Category Archives: City Politics

soh

DC, NYC now offering low-income tenants free legal representation

Image: Tenant rights activists rally in DC earlier this year

Eviction is just about the scariest thing that a tenant can face. It increases your risk of homelessness, poverty, and job loss. It’s more likely to happen to you if you’re a woman, if you’re black, or if you have kids. And it can set your family back for years. That’s why Washington, DC and New York City just implemented laws offering free legal services to low-income tenants facing eviction.

These laws are part of a growing movement across the country, called “civil Gideon,” to provide legal representation to tenants facing eviction. It stems from data showing that while landlords almost always have a lawyer in eviction suits, tenants almost never do. In DC, 94 percent of landlords have legal representation. That’s compared to only 5 percent of tenants.

That gap produces a huge disparity in outcomes, with tenants often being evicted over minimal debts. Sometimes it’s not even a debt tenants are unable to pay–withholding rent is a common last-straw tactic for tenants who can’t get landlords to make necessary fixes. But without a lawyer to guide them, that tactic can end in eviction.

Opponents of New York City’s law, which offers free representation to tenants making up to $50,000, complain about its cost–estimated to be about $200 million each year. But because evictions so often result in homelessness, increased reliance on safety net programs, and other costs to local governments, supporters of the bill decided to run the numbers.

They found that the measure will not only pay for itself, but it will result in over $300 million of additional savings each year. Between saving tenants strife and saving the city money, it’s hard to find a reason to oppose this bill.

The DC Council agrees, and a similar bill put forward earlier this year by Councilmember Kenyan McDuffie (Ward 5) ended up being included in this year’s budget support act. As a much smaller city, the costs for DC’s program are significantly less than in New York City–the budget included $3.9 million in ongoing funds and an additional $600,000 for this year.

Tenant groups and other advocates will be sure to watch this process closely. But with widespread support, plus clear benefits for tenants and the city coffers, DC’s new effort to get free legal representation for low-income tenants should be a great success.

 

neighborhood cut by interstate

Denver, DC make communities of color “dumping ground”

An interstate slashing through Latino communities in the name of progress. An air-polluting city truck fleet moved from a “commercially viable” gentrifying neighborhood to a lower-income black neighborhood. In the last few weeks, DC and Denver have been busy showcasing the worst of the 20th century’s development ideas—well into the 2010s.

Denver’s new renewal

In the 1950s and ’60s, a philosophy called “urban renewal” was sweeping the nation. Crumbling inner city areas, went the thinking, simply weren’t worth saving. It was better to just knock everything down and start over.

And that’s exactly what urban planners did all across the country. Block by block, city by city, the wrecking balls moved in and cleared old structures out. What determined their path, however, had much more to do with race than it did with a plan for urban growth.

The homes, businesses, churches, and community centers the planners targeted for renewal were almost exclusively owned by people of color. Many communities organized extensively in the face of this theft, and some won decisive victories. But through the use of eminent domain, American cities seized and destroyed whole communities, with the displaced, undercompensated black and Latino families left in their wake shunted along into newly built public housing facilities.

DC has its own history of this practice, with the destruction of functioning black communities along the southwest waterfront something still being felt today.

southwest_1939

Southwest DC in 1939, before the majority black neighborhoods were destroyed

The practice largely petered out in the 1970s and ’80s as community groups honed their resistance tactics, winning more and more victories. But Denver is looking to bring back the bad ol’ days with a new interstate expansion.

In a city that is almost 80 percent white, city planners have targeted several majority Latino neighborhoods on the edge of city limits for destruction. Fifty-six homes and 17 businesses would be razed, and the neighborhoods would be cut down the middle by a full decade of construction.

When community groups filed a complaint alleging disparate impact, the federal government admitted that was the case—but decided it wasn’t enough to force a change in plans. Residents aren’t giving up the fight, however, and you can read more about their efforts here.

