The 1995 estimated population is 5,125,000 with an estimated growth rate of approximately 4 percent. The minority population was 8.73 percent in 1990. The State's metropolitan counties, as a group, are growing at twice the rate of the non-metropolitan counties. In 1990, 67.4 percent of the population resided in metropolitan areas. Although, the State's population growth rate is below the national average, it exceeds that of most of its neighbor states.
The age composition of the State's population changed significantly between 1980 and 1990. Four age groups gained population, while three age groups lost population. The prominent changes were:
With respect to geographic location, growth was concentrated in the smaller metropolitan counties, which as a group grew at the rate of 6.94 percent (not including the Milwaukee metropolitan area). Non-metropolitan counties experienced minimal growth at the average rate of 1.97 percent, while the four Milwaukee metropolitan counties grew at the rate of 2.51 percent. There were 19 counties that had negative growth rates in the last decade, with the vast majority of them being non-metropolitan counties.
Only two of the metropolitan counties decreased in population: Milwaukee County, with a slight decrease of 0.59 percent; and Douglas County, with a significant decrease of 5.99 percent. Overall, the State's population is getting older. From 1980 to 1990, the State's median age level increased from 29.4 years to 32.9 years. In addition, persons over 65 years of age increased their ratio to the total population by 1.32 percentage points.
The total minority population residing in the state in 1990 consisted of 427,092 persons, representing 8.7 percent of the state's population. Of the 427,092 minority persons residing in Wisconsin, more than one-half were African-Americans. Persons of Hispanic origin comprised the next largest minority group, followed by Asians or Pacific Islanders. Most of Wisconsin's minority residents, 90 percent in 1990, live in metropolitan areas of the state. African-Americans comprised the largest minority group in metropolitan areas, while American Indians comprised the largest minority group in non-metropolitan areas. From 1980 to 1990, the overall minority population throughout the state grew by 42.3 percent.
With respect to racial and ethnic groups, the fastest-growing segments of the population are non-Hispanic Asian and Pacific Islanders, with an average growth rate of 144.06 percent. The second-fastest growing group in the state is the Hispanic population (48 percent), closely followed by the Black, Non-Hispanic population (33.4 percent). Yet, in spite of the remarkable growth rates, these groups represent a very small segment of the total population.
In Wisconsin, ethnic and minority populations are heavily concentrated in certain geographic areas. Counties with a high percentage of black population (over 4 percent) account for 91.9 percent of black households within the state; counties with a high percentage of Asian and Pacific Islander population (over 1.5 percent) make up 63.3 percent of Asian and Pacific Islander households within the state; counties with a high percentage of Native Americans (over 8.6 percent) make up 27.7 percent of the Native American households within the state; and counties with a high percentage of Hispanic population (over 4.3 percent) make up 63.7 percent of the Hispanic households within Wisconsin.
With respect to relative family incomes, more than 50 percent of the total number of households in the state have incomes below the 95 percent Median Family Income (MFI) limit (adjusted for family size). The prevalence of lower-income households is more pronounced in the rural counties, with more than 52 percent of the total number of households having incomes below 95 percent of MFI. Conversely, metropolitan counties show a lower concentration of lower-income households also more than 43 percent of the rural households have incomes below 80 percent of MFI, with several rural counties showing an even larger concentration.
Low incomes are more prevalent among minority groups with black, non-Hispanic persons being the worst off (70.10 percent of households are low-income), followed by Native Americans (65.31 percent of households are low income).
Poverty has been on the rise, as well. In 1980, 8.7 percent of the state's population lived in poverty, compared with 10.70 percent in 1990. The increase in poverty was most dramatic in the "other metro" counties (as a group), with a rise from 7.69 percent in 1980 to 9.38 percent in 1990. However, Milwaukee metropolitan counties, as a group, still have the highest percentage of poverty.
