City of Newark, New Jersey 2010-2015 HUD Consolidated Plan & 2010-2011 Annual Action Plan

Cory A. Booker, Mayor

Department of Administration Office of the Business Administrator

September 1, 2010 to August 31, 2015

City of Newark, New Jersey 2010-2015 HUD Consolidated Plan & 2010-2011 Annual Action Plan

Cory A. Booker, Mayor

PREPARED FOR

City of Newark Office of Partnerships and Grants Management Office of Business Administrator Newark City Hall 920 Broad Street Newark, NJ 07102

PREPARED BY

Dennison Associates, Inc. 1100 G Street N.W., Suite 910 Washington, DC 20005-7406 www.dennisonassociates.com [email protected]

Section 1: Table of Contents

I. TITLE PAGE ...... 1-1 A. TABLE OF CONTENTS ...... 1-3 II. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...... 2-1 A. INTRODUCTION ...... 2-2 B. EVALUATION OF PAST PERFORMANCE ...... 2-2 C. SUMMARY OF 2010 HUD RESOURCES ...... 2-4 D. SUMMARY OF PRIORITY NEEDS, GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND ACTIVITIES ...... 2-5 Summary of Priority Needs and Objectives ...... 2-6 Priority Consolidated Plan Activities ...... 2-7 E. GEOGRAPHIC DISTRIBUTION ...... 2-8 F. SUMMARY OF CITIZEN PARTICIPATION PROCESS ...... 2-8 III. MANAGING THE PROCESS ...... 3-1 A. INTRODUCTION...... 3-2 B. LEAD AGENCY...... 3-2 C. INSTITUTIONAL STRUCTURE...... 3-2 D. COMMUNICATION PLAN AND STRATEGY...... 3-4 E. CONSULTATION...... 3-8 F. CITIZEN PARTICIPATION PLAN...... 3-9 G. APPENDICES...... 3-2 IV. HOUSING MARKET ANALYSIS ...... 4-1 A. INTORDUCTION ...... 4-1 B. DEMOGRAPHIC AN DEMPLOYMENT ANALYSIS ...... 4-2 C. HOUSING VALUE AND COST BURDEN ANALYSIS ...... 4-5 D. HOUSING SUPPLY ANALYSIS ...... 4-7 E. PUBLIC HOUSING ...... 4-12 F. ASSISTED HOUSING ...... 4-12 G. FORECLOSURES ...... 4-12 H. VACANT AND ABANDNONED BUILDINGS ...... 4-14 I. SPECIAL NEEDS HOUSING ...... 4-15 J. HOUSING DEMAND ANALYSIS ...... 4-15

Figure 1: City of Newark Zip Codes

Chart 1: City of Newark Permit Trends 2008-2009 Chart 2: Newark Rental Submarket Total Inventory and Vacancy Rate Chart 3: Newark Rental Submarket Average Asking and Effective Rents Chart 4: City of Newark Home Sale Price Trends in 2009 Chart 5: Unsold Inventory and Months of Supply in 2009 Chart 6: Contract Sales January 2009-January 2010 Chart 7: City of Newark Foreclosures by Zip Code – Feb. 2009 – Jan. 2010 Chart 8: Distribution of Newark Foreclosures by Zip Code in January 2010 Chart 9: Newark Foreclosures and Average Sales Price V. HOUSING AND HOMELESS NEEDS ASSESSMENT ...... 5-1 A. INTRODUCTION ...... 5-2 Household Income and Poverty ...... 5-2 Housing Unit Characteristics ...... 5-3 B. HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT ...... 5-4 All Low-Income Households with Housing Needs ...... 5-5 Low-Income Renter Households with Housing Needs ...... 5-6 Low-Income Owner Households with Housing Needs ...... 5-7 Housing Affordability Mismatch ...... 5-9 Low-Income and Racial/Ethnic Concentrations ...... 5-10 Public Housing Needs ...... 5-12 Housing and Transportation ...... 5-14 C. HOMELESS NEEDS ASSESSMENT ...... 5-15 Definition of Homelessness ...... 5-16 Nature and Extent opf Homelessness in Newark ...... 5-17 Persons at Risk of Becoming Homeless ...... 5-18 Contributing Factors to Homelessness ...... 5-18 Homeless Facilities and Service Providers ...... 5-18 D. ASSESSMENT OF NON-HOMELESS SPECIAL NEEDS POPULATIONS ...... 5-19 Needs of Non-Homeless Subpopulations in Newark ...... 5-20 E. LEAD-BASED PAINT ...... 5-24

Table 1: Household Income Table 2: Housing Units Table 3: Housing Problems – City of Newark Census Place Table 4: Low-Income Renter Households with Housing Problems Table 5: Low-Income Owner Households with Housing Problems Table 6: Affordability Mismatch for All Households Table 7: Rental Affordability Gap Analysis Table 8: Owner Affordability Gap Analysis Table 9: NHA Family Developments Table 10: NHA Townhouse Specific Developments Table 11: NHA Elderly Developments Table 12: Means of Transportation to Work by Tenure (16 yrs and over) Table 13: (HUD Table 1A): Housing Gap Analysis Chart Table 14: Contributing Factors of Homelessness Table 15: (HUD Table 1B): Special Needs (Non-Homeless) Populations Table 16: Newark Residents HIV/AIDS Cases Reported as of June 30, 2009 Table 17: Newark Residents with a Disability by Type and Age

Chart 1: Housing Units by Size, Newark Section 1: Table of Contents

Chart 2: Housing Stock Comparison Chart 3: Racial/Ethnic Concentrations by Zip Code Chart 4: Veterans by Sex and Age in Newark Chart 5: Age of Housing Stock in Newark

Map 1: Housing and Transportation Costs, Newark Map 2: Newark –Essex County CoC Boundary Map 2008 VI. 2010-2015 STRATEGIC PLAN ...... 6-1 A. INTRODUCTION ...... 6-2 B. PRIORITY NEEDS ...... 6-5 Priority Housing Needs ...... 6-5 Priority Homeless Needs ...... 6-6 Special Needs Population Priority Needs ...... 6-7 Community Development Priority Needs ...... 6-10 Section 108 Loan Program Summary ...... 6-10 C. SPECIFIC GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND STRATEGIES ...... 6-13 Priority Consolidated Plan Activities ...... 6-15 Performance Measurement System ...... 6-15 D. CROSS CUTTING ISSUES ...... 6-17 Lead-Based Paint Strategy ...... 6-17 Barriers to Affordable Housing (AI Summary) ...... 6-18 Antipoverty Strategy ...... 6-18 Monitoring ...... 6-19 Community Development Priority Needs ...... 6-10 Section 108 Loan Program Summary ...... 6-10 E. APPENDICES ...... 6-23 Appendix A – HUD Table 1A ...... 6-24 Appendix A – HUD Table 1B ...... 6-25 Appendix A – HUD Table 2A Part I ...... 6-26 Appendix A – HUD Table 2A Part II ...... 6-27 Appendix A – HUD Table 2A Part III ...... 6-28 Appendix A – HUD Table 2B ...... 6-29 Appendix B – Newark 2010-2015 Strategic Framework ...... 6-30 Appendix C – Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing CHoice ...... 6-32

Table 1: Proposed Activities for Funding Table 2: HUD Outcome Statements VII. 2010-2011 ANNUAL ACTION PLAN ...... 7-1 A. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...... 7-2 Evaluation of Past Performance ...... 7-4 Summary of Priority Needs ...... 7-6 Statement of Specific Annual Objectives – HUD Table 3A ...... 7-7 Sources of Funds ...... 7-8 Allocation of Funds Summary ...... 7-9 Geographic Distribution ...... 7-10 B. MANAGING THE PROCESS ...... 7-11 Lead Agency ...... 7-11 Institutional Structure ...... 7-11 Summary of Citizen Participation Process ...... 7-13 Section 1: Table of Contents

Monitoring ...... 7-14 C. HOUSING ...... 7-16 HOME Specific Requirements ...... 7-17 Needs of Public Housing ...... 7-17 Barriers to Affordable Housing ...... 7-19 Lead-Based Paint Strategy ...... 7-19 D. HOMELESS ...... 7-20 Homeless Coordination Strategy ...... 7-20 Chronic Homeless Strategy ...... 7-20 ESG Program ...... 7-21 E. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ...... 7-21 Antipoverty Strategy ...... 7-21 F. NON-HOMELESS SPECIAL NEEDS ...... 7-22 HOPWA Program ...... 7-22 G. APPENDICES ...... 7-23 Appendix A – Listing of Action Plan Projects – HUD Table 3C ...... 7-24

HUD Table 3A: Summary of Specific Annual Objectives Table 1: Allocation of HOME Funds Table 2: Allocation of CDBG Funds Table 3: Allocation of ESG Funds Table 4: Allocation of HOPWA Funds

Section 2: Executive Summary

TABLE OF CONTENTS II. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...... 2-1 A. INTRODUCTION ...... 2-2 B. EVALUATION OF PAST PERFORMANCE ...... 2-2 C. SUMMARY OF 2010 HUD RESOURCES ...... 2-4 D. SUMMARY OF PRIORITY NEEDS, GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND ACTIVITIES ...... 2-5 Summary of Priority Needs and Objectives ...... 2-6 Priority Consolidated Plan Activities ...... 2-7 E. GEOGRAPHIC DISTRIBUTION ...... 2-8 F. SUMMARY OF CITIZEN PARTICIPATION PROCESS ...... 2-8

______City of Newark, New Jersey 2010-2015 HUD Consolidated Plan 2‐1

Section 2: Executive Summary

A. INTRODUCTION

The City of Newark is required to prepare this five-year Consolidated Plan to receive federal funds from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). The Consolidated Plan combines, in one report, important information about Newark demographics and economic activity as well as detailed information on the housing and community needs of its residents. The plan outlines the City’s goals and objectives for the ensuing five-year period and the strategies the City will implement to achieve these goals and objectives. The plan also incorporates comments from the public received during public hearings, stakeholders meetings and in writing.

For each succeeding year, the City of Newark is required to prepare an Annual Action Plan to inform citizens and HUD of the City’s intended actions during that particular year. The Action Plan details how the City will allocate its resources to fund projects and services consistent with its annual goals and objectives, which are a subset of the Consolidated Plan goals and objectives.

The Action Plan is developed in accordance with HUD guidelines and serves as the application for the following four annual grant programs:

 Community Development Block Grant (CDBG);  HOME Investment Partnerships (HOME);  Emergency Shelter Grant (ESG); and  Housing Opportunities for Persons with AIDS (HOPWA).

At the end of each program year, the City must prepare a Consolidated Annual Performance and Evaluation Report (CAPER) to provide information to HUD and citizens about that year’s accomplishments towards achieving the goals and objectives identified for that year. This information allows HUD, city officials, and the public to evaluate the City’s performance and determine whether the activities undertaken during the program year helped to achieve the City’s goals, objectives and strategies to address priority needs identified in the Consolidated Plan. Overall, the CAPER reflects the City’s progress toward meeting the needs, strategies, and objectives described and presented in the City’s 2010-2015 Consolidated Plan and the 2010- 2011 Annual Action Plan.

The Office Partnerships and Grants Management (PGM) is the lead City agency responsible for consolidated planning and reporting on the four formula programs to HUD. PGM is directly responsible for administration of CDBG and ESG funds. The Department of Child and Family Well Being (CFWB) is responsible for administration of HOPWA funds. The Department of Economic and Housing Development (EHD) is responsible for the administration of HOME funds.

B. EVALUATION OF PAST PERFORMANCE

The City of Newark adopted its previous Consolidated Plan in 2005, at which time the following priorities were identified:

1. Provision of Neighborhood Services; 2. Provision of Public Services Across a Continuum of Care; and 3. Provision of Economic and Housing Development Services ______City of Newark, New Jersey 2010-2015 HUD Consolidated Plan 2‐2

Section 2: Executive Summary

For program year 2008-2009, the City of Newark received five (5) entitlement grants from HUD totaling $17,884,235. The City and its community partners used these funds and additional resources to address these three priorities. The following provides a summary of the City’s progress towards addressing these three priorities, as identified in the City’s 2008-2009 CAPER.

Provision of Neighborhood Services

During the 2008-2009 program year the City focused its neighborhood services on demolition/clearance and code enforcement activities. The City’s demolition program focused on damaged and abandoned housing structures in low- to moderate-income block groups that pose an imminent risk to health and safety. During the 2008-2009 program year the City demolished 30 properties totaling 39 units. The City’s code enforcement activities worked in concert with demolition activities to target properties to enforce local and state building codes to improve City neighborhoods. Four non-profit organizations were also funded to conduct an array of services to youth, seniors, and the general population of Newark’s NRSA target area. Additionally, three CBDOs were funded to provide neighborhood services targeted in specific communities of need. In total, over $1,509,859 in funding was disbursed during the 2008-2009 program year for neighborhood service objectives.

Provision of Public Services across a Continuum of Care

One of Newark’s Consolidated Plan priorities was to establish a continuum of public services for its residents. In the 2008-2009 program year, the City prioritized ten (10) key services to address the priority needs of its residents, including: general services, workforce development, educational services, ex-offender re-entry, emergency shelter services (ESG), surveillance and prevention services, environmental health – including lead poisoning services, services and housing for persons with AIDS (HOPWA), and housing counseling services. Approximately 65% of the funds disbursed to address this priority were from the City’s HOPWA program, providing services to persons with AIDS. In total, eighteen (18) organizations were funded to provide services to persons with AIDS. In total, over $4,281,957.23 in total HUD funding was disbursed to sustain a continuum of public services for City residents.

Provision of Economic and Housing Development Services

In the 2008-2009 program year, the City used a variety of activities to address this priority, including: acquisition, relocation, residential rehabilitation, public facility rehabilitation, new construction, and downpayment assistance. During the program year the City disbursed $507,775.91 to facilitate acquisition ($197,255.21) and relocation ($310,520.70) efforts targeting six (6) project sites to support surrounding development activities. The City’s Neighborhood Rehabilitation Program (NRP) assisted 44 units with rehabilitation activities totaling $1,304,949.27, accounting for approximately 50% of the City’s efforts towards addressing this priority. The City also provided downpayment assistance to 35 homebuyers with ADDI funds during the 2008-2009 program year.

Section 2: Executive Summary

result properties were abandoned and left to deteriorate. While housing and other community development objectives are often the most publicized, providing services to homeless and special needs populations are just as important. Given the wide-spread needs of City residents and the physical deterioration of properties, prioritization and targeting of City programs remains a challenge.

C. SUMMARY OF 2010 HUD RESOURCES

Sources of Funds

HUD Entitlement Funds

For program year 2010-2011, the City of Newark will receive four (4) entitlement grants from HUD totaling $20,569,064. A brief description of the grants and the City’s allocation for the 2010-2011 program year is as follows:

. Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) - $9,359,979 – The primary objective of the CDBG program is to develop “viable urban communities, by providing decent housing and suitable living environment and expanding economic opportunities principally for persons of low and moderate income”. All CDBG projects and activities must meet one of three national objectives: (1) principally benefit low- and moderate- income persons; (2) aid in the prevention or elimination of slums or blight; or (3) meet other urgent community needs. Each approved activity must benefit at least 51% low- and moderate-income families or individuals. At least 70% of the City’s total funds must be used for low- and moderate-income benefit activities.

. HOME Investment Partnerships Program (HOME) - $4,210,862 – The purpose of the HOME program is to undertake activities that achieve the following: (1) provide decent affordable housing to lower income households; (2) expand the capacity of nonprofit housing providers; (3) strengthen the ability of local governments to provide housing; and (4) leverage private-sector participation. HOME funds can be used for homeowner rehabilitation, homebuyer activities, rental housing and tenant-based rental assistance (TBRA).

. Housing Opportunities for Persons with AIDS (HOPWA) - $6,620,013 – HOPWA funding provides housing assistance and related supportive services and grantees are encouraged to develop community-wide strategies and form partnerships with area nonprofit organizations. HOPWA funds may be used for a wide range of housing, social services, program planning, and development costs. These include, but are not limited to, the acquisition, rehabilitation, or new construction of housing units; costs for facility operations; rental assistance; and short-term payments to prevent homelessness. HOPWA funds also may be used for health care and mental health services, chemical dependency treatment, nutritional services, case management, assistance with daily living, and other supportive services.

. Emergency Shelter Grant (ESG) - $378,210 – The purpose of the ESG program is to provide funds for the rehabilitation or conversion of buildings for use as emergency shelters for the homeless, for the payment of certain operating expenses and essential services in connection with emergency shelters for the homeless, and for homeless prevention activities. ______City of Newark, New Jersey 2010-2015 HUD Consolidated Plan 2‐4

Section 2: Executive Summary

HUD Stimulus Funds

As a result of the Housing and Economic Recovery Act (HERA) and American Recovery Reinvestment Act (ARRA) the City of Newark received direct stimulus funds in 2009 totaling $9,250,334, as follows:

. Neighborhood Stabilization Program (NSP1) - $3,406,849 – The Neighborhood Stabilization Program (NSP) was a formula grant awarded for activities eligible under division B, title III of the Housing and Economic Recovery Act of 2008 (Public Law 110- 289, NSP round 1), to address home foreclosure and abandonment and for the provision of capacity building and support for NSP grantees. Rating factors will include grantee capacity to execute projects, leveraging potential, and concentration of investment to achieve neighborhood stabilization.

. Neighborhood Stabilization Program (NSP2) - $20,759,155 – The City of Newark in a consortium agreement with The City of Essex, The City of East Orange, The City of Irvington, The City of Montclair, The Township of Orange, Brand New Day, Don Pedro Development Corporation, Episcopal Community Development Corporation, Housing and Neighborhood Development Services, HOMECorp, Ironbound Community Corporation, Make It Right Foundation, Unified Vailsburg Service Organization, and The Community Loan Fund of New Jersey and in a for‐profit partnership with Fairmount Heights Development Corporation, Michaels Development Corporation, and RPM Development Corporation has been awarded $20,759,155 in NSP2 funds. Approximately $11 million of the allocation will be used for Newark area activities. Grantees must expend at least 50 percent of each grant within 2 years and 100 percent within 3 years of grant award.

. CDBG-R - $2,310,137 – The Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Recovery program enables local governments to undertake a wide range of activities intended to create suitable living environments, provide decent affordable housing and create economic opportunities, primarily for persons of low and moderate income. The City is using CDBG-R to perform renovations of lead free safe houses, renovations of Newark Public Library, and provide Community Based Organizations with funding to support employment training services.

. Homeless Prevention and Rapid Re-housing Program (HPRP) – $3,533,348 – The Homelessness Prevention and Rapid Re-Housing Program provides financial assistance and services to prevent individuals and families from becoming homeless and help those who are experiencing homelessness to be quickly re-housed and stabilized. The funds under this program are intended to target individuals and families who would be homeless but for this assistance. The funds will provide for a variety of assistance, including: short-term or medium-term rental assistance and housing relocation and stabilization services, including such activities as mediation, credit counseling, security or utility deposits, utility payments, moving cost assistance, and case management.

D. SUMMARY OF PRIORITY NEEDS, GOAL, OBJECTIVES AND ACTIVITIES

Summary of Priority Needs and Objectives

______City of Newark, New Jersey 2010-2015 HUD Consolidated Plan 2‐5

Section 2: Executive Summary

This 2010-2015 Consolidated Plan outlines the current planned uses of CDBG, HOME, ESG, and HOPWA funds for activities that are consistent with the current priority needs identified and support identified objectives presented in this document. These activities will support three overarching goals developed for the 2010-2015 consolidated planning period, including:

1. Jobs for residents; 2. Healthy and safe neighborhoods; and 3. Newark as a City of choice.

The priorities needs below have been identified based on the assessment of housing and homeless needs, housing market analysis and consultation with stakeholders and partner agencies. Below is a summary of the priority needs identified through these assessments.

Housing

. Increasing affordable rental housing opportunities for low-income households. . Providing new affordable homeownership opportunities for low- to moderate-income households. . Improving condition of existing housing. . Increasing availability of sustainable housing options. . Providing counseling for first-time homebuyers and current homeowners.

Homeless

. Reducing the number of individuals and families that become homeless. . Increasing availability of permanent supportive housing options for homeless individuals and families. . Supporting operations of existing emergency/transitional homeless facilities. . Providing essential services to homeless populations.

Special Needs Populations

. Increasing accessibility/availability of affordable housing specifically for persons with HIV/AIDS. . Providing new affordable permanent supportive housing for low- to moderate-income veteran households. . Increasing availability of permanent housing for special needs populations. . Providing support services to special needs populations.

Community/Economic Development

. Increasing economic opportunities for low-income residents in Newark. . Revitalizing and beautifying Newark businesses and storefronts. . Technical Assistance to small businesses. . Establishing social venture programs. . Public Services.

To address the priority needs identified above, the City will focus on the following seven (7) objectives as detailed in the Strategic Plan, working towards the three overarching goals:

______City of Newark, New Jersey 2010-2015 HUD Consolidated Plan 2‐6

Section 2: Executive Summary

. Objective 1: Increase economic growth and job opportunities through large scale development projects, social ventures and job training programs

. Objective 2: Increase access to quality affordable housing choices

. Objective 3: Improve condition of existing neighborhoods through redevelopment and rehabilitation of residential and commercial properties, and public facilities

. Objective 4: Provide funding for public services to support workforce development, educational services, child care services, ex-offender social services and homeowner foreclosure prevention programs for low-income individuals and families in targeted neighborhoods

. Objective 5: Support homeless and at-risk special needs populations with coordinated support services and housing assistance, focusing on prevention and “housing first” activities

. Objective 6: Promote and fund targeted developments to help facilitate a living downtown urban center around key development nodes

. Objective 7: Green Newark’s Neighborhoods

Priority Consolidated Plan Activities

The tables below summarizes the proposed eligible HUD-funded program activities the City will fund to achieve desired objectives and to support identified strategies.

Proposed Activities for Funding Specific Housing Activities Funding Source(s) Rental new construction CDBG, HOME, Section 108 Acquisition and rehabilitation CDBG, HOME, Section 108 Rental acquisition CDBG, HOME, Section 108 Acquisition and rehabilitation CDBG, HOME, Section 108 Homeowner rehabilitation/maintenance CDBG, HOME, Section 108 Homebuyer acquisition CDBG, HOME, Section 108 Downpayment and/or closing cost assistance CDBG, HOME, Section 108 Lead-based paint remediation CDBG, HOME, LHRDG Green building and energy efficiency rehabilitation CDBG, HOME, Section 108 Specific Homeless Activities Funding Source(s) Short/long-term rental/mortgage and utility assistance HOPWA, HPRP,CDBG Public facility renovations CDBG, ESG, HOPWA Case management and coordination services ESG Essential services ESG Homeless prevention HPRP, ESG Housing information and referral services HOPWA Operations assistance for homeless facilities HOPWA, ESG Specific Special Needs Subpopulation Activities Funding Source(s) New construction of special needs housing HOME, CDBG Acquisition and rehab for special needs housing HOME, CDBG Downpayment assistance HOME, CDBG Specific Community Development Activities Funding Source(s) Property acquisition CDBG, Section 108 Demolition/Clearance CDBG Site improvements CDBG, Section 108 ______City of Newark, New Jersey 2010-2015 HUD Consolidated Plan 2‐7

Section 2: Executive Summary

Public facilities and improvements CDBG Direct technical assistance to businesses CDBG Tree planting/Urban agriculture CDBG Acquisition of real property CDBG, Section 108 Direct financial assistance to for-profit businesses (commercial façade CDBG beautification) Educational services CDBG Childcare services CDBG Workforce development/Employment training CDBG Capacity building CDBG Surveillance and Prevention CDBG Housing/Foreclosure counseling CDBG Senior Services CDBG Youth Services CDBG

The City of Newark will fund a variety of activities using HUD entitlement funds throughout the Consolidated Plan period however not all activities identified above will be funded each year of the five-year Consolidated Plan period.

E. GEOGRAPHIC DISTRIBUTION

The City of Newark will continue to direct its resources into the areas with the highest needs. The City will allocate HUD resources to the areas with the highest needs, including areas of minority concentration which includes the South Ward, Central Wards, and the lower North and West Wards. We believe the rational for this geographical distribution is straightforward. While these areas have received large shares of assistance through HUD programs over the years, the resources have never been sufficient to meet the demonstrated need. The City will also utilize the opportunities and strategies identified in various redevelopment plans to coordinate allocation of resources across targeted neighborhoods and development nodes.

F. SUMMARY OF CITIZEN PARTICIPATION PROCESS

As required by Consolidated Plan regulations, the City has implemented a Citizen Participation Plan (CPP) to engage citizens and stakeholders in the consolidated planning process. The CPP is discussed in detail in Section 3 of the Consolidated Plan. The CPP includes public notice, community engagement of stakeholders, as well as technical assistance during the drafting and finalizing of the Consolidated Plan. The City of Newark held two stakeholder focus group sessions on April 21 and 23 of 2010, where over 40 organizations representing various communities provided the City with feedback on key priorities and objectives. Additionally, a public hearing was held on May 14, 2010 whereby citizens were provided an opportunity to provide feedback on the City’s needs and priorities. Input received during the public hearing process was incorporated into the plan regarding the priorities, strategies, allocation of resources and target areas outlined in this Consolidated Plan.

______City of Newark, New Jersey 2010-2015 HUD Consolidated Plan 2‐8

Section 3: Managing the Process

TABLE OF CONTENTS III. MANAGING THE PROCESS ...... 3-1 A. INTRODUCTION...... 3-2 B. LEAD AGENCY...... 3-2 C. INSTITUTIONAL STRUCTURE...... 3-2 D. COMMUNICATION PLAN AND STRATEGY...... 3-4 E. CONSULTATION...... 3-8 F. CITIZEN PARTICIPATION PLAN...... 3-9 G. APPENDICES...... 3-2

______City of Newark, New Jersey 2010-2015 HUD Consolidated Plan 3‐1

Section 3: Managing the Process

A. INTRODUCTION

This section summarizes the process the City of Newark took in consulting with key agencies partners, and the public in preparing this Consolidated Plan and Action Plan submission to HUD. The description of the management process, the citizen participation plan, institutional structure and other HUD requirements outlined in this section fulfill or partially fulfill Sections 91.200, 91.215, 91.230 and 91.215 of the Consolidated Plan regulations.

B. LEAD AGENCY

In 2008, the Department of Administration renamed the Bureau of Research, the Office of Partnerships and Grants Management (PGM). By establishing the PGM, the Administration sought to expand on the functions of the former Bureau of Research with the goal of ultimately centralizing grants management city-wide. PGM is the lead city agency responsible for consolidated planning and reporting on the four formula programs to HUD. PGM is directly responsible for administration of CDBG and ESG funds. The Department of Child and Family Well Being (CFWB) is responsible for administration of HOPWA funds. The Department of Economic and Housing Development (EHD) is responsible for the administration of HOME funds.

C. INSTITUTIONAL STRUCTURE

The City of Newark cannot implement its Consolidated Plan without a strong institutional structure and the closest possible intra- and intergovernmental cooperation. Our institutional structure is composed of segments of the public sector – local, county and state – as many as one-hundred nonprofit organizations, and a like number of for-profit companies, developers, and financial corporations. Major partner organizations are specified below by name.

City Departments

. Department of Administration, Office of the Business Administrator and Bureau of Research and Program Development: Overall policy-making, management and decision-making for all local community development and planning initiatives; coordination of all HUD programs and requirements that involve more than one City agency, including Con Plan coordination; IDIS administration.

. Department of Administration, Office of Management and Budget: Fiscal planning for all community development activities; coordination of HUD programs with other federal and state aid and City operating budget.

. Department of Administration, Office of Partnerships and Grants Management: Lead City agency responsible for consolidated planning and reporting on the four formula programs to HUD.

. Department of Finance: Financing of all community development activities, including bonding programs; grant accounting, grant accounts payable, internal auditing of grants.

______City of Newark, New Jersey 2010-2015 HUD Consolidated Plan 3‐2

Section 3: Managing the Process

. Department of Economic and Housing Development (EHD), Office of the Director: Planning and management of all City housing and economic development initiatives in accordance with policies of the City administration; all regulatory aspects of land use and real property, through the Boards of Adjustment and Zoning, Central Planning, and Rent Control.

. Department of Economic and Housing Development, Division of Housing and Real Estate: Design, planning and implementation of all assisted housing programs, under the supervision of the Director's Office; development of "mainstream" housing elements of the Con Plan. Planning and implementation, under the Director's Office, of all housing and economic redevelopment activities, i.e., real property acquisition and relocation of families and businesses, management and disposal of City-owned properties.

. Brick City Development Corporation: Brick City Development Corporation (BCDC) is the City’s primary economic development catalyst, organized to retain, attract, and grow businesses; enhance small and minority business capacity, and spur real estate development within Newark. BCDC initiates and executes economic development activities to produce and sustain economic growth, generate jobs, and create wealth for the citizens of Newark.

. Department of Child and Family Well-Being: Design, planning and implementation of all special needs housing programs, involving City and Essex County welfare recipients, people with AIDS, the elderly, and the homeless; development of special needs housing elements of the Con Plan; development and coordination of ESG; development and coordination of Newark and EMA HOPWA.

. Department of Neighborhood and Recreational Services, Division of Inspections and Enforcement: Residential and commercial property code enforcement.

. Department of Neighborhood and Recreational Services, Division of Demolition and Clearance: Emergency demolitions; clearance of properties.

Newark Housing Authority

NHA, the City's public housing authority, is responsible for the development and operations of more than 8,000 dwelling units for very- and extremely low-income Newark residents. NHA works in close cooperation with the City to plan, design, develop and operate public housing.

Newark State Board of Education

The Board coordinates and cooperates with the Newark administration and NHA in the planning, design and development of facilities.

University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey (UMDNJ)

UMDNJ coordinates and cooperates with the above and below-listed institutions in planning, design and site identification for facilities.

County of Essex

. Department of Economic Development, Training and Employment: The Department operates housing grant programs, primarily Balanced Housing and ______City of Newark, New Jersey 2010-2015 HUD Consolidated Plan 3‐3

Section 3: Managing the Process

Regional Contribution Agreements; PHA activities in Newark, including Section 8 vouchers; and coordinates its own Con Plan with those of local entitlement cities.

. Department of Health and Human Services: The Department coordinates and cooperates with regard to City housing services for special needs populations.

. Essex-Newark Continuum: the CoC coordinates strategies and activities to identify and serve homeless populations.

Nonprofit Organizations

Major organizations expected to implement rehabilitation and/or development projects meet regularly with Department of Economic and Housing Development staff. Often, these meetings occur through the Newark Community Development Network, an organization whose constituents include all our leading CDCs.

EHD has fostered, encouraged and established relationships with two major intermediaries in the housing finance and development industry, the Local Initiative Support Corporation (LISC), NeighborWorks and the Enterprise Foundation. Through these three intermediaries private capital is channeled to support investment in affordable housing that is eligible for low income housing tax credits and other federal and state subsidy programs. The City of Newark, together with the above referenced intermediaries and nonprofit organizations, works with the New Jersey Housing and Mortgage Finance Agency and the New Jersey Department of Community Affairs to secure construction financing.

D. COMMUNICATION PLAN AND STRATEGY

The Consolidated Plan combines, in one report, important information about Newark demographics and economic activity as well as detailed information on the housing and community needs of its residents. The plan outlines the City’s goals and objectives for the ensuing five-year period and the strategies the city will implement to achieve these goals and objectives. The plan also incorporates comments from the public received during public hearings, stakeholders meetings and in written responses to published documents.

The City of Newark recognizes the value of citizen involvement and the wealth of information and resources that citizens of Newark possess. Equally important, is communication between key City agencies, divisions, partners, non-profit partners and elected officials. It is important to increase the City’s understanding of these stakeholder’s concerns, ideas and values so that they can be used to inform the City’s decisions, strategies, goals and objectives identified in the City’s Consolidated Plan. Working towards this effort, the City of Newark has developed a communication strategy to outline the key messages the City wishes to deliver to its stakeholders and the planning process by which the City will seek to engage its various stakeholders. This document outlines the City of Newark’s communication strategy for the ensuing five-year HUD Consolidated Plan period.

Process Overview

Much of the City’s overall success is shaped by the quality of its communication efforts. Therefore, a proactive approach is needed to foster effective two-way communication amongst

______City of Newark, New Jersey 2010-2015 HUD Consolidated Plan 3‐4

Section 3: Managing the Process stakeholders during the consolidated planning process. The following is an overview of the City’s proposed communication process and strategy for the ensuing Consolidated Plan period:

STAKEHOLDERS CITY COUNCIL CITIZENS PARTNERS BUSINESSES ______

INFORM MEMORANDUMS  PUBLIC CALENDAR OF EVENTS  MEDIA BRIEFINGS

CONSULT INTERVIEWS  SURVEYS  PUBLIC HEARINGS  RESEARCH

ASSESS REVIEW SURVEY RESULTS  MARKET ANALYSIS  NEEDS ASSESSMENTS

INCORPORATE GOALS/OBJECTIVES  FUNDING STRATEGIES  CONSOLIDATED PLAN

Key Objectives

The key objectives of the City of Newark’s communication strategy and plan are summarized below:

1. To identify key stakeholders, outline the message to each and how the message will be delivered 2. To reinforce and increase accountability through the communication process 3. Obtain community buy-in through information sharing, consultation and education processes 4. Provide citizens with complete, accurate and timely information enabling them to make informed judgments 5. Strengthen direct communication between elected officials, City departments, partners, for-profit businesses and non-profit community 6. Support, reinforce and reflect the goals of the City government as established by the City Council and the Administration, through a coordinated communication plan 7. Establish an inclusive process that builds teamwork and motivates stakeholders to implement change in their communities

Below is an overview of the various messages the City would like to communicate to each of its stakeholders and the ways in which the message will be delivered.

Citizens

Message: The City will create an open, interactive and inclusive communication strategy that enhances the principle of community building, interactive government and community feedback.

HUD Consolidated Plan regulations require the City to develop a Citizen Participation Plan (CPP). The purpose of the CPP is to provide citizens of the City of Newark maximum ______City of Newark, New Jersey 2010-2015 HUD Consolidated Plan 3‐5

Section 3: Managing the Process involvement in identifying and prioritizing housing and community development needs in the City, and responding to how the City intends to address such needs through allocation of HUD funding. From the onset of the first public hearing to the distribution of a community-wide survey and writing of the Consolidated Plan, the needs of the Newark residents must be carefully considered and reflected during the drafting of the plan.

Method of Delivery:

Phase Method of Delivery Public Hearing:  Hold two public hearings during the consolidated planning process, including one hearing prior to development of the plan Calendar of Events:  Publish a detailed calendar of events on the City’s website outlining schedule of Inform meetings, hearings and publications Newspapers:  Publish summaries of the draft Consolidated Plan in local community newspapers Annual Performance Report:  Prepare an annual assessment report of the City’s accomplishments for citizen review and comment Community Survey:  Distribute a mass community survey to solicit feedback from citizens on the City’s programs, communication efforts and overall needs of the City Consult Public Comment Period:  Administer a 30-day comment period for Citizens to comment on the City’s strategic framework and Consolidated Plan Needs Assessment: Assess  Compile survey and discussion results to establish congruent themes on the needs of the City Citizen Participation Plan: Incorporate  Incorporate survey and discussion results into improved communication strategies

Partner Agencies

Message: The City wants to establish a comprehensive Consolidated Plan strategy that integrates and addresses the many interrelated housing, community development, economic, educational and geographic issues facing the City.

Three key HUD and other federal initiatives necessitate the need for the City to engage its partner agencies in a comprehensive planning strategy, including: Choice Neighborhoods, Promise Neighborhoods and Sustainable Communities. These initiatives will provide substantial grant opportunities, as well as require comprehensive strategies that engage partner agencies on multiple levels.

Method of Delivery:

Phase Method of Delivery Partner Agency Surveys:  Survey partner agencies on critical needs facing their agencies and methods and Inform strategies on how the City could better comprehensively work to address issues with HUD funding Save the Date: ______City of Newark, New Jersey 2010-2015 HUD Consolidated Plan 3‐6

Section 3: Managing the Process

 Issue save the date memos to partner agencies on upcoming events or meetings the City will hold to engage its partners Focus Group Sessions:  Hold monthly focus group sessions to discuss areas of need, strategies on comprehensive planning and potential projects that leverage resources of partner Consult agencies Partner Agency Survey:  Distribute survey to solicit feedback from partners on the City’s programs, communication efforts and overall comprehensive needs of the City Strategic Planning Sessions: Assess  Hold strategic planning sessions with partner agencies on goals, objectives and opportunities to leverage resources on potential projects and community objectives for the ensuing Consolidated Plan period Focus Projects:  Establish pipelines of potential projects that leverage resources of partner agencies (Choice Neighborhoods, Promise Neighborhoods, etc.) Consolidated Plan:  Develop distinctive and outcome oriented objectives in a comprehensive Consolidated Plan Choice Neighborhoods Grant Application: Incorporate  Leverage focus group discussions to incorporate Choice Neighborhood requirements and objectives into a comprehensive application and overall choice neighborhood strategy Promise Neighborhoods Grant Application:  Leverage focus group discussions to incorporate Promise Neighborhood requirements and objectives into a comprehensive application and overall promise neighborhood strategy

For-profit Businesses and Non-profit Community

Message: The City of Newark is modifying its application and RFP award processes that will focus on outcome oriented objectives, reporting requirements, and performance standards.

Method of Delivery:

Phase Method of Delivery Non-Profit Focus Group Sessions:  Hold annual non-profit focus group sessions to engage existing, active and new non-profit developers and service providers Inform For-Profit Developer Applications:  Post housing development application guidelines after development of Consolidated and Annual Action Plans and hold application workshops Stakeholder Focus Groups:  Conduct stakeholder focus groups to engage non-profit community during the consolidated planning process and the needs of the City’s residents and Consult processes Survey:  Distribute a non-profit community survey to solicit feedback from organizations on the City’s programs, communication efforts and overall needs of the City Needs Assessment: Assess  Compile survey and breakout session results and feedback and use to establish congruent themes on the needs of the City Incorporate Strategic Framework: ______City of Newark, New Jersey 2010-2015 HUD Consolidated Plan 3‐7

Section 3: Managing the Process

 Develop a strategic framework for the City that incorporates feedback from non- profit and for-profit organizations Project Applications:  Structure project applications to be consistent with existing development projects and community services provided by the non-profit and for-profit business community

E. CONSULTATION

Newark’s Consolidated Plan is developed through a collaborative process with NHA, CFWB, the Essex-Newark Continuum of Care, and numerous other City departments. Citizen participation is another important part of the Consolidated Plan including developing and amending the Plan as well as commenting on program performance. As part of the Consolidated Planning process, information on housing and community development needs of Newark citizens was gathered through stakeholder focus group sessions and surveys, coordination of planning documents and public hearings. Upon publishing this plan Newark will allow a 30-day public comment period during June 2010 to allow the public time to review and comment on the draft 2010-2015 Consolidated Plan and 2010 Action Plan. During this public comment period, citizens were encouraged to provide written comments to PGM regarding the City’s draft plans.

Per Consolidated Plan requirements, the City of Newark has specifically consulted with the following agencies:

. Lead-based Paint – Newark’s Department of Child and Family Well-Being (CFWB) is the department charged with coordinating the city’s lead-based paint strategy. CFWB is responsible for the mitigation and prevention of lead-based paint poisoning. As such, the Division regularly consults with state and local health and child welfare agencies, and examines data on hazards and poisonings. The Division maintains a database with the addresses of housing units in which children have been identified as lead poisoned.

. Essex-Newark Continuum of Care (CoC) – The City of Newark has adopted the Essex-Newark CoC approach to addressing the needs of homeless and at-risk populations. Newark is part of the Essex-Newark CoC and coordinates with Essex County on strategies and activities to identify and serve homeless populations. The Essex-Newark CoC addresses the housing and supportive service needs in each stage of the process to help homeless persons make the transition to permanent housing and independent living. As identified above, permanent supportive housing is a priority need in Newark. Newark is committed to providing both housing and support services for homeless persons in need of permanent housing and working to end incidences of homeless in Newark.

. Newark Housing Authority – The City of Newark held two strategic planning sessions with NHA to discuss goals, objectives and strategies for the ensuing Consolidated Plan period. Consistent with this Consolidated Plan, NHA’s housing strategy involves both physical development and rehabilitation, and supportive services. Over the past three years NHA has made significant progress in revamping its mission, goals and objectives, and has been removed from HUD’s “troubled status” designation. NHA will be working in close partnership with EHD on redevelopment and rehabilitation projects to increase the availability and affordability of housing in Newark.

______City of Newark, New Jersey 2010-2015 HUD Consolidated Plan 3‐8

Section 3: Managing the Process

. Non-profit Stakeholders – The City of Newark held two stakeholder focus group sessions on April 21 and 23 of 2010, where over 40 organizations representing various communities provided the City with feedback on key priorities and objectives.

F. CITIZEN PARTICIPATION PLAN

Participation

As required by Consolidated Plan regulations, the City has implemented a Citizen Participation Plan (CPP) to engage citizens and stakeholders in the consolidated planning process. The CPP includes public notice, community engagement of stakeholders, as well as technical assistance during the drafting and finalizing of the Consolidated Plan. The City of Newark held two stakeholder focus group sessions on April 21 and 23 of 2010, where over 40 organizations representing various communities provided the City with feedback on key priorities and objectives. Additionally, a public hearing was held on May 14, 2010 whereby citizens were provided an opportunity to provide feedback. Input received during the citizen participation process was incorporated into decision making regarding the priorities, strategies, allocation of resources and target areas outlined in the Annual Action Plan.

Access to Information

The City provides reasonable and timely access for citizens, public agencies, and other organizations to access information and records relating to the City’s Consolidated Plan, annual Action Plan, performance reports, substantial amendment(s), Citizen Participation Plan, and the City’s use of assistance under the programs covered by the plan during the preceding five years. The City of Newark announces the availability of planning documents on its website and specifically regarding Consolidated and Annual Action Plans, in the Star Ledger and El Coqui newspapers. Additionally, the city makes copies of plans available for review at City Hall.

The City of Newark’s web page is http://www.ci.newark.nj.us/ for citizens interested in obtaining more information about city services and programs or to review the plans and performance reports.

Public Hearings and Public Comments

Consolidated Plan regulations requires grantees to provide a minimum of two public hearings per year to obtain citizen’s views and to respond to comments and questions, to be conducted at a minimum of two different stages of the program year.

Consolidated/Annual Action Plan

A two-week public notice is given prior to publishing the draft Consolidated Plan/Annual Action Plan. This year, notice was given on April 29th and on May 6th, advertising the public hearing held on May 14, 2010. The city will advertise public hearings for at least two consecutive weeks and in multiple newspapers when possible. The City’s primary newspapers for advertising public hearings are the Star Ledger and El Coqui. The public notices will include a brief summary explaining the content of the draft plan and announce when plan will be available for comment. A thirty-day public comment period will be provided to receive, review and incorporate comments from the public into the final Consolidated Plan/Annual Action Plan.

______City of Newark, New Jersey 2010-2015 HUD Consolidated Plan 3‐9

Section 3: Managing the Process

Annual Performance Reports

The second public hearing will be held prior to drafting of the City’s annual performance report (CAPER). A two-week notice will be given for the public hearing on the annual performance report. A fifteen-day public comment period will be provided to receive, review and incorporate comments from the public into the final CAPER.

Substantial Amendments

Any substantial amendment to the Consolidated Plan or Annual Action plan requires a public hearing and an additional thirty-day public comment period. The City defines a substantial amendment to the Consolidated Plan or Annual Action Plan as any changes in the use of CDBG funds from one eligible activity to another. Reallocating funds amongst identified activities will not constitute a substantial amendment.

Complaints

The public may provide comments and complaints related to any HUD program. Written public comments and complaints can be mailed to PGM at 920 Broad Street, Room B-16, Newark, New Jersey 07102.

Written complaints must clearly state the complainant’s name, address, and zip code. A daytime phone number or email should also be included in the event further information or clarification is needed. DHND will provide a timely, substantive written response to every written complaint, within 15 days of receipt.

Technical Assistance

The City can provide technical assistance to groups, representative of the target neighborhoods or other low-income areas that request such assistance for the preparation of funding proposals to the greatest extent possible. Technical assistance may consist of workshops, one on- one assistance, or information and referral. When the City initiates a request for proposals, technical assistance is available during the pre-application phase to ensure all organizations are aware of the opportunities and limits of the funding source. The City’s provision of technical assistance does not include the preparation of grant applications for individuals or organizations. The City’s provision of technical assistance can be limited by funds and staff availability.

______City of Newark, New Jersey 2010-2015 HUD Consolidated Plan 3‐10

Section 3: Managing the Process

G. APPENDICES

Appendix A – Public Hearing Notices

______City of Newark, New Jersey 2010-2015 HUD Consolidated Plan 3‐11

Section 4: Housing Market Analysis

TABLE OF CONENTS IV. HOUSING MARKET ANALYSIS ...... 4-1 A. INTORDUCTION ...... 4-1 B. DEMOGRAPHIC AN DEMPLOYMENT ANALYSIS ...... 4-2 C. HOUSING VALUE AND COST BURDEN ANALYSIS ...... 4-5 D. HOUSING SUPPLY ANALYSIS ...... 4-7 E. PUBLIC HOUSING ...... 4-12 F. ASSISTED HOUSING ...... 4-12 G. FORECLOSURES ...... 4-12 H. VACANT AND ABANDNONED BUILDINGS ...... 4-14 I. SPECIAL NEEDS HOUSING ...... 4-15 J. HOUSING DEMAND ANALYSIS ...... 4-15

Figure 1: City of Newark Zip Codes

Table 1: City of Newark Household Trends Table 2: Distribution of Household by Income Table 3: Household Growth Trends by Zip Code Table 4: Employment and Earnings by Occupant Table 5: City of Newark Housing Characteristics Table 6: City of Newark Housing Cost Burden by Household Type Table 7: City of Newark Housing Cost Burden by Household Income Table 8: Year Housing Unit Built, City of Newark Table 9: Number of Units in Housing Structures in the City of Newark, 2009 Table 10: City of Newark Affordable Housing Inventory Table 11: City of Newark Foreclosure Rates for February 2009 – January 2010 Table 12: Special Needs Households Table 13: Homeless Special Needs Sub-Populations Table 14: City of Newark Residential Housing Demand in 2010 Chart 1: City of Newark Permit Trends 2008-2009 Chart 2: Newark Rental Submarket Total Inventory and Vacancy Rate Chart 3: Newark Rental Submarket Average Asking and Effective Rents Chart 4: City of Newark Home Sale Price Trends in 2009 Chart 5: Unsold Inventory and Months of Supply in 2009 Chart 6: Contract Sales January 2009-January 2010 Chart 7: City of Newark Foreclosures by Zip Code – Feb. 2009 – Jan. 2010 Chart 8: Distribution of Newark Foreclosures by Zip Code in January 2010 Chart 9: Newark Foreclosures and Average Sales Price

______City of Newark, New Jersey 2010-2015 HUD Consolidated Plan 4‐1

Section 4: Housing Market Analysis

A. INTRODUCTION

The City of Newark has experienced little household or population growth in recent years, with growth projected to continue at a rate of .3% annually over the next five years. Household incomes in the City of Newark are significantly lower than those in the remainder of Essex County and the Newark Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA). The median family income in the City of Newark was $38,700 in 20081, compared to a median income in the Newark MSA of $106,7002. Despite Newark’s lower household incomes and an unemployment rate of 13%3, the city has still experienced substantial housing market pressure since 2000. As growth in housing values has outpaced income growth, a crisis of housing affordability has become pervasive throughout the city.

