Comments on Protect DC's Housing Production Trust Fund - Greater Greater Washington

Comment by AWalkerInTheCity

Wed, 18 Apr 2012 11:14:26 EDT

"The problem is that DC already has a far higher number of very poor people than any other jurisdiction in the region. Increasing the amount of spending so that we can increase that number makes no sense"

My guess is that the number of poor people in DC is trending down (with a spike due to the recent recession)(and the percent is going down even faster, as total pop increases). Programs for affordable housing for the poor would be more likely to slow the rate of decrease than to lead to an increase.

To the extent that they reduce the resistance to new development at higher densities (a political question) they might in fact result in increased production of market rate housing, and hence a faster increase in the middle and upper class population.

Comment by oboe

Wed, 18 Apr 2012 10:56:14 EDT

The Trust Fund can be used to develop housing for people who make up to 80% AMI, so working class and middle class families can benefit from the program. Although the program is targeted at lower income levels, this allows for greater income diversity in Trust Fund-funded properties than many other federal and local programs.

There's always the tendency to conflate two different things: on the one hand, ensuring we have a supply of housing for working class and middle-class residents contributes to the economic health of the city. On the other, providing housing as charity for very poor people is a moral good.

The problem is that DC already has a far higher number of very poor people than any other jurisdiction in the region. Increasing the amount of spending so that we can increase that number makes no sense. DC is doing its share. (What's our end goal? To corner the market?)

When the poverty numbers in MD and VA are anywhere close to DC, then we can talk about how DC should do more. Til then, workforce housing should be our goal.

Comment by dcd

Wed, 18 Apr 2012 10:06:19 EDT

@Kolohe: I admit it, the image of Tommy Wells as Frodo cracked me up. Nicely played.

Comment by Elizabeth

Wed, 18 Apr 2012 08:19:51 EDT

Comment by Taxed Enough

Tue, 17 Apr 2012 23:18:35 EDT

For everybody in affordable housing there is a taxpayer getting stuck with having to pay part of the cost. Nothing fair about that.
My parents had to pay their own rent and I had to work my way through college holding a full time job. Both of my parents had a full time and a part time job. I guess we were all stupid, we should have just cried "Woe is Me" and let somebody else pay for everything.
I worked with a man who had seven kids. He was in subsidized housing and always refused overtime because the extra money would interfere with his subsidized rent and other giveaways he was getting, including food stamps.
Somebody has to advocate for the taxpayers sooner or later because they are really getting screwed.

Comment by Kolohe

Tue, 17 Apr 2012 21:36:06 EDT

"DC has finally crossed the mythical population mark of 600,000 residents"

Uh, what does this mean? Hogwarts is opening a charter school on Benning Road? Griffins are replacing the Canadian Geese around the reflecting pool? Tommy Wells is going walk across town to throw the One Ring into Mount Pleasant?

Comment by WRD

Tue, 17 Apr 2012 21:07:51 EDT

We will never subsidize ourselves into affordable housing. Supply side reforms must be enacted as aggressively as demand side subsidies.

Comment by AWalkerInTheCity

Tue, 17 Apr 2012 17:13:49 EDT

1. there are affordable housing progams that target workforce housing at various percentages of Average income, not only housing for the worst off

2. While an overly harsh affordability requirement for private developers could limit production of market rate housing A. This post is not about such requirements, but about local govt funding for affordable housing and B. the rate of development of new market rate housing in DC suggest this problem still allows large scale production of market rate housing and C. To the extent that inclusive zoning overcomes local resistance to dense redevelopment, it actually enables the production of market rate housing.

In parts of NoVa affordable housing is at the option of the developer, in exchange for density bonuses.

Comment by Rob

Tue, 17 Apr 2012 17:08:19 EDT

I'm skeptical of "affordable housing" for the same reason Steve S. is. And I'd add that in many cases, "affordable housing" program make it more expensive to build market-rate housing, so the "affordable housing" programs raise market rents. As a result, "affordable housing" programs usually make housing less affordable for the middle class.

You can see that in DC: there's a substantial affluent population living in market-rate housing, a substantial poor population living in subsidized housing, but not much of a genuine middle class.

Comment by Steve S.

Tue, 17 Apr 2012 17:01:23 EDT

I tend to be skeptical of "affordable housing" because I suspect it will be heavily means-tested. This leaves middle class workers, who can barely afford market rents, also means-tested out of affordable housing set aside for the poor; creating a "doughnut hole" in housing affordability.

Comment by KR

Tue, 17 Apr 2012 15:48:31 EDT

Affordable Housing is the number one priority of DC residents. It is about time the City start investing in it!