Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing-2019
2019
Prepared by the Pioneer Valley Planning
Commission in conjunction with the
Northampton Housing Partnership
Unlocking
Opportunity:
AN ASSESSMENT OF
BARRIERS TO FAIR HOUSING
IN NORTHAMPTON
Unlocking Opportunity:
An Assessment of Barriers to Fair Housing in Northampton
Prepared by
Pioneer Valley Planning Commission
60 Congress Street
Springfield, MA 01104
August 2019
Acknowledgements
Northampton Housing Partnership
Gordon Shaw Carmen Junno
Richard Abuza Dan Krassner
Jim Reis Alexander Jarrett
Mark Goggins Julio Alves
Rev. Todd Weir Edgardo Cancel
Patrick Boughan Rebecca Lockwood
Kyla Prior Theresa Poe
Pioneer Valley Planning Commission
Allison Curtis Ashley Eaton
Catherine Ratté Jillian DeCoursey
Special thanks to Peg Keller, Northampton Housing and Community Development Planner, who provided
invaluable information and guidance throughout the creation of this document.
This report was funded by the City of Northampton through a general fund appropriation as recommended by
the Mayor and approved by the City Council.
Cover photo credit: Richard Cowles, Paradise Pond Apartments West Street, Northampton
Project Architect: Peter Frothingham, Real Estate Project Manager: Karen Leveille, HAP Housing
Contents
Acknowledgements .................................................................................................................................iv
Executive Summary ................................................................................................................................. 1
Identified Impediments to Fair Housing Choice .............................................................................. 2
Actions to Address Identified Impediments ..................................................................................... 3
Introduction ............................................................................................................................................. 2
Protected Classes and Expansion of Fair Housing Protection ......................................................... 4
Barrier 1: Cost of Housing ....................................................................................................................... 8
Barrier 2: Limited Job Opportunities .................................................................................................... 17
Barrier 3: Limited Knowledge of Fair Housing Rights and Lack of Trust in Enforcement ............... 19
Barrier 4: Lack of Housing for Families ............................................................................................... 20
Barrier 5: Impediments to Accessibility for Those with Disabilities ................................................. 22
Barrier 6: Limited Public Transportation ............................................................................................. 25
Barrier 7: Section 8 Voucher Discrimination ....................................................................................... 27
Barrier 8: Northampton Housing Authority Local Preference ............................................................ 29
Barrier 9: Fair Market Rent Calculation ............................................................................................... 31
Barrier 10: Difficulty of Navigating Affordable Housing System ...................................................... 32
Barrier 11: Service Agencies Have Limited Resources ........................................................................ 33
Barrier 12: Northampton Housing Authority Information Accessibility ........................................... 34
Barrier 14: Length of Affordable Housing Waitlists............................................................................ 37
Barrier 15: Lead Paint............................................................................................................................. 38
Barrier 16: Sub-Standard Housing Stock ............................................................................................. 42
Action Plan ............................................................................................................................................. 44
Appendices ............................................................................................................................................ 49
Appendix A: Community Engagement ................................................................................................ 50
Appendix B: General Background Data ............................................................................................... 55
Appendix C: Public and Private Sector Characteristics ....................................................................... 80
Appendix D: Current Fair Housing Profile .......................................................................................... 95
Appendix E: Housing Projections........................................................................................................ 100
Appendix F: Terms and Definitions .................................................................................................... 105
1
Executive Summary
The Springfield Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA), home to Northampton, Springfield and most of the cities
and towns in the Pioneer Valley, ranks third in the country for MSAs with the highest dissimilarity indices
between White and Hispanic populations.1 This index, used by HUD to assess levels of segregation between
two groups, measures whether a racial or ethnic group is distributed equally across a region in the same way
as another racial or ethnic group. A higher score, simply put, means higher levels of segregation between racial
and ethnic groups.
The City of Northampton is a welcoming community, rich in cultural and social amenities. Northampton itself is
considered a “community of opportunity”—an area that provides access to high-quality education, a healthy
and safe environment, sustainable employment, political empowerment, and avenues for wealth-building.2The
city of Northampton is working to figure out how to address the legacy of institutionalized racism and
disparate access to opportunity that resulted in our segregated region. According to the Pioneer Valley
Planning Commission’s Fair Housing Equity Assessment (FHEA), if the population of white people and people of
color were evenly spread across the region, communities in the region should be 70/30 white/people of color.
Northampton’s population is 81% white and 19% people of color. Northampton is committed to sustainability
that specifically includes a focus on equity, as stated in the Office of Planning and Sustainability’s mission:
Identify and implement the community vision for a sustainable and resilient future with a healthy and
equitable economy and environment.
Northampton’s land use regulations and local zoning are very forward-thinking with respect to the current
trend to end zoning exclusively for single-family homes. In 2013 the city completed a long-term effort to
overhaul the city’s zoning which resulted in expanded by right options for residential development as well as
other changes that made it easier to develop housing in the city 3.
This Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice aims to identify and advance the city’s efforts to address
barriers in access to housing and opportunity in Northampton. The inclusion of ‘access to opportunity’ with the
focus on housing is grounded in decades of research that demonstrates that segregated neighborhoods where
people of color were systematically forced to live not only have poorer quality housing but also poorer quality
schools, grocery stores, roads and sidewalks, street lights and other infrastructure and other social
determinants of health resulting in higher rates of preventable disease, lower rates of education, earning
power, poorer health outcomes, economic opportunities and shorter life expectancy.
In addition to race, the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development recognizes that people
experience discrimination in housing based on disability, national origin, sex, familial status, marital status,
age, sexual orientation, gender identity, military status, genetic information, ancestry and because they
1 7 http://www.s4.brown.edu/us2010/SegSorting/Default.aspx. This study assigns a dissimilarity value for all MSAs in
the country. The University of Michigan, Population Studies Center analyzed the MSAs with more than 500,000 people
and ranked the Springfield MSA as the most segregated MSA in the country when considering White-Latino
segregation. 2 The Geography of Opportunity: Building Communities of Opportunity in Massachusetts, The Kirwan Institute, January
2009. 3 Detailed in Appendix C, pp79-81
2
receive public assistance/housing subsidies. This update to Northampton’s Analysis of Impediments to Fair
Housing Choice has found that there are impediments to Fair Housing Choice in the city.
Identified Impediments to Fair Housing Choice
• Cost of Housing and generational wealth
disparity
• Job opportunities lacking
• Lack of knowledge of fair housing rights
and little trust in organizations that do the
work
• Not enough housing with more than 2
bedrooms
• Not enough visitable rentals
• Growing affordability gap
• Fear of retribution if complaints are made
regarding substandard housing
• Discrimination against people with
disabilities
• Discrimination based on race and country
of origin
• Section 8 discrimination
• Zoning stops the production of multi-family
housing
• Local preference
• FMR does not capture the living expenses
for Northampton
• Information about how to access
affordable housing is difficult to find and
even harder to navigate
• Service agencies are tapped for resources
• Limited transportation options
• Few resources to help with bad credit
• Lead Paint
• Materials not translated into Spanish/other
languages
• Incarcerated and returning citizens have
difficulty searching for and finding housing
While Northampton is more racially diverse than Hampshire County, it is less racially diverse than the Pioneer
Valley region (30.2% people of color) and the state (27.1% people of color). In 2017, 18.9% of Northampton’s
population identified as people of color, whereas 15.8% of Hampshire County identified as such. 4
4 This document will refer to “people of color” as someone who identifies in any other way than White, Not Latino or
Hispanic. People who identify as Hispanic or Latino can be of any race but are considered people of color in this
context.
2
FIGURE 1: PERCENT PEOPLE OF COLOR
18.9%
15.8%
30.2%
27.1%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
Northampton Hampshire County Pioneer Valley
Region
Massachusetts
3
Actions to Address Identified Impediments
The Northampton Housing Partnership recognizes that housing can and should be used as a tool to address
unequal opportunity in the region. However, the solution to the region’s racial and ethnic disparities does not
rest with housing strategies alone: employment opportunities, taxation policies, and zoning regulations, for
example, all impact the ability for Northampton to become more accessible to all. As detailed in the above
chart, Northampton needs to attract and retain thousands of people of color. Below is a list of the actions
identified to address fair housing concerns, integrating the goals of affirmatively furthering fair housing that
are more fully described later in this document.
• Translation of Public Materials into Multiple Languages
• Continue the Production of Affordable Housing
• Visitability Ordinance
• Community Land Trusts (CLTs)
• Removal of Local Preference for Tenant Selection
• Public Information Campaign
• Meet and Greet Landlord Day
• Social Service Presentation for Landlords
• Assist households to become homeowners
• Fair Market Rent vs. Small Area FMR
• Rental Family Housing Incentives
• Access to Housing Resources for Incarcerated Individuals
• Housing Mobility Programming
• State Legislative Proposals
• Rent Control
• Host a Housing Navigator
• Increased Transportation Options
• Lead Paint Remediation Programming
• Resources to help with Bad Credit
• Anti-Racism Training
2
Introduction
Purpose and Context
A home is much more than a structure that provides shelter for those who live within. Research routinely
shows that where one lives has a profound impact on a person’s ability to succeed 5. Access to a high quality
education, a healthy environment and nourishing food, employment opportunities, and strong social and
cultural networks are all tied to where we live. A person’s world can be turned upside down without a safe and
affordable place to raise a family, create community, and sleep at night. By ensuring that everyone has access
to housing, and thus to opportunity, we can increase the likelihood that individuals, families, and society as a
whole can succeed.
However, historic and structural patterns of segregation and discrimination in our country’s housing market
have put certain populations at a disadvantage. The history of the United States is riddled with explicitly
discriminatory policies and practices by both public and private actors that have inhibited people of color, and
other marginalized populations, from accessing and maintaining generational wealth including red-lining,
steering, and blatant discrimination. The Fair Housing Act, passed in 1968, was originally intended to address
the segregation of Black and White neighborhoods and the unequal opportunity available to communities of
color. Since 1968, our country has become far more diverse, with a large and growing increase in the Latino
population, as well as increases of people of color from many nations. This increased globalization has
transformed the challenge of segregation from being only Black-White, to being about all people of color.
The Springfield Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA) which includes Springfield and Northampton was recently
ranked third in the country for MSAs with the highest dissimilarity indices between White and Hispanic
populations. This index, used by the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) to
assess levels of segregation between two groups, measures whether a racial or ethnic group is distributed
equally across a region in the same way as another racial or ethnic group. A higher score means higher levels
of segregation between racial and ethnic groups.
Northampton is a small city in the heart of the Pioneer Valley that has been considered a “community of
opportunity”—an area that provides access to high-quality education, a healthy and safe environment,
sustainable employment, political empowerment, and avenues for wealth building. However, as is discussed
throughout this report, not everyone may have access to the “Paradise City.” As rents rise in Northampton,
housing has become increasingly unstable for families and households within the city and further out of reach
for those interested in moving in. Families fear retribution and potential eviction from landlords for reporting
unhealthy living conditions. Those with disabilities are refused reasonable accommodations to help them
move freely around their homes and access the wonderful resources in their community. Barriers preventing
families and individuals from accessing housing like these are the focus of this report, as are proposed
solutions to combat them.
Northampton has made impressive strides to address fair housing issues in recent years. The City’s zoning code
has been updated to make multi-family housing easier to develop and two large affordable housing projects
were recently completed—Live 155 and the Lumberyard Apartments. Since 2015 89 households have
5 www.opportunityatlas.org & Nicholas Kristof NYT 8/3/2019
3
participated in a Community Housing Support Services Program to help tenants at risk of eviction navigate
access to community resources and social services. Of course there is still more to be done. In the fall of 2018,
the city of Northampton with their Housing Partnership engaged the Pioneer Valley Planning Commission
(PVPC) to conduct an Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice—a closer look at fair housing issues
throughout the city including suggestions for how to address identified issues.
“Fair housing is important for those who work in Northampton, for
those who live in Northampton, and it is vitally important for those
who live in the City but are not stably, safely, or affordably housed.
It is critically important for those who would like to live in
Northampton, but due to some barrier, are unable to. The work
reflected in this report discusses things we do not often talk about,
but that we must talk about. We must look beyond and beneath the
accolades and the often acknowledged list of accomplishments
Northampton has earned. We must ask the hard questions and we
must be willing to hear the answers. For those of us and among us
that experience discrimination, confront barriers and face
challenges, whether we ourselves experience it directly, or not, we
need to set the course to move us all towards sharing equally in the
offerings of Paradise City.” – Peg Keller, Northampton’s Housing
and Community Development Planner.
4
Protected Classes and Expansion of Fair
Housing Protection
Title VIII of the Civil Rights Act of 1968, commonly referred to as
the Fair Housing Act, was enacted with the primary purpose of
prohibiting discrimination in transactions involving the rental,
sale or financing of a home based on race, color, national origin,
religion, sex, familial status and mental or physical handicap.
Massachusetts law includes additional protected classes:
marital status, sexual orientation, age, gender identity and
expression, military or veteran status, ancestry, genetic
information, and receipt of public assistance or rental subsidies.
Under Federal law, state and local governments that receive
federal housing funds are not only required to refrain from
discriminatory practices, they must also take steps to advance
the goals of fair housing and use their policies and programs to
help promote open and inclusive patterns of housing (also
referred to as “affirmatively furthering fair housing.”) HUD
defines “affirmatively furthering fair housing” to include the
following:
• Analyze and eliminate housing discrimination in the
jurisdiction;
• Promote fair housing choice for all persons;
• Provide opportunities for inclusive patterns of housing
occupancy regardless of race, color, religion, sex, familial status,
disability, and national origin;
• Promote housing that is structurally accessible to, and
usable by all persons, particularly persons with disabilities;
• Foster compliance with the nondiscrimination provision
of the Fair Housing Act.
Massachusetts Executive Order 526 (2011), an “Order
Regarding Non-Discrimination, Diversity, Equal Opportunity,
and Affirmative Action,” provides that “Equal opportunity and
diversity shall be protected and affirmatively promoted in all
state, state-assisted, and state-regulated programs, activities,
and services.” All state funded programs, including Community
Preservation Act funds, fall under this Executive Order.
Under Federal and State law, municipalities must also ensure
that municipal policies and programs do not have a disparate
impact (negative impact) on members of a protected class
compared to the general population. Disparate impact is an
important legal theory in which liability based upon a finding of
The key federal fair housing statutes
informing housing affordability are:
• Fair Housing Act (Title VIII of
the Civil Rights Act of 1968, as
amended)
• Title VI of the Civil Rights Act
of 1964, as amended
• Section 504 of the
Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as
amended
• Americans with Disabilities
Act of 1990, as amended
The key state fair housing statutes in
Massachusetts are:
• Massachusetts fair housing
law (M.G.L. Chapter 151B)
• Massachusetts public
accommodation law (M.G.L.
Chapter 272, section 98)
• Massachusetts lead paint law
(Chapter 111, section 199A)
Under both of these groups of laws
and regulations, the “Protected
Classes” of people are
• Race
• Color
• National Origin
• Religion
• Sex
• Disability/Handicap
• Familial Status; Children
• Marital Status
• Age
• Sexual Orientation
• Gender Identity
• Military Status (veteran or
member of the armed forces)
• Public Assistance/Housing
Subsidy Recipient
• Genetic Information
• Ancestry
5
discrimination may be incurred even when the discrimination was not purposeful or intentional. The
municipality should consider if the policy or practice at hand is necessary to achieve substantial, legitimate,
non-discriminatory interests and if there is a less discriminatory alternative that would meet the same interest.
While the Fair Housing Act was originally passed in response to racial discrimination, the Act also includes
protections against discrimination based on color, national origin, religion, and sex. In 1988, the Fair Housing
Amendments Act added protections based on disability and familial status. Massachusetts law includes
additional protected classes: marital status, sexual orientation, age, gender identity and expression, military or
veteran status, ancestry, genetic information, and receipt of public assistance or rental subsidies. The Fair
Housing Act’s non-discrimination provisions aim to prevent and impose liability for discriminatory acts. But in
order to also address the legacy of past discrimination, the Act requires HUD and its grantees to take steps to
affirmatively further fair housing. In order to carry out this requirement, the City of Northampton has
undertaken this analysis of impediments to fair housing and creation of strategies to address the identified
impediments.
