Tab 7 Written Comments from the Public
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Tab 7 Written Comments from the Public Written Comments Received for Modifications Made to the Low Income Housing Tax Credit FY2018 Qualified Allocation Plan December 4, 2017 Aumann, Shirah Miriam “Mimi” Beacon Village Resident Springfield, MO 65802 I am a resident of Beacon Village in Springfield, MO, low income level residence. My rent is $475/Mo, and I really struggle to make that rent payment but have never been late. I am 78 years old and live alone with no family checking on me. If I did not have this apartment, I would definitely be either out on the street or living in sub-standard conditions which exist all over Springfield, MO. Before I got on the waiting list for this apartment while it was being built, I was living in a 20-year old trailer and driving a 20-year old car. By a miracle, I was able to sell that trailer and got enough money to pay for a used car so I would not have to have a car note monthly. There was a little left that I have been living on in the 4 years I have lived in Beacon Village. I am VERY thrifty- I do not smoke or drink, have a lot of medications or eat out a lot. I spend any money very carefully and do not abuse "the system" by trying to get all I can out of it. Until now, I have made it barely. Recently I had to cash in a couple of CO's I had been saving for years to leave to two nieces who have been kind to me but live at a great distance in other states. Recently, because of my need, I have had to apply for help and qualify for Medicare monthly payment to be paid for me. It hasn't happened yet but I am hoping it will as I need some kind of assistance it would appear... I would repeat, if it were not for this housing I am currently in, I would end up on the street or in very dire conditions. I have lived a good life of service and character, being a volunteer most of my life and in leadership roles. I have been a teacher and worked in Christian environments by choice, rather than the worldly roles I could have filled at higher pay. I am one of those who has slipped through the cracks through no fault of my own but by the circumstances of my life. I know others in this situation as well. We tend to commiserate together about how we would have come to this condition in our golden years when we are supposed to at last get a little rest and leisure activities when we have been "good citizens" and lived exemplary lives... Please make a way that low income housing would still be available- especially to deserving members of the population. Not those simply using "the system" and continuing in a lifestyle of entitlement and addictions and abuses ... Sincerely, Shirah Miriam "Mimi" Aumann Beacon Village 3936-B West Maple Street Springfield, MO 65802 [email protected] 417.230.0114 Braunage, Toni Highland Ridge Senior Complex Resident Carpentry and Exteriors, LLC Lana McPartlin Kansas City, MO City of Columbia – City Council Matt Pitzer, City Council 701 E. Broadway, Columbia, MO 65205 I write as a representative of Columbia to urge you restore funding for the state low-income housing tax credit program. We in Columbia know the dramatic positive effect this funding has on our community and fear that a decision to end the program would cause irreparable harm to those in most need. Here in Columbia, state LIHTC funding recently has helped renovate 360 public housing units, construct 25 new apartments for homeless veterans and hundreds more units for Missouri seniors. We have plans to renovate more than 200 additional public units in future years, helping to restore our aging public housing property. These affordable housing opportunities provide a critical "hand up" to families who simply need the dignity of a roof over their heads to stabilize their lives. The state LIHTC program, with private market oversight, has served as an efficient alternative to the old, bloated government-run bureaucracies that rightfully earned scorn. Here in Missouri, we have done it better, cheaper and with less government involvement. We have entrusted the private market to deliver efficiency where government cannot. Missouri spending on state LIHTCs is a fraction of the $1 billion in rent subsidies spent by New York City alone. Further, mandates elsewhere require developers to set aside a percentage of all new units as affordable. Missouri's LIHTC program keeps taxes down and reduces costs for all citizens. And with an aging population, veterans who struggle to stay out of the cold and the serious challenges facing the disabled, the need for affordable housing is acute. More than ¼ of all renters spend more than half their income on rent, and waitlists for rental assistance in Missouri are often so long they are closed to new applicants. A recent study counted 16,000 homeless schoolchildren, each of whom is less likely to complete high school and more likely to require state support throughout their lives. The Missouri low-income housing tax credit program has delivered countless benefits to thousands of Missourians at low cost to taxpayers. I implore you to reconsider your vote to end this valuable funding. City of Columbia – City Council Ian Thomas, Fourth Ward Councilman 701 E. Broadway, Columbia, MO 65205 I am writing to you in support of Missouri's Low-Income Housing Tax Credit (LlHTC) program, which utilized Federal and State funds to develop affordable housing throughout the state. As a member of the Columbia City Council, I am aware of a serious shortage of affordable homes in our community. More than 12,000 rental households ln Columbia (about 57% of all renters) and about 3,500 owner-occupied households (23%) are cost-burdened by 30% or more. In spending 30% or more of their income on housing and utilities, these families and individuals are in a fragile economic situation and at high risk of becoming homeless. This inability of the market to provide affordable housing is replicated across the state, and the UHTC program is an essential tool for Missouri communities to mitigate the problem. , · The following remarks provide support and justification for the LIHTC program, and respond to criticism that has been articulated. 1. The federal government's old way of financing affordable housing was broken; Missouri has helped fill the gap for decades ...until now. LIHTCs .are preferable to the old public housing system which suffered from tremendous waste and mismanagement, and which saw taxpayers spending money to tear down structures just 2-3 decades after they were built. Compared to that, a tax credit with private market oversight, as originally crafted and enacted by Ronald Reagan and Jack Kemp, is a very efficient alternative. Missouri has long assisted seniors, veterans, low-income families and the disabled secure safe, quality affordable housing to remain productive and independent. For 25 years, we have achieved this policy goal via the state low- income, housing tax credit. As the population ages, our veteran community grows, and the disabled face serious challenges, the need for affordable housing will continue to increase. Eliminating the state's LIHTC will leave tens of thousands of vulnerable Missouri senior and veterans out in the cold. 2. The need for affordable housing is more acute than ever. A recent study found that 1/4 of all renters spend over half their income on rent. Less than 20% of them receive aid, because resources are scarce- waitlists for rental assistance in Missouri are years long. Today, the St. Louis City, St Louis County, and Kansas City Housing Authorities waitlists range from 4,000-15,000 people; lists in smaller counties often exceed 1,000. Nearly all of the state's waitlists are so full that they are closed to new applicants. A recent state study counted 16,000 homeless schoolchildren, excluding kids age 0-5. Research shows that homeless children are less likely to complete high school and more likely to cost the state money throughout their lives. 3. Missouri's program isn't unusually large ... we just meet housing needs differently. Our LlHTC program is larger than that pf many other states but other states spend far more money to subsidize affordable housing using programs Missouri lacks. For instance, while Missouri spent $144 million on state LIHTCs last year, New York City alone spends $1 billion annually to subsidize rents and requires developers to set aside 20% of all new units as affordable. During the past decade; California has spent an average of a half million dollars a year on state housing bonds. And LIHTC spending is not, as opponents claim, out of control. LIHTC spending has grown by $144M since 1992.Since 1992, K-12 education has risen over $2B from $1.3 billion to $3.5B; Medicaid spending has increased similarly. Thus, the actual spending increase on education and Medicaid has been 15-20 times as large as that on affordable housing. 4. A recent audit of the state LJHTC program contains significant errors; LIHTC is the most efficient way to inject capital into affordable housing development. The audit suggests using state grants as a more efficient way to build affordable housing. But tax credits are more efficient as they're less taxable than grants. Grants or forgivable loans would cost the state up-front, creating a huge short term fiscal note.