All posts in “News”

A Just & Resilient Recovery: Urbanism on the Ballot

October 30, 2020 / No Comments

Sign up for our newsletter here!

 

Much more is on the ballot on Tuesday than the White House, Congress, and hundreds of State Houses and City Halls. Local ballot measures may unlock billions of dollars in new spending authority, change the powers of local governments, and shape a more just and resilient recovery – or not.

 

We’ve worked with our team of experts and collaborators to highlight more than 50 of these measures across 8 issue areas – it’s #UrbanismOnTheBallot

 

 

Affordable Housing Transit
Open Space Equitable Budgeting
Digital Inclusion Tax Responses to Crisis
Additional Measures

 

 

AFFORDABLE HOUSING
Will cities’ role in housing continue to expand?

 

As growing cities face a housing affordability crisis, voters will weigh in on dedicating additional local funds for affordable housing and expanding and strengthening rent regulations. The majority of these referenda are products of long-running campaigns to increase the role of local governments in addressing affordable housing. These votes will be a good indication of whether voters continue to view affordable housing as a pressing issue – a budget priority. – HR&A Partner Phillip Kash

 

  • Voters in Raleigh, N.C. are deciding on the City’s largest-ever affordable housing bond. Portions of the $80 million raised would be used for public-private partnerships, gap financing, and purchasing land for affordable housing along new transit lines. $50 million in bonds on the ballot in Charlotte could increase the supply of affordable housing in North Carolina’s largest city, too.
  • In Detroit, City government is seeking permission to issue $250 million in bonds to rehab 8,000 homes and demolish an additional 8,000 homes that contribute to blight. HR&A is helping the city develop the programs that would enable Detroiters to access affordable housing and make neighborhood improvements through this program.
  • Californians will consider lifting limitations on local rent controls once again. On the other side of the country, Portland, Maine could limit rent increases to the rate of inflation and restrict short-term-rentals to owner-occupied properties.
  • Coloradans could embrace new taxes to stem the tide of homelessness. In Denver, increasing the sales tax by 0.25% would mean an additional 1,800 units of supportive housing. In Boulder, a $75 annual fee per unit on landlords could mean $1.9 million to provide legal representation to tenants facing eviction.
  • Nonprofits could get a boost in Georgia. Statewide, voters could exempt nonprofits from taxes on properties they are using to build or repair single-family homes for affordable housing. In Atlanta, voters could exempt homes located on community land trusts from $30,000 in property taxes.

 

↑ Back to Top

 

TRANSIT
Will cities build back better with transit?

 

In the face of devastating and disparate impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic, transit investment remains critical to the well-being of our communities. Ballot initiatives across the country seek new funding to invest in diverse mobility options – including rail, bus, walking, and cycling - in support of a just and resilient recovery. In Austin and Portland, equitable access, affordable housing, and anti-displacement measures are incorporated into mobility proposals. And as core suburban areas like Georgia’s Gwinnett County seek to strengthen their position as centers for knowledge economy jobs, they are increasingly finding that high-quality transit connectivity within the metropolitan region is essential to their competitiveness. – HR&A CEO Eric Rothman

 

  • Propositions in the Austin, TX, and Portland, OR metros would fund improved transit connections and diverse mobility options with equity in mind. Austin Prop A, a property tax increase of approximately 4% would fund a $7.1 billion mass transit system and some 27 miles of rail service while earmarking $300 million for anti-displacement measures and affordable housing along the TOD routes. Austin Prop B includes infrastructure like sidewalks, bikeways, and transportation safety projects, and is viewed as a climate change prevention and transportation measure. Portland’s Measure 26-218 would fund ~150 transit projects in 17 regional corridors through proposed projects including light rail, rapid regional bus, and off-street biking and pedestrian improvements.
  • In Gwinnett County, GA, the expansion of the Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority (MARTA) through a 1% sales tax is up for vote. Voters have rejected joining MARTA in the past; this latest proposition promises local control, with County residents sensitive to the idea that funding would be used for MARTA operations elsewhere in the region.
  • In the Bay Area, voters could authorize a measure to increase the sales tax by 1/8 cent to support the operations and expansion of Caltrain. The system risked closure this past spring with the vanishing of its regular ridership.

 

↑ Back to Top

 

OPEN SPACE
Will voters overrule City Hall on parks’ budgets?

 

We have come to rely on parks as never before – for respite, celebration, protest, and emergency response. Simultaneously, as is usual in fiscal crises, parks systems’ budgets have been among the first and most deeply cut. Efforts to restore or increase parks’ budgets include bond measures to acquire land for future parks and build dreamt-of parks. More exciting (if less sexy) are the 10 or so initiatives that will increase funds for the maintenance functions that ensure parks deliver on their promise. (Thanks to the Trust for Public Land’s (TPL) excellent ballot tracker from which we were made aware of many of these measures.) We’re particularly interested in the results of three referenda, which seek to create sources of operating revenue that will make parks more equitable and inclusive, including by reducing user fees, strengthening programs for families, and focusing on career tracks. – HR&A Vice Chairman Candace Damon

 

  • In Rochester, MN, voters are considering whether to raise property taxes for the median homeowner by $33 in order to better maintain the parks system, including by “improv[ing] access to existing parks and recreational facilities for kids and people with disabilities.” The initiative is a product of TPL collaboration with the City’s Parks and Recreation Department.
  • In Portland, OR, the City Council referred a five-year parks and recreation local property tax levy pricier than Rochester’s to the voters. With an annual increase of $151 for the median homeowner (same median home value as in Rochester), the proposed tax increase will restore budget cuts and “center equity and affordable access for all,” including by offering more free programs to low-income households. It has been advanced by Portlanders for Parks and endorsed by a diverse group that includes the Portland Business Alliance, Nike, and a host of groups focused on the concerns of local communities of color.
  • In Collier County, FL, a second round of funding for Conservation Collier, a17-year old program to acquire and maintain land for conservation and recreation, is on the ballot. Proposed to be funded with a property tax levy that will increase taxes on the median home by about $35, 25-35% of funds raised will be dedicated to maintenance costs. Vincent Keeys, president of the local branch of the NAACP, stated, “As this pandemic, … environmental justice, and racial injustice ravage this nation, … we often look to Mother Nature for the cure.” Keeys, who grew up across from Fairmount Park in Philadelphia, noted the importance of reclaiming healthy green spaces for communities of color and low income and applauded Conservation Collier’s past success in equitable investment.

 

↑ Back to Top

 

EQUITABLE BUDGETING
Will voters approve new spending on equity?

 

Budgets are statements of priorities. We’re watching referenda that could unlock $4.7 billion to advance more equitable spending. Three cities – Baltimore, Dallas, and San Francisco – all have bond issuances on their ballots, while Los Angeles County’s referendum would set spending guidelines for existing revenues. All four initiatives would invest in community members who face neighborhood disinvestment and discrimination. As one example, $41 million of the Dallas Independent School District’s bond program would be earmarked for Student and Family Resource Centers for building racial equity, which HR&A and the Child Poverty Action Lab helped conceive. – HR&A President Jeff Hebert

 

  • If Dallas voters approve the largest bond election in Texas history, they will invest $3.7 billion in new and renovated school facilities, $41 million of which for the aforementioned community resource centers with wraparound services.
  • Los Angeles County voters could require that their government spend at least 10% of the general fund on community alternatives to incarceration. This would protect $400 million from being spent on law enforcement or jails, instead guiding it to housing, mental health programs, and social services that could keep people out of the criminal legal system.
  • If two-thirds of San Franciscans sign on to Measure A, they will dedicate $239 million to open space, $207 million to mental health supports, and $41.5 million to improving public streets and plazas.
  • A host of ballot measures for new borrowing in Baltimore could mean $72 million for public buildings and infrastructure, $38 million for school facilities, $38 million for community economic development, and $12 million for affordable housing.

 

↑ Back to Top

 

DIGITAL INCLUSION
Will cities take charge of their broadband future?

