 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
It came about because of ignorance. At least that's what Jaimie Ross, affordable housing director at 1000 Friends of Florida claims. When she arrived in Tallahassee in Summer 1991, Ross knew little about the politics and animosities surrounding funding for affordable housing. But she quickly found out all was not well.
Ross's first goal on the job was encouraging local governments to implement their comprehensive plans and meet their affordable housing goals. But she was getting nowhere because it was lack of funds-rather than lack of will-that was holding the localities back. So Ross began to look into the question of funding, and she found two initiatives afoot.
The city of Tampa had for years been
trying to win a "local option" bill that would 
give
localities the right to pass their own real estate transfer taxes to fund
affordable housing. Meanwhile, a different affordable housing funding
bill had emerged from several housing industry groups who were participating
in an ad hoc working group on affordable housing convened by Governor Lawton
Childs . Ross talked to the sponsors of each bill, and each felt the
other one didn't stand a chance. "I said these people need to come
together," she remembers.
Ross started by calling the Tampa city lobbyist, Cathy Bentancourt, who put her in touch with other affordable housing advocates. "Soon there were so many people coming to my meetings we couldn't hold them in our office," recalls Ross. "So I asked the home builders if we could have it at their office." The home builders said yes, but when Ross told Bentancourt about the new location, Bentancourt told her "Hell no!" The home builders, along with the Realtors, had taken the lead in defeating the Tampa local option bill over and over, and Bentancourt refused to show up if the meetings were at their offices.
Ross had uncovered a deep mistrust in the housing world. "If I'd had that knowledge beforehand, I would've thought it couldn't be done," she says. But having come this far, and seeing it as the only option to make some lasting change, she persevered. She found a meeting room on neutral ground - at the legislature - invited everyone, and sat back. "I was scared out of my mind," she says. "These were powerful people. No one knew who I was, but they knew each other. And they started hammering out a compromise bill."
The coalition included the Florida Home Builders Association, Florida Association of Realtors, Florida Association of Counties, Florida League of Cities, Florida Legal Services, Department of Community Affairs, Florida Housing Finance Corporation, Florida Impact, Florida Catholic Conference, and the Florida Housing Coalition. Their bill became the William E. Sadowski Act of 1992. It raised the state's real estate transfer tax (called the documentary stamp tax) by a dime, from 60 to 70 cents per $100. That increase was directed 30 percent to the state housing finance corporation, and 70 percent to be divided among the housing trust funds of 67 counties and 48 cities (the ones eligible for federal Community Development Block Grants). In 1995 another 10 cents per $100 of the revenue stream would be re-directed to the housing programs.
Ross says the bill was successful
because it spelled out a very specific program - the State Housing Initiative
Program - that explained exactly how the money would be used. Each
member of the coalition got some benefits and made some 
compromises
in crafting the program's guidelines. For example, 65 percent of the money
must go to homeownership programs - this was a compromise between the Realtors'
goal of 100 percent and the low-income advocates' goal of no more than 50
percent. The home builders got a guarantee that 75 percent of the money
would go to construction-related activities, and that participating local
governments would expedite the permitting process for affordable housing.
The low-income advocates got a requirement that at least 30 percent of the
money would go to housing for very low-income people (under 50 percent of
median income) and another 30 percent to low-income (under 80 percent of
median), with the remaining available for projects for people up through
moderate-income (under 120 percent of median).
No exemptions to the tax at all were included - Ross says the prospect of negotiating them was far too complicated, and would've become a real "sticky wicket." So the coalition steered clear.
Within these parameters, the local
governments have flexibility about how to use 
the
money. It has been used for rehab work, foreclosure prevention, new construction,
down payment assistance, and more. A strong accountability component
is built in - the money must be "expended" within two years, and "expended"
means a qualified person has actually moved in. The Sadowski Act also
sets aside $350,000/year for the Catalyst Program, which provides training
and technical assistance on all aspects of affordable housing to local governments
- many of which had never received housing funding before the act was passed.
It was these details and compromises that made the bill politically feasible," says Ross. The state housing finance corporation went to bat for the Act, since it stood to get 30 percent of the revenue. And the housing industry lobbyists saw that in the end, the increased housing funding would be good for business. "Have your Realtor call my Realtor," Ross sometimes jokingly tells colleagues in other states who are facing Realtor resistance.
Although the Sadowski Act has made Florida the envy of affordable housing advocates across the country for the past 10 years, in 2003 Florida housing advocates are facing a tough challenge. Governor Jeb Bush has proposed redirecting the transfer tax money and funding housing on an annual appropriations basis. This would seriously weaken the housing programs, and require a huge amount of energy to yearly lobby for funding.
But the good news, according to Ross, is that the Sadowski Act Coalition has continued to meet every year since the act was passed to monitor its successes and advocate for continued affordable housing funding. Since the coalition is still around, Ross thinks they can put up a good fight in the legislature. The years of accountability reports will also provide them with good data to make their case. After all, the reason the coalition is still together, says Ross, is because the housing program works.
 |
 |
 |