Process to Update the Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing
The City of Northampton engaged the Pioneer Valley Planning Commission (PVPC) to update the city’s prior
Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice between the fall of 2018 and summer of 2019. The update was
funded through a general fund appropriation, per recommendation of the Mayor.
The framework for this Analysis of Impediments (AI) is a modified version of the “Suggested Format for the
Analysis of Impediments” that is recommended by HUD in its Fair Housing Planning Guide. The PVPC took the
following actions to develop this AI:
• Reviewed the City’s previous AI documents
• Reviewed the City’s 2011 Housing Needs Assessment and Strategic Housing Plan
• Reviewed the 2014 Pioneer Valley Regional Housing Plan
• Reviewed the 2014 Knowledge Corridor Fair Housing and Equity Assessment
• Reviewed the Massachusetts Department of Housing and Community Development Statewide Analysis
of Impediments to Fair Housing Access and Consolidated Plans as well as other state policies.
• Reviewed the City of Northampton Zoning ordinance, Sustainability Plan, Just Big Enough competition,
Small Lots Big Ideas, STAR Sustainability report and other plans and policies
• Analyzed quantitative data such as the US Census Bureau statistics, US Bureau of Labor Statistics,
Warren Group Data, etc.
• Reviewed fair housing legal background information
• Conducted a robust community engagement process
Community Engagement
To accurately understand, describe, and be able to address and improve access to fair housing choice, PVPC
worked with the City to design and implement a robust community engagement process to reach both the
people who face barriers in accessing housing and the organizations and institutions that serve these people as
well as the entities that may be discriminating against them, such as their landlords, rental agencies and
affordable housing providers. For a detailed review of the data collected during this process, see Appendix A.
6
Fair Housing Survey
The City distributed a survey to the public to gather input on fair housing issues in Northampton and the
Pioneer Valley in general. The survey was created on SurveyMonkey and distributed through email lists, a
Facebook page, the Mayor’s Twitter account, and through various community partners. Hard copies were also
made available at several social service organizations and at the local Public Library, and media releases about
the AI and the survey were published. The survey was available in both English and Spanish. A total of 204
responses were collected; 203 in English and 1 in Spanish.
Focus Groups
To hear directly from various protected classes, PVPC, in collaboration with City staff and the Northampton
Housing Partnership (NHP), conducted four focus groups in partnership with social service agencies throughout
Northampton in the winter and spring of 2019. These groups lasted between 30 and 60 minutes.
Stakeholder Interviews
In January of 2019, PVPC, City staff and members of the NHP conducted ten stakeholder interviews over the
course of two days. Stakeholders invited were from surrounding towns and governments, housing providers,
realtors, government officials and staff, social service and housing search workers, property managers, housing
authorities, and disability community advocates. Each meeting consisted of between 4 and 8 participants.
After being given a brief overview of the project, a few basic questions were asked with the intention of
sparking conversation and response amongst the participants. A list of each of the participants can be found in
Appendix A along with summaries of the interviews.
Public Forum
A public forum was held on May 22nd 2019 at 7pm at the Northampton Senior Center to present the initial
findings of this study and to receive public feedback. Approximately 50 members of the community attended
the event which included an overview of targeted findings of the report and small group breakouts to
elaborate on proposed actions to address specific barriers. Detailed Notes from this meeting can be found in
Appendix A.
Barriers and Solutions to Housing Choice
The following chapters outline 17 barriers to accessing housing and 39 solutions to overcome these barriers
identified through this process. While this list does not capture every instance of discrimination and unfair
housing practice, it does identify barriers that have the potential to be rectified by actions taken by the City
and its community partners. In addition to a range of proposed policies and programs that were identified by
both the AI planning team and the community, the process recommends that the city of Northampton
government, including the NHP and leading Housing Advocacy Organizations and individuals, engage robustly
with their state government representatives as leaders on a number of pieces of proposed legislation that aim
to reduce barriers to fair housing choice in Massachusetts. The Commonwealth of Massachusetts has recently
completed the State’s AI, and referring to it for statewide action would also be useful for the city of
Northampton. Because Northampton is a community of opportunity, it is incumbent on the community to
affirmatively further fair housing; just analyzing impediments is insufficient.
A more thorough overview of demographic information and data is included in Appendix B. In addition to the
data collected as part of this work, we strongly encourage readers to review the Opportunity Atlas website, an
7
initial release of social mobility data, the result of collaboration between
researchers at the Census Bureau, Harvard University, and Brown
University. Additional detail on the city’s current policies and
programming and analysis of the public and private housing market can
be found in Appendix C. Northampton’s current Fair Housing Profile is in
Appendix D.
The information in the following chapters impacts both current residents
of Northampton, as well as those who live in the surrounding region
(Hampden, Hampshire and Franklin counties).
The City of Northampton has been focused on improving equity in a
number of past and current initiatives. City efforts focus on four aspects
of equity, all of which are relevant to this report and our
recommendations:
1. Distributional equity- who benefits and who loses from public
goods. Clearly, this is a major part of the focus of fair housing and city
efforts to support affordable housing.
2. Structural equity- how to overcome historical racism and
institutional racism that has created a path (path dependence) that is
very hard to change.
3. Trans- or Inter-generational equity- how do decisions we make
today affect opportunities for future generations.
4. Procedural equity- how do we include members of effected
populations not only in outcomes but in representation at the table and
in decision making.
This report was written using an
equity lens—it is based in the
understanding that certain
populations have historically had
less access to opportunity due to
systemic systems of racism, ableism,
sexism and oppression. In order to
affirmatively further fair housing, we
must acknowledge how these historic
patterns impact our communities
today.
For example, people of color have
historically had less access to wealth
due to redlining, steering, and other
discriminatory real estate policies.
This has made it harder to build
generational wealth and contributes
to higher poverty rates amongst
communities of color.
Thus, the rise in housing costs
outlined in the following sections of
this report is a fair housing issue as it
prohibits certain populations from
having access to the amenities and
quality of life that Northampton has
to offer.
In order to address these inequities,
we must not only recognize the
implications of history, but must find
affirmative ways to provide ample
opportunity for all.
8
Barrier 1: Cost of Housing
“I’m concerned that our teachers, police, firefighters mostly can’t
afford to live here, and that young people can’t buy homes here,
between student debt and our houses… getting more and more
expensive.” – Northampton resident.
Northampton’s housing prices are some of the highest in the
region, as the City is an extremely desirable place to live. Using
the language of HUD, Northampton is a “community of
opportunity” with access to good schools, a business-rich
downtown, and important community and social services. Costs
are increasing for both homebuyers and renters at rates higher
than those of surrounding communities and the region at-large.
People of color and people with disabilities are much more
likely to be poor than their white able-bodied neighbors. This
fact, combined with the limited supply of affordable housing in
a city of higher than normal cost of housing is de facto
discrimination.
Renters
“To be blunt, the rental prices here are
staggering, especially considering the lack
of high paying work and lack of major city
amenities, transit, etc. I paid less to rent an
apartment in Philadelphia than I pay now.”
–Northampton Resident
Northampton is currently facing a rental affordability problem.
According to the ACS 2013-2017, 52% of households are
currently paying 30% or more of their income on housing. Those
who spend over 30% of their income on housing are considered
“housing cost burdened” by HUD. A surprising 38.7% of
households are spending over 50% of their incomes on rent. These households are considered “severely
housing cost burdened”. Those who have a lower annual income are more likely to be cost burdened. For
example, as is illustrated in the figure below, 84% of households making less than $20,000 annually are
severely housing cost burdened. Further, the percentage of housing stock that is renter occupied has
The median monthly housing
cost for residents of
Northampton is $1,166 which
includes the cost of rent or a
mortgage and utilities.1
If a person were to spend no
more than 30% of their income
on housing (more than 30% is
considered housing cost
burdened), they would have to
make at least $46,640/year in
order to afford the median
monthly housing cost.
The median gross rent in
Northampton is $1,054 per
month, an increase of 25% since
2010. 1
The City has seen growth in
median household income of
18.9% during this time, but
regional income increased much
less, at just over 9%, potentially
making Northampton less
accessible for people outside the
city who want to move in.
9
decreased over the past three decades due to condo formation, new construction of homeownership units
happening at a faster rate than rental creation, and the loss of units as multifamily units that lose party walls
(e.g., two family homes being converted to one family homes).
FIGURE 2: COST BURDEN OF RENTER-OCCUPIED HOUSEHOLDS
Median gross rent refers to the amount a household pays for rent per month, as is indicated on their lease.
The median gross rent in Northampton has increased by 12.6% since 2010, whereas the median household
income (what a household makes and can thus put towards rent), has only increased by 7.1%. Thus we can
assume that households are spending more of their income on rent than they were in 2010. Minimum wage in
Massachusetts is 12.00 per hour as of January 1, 2018. A person making minimum wage working full time
would spend 50.7% of their income on rent if they were to pay the gross median rent in Northampton. This is
considered extremely cost burdened.
“I find it completely ridiculous that it isn't illegal for Rent Noho to
charge the renter a ‘rental fee’ that's 60% of one month's rent to
provide absolutely no service to the renter. The service they provide
is to the landlord only. But they manage so many units in town and
almost all the quality units. It is undoubtedly pricing people out of
town- it's unreasonable to expect people to be able to put down 1st,
last, deposit, and 60% all at once.”—Northampton Resident
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600
Less than $20,000
$20,000 to $34,999
$35,000 to $49,999
$50,000 to $74,999
$75,000 or more
Total Households Annual Income Not Burdened
Burdened
Severely Burdened
10
The number of high-rent units has increased very significantly since 2010. Units costing $2,000 or more have
increased by over 850% and units costing between $1,000 and $1,999 have increased by 58% since 2010.6 The
number of rentals that cost less than $1,000 has decreased by 27%.
FIGURE 3: RENTAL PRICES
Stakeholder interviews, focus groups, and the community survey all revealed concerns amongst community
members about the rise in popularity of management companies that charge “finder’s fees” to renters. Of
particular note is RentNoho.com, a rental company that has saturated the market in recent years. Many of the
listings posted on this site include fees between 50-100% of a single month’s rent upon move-in. These fees
make units inaccessible to anyone who does not have a large savings for move-in expenses. Specifically,
Section 8 vouchers are not designed to pay for any additional move-in fees (this issue will be discussed more
thoroughly later in the report).
In addition, most renters pay their heating and energy bills, creating little incentive for landlords to create
energy efficient units. However, most tenants do not stay in their units long enough to justify making
6 2013-2017 and 2006-2010 ACS B25063
823 961
1384 1600
23
907
352
1045
2527
223
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
Less than $500 $500 to $749 $750 to $999 $1000 to
$1999
$2000 or moreNumber of Households Amount Spent on Rent
2010
2017
Median Household Income
Actual Value In 2017
Dollars
2017 $62,838 $62,838
2010 $52,868 $58,671
Percent
Change
18.9% 7.1%
Median Gross Rent
Actual Value In 2017
Dollars
2017 $1,054 $1,054
2010 $843 $936
Percent
Change
25.0% 12.6%
11
investments in energy efficiency themselves. This often means that residents with the fewest resources are
paying the highest costs for energy on a square foot basis, and that mandated utility subsidies for energy
efficiency help homeowners but not renters.
Increasing rental prices impact certain racial and ethnic groups more than others. Not only are the median
household incomes of people of color significantly lower than those of White households in Northampton, but
they are more than twice as likely to be renters as homeowners.
Homeowners
“As a working-class single parent, I cannot imagine ever being able
to afford a home in Northampton. That feels frustrating because I
do feel safe here. But it’s way too overpriced.”—Northampton
Resident
The median sales price of homes in Northampton has been steadily rising over the past few decades.7 The
chart below shows the median sales price over time for all homes (including condos, and multi-family homes)
and single family homes. In 2018 the median sales price for all homes in Northampton was $287,000 and for a
single family home was $336,000. This accounts for a 6.3% and 12.19% increase in price respectively since
2014. The median sales price in Hampshire County was $253,500, and $275,000 for a single family home.
These prices do not take inflation into consideration.
FIGURE 4: MEDIAN SALES PRICE
7 The Warren Group Five Year Report: Median Sales Price by Town.
0
50,000
100,000
150,000
200,000
250,000
300,000
350,000
400,000
1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018
1 Family Homes All Homes
12
Zillow characterizes Northampton’s market temperature as “very hot” and a sellers’ market, noting that the
median price increased 9% over the past year. They predict the value to increase another 1.6% within the next
year. Zillow lists the current median price for a home in Northampton as $387,950.8
The median monthly owner costs for a home with a mortgage in Northampton is $1,872. The table below
shows what percentage of a household’s income goes towards housing costs for those who have a mortgage.9
This table shows that approximately 30% of homeowners are housing cost burdened, or pay more than 30% of
their income on housing.
Percent of Income Spent on Housing- Units with Mortgage
2017 Number of
Households
Percent
Total Housing Units With a Mortgage 3,837 100.0%
Less than 20.0 percent 1,639 42.7%
20.0 to 24.9 percent 610 15.9%
25.0 to 29.9 percent 425 11.1%
30.0 to 34.9 percent 251 6.5%
35.0 percent or more 912 23.8%
Owner-occupied households are less likely than renters to be housing cost burdened, however 30.3% of
owners with mortgages are still cost burdened.
FIGURE 5: COST BURDEN OF OWNER-OCCUPIED HOUSEHOLDS
8 Zillow, Northampton Home Prices and Values, https://www.zillow.com/northampton-ma/home-values/, Accessed
6/10/19 9US Census Bureau, 2013-2017 ACS, DP04
0 1000 2000 3000 4000
Less than $20,000
$20,000 to $34,999
$35,000 to $49,999
$50,000 to $74,999
$75,000 or more
Total Households Annual Income Not Burdened
Burdened
Severely Burdened
13
Figure 6: Northampton Affordable Housing Locations
This image is a screen shot of an interactive Story Map located on Smith College’s website. To explore further, visit:
https://tinyurl.com/y4b9frk3 (full URL:
https://smithcollege.maps.arcgis.com/apps/StoryMapBasic/index.html?appid=17f76abaa73e4ec9980fca8cc6b4eee1&ext
ent=-72.7680,42.2517,-72.5743,42.4008 )
14
Solutions
Continue the Production of Affordable Housing
Northampton has made impressive strides in building affordable housing since 2012. 102 new affordable units
have been created, with more in the pipeline. In order to meet the need of the City and the region in general,
this pattern should continue in partnership with local community affordable housing developers such as Way
Finders and Valley CDC. A report on the recent production of affordable housing is available in the Appendix.
Support the Creation of Community Land Trusts (CLTs)
Community land trusts (CLTs) are limited equity homeownership models that can help to provide stable,
affordable housing in perpetuity for low-income households. A CLT is typically a nonprofit community-based
organization that develops affordable housing and ensures community stewardship of land. The trust acquires
land and maintains permanent ownership over it while selling the homes that exist on the land. Homeowners
enter into a long-term renewable land lease instead of a traditional sale and when they decide to re-sell, they
earn only a portion of the increased property value. The remainder is kept by the trust, ensuring that the home
stays affordable for future households. A CLT can provide low and moderate income people with the
opportunity to own their own home and build equity.
Municipalities can provide support in the development and ongoing success of CLTs in their communities in
many ways. For example, a local government might provide administrative or financial support, donate land to
the trust, provide low-interest loans for development, or use inclusionary zoning as a means of acquiring
properties for the trust. The City Council of Burlington, VT for example, provided a startup grant for the
Burlington Community Land Trust (now the Champlain Housing Trust). Chicago, IL; Irvine, CA; Portland, OR; and
Sarasota, FL have all contracted with consultants regarding CLT development.
Northampton was previously home to the Northampton Area CLT in the 1980’s and 1990’s but had limited
success. However, due to the rising prices of the City’s real estate market Northampton could encourage
and/or help to launch a new CLT that would likely be more successful.
Assist households to become homeowners
Homeownership, particularly amongst low-income residents and people of color is relatively limited in
Northampton. Down-payment assistance and guidance on how to access that assistance should continue to be
supported by the City through Community Development Block Grant funding to the Valley CDC and Way
Finders and Valley CDC should continue to provide counseling and first time homebuyer classes. Increased
publicity and expansion of these programs would encourage and assist households to pursue homeownership.
Another option for potential homeowners is to co-own with family members or friends. Co-ownership of a
larger unit is an option for those interested in owning a home but without the financial means to cover the
entire cost. The City could provide technical and legal assistance for those interested in this option.
