rural voices Archives

Tag Archive for: rural voices

Farmworker Housing Travails from Pennsylvania

May 4, 2015/in Some Mistakes Have Been Made

This story appears in the 2015 Spring Edition of Rural Voices

PathStone stayed the course through a ten-year predevelopment process and emerged a stronger real estate developer.

by John Wiltse

Adams County, Pennsylvania, is famous for the Gettysburg battlefields but less well-known outside the immediate vicinity as a major fruit-growing region with a large migrant and seasonal farmworker population. Since 1978, PathStone Corporation, based in Rochester, NY, has been providing critical housing and human services to Adams County farmworkers.

PathStone provided technical assistance to the Adams County Housing Authority for the development of the 12-unit McIntosh Court Apartments, the first off-farm labor housing community in Pennsylvania, which was completed in 1989. We also administered an on-farm housing rehab program in Adams and Berks Counties and developed several other multifamily projects which served both farmworkers and other low income families in the area.

In 1995, buoyed by the successful completion of the first USDA Section 514/516 farm labor housing projects in New Jersey, New York, Ohio and Pennsylvania, PathStone began pre-development work for Jonathan Court. The development is the first-ever Federally funded off-farm migrant housing complex in PathStone’s service area, located down the road from McIntosh Court among the peach and apple orchards of south central Pennsylvania.

This organization was managed by volunteers with no paid staff and no housing development experience whatsoever.

At the time, PathStone was under contract with USDA Rural Development (RD) to provide technical assistance to other non-profits to assist them in developing farm labor housing projects. We secured a commitment from a local faith-based organization, Fruitbelt Ministries, to serve as sponsor/owner of the project, and we helped them modify their organizational structure to conform to the “broad-based membership organization” structure required by RD at the time. This organization was managed by volunteers with no paid staff and no housing development experience whatsoever.

First Lesson Learned: Don’t Try This At Home!

PathStone learned through this and a farmworker housing project located in New Jersey that the development and ownership of a multi-family housing complex is best left to organizations with paid staff trained (or at least in training) to undertake these responsibilities and with affordable housing as a central part of their organizational history and mission.

In the case of the Jonathan Court project, PathStone wound up taking over development of the project due to changes in priorities for Fruitbelt Ministries. In a similar situation in New Jersey, PathStone staff became the de facto staff for the volunteer-run nonprofit membership organization we established to own the first and only 514/516 project in that state.

Our lessons learned here are that change can come very slowly.

The project site for Jonathan Court was an assemblage of three lots, plus two additional parcels with existing family apartments. The existing apartments were going to be part of the project initially, but were later excluded from the deal. There was public water and sewer available and a building boom was going on in the area, so the landowner had no interest in signing our proposed option agreement. After several months of fruitless negotiations, Fruitbelt Ministries borrowed $136,000 from a national nonprofit organization through their revolving loan fund and bought the land. The lender insisted that PathStone guarantee the loan, so it’s not hard to see how we wound up in the driver’s seat on this deal!

For the next eight years or so, this project proceeded down a long and winding development path. PathStone had four different Pennsylvania housing directors over this period and inconsistent project management direction from the Rochester headquarters. The Pennsylvania State Executive Director provided skilled leadership for all PathStone human service programs in the state in addition to housing development, but did not have specific real estate development training or expertise.

Second Lesson Learned:

Make sure housing development staff are directed and supported by experienced housing developers and provide consistent supervision and training, especially through key staff transitions.

Immediately after purchasing the site, we started to receive monthly bills for reservation of sewer capacity from the Possum Valley Sewage Authority. The lack of as-of-right sewer access was overlooked in the due diligence process and wound up adding about $120,000 to the project cost. Another expensive lesson learned!

Getting through the local approvals process proved to be more involved than anticipated, stretching out over two years. Each time we thought we were close to securing the necessary approvals, the local planning board would come forward with a new requirement, report or study that needed to be completed, each of which required the expenditure of additional time and money. We erred in not getting the full scope of the planning board review requirements up front, in writing (though some of these requirements did, in fact, change during the pre-development process).

Working with RD was also challenging, to say the least. RD interpretations of the design guidelines and requirements changed several times during the protracted pre-development stage, necessitating at least three sets of architectural drawings and many months
of additional architectural and engineering work.

In October 1998, the USDA multi-family housing statute was amended to allow owners of off-farm migrant housing projects financed under its Labor Housing Program (Section 514/516) to use RD Rental Assistance funds to provide an annual operating assistance grant to the project (instead of providing individual rental assistance to each household). PathStone decided to take advantage of this new opportunity and the operating budget was revised to show the projected operating assistance in lieu of traditional RA.

In June 2003, five years after the operating assistance change was made to the statute, the National Office of RD finally released a Proposed Rule for the implementation of this change. Although the operating assistance mechanism was put into place by several RD-financed migrant projects in other states, RD in Pennsylvania was unable to process our requests for this subsidy funding.

As of this writing, PathStone has amassed operating deficits of over $300,000 from Jonathan Court over the past 10 years and RD has yet to release any operating assistance. Thankfully, RD staff have recently joined in negotiations with PathStone and we hope
to have a resolution to the past due operating assistance by the time this is printed. Our lessons learned here are that change can come very slowly. at RD and that each RD State Office operates with a high degree of autonomy. PathStone had been aware of both of these facts, but Jonathan Court put a very painful price tag on these lessons!

The Good News:

The 14 apartments in the Jonathan Court project have continued to provide decent, safe housing for hundreds of farmworkers and their families over the past 10 years. The housing is operated in close coordination with the PathStone farmworker services office just down the road and our residents are often enrolled in job training programs and are receiving other supportive services. Their children are often served by the Migrant Head Start Center also operated by PathStone.

Which Brings Us to One Final Lesson Learned:

Include supportive services staff on the development team from the beginning.

Our farmworker service staff just down the road from the site could have been much more involved in the project throughout the process if they had been fully engaged by the real estate development staff.