 

In a year that has highlighted America’s digital divide, in which 18.4 million households lack broadband internet service, communities across the country are asking voters to help them connect all residents. Some are asking for new powers to override State limits on local sovereignty while others are asking to take matters into their own hands and invest millions of dollars to ensure internet access for all. With ISPs maintaining near monopolies in many cities, these attempts for greater local control are inevitable, and could unlock greater innovation at the local level. – HR&A Managing Partner Danny Fuchs

 

  • The most ambitious effort belongs to Lucas, TX, where voters could approve more than $19 million in public bonds to create a city-run broadband utility that would offer subscription service to local households and businesses. The measure follows a feasibility study that recommended a 108-mile backbone fiber network to connect all residents and businesses within city limits.
  • In Colorado, Denver, Englewood, and Berthoud could join a growing list of 120+ Colorado communities to opt out of a State law that prohibits local governments from providing broadband internet service. While the measures would not automatically establish municipal broadband, voter approval would permit the cities and towns to experiment with public options.
  • As Chicago prepares to spend $50 million to expand broadband access to 100,000 residents, voters will weigh in on the question: should “all the city’s community areas have access to broadband Internet?” – a chance to justify bolder investment still.

 

↑ Back to Top

 

TAX RESPONSES TO CRISIS
In a year of crisis, will taxes provide relief?

 

As states and municipalities recover from a year of unprecedented public health and climate crises, ballot measures seeking to create new tax revenue have emerged as important sources to fund increased expenditures. Most of these initiatives levy new sales, utility, and/or parcel taxes. Many, however, go beyond flat-rate general fund tax increases to create more progressive tax structures that focus on high-value property sales and businesses with disproportionately high executive incomes. These tax increases would generate new revenue to ensure effective crisis response, including economic recovery and future disaster preparedness. – HR&A Partner Paul J. Silvern

 

  • San Francisco residents will consider a host of tax-related measures: restructuring business taxes, doubling the real estate transfer tax for high-value properties, and taxing businesses whose ‘overpaid executives’ earn more than 100 times as much as their median employee in the city.
  • In Los Angeles County, Culver City and Santa Monica are considering increases to property transfer taxes to fund a mix of local services. Culver City’s graduated rate would raise $6 million per year and Santa Monica’s flat rate would raise $3 million per year.
  • Voters across California could modify property tax limitations introduced in 1978, requiring that commercial and industrial properties are reassessed to market value every three years, among other changes. These changes do not affect existing property tax limitations on residential or agricultural properties, however.
  • Arizona’s increased income tax on individuals earning over $250,000 and couples earning over $500,000 would increase funding for public schools, especially teacher salaries. Illinois voters, meanwhile, could repeal their state’s flat income tax, allowing for the introduction of six graduated tax brackets.
  • In wildfire-stricken California, Berkeley and San Diego County voters could authorize parcel taxes to fund fire protection.
  • Oregon and Colorado voters could increase taxes on tobacco. Oregon would focus funding on healthcare programs. Colorado would turn the revenue toward health, housing, and education.

 

↑ Back to Top

 

ADDITIONAL MEASURES
Will systemic change win at the ballot box?

 

Ballot measures often come in waves, as the most urgent issues of the day inspire change and as citizen-led efforts in one jurisdiction spark action in another. More than two dozen local and State initiatives this year would reform policing and address mass incarceration. As the pandemic continues to batter the economy, worker safety nets are on the ballot. And the trend toward cannabis legalization could make its way to four additional states, with direct investment in restorative justice in at least two.

 

  • Justice is on the ballot across the country, as numerous cities and counties, from Oakland to Philadelphia to King County, WA, are weighing reforms to police oversight, policies, and budgets in the wake of George Floyd’s murder at the hands of police in May. California is considering measures to restore voting rights for people on parole for felonies and to end cash bail, while Oklahoma would prevent prior non-violent felony convictions such as drug crimes from factoring into sentencing for people convicted of other non-violent felonies. The Vera Institute offers a deep dive into justice issues on the ballot.
  • Workers could gain or lose rights as the pandemic continues to batter the service sector. In one of the country’s highest profile (and the costliest) referenda, California’s Prop 22 would reclassify drivers for Uber, Lyft, and other gig companies as independent contractors rather than employees, reversing a 2019 state law that extended labor protections to these workers. The gig companies argue workers benefit from the flexibility of independent work; Prop 22 proponents say only employee classification can protect workers’ interests. The voters will decide. Meanwhile, Colorado could become the first state to enact a paid leave policy by referendum, and both Florida and Portland, ME, could join the wave of jurisdictions establishing a $15 minimum wage.
  • Four states could legalize marijuana this year. Arizona has the most progressive measure, with proceeds from a 16% sales tax distributed among community colleges, justice reinvestment, public safety, and infrastructure. Licenses would also favor people from communities impacted by marijuana laws. New Jersey would become the first state in the mid-Atlantic with legal cannabis. South Dakota and Montana round out the list.

↑ Back to Top

Broadband from the Bottom Up: How Community Organizations Can Shape the Broadband Future

October 15, 2020 / No Comments

Written by Danny Fuchs, David Gilford, and Ariel Benjamin
 
Universal high speed internet access is foundational to addressing American inequality, particularly in education, employment, and healthcare. Nearly every effort to address inequality relies in some way on the internet. Yet more than 18 million American households live without a broadband subscription, 13.9 million of them in metro areas. In urban counties, people of color represent 75% of all unconnected residents.
 
The private market will not close this digital divide on its own. Nearly 28 million American households have a single choice of broadband provider; millions more live in duopolies. Government primarily serves as a regulator—recently, an anti-city, anti-competition regulator—with a few programs that subsidize internet service providers’ (ISPs) service of low-income residents.
 
New models of public-private partnership are essential to achieve universal broadband. The public and civic sectors have three principal tools to shape these partnerships:
 

  1. Investing capital directly in building networks, deploying fiber and other infrastructure;
  2. Making real estate assets available to support broadband deployment —especially street poles, which are essential for 5G deployments; and
  3. Aggregating demand for internet service to leverage collective buying power.

 
Given the scale of the required capital investment, complex regulatory framework, and essential nature of street poles to 5G, government will be a part of any comprehensive solution. However, communities themselves need not wait to act. Detroit’s Equitable Internet Initiative and New York City’s NYC Mesh and Silicon Harlem show how neighborhood-governed broadband infrastructure can be deployed to provide faster, cheaper service with better privacy than incumbent ISPs’. These community organizing efforts are essential to a more equitable broadband future. Scaling them presents opportunities to unlock local economic opportunity, prioritize community values in the delivery of services, and begin closing the digital divide. Bringing these efforts to scale will require attention to these lessons of the initial efforts:
 
Aggregating demand changes private partners’ development economics.
 
ISPs invest where they can be assured a reasonable rate of return. In deciding whether to expand to a new neighborhood, an ISP estimates revenue that will accrue through adoption (the rate at which a household subscribes to any internet service) and take rate (the rate at which a subscriber household chooses a particular ISP over the competition’s). This expected revenue is compared to estimated costs: financing the required infrastructure investment, operations and maintenance costs, and the cost of marketing and sales to new customers. When communities pool households or businesses, they are guaranteeing a take rate while reducing customer acquisition costs. This permits ISPs to provide bulk discounts and assurances on performance and other community priorities, like privacy.
 
Aggregating demand can take different shapes, such as bulk purchasing internet service at negotiated rates or guaranteeing a threshold of monthly revenue and/or underwriting the service provided to low-income subscribers. Aggregated demand can help ISPs finance critical network investments in areas where broadband infrastructure is poor. In areas where affordability is a challenge, aggregated demand can connect households across larger geographies.
 
Collective purchasing enables organizations to obtain better services and pricing.
 
From school districts to church groups, community development corporations to unions, organizations can approach ISPs to evaluate options, negotiate rates, and reduce overall costs. As with home heating oil buying clubs and community group-led solar installations, group purchasing programs have achieved cost reductions, while empowering members to make educated decisions on topics from price volatility to sustainability. Among these early successes, we number:
 

  • The New York City Department of Education’s (DOE) recent purchase of 300,000 internet-enabled iPads to enable remote learning. In April, DOE reported paying T-Mobile $10 per month per device for unlimited data, 70% less than the typical retail price for this service.
  • Chicago Connected’s issuance of a Request for Proposals to connect low-income households with the best-possible internet service package, including minimum speed thresholds. This public-private partnership that aims to close Chicago’s digital divide, intends to guarantee payment to the ISPs, reducing risk while unlocking a new customer segment for the provider.
  • South Bend, Indiana’s non-profit business accelerator, enFocus’ development of nCloud, a shared IT purchasing program for non-profits to access the local dark fiber network, ChoiceLight. Aggregating the high-speed internet needs of over 20 organizations allowed each to receive connectivity for less than 10% of a commercial provider’s rates.
  • At a smaller (and less effective, less equitable) scale, condo boards in some urban areas have negotiated with incumbent carriers to wire buildings for fiber-to-the-home by committing that a specific percentage of residents sign up for service.

