DELAWARE STATEWIDE ANALYSIS OF IMPEDIMENTS TO FAIR HOUSING CHOICE

Transcription

1 DELAWARE STATEWIDE ANALYSIS OF IMPEDIMENTS TO FAIR HOUSING CHOICE 1. INTRODUCTION... 1 A. Introduction... 1 B. Obligation to Affirmatively Further Fair Housing... 1 C. Fair Housing Choice... 3 D. The Federal Fair Housing Act... 4 i. What housing is covered?... 4 ii. What does the Fair Housing Act prohibit?... 5 iii. Additional Protections for the Disabled... 5 iv. Significant Recent Changes... 6 v. Requirements for New Buildings... 6 vi. Housing Opportunities for Families... 7 E. Delaware Fair Housing Act... 7 F. Local Fair Housing Ordinances... 8 G. Methodology... 9 i. Use of Census Data ii. Other Data Sources Used iii. Areas of Racial or Ethnic Concentration H. Development of the Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing i. Local Collaboration of HUD Entitlement Entities in Conducting the AI ii. Agency Consultation iii. Public Comment I. The Relationship between Fair Housing and Affordable Housing DELAWARE STATE REGIONAL PROFILE A. Demographic Profile i. Population Trends ii. Areas of Racial and Ethnic Minority Concentration iii. Residential Segregation Patterns B. Economic Profile i. Race/Ethnicity and Income ii. Concentrations of LMI Persons iii. Disability and Income iv. Familial Status and Income v. Ancestry and Income vi. Persons with Limited English Proficiency vii. Protected Class Status and Unemployment C. Housing Market i. Housing Inventory ii. Types of Housing Units iii. Foreclosure Trends iv. Protected Class Status and Home Ownership v. The Tendency of the Protected Classes to Live in Larger Households vi. Cost of Housing D. Home Mortgage Financing i. Mortgage Lending Practices ii. High-Cost Lending Practices Page i

2 3. CITY OF WILMINGTON A. Historical Residential Settlement Patterns B. Demographic Profile i. Population Trends ii. Areas of Racial and Ethnic Minority Concentration iii. Residential Segregation Patterns iv. Race/Ethnicity and Income v. Concentrations of LMI Persons vi. Disability and Income vii. Familial Status and Income viii. Ancestry and Income ix. Persons with Limited English Proficiency x. Protected Class Status and Unemployment C. Housing Market i. Housing Inventory ii. Types of Housing Units iii. Protected Class Status and Homeownership iv. Foreclosure Trends v. The Tendency of the Protected Classes to Live in Larger Households vi. Cost of Housing vii. Protected Class Status and Housing Problems D. Review of Public Sector Policies i. Wilmington Housing Authority ii. Privately Assisted Housing iii. City Policies Governing Investment of Federal Entitlement Funds iv. Affirmative Marketing Policy v. Site and Neighborhood Selection Policy vi. Appointed Boards and Commissions vii. Accessibility of Residential Dwelling Units viii. Language Access Plan for Persons with Limited English Proficiency ix. Comprehensive Planning x. Zoning E. Private Sector Policies i. Mortgage Lending Practices ii. High-Cost Lending Practices F. Evaluation of Current Fair Housing Profile i. Existence of Fair Housing Discrimination ii. Determination of Unlawful Segregation G. Assessment of Current Fair Housing Policies, Programs, and Activities i. City of Wilmington Fair Housing Ordinance ii. Progress since Previous AI iii. Current Fair Housing Programs and Activities H. General Fair Housing Observations I. Potential Impediments to Fair Housing Choice and Recommendations i. Public Sector ii. Private Sector J. Fair Housing Action Plan K. Signature Page for the City of Wilmington NEW CASTLE COUNTY A. Historical Residential Settlement Patterns B. Demographic Profile i. Population Trends ii. Areas of Racial and Ethnic Minority Concentration iii. Residential Segregation Patterns iv. Race/Ethnicity and Income v. Concentrations of LMI Persons vi. Disability and Income Page ii

3 vii. Familial Status and Income viii. Ancestry and Income ix. Persons with Limited English Proficiency x. Protected Class Status and Unemployment C. Housing Market i. Housing Inventory ii. Types of Housing Units iii. Protected Class Status and Home Ownership iv. Foreclosure Trends v. The Tendency of the Protected Classes to Live in Larger Households vi. Cost of Housing vii. Protected Class Status and Housing Problems D. Review of Public Sector Policies i. New Castle County Housing Authority ii. Newark Housing Authority iii. Privately Assisted Housing iv. County Policies Governing Investment of Federal Entitlement Funds v. Affirmative Marketing Policy vi. Site and Neighborhood Selection Policy vii. Appointed Boards and Commissions viii. Accessibility of Residential Dwelling Units ix. Limited Access Plan Persons with Limited English Proficiency x. Comprehensive Plan xi. Zoning E. Private Sector Policies i. Mortgage Lending Practices ii. High-Cost Lending Practices F. Evaluation of Current Fair Housing Profile i. Existence of Fair Housing Discrimination ii. Determination of Unlawful Segregation G. Assessment of Current Fair Housing Programs and Activities i. Progress since Previous AI ii. Current Fair Housing Programs and Activities H. General Fair Housing Observations I. Potential Impediments to Fair Housing Choice and Recommendations i. Public Sector ii. Private Sector J. Fair Housing Action Plan K. Signature Page for the Urban County of New Castle County L. Signature Page for the City of Newark CITY OF DOVER A. Historical Residential Settlement Patterns B. Demographic Profile i. Population Trends ii. Areas of Racial and Ethnic Minority Concentration iii. Residential Segregation Patterns iv. Race/Ethnicity and Income v. Concentrations of LMI Persons vi. Disability and Income vii. Familial Status and Income viii. Ancestry and Income ix. Persons with Limited English Proficiency x. Protected Class Status and Unemployment C. Housing Market i. Housing Inventory ii. Types of Housing Units iii. Protected Class Status and Home Ownership iv. Foreclosure Trends Page iii

4 v. The Tendency of the Protected Classes to Live in Larger Households vi. Cost of Housing vii. Protected Class Status and Housing Problems D. Review of Public Sector Policies i. Dover Housing Authority ii. Privately Assisted Housing iii. City Policies Governing Investment of Entitlement Funds iv. Appointed Boards and Commissions v. Accessibility of Residential Dwelling Units vi. Comprehensive Plan vii. Zoning E. Private Sector Policies i. Mortgage Lending Practices ii. High-Cost Lending Practices F. Evaluation of Current Fair Housing Profile i. Existence of Fair Housing Discrimination ii. Determination of Unlawful Segregation G. Assessment of Current Fair Housing Programs and Activities i. Progress since the Previous AI ii. Current Fair Housing Programs and Activities H. General Fair Housing Observations I. Potential Impediments to Fair Housing Choice and Recommendations i. Public Sector ii. Private Sector J. Fair Housing Action Plan K. Signature Page for the City of Dover BALANCE OF STATE KENT AND SUSSEX COUNTIES A. Historical Residential Settlement Patterns B. Demographic Profile i. Population Trends ii. Areas of Racial and Ethnic Minority Concentration iii. Residential Segregation Patterns iv. Race/Ethnicity and Income v. Concentrations of LMI Persons vi. Disability and Income vii. Familial Status and Income viii. Ancestry and Income ix. Persons with Limited English Proficiency x. Protected Class Status and Unemployment C. Housing Market i. Housing Inventory ii. Types of Housing Units iii. Protected Class Status and Home Ownership iv. Foreclosure Trends v. The Tendency of the Protected Classes to Live in Larger Households vi. Cost of Housing vii. Protected Class Status and Housing Problems D. Review of Public Sector Policies i. Delaware State Housing Authority ii. Privately Assisted Housing iii. State Policies Governing Investment of Federal Entitlement Funds iv. Affirmative Marketing Policy v. Project and Neighborhood Standards vi. Appointed Boards and Commissions vii. Accessibility of Residential Dwelling Units viii. Kent County Comprehensive Plan ix. Sussex County Comprehensive Plan x. Zoning Page iv

5 E. Private Sector Policies i. Mortgage Lending Practices ii. Denials by Race and Income iii. High-Cost Lending Practices iv. Refinancing Loans F. Evaluation of Current Fair Housing Profile i. Existence of Fair Housing Discrimination ii. Determination of Unlawful Segregation G. Assessment of Current Fair Housing Programs and Activities i. Progress since Previous AI ii. Current Fair Housing Programs and Activities H. General Fair Housing Observations I. Potential Impediments to Fair Housing Choice and Recommendations i. Public Sector ii. Private Sector J. Fair Housing Action Plan K. Signature Page for the Balance of State REGIONAL CONSIDERATIONS A. Statewide Policies, Programs, and Issues i. Qualified Allocation Plan (QAP) and Related Policies ii. Senate Bill iii. Statewide Single Family Mortgage Revenue Bond (SFMRB) Program iv. Statewide Live Near Your Work Program v. Delaware Growth Management Policies vi. Uniform Definition of Impaction/Areas of Concentration vii. Communities of Opportunity viii. Impact Fees B. Housing Mobility i. Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher (HCV) Portability ii. Regional Collaboration to Remedy Concentrations in Wilmington iii. Lack of Accessible Housing Throughout the State C. Taxes i. City of Wilmington ii. New Castle County iii. City of Dover iv. Balance of State D. Public Transit i. Destinations and Routes ii. Accessibility E. Newspaper Advertising i. Publisher s Policies ii. Placement of Fair Housing Logo iii. Potentially Discriminatory Language in Advertisements F. Other Advertising G. Real Estate Practices i. New Castle County Board of Realtors (NCCBOR) ii. Kent County Association of Realtors (KCAOR) iii. Sussex County Association of Realtors (SCAOR) H. Evaluation of Current Fair Housing Profile i. HUD Office of Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity (FHEO) ii. Delaware Community Legal Aid Society, Inc (CLASI) I. Assessment of Current Fair Housing Programs and Activities i. Statewide Fair Housing Programs and Activities ii. State Office of Human Relations (OHR) iii. Delaware Human Relations Commission (DHRC) iv. Statewide Fair Housing Training Seminars J. General Fair Housing Observations Page v

6 K. Potential Regional Impediments to Fair Housing Choice and Recommendations556 i. Public Sector ii. Private Sector L. Regional Fair Housing Action Plan APPENDIX A: LIST OF ACRONYMS APPENDIX B: PARTICIPATING STAKEHOLDERS APPENDIX C: ZONING REVIEWS APPENDIX D: PUBLIC HEARING MINUTES APPENDIX E: SUMMARY OF PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED Page vi

7 Index of Tables and Figures Figure 1-1 Protection for Members of the Protected Classes... 9 Figure 2-1 Population Trends, Figure 2-2 Population Trends, Figure 2-3 Population Trends by Race and Ethnicity, Figure 2-4 Population by Race and Ethnicity, Figure 2-5 Areas of Concentration by Municipality, Figure 2-6 Delaware Municipal Dissimilarity Index Rankings, Figure 2-7 Median Household Income and Poverty Rates by Race/Ethnicity, Figure 2-8 Household Income Distribution by Race, Figure 2-9 Household Income Distribution by Race, Figure 2-10 Low and Moderate Income Persons, Figure 2-11 Persons with Disabilities, Figure 2-12 Poverty Rates by Disability, Figure 2-13 Female-Headed Households with Children, Figure 2-14 Foreign-Born Residents, Figure 2-15 Families with Children with Incomes less than 200% Poverty, Figure 2-16 Persons with LEP by Locality, Figure 2-17 Civilian Labor Force, Figure 2-18 Trends in Total Housing Units, Figure 2-19 Trends in Housing Units in Structures, Figure 2-20 Estimated Residential Foreclosure Rankings, January 2007 June Figure 2-21 Home Ownership by Race and Ethnicity of Householder, Figure 2-22 Families with Three or More Persons, Figure 2-23 Housing Units by Number of Bedrooms, Figure 2-24 Trends in Housing Value, Rent and Income, Figure 2-25 Loss of Affordable Rental Housing Units, Figure 2-26 Housing Market Sales Trends, Figure 2-27 Housing Market Sales Trends, Figure 2-28 Number of Housing Units Sold by Price, Figure 2-29 Summary Report Based on Action Taken Mortgage Data, Figure 2-30 Summary Report Based on Action Taken Mortgage Data, Figure 2-31 Denials by Race and Ethnicity, Figure 2-32 Denials by Income, Figure 2-33 Denials by Race for Lower Income Applicants, Figure 2-34 Denials by Race for Upper Income Applicants, Figure 2-35 High-Cost Home Purchase Loans by Race/Ethnicity and Income, Figure 2-36 High-Cost Refinancing Loans by Race/Ethnicity and Income, Figure 3-1 Population Trends, Figure 3-2 Changes in the Racial and Ethnic Characteristics of the Population, Figure 3-3 Census Tract Population by Race and Hispanic Origin, Figure 3-4 Delaware Municipal Dissimilarity Index Rankings, Figure 3-5 Wilmington Dissimilarity Indices, Page vii

8 Figure 3-6 Median Household Income and Poverty Rates by Race/Ethnicity, Figure 3-7 Household Income Distribution by Race and Ethnicity, Figure 3-8 Household Income Distribution by Race and Ethnicity, Figure 3-9 Low and Moderate Income Persons, Figure 3-10 Female-headed Households and Households with Children, Figure 3-11 Civilian Labor Force, Figure 3-12 Trends in Total Housing Units, Figure 3-13 Trends in Housing Units in Structures, Figure 3-14 Home Ownership by Race and Ethnicity, Figure 3-15 Estimated Residential Foreclosure Rates by Census Tract, January 2007 June Figure 3-16 Foreclosure Filing Trends, January 2008 to August Figure 3-17 Families with Three or More Persons, Figure 3-18 Housing Units by Number of Bedrooms, Figure 3-19 Trends in Housing Value, Rent and Income, Figure 3-20 Loss of Affordable Rental Housing Units*, Figure 3-21 Housing Market Trends, Figure 3-22 Housing Market Trends, Figure 3-23 Units Sold by Price, Figure 3-24 Maximum Affordable Purchase Price by Race/Ethnicity, Figure 3-25 Lower Income Households with Housing Problems, Figure 3-26 WHA Public Housing Developments, Figure 3-27 Characteristics of Current Public Housing Residents, Figure 3-28 Characteristics of Applicants on Public Housing Waiting List, Figure 3-29 Section 504 Mobility and Sensory-Accessible Units, Figure 3-30 Characteristics of Current Section 8 Voucher Holders, Figure 3-31 Characteristics of Applicants on Section 8 Waiting List, Figure 3-32 Other Assisted Rental Housing Inventory in City of Wilmington, Figure 3-33 Composition of Appointed Boards and Commissions, Figure 3-34 Summary Report Based on Action Taken Mortgage Data, Figure 3-35 Summary Report Based on Action Taken Mortgage Data, Figure 3-36 Denials by Race and Ethnicity, Figure 3-37 Denial Rates by Race and Ethnicity, Figure 3-38 Denials by Income, Figure 3-39 Denials by Race for Lower-income Applicants, Figure 3-40 Denials by Race for Upper-income Applicants, Figure 3-41 Denial Rates by Race and Income, Figure 3-42 High-Cost Home Purchase Loans by Race/Ethnicity and Income, Figure 3-43 High-Cost Refinancing Loans by Race/Ethnicity and Income, Figure 3-44 City of Wilmington Fair Housing Action Plan Figure 4-1 Population Trends, Figure 4-2 Changes in the Racial and Ethnic Characteristics of the Urban County Population, ** Figure 4-3 Census Tract Population by Race and Hispanic Origin, Figure 4-4 Delaware Dissimilarity Index Rankings, Page viii

9 Figure 4-5 Median Household Income and Poverty Rates by Race/Ethnicity, Figure 4-6 Household Income Distribution by Race and Ethnicity, Figure 4-7 Urban County Household Income Distribution by Race and Ethnicity, 2008* Figure 4-8 Low and Moderate Income Persons, Figure 4-9 Female-headed Households and Households with Children, Figure 4-10 Persons with LEP, Figure 4-11 Civilian Labor Force, Figure 4-12 Trends in Total Housing Units, Figure 4-13 Trends in Housing Units in Structures, Figure 4-14 Home Ownership by Race and Ethnicity, Figure 4-15 Estimated Residential Foreclosure Rates by Census Tract, January 2007 June Figure 4-16 Urban County Foreclosure Filing Trends, January 2008 to August 2010* Figure 4-17 Families with Three or More Persons, 2000* Figure 4-18 Housing Units by Number of Bedrooms, 2000* Figure 4-19 Trends in Housing Value, Rent and Income, Figure 4-20 Loss of Affordable Rental Housing Units, * Figure 4-21 Housing Market Trends, Figure 4-22 Housing Market Trends, Figure 4-23 Units Sold by Price, Figure 4-24 Maximum Affordable Purchase Price by Race/Ethnicity, Figure 4-25 Lower Income Households with Housing Problems, 2000* Figure 4-26 Characteristics of Current Section 8 Voucher Holders, Figure 4-27 Characteristics of Applicants on the Section 8 Waiting List, Figure 4-28 NHA Public Housing Developments, Figure 4-29 Characteristics of Current Public Housing Residents, Figure 4-30 Characteristics of Applicants on the Public Housing Waiting List, Figure 4-31 Characteristics of Current Section 8 Voucher Holders, Figure 4-32 Characteristics of Applicants on the Section 8 Waiting List, Figure 4-33 Other Assisted Rental Housing Inventory in New Castle County (excluding Wilmington), Figure 4-34 Estimated Growth Rates in New Castle County Figure 4-35 Summary Report Based on Action Taken Mortgage Data, Figure 4-36 Summary Report Based on Action Taken Mortgage Data, Figure 4-37 Denials by Race and Ethnicity, Figure 4-38 Denial Rates by Race and Ethnicity, Figure 4-39 Denials by Income, Figure 4-40 Denials by Race for Lower-Income Applicants, Figure 4-41 Denials by Race for Upper-Income Applicants, Figure 4-42 Denial Rates by Race and Income, Figure 4-43 High-Cost Home Purchase Loans by Race/Ethnicity and Income, Figure 4-44 High-Cost Refinancing Loans by Race/Ethnicity and Income, Figure 4-45 New Castle County Fair Housing Action Plan Figure 5-1 Population Trends, Figure 5-2 Changes in the Racial and Ethnic Characteristics of the Population, Page ix

