|
|
|
Report of the Bipartisan
Millennial Housing Commission |
|
Appointed by the
Congress of the United States |
|
|
|
|
|
Authorized in October 1999 (P.L. 106-74) |
|
Members (22) appointed in December 2000 by
chairs and ranking minority members of |
|
House and Senate Appropriations Committees and
Subcommittees for VA, HUD and Independent Agencies |
|
Senate Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs
Committee and Housing and Transportation Subcommittee |
|
House Financial Services Committee and Housing
and Community Opportunity Subcommittee |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
To examine, analyze, and explore |
|
the importance of housing, particularly
affordable housing, to the infrastructure of the United States; |
|
the various possible methods for increasing the
role of the private sector in providing affordable housing, including the
effectiveness and efficiency of such methods; |
|
whether the existing programs of HUD work to
provide better housing opportunities for families, neighborhoods, and
communities, and how such programs can be improved. |
|
|
|
|
|
Thirteen Principal Recommendations |
|
Fifteen Supporting Recommendations |
|
Sections on |
|
Why housing matters |
|
America’s housing challenges |
|
The federal role in housing |
|
Released May 30, 2002 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Family stability and childhood outcomes |
|
Neighborhood quality and access to opportunity |
|
Neighborhood revitalization |
|
Household wealth |
|
Contribution to economic growth and stability |
|
|
|
|
Disruptive moves affect school, job performance |
|
For welfare-to-work recipients, housing plus job
assistance results in better employment outcomes than job assistance alone |
|
Homeownership has especially positive effects
for children in terms of school success and social behavior |
|
Better-quality housing is related to lower
levels of psychological distress and improved educational and economic
achievement |
|
|
|
|
Unemployment, crime, high-school dropout, and
teen pregnancy rates higher in high-poverty urban, rural areas than
elsewhere |
|
Incidence of depression and anxiety higher among
inner-city youth |
|
Relocating families to better neighborhoods can
improve educational, mental health, and behavioral outcomes |
|
|
|
|
Relocating families can improve outcomes; so can
revitalizing distressed neighborhoods |
|
Important to strengthen schools, provide access
to services, connect residents to jobs |
|
Rundown and abandoned structures can have a
contagious effect |
|
Concentrated public investment in housing can be
first step in reclaiming neighborhoods |
|
|
|
|
|
Homeownership |
|
Insulates households from rising rental costs,
home prices |
|
Enables households to build equity, wealth |
|
Refinancing can be source of cash for other
spending, investment |
|
Capital gains on home sales add liquidity to the
economy, stimulate consumer spending |
|
|
|
|
Housing makes up more than one-third of the
nation’s tangible assets |
|
|
|
|
In 2000, home building and remodeling accounted
for about 4 percent of GDP |
|
In 2001, new residential construction was
associated with roughly 3.5 million jobs nationally and $166 billion in
local income |
|
In 2001, home building was the source of about
$65 billion in combined taxes and fees |
|
|
|
|
|
Serves as a critical stabilizing force |
|
Manages risk |
|
Provides expanded, continuous access to mortgage
credit |
|
Benefits derive largely from |
|
Evolution of a strong secondary market |
|
Role of the Federal Housing Administration and
the Government National Mortgage Association |
|
The Federal Home Loan Banks |
|
|
|
|
|
Affordability is the single greatest housing
challenge facing the nation |
|
Extremely-low income households face the
greatest problems, but… |
|
Affordability problems reach across all but the
highest income groups |
|
The burden on working families |
|
The shrinking rental supply |
|
Constraints on production and preservation |
|
Persistent homeownership gaps |
|
|
|
|
Extremely low income (ELI) = below 30% of area
median income (AMI) |
|
Very low income (VLI) = 30.1 to 50% AMI |
|
Low income (LI) = 50.1 to 80% AMI |
|
Lower income = less than 80% AMI |
|
Moderate income (MI) = 80.1 to 120% AMI |
|
High income (HI) = above 120% AMI |
|
|
|
|
|
Most federal programs measure affordability by
the relationship of income to housing costs. |
|
Spending 30 to 50% of income on housing is
considered a “moderate” affordability problem. |
|
Spending more than 50% of income on housing is
considered a “severe” affordability problem. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