We have been able to carry the operating deficit as a receivable on our books all these years with advances from our unrelated property management reserves. We have made many changes to the way we manage the development of multi-family housing as a result of the mistakes made on Jonathan Court but, as any experienced developer will tell you, every deal presents a fresh set of challenges and opportunities to learn from new mistakes. Our real estate developers in each state now report to the Senior VP for Housing in Rochester and are supported by a strong internal team. The PathStone Asset Management Committee (composed of the President & CEO, CFO, Senior VP for Housing and Senior VP for Property Management) also provides a level of oversight of our development projects that wasn’t in place for Jonathan Court.

John Wiltse is the Senior Operations Director at PathStone Corporation in Rochester, New York. John cut his teeth on rural community development work at the Cranks Creek Survival Center in Harlan County, KY, as a college intern and has worked in the field for 24 years with PathStone.

"My House Is Backwards!"

May 4, 2015/in Some Mistakes Have Been Made

This story appears in the 2015 Spring Edition of Rural Voices

The Housing Development Alliance takes a calm but straightforward approach to mistakes: admit them, fix them, and learn from them in hopes of not making the same mistake twice.

by Scott McReynolds

Last fall the Housing Development Alliance celebrated our 20th Anniversary and our 200th new home with a double house raising. In the midst of this controlled chaos, an overzealous volunteer nailed some studs on the wrong side of the layout mark. While the volunteer wasn’t great at reading layout marks, he could swing a hammer; so by the time the mistake was discover he had most of the wall framed. The volunteer was embarrassed and concerned that he had wasted time and materials. I watched as the Housing Development Alliance carpenter showed the volunteer how to knock the wall apart and pull the nails. The carpenter then showed him how to read the layout marks. As the volunteer, who was still embarrassed, apologized yet again, the Housing Development Alliance carpenter said, “Don’t worry about it. The only person who doesn’t make mistakes is the person who doesn’t do anything.” Hearing this, the volunteer finally relaxed and went on to have a great day. I even saw him explaining layout marks to another volunteer later in the day.

Who’s to blame doesn’t really matter; the fact is we had a flawed procedure that allowed this mistake to happen.

There is a lot of wisdom in that carpenter’s statement. If you do something, especially new things, you are going to make mistakes. It’s inevitable. Don’t worry about it. In fact, if you aren’t making mistakes, you probably are not pushing yourself or your organization hard enough. As the Executive Director of the Housing Development Alliance, I certainly don’t encourage mistakes, but I do try to embrace them when they happen. So the question isn’t if you will make mistakes, but the question is how you and your organization handle them. Playing the blame game, pointing fingers at others, jumping up and down on someone’s desk, yelling, and the like aren’t useful responses and do nothing to help you avoid making similar mistakes in the future.

At the Housing Development Alliance we take a relatively calm and direct approach to mistakes. We admit them, we fix them, and we learn from them in the hope of not making the same mistake twice. Since the only thing better than learning from your own mistakes is learning from someone else’s, here are two examples of mistakes and the lessons we have learned from them.

Lesson 1 – My House Is Backwards

We had just finished framing the exterior walls on Mickey’s house when she called me; “My house is backwards, the door is on the wrong side.” I called the construction supervisor who swung by the site to check it out. He called me back and said it was built just like the plans. Then I checked with our assistant director who works with customers on house plans. He gave me a copy of the plans she had picked out. Turns out the two sets of plans were mirror images. One had the door on the right; one had the door on the left. Mickey had changed her mind several times during the process and somehow or another, our staff had gotten out of sync. To this day, I still don’t know “who’s to blame.” Did the assistant director forget to let the construction supervisor know about a change? Did the construction supervisor forget that the assistant director had told him to change it one more time? Or was it something completely different like an email that got lost in cyberspace? Who’s to blame doesn’t really matter; the fact is we had a flawed procedure that allowed this mistake to happen.

We realized that the process is confusing and that people often hear what they want to hear.

The first thing we did was fix the problem. We got lucky that 1) Mickey noticed the problem before the roof was framed (otherwise we would have had to pull trusses off) and 2) that the house was a rectangle. So the fix was pretty simple, we just cut out a few studs, and moved some windows and doors. The second thing we did was to figure out how to make sure it never happened again. Our solution was to improve our preconstruction conference. We made several changes. First, we now have the homeowners sign the final plan. When possible, we do this at the site so the client can easily visualize where the house will sit, where the doors/windows will be, where the driveway will be, and such. The construction supervisor ensures that the signed plan is what gets built. We also explain to the customer that from this point forward, their point of contact is the construction supervisor and only he has the authority to approve any changes to the plan and that any changes must be made in writing. I am happy to report that, 150 plus houses later, we have not made this mistake again.

Lesson 2 – Make Sure They Hear What You Say

I was conducting a final inspection on a USDA Rural Development (RD) Section 504-funded home rehabilitation with the local USDA staff. The inspection was going great — the homeowner loved the work and couldn’t be happier. Then the RD staff asked the homeowner to sign the check to pay us. That’s when the homeowner said, “But they’re not done yet. They haven’t done the back bedroom floor.” The RD staff and I both pulled out the scope of work attached to the contract. To my relief (or so I thought), the scope didn’t mention the back bedroom floor. The USDA staff member explained to the homeowner that it was not part of the contract. That’s when the homeowner got upset, “But I needed that fixed. They measured it; they made a drawing of the room. We even talked about what floor covering I wanted. This isn’t fair!”

I knew instantly what the problem was. Many home repair clients request more work than they can afford. We estimate all the repairs a homeowner requests, then work with them to establish the final scope of work. We look at the homeowner’s wants, but also prioritize based on importance of the repair. In this case, the roof work had been prioritized over the floor repair. It doesn’t make sense to fix a floor only to have water from a leaky roof drip all over it. But somehow in the process, the homeowner didn’t understand that the bedroom floor wasn’t going to get fixed. I’m sure at the loan closing, we reviewed the scope of work with the homeowner. And yes, the homeowner should have realized that the back bedroom wasn’t on the scope of work. So we could have just chalked this up to a customer not paying attention. But placing blame on the customer isn’t the best approach for improving word-of- mouth marketing.

We realized that the process is confusing and that people often hear what they want to hear. Furthermore, the loan closing takes place in the RD office where it’s harder for the homeowner to visualize the repairs. To prevent a recurrence of the mistake, we bought a big red stamp and added an extra walk through. A day or two before we start a rehab, one of our staff members visits the home and does a thorough walkthrough of the scope of work with the homeowner. They review each scope of work item and explain what is going to be repaired and how w
e are going to repair. Then we stamp the scope of work with a red stamp that explains that only the work on the write up will be completed. Furthermore, the stamp explicitly says that no other work – even work previously talked about, estimated, or measured – will be completed. This process has proved very useful and has helped us avoid several similar misunderstandings with other homeowners.

So next time you make a mistake, remember, “Don’t worry about it. The only person who doesn’t make mistakes is the person who doesn’t do anything.” The best we can do is to learn from our mistakes so we don’t repeat them.

Scott McReynolds the Housing Development Alliance, has worked in the rehabilitation and construction of affordable housing in Eastern Kentucky since 1992. Since 1996, the Housing Development Alliance has completed over 200 homeownership units, completed over 500 repairs for low income homeowners, and developed 36 rental units. Scott serves on the board of the Federation of Appalachian Housing Enterprises, the National Rural Housing Coalition, the Appalachian Arts Alliance and the Community Foundation of Hazard and Perry County, KY.

Some Mistakes Have Been Made

May 1, 2015/in Rural Voices Capacity Building

Rural Housers Share Their Favorite Mistakes, and What They Learned from Them

This edition of Rural Voices features stories from rural housing professionals who share notable mistakes they or their organization made. These candid and even humorous accounts of mistakes in rural housing are intended to convey that blunders are inevitable, but assessing and learning from mistakes can actually improve your organization and its efforts.

Rural Housers Share Their Favorite Mistakes, and What They Learned from Them

Download a pdf version of Rural Voices
This edition of Rural Voices features stories from rural housing professionals who share notable mistakes they or their organization made. These candid and even humorous accounts of mistakes in rural housing are intended to convey that blunders are inevitable, but assessing and learning from mistakes can actually improve your organization and its efforts.

A VIEW FROM WASHINGTON

HUD Secretary Julián Castro Discusses Rural Housing
by the Housing Assistance Council

Newly Appointed Under Secretary of Rural Development Lisa Mensah
by Lisa Mensah

FEATURES

“My House Is Backwards!”
by Scott McReynolds

The Housing Development Alliance takes a calm but straightforward approach to mistakes: admit them, fix them, and learn from them in hopes of not making the same mistake twice.

A Promising Concept… With a Harsh Realization
by Laura Buxbaum

After self-examination, a housing nonprofit in Maine asks, “How did we get here? What might we have done differently? And would we ever, under any circumstances, do it again?”

The Gray Panthers of El Dorado, Amador, and Placer Counties: How the Good Guys Finally Won
by John Frisk

A local citizenboard and a group of rural “housers” kept a project afloat after near-collapse in its early years resulting in a development that now serves the community with 40 units of senior housing.

Always Improving, One Misstep at a Time
by Nick Mitchell-Bennet and Kathy Tyler

“I have not failed. I have just found ten thousand ways that won’t work.” Thomas Edison was no stranger to failures, but he took a healthy approach to mistakes.

Farmworker Housing Travails from Pennsylvania
by John Wiltse

PathStone stayed the course through a ten-year predevelopment process and emerged a stronger real-estate developer.

Underestimating Bureaucracy in Bureaus
by Marvin Ginn

Cutting through red tape on tribal lands comes with unique pitfalls

Trust AND Verify
by Wilbur Cave

A seemingly small oversight can become a big problem quickly

Additional Content

Mortgage Lending and Access in Rural America

Rural Voices would like to hear what you have to say about one, or all, of these issues. Please feel free to comment on this story by sending a tweet to #RuralVoicesMag, discuss on the Rural Affordable Housing Group on LinkedIn, or on our Facebook page.

Revisiting Poverty in Rural America

November 28, 2014/in Rural Voices High Need Regions, Housing Affordability, Persistent Poverty, Vulnerable Populations

Where are we 50 years after the war on poverty began?

In the 2014 special edition of Rural Voices magazine, HAC revisits the issue of rural poverty with frank questions, informed viewpoints, and honest assessments. Experts and contributors from across the nation help provide a better understanding of this complex issue and its intersection with housing in rural communities.

Where are we 50 years after the war on poverty began?

FEATURES

Rural Poverty, Before & After the War
by James P. Ziliak, Center for Poverty Research and Department of Economics, University of Kentucky

The 50th anniversary of the War on Poverty has generated scores of articles, books, and radio and television reports. Lost in much of this coverage is the acute hardship facing rural America at the dawn of the 1960s, and the role this played in shaping the nation’s response to poverty.

A Frank Discussion on Persistent Poverty in Rural America

Forgotten or hidden from mainstream America, several rural areas and populations are isolated geographically, lack resources and economic opportunities, and have suffered through decades of disinvestment and double-digit poverty rates. Persistent poverty is most evident within several rural regions and populations, including the Lower Mississippi Delta, the rural Southeast, Central Appalachia, Native American lands, the colonias along the U.S. Mexico border, and migrant and seasonal farmworkers.

Among the most economically depressed areas in the country, addressing social, economic, and housing problems has proved challenging. To help better understand this issue, Rural Voices spoke with five housing experts, each with decades of experice providing housing and working with low-income familes in persistent poverty areas. Their firsthand knowledge presents an unparalleled view into the harsh reality of families and communities grappling with long-term poverty. These experts offer their insights, passion, and commitment to help solve what is often considered an intractable problem.

Bill Bynum is the CEO of Hope Enterprise Corporation/Hope Credit Union (HOPE). Bill has worked with HOPE for over 20 years providing banking opportunities to low-income individuals and families in the Mid South.
Tom Carew is the Executive Vice President of Membership and Advocacy at the Federation of Appalachian Housing Enterprises (FAHE). Tom has more than 34 years of experience providing affordable housing in Central Appalachia.
Ann Cass is the Executive Director of Proyecto Azetca and has over three decades of experience working in the Texas border colonias.
Emma “Pinky” Clifford is the Executive Director for the Oglala Sioux Tribe Partnership for Housing (OSTPH). As a tribal member of the Oglala Sioux, Pinky has worked to improve access to safe, affordable housing with OSTPH for the past two decades.
Selvin McGahee is the Executive Director of Florida Non-Profit Housing, Inc. and has spent his career working to provide affordable housing in the rural Southeast and farmworker housing.

Decline in Senior Poverty: A Success Story…
by the Housing Assistance Council

One of the biggest successes in reducing poverty has been among older Americans.

…With a Cautionary Outlook
by Kim Datwyler, Executive Director, Neighborhood Nonprofit Housing Corporation (NNHC)

Staying Housed on a Fixed Income: The Importance of Available Affordable Housing for Seniors

From a Spare Bedroom to a Home of Her Own
by Stacey Howard, Dream$avers IDA Program Director, NeighborWorks Umpqua

A Single Mother’s Struggle Out of Poverty to Provide a Better Life for Her Son

Innovative Approaches to Reducing Poverty Locally

The problem of poverty is often viewed from a national or regional perspective. But success in moving people out of poverty can emanate from community-specific innovation and solutions.

Job Skills through Housing Development – Motivation, Education, Training, Inc. (Texas)
Combating Poverty in Puerto Rico with Job Training & Economic Development – Pathstone (Puerto Rico)
IDAs Help Low-Income Families Save for Increased Opportunities in Rural Oregon – NeighborWorks Umpqua (Oregon)

A VIEW FROM WASHINGTON

“The People Left Behind” Are Today the People Still Behind
by Joe Belden and Lance George

Additional Content

Poverty in Rural America

Approximately 45 million Americans, or 15 percent of the population, had incomes below the official poverty rate in 2012. In rural America, the poverty rate is above 17 percent with more than 10 million people living in poverty.

HAC News: October 17, 2014

October 17, 2014/in HAC News

HAC News Formats. pdf

October 17, 2014
Vol. 43, No. 21

• USDA unable to spend all single-family appropriations in FY14 • HUD has Jobs Plus funds available • Rule changes suggested for Section 202 and 811 programs • 2015 DDAs and QCTs announced • Final Fair Market Rents set • HUD publishes new OCAFs • Most children in HUD-assisted renter households still live in high-poverty neighborhoods • Rural Voices wonders “What does affordable housing mean to you?” •HAC analysis of mortgage data now available • Farmworker housing and health conference set for November • Webinar to cover protecting seniors and other RD tenants from displacement • REGISTER FOR CONFERENCE BEFORE OCTOBER 31!

October 17, 2014
Vol. 43, No. 21

USDA UNABLE TO SPEND ALL SINGLE-FAMILY APPROPRIATIONS IN FY14. HAC’s analysis of USDA RD data for FY14 determined that 90% of Section 502 direct loan funds were obligated. (See HAC News, 9/17/14.) Very low-income borrowers received 33.2% of the obligations, consistent with past RD difficulties in meeting the requirement to loan 40% of its Section 502 direct dollars to VLI households, and all the unobligated FY14 funds were in the VLI setaside. A 2010 HAC report examined possible reasons and solutions to achieve the 40% requirement. Other FY14 obligation levels include 80% for Section 502 guaranteed loans, 53% and 98% for Section 504 loans and grants, and 73% for Section 523 self-help grants. Well over 100% of the amounts appropriated for Section 514/516 farmworker housing and Section 533 Housing Preservation Grants were obligated, along with 96% of Section 515 loans and 112% of Section 542 vouchers. A percentage could not be calculated for the MPR rental preservation program. HAC’s early analysis is posted now and a more detailed report will be published also. Contact Michael Feinberg, HAC, 202-842-8600.

HUD HAS JOBS PLUS FUNDS AVAILABLE. Public housing agencies can apply by December 17 for grants to provide job support to public housing residents. Contact Anice Chenault, HUD, JobsPlus@hud.gov.

RULE CHANGES SUGGESTED FOR SECTION 202 AND 811 PROGRAMS. HUD’s proposal would implement statutory amendments made in 2011 to both programs, and would “streamline” the programs. Comments are due December 8. Contact Alicia Anderson, HUD, 202-708-3000.

HUD PROPOSES REGULATIONS ON DEMOLITION AND DISPOSITION OF PUBLIC HOUSING. Comments are due December 15 on updates that would increase HUD’s oversight of demolition and disposition of public housing and make other changes. Contact Kathleen Szybist, HUD, 401-277-8310.

2015 DDAS AND QCTS ANNOUNCED. For the Low-Income Housing Tax Credit program, HUD designates Difficult Development Areas every year, and this year is also making new designations of Qualified Census Tracts to incorporate recent income and poverty measures. Contact Michael K. Hollar, HUD, 202-402-5878.

FINAL FAIR MARKET RENTS SET. FMRs for FY15 are used for HUD’s voucher and moderate rehabilitation programs, and to calculate Flat Rents for public housing. Contact local HUD program staff.

HUD PUBLISHES NEW OCAFS. These operating cost adjustment factors will be used to adjust Section 8 rents in some HUD-assisted properties, effective February 11, 2015. Contact Stan Houle, HUD, 202-402-2572.

MOST CHILDREN IN HUD-ASSISTED RENTER HOUSEHOLDS STILL LIVE IN HIGH-POVERTY NEIGHBORHOODS. The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities reports that only 15% of children with HUD rental assistance live in low-poverty neighborhoods, while 18% are in extreme-poverty neighborhoods. Families with vouchers are more likely to escape concentrations of poverty than those in public housing or receiving Section 8 project-based aid, but a quarter of a million children in the Housing Choice Voucher program do live in extreme-poverty neighborhoods. “Creating Opportunity for Children: How Housing Location Can Make a Difference” states that this problem exists in nearly every state and in rural as well as urban areas, though it is most prevalent east of the Mississippi and in California.

RURAL VOICES WONDERS “WHAT DOES AFFORDABLE HOUSING MEAN TO YOU?” The fall issue of HAC’s magazine presents the perspectives of rural families, the challenges they faced when living in unaffordable or substandard conditions, and how they used federal resources to obtain quality housing. Sign up online for email notices when new issues are published, or request one free print subscription per organization from Dan Stern, HAC, 202-842-8600.

HAC ANALYSIS OF MORTGAGE DATA NOW AVAILABLE. “Rural Mortgage Activity Declines,” a Rural Research Note, is now available on HAC’s site and is also covered in a story on the Daily Yonder. (See HAC News, 10/1/14.)

