Inexpensive housing: How much can the new tenants earn?

Created: 01/26/2022, 10:42 am

By: Kathrin Böhmer

The construction site on Großer Berg shortly after the fire: 31 apartments are available here in the complex directly on Münchner Straße.

© Weber

Even if the major fire has delayed work on the construction site by half a year, the city is slowly having to decide who will be given the 31 apartments on Münchner Strasse.

There is a sticking point.

Olching - This is: It should be affordable, even for low earners, but there shouldn't be a ghetto.

CSU parliamentary group leader Tomas Bauer put it in a nutshell: "We don't want a broken glass district." Not only people who live from the state should live on the Großer Berg.

It cannot only be a question of offering affordable housing, but of creating a stable social structure.

So no small Hasenbergl in Olching.

This opinion was not shared by everyone in the main committee.

SPD parliamentary group leader Ralf Greim considered the fear of a "ghetto" to be completely exaggerated.

But there was a clear consensus that the around 25 million euro project (including a day care center) is not only intended to give tenants who are scratching the subsistence level a chance.

The only question is: how is this supposed to work?

Who should get an apartment?

Last Thursday, the main committee had a first draft of how the 31 municipal apartments could be allocated.

The Greens group had ensured that the issue was dealt with publicly, which all members of the panel supported.

In principle, the aim is to offer low-income families with children affordable housing.

However, other criteria should also be taken into account, for example whether someone has a social profession or volunteers.

What is the income limit?

Mayor Andreas Magg (SPD) explained at the beginning that this was a draft for a first occupancy.

These criteria would be valid until June 30, 2025, after which general guidelines would apply.

"Now it's all about advice," said Magg.

One sticking point was income.

Because the Treasury had suggested that this should be 50 percent above the limit specified in the Housing Promotion Act.

A married couple with two children would thus come to 82,250 euros (see box).

For Andreas Teichmann (FDP) too much: "This is outside the target group for which the subsidized municipal housing is intended." According to Mayor Magg, this is not clearly defined.

As it turned out later, it must also be checked whether it is about the gross or net total income.

"80,000 euros would not necessarily be the burner before tax," explained Maria Hartl (CSU).

How high can the rent be?

Teichmann also inquired what the rent would be, reiterating that he had still not been presented with a business plan for the building that would indicate profitability. The administration had not specifically formulated information about the rent: This should be calculated in such a way that it was affordable for poorer apartment seekers. This is part of the legal requirements, the city has received funding. According to Magg, the rent is 12.80 euros per square meter, based on the requirements of the job center.

Green leader and third mayor Ingrid Jaschke also considered the 50 percent surcharge to be "very high", as she said.

Although she understands that "social enforcement" is needed.

But: "That doesn't reflect reality, I don't want to agree with that." Jaschke suggested reducing the surcharge to a maximum of 25 percent, which was rejected by the majority.

How fair is the points system?

The SPD parliamentary group had already discussed the income limits in advance, as finance officer Fritz Botzenhardt explained. However, he considers the criteria, most of which have been adopted from the Pfarrstraße project, to be in order. Group colleague Greim saw things differently. He considers the system to be unfair because higher earners could overtake low earners with additional points, for example for volunteering (see box). FDP city councilor Teichmann had even said that the preference for some professions was at the expense of the poor.

The SPD therefore proposed that 30 percent of the apartments should only be made available to people in the lowest income bracket (a maximum of five percent more than stipulated by law).

However, only Greim himself followed this idea when voting. The problem here is the distribution of the apartments: There are four one-room, twelve two-room, eleven three-room and four four-room apartments, two of which are suitable for wheelchair users.

Greim now wants to bring in a modified proposal.

Tenants with social jobs or volunteer work can score points

In a first draft, it was explained to the members of the main committee what a points system could look like, according to which the city apartments are awarded (for the first time).

The total income is important.

This value is calculated according to the specifications of the law for the promotion of social housing.

The limit for a one-person household is 22,600 euros, for a two-person household 34,500 euros.

8,500 euros are added for each additional person living in the household, and another 2,500 euros for each child.

Sample calculation: The Müller couple has two children and thus an income limit of 56,500 euros (34,500 euros plus two times 8,500 euros plus two times 2,500 euros).

The city of Olching wants to allow some leeway here: This income can be exceeded by up to 50 percent.

In the case of the Müllers, the limit would be 82,250 euros.

The question is now: is this about taxable income or not?

That still needs to be defined.

However, if you earn more, you get fewer income points.

Aspirants with the lowest income (maximum exceeding the income limit of five percent) receive four points, with the highest (50 percent) only one.

If the income is no more than 20 percent, there are three points, and if the income is no more than 35 percent, there are two points.

That also counts: One point for children until they finish school, not just as long as they are of compulsory schooling (this change to the template came from Marina Freudenstein, Green).

The Greens also prevailed that single parents receive two points instead of one.

Maria Hartl (CSU) suggested that people with disabilities should not be given one point across the board.

Those who are more seriously ill receive two points.

In addition, social professions/police/rescue workers get a point – volunteers do the same.

The CSU prevailed that this should be capped in such a way that a volunteer salesperson would not be disadvantaged compared to a police officer who worked on a voluntary basis.

In the event of a tie, the award is at the discretion of the city.

In cases of hardship, you can deviate from the catalogue.

The main committee also voted in favor of Andreas Hörl's (CSU) proposal that the decision on individual cases does not lie solely with administration and finance officer Fritz Botzenhardt.

Botzenhardt also supported this.

Hardship cases should be presented to the Main Committee.

Also interesting: