This story was originally published by Reveal from The Center for Investigative Reporting, a nonprofit news organization based in the San Francisco Bay Area. Learn more at revealnews.org and subscribe to the Reveal podcast, produced with PRX, at revealnews.org/podcast.
People of color continue to be denied conventional mortgage loans at rates far higher than their white counterparts.
We spent a year analyzing 31 million mortgage records, employing techniques used by leading academics, which control for nine economic and social factors. We found a troubling pattern of denials for African Americans, Latinos, Asians and Native Americans across the country.
People of color have struggled for equal access to loans for decades. Join Reveal host Al Letson for a visual overview of how our findings fit into this larger history.
“This story was produced by Reveal from The Center for Investigative Reporting, a nonprofit news organization. Learn more at revealnews.org and subscribe to the Reveal podcast, produced with PRX, at revealnews.org/podcast.”
“Today, Manhattan Plaza has several waiting lists of over 600 people. Like most of the city, the development’s surrounding neighborhood has undergone a complete transformation, and it now sits on prime real estate. Related Companies purchased the complex in 2004 and extended its Section 8 contract, which requires renewal regularly. Elliot says there is a new plan to build 1,500 affordable housing units for artists in New York City.”
Working in a non-profit organization, and often working most directly on public policy and advocacy issues with people in other non-profit or governmental entities, I can easily lose sight of some aspects of the universe of for-profit businesses. I recently started thinking more about how much overlap and shared common interests that my work as an advocate for affordable and inclusive housing has with at least some private for-profit housing developers. We both are often striving for zoning by-laws that permit a higher density of homes, narrower setback requirements, more flexible parking requirements and simpler-more predictable permitting processes among a myriad of other related things.
My primary aim is to create more homes at rental and sale prices that are more affordable to more people in a state with very high housing costs and housing shortages in many places. I know that a more or less planned increasing supply of homes especially in combination with various public subsidies can generate at least some housing that is affordable to people on the lower ends of the income scale. I also know that because of the fact that more people in certain fair housing protected classes tend to have lower incomes and that developing more affordable and accessible homes will increase housing opportunities for people in protected classes. The flip side is that shortages of housing supply, overdevelopment of high end housing on large lot sizes, and long uncertain and unnecessarily daunting and expensive permitting processes will tend to increase the price of homes and that tends to disparately exclude— whether purposely or not— people in protected classes such as many minorities, people with disabilities, and others. My goal is creating more inclusive and less expensive homes and communities, and not creating more exclusive and more expensive homes and communities.
Achieving more of the goals of inclusivity will create conditions that are beneficial to large sectors of our towns and cities—including businesses that need more workers, more shoppers and more consumers of services. Governmental entities will be in better shape also with a broader tax base to help maintain needed services.
To get to a state of increased inclusion and affordability will require some willingness to change some bylaws that have been around for a long time and if they ever had a good purpose do not do so now in our current society and economy. It is in the work of achieving some of these changes that I have come to realize that advocates of fair, affordable and safe homes have good opportunities to collaborate with private developers.
To this end our Fair Housing Project has pulled together some private developers, currently mostly in the Chittenden County, Vermont area, to join forces with us to work on some of those things we agree on and to perhaps mitigate some of the areas of disagreement that we will no doubt have.
Getting stuck in our own limited world view does not help us make real progress in our communities. We can break out of that mode.
On Nov, 8, voters across the country heard the affordable housing call and approved numerous state and local housing funding measures that will make it possible for more of our neighbors to live in safe, healthy, and affordable homes. This was a real achievement in housing advocacy, but the work is far from over. Developers, local governments, and advocates must now move to convince the neighbors of proposed housing developments to accept more affordable homes into their communities.
The election that brought over 37 affordable housing measures to the ballot in eight states also elevated toxic rhetoric about people of color and other populations. The public discourse has changed, and that’s likely to affect our efforts to build support for affordable housing development and counter community opposition. Here’s what you may hear about affordable housing in your community, and how to prepare for it:
Racial animus. In the wake of the election, there have been many reports of hate-based harassment and intimidation across the country. An offending segment of our population feels newly empowered to use racist language in all types of situations. While racism and fear of difference have always been, at the very least, an undercurrent of some forms of community opposition, in recent years it’s largely been implied, not overt. You may see an uptick in overt racism in siting conversations.
What to do? While it would be satisfying—and, arguably, right—to call out racist language directly when you hear it, research tells us that this is likely to backfire, causing the speaker to defensively double-down on the prejudiced belief. Instead, a study this year found that “a short conversation encouraging actively taking the perspective of others can markedly reduce prejudice.” It argues for holding small-group conversations and facilitators trained to listen and find common ground.
Misinformation. You’ve likely heard much about the success of fake news during the presidential campaign. Misinformation this election cycle may have had a distinctive rightward bent, but don’t pat yourself on the back if you lean left. All of us are susceptible to information that confirms what we already believe, regardless of its factual accuracy. Don’t be surprised to see an increase in the misinformation about your work being posted online and handed around in anonymous flyers around the neighborhoods where you work.
What to do? Don’t write up a “frequently asked questions” page correcting the lies being told about your work. By emphasizing the misinformation—even when you later correct it—you’re just driving it deeper into peoples’ consciousness. Instead, first tell your truth (“Our apartments increase neighborhood safety.”), then signpost the misinformation and explain the motive behind it (“There is a myth circulating that affordable housing increases crime, promoted by a small new neighborhood group formed to fight our proposal.”), and finally give a brief, clear alternative explanation, repeated in graphics if possible (“In fact, by starting a neighborhood watch program and installing security cameras, we’ve helped create a 13 percent decrease in property crime in another neighborhood where we work. We want to work with you to have a similar positive impact here.”).
