CC YorkPA 010501

Housing Working Families in York, PA: 

The Center for T H E F R A N K H A W K I N S K E N A N I N S T I T U T E O F PR I V A T E E N T E R P R I S E Community Capitalism Housing Working Families in York, PA By Michael A. Stegman University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill May 30, 2001

Housing and the New Economy: 

Housing and the New Economy “The booming economy lines the pockets of the rich and middle class households, which is absolutely wonderful. Their wealth is nice for them, and plenty trickles down via the taxes they pay and the jobs they create for others. But in one area of the economy, the opposite of trickle down occurs. This perverse exception is the housing market. Because the supply of well located land is more or less fixed, rising prosperity tends to drive up its price, making it harder for non-homeowners with steady incomes to afford it.” George Ladner, jr., Washington post, June 12, 2000.

Housing Casualties of the Booming Economy: 

Housing Casualties of the Booming Economy “For Hospitals, the Emergency is Housing,” The Wall Street Journal 12/15/99. “Workers Trapped at el Minimo,” Los Angeles Times, 3/9/00. “Homeless on $50,000 a Year in Luxuriant Silicon Valley,” The New York Times, 2/20/00. “Climbing House Prices Put Squeeze on Buyers; Economy Jacking Up Demand for Dwellings,” The Houston Chronicle, 10/3/99. Cities Revive, but Where Will the Working Poor Live? The Washington Post, 10/24/99. “Resort Towns Face Ruckus Over ‘Affordable’ Housing, The Wall Street Journal, 11/24/99. ‘HUD Aid No Match for Soaring Rents, Fewer Apartments, The Washington Post, 10/12/99.

Defining Critical Housing Needs: 

Defining Critical Housing Needs Critical Housing Needs –Paying more than half of family income for housing and/or living in severely inadequate housing.

13.8 Million Households (14%) Have Critical Housing Needs, U.S., 1999(000s’): 

13.8 Million Households (14%) Have Critical Housing Needs, U.S., 1999 (000s’) *Marginally employed include families with earnings from wages of $2,675 - $10,700, (e.g. between on-quarter and one, full-time minimum wage equivalent. **Moderate income are families whose total income is between $10,700 and 120 percent of area median income, and where earnings account for at least half the family’s total income. Source: 1999 American Housing Survey

Percent of All Households With Critical Housing Needs,Selected Metropolitan Areas, U.S., 1998: 

Percent of All Households With Critical Housing Needs, Selected Metropolitan Areas, U.S., 1998 *Los Angeles are for 1997. Los Angeles CMSA includes **New York are for 1997. New York CMSA includes Source: 1998 American Housing Survey metropolitan files and authors’ calculations

Working Families are Most at Risk: 

Working Families are Most at Risk The critical housing needs of moderate income working families--households with incomes of $10,700-120% of area median—are rising faster than any other population group.

More than 3.7 million Moderate-Income Working Families Have Critical Housing Needs, U.S., 1999 : 

More than 3.7 million Moderate-Income Working Families Have Critical Housing Needs, U.S., 1999 Source: 1999 American Housing Survey and authors’ calculations

Working Families with Critical Needs are Growing While Others are Stable or Declining, U.S., 1997 and 1999(000’s): 

Working Families with Critical Needs are Growing While Others are Stable or Declining, U.S., 1997 and 1999 (000’s)

Moderate Income Working Families with Critical Housing Needs Vary Widely,Selected Metropolitan Areas, U.S. 1998: 

Moderate Income Working Families with Critical Housing Needs Vary Widely, Selected Metropolitan Areas, U.S. 1998 Source: 1998 American Housing Survey metropolitan files and authors’ calculations

Critical Housing Needs are Increasing for Moderate Income Working Renters and Owners, U.S., 1995, 1997 & 1999: 

Critical Housing Needs are Increasing for Moderate Income Working Renters and Owners, U.S., 1995, 1997 & 1999

Critical Housing Needs Have Also Moved to the Suburbs U.S., 1997 & 1999: 

Critical Housing Needs Have Also Moved to the Suburbs U.S., 1997 & 1999

Critical Housing Needs of Working Families are More Extreme on Both Coasts, U.S., 1997 &1999: 

Critical Housing Needs of Working Families are More Extreme on Both Coasts, U.S., 1997 &1999

Housing & the New Economy:Critical Housing Needs in Selected Metro Areas by High Tech Job Growth (1992-97), U.S., 1999: 

Housing & the New Economy: Critical Housing Needs in Selected Metro Areas by High Tech Job Growth (1992-97), U.S., 1999

Severe Housing Cost Burdens of Essential Community Workers, U.S., 1993 and 1996: 

Severe Housing Cost Burdens of Essential Community Workers, U.S., 1993 and 1996

The Rental Stock has Not Kept Pace with Household GrowthThe Size of the Occupied Housing Stock, U.S., 1989-2000(000’s): 

The Rental Stock has Not Kept Pace with Household Growth The Size of the Occupied Housing Stock, U.S., 1989-2000 (000’s)

