The development of affordable housing is not a quick and easy task anywhere. However, the process faces substantial barriers in central and southern (rural) Delaware. The following is a list of issues that must be dealt with and barriers to be overcome in order to provide decent, affordable housing for lower income households.

Incomes are lower: Median incomes in Kent and Sussex are 30% or more lower than in urban areas. Thus, when federal or state programs require serving those below 80% or 50% of median, developers in rural Delaware are at a distinct disadvantage. Since cost of development remains high even in rural areas, the goal of reaching those living poverty becomes substantial. Reaching down to incomes this low used to be the function of "rental subsidies" which are now virtually nonexistent for new construction.

Wide affordability gap: With substantially lower incomes and housing development and financing costs that are not significantly different in Kent and Sussex, the affordability gap becomes difficult to bridge. This gap requires tools not often used such as capital grants, deferred loans, no debt service financing, and creative ways to implement rent subsidies. These bridges are expensive; however, without them little housing can be built to reach down to those in greatest need.

Jobs are often service sector and agricultural: Modest paying jobs dominate the landscape in Kent and Sussex Counties. Whether jobs be retail, fast food, service sector, poultry processing, or jobs that support agriculture, incomes and potential income growth are limited in rural Delaware. Even County income figures are skewed by incomes around the Capitol and the resorts. Lower incomes simply mean less disposable income to pay for housing and housing costs.

Fewer housing resources: Rural areas traditionally have access to fewer government resources. HUD concentrates its programs largely in urban areas. Rural towns and counties rarely have substantial housing departments, divisions and programs that you see in urban Cities and Counties. Rural areas have traditionally not had local Housing Authorities to address needs.

Fewer banks and less housing credit: Kent and Sussex Counties are home to far fewer banks than northern New Castle County. Fewer banks have their delineated Community Reinvestment Act areas in central and southern Delaware. Thus, much of the rural CRA work is left to a few banks who cannot possibly address the needs alone. We hope more and more banks will see Delaware as a whole and expand their CRA delineation statewide so that desperate housing and poverty needs can be addressed.

Highest rate of substandard housing: Kent and Sussex Counties have a disproportionate high share of Delaware's substandard housing which is in need of substantial repair or replacement. Yet, County home repair programs traditionally have waiting lists of three or more years because of limited funding.

Withdrawal of federal housing assistance: USDA's Rural Development has been the major provider of housing and water/sewer credit for rural America. However, direct housing assistance has been cut by more than 50% since 1994. An example is the 79% cut from $540 to $114 million for Section 515 rural rental housing, a program that has worked extremely well in Delaware. By contrast, HUD's budget typically stays at least at a freeze, but often with new initiatives.

Smaller communities and counties face infrastructure problems: Public water and sewer systems are expensive to develop, to increase capacity, and to maintain. For years our rural communities have relied on USDA for water and sewer help. While USDA remains a major partner, there will be more assistance needed from the state to address current and future needs.

Many smaller communities and governments have difficulty funding public utilities, yet these systems are necessary if affordable housing is to be built. Impact, hook-up, and tap fees charged by local governments for new development are becoming a major cost impediment for affordable housing.

Dispersed population results in less advocacy: Rural households are often dispersed and somewhat isolated, less able to organize to effect positive change than more heavily populated urban neighborhoods. This often results in less participation in the public process and less access to resources. Particularly people in need have fewer avenues to express their needs and take action to see that they are addressed.

Need for technical assistance: Traditionally, rural areas are home to fewer nonprofit housing development corporations with the capacity needed to tackle complicated government programs and the long and difficult housing development process. Access to technical assistance can help to build capacity and rural nonprofits be competitive with their urban brethren.

Less access to charitable foundation and corporate giving: Few national foundations are prioritizing their giving to rural housing development. Delaware's foundations are based in metropolitan Wilmington. Fewer corporations, banks, and large employers exist in rural Delaware, causing far less access to corporate giving.

NIMBY (Not In My Back Yard) rears its ugly head in rural Delaware: Affordable housing often faces NIMBY pressures which can be particularly damaging where less sophisticated land use laws prevail and where there is less access to higher density, multi-family zoned land. Some communities may not have a well defined process for site approvals. Others call for public hearings where none are required. Too often, the land use discussions drift from setbacks, side yards, and density to who is going to live there, what are their incomes, and property management issues. Often stereotypes abound with residents pointing to some failed urban projects, rather than acknowledging the significant rural Delaware successes. Too often issues like traffic, congestion, burden on local services are used to hide the real issues of discrimination, fear, and ignorance.

Notification bills: The latest trend negatively impacting the development of affordable housing are "notification bills", one passed previously, and one to be under consideration this session, that require affordable housing developers to notify everyone around them that they are planning a development and provide certification that all governments and civic associations have been informed early in the process. These notification bills are duplicative of the notification requirements of local land use laws. They also clearly give a head start to any negative NIMBY activities that affordable housing will face. Land use laws are sufficient and anything above that smacks of a very real Fair Housing impediment.

New populations: New populations moving to Sussex and Kent can face barriers of acceptance, language, culture, and financial practices that all tend to make access to improved housing, whether rental or homeownership, more difficult and the path more strenuous.

The housing development process itself: Gone are the days of one stop shopping at your HUD or USDA office. Housing development now requires multiple financing sources such as Low Income Housing Tax Credits, federal financing, state financing, equity partners, Federal Home Loan Bank participation, etc. What was once one application, one attorney, one inspector has now turned into a patchwork quilt requiring several of each which drives up costs and the learning curve substantially. Let's take a look at the aspects of simply choosing a housing site on which to build apartments: shape, size, access to water and sewer, within corporate limits, zoning, environmental issues, wetlands, flood plains, Livable Delaware, cost, topography, storm water management, soils, previous use, prime farm land, frontage, access to paved road, compatible surrounding land uses, etc.

This is why special attention, programs, rates and terms, and initiatives are necessary for rural Delaware.

Joe Myer is Executive Director of NCALL Research and founding President of the Delaware Housing Coalition.