"In 2005 my partner at the time and another couple bought a two-
family house in Florence together. We had spent a couple of years
meeting and brainstorming, first with a group of people, then
finally down to just the four of us. We qualified for a mortgage
15
together and made an offer on the second house we looked at,
which was accepted. We developed a legal agreement between us
that answered questions such as how we would sell the house if one
party wanted out, share the common spaces or save up and spend
money on maintenance. We had a lawyer look over that
agreement, and have modified it slightly since then as
well. Fourteen years later, we all agree it was one of the best
decisions we ever made." -- Alex, Northampton resident
Continue to Explore Allowing Two-Family Homes By-Right
The Office of Planning and Sustainability has been exploring the impact of making two-family homes by right
within the City’s zoning code. If adopted, this change would allow two-family home production without a site
plan review if the homes are designed to add to the vibrancy of neighborhoods. The Office of Planning and
Sustainability will create an analysis of desirable forms of housing and draft a form based code and should
continue to pursue less strict zoning throughout the City.
In December of 2018, Minneapolis, MN voted to get rid of single-family zoning in the entire city with the
intention of confronting a history of racist housing practices. As the first major city in the United States to
approve such a change, Minneapolis will now allow residential structures with up to three units in every
neighborhood.10
Support Legislation—No Fault Eviction for Older Adults (H3373)
Northampton should review and consider supporting this proposed state legislation that will authorize
municipalities to prohibit eviction of older adults over 75 without just cause. The bill requires that the
municipality be notified when a landlord is seeking to evict someone over age 75 and set a ceiling for any rent
increase bigger than 5%. The bill seeks to prohibit no fault evictions such as when landlords or property
owners want to clear out the building in order to renovate or sell to higher income individuals.
Support Legislation—Rent Arrearage Program (H1264)
Northampton should review and consider supporting this initiative that proposes restoring a statewide rent
arrearage program, which would provide cash assistance to cover the cost of up to four months of back rent or
mortgage payments for low income households, prior to the start of eviction or foreclosure proceedings.
Support Legislation—Tenants’ Right to Purchase (H1260)
Northampton should review and consider supporting this initiative that will allow municipalities to adopt a
right of purchase for tenants in rental properties with six or more units, in order to minimize displacement of
long term tenants. The bill will give existing tenants or tenant associations the opportunity to match any bona
10 “Minneapolis, Tackling Housing Crisis and Inequality, Votes to End Single-Family Zoning,” New York Times, December
13, 2018. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/12/13/us/minneapolis-single-family-zoning.html?module=inline
16
fide offer to sell the property or to assign their right to purchase to a non-profit acting on their behalf such as a
community development corporation.
Support Legislation—Increased Community Preservation Act Funding (H2463/S1618)
Northampton should review and consider supporting this initiative that would increase the state match for
communities that have adopted the Community Preservation Act (CPA) as Northampton has done. This
funding may be used for affordable housing production.
Support Legislation—Local Option Transfer Fee to Fund Affordable Housing
(H1769/S773, H2552, H2457)
Northampton should review and consider supporting these initiatives (co-sponsored by Senator Comerford of
Northampton) to allow municipalities to impose real estate fees in order to generate revenue to support
affordable housing. The various proposals differ now in details so work will be required to determine which
proposal advances and which to support.
Explore the Use of Revenue from a Short-term Rental Regulation for Affordable
Housing
Mayor Narkewicz successfully proposed that the City of Northampton adopt two local option community
impact fees included in the state’s new short-term rental law regulating Airbnb and similar operators. Under
the Mayor’s proposal, which was adopted unanimously by the City Council, an additional 3% community
impact fee will be levied against short-term rentals (such as Airbnb’s) of two or more professionally managed
units and owner-occupied two and three-family homes. The Mayor’s proposal dedicates 100% of the revenue
generated from these short-term rental community impact fees to supporting affordable housing efforts. The
Housing Partnership will provide input to the Mayor regarding how this funding is spent to best support
affordable housing.
Provide Resources to help Improve Credit
The National Fair Housing Association (NFHA) advocates policies, like preserving the disparate impact tool, that
expand credit access in the financial mainstream because accessing credit in this space yields financial
opportunities that inure to the benefit of the consumer and society 11. Newly elected MA State Rep Ayanna
Presley testified about the challenges of living as an un-banked person in Massachusetts and the NFHA has a
useful graphic on their website that shows how easy it is to get stuck in a cycle of no credit/low credit that
drives poor people to borrow with high interest, thereby spending more and then never building a credit rating
because the high interest ‘alternative lenders’ do not participate in the mainstream credit market.
Northampton and its partners should work to provide resources to help individuals improve their credit,
making it easier for them to access housing.
Rent Control
While Massachusetts Governor Baker recently came out against rent control, there is growing interest across
the Commonwealth in re-visiting this approach that was banned in Massachusetts in 1994 and this plan
11 https://nationalfairhousing.org/access-to-credit/
17
recommends the city of Northampton and its Fair Housing allies investigate this possible solution. Other states
are working on this, including Oregon that recently become the first state in the nation to impose rent control
on landlords, after lawmakers passed an extensive measure in February, 2019 that was signed by the
Governor. As reported on National Public Radio, Senate Bill 608 sailed through the state's House in a 35-25
vote. The bill will limit rent increases to 7 percent each year, in addition to inflation. Subsidized rent would be
exempted, as would new construction for 15 years. If tenants leave their residences of their own volition,
landlords would be able to increase the rent without a cap. The measure would also require landlords to give
a reason for evicting renters — from renovation plans to the landlord's intent to move into the dwelling.
Depending on the cause of the eviction, tenants could receive at least 90 days' notice and one month of paid
rent. 12
Research the Feasibility of Providing Local Tax Abatements to Property Owners who
Keep Rents “Affordable”
The city staff should research whether it is possible and feasible for the city to offer local property tax
abatements for property owners who agree to rent their properties at an approved “affordable” rent. This way
the abundance of single family homes that are rented out now could be affordable. Without such incentives
many property owners are too busy, tired or otherwise occupied to rent their properties themselves and
instead have used third party rental agencies that make moving in hard for people suffering from economic
insecurity by requiring up to three moths rent (1st, last, security deposit) just for people to move in.
Other potential solutions for further research:
• Facilitate construction of more tiny houses and accessory dwelling units (ADUs)
• Create a fund to help Section 8 and low-income renters pay move-in fees
• Explore options for regulating rental finders’ fees
• Provide a property tax abatement for property owners who offer below-market-rents
• Explore ways to inform tenants about energy usage including crowd source apps like Rent Rocket or
energy disclosure requirements
• Explore energy bench-marking requirements that require units to be upgraded for energy efficiency at
certain threshold events (like the sale of a unit)
• Research how to use Property Assessed Clean Energy and Community Choice Aggregation to create
incentives to make it easier for landlords to invest in energy efficiency
Barrier 2: Limited Job Opportunities
“I live in South Deerfield because the agency I work for doesn’t pay
a living wage and I would have to earn at least $15 an hour to
afford a rental in Northampton.” – South Deerfield resident who
works in Northampton
12 https://digboston.com/its-time-to-bring-back-rent-control-in-massachusetts/
18
“So many of the clients I work with are looking for a job but have
trouble accessing employment services. If they can’t get to the
library during MassHire office hours, they’d have to get all the way
up to Greenfield or Springfield.” – Service provider
During the community engagement process, residents of Northampton expressed frustration at the lack of job
opportunities in Northampton that pay a living wage. Without access to jobs that pay a high enough salary,
individuals and families cannot afford the higher rent prices in Northampton 65.8% of survey respondents
identified the lack of employment options that pay a living wage as a barrier to accessing fair housing in
Northampton.
The amount of money a household can afford to spend on housing is deeply connected to housing choice.
Northampton’s median household income was $62,838 according to the 2013-2017 American Communities
Survey (ACS), slightly lower than that of Hampshire County as a whole ($64,974).13 The median household
income for Massachusetts was $74,167. In Northampton, Asian residents have the highest median household
income at $93,472 and Latinos have the lowest at $31,978. Data from the 2013-2017 ACS does not include
median household income for Black households, likely due to a small sample size. The most recent ACS to
include this data is from 2008-2010. This data shows a large disparity between Black households and White
households as well as between Latino households and non-Latino White households. Asian households have a
higher income than any other racial or ethnic group.
FIGURE 7: MEDIAN HOUSEHOLD INCOME (ACS 2006-2010)
13 ACS 2013-2017 Table S1903
$59,505 $61,525
$33,008 $36,108
$49,331 $52,868 $56,007
$28,038 $31,210
$74,167
$-
$10,000
$20,000
$30,000
$40,000
$50,000
$60,000
$70,000
$80,000
Total Households White alone, not
Hispanic or Latino
Hispanic or Latino
(of any race)
Black or African
American
Asian
Hampshire County Northampton
19
Solutions
Relocate a Career Center in Northampton
The MassHire Franklin Hampshire Career Center, the regional career center that serves Northampton, is
located in Greenfield, about a 25 minute drive away. While MassHire used to have an office in Northampton,
that office was shut down and MassHire now holds office hours at the Forbes Library in Northampton once a
week. While this center provides much needed employment and training services at no charge to job seekers,
many find the location inhibits their ability to receive said services. We recommend that the City of
Northampton research the potential of locating a career center again in Northampton to provide easier access
to those in need of workforce development services. Career services could also be provided at other locations
in Northampton where community members go to receive other social services.
Increase Transportation Options
Many who live in Northampton find work in other communities. However in order to have access to these
opportunities, residents must have access to reliable transportation. (See Barrier 6 for more details)
Implement an Award Program for Businesses that Hire Local
In order to incentivize businesses to hire more local residents, we propose that Northampton introduce an
incentive program. Businesses of different sizes would be given awards based on the number of employees
they hire who live in Northampton. This program would not only provide publicity for local businesses that are
already committed to hiring local, but would also encourage other businesses to do the same. However,
before advancing this proposal, City officials must research and understand whether or not such an initiative
would be unintentionally discriminatory, considering that the population of Northampton is whiter than that
of the region. The City does not want to replicate the problems of a local preference for housing that ends up
favoring white people over people of color.
Barrier 3: Limited Knowledge of Fair Housing Rights and
Lack of Trust in Enforcement
“[There are] not enough resources to protect low income renters
from discrimination and unfair housing practices.” – Northampton
resident who experienced discrimination
“Why waste time [reporting discrimination]…just move on to
something else.” – Northampton resident who experienced
discrimination
Of the survey respondents who reported having experiencing housing discrimination, only 21% (about one out
of five) reported having sought help in dealing with the discrimination they experienced. Most of those
respondents (64%) had been discriminated against by a private landlord, property owner, or property
20
manager. Residents reported that they did not know where to go to report a fair housing issue, did not know
what good would come from reporting, and that they feared retribution from landlords. Many community
members also reported that they were not sure what would be considered a violation of fair housing law.
Solutions
Produce a Public Information Campaign—Tenants’ Rights/Landlords Responsibilities
In order to effectively report and end discriminatory practices, residents and landlords both need more
information about fair housing and tenant’s rights. Information about fair housing and tenant’s rights should
be posted on the City’s website. We also recommend a public information campaign to help educate tenants
about their rights and the laws that protect them. Information should be made highly visible, be detailed and
accurate, while catching the eye and directing people to additional resources. This campaign could take the
shape of billboards, bus stop signs, flyers,
and an interactive website.
The Fair Housing Center of Southeastern
Michigan used colorful billboards to provide
information to the public about fair housing.
Their billboards included true/false
statements, specifically about discrimination
against people with disabilities 14.
Support Resident Mentoring
Activity in Affordable Housing Developments
Residents who live in subsidized housing share their knowledge and resources with one another, helping one
another to navigate the system, learn how to follow very restrictive rules and become accustomed to what can
feel like invasive oversight to maintain housing. Affordable Housing complexes should support this self-help
system and expand on it by considering stipending or otherwise supporting “mentor” residents who assist
newcomers and others who may be struggling. Similar tenant to tenant models are being used by other
housing authorities including Somerville HA and Holyoke HA. These mentors/organizers can help to ensure
that tenants’ needs are being met and that their rights are being respected.
Barrier 4: Lack of Housing for Families
“Families I’m trying to place don’t even look in Northampton. They
know that there are so few bigger houses on the market and that
they’re gonna have to compete with college kids. They want to go
14 https://www.fhcmichigan.org/news/#.XMDBRuhKiUl
21
to Northampton schools, but they can’t find a house.” – Service
provider
Twenty-five-percent of Northampton households are comprised of families with children compared to 30.2%
of families in the Pioneer Valley Region. This may be due to the higher cost of living or the lack of available
homes with more bedrooms. The rental stock of homes with more than 3 bedrooms is very limited in
Northampton. Only 5.8% of rental homes and 17% of all homes in Northampton have 4 or more bedrooms.
81.7% of rental units have 2 or less bedrooms.15 This limits rental options for families with children.
Owner Occupied Renter Occupied
Size of Housing
Units
Units Percent of
Total
Units Percent of
Total
Total: 6,229 100.0% 5,177 100.0%
No bedroom 5 <0.1% 273 5.3%
1 bedroom 271 4.3% 1,887 36.4%
2 bedrooms 1,466 23.5% 2,069 40.0%
3 bedrooms 2,812 45.1% 648 12.5%
4 bedrooms 1,297 20.8% 266 5.1%
5 or more
bedrooms
378 6.0% 34 0.7%
People of color are more likely to reside in larger households in Northampton, and also are more likely to be
renters. Asian and Latino families in particular are more likely to have households with more than 5 members
than White and Black households. This may be due to cultural preferences for intergenerational living. While
families may not mind sharing rooms, landlords are often less likely to rent units with fewer rooms to larger
families to avoid overcrowding.
FIGURE 8: HOUSEHOLDS WITH 4+ MEMBERS
15 ACS 2013-2017 B25042
14% 15.70%
21.80%
29.40%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
White, not
Latino
Black Latino Asian
22
Because the rental housing stock available to accommodate larger families and households is so small, and
those who are in need of homes with more bedrooms tend to be people of color, this may be a fair housing
concern. The lack of supply disproportionately impacts members of protected racial groups who tend to be
renters and have larger households.
Solutions
Continue Ongoing Land Use Regulatory Improvements to Facilitate Family Housing
As is described in Appendix C the City should continue to research best practices from other communities of
opportunity to reduce the regulatory burden of developing housing. This research should also be committed to
understanding how the zoning code might limit family housing production—housing with 3 or more bedrooms.
Researchers should consider potential incentives that could be offered to developers for building larger units
that could house families with children. The City of Seattle, for example, published a report on how to
incentivize family housing production. The report includes recommendations such as height bonuses for
buildings with family friendly housing, stronger incentives for developers to include family-sized units, and the
exploration of a family friendly multi-family zoning classification.
Barrier 5: Impediments to Accessibility for Those with
Disabilities
“I work with people with disabilities and have witnessed both overt
and subtle housing discrimination against them.” – Service provider
“We need deep subsidies where people [with disabilities] are only
paying 30% of their income. Otherwise people are spending 70% of
their income on rent. We can’t find the combination of affordable
and accessible units.” – Service provider
People who have disabilities are a protected class under state and federal fair housing laws. The US Census
Bureau defines a disability as a long-lasting physical, mental or emotional condition. These conditions can
make it difficult for a person to do activities such as walking, climbing stairs, dressing, bathing, learning or
remembering and can also make it challenging for individuals to go outside of the home or to work at a job or
business (leading to higher levels of poverty).
Many residents with one or more disabilities face housing challenges due to a lack of housing that is affordable
and/or physically accessible. Residents with disabilities also report direct discrimination in the form of being
refused reasonable accommodations, or being unrightfully turned away from housing opportunities due to
23
their disabilities. Those with disabilities have made the most discrimination complaints to Mass Fair Housing
over the past five years.16 Thirty-one (31) complaints were made in Northampton based on disability out of 57
total complaints. In Hampshire and Hampden Counties, the most reported type of discrimination was also due
to disability with a total of 597 cases between 2014 and 2019 (44% of all reports).17
FIGURE 9: DISCRIMINATION COMPLAINTS TO MASS FAIR HOUSING
According to the U.S. Census Bureau’s 2013-2017 American Community Survey, approximately 11.1% of
Northampton’s population has a disability, 3,073 individuals. Most of these individuals (6.2% of the
population) have ambulatory difficulties but other disability types include cognitive difficulty, vision difficulty,
hearing difficulty, independent living difficulty, and self-care difficulty. 6.5% of children under the age of 18
and 45.2% of adults over the age of 75 have a disability.18 For more data on the demographics of those with
disabilities in Northampton, see Appendix B.
