Category: Affordable Housing

Testimony supporting Maryland tenant rights and protection legislation

Posted on by Jane Lyons

February 18, 2020

Environment and Transportation Committee

House Office Building, Room 251

Annapolis, MD 21401

HB 744, Landlord and Tenant – Residential Leases – Tenant Rights and Protections (Tenant Protection Act) (Support)

Testimony for February 18, 2020

Jane Lyons, Maryland Advocacy Manager

Thank you, Chair Barve, Vice Chair Stein, and Environment and Transportation Committee members. This testimony is on behalf of the Coalition for Smarter Growth, the leading organization in the D.C. region advocating for walkable, inclusive, transit-oriented communities. We are in favor of HB 744, a bill that establishes long overdue basic rights for tenants.

HB 744 is an omnibus renter’s rights bill which includes a requirement that security deposits be returned within 30 days, allowance for a tenant to terminate their lease if the landlord fails to make in-unit repairs within a reasonable timeframe, and an authorization for a tenant to terminate their lease without fear of future liability in cases where they have faced harassment and stalking, and must move for their safety.

Renters are a growing population in Maryland. Currently, nearly 40 percent of residents are renters. As this trend continues, it will only become more important to ensure that Maryland’s tenant protections are of a high quality. Home is the center of life and family security – the improvements to landlord-tenant law in HB 722 can make all the difference in someone’s life and to their family.

Right now, we’re behind. Maryland ranks 32nd for tenant rights. Strong tenant protections can mean the difference between a community being welcoming and inclusive, or not. Inclusive policies that protect more vulnerable community members are especially important as neighborhoods grow and change. Tenant empowerment helps residents stay in their neighborhoods and benefit from new amenities.

This bill is part of a larger bill package called “Homes for All,” which includes two other bills: HB 1149, which creates a program to finance social housing projects, and HB 1406, which legalizes the construction of multifamily housing in neighborhoods with higher incomes, an abundance of job opportunities, and access to public transit. Fixing the lack of affordable housing is critical to Maryland’s economic competitiveness, and the three bills together will increase the supply of affordable housing, improve access jobs, and provide greater security for renters, enabling them to focus on work and improvement, and their children to have the home security they need to do well in school.

Therefore, we urge you to support HB 744 and protect the rights of nearly 40 percent of Marylanders. Thank you for your consideration.

CSG testimony supporting Montgomery County CIP amendments

Posted on by Emily Maurer

January 30, 2020

Montgomery County Council Office

Council Office Building

100 Maryland Ave.

Rockville, MD 20850

FY 21 Capital Budget and FY 21-26 CIP (Support with Amendments) 

Testimony for February 5th, 2020 

Jane Lyons, Maryland Advocacy Manager

President Katz and Councilmembers, thank you for the opportunity to speak today. I am here on behalf of the Coalition for Smarter Growth, which supports the FY 21-26 CIP with several critical amendments. We are pleased with the support the County Executive’s CIP gives to bicycle and pedestrian safety, the Bethesda station south entrance, and bus stop improvements. These projects are a necessity if we want to end unnecessary tragedies on our streets. 

Missing projects: Given that, I’ll begin with what we believe is missing: funding for the northern entrance for the White Flint Metro station, the Capital Crescent Trail tunnel in Bethesda, and a multi-use path along Dale Drive. These projects will support economic development and increase both Metro and Purple Line ridership. They also both specifically address safety along MD 355, one of the most dangerous and deadly roads in the county, where two people have already been killed in 2020. 

Bus Rapid Transit: Regarding BRT, we are happy that this CIP includes funding for preliminary engineering of BRT on MD 355, Veirs Mill Rd, New Hampshire Ave, and the North Bethesda Transitway. However, given our economic development and climate crises, these projects cannot wait and should be advanced to start even sooner. Likewise, it is disappointing that there is no money included in the CIP for BRT construction. This is especially disappointing when every road project includes costs for both preliminary engineering and construction. Not one BRT project has a construction timeline. I hope the Council will prioritize BRT by actively planning for its implementation. 

