State CED Associations Affect the
Emergence of Regional and Smart Growth Policies
Focused and well planned development in the city core will not only meet the needs of city residents for housing and jobs; it will also ease the pressure to over-develop green spaces, watersheds, and farms beyond the city limits. State CDC associations affect smart growth policies in the following ways:
Ø Strategic alliances. The Network provides leadership to the Coalition for Affordable Housing and the Environment (the Coalition). MCCD allies with 1,000 Friends of Maryland, the Forum for Rural Maryland, and the Chesapeake Bay Foundation (environmental and rural organizations) on smart growth. MCCD’s efforts have increased these organizations’ awareness about the need to incorporate low-income housing in market communities, particularly new developments, to avoid the concentration of poverty. These organizations have taken the message to heart, working to modify a county government plan to acquire property in low-income areas through eminent domain while prohibiting the development of rental housing on those acquired properties. Mixed income housing will relieve pressure on low-income communities, and increase housing options for low-income people.
Ø Directing the Discussion . CCEDA is steering the discussion to jobs-housing balance, regional collaboration, and inner-city infill development. The Network developed an urban revitalization platform with the Coalition and hosted a conference last March, "Cities and the State Plan: Setting a Direction." MCCD led discussions about why smart growth should address the needs of low-income communities, not just protect against suburban expansion: Growth boundaries and policies can inadvertently promote the concentration of poverty and inhibit convenient access to jobs. MCCD has participated in several smart growth conferences, as well as at a state government employee executive training program on Smart Growth, always raising concerns about the need for social justice policies to accompany growth restriction policies. MCCD held a roundtable in Baltimore of urban and rural practitioners about the unfulfilled promise of smart growth. In addition, the Maryland Office of Planning will develop model guidelines for smart communities; MCCD has consistently advocated that those guidelines include mixed income communities.
Ø Brownfields. Brownfield initiatives open urban sites for job‑creating commercial and industrial development, thereby reducing the pressure for development in more far‑flung locales. Associations will develop the capacity of CDCs to undertake projects involving brownfields, with a focus on state financing tools connected to the state's recent brownfields law. MACDC and OCDCA are active in brownfields remediation activities. MACDC is involved in the implementation of the
Brownfields Redevelopment Fund. MACDC’s top priority is to ensure that the funds are made available both as grants and loans, as called for in the legislation. MA Development, the agency responsible for running the program, has made it clear that they are reluctant to give grants. Toward that end, MACDC had three strong CDC allies appointed to the advisory committee that oversees the Fund. MACDC has also sent two specific letters on this issue to the Development office. In addition, MACDC has worked closely with CDCs to help them access the Fund. Six CDCs submitted applications. MACDC has also facilitated conversations between its members and the Attorney General’s office regarding a new covenant not to sue that can provide added liability protection to projects that have strong community development impacts. The AG is hoping to use one or two CDC projects as models to begin implementing this new program. The Network published a guide on remediating and redeveloping brownfields in New Jersey (see attached) and hosted a day-long workshop on brownfields redevelopment.
Ø Financing Tools
. State associations will work to develop special financing tools which provide "patient" capital for acquisition, demolition and new construction of commercial districts, in both urban and rural areas or open space funding that includes urban areas.
CCEDA is working to link state lending tools to Smart Growth Principles issued by the CA Treasurer’s office. Those principles are:
Ø Plan for the future
Ø Promote prosperous and livable communities for everyone
Ø Provide better housing and transportation
Ø Conserve open and green space
Ø Protect farm, range, and forest from sprawl and maximize inner city brownfields.
Ø Tax Issues . The Coalition also engaged a public policy research firm to interview local, state and national tax policy experts to assess the Coalition’s tax reform recommendations reducing NJ’s dependence on property taxes, and ascertain which of the Coalition’s recommendations would be most likely to be successful. MACDC worked closely with environmentalists and historic preservationists on the Community Preservation Act. This bill would empower local municipalities to enact new local taxes (not currently allowed under state law) in order to fund open space protection, historic preservation or affordable housing. A critical element of the bill, and one supported by all stakeholders, is the requirement that at least 10% of the funds be used for each of the three purposes. This forces suburban towns that are historically reluctant to build affordable housing to invest at least some new funds into housing. It also prevents towns from using open space protection as a strategy for keeping low-income people out of their communities.
Ø Land use . The Network secured a set-aside for urban areas in the Governor's recent open space legislation. A Maryland state forum on smart growth led to the development of smart codes legislation whose goal is to streamline building codes to encourage in-fill development. MCCD supported this measure, understanding that efforts to renew distressed inner city areas would be hastened if rebuilding efforts were less costly and more efficient.
Ø Transportation . OCDCA is reviewing programs that have successfully used TEA-21 funding to link community-based development efforts with transportation strategies.
Ø Fair Housing . After three years of unsuccessful legislative efforts to prohibit discrimination in housing based on source of income, MCCD began a dialogue with property owners and managers, HUD, the state, county and city housing authorities, and advocates about how to remove barriers to section 8 voucher usage. So far, their efforts identified a need to separate myth from fact about section 8 vouchers. Landlords who accepted section 8 years ago and ran afoul of rigid policies do not know that those policies have changed. In addition, the working group has identified multi-family property owners who should be educated about Section 8. The goal is to relieve the concentration of section 8 vouchers in certain communities by increasing housing choice in the more stable, safe and prosperous communities.