housing

SACRAMENTO — Three state bond measures are on California’s November ballot. You probably haven’t paid much attention to them. So here’s my read on these big-ticket proposals.

One is a no-brainer “yes.” It would help middle-class Californians buy a new home by allowing them to borrow most of the down payment. And it wouldn’t cost taxpayers a dime. That’s Proposition 37.

Another housing measure is probably worthwhile, but gives me pause because it accommodates too many interests in order to attract broad political support. And it burns a barrel of money. That’s Proposition 1.

The third proposal would fund important medical research. But I wince because it was written to largely benefit one institute that was co-founded and is headed by the measure’s chief backer. That’s Proposition 38.

Propositions 1 and 38 combined would add $18.4 billion to the state’s general fund bond debt, which already is about $80 billion, according to the nonpartisan Legislative Analyst‘s Office.

Plus, there is $40 billion in previously authorized bonds waiting to be sold. The new bond proposals would cost the state at least $1 billion annually for 20 to 25 years. Taxpayers are paying about $6 billion annually to retire state bonds.

Bonds are boring, but they’re also tax eaters. So we should pay some attention before voting on them.

“People think about bonds as free money. And, of course, they’re not,” says Mark Baldassare, polling director for the Public Policy Institute of California. “People don’t think bonds are going to raise their taxes.”

But most bonds are repaid by the state’s general fund, the main cash box that finances major programs such as education, healthcare, prisons and fighting wildfires. Bond debt has No. 1 dibs on the money. When revenue runs short — a common dilemma in Sacramento — other programs must be cut or taxpayers are hit harder. So bonds aren’t necessarily tax-free.

Baldassare released a PPIC poll last week that found a majority of likely voters supporting all three bond measures — especially Proposition 37 to ease homebuyers’ down payments.

The pollster noted that fall election campaigns are just starting and opposition arguments could reduce support for the measures.

But there’s no organized opposition to the two housing proposals. And although the medical research measure has some outspoken critics, there’s no money for an opposition campaign.

OK, a few specifics on each measure.

Proposition 37 is a taxpayer freebie, a $25-billion bond repaid solely by homebuyer beneficiaries. Here’s how it would work:

Middle-income people could pay 3% down on their home purchases rather than the normal 20%. They’d borrow the other 17% as a second mortgage and repay it along with the first mortgage.

The proposition defines middle class as household income that’s less than double the median for the area. Statewide, that income ceiling would be around $200,000 but would vary greatly by locale.

The purchased dwelling must be a brand-new home, whether stand-alone or a condo. That’s to increase the housing supply and create construction jobs. Politically, it gains the support of developers and unions.

No vacation home. It must be owner-occupied full-time. And the buyer must be a California resident.

The state’s sale of revenue bonds would create the down-payment pot. Regular lending institutions would arrange the loans and charge minimum fees. Loan repayments would replenish the pot and make it self-sustaining.

This was the brainchild of Bob Hertzberg, a former Democratic Assembly speaker and Senate majority leader from the San Fernando Valley.

Hertzberg tried several times to sell his proposal to the Legislature, but lawmakers wanted to juice it up with their own pet ideas. “I couldn’t get something just focused on the middle class,” he says. So he crafted this citizen initiative.

Proposition 1 proposes $11.25 billion in bonds for a smorgasbord of affordable housing.

This is the political establishment’s creation — Gov. Gavin Newsom, the Democratic-controlled Legislature and housing interests. There’s no organized opposition.

It was dressed up with $1.25 billion in popular CalVet loan bonds for military veterans. They repay their home loans through mortgages, costing the state nothing.

But the remaining $10 billion in bonds would be repaid through the state general fund, costing at least $500 million annually for 25 years.

The measure is mainly designed to generate affordable rentals for poor people. But to assure legislative passage, money was added for affordable student and farmworker housing, plus other goodies.

It’s a lot of money and makes only a small dent in California’s unaffordable housing plague. Moreover, it seems too scattershot.

But it could spare more people from becoming homeless — living in their cars or on sidewalks, ultimately costing taxpayers even more.

Then there’s Proposition 38, the problematic $8.4-billion general fund bond for medical research, including cures for cancer, heart disease and Alzheimer’s.

The hang-up for me and others is that the ballot initiative was crafted to virtually assure that half the bond money would go to one outfit, the UCLA-affiliated California Institute for Immunology and Immunotherapy. The institute was co-founded and is headed by the proposition’s originator and chief backer, billionaire Gary Michelson.

“I know opponents want to create a billionaire boogeyman, but isn’t curing cancer and other terrible diseases exactly what we want billionaires to spend their money on?” says Robin Swanson, a campaign spokesperson.

Sure. But being backed by a billionaire isn’t the problem. It’s being written to substantially benefit one research institute that’s led by the billionaire.

Two cancer survivors and political opposites — conservative consultant Jon Fleischman and liberal consultant Steve Maviglio — co-authored an op-ed that declared:

“Imagine either major political party proposing to borrow billions of dollars and writing the qualifications so narrowly that an organization founded and chaired by a principal campaign benefactor appears positioned to collect half the money. The other party would rightly howl. So should voters.”

