Author: Rick Jacobus

  • Inclusinary Housing in California

    Inclusinary Housing in California

    Inclusionary Housing ReportWritten By Rick Jacobus and Maureen Hickey.

    Download PDF File

    Affordable By Choice:Trends in California Inclusionary Housing Programs was commissioned by the Nonprofit Housing Association of Northern California, The California Coalition for Rural Housing, The San Diego Housing Federation and the Sacramento Housing Alliance. The report details the findings of a statewide survey of local government agencies that have adopted inclusionary housing policies. Key findings include:

    * Nearly one-third of California jurisdictions have inclusionary programs
    * More then 80,000 Californians have housing through inclusionary programs
    * Most inclusionary housing in integrated within market rate developments
    * Inclusionary housing provides shelter for those most in need
    * Lower-income households are best served through partnerships

     

  • Joint Venture Guide

    Joint Venture Guide

    Joint Ventures GuideJoint Ventures with For-Profit Developers. A Guide for Community Development Corporations

    Written by Greg Maher, Rick Jacobus, Maegan Winning and Judy Turnock.

    This guide is designed to assist CDCs in becoming educated consumers as they think about, plan and become partners in joint ventures with for-profit developers.

    Joint ventures between a community development corporation (“CDC”) and a for-profit partner present tremendous opportunities for a CDC to build its skills and complete projects that are larger in scale and/or beyond its core competencies. However, there are a host of business issues raised by the prospect of a CDC co-owning or working closely with a for-profit on a project. Many issues need to be carefully negotiated for the CDC to protect its financial integrity and credibility. Based on Greg Maher’s 2005 memo, this guide is structured to assist CDCs in becoming educated consumers as they think about, plan and become partners in joint ventures with for-profit developers.

    Download PDF file

  • San Francisco’s Neighborhood Marketplace Initiative

    Mayor Newsom Announces Neighborhood Marketplace Initiative
    Unique program targets public, private resources
    to strengthen neighborhood business districts

    May 23, 2005

    SAN FRANCISCO – Speaking at a national conference on urban commercial district revitalization held in San Francisco today, Mayor Newsom announced a new program to bolster neighborhood business districts – the Neighborhood Marketplace Initiative. The initiative is a public-private partnership between the City of San Francisco, the nonprofit Local Initiatives Support Corporation (LISC), and private corporate and philanthropic donors. Coordinated by LISC and the City, the Neighborhood Marketplace Initiative (NMI) represents a major step forward in efforts to strengthen the city’s neighborhood business districts.

    The City and LISC are backing the Neighborhood Marketplace Initiative to improve job creation, investment and the physical landscapes in San Francisco’s neighborhoods. Piloted recently in the city’s Excelsior district with tremendous results and modeled on similar LISC-supported programs around the country, the Neighborhood Marketplace Initiative brings together business, resident, and other civic leaders in selected neighborhoods to develop and implement business district improvement strategies. Across the country similar programs have proven effective at reducing storefront vacancies, bringing in new businesses and jobs, and stimulating community involvement.

    “What makes this program unique, and why we are excited about it,” said Mayor Newsom, “is that we have city departments, LISC, and local funders coordinating work and dollars to assist our neighborhood business districts — and to assist the districts based upon what the residents and merchants say they need and want. It is a public-private partnership that is do-able and proven successful. It is exactly the kind of collaborative, targeted approach we need to help our neighborhoods and local businesses.”

    Under the Neighborhood Marketplace Initiative, the City and LISC jointly plan to invest approximately $500,000 annually to support neighborhoods selected for the program. Private funders play a pivotal role; approximately half of this investment is provided through donations to LISC from the State Farm Insurance Companies and the Evelyn & Walter Haas, Jr. Fund, among other funders. In addition, LISC is targeting an additional $25 million in flexible loan dollars ($10 million) and other financing ($15 million) for viable and desired development projects in neighborhoods selected to participate in the initiative.