The population of Northampton and across the country is aging as baby boomers hit retirement age. This is
important to note due to the likelihood of older individuals having mobility concerns and thus a need for more
accessible housing. The number of individuals ages 65 and above is projected to increase by 94% by 2035 and
the population of those with disabilities will thus also increase. It is expected that by 2035, 32.5% of the
population over 65 will have a disability, or an increase of 1,496 individuals. Every other age group from 0-69
has been projected to decrease between 2015 and 2035.
16 MFHC, Meris Berquist, ED direct communication 3/19
17 It is important to note that these numbers are likely vastly under-reported. As is discussed elsewhere in this report
many individuals do not know how to report a fair housing issue, or whether or not their specific case qualifies as
discrimination. Numbers for Northampton specifically are also reported only based on landlords who live in Northampton.
For example, if an individual faces discrimination for an apartment in Northampton but the landlord lives in Springfield,
the complaint will be filed under Springfield.
18 ACS 2013-2017 Table S1810
31, 54%
10, 18%
7, 12%
3, 5%
1, 2%
1, 2%
4, 7%
Disability
Race
Familial Status
Public Assistance
National Origin
Religion
Other
24
There is a strong correlation between disability and poverty. 39.2% of people with a disability between 18 and
64 years old are living in poverty in Northampton compared to 13.7% of people between 18 and 64 in poverty
who do not have a disability.19 This makes finding housing as a person with a disability particularly challenging.
For more information on people with disabilities living in publicly funded housing in Northampton, see
Appendix B.
Residents also reported that those with service animals and chemical sensitivities face discrimination when
trying to access housing. Technically, even if a lease says “no pets” a landlord is required to make a reasonable
accommodation to allow pets who serve as assistance animals. However, not every landlord and renter is
aware of these laws, which can lead to discrimination against people with disabilities. Multiple Chemical
Sensitivity, or MCS, is an illness wherein a person reacts to different chemicals used to clean or maintain an
environment. Because MCS is not officially considered an illness through the American Medical Association, it
is often not taken seriously by landlords and property management, leading to disregard of the discomfort and
suffering of residents.
Solutions
Implement a Visitability Ordinance
The City of Northampton should implement a visitability requirement for all new construction. Typically, the
term “visitability” refers to a basic level of accessibility to a home that allows people with disabilities to visit
and includes one entrance with no steps, doorways at least 32 inches wide, and at least one half-bath on the
main floor. Vermont is the only state to require visitability on new single-family homes built with and without
public funds. Austin, Texas has also introduced a visitability ordinance that the city could replicate.20
The new Live 155 development created by Way Finders with architectural services provided by Northampton-
based architect Peter Frothingham in Partnership with LDa Architecture and Interiors of Cambridge includes
the following visitability features:
• All of the units are designed with fully accessible floor plans; roll-through entries, interior doors are
wider, and every room (when furnished) including kitchens and bathrooms allow turn-around space
for wheel chairs, etc. In units that have two floors, a bathroom (and ideally a bedroom) on the entry
floor complies.
• All units are rough-constructed to incorporate roll-in showers; blocking is provided for grab bars as
well as accessible cabinets, appliances, and counters; and specialty rough plumbing and electrical
(wiring for signaling devices such as bed shakers, etc.) are installed.
• The units designated for full accessibility are finish-constructed in full compliance with Architectural
Access Board requirements. The remaining units however are finished with conventional fixtures,
appliances, cabinets, etc.
19 ACS 2013-2017 Table C18130 20 http://cohhio.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/Inclusive_Neighborhoods_2017.pdf
25
The National Council on Independent Living notes that the costs for integrating visitability into new
construction are quite low; they estimate that costs range between $10 and $260 per house.21 The costs of not
making changes to new construction include moving costs, renovation and retrofit costs, medical costs due to
injuries, and the cost of increased institutionalization. Visitability ordinances enable all visitors to get to every
location they desire and welcome greater diversity of lifestyles that promotes a more inclusive community.
Facilitate a Landlord and Property Management Information Sessions on
Accommodation Requests
It is clear, based on the number of reports of discrimination based on disability in Northampton, that training is
needed for landlords and property managers on the rights of those with disabilities and accommodation
requests. The City offered a session like this after the previous AI was published, however they should occur
regularly. These sessions could also include a review of property management policies to ensure that landlords
and property managers are aware of the ways their policies might impact certain populations more than
others. The City should provide training for all landlords.
Barrier 6: Limited Public Transportation
“What I do know is that housing outside of the town centers is
considerably cheaper - but the lack of any bus service prevents
many from living in those areas.” —Northampton resident
“The locations of [some] public housing make many essential
services individuals would utilize hard to access. The public
transportation system does not travel to many of the outer
locations of the community in a timely manner.” – Northampton
resident
“Having a car is an issue if you’re undocumented, so living
somewhere else and commuting in is a huge risk. Most of our folks
can’t get a license or afford a car. Lack of transportation narrows
the possibilities.” – Staff from Center for New Americans
The public transportation system in the Pioneer Valley (as is the case across the United States) is financially
constrained and therefore limited. Much of Northampton is not served by Pioneer Valley Transit Authority’s
(PVTA) bus routes, making many neighborhoods off-limits or inaccessible to individuals who do not have a car
and rely on the bus to get to work, school, and elsewhere.
21 Visitability: Basic Access to Homes, National Council on Independent Living. https://visitability.org/quick-guide-to-low-
costs-of-visitability-vs-costs-of-no-change/
26
Of Northampton residents who work, 48.4% work in Northampton and 51.6% work in other communities.22
Northampton has the third lowest rate in the Pioneer valley of people who work within the community they
live in, followed closely behind Springfield (49%) and Amherst (35.5%). Most residents commute alone by car
(65%) and only 2% use public transit to commute.23
FIGURE 10: COMMUTING FROM NORTHAMPTON
Northampton receives service from several of PVTA’s 41 routes in the Pioneer Valley Region. PVTA Northern
Region riders (those who use the 18 routes in Hampshire County) are more diverse than the population of
Hampshire County as a whole. The largest single racial and ethnic customer group is Whites, followed by
Asians (16.2%, or nearly four times the countywide proportion), Hispanic/Latino (7.5%, or almost twice the
countywide average) and Black/African American (7.6%, or more than three times the countywide average).
During a survey of PVTA users in the northern half of PVTA’s service area, the frequency of service, condition of
bus shelters, and on-time performance received low customer satisfaction scores.24 For those who do not have
a car, having access to public transportation is a primary concern when looking for housing. If bus routes are
not reliable in Northampton, those without cars are less likely to be able to live in the City.
Solutions
Maintain Focus on Increasing Transportation Options
Northampton is striving to have affordable housing developments in the City center and surrounding
neighborhoods where it is easier for people to walk and/or bike to their destinations. This is one of the primary
approaches the City uses to address the challenges facing people with limited means who do not have access
to a vehicle as they struggle to access housing. Northampton has adopted a Complete Streets policy,
22 ACS 2013-2017 Table S0801 23 ACS 2013-2017 Table S0801 24 PVTA onboard Customer Survey Northern Service Region 2016
65%
4%
5%
2%
13%
11% Alone by Car
Bike
Carpool
Public Transit
Walk
Work at Home
27
developed a comprehensive Pedestrian and Bicycle Plan, with enhanced engagement and outreach to
communities of color, submitted a complete streets prioritization plan to MassDOT and secured several
competitive Complete Streets implementation grants. The city also has a comprehensive trails plan and
regularly purchases land as it becomes available for sale to complete planned walking trail system.
In addition, Northampton played a leadership role in launching ValleyBike, our region’s bike sharing system
which is designed to expand transportation options for Northampton residents. The Community Foundation of
Western Massachusetts has generously funded affordable memberships for people who are eligible for
government assistance. The Mayor of Northampton has been extremely active and vocal as a member of the
PVTA Advisory Board and the Pioneer Valley Planning Commission advocating for increased funding for the
PVTA and should continue this leadership role.
Northampton could consider using a ‘cost per person per mile travelled of different transportation modes’ as a
means of evaluating which possible transportation investment is needed in the future. This perspective could
clarify and improve the city’s emphasis on implementing cost-effective ways to move people without cars that
includes not only expanded transit, but also improved pedestrian and bicycling facilities as well as encouraging
and incentivizing development where there is existing infrastructure.
Legislative Advocacy—Regional Ballot Initiatives (S. 1694)
In addition to strongly encouraging Northampton to push for equitable funding of transit in the region—as
compared to the robust public transportation system available to residents of Boston and environs, it is also
recommended that Northampton join the chorus advocating for legislative solutions to the barriers to Fair
Housing Choice identified in this report and echoed in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts recently
completed Statewide AI. Regional Ballot Initiatives would enable one or more municipalities to join together
and ‘tax themselves’ to raise funds for local transportation projects.
Barrier 7: Section 8 Voucher Discrimination
The Housing Choice, or Section 8, voucher program is a federal program designed to assist very low-income
families, the elderly, and the disabled to rent homes. The Massachusetts Rental Voucher Program (MVRP) is a
similar program that is administered through the state. Vouchers are distributed to households in need that
can be used in the private rental market. Vouchers usually cover the difference between the cost of rent and
30% of a household’s income.
The Northampton Housing Authority (NHA) administers Section 8 Housing Choice Vouchers and MVRP, which
provide rental vouchers for 856 units in the private rental market (including SRO units). There are currently
229 applicants on the Section 8 waiting list in Northampton. The voucher list has been closed since 2014 and
the Housing Authority reports that it will be another 3+ years before it is opened again. Families and
individuals have reported waits of longer than 5 years for a voucher. The chart below shows where individuals
who received housing vouchers administered through NHA lived as of February 2019. Approximately 58% of
voucher holders administered through NHA do not live in Northampton (including the neighborhoods of
Florence and Leeds, within Northampton).
28
Municipality Voucher
Holders
Percent
Amherst 28 3.5%
Chicopee 38 4.8%
Easthampton 88 11.0%
Feeding Hills 48 6.0%
Florence 166 20.8%
Greenfield 15 1.9%
Holyoke 32 4.0%
Leeds 42 5.3%
Northampton 129 16.2%
Pittsfield 10 1.3%
South Hadley 13 1.6%
Springfield 88 11.0%
West Springfield 14 1.8%
Westfield 13 1.6%
Other 74 9.3%
Total 798 100.0%
Some landlords refuse to rent to people using Section 8 or MRVP vouchers (3 complaints were made to the
Massachusetts Fair Housing Center over five years in Northampton). Qualitative data gathered through the
community engagement process suggests that it is difficult for households to find appropriate housing using a
voucher in Northampton. While it is illegal to discriminate against a person based on their income or voucher
status according to state law, many landlords still do so, either explicitly or implicitly. As will be discussed
further in this report, housing is also often too expensive in Northampton to be covered by a voucher.
Solutions
Support Housing Mobility Programming
Mass Fair Housing, located in Holyoke, runs a housing mobility program, SUN and currently accepts intakes
from individuals or families with housing vouchers who are interested in moving to, or remaining in, a
community of opportunity. Over the past two years of the program, there have been no successful moves to
Northampton for any SUN clients due to the rental market being unaffordable for individuals who receive
rental assistance. As is noted in other areas of this report, the fair market rent (FMR) for the Springfield
Statistical Area is too low to compensate for the higher rents in Northampton. Using a Small Area FMR is one
potential fix to this problem. However, some voucher holders may also benefit from increased outreach about
the SUN program and the benefits of living in a community of opportunity. In order to best utilize this program,
the City should continue to offer to partner with MFH to provide presentations to potential residents
interested in moving to areas of opportunity. This partnership could lead to a stronger pipeline for voucher
holders to Northampton. The City could also help to create connections between local landlords and the MHC
to ensure that participants in the SUN program know about open units.
The Commonwealth recently announced that they will also be implementing a mobility program with a pilot in
Western Massachusetts housed at Way Finders, the regional housing agency. Northampton is being targeted
29
as a receiving community for this program. The Supporting Neighborhood Opportunity in Massachusetts (SNO
Mass) program serves families with school-aged children who have Housing Choice Vouchers who are
interested in moving to communities that offer greater opportunity. Dedicated counselors provide families
with connections to available units and landlords and financial assistance is available to help with moving costs
and security deposits. This program will also use small area fair market rent rates to increase the amount
attached to vouchers. For more information, see Barrier 9. Data will be collected during this program and
analyzed at the end of a year to assess its success.
Host a Meet and Greet Landlord Day
Throughout stakeholder interviews and focus groups, we heard that home-seekers who experience barriers in
finding housing are more likely to be successful if they have the opportunity to meet with landlords face-to-
face. This allows them to create relationships with landlords as individuals, as opposed to being simply an
application. For this reason, we recommend that the City host a “meet and greet landlord/resident” event for
local landlords and home-seekers. This would provide the opportunity for landlords to distribute applications
for units, home-seekers to fill out applications, and for both groups to meet and interact with each other
directly without mediating agencies that have to add on costs to cover their services.
Host a Social Service Presentation for Landlords
Through our community engagement efforts, we learned that there is often a lack of communication and
mutual understanding that exists between landlords and service providers. Providers rarely have the
opportunity to communicate directly with landlords about the types of services they provide and how those
services help tenants overcome barriers that exist for the people they serve. We recommend that the City host
an event for landlords to come and hear from service providers about the individuals that they serve and what
support services are available. This type of conversation might help to encourage landlords to rent to
individuals who may not otherwise be considered as potential tenants. It can also help to clear up
misconceptions about protected groups. We recommend having service providers present from organizations
who work with immigrant and refugee communities such as the Center for New Americans, returning citizens
(those leaving the prison system), those experiencing homelessness, Section 8 voucher holders, and individuals
with disabilities, such as Stavros.
Barrier 8: Northampton Housing Authority Local
Preference
The Northampton Housing Authority currently has a preference for applicants who live or work in
Northampton. Because Northampton is 81% White, this policy inevitably favors White applicants over
applicants of color.
While Northampton is more racially diverse than Hampshire County, it is less racially diverse than the region as
a whole. In 2017, 18.9% of Northampton’s population identified as people of color, whereas 15.8% of
Hampshire County identified as POC. The Pioneer Valley Region (Hampden and Hampshire Counties) has a
30
more diverse population than Northampton, with 30.2% people of color, which is also higher than the state
percentage of 27.1%.25
Residents of public housing in Northampton are about 2/3 White, whereas in the greater Pioneer Valley
Region, White individuals make up only 13.5% of public housing households 26. 76.61% of residents in public
housing in the Pioneer Valley Region are Latino or Hispanic, versus 28.7% of public housing residents in
Northampton. Similarly, only 2.8% of Northampton’s public housing residents are Black, versus 9.3% for the
region. For more details on the racial makeup of publicly subsidized housing, see Appendix B.
FIGURE 11: RACE OF RESIDENTS IN PUBLIC HOUSING
Residency preferences in public and subsidized affordable housing are a systemic barrier making it that much
harder for low-income families to move into Northampton. Due to the racial make-up of the City, 81% white,
compared to the region, 70% white, a local preference exacerbates racial and ethnic discrimination.
Solutions
Remove NHA Local Preference
Given the disproportionately low numbers of people of color living in the city (compared to state and regional
percentages) a way for the city to affirmatively further fair housing would be to make it easier for non-
residents to secure affordable housing versus prioritizing the majority white resident population. Northampton
Housing Authority should remove its residency preferences from its application policy.
According to HUD a city can be in violation of fair housing law if a policy results in disparate impact on a
protected class. In order to avoid legal action, a city should conduct a statistical analysis to ensure that a case
cannot be brought against them. However, there are no firm guidelines (via HUD, or anyone else) as to how to
statistically “prove” a policy is not discriminatory. HUD does, however, provide a worksheet as part of their
25 US Census, ACS 2013-2017 5-Year Estimates, Table DP05 26 AFFH-T Data and Mapping Tool, HUD Exchange, CHAS
67.59%
13.45%
2.78%
9.33%
28.70%
76.61%
0.93% 0.58%
0.00%
10.00%
20.00%
30.00%
40.00%
50.00%
60.00%
70.00%
80.00%
90.00%
Northampton Pioneer Valley Region
White
Black
Latino/Hispanic
Asian or Pacific Islander
31
Affirmative Fair Housing Marketing Plan that can be used to calculate how the percentage of the eligible
population living or working in the residency preference area compares to that of residents of previous project
applicant data, the census tract of the project, the housing market area, and the expanded housing market
area.
