HomeMy WebLinkAboutSubmittal-Community Development and Housing Committee DocumentSUBMITTED INTO THE
PUBLIC RECORD FOF
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND HOUSING COMMIE EE M P2 17 O N 43-0
US CONFERENCE OF MAYORS
LOW-INCOME HOUSING TAX CREDIT VOLUME INCREASE
AND TAX-EXEMPT PRIVATE ACTIVITY BOND VOLUME CAP INCREASE
WHEREAS, the Low -Income Housing Tax Credit is the primary tool for producing rental housing across the
country; and
WHEREAS, since 1987, more than $3 billion in housing tax credits have been allocated to help finance
more Than 900,000 multifamily housing units for lower -income persons; and
WHEREAS, it is estimated that in 1999 demand for housing tax credits outstripped supply by more than 3 to
1; and
WHEREAS, the Low -Income Housing Tax Credit has lost purchasing power due to remaining at the $1.25
per capita since it was enacted in 1986; and
WHEREAS thousands of units are being removed from the low rent public housing inventory annually
because of their poor physical condition; and
WHEREAS, LIHTC should discourage the concentration of poor families in housing developments, and
instead promote the reviataliL_ation of neighborhoods by providing mixed -income housing opportunities;
and
This program consists of 150 units located in 11 cities in suburban Anoka, Hennepin and
Ramsey Counties. The Family Afford -able Housing Program gives families with low
incomes the opportunity to live in neigh-borhoods outside areas with high levels of poverty.
The units are leased to families on the Minneapolis Public Housing Authority and Metro
HRA waiting lists. At least 40% of the units must be leased to households with incomes of
30% of area median income or less; the remainder are leased to house -holds with incomes
of 80% of median or less.
Minnesota Metropolitan Council 3/06
NEW JERSEY
Special Master Objects to Concentration of Affordable Housing Units
If anyone doubted the future of New Jersey's "fair share" affordable housing law, news
from the Garden State in December confirms that the law has teeth, at least in a court -
monitored housing development in Cherry Hill. Philip Caton, appointed as special master
by the Superior Court to oversee the case, advised the court that a proposal for
development of new housing on the former Garden State Park racetrack should be
reconsidered because it would have concentrated 76 units of low-cost housing (affordable
to people with incomes as low as $30,000fyear) in just three buildings, leaving them
segregated from market -rate units in the development.
Underlining the importance of full integration of low income people under the state's
+ Page 4
Cot - C,iQo1L4MUI
vnitGt.i- Comm')
Co one
'Ve 4oprecint and Ho vi tn3
i-
Docu, e
"Mount Laurel" doctrine —named after a lawsuit in the 1970s that spurred the imposition
of a fair share obligation in every municipality in the state —Mr. Caton, who has overseen
Cherry Hill's compliance with the state law since the early 1990s, told the court that
"[t]he concentration of affordable housing in the mined -use building is undesirable.
Those buildings should be integrated affordable and market rate. Affordable housing
should not comprise more than 25% in any building." He pointed out that such
concentration risked both stigmatizing the affordable units and their residents, and having
an overall negative effect on the community. 2003
Mission 6oaLs
MISSION STATEMENT:
To assist San Jose's rawer- and moderate -income families by increasing, preserving, and improving housing that is
affordable and livable, and to the extent possible, ensuring long-term affordability and contributing to neighborhood
revitalization.
CORE SERVICES:
The Department of Housing's core services as defined through the City's Investing In Results (IIR) initiative are to:
• Increase the affordable housing supply.
• Maintain the existing affordable housing supply.
• Provide services to homeless and at -risk populations.
HOUSING GOALS:
The Mayor's Task Force on Housing's Final Report outlined the following housing policy goals:
• Increase the supply of affordable housing, preserve the housing stock, and reduce the cost of developing
affordable housing.
• Utilize available resources to address priority needs for housing.
• Increase the funds available for the preservation and development of affordable housing.
• Disperse low-income housing throughout the City, to avoid concentration of low-income households and to
encourage racial and economic integration.
• Encourage greater involvement of the public and private sector to increase and preserve the stockof affordable
housing in San Jose.
City of San Jose, California, Housing Task Force - 2003
Rebuilding New Orleans
Housing and Neighborhood Planning
All Congregations Together fTflTED INTO THE
# Page 5
PUBLIC RECORD FOR
!TEMzI7 ON zoi.
