AFFORDABLE AND WORKFORCE HOUSING
State of Affairs: Experts advise families to spend no more than 30 percent of household income on housing. Yet in Illinois, more than 1.2 million households earning less than 80 percent area median income ($46,540) are doing just that – or are living in overcrowded, substandard conditions, according to “Building for Success,” the state’s comprehensive housing plan. That’s more than a quarter of Illinois ’ total households (4,592,740). The state’s lack of affordable housing is so severe that a full-time minimum wage worker cannot afford a two-bedroom apartment at market-rate rent anywhere in Illinois. Thousands of families are doubling up, living in overcrowded conditions, because they cannot afford their own homes. And where housing is less expensive, job opportunities are scarce – contributing to the traffic congestion, economic disparity, and racial segregation challenging Chicagoland and the rest of the state.
Neighborhoods succeed when housing is affordable. Our vision is of a region where valued members of our communities, such as teachers, police officers, firefighters, and nurses can live near work; seniors can age in the communities where they raised their families; recent graduates can find that first apartment; and families can raise their children in a single school district, rather than move year-to-year in search of housing within their means. We all benefit from increased investment in our neighborhoods and less congestion on our roads.
The reasons to pursue a more balanced housing stock are many; yet so are the rationalizations not to do so. The good news is that elected officials, nonprofit organizations, and the private sector have joined forces to wage a multi-front attack on the lack of affordable housing. For instance, the Metropolitan Mayors Caucus has its own Housing Endorsement Criteria, Housing Action Agenda, and Model Housing Plan that municipal leaders are using to craft local housing solutions. Business leaders throughout Chicagoland – more than 40 today and growing – are investing in employer-assisted housing, helping employees afford their first homes by providing them with downpayment assistance and free homeownership counseling. And, to combat common misperceptions about affordable housing, the Housing Illinois coalition developed television ads to spread the message, “We need the people who need affordable housing.”
In September 2003, Gov. Rod R. Blagojevich signed an executive order creating the state’s first housing policy and appointing a task force to transform that policy into a comprehensive housing plan. In January 2005, the Governor’s Office released the result of that effort, “Building for Success.” The plan kicks off a multi-year agenda to preserve and expand the state’s supply of affordable housing near jobs and transportation, and to encourage more local leaders to support housing solutions in their communities. Spearheaded by the Illinois Housing Development Authority and a 35-member state Housing Task Force (including MPC Housing Director Robin Snyderman ), the plan details assignments, accountability mechanisms, and timelines for more than a dozen state departments whose work impacts housing choices. The plan also begins to align these departments with each other and the private sector – including financial institutions, business leaders, and philanthropic organizations – and other local and federal governmental efforts.
This is welcome news both to developers and communities. Historically, the disconnected maze of application processes, qualifying criteria, and program administrators scared away even more developers than it frustrated. That left millions of dollars unclaimed – and untold Illinois families out in the cold.
“Building for Success” also offers guidance and support to local governments, both in terms of technical assistance as well as more coordination around housing as it relates to infrastructure, economic development and human services.
Looking ahead, the challenge is to make good on this offer. Communities are seeking more support as they work to expand housing choice in the face of a continuing statewide workforce housing shortage.
Solutions: Despite the significant progress made in recent years, much work remains. Perhaps the single greatest concern about “Building for Success” is the lack of financial incentives currently available to municipalities. The state plan offers capacity-building assistance, calls for an exploration of incentives, and outlines a number of areas where this could occur. Yet it falls short of providing a competitive edge to towns that are helping the state save money by supporting housing for the local workforce, and enhancing quality of life by linking housing, jobs and transportation.
In addition to codifying the governor’s 2003 executive order in 2006 (to ensure that this housing strategy outlives any administration), more tangible support to municipalities is a necessary next step. The goal is to make it easier for developers to get the housing built and renovated for the people – and in the places – where it’s needed most.
Questions for Candidates:
- What are your strategies for identifying funding or other incentives to support communities working to preserve or expand affordable and workforce housing, especially in areas of high job growth where housing is particularly scarce?
- What tools and incentives will you deploy to attract the engagement of public-private partnerships, both for employers and nonprofit community-based experts.
- How do you see the Regional Planning Board bolstering statewide efforts to better coordinate infrastructure, economic development and housing investment?
- Recognizing that any state housing progress will be for naught if federal investments aren’t maintained, what will be your federal housing agenda?
