Letter to the Editor

Sam Kaufman – Key West City Commissioner

Many questions arise regarding the most recent proposal to give $12.5 million to a private purchaser of Peary Court. If approved, the City in return will acquire an interest in the property in the form of affordable deed restrictions on all units.

  • Does this proposal meet the most critical affordable housing need in our community?

The most critical need is housing for lower wage earners and families in the city who struggle to find a place to live within their budget. Peary Court offers two-bedroom units at approximately $2,500 per month or $30,000 per year plus utilities etc. The City alone employs over 120 people earning $35,000 per year or less. Where are these and future employees and their families going to live?

This proposal offers no additional affordable residential units. How does this increase the availability of affordable housing for working people struggling to keep a roof over their head?

Federal guidelines suggest that families should not spend over 30% of their income on housing. Otherwise, they are considered “cost-burdened” for housing. Peary Court at $30,000 per year offers housing for families earning $100,000 per year or more. Should people in this income bracket be the priority for affordable housing in the City?

  • Does this proposal undermine the voter intent of the recent election? Voters rejected this proposal (for the city to purchase the property) with a $10 million dollar investment. 58% voted against and 42% voted in favor.

Now $12.5 million is being proposed to be given to the

private investment group.

  • Would this proposal deplete the funds available for other affordable housing projects?

The Key West Housing Authority has recently expressed willingness to partner with the City to build 150-200 lower income units (mostly one bedroom and efficiencies) at the Poinciana community in New Town. The Housing Authority expects the City to contribute finances for this project. How long will this project be delayed if the availability affordable housing funds are exhausted due to Peary Court? Will the rents at Poinciana need to be higher because of the depleted financial contribution from the City as a result of the taxpayers investment in Peary Court?

  • Does this proposal comply with Section 1.08 of the City Charter requiring a city-wide vote when the City acquires an interest in real property?

A deed restriction acquired by the City is an interest in real property. This Charter provision states that “any and all real property” must be approved by the voters.

  • Has this proposal been properly vetted and aired for community input?

I would support the Peary Court proposal if there was a commitment by the private purchaser to provide affordable housing for the residents earning $20,000 to $50,000 per year, the most critical need in our community. It seems reasonable as a minimum to attach a condition to the money such that 80% of the units be dedicated to lower income wage earners. But, private purchaser has stated they are unwilling to make this commitment.

[livemarket market_name="KONK Life LiveMarket" limit=3 category=“” show_signup=0 show_more=0]