I had heard that the Crossings in Stuart was losing its affordability status. That would have been a serious blow to families in the city.

Stuart City Manager David Dyess forwarded to me an email he received from the county’s Housing Program Coordinator clarifying that this was not true. The complex will continue having rent limits based on the adjusted AMI (Adjusted Median Income) until 2044. As the AMI changes so too will the rents. Even with a rising AMI, there are rent caps for tenants.

While this is much better than the apartments going to market, using the AMI may still place rents out of the reach of many people. When HUD was active in providing funding for different housing programs, the rent people paid was more tailored to the individual. That of course has all changed with the shrinking of those programs, which has resulted in the crises we see today.

Using solely the AMI to determine affordability will leave many renters not able to afford their apartments. The government needs to greatly expand the number of families that would be eligible for HUD’s Section 8 program.

Section 8 is a voucher program that allows those eligible to find their own apartment in which to live. The tenant then pays the landlord a pre-determined amount based on their income, and the government sends the landlord/owner the remainder of the rent.

This program worked extremely well in the 1980s and 1990s. All properties are eligible to participate. There were gross rent caps on the funding depending on family size. The Section 8 program was instituted at a time when public housing was failing to provide safe housing. The program became the perfect public-private partnership.

The federal government has all but given up on housing for people who need help. Homelessness for families is one of the outcomes of greatly reducing this type of aid. Can we really expect a few private owners, even using other government-backed programs, to build all the housing needed? The answer is obvious.

There are many problems in Martin County when it comes to affordable, workforce, or attainable housing. Some of the housing shortages for more affluent people can be solved by just building. The more product on the market, the cheaper prices are.

Years ago in big cities, unions and manufacturers constructed housing for their members and employees. This was an attempt to provide “wholesome” homes instead of tenement apartments. It was very successful in combatting social as well as economic problems and contributed to a stable workforce.

I don’t quite understand why the school board and Cleveland Clinic do not investigate doing something like that. Employees just starting out in their careers could be offered this type of housing first since their earnings are the lowest. More and more employers throughout the country are coming to this realization such as the “Teachers Village” in Newark N.J. and “Sea Pines” in Hilton Head S.C. Employers who want to attract good personnel can also provide rent subsidies as a perc.

Progressive has come to mean socialist in our political era. It wasn’t always so…just remember Theodore Roosevelt. Nothing beats the free market for sorting winners and losers. The government needs to be ruthless in not protecting industries or individual companies and enforcing anti-trust laws. However, when it comes to individuals, government has an obligation to provide basic needs…one of which is housing.

The question is will we? The answer would require a national effort. It is not anything we can do on the local level alone.