 
Scaling this approach will require cross-sector collaboration and specific expertise.
 
While such successes should be celebrated, they have not yet achieved scale. Organizations that have large membership or stakeholder bases, from universities to unions, are best positioned to create larger-scale programs. Yet delivering aggregated demand to ISP partners requires skillsets and expertise outside most of these organizations’ core competencies: few are well-positioned to surmount administrative and regulatory hurdles, nor to deliver on customer service responsibilities. Helping to build this capacity—whether in-house to the nonprofit or contracted out—will require the involvement and partnership of philanthropy, technology firms, marketing experts, and entrepreneurs in bespoke combinations—unless and until national models emerge. Nonprofits with large memberships that successfully grapple with this challenge will not only provide new benefits to their members, but also secure a source of unrestricted operating income. One approach that seems to have significant promise is for these organizations to bundle their aggregated demand into a municipally led public-private partnership, enhancing what local governments can offer private partners.
 
Nonprofit-led demand aggregation presents an opportunity to help local governments build capacity.
 
On its own, aggregated demand will not close the digital divide. It will not expand broadband networks to serve every neighborhood, ensure public ownership of fiber infrastructure, fund robust digital literacy programs, or unlock the street poles critical for the delivery of 5G. While it may help enable, it cannot force capital investment in a new network. Local government has the power to coordinate these levers, although it may not have the resources. Helping local nonprofits develop demand aggregation programs is a starting point, but equally important is understanding what else is needed, specifically infrastructure investment and leveraging real estate assets.
 
Developing that understanding is critical: local and regional governments must position themselves for an evolving landscape and forthcoming federal investments. Broadband is poised to be a central piece of the next big federal infrastructure bill, already passed in the House of Representatives, and any future comprehensive federal COVID-19 recovery package is likely to include quick-spend broadband infrastructure support. In addition to federal money, broadband infrastructure will likely draw private capital to fund deployment. Telecom industry analysts are predicting rising demand for fixed broadband as people seek better performing internet at home, and private investors began the year with a record $1.5 trillion in unspent cash and are eager to invest. Communities with ready-to-go broadband plans, as well as the administrative capacity and the political support to advance them, will be ahead of their peers to take advantage of these substantial future sources of funding.

Danny Fuchs is Managing Partner of HR&A’s New York City office, where David Gilford is a Principal and Ariel Benjamin is a Director. Together they led the master planning team for New York City’s Internet Master Plan and advise private and public sector clients globally on urban technology and innovation. 

Jeff Hebert Announced as President

October 7, 2020 / No Comments

HR&A Advisors is excited to announce that our Partner, Jeff Hebert, has been appointed as the Company’s President and elected to our Board of Directors. “Our Partners and I are thrilled to have Jeff on our executive leadership as President,” said HR&A’s CEO Eric Rothman. “Jeff’s client work and experience with urban revitalization, economic development, urban infrastructure, climate resilience, inclusive growth and equity are central to the recovery and future success of American cities.”
 
Jeff will join Board Chair John Alschuler, Vice Chair Candace Damon and CEO Eric Rothman in the leadership of the firm and will retain a client practice. Jeff’s promotion advances the firm’s broader strategic management changes and leadership transition announced at the end of last year.
 
Since joining the firm Jeff has led real estate market analysis, economic analysis, climate resilience, and strategic planning projects for clients across the country and has most recently been a leader of the firm’s A Just and Resilient Recovery initiative and Covid-19 economic recovery consulting. For the past year he has served on the firm’s Management Committee.
 

I am honored to join the leadership of HR&A. In my new role as President, I will have greater opportunity to shape the future of the firm while continuing the work of meeting the challenges that cities face. I thank my partners, and especially John, Candace, and Eric, for this exciting opportunity.
 
– Jeff Hebert

 
The CEO and President will work together to ensure that HR&A remains an industry-leading consulting firm that provides strategic advisory services for clients in the public, private, and non-profit sectors, focused on real estate, economic development, and public policy. HR&A will also be at the forefront of providing solutions to the complex and interconnected challenges cities continue to face around race, class, climate change, inclusive economic growth, crumbling infrastructure, technological innovations, and housing affordability. As President, Jeff will ensure that the firm has the talent and business infrastructure to provide outstanding and innovative service to our clients.
 
“Jeff is an exceptionally talented professional and represents a new generation of leadership at HR&A,” said HR&A Chair John Alschuler. “As he becomes President and joins our Board, I look forward to him building on HR&A’s mission to improve economic opportunity, quality of life, and the built environment.”
 
Prior to joining HR&A, Jeff served Mayor Mitch Landrieu and the City of New Orleans in many capacities, including as the First Deputy Mayor & Chief Administrative Officer, Chief Resilience Officer, Executive Director of the New Orleans Redevelopment Authority, and the Mayor’s blight czar. In these roles he managed the day to day operations of City Hall, tackled the crippling blight issues plaguing New Orleans, and refocused over $250M in place-based development investments. He began his career working on the redevelopment of Downtown Brooklyn.
 
In addition to his role as President of HR&A, Jeff is the Co-Chair of FUSE Corps, and serves on the advisory boards of the ULI Center for Sustainability and Economic Performance and the Reinvestment Fund.
 
HR&A is a leading, national consulting firm providing services in real estate, economic development, and public policy. HR&A has over 100 employees with experience as public servants, non-profit managers, city planners, economists, and real estate developers based in our offices in New York, Dallas, Los Angeles, Raleigh and Washington, DC.

To rebound from the pandemic, Manhattan has to rethink retail real estate

October 5, 2020 / No Comments

“There is no going back to the Manhattan retail landscape of 10 years ago or even 10 months ago. We must rethink how we use ground-floor spaces and focus those efforts on the avenues—or some subset of them—to create a critical mass of activities and experiences. Without doing so, we risk losing the vitality of Manhattan altogether.”
 
HR&A Principal Sulin Carling penned an op-ed in Crain’s New York on the dire straits of Manhattan retail and why business improvement districts, civic organizations and government should be re-thinking storefronts as we emerge from the pandemic.
 
Read the full op-ed here.

Wake County Offers a Model for Eviction Prevention as Renters Face a National Crisis

October 1, 2020 / No Comments

Written by Phillip Kash and Sarah Kirk
 
The economic impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic have exacerbated pre-existing housing affordability challenges and will lead to an eviction crisis on a scale never before seen. In the face of this crisis, Wake County, North Carolina, recently announced the House Wake! COVID-19 Eviction Prevention Program following an in-depth study of housing needs by HR&A. The program offers a model for other state and local governments seeking to keep low- and moderate-income renters in their homes and to stretch limited public dollars.
 
Loss of income is the leading cause of housing insecurity for low- and moderate-income households, and the rise in housing insecurity tied to COVID-related job loss, reduced hours, and illness will be acute. Thousands of families will find themselves at risk of eviction or foreclosure and homelessness, as well as in need of expanded access to government services.
 
Local governments are largely on their own as they respond to this need. Most states temporarily suspended evictions and utility shut-offs in the spring to keep families in their homes, and the CARES Act put in place supplemental unemployment insurance to affected households. As is well-known, however, most of these federal and state protections have exhausted their funds or lapsed or shortly will. Attempts to pass additional federal recovery measures have stalled.
 
A notable exception to this litany of “too little for not long enough” is the CARES Act’s Coronavirus Relief Fund (CRF), an atypically flexible grant program that has awarded $150 billion to state and local governments to cover a wide range of costs incurred due to the pandemic as long as they were not previously budgeted for. Wake County, which encompasses the Raleigh metro area and is home to 390,000 households (including four staff members in HR&A’s downtown Raleigh office), received $194 million in CRF funds.
 