They should at least be skeptical.

What else you should be reading

The must-read: California health clinics accuse influential union and its leader of racketeering in civil lawsuit
Danger zone: Newsom creates panel on AI safety regulation, suggests possible ‘kill switch’
The L.A. Times Special: Union power vs. MAGA politics in California’s schools superintendent race

Until next week,
George Skelton

—
Was this newsletter forwarded to you? Sign up here to get it in your inbox.

Far-right AfD defeated German chancellor’s CDU in recent Saxony-Anhalt state election, casting doubt on his future.

Voters in the eastern German states of Berlin and Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania are heading to the polls as far-right and far-left gains threaten to affect the political standing of Chancellor Friedrich Merz.

About 2.5 million people are eligible to vote in the city-state of Berlin, Germany’s capital, and nearly 1.3 million in Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania on Sunday. Polling booths in both states – traditionally seen as more left-leaning – opened at 8am local time (06:00 GMT) and will close at 6pm (16:00 GMT).

Pressure on Merz has been mounting after the far-right Alternative for Germany (AfD) delivered a major defeat to his Christian Democratic Union party (CDU) party two weeks ago in the key state of Saxony-Anhalt. The AfD fell just short of an absolute majority, which would have allowed it to govern on its own.

And after just 16 months in power, Merz’s approval ratings have plunged to about 14 percent, the latest polls suggest, as he struggles to push through promised economic and social welfare reforms with his centre-left coalition partners, the Social Democratic Party (SPD), raising doubts among fellow party members whether he can continue to lead.

In Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania, Merz’s party is an onlooker to the main battle between the SPD’s popular state premier Manuela Schwesig and the AfD’s lead candidate, former radio presenter Leif-Erik Holm.

While the AfD was polling at 36 percent against the SPD’s 37 percent, Merz’s CDU, at just 6 percent, was dangerously close to the 5 percent hurdle needed to stay in the state parliament, according to public broadcaster ZDF.

Reporting from a polling station in Schwerin, Al Jazeera’s Dominic Kane said there was “very much all to play for” in Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania.

“The race between the AfD here and the Social Democrat government is very close indeed,” he added, pointing out to the recent opinion polls.

In  Berlin, the CDU is running a tight race against the far-left Die Linke (The Left), which promises drastic measures to solve a dire housing crisis and is popular with young people.

Regional elections would not usually draw much interest outside Germany, but the AfD’s success in Saxony-Anhalt, which it sees as the first step towards winning federal elections due in 2029, has sent shockwaves through Europe.

“Saxony-Anhalt was certainly a revolution for the German party system,” Florian Hartleb, a professor of international relations at Modul University in Vienna and an expert on far-right movements, told Al Jazeera.

Hartleb said the AFD had been “fundamentally excluded” from the power system, with the other political parties trying “everything” against it in recent years. “But it didn’t work out,” he said, citing voters’ dissatisfaction over migration, the economy and social inequality.

Merz has reportedly scheduled a crisis CDU meeting and cleared his calendar to deal with potential aftershocks from Sunday’s elections.

The Aichi-Nagoya Asian Games get under way this weekend under the shadow of a housing crisis that has organisers scrambling to placate athletes and officials from participating nations.

The tournament has been mired in complaints over housing options for athletes travelling to Japan, after the host nation decided not to build a dedicated Games village for the 17,000 competitors and officials.

To cut costs this year, organisers are relying on a cruise ship, temporary wooden cabins and hotels, but this temporary accommodation has met with criticism in the days leading up to the continental competition.

On Monday, South Korean officials slammed beds in shipping container-style huts as the “worst-ever”, as the South Korean basketball chief said the beds were too short to stretch out in.

Here’s everything we know:

Why are the Asian Games facing an accommodation crisis?

The official housing committee said the issue arose because they expected 15,000 athletes and officials, but numbers increased as new sports were added.

This year’s Games will feature several newcomers, including mixed martial arts, padel and surfing, as well as virtual taekwondo and teqball, which ‌‌combines aspects of football and table tennis.

Ahead of the Games’ opening, chief organiser Hideaki Omura said efforts are being made to ensure athletes are comfortable.

“If there are different opinions, then we will respond to them appropriately,” Omura, who also serves as governor of Aichi prefecture, told the AFP news agency.

“At this point, while we are responding to individual opinions, we have been improving everything as issues arise, and we will continue to respond that way.”

He added that a committee of former athletes, including Olympians, gave a favourable assessment of the plans for the huts built this year.

“We explained everything to them and had them take a look around, and they said it looked functional and good,” he said.

Where will the Asian Games athletes stay?

Alternative housing options range from a cruise liner and wooden containers to hotel rooms.

On Tuesday, the Italian cruise ship, Costa Serena, which will host 4,000 athletes and officials, arrived in Nagoya.

The shipping container-style huts in the dock area of Japan’s biggest port will host 2,000 other athletes and officials.

On Thursday, Japan’s deputy Chef de Mission Hisashi Mizutori told a news conference that athletes have been going through entry procedures since the cruise ship village opened a day earlier.