DC’s pollution distribution

Unlike Denver’s throwback to another era of racist urban planning, DC’s project is part of a long line of cities putting unwanted goods in black neighborhoods. Residents of majority black Langdon Park in Ward 5 recently learned that Department of Parks and Recreation vehicles will soon be rolling into a new home in their neighborhood.

Langdon Google MapsLangdon Park and Ivy City in northeast DC. Link to Google Maps.

That was only discovered after neighbors noticed activity at the site and did some online searching. The search revealed a lease agreement for the site—and the fact that the city failed to fulfill its legal requirement for notifying residents. ANC officials, who didn’t receive their requisite 30-day notice, were in the dark.

And Ward 5 Councilmember Kenyan McDuffie learned that he also had been illegally kept out of the loop—after investigating, he found that the Council had already unwittingly approved the city’s plan through a 10-day passive approval period last year.

City officials admit their mistake, but they see no reason the project shouldn’t more forward as planned.

The site’s location is problematic because it adds an unwanted good to an already overburdened population. Ward 5 already contains a hugely disproportionate amount of the city’s industrial sites. What’s more, DC, like most American cities, has asthma rates that largely fall along racial lines—black children are far more likely to have respiratory issues than white children.

The addition of more smog-belching trucks to a majority black area of the city, an area that already has too much air pollution and the asthma rates to match, is the stuff of textbooks on environmental racism.

It comes just a few years after a similar fight in Ivy City, Langdon Park’s Ward 5 neighbor, where then-Mayor Vincent Gray announced plans for a new bus depot in another overburdened majority black neighborhood. Mayor Muriel Bowser killed that plan when she came into office, in a win for local residents.

But now she’s advancing an almost identical project. In explaining their decision to move DCPR from its current location in Shaw, the administration stated that the existing site is simply too “commercially desirable” to house vehicles. The burden, then, is intentionally being shifted from a gentrified neighborhood to one with a majority of people of color.

Jeremy Wilcox, the Langdon Park resident who was the first to find the lease agreement, told the Washington Post what it communicates to the neighborhood on no uncertain terms: “We are a dumping ground—Ward 5 is a dumping ground.”

The methods and the scale might be different, but Denver and DC keep putting unwanted goods on the shoulders of people of color. It’s a game American cities have been playing for far too long.

Asset Building cover

New Push in DC for Racial Justice Through Asset Building

A bold new report released this month details the disparity of wealth along racial lines in DC, then plots several ways the city can achieve a more equitable future. Its authors hope it’s just the start of a city-wide movement for building wealth in communities of color.

The report, entitled An Introduction to Asset Building in the District of Columbia, was written by the Coalition for Nonprofit Housing and Economic Development (CNHED) and Capital Area Asset Builders (CAAB), two long-time players in DC’s asset building landscape.

The need is clear. According to the report, 40 percent of DC residents don’t have enough net worth to stay above the poverty line for three months if their income disappeared. One in ten don’t even have a bank account—and among those who do a full quarter of residents are still forced to use predatory institutions like payday loan offices.

Asset building stats

It’s a problem that largely falls along racial lines. An analysis of DC post-recession found that the average white household has over 80 times the wealth of the average black household. That’s largely due to a lack of asset ownership, especially homeownership, in black communities.

CNHED and CAAB want to start a new coalition to take this problem on. Because this disparity has been created by several centuries of discriminatory laws and spending, it will take smart new investments by public and private actors to start to shrink this racial wealth gap.

The report outlines four general approaches that an asset building coalition could take, from pressuring the city government to institute new programs for low-income wealth building, to creating and managing new programs through a steering committee made up of members from this future coalition.

Whatever form this coalition takes, DC residents are counting on it to be impactful. Many literally can’t afford failure.

For more info about the Asset Building Policy Project and how to join the coalition, click here!