In June and July of 1994, the Department of Housing (DOH) and the Department of Development (DOD) held five roundtable discussions throughout Wisconsin at which representatives of local governments, non-profit organizations, housing authorities, local development corporations, regional planning commissions, community development consultants and other interested citizen groups were requested to participate. During the writing of the Plan, the State shared a draft with interested parties, including those participating in the roundtables, and several ad hoc committees from the Wisconsin Associations of Housing Authorities (WAHA), the Wisconsin Community Action Program Association (WISCAP), and the Wisconsin Realtors Association (WRA). DOH and DOD also provided all Plan information available to communities and other interested parties upon request.
Advance notices of the roundtable discussions were promoted via DOH's newsletter (which reaches over 600 persons with an interest in housing), DOD's CDBG mailing list numbering in the thousands, news releases, and through more informal means, such as person-to- person notice at meetings. DOH and DOD also actively solicited public input to the Plan via its housing newsletter, news releases, and by highlighting the Plan in speeches made by DOH and DOD staff members throughout the comprehensive planning process. On June 10, 1994, DOH and DOD sent more than 2,200 notices to affordable housing providers and economic development officials announcing the commencement of roundtable public hearings concerning the development of the 1995 Plan. The roundtables and public hearing dates and locations for the 1995 Plan were:
In addition, DOH and DOD, in cooperation with the UW Extension, provided for an electronic discussion, entitled Housing and Development Funding, through the Extension Teleconference Network (ETN) on October 28, 1994.
The official public examination and comment period for the draft Plan was scheduled January 13 to February 13, 1995, with notification of the Plan and summary published in the legal section of the Milwaukee Sentinel on January 13, 1995. In addition, the draft Plan was available during this comment period at public libraries in Madison, Milwaukee, Racine, La Crosse, Appleton, Green Bay, Wausau, Eau Claire, Richland Center, Platteville, River Falls, Rice Lake, Superior, Rhinelander and Marinette. The State received five written comments; these are available for public inspection, and appropriate comments have been incorporated into the Plan.
The composition of the state's housing stock has been changing in recent years. Although the conventional single-family home is still the most prevalent type of housing within the state, the popularity of multifamily housing has been increasing. Almost 40 percent of all units produced since 1978 were multifamily units.
In order to alleviate overcrowding, Wisconsin will require 2,216,859 housing units (this includes year-round and vacation homes) by 1996, based on projected household increases. This requires the addition of 161, 085 housing units to the state's housing stock between 1990 and 1996.
In 1990, it was estimated that 41.6 percent of all housing units in the state were built prior to 1949; 13.1 percent were built between 1950 and 1959; 14.2 percent were built between 1960 and 1969; 20.9 percent were built between 1970 and March 1980; and 8.0 percent were built from March 1980 to January 1990. Thus, it is evident that more than one-half of the state's housing stock was built prior to 1960.
From 1980 to 1990, the number of households in Wisconsin increased from 1,652,354 to 1,822,118. This represents an increase of 10.3 percent, compared to a population growth of 4.0 percent. Between 1970 and 1980, the household growth rate was 24.3 percent, compared to a population increase of 6.5 percent.
According to HUD, an overall available vacancy rate of 3.0 percent (1.5 percent for the owned portion of a housing stock and 5.0 percent for the rented portion) is required to allow for an adequate housing choice among consumers. The overall available vacancy rate for Wisconsin is 4.75 percent for rentals and 1.14 percent for owner occupants.
According to the Census Bureau, the median market value of single-family homes in Wisconsin in 1970 was $17,300. In 1980, the median market value of single-family homes stood at an estimated $48,600. This represents a significant increase of 180.9 percent. By 1990, the median market value of single-family homes was $62,500. This represents a modest increase of 29 percent, significantly less than the 53 percent rise in the Consumer Price Index for all goods during the same period.
In terms of geographic distribution, 36.96 percent of the housing units in Wisconsin are located in rural counties, 27.34 percent in the Milwaukee metropolitan counties, and 34.69 percent in the "other metro" counties. It is evident that metropolitan counties house a much larger share of the population than their share of housing stock. This increased pressure on the urban housing markets also is reflected in the vacancy rates.
