HARTFORD, Conn. – Tomorrow is Veterans Day, and in Connecticut there is reason to celebrate progress in the struggles many veterans have faced since leaving the armed forces.

A few years ago, 10 percent of the adult homeless population in Connecticut was made up of veterans. Lisa Tepper Bates, executive director of the Connecticut Coalition to End Homelessness, says that has changed dramatically.

"Not only did we manage to end the homelessness of all chronically homeless veterans," she says, "we are on track as a state to end all veteran homelessness in the very near future, hopefully by the end of this year."

Connecticut was the first state in the country to eliminate chronic homelessness for veterans. Bates credits service providers for taking an individual approach to each person's situation.

According to Bates, homeless adults are often given shelter, but then left on their own to deal with the root causes of their homelessness. That approach had to change in order for the state to make progress.

"All of the providers have pulled together to understand, by person, by name, the situation of each one of those veterans, and an understanding of what each one needs," she says.

Connecticut is one of only four states accepted into the national Zero: 2016 campaign to end all veteran homeless by the end of next year.

The state is also making significant progress toward ending homelessness altogether. Last February, the annual count of homeless in Connecticut identified 4,038 homeless individuals on a single day. According to Bates, that's the lowest number since the count began in 2007.

"That count reflected a drop of over 30 percent in unsheltered homelessness since the last unsheltered count," she says. "It also reflects a drop in sheltered homelessness by about four percent."

Bates says there's still a lot of work to do, but the state is headed in the right direction to end homelessness for all.


get more stories like this via email

By Sarah Melotte for The Daily Yonder.
Broadcast version by Eric Galatas for Colorado News Connection for the Public News Service/Daily Yonder Collaboration

Migrants to Pitkin County added a quarter billion dollars to the county's Adjusted Gross Income in 2020. Pitkin's recreation economy is thriving, but what does that mean for middle- and low-income families?

Outdoor enthusiasts from all over the world visit rural Pitkin County for year-round recreation. Skiers and snowboarders flock to Aspen's world-famous slopes in the winter and the summer months bring even more opportunities for outdoor adventure. Tourists engage in hiking, tubing, rafting, kayaking, fishing, and camping in the Rocky Mountains that tower over the rural town.

From 1998-2019, industries related to travel and tourism increased 12% in Pitkin County. Some reports cite the benefits that recreation bring to a rural economy, such as economic diversification and the migration of young workers into the area. A 2018 Pew Trust analysis found that a recreation county in Montana had more high-paying full-time employment and a 29% increase in jobs from 2000 to 2015 all due to recreation. Recreation-dependent counties, which are defined by the USDA Economic Research Service (ERS) as having a certain share of their economy dependent on recreation related industries, also have lower persistent poverty levels. But the effects of recreation are complex and vary county to county.

Recreation Can Dislocate Residents

Recreation can cause dislocation, which occurs when people who can no longer afford to live in an area move, according to a recent Daily Yonder analysis.

A 2005 ERS report stated that although recreation can attract permanent residents and produce a diverse economy, it can also introduce seasonal, low- wage and low- skilled jobs while simultaneously increasing housing prices. Aspen, one of Pitkin County's resort towns, was named the most expensive neighborhood in the country in 2020.

Over 900 households migrated to Pitkin County in 2020, resulting in a net gain of $283 million in Adjusted Growth Income, when factoring in the income lost when people left the county.

The migration of high-income residents and rising costs of living, combined with the share of homes intended for seasonal use, increases housing competition in rural recreation counties. Workers from outside the county could be commuting into Pitkin County for a variety of reasons, but often it is because of an increased cost of living, said Megan Lawson, Ph.D., of Headwaters Economics in an interview.

"In non-metro counties, as the net migration rate increases by 10%, the share of wages spent on mortgages increases by 7%" Lawson wrote in a 2020 housing analysis on rural recreation communities. As Pitkin County grew 1.2% in the last decade, households struggling to pay rent increased by 3.7%.

A five-year estimate of the American Community Survey (ACS) released in 2015 found that 3,219 workers commuted to Pitkin County from Eagle County, while 4,201 workers commuted from Garfield County. ACS 5-year estimates are data collected over a 60 month period and describe the average of that period. The population in Pitkin County 16 years and older during the same collection period was about 14,911, meaning that the number of commuters into Pitkin was equal to about half the population that was of age to work.

Pitkin County has more employees that commute from outside the county than the state average. The average percentage of people who work outside their county of residence in Colorado is 22%. But only 11% of Pitkin County residents commuted outside the county for work.

Pitkin County has a lower percentage of people who commute outside the county to work than the state average, suggesting that Pitkin County has a higher share of employees that come from outside the county than other Colorado counties.

Possible Solutions

While recreation is often touted as a cure for rural poverty and economic stagnation, locals can find themselves pushed out of their homes to make space for new development. Experts suggest there are solutions to the problem. Constructing new housing priced for low-income families can reduce the burden of competition for those experiencing housing insecurity, for example.

Other solutions include revising zoning policies that regulate the supply of housing for low - income households, giving tax credits for more densely developed housing units, removing square footage requirements for units, and eliminating impact fees (fees developers pay a local government for infrastructure offsets) for affordable housing.

