Category: Inclusionary Housing

  • The Most Interesting Things from Thursday’s Housing Forum at City Hall

    The Most Interesting Things from Thursday’s Housing Forum at City Hall

    From The Stranger

    Posted by on Mon, Feb 17, 2014 at 4:23 PM

    shutterstock_87467168.jpg

    Last week, Dominic urged you to attend a forum organized by the city council around affordable housing in Seattle. Why did he want you to go hang out at City Hall and watch PowerPoints? Because the affordability of housing, and how to better achieve it, is one of the most hotly debated topics in the city.And you know why: Because if you’re a renter, or a prospective home-buyer, and you make less than the median income (around $60,000 a year for a single-person household), you may have noticed recently that shelter is expensive as all hell, and only getting expensiver.

    But the things that really stood out most in my mind from the housing forum were not part of any PowerPoint. They were a couple of offhand comments by a consultant, Rick Jacobus:

    • First, he mentioned that data shows that mixed-income neighborhoods are good for everyone—both the higher- and lower-income people who live in them. Which is an important reminder for people who keep arguing that the only solution is to just have developers keep building whatever and wherever they want, without much restriction, and let the market take care of it—meaning let the centrally located, amenity-filled neighborhoods with expensive land prices house the rich, while the poor and middle-class are pushed out into outlying, less-accessible, transit-starved neighborhoods where land prices are cheap.

    I have a message for y’all market-solutions-only-forever people: Your city sounds terrible.

    • Second, someone asked Jacobus about the inherent conflict between affordable housing requirements and density. If you’re not a housing/land-use nerd, this is basically a fight between well-intentioned density activists, who say that adding more housing will drive prices down (they sometimes sound just like the market-will-solve-everything people I mentioned above), and well-intentioned affordable-housing activists, who say you should straight-up require developers to build some moderately-priced housing while they’re also building fancy-schmancy units for the rich. He answered carefully, saying that while studying Seattle’s housing issues, he heard that argument a lot. But, he continued, you don’t hear that argument anywhere else. In other cities, he said, people who fight for affordable housing requirements and people who fight for density are on the same side, and the developers use the fact that they’ll be paying for affordable housing as a way to sell density to wary residents.

    Seattle, it would seem that we keep having entirely the wrong conversation here.

    Way wonkier stuff coming soon, but for now, I leave you with one more important thing I learned: Eating a banh mi in the back of a conference room and wearing fleece don’t mix. (Crumbly sandwich + fleece = CRUMB MONSTER.) Hot tip, y’all! Don’t forget.

  • Shelterforce: Cities and CLTs

    Shelterforce: Cities and CLTs

    Download City Hall Steps In Written by Rick Jacobus and Michael Brown. Published By Shelterforce.

    This article from Shelterforce Magazine outlines the growing trend of municipal sponsorship of Community Land Trusts including profiles of new CLTs in Irvine, CA and Chicago.

    Shelterforce.jpg

  • Preservation of Affordable Homeownership

    Preservation of Affordable Homeownership

    Download Preservation of Affordable Homeownership: A Continuum of Strategies Written by Rick Jacobus and Jeff Lubel.
    Published by the Center for Housing Policy of the National Housing Conference.

    chp_se_transwealth_0407_sm.png

    In recognition of the significant benefits of homeownership for families and the communities in which they live, many cities, counties and states have adopted policies that seek to increase residents’ access to affordable homeownership opportunities. This paper examines the range of different policy options that communities have adopted to reduce the cost of homeownership, with a particular focus on the effectiveness of each option in preserving affordable homeownership opportunities over time.

    The focus of this review on the preservation of affordable homeownership grows out of the collective experience of numerous communities around the country with sharply rising home prices over the past five to ten years. As many communities have learned the hard way, homes that they helped make affordable through an initial downpayment grant or other assistance often have become unaffordable when sold to the next family. With the amount of subsidy needed to bring homeownership within reach of working families growing exponentially, communities have struggled with the question of how to ensure that the public’s investments in homeownership keep pace with the market. This review provides an overview of the range of mechanisms that local governments use to ensure that housing funds invested in affordable homeownership today are able to serve additional families into the future. In general, this is accomplished either through resale restrictions that preserve the affordability of specific assisted units or through deferred loans that allow the locality to capture a portion of home price appreciation at the time that assisted units are sold that can then be used to help subsequent buyers purchase homes of their choice.

  • Preserving Affordability in Inclusionary Housing

    Preserving Affordability in Inclusionary Housing Programs

    This half day workshop was offered as part of a training series organized by the Nonprofit Housing Association of Northern California for local housing activists working toward local inclusionary housing ordinances.