10 Figure 5-3 Census Tract Population by Race and Hispanic Origin, Figure 5-4 Delaware Municipal Dissimilarity Index Rankings, Figure 5-5 Dover Dissimilarity Indices, Figure 5-6 Median Household Income and Poverty Rates by Race, Figure 5-7 Household Income Distribution by Race, Figure 5-8 Household Income Distribution by Race, Figure 5-9 Low and Moderate Income Persons, Figure 5-10 Female-headed Households and Households with Children, Figure 5-11 Civilian Labor Force, Figure 5-12 Trends in Total Housing Units, Figure 5-13 Trends in Housing Units in Structures, Figure 5-14 Home Ownership by Race and Ethnicity, Figure 5-15 Estimated Residential Foreclosure Rates by Census Tract, January 2007 June Figure 5-16 Families with Three or More Persons, Figure 5-17 Housing Units by Number of Bedrooms, Figure 5-18 Trends in Housing Value, Rent and Income, Figure 5-19 Loss of Affordable Rental Housing Units*, Figure 5-20 Housing Market Trends, Figure 5-21 Housing Market Trends, Figure 5-22 Units Sold by Price, Figure 5-23 Maximum Affordable Purchase Price by Race, Figure 5-24 Lower Income Households with Housing Problems, Figure 5-25 DHA Public Housing Developments, Figure 5-26 Characteristics of Current Public Housing Residents, Figure 5-27 Characteristics of Applicants on Public Housing Waiting List, Figure 5-28 Section 504 Accessible Units, Figure 5-29 Characteristics of Current Section 8 Voucher Holders, Figure 5-30 Characteristics of Applicants on Section 8 Waiting List, Figure 5-31 Other Assisted Rental Housing Inventory in the City of Dover, Figure 5-32 City of Dover CDBG Allocations, Figure 5-33 Composition of Appointed Boards and Commissions, 2010* Figure 5-34 Zoning and Land Use Categories Figure 5-35 Summary Report Based on Action Taken Mortgage Data, Figure 5-36 Summary Report Based on Action Taken Mortgage Data, Figure 5-37 Denials by Race and Ethnicity, Figure 5-38 Denial Rates by Race and Ethnicity, Figure 5-39 Denials by Income, Figure 5-40 Denials by Race for Lower-income Applicants, Figure 5-41 Denials by Race for Upper-income Applicants, Figure 5-42 Denial Rates by Race and Income, Figure 5-43 High-Cost Home Purchase Loans by Race/Ethnicity and Income, Figure 5-44 High-Cost Refinancing Loans by Race/Ethnicity and Income, Figure 5-45 City of Dover Fair Housing Action Plan Figure 6-1 Population Trends, Page x

11 Figure 6-2 Changes in the Racial and Ethnic Characteristics of the Population, Figure 6-3 Census Tract Population by Race and Hispanic Origin, Figure 6-4 Delaware Municipal Dissimilarity Index Rankings, Figure 6-5 Median Household Income and Poverty Rates by Race/Ethnicity, Figure 6-6 Household Income Distribution by Race and Ethnicity, Figure 6-7 Household Income Distribution by Race, Figure 6-8 Low and Moderate Income Persons, Figure 6-9 Persons with Disabilities, Figure 6-10 Female-headed Households and Households with Children, Figure 6-11 Foreign-Born Population, Figure 6-12 Families under 200% Poverty level by Ancestry, Figure 6-13 Persons with Limited English Proficiency, Figure 6-14 Civilian Labor Force, Figure 6-15 Trends in Total Housing Units, Figure 6-16 Trends in Housing Units in Structures, Figure 6-17 Home Ownership by Race and Ethnicity, Figure 6-18 Estimated Residential Foreclosure Rates by Census Tract, January 2007 June Figure 6-19 Balance of State Foreclosure Filing Trends, January 2008 to August Figure 6-20 Families with Three or More Persons, Figure 6-21 Housing Units by Number of Bedrooms, Figure 6-22 Trends in Housing Value, Rent and Income, Figure 6-23 Loss of Affordable Rental Housing Units, Figure 6-24 Housing Market Trends in Kent County, Figure 6-25 Housing Market Trends in Kent County, Figure 6-26 Units Sold by Price in Kent County, Figure 6-27 Maximum Affordable Purchase Price by Race/Ethnicity in Kent County, Figure 6-28 Housing Market Trends in Sussex County, Figure 6-29 Housing Market Trends in Sussex County, Figure 6-30 Median Sales Price by Unit Size per Year in Sussex County, Figure 6-31 Maximum Affordable Purchase Price by Race/Ethnicity in Sussex County, Figure 6-32 Lower Income Households with Housing Problems in Balance of State, Figure 6-33 Lower Income Households with Housing Problems in Kent County, Figure 6-34 Lower Income Households with Housing Problems in Sussex County, Figure 6-35 DSHA Public Housing Developments, Figure 6-36 Characteristics of Current Public Housing Residents, Figure 6-37 Section 504 Accessible Units, Figure 6-38 Characteristics of Current Section 8 Voucher Holders, Figure 6-39 Characteristics of Applicants on Combined DSHA Waiting List, Figure 6-40 Other Assisted Rental Housing Inventory in Kent County (excluding Dover), Figure 6-41 Other Assisted Rental Housing Inventory in Sussex County, Figure 6-42 Composition of Appointed Boards and Commissions in Kent County, Figure 6-43 Composition of Appointed Boards and Commissions in Sussex County, Figure 6-44 Land Use Matrix Figure 6-45 Summary Report Based on Action Taken Mortgage Data in Kent County, Page xi

12 Figure 6-46 Summary Report Based on Action Taken Mortgage Data in Sussex County, Figure 6-47 Summary Report Based on Action Taken Mortgage Data in Kent County, Figure 6-48 Summary Report Based on Action Taken Mortgage Data in Sussex County, Figure 6-49 Denials by Race and Ethnicity, Figure 6-50 Denial Rates by Race and Ethnicity Balance of State, Figure 6-51 Denials by Income, Figure 6-52 Denials by Race for Lower-income Applicants, Figure 6-53 Denials by Race for Upper-income Applicants, Figure 6-54 Denial Rates by Race and Income, Figure 6-55 High-Cost Home Purchase Loans by Race/Ethnicity and Income in Kent County, Figure 6-56 High-Cost Home Purchase Loans by Race/Ethnicity and Income in Sussex County, Figure 6-57 High-Cost Refinancing Loans by Race/Ethnicity and Income in Kent County, Figure 6-58 High-Cost Refinancing Loans by Race/Ethnicity and Income in Sussex County, Figure 6-59 DSHA/Balance of State Fair Housing Action Plan Figure 7-1 QAP Priority Pools/Setasides Figure 7-2 QAP Scoring Categories Figure 7-3 Comparison of QCTs, DDAs, DSHA Impacted Areas, and Areas of Concentration Figure 7-4 SFMRB Program Recipients by Race/Ethnicity, 2008-Present Figure 7-5 Statewide Investment Areas Figure 7-6 Level 1 and 2 Areas by County Figure 7-7 Areas of Concentration Throughout the State Figure 7-8 Estimated Annual Real Estate Taxes in the City of Wilmington per $100,000 Market Value, Figure 7-9 Estimated Annual Real Estate Taxes per $100,000 Market Value in Incorporated Areas, Figure 7-10 Estimated Annual Real Estate Taxes per $100,000 Market Value in Unincorporated Areas, Figure 7-11 Estimated Annual Real Estate Taxes per $100,000 Market Value, Figure 7-12 Kent County Estimated Annual Real Estate Taxes per $100,000 Market Value in Incorporated Areas, Figure 7-13 Kent County Estimated Annual Real Estate Taxes per $100,000 Market Value in Unincorporated Areas, Figure 7-14 Sussex County Estimated Annual Real Estate Taxes per $100,000 Assessed Value in Incorporated Areas, Figure 7-15 Sussex County Estimated Annual Real Estate Taxes per $100,000 Assessed Value in Unincorporated Areas, Figure 7-16 Percent of Transit-Dependent Households by Race and Ethnicity, Figure 7-17 Modes of Transportation to Work, Figure 7-18 Use of Public Transportation to Work by Community, Figure 7-19 Bases for Fair Housing Complaints Filed with HUD, Figure 7-20 Resolution of Fair Housing Complaints Filed with HUD, Figure 7-21 Bases for Fair Housing Complaints Received by CLASI, Page xii

13 Figure 7-22 Regional Fair Housing Action Plan Figure 10-1 City of Wilmington Zoning Ordinance Review Figure 10-2 New Castle County Zoning Ordinance Review Figure 10-3 Town of Elsmere Zoning Ordinance Review Figure 10-4 City of Newark Zoning Ordinance Review Figure 10-5 New Castle City Zoning Ordinance Review Figure 10-6 City of Dover Zoning Ordinance Review Figure 10-7 Kent County Zoning Ordinance Review Figure 10-8 Sussex County Zoning Ordinance Review Figure 10-9 Town of Milford Zoning Ordinance Review Figure Town of Smyrna Zoning Ordinance Review Figure Town of Georgetown Zoning Ordinance Review Page xiii

14 7. REGIONAL CONSIDERATIONS A. Statewide Policies, Programs, and Issues i. Qualified Allocation Plan (QAP) and Related Policies The Qualified Allocation Plan (QAP) is a public policy that establishes DSHA s priorities for rental housing initiatives financed in part with equity from the sale of Low Income Housing Tax Credits. Each year, the QAP must be approved by the Governor of the State of Delaware before credits can be awarded by DSHA. Because the competition for tax credits is robust, tax credit developers design their rental housing projects to achieve maximum scoring under DSHA s scoring categories. Taken together with the State s Housing Development Fund (HDF), the QAP has a major impact on what populations are served, the types of projects that will be undertaken (i.e., new construction or rehabilitation of existing dwellings) and, indirectly, where rental housing is built or rehabilitated. In a recent federal fair housing case, The Inclusive Communities Project, Inc. v. Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs (N.D. Tex. 2010), the Texas QAP was challenged by a local affordable housing advocate. The Department of Housing and Community Affairs is the housing finance agency for the State of Texas. The lawsuit alleged that TDHCA disproportionately approved tax credits for low-income housing in minority neighborhoods and denied applications for family tax credit housing in predominantly Caucasian neighborhoods. The plaintiff alleged that TDHCA's policy in awarding credits perpetuated racial segregation in violation of the FHA. TDC argued that it prioritized tax credit applications for projects located in QCTs in accordance with Section 42 and that as such, it was unavoidable that tax credit projects would be located in concentrated minority neighborhoods rather than Caucasian neighborhoods. TDHCA submitted a motion for summary judgment (i.e., dismissal of the case). On September 28, 2010, Judge Fitzwater denied TDHCA's motion and affirmed the plaintiff's standing to sue. This case is now headed to trial. It is within this context that the AI considers DSHA s QAP. For the purposes of the AI, DSHA s 2010 QAP was reviewed to determine the extent to which it offers opportunities to expand fair housing choice for members of the protected classes. Rather than focusing on the requirements of Section 42 of the IRC, this review will examine those policies and priorities expressed in the QAP that are unique to DSHA. The total annual tax credit authority for the entire state of Delaware in 2010 was $2,430,000. DSHA s QAP establishes four priority pools or setasides in which projects compete for credits, as follows: Page 493

15 Pool or Setaside Figure 7-1 QAP Priority Pools/Setasides % of Total Tax Credit Authority Description 1 2 Non profit Preservation/rehab 10% 45% Includes projects in which a qualified 501 (3) or 501 (4) nonprofit organization owns an interest in and materially participates in the development and operation of affordable rental housing throughout the 15 year compliance period. Eligible projects include: (a) any tax credit development that has survived its 15 year compliance period that is in need of rehabilitation or is at risk of losing its affordability, and (b) any occupied rental development that is subsidized with rental assistance contracts and in need of rehabilitation or is at risk of losing its affordability 3 Chronically homeless 4 New housing creation 9% Housing for special populations including residents with a diagnosable substance abuse disorder, serious mental illness, developmental disability or chronic physical illness or disability. The first priority under this category is for residents that are homeless, institutionalized or those living in substandard or overcrowded conditions. The second priority is for all others. 36% Includes new construction of rent and income restricted rental housing. Also includes the conversion of non residential structures to residential use. Excludes elderly housing unless all units are at least 50% subsidized. Vacant and/or abandoned structures qualify under this category. TOTAL 100% In addition to the above described setasides, DSHA awards points to projects that address certain program priorities. Tax credit applicants must score a minimum of 55 points based on the 22 scoring categories in the following chart in order to meet DSHA s threshold for an award of credits. Page 494

16 Figure 7-2 QAP Scoring Categories Category Description Increase in the compliance period for affordability Serving the lowest income tenants Additional new units for families in poverty Developments in which the term of the compliance period is greater than that required by Section 42 of the IRC; also projects designed to convert to homeownership upon expiration of the initial 15 year compliance period Developments serving very low income tenants below 50% of median income Developments that are affordable to families in poverty as defined by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Range of Potential Points for Qualifying Projects 0 to 3 points 0 to 15 points 0 to 5 points 4 Per unit cost reduction Developments where project costs are between 50% and 80% of HUD s 221(d)(3) 0 to 5 points cost limits. Developments that provide permanent housing for persons with special needs, 5 points 5 Special needs housing including HIV/AIDS, homeless, mentally ill, persons with physical disabilities, developmentally disabled persons and migrant/seasonal farm workers. Supportive services must be provided free of charge to the residents. 6 Fair housing and ADA Developments that provide accessible units above and beyond the minimum 0 to 5 points units requirement of 5% of the total units to be developed. Developments that receive financial support from local government that reduce 0 to 5 points 7 Local government the capital costs or operating costs by at least 2%, including direct capital funding, contribution waiver of fees, tax abatements, donation of land or land provided at a nominal price. 8 Local government Applications that include a signed letter of support from the Chief Executive Officer 3 points support of the local unit of government in which the project is located. 9 Leveraging of non DSHA Applications with commitments of funds other than tax credit equity and DSHAadministered programs 0 to 15 points funds 10 Mixed income market Developments where at least 20% and no more than 50% of the total units in the 5 points rate development are not rent restricted and not income restricted. 11 Historic housing Developments that utilize state or federal historic tax credits 5 points 12 Preservation Developments that are at imminent risk of losing affordability restrictions 0 to 5 points USDA Rural Development Developments that have received an award of new USDA or other federal rental or other federal rental subsidy subsidy Public Housing and Developments that utilize public housing and/or Section 8 waiting lists to recruit Section 8 waiting list tenants Capacity of development and management team Provision of social services Site and neighborhood standards Development and unit amenities 19 Energy efficiency Relevant experience and qualifications of the developer and management entity Projects that provide on site supportive services that are actively linked to the residents (requires the submission of a supportive service plan with the tax credit application). (A) Development sites that are suitable for the proposed development without excessive geo technical, environmental or infrastructure costs (B) Developments in economically mixed neighborhoods that address DSHA s suitability factors, including proximity to retail, employment, daycare, medical care, public transit, entertainment, schools and within non industrial areas with no other rental housing in the immediate area. Developments that exceed DSHA s minimum construction standards, including an on site community center, security/surveillance system, community garden, separate maintenance building, on site daycare, on site senior care, eat in kitchens, irrigation systems and exterior storage closets. In order to qualify, the amenities must affect 100% of the units. Developments with new energy saving features that exceed DSHA s minimum energy guidelines Developments that are clearly identified and included in approved community revitalization plans 3 points 1 point 0 to 6 points 0 to 3 points 0 to 5 points 1 to 5 points Community 2 points 20 revitalization plan 21 Qualified census tract Developments located within a HUD identified Qualified Census Tract 1 point 22 Community outreach Developments in which the sponsor notifies the elected county executive, existing residents, the local state senator, the local state representative and/or the local mayor or council president prior to submission of the tax credit application Developments in which the sponsor conducts community meetings or presentations prior to submission of the tax credit application (A) 0 to 2 points (B) 0 to 10 points 0 to 5 points Page 495

