POR 2017 #237 · Agenda item attachment · Sep 18 2017

A Comprehensive Housing Plan for Cambridge The City of Cambridge, which is home to 45,569 households, is facing a housing affordability emergency. In January 2015, the Cambridge City Council unanimously approved an order setting a goal of creating 1,000 new affordable homes by the end of this decade. Since 1997, the City has maintained a ratio of roughly 15 % of the overall housing stock as affordable, despite the loss of 15,700 rent controlled units (rent controlled units represented 40 % of Cambridge’s total rental housing stock in 1995), the market conversion of 349 low and moderate income rental housing units in expiring-use properties, and the conversion of thousands of housing units into condominiums. Given the present conditions of one of the most expensive housing markets in the country, and the federal government’s retrenchment of its role in providing housing assistance to lower income renters, it is clear that the City’s existing policies and programs will not produce the number of affordable units and the diversity of housing types to meet the housing needs of our community. Even if the council’s vision of building 1,000 new affordable units was realized, which according to the Community Development Department, would be a “significant increase to the City’s historic rates of affordable housing creation,” it would not counteract the other major influence on the housing market generating the affordability problem, the dramatic increase in income inequality in this “high opportunity” city. The change in incomes in Cambridge over the past three decades is one of the consequences of ever rising housing prices. During the period of 1990 to 2011, the number of households in Cambridge earning 50 – 80 % of Area Median Income (low and moderate income households) declined by 49 %, while the number of households earning over 120 % increased by 60 %. Developing a comprehensive local housing plan that would expand the supply and affordability of housing in Cambridge, and ensure greater housing security for low and moderate income renters and homeowners, would serve to protect those people who are most at risk of displacement, and maintain socioeconomic diversity in our community. The 2017 City of Cambridge Community Needs Assessment Report identified affordable housing and homelessness as top tier community needs. But have we made the City’s commitment to affordable housing a top priority? A comprehensive local housing plan that is not merely another housing report would shift our thinking about what the City’s role should be in creating an affordable Cambridge. Local decisions would be framed within the question, “How will this affect housing affordability in Cambridge?” To this end, City Departments would be required to produce impact statements that look at how affordable housing would be affected when ordinances, policies, regulations, and fees are enacted or changed. Beyond considering whether the city’s goal of expanding the supply and affordability of housing would be undermined by an action or decision, every City Department would be charged with developing ideas and practices that would promote affordable housing. There would be a process for measuring and reporting on the changes that occur as a result of this new approach to community planning. The demand for housing in Cambridge seems to have no limits, but what kind of community do we want to be? A comprehensive local housing plan would describe the specific actions that we can take to make Cambridge the kind of place that develops inclusively.

1 What are the dimensions of Cambridge’s affordable housing emergency? What are the consequences? ______________________________________________________________________________ Escalating rents ______________________________________________________________________________ Between 2000 and 2015, median asking rents for a one-bedroom apartment in Cambridge increased 90 % from $1,268 to $2,403. For a two-bedroom apartment, median asking rents increased 70 % from $1,691 to $2,882; and for a three-bedroom apartment, 64 % from $2,050 to $3,368. (City of Cambridge Housing Profile 2016) ______________________________________________________________________________ Housing cost burdens ______________________________________________________________________________ In 2013, 65.6 % of extremely low income (at or below 30 % of Area Median Income or AMI) renter households in Cambridge were housing cost-burdened (paying more than 30 % of their gross income on rent); 55.8 % were severely cost-burdened (paying more than 50 % of gross income on rent). (HUD Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy Data, 2000 and 2009 – 2013) Seventy-eight % of very low income (31 – 50 % of AMI) renter households in Cambridge were cost- burdened; 49.9 % were severely cost-burdened. Seventy-four % of low income (51 – 80 % of AMI) renter households in Cambridge were cost- burdened; 22.1 % were severely cost-burdened. Twenty % of renter households in Cambridge with incomes above 80 % of AMI were cost-burdened; 1.6 % were severely cost-burdened. ______________________________________________________________________________ Changing incomes in Cambridge ______________________________________________________________________________ The number of households in Cambridge earning 50 – 80 % of AMI has declined by 49 % since 1990, while the number of households earning over 120 % of AMI has increased by 60 %. (Memo to the Cambridge Affordable Housing Trust, Analysis of incomes in Cambridge since 1990, CDD Staff, 28 August, 2014) ______________________________________________________________________________ Voucher usage inside/outside Cambridge ______________________________________________________________________________ Forty-three % of Cambridge Housing Authority (CHA) Moving to Work tenant-based (mobile) voucher households live outside Cambridge. This represents an 11 % increase since 2011. (CHA, 11 May, 2017) Over half of recent lease-ups who located outside Cambridge are paying more than 30 % of their income on rent.