    DETAILED AGENDA:

    Goals:
    To give participants an opportunity to discuss and think about the social objectives of affordable homeownership programs and specifically about the tradeoffs between wealth creation and preservation of public subsidy.
    To familiarize participants with a wider range of alternative approaches that balance those interests differently
    To encourage critical thinking about existing programs and to model the kinds of questions that policy makers and program managers might ask to insure that their programs are appropriate to local circumstances.
    To expose participants to techniques for mathematically modeling long-term affordability and the consequences of program design choices.

    Handouts:
    Agenda
    One case study
    Example spreadsheet comparing approaches

    Materials:
    Powerpoint projector and laptop with speakers
    Flipchart and markers
    Sheets of 8.5×11 paper and tape
    Spare pens and blank paper

    Total Time: 3 hours

    1:00 Opening
    OK you just won your campaign and now developers in your community will be building affordable units into every new project. Low-income homebuyers will, at last have some homes within their price range. If you have done your advocacy work well, your program will produce brand new homes that look a lot like the market rate homes that they are built alongside but sell for hundreds of thousands of dollars less than the neighboring homes. What keeps the low-income families that move in from turning right around the next day and selling at market rate and pocketing all of that money? Would that be wrong?

    Audience response about preserving the stock, requiring people to live there for a fixed period, resale restrictions, shared equity, etc.

    Overview of workshop: this is a workshop about “WHY” we have affordable ownership programs. This is a workshop about thinking harder about the goals.

    Who I am:
    I noticed that local ownership programs varied very widely in how they balanced asset building and maintaining affordability. The only common factor was that the program managers were sure that what they were doing was “Fair”. How can we talk about “Fair” without knowing the goals of these programs? To most people what seemed fair was actually just the option that was most familiar. But there are a lot of options and while some may be truly unfair, it seems like there really is not a “most fair” approach. That is bad news because it means we have to do some hard work to balance different interests and clarify our values.

    1:15 Small Group Discussion: 15 Minutes
    Given the costs and subsidies required, and the developer’s goals…

    How should they handle the potential increases in the value of these homes?

    Should the homeowners be allowed to keep all of the increase in price?

    Should they have to return all of the increase to the developer or something in the middle?

    Large Group Discussion: 10 Minutes
    One or two present what they came up with.
    What are some other options?

    1:40 Video – Race the power of an Illusion

    Show a brief excerpt from this PBS video about race in America. The clip presents the story of how homeownership in postwar America functioned as a great wealth generator for white families while, housing market descrimination and federal lending policies meant most African-American families were unable to buy homes and those that did earned little equity.

    Discussion about how home equity can dramatically change people’s lives and the futures for their children.

    2:10 Flash Presentation: Understanding Subsidy Retention – 20 Minutes

    Animated presentation demonstrating the underlying economic differences between different approaches to preserving homeownership subsidy.

    2:30 Continuum of Subsidy Preservation Mechanisms – 15 Minutes
    Full group discussion focused on placing different approaches that participants are familiar with on a continuum between models that allow homeowners to earn unlimited equity and those that preserve public subsidy perfectly.

    Make a large post-it for each option
    – Grants
    – Forgivable Loans
    – Interest Free Deferred loans
    – Deferred Interest Loans
    – Shared Equity Loans
    – Resale Price Restrictions
    — Appraisal Based
    — Indexed
    — Mortgage based

    2:45 Other Factors to consider in program design:
    Every program needs:
    1)A pricing formula, which defines the maximum price at which the housing may be rented or resold; a cap intended to maintain rents and resale prices at an affordable level for some targeted class of low-income or moderate-income persons while providing a modest build up of equity if homeownership is involved;
    2)a legal mechanism by which the pricing formula is contractually imposed on the housing’s current (and future) owners; and
    3)An administrative structure for monitoring and enforcing any restrictions on price (and use) imposed on the housing.

    Some other issues
    Owner Occupancy/Subletting
    Longevity/stability: Do you want people to stay?
    Improvements: Do you want people fixing their homes up?
    Administration – Outsourcing
    Monitoring
    Dealing with law suits
    Marketing resales

    3:00 Detailed Comparison of Two Mechanisms

    Case #1: Shared Equity Loan Agreement
    Small Group Activity: – 15 Minutes
    Handout two legal documents and ask groups to summarize the relevant terms and identify some potential strengths and weaknesses of each approach to preservation of subsidy. Under what circumstances would this approach make sense?

    Full group discussion: – 15 Minutes
    Did all the groups come to the same conclusions?
    Which of these two approaches works better?
    Which preserves affordability best?
    Which generates the most wealth creation?
    Which is easiest to administer?
    Do these approaches work as well under different assumptions about inflation and interest rates?

    3:30 Modeling Long-Term Affordability Under Changing Market Conditions
    (30 Minutes)

    Project at an Excel spreadsheet which compares the several alternative resale price restriction formulas under several different interest rate and price inflation scenarios.

    Download the spreadsheet

    4:00 Adjourn


© Copyright 2012 – 2025 Street Level Advisors LLC  |  All Rights Reserved  |  Powered by WordPress

510.653.2995      Email Us