Real Affordability for All

An Affordable Housing Policy Platform for Mayor de Blasio April 2014 IN R!"#$ I!N% &e Real Affordability $risis in Ne' (or) $ity
Across the five boroughs of New York City, low-income and moderate-income households are facing a real affordability crisis in housing. The crisis is fueled by the fact that wages are declining and housing prices are rising. olicies like the !rstadt "aw prevent the city from advancing strategies to preserve affordable housing. #ver the past $% years, rents have increased at twice the rate of household incomes citywide. At the same time, the number of rent-regulated apartments has been steadily declining, and most new housing construction has been geared toward the rich. And New York City&s homeless population has soared to the highest levels since the 'reat (epression. The )eal Affordability for All campaign was launched in *arch +%$, to advocate for low- and moderate-income households who are increasingly being priced out of their neighborhoods. The campaign is driven by a broad coalition of tenant associations, community organi-ations, faith groups, immigrant advocates, and others committed to real affordability. .t has reenergi-ed and reactivated a shared sense of purpose in the affordable housing movement. A ma/or goal of )eal Affordability for All is to ensure that *ayor de 0lasio&s housing policies prioriti-e and deliver real affordability for the most economically vulnerable households. The campaign has already released two reports that reveal the need for significant reforms in how the city approaches affordable housing. The first report showed that more than 1%%,%%% lowincome New Yorkers were shut out of the 0loomberg housing boom. The second report showed that the ,+$-a ta2 abatement program has been used and abused by developers to subsidi-e new housing for wealthy New Yorkers at the e2pense of low and moderate income New Yorkers. And now )eal Affordability for All is releasing a first-of-its-kind policy platform designed to influence the larger affordable housing plan *ayor de 0lasio is set to release on *ay $.

!*+R*I+,% A Platform for ac)ling t&e Real Affordability $risis

This platform reflects the views of thousands of low-income and moderate-income New Yorkers, and do-ens of organi-ations actively involved in the )eal Affordability for All campaign. .t combines the on-the-ground perspective of tenants with analysis from top e2perts and recommendations from affordable housing developers. .n this way, it is unlike any other affordable housing platform out there, and designed to spur action by *ayor de 0lasio.

.t is organi-ed into four sections3 $4 new construction of affordable housing5 +4 preservation of e2isting affordable housing5 64 NYC7A and public housing5 and ,4 addressing record homelessness.

N+, $!N- R#$ I!N !. A..!R"AB/+ H!#-IN0

&e .ailure of 4211a and t&e /imits of t&e 20320 Model
The city is using the ,+$-a program to subsidi-e the creation of lu2ury housing for the wealthiest New Yorkers, causing rents to rise and making more neighborhoods unaffordable. .n recent years, developers in *anhattan and downtown 0rooklyn were re8uired to make +%9 of a development&s units affordable if they opted for a +:-year abatement. 0ut if developers build in other areas of the city or if they opt for a $:-year abatement, there is no affordable housing re8uirement to receive these ta2 savings. ;o most developers have opted for the $:-year abatement and created very little real affordable housing in the city as a result. A recent study by )eal Affordability for All found that only <9 of new apartments in downtown 0rooklyn between +%%= and +%$+ were real affordable units. (evelopers e2ploited the lu2urious loophole in ,+$-a3 they used abatements to create new housing for wealthy households, because they weren&t re8uired to create real affordable housing for low and moderate income households. There are two key problems with the =%>+% model3 $4 it is far too easy for developers to opt for $: year abatements in the ,+$-a program and avoid having to build any real affordable housing units5 +4 even if many more developers using the ,+$-a program opted for +:-year abatements and were re8uired to build +%9 affordable units in new buildings, it would not yield enough real affordable housing to meet the needs of low-income and moderate-income households. The =%>+% model is unable to generate the real affordability that New Yorkers need and deserve.

&e 40340 Model% Ma5imi6ing Real Affordability in Ne' Housing

*ayor de 0lasio set a goal of building and preserving at least +%%,%%% affordable apartments while simultaneously creating a more e8uitable and affordable city for households at all income levels. To achieve this laudable goal, the *ayor&s housing plan must include a bold commitment to building and developing for deeper density. That is to say3 there must be a ma/or up--oning of many neighborhoods currently -oned for commercial, manufacturing and low-density residential use. 0y re8uiring developers to use up--oning, subsidies, and other tools more effectively, the city can ensure that a minimum of :%9 of new housing construction is real affordable housing. A :%>:% model that replaces the =%>+% model would yield long-term real affordability for a wide array of low-income and moderate-income households shut out of the new housing developments built under 0loomberg. And not only that3 the :%>:% model would also give city ta2payers a higher return on their investment in new affordable housing developments while still enabling real-estate developers to reap significant profits and construction trade union workers to get good /obs. +