    Five neighborhoods have been selected to receive initiative assistance as part of the program’s launch. The Excelsior and Visitacion Valley will receive assistance in implementing comprehensive commercial corridor plans while Third Street in the Bayview, San Bruno Avenue in the Portola neighborhood, and Ocean Avenue in the OMI (Ocean-Merced-Ingelside) neighborhood will all receive assistance in developing a comprehensive strategy and beginning implementation. The targeted neighborhoods will benefit from coordinated services from several city agencies. For example, some of the neighborhoods will receive priority for façade improvement grants through SF Shines, a program of the Mayor’s Office of Community Development as well as support from the Mayor’s office of Economic and Workforce Development in working with property owners, developers and retailers to fill vacant retail properties.

    Some of the targeted neighborhoods will also receive help in forming community benefit districts (CBD). Similar to a Business Improvement District, a CBD is formed when property owners in a proposed district voluntarily agree to a special assessment in addition to their regular property taxes, in order to finance capital improvements and services over and above those already provided by the City.

    “Because the City, LISC and other funders are working together to support these neighborhoods, we are not only using existing resources more effectively but we hope to engage more local corporate and philanthropic institutions in helping our neighborhoods”, said Stephanie Forbes, Director of LISC’s Bay Area program. “With this partnership, we now have the infrastructure for a new era of neighborhood change based upon residents and merchants working together on the ground, and the local funders and the City working together to support their visions. We can’t afford to work separately anymore.”

    The Mayor’s announcement was made at the opening session of a conference bringing together more than 400 neighborhood revitalization practitioners from around the country. Urban Forum 2005, the third such conference hosted by LISC’s Center for Commercial Revitalization, will include several workshops and presentations, with a special focus on successful efforts to help communities revitalize commercial corridors. The conference is being held today and tomorrow at the Bill Graham Civic Auditorium.

    LISC is a 25 year-old national nonprofit community development support organization that provides program models, policy analysis, training, technical assistance and financing to help community-based organizations working on behalf of our nation’s lower income families and neighborhoods. LISC works in 33 urban areas around the country and operates a rural program in 66 rural areas. LISC is the largest nonprofit community development financial institution in the country. Bay Area LISC has supported the region’s affordable housing and community development work since 1981.
    ####

  • Preserving Affordability in Inclusionary Housing

    Preserving Affordability in Inclusionary Housing Programs

    This half day workshop was offered as part of a training series organized by the Nonprofit Housing Association of Northern California for local housing activists working toward local inclusionary housing ordinances.

    DETAILED AGENDA:

    Goals:
    To give participants an opportunity to discuss and think about the social objectives of affordable homeownership programs and specifically about the tradeoffs between wealth creation and preservation of public subsidy.
    To familiarize participants with a wider range of alternative approaches that balance those interests differently
    To encourage critical thinking about existing programs and to model the kinds of questions that policy makers and program managers might ask to insure that their programs are appropriate to local circumstances.
    To expose participants to techniques for mathematically modeling long-term affordability and the consequences of program design choices.

    Handouts:
    Agenda
    One case study
    Example spreadsheet comparing approaches

    Materials:
    Powerpoint projector and laptop with speakers
    Flipchart and markers
    Sheets of 8.5×11 paper and tape
    Spare pens and blank paper

    Total Time: 3 hours

    1:00 Opening
    OK you just won your campaign and now developers in your community will be building affordable units into every new project. Low-income homebuyers will, at last have some homes within their price range. If you have done your advocacy work well, your program will produce brand new homes that look a lot like the market rate homes that they are built alongside but sell for hundreds of thousands of dollars less than the neighboring homes. What keeps the low-income families that move in from turning right around the next day and selling at market rate and pocketing all of that money? Would that be wrong?

    Audience response about preserving the stock, requiring people to live there for a fixed period, resale restrictions, shared equity, etc.

    Overview of workshop: this is a workshop about “WHY” we have affordable ownership programs. This is a workshop about thinking harder about the goals.

    Who I am:
    I noticed that local ownership programs varied very widely in how they balanced asset building and maintaining affordability. The only common factor was that the program managers were sure that what they were doing was “Fair”. How can we talk about “Fair” without knowing the goals of these programs? To most people what seemed fair was actually just the option that was most familiar. But there are a lot of options and while some may be truly unfair, it seems like there really is not a “most fair” approach. That is bad news because it means we have to do some hard work to balance different interests and clarify our values.

