• Please Join the Arlington Greens on Thursday, Aug. 4 2016 at 7:30 pm at the Community Room of the Arlington County Fire Station 2 Ballston, 4805 Wilson Blvd Arlington, VA 22203

June 21, 2016

Westover historic preservation efforts–meet with success in first step

Residents of Westover area and Arlington Greens went to the Arlington County Board on June 18 asking the board to initiate a study of local historic district protection for the Westover Village and to temporarily block any more demolitions of apartment buildings there. The board agreed to begin the process of historic study of Westover, but would not agree to temporarily block more demolitions.

Over the past 2 years about 7 apartment buildings were demolished in Westover, eliminating about 70 market rate affordable units. These apartments have existed for about 76 years and were surrounded by many hundred year old trees and vegetation. In their place will be million dollar townhouses with virtually no green space and virtually the entire surface area paved over.

The county government will hold a public community meeting in July to explain the legal process of designating the current national historic district of Westover Village as a local Arlington historic district. With a local historic district, buildings could not be demolished without being offered for sale to another investor for one year.westover apts demolition april 2016 pic2

Here is a map of the current national historic district of Westover:

Scan_Pic0064

Tagged:

May 18, 2016

Saving Historic Westover Village–Community meeting Tue. May 31 at Westover Public Library

SAVE HISTORIC WESTOVER FROM DEMOLITION
Community Meeting Tue. May 31, 7 PM at Westover Library

Many historic Westover apartment buildings over the past year were demolished, evicting residents and destroying green space and 100-year old trees. Westover has been designated since 2005 as a national historic district in a futile effort to protect our buildings and neighborhood from excessive development, but this did not stop this senseless demolition. Residents want the county government to now protect existing buildings from demolition by designating the Westover area as a county historic district.

Come to a neighborhood meeting to find out how we can together maintain the current historic neighborhood of Westover with its trees, green space, and 75-year old buildings, and its mix of small commercial properties, homeowners, and renters as it has been since 1940.

Where: Westover Public Library

When: Tuesday, May 31, 2016 @ 7 PM

Who: Joan Lawrence, chair of the Historic Architectural Review Board
(HALRB) will describe obtaining local historic district protectionwestover apts demolition april 2016 pic2

Sponsors: the Arlington Greens and the Westover Civic Association
For more information: Email Info@greensofarlington.org

Tagged:

May 5, 2016

Historic moderate rental Westover apartments demolished to make way for luxury townhouses

westover apts demolition april 2016 pic2

westover apts demolition april 2016 pic1Approximately five 76 year old garden apartment buildings in the historic district of Westover are being demolished this spring to make way for townhouses to be sold for close to a million dollars. These approximately 60 apartments (mostly one and two bedroom units) in these buildings were rented for moderate income renters. Even though these historic buildings are over 75 years old, well maintained graceful structures with many older trees surrounding (including some 100 year old trees), and are in the center of a National Historic District, they were bulldozed down to the red clay to make way for million dollar townhouses for the well to do.

These market-rate affordable garden apartments are privately owned; the owner demolished them and is putting up luxury townhouses that can be done “by right” under the existing zoning and since the county government refused to intervene to save them under its historic preservation ordinance. Last year about two blocks away another 4-5 historic garden apartment buildings were demolished to make way for similar high end townhouses. There are fewer than 3,000 private affordable rental apartment left in the entire Arlington County, and in one demolition, the county lost 60 more units.
The county board has stubbornly refused to use historic preservation status as a means to keep older apartments and older detached homes throughout Arlington.

Today developers routinely bulldoze off an entire property including all trees even if 100 years old and put up monstrous sized McMansions and ugly townhouses like these. The tree canopy and green space in many Arlington neighborhoods is much reduced; graceful 60 or 70 old houses are dwarfed by looming McMansions that are gigantic energy hogs and spew rainwater the used to percolate into the soil into the streets and onto neighbor’s properties.

An Arlington Green member asked the county board to designate to extend county historic preservation to the entire Westover Historic District to prevent future demolition of historic properties and surrounding green space. Under the county historic ordinance, an owner seeking to demolish a building must seek offer the property for sale for one year prior to such demolition allowing another owner to emerge to keep the property intact.