Specifically, I hope you will accelerate the preliminary engineering timeline for MD 355 – four years is much longer than needed – and schedule planning for New Hampshire Ave and North Bethesda Transitway to begin much earlier than FY22 and FY24, respectively. At this rate, we can expect that service wouldn’t begin on these lines until at least 2026. Can our economy or climate wait that long? Can transit-dependent residents in Gaithersburg or Germantown wait that long for high quality transit, especially in light of the Corridor Cities Transitway cancellation? 

MCDOT has proposed that MD 355 BRT service be broken into three routes since the full 22 mile route is too long for an ideal level of frequency. This effectively breaks up construction and service commencement into three phases. I recommend that the Council select a design alternative (Alternative B); then when preliminary engineering and design for the first phase is complete, construction could begin on that phase while the second phase undergoes preliminary engineering and design, and so on. 

Finally, we firmly believe that Route 29 BRT will not set a good example without dedicated lanes south of Tech Road. MCDOT’s median lane study was supposed to be released last fall. This report should be shared with the Council immediately so that any construction funding can be included in the CIP. 

Ride On improvements: Given slow progress, most BRT service in the county won’t be operational for five to ten years. We recommend that MCDOT take the success of Ride On extRa and expand express bus service to the other future BRT corridors. Ride On extRa Route 101 increased ridership by 11 percent and reduced travel times by 25 percent. MCDOT should also officially name priority service corridors, similar to WMATA’s Priority Corridor Network, which has helped WMATA to quickly improve service in phases. 

As mentioned, we are pleased with the continued upgrade of Ride On’s 5,400 bus stops. The CIP details a GIS bus stop inventory and condition assessment, criteria for improvements, and prioritization. To the best of our knowledge, that information is not easily available to the public. We request that MCDOT publicly post that information, especially their criteria for improvements and prioritization. 

Additionally, we urge the county to prioritize electric vehicle replacement. Most replacements for the Ride On fleet are set to be hybrids; however, the proposed CIP still details that 80 of the 153 vehicles will be diesel. 

Affordable housing: We are grateful to the County Executive for creating the new Affordable Housing Opportunity Fund to help acquire properties in areas with growing rents. This fund supports the recommendations we crafted as members of the Purple Line Corridor Coalition Housing Action Team. We hope the County Executive and DHCA will continue to work with affordable housing developers to craft a program that best fits their financing needs. 

School capital projects: Finally, we want to support funding for school capital projects, especially those that will relieve clusters in moratorium. However, we should note that the incentive created by the moratorium to fund capacity projects leaves out the vital capital needs of schools that are falling apart but aren’t overcapacity. Through the SSP update process, we hope to revisit the moratorium, and replace it with a policy that better serves the needs of both schools and housing. 

Given the challenge of a shrinking capital budget and so many urgent projects, it’s time for the Council to start considering new funding sources. We will not meet our economic development, climate, and equity goals without significant investments the infrastructure that allows us to thrive. Thank you for your time.

Testimony supporting Maryland Housing Impact Fairness Act

Posted on by Emily Maurer

November 21, 2019

Montgomery County Council

Council Office Building

100 Maryland Ave.

Rockville, MD 20850

Bill 34-19, Taxation – Development Impact Taxes – Affordable Housing – Housing Impact Fairness Act (Support)

Testimony for December 3, 2019

Kimberly Golden Brandt, Director, Smart Growth Maryland

Jane Lyons, Maryland Advocacy Manager, Coalition for Smarter Growth

President Navarro and Councilmembers, thank you for the opportunity to speak today. My name is Kim Golden Brandt, Director of Smart Growth Maryland, which advocates for a more environmentally and economically sustainable future that creates opportunities for all Marylanders through better development patterns. I am also speaking on behalf of the Coalition for Smarter Growth, the leading organization in the D.C. region advocating for walkable, inclusive, transit-oriented communities. 