B. DEMOGRAPHIC AND EMPLOYMENT ANALYSIS

The City of Newark is the largest city in the State of New Jersey, with an estimated population of 282,058 in 2009. The city encompasses nine zip codes and is located within Essex County. Overall Newark is composed of 52% African American households, 15% White/Non- Hispanic/Latino households, and 13% White Hispanic/Latino households. The trends within each of the city’s zip codes are similar to the trends for the city as a whole, except for zip code 07105, located in the east part of downtown along the riverfront, which has 55% White Non- Hispanic/Latino Households and 4% African American households. The greatest concentration of Hispanic/Latino households is located in zip code 07104, with 07105 and 07107 also having Hispanic/Latino concentrations over 15%. The African American population is represented in significant concentrations in all the zip codes except 07105. In zip codes 07112, 07108, and 07106, African Americans make up over 75% of the households.

Figure 1. City of Newark Zip Codes

1 Source: American Community Survey, U.S. Census Bureau (median income for family of four) 2 Source: Claritas 3 Source: City of Newark Re-Examination Report, 2009

Section 4: Housing Market Analysis

The City of Newark has seen average annual household growth of .4% per year and average annual population growth of .3% per year between 2000 and 2009, a trend that is projected to continue through 2014. The median household income within the City of Newark has increased by $664 per year since 2009, to $33,300 in 2009. The household income in the city is projected to increase to $36,898 in 2014 at a rate of .3% per year, which is well below inflation. Table 1, below, demonstrates the household trends for the City of Newark.

Table 1. City of Newark Household Trends City of Newark 2000 2009 2014 CENSUS ESTIMATE PROJECTION Population 273,546 282,058 286,541 Average Annual Change - 946 897 Compounded Annual Growth Rate - 0.3% 0.3% Households 91,382 94,494 96,073 Average Annual Change - 346 316 Compounded Annual Growth Rate - 0.4% 0.3% Median Income $27,323 $33,300 $36,898 Average Annual Change - $664 $720 Compounded Annual Growth Rate - 2.2% 2.1% Household Size 2.85 2.85 2.85 Compounded Annual Growth Rate - 0.0% 0.0%

The median family income (MFI) for the City of Newark in 2008 was $38,700, reflecting only a slight increase over the median income for all households. This presents a sharp contrast to the area median income (AMI) of the Newark Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA) of $106,700. An analysis of the distribution of households by income, based on the MFI for the city of Newark, reveals that a third of the city’s households earn less than 50% of AMI. Similarly, this analysis indicates that almost 70% of households earn less than 50% of the AMI for the metro region. This household distribution is shown in Table 2 below.

Table 2. Distribution of Households by Income

30% of AMI/MFI or Above 80% of CITY OF NEWARK INCOME DISTRIBUTION Less 30-50% of AMI/MFI 50%-80% of AMI/MFI AMI/MFI Total

Income Distribution Based on: 19,852 11,263 13,563 49,816 94,494 Median Family Income for the City of Newark of $38,700 % Income Distribution 21% 12% 14% 53% 100%

Income Distribution Based on: 45,835 18,436 15,978 14,245 94,494 AMI for the Newark MSA of $106,700 % Income Distribution 49% 20% 17% 15% 100%

Within the City of Newark, the lowest median household incomes at the zip code level are $15,900 in zip code 07102 (Downtown Newark along the riverfront) and $19,400 in zip code 07114, indicating that those two zip codes have the highest poverty levels in the city. The highest median incomes in Newark are $42,600 in zip code 07105 (East part of downtown Newark along the riverfront), $38,800 in zip code 07106, and just over $35,000 in zip codes 07104 and 07112. The breakdown of households, household income, and race for each zip code is shown in Table 3 below.

______City of Newark, New Jersey 2010-2015 HUD Consolidated Plan 4‐3

Section 4: Housing Market Analysis

Table 3. Household Growth Trends by Zip Code ZIP CODE HOUSEHOLD COMPOSITION BY RACE

Median % White (Non % White City of Newark Zip Codes Household Hispanic/ (Hispanic/ % African Households Income Latino) Latino) American % Other

07102 4,311 $15,858 8% 8% 64% 17% 07103 10,925 $28,571 2% 5% 83% 8% 07104 17,277 $35,707 11% 31% 26% 29% 07105 16,036 $42,643 55% 16% 4% 24% 07106 11,310 $38,805 9% 3% 79% 6% 07107 12,589 $31,602 12% 16% 38% 31% 07108 8,635 $24,107 1% 3% 89% 7% 07112 9,754 $35,384 1% 1% 93% 5% 07114 3,580 $19,424 8% 12% 49% 30%

City of Newark - Total 94,417 $33,347 15% 13% 52% 18%

The average annual earnings for all employment within the City of Newark are $28,300. The majority of employment within Newark falls into the industry categories of Service occupations (25% of employment), Production, Transportation, and Material Moving (19%), Office and Administrative Support (14%), and Construction, Extraction, Maintenance, and Repair occupations (12%). The median annual incomes for each of these industry sectors range from $22,000 to $29,000. Some of the higher paying occupations, such as Management and Business and Financial Services have median annual earnings of around $50,000, but they make up only a small portion of Newark’s employment, as shown on table 4 below.

Table 4. Employment and Earnings by Occupation % of Total Median Annual Total Employees Employees Earnings Management Occupations 5,535 5% $50,033 Business and Financial Operations Occupations 2,458 2% $51,229 Computer and Mathematical Occupations 928 1% $47,377 Architecture and Engineering Occupations 939 1% $46,085 Life, Physical, and Social Science Occupations 455 0% $28,401 Community and Social Services Occupations 2,321 2% $41,597 Legal Occupations 657 1% $29,697 Education, Training, and Library Occupations 5,629 5% $31,438 Arts, Design, Entertainment, Sports, and Media Occupations 811 1% $48,252 Healthcare Practitioner and Technical Occupations: 2,765 3% $42,140 Service Occupations: 27,684 25% $22,017 Sales and Related Occupations 9,715 9% $21,691 Office and Administrative Support Occupations 15,672 14% $29,008 Farming, Fishing, and Forestry Occupations 0 0% N/A Construction, Extraction, Maintenance, and Repair Occupations: 13,016 12% $26,691 Production, Transportation, and Material Moving Occupations: 20,952 19% $28,661

Total 109,537 100% $28,282

______City of Newark, New Jersey 2010-2015 HUD Consolidated Plan 4‐4

Section 4: Housing Market Analysis

C. HOUSING VALUE AND COST BURDEN ANALYSIS

An analysis of the trends in housing values reveals significant growth in values since 2000, with the increasing housing market pressure further constraining housing affordability in the City of Newark. The median housing value within Newark was $132,800 in 2000 and grew to average of $305,400 during the 3-year period of 2006-2008. This growth of 130% in a 6-8 year period reflects the rapid housing market increase during the boom period of the last market cycle. The 2009 estimate for housing values is $268,900, is a 12% decline in value from the 2006-2008 average which represented the peak of the latest housing market cycle. Despite this correction in the housing market, owner-occupied housing continues to be affordable to only a small segment of Newark’s households.

Housing values within the Newark zip codes range from $204,800 in zip code 07103 to $402,800 in zip code 07105. Located on the east portion of downtown along the river, zip code 07105 has the highest median household income and the highest median housing value. In this zip code the median housing value was 9.5 times the median income in 2009, compared to an industry standard of housing values approximately 3 times household incomes. Throughout the rest of Newark’s zip codes, this ratio of median housing value to median household income ranges from 6.3 to 17.0, with an average of 9.7 in 2009. These ratios were substantially lower in 2000 with an average of 4.7 for the City of Newark. The change in these ratios between 2000 and 2009 indicates that housing value has significantly outpaced income growth, increasing the housing cost burden for households occupying for-sale units and likely contributing to, in some neighborhoods, high foreclosure rates.

Consistent with these trends, the local housing market is made up primarily of rental housing stock, as the majority of households are priced out of the for-sale market. In 2009, 76% of households are renters and 24% are home-owners. The portion of renter households in each zip code ranges within Newark’s zip codes from 66% in zip code 07106 to 92% in zip code 07102, consistently reflecting a majority of renters in the market.

Table 5. City of Newark Housing Characteristics

Median Median Housing Median % Change in City of Newark Zip Codes Housing Value Value 2006-2008 Housing Value Value: 2000 Avg. 2009 2000 - 2009 % Renter

07102 $138,710 N/A $269,928 95% 92% 07103 $98,264 N/A $204,792 108% 77% 07104 $146,751 N/A $297,382 103% 78% 07105 $187,721 N/A $402,117 114% 74% 07106 $124,007 N/A $243,009 96% 66% 07107 $137,075 N/A $282,563 106% 76% 07108 $99,015 N/A $216,267 118% 80% 07112 $124,476 N/A $248,894 100% 71% 07114 $123,056 N/A $269,928 119% 86%

City of Newark Total $132,825 $305,400 $268,910 102% 76%

______City of Newark, New Jersey 2010-2015 HUD Consolidated Plan 4‐5

Section 4: Housing Market Analysis

An analysis of 2008 Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (C.H.A.S.) data confirms that there is a persistent housing affordability problem within Newark. Table 6 contains the percent of households spending between 30%-50% and over 50% of their income on housing, broken out by family type and tenure. Consistently across all family types, 55% of households spend more than 30% of their household income on housing each year, and 31% of households spend more than 50% of their household income on housing each year. Consistent with the housing value trends observed between 2000 and 2009, the CHAS data reveals that owners experience a more significant cost burden, with 36% of owner households spending more than 50% of their income on housing, compared to 26% of renters. Elderly households that are homeowners experience the greatest housing cost burden, particularly those households that are made up of non-related members.

The persistence of the recent foreclosure crisis and rising housing values, coupled with high unemployment rates and continued vulnerability within the job market makes this cost burden particularly alarming. Based on this analysis, a significant portion of Newark’s households represent an “at-risk” population, particularly those households currently paying over 50% of their income on housing.

Table 6. City of Newark Housing Cost Burden by Household Type % of Income Spent on Housing Owner Household Type Less than 30% 30%-50% Greater than 50% Total Large family 48% 27% 25% 100% Non-Family Household, Elderly 18% 31% 51% 100% Non-Family Household, Not Elderly 33% 21% 46% 100% Small Family, Elderly 46% 24% 31% 100% Small Family, Not Elderly 51% 24% 25% 100%

% of Income Spent on Housing Renter Household Type Less than 30% 30%-50% Greater than 50% Total Large family 58% 23% 19% 100% Non-Family Household, Elderly 48% 28% 25% 100% Non-Family Household, Not Elderly 49% 23% 28% 100% Small Family, Elderly 46% 21% 33% 100% Small Family, Not Elderly 52% 24% 24% 100%

Table 7 on the following page demonstrates that this cost burden is experienced primarily by lower income households, for both renter and owner households. Not surprisingly, 97% of owner households earning less than 30% of area median income (AMI) spend more than 30% of their income on housing, and 90% of households earning 30%-50% of AMI spend more than 30% of their income on housing. Each of these groups represents a significant portion of the City of Newark’s households.

______City of Newark, New Jersey 2010-2015 HUD Consolidated Plan 4‐6

Section 4: Housing Market Analysis

Table 7. City of Newark Housing Cost Burden by Household Income % of Income Spent on Housing

OWNER Less than Greater than 30%-50% HOUSEHOLDS 30% 50% Total 30% AMI or less 3% 10% 87% 100% 30.1-50% AMI 10% 31% 59% 99% 50.1-80% AMI 29% 33% 38% 100% 80% AMI and Above 69% 23% 8% 100%

% of Income Spent on Housing

RENTER Less than Greater than 30%-50% HOUSEHOLDS 30% 50% Total 30% AMI or less 25% 19% 56% 100% 30.1-50% AMI 33% 51% 16% 100% 50.1-80% AMI 75% 24% 1% 100% 80% AMI and Above 57% 21% 22% 100%

D. HOUSING SUPPLY ANALYSIS

An analysis of permitting trends, as displayed in Chart 1, reveals little activity within the single family housing market since mid 2008, which are presumably for-sale units. This reflects the recent housing market crisis and the higher proportion of renters to owners within Newark. Multifamily permitting activity has been sporadic, with a few spikes in permitting in early 2009. This lack of permitting activity indicates that there will be minimal housing construction within Newark over the next few years, except for a few small to mid-size rental communities.

Chart 1. City of Newark Permit Trends 2008-2009 90

Single Family Units Total Multifamily

______City of Newark, New Jersey 2010-2015 HUD Consolidated Plan 4‐7

Section 4: Housing Market Analysis

The majority of Newark’s housing units, 68%, were built before 1970, 19% were built between 1970 and 1990, and 13% of housing units have been built since 2000. The increase in new housing units built after 1999, compared to the prior ten year period, reflects the housing market growth that put pressure on housing affordability. Table 8, below, summarizes the year that Newark’s residential housing units were built for the city overall and for each zip code. Zip code 07103 experienced the most growth since 2000, with 21% of housing units built in that time period. Zip codes 07102 and 07106 have had the fewest new units built since 2000, with their housing stock more heavily weighted towards older housing units.

Table 8. Year Housing Unit Built, City of Newark YEAR HOUSING UNITS BUILT

City of Newark Zip Codes % Built After % Built 1990- % Built 1970- % Built 1950- % Built Before 1999 1999 1989 1969 1950

07102 6% 2% 32% 35% 24% 07103 21% 10% 19% 20% 30% 07104 14% 5% 15% 27% 39% 07105 12% 9% 12% 23% 45% 07106 8% 1% 9% 38% 44% 07107 13% 4% 12% 33% 38% 07108 11% 4% 18% 26% 41% 07112 13% 2% 8% 29% 48% 07114 14% 5% 13% 39% 29%

City of Newark Total 13% 5% 14% 29% 39%

The dominance of multi-family units in the permitting trends and in the existing housing stock is similarly reflected in Table 9, which reveals that single family detached homes only account for 11% of Newark’s total housing stock.

Table 9. Number of Units in Housing Structures in the City of Newark, 2009 NUMBER OF UNITS IN STRUCTURE

City of Newark Zip Codes 1 Unit Detached 1-Unit Attached Multifamily - 2 Multifamily - 3- Multifamily - 20- Multifamily - - Single Family - Townhome Units 19 Units 49 Units Over 50 Units

07102 3% 3% 4% 32% 10% 49% 07103 8% 14% 14% 46% 2% 15% 07104 13% 6% 16% 36% 9% 19% 07105 7% 3% 28% 58% 2% 1% 07106 21% 2% 19% 36% 2% 20% 07107 10% 6% 20% 40% 6% 16% 07108 10% 8% 12% 49% 7% 14% 07112 13% 1% 18% 42% 11% 14%

07114 7% 6% 11% 44% 8% 24%

City of Newark - Total 11% 6% 18% 43% 6% 16%

______City of Newark, New Jersey 2010-2015 HUD Consolidated Plan 4‐8

Section 4: Housing Market Analysis

As part of the housing supply analysis, an evaluation was conducted of the trends in the Newark rental submarket. The Newark rental submarket boundaries extend beyond Essex County, but the City of Newark drives the submarket trends as it contains most of the rental properties in the submarket. There has been little change in the overall inventory of rental units within the submarket between 2005 and 2009, although the vacancy rate has increased from 3.5% in the first quarter of 2005 to 8% in the fourth quarter of 2009. While this is still within the range of a healthy vacancy rate for a submarket, it is on the edge of the healthy range. The trends in the total inventory of rental units and the submarket vacancy rate are shown below in Chart 2.

Chart 2. Newark Rental Submarket Total Inventory and Vacancy Rate 45,000 10.0% 9.5% 9.0% 40,000 8.5% 8.0% 7.5% 35,000 7.0% 6.5% 6.0% 30,000 5.5% 5.0% 4.5% 25,000 4.0% 3.5%

20,000 3.0% 2.5% 2.0% 15,000 1.5% 1.0% 0.5% 10,000 0.0% 2005 2005 2005 2005 2006 2006 2006 2006 2007 2007 2007 2007 2008 2008 2008 2008 2009 2009 2009 2009 1Q 2Q 3Q 4Q 1Q 2Q 3Q 4Q 1Q 2Q 3Q 4Q 1Q 2Q 3Q 4Q 1Q 2Q 3Q 4Q

Inventory of Units in Submarket Vacancy Rate

The average effective rental rate in the Newark is $848/month, which is affordable to a one person household earning 55% of the Newark MSA’s AMI, a 2-person household earning 48% of the MSA AMI, or a 3-person household earning 43% of the MSA AMI. The average effective rent for the Newark submarket has increased since 2005, with a slight decline in rates in 2009. The gap between effective and asking rents has increased slightly throughout 2009, indicating that the amount of concessions being offered is increasing, likely as a reaction to increasing vacancies across the submarket.

______City of Newark, New Jersey 2010-2015 HUD Consolidated Plan 4‐9

Section 4: Housing Market Analysis

Chart 3. Newark Rental Submarket Average Asking and Effective Rents $1,000

$950

$900

$850

$800

$750

$700 2005 2005 2005 2005 2006 2006 2006 2006 2007 2007 2007 2007 2008 2008 2008 2008 2009 2009 2009 2009 1Q 2Q 3Q 4Q 1Q 2Q 3Q 4Q 1Q 2Q 3Q 4Q 1Q 2Q 3Q 4Q 1Q 2Q 3Q 4Q Asking Rents Effective Rent

Newark’s for-sale housing supply has not experienced as much permitting activity over the past few years, but the change in housing values has had a significant impact on the local housing market. As discussed in the analysis of housing value trends in the housing cost burden section of this report, increases in home values between 2000 and the peak of the market in 2006-2008 further exacerbated the housing cost burden felt by the majority of Newark households. Home values have declined slightly as the market has corrected, but they remain high relative to household incomes. Chart 4 presents the sale price trends for for-sale housing units throughout 2009, comparing the average for all of Newark’s sales with the sales of foreclosed homes.

Chart 4. City of Newark Home Sale Price Trends in 2009

In the fourth quarter of 2007, Newark’s unsold for-sale housing inventory was at a peak of around 22 months of supply and 505 unsold units existing in the marketplace. Since this peak, the inventory has declined and the market has slowly absorbed this excess of units. The unsold inventory count was 400 in the fourth quarter of 2009, and the months of supply in the market declined to 15. This is a positive trend, as a healthy market typically has around 12 months of supply in the pipeline.

______City of Newark, New Jersey 2010-2015 HUD Consolidated Plan 4‐10

Section 4: Housing Market Analysis

Chart 5. Unsold Inventory and Months of Supply in 2009 550.0 25.0

530.0

510.0 20.0

490.0

470.0 15.0

450.0

430.0 10.0

410.0

390.0 5.0

370.0

350.0 ‐ 4Q 2006 4Q 2007 4Q 2008 4Q 2009

Unsold Inventory Months Supply

There was an average of approximately 30 contract sales per month in the City of Newark throughout 2009, as seen in Chart 6 below, with a slight decline towards the end of 2009 to a total of 21 sales in the month of January 2010.

Chart 6. Contract Sales January 2009 – January 2010 60

10 Jan‐09 Feb‐09 Mar‐09 Apr‐09 May‐09 Jun‐09 Jul‐09 Aug‐09 Sep‐09 Oct‐09 Nov‐09 Dec‐09 Jan‐10

Contract Sales Seller:Buyer Ratio

______City of Newark, New Jersey 2010-2015 HUD Consolidated Plan 4‐11

Section 4: Housing Market Analysis

Despite these recent market corrections, home values remain high in relation to household incomes in Newark, and future market correction will likely do little to narrow this gap significantly. In conjunction with fairly stagnant income growth and persistent unemployment, the presence of affordable housing will continue to be a key component in meeting housing demand for Newark’s residents.

E. PUBLIC HOUSING

Newark’s existing affordable housing is primarily rental housing stock. The affordable rental properties include properties managed by the Newark Housing Authority and other rental properties managed by private owners. Exhibit 28A in the appendix contains the inventory of the Newark Housing Authority units, broken down by type of unit. Of the 6,230 public affordable housing managed by the Newark Housing Authority, 2,585 units (or 44%) are oriented towards senior renters, 3,276 are family rental units, and 369 are units redeveloped through the Hope VI program. Due to the housing cost burden on seniors identified earlier in this report, the presence of affordable rental housing oriented towards seniors is an important resource in addressing the housing cost burden.

F. ASSISTED HOUSING

In addition to the affordable public rental housing discussed above, there is also a significant presence of assisted affordable housing offered by the private and non-profit sector. Table 10, below, summarizes the breakdown of Newark’s affordable housing into Housing Authority properties, private affordable rental properties, and for-sale affordable units. Exhibit 28B in the appendix contains the complete inventory of the 7,342 assisted affordable rental properties, of which 1,178 are senior units. There are currently 41 for-sale affordable units in Newark, which are listed in the appendix on Exhibit 29.

Table 10. City of Newark Affordable Housing Inventory Inventory of City of Newark Affordable Housing ‐ 2010 Total Units Newark Housing Authority Properties 6,230 Private Affordable Rental Properties 7,342 Total Affordable Rental Units 13,572

For‐Sale Affordable Units 41

G. FORECLOSURES

There was an increase in foreclosures within the City of Newark throughout the second half of 2009, with small declines in September, November, and January 2010. Newark hit a peak of 516 foreclosures in the month of December 2009, although the number of foreclosures dropped in January 2010 to 319 foreclosures. The distribution of foreclosures by zip code within Newark has remained fairly consistent throughout 2009 and into January 2010, as demonstrated in Charts 7 and 8 on the following page.

______City of Newark, New Jersey 2010-2015 HUD Consolidated Plan 4‐12

Section 4: Housing Market Analysis

Chart 7. City of Newark Foreclosures by Zip Code – February 2009 through January 2010 550

500

450

400

350

300

250

200

150

100

0 Feb‐09 Mar‐09 Apr‐09 May‐09 Jun‐09 Jul‐09 Aug‐09 Sep‐09 Oct‐09 Nov‐09 Dec‐09 Jan‐10 Zip 07107 Zip 07106 Zip 07103 Zip 07104 Zip 07108 Zip 07112 Zip 07102 Zip 07114 Zip 07105

Chart 8. Distribution of Newark Foreclosures by Zip Code in January 2010 Distribution of Newark Foreclosures in January 2010

8% 3% 4% 17%

10%

17%

12%

14% 15%

Zip 07106 Zip 07107 Zip 07103 Zip 07104 Zip 07108

Zip 07112 Zip 07102 Zip 07114 Zip 07105

In January 2010, zip codes 07106 and 07107 both had the highest portion of Newark’s foreclosures, each representing 17% of the city’s total. The foreclosure rates for these zip codes over the 12 months from February 2009 through January 2010 are 15% and 21%, respectively. As shown in Table 11, the 12-month foreclosure rate across Newark’s zip codes range from 10% to 50%, with a total of 19% for the city as a whole. The average foreclosure rate for the three zip codes that make up over 50% of Newark’s owner-occupied housing supply (zip codes 07105, 07106, and 07104) is 17%. These unhealthy foreclosure rates are indicative of the housing market crisis that created home value appreciation not matched by income growth among Newark’s households.

______City of Newark, New Jersey 2010-2015 HUD Consolidated Plan 4‐13

Section 4: Housing Market Analysis

Table 11. City of Newark Foreclosure Rates for February 2009-January 2010

12‐Month Total % of City's Owner‐ Zip Code Foreclosure Rate Occupied Units 07105 10% 18% 07106 15% 17% 07104 17% 17% 07107 21% 13% 07112 19% 12% 07103 24% 11% 07108 32% 8% 07114 40% 2% 07102 18% 2% City of Newark Total 19% 100%

As foreclosures increased throughout 2009, the average sales price for for-sale homes in Newark declined from around $300,000 to just over $200,000. While the surplus of homes on the market had a negative impact on sales price, the observed trend of a decline in the total inventory of unsold units indicates that the market is experiencing a correction as excess supply decreases.

Chart 9. Newark Foreclosures and Average Sales Price 550 $350,000

500 $300,000 450

400 $250,000

350

$200,000 300

250 $150,000

200

150 $100,000

100 $50,000 50

0 $0 Feb‐09 Mar‐09 Apr‐09 May‐09 Jun‐09 Jul‐09 Aug‐09 Sep‐09 Oct‐09 Nov‐09 Dec‐09 Newark Foreclosures Newark Average Sales Price

H. VACANT AND ABANDONED BUILDINGS

The presence of vacant and abandoned buildings can lower property values and limit neighborhood investment. According to the US Department of Housing & Urban Development and the U.S. Postal Service, 3.6% of Newark’s residential addresses, over 2,500 properties,

______City of Newark, New Jersey 2010-2015 HUD Consolidated Plan 4‐14

Section 4: Housing Market Analysis

were vacant or abandoned in the Fourth Quarter of 2009. This total includes vacant properties, and therefore the number of abandoned buildings is only a portion of the total. In July of 2008 Newark’s Division of Housing Code Enforcement estimated 300 abandoned structures, indicating that the abandoned properties represent a minority of the 2,500 abandoned and vacant properties.

I. SPECIAL NEEDS HOUSING

In addition to cost-burdened low-income households, there are also a number of special-needs households with unique housing needs. Table 12 summarizes the number of households, number of persons, and number of youth living in emergency shelter, transitional housing, safe haven housing, and that are unsheltered.

Table 12. Special Needs Households Emergency Transitional Household Types Shelter Housing Safe Haven Unsheltered

Households w/Dependent Children # of Households w/Dependent Children 154 145 0 25 # of Persons (Adults & Children) 426 394 0 54

Households w/out Children # of Individuals 556 121 0 165

Youth Households # of Households 0 0 0 0 # of Persons 0 0 0 0

Table 13, below, summarizes the homeless population in Newark by special needs sub- category and by whether the individuals are currently sheltered or unsheltered.

Table 13. Homeless Special Needs Sub-Populations Household Types Sheltered Unsheltered

Chronically Homeless 101 28 Severe/Persistant Mental Illness 215 44 Substance Abuse 208 39 HIV/AIDS 146 18 Domestic Violence 56 8 Veterans 32 10 Unaccompanied Youth 0 0

J. HOUSING DEMAND ANALYSIS

The following provides a detailed analysis of for-sale and for-rent housing demand in 2010 for the City of Newark by income range (for households with incomes at or below 80% of AMI) and by household size. This analysis was based on current household trends and the distribution of households by income and household size. Table 14 on the following page summarizes the demand by income, household size, and tenure. The demand analysis was also based on current trends for turnover within renter and owner households. The renter and owner demand analyses were conducted separately. The analysis indicates that annually there is demand for a

______City of Newark, New Jersey 2010-2015 HUD Consolidated Plan 4‐15

Section 4: Housing Market Analysis total of 720 for-sale housing units within the City, due to owner turnover and a small portion of renters becoming owners. However, the lack of household growth within the city indicates that this annual turnover will result in little demand for new housing as the current housing stock is already accommodating the majority of households in turnover. New demand for for-sale housing units will result from the small amount of projected household growth and from the need for replacement units as housing ages and becomes obsolete.

There is a significant mismatch between the home prices that households can afford and the home values within the City of Newark. For example, a 2-person household earning 30%-50% of AMI can afford a home valued between $86,800 and $144,700, and a 2-person household earning 50% to 80% of AMI can afford a for-sale housing unit between $144,700 and $231,600. These affordable home prices are all lower than the City of Newark average, and lower than the average for all but two zip codes (07103 and 07108).

There is demand for 3,024 rental units each year, as renter households turnover and as owners become renters (primarily due to recent foreclosures). This demand is the total annual demand within the City of Newark, most of which is met by the existing rental stock. This rental demand is concentrated in households with 1 person and primarily for households earning less than 30% of AMI. The presence of 11,889 affordable rental units in the city is already meeting some of this rental demand from very-low income households. There is also a large portion of the rental demand coming from households with 4 or more persons, which translates to larger rental units with 3 or more bedrooms. Similar to the for-sale demand, the demand for new rental units will largely be driven by the replacement of obsolete rental units unless Newark’s household growth is altered significantly from the current projections.

Table 14. City of Newark Residential Housing Demand in 2010 5 or More 1-2 Person 3-4 Person Person Households Households Households Total

Owner Demand Potential Households Less than 30% AMI 150 123 71 343 Households 30%-50% AMI 80 61 34 175 Households 50%-80% AMI 99 68 34 201 Total Rental Demand Potential 329 252 139 720

Renter Demand Potential Households Less than 30% AMI 591 430 555 1,576 Households 30%-50% AMI 290 189 222 702 Households 50%-80% AMI 354 202 190 746 Total Rental Demand Potential 1,235 822 967 3,024

______City of Newark, New Jersey 2010-2015 HUD Consolidated Plan 4‐16

Exhibit 1

ZIP CODE MAP CITY OF NEWARK, NEW JERSEY MARCH 2010

City of Newark

Exhibit 1 64-1284.02 Printed: 4/19/2010 Exhibit 2

POPULATION & HOUSEHOLD GROWTH TRENDS CITY OF NEWARK, NEW JERSEY 2000-2014

City of Newark 2000 2009 2014 CENSUS ESTIMATE PROJECTION Population 273,546 282,058 286,541 Average Annual Change - 946 897 Compounded Annual Growth Rate - 0.3% 0.3% Households 91,382 94,494 96,073 Average Annual Change - 346 316 Compounded Annual Growth Rate - 0.4% 0.3% Median Income $27,323 $33,300 $36,898 Average Annual Change - $664 $720 Compounded Annual Growth Rate - 2.2% 2.1% Household Size 2.85 2.85 2.85 Compounded Annual Growth Rate - 0.0% 0.0%

SOURCE: U.S. Census Bureau; Claritas, Inc.

Exhibit 2 64-12484.02 Printed:4/19/2010 Exhibit 3

HOUSEHOLD INCOME DISTRIBUTION CITY OF NEWARK, NEW JERSEY 2009

1 Newark MSA City of Newark

AMI for a 4-Person Household $106,667 $38,668

Less than 30% AMI Income Range Less than $32,000 Less than $11,600

30% - 50% AMI Income Range $32,000 - $53,333 $11,600 - $19,300

50% - 80% Income Range $53,333 - $85,333 $19,300 - $30,900

Over 80% AMI Income Range Over $85,333 Over $30,900

30% of AMI/MFI or Above 80% of CITY OF NEWARK INCOME DISTRIBUTION Less 30-50% of AMI/MFI 50%-80% of AMI/MFI AMI/MFI Total

Income Distribution Based on: 19,852 11,263 13,563 49,816 94,494 Median Family Income for the City of Newark of $38,700 % Income Distribution 21% 12% 14% 53% 100%

Income Distribution Based on: 45,835 18,436 15,978 14,245 94,494 AMI for the Newark MSA of $106,700 % Income Distribution 49% 20% 17% 15% 100%

1 Data reflects 2008 Median Family Income for the City of Newark Source: US Department of Housing and Urban Development, Claritas

Exhibit 3 64-12484.02 Printed:4/19/2010 Exhibit 4

HOUSEHOLD TRENDS BY ZIP CODE THE CITY OF NEWARK, NEW JERSEY 2009

ZIP CODE HOUSEHOLD COMPOSITION BY RACE

Median % White (Non % White City of Newark Zip Codes Household Hispanic/ (Hispanic/ % African % Pacific % Native Households Income Latino) Latino) American % Asian Islander American % Other

07102 4,315 $15,858 8% 8% 64% 2% 0% 1% 17% 07103 10,934 $28,571 2% 5% 83% 1% 0% 0% 8% 07104 17,291 $35,707 11% 31% 26% 2% 0% 0% 29% 07105 16,049 $42,643 55% 16% 4% 0% 0% 0% 24% 07106 11,319 $38,805 9% 3% 79% 3% 0% 0% 6% 07107 12,599 $31,602 12% 16% 38% 2% 0% 1% 31% 07108 8,642 $24,107 1% 3% 89% 0% 0% 0% 7% 07112 9,762 $35,384 1% 1% 93% 1% 0% 0% 5% 07114 3,583 $19,424 8% 12% 49% 0% 0% 0% 30%

City of Newark - Total 94,494 $33,347 15% 13% 52% 1% 0% 0% 18%

- The neighborhoods within the City of Newark have a range of median household incomes from $15,800 to $42,600, with a the median household income for the City of Newark of $33,300.

- Overall the City of Newark is composed of 52% African American householdshouseholds, 15% White NonNon-Hispanic/LatinoHispanic/Latino householdshouseholds, and 13% White Hispanic/Latino households. households The trends within each of the zip codes is similar to that of the city overall, except for zip code 07105, which has 55% White Non-Hispanic/Latino households and 4% African American households.

Source: Claritas

Exhibit 4 64-12484.02 Printed:4/19/2010 Exhibit 5

MAP OF MEDIAN HOUSEHOLD INCOMES BY ZIP CODE CITY OF NEWARK, NEW JERSEY 2009

$35,700

$31,600

$38,900 $28,600

$15,900 $42,600 $24,100

$35,400

$19,400

Source: Claritas

Exhibit 5 64-12484.02 Printed: 4/19/2010 Exhibit 6

MAP OF MEDIAN HOUSING VALUE BY ZIP CODE CITY OF NEWARK, NEW JERSEY 2009

$297,400

$283,600

$243,000 $204,800

$269,900 $402,100 $216,300

$248,900

$270,000

Source: Claritas

Exhibit 6 64-12484.02 Printed: 4/19/2010 Exhibit 7A

CONCENTRATION OF WHITE HOUSEHOLDS BY ZIP CODE CITY OF NEWARK, NEW JERSEY 2009

White Households % of Zip Code Total

0%-25%

26%-50%

51%-75%

76%-100%

City of Newark Boundaries

Source: Claritas

Exhibit 7A 64-12484.02 Printed: 4/19/2010 Exhibit 7B

CONCENTRATION OF HISPANIC/LATINO HOUSEHOLDS BY ZIP CODE CITY OF NEWARK, NEW JERSEY 2009

Hispanic/Latino Households % of Zip Code Total

0%-25%

26%-50%

51%-75%

76%-100%

City of Newark Boundaries

Source: Claritas

Exhibit 7B 64-12484.02 Printed: 4/19/2010 Exhibit 7C

CONCENTRATION OF AFRICAN AMERICAN HOUSEHOLDS BY ZIP CODE CITY OF NEWARK, NEW JERSEY 2009

African American Households % of Zip Code Total

0%-25%

26%-50%

51%-75%

76%-100%

City of Newark Boundaries

Source: Claritas

Exhibit 7C 64-12484.02 Printed: 4/19/2010 Exhibit 7D

CONCENTRATION OF HOUSEHOLDS BY RACE CITY OF NEWARK, NEW JERSEY ZIP CODES 2009

100%

90%

80%

70%

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0% 07102 07103 07104 07105 07106 07107 07108 07112 07114

White Hispanic/Latino AfricanAmerican Other

Source: Claritas

Exhibit 7D 64-12484.02 Printed: 4/19/2010 Exhibit 8

HOUSING UNIT TRENDS BY ZIP CODE THE CITY OF NEWARK, NEW JERSEY 2009

YEAR HOUSING UNITS BUILT Median Median Housing Median % Change in City of Newark Zip Codes Housing Value Value 2006-2008 Housing Value Value: % Built After % Built 1990- % Built 1970- % Built 1950- % Built Before 2000 Avg. 2009 2000 - 2009 1999 1999 1989 1969 1950 % Renter

07102 $138,710 N/A $269,928 95% 6% 2% 32% 35% 24% 92% 07103 $98,264 N/A $204,792 108% 21% 10% 19% 20% 30% 77% 07104 $146,751 N/A $297,382 103% 14% 5% 15% 27% 39% 78% 07105 $187,721 N/A $402,117 114% 12% 9% 12% 23% 45% 74% 07106 $124,007 N/A $243,009 96% 8% 1% 9% 38% 44% 66% 07107 $137,075 N/A $282,563 106% 13% 4% 12% 33% 38% 76% 07108 $99,015 N/A $216,267 118% 11% 4% 18% 26% 41% 80% 07112 $124,476 N/A $248,894 100% 13% 2% 8% 29% 48% 71% 07114 $123,056 N/A $269,928 119% 14% 5% 13% 39% 29% 86%

City of Newark Total $132,825 $305,400 $268,910 102% 13% 5% 14% 29% 39% 76%

Source: US Census, Claritas, 2006-2008 American Community Survey

Exhibit 8 64-12484.02 Printed:4/19/2010 Exhibit 9

HOUSING UNIT TRENDS BY ZIP CODE THE CITY OF NEWARK, NEW JERSEY 2009

NUMBER OF UNITS IN STRUCTURE

1 Unit 1-Unit City of Newark Zip Codes Detached - Attached - Multifamily - 2 Multifamily - 3- Multifamily - 20- Multifamily - Single Family Townhome Units 19 Units 49 Units Over 50 Units Total

07102 3% 3% 4% 32% 10% 49% 100% 07103 8% 14% 14% 46% 2% 15% 100% 07104 13% 6% 16% 36% 9% 19% 100% 07105 7% 3% 28% 58% 2% 1% 100% 07106 21% 2% 19% 36% 2% 20% 100% 07107 10% 6% 20% 40% 6% 16% 100% 07108 10% 8% 12% 49% 7% 14% 100% 07112 13% 1% 18% 42% 11% 14% 100%

07114 7% 6% 11% 44% 8% 24% 100%

City of Newark - Total 11% 6% 18% 43% 6% 16% 100%

Housing Unit Vacancy - City of Newark

Number of Vacant Residential Addresses 2,586 Vacant as of 4Q 2009

% Of Total Residential Addresses 3.6% Vacant as of 4Q 2009

Average Years that Addresses are Vacant 2.23

Source: US Census, Claritas, US Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD)

Exhibit 9 64-12484.02 Printed:4/19/2010 Exhibit 10

HOUSING COST BURDEN BY HOUSEHOLD TYPE CITY OF NEWARK, NEW JERSEY 2008

% of Income Spent on Housing

Owner Household Type Less than 30% 30%-50% Greater than 50% Total Large family 48% 27% 25% 100% Non-Family Household, Elderly 18% 31% 51% 100% Non-Family Household, Not Elderly 33% 21% 46% 100% Small Family, Elderly 46% 24% 31% 100% Small Family, Not Elderly 51% 24% 25% 100%

% of Income Spent on Housing

Renter Household Type Less than 30% 30%-50% Greater than 50% Total Large family 58% 23% 19% 100% Non-Family Household, Elderly 48% 28% 25% 100% Non-Family Household, Not Elderly 49% 23% 28% 100% Small Family, Elderly 46% 21% 33% 100% Small Family, Not Elderly 52% 24% 24% 100%

SOURCE: U.S. Census Bureau; U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development CHAS Data

Exhibit 10 64-12484.02 Printed:4/19/2010 Exhibit 11

HOUSING CHARACTERISTICS BY MEDIAN HOUSEHOLD INCOME CITY OF NEWARK, NEW JERSEY 2008

% of Income Spent on Housing Household Distribution by Number of Bedrooms % In Sub- OWNER Greater than 0-1 Bedroom 2-Bedroom 3- or more Less than 30% 30%-50% Standard HOUSEHOLDS 50% 1 Units Units Bedroom Units Total Housing Total 30% AMI or less 3% 10% 87% 100% 0.7% 16% 29% 55% 100% 30.1-50% AMI 10% 31% 59% 99% 0.0% 6% 30% 64% 100% 50.1-80% AMI 29% 33% 38% 100% 0.5% 6% 27% 67% 100% 80% AMI and Above 69% 23% 8% 100% 0.1% 4% 30% 67% 100%

% of Income Spent on Housing Household Distribution by Number of Bedrooms % In Sub- RENTER Greater than 0-1 Bedroom 2-Bedroom 3- or more Less than 30% 30%-50% Standard HOUSEHOLDS 50% Units Units Bedroom Units Total Housing 1 Total 30% AMI or less 25% 19% 56% 100% 0.7% 46% 34% 20% 100% 30.1-50% AMI 33% 51% 16% 100% 0.6% 27% 45% 27% 100% 50.1-80% AMI 75% 24% 1% 100% 0.2% 26% 43% 31% 100% 80% AMI and Above 57% 21% 22% 100% 0.7% 19% 43% 38% 100%

1 Substandard housing indicates lack of a complete kitchen or adequate plumbing facilities SOURCE: U.S. Census Bureau; U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development CHAS Data

Exhibit 11 64-12484.02 Printed:4/19/2010 Exhibit 12

HOUSEHOLDS BY AGE AND INCOME CITY OF NEWARK, NEW JERSEY 2000

Under 25 25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65-74 75 and over TOTAL Income Range#% #% #% #% #% #% #% #% Less than $15,000 2,347 43% 5,383 29% 5,664 26% 4,102 25% 4,105 31% 4,044 43% 3,968 57% 29,613 32% $15,000 - $24,999 970 18% 2,854 16% 3,393 16% 1,731 10% 1,758 13% 1,418 15% 1,200 17% 13,324 15% $25,000 - $34,999 872 16% 2,820 15% 3,085 14% 1,872 11% 1,538 12% 970 10% 666 10% 11,823 13% $35,000 - $49,999 619 11% 2,889 16% 3,392 16% 2,583 16% 1,881 14% 947 10% 400 6% 12,711 14% $50,000 - $74,999 347 6% 2,764 15% 3,552 17% 3,098 19% 1,939 15% 962 10% 382 5% 13,044 14% $75,000 - $99,999 224 4% 1,019 6% 1,501 7% 1,646 10% 1,041 8% 419 4% 197 3% 6,047 7% $100,000 - $124,999 32 1% 325 2% 431 2% 807 5% 430 3% 242 3% 83 1% 2,350 3% $125,000 - $149,999 17 0% 137 1% 228 1% 213 1% 204 2% 111 1% 58 1% 968 1% $150,000 - $199,999 15 0% 51 0% 153 1% 246 1% 160 1% 104 1% 0 0% 729 1% $200,000 and above 22 0% 78 0% 80 0% 202 1% 148 1% 179 2% 48 1% 757 1%

TOTAL 5,465 100% 18,320 100% 21,479 100% 16,500 100% 13,204 100% 9,396 100% 7,002 100% 91,366 100% Percent of Total 6% 20% 24% 18% 14% 10% 8% 100%

Median Income $18,683 $28,058 $30,025 $38,153 $29,771 $19,209 $12,968

INCOME DISTRIBUTION DISTRIBUTION OF HOUSEHOLDERS BY AGE 35% 35% 32%

30% 30% 27% 25% 25% 24% 20% 20% 20% 18% 15% 14% 14% 15% 15% 10% 10% 10% 8% 7% 6% 5% 4% 5% 2% 0% 0% Less than $15,000- $25,000- $50,000- $75,000- $100,000- $150,000 Under 25 25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65-74 75 and $15,000 $24,999 $49,999 $74,999 $99,999 $149,000 and above Age of Householder over Income Range

Exhibit 12 64-12484.02 Printed: 4/19/2010 Exhibit 13

HOUSEHOLDS BY AGE AND INCOME CITY OF NEWARK, NEW JERSEY 2009

Under 25 25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65-74 75 and over TOTAL Income Range#% #% #% #% #% #% #% #% Less than $15,000 2,124 37% 4,212 24% 4,505 22% 4,144 21% 4,191 29% 3,405 34% 3,089 45% 25,670 27% $15,000 - $24,999 861 15% 2,338 14% 2,452 12% 1,831 9% 1,932 13% 1,670 17% 1,476 22% 12,560 13% $25,000 - $34,999 880 15% 2,048 12% 2,602 12% 1,997 10% 1,540 10% 1,013 10% 783 12% 10,863 11% $35,000 - $49,999 845 15% 2,884 17% 3,261 16% 2,677 14% 1,948 13% 1,071 11% 558 8% 13,244 14% $50,000 - $74,999 581 10% 2,919 17% 3,515 17% 3,593 19% 2,275 15% 1,231 12% 392 6% 14,506 15% $75,000 - $99,999 218 4% 1,517 9% 2,324 11% 2,187 11% 1,222 8% 558 6% 215 3% 8,241 9% $100,000 - $124,999 143 2% 725 4% 1,177 6% 1,384 7% 800 5% 374 4% 126 2% 4,729 5% $125,000 - $149,999 32 1% 283 2% 457 2% 686 4% 325 2% 176 2% 64 1% 2,023 2% $150,000 - $199,999 24 0% 178 1% 323 2% 437 2% 235 2% 152 2% 49 1% 1,398 1% $200,000 and above 28 0% 114 1% 231 1% 367 2% 222 2% 248 3% 50 1% 1,260 1%

TOTAL 5,736 100% 17,218 100% 20,847 100% 19,303 100% 14,690 100% 9,898 100% 6,802 100% 94,494 100% Percent of Total 6% 18% 22% 20% 16% 10% 7% 100%

Median Income $23,535 $35,051 $38,787 $44,923 $32,944 $23,968 $16,446

INCOME DISTRIBUTION DISTRIBUTION OF HOUSEHOLDERS BY AGE 35% 35%

30% 30% 27% 26% 25% 25% 22% 20% 20% 20% 18% 15% 16% 15% 13% 15% 10% 10% 9% 7% 10% 7% 6% 5% 5%

0% 0% Less than $15,000- $25,000- $50,000- $75,000- $100,000- $15,000 $24,999 $49,999 $74,999 $99,999 $149,000 Under 25 25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65-74 75 and Age of Householder over Income Range