Wake County retained HR&A to estimate the scale of need for emergency housing assistance due to COVID-19, understand which residents faced the greatest impacts, and advise on a strategy to keep families housed. The County chose to focus on renters because of the weakness of State eviction protections for renters, stronger protections for owners at both the State and federal level, and the relative lack of assets among renters vis-a-vis owners at all income levels.
 
More than a third of Wake County households rent, and most of them have incomes below 80% of area median income (AMI) (62% of renter households, or 88,000 of 141,000). Eleven percent of renters were unemployed as we began the assessment stage of the project in June, principally as a function of COVID-19. We defined the households at greatest risk of eviction as being those who had become unemployed and whose income had been 80% of AMI or less – approximately 11,000 households or 7.5% of all renters.
 
The House Wake! Eviction Prevention Program – funded with $17 million of CRF allocations – and its sister program elements are designed to prioritize households at greatest risk of eviction, provide multiple safety nets to keep tenants in their home, and serve the most households by sharing the economic burden among the County, tenants, and landlords. The three-step intervention program consists of:
 

  1. Eviction prevention through financial assistance to tenants and landlords to cover rent shortfalls resulting from a loss of income. The program will pay a portion of tenants’ rent from March through December, in exchange for landlords agreeing to forgive the remainder, discount rent January through March 2021, and forego eviction.

    2.  

  2. Eviction mediation services consisting of pro bono legal support for tenants who are unable to reach an agreement with their landlord. Through a partnership with Legal Aid of North Carolina, this program will aim to find solutions to stabilize tenant obligations and prevent eviction.

    3.  

  3. Relocation assistance, including transitional services and relocation support, to residents whose housing could not be stabilized through interventions 1 or 2.

 
Through these three steps, the County estimates that the Eviction Prevention Program will help keep more than 3,000 households in their homes, while facilitating access to other housing protection for additional households in need and testing the effectiveness of the program model to support future state or local funding if needed. Local and state governments nationally can learn from this model, including several key features that increase its potential to limit evictions over the long term:
 

  • It provides timely assistance to those in greatest need. The Eviction Prevention Program is targeted to low- and moderate-income renters, those residents most vulnerable to eviction in the short term.

    •  

     

  • It provides multiple points of intervention to reach more residents. Wake County renters interested in the Eviction Prevention Program may be unable to participate if their landlords are unwilling to participate, but the County can serve all income-qualified renters facing eviction through the other tiers of intervention, either to prevent eviction through mediation or to quickly re-home evicted households. The flowchart above illustrates the path of assistance for at-risk renters.
  • It incentivizes landlords to share in the cost of rental assistance. The goal of this requirement is not to be punitive or create burdens for landlords, but rather to distribute the costs among renters, landlords, and taxpayers. In exchange for forgiving a share of rent, landlords can receive compensation for lost back rent they otherwise could not recoup, and the program can reach more households by reducing the cost to serve each individual household. The table below provides an illustration of how the burden-sharing works form a landlord’s point of view, contrasting landlord recovery under the Eviction Prevention Program with recovery under an eviction scenario. The Eviction Prevention Program makes burden-sharing requirements explicit; the Eviction Mediation Program does not have set requirements but will aim to reach equitable settlements between landlords and renters, which may require concessions on the part of the landlord to prevent evictions.

 

 

  • It provides enhanced legal services to tenants. North Carolina’s eviction laws overwhelmingly favor the landlord, and renters have few rights and limited recourse to slow or prevent eviction. By layering funding for rental assistance with funding for legal services and mediation outside of court, the Eviction Prevention Program helps alter the balance of power between landlords and residents, slow the eviction process, and find alternative settlements.

Eviction prevention measures instituted at the local level must be tailored to match local needs, government resources, and market realities. These features will be critical to sustaining and maximizing the benefits of local efforts and, collectively, local efforts will be critical to forestalling a national housing crisis.

Work from Home Will Fade. Work from Anywhere Will Thrive.

September 21, 2020 / No Comments

Written by Danny Fuchs, Kate Wittels, Jessica Jiang, and Adam Tanaka
 
At this point, much has been written about the extent to which COVID-19 has disrupted commercial real estate occupancy. The share of remote workers nationwide surged from 13% to nearly 50% in a matter of weeks this spring. Six months later, office districts from Los Angeles to New York remain largely empty. Even as infection rates wane, evidence is mounting that the pandemic is accelerating a shift toward greater flexibility in talent’s choice of workplace. The white-collar Work from Home experiment of mid-2020 is beginning to end. In its wake, a new Work from Anywhere economy will rise.
 
HR&A’s own physical footprint has been evolving toward a Work from Anywhere model for some time. Six years ago, the firm maintained open plan offices in desirable mixed-use districts in New York City, Washington DC, and Los Angeles. By the start of 2020, employee preferences, a need to service a broader client base, and technological advancements had produced a more dispersed web of work environments. HR&Aers were working not only in our three “traditional” offices, but also in a retail storefront office in Dallas, coworking facilities in Raleigh and Chicago, and home offices in Atlanta and Vermont, as well as transient workplaces in numerous airports, hotels, and client offices across the country. This diffusion of work environments has been reinforced by the pandemic, as employees have moved closer to family while schools are closed, temporarily relocated to try a new city, or bought homes (and home offices) outside of the urban core but with the ability to commute to the office regularly. Two weeks ago, HR&A reopened its New York office at the request of staff who will use the space on a voluntary basis. We are proceeding with a phased approach to reopening our other offices as public health conditions improve and staff seek alternatives to working from home.
 
What exactly do we mean by “the Work from Anywhere economy?”
 
We define the Work from Anywhere economy as one in which most office workers have workplace choices. In the Work from Anywhere economy, the central office remains essential, but the choice to work at least part time from home, a coworking space, or new workplaces fashioned out of retail storefronts, hotels, and residential complexes is one that is real. Work from Anywhere does not represent the death of the office, but rather the rise of the diversified workplace.
 
The difference between Work from Home and Work from Anywhere is primarily the real estate footprint that employers purchase. Prior to the pandemic, Gensler’s 2019 Workplace Survey reported that 45% of US workers had a choice of workspaces within their offices; workplaces that offered variety and choice in work settings had a higher effectiveness and experience score. The change happening now is that the choice of whether to do heads-down work in the office lounge or at an assigned desk has expanded to include a home office, a co-working space or business lounge, a hotel on the way to a client meeting, or a coffee shop down the street.
 
In a series of articles, beginning with this one, we will explore the impacts this transition will have on people, companies, communities, and cities.
 
We begin by looking at the supply and demand characteristics of the transition. Thirty years ago, an explosion of coffee shops provided initial supply. Following the Great Recession, businesses of all sizes and industries explored the potential of coworking spaces and flex office models like Convene. By late 2019, the largest tenants in London, New York, and Chicago were coworking entities. Innovative office developers like Hines, Hudson Pacific Properties, Jamestown, RXR, and Tishman Speyer began to compete in “amenities wars” within office developments; four fifths of employers perceived amenities as “integral” to the employee experience. Now Marriott is rebranding some of its most popular travel destinations as glorified business centers – a tack being taken by others from DC to LA. The co-living company Common recently launched a competition seeking proposals from cities and developers for remote work hubs. We expect more such experiments to emerge.
 
On the demand side, employee interest in the Work from Anywhere model appears high: homeowners are building mini office buildings in their backyards, and stocks for home improvement companies are soaring. Employer demand is more complicated. Take the tech sector – already prone to remote work. Late last month, Pinterest paid a $90M penalty to renege on a long-term lease commitment in San Francisco in favor of a “more distributed workforce.” Meanwhile, Netflix CEO Reed Hastings disparaged remote work as a “pure negative” and insisted that the company would bring workers back into the office as soon as a vaccine was available.
 
Likewise, while 56% of hiring managers surveyed by Upwork said the shift to remote work had gone better than expected, J.P. Morgan Chase reported that productivity slipped among those working from home. J.P. Morgan and others have observed that certain aspects of white-collar work have proved challenging to adapt to a virtual setting, including onboarding, training, socializing, and unstructured collaboration. Employer demand will not be uniform; it will be informed by internal culture, worker-management relationships, the extent of supply-side changes, and successes and failures across industries, all of which will take time to manifest.
 