Asset Building strategies

Nam_Viet_DC

New Bill Would Help DC Restaurants with Rent Increases

Nam-Viet in Cleveland Park, which closed on June 25

After two high-profile restaurant closings in Cleveland Park, Councilmember Brianne Nadeau (Ward 1) has introduced a new bill to help longtime DC restaurants deal with rising rents.

The bill, supported by Councilmembers Elissa Silverman (At-Large), Robert White (At-Large), Trayon White (Ward 8), David Grosso (At-Large), and Charles Allen (Ward 6), would provide restaurants that have been in the same location for at least a decade with up to $50,000 of assistance a year for up to five years. The restaurants must also be certified small business enterprises.

With this bill, CM Nadeau is trying to not only stop the displacement of longtime DC eateries, but also to prevent the cultural gentrification that many life-long Washingtonians say makes them feel like strangers in their own neighborhoods.

CM Nadeau’s website says that she hopes the bill will help mitigate “commercial gentrification [that] risks the vibrancy and continuity of our neighborhoods…”

In one study on the topic, researchers at the City University of New York found that longtime restaurants in a gentrifying majority-black New York City neighborhood were likely to receive online reviews portraying them in a negative light.

Reviewers used words like “sketchy” or “ghetto” to describe the neighborhood’s black owned businesses, language that is almost always a coded racial condemnation of a majority-black space.

The CUNY researchers termed this practice “discursive redlining,” noting that the public branding of black-owned institutions as undesirable is an important part of the neighborhood takeover.

While rental assistance alone can’t shift newcomers’ perceptions, it can give longtime restaurants—and by extension, residents—a better chance to feel secure in a changing neighborhood. Perhaps a longer time frame would even convince newcomers to try longtime establishments, increasing chances of connections forming between the old and the new.

In any case, CM Nadeau’s bill would help otherwise sound restaurants deal with rising rents. And that in itself may be enough to make it law.

Anita Bonds

CM Bonds Moves Rent Control Fixes

Councilmember Anita Bonds (At-Large) symbolically closes a rent control loophole at an event in October 2016

DC has one of the strongest rent control laws in the nation. Unfortunately, several landlord-sized loopholes turn lots of ostensibly rent controlled housing into market rate units each year. But Councilmember Anita Bonds (At-Large) is working on passing a pair of bills to fix that.

The problem comes in both cases when a rental unit changes hands.

Currently, anyone living in a rent controlled building (any building built before 1975 that has five or more units) by law sees only modest increases in their rent each year. For people who find an affordable rent-controlled unit and then are able to age in place, the protections are stellar.

But when a unit experiences turnover, as units are liable to do in DC’s fast-paced rental market, landlords are able to raise prices by up to 30 percent—often essentially taking the unit to market rate. One family may leave a home that costs $1300 a month only for the next family who moves in to find themselves facing rent of $1700 a month or more.

One of CM Bonds’ bills, entitled the Rental Housing Affordability Stabilization Amendment Act of 2017, would cap that increase at just 5 percent—an amount that preserves the unit’s affordability and doesn’t incentivize pushing current tenants out the door. Publicly supported by Councilmembers Cheh (Ward 3), Silverman (At-Large), Gray (Ward 7), Grosso (At-Large), and Trayon White (Ward 8), the bill would also limit yearly rent increases to strictly the rate of inflation.

Another tactic landlords sometimes use to raise prices is to make voluntary agreements with tenant associations. It’s a process that involves several steps of abuse.

Landlords can file to raise rent above allowable rates with a “hardship petition,”* claiming that they can’t afford to make necessary improvements (or at least can’t earn enough profit while doing so) without more revenue. If their petition is accepted, tenants have no negotiating power—they can pay the new, higher rates or move out.

But sometimes landlords are unsure whether their petition would succeed or not. If that’s the case, they’ll go a different direction and use the threat of a hardship petition as a bargaining chip. In negotiating with tenant associations, landlords portray the tenants’ choices as this: you can either go through with the petition process and likely see automatic rent increases, or you can sit down with me and work on a deal where you’re guaranteed not to see any increases—but you wave future tenants’ rent control rights.

