News & Research Listing

News, Apartment Advocate, COVID-19
Trump Signs Executive Order on Housing, No Eviction Moratorium

On August 8, President Trump signed four executive actions directing federal agencies to provide additional relief to those affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. These actions focused on student loans, payroll taxes, unemployment benefits and housing. Importantly, the President’s executive order on housing highlights the need for robust financial assistance to stabilize renters who are experiencing hardship. The order does not, on its own, extend the CARES Act eviction moratorium. 

Trump’s “Executive Order on Fighting the Spread of COVID-19 by Providing Assistance to Renters and Homeowners” focuses on the following asks:

  • Directs the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) to consider whether any measures temporarily halting residential evictions of any renters for failure to pay rent are reasonably necessary to prevent the further spread of COVID-19;
  • Urges the Department of the Treasury (Treasury) and the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) to identify available federal funds to provide temporary financial assistance to renters and homeowners who, as a result of COVID-19, are struggling to meet their rental or mortgage obligations;
  • Further encourages HUD to take action to promote the ability of renters and homeowners to avoid eviction or foreclosure resulting from financial hardships caused by COVID-19. Such action may include encouraging and providing assistance to public housing authorities, affordable housing owners, housing providers, and recipients of federal grant funds to minimize evictions and foreclosures; and
  • Orders the Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA), in consultation with Treasury, to review all existing authorities and resources that may be used to prevent evictions and foreclosures resulting from hardships caused by COVID-19.

In addition to these efforts, President Trump also emphasized the importance of extending supplemental unemployment benefits in a second order. It has been the Administration and Congress’ efforts thus far to provide financial assistance to households and businesses affected by COVID-19 that have prevented widespread evictions, kept renters stably housed and preserved the viability of the rental housing industry. Whether in the form of enhanced unemployment benefits or rental assistance, these efforts, combined with the payment plans and other creative solutions agreed to by housing providers and residents, have been essential.

Although the CARES Act federal eviction moratorium has expired, the Federal Housing Administration (FHA) and FHFA’s foreclosure and eviction moratoria for single-family homes in the agencies’ purview remain in effect until August 31. FHA and FHFA’s tenant protection measures that apply to multifamily borrowers in forbearance also remains effective. Additionally, HUD announced $472 million for public housing authorities (PHAs) to support current participants of voucher programs.

NAA continues to work with the Administration and Congress to fix the outstanding issues from the CARES Act eviction moratorium (including a clear sunset date for the 30-day notice to vacate requirement), and advocate for responsible housing policies that balance the needs of our nation’s 40 million apartment residents, countless rental housing owners and operators and the 17.5 million employees supported by our industry.

NAA will keep the industry abreast of any new guidance or rules issued by federal agencies as a result of President Trump’s executive actions.

August 11, 2020
front-view of The White House
Industry Insider
Four Multifamily Housing Partners Achieve Better Buildings Challenge Goal

These companies achieved 20 percent energy savings goal as part of the Better Buildings Challenge.

The U.S. Departments of Energy (DOE) and Housing and Urban Development (HUD) have recognized Mercy Housing, Corcoran Management, Preservation of Affordable Housing and Trinity Housing Corporation of Greeley for achieving their 20 percent energy savings goal as part of the Better Buildings Challenge, a voluntary leadership initiative that asks leading organizations from a variety of building sectors to make a public commitment to energy efficiency.

These four multifamily housing challenge partners serve a combined portfolio of more than 35,000 affordable and market-rate apartment homes in 415 communities nationwide. Their Better Buildings Challenge results:

  • Mercy Housing achieved 24 percent energy savings across its nationwide portfolio of 320 communities containing a total of 23,000 apartment homes. The company was able to leverage more than $6 million in rebates to implement more than 240 projects. To achieve its goals, Mercy Housing used innovative financing methods, including a pay-from-savings efficiency program, and started with pilots to develop proof of concepts before expanding to larger-scale implementation. It also built new communities to environmental standards and dedicated a staff team to efficiency and environmental duties. 
  • Corcoran Management attained 23 percent energy savings across its portfolio of 10 communities with 1,300 total apartments. The company invested in boiler and lighting upgrades throughout its communities and added smart thermostats to apartments. Corcoran also fostered a culture of efficiency and sustainability by training 80 percent of its staff in energy-efficiency principles.
  • Preservation of Affordable Housing (POAH) achieved 20 percent energy savings across its portfolio of 84 communities, totaling 11,000 apartments in 11 states and the District of Columbia. At the start of the challenge, POAH used its data platforms to establish analytical tools that prioritized energy and water projects in all of its communities, and educated its development team on effective energy and water strategies in new projects. POAH also created a web-based platform, Basis of Design, to establish material and energy-efficiency standards both across its existing portfolio and in projects under development. Targeting local and state incentives based on community needs provided more opportunities for retrofits. 
  • Trinity Housing Corporation of Greeley, based in Colorado, reaped 20 percent energy savings in just six years across its portfolio of 108 apartments. Trinity implemented whole-property LED and ultra-bright LED retrofits and installed temperature-limiting thermostats in the apartments. The company also upgraded to high-efficiency appliances and systems, increasing the comfort and quality of life for residents while saving energy and costs.As part of Better Buildings Challenge, HUD works with DOE to support multifamily housing sector partners, providing incentives and technical assistance for utility benchmarking and planning portfolio-wide investments in energy and water efficiency. Through this initiative, 92 multifamily housing partners have committed to reducing energy use in their communities by 20 percent in 10 years.
August 7, 2020
Energy efficiency
Industry Insider, COVID-19
Reversal of Trump Policy Helps Student Operators

The departure of international students would hurt some schools more than others.

In July, the Trump administration reversed a plan that would have sent international students back to their home country.

A week earlier, the administration announced that international students enrolled in schools that were only offering online classes this fall would have to move home. For some in the student housing industry, the reversal was welcome news.

“It means a great deal to student operators,” says Jake M. Jarman, Chief Operating Officer for Redstone Residential. “It signals to the world that we love, respect and welcome international students to our universities. It shows how important our international students are to the cultures and energies of our various student populations. Many schools with high populations of international students rely on these study abroad programs to fill niche degrees and classes.”

International enrollments already were falling. The National Foundation for American Policy projected a 63-percent to a 98-percent decline in new international students.

KrisAnn Kizer, National Director of Leasing and Marketing for Pierce Education Properties, says the rollback helps student housing operators who have built strong relationships with international student housing brokers to help fill student beds. 

“While we still expect a decrease in the number of new international students coming to universities and colleges in the U.S, due to travel restrictions and difficulties securing visas, we are hopeful that those that are already here see this news as a reason to stay where they are and continue their education in whatever format their university is offering,” Kizer says.

The Trump administration’s reversal also could give schools a late-season leasing boost. “This gives particular hope at universities that have cultivated a large international program that we will see some late-stage leasing to help bring properties to occupancy during the last push prior to classes starting,” Kizer says.

While Brent Little, President of Fountain Residential Partners, says the international students “all certainly breathed a sigh of relief,” he doesn’t think the reversal makes a considerable difference in occupancy. He cites a survey that says of mid-July less than 10 percent of all colleges and universities say they are seriously considering an all-online model. “This would have affected very few academic institutions and their students,” Little says.

But as COVID-19 spreads, more schools could consider taking their courses online for the fall semester.

The concerns about declines in international enrollments only affect certain schools, according to Little. “There are also multidirectional state schools that have very few international students that would not be affected even if an edict was issued,” Little says.

The Department of Homeland Security has left open the possibility of issuing a regulation “addressing whether foreign students can remain in the United States if their classes move online,” according to Reuters. That move could potentially harm certain schools.

“Any decision forcing international students home could have hurt schools that have a large international student base and have decided to teach all online,” Little says. “The Venn diagram of the overlap of these two is relatively small, but if you have off-campus housing at one of those colleges or universities, it would be very impactful to you.”

August 3, 2020
Apartment Advocate
NAA Analysis of Senate's Latest COVID-19 Relief Package

On Monday, July 27, 2020, Senate Republicans released multiple legislative proposals in response to the COVID-19 emergency, collectively referred to as the Health, Economic Assistance, Liability Protection and Schools (HEALS) Act. The more than $1 trillion package contains a series of priorities intended to mitigate the adverse effects of COVID-19 and is a starting point in ongoing negotiations to finalize what will likely be the final phase of COVID-19 relief before the elections in November. Following is a detailed summary of the most pertinent provisions of the legislation.