The Abington Housing Authority, in Abington MA, with a population which is whiter than Northampton’s at
92.5, was brought to court under a disparate impact case for the use of a local residency preference in
connection with a lottery for affordable housing units. The court required the housing authorities to submit
analyses of lists using a local residency preference, and lists without the preference. These analyses included
predictions about the impact the preference would have on the racial and income make-up of each list. Since
local residents were more likely to be of a higher income and to be white, the court found that the program
had a disparate impact on people of color.
Barrier 9: Fair Market Rent Calculation
Housing Choice Vouchers (HCVs), also known as Section 8 vouchers, allow residents to choose their own rental
unit on the private market, as long as it meets certain rent and quality parameters. They are designed to allow
residents the chance at relocating to a higher opportunity neighborhood with better schools, lower poverty
rates, and better work opportunities. Fair Market Rent (FMR) is a calculation used to designate how much
money a voucher holder (Section 8 or MRVP) will receive. The FMR used in Northampton is the same as the
entire Pioneer Valley Region. Because rents are higher in Northampton than in most of the region, voucher
holders cannot find inexpensive enough places to rent in Northampton where their voucher will cover the cost.
As is noted earlier in this report, 58% of voucher holders who were administered those vouchers in
Northampton live outside of the City.
Below are the payment standards currently in use by the Northampton Housing Authority.27
During a stakeholder interview with a representative from the Holyoke Housing Authority (a nearby local
community), the issue of mobility was brought up. Holyoke is not a “community of opportunity” and the
27 Northampton Housing Authority, direct communication.
32
Housing Authority was surprised to find how few people are amenable to moving to other high opportunity
areas like Northampton—most stay in Holyoke. Some are working with witness protection or domestic
violence services but still have no interest in leaving their communities. NHA also reports very few numbers of
voucher holders from other communities looking for housing in Northampton.
Solutions
Switch to Small Area FMR
Using a single metropolitan-wide standard as the basis for setting the maximum subsidy available to voucher
holders makes it difficult for households to access housing in Northampton. Thus, we recommend that the
Northampton Housing Authority use small area FMRs as opposed to the FMR designated by the Springfield
Metropolitan Area. These small area FMRs use zip codes to designate rates. In a study prepared for HUD in
2018, researchers compared communities using SAFMRs to those using FMRs over the course of 8 years.28
They found that SAFMRs increased the number of rental units available to voucher holders in high opportunity
neighborhoods and decreased the number of units available in low-opportunity neighborhoods. Voucher
holders in SAFMR housing authorities were more likely to live in higher-rent and higher-opportunity zip codes
than they had before the switch to SAFMRs took place. While housing authorities noted that there was an
administrative cost and burden in implementing and administering SAFMRs, they noted that these were
justified by the benefit to voucher holders.
We recently learned that the Department of Housing and Community Development (DHCD) will soon launch a
pilot program to test the use of small area FMRs in the Pioneer Valley in partnership with Way Finders, a local
community development corporation. For more information, see the Barrier 7.
Support Housing Mobility Programming
(See Barrier 7 for more detail)
Barrier 10: Difficulty of Navigating Affordable Housing
System
“It seems like you need to have an advanced law degree to figure
out these applications. And there are so many of them! You have to
go to each different place and fill out each different application. It’s
overwhelming.” – Homeless service provider
“Newcomers aren’t savvy when it comes to finding housing. It’s a
complicated system. Everyone has a different application and
requires different documentation.” – Immigrant service provider
28 https://www.huduser.gov/portal/sites/default/files/pdf/SAFMR-Evaluation-Final-Report.pdf
33
Respondents in focus groups, stakeholder interviews, and the community survey noted that the process of
finding and applying for affordable housing is incredibly complicated. Applicants are expected to fill out
extensive forms that are often only provided in paper, require a great deal of documentation regarding their
low-income and familial status, and often must re-apply at each location at which they are seeking housing.
This process is emotionally, physically, and at times financially draining, particularly on low-income people who
may already be facing multiple barriers as they seek to access opportunity for themselves, their children and
other family members.
Solutions
Host a Housing Navigator
Northampton and its partners should host a housing navigator to help individuals find housing, similar to a
healthcare navigator at a community health center. Volunteers could be trained to act in these roles,
particularly those who already have past experience navigating the system themselves, however due to the
importance of a role like this we recommend the City or an appropriate community based organization hire a
staff person to serve in this capacity.
Ensure Service Providers are Aware of CHAMP
After many years of AIs and AFFH’s recommending that the State’s Department of Housing and Community
Development (DHCD) create and administer a listing of all available public housing options in Housing
Authorities across the Commonwealth, they finally launched the system on April 10, 2019. CHAMP, the
Common Housing Application for Massachusetts Public-Housing is designed to assist people to apply for state-
aided public housing and find any existing applications they might have. 29 Those who work with home-seekers
should distribute information about CHAMP widely so that applicants are aware of the new system.
Provide a Centralized Location to Access Services, Community Center
At the final community meeting to advance work on targeted draft recommendations of this report, both
housing advocates and people who rely on subsidized housing articulated the need for a physical space where
individuals and families who need assistance navigating the complicated housing support system can go to
receive help. The physical space should have on-site child care, Spanish language interpretation/translation,
computers available to use at no cost as well as paper copies of the many forms required to get on housing
assistance and paid staff or volunteers to assist.
Barrier 11: Service Agencies Have Limited Resources
“Mental health and substance abuse issues are a huge struggle.
People are at risk of eviction because of behaviors connected to
29 https://publichousingapplication.ocd.state.ma.us/
34
those things. There is a lack of services and support. Capacity is
really tapped at agencies doing good work… Reasonable
accommodation and fair housing laws are helpful, but there have to
be solutions for landlords that whatever concerning behavior is
going to stop. It’s all connected to people having access to
supports.” – Service provider
Many organizations that provide services to our most vulnerable community members reported during
stakeholder interviews that there simply are not enough resources to meet the need. Counselors and social
workers are not able to provide long-term care and assistance due to budgetary constraints which often leaves
residents with behavioral and/or health issues at risk of eviction.
Solutions
Social Service Presentation for Landlords
(See Barrier 7 for more details)
Encourage Trauma Informed Property Management
Many of those who need to access affordable housing have experienced trauma (or currently are) as a result of
a distressing or dangerous event (for example, living on the streets or experiencing domestic violence). Trauma
can cause ongoing problems including strong emotional reactions and PTSD. Because many tenants may be
dealing with trauma on a daily basis, it is important for Housing Authority staff and staff at other affordable
housing programs and properties to be “trauma-informed.” Trauma-Informed Care (TIC) is an approach to
human services that understands and considers the pervasive nature of trauma and avoids inadvertently re-
traumatizing those being served. Many of the issues that come up for tenants during their residencies in
affordable housing are directly related to the trauma they have experienced. Housing Authority staff and
affordable housing staff should be required to complete a TIC training to help them to better understand the
experiences of their tenants and better help them to stay housed.
Barrier 12: Northampton Housing Authority Information
Accessibility
The Northampton Housing Authority’s information is located on the City’s website, and thus its services are
available online in other languages as long as the user sees how to switch the language option on the city’s
home page. A representative of Community Legal Aid, a nonprofit that provides free civil legal services to low-
income and elderly residents of western Massachusetts, mentioned that people often do not understand
forms that are mailed to them, “they don’t understand the forms, so they miss deadlines, and then they miss
out on opportunities.” A Language Accessibility Plan is not available online, nor is any other NHA policy. Of the
population of residents of Northampton who are over 5 years old, 12.6% speak a language other than English.
35
Of those who speak another language, 20% speak English “less than very well.”30 Spanish is the most prevalent
language spoken in Northampton besides English. 21.6% of people over five years old in the Pioneer Valley
Region speak a language other than English at home and 34% of those individuals speak English “less than very
well.” For more data and information on the foreign born population in Northampton see Appendix B.
The Northampton Housing Authority’s Admissions and Continued Occupancy Policy for its public housing units
states that they will complete an analysis to decide what language assistance services are appropriate
depending on the Limited English Proficiency (LEP) population being served. They then state that “if it is
determined that the [public housing authority] serves very few LEP persons, and the PHA has very limited
resources, the PHA will not develop a written LEP plan, but will consider alternative ways to articulate in a
reasonable manner a plan for providing meaningful access A language accessibility plan (LAP) has been written,
but at the time this report was written was not posted online.
Between May and December of 2015, the Massachusetts Fair Housing Center tested the Northampton Housing
Authority for language access for Spanish-speaking applicants. During this testing session, White English-
speaking testers were sent to apply for housing at NHA, followed by Spanish-speaking Latino applicants. The
two test groups were not provided with the same information during the testing period. Translations of
important information were not posted publicly. During one test, a Spanish-speaking tester was given a phone
number to call that was not in service, whereas English-speaking testers were given detailed information in
their own language. By not providing the same information to those who speak different languages, the
Northampton Housing Authority was not providing equal access to its housing. Since that time, the NHA has
instituted operational changes to address that issue. They have chosen one language assistance plan (LAP) for
all of their physical sites and programs to make sure that their policies and procedures are consistent.
Language assistance to individuals with limited English proficiency for important critical junctures, such as
assistance with the application, the application interview, recertification, health and safety related issues, fair
housing related matters (including any discussions regarding the need for reasonable accommodation), conflict
resolution between residents, lease violation notification and related meetings, and relocation and
displacement issues is available when requested. Notice of the right to free language assistance is provided in
their offices and presented anytime a member of the NHA staff is in contact with an individual with limited
English proficiency. In addition to hiring bilingual staff to act as interpreters for applicants, voucher holders and
tenants, the Housing Authority has implemented the use of LanguageLine Solutions to provide verbal and
written translations as needed. This program not only provides translations in 35 spoken languages by
telephone but also provides InSight video Interpreting for people with hearing impairments.
Solutions
Create NHA Website
In order to best serve the needs of the community, NHA must have its own website to ensure that information
is accessible. This website should provide access to policies, contact information, and an online application.
30 US Census, ACS 2013-2017 5-Year Estimates, Table S1601
36
Translate Public Materials into Multiple Languages
Northampton Housing Authority should make it a priority to assure ability to view its website in Spanish, and
other languages based on an assessment of the language characteristics of residents and the region. All
language accessibility plans should be posted on the City’s website, including the LAP for the Northampton
Housing Authority. Information on how to access Housing Authority services should be provided in many
languages on the website and in the Housing Authority office and at the NHA properties.
Participate in Anti-Racism or Undoing Racism Training/Workshop
In order to best serve all of the residents of the Pioneer Valley we recommend the Northampton Housing
Authority participate in an anti-racism/Undoing Racism training like those provided by the Government
Alliance on Race and Equity (GARE) or the People’s Institute or Glasswing. The City could coordinate with
neighboring communities to share the cost of the training and expand access to equity trainings to other
communities of opportunity. Barrier 13: Incarcerated and Returning Citizens Cannot Find Homes
“I get out in two days and I have absolutely no idea where I’m going
to go. I have a job. I might have to stay in a hotel for a couple of
weeks. I’m anxious and worried, I’m not gonna lie. And I’m not
trying to put any blame on the jail, it’s up to us to follow through
and put in the work. There are only so many resources to go
around. I at least have a leg up with the job.” – Currently
incarcerated individual
Many large rental companies will screen applicants for Criminal Offender Record Information (CORI). If a
person has a criminal record, they are often refused apartments, regardless of how long ago the crime took
place. Because the population of individuals with a criminal record is disproportionately high for people of
color, this type of screening impacts people of color disproportionately. In addition, due to security, some
incarcerated individuals do not have internet access, meaning that they cannot search for housing before they
become returned citizens.
Solutions
Increase Access to Housing Resources for Incarcerated Individuals
Inmates face many challenges while seeking housing. Due to security concerns not all inmates have access to
the internet to search for housing and do not know how to find housing once they return to their communities.
We recommend that workshops are provided to all incarcerated individuals that provide resources on how to
challenge denials based on CORI records, be granted supervised access to the internet for housing searches,
and provided counseling on how to connect with private landlords who might be less likely to consider a CORI
check. Massachusetts legal aid programs might be an appropriate organization to aid in these workshops.31
31 https://www.masslegalhelp.org/housing/turning-a-denial-around
37
In 2005, the House of Correction initiated a collaboration between local police departments, the
Massachusetts State Police, the departments of parole and probation, and numerous community service
providers to review transitioning offenders. This coordinated effort allows a sharing of information and
resources between the many agencies involved with individuals leaving custody and returning to the
community. It supports a more coordinated transition for men leaving the House of Correction and the
numerous organizations they are involved with during release.
Unfortunately, however, with private landlords often being reluctant to rent to people with criminal record
histories, and some public housing authorities outright banning people with CORI's from certain units, many
inmates not returning to family or friends get placed on emergency shelter waitlists. A potential community
collaboration could include the House of Corrections working with affordable housing developers to create
"Next step" housing in the community to allow post incarcerated people to establish solid credit and landlord
references, to take into the private market.
Barrier 14: Length of Affordable Housing Waitlists
“Everything moves at a snail’s pace. They said they’d put me on a
list, and then told me I’d be at the bottom of 500 applicants.” –
Northampton resident
“Domestic violence survivors get put on their own waitlist, but
sometimes it takes 7 years to get an apartment. When they’re
waiting, sometimes they end up back with their abuser.” – Anti-
Domestic violence staff
The waitlists for affordable housing in Northampton are very long. While the City has made huge strides in
producing more units in the last few years, more affordable housing is needed in the city and throughout the
region to meet the need.
All Housing Authority applications have a residency preference that includes those living or being offered
employment in Northampton at the time of the application, veterans, those experiencing homelessness, and
survivors of domestic violence. Units for the elderly and the disabled are also available and can only be filled by
those who need the accommodation. The wait for both federal and state units is over 2 years, with reports
that households have been told to wait as long as 8 years. Some preference is given for emergency situations
depending on vacancies, but the wait is still between 8-12 months.32 The charts below show the waitlist
lengths for federal and state units. As was noted by a representative from the Northampton Housing
Authority, federal waitlists have not been open for about five years.
32 Direct Communication Jack Redman, Northampton Housing Authority, 4/23/19
38
Federally Funded Affordable Housing Waitlist
Type of Unit 1 Br 2 Br 3 BR
Elderly/Disabled 225 6
Family 0 36 4
State Funded Affordable Housing Waitlist
Type of Unit All
Bedrooms
Elderly/Disabled 415
Family 477
Solutions
Continue production of affordable housing stock
(See Barrier 1 for more details)
Barrier 15: Lead Paint
“The States’ lead paint laws have become de facto legalized
discrimination as property owners simply refuse to address the lead
paint in their properties and therefore say they cannot rent to
families with children.” – Representative from the Massachusetts
Fair Housing Center
Northampton has an old housing stock; the median year housing structures were built is 1950. 50.8% of all
houses in Northampton were built before 1950.33 Older homes often present problems for residents, including
lead paint. Lead was banned in residential paint starting in 1978 and homes that were built before 1950 are
most likely to have lead paint in them. Lead paint poses a health risk to children and pregnant women, causing
permanent cognitive and behavioral problems. The Massachusetts Lead Law requires the removal or control of
lead paint in homes with children under six, a process that is often costly. Landlords must de-lead a home
before a young child can live there, otherwise they can be held legally responsible for any lead-related illness
or injury.
According to Massachusetts General Law Chapter 111 Section 197, any owner of a property in which a child
under the age of 6 resides must abate lead paint that exists at dangerous levels. This law may have the
unintended consequence of dissuading landlords from renting to families with young children due to the
33 US Census, ACS 2013-2017 5-Year Estimates, Table DP04
39
potential cost of lead paint abatement, and/or making it temporarily impossible as the property owners wait
for funding availability. This ‘temporary’ (but in reality long-term) removal of multi-bedroom homes from the
market for families with children is a barrier to fair housing. In 2016 Massachusetts dropped the threshold for
lead poisoning to 10 micrograms per deciliter, and the de-leading requirements were simplified – for the most
part to friction surfaces and “accessible” surfaces (window sills, railing caps). While deemed ‘not perfect’ by
advocates, this move was seen as a good step towards ending discrimination based on lead paint. However,
there is not enough public funding for lead paint remediation on a large scale.