Despite the state's relative economic health, there are still many households in the extremely-low and very-low income range who need housing assistance. In addition, many other households in the low-income range have great difficulty finding adequate housing within their means and that accommodates their needs. Because of the limited income of these households, their choice of housing is restricted to the low end of the housing market -- old and, in many cases, deteriorated housing units.
Renters as a group, in all geographic areas, tend to have considerably more housing problems than owners. As expected, the extremely-low income renters are the ones primarily affected. Among both the renter and the owner population, housing problems are more prevalent among non-elderly households. In terms of a comparison between the renter and owner groups, housing problems seem to be more or less equally distributed in the rural counties (slightly higher incidence among owners) and the "other metro" counties (slightly higher incidence among renters). In the "Milwaukee metro" area, though, housing problems fall primarily on renter households, with percentages as high as 94.81 percent (large related-renter households).
Housing costs seem to be the primary course of concern for all income groups, with physical deficiencies and overcrowding being of secondary importance. The only exception is the large related-renter household group, which suffers both from housing cost problems and overcrowded conditions.
According to the Census, in 1990 there were 403,553 very -low income households in Wisconsin (22.12 percent of total households). Of these, 195,533 households (48.45 percent) had incomes below 30 percent of MFI. Extremely low-income households are the group primarily affected by housing costs. The incidence of housing problems is higher among renters than it is among owners. The majority (57.78 percent of the total) of extremely-low income households are renters. Housing cost problems are even more severe among the large related-household population (86.26 percent with a housing cost problem). Elderly households in general are better off than non-elderly ones in both the renter and owner categories. Among the elderly population, owners seem to have a more severe housing cost burden.
Extremely-low income households have a particularly high incidence of housing problems in the "other metro" counties. Once again, non-elderly households are worse off than elderly ones, and the same holds true for renters versus owners.
In 1990, there were 337,036 households with incomes between 50 percent and 80 percent of MFI in Wisconsin (18.48 percent of total rental households). Of these, 24.64 percent had a housing cost problem. Surprisingly, elderly renter households were the ones most severely affected by housing costs, with 41.92 percent of them paying more than 30 percent of their income for rent, followed by non-elderly owners. More than 17 percent of Wisconsin owner-households and more than 36 percent of rental-households pay more than 30 percent of their income for housing.
The percentage of minority rental households with any type of housing problem is 59.3 percent, compared to 37.9 percent of all rental households throughout the state. The percent of extremely-low income (0-30 percent) minority owner households with housing problems is nearly twice (10.0 percent) the percent of the state as a whole (5.5 percent). Of the owner households, extremely low-income Black non-Hispanic persons have a disproportionately high (11.4 percent) incidence of housing problems.
Of the state's total occupied housing units, 66 percent are owner occupied and 33 percent are renter occupied. The White non-Hispanic owner occupancy rate is 69 percent (1,175,396 units), and the rental occupancy rate is 31 percent (525,926). Minority occupied units have a larger rate of renting, compared with ownership. Of all minority occupied units, the owner occupancy rate is 35.1 percent (39,928), and the rental occupancy rate is 65 percent (80,868).
Of all occupied housing, both Native American Indian (2.0 percent) and Asian or Pacific Islander (3.9 percent) households have a higher percentage of units that lack complete plumbing facilities, compared with other ethnic/racial groups.
The number of homeless persons in Wisconsin has shown annual increases. A current estimate of the total number of homeless persons in the state is 27,000, not including persons at-risk of homelessness, such as patients newly discharged from a mental or penal institution. In addition, many adults without their own housing are not officially counted as homeless because they temporarily live with friends or relatives out of economic necessity.
In 1993, the 24 shelter programs funded by the State Shelter Subsidy Grant Program (SSSG) provided an estimated 314,000 shelter nights for homeless persons, and domestic abuse shelters funded by DHSS provided 108,687 shelter nights (one night of shelter for one person). An estimated 24,650 individuals were served. The average length of stay was 12.48 nights; however, the shelter stay averages range across agencies from one night to 33 nights. State shelter programs estimated they would provide more than 340,000 nights of shelter in 1994.
