Stored in this Portal

Since 2008, many have questioned the efficacy of conventional homeownership, particularly for low-income households. Advocates champion shared equity homeownership as an alternative, including community land trusts (CLTs) and limited equity cooperatives (LECs); yet, they too have limitations. CLTs offer ongoing homeownership support, but require conventionally “bankable” households. LECs can offer low-income households autonomy and limited asset building, but often require fiscal and organizational support to succeed. This paper explores an innovation in shared equity—the merger of CLTs and LECs to address challenges and maximize collective strengths. Set within the context of the benefits and limits of CLTs and LECs as independent organizations, the paper examines five CLTs with LEC projects. It considers the CLTs’ motivations for pursuing LECs and appraises the characteristics of hybrid projects. While CLT-LEC projects are small in number, they illustrate an emergent practice in the field and speak to the organizational adaptability of the broader shared equity model.

Over the past year, I had the opportunity to reach out to people throughout the country, listen to their life experiences, and seek their ideas. Community residents told of their struggles to find an affordable home. Developers and builders, eager to build homes but stymied by too many requirements and delays, identified changes and models that can free the market. State, local, and tribal leaders expressed frustration: some represent communities where job growth is outpacing housing growth; others are frustrated with their inability to attract builders in an area with little growth but continuing need, particularly in rural areas and on tribal lands. State and local officials shared success stories as well, as they removed unnecessary regulatory barriers and implemented cultural changes within planning and building departments. My team and I also had the privilege to work with staff from the other agencies to learn about their activities to reduce regulatory barriers. Throughout the activities, I have seen a commitment at every level of government to reduce regulatory barriers and encourage a functioning housing market.

Many housing market analysts point to the financial burdens of high home prices and rents as justifying government intervention in housing markets. Indeed, in recent years, the cost burdens and presumed shortage of affordable housing have been recurring themes in numerous reports, news articles, policy debates, conferences, and market commentaries (see, for example, Gabriel and Painter [2017] and the Joint Center for Housing Studies [2018]). Prominently featured in these discussions are calls for new regulations, additional public resources, or the redesign of existing policies to reduce the cost of housing and increase the supply of affordable housing.

A collaborative project of Roosevelt University's Institute for Metropolitan Affairs and the Center for Urban Research and Learning at Loyola University Chicago, and their community partners

Southern Maine, much like the state and nation, has struggled to balance attainable workforce housing through a changing economy. As a regional organization, we have heard from multiple towns and cities that housing affordability is their greatest challenge. Many municipalities have taken important steps to change local policy and regulations in hopes of encouraging more affordable housing options, but many complex factors still influence the housing market across the region. This challenge is only exacerbated by the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic, increasing in-migration, development costs, and supply shortages or bottlenecks.

This Cooperative Housing Compendium was prepared under auspices of the Center for Coop­eratives at the University of California at Davis. In 1990, Lottie Cohen was awarded a grant to write a report about the various types of coopera­tive housing in California. In 1993, this book emerges, a needed and timely addition to the much too sparse collection of materials on coop­eratives. Yet it would never have been written without sponsorship and an important research grant from the Center for Cooperatives.

Of the 236 cooperatives that responded to the survey – mostly from North and South America and Europe – almost 70% place innovation among their top three priorities. Over the next three to five years, cooperatives will prioritize the expansion of new services (91%), the development of capacity in innovation (84%), technology platforms (83%), and speed of adopting new technologies (81%). Cooperatives pursue innovation in order to take advantage of new opportunities (85%), as well as to counter threats (81%). However, they face a number of challenges in terms of generating ideas, as well as selecting and funding innovation projects.

workers especially hard. Industries with lower paying jobs, including retail, food and beverage, and hospitality, were more likely to be exposed to shutdowns (Dey and Loewenstein, 2020), and consequently low-wage workers were more likely to see their hours reduced or their jobs cut. As of late March 2021, nearly 14 million renter households with annual incomes below $50,000 had lost employment income during the pandemic (Census, 2021). According to the Economic Policy Institute, over 82% of the 9.6 million net jobs lost in 2020 were held by workers in the bottom quartile of the wage distribution (Gould & Kandra, 2021). That loss of employment income often caused serious material hardship. The need for food banks, for example, was considerably higher than normal throughout 2020, and four in 10 food bank visitors sought such assistance for the first time (Cohen, 2020). Surveys conducted between August 2020 and March 2021 suggest about a third of all households were consistently having trouble paying for usual household expenses. A year after the start of the pandemic, nearly a fourth of renters with incomes below $50,000 were borrowing from friends and family to meet spending needs (Census, 2021).

An analysis of the municipality's residential development regulations, such as land use controls, site improvement requirements, fees and land dedication requirements, and permit procedures. The analysis shall calculate the financial impact that each regulation has on the cost of each new subdivision. The analysis shall identify ways in which the municipality can modify its construction and development regulations, lot sizes, approval processes, and related fees to do each of the following:

Perhaps as a result of these efforts, although unusually low interest rates and generally low unemployment rates have also played their part, homeownership rates have inched upward. By 2004, 69 percent of American households owned their own home, up from 64 percent in 1985. At the same time, particularly for lower income households and people of color, the downside of this strategy is becoming more and more apparent. Foreclosures are rising in many parts of the nation and, as recent research has shown, a disproportionately large share of lower income homeowners lose their homes, finding themselves back in the rental market a few years later.

CDS’ experience with cooperative housing has been in the senior co-op housing sector. For more than a decade, CDS has provided leadership to this sector including co-founding the annual Senior Cooperative Housing Conference (now in 13th year). CDS also supported development of the Senior Cooperative Housing Education Program (SCHEP) and prepared the business feasibility analysis resulting in the creation of the SCH Purchasing Cooperative. Under contract to Cooperative Network, Vicky Chaput continues to be the primary contact point for all manner of incoming requests for assistance and referrals related to senior housing.

As of July 2021, there is an urgent demand for affordable housing in Utah’s cities. The sales prices of homes and the prices of rent have dramatically increased over only a few years. As a result, around one-fourth of Utah homeowners and almost half of Utah renters are considered cost-burdened (U.S. Census Bureau, 2019a; U.S. Census Bureau, 2019b). The shortage of units also contributes to this housing crisis and means that more Utahns are housing unstable. Researchers estimate there is a 30% deficit between available units and needed units (Wood et al., 2020). Housing instability can contribute to a large number of problems for individuals, such as worsened physical and mental health, developmental delays in children, and homelessness (Chetty et al., 2016; Chyn, 2018; Desmond, 2012; Ludwig et al., 2005; Medina et al., 2020; Warren & Font, 2015). Affordable housing is a solution that addresses this instability

A growing body of research suggests that stable, affordable housing may increase children’s opportunities for educational success. A supportive and stable home environment can complement the efforts of educators, leading to improved student achievement. Affordable housing may foster the educational success of low-income children by supporting family financial stability, reducing mobility, providing safe, nurturing living environments, and providing a platform for community development.