|
Homeownership: Benchmark for a Vital CommunityHow to Expand OpportunitiesBackground Information The DuPage Homeownership Center (DHOC), a nonprofit, HUD-certified housing counseling agency, has for 15 years been helping low-income families become homeowners in high-cost DuPage County through education, counseling and special mortgage financing programs. But in recent years, skyrocketing home prices and the proliferation of teardowns have made it increasingly difficult for our clients to find properties, even with the assistance our programs provide. In March 2006, DHOC and the DuPage Housing Action Coalition, a broad-based network of individuals and organizations that advocate for fair and affordable housing in DuPage County, convened a symposium, Homeownership: Benchmark for a Vital Community, bringing together over 160 builders, developers, lenders, governmental officials and other community leaders to identify barriers to increasing and preserving the supply of affordable starter homes here in DuPage. The event, held at Benedictine University, resulted in the creation of four community task forces to address systemic impediments to affordable housing. All of the groups reconvened on November 29, 2006 at the College of DuPage to report on their progress and outline a Blueprint to Expand Opportunities. Following are the reports that form the basis for that blueprint.
Bringing the Blueprint to Life This process is designed to encourage broad-based community participation. We welcome and encourage your involvement in bringing the blueprint to life. For more information or to receive email updates, please contact the DuPage Homeownership Center at (630) 260-2500 or info@dhoc.org. ________________________________________________________________________
Homeownership: Benchmark for a Vital Community Perceptions Work Group Report William Carroll, President Benedictine University, Chairman November 29, 2006 Introduction The Perceptions Work Group came together following the March, 2006 Breakfast Symposium Homeownership: Benchmark for a Vital Community held at Benedictine University. The group was chaired by William Carroll, president of Benedictine University and this report represents the key findings of this group along with some recommendations and action steps as we move forward. The Perceptions group worked diligently over the past 6 months to identify common perceptions surrounding affordable housing and to find ways to address the misperceptions that create barriers to the development and preservation of affordable housing in DuPage County. Since there had been an earlier 1991 DuPage Affordable Housing Task Force Report chaired by Dan Goodwin, the group felt it important to study and review its findings. “Unless the people of DuPage County understand that providing greater access to affordable housing is important to the continued health of our community as a whole and need not have injurious impacts, no program or combination of programs can be expected to succeed.” This quote was taken from the conclusions to the earlier report. Fifteen years have passed since that Task Force met. And although there have been notable achievements in affordable housing, there is still a need to tackle the fundamental issue of changing community attitudes. One of the members of that 1991 Task Force was Bob Christ, director of Marion Park, leading affordable housing advocate, and founding board president of the DuPage Home Ownership Center. Just after the Task Force report was issued, Bob wrote a terrific paper that calls for a paradigm shift in affordable housing similar to the civil rights movement in the 1960s of which he was a part. Bob recognized that in order to affect community change we need to reach 1 ½ to 2 % of the population—in DuPage that’s about 15,000 to 20,000 people. Increasingly it has become clear that the Perception group must address that paradigm shift. The group divided into 4 sub-groups to research and address the following:
Each of these sub-groups developed a Myths and Realities document identifying some of the common misperceptions about affordable housing and what research shows to be true and accurate. Other information compiled by the Perceptions sub-groups will be used to support public presentations as we seek to win support for affordable housing initiatives community by community. Let me share with you some key findings: Who Needs Affordable Housing
Jobs/Housing Mismatch Contributes to Traffic Congestion, Pollution, Absenteeism
Population Growth Upends 100 Year Pattern
Minority Homeownership Rates Lag Behind Rates for Whites
Recommendations and Action Items: To realize this shift in understanding and thinking about affordable housing, the group proposes a grass roots education campaign that coordinates and supports this group’s findings as well as what the other work groups found. Education is at the core of everything we want to accomplish.