Louisiana Intertaiths Together
PICO National Network
On October 4, 2005 Louisiana interfaith Together (PICO LIFT) and its six Louisiana
federations gathered 1,000 displaced and host families in Baton Rouge to launch a
Covenant to Rebuild Louisiana. Hundreds of congregations and local, state and
federal officials have signed on to the. Covenant, which is built around the right of
families to return to their homes and communities. Since October PICO LIFT and All
Congregations Together (ACT) have listened to the concerns and ideas of more than
4,000 displaced families, including surveys of 1,400 New Orleans families during
February. On March 5 and March 12 clusters of ACT congregations from across New
Orleans representing every planning area and city council district held six community
meetings attended by more than 1,500 people. PICO LIFT`s six Louisiana federations
have also solicited input from hundreds of families living in other parts of the state.
Affordable Housing
Flooding destroyed 128,000 private homes and 133,000 rental units. Yet more than
six months after Katrina families have yet to receive a penny in federal aid to help
rebuild their homes. Without clear information about what will happen to their
communities or what resources will be available to rebuild, families have been left to
their own devices. Speculators have already started to buy up homes, preying on
desperation and confusion. The majority of displaced families who rented face great
obstacles in returning home. Rents for apartments in the New Orleans area have
doubled and tripled. Families being evicted from hotels in New Orleans are being
sent back to homeless shelters, located in some cases hundreds of miles away from
the city. New Orleans faces an affordable housing crisis. Yet at a February 15, 2006
hearing before the Senate Banking Committee, HUD Secretary Alphonse Jackson said
that he was not aware of a rental shortage in New Orleans. To bring families back
to New Orleans city, state and federal government needs to work much more quickly
with families and with private and non-profit developers to renovate and rebuild
large quantities of affordable housing.
ACT', PICO LIFT and PICO National Network are, asking Congress to
immediately pass $4.2 billion in supplemental community development: funding to
help homeowners rebuild their homes and fund renovation and new construction of
rental and ownership housing for families that were renters pre -Katrina.
ACT, PICO LIFT and PICO National Network are asking Congress to remove
the Stafford Act section 404 restrictions from the $4.2 billion so that local and state
government have the flexibility to use money to rehabilitate homes and safely
redevelop communities as needed.
ACT, PICO LIFT and PICO National Network are asking MUD and FEMA to
work together to reopen federally subsidized housing, including HUD/NANO
apartments, and FHA owned properties, in New Orleans to meet a growing crisis of
affordable housing in the region.
ACT, PICO LIFT and PICO National Network are asking HUD and FEMA to
provide a list of federally -subsidized housing units in the New Orleans region,
including the condition of these units and the timeline for bringing them online.
ACT, PICO LIFT and PICO National Network are asking HUD and FEMA to
develop creative strategies for transferring federally owned properties for
redevelopment by non-profit community development organizations.
ACT and PICO LIFT are asking the State of Louisiana to include enough
resources in the state's Community Development Block Grant request to HUD to
build and renovate affordable homeownership and rental housing for the majority of
+ Page 6
Submitted into the public
recorgl in connection with
item rz (1 on 12- -07
Prisdiia A. Thompsaf
City Cleric,
low and moderate -income displaced families who did not own property in New
Orleans, but still want to return to the city.
ACT and PICO LIFT are asking the State of Louisiana to assure that as part of
block grant request there is funding set aside to enable non-profit developers to
acquire and renovate abandoned and damaged housing for ownership and rental for
displaced families.
ACT and PICO LIFT are asking the State of Louisiana to adopt a 20/20
affordable housing policy that set asides 20 percent of units for low-income families
and 20 percent for low to moderate -income families for all large-scale housing
construction that receives public subsidy for either land acquisition or development.
ACT and PICO LIFT are asking the State of Louisiana to assure that pre -Katrina
renters and homeowners who are not able to rebuild their homes receive first priority
for new affordable housing, including creating pathways for homeownership.
ACT and PICO LIFT are asking the State of Louisiana to convene state
legislative leaders,, FEMA. officials, local officials, the State Insurance Commissioner
and private insurance companies to address the need for affordable insurance
products for families that want to rebuild in Louisiana.