FARMWORKER HOUSING AND HEALTH CONFERENCE SET FOR NOVEMBER. “Farmworker Housing Quality and Health: A Transdisciplinary Conference” will be held November 11 in Arlington, VA. Registration is $70.

WEBINAR TO COVER PROTECTING SENIORS AND OTHER RD TENANTS FROM DISPLACEMENT. The National Housing Law Project will offer a free webinar on October 21 at 2:00 pm Eastern time/11:00 am Pacific on “Prepayments, Maturing Mortgages, and Foreclosures: Protecting Seniors and Others from Rural Development Rental Housing Displacement.

REGISTER FOR CONFERENCE BEFORE OCTOBER 31! Register online for the National Rural Housing Conference 2014: Re-tool, Rebuild, Renew, in Washington, DC, December 3-5 with pre-conference activities December 2. Until October 31, the rate is $350 for nonprofits and government, $400 for for-profits. Contact HAC staff, registration@ruralhome.org.

What does affordable housing mean to you? Rural families share their stories

October 7, 2014/in Rural Voices Homeowner Housing, Rental Housing

The Fall 2014 issue of Rural Voices presents the perspectives of rural families, their challenges of living in unaffordable or substandard conditions, and how they ultimately utilized federal resources to obtain quality housing. These success stories almost always involve innovative community-based organizations that provide the vital link between housing resources and the families who need them.

VIEW FROM WASHINGTON

Affordable Rural Housing: It’s Not a Nicety But a Necessity
by Congressman Emanuel Cleaver, II, Missouri’s Fifth District

Congressman Emanuel Cleaver, II, shares his housing story and offers his views on housing across the country

FEATURES

The Balancing Act
by Joey Henderson, Florida Home Partnership, Inc.

A single mother’s self-help journey

“Our Home, Our Community”
by Lucero Cortez and Erika Parkinson, Catholic Charities of Yakima

Zaida Elena Lopez and Ivan Chavez

Making Almost Heaven a Reality in Rural West Virginia
by John David, Southern Appalchian Labor School (SALS)

Converting a log cabin to a modern home means this widow does not have to live in the cold

The Power of Working Together

Three families share their experiences with USDA’s Mutual Self-Help Program

“I’ve lived here my whole life.”

Leslie Robbins, Jr.

Self-Help, Sweat Equity and Success
by BC EchoHawk, National American Indian Housing Council (NAIHC)

“It made me feel good, it made me powerful and I’m looking forward to spending whatever days I have, God bless me, in that house.”

A Farmer’s Fight
byYuqi Wang, Bill Emerson National Hunger Fellow

Many Hmong farmers have recently experienced financial problems from faulty loans

Additional Content

The Faces of Affordable Housing

What does Affordable Housing Mean to You?

“We wouldn’t want to live any place else”

The Davis Family (SALS, WV)

The Power of Working Together

October 6, 2014/in What does affordable housing mean to you? Persistent Poverty

Three families share their experiences with USDA’s Mutual Self-Help Housing Program

This story appears in the Fall 2014 issue of Rural Voices

Mutual Self-Help is a USDA Rural Development program administered by community-based nonprofit housing organizations that makes housing affordable through “sweat equity”. Families work together as a group to build approximately 65 percent of their homes. This labor not only acts as the down payment, but can substantially reduce the price of the home. However, it is hard work and it does require commitment. Households work together, with each family contributing a minimum of 35 hours of labor per week for approximately 8 to 12 months. The homes are built simultaneously; no one moves in until all the homes are completed.

Dillan and Lacie; Rebecca; and Anita and Robbie all participated in the Neighborhood Nonprofit Housing Corporation (NNHC) mutual self-help program. Below each family recounts their challenges, successes, and experiences building their own home and helping other families build theirs.

How did you first hear about self-help housing?

Dillan: When attending school, Lacie and I had no thoughts of buying, let alone, building a brand new house. Because I am a student, the idea of securing a home loan was near impossible, until we heard about Neighborhood Nonprofit’s housing program. A family member mentioned to me an advertisement they had seen in the newspaper one day and I just stopped in the office to see what it was about. Ten months later here we are in the final stages of building our beautiful new home. The process was very simple to qualify for the program and the Neighborhood Nonprofit staff was very helpful.

Dillan and Lacie are both originally from Cache Valley, UT and wanted to raise their children there. Lacie is a stay at home mom. Dillan is a returning student at Utah State University and plans to be a teacher.

Rebecca: I had previously heard about Self-Help housing a couple of years before applying, but I did not want to make such a major decision so soon after my husband’s death. I also didn’t see how I would be able to put in the time needed to build as a single mother. It wasn’t until after I tried unsuccessfully to find affordable housing for my family that I decided to throw in my application and see what happened.

Anita: We heard about the Self-Help program from one of my husband’s coworkers. They had built in the nearby town of Nibley, UT. We decided to look into the program after looking for houses to buy became discouraging. We knew that my staying at home with our children would make it difficult to afford one. We were also excited about the opportunity to learn the skills involved with building a house. We are grateful we learned these skills because we feel more prepared to maintain our home.

What was the construction process like?

Anita: During the time we built, life was so busy! I was pregnant when we started, so my husband did most of the work for the first several months. Life was hard but we were excited for the end result. It took our group ten months to finish all our homes. We worked with really great people. Everyone had the same attitude to work on each other’s home like it was their own. This created a positive working environment. I would say the hardest challenge we faced was everyone getting burned out and not working as fast as we had hoped. I was glad to be able to go out and work too. Working together on our home taught us a lot and was a great benefit to us recently when we finished our basement.

Dillan: While the qualification process was simple, the building process has not been quite as simple. Building each home together has been challenging and rewarding at the same time. The families in our group have worked so hard together and have accomplished so much. The program has not been easy, but it has been worth it. I believe that each family will leave the program with a greater sense of community and friendship because of the hard work that everyone has endured.

Rebecca: My youngest was only three when I started building! Since my oldest was just 12, I was the only one in our family that was able to work on the homes. To be honest, it was a difficult process for me to build; besides having five children and no spouse, I am a student at Utah State University. A typical day would start at 4:30 a.m. I had to get up that early to get everything ready for the day, including dropping off my children at school and getting myself to class. After school was out, I would have to rush to pick up my children and take them to a baby sitter (none of them were old enough to be on the site) and then get myself to the work site. I usually wouldn’t get home until after 10:00pm. I still had to put kids to bed, take a shower (get all the sawdust and grime off that I’m allergic to), and do regular household chores.