Tagged:

April 8, 2016

Arlington’s housing program and the public school student achievement gap between north and south Arlington

Letter to the Arlington County Board April 7, 2016

Thank you again for meeting with the Greens regarding housing grants and other issues several weeks ago. We wanted to provide you some concrete data that can be instrumental in your consideration of expanding the housing vouchers program in the future. These numbers connect housing and education.

Academic achievement gap between North Arlington and west Pike schools is wide
Data illustrate there is a large achievement gap between south Arlington and North Arlington public schools. For example, below are the Standards of Learning (SOL) results for 2015/16 (three year average) for two south Arlington elementary schools on the west end of Columbia Pike, Barcroft Elementary and Carlin Springs Elementary. Both of these typically feed into Kenmore MS. The west end of the Pike has a large concentration of private market-rate affordable housing and committed affordable subsidized units (CAFs).
By contrast, if one examines the scores of students in some North Arlington schools (Tuckahoe Elementary and Williamsburg Middle School) the scores are much higher; results are the passing rate in percentage of students tested. https://p1pe.doe.virginia.gov/reportcard/
There are far fewer market-rate affordable and CAFs in North Arlington where SOL scores are highest.
Tuckahoe Barcroft Carlin Spring Kenmore Williamsburg APS avg. all students
English 92% 82 80 73 91 86
Math 92% 81 90 80 94 87
Science 95% 71 72 74 95 85
Share of students receiving
free or reduced lunch 3% 61 82 52 9 30

The share of students receiving free or reduced lunch is a widely accepted indicator of poverty among students; source: APS for October 2015 http://apsva.us//site/Default.aspx?PageID=33492

Young Graduates

The gap between the north and south Arlington elementary schools is as much as 24 percentage points on science, and as much as 12 percent points on English and math. The economic disparity as reflected in the share of students receiving free or reduced lunch is as much as 79 percentage points. There are almost no students receiving free lunch in the North Arlington elementary school, whereas between 61-82 percent of the two South Arlington School students receive free lunch.

This economic and academic gap persists in middle schools. Nearly half of Kenmore Middle School students receive subsidized lunch. About 9% percent of North Arlington Williamsburg Middle School receives meal assistance.
Academic research is clear that the socioeconomic status of the school does affect academic outcomes. For example, Richard Kahlenberg of The Century Foundation states, in A New Hope for School Integration, “In the last decade, the research has become even more convincing. A 2010 review of 59 studies on the relationship between a school’s SES (socioeconomic status) and outcomes in math found consistent and unambiguous evidence that higher school poverty concentrations are linked with less learning for students irrespective of their age, race, or family’s SES.” https://www.aft.org/sites/default/files/periodicals/Kahlenberg.pdf

Test scores of Arlington students above illustrate this situation.

Housing Grants are distributed countywide; they do not concentrate lower income recipients to a few neighborhoods. A larger number of housing grants would create economic diversity throughout the county; subsequently schools in all of Arlington would become more pluralistic. Rather than concentrating lower income students in a few schools along Columbia Pike where most recent CAFs have been built (e.g. Arlington Mills, Columbia Gardens, and Arlington Presbyterian Church site), children all over Arlington could learn together in a neighborhood school and live side by in the same neighborhoods.

No CAF units were built in north and northwest Arlington in the past four years
Over the past 10 years, the county has not met its housing target of geographically distributing new CAFs across the county. In the past four years, the county added about 1,200 new CAFs; none were added north of Lee Highway and in northwest Arlington. The county’s housing target was to add 300 new CAF units (25% of total new CAFs) in those areas—none were added.
http://arlingtonva.s3.amazonaws.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/15/2016/02/Annual-Affordable-Housing-Targets-Report-FY-2015.pdf page 26.

The current AHIF program enhances economic segregation. Economic segregation is associated with income inequality and even more so than with wage inequality. Its effects appear to compound those of economic inequality and may well be more socially, and economically deleterious than inequality alone. See Richard Florida, City Lab, “America’s most economically segregated cities,” http://www.citylab.com/work/2015/02/americas-most-economically-segregated-cities/385709/.

The result of Arlington’s current residential pattern in private housing is widening economic segregation among students in Arlington public schools. Moving forward, affordable public housing projects and programs should include integration that would result in the same in public schools without the necessity of the school board’s redrawing school boundaries.
We Greens believe that expanding housing grants across our community will decentralize lower income tenants, and dramatically help our public schools narrow the very wide achievement gap that better teaching methods and teachers alone cannot solve. The unintended consequence of our current AHIF program is to concentrate lower income students in already struggling public schools in a narrow section of our 22-square mile county.