Safe To Work Act

  • Congress’ effort to establish federal protection against any COVID-19 related medical liability for businesses, schools and healthcare facilities.
  • Acknowledges the unpredictability of state liability protection laws alone as the economy reopens.
  • Grants liability protection to businesses that have undertaken reasonable efforts to comply with mandatory safety guidelines available at the time of exposure. Also includes similar safe harbors for businesses in jurisdictions without mandatory guidelines.
  • Creates a narrow cause of action under which individual claims may be brought forward against businesses due to exposure. Gross negligence remains an allowable cause of action.
  • Protects employers that follow applicable government standards and guidance from lawsuits brought forward under federal labor and employment law.
  • Shields businesses from enforcement actions due to the refusal to make public accommodations under the Americans with Disabilities Act and Civil Rights Act of 1964, so long as they can demonstrate doing so would be a substantial risk to public health or the health of employees.
  • Applies to claims brought forward after December 1, 2019 and prior to October 1, 2024.


American Workers Families and Employer Assistance Act

  • Replaces $600 per week unemployment insurance (UI) with $200 per week UI through September.
    • Beginning in October, UI will be replaced by a state payment of up to $500 that would replace 70% of lost wages.
    • Payment is determined by the formula proposed in the bill or by state alternative.
    • If unable to supplement this second form of payment, states may apply for a Department of Labor waiver and continue paying a fixed amount for two months.
  • Requires states, thirty days after the passage of this bill, to notify workers and employers of the state’s return to work requirements, the individual’s rights to refuse to return to work or to refuse suitable work, and the process to contest the denial of a claim as a result of these requirements.
  • Contains additional recovery rebate “stimulus checks” for individuals and families.
    • A sum of $1,200 to individuals with a gross income of less than $75,000 and $2,400 to married couples with gross income of less than $150,000 combined.
    • Qualifying families would now receive an additional $500 for dependents of any age.
  • Includes heavy revisions to the Employee Retention Tax Credit (ERTC).
    • Changes the amount of the ERTC to equal 65% of certain wages paid to employees. The maximum amount of qualified wages has increased from $10,000 per year to $10,000 per quarter (limited to $30,000 per calendar year).
    • Allows employers to qualify for the ERTC if they can demonstrate a full or partial suspension of operation due to COVID-19 and can reflect a decline in gross receipts by 25%.
    • This provision increased the 100-employee threshold to 500 employees, expanding eligibility for employers. Businesses under this threshold may apply the wages of all employees, while those over may only apply the wages of those employees who cannot work.
  • This bill establishes a safe and healthy workplace tax credit equal to 50% of an employer’s qualified employee protection expenses.
    • These expenses are defined as: Employee and customer COVID-19 testing; personal protective equipment (PPE) including masks, gloves and disinfectants; cleaning products or services to prevent the spread of COVID-19; and amounts paid to design and reconfigure areas of regular employee and customer use to prevent the spread of COVID-19 between March 13, 2020 and January 1, 2021.
    • Expenses may not exceed the cap based on average number of employees. The cap starts at $1,000 for each of the first 500 employees, plus $750 for each employee between 500 and 1000, plus $500 for each employee that exceeds 1,000.
    • Sole proprietors, self-employed individuals and independent contractors are also eligible for this tax credit.
  • New changes will also allow use of Paycheck Protection Program loans simultaneously with the ERTC with limitations in place to prevent double benefits.


Continuing Small Business Recovery and Paycheck Protection Program Act

  • Despite minimal changes to eligibility, the Paycheck Protection Program (PPP) faces major upheaval that will impact the lending program’s reach and operation.
    • Payments for any human resource or accounting software, property damage not covered by insurance, goods essential to current operations, and PPE expenditure would be considered eligible for forgiveness.
    • Borrowers may select any 8-week period between their loan origination and December 31, 2020 to qualify for forgiveness.
    • Simplified loan application standards for borrowers of loans under $150,000 and loans between $150,000 and $2 million.
  • This bill creates the $190 billion PPP Second Draw loan program available to borrowers who have already received a PPP loan.
    • Borrowers must meet the SBA’s revenue size standard, employee fewer than 300 employees, and demonstrate a 50% reduction in gross receipts in the first or second quarter of 2020 relative to 2019.
    • Further eligibility criteria reflect the regulations prescribed under the original PPP and excludes those multifamily firms under PPP Second Draw.
    • Loan terms mimic those under the original PPP.
  • Furthermore, 501(c)(6) organizations would be made eligible under this bill based on certain criteria.
    • The organization does not receive more than 10% of receipts from lobbying activities.
    • Lobbying activities do not comprise more than 10% of receipts.
    • The organization has fewer than 300 employees.