Exhibit 13 64-12484.02 Printed: 4/19/2010 Exhibit 14

HOUSEHOLDS BY AGE AND INCOME CITY OF NEWARK, NEW JERSEY 2014

Under 25 25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65-74 75 and over TOTAL Income Range#% #% #% #% #% #% #% #% Less than $15,000 1,923 35% 3,691 23% 3,809 19% 3,873 19% 4,253 26% 3,536 32% 2,809 39% 23,894 25% $15,000 - $24,999 813 15% 2,035 13% 2,046 10% 1,765 9% 1,986 12% 1,885 17% 1,635 23% 12,165 13% $25,000 - $34,999 770 14% 1,841 12% 2,186 11% 1,742 9% 1,621 10% 1,204 11% 938 13% 10,302 11% $35,000 - $49,999 893 16% 2,735 17% 2,922 15% 2,556 13% 2,081 13% 1,242 11% 814 11% 13,243 14% $50,000 - $74,999 631 11% 2,798 18% 3,488 17% 3,789 19% 2,530 16% 1,337 12% 460 6% 15,033 16% $75,000 - $99,999 247 4% 1,421 9% 2,324 12% 2,450 12% 1,477 9% 751 7% 226 3% 8,896 9% $100,000 - $124,999 144 3% 793 5% 1,521 8% 1,656 8% 932 6% 448 4% 160 2% 5,654 6% $125,000 - $149,999 78 1% 344 2% 767 4% 980 5% 557 3% 259 2% 76 1% 3,061 3% $150,000 - $199,999 28 1% 185 1% 507 3% 709 4% 331 2% 197 2% 67 1% 2,024 2% $200,000 and above 39 1% 130 1% 389 2% 559 3% 319 2% 304 3% 61 1% 1,801 2%

TOTAL 5,566 100% 15,973 100% 19,959 100% 20,079 100% 16,087 100% 11,163 100% 7,246 100% 96,073 100% Percent of Total 6% 17% 21% 21% 17% 12% 8% 100%

Median Income $25,614 $37,246 $44,702 $50,603 $35,952 $26,047 $19,123

INCOME DISTRIBUTION DISTRIBUTION OF HOUSEHOLDERS BY AGE 35% 35%

30% 30% 25% 25% 25% 25% 21% 21% 20% 20% 16% 17% 17% 15% 13% 15% 12% 9% 10% 9% 10% 8% 6% 4% 5% 5%

0% 0% $15,000- $25,000- $50,000- $75,000- $100,000- $150,000 and Under 25 25-34 35-44 45-54 55-64 65-74 75 and $24,999 $49,999 $74,999 $99,999 $149,000 above Age of Householder over Income Range

Exhibit 14 64-12484.02 Printed: 4/19/2010 Exhibit 15

TOTAL EMPLOYMENT AND EARNINGS BY OCCUPATION CITY OF NEWARK, NEW JERSEY 2008

% of Total Median Annual Total Employees Employees Earnings Management Occupations 5,535 5% $50,033 Business and Financial Operations Occupations 2,458 2% $51,229 Computer and Mathematical Occupations 928 1% $47,377 Architecture and Engineering Occupations 939 1% $46,085 Life, Physical, and Social Science Occupations 455 0% $28,401 Community and Social Services Occupations 2,321 2% $41,597 Legal Occupations 657 1% $29,697 Education, Training, and Library Occupations 5,629 5% $31,438 Arts, Design, Entertainment, Sports, and Media Occupations 811 1% $48,252 Healthcare Practitioner and Technical Occupations: 2,765 3% $42,140 Service Occupations: 27,684 25% $22,017 Sales and Related Occupations 9,715 9% $21,691 Office and Administrative Support Occupations 15,672 14% $29,008 Farming, Fishing, and Forestry Occupations 0 0% N/A Construction, Extraction, Maintenance, and Repair Occupations: 13,016 12% $26,691 Production, Transportation, and Material Moving Occupations: 20,952 19% $28,661

Total 109,537 100% $28,282

Source: US Census Bureau 2008 American Community Survey

Exhibit 15 64-12484.02 Printed:4/19/2010 Exhibit 16

MONTHLY RESIDENTIAL BUILDING PERMITS CITY OF NEWARK, NEW JERSEY 2008-2009

SingleFamilyUnits TotalMultifamily

Source: New Jersey Department of Labor

Exhibit 16 P# 64-12484.02 Printed: 4/19/2010 Exhibit 17

AVERAGE SALES PRICE CITY OF NEWARK ZIP CODES, NEW JERSEY MARCH 2009 - DECEMBER 2009

$350,000

$300,000

$250,000

$200,000

$150,000

$100,000

$50,000

$0 Feb09 Mar09 Apr09 May09 Jun09 Jul09 Aug09 Sep09 Oct09 Nov09 Dec09

Zip07106 Zip07107 Zip07103 Zip07104 Zip07108 Zip07112 Zip07105 CityofNewarkAverage

Source: RealtyTrac Exhibit 17 P# 64-12484.02 Printed: 4/19/2010 Exhibit 18

AVERAGE SALES PRICE AND AVERAGE FORECLOSURE SALES PRICE CITY OF NEWARK, NEW JERSEY JANUARY - DECEMBER 2009

Source: City of Trenton Assessor Data

Exhibit 18 P# 64-12484.02 Printed: 4/19/2010 Exhibit 19

CONTRACT SALES AND SELLER:BUYER RATIO CITY OF NEWARK, NEW JERSEY JANUARY 2009 - JANUARY 2010

10 Jan09 Feb09 Mar09 Apr09 May09 Jun09 Jul09 Aug09 Sep09 Oct09 Nov09 Dec09 Jan10

ContractSales Seller:BuyerRatio

Source: Otteau Report

Exhibit 19 P# 64-12484.02 Printed: 4/19/2010 Exhibit 20

UNSOLD FOR-SALE RESIDENTIAL INVENTORY AND MONTHS OF SUPPLY CITY OF NEWARK, NEW JERSEY 4Q 2006 - 4Q 2009

550.0 25.0

530.0

510.0 20.0

490.0

470.0 15.0

450.0

430.0 10.0

410.0

390.0 5.0

370.0

350.0 4Q2006 4Q2007 4Q2008 4Q2009

UnsoldInventory MonthsSupply

Source: Otteau Report

Exhibit 20 P# 64-12484.02 Printed: 4/19/2010 Exhibit 21

AVERAGE MONTHLY SALES AND SUPPLY:DEMAND RATIO CITY OF NEWARK, NEW JERSEY 4Q 2005 - 4Q 2009

60%

70.0

50% 60.0

50.0 40%

40.0 30%

30.0

20%

20.0

10% 10.0

0% 4Q2006 4Q2007 4Q2008 4Q2009

Average#ofSalesMonthly Supply:DemandRatio

Source: Otteau Report

Exhibit 21 P# 64-12484.02 Printed: 4/19/2010 Exhibit 22

RECENT FORECLOSURE TRENDS CITY OF NEWARK ZIP CODES, NEW JERSEY FEBRUARY 2009 - JANUARY 2010

550

500

450

400

350

300

250

200

150

100

0 Feb09 Mar09 Apr09 May09 Jun09 Jul09 Aug09 Sep09 Oct09 Nov09 Dec09 Jan10

Zip07107 Zip07106 Zip07103 Zip07104 Zip07108 Zip07112 Zip07102 Zip07114 Zip07105

Source: RealtyTrac

Exhibit 22 P# 64-12484.02 Printed: 4/19/2010 Exhibit 23

FORECLOSURES BY ZIP CODE CITY OF NEWARK, NEW JERSEY JANUARY 2010

DistributionofNewarkForeclosuresinJanuary2010

8% 3% 4% 17%

10%

17%

12%

14% 15%

Zip07106 Zip07107 Zip07103 Zip07104 Zip07108

Zip07112 Zip07102 Zip07114 Zip07105

Source: RealtyTrac

Exhibit 23 P# 64-12484.02 Printed: 4/19/2010 Exhibit 24

RECENT FORECLOSURE AND SALE PRICE TRENDS CITY OF NEWARK ZIP CODES, NEW JERSEY 2009

550 $350,000

500 $300,000 450

400 $250,000

350

$200,000 300

250 $150,000 200

150 $100$100,000 000

100 $50,000 50

0 $0 Feb09 Mar09 Apr09 May09 Jun09 Jul09 Aug09 Sep09 Oct09 Nov09 Dec09

NewarkForeclosures NewarkAverageSalesPrice

Source: RealtyTrac

Exhibit 24 P# 64-12484.02 Printed: 4/19/2010 Exhibit 25

FOR-RENT RESIDENTIAL SUBMARKET MAP NEWARK AND EAST ESSEX COUNTY, NEW JERSERY MARCH 2010

Newark Rental Submarket Source: REIS

Exhibit 25 P# 64-12484.02 Printed: 4/19/2010 Exhibit 26

TOTAL INVENTORY OF UNITS AND VACANCY RATE NEWARK/EAST ESSEX COUNTY RENTAL SUBMARKET 2005-2009

45,000 10.0% 9.5% 9.0% 40,000 8.5% 8.0% 7.5% 35,000 7.0% 6.5% 6.0% 30,000 5.5% 5.0% 4.5% 25,000 4.0% 3.5% 3.0% 20,000 2.5%2.5% 2.0%

15,000 1.5% 1.0% 0.5% 10,000 0.0% 20051Q 20052Q 20053Q 20054Q 20061Q 20062Q 20063Q 20064Q 20071Q 20072Q 20073Q 20074Q 20081Q 20082Q 20083Q 20084Q 20091Q 20092Q 20093Q 20094Q

InventoryofUnitsinSubmarket VacancyRate

Source: REIS

Exhibit 26 P# 64-12484.02 Printed: 4/19/2010 Exhibit 27

ASKING AND EFFECTIVE RENTS NEWARK/EAST ESSEX COUNTY RENTAL SUBMARKET, CENTRAL NEW JERSEY 2005-2009 $1,000

$950

$900

$850

Theaverage effectiverentalrateintheNewarksubmarket in4Q2009is $848/month,thisrateisaffordableto: $800 1personhouseholdearning55%ofAMIfortheMSA 2personhouseholdearning48%ofAMIfortheMSA 3personhouseholdearning43%ofAMIfortheMSA 4personhouseholdearning39%ofAMIfortheMSA $750 AccordingtotheHUDguidelinesforFairMarketRents,thesubmarket averageeffectiverentof$848inthe4Q2009correlatestotherentfor anefficiency/studiounit.

$700 2005 2005 2005 2005 2006 2006 2006 2006 2007 2007 2007 2007 2008 2008 2008 2008 2009 2009 2009 2009 1Q 2Q 3Q 4Q 1Q 2Q 3Q 4Q 1Q 2Q 3Q 4Q 1Q 2Q 3Q 4Q 1Q 2Q 3Q 4Q

AskingRents EffectiveRent

Source: REIS Exhibit 27 P# 64-12484.02 Printed: 4/19/2010 Exhibit 28A

SELECT AFFORDABLE RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES CITY OF NEWARK, NEW JERSEY MARCH 2010

PROJECT NAME ADDRESS UNITS WAITING LIST % AFFORDABILITY

NEWARK HOUSING AUTHORITY PROPERTIES - FAMILY HOUSING

James Baxter Terrace 180-234 Orange Street 508 Over 24 Months 30% of AMI or Less Total 508

Bradley Court 16-32 N. Munn Avenue 18 Over 24 Months 30% of AMI or Less Total 18

Felix Fuld N/A 300 N/A 30% of AMI or Less Multi-family Total 300

Hyatt Court 2 Roanoke Avenue 402 N/A 30% of AMI or Less Multi-family Total 402

Pennington Court 214 South Street 227 N/A 30% of AMI or Less Multi-family Total 227

Redevelopment NJ2-46 N/A 96 N/A 30% of AMI or Less Multi-family Total 96

Seth Boyden Terrace 124 Seth Boyden Terrace 503 N/A 30% of AMI or Less Multi-family Total 503

Stephen Crane Village N/A 351 N/A 30% of AMI or Less Multi-family Total 351

Kemsco NJ2-42 93 7th Ave; 33 Triton Terrace 194 N/A 30% of AMI or Less Townhouse Total 194

La Villa Jose Rosario 111 Wright Street 94 N/A 30% of AMI or Less Townhouse Total 94

Millard E. Terrel Homes NJ2-9 35 Riverview Ct. 275 N/A 30% of AMI or Less Townhouse Total 275

Scattered Sites NJ2-39 190 Court Street 254 N/A 30% of AMI or Less Townhouse Total 254

Exhibit 28A P# 64-12484.02 Printed: 4/19/2010 Exhibit 28A

SELECT AFFORDABLE RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES CITY OF NEWARK, NEW JERSEY MARCH 2010

PROJECT NAME ADDRESS UNITS WAITING LIST % AFFORDABILITY

West Side Village NJ2-35 281 16th Ave 248 N/A 30% of AMI or Less Townhouse Total 248

West Side Village 560 15th Ave 48 N/A 30% of AMI or Less Townhouse Total 48

Wynona Lipman 200 Cathedral Court 300 N/A 30% of AMI or Less Townhouse Total 300

Oak Brook Square Clinton Avenue 43 N/A 30% of AMI or Less Townhouse Total 43

NEWARK HOUSING AUTHORITY PROPERTIES - SENIOR HOUSING

Baxter Elderly Summit St. 341 N/A 30% of AMI or Less Senior, Multifamily Total 341

Foushee Towers Lincoln St. 252 N/A 30% of AMI or Less Senior, Multifamily Total 252

James C. White NJ2-25 516 Bergen St. 206 N/A 30% of AMI or Less Senior, Multifamily Total 206

Kretchmer Elderly NJ2-70 100 Ludlow St. 143 N/A 30% of AMI or Less Senior, Multifamily Total 143

Otto Kretchmer Elderly NJ2-17 N/A 198 N/A 30% of AMI or Less Senior, Multifamily Total 198

Seth Boyden Elderly 27 Foster St. 360 N/A 30% of AMI or Less Seth Boyden Elderly NJ2-21E 130 Dayton St. 286 N/A 30% of AMI or Less Seth Boyden Elderly NJ2-21F 991 Frelinghuysen Ave. 200 N/A 30% of AMI or Less Seth Boyden Elderly NJ2-21F 46 Evergreen Ave. 199 N/A 30% of AMI or Less Total 1,045

Stephen Crane Elderly 900 Franklin Ave. 375 N/A Stephen Crane NJ2-16 60 Cedar Lane 198 N/A Stephen Crane Elderly NJ2-22D 789, 801, 815 N. 6th St. 374 Over 24 Months 30% of AMI or Less Total 947

HOPE VI PROPERTIES

Stella Garden Townhomes 35 Spruce St. 93 N/A Hope VI Total 93

Exhibit 28A P# 64-12484.02 Printed: 4/19/2010 Exhibit 28A

SELECT AFFORDABLE RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES CITY OF NEWARK, NEW JERSEY MARCH 2010

PROJECT NAME ADDRESS UNITS WAITING LIST % AFFORDABILITY

Charlton Gardens 151 Irvine Turner Blvd. 60 N/A Hope VI Total 60

Cottage Place (Hill Manor) 643 Martin L King Jr. Blvd 100 N/A Hope VI Total 100

City View Landing Apartments 147 W. Kinney St. 116 N/A Hope VI Total 116

Total Family Housing 1 3,276 Total Senior Housing 1 2,585 Total Hope VI Units 369

Total Housing Authority Units 1 6,230

1 Excluding developments with no unit count available. Source: Newark Housing Authority

Exhibit 28A P# 64-12484.02 Printed: 4/19/2010 Exhibit 28B

SELECT AFFORDABLE FOR-RENT RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES CITY OF NEWARK, NEW JERSEY MARCH 2010

PROJECT NAME ADDRESS ZIP CODE TOTAL UNITS TYPE LEVEL OF AFFORDABILITY OTHER AFFORDABLE RENTAL HOUSING

Bruce Street Gardens 47-61 12th Ave. 24-58 Bruce St 07102 N/A Family N/A CHARC 203 W. Runyon St. 07108 N/A Family N/A Clinton Street Lofts 9-15 Clinton Street 07102 63 Family N/A Ebon Square 753-759 Clinton Ave. 07104 N/A Family N/A Littleton Ave. Community Vill. 352 South 6Th St., 07103 79 Family Between 101% & 120% FMR Pilgrim Baptist Village II 446 Bergen Street 07108 151 Family Between 101% & 120% FMR St. Clares Home Phase II 182 Roseville Ave. 07107 13 Family N/A Telephone Heights 176 Avon Avenue 07108 N/A Family N/A Tiffany Manor/Parkside Manor 90 Tiffany Blvd. 07108 147 Family N/A University Court 419 Washington St. 07102 N/A Family N/A Weequahic Park 525 Elizabeth Ave. 07108 N/A Family N/A West Kinney Gardens (B) Springifeld / Morris Ave. 07102 36 Family N/A West Kinney Garden (A) Boyd Street 07102 133 Family , LIHTC N/A Carmel Towers 440 Elizabeth Ave. 07112 N/A Family , Section 8 N/A Georgia King Village 250 Georgia King Village 07107 422 Family , Section 8 N/A New Comm. Douglass-Harrison 51 Somerset St. 07103 135 Family , Section 8 N/A New Community Commons 140 South Orange Ave. 07106 370 Family , Section 8 N/A New Community Gardens 265 Morris Ave. 07106 233 Family , Section 8 N/A New Hope 195 West Market St. 07103 N/A Family , Section 8 N/A Norfolk Square Apartments 20 Hartford St. 07199 224 Family , Section 8 Between 80% & 100% FMR Pilgrim Baptist I 446 Bergen St. 07108 152 Family , Section 8 Between 101% & 120% FMR Reservoir Site 185 14th Ave. 07103 N/A Family , Section 8 N/A Shalom Clemente 75-95 Clinton Ave. 07114 150 Family , Section 8 N/A St. James AME 440 Washington St. 07102 109 Family , Section 8 Between 141% & 160% FMR Villa Victoria 133-7th Avenue 07104 193 Family , Section 8 Between 101% & 120% FMR Willie T. Wright Plaza Apts. 135 Prince St. 07103 114 Family , Section 8 N/A Zion Towers 515 Elizabeth Ave. 07112 N/A Family , Section 8 N/A Newark Genesis Apartments Oriental & Mt. Pleasant Ave 51 LIHTC, Below50% AMI *15 Units Designated for HIV/AIDS 28 FLEMING AVENUE 28 FLEMING AVENUE 07105 59 Section 8 Below 80% FMR Amity Village #1 325 - 329 Hawthorne Avenue 07103 21 Section 8 Between 80% & 100% FMR Amity Village #2 413 So. 15th Street 07103 13 Section 8 Between 80% & 100% FMR Amity Village #5 523 S 14th St 07103 16 Section 8 Below 80% FMR Amity Village #6 458 So. 16th Street 07103 12 Section 8 Below 80% FMR Amity Village #7 410,474-76, 519, 534-36, 07103 48 Section 8 Between 80% & 100% FMR Amity Village #8 307 14th Avenue,503 South 19th Street 07103 28 Section 8 Between 80% & 100% FMR ASPEN BELMONT B 399-400 BELMONT AVENUE 07102 35 Section 8 Between 80% & 100% FMR ASPEN RIVERPARK APTS 17 OXFORD STREET 07105 255 Section 8 Between 101% & 120% FMR ASPEN STRATFORD B 29 STRATFORD PL 07108 59 Section 8 Below 80% FMR ASPEN STRATFORD C 19 STRATFORD PL 07102 54 Section 8 Below 80% FMR BALLANTYNE HOUSE 585 Mt. Prospect Avenue 07104 58 Section 8 Below 80% FMR BELMONT APTS A 393-395 BELMONT AVENUE 07102 200 Section 8 Below 80% FMR BRANCH BROOK MANOR 1 BRANCH BROOK PLZ 07104 70 Section 8 Between 80% & 100% FMR BROADWAY MANOR 766 - 780 BROADWAY 07104 85 Section 8 Between 80% & 100% FMR CASA MIA 502 SUMMER AVE 07104 41 Section 8 Below 80% FMR CENTER CITY HOUSING 9C 1007 BROAD ST 07102 41 Section 8 Over 160% FMR CLINTON HILL COMMUNITY GARDENS 201 W. RUNYON STREET 07108 9 Section 8 N/A

Exhibit 28B P# 64-12484.02 Printed: 4/19/2010 Exhibit 28B

SELECT AFFORDABLE FOR-RENT RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES CITY OF NEWARK, NEW JERSEY MARCH 2010

PROJECT NAME ADDRESS ZIP CODE TOTAL UNITS TYPE LEVEL OF AFFORDABILITY ESSEX PROPERTIES 193 -211HUNTERDON ST 07103 24 Section 8 Over 160% FMR FOREST HILL HOUSE 505 MT. PROSPECT AVE 07104 99 Section 8 Between 101% & 120% FMR GARDEN SPIRES 175-195 FIRST STREET 07107 350 Section 8 Between 80% & 100% FMR GRACE WEST MANOR APTS. 301 IRVINE TURNER BLVD 07108 428 Section 8 Between 101% & 120% FMR MOUNT CALVARY I 244 Chadwick AVE 07103 115 Section 8 Below 80% FMR MT. CALVARY II 100 CHADWICK AVE 07103 115 Section 8 Below 80% FMR New Community Manor 200 S. Orange Ave 07103 324 Section 8 Between 131% & 140% FMR NEW JERSEY SCATTERED SITE - NEWARK, 88 Meade Street 07106 10 Section 8 Unknown NEW JERSEY SCATTERED SITE PHASE II 82 CHELSEA AVENUE 07102 30 Section 8 Below 80% FMR PROJECT LIVE II 457-63 BROADWAY 07104 8 Section 8 Between 101% & 120% FMR PROJECT LIVE III 682 RIDGE STREET 07104 5 Section 8 Below 80% FMR Project Live IV 305 N. 11TH ST 07107 3 Section 8 Below 80% FMR Project Live XIII ILC 465-475 Broadway 07107 5 Section 8 Below 80% FMR PROJECT LIVE, INC. 75 - 79 Lincoln Avenue 07104 10 Section 8 Between 80% & 100% FMR PUEBLO CITY HOUSING 86 BRUNSWICK ST 07114 80 Section 8 Between 80% & 100% FMR SPRUCE GARDENS (Spruce Spires) 100 SPRUCE ST 07103 112 Section 8 Between 80% & 100% FMR ST MARY'S VILLA 425 SANFORD AVE 07106 360 Section 8 Between 80% & 100% FMR St Rocco's Housing 39 Ashland Avenue 07103 38 Section 8 Below 80% FMR WESLEY TOWERS 444 MT PROSPECT AVE 07104 169 Section 8 Below 80% FMR Ballantyne House 595 Mt. Prospect Ave 07104 169 Senior Between 101% & 120% FMR Casa Mia 502 Summer Ave. 07104 90 Senior Between 101% & 120% FMR Madison Turner Senior Housing 11-25 Madison Avenue 07108 75 Senior Between 80% & 100% FMR New Community Associates 180 S. Orange Ave. 07103 225 Senior N/A Court Towers 1 Court St. 07102 N/A Senior, Section 8 N/A Nevada Street Apartments 2 Nevada St. 07102 306 Senior, Section 8 Between 101% & 120% FMR NEW COMMUNITY - ROSEVILLE 1 S 8th ST 07106 99 Senior, Section 8 Between 80% & 100% FMR New Community Douglas 15 Hill St. 07102 134 Senior, Section 8 Below 80% FMR Lincoln Park Towers 31-33 Lincoln Park 07102 80 Senior, Section 8, LIHTC N/A

Senior Units 1,178 Non-Senior Units 6,164 Total Other Affordable Rental Units 1 7,342

1 Excludes properties where unit counts were unavailable Source: New Jersey Housing Finance Agency, HUD

Exhibit 28B P# 64-12484.02 Printed: 4/19/2010 Exhibit 29

SELECT AFFORDABLE FOR-SALE RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES CITY OF NEWARK, NEW JERSEY MARCH 2010

PROJECT NAME ADDRESS TOTAL UNITS DEVELOPER LEVEL OF AFFORDABILITY

Renaissance Housing Scattered Sites - South and Central Wards 8 Episcopal Community Development N/A Scattered Sites - Foreclosure Rehabs 12th Street, 504 South 19th Street, 280 Johnson Ave 3 Episcopal Community Development N/A The Cooper Building N/A 4 M&M Development Prices $53K - $112K MLK Homes Development N/A 19 Don Pedro Development Corp.N/A S. Ward Scattered Site 91 Lehigh2Episcopal Community Development N/A S. Ward Scattered Site 26 Renner Ave. 1 Episcopal Community Development N/A S. Ward Scattered Site 356 Peshine Ave. 2 Episcopal Community Development N/A S. Ward Scattered Site 411 Jelliff Ave. 2 Episcopal Community Development N/A

Total For-Sale Affordable Units : 41

Source: New Jersey Housing Finance Agency, HUD

Exhibit 29 P# 64-12484.02 Printed: 4/19/2010 Exhibit 30

PLANNED AND PROPOSED AFFORDABLE RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES CITY OF NEWARK, NEW JERSEY MARCH 2010

TOTAL STATUS/ PROJECT NAME ADDRESS UNITS TIMING OWNER/SPONSOR Planned and Proposed Rental Properties

Ivy Hill Senior Care facility (Bldg C Phase I and II) Irvington Avenue 71 2010 Ivy Hill Senior Care Corp. Richardson Lofts Green St. and Columbia St. 15 2009 NewWorks/50-60 Columbia St. Urban Renewal, LLC Ridgewood Ave Apts 21 8/10 Project Live Inc Roseville Commons Orange St and S. 11th St. 50 2010 RPM Development/New Comm Corp West Ward Pilot Program Fairmount Heights Development Corp. 2010 George Group, LLC Pacific Apts (Pennington) LIHTC Pennington and Pacific Streets 80 9/10 ETC Lower Clinton Hill 9 Future Now CDC Newark Genesis Apartments Oriental and Mt. Pleasant Ave. 50 Help USA, Inc CURE 17th St Apts 418-420 S 17th St 6 Community Urban Renewal Enterprise Integrity Women's Program Housing MLK Blvd. 8 Integrity, Inc West End, Brookdale, Columbia - Rental 3 2010 Unified Vailsburg Service Organization Union Chapel Estates Union Chapel Community Dev't Corp Ivy Hill Senior Care Facility(Bldg B) Irvington Avenue 65 Ivy Hill Senior Care Corp. Brick Towers- Montgomery St. Montgomery and MLK 80 2010 Unipen Co. Avon/Springfield Multi-Generational Housing Avon Avenue 23 2011 Episcopal Community Development Corp. St. Clare's Residence on Roseville Roseville Ave. 13 2009 AIDS Resource Foundation Visions Development MLK Blvd., Chancellor Ave. 45 2011 Visions Economic Development, Inc BAT District Lofts 368 Broad Streets 33 2010 Associates 368, LLC/ Rock Properties Lower Broadway Stabilization Project - Rental 282 Broad St 3 2010 La Casa de Don Pedro Macedonia Hts (Kent St) 35 Macedonia Ministries Crest Pointe Homes - Rental 507 S. 10th St (B.307/L.10-11) 2 2010 CREST CDC Kitty Taylor Senior Citizen Building 443-467 15th Ave 37 TBD UCC Youthbuild Wright St Project Miller St. and Wright St. 2010 Youthbuild 344 Sanford Ave, 237 S. 8th, 149 Fabyan Pl, & Next Generation Homeownership - Rental 92 W. Alpine St 4 2010 Community Urban Renewal Enterprise Maybaum Ave & Silver St - Rental Maybaum Ave. 4 2009 Unified Vailsburg Service Organization 18-28 W. Kinnery Street, 15-17, 65 Lincoln Lincoln Park LIHTC Park 70 Lincoln Park LIHTC, LLC/LPCCD S.Ward Scattered site: 476 S.19th St 476 S. 19th Street 4 12/09 Episcopal Community Development Corp. Baxter Park II 101 TBD NHA/TBD Baxter Park I 240 TBD NHA/TBD Brick Towers MLK Blvd. 200 TBD NHA/TBD Felix Fuld 103 TBD NHA/TBD Harmony - Special Needs Broad St. 16 TBD M and M Development High Spruce Spruce and MLK Blvd. 111 TBD NHA/TBD Ivy Hill Senior Project Building C (Phase I) 489, 559 Irvington Avenue 46 TBD Ivy Hill Senior Partners, LLC/VOA Ivy Hill Senior Project Building C (Phase II) 489, 559 Irvington Avenue 25 TBD Ivy Hill Senior Partners, LLC/VOA Milford Ave. Milford Ave. 24 TBD NHA/TBD New Horizons ITB 86 TBD NHA/TBD New Horizons MLK 84 TBD NHA/TBD NJPAC Downtown TBD TBD NJPAC/Dranoff Properties Quitman/Clinton Quitman St. and Clinton St. 150 TBD NHA/TBD Quitman/Spruce Quitman St. and Spruce St. 12 TBD NHA/TBD Towers at Montgomery MLK Blvd. 80 TBD NHA/TBD West Ward Vacant/Abandoned Prop TBD Restoration Central to S. Orange Ave., 9th St. to 10th St. TBD Fairmount Heights Dev. Corp. 129 Littleton Ave 129 Littleton Ave. 75 TBD Make It Right Integrity Women's Prog. Housing Phase II TBD Integrity, Inc. Meeker/Elizabeth TBD APEX Union Chapel Villas @ West Side TBD Union Chapel Comm Venture LLC

Exhibit 30 P# 64-12484.02 Printed: 4/19/2010 Exhibit 30

PLANNED AND PROPOSED AFFORDABLE RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES CITY OF NEWARK, NEW JERSEY MARCH 2010

TOTAL STATUS/ PROJECT NAME ADDRESS UNITS TIMING OWNER/SPONSOR Planned and Proposed For-Sale Properties

YouthBuild-Corinthian Homes South Orange Ave. 10 3/10 Corinthian Housing Development West End, Brookdale, Columbia - For-Sale 3 2010 Unified Vailsburg Service Organization Habitat West Ward S. 12th Street 2 2010 Habitat For Humanity Maybaum Ave & Silver St - For Sale Maybaum Ave. 4 2009 Unified Vailsburg Service Organization 344 Sanford Ave, 237 S. 8th, 149 Fabyan Pl, & Next Generation Homeownership - For-Sale 92 W. Alpine St 7 2010 Community Urban Renewal Enterprise Crest Pointe Homes - For-Sale 507 S. 10th St (B.307/L.10-11) 2 2010 CREST CDC Condominiums at Harmony Square Third Ave. and Broad Street 24 M & M Development

Lower Broadway Stabilization Project - For-Sale 282 Broad St 4 2010 La Casa de Don Pedro Habitat for Humanity 3 2010 Habitat For Humanity UMMAT II 203-213 Littleton Ave 4 UMMAT Developers Black Wall Street Project 9th Street 2 2009 Mid-Atlantic Investment Alliance One Court 222 TBD NHA 385-391, 393, 399, 400, 416 Irvine Turner TBD Belmont Apartments Blvd. 110 Veramax/RMA Condominiums @ Harmony Square Phase II 21 TBD M&M Development Habitat for Humanity Newark 8 TBD Habitat for Humanity West Ward Rehab Phase III 58 TBD Fairmount Heights Dev. Corp. Help USA, II 60 TBD Help USA Chen/Genesis 45 TBD Genesis Developers Springfield Ave. Seniors 50 TBD Telesis Development Montgomery Heights II 80 TBD Penn Rose Douglas Harrison Somerset, Irvine Turner and Spruce 100 TBD TBD

Total Planned & Proposed Rental Units 2,084 Total Planned & Proposed For-Sale Units 819

Total Planned & Proposed Units 2,903

Source: City of Newark Department of Economic & Housing Development

Exhibit 30 P# 64-12484.02 Printed: 4/19/2010 Exhibit 31

SUMMARY OF RESIDENTIAL DEMAND CITY OF NEWARK, NEW JERSEY 2010

Owner Demand Potential - 2010 1-2 Person HH 3-4 Person HH 5+ Person HH Total Households Less than 30% AMI 150 123 71 343 Households 30%-50% AMI 80 61 34 175 Households 50%-80% AMI 99 68 34 201 Total Rental Demand Potential 329 252 139 720

Renter Demand Potential - 2010 1-2 Person HH 3-4 Person HH 5+ Person HH Total Households Less than 30% AMI 591 430 555 1,576 Households 30%-50% AMI 290 189 222 702 Households 50%-80% AMI 354 202 190 746 Total Rental Demand Potential 1,235 822 967 3,024 Exhibit 32A DEMAND FOR RENTAL HOUSING BY INCOME RANGE CITY OF NEWARK, NEW JERSEY 2010

Total Households in the City of Newark - 2009 94,494 % Renter 76% Annual Household Growth 2009-2014 316 Total Renter Households in the City of Newark - 2010 72,056

LESS THAN 30%OF AREA MEDIAN INCOME 1 Household Size 1 person 2 person 3 person 4 person 5 person 6 person 7 person 8 person $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Household Income $18,390 $21,030 $23,640 $26,280 $28,380 $30,480 $32,580 $34,680 TOTAL (x) % HH Size Qualified 3/ 27% 0% 0% 15% 9% 4% 3% 1% (x) % Income Qualified 3/ 30% 34% 38% 39% 42% 45% 48% 51% (x) % HH Size and Income Qualified 2 7.9% 0.0% 0.0% 5.7% 3.7% 1.9% 1.5% 0.5% (=)Total HH Size and Income Qualified Households 5,687 0 0 4,134 2,631 1,340 1,045 371 15,208

(x) % Renters In Turnover 3 10% 10% 10% 10% 10% 10% 10% 10% 10% (=) Total Potential Renter Demand Less than 30% AMI 580 0 0 422 269 137 107 38 1552

(x) % Owners Becoming Renters 7% 7% 7% 7% 7% 7% 7% 7% 7% (=) Total Owner Becoming Renter Demand Less than 30% AMI 5554211024

(=) Potential Demand for Rental Housing Affordable to Households Less than 30% AMI 586 5 5 426 271 138 108 38 1,576

Affordable Rental Rates $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $460 $526 $591 $657 $710 $762 $815 $867

30% TO 50% OF AREA MEDIAN INCOME 1 Household Size 1 person 2 person 3 person 4 person 5 person 6 person 7 person 8 person $18,390 $21,030 $23,640 $26,280 $28,380 $30,480 $32,580 $34,680 Household Income $30,650 $35,050 $39,400 $43,800 $47,300 $50,800 $54,300 $57,800 TOTAL

(x) % HH Size Qualified 3/ 27% 0% 0% 15% 9% 4% 3% 1% (x) % Income Qualified 3/ 15% 16% 17% 18% 19% 17% 18% 19% (x) % HH Size and Income Qualified 2 4.0% 0.0% 0.0% 2.6% 1.7% 0.7% 0.5% 0.2% (=)Total HH Size and Income Qualified Households 2,904 0 0 1,895 1,206 492 384 136 7,016

(x) % Renters In Turnover 3 10% 10% 10% 10% 10% 10% 10% 10% 10% (=) Total Potential Renter Demand 30%-50% AMI 290 0 0 189 121 49 38 14 702

(x) % Owners Becoming Renters 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% 5% (=) Total Owner Becoming Renter Demand 30%-50% AMI 000000000

(=) Potential Demand for Rental Housing Affordable to Households 30%-50% AMI 290 0 0 189 121 49 38 14 702

Affordable Rental Rates $460 $526 $591 $657 $710 $762 $815 $867 $766 $876 $985 $1,095 $1,183 $1,270 $1,358 $1,445

50% TO 80% OF AREA MEDIAN INCOME 1

Household Size 1 person 2 person 3 person 4 person 5 person 6 person 7 person 8 person $30,650 $35,050 $39,400 $43,800 $47,300 $50,800 $54,300 $57,800 Household Income $49,040 $56,080 $63,040 $70,080 $75,680 $81,280 $86,880 $92,480 TOTAL (x) % HH Size Qualified 3/ 27% 0% 0% 15% 9% 4% 3% 1% (x) % Income Qualified 3/ 19% 15% 17% 19% 17% 15% 16% 17% (x) % HH Size and Income Qualified 2 5.0% 0.0% 0.0% 2.8% 1.4% 0.6% 0.5% 0.2% (=)Total HH Size and Income Qualified Households 3,586 0 0 2,045 1,039 435 339 120 7,563

(x) % Renters In Turnover 3 10% 10% 10% 10% 10% 10% 10% 10% 10% (=) Total Potential Renter Demand 50%-80% AMI 351 0 0 200 102 43 33 12 741

(x) % Owners Becoming Renters 3% 3% 3% 3% 3% 3% 3% 3% 3% (=) Total Owner Becoming Renter Demand 50%-80% AMI 111100005

(=) Potential Demand for Rental Housing Affordable to Households 50%-80% AMI 353 1 1 201 102 43 33 12 746

Affordable Rental Rates $766 $876 $985 $1,095 $1,183 $1,270 $1,358 $1,445 $1,226 $1,402 $1,576 $1,752 $1,892 $2,032 $2,172 $2,312

SUMMARY OF DEMAND

1 person 2 person 3 person 4 person 5 person 6 person 7 person 8 person Total

Total Rental Demand Potential for Households Less than 30% AMI 586 5 5 426 271 138 108 38 1,576 Total Rental Demand Potential for Households 30%-50% AMI 290 0 0 189 121 49 38 14 702 Total Rental Demand Potential for Households 50%-80% AM 353 1 1 201 102 43 33 12 746

Total Rental Demand Potential - Up to 80% AMI 1,229 6 6 816 494 230 179 64 3,024

1 HUD 2009 Income Limits 2Claritas 2009 data for City of Newark 3Census 2000 PUMS data for Washington, D.C. PMSA Exhibit 32B DEMAND FOR FOR-SALE HOUSING BY INCOME RANGE CITY OF NEWARK, NEW JERSEY 2010

Total Households in the City of Newark - 2009 94,494 % Owner 24% Annual Household Growth 2009-2014 316 Total Owner Households in the City of Newark - 2010 22,754

LESS THAN 30% OF AREA MEDIAN INCOME 1 Household Size 1 person 2 person 3 person 4 person 5 person 6 person 7 person 8 person $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 Household Income $18,390 $21,030 $23,640 $26,280 $28,380 $30,480 $32,580 $34,680 TOTAL (x) % HH Size Qualified 3/ 27% 24% 19% 15% 9% 4% 3% 1% (x) % Income Qualified 3/ 30% 34% 38% 39% 42% 45% 48% 51% (x) % HH Size and Income Qualified 2 7.9% 8.0% 7.3% 5.7% 3.7% 1.9% 1.5% 0.5% (=)Total HH Size and Income Qualified Households 1,796 1,825 1,657 1,305 831 423 330 117 8,285

(x) % Owners In Turnover 3 4% 4% 4% 4% 4% 4% 4% 4% 4% (=) Total Potential Owner Demand Less than 30% AMI 74 76 69 54 34 18 14 5 343

(x) % Renters Becoming Owners 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% (=) Total Renter Becoming Owner Demand Less than 30% AMI 000000000

(=) Potential Demand for Owner Housing Affordable to Households Less than 30% AMI 74 76 69 54 34 18 14 5 343

Affordable Sales Prices $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $75,941 $86,842 $97,620 $108,522 $117,194 $125,866 $134,537 $143,209

30% TO 50% OF AREA MEDIAN INCOME 1

Household Size 1 person 2 person 3 person 4 person 5 person 6 person 7 person 8 person $18,390 $21,030 $23,640 $26,280 $28,380 $30,480 $32,580 $34,680 Household Income $30,650 $35,050 $39,400 $43,800 $47,300 $50,800 $54,300 $57,800 TOTAL (x) % HH Size Qualified 3/ 27% 24% 19% 15% 9% 4% 3% 1% (x) % Income Qualified 3/ 15% 16% 17% 18% 19% 17% 18% 19% (x) % HH Size and Income Qualified 2 4.0% 3.7% 3.3% 2.6% 1.7% 0.7% 0.5% 0.2% (=)Total HH Size and Income Qualified Households 917 834 757 598 381 155 121 43 3,806

(x) % Owners In Turnover 3 4% 4% 4% 4% 4% 4% 4% 4% 4% (=) Total Potential Owner Demand 30%-50% AMI 39 35 32 25 16 7 5 2 161

(x) % Renters Becoming Owners 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% (=) Total Renter Becoming Owner Demand 30%-50% AMI 6004211014

(=) Potential Demand for Owner Housing Affordable to Households 30%-50% AMI 45 35 32 29 19 8 6 2 175

Affordable Sales Prices $75,941 $86,842 $97,620 $108,522 $117,194 $125,866 $134,537 $143,209 $126,568 $144,737 $162,700 $180,870 $195,323 $209,776 $224,229 $238,682

50% TO 80% OF AREA MEDIAN INCOME 1

Household Size 1 person 2 person 3 person 4 person 5 person 6 person 7 person 8 person $30,650 $35,050 $39,400 $43,800 $47,300 $50,800 $54,300 $57,800 Household Income $49,040 $56,080 $63,040 $70,080 $75,680 $81,280 $86,880 $92,480 TOTAL (x) % HH Size Qualified 3/ 27% 24% 19% 15% 9% 4% 3% 1% (x) % Income Qualified 3/ 19% 15% 17% 19% 17% 15% 16% 17% (x) % HH Size and Income Qualified 2 5.0% 3.6% 3.3% 2.8% 1.4% 0.6% 0.5% 0.2% (=)Total HH Size and Income Qualified Households 1,132 828 752 646 328 137 107 38 3,968

(x) % Owners In Turnover 3 4% 4% 4% 4% 4% 4% 4% 4% 4% (=) Total Potential Owner Demand 50%-80% AMI 49 36 33 28 14 6 5 2 172

(x) % Renters Becoming Owners 4% 4% 4% 4% 4% 4% 4% 4% 4% (=) Total Renter Becoming Owner Demand 50%-80% AMI 14 008421030

(=) Potential Demand for Owner Housing Affordable to Households 50%-80% AMI 63 36 33 36 18 8 6 2 201

Affordable Sales Prices $126,568 $144,737 $162,700 $180,870 $195,323 $209,776 $224,229 $238,682 $202,508 $231,580 $260,320 $289,392 $312,517 $335,642 $358,767 $381,891

SUMMARY OF DEMAND

1 person 2 person 3 person 4 person 5 person 6 person 7 person 8 person Total Total Owner Demand Potential for Households Less than 30% AMI 74 76 69 54 34 18 14 5 343 Total Owner Demand Potential for Households 30%-50% AMI 45 35 32 29 19 8 6 2 175 Total Owner Demand Potential for Households 50%-80% AMI 63 36 33 36 18 8 6 2 201

Total Owner Demand Potential - Up to 80% AMI 182 147 133 119 71 33 26 9 720

1 HUD 2009 Income Limits 2Claritas 2009 data for City of Newark 3Census 2000 PUMS data for Washington, D.C. PMSA Section 5: Housing and Homeless Needs Assessment

TABLE OF CONTENTS V. HOUSING AND HOMELESS NEEDS ASSESSMENT ...... 5-1 A. INTRODUCTION ...... 5-2 Household Income and Poverty ...... 5-2 Housing Unit Characteristics ...... 5-3 B. HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT ...... 5-4 All Low-Income Households with Housing Needs ...... 5-5 Low-Income Renter Households with Housing Needs ...... 5-6 Low-Income Owner Households with Housing Needs ...... 5-7 Housing Affordability Mismatch ...... 5-9 Low-Income and Racial/Ethnic Concentrations ...... 5-10 Public Housing Needs ...... 5-12 Housing and Transportation ...... 5-14 C. HOMELESS NEEDS ASSESSMENT ...... 5-15 Definition of Homelessness ...... 5-16 Nature and Extent opf Homelessness in Newark ...... 5-17 Persons at Risk of Becoming Homeless ...... 5-18 Contributing Factors to Homelessness ...... 5-18 Homeless Facilities and Service Providers ...... 5-18 D. ASSESSMENT OF NON-HOMELESS SPECIAL NEEDS POPULATIONS ...... 5-19 Needs of Non-Homeless Subpopulations in Newark ...... 5-20 E. LEAD-BASED PAINT ...... 5-24

Chart 1: Housing Units by Size, Newark Chart 2: Housing Stock Comparison Chart 3: Racial/Ethnic Concentrations by Zip Code Chart 4: Veterans by Sex and Age in Newark Chart 5: Age of Housing Stock in Newark

Map 1: Housing and Transportation Costs, Newark Map 2: Newark –Essex County CoC Boundary Map 2008

______City of Newark, New Jersey 2010-2015 HUD Consolidated Plan 5‐1

Section 5: Housing and Homeless Needs Assessment

A. INTRODUCTION

This section discusses the City of Newark’s housing and homeless needs, as determined through review of various census and HUD data resources, and of input from citizens, public service agencies and government agencies via stakeholder consultation, public meetings and surveys. This section addresses the requirements of section §91.205 of HUD’s Consolidated Plan regulations.

Consolidated Plan regulations require that the assessment of the needs of the community be based on census data or other data resources provided or approved by HUD. Given that the most current census data is from the 2000 Census, the City attempted to use the most current data available through other data sources including, Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) data, 2006-2008 and 2008 American Community Survey (ACS) estimates, local plans or other studies as indicated. Therefore, the data and statistics presented in this section may differ slightly from the data provided in the Housing Market Analysis (Section 4). The following assessment describes Newark’s estimated housing needs projected for the five- year period from 2010-2015.

Household Income and Poverty

The income categories required by HUD for the Consolidated Plan are: extremely-low income defined as income less than 30 percent of median family income (MFI); low-income defined as income between 30 percent and 50 percent MFI; and moderate-income defined as income between 50 percent and 80 percent MFI. Collectively, households in these income groups are referred to as low-income households.

The MFI for Newark increased from $30,781 in 2000 to an estimated $38,668 in 2008, a 20 percent increase over this period. The increase in the MFI parallels the shift in the distribution of households by income, a decrease in number of lower income households, coupled with a proportionate increase in the number of more affluent households from 2000 to 2008. This trend however does not reflect the current recession which might have reduced these income gains.