The Arlington Greens

Tagged:

March 30, 2016

Raising $7 million more for Arlington housing grants through higher fees on developers

How to raise $7 million more for the county housing grants program through a higher developers’ fee

Under the 2005 Affordable Housing Ordinance, the county requires developers of new housing projects needing or requesting a zoning change for the project to provide that at least 5 percent of the additional apartments added as a result of the zoning change to be “affordable rental units” or to pay a fee. Unfortunately, this ordinance was not tightly written, and, for the most part, developers do not provide new affordable units on site, but rather pay a modest fee that amounts often to a portion of the actual cost of the new apartment. (for more information http://housing.arlingtonva.us/development/land-use-zoning-tools/)

The county board could increase the required fee under the ordinance much closer to actual costs of new apartments. This could generate an estimated $7 million more annually to the housing program. Developers exacerbate the problem of rising rents in our community by their activities, and it is fair to shift some of the tax burden of housing assistance programs to them rather than to only general taxpayers.

During 2005-October 2014, a total 295 additional units were approved under this ordinance, of which only 30 units were located in the new developments, whereas developers choose to pay a fee for the 265 units not provided in the new developments. (Source: Arlington County Affordable Housing Implementation Framework, Draft 2.1, Mar. 10, 2015, p. 9).

Thus, this ordinance applied to an average 30 new units per year. These fees yielded only $36.2 million during the 10 years or $3.6 million annually, the equivalent of $137,000 per new additional apartment. These funds were simply added to the AHIF.

This Affordable Housing Ordinance fee should be changed to increase the per unit fee from $137,000 to the developer’s actual cost per unit which currently is around $350,000 or more per unit. With a fee of at least $350,000 per unit for 30 units, the county would likely receive $10.5 million annually, an increase of $6.9 million a year from the current $3.6 million. This entire additional $6.9 million annually could be placed in the housing grants fund.

-2-

Tagged:

March 4, 2016

Expanding the living wage in Arlington–a good approach to helping working people in Arlington

Development,Jobs — @ 1:02 pm

The Arlington County manager has proposed to the Arlington County Board as part of its annual budget adoption that it increase the living wage of $13.13 per hour (the minimum wage for county employees and for certain contractor employees working in a county building) to $14.50 an hour. At 40 hours per week for 52 weeks, such a wage yields $30,000 in gross income (before taxes).

The living wage is based on the federal poverty income needed for a single person to live slightly above the poverty level. In Arlington according to database from a MIT professor, a single person living in Arlington would need to spend $26,430 a year to live without public subsidies, mainly $14,000 for housing; $3,000 for food, $2,300 for medical, and $4,600 for transportation. http://livingwage.mit.edu/counties/51013
For a single parent with one child, living expenses in Arlington are much higher at $48,000 or $26 per hour (before taxes), as childcare would cost about $7,000 a year.

help wanted newspaper ad

Arlington Greens support the proposed increase in the rate of the living wage, but also believe the ordinance should be expanded to cover ALL contractor employees of Arlington County including healthcare aides, employees of nonprofits, and employees of private companies that receive tens of millions of dollars of local funds of economic development subsidies. Last November, for example, the county board gave $50 million in county funds to the Ballston shopping center developer to rebuild and develop a new shopping center that will employ hundreds of low paid retail clerical employees, food service workers and cleaning crews. Many of the low paid employees will then be eligible for a range of county safety net subsidies ranging from food assistance, free or reduced lunch for their children, and housing assistance.

The current Arlington county ordinance on the living wage does not require the payment of a living wage to organizations that contract with the county and provide these services outside a county-owned facility. Thus, most nonprofit organizations do not provide a living wage routinely. Employees of group homes that are privately operated are not routinely paid a living wage. Healthcare aides working in a disabled person’s home are not required to receive a living wage.

In essence, low wage employers shift their employment costs onto the public taxpayers by paying less than a minimum poverty income. Arlington County development funds that come from Arlington county residents should NOT be used to attract and keep low wage employers in Arlington. The county should require that companies getting these funds guarantee that all its employees receive at least a living wage.