ACT and PICO LIFT are asking the State of Louisiana to make a formal request
that HUD repair and return to use publicly subsidized housing units in the New
Orleans region.
Neighborhood Planning
Each Sunday thousands of families travel from Baton Rouge„ Shreveport, Houston
and across the South to New Orleans to work on their homes and worship together.
A January survey by the City of New Orleans found that the population of the New
Orleans that flooded was down from :350,000 to 50,000, but that the number of
people in the once -flooded areas doubled or more on weekend days. Rising church
attendance and the influx of residents point to the will that families have to return
and rebuild. Over the past month 1,500 people participated in six neighborhood
meetings organized by ACT across New Orleans. Large numbers of people have also
been attending neighborhood civic meetings to voice their needs and intent to
return. ACT will be working over the next six months in six clusters to help families
and congregations have a real say in how our communities are rebuilt, including
4
shaping plans for communities that provide adequate and mixed -income affordable
housing and high quality health, education and recreation opportunities.
ACT is asking the Bring Back New Orleans Commission Urban Planners to
assure that ACT member -congregations have representation on the planning teams
in the planning districts where we are leading rebuilding campaigns.
ACT is asking the Bring Back New Orleans Commission Urban Planners to
send planning staff to attend planning days organized by ACT member -congregations
in each of our six clusters to solicit input and ideas from residents.
ACT is asking the Bring Back New Orleans Commission Urban Planners to
make mixed -income and affordable housing (including ownership and rental housing)
a necessary part of each neighborhood plan and of the citywide plan to avoid
concentration of poverty and to create housing opportunities for all families that
want to return.
ACT is asking the Mayor and City Council to use their oversight authority over
the planning process to assure that no neighborhoods are unfairly written off for
redevelopment and that families from all areas of the city are able to have a voice in
the final plan.
+ Page 7
Submitted into the public
record in connection with
item Z it an 1 __.
Prisdila A. ThOrflpSOP
Clerk
ACT is asking the City of New Orleans to adopt a policy that requires mixedincome
and affordable housing (including ownership and rental housing) as part of
neighborhood plans and the citywide plan to avoid concentration of poverty and to
create the maximum possible housing opportunities for ail families that want to
return.
National Academy of Science - 2006 Research grant award to:
Dr. Lincoln Quillian University of Wisconsin - Madison Sources of the Spatial Concentration of Poverty in
U.S. Metropolitan Areas Following the work of Wilson (1987), a major concern in both social science and policy
circles has been the spatial concentration of low-income households. Research has shown that neighborhoods
with high rates of concentrated poverty tend to expenence problems like high rags of crime and poor public
schools (Krivo and Petersen 1996). The effect of subsidized housing policies on the spatial distribution of poverty
has become a major concern in discussions of housing policy (Turner 1998). My proposed research while an
Urban Scholars fellow awns to better understand the caws of concentrated poverty in American cities. My
project WO Focus an understanding two factors that are likely related to spatially concentrated poverty:
metropolitan transportation systems and subsidized housing policies. These factors have not been included in the
most complete prior studies of the causes of metropolitan poverty concentration (Massey and Eggers 1990,.
Jargowsky 1997). There is good reason to believe that both systems of metropolitan transportation and
subsidized housing policies are important to understanding poverty concentration. Because low-income families
often do not own cars, they are constrained to live within urban zones with good access to public transportation.