Nonetheless, the disruption in the geography of work is already undermining the tax base of cities, upending mobility patterns, and transforming demand for all manner of urban real estate. In New York City, nearly 10% of the city’s 2019 tax revenue was derived from what are now mostly empty office buildings; as of mid-September, weekday subway ridership is down by more than 70% compared to last year. As we explored in an earlier analysis, not all cities are the same: knowledge hubs like Washington DC, where 53% of workers are able to work remotely, will face very different challenges in the Work from Anywhere economy than tourism hotspots like New Orleans, where less than 40% of workers can telework.
 
In the coming months, HR&A, in partnership with you, our readers and collaborators, will examine the following questions:
 

  • How should office owners and developers respond to the Work from Anywhere economy? What services and amenities should landlords provide to stay competitive? What data will be needed to communicate the value of the physical office to tenants? How can residential, retail, and hospitality developers best position themselves to compete?
  • Which cities will benefit, and which are at risk of being left behind? What will dispersed work do to municipal finances, housing markets, commuting patterns, and neighborhood services? What uses will shrink and which will grow? How will the street experience change? What investments in physical or digital infrastructure should cities make? What are the implications for central city and suburban labor markets?
  • How can we continue to support a Just and Resilient Recovery in a Work from Anywhere economy? How will the erosion of the traditional office model impact the most vulnerable, including low-income households, communities of color, and undocumented immigrants? How should the labor force be reskilled to adapt – notably including the estimated 22 million workers in office support functions? How might redistributions of wealth within regions aid efforts to reduce inequality rather than continue to exacerbate it?

    •  
    The promise of cities is anchored in density and diversity of people and experiences. Over the coming months, we look forward to exploring how urbanists in government, private industry, and nonprofits can work together to ensure our cities continue to thrive in a Work from Anywhere economy. If you have ideas or experiences to share, please get in touch with Kate Wittels and Danny Fuchs to carry on the conversation.

Can Urban Manufacturing Make Cities More Resilient?

September 1, 2020 / No Comments

Written by Sulin Carling, with Carl Hooks
Special thanks to Kevin Clyne and Meredith Nissenbaum

 
Manufacturing in the Time of COVID
 
The U.S. is dependent on goods that come from all corners of the world. As a result, this spring American cities were left scrambling when demand for critical medical supplies surged beyond what supply chains could handle. In response, local manufacturers innovated, in varying degrees of coordination with local and state government, to manufacture face shields, disposable gowns, hand sanitizer, nasal swabs, and more. Many of these efforts required expensive retooling, hasty matchmaking between manufacturers, and extensive searches for suppliers. “Success” has been relatively inefficient, costly, and difficult to scale. Even after many months, shortages of critical supplies remain.
 
With the increasing threat of climate disasters, supply chain disruptions are expected to become more frequent. There has been much discussion of potential limitations on the United States’ ability to scale production of a vaccine within the country.
 
Could bringing manufacturing back into our cities increase national resiliency while creating new economic opportunities for low-income communities of color disproportionately impacted by the pandemic? We believe the answer is yes, though urban manufacturing is and likely will remain smaller and more specialized than sub- and ex-urban manufacturing. It would be fruitful to think about regional manufacturing ecosystems that could reinforce supply chains and create economic opportunity. A deeper look at the manufacturing landscape in the New York City metro region demonstrates why.
 
Economics of Urban Manufacturing: New York City Region Case Study
 
Of the 459,000 manufacturing jobs located in the New York metro, 84% are located outside New York City. Of all subregions, Inner New Jersey – comprising the eight New Jersey counties closest to the city – contains the largest share of these jobs: 163,600 (36%). (Source: Emsi, NYC Department of City Planning.)
 
The average Inner New Jersey manufacturer employs twice as many people as the average New York City manufacturer (31 vs. 14) and pays less than half the rent on a per-square-foot basis ($10/SF vs. $21/SF). (Source: Emsi, CoStar.) While locating in a city offers proximity to talent and consumers, operations in aging buildings are often less efficient and more costly than in the suburbs.
 
As manufacturers scale, the benefits of affordable, modern facilities found in the suburbs outweigh the advantages of a central location. Inner New Jersey manufacturers range from mass producers of low-cost commodities to scaled-up advanced manufacturing firms. Manufacturers in New York City generally produce high-margin, small-batch, niche products, including food, woodworking, fashion, and high-tech products. Large “legacy” manufacturers that purchased land when prices were much lower are outliers.
 
Some have argued that NYC should embrace land use policies and incentives to counteract market forces that make NYC unaffordable for lower-margin manufacturers that offer good-paying, low-barrier jobs. The City should maintain land use policies that retain land for industrial uses, experiment with land use tools that facilitate industrial mixed-use space where feasible, and support provision of below-market space in City-owned properties like the Brooklyn Army Terminal or by non-profits like the Greenpoint Manufacturing and Design Center. On the other hand, the cost of more broadly counterbalancing market forces – through sweeping land use restrictions in a city with limited land area or broadly subsidizing the private market – is so great, that our limited tax dollars are better served by training workers for the types of more specialized manufacturing jobs locating in cities today and reinforcing regional transit connections to jobs outside the city.
 
In this market context, specialized urban manufacturers are likely to lead in creation of new technologies, while, in an emergency, large suburban factories can execute at scale. Further, with lower operating costs, the latter are better positioned to produce simple goods such as gowns and face masks at a lower cost.
 
The chart below illustrates the relationship between size, rent, and location for eight manufacturing firms:
 


Note: Businesses are representative of large and/or growing manufacturing sectors in the NYC metro. Estimated rents are based on asking rents in business’ buildings within the past five years or 2020 submarket rents. Analysis does not include “legacy” NYC businesses that may own properties or have older, lower-cost leases. (Sources: Costar, news reports.)
 
Leveraging Manufacturing for Urban Resilience and Economic Recovery

COVID gives us the opportunity to rethink how we can leverage regional manufacturing capability to increase both resiliency and economic opportunity. Given what we know about how market forces shape manufacturing in urban and suburban locations, the public sector should:
 

  • Support high-tech manufacturing that benefits from locating in cities and can innovate rapidly in a crisis. Innovation happens in dense, mixed-use environments powered by collaboration across sectors and companies, which will only become more important for post-COVID recovery. The Brooklyn Navy Yard’s Newlab partnered with 10XBeta, a product design and engineering firm, to design a cost-effective ventilator in just one month, leveraging a network of innovators and investment by the City of New York. Municipalities should leverage (or acquire) public properties to offer affordable space to select manufacturers, and should support innovation districts such as Cortex in St. Louis, the South Main Innovation District in Houston, and Tech Square in Atlanta, to encourage co-location of large and small innovative manufacturing businesses in flexible spaces with business supports such as incubators and technical assistance. The public sector can facilitate these initiatives, in partnership with universities and private developers, through provision of land, capital investment, tax increment financing, funds for programming, seed funding for businesses, and/or land use approvals.
  • Establish a regional manufacturing network that can be mobilized during a crisis based on a regional market assessment. Cities, counties, regional planning groups, and states should collaborate to identify the manufacturing assets most crucial in a crisis. They should conduct a regional inventory of manufacturers and suppliers to understand their capabilities, equipment, and space, and analyze market dynamics that drive where manufacturers choose to locate. This can inform policies that maintain and grow manufacturing capabilities, including land use policies that retain land for industrial uses, provision of affordable industrial space, economic incentives, and creation of a manufacturing business registry. Done on a regional scale, this can leverage smaller, innovative companies in urban areas and suburban manufacturers with greater production capacity. In a crisis, the public sector can call upon this network, facilitate new partnerships, and support retooling.
  • Fund workforce development training for low-income urban and suburban communities to address a legacy of inequitable access to manufacturing and tech jobs. Despite a national nostalgia for manufacturing jobs as a post-War route to the middle class, these opportunities were largely reserved for White Americans. Black manufacturing workers were relegated to the most menial and dangerous tasks, often as temp workers. Today, manufacturing in New York and Inner New Jersey remains majority White – although with a significant Hispanic presence. Our NYC Tech Opportunity Gap Study, conducted with Cognizant and Civic Hall, showed that tech, an increasingly important component of manufacturing, has an abysmal diversity record. Any public sector support for manufacturing firms should be paired with investments in workforce development organizations that are uniquely positioned to support post-COVID economic recovery in low-income communities of color, as well as incentives to rethink hiring practices to address underrepresentation.
  • Map regional supply chains to create redundancies, step in to redirect existing supplies when needed, and coordinate procurement in an emergency. Manufacturing locally is not the only tool to prevent supply shortages in a crisis; reinforcing supply chains is also key. Jurisdictions within a region should chart sources of essential goods such as medicine and food and address vulnerabilities, such as overreliance on a single transportation route or supplier. The public sector can also create regional partnerships to coordinate purchasing supplies rather than compete for them.