May have incomes too low to cover even modest
rental costs |
|
May live in high-cost markets where even a
moderate income is insufficient |
|
May be unable to earn adequate wages to manage
housing plus basic needs due to age, disability, or difficulty finding
full-time work |
|
May need to trade off neighborhood quality in
order to lower housing costs |
|
|
|
|
Of the 11.3 million LI households with severe
housing affordability problems in 1999, nearly one-quarter had earnings at
least equivalent to full-time work at the minimum wage ($10,712 per year). |
|
Many families with significantly higher earnings
face moderate and severe housing affordability problems. |
|
|
|
|
The supply-demand gap affects ELI households and
those earning between 60 and 120% of AMI. |
|
|
|
|
|
Inadequate financing for multifamily housing in
particular |
|
Insufficient federal subsidy |
|
Lack of secondary markets for development and
construction loans, and loans on small multifamily properties |
|
Development controls such as local zoning and
subdivision regulations |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Federal programs that under-budget for
operations, maintenance, and renovations |
|
Federal tax policies |
|
Codes oriented toward new construction rather
than moderate rehabilitation |
|
Inadequacy of federal subsidy needed to cover
the gap between affordable rents and operating costs |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Despite recent gains, minority and low-income
homeownership rates still lag. |
|
|
|
|
The high cost of housing generally |
|
Costs associated with buying a home |
|
Underwriting standards applied by
mortgage
lenders |
|
Cost and availability of mortgage credit |
|
The largest single constraint on
lower-income
households is lack of savings. |
|
Recent research indicates that face-to-face
pre-purchase education and counseling reduces loan delinquencies by as much
as 34 percent. |
|
|
|
|
|
Historical overview |
|
Programs active today |
|
Appendix 3 of the Commission report provides a
description of past and current federal housing programs. |
|
Lessons learned |
|
These lessons informed the Commission’s
recommendations. |
|
|
|
|
Affordable housing developments cannot be
isolated from the broader community in which they are located and must
provide access to decent schools, job opportunities, and transportation. |
|
Decisions about the location and management of
affordable housing are best made by state or local governments, rather than
the federal government. |
|
|
|
|
The private sector needs the proper incentives
to be an effective partner in the federal government’s efforts to address
the nation’s housing challenges. |
|
When resources are limited, there are difficult
tradeoffs between making rents affordable to the poorest tenants and
ensuring that enough income flows into a property to cover the repairs
necessary to sustain the structure’s useful life. |
|
|
|
|
|
New tools (5) |
|
Administered by states working with localities |
|
Targeted to unmet need |
|
Involve the private sector as appropriate |
|
Major reforms to existing programs (4) |
|
Realignment with the programs’ stated missions |
|
Streamlining of existing programs (4) |
|
Work well but could benefit from some
improvement |
|
|
|
|
|
State could use for two purposes: |
|
to promote the production or rehabilitation of
units in eligible census tracts where production/rehabilitation costs
exceed the market value of the completed properties; and/or |
|
to achieve affordability for low-income buyers
by applying the credit against the borrower’s mortgage in the form of
prepaid points, below-market interest rates, or other subsidized mortgage
terms. |
|
|
|
|
Within appropriate federal guidelines and under
state oversight, sellers who transfer ownership to a “preservation entity”
would qualify for tax relief. |
|
The “preservation entity” must commit to
long-term affordability and comply with criteria established by the state. |
|
|
|
|
On units earmarked for ELI households |
|
Rents paid by tenants and would cover operating
expenses, including an adequate reserve |
|
Eligible uses would include new construction,
preservation, and acquisition with or without rehabilitation |
|
|
|
|
Remove the limits on states’ ability to issue
tax-exempt debt for specific multifamily properties. |
|
To be eligible for financing, properties must
reserve at least 20 percent of units for families earning no more than 80
percent of AMI. |
|
Congress should consider requiring states to
develop a qualified allocation plan for the use of this resource. |
|
|
|
|
Allow governors to reserve up to 15 percent of