17 To its credit, DSHA has established a policy within the updated 2011 QAP to expand fair housing choice in non-impacted areas of the state. In scoring category 17(B) (listed in Figure 7-2), tax credit projects located in nonimpacted census tracts can receive up to ten points. According to DSHA s HDF policies, the definition of impacted census tracts include areas that have a homeownership rate of less than 50% and where more than 25% of the total number of housing units are subsidized. Using this definition, there are six impacted census tracts in the State of Delaware, including tracts 1, 4, 17, 20 and 21 in the City of Wilmington, tract 425 in Milford, and tract 409 in Dover. The AI defines areas of racial and ethnic concentration as those census tracts having a percentage of Black or Hispanic residents that is at least 10 percentage points higher than the relative presence of Black or Hispanic residents for the community (City or County) as a whole. Using this definition, there are 47 areas of racial concentration and 15 areas of ethnic concentration in the State of Delaware. Furthermore, the AI defines areas of LMI concentration as block groups where more than 51% of residents meet the criteria for LMI status. In the State of Delaware, 140 block groups met the criterion for areas of LMI concentration. OBSERVATION: Delaware s HDF policies already recognize the importance of expanding the supply of affordable housing outside of areas of racial and ethnic concentration. DSHA s definition of impaction includes areas with a higher than average number of renter households and where there is already an adequate supply of subsidized rental housing. However, DSHA s definition of impaction does not consider racial, ethnic, or LMI concentrations. Both the QAP and HDF development standards should provide a definition of impacted areas that is consistent with the AI and DSHA s Five Year Consolidated Plan. Section 42 of the Internal Revenue Code encourages the production of tax credit housing in hard-to-serve areas known as Qualified Census Tracts (QCTs) and Difficult to Develop Areas (DDAs). The Code defines a DDA as "any area designated by the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development as an area which has high construction, land, and utility costs relative to the area median gross income." QCTs are census tracts in which one-half or more of the households have incomes below 60 percent of the area median income or the poverty rate is 25 percent or higher. Not more than 20 percent of a State s population may be designated as QCTs. Based on the QCT and DDA designations, developers using the Low-Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) program to build or rehabilitate affordable rental housing can claim 30 percent more in eligible basis than is available to identical projects outside of these areas. The following chart compares HUD QCTs, DDAs, DSHA Impacted Areas, and areas of racial, ethnic, and/or LMI concentration within the State of Page 496

18 Delaware. Highlighted census tracts on the chart represent QCTs that are also areas of racial, ethnic, and/or LMI concentration. Figure 7-3 Comparison of QCTs, DDAs, DSHA Impacted Areas, and Areas of Concentration Census Tract Community HUD QCT* (2011) HUD DDA** (2011) DSHA Impacted Areas *** AI Racial, Ethnic, and LMI Concentrations **** B=Black H=Hispanic LMI=Low and moderate income 1 Wilmington (B), (LMI) 2 Wilmington (B) 3 Wilmington (B) 4 Wilmington (LMI) 5 Wilmington (B), (LMI) 6.01 Wilmington (B), (LMI) 6.02 Wilmington (B), (LMI) 7 Wilmington (B), (LMI) 8 Wilmington (B), (LMI) 9 Wilmington (B), (LMI) 14 Wilmington (LMI) 15 Wilmington (LMI) 16 Wilmington (B), (LMI) 17 Wilmington (B), (LMI) 18 Wilmington None 19 Wilmington (B), (LMI) 20 Wilmington (B), (LMI) 21 Wilmington (B), (LMI) 22 Wilmington (H), (LMI) 23 Wilmington (H), (LMI) 25 Wilmington (H), (LMI) 26 Wilmington (H), (LMI) 27 Wilmington (LMI) 129 Wilmington and (H) Lower Christiana 24 New Castle County (B) 27 New Castle County (B), (H) New Castle County (B), (LMI) New Castle County (B), (LMI) 103 New Castle County (LMI) 107 New Castle County (B), (LMI) New Castle County (LMI) Page 497

19 Census Tract Community HUD QCT* (2011) HUD DDA** (2011) DSHA Impacted Areas *** AI Racial, Ethnic, and LMI Concentrations **** B=Black H=Hispanic LMI=Low and moderate income 120 New Castle County (LMI) 121 New Castle County (LMI) 122 New Castle County (H), (LMI) 123 New Castle County (H), (LMI) 124 New Castle County (LMI) 125 New Castle County (LMI) 127 New Castle County (LMI) 129 New Castle County (H), (LMI) 131 New Castle County (LMI) 132 New Castle County (H), (LMI) New Castle County (LMI) 137 New Castle County (H), (LMI) New Castle County (LMI) 140 New Castle County (LMI) 141 New Castle County (LMI) 143 New Castle County (LMI) New Castle County (LMI) Greater Newark Area (LMI) Greater Newark Area (LMI) Greater Newark Area (LMI) New Castle County (LMI) New Castle County (B) New Castle County (LMI) New Castle County (B) New Castle County (B), (LMI) New Castle County (B), (LMI) 150 New Castle County (LMI) 151 New Castle County (LMI) 152 New Castle County (H), (LMI) 154 New Castle County (B), (LMI) 155 New Castle County (B), (LMI) 156 New Castle County (B), (H), (LMI) 158 New Castle County (LMI) 159 New Castle County (LMI) 160 New Castle County (B) 162 New Castle County (LMI) New Castle County (LMI) New Castle County (B) New Castle County (B), (LMI) New Castle County (LMI) New Castle County (B) Page 498

20 Census Tract Community HUD QCT* (2011) HUD DDA** (2011) DSHA Impacted Areas *** AI Racial, Ethnic, and LMI Concentrations **** B=Black H=Hispanic LMI=Low and moderate income Kent County (B), (LMI) 405 Kent County (B) 406 Dover (B) 406 Kent County (B) 407 Kent County (B) 408 Kent County (B) 409 Dover None 410 Kent County (B) 411 Kent County (LMI) 412 Kent County (B) 413 Kent County (B) 414 Dover (B), (LMI) 414 Kent County (B), (LMI) 415 Kent County (B), (LMI) Kent County (LMI) Kent County (LMI) Kent County (LMI) 424 Kent County (LMI) 425 Kent County Milford (B), (LMI) 430 Kent County (LMI) 502 Sussex County (B) Sussex County (LMI) Sussex County (LMI) Sussex County (LMI) Sussex County (B) Sussex County (H), (LMI) Sussex County (LMI) Sussex County (B) Sussex County (LMI) Sussex County (LMI) 514 Sussex County (H), (LMI) Sussex County (B), (LMI) All of Sussex County N/A *The IRS defines QCTs as census tracts in which one half or more of all households have incomes below 60% of the area median income or the poverty rate is 25 percent or higher. Source: **The IRS defines a DDA as any area designated by the Secretary of HUD as an area which has high construction, land and utility costs relative to the area median gross income. Source: ***DSHA defines impacted areas as those census tracts having a homeownership rate of less than 50% and where more than 25% of the total number of housing units are state or federally subsidized. ****The AI defines areas of concentration as those census tracts having a percentage of Black or Hispanic residents that is at least 10 percentage points higher than the relative presence of Black or Hispanic residents for the community as a whole. The AI defines areas of LMI concentration as block groups where 51% or more of residents met the criterion for LMI status. Dover (50.11% and New Castle County (45.69%) are exceptions. Page 499

21 In Delaware, there are a total of 15 QCTs. Twelve of the State s QCTs are located in the City of Wilmington. All 12 of the QCTs in Wilmington are located in areas of racial, ethnic and/or LMI concentration. The remaining three QCTs are located in and around the City of Newark in New Castle County. Of these, all three are located in areas of LMI concentration. Prioritizing tax credit projects located in QCTs limits fair housing choice because frequently these projects are located in areas where other tax credit housing is located. Furthermore, all 15 QCTs are located in areas of racial, ethnic, and/or LMI concentration. As such, this federally legislated priority of prioritizing tax credit projects in QCTs is an impediment to fair housing choice. It should be noted, however, that this impediment is beyond the purview of DSHA. DSHA is essentially caught between two conflicting federal statutes. On one hand, the federal government requires DSHA to affirmatively further fair housing choice by expanding the supply of affordable rental housing in nonimpacted neighborhoods. On the other hand, the federal government requires DSHA to incentivize tax credit projects in QCTs, many of which are located in areas of racial, ethnic, and/or LMI concentration. Section 42(m)(1)(B)(iii) of the Code requires all states to provide a QAP preference for projects located in QCTs where such projects contribute to a concerted community revitalization plan. DSHA addresses this requirement in scoring category 21. Under this criterion, one (1) point is awarded to tax credit projects located in QCTs. DSHA recently revised its QAP to lower the points granted to a project located in a QCT (total points allotted previously was three points). Reducing the QCT incentive to one (1) point in the QAP is a prudent effort on the part of DSHA to meet the QAP requirements of Section 42 while making every effort to affirmatively further fair housing choice. DSHA must strive to achieve a delicate balance in terms of the geography of its housing investments. On the one hand, expanding fair housing choice requires DSHA to affirmatively select projects in non-impacted neighborhoods of opportunity. On the other hand, expanding affordable housing exclusively in neighborhoods of opportunity and withholding investment entirely from impacted areas would adversely affect efforts to revitalize neighborhoods in decline. Expanding fair housing choice and breaking down historic patterns of segregation is a double edged sword. For some residents of impacted neighborhoods, exercising fair housing choice means moving to another neighborhood that offers economic opportunity, proximity to the workplace, better schools and a more safe and secure environment. Affirmative moves from impacted neighborhoods to areas of opportunity help to break down patterns of segregation. As such, it is important to allocate credits, HOME funds and HDF funds in neighborhoods of opportunity in order to provide this choice to members of the protected classes and other LMI residents of the State. Page 500

22 For other residents that live in impacted neighborhoods, exercising fair housing choice means revitalizing the community into a more attractive and safer place so that they may continue to live in their neighborhood and so that others will want to move into the neighborhood. Public policy aimed at stabilizing decline and encouraging others to move into the neighborhood also helps to break down patterns of segregation. If DSHA fails to invest public resources in impacted neighborhoods, it is inevitable that these areas will continue to decline, thereby limiting fair housing choice on the part of members of the protected classes and other residents that would prefer to remain in the neighborhood. Balancing a variety of resident housing preferences and complying with Section 42, HUD s site and neighborhood standards and other federal regulatory requirements is achieved by making affordable housing investments both in neighborhoods of opportunity and by re-investing in impacted areas. OBSERVATION: Scoring category 21 (listed in Figure 7 2) of the QAP provides one point for projects located in QCTs and DDAs. DSHA is in the unenviable position of being required to comply with two contradictory federal statutes. On one hand, the federal Housing and Community Development Act and related statutes require DSHA to affirmatively further fair housing choice by expanding the supply of affordable rental housing in non impacted neighborhoods. On the other hand, Section 42 of the federal Internal Revenue Code requires DSHA to incentivize tax credit projects in QCTs, many of which are located in impacted and concentrated areas. This provision of Section 42 is an impediment to fair housing choice. It is beyond the purview of DSHA to overcome this federal impediment. Furthermore, DSHA must comply with both statutes in order to insure continued tax credit authority under Section 42 and in order to insure continued CDBG and HOME funding under the Housing and Community Development Act. By granting only one point to projects located in a QCT or DDA, DSHA is providing the least amount of incentive possible in order to maintain compliance with Section 42. Above and beyond the 22 separate scoring categories described in Figure 7-2, DSHA may award a 30% boost in eligible basis for high-ranking projects where additional resources are needed to render the project financially feasible and where the development is not located in a Qualified Census Tract (QCT) or Difficult to Develop Area (DDA). This provision in the QAP grants DSHA the ability to support projects of special merit. In light of the decline in the tax credit equity market during the period 2008 to 2010, DSHA used this provision of the QAP to fill financing gaps in projects across-theboard. As of this writing, equity investors are now cautiously returning to the tax credit market. As the market continues to improve, DSHA may have more flexibility to award the non-qct 30% basis boost to tax credit projects of special merit, including those located in non-impacted, non-concentrated areas. Page 501

23 OBSERVATION: DSHA may award a 30% boost in eligible basis for high ranking projects where additional resources are needed to render the project financially feasible and where the development is not located in a Qualified Census Tract (QCT) or Difficult to Develop Area (DDA). This important provision in the QAP allows DSHA to give special consideration to projects of special merit, including those that expand fair housing choice in non impacted, non concentrated areas of the State. Project notification requirements are evident in three separate policies Section 42(m)(1)(A)(ii) of the Internal Revenue Code, State Senate Bill 400 (Section 4028 of Chapter 40, Title 31 of the Delaware Code), and scoring categories 8 and 22 of the QAP (listed in Figure 7-2). In accordance with Section 42(m)(1)(A)(ii) of the Internal Revenue Code, DSHA notifies the chief elected official having jurisdiction over the location of any application meeting the minimum threshold eligibility requirements. In addition to the federal statute outlined in Section 42, State Senate Bill 400 (Section 4028 of Chapter 40, Title 31 of the Delaware Code) requires DSHA to notify the elected officials (i.e. Senators, Representatives, Mayors, etc.) in the jurisdiction of the application. To comply with Section 42 and SB 400, DSHA s QAP requires the applicant to notify the elected officials and civic groups located within a quarter mile of the development 10 days after the LIHTC application. Both Section 42 and SB 400 are barriers to fair housing choice because they increase the likelihood that the proposed project will be resisted by local NIMBYists. These requirements also increase the likelihood that the project may be opposed through political intervention. It should be noted that these regulatory barriers to fair housing choice are beyond the purview of DSHA. To receive notification points (up to 3 points) under scoring category 8, an applicant can notify elected officials and civic groups of the project 30 days prior to application submission. This DSHA policy is a barrier to fair housing choice because it increases the likelihood that the proposed project will be resisted by NIMBYists or through political intervention. Under scoring category 22, the developer may also sponsor and hold meetings with the community to present their application 30 days prior to submission. This policy represents a barrier to fair housing choice because in order to earn points, developers will likely be required to make a public presentation of the proposed project, even if the project does not require a public hearing in order to obtain zoning approval. In other words, developers who do not wish to expose the project to the potential objections of neighboring property owners are penalized in this point category. The fair housing rule of thumb is that an affordable housing project should not be subjected to a higher standard of public notification than market rate housing. To do so is discriminatory. A community s land use regulations should be the sole determining factor in deciding whether a public meeting is required. If an apartment building is permitted by right in a certain location, a public hearing is not required under normal circumstances. The method of Page 502

24 financing (i.e., conventional market-rate financing versus tax credit equity or other public subsidies) should not be a factor for consideration when deciding whether a public meeting is required. OBSERVATION: Section 42(m)(1)(A)(ii), SB 400, and QAP scoring category 8 of the QAP require that local elected officials be informed of a developer s intent to develop tax credit housing. In addition, scoring category 22 provides additional points to a developer that sponsors and holds a public meeting to present their application. Collectively, these requirements increase the likelihood that the proposed project will be resisted by NIMBYists or through political intervention. There exists no such public notification requirement for conventional or market rate housing in Delaware. Therefore, the method of financing a residential development project is the key factor in determining whether public notification is required. If a tax credit developer chooses not to pursue the award of points under scoring category 8, he/she is at a competitive disadvantage. In reaction to these policies, most developers will follow the path of least resistance by developing properties in jurisdictions where they will be met with the least public resistance rather than in locations that offer an opportunity to expand fair housing choice or otherwise address a critical need for affordable housing. These public policies (i.e., Section 42, SB 400, and scoring categories 8 and 22 of the QAP) are discriminatory. The local land use approval process should be the sole factor in determining the need for public notification. Tax credit housing should not be subjected to a higher standard of public notification than conventionally financed market rate housing. Notification policies and incentives that encourage public notification limit fair housing choice. Once constructed and placed in service, DSHA monitors each project to insure compliance with regulatory requirements. One such requirement is the Fair Housing Act (FHA). DSHA requires the owner to disclose any findings of discrimination. The owner is required to certify annually that it has not been a party to a finding of discrimination under the FHA, nor has it refused to lease a unit in the project to an applicant on the basis that the applicant holds a Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher. DSHA physically inspects at least 20% of all tax credit projects annually. This inspection involves, among other things, a review of the owner s documentation to support the annual project certification. DSHA s policy on civil rights compliance is stated on page 62 of the QAP. This policy requires the owner to comply with the federal Fair Housing Act, ADA and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of The policy specifically references the protected classes in the State of Delaware as well as the owner s responsibility for compliant design, affirmative marketing, tenant selection and reasonable accommodation. In the section of the QAP entitled Minimum Construction/Rehab Standards, developers and owners are reminded of their responsibility to comply with the Fair Housing Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act and the Delaware State Accessibility Standards. Under the description of ADA requirements, there is an indirect reference to Section 504 laws. Page 503

