Recent comments in /f/newhampshire

simonhunterhawk t1_ja8ff2t wrote

I mean laws are different now so realistically they’d probably just evict a family but even then for some low income people that could mean homelessness if they can’t find different housing, and most families are dual income these days anyways. But I just feel like it’s important to remember why company towns went away in the first place.

5

simonhunterhawk t1_ja8dodt wrote

Back when company towns were huge, they’d send someone to tell a man’s wife he’d died in the mines/factory/etc and they either needed to provide another worker (boy older than 10) or move within 7 days. If the child couldn’t be as productive as his father was, he’d get only half his dad’s wages so they’d still be fucked.

20

TheMobyDicks t1_ja8cyc2 wrote

Well, for one thing, they didn't really understand LIHTC when they started the project. It's kind of a difficult process but I'm confident they'll apply on future projects that don't involve housing for their own employees. That particularly was why they didn't pursue it for the Dover project because if they accepted LIHTC resources they couldn't direct any units towards their employees. Yes, the project was bourn as a way to house Harmony Homes folks, but they've been approached by so many would-be renters and companies that need employees, they plan on building attainable housing in other parts of the state. As an example, they were approached by Manchester to see if they can collaborate on a project in that town to create such housing. The name of the game is house workers as affordably as possible.

1

TheTowerBard t1_ja8b7a4 wrote

People working ANY job should be able to afford a house for themselves and/or their families, an actual house in the community where their job is located. If the CORPORATE ENTITY that you work for is also your landlord, you should be getting a HUGE deal on your rent, not handing your personal profits right back to the company. This is deranged. This was the American dream until they brainwashed you all into good little bootlickers.

−2

TheMobyDicks t1_ja89wtj wrote

Be surprised all you want. I know this project backwards and forwards and Chris Parker as well. You're just WRONG. These folks are doing something that the seacoast and state desperately need. And kudos to Dover for letting it happen. Here's some facts for you:

  1. There is a labor shortage on the seacoast (and state)
  2. There is not enough housing, particularly attainable housing, on the seacoast
  3. The Randolphs and Dover are doing something outside the box to try to help the situation
  4. Their plan going forward is to work with other businesses to help fund similar type housing, including multifamily where zoned/appropriate, in other communities of the willing

Now I'm sure you can agree on points one and two. That said, what's your solution? Er, pay people more? No even close to practical in many industries. With the supply chain issues and other economic factors many companies are operating on razor thin margins. Yes, granted there are plenty of employers who gouge on wages but that doesn't account for the crisis we're in. Honestly, I'd love to hear what you think employers and the state should do about the workforce and housing crises?

4

wenestvedt t1_ja88u79 wrote

> gas still pays for more of the maintenance as a method of discouraging further use of ICE cars.

Well, as long as something works to reduce gas use, I am in.

I wish that we had better public transit, but a lot of America is just too spread out for that. I have spent time living in the UK and Europe, and it's so awesome to be able to walk places or hop on a regional train...but that's not practical in northern NH or Minnesota's Iron Range!

1

TheMobyDicks t1_ja87y68 wrote

> Here's your pay check, I'll have 2/3 of it back now

The 30% rule notes that one should only pay 30% of gross salary for housing. In NH many renters pay WAY more than that. This couple who are building the cottage units in Dover also built an apartment building in Durham with daycare on the first floor for their workers. One option for their workers is to pay 30% of their salary to live there. They are certainly not required to do so, but - considering the cost of living on the seacoast - it's an attractive option. And, by the way, the apartments are spacious, well lit all have balconies over looking the river. It's a really nice place and, if the Randolphs opted to, they could charge a heckuva lot more.

7