Rebecca is a widow with five children ages 16, 15, 12, 10, and 7, and is currently a student at Utah State University pursuing a degree in Social Work.

What were your living conditions before and after your participation in the self-help program?

Rebecca: Before [the Self-Help program] we had been living in a three-bedroom apartment for about two years. It was definitely cramped; my two daughters shared one bedroom, and my three sons shared another bedroom. We all needed some personal space. In addition, the apartment would flood occasionally, so it had mold and mildew issues and smelled terrible. It was also where we were living when I lost my husband and the children lost their dad. That apartment created some difficult memories for us. It was really healthy, both physically and emotionally, for us to get out of that environment. Every day, I count my blessings – I have a house, a yard, and good neighbors. I love the neighborhood! One especially nice benefit to having our home is having a back-yard big enough to grow a garden. I could never afford to buy fresh produce for my family. Now, we eat fresh food that we’ve grown ourselves!

Anita: Before we built our house, we lived in a townhouse. The community was nice but the main thing that was missing was a private backyard. One of my favorite features of the program was being able to move in having our landscape and fences included in the building process. I love being able to send my own kids out to have fun in our large fenced-in area. One other major unexpected benefit to having a fenced-in backyard was that it helped my preschool business. My city requires all new preschools to have a fenced-in backyard. This could have been an expensive hurdle but thanks to the Self-Help specifications, this was included.

Gerber-family-cropped-web Anita and her husband Robbie have three children all under the age of six. Anita is a stay at home mom who started her own preschool business. Robbie is a conference coordinator for Utah State University.

Dillan: Before the Self-Help program and as students with a large family, our housing conditions have been, at times, hard to deal with. Now that we are able to have a home to call our own it has given our family and especially our children a place to feel comfortable and more importantly a place to stay for a long time. We now have a “Room with a View,” a place to grow together and create lasting memories.

What specific successes or challenges did you experience?

Dillan: A challenge we faced in our group was learning to work together on a home that wasn’t your own. The workmanship as well as the attitude of all the families involved improved once everyone truly figured out that no one could move in to their own homes before the other houses were completed. No work was completed without the thought of “If it was my home, would I do it like that?” When this concept was grasped, the work excelled in speed and accuracy. Although this and other things were challenges, the successes far exceeded them. A friendship has been made between the families as we worked hard together.

Rebecca: It took a lot of determination to get my weekly hours in and keep up with my other responsibilities. Because it is easier to meet the time requirements if the family is a two parent household (it’s estimated that both husband and wife can come in together one day a week), I had to go in outside of the group’s regular work hours in order to work my full 35 hours per week. During the building process, I had to have two surgeries on my broken leg. While on crutches, and not allowed on site, I had good people that helped donate hours so I could keep up.

I love the neighborhood. I got to know my neighbors really well while we built – both the good and the bad! We learned to work with everyone’s personalities, and I think we learned the importance of not saying things we would regret later. Now, we have a real sense of taking care of each other. It is like having a built-in Neighborhood Watch Program! I have developed some very good friendships from the time we spent building together.

Anita: We are very grateful to have been able to build our home through the Mutual Self Help process. We learned a lot from our construction supervisor and have a lot of respect for him. He made sure things were done the right way. The process was hard; but worth it because we not only got a beautiful home but gained knowledge and friendships.

My father passed away a couple months into the building process. It was very unexpected and very difficult. Because we had to travel to the funeral, the people in our group told us they would donate any hours we needed to cover our weekly hours. Our group was very generous and kind. We truly appreciated them. We know these families care about us. On the anniversary of our open house, we always have a get-together to celebrate. We love the families we built with!

Neighborhood Nonprofit Housing Corporation (NNHC): A Utah-based nonprofit committed to creating quality affordable housing opportunities in their communities and giving households skills necessary to become self-sufficient. NNHC offers programs such as mutual self-help housing, and housing and foreclosure counseling, and as well as loan products.

"Our Home, Our Community"

October 6, 2014/in What does affordable housing mean to you?

by Lucero Cortez and Erika Parkinson, Catholic Charities of Yakima

This story appears in the Fall 2014 issue of Rural VoicesZaida Elena Lopez and Ivan Chavez moved to Washington State from Chicago four years ago in search of work. They moved into a one bedroom house that they rented in an orchard that was very far from the community. This is where they had been raising their four year-old son, Brandon. Zaida explained that this was a very lonely, solitary house to live in as there were no other children for her son to play with. She also explained that besides being very isolated and lonely the house had very poor living conditions. It was poorly insulated and the family was often cold in the winter as the house did not retain heat and their heater rarely worked properly. Furthermore, the bills they paid were very expensive. Zaida told us that her monthly electric bill totaled approximately $400 a month!

screenshot from video jpg Zaida Elena Lopez and Ivan Chavez in their new home

Since their move from Chicago to Washington, Zaida is a stay at home mom and Ivan works as a Forklift Driver for an agricultural warehouse. Ivan works nights at the warehouse leaving his wife and son alone. He wanted a more secure living environment for his family, and a better house for them to live in as they think about expanding their family. These many factors made the family want to have their own home that would be safer, larger, and more integrated into the community.

Zaida’s aunt told her about Catholic Charities Housing Services (CCHS) and their Single-Family Home Ownership Program. Her aunt was filling out an application with CCHS, and this motivated Zaida to apply as well. Ivan and Zaida were surprised at how easy the process was, from the moment Lucero Cortez, Program Assistant with CCHS, helped them fill out the application.

“That is where everything started,” Zaida said. “At some point we thought that we were not going to qualify because of my husband’s income, but thank God that CCHS was able to help us and we were able to qualify for a home in the coommunity of Tieton.”

CCHS requires qualified homeowners to put 250 hours in “sweat equity,” which means they help with work on their house while it is being built. This may seem like a deterrent to some families, but Zaida said, “When you are interested in something it doesn’t matter what you have to do to accomplish your goal.” Zaida would come to the house with her son, Brandon, to clean, pick up garbage and debris the contractors left behind, and to weed. The family would often come once or even twice a week to help, and Ivan would sometimes leave work early to spend time helping his wife and son. “My son helped out a lot,” said Zaida. “He would come here and be very happy to clean the house. I told him from day one that this was going to be our house that this would be where we would move.” Brandon can often be heard at the house telling his mom proudly, “This is our little house.”