25 OBSERVATION: During the course of AI outreach to advocacy organizations and PHAs, it became apparent that there is insufficient housing for persons with mobility impairments in Delaware. Due in part to an aversion to density, the stock of accessible elevator buildings in Delaware is in relatively short supply. PHAs report that despite local preferences for the disabled, it is exceptionally difficult for Section 8 voucher holders with mobility impairments to secure private housing. It is inherently difficult and expensive to rehabilitate existing rental housing units in a manner that creates fully accessible dwelling units. Therefore, new tax credit units are the primary method of expanding the supply of accessible rental housing in Delaware. The Rehabilitation Standards Checklist included in the QAP requires the applicant to respond to several closed end (yes/no) questions involving the provision of handicapped parking spaces, ADA access, accessible laundry room, and accessible community room. The Development Standard Checklist requires the applicant to secure the approval of the Architectural Accessibility Board (the specific date of the Board s approval is required) as well as closed end (yes/no) questions relative to compliance with the Federal Fair Housing Amendment Act and the American with Disabilities Act. The management agent questionnaire requires the manager to provide information on previous experience, including the preparation of marketing plans. Section 15 of the questionnaire requires the manager to respond to a closed end (yes/no) question has the manager or its present personnel ever been involved in governmental or judicial action concerning an alleged violation of Fair Housing laws. However, this questionnaire does not require the manager to provide specific information on the nature and frequency of fair housing education provided to its staff. The QAP requires the owner to submit the HUD 935-2a Affirmative Marketing form. Question 6(b) requires the applicant to submit on separate sheets a description of the fair housing training to be provided to staff, along with a copy of instructions to staff regarding fair housing. The applicant is required to update this form at least once every five years. OBSERVATION: The QAP requires only minimal information from the applicant relative to the fair housing acumen of management staff. Above and beyond the QAP, DSHA imposes certain management agent requirements on all projects financed by the Agency. These standards are defined in an umbrella policy entitled DSHA Management Agent Requirements. Section 3 of this policy describes the minimal educational requirements for management agents. Subsection 3(B) requires the Principal and all management personnel to obtain a fair housing certification. Page 504

26 Section 4 of this policy describes DSHA requirements relative to staff capacity. The policy states that on-site management staff must have accredited certification for fair housing. Section 9 of this policy imposes a more generic requirement that management staff has received continued training and education. DSHA s policy certainly underscores the importance of management personnel that are thoroughly knowledgeable in fair housing law and procedures. But the terms fair housing certification, accredited certification and continued training and education are somewhat vague. DSHA does provide funding aimed at expanding fair housing training opportunities for housing managerial staff. For example, last year DSHA provided $1,650 to send 30 site managers to a statewide fair housing training sponsored by the Delaware Chapter of the National Association of Housing and Redevelopment Officials (DE NAHRO). In 2011, DSHA is providing $2,420 to send 44 site managers to this same training. While DSHA provides support for DE NAHRO s annual fair housing training by sending and paying for a majority of the attendees, DSHA could further demonstrate its commitment to educating housing staff and managers by directly cosponsoring the event with DE NAHRO and other state agencies. In 2001, DSHA co-sponsored this fair housing conference with DE NAHRO and the State Office of Human Relations. Since then, DE NAHRO has continued to provide and sponsor the training on an annual basis. DSHA has agreed to provide funding in support of these workshops. OBSERVATION: DSHA should continue to provide funding to allow site managers to attend DE NAHRO s annual fair housing training session. To further demonstrate its commitment to affirmatively further fair housing, DSHA should begin to co sponsor this event, or a similar event, in partnership with DE NAHRO and other applicable state agencies such as the Office of Human Relations. DSHA s Management Agent Selection Procedure is another policy that imposes fair housing-related requirements on organizations that manage DSHA-financed developments. Section 3 of this policy requires the submission of a comprehensive management plan that describes how the project will insure equal housing opportunity and avoid discrimination in leasing. OBSERVATION: While DSHA does provide financial support for fair housing trainings, it does not have an agency wide policy that encourages housing managers to participate in fair housing trainings. DSHA could benefit from a single management agent policy relative to fair housing that is articulated with consistency throughout the QAP, in its HDF guidelines, and in the broader umbrella of requirements that apply to all developments financed by DSHA. Page 505

27 Since 90% of all tax credit projects in Delaware involve financial support from DSHA s Housing Development Fund (HDF), it is important to note that the Project and Neighborhood Standards for HDF-assisted developments include two fair housing-related requirements. Developments financed with HDF must: Be suitable from the standpoint of facilitating and furthering full compliance with the applicable provisions of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Title VIII of the Civil Rights Act of 1968, and Delaware Code Chapter 46, Title 6, The Equal Right To Housing provisions. Promote greater choice of housing opportunities to, and avoid undue concentration of assisted persons in areas containing a high proportion of low-income persons OBSERVATION: Ninety percent (90%) of all tax credit projects in Delaware involve HDF as a source of funds. HDF Project and Neighborhood Standards require that each HDF assisted project: Comply with state and federal fair housing statutes, Promote fair housing choice, and Prohibit undue concentration of affordable housing in lower income areas. HDF guidelines provide a definition of impacted census tracts/areas of concentration. However, this definition should be revised to provide a more concise definition of what is meant by the phrase areas of racial, ethnic and LMI concentration, along with a listing of census tracts in Delaware that meet this definition. The HDF definition should be consistent with the definition of impacted areas in DSHA s Consolidated Plan and the AI. ii. Senate Bill 400 On June 30, 2000, the Delaware State Senate adopted Bill No. 400 (Section 4028 of Chapter 40, Title 31 of the Delaware Code) which requires DSHA to notify by certified and regular mail any state senators and representatives in whose districts affordable housing projects are being considered or approved by DSHA. More specifically, this legislation requires DSHA to provide such notification whenever: An application for a reservation of Low Income Housing Tax Credits has been received by DSHA, and again whenever An application for a reservation of Low Income Housing Tax Credits has received preliminary approval by DSHA, and whenever DSHA makes any loans or grants from the State s Housing Development Fund. This statutory requirement is an impediment to fair housing choice because it increases the likelihood that the proposed project may be resisted by local NIMBYists. This requirement also increases the likelihood that the project Page 506

28 may be opposed through political intervention. It should be noted that this regulatory barrier to fair housing choice is beyond the purview of DSHA. The fair housing rule of thumb is that an affordable housing project should not be subjected to a higher standard of public notification than market rate housing. To do so is discriminatory. A community s land use regulations should be the sole determining factor in deciding whether public notification is required. If an apartment building is permitted by right in a certain location, public notification is not required under normal circumstances. The method of financing (i.e., conventional market-rate financing versus tax credit equity, HDF or other public subsidies) should not be a factor for consideration when deciding whether public notification is required. OBSERVATION: Senate Bill 400 (Chapter 40, Title 31, Section 4028 of the Delaware Code) requires that state senators and representatives be notified whenever a housing tax credit application is received by DSHA, approved by DSHA, or whenever DSHA makes a loan or grant to an affordable housing project under its Housing Development Fund (HDF). This legislation increases the likelihood that the proposed project will be resisted by NIMBYists or through political intervention. There exists no such notification requirement for conventional or market rate housing in Delaware. Therefore, the method of financing a residential development project is the key factor in determining whether notification is required under this legislation. This public policy is discriminatory. The local land use approval process should be the sole factor in determining the need for public notification. Tax credit housing or HDF financed affordable housing should not be subjected to a higher standard of public notification than conventionally financed market rate housing. Notification policies have the potential to limit fair housing choice. iii. Statewide Single Family Mortgage Revenue Bond (SFMRB) Program DSHA s Single Family Mortgage Revenue Bond (SFMRB) Program, also known as the First-Time Homebuyers Program, is a statewide program that provides first mortgage financing at below-market interest rates to qualified Delaware homebuyers who have not owned a home in the past three years. Program requirements differ by county, by location in targeted versus nontargeted areas, and by number of persons per household. Income limits are higher in targeted areas of the three counties and for households with three or more persons. There are also certain qualifications that the sales price of the home to be purchased must meet, depending on the location of the home and the number of units. There are currently 18 participating lenders from which qualified applicants can choose from in order to secure mortgage financing. From 2008 to the present, the First-Time Home Buyers Program has assisted 1,290 persons to purchase a home in locations statewide. The beneficiaries of this program represent a diverse mix of races, ages, ethnicities, and household types. Of the 1,290 households, just over 31% were Black, almost 3% were Hispanic, and 1% were Asian, compared to White households which comprised over 60% of the recipients. The following chart provides Page 507

29 an overview of the ethnic and racial characteristics of SFMRB Program participations from 2008 through January Figure 7-4 SFMRB Program Recipients by Race/Ethnicity, 2008-Present Race of Applicants % of Total Applicants White % Black % Undisclosed % Hispanic % Asian % Other 2 0.2% American Indian 1 0.1% TOTAL 1, % Source: Delaware State Housing Authority, January 2011 Data was also available for age, sex, and familial status. In regard to age, the majority of program participants, or over 67%, were between the ages of 26 and 49. In addition, 22.7% of participants were 25 or younger while 8.8% were between the ages of 50 and 64. About 1% of participants were 65 or older. In addition, 52.2% of participants were male while 47.8% were female. The majority of participants, or 68.5%, were unmarried. In contrast, almost 30% were married while the remaining participants were divorced, separated, or widowed. OBSERVATION: The Single Family Mortgage Revenue Bond (SFMRB) Program is a valuable resource for households throughout the State that are interested in purchasing a home. Since 2008, the program has assisted almost 1,300 households to achieve their dream of homeownership. SFMRB program participants represent a wide range of households, including several members of the protected classes, such as Black and Hispanic households and single parent households. DSHA should continue to reach out to members of the protected classes through the SFMRB program to help them achieve their dream of owning a home and building wealth. iv. Statewide Live Near Your Work Program The Live Near Your Work (LNYW) program began in FY 2004 and is administered by DSHA. The program provides down payment and/or closing cost assistance to encourage eligible employees to purchase homes near their place of employment. Participating employers contribute $1,000 for each participating employee, which is matched by the State (DSHA) and the local jurisdiction, if they participate. For homes located in communities targeted for revitalization, the grant from each party may be increased, bringing the total amount of assistance provided to as much as $5,000. Page 508

30 To qualify for the LNYW program, a borrower cannot exceed the gross household income requirements as outlined in the program guidelines. These income limits vary by county and by the number of persons per household. For example, a 1-2 person household in New Castle County cannot earn more than $77,800 per year while the same type of household cannot earn more than $70,800 per year in Kent or Sussex Counties. For households with 3 or more persons, the income limits in New Castle County and Kent and Sussex Counties are $89,470 and $81,420, respectively. There are 19 employers throughout the State that participate in the LNYW program, including the University of Delaware, Wesley College, St. Francis Hospital, Seawatch International, Perdue Farms, Inc., Westside Family Healthcare, and Decrane Aerospace/ Pats Aircraft Completions. In addition, several local units of government provide matching funds, including the City of Wilmington, the City of Milford, and the Town of Georgetown. As part of the program requirements, employees must complete a HUDapproved homeownership education/housing counseling course, must maintain the home as their primary residence, and the first mortgage must be a 30-year fixed-rate mortgage with no cash out or back to the borrower. In addition, the employee must obtain a first mortgage through a participating lender. There are 15 participating lenders, including PNC Mortgage, Chase Home Finance, Bank of America, MetLife Home Loans, Wells Fargo Home Mortgage, and the Wilmington Trust Company, to name a few. Homes purchased must be located within employer-identified areas, which typically includes an area not to exceed a 3-mile radius from the employer s worksite. DSHA promotes the LNYW program to employers statewide through Chamber of Commerce functions, advertising, press releases, and by sponsoring informational booths at various community events and housingrelated conferences. Since the program s inception in 2004, there have been 62 employee closings throughout the State. An additional 10 closings are projected for FY Overall, the LNYW program provides meaningful benefits to all involved parties. For example, employers realize a reduction in turnover and recruitment costs while local jurisdictions are revitalized through increased homeownership. In addition, everyone benefits from reduced commute times and less traffic congestion. Most importantly, employees are given an opportunity to achieve homeownership and to build wealth. Page 509

31 OBSERVATION: The Live Near Your Work (LNYW) Program is a valuable tool for area employers, employees, and local jurisdictions. The program provides incentives, in the form of a down payment and/or closing cost assistance, to potential homebuyers who are employed through participating employers. DSHA should continue to offer this program as a way to expand housing choice and to provide homeownership opportunities to income eligible households. DSHA should also continue to recruit additional employers, lenders, and local jurisdictions to participate in the program. v. Delaware Growth Management Policies The purpose of the Strategies for State Policies and Spending document, updated in 2010 and formally adopted by Governor Markell, is to coordinate land use decision- making with the provision of infrastructure and services in a manner that makes the best use of Delaware s natural and fiscal resources. The 2010 update to the Strategies for State Policies and Spending builds on the groundwork previously established in the 1999 and 2004 versions of the document by the Cabinet Committee on State Planning Issues. The 2010 update includes the same area designations as outlined in the 2004 update. Levels 1 and 2 identify areas that are most suitable for growth and where the State can make the most cost-effective infrastructure investments in terms of schools, roads, and public safety. Level 3 areas are those locations where growth is anticipated by local, county, and/or state plans in the longer term, or areas that may have environmental or other constraints to development. Level 4 areas are more rural in character and include areas where the state will make investments that will help to preserve the existing rural character by promoting open space and agricultural uses. In addition, out of play areas include areas that generally cannot be developed. Strategies for State Policies and Spending outlines goals for the aforementioned investment areas in the following categories: agriculture, economic development, education, housing, natural resources and the environment, state facilities and investments, and transportation. Levels 1 through 3 are areas in which state policies will support growth activities, with Levels 1 and 2 being the primary focus. Within DSHA s policies, tax credit projects that involve new housing construction are permitted in investment area Levels 1, 2, and 3. Moreover, State policies will support agriculture and open space activities in Level 4 areas, including the promotion of the agriculture industry support activities. The following table provides a summary of the investment areas used to guide spending, planning, and development throughout Delaware, along with the specific housing strategies for each area level. Page 510

32 Figure 7-5 Statewide Investment Areas Investment Area Level 1 Description of Area Municipalities, towns, or urban/urbanizing places in counties; generally higher density with a variety of transportation opportunities available Housing Strategies Support the development of a broad mix of housing options to meet the needs of people of all abilities, income levels, and housing types; Coordinate the provision of housing with the location of jobs, transit, services, and infrastructure; Multi family housing should be compatible with a community's character; Emphasize infill and redevelopment of vacant and underutilized parcels within developed areas; Utilize collaborative measures to restore and improve existing neighborhoods through a variety of acquisition, code enforcement, rehabilitation, and community development measures. Level 2 Level 3 Level 4 Composed of less developed areas within municipalities, rapidly growing areas in the counties that have or will have public water and wastewater services and utilities, areas which are generally adjacent to or near Level 1 areas, smaller towns and rural villages, and suburban areas with public water, wastewater, and utility services. Lands which are in the long term growth plans of counties or municipalities where development is not necessary to accommodate expected population growth; lands which are adjacent to or intermingled with fast growing areas within counties or municipalities which are otherwise categorized as Levels 1 or 2. Includes many unincorporated communities; these areas are predominantly agricultural and contain agribusiness activities, farm complexes, and small settlements; these areas also boast undeveloped natural areas, such as forestlands and large recreational uses, such as state and county parks and fish and wildlife reserves. Support residential growth supplemented with infrastructure and essential neighborhood services; Continue to encourage a broad mix of housing options, such as small single family detached, duplexes, and townhomes, to meet the diverse needs of all income ranges and household types; Rehabilitation efforts are needed to ensure safe and habitable housing; Restore homeownership in areas impacted by foreclosure crisis. Level 3 Areas are characterized by low density and rural homes, which may or may not be serviced by public utilities; New housing development, in the short term, would represent "leap frog" development which would be undesirable; In the longer term, these areas may be desirable for a variety of housing types, styles, and densities in conjunction with local government comprehensive plans; May be appropriate for compact development once Level 2 areas are built out and utilities are available; May be appropriate as low density housing that serves as a transition from more urban/suburban areas to the rural areas of Level 4; In relation to partially built subdivisions, strategies will include sunsetting unbuilt subdivisions, converting some of the partially built subdivisions back to agricultural use, or replatting for a smaller, but viable market segment. Construction of new homes is discouraged in Level 4 areas; Housing programs will focus on existing housing in regard to maintenance, health, and safety; programs will continue to promote revitalization of these areas through housing rehabilitation. Out of Play (OOP) Publicly owned lands, lands for which serious legal constraints on development are identified, and lands in some form of permanent open space protection. These areas are not at all available for development or for redevelopment. Source: 2010 Strategies for State Policies and Spending Draft dated 6/3/10; Map 7-1 on the following page compares the locations of Investment Areas 1, 2, and 3 with areas of minority concentration throughout the State. The majority of New Castle County is composed of Level 1 and 2 areas while the majority of Kent and Sussex Counties include Level 4 and out of play areas. Nonetheless, there are ample Level 1 and 2 communities throughout the State where housing investments can occur in non-impacted areas. The following chart provides an overview of the Level 1 and 2 areas by county. Page 511

33 Map 7-1: Comparison of Investment Strategy Areas and Areas of Minority Concentration in the State of Delaware Delaware Statewide Upper New Castle County Legend Delaware Bay/ Atlantic Ocean Hispanic Concentration Black Concentration Other Census Tracts 2010 State Strategy Level Level 1 Level 2 Level 3 Level 4 Out of Play City of Wilmington Salem City of Dover