Ideological conflict.Research into persistent opposition to affordable housing has shown that spatial ideology—an individual’s set of beliefs around who can live in and use a particular place, and who has the right to participate in decision-making about a place—can be predictive of opposition to, or support of, affordable housing. The recent push to disenfranchise groups of Americans through voter ID laws and other restrictions is an example of a narrow conception of spatial rights, and the electoral contest was rife with rhetoric supporting a conscribed idea of to whom America truly belongs. Opposition may now more frequently focus on delegitimizing prospective low-income residents, perhaps as “not American” or simply “not from here.”
What to do?Unfortunately, ideology might be hard-wired, and thus addressing spatial ideology head-on might not be effective. At the same time, there are likely to be people in your community who believe lower-income people have an equal right to live in a place. Find these potential supporters by emphasizing the values of diversity and inclusion, and give this group a clear way to take action and vocalize support of your work.
Distrust of institutional authority. The success of populist presidential candidates from both parties points to, among other things, Americans’ growing distrust of institutions. Whether it’s in banks, the news media, or government itself, people across the political spectrum have lost faith. Unfortunately, affordable housing development connects to all sorts of things many of our neighbors have come to doubt: taxation, finance systems and entities, and zoning, just to name a few.
What to do? First, people who have lost trust will hear a developer mention “partnering with the government” and translate that into an attempt to paper over a profit-making arrangement. Step away from the marketing talk and use plain language to explain what you do, and why it is successful. Second, reframe the role of these perceived-suspect institutions. A new paper from Enterprise Community Partners and the FrameWorks Institute recommends that we help people understand the role of government in affordable housing by explaining, “the role of systems in shaping outcomes for people and … communities,” and by, “zooming out” to tell broader stories that explain the impact of housing issues on an entire community. You know your work is about more than simply units; help others understand this too.
Countering community opposition has never been easy, and I hope to hear that these predictions have not come true, but even if they do, our work can have a long-term impact on decreasing bias. There is evidence that white people living in diverse neighborhoods “endorsed fewer negative stereotypes, and [feel] closer to Blacks as a group.” When we create diverse, inclusive communities, we help decrease prejudice and division. That’s something truly worth fighting for.
Charlie Baker, executive director of the Chittenden County Regional Planning Commission, is part of a new coalition that will try to bring about the construction of 3,500 housing units in Chittenden county over the next five years. Peter Hirschfield / VPR
Chittenden County, Vermont: The Champlain Housing Trust, Housing Vermont, and the Chittenden County Regional Planning Commission are currently undergoing a coordinated campaign to increase the housing supply in Chittenden County. This campaign is called Building Homes Together.
A press conference was held on June 27, 2016 to announce this campaign, which sets a target of 3,500 new homes created in the next five years.
Individuals, businesses or organizations that wish to sign on and participate in the campaign are encouraged to by sending an email to Chris Donnelly at chris@champlainhousingtrust.org.
* Frequently Asked Questions (“Don’t we have enough housing now?”)
Q: The vacancy rate was 3.0% in December 2015 (reported by Allen & Brooks), so haven’t we already reached our goal?
A: No. The 3.0% figure relates to just a point in time. We look at a long-term vacancy rate to avoid using numbers that could be skewed by new housing just opening. A long-term rate is a better indicator of the health of the housing market over the past fifteen years. For instance, the reported vacancy rate was 3.0% in December, 2015 and 2.1% in June, 2016; meanwhile the long-term vacancy rate is only 1.6%.
Q: There are a lot of housing units in the development pipeline, so why do we need to build even more?
A: The Building Homes Together campaign to build 3,500 homes by 2021 for people of all incomes, including 700 affordable homes, is a goal for the number of homes constructed. The number of homes planned in the pipeline is not an accurate count of what actually gets built. However, the homes that are in the pipeline, that do get built will count toward the 3,500 homes.
Q: Who is living in these new homes?
A: We all are. Household size is shrinking so even if we didn’t have any new residents we would need more homes to house the residents we have. In addition, Chittenden County has grown by an average of 915 people per year over the last 6 years (U.S. Census American Community Survey, 1 – Year Estimates). Also, it is important to note that some of our County employees are not living here. While the number of jobs has remained relatively steady in Chittenden County, there are 7,329 fewer workers living here now than in 2002. Only 65% of county employees lived here in 2014, down from 75% in 2002, indicating a lack of available, affordable homes within the County. Specifically, the average annual increase in rent is about 3.0%; while the median household income in the Burlington-South Burlington Labor Market declined by 1.0% annually since 2010 (Allen & Brooks Report, June 2016
“Today, Manhattan Plaza has several waiting lists of over 600 people. Like most of the city, the development’s surrounding neighborhood has undergone a complete transformation, and it now sits on prime real estate. Related Companies purchased the complex in 2004 and extended its Section 8 contract, which requires renewal regularly. Elliot says there is a new plan to build 1,500 affordable housing units for artists in New York City.”
Working in a non-profit organization, and often working most directly on public policy and advocacy issues with people in other non-profit or governmental entities, I can easily lose sight of some aspects of the universe of for-profit businesses. I recently started thinking more about how much overlap and shared common interests that my work as an advocate for affordable and inclusive housing has with at least some private for-profit housing developers. We both are often striving for zoning by-laws that permit a higher density of homes, narrower setback requirements, more flexible parking requirements and simpler-more predictable permitting processes among a myriad of other related things.
