Why a Commission?

Bulletin #7

July 16, 2005

 

We are beginning to get questions about why a commission is needed.  Why can’t this be done without government involvement and use of public funds?  Why can’t we just do it with private money?

 

Let us begin by looking at the cost of building a 1500 sq ft, 3 bedroom, 2 bath home.  The best estimates that we have gotten from local builders are $100 to $125 per sq ft bringing the cost of the house alone to a range of $150,000 to $187,500.  For all practical purposes, the cost of land plus improvements will cost an additional $100,000. 

 

Our best case total cost for this house is therefore $250,000 to $287,500.  If we attempted to simply purchase housing for perpetual affordability in the open market, we would be looking at median housing prices of above $400,000.  Clearly out of the range of any moderate income family.

 

A moderate income family of four is defined to have an income in the range of $48,080 to $57,095, only partially covering the income range for most of our skilled infrastructure workers.  For example, salaries for certified teachers are $30,023 to $56,588 and starting salaries for a Sheriff’s Deputy are between $40,000 and $50,000.  Our fire departments are presently unable to hire paramedics for less than $45,000.  

 

Assuming a 30% debt to income ratio and a 6% fixed rate 30 year mortgage, these potential homeowners can only afford a home in the range of roughly $183,000 to $225,000.  This is clearly well below our best effort to build an affordable home.

 

(Note:  We are well aware that today’s FHA mortgages extend up to $290,000 and provide rates of 5.5%.  We have selected 6% as a benchmark in anticipation of rates that are likely to exist once the Housing Bank is operational.  There are also a variety of variable rate mortgages, interest only mortgages and even negative amortization mortgages.    In today’s climate of increasing interest rates, we take the conservative position that these introduce too much risk for the homeowner and also for our investors in alternative financing approaches.  We don’t want the homeowner to fail!)

 

Augmenting conventional mortgages with mezzanine funding (described in our last bulletin) or perpetual shared equity (more on that later), the best that we can do is $220,000 to $270,000.  This begins to cover the cost of the home and land for moderate income families, at today’s land and construction prices.  In San Juan County, real estate prices increased by 27% from 2003 to 2004 and by 15% from 2004 to 2005.  Even if the cost of land increased by only 10% and the cost of construction remained constant, our best case cost for this house next year will be $260,000 to $297,000.    This is now only marginally affordable at the upper limit for moderate income families and the costs are likely to increase by much more. 

 

At this point we would love to be proved wrong, but we have concluded that moderate income families cannot afford to purchase a home in San Juan County, even with our best and most creative approaches to financing.

 

The only solution that we have found that works for moderate income families is the Land Trust approach.  This approach, used by all our Community Land Trust organizations, acquires the land, retains ownership of that land, and charges a very low lease fee to the homeowner (typically $1 for a very long term lease).  By removing the cost of the land, we can reduce the cost of the house to a level well within the affordability range for moderate income, especially if we couple a standard fixed interest mortgage with mezzanine or other creative approaches to financing.

 

While there are a few cases where land has been donated, our current affordable housing programs rely almost exclusively on government grants of various types that exclude moderate income (and higher income) families.

 

The inescapable conclusion is that public money is essential to acquire useable land and  to provide incentives to non-profit organizations and private builders to create affordable housing for moderate income families. 

 

Where should that money come from and how should it be administered?

 

Other communities, faced with this problem, have used a variety of approaches, often in combination to raise public money.  These include various impact fees, excise taxes, sales taxes and property taxes. 

 

Based on the surveys that we have done of infrastructure workers, we anticipate a need for 60 to 80 homes over the next 5 years.  Assuming a land trust approach, relatively modest increases in land costs, favorable zoning alternatives, and creative financing, this translates to a need for $1.2 million to $1.6 million per year, likely increasing to $1.8 million to $2.3 million by year five.

 

This is clearly well beyond what can be raised by impact fees, which are of doubtful legality in Washington State in any case.  If the money were attempted to be raised through sales taxes, it would require in increase in sales tax of 0.5%, which is unlikely to be a popular option.  Alternatively, it would require an increase in property taxes of 5% to provide the funds.  This is an amount equivalent to 20% of the share that our county currently receives from real estate tax!  Both of these tax options are undesirable because they force everyone to pay for a problem that was caused through no fault of their own.  Either approach would be especially difficult for low income families or our retired residents who have fixed incomes.

 

The best solution, in our view, is a real estate excise tax, levied on the purchaser of homes.  There is some justification for this approach since it is levied on the new purchasers that are creating the inflated housing prices in the first place, namely by steadily increasing demand for property. 

 

In today’s market, a 0.5% excise tax would raise $1.5 million per year and would increase roughly at the same rate as the increase in property prices.

 

If the excise tax is the best (and perhaps the only viable source of public funds), then what is the best way to administer it?

 

We have carefully examined the alphabet soup of approaches that other communities have taken.  There are four factors that led us to select a county commission as the best approach. 

 

First and foremost, while it represents the county government, it is the least bureaucratic approach that we have found.  It will consist of seven commissioners who are not county employees, but citizens who will volunteer their time and expertise to administer the Housing Bank.  Their responsibility is to be an enabler, to set policy, to build project teams, to solicit proposals, to provide “capstone” funding to make projects possible, to monitor progress, and to report back on progress to the community.  They will be assisted by an Executive Director who will be the only paid staff member.

 

Second, a county commission can accept tax deductible donations of money or land.

 

Third, a county commission can issue tax exempt bonds that will comprise an important source of low interest money that is essential to our finance strategy.

 

Fourth, in Washington State, there are strict regulations as to what organizations can act as an agent of the government in making spending decisions.  A county commission is one such organization, subject only to approval by the Board of County Commissioners.

 

We believe that this organization will be able to draw upon the expertise of our citizens to move quickly and efficiently to solve our housing problem.  The revenue that they receive from the excise tax will give them the practical financial leverage needed to bring teams together and will multiply these funds many times over.

 

To this end, we have drafted an ordinance and presented it to the county to establish the Housing Bank Commission, replacing an existing commission, the Affordable Housing Fund Commission.  We expect it to be approved by the Board of County Commissioners soon.

 

Signed,

 

Lee Sturdivant, San Juan Island

Paul Losleben and Steve Garrison, Orcas Island

Sandy Bishop, Lopez Island

 

As always, our most recent publications are posted at our website http://orcasresearch.org/  and you can contact us at any time at Losleben@rockisland.com or Garrison@rockisland.com

 

Tax deductable donations to help support the Housing Project and to help pay for materials and supplies are gratefully accepted through Navigating Our Future, Housing Project, PO Box 298, Deer Harbor, WA 98243.  This is a totally volunteer effort, so your help is appreciated.