federal block grant funds to support comprehensive, geographically defined
redevelopment projects sponsored by local governments. |
|
Governors would have limited waiver authority to
facilitate the blended use of funds, which would have to be consistent with
the purposes of the respective block grant programs. |
|
|
|
|
Apply private real estate principles |
|
Provide for an orderly transition at severely
distressed properties |
|
Allow debt financing of capital needs |
|
Simply the rating of public housing agencies
(PHAs) |
|
Test new rent-setting mechanisms |
|
Exempt small PHAs from unnecessary and
burdensome reporting requirements |
|
|
|
|
|
Restructure the Federal Housing Administration
(FHA) as a wholly owned government corporation within HUD. |
|
Combine FHA and Ginnie Mae into a single entity
based on the model laid out in the Government Corporation Control Act. |
|
Provide for more flexible multifamily and
single-family operations. |
|
|
|
|
Address transitional homelessness by increasing
the supply of units affordable to ELI households using tools such as the
100 percent capital subsidy. |
|
End chronic homelessness by providing an
additional 15,000 units of permanent supportive housing over each of the
next 10 years. |
|
|
|
|
Fund the services and supports needed to enable
families who receive housing assistance to find and maintain employment. |
|
Fund financial incentives (e.g., income
disregards, savings accounts exempt from resource limitations) to enable
families to keep more of their earnings. |
|
Continue to experiment with stepped and flat
rents. |
|
|
|
|
Improve utilization and success rates |
|
Increase landlord participation |
|
Link vouchers to housing production programs |
|
Link vouchers to work opportunity and
self-sufficiency initiatives |
|
Link vouchers to non-housing programs |
|
Allow for the flexible use of Section 8
project-based units |
|
|
|
|
|
Improve the HOME Investment Partnerships Program
(HOME) |
|
Increase funding for HOME |
|
Improve the Low Income Housing Tax Credit
(LIHTC) program |
|
Eliminate barriers to combining the LIHTC with
HOME and other programs |
|
|
|
|
|
Repeal the 10-year rule |
|
Allow housing finance agencies 18 months to
issue new mortgages using prepayment funds |
|
Given the enforcement of Mortgage Revenue Bong
income limits: |
|
Remove purchase price limits |
|
Repeal the first-time homebuyer eligibility
requirement |
|
Remove eligibility restrictions on Veterans |
|
Increase the limits on home improvement loans to
the FHA Title I loan level |
|
|
|
|
|
Shift appropriations risk away from property
owners, lenders, and tenants by |
|
moving project-based, Section 8 Housing
Assistance Payment contract funding from the discretionary to the mandatory
part of the federal budget; and/or |
|
offering some form of insurance to owners/
lenders to minimize the appropriations risk in their pricing. |
|
|
|
|
Increase funding for housing assistance in rural
areas. |
|
Increase funding for Native American and Native
Hawaiian housing. |
|
Establish Individual Homeownership Development
Accounts to help more low-income households buy homes. |
|
|
|
|
Allow housing finance agencies to earn
arbitrage. |
|
Exempt housing bond purchasers from the
Alternative Minimum Tax. |
|
Undertake a study of the Davis-Bacon Act
requirements. |
|
|
|
|
Address regulatory barriers that either add to
the cost of or effectively discourage housing production. |
|
Streamline state planning requirements for
community development programs. |
|
Expand the financing options for small
multifamily properties. |
|
|
|
|
Foster a secondary market for development and
construction lending. |
|
Launch a demonstration project for comprehensive
community-based work. |
|
Improve consumer education about home mortgage
lending. |
|
|
|
|
Improve manufactured homebuyer and owner access
to capital markets. |
|
Affirm the importance of the Community
Reinvestment Act. |
|
Affirm the importance of the
government-sponsored enterprises. |
|
|
|
|
Download a copy of the report from the
Commission site at http://www.mhc.gov. Both PDF and Word formats are
available. |
|
The Commission Web site also provides
instructions on how to obtain a report from the Government Printing Office. |
|
|
|
|
The report comes with a CD-ROM that includes a
PDF version of the report, a description of the Commission’s methodology,
testimony submitted during hearings, and documents submitted during focus
meetings. |
|
A separate CD-ROM, available through the
National Housing Conference, contains products prepared by MHC consultants
and others. To request a copy of this CD-ROM, send an email message to cegan@nhc.org. |
|