First, thank you to the Council for your support of affordable housing, shown through your continued investment in the Housing Initiative Fund and recent adoption of the Council of Government’s housing targets. In addition to the legislation before us this evening, we welcome additional proposals that will help get the HIF to the $100 million per year goal and help double housing production to meet the COG targets.

We support the Housing Impact Fairness Act, given the existing and growing need for both affordable housing and school construction funding. This legislation ensures that all new construction contributes for its impact. 

For example, there was a $575,000 home from 1953 on Dickens Avenue in Bethesda. It was torn down and replaced with a 4,891 square foot, $1.425 million home. When this happens again and again in a neighborhood, middle-class households are replaced by wealthier households. Teardowns can lead to neighborhoods becoming more exclusionary over time, especially when “middle” housing types are missing.

On average, the additional impact fees would result in a newly rebuilt home costing $1.8 million instead of $1.75 million. As with all taxes, this is a statement of values. The HIF portion of the impact tax from just this one teardown would go a long way to helping provide affordable housing, for example, more than covering the rent of two very low-income families for over a year. Or it would meaningfully contribute to more room in our schools for students. For homes built after 1986, we’ve already made that value judgement to support these goals.

In addition to our support of the bill, we also offer the following amendments and considerations. First, to ensure that this proposal will be a net gain in revenue over time, we welcome additional economic analysis. The recordation tax and increased property taxes that come from teardowns also go towards affordable housing, school construction, and other investments.

Next, we recognize that some neighborhoods, especially those with older structures, need investment including improved housing stock, and that teardowns can offer that needed investment. Therefore, we welcome an amendment that exempts blighted or condemned properties.

Finally, we ask the PHED committee to strongly consider exempting properties if an additional living unit is provided. This policy could be modeled after Portland’s residential infill project. Replacing one home with another does nothing to address the county’s housing shortage. If we do not build enough homes to address demand, then older homes will just continue to become more and more unaffordable.

Thank you for your time.

CSG in the News: Study: DC rent is 3rd highest in the country

Posted on by Cheryl Cort

Study: DC rent is 3rd highest in the country; Here’s how much income you need to afford it

by AMANDA HOROWITZ, ABC 7 WJLA, 

WASHINGTON (ABC7) — The D.C. Council unanimously voted on the first step of the city’s Comprehensive Plan for development last week.

A spokesperson for Mayor Bowser’s office said she will likely unveil the remaining elements of the comprehensive plans as well as area housing targets and maps on October 15.

The comprehensive plan includes proposed solutions to the city’s affordable housing shortage – an issue that elected officials and advocates are coming together to try to fix.

The plan will go through review by the National Capital Planning Commission and Congress before it gets to the mayor’s desk for signing, the mayor’s spokesperson said….

Numbers from the National Low Income Housing Coalition estimate that over 50 percent of residents living in the D.C. metro area are renters.

According to NLIHC, the median family income for both renters and buyers is $121,000. This means families can afford to pay $3,000 a month for rent without being cost-burdened.

HUDs estimate of a fair market rent that recent movers paid for a modest two-bedroom apartment in D.C. was $1665, but 60 percent of rents are currently higher according to the NLIHC.

For those in the fortieth percentile, in order to afford $1665 without being “cost-burdened” an individual would have to earn $66,000 a year, or $5500 monthly, the NLIHC estimates.

Assuming a 40-hour workweek, 52 weeks per year, this level of income translates into $32.02 an hour. Working at the minimum wage of $14.00 an hour in D.C. each week an individual would have to work 90 hours weekly at two jobs to afford a modest apartment.

Cheryl Cort, policy director for Coalition for Smarter Growth, an organization dedicated to bettering the district believes lack of affordable housing is one of the greatest challenges D.C. faces.