Helpful Sources:
Metropolitan Planning Council, www.metroplanning.org
MPC Housing Director Robin Snyderman , rsnyderman@metroplanning.org or 312-863-6007
Greater Chicago Housing and Community Development Web site, www.chicagoareahousing.org
Metropolitan Mayors Caucus, www.mayorscaucus.org
Illinois Housing Development Authority, www.ihda.org
Knowledgeplex, www.knowledgeplex.org
National Housing Conference, www.nhc.org
TRANSPORTATION PRIORITIES
State of Affairs: For years, northeastern Illinois has topped the transportation-related rankings – both good and bad. Every day, a third of the nation’s rail and truck cargo moves through the region, and six major railroads converge in Chicago . As the nation’s intermodal hub, more freight traffic passes through our region than anywhere else in the nation, indeed, almost anywhere else in the world (save Singapore and Hong Kong.) Meanwhile, Chicagoland continues to expand, with some two million more people and one million more cars expected by 2030. To meet the just-in-time delivery demands of our growing, globalizing society, regional freight traffic is expected to double by 2020.
What does that mean for Chicagoans, who already have grown tired of marathon commutes and maddening trips to the grocery store? Quite literally, we’re at a fork in the road: over the next two decades, we can continue to climb the ranks of most-congested regions in the U.S. – though at number three, we’re already frittering away some 365 million gallons of fuel, $4.2 billion in financial losses, and 237 million hours stuck in traffic jams, time we all can agree would be much better spent with our families or in our communities.
Or, we can take a different route. We can plan our regional transportation and land use development in sync, prioritizing projects that connect public transit to job centers and spark economic development in mature areas. That’s sensible growth.
State leaders are poised to adopt a new state capital investment plan to replace the expired Illinois FIRST package. The urgency for a new plan has intensified since the U.S. Congress passed a new surface transportation package this summer. But in the fierce competition for federal dollars, MPC and Business Leaders for Transportation (of which MPC is a lead member) urge state leaders not to lose sight of what’s best for all of Illinois ’ residents and businesses. What we don’t need is a laundry list of projects. What we do need is a combined transportation and land use plan that makes the best use of limited state resources by moving to the front of the line those projects that reduce congestion and air pollution, and boost local economies through compact, mixed-use development near transportation.
Solutions: In August 2005, the Regional Planning Board was created by a merger of the Northeastern Illinois Planning Commission and Chicago Area Transportation Study. For the first time, our region has a single agency devoted to coordinating and guiding development and infrastructure investments – and it has great potential to reduce waste and inspire innovative changes in the way Chicagoland grows.
The agency’s charge is addressing the fiscal, social and physical challenges inherent to growth, and coordinating economic development, housing, transportation, and natural resources decisions in Cook, DuPage, Kane, Kendall, Lake , McHenry and Will counties. By September 2006, the agency must craft a clear vision and recommend policies and tools that serve the needs of all of northeastern Illinois ’ residents and businesses.
MPC and Business Leaders for Transportation believe the Regional Planning Board can and must play a strong role in guiding the development of a capital spending plan that points the way to sensible transportation and land use development. For instance, the Regional Planning Board can ensure that Metra’s STAR line, which will link 100 communities from O’Hare Airport to Joliet , isn’t just a new route to take commuters from point A to point B. With the board’s guidance, the region can maximize this $1.2 billion investment by increasing transportation linkages, incorporating supportive land use, and creating new economic development clusters along the 55-mile route.
Questions for Candidates:
- How will you ensure that the Regional Planning Board has what it needs to implement its strategic plan for growth in Chicagoland?
- What criteria would you suggest for prioritizing transportation and land use projects in Illinois ? Will you insist on criteria before the next state investment package is passed?
- What do you believe your role should be in ensuring adequate operating and capital funding for all three transit service agencies in Chicagoland, Metra, Pace and the Chicago Transit Authority?
- How would you address constituents’ concerns that the Regional Planning Board will usurp local control in the name of regional planning?
Helpful Sources:
Metropolitan Planning Council, www.metroplanning.org
Peter Skosey, MPC Vice President of External Relations, pskosey@metroplanning.org or 312-863-6004
Business Leaders for Transportation, www.businessleadersfortransportation.org
Regional Planning Board, www.rpbchicago.org
Center for Neighborhood Technology, www.cnt.org
Chicago Metropolis 2020, www.chicagometropolis2020.org
A Journalist’s Guide to Urban Sprawl, www.smartgrowthamerica.org/urban_sprawl.pdf
The Brookings Institution, www.brookings.org
EDUCATION FUNDING AND TAX REFORM
State of Affairs: All children need a quality education in order to become adults who contribute positively to society. We are failing to educate many Illinois students, and consequently, we all face an uncertain future. Research underscores the detrimental outcomes we can expect from the current state of education in Illinois :
- A 2005 study by the Illinois Education Research Council (IERC) found that about two-thirds of all Illinois high school seniors are “unprepared” or only “partly ready” for college because schools lack the resources necessary to provide students with an education that prepares them for college entrance exams.