 
We cannot know what supply shortages the next crisis might bring. But as climate change accelerates and vulnerable populations become increasingly exposed, we must embrace a multi-pronged approach that supports regional manufacturing capabilities – with the associated economic benefits – while also shoring up our supply chains to make us all more resilient.

Listening to Institutional Leaders

August 18, 2020 / No Comments

HR&A staff members Adam Tanaka and Amelia Taylor-Hochberg spoke with four of our collaborators about how they’re leading their organizations through the COVID-19 crisis and toward A Just & Resilient Recovery. Read our interviews here:

 
University-Led Development with Jonathon Bates, University of Utah Future of Community Health with Reann Gibson, Conservation Law Foundation
Future of Innovation Districts with Adam Klein, American Underground Future of Volunteer Organizations with Josh Lockwood, American Red Cross
   
 

How Will the COVID-19 Crisis Shape the Future of University Real Estate Development?

Q&A with Jonathon Bates, Executive Director of Real Estate, University of Utah

 
For almost a decade, Jonathon Bates has served as the Executive Director of Real Estate for the University of Utah in Salt Lake City, where he also is the Director of the University’s Research Park. In response to COVID-19, Bates has had to adapt the Park’s master planning process to the uncertainties of higher education’s day-to-day activities, while continually reimagining how the Park can be an engine of creativity and growth for both the university and the city more broadly. HR&A spoke with Bates about how the Park fosters innovation and his approach to weathering the pandemic.
 
You have spent the past few years shepherding a major master planning process for the University of Utah’s Research Park. How has the pandemic impacted the project? What will change, and what will stay the same?
 
The pandemic obviously significantly impacted our planning approach. We have moved to an entirely online format for both stakeholder engagement and our steering committee work. It has also strengthened our resolve to create spaces and programming that increase that “bumpability” factor between researchers, students, faculty, staff, and our industry partners that is so critical to innovation.
 
Ultimately, we have supported the commercialization process for the university and incubated companies for decades, and the pandemic has not changed the master plan’s focus on ensuring we continue to grow and contribute to Utah’s economic vitality.
 
The University’s location at the base of the Wasatch Mountains makes it an ideal place for socially distant outdoor activities. Has the University pursued any deliberate strategies to increase access to outdoor spaces and get people out of doors?
 
Our setting against the foothills of the Wasatch Mountains is unique, giving us an opportunity to make ecological design our calling card. From the beginning of our planning process, we knew that our geographic location was a huge opportunity. We wanted to better plan and position our streets and walkways to make them more inviting places to conduct business beyond the brick and mortar office.
 
To that end, we are developing the concept of a green spine traversing the research park, with attractive outdoor spaces and an active transportation corridor. We plan to daylight an outdoor natural spring, and reinforce and expand our recently established pop-up venue for food and transportation — we call it “the heart of the park.” Individuals can convene over food and access e-bikes, scooters, university shuttles, and the local bus network.
 
How has the pandemic impacted the Research Park’s current operations? Are there any aspects of distance learning or remote work that you think will become more ingrained moving forward?
 
The percentage of individuals remotely working is still extremely high. Programming to build the research park community and the “bumpability” has gone 100% online, through video conferencing and online social events. But there is an aspect of community you do not find in remote work, so I think we will settle on a hybrid model where people can still physically connect on a campus from time to time.
 
Like bars, music venues, and other gathering spaces, higher education institutions are deeply impacted by social distancing constraints. What measures is the University of Utah putting in place, both in the short- and medium-term, to adjust the campus’ indoor and outdoor spaces to the new normal?
 
In the short term, the University made the decision to go 100% online for our academic processes. For the fall, students will have the option to take classes in person, and we are establishing social distancing guidelines in all spaces: on-campus housing, food venues, outdoors, and of course, athletic venues. Flexibility is key here — we need several different plans to adjust to as the pandemic continues to evolve.
 
How has the pandemic impacted the university’s economic development priorities and its partnerships with state and local government?
 
Thus far, Utah has weathered the economic storm of COVID resiliently, thanks to the breadth and diversity of industries here — in particular, the life sciences. That industry is anchored by the University of Utah and our integrated medical system, continuing to foster the incucation and spinning out of companies. With Salt Lake City Mayor Erin Mendenhall, we have been discussing how we can further foster the life sciences industry through an innovation corridor extending from our research park through the core business district.
 
How do you think the COVID-19 pandemic will impact the practice of university real estate development going forward? What will universities invest more in, or less in, when it comes to physical space?
 
We have been looking for ways to better monetize our real estate assets, through creative public-private partnerships, ground leases, and housing development. We’re also interested in future landbank opportunities for academic and healthcare expansion.
 
From a physical standpoint, we are going to have to continue to be flexible in our designs so we can pivot pedagogy and administration as the pandemic evolves. At the same time, we need to foster that critical cultural environment on campus that encourages interaction and leverages the outdoors. Ultimately I think the future is bright, with higher education institutions as placemaking and economic development leaders.
 
Back to top

How Will the COVID-19 Crisis Shape the Future of Community Health?

Q&A with Reann Gibson, Senior Research Fellow, Conservation Law Foundation

 
The Conservation Law Foundation (CLF), an advocacy group based in Boston, works to protect New England’s environment through legal advocacy and social science research. One of its major initiatives is the Healthy Neighborhood Study (HNS), a longitudinal study of the relationship between urban development and health in nine Massachusetts communities, each selected for their common struggles to achieve greater public health and economic growth, in the context of explosive regional development pressures. Using a methodology known as Participatory Action Research (PAR), CLF partners with over 30 resident-researchers from these communities to develop the Study’s research questions, collect data and determine how it should be analyzed — all in service of informing future planning decisions in these communities.
 
HR&A spoke with Reann Gibson, CLF’s Senior Research Fellow and manager of the study, about COVID-19’s amplification of environmental and racial justice issues, and the importance of elevating community voice through data.
 
How has the pandemic impacted CLF’s preexisting environmental advocacy initiatives?
 
COVID-19 has not meaningfully changed our work to build healthier communities, but it has highlighted its importance. We’ve always believed that racial justice is at the heart of environmental justice, and we know that after decades of racist housing and environmental policies, Black and brown communities are being hit very hard. These residents are also on the front lines of the climate impacts that disproportionately affect them and compound the impacts of COVID-19. We’ve had to adapt to remote work, but luckily our current research phase for the HNS is focused on preparing our analysis, rather than gathering data in the field.
 
What have you been hearing from the HNS’s community organizations about how they are coping with the day-to-day impacts of COVID-19?
 
The nine communities in the HNS work with us because they are likely to experience pressures from transit-oriented development. Those communities have also experienced historical disinvestment and are vulnerable on many fronts. With COVID, city leaders and community partners are better aligned than ever to protect people’s safety and help them get what they need to stay safe. There have been lots of great partnerships with community organizations helping organize donations and distribute funds to people in need.
 
One of the first things CLF did was write an open letter using HNS data to highlight some of the vulnerabilities faced by these communities and highlight the supports that are most needed. The HNS tells a unique story from the residents’ perspectives about healthy communities, so that when they are looking for resources, they have data to call on.
 
How have the HNS’s Participatory Action Research (PAR) techniques changed to adapt to social distancing measures?
 
Mainstream narratives lack the language to talk about long-term residents’ experiences in a gentrifying neighborhood. We are creating that narrative. We would not be able to do that without PAR, where we source data directly from residents, and they help develop the questions. CLF’s role is to make sure the survey meets the community’s needs for the data. Otherwise, we risk just replicating the mainstream media’s narrative on gentrification and housing, which focuses on the number of new white residents or the number of new developments, or percent AMI, or percent affordable housing.
 
Post-pandemic, which policies and programs do you most hope the HNS’s data will influence?
 