There are many ways to conceive and build :%>:% developments that would achieve a level of real affordability that is simply impossible within the narrow constraints of =%>+% developments. Affordable housing developers, private sector developers and housing e2perts agree on two broad :%>:% scenarios that are viable and pragmatic, based on e2isting developments, current real-estate market assumptions, and the latest mathematical modeling3 17 ?or high-cost areas of the city @particularly *anhattan4, depending on the level of up--oning, new developments can ensure that :% percent of the units are market rate and :% percent are real affordable units targeted to low-income households3 specifically, households of four earning 6%-<% percent of Area *edian .ncome. 27 ?or the outer boroughs, where land costs are lower, $%%9 of new developments can be affordable3 :% percent of the units can be for low-income households @those earning 6%-<% percent of Area *edian .ncome4 and :% percent for moderate income households @those earning up to $%% percent of Area *edian .ncome4. $%%9 real affordability can be achieved by increasing current per unit subsidies in the outer boroughs and applying those subsidies to real affordable housing units for low-and moderate-income households. The second scenario holds a lot of promise, as more residents and new arrivals look to the outer boroughs for real affordable housing, especially in neighborhoods that have not yet gentrified. 0ut together, both scenarios can achieve a much greater level of real affordability across the city than was achieved by 0loomberg&s housing policies and the =%>+% model in recent years. Aey elements of the :%>:% model would include3 up--oning for ma2imum density in areas with the most vacant land5 increasing floor-to-area @?A)4 bonuses in all new developments5 adding real affordability re8uirements for low-income and moderate-income households in mandatory inclusionary -oning5 removing height and bulk restrictions in new developments5 transferring air rights5 and providing permanent low-cost financing for new real affordability developments. The city can identify vacant land for real affordable housing development from an array of sources, including publicly-owned land and land where the ownership is split between public and private. At all of these locations, -oning can be upgraded so that developers can build to ma2imum density while generating much more real affordability in new units. 0ecause land costs and market rents vary drastically in *anhattan and in the outer boroughs, the e2act number of real affordable units will also vary in each scenario for the :%>:% model. 0ut when implemented throughout the city, the :%>:% model will incentivi-e developers to use the best tools at their disposal to increase land values, and to ma2imi-e real affordability.

Ho' t&e $ity $an Incenti8i6e t&e 40340 Model and Real Affordability

To ensure that the :%>:% model succeeds, the city can take specific actions that will yield the greatest 8uality and 8uantity of real affordability in new housing construction, especially for the lowest income New Yorkers who are shut out of and left behind by 0loomberg&s policies.

0elow are five key recommendations3 $4 #se -ubsidies More ,isely to "ri8e Real Affordability9 ;ubsidies should only be offered to developers who can demonstrate a commitment to including the largest number of apartments for households earning below :%9 of Area *edian .ncome and with the most apartments available to households earning as low as +:9 of area median income. 7ousing programs within the city&s (epartment of 7ousing reservation and (evelopment @7 (4 and 7ousing (evelopment Corporation @7(C4 should achieve much greater, and more measurable, affordability for low-income New Yorkers. ;ubsidies are powerful bargaining chips that give the city tremendous leverage with developers. ?or too long, subsidies have been offered with few or any strings attached, and enabled already wealthy develops to become even richer. This approach will help ensure that a ma2imum number of the +%%,%%% housing units not only tackle the real affordability crisis, but also meet the two and three bedroom apartment si-e needs of low-income families. +4 Implement a Ne' /o'1Income Real Affordability .rame'or) Across All Housing Programs so that the city prioriti-es and tracks in every single development deal, )? , )?B, land disposition, re-oning, and allocation of public resources the creation of more affordable housing specifically for the low-income New Yorkers, with a focus on two- and threebedroom apartments, which are the most needed. New developments only geared toward housing production without attention to bedroom si-e are insufficient. 64 +nable Not1for1Profit "e8elopers and !'ners to Play a -trong and Acti8e Role in t&e $ity:s Housing Agenda9 The best not-for-profit developers and owners are grounded in the local community, protect the affordability of developments, properly represent and address community concerns, ma2imi-e community value and benefit, and build neighborhood assets. "ocal not-for-profit developers bring more than simple bricks-and-mortar development. They bring a commitment to hiring locally, supporting local businesses and subcontractors, and otherwise make development decisions that create strong neighborhoods, not /ust buildings. ?or those reasons, not-for-profits with a strong track record of active housing development in underserved communities and neighborhoods should be play a greater role in e2ecuting the city&s affordable housing agenda moving forward. ,4 Prioriti6e Permanent Affordability for All $ity1o'ned /and "ispositions9 This can be done through a variety of ways3 a land lease arrangement, a city right of first refusal, a city option for a combination of a ta2-abatement and regulatory agreement renewal. .deally, priority is given to a mission-driven, not-for-profit developer including community land trusts if and when available. .f the proper mechanisms are not yet in place to ensure permanent affordability, a minimum <%-year affordability term for any disposition of land that is likely to receive any type of ta2-credit financing, as the term coincides with the ,

ma2imum length of the ,+%c ta2 abatement as well as matching two potential terms of the city&s 6%-year mortgage authority. :4 Re;uire t&at "e8elopers and In8estors Recei8ing Any ype of $ity -ubsidy Pro8ide a Reser8e .und t&at $reates a -afety Net for +5cessi8ely Rent1Burdened enants9 This re8uirement would apply to all affordable housing developments underwritten and built with any type of city subsidy. .t would help ensure that pro/ects are economically viable not only for the developer and investors, but also for low-income residents who will actually live in these homes. The reserve fund would protect low-income residents whose annual certification verifies e2treme rent burden, and enable long-term affordability, without damaging or /eopardi-ing new developments.