There has Also Been a Precipitous Decline in the Number of Public Housing and Other Federally-Assisted “Hard Units” FY 1977-2001: 

There has Also Been a Precipitous Decline in the Number of Public Housing and Other Federally-Assisted “Hard Units” FY 1977-2001

Shallow Subsidy Tax Credit Units are Replacing Project-Based, Deep Subsidy Units, Net Change in Project-Based Inventory, U.S. Selected Years: 

Shallow Subsidy Tax Credit Units are Replacing Project-Based, Deep Subsidy Units, Net Change in Project-Based Inventory, U.S. Selected Years

“New Economy” and Strict Building Codes Increase the Rate of Critical Housing Needs, Selected MSAs, U.S., 1999: 

“New Economy” and Strict Building Codes Increase the Rate of Critical Housing Needs, Selected MSAs, U.S., 1999

Affordable Housing Has Fallen Off the Federal Radar Screen: 

Affordable Housing Has Fallen Off the Federal Radar Screen Congress increased per capita LIHTC and MRB allocations….but places like York need more HOME funds. Need more demand-side assistance. The number of severely cost-burdened renters increased by 269,000 (29%) between 1997 and 1999, but 57% of all moderate income working families with severe cost burdens are homeowners! The income limits of some federal housing programs should probably be raised to recognize the fact that critical housing problems are moving up the income ladder. It is also time for the federal government to get back into the production business with a new targeted rental construction initiative. Create an individual development account (IDA) savings incentive program for working families. Capitalize State and Local Housing Trust Funds

Toward a New Federal Housing Policy: 

Toward a New Federal Housing Policy For the past 20 years, federal housing policy has been closely linked to issues of poverty and welfare dependency. While the non-working poor have by far the highest incidence of housing needs, millions of working families who are not poor are also experiencing growing housing stress.

Reinvent the Affordable Housing Conversation--Change the Rhetoric: 

Reinvent the Affordable Housing Conversation--Change the Rhetoric We need to make affordable housing part of the working families agenda. At the same time that low income housing has fallen out of favor, a “quiet revolution” has taken place in national family policy, based upon the simple idea that “if you work, you shouldn’t be poor.” From 1984 to 1999, annual federal expenditures on low-income families not on welfare grew from $6 billion to $52 billion—led by the Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC). Why not: “If you work hard and play by the rules, you should be able to find a decent place to live at an affordable cost?”

Well-Designed, Well-Managed Affordable Housing Does Not Reduce Property Values: 

Well-Designed, Well-Managed Affordable Housing Does Not Reduce Property Values Virtually all independent studies support the conclusion of the York County Impact Study that affordable housing does not harm nearby home values: Family Housing Fund (2000) A Study of the Relationship Between Affordable Family Rental Housing and Home Values in the Twin Cities: Final Report. Aidala, A., Darden, J.T. & Souza Briggs, X, (1999) In the Wake of Desegregation: Early Impacts of Scattered Site Public Housing on Neighborhoods in Yonkers, New York, Journal of the American Planning Association 5, 1. Cha, C., (1996) NIMBY Fears, Community Perception: Analysis of Affordable and Market-Rate Housing Development in Oakland, CA, Department of City and Regional Planning of the University of California. Coopers & Lybrand, (1994) Habitat for Humanity South Ranch 2 Community Impact Study. Cumming, P.M., & Landis, J.D. (1993) Relations Between Affordable Housing Development and Property Value, Berkeley, Institute for Urban and Regional Development, Working Paper 599.

Smart Growth, Not No Growth: 

Smart Growth, Not No Growth Smart growth seeks to accomplish three objectives: Curb sprawling development patterns Promote reinvestment in older cities, suburbs and towns Provide greater choice than traditional suburban development of strip malls, office parks, and auto-dependent neighborhoods Smart growth is different from just fighting sprawl, which usually involves saying “no” to projects but rarely involves finding a positive alternative. Good development in the right place is part of the solution to metropolitan problems. Local efforts to control urban sprawl and limit growth could aggravate the housing problem of working families. Affordable housing must become an integral element of growth management strategies.

State and Local Housing Policies Should Support Smart Growth: 

State and Local Housing Policies Should Support Smart Growth Make it easier to build housing in older communities—reexamine local zoning rules for downtown areas, as well as commercial and industrial areas in cities and older suburbs; Preserve existing affordable housing Make it easier to rehabilitate older buildings—modernize building codes for rehab; Take maximum advantage of secondary market innovations that create liquidity for CRA portfolio lenders, expand Habitat for Humanity’s capacities, and Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac’s new products for conforming loans. Use the LIHTC to create mixed income communities in distressed urban neighborhoods; Close the downpayment gap with savings incentives like IDAs More affordable Housing needs to be where the jobs are—inclusionary zoning like Montgomery County, MD’s can make a difference. .

For Copy of Slides: 

For Copy of Slides Stegman@email.unc.edu