With the voluntary agreement from the tenant association in hand, landlords are able to make any unit that changes hands into a market rate apartment.

CM Bonds’ other bill, the Preservation of Affordable Rent Control Housing Amendment Act of 2017, wants to stop landlords from pitting current and future tenants against each other. It would outlaw the practice of making deals that only raise prices for newcomers, mandating that any agreed upon increases must be applied across the board.

It was co-introduced by Councilmembers Robert White (At-Large), Silverman, Cheh, and Trayon White.

If passed by the Council and signed into law, both bills would move DC closer to protecting tenants as the District’s rent control law intended.

 

*Another one of CM Bonds’ bills on rent control, this one targeting hardship petitions, was signed into law last December. It succeeded in lowering the return on investment guaranteed to landlords from 12 percent to 5 percent.

HOTH 2017 2

HAT, Partners Work Against Racial Wealth Gap with Town Hall; Trump Administration Exacerbates It

One-sixteenth.

That’s the average wealth of a black family compared to a white family in America. It’s the result of centuries of racist policy in education, employment, and especially homeownership.

MANNA’s Housing Advocacy Team has long had an explicit focus on closing the racial wealth gap in our communities, and along with our partners at the Coalition for Nonprofit Housing and Economic Development and the Latino Economic Development Center, this past Saturday we hosted a Homeownership Town Hall aimed at connecting low-income families, especially families of color, to homeownership opportunities.

HAT and our partners are proud of the work we do, and we can see the impact that it has in DC. At the same time, however, we realize that there needs to be national progress in order to achieve justice in our country. The Trump Administration, on the other hand, is looking for a massive transfer of wealth from the bottom to the top; one that’s sure to widen America’s racial wealth divide.

The Town Hall

Close to 200 people came on Saturday for a series of workshops, vendor tables, and presenters covering every step of the affordable homebuying and ownership process. Participants learned about how to improve their credit scores, how to connect with organizations like MANNA that can help them find a home, and the wide variety of city programs that can help make affordable homeownership possible.

Current homeowners were able to learn about city property tax laws and legal estate planning, helping to ensure that their homes will be passed on to their children.

MANNA’s Director of Homebuyer Education, TC Caviness, started off the strong lineup of speakers by articulating the extent to which a gap in homeownership holds back wealth building for black families. Even other areas that are typically thought of as wealth builders, like education level, pale in comparison to the impact that homeownership has.

Despite having worked around housing for years, said TC, “I was shocked when I saw these charts.”

RacialWealthGap_1.pdf college RacialWealthGap_1.pdf

A college education, while important for many, many reasons beyond money, does almost nothing to close the racial wealth gap, explained TC. Homeownership, on the other hand, shrinks that gap by more than a third.

Polly Donaldson, Director of the DC Department of Housing and Community Development, and Councilmember Anita Bonds, Chair of the Council’s housing committee, both spoke about the importance of affordable homeownership for building a city where all residents can thrive.

Councilmember Bonds, reflecting on the positive impact of recent increases to DC’s Home Purchase Assistance Program for first time low- and moderate-income homebuyers, told the crowd, “Next year, I want to increase it again!”

Trump Administration’s Reverse Robin Hood

That was in stark contrast to the ideas that are coming out of the White House. The Trump Administration has released a series of tax cuts for the wealthy that would collectively cost around $6.2 trillion over the next decade.

To pay for them, the President has introduced a budget plan that would drastically cut many programs targeting poor families, among which families of color are disproportionately represented.

Here are a few of his proposed tax and budget cuts, juxtaposed for context.

