Extra

What is Missing-Middle Housing for Teachers? A Dialogue

Charles Siegel, Zelda Bronstein
Tuesday February 12, 2019 - 11:02:00 AM

Charles Siegel: There is an obvious error in the article about Lori Droste's push for missing-middle housing.

The article says: "In 2018 ... the 120% AMI for a household of four was $125,300. As of January 31, 2019, the average public school teacher salary in Berkeley was $66,918 .... Ergo, what’s missing from Droste’s missing-middle housing is housing that most Berkeley public school teachers, especially if they have kids, could afford."

Notice that the article compares 120% of average median HOUSEHOLD income with ONE TEACHER'S SALARY (not with teachers' household income). 

If both members of a couple are teachers earning the average salary, their household income would be enough to afford housing priced for 120% AMI. According to the figures in the article, average combined income of two teachers = $133,836 while 120% AMI = $125,300. 

The case of a household headed by two teachers who earn average salary is just one example showing that it is possible for 120% AMI housing to be affordable to households that include teachers. Of course, teachers live in many types of households. The example is meant to underline the point that someone writing an article about whether housing is affordable for teachers should look at teachers' household incomes, not at one teacher's salary. 

 


 

Zelda Bronstein: In his Letter to the Editor regarding “the article about Lori Droste’s push for missing-middle housing,” Charles Siegel marks “an obvious error”: “the article compares 120% of average median HOUSEHOLD income with ONE TEACHER’S SALARY (not with teachers’ household income).” Siegel then argues that “a household headed by two teachers who [each] earn average salary [for a BUSD school teacher] is just one example showing that it its possible for 120% AMI housing to be affordable to household that includes teachers.” He concludes: “someone writing an article about whether housing is unaffordable for teachers should look at teachers’ household income, not at one teacher’s salary.” 

As the “someone” who wrote the article, I agree and thank Siegel for his comments. 

Actually, I think we need to go further: HUD bases its AMIs (Area Median Incomes) not only on incomes per household, but also on the size of households. 

Unfortunately, my preliminary investigation suggests that the missing data is not available. Certainly it’s not easily available: I contacted both the BUSD and the Berkeley teachers’ union. Neither one had any information about the household incomes of teachers in Berkeley public schools, much less the size of teachers’ households. Nor did I see any such figures on the website of the California Department of Education. 

In any case, the responsibility for obtaining and publishing the requisite data lies with the public official who’s pitching “missing-middle” housing as affordable to Berkeley’s public school faculty. 

Councilmember Droste, your move.