Families with children under the age of six who seek rental housing in Northampton face discrimination based
on the presence of lead. These families often engage in lengthy housing searches, are repeatedly rejected by
landlords who are aware of lead paint in their properties, and receive eviction notices if they are expecting a
child. This situation restricts housing choice, can cause homelessness, housing instability, and unnecessary
stress on families.
As can be seen in the map below, homes that are closer to city center and thus with better access to
transportation and downtown amenities, are more likely to be older than those on the outer parts of the City.
More detailed data on the location of older homes can be found in Appendix B.
40
FIGURE 12: YEAR STRUCTURES WERE BUILT
The oldest structures are in census tracts 8219.01, 8219.03, 8219.04, and 8220. The median year homes were
built in these areas was before 1939. Census tracts 8217, 8222, and 8216.01 are the only census tracts where
the median year is higher than 1950, the age considered safer in terms of potential lead exposure.34 A map of
census tract locations can be found in Appendix B. Particular attention should be given to those census tracts
wherein a higher percentage of young children live and the age of housing is older. Census tract 8216.02 has a
higher percentage of young children than the city average and a median housing age of 1941. It is also
important to note that children of color and poor children are disproportionately victims of lead poisoning.35
Census Tract Median Year
Structures Built
% of Residents
Under Age 6
% of Residents
Identifying as a
Person of Color
Northampton 1948 4.3% 19.1%
8216.01 1968 6.9% 27.4%
8216.02 1941 6.9% 20.9%
8217 1958 4.0% 10.1%
8219.01 1939 or earlier 2.8% 13.0%
8219.03 1939 or earlier 2.9% 22.0%
8219.04 1939 or earlier 3.6% 13.2%
8220 1939 or earlier 0.1% 34.4%
8222 1972 4.7% 17.6%
34 US Census, ACS 2013-2017 5-Year Estimates, Table B25035 35 US Census, ACS 2013-2017 5-Year Estimates, Table DP05
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
1939 or
earlier
1940 to
1949
1950 to
1959
1960 to
1969
1970 to
1979
1980 to
1989
1990 to
1999
2000 to
2009
2010 to
2013
2014 or
laterNumber of Units
41
Solutions
Maintain and Expand Lead Paint Remediation Programming
Lead paint remediation is one of the ongoing pressing and yet unresolved issues in Massachusetts. The
Northampton Housing Partnership should research additional funding sources for a robust lead paint
remediation program to help homeowners remove the dangerous substance from their properties. At the
State AI meeting participants pointed out that the way MA has handled lead paint has led to de facto
‘apparently legal’ housing discrimination, as landlords are not required to fix the problem, and homeowners
are only required to disclose the presence of lead paint when they sell their home, if they know it is there, so
homeowners have a disincentive to assess the problem. The City of Worcester is working proactively to
address this problem as they successfully secured a $3,700,000 federal grant from the Office of Lead Hazard
Control and Healthy Homes to work on remediation.
The City’s Housing Rehabilitation program, administered by PVPC since 2016, has a $45,000 cap per unit in
order to accommodate for the high costs of lead remediation. This Community Development Block Grant
(CDBG) funded program helps to remediate lead from between 3 to 5 units per year. So far, 13 units have been
rehabbed and five more are in the pipeline. Lead testing is conducted on every participating property and
abatement occurs when required. A more robust funding program could provide resources for property
owners who may not meet the CDBG eligibility income requirements, and address more units, such as multi-
family buildings.
42
Barrier 16: Sub-Standard Housing Stock
“I’ve seen black mold in my apartment building and the property
manager just comes in and paints over it. That doesn’t remove
black mold! It’s a health hazard and no one is doing anything about
it.” – Northampton resident
“[Some landlords] do not come through on providing what was
promised in exchange for rent-- a clean, habitable, safe place to live
free of hazards, and infestation and they do nothing to remedy the
problem because they know their renters are low-income and don't
have the means or time to take them to court.”—Northampton
Resident
There are housing issues other than lead that impact the quality of life of Northampton residents. According to
HUD, a household is said to have a housing problem if they have any one or more of the following problems:
the housing unit lacks complete kitchen facilities, the housing unit lacks complete plumbing facilities, the
household is overcrowded (more than 1 person per room), or the household is cost burdened. According to
the chart below, people of color, non-family households, and family households with more than 5 members
are more likely to experience housing problems in Northampton and in the region in general. Other issues
reported by residents included heating inadequacy, black mold, rodent infestations, and general lack of
cleanliness upon move-in. Some residents have said they will not report housing issues to a landlord because
they fear retaliation. As a service provider serving low-income residents in Northampton said, “Some have
lived in really shoddy housing that is very overcrowded. Because housing is so scarce, people will bend over
backwards with [bad] situations because they like living in Northampton.”
The chart below identifies the percent of households in Northampton and the Pioneer Valley region who are
experience any of the four housing problems: housing lacks complete kitchen facilities, housing lacks complete
plumbing facilities, housing is overcrowded, and household is cost burdened.
Disproportionate Housing Needs 36 Northampton Pioneer Valley
Region
Households experiencing any of 4
housing problems
% with
problems
% with
problems
36 AFFH Table 9 Demographics of Households with Disproportionate Housing Needs; CHAS
43
Race/Ethnicity
White, Non-Hispanic 33.53% 32.11%
Black, Non-Hispanic 67.04% 46.69%
Hispanic 37.40% 57.85%
Asian or Pacific Islander, Non-Hispanic 31.24% 43.79%
Native American, Non-Hispanic 71.43% 57.29%
Other, Non-Hispanic 48.25% 54.10%
Total 34.37% 37.13%
Household Type and Size
Family households, <5 people 22.80% 30.38%
Family households, 5+ people 46.79% 45.60%
Non-family households 43.46% 45.73%
Solutions
Create a Registry of Landlords
Some cities and towns use a landlord registry to ensure efficient and effective communication with people and
companies who own rental properties. These registries also help to promote the health and safety of tenants
and residents by providing oversight. A few examples of municipalities who use landlord registries are: Troy,
NY; South Bend, IN; Amherst, MA; and Omaha, NE. Some municipalities require regular inspections (Omaha,
for example, requires inspections of all rental properties every ten years) and some charge a small fee to help
fund the program.
Publicize/Promote Property Improvement Resources/Funding
The Commonwealth of Massachusetts, the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, various
utility companies, , Anchor Institutions? andfoundations have numerous programs (HMLP, MassSave, etc.)
available to assist property owners to bring properties up to code and make them safe, accessible and energy
efficient. The city should work with PVPC, the Commonwealth and these other entities to assure funds are
brought to Northampton properties to correct the alarming number of problem properties identified in the
chart above.
44
Action Plan
Action Timeline Responsible Party
Identify funding sources to continue
Community Housing Support Services Program
Short Mayor’s Office/ Housing & CDBG, Center for Human Development,
Community Legal Aid, Northampton Housing Authority
Conduct Landlord and Property Management
Training on Reasonable Accommodation
Short Northampton Housing Partnership, Community Legal Aid, Stavros Center for
Independent Living, Northampton Housing Authority, Mass Fair Housing
Center
Host a Social Service Presentation for
Landlords
Encourage “Conditional” Tenancies
Short Mayor’s Office/ Housing and CDBG, Northampton Housing Partnership,
community social service providers
Host a Meet and Greet
Landlord/ Tenant Day
Encourage “Conditional” Tenancies
Short Mayor’s Office/Housing & CDBG, Northampton Housing Partnership, Landlord
community, Hampshire County Resource Center, Hampshire County House of
Corrections, Northampton Veteran’s Services Office, other housing search
organizations
Ensure Service Providers are Aware of
CHAMP/ Common Housing Application for
Massachusetts Public Housing
Short Mayor’s Office/ Housing and CDBG, Northampton Housing Partnership,
Northampton Housing Authority, Western Mass Network to End
Homelessness
Encourage Trauma Informed Property
Management/ Identify Trainers, Conduct
Sessions
Short Mayor’s Office/ Housing and CDBG, Northampton Housing Partnership, area
property managers and housing providers
Create Northampton Housing Authority
Website With Language Options
Short Northampton Housing Authority
45
Translate all Housing Authority Materials into
Multiple Languages & Provide on website and
at office locations
Short Northampton Housing Authority, area property managers and housing
providers
Investigate Adoption of Small Area FMR’s at
Northampton Housing Authority
Short Mayor’s Office/Housing & CDBG, Northampton Housing Partnership,
Northampton Housing Authority
Identify Procedure for Utilizing Air B and B
Community Impact fees for affordable housing
Short Mayor’s Office/ Housing & CDBG, Northampton Housing Partnership
Participate in SNO Housing Mobility Pilot
Program/ Include Language Access
Component
Short Mayor’s Office/ Housing & CDBG, Northampton Housing Partnership, Way
Finders, Center for New Americans, International Language Institute
Encourage Housing Developers to Work with
Stavros when accessible units are created
Short Mayor’s Office/ Housing & CDBG , Northampton Office of Planning and
Sustainability, Stavros Center for Independent Living, Northampton Disability
Commission
Support Legislation:
No Fault Eviction for Older Adults, Rent
Arrearage Programs, Tenants' Right to
Counsel, Increased Community Preservation
Act Funding, Local Option Transfer Fee to Fund
Affordable Housing, Regional Ballot Initiatives
Short
On-going
Mayor’s Office/ Housing & CDBG, Northampton Housing Partnership, Western
Mass Network to End Homelessness, Pioneer Valley Planning Commission,
State Legislative Delegation
Address Barrier Created for Tenants by Rental
Agency Finder’s Fee Requirement
Short Mayor’s Office/ Housing & CDBG, Northampton Housing Partnership, Rent
NOHO
46
Examine CDBG set aside fund for landlords to
cover unit damage / Incentive to accept
Section 8 vouchers
Medium Mayor’s Office/ Housing & CDBG, Northampton Housing Partnership,
Landlord community
Consider tax abatement for private landlords
to accept tenants with Rental Vouchers
Medium Mayor’s Office/ Housing & CDBG, Assessor’s Office, Northampton Housing
Partnership
Consider CDBG set aside in Housing Rehab
Program for Landlords to Accomplish
Reasonable Accommodation
Medium Mayor’s Office/ Housing & CDBG, Northampton Housing Partnership, Pioneer
Valley Planning Commission, Northampton Disability Commission, Stavros
Support Creation of Full Time ADA Coordinator
Position / locally or regionally based
Medium Mayor’s Office/ Housing & CDBG, Northampton Disability Commission
Schedule and Participate in Anti-Racism or
Undoing Racism Trainings/Workshop
Medium Mayor’s Office/Housing & CDBG, City Departments, Northampton Housing
Partnership, Northampton Human Rights Commission, Northampton Housing
Authority, community partners
Create a Housing Navigator Position Medium Mayor’s Office/Housing & CDBG, Northampton Housing Partnership,
community partners
Provide Resources to Help Repair/Improve
Credit
Medium Mayor’s Office/Housing & CDBG, Northampton Housing Partnership Way
Finders, Valley CDC, Community Action Pioneer Valley, area banking
institutions
Increase Career Center Presence in
Northampton & Remove Language barriers
Medium Mayor’s Office, MassHire
Implement an Award Program for Businesses
that Hire local
Medium Mayor’s Office, Northampton Chamber of Commerce
----
47
Implement a Visitability Ordinance Medium Northampton Planning and Sustainability/Housing, Northampton Housing
Partnership, Stavros, Local American Institute of Architects Chapter
List Inventory of Local Handicap Accessible
Units and Vacancies on Line
Encourage Housing Providers to use Mass
Access Registry
Medium Mayor’s Office/ Housing & CDBG, Housing Partnership, Northampton Housing
Authority, Stavros, Northampton Disability Commission, Affordable Housing
Providers
Support On-going Housing Mobility
Programming
Medium Mayor’s Office/Housing & CDBG, Northampton Housing Partnership, Mass
Fair Housing Center, Way Finders - Supporting Neighborhood Opportunity
Project (SNO)
Identify & Adopt Regulatory Land Use
Improvements to Facilitate Family Housing
Medium Mayor’s Office/Housing & CDBG, Northampton Housing Partnership,
Northampton Office of Planning and Sustainability, Pioneer Valley Planning
Commission
Increase Housing Resources for Post-
Incarcerated Individuals (Returning Citizens)
Medium Mayor’s Office/Housing & CDBG, Northampton Housing Partnership,
Hampshire County House of Corrections
Provide Lead Paint Remediation Programming Medium Mayor’s Office/Housing and CDBG, Northampton Housing Partnership,
Pioneer Valley Planning Commission/Northampton Housing Rehabilitation
Program, City Health Department
Research Refugee Placement Circles of Care
model to mentor/assist people
Medium Mayor’s Office/Housing & CDBG, Northampton Housing Partnership, Next
Step Collaborative, Catholic Charities
Examine (Re)Creation of Community Land
Trust
Medium/Long Northampton Housing Partnership, Mayor’s Office/Housing & CDBG, Valley
CDC, Massachusetts Housing Partnership
Encourage the Creation of Local Landlord
Association for Information Dissemination and
Support
Medium/Long Northampton Housing Partnership, Northampton Chamber of Commerce,
Way Finders
Continue Production of Affordable Housing
- Housing First Units/Low Barrier
- Housing and Support Services for
Women
Short/Medium/Long , Mayor’ Office/Housing & CDBG, Northampton Planning and Sustainability
Pioneer Valley Habitat for Humanity, Way Finders, Valley CDC, Home City
Housing, Friends of Hampshire County Homeless Individuals, Safe Passage,
State Department of Housing and Community Development, Dept. of Mental
Health, other public and private housing developers
48
Encourage Regional Participation in Regional
Housing Production
On-going Mayor’s Office/Housing & CDBG, Northampton Housing Partnership, Pioneer
Valley Planning Commission, Western Mass Network to End Homelessness,
Three County Continuum of Care/Community Action of Pioneer Valley
Continue to Assist Households in Becoming
Homeowners
On-going Mayor’s Office/Housing & CDBG, Valley Community Development
Corporation, Pioneer Valley Habitat for Humanity Community Action Pioneer
Valley,
Encourage On Site Workshops on Financial
Literacy, Eviction Prevention, Orientations to
Promote Successful Tenancies for tenants
where they live
On-going Mayor’s Office/Housing & CDBG, Community Housing Support Services
Program, Community Legal Aid, area housing property managers
Require On Site Resident Service
Coordinators/ Support Services for all new
affordable housing developments and
advocate for funding to ensure
On-going Mayor’s Office/ Housing & CDBG, Northampton Housing Partnership,
Affordable Housing Developers
Increase Transportation Options
Ongoing PVTA, Northampton Planning and Sustainability, ValleyBike, PVPC, MassDOT,
FTA, USDOT, State and federal elected officials
Short = within one year
Medium = Between 1-3 years
Long = 3+ years
49
Appendices
50
Appendix A: Community Engagement
Fair Housing Survey
A survey was distributed to the public to gather input on fair housing issues in Northampton and the Pioneer
Valley in general. The survey was created on SurveyMonkey and distributed through email lists, a Facebook
page, the Mayor’s Twitter account, and through our various community partners. Hard copies were also made
available at several social service organizations and at the Forbes Public Library. The survey was available in
both English and Spanish. A total of 204 responses were collected; 203 in English and 1 in Spanish. As is typical
of community surveys, respondents do not represent the entire population of Northampton, and thus their
responses must be considered with some reservations. Most respondents were older (55-74), White, and
homeowners with high levels of education.
A few of the major findings are listed below:
• The top two housing challenges in Northampton were identified as affordability and lack of housing.
• Not all of the features that are important to residents of Northampton are equally available in all areas
of the city.
• Some populations have less access to jobs that pay decent wages and to reliable bus service.
• Rising rents and a lack of employment opportunities are the most impactful barriers being faced by
those who responded to the survey.
• Only 7% of respondents believe that housing discrimination is not an issue in Northampton, the other
93% believe it is a problem, or are not sure.