Table 1: Household Income 2000 2008 ACS 2009 Federal Poverty Rates

Census Estimate $40,000 Total 91,366 92,048 $37,010 Less than $10,000 21,491 14,804 $35,000 $33,270 $10,000 to $14,999 8,122 7,304 $29,530 $15,000 to $19,999 7,295 6,491 $30,000 $25,790 $20,000 to $24,999 6,029 5,599 $25,000 $22,050 Poverty $25,000 to $29,999 6,420 5,685 Line $30,000 to $34,999 5,403 5,719 $20,000 $18,310 $35,000 to $39,999 4,711 6,281 Poverty $14,570 $40,000 to $44,999 4,179 3,942 $15,000 Line for a $10,830 $45,000 to $49,999 3,821 4,369 family of $50,000 to $59,999 5,986 6,016 $10,000 three $60,000 to $74,999 7,058 7,481 $5,000 $75,000 to $99,999 6,047 9,253 $100,000 to $124,999 2,350 4,962 $0 $125,000 to $149,999 968 1,927 $150,000 to $199,999 729 829 12345678 $200,000 or more 757 1,386 Source: 2000 CHAS Data and 2008 ACS Source: 2009 Poverty Guidelines

______City of Newark, New Jersey 2010-2015 HUD Consolidated Plan 5-2

Section 5: Housing and Homeless Needs Assessment

Based on 2008 ACS estimates the average household size for owner-occupied housing in Newark is 3.06 and 2.64 for renter-occupied units. According to the 2009 Department of Health and Human Services Poverty Guidelines, the poverty threshold for a family of three is $18,3101. Approximately 28,000 households (an estimated 66,022 individuals) were earning below the federal poverty level for a family of three in 2008, down from approximately 36,000 households in 2000. Pl

Housing Unit Characteristics

Newark’s housing market consists primarily of rental housing, with 76 percent of the housing stock made up of rental housing units. The distribution of housing units has changed very little since 2000, as seen in the table below. The decrease in renter-occupied housing units is likely attributed to the increase in the City’s vacancy rate of rental housing since 2000, demolition of deteriorated units, conversion or abandonment.

Table 2: Housing Units 2000 2008

Census ACS Estimate Total 100,141 108,423 Occupied 91,382 92,048 Vacant 8,759 16,375 Renter-Occupied 69,644 69,181 Owner-Occupied 21,738 22,867 Source: 2000 CHAS Data and 2008 ACS

The distribution of rental units by bedroom size is: two-bedroom units (35% of occupied renter units), one-bedroom (26%), and three-bedroom (23%). Newark’s owner-occupied units consist primarily of three-bedroom (40%) or two-bedroom (23%) houses.

Chart 1: Housing Units by Size, Newark

Owner Occupied Units By Size Renter Occupied Units By Size

No 5 or more 5 or more Bedrooms No 1 Bedroom 4 Bedrooms Bedrooms 4 Bedrooms 3% Bedrooms 6% 3% 1% Bedrooms 15% 12% 13% 2 3 Bedrooms Bedrooms 23% 1 Bedroom 23% 26% 3 2 Bedrooms Bedrooms 35% 40%

Source: 2008 ACS

1 Federal Register Notice of the 2009 Poverty Guidelines, http://aspe.hhs.gov/poverty/09poverty.shtml

______City of Newark, New Jersey 2010-2015 HUD Consolidated Plan 5-3

Section 5: Housing and Homeless Needs Assessment

Newark’s owner-occupied housing stock is made up primarily of single detached units (33%) and two-unit duplexes (29%). The rental housing stock consists primarily of three to four-unit complexes (28%) and larger fifty or more unit complexes (19%).

Chart 2: Housing Stock Comparison

Owner Occupied Units By Type Renter Occupied Units By Type

50 or more 1, detached 5 to 9 units 10 or more units 3% 1, attached 1% 2% 19% 6%

20 to 49 3 or 4 units units 2 units 1, detached 21% 10% 15% 33% 3 or 4 units 2 units 1, attached 5 to 9 units 28% 29% 14% 10 to 19 12% units 7%

Source: 2008 ACS

Newark’s housing stock is also one of the oldest in the region. Of the 22,867 owner occupied units, 18,452 or 81 percent were built prior to 1980 and 12,133 or 53 percent were built prior to 1950. Of the 69,181 renter occupied units, 55,561 or 80 percent were built prior to 1980 and 25,626 or 37 percent were built prior to 1950. The median year built of owner-occupied units is 1948 and 1958 for renter-occupied units.

B. HOUSING NEEDS ASSESSMENT

The uncertainty and instability created by the recent economic and housing crisis has and will continue to affect the economic and housing characteristics of Newark. The following provides an estimate of the number and type of households in need of housing assistance and or experiencing housing problems. Housing needs are broken down by various HUD-defined income categories provided through the CHAS data special tabulations of the U.S. Census and ACS estimates provided by HUD to support localities in preparing Consolidated Plans. To help understand the CHAS data analysis, a definition of key terms follows:

. Elderly households are defined as one and two person units having one or more persons at or over age 62, or who are declared to be disabled. . Small related households vary in size from 2-4 related individuals. . Large related households consist of 5 or more related individuals. . “All Other” households consist of those households which do not meet the other criteria . Housing is considered “affordable” if no more than 30 percent of a household’s monthly income is needed for rent and utilities, or mortgage payments. . When the proportion of household income needed to pay housing costs exceeds 30 percent, a household is considered “cost burdened” and is “severely cost burdened” if the proportion of income to pay housing costs exceeds 50 percent. ______City of Newark, New Jersey 2010-2015 HUD Consolidated Plan 5-4

Section 5: Housing and Homeless Needs Assessment

. HUD defines “any housing problem” as being cost burdened, living in overcrowded conditions, and/or living in units without complete kitchen and plumbing facilities.

Tables provided in the CHAS tabulations are estimates of the numbers of households and persons that fit certain combinations of HUD-specified criteria such as housing needs by various types of households and income ranges. 2000 Census data is primarily used to illustrate housing needs within a particular income category. In addition, 2006-2008 or 2008 ACS estimates were also used to illustrate growing trends of housing needs in Newark.

All Low-Income Households with Housing Needs

The table below is a special tabulation of the 2000 Census (CHAS data) and illustrates housing problems experienced by low-income renters and owners in Newark.

Table 3: Housing Problems – Newark, NJ Renters Owners Household Small Large Small Large Total Elderly Elderly by Type, Related Related All Total Related Related All Total 1 & 2 1 & 2 Households Income, & 2 to 4 5 or more Other Renters 2 to 4 5 or more Other Owners members members Housing members members members members Problem (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F) (G) (H) (I) (J) (K)

Household Income 7,694 11,895 3,880 7,145 30,614 1,474 982 392 384 3,232 33,846 <=30% MFI % with any housing 57.1 74.6 90.2 67.2 70.5 82.0 76.1 93.9 60.9 79.1 71.3 problems % Cost 54.8 71.0 75.0 64.9 66.0 82.0 73.6 91.3 57.3 77.7 67.1 Burden >30% % Cost 34.1 53.6 52.1 51.6 48.1 68.8 65.6 80.4 53.4 67.4 49.9 Burden >50% Household Income 1,864 6,430 2,015 2,285 12,594 1,069 1,215 484 194 2,962 15,556 >30 to <=50% MFI % with any housing 44.7 60.4 77.4 65.4 61.7 65.5 79.0 80.4 82.0 74.5 64.2 problems % Cost 42.9 51.2 33.7 58.9 48.6 65.5 79.0 74.4 82.0 73.6 53.3 Burden >30% % Cost 9.7 6.5 4.5 7.2 6.8 34.6 60.9 39.3 56.7 47.6 14.6 Burden >50% Household Income 1,003 5,550 1,645 2,730 10,928 793 1,823 910 425 3,951 14,879 >50 to <=80% MFI % with any housing 16.7 20.5 60.2 24.4 27.1 40.7 65.2 72.0 69.4 62.3 36.5 problems % Cost 11.8 8.4 5.5 20.3 11.2 40.2 64.1 58.8 69.4 58.7 23.8 Burden >30% % Cost 0.8 0.2 0.0 1.1 0.4 21.4 29.3 13.2 40.0 25.2 7.0 Burden >50% Source: 2000 CHAS (used to complete HUD Table 2A)

______City of Newark, New Jersey 2010-2015 HUD Consolidated Plan 5-5

Section 5: Housing and Homeless Needs Assessment

Based on this data there are a total of 64,281 low-income households (those earning less than 80 percent MFI) occupying housing in Newark. Of these households, 53 percent or 33,846 households earn less than 30 percent of MFI. 24 percent or 15,556 households earn between 30 and 50 percent of MFI, and 23 percent or 14,879 households earn between 50 and 80 percent of MFI.

Low-Income Renter Households with Housing Needs

The following table illustrates the housing needs of low-income renters based on 2000 CHAS data provided in Table 3. There are approximately 54,136 low-income renter households experiencing housing problems in Newark, the majority of which are earning less than 30 percent MFI. Of the 54,136 low-income renter households, 27,550 are cost burdened greater than 30 percent and 15,625 households are cost burdened greater than 50 percent.

Table 4: Low-income Renter Households with Housing Problems % Of Total Low- < 30% 30 to 50 to 80% Total Low-income Income Renter MFI 50% MFI MFI Renter Households Households Total Households 30,614 12,594 10,928 54,136 100 With any housing problems 21,583 7,770 2,961 32,314 60 Cost Burdened >30% 20,205 6,121 1,224 27,550 51 Severely Cost Burdened >50% 14,725 856 44 15,625 29 Source: 2000 CHAS Data (excerpted from Table 3)

Renter households earning less than 30 percent of MFI make up the majority of renter households that are cost-burdened. The following is a breakdown of renter households by type that are cost burdened and with housing problems.

Cost Burdened Renters

Elderly Households: . There are 10,561 elderly renter households, representing 19 percent of the 54,136 low-income renter households. . 7,694 elderly renter households have a household income less than 30 percent of MFI; of which 54.8 percent are cost burdened greater than 30 percent and 34.1 percent are cost burdened greater than 50 percent.

Small Related: . There are 23,875 small related renter households, representing 44 percent of the 54,136 low-income renter households. . 11,895 of small related renters have a household income less than 30 percent of MFI; of which 71 percent are cost burdened greater than 30 percent and 53.6 percent are cost burdened greater than 50 percent.

Large Related: . There are 7,540 large related renter households, representing 14 percent of the 54,136 low-income renter households. . 3,880 of large related renters have a household income less than 30 percent of MFI; of which 75 percent are cost burdened greater than 30 percent and 52.1 percent are cost burdened greater than 50 percent.

______City of Newark, New Jersey 2010-2015 HUD Consolidated Plan 5-6

Section 5: Housing and Homeless Needs Assessment

All Other Households: . There are 12,160 “all other” renter households, representing 22 percent of the 54,136 low-income renter households. . 7,145 of the other renter households have a household income less than 30 percent of MFI; of which 64 percent are cost burdened greater than 30 percent and 51.6 percent are cost burdened greater than 50 percent MFI.

This suggests the need to increase availability, accessibility and affordability of rental housing options specifically amongst extremely low and very low-income renters, focusing on small related, large related and elderly households. Elderly households in particular are on fixed incomes and require affordable housing options. Supportive services like child care, transportation subsidies, job training and education, and other services are often needed to supplement affordable rental housing and to alleviate additional cost burdens faced by low- income renters.

Any Housing Problems

60 percent of low-income renter households are experiencing housing problems which is consistent with the percentage of all low-income households, as renter households make up the majority of the population. 90 percent of large related households earning less than 30 percent MFI have housing problems, compared to 74.6 percent of small related (2-4 member households) and 57.1 percent of elderly renter households. Larger households are more likely to experience overcrowding issues as five-bedroom rental units make up only 1% of the occupied housing stock. Overcrowding and substandard housing have been exacerbated by the rising cost of energy prices, including heating and transportation costs, straining the budgets of low-income families. According to 2008 ACS data, of the 69,181 renter occupied units, 1,085 lack plumbing facilities and 1,086 lack complete kitchen facilities. As noted previously, 25,626 or 37 percent of the renter-occupied units were built prior to 1950. These units are often in substandard condition requiring repairs and may need to be replenished in the near future.

Low-Income Owner Households with Housing Needs

The following table illustrates the housing needs of low-income owners based on 2000 CHAS data provided above. Compared to the total number of low-income households, owners only make up a small portion of the low-income households, with 10,145 households. The majority of households in this category earn between 50 to 80 percent of MFI.

Table 5: Low-income Owner Households with Housing Problems % Of Total Low- < 30% 30 to 50 to Total Low-income Income Owner MFI 50% MFI 80% MFI Owner Households Households Total Households 3,232 2,962 3,951 10,145 100 With any housing problems 2,557 2,206 2,461 7,224 71 Cost Burdened >30% 2,511 2,180 2,319 7,010 69 Severely Cost Burdened >50% 2,178 1,410 996 4,584 45 Source: 2000 CHAS Data (excerpted from Table 3)

Of the 10,145 low-income owner households 7,010 are cost burdened greater than 30 percent and 4,584 households are cost burdened greater than 50 percent. Owner households earning less than 30 percent of MFI make up the majority of owner households that are cost-burdened. The following is a breakdown of owner households by type that are cost burdened and with housing problems.

______City of Newark, New Jersey 2010-2015 HUD Consolidated Plan 5-7

Section 5: Housing and Homeless Needs Assessment

Cost Burdened Owners

Elderly Households: . There are 3,336 elderly owner households, which represents 32 percent of the 10,145 low-income owner households. . 1,474 elderly owner households have a household income less than 30 percent of MFI (or 45% of all owner households earning less than 30% of MFI); of which 82 percent are cost burdened greater than 30 percent and 68.8 percent are cost burdened greater than 50 percent.

Small Related: . There are 2,320 small related owner households, representing 23 percent of the 10,145 low-income owner households. . 982 of small related owner households have a household income of less than 30 percent of MFI; of which 73.6 percent are cost burdened greater than 30 percent and 65.6 percent are cost burdened greater than 50 percent. . 1,823 of small related owner households have a household income between 50 and 80 percent of MFI; of which 64.1 percent are cost burdened greater than 30 percent and only 29.3 percent are cost burdened greater than 50 percent.

Large Related: . There are 1,786 large related owner households, representing 18 percent of the 10,145 low-income owner households. . 392 of large related owners have a household income less than 30 percent of MFI; of which 91.3 percent are cost burdened greater than 30 percent and 80.4 percent are cost burdened greater than 50 percent.

All Other Households: . There are 1,003 “all other” renter households, representing 10 percent of the 10,145 low-income owner households. . 194 of all other owner households have a household income between 30 and 50 percent of MFI; of which 82 percent are cost burdened greater than 30 percent and 56.7 percent are cost burdened greater than 50 percent MFI

Owner-occupied households make up the minority of households in Newark which underlines the need to increase homeownership opportunities for Newark residents. Higher housing costs also negatively affect low-income owners, limiting their ability to maintain their homes. This results in a concentration of lower-income households living in older neighborhoods with high concentrations of substandard housing and overcrowding.

Any Housing Problems

7,224 or 71 percent of owner households are experiencing housing problems, compared to 60 percent of all low-income households. The majority of these housing problems are experienced by those earning less than 30 percent MFI. This population is often unable to afford general maintenance repairs and upkeep of their homes due to proportion of their income expended on housing related expenses, and therefore these units are often in substandard condition. According to 2008 ACS data, of the 22,867 owner occupied units in Newark, 113 lack plumbing facilities and 113 lack complete kitchen facilities. The declining real estate market also places low-income owners at risk of foreclosure and property deterioration. As noted previously, 12,133 ______City of Newark, New Jersey 2010-2015 HUD Consolidated Plan 5-8

Section 5: Housing and Homeless Needs Assessment or 53 percent of owner-occupied units were built prior to 1950. Emergency repairs that constitute health and safety concerns are also common amongst low-income owners, particularly occupants of housing built prior to 1950.

Housing Affordability Mismatch

To assist in assessing the affordability gap HUD provides a special tabulation of the 2000 Census to illustrate affordability gaps of renters and owners. Table 6 illustrates the number of units that are affordable to low-income renter and owner households within the specified MFI ranges.

Table 6: Affordability Mismatch for All Households Data Current as Rental Units by # of bedrooms Owned or for sale units by # of bedrooms of 2000 Housing Units 0-1 2 3+ Total 0-1 2 3+ Total by Affordability (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) (F) (G) (H) 1. Rent Affordable to <=30%MFI Value Affordable to <=30% MFI a. # occupied 10,170 6,025 4,995 21,190 N/A N/A N/A N/A units b. % occupants 76.2 61.2 54.8 66.9 N/A N/A N/A N/A <=30% c. % built before 61.8 69.0 61.2 63.7 N/A N/A N/A N/A 1970 d. % some 40.0 40.0 36.5 39.2 N/A N/A N/A N/A problem e. # vacant for 650 775 325 1,750 # vacant for sale N/A N/A N/A N/A rent 2. Rent Affordable to >30% to <=50% MFI Value Affordable to <=50% MFI a. # occupied 11,625 13,690 8,440 33,755 194 1,415 4,360 5,969 units b. % occupants 63.1 55.5 51.0 57.0 59.3 47.0 25.1 31.4 <=50% c. % built before 80.8 78.8 74.9 78.5 82.5 85.2 90.7 89.1 1970 d. % some 59.3 50.9 49.3 53.4 18.0 13.4 7.9 9.5 problem e. # vacant for 895 1,505 595 2,995 # vacant for sale 15 130 130 275 rent 3. Rent Affordable to >50% to <=80% MFI Value Affordable to >50% to <=80% MFI a. # occupied 5,385 5,155 2,310 12,850 293 1,775 4,670 6,738 units b. % occupants 72.7 61.6 61.0 66.1 40.3 53.5 41.0 44.3 <=80% c. % built before 78.2 75.5 69.0 75.4 70.0 82.3 83.5 82.6 1970 d. % some 62.5 53.6 53.7 57.4 15.4 12.7 4.5 7.1 problem e. # vacant for 275 40 45 360 # vacant for sale 15 45 85 145 rent Source: HUD 2000 State of the Cities CHAS Data Sets (SOCDS) ______City of Newark, New Jersey 2010-2015 HUD Consolidated Plan 5-9

Section 5: Housing and Homeless Needs Assessment

Rental Gap Analysis

Renter households are often cost burdened due to lack of supply of affordable housing options. The table below compares the supply of rental units to the number of renter households in each income category. The gap/surplus column indentifies the gap or surplus in the market.

Table 7: Rental Affordability Gap Analysis Households in # of Vacant for Income Ranges Units Occupied Gap/Surplus* Category Rent <30% MFI 30,614 21,190 1,750 7,674 30 to 50% MFI 12,594 33,755 2,995 24,156* 50 to 80% MFI 10,928 12,850 360 2,282* Total Gap 7,674 Total Surplus 26,438 Source: 2000 CHAS Data

Renter Mismatch Summary:

<30% MFI: . The majority (10,170) of units occupied by households earning less than 30 percent of MFI consist of zero to one-bedroom units. . Only 67 percent of the 21,190 occupied units in this income category are actually occupied by households earning less than 30 percent of MFI. . Based on this data there is need for an additional 7,674 rental units affordable to households earning less than 30 percent of MFI.

30% to 50% MFI: . The majority (13,690) of units occupied by households earning between 30 and 50 of MFI consists of two-bedroom units. . Only 57 percent of the 33,755 occupied units in this income category are actually occupied by households earning less than 50 percent of MFI.

50 to 80% MFI: . The majority (5,385) of units occupied by households earning between 50 and 80 MFI consists of one-bedroom units. . Only 66 percent of the 12,850 occupied units in this income category are actually occupied by households earning less than 80 percent of MFI

Owner Gap Analysis

Owner households are often cost burdened due to lack of supply of affordable housing options but also due to the costs of maintaining their properties.

Table 8: Owner Affordability Gap Analysis Households in Income Ranges Units Occupied # of Vacant for Sale Gap/Surplus* Category <30% MFI 3,232 n/a n/a n/a 30 to 50% MFI 2,962 5,969 275 3,282* 50 to 80% MFI 3,951 6,738 145 2,932* Total Gap - Total Surplus 6,214 Source: 2000 CHAS Data ______City of Newark, New Jersey 2010-2015 HUD Consolidated Plan 5-10

Section 5: Housing and Homeless Needs Assessment

The table above compares the supply of owner units to the number of owner households in each income category. The gap/surplus column indentifies the gap or surplus in the market.

Owner Mismatch Summary:

<30% MFI: . 2000 CHAS data is not available to assess the needs of households in this income category.

30% to 50% MFI: . There appears to be a reasonable supply of ownership housing to meet the need of low-income households, specifically those in this income category. The surplus identified is likely due to lack of financial resources of renter households in this income category to pursue homeownership or the condition or location of the housing is not suitable. . Data presented does not account for condition of vacant units, or units demolished or lost over the years.

50 to 80% MFI: . There appears to be a reasonable supply of ownership housing to meet the need of low-income households, specifically those in this income category. The surplus identified is likely due to lack of financial resources of households in this category to pursue homeownership. . Data presented does not account for condition of vacant units, or units demolished or lost over the years.

Low Income and Racial/Ethnic Concentrations

The following chart illustrates the concentration of races by zip code. The City of Newark is comprised of 55% African Americans, 15% White (non-Hispanic/Latino), 13% White (Hispanic/Latino) and 18% other.

Chart 3: Racial/Ethnic Concentrations by Zip Code

100% 93% 89% 90% 83% % White (non 80% 79% Hispanic/Latino)

70% 64% 60% % White ( Hispanic 49% /Latino) 50% 38% 40% 26% % African American 30% 20% 4%

10% % Other 0% 07102 07103 07104 07105 07106 07107 07108 `07112 `07114

Source: 2008 ACS ______City of Newark, New Jersey 2010-2015 HUD Consolidated Plan 5-11

Section 5: Housing and Homeless Needs Assessment

The City of Newark is characterized by a predominantly minority, lower income population. Within the City of Newark, the lowest median household incomes at the zip code level are concentrated in zip codes 07102 (median household income of $15,858), 07114 (median household income of $19,424), 07108 (median household income of $24,107) and 07103 (median household income of $28,571), indicating that these four zip codes have the highest poverty levels in the city. Zip code 07102 is 64% African American. Zip code 07114 is 49% African American. Zip code 07108 is 80% African American and 07103 is 83% African American.

HUD defines a disproportionate greater need as when the percentage of persons in a category of need who are members of a particular racial or ethnic group is at least ten percentage points higher than the percentage of persons in the category as a whole. The above chart would indicate that African American low-income households have a disproportionate greater need compared to other non-African American households in Newark.

Public Housing Needs

The Newark Housing Authority (NHA) is the largest public housing authority in the State of New Jersey, charged with administering Public Housing, Housing Choice Voucher (HCV) Section 8 and HOPE VI programs in Newark. NHA currently owns and manages 45 active properties and approximately 8,173 affordable housing units. Of these units, 7,817 are public housing units. NHA has also developed a Homeownership Program that includes 42 renovated townhouse units made available to qualified public housing residents. Approximately 25 townhouse units under the HOPE VI Ward Community Redevelopment Program are also made available for homeownership.

While NHA expects to increase its inventory of new housing units as it builds townhouses at various sites in the city, over one-third of its stock is older family low-rise units with undersized rooms, poor layout and design issues that could not be rectified by available capital improvement funds. NHA is assessing its developments to determine if portions of its family low- rise sites could be replaced in the near future.

The following tables break down NHA’s inventory of active public and affordable housing sites by type of development.

Table 9: NHA Family Developments Name 0 BR 1BR 2BR 3 BR 4BR 5BR Year Built Total James Baxter Terrace* - 132 254 144 33 6 1940 569 Bergen Street Village - - - 36 10 4 1986 50 Joseph P. Bradley Court - 45 181 75 - - 1940 301 Felix Fuld Court* 1 65 144 82 7 1 1940 300 John W. Hyatt Court - 111 186 90 15 - 1941 402 Milliard E. Terrell Homes - 100 110 65 - - 1946 275 Pennington Court - 82 114 38 2 - 1939 236 Serenity Village - - - 72 20 8 1992 100 Seth Boyden Terrace - 156 249 110 15 - 1939 530 Stephen Crane Village - 136 147 71 - - 1940 354 Total 1 8271,385 783 102 19 - 3,117 Source: www.newarkha.org *Approved for demolition

______City of Newark, New Jersey 2010-2015 HUD Consolidated Plan 5-12

Section 5: Housing and Homeless Needs Assessment

NHA has a total of ten family developments with a total of 3,117 units, the majority of which are two-bedroom units.

Table 10: NHA Townhouse Specific Developments Name 0 BR 1BR 2BR 3 BR 4BR 5BR Year Built Total Bellemead - - - 67 24 5 1998 96 Betty Shabazz Village - - - 91 23 10 - 124 Bradley Court I - - 8 10 - - 1981 18 Bradley Court II - - 4 2 - - - 6 Century 21 - 20 38 38 - - 2003 96 Chadwick Avenue Village - - - - 34 - 1986 34 Claremont - 24 71 5 - - - 100 Clinton Ave Townhomes - 20 41 39 - - 2003 100 Dr. Jose Rosario Village - - - 66 23 5 1996 94 Fifteen Avenue Village - - - 70 25 5 1998 100 Janice Cromer Village, 36 - - 38 39 10 2 1987 89 Janice Cromer Village, 52 - - - 6 - - - 6 Kemsco Development - - - 135 48 11 1994 194 Mount Prospect Village/Victoria - - - - 27 - - 27 Avenue Oriental Village - - 72 17 4 2 1987 95 Oscar Miles Village - - 68 100 24 7 1994 199 Otto Kretchmer Homes - 27 69 41 6 - 2005 143 Riverside Villa - 40 70 68 14 6 - 198 Town Homes at North Point - 14 26 14 - - - 54 Town Homes at South Point - 4 11 19 - - - 34 Westside Village - - - 36 8 4 1986 48 Woodland Village - - - 33 9 5 1986 47 Wynona Lipman Gardens - 76 209 15 - - 2002 300 Total 0 225 725 911 279 62 - 2,202 Source: www.newarkha.org

NHA has a total of 23 townhome developments with a total of 2,202 units, the majority of which are three-bedroom units.

Table 11: NHA Elderly Developments Year Elderly Name 0 BR 1BR 2BR 3 BR 4BR 5BR Total Built Only Baxter Terrace Elderly 96 130 24 - - - 1966 125 250 Geraldine Foushee Towers 61 143 48 - - - 1962 244 252 James C. White Manor - 156 50 - - - 1976 205 206 Otto E. Kretchmer Elderly, 21A 175 221 44 - - - 1968 159 440 Otto E. Kretchmer Elderly, 17 44 132 22 - - - 1961 98 198 Seth Boyden Elderly, 21E 73 251 36 - - - 1969 176 360 Seth Boyden Elderly, 21F 80 100 20 - - - 1969 198 200 Stephen Crane Elderly, 16 44 132 22 - - - 1962 98 198 Stephen Crane Elderly, 22C 151 194 30 - - - 1967 304 375 Stephen Crane Elderly, 22D 151 194 30 - - - 1967 303 375 Total 875 1,653 326 - - - - 1,910 2,854 Source: www.newarkha.org

NHA has a total of ten elderly developments with a total of 2,854 units, the majority of which are one-bedroom units. NHA’s 2010 Designated Housing Plan designated 1,910 units as “elderly only” units, representing about 23 percent of NHA’s total portfolio.

______City of Newark, New Jersey 2010-2015 HUD Consolidated Plan 5-13

Section 5: Housing and Homeless Needs Assessment

NHA also has a number of vacant units, including: 196 units vacant due to modernization; 659 units vacant due to approved demolition; 490 routine vacancies; and 174 units vacant for other reasons.

To address this need NHA has prioritized the development of over 600 units of affordable housing over the next five years. In addition, NHA will issue 1,000 HCVs to households on its waiting list during the summer of 2010.

Housing and Transportation

The City of Newark has one of the premier transportation networks in the nation and the best in the region. Newark International Airport is the fastest growing such facility in the U.S., handling over 28 million passengers annually. Port Newark is the second largest containership port in the country. The City is the hub of seven major highways, including the Garden State Parkway and the New Jersey Turnpike. Pennsylvania Station, situated in the central business district, provides train and bus transportation for 70,000 commuters daily.

The table below illustrates the means of transportation to work by workers sixteen years and over in households. Based on this data only 30 percent of Newark workers age sixteen and over utilize public transportation, while most residents (49%) drive alone.

Table 12: Means of Transportation to Work by Tenure (16 Years and Over) Owners % Renters % Total % Car, Truck, or Van – drove alone 21,200 67 30,698 42 51,898 49 Car, Truck, or Van – carpooled 2,382 7 5,473 7 7,855 7 Public Transportation (excluding taxicab) 5,741 18 26,247 36 31,988 30 Walked 1,363 4 6,646 9 8,009 8 Taxicab, Motorcycle, Bicycle, or other 1,040 3 4,120 6 5,160 5 Worked at Home 147 0 625 1 772 1 Total 31,873 100 73,809 100 105,682 100 Source: 2008 ACS

Buses play a significant role in transporting residents to jobs and subway stations in Newark. Nearly 24,000 passengers or 74 percent of workers in Newark taking public transportation board buses each day going to work. Additionally, of those workers taking public transportation, almost 23,000 or 71 percent earn less than the $35,000 annually.

Although all of NHA’s sites and most other affordable housing developments are strategically situated in proximity to public transportation, the added cost of transportation increases the cost burdens of low-income residents and makes it difficult to access employment opportunities and supportive services. Considering housing plus transportation (H+T) costs provides a more complete measure of affordability beyond the standard method of assessing only housing costs.

2 Based on data presented in NHA’s 2009-2014 Five Year Plan, Attachment B. Families are allowed to apply for up to 3 waiting lists. Therefore, waitlist totals most likely include applicants that are on multiple waitlists. ______City of Newark, New Jersey 2010-2015 HUD Consolidated Plan 5-14

Section 5: Housing and Homeless Needs Assessment

Map 1: Housing (right) and Transportation (left) Costs, Newark

Source: http://htaindex.cnt.org/ Less than 15% Less than 30% 15 to 18% 30% and Greater 18 to 20% 20 to 28% 28% and Greater While housing alone is traditionally deemed affordable when consuming no more than 30 percent of income, an affordable range for H+T is defined as the combined costs consuming no more than 45 percent of income. According to the Housing and Transportation Affordability Index, Newark households on average spend 17.46 percent of their income on transportation and 30.42 percent on housing costs3. While this data does not separate low-income households from higher-income households, it does indicate that on average, low-income households exceed the affordable range of H+T costs.

C. HOMELESS NEEDS ASSESSMENT

The City of Newark is part of the Newark-Essex County Continuum of Care (CoC) and coordinates with Essex County on matters relating to identifying and serving homeless populations. In 2009, Mayor Cory A. Booker and County Executive Joseph DiVincenzo, Jr., each convened a Task Force to End Homelessness in their respective jurisdictions. The Essex- Newark Ten Year Plan to End Homelessness enumerates the goals, strategies and objectives of the CoC in serving homeless populations for a ten year period commencing in 2010. The map below indentifies the boundaries covered by the CoC.

3 Percentages are based on statistics for the Newark Metropolitan Region ______City of Newark, New Jersey 2010-2015 HUD Consolidated Plan 5-15

Section 5: Housing and Homeless Needs Assessment

Map 2: Newark-Essex County CoC Boundary Map 2008

Each year, a Point-in-Time Count (PITC) is conducted to identify the number of homeless individuals and families residing in emergency shelters or transitional housing facilities, as well as those living unsheltered, in the Newark-Essex County CoC region. It is estimated that nearly 3,708 adults and children are homeless in Essex County, the vast majority (88%) of which are staying, sheltered and unsheltered, in Newark.

Definition of Homelessness

HUD defines a homeless person as someone who resides in a place or places not meant for human habitation. The person can also reside in an emergency shelter or a transitional housing facility for the homeless and still be considered homeless provided the person was living on the street just prior to receiving shelter. Persons who lack resources and support networks needed to obtain housing are also considered to be homeless when such persons are fleeing domestic violence, facing eviction within one week, or being discharged within a week from an institution, such as a mental health or substance abuse treatment facility or a jail/prison.

Persons living in substandard and/or overcrowded housing or are paying an excessive amount for housing are not considered to be homeless. Additionally, persons that currently live in board and care facilities, adult congregate living facilities, or similar places as well as institutionalized persons are not considered to be homeless under the federal definition. Youth that are wards of the State and therefore eligible for state housing assistance are not considered homeless, although youth in foster care may receive needed supportive services which supplements, but does not substitute for, the state’s assistance.

______City of Newark, New Jersey 2010-2015 HUD Consolidated Plan 5-16

Section 5: Housing and Homeless Needs Assessment

Nature and Extent of Homelessness in Newark

The CoC analyzed and compared information and data from the housing inventory, PITC survey, Homeless Management Information System (HMIS) to establish accurate unmet needs and ascertain the number of homeless people, from the unsheltered count and subpopulations information, who require supportive services provided by transitional and permanent supportive housing. On January 28, 2009 the Newark-Essex County CoC completed its 2009 PITC that estimated the Newark-Essex County homeless count at 1,730 homeless adults (1,071) and children (659), based on the official HUD McKinney-Vento Act definition of homelessness.

Table 10 (HUD Table 1A) below summarizes the current inventory of homeless individuals and families, and homeless subpopulations and the unmet need.

Table 13 (HUD Table 1A): Housing Gap Analysis Chart Current Inventory Under Development Unmet Need/Gap Individuals (beds) Emergency Shelter 1,327 -434 Transitional Housing 211 -55 Permanent Supportive Housing 244 793 Subtotal 1,782 Persons in Families with Children (beds) Emergency Shelter 122 -44 Transitional Housing 151 -31 Permanent Supportive Housing 150 600 Subtotal 423 Total 2,205 Part 1: Homeless Population Sheltered Unsheltered Total Emergency Transitional Number of Families with Children 154 145 25 324 1. Number of Persons in Families with 426 394 54 874 Children 2. Number of Single Individuals and 556 121 165 842 Persons in Households without Children Total Persons (lines 1 & 2) 982 515 219 1,716 Part 2: Homeless Subpopulation a. Chronically Homeless 125 28 129 b. Seriously Mentally Ill 246 c. Chronic Substance Abuse 187 d. Veterans 47 e. Persons with HIV/AIDS 126 f. Victims of Domestic Violence 55 g. Unaccompanied Youth Not available Source: 2009 NJ PITC Report- Essex County

As the data above indicates, there is an unmet need for approximately 793 individual beds and 600 family beds in permanent support housing facilities. The existing inventory of emergency and transitional facilities is able to serve the existing homeless population. The majority of homeless individuals and families reside in emergency or transitional facilities, with 219 unsheltered persons. Of the homeless surveyed in 2009, 374 or 35 percent indicated that the length of their homelessness exceed 365 days. A total of 599 or 56 percent were male, 435 or 41 percent were female and 7 or one percent reported to be transgender. 296 were children under the age of six. The 2009 count showed that the largest percentage of homeless persons were 30-59 years of age, representing approximately 77 percent of the total homeless

______City of Newark, New Jersey 2010-2015 HUD Consolidated Plan 5-17

Section 5: Housing and Homeless Needs Assessment population. Approximately 74 percent of the homeless population surveyed was African American and 10 percent was Asian.

Chronic Homeless

A person who is "chronically homeless" is an unaccompanied homeless individual with a disabling condition who has either been continuously homeless for a year or more OR has had at least four (4) episodes of homelessness in the past three (3) years. In order to be considered chronically homeless, a person must have been sleeping in a place not meant for human habitation (e.g., living on the streets) and/or in an emergency homeless shelter. Chronically homeless persons have priority for specific types of services and shelters and must be included in any planned strategy for local homeless assistance. A disabling condition is defined as "a diagnosable substance abuse disorders, serious mental illness, developmental disability, or chronic physical illness or disability, including the co-occurrence of two or more of these conditions." A disabling condition limits an individual's ability to work or perform one or more activities of daily living. An episode of homelessness is a separate, distinct, and sustained stay on the streets and/or in an emergency homeless shelter. A chronically homeless person must be unaccompanied and disabled during each episode.

In 2009, there were 125 chronically homeless counted in the PITC, totaling 11.6 percent of the total homeless population surveyed. This represents a decrease in chronically homeless individuals, down from 379 in 2007 and 128 in 2008. The majority (88) of the chronically homeless resided in emergency shelters, 33 were unsheltered and four stayed periodically in hotels and motels. Approximately 64 percent of the chronic homeless population is African American and 20 percent White.

Persons at Risk of Becoming Homeless

Households earning less than 30 percent of MFI and/or cost burdened more than 30 percent represent the population most at risk of becoming homeless. As indicated above, there are an estimated 33,846 households earning less than 30% of MFI, and 67 percent or 22,677 of these households are cost burdened greater than 30 percent. As illustrated in Table 11 below, high housing costs contributed to 18 percent of the instances of homelessness in Newark.

In addition, ex-offenders who have recently been released from a county or state correctional facility represent a population at risk of becoming homeless. Finally, a new, growing population of sheltered homeless in the City of Newark is runaway or abandoned youth, aged 14 to 22. The sweeping changes in the welfare system are forcing females, especially those who are heads of household, either to work or sink more deeply into homelessness. As a result more youth and young adults are showing up in the transient shelters of Newark. This growing phenomenon is necessitating an emergent shelter system that provides services specifically for homeless adults aged 18 to 22 and younger.

Contributing Factors of Homelessness

Based on the 2009 Essex County Point in Time Count there were twelve contributing factors to homelessness. As the table below illustrates, the highest ranking factor that respondents indicated contributed to their homelessness was loss of job/inability to find work, representing 29 percent of the homeless population surveyed.

______City of Newark, New Jersey 2010-2015 HUD Consolidated Plan 5-18

Section 5: Housing and Homeless Needs Assessment

Table 14: Contributing Factors of Homelessness Factor Percent Lost job/cannot find work 29 Eviction 27 Alcohol or drug abuse problems 25 Relationship/family breakup/death 20 Housing costs too high 18 Mental illness/emotional problems 14 Incarceration 13 Have work but wages are too low 11 Medical problems/physical or developmental disability 10 Lost job due to lack of transportation 6 Domestic violence 5 Utility costs too high 5 House condemned 3 Foreclosure 2 Loss of child support 1 Natural disaster 1 Source: 2009 NJ PITC Report: Essex County

Other top ranking factors included eviction, substance abuse issues, and relationship problems. In total, 55 percent of respondents identified housing related problems as contributing to their homelessness, 41 percent identified economic factors as contributing to their homelessness, and 6 percent identified transportation issues as contributing to their homelessness. This necessitates the need for comprehensive supportive services for our homeless, focusing first on prevention and rapid re-housing services.

Homeless Facilities and Service Providers

The Newark Department of Child and Family Well-Being (CFWB) maintains a network of facilities and services for the homeless and those at-risk of homelessness within our jurisdiction. At present, the inventory consists of: Four (4) transitional shelters with approximately 191 beds/units and twelve (12) emergency shelters with approximately 566 beds.

Newark’s network of emergency shelter and transitional shelter providers and various other nonprofit agencies, as well as City and county agencies provides a continuum of care through shelter, food, medical and other supportive services. Additionally, Newark’s Municipal Welfare Division participates in the State Temporary Rental Assistance (TRA) program helps to prevent homelessness among welfare clients, particularly those also in need of mental health and substance abuse services. There are a group of facilities, including private boarding homes and hotels, with which the City contracts to provide affordable housing to homeless individuals and families.

D. ASSESSMENT OF NON-HOMELESS SPECIAL NEEDS POPULATIONS

Due the need for supportive services, special needs populations are most likely to encounter difficulties finding affordable housing and often need supportive services in addition to affordable housing options. The special needs populations discussed in this section include:

. Elderly/Frail Elderly; . Persons with HIV/AIDS; . Persons with Disabilities; ______City of Newark, New Jersey 2010-2015 HUD Consolidated Plan 5-19

Section 5: Housing and Homeless Needs Assessment

. Veterans; . Ex-offenders.

The City used a variety of resources to assess the needs of special needs populations, including secondary data and existing studies on housing and service needs of special needs populations. The following sections summarize the estimated needs of these subpopulations.

Needs of Non-homeless Subpopulations in Newark

The following table (HUD Table 1B) summarizes the priority needs of non-homeless subpopulations in Newark.

Table 15 (HUD Table 1B): Special Needs (Non-Homeless) Populations Priority Need Unmet Dollars to Multi-Year Annual Special Needs Subpopulations Level Need* Address* Goals* Goals* Elderly Y Frail Elderly Y Severe Mental Illness N Developmentally Disabled N Physically Disabled Y Persons with Alcohol/Other Drug Addictions N Persons with HIV/AIDS Y 3,337 Victims of Domestic Violence N Veterans Y Ex-offenders Y Total - - - - *denotes an optional field

The City of Newark is prioritizing the needs of the elderly, disabled, persons with HIV/AIDS, veterans and ex-offender subpopulations for the 2010-2015 consolidated planning period. The following sections discuss the needs of these subpopulations.

Elderly/Frail Elderly

Based on 2008 ACS data there are a total of 23,359 non-institutionalized elderly civilians residing in Newark, representing 9 percent of the total population. As noted in the Housing Needs Assessment section, there are approximately 13,897 low-income elderly households, representing approximately 22 percent of all low-income households in Newark. Of the 23,359 non-institutionalized elderly civilians, 8,922 or 38 percent have a disability. Frail elderly are defined for purposes of this assessment as individuals age 65 and older with a self-care difficulty. In 2008, there were a total of 1,688 elderly persons with a self-care difficulty, representing 7 percent of all elderly persons.

HUD’s 1999 Elderly Housing Report includes the most recent national data available on seniors living in housing in need of repair or rehabilitation. HUD indicated that 6 percent of seniors nationwide lived in housing that needed repair or rehabilitation4. Applying this percentage to Newark, it is estimated that as many as 1,402 elderly residents are likely living in substandard housing based on 2008 ACS population estimates. Necessary ADA modifications for elderly

4 Department of Housing and Urban Development, Housing our Elders: A report card on the housing conditions and needs of older Americans, 1999 ______City of Newark, New Jersey 2010-2015 HUD Consolidated Plan 5-20

Section 5: Housing and Homeless Needs Assessment owners contribute to housing problems for elderly owner households as well. As noted previously, elderly homeowners earning less than 30 percent MFI are the most affected subpopulation of owner-occupied households.

NHA recently proposed in its 2010 Designated Housing Plan, to designate 1,910 public housing units for elderly families only. These 1,910 units are located in eighteen (18) buildings that are part of ten (10) NHA public housing developments. In addition, there are fourteen additional subsidized developments for elderly persons in Newark. The total number of units available in each development is was not readily available during the development of this plan. Therefore, assumptions could not be made regarding the unmet need for this subpopulation.

Persons with HIV/AIDS

As the HUD HOPWA grantee, CFWB allocates funds and monitors HOPWA programs in the Newark Eligible Metropolitan Statistical Area (NEMSA). NEMSA includes Essex, Morris, Union, Sussex, and Hunterdon Counties in New Jersey and Pike County, Pennsylvania. NEMSA provides services in the following categories: long-term rental assistance, short-term rental assistance, housing information, and operating cost. CFWB administers the City’s HOPWA program and funds approximately seventeen (17) non-profit agencies and units of local government annually to enhance the quality of services provided to persons with AIDS and establish affordable housing opportunities and services to move families towards self sufficiency.

Housing and support services are particularly difficult for women with HIV/AIDS to obtain. Programs that allow women to be housed with their children are important; since women make sure that their children are secure before they take care of themselves. For those who are also homeless, some services are impossible to obtain without a permanent address. Thus, housing identification and rental assistance become crucial services, if only to allow them to maintain an address and thus receive other necessary services.

The greatest gap in service provision for the HIV/AIDS homeless population is the need for emergency and/or transitional housing. This type of housing specifically for persons with HIV/AIDS however is limited throughout the Newark EMSA. The most affordable housing available to persons with special needs, such as persons with HIV/AIDS is usually found within Public Housing. However, even with a number of vacant units, there are long waiting lists and red tape that make obtaining affordable housing extremely difficult. The following table identifies the number of persons estimated to be living with HIV and AIDS in Newark.

Table 16: Newark Residents HIV/AIDS Cases Reported as of June 30, 2009 Diagnostic Status Males Females Total HIV Cases 2,281 1,632 3,913 AIDS Cases 4,607 2,414 9,831 Total 8,570 5,174 13,744 Source: http://www.state.nj.us/health/aids/repa/impactcities/documents/newark.pdf

A total of 13,744 HIV/AIDS cases have been reported in Newark, including pre- and post-1990 counts. There have been a total of 7,907 deaths from these reported cases. Therefore, it is estimated that 5,837 persons with HIV/AIDS are residing in Newark. The City’s HOPWA program provides housing information, financial assistance and related services to approximately 2,500 persons annually, representing about only half of the HIV/AIDS population

______City of Newark, New Jersey 2010-2015 HUD Consolidated Plan 5-21

Section 5: Housing and Homeless Needs Assessment in Newark. Therefore, about 3,337 persons with HIV/AIDS are not serviced by the City through HUD funded programs.

Priority needs of this group will be addressed by informing eligible, low-income persons with HIV/AIDS and related diseases and their families of the Newark HOPWA services provided in the EMSA. Our communication vehicles are the HOPWA Service Providers' network; Ryan White HIV Planning Council and its Service Providers' network; County Welfare agencies and CEAS Committees; Homeless providers Network; and various social service, health and substance abuse treatment centers. The major services required are long- and short-term rental assistance, short-term mortgage and utility payments, housing information and supportive services.

Persons with Disabilities

2008 ACS data estimates the number of disabled persons in Newark with at least one disabling condition at 61,583. The table below identifies the number of persons with disabilities by type of disability and by age.

Table 17: Newark Residents with a Disability by Type and Age Under 5 5 to 17 18 to 34 35 to 64 65 to 74 75 years Total Type of Disability years years years years years and older Male Hearing 266 46 216 1,109 175 699 2,511 Vision 145 46 508 1,021 312 739 2,771 Cognitive - 1,793 1,042 2,552 231 493 6,111 Ambulatory - 92 587 3,482 876 1,334 6,371 Self-Care - 581 465 940 648 488 3,122 Independent Living - - 795 2,160 571 892 4,418 Subtotal 25,304 Female Hearing 0 74 379 1,951 811 1,062 4,277 Vision 115 42 510 2,092 638 778 4,175 Cognitive - 838 689 3,042 662 1,000 6,231 Ambulatory - 0 681 5,013 1,794 2,540 10,028 Self-Care - 0 426 2,031 514 1,174 4,145 Independent Living - - 627 3,285 879 2,632 7,423 Subtotal 36,279 Total 526 3,512 6,925 28,678 8,111 13,831 61,583 Source: 2008 ACS

Persons 35 to 64 years of age encompass the largest population of persons with disabilities, representing almost half of Newark’s disabled population. Females with ambulatory conditions make up the largest type subgroup of disabled persons, followed by females with independent living conditions, and males with ambulatory disabilities.

