Your panelists. Building a Housing Policy that Works. Today s panel. Helen Bradbury President, Stone House Development 10/8/2016

Transcription

1 Your panelists Building a Housing Policy that Works 2016 Wisconsin Real Estate and Economic Outlook Conference Madison, Wisconsin October 13, 2016 Helen Bradbury, President, Stone House Development Katherine Kamp, Executive Director, Wisconsin Partnership for Housing Development Brian Ohm, Professor, Urban and Regional Planning, University of Wisconsin Madison Stephen Malpezzi, Emeritus Professor, Graaskamp Center for Real Estate Today s panel A short presentation by each panelist Three questions from the moderator to the panel On land use and development regulations, and other government interventions On alternative strategies for housing subsidies (supply side and demand side) On financial and macroeconomic policies Questions and discussion from the floor Helen Bradbury President, Stone House Development 1

2 What is Section 42? A federal tax credit given to large corporations to encourage their investment in work force or affordable housing Each state receives an allocation based on their population developers compete for an allocation in the state the project is to be built in The program has been in existence since 1986 Investors receive the tax credit over a ten year span Incomes and rents are adjusted annually by HUD Projects must remain affordable for 30 years If during the 15 year holding period the project goes into foreclosure the tax credits are recaptured Developers, like Stone House, guarantee that the project will remain viable and that only qualified residents will reside in it Federal Impact on LIHTC Program Mandatory Federal Preferences for all states QAPs: Projects serving the lowest income tenants Projects obligated to serve qualified tenants for the longest periods Projects which are located in qualified census tracts and the developments of which contributes to a concerted community revitalization plan Per Capita Amount of Credits currently $2.35 Establishment of Credit Percentage currently locked at 9% and 4% Corporate Tax Policy Disaster relief credit increases WHEDA s LIHTC Goals Increase the supply of housing for very low income families and seniors Increase the supply of affordable housing with services, including Veterans Encourage housing development in areas of economic opportunity Coordinate housing development with housing and community development plans Ensure the efficient use of LIHTCs Support the housing goals and objectives stated in the State of Wisconsin Consolidated Plan and the housing goals and objectives stated in the Plan to End Homelessness State Impact on LIHTC Program Establish timing of competitive cycle and number of cycles one pool Amount of credit per development/and or developer Establish set asides: general, rural, non profit, preservation Determine size of overall project Project cost restrictions Type of projects family, senior, special needs, etc. Points for 3 bedrooms Points for supportive services Geographic or market preferences Establish high needs area criteria Subjectively determine market viability 2

3 Local Impact on LIHTC LIHTC Project Examples Financial support Affordable Housing Initiative TIF Project Based Vouchers Park Fee Waiver Readiness to Proceed Category Project Credit Year # Units 30% 40% 50% 60% Market Rate 3 br Credit Price Cost/Unit Credit/ Unit Hanover $0.80 $88,569 $6,526 City Row $0.67 $200,301 $17,051 Mifflin Street $1.07 $190,677 $12,019 Current $1.03 $190,274 $12,262 Reducing Inequity with Housing Policy Katherine Kamp Executive Director, Wisconsin Partnership for Housing Development Increase production of affordable housing for lowest income households Re allocate current federal housing expenditures Expand and enhance the voucher program Local zoning changes 3

4 Create Housing Affordable for Lowest Income Households Reallocate Federal Expenditures to Meet Need 4

5 Increase Available Vouchers Population in High Poverty Neighborhoods Status of planning in Wisconsin (1999) Brian Ohm Professor, Urban and Regional Planning, University of Wisconsin Madison 5