• 13% of respondents reported having been discriminated against during a housing search, and another
7% think they were, but are not sure. Of those who have been discriminated against, 63% reported
that the discrimination happened by a private landlord, property owner, or property manager. 10%
experienced discrimination from a public housing authority staff person, and 13% from a rental agent.
• Section 8 or public assistance recipients, families with children, and people with disabilities were the
most reported groups facing discrimination. Those with disabilities have also faced landlords who
refused to make improvements to their unit to assist with their disability.
• Of those who reported facing discrimination, only 21% sought help. Those who did not seek help did
not know where to go, didn’t know what good it could do, were afraid of retaliation, and were not sure
if the discrimination was against the law.
• 66% of those who are interested in moving to Northampton want to be closer to services or amenities
that are offered there. 53% want to be closer to work or job opportunities.
• Respondents who reported having an interest in moving to Northampton said that they had not done
so yet because it is too expensive.
Focus Groups
As a means of better understanding the experiences of protected classes, focus groups were conducted in
partnership with social service agencies throughout Northampton in the winter and spring of 2019. These
groups lasted between 30 and 60 minutes and participants were gathered by social service agencies
themselves to ensure buy-in. Focus groups were hosted at:
51
• The Northampton Recovery Center with those recovering from addictions
• The Hampshire County House of Corrections Pre-Release program for those currently incarcerated and
soon to be released
• Hampshire County Homeless Resource Center- those experiencing homelessness
• Safe Passage- survivors of domestic violence (note: this focus group was conducted with staff from
Safe Passage to protect the identities of those receiving services)
Stakeholder Interviews
In January of 2019, ten stakeholder interviews were held over the course of two days. Stakeholders were
invited from surrounding towns and governments, housing providers, realtors, government officials and staff,
social service and housing search workers, property managers, housing authorities, and disability community
advocates. Each meeting consisted of between 4 and 8 participants. After being given a brief overview of the
project, a few basic questions were asked with the intention of sparking conversation and response amongst
the participants. The questions that were asked were:
1) What barriers do you see facing Northampton and Pioneer Valley residents when they are trying to
access housing?
2) What solutions can you imagine to deal with these barriers?
3) What information, resources, data, etc. might help you or your agency better understand issues of fair
housing in the region?
Questions were altered slightly based on the audience in the room and their specific understandings of the
housing issues facing the region and City of Northampton. Detailed notes were taken based off of these
conversations. A few of the primary findings from those conversations are listed below:
• There simply is not enough funding for Northampton’s social service agencies to meet the need of the
community. When families and individuals are struggling to make ends meet, they have a hard time
navigating a complicated and overwhelming system.
• More family housing with three or more bedrooms is needed in Northampton.
• There is a need for materials to be translated into Spanish and other languages, particularly
Northampton Housing Authority materials.
• Waitlists for affordable housing are incredibly long (waits of up to five years were reported)
• Those who receive Section 8 vouchers are often discriminated against in the private housing market.
• A centralized place to access information about housing would be helpful for service providers as well
as those seeking housing.
• SSI checks are not enough to cover the cost of rent for a unit on the private market.
• A “visitability” ordinance might be a possible way to ensure that enough accessible housing is being
built.
52
Unlocking Opportunity: An Assessment of Barriers to Fair Housing Choice in Northampton
Stakeholder/Focus Group Participation
Organizational Grouping
Organization Representative(s)
Social Service Provider/
Housing Search Worker
Center for New Americans Laurie Millman, Director
Community Legal Aid Jen Dieringer, Managing
Attorney & Mandy
Winalski, Staff Attorney
Catholic Charities Kathryn Buckley Brawner,
Director
Pioneer Valley Workers
Center
Gabriella della Croce
Lead Organizer
Community Action Janna Tetreault
Department of Mental
Health
Kate Shapiro, Chris Zabik
Eliot Homeless Services Jay Levy, Charlyn Arnell
ServiceNet Resource
Center
Katie Miernecki
Mike Trembley
A Positive Place Laura Hudson
Carmen Burgos
Property Management HMR Properties Liz Reno, Robbie Brooks
ServiceNet, Inc. Alex Spear
The Community Builders Yvette Tanguay
Julia Scannell
Hathaway Farms Jon Devins
Mt. Holyoke Management Julia Clinton
Appleton Corporation Donna Coyle
Georgette Gigliano
Housing Authorities Northampton Jack Redman
Amherst Pamela Rogers
Franklin Regional Hank Abrashkin
Holyoke Matt Mainville
Nick Ottomaniello
Donna Wagner
Disability Community
Advocates
Northampton ADA
Coordinator
Marie Westberg
Director
Stavros Center for Ind.
Living
Jim Wolejko , Iheme
Onyekaba, Joe Tringali
Surrounding Towns/ City
Officials
Springfield Gerry McCafferty,
Housing Director
Amherst Julie Federman, Health
Director
Easthampton Hayley Wood, COA
Greenfield MJ Adams, CD Director
Affordable Housing
Providers
Valley CDC Laura Baker, Real Estate
Project Manager
53
Way Finders Peter Serafino, Project
Developer
Habitat for Humanity Megan McDonough,
Director
The Community Builders Rachana Crowley,
Project Manager
Realtors Maple and Main Julie Held
5 Colleges Alyx Akers
Murphy’s Real Estate David Murphy
Goggins Real Estate Rachel Simpson
Local Government
Officials
Mayor David Narkewicz, Mayor
Office of Planning and
Sustainability
Wayne Feiden, Director
Senior Services Marie Westberg, Cynthia
Langley, Michele
Dihlmann
Public Schools Kelley Knight,
Social Worker
Housing Partnership Jim Reis, Gordon Shaw,
Rev. Todd Weir
Focus Groups
Affiliation Number Participating
Northampton Recovery
Center
6 participants
Hampshire County House
of Corrections Pre-Release
Program
10 participants
Hampshire County
Resource Center /
Homeless
5 participants
Safe Passages/ Shelter
and Services for Victims
of DV
2 participants
Public Forum
A public forum was held on May 22nd 2019 at 7pm at the Northampton Senior Center to present the initial
findings of this study and to receive public feedback. Fifty community members attended the event, listened
to a presentation on the progress of the AI process, and worked on creating solutions to specific barriers in
small groups. A list of primary findings from this meeting is below:
• Housing cost is one of the primary issues for Northampton, both for renters and potential owners.
Prices have sky-rocketed and there are not enough protections for renters facing the hot housing
market.
54
• Northampton Housing Authority should use small area fair market rent (FMR) to calculate rental
voucher subsidy payments
• Rental fees need to be addressed as they are stopping many community members from finding
housing, particularly low-income individuals.
• Northampton should study other communities that have taken action on affordable housing to inform
their approach.
• Transportation is a key part of the housing issues facing Northampton. Without reliable public
transportation, residents are limited in their housing options.
• Landlords need education on: tenant rights, reasonable accommodation, how to be trauma informed
and work with people who have other barriers in their lives.
• Accommodation issues are not just about ambulatory accessibility. Some people have chemical
sensitivities, have trouble seeing clearly without overhead lights, or have support or therapy animals.
These issues need to be included in conversations about accessibility.
• Jobs that pay a living wage are hard to come by in Northampton; there should be a stronger emphasis
on entrepreneurship and vocational education. Northampton also needs its own career center.
• Northampton residents identify many issues with Northampton Housing Authority: health and safety
issues, inaccessibility, and disrespectful policies.
• The lead paint in Northampton needs to go. Some communities have committed funding to completely
abating lead.
55
Appendix B: General Background Data
The Pioneer Valley Region is made up of five types of communities: central cities, communities with downtown
centers, suburban communities, exurban communities, and rural communities. Northampton is considered a
community with a downtown center with its historic multi-story commercial buildings and more densely
settled residential neighborhoods. These types of communities are characterized by several trends including
low population growth, higher levels of: racial and ethnic diversity, poverty, instances of single mother
households, and householders that live alone, compared to the rest of the region. They also tend to have
higher concentrations of people with disabilities and special needs.37 The following section will provide data
and analysis on the different populations living in Northampton and how these groups compare to the county,
region, and state as a whole.
Population
The population of the City of Northampton is currently 28,548, according to the 2013-2017 American
Communities Survey Estimates (the most recent data available at the time this report was written).38 The
population has stayed relatively stable over the past few decades, with a mild decline, but hovers just below
30,000. This number is expected to decrease slightly over the coming years according to UMass Donahue’s
population projections.
FIGURE 11: POPULATION PROJECTIONS
The age distribution of a community’s population has important implications for planning and the formation of
public policies related to housing and community development because different age groups have different
demands and preferences. Age is also a protected class under Massachusetts state law.
37 Pioneer Valley Regional Housing Plan, February 2014 38 US Census, ACS 2013-2017 5-Year Estimates, Table DP05.
29,242
28,978
28,634 28,702
28,481
28000
28200
28400
28600
28800
29000
29200
29400
1990 2000 2010 2020 Projection 2030 Projection
56
As one can see in the figure below, Northampton has a relatively stable population with residents spread fairly
evenly throughout the various cohorts. It is, however, home to an unusually high number of young women due
to the presence of Smith College, an all-women’s college. Smith’s enrollment is approximately 2,500
undergraduate students and 400 graduate students (some of which are co-ed). 95% of undergraduate students
live in college-owned, -operated, or –affiliated housing.39 Northampton is experiencing a graying of its
population, similarly to most of the country. The median age in 2010 was 37.6 and in 2017 it was 39.4.40 This
increase in average age is due to the baby-boomer generation nearing retirement. Older populations are more
likely to have mobility restrictions and as this population grows, the need for more accessible housing will also
grow.
FIGURE 12: AGE OF RESIDENTS
39 https://www.usnews.com/best-colleges/smith-college-2209 40 US Census, ACS 2013-2017 5-Year Estimates, Table S0101
-2000-1500-1000-5000500100015002000
-2000 -1500 -1000 -500 0 500 1000 1500 2000
Under 5 years
5 to 9 years
10 to 14 years
15 to 19 years
20 to 24 years
25 to 29 years
30 to 34 years
35 to 39 years
40 to 44 years
45 to 49 years
50 to 54 years
55 to 59 years
60 to 64 years
65 to 69 years
70 to 74 years
75 to 79 years
80 to 84 years
85 years and over
Male
Female
57
Household Data
According to the 2013-2017 American Community Survey, Northampton had 11,406 households (defined as all
the people who occupy a housing unit, regardless of their relationship, including individuals living alone).
Northampton is split almost exactly in half between family and non-family households. 37% of family
households are married-couple households, family households with a female but no husband present make up
11% of households, and family households with a male present but no wife make up 3% of households. The
census does not currently track same-sex households specifically. The U.S. Census uses the term “non-family
households” to refer to single-person households, households made up of unrelated individuals (unmarried
partners or roommates), and same-sex households. The total number of households in Northampton has
steadily decreased over time.
FIGURE 13: HOUSEHOLD TYPES
37%
3% 11%
49%
Married-couple family
household
Male householder, no
wife present, family
household
Female householder, no
husband present, family
household
Nonfamily household
58
FIGURE 14: TOTAL HOUSEHOLDS OVER TIME
The most common household type in Northampton is a non-family 1-person household which makes up 37%
of all households, followed by the 2-person family household at 22.9% of all households. Family households
are generally larger than non-family households due to the presence of children.41 Northampton has a lower
percent of family households than Hampshire County (50.8% compared to 59.4%) suggesting that
Northampton may be less accessible to families due to the housing stock and housing costs.
Household Type by Size Number Percentage
Family Households 5796 50.8%
- 2-person household 2609 22.9%
- 3-person household 1530 13.4%
- 4-person household 1225 10.7%
- 5-person household 384 3.4%
- 6-person household 14 0.1%
- 7-or-more person household 34 0.3%
Non Family Households 5610 49.2%
- 1-person household 4224 37.0%
- 2-person household 1046 9.2%
- 3-person household 236 2.1%
- 4-person household 95 0.8%
- 5-person household 9 0.1%
- 6-person household 0 0.0%
- 7-or-more person household 0 0.0%
Total Households 11406 100.0%
41 US Census, ACS 2013-2017 5-Year Estimates, Table B11016
11738
11853
11739
11538
11637
11484
11364 11406
11100
11200
11300
11400
11500
11600
11700
11800
11900
2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017
59
Group Quarters
People who do not live in a family or non-family household are classified by the U.S. Census as living in “group
quarters.” These include correctional facilities, nursing homes, hospitals, college dormitories, military barracks,
group homes, missions, and shelters. According to the 2013-2017 American Community Survey, there are
3,710 people in Northampton living in group quarters. Many of these individuals are college students
associated with Smith College (approximately 2,000 students). Others live in institutions such as correctional
facilities for adults and juveniles and nursing facilities.
Geographic Mobility
83.7% of Northampton’s population lived in the same residence during the 2013-2017 ACS as they did one year
before. 9.2% of the population moved from within Hampshire County (including those who moved from within
Northampton), 3% moved from a different county within Massachusetts, 3.6% moved from a different state,
and 0.5% moved from abroad.42 Of those who moved from one house to another who are currently living in
Northampton, 24.7% were below the poverty line.43
FIGURE 15: GEOGRAPHIC MOBILITY
In Hampshire County, 86.1% of residents live in the same house as they did one year ago, 7.2% moved within
county, 3.5% moved from within the state but a different county, 2.6% from a different state, and .7% from
abroad. This indicates that Northampton has a slightly higher mobility rate than Hampshire County, likely due
to affordability, availability, and somewhat to the presence of college students.
42 US Census, ACS 2013-2017 5-Year Estimates, Table B07012 43 US Census, ACS 2013-2017 5-Year Estimates, Table B07012
20819
2298
750 894 119 Same house 1 year ago
Moved within same
county
Moved from different
county within same
state
Moved from different
state
Moved from abroad
60
Protected Classes
Race, Color and National Origin
Race is a protected class under national and state fair housing laws. The City of Northampton continues to be
primarily White, but is slowly diversifying. 19.1% of the population of Northampton identifies as people of
color. 89.6% of the population identifies as White, 5.8% as Asian, 2.8% as Black, and 1.8% as other races. 8.7%
identify as Hispanic or Latino of any race. According to the Decennial Census, taken every ten years, the
population of Asians in Northampton grew by 28% between 2000 and 2010. The population of people who
identify as two or more races also increased, by 32.6%. The Latino population rose by 27% and the Black
population rose by 29%. The only racial group to decline in numbers between 2000 and 2010 was the White
population, by 4.1%. However, the entire population of Northampton also decreased slightly, by 1.5%.
Population Changes in Northampton 44
Population 2000 Census 2010 Census Percent Change
Total Pop 28978 28549 -1.5%
White 26083 25025 -4.1%
Black 602 776 29%
Asian 906 1162 28.3%
Two or more
races
589 781 32.6%
Latino of any
race
1518 1928 27%
The American Community Survey provides estimates for every year, as opposed to every ten years. The chart
below shows changes in the racial make-up of Northampton between 2010 and 2017 according to the ACS
(please note that the values listed in the 2010 ACS are different from those in the 2010 Census above due to
differences in data collection strategies). These figures show a strong increase in the number of Asian residents
and residents of two or more races, and an increase in the number of Latino residents. Black populations have
decreased slightly since 2010 according to this data.45
Population 2010 ACS 2017 ACS Percent Change
Total Pop 28709 28548 -0.56%
White 23515 24946 6.09%
Black 768 720 -6%
Asian 1371 1477 7.73%
Two or more races 774 948 22.48%
Latino of any race 2123 2475 17%
44 2010 U.S. Census Summary File 1 Table QT-P6 45 US Census, ACS 2013-2017 5-Year Estimates, Table DP05
61
The Latino population is the largest ethnic minority in Northampton as it compromises 8.7% of the
population.46 However, the Latino population has increased at a slower rate than in Massachusetts or
Hampshire County. Since 2010, Hispanic/Latino population in Massachusetts has increased by 30%, whereas in
Northampton is has only increased by 17%. This data suggests that housing in Northampton may not be
accessible for Hispanic/Latino populations in Northampton.