    1:15 Small Group Discussion: 15 Minutes
    Given the costs and subsidies required, and the developer’s goals…

    How should they handle the potential increases in the value of these homes?

    Should the homeowners be allowed to keep all of the increase in price?

    Should they have to return all of the increase to the developer or something in the middle?

    Large Group Discussion: 10 Minutes
    One or two present what they came up with.
    What are some other options?

    1:40 Video – Race the power of an Illusion

    Show a brief excerpt from this PBS video about race in America. The clip presents the story of how homeownership in postwar America functioned as a great wealth generator for white families while, housing market descrimination and federal lending policies meant most African-American families were unable to buy homes and those that did earned little equity.

    Discussion about how home equity can dramatically change people’s lives and the futures for their children.

    2:10 Flash Presentation: Understanding Subsidy Retention – 20 Minutes

    Animated presentation demonstrating the underlying economic differences between different approaches to preserving homeownership subsidy.

    2:30 Continuum of Subsidy Preservation Mechanisms – 15 Minutes
    Full group discussion focused on placing different approaches that participants are familiar with on a continuum between models that allow homeowners to earn unlimited equity and those that preserve public subsidy perfectly.

    Make a large post-it for each option
    – Grants
    – Forgivable Loans
    – Interest Free Deferred loans
    – Deferred Interest Loans
    – Shared Equity Loans
    – Resale Price Restrictions
    — Appraisal Based
    — Indexed
    — Mortgage based

    2:45 Other Factors to consider in program design:
    Every program needs:
    1)A pricing formula, which defines the maximum price at which the housing may be rented or resold; a cap intended to maintain rents and resale prices at an affordable level for some targeted class of low-income or moderate-income persons while providing a modest build up of equity if homeownership is involved;
    2)a legal mechanism by which the pricing formula is contractually imposed on the housing’s current (and future) owners; and
    3)An administrative structure for monitoring and enforcing any restrictions on price (and use) imposed on the housing.

    Some other issues
    Owner Occupancy/Subletting
    Longevity/stability: Do you want people to stay?
    Improvements: Do you want people fixing their homes up?
    Administration – Outsourcing
    Monitoring
    Dealing with law suits
    Marketing resales

    3:00 Detailed Comparison of Two Mechanisms

    Case #1: Shared Equity Loan Agreement
    Small Group Activity: – 15 Minutes
    Handout two legal documents and ask groups to summarize the relevant terms and identify some potential strengths and weaknesses of each approach to preservation of subsidy. Under what circumstances would this approach make sense?

    Full group discussion: – 15 Minutes
    Did all the groups come to the same conclusions?
    Which of these two approaches works better?
    Which preserves affordability best?
    Which generates the most wealth creation?
    Which is easiest to administer?
    Do these approaches work as well under different assumptions about inflation and interest rates?

    3:30 Modeling Long-Term Affordability Under Changing Market Conditions
    (30 Minutes)

    Project at an Excel spreadsheet which compares the several alternative resale price restriction formulas under several different interest rate and price inflation scenarios.

    Download the spreadsheet

    4:00 Adjourn

  • Creating Permanently Affordable Homeownership with CLTs

    Creating Permanently Affordable Homeownership with CLTs

    Subsidy Retention
    Subsidy Retention

    By Rick Jacobus and Amy Cohen

    in California Affordable Housing Deskbook, Solano Press.

    Written for local elected officials and housing program administrators, this chapter explains how Community Land Trusts operate and places them within a continuum of other policy alternatives.

    Download the PDF file

  • Commercial Development Training Program

    Commercial Development Training Program

    I developed this series of day long and multi-day workshops for the Local Initiatives Support Corporation’s national Center for Commercial Revitalization to help community development corporations and local governments understand the unique challenges associated with neighborhood retail development. I delivered training courses in communities around the country including: Philadelphia, Providence, Indianapolis, San Francisco, Toledo, Jacksonville, San Diego, Seattle, Miami and Cincinnati.