34 Figure 7-6 Level 1 and 2 Areas by County County New Castle Kent Sussex Level 1 and 2 Areas Wilmington, Newark, New Castle, Newport, Elsmere, Bellefonte, Arden, Middletown, Odessa, Delaware City, Smyrna, and surrounding areas Smyrna, Cheswold, Dover, Camden, Woodside, Wyoing, Milford, Magnolia, Viola, Felton, Frederica, Harrington, and surrounding areas Milford, Greenwood, Bridgeville, Georgetown, Dagsboro, Lewes, Shelbyville, Delmar, Seaford, Laurel, Blades, Millsboro, Bethany Beach, Dewey Beach, Rehoboth Beach, Ocean View, Millville, and surrounding areas Overall, the Strategies for State Policies and Spending 2010 update helps to create a unified vision towards a balance of growth and preservation priorities that all levels of government in Delaware can utilize to allocate resources. The strategies outlined in the 2010 update provide a framework for infrastructure, service, housing, and development investments by various state agencies. Furthermore, the strategies also provide guidance on regional planning issues for county and local jurisdictions and promote regional collaboration. OBSERVATION: The 2010 Update to the Strategies for State Policies and Spending provides a collaborative framework to guide the investment of funds throughout the State that promotes housing choice. Specifically, the 2010 Update identifies areas that should be targeted for development, redevelopment, conservation, open space, and/or preservation. Housing growth, in terms of new construction, is focused in Level 1 and 2 areas, which include a mix of both impacted and non impacted communities. Whenever possible, state, county, and local government entities should allocate funds towards the construction of new, affordable multi family housing units in non impacted areas in order to affirmatively further fair housing and promote greater housing choice. vi. Uniform Definition of Impaction/Areas of Concentration In their most recent Five Year Consolidated Plans (CP) submitted to HUD, both the City of Wilmington and New Castle County defined areas of racial or ethnic minority concentration as geographic areas where the percentage of a specific minority or ethnic group is 10 percentage points higher than in the jurisdiction overall. In contrast, in its most recent Five Year CP, the City of Dover defined an area of concentration as a neighborhood or development in which more than 30% of the population has a common race, ethnicity, or income. DSHA did not provide a concrete definition of areas of minority concentration in its FY Consolidated Plan. Page 512

35 Within this AI, areas of racial or ethnic minority concentration are defined as geographic areas where the percentage of a specific minority or ethnic group is 10 percentage points higher than in the jurisdiction overall. The following table provides a summary of all racial and ethnic areas of concentration throughout the State, as defined in this AI. Figure 7-7 Areas of Concentration Throughout the State Areas of Black Concentration (by Census Tract) Areas of Hispanic Concentration (by Census Tract) City of Wilmington 1, 2, 3, 5, 6.01, 6.02, 7, 8, 9, 16, 17, 19, 20, and 21 22, 23, 25, 26, and , 27, , , 107, , , , New Castle County , 154, 155, 156, 160, , , and , 122, 123, 129, 132, 137, 152, and 156 City of Dover 406 and 414 None Kent County Sussex County , 405, 406, 407, 408, 410, 412, 413, 414, 415, and 425 None 502, , , and and 514 In the interest of statewide consistency and to enhance regional collaboration in promoting greater fair housing choice, a uniform definition of impacted areas should be adopted and utilized by all entitlement entities throughout the State. It is recommended that the New Castle County and City of Wilmington definition be adopted, as it is used extensively throughout this AI in reference to impacted versus non-impacted areas. A uniform definition of areas of concentration will provide continuity on the use of the terms impacted versus non-impacted areas and will help to develop a consistent statewide approach to affirmatively further fair housing and to promote housing choice. OBSERVATION: In the interest of statewide consistency and to enhance regional collaboration in promoting greater fair housing choice among the protected classes, a uniform definition of areas of concentration should be adopted and utilized by all entitlement communities throughout the State. It is recommended that the New Castle County and City of Wilmington definition be adopted, as it is used extensively throughout this AI in reference to impacted versus non impacted areas. A uniform definition of areas of concentration will promote greater understanding and provide continuity on the use of the terms impacted versus non impacted areas and will contribute to a consistent approach to affirmatively further fair housing and to promote greater housing choice throughout the State. Page 513

36 vii. Communities of Opportunity Non-impacted communities throughout the State of Delaware can also be referred to as communities of opportunity. In order to affirmatively further fair housing and to promote greater housing choice, at least some of the development of affordable and accessible housing should be directed towards communities of opportunity. Jurisdictions receiving allocations of entitlement funds should aim to balance investments in both impacted and non-impacted neighborhoods. There are several communities of opportunity throughout the State, particularly throughout the three counties. Due to the high number of impacted census tracts (19 of 29), the non-impacted areas within the City of Wilmington are somewhat limited. In contrast, there are numerous communities of opportunity throughout the City of Dover. OBSERVATION: Overall, entitlement jurisdictions throughout the State should aim to balance investments in both impacted and non impacted neighborhoods. Non impacted neighborhoods, also referred to as communities of opportunity, are areas that do not contain concentrations of racial, ethnic, or LMI persons. Balancing affordable housing investments in impacted and nonimpacted areas will promote greater housing choice, particularly for members of the protected classes. viii. Impact Fees Impact fees are charges on new development to finance the construction or expansion of off-site capital improvements that are necessitated by and benefit the new development. Impact fees have become an important method in infrastructure financing and an essential element of local government efforts to fund infrastructure or public services. Often times, these fees help to assist in the development of needed parks, schools, roads, sewer improvements, water treatments, utilities, libraries, and public safety buildings to newly developed areas. Many states recognize and allow the use of impact fees as a way to regulate land use. Title 29, Chapter 91, Subchapter II of the Delaware State Code outlines the development and use of impact fees at the state and county levels. The code defines an impact fee as a payment of money imposed upon development as a condition of development approval to pay for a proportionate share of the cost of system improvements needed to serve new growth and development. The Code also enables counties to establish impact fees for services which the county will bear increased costs of development. One drawback associated with impact fees is that they can discourage new housing construction, particularly projects that are undertaken by non-profit housing developers and community development corporations such as Habitat for Humanity (several chapters throughout Delaware), the Page 514

37 Wilmington Housing Partnership, and other similar organizations. In order to encourage new construction of affordable rental and homeownership housing, county and local government entities should substantially reduce or preferably waive impact fees for affordable housing units. Some municipalities and counties currently waive or reduce fees in order to enhance the feasibility of affordable housing developments. In the City of Dover, impact fees for new construction are $5,763 per equivalent dwelling unit 65, which is a significant amount of funds for an organization such as Habitat for Humanity that endeavors to control costs and provide affordable housing for extremely low and very low income households earning 50% or less of the area median income. While the City has no control over the Kent County portion of its impact fees, it can choose to reduce and/or waive its City impact fees, but only in designated downtown areas and only for mixed use, multi-story larger buildings. The City relies on fee revenues to fund sewer and water improvements. Kent County adopted its Adequate Facilities Ordinance in October Impact fees listed in this ordinance include fees for schools, emergency services, and building permit fee surcharges. In regard to schools, there is a per student fee ranging from $4,174-$6,888. This fee is charged to a developer prior to the issuance of a building permit and is paid directly to the school district. The fee is based on the number of students generated by the development and the overall capacity of the school district. The emergency services fee in Kent County is $67 per dwelling unit. Kent County also has two building permit fee surcharges, as follows: One-fourth of 1% of the building permit valuation to provide assistance to volunteer fire and ambulance companies, and 1.25% of building construction costs to provide capital funding to the school district. Impact fees in New Castle County vary based on the type of land use, specifically residential vs. non-residential uses, and are assessed for public facilities, safety, and services, including parks and special facilities, libraries, county facilities, emergency medical services (EMS), fire and rescue, and law enforcement. Impact fees for residential uses range from $1,157 per housing unit for a single-family detached dwelling to $1,044 per housing unit for a single-family attached dwelling. The impact fee for all other housing units, including single-wide mobile homes, is $762 per unit. Impact fees for nonresidential uses vary from a high of $463 per 1,000 square feet of floor area for office/institutional uses ranging from 10,000-50,000 square feet to a low of $148 per 1,000 square feet of floor area for warehousing. The City of Wilmington does not have a set rate schedule for impact fees because the City is predominantly built-out and the existing infrastructure necessary for development and construction is already in place. The City s 65 $1,900 City sewer fee, $2,100 City water fee, $1,679 Kent County Sewer Fee, and $84 administration fee. Page 515

38 water and sewer hook-up fees are typically assessed when new construction must tap in to existing lines or build new lines. In regard to infill housing development in Wilmington, many developers reuse the existing sewer and water lateral lines. Sussex County s sewer and water system connection charges vary by area and by the specific water or sewer district in which a particular house or development is located. System connection charges are highest in the Dagsboro-Frankford Sewer District and the Bay View Estates Sewer District, where the fees total $6,223 and $5,937, respectively, per equivalent dwelling unit. On the other hand, the lowest connection fees in the County are in the Dewey Beach Water District, where the total system connection charge is $942 per equivalent dwelling unit. Sussex County offers several programs to provide assistance to lower-income households to make the connection charges more affordable. For example, the County offers a sewer hookup/connection fee grant of up to $2,500 for qualified households. In addition, through its CDBG program, the County provides grants for the installation of sewer hook-ups to the County sewer system to qualified households. OBSERVATION: County and local government entities throughout the State of Delaware should reduce and/or waive their respective sewer, water, and/or public facilities and services impact fees for area developers and non profit organizations seeking to build affordable housing units, including both rental and owner units. B. Housing Mobility i. Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher (HCV) Portability One of the primary effects of housing discrimination is the perpetuation of segregated residential patterns. In many communities, neighborhoods historically called home by generations of minorities have been the lowest income, highest poverty neighborhoods with the fewest amenities and most substandard housing. Whether trapped in their neighborhoods by a lack of resources to relocate, a lack of knowledge of what lies beyond, a perceived or real fear of moving to a White neighborhood with better opportunities, or public policies meant to maintain segregation, many minorities have remained in areas where crime is higher, grocery stores are lacking, jobs are non-existent and schools are noteworthy for substandard scores. Recent studies on housing mobility reveal that access to opportunities for employment, education, and health care are influenced by housing location. For families who choose to move to lower poverty, higher opportunity neighborhoods, the pay-off can be significant. For example, a national fivecity experimental mobility program (Moving to Opportunity) reported that many participating low income families experienced improved physical and mental health when they moved to substantially lower poverty communities. Adult obesity was lowered and participants experienced marked declines in Page 516

39 psychological distress and depression. In addition, attendance at lower poverty, racially integrated schools tended to improve critical thinking skills and academic achievement among children. Finally, children in lower poverty suburban areas were less likely to drop out of school and more likely to attend college. 66 However, in order for a housing mobility program to be successful, studies also show that housing alone cannot facilitate true upward mobility. In addition, supportive services must follow the families to help them adjust to their new way of life in their new neighborhood. The core elements of a highly functioning housing mobility program include, but are not limited to: Recruitment that attracts eligible participants and minimizes ineligible or disinterested applicants Recruitment and retention of landlords with rental units located in neighborhoods of opportunity Pre-move counseling, intake proceedings and briefing of potential participants Housing search assistance Post-move counseling Second-move counseling, and A holistic approach to client assistance which engages all family members, and ensures sufficient counselor contact through high counselor-client ratios. 67 The Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher Program offers a family the opportunity to consider rental housing locations that extend beyond their current familiar boundaries. The voucher enables a family to secure a rental unit on the private housing market, paying no more than 30% of their income on rent. There are five agencies in Delaware that administer Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher Programs, either through a public housing authority or a municipal department. These include the City of Newark, New Castle County, the City of Wilmington, and DSHA. Each program has its own set of policies and procedures, including preferences for admission, payment standards for persons with disabilities or locations outside of concentrated areas, and portability of vouchers to other jurisdictions. While it is possible to move between jurisdictions as a voucher holder, it is not easy to navigate five separate sets of policies, procedures, and qualifying preferences. Due to the compact scale of Delaware, and the close interconnections between housing, employment, transportation, educational facilities, and 66 Kami Kruckenberg et al, Connecting Families to Opportunity: A Resource Guide for Housing Choice Voucher Program Administrators (Poverty & Race Research Action Council, July 2009). 67 Kami Kruckenberg et al, Connecting Families to Opportunity: A Resource Guide for Housing Choice Voucher Program Administrators (Poverty & Race Research Action Council, July 2009). Page 517

40 cultural amenities, the residents of the region could conceivably benefit from uniform Section 8 programmatic regulations. With identical administrative plans for the five Section 8 administering agencies, the chances of lower income households achieving housing mobility become much greater. Specifically, the coordination of portability policies would create, in essence, one regional Section 8 market in which voucher holders could move freely from one community to another. This is an action that would expand fair housing choice. Inter-agency collaboration relative to the Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher Program could lead to other measures that expand fair housing choice in the region. OBSERVATION: Section 8 voucher holders are currently required to navigate five different policies in order to port between jurisdictions. Inter agency collaboration between the Section 8 program providers, which would include a uniform set of policies and procedures, could conceivably expand fair housing choice by creating, in essence, one regional Section 8 market in which voucher holders could move freely from one community to another. Section 8 administrative agencies in Delaware should collaborate in the provision of support services that enhance inter jurisdictional mobility on the part of voucher holders. DSHA s Moving to Work (MTW) program contains regulatory requirements regarding work and case management that will have to be considered during this process. ii. Regional Collaboration to Remedy Concentrations in Wilmington Wilmington is Delaware s largest City and the epicenter of business and industry in the region. As such, the City and its suburban neighbors are inextricably linked. A healthy and vibrant urban core benefits the region. Conversely, any perceived shortcomings or problems in the City will adversely impact the surrounding suburbs. Businesses reach investment decisions on the basis of a variety of factors, including the relative tax burden, the economic and physical stability of the community, the ability to recruit a qualified workforce, a sense of economic and personal well-being, and opportunities for cultural, educational, and recreational enrichment. The regional housing market reflects prospects for continued economic growth, personal prosperity and the availability of good schools and high quality neighborhoods. The region s housing market expands when these factors are positive. Conversely, the market contracts whenever one or more of these indicators turns negative. The City of Wilmington is not unlike other central cities of a major metropolitan area. Historically, Wilmington has housed the region s poor and disenfranchised. For example, over 41% of Black households and 48.3% of Hispanic households living in Wilmington earn less than $25,000 annually. Comparatively, only 27% of While households earn less than $25,000. The percentage of Black and Hispanic households earning less than $25,000 annually is significantly higher in Wilmington than in other areas of Page 518

41 the State, including the Urban County of New Castle County and the Balance of State. In addition, the median household income (MHI) for Black households in Wilmington is $28,997, which is equivalent to only 54.5% of that for Whites ($53,249). The MHI for Hispanic households in the City is even lower, as these households earn $26,372. Heavy concentrations of minority poor normally coincide with high crime rates, drug addiction, family disintegration, and welfare dependency. Despite its role as a major center of banking, commerce, and culture, the number of manufacturing jobs in the City has declined. Between 1990 and 2000, the percentage of the civilian population aged 16 years or older employed in the manufacturing industry declined from 16% to 9.6%. 68 According to the American Community Survey, this percentage has since further declined to 7.7%. Many of the region s low wage jobs can now be found in suburban locations near shopping malls and along highway commercial corridors. Although the Wilmington Housing Authority has taken steps to eliminate obsolete public housing, over 67% of Delaware s public housing units are located in the City. Furthermore, the Homeless Planning Council of Delaware (HPC) estimates that over the course of one year, there are 6,758 homeless persons in the State. 69 Of those, 73% are located in New Castle County, many of which are concentrated in the City of Wilmington. These factors contribute to a pattern of housing segregation in the City of Wilmington. The City of Wilmington was the most segregated jurisdiction in the State in 2000, with a Black/White index of 65.3, a Hispanic/White index of 61.4, and an Asian/White index of The index of dissimilarity is rated on a scale from 0 to 100, in which a score of 0 corresponds to perfect integration and a score of 100 represents total segregation. 70 The index is typically interpreted as the percentage of the minority population that would have to move in order for a community or neighborhood to achieve full integration. A dissimilarity index of less than 30 indicates a low degree of segregation, while values between 30 and 60 indicate moderate segregation, and values above 60 indicate high segregation. By comparison, the City of Dover and Kent County were both moderately segregated, while New Castle County and Sussex County had low degrees of segregation. Since 1990, the White population in Wilmington has decreased while the minority population has experienced rapid growth. Overall, White flight from the City to surrounding suburbs in New Castle County describes the overall trends in migration over the last two decades. 68 U.S. Census Bureau, 1990 STF3 data; 2000 SF3 data. 69 Delaware Statewide Housing Needs Assessment, The index of dissimilarity is a commonly used demographic tool for measuring inequality. For a given geographic area, the index is equal to 1/2 ABS [(b/b)-(a/a)], where b is the subgroup population of a census tract, B is the total subgroup population in a city, a is the majority population of a census tract, and A is the total majority population in the city. ABS refers to the absolute value of the calculation that follows. Page 519

