The boom is bust – Higher housing costs fewer births more deaths slow O.C. to a crawl – Home prices to blame

The boom is bust: Higher housing costs, fewer births, more deaths slow O.C. to a crawl

Orange County’s population growth is little more than a trickle these days, according to figures released this week by the U.S. Census Bureau.

Throughout most of the 1970s and ’80s, the ethnically diverse mass of people calling Orange County home ballooned by more than 2 percent annually. In 1975, more than 56,000 people were added, by birth or moving here – a 3.4 percent bump from the previous year.

But last year, population grew by just 23,600, less than 1 percent – the sixth-slowest rate in the past half-century of census data. The only years with less growth preceded the national economic recession.

The primary reasons, in Census Bureau parlance, are domestic migration patterns and deaths. In plain English, more people are leaving Orange County for other parts of the U.S. than are coming to live here. And our increasingly elder population is dying off faster than babies are being born.

Though the net change in migrants from other countries grew by 29 percent in 2014 from the previous year, much of that growth was wiped out by a domestic exodus. About 8,000 more residents left Orange County than new ones arrived here.

Home prices to blame

Urban planning and real estate experts said rising home prices may be partially to blame. Orange and Los Angeles counties both lost residents to domestic migration, while Riverside County, with cheaper housing options, continued rapid growth in 2014.

Orange County home prices have continued a steady climb in recent months, according to CoreLogic DataQuick figures, nearly reaching prerecession levels. In February, the median home price was about $571,000 in Orange County, compared with $305,000 in Riverside County.

“Even though there’s more construction, we still hear the issue of housing prices,” said Deborah Diep, director of the Center for Demographic Research at Cal State Fullerton. “It’s been a huge ongoing issue, not just for Orange County but for the whole Southern California region.”

The new data don’t spell out exactly where Orange County residents are moving and why they’re moving. More detailed data won’t be released until later this year.

Work here, live elsewhere

Wallace Walrod, a chief economic adviser for the Orange County Business Council, cautioned against drawing too many conclusions from the new report. Population estimates sometimes later are revised because of changes in the Census Bureau’s statistical methods.

But Walrod said the data match up with other economic trends. Noting that Orange County’s unemployment rates remain lower than other Southern California counties, he said more residents may be choosing to work in Orange County and live elsewhere.

“The No. 1 reason that people move is typically for jobs,” Walrod said. “But I think it is mostly about housing prices.”

Karen Edmonds, president of Fullerton-based Winkelmann Realty, said one of her clients, an out-of-state family with four children, recently was looking for a home in Fullerton on a $650,000 budget. It turned to Corona instead. Getting to work and other regional attractions would take longer, but the family also could find a bigger home for thousands less.

The last time Orange County’s annual population growth fell below 1 percent was before the national housing market collapsed. Median home prices skyrocketed then, peaking at $642,000 in August 2007.

Pressure for services

Whether population expands or shrinks might sound like a dry subject. But it influences how much federal funding flows in the county and gets fed into public policy debate and business decisions.

For example, more older residents will put greater pressure on some economic sectors, such as health care, while reducing demand for others like child care and schools.

Geographic shifts in residential population also can strain the transportation system – such as increasing the number of freeway commuters – and cut sales tax revenue that many government agencies rely on to fund core public services.

And as young adults decide to put off having a family – or move outside the county – that affects demand for home furnishings and various services. In a story last year, the Register reported that Orange County had added about 7,500 households a year since 1990, but average growth fell to 2,700 households a year from 2009 on.

“People tend to do most of their retail shopping close to where they live less than where they work,” Walrod said. “That’s the other thing we’re losing out on when people choose to still work in Orange County but live in Riverside or San Bernardino.”

With about 3.15 million residents, Orange County’s population is the third-largest in California – behind Los Angeles and San Diego counties – and larger than 22 states.

Deaths are up 11%

Stagnant birth rates and substantially more deaths also have pushed Orange County toward slower population growth in recent years, the new census data show.

Last year, the bureau estimated nearly 2,000 more deaths in the county than three years earlier, an 11 percent climb.

The trend follows previous census figures that show Orange County increasingly has become a home for people over 45. From 2000 to 2010, the number of residents ages 45 and older grew by 29 percent, while the number of younger residents fell by 4 percent.

The growing population of seniors presents new challenges for social service agencies aiming to cut health care costs. The county Office on Aging has programs that deliver meals to seniors and help seniors attend medical appointments in an effort to prevent them from entering managed care prematurely, said director Karen Roper.

“If you’re getting seniors to doctors and helping them remain healthy, people can stay at home,” Roper said. “The best quality of life is certainly not in skilled nursing (facilities). It’s extremely expensive and not the best place to age with dignity.”

Contact the writer: [email protected] Twitter: @keegankyle

https://www.ocregister.com/articles/county-655991-orange-home.html

Property Taxes – Fees – Utilities – and HOAs $2000.00 a Month or More – at the Tustin Legacy? – Say Goodbye to Food – Cars and College

Tustin, California

Tax district for next Tustin Legacy homes?

Homeowners could pay as much as $2,050 each year on top of standard property taxes to live in the next phase of Tustin Legacy homes due to a special tax district planned for the development.

Tustin Unified School District wants extra tax revenue from that community facilities, or Mello-Roos, district to finance up to $75 million in improvements, including adding two new schools.

Those facilities are needed to serve the thousands of residents expected to move over the next two decades to Tustin Legacy, a master-planned community of homes and retail that’s being built on former Marine Corps Air Station property.

A large portion of that $75 million will be used to build a secondary school in two phases. First will come a junior high, with sixth through eighth grades. Next will come a high school.

