Affordable housing: no easy answers.

Of the phrase "affordable housing" were a piece of luggage, the range of issues the two simple words encompass would burst the hinges.

The meaning of the words "affordable housing" depends on the income, the age, the geographic location, and the ethnic group or race of the people involved.

Nature of problem. The issue of affordable housing has been studied to death, yet the challenge remains.

Indeed, in the massive federal study "Not In My Back Yard": Removing Barriers to Affordable Housing, a small section recounts a series of ten major federally sponsored task forces and conferences, going back to the presidency of Lyndon Johnson, that focused at least partially on affordable housing issues. In its broadest sense, the issue truly dates to the beginning of the human race, as there have always been people who could not find or afford, or were displaced from, some reasonable form of shelter.

The "NIMBY" study, released in mid-1991 by the Department of Housing and Urban Development's Advisory Commission on Regulatory Barriers to Affordable Housing, recounted many of the same obstacles reviewed in the past.

"The Commission's disturbing conclusion," wrote HUD Secretary Jack Kemp in a transmittal letter to President Bush, "is that exclusionary, discriminatory, and unnecessary regulations constitute formidable barriers to affordable housing, raising costs by 20% to 35% in some communities."

The report attacks a wide variety of regulatory barriers. In the suburbs, it cites zoning and other land-use policies that limit housing opportunities. Measures that require large minimum lot sizes drive home prices beyond the reach of many families. Population limits discourage multifamily housing.

In theory, such rules arise from concerns that additional homes and multifamily construction will place a burden on municipal services, such as sewer systems and schools. However, "the unstated rationale is that [affordable housing candidates] have lower incomes than 'we' do and 'we' don't want them living near us," says Anthony Downs, a member of the commission and a senior fellow specializing in housing issues at The Brookings Institution, Washington.

The report likewise criticizes rent control laws, which the commission believes hurt the poor in the long run by discouraging development of new multifamily housing stock.

The NIMBY report is somewhat critical of federal tax policies, pointing out, for example, that the Tax Reform Act of 1986 increased the costs of investment in multifamily housing. However, a more fundamental argument regarding taxes can be found in other literature.

One example is in a mid-1992 report called A Decent Place to Live: Revisited; The State of Housing in America, published by The Enterprise Foundation, Columbia, Md.

In the report, the foundation argues that federal spending on housing should be looked at not only in the form of direct spending, as is typical, but also in the form of "spending" through tax benefits. The federal government is found to spend four times what it spends on all low-income housing programs on tax deductions for homeowners. These include deductions for home mortgage interest, property taxes, and capital gains made when a home is sold. Many of the households benefiting from these breaks, the report states, are affluent. Taxpayers may see the broad need, but are understandably not willing to surrender what they have to solve it.

Multifamily Housing

In the minds of many, "affordable housing" is synonymous with "singlefamily homeownership."

"There's a recent emphasis on affordable single-family issues because of rising single-family home prices and because the lower-middle-income group is being squeezed," observes Thomas W. White, senior vice-president--multifamily activities, at the Federal National Mortgage Association (Fannie Mae).

However, "in a lot of cases, it's not a choice issue. You have people who don't have a choice--the poor," says Bart Harvey, co-director of The Enterprise Foundation, which specializes in working with groups providing housing for the poor. He says the median income of renters across the U.S. is about half that of homeowners.

This is not just an issue for the poor. "Not everyone can buy a home," says Charles Goetze, executive director of a multilender multifamily loan pool called SAMCO. "In some markets, only 50% of the population can."

Supply and price. That leaves rental housing as the broadest available alternative, and in many areas that means multifamily units. The problem of affordable multifamily housing is characterized by different degrees of two broad issues: supply and price.

"Although rents have flattened recently in response to recession, they remain near historic highs," states a midyear report called From The Neighborhoods To The Capital Markets. "And the situation, if anything, may worsen, since much of the affordable stock is at risk of loss through abandonment, demolition, or upgrading." The report was issued by the National Task Force on Financing Affordable Housing, a private effort.

Tom White of Fannie Mae notes that the rental market, in terms of availability, is soft in many parts of the country. However, he says that many lower-income earners don't make enough to handle even the rents resulting from the soft market. Often, he says, subsidies from governmental and private grant and loan programs are necessary to make the units affordable.