.inancing Real Affordability% Mec&anisms and Policies to Raise Re8enue

To ensure that a ma2imum number of real affordable housing units are created in the coming months and years, city government should actively create mechanisms and promote policies that would raise substantial revenue for new buildings. 0elow are several recommendations. $. .lip a59 City government should establish a new incremental transfer ta2 on high-end residential properties in the five boroughs. )evenue from this source would be earmarked specifically for affordable housing. .nitial estimates from )eal Affordability for All estimate indicate that such a ta2 could generate between C$%% and C$:% million per year. +. Non1!ccupancy a59 Dealthy buyers from foreign countries are increasingly purchasing high-end lu2ury condos in new buildings as investment properties, with no plans to ever live in them and contribute to the ta2 base in New York City. City government should aggressively ta2 all buyers who are non-occupants of these apartments. Too many of these apartments are sitting vacant and these new condos are inflating housing prices across the city, but especially in rapidly gentrifying areas. The city should establish strict occupancy re8uirements and ta2 these buyers are progressively higher rates the longer they do not live in the lu2ury apartments they own here. 6. Property a5 !8er&aul9 City government should look seriously reforming the property ta2 system and creating a more e8uitable system. )elevant agencies should review ta2es on multiple dwellings @rentals4, particularly buildings for low and moderate income households and seniors, and ta2 vacant land to incentivi-e affordable housing development and dis-incentivi-e Eholding or buying low and selling high for speculative or lu2ury development.F ,. ,ater and -e'er a5 Reform. City government should look at the water and sewer ta2 system and set a cap rate particularly for affordable housing developments :. "ensity Bonuses9 ?unds generated by having developers Ebuy upF additional space via increased floor-to-area bonuses to a fund managed by the city to finance real affordable :

units in outer borough neighborhoods where market rents do not generate a full internal cross subsidy G that is to say, where market rents are not high enough to offset the cost of building for real affordability for low and moderate income households.

Additionally, at the state level, city officials should lobby for an overhaul of the ,+$-a program so that the program is used only by real affordable housing developers not lu2ury developers.

Meeting Housing 0oals ,&ile $reating 0ood <obs

The administration should work in partnership with organi-ed labor and the building trades to ensure /obs for construction and building operations workers include decent wages, healthcare, retirement benefits and ade8uate safety training. Additionally, the administration should prevent irresponsible, law breaking contractors with records of wage and hour, minimum wage, prevailing wage and safety violations from working on subsidi-ed housing.

-andy Rebuilding% An !pportunity for Real Affordability in Hard1Hit Areas

7urricane ;andy devastated many communities and neighborhoods across the city. Thousands of housing units were lost in some of the lowest-income areas of the city. As a result low-income communities and immigrant communities are still dealing with the fall-out effects of the stormthe loss of affordable housing, which if the City does not act fast will become permanent. The rebuilding and recovery process after ;andy is a ma/or opportunity to ensure that real affordability for ;andy survivors is achieved in new housing construction. .n fact, federal rebuilding funds, including the Community (evelopment 0lock 'rant-(isaster )ecovery @C(0'-()4 funds are governed by the ?air 7ousing Act, which re8uires that grantees use the funds to Eaffirmatively further fair housingF. $4 &e city can direct t&e Housing Reco8ery !ffice =HR!7 and t&e "epartment of Housing Preser8ation and "e8elopment =HP"7 to ma)e real affordability a prere;uisite for landlords accepting federal disaster aid9 7)# and 7 ( can attach real affordability re8uirements if landlords use federal aid for repairs or rehabilitation @for multifamily or rental single-family homes4. Dithout real affordability re8uirements on rental apartments, landlords will renovate units and drastically increase rents, in this way public funds will help to line the pockets of landlord. .n fact, this is already happening3 a recent Alliance for a Hust )ebuilding survey of ;andy-affected renters found that the median rent paid by ;andyaffected households has increased C+%% a month since the hurricane. There is precedent for a real affordability re8uirement in disaster recovery efforts elsewhere in the country3 "ouisiana&s The )oad 7ome rogram after 7urricane Aatrina attached $%-year affordability re8uirements for landlords receiving federal aid. &e city can use federal disaster reco8ery funds to in8est in t&e de8elopment of real affordable &ousing9 ;andy e2posed and e2acerbated ine8uities in our city&s housing, and <

+4

destroyed thousands of affordable housing units, especially basement apartments and other accessory dwellings, as well as units owned by small mom and pop landlords in low-income areas like ?ar )ockaway, Coney .sland, )ed 7ook, and the ;outh ;hore of ;taten .sland. 0ut the city can use for real affordable housing construction in those neighborhoods a portion of the C(0' funds and other federal funds that have or will have been earmarked for ;andy rebuilding and recovery in the coming months. .n fact, the federal (epartment of 7ousing and !rban (evelopers @7!(4 already re8uires city government to spend at least half of C(0' funds on households earning =% percent or less of Area *edian .ncome. 64 &e $ity can use land from t&e ac;uisition program to build affordable &ousing in -andy affected areas9 Through the 0uild it 0ack program, homeowners who have damages e8ual to more than half of the value of their home will have the option to participate in the City&s ac8uisition for redevelopment program. Through this program the City will purchase these properties and redevelop them for other uses. The City should commit now to ensure that all of the properties through this program are dedicated to the creation of affordable housing. &e city can also use federal disaster reco8ery funds to increase the availability of Temporary (isaster Assistance rogram @T(A 4 for low-income renters who were affected by ;andy and still grappling with displacement. T(A vouchers should be available to all ;andy-impacted residents, regardless of immigration status, to ensure that the most vulnerable among them can gain access to real affordable housing.

