 stock for seniors. Pasadena has a senior population with similar proportions to Alhambra’s at 11%, but the city dedicates only 57% of its affordable rental units to them. Baldwin Park, a city which has a similar household income to Alhambra, has a senior population of about 6.2% and sets aside 47% of affordable rental housing to those 65 and older. And Monterey Park, which has a significantly higher percentage senior population than Alhambra at 18%, dedicates 72% of affordable units to them.
Nationwide, the net worth of households headed by adults ages 65 and older was 47 times that of households headed by adults under the age of 35 as of 2009.[ Unlike the working poor, seniors benefit from strong lobbying groups, AARP being one. Efforts to perform wealth redistribution will also favor the elderly in the form of Medicare and Social Security. Locally, cities such as Alhambra only consider income when determining qualification for affordable housing. But while seniors often have fixed incomes, their net worth is substantially higher. In fact, the city relies on seniors being able to sell existing homes in order to afford the many senior units developed in Alhambra over the years. It is worth noting that the senior development at 210 N. Monterey Street which was at the center of the scandal involving a former Alhambra mayor-turned-developer, J. Parker Williams, and then councilman Daniel Arguello (Arguello was responsible for notifying authorities and was not implicated in the crime) is still in development, albeit with new partners. But at the November 7, 2011 Planning Commission meeting where it was up for approval, Development Services Director Mary Swink responded to a question regarding whether there would be enough seniors to qualify for the low to moderate-income units, she responded “they way seniors get in to these units is by selling their existing homes and then buying these units. It does not count as income. This is what the [county] housing department has told us.”
By not providing affordable housing to residents in Alhambra, regardless of age, the city is denying those in need of low-income housing the opportunity afforded to them by the state and federal government. After 2008, the city changed their density bonus laws to comply with the state law. But by this time, the damage had been done. The city is largely built-out in terms of large rental units. And if recent activities are any indication, the future actually looks worse, as evidenced by the examples cited of the wrongful selling of affordable units to investors, the use of Specific Plans to bypass affordable housing concessions from developers while still giving them large density bonuses, and the borrowing and subsequent loss of former redevelopment agency affordable housing coffers.
The question still remains: Why not base eligibility for affordable housing solely on income? Seniors certainly wouldn’t be precluded, nor would families, single mothers, the disabled, or any others provided they met income requirements. By doing so, the city would be closer to addressing the needs of its residents.
The question still remains: Why not base it solely on income? Seniors certainly wouldn’t be precluded, nor would families, single mothers, the disabled, or any others provided they met income requirements. By doing so, the city would be closer to addressing the needs of its residents, and that, in turn, would reduce housing stress and promote a more amiable environment. It would also be closer to meeting its ethical obligations.
 City of Alhambra, Alhambra Consolidated Plan for Housing & Community Development (2010-2015), 2010.
 Kathleen Short and Timothy Smeeding, Understanding Income-to-Threshold Ratios Using the Supplemental Poverty Measure: People with Moderate Income, U.S. Census Bureau, SEHSD Working Paper Number 2012-18, August 21, 2012.
Jason DeParle, Robert Gebeloff, and Sabrina Tavernise, “Older, Suburban and Struggling, ‘Near Poor’ Startle the Census,” New York Times, November 18, 2011.
 State density bonuses are proportional to those most in nee