The nature and extent of available public transportation then influences the resulting spatial distribution of low-
income households. Likewise, several features of subsidized housing policy tend to concentrate low-income
households together, contributing to high rates of poverty in neighborhoods with clusters of subsidized
households (Massey and Kanaiaupuni 1993, Newman and Schnare 1997). A better understanding of how these
factors influence poverty concentration is irnportant for designing public transit and housing subsidy programs
that minimize poverty concentration. The extent and means by which these factors contribute to the
concentration of poverty will be assessed through metropolitan -level regression analyses. The first stage of the
study will create metropolitan -level measures of neighborhood poverty concentration using census tract data for
about 50 metropolitan areas in the 1990 and 2000 censuses. The second stage will combine census data, data
from the A Picture of Subsidized Households dataset (HUD 1998), and data from the National Transit Database
(Federal Transit Administration 2000) to estimate metropolitan -level models of factors that contribute to urban
poverty concentration. The study will also include controls for demographic and economic factors, and examine
how urban charactenstics such as racial segregation may condibon the effects of public transportation systems
and housing policy on poverty concentration,
Senate Report 109-109 - TRANSPORTATION, TREASURY, THE
JUDICIARY, HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT, AND RELATED
AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS BILL, 2006
COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION
The Committee recommends an appropriation of $15,636,064,000 for fiscal
year 2006, including $4,200,000,000 as an advance appropriation to be
made available on October 1, 2006. These funds are $870,144,000 above the
fiscal year 2005 level. Of these amounts, the Committee has allocated
$14,089,756,000 for the renewal of all expiring section 8 contracts;
$192,000,000 for section 8 preservation contracts through tenant
protections; $48,000,000 for family self-sufficiency contracts;
$1,295,408,000 for administrative fees; $5,900,000 for transfer to the
Working Capital Fund; and $5,000,000 for transfer to the Affordable Housing
and Economic Development.
4 Page 8
Submitted Into the public
record in connection
item E.ZILOn?- - ° 1
Pala A. Thompson
This account provides funding for section 8 tenant -based housing programs
based on a budget -based approach that seeks to ensure funding for vouchers
in use while permitting public housing agencies [PHAs] to fund vouchers up
to the authorized level. This account funds housing for over 2 million families.
Moreover, this level of funding will ensure that PHAs have adequate funds for
all vouchers -in -use. The Committee expects that many PHAs will be able to
pay the cost of all vouchers up to the legal authorized level.
In addition, the account funds incremental vouchers to assist non -elderly
disabled families, vouchers for tenants that live in projects where the owner
of the project has decided to opt -out of the section 8 project -based program,
or for the replacement of other units lost from the assisted housing
inventory, The Committee remains concerned over the increased costs of
section 8 rents over the last few years and what that could mean to this
program in the future. The Committee believes lax administration has
resulted in the spiraling costs of this program and the unacceptably high
costs of rents for low-income housing.
The Committee is optimistic that the budget -based approach will ensure a
more rigorous rent policy and fiscally responsible approach. As a result, the
Committee directs HUD to report semi-annually on rent increases for
affordable, low-income housing throughout the Nation, including the cost to
the government due to its failure to promote or implement a policy for
developing low-income housing, especially in tight rental housing markets.
The Committee also directs HUD to report no later than June 30, 2006 on the
effectiveness of this budget -based approach to vouchers, including the extent
to which available housing units are lost because of new cost adjustments as
well as the impact of this policy on extremely low-income families (those at
or below 30 percent of median income for an area).
The Committee has also broadened the base for determining the funding for
section 8 vouchers for each PHA by eliminating the 3-month May through
July snapshot of voucher costs and replacing it with the most recent 12-
month period that provides accurate and reliable data. The legislation also
includes up to $45,000,000 for HUD to award funds to PHAs that were
unfairly disadvantaged by the 3-month snapshot and from excessive costs
due to portability over the last year. This funding should eliminate the need
for any central fund.
The Committee includes $192,000,000 for tenant protection assistance. This
represents some $183,000,000 less than the budget request is some
$9,304,000 more than the fiscal year 2005 level. The administration has
assumed the full implementation of a demolition rule for ' obsolete' public
housing. This rule will not be implemented in time to obligate these funds,
especially since HOPE VI remains a viable option for this housing. This
funding does include up to $12,000,000 for section 8 assistance to cover the
cost of judgments and settlement agreements.
+ Page 9
Submitted Into the public
record in item � cnct;on � � - °
Priscilla A. Thompson
City Clerk
The Committee also remains concerned that HUD is not committed to
maintaining section 8 project -based housing and may be encouraging owners
to opt out of the program. This would be a tremendous mistake since
affordable housing needs are growing while the stock of affordable low-
income housing is shrinking. HUD is directed to report no later than June 30,
2006 on the status of HUD's efforts to retain section 8 project -based housing,
including a 5-year analysis of units lost and retained, by year, State, and
locality. HUD is also directed to provide an analysis of all efforts made by
HUD to preserve low-income section 8 units.. The Committee also directs GAO
to assess HUD's efforts and success in preserving HUD -assisted Iow-income
housing, especially section 8 project -based housing, including
recommendations on how better to preserve this housing. This report shall
be submitted to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations no
later than July 15, 2006.