  • $192 billion cut to food stamps pays for $174 billion giveaway by abolishing the Estate Tax
  • $143 billion in cuts to student loans helps pay for $158 billion lost by repealing a tax on the unearned income of the wealthy (interest, dividends, capital gains, etc.)
  • $40 billion in cuts to EITC and the child tax credit vs. $400 billion lost by abolishing the Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT is often the only tax paid by billionaires)

(from Americans for Tax Fairness)

While HAT and others are prepared to continue our push for fair funding in the District, we need help from our national partners and from people all around the country to stop the Trump Administration’s disastrous and immoral plan to take from the poor and give to the rich. We know that the impact of this theft will disproportionately fall on communities of color, causing the racial wealth gap to grow wider and wider.

Looking at our country’s history, it’s certainly not unprecedented. But as MANNA’s work in DC has proven, it’s not inevitable, either.

grosso

As Budget Holes Abound, Council Approves Tax Break for Millionaires

Councilmember Davd Grosso (At-Large)

In front of a packed hearing room, as many held signs in silent protest, the DC Council Tuesday morning rejected an effort by Councilmember David Grosso (At-Large) to delay a cut in the District’s estate tax. The tax cut, which would raise the threshold for the estate tax from $2 million to $5 million, will go into effect in January 2018 unless the Council acts before then.

Some have estimated that the proposed cut in the estate tax would affect only a hundred families in the District.

Alongside a reduction in the business franchise tax that Councilmember Grosso and advocates also unsuccessfully opposed, these cuts come against the backdrop of a tight and stressful budget season.

Metro funding, investments in education, looming federal cuts, and an on-going affordable housing crisis have made for a lot of hard discussions about what should be funded and at what levels. Yet as we’ve covered before, the Council has made things unnecessarily harder for themselves with tax cuts that do little to help the city move forward.

Councilmember Grosso laid out in plain terms the reasons for his opposition. When the District was struggling, he said, the Council bent over backwards to try to attract new businesses. But that effort was with an explicit goal in mind: to lift up all the city’s residents, especially those that had been left behind by a changing economy.

Now, said the councilmember, the District is thriving—but the boom times aren’t being shared by all. Not giving away the revenue from multi-million dollar estates and big businesses’ franchise expansions is a simple way to move towards fulfilling the original vision for growth.

“I’m not quite sure,” said Councilmember Grosso, “how we ended up as a Council aligning with the Trump administration’s budget priorities. We’re looking at underfunding social services and prioritizing tax cuts for big business and the wealthy.”

Councilmembers Brianne Nadeau (Ward 1) and Elissa Silverman (At-Large) joined Grosso in their opposition. Both spoke about the challenges facing the District and the impact that this money could have if directed towards community needs.

Councilmember Trayon White (Ward 8) supported the effort to postpone the estate tax cut, while joining the majority in allowing the business franchise tax cut to move forward.

The rest of the Council followed Chairman Phil Mendelson’s lead in preserving the cuts, with many speaking about a desire to grow the District’s economic output.

As Councilmember Grosso noted, however, economic output is no longer in question. It’s the original vision of inclusive growth that now is imperiled.

post

The Post Misleads on DHCD Grant Givebacks

From its opening line and its title alone, a recent Washington Post article’s message is clear: Mayor Bowser’s administration is responsible for losing almost $16 million in federal funds for affordable housing. Yet the facts behind the Post’s recent article do little to support this conjecture.

The Facts

The article, entitled “The D.C. Housing Department forfeited millions as families waited for help,” details how DC’s Department of Housing and Community Development (DHCD) was forced to return millions of dollars between 2014 and 2016.

These returns, representing a significant portion of the District’s HOME block grant for affordable housing, were compelled because of mismanagement. Some of the $16 million represented money that was never allocated for specific projects and ran into a deadline for use, while the rest came from projects that DHCD approved, but that the federal government later determined did not meet their standards.

This giveback was undoubtedly a tragedy in a city starved for affordable housing, and a preventable one. However, it’s not a reflection of DHCD’s capacity under Mayor Bowser and DHCD Director Polly Donaldson.

