Four the Future - October 14

Four stories on reducing the cost of housing for those most in need.

• New Hillyard apartment offers hope
  Source: KREM-TV; October 13, 2010
  Summary: Market Street Station is a new housing development in Hillyard for people making no more than 50% of the county’s median wage. They are single bedroom and studios. While funding has fallen through on several occasions, the current funding sources all have at least 40 year commitments.
  Opinion: The piece points out some of the issues associated with providing access to housing for those who don’t have a lot of cash. I've heard city council members actually attempt to convince people that if the market sensed a need for workforce housing, then the market would supply it. So, there is a significant amount of ignorance, willful or not, about housing financing.
  
• Habitat building 114 low-cost homes in Deer Park
  Source: Spokesman-Review; October 10, 2010
  Summary: Habitat for Humanity is building 114 houses in Deer Park for people making less than 30% of the county’s median income. The houses are less expensive to pay for because they depend on volunteer labor, including 500 hours of labor from the families who occupy the homes. The project costs about $12 million. The homes have energy efficient appliances, heating, cooling, and windows. Deer Park was chosen because nearly 40% of the households within 1 mile of the site qualified based on income.
  Opinion: That housing is averaging $105,000 apiece, which is quite a bargain. I have two comments. First, is Habitat actually arguing that they placed the housing way out in Deer Park because there are already lots of low income people there? If they argue that the locals will just move, what will happen to the old homes? Will they sit empty, or will even more low-income folks move out to Deer Park to occupy them? Either result is bad. Don’t get me wrong: I think Habitat provides a vital service to the community when many people around here would just prefer to assume that people with low incomes are just lazy and deserve what they get anyway. But, what am I missing here in choosing Deer Park? Wouldn't Spokane or Spokane Valley be better? (Actually, I think the problem is more insidious, and related to general developer's denial that they have any responsibility in this problem, see below.)
  
  And, second, is America such a small-minded place that our dream is nothing more than owning a house? It’s not my dream. My dreams are not so materialistic, and I bet that it's not everyone else's number one goal in life either. Not even close. It's time to retire that tired marketing slogan.
  
• Green revolution comes to urban neighborhoods
  Source: Los Angeles Times; September 3, 2010
  Summary: Up to now, the "green movement" has been marketed almost exclusively to people with money. Low income neighborhoods don’t have financial access to solar panels, hybrid cars, and energy-efficient appliances. Programs are now in place to help disadvantaged youth to learn the skills necessary to go back and help their communities to save money through better energy management.
  Opinion: This is great, especially when you’re creating jobs in a neighborhood which provides a positive feedback by reducing the costs of living in a neighborhood which may help people get in a better economic position. There are other things to be aware of, however. A planner I spoke to once told me that they had run into issues with improving the conditions of rental homes. When they'd get a grant to improve the facility, the intent was to reduce the cost of living in those units. However, with the building in better condition and with lower utility costs, the landlord would inevitably kick out the low income renters in order to get higher rents for the better accommodations. It's important to know who you're trying to help, and build the intentions into the plan. If money is used to improve the living conditions of people with low incomes, then there must be a requirement to keep the rents low even after the improvement.
  
• Face Time: Advocate discusses efforts to reduce homelessness
  Source: Spokesman-Review; September 27, 2010
  Summary: Cindy Algeo answers questions about the current state of the Spokane Low Income Housing Consortium. While the inventory of housing accessible to people with low incomes has increased, but there are times when we go backwards, as in 2007. There are still 1,200 homeless people in Spokane County. A recent survey of Spokane County voters showed that people are aware that there is a problem that government should solve, but do not support raising taxes to solve it. More than 50% of Spokane County voters know someone who’s having difficulty paying their rent.
  Opinion: Clearly there is a deficiency of available housing. There is a potential long-term fix that I’ve devised, but it involves Spokane County and other local jurisdictions recognizing the developers have a responsibility to have a hand in solving it, so it won’t happen any time soon. The base concept is simple: require each development to have its fair share of low-, moderate- and average-cost housing. Allow limited exchange of this “responsibility” between developers, which would create a market for buying and selling the credits. The sale price for the credits would help subsidize the cost of low income housing. That doesn’t solve the immediate problem, but it would prevent the problem from returning if anyone had the courage to fix it in the first place.