And return to irresponsible home loans… like we haven’t learned from that last time… mortgage is one cost to homeownership.
Yeah that's a great point, because when you're renting there are definitely no other costs associated with that.
You got $5k-$8k sitting around for a boiler? $20k for a roof? Banks want to know the property will continue to be kept valuable till they get all their money back.
>You got $5k-$8k sitting around for a boiler? $20k for a roof?
Not sure why you're asking me, but yes, I have enough money in the bank to pay for both of those things out of pocket. I'm not a renter though.
> Banks want to know the property will continue to be kept valuable till they get all their money back.
Reasonable, but (1) that is why they require home insurance and, (2) that doesn't make it reasonable to tell someone they "can't afford" a mortgage payment that's significantly lower than the rent they're already paying.
Yes, home maintenance costs money, but someone who's paying $2,500 for rent can save quite a bit of money every month if their mortgage is going to be $1,500. And while those big expenses you're talking about do happen, they're rare, and generally foreseeable. You don't just suddenly need a new roof, if the house is going to need a new roof, generally everybody is aware of that going into the purchase.
And if a surprise expense does pop up that the homeowner can't cover, there are options including home equity loan, HELOC, potentially the home insurance, etc.
And honestly, owning a home is a big part of the reason why I do have money in the bank to cover those kinds of expenses. If I had to try to rent an equivalent place, or even a smaller one, I'd be saving a lot less each month.
Mortgage lenders look for 35ish% debt to income. Some will go up to 45%. Even 50% sometimes.
The first one is very reasonable. The second two imo are borderline irresponsible.
Their rent payment doesn’t matter for getting a mortgage.
If they can’t get a mortgage; it’s either their income isn’t high enough to keep housing to an acceptable percentage or they have other debt issues.
That system isn’t the problem. That’s all very fair. Remember; just because they’re paying rent doesn’t really mean they can afford that rent. A lot of people are paying more rent than they should.
Which leads to the biggest issue being zoning and a lack of units leading to higher prices which have nothing to do with mortgages and is something they have a say in through voting.
A big part of the reason banks are more conservative than landlords is because it takes about two months to evict a tenant, and about 18 months to foreclose on a borrower.
Landlords and lenders are not weighing the same risk, at all.
So it's not entirely fair to suggest that banks are saying renters "can't" afford a mortgage payment lower than their rent payment. It's more like, "as a lender, I am not willing to bet 18 months worth of payments, plus all the costs and hassle of a foreclosure, that you will be able to make this payment."
Yeah, if only there was some way to... "insure" the home against such large damages, so that you didn't have to pay a huge lump sum out of pocket.
And they could even require that you hold that insurance on the home while the loan is still active!
Man if only.
Insurance doesn't pay for maintenance on stuff like a new roof or boiler. That's normal wear and tear that you're expected to pay for as the home owner.
I mean, that's a fair point, but as an owner of an old fixerupper money pit myself, I can confidently say that those expenses pale in comparison to paying rent.
A roof pales next to rent? What the hell does your rent look like?
Lets walk through this slowly.
Rent is more expensive than a mortgage for a comparable amount of living space. By a lot.
So If I'm renting, I'm wasting a shitload of money, that I'd otherwise be saving if I paid a mortgage instead.
With me?
So if I need to do repairs or maintenance, I have the money because my monthly expenses are lower.
No one is getting a mortgage and getting blasted with having to put a new roof on all of a sudden due to wear and tear. Anything else is covered by your homeowners insurance, which you have to have as long as you're paying the house off.
This really isn't all that hard. Mortgage = cheaper = save money = have money.
I think you'd be surprised. In my first house I had a furnace go very quickly after buying and my next home I had both washer and dryer go, as well as need to do roof maintenance. None of which made any sense to claim on home owners insurance and therefore came out of pocket.
Maintenance and surprise issues that insurance doesn't cover is not uncommon. If you don't have money to keep up with it and are depending on your insurance you're going to be in for a very bad time.
I spent thousands beyond my mortgage just keeping up and handling house issues at the last place I owned
Edit: forgot to add I had inspections on these places too. Shit just happens.
A roof typically lasts 20-30 years. Let's say 20. I just had mine replaced for 10k, but let's say you have a massive roof and it's 20k. That's $80 a month over 20 years, which is less than the rent increases most people see year to year.
Also when I replace my roof, it adds to the value of my house. When my landlord increases my rent to cover the new roof, it adds to the value of their house.
You're paying maintenance costs on the property either way, you just pay it through rent, building equity for the landlord. Oh yeah, and the roof repair on a rental is tax deductible for a landlord.
So sure, you do need some extra cash on hand for surprises, but it's leaps and bounds better than renting in the long run financially.
Your comparing 80 a month over 20 years to a huge out of pocket expense. It doesn't matter if over 20 years the roof is cheaper if you can't afford it now.
Which is my point. A new roof is not cheaper than your current rent cost.
Those aren’t damages. That’s wear and tear. Insurance doesn’t cover that.
This is a naive statement.
NINJA loans sound fun, let's have them back!
Density is the issue and most suggestions here are good. One large impediment to building at scale is lack of public sewer. The issue for small rural communities is asking residents to tax themselves to build a public sewer system that benefits the developer.
Rural communities don’t necessarily need to meaningfully change if urban communities don’t force them to by refusing to be… urban. Cities are better equipped for scaling public works, so let’s stop zoning them for single family housing.
How many airbnbs and vbros in your town?