In 2015 according to data of the Virginia Employment Commission, the average wage in the retail stores, entertainment, and food/hotel service in Arlington in 2015 was about $500 per week or $13 per hour, with many such employees making far less than $13 per hour or unable to work a full 40 hours a week. These three industries employed 27,000 people or 16 percent of total Arlington employment of 169,000. Thus, today about one out of every six employees working in Arlington are in a low wage industry. http://virginialmi.com/report_center/community_profiles/5104000013.pdf

Arlington County planning and community development staff have indicated in the past that every new high rise commercial office building in Arlington will generate over 50 low wage jobs that would entitle the employee to county subsidies, particularly housing assistance. The county’s economic development philosophy should be to discourage such low wage jobs and such associated development.

Arlington Greens have long supported the living wage which has been in effect in Arlington since about 2006. We support raising the living wage to at least $14.50 and support expanding its coverage to all employees of private contractors of the county government and to private employees of companies receiving large amounts of county development funds, such as at the Ballston Shopping Center.

Tagged:

January 5, 2016

County Board overpaid more than twice the actual costs for the latest subsidized housing project on Columbia Pike

On December 12, 2015, the Arlington County Board approved giving about $19 million in local housing funds and up-zoning of a property to high-rise commercial development to create a new subsidized housing project with 173 apartments in two 7-story buildings on Columbia Pike. The county board approved this Arlington Presbyterian Church (APC) housing project despite evidence that the land cost was above other commercial sites, and the construction cost was more than double what an apartment should cost in the Washington, D.C. Metro area. A private nonprofit organization APAH and a pool of private investors and developers will build and own this project.

Then county board chairman Mary Hynes said during the board’s public discussion of the APC project that the $8.5 million cost of the) property was reasonable even though the county’s assessed tax value was half this amount $4.3 million. She said that a price of $5 million per acre is a reasonable for land already zoned for commercial use.
arl presbyterian church jan 16 pic3

Unfortunately, the county board paid a price of $7.1 million per acre. The property was not zoned for high-rise commercial use and thus worth far less. However, even using Ms. Hynes’ inflated price of $5 million/acre, the county should have only paid $6 million for the land, and thus overpaid $2.5 million or 42 percent.

The county staff report to the county board indicated APAH and the APC had privately and earlier agreed to the $8.5 million, and they asserted without proof that the commercial value of the property was really $10 million or about double the price of other commercial land in the county. Without substantiation of these ten million dollars, one can only conclude this is wishful thinking and hyperbole.

The county was NOT a party to the negotiation of this $8.5 million price, and had no assessment of the property’s value. The county was negligent in not obtaining its own independent assessment of the property as then zoned for residential and church use only.
APAH’s pool of private investors will actually own the project and land, and the county government did not become the legal owner of the property even though the count paid for the land. APAH and its investors are going to sell off residential lots behind the new buildings for single family homes. Some of this space is already used for a tot lot and for green space that will be lost. This land could have been kept for a small park and retaining green space for the neighborhood if the county government owned the property. With probably 300 tenants including children living in the new project, this park would have been used and sorely needed.
arl presbyterian church jan 16 pic3

The construction costs for the APC project are well above what industry sources indicate are multifamily apartment costs. A well known industry leader R.S. Means Company has estimated that hard construction cost of a new apartment in a 4-7 story building in the DC Metro region is between $172-200 per square foot. The cost per unit of the APC project was $395 per square foot. Thus, APC construction costs are twice what a new apartment should cost in the DC Metro area. Total hard construction costs for the APC project were about $41 million for 173 apartments or $237,000 per apartment which is roughly $395 per square foot for a 600-square foot apartment.
The combined over-costs for just land and hard construction costs (not even considering the other inflated costs) were about $22 million for a total project cost of $67 million.

Arlington Greens have asked the county board on several occasions to use competitive bidding to avoid overpaying for construction of new CAF projects such as these, but they always choose to use a sole source contractor. Other county construction projects are all bid and given to the low cost bidder. This is irresponsible stewardship of scarce county funds for housing assistance.

Tagged:

December 9, 2015

Housing project proposed at Arlington Presbyterian Church site does not provide assistance for lower income renters

Statement to the Arlington County Board Dec. 9, 2015 on a proposal to provide $19 million in local funds to build at new apartment building at site of Arlington Presbyterian Church and to rezone the property to provide higher density (item 31 of the Arlington County Board’s meeting on Dec. 12, 2015:

Good afternoon, members of the Arlington County Board:

The Arlington Greens oppose the rezoning of the Arlington Presbyterian Church, and oppose approval of approximately $19 million in county housing assistance funds to build a new apartment complex at this site.