These solutions can be hard sells because people who own homes in a neighborhood of single family units often resist affordable housing developments, citing fears of urbanization and decreasing home values, among other things. Community development specialists suggest that circumventing a NIMBY (Not In My Back Yard) attitude is easier than fighting it. Purchasing buildings for units that accept housing vouchers (instead of constructing new ones) is one approach, says former director of The National Housing Trust Michael Bodaken in an interview with Shelter Force. Some states also enact Fair Share laws that require municipalities to provide enough affordable housing for middle and low income residents or risk losing zoning and permitting privileges.

Local housing authorities and non-profits can organize to provide affordable housing as well. The Aspen/Pitkin County Housing Authority (APCHA) provides Pitkin County workers affordable housing by offering deed-restricted units - units that must be sold or rented to qualified individuals at an affordable price. Residents may be eligible for the bidding lottery if they have worked in Pitkin County for at least four years. APCHA also allows employers to buy affordable units to rent or sell to their full-time employees. Their interactive map shows units organized by APCHA for interested participants.

Rural recreation communities confronting the prospect of affordability issues may plan ahead to protect their long-term residents. Harvard's Joint Center for Housing Studies provides information on how communities can create incentives for affordable housing.

Methods

Recreation-dependent counties are defined using a weighted index that considers three components - 1) jobs; 2) earnings in entertainment, recreation, accommodations, food/drink, and real estate; and 3) the percentage of housing set aside exclusively for seasonal use. Recreation counties are counties with a weighted index one standard deviation or more above the mean.

The tourism data was compiled and organized by Headwaters Economics, which provides a free tool to download socioeconomic data by county. Data sources include Census Bureau, American Community Survey annual and 5-year estimates, and Zillow housing data. To review their full methods, download a report.

Sarah Melotte wrote this article for The Daily Yonder.


get more stories like this via email

Higher mortgage rates and skyrocketing rents have fueled the nation's housing crisis. In states like Iowa, rural communities deal with the same market issues, but they point to existing efforts as a blueprint to increase access.

In the past decade, housing growth in rural areas was roughly 3%, which is far below suburban areas.

Alissa O'Connor, director of the Humboldt County Development Association, said over the years, they have established programs to help smaller towns in their area counteract housing shortages.

"We do have a very successful building trades program," O'Connor pointed out. "We utilize the high school students to construct new, or renovate existing, homes."

She noted they have purchased land to spur development in subdivisions. But groups tracking the efforts say not all areas have equal resources, and detailed planning is needed to see what fits. Rising construction costs are seen as another barrier to building more homes in rural settings.

Johnathan Hladik, policy director at the Center for Rural Affairs, said small communities also may not have as many contractors available for new development. But in his view, it should not stop local leaders from being proactive. He noted the remote-work movement is adding to competition for residents.

"This is the moment where people are interested in living in a rural area, and a community needs to do what it can to attract them," Hladik explained. "You need to have housing stock, and you need to have a good broadband. And if you combine that with good schools and a good quality of life, you're going to be in a really good spot."

There are existing government programs towns can use to help increase housing stock and attract developers.

Sara Barron, executive director of the Johnson County Affordable Housing Coalition, said a lot of federal assistance often goes to large cities, leaving a local funding gap.

"Some of that can be funded by local and county governments," Barron acknowledged. "But especially for rural, smaller communities, it really requires that state investment."

Some North Dakota groups are renewing calls for the state to be more efficient in dispersing emergency pandemic rental aid. They say improvements have been made, but warn people who still need it are going without.

Last fall, North Dakota launched the online component of its Rent Help initiative, which distributes federal assistance for households facing eviction.

Sue Shirek, board chair of the North Dakota Coalition for Homeless People, said they are still hearing stories about payment delays, in some cases, prompting eviction proceedings. She acknowledged the state has acted on some concerns but thinks it should no longer be a problem.

"This is money that gets put directly in the hands of the landlord, or the utility company," Shirek pointed out. "This should be a program that benefits our state and keeps people housed. And it's just not working the way it should."

She emphasized their feedback is coming from application counselors. The state human services department said it is aware of the lingering frustration and continues to eye system upgrades. It noted the average wait times for calls to the program's contact center are much shorter. So far, North Dakota has distributed more than $42 million in rental aid.

Katie Jo Armbrust, board chair of North Dakota Continuum of Care, said with an undertaking like this, glitches are expected. But she stressed local partners wish there had been more planning to better use their intake systems as the state prepared the online portal with its vendor.

"The system and the infrastructure are certainly there," Armbrust asserted. "I think on our end, there was a little frustration or disappointment that there wasn't a better coordination with the coordinated entry system."

The groups suggest the problems almost defeat the purpose of emergency relief.

Jessica Thomasson, executive policy director for the North Dakota Department of Human Services, contended the system is especially helpful in counties with fewer resources, and countered the state isn't tuning out the feedback.

"We try to learn what we hear from the contact center," Thomasson emphasized. "We try to learn from our community partners if there's confusion."

Thomasson said other improvements include simplifying the email updates for applicants, as well as "how to" videos. After a slow rollout, data show rental-aid distribution has ticked up in recent months.