2 The success rate of recent CHA voucher holders was 59 %. Forty-eight % of elderly/disabled households were able to use their voucher compared to 63 % of family households. (This was a group of preference applicant households on the CHA’s public housing waitlist who were issued vouchers during the period of spring 2015 through April 2017 when the public housing wait list was closed, and vacancies were held for current CHA tenants who were relocated due to construction.) ______________________________________________________________________________ Waiting lists for housing assistance ______________________________________________________________________________ CHA Waitlists All applications: 13,700 (CHA, 18 May, 2017) Total applications for public housing/RAD/former public housing: 4,909 Applications for elderly/disabled developments: 797 (Preference applicants: 264 No preference: 533) Applications for family developments: 4,112 (Preference applicants: 754 No Preference: 3,358) Total applications for the Housing Choice Voucher program: 8,791 (Preference applicants: 3,214 No preference: 5,577) The great majority of applicant households on the CHA’s waitlists are extremely low income (income at or below 30 % of AMI). (Note: The CHA’s public housing waitlists were closed January 1, 2015. The CHA’s voucher waitlist was re-opened October 1, 2016 after being closed for eight years.) Single Room Occupancy (SRO) Waitlist All applications: 1,235 (CHA, 18 May, 2017) There was a 23 % increase in applications for SRO units in 2015, and a 147 % increase in 2016. Inclusionary Housing Rental Applicant Pool All applications: 2,250 (Community Development Department, 16 May, 2017) Between March 31, 2016 and October 17, 2016, there was a 26 % increase in applications from 1,623 to 2,037. 101 households were served during the period of April 1, 2016 and March 31, 2017. Thirty-nine % of these households had emergency needs (i.e., living in an overcrowded situation; homeless). As of April 1, 2017, 56 % of all inclusionary rental housing units were occupied by voucher holders.

3 _______________________________________________________________________ Displacement; evictions from affordable housing ______________________________________________________________________________ Cases filed and evictions of CHA public housing households: - In 2016, CHA filed 141 cases in court for non-payment of rent and 12 cases for cause. There were five evictions. - Between January and April of 2017, there were 32 cases filed in court for non-payment of rent and 15 for cause. There were five evictions. (CHA Director of Operations Dean Petruzzi) Terminations of CHA voucher households: - During 2016, CHA commenced the termination of 83 voucher households. Thirty households were terminated. - Two terminations were upheld in conference panel. 20 households that filed an appeal failed to appear for the conference panel. - Fifty-one households resolved the matter which had caused CHA to commence a termination. One household was reinstated in conference panel. - There were 37 informal hearings; six of which resulted in repayment agreements. Fourteen households resolved the matter which had caused CHA to commence their termination prior to an informal hearing. - There is one termination that is still pending (as of June 27, 2017). - The reasons for terminations: Twenty-seven were for failure to recertify or provide the necessary documents to complete recertification. Eleven were for other program violations. Six were for unreported income. The remainder were for other reasons or a combination of reasons, including failure to show up for a scheduled appointment and failed inspection. (CHA Director of Leased Housing Hannah Lodi) ______________________________________________________________________________ Homelessness ______________________________________________________________________________ Cambridge counted 517 persons who were experiencing homelessness on the night between January 27 and January 28, 2016, the annual Point-in-Time census of sheltered and unsheltered homeless persons. There was an increase of 53 persons from 2015, which was related to an increase in shelter beds. (City of Cambridge: 2016 Census of Persons Experiencing Homelessness)