,4

:4 $reate a /and Ban) to address problems faced by ;andy-affected housing, over-leveraged multi-family buildings, and homes in foreclosure. An ideal land bank would prioriti-e nonprofit, community-led institutions @including community land trusts4, and create permanently affordable housing for ;andy victims, those displaced by foreclosure, and e2tremely lowincome people. >>>

PR+-+R*A I!N !. +?I- IN0 A..!R"AB/+ H!#-IN0

+ffecti8e $ode +nforcement as a @ey ool for Preser8ing Real Affordability
There is broad agreement that city government can and should be much more aggressive in enforcing all relevant codes, laws, and regulations that are designed to protect tenants and preserve the real affordability of housing. Dhile )ent ;tabili-ation, *itchell-"ama, and other affordable housing programs are not administered at the city level, below are recommendations for how city agencies and officials can do more of this enforcement and hold landlords accountable for bad behavior while protecting our e2isting stock of affordable housing. Neighborhoods with widespread neglect of housing conditions are increasingly the site of rapid gentrification. .ntentional neglect, combined with harassment, pressures to accept buy-out offers, 1

and other tactics, are used by owners to vacate entire buildings of their long-standing tenants. They then renovate and rent the same apartments at amounts beyond the reach of former tenants, who are predominantly low-income people of color. )ent stabili-ed buildings are particularly susceptible to this practice. As the current Administration is set to unfold its agenda for the construction of +%%,%%% affordable housing units in the ne2t decade, it should also address the rapid loss of affordable housing across the city, in particular in low-income communities of color where escalating rents and permanent displacement are most pronounced. Iffective Code enforcement is a means of preserving the 8uality of the city&s e2isting affordable housing stock while also stemming the tide of gentrification by eliminating factors that drives low-income tenants from their homes. The tools3 $. HP":s Alternati8e +nforcement Program =AA+PB7 s&ould be e5panded9 0y selecting the +%% buildings with the worst conditions in the City and by making repairs when landlords fail to comply, this rogram has positively impacted thousands of apartments during its seven year e2istence. The rogram&s own success is grounds for enlarging its scope and coverage. .n addition, 7 ( should increase its profile in AI buildings and help prevent displacement by forcing landlords to post notices concerning the building&s placement in the program and by distributing Eknow your rightsF materials to tenants, especially in rent stabili-ed buildings. +. o incenti8i6e compliance in t&e conte5t of t&e most serious &ousing code 8iolationsC t&e $ity s&ould increase ci8il penalties and inspector fees for A$lass $B 8iolations at largeC and in particular for &eat and &ot 'ater 8iolations9 #n the administrative front, 7 ( should use its Imergency )epair rogram to the fullest e2tent combined with foreclosing on repair liens more aggressively. At the same time, ta2 lien sales should be reformed to promote the transfer of neglected buildings to affordable housing providers as opposed to the highest bidder. o better address t&e &ig& incidence of ast&ma in d'elling units 'ere mold is pre8alentC t&e $ity s&ould enact compre&ensi8e mold remediation legislation to re;uire mandatory annual inspections for indoor allergens t&at trigger ast&ma9 The legislation should also impose standardi-ed remediation rules and procedures, as well as re8uire 7 ( to make repairs and charge landlords who fail to do so. arget enforcement acti8ities on landlords '&o &ouse lo'1income tenants9 This means focusing enforcement efforts on ;ection = landlords, landlords that receive massive ta2 breaks through the H-:$ and ,+$a programs, and landlords with overleveraged portfolios of rent regulated housing who fail to make repairs as a costcutting measure. Dith respect to ;ection = housing, these tenants are at risk of losing their housing through no fault of their own when their landlords fail to comply with housing 8uality standards @7B;4. All too often, ;ection = landlords who displace tenants will rent newly renovated units to tenants with much higher incomes. 7 ( should focus code enforcement resources on these building to preserve ;ection = tenants in their =

6.

,.

homes, in particular those ;ection = tenants who are residing in rent stabili-ed units. 7 ( should work closely with the other agencies administering ;ection = benefits @NYC7A and (7C)4 to identify ;ection = units in need of Code Inforcement. :. Promote t&e type of $ity3-tate coordination t&at may result in muc& needed relief for tenants li8ing in substandard conditions9 7 ( should establish a mechanism to share its enforcement results with the (7C)&s Tenant rotection !nit @T !4, and the T ! should in turn initiate rent reduction proceedings without the need for a tenant complaint. <. +stablis& broader administrati8e mec&anisms to increase code compliance and fine collection9 A )epair Inforcement 0oard is one such mechanism whereby they city could impose and collect fines for code violations, as well as foreclose on certain unpaid fines. Currently, when 7 ( places a violation, fines begin to accrue if the landlord does not address the condition within the timeframe provided by law. 7owever, only a Hudge can order said fines to be paid after a lawsuit is commenced by the City or tenants. Not only may a lawsuit take months, even years, but once in court many such cases settle for an order to correct the violations without the imposition of any fines. Currently, 7 ( simply does not have the resources to pursue and recoup all of the fines landlords are liable for in court and as a result landlords fail to make repairs with impunity. 0y creating an effective mechanism for fine imposition and collection, the City can create a financial incentive for repairs and proper upkeep that is largely lacking under the current system. 1. Reforming t&e $ity:s a5 /ien -ale Program. The city should add code enforcement liens to lien sale program and move all ta2 lien sale buildings to the city&s third-party transfer program rather than ta2 lien sale. All buildings that are not redeemed go to thirdparty transfer get buildings into the hands of long term affordable owners and developers. I2pand or implement tools to. Add Imergency )epair rogram liens into the ta2 lien sale program so that the buildings with the worst conditions, especially those in overleveraged, speculatively purchased multi-family portfolios, are transferred to more responsible owners, preferably non-profit developers or those who have a record of preserving true affordability for low-income families. =. $rac)ing "o'n on Airbnb and Illegal Hotels9 Airbnb is fueling gentrification in many neighborhoods by incentivi-ing higher rents and helping to push out low-income and moderate-income residents. The .llegal 7otel "aw passed in +%$% strengthened the law re8uiring that residential units be occupied for periods of at least 6% days. The *ayor&s #ffice of ;pecial Inforcement is charged with cracking down on illegal hotel operators and should be e2panded and beefed up with additional resources. That unit should be cracking down on Airbnb and other companies that are illegally converting apartments into hotels. Airbnb&s recent offer to pay more ta2es in New York does not change the fact that it is driving up housing costs across the city. J. Impro8e "!B +nforcement in Buildings #nder $onstruction9 The (epartment of 0uildings @(#04 can help ensure the health and safety of families who occupy buildings that are under construction or renovation by disallowing self-certification of plans by J