42 As in other metro areas, Wilmington is being abandoned to the Black poor who, ultimately, become the victims of such abandonment. Nineteen (19) of the City s 29 CTs are racially and ethnically concentrated. Since most of the City is impacted, the City of Wilmington is very limited in its ability to expand fair housing choice outside of areas of racial and ethnic concentration. Therefore, a broader public policy discussion of poverty and race will be required in order to make progress on this issue. To be certain, it is difficult for suburban officials to think of the high concentration of poverty among black residents in Wilmington as a regional problem. Local officials rarely voluntarily agree to absorb the outmigration of the minority urban poor. But without the active support and participation of surrounding jurisdictions, it is unrealistic to believe that poverty, crime, unemployment and welfare dependency in Wilmington can be abated. OBSERVATION: Without the active support and participation of surrounding jurisdictions throughout the State, it is unrealistic to believe that poverty, crime, unemployment, and welfare dependency can be abated in the City of Wilmington. Unless the various localities collaborate to develop a strategy to address these issues, the historic pattern of segregation in Wilmington may adversely affect the regional economy and housing market. An important first step in the discussion was spearheaded by the preparation of a regional fair share housing strategy by the Delaware Housing Coalition. This study identifies geographic areas within the State that have a deficit of affordable housing. The purpose of the study is to encourage the creation of public policies aimed at a more equitable sharing of affordable housing throughout the State. iii. Lack of Accessible Housing Throughout the State A common observation noted throughout the individual jurisdictional sections of this document is the overall inadequacy of the current affordable and accessible housing supply to meet demand. During the stakeholder interview process involved in the preparation of the AI, several advocacy organizations stated there is an overall lack of affordable, accessible housing throughout the State and that many accessible units are concentrated in Wilmington and Dover. While there are a substantial number of individuals and/or families with a disability on the various PHA Section 8 and public housing waiting lists, it is impossible for area Housing Authorities and local and county officials to know how many of those on the waiting list have a mental disability or a physical disability that requires a mobility-accessible unit. According to many PHAs throughout the State, non-disabled households continue to occupy the majority of their accessible units. These residents are required to sign an agreement agreeing to move to the first available unit whenever the mobility-accessible unit is needed by a person with a disability. Page 520

43 OBSERVATION: In order to more accurately and efficiently track the number of persons with mobility impairments on PHA waiting lists, PHAs throughout the State should add the following questions to their respective housing applications: Do you or any member of your family require a dwelling unit that is barrier free and accessible to persons with mobility impairments (for example, a wheelchair accessible unit)? Are you or other members of your family able to go up and down stairs unassisted? Do you or any member of your family require a dwelling unit with features designed to assist persons with hearing impairments? Do you or any member of your family require a dwelling unit with features designed to assist persons with visual impairments? With the addition of these questions, PHAs should be able to distinguish between applicants with mental versus physical disabilities. Moreover, data collected from the results of this question can be used to more effectively determine the need for mobility accessible units in Delaware. Currently, DSHA is the only PHA in Delaware that collects data on its applicants disabilities during the application process. Within DSHA s combined public housing and Section 8 HCV application form, there is a section titled Special Unit Requirements Questionnaire. This section asks applicants if they or another family member are in need of an accessible unit, including details on specific amenities and features required, such as a separate bedroom, a unit for vision or hearing impaired, barrier-free apartments, etc. Having this section on its application form allows DSHA to better track and monitor the overall need for accessible units. As of April 1, 2011, there were 63 applicants that required a barrier-free (i.e. wheelchair) unit. Another 79 applicants requested either a unit for the hearing impaired for a unit for the vision impaired. To assist residents throughout the State and those with disabilities to find adequate housing that meets their needs, DSHA offers the Affordable and Accessible Online Apartment Locator Service, a searchable database found on DSHA s website. The locator service features over 200 affordable and/or accessible properties scattered throughout the State. An array of information can be obtained for each site, including accessibility features, site location, rent prices, and other useful information. DSHA should be commended for its efforts to provide an online housing locator for residents to use to assess their affordable and accessible housing options. In addition to the locator service, DSHA also has an Affordable Rental Housing Sites Directory that is available for download on its website and that can also be mailed to those seeking housing that do not have access to the Internet. Currently, the various PHAs and entitlement communities statewide do not have an appropriate method in place to measure the overall need for affordable, accessible housing. Census data and other sources of statistical Page 521

44 information are insufficient to measure the demand for accessible housing. Primary research is required to analyze needs. This may involve consultations with public agencies, PHAs, and advocacy organizations, as well as consumer surveys aimed at the disability community. In order to more accurately gauge the number of persons throughout the State that are in need of mobility-accessible housing units, DSHA should partner with other entitlement communities to conduct a statewide study to determine the supply/demand characteristics of housing for persons with mobility impairments. The results of this study should be reflected in the Section 504 Needs Assessment and Transition Plan for each PHA. OBSERVATION: In order to more accurately gauge the number of persons throughout the State that are in need of mobility accessible housing units, DSHA should partner with other entitlement communities to conduct a statewide study to determine the supply/demand characteristics of housing for persons with mobility impairments. C. Taxes Taxes impact housing affordability. While not an impediment to fair housing choice, real estate taxes can impact housing options. Tax increases can be burdensome to lowincome homeowners, and increases are usually passed on to renters through rent increases. Tax rates for specific districts and the assessed value of all properties are the two major calculations used to determine revenues collected by a jurisdiction. Determining a jurisdiction s relative housing affordability, in part, can be accomplished by analyzing the local real estate tax burden. However, straight comparison of tax rates to determine whether a property is affordable or unaffordable gives an incomplete and unrealistic picture of property taxes. Local governments with higher property tax rates, for example, may have higher rates because the assessed values of properties in the community are low, resulting in a fairly low tax burden for any given property. For example, upon first glance at the higher millage rates in areas throughout Sussex County, one might assume that Sussex County s taxes are extremely high. However, this is not the case because Sussex County taxes property at 50% of its 1974 appraised value. In all of the communities surrounding a jurisdiction, comparable rates for various classes of property (residential, commercial, industrial, etc.) are assigned to balance each community s unique set of resources and needs. These factors and others that are out of the municipality s control must be considered when performing tax rate comparisons. Real property taxes in Delaware are imposed at the local level to fund municipal governments, county governments, and school districts. There are no state level property taxes in Delaware and only real property is subject to taxation. While there are exceptions, the majority of tax rates are the same for all types of property, including residential, commercial, and industrial. Exceptions may include property tax incentives for seniors or certain types of businesses. In addition, agricultural land is treated differently in certain jurisdictions. Page 522

45 The three Delaware counties have different rates of assessment, tax a different proportion of that assessment, and tax at different rates. Municipal and school district tax rates also vary throughout the State. With a few exceptions, municipalities and school districts use the county property assessment and assessment ratios when imposing property taxes. Tax rates are typically lower in unincorporated areas of the State due to the lack of a municipal tax in these areas. Taxes rates in the State of Delaware range from a low of mills in Viola, located in Kent County, to a high of mills in the Town of Georgetown, located in Sussex County. While the millage rates in Sussex County are significantly higher than in other parts of the State, Sussex County taxes property at 50% of the 1974 appraised value. Thus, tax payments are actually much lower in Sussex County than in other areas of the State. The significance of higher property taxes on residential properties is that the amount of taxes must be factored into the question of affordability. If a property owner is considering the purchase of a home, estimating the monthly mortgage payment must include the mortgage principal and interest, property taxes, and homeowner s insurance. Kent, Sussex, and New Castle Counties, along with the City of Wilmington and the City of Dover, all offer tax relief programs for senior citizens over the age of 65 and/or permanently disabled citizens. To qualify, residents must meet certain income requirements established by the municipal government. In all of the local entities, property tax exemptions (full and partial) are the primary form of tax relief. In addition, the State of Delaware also offers the State Senior Citizen School Property Tax Credit Program, which provides homeowners age 65 or over with a tax credit against regular school property taxes of 50% (up to $500). The following narrative provides additional detail on the tax rates in Wilmington, New Castle County, Dover, and the Balance of State (Kent and Sussex Counties). i. City of Wilmington Property taxes in the City of Wilmington include a New Castle County tax, a local City tax, a school district tax, a crossing guard tax, and a vocational tech tax. Tax rates are levied on every $100 dollars of assessed value. Figure 7-8 details the composite tax rates and estimated tax liability for a home with a market value of $100,000 in 2010 in each of the school districts within the City. Page 523

46 Figure 7-8 Estimated Annual Real Estate Taxes in the City of Wilmington per $100,000 Market Value, 2010 School District County Rate School Rate City Rate Cross ing Guard Rate Vo Tech Rate Total Tax Rate Per $100 Assessment Estimated Taxes per $100,000 Market Value Brandywine $ 3, Christiana $ 3, Colonial $ 3, Red Clay $ 3, Source: City of Wilmington Tax Office; Delaware Economic Development Office ii. The City, County, and Vo-Tech tax rates are fixed rates that apply citywide. The school rates and crossing guard rates vary by school district. Within the City of Wilmington, the lowest tax rate per $100 assessment is the Colonial School District ( ). On the contrary, the highest tax rate is in the Brandywine School District ( ). In Wilmington, tax rates range from mills to mills. Taxes are based on 100% of the July 1, 1983 fair market value. Compared to other areas throughout the State, estimated tax payments in Wilmington are the highest. For example, the annual taxes for a house with a market value of $100,000 in Wilmington would be $3,500-$4,000, depending on the school district in which the house is located. New Castle County Property taxes in New Castle County include a New Castle County tax, a local City tax (for incorporated areas only), a school district tax, a crossing guard tax, and a vocational tech tax. Figure 7-9 details the composite tax rates and estimated tax liability for a home with a market value of $100,000 in 2010 for all the County s incorporated areas, categorized by school district. Page 524

47 Figure 7-9 Estimated Annual Real Estate Taxes per $100,000 Market Value in Incorporated Areas, 2010 School District / Locality Appoquinimink County Rate School Rate City Rate Cross ing Guard Rate Vo Tech Rate Total Tax Rate Per $100 Assessment Estimated Taxes per $100,000 Market Value Middletown $ 2, Odessa Residential $ 2, Business $ 2, Townsend $ 2, Brandywine Arden $ 2, Ardencroft $ 2, Ardentown $ 2, Bellefonte $ 2, Wilmington $ 3, Chris tiana Newark $ 2, Wilmington $ 3, Colonial Delaware City $ 2, New Cas tle $ 3, Wilmington $ 3, Red Clay Elsmere Residential $ 3, Business $ 3, Newport $ 3, Wilmington $ 3, Smyrna Smyrna $ 2, Source: New Castle County Tax Office; Delaware Economic Development Office Residential property tax rates in the incorporated areas of New Castle County (excluding the City of Wilmington) range from in Smyrna to in Newport. Due to the City of Wilmington s local tax rate structure, the City of Wilmington s tax rates are significantly higher than in other incorporated areas across the County. The significance of higher property taxes on residential properties is that the amount of taxes must be factored into the question of affordability. If a property owner is considering the purchase of a home, estimating the monthly mortgage payment must include the mortgage principal and interest, property taxes, and homeowner s insurance. Page 525

48 Figure 7-10 details the composite tax rates and estimated tax liability for a home with a market value of $100,000 in 2010 for all the County s unincorporated areas, categorized by school district. Figure 7-10 Estimated Annual Real Estate Taxes per $100,000 Market Value in Unincorporated Areas, 2010 School District County Rate School Rate Cross ing Guard Rate Vo Tech Rate Total Tax Rate Per $100 Assessment Estimated Taxes per $100,000 Market Value Appoquinimink $ 2, Brandywine $ 2, Chris tiana $ 2, Colonial $ 2, Red Clay $ 2, Smyrna $ 1, Source: New Castle County Tax Office; Delaware Economic Development Office Due to the lack of a local tax, tax rates in the unincorporated areas of New Castle County are lower than in the incorporated areas. Among the unincorporated areas of the County, taxes are lowest in areas located within the Smyrna School District and are highest in areas located within the Brandywine School District. iii. City of Dover Property taxes in the City of Dover include a Kent County tax, a local City tax, a school district tax, a library tax, and a vocational tech tax. Figure 7-11 details the composite tax rates and estimated tax liability for a home with a market value of $100,000 in 2010 in each of the two school districts located within the City. School District Figure 7-11 Estimated Annual Real Estate Taxes per $100,000 Market Value, 2010 County Rate School Rate City Rate Library Rate Vo Tech Rate Total Tax Rate Per $100 Assessment Estimated Taxes per $100,000 Market Value Caesar Rodney $ 1, Capital $ 2, Source: Delaware Economic Development Office The City, County, library, and vocational tech tax rates are fixed rates that apply citywide. The school rates, however, vary by school district. Within the City of Dover, the Caesar Rodney School District has a lower tax rate than the Capital School District. iv. Balance of State All taxable parcels in Kent County are valued as of the date of the last reassessment, which occurred on June 1, Kent County s assessment Page 526

49 ratio is 60%. Figure 7-12 details the composite tax rates and estimated tax liability for a home with an assessed value of $100,000 in 1987 in each of the incorporated areas in Kent County by school district. Residents living in Cheswold, located in the Capital School District, pay the highest taxes in Kent County, followed by those living in Camden in the Caesar Rodney School District. The lowest tax rates can be found in Viola, which is part of the Lake Forest School District, and in Woodside, which is part of the Caesar Rodney School District. Figure 7-12 Kent County Estimated Annual Real Estate Taxes per $100,000 Market Value in Incorporated Areas, 2010 School District / Locality Caesar Rodney County Rate School Rate City Rate Library Rate Vo Tech Rate Total Tax Rate Per $100 Assessment Estimated Taxes per $100,000 Market Value* Camden $ 1, Dover $ Magnolia $ Woodside $ Wyoming $ Capi tal Cheswold $ 1, Dover $ Hartly $ Leipsic $ Little Creek $ Lake Forest Bowers Beach $ Felton $ Frederica $ Harrington $ Viola $ Milford Houston $ Milford $ Smyrna Clayton $ Kenton $ Smyrna $ Woodbridge Farmington $ Source: Delaware Economic Development Office *All taxable parcels in Kent County are valued as of the date of the last reassessment ( June 1, 1987). The taxable assessment is obtained by multiplying the 1987 market value by 60%. The ad valorem tax is calculated by multiplying the taxable assessment by the tax rate. In addition, certain localities may have other tax rate structures and more recent assesed values. Calculations on this chart are based on an overall assessment ratio of 60% for both the locality and County. Page 527

50 Tax rates are lower in unincorporated areas of Kent County. Figure 7-13 details the tax rates by school district for all unincorporated areas of the County. Overall, the tax rates are lowest in the Lake Forest School District and highest in the Capital School District. Figure 7-13 Kent County Estimated Annual Real Estate Taxes per $100,000 Market Value in Unincorporated Areas, 2010 School District County Rate School Rate Library Rate Vo Tech Rate Total Tax Rate Per $100 Assessment Estimated Taxes per $100,000 Market Value* Caesar Rodney $ Capital $ Lake Forest $ Milford $ Smyrna $ Woodbridge $ Source: Delaware Economic Development Office *All taxable parcels in Kent County are valued as of the date of the last reassessment ( June 1, 1987). The taxable assessment is obtained by multiplying the 1987 market value by 60%. The ad valorem tax is calculated by multiplying the taxable assessment by the tax rate. Sussex County taxes property at 50% of the 1974 appraised value. Figure 7-14 details the composite tax rates and estimated tax liability for a home with an appraised value of $100,000 in 1974 in each of the incorporated areas in Sussex County by school district. Residents living in Georgetown, located in the Indian River School District, pay the highest taxes in Sussex County, followed by those living in Bridgeville in the Woodbridge School District. The lowest tax rates can be found in Ocean View, which is part of the Indian River School District. Page 528

51 Figure 7-14 Sussex County Estimated Annual Real Estate Taxes per $100,000 Assessed Value in Incorporated Areas, 2010 School District / Locality Cape Henlopen County Rate School Rate City Rate Library Rate Vo Tech Rate Total Tax Rate Per $100 Assessment Estimated Taxes per $100,000 Appraised Value* Dewey Beach $ 1, Henlopen Acres $ 2, Lewes $ 1, Milton $ 1, Rehoboth Beach $ 2, Delmar Delmar $ 2, Indian River Bethany Beach $ 1, Dagsboro $ 1, Fenwick Island $ 2, Frankford $ 2, Georgetown $ 3, Millsboro $ 1, Millville $ 1, Ocean View $ 1, Shelbyville $ 2, South Bethany $ 2, Laurel Bethel $ 1, Laurel $ 2, Milford Ellendale $ 2, Milford $ 2, Slaughter Beach $ 2, Seaford Blades $ 2, Seaford $ 2, Woodbridge Bridgeville $ 2, Greenwood $ 2, Source: Delaware Economic Development Office *Sussex County taxes property at 50% o the 1974 appraised value. In addition, certain localities may have other tax rate structures and more recent assesed values. Calculations on this chart are based on an overall assessment ratio of 50% for both the locality and County. Page 529