6 10/8/2016 Status of planning in Wisconsin (2012) Zoning in Cities, Villages, and Towns Lake Superior Bayfield Douglas Bayfield Douglas Ashland Iron Michigan Iron Ashland Vilas Burnett Burnett Washburn Sawyer Washburn Vilas Sawyer Florence Florence Oneida Price Oneida Price Polk Forest Barron Rusk Barron Polk Marinette Lincoln Marinette Langlade Taylor Pierce Pierce Door Shawano Clark Marathon Towns Portage Wood Buffalo Trempealeau Kewaunee Waupaca Outagamie Town Zoning: 242 Brown Jackson Waushara Minnesota La Crosse Fond du Lac Sheboygan Lake Michigan Columbia Dodge WashingtonOzaukee Crawford Iowa 1402 municipal plans received 60 county plans received Yes Zoning: 552 No Zoning: 36 Sauk Richland Dane Jefferson WaukeshaMilwaukee Grant Racine Lafayette La Crosse Green Rock Door Walworth Kenosha Illinois Texas Dep't of Hous, & Cmity Affairs v. Inclusive Communities Project, Inc. 576 U.S. (2015) allow[s] private developers to vindicate the FHA s objectives and to protect their property rights by stopping municipalities from enforcing arbitrary and, in practice, discriminatory ordinances barring the construction of certain types of housing units. Unknown: 7 Cities, villages, and towns exercise zoning ordinances under s or or 60.62, Wis. Stats, and counties excercise zoning in towns under s , Wis. Stats. Please consult with individual local governments to check accuracy and for those municipalities with an "unknown" status. comp.planning@wisconsin.gov with any corrections to be made. Outagamie Kewaunee Brown Manitowoc Waushara Winnebago Calumet Adams Marquette Green Lake Fond du LacSheboygan Monroe Juneau Cities and Villages MarquetteGreen Lake Portage Waupaca Buffalo Trempealeau Jackson No Zoning: 246 Winnebago Calumet Adams Juneau Vernon Iowa Wood County Zoning: 767 Manitowoc Monroe Shawano Clark Eau Claire Pepin Pepin As of Jan. 16, 2012 Menominee Oconto Dunn Menominee Oconto Marathon Eau Claire Chippewa St. Croix Chippewa Dunn Langlade Taylor Lincoln St. Croix Forest Rusk Vernon Richland Sauk Columbia Dodge WashingtonOzaukee Crawford Iowa Dane JeffersonWaukesha Milwaukee Grant Racine Lafayette Green Rock Walworth Kenosha Information self-reported by local and regional governments HUD s New Affirmatively Further Fair Housing (AFFH) Rule Applies to communities that receive certain funding from HUD (CDBG, HOME, ESG or HOPWA funds) and Public Housing Agencies (PHAs) In order to receive the funding, communities must show they are taking meaningful action to further fair housing 6

7 Today s panel A short presentation by each panelist Three questions from the moderator to the panel On land use and development regulations, and other government interventions On alternative strategies for housing subsidies (supply side and demand side) On financial and macroeconomic policies Questions and discussion from the floor Balancing regulatory costs and benefits? The White House recently released a paper entitled Housing Development Toolkit, that explored significant barriers to housing development including poorly designed land use and development regulations. Question: How can we improve the regulatory framework for housing development in Wisconsin? What are the elements of a smarter state and local government interventions (taxes, subsidies, regulations)? How do we balance the costs and benefits of specific regulations in particular markets? 7

8 Today s panel A short presentation by each panelist Three questions from the moderator to the panel On land use and development regulations, and other government interventions On alternative strategies for housing subsidies (supply side and demand side) On financial and macroeconomic policies Questions and discussion from the floor Two overarching approaches to housing subsidy Supply Side Subsidy: Subsidize the unit ("bricks and mortar" subsidies). Cut some ribbons! Public housing* Section 236 interest subsidies to landlords* Section 8 New Construction/Rehab* Section 42 Low Income Housing Tax Credits Many local programs Demand Side Programs: Subsidize the tenant. Cut some checks! Section 8 Existing Certificates** Housing Choice Vouchers *Legacy programs no new additions for many years. ** Section 8 Existing folded into Voucher program 3,000,000 2,500,000 2,000,000 1,500,000 1,000, ,000 Housing Units/Households in Major U.S. National Programs, Most data compiled by Ingrid Gould Ellen of NYU, from HUD and other sources. Public Housing Other Project based Vouchers LIHTC (in place) Improving the mix of housing subsidies? Over the past 30 years, federal subsidies have moved from supply side (public housing) to demand side (vouchers); with the notable exception of Section 42 Low Income Housing Tax Credits. Many local governments remain focused on supply side strategies, such as inclusionary zoning. Question: what s the correct mix for Wisconsin? Does the mix vary by location? What are the reasons for the proposed mix? Is there something we should add to the mix? Could we improve existing programs, do we have ideas to improve specific elements of the mix? 8