  • $2.2 billion in Tenant-Based Rental Assistance (TBRA) until expended. Specifically, these funds would be used to provide additional funding for Public Housing Agencies (PHAs) to maintain normal operations during the period significantly impacted by coronavirus. Of these amounts:
    • $500 million would be available for both administrative expenses and other expenses of PHAs for their Section 8 programs, including Housing Choice and Mainstream vouchers.
      • An important note is that any amounts provided for administrative expenses and other expenses of PHAs, including Housing Choice and Mainstream vouchers, under both the CARES Act and this Act, will be available for Housing Assistance Payments.
    • $1.7 billion would be used for adjustments in the calendar year 2020 and 2021 Section 8 renewal funding allocations, including Housing Choice and Mainstream vouchers, for agencies that experience a significant increase in voucher per-unit costs.
    • The Secretary maintains broad waiver authority for dealing with circumstances related to coronavirus but must notify the public of the use of such waiver authority.
  • $1 billion to the Public Housing Operating Fund until September 30, 2022, which will provide PHAs with additional operating assistance to make up for reduced tenant rent payments, as well as to help contain the spread of coronavirus in public housing properties.
  • $113.4 million to the Rural Development Rental Assistance Program until September 30, 2021, which will be used for necessary expenses related to the temporary adjustment of loss of wage income losses for residents of housing financed or assisted under Section 514, 515 or 516.
July 31, 2020
Industry Insider
Pricing Apartments in a Recession

In many areas of the country, concessions are back.

One byproduct of the apartment industry’s decade-long run of success has been that there is an entire generation of onsite staffers who have never worked in an environment where rents are falling.

But COVID-19 has changed things dramatically. In many areas of the country, concessions are back. Skyrocketing unemployment numbers make it even harder for apartment operators to know who will and won’t pay rent.

“The reemergence of concessions in a broad way makes pricing within a submarket more difficult, as net pricing moves on a daily basis are widening,” Bridge Property Management COO Tim Reardon told Multi-Housing News’ Diana Mosher. “The understanding that availability is currently hazy—based on the potential of many nonpaying residents moving out at once—makes pricing decisions more difficult.”

Reardon thinks pricing and revenue management systems are essential during this current recession. He told Mosher that these systems could keep operators from reacting too emotionally and potentially giving up revenue. The company continually fine tunes its pricing and revenue management best practices and is now including eviction risk of a property’s resident base into its pricing model.

Even with revenue management, Reardon knows that eviction policy will play a significant role in the Bridge’s success going forward.

“We’ve been pleasantly surprised with the success of our properties over the past few months, but we know the stability we’re experiencing may be running out with the stimulus dollars dwindling,” Reardon told Mosher. “Until the moratorium on evictions ceases, we won’t really know the extent of the impact on the industry, but we’re hoping to be able to find some viable deferral solutions for all of our residents, so we can keep them in place, which would be a win for everyone.”

Read More

July 27, 2020
The Demand for Flexibility in the Workplace: Overcoming Challenges for Onsite Staffing

To address the need for greater flexibility, employers should consider loosening paid time-off policies.

With the world’s response to the COVID-19 pandemic coronavirus eliciting a host of new behaviors personally and professionally, the need for more flexibility in employee policies and procedures has been a hot topic among companies across all industries.

Given the essential societal role the industry plays through providing housing, employers should consider the unprecedented nature of this crisis and why it necessitates greater workplace flexibility. Requiring an employee to exhaust all paid time off (PTO) at this time is likely not a best practice for resolving this concern, so how do employers meet their workforce more than halfway?

Employers must face the reality that employees with school-age children are going to be faced with tough decisions as the fall approaches. Other than potential ADA and Family Medical Leave Act considerations, this is unchartered territory. Employees certainly should be allowed to use PTO during these school closures, but employers should relax the rules relating to the notice of use of PTO and avoid enforcing the policy in a manner that results in the employee having to use all PTO because of a school closing or related challenges, like elder care.

But the issue remains: How can any company optimally operate with a portion of their staffing unable to work regular hours because of the pandemic?