The Mislead

In fact, the Post is careful never to specifically fault the Mayor or her administration for the givebacks, preferring instead to lay blame with DHCD. It’s a fair claim—an indisputable one, actually. DHCD mismanagement under the past administration is undoubtedly the reason these funds were lost. But by weaving the facts with repeated references to Mayor Bowser and Director Donaldson, the Post attempts to imply a connection where none exists.

It’s the same game the Bush administration played in going to war in Iraq—say “9/11” and “Saddam Hussein” enough times in the same sentence, and the result is over half the population believing that Hussein was personally responsible for the attacks.

The Post additionally misleads readers with its talk of using the $16 million for local rental vouchers under the city’s Local Rent Supplement Program (LRSP). The article claims that the $16 million “could have provided rent vouchers for a year to roughly 1,000 of the city’s poorest families.”

As the administration noted in a rebuttal it circulated earlier this week, the funds in question were spread over multiple years—no single year had $16 million left over. Furthermore, rent supplements are not a one-time expense. The city is required to cover that supplement for as long as the family lives in their subsidized unit. The “1,000 families,” then, is nothing but hyperbole.

The Forgotten

The most important piece left out of the Post article is the most damning to their tenuous connection. All of the money forfeited, both because of deadlines for use or projects that didn’t meet federal standards, was the result of decisions DHCD made before the Bowser administration took over.

The administration’s statement notes that “the over $15 million in HOME funds referenced in the Post’s story actually expired prior to 2015. These projects were funded and approved by the prior administration and were subsequently found to be ineligible for HOME funds during the first six months of the Bowser Administration…”

What’s more, the Post fails to identify that the former DHCD employees it quotes were in fact responsible themselves for underwriting several of the projects that were denied by the federal government.

Whether through an intentional omission or an accidental oversight, this irony is lost for the reader.

While DHCD undeniably had major problems in the past, under Director Donaldson’s leadership it has become a major asset in DC’s work to build and preserve affordable housing. A piece like this one from the Post, with its misleading ties and hyperbolic claims, serves only to endanger funding for the families it ostensibly wants to help.

grosso

Councilmembers Call for Divestment from Wells Fargo

Councilmember David Grosso, whose office wrote the resolution

The City Council wants DC to reconsider its relationship with Wells Fargo Bank. That’s according to a resolution introduced by Councilmembers David Grosso (AL), Anita Bonds (AL), Elissa Silverman (AL), Brianne Nadeau (Ward 1), and Charles Allen (Ward 6) last month.

Wells Fargo handles the city government’s banking needs as the city’s bank of record, with billions of dollars in its account.  But in their statement, the councilmembers expressed skepticism that Wells Fargo was meeting its obligations to the communities it serves and called for the District to “reassess its existing relationship with Wells Fargo and consider greater investment in local banks to support community growth.”

Their statement listed concerns about Wells Fargo’s history of racially discriminatory lending practices, its funding of private prisons, and its role in financing the Dakota Access Pipeline. That pipeline was rerouted through the drinking water of the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe in part because it was deemed by the EPA to be too dangerous to pass through predominantly-white Bismark, ND’s water supply.

Wells Fargo has also made news in the past year with revelations that thousands of their employees opened millions of false accounts using customers’ information. According to past employees, this was driven by unrealistic sales requirements and a toxic corporate culture. In September of last year Wells Fargo settled with federal regulators for $185 million.

In part because of this, Wells Fargo’s score under the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA), a piece of legislation designed to monitor and encourage responsible banking in low- and-moderate-income communities, was recently downgraded to a “needs to improve.” This is a failing grade under the CRA ratings, a rare occurrence under a system some advocates have described as being too lenient.

Between 1990 and 2007, an average of only 4 percent of banks each year received a failing grade on their CRA exam.

In their report, federal regulators also referenced Wells Fargo’s history of racial discrimination in lending and other improper lending techniques.

Wells Fargo, for its part, claims its problems are now in the past and that it has taken concrete steps to improve its community services. In a statement after their federal settlement, CEO Tim Sloan declared that Wells Fargo is on a “journey to make things right with customers and rebuild trust.”