The relatively small increase understates the growing number of homeless persons since many existing shelters have reached capacity. The number of persons turned away in 1993 increased significantly and data from the first two quarters of 1994 indicates a substantial increase in persons turned away, especially in the family shelters.
Although shelter and service programs continue to expand, there are many unmet needs. Many shelters turn away several individuals or families for each individual or family they are able to serve. The demographics of the homeless population continue to show an increasing number of families in need. In 1989, half of the shelter users were men, one fourth were women, and one fourth were children. In 1993, 35 percent of shelter users were men, 32 percent were women, and 33 percent were children. Additional demographic data on the shelter homeless population shows the following racial/ethnic background: 49.5 percent African American; 35.3 percent White; 6.9 percent Hispanic; 5 percent Native American Indian; and 1 percent Asian. Eighty three percent of the population was homeless less than 6 months, and 61 percent had been homeless less than 1 month. This demographic data is collected on a monthly basis; each shelter program receiving funds from the SSSG program provides data on all persons sheltered on the second Thursday of each month.
Data collected from the monthly shelter reports indicates the leading causes for the current homeless episode are low or no income, family violence and eviction. The 1990 Census data shows more than 50 percent of all rental households pay more than 30 percent of their income for shelter and 16 percent pay more than 50 percent of their income for shelter. Among large family rental households, 55 percent pay more than 30 percent of their income for shelter. Census data also shows that number of families living in overcrowded conditions, and also possibly paying more than 50 percent of their income for housing, translates into an increasing at-risk population. At the same time, costs for rental housing increases, and benefit levels from AFDC and General Assistance (GA) are not increasing, and wages for service-sector employment remain stagnant.
These factors plus the consistent increase in the number of homeless persons over the past several years leads us to the conclusion that the homeless population in Wisconsin has not yet peaked.
One of the principal barriers identified by the public are excessive state and federal regulations surrounding governmental housing programs. The regulations have one of two negative results: They force local communities to spend thousands of dollars or hundreds of hours to prepare an application; or the local community simply refuses to apply for funds from particular programs.
Another barrier to developing affordable housing may be the governmental statutes that regulate the declaration of Reinvestment areas, also known as Target Areas, or Areas of Chronic Distress. Housing development in these areas is subject to preference under state and federal homeownership and rental development programs. It has been said that many of these areas are poorly defined, or that communities avoid using the designation process because it is too cumbersome. DOH will review this process and will recommend changes if it is found to be a barrier.
Wisconsin's equal housing laws surpass those of many other states in providing protection for all citizens. The state is responsible for ensuring that those laws are enforced, and that citizens are aware of and able to access their rights under those laws. The state encourages fair housing practices via statutes, program rules and operations, and it promotes the education of all Wisconsin citizens on their rights and responsibilities as a homeowner or tenant. Fair housing laws that are enforced locally and at the state level by the Department of Industry, Labor, and Human Relations (DILHR), Equal Rights Division will not only be adhered to, but also promoted as a means of providing equal housing opportunity to all of Wisconsin's residents.
DILHR is currently under contract with the Milwaukee Metropolitan Fair Housing Council. The contract is designed to enhance the services provided directly by DILHR's Equal Rights Division staff. The Division retains full responsibility for:
Lead-based paint is a prevalent problem in Wisconsin. According to DHSS, Division of Health and the Wisconsin Realtors Association: 75 percent of the housing units in the State have lead-based paint. The 1990 Census estimates that there are 797,619 units that are occupied by extremely-low to low-income households. Therefore, it can be estimated that a least 598,214 units contain lead-based paint hazards.