This is an effort that needs broad-based, grassroots, community participation in order to reach 1 ½ to 2% (or 15,000 to 20,000 people) of the population that is needed to affect change. The action steps outlined above will build awareness and support actions recommended by the Employer, Government and Land and Zoning Work Groups. As we move forward, it is vital that we re-commit to our goal of bringing about a sea change in thinking about affordable housing. We must correct misperceptions, appeal to the self-interest of individuals and communities and tap into the American values of fairness and opportunity for all. What follows are individual work group reports addressing myths and perceptions surrounding affordable housing. Affordable Housing Myths & Perceptions Background: Over the past 20+ years much has been written about the affordable housing crisis , not only in America but in many highly developed towns and cities throughout the world. The decline of existing affordable housing stock and the barriers to the construction of new affordable housing ha ve been receiving an increased amount of press of late. Attention to the crisis has increased due to the increasing numbers of affected persons. Numerous governmental commissions and housing advocacy groups have studied the problems. Several studies have shown that although the American public is in agreement with the rights of all to live and work where they choose, in actuality when the issue calls for change the conviction is weaker. It appears that misconceptions and myths surrounding the call for more affordable housing options lie deep in the human psyche. The purpose of this paper is to address three of the misconceptions prevalent in the arguments against affordable housing. Many social and economic studies have been completed that have debunked the myths and misconceptions against affordable housing. Definitions : Affordable Housing: The following definition is taken from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development: “Affordable housing is housing for which the occupant is paying no more than 30% of his or her income for gross housing costs, including utilities”. Some define affordable housing for moderate-income families as America’s workforce housing. Affordable housing has sometimes been identified as ‘starter home’ housing. Affirmative Statements in Support of Affordable Housing for DuPage County Affordable Housing is not Public Housing . Public Housing was established to provide decent and safe rental housing for eligible low-income families, the elderly and persons with disabilities. The bad connotation of Public Housing lingers today due to the unfortunate failure of some experimental projects. Although public housing is very affordable rental housing, there are no public housing units in DuPage County. Further more, there are some but not many privately owned housing developments/apartment buildings in DuPage County that provide subsidized apartments. The U. S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and the Illinois Housing Development Authority provide s rent subsidies to the owners of these buildings, which then allows the owners to rent to low- and moderate-income seniors, persons with disabilities as well as families and individuals. Generally, most, if not all, of these privately owned buildings have long waiting lists for these subsidized apartments. In addition to the above, t he DuPage Housing Authority provides tenant-based rental assistance, Housing Choice Vouchers (formerly called Section 8), through a Program funded by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. The DuPage Housing Authority has an allocation of approximately 2, 571 Housing Choice Vouchers but its waiting list is currently not taking additional names. The Housing Choice Vouchers allow income eligible families and individuals, elderly persons and persons with disabilities to live in decent affordable rental units. Participants locate a private market unit for rent. The participant typically pays no more than 30% of their adjusted monthly income towards rent and utilities. Approximately 50% of the program participants are families, with 25% elderly and 25% disabled. In addition to rental units described above, affordable housing is also found in most communities of DuPage County in the form of smaller and usually older single family homes. These homes were built shortly after World War II , coinciding with the appearance of the Baby Boom Generation. These homes have served their function for many years and to this day are functionally and architecturally appealing. These homes were the ‘right-size’ living space for a people in need. Today working class people still need and desire to live near where they work. Our children need and want to remain in the community where they grew up. Unfortunately many factors have led to the rapid decline of this affordable housing stock. These same factors are also preventing the construction of new affordable housing stock. An effort should be made to retain the existing housing stock. There are several initiatives that attempt to meet this challenge. They are listed below: Examples of Affordable Housing Options include :
Affordable Housing is not poor quality housing . This perception is another memory of the Housing Projects experiment of the 1960s when some low-bid contractors and budget minded government officials constructed poorly designed buildings. In the recent decade the old public housing projects have been torn down and replaced with attractive and functional townhomes and apartments. Newly proposed affordable housing projects are subject to same building code restrictions established for the safety of the residents and the surrounding community’s citizens. The lessons of the poorly planned and poorly executed public housing projects of the 1960s has been learned and will not be forgotten. There is no evidence that affordable housing attracts non-working poor people with large families. Quite the contrary working families, whether large or small, need affordable housing to raise and nurture their children. In communities where affordable housing projects have been constructed, working families from diverse social and economic levels have flourished. The latest generation of affordable and mixed-income housing is based on good planning and minimal impact to the community. These projects come in every size and design to fit the need of the family and the community. Housing cost burdens are not limited to the poor. Working families face higher housing costs each year while family incomes stagnate. Families are forced to find less desirable housing conditions in locations further away from employment. Studies do not show a relationship between increasing density and social problems. Well-designed housing can actually help protect against crime by making neighborhoods safer as they bring added foot-traffic to an area. Prepared by Group #2 Committee Members John Day , DuPage Housing Authority Kevin Doyle, Benedictine University Tammie Grossman, Housing Action Illinois Tracy Jackson, Mid America Bank Mike Moone, West Suburban Bank Mary Nurse, Rep. Sandy Pihos Pat Sullivan, Department of Housing and Urban Development Affordable Housing Myths & Perceptions Myth: There is an adequate supply of affordable housing in Du Page County. Reality: Outside of government officials, realtors, social service workers, builders and developers, there is little recognition of the lack of affordable housing or the implications of this shortage on Du Page County. The trends occurring right now are not readily apparent to the general public. The work of the committee will be to increase public awareness of the affordable housing crisis in DuPage County by publicizing the following information through press releases, community meetings and public service announcements.