Rather we favor using the $19 million for $200 per month housing rental vouchers for the 7,000 needy Arlington families needing housing assistance across the entire county. We believe low income housing should be widely spread out across the county and not concentrated within one small area along western Columbia Pike, and housing grants to 7,000 households located across the entire county are the best and lowest cost way to do so.

arl presbyterian church jan 16 pic1

It is worthwhile to look at affordable housing projects costs in surrounding jurisdictions or in other locations in our county so that you have some sort of basis to compare the nearly $20 million requested for the project at the Arlington Presbyterian Church. This way, the County has leverage against any bids proposed by developers, and can drive down these excessive construction costs.
This plan would cost the County nearly $400,000 per affordable unit. This excessively high cost means fewer desperately needy families could be served. Please postpone any consideration until you have evaluated alternatives–such as providing direct housing grants or building a totally different project with a different developer at a much lower cost.

The new proposed apartments serve middle class renters and not the low income in Arlington
The proposed high-rise project at the Arlington Presbyterian Church at 3507 Columbia Pike will have two new buildings with 173 apartments, all of which are to be “affordable rentals” to households earning at least 60 percent of the area median income (AMI) (around $60,000 for a family of three persons).

Unfortunately for nearly all such Arlington subsidized projects, only 5 percent of the units will be affordable to truly low income Arlington families, i.e. those making 40 percent or less AMI (generally making $15,000 to $39,000 a year) and those who most desperately need housing assistance in Arlington today. The lucky few renters in the new project will probably get a de facto rent subsidy of $200 a month below comparable rents along the Pike.
house_sketch

These new apartments will each cost $393,000, and the county will provide $105,000 per unit in its local AHIF funds ($18.2 million), and then another $0.7 million from a Pike transit fund. This is not the best use of $19 million in local housing funds–it wastes far too much on bricks and cement, and does too little to lower rents and to broadly help lower income renters across all of Arlington.

Better housing assistance approach for the $19 million in county funds
Alternatively with the $19 million, the county could help ALL of the approximately 7,000 cost-burdened low income households in the entire county for one year each with a $200 monthly housing grant. The recently adopted Affordable Housing Master Plan identified 7,000 such households needing housing assistance. It is far better to help 7,000 households than just 173.

Excessive land costs for the project
We also have concerns about excessive costs in this project. The Presbyterian Church members are getting $8.5 million from the county for the land. The church is actually contributing nothing for this affordable housing project and walking away with over $8 million.

The county is paying twice the current commercial assessed value of the property which is $4.3 million. Why is the county paying twice the commercial value? Who negotiated this price—the county government or APAH and the church, and why should the public pay twice the commercial value? You are asked in this proposal to rezone this property from residential use to high-density commercial, and then implicitly the church owners reap this windfall profit in the form of the $8.5 million payout from the county.
Too many subsidized apartments in west Columbia Pike area and too few in north Arlington
Since the county has to purchase the land at such a high cost ($50,000 land charge per unit), there is no advantage economically to locating these 177 apartments at this site. Why not build the next subsidized apartment complex on the 5-acre county owned Edison Street site adjacent to the Virginia Hospital Center or on the 13 acres on the North Quincy Street site across from W-L High School? Why are you concentrating most of the new subsidized apartments built in the county in the past five years in the western Columbia Pike area? We need subsidized housing in North Arlington as well.

Tagged:

October 13, 2015

AGP Statement on development plans for Wilson School/Rosslyn Highlands Park

AGP Statement on development plans for Wilson School/Rosslyn Highlands Park

wilson school photo2

The Arlington Greens approved the following position on the development plans for the Wilson School and Rosslyn Highlands Park area at its October 1st meeting.

The Arlington Green Party condemns both the process and results of recent government decision-making concerning the public land around the Wilson School and Rosslyn Highlands Park

Process: Final decisions were made during secret negotiations* between government and developers long before the public process began. Because the outcome was predetermined, the public process disregarded longtime local community requests in framing a draft proposal**, and disregarded local community responses to the draft proposal. Secret agreements and ignored input; that’s not consistent with the way government should function in a democracy.

Outcome: The Wilson school area is the only substantial family recreation area within easy walking distance of the nearby neighborhoods***. No urban planner would recommend intense development of the site. And yet that is what will happen. The historic elementary school will be torn down and replaced by a much larger structure. Parking lots and small fields and one story buildings will be replaced with skyscrapers. Greenspace in the heart of a city will be paved over, parkland will be given over to development, and families will have reduced playspace – these are astonishingly bad outcomes.