In Wisconsin, there are more than 440,000 children under the age of seven -- the age group most vulnerable to lead hazards. In the year ending July 1, 1994, 50,985 children were tested for lead poisoning and 9,619 were found with elevated levels of lead in their blood (10 micrograms/deciliter ug/dl or more). Of these children, 2,135 were identified with a blood level of 20 ug /dl. Less than one half of these children (1,022) lived in units where the lead hazards causing their exposure have been addressed. The majority of dwelling units where lead-poisoned children live are not repaired under the current system of service delivery and regulatory enforcement.
Lead-based paint in Wisconsin homes is not just a concern for urban areas, according to the latest statistics on Wisconsin Housing Structures. In one-third of rural Wisconsin counties, at least 70 percent of homes more than 10 years old contain lead-based paint.
Percent Distribution of Homes containing Lead Paint
(based on housing older than 10 years)
Number of Counties
in Each Range Percentage of Homes Containing Lead Paint
<60% 60-90% >70%
Milwaukee Metro 1 2 1
(4 counties total) (25%) (50%) (25%)
Other Metro 1 9 5
(15 counties total) (7%) (63%) (30%)
Rural 7 28 18
(53 counties) (13%) (53%) (34%)
All Wisconsin 9 39 24
Counties (72 total) (13%) (54%) (24%)
An important need is to upgrade community infrastructure. Many of the state's communities have limited resources that prevent or hinder the upgrading and replacement of infrastructure that is undersized and/or dilapidated. The infrastructure, including water and sewer, sidewalks, street, curb, gutter and community facilities is widely needed and the costs of improvements impose an excessive burden.
Economic development is identified as widely needed because it responds to a variety of community needs. Business expansion creates jobs, increases the local tax base, encourages other business development including service industries, and reduces the costs of unemployment. Economic development helps provide a response to the housing needs of a community's population since it contributes to providing the economic means necessary for people to provide for themselves.
Although statistics point to generally low unemployment, there remains numerous pockets of high unemployment in the state. The CDBG program, along with the utilization of other state and federal resources, will continue to provide financing needed to communities and businesses for start-up or expansion purposes.
The State envisions focusing its efforts on providing for affordable housing needs through the preservation of existing housing stock and the production of new units. Also, the provision of housing for the homeless persons with special need, including support services, will be addressed.
The upgrading of municipal infrastructure and to alleviate the high cost of doing so is a community development priority. Also, promoting economic development through assistance to both businesses and local governments will be emphasized in order to create jobs and a strong economic base.
The five major housing goals are:
Given that Wisconsin's housing stock is relatively old (over 53 percent of all units having been built prior to 1960), a somewhat higher priority shall be given to rehabilitation. Rehab funds that serve occupied units will take priority over vacant ones in order to keep people in their homes. The relative proportion of substandard housing units, as determined by 1990 Census data, is generally the same throughout the state. Therefore, no higher priority shall be given to one geographic area over another regard to resources made available for rehabilitation.
Particular attention will be paid to housing needs on Wisconsin's Indian Reservations, inner city areas, rural neighborhoods that have been determined to have a high level of substandard housing, areas exhibiting signs of housing distress, and rural counties that have more than 50 percent of the households at incomes below 80 percent of MFI. Also included would be urban counties that have high concentrations of low income households (over 40 percent). Counties with a high poverty rate will also draw as many available resources as possible over the next 5-year period, especially those counties with over 15 percent of people in poverty. Attention will continue to be placed on neighborhoods that have a high degree of concentration of ethnic, minority, or low-income households. Over the course of this 5-year strategy, innovative, targeted, or collaborative efforts will be encouraged in those areas to address the need for quality, affordable housing.
According to the Census, in 1990 there were 403,553 extremely income households in Wisconsin (22.12 percent of the total households). Very low income households are affected the most by housing costs. The incidence of housing problems is higher among renters than among owners. The majority of extremely low income households are renters (57.78 percent). Housing cost problems are even more severe among the large related household population (86.26 percent). Because of this resources will be directed to those areas of the state with the highest concentrations of extremely low income households.
Twenty-seven percent of all elderly households live in substandard housing. Fifty-six percent of low income elderly renters live in substandard housing. Generally, renters are worse off than owners. Therefore, the number-one ranking is for elderly renters.