Ownership over our environmental changes matters for health. The community knew that five years ago. Data is important, but we need to be mindful of how it’s produced, and how it can reflect that sense of ownership. Who gets to decide what happens in a community should be sourced from the community living there now, and based on their direct needs.
 
Many of our community partners hope that the HNS’s data will influence decision making on the local and regional scale and impact community control, housing, and investment. We hope the key decision makers will understand the risks of excluding people and make changes that center community voice in these processes.
 
The protests following the murder of George Floyd have prompted a nationwide conversation about systemic racism, including framing it as a public health crisis. Do you think this will change public health’s role in planning?
 
Absolutely. We are on that path. We need neighborhoods that are healthier and more affordable. We also need better data and tools to understand what is going on in communities. We hope this moment will help us see as a society how critical it is to prioritize health and equity in all the investments we make in communities. The reckoning on systemic racism’s role in our nation’s history is long overdue. We hope that this moment is finally a catalyst for change.
 
Back to top

How Will the COVID-19 Crisis Shape the Future of Innovation Districts?

Q&A with Adam Klein, Chief Strategist, American Underground

 
Adam Klein is the Chief Strategist for American Underground, “the startup hub of the South.” Based in Durham, North Carolina, AU’s approach to fostering startups is rooted in diversifying economic opportunity and connecting entrepreneurs with the rich local resources afforded by the nearby Research Triangle Park and multiple universities. While AU’s day-to-day operations have certainly adjusted in response to COVID-19, Klein is confident that dense, in-person collaboration will remain integral to a successful startup economy, with platforms like AU playing a pivotal role.
 
What digital engagement strategies have you used to keep your members engaged during the pandemic? Do you think you will retain any of these methods even as social distancing measures are relaxed?
 
We launched a community-wide Slack channel about three weeks before COVID hit, as a means of organizing community conversations. We have launched more community-wide Zoom sessions that are practical, expert-driven talks. These have enabled us to engage speakers beyond the confines of the Triangle that we usually would not be able to get, like a mental health expert based in London, and the former head of Google for Startups. We plan to have those continue, post-COVID.
 
How are you approaching the use of your physical space as Durham starts to reopen?
 
Because some of our businesses are essential, we have not fully closed the space. But as more of our members return, our goal is for people to be able to get to their office without touching a door handle. We have invested in anti-microbial door handles, copper covers, hand sanitizers, and chemical wipes. We installed foot pulls on all the doors, a small, easy hack that one of our members came up with. We have pulled a lot of chairs out of the conference room so that social distancing is standard, and invested more in videoconferencing tech.
 
We have also worked with our landlords to bring in more fresh air throughout the day and more frequently replace the HVAC filters. Finally, we are asking our members to commit to daily temperature checks, to stay at home if they are not feeling well, and not to bring any guests, at least for now.
 
Have any of your members pivoted to developing new or modified products and services in response to the pandemic?
 
Most of our companies are enterprise software companies so they have not really been impacted. One of our software development shops, CrossComm, developed an app that helps Duke Health’s ventilators to be split and shared. They also created Three Good, an app that asks people to spend a few minutes every morning saying what they are grateful for, as a way to start their day in a different frame of mind. Another really neat company is MindSumo. They identify talent by posing large challenges to students. They partnered with the National Security Innovation Network to launch a contact tracing challenge at Fort Bragg.
 
American Underground has long been a leader in promoting diversity and inclusion in the innovation economy. Given the current national focus on the persistence of systemic racism, what lessons or best practices can you share for expanding opportunity in underserved communities?
 
The work of anti-racism has to be core to an organization. It also needs to start with a long time horizon, knowing that as a society we did not get here overnight. The work of inclusion and equity are part of our DNA at American Underground, and as a White-led organization now five to six years into our work, we are only now starting to hit our stride in terms of our impact in the Black innovation community.
 
Too often, innovation organizations go to the Stanfords and the MITs, and don’t make the right connections with historically Black colleges and universities (HBCUs) and other strong Black-led institutions doing powerful work.
 
Historically, Durham was home to “Black Wall Street” and known as the “Capital of the Black Middle Class.” How has that legacy shaped the city’s entrepreneurial ecosystem and what can other cities learn from Durham’s experiences?
 
It has shaped the city overall. The Black community has held political power in Durham for a very long time and continues to be a community power broker. We have a strong Black middle class and Black institutions, and so for people who are living in Durham, there is a desire to continue to carry that baton.
 
As a White man, one of my jobs is to ask how AU can play a supporting role. There is an awakening in the venture community that their investment thesis, that has historically centered on White men, is fraught with problems. AU has played an intermediary role, cultivating Black entrepreneurs and connecting them with VC institutions, so that we see economic growth in the Black community. Our work is about seeing wealth grow through broad ownership, not just in one community. For those interested in an example of this work, check out our Google for Startups Black Founder Exchange program happening this fall.
 
Back to top

How Will the COVID-19 Crisis Shape the Future of Volunteer Organizations?

Q&A with Josh Lockwood, Division Vice President, Northeast US, American Red Cross

 
Volunteer organizations play a central role in disaster response efforts, distributing supplies, coordinating services, and providing comfort to those most in need. The COVID-19 pandemic has disrupted conventional volunteerism, due to the constraints of social distancing and the exceptional duration and geographic dispersal of the crisis.
 
To learn more about how volunteer organizations are responding to the pandemic, we spoke to Josh Lockwood, Division Vice President of the Northeast United States for the American Red Cross. A seasoned not-for-profit executive, Lockwood oversees the Red Cross’ recovery efforts following disasters of all kinds, from hurricanes and housefires to mass shootings and train derailments. Prior to his role at the Red Cross, Lockwood was CEO of Habitat for Humanity in New York City, where he led the organization’s efforts to build affordable housing throughout the five boroughs.
 
How have the Red Cross’ day-to-day activities shifted since the onset of the crisis?
 
We have launched over 200 new programs across the country in response to COVID-19, including giving supplies to healthcare workers, feeding underserved communities, providing mental health support to grieving families, and doing wellness checks at nursing homes and veterans hospitals, powered by a trained volunteer base.
 
At the same time, the Red Cross is continuing its other initiatives. We collect 40% of the nation’s blood, so that hospitals and surgeries have access to transfusions. At the start of the crisis, nine thousand blood drives were cancelled, threatening the collapse of the US healthcare system. We had to do everything we could to make sure governors and mayors could allow us to collect blood in places that were still safe and convince the public that it was a noble thing to do, especially during a pandemic.
 
We also respond to 60,000 disasters a year, mostly home and apartment fires. During larger events such as hurricanes, we have deployed respondents directly. We have also transitioned other programs to operate virtually.
 
It has been a very intense period. We have lost members of our staff and volunteer corps to COVID-19, and those are incredibly tough moments that bring home the severity of what we are all dealing with.
 
Relative to other disasters, the pandemic is a long-term crisis rather than a one-off event. How has the duration of the crisis affected the Red Cross’ planning for the coming months and years?
 
Usually we are deployed for two to three very intense weeks after crises, but this is different. As such, we are taking a very different approach in terms of self-care and counseling for our staff. We have brought in psychologists to help us balance work and life, and we insert mission moments into our calls to remind everyone of why we are doing our work. We are also enforcing paid time off to ensure people can unplug.
 
Financially, we are very fortunate to have a very savvy business leader as our national CEO, Gail McGovern. We are better positioned than most not-for-profits to weather a drop in donations, which gives all of us great psychological comfort.
 
How has the Red Cross coordinated with state and local authorities in New York to deliver essential supplies and other assistance?
 
We are always well connected. When state or local authorities open an Emergency Operations Center, the Red Cross will always have a seat there. We also have a special role within federal emergency management written into our charter. We provide regular updates to mayors, federal officials, and so forth, to make sure they are aware of what we are doing.
 
Crises often contribute to a surge in mutual aid. Given the constraints of social distancing, how has volunteerism played out during the pandemic? And with lockdowns easing, how do you see volunteerism evolving in the longer-term?
 
The Red Cross has hundreds of thousands of trained volunteers nationally. Even without a pandemic, it is always a challenge to keep those volunteers engaged. So right now, with fewer services being delivered in the field, accommodating volunteers is much more difficult. That said, as a larger not-for-profit, we do have a virtual platform, and we have case workers and disaster responders who can do a lot of terrific work virtually. Until the vaccine comes, our focus is on engagement rather than recruitment.
 
