Asheville contracted with a consultant for $50,000 to help the Mayor’s Affordable Housing Task Force develop recommendations for the city. It took me about six hours to read the report, not because it was 81 pages long, but because I had a stroke after almost every paragraph. I excerpted the alarming sentences for this blog, and they totaled five pages. I will therefore summarize some of the worst of it:

The consultants recommended pursuing a path of “aggressive, committed public policy.” They advocated public/private collaboration, which I interpret to mean, “your tax dollars for my pet nonprofits.” The task force “implored” city council to have the political will to uphold their recommendations.

The report states that few undeveloped parcels remain for affordable housing, outside the grasp of the floodplain and steep slope ordinance, and recommended infill development and annexation to compensate. The rough topography was blamed for Asheville’s high planning penalty. Still, the city needed to conduct a land study.

Households earning up to 140% of median income, or $73,500 annually, are considered eligible for workforce housing subsidy. Affordability applies to people of all incomes, so the cap on home sales prices eligible for Housing Trust Fund loans should be lifted.

Government is seen as the means of matching demand with supply. Asheville and Buncombe County should reduce the public’s options to vote with its feet and create a government monopoly on affordable housing options by creating regional affordable housing rules and regulations. Since transportation is the second largest expense of low-income families, the city should encourage transit by reducing the amount of available parking.

People who have not yet proven themselves able to pay rent reliably should receive counseling from nonprofits so they can over-extend themselves with high-risk mortgages.

Perhaps the best way to fund more affordable housing would be through a bond referendum with many riders, like “open spaces and parks, infrastructure improvements, etc.” to maximize chances for public approval.

Tax Increment Financing was described as “a responsible tool.” Tax credits were regarded as another strong option to further affordable housing goals. “Hopefully legislation authorizing cities to take broader action around housing and property taxation will be enacted by the State of North Carolina.”

Twenty-year rent controls were advocated by all but two on the board, who wanted them to last thirty years.

Education is needed because some people are, not in so many words, racist about affordable housing. Mavens from all sectors of society needed to be brought on board for those who only listen to people of their own gender or race. Using the clergy and houses of worship to spread the message was mentioned three times. Supporting elected representatives that support affordable housing initiatives was another strategy.

Employers should get involved in assuming risks by underwriting employees’ mortgages and paying security deposits and compensating for rent lapses. Human resources officers can draft paperwork and corporate policies to contract with nonprofit agencies for housing counseling and other services. One element of this program was “partnering with a lead bank.” Employees could also take out Master Leases in an apartment complex to insure occupancy levels.