“We are very thankful to Catholic Charities Housing Services for their support. They made us feel calm through the entire process because whenever we had a problem they would be there,” Zaida said. This home will be a place for Zaida, Ivan, and Brandon to have a community with neighbors and children for Brandon to play with, and will be a great place for them to continue their family in a safer, friendlier environment.

Catholic Charities of the Diocese of Yakima provides help and creates hope for thousands of people each year regardless of religious, social or econimic backgrounds. Catholic Charities provides a myriad of vital services in communities through it’s network of agencies: Catholic Family & Child Service, Catholic Charities Housing Services and the St. Vincent Centers.

Making Almost Heaven a Reality in Rural West Virginia

October 6, 2014/in What does affordable housing mean to you?

Converting a log cabin to a modern home means this widow does not have to live in the cold

by John David, Southern Appalachia Labor School (SALS)

This story appears in the Fall 2014 issue of Rural VoicesNancy and Cecil (Cork) Labus decided 19 years ago to return home to West Virginia and looked for a rural inexpensive house near where Cork had family. They found an old place that had been unoccupied for a decade near Hico, West Virginia in Fayette County.

Fayette County is “at risk” as defined by the Appalachian Regional Commission. Recently, USDA-Rural Development added the county to its “Strikeforce” category citing pervasive poverty and related socio-economic factors. People who once worked hard in coal mining and resource-based industries are struggling to survive and many, such as Nancy and Cork, had health issues.

The house that Nancy and Cork found was actually a three wall log cabin structure with an “add on” on the fourth side. The roof consisted of trusses and rafters made from tree limbs. The house was heated by a wood burner and wires dangled dangerously inside and out. Needless to say the rehabilitation of this house presented a unique challenge to members of YouthBuild, AmeriCorps, and volunteer programs with the Southern Appalachian Labor School (SALS) who participated in helping to rehabilitate Nancy and Cork’s house.

labus-smith-web Nancy Labus (left) and Vickie Smith of SALS enjoy a peaceful moment together

Vickie Smith, who has been the SALS Construction Manager and licensed contractor for 20 years, had never seen a house like Cork and Nancy’s before. At first Vickie expressed dismay that the home was on the “to do” list for her. But Nancy, who had heard about the SALS program in a newspaper featured article, was tenacious to see her house rehabilitated. She called SALS over and over for at least a year and until she finally prevailed. SALS then engaged in the tedious process of cobbling together funds from the Pittsburgh Federal Home Loan Bank/United Bank’s Affordable Housing Program, USDA-Rural Development’s Housing Preservation Grant program, residual money from other projects, and tax-credit donations through the West Virginia Neighborhood Investment Program to assemble a “Force to Make a Difference” for the Labus family. The job was turned over to Dave Shaver, a seasoned SALS site supervisor, who has experience with turning around almost impossible to rehabilitate houses into something beautiful.

The rehabilitating process was helped considerably by the grateful attitude exhibited by Nancy and Cork. While they had no children together, Nancy had several by a previous marriage. Her son, along with Cork, worked on the roof as “self-help sweat-equity”. Nancy provided holiday presents and cooked for the crew, which was highly appreciated since the house was a long ways from anywhere. Crew members even helped cook and Nancy now jokes that the nearly two year project took longer than needed because nobody wanted to leave. Daniel David, a crew member from the first day of construction, recalls that the house was tough but the family’s support made everyone more than willing to go the extra mile.

Some of Nancy’s most special moments were being around the crew who contributed so much love, sweat, and tears for her “Home Sweet Home” in Almost Heaven, West Virginia.

The energy audit conducted by SALS on the house was off the charts. The entire house had to be insulated and almost everything inside and outside of the house had to be either replaced or rebuilt. The logs of the cabin had to be sheeted inside and out due to cracks, skeletons of critters in the attic had to be removed, and tree branches supporting the roof had to be reinforced. The windows that were popping out had to be custom made, Energy Star rated, and re-fitted. The back entrance with steps had to be totally re-built since access was impossible, not to mention the wood burner and pipe had to be replaced with an Energy Star HVAC (heat/AC) system. The crew installed all new wiring, and due to a new regional rural water system, the Labus’ old well which contained brown iron-water had to be disconnected and new plumbing installed. Crew members also leveled and fixed the floors because the new added on rooms and porches had various levels, support structures, and underpinning. Nancy recalls a situation where it took three hours and a smoking hot drill to install a light due to the logs and hard wood used throughout the house.

Despite everything that had to be done, Nancy could not hide her excitement at seeing her home coming together. She kept telling crew members “Thank you! Thank you!” and says she cried a lot with happiness. She now says she is “real proud” of her home. As she puts it, “The house is no longer an eyesore along the highway”. Some of Nancy’s most special moments were being around the crew who contributed so much love, sweat, and tears for her “Home Sweet Home” in Almost Heaven West Virginia.

The house was completed nearly five years ago. Then, just last year on December 19, 2013, Cork suddenly died after over 30 years of marriage. In remembrance of him and his memories, Nancy wears a heart-shaped pendant containing some of his ashes. She said the welfare department in West Virginia offered to pay $1,250 for his arrangements, but it wanted to put a repayment lien on the house. Proudly, thanks to having the house done by SALS at no cost, Nancy said she turned down the offer. She told us that she wanted to be “debt-free at last”.

As Vickie and I concluded our visit, Nancy hugged us and cried. But the day was not over. The home health nurse was knocking on the front door. It was time to keep hope alive.

Southern Appalachian Labor School (SALS): is a West Virginia nonprofit that provides education, research, and linkages for working class and disenfranchised peoples in order to promote understanding, empowerment, and change. SALS is committed to developing a real comprehension of the social, economic, and legal structures which affect the lives of the Appalachian people.

Affordable Rural Housing It’s Not a Nicety But a Necessity

October 2, 2014/in What does affordable housing mean to you?