“There have been cases where coaches, team officials and athletes have been assigned to the same room. There are also situations where room assignments were made purely based on the numbers, such as assigning five twin rooms for a group of five men and five women,” Mizutori said.

“While the numbers match on paper, practically it creates challenging situations such as men and women being assigned together, coaches being assigned with athletes, or trainers who need to accommodate a lot of medical equipment being assigned together.”

He added that the Japanese Olympic Committee (JOC) had also anticipated accommodation “challenges” and secured hotels in the city as a backup.

“We are currently working to coordinate and negotiate adjustments wherever possible. For cases where that proves too difficult, we are considering using the backup accommodations that Team Japan prepared in advance as alternatives.”

Why are participating nations and athletes complaining about the accommodation?

Jung Jae-yong, vice president of the Korea Basketball Association (KBA), slammed the cabins hosting the men’s basketball team.

“Athletes who are over two metres tall cannot even stretch their legs out on the beds. It’s unreasonable.”

Jung also accused the organisers of failing to respond to South Korea’s concerns about the housing options.

“The organisers have still not said anything,” he said, adding: “We are very concerned and discussing extensively with the Korean Sport and Olympic Committee what to do about this.”

Player Byeon Jun-hyeong, from the basketball team, posted a video on social media showing a leaking sink and a soaked floor in his hut.

“Please help us,” he posted.

Philippine Olympic Committee president Abraham Tolentino also said that while all his athletes had been given a room, “some officials, like coaches, were moved to different hotels and Airbnb”.

Why will cricketers get the best accommodation at the Asian Games?

Head of Japan’s cricket association, Naoki Alex Miyaji, said in early September that cricket would get better accommodation than other sports.

According to Miyaji, the cricket tournament is being run by the Asian Games organising committee in collaboration with the Asian Cricket Council.

He said that the two bodies had been discussing accommodation options “for a long time”.

“The participating teams in cricket are being offered hotel accommodation,” Miyaji said.

“Many other sports are being accommodated in much more limited facilities, such as a cruise ship or container hotels.”

What other issues have hit the Asian Games?

While the opening ceremony has yet to take place, several events such as basketball, football, cricket, hockey and modern pentathlon have already begun.

On Thursday, Tropical Storm Dujuan was located off Japan’s Pacific coast as of 03:00 GMT and heading northwest towards central Japan, where Nagoya is located.

Last week, torrential rains hit Nagoya and the surrounding areas, forcing schools to close and suspending train services. Several hundred athletes were also forced to leave their accommodation.

Kosei Inoue, Japan’s chef de mission for the Games and a senior executive board member of the JOC, said at a news conference on Thursday that some competitions have already experienced “delays or postponements, and there is also a possibility that a typhoon could approach on September 21”.

“Under these circumstances, we are holding thorough meetings within the JOC to ensure that we are fully prepared and capable of responding appropriately to these situations.”

Sydney: Australia will reduce migration by curbing “visa hopping”, tightening rules on students and working holiday makers as well as cracking down on overstayers, its interior minister said Thursday, as the far-right surges in the polls.

Home Affairs Minister Tony Burke told the National Press Club in Canberra that immigration was “fundamentally a strength” for Australia, but accepted that housing pressures required changes.

He denied his ruling Labor party was tightening visa rules in response to the rise of One Nation, which has become one of the country’s most popular parties this year with pledges to drastically slash migration. Business groups warned such cuts would cause economic damage.

“We need immigration to soften enough that housing has a chance to catch up,” he said, while stressing the housing shortage was not caused by migrants.

Net overseas migration – the net gain or loss to the population through movement to and from Australia – reached a peak of 538,000 in 2022 after a surge in arrivals when borders re-opened after the Covid-19 pandemic.

Numbers fell to 292,100 in the year to March, data on Thursday showed.

Burke said this was 47 percent below the post-Covid peak — and that policy changes would help to reach a target of 225,000 for next year.

Australians want to know the government was “taking control” of migration but also “being decent about it”, he said.

Students are the largest group of arrivals, with 753,000 international students in Australia, most from China and India, data shows.

Under the new rules, family members seeking to join students in Australia will face new curbs and it will become harder for students to move between courses to extend their stay, Burke said.

A backlog of applications from the UK for working holiday visas would continue to be processed slowly after a record 80,000 applications — a matter that is under discussion with the UK government, he said.

Working holiday makers in rural areas will enter a ballot to stay for a second or third year, with just 5,000 visas available for the latter.

Family members seeking to visit Australians will have “no further stay” conditions attached to their temporary visas.

Migrants with construction and housing skills will be prioritised for visas, he said.

Australia would return to a policy of a decade earlier in which visa overstayers were given two weeks to leave the country or face detention and deportation, he said.

An additional 100 compliance officers and 250 more beds in immigration detention centres would show there are consequences to overstaying a visa, he said.

But he stressed “this is not the sort of operation that some people have seen on TV happening in other countries” — a nod to hardline immigration policies in the United States.

A third of Australia’s resident population of 27.6 million was born overseas, the latest census data shows.