How to clear up the myths and provide solutions to residents of Du Page County?
Prepared by Group #3 Committee Members Barb Dinon, Naperville Cares Fred Hoebel, Coldwell Banker Residential Brokerage Gail Hoffman, Wheaton Youth Outreach Kathy Kregor, DuPage Housing Action Coalition Steve Marshall, Village of Bensenville Affordable Housing Myths & Perceptions MYTH: DuPage County has a stable population mix of primarily white with a small minority of Hispanic and black residents REALITY: According to the Regional Development Institute of Northern Illinois University, the County is experiencing a dramatic, historic shift in its demographics. New residents from other parts of the country as well as new immigrants are entering the County in large numbers as DuPage’s economy becomes more and more integrated into the national and global economy. Ongoing redevelopment and gentrification of Chicago neighborhoods are sending more lower-income families into the surrounding suburbs. ¹ The latest population estimate by the U.S. Census Bureau (2005) shows DuPage County’s population at 913,781. Approximately 104,000 County residents (both native-born and immigrants) identify themselves as Latino. 90,000 identify themselves as Asian-Americans and more than 36,000 identify themselves as African-Americans. ² MYTH: Chicago minorities are moving to DuPage County REALITY: Currently, new immigrants are the largest source of population increase in DuPage County, comprising 14.9% of the population. Since 1990, more than half of all population growth in DuPage has come from new immigrants. DuPage County’s population is no longer driven by people moving out of Chicago. This change ends a one-hundred year pattern of population movement with the region. ³ MYTH: Affordable housing will attract a diverse population of large families increasing the burden on schools and other local taxing bodies. REALITY: According to the U.S. Census Bureau, rental apartments have fewer children per unit on average than owner-occupied, single-family housing; rental apartments. A Massachusetts study found that multi-family housing developments did not increase school costs because most multi-family housing is designed to be “childproof,” that is, it’s mostly one- and two-bedroom units. Although not all multi-family rental units are affordable, they make up the bulk of affordable housing. 4 In 1992, the DuPage Homeownership Center created the Homestead Program to help low-income, working families purchase homes in the high-cost DuPage real estate market. Minorities make up 32% of households who have purchased homes under the program, since its beginning. Average household size of all purchasers is 2 children per household. Homeownership is a vital building block for creating healthy and diverse communities. Homeowners have an emotional and financial commitment to their community. Statistics show that they are more likely than renters to volunteer, vote, engage in civic affairs, maintain and upgrade their properties, invest in their schools and patronize local businesses. 5 MYTH: Increase in affordable housing serving a diverse population will bring down property values and increase crime. REALITY: Numerous studies over time from around the country support the general notion that affordable housing has no negative impact on surrounding property values—especially if it is thoroughly integrated into the neighborhood. 6 Additionally affordable housing, as a tool of economic development, can often help to lower crime rates. The National Crime Prevention Council calls for the construction of affordable housing to reduce crime because “neighborhood cohesion and economic stability are enhanced in areas where the continuing supply of dispersed, affordable housing is assured.” 7 The idea that investment in housing is actually a crime deterrent is backed up by a leading expert on street gang violence. A study comparing New York and Chicago crime figures shows that the South Bronx had the same homicide rate as Chicago, however following an investment of $1 billion in affordable housing; crime plummeted in the South Bronx despite the fact that poverty rates stayed the same. The difference is attributed in part to the investment in affordable housing that stabilized neighborhoods and gave residents a sense of empowerment. 8 MYTH: Homeownership is for people who can afford it. Why should I have to support minorities or others who want to own a home if they can’t afford it? REALITY: A lack of affordable housing negatively affects employers, seniors, poor people, immigrants, entry-level and service sector workers, and public sector professionals such as teachers, firefighters, and police officers. It also impinges on broader quality of life issues such as the economic development of the region, traffic congestion, commute times, and air quality. In short, it affects us all. Effectively solving the affordable housing crisis does not mean addressing the needs of just the poor; it also means addressing the needs of the business community, working- and middle-class families, and the broader population. 9 MYTH: Affordable housing is not fair; only minorities benefit REALITY: The U.S. Census Bureau’s Housing Vacancies and Homeownership Report documents that minority homeownership rates lag significantly behind homeownership rates for whites. In 2004, 76% of non-Hispanic whites were homeowners, compared with just 49% of blacks and 48% of Hispanics/Latinos. DuPage County’s population is 913, 781. The racial/ethnic make-up is 81.4% white, 9.9% Asian, 4% African-American, and 7.9% other/mixed race. 11.5% of DuPage County residents are of Hispanic or Latino origin. 