DC councilmembers, however, remain unconvinced.

combine_images

How to Keep DC From Becoming the Next San Francisco

Washington, DC and San Francisco have some striking similarities. Both are mid-sized cities with institutions (government and the tech industry) that pack a punch above their population size. Both are somewhat restrained in terms of expansion, with DC’s small, set borders, and San Francisco’s watery boundaries. And above all, both have seen extreme gentrification in recent years, with the cities growing rapidly and becoming wealthier and whiter as time goes on.

But San Francisco is undoubtedly further along in this vicious process: while DC’s average monthly rent of $1,400 for a single person is the fourth highest in the US, San Francisco’s is the highest in the world at an impressively awful $2,000+.

That allows DC residents to look to San Francisco for some lessons—or, if we’re not careful, to behold our future.

Based on these insights, we’ve got some recommendations for the city council… and for you, the reader. Read on.

What will the future hold for DC if it follows the Frisco model?

  • All housing development, including affordable housing, will be stymied as fear over housing shortages and NIBMY-ism drives irrational opposition. In the Bay Area, this has resulted in severe housing shortages at every level, not just for low-income families. Unlike San Francisco, DC is currently in no danger of a total housing shutdown. The recent explosion of luxury units and high-end condos contributed to overall supply actually outpacing demand in the District’s housing market last year. Of course, affordable housing is nowhere near keeping up.
  • Homeownership will drop even further and DC, like San Francisco, will become truly a renters’ city. Ownership rates in San Francisco have been on a multi-decade slide, with only a third of residents now owning their own homes. DC isn’t much better at a 40 percent homeownership rate.
  • In part because of rock bottom homeownership rates, displacement will move from a low-income issue to a middle class issue. Only the truly wealthy will be able to afford the city proper. That’s already the case in San Francisco, where things have gotten so bad that even good-paying professional jobs are starting to move out because the companies’ employees can’t afford the city.

“Yikes!” you say. “That’s pretty grim. What can we do to avoid all this?” Well, I’m glad you asked!

4

One of San Francisco’s iconic cable cars

DC doesn’t have to go down this path—there’s still time to change. Here are some simple steps we can take to make sure the District remains home for everyone.

  • Affordable Housing: It needs to be funded and constructed like never before. That’s why we’re asking the city council to commit at least $125 million to the Housing Production Trust Fund for the coming year. And honestly, that number might not be big enough. Because of problems in the Low Income Housing Tax Credit market, a primary funding tool for many affordable housing projects across the country, $125 million is probably the new $100 million. If the council really wants to take a step forward rather than just holding even, we’ll need even more commitment.
  • Homeownership: Increasing homeownership needs to be a top priority, both because of the wealth it builds and the protection it offers against sky-rocketing rents. We’re calling on the council to keep funding the Home Purchase Assistance Program (HPAP) at $16 million, the level it was increased to last year. HPAP provides crucial down payment assistance and secondary mortgage loans to first time homebuyers in DC. That builds wealth, moves people into the middle class, and keeps long-time residents in our city.
  • An ever-broader movement: More middle-income Washingtonians need to realize that affordable housing is their issue, too. NIMBY-ism and indifference might work in the short term, but sooner or later it will catch up. We need to build a broad coalition of DC residents, new and old, of all wealth levels and racial backgrounds. (The rich benefit from affordable housing, too, by the way. Unless wealthy urbanites want to start entering the service industry en masse, it’s in their best interest to keep around the people who make cities run.)

If DC is to avoid the fate of its West Coast sister city, we need to move on funding and organizing now. Tell your councilmembers to boost the Trust Fund. Get their commitment that they’ll keep supporting HPAP. And join a local organization that’s fighting for affordable housing. Hey, we’ve got a suggestion right here.

If you would like more information about joining the Housing Advocacy Team, email Jonathan Nisly at jnisly@mannadc.org!