As identified in the Homeless Needs Assessment section, permanent supportive housing has been identified as a priority need and will likely be needed for non-homeless special needs populations. There are approximately seven subsidized developments specifically for disabled persons. The total number of units available in each development was not readily available during the development of this plan. Therefore, assumptions could not be made regarding the unmet need for this subpopulation.

______City of Newark, New Jersey 2010-2015 HUD Consolidated Plan 5-22

Section 5: Housing and Homeless Needs Assessment

Veterans

Based on 2008 ACS data, there are approximately 7,690 veterans living in Newark. The majority of veterans are male ages 35 to 54 years, representing 32 percent of the total veteran population. While veterans only make up three percent of Newark’s population, veterans make up a subpopulation most in need of affordable housing and supportive services.

Chart 4: Veterans by Sex and Age in Newark 1% 2% 1% 1% 0% Male, 18 to 34 years 12% Male, 35 to 54 years 19% Male, 55 to 64 years Male, 65 to 74 years Male, 75 years plus 32% 14% Female, 18 to 34 years 18% Female, 35 to 54 years Female, 55 to 64 years Female, 65 to 74 years Female, 75 years plus

Source: 2008 ACS

There are approximately 1,848 veterans with incomes below the poverty line in Newark, and 2,342 with a disability. Affordable housing options for veterans will be prioritized through homeownership and affordable rental housing options, as well as through support services. While there are numerous subsidized housing developments in Newark, none specifically target the service the needs of veterans. Providing veterans with affordable housing opportunities and services will be a priority for the ensuing five-year period.

Ex-Offenders

The New Jersey Institute for Social Justice (NJISJ) states that of the nearly 70,000 adults and juveniles expected to leave New Jersey correctional facilities over the next five years, it is estimated that two-thirds of that population will be re-arrested within three years of release. Individuals convicted of crimes in New Jersey are subject to a range of criminal and civil sanctions, from probation and fines to incarceration and parole supervision, the inability to access certain public benefits such as affordable housing, employment opportunities, and job training or education assistance. NJISJ highlights these barriers for ex-offenders5:

. Barriers to Housing - New Jersey’s anti-discrimination law, which includes protection against housing discrimination, does not protect against discrimination on the basis of criminal convictions, and federal laws can limit access to public housing for those with criminal convictions. Nationally, more than 10 percent of those coming in and out of prisons and jail are homeless in the months before their incarceration.

5 Legal Barriers to Prisoner Reentry in New Jersey, 2006, http://www.njisj.org/equal_justice/publications.php#4 Note: Laws identified in these briefs may change. ______City of Newark, New Jersey 2010-2015 HUD Consolidated Plan 5-23

Section 5: Housing and Homeless Needs Assessment

. Barriers to Employment - Individuals with criminal records face disadvantages, particularly in an unyielding labor market. New Jersey’s law against discrimination does not include any protections against discrimination based on arrest or conviction of a crime. The Rehabilitated and Convicted Offenders Act (RCOA) may provide relief from occupational licensing barriers.

. Barriers to Education - One of the primary means an individual can move forward from a criminal conviction and improve the quality of life is through education. Public and Private colleges have a wide discretion to admit or deny admissions based on criminal convictions. In addition, financial aid to those with convictions has been restricted.

. Barriers to Public Benefits - Public Assistance benefits that provide cash assistance and food stamps are critical to help individuals leaving jail and prison to obtain basic necessities while looking for employment. Eligibility for public assistance includes job training, child care, transportation, and certain medical assistance.

To reduce the number of repeat offenders, Newark strengthened its vocational and job training programs, and increased career development courses that not only provide ex-offenders the ability to learn an employable skill but also to restore confidence in their futures. Newark’s One- Stop Career Center provides employment assistance and a single point of access to services that can help individuals successfully re-enter the workforce. NewarkWorks has successfully developed a network of over 50 Newark companies that have signed on to hire ex-offenders referred and placed by NewarkWorks. Continued funding of these programs to support ex- offenders will continue to be a priority for the ensuing five-year period.

E. LEAD BASED PAINT

Lead is a highly toxic metal used for many years in products found in and around our homes. Lead can cause a variety of health effects particularly in young children, including behavioral problems and learning disabilities, to seizures and even death. Childhood lead poisoning is one of the major environmental health hazards facing children today. Children are exposed to lead poisoning through paint debris, dust and particles released into the air that settle onto the floor and windowsills. Lead-based paint is most prevalent in homes constructed before 1940 however lead-based paint was not prohibited by law until January 1, 1978, thus home built prior to 1978 may also contain lead-based paint.

Chart 5: Age of Housing Stock in Newark 2% 6% Built 2005 or later 6% Built 2000 to 2004 5% 28% Built 1990 to 1999 11% Built 1980 to 1989 Built 1970 to 1979 14% 12% Built 1960 to 1969 16% Built 1950 to 1959 Built 1940 to 1949

Built 1939 or earlier Source: 2008 ACS ______City of Newark, New Jersey 2010-2015 HUD Consolidated Plan 5-24

Section 5: Housing and Homeless Needs Assessment

Based on the percentages in the chart above, there are approximately 87,611 housing units in Newark constructed prior to 1980. Pre-1980 housing represents 81 percent of Newark’s housing stock and pre-1939 units represent 28 percent. Given the age of the housing stock and the overall condition of much of the housing in the city, it is reasonable to assume that a high percentage of pre-1980 housing units contain lead-based paint that could present hazards to its occupants, especially children. A conservative estimate is that at least 50% of the pre-1980 units (approximately 43, 000 units) could contain lead based paint. National data indicates that housing units occupied by low and very low income families tend to comprise the greatest number of units with lead based paint hazards.

Lead-based paint remediation can be costly. Low-income households are often unable to afford to the necessary repairs to remediate their homes. The City of Newark has administered a Lead Hazard Reduction Demonstration Grant (LHRDG) program for a number of years. CFWB’s Division of Childhood Lead Poisoning Prevention Program has worked to abate over 725 housing units of lead-based paint hazards over the past seven years. Lead hazard programs have repaired hundreds of homes over the years however the magnitude of the numbers of potential housing units with lead hazards suggests that there is potentially thousands of housing units containing lead-based paint that are not being addressed. The continued funding of Lead Hazard Reduction programs will continue the City’s progress in addressing lead-based paint hazards.

______City of Newark, New Jersey 2010-2015 HUD Consolidated Plan 5-25

Section 6: 2010‐2015 Strategic Plan

TABLE OF CONTENTS VI. 2010-2015 STRATEGIC PLAN ...... 6-1 A. INTRODUCTION ...... 6-2 B. PRIORITY NEEDS ...... 6-5 Priority Housing Needs ...... 6-5 Priority Homeless Needs ...... 6-6 Special Needs Population Priority Needs ...... 6-7 Community Development Priority Needs ...... 6-10 Section 108 Loan Program Summary ...... 6-10 C. SPECIFIC GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND STRATEGIES ...... 6-13 Priority Consolidated Plan Activities ...... 6-15 Performance Measurement System ...... 6-15 D. CROSS CUTTING ISSUES ...... 6-17 Lead-Based Paint Strategy ...... 6-17 Barriers to Affordable Housing (AI Summary) ...... 6-18 Antipoverty Strategy ...... 6-18 Monitoring ...... 6-19 Community Development Priority Needs ...... 6-10 Section 108 Loan Program Summary ...... 6-10 E. APPENDICES ...... 6-23 Appendix A – HUD Table 1A ...... 6-24 Appendix A – HUD Table 1B ...... 6-25 Appendix A – HUD Table 2A Part I ...... 6-26 Appendix A – HUD Table 2A Part II ...... 6-27 Appendix A – HUD Table 2A Part III ...... 6-28 Appendix A – HUD Table 2B ...... 6-29 Appendix B – Newark 2010-2015 Strategic Framework ...... 6-30 Appendix C – Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing CHoice ...... 6-32

Table 1: Proposed Activities for Funding Table 2: HUD Outcome Statements

______City of Newark, New Jersey 2010-2015 HUD Consolidated Plan 6‐1

Section 6: 2010‐2015 Strategic Plan

A. INTRODUCTION

This section summarizes the City of Newark’s housing and community development priority needs as well as the goals, objectives and strategies to meet those needs for program years 2010 through 2015. This section specifically addresses the requirements of section §91.215 of HUD’s Consolidated Plan regulations. The goals, objectives, strategies and outcomes identified will guide the city’s planning efforts and allocation of four HUD formula grants and other funding sources over the ensuing five-year Consolidated Plan period. The City of Newark expects to receive, at a minimum, the following entitlement grants:

. Community Development Block Grant (CDGB); . HOME Investment Partnerships Program (HOME); . Housing Opportunities for Persons with AIDS (HOPWA); . Emergency Shelter Grant (ESG).

The City of Newark will also leverage other non-entitlement HUD funds to meet identified needs, including:

. Neighborhood Stabilization Program (NSP-1 and NSP-2); . Community Development Block Grant (CDBG-R); . Homeless Prevention and Rapid Re-Housing Program (HPRP); . Lead Hazard Reduction Demonstration Grant (LHRDG); . Section 108 Loan Guarantee (applying in 2010).

The City of Newark recognizes that affordable housing and community development needs of its citizens are complex and require holistic community-wide initiatives. The City of Newark also recognizes the need to have a long-term vision for the use and application of resources received from HUD. This Strategic Plan seeks to link 2010 to 2015 Consolidated Plan goals, objectives and strategies to longer-term objectives, strategies and initiatives as outlined in Shifting Forward 2025: Newark Master Plan Re-Examination Report, the 2004 Updated Land Use Element, Newark’s economic development strategy, germane redevelopment plans, The Newark Housing Authority’s Five Year Plan, Newark and Essex County’s Ten Year Plan to End Homelessness, and HUD’s Sustainable Community Initiative. The following is a summary of these long-term planning documents and initiatives.

Shifting Forward 2025: Newark Master Plan Re-examination Report. On February 17, 2009, Mayor Cory A. Booker, submitted Shifting Forward 2025: Newark Master Plan Re-Examination Report, to the Central Planning Board, highlighting the future needs of Newark residents as well as critical goals, strategies and objectives over the next fifteen (15) years. The report was approved by the Central Planning Board on March 9, 2009. The report identifies major challenges and an objective based upon the critical needs of current and future residents, and describes how a Master Plan, which governs physical development, could address those needs. It examines the extent of change (and the need for updated policy) by looking at how the City’s most recent comprehensive planning documents ‐ the 1999 Newark Master Plan Re‐examination Report and the 2004 Land Use Element of the Newark Master Plan – addressed these critical needs. Shifting Forward 2025 adopts three overarching goals, including: (1) jobs for residents; (2) healthy and safe neighborhoods; and (3) Newark as a City of Choice.

______City of Newark, New Jersey 2010-2015 HUD Consolidated Plan 6‐2

Section 6: 2010‐2015 Strategic Plan

Land Use Plan. The Land Use Plan describes the recommended future land use of Newark in terms of a set of twenty-one land use designations in four categories: residential, commercial, industrial, and special purpose. There are also four special overlay districts that add an additional set of regulations to the underlying land use designations.

Redevelopment Plans. Newark has seven (7) active redevelopment plans. This Strategic Plan seeks to utilize the opportunities and strategies presented in each plan to address priority needs of Newark and its residents. Below is a summary of these plans.

. Lincoln Park Redevelopment Plan – The goal of the redevelopment plan is to create a vibrant, fully productive, mixed-use neighborhood by creating new development opportunities for private and public-private investment. The plan will provide a range of quality commercial and residential uses that will capitalize on the area’s strategic location. The objectives of the redevelopment plan are to: promote living and working arrangements suitable and affordable to practitioners of the fine arts; provide parcels of land of sufficient size and dimension to enable an orderly arrangement of new land uses; create land use and building requirements specific to the redevelopment areas that are sensitive to adjoining uses; provide opportunities for local and regional cultural, retail, commercial and civic services; provide new housing and employment opportunities; provide infrastructure improvements including streets, curbs, sidewalks, parking, and open space.

. Broad Street Station District Redevelopment Plan – The Broad Street Station District Redevelopment Plan consists of a $73 million project for infrastructure improvements at the New Jersey Transit’s historic Broad Street Station which serves; three commuter rail lines, 12 bus routes, and a new light rail line. These improvements are intended to expedite boarding and exiting of trains, increase the availability of information to customers, improve pedestrian circulation in and around the station, increase the flexibility of train operations, and make the station fully accessible to customers with disabilities. In order to attract transit-oriented development projects, the State of New Jersey passed the Urban Transit Hub Tax Credit and included the Broad Street Station District within that Act. Most of the site is within a 5-10 minute walking distance of the Newark Light Rail Line, the Newark Subway system, Rutgers University and NJIT, cultural institutions and sports venues, and the Passaic Riverfront.

. Downtown Core Redevelopment Plan – The Newark Downtown District Core Area is comprised of approximately 24 acres bounded by Market Street and Edison Place to the north; Broad Street to the west; Green Street and Lafayette Street to the south; and McCarter Highway and Mulberry Street to the east. The plans seeks to eliminate blighting influences, coordinate the redevelopment of the land surrounding Penn Station in a manner that is consistent with other redevelopment projects, to allow for more efficient use of land and public services and to expand the City's tax base by encouraging higher density development, to provide site improvements that will beautify the area, to create a well planned development area which will provide opportunities for entertainment, recreation, permanent employment, commercial and/or retail facilities and housing within an area that is currently underutilized but has the potential for sound development.

. Kent-Brenner-Springfield Redevelopment Plan – The Kent/Brenner/Springfield Study Area comprises approximately 450 acres in both the Central and South Wards of the City of Newark, NJ, and is bounded by Bergen Street to the East, 15th Avenue to the ______City of Newark, New Jersey 2010-2015 HUD Consolidated Plan 6‐3

Section 6: 2010‐2015 Strategic Plan

North, Irvington to the West and Avon Avenue to the South. Encompassing most of Newark’s “West Side” neighborhood, the Study Area is bisected by Springfield Avenue, which connects downtown Newark to surrounding municipalities and remains one of Essex County’s most prominent arterials. The ultimate revitalization goal is to reestablish Springfield Avenue as a thriving mixed-use corridor surrounded by a stable residential neighborhood. New investments in housing, business, open space and improvements to the physical environment are envisioned to address the concerns raised by members of the community. This Plan also endeavors to provide affordable housing choices for residents of all income levels within the Study Area, including low income, public housing, workforce and market rate housing.

. Newark Living Downtown Development Plan – The Newark redevelopment living downtown plan was submitted to the Central Planning Board on June 3, 2008 by the Department of Housing and Economic Development, Division of Planning and community Development. The Central Planning Board Hearing was June 9, 2008. This plan is intended to help stimulate investment in downtown Newark, to provide jobs, revenue to pay for city services, and the chance to upgrade the living, working and playing environment in the downtown. The plan will support the redevelopment of all Central Business District (CBD) buildings and sites, promote high density development, mixed-use developments and the adaptive reuse of the downtown’s historic buildings.

. Old 3rd Ward Redevelopment Plan – The Urban Renewal plan of the Old Third Ward Urban Renewal Area is located in the City of Newark. This project was originally dated January 12, 1960 and since then has received 19 amendments, the most recent being on March 28, 2008. The Old Third Ward Urban Renewal plan’s objectives essentially are to displace buildings that are structurally substandard, eliminate overcrowding of buildings on land, excessive dwelling unit density, and other identified hazards to the health, safety and general well-being of the community.

. Proposed West Market Redevelopment Plan – The Northern Fairmount Neighborhood is in Newark’s West Ward. Most of the Northern Fairmount Neighborhood is in Fairmount, though some of it is in Lower Roseville. West Market contains Census Tracts 7, 10, 16, and 17. This plan deploys three strategies: West marketing, Educating, and Catalyzing. “West marketing” is an advertising campaign that lets Newarkers know that neighborhood is a great place to live. “Educating” seeks to help existing residents and potential residents become homeowners by helping them make informed and responsible decisions regarding home purchases. “Catalyzing” uses design proposals, zoning recommendations and investments to increase the amenities and improve the physical environment of the neighborhood.

The Road Home – Ten Year Plan to End Homelessness (2010-2020). The Essex-Newark Task Force to End Homelessness developed the Essex-Newark Ten Year Plan to End Homelessness to provide a framework to transform the homeless response system from one built on emergency and temporary housing to one of prevention and permanent housing. The plan identifies seven (7) priorities, including (1) homelessness prevention; (2) housing; (3) coordinated services; (4) data quality and performance management; (5) employment, training and education; (6) advocacy and community awareness; and (7) financing.

Newark Housing Authority Five-Year Plan. NHA’s five-year plan for 2009 to 2014 fiscal years will enable it to serve the needs of low-income, very low-income and extremely low-income families over the next five years. Specifically, NHA seeks to build, maintain, and renovate ______City of Newark, New Jersey 2010-2015 HUD Consolidated Plan 6‐4

Section 6: 2010‐2015 Strategic Plan housing communities to the highest standards. To that end, NHA plans to build or acquire over 600 units of affordable housing in the next five years and expand affordable housing options for families using a high quality Housing Choice Voucher program.

HUD Sustainable Communities Initiative. HUD established six principles of sustainable communities, including: (1) provide more transportation choices; (2) promote equitable and affordable housing; (3) enhance economic competitiveness; (4) target resources to existing communities; (5) coordinate and leverage federal policies and investments; and (6) value unique characteristics of communities, no matter their size. These principles have been incorporated in consolidated planning efforts and will guide the City’s overall objectives in its use of HUD resources.

B. PRIORITY NEEDS

This section summarizes the priority needs as determined by the Housing Market Analysis, housing and homeless needs assessments, stakeholder focus groups, citizen participation process, analysis of impediments and consultation with partner agencies.

Priority Housing Needs

The housing market analysis and housing needs assessment identified the housing problems and severity of cost-burdened low-income owners and renters in Newark. The city will address the following priority housing needs over the 2010 to 2015 Consolidated Plan period:

. Increasing affordable rental housing opportunities for low-income households. A comparison of the affordability mismatch gap analysis for rental housing found that there is need for 7,674 rental units affordable to extremely low-income renters (<30% MFI). Over 90 percent of large-related extremely low-income renter households in Newark have housing problems, primarily due to overcrowding and substandard living conditions. Adding newly constructed affordable housing and rehabilitating obsolete rental housing will help to address this priority need.

. Providing new affordable homeownership opportunities for low- to moderate- income households. The City of Newark comprises approximately 76 percent renter- occupied housing. As noted in Section 4, despite the growing trend of home sales in Newark, home values remain high in relation to household incomes. Therefore, many low-income households in Newark are capable of homeownership but lack the financial resources to achieve homeownership. Providing downpayment and closing cost assistance will provide low-income households new access to homeownership opportunities.

. Improving condition of existing housing. There are approximately 32,314 renter households and 7,224 owner households in Newark experiencing housing problems. Given the age of housing in Newark, many housing units are in need of repair and upgrading. Improving the condition of housing in Newark, especially for extremely low- income senior owner-occupants, would return quality affordable housing to the market.

. Increasing availability of sustainable housing options. Continuing to incorporate energy efficiency and green design elements in new construction and substantial rehabilitation projects will be a priority for the ensuing consolidated planning period. ______City of Newark, New Jersey 2010-2015 HUD Consolidated Plan 6‐5

Section 6: 2010‐2015 Strategic Plan

. Providing counseling for first-time homebuyers and current homeowners. Homeowner counseling and education assistance, and foreclosure prevention outreach and counseling will also be a priority.

HUD Table 2A in Appendix A of this section outlines the allocation of HUD resources to priority housing needs of renters, owners and non-homeless subpopulations, specified by type of households and income range.

Public Housing Coordination Strategy Summary

Consistent with the Consolidated Plan, NHA’s housing strategy addresses the needs of priority low-income households in Newark. NHA’s strategy for addressing identified needs over the next five years involves both physical development and rehabilitation, and supportive services. Over the past three years NHA has made significant progress in revamping its mission, goals and objectives, and has been removed from HUD’s “troubled status” designation. NHA will be working in close partnership with EHD on redevelopment and rehabilitation projects to increase the availability and affordability of housing in Newark. Specifically, NHA has identified the following priority activities over the next five years:

. Mixed Finance Modernization/Development – NHA plans to engage mixed-finance development activities for the redevelopment of the Baxter Terrace, Felix Fuld, and New Horizons A and B public housing sites. Baxter Terrace contains 569 units and Felix Fuld contains 300 units. Modernizing these sites will return approximately 850 quality affordable public housing units to the market.

. Demolition/Disposition – Demolition applications for Baxter Terrace and Felix Fuld and five buildings at Hyatt Court have been approved. NHA also proposes to develop a series of green spaces on the site of the former Hyatt Court buildings. The proposed green space will include a football field, two basketball courts, a leasing office, and conference center and laundry rooms for the residents. A disposition application for these properties will be filed this year. A disposition application for Geraldine Foushee Towers is pending approval. It was determined that the current modernization needs of this property could not be addressed under the current capital grant. However, NHA plans to use Low Income Tax Credits and Section 8 vouchers to save and maintain the 252-unit building. In addition, NHA plans to build a new 16,000 square foot family activity center and 8,000 square foot senior activity center on the site of the former Otto Kretchmer Homes.

. Project Based Vouchers – NHA has an active Project Based Assistance (PBA) program. Several rounds of RFP’s have been conducted resulting in the award of approximately 200 project based voucher commitments to several developers resulting in approximately 600 new units being built or made available in Newark. PBA resources will be targeted to priority needs, especially extremely low-income renters, veterans, HIV/AIDS, ex-offenders and other permanent supportive housing.

. Designated Housing for Elderly and Disabled Families – NHA’s 2010 Designated Housing plan identifies 1,910 units that will be designated “elderly only” units, representing approximately 24 percent of NHA’s total portfolio. This designation will help to address the needs specific to elderly households.

______City of Newark, New Jersey 2010-2015 HUD Consolidated Plan 6‐6

Section 6: 2010‐2015 Strategic Plan

. Community Service and Self-Sufficiency – NHA operates a self-sufficiency program for both public housing and voucher participants. Some of the services provided include a workplace literacy program, workforce learning link, personal counseling, career counseling, educational counseling, educational seminars/workshops, referral services, networking, job preparation assistance, financial aid application assistance, assistance with defaulted student loan situations, credit repair assistance.

. Section 3 – The NHA board approved a Section 3 Plan to increase the opportunities of low-income residents to obtain employment with funded contractors. The plan establishes thresholds for professional service contracts to reserve percentages of the contracts specifically for section 3 residents.

. Safety and Crime Prevention – NHA’s goal is to invest in innovative crime prevention and quality of life strategies. NHA is working with local law enforcement to collect and store data of crimes occurring on NHA sites. NHA has installed over 700 state of the art surveillance cameras throughout its properties. In addition, NHA has established a telephone “tip-line” encouraging anyone to report incidences of crime anonymously, as well as quality of life issues.

NHA will continue to fully utilize its voucher allocation, as well as apply for additional vouchers to support affordable housing goals of the city. NHA will continue to renovate and lease up vacant units to increase the number of available affordable units to persons on its waiting lists. NHA is also pursuing development and acquisition of additional affordable housing by leveraging tax credits and other funding to address the overall shortfall of affordable housing in Newark. NHA’s strategies are consistent with the priority needs identified in this Consolidated Plan.

Homeless Priority Needs

The homeless needs assessment identified the severity of homelessness in Newark. Consistent with the Essex-Newark Ten Year Plan to End Homelessness, Newark’s priorities and strategies indicate a shift in our homeless response system from one built on a foundation of emergency and temporary housing to one build upon a foundation of prevention and permanent housing. The city does acknowledge however that during this transition some level of emergency or transitional housing, under the former response system and strategy, will require funding. The city will address the following priority homeless needs over the 2010 to 2015 Consolidated Plan period:

. Reducing the number of individuals and families that become homeless. Of the homeless individuals surveyed 55 percent identified housing related problems as contributing to their homelessness and 41 percent identified economic factors as contributing to their homelessness. Providing homeless prevention services via rental/mortgage and utility assistance to individuals and families will help to prevent homelessness in Newark.

. Increasing availability of permanent supportive housing options for homeless individuals and families. There is an unmet need for approximately 793 individual beds and 600 family beds in permanent supportive housing facilities. This priority need is consistent with the CoC’s objective to create 1,000 new units of permanent supportive housing within five years and 3,000 new units of low income housing within ten years.

______City of Newark, New Jersey 2010-2015 HUD Consolidated Plan 6‐7

Section 6: 2010‐2015 Strategic Plan

. Supporting operations of existing emergency/transitional homeless facilities. There are approximately four transitional homeless shelters and twelve emergency homeless shelters in Newark. Supporting the operations of existing emergency and transitional homeless facilities using ESG funds, ensures a suitable living environment for homeless individuals and families as shelters transition to the housing first model.

. Providing essential services to homeless populations. Providing homeless individuals and families with case management and other essential supportive services will help homeless individuals maintain a suitable living environment and become more independent.

HUD Table 1A in Appendix A of this section illustrates the priority needs of homeless populations.

Homeless Coordination Strategy Summary

The City of Newark has adopted the Essex-Newark CoC approach to addressing the needs of homeless and at-risk populations. Newark is part of the Essex-Newark CoC and coordinates with Essex County on strategies and activities to identify and serve homeless populations. The Essex-Newark CoC addresses the housing and supportive service needs in each stage of the process to help homeless persons make the transition to permanent housing and independent living. As identified above, permanent supportive housing is a priority need in Newark. Newark is committed to providing both housing and support services for homeless persons in need of permanent housing and working to end incidences of homeless in Newark. Consistent with the Essex-Newark Ten Year Plan to End Homelessness, Newark’s strategy adopts seven (7) key elements:

. Homeless Prevention – aimed at reducing the number of individuals and families who become homeless by providing rent, mortgage and utility assistance to allow families and individuals to stay in their homes.

. Housing – aimed at creating 1,000 new units of permanent supportive housing within five years and 3,000 new units of low-income housing within ten years county-wide. This signifies a shift of the homeless response system to a housing first strategy, helping persons rapidly exit homelessness by placing them directly into permanent, low-income housing, with wraparound services as needed. Three core strategies emerge from this element, including:

o Housing production – new construction, rehabilitation and leasing of units o Access to housing – rapid re-housing and housing first activities o Interim housing – development of a interim housing model and technical assistance to shelters transitioning to this model

. Coordinated Services - increasing the speed, accuracy, and effectiveness of service delivery and housing placement by streamlining entry into the system, eliminating service barriers, and creating a web-based, real-time view of housing and services available throughout the system.

. Data Quality and Performance Management – continuously improving the quality and comprehensiveness of the program and resource data in Newark and provide regular reports to the community. ______City of Newark, New Jersey 2010-2015 HUD Consolidated Plan 6‐8

Section 6: 2010‐2015 Strategic Plan

. Employment, Training, and Education – increasing employment, training, and career opportunities for homeless and formerly homeless individuals through dedicated partnerships with mainstream workforce agencies, educational institutions, and public and private sector employers.

. Advocacy and Community Awareness – expanding community awareness and support for ending homelessness through outreach, regular reporting, and ongoing opportunities to join us in this work. We will advocate for changes to public policies that undermine or delay efforts to end homelessness.

. Financing – securing the funding necessary to reach homeless program objectives, through increased leveraging of federal, state, and local funds, expanded philanthropic support, and re-investment of cost-savings.

Chronic Homelessness Strategy Summary

Although the number of reported chronic homeless persons (125) represents only a fraction of the homeless population in Newark, the city has developed a strategy to address the chronic homeless subpopulation. This strategy includes a “housing first” and “interim housing” model to provide housing as quickly as possible, allowing time to assess the specific needs in order to provide the appropriate services. Approximately 51 percent of the chronic homeless persons surveyed identified substance abuse as the contributing factor to their chronic homelessness. The City of Newark is incorporating substance abuse programs and coordinating with service providers to develop related case management services. Ultimately, chronic homeless persons will need long-term supportive housing options. Newark is working to develop an adequate supply of permanent supportive housing to meet the needs of the chronically homeless.

Special Needs Population Priority Needs

The special needs subpopulation needs assessment identified five target subpopulations that will be addressed over the 2010 to 2015 Consolidated Plan period, including: persons with HIV/AIDS; persons with disabilities; veterans; and ex-offenders. The following priorities are identified for these subpopulations:

. Increasing accessibility/availability of affordable housing specifically for persons with HIV/AIDS. Persons with HIV/AIDS comprise one of Newark’s most vulnerable populations. Providing access to affordable housing options for this subpopulation reduces the risk of homelessness and provides a foundation to become self-sustaining. The city will pursue tenant based rental assistance for leased units, short-term mortgage/rent/utility payments to prevent homelessness, and housing information service strategies to support persons with HIV/AIDS.

. Providing new affordable permanent supportive housing opportunities for low- to moderate-income veteran households. While veterans only make up three percent of Newark’s population, veterans make up a subpopulation most in need of affordable housing and supportive services. There are approximately 1,848 veterans with incomes below the poverty line in Newark, and 2,342 total veterans with a disability. Providing veterans with affordable supportive housing opportunities will be a priority for the ensuing five-year period.

______City of Newark, New Jersey 2010-2015 HUD Consolidated Plan 6‐9

Section 6: 2010‐2015 Strategic Plan

. Increasing availability of permanent housing for special needs populations. It is important to develop permanent supportive housing for special needs populations. Combining affordable housing options with supportive services allows special needs populations to become more self-sustaining and prevent these at risk special needs subpopulations from becoming homeless.

. Providing support services to special needs populations. Providing special needs populations with essential supportive services will help them to maintain a suitable living environment.

HUD Table 1B in Appendix A of this section outlines the allocation priorities of HUD resources to the identified special needs subpopulations.

Community Development Priority Needs

Newark’s list of priority community development needs is extensive. Similar to most major metropolitan cities, Newark has a number of distressed neighborhoods in need of revitalization. Over the past several years, the city has completed a comprehensive assessment of the City’s needs, from improved land use and zoning, developing and increasing the supply of affordable housing, eradicating homelessness, and has invested heavily in crime reduction, code enforcement and demolition activities. The recent housing crisis and subsequent recession, necessitates the need to shift away from public service programs and focus on development projects that produce jobs and/or create job opportunities for Newark residents. This shift, in effect, reduces the portion of CDBG funds that will be made available for public service programs during the 2010 to 2015 consolidated planning period. The following is a summary of the priority community development needs for the ensuing Consolidated Plan period:

. Increasing economic opportunities for low-income residents in Newark. As identified in Section 5, Newark’s unemployment rate is at 13%, well above the national average. Of Newark’s 160,000 jobs, only 25 percent are currently held by Newark residents1. The primary industries employing Newark residents are production, transportation, material moving, service, administrative, and construction. Pursuing large-scale development projects that increase job opportunities for low-income Newark residents and bring businesses to Newark is a priority for the 2010 to 2015 consolidated planning period.

. Revitalizing and beautifying Newark businesses and storefronts. Streetscape improvements and commercial façade improvement in targeted neighborhoods and development nodes are needed to improve the appeal of these neighborhoods to local businesses and entrepreneurs. Providing direct assistance to local business to improve façade and storefronts consistent with zoning requirements will enhance their sustainability and their capacity to provide both needed services and economic opportunities for Newark residents.

. Technical Assistance to small businesses. Small businesses in Newark drive the local economy, providing job opportunities to low-income residents in particular. The city will provide technical assistance to small-businesses operating in key target neighborhoods and development nodes.

1 Source: Shifting Forward 2025: Newark Master Plan Re-examination Report, 2009 ______City of Newark, New Jersey 2010-2015 HUD Consolidated Plan 6‐10

Section 6: 2010‐2015 Strategic Plan

. Establishing social venture programs. Newark has a high number of at risk populations, none more at risk than ex-offenders. As noted in Section 5, it is estimated that two-thirds of ex-offenders will be re-arrested within three years of release. Economic development and job training programs that target ex-offenders will help them to develop employable trades and other social skills, and facilitate and stabilize their re-entry into the community.

. Public Services. Despite the shift away from public services, programs that include educational services, childcare services, senior services, workforce development, tree planting/urban agriculture, and homeowner counseling/foreclosure prevention will be funded on a limited basis for the ensuing consolidated planning period.

Section 108 Loan Program Summary

The City intends to make application to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) for the use of Section 108 Loan Guaranty Funds in an amount not to exceed $30,000,000.00. The purpose of the Section 108 Loan Fund is to assist with economic, housing, and community development activities throughout all five wards of the City of Newark, New Jersey which will foster job creation and the elimination of blight in communities. Goals of the Section 108 Loan Fund include acquiring land for redevelopment and directly assisting businesses, nonprofits and real estate development projects that produce a public benefit. Individual projects are proposed to be evaluated by a loan and investment committee involving City and community representatives and the City’s economic development catalyst, Brick City Development Corporation (“BCDC”).

BCDC has an impressive record of achievement promoting small business and real estate development in the City of Newark and would be a critical partner in the Section 108 Loan Fund administration. Highlights of BCDC’s work on behalf of economic development efforts in the City include: gaining approval of over $5,000,000 in financing to local small businesses; assisting over 45 businesses with City and State regulatory processes; achieving bonding for local contractors and supporting local and national developers to actualize important development projects.

Additionally, BCDC partnered with the National Development Council (“NDC”) to provide technical assistance to the City and BCDC in the Section 108 Loan Fund underwriting process. NDC has been instrumental as a nonprofit partner, assisting thousands of organizations around the country to access capital and provide community development services in underserved areas.2 Leveraging NDC’s experience of financing over a billion dollars for community development projects and its impressive track record in related technical assistance areas, the City of Newark and BCDC will have a strong advisor and support mechanism from which to address questions on the Section 108 Loan Fund administration process.

Section 108 National Objectives and Public Benefit Criteria

There are specific National Objectives, as defined by HUD, which this loan fund will address. Title 24 of the U.S. Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Section 570.208, defines the criteria under which an activity may meet Section 570.200(a)(2), National Objectives. Section 570.200(a)(2) requires that all CDBG activities meet one of three national objectives. These

2 National Development Council Website, “About NDC” ______City of Newark, New Jersey 2010-2015 HUD Consolidated Plan 6‐11

Section 6: 2010‐2015 Strategic Plan objectives are to: 1) benefit low and moderate income families; 2) aid in the prevention or elimination of slums or blight; and 3) meet other urgent community development needs that pose a serious and immediate threat to the health or welfare of the community. Each project funded through the Section 108 Loan Fund will meet one of these National Objectives as detailed in Section 570.208.

Section 108 loans will benefit the public directly and indirectly by allocating funds for redevelopment projects that would not occur in their absence. Redevelopment activities such as rehabilitation, acquisition, clearance, demolition, and removal will be permissible through the Section 108 Loan Fund. The application of Section 108 loans covered under Section 570.703(a): “acquisition of improved or unimproved real property in fee or by long-term lease, including acquisition for economic development purposes” will be a vital resource in the redevelopment of Newark. The City of Newark holds a federal HUD designation as a Renewal Community (“RC”), allowing it to access tax incentives designed to encourage business location to the City. The Section 108 Loan Fund will be a tool to bring real estate and community development projects to fruition in the City, building upon the federal government’s recognition of this need through granting the City’s RC status.

Loan Activities

These projects will benefit residents of the City of Newark as they will either provide opportunities for low and moderate-income residents to access permanent residential housing, or will permit other economic development activity to take place. Other economic development activity must be targeted either to citizens in a geographic area where at least 51 percent of residents are of low or moderate income or to groups of citizens residing anywhere within the City in which at least 51 percent of beneficiaries are of low or moderate income. The last possible usage of the loan funds is to provide jobs for individuals, of which at least 51 percent of said jobs employ persons of low or moderate income.

As required by Title 24 of the CFR, Section 570.209, one of the underwriting objectives for the Section 108 Loan Fund is to avoid substituting CDBG funds for non-Federal financial support. Additionally, the creation of Newark’s Section 108 Loan Fund will create jobs for low and moderate income persons, provide services to a low income area and/or eliminate conditions of blight in the City. The specific hiring parameters for jobs created or retained through Section 108 funds may not exceed $50,000 per full-time permanent job created by the CDBG assistance, or $1,000 per low- and moderate-income person aided by the creation of the activity. The goal of using Section 108 funds to lend to businesses that invest in real estate activities is to create net new jobs in the City of Newark, especially on behalf of individuals meeting the low to moderate income criteria.

Section 108 loans will be used for traditional lending, in addition to short-term financing. An example of the type of loans that the Section 108 Loan Fund may provide is short-term monies dedicated to bridging a financial gap for economic development projects that will utilize local and state investments in the future, but which need immediate assistance in gathering initial financing.

Financial Guarantees, Reporting and Usage

If the Section 108 Loan Guaranty Fund is approved, any potential borrowers will be obligated to send quarterly reports to the City and/or BCDC detailing job creation resulting from Section 108 Loan Funds. Collateral needed to secure a loan through the Section 108 Loan Fund includes ______City of Newark, New Jersey 2010-2015 HUD Consolidated Plan 6‐12

Section 6: 2010‐2015 Strategic Plan real property assets, personal and/or corporate guarantees and pledge of future CDBG allocation.

HUD Table 2B in Appendix A of this section outlines the allocation of CDBG/Section 108 resources to priority non-housing needs in Newark.

C. SPECIFIC GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND STRATEGIES

Consistent with Shifting Forward 2025, this Consolidated Plan adopts three overarching goals, including: (1) jobs for residents; (2) healthy and safe neighborhoods; and (3) Newark as a City of Choice. Aligning planning efforts and allocation of HUD resources with these three goals will support development of measurable short-term strategies and objectives to further the City’s progress towards meeting its long-term goals.

The following section identifies the specific goals, objectives and strategies the City will implement during the 2010-2015 HUD Consolidated Plan period to address the priority needs identified above.

Goal 1: Jobs for Residents

The following objectives and strategies will increase the availability/accessibility and sustainability of economic opportunities in Newark.

Objective 1: Expand economic growth and job opportunities through large scale development projects, social ventures and job training programs.

Strategy 1.1 – Fund large scale physical development projects consistent with redevelopment plans targeting key development nodes and neighborhoods.

Strategy 1.2 – Fund the development of mixed-use commercial and retail spaces

Strategy 1.3 – Fund social venture programs and asset building opportunities to support life skills training and other development services to ex-offenders and other under employed and low-income individuals.

Strategy 1.4 – Provide technical assistance to small businesses and micro-enterprises operating and expanding in targeted neighborhoods and development nodes in Newark.

Goal 2: Healthy and Safe Neighborhoods

The following objectives and strategies will increase/improve the availability/accessibility, affordability and sustainability of housing, and provide sustainable suitable living environments and economic opportunities in Newark.

Objective 2: Increase access to quality affordable housing choices.

Strategy 2.1 – Fund new construction of affordable rental units in targeted development nodes.

Strategy 2.2 – Fund CHDOs and other non-profit developers to develop new affordable housing opportunities, including permanent supportive housing (see also strategy 3.1). ______City of Newark, New Jersey 2010-2015 HUD Consolidated Plan 6‐13

Section 6: 2010‐2015 Strategic Plan

Strategy 2.3 – Increase homeownership opportunities through a HOME-funded Homebuyer Program targeting households earning between 50 and 80% AMI, specifically returning veterans, first-time homebuyers, public safety officers and educators.

Strategy 2.4 – Provide funding to support homebuyer counseling services for low-income households in targeted neighborhoods.

Objective 3: Improve condition of existing neighborhoods through redevelopment and rehabilitation of residential and commercial properties and public facilities

Strategy 3.1 – Fund the acquisition, rehab and resale of abandoned/or foreclosed residential properties, focusing on targeted neighborhoods with high rates of foreclosure.

Strategy 3.2 – Fund a CBDG homeowner rehabilitation program focusing on emergency repairs to alleviate unsafe/unhealthy living conditions targeting extremely low-income senior homeowners.

Strategy 3.3 – Revitalize/renovate existing public and homeless facilities serving youth, seniors, homeless, special needs and disabled populations.

Strategy 3.4 – Fund a commercial façade improvement program consistent with updated Master Plan zoning requirements.

Objective 4: Provide funding for public services to support workforce development, educational services, child care services, ex-offender social services and homeowner foreclosure prevention programs for low-income individuals and families in targeted neighborhoods

Strategy 4.1 – Provide funding to support Workforce development programs.

Strategy 4.2 – Provide funding to support Educational services targeting youth and individuals.

Strategy 4.3 – Provide funding to support various capacity building activities such as: nutritional and other health related services, senior and preschool transportation, senior daycare services, health education and training and recreational activities.

Strategy 4.4 – Provide funding to support Ex-offender/Re-entry services with case management, social services, and various other life skills necessary to allow individuals being released from incarceration to become actively involved in society as productive citizens.

Strategy 4.5 – Provide funding to support foreclosure outreach and prevention counseling to at risk households.

Objective 5: Support homeless and at-risk special needs populations with coordinated support services and housing assistance, focusing on prevention and “housing first” activities

Strategy 5.1 – Develop and/or acquire and rehab special needs permanent supportive housing targeting veterans, ex-offenders, persons with HIV/AIDS and other identified priority need subpopulations.

______City of Newark, New Jersey 2010-2015 HUD Consolidated Plan 6‐14

Section 6: 2010‐2015 Strategic Plan

Strategy 5.2 – Provide housing opportunities to persons with HIV/AIDS via tenant based rental assistance services.

Strategy 5.3 – Provide housing opportunities to persons with HIV/AIDS via short-term rent, mortgage and utility assistance services, targeting persons and households with short-term financial needs.

Strategy 5.4 – Provide housing information and coordination services to persons with HIV/AIDS.

Strategy 5.5 – Provide funding for operation of transitional/short-term homeless facilities or leased units.

Strategy 5.6 – Provide funding to support delivery of essential services for homeless individuals and special needs populations.

Strategy 5.7 – Fund homeless prevention activities and related services to assist individuals at risk of becoming homeless.

Goal 3: Newark as a City of Choice

Objective 6: Promote and fund targeted developments to help facilitate a living downtown urban center around key development nodes

Strategy 6.1 – Fund mixed-income and transit-oriented housing projects, focusing on key downtown development nodes and corridors.

Objective 7: Green Newark’s neighborhoods

Strategy 7.1 – Incorporate green building and energy efficiency design requirements in all affordable housing development and rehabilitation projects.

Strategy 7.2 – Provide funding for tree planting and urban agriculture services in targeted neighborhoods.

______City of Newark, New Jersey 2010-2015 HUD Consolidated Plan 6‐15

Section 6: 2010‐2015 Strategic Plan

Priority Consolidated Plan Activities

The tables below summarizes the proposed eligible HUD-funded program activities the City will fund to achieve desired objectives and to support identified strategies.

Table 1: Proposed Activities for Funding Specific Housing Activities Funding Source(s) Rental new construction CDBG, HOME, Section 108 Acquisition and rehabilitation CDBG, HOME, Section 108 Rental acquisition CDBG, HOME, Section 108 Acquisition and rehabilitation CDBG, HOME, Section 108 Homeowner rehabilitation/maintenance CDBG, HOME, Section 108 Homebuyer acquisition CDBG, HOME, Section 108 Downpayment and/or closing cost assistance CDBG, HOME, Section 108 Lead-based paint remediation CDBG, HOME, LHRDG Green building and energy efficiency rehabilitation CDBG, HOME, Section 108 Specific Homeless Activities Funding Source(s) Short/long-term rental/mortgage and utility assistance HOPWA, HPRP,CDBG Public facility renovations CDBG, ESG, HOPWA Case management and coordination services ESG Essential services ESG Homeless prevention HPRP, ESG Housing information and referral services HOPWA Operations assistance for homeless facilities HOPWA, ESG Specific Special Needs Subpopulation Activities Funding Source(s) New construction of special needs housing HOME, CDBG Acquisition and rehab for special needs housing HOME, CDBG Downpayment assistance HOME, CDBG Specific Community Development Activities Funding Source(s) Property acquisition CDBG, Section 108 Demolition/Clearance CDBG Site improvements CDBG, Section 108 Public facilities and improvements CDBG Direct technical assistance to businesses CDBG Tree planting/Urban agriculture CDBG Acquisition of real property CDBG, Section 108 Direct financial assistance to for-profit businesses (commercial façade CDBG beautification) Educational services CDBG Childcare services CDBG Workforce development/Employment training CDBG Capacity building CDBG Surveillance and Prevention CDBG Housing/Foreclosure counseling CDBG Senior Services CDBG Youth Services CDBG

Performance Measurement System

In 2006, HUD established a Community Planning and Development (CPD) Performance Measurement System, designed to evaluate and aggregate performance of grantees nationally. HUD’s performance measurement system includes three objectives and three outcomes.

______City of Newark, New Jersey 2010-2015 HUD Consolidated Plan 6‐16

Section 6: 2010‐2015 Strategic Plan

Each activity funded with HUD funds must meet at least one these objectives and outcomes. The table below summarizes these objectives and outcomes, and when combined produce an outcome statement.

Table 2: HUD Outcome Statements Objectives / Outcomes Availability/Accessibility (1) Affordability (2) Sustainability (3) Decent Housing (DH) DH-1 DH-2 DH-3 Suitable Living Environment (SL) SL-1 SL-2 SL-3 Economic Opportunity (EO) EO-1 EO-2 EO-3

HUD also identified specific accomplishment indicators against which to measure grantee performance, including but not limited to: housing units; households; people; youth; businesses; and facilities. The City used HUD’s performance measurement system to objectify its goals, objectives and strategies for the 2010 to 2015 Consolidated Plan period. Please see Appendix B of this section for a breakdown of proposed accomplishments by strategy and program year.

D. CROSS CUTTING ISSUES

Lead-Base Paint Strategy

Newark’s Department of Child and Family Well-Being (CFWB) is the department charged with coordinating the city’s lead-based paint strategy. The Newark Department of Child and Family Well-Being, (CFWB) Childhood Lead Poison Prevention Program, (CLPPP) evaluates approximately 400 Newark properties annually for the presence of lead based paint hazards. These units will be identified from several sources, the primary source being from the New Jersey Department of Health and Senior Services, (NJDHSS) lead tracking system named “Weligent.” This system is an interactive web-based data system that notifies the CLPPP of all lead levels in Newark.

The City of Newark is funded to respond to all lead levels over 10ug/dl. This process alone leads to an estimated 250-300 homes being tested as a result of lead levels 10ug/dl or above. The second vehicle of evaluating units throughout Newark is through the CLPPP collaboration with the local Newark Housing Authority (NHA).