52 Figure 7-15 details the tax rates by school district for all unincorporated areas of Sussex County. Overall, the tax rates are lowest in the Laurel School District 71 and the highest tax rates are in the Milford School District. Figure 7-15 Sussex County Estimated Annual Real Estate Taxes per $100,000 Assessed Value in Unincorporated Areas, 2010 School District County Rate School Rate Library Rate Vo Tech Rate Total Tax Rate Per $100 Assessment Estimated Taxes per $100,000 Appraised Value* Cape Henlopen $ 1, Delmar $ 1, Indian River $ 1, Laurel $ 1, Milford $ 2, Seaford $ 2, Woodbridge $ 1, Source: Delaware Economic Development Office *Sussex County taxes property at 50% o the 1974 appraised value. The tax payments for properties in incorporated areas of Kent County are typically lower than in incorporated areas of Sussex County. In terms of annual tax payments, some areas in the Balance of State are more affordable than other areas, which may lead to lower homeownership rates among minority households in the more expensive localities. Overall, the tax rates in the Balance of State are fairly reasonable and affordable. D. Public Transit Households without a vehicle, which in most cases are primarily low and moderate income households, are at a disadvantage in accessing jobs and services, particularly if public transit is inadequate or absent. Access to public transit is critical to these households. Without convenient access, employment is potentially at risk and the ability to remain housed is threatened. In 2000, there were 23,844 transit-dependent households in the State, comprising 8.1% of all households. Wilmington and Dover experienced the highest levels of transit dependency at 26.8% and 11.3%, respectively. In contrast, Sussex County and the Urban County of New Castle County had the lowest levels of transit dependency at 5.8% and 5.7%, respectively. Throughout Delaware, renters were far more likely to be transit-dependent than owners, as 18.7% of renter households did not have access to a vehicle, compared to 4% of owner households Residents of the Laurel School District recently approved a tax referendum to help fund various renovations and improvements to area schools. Thus, tax rates are scheduled to go increase substantially over the next several years. The tax increase will not occur all at once. It will be phased in over a four year period, then decrease for the remaining life of the bonds. 72 U.S. Census Bureau, 2000 Census, (SF3, H44) Page 530

53 Among categories of race and ethnicity, White households were far less likely to be transit-dependent than Black and Hispanic households. Among White households, 5.6% were transit-dependent, compared to Black households who were over three times as likely to be transit dependent at 18.5%. Among Hispanic households, 12.3% did not have access to a vehicle. Figure 7-16 details transit-dependency by race and ethnicity for each of the entitlement communities throughout the State. Figure 7-16 Percent of Transit-Dependent Households by Race and Ethnicity, 2000 Total White Black Hispanic State of Delaware 8.1% 5.6% 18.5% 12.3% City of Wilmington 26.8% 18.2% 34.4% 25.2% New Castle County* 5.7% 4.7% 10.5% 9.7% City of Dover 11.3% 8.3% 17.1% 10.2% Balance of State Kent County** 6.7% 5.6% 12.8% 7.8% Sussex County 5.8% 4.5% 14.5% 6.9% *Excludes the City of Wilmington **Excludes the City of Dover Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2000 Census, SF3, (HCT33A, HCT33B, HCT33H) Figure 7-17 provides information on the modes of transportation residents used to travel to work in 2009 throughout the State. The vast majority of residents (79.8%) drove alone while 3.1% used public transportation and 10.1% carpooled. Of those using public transportation, 80.2% rode the bus. Figure 7-17 Modes of Transportation to Work, 2009 % State of Delaware Total 405, % Car, truck or van 364, % Drove alone 323, % Carpooled 40, % Public Transportation 12, % Bus or trolley bus 10, % Streetcar or trolley car % Subway or elevated % Railroad 2, % Ferryboat % Taxicab % Motorcycle % Bicycle 1, % Walked 10, % Other Means 3, % Worked at Home 12, % Source: U.S. Census Bureau, ACS 2009 B08301 Page 531

54 The use of public transportation to work differed across the various counties and entitlement communities throughout the State, reflecting diverse levels of transitdependency in the region. For example, less than 1% of residents in both Kent and Sussex Counties used public transportation to get to work in 2009, compared to 13.3% of residents in the City of Wilmington. Figure 7-18 Use of Public Transportation to Work by Community, 2009 % Drive % Public Transportation State of Delaware 89.8% 3.1% City of Wilmington 76.4% 13.3% New Castle County* 90.5% 3.1% City of Dover 89.8% 2.3% Balance of State Kent County** 93.7% 0.9% Sussex County 91.0% 0.7% *Excludes the City of Wilmington **Excludes the City of Dover Source: U.S. Census Bureau, ACS 2009 B08301 According to advocates for persons with disabilities, the lack of 24-hour reliable transportation to and from jobs was identified as a significant barrier to fair housing choice throughout the State. OBSERVATION: Lack of reliable 24 hour transportation to and from work is a significant barrier to fair housing choice in the State of Delaware. Black, Hispanic, and renter households are most likely to be transit dependent. Among Black and Hispanic households, 18.5% and 12.3%, respectively, were transit dependent, compared to 5.6% of White households in Almost 19% of renter households did not have access to a vehicle, compared to 4% of owner households. Public transportation in Delaware is managed by the Delaware Transit Corporation (DART). DART provides public transportation through four divisions: New Castle County, Kent County, Sussex County, and Inter-county services. Although most of its routes run in and around Wilmington and Newark in New Castle County, DART operates bus route networks in the Dover area of Kent County, two year-round bus routes which hub at Georgetown in Sussex County, one route which operates into Elkton, Maryland, with connection to the modified fixed-route and dial-a-ride services of Cecil County, Maryland, and six seasonal routes connecting Rehoboth Beach and other coastal resort towns in Sussex County, and with Ocean City, Maryland. Paratransit, statewide door-todoor bus service for the elderly and disabled is also available through DART. In addition, Amtrak has two stations in Delaware along the Northeast Corridor, including the relatively quiet Newark Rail Station in the City of Newark and the busier Wilmington Page 532

55 Rail Station in the City of Wilmington. The Northeast Corridor is also served by SEPTA's Wilmington/Newark Line of Regional Rail, which provides service to Claymont, Wilmington, Churchman s Crossing, and Newark. The major freight railroad in Delaware is the Class 1 Norfolk Southern, which provides service to most of Delaware. It connects with two short line railroads, the Delaware Coast Line Railway and the Maryland & Delaware Railroad. These two short lines serve local customers in Sussex County. Another Class 1 railroad, CSX, passes through northern New Castle County parallel to the Amtrak Northeast Corridor. i. Destinations and Routes New Castle County DART buses carry passengers across the County, with routes connecting Newark, Wilmington, and the Christiana Mall, along with other locations across the County. Shuttles to Philadelphia and New Jersey as well as Kent and Sussex Counties are also available. On Monday through Friday, buses run throughout the day, from about 7AM to 11PM. On weekends, buses run from 7AM until 8PM on Saturdays and from 10AM to 5PM on Sundays. The website also notes that Sunday service is a pilot program that will be evaluated periodically to determine continuation of service. Dover buses carry passengers across Kent County, with routes connecting the Centre at Dover Shopping Center, Edgehill Shopping Center, Wesley College, the Dover Mall, Kent General Hospital, and the Dover Transit Center to other smaller business and residential areas. Buses run throughout the day on Monday through Friday, from about 6:30AM to 6PM. On Saturday, fewer routes run from 9:30AM until 6PM. There are no Sunday routes in the Dover area. Buses carry passengers across Kent and Sussex Counties in the Balance of State, with routes connecting Laurel, Seaford, Bridgeville, Georgetown, Milton, Lewes, Milford, and Dover. Inter-County routes are also available. Routes run throughout the day on Monday through Friday, with some starting as early as 6AM and ending at 11PM. Saturday and Sunday service is not available in most areas of Sussex County. Kent County has limited availability on weekends. Though these various schedules may be adequate for some commuters, workers of evening and midnight shift jobs will not be able to use the bus system for one of their commutes, which could limit housing choice for lowincome households. OBSERVATION: Transit dependent riders are restricted in their employment opportunities by the limited DART service. With service operating primarily between 7AM and 11PM on weekdays, persons who work the second and third shifts do not have public transportation available to them, ensuring uninterrupted employment. With an even more limited weekend service schedule, persons who are required to work weekend shifts and depend on public transit to get to and from work are at a severe disadvantage. Page 533

56 Map 7-2 on the following page compares the location of public housing units and other assisted private housing units to DART s transit routes throughout the State. As shown in the map, many of the housing units are located adjacent to or within walking distance of DART transit bus routes. ii. Accessibility DART s New Freedom Program was created to improve the state s transportation mobility options for disabled and elderly persons. After recognizing the need to provide transportation to those with mobility issues after a study of disability and unemployment, the New Freedom Program was initiated. Individuals and groups with disabilities can apply for assistance through the program, which makes transportation possible through buses or shuttles, or other community programs, including carpooling, rideshare, and other services. Page 534

57 Map 7-2: Location of PublicHousing, Other Assisted Housing, and Public Transit Routes in the State of Delaware, 2010 Delaware Statewide!!!!!!!!!! Legend Upper New Castle County (! Public Housing Sites DART Transit Routes Delaware Bay/ Atlantic Ocean Hispanic Concentration Black Concentration!! Assisted Housing Sites!!!!!!!!!!! Census Tracts City of Wilmington (! (!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! (! (! Salem (! City of Dover (! (! (!!!!!

58 E. Newspaper Advertising Under federal law, the making, printing, and publishing of advertisements that state a preference, limitation, or discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, handicap, familial status, or national origin is prohibited. The prohibition applies to publishers, such as newspapers and directories. The prohibition also applies to persons and entities placing real estate advertisements. Publishers and advertisers are responsible under federal law for making, printing, or publishing an advertisement that violates the Fair Housing Act in its face. Thus, they should not publish or cause to be published an advertisement that on its face expresses a preference, limitation, or discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, handicap, familial status, or national origin. The law, as found in the Fair Housing Amendments Act of 1988, describes the use of words, photographs, symbols, or other approaches that are considered discriminatory. For this AI, the real estate sections of the following newspapers were reviewed: The News Journal, the Dover Post, Delaware State News the State Capital Daily, and the Cape Gazette. i. Publisher s Policies The publisher s policy on accepting advertisements was prominently displayed and easy to read in the Sunday, November 28, 2010 edition of The News Journal. The policy cited the publisher s intended compliance with federal and state fair housing laws and informed readers that the newspaper would not knowingly accept any advertising for real estate which is in violation of the law. HUD s toll-free telephone number, including a separate phone number for the hearing impaired, was also provided to report potential discriminatory activities. The printed edition of the Sunday, June 6, 2010 edition of the Delaware State News The State Capital Daily did not state its policy on accepting advertisements for the newspaper. A subsequent review of the newspaper s website revealed the newspaper s policy, but it was difficult to find. The policy statement on the website, hosted by cited the publisher s intended compliance with federal and state housing laws, and informed readers that the newspaper would not knowingly accept advertising for illegal products or services or advertising that discriminates on the basis of race, religion, national origin, gender, age, marital status, or disability. The Saturday July 10, 2010 printed edition of the Dover Post did not state its policy on accepting advertisements for the newspaper. In addition, the online version of the paper also did not provide information on the newspaper s policy specific to federal fair housing laws. The real estate section of the Cape Gazette for Friday, July 2, 2010 through Monday, July 5, 2010 was also reviewed as part of this analysis. The Cape Gazette covers Delaware s Cape Region which includes Lewes, Rehoboth Beach, Milton, and Dewey. The printed edition did not state its policy on accepting advertisements for the newspaper. In addition, the online version Page 535

59 ii. of the paper also did not provide information on the newspaper s policy specific to federal fair housing laws. The majority of real estate firms featured throughout the real estate section of the Cape Gazette included the equal housing opportunity logo in their banner ads. Placement of Fair Housing Logo Placement of the fair housing logo was consistent throughout all of the newspapers reviewed, as the majority of real estate firms featured included the logo in their banner ads. Most, but not all, of the advertisers showed both the Equal Housing Opportunity logo and/or the Equal Housing Lending logo. iii. Potentially Discriminatory Language in Advertisements Of the rental advertisements for apartments throughout the various newspapers reviewed, several ads stated no pets policies. In addition, other advertisements stated small pets ok, no dogs, or pets negotiable. For some persons with disabilities, service animals and therapeutic pets are necessary to achieve independent lives. Specifically, statements prohibiting or limiting pets discourage persons with disabilities that require service or therapeutic animals from applying for, or even inquiring about, these units. Discussions with the newspapers should be initiated with the recommendation that their policies be revised to include a statement to the effect of All advertisements prohibiting or restricting pets shall be made with the understanding that such policies shall not apply to persons with disabilities, as defined by the Fair Housing Act, who require service or companion animals. OBSERVATION: The real estate sections in The News Journal, the Dover Post, Delaware State News the State Capital Daily, and the Cape Gazette included prohibition of and/or restrictions on pets. For some persons with disabilities, service animals and therapeutic pets are necessary to achieve independent lives. Statements prohibiting or limiting pets discourage persons with disabilities that require service or therapeutic animals from applying for, or even inquiring about, these units. F. Other Advertising The Rentals.com Metropolitan Philadelphia, Delaware, and South Jersey Apartments booklet, published by PRIMEDIA Inc., was also reviewed as part of this analysis. This rental apartment guide is a free publication that can be found at various grocery and convenience stores, colleges and universities, and other major employers throughout New Castle County. The publisher s policy on accepting advertisements was prominently displayed and easy to read. The policy stated the publisher s intended compliance with federal and state fair housing laws and informed readers that the publisher would not knowingly accept any advertising for real estate which is in violation of the law. Page 536

60 Several rental apartment and townhome communities featured in the Rentals.com guide noted their pet policies on their individual advertisement pages, including phrases such as pet friendly, feline friendly, small pets welcome, and large dogs welcome. While the individual communities noted these preferences in their respective advertisements, the publisher s policy states that pet restrictions do not apply to pets assisting the handicapped. The publisher s pet policy is found in the Feature Finder section of the booklet which provides a matrix for readers to compare the various amenities offered by all rental communities featured in the brochure. It is delineated with an asterisk. The Equal Housing Opportunity logo was prominently displayed on the majority of the communities rental advertisements featured within the brochure. The Real Estate Book (Vol. 13, No.8 and Vol. 13, No.11), published by Network Communications Inc., for Kent County/Dover were also reviewed as part of this analysis. This guide to homeownership opportunities is a free publication that can be found at various grocery and convenience stores, department stores, and other area businesses and institutions. The printed edition of the booklet did not state its policy on accepting advertisements. However, a later review of the online version, available at revealed the publisher s policy. The policy statement on the website cited the publisher s intended compliance with federal and state fair housing laws and informed readers that the publisher would not knowingly accept any advertising for real estate which is in violation of the law. HUD s toll-free telephone number, including a separate phone number for the hearing impaired, was also provided to report potential discriminatory activities. Moreover, the Equal Housing Opportunity logo was prominently displayed on the majority of the real estate firms advertisements featured within the brochure. In the 8 th edition, one advertisement for a homeownership opportunity in Kent County was found to be potentially discriminatory. The advertisement stated the home had his & hers closets. Any phrase that notes a preference for married couples is unlawful. The rule of thumb when advertising residential real estate for rent or for sale is to describe the property, and not the people who may occupy it. The reference to his & hers may discourage single-parent households and gay/lesbian households from inquiring about the property. The 11 th edition of the booklet also had a potentially discriminatory advertisement. One advertisement for a homeownership opportunity in Kent County was found to be discriminatory. The advertisement read as follows: If you have the Brady Bunch this 4BR/2.5BA home is for you. Any phrase that notes a preference for married couples with children is unlawful. The rule of thumb when advertising residential real estate for rent or for sale is to describe the property, and not the people who may occupy it. The reference to the Brady Bunch may discourage single-parent households, unmarried households, married households without children, and elderly households from inquiring about the property. Under federal law, the making, printing, and publishing of advertisements that state a preference, limitation, or discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, handicap, familial status, or national origin is prohibited. The prohibition applies to Page 537

61 publishers, such as newspapers and directories. The prohibition also applies to persons and entities placing real estate advertisements. G. Real Estate Practices Information for this section of the AI was derived from interviews with representatives of the following organizations throughout the State of Delaware: the New Castle County Board of Realtors (NCCBOR), the Kent County Association of Realtors (KCAOR), and the Sussex County Association of Realtors (SCAOR). Fair housing and ethics are core parts of the licensing and continuing education requirements for all Realtors licensed in Delaware. Agents and brokers are required to achieve 15 hours of continuing education every two years. Included in the 15 credits, each licensed salesperson must complete three mandatory credits in the required salesperson's core course plus an additional three mandatory credits in Legislative Update relating to both state and federal laws. The three local realtor boards all have members that are licensed through the State to teach various continuing education courses. NCCBOR, KCAOR, and SCAOR all subscribe to the National Association of Realtors (NAR) Code of Ethics. However, each individual organization has their own unique process for handling grievances and complaints filed against their respective members. The following narrative provides additional information on the programs, activities, and initiatives of each of the local realtor associations. i. New Castle County Board of Realtors (NCCBOR) NCCBOR offers a variety of continuing education classes including the At Home with Diversity elective. On average, anywhere from six to eight courses per year offered by NCCBOR contain fair housing components. In addition, two local realtors who are members of the Board are certified through the National Association of Realtors (NAR) to teach various continuing education courses. Currently, NCCBOR has approximately 2,000 members. Diversity among its membership and leadership is a priority of the Board. One of the Board s value statements listed in its 2009 Strategic Plan is to respect the diversity that exists in our community and to reflect it in its leadership and membership. NCCBOR believes the diversity of the region s population and economy is a dynamic that should be upheld and strengthened. According to the Board, its membership and leadership is representative of the County s overall population. NCCBOR is currently pursuing various partnerships and proactive relationships with public agencies, private sector associations, and other stakeholders as an element of its outreach and advocacy efforts. Through such efforts, NCCBOR hopes to identify and pursue opportunities for strengthening the real estate market and coordinating advocacy strategies on behalf of its members. NCCBOR conducts outreach to help assess the needs of the community, including specific stakeholders, so that the Board can focus available resources on these needs in a collaborative process. NCCBOR envisions soliciting the support of NAR, through various grant Page 538