10 Homeownership is THE key to economic self-sufficiency. Homeownership is the single most viable means for families – especially low-income households – to build a safety net for the future. The net worth of a low-income homeowner is 12 times greater than that of a low-income renter – and two-thirds of their net worth comes from their home equity. By purchasing a home, families are able to build equity that can be used to achieve other goals, such as paying college tuition or ensuring retirement security. Prepared by Group #4 Committee Members Sheila McCann, DuPage Homeownership Center Mark Milligan, Bridge Communities Julie Moreschi, Benedictine University Stephen Pleimling, Hinsdale Bank & Trust Linda Shea, LaSalle Bank 1 Regional Development Institute, Northern Illinois University, “DuPage Government: Challenges and Need for Strategic Planning,” Feb. 2006. A full report is available at http://www.dupageco.org/agendas/generic.cfm?doc_id=2427. Report on the Information Gathering Phase of the Strategic Planning Process (July, 2006). 2 U.S. Census Bureau DuPage County Fact Sheet. 2005 American Community Survey. Also available at http://factfinder.census.gov/home/saff/main.html?_lang=en 3 IBID “DuPage Government: Challenges and Need for Strategic Planning.” 4 Business and Professional People for the Public Interest, “Myths and Stereotypes about Affordable Housing.” June 2004. Community Opportunities Group and Connery Associates, Housing the Commonwealth’s School Age Children. Boston: Citizens’ Housing and Planning Association, 2003. 5 DuPage Homeownership Center, Homestead Facts at a Glance, April 30, 2006. 6 Business and Professional People for the Public Interest, “Myths and Stereotypes about Affordable Housing.” June 2004. Michael MaRous, “Low-Income Housing in Our Backyard: What Happens to Residential Property Values?” The Appraisal Journal 64, 1, (1996). 7 Business and Professional People for the Public Interest, “Myths and Stereotypes about Affordable Housing.” June 2004. National Crime Prevention Council, Topics in Crime Prevention. “Strategy: Ensure Supply of Affordable Housing.” http://www.ncpc.org/ncpc/ncpc/?pg=2088-9318. 8 John M. Hagedorn, “Building a Way to Stop Murder.” The Chicago Tribune (June 1, 2003). Also available at http://gangresearch.net/Globalization/guggenheim/housing/tribhousmur.html. 9 Business and Professional People for the Public Interest, “Myths and Stereotypes about Affordable Housing.” June 2004. 10 U.S. Census Bureau “Housing Vacancies and Homeownership Report,” http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/housing/hvs/qtr104/q104prss.pdf. IBID U.S. Census Bureau DuPage County Fact Sheet. Perceptions Work Group Report - Printable Version (PDF) ___________________________________________________________________ Homeownership: Benchmark for a Vital Community Employer Work Group Report Debra Olson, DuPage County Board District 4, Chairman November 29, 2006
Background The DuPage Homeownership Center (DHOC), a nonprofit, HUD-certified housing counseling agency, has for over 14 years been helping low-income families become homeowners in high-cost DuPage County through education, counseling and special mortgage financing programs. But in recent years, skyrocketing home prices and the proliferation of teardowns have made it increasingly difficult for our clients to find properties, even with the assistance our programs provide. In March 2006, DHOC and the DuPage Housing Action Coalition, a network with broad-based grassroots participation that advocates for affordable and fair housing in DuPage County, convened a symposium, Homeownership: Benchmark for a Vital Community, bringing together over 160 builders, developers, lenders, governmental officials and other community leaders to identify barriers to increasing and preserving the supply of affordable starter homes here in DuPage. The event, held at Benedictine University, resulted in the creation of four community work groups to address systemic impediments to affordable housing development:
Employer Work Group Members
Employer Work Group Methodology At the Symposium, the attendees concurred that local employers are a critical stakeholder that must play a part in the effort to increase affordable homeownership opportunities, as the issue affects their ability to attract and retain qualified employees. After some initial, wide-ranging discussion of the issues, the Employer Work Group quickly recognized the need to gauge employers’ current awareness of and attitudes toward affordable housing before ever attempting to engage them as advocates. Through the leadership of work group member Joyce Hothan, we secured, pro bono, the services of Maureen Quinn Olsen of M.Q. Olsen Marketing Research to conduct three focus groups with employers. We had two specific goals:
The work group members assembled a list of potential focus group attendees based on personal knowledge and group consensus, and made personal contacts to invite the participants. A conscious effort was made to balance the groups geographically. The focus groups were divided into three segments: larger businesses (50+ employees), small businesses and unions/other. Invitations were extended to approximately ten organizations in each category. The following organizations participated in the focus groups:
Maureen conducted the three focus groups at Metropolitan Family Services in Wheaton in a room with a two-way mirror that allowed work group members to observe the proceedings. She informed the participants that they were being observed and that their comments were being recorded in order to capture the conversation accurately. She began the 90-minute sessions by asking the attendees to introduce themselves and their organizations, and then rate their current awareness of affordable housing issues. Next, she sought reaction from the attendees to six position statements about affordable housing: Following the group discussion, Maureen asked each attendee to rank six statements about affordable housing from most to least compelling to help the work group identify which messages are most effective in reaching employers. She then divided the attendees into smaller work groups to brainstorm ideas for engaging employers in the issue of affordable housing. Each session concluded with the attendees sharing how their knowledge and perceptions about affordable housing had changed over the course of the morning. The Employer Work Group compiled the information from the three focus groups and invited the participating employers to a follow-up breakfast on September 28, 2006, at ARAMARK in Downers Grove to share the results. Two of the focus group attendees came to the breakfast, which evolved into an informal conversation as opposed to a report. In reviewing this report, readers should remember that this qualitative research was designed to be exploratory in nature:
These findings represent the opinions and attitudes of these three groups of business people and should be validated in quantitative research. Nonetheless, the information presented does provide some interesting insights into employer attitudes, knowledge and perceptions of this important topic. Employer Work Group Findings Overall, the employers had anecdotal knowledge of the affordable housing issue in DuPage, often through personal experience; however, none had any quantitative information about the impact of the issue on their employees or their company’s bottom line. The position statements confirmed a general sense they had about the housing market in DuPage; however, they did not always agree with every statement. Interestingly, they ranked the messages that dealt with the business costs associated with the lack of affordable housing as the least compelling. They generally felt that they left the sessions better informed than when they entered, but also felt a bit overwhelmed by the enormity and complexity of the problem. They offered several suggestions about how to reach employers, but most came down to basic education on the topic. Initial Awareness: Looking more specifically at the attendees’ responses, some attendees were highly aware of the issue, but most admitted having medium to low awareness regarding affordable housing. Those with a higher awareness often had volunteer experiences with local non-profits in the housing field, such as Bridge Communities or Habitat for Humanity. Impact on Business Operations: Although they did not have any quantitative data about the impact of affordable housing on their businesses or, in the case of the unions, their members, they did have lots of anecdotal information that it was an issue. The larger employers saw a direct and dramatic impact when attempting to recruit professionals from outside of the area. One noted that she lost an ideal managerial candidate from Minnesota who specifically cited the high housing costs in DuPage as the primary deciding factor. Now when she recruits potential workers, she doesn’t even mention DuPage County, instead suggesting Kane County as the first housing option. Others shared their personal experiences of “sticker shock” when they moved from lower-cost areas into DuPage. One employer lamented the adverse impact of housing prices on his ability to attract minority candidates, noting that he felt the high costs in DuPage have hurt the ethnic diversity of our community. Reactions were mixed when employers were asked about the impact of high housing costs on their ability to attract lower-wage workers. Some noted that they are able to draw from ethnic enclaves in Cook County and other areas and have not really experienced any problems. Employers such as retail stores and banks found that they were losing lower-wage employees who could find comparable jobs closer to home as service businesses continue to open in fast-growing, lower-priced areas to the south and west of DuPage. Some businesses noted that it was becoming more expensive to attract employees, with one small business employer stating, “Where I used to start someone as a receptionist at $10 an hour, I’m now starting them at $14 an hour.” Commute Issues: In all three groups, the issue of commute times was a prominent and complicated topic. The attendees all acknowledged that commute times around the Chicago metro region are bad and getting worse. Many noted, again anecdotally, that this affects employees’ tardiness and absenteeism; however, not all were convinced of the connection. One employer said that they have problems with absenteeism and tardiness for other reasons, but rarely, if ever, do employees say they’re late because they live too far away. None of the attendees reported discussing commute times or affordable housing in exit interviews with departing employees. Some employers and union representatives reacted to the statements relating to commute times by noting that it’s really an issue of work ethic and people just need to get up and get going early enough to get to work on time. Many attendees reported that longer commutes were problematic in bad weather, with more employees simply deciding it wasn’t even worth trying to make it into work. Some also noted that employees with long commutes are more likely to miss an entire day for a simple errand, such as a doctor appointment, that normally could be done on a long lunch hour. Because the three focus groups were held in August when gas prices were over $3 per gallon, several attendees noted that commute costs suddenly were becoming an issue. One employer said several of her workers had moved to Elburn or Sugar Grove a few years ago because they could get more land and house for their money. They were not concerned about the commute at that time because gas prices were relatively low; however, as gas prices skyrocketed recently, they were reassessing their situations. Some of the attendees commented that where people choose to live is a lifestyle decision, and that many people willingly accept the tradeoff between longer commute times and other factors such as bigger yards and lower taxes. Some attendees who recently moved to the area noted that they could have found housing in DuPage, but