Homes Act, Mr. Walz, MN Twins

The Homes Act, Friday Night Lights with Mr. Walz, MN Twins Implosion, Constitutional Amendment ENRTF

In continuing to highlight the “Homes Act” introduced by Sen. Tina Smith (MN) and Rep. Ocasio Cortez one of the significant hurdles it addresses is repealing the Faircloth Amendment. "What’s the Faircloth Amendment” Below is a pretty good primer. But for the “Too Long Didn’t Read" crowd- the Faircloth Amendment prevents any new public housing from being constructed since 1998, meaning in the United States we can have about 1.2-1.3 million units of public housing.

Background

The Faircloth Amendment, part of the Quality Housing and Work Responsibility Act of 1998, modified the Housing Act of 1937. This act authorized federal assistance for states and housing authorities to provide low-income housing. The Faircloth Amendment specifically prohibits any net increase in public housing units. Under this amendment, the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) cannot use the Public Housing Capital Fund or Public Housing Operating Fund to construct or operate new units if doing so would exceed the number of units in place as of October 1, 1999. Essentially, it caps the number of units any public housing authority (PHA) can manage, effectively halting new public housing construction. This limitation creates an artificial barrier, hindering policymakers from addressing the growing housing and homelessness crisis by building much-needed affordable housing.

Public housing is the oldest and, until recently, the largest housing subsidy program in the United States. Currently, there are about 1.1 million public housing units managed by over 3,000 local PHAs, serving approximately 2.2 million residents. It's important to note that public housing is distinct from other housing subsidy programs; it consists of units owned by HUD and administered locally by PHAs.

Impact of the Faircloth Amendment Today

Housing authorities are now bound by “Faircloth Limits,” which restrict the number of units eligible for federal funding. Since the amendment's enactment, these authorities have been unable to increase their public housing stock beyond what was allowed in 1999. While some new buildings have been constructed since then, they are mostly “replacement units” meant to compensate for recently demolished or decommissioned public housing, leaving many tenants displaced.

Over the past two decades, rent costs have surged while incomes have stagnated. Since 2001, the median inflation-adjusted rent has risen by 13%, while the median inflation-adjusted income for renters has only increased by 0.5%. This growing challenge is compounded by a $70 billion backlog in maintenance and repair funding for existing public housing.

By HUD’s latest counts, there are now 227,000 fewer public housing units than in 1999—units that could be rebuilt without violating the Faircloth limits. Despite having the legal capacity to build new units, housing authorities have constructed very few new homes in recent years due to a lack of available funding. Although HUD's mixed-finance program can assist, development remains costly, and PHAs often rely on outside financing, such as Low-Income Housing Tax Credits (LIHTC) and traditional debt.

Public housing plays a vital role in the rental market, providing stable and affordable homes for over 2 million low-income Americans, including older adults, individuals with disabilities, and families with young children. The Faircloth Amendment’s restrictions have left many without adequate housing.

Repeal the Faircloth Amendment

The private market alone cannot adequately meet the need for affordable, safe, decent, and accessible housing. Repealing the Faircloth Amendment would enable the construction of more public housing units, particularly in markets where it’s difficult for voucher holders to find suitable options. There is a pressing need for deeply subsidized housing units.

HUD has begun to explore ways to finance new Faircloth units through the Rental Assistance Demonstration (RAD), but outright repealing the Faircloth Amendment would empower PHAs to go beyond existing limits and address the urgent need for affordable housing.

Repealing the Faircloth Amendment would not only lift restrictions that have limited access to affordable housing for over two decades, but it would also empower communities, tenants, and PHAs to envision a future where more public housing fosters permanent affordability. Thoughtful planning can integrate public housing into communities, providing residents with access to jobs, resources, and public amenities. However, this vision can only be realized once the Faircloth Amendment is repealed.

Friday Night Lights with Mr. Walz

This past Friday I traveled back home to Mankato to watch the Mankato West Scarlets take on the Mankato East Cougars for the “Jug” game- a cross-town rivalry where the winner of the game gets the “jug” for a year. It has been pretty lopsided in favor of my alma mater with West winning the last 19 years- a streak dating back to me being a student. It was great to visit with Mr. Walz and watch him experience an hour or so of normalcy during the campaign. Here is a photo of what it is like to be running for Vice President of the United States (exhausting!)

Mr. Walz will be on the “Smartless” podcast this coming Monday, as well as the “Daily Show” and “The View”. Pretty surreal to see your high school teacher on various forms on the national stage. And still just so dang proud of him.

The MN Twins

This Twins season ended in perhaps the most disappointing season I have experienced as a fan, this team held so much promise, and it was a fun summer, with the Rally Sausage, Jose Miranda and his hit streak, our 13-game winning streak where it felt like the Twins would never lose again, what a disappointing end. The good news is; hopefully, the Pohlads can sell the team to a more invested ownership group willing to invest when the window to win is open.

Constitutional Amendment MN Ballot

I’m an avid outdoorsman and conservationist and one of the issues Minnesota voters will get to choose is renewing the Minnesota Environment Natural Resource Trust Fund. A little history on the Minnesota Environment Natural Resource Trust Fund (ENRTF). In 1988, 77% of voters approved the creation of the ENRTF. This is one of the few issues that has remained bipartisan and is supported by conservation and hunting and angling groups, however, it is opposed by The Center of the American Experiment (an extreme right-wing “think tank”). An easy choice on who to side with.

Its purpose is to provide a long-term, stable funding source for activities that protect and enhance our environment and natural resources that benefit current and future generations. Since 1991 the ENRTF has invested more than $1 billion to protect and restore water, land, and habitat throughout our state and combat invasive species.  This has resulted in 1,600 projects to improve prairies, lakes, and forests.

This revenue originates from a combination of lottery funds and investment income from those proceeds, 40% of the net proceeds from the Minnesota Lottery are deposited into the ENRTF annually. Meaning, that these dollars do not come at the expense of your local property, sales tax, or state income tax dollars, only dollars raised if you choose to participate in the Minnesota State Lottery go towards the ENRTF. Each year the Legislative Citizen Commission on Minnesota Resources sends out millions of dollars from the ENRTF to eligible projects around the state.

Here is what the ballot language looks like on your ballot:

Environment and Natural Resources Trust Fund Renewal

Shall the Minnesota Constitution be amended to protect drinking water sources and the water quality of lakes, rivers, and streams; conserve wildlife habitat and natural areas; improve air quality; and expand access to parks and trails by extending the transfer of proceeds from the state-operated lottery to the environment and natural resources trust fund, and to dedicate the proceeds for these purposes?

A reminder that since this is a Constitutional amendment a “yes” vote is needed for support, a “no” vote or leaving this portion of your ballot blank also results in a “no” vote. A “yes” vote means that the current 40% net proceeds from the Minnesota Lottery would continue to be deposited and invested into the ENRTF for the next 25 years. A “yes” vote also increases the annual withdrawal from the ENRTF from 5.5% to 7% (due to growing principal) and appropriates the additional 1.5% of the ENRTF to a New Community Grant Program. I am voting yes and encourage you to do so also.