Many federal multifamily subsidy programs were cut back in the 1980s, notes Enterprise Foundation's Bart Harvey. The National Affordable Housing Act of 1990 reversed course somewhat, but housing advocates say some of its efforts, such as the HOME program (a group of housing assistance programs), require additional funding and less red tape before they will be helpful.

Supply is also a problem in some locales. Harvey notes that in many areas, the troubles of the savings and loan industry stopped development of multifamily housing of all types.

One typical problem spot is rural areas. Take rural North Carolina. Though there is a need for rental housing, there is comparatively little, according to Doris Schnider, president of Community Investment Corp. of North Carolina, a multilender group concentrating on low-income rental housing projects.

Nor is living in a metropolitan area easy. The Enterprise Foundation's Decent Place: Revisited study points out that there is actually an oversupply of high-income units, a legacy of the 1980s. It argues against analysts who say this oversupply will create sufficient supply for lower-income renters by "trickling down."

"It is cold comfort to a renter in New York City who cannot find an affordable apartment to know that dozens are available in Houston, Texas," the study states. "A vacant suburban apartment 20 miles from downtown is of little use to a low-income renter without a car whose job is located in the center of downtown."

Three cases. Banks can fulfill several roles in the multifamily arena. Here are three examples of bank activities.

California effort. The Savings Associations Mortgage Company, Inc. (SAMCO), Santa Clara, was rounded in 1969 by thrifts, but its statewide membership has grown to include ten commercial banks as well. Though it started as a single-family lending pool, it evolved into a multifamily effort.

The typical multifamily deal involving SAMCO entails three to seven layers of financing, according to executive director Charles Goetze. These include sources of grants, sources of below-market-rate construction loans, and permanent "exempt" lending. Project participants include city, municipal, and state governments. Construction lenders include banks and thrifts, though Goetze says thrift activity has fallen off due to the industry's troubles. SAMCO itself fulfills the takeout role.

"We don't do a deal unless we know a city or municipality is involved in some way," says Goetze. This may include a grant of city-owned land or waiver of zoning laws that would otherwise preclude the development.

Many of the deals SAMCO has done are what Goetze calls "unusual" properties. These include single-room occupancy projects, considered a viable solution for the homeless when done right; senior citizens' housing; and hospices for AIDS patients. In any project, SAMCO requires 51% of the units to be available only to tenants earning 80% or less of median income.

Once SAMCO's loan committee and board have approved a takeout, it distributes the particulars of the loan to its members, about 70 of which are currently active in its program. "They can pick and choose which deals they want to participate in," Goetze explains, each lender putting up a portion of the credit.

SAMCO provided approximately $40 million in takeouts in 1991, and expects to reach the same level in 1992. Goetze says 1993 may see a falloff because a state redevelopment program hasn't been passed.

North Carolina effort. The Community Investment Corp. of North Carolina is an offshoot of the North Carolina Alliance of Community Financial Institutions, Raleigh, a state group that includes banks and savings institutions. The investment corporation has 111 members, including 12 community banks and two large ones, Wachovia and NationsBank.

Like SAMCO, the North Carolina group permits members to select which projects they will take part in, according to Doris Schnider, president. "If it's in the lender's neighborhood, they are more likely to participate," says Schnider. The group, relatively new, averages 50 lenders per project and has $4.5 million outstanding thus far, with another $7.5 million in projects still in the construction phase.

Bank as equity partner. Banks don't have to lend to help affordable multifamily projects get off the ground. Case in point is The Howard Bank, N.A., Burlington, Vt., a $553 million-assets subsidiary of $1.6 billion Banknorth Group, Burlington.

Vermont has the unfortunate distinction of being ranked by one survey as one of three states with the least affordable rental housing.

In February 1990 the Salmon Run apartments were completed in Burlington's depressed Old North End. The project was the result of teamwork among two nonprofit general partners, Housing Vermont and Lake Champlain Housing Development Corp., and three banks, including Howard, which served as equity partners. The banks' investment is offset by tax credits obtained under the federal Low-Income Housing Tax Credit program.

The project consists of 80 units in seven low-rise buildings; 36 of the units are restricted to individuals earning 60% or less of area median income. A tax-credit three-bedroom apartment at Salmon Run rents at $430 a month, versus the $645 market rate.