architects when landlords are doing e2tensive construction>renovation in these buildings, increasing fines and violations when landlords do work without permits or are doing any illegal work, change the basis for which (#0 issues vacate orders and instead have them issue orders to correct, create a bad contractor list, for contractors who engage in illegal construction>renovation, and post a tenants bill of rights in buildings undergoing construction and renovation.

Additional -trategies to Preser8e and +n&ance Real Affordability

.n New York City, from +%%+ to +%$$, there was a 6J9 drop in the total number of apartments affordable to a family with an income at +%% percent of the federal poverty line.$ That means that the city lost 6=:,%%% units of housing affordable to low-income New Yorkers. The governmentassisted share of the city&s housing stock has been declining for many years. Additionally, much of the newly developed government-assisted housing stock is targeted at higher income New Yorkers through "ow .ncome 7ousing Ta2 Credits. This is in comparison to the *itchell-"ama and 7!( ;ubsidi-ed, deeply affordable, housing stock which has decreased over the years as landlords privati-e their developments. Currently there are almost $%%,%%% *itchell-"ama and 7!( subsidi-ed housing units left in New York City. Additionally, there are =%,%%% units provided under the "ow .ncome 7ousing Ta2 Credit program. ;)#s are a critical part of the remaining affordable housing stock and housing of last resort for many low-income and working poor New Yorkers. "andlords harass tenants out with deteriorating living conditions among other means in order to convert the buildings for more profitable means, including illegal tourist rentals or lucrative contracts with city agencies to house the homeless. "andlords can afford to warehouse units for years until the building is empty when they can more easily convert the building or sell it for higher profits. (evelopment of new affordable housing cannot be the only solution to the problem and preservation of affordable housing stock may be the most cost-effective step toward meeting the need for affordable housing. 0elow are recommendations for additional preservation strategies. 19 Repeal t&e #rstadt /a' to Regain Home Rule of Rent /a's9 The administration should lobby the state legislature to repeal the !rstadt "aw, enacted in $J12. This legislation prevents the city from strengthening laws that protect the nearly +.: million tenants who live in rentstabili-ed or rent-controlled apartments and is a potential stumbling block for mandatory inclusionary -oning and other innovative strategies to create more affordable housing. Kacancy deregulation is pro/ected to cause the city to lose more affordable housing than it can create, and could also be repealed by the city if the state repealed the !rstadt "aw. 29 Preser8e Mitc&ell1/ama Housing9 7 ( should develop a preservation plan to preserve the remaining city-supervised *itchell-"ama developments. Additionally, the city should e2plore the usage of Article L. as a tool to bring former *itchell-"ama developments under a regulatory framework, and when Article L.s are used as a *itchell-"ama preservation tool, to ensure that

Community ;ervice ;ociety, EDhat New Yorkers Dant ?rom the New *ayor3 An Affordable lace to "ive.F Kic 0ach M Tom Daters, Hanuary +%$,.

$%

the income targeting matches is neighborhood-specific and no *a/or Capital .mprovements that are permitted while the owner is receiving an Article L. ta2 abatement. 29 Preser8e ProDect1Based -ection 2 Housing9 The city should work with the !nited ;tates (epartment of 7ousing and !rban (evelopment to identify buildings at risk of loss of affordability and work closely with advocates to preserve those buildings as a long-term affordable housing resource. E9 Preser8e /o' Income Housing a5 $redit #nits and Housing "e8elopment .und $orporation:s9 #ver the last number of years, the city has preserved affordable housing through ".7TC&s and through 7(?C&s. 7owever, many of the affordability restrictions are contained in complicated legal agreements between the owners and the City. The city should create a centrali-ed searchable database which would provide the public with information about these units to ensure that the tenants and cooperators understand their rights. Additionally there should be increased oversight over owners to ensure they are meeting their low-income housing ta2 credit obligations. "astly the city should develop a plan to address the end of affordability restrictions of the remaining ".7TC units and to ensure permanent affordability. 49 Preser8e -ingle Room !ccupancies =-R!79 The city should @a4 ;top rewarding ;)# owners who harass permanent tenants out of their buildings in order to empty units for lucrative contracts with City agencies @(7;, 7)A, 7 (, etc. for upwards of C6,%%%>month4 and preserve the housing as affordable permanent housing5 @b4 I2plore solutions to warehousing ;)# units5 @c4 ropose legislation to amend the law to increase the in8uiry period for Certification of No 7arassments from three to ten plus years. 49 Preser8e Affordable Rent1-tabili6ed Apartments9 To correct the high increases of the past years approved by a *ayor 0loomberg appointed )ent 'uidelines 0oard, this Administration&s )ent 'uidelines 0oard should issue a rent guideline which provides for a rent free-e for two consecutive years. Additionally, the city should support the tenant movement in the +%$: rent law renewal campaign to repeal vacancy deregulation and reform the *a/or Capital .mprovement ;ystem, the referential )ent system, the .ndividual Apartment .mprovement ;ystem, the Kacancy 0onus system, and the )ent Control ;ystem as the means of raising rents to the decontrol threshold. 7 ( should work with (7C) to identify landlords who are deliberately violating the rent laws and to take action where necessary.