they would have had to “settle” for a smaller, older home on a tiny lot. Real Estate Taxes: This issue came up frequently, as many attendees mentioned that DuPage has very high real estate taxes relative to other parts of the metro area, which is an important factor when people are deciding where to purchase a home. However, they also stated that DuPage has a reputation for excellent schools and that people often choose to live here specifically because of the schools (which several acknowledged are funded by real estate taxes). Quality of Life Issues: Several of the discussions turned to quality of life issues, as attendees mentioned that longer commutes mean less family time. They also noted that it really takes two incomes to afford a home in DuPage and discussed the impact this has on children. Representatives of public service workers, such as teachers and police officers, noted that their members who moved outside DuPage were not as connected to the communities in which they worked. One noted, “When they have a two-hour commute, they’re not going to stay for a meeting after school.” Another stated, “All my guys are coaching little league and midget football and everything else everyplace else but here, where I’d like to have them (local children) have the influence of having a cop as a coach.” Some attendees mentioned the difficulty their own adult children were having finding affordable housing in DuPage County, and several who were long-time residents of DuPage reported they could not afford to purchase their homes if they had to buy them today. Several employers and union representatives reported that their younger, entry-level employees often live with their parents, but when they decide to marry and start families, almost all are moving outside of DuPage. NIMBYism: Although the topic of perceptions of affordable housing was not on the agenda, it came up during most of the discussions. Attendees noted that, for many people, “affordable housing” conjures images of failed projects in Chicago and that “Not In My Back Yard” is a common reaction in DuPage County. Messages that Resonate: Maureen asked each attendee to rank six statements about affordable housing from most to least compelling. The goal was to identify which messages resonate most with employers. The results were consistent across all three groups and, interestingly, the statements that related to business costs and competitiveness were the lowest ranked. Following are the six statements ranked from most to least compelling:
Ideas to Involve Employers: Maureen divided the attendees into smaller groups to brainstorm ideas for involving employers in the affordable housing issue. She specifically instructed them to “free-wheel,” “think outside the box” and go for quantity, as it is always easier to edit down a list once it’s compiled. Gathering more data on employee needs and providing employer and community education (both in terms of the scope of the problem and resources to address it) were the top suggestions. The full lists from each group are in Appendix A. End-of-Session Reactions: Maureen concluded each group by asking the attendees how their attitudes had changed since the beginning of the session. In all three groups, the attendees noted
Key points from the small business group included the following:
One attendee said that information from their local government would be more likely to catch their attention than information from an advocacy group. In terms of getting businesses involved, they said that money was a factor, but so was time. “If it’s going to take a great deal more time, I would back off immediately,” one employer said. Key points from the larger businesses were:
Union representatives noted that
One attendee in particular stressed that health care remains an even bigger concern. The attendee statement that probably best summed up the sessions was, “It’s a huge issue and it doesn’t have an easy fix. It’s going to take everyone working towards it, but I’m not sure it’s on everyone’s radar screen.” Employer Work Group Blueprint to Expand Opportunities The Employer Work Group Blueprint will focus on plans to educate businesses about the need for affordable housing in order to engage them as advocates for the creation of workforce housing opportunities. We will develop our presentations using the messages created by the Perceptions Work Group and information developed by our group. We also can draw upon the experiences of other regional efforts on this topic facilitated by groups such as the Metropolitan Mayors Caucus and Housing Illinois. We plan to reach employers individually and through professional gatherings such as Chambers of Commerce meetings and networks of human resources professionals. Each presentation team will consist of an employer who is sympathetic to the topic, who will introduce the talk by explaining why this issue is important to employers. A speaker from our Speakers Bureau will present the information on affordable housing and offer employers an opportunity to become involved as advocates. Based on the information provided in the small business focus group, it would help to include endorsements from government officials who have been involved in the Affordability Task Force. We learned that the messages that most resonated, at least with these employers, were the basic facts about the lack of affordable housing. This information can help employers “connect the dots” from their anecdotal experiences to the bigger public policy issues. The employers in the focus groups did not completely embrace the arguments linking the lack of affordable housing to increased commute times because some saw that as more of a lifestyle choice or an issue of work ethic. (We might encourage businesses to ask about commute times and housing issues in employee exit interviews so that they can begin collecting data about the impact of this issue on their workforce.) When we identify employers who embrace the issue, we will ask them to write letters and make personal contacts to their local officials to support affordable housing projects and initiatives when they come before their local governments. Any efforts that we undertake must be respectful of the limited time employers have to devote to this cause. We must be concise, fast and focused, clear in what we are asking employers to do and organized in providing resources (sample letters, fact sheets, lists of elected officials) to make it easy for them to advocate in their communities. Once we have engaged employers as advocates, we can look for opportunities to introduce additional ways they can become involved, such as implementing employer-assisted housing programs. How You Can Help Please sign up to become involved in bringing the Blueprint to life by