Encouraged by its experiences, Howard Bank in August made a $5 million commitment to the city of Burlington to invest in additional affordable housing projects.

Tax credit need. A concern on the horizon for developers of multifamily affordable housing and the lenders who work with them is the fate of the Low-Income Housing Tax Credit.

When talking about multifamily projects that have worked out, it's hard to find one that doesn't rely on the program to some degree.

The tax credit is capped in each state annually according to the size of that state's population. It provides the corporation providing equity to a project with a 9% credit, with a lower credit imposed if a project benefits from certain other funding or tax-exempt financing. The credit lasts ten years, even if the program disappears subsequent to a credit being granted.

The problem right now is that the credit program expired last June, and while both major Presidential campaigns favor its continuation, the program's future appeared to be entwined with tax legislation, whose future was uncertain.

Secondary market. Some say that what multifamily affordable housing needs is a boost from a strong secondary market, as exists for single-family loans.

A secondary market for multifamily loans is not a new idea, but one in need of an overhaul.

The Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corp., for example, took an almost two-year hiatus from the business of purchasing such loans. Freddie Mac suffered credit losses in its portfolio, which it blamed on poor underwriting, and created a $100 million special reserve to cover losses in 1990.

In July, Freddie Mac announced that it would reenter the market in phases. The first phase consists of $1.5 billion earmarked for refinancing of Freddie-owned multifamily properties experiencing cashflow problems. The funds are intended to lower the borrowers' rates, easing their cash problems and enabling them to improve their properties.

"I envision a long-range goal of some $10 billion in new financing nationwide by 1997," Leland Brendsel, Freddie's chairman and CEO stated in announcing the revamped effort. Phase two, slated to begin later this year, will consist of purchases of existing multifamily loans. Later, Freddie plans to resume buying new originations.

Fannie Mae, meanwhile, continues its own multifamily program. Both Freddie and Fannie took part in the Neighborhoods To Capital Markets study referred to earlier.

That study proposed a revamped secondary market that would feature increased standardization.

"One problem is that the secondary market for multifamily housing is relatively new," the report states, "without the depth or resiliency of the singlefamily system. As the multifamily finance system has become more fragmented, with a resultant increase in investor confusion and transaction costs and in the overall difficulty of putting projects together, both the availability and the cost of capital have suffered," the report stated.

Single-Family Housing

The low-interest-rate environment of recent months has made affordable housing loans somewhat more doable. However, "there's still a clear affordability gap," says Martin D. Levine, senior vice-president low- and moderate-income housing at Fannie.

Communication is critical to affordable single-family lending, according to Levine. Sometimes people who could qualify for programs that could boost them into their first home don't apply because they don't know such assistance exists.

Counselling and homebuyer education may be provided through seminars sponsored by nonprofit groups or lenders themselves, or provided in self-teaching formats.

First Bank System, Inc., St. Paul, often requires pre-loan counselling. The neighborhood groups who provide it tell the bank that only 10% of the people who attend the sessions are really bank-ready. The remainder need to clear up past credit problems, establish a savings pattern, or take other steps.

Still, the effort has value. "A lot of people will go to the counselling just to explore the idea," says Gary Beatty, product manager at the company's FBS Mortgage Corp. subsidiary. "Often the initial marketing is just to create the notion that homeownership may be possible."

What about ARMs? In the current rate environment, adjustable rate mortgages with low opening rates can look attractive. However, lenders don't see such loans as a good choice for first-time buyers seeking affordable housing credit.

"I'd be worried about payment shock," explains John F. Faulhaber, division administrator and head of secondary mortgage market operations for Chicago's Harris Bank. Rates on ARMs closed now are unlikely to go anywhere but up, lenders say, and borrowers' income may not keep pace. Because many borrowers seeking affordable first homes are extending themselves to make it under the wire of even specialized programs, lenders consider stability more important to this market than starting out with the cheapest possible rate.

Additionally, private mortgage insurers tend to be more nervous about ARMs, explains Faulhaber of Harris.

Secondary market outlet. Both Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac offer specialized programs for affordable home mortgages.

Fannie was first off the block, introducing its Community Home Buyer's Program in 1991. Borrowers generally must be making no more than 115% of area median income.