Through this collaboration units are inspected by CLPPP before a child age six or younger is permitted to move into the unit. This is the single most effective activity for preventing children’s exposure to lead hazards by making the process automatic protecting hundreds of children annually. Thus far since the re-starting of this collaboration in 2008 the CLPPP has inspected twenty-one (21) units and identified five (5) units that had a lead hazard that could have poisoned a child. The CLPPP also inspects units on demand from concerned residents calling in to have their homes inspected.

The CLPPP uses its HUD Funding through the Lead Hazard Reduction Demonstration Grant (LHRDG), to remove lead hazards identified from these homes. The homes identified to have lead hazards and qualify for the HUD funds are directed to the LHRDG grant intake process for further inspection and processing. The hazards identified at the time of inspection are removed and clearance will be achieved before families are permitted to move back to these units. Lead hazards that are identified and verified as being lead hazards diagnostically are removed and cleared by an independent lab and consultant. In Newark the reduction of lead based hazards is

______City of Newark, New Jersey 2010-2015 HUD Consolidated Plan 6‐17

Section 6: 2010‐2015 Strategic Plan based on the presence of hazards at the time of inspection making units’ lead–safe not lead free.

The units that are remediated are a part of the CLPPP lead safe housing registry and are offered as a referral base for families seeking lead safe housing. The activities of the CLPPP increase the availability of lead safe housing throughout Newark and by removing lead hazards from (725) homes over the past seven years, it has created awareness to a clear and present danger that is located directly in homes built before 1978. The City also maintains one five-unit and one two-family Temporary Safe House for families whose homes are being remediated.

Barriers to Affordable Housing (Analysis of Impediments Summary)

The Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice (AI) is a comprehensive review of a jurisdiction’s laws, regulations, and administrative policies, procedures, and practices affecting the location, availability, and accessibility of housing, as well as an assessment of conditions, both public and private, affecting fair housing choice. Impediments to fair housing choice are any actions, omissions, or decisions taken because of race, color, religion, sex, disability, familial status or national origin which restrict housing choices, or any actions, omissions, or decisions which have the effect of restricting housing choices or the availability of housing choices on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, disability, familial status or national origin. Policies, practices or procedures that appear neutral on their face, but which operate to deny or adversely affect the provision of housing to persons of a particular race, color, religion, sex, disability, familial status, or national origin may constitute such impediments.

Fair housing continues to be an unachieved goal in many communities in the nation. The City of Newark is fortunate that such practices have not been employed locally. This may be attributed to many possible factors, including: (1) a relatively diverse population; (2) a high percentage of minority residents; and (3) a cohesive community spirit, wherein residents exhibit a concern and willingness to act in support of their neighbors. While local conditions are favorable with respect to fair housing, the possibility of discrimination is present. Accordingly, the City of Newark has developed an AI to assist in assuring the effectuation of fair housing in the City and assuring that discriminatory housing practices do not occur in the future.

Currently, Newark’s fair housing activities consist of four key areas: education, assistance to minority families, local compliance, and special programs. The coordination of these activities, in a planned fashion in which results can be monitored, will enable the City to measure and report the progress of its fair housing efforts. With the public and private sector working together, freedom of choice in housing can continue to be a reality for all the City’s residents. The full AI has been incorporated in this plan as Appendix C.

Antipoverty Strategy

Newark's anti-poverty strategy is to a large extent the sum total of the strategies in this five-year Consolidated Plan. As noted in Section 5 of this plan, the average household size for owner- occupied housing in Newark is 3.06 and 2.64 for renter-occupied units. According to the 2009 Department of Health and Human Services Poverty Guidelines, the poverty threshold for a family of three is $18,310. Approximately 28,000 households (an estimated 66,022 individuals) were earning below the federal poverty level for a family of three in 2008, down from approximately 36,000 households in 2000.

______City of Newark, New Jersey 2010-2015 HUD Consolidated Plan 6‐18

Section 6: 2010‐2015 Strategic Plan

The barriers to the realization of the City’s objectives are economic, involve complex forces that impact human development, and can only be removed by self-interested partnerships that transcend local boundaries. Although recent data would indicate that the total number of households living in poverty in Newark has declined, this data does not reflect the recent economic and housing crisis that has resulted over the past three years. Newark’s 13 percent unemployment rate is more indicative of the poverty levels experienced by some residents.

CFWB has the primary responsibility for developing and implementing anti-poverty initiatives. Coordination is multi-level and accomplished through contractual and legally mandated relationships with counterpart agencies at the local, county, state and federal levels, as well as non-profit institutions and agencies, and private entities.

Newark's anti-poverty strategy is designed not only to educate to bring basic skills up to high school graduate and college graduate level, but also to train people for existing jobs and anticipated jobs through the year 2010 and beyond. In addition to job training and education, it is critical that jobs are available to support the demand. This Consolidated Plan purposefully focuses more on housing and economic development to maximize the number of construction jobs and workforce training opportunities. The City plans to pursue several large scale development projects to aid in this effort.

The Federal Section 3 program regulations require that recipients of certain HUD financial assistance, to the greatest extent possible, provide job training, employment, and contract opportunities for low- or very-low income residents in connection with projects and activities in their neighborhoods. Section 3 is intended to ensure that when employment or contracting opportunities are generated because a covered project or activity results in the employment of additional persons or the awarding of contracts for work, preference must be given to low- and very low-income persons or business concerns residing in the community where the project is located.

Due to the dynamic nature of Newark's population, and the difficulty in identifying and assisting persons in poverty or at-risk of falling into poverty, the City cannot present firm, quantitative estimates regarding the reduction of the numbers of persons and households in poverty. The antipoverty strategy is intended to be a comprehensive strategy of housing assistance, social services and employment and training programs all contributing to the reduction of Newark households in poverty.

Monitoring

Consistent with regulations of 24 CFR, the City of Newark as a grantee of HUD funds is responsible for ensuring that CDBG, ESG, HOME, and HOPWA funds are used in accordance with all program requirements, Additionally, the City is responsible for determining the adequacy of performance under Subrecipient agreements and procurement contracts and for taking appropriate action when performance is inadequate or problems arise. The City is working to revamp its monitoring procedures to improve compliance of HUD funded programs, and to enforce performance standards of subrecpients and various partner agencies. Two Newark City agencies monitor and oversee more-or-less all sub-recipient contracts. CFWB has internal control procedures that require written notification to a sub-recipient that does not respond to requests to sign a contract or, having done so, does not submit reimbursement requests on a regular basis. Generally, written warnings are issued within sixty (60) days. The department attempts to be flexible and responsive to extenuating circumstances, however, and does not

______City of Newark, New Jersey 2010-2015 HUD Consolidated Plan 6‐19

Section 6: 2010‐2015 Strategic Plan rigidly impose a schedule of sanctions. Very few public services sub-recipients are late in submitting payment requests.

EHD’s Division of Housing Assistance, monitors and oversees all HOME and NSP activities, as well as many sub-recipient activities, especially the renovation of public facilities that are multi- year in nature. The Division has a written set of procedures for monitoring and approving construction, change orders, and progress payments and close-outs.

All Departments under which a Subrecipient provides Consolidated Plan activities must:

. Execute separate written agreements with all Subrecipients that delineate all provisions of the federal regulations for the corresponding program and stipulate conditions for receiving funds, including performance and compliance requirements;

. Monitor Subrecipients through documentation review and routine site visits to ensure Subrecipient activities comply with program requirements;

. Provide technical assistance to Subrecipients or take effective corrective action, as needed, with Subrecipients that are non-compliant; and

. Complete performance evaluation and close out all projects within 90 days of activity completion.

City departments maintain routine contact with Subrecipients and require monthly reporting on programmatic and fiscal activities. A “Monthly Project Status Report” must be submitted by each funded non-profit no later than the 10th day of the following month in which the activity occurs. Each Department maintains internal control procedures that require written notification to a Subrecipient that fails to execute a contract once it has been adopted by the Municipal Council or which, after the contract is executed, fails to submit reimbursement requests on a regular basis.

Programmatic Review

Department monitors perform a programmatic review of each monthly report to ensure the Subrecipient is adhering to the Scope of Services and regulatory requirements of the grant by determining the following:

. Is the project proceeding towards the goals listed in the scope of services?

. Is the project utilizing methods and procedures described in the contract? Has the provision of required staffing as project in the contract budget been accomplished?

. Is the project keeping adequate records of activities for its low/moderate income beneficiaries?

. Has the Subrecipient anticipated problems in the upcoming month that might prevent the project from reaching its objectives or meeting its time schedule?

. Has the Subrecipient listed activities which occurred during the month that were not a part of its planned work program?

______City of Newark, New Jersey 2010-2015 HUD Consolidated Plan 6‐20

Section 6: 2010‐2015 Strategic Plan

. Major events that took place in the past month, which affected the project.

. Interrelated activities that the project has had with other entities

. Requests for services related project activities that were not met

. List of current contractual obligations, including compliance and performance objectives

. Anticipated contracts and a description of the purpose of each contract

Fiscal Review

Pursuant to HUD uniform administrative requirements, Subrecipients are required to keep records and submit reports and supporting documentation that identify the application of funds for grant-supported activities. These records must contain information pertaining to obligations, un-obligated balances, expenditures and program income. All reimbursement requests must represent allowable costs as itemized in OMB Circular A-122. Although sub-recipients receive an explanation for any disallowed costs, those items are deducted from the payment requests. Department fiscal monitors or accountants perform a review of each monthly report and all requests for reimbursement of expenditures in accordance with the following:

. Inclusion of the Monthly Budget Status Report, an itemized line item accounting form used as a tool to indicate the manner and patter of expenditures, that properly details a monthly accounting of the project’s total actual CDBG expenditures, accrued expenses, total expenses, available balances, and my revisions to the original appropriations.

. Inclusion of Monthly Personnel Expenditure Reports that include proper source documentation for all requested reimbursements of funds. Source documentation, may include the following: cancelled checks, invoices marked paid, purchase orders, copies of bid advertisements, and contracts for subcontractors, order to proceed letters, payroll journal, etc.

. Accuracy of computations and consistency with line items identified in the Subrecipient’s approved budget.

On-Site Monitoring Visits

Departments conduct monitoring site visits of all Subrecipients, whereby a team comprised of the programmatic and fiscal monitors physically visit the facility where the grant project or activity occurs with the following purposes:

. To inquire into all aspects of project operations and to analyze related information for the purpose of determining compliance with the subrecipient’s contract;

. To identify problems that might affect the fulfillment of the Subrecipient;s objectives and to document project status and progress;

. To recommend corrective actions to improve project performance or to remedy existing problems;

______City of Newark, New Jersey 2010-2015 HUD Consolidated Plan 6‐21

Section 6: 2010‐2015 Strategic Plan

. To recommend grant revisions or amendments as necessary to assist the project in fulfilling its objectives; and

. To provide necessary technical assistance and/or to assist the staff in obtaining support to provide the project with the opportunity to achieve its objectives.

______City of Newark, New Jersey 2010-2015 HUD Consolidated Plan 6‐22

Section 6: 2010‐2015 Strategic Plan

E. APPENDICES

Appendix A – HUD Required Tables

Appendix B – Newark 2010-2015 Consolidated Plan Strategic Framework

Appendix C – Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice

______City of Newark, New Jersey 2010-2015 HUD Consolidated Plan 6‐23

Section 6: 2010‐2015 Strategic Plan

Appendix A – HUD Required Tables

HUD Table 1A Homeless Gap Analysis and Homeless Population/Subpopulation Chart

Housing Gap Analysis Chart Current Inventory Under Development Unmet Need/Gap Individuals (beds) Emergency Shelter 1,327 -434 Transitional Housing 211 -55 Permanent Supportive Housing 244 793 Subtotal 1,782 Persons in Families with Children (beds) Emergency Shelter 122 -44 Transitional Housing 151 -31 Permanent Supportive Housing 150 600 Subtotal 423 Total 2,205 Part 1: Homeless Population Sheltered Unsheltered Total Emergency Transitional Number of Families with Children 154 145 25 324 1. Number of Persons in Families with 426 394 54 874 Children 2. Number of Single Individuals and 556 121 165 842 Persons in Households without Children Total Persons (lines 1 & 2) 982 515 219 1,716 Part 2: Homeless Subpopulation a. Chronically Homeless 125 28 129 b. Seriously Mentally Ill 246 c. Chronic Substance Abuse 187 d. Veterans 47 e. Persons with HIV/AIDS 126 f. Victims of Domestic Violence 55 g. Unaccompanied Youth Not available

______City of Newark, New Jersey 2010-2015 HUD Consolidated Plan 6‐24

Section 6: 2010‐2015 Strategic Plan

HUD Table 1B Special Needs (non-homeless) Populations

Special Needs (Non-Homeless) Populations Priority Need Unmet Dollars to Multi-Year Annual Special Needs Subpopulations Level Need* Address* Goals* Goals* Elderly Y Frail Elderly Y Severe Mental Illness N Developmentally Disabled N Physically Disabled Y Persons with Alcohol/Other Drug Addictions N Persons with HIV/AIDS Y 3,337 Victims of Domestic Violence N Veterans Y Ex-offenders Y Total *denotes an optional field

______City of Newark, New Jersey 2010-2015 HUD Consolidated Plan 6‐25

Section 6: 2010‐2015 Strategic Plan

HUD Table 1C Summary of Specific Homeless/Special Needs Objectives

Summary of Specific Homeless/Special Needs Objectives Sources of Performance Expected Actual Outcome/ Obj. # Specific Objective Funds Measures Units Units Objective Homeless Objectives Permanent Supportive Housing HOME/CDBG People 500 Transitional Housing ESG People 50 Emergency Housing ESG People 50

Special Needs Objectives Disabled CDBG People 200 Persons with/HIV AIDS HOPWA People 5,000 Elderly CDBG People 250 Veterans CDBG People 50 Ex-offenders CDBG People 100

______City of Newark, New Jersey 2010-2015 HUD Consolidated Plan 6‐26

Section 6: 2010‐2015 Strategic Plan

HUD Table 2A – Part I Priority Housing Needs PRIORITY HOUSING NEEDS (households) Priority Unmet Need* 0-30% H 8,099 Small Related 31-50% H 2,379 51-80% L TBD 0-30% H 3,175 Large Related 31-50% M 965 51-80% L TBD Renter 0-30% H 3,743 Elderly 31-50% H TBD 51-80% L TBD 0-30% H 4,801 All Other 31-50% H 1501 51-80% M 30 0-30% M 746 Small Related 31-50% H 830 51-80% H 1,778 0-30% H 368 Large Related 31-50% H 259 Owner 51-80% H 825 0-30% H 1,209 Elderly 31-50% H 685 51-80% L 778 0-30% L 204 All Other 31-50% L 159 51-80% L 280 Elderly 0-80% H 6,415 Frail Elderly 0-80% H

Non- Severe Mental Illness 0-80% H 1,452 Homeless Physical Disability 0-80% L 2,443 Special Needs Developmental Disability 0-80% M 1,047 Alcohol/Drug Abuse 0-80% H 3,130 HIV/AIDS 0-80% H 2,052 Victims of Domestic Violence 0-80% L 1,810 Ex-offenders 0-80% H 1,500 Veterans 0-80% H 1,848 *estimate of housing needs only

______City of Newark, New Jersey 2010-2015 HUD Consolidated Plan 6‐27

Section 6: 2010‐2015 Strategic Plan

Table 2A – Part II Priority Housing Needs/Investment Plan Goals 5-Yr. Yr. 1 Yr. 2 Yr. 3 Yr. 4 Yr. 5 Priority Need Goal Goal Goal Goal Goal Goal Plan/Act Plan/Act Plan/Act Plan/Act Plan/Act Plan/Act Renters 0 ‐ 30 of MFI 1,200 200 200 300 300 200 31 ‐ 50% of MFI 400 50 50 100 100 100 51 - 80% of MFI 200 25 25 25 25 25 Owners 0 ‐ 30 of MFI 150 30 30 30 30 30 31 ‐ 50 of MFI 100 20 20 20 20 20 51 - 80% of MFI 200 40 40 40 40 40 Homeless* Individuals 200 40 40 40 40 40 Families 100 20 20 20 20 20 Non-Homeless Special Needs Elderly** Frail Elderly - Severe Mental Illness - Physical Disability - Developmental Disability - Alcohol/Drug Abuse - HIV/AIDS 1200 240 240 240 240 240 Victims of Domestic Violence - Ex‐offenders** Veterans** Total Total Section 215 215 Renter 1,800 215 Owner 450 * Homeless individuals and families assisted with transitional and permanent housing **These subpopulations are included in overall renter and owner housing investment goals

______City of Newark, New Jersey 2010-2015 HUD Consolidated Plan 6‐28

Section 6: 2010‐2015 Strategic Plan

Table 2A – Part III Priority Housing Activities 5-Yr. Yr. 1 Yr. 2 Yr. 3 Yr. 4 Yr. 5 Priority Need Goal Goal Goal Goal Goal Goal Plan/Act Plan/Act Plan/Act Plan/Act Plan/Act Plan/Act CDBG Acquisition of existing rental units 100 20 20 20 20 20 Production of new rental units 400 80 80 80 80 80 Rehabilitation of existing rental units 100 20 20 20 20 20 Rental assistance Acquisition of existing owner units Production of new owner units Rehabilitation of existing owner units 150 30 30 30 30 30 Homeownership assistance HOME Acquisition of existing rental units 100 20 20 20 20 20 Production of new rental units 500 100 100 100 100 100 Rehabilitation of existing rental units 100 20 20 20 20 20 Rental assistance Acquisition of existing owner units 100 20 20 20 20 20 Production of new owner units Rehabilitation of existing owner units Homeownership assistance 100 20 20 20 20 20 HOPWA Tenant-Based Rental assistance (long-term) 2300 460 460 460 460 460 Short term rent/mortgage utility payments 400 80 80 80 80 80 Facility based housing development 200 40 40 40 40 40 Facility based housing operations 200 40 40 40 40 40 Supportive services Other

Note: Goals indentified for priority housing activities are estimates only. The City of Newark reserves the right to revise, amend or otherwise redirect investments across these categories as necessary.

______City of Newark, New Jersey 2010-2015 HUD Consolidated Plan 6‐29

Section 6: 2010‐2015 Strategic Plan

Table 2B Priority Community Development Needs Priority Need Level Unmet Dollars to 5 Yr Annual Percent Priority Need (High, Medium, Low) Priority Address Goal Goal Goal Need* Need* Plan/Act* Plan/Act* Completed* Acquisition of Real Property H Disposition L Clearance and Demolition H Clearance of Contaminated Sites H Code Enforcement H Public Facility (General) Senior Centers H Handicapped Centers L Homeless Facilities H Youth Centers H Neighborhood Facilities H Child Care Centers n/a Health Facilities H Mental Health Facilities H Parks and/or Recreation Facilities H Parking Facilities M Tree Planting L Fire Stations/Equipment M Abused/Neglected Children Facilities H Asbestos Removal n/a Non‐Residential Historic Preservation L Other Public Facility Needs Infrastructure (General) M Water/Sewer Improvements M Street Improvements M Sidewalks M Solid Waste Disposal Improvements L Flood Drainage Improvements M Other Infrastructure Public Services (General) H Senior Services H Handicapped Services M Legal Services n/a Youth Services H Child Care Services M Transportation Services M Substance Abuse Services ? Employment/Training Services H Health Services H Lead Hazard Screening H Crime Awareness H Fair Housing Activities L Tenant Landlord Counseling L Other Services Economic Development (General) H C/I Land Acquisition/Disposition H C/I Infrastructure Development H C/I Building Acq/Const/Rehab H Other C/I ED Assistance to For‐Profit H ED Technical Assistance H Micro‐enterprise Assistance L Other *denotes an optional field

______City of Newark, New Jersey 2010-2015 HUD Consolidated Plan 6‐30

Section 6: 2010‐2015 Strategic Plan

Appendix B – Newark 2010-2015 Consolidated Plan Strategic Framework Overarching Funding Output/Indicator for Action Plan Year Outcome 5‐Yr Strategic Plan Objectives and Strategies Category Goal Source(s) 2010‐11 2011‐12 2012‐13 2013‐14 2014‐15 Statement Objective 1: Increase economic growth and job opportunities through large scale development projects, social venture and job training programs Strategy 1.1 Fund large‐scale physical development consistent with redevelopment plans CDBG Economic 2500 EO‐1 targeting key development nodes and neighborhoods Section 108 Development (Jobs) Strategy 1.2 Fund the development of mixed‐use commercial and retail spaces CDBG Economic Over 200,000 SF. Of Commercial Space EO‐1 Section 108 Development Jobs for Residents Strategy 1.3 Fund social venture and asset building opportunities to support life skills training Economic 100 and other development services to ex‐offenders and other under employed and CDBG EO‐3 Development (Persons) low‐income individuals Strategy 1.4 Provide Technical Assistance to small businesses and micro‐enterprises Economic 20 operating and expanding in targeted neighborhoods and development nodes in CDBG EO‐3 Development (Businesses) Newark Objective 2: Increase access to quality affordable housing choices Strategy 2.1 Fund new construction of affordable rental units in targeted development HOME Affordable 400 nodes and within walking distance of public transportation CDBG DH‐1 Housing (Units) Section 108 Strategy 2.2 Fund CHDOs and other non‐profit developers to develop new affordable Affordable 100 HOME DH‐2 housing opportunities, including permanent supportive housing Housing (Units) Strategy 2.3 Increase homeownership opportunities through a HOME‐funded Homebuyer Affordable 100 Program targeting households earning between 60 and 80% AMI, specifically HOME DH‐2 Housing (Households) returning veterans, first‐time homebuyers, public safety officers, and educators. Strategy 2.4 Provide funding to support homebuyer counseling services for low to moderate‐ 250 CDBG Public Service DH‐3 income homebuyers in targeted neighborhoods (Households) Objective 3: Improve condition of existing neighborhoods through redevelopment and rehabilitation of residential and commercial properties and public facilities Healthy and Safe Strategy 3.1 Fund acquisition, rehab and resale of abandoned and/or foreclosed residential Affordable 110 Neighborhoods CDBG DH‐1 properties neighborhoods with high rates of foreclosure Housing (Units) Strategy 3.2 Fund a CDBG Homeowner Rehabilitation Program focusing on emergency CDBG Affordable 150 repairs to alleviate unsafe/healthy living conditions targeting extremely low‐ DH‐2 Housing (units) income senior homeowners Strategy 3.3 Revitalize/renovate existing public, homeless facilities serving youth, seniors, CDBG Public 15‐20 SL‐3 homeless, special needs and disabled populations ESG Improvements (Facilities) Strategy 3.4 Fund a Commercial Façade and Streetscape Improvement program consistent Economic 60 CDBG EO‐3 with revised Master Plan zoning requirements Development (Businesses) Objective 4: Provide funding for public services to support workforce development, educational services, capacity building, ex‐offender social services and homeowner foreclosure counseling programs for low‐income individuals and families in targeted neighborhoods Strategy 4.1 Provide funding to support Workforce development programs CDBG Public Service 10,000 (People) SL‐1

______City of Newark, New Jersey 2010-2015 HUD Consolidated Plan 6‐31

Strategy 4.2 Provide funding to support Educational services targeting youth and individuals CDBG Public Service 10,000 SL‐1 (People) Strategy 4.3 Provide funding to support various capacity building activities such as: nutritional and other health related services, senior and preschool CDBG Public Service 10,000 SL‐1 transportation, senior daycare services, health education and training and (People) recreational activities. Strategy 4.4 Provide funding to support Ex‐offender/Re‐entry services with case management, social services, and various other life skills necessary to allow CDBG Public Service 200 EO‐2 individuals being released from incarceration to become actively involved in (People) society as productive citizens Strategy 4.5 Provide funding to support foreclosure outreach and prevention counseling to CDBG Public Service 200 SL‐3 at risk households (households) Objective 5: Support homeless and at‐risk special needs populations with coordinated support services and housing assistance, focusing on prevention and “housing first” activities Strategy 5.1 Develop and/or acquire and rehab special needs permanent supportive HOME Affordable 300 housing targeting veterans, ex‐offenders, persons with HIV/AIDS and other DH‐1 CDBG Housing (Units) priority need subpopulations Strategy 5.2 Provide housing opportunities persons with HIV/AIDS via tenant based rental Affordable 2300 HOPWA DH‐1 assistance services Housing (Persons) Strategy 5.3 Provide housing opportunities to persons with HIV/AIDS via short‐term rent, HOPWA Affordable 1250 mortgage and utility assistance services targeting persons and households with DH‐3 Housing (Persons) short‐term financial needs Strategy 5.4 Provide housing information and coordination services to homeless persons 5000 HOPWA Public Service DH‐1 with HIV/AIDS (Persons) Strategy 5.5 Provide funding for operations of transitional/short‐term and emergency Affordable 1000 ESG DH‐2 homeless facilities or leased units Housing (Persons) Strategy 5.6 Provide funding to support delivery of essential services for homeless 2500 ESG Public Service SL‐1 individuals and special needs populations (Persons) Strategy 5.7 Fund homeless prevention activities and related services to assist individuals at 200 ESG Public Service DH‐3 risk of becoming homeless (Households) Objective 6: Promote and fund targeted developments to help facilitate a living downtown urban center around key development nodes Strategy 6.1 Fund mixed‐income and transit‐oriented housing projects with NHA, focusing on CDBG Affordable 200 key downtown development nodes and corridors HOME DH‐1 Housing (Units) Section 108 Newark as a City of Objective 7: Green Newark’s neighborhoods Choice Strategy 7.1 Incorporate green building and energy efficiency design requirements in all CDBG Affordable 400 SL‐3 affordable housing development and rehabilitation projects HOME Housing (Units) Strategy 7.2 Provide funding for tree planting and urban agriculture services in targeted CDBG Public TBD TBD neighborhood Section 108 Improvements Section 6: 2010‐2015 Strategic Plan

Appendix C – Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice

______City of Newark, New Jersey 2010-2015 HUD Consolidated Plan 6‐33

City of Newark New Jersey

Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice

Date: May 27, 2010 ANALYSIS OF IMPEDIMENTS TO FAIR HOUSING CHOICE Table of Contents I. INTRODUCTION AND GENERAL SUMMARY ...... 1 A. CONDUCT OF THE ANALYSIS AND FUNDING ...... 1 B. METHODOLOGY ...... 1 C. CONCLUSIONS ...... 1 II. BACKGROUND DATA...... 3 A. DEMOGRAPHIC DATA ...... 3 1. Community Description ...... 3 2. Population ...... 3 3. Race...... 6 4. Age and Gender ...... 14 B. INCOME DATA ...... 17 1. Income ...... 17 2. Poverty ...... 23 C. EMPLOYMENT CHARACTERISTICS ...... 25 1. Labor Force ...... 25 2. Resident Employment by Industry and Occupation ...... 26 3. Employment Projections ...... 30 4. Housing and Employment ...... 30 5. Employment Centers ...... 31 D. HOUSING PROFILE ...... 34 1. Units by Tenure and Type ...... 34 2. Households ...... 35 3. Age of Housing ...... 35 4. Condition of Units ...... 40 5. Owner Occupied Housing Value and Rental Rates ...... 40 6. Housing Costs ...... 42 7. Incidence of Overcrowding by Tenure and Income Group ...... 46 8. Affordability of Housing for Low and Moderate Income Households ...... 49 E. PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES ...... 61 1. Frail Elderly ...... 61 2. Developmentally Disabled ...... 61 3. Physically Disabled ...... 61 III. EVALUATION OF CURRENT FAIR HOUSING LEGAL STATUS ...... 62 A. FAIR HOUSING COMPLAINTS OR COMPLIANCE REVIEWS WHERE THE SECRETARY OF HUD OR THE N.J. DIVISION ON CIVIL RIGHTS HAS ISSUED A CHARGE OF OR MADE A FINDING OF DISCRIMINATION...... 62 B. EXPLANATION OF TRENDS OR PATTERNS...... 62 C. DISCUSSION OF OTHER FAIR HOUSING CONCERNS OR PROBLEMS...... 63 IV. IDENTIFICATION OF IMPEDIMENTS TO FAIR HOUSING CHOICE AND ASSESSMENT OF CURRENT PUBLIC AND PRIVATE FAIR HOUSING PROGRAMS AND ACTIVITIES IN THE JURISDICTION ...... 64 A. PUBLIC SECTOR...... 64 B. PRIVATE SECTOR ...... 66 C. PUBLIC AND PRIVATE SECTOR ...... 67 V. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ...... 70 A. CONCLUSIONS ...... 70 B. RECOMMENDATIONS ...... 70 VI. SIGNATURE PAGE ...... 71 I. INTRODUCTION AND GENERAL SUMMARY

A. Conduct of the Analysis and Funding

Impediments to fair housing choice are any actions, omissions, or decisions taken because of race, color, religion, sex, disability, familial status or national origin which restrict housing choices, or any actions, omissions, or decisions which have the effect of restricting housing choices or the availability of housing choices on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, disability, familial status or national origin. Policies, practices or procedures that appear neutral on their face, but which operate to deny or adversely affect the provision of housing to persons of a particular race, color, religion, sex, disability, familial status, or national origin may constitute such impediments.

The analysis was conducted by the Department of Economic and Housing Development of the City of Newark.

B. Methodology

Census and other data was collected in order to augment the data provided by the U.S. U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. Written materials on fair housing problems and programs, regional and local demographics, transportation, and local planning were collected and reviewed. Various federal, state and local statutes and ordinances were consulted. This report is the product of these analyses.

C. Conclusions

Fair housing continues to be an unachieved goal in many communities in the nation. The City of Newark is fortunate that widespread discriminatory practices in housing have not been employed locally. This may be attributed to many possible factors, including: (1) a relatively diverse population; (2) a high percentage of minority residents; and (3) active public forums and widespread participation.

While local conditions are favorable with respect to fair housing, the possibility of discrimination is present. Accordingly, the City of Newark has developed this Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice to assist in promoting of fair housing in the City and assuring that discriminatory housing practices do not occur in the future.

1 private sector working together, freedom of choice in housing can continue to be a reality for all the City’s residents.

2 II. BACKGROUND DATA

A. Demographic Data

1. Community Description

The City of Newark is located in southeastern Essex County, the northeastern segment of the State of New Jersey, on the Passaic River, 10 miles west of New York City. Newark, the nation’s third oldest city, has a land area of 23.8 square miles, the largest area of any municipality in the County. The City is a part of the New York-New Jersey Metropolitan Region. It is bound on the south by Elizabeth in Union County. Hillside in Union County lies to the west as do Irvington and East Orange. Bloomfield Township is northwest of the City. Kearny and Harrison lie to the east, across the Passaic River, as does Bayonne which is on the eastern shore of Newark Bay.

The City is home to the 2nd busiest airport in the New York City region which is also the 10th busiest in the country for handling cargo1, the largest port on the East Coast, and one of the most heavily traveled hubs on Amtrak’s Northeast Corridor. As an employment center to the region, Newark is home to more jobs than any other city in New Jersey. Seventy-six companies have located their corporate headquarters within one mile of the intersection of Broad and Market Streets and 147,000 people commute to work in Newark every day. Newark is one of the state’s most accessible municipalities as it is traversed by the N.J. Turnpike (I-95), Garden State Parkway, Interstate Routes 78 and 280, U.S. Routes 1 & 9 and U.S. Route 22, and State Routes 21 and 27.

2. Population

The City of Newark has been the most populous city in New Jersey for many years, with a peak population of 442,337 reported in the 1930 Census. Since that peak, however, the City’s population has declined as residents migrated to suburban areas. This trend reversed by 2008. With a total population in 2008 of 278,9802, the resident population per square mile of Newark’s 23.8 square mile land area was approximately 11,721. Essex County’s 2008 population stood at 772,663.

The City of Newark’s total population increased 2 percent from 273,546 in 2000 to 278,980 in 2008. The City’s total population had declined steadily since 1930, declining by 37.8 percent from 1930 to 1990. Population increased after World War II to 438,776 in 1950, an increase of 2.1 percent. From 1950 to 2000, the City lost over 160,000 residents; the greatest rate of loss occurred between 1980 and 1990, when the City lost about 54,000 residents, or about 16.4 percent. By 2000, the rate of population loss drastically fell, to only .6 percent, as the 2000 population fell to 273,546 from 275,221. By 2008, the population loss had shifted to a population growth.

1 Airports Council International. The Top 30 Airports 2008 – Cargo traffic. The ACI World Airport Traffic Report 2008. 2 U.S. Census Bureau, Population Estimation Program, 2008.

3 Table II-1 portrays the City’s population from 1930 through 2008 while the chart which follows graphs the data for the same period.

Table II-1 City of Newark & Essex County, N.J. Population Trends: 1930-2008

City of Newark County of Essex Numerical Percent Numerical Percent Year Population Change Change Population Change Change 1930 442,337 833,513 1940 429,760 -12,577 -2.8% 837,340 -3,827 -0.5% 1950 438,776 9,016 2.1% 905,949 -68,609 -8.2% 1960 405,220 -33,556 -7.6% 923,545 -17,596 -1.9% 1970 381,930 -23,290 -5.7% 932,526 -8,981 -1.0% 1980 329,248 -52,682 -13.8% 851,304 81,222 8.7% 1990 275,221 -54,027 -16.4% 778,206 73,098 8.6% 2000 273,546 -1,675 -0.6% 793,633 -15,427 -2.0% 2008 278,980 5,434 2.0% 772,663 20,970 2.6%

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Population Estimates Program

4 City of Newark, N.J. Population 1930-2008

500000

400000

300000

Persons

200000

100000

0 1930 1940 1950 1960 1975 1980 1990 2000 2008 Total 442337 429760 438776 405220 339568 329248 275221 273546 278980

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Population Estimates Program

3. Race

Reflecting a statewide trend, the City of Newark’s population became more diverse in terms of racial/ethnic composition from 1980 to 2008. Table II-2 provides the breakdown from the 1990 and 2000 Census, as well as the 2006-2008 American Community Survey. Examination of the data reveals that the percentage of White (non-Hispanic) persons in the City increased from 46,276 in 1990 to 63,856 in 2008, an increase of 38 percent. The Black (non-Hispanic) population decreased from 155,055 persons in 1990 to 140,608 persons in 2008 and currently comprises approximately 53.6 percent of Newark’s population. This represents a 3.3 percentage point decrease from 1990. The Asian and Pacific-Islander (non-Hispanic) portion of the population increased from 2,808 in 1990 to 4,352 persons in 2008, currently representing 1.7 percent of the City’s population. From 1990 to 2008, this portion of the population grew 55 percent. The Native American population increased from 480 in 1990 to 912 in 2008. The Other Race (non-Hispanic) category grew significantly from 1990 to 2008, increasing by 162.7 percent, although representing only 1.4 percent of Newark’s total population in 2008. The number of Hispanics of all races increased significantly as well, from 69,204 in 1990 to 83,687 in 2008, a 20.9 percent increase. This segment of the population now represents 31.9 percent of the City’s population, the second-largest racial group in Newark.

Minority population in the City increased from 228,945 in 1990 to 233,232 in 2008, an increase of 4,287 persons.3 Minorities now comprise 88.9 percent of the City’s population, making Newark a majority-minority city.

Table II-2 and the chart on the following page graphically portray the change in the White and Non-White population (all races) from 1990 to 2008.

3 A minority person is as defined by the U.S. Bureau of the Census (Black, Hispanic Origin, American Indian, Eskimo or Aleut, Asian or Pacific Islander, Other Race).

Table II-2 City of Newark, N.J. Population by Race, 1980-2008

1990 2000 2008 1990-2008 Numerical Population Number % Number % Number* % Change % Change White (non-Hispanic) 46,276 16.8% 72,537 26.5% 63,856 24.3% 17,580 38.0% Black (non-Hispanic) 155,055 56.3% 146,250 53.5% 140,608 53.6% -14,447 -9.3% Hispanic (all races) 69,204 25.1% 80,622 29.5% 83,687 31.9% 14,483 20.9% Native-American (non-Hispanic) 480 0.2% 1,005 0.4% 912 0.3% 432 90.0% Asian & Pacific Islanders (non- Hispanic) 2,808 1.0% 3,398 1.2% 4,352 1.7% 1,544 55.0% Other (non-Hispanic) 1,398 0.5% 3,843 1.4% 3,673 1.4% 2,275 162.7%

Minority Population 228,945 83.2% 235,118 86.0% 233,232 88.9% 4,287 1.9%

Total Population 275,221 273,546 262,313 -12,908 -4.7%

Household Population 266,319 260,773 248,845 -17,474 -6.6% Non-Household Population 8,902 12,773 NA

*Total population figures for 2008 are taken from the 2006-2008 American Community Survey, where race information is collected. Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2000 Summary File 1, Table P3; 1990 Summary Tape File 3, Table P012; 2006-2008 American Community Survey 3-Year Estimates, Tables B02001.

7 City of Newark, N.J. Population by Race 1990-2008

180,000

160,000

140,000

120,000

100,000

Persons 80,000

60,000

40,000

20,000

0 1990 2000 2008 Asian & Pacific Islanders 2,808 3,398 4,352 Black 155,055 146,250 140,608 Hispanic (all races) 69,204 80,622 83,687 Native-American 480 1,005 912 Other 1,398 3,843 3,673 White 46,276 72,537 63,856

Source: U.S. Census Bureau

8 City of Newark, N.J. Minority Population, 1990-2008

250,000

200,000

150,000 Persons 100,000

50,000

0 1990 2000 2008 Minority 228,945 235,118 233,232 White (non-Hispanic) 46,276 72,537 63,856

Source: U.S. Census Bureau

9 For the purposes of this analysis, an Area of Racial/Ethnic Minority Concentration has been defined as Census Tracts in which the percentage of minority population exceeds ten percent of the minority percentage population of the city. According to the 2000 U.S. Census, minorities comprise 86 percent of the total population of the City of Newark.4

Of the 90 Census Tracts in Newark with reported populations in 2000 there were 3 with a total population identified as a minority race. There are 51 Census Tracts in the City with a percentage of minorities exceeding the City of Newark’s minority percentage of 86. These Census Tracts are generally located west of Broad Street and south of Central Avenue.

Table II-3 lists the City’s minority population by Census Tract. Map 1 – Percentage Minority Population by Census Tract locates the City’s minority population by Census Tract.

Table II-3 City of Newark, N.J. Minority Population by Census Tract, 2000

Minority Total Census Tract Census Tract population population Percentage 1 2,515 5,619 44.8% 2 1,123 2,273 49.4% 3 2,023 3,395 59.6% 4 802 2,083 38.5% 5 879 1,697 51.8% 6 2,720 4,385 62.0% 7 5,597 6,517 85.9% 8 2,947 4,410 66.8% 9 3,460 4,014 86.2% 10 3,718 4,512 82.4% 11 1,953 2,542 76.8% 13 1,440 1,473 97.8% 14 2,589 2,743 94.4% 15 1,555 1,636 95.0% 16 1,609 1,706 94.3% 17 2,043 2,135 95.7% 18 2,089 2,176 96.0% 19 2,109 2,246 93.9% 20 4,493 4,714 95.3% 21 3,344 3,504 95.4% 22.01 5,360 7,444 72.0% 22.02 2,998 3,337 89.8% 23 4,680 4,920 95.1% 24 3,854 4,004 96.3% 25 4,087 4,179 97.8%

4 According to the 2006-2008 American Community Survey 3-Year Estimates, minorities comprise 88.9 percent of the total population of the City of Newark. However, race information is not aggregated by census tract in the American Community Survey. Census tract minority population figures in this report are therefore based on 2000 Census information. 10 Table II-3 City of Newark, N.J. Minority Population by Census Tract, 2000

Minority Total Census Tract Census Tract population population Percentage 26 1,212 1,228 98.7% 27 810 890 91.0% 28 1,714 1,735 98.8% 29 1,351 1,450 93.2% 30 1,621 1,653 98.1% 31 787 789 99.7% 34 1,300 1,335 97.4% 35 1,715 1,747 98.2% 37 1,813 1,926 94.1% 38 2,416 2,567 94.1% 39 2,552 2,570 99.3% 40 1,030 1,055 97.6% 41 3,278 3,293 99.5% 42 3,407 3,460 98.5% 43 1,733 1,780 97.4% 44 1,904 1,904 100.0% 45 3,459 3,476 99.5% 46 3,020 3,041 99.3% 47 4,697 4,848 96.9% 48.01 2,363 2,388 99.0% 48.02 3,124 3,463 90.2% 49 4,274 4,302 99.3% 50 2,004 2,140 93.6% 51 2,401 2,409 99.7% 52 1,483 1,509 98.3% 53 2,178 2,184 99.7% 54 3,945 4,035 97.8% 57 1,624 1,872 86.8% 58 1,566 1,782 87.9% 62 2,526 2,561 98.6% 64 1,577 1,631 96.7% 66 2,303 2,303 100.0% 67 3,166 3,803 83.3% 68 2,076 3,455 60.1% 69 812 3,881 20.9% 70 723 3,553 20.3% 71 526 3,175 16.6% 72 463 3,567 13.0% 73 820 5,072 16.2% 74 530 2,475 21.4% 75.01 2,210 4,207 52.5% 75.02 1,546 3,136 49.3% 76 846 3,208 26.4% 77 453 2,543 17.8% 78 1,137 3,434 33.1%

11 Table II-3 City of Newark, N.J. Minority Population by Census Tract, 2000

Minority Total Census Tract Census Tract population population Percentage 79 1,519 4,279 35.5% 80 1,334 1,767 75.5% 81 2,917 3,253 89.7% 82 2,216 2,416 91.7% 85 1,177 1,642 71.7% 86 1,204 1,328 90.7% 87 2,286 4,065 56.2% 88 1,090 1,678 65.0% 89 1,198 2,322 51.6% 90 1,685 2,142 78.7% 91 1,900 3,089 61.5% 92 3,513 5,352 65.6% 93 3,179 4,864 65.4% 94 3,624 6,085 59.6% 95 3,592 6,600 54.4% 96 2,172 3,071 70.7% 97 3,152 5,125 61.5% 98 2,742 3,338 82.1% 227 2,726 2,756 98.9% 228 1,875 1,875 100.0%

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2000 Summary File 1, Table P3

12 Map 1 – Percentage Minority Population by Census Tract

4. Age and Gender

With respect to the breakdown by gender, there were 131,862 men and 143,359 women residing in Newark in 1990, with males representing 47.9 percent and females representing 52.1 percent of the City’s population. The 2008 American Community Survey reported 128,841 males or 49.1 percent of the total population, and 133,472 females or 50.9 percent of the total population.

Table II-4 presents the 1990, 2000 and 2008 populations by age and gender for the City of Newark. As indicated, there were significant changes in the age distributions over the almost twenty year period due to the overall loss of population. All age groups lost population with the exception of the 35-64 age groups and the 75 and over age group. These age groups experienced moderate to pronounced growth, with the greatest growth occurring in the 45-54 year age group. The table and the charts that follow indicate the changing characteristics of the age of the City’s population between 1990 and 2008.

Table II-4 City of Newark, N.J. 1990-2008 Population by Age & Gender

1990 2000 2008 1990-2008 % of % of % of Numerical % Age Male Female Total Total Male Female Total Total Male Female Total Total Change Change Under 5 11,225 10,640 21,865 8.6% 10,598 10,695 21,293 7.9% 10,851 9,837 20,688 7.8% -1,177 -5% 5 to 9 11,023 10,316 21,339 8.8% 11,502 10,741 22,243 7.8% 8,673 8,967 17,640 8.1% -3,699 -17% 10 to 14 11,210 11,076 22,286 10.3% 10,471 10,438 20,909 8.1% 10,103 9,410 19,513 7.6% -2,773 -12% 15 to 19 12,033 10,957 22,990 10.3% 10,737 10,319 21,056 8.4% 10,587 9,289 19,876 7.7% -3,114 -14% 20 to 24 12,404 12,327 24,731 8.8% 12,008 12,006 24,014 9.0% 10,940 10,571 21,511 8.8% -3,220 -13% 25 to 34 24,998 25,821 50,819 14.8% 23,324 22,820 46,144 18.5% 21,602 19,702 41,304 16.9% -9,515 -19% 35 to 44 17,443 19,589 37,032 11.4% 20,567 20,755 41,322 13.5% 20,271 19,849 40,120 15.1% 3,088 8% 45 to 54 12,399 14,953 27,352 9.5% 14,089 15,860 29,949 9.9% 15,634 17,776 33,410 10.9% 6,058 22% 55 to 59 4,762 6,130 10,892 4.6% 5,069 6,307 11,376 4.0% 5,784 6,881 12,665 4.2% 1,773 16% 60 to 64 4,794 5,634 10,428 4.1% 4,574 5,360 9,934 3.8% 4,852 5,670 10,522 3.6% 94 1% 65 to 74 6,190 9,465 15,655 5.6% 6,122 8,363 14,485 5.7% 6,145 8,775 14,920 5.3% -735 -5% 75 & over 3,381 6,451 9,832 3.2% 3,640 7,181 10,821 3.6% 3,399 6,745 10,144 4.0% 312 3% Total 131,862 143,359 275,221 100.0% 132,701 140,845 273,546 100.0% 128,841 133,472 262,313 100.0% -12,908 -5%

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 1990 Summary Tape File 3, Table P118; 2000 Summary File 3, Table P8; 2006-2008 American Community Survey 3-Year Estimates, Table B01001

15 City of Newark, N.J. 1990-2008 Change in Population by Age & Gender

2008 over 75 & 1990 2008 74

65 to 1990 2008 64

60 to 60 1990 2008 59

55 to 1990 2008 54

45 to 1990 2008 44

35 to 35 1990 2008 34

25 to 1990 2008 24 Age Groups by Year

20 to 1990 2008 19

15 to 1990 2008 14

10 to 1990 2008 9

5 to 1990 2008 5 1990 Under 0 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 25,000 30,000 35,000 40,000 45,000 50,000

Female Male

Source: U.S. Census Bureau

16 B. Income Data

1. Income

Table II-5 provides 1990, 2000, and 2008 data on per capita, median family and average household income for Newark, Essex County, and New Jersey.