    Workshop topics include:

    Developing a Neighborhood Retail Strategy (1 day)
    Commercial District Revitalization 101 (2.5 days)
    Introduction to Commercial Real Estate Development (2 days)
    Developing a Retail Leasing Strategy (1 day)
    Joint Ventures with Private Developers (1 day)
    Financing Commercial Real Estate Projects (1 day)
    Negotiating Commercial Leases (1 day)
    Evaluating Commercial Tenants (1/2 day)
    Commercial Property and Asset Management (1 day)
    Overview of Commercial Real Estate Development (2.5 hours)
    Overview of Commercial District Revitalization (2.5 hours)

    Download flyer with detailed course descriptions

  • Commercial Stabilization ToolKit

    Commercial Stabilization ToolKit

    PLBanner.png

    Produced for PolicyLink’s Equitable Development ToolKit

    Commercial districts in low- and moderate-income urban neighborhoods can be sources of blight and crime or they can contribute to the economic and social health of the community. However, efforts to improve commercial districts often struggle with how to strengthen a district without contributing to gentrification and displacement. As part of their Equitable Development Toolkit PolicyLink asked me to write this paper describing ways that community groups are managing this tension and highlighting some initial lessons learned from these efforts. The paper provides real world examples that support the idea that stabilizing and improving a neighborhood serving commercial district can not only be achieved without fueling gentrification it may be a necessary step in preventing gentrification.

    Download PDF File

     

  • Understanding Subsidy Retention

    Understanding Subsidy Retention

    I created this interactive tutorial on the economics of permanently affordable housing after trying to explain these concepts to small groups with static PowerPoint slides. The key to understanding the growing homeownership affordability challenge is the relative rates of change of housing prices and incomes. I found that this idea was difficult to explain verbally but was easy for people to understand with the help of simple drawings. To create the tutorial, I had to not only create the images and write the accompanying text but build a complex user interface to allow people to control the flow of the presentation and skip forward and backwards.

    The presentation has proven extremely popular and has been shown by myself and a number of other advocates to thousands of people at a series of housing and urban development conferences. The latest version includes an imbedded voice narration. The presentation can also be run without the audio with either full text narration on screen or with bulleted text for live presentations to groups.

     

    View Interactive Animation Full Screen

  • EastLake Revitalization Plan

    EastLake Revitalization Plan

    In the mid 1990s, Oakland’s EastLake District, then known as “New Chinatown,” was the site of a string of arson fires targeting Asian Groceries. The fires were a dramatic set back for a struggling commercial district. As Director of Neighborhood Economic Development for the East Bay Asian Local Development Corp., I oversaw the development of a revitalization strategy in the wake of the fires. The Strategy involved organizing a multi-ethnic merchants association, and coordination of an ongoing program of targeted business assistance, promotion of a new more inclusive image for the district (which was never predominantly Chinese), and a series of capital improvements. The EastLake Main Street Strategy outlined overall goals of this effort, identified key stakeholders whose support would be essential and spelled out a 3-year workplan and budget. The document led directly to multi-year funding commitments from the City of Oakland, the Local Initiatives Support Corp. and two foundations.

    Download PDF Document

  • Multi-Lingual Welfare to Work Collaboration

    Multi-Lingual Welfare to Work Collaboration

    Screen Shot 2014-05-05 at 5.48.48 PM

    CIRCLES Welfare to Work Collaborative

    As Neighborhood Economic Development Director of EBALDC, I coordinated a community planning process focused on the challenge of welfare to work. The process involved all of the 35 social service agencies and immigrant associations serving the neighborhoods in identifying collaborative solutions.

    The planning process led to the formation of the CIRCLES collaborative, through which 12 organizations coordinated a comprehensive set of services ranging from English as a second language classes, work readiness counseling, transportation assistance, work experience job placements and ultimately job referrals. The program model involved several small immigrant service associations as direct case managers and language specialists but built a common infrastructure of relationships with larger institutions such as the local community college, employers and transportation support organizations. Collaboration allowed the smaller organizations to build on their relationships in the ethnic communities while benefiting from the resources and access to jobs that larger institutions could provide. I facilitated collaborative meetings and coordinated the preparation of funding applications that successfully secured over $2.5 million from 9 different sources to support the initial pilot program.

    Download the PDF Document