Wisconsin's elderly population is rising, necessitating more production of housing for elderly in certain communities. The State will work with local, regional, and federal organizations to determine that resources will be appropriately applied so that all housing, with a special emphasis on rental housing, will remain affordable and amenable to elderly persons.
The State will encourage service coordination and the provision of supportive services in housing for the elderly. Every effort will be made between state agencies to provide training for housing managers on the needs of the frail elderly and disabled individuals on how to connect the frail elderly with the appropriate service systems.
Wisconsin has experienced a decline in homeownership levels from 1980. Funds will be directed toward reducing that decline, especially with very low income people, through down payment or closing cost assistance, interest rate reductions, and home ownership counseling. This will be especially true for the first-time homebuyer with children.
Other non-traditional housing alternatives such as mutual housing, cooperative, condominiums, lease-purchase programs and land trusts should be explored and supported with new construction and rehabilitation resources as needed.
Existing state funding from the general fund for emergency shelters (approximately $1.05 million/year) to provide up to 50 percent of the operating funds for generic shelters and for transitional Housing ($375,000/year) to provide for the development and expansion of transitional housing programs will be maintained.
The state will continue to devote both state and federal housing resources to prevent homelessness, provide essential services, and develop longer term alternatives for homeless individuals and families. The transitional housing program focus will continue to support the expansion and development of new shelter and service programs for families. Coordination of local efforts reinforced by state and federal programs will be the basis for the development of a continuum of care methodology for serving Wisconsin's homeless population.
The state will promote the creation of affordable units for people with developmental disabilities, especially those very low income individuals who must support themselves at the level of income generated by SSI.
There is also the lack of safe, affordable housing which often prevents the timely discharge from acute care facilities. Therefore, a high priority for housing for people with HIV/AIDS will remain a high priority.
Through a series of reform initiatives, Wisconsin will continue to combat poverty by enacting policies that encourage and support the ability of low income individuals and families to become as independent and self sufficient as possible. Through funds, programs and policies under the auspices of DOH, housing providers throughout Wisconsin will continue to utilize housing assistance as a tool to increase self sufficiency for low income program participants.
For example under the state HCRI Program many of our grantees tie security deposit or rental assistance benefits provided under the program to participants progress in improving their education or work skills or moving away from a substance abuse problem. Under our HCRI and federal HOME Programs, intensive counseling is provided to resolve impediments facing first time homebuyers. The economic, social and locational aspects of first time homeownership is transforming the lives of many families.
The state funded Transitional Housing Program moves beyond mere housing benefits to also provide child care, educational and vocational training, transportation and other services to help formerly homeless households achieve lasting economic independence.
In several of our state and federally funded programs, DOH will continue to provide funding preferences to those applicants who design proposals which incorporate client self sufficiency strategies, include collaborative linkages with other local human service agencies or identify appropriate supportive services for housing beneficiaries.
The economic development program is an integral part of the State's anti-poverty strategy, and will produce additional jobs and increased job skills.
Total federal funds expected to be available to carry out the State's housing and community development activities during Fiscal Year 1995 is $73,111,000. This includes $12,707,000 for the HOME program, $35,537,000 for the Community Development Block Program, $1,817,000 for the ESG program, $650,000 for HOPWA, $14,500,000 for energy programs, and $7,700,000 for competitive housing programs. State funding and loan financing are expected to total $172,634,000 for housing and $116,300,000 for community development.
The Division of Housing will continue to work closely with other state mental health and service agencies to coordinate housing and service programs for people with special needs, in order to help them to achieve the best housingoption available.
Wisconsin has also been involved and will continue to be involved in several other collaborative efforts described below:
Wisconsin expects to receive approximately $35 million of CDBG non-entitlement funds for FY 1995. OF this amount, 70 percent will be used for Public Facilities and Economic Development (non-housing community development activities) by DOD, and 30 percent for Housing by DOH. Of DOD's 70 percent, up to 75 percent may be used either for Economic Development or Public Facilities activities.