62 ii. programs, to support such initiatives. Other resources available include the local Delaware Housing Opportunities Fund Inc., a nonprofit that NCCBOR initiated in the late 1990s and revitalized in the mid-2000s. Supporting local established external programs, such as Housing Opportunities of Northern Delaware (HOND) and the Delaware Community Reinvestment Action Council (DCRAC), as well as educating internal (Realtors/Brokers) and external clients (buyers/sellers) on financial health, rights, and obligations are all part of NCCBOR s strategic action plan. According to the Board, the listing agreements used locally do not have a feature that permits brokers to list accessible characteristics as a searchable field. However, the input sheet for the TREND Regional multi-list service (MLS) does have a setting to list accessible features such as ramps and doorways and these accessible features are searchable via the MLS system. Officials from NCCBOR are interested in doing more research and outreach in order to make any necessary changes to these systems so that they can be searchable for accessible features. NCCBOR has an elaborate internal Grievance and Professional Standards process that relates to its Code of Ethics. Complaints concerning civil or fair housing violations are referred to the Delaware Real Estate Commission and/or the Delaware Human Rights Commission, accordingly. Once those investigations are concluded, NCCBOR then proceeds under its internal review process. NCCBOR also has an internal mediation and arbitration program. Over the past five years, there have been no referrals to either State Commission related to civil or fair housing complaints against NCCBOR or a member of NCCBOR. Kent County Association of Realtors (KCAOR) KCAOR offers several ongoing continuing education courses throughout the year. In addition, KCAOR has a variety of instructors available to teach courses related to fair housing. These instructors are approved by the Delaware State Real Estate Commission. In addition, the Association s attorney offers a presentation on fair housing specific to Article 10 of the Code of Ethics and all new members are required to attend this presentation. In 2010, the Association collaborated with NCALL Research Inc. to educate members of the Kent County community who were interested in purchasing a home. The program, funded through a grant from the National Association of Realtors (NAR), waived counseling fees and mortgage application fees associated with purchasing a home. As part of this program, NCALL and KCAOR co-sponsored several workshops throughout the County for potential homebuyers. Many of these homebuyers were members of the protected classes. After the workshop, individual attendees were paired with an NCALL counselor. The goal of the program was to educate residents on the home buying process. KCAOR and NCALL plan to offer the workshops and fee waivers again in In response to the recent foreclosure crisis, much of KCAOR s outreach and education efforts have focused on foreclosure education and prevention. Page 539

63 KCAOR offers an educational program for Kent County residents who are at risk of losing their homes to foreclosure. This program has indirectly helped several members of the protected classes to remain in their homes and avoid being foreclosed upon by their mortgage lenders. Currently, the Association has approximately 450 members, including both individual Realtors and brokerage firms. KCAOR does not offer prelicensing courses at the present time and thus does not conduct any special outreach efforts to increase its membership. If interest in becoming a real estate agent would increase in the area, the Association would explore the possibility of providing pre-licensing courses. The Association reports that its membership is quite diverse and includes persons with disabilities, minorities, persons of all different age groups, and persons of various religious affiliations. While information is kept on file, KCAOR does not actively analyze the demographics of its members. According to the Board, the listing agreements used locally do not have an area to list accessible characteristics. However, the input sheet for the multilist service (MLS) does have a section to list accessible features such as ramps and doorways and these accessible features are searchable via the MLS system. KCAOR subscribes to the NAR Code of Ethics. Article 10 of the Code of Ethics covers fair housing. According to the code, if a grievance is filed against an Association member concerning fair housing, the complaint is forwarded to the Delaware State Human Relations Commission and/or the Delaware State Real Estate Commission for review. According to the Association, there have been no referrals to either State Commission related to civil or fair housing complaints against KCAOR or a member of KCAOR over the past ten years or more. iii. Sussex County Association of Realtors (SCAOR) There are two members of SCAOR who are trained to conduct the Legislative Update course and two elective courses titled Employer Assisted Housing and At Home with Diversity. These continuing education courses are offered throughout the County. In response to the growth in the Hispanic population in Sussex County, SCAOR initiated a Spanish for Realtors program in This program was made possible through a grant from NAR s Diversity Program. The course was approved for continuing education credits through the Delaware State Real Estate Commission and students were engaged for a minimum of 15 classroom hours. The class was quickly filled and so successful that it has been offered again and again. Subsequently, the students requested a next level and another class was created. In 2006, SCAOR s Diversity Committee expanded its initiatives and changed its name to the Housing Opportunities Partners (HOP) Committee. The Association works closely with County officials and assisted the County with the development its NSP and moderately priced housing programs. In the Page 540

64 spring of 2007, SCAOR fostered a working relationship with many nonprofit housing partners in Sussex County. As a result, a Community Outreach event was planned for elected officials and the general public. A portion of the Spanish for Realtors Program includes an outsource component, which provides students with the chance to explore opportunities to network and develop a stronger understanding of local initiatives to address housing needs. The student and participant response was so strong that the desire to create an educational and informational Out Reach event was evident. Some of the goals of the Out Reach event were to: Enable Realtors to learn about new programs and initiatives in their community and throughout the County to assist in development and funding for housing Discuss regulatory barriers and awareness of issues that impact affordability and growth and development Unveil the new County ordinance for moderately priced housing Review current programs and agencies for Realtors to develop partnerships and reach new or emerging prospects Invite consumers to a first time homebuyers evening Many of the resources and brochures produced by SCAOR are available in both Spanish and English. In addition, SCAOR sponsors the Sussex County Association of Realtors Go LOCAL program. The Association developed the program to assist homebuyers in making their dream of home ownership a reality. The LOCAL in Go LOCAL stands for Local Opportunity Creates Affordable Living. Through this program, education and counseling is provided at no cost. The Association regularly hosts Go LOCAL events at their offices and at various sites throughout the County. For example, in the past the Association has partnered with area poultry plants to conduct educational outreach on housing issues as well as homeowner training for the plant s employees. This program has helped respond to both the influx of Haitian residents in the western areas of the County near Seaford and Laurel and the increase of Hispanic residents over the past decade. Another project of the HOP Committee is the Talk Before You Walk Away program. This program is in response to the recent foreclosure crisis that has occurred both nationwide and in Delaware. The program combines education and public awareness, with a focus on financial-literacy education programs for homeowners. In addition, local realtors received Realtor Survivor Tool Kits as part of the program. The kits were meant to help educate local Realtors so they, in turn, can educate and better advise their clients. SCAOR s goal is to help 100 area families through financial counseling assistance. The multi-list service used by SCAOR, which differs from the TREND Regional MLS, does not use a specific term for labeling units as accessible for persons with disabilities. However, SCAOR has developed coded features upon which a search for property is conducted. Each section of Page 541

65 coded features has appropriate descriptions such as wide doorways, handicapped parking, ramps, etc. According to representatives from the Association, all agents are familiar with the coded features application, as it is very thorough and easy to use. If a grievance is filed against an Association member, the complaint is presented to the Grievance Committee, whose membership will meet to review and discuss it. If warranted, a hearing will be held. SCAOR only handles violations of the Code of Ethics. The Association currently subscribes to the National Association of Realtors (NAR) Code of Ethics. All fair housing complaints are forwarded to the State of Delaware Real Estate Commission. The Fair Housing Committee of the Commission then handles the review and procedure process for any complaints filed. H. Evaluation of Current Fair Housing Profile This section provides a review of fair housing complaints or compliance reviews where a charge of a finding of discrimination has been made. Additionally, this section will review the existence of any fair housing discrimination suits filed by the United States Department of Justice or private plaintiffs in addition to the identification of other fair housing concerns or problems. i. HUD Office of Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity (FHEO) A lack of filed complaints does not necessarily indicate a lack of housing discrimination. Some persons may not file complaints because they are not aware of how to go about filing a complaint or where to go to file a complaint. In a tight rental market, tenants avoid confrontations with prospective landlords. Discriminatory practices can be subtle and may not be detected by someone who does not have the benefit of comparing his treatment with that of another home seeker. Other times, persons may be aware that they are being discriminated against, but they may not be aware that the discrimination is against the law and that there are legal remedies to address the discrimination. Finally, households may be more interested in achieving their first priority of finding decent housing and may prefer to avoid going through the process of filing a complaint and following through with it. Therefore, education, information, and referral regarding fair housing issues remain critical to equip persons with the ability to reduce impediments. The Office of Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity (FHEO) at HUD receives complaints from persons regarding alleged violations of the Fair Housing Act. Between January 2000 and August 2010, 327 cases were filed through HUD for the entire State of Delaware. About one-third of the cases were from the Cities of Wilmington and Dover. Disability was the most commonly alleged basis of discrimination (139 complaints), followed by race (118 complaints). Together, race and disability accounted for 78.6% of all complaints. Several complaints alleged more than one basis for discrimination. Page 542

66 Figure 7-19 Bases for Fair Housing Complaints Filed with HUD, Disability Race Familial Status National Origin Sex Religion Harrasment Retaliation Color Of the 341 cases in the State, 108 (33%) were successfully conciliated and 111 (32.7%) were found to be without probable cause and closed. An additional 84 cases (25.7%) were withdrawn by the complainant. Three cases (1%) were settled by a judicial consent order, which often results in a Voluntary Compliance Agreement (VCA), and two were dismissed. Three cases were closed after discrimination was found. Of these cases, all three alleged discrimination on the basis of race. Figure 7-20 Resolution of Fair Housing Complaints Filed with HUD, Conciliated No Cause Withdrawn by Complainant Uncooperative complainant FHAP Judicial Consent Order Other Discrimination Found FHAP or DOJ Dismissed Page 543

67 As of August 2009, eight cases were still pending. In three cases, probable cause was found and the cases are pending litigation. Two cases alleged discrimination on the basis of familial status and one on the basis of disability. Five additional cases are still pending investigation to determine if there is probable cause. ii. Delaware Community Legal Aid Society, Inc (CLASI) Delaware s Community Legal Aid Society, Inc. (CLASI) also receives complaints from persons regarding alleged violations of the federal Fair Housing Act and Delaware s Fair Housing Act. CLASI also conducts testing to determine the presence of discrimination in the housing market. Between January 2009 and September 2010, CLASI received 179 complaints alleging discrimination. Disability was the most commonly alleged basis of discrimination (145 complaints), followed by gender. Several complaints alleged more than one basis for discrimination. Figure 7-21 Bases for Fair Housing Complaints Received by CLASI, Disability Sex Race National Origin Familial Status Age Sexual Orientation Religion A total of 77 cases were settled through CLASI between 2009 and 2010, or 43% of all cases filed. Of these, 61 involved cases alleging discrimination on the basis of disability. OBSERVATION: The majority of complaints filed with the HUD FHEO office and CLASI alleged discrimination based on disability or gender. Of the complaints filed with CLASI between January 2009 and October 2010, over 78% alleged discrimination based on disability while 10.2% alleged discrimination based on gender. For complaints filed with the HUD FHEO office between January 2000 and August 2010, disability and race accounted for 42.6% and 36.1%, respectively, of the alleged bases for discrimination. In addition to complaint data, CLASI also tracks the results of matched-pair testing in its enforcement logs. From January 2009 to September 30, 2010, Page 544

68 157 matched-pair tests were conducted. These tests included 35 (22.3%) tests of housing providers in the rental context, 69 (44%) tests of home owner s insurance providers, 25 (16%) tests of Realtors in the sales context to target racial steering, 10 (6.4%) mortgage tests, and 18 (11.5%) interior and exterior accessibility tests for potential violations of the design and construction provisions of the Fair Housing Act. I. Assessment of Current Fair Housing Programs and Activities i. Statewide Fair Housing Programs and Activities a. Housing Opportunities of Northern Delaware (HOND) Housing Opportunities of Northern Delaware (HOND) was founded in 1981 as a fair housing advocacy group. HOND offers education and housing counseling programs, including a monthly workshop for first time home buyers and one-on-one comprehensive home ownership and credit counseling services. HOND also conducts matched pair testing in the real estate and insurance markets. HOND works primarily in New Castle County and the City of Wilmington, but offers services throughout the State. b. Delaware Community Reinvestment Action Council (DCRAC) Delaware Community Reinvestment Action Council (DCRAC) was founded in 1987 in response to the disparities of mortgage denial rates between Blacks and Whites. Its mission is to ensure equitable treatment and equal access to credit and capital for underserved populations throughout Delaware. DCRAC offers a variety of services, including three clinics for counseling in the areas of housing, credit, and taxes; advocacy campaigns to lending institutions to support the Community Reinvestment Act; and the Financial Fitness and Money Matters educational series. DCRAC receives funding through HUD s Fair Housing Initiatives Program (FHIP) to assist people who believe they have been victims of housing discrimination. DCRAC typically uses its FHIP grant to coordinate symposia on fair housing and fair lending and to participate in foreclosure prevention activities. The Council also educates the public on foreclosure prevention strategies, accepts and refers viable complaints of discrimination, and reaches out to individuals in underserved areas. c. Community Legal Aid Society, Inc. (CLASI) Community Legal Aid Society, Inc. (CLASI) works statewide to provide free civil legal services to lower income persons, persons with disabilities, and the elderly. With regards to housing, CLASI offers a foreclosure mediation program. Additionally, CLASI has been funded by the state to conduct matched pair testing and assists residents in understanding their legal rights, in particular landlord-tenant relations. CLASI also receives funding through HUD s Fair Housing Initiatives Program (FHIP) to reduce housing discrimination in the State of Delaware through increased enforcement efforts. Project activities Page 545

69 include working with agencies, advocacy, and grassroots groups to address the fair housing challenges of non English speaking immigrants, persons with disabilities, minorities, and families with children. The organization also conducts fair housing tests and collaborates with the University of Delaware s Center for Community Research and Service to analyze testing data and information concerning possible steering by Delaware real estate brokers. d. Delaware Housing Coalition (DHC) Delaware Housing Coalition (DHC) was founded in 1983 with the mission to advocate for safe, decent, and affordable housing throughout Delaware. DHC conducts research and advocates for expanding fair and affordable housing choice. DHC s annual reports include studies on the affordability gap in the State and a report entitled The Realities of Poverty in Delaware. DHC also compiles and distributes a brochure titled Housing in a Hurry: A Guide to Finding Room in Delaware, which lists service providers of temporary and affordable housing in Delaware s three counties. 1) Summary of the Fair Share Housing Measure in Delaware The Delaware Housing Coalition published a report in the fall of 2010 that encourages a more equitable geographic distribution of affordable rental housing across the entire state. Research for this report was conducted by students and staff at the University of Delaware. Because this report touches on the geography of opportunity, the research is being summarized in the AI. The fair share measurement is derived from an analysis of the housing needs of renter households. For the purposes of this analysis, the population in need consists of cost-burdened, extremely low income renter households (i.e., household incomes of less than 30% of MHI paying more than 30% of their income towards rent) and very low income renter households (i.e., household incomes between 30% and 50% of MHI) that are severely rent burdened (i.e., paying more than 50% of their incomes toward rent. The research shows that there are over 14,000 households in Delaware that fall into this classification. When the total supply of affordable housing in Delaware is taken into consideration, there are still over 9,000 rental units needed to accommodate the population in need. The Fair Share Housing Measure defines the geographic locations where affordable rental housing should be provided. This procedure considers the location of the population in need and the location of existing affordable units of rental housing. A fair share deficit means that the population in need exceeds the supply of affordable rental housing. The number of additional affordable rental housing units needed was then mapped by census tract. The fair share surplus/deficit map reveals that there are very few census tracts in the state that have a positive fair share. Page 546

70 Taking the analysis one step further, the authors wisely realize that the geographic location of new affordable rental housing units should not simply be based on the fair share surplus or deficit, but should also consider the socioeconomic characteristics of the census tract. Placing new affordable rental units in impoverished neighborhoods would be a disservice to both the population in need and the neighborhood. On the other hand, placing new affordable rental housing in areas of opportunity would give households greater choice and opportunities while benefitting communities as a whole. Therefore, the report establishes targeted census tracts for the development of affordable rental housing that reflect a fair share deficit and where the median household income is greater than $40,000, the poverty rate is less than 15% and the percentage of rental housing is less than 30%. The targeted Fair Share census tracts are depicted on the following map: Source: Fall 2010 Edition of the Housing Journal, published by the Delaware Housing Coalition Page 547