Take a look This is your housing inventory. Hogged up by out of state investors making bank doing short term rentals.
Ban Airbnb NOW
It might be a good start in some places, but only a start and not remotely a solution. We would have a housing crisis anyway.
It's r/Maine, this state is one of the worst impacted by short term rentals eating away the otherwise normal housing stock, and attacking services like Airbnb might have more positive impact here statewide compared to most areas of the country. Between people having a second home in Maine to summer in and short term rentals catering to people doing the same, the street I live on is something like three quarters gobbled up by housing which sits vacant except when rich assholes vacation here for three months out of the year.
Even building more housing here likely won't help without this situation being addressed - since the 60s, Maine has built about one new house for every two people added to the population, but a supermajority of those new houses are not lived in by full time Mainers. New houses right now are majority built by developers looking to sell them to the highest bidder and tailoring them to that market, so it's mostly to the short term rental/vacation home people.
There’s no other solution to a lack of housing than building more housing.
Fr I can’t even get one landlord to message me back about renting their place
Build more apartments, but make them actually affordable, not yet another $$$$$$$ luxury apt in the sky.
How exactly do you build affordable apartments without a government subsidy and make the effort profitable?
I have no idea.
All I do see lately though are pricey new construction downtown and Bayside. I wish I knew the answer!
New luxury housing means that the other housing doesn’t become luxury housing… I don’t see any sense in discouraging it.
What other housing?
existing stock
Since Maine bills itself as Vacationland and tourism generates a lot of revenue for the state, I don't know how you address the AirBnB taking up housing stock and second homes sitting vacant. Maine is all about short term rental housing for the summer.
[deleted]
Mr. Wigit builds an apartment as an addition to an existing structure at a total cost of 150k. He borrows the money at a 7.00% fixed rate for 30 years...his payments are approx. $1000 a month w/o other expenses. He would like to make at least a 10% profit on the project ....so he decides that $1500 month would be a fair price....yes or no?
There don't seem to be tons of complaints that there are just too many $1500/mo rents available, even though that's pretty high compared to the average income in state
Anti-nimby. Request shelters in your neighborhood
you dont. realizing limitations in our ability to make political change makes change.
You can’t it’s not political! When people stop buying the prices come down until then your out of luck!
Abolish zoning rules, encourage banks to let homeowner's build using construction loans, give tax breaks to people building multi family and starter homes. Fund schools through sales taxes.
Most zoning rules are pretty good - I like not living next to a cement factory. Landowners can take out loans to build their own homes, generally, but banks will indeed treat them differently than a company known for already doing so. Sales taxes are regressive but school funding does need a mixup to be more equitable
All taxes are regressive. Very few areas need zoning for planning services. 90% of Zoning in Maine is Nimbyism created by flatlanders who move up here build a house fill the driveway with 2.5 Subarus and begin stopping people from doing exactly what they did.
>All taxes are regressive.
what
​
> Very few areas need zoning for planning services. 90% of Zoning in Maine is Nimbyism created by flatlanders who move up here build a house fill the driveway with 2.5 Subarus and begin stopping people from doing exactly what they did.
ight. What do you think zoning is? It's not just "you can't build multifamily homes and must have cars everywhere", it's the entire concept of having regulations around which kinds of buildings can be which places. What zoning laws in maine are you envisioning here?
Have you ever been to Houston, TX? They don't have zoning rules, and its a shithole nightmare of sprawl.
"Libertarians are like house cats: absolutely convinced of their fierce independence while utterly dependent on a system they don't appreciate or understand."
Shoulda pulled the trigger on a house 6 years ago….😬
They were going for pennies on the dollar.
Convince the state do forgo the "fair market prices" and allow no rent prices be higher that 20% of the lowest wage locally (so each town would have to evaluate what the highest rent could be). There's no reason some small town I the middle of nowhere should have rents starting at $2000 with nothing included when the highest you can earn locally is like $13.80 (or whatever minimum wage is now).
Never will happen, but it'd be nice.
uh, what are you looking for exactly? a law preventing people from selling their houses for too much?
The Government IS the problem!
The only way to fix housing is not more Government intervention. The government has caused this problem. With zoning regulations, code, limiting number building permits (or having any building at all). Taxes, allowing monopolies on utility companies, giving free housing to people that refuse to work.
If anyone could simply cut some trees down and build an kind of structure they wanted for their home there would be no homeless people.
The solution is simple. Get any and all government organizations out of housing and the problem will correct itself.
You started off so strong, but then the minecart went off the rails
Glad you agree! Be well!
I think Current You needs to take advice from Past You.
>Stay away from home built after 1980. The quality of materials had drastically decreased since that time frame. If possible homes built in the 1880-1950’s era are best. Quality construction and builders that actually took pride in their craft.
Past You would probably find some flaws in repealing all those pesky building codes.
I thought I had seen some kooky takes on the housing crisis, but "Eliminating all building regulations to allow homeless people to build their own log cabins will solve homelessness" is a new one. Bravo!
And anytime someone says, "The solution is simple" to a complex problem is when I stop listening.
You seem to have paid pretty close attention for a guy at is not interested in my opinion.
freeski919 t1_j6xuhnk wrote
I work on public housing policy all day every day. The one thing we can control for housing costs is the supply. We need more housing. A lot more. That means changing zoning and code laws to increase density. And we need to push through the NIMBYism that crops up when denser developments do get proposed. That's just the tip of the iceberg.