4 Seventy-seven % of persons experiencing homelessness in the 2016 Point-in-Time count were single individuals and 23 % were members of households with children. The average bed utilization rate in Cambridge emergency shelters which serve individuals is 90 % compared to 97 % for emergency shelters which serve families. (City of Cambridge, “2016 Cambridge Homeless Housing Inventory Count”) The average bed utilization rate in transitional housing is 91 % compared to a 95 % utilization rate in permanent supportive housing. Fifty % of families in Cambridge emergency shelters stayed for longer than six months during the period of October 2014 – September 2015. (2015 Annual Homeless Assessment Report) Cambridge residents who are Black disproportionately experience homelessness. Though Black residents constitute only 11 % of the city’s population, they are 29 % of the total homeless population. (2016 Census) Current residents at six Single Room Occupancy (SRO) sites in Cambridge have annual average earned incomes in the range of $153 - $4,278. Annual median total incomes of these SRO residents fall in the range of $9,797 - $10,193. (Memo to CHA Board of Commissioners, Amendments to the Administrative Plan (Parts 1-3) and ACOP regarding Single Room Occupancy Waitlist Policy and Program Description Updates, Martha Tai, 18 May, 2017)

1 The Cambridge City Council Housing Committee will consider a range of strategies to address Cambridge’s housing needs. _____________________________________________________________________________ Goal: Create and preserve affordable housing for low and moderate income households _____________________________________________________________________________ 1. Increase local and state resources for affordable housing. - Commit additional funds in the City’s budget. - Issue affordable housing minibonds. - Establish dedicated streams of city revenue to be used for affordable housing development such as parking fees, building permit fees, short-term rental taxes, and a local transfer tax. - Support a state real estate transfer tax which is dedicated to affordable housing. 2. Maximize the use of zoning to increase the supply of affordable housing. - Review the incentive zoning and inclusionary housing ordinance on a regular basis. - Create a city-wide affordable housing overlay district. - Make the permitting process for affordable housing projects expeditious and predictable. - Reduce or remove motor vehicle and bicycle parking requirements for 100 % affordable housing projects based on data on actual usage and distance from public transit. - Reduce motor vehicle parking requirements for transit-accessible residential developments in exchange for additional affordable units. - Require that large commercial development projects include a residential component. 3. Coordinate all of the local government roles and departments that affect housing affordability. - Local affordable housing providers will meet on an ongoing basis to update one another on projects, and discuss possible solutions to the challenges to affordable housing preservation and development. - The City Council will hold quarterly Roundtable/Working Meetings to discuss how to expand housing affordability in Cambridge, and educate local officials and the public on policy, planning, and funding issues. - Produce a guidebook to all of the City departments, boards and commissions, housing agencies, and community organizations that make up Cambridge’s housing system. - Require every City department to produce affordable housing impact statements when ordinances, policies, regulations, and fees are enacted or changed. Provide training to key staff on how to do an affordable housing impact analysis.

2 - Require every City department to develop an action plan that will identify what they can do to promote (or at least not impede) affordable housing development. Provide training to key staff on how to develop an affordable housing action plan for their department. 4. Remove barriers to new development by understanding and challenging NIMBY (not in my backyard) and LULU (locally unwanted land uses) responses to affordable housing projects. 5. Recognize that higher density allows for a greater number of affordable housing units to be built, and make the case that an anti-growth sentiment can serve to thwart one of the core values of Cambridge, equality. Bring attention to the social and economic consequences of exclusionary zoning. 6. Create a more inclusive planning process. - Increase the participation of underrepresented communities, including lower income tenants, individuals and families who have experienced homelessness, and people for whom English is not their first language. - Collect demographic information about the membership of City boards and commissions, particularly, those bodies that make decisions that affect housing affordability, with the goal of increasing the diversity of experiences and perspectives that inform the City’s housing policy. 7. Prioritize the preservation of existing low and moderate income housing that is at risk of losing affordability restrictions and/or is in need of major capital improvements - Continue to commit 80 % of Community Preservation Act funds to affordable housing. - Strengthen state law 40T notice requirements for expiring-use housing by enacting a home rule petition. - Project-base tenant protection vouchers at Cambridge Housing Authority (CHA) Former Public Housing (FPH) developments. - Support adding units at CHA Rental Assistance Demonstration (RAD) and FPH developments. - Support adding units at other affordable developments that are being preserved. - Eliminate the payment in lieu of taxes (PILOT) to the City for CHA RAD and FPH developments. - Reduce the building permit fee for affordable housing projects 8. Reduce the competition for private market rental housing, particularly, for family-sized apartments, by requiring universities to build more student housing 9. Require the Cambridge Community Development Department to produce an Annual Housing Report for the City of Cambridge that would include data on the number of new market rate and affordable housing units that were created, and the number of affordable housing units that were preserved and lost by neighborhood; and an overview of the households served by affordable housing programs in Cambridge.