As a disaster truly unique in living memory, what do you think the longer-term impact of the pandemic will be on the mission and scope of volunteer organizations overall?
 
I am not at all worried about volunteerism in America. There is a very generous and entrepreneurial spirit here. I do think we have learned how to perform virtually, so it is likely we will be more reliant on those processes going forward. We also need to think about maximizing the health of populations who may have preexisting conditions. Things like social distancing, wearing masks, and washing hands, will become second nature in our deployments and in our volunteer-led work. When the vaccine comes, I think there will be a rush of people racing to be out in the field again.
 
Back to top

Three Regional Strategies Essential for a Just and Resilient Recovery

August 10, 2020 / No Comments

Written by Kate Collignon with Adam Tanaka
 
Recovery Will Be Regional
The impacts of COVID-19, coupled with the national outcry for racial justice, have the potential to transform urban landscapes socially, physically, and economically. For this to be a positive transformation, we need regional coordination. Fortunately, notes NYC Dept. of City Planning Director of Regional Planning Carolyn Grossman Meagher, “During and immediately after a crisis, government tends to be more open to innovation. We are now seeing more coordination than ever before… Success … breeds trust: the more we see regional actors working together and creating positive local outcomes, the more local leaders will … accept these … partnerships.”
 
Regional collaboration has long been important for leaders seeking to align housing, employment, and transportation systems to ensure workers have physical and equitable access to jobs. Emergency response to COVID-19 has spurred new regional coordination around the purchase and distribution of personal protective equipment, supply chain support to ensure food security, and safe reopening. Regional coordination must now expand for recovery. In a June conversation hosted by HR&A, the New York Metro Regional Planning Network’s 23 member jurisdictions and the Regional Planning Association discussed regional coordination to support a strong recovery. As communities not only in the New York area but also nationwide look beyond stabilization, just and resilient regional planning must:
 

  1. Plan for remote work
  2. Meet changing housing needs
  3. Sustain regional transit & TOD systems

      4.  
      Plan for Remote Work
      I am a New Yorker. As COVID pummeled New York City, I watched colleagues, friends, and neighbors who were able to work remotely relocate to suburbs or to other regions altogether, where they could be closer to family at less cost – most temporarily, some permanently. Their moment may reflect only a pandemic-driven acceleration of the natural churn that has always moved population among cities, suburbs and regions; on average 200,000 residents leave NYC every year, 2/3 for other regions, making way for new arrivals. Or it may indicate that remote work is loosening the threads that tied workers to downtown offices and the high cost markets that surround them. Should the latter prove true, offices are likely to continue to be important for building corporate culture, and employers will likely continue to seek locations that are physically accessible by large populations of skilled workers. We won’t be able to distinguish specter from fact for some time. But we do know that cities and their surrounding suburbs have a shared interest in retaining residents and their tax-paying employers within the region. This shared interest is as strong in relatively affordable regions as in places like NYC; cities and counties around Tulsa, Savannah, and Topeka are already partnering to attract remote workers and bolster their talent base.
       
      Collaboration between cities and suburbs to ensure regions can meet telework needs can help stem a loss of – or attract new — population, jobs and fiscal resources. Data analyses of trends in office markets, commuting patterns, and population flows can be generated and shared regionally. Pairing this data with information about best practices – for liberalizing zoning that allows for live-work situations to enable properties and neighborhoods to adapt to shifts in use demand over time, for adapting suburbs to meet new daytime service needs of teleworkers, for mitigating affordable housing pressures – can arm regions for collective recovery. To ensure residents don’t get left behind amid the shift to remote work, jurisdictions also need to assess telework capacity among their residents, ensure broadband access, and identify other approaches to bridging the digital divide.
       
      Meet Changing Housing Needs
      The COVID shutdown is affecting residents’ ability to meet rent and mortgage obligations. Although the economic downturn may slow rent and cost appreciation in some markets, a June HR&A analysis found that in New Haven, for example, financial pressures will put one in 10 households at risk of losing housing over the next six months. Simultaneously, relocation by more affluent households with the ability to work remotely may increase affordability pressures in the places to which they move, particularly as many are relocating to areas that already struggle with a constrained housing supply. While new multifamily and affordable housing could relieve these pressures, opponents of development in the suburbs may now argue that density brings contagion, even though it is increasingly clear that viral transmission is associated with overcrowding, institutional living, and other factors rather than density.
       
      In the face of these risks, planners and policy makers are calling for immediate housing supports for at-risk residents and collaborating across jurisdictional boundaries to deliver them as Revere and Chelsea, MA did in creating a “quarantine hotel” to assist individuals living in overcrowded housing. In Connecticut, long-standing efforts by advocates to secure fair share housing strategies that extend regionally are receiving renewed attention. For such efforts to succeed, planners need to be armed with data articulations that show the relationship between health outcomes and density in anticipation of contemporary expressions of systemic racism that weaponize COVID concerns to fight multifamily housing.
       
      Sustain Regional Transit and TOD Systems
      Public transit and transit-oriented development are threatened by COVID. The Chicago Transit Authority is currently losing an estimated $1M per day in fare box revenues, while incurring increased cleaning costs, jeopardizing this anchor of the mixed-income neighborhoods in its path, even as these communities’ ability to bear housing costs becomes increasingly tenuous, and shelter-in-place and social distancing requirements threaten their main streets. Here in New York – where I am privileged to be able to work remotely, and my personal ridership has fallen from ~14 rides/week to 0 since March — our Metropolitan Transportation Authority is facing a $16B budget shortfall over the next four years. Weakened transit systems will jeopardize regional employment, increase adverse environmental impacts from cars, diminish opportunities for multifamily and affordable housing, make walkable retail districts and employment centers that strengthen social and community connections in suburban locations less viable, and put in peril workers who cannot telework and rely on public transit.
       
      To meet these challenges, communities are rallying to save transit, uniting regional resources and voices to advocate for federal funding, while looking for ways to save costs without harming service. Notes Bay Area Council Senior Vice President Gwen Litvak, “With 26 individual transit operators within the [San Francisco] Bay Area, many reliant on farebox and sales tax revenue to fund operations and thus in a precarious position, there may be opportunities” to reduce overhead – a conversation now taking place among stakeholders convened by the Metropolitan Transportation Commission.
       
      Start with Data
      Participants in the New York Metro Regional Planning Network forum identified both long-term opportunities for collective strategy development and short-term opportunities to collaborate around data and best practice sharing to maximize resources and impact. Realizing the short-term opportunities is a prerequisite for deeper engagement. Regional networks that recognize this fact are:
       

      • For remote work, facilitating conversations with major employers around return to work expectations to inform transit planning, and modeling how remote work may change travel behavior and demand, as the [Boston] Metropolitan Area Planning Council’s Deputy Director Rebecca Davis reports.
      • For housing, aggregating stark data on residential segregation to support campaigns like Desegregate Connecticut, which is capitalizing on the pandemic’s spotlight on disparities – and the Trump administration’s recent rollback of fair housing laws – to expand housing supply and diversity.
      • For transit and TOD systems, providing frameworks for targeting recovery resources that recognize potential equity impact, like the Chicago Metropolitan Agency for Planning’s open-source Community Cohort Evaluation Tool, which enables users to analyze projects and investments through an equity lens, and is being leveraged by partners to distribute CARES Act and transportation dollars equitably.

      By starting with data and best practice sharing, cities, counties, states, employers, foundations, and other partners can help fuel economic recovery that makes our regions more just and more resilient.

Funding to Purchase Naturally Occurring Affordable Housing

August 3, 2020 / No Comments

It’s vital that we work to preserve properties that rent at rates that are broadly affordable. Here’s a closer look at three funds that can help preserve naturally occurring affordable housing.
 
HR&A Senior Analyst Daniel Warwick and National Housing Trust Public Engagement and Policy Associate Moha Thakur co-authored a piece in Shelterforce calling for the preservation of naturally occurring affordable housing (NOAH) units. In the piece they explore three funds and how each can be structured.
 
Read the full column here.
Learn more about HR&A’s affordable housing work here.