The secondary school will be a magnet Technology, Innovation and Entrepreneurship Academy, according to plans supported by the TUSD board during a study session Monday. Curriculum will be focused on project-based learning, with technology courses covering video game design, robotics and coding, while business classes will cover topics such as leadership and creating a small-business plan.

Another significant chunk of the $75 million would be used to finally open and expand Heritage School, a 10-acre campus at 15400 Lansdowne Road that will be developed as a feeder to the magnet secondary school.

The elementary campus was built a few years ago, but TUSD says not enough school-age kids have moved into the Legacy community yet to justify starting classes there. Instead, the district has hosted adult students and administrator offices at the $12 million campus since 2013.

That decision angered local families, who said their children were being sent out of the area to overcrowded schools. And it prompted the city of Tustin to sue the school district in 2011, though a judge ruled that TUSD had the right to delay the school opening.

Figures presented during Monday’s meeting show that many schools are now bursting at the seams, with more residents coming soon.
The new Mello-Roos tax supported by the board Monday would apply to all homes built on vacant land roughly between Jamboree Road and Red Hill Avenue, east of Barranca Parkway and west of Edinger Avenue.

Owners of single-family homes there will pay from $1,325 to $2,050 in extra taxes for up to 40 years, depending on the size of the home. Townhome owners will pay from $875 up to $1,250 in taxes each year, while apartment owners will pay $600 and low-income homeowners will pay $215.

The district plans to hold a public hearing April 20 on forming the Mello-Roos district, which doesn’t require voter approval since no residents live there yet. Before that hearing, a TUSD team will draft a report on what new facilities are needed to accommodate growth for Tustin Legacy and how much those developments are estimated to cost.

The district is expected to vote on the plan May 18. Then it would head to the City Council for final approval May 19, since Tony Soria, chief financial officer for TUSD, said a small portion of the tax revenues would potentially support other public infrastructure needed in the area.

Contact the writer: 714-796-7963 or [email protected]

https://www.ocregister.com/articles/school-652286-district-tustin.html

An airship company is suing the Navy for $65 million stemming from the 2013 roof collapse of a Navy blimp hangar in Tustin California – MCAS Tustin – that destroyed an experimental airship

Tustin, California –

An airship company is suing the Navy for $65 million stemming from the 2013 roof collapse of a Navy blimp hangar in Tustin that destroyed an experimental airship.

In a complaint filed Monday in federal district court, Aeros Aeronautical Systems claims the Navy knew 16 years before the incident that the roof of the massive wooden structure was unstable.

“They had not done anything done about it,” James Gallagher, a Los Angeles attorney representing Aeros, said Wednesday.

The Navy and the Department of Justice, representing the Navy in the lawsuit, didn’t respond to requests for comment.

Aeros leased a third of the 1,000-foot hangar in 2009. With funding from the Department of Defense and NASA, Aeros crews spent the next few years developing Aeroscraft. The rigid airship drew headlines for its buoyancy technology, which allowed the 266-foot ship to land just about anywhere, plus its potential for carrying heavier cargo than any plane or helicopter.

In early October 2013, Aeros officials say a piece of wood fell from the World War II-era hangar and engineers were called to assess the structure. A week later, a 25-foot chunk of the roof fell 17 stories, with some debris puncturing the aircraft.

At the time, officials said the cause of the collapse was unknown. The Aeros lawsuit alleges delayed maintenance was to blame.

The Navy built the hangar and a twin structure to the south in 1942 to store planes and blimps during World War II. Helicopters were also kept there during the Korean and Vietnam wars.

The Tustin Marine Corps Air Station was shuttered in 1999, with most of the land transferred to Tustin. But the Navy hung onto the hangars, with plans to eventually hand the north one off to Orange County and the south one to Tustin.

Through public records requests, Gallagher said his team learned the Navy paid a structural engineering firm to assess the roof of the hangar in 1997.

“They had come back with a report that said there was a certain area of roof that was in need of critical repair,” Gallagher said, recommending repairs be made within two years. In 2013, Graham said, “That is the precise part of the roof that collapsed.”

The Navy blocked access to the hangar for eight months, Gallagher said, fearful more of the roof might come tumbling down. When Aeros was allowed back inside, the company declared Aeroscraft a total loss.

Aeros filed a claim for damages, but the Navy denied the claim in December. No reason was given, Gallagher said.

“For the past 17 months, we have attempted to address damages arising from a clear dereliction of duty as quietly as possible,” Aeros CEO Igo Pasternak said in a statement. “However, the Navy’s unwillingness to resolve the issue in a timely manner is now delaying a long-sought airlift capability that holds promise to solve complex logistics problems, save significant taxpayer money and save lives following natural disasters.”

The lawsuit asks for at least $65 million in property damages, plus a portion of a $3 billion financing campaign Aeros claims was derailed by the roof collapse. Aeros says it hoped to fund a fleet of cargo-carrying airships to help with military, commercial and humanitarian efforts.

https://www.ocregister.com/articles/navy-653939-aeros-roof.html

Contact the writer: 714-796-7963 or [email protected]

Hangar Fire - "Without Litigation" - City of Tustin Already On the Hook for $90 Million in Clean-Up Costs - "Not Including the Actual Hangar Property" - and Heading for a Billion Dollars - Developers Likely Not Off the Hook Either - Property Value Assessments Undergoing Official Review - Ask Yourself - Would You Buy or Rent at the Tustin Legacy - Remember there's "Another" Hangar Too
Addicted? 1-800-662-HELP
URGENT REMINDER - if You're on Southern California Edison's - "Time to Fuck You" - "Electricity Rate Plan" - "Opt Out Now" - Call Today or Visit the Website - 1-800-810-2369