>>> - R+N0 H+NIN0 N($HA AN" PR+-+R*IN0 P#B/I$ H!#-IN0

*ayor de 0lasio should use every available tool to strengthen and preserve the $1J,%%% public housing apartments owned or managed by the New York City 7ousing Authority @NYC7A4. At the least, the city should commit to3

$$

$4 An accelerated repair plan that ensures every resident the dignity of decent living conditions in their homes. +4 A long-term capital plan to catch up with the multi-billion dollar backlog in ma/or infrastructural improvements. 0elow are policy recommendations to help the city achieve those ob/ectives.

N($HA .unding -trategies

reservation cannot be accomplished without the operating resources NYC7A needs to ade8uately maintain public housing, free of the stress of large, structural operating deficits from year to year. And it cannot be accomplished with insufficient capital to rebuild its aging infrastructure. Dashington provides nearly all of NYC7A&s funding at present, but it cannot be relied on to provide ade8uate funds for the foreseeable future. As a result, it is up to the city and the state to see that NYC7A has the resources it needs. There are several ways this can be accomplished3 $. N($HA must retain all t&e operating resources it recei8es from H#" and resident rent payments9 The Authority is re8uired to pay the City over C$%% million annually, draining its limited operating resources and reserves, contributing substantially to its structural deficit. &e Mayor s&ould terminate t&e Memorandum of #nderstanding =M!#7 under '&ic& N($HA is no' re;uired to pay o8er FG0 million annually for Aspecial police ser8ices9B !nder #peration Clean 7alls, the NY ( provides similar services to private landlords free of charge. )esidents should not be ta2ed twice for the municipal services they re8uire. To his credit, the *ayor has already acted to relieve NYC7A of this year&s NY ( payment, but the obligation should be permanently ended. &e Mayor s&ould e5empt N($HA from furt&er PI/! payments =in lieu of property ta5es7 no' amounting to F2H million annually9 *any nonprofit housing providers and institutions are already e2empted from any property ta2es.

29 N($HA must ma5imi6e t&e cost1effecti8eness of its operating resources t&roug& strategic management reforms t&at produce cost1sa8ings and impro8e ser8ices9 An internal review should identify where management reforms can best ma2imi-e efficiency and eliminate waste. To reduce soaring utility costs, an energy management and efficiency plan should e2plore options for improving energy operation and usage, including co-generation systems that can generate revenues by servicing the surrounding community. (iscussions with unions should identify where ad/ustments in work rules and rates can improve performance.

$+

E9

&e Mayor s&ould press Ne' (or) -tate to increase t&e public assistance s&elter allo'ance9 About one out of si2 @$194 of NYC7A households receive some income through public assistance. The shelter allowance portion of the public assistance payment has not been increased since +%%6Nwhen it was set at C ,%% monthly for a 6-person householdNdespite the soaring rents that have followed since. .n +%%1, when the ;tate acted to end discounted shelter allowances paid to NYC7A, the result was an increase in NYC7A&s rental revenue stream of about C ,1 million annually. &e Mayor s&ould prepare a en1(ear $apital Plan committing city capital funds to maDor infrastructural impro8ements in N($HA buildings9 Dith a current capital improvement backlog estimated at C1 to $% billion, and the prospect of only about C+.: billion in 7!( capital subsidies over the ne2t $% years, NYC7A must rely on city initiative to commit the capital necessary to restore and preserve NYC7A&s aging buildings. #ne such source would be a dedicated revenue stream from ongoing 0attery ark City e2cess revenues, which were intended for rehabilitating and developing affordable housing in other neighborhoods. The *ayor should also be a strong advocate for emerging opportunities to draw down capital funds from the ;tate and from federal trust funds, which can be incorporated into the planned capital budget.

49

N($HA $ommunity "e8elopment !ptions

"and available in NYC7A communities, which is increasingly scarce elsewhere, can be a ma/or potential resource for fulfilling the *ayor&s affordable housing planNbut only if there is a community consensus on how its planned future is shaped. I2perience under the recent NYC7A .nfill>"and-"ease .nitiative has been negative. The *ayor has done well to scrap plans that have been submitted to date and go back to the drawing boards. Any future plans for redevelopment in NYC7A communities must respect the following principles3 $. +ffecti8e community engagement must be part of t&e planning process from t&e startC to decide '&et&er and &o' de8elopment 'ill proceed in t&e community9 Affected NYC7A resident organi-ations, community boards, and other key stakeholders must be included in planning the community&s future. The *ayor&s preservation plan should innovate an effective model for community engagement, one that can serve as a model for other cities. @"essons learned from articipatory 0udgeting NYC could be informative here both for planning a process and for allowing residents to engage more deeply.4 +. N($HA must comply 'it& #/#RPC t&e #niform /and #se Re8ie' Procedure9 !"!) is the prevailing city standard for community review of development plans. .t must be observed so that the affected community has a clear voice in the process. 6. Residential de8elopment in N($HA communities mustC to t&e ma5imum e5tent feasibleC be affordable to lo'1income Ne' (or)ers ='it&in t'ice t&e federal po8erty le8el7 and it must offer on1site N($HA residents priority access to ne' units9 *any resident leaders have spoken to the particular needs of senior residents. roviding them with new apartments within the community could also open up a good many under-occupied $6