For each company, the idea and execution of workplace flexibility may look different. This may be easier for corporate offices, as there are more shared job responsibilities and most, if not all, employees may have the option for remote work.

The more challenging part of flexibility greatly affects those employees working onsite, serving on the front lines. Each property has limited staff in place and with the need to be physically present to assist residents, there is difficulty in continuing to meet resident needs and expectations while working with this limited staff and the limited operating hours.

There are many ways to allow for flexibility for all employees, including onsite team members:

  • Job sharing and compressed workweeks are a start.
  • Shared staffing, or “floaters,” between multiple properties is encouraged.
  • Cross-training employees will ensure that when someone is out, there is always a minimum of one other person who can complete a specialized task in their absence.
  • Leveraging technology for virtual leasing, online payments and resident requestsshould be a primary area of focus.
  • Retrain residents to understand the difference in services that still provide value. Are you there because your residents demand your physical presence or because technology platforms are non-existent or minimally used?
    • This will especially be difficult for long-term residents who expect personnel to be onsite daily, such as maintenance staff walking residents through work orders remotely or providing resources such as resident handbooks and videos on how to complete simple maintenance in their homes.
  • Create solid relationships with companies you can contract for cleaning and other tasks in the event of absence.
  • Utilizing smart locks, allowing access to areas for residents and contractors.
  • Partnering with a local temp staffing agency to assist with extended absences.
  • Outside of standard operating hours, determine your core business hours. This is the time frame that your employees are most focused and readily available to assist your residents.
    • This shortened period of time can be communicated to residents and supplier partners to ensure someone is available to meet their needs.

Allowing increased flexibility for all employees will continue to be a significant challenge for companies. The Families First Coronavirus Response Act (FFCRA or Act) allows a parent to take leave to take care of child if they meet the qualifications. Trying to be flexible and allow work from home when possible will be key.

If companies do not help employees by making adjustments, they could lose great employees for reasons beyond their control. It makes most sense to take care of your people, make arrangements for accommodation and work together. For more information on flexible scheduling, please see NAA’s Best Practice Flexible Scheduling.

July 20, 2020
Industry Insider
Brixton Capital Acquires San Antonio Property Management Firm UAG

UAG’s property management portfolio includes approximately 30,000 apartment homes, primarily in the southwest and southeast U.S.

Brixton Capital has acquired property management firm United Apartment Group (UAG), based in San Antonio, Texas.

UAG’s property management portfolio includes approximately 30,000 apartment homes, primarily in the southwest and southeast U.S. The UAG current management team, including Managing Partners Carrie Girgus and Tim Settles, will remain in place.

“Through this acquisition, Brixton Capital will expand our fully integrated platform that includes capital raising, acquisitions and property management,” Mark Selman, president of Brixton Capital said in a news release. “We will increase our foothold in the necessity housing market, while current UAG clients will continue to enjoy the same high level of service and leadership.”

Brixton Capital, a longtime UAG customer before the acquisition and new partnership, will work closely with the UAG team to evaluate markets and opportunities for investments in durable-income workforce housing. UAG will continue to operate and serve its broad base of clients with no interruption to service, as well as with additional capacity and resources.

UAG, founded in 1995, has been among the top 50 property management companies in the U.S. for four consecutive years, based upon units managed, as ranked by National Multifamily Housing Council. Girgus and Settles will maintain ownership in UAG.

Brixton currently owns and operates a portfolio valued in excess of $1 billion, representing over 10 million square feet of multifamily, retail, office, industrial and land investments across the United States and Europe.

July 17, 2020
Apartment Advocate
Eligible Borrowers Receive Five-Week Lifeline on Paycheck Protection Program

Nearly one quarter of the PPP’s original $659 billion earmark remains as demand for the program has cooled amongst eligible borrowers. So far, the PPP has assisted more than four million businesses with meeting their payroll and routine debt obligations. Still, many more face great economic uncertainty driven by COVID-19 and are either unable or ineligible to receive PPP funding, including the multifamily industry which is still largely excluded from PPP eligibility 

The National Apartment Association (NAA) continues to advocate for the unique needs of the multifamily industry before Congress and the Small Business Administration (SBA) on PPP and future business relief programs. We urge Congress to: 

  • Amend the Coronavirus Aid, Relief and Economic Security (CARES) Act to include multifamily firms in the provision granting PPP access to businesses with more than 500 employees operating across more than one physical location.  