For more information, contact the DuPage Homeownership Center at (630) 260-2500 or info@dhoc.org. A Note from Chairman Debra Olson Thank you to all of the Employer Work Group members for your efforts over the past six months to bring this report to fruition. Everyone contributed and this product truly is the culmination of a tremendous collaborative effort. Thank you to all of the employers who so generously shared their time and insights with our group. A very huge thank-you to Maureen Quinn Olsen of M.Q. Olsen Marketing Research, a consummate professional who so generously donated her time and expertise to our cause. Thank you to ARAMARK, The Pampered Chef and DuPage County for hosting our work group meetings, and to Metropolitan Family Services in Wheaton for hosting our three focus groups. And finally, thank you to everyone who has been involved or is about to become involved in our Affordability Task Force movement. I firmly believe that this type of positive, broad-based, grassroots civic engagement is the most effective, meaningful way to address public policy issues in our community. Appendix A: Ideas to Involve Employers Small Businesses (under 50 employees)
Large Businesses
Unions/Other
Employer Work Group Report - Printable Version (PDF) ___________________________________________________________________ Homeownership: Benchmark for a Vital Community Government Engagement Working Group Liz Corry , Wheaton City Council Member, Chairperson November 29, 2006
The Government Engagement Working Group (GEWG) presents their findings and recommendations, following seven months of research, study, meetings, and discussion on the barriers to affordable housing that exist at the governmental level. In general, the GEWG agreed that affordable housing, particularly workforce housing, needs to be a strategic priority in local municipalities, as well as the overall DuPage County region, with the government working in partnership with the private sector. Tax Increment Financing ( TIF) districts need to be tied to affordable housing priorities, including creation and preservation of affordable housing. How the affordable housing stock of the community is being preserved or created in any planned housing proposal should be part of the questions to developers as they bring plans to the municipality. Developers should set aside units for affordable workforce housing. Why We Came Together The March 22 Symposium, “Homeownership: Benchmark for a Vital Community”, identified numerous barriers to affordable housing at the governmental level. A summary of the barriers identified at the Symposium include:
The Government Engagement Working Group (GEWG) emerged from the Symposium, with the mission of understanding and responding to these barriers, including the following tasks:
Regulatory and structural barriers exist that place obstacles in the way of developing and preserving affordable workforce housing in neighborhoods and municipalities. Participants in the GEWG agreed to work on a study over several months which would culminate in a report to another Symposium on November 29, 2006. The GEWG has met six times since March, studying and discussing the issues and barriers that were raised at the Symposium. Several fact-finding activities and meetings with experts were carried out to better understand the history and current climate of the issue, available resources, and avenues for solutions. Government Engagement Working Group Members The 26 people who participated in some or all of the GEWG meetings included:
What We Did The GEWG met six times, and as we identified an issue for further research, the need for an expert, or additional fact finding, we investigated that area. We also called in people who could help us to better understand the resources available. We had lively discussions at every meeting, filled with anecdotes of local issues that are currently being experienced. These discussions confirmed the need for local governments to have affordable housing as a key strategic issue in city planning. The following list summarizes the activities of the GEWG in their study:
Findings and Recommendations The GEWG considered multiple ideas, templates for development, systemic issues and current resources available. Over the months, ideas emerged in the group to address the key barriers that exist. We ended up identifying 10 recommendations on creating and preserving affordable housing in DuPage County. Each recommendation needs to be considered in light of the unique history, characteristics, opportunities and challenges of a given community or municipality. Each recommendation requires the cooperation and collaboration of government and the private sector. In general, the GEWG agreed that affordable housing, particularly workforce housing, needs to be a strategic priority in local municipalities, as well as the overall DuPage County region, with the government working in partnership with the private sector. The culture of municipal planning needs to be instilled with the political will to create and maintain workforce housing in the community.