3 ____________________________________________________________________________ Goal: Strengthen tenant protections _____________________________________________________________________________ 1. Enact just cause eviction legislation through a home rule petition. 2. Establish and fund the right to counsel in certain housing cases. (House No. 3589. An Act establishing a right to counsel in certain eviction cases.) 3. Adopt a local condo conversion law. (Acts, 1983 – Chap. 527. An Act enabling cities and towns to regulate the conversion of residential property to the condominium forms of ownership.) 4. Create the position of Housing Ombudsman/Advocate for the City of Cambridge. 5. Develop a Tenant Harassment Prevention Program. 6. Create an online Landlord Watchlist to share information about buildings with multiple serious violations of City laws and codes relating to housing quality and safety 7. Provide information on landlord-tenant laws on the City website which would include the obligations of landlords, the obligations of tenants, and city ordinances that affect tenants and landlords. _____________________________________________________________________________ Goal: Promote housing stability _____________________________________________________________________________ 1. Enhance the enforcement of Cambridge’s source of income discrimination ordinance. 2. Offer tenant education programs to test whether requiring participants to successfully complete a series of workshops dealing with topics such as budgeting and credit, housing search basics, maintaining stable housing, tenant rights and responsibilities, and CORI mitigation, before they are issued a tenant-based voucher would improve the rate of voucher takers who are able to use their voucher. 3. Establish a Landlord Liaison Program. Provide benefits and guarantees to landlords who agree to use an alternative screening/application process to reduce barriers to housing (e.g., waive credit history screening, not screen out applicants for non-payment eviction history, individualized assessments of applicants with a criminal record history). 4. Expand tenant outreach to track and analyze the causes of displacement, including physical evictions and forced moves; develop targeted solutions for vulnerable subpopulations of tenants; incorporate displacement risk in planning decisions. 5. Create an inventory of the stock of affordable accessible housing in Cambridge. 6. Increase the housing choices of CHA tenant-based voucher (TBV) households. Offer CHA TBV households who are located outside Cambridge the opportunity to apply for a transfer to a newly

4 renovated apartment at a RAD/FPH development. Interview and survey CHA TBV households to find out the reasons for their locational choices. 7. Increase the housing choices of CHA ceiling rent (so-called over income or above 80 % of Area Median Income) public housing/RAD/FPH households who are interested in transitioning out of CHA housing by creating a time-limited right of return subsidy; establish a set-aside program for these households in the City’s Inclusionary Housing Program or change the inclusionary tenant selection policies to preference these households. 8. Expand the preference for Cambridge residents to include former residents who have been displaced due to the high cost of housing. 9. Include an evaluation process in the City’s homeownership program HomeBridge for moderate- and middle income households to see which types of households (i.e., household size and composition, income level, resident or employed in Cambridge, and type of housing they moved from) choose to apply for the program, and which ones are successful. 10. Establish a state income tax credit for owners who charge below market rents. 11. Provide assistance for lower income households who move; the cost of moving, including first month’s rent, last month’s rent, security deposit, and realtor’s fee, has been estimated by CHA to be $7,200.