The program provides fixed-rate mortgages of 15 or 30 years. Underwriting guidelines for the program are more liberal than the standard Fannie programs; for example, total monthly obligations to income can reach 38%, versus the standard 36% ratio. Downpayments can be as low as 5%. Under a special subprogram, homebuyers can make a personal downpayment of only 3%, the additional 2% coming from a family gift or a grant from a government or private organization.

"These loans are not all at the far end of underwriting flexibility," says Fannie Mae's Levine. Typically, he explains, the borrower will tap one aspect of the eased guidelines, such as a lower downpayment only. To mitigate Fannie's additional risk, borrowers are required to obtain some form of homebuyer education, and private mortgage insurance is mandatory.

Close to one out of two of Fannie's active lenders are making loans under this program, according to Levine. As of August, approximately 25,000 loans had been made; at any given time, the loans represent between 2%-3% of Fannie's volume. Levine says they are tracked separately; thus far, they have been performing on par with Fannie's regular portfolio.

Freddie Mac launched a substantially similar pilot program, called "Affordable Gold," in July 1992. However, one difference in Freddie's program is very appropriate to the affordable home loan market in the eyes of John Faulhaber of Harris Trust.

Affordable Gold requires the borrower to obtain an inspection of the property to ensure that it is structurally sound. Faulhaber, whose bank is one of the pilot Affordable Gold lenders, applauds this measure as a good protection of first-time buyers' finances.

The home inspector's findings may dictate a change in selling price, says Faulhaber, or may even convince the borrower to look for another house instead. "There isn't much margin for error in these things," says the banker, "And if you turn out to need a new furnace and a new roof, do you have the money right now? It's not like nothing can go wrong, but at least people know up front what the situation is." Fannie Mae's program generally does not require inspections, although Levine says they are encouraged.

Expanded flexibility. Lenders have gone beyond the secondary market's programs in some cases, extending still more liberal underwriting.

One example is the Home Advantage program First Bank System has recently unveiled in several markets. The program is offered exclusively through community organizations.

First Bank Systems' Gary Beatty says research found that borrowers often don't require a low rate so much as a lower initial investment. Being able to put even less down than the Fannie and Freddie special programs--a minimum of $1,000 cash, versus a 3% downpayment enables Home Advantage borrowers to use more of their cash on hand to improve the properties they are buying.

Home Advantage also provides for slightly higher credit ratios than the Fannie and Freddie programs. Additionally, a borrower need not be employed in a full-time job if they can demonstrate that they have a steady income stream. As an example, Beatty points to a borrower who generally works for temporary employment agencies. First Bank System made the loan because the borrower demonstrated a good ongoing relationship with several temp agencies and had earned sufficient income through this employment to qualify for mortgage credit. Ordinarily, according to Beatty, such borrowers would be turned down.

"Actually," says Beatty, "such borrowers may be more stable than someone who is self-employed."

The appraisal barrier. Appraisals can be a sticking point when banks try to finance affordable single-family housing in low- and moderate-income sections of the nation's cities.

A key element of the typical residential appraisal is a comparison of the property being appraised to comparable properties nearby that have recently changed hands.

This can be a problem in the inner city, particularly when an area is just starting to come back. If there's been no turnover in the immediate neighborhood, comparables become more difficult to find, says Neil Olson, president and CEO of California Market Data Cooperative, Orange, Calif.

Scarcity of market data for low- and moderate-income neighborhoods can also be a problem.

A further complication of the inner city is that urban neighborhoods often consist of only two or three blocks, with the next section sometimes differing tremendously in use and character, according to Anthony Graziano, president, Atlantic Coast Realty Appraisal Group, Toms River, N.J.

Graziano suggests one remedy for the shortage of market data in urban neighborhoods. This entails looking at the neighborhood as a rental market first. While there may be no recent sales in a neighborhood, he continues, an appraiser can determine the rent levels of certain types of units in a neighborhood. The suggested purchase price of a property could be weighed based on the income that could be derived if it were rented.

Appraisers' experience and personal background can also pose difficulties. One midwestern banker whose institution is boosting its inner-city mortgage lending effort says many of the appraisers his bank has been using are white, male, and suburban-oriented. This has made it harder to lend in predominantly black inner-city neighborhoods where women are often the head of the household, the banker says. To begin to address this difficulty, his bank recently obtained a list of minority appraisers from a local group.

To produce a long-term solution, ABA's new Center for Community Development and the Appraisal Institute, a Chicago-based trade organization, have been studying the issues. One expected result will be an institute manual for training appraisers in evaluating low- and moderate-income housing units.