NYC7A apartments, making them available to larger, overcrowded households and to disabled residents as well. (isabled residents could be provided with new apartments that are more accessible @on lower floors4. ,. ,&ere t&e community sees fitC appropriate 6oning strategies s&ould be considered to protect N($HA communities and residents from un'anted de8elopment9 ?or e2ample, special preservation -ones have been used in the past to help preserve the fabric of e2isting developments.

N($HA ransparency and Accountability

NYC7A residents have e2perienced abysmal living conditions for too long, as the Authority&s operating budget and workforce have shrunk under deficit pressures. art of the problem has been the Authority&s control over how its finances are presented for public deliberationNfor instance, NYC7A was running large operating deficits since +%%$ before it made them public in +%%<. Another large part of the problem is NYC7A&s insulation from the regulations, procedures, and rights that help protect tenants from condition deficiencies in multiple dwellings outside of public housing. .n that regard, NYC7A is a world unto itself. Dhat is known of NYC7A repairs, its responses to resident complaints is what the Authority chooses to include in press releases. ;everal steps need to be taken to make NYC7A more transparent and accountable, so that government action can be more responsive to the Authority&s actual financial condition and to deficient physical conditions that residents face daily. $. An independentC annual audit and analysis of N($HA:s financial condition s&ould be publicly a8ailable prior to $ouncil budget deliberations eac& year9 City Council does well with the information it receives from NYC7A and from its staff, but much more needs to be done to provide an unbiased, reliable, consistent analysis from year to year. +. An independentC annual management audit of N($HA li8ing conditions and repair acti8ity s&ould be publicly a8ailable prior to $ouncil budget deliberations eac& year9 #ther than NYC7A press releases, it is difficult to obtain accurate, reliable, unbiased information about outstanding deficiencies and the Authority&s efforts to address them. 6. An independent Arepair 'atc&B s&ould be de8eloped to allo' residents and t&e public to trac) N($HA progress in ma)ing repairs9 .n +%$6, then ublic Advocate 0ill de 0lasio created an on-site resource for monitoring repairs. erhaps that should be an ongoing task for the current ublic Advocate "etitia Hames. ,. N($HA resident complaints s&ould be integrated 'it& t&e city:s AE11B system a8ailable to tenants in ot&er multiple d'ellings9 As things stand, NYC7A residents calling E6$$F are told to contact the NYC7A Centrali-ed Call Center, where an appointment is made for repairs, often a year or more in advance. As a result, resident complaints are not systematically registered or reported as they are in the 6$$ system and 7 ( code enforcement is not alerted. The process is completely internal to NYC7A, allowing serious condition deficiencies to go uninspected and unreported @unless the resident initiates court action.7

$,

:. N($HA code 8iolations must be included in t&e data bases maintained by HP" and by t&e "epartment of Buildings ="!B79 !nder an EinformalF agreement among the relevant agencies, NYC7A code violations, when they are uncovered, are not recorded by 7 ( or (#0, thereby insulating NYC7A from the public attention and scrutiny that private landlords receive. NYC7A&s responsibility to its :%%,%%% residents, whose complaints are now 8uarantined within the Authority, calls for similar transparency and accountability if inade8uate living conditions are to be fully addressed.

N($HA Resident Associations

About one third of NYC7A&s 6,6 developments have no resident association representing them. I2isting resident associations are often small in number and weakly organi-ed. .f NYC7A is to partner with residents in improving conditions, in e2ploring community development options, in moving forward on a variety of preservation initiatives, it must have strong, well-informed, wellorgani-ed resident partners to work with. De recommend3 19 N($HA must see t&at resident leaders mo8e for'ard to trainC organi6eC and strengt&en t&eir associations9 Initiati8es s&ould be ta)en to form and train resident organi6ations in de8elopments '&ere t&ey don:t e5ist9 The resources for carrying this agenda out are available, if resident leaders make use of T A @Tenant articipation Activity4 funds allocated by 7!( since +%%6 specifically for that purpose. To date an estimated C$1 million in T A funds remain une2pended, which can be used to contract 8ualified outside organi-ations to provide technical and organi-ing assistance. .f T A funds are not tapped, the City and>or NYC7A should provide the needed support. 29 N($HA must encourage resident leaders to participate in t&e broader community outside N($HAC '&ere t&ey can find important resources t&at could increase t&eir strengt&9 Too often NYC7A resident leadership insulates itself, relying primarily on the Authority for needed information and resources. "inkages with community boards, neighborhood housing and service groups, legal and policy advocates, technical assistance providers, as well as liaison with local elected officials, can be important sources of advice and outside support for resident agendas. >>>