  • Compel the SBA to revise and reverse the PPP Final Rule that excludes passive owners and other multifamily entities from loan access. 

For more information on PPP related advocacy issues, please contact Sam Gilboard, NAA Manager of Public Policy. For more information on COVID-19 related advocacy issues, please visit our COVID-19 Policy Concerns page. For multifamily operation and compliance assistance, please visit our COVID-19 Resource and Guidance Center. 

July 15, 2020
Apartment Advocate
New Study Shows NYC Mandatory Inclusionary Housing Policy Misaligned

As the rental housing industry has long known, mandatory inclusionary zoning policies are often a greater barrier to housing development instead of the new affordable housing source imagined. In fact, according to a new study by the Manhattan Institute, only a modest 2,065 affordable housing units have been built in New York City since the Mandatory Inclusionary Housing (MIH) Program was created 4 years ago. The shortcomings of MIH illustrate how uneven policy deters development of new affordable housing and why future inclusionary zoning iterations will fall short of their housing goals.

The report, authored by former New York City housing official Eric Kober, begins by explaining the mechanics of MIH.

MIH applies to any residential development of 10 units or more seeking a zoning change to increase density. MIH also triggers when the city rezones an area to allow for increased density.  Developers must adopt one of the following options:

  • Option 1: At least 25% of units are affordable at 60% of the area median income (AMI) and 10% of units affordable at 40% AMI.
  • Option 2: At least 30% of units affordable at 80% AMI.
  • Option 3 (Workforce Option): At least 30% of units affordable at 115% AMI, 5% of units affordable at 70% AMI, 5% of units affordable at 90% AMI.
  • Option 4 (Deep Affordability Option): At least 20% of units are affordable at 40% AMI with subsidies allowed.

Koper’s research discredits MIH as a broad tool to increase the supply of affordable housing in an economically feasible way. While New York City has set ambitious housing goals, the incentive structure for MIH did not adequately reflect the losses incurred when developing below-market rate units. New developments may receive property tax exemption for affordable set-asides and smaller projects can take advantage of an in-lieu payment alternative, but these incentives have failed to overcome the high cost of development.   

In 2015, the New York City Housing Development Corporation (NYCHDC) released a study scoring the strength of housing markets in neighborhoods across the city from weak to very strong. The NYCHDC noted that the successful application of MIH would only be viable in strong and very strong housing markets, while greater public subsidy would be needed to utilize MIH in a profitable manner in weaker housing markets.

According to the report, NYC’s rezoning efforts since 2016 have been effectively limited to low-income neighborhoods with weaker housing markets as defined by the NYCHDC study. Naturally, this has resulted in fewer residential starts in these areas, thus preventing the application of MIH. Furthermore, anti-development groups have been successful in influencing city council vetoes of rezoning proposals, thereby stalling future MIH use. Alternatively, fewer developers are seeking zoning changes in neighborhoods with weaker housing markets, opting for starts in neighborhoods with strong and very strong housing markets where zoning for higher density buildings is already allowed and the need for public subsidy is low.

Koper’s report also highlights MIH’s inherent design flaws. First, new developments between 11 and 25 units face prohibitively high in-lieu payments if they do not wish to participate in MIH. Koper provides the example of a 15,000 square foot property that would require a cash payment of more than $4 million in order to circumvent the requirements of MIH. To date, no development has utilized the in-lieu payment option. Second, New York City’s advocacy for changes to the state’s property tax exemption laws fell short, leaving conversions of nonresidential properties and condominium conversions ineligible for exemption. Without this necessary incentive, housing production remains modest and less likely to trigger MIH.

Koper’s analysis of MIH underscores the deep concerns felt by developers operating in jurisdictions with self-defeating inclusionary housing policy. MIH was created to help meet New York City’s affordable housing goals, but its triggering effects have been limited to neighborhoods underscored by weak housing markets. In addition, the program’s incentive structure has done little to generate interest in developing in these communities, instead directing new housing starts to areas where MIH would not be imposed on developers.

As Koper explains, mandatory inclusionary housing is a misnomer. Without the certainty of economic feasibility, developers will simply choose to develop in another market, denying a jurisdiction of its much-needed housing. It is essential that housing policy reflect equity between developers and communities.

July 15, 2020