The 1990 per capita income for the City was $9,424. Per capita income increased to $13,009 in 2000 and $17,364 in 2008, compared to $17,574 in 1990, $24,943 in 2000, and $31,902 in 2008 for the County. New Jersey’s per capita income was $18,714 in 1990, increasing to $27,006 in 2000 and $34,899 in 2008. Per capita income increased by 84.3 percent in Newark from 1990 to 2008 compared to 81.5 percent for the County and 86.5 percent for the State. Of the 22 municipalities in the County, Newark ranked twenty-second in per capita income in 2000. Of the 21 counties in the State, Essex County ranked twelfth in per capita income in 2000.5

The U.S. Census and American Community Survey reported median family incomes in Newark of $25,816, $30,781, and $41,625 in 1990, 2000, and 2008 respectively compared to $42,150, $54,818, and $69,342 respectively for Essex County and $47,589, $65,370, and $84,743 respectively for New Jersey. Median family income in the City, adjusted for inflation, increased by 61.2 percent from 1990 to 2008, while the median family income for the County and State increased by 64.5 and 78.1 percent respectively.

Median household income in Newark in 1990 was $21,650, compared to $26,913 in 2000 and $35,601 in 2008. For the County, the 1990 median household income was reported at $34,518, $44,944 in 2000, and $55,407 in 2008. Median household income increased by 64.4 percent in Newark from 1990 to 2008 compared to a 60.5 percent increase for the County and a 70.2 percent increase for the State for the same period.

Table 11-5 displays 1990 and 2000 Census information along with 2008 American Community Survey 3-Year Estimates on per capita income, median family income, and median household income for the City, the County, and New Jersey.

Table II-5 Newark, Essex County & New Jersey 1990-2008 Per Capita, Median Family & Median Household Income

Per Capita Median Family Median Household Income Income Income City of Newark 1990 $9,424 $25,816 $21,650 2000 $13,009 $30,781 $26,913 2008 $17,364 $41,625 $35,601 Essex County 1990 $17,574 $42,150 $34,518

5 These rankings come from the New Jersey State Data Center, prepared for the New Jersey Department of Labor, August 2002, based on 2000 Census Summary File 3. 17 2000 $24,943 $54,818 $44,944 2008 $31,902 $69,342 $55,407 New Jersey 1990 $18,714 $47,589 $40,927 2000 $27,006 $65,370 $55,146 2008 $34,899 $84,743 $69,674

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 1990 Summary Tape File 3, Tables P080A, P107A, P114A; 2000 Summary File 3, Tables P53, P77, P82; American Community Survey 2006-2007 3- Year Estimates, Tables B19013, B19113, B19301

Table II-6 City of Newark Households by Minority Status & Income Group

Percent of Very Low Other Low Total Total Income 0- Income 51- Above Households Households 50% MFI 80% MFI 80% All Households 91282 49402 14879 27001 Percent 54.1% 16.3% 29.6% White (non-Hispanic) 23700 26.0% 6325 2480 5625 Percent 26.7% 10.5% 23.7% Black (non-Hispanic) 49039 53.7% 27710 7895 13434 Percent 56.5% 16.1% 27.4% Hispanic (all races) 23854 26.1% 13414 3840 6600 Percent 56.2% 16.1% 27.7% Native Amer. (non-Hispanic) 138 0.2% 79 10 49 Percent 57.2% 7.2% 35.5% Asian and Pacific Islander (non- Hispanic) 1017 1.1% 483 129 405 Percent 47.5% 12.7% 39.8%

Source: CHAS Data Book 2000

The CHAS Data book, published by HUD in connection with the preparation of the Consolidated Plan, provided information on households by minority status and income group and is shown in Table II-6 above. It is summarized as follows:

. Of the total of 91,282 households in the City, 49,402 (54.1%) were very low income, 14,879 (16.3%) were other low income, and 27,001 (29.6%) were moderate income and above.

. Of the 23,700 white (non-Hispanic) households in the City, 6,325 (26.7%) were very low income, 2,480 (10.5%) were other low income, and 5,625 (23.7%) were moderate income and above.

. Of the 49,039 black (non-Hispanic) households in the City, 27,710 (56.5%) were very low income, 7,895 (16.1%) were other low income, and 13,434 (27.4%) were moderate income and above.

18 . Of the 23,854 Hispanic (all races) households in the City, 13,414 (56.2%) were very low income, 3,840 (16.1%) were other low income, and 6,600 (27.7%) were moderate income and above.

. Of the 138 Native American (non-Hispanic) households in the City, 79 (57.2%) were very low income, 10 (7.2%) were other low income, and 49 (35.5%) were moderate income and above.

. Of the 1,017 Asian and Pacific-Islander (non-Hispanic) households in the City, 483 (47.5%) were very low income, 129 (12.7%) were other low income, and 405 (39.8%) were moderate income and above.

For the purposes of this analysis, an area of low income concentration has been defined as a Census Tract that is eligible (51% L/M population) for inclusion of an area benefit Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program activity within its boundaries.

Under the above definition, all of the 91 Census Tracts in the City are considered to have a concentration of low and moderate income persons. Twenty-one of Newark’s Census Tracts have more than 80 percent of their populations in the low-mod income category. Several of these are in the central portion of the City, including the Lincoln Park and Clinton Hill neighborhoods.

Table II-7 shows the number and percentages of low and moderate income persons by Census Tract in Newark based upon estimates from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development for Fiscal Year 2008, which are based on data from the U.S. Census Bureau. Map 2 – Percentage of Low/Moderate Income by Census Tract shows the geographic location of these areas.

Table II-7 City of Newark, N.J. Low/Mod Income Areas by Census Tract

Low/Mod Low/Mod Low/Mod Census Tract Universe Persons Percent 1 5,619 3,298 58.7 2 2,273 1,919 84.4 3 3,387 2,562 75.6 4 2,083 1,295 62.2 5 1,693 938 55.4 6 4,257 2,701 63.4 7 6,492 4,875 75.1 8 4,344 2,955 68.0 9 4,014 3,421 85.2 10 3,513 3,056 87.0 11 1,411 731 51.8 13 1,433 1,117 77.9 14 2,726 2,179 79.9 15 1,613 1,471 91.2 16 1,684 1,274 75.7 17 2,135 1,677 78.5

19 Low/Mod Low/Mod Low/Mod Census Tract Universe Persons Percent 18 2,176 1,689 77.6 19 2,246 1,713 76.3 20 4,697 3,356 71.4 21 3,493 1,884 53.9 22.01 7,444 5,120 68.8 22.02 3,337 1,909 57.2 23 4,917 2,681 54.5 24 4,004 2,502 62.5 25 4,179 2,705 64.7 26 1,228 960 78.2 27 890 746 83.8 28 1,735 1,387 79.9 29 1,132 904 79.9 30 1,653 1,546 93.5 31 787 590 75.0 34 1,230 982 79.8 35 1,700 1,259 74.1 37 1,902 1,284 67.5 38 2,493 1,944 78.0 39 2,570 2,361 91.9 40 1,055 938 88.9 41 3,255 2,366 72.7 42 3,447 2,402 69.7 43 1,780 1,252 70.3 44 1,904 1,335 70.1 45 3,438 2,284 66.4 46 3,041 2,162 71.1 47 4,848 3,043 62.8 48.01 2,388 1,815 76.0 48.02 3,448 2,870 83.2 49 4,302 3,137 72.9 50 2,122 1,724 81.2 51 2,409 1,523 63.2 52 1,509 887 58.8 53 2,174 1,636 75.3 54 4,017 3,084 76.8 57 1,862 1,446 77.7 58 1,748 1,458 83.4 62 2,561 2,394 93.5 64 3,559 2,724 76.5 66 2,303 2,001 86.9 67 3,301 3,005 91.0 68 3,440 2,664 77.4 69 3,881 2,632 67.8 70 3,549 2,253 63.5 71 3,175 1,924 60.6 72 3,567 2,201 61.7 73 5,040 2,748 54.5 74 2,471 1,650 66.8 75.01 4,156 3,007 72.4 75.02 3,136 2,383 76.0

20 Low/Mod Low/Mod Low/Mod Census Tract Universe Persons Percent 76 3,208 2,137 66.6 77 2,541 1,496 58.9 78 3,434 2,148 62.6 79 4,272 2,829 66.2 80 1,402 1,139 81.2 81 3,152 2,738 86.9 82 2,146 1,684 78.5 85 653 386 59.1 86 1,328 950 71.5 87 4,007 2,974 74.2 88 1,678 1,408 83.9 89 2,322 2,033 87.6 90 2,139 1,530 71.5 91 3,067 2,309 75.3 92 2,496 2,338 93.7 93 4,827 3,823 79.2 94 6,015 3,771 62.7 95 6,445 4,036 62.6 96 3,054 2,208 72.3 97 5,124 3,892 76.0 98 79 46 58.2 227 2,683 2,314 86.2 228 1,875 1,619 86.3 Source: U.S. Dept of Housing and Urban Development based on 2000 U.S. Census data

Map 2 – Percentage of Low/Moderate Income by Census Tract

2. Poverty

The number of persons residing in the City (those for whom poverty status is determined) in 2000 living below poverty was 74,263, or 28.4 percent of those counted. In 2008, the number of persons living below poverty was 66,022, or 26.1 percent of those counted. Of the 66,022 persons living below poverty in 2008, 55.6 percent were female. Minority (non-Hispanic) persons represented 79.1 percent of those residents living below poverty according to the 2006- 2008 American Community Survey 3-Year Estimates. Of the 62,068 residents living below poverty in 2008, 21,049 (33.9%) were Hispanic. There are thirteen Census Tracts in the City where the percentage of persons living below poverty exceeds 44 percent. Map 3 – Percentage of Population Below Poverty Level by Census Tract shows the geographic location of these areas.

The U.S. Census reports the number and aggregate income for households receiving public assistance. According to the Census Bureau, “public assistance” includes any funds provided though supplemental security income (SSI) payments by federal or state welfare agencies to low-income persons who are aged (65 years and older), public assistance, or food stamps. Table II-8 lists the number of households receiving SSI or public assistance. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, 10.3 percent of households for whom poverty status was determined were receiving SSI. In addition, 12.6 percent of households were receiving public assistance (including food stamps). By 2008, the percentage of households receiving SSI had dropped to 8.2 percent, and the percentage receiving public assistance had jumped to 17.3 percent.

Table II-8 also describes the level of assistance being received. In 2000, the average annual amount of SSI received per household was $6,304.26. By 2008, this figure rose to $7,067.77. The average annual amount of public assistance received per household in 2000 was $3,140.54. This dropped to $1,185.03 by 2008, a 62 percent drop from 2000.

Table II-8 City of Newark, N.J. Public Assistance Recipients

2000 2008 % of % of Number Households Number Households Households receiving SSI 9,421 10.3% 7,390 8.2% Households receiving Public Assistance 11,515 12.6% 15,658 17.3% Total Number of Households for which Poverty Status was determined 91,366 90,599

Aggregate SSI for Households $59,392,400 $52,230,800 Average Annual Amount of SSI $6,304.26 $7,067.77 Aggregate Public Assistance Income for Households $36,163,300 $18,555,200 Average Annual Amount of Public Assistance $3,140.54 $1,185.03

Soucres: U.S. Census Bureau, 2000 Census, Tables P63, P64, P72, P73; 2006-2008 American Community Survey 3-Year Estimates, Tables B19056, B19057, B19066, B19067

Map 3 – Percentage of Population Below Poverty Level by Census Tract

24 C. Employment Characteristics

1. Labor Force

Table II-9 displays labor force data from the 1990, 2000, and 2008 Census which indicates that the civilian labor force in the City decreased 2.5 percent from 123,808 in 1990 to 120,760 in 2008, a result of the overall population loss in Newark. In 1990 the Census reported that 53.4 percent of women over 16 were in the civilian labor force. This percentage increased to 57.7 percent in 2008, an increase of over 4 percentage points. The increased participation of women in the labor force is a reflection of general economic trends.

In 1990 the Census reported that 68.1 percent of men over 16 were in the civilian labor force. The participation rate decreased to 62.7 percent in 2008, with the total number of males in the labor force decreasing by 3,848. The Census reported a change in the overall unemployment rate in the City from 14.7 percent in 1990 to 11.4 percent in 2008.

Table II-9 City of Newark Sex by Employment Status 1990-2008

Number Change % Change 1990 2000 2008 1990-2008 1990-2008 Persons Age 16 & Over In Labor Force: Armed Forces 314 19 165 -149 -47.5% Civilian: Employed 105,553 90,819 108,033 2,480 2.3% Unemployed 18,255 17,437 12,727 -5,528 -30.3% Not in Labor Force 81,394 97,236 78,301 -3,093 -3.8% Unemployment Rate 14.7% 16.1% 11.4%

Males Age 16 & Over In Labor Force: Armed Forces 264 19 51 -213 -80.7% Civilian: Employed 55,636 45,848 56,061 425 0.8% Unemployed 9,842 8,909 5,569 -4,273 -43.4% Not in Labor Force 30,457 43,265 36,619 6,162 20.2% Unemployment Rate 15.0% 9.1% 5.7%

Females Age 16 & Over In Labor Force: Armed Forces 50 0 114 64 128.0% Civilian: Employed 49,917 44,971 51,972 2,055 4.1% Unemployed 8,413 8,528 7,158 -1,255 -14.9% Not in Labor Force 50,937 53,971 41,682 -9,255 -18.2% Unemployment Rate 14.4% 7.9% 7.0%

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 1990 Summary Tape File 3, Table P070; 2000 Summary File 3, Table P43; 2006-2008 American Community Survey 3-Year Estimates, Table B23001

2. Resident Employment by Industry and Occupation

Newark’s total employment of residents 16 and over increased by 17,214 from 90,819 in 2000 to 108,033 in 2008. Services gained the most employees in the decade increasing by 7,888 employees, a gain of 40 percent. The construction industry grew from 6,753 in 2000 to 11,244 in 2008, a 67 percent increase. Wholesale trade employment posted a decrease, from 3,748 to 2,916, a 22 percent loss.

With respect to manufacturing, the City of Newark has suffered along with other urban centers, counties, the state and the region. From 2000 to 2008, resident employment in the manufacturing sector fell 15 percent, from 11,737 to 9,979. This trend continues the long-term trend of manufacturing loss in the nation.

Table II-10 compares the 2000 and 2008 industry group employment trends of City residents. The Chart entitled Resident Employment by Industry 2000-2008 portrays industry categories of employed City residents as reported by the U.S. Census.

Similar to nationwide trends since the 1960s, the City’s employed residents have been shifting from blue collar to white collar occupations. Since the 1960s these occupations have become less prevalent. Blue collar occupations among City residents also changed during the last decade. Table II-10 City of Newark, N.J. Resident Industry Groups 2000-2008 Employed Persons 16 Years and Over 2000 2008 Change in 2000-2008 Number % Number % Number % Agriculture/Fishing/mining 107 0% 166 0% 59 55% Construction 6,753 7% 11,244 10% 4,491 67% Manufacturing 11,737 13% 9,979 9% -1,758 -15% Wholesale trade 3,748 4% 2,916 3% -832 -22% Retail trade 8,456 9% 10,486 10% 2,030 24% Transportation, warehousing, and utilities 9,303 10% 9,910 9% 607 7% Information 2,489 3% 2,000 2% -489 -20% Finance/insurance/real estate 5,663 6% 6,430 6% 767 14% Professional, scientific, and management, and administrative and waste management services: 8,096 9% 9,946 9% 1,850 23% Education/health/social services 18,270 20% 25,064 23% 6,794 37% Arts/entertainment/food 6,227 7% 7,940 7% 1,713 28% Other services, except public administration: 5,706 6% 6,507 6% 801 14% Public administration 4,264 5% 5,109 5% 845 20% Total 90,819 107,697 16,878

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2000 Summary File 3, Table P49; 2006-2008 American Community Survey 3-Year Estimates, Table B24030

Table II-11 and the Chart entitled Occupation Groups 2000-2008 portrays occupations of employed Newark residents as reported by the U.S. Census in 2000 and 2008. The trends have been toward significant increases in managerial and professional specialties, construction

26 occupations (as the growth in home and office construction soared throughout the decade), and service occupations. These occupations showed increases of 31 percent, 38 percent and 40 percent, respectively.

Table II-11 City of Newark, N.J. Resident Occupational Groups 2000-2008 Employed Persons 16 Years and Older 2000 2008 Change 2000-2008 Number % Number % Number % Management, professional and related occupations 17,168 19% 22,498 21% 5,330 31% Service 19,796 22% 27,684 25% 7,888 40% Sales and office 24,985 28% 25,387 23% 402 2% Farming, fishing and forestry 134 0% 0 0% -134 -100% Construction, extraction and maintenance 9,455 10% 13,016 12% 3,561 38% Production, transportation, and material moving 19,281 21% 20,952 19% 1,671 9% Total 90,819 109,537

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2000 Summary File 3, Table P50; 2006-2008 American Community Survey 3-Year Estimates, Table B24010

27 CITY OF NEWARK, N.J. Resident Employment by Industry 2000-2008

45000

40000

35000

30000

25000

Persons 20000

15000

10000

5000

0 Transportation, Agriculture/Fishi Arts/entertainm Public Construction Manufacturing Trade warehousing, Information FIRE Services ng/Mining ent/food administration and utilities 2000 107 6753 11737 12204 9303 2489 5663 32072 6227 4264 2008 166 11244 9979 13402 9910 2000 6430 41517 7940 5109

Source: U.S. Census Bureau

28 CITY OF NEWARK, N.J. Occupational Groups 2000 - 2008

30000

25000

20000

15000

10000 Employed Residents 16 & Over

5000

0 Management, Production, Construction, Farming, fishing and professional and Service Sales and office transportation, and extraction and forestry related occupations material moving maintenance 2000 17168 19796 24985 134 19281 9455 2008 22498 27684 25387 0 20952 13016

Source: U.S. Census Bureau

29 3. Employment Projections

The economic recession has significantly shifted the workforce landscape in Newark, and in the larger metropolitan area. According to the New Jersey Department of Labor and Workforce Development, the fastest growing industries in Essex County are health care and social assistance.6 According to the Industry Employment Projections, health care and social assistance industries will grow by about 20% by 2016. The projections also suggest that finance and insurance industries will grow by 37% by 2016, although this projection was made in 2006 and may have significantly changed due to the economic recession beginning in 2007. The industries experiencing the greatest decline in Essex County include manufacturing of all types; machinery manufacturing alone is projected to drop about 40% by 2016.7

The City’s workforce is expected to grow by 30,712 employees, according to the projections of the Council on Affordable Housing. General employment projections are continuing to shift, however, as the economy goes through dramatic changes in four areas: the housing market, patterns of consumption, the global credit surge, and the ongoing macroeconomic dominance of financial activities.8 The Northern New Jersey area experienced some of the greatest decreases in jobs in the State. The Newark/Union Labor Area experienced a drop in employment of 1.8% in 2008.9 With its close ties to the finance and banking institutions of New York City, the overall North Jersey region has significantly felt the burden of the financial, credit and housing market slumps.

However, 2009 showed some areas of improvement for the Newark/Union region, as employment gains occurred in educational and health services, as well as leisure and hospitality. Despite slow growth, these two sectors continue to inspire optimism for future growth. The ongoing loss in manufacturing jobs and trade, transportation and utilities sector jobs continues to overwhelmingly burden Newark and the surrounding suburbs. Initiatives targeted at slowing this downward trend in these two sectors will be a crucial element in retaining jobs and expanding residents’ access to the labor market. In addition, a turn in the real estate market as well as infrastructure improvements in the North Jersey region will generate new construction jobs and strengthen a sector greatly influenced by the economic downturn.

4. Housing and Employment

A commonly recognized impediment to choice of housing is the inability to obtain employment in proximity to affordable housing. Table II-12 portrays the number of Newark residents working in the state, county and city. In 2000, the number of residents living in Newark and working outside the city was 58.6 percent of all Newark’s employed residents. The number of residents working outside the county was 31.7

6 State of New Jersey, Department of Labor and Workforce Development. Industry Employment Projections. 2006. 7 Ibid. 8 Sitar-Rutgers University. 2009: The Shape of the “New Normal”. Sitar-Rutgers Regional Report. 12:1, Feb 2009. 9 State of New Jersey. Department of Labor and Workforce Development. New Jersey Economic Indicators. November 2009.

30 percent of Newark’s employed residents. Only 6.8 percent of Newark’s employed residents worked outside of the state. These trends remained relatively stable, although the proportion of Newark residents working in the City rose by about one percentage point (from 41.4% to 42.1%).

Table II-12 City of Newark, N.J. Workplace of Residents

2000 2008 Total: 87,720 103,478 Worked in state of residence: 81,768 93.2% 94,797 91.6% Worked outside state of residence 5,952 6.8% 8,681 8.4% Worked in county of residence 53,949 61.5% 62,763 60.7% Worked outside county of residence 27,819 31.7% 32,034 31.0% Worked in place of residence 36,319 41.4% 43,552 42.1% Worked outside place of residence 51,401 58.6% 59,926 57.9%

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2000 Summary File 3, Tables P26, P27; 2006-2008 American Community Survey 3-Year Estimates, Table B08007, B08008

5. Employment Centers

According to the City’s Master Plan Re-Exam of February 2009, out of the City’s 160,000 jobs, only 25% are currently held by Newarkers and 60% of Newark residents work outside the City. Thus, a high percentage of Newarkers still commute out of the City to work, many commuting to places that are not well served by transit from Newark’s neighborhoods, as shown in Figure 110. This is especially true of neighborhoods in need (high unemployment, low-income, low motor vehicle ownership). Commuting to the suburbs often requires driving, yet 44% of households still lack access to a car. And while the City’s transit system provides excellent connections to the downtown, it fails to provide efficient access to growing employment opportunities at the air and sea ports. The City’s Master Plan Re-Exam of February 2009 promotes a series of long-range transit projects and policies that improve resident employment opportunities, as well as community and business development (demonstrated in Figure 2).

10 The figures are taken from Newark’s Master Plan Re-Exam of February 2009.

31 Figure 1: Transit and Employment Centers

32 Figure 2: Proposed Transit Enhancements

33 D. Housing Profile

1. Units by Tenure and Type

According to 2008 U.S. Census data, the total number of housing units in the City, including vacant, seasonal and migratory units was 108,423, with 92,048 occupied housing units and 16,375 vacant units.

Of the vacant housing units reported in 2008, there were 6,655 units for rent and 1,525 units for sale, with a reported vacancy rate of units for rent of 9.4 percent and 4.9 percent for units for sale.

Table II-13 indicates the changing characteristics of the City’s housing stock from 1990 to 2008.

Renter occupied housing is the most dominant housing type in the City. The 2008 American Community Survey reported that, of the 92,048 total occupied housing units in the City, renter occupied housing comprised 69,181 units or 75 percent. Owner occupied units were reported at 22,867 units or 25 percent in 2008.

Table II-13 City of Newark, N.J. Housing Units by Tenure 1990-2008

1990 2000 2008 Num. Change % Number % Number % Number % 1990-2008 Change Total Year- round Units 102,473 100,141 108,423 5,950 5.8% Occupied Housing Units 91,552 91,382 92,048 496 0.5% Owner- Occupied 21,115 23% 21,738 24% 22,867 25% 1,752 8.3% Renter- Occupied 70,437 77% 69,644 76% 69,181 75% -1,256 -1.8%

Vacant units 10,921 8,759 16,375 5,454 49.9% For rent 6,042 55% 4,112 47% 6,655 41% 613 10.1% Rented or sold, not occupied 1,476 14% 440 5% 827 5% -649 -44.0%

For sale only 536 5% 451 5% 1,525 9% 989 184.5% For seasonal, recreational, or occasional use 53 0% 124 1% 230 1% 177 334.0% For migrant workers 20 0% 4 0% 0 0% -20 -100.0% Other vacant 2,794 26% 3,628 41% 7,138 44% 4,344 155.5%

34 Vacancy Rate Homeowner Vacancy Rate 2.5% 2.0% 4.9% Rental Vacancy Rate 7.9% 5.6% 9.4% Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 1990 Census, 2000 Census, 2008 American Community Survey

2. Households

As with its total population, the City’s household population experienced a decline during the past decade. According to the U.S. Census, the City’s 1990 household population was 266,319, while its 2008 total household population was 248,845. This indicates a decrease of 17,474 persons or 6.6 percent. In 2008 the number of households was 92,048 compared to 91,382 in 2000. The average number of persons per household was 2.74 in 2008 compared to 2.85 in 2000.

Non-household population decreased from 12,784 to 11,477, a decrease of 1,307 persons, representing a 10 percent decrease from 2000 to 2008. In 2008 the U.S. Census reported 59,754 family households and 32,294 non-family households.

3. Age of Housing

The age of housing stock in the City is reflective of the fact that Newark was largely settled prior to World War II and has developed slowly during the decades following the end of the war. Of the 108,423 housing units in the City in 2008, 30,400 or 28 percent were constructed in 1939 or earlier. The most intensive decade for housing construction after the war was during the 1950’s when 16,591 units or 17 percent of the housing stock was built. From 2000 to 2008, 8,736 units were added to the City’s housing stock. This represents a boom in housing construction consistent with national trends.

Table II-14 and the chart on the following page portray the age of the City’s housing inventory.

Table II-14 City of Newark, N.J. Number of Housing Units by Age

2000 2008 Year Built Number % Number % 2005 or later NA 2094 2% 2000 to 2004 NA 6642 6% 1990 to 1999 7325 7% 6452 6% 1980 to 1989 6168 6% 5624 5% 1970 to 1979 9710 10% 11800 11% 1960 to 1969 15592 16% 13164 12% 1950 to 1959 16591 17% 17672 16% 1940 to 1949 16379 16% 14575 13%

35 1939 or earlier 28376 28% 30400 28% Total 100141 108423

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2000 Summary File 3, Table H34; 2006-2008 American Community Survey 3-Year Estimates, Table B25034

36 City of Newark, N.J. Occupied Units by Year Structure Built, 2008

2005 or later , 2,094, 2% 2000 to 2004 , 6,642, 6% 1990 to 1999 , 6,452, 6% 1939 or earlier , 30,400, 29% 1980 to 1989 , 5,624, 5%

1970 to 1979 , 11,800, 11%

1940 to 1949 , 14,575, 13% 1960 to 1969 , 13,164, 12%

1950 to 1959 , 17,672, 16%

Source: U.S. Census Bureau

37 Table II-15 below and the chart on the following page portray the age of the City’s housing inventory categorized by owner or rental occupied units. It is interesting to note that rental type units have been the predominant type of residential construction in the City, particularly in the more recent decades.

Table II-15 City of Newark, N.J. Tenure by Year Housing Unit Constructed, 2008

Year Built Owner Percent Renter Percent Built 2005 or later 303 1.3% 1,575 2.3% Built 2000 to 2004 1,669 7.3% 3,496 5.1% Built 1990 to 1999 1,882 8.2% 3,871 5.6% Built 1980 to 1989 561 2.5% 4,678 6.8% Built 1970 to 1979 1,142 5.0% 9,118 13.2% Built 1960 to 1969 1,576 6.9% 9,305 13.5% Built 1950 to 1959 3,601 15.7% 11,512 16.6% Built 1940 to 1949 4,071 17.8% 8,558 12.4% Built 1939 or earlier 8,062 35.3% 17,068 24.7% Total: 22,867 69,181

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2000 Summary File 3, Table H36; American Community Survey 3-Year Estimates, Table B25036

City of Newark, N.J. Occupied Housing Units by Year Structure Built

Renter Units (2008) Owner Units (2008)

2005 or later, 1575, 2% 2005 or later, 303, 1% 2000 to 2004, 3496, 5% 2000 to 2004, 1669, 7% 1990 to 1999, 3871, 6% 1939 or earlier, 17068, 25% 1990 to 1999, 1882, 8% 1980 to 1989, 4678, 7%

1939 or earlier, 8062, 36% 1980 to 1989, 561, 2%

1970 to 1979, 1142, 5%

1970 to 1979, 9118, 13%

1960 to 1969, 1576, 7% 1940 to 1949, 8558, 12%

1950 to 1959, 3601, 16% 1960 to 1969, 9305, 13% 1940 to 1949, 4071, 18% 1950 to 1959, 11512, 17%

Source: U.S. Census Bureau

39 4. Condition of Units

The condition of much of the housing stock in the City is fair to good because of its age although many units have been well maintained in several neighborhoods. Most of the housing quality problems are scattered throughout the City, however several of the areas within the City show housing rehabilitation needs.

Housing quality can be measured with a number of quality indicators collected by the U.S. Census. Age, overcrowding, plumbing facilities, kitchen facilities, and heating facilities all provide insight into the overall state of the City’s housing.

For descriptive purposes, the following indicators were collected: - Age: Units built in 1939 or earlier are considered to be aged and more likely to need rehabilitation. - Overcrowding: Units containing more than 1.0 person per room are considered overcrowded. - Plumbing facilities: Units lacking plumbing facilities are considered deficient. - Kitchen facilities: Units lacking complete kitchen facilities (i.e. piped water, a stove and a refrigerator) are considered deficient. - Heating facilities: Units lacking a central source of heating are considered deficient.

As indicated above and in the chart below, over a quarter of Newark’s housing stock was built before 1940. The percentage of aged structures has greatly declined since 1990, from 35% of the housing stock to about 28% in 2000. In addition, the level of overcrowded units has also greatly decreased, from 12% of the housing stock in 1990 to only 6% in 2008. Of the total housing units, 6% lack complete kitchen facilities, 3% lack complete plumbing facilities, and virtually none lack central heating.

Table II-16 City of Newark, N.J. Quality Indicators 1990 2000 2008 Number % Number % Number % Lacking complete kitchen facilities 2,413 2% 1,875 2% 5,005 5% Lacking complete plumbing facilities 2,128 2% 1,733 2% 2,167 2% Lacking central heating 1,596 2% 1,088 1% 405 0% Units containing more than 1.0 persons per room (both renter and owner occupied) 12,472 12% 11,800 12% 6,110 6% Built before 1940 36,014 35% 28,376 28% 32,291 30% Total housing units (including vacant and occupied) 102,473 100,141 106,898

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 1990 Summary Tape File 3, Tables H025, H030, H042, H064, H069; 2000 Summary File 3, Tables H20, H34, H40, H47, H50; 2006-2008 American Community Survey 3-Year Estimates Tables B25014, B25034, B25040, B25047, B25051

5. Owner Occupied Housing Value and Rental Rates

The value of single family units as reported by the Census Bureau is based upon the owner’s estimate of current market value. The median value of owner occupied housing units in Newark in 2000 was reported at $132,800 while the median value of such units for Essex County and New Jersey was $188,400 and $167,900, respectively. The median value of owner occupied

40 housing units in Newark in 2008 increased to $305,400 while the median value of such units for Essex County and New Jersey increased to $420,000 and $367,600, respectively. The median gross rent was reported at $586 for Newark in 2000, while the median gross rent was $675 for the County and $751 for New Jersey. The median gross rent increased to $864 for Newark in 2008, while the median gross rent increased to $947 for the County and $1,058 for New Jersey.

Table II-17 provides data on the value of specified housing units in the City.

Table II-17 City of Newark, N.J. Value of All Owner Occupied Units

2000 2008 Value Number % Number % Less than $50,000 910 4% 264 1% $50,000 to $99,999 2,003 9% 337 1% $100,000 to $149,999 7,277 33% 1,440 6% $150,000 to $199,999 4,894 23% 2,339 10% $200,000 to $249,999 1,704 8% 3,681 16% $250,000 to $299,999 1,002 5% 3,181 14% $300,000 to $399,999 392 2% 6,112 26% $400,000 to $499,999 76 0% 3,614 16% $500,000 to $749,999 61 0% 2,051 9% $750,000 to $999,999 27 0% 60 0% $1,000,000 or more 71 0% 65 0% Total 21,750 23,144

Median Value 2000 2008 Newark 132,800 305,400 Essex County 188,400 420,000 New Jersey 167,900 367,600

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2000 Summary File 3 Tables H84, H85; 2006-2008 American Community Survey 3-Year Estimates Tables B25075, B25077

Table II-18 provides data on the Gross Rent of specified housing units in the City.

Table II-18 City of Newark, N.J. Gross Rent of Renter Occupied Units 2000 2008 Value Number % Number % Less than $100 2,308 3% 1,372 2% $100 to $199 7,248 10% 3,888 6% $200 to $299 4,088 6% 4,768 7% $300 to $399 3,729 5% 2,127 3% $400 to $499 7,309 11% 2,092 3% $500 to $599 11,177 16% 2,690 4% $600 to $699 11,797 17% 4,244 6% $700 to $799 9,020 13% 6,606 10%

41 $800 to $899 5,550 8% 8,367 12% $900 to $999 2,697 4% 7,353 11% $1,000 to $1,499 3,147 5% 18,122 27% $1,500 to $1,999 298 0% 4,346 6% $2,000 or more 88 0% 377 1% No cash rent 1,059 2% 1,103 2% Total 69,515 67,455

Median Gross Rent 2000 2008 Newark 586 864 Essex County 675 947 New Jersey 751 1,058

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2000 Summary File 3, Tables H62, H63; 2006-2008 American Community Survey 3-Year Estimates, Tables B25063, B25064

Table II-19 shows that in 2008 for owner occupied units, 15,538, or 67.1 percent, have three or more bedrooms. However, for renter occupied units, 18,891, or 28.0 percent have three or more bedrooms. Large family renters in the City may have a difficult time finding a suitable unit, particularly those low- and very low-income households.

Table II-19 City of Newark, N.J. Number of Bedrooms by Tenure

2000 2008 Owner Owner Occupied Renter Occupied Occupied Renter Occupied No bedroom 68 4,936 214 5,129 1 bedroom 1,615 23,292 1,085 18,797 2 bedrooms 6,958 25,385 6,307 24,638 3 bedrooms 7,740 13,168 9,202 15,872 4 bedrooms 2,514 2,029 3,073 2,208 5 or more bedrooms 2,855 822 3,263 811 Total 21,750 69,632 23,144 67,455

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2000 Summary File 3, Table H42; 2006-2008 American Community Survey 3-Year Estimates, Table B25042

6. Housing Costs

Two of the 2008 American Community Survey tables provided data on the housing costs as a percentage of income broken down by age and tenure. Table II-20 provides comparative data for Newark, Essex County and New Jersey for households whose householder is from age 15 to 64 years and for householders age 65 years and older. Generally, households whose monthly housing costs exceed thirty percent of income are experiencing difficulty making ends meet.

According to the 2008 American Community Survey, a higher percentage of owner households in the City paid more than 30 percent of monthly income on housing costs than did Essex County and New Jersey households. Fifty-seven percent of City owner

42 households paid more than 30 percent of their income on home costs compared to 46.4 percent for Essex County and 40.7 percent for all of New Jersey. In addition, a higher percentage of renter households in the City paid more than 30 percent of their monthly income on housing costs than County and New Jersey households. Fifty-three percent of City renter households paid more than 30 percent of their income on home costs compared to 50.0 percent for Essex County and 50.4 percent for all of New Jersey.

The pie chart that follows provides a graphic portrayal of the housing costs of the population as a percentage of income for both owner and rental households in the City of Newark. a. Owner Households

The 2008 American Community Survey reported a total of 16,997 sampled City owner households whose householder was age 15 to 64 years. Of these, 4,009 (23.6 percent) paid less than 20 percent of their monthly income on housing costs, 1,537 (9.0 percent) of non-elderly owners paid between 20 and 24 percent of their monthly income on housing costs, 1,842 (10.8 percent) of non-elderly owners paid between 25 and 29 percent of their monthly income for housing costs. One thousand four hundred and thirty-eight (8.5 percent) non-elderly residents pay 30 to 34 percent of their income on housing, and 8,171 (48.1 percent) paid 35 percent or more. These residents are considered cost-burdened.

The 2008 American Community Survey reported a total of 5,943 sampled elderly owner households in the City. Of these, 1,527 (25.7 percent) paid less than 20 percent of their monthly income on housing costs, 511 (8.6 percent) paid between 20 and 24 percent of their monthly income on housing, 487 (8.2 percent) paid between 25 and 29 percent of their monthly income on housing costs. Two hundred and ninety-seven (5.0 percent) elderly owners paid 30 to 34 percent, and 3,121 (52.5 percent) paid 35 percent or more of their monthly income on housing costs. Over 55 percent of Newark’s elderly homeowners are cost burdened or severely cost-burdened. b. Renter Households

The 2008 American Community Survey reported a total of 55,344 non-elderly sampled renter households in the City. Of these, 14,870 (26.9 percent) paid less than 20 percent of their monthly income on housing costs, 5,185 (9.4 percent) paid between 20 and 24 percent of their monthly income on housing costs, and 6,315 (11.4 percent) paid between 25 and 29 percent of their monthly income on housing costs. Five thousand three hundred and thirty-one (9.6 percent) paid between 30 and 34 percent of their monthly income and 23,643 (42.7 percent) paid over 35 percent of their monthly income on housing costs.

The 2008 American Community Survey reported a total of 9,555 elderly sampled renter households in the City. Of these, 1,429 (15.0 percent) paid less than 20 percent of their monthly income on housing costs, 648 (6.8 percent) paid between 20 and 24 percent, and 1,798 (18.8 percent) of elderly renters paid between 25 and 29 percent of their monthly income on housing costs. One thousand five hundred and ninety-five (16.7 percent) paid 30 to 34 percent of their monthly income and 4,085 (42.8 percent) paid 43 over 35 percent of their monthly income on housing costs. Over 55 percent of elderly rental households are considered cost-burdened or severely cost-burdened.

Table II-20 Newark, Essex County & New Jersey Housing Costs as a Percentage of Income Householders by Age & Tenure

Newark Essex County New Jersey Homeowners Number % Number % Number %

Age 15 to 64 years: Less than 20.0 percent 4,009 23.6% 30,839 30.9% 529,143 33.0% 20.0 to 24.9 percent 1,537 9.0% 12,497 12.5% 229,136 14.3% 25.0 to 29.9 percent 1,842 10.8% 10,656 10.7% 200,756 12.5% 30.0 to 34.9 percent 1,438 8.5% 9,340 9.3% 153,870 9.6% 35.0 percent or more 8,171 48.1% 36,567 36.6% 492,249 30.7% Total Computed: 16,997 99,899 1,605,154

Age 65 years and over: Less than 20.0 percent 1,527 25.7% 10,559 33.9% 187,009 37.0% 20.0 to 24.9 percent 511 8.6% 2,951 9.5% 59,394 11.8% 25.0 to 29.9 percent 487 8.2% 2,709 8.7% 46,392 9.2% 30.0 to 34.9 percent 297 5.0% 1,836 5.9% 35,313 7.0% 35.0 percent or more 3,121 52.5% 13,126 42.1% 177,141 35.1% Total Computed: 5,943 31,181 505,249

Newark Essex County New Jersey Renters Number % Number % Number %

Age 15 to 24 years: Less than 20.0 percent 14,870 26.9% 32,579 27.7% 223,002 27.1% 20.0 to 24.9 percent 5,185 9.4% 14,388 12.2% 110,871 13.5% 25.0 to 29.9 percent 6,315 11.4% 14,469 12.3% 95,227 11.6% 30.0 to 34.9 percent 5,331 9.6% 10,304 8.8% 75,669 9.2% 35.0 percent or more 23,643 42.7% 45,864 39.0% 319,393 38.8% Total computed: 55,344 117,604 824,162

Age 65 years and over: Less than 20.0 percent 1,429 15.0% 3,241 14.5% 22,753 14.8% 20.0 to 24.9 percent 648 6.8% 1,706 7.6% 13,075 8.5% 25.0 to 29.9 percent 1,798 18.8% 3,724 16.6% 19,751 12.8% 30.0 to 34.9 percent 1,595 16.7% 3,382 15.1% 17,649 11.5% 35.0 percent or more 4,085 42.8% 10,375 46.3% 80,553 52.4% Total computed: 9,555 22,428 153,781

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2006-2008 American Community Survey 3-Year Estimates, Tables B25072, B25093

44 City of Newark, N.J. Housing Costs as Percentage of Income

Owner Households Renter Households

Less than 20 percent Less than 20 percent 25% 28%

30 percent or more 30 percent or more 53% 50% 20 to 24 percent 9%

20 to 24 percent 10% 25 to 29 percent 13%

25 to 29 percent 12%

Source: 2006-2008 American Community Survey 3-Year Estimates

45 7. Incidence of Overcrowding by Tenure and Income Group

The CHAS Data Book provided information of the incidence of overcrowded households by tenure and income group for various types of households in the City of Newark. An overcrowded household is defined as one that has occupancy of more than 1.01 persons per room.

a. Renter Households

According to the data provided, 5,045, or 7.4 percent, of all renter households experience conditions of overcrowding. Of the households at 0-30 percent of HUD Adjusted Median Family Income (HAMFI), 1,685 (6.3 percent) were overcrowded. Of the households at 30.1-50 percent of HAMFI, 1,560 (10.9 percent) were overcrowded. Of the households at 50.1-80 percent of HAMFI, 880 (6.2 percent) were overcrowded. Of the households at 80.1-95 percent of HAMFI, 360 (8.2 percent) were overcrowded. Of the households at 95.1 percent and higher of HAMFI, 550 (6.6 percent) were overcrowded.

Of a total of 2,715 large related rental households, 810 or 29.8 percent experience conditions of overcrowding. Of the large related households at 0-30 percent of HAMFI, 325 (68.4 percent) were overcrowded. Of the large related households at 30.1-50 percent of HAMFI, 155 (36.5 percent) were overcrowded. Of the large related households at 50.1-80 percent of HAMFI, 265 (34.6 percent) were overcrowded. Of the large related households at 80.1-95 percent of HAMFI, 45 (13.8 percent) were overcrowded. Of the large related households at 95.1 percent and over of HAMFI, 55 (15.3 percent) were overcrowded.

b. Owner Households

According to the data provided, 710, or 3.1 percent, of all owner household experience conditions of overcrowding. Of the owner households at 0-30 percent HAMFI, 35 (1.1 percent) were overcrowded. Of the owner households at 30.1-50 percent HAMFI, 80 (2.6 percent) were overcrowded. Of the owner households at 50.1-80 percent HAMFI, 250 (4.6 percent) were overcrowded. Of the owner households at 80.1-95 percent HAMFI, 50 (2.1 percent) were overcrowded. Of the owner households at 95.1 percent and over HAMFI, 300 (3.2 percent) were overcrowded.

46 Table II-21 City of Newark, N.J. Incidence of Overcrowded Households by Tenure & Income Group

Number & Percent Incidence by Income Group

0-30% 30.1-50% 50.1-80% 80.1-95% 95.1% AMI and up Total Number Num. Num. Num. Num. Num. Units Overcrowded % Total % Crw. Total % Crw. Total % Crw. Total % Crw. Total % Crw.

Renters All Renters 68,245 5045 7.4% 26,920 6.3% 1685 14,350 10.9% 1,560 14,240 6.2% 880 4405 8.2% 360 8,320 6.6% 550 Large Related 2,715 810 29.8% 475 68.4% 325 425 36.5% 155 765 34.6% 265 325 13.8% 45 360 15.3% 55

Owners All Owners 23,245 710 3.1% 3,170 1.1% 35 3,030 2.6% 80 5,395 4.6% 250 2375 2.1% 50 9,280 3.2% 300 Large Related 1,600 105 6.6% 75 0.0% 0 215 14.0% 30 275 7.3% 20 120 0.0% 0 915 6.0% 55

Source: CHAS Data Book 2000 – Table 10

47 City of Newark, N.J. Incidence of Overcrowded Units

All Rental Households All Owner Households

Overcrowded Overcrowded 7% 3%

Not Overcrowded 93% Not overcrowded 97%

Source: CHAS Data Tables, U.S. Department of Housing & Urban Development

48 8. Affordability of Housing for Low and Moderate Income Households

Table II-22 and the charts that follow provide data on the number of housing units affordable to households with incomes of less than 30%, 50% or 80% HUD Adjusted Median Family Income by tenure and vacancy status in the City of Newark.

a. Rental Units

Of a total of 22,165 0 to 1 bedroom renter occupied units in the City, there were 8,130 (36.7%) units affordable to households at 0 to 30 percent HAMFI; 16,135 (72.8%) of the units were affordable to households at 0 to 50 percent HAMFI; and 21,890 (98.8%) were affordable to households at 0 to 80 percent HAMFI.

Of a total of 26,895 2 bedroom renter occupied units in the City, there were 5,395 (20.1%) units affordable to households at 0 to 30 percent HAMFI; 16,000 (59.5%) of the units were affordable to households at 0 to 50 percent HAMFI; and 26,215 (97.5%) were affordable to households at 0 to 80 percent HAMFI.

Of a total of 18,300 3+ bedroom renter occupied units in the City, there were 4,065 (22.2%) units affordable to households at 0 to 30 percent HAMFI; 10,175 (55.6%) of the units were affordable to households at 0 to 50 percent HAMFI; and 17,580 (96.1%) were affordable to households at 0 to 80 percent HAMFI.

Of a total of 1,645 vacant 0 to 1 bedroom rental units in the City, there were 475 (28.9%) units affordable to households at 0 to 30 percent HAMFI; 1,075 (65.3%) of the units were affordable to households at 0 to 50 percent HAMFI; and 1,645 (100%) were affordable to households at 0 to 80 percent HAMFI.

Of a total of 1,760 vacant 2 bedroom rental units in the City, there were 310 (17.6%) units affordable to households at 0 to 30 percent HAMFI; 1,470 (83.5%) of the units were affordable to households at 0 to 50 percent HAMFI; and 1,730 (98.3%) were affordable to households at 0 to 80 percent HAMFI.

Of a total of 1,720 vacant 3+ bedroom rental units in the City, there were 370 (21.5%) units affordable to households at 0 to 30 percent HAMFI; 1,350 (78.5%) of the units were affordable to households at 0 to 50 percent HAMFI; and 1,690 (98.3%) were affordable to households at 0 to 80 percent HAMFI.

b. Owner Units

Of a total of 440 owner occupied 0 to 1 bedroom units in the City, there were no units affordable to households at 0 to 30 percent HAMFI; 100 (22.7%) of the units were affordable to households at 0 to 50 percent HAMFI; and 130 (29.5%) units affordable to households at 0 to 80 percent HAMFI.

Of a total of 2,495 owner occupied 2 bedroom units in the City, there were no units affordable to households at 0 to 30 percent HAMFI; 365 (14.6%) of the units were affordable to households at 0 to 50 percent HAMFI; and 685 (27.5%) units affordable to households at 0 to 80 percent HAMFI. 49

Of a total of 3,350 owner occupied 3+ bedroom units in the City, there were no units affordable to households at 0 to 30 percent HAMFI; 625 (18.7%) of the units were affordable to households at 0 to 50 percent HAMFI; and 1,650 (49.3%) units affordable to households at 0 to 80 percent HAMFI.

Of a total of 45 vacant for sale 0 to 1 bedroom units in the City, there were no units affordable to households at 0 to 30 percent HAMFI, 0 to 50 percent HAMFI, and 0 to 80 percent HAMFI.