The Committee recommends $1,295,408,000 for administrative fees for
PHAs. These funds are to be allocated on a pro-rata share based on the fiscal
year 2005 allocation. These funds are intended to ensure the success of the
section 8 voucher program, but can be used to provide related low-income
housing, including development costs.
The Committee provides $48,000,000 for Family Self -Sufficiency coordinators
[FSS]. These funds are designed to promote self-sufficiency by moving from
welfare to work. The Department was unable to justify its request for
$55,000,000. Therefore, the Committee directs HUD to provide an
assessment on the use of FSS funds over the last 5 years and projected
future needs. The Committee also directs the HUD Inspector General to
assess the use of FSS funds over the last 5 years.
The Committee includes $5,000,000 to transfer to the Affordable Housing
and Economic Development Technical Assistance Board.
The administration continues to urge the adoption of its block grant proposal
and asserts that PHAs will have the needed flexibility to meet local needs and
conditions and to respond to local rental costs in a more responsible manner.
However, the proposal fails for, among other things, the following reasons:
(1) the proposed funding is inadequate to support current section 8
utilization; and (2) the proposal would eliminate the current section 8
requirement that three-quarter of all vouchers go to extremely Iow-income
families who are often the elderly, disabled and those most in need of
affordable housing.
These flaws in the section 8, proposal could result in very low and extremely
Iow-income families and households having to live in substandard housing at
unsustainable rents or else become homeless which would be a greater
burden and cost on the social safety net than the current use of vouchers. In
addition, the proposal could result in PHAs lowering the payment standard for
housing or increasing the rent burden on families. In either case the result
Submitted Into the public
record in connecion with
+ Page 10 item FZ- f oil 12.- 1. r Oni
Priscilla A. Thampsyn
City Cleck
could be a disaster and a retreat on a long-term Federal commitment
designed to eliminate the concentration of low-income familie$ in the worst
and poorest communities.
Enforce fair -share housing requirements. By monitoring
cities to make sure they implement their
general plans with respect to providing their fair
share of the region's low-income housing, California
would avoid concentration of affordable
housing and encourage locational choice. The state
could also provide incentives to cities that meet
their requirements. Appropriate incentives might
include levying, fair -share housing fees on housing
sales or building permits, or requiring compliance
with housing -element law, as a condition for receiving
transportation and infrastructure fiends
Affordable Housing, Opportunities and Constraints for Non-profit developers
University of California / Berkeley — Policy research center, 3/2001
Tearing Down Cabrini-Green
„ .. rti a . fie Repta
July 23, 2003
+ Page 11
Work?
Submitted Into the ,public
record in connection
with
01
item ..13---cThompson
Priscilla A. Thompson
Clerk
Chicago's North Town Village represents one of the
most daring concepts in public housing today. (CBS)
ro
QUOTE
"We used to go over to people's houses and
spend the night. Now they'd rather come home. It's the largest demolition of public housing in the nation's
And I like that" history, and it will uproot some 40,000 people - many of
former CANini-Green tenant Sherry Wade. who moved to North whom have never lived anywhere else but in public housing.
Town Wage with her two children
(CBS) They're finally tearing down Cabrini-Green. For
decades, the red and white tenements near downtown
Chicago have been a blot on the skyline — the nation's most
infamous public housing project, synonymous with gangs,
drugs, misery and murder.
But Cabrini-Green is just the beginning. As Coma$pondent
Vicki Mabrey first reported last winter, the plan is to replace
all of Chicago's projects with beautiful new "mixed -income
developments rich and poor living side by side.
So what do you get when you take the nrwntry`s most
disadvantaged families, add in some young professionals,
and build them a brand new neighborhood?
Chicago is finding out.
All over Chicago, they're tearing down the cinderblock
dinosaurs known simply as "the projects"
They have been a disaster --with generations of children
raised in the squalor. But by the end of 2009, all 53 of
Chicago's public housing high-rises will be gone.
"I'd rather sleep on a cardboard box, in the streets, rather
than keep going through what I was going through," says Larry Sargent.
Sargent grew up in Cabrini-Green, but when he took on sole custody of his baby son, he knew he had to break the
cycle and get out.
