While many details remain, the House legislation could incentivize more rental density. The goal is if there is more housing stock avaiable, it will reduce the competition on the market that drives up prices.

The reality is Ohio needs a diverse housing stock, and as advocates we need to encourage low cost rental housing as part of the solution.e

One proposal in the Senate plan could prioritize workforce rental housing (81-100% of AMI). The concern is this proposal coud pull resources from low-income housing.

For many, home ownership is a way to have an asset that grows in value and can help create wealth.

The Robert Wood Johnson Foundation is currently funding an initiative that could offer insights into this issue that can help guide future policy.

However, one foundation cannot do this alone. Ohio’s General Assembly needs to develop plans to make sure the economic abundance of our community is accessible to all, regardless of their rental vs. ownership status.

Research shows that health and well-being, housing, education, and hunger are linked and must all be addressed. The National Low-income Housing Coalition has links to these studies on their website.

In local development plans, these factors must be considered and incentivized to make the necessary resources accessible.

Tax abatement, credits, and other incentives to developers are an expense to the public. HNO director Nick Bates says, “spending through the tax code can easily hide the true investment and costs of a project. I encourage public officials to ask two questions when weighing any tax credit or incentive -

1. What is the cost compared to the community gain? (Consider what the developer would have done WITHOUT the credit or incentive).

2. Could direct spending, which is more transparent for public evaluation, be used and more effective. The problem is that spending through the tax code doesn’t receive the same level of review and scrutiny as other types of spending.”

This article goes into more depth on this subject

Property taxes are increasing in part because of housing valuations going up. However, the state of Ohio has been shifting the tax load from the state to local communitiies for nearly 2 decades. Here are some of te changes.

1. Property tax rollback eliminated. This was a policy adopted in the 1970s where the state reduced all homeowner property taxes by 12.5%. This was eliminated under Gov. Kasich in the 2013 budget. Over the past 10 years, new money levies are 12.5% more expensive than they would have been.

2. LGF cut by 50% The Local Government Fund was also cut by 50% by Governor Kasich. This reduction put local governments in a position to raise revenue locally and cut services.

3. Cuts to services: The state has spent decades cutting spending for schools and community services that result in the need to replace that revenue locally.

4. Estate Tax: This is another revenue source that went primarily to local governments that was eliminated.

5. All of these changes were designed to fund about a dozen state income tax cuts.

Ohio should adopt a Property Tax Circuit Breaker. “Circuit breakers target property tax relief to homeowners paying the highest share of their income in property taxes, such as seniors on fixed incomes, low-income homeowners in gentrifying neighborhoods, and individuals facing a sudden reduction in earnings. These programs are more cost-effective than those that provide a small amount of tax relief to all homeowners, because they can allow significant assistance to the most heavily burdened households at a lower cost overall.” (PMO Jan 2024).

Senator Blessing (R-Colerain Township) has proposed legislation that should be considered by his colleagues. You can read more about this bill here.

At the Hunger NETWORK, we are blessed with many partners who are doing great work to assist people and advocate for change for those returning after incarceration. Here a few partners we encourage you to connect with:

ARCH Reentry

Lutheran Metropolitan Ministries Cleveland

Horizon Prison Initiative

Affordability is defined as 30% of income. As we look at different affordability issues we need housing at all tiers.

Extremely low income (ELI) = 0-30% Area Median Income (AMI)

Very Low Income (VLI)= 31-50% AMI

Low income(LI)= 51-80% AMI

Moderate Income =81-100% AMI

If the median income is $63,000, moderate income housing would be affordable for family making $51,000-$63,000 a year. (30% of their income - $1,275 a month for rent/mortgage and utilities). You can read more here.

Housing should be seen as a continuum. While home ownership should not be seen as the ultimate end for everyone, its one major advantage is that many people in the U.S. can build wealth through home ownership that they cannot build in other ways. While some communities attempt to integrate the below steps, in reality there are many gaps that must be addressed.

• Emergency Shelter - a (hopefully) very temporary living situation. Assessent of housing barriers should be done and a plan developed toward housing stability

• Transitional Housing - A progam that allows a person to live, often up to 2 years. Often, an agency holds your lease.

• Permanent Supportive Housing (PSH) - Long-term housing with supportive services.

• Public housing- Housing that is owned and operated by a local public housing authority.

• Project Based Housing-

• Housing Choice Vouchers- Where eligible individuals are given a voucher to assist in covering rent costs with a private landlord.

• Workforce Housing- Rental housing that is often below market value, but targeted at those earning 60-120% of the area Median income and likely not eligible for housing vouchers

• Market Rate Rental housing- Rental housing that is based on the market.

• Home Ownership - Often entered into through a mortgage that allows residents to be the owners of the property. Often will fix the rate of monthly payment or 15-30 years.