“Housing insecurity worsens other conditions in a person’s life. Many DC residents face daunting challenges — lack of access to quality education and training, violent neighborhoods, poor health status, low wage jobs and unstable employment. Lack of access to stable, quality housing compounds all these problems, and is also one of the solutions to a number of these problems,” Cort said.

Cort said the CSG stands behind the mayor’s housing strategy. In May, the mayor signed an order directing District agencies to identify new policies, tools, and initiatives that would start moving toward the goal of creating 36,000 new housing units, 12,000 of them affordable, by 2025….

 Regardless of how the numbers add up, whether you’re renting or buying, one thing is clear – officials and advocates think housing in D.C. is too expensive.“Bold action to address housing affordability requires the entire city’s input and energy,” Cort said.

View the full story by WJLA here.

CSG in the News: Phil Mendelson added important affordable housing language to the Comp Plan, but some are trying to undo it

Posted on by Cheryl Cort

Phil Mendelson added important affordable housing language to the Comp Plan, but some are trying to undo it

By David Alpert (Executive Director) October 7, 2019, Greater Greater Washington

…On October 2, Chairman Phil Mendelson’s latest draft of the plan’s Framework Element added language similar to those principles, especially around building and preserving affordable housing and protecting tenants in affordable housing when their properties undergo redevelopment. The chairman’s draft also centers the importance of, as DC grows, building in racial and economic equity, a credit to interventions by Councilmember Kenyan McDuffie (Ward 5) and Councilmember Trayon White (Ward 8).

The final vote on the Framework bill is on Tuesday, October 8, and last week, some opponents emerged to fight this language. We’re pushing for it to remain….

The Comp Plan Framework now borrows much of this language

Chairman Phil Mendelson’s latest draft of the Framework has…a lot of what the Housing Priorities Coalition proposed! (The final version will be released on Monday.)

Notably, it reflects an amendment introduced by Councilmember Brianne Nadeau (Ward 1) at the bill’s first reading. Advocacy by many of affordable housing groups who were part of the original coalition, like, DC Fiscal Policy Center, Housing Association of Nonprofit Developers, Enterprise Community Partners, Coalition for Nonprofit Housing and Economic Development, and Coalition for Smarter Growth emphasized the necessity of this sort of language, so it’s a win that Mendelson added more beyond what he had included in the version voted on at first reading.

Not everyone is happy with the new community benefits language. Attorney David Goldblatt of Goldblatt Martin Pozen LLP, which does lobbying and real estate transactions for large companies, wrote a letter on behalf of the DC Building Industry Association (DCBIA) asking to water down this language. Goldblatt said the changes were in the interests of the DC Housing Authority, though his letter says he’s not speaking for DCHA, just DCBIA.

It’s worth repeating that this language is only about benefits given in exchange for zoning flexibility as part of a PUD, like more density. It doesn’t impose any kind of unfunded requirement on property owners. What it does is say is that in exchange for more affordable housing or anti-displacement measures, you can build taller or bigger in proportion.

Affordable housing is really necessary. It’s also expensive. With more floors or larger buildings, it can become economically feasible to offer one-for-one replacement, “build first,” and other features that the city’s residents deserve when their homes are redeveloped.

Not all developers are supportive of this concept, but a lot are. Many think it’s a great idea to build more affordable housing and avoid displacing anyone, as long as they can design a project which does so and actually works economically. Sure, if people could build higher and didn’t have to build affordable units, that would be even more profitable, but public policy can ensure we get affordable housing, while projects still “pencil out.”

Right now, DC’s acute limits on new buildings directly prevent developers from paying for more affordable housing to avoid displacement. Some people from the development community, at least, would like to be part of the solution, and the proposed rule would let them.

The proposed Framework language takes a big step toward achieving what the Housing Priorities Coalition recommended. It’s not everything, because this language just applies to PUD benefits. There will be other opportunities to enact these and the rest of the coalition’s 10 principles in the rest of the Comp Plan. The Office of Planning will release its amendments to the rest of the document October 15, along with housing targets and map changes.

Read the full post here.