However, he never imagined that 'out" might mean a brand-new, $70 million development just 100 yards from
Cabrini-Green.
It's called North Town Village and consists of 261 condos and town homes that represent one of the most daring
concepts in public housing today.
A total of 79 families will have '•1,e chance to move out of Cabrini-Green and move in there - next to someone who
bought one of the brand-nev,• . o. nes at market. rate. A three -bedroom, top -of -the -line town home like that costs
nearly $500,000. But an i unit next door could be reserved for a Cabrini-Green family, whose rent is
subsidized by the govemi
The project started two years ago with a complex mix of public and private funding. The man an the ground was
Peter Holsten, an idealistic developer selling this vision of gentrification with a twist.
''So here's someone coming and buying a $500,000 town home, and we're telling him in the sales trailer — or her that the the town home next to you, which is no different than yours, is gonna have a Cabrini-Green family in it," says
Holsten. "And these people are not turning away. They're buying them."
Mark and Amanda Tomlinson, young professionals, stopped by the sales trailer the day it opened.
"I told her just for kicks, 'Bring the checkbook,"" says Mark Tomlinson."And it was just a feeding frenzy in there."
The Tomlinsons bought a three -bedroom town house on the spot. Incredibly, all the units sold before they were
even built.
But why would anyone invest in a neighborhood like this? Because Cabrini-Green, and now North Town Village,
are just a mile away from Chicago's ritziest strip.
Page 12
Submitted Into the public
recorYin connection with
item Z i 1 on
Priscilla A. Thompson
City Clerk
'There's tons of shops, great stores, restaurants," says Amanda Tomlinson.
"You go two blocks one way, you're in public housing," adds her husband, Mark. "You go two becks the other way,
you're at Banana Republic."
Finding buyers was easy. The hard sell was convincing public housing residents to apply, which Holsten discovered
when he made his pitch to a skeptical crowd at a town hall meeting at Cabdni-Green.
Cabrini residents, already angry about being pushed out, thought Holsten's offer sounded too good to be true.
'These people were amazed," says Holsten. 'They're waiting to get taken advantage of. They're waiting to get
screwed. They're waiting for something to go wrong."
But there was no catch, Holsten says. 'The catch is. follow the building rules and enjoy yourself in a wonderful
brand-new home."
But for many coming from the chaos of Cabrini-Green, the building rules are barrier enough. On top of the obvious -
no drugs, no loitering, no loud music - there is perhaps the hardest expectation of all: that they fit in with their
wealthy neighbors.
For Sargent, it seemed overwhelming. To get into North Town Village, he and the other applicants would have to
pass a screening process so tough that many people simply dropped out. There's a home inspection, a criminal
background check, and mandatory drug tests.
Wrth that in mind, you might think Sargent's past would disqualify him from landing a spot at the new development.
He spent his youth trying to escape all that's wrona with Cabrini-Green, joining the Army at 17 to get away. But after
six years, he ended up right back where he started, and spent the last 15 years struggling with drug addiction.
But when North Town Village held its first orientation meeting, Sargent was one of the first to arrive.
At the tirne, Candice Howell was a vice president at Holsten's development company, in charge of the screening
process.
'We're looking for things, red flags, like criminal behavior against property, criminal behavior against people," she
says. "Guns, drugs, convictions. Because were not miracle workers."
Howell made it clear from Day One that North Town Village would be nothing like Cabrini-Green. And she literally
gave lessons to prospective tenants on how to get along there.
"You get good neighbor training - how do I go out and be a good neighbor," says Howell.
They also required seminars that all families had to attend before moving in. "Every household has to go through
these orientations, and were gonna have a bunch of social events. and we're going to push it," says Hofsten.
"Push, push, push the concept of building a community."
Sheri Wade was desperate for a safer community. A run of bad luck landed her at Cabrini-Green eight years ago.
And for her two youngest children — Travis, 12; and Jamilla, 9 — the projects have been a prison. In fact, Wade says,
she had to keep them indoors in order to keep them safe.
0 MMfI, CBS Worldv,Mde I'm. Al Rights Reserved.
+ Page 13
Submitted into the pub€ic
record in connection with
item 172-, ,on _L�. (3 - a-)
prisdi4a A. Thompson