1:03 PM
Julio Barreto
Lost in the furor of the current economic climate is rental housing. Elected officials have marshaled billions of dollars to assist homeowners, banks, other financial service institutions and are now considering assistance to the auto industry. While all this money is being printed and tossed around, low and moderate income households are the forgotten victims of this housing crisis.
Using its own research and a review of state and local studies and news stories, the National Low Income Housing Coalition (NLIHC) reached the following conclusion about the current foreclosure crisis:
• Multi-unit buildings are a significant share of the foreclosures in some areas potentially displacing many households at once;
• A majority of the displaced by foreclosure are renters who find themselves in more tenuous living arrangements in their new environs;
• A majority of the households seeking foreclosure counseling earn less than 80 percent of area median income;
• High-poverty and socio-economically disadvantaged neighborhoods are where a high concentration of foreclosures are located; and,
• No one appears to be immune to the crisis. Communities of all types are being affected the degree to which is determined by their history, laws, housing stock and population.
With this back drop more than 30 organizations met during the summer and agreed to a policy framework on the future of public housing. Public housing is typically considered the housing of last resort. Yet according to advocates for public housing, those programs have been consistently under funded. Making matters worse, public housing authorities (PHAs) have lists in the tens of thousands of families waiting to be selected for an available public housing unit or to receive a voucher. These lists do not include the thousands of others who can not get on the waiting lists because PHAs closed them knowing they will never be able to meet the demand.
The groups (see list below) which met over the summer represent a broad spectrum of the advocates for affordable housing. Brokered by the Council of Large Public Housing Agencies (CLPHA), the groups reached agreement on five objectives to restore public housing to the point where it can provide affordable housing to those who need it. The objectives are:
• Attract new private and public capital investment to ensure safe, high-quality housing for residents by eliminating the substantial capital backlog and providing for future needs;
• Change the program structure to facilitate adequate and reliable revenues, including offering PHAs the option to transition individual properties to other program models;
• Maintain a commitment to decent, safe housing at rents affordable to the current mix of residents for the long term in communities that advance our nation’s fair housing and civil rights goals;
• Redefine the relationship between the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and PHAs through sensible regulation that achieves both accountability and the flexibility to address local conditions.
• Enable PHAs to expand partnerships with others who share our commitment to serve low-income families, seniors, and persons with disabilities and reframe our mission in ways that attract partners who can provide access to new resources and responsible environmental stewardship, and economic and educational opportunities that enhance choice and the quality of life.
The objectives represent a major step forward in attempting to reach a consensus by groups which at times are on such opposite sides of issues it makes the Hatfield-McCoy feud child’s play. However, there are at least four issues which must be resolved and will test the strength of the coalition.
First, HUD needs to be reorganized. The coalition must agree on how the agency will be reshaped which will determine how programs are structured, funded and implemented. There is a lot of talk about the need to change HUD but how that change occurs will put this coalition to the test.
Second, the discussion is too narrowly focused on public housing. Public housing is a subset of the broader issue – the lack of affordable housing, public and private, for low- and moderate-income households. The National Housing Conference (NHC) and NLIHC have conducted a number of studies which attest to the extent of this problem.
Third, the participants of the group were too narrow. Absent from the discussion were the mayors and community development professionals, and lending institutions to name a few. All of these players need to be at the table to discuss the future of affordable housing and HUD since their opinion will carry a considerable amount of weight.
Fourth, there are substantial disagreement on issues which separate the groups. Resident advocates will campaign strongly for the reestablishment of the public housing one-for-one replacement rule which public housing authorities (PHA) vehemently oppose. This rule requires PHAs to replace every lost unit of public housing with another hard unit. There are some advocates who support the creation of regional housing authorities to address the housing needs of families. PHAs also vehemently oppose this. Without some level of compromise on these and other issues, the spirit of the agreement could unravel quickly.
Organizations signing the Framework for the Future of Public Housing
Abt Associates
American Association of Homes & Services for the Aging
California Housing Partnership Corporation
Cambridge Housing Authority
Center on Budget and Policy Priorities
The Municipal Housing Authority for the City of Yonkers
CityView
Council of Large Public Housing Agencies
Consensus Building Institute
District of Columbia Housing Authority
Enterprise Community Partners
Fannie Mae
Housing Authority Insurance Group
Keene Housing Authority
Housing Authority of the City of Los Angeles
Massachusetts Union of Public Housing Tenants
MIA Consulting
National Association of Housing and Redevelopment Officials
NCB Capital Impact
National Organization of African Americans in Housing
New York City Housing Authority
National Housing Conference
National Housing Law Project
National Low Income Housing Coalition
National Housing Trust
Newark Housing Authority
Oklahoma City Housing Authority
Public Housing Authorities Directors Association
Reno & Cavanaugh
San Diego Housing Commission
US Green Building Council
Urban Institute
Interesting Reads
Housing
Obama Wrote Federal Staffers About His Goals
Workers at Seven Agencies Got Detailed Letters Before Election
By Carol D. Leonnig
The Washington Post
How Hills Tamed HUD
By Bendix Anderson
Affordable Housing Finance
HUD at the Crossroads
By Jerry Ascierto
Housing Finance News
The Foreclosure Fight Gets Streamlined
By Renae Merle
The Washington Post
Beyond the Fat Cats
Bob Herbert
The New York Times
It’s About the Mortgages
The New York Times
A Town Drowns in Debt as Home Values Plunge
By David Streitfeld
The New York Times
Community Development
City Halls call out for help from Obama
'Main Street America' ailing, mayors say in msnbc.com survey
By Bill Dedman
MSNBC.COM
Michael Bloomberg sweetens Willets Pt. deal
By John Lauinger
The New York Daily News
Using its own research and a review of state and local studies and news stories, the National Low Income Housing Coalition (NLIHC) reached the following conclusion about the current foreclosure crisis:
• Multi-unit buildings are a significant share of the foreclosures in some areas potentially displacing many households at once;
• A majority of the displaced by foreclosure are renters who find themselves in more tenuous living arrangements in their new environs;
• A majority of the households seeking foreclosure counseling earn less than 80 percent of area median income;
• High-poverty and socio-economically disadvantaged neighborhoods are where a high concentration of foreclosures are located; and,
• No one appears to be immune to the crisis. Communities of all types are being affected the degree to which is determined by their history, laws, housing stock and population.
