News from the Continuum

Revised: January 2019

By Sarah Owens and Michael Livingston

Affordable Hsg, Social Svces & Homelessness SP work group

Those unable to effect change through chance meetings with important persons must suffer through meetings like the one pictured at left, where it seems like there's always at least one elected official who hasn't read the meeting materials and isn't prepared to work, and yet feels compelled to make lengthy pronouncements about almost unintelligible public policy ideas she doesn't remotely understand and cannot articulate.  Fortunately, there was only one of those at last week's meeting of the Salem's Affordable Housing, Social Services and Homelessness strategic plan work group.  But, one was enough.

The meeting was intended to focus on affordable housing, i.e., how do we get more of it?  But, go figure, Councilor Cook wanted to talk about whether there's any need and whether there's any data to support the alleged need.  Now, before you say anything, she does, after all, represent Ward 7, where they don't seem to need much of anything, and she'd only had since April to read the materials containing the data she wanted.

Had Councilor Cook been able to restrain herself, the group would probably have selected from among, or at least ranked, the twenty or so "strategic housing tools" listed on an 11x17 color-coded sheet.  Dedicated local funding (e.g., cannabis tax revenue), opportunity fund-construction excise tax, local housing fund, reduced/waived development fees, reducing infrastructure costs, low-interest-rate loans, surplus public property/land, bonus density, ADUs, and parking flexibility were all in yellow, meaning the group had previously shown interest in these tools.  Tax exemptions, cash-in-lieu/inclusionary housing ordinance, commercial linkage fees, fast track regulatory process, inclusionary zoning/housing (on-site), annexation ordinance, community benefit ordinance were all in white, meaning the group had not previously shown interest in these tools.  Two new ideas, tax increment financing and add City FTE dedicated to housing policy and implementation, were in blue.  Finally, five tools were removed from the list, as being more related to homelessness than affordable housing.  Also on the list were "How does it [the tool] work?", "Pros" and "Cons and/or Challenges."  Minutes of the meeting have been posted.

For readers who may be wondering what ever happened to the Affordable Housing Committee that the City Council created in December of 2015, the above list is its relic.  For a while, the Housing Advisory Committee served as an interim Affordable Housing Committee and worked up this very same list.  But, perhaps because housing was not a priority for Mayor Peterson, no one was ever appointed to the "real" committee, and things just sort of petered out.  It's a good example of why the City must make a commitment to strategic planning if it expects to address its more difficult problems.

The work group's affordable housing goals are simple: increased housing stock and a sustainable funding stream.  As April Brenden-Locke noted during public comment, the work group indicated a preference for tools that comply with the existing law, could be implemented within a year or two and had a good return on investment (units to dollars).  It shouldn't be that hard to rank the items on the list and then make a few decisions.

Speaking of planning decisions, the trouble with "chance meeting" stories like the one about how a $12M "gift" from Sen. Courtney landed in the lap of the YMCA, is that it reinforces the tendency of charitable institutions to "solve their problems" by waiting passively to be rescued.  Take, for example, the Mid Willamette Community Action Agency.  They've known for over a year they wanted to move The ARCHES Project from its Madison Street location.  Their lease was up six or seven months ago, but when a suitable location didn't magically appear, they extended another six months, only to have the same thing happen.  With half a million in state homeless assistance funds they've got to use or lose by June 30, what do they do?  They buy a building that's three times the size they need for a whopping $2.1M, close their day center and move, without coordinating with partners, and without a business plan.  Three weeks later, no one's even bothered to update the website.  Same sort of approach characterizes MWVCAA's warming center and point-in-time count preparations, even though they're annual events.

The Salem Weekly published a short piece about the move which ended with this cryptic statement, "With ARCHES' arrival it may well play a leading role in the lack of available housing that is so prevalent in our city."  If this is how the agency that supposedly coordinates our local continuum of care operates, it's no wonder that the community wants the City Council to take on housing and homelessness as part of its strategic planning process.