- Yet, never before has a worker’s education level been so important: “The State of Working Illinois ,” a November 2005 report by the Center for Tax and Budget Accountability and Northern Illinois University , noted that as manufacturing jobs decline, workers need new skill sets and technological proficiencies to compete for better-paying jobs. Between 1980 and 2004, only those with a bachelor’s degree or higher saw sizeable gains in their incomes – $3.14 per hour (a 16.7 percent increase). All others – those who did not graduate from high school, those with only a high school diploma, and those with some college – saw their incomes fall, in real dollars.
- An Illinois high school dropout will cost taxpayers $16,000 more in Federal Earned Income Tax Credits, and $63,500 more in Medicaid benefits, rental subsidies, and food stamps, over their lifetime than a high school graduate.
- High school dropouts are 3.5 times more likely to be arrested in their lifetime than those who have completed high school. During fiscal year 2004, the state of Illinois spent $20,868 per adult inmate and $64,406 per juvenile inmate.
In short, failing to invest now in educating tomorrow’s workforce means we’ll pay later in the form of unemployment wages, welfare payments, prison costs, and other costs inherent to an uneducated society.
Despite these warnings, the State of Illinois is not providing all of its students a quality education. The per-pupil spending gap between the highest and lowest spending Illinois school districts has reached more than $19,000 at the extreme, and almost $2,500 on average – the second widest gap in the U.S., according to The Education Trust, a national organization focused on reducing student achievement gaps.
While naysayers suggest that money isn’t everything, it’s proven a significant factor in student achievement. A 2002 Center for Budget and Policy Priorities analysis determined it costs two to 2.6 times more to educate a low-income child than to educate more affluent children. Data from the 2005 National Assessment of Educational Progress, commonly called “the nation’s report card,” also supports the link between per-pupil spending and student achievement: Illinois – with the nation’s second highest spending gap between poor and rich school districts – posted the largest achievement gap between poor and non-poor students.
The cause of this spending gap is Illinois ’ over-reliance on property taxes to fund education. The Illinois Constitution assigns the state “primary responsibility” for funding schools, yet, on average, Illinois state revenues account for just 36 percent of total school spending. While Illinois ’ own Education Funding Advisory Board has set the foundation level – what is needed to guarantee each child an adequate education – at $6,405 per pupil, we are falling about $1,200 per-pupil short of hitting that mark, putting the rest of the burden on local school districts. The result: local property taxpayers, already overburdened, are increasingly saying “no” to school funding referenda, exacerbating local school funding dilemmas.
Meanwhile, Illinois ’ extreme over-reliance on property taxes is leading to economic disinvestment in many communities. Most local leaders realize encouraging business development is vital to generate the necessary property tax revenues to fund schools. Yet commercial and industrial property taxpayers in Illinois , especially in Cook County , pay far higher property taxes than in neighboring states, to help generate revenues for local schools. This stymies economic development in many areas.
Finally, the well-being of children and families depends not only on good schools, but also on strong health and human services. Yet with its fiscal health on life support, the state has cut back on important services to children and families, as these services often are the first to be put on the chopping block during tight fiscal periods.
Solution: The culprit is an outmoded, inefficient and unfair state tax system. Illinois ’ tax structure has a built-in deficit in which the cost of maintaining current programs and services – let alone keeping up with inflation and population growth – far outpaces revenue growth. The state’s 3 percent income tax is very low as compared with other states, and our narrow sales tax base fails to tap potential revenues stemming from an increasingly service-based economy. Meanwhile, local property taxes, on average, are very high to support schools and municipal services. Last year’s budget “fix” – foregoing payments to already-underfunded state pensions to create a temporary bail-out – clearly is not a long-term solution to our state’s fiscal or school funding woes.
Simply put, we need a more progressive state tax system in order to increase the state’s share of education funding to “bring the bottom up,” reduce the over-reliance on property taxes to fund education, and improve the state’s fiscal well-being to ensure adequate funding for services to children and families.
Questions for Candidates:
- How would you change public education to ensure adequate school funding, regardless of local resources, and reduce schools’ reliance on property taxes?
- Specifically, how would you “bring the bottom up” while protecting the existing resources of other schools?
- How would you help lighten the load for commercial, industrial and residential property taxpayers to encourage economic development?
- How would you help put the state in a stronger financial position to pay its bills and meet some of the most basic and critical needs of families and communities?
- Since these strategies will incur costs, state specifically how much, how you would pay for it, and what your timeline is for implementing these objectives.