———————
*Secret negotiations and disregard for local community input
See letter from Friends of Rosslyn Highlands Park dated June 16, 2014.

http://arlington.granicus.com/MetaViewer.php?view_id=2&event_id=784&meta_id=132793

also: Personal Communication with Katie Elmore and Stan Karson, local civic association designees to the Western Rosslyn Area Planning Study (WRAPS) process.

**Long time Community desire to save green space and historic space
-Many presentations to the APS and County Boards by Mark Antell and Stan Karson, local civic association contacts for Wilson School for over a decade.
-Arlington County Civic Federation resolution recommending preservation of the Wilson School Playfields, endorsed 2007 and reaffirmed in 2014.
-Historic Architecture and Landmark Review Board recommendations in 2007 and 2014 that Wilson School be designated an historic site.

***Wilson School / Rosslyn Highlands Park the only substantial recreation area within easy walking distance of the surrounding neighborhoods. Look at the map.

Tagged:

September 29, 2015

County Board Affordable Housing Master Plan—Likely Annual Cost of $17 Million to $51 million, depending greatly on type of program

County Board Affordable Housing Master Plan—Initial Annual Cost of $17 Million to $51 million, depending on type of program

The Arlington County Board adopted on September 19, 2015 the Affordable Housing Master Plan (AHMP) that has useful data and some broad goals. Unfortunately, there was no cost or budget information on how these optimistic goals can be achieved in Arlington over the next 25 years, and nothing on how these funds can be raised or considering alternative ways to achieve the same goal. http://newsroom.arlingtonva.us/release/county-board-adopts-first-affordable-housing-master-plan/
Below is an effort to provide costs and compare two ways of providing these benefits.

The plan’s primary goal is to have a supply in Arlington of 22,800 affordable units by 2040, a rise of about 16,000 units from the current supply of 7,000 committed subsidized units (CAFS). This is an annual goal of adding 640 CAFs over 25 years. Today, an average CAF rents for about $200 per month below comparable private market rents. Another way to effectively add 16,000 affordable units in Arlington would be to provide 16,000 housing vouchers on existing private rental units.

Cost of building or adding 16,000 CAFs
Based on cost data over the past two years, the county affordable housing investment fund (AHIF) has supplied $80,000 per new CAF; thus $51 million of AHIF funding is needed annually to add 640 CAFs. Over the past 14 years, the county added 250 CAFs annually. Since the county now contributes about $12 million for AHIF, another roughly $40 million is needed annually for AHIF. However as housing construction costs rise as they have over the past five years, the required AHIF contribution will have to increase as well.

Most of this additional funding will have to come from local tax sources or developer contributions (that only amounted to $3 million annually over the past decade). Some funds will come from re-payment of prior AHIF loans, but in most cases AHIF loans are for 30 years, and repayments are likely to fund only a small portion of the annual $51 million required. Over the 25 years, the budget cost will be $1.3 billion (current dollars). AHIF funds must continue indefinitely or the CAFs will cease to exist.
Cost of providing housing vouchers for 16,000 households within 25 years

An alternative way to obtain the same effect would be to provide 16,000 housing vouchers. A housing voucher for $200 per month would cost $2,400 per year per household, and the one year cost of 675 new vouchers is $1.6 million. In 2040, 16,000 vouchers would cost thus $38 million. This is still $13 million less per a one year cost of building new 640 CAFs. Vouchers are provided during the entire 25 years, unlike building new CAFs which will only fully appear 25 years from now and provide little housing relief in the next ten years.

Over the full 25 years voucher costs are half those building 16,000 new CAFs. The number of vouchers to meet the full needs of all households earning less than 60-percent AMI is 7,000 in 2016, and then rises by 640 annually reaching 16,000 by 2040. The cost to provide $200 per month vouchers during 2016-40 is $687 million, only half of the cost of providing the $1.3 billion to build 16,000 CAFs.

Vouchers provide about 43 percent more benefits to renters during the 25 years than slowly building new CAF units.
Measured in benefits over the 25 years, vouchers provide 287,000 household-years versus only 200,000 household-years for the CAFs. Vouchers also go to much lower income renters than those in a CAF who are predominantly at the 60-percent AMI.

Tagged:
Next Page »