Of a total of 300 vacant for sale 2 bedroom units in the City, there were no units affordable to households at 0 to 30 percent HAMFI and 0 to 50 percent HAMFI; 30 (10.0%) units were affordable to households at 0 to 80 percent HAMFI.

Of a total of 305 vacant for sale 3+ bedroom units in the City, there were no units affordable to households at 0 to 30 percent HAMFI; 30 (9.8%) of the units were affordable to households at 0 to 50 percent HAMFI; and 145 (47.5%) units affordable to households at 0 to 80 percent HAMFI.

50 Table II-22 City of Newark, N.J. Units Affordable* by Bedroom to Households with Incomes Less Than 30%, Less Than 50% and Less Than 80% HAMFI

0 and 1 Bedroom 2 Bedrooms 3 or more Bedrooms TOTAL Total 0-30% 0-50% 0-80% Total 0-30% 0-50% 0-80% Total 0-30% 0-50% 0-80% Renter Occupied Units 67,360 22,165 8,130 16,135 21,890 26,895 5,395 16,000 26,215 18,300 4,065 10,175 17,580 % Affordable 36.7% 72.8% 98.8% 20.1% 59.5% 97.5% 22.2% 55.6% 96.1%

Vacant for Rent 6,345 1,645 475 1,075 1,645 1,760 310 1,470 1,730 1,720 370 1,350 1,690 % Affordable 28.9% 65.3% 100.0% 17.6% 83.5% 98.3% 21.5% 78.5% 98.3%

Owner Occupied Units 6,340 440 0 100 130 2495 0 365 685 3,350 0 625 1,650 % Affordable 0.0% 22.7% 29.5% 0.0% 14.6% 27.5% 0.0% 18.7% 49.3%

Vacant for Sale 805 45 0 0 0 300 0 0 30 305 0 30 145 % Affordable 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 10.0% 0.0% 9.8% 47.5%

Source: CHAS Data Book 2000 – Tables 14A, 14B, 15A, 15B

*Affordable is defined as: Renter Affordability assumes that a 30% monthly payment standard is the threshold for affordability. The Owner Affordability dimension requires a series of assumptions, in order to determine the relationship between a housing unit’s value and the monthly mortgage payment required to purchase it. HUD assumed a 31% monthly payment standard, 96.5% loan-to-value rate, a 5.5% interest rate, a 1.75% upfront insurance premium, a .55% annual insurance premium, and 2% annual taxes and insurance. Based on these assumptions, HUD estimated value to income ratio of 3.36 for an “affordable” home.

51 City of Newark, N.J. Housing Units by Bedroom, Tenure and Affordability Group

Renter Occupied Units

30,000

25,000

20,000

0-30% HAMFI 15,000 0-50% HAMFI 0-80% HAMFI

10,000

5,000

0 0-1 Bedroom 2 Bedrooms 3 or more Bedrooms 0-30% HAMFI 8,130 5,395 4,065 0-50% HAMFI 16,135 16,000 10,175 0-80% HAMFI 21,890 26,215 17,580

Source: CHAS Data Tables, U.S. Department of Housing & Urban Development

52 City of Newark, N.J. Housing Units by Bedroom, Tenure and Affordability Group

Vacant Rental Units

2,000

1,800

1,600

1,400

1,200 0-30% HAMFI 1,000 0-50% HAMFI 0-80% HAMFI 800

600

400

200

0 0-1 Bedroom 2 Bedrooms 3 or more Bedrooms 0-30% HAMFI 475 310 370 0-50% HAMFI 1,075 1,470 1,350 0-80% HAMFI 1,645 1,730 1,690

Source: CHAD Data Tables, U.S. Department of Housing & Urban Development

53 City of Newark, N.J. Housing Units by Bedroom, Tenure and Affordability Group

Owner Occupied Units

1,800

1,600

1,400

1,200

1,000 0-30% HAMFI 0-50% HAMFI 800 0-80% HAMFI

600

400

200

0 0-1 Bedroom 2 Bedrooms 3 or more Bedrooms 0-30% HAMFI 000 0-50% HAMFI 100 365 625 0-80% HAMFI 130 685 1,650

Source: CHAS Data Tables, U.S. Department of Housing & Urban Development

54 City of Newark, N.J. Housing Units by Bedroom, Tenure and Affordability Group

Vacant Units for Sale

160

140

120

100

0-30% HAMFI 80 0-50% HAMFI 0-80% HAMFI

0 0-1 Bedroom 2 Bedrooms 3 or more Bedrooms 0-30% HAMFI 000 0-50% HAMFI 0030 0-80% HAMFI 030145

Source: CHAS Data Tables, U.S. Department of Housing & Urban Development

55 9. Disproportionate Needs Analysis

Table II-23 provides insights on the extent that any racial or ethnic group has housing needs that are disproportionate to the needs of that category as a whole. The information on the City of Newark is from the CHAS data book that was provided by HUD.

a. Rental Households

Extremely Low-Income Households (0-30% HAMFI)

Of the 26,925 households in this category, 70.7 percent, or 19,025 households reported having housing problems. Of the 24,595 minority headed households, 70.2 percent, or 17,275 households reported having housing problems. Of the 16,035 Black non-Hispanic households, 66.6 percent, or 10,680 households reported having housing problems. Of the 8,045 Hispanic households, 77.1 percent, or 6,200 households reported having housing problems.

Very Low-Income Households (30.1-50% HAMFI)

Of the 14,355 households in this category, 72.1 percent, or 10,350 households reported having housing problems. Of the 12,840 minority headed households, 70.7 percent, or 9,080 households reported having housing problems. Of the 7,965 Black non-Hispanic households, 66.5 percent, or 5,295 households reported having housing problems. Of the 4,125 Hispanic households, 76.2 percent, or 3,145 households reported having housing problems.

Other Low-Income Households (50.1-80% HAMFI)

Of the 14,240 households in this category, 31.0 percent, or 4,420 households reported having housing problems. Of the 12,440 minority headed households, 30.0 percent, or 3,735 households reported having housing problems. Of the 6,970 Black non-Hispanic households, 30.8 percent, or 2,150 households reported having housing problems. Of the 4,725 Hispanic households, 28.6 percent, or 1,350 households reported having housing problems.

Moderate Income Households (80.1-95% HAMFI)

Of the 4,405 households in this category, 14.1 percent, or 620 households reported having housing problems. Of the 3,730 minority headed households, 14.5 percent, or 540 households reported having housing problems. Of the 2,230 Black non- Hispanic households, 13.0 percent, or 290 households reported having housing problems. Of the 1,085 Hispanic households, 20.7 percent, or 225 households reported having housing problems.

Total Low-Income Renter Households

There are 59,925 low income renter households which comprise 87.8 percent of the renter households in the city. Of these, 34,415 households or 57.4 percent, reported housing problems. Of the 53,605 minority headed households, 57.1 percent, or 56 30,630 households reported having housing problems. Of the 33,200 Black non- Hispanic households, 55.5 percent, or 18,415 households reported having housing problems. Of the 17,980 Hispanic households, 60.7 percent, or 10,920 households reported having housing problems. b. Owner Households

Extremely Low-Income Households (0-30% HAMFI)

Of the 3,160 households in this category, 93.2 percent, or 2,945 households, reported having housing problems. Of the 2,405 minority headed households, 90.9 percent, or 2,185 households reported having housing problems. Of the 1,455 Black non-Hispanic households, 86.9 percent, or 1,265 households reported having housing problems. Of the 8,045 Hispanic households, 77.1 percent, or 6,200 households reported having housing problems.

Very Low-Income Households (30.1-50% HAMFI)

Of the 3,030 households in this category, 90.4 percent, or 2,740 households, reported having housing problems. Of the 2,230 minority headed households, 90.1 percent, or 2,010 households reported having housing problems. Of the 1,425 Black non-Hispanic households, 88.4 percent, or 1,260 households reported having housing problems. Of the 735 Hispanic households, 92.5 percent, or 680 households reported having housing problems.

Other Low-Income Households (50.1-80% HAMFI)

Of the 5,390 households in this category, 71.5 percent, or 3,855 households, reported having housing problems. Of the 4,525 minority headed households, 75.1 percent, or 3,400 households reported having housing problems. Of the 2,600 Black non-Hispanic households, 69.8 percent, or 1,815 households reported having housing problems. Of the 1,870 Hispanic households, 81.8 percent, or 1,530 households reported having housing problems.

Moderate Income Households (80.1-95% HAMFI)

Of the 2,375 households in this category, 60.0 percent, or 1,425 households, reported having housing problems. Of the 2,050 minority headed households, 65.1 percent, or 1,335 households reported having housing problems. Of the 1,365 Black non-Hispanic households, 67.8 percent, or 925 households reported having housing problems. Of the 560 Hispanic households, 57.1 percent, or 320 households reported having housing problems.

Total Low-Income Owner Households

There are 13,955 low-income owner households which comprise 60.0 percent of the owner households in the city. Of these, 10,965 households, or 78.6 percent, reported housing problems. Of the 11,210 minority headed households, 79.7 percent, or 8,930 households reported having housing problems. Of the 6,845 Black non- 57 Hispanic households, 76.9 percent, or 5,265 households reported having housing problems. Of the 4,020 Hispanic households, 83.5 percent, or 3,355 households reported having housing problems.

According to HUD regulations, a disproportionately greater need exists when the percentages of a particular racial or ethnic group is at least ten percentage points higher than the percentage in the category as a whole. With respect to renter units in the city a disproportionate need does not exist in any category inasmuch as Black non-Hispanic low-income households report 55.5 percent with housing problems. Hispanic rental households report 60.7 percent with housing problems compared to 57.4 percent for all renter households.

With respect to owner units in the city a disproportionate need does not exist in any category inasmuch as 76.9 percent of Black non-Hispanic owners report having housing problems while 83.5 percent of Hispanic owners report housing problems compared to 78.6 percent of all low- income owner households.

The chart entitled Disproportionate Needs of Low-Income Households by Tenure & Race shows the percentage of low-income households with housing problems by total households, minority households, Black non-Hispanic households and Hispanic households.

58 Table II-23 City of Newark, N.J. Income Distribution by Tenure & Percent with Housing Problems by Minority Status Disproportionate Needs Analysis Income Group Total Low-Income 0-30% HAMFI 30.1-50% HAMFI 50.1-80% HAMFI 80.1-95% HAMFI Households Total All Households Households Number % Number % Number % Number % Number % Income Distribution of Renter Households 68,245 26,925 39.5% 14,355 21.0% 14,240 20.9% 4,405 6.5% 59,925 87.8% % Renter Households w/ Any Housing Problems 51.4% 19,025 70.7% 10,350 72.1% 4,420 31.0% 620 14.1% 34,415 57.4%

Income Distribution of Owner Households 23,245 3,160 13.6% 3,030 13.0% 5,390 23.2% 2,375 10.2% 13,955 60.0% % Owner Households w/ Any Housing Problems 57.3% 2,945 93.2% 2,740 90.4% 3,855 71.5% 1,425 60.0% 10,965 78.6%

All Minority Headed Households Income Distribution of Renter Households 60,140 24,595 40.9% 12,840 21.4% 12,440 20.7% 3,730 16.0% 53,605 89.1% % Renter Households w/ Any Housing Problems 52.1% 17,275 70.2% 9,080 70.7% 3,735 30.0% 540 14.5% 30,630 57.1%

Income Distribution of Owner Households 17,090 2,405 14.1% 2,230 13.0% 4,525 26.5% 2,050 8.8% 11,210 65.6% % Owner Households w/ Any Housing Problems 54.7% 2,185 90.9% 2,010 90.1% 3,400 75.1% 1,335 65.1% 8,930 79.7%

Black Non-Hispanic Households Income Distribution of Renter Households 37,325 16,035 43.0% 7,965 21.3% 6,970 18.7% 2,230 9.6% 33,200 88.9% % Renter Households w/ Any Housing Problems 49.7% 10,680 66.6% 5,295 66.5% 2,150 30.8% 290 13.0% 18,415 55.5%

Income Distribution of Owner Households 11,610 1,455 12.5% 1,425 12.3% 2,600 22.4% 1,365 5.9% 6,845 59.0% % Owner Households w/ Any Housing Problems 54.0% 1,265 86.9% 1,260 88.4% 1,815 69.8% 925 67.8% 5,265 76.9%

Hispanic Households Income Distribution of Renter Households 19,665 8,045 40.9% 4,125 21.0% 4,725 24.0% 1,085 4.7% 17,980 91.4% % Renter Households w/ Any Housing Problems 57.6% 6,200 77.1% 3,145 76.2% 1,350 28.6% 225 20.7% 10,920 60.7%

Income Distribution of Owner Households 6,125 855 14.0% 735 12.0% 1,870 30.5% 560 2.4% 4,020 65.6% % Owner Households w/ Any Housing Problems 67.5% 825 96.5% 680 92.5% 1,530 81.8% 320 57.1% 3,355 83.5%

Source: CHAS Data Book 2000 – Table 1

City of Newark, N.J. Disproportionate Needs of Low Income Households by Tenure & Race

Percent with Housing Problem

100%

83.5% 78.6% 79.7% 80% 76.9%

60.7% 60% 57.4% 57.1% 55.5% All All Minority Black Hispanic 40%

20%

0% Owner Renter

Source: CHAS Data Tables, U.S. Department of Housing & Urban Development

60 E. Persons With Disabilities

The data available to the City to report on the needs of persons with disabilities is extremely limited. However, the City has estimated the needs to the best of its ability based on the limited available Census data for each of the special needs subcategories as follows:

1. Frail Elderly

A frail elderly person has been defined as an elderly person who is unable to perform at least three activities of daily living (i.e. eating, dressing, bathing, grooming and household management activities). Census data indicates that 9,176 or 38.7 percent, of the City’s population age 65 or older has a mobility limitation (defined as a sensory disability, a physical disability, a mental disability or a go-outside-home disability), a self-care limitation or both a self-care limitation and a mobility limitation. The City has determined that this segment of the population is frail elderly.

2. Developmentally Disabled

Census data indicates that 6,611 non-elderly residents of the City’s population have a self- care limitation or both a self-care limitation and a mobility limitation, thus meeting the definition of developmentally disabled. This total did not include elderly residents or those non-elderly residents counted in section 3 below with mobility limitations so as to avoid double counting.

3. Physically Disabled

Census data indicates that 4,246 non-elderly residents of the City’s population have a mobility limitation, thus meeting the definition of physically disabled.

61 III. EVALUATION OF CURRENT FAIR HOUSING LEGAL STATUS

A. Fair housing complaints or compliance reviews where the Secretary of HUD or the N.J. Division on Civil Rights has issued a charge of or made a finding of discrimination.

The City’s Department of Housing and Economic Development received the following information from the Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity Division of the HUD’s Newark Area Office. Table III-1 lists the fair housing complaints filed from January 1, 2004, to February 28, 2010, as well as the categories of the complaints received.

Table III-1 City of Newark, N.J. Fair Housing Complaints by Category: Cases filed 2004 – February 201011

Category Cases filed Disposition Disability 30 44.8% Race/Color 16 23.9% National Origin 12 17.9% Familial Status 4 6.0% Sex 3 4.5% Religion 1 1.5% Sexual Harassment 1 1.5% Retaliation 0 0% Total 67 100%

Source: U.S. Department of Housing & Urban Development

B. Explanation of trends or patterns.

From 2004 to February 2010, 67 Fair Housing complaints were filed with HUD. Of these, the majority of complaints (44.8 percent) were based on disabilities, followed by race/color (23.9 percent) and national origin (17.9 percent).

The number of complaints does not necessarily represent an accurate reflection of the magnitude of a discrimination problem. Many victims of discrimination may not be aware of their Fair Housing rights or may feel uncomfortable going to a government office because of their legal status or language and cultural barriers.

It should also be noted that the filing of a complaint does not necessarily mean that housing discrimination occurred. Any person who believes their rights have been violated may file a complaint with HUD. HUD will investigate the complaint and try to reach a conciliation agreement between the parties involved. If, after investigating the complaint, HUD finds reasonable cause to believe that discrimination occurred, the case may be heard in either an administrative hearing or in federal district court.

11 Equal Opportunity Division of HUD’s Newark Area Office. 62

The City has not received notice of any compliance reviews where a charge of or a finding of discrimination has been made by the Secretary of HUD. All complaints listed above were either resolved, withdrawn, no cause determined, or reconciled. The City has received 67 notices of fair housing complaints or compliance reviews in over 6 years. There appear to be no trends or patterns requiring further investigation.

The high percentage of complaints relating to disabilities may be interpreted as a sign that special attention should be placed on education targeted to housing opportunities ad rights, particularly as they relate to accessibility of public facilities, for this population. The City willl work with HUD to seek additional insight into the nature of these complaints and to assess whether public action is required.

C. Discussion of other fair housing concerns or problems.

Other fair housing concerns and problems are discussed in detail in the following section “Identification of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice.”

63 IV. IDENTIFICATION OF IMPEDIMENTS TO FAIR HOUSING CHOICE AND ASSESSMENT OF CURRENT PUBLIC AND PRIVATE FAIR HOUSING PROGRAMS AND ACTIVITIES IN THE JURISDICTION

The Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice is a review of impediments to fair housing choice in the public and private sector. Impediments to fair housing choice are any actions, omissions, or decisions taken because of race, color, religion, sex, disability, familial status or national origin which restrict housing choices or any actions, omissions or decisions which have the effect of restricting housing choices or the availability of housing choices on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, disability, familial status or national origin.

The background data suggests that no disproportionate need exists for renters or homeowners. In addition, no findings of discrimination were identified by the Newark Area Office of HUD.

Impediments to fair housing choice include actions or omissions in a jurisdiction’s public or private housing sector that:  Constitute violations or potential violations of the Fair Housing Act;  Are counter-productive to fair housing choice such as: o NIMBYism o Resistance when minorities and/or low-income persons first move into white and/or moderate to high income areas, or o Community resistance to the siting of group homes for the disabled in residential neighborhoods based on their disabilities; and  Have the effect of restricting housing opportunities on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, disability, familial status or national origin.

A. Public Sector

1. Potential Impediment – Local building, occupancy, health and safety codes that may affect the availability of housing for minorities, families with children and persons with disabilities.

Assessment – Building, occupancy, health and safety codes as administered by the City are mandated by state statute, and are based on nationally recognized standards and code sources. Other than affordability, such codes have not been found to adversely impact the availability of housing for minorities, families with children, and persons with disabilities.

2. Potential Impediment – Public policies and actions affecting the approval of sites and other building requirements used in the approval process for the construction of public (assisted) and private housing such as: (1) Requirements for the provision of essential municipal services; (2) Real estate property tax assessments; (3) Building codes; (4) Accessibility standards that do not meet the requirements of the Fair Housing Act; (5) Equalization of municipal services; (6) Local zoning laws and policies; and (7) Demolition and displacement decisions pertaining to assisted housing and the removal of slums and blight.

64 Assessment – The City’s policies and actions affecting the approval of sites and other building requirements used in the approval process for assisted and private housing do not place special restrictions on housing being developed as affordable and/or inclusionary housing.

3. Potential Impediment – The administrative policies concerning community development and housing activities such as: (1) Multi-family rehabilitation; (2) The application of site and neighborhood standards for new construction activities; (3) Activities causing displacement which affect opportunities of minority households to select housing inside or outside areas of minority concentration or individuals with disabilities to select housing that is accessible and is in accessible locations.

Assessment – The jurisdiction’s policies concerning community development and housing activities have not been identified as impediments to fair housing. The only neighborhood and site standards applied to community development assistance are those mandated by federal regulations. Activities causing displacement are implemented in accordance with statutory and regulatory controls.

4. Potential Impediment – Public policies that restrict the provision of housing and community development resources to areas of minority concentration, or policies that inhibit the employment of minority persons and individuals with disabilities.

Assessment – The municipality does not have policies restricting the provision of housing and community development resources to areas of minority concentration. The City of Newark is an equal opportunity employer and, as such, does not have policies that inhibit the employment of minority persons and individuals with disabilities.

5. Potential Impediment – Public policies that restrict the inter-departmental coordination between other local agencies in providing housing and community development resources to areas of minority concentration or to individuals with disabilities.

Assessment – The City does not have a policy of restricting the inter-departmental coordination between other local agencies in providing housing and community development resources to areas of minority occupation or to individuals with disabilities.

6. Potential Impediment – Planning, financing and administrative actions related to the provision and siting of public transportation and supportive social services that may inhibit or concentrate affordable housing opportunities for persons with disabilities.

Assessment – The City does not have planning, financing or administrative control over the provision and siting of public transportation which falls under the purview of the N.J. Department of Transportation. Supportive social services are primarily under the province of the County and as such are subject to financing, administration, siting and control by the County. Local public assistance is provided in accordance with state statutory requirements and is administered by the municipality and county

65 welfare agencies. These resources and services neither inhibit nor concentrate affordable housing opportunities with persons with disabilities.

7. Potential Impediment – Policies and practices affecting the representation of all racial, ethnic, religious and disabled segments of the community on planning and zoning boards.

Assessment – The selection of representatives on the planning and zoning boards is made in conformity with municipal codes and state statutes. The representation on these boards provides for full participation of all racial, ethnic, religious and disabled segments of the community.

B. Private Sector

1. Potential Impediment – The sale or rental of housing and real estate practices such as: (1) Steering or blockbusting; (2) Deed restrictions; (3) Trust or lease provisions; (4) Conversion of apartments to all-adult; (5) Inaccessible design; or (6) Property management firm’s “occupancy quotas.”

Assessment – The above real estate practices are illegal in the state of New Jersey. HUD’s Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity Division indicated the number and types of complaints that have been filed alleging housing discrimination, including complaints in which the Secretary of HUD issued a charge of discrimination or where a suit has been filed by the U.S. Department of Justice, the N.J. Division on Civil Rights, or private plaintiffs. They identified 67 complaints from 2004 to February 2010, as described in Section III, indicating such practices have not been identified throughout the City.

2. Potential Impediment – Banking and insurance policies and practices pertaining to the financing, sale, purchase, rehabilitation, and rental of housing that may affect the achievement of fair housing choice within the jurisdiction.

Assessment – Throughout the first part of this decade, subprime lenders targeted the City of Newark and similar cities across the country. The City’s neighborhoods were targeted with aggressive marketing and often unscrupulous and predatory lending practices. These practices imposed what in many cases was an untenable additional burden on an already cost-burdened residential population. In 2006, the peak of subprime lending, 54% of all new loans in Newark were subprime, versus 26% in New Jersey. Approximately 27% of the loans originated on homes in Newark in 2006 are currently in foreclosure. In Newark, foreclosure filings grew from 866 in 2004 to 2,080 in 2007, and to 2,701 in 2008. Approximately 2,500 loans are currently in the foreclosure process in Newark and an additional 813 homes are currently bank-owned REO’s. According to a survey conducted by Rutgers University Bloustein School graduate students, in the spring of 2008 approximately 70% of the 96 properties in Clinton Hill with foreclosure filings were vacant upon inspection. In Lower Broadway, 41% of the 52 foreclosed properties were already empty. A more recent Bloustein study in Clinton Hill indicated that 46% of properties in the survey area had a foreclosure filed against it at some point between 2004 and 2009.

66 In response to this crisis, the City of Newark’s Housing and Real Estate Division and the Essex County Housing and Community Development Division co-convened a taskforce in November 2007 to address the impact of mortgage foreclosure on residents and neighborhoods in Newark and adjacent municipalities. The Newark/Essex Foreclosure Taskforce currently has over 35 organizational members including government, community groups, research and advocacy organizations, state and local regulators and community development lenders. The Taskforce seeks to create a coordinated, strategic local response to the negative impact of mortgage foreclosures on residents and neighborhoods in Newark, Irvington, East Orange, Orange, Montclair and the surrounding area by:  Creating a forum for sharing ideas and information and coordinating action among the various entities working in Essex County on foreclosure prevention and neighborhood stabilization  Supporting programs and activities that help Essex residents affected by foreclosure as either owners or renters to preserve their homes and neighborhoods  Advocating for the needs of low- and moderate-income residents and their communities as programs and policies take shape to respond to the current mortgage crisis.

Accomplishments over the last two years include:  1,010 individuals attended the two Hope Now mortgage workout fair events held in Newark  Approximately 4,500 households were contacted through outreach efforts such as flyer handouts, mailings and door-to-door outreach

3. Potential Impediment – The discriminatory provision of housing brokerage services.

Assessment – The above practices are illegal in the state of New Jersey. HUD’s Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity Division indicated the number and types of complaints that have been filed alleging housing discrimination, including complaints in which the Secretary of HUD issued a charge of discrimination or where a suit has been filed by the U.S. Department of Justice, the N.J. Division on Civil Rights, or private plaintiffs. They identified 67 complaints from 2004 to February 2010, as described in Section III, indicating such practices have not been identified throughout the City.

4. Potential Impediment – Availability of, and dissemination of, information on the availability of programs that may be used to provide financial assistance for modifications to privately owned housing to make such housing accessible to persons with disabilities and their families.

Assessment – Funding for modifications to privately owned housing to accommodate persons with disabilities and their families is available to low-income households through the City’s housing rehabilitation programs. The availability of these programs is regularly advertised.

C. Public and Private Sector

1. Potential Impediment – The nature, extent, and disposition of housing discrimination complaints, violations, or suits against private housing providers within the jurisdiction; other evidence of private housing discrimination occurring within the jurisdiction; information on any contract conditions related to fair housing considerations placed by HUD on the jurisdiction; or information on any failure by the jurisdiction in complying with its Affirmatively Further Fair Housing certification.

Assessment - HUD’s Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity Division indicated the number and types of complaints that have been filed alleging housing discrimination, including complaints in which the Secretary of HUD issued a charge of discrimination or where a suit has been filed by the U.S. Department of Justice, the N.J. Division on Civil Rights, or private plaintiffs. They identified 67 complaints from 2004 to February 2010, as described in Section III, indicating such practices have not been identified throughout the City.

2. Potential Impediment – Evidence of segregated housing conditions, and the housing desegregation plans or efforts of HUD or other Federal agencies.

Assessment – HUD’s Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity Division indicated the number and types of complaints that have been filed alleging housing discrimination, including complaints in which the Secretary of HUD issued a charge of discrimination or where a suit has been filed by the U.S. Department of Justice, the N.J. Division on Civil Rights, or private plaintiffs. They identified 67 complaints from 2004 to February 2010, as described in Section III, indicating such practices have not been identified throughout the City.

3. Potential Impediment – The delivery system for programs providing supportive services to families with children and persons with disabilities.

Assessment – The delivery system for programs providing supportive services to families with children and persons with disabilities includes a wide range of service providers. These service providers are not for profit organizations and Essex County. The City is supportive of these service providers and maintain an ongoing liaison and dialog with these providers.

4. Potential Impediment – Provision of financial assistance for dwellings, such as: (1) Discriminatory lending patterns, practices and disclosures; (2) Discriminatory appraisal and insurance underwriting practices; (3) Disinvestment and insurance redlining practices.

5. Potential Impediment – Other laws, policies and practices affecting the location, cost and availability of housing.

Assessment – The City has not identified other laws, policies, and practices affecting the location, cost and availability of housing.

6. Potential Impediment – Where is a determination of unlawful segregation or other housing discrimination by a court or a HUD Administrative Law Judge, or a finding of noncompliance with Title VI or the Fair Housing Act by HUD regarding assisted housing within a jurisdiction, an analysis of the actions which could be taken by the jurisdiction to help remedy the discriminatory condition.

Assessment – There has been no determination of unlawful segregation or other housing discrimination by a court or a HUD Administrative Law Judge, or a finding of noncompliance with Title VI or the Fair Housing Act by HUD regarding assisted housing within the City. As such, an analysis of the actions which could be taken by the jurisdiction to help remedy the discriminatory condition is unnecessary.

69 V. CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

A. Conclusions

The City of Newark is complying with its certification to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development that it affirmatively further fair housing opportunities as follows:

1. The community profile and housing analysis did not identify conditions which would indicate a pattern of housing development or occupancy indicating a lack of fair housing opportunities in the City.

2. The analysis of impediments did not identify conditions or actions adversely impacting fair housing opportunities.

B. Recommendations

1. Continue to closely monitor available statistical data as a means of early identification of any trends indicating that fair housing opportunities are being restricted and if such restrictions are identified, take appropriate affirmative remedial action.

2. Monitor the achievements in the provision of affordable housing opportunities in the municipality as proposed in the City’s housing element and consolidated plans. In the event substantive lack of performance is determined, appropriate plan revisions should be initiated.

3. Regularly contact federal and state enforcement agencies to determine if fair housing complaints related to the City of Newark have been filed and the status of any such complaints.

4. Annually review this Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice and its contents to determine any necessary and appropriate changes and/or revisions necessary to maintain its accuracy and ensure the City’s continued compliance with both the letter and spirit of statutes and regulations related to the City’s obligation to affirmatively further fair housing opportunities.

5. The City, perhaps with Essex County as well as public and private entities, should consider initiating adequate outreach programs and information to educate individuals and housing providers in fair housing rights and responsibilities.

70 VI. SIGNATURE PAGE

______Title Date

71 City of Newark, New Jersey 2010-2011 Annual Action Plan

Cory A. Booker, Mayor

Department of Administration Office of Business Administrator

September 1, 2010 to August 31, 2015

______City of Newark, New Jersey 2010-2015 HUD Consolidated Plan 7‐1

City of Newark, New Jersey 2010-2011 Annual Action Plan

Cory A. Booker, Mayor

PREPARED FOR

City of Newark Office of Partnerships and Grants Management Office of Business Administrator Newark City Hall 920 Broad Street Newark, NJ 07102

PREPARED BY

Dennison Associates, Inc. 1100 G Street N.W., Suite 910 Washington, DC 20005-7406 www.dennisonassociates.com [email protected]

______City of Newark, New Jersey 2010-2015 HUD Consolidated Plan 7‐2

Section 7: 2010‐2011 Annual Action Plan

TABLE OF CONTENTS VII. 2010-2011 ANNUAL ACTION PLAN ...... 7-1 A. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ...... 7-2 Evaluation of Past Performance ...... 7-4 Summary of Priority Needs ...... 7-6 Statement of Specific Annual Objectives – HUD Table 3A ...... 7-7 Sources of Funds ...... 7-8 Allocation of Funds Summary ...... 7-9 Geographic Distribution ...... 7-10 B. MANAGING THE PROCESS ...... 7-11 Lead Agency ...... 7-11 Institutional Structure ...... 7-11 Summary of Citizen Participation Process ...... 7-13 Monitoring ...... 7-14 C. HOUSING ...... 7-16 HOME Specific Requirements ...... 7-17 Needs of Public Housing ...... 7-17 Barriers to Affordable Housing ...... 7-19 Lead-Based Paint Strategy ...... 7-19 D. HOMELESS ...... 7-20 Homeless Coordination Strategy ...... 7-20 Chronic Homeless Strategy ...... 7-20 ESG Program ...... 7-21 E. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT ...... 7-21 Antipoverty Strategy ...... 7-21 F. NON-HOMELESS SPECIAL NEEDS ...... 7-22 HOPWA Program ...... 7-22 G. APPENDICES ...... 7-23 Appendix A – Listing of Action Plan Projects – HUD Table 3C ...... 7-24

HUD Table 3A: Summary of Specific Annual Objectives Table 1: Allocation of HOME Funds Table 2: Allocation of CDBG Funds Table 3: Allocation of ESG Funds Table 4: Allocation of HOPWA Funds

______City of Newark, New Jersey 2010-2015 HUD Consolidated Plan 7‐3

Section 7: 2010‐2011 Annual Action Plan

A. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The City of Newark is submitting this 2010-2011 Action Plan as the first annual action plan of the 2010-2015 Consolidated Plan period in accordance with Consolidated Plan regulations found at §92.220. An annual Action Plan is required by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) from all jurisdictions receiving annual entitlements of formula grants. This section discusses the general goals and objectives during 2010-2011 Action Plan year, including available and potential resources, funding priorities and projects, and various HUD- funded program information. Newark expects to receive the following entitlement grants during the 2010-2011 program year:

. Community Development Block Grant (CDBG); . HOME Investment Partnerships Program (HOME); . Housing Opportunities for People with AIDS (HOPWA); and . Emergency Shelter Grant (ESG).

This Annual Action Plan outlines the activities that will be undertaken during the program year beginning September 1, 2010 and ending August 31, 2011. All activities mentioned in this Action Plan are based on current priorities and quantified by level of need. By addressing these priorities, the City hopes to meet local objectives identified in the 2010-2015 Consolidated Plan. All proposed activities and projects are intended to principally benefit citizens of Newark who have extremely low-, low- and moderate-incomes, and populations that have special needs, such as homeless, elderly, disabled persons, persons with HIV/AIDS, and other special needs populations.

Evaluation of Past Performance

The City of Newark adopted its previous Consolidated Plan in 2005, at which time the following priorities were identified:

1. Provision of Neighborhood Services; 2. Provision of Public Services Across a Continuum of Care; and 3. Provision of Economic and Housing Development Services

Provision of Neighborhood Services

During the 2008-2009 program year the City focused its neighborhood services on demolition/clearance and code enforcement activities. The City’s demolition program focused on damaged and abandoned housing structures in low- to moderate-income block groups that pose an imminent risk to health and safety. During the 2008-2009 program year the City demolished 30 properties totaling 39 units. The City’s code enforcement activities worked in concert with demolition activities to target properties to enforce local and state building codes to improve City neighborhoods. Four non-profit organizations were also funded to conduct an array of services to youth, seniors, and the general population of Newark’s NRSA target area. Additionally, three ______City of Newark, New Jersey 2010-2015 HUD Consolidated Plan 7‐4

Section 7: 2010‐2011 Annual Action Plan

CBDOs were funded to provide neighborhood services targeted in specific communities of need. In total, over $1,509,859 in funding was disbursed during the 2008-2009 program year for neighborhood service objectives.

Provision of Public Services across a Continuum of Care

Provision of Economic and Housing Development Services

The City of Newark strives to achieve every goal and objective established for its programs. Given the recent foreclosure, housing, and economic crisis it has become increasingly challenging to achieve desired accomplishments. The City’s population encompasses a predominantly low-income population with needs across the spectrum of community, housing, and economic development categories. The City was hard hit by the foreclosure crisis and as a result properties were abandoned and left to deteriorate. While housing and other community development objectives are often the most publicized, providing services to homeless and special needs populations are just as important. Given the wide-spread needs of City residents and the physical deterioration of properties, prioritization and targeting of City programs remains a challenge.

Summary of Priority Needs

This 2010-2011 Annual Action Plan outlines the current planned uses of CDBG, HOME, ESG, and HOPWA funds for activities that are consistent with the current priority needs identified in the City of Newark’s strategic plan and support identified objectives. These activities will support three new overarching goals, including:

1. Jobs for residents; 2. Healthy and safe neighborhoods; and 3. Newark as a City of choice. ______City of Newark, New Jersey 2010-2015 HUD Consolidated Plan 7‐5

Section 7: 2010‐2011 Annual Action Plan

The priorities below have been identified for the 2010-2011 Action Plan year based on the housing and homeless needs assessments, housing market analysis and consultation with stakeholders and partner agencies. Below is a summary of the priority needs identified through these assessments.

Housing . Increasing affordable rental housing opportunities for low-income households. . Providing new affordable homeownership opportunities for low- to moderate-income households. . Improving condition of existing housing. . Increasing availability of sustainable housing options. . Providing counseling for first-time homebuyers and current homeowners. Homeless . Reducing the number of individuals and families that become homeless. . Increasing availability of permanent supportive housing options for homeless individuals and families. . Supporting operations of existing emergency/transitional homeless facilities. . Providing essential services to homeless populations. Special Needs Populations . Increasing accessibility/availability of affordable housing specifically for persons with HIV/AIDS. . Providing new affordable permanent supportive housing for low- to moderate-income veteran households. . Increasing availability of permanent housing for special needs populations. . Providing support services to special needs populations. Community/Economic Development . Increasing economic opportunities for low-income residents in Newark. . Revitalizing and beautifying Newark businesses and storefronts. . Technical Assistance to small businesses. . Establishing social venture programs. . Public Services.

During the 2010-2011 Action Plan year, the City will focus on the following objectives and strategies identified in the Strategic Plan, working towards the three goals above:

. Objective 1: Increase economic growth and job opportunities through large scale development projects, social ventures and job training programs [Strategies 1.1-1.3] . Objective 2: Increase access to quality affordable housing choices [Strategies 2.1-2.4] . Objective 3: Improve condition of existing neighborhoods through redevelopment and rehabilitation of residential and commercial properties, and public facilities [Strategies 3.1-3.5] . Objective 4: Provide funding for public services to support workforce development, educational services, child care services, ex-offender social services and homeowner foreclosure prevention programs for low-income individuals and families in targeted neighborhoods [Strategies 4.1-4.5] . Objective 5: Support homeless and at-risk special needs populations with coordinated support services and housing assistance, focusing on prevention and “housing first” activities [Strategies 5.1-5.7]

______City of Newark, New Jersey 2010-2015 HUD Consolidated Plan 7‐6

Section 7: 2010‐2011 Annual Action Plan

. Objective 6: Promote and fund targeted developments to help facilitate a living downtown urban center around key development nodes [Strategy 6.1] . Objective 7: Green Newark’s Neighborhoods [Strategy 7.1]

Statement of Specific Annual Objectives – HUD Table 3A

The following table (HUD Table 3A) summarizes the City’s 2010-2011 annual goals and funded activities using HUD resources.

HUD Table 3A: Summary of Specific Annual Objectives Obj. Source 2010-11 2010-11 Objective/ Specific Objectives Indicator # of Funds Projected Actual Outcome Rental Housing Objectives 003 Affordable Rental Housing New Constr. HOME Units 80 DH-1 0024 Rental Housing Acquisition & Rehab CDBG Units 25 DH-2 004 CHDO Rental Housing Development HOME Units 20 DH-1 Owner Housing Objectives 005 Neighborhood Rehabilitation Program HOME Units 5 DH-3 007 Senior Emergency Repair Program HOME Units 40 DH-3 002 Downpayment Assistance HOME Households 20 DH-2 Economic Development Objectives 008 Commercial/Industrial Development CDBG People 500 EO-1 Commercial Façade/Streetscape 0010 CDBG Businesses 12 EO-3 Improvements Public Facilities Objectives 0011 Public Facility Rehabilitation CDBG Facilities 3 SL-3 0023 Homeless Facility Renovations ESG Facilities 4 SL-3 Public Services Objectives 009 CDBG Public Services (Various) CDBG People 30,000 SL-1 0026 Urban Agriculture/Tree Planting CDBG People TBD TBD Special Needs and Homeless Objectives 0014 Long-term Tenant Rental Assistance HOPWA People 460 DH-1 0016 HIV/AIDS Facility Operations HOPWA People 1,000 DH-2 Short-term Rent, Mortgage and Utility 0017 HOPWA People 250 DH-3 Assistance 0018 Housing Information Services HOPWA People 1,400 DH-1 0020 Essential Services ESG People 60 DH-1 0021 Homeless Prevention Services ESG People 50 DH-3 0022 Facility Operational Assistance ESG People 100 DH-1 Administration/Planning/Project Delivery 001 General HOME Administration HOME - - N/A 006 CDBG Administration CDBG - - N/A 0012 CDBG Project Delivery CDBG - - N/A 0013 HOPWA Administration (City) HOPWA - - N/A 0015 HOPWA Administration (Subrecipient) HOPWA - - N/A 0019 ESG Administration ESG - - N/A

______City of Newark, New Jersey 2010-2015 HUD Consolidated Plan 7‐7

Section 7: 2010‐2011 Annual Action Plan

Sources of Funds

HUD Entitlement Funds

For program year 2010-2011, the City of Newark will receive four (4) entitlement grants from HUD totaling $20,569,064. The City will allocate these resources to the areas with the highest needs, including areas of minority concentration which includes the South Ward, Central Wards, and the lower North and West Wards. A brief description of the grants and the City’s allocation for the 2010-2011 program year is as follows:

HUD Stimulus Funds

As a result of the Housing and Economic Recovery Act (HERA) and American Recovery Reinvestment Act (ARRA) the City of Newark received direct stimulus funds in 2009 totaling $9,250,334, as follows: ______City of Newark, New Jersey 2010-2015 HUD Consolidated Plan 7‐8

Section 7: 2010‐2011 Annual Action Plan

The activities and priorities of 2009 stimulus funding and projected accomplishments and expenditures are identified under separate specific action plans or substantial amendments. To review these documents please refer to the City’s website for additional information, found at http://www.ci.newark.nj.us/government/City_departments/.

Allocation of Funds Summary

The funding of activities to achieve desired accomplishments and goals outlined in this document are based on 2010 federal funding allocations as follows:

______City of Newark, New Jersey 2010-2015 HUD Consolidated Plan 7‐9

Section 7: 2010‐2011 Annual Action Plan

HOME Funds

Table 1: Allocation of HOME Funds Program/Activity % Total Funds Allocated Administration 10% $421,086 Homebuyer Assistance 5.2% $220,000 Homeowner Rehabilitation (NRP) 3.6% $150,000 Rental Housing Development/Rehabilitation 66.2% $2,788,146 CHDO Housing Development (Set-aside) 15% $631,630 Total 100% $4,210,862

CDBG Funds

Table 2: Allocation of CDBG Funds Program/Activity % Total Funds Allocated Administration 20% $1,871,996 Homeowner Emergency Rehabilitation 10% $935,998 Commercial/Industrial Development 33% $3,088,793 Public Services (various) 10.7% $1,003,997 Urban Agriculture/Tree Planting 4.3% $400,000 Commercial Façade Improvement Program 2.5% $234,000 Public Facility Rehabilitation 2.5% $234,000 Rental Housing Development/Rehabilitation 10% $935,998 Project Delivery 7% $655,199 Total 100% $9,359,979 Anticipated Program Income* $100,000 *program income will be used to fund one of the eligible CDBG activities identified above.

ESG Funds

Table 3: Allocation of ESG Funds Program/Activity % Total Funds Allocated Administration 5% $18,911 Essential Services 21% $79,424 Homeless Prevention 17% $64,296 ESG Facility Operational Assistance 17% $64,296 Homeless Facility Renovations/Rehabilitation 40% $151,284 Total 100% $378,210

HOPWA Funds

Table 4: Allocation of HOPWA Funds Program/Activity % Total Funds Allocated Administration (City) 3% $198,600 Administration (Subrecipients) 6% $397,201 Long-term Tenant Based Rental Assistance 76% $4,965,010 HIV/AIDS Facility Operational Assistance 8% $529,601 Short-term Rent, Mortgage and Utility Assistance 6% $397,201 Housing Information Services 1% $66,200 Total 100% $6,220,013

______City of Newark, New Jersey 2010-2015 HUD Consolidated Plan 7‐10

Section 7: 2010‐2011 Annual Action Plan

The above activities are funded specifically to implement the strategies and address priorities identified in the five-year strategic plan.

Geographic Distribution

The City of Newark will continue to direct its resources into the areas with the highest needs. The primary areas targeted for investments are the South and Central Wards, where the demographics are mostly comprised of: Latinos, Hispanics, Portuguese, Brazilians, and others. The West Ward carries a population comprised of: Russians, Asians, Hispanics, Latinos, African Americans, South Africans, and others. We believe the rational for this geographical distribution is straightforward. While these areas have received large shares of assistance through HUD programs over the years, the resources have never been sufficient to meet the demonstrated need. The City will also utilize the opportunities and strategies identified in redevelopment plans to coordinate allocation of resources across targeted neighborhoods and development nodes.

B. MANAGING THE PROCESS

Lead Agency

In 2008, the Department of Administration renamed the Bureau of Research, the Office of Partnerships and Grants Management (PGM). By establishing the PGM, the Administration sought to expand on the functions of the former Bureau of Research with the goal of ultimately centralizing grants management City-wide. PGM is the lead City agency responsible for consolidated planning and reporting on the four formula programs to HUD. PGM is directly responsible for administration of CDBG and ESG funds. The Department of Child and Family Well Being (CFWB) is responsible for administration of HOPWA funds. The Department of Economic and Housing Development (EHD) is responsible for the administration of HOME funds.

Institutional Structure

City Public Agencies

______City of Newark, New Jersey 2010-2015 HUD Consolidated Plan 7‐11

Section 7: 2010‐2011 Annual Action Plan

. Department of Administration, Office of Partnerships and Grants Management: Lead City agency responsible for consolidated planning and reporting on the four formula programs to HUD.

. Department of Finance: Financing of all community development activities, including bonding programs; grant accounting, grant accounts payable, internal auditing of grants.

. Department of Neighborhood and Recreational Services, Division of Inspections and Enforcement: Residential and commercial property code enforcement.

. Department of Neighborhood and Recreational Services, Division of Demolition and Clearance: Emergency demolitions; clearance of properties.

Newark Housing Authority

Newark State Board of Education

______City of Newark, New Jersey 2010-2015 HUD Consolidated Plan 7‐12

Section 7: 2010‐2011 Annual Action Plan

The Board coordinates and cooperates with the Newark administration and NHA in the planning, design and development of facilities.

University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey (UMDNJ)

UMDNJ coordinates and cooperates with the above and below-listed institutions in planning, design and site identification for facilities.

County of Essex

. Department of Economic Development, Training and Employment: The Department operates housing grant programs, primarily Balanced Housing and Regional Contribution Agreements; PHA activities in Newark, including Section 8 vouchers; and coordinates its own Con Plan with those of local entitlement cities.

. Department of Health and Human Services: The Department coordinates and cooperates with regard to City housing services for special needs populations.

. Essex-Newark Continuum: the CoC coordinates strategies and activities to identify and serve homeless populations.

Nonprofit Organizations

Summary of Citizen Participation Process

As required by Consolidated Plan regulations, the City has implemented a Citizen Participation Plan (CPP) to engage citizens and stakeholders in the consolidated planning process. The CPP is discussed in detail in Section 3 of the Consolidated Plan. The CPP includes public notice, community engagement of stakeholders, as well as technical assistance during the drafting and finalizing of the Consolidated Plan. The City of Newark held two stakeholder focus group sessions on April 21 and 23 of 2010, where over 40 organizations representing various communities provided the City with feedback on key priorities and objectives. Additionally, a public hearing was held on May 14, 2010 whereby citizens were provided an opportunity to provide feedback. Input received during the public hearing process was incorporated into decision making regarding the priorities, strategies, allocation of resources and target areas outlined in this draft Annual Action Plan.

______City of Newark, New Jersey 2010-2015 HUD Consolidated Plan 7‐13