ATTACHMENTS - Laserfiche WebLink

Taking Stock Most Policies Remain Intact After the Housing Downturn not shared by other homes on the m3rket.11 Finally, many of these policies were adopted very recently, as a reaction to the housing bubble,leaving t-em vulnerable to challenge when the bubble burst.12 , In contrast, in the three states that account for the vast majority of the nation's inclusionary policies-California,New Jersey, and Massachusetts13- it does not appear that any �•.k.�, 4 policies were eliminated during the market downturn. i I[ a' Similarly,relatively few local government,appear to have I1 reduced their inclusionary affordability requirements between 2007 and 2012.My research has uncovered only a handful of examples: A mix of market-rate and inclusionary townhomes In Davidson(NC). • In November 2012, San Franciscans passed Measure C, which reduced the city's on-site affordability In 2006, the U.S. housing market entered one of its requirement from 15 to 12 percent in most areas of most severe downturns in the last 120 years. Housing the city. The reduction was part of a larger, political production slowed dramatically in most corners compromise that will create a citywide Housing Trust of the country. The private development industry Fund with ongoing, annual allotments of at least $20 saw tremendous job losses. Many local and state million from the city's General Fund.14 governments experienced significant fiscal hardship, as property tax revenues fell and other revenues derived • Santa Fe temporarily reduced its inclusionary home from real estate activity dried up. ownership requirement from 30 percent to 20 percent. The change is slated to expire,however in 2014.15 Yet in spite of these market difficulties,most of the nation's • Several jurisdictions in the San Diego region lowered inclusionary housing policies survived the downturn. Of their in-lieu fee requirements, inducing the city of the roughly 400 mandatory inclusionary policies that Oceanside, which had originally planned to terminate existed nationwide in 2007, my research has uncovered its policy but ultimately lowered its fee instead.16 only a handful that have been discontinued over the past five years:two in Colorado(Longmont and Lafayette),one in Minnesota (St. Cloud), one in Montana (Bozeman), one in Wisconsin(Madison),one in Florida(the town of Davie), Defining inclusionary Hcusing and two in Idaho struck down by legal challenge (McCall The term "inclusionary housing" is used here to and Sun Valley).9 Since there is no comprehensive up-to- describe policies that either require developers date database of inclusionary housing policies,there may to offer lower-priced units in otherwise market- well be other communities that have discontinued their rate developments, or encourage their inclusion policies, but the small number of abandoned policies are through incentives. The differences between still the exception that proves the rule - most policies mandatory and voluntary policies ca,n be thin at remain in place. times,with some"voluntary" policies effectively acting as requirements, and some "mandatory" In most of the eight cases above,local officials struggled policies applying only to special districts or with a weaker housing market than typically exists in certain development types, essentially giving jurisdictions with inclusionary policies,'° Also, in most developers a choice of whether to op':in.Because of these jurisdictions, home prices had declined to such of the substantial gray area between voluntary low levels jurisdiction-wide that inclusionary units were and mandatory policies,and because they strive being priced at levels comparable to or higher than to achieve the same general outcomes, this nearby market-rate homes. Developers were unable report uses the term "inclusionary housing" to to sell their inclusionary units, especially given that encompass both approaches. these homes came with resale restrictions that were 3