9 Today s panel A short presentation by each panelist Three questions from the moderator to the panel On land use and development regulations, and other government interventions On alternative strategies for housing subsidies (supply side and demand side) On financial and macroeconomic policies Questions and discussion from the floor Index of Real GDP Before and After Business Cycle Peak Numbers next to line ends are index values 32 quarters after peak, followed by annual growth rate from peak to 32 quarters later Quarters Before or After Peak (0) 133, 3.7% 129, 3.3% 120, 2.6% 114, 2.2% 110, 1.1% Great Recession 98, 0.5% Tech Wreck 1990 Recession Oil Shock #2 Oil Shock # Peak 180 Index of Average Real Household Income Within Each Quintile Bottom Fourth Middle Second Top Spliced Quarterly Real House Price Index FHFA Index 1975 to 1986; Case Shiller (Q2) Spliced FHFA/CS Real House Price Index Prediction from Log Trend, Prediction, minus 2 SEs Prediction, plus 2 SEs 9

10 120 Real CPI Rent Index Seasonally Adjusted, January 1981= Monthly Federal Funds and Mortgage Rates Recession Effective Fed Funds 30 Year FRM Rate CPI Rent of Primary Residence, deflated by Atlanta Fed "Sticky CPI" (CPI less food, energy, shelter) Real rents have grown by 1.6 percent per annum since October Real rents have grown by 0.3 percent per annum since Jan 81 Jan 82 Jan 83 Jan 84 Jan 85 Jan 86 Jan 87 Jan 88 Jan 89 Jan 90 Jan 91 Jan 92 Jan 93 Jan 94 Jan 95 Jan 96 Jan 97 Jan 98 Jan 99 Jan 00 Jan 01 Jan 02 Jan 03 Jan 04 Jan 05 Jan 06 Jan 07 Jan 08 Jan 09 Jan 10 Jan 11 Jan 12 Jan 13 Jan 14 Jan 15 Jan 16 Jan 71 Jan 72 Jan 73 Jan 74 Jan 75 Jan 76 Jan 77 Jan 78 Jan 79 Jan 80 Jan 81 Jan 82 Jan 83 Jan 84 Jan 85 Jan 86 Jan 87 Jan 88 Jan 89 Jan 90 Jan 91 Jan 92 Jan 93 Jan 94 Jan 95 Jan 96 Jan 97 Jan 98 Jan 99 Jan 00 Jan 01 Jan 02 Jan 03 Jan 04 Jan 05 Jan 06 Jan 07 Jan 08 Jan 09 Jan 10 Jan 11 Jan 12 Jan 13 Jan 14 Jan 15 Jan 16 Macroeconomic and financial outlook? The U.S. economy has had a long but disappointingly weak expansion since We have recently seen some signs of a strengthening labor market across the income distribution, after 15 years of weak income growth for middle income and low income consumers. Rents and housing prices have been rising faster than inflation since Mortgages are inexpensive, if you qualify. Question: What is the outlook for the national and Wisconsin economies and housing markets? Will we see continued strengthening of the economy and housing markets? Will the middle class and lower income households share in any gains? What are the possible headwinds and tailwinds for our markets and our customers? What can be done to improve the outlook? Today s panel A short presentation by each panelist Three questions from the moderator to the panel On land use and development regulations, and other government interventions On alternative strategies for housing subsidies (supply side and demand side) On financial and macroeconomic policies Questions and discussion from the floor 10