Not now.
Those two words have plagued the effort in Lexington to make a real commitment to affordable housing.
Not now, when the economy is such a disaster. Not now, when the recovery is just beginning. Not now, when it can involve the dreaded "t" word and an election is coming down the pike.
When that thinking guides public policy, "now" never happens. It always remains some idyllic moment in the future when a good can be accomplished that requires absolutely no hard decisions.
The yearning for that perfect moment was evident, and understandable, recently when the Urban County Council heard a presentation by Mary Brooks from the Housing Trust Fund Project, which advises affordable housing trust funds across the country.
After noting that if you filled out your brackets last year according to communities that have housing trust funds you would have done well in an NCAA Final Four pool, Brooks stressed that successful trust funds have dedicated sources of funding.
What that means is a steady, predictable stream of money year to year. It's the way, for example, the local library system is funded (an add-on to the property tax) or the state and federal road funds (taxes on gasoline.) That steady stream is what allows for long-term planning on major projects, like building roads or libraries or affordable housing.
So, while Mayor Jim Newberry's proposal to throw in $250,000 to be matched by private donations or Councilwoman Diane Lawless' hopeful suggestion that University of Kentucky Coach John Calipari host a Hoops for Housing benefit might constitute a good and admirable start, neither will get the job done.
If Lexington is to have a working housing trust fund, then some fee or tax must be dedicated to it.
The Affordable Housing Trust Fund Commission that Newberry appointed a couple of years ago suggested adding a 1 percent tax on insurance premiums to raise $4 million annually. But communities have used a wide range of approaches, including recording fees, real-estate excise taxes, hotel/motel taxes and building-permit fees.
At the end of the day, it will take a tax or fee. That's difficult to do, as it should be, without a very good reason.
Developing housing that is affordable for people who can't pay market rates is the right and charitable thing to do. For many in our community, that's a good enough reason. I'd argue, though, that committing public funds demands a more rigorous and tangible explanation of the benefit to the community.
One good reason might be that affordable housing is a good investment.
Brooks cited a 2007 survey from her organization that showed trust-fund monies attracted $6 to $10 for each dollar invested. That's money that will go directly into local construction jobs and materials.
Brooks also noted a study done for Lee County, Fla., in 2002 that calculated the cost of not having affordable housing. Economic activity from jobs created by building affordable housing, the increased property-tax revenue and money families would spend on food, clothing and school supplies if they didn't overpay for housing amounted to over $240 million a year.
The researchers also figured a total of $5.5 million annually in the infrastructure costs of workers who made long commutes because they couldn't afford to live in the county where they work, and the health and education costs associated with a lack of affordable housing.
That last point is that children of families that can't find affordable housing often move frequently, which hurts their performance in school. They are hospitalized more often and have more respiratory infections than other kids. That's because they are exposed to health risks such as pest infestations that cause asthma or lead poisoning that can lower intelligence or hazards like faulty wiring.
Who are these people who would live in affordable housing subsidized through a trust fund?
In most places they earn less than a certain percentage of the area median income. That usually includes seniors and people with disabilities, pre-school teachers, health care aides and people who work in hospitality, retail and emergency services.
Lexington's commission figured in 2008 that 18 percent, or almost 9,000, of those who rent in Lexington spent more than 50 percent of their gross income on housing and another 36 percent spent more than 30 percent.
Affordable housing isn't for some undefined, unseen "other"; it's for the people who take care of us and our kids, who wait on us in stores and restaurants, who respond when we're in need and who have retired with a limited income after years in the work force.
In an interview, Brooks said acting to ensure affordable housing usually requires a mind shift. We have to go from seeing it as just a good thing to do to seeing it as an essential part of a community's infrastructure. We need roads and sewers and police protection and street lights and affordable housing.
There isn't a firm proposal in front of the council now for how to fund or operate an affordable housing trust fund. So, in reality, the heavy lifting won't happen until after the election this fall.
But voters can make it clear to candidates for mayor and the council that creating a trust fund and a reliable source of revenue must be a priority in 2011. And then remind them after they're sworn in next January that "now" has arrived.
Jacalyn Carfagno of Lexington is a free-lance writer and a former Herald-Leader editorial writer. Reach her at jacalyncarfagno@insightbb.com.
