 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
Challenges to the development of Community Land Trusts are diverse in different locations, but there are common considerations.
Community land trusts may face organized resistance from various political or ideological perspectives. While still in its infancy, the Burlington CLT faced organized opposition from a group of realtors and homeowners called Homeowners Against the Land Trust (HALT). Though a classic case of Not in My Back Yard opposition to any new development on vacant land, Claiming defense of private property rights, HALT accused BCLT of a "Communist plot." Several CLTs have experienced a different kind of resistance from the opposite end of the political spectrum, from well-intentioned advocates who worry that the land trust model denies low-income people return on their housing investment equal to others without resale restrictions. These opposing voices have not prevented CLTs from becoming a powerful force in their communities and gaining quite a lot of community support. Still, because sentiments in favor of "traditional" homeownership run deep, CLTs have found that education about the CLT's unique approach to private property must be an ongoing process.
Recruiting potential homeowners, orienting them to the special features of the CLT model, and then persuading them to invest in a CLT home is a challenge for every CLT, especially those that are just getting started. This is a model where informed consent is essential; it does not lend itself to the "hard sell." CLTs work to ensure that prospective homebuyers know what they are getting and what they are giving up when they purchase a CLT home. Publicizing the CLT to prospective eligible homebuyers is an important task. Reaching out to other social service and nonprofit housing organizations is one way to achieve this. Another way is to provide services for the community at large. Burlington CLT offers homeownership workshops for the public in order to attract prospective homebuyers.
Sometimes, a CLT needs to address cultural barriers to the concept of a land trust. Not owning the land under one's home can be a daunting prospect for anyone, even with the assurance of a 99-year lease, but for some communities the dual ownership aspect of the CLT can be especially worrisome. For Mexican-Americans who have experienced deceptive land agreements, for African-Americans not far removed from the reality of sharecropping, and for new immigrants who have dreamed of owning housing for the very first time, the CLT's permanent ownership of the underlying land can present a significant challenge to the successful marketing of a CLT's homes.
Since CLTs generally do not have the resources to compete in the market for high-priced land or to serve very low-income households without outside subsidies, they must look to local government for help. Most CLTs rely heavily on local government for the funds to develop their projects and, in some cases, for the funds to sustain their operations. Some cities and counties have been significant donors of land and buildings as well.
There are constant challenges in working with the public sector:
Portland 's CLT has experienced a different type of challenge in its work with the City. The City played a part in initiating PCLT, convinced that the community land trust could retain public subsidies for affordable housing and community development over the long term. The City has expressed interest in transferring many of its holdings to PCLT. For Mary Bradshaw, Executive Director of PCLT, this is a "double-edged sword." Some of the land the City would like to develop is for commercial purposes and is not explicitly intended to serve the CLT's target population of households earning under 80 percent of the Area Median Income. For PCLT, retaining the subsidy over time is very important, but an equally important goal is to honor community priorities and to serve community needs that may be different than those set by the City. Currently, PCLT is trying to convince the City to develop a small business incubator on a land trust parcel as opposed to a commercial development serving larger corporations. (More about Area Median Income)
While CLTs are able to take parcels of land out of the market, building perpetually affordable housing on them, their success is limited by the amount of housing they can acquire. In gentrifying areas, it is more difficult to acquire and develop land.
In Burlington , the CLT's capacity
is not sufficient to solve the problems in the current housing market.
While housing prices have escalated, government funds for affordable housing
have decreased and private funders are unable to subsidize these projects
at the level previously supported by the government. The 32% increase
in the price of a single-family home since 1990 has made it increasingly
difficult for families who qualify for Vermont Housing and Conservation
Fund grants to even find a home on which to spend the grant. The vacancy
rate for rentals is currently hovering at 0.6% and half of the county's
renters pay more than 30% of their annual incomes on housing.
In Portland , PCLT feels fortunate to have received $400,000 from the Anti-Displacement program, but given the tight housing market, those funds will only help about a dozen families. Moving a family that makes below $50,000 into the position of purchasing a home is extremely difficult without a great deal of subsidy. PCLT also faces the problem of a severe shortage of land available for new development, a result of Portland 's urban growth boundary.
 |
 |
 |