Put More Money in the Housing Trust Fund
I’ve already written about the basic math when it comes to meeting the demand for affordable housing in the next two decades: the Multifamily Tax Exemption Program and the Housing Levy very efficiently can meet that need. Meanwhile, the linkage tax being promoted by Councilmember O’Brien is a pricey solution that will raise rents—exactly what the city doesn’t need! Part of what makes the Housing Levy work is funding from the Housing Trust Fund (HTF), which provided over $12 million dollars for 9 Seattle housing projects that produced 663 units of affordable housing. Dollars from the HTF are used along with local levy funds, loans and Low Income Housing Tax Credits (LIHTC) to build and preserve affordable housing. Unfortunately funds in the HTF have declined by 64 percent over the last 7 years, a trend that needs to be reversed.
The money in the HTF is appropriated by the Washington State Legislature and funds the construction of new housing affordable for people earning from 0 to 60 percent of Area Median Income (AMI), exactly where there is the most need for affordable housing in Seattle.
Here’s some detail on who benefits from HTF investment from the Washington Low Income Housing Alliance (WLIHA):
The vast majority of people living in homes built or preserved by the HTF are extremely low-income, earning less than $19,000 per year for a family of three. HTF has also funded first-time homeownership programs, & homes for vulnerable communities, such as veterans, people with disabilities, & seniors (read the whole WLIHA One pager).
Every two years the Legislature debates how much money to put in the HTF and what kinds of projects should be prioritized. Over the years this process has varied, with some Legislatures picking specific projects and others simply outlining a broad criteria for funding.
The HTF is administered by the Washington State Commerce Department and funding is awarded through a competitive process supervised by Commerce Department staff and the Policy Advisory Team (PAT) which is a committee appointed by the Affordable Housing Advisory Board (AHAB).
Some years the process for funding gets caught up in local and partisan politics with legislators pushing for funding in their districts. Other budget cycles have had broader directives from the legislature to fund Farmworker housing, or housing for people who are homeless.
The process needs improvement; there are far too few people with interest pushing lots of money around for housing. What’s needed is a reform of the way HTF funds get allocated. Nevertheless, the fact that the HTF has dramatically declined over the course of the last several years is unacceptable—especially for Seattle, a city facing the greatest demand pressures on housing from all levels of income.
Let’s start to make the case that the HTF can and should be a tool to support the Growth Management Act (GMA) and part of a broader commitment to end generational poverty by providing families living (or who want or need to live) in our region’s most job and opportunity rich city Seattle. We believe the city can be transformative by giving people a chance to grow personally and economically in a way that is profoundly more sustainable than other arrangements. Dollars from the HTF accounted for only 8 percent of the funding mix for recent Housing Levy projects and that percentage should be expanded to make all the other dollars go further.
Therefore, the City’s Housing Affordability and Livability (HALA) Committee, the Mayor, and the City Council should urge the Legislature to consider doubling the State’s commitment to funding the HTF (or more, say $150 million for the next biennium) and targeting a substantial portion of those funds for supporting affordable urban housing solutions that leverage local housing levies. Seattle is an economic engine for the state, producing jobs that can lead to prosperity—but that prosperity means we need more housing for all levels of income. The State Legislature should invest in that prosperity to ensure that it doesn’t leave out the people who would benefit from it the most.