Guest Comment: Land trusts may be the answer

While I did not attend the public meeting for the proposed Las Mesas development, I did attend the public meeting related to the proposed Montosa development.

I was surprised that the commitment demonstrated by the Santa Cruz officials to the comprehensive land plan wavered after such a short period of time.

True, the Montosa development was down the road a piece BUT a lot of the issues remain consistent: water, roads, sewer, traffic, flood plains and the initial intent of the land use plan to sustain and retain a certain ideal for the “landscape” of the land.

Both developers touted the need for affordable housing which, as we all know, is true.

But here’s where I begin to lose confidence in those promises.

How long will homes stay affordable associated with the Tubac mailing address? Is there a mechanism in place to keep those homes affordable in perpetuity?

According to Mr. Ruiz, there are several more hurdles to overcome in the planning process and opportunities for dialogue.

I would suggest, as the process moves forward, that those in positions of authority and the developers begin to consider a mechanism to keep the homes affordable.

And, since it seems that affordable housing is the cornerstone of what developers are selling, then it “shouldn’t” be too much of a leap for them to looked at options to walk their talk.

Land trusts are being utilized throughout the country as a means to keep homes affordable for the mainstay and backbone of our work force—lower to upper middle class America.

By offering a land trust mechanism, buying affordable housing and flipping them for higher prices, thereby driving up the real costs in neighborhoods, can be avoided.

First-time home buyers can still gain the benefits of owning their own homes with some limitations.

Personally, I am against the type of development proposed for the Tubac, Tumacacori, Montosa Ranch corridor, but I do passionately support affordable housing.

It’s unfortunate that emotions seemed to be what forced the deciding vote and not the facts.

When one’s home and chosen life style is threatened, I can’t imagine anything else coming to the forefront but emotion.

From what I observed during the public meeting related to the Montosa proposal, those against the proposal were very well informed representatives of the community that encompassed the general area including Tubac.

I would suggest a task force to begin the dialogue with officials and developers to come to the table with some insurance for what they are selling.

If, according to Mr. Ruiz development is a done deal, then at least offer the type of development that may actually be worth more than a developer’s profit and a higher tax base—build a community not a development.

Terry Nance has lived in Green Valley permanently for four years. She previously lived in Denver. She was project manager for the Lowry Redevelopment Authority for the former Air Force base there. Her involvement included establishment of a land trust to keep affordable homes affordable in perpetuity.

The views expressed are the author’s and not necessarily this newspaper’s.