The CDBG Program for Economic Development is expected to generate approximately $2,500,000 in program income to be used for Public Facilities for Economic Development grants.
The Department of Administration - Division of Housing (DOH) receives 30 percent of the State's Annual CDBG-Small Cities allocation to be used for Housing and Related Neighborhood Improvements. the total amount of funds available to units of general local government includes recaptured CDBG housing funds and program income. An eligible applicant may request up to $500,000 in each annual funding round. These funds may be used for rehabilitation, acquisition, neighborhood improvements and homeownership opportunities.
Other activities funded by the DOH allocation are:
The $12,707,000 HOME allocation will be distributed as follows:
REHAB/WEATHERIZATION: HOMEOWNER
REHAB/ACCESSIBILITY: HOMEOWNER
Funds may be disbursed by formula through certain non-profit organizations
such as the Independent Living Centers to provide accessibility modifications
and other needed repairs for low-income persons with disabilities residing in
owner-occupied dwellings.
REHAB: RENTER
Funds may be disbursed through local governmental entities and non-profit
organizations which have previously administered federal or sate rehabilitation
programs.
RENTAL HOUSING DEVELOPMENT
Funds may be set aside for qualified applicants that propose to create
affordable rental housing projects. Applications are accepted and reviewed
several times during the course of a year.
RENT ASSISTANCE
Funds may be disbursed to PHAs or other entities with prior rent assistance
experience for tenant-based rent assistance and security deposits for time
periods up to the maximum allowed by HUD. Funds may also be provided in
connection with persons affected by HOME-funded construction and substantial and
moderate rehabilitation projects.
HOME BUYER AND RESALE PROVISION
Funds may be disbursed through a competition to community based
organizations and local governments. Grant funds are provided to eligible
households to provide closing costs and down payment assistance and/or new
construction, moderate or substantial rehabilitation funds for eligible home
buyers.
LEASE-PURCHASE: HOME BUYER
Funds may be disbursed as described above, however, a State HOME grantee
would sponsor the purchase of a property for the tenant/buyer and hold a first
mortgage until the lease period is completed (no later than the time period
permitted by HUD) and the tenant then assumes the mortgage. During the lease
period the tenant is able to save their share of the down payment and meet
creditworthiness standards.
TENANT BASED RENTAL ASSISTANCE
CHDO SET ASIDE
At least 15 percent of Wisconsin's HOME funds will be made available to
community based housing development organizations (CHDO) for the purpose of
providing affordable housing units for low-income households.
The $1,817,000 in ESG funds may be used for one or more of the following four categories relating to emergency shelter or transitional housing for homeless individuals and families.
DOH may operate a rental assistance program or may contract with PHAs or other entities with the capacity to operate a program. Program operators would enter into an Assistance Contract with an owner who leases a unit to an assisted family. If necessary, program operators may provide assistance directly to the family. The term of the HOME supported rental assistance contract may not exceed 24 months but may be renewed, subject to availability of subsequent HOME funds.
Funds will be distributed statewide. Applications are reviewed based on a point ranking system. The applicants receiving the highest points receive funding. The description of an applicant's housing needs, and how those needs will be addressed with CDBG and other funds, including how funds will be targeted to low-income households and the neediest areas of the community, accounts for over half of the available points. Twenty percent of the points are awarded for the extent to which the CDBG funds will benefit low- and moderate-income households. Twenty percent of the points are assigned to the relative need, or "distress", of the applicant's community and the neighborhood(s) in which most of the funds will be targeted. The balance of the points are assigned to the applicants' efforts in Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing, and Capacity to administer the program if funded.
An applicant must receive at least 50 percent of the total points available in the Program Narrative section to be funded.
The administering agency for the CDBG program is the DOD. The DOD is responsible for economic development and public facilities, and allocating 30 percent of the CDBG funds to the DOA, DOH for housing related activities. The DOH also administers HOME and ESG funds.