"If we're going to save the cities," says appraiser Graziano, a member of the Appraisal Institute's government relations committee, "people have to be able to buy homes there."

AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND PRESIDENTIAL POLITICS

When asked what impact the upcoming Presidential elections could have on Washington's housing policies, Bart Harvey, deputy chairman of The Enterprise Foundation, a nonprofit group dedicated to the housing needs of the poor, plays it cagey.

"I'm hopeful, whoever the new President is," says Harvey.

Both major parties have made an issue of affordable housing. Here are some of the basics of the Bush and Clinton positions, taken from campaign position papers provided in late August. There is a degree of common ground, perhaps not surprising given the politics of the issue.

Clinton's view. Clinton proposes raising the ceiling on Federal Housing Administration mortgage insurance to accommodate higher purchase prices; subsidizing low-income buyers' purchase, restoration, and sales of condemned housing; toughening enforcement of fair housing laws; and maintaining the mortgage revenue bond program. To help renters, Clinton proposes easing restrictions state and local officials face under the govern- (a group of housing assistance programs) and permanently extending the Low-Income Housing Tax Credit. He also favors boosting the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) budget for maintenance of existing public housing.

Broadly, Clinton proposes creation of a nationwide network of community development banks; passage of a more progressive version of the Community Reinvestment Act; and creation of urban enterprise zones,

By way of past accomplishments, Clinton's campaign points to the candidate's creation of the Arkansas Development Finance Authority and the Arkansas Interagency Council for the Homeless and Vice-Presidential candidate Gore's active support and cosponsorship of the National Affordable Housing Act of 1990, among other congressional initiatives.

Bush's view. The Republicans' position paper states: "Beyond the Administration's HOPE [Homeownership and Opportunity for People Everywhere] initiative, Secretary [Jack] Kemp has streamlined the administration of housing programs and broadened housing opportunities for public tenants." Among the accomplishments listed: the LowIncome Housing Preservation Program, which enables tenants to purchase private buildings whose owners want to terminate low-income housing subsidies; expansion of the federal program for resident management of public housing; and hiking FHA mortgage limits for single-family homes, with provision for regional flexibility where higher prices prevail.

Much of what the campaign recounts regarding the President's proposals comes from the Administration's proposed fiscal 1993 budget, submitted to Congress early this Year towards homeownership, the budget request included a 180% increase in HOPE funding, over 1992 budget levels, to help low-income citizens become homeowners; permitting Section 8 rental housing vouchers to be used toward mortgage payments; nearly doubling funding for the Low-Income Housing Preservation Program; tax-favored individual retirement account withdrawals for first-time home purchase; tax credits for first-time homebuyers; and extension of the mortgage revenue bond program.

To he p renters, the budget proposal included expansion of the housing voucher program, including a limited special allotment for rural housing needs; provision of funds for modernizing public housing and for improving troubled projects insured by FHA; and expanded opportunities for tenants and state and local governments to purchase public housing developments from the federal government.

The Administration has also pushed for creation of additional urban enterprise zones.

AMERICANS' MESSAGE FOR LENDERS

"The primary value of homeownership as viewed by Americans in 1992 is security--financial security through the development of equity, and psychological security through a sense of permanence and control over one's life."

This was a major conclusion of a survey of more than 1,500 Americans conducted earlier this year on behalf of the Federal National Mortgage Association. The sample was structured to reflect the 64%-36% national split between those who own and those who rent.

Nearly half of the respondents identified lack of affordable housing as a serious problem facing the country and more than a third considered it one of the country's most serious problems.

Eighty percent of the respondents said they considered the traditional single-family detached home with a yard as the best place to live. Just how much Americans will sacrifice to get it, another focus of the survey, was enlightening--"it is one of their highest priorities in life," the survey report stated.

For example, the survey found that many respondents put homeownership ahead of retiring ten years early or having a more comfortable commute if the latter meant renting. Many were willing to work second jobs, take limited vacations, and own only one car in order to own a home. Blacks and Hispanics were more willing than whites to make some sacrifices, such as working two jobs, the survey found.

However, only 17% of the sample felt homeownership was worth overextending their finances.