View From Washington

Congressman Emanuel Cleaver, II, shares his housing story and offers his views on housing across the country

by The Honorable Emanuel Cleaver, II, Missouri’s Fifth District

This story appears in the Fall 2014 issue of Rural VoicesOwning a home is part of the American dream. It’s a person’s private piece of paradise. The pride of home ownership often fosters not only a desire to take care of one’s personal property, but also an effort to protect the integrity and appearance of the surrounding neighborhood as well. Affordable housing is a key component to a vibrant, expanding, and prosperous community.

As a little boy, growing up in Waxahachie, Texas, my family and I didn’t have indoor plumbing until I was 7 years old. That’s when we moved up in the world, by moving into public housing. When a move into public housing is considered a monumental step up in the world, you can imagine the delirious euphoria that came years later, when we finally had a home of our own. My father worked three jobs, put my sisters, my mother, and I through college, and moved our family into the first home we ever owned. He still lives there today.

We all have our own personal stories, but the availability of, and access to, affordable housing for everyone, is a national concern as well. The buying and building of houses is a huge contributor to the vitality and viability of a community. Jobs are created or sustained as construction crews, real estate and other professionals, and business owners and employees are in high demand. The influx of tax dollars provides a solid foundation for public services including police, fire, and sanitation workers who help make a neighborhood safe, clean, and a quality place to live. Financial institutions make loans, restaurants sell food, and teachers begin educating our children. Affordable housing helps a community come alive. According to the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), families and individuals living in Rural Development financed homes in the district I represent, Missouri’s Fifth District, see every dollar spent in the local economy multiply by six times.

So, I am asked all of the time, “What are elected officials doing in Washington to continue improving programs, increasing opportunities, and ensuring affordability for those in rural areas throughout our nation?” Sadly, a better question might be, “What are we doing in Washington at all?”

I say to you without hesitation – Not Enough! And some days, it seems, nothing is getting done at all. Except for arguing. The partisan back-biting, political bickering and agenda motivated maneuvering seem to go on forever. And it needs to stop. There are important issues on our plate. Issues that impact our families and our futures. Issues that need, and deserve, our serious attention right now.

Missouri’s Fifth District stretches all the way from the urban core of Kansas City east to the farms of Marshall. The distance is a whopping 90 miles, but the lifestyles seem even farther apart than that at times. My district truly represents a microcosm of this great nation, with not only urban and rural communities, but suburban ones as well. The needs of these residents vary greatly from region to region. Rural communities have different needs and different concerns than those in the other areas. And while it is my passionate belief that all residents of my district need access to affordable housing options, certainly my rural constituents have special and unique needs that need to be addressed as such.

As a Member of the House Financial Services Committee, and a Member of the Subcommittee on Housing and Insurance, I pay special attention to these issues and concerns. One important issue for rural communities, for instance, is flood insurance. Congress recently enacted the Homeowner Flood Insurance Affordability Act of 2013. This law protects people who have flood insurance from facing dramatic rate hikes. For constituents hit by premium increases they simply can’t afford, it provides relief in the form of a refund. The law also requires the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) to get the affordability study to Congress that was supposed to be finished almost a year ago.

Source: HAC Tabulations of HUD and USDA data; National Housing Preservation Database

Folks living in rural areas are particularly well served by their local USDA offices. That agency plays a critical role in bringing the dream of home ownership within reach. For people who choose to live, work, and raise their families in this country’s strong rural communities, many have not only found that the programs focusing on housing loans have helped them buy, but have also vastly improved their quality of life. Other available options provide loans and grants for everything from hospitals, fire stations, and nursing homes, to funding for apartments for those with low-income or the elderly, schools, and housing for farm laborers.

There are issues and complexities that occur in a rural landscape unique only to those communities. The USDA, through Rural Development, has worked for more than half a century to understand those nuances and provide housing options that don’t exist outside of rural America. For instance, USDA’s loan program offers borrowers an opportunity for homeownership with no money down, and allows rural families to stay right where they are. I continue to believe moving rural housing programs under a freestanding FHA is not a move toward efficiency, as many in Washington contend, but one that sets rural communities back and leaves them stuck in the past.

Right now, in Missouri’s Fifth Congressional District, the numbers and dollar amounts for 502 Guaranteed loans active and being serviced in Jackson, Lafayette, Ray, and Saline counties, show an impressive amount of families utilizing the program. There are 1,691 loans totaling more than $170 million.

Affordable housing in rural America is not just a nicety, it’s a necessity. It must be available, accessible, and affordable for those who need it. And, make no mistake, I will continue fighting to make sure it’s just that.

Tag Archive for: rural voices

Farmworker Housing Travails from Pennsylvania

PathStone stayed the course through a ten-year predevelopment process and emerged a stronger real estate developer.

First Lesson Learned: Don’t Try This At Home!

Second Lesson Learned:

The Good News:

Which Brings Us to One Final Lesson Learned:

"My House Is Backwards!"

The Housing Development Alliance takes a calm but straightforward approach to mistakes: admit them, fix them, and learn from them in hopes of not making the same mistake twice.

Lesson 1 – My House Is Backwards

Lesson 2 – Make Sure They Hear What You Say

Some Mistakes Have Been Made

Rural Housers Share Their Favorite Mistakes, and What They Learned from Them

Rural Housers Share Their Favorite Mistakes, and What They Learned from Them

FEATURES

Revisiting Poverty in Rural America

Where are we 50 years after the war on poverty began?

Where are we 50 years after the war on poverty began?

FEATURES

HAC News: October 17, 2014

What does affordable housing mean to you? Rural families share their stories

VIEW FROM WASHINGTON

FEATURES

Additional Content

The Power of Working Together

Three families share their experiences with USDA’s Mutual Self-Help Housing Program

How did you first hear about self-help housing?

What was the construction process like?

What were your living conditions before and after your participation in the self-help program?

What specific successes or challenges did you experience?

"Our Home, Our Community"

Making Almost Heaven a Reality in Rural West Virginia

Converting a log cabin to a modern home means this widow does not have to live in the cold

Affordable Rural Housing It’s Not a Nicety But a Necessity

View From Washington

Congressman Emanuel Cleaver, II, shares his housing story and offers his views on housing across the country

GET THE HAC NEWS!

50 Years for Rural America