R+"#$IN0 AN" PR+*+N IN0 H!M+/+--N+-&e strongest e8idence of Ne' (or) $ity:s 'orsening affordability crisis is t&e fact t&at &omelessness &as soared to t&e &ig&est le8els since t&e 0reat "epression9 $urrently more $:

t&an 4EC000 &omeless Ne' (or)ersC including more t&an 22C000 c&ildrenC sleep eac& nig&t in municipal s&elters9 "urine t&e Bloomberg administrationC t&e &omeless s&elter population rose by G1 percent and t&e number of &omeless families increased by a remar)able 2E percent9 &e maDor causes of record Ne' (or) $ity &omelessness are t&e 'idening gap bet'een &ousing costs and incomesC and disastrous Bloomberg1era policies t&at too) a'ay permanent &ousing resources from &omeless c&ildren and families9 Mayor de Blasio and &is administration can re8erse t&ese failed polices by embracing &ousing1based solutions to t&e problem of &omelessness t&at &a8e been pro8en to reduce t&e number of &omeless families and indi8iduals9 19 Prioriti6e +5isting .ederal and $ity Housing Resources to Mo8e Homeless .amilies and Indi8iduals .rom t&e -&elter -ystem into Permanent Housing9 The City should3 )esume priority referrals of at least +,:%% homeless households per year to the NYC7A public housing waiting list. )esume referrals of homeless households to ;ection = voucher waiting lists, such that homeless households can obtain at least one of every three available vouchers. )einstate the NYC7A waiting list priority status previously granted to homeless applicants for both the public housing and ;ection = voucher programs. Track vacant properties and rental units, and put them to use by converting the units to permanently affordable housing. Target homeless families and individuals at least one of every five vacancies in e2isting housing units assisted by the NYC (epartment of 7ousing reservation and (evelopment. 29 $reate a Ne' $ity1-tate Rental Assistance Program for Homeless Ne' (or)ers to -upplement +5isting .ederal and $ity Housing Resources9 ;uch a program should3 Assist at least :,%%% households annually5 0e a permanent subsidy or at least offer five years of rent subsidy per eligible household5 0e modeled on the proven ?ederal ;ection = voucher program @this includes provisions that rent subsidies are not linked to welfare benefits5 program participants pay no more than 6%9 of their income towards rent5 apartments must meet ;ection =-style housing 8uality standards5 and rent levels are in line with ;ection = E?air *arket )entsF45 rovide a mechanism to ensure housing stability for those homeless households with members with disabilities or other barriers to employment who cannot otherwise afford to retain housing if they lose the subsidy E9 $reate Ne' Affordable Housing argeted to Homeless Ne' (or)ers as Part of Mayor de Blasio:s en1(ear Housing "e8elopment Plan9

$<

0uilding on the successful approach of *ayor Aoch&s ten-year E7ousing New YorkF plan, which targeted $%9 of the $:%,%%% apartments created to homeless New Yorkers, *ayor de 0lasio&s new ten-year plan should3 Allocate at least $%9 of all housing units created or preserved to homeless families and individuals5 Insure that those housing units are set aside for future homeless New Yorkers when tenants leave those apartments5 and Track vacant properties and rental units, and put them to use by converting the units to permanently affordable housing. 49 Negotiate a Ne' $ity1-tate Agreement to $reate Permanent -upporti8e Housing9 The new ENew York>New York AgreementF agreement should3 Create 6%,%%% units of permanent supportive housing over ten years for homeless individuals and families living with mental illness and other special needs, in particular homeless individuals residing on the streets and in other public spaces5 7alf of the new supportive housing units should be new construction, and half should be scattered-site apartments5 Continue to prioriti-e those with long histories of homelessness and illness5 rovide ade8uate funding to operate housing and provide support services5 and Two-thirds of the units @+%,%%% units4 should be for individuals, with the remaining one-third of units for families @=,1%% units4 and youth @$,6%% units4. 49 $on8ertt A$luster1siteB -&elter #nits Bac) to Permanent Housing The City can convert Ecluster-siteF shelter units back to permanent housing to help significantly reduce the number of homeless families3 *ove homeless families stranded in Ecluster-siteF units to permanent housing with priority referrals to federal housing programs or using rent subsidies. rovide City-;tate rent subsidies to allow families in Ecluster-siteF units that meet ;ection = 8uality standards to secure leases for the very apartments in which they already reside. ?inally, the City should commit to a definitive public timeline to reduce G and ultimately eliminate G City reliance on Ecluster-siteF shelter while instituting strong deterrence measures to safeguard against the harassment of tenants in former Ecluster-siteF buildings by property owners. I9 In8est in $ost1-a8ing Programs to Pre8ent Homelessness To better prevent homelessness, the City should3 Coordinate prevention services among prevention agencies so that at-risk families and individuals know where to go to get help. Inhance funding for anti-eviction legal services to help many more low-income tenants avert eviction in housing courts. .ncrease funding for rent arrears, which will ensure that more families can avoid costly emergency shelter and remain in their own homes. $1

Negotiate with the ;tate to administer the ?amily Iviction revention ;upplement @?I ;4 program at neighborhood welfare offices and>or other sites, to make the ?I ; benefit more widely available to at-risk families. ;eek immediate approval from the ;tate to increase ?I ; subsidy rent levels e8uivalent to those in the ;ection = program. )emove restrictions that prevent families from accessing the ?I ; subsidies, such as the re8uirement that the family be sued in 7ousing Court, e2posing them to inclusion on the O0lack "istsO at tenant screening bureaus. ;upport ;tate legislation to e2pand access to the (isability )ent .ncrease I2emption @().I4 program by including families with a family member with disabilities who is not head of household @i.e., minor and adult children45 all military veterans with disabilities5 and former workers and disability income recipients with incomes up to C+J,%%% per year. JJJ

$=