With this back drop more than 30 organizations met during the summer and agreed to a policy framework on the future of public housing. Public housing is typically considered the housing of last resort. Yet according to advocates for public housing, those programs have been consistently under funded. Making matters worse, public housing authorities (PHAs) have lists in the tens of thousands of families waiting to be selected for an available public housing unit or to receive a voucher. These lists do not include the thousands of others who can not get on the waiting lists because PHAs closed them knowing they will never be able to meet the demand.
The groups (see list below) which met over the summer represent a broad spectrum of the advocates for affordable housing. Brokered by the Council of Large Public Housing Agencies (CLPHA), the groups reached agreement on five objectives to restore public housing to the point where it can provide affordable housing to those who need it. The objectives are:
• Attract new private and public capital investment to ensure safe, high-quality housing for residents by eliminating the substantial capital backlog and providing for future needs;
• Change the program structure to facilitate adequate and reliable revenues, including offering PHAs the option to transition individual properties to other program models;
• Maintain a commitment to decent, safe housing at rents affordable to the current mix of residents for the long term in communities that advance our nation’s fair housing and civil rights goals;
• Redefine the relationship between the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and PHAs through sensible regulation that achieves both accountability and the flexibility to address local conditions.
• Enable PHAs to expand partnerships with others who share our commitment to serve low-income families, seniors, and persons with disabilities and reframe our mission in ways that attract partners who can provide access to new resources and responsible environmental stewardship, and economic and educational opportunities that enhance choice and the quality of life.
The objectives represent a major step forward in attempting to reach a consensus by groups which at times are on such opposite sides of issues it makes the Hatfield-McCoy feud child’s play. However, there are at least four issues which must be resolved and will test the strength of the coalition.
First, HUD needs to be reorganized. The coalition must agree on how the agency will be reshaped which will determine how programs are structured, funded and implemented. There is a lot of talk about the need to change HUD but how that change occurs will put this coalition to the test.
Second, the discussion is too narrowly focused on public housing. Public housing is a subset of the broader issue – the lack of affordable housing, public and private, for low- and moderate-income households. The National Housing Conference (NHC) and NLIHC have conducted a number of studies which attest to the extent of this problem.
Third, the participants of the group were too narrow. Absent from the discussion were the mayors and community development professionals, and lending institutions to name a few. All of these players need to be at the table to discuss the future of affordable housing and HUD since their opinion will carry a considerable amount of weight.
Fourth, there are substantial disagreement on issues which separate the groups. Resident advocates will campaign strongly for the reestablishment of the public housing one-for-one replacement rule which public housing authorities (PHA) vehemently oppose. This rule requires PHAs to replace every lost unit of public housing with another hard unit. There are some advocates who support the creation of regional housing authorities to address the housing needs of families. PHAs also vehemently oppose this. Without some level of compromise on these and other issues, the spirit of the agreement could unravel quickly.
Organizations signing the Framework for the Future of Public Housing
Abt Associates
American Association of Homes & Services for the Aging
California Housing Partnership Corporation
Cambridge Housing Authority
Center on Budget and Policy Priorities
The Municipal Housing Authority for the City of Yonkers
CityView
Council of Large Public Housing Agencies
Consensus Building Institute
District of Columbia Housing Authority
Enterprise Community Partners
Fannie Mae
Housing Authority Insurance Group
Keene Housing Authority
Housing Authority of the City of Los Angeles
Massachusetts Union of Public Housing Tenants
MIA Consulting
National Association of Housing and Redevelopment Officials
NCB Capital Impact
National Organization of African Americans in Housing
New York City Housing Authority
National Housing Conference
National Housing Law Project
National Low Income Housing Coalition
National Housing Trust
Newark Housing Authority
Oklahoma City Housing Authority
Public Housing Authorities Directors Association
Reno & Cavanaugh
San Diego Housing Commission
US Green Building Council
Urban Institute
Interesting Reads
Housing
Obama Wrote Federal Staffers About His Goals
Workers at Seven Agencies Got Detailed Letters Before Election
By Carol D. Leonnig
The Washington Post
How Hills Tamed HUD
By Bendix Anderson
Affordable Housing Finance
HUD at the Crossroads
By Jerry Ascierto
Housing Finance News
The Foreclosure Fight Gets Streamlined
By Renae Merle
The Washington Post
Beyond the Fat Cats
Bob Herbert
The New York Times
It’s About the Mortgages
The New York Times
A Town Drowns in Debt as Home Values Plunge
By David Streitfeld
The New York Times
Community Development
City Halls call out for help from Obama
'Main Street America' ailing, mayors say in msnbc.com survey
By Bill Dedman
MSNBC.COM
Michael Bloomberg sweetens Willets Pt. deal
By John Lauinger
The New York Daily News