Helpful Sources:
Metropolitan Planning Council, www.metroplanning.org
A+ Illinois Campaign Manager Bindu Batchu, bbatchu@aplusillinois.org or 312-863-6014
A+ Illinois, www.aplusillinois.org
Voices for Illinois Children, www.voices4kids.org
Illinois Education Research Council, http://ierc.siue.edu
The Education Trust, www.edtrust.org
WATER
State of Affairs: With Lake Michigan stretched out like an ocean, and miles of meandering streams and rivers, northeastern Illinois ’ water resources can seem unlimited. Yet the reality is that some 40 percent of Illinois ’ rivers and streams and 60 percent of lakes have “fair” or “poor” water quality, and much of our deep aquifer system, our region’s groundwater store, is nearing its sustainable limit.
Meanwhile, mounting development pressures both within and beyond the seven-county Chicago metropolitan region mean our water needs are increasing. Today, northeastern Illinois uses 18 billion gallons of water daily; these numbers are expected to grow by 30 percent in the next two decades. Those who suggest the obvious – further tapping the big pond to our east – don’t realize that rules of an international treaty between the U.S. and Canada prohibit us from drawing any more water from Lake Michigan .
Last summer’s drought – projected to continue well into the winter months – served as a cautionary tale, drawing attention statewide to the need for municipalities and counties to plan now to protect and preserve our limited water resources. And destruction wrought by Hurricanes Katrina and Rita underscored the very real connection between land use decisions and flooding. In northeastern Illinois alone, poorly planned development has led to flooding damage averaging $40 million a year.
Planning ahead for anticipated growth is a strong first step to ensuring clean, abundant water to meet our growing needs. That’s why, in the December 2004 report Changing Course , MPC, Openlands Project, and the Campaign for Sensible Growth cite sensible land use planning tools and incentives as keys to balancing regional growth and water resources in the coming decades. The report provides an overview of the state of the region’s water resources and makes recommendations for improving state policies, watershed planning, and local development practices and ordinances to protect Illinois ’ high-quality streams, rivers and lakes from the unnecessarily ill effects of urbanization.
To demonstrate some of these recommendations, the three organizations have been working in the past year in two parts of the region (McHenry and Kankakee/Will counties) to bring together counties and municipalities to do coordinated watershed management. A watershed is all of the land that drains into a specific waterway. Water knows no political boundaries; it flows in accordance with land use, consumption and weather patterns. Thus, the goal of both projects is to create watershed-wide development guidelines and ordinances that govern new growth, in order to protect the Kishwaukee River and its tributaries in McHenry County , and the Kankakee River and its tributaries in the Kankakee/Will county area.
Meanwhile in 2005, advocates for improved statewide water management notched a significant win when the Illinois General Assembly passed the Stormwater Management Act (PA 094-0675). The legislation allows more counties in Chicagoland and the East St. Louis area to create countywide stormwater management commissions, develop a stormwater management plan, and adopt ordinances in accordance with the plan.
Solutions: Much work remains. In Illinois , groundwater and surface waters are generally managed separately, even though they are part of one hydrologic system. Another problem is that water in aquifers and surface water cross political boundaries, but water supply is managed primarily by communities, counties and private companies in isolation from one another. This approach is ineffective because communities, counties and the state share water resources, and withdrawals in any area will have local and regional effects. That’s why Illinois needs a framework that identifies appropriate roles for state agencies and research branches, regional water supply planning committees, and local governments.
The Campaign for Sensible Growth, Metropolitan Planning Council, and Openlands Project are among several organizations promoting an integrated, statewide, regional and local framework to provide the most effective, long-lasting and meaningful approach to the state’s water supply. Explosive population growth is certain to increase the strain on our water supply, and we must absorb the fact that, even in the Great Lakes region, water is a precious commodity that must be conserved.
Questions for Candidates:
- What would you do to ensure that Illinois and the Chicago metropolitan region have a clean, abundant water supply sufficient to meet our growing needs?
- What should the state do to ensure adequate planning is being undertaken to prevent a devastating flood, like the 1993 Mississippi flood or the recent effects of Hurricanes Katrina and Rita?
- What would you do to encourage communities to reach out across their borders to improve and protect the quality of water in their watershed?