Among the barriers to homeownership probed by the survey was racial discrimination. Only 9% of the overall sample cited discrimination as a major obstacle, but perceptions varied by racial group. Only 6% of whites saw discrimination as a problem, while 21% of blacks and 13% of Hispanics did.

Not surprisingly, meeting downpayment requirements and managing monthly mortgage costs were frequently mentioned as barriers to homeownership. However, the mortgage process itself is a mystery to many. Only 20% of those questioned felt very comfortable with mortgage terminology. Notably, among people between 25 and 34, more than half said they are confused by mortgage lingo.

LOOKING FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING?

TRY HUD AND RTC

Where will the future supply of affordable housing come from? Some already exists, in the form of properties that have fallen into federal hands.

The federal Housing and Urban Development Department, for example, currently holds about 36,000 single-family homes, generally obtained through foreclosures on government-insured loans, and 250 multifamily units.

Another source is the Resolution Trust Corp. At the end of June (the latest figures available), the RTC's Affordable Housing Disposition Program had at least received offers on 19,472 single-family homes and 406 multifamily buildings. At that point, approximately 5,000 single-family homes and 250 multifamily buildings were still available.

HUD offerings. Getting involved in HUD holdings offers a dual advantage to lenders. HUD's single-Family homes provide low- and moderate-income buyers with opportunities not always available in the market. At the same time, the buildings are put back into active use, which can turn boarded-up eyesores into community improvements.

"There is a lot of single-family housing stock that is vacant in our area,. says Virgil L. Miller, Jr., senior vice-president and director of community development at Worthen National Bank of Arkansas, Little Rock. The $1.2 billion-assets bank has been working with city and nonprofit agencies to convert the empty homes, many owned by HUD, into useful dwellings.

RTC effort. By contrast to the HUD properties requiring rehabilitation, some RTC properties have never been occupied, having been seized by the original savings institution lender when the developer defaulted.

RTC properties are marketed in a variety of ways. Nonprofit housing groups and public housing agencies, for example, have first dibs on multi-family buildings. Single-family homes have often been sold at public auction, though sealed-bid sales and brokers are also used. To be eligible to bid, prospective buyers must either be individuals making no more than 115% of median income in their area or a non-profit or public agency who will rent or resell to people whose income is no more than 80% of area median income. RTC offers financing to qualified buyers of multifamily and single family units.

The single-family program represents a good opportunity for banks new to affordable housing to get their feet wet, according to Chuck Scheid, executive director of the Atlanta Mortgage Consortium. The Atlanta group, which pools the Funds of 11 banks and thrifts, has helped out at RTC auctions, pre-qualifying bidders; offering financial counselling, which is required to borrow from RTC; and offering financing of its own. RTC has financed about 2,000 of the homes sold through the affordable housing effort; seller financing of multifamily units is less common, according to an RTC spokesman.

Scheid, who speaks about the RTC program around the country, believes it's more appropriate for local lenders than for RTC to take on the financing. The Atlanta consortium has financed about 200 homes. HELP FROM AN OLD ENEMY

If your bank is interested in increasing affordable home lending efforts. consider joining your area's Federal Home Loan Bank. (Not all banks find this step palatable, as the Community Banking column explores.)

As of late August, 1,000 banks had joined the Federal Home Loan Bank System. As members, they can avail themselves of two programs created by the Financial Institutions Reform Recovery, and Enforcement Act to boost affordable housing opportunities.

AHP. The first is the Affordable Housing Program, which has two facets.

First, AHP provides advances at subsidized rates to lenders to finance affordable housing for low- and moderate-income people. Lenders must pass the rate subsidy along to the borrower. Alternatively, district home loan banks may make outright grants under the program, with the local lender serving as conduit for the grant funds.

Funds can be used to finance the purchase, construction. and rehabilitation of owner-occupied housing for households whose income does not exceed 80% of area median income. The funds can also be used to finance rental housing at least 20% of which will be available only to very low income households.

Since the program was launched in 1990, it has produced approximately 45,000 single- and multifamily units of new and rehabilitated housing.

CIP. The second effort is the Community Investment Program, which provides reduced-rate advances to members for financing purchase or rehabilitation of owner-occupied or rental housing for families whose income does not exceed 115% of median area income. Funds can also be used to finance a variety of community development projects.

Since the program was launched in 1990, approximately 50,000 Units of housing have been produced or rehabilitated.