The Creation of a Federal Partnership: The Role of the States in Affordable Housing

253 Pages·2010·6.3 MB·English

by  Margaret M. Brassil

The Creation of a
Federal Partnership
The Role of the States in Affordable Housing
Margaret M. Brassil
THE CREATION OF A FEDERAL PARTNERSHIP
SUNY series in Urban Public Policy
C. Theodore Koebel, editor
THE
CREATION
OF A
FEDERAL
PARTNERSHIP
The Role of the States
in Affordable Housing
MARGARET M. BRASSIL
Coverart:©Vatikaki/Dreamstime.com
PublishedbyStateUniversityofNewYorkPress,Albany
©2010StateUniversityofNewYork
Allrightsreserved
PrintedintheUnitedStatesofAmerica
Nopartofthisbookmaybeusedorreproducedinanymanner
whatsoeverwithoutwrittenpermission.Nopartofthisbookmaybe
storedinaretrievalsystemortransmittedinanyformorbyanymeans
includingelectronic,electrostatic,magnetictape,mechanical,photocopying,
recording,orotherwisewithoutthepriorpermissioninwritingofthe
publisher.
Forinformation,contactStateUniversityofNewYorkPress,Albany,NY
www.sunypress.edu
ProductionbyDianeGaneles
MarketingbyAnneM.Valentine
LibraryofCongressCataloging-in-PublicationData
Brassil,MargaretM.,1959-
Thecreationofafederalpartnership:theroleofthestatesin
affordablehousing/MargaretM.Brassil.
p.cm.—(SUNYseriesinurbanpublicpolicy)
Includesbibliographicalreferencesandindex.
ISBN978-1-4384-3333-2(hbk.:alk.paper)
1.Housingpolicy—UnitedStates. 2.Low-incomehousing—United
States. 3.Housingauthorities—UnitedStates. 4.Federalaidto
housing—UnitedStates. I.Title.
HD7293.B6752010
363.5'83—dc22
2010008211
10987654321
C
ONTENTS
LIST OF TABLES vii
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ix
Chapter 1 INTRODUCTION 1
Chapter 2 THE DEVOLUTION OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING
POLICY AND THE EVOLUTION OF A FEDERAL-STATE
HOUSING PARTNERSHIP 11
Chapter 3 STATE HOUSING AGENCIES: THE LINK BETWEEN
STATE AND NATION 49
Chapter 4 STATE HOUSING AGENCIES IN MARYLAND,
MINNESOTA, AND TEXAS 75
Chapter 5 STATE HOUSING AGENCIES’ POLICIES AND
PROGRAMS 101
Chapter 6 COMPARISONS 133
Chapter 7 CONCLUSIONS 165
NOTES 183
BIBLIOGRAPHY 211
INDEX 233
v

T
ABLES
Table 2.1 HUD AMFI Table for Somerset County and Prince
George’s County, Maryland 14
Table 2.2 Income Eligibility Limits for HUD Programs 15
Table 2.3 Net Budget Authority for Selected HUD Programs,
1977–2000 27
Table 2.4 Outlays for Housing Assistance, Selected Programs
and Total, 1977–2000 28
Table 2.5 Net New Commitments for Renters and Home Buyers
Receiving Direct Housing Assistance Administered by
HUD, by Type of Subsidy, 1977–2000 30
Table 2.6 State Housing Appropriations and Trust Funds, 2000 38
Table 2.7 States with Trust Funds, but No Other Direct
Appropriation 41
Table 2.8 States without Housing Appropriations or Trust Funds 42
Table 2.9 Sources of Housing Agencies’ Operating Funds 43
Table 2.10 State-Sponsored Housing Programs 45
Table 2.11 Agency Sources for Funding State Housing Programs 45
Table 2.12 Sampling of State Housing Agency Programs
Supported by State Funding Sources 46
Table 3.1 The First Wave: State Housing Finance Agencies
Created 1960–1972 52
Table 3.2 The Second Wave: State Housing Finance Agencies
Created 1973–1980 53
Table 3.3 The Third Wave: Housing Finance Agencies Created
1981–1992 54
Table 3.4 Private Activity Bond Use, Comparison of the
Case Study States 59
vii
viii TABLES
Table 3.5 LIHTC: State Authority, Requests, and Allocations,
1998 64
Table 3.6 Policy Initiation in the States as Viewed by Housing
Agency Officials 73
Table 3.7 Responsibility for Decision Making in the States 74
Table 4.1 Maryland, Minnesota, and Texas in Comparison, 2006 76
Table 4.2 Summary of MHFA Bonds and Appropriations,
1971–1988 79
Table 4.3 Texas Households with Housing Need by
Income Group 91
Table 4.4 Texas Households by Income Group 92
Table 5.1 Minnesota Housing Finance Agency Housing
Programs, FY 2003 114
Table 5.2 State-Funded Programs in Maryland, 2000–2002 118
Table 5.3 Business Types and Employment Assisted through
DHCD’s Neighborhood Business Development
Program, 1998 123
Table 5.4 Texas Department of Housing and Community
Affairs Programs, 2003 125
Table 6.1 State Comparisons: Maryland, Texas, and
Minnesota, 2006 135
Table 6.2 Summary of State Housing Problems 139
Table 6.3 Comparison of Funding: Maryland, Texas, and
Minnesota Housing Agencies 142
Table 6.4 State Appropriations per Person Below Poverty Level 144
Table 6.5 Project Evaluation Criteria for Allocating LIHTC
in Maryland, Texas, and Minnesota 147
Table 6.6 Common Strategies Used by State Housing Agencies 153
Table 6.7 Is Housing an Economic Development or a
Poverty Issue? 160
Table 7.1 ADDI Accomplishment Report—Maryland,
Minnesota, and Texas 169
Table 7.2 Housing-Related Tax Expenditures, 2002 181
Table 7.3 Estimated Distribution of Housing
Subsidies by Income Quintile, 2002 181
A
CKNOWLEDGMENTS
Ilived in New York City during the 1980s and—along with most New
Yorkers—was daily aware of the extent of the homeless crisis. While
working in the publishing industry, I volunteered at Covenant House, a
shelter for homeless children. My first debt of gratitude, therefore, is to
my fellow volunteers and the staff and the youth who sought shelter
and safety; and particularly to two special people whom I got to
know—April and Phyllis. Both were residents of Grand Central Station
and both died homeless. They made me aware of the human suffering
that can be caused when public policymakers forget that their decisions
affect real people.
Those experiences led me to my initial research question when
beginningmydissertation,whichwas,verysimply:Whathadhappened
tohousingpolicyduringthe1980s?Whenmyresearchbeganinthelate
1990s,everyonewastalkingabout“devolution”andarguingwhetherit
was good or bad for social policy in the United States. I set out to find
out whether the policies of the 1980s had resulted in the devolution of
affordable housing policy to the states. As almost nothing had been
written at the time on the states’ role in affordable housing policy, I am
truly grateful to all the people I interviewed in Maryland, Minnesota,
and Texas who generously gave their time and shared their knowledge
of affordable housing with me.
This book grew out of my dissertation, which I wrote for the
Political Science Department at Johns Hopkins University. I am partic-
ularly grateful to my primary dissertation advisor, Matthew Crenson,
whose critical reading and detailed comments through many drafts not
only helped shape my thinking but also greatly improved my writing. I
also thank Benjamin Ginsberg who provided advice and encourage-
ment as well as a travel grant that allowed me to conduct my initial
research in Texas and Minnesota. I greatly appreciated the advice and
ix