Helpful Sources:
Metropolitan Planning Council, www.metroplanning.org
MPC Vice President for Policy and Planning Scott Goldstein, sgoldstein@metroplanning.org or 312-863-6003
Openlands Project Assistant Director Joyce O’Keefe, jokeefe@openlands.org or 312-863-6263
Campaign for Sensible Growth, www.growingsensibly.org
Illinois Environmental Protection Agency, www.epa.state.il.us
American Planning Association, www.planning.org
Regional Planning Board, www.rpbchicago.org
Chicago Wilderness, www.chicagowilderness.org
Urban Land Institute, www.uli.org
Smart Growth Network, www.smartgrowth.org
EMINENT DOMAIN
State of Affairs: The Kelo v. City of New London U.S. Supreme Court decision of June 23, 2005 brought focus to the issues of economic development, planning and the public good. In upholding the City of New London ’s action to acquire property as a part of implementing its economic development plan, the Court affirmed precedent for economic development as a public good, even if, as in the Kelo case, it was for the purpose of facilitating private economic redevelopment.
In the aftermath of Kelo , there has been heated discussion regarding the appropriate and careful use of eminent domain for economic development across the nation and in Illinois . Widespread public outcry in opposition to the decision created an unholy alliance between conservative defenders of property rights and liberals who argue that the decision could lead to low-income communities being razed in the name of revitalization. In response to this outcry, the U.S. House of Representatives overwhelmingly (376-38) passed legislation that would withhold for two years all federal economic redevelopment funds from states and localities that use economic redevelopment as a rationale for the use of eminent domain. A similar bill remains under consideration, but has yet to be put to vote by the U.S. Senate.
Yet elected officials are responsible for the well being of their communities, and the central issues in many elections are improving public safety and economic development, and providing adequate housing for the workforce. All of these may require the use of eminent domain, an important tool especially for areas in dire need of jobs and/or tax revenues to support local schools and municipal services. Communities face tough decisions, including the cost of inaction, which can lead to further decline of a blighted area.
As the Supreme Court recognized, “Promoting economic development is a traditional and long accepted function of local government.” Yet, the harsh fact is that there are few tools available to Illinois communities to support economic development in distressed areas. More and more – particularly in distressed communities – the responsibility for improving economic development opportunities rests not only with the public sector, but also with the private sector. This trend toward greater use of partnerships between the two sectors can be a positive, fiscally conservative approach to creating jobs and attracting economic investment.
That’s why, while eminent domain is expensive and time-consuming, its use can be necessary to further a public good – from facilitating a transit station improvement project to revitalizing a troubled Main Street . How it is done and the extent to which policymakers reach out to community members are both key components of a fair, inclusive public process.
Solutions: The importance the Kelo decision places on planning, as a necessary precursor to government action, raises the question of whether all Illinois communities have the resources to undertake a high-quality planning process. In 2002, MPC was instrumental in working with the Illinois General Assembly to pass the Local Planning Technical Assistance Act (Public Act 92-0768). The act defined – for the first time in Illinois – the basic elements that all comprehensive plans should address at the local level. These elements include land use, transportation, community facilities (schools, parks, water and sewer), telecommunications infrastructure, housing (including affordable and special needs housing and taking into account the housing needs of a larger region), economic development, natural resources, and public participation. While many communities have followed these guidelines, not all communities have the resources to initiate a plan or to update their plans according to the guidelines. The state should ensure funding is available so that communities can undertake proper, high-quality planning that includes a vibrant public participation process.
In Illinois , MPC cautions against any major changes in public policy without adequate study, public participation and deliberation. In fact, Illinois Supreme Court precedent exists, via the Swida case, limiting the use of eminent domain in cases of economic development: the court ruled that an economic development authority in southwestern Illinois had gone too far in using eminent domain to provide parking for a racetrack, when other pieces of land could have been purchased instead.
Local communities should proceed very cautiously with the use of eminent domain, and only when it is consistent with their plans. By having robust public participation processes at the front-end of a planning initiative, municipalities and counties can establish strong public support for projects undertaken for the public good. And, communities should continue to use the power sparingly and only when necessary on specific projects for which there is a clear, market-based expectation that the project will result in an economically sound reuse of the property. To meet the challenges facing local communities, the U.S. Supreme Court reaffirmed the right of local communities to exercise the use of eminent domain in concert with a plan that had been adopted by the community with local participation.
Questions for Candidates:
- Do you support allowing local and state governments to use eminent domain as a last resort to promote economic development and housing development?
- Do you support state funding for local planning to ensure that all communities have adequate public input and information prior to pursuing the use of eminent domain/
- If eminent domain is not allowed, will it increase the cost of pursuing local projects, putting the burden on local citizens?
Helpful Sources:
Metropolitan Planning Council, www.metroplanning.org
MPC Vice President for Policy and Planning Scott Goldstein, sgoldstein@metroplanning.org or 312-863-6003
American Planning Association, www.planning.org
Illinois Municipal League, www.iml.org
Smart Growth Network, www.smartgrowth.org