Kansas City needs affordable housing now. Plan to link help to November vote is risky

No wonder folks who’ve struggled to find affordable housing in Kansas City don’t trust that city leaders are making it a priority for low-income families, including the working poor who teach our children, staff our stores or wait on us in restaurants.

Mayor Quinton Lucas recently unveiled a proposal to ease requirements to build affordable housing for private developers who get tax breaks for their projects. The proposal will eliminate requirements that new projects include housing for the very low-income residents, instead allowing developers to focus on residents who can afford rents closer to market value.

To address those left-behind residents, the mayor’s plan is relying on a $50 million bond that will add money to the city’s housing trust fund over several years — if voters approve it.

We strongly favor a range of housing options for families priced out of the market, and those options must include families and others who can afford rents closer to the market rate, the group the mayor’s proposal targets. But the thousands of Kansas City residents who need the most help — those no longer included in the city’s affordable housing tax credit program — risk being left out entirely. That also endangers the workforce.

That’s because the mayor is leaving it up to voters to decide whether they will provide money for the housing trust fund, rather than require developers to set aside housing for very low income workers. Making it even dicier: The plan has been rushed through the City Council without adequate public debate or a full airing of the details.

Lucas told the editorial board this month that the pace is dictated in part by the calendar. The vote is in November, but the council must decide by Aug. 30 if it wants the bond proposal on the ballot — which will also include a second question authorizing $125 million in city borrowing for infrastructure improvements.

He’s right about the tight timing, but he could have built in more time had he not waited so close to the deadline to propose the changes.

That is partly why advocates for low-income housing have been outraged.

Trust fund money could take 5 years

Even if the money is approved, the city has yet to detail how it will be used and how quickly the money would be borrowed. The terms of the bond election state only that the funds will be drawn down over five years.

That’s in keeping with what remains a bare-bones outline for the city’s plan for affordable housing in general. It has set a goal of 10,000 affordable housing units by 2027, and has pledged funds already committed to the trust fund to build roughly 500 units per year over the next five years, including 14 projects approved this summer. Federal COVID-19 relief funds are earmarked to build 4,000 units. That leaves 2,000 units dependent on the $50 million bond voters will be asked to approve, with the balance depending on private fundraising.

But how fast that money will be spent, and on what kinds of housing, isn’t yet set. People facing a housing crisis need a roof over their heads now. Asking them to wait possibly five years before construction starts prolongs the hardship.

That hardship affects residents up and down the income ladder. Even workers earning nearly $50,000 a year can struggle to find housing suitable for their families.

“At least 30 city jobs don’t make enough to afford $1,200 rent,” — the rate set for a one-bedroom apartment — said Wilson Vance of KC Tenants, which has battled the city for years over a lack of affordable housing.

That’s why so many joined housing advocates at City Hall recently to protest the mayor’s plan.

Lucas insists that the changes will mean more housing built for families with incomes ranging from about $50,000 to $80,000. We agree those families also need more affordable housing options.

And it’s also true that the current plan, which requires developers seeking tax credits to make 10% of their units affordable for those earning as little as roughly $25,000 a year, has had no takers in the past 18 months.

It’s important to remember that these tax credits were designed to force developers to build a mix of homes so that at least 20% of them carry rents affordable to low-income residents. That’s essential, especially in a city where nearly half the residents are renters.

But counting on the voters to pass the bond is a risky strategy.

No plan to address housing in Kansas City is a good one if it leaves out lower-income, poor and extremely poor families. That’s where the city’s greatest shortage of affordable housing is.

The projects already on the book prove that investments can help the city dig its way out of the housing crisis among the very poor. But to reach the goal of 10,000 new units, it’s going to take sustained effort across a wide range of programs.

Hoping voters will approve a $50 million bond fund is not a housing strategy. What’s needed is a steady source of funding that will ramp up and maintain efforts to provide more units affordable to even the lowest-income workers in Kansas City.