Government Engagement Work Group Report - Printable Version (PDF) ____________________________________________________________________ Homeownership: Benchmark for a Vital Community Land Use, Zoning & Building Codes Working Group Phil Passon, Kingsland Properties, Ltd. and Paul Colgan, Colgan Public Affairs, Co-Chairpersons Final Report - November 29, 2006
Land Use, Zoning & Building Codes Work Group was co-chaired by Phil Passon of Kingsland Properties, Ltd. and Paul Colgan of Colgan Public Affairs. Thank you to the many people who gave of their time to participate in one or more of our meetings. (These individuals are identified at the end of this report). The initial task of our Work Group was to identify significant barriers to affordable workforce housing in DuPage County and to determine those barriers that could be reasonably impacted through changes in land use & zoning regulations or through changes in building codes and/or providing incentives to builders. The great disparity between the cost of housing and the ability of much of our workforce to pay for the average home in DuPage County has been well documneted. This obvious price barrier is the direct result of a market imbalance in the supply of affordable housing versus the demand. This work group identified the following significant barriers.
As we analyzed these barriers our work group focused on solutions that would result in increased supply of workforce housing.
Our Land Use, Zoning & Building Codes Work Group recommends that:
Implementing these eight recommendations, will provide incentives for developers, in that affordable workforce housing will be an accepted, known commodity. The approval times for projects will be greatly diminished, and the potentially confrontational nature of approval processes will be substantially reduced. Implementing these recommendations will also greatly reduce the need for direct government subsidies through grants. It is very important for us to move forward to build developments which are a credit to our neighborhoods and meet the housing needs of those people who provide our basic services. We then need to find ways to keep those units in the workforce housing sector. This latter objective can be accomplished through land trusts or other creative methods. We also need to assure that these units are properly maintained . It is imperative that incorporated cities and villages and the County work together to accomplish these recommendations. Thus, we will provide positive examples of viable workforce housing and mixed income housing in our communities. We will be able to say “look, here is how it is done”. I challenge you today to consider these recommendations and those of the other work groups and ask you to consider how you can help us move forward in this extremely vital area. Thank you for your time and help. Land Use, Zoning & Building Codes Working Group Members Dru Bergman, DuPage Homeownership Center Mike Brosnahan, West Suburban Bank Julie Carlsen, DuPage Community Foundation Kelly Cassity, Harris, N.A. Paul Colgan, Colgan Public Affairs Rick Curneal, DuPage Mayors & Managers Conference Tim Dineen, West Suburban Bank John Dzarnowski, PHN Architects Dave Faganel, R.A. Faganel Builder/Developers Cathy Ficker-Terril, Ray Graham Association Sheila Fiett, DuPage Habitat for Humanity Kyle Gilgis, DuPage County Board Dulcinea Gillman-Cronin, #9 Design Susan Hart, National City Mortgage Paul Hoss, DuPage County David Hulseburg, Village of Lombard Tam Kitzmark, DuPage Mayors & Managers Conference Kurt Kyawa, Charter One Bank Amy Lawless, DuPage United Susannah Levine, Business and Professional People for the Public Interest (BPI) Mike Lipke, Noveon Rob Lloyd, Noveon Christine Ludwiszewski, Attainable Housing Alliance Sheila McCann, DuPage Homeownership Center Debra Olson, DuPage County Board Phil Passon, Kingsland Development Corp. & CHAD Mike Provinzino, Century 21 Lullo Barbara Richardson Cassandra Robinson, Catholic Charities Al Sabatino, Century 21 Lullo Silas Shadid, Equity Management Group Phil Smith, DuPage County, Community Services Gerald Stewart, G.Stewart, Inc. Mitchell Trier, Allied First Bank Don Ursin, CHAD Bob Wahlgren, CHAD Marie Wiermanski Land Use, Zoning & Building Codes Work Group Report - Printable Version (PDF) __________________________________________________________________________ Homeownership: Benchmark for a Vital Community Building Codes and Land Costs Paul Colgan
_____________________________________________________________________________ Homeownership: Benchmark for a Vital Community Remarks by Dr. Sunil Chand
__________________________________________________________________________ Homeownership: Benchmark for a Vital Community Purpose of Charrettes
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
 |
DuPage Homeownership Center 1333
North Main Street Wheaton, Illinois 60187 Tel: (630) 260-2500 Fax: (630) 260-2505 E-mail: info@dhoc.org |