Latino Population Population in 2010 Population in 2017 Percent Increase
Northampton 2,123 2,475 17%
Massachusetts 584,975 760,177 30%
Hampshire County 7,105 8,634 22%
The map below depicts the racial and ethnic makeup of the Pioneer Valley Region (Hampden and Hampshire
counties) using 2010 Decennial Census data. Most of the non-White population in the region lives in
Springfield and Holyoke.47
The U.S. Census defines “foreign born” residents as including both non-citizens and naturalized citizens who
were born in another country. At 7.67%, Northampton has a smaller foreign born population than the Pioneer
Valley, Pioneer Valley Region, and Hampshire County. 16.2% of all residents of Massachusetts are foreign born,
46 US Census, ACS 2013-2017 5-Year Estimates, Table DP05 47 AFFH Mapping Tool, Map 1 Race/Ethnicity, https://egis.hud.gov/affht/
62
however only 7.67% of residents of Northampton are foreign born, suggesting that Northampton is
inaccessible for these populations compared to other communities in the region. National origin is a protected
class under both federal and state fair housing laws. Discriminatory actions based on language, appearance,
and cultural practices, can often present a significant challenge to finding safe, decent, and affordable housing.
FIGURE 16: PERCENT FOREIGN BORN RESIDENTS
Of the population of residents of Northampton who are over 5 years old, 12.6% speak a language other than
English. Of those who speak another language, 20% speak English “less than very well.”48 Spanish is the most
prevalent language spoken in Northampton besides English. 21.6% of people over five years old in the Pioneer
Valley Region speak a language other than English at home and 34% of those individuals speak English “less
than very well.”
The Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) developed the Affirmatively Furthering Fair
Housing (AFFH) Tool that displays Racial/Ethnic Dissimilarity trends. This tool was designed by HUD to aide
local municipalities in determining fair housing issues in their communities.49 The dissimilarity index measures
community-level segregation and represents the extent to which the distribution of any two groups (in this
case, racial or ethnic groups) differ across census tracts. The values range from 0 to 100, where a value of 0
represents perfect integration between the two racial or ethnic groups. A 100 value would represent absolute
segregation. HUD recommends the following way to understand the values:
Values Description
<40 Low segregation
40-54 Moderate segregation
48 US Census, ACS 2013-2017 5-Year Estimates, Table S1601
49 AFFH Table 3, Decennial Census Data
7.67%
8.01%
8.60%
8.26%
16.20%
0%2%4%6%8%10%12%14%16%18%
Northampton
Hampshire County
Pioneer Valley Region
Pioneer Valley
Massachusetts
63
>55 High segregation
According to this measurement, none of Northampton’s racial or ethnic groups experience moderate or high
levels of segregation. However, in the greater Pioneer Valley Region, either moderate or high levels of
segregation exist between all of the racial or ethnic groups, with the highest level of segregation existing
between Black and White communities (when multiracial individuals are not included) and Hispanic and White
communities. Asian or Pacific Islander and White communities experience moderate levels of segregation.
Values in the chart below that showcase moderate segregation are in bold and those showcasing high
segregation are bold and underlined.
(Northampton, MA CDBG) Jurisdiction Pioneer Valley Region (Hampden and
Hampshire Counties)
Racial/Ethnic Dissimilarity
Index
1990
Trend
2000
Trend
2010
Trend
2010
excluding
multiracial
individuals
1990
Trend
2000
Trend
2010
Trend
2010
excluding
multiracial
individuals
Non-White/White 24.63 17.76 17.64 28.69 59.22 57.07 55.71 60.50
Black/White 24.33 14.74 17.20 35.10 67.85 64.37 61.57 66.94
Hispanic/White 23.70 16.74 19.88 32.01 63.91 63.20 63.01 65.79
Asian or Pacific
Islander/White
38.91 28.68 26.01 31.63 44.52 42.17 37.60 43.22
There are eight census tracts in Northampton (listed below). According to the percentages of people of color
living in each census tract, it appears as though people of color are concentrated in certain neighborhoods, and
more likely to be absent in others. Census tracts 8216.02, 8222, 8219.01, and 8219.03 are within 3 percentage
points of the average distribution of people of color in Northampton (18.9%). The census tract with the highest
percentage of people of color is 8220, which can most likely be attributed to the presence of Smith College in
this particular tract. Latinos are disproportionately represented in census tract 8216.01 at 16.4% compared to
the city average of 8.7%.50 Most notably, Census tract 8217 has a significantly lower percentage of residents of
color and Hispanic/Latino residents as the town average. People of color are more highly concentrated in
census tracts 8216.01, 8216.02, and 8222 because these tracts are where much of the multi-family housing in
Northampton is located. Hampshire Heights (80 units), Hathaway Farms (207 units), Meadowbrook (252 units),
and River Run (225 condo units) are all located within these census tracts and provide both subsidized and
“naturally occurring” affordable housing.
50 US Census, ACS 2013-2017 5-Year Estimates, Table DP05
64
Census Tract Percent People of Color Hispanic or Latino (of any race)
Census Tract 8216.01 25.4% 14.7%
Census Tract 8216.02 21.7% 10.4%
Census Tract 8217 9.8% 3.3%
Census Tract 8219.01 16.4% 5%
Census Tract 8219.03 18.1% 11.4%
Census Tract 8219.04 12.2% 6.1%
Census Tract 8220 32.3% 7.8%
Census Tract 8222 19% 9.9%
65
Sex, Familial Status and Presence of Children
As noted previously, Northampton has significantly more female residents than male residents (15,991 vs.
12,557). For every 100 women, there are 78.5 men. Men compromise 44% of the population and females
compromise 56%. This is likely due to the presence of Smith College, an all-women’s University.
In Northampton, the presence of children makes a family more likely to experience poverty. As shown in the
table below, families with children under 18 are almost twice as likely to experience poverty as all families.51
Families with a female householder and no husband were even more likely to experience poverty at 24.2%.
That rate increases when children are present as more than one-third of these families are experiencing
poverty.
Family Type Poverty Rate
All Families 7.7%
Married Couple Families 2.1%
Female Householder No Husband 24.2%
Families with Children Under 18 13.0%
Female Householder No Husband With Children Under
18
35.3%
51 US Census, ACS 2013-2017 5-Year Estimates, Table S1702
66
Northampton has a similar percentage of households with children under 18 as Hampshire County, and
approximately 6% lower than in Massachusetts. Households with at least one individual over the age of 60
account for 38.3% of all households.52 For more information on the implications of the aging population, see
the Housing Projections section of this report.
Geography HH's with child under 18 HH's with individual over 60
Massachusetts 29.8% 38.9%
Hampshire County 25.0% 40.6%
Northampton 23.8% 38.3%
Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity and Expression
Sexual orientation and gender identity are both protected classes in the state of Massachusetts. However, data
on these populations is difficult to obtain. Same-sex relationships are not currently counted in the census at
the city level nor are transgender or gender-queer individuals. According to the National Center on
Transgender Equity’s 2015 U.S. Transgender Survey, people who are transgender are twice as likely to be living
in poverty as the general U.S. population. According to the Williams Institute at ULCA School of Law, 24% of
lesbian and bisexual women are poor, compared with 19% of heterosexual women. Children of same-sex
couples have poverty rates twice as high as children of heterosexual couples, thus these families may have a
harder time finding housing in Northampton.53
Veterans
There are an estimated 1,335 veterans residing in Northampton, accounting for about 5.6% of the population
according to the ACS 2013-2017. This number has reduced slightly since the 2009-2010 ACS from 1,513
veterans and 6.5% of the population.54 Northampton is home to the Northampton Veterans Affairs Medical
Center, a VA hospital serving Western Massachusetts that provides a regional Northeast draw to Northampton
for services. The VA is also home to Soldier On, Inc. a nonprofit organization committed to ending veteran
homelessness. The Northampton Housing Authority administers VA Supportive Housing (VASH) vouchers that
can be used for privately owned housing.
People with Disabilities
Below is a chart depicting the categories of people with disabilities living in Northampton. Older adults are
more likely to have disabilities and the most common disability is ambulatory difficulty. 11.1% of Northampton
residents have a disability according to the 2013-2017 ACS. Those living with different disabilities may need
different types of accessibility features in their housing units. It is important that as housing is developed in
Northampton, particularly affordable housing, these potential needs are taken into consideration.
52 US Census, ACS 2013-2017 5-Year Estimates, Table S1101 53 https://williamsinstitute.law.ucla.edu/williams-in-the-news/beyond-stereotypes-poverty-in-the-lgbt-community/ 54US Census, ACS 2013-2017 5-Year Estimates, Table S2101
67
Estimate % with Disability
Total Non-institutionalized Population 27,662
With a disability 3,073 11.1%
Population 18 to 64 years 18,994
With a disability 1,677 8.83%
- With a hearing difficulty 263 1.4%
- With a vision difficulty 146 0.8%
- With a cognitive difficulty 758 4.0%
- With an ambulatory difficulty 821 4.3%
- With a self-care difficulty 432 2.3%
- With an independent living difficulty 369 3.4%
Population 65 years and over 4,000
With a disability 1174 29.4%
- With a hearing difficulty 454 11.4%
- With a vision difficulty 222 5.6%
- With a cognitive difficulty 248 7.1%
- With an ambulatory difficulty 781 19.5%
- With a self-care difficulty 268 6.7%
- With an independent living difficulty 464 11.6%
The number of people with a disability living in publicly supported housing is high compared to that of the
community at large.55In Northampton, 46.4% of people with Housing Choice Vouchers have disabilities and
31.5% of those living in public housing have disabilities.
55 AFFH Table 15- Disability by Publicly Supported Housing Program Category; ACS
68
People with Disabilities in Publicly Funded Housing
Northampton # %
Public Housing 34 31.48%
Project-Based Section 8 11 12.79%
Other Multifamily N/a N/a
HCV Program 220 46.41%
Pioneer Valley Region # %
Public Housing 1,369 43.36%
Project-Based Section 8 1,332 28.70%
Other Multifamily 16 5.65%
HCV Program 3,694 35.68%
The percent of public housing and project-based Section 8 residents in the Pioneer Valley Region with
disabilities is significantly higher than the percent of residents with disabilities in Northampton. This suggests
that these types of public housing may be somewhat inaccessible to those with disabilities in Northampton.
Economic Characteristics
The annual unemployment rate for Northampton in 2017 was 3.0%, compared to 3.7% in Massachusetts. This
accounts for approximately 483 unemployed residents. 56 It is important to note, however, that the
unemployment rate fails to capture those who are working part-time because they cannot find full-time
employment or those that have dropped out of the labor market all together.
56 Executive Office of Labor and Workforce Development, not seasonally adjusted
69
FIGURE 17: UNEMPLOYMENT RATES
The top industry of employment in Northampton is Health Care and Social Assistance which makes up about
30% of the employment. It is followed by Educational Services with 14%, Retail Trade with 10.8%,
Accommodation and Food Services at 9.2% and Public Administration at 5.3%.
Top 5 Industries by Employment57
Industry Number of
Establishments
Total Wages Average
Employment
Percentage of
Employment
Health Care and Social
Assistance
333 $330,377,476 6,067 30.5%
Educational Services 47 $163,006,390 2,778 14.0%
Retail Trade 162 $70,797,346 2,149 10.8%
Accommodation and Food
Services
106 $38,254,149 1,827 9.2%
Public Administration 49 $64,029,031 1,045 5.3%
A community’s access to a quality education is deeply connected to its economic success. Northampton’s
population is very educated, with approximately 33% of the population above the age of 25 holding a graduate
or professional degree.58 This is almost twice the percent of the population of the Pioneer Valley where
approximately 14% of the population holds a graduate or professional degree.
57 Executive Office of Labor and Workforce Development, ES-202, 2017. 58 US Census, ACS 2013-2017 5-Year Estimates, Table S1501
0.0%
1.0%
2.0%
3.0%
4.0%
5.0%
6.0%
7.0%
8.0%
9.0%
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017
Northampton
Massachusetts
Hampshire County
70
The percent of people at or below the poverty line in Northampton is slightly higher than Hampshire County as
a whole, and lower than the Pioneer Valley (Franklin, Hampden, and Hampshire counties combined). 59
Geography Percent of population
under the poverty line
Northampton 15.0%
Hampshire County 13.8%
Pioneer Valley Region 16.4%
Pioneer Valley 15.8%
Massachusetts 11.1%
Household income also ranges depending on the number of individuals in a household. The median household
income is higher ($91,707) for families than it is for all households ($62,838). The tables below show median
household incomes for all households and family households (two or more people related by birth, marriage,
or adoption who are living together).
Household Size
Median
Household
Income
All $ 62,838
1-person households $ 30,640
2-person households $ 80,256
3-person households $ 89,444
4-person households $ 116,250
5-person households $ 111,875
6-person households N/A
7-or-more-person
households N/A
59 US Census, ACS 2013-2017 5-Year Estimates, Table S1701
Family Size
Median Family
Income
Total $ 91,707
2-person families $ 82,030
3-person families $ 83,750
4-person families $ 119,673
5-person families $ 111,250
6-person families $ 117,778
7-or-more-person families $ 36,667
71
Household income varies depending on the race of the household as well. In 2017, the median income of a
White household was more than twice that of a Latino household in Northampton. Data is not available for
Black households due to a small sample size.
Race 2010 2017
White $56,007 $63,438
Latino $28,038 $31,978
Black $31,210 N/A
72
FIGURE 18: EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT
Educational attainment in Northampton correlates very clearly with a person’s poverty rate. Over 45% of those
in Northampton with less than a high school graduate degree are living at or below the poverty line, whereas
only 7.3% of those with a Bachelor’s degree or higher are living in poverty.60
Educational Attainment Poverty
rate
Less than high school graduate 45.1%
High school graduate (includes
equivalency)
23.7%
Some college or associate's degree 15.6%
Bachelor's degree or higher 7.3%
60 US Census, ACS 2013-2017 5-Year Estimates, Table B17003
Massachusetts Hampshire
County
Pioneer Valley
Region Pioneer Valley Northampton
Less than 9th grade 4.7%1.9%5.1%4.7%2.1%
9-12th grade, no diploma 5.3%3.8%7.3%7.1%3.2%
High school graduate 25.1%24.3%28.8%28.7%17.0%
Some college, no degree 16.0%15.8%18.0%18.0%12.8%
Associate's degree 7.7%9.4%9.7%9.8%7.4%
Bachelor's degree 23.1%21.8%17.3%17.5%25.6%
Graduate/professional degree 18.2%22.9%13.7%14.2%32.0%
0.0%
5.0%
10.0%
15.0%
20.0%
25.0%
30.0%
35.0%
73
Housing Supply Characteristics
The purpose of this section is to review the characteristics and types of housing in Northampton to assess how
its housing stock is responding to changing demographics, affordability pressures and market conditions. Local
land use policies, the strength and weakness of the housing market, mortgage lending practices, housing
discrimination, transportation networks, topography, and public infrastructure dictate where homes have
been built and will continue to get built as well as the type and characteristic of the housing stock. Settlement
patterns and the built environment are also a reflection of structural issues, such as economic security and
educational attainment, which taken together, can encourage self-sufficiency, mobility and residents’ ability to
obtain and maintain housing. The City needs a full range of housing opportunities that are affordable to
households of all racial and ethnic backgrounds, abilities and income ranges to ensure that the city and region
remain economically competitive and welcoming to all.
Housing Inventory and Types of Housing Units
Both the population of Northampton and the total number of households has decreased between 2010 and
2017. The average household size in 2010 was approximately 2.1 whereas it increased slightly in 2016 to
2.19.61 The total number of housing units has also decreased slightly since 2010 from 12,489 to 12,147.62 The
number of owner-occupied units has decreased since 2010 by about 3%, suggesting a slight increase in the
number of renters in Northampton. In 2010 the owner-occupied rate was 57.8% compared to 54.6% in 2017.63
According to the ACS 2013-2017, 51% of Northampton’s housing stock is single family units, and 49% are multi-
family units. Units are distributed fairly equally around the City, with the exception of census tract 8220, which
has by far the lowest number of total units. This is due to the location of Smith College, where many residents
live in group quarters (dormitories). The largest tract is 8222, which comprises approximately 19.5% of the
City’s housing units.
Geography Total
Units
Single-Family Units 2 3 or 4 5 to 9 10 to 19 20 or
more
Total Multi-
Family Units
Northampton 12147 6200 1461 1406 1342 773 965 5940
8216.01 1673 832 80 183 228 129 221 841
8216.02 1784 978 128 132 242 265 39 806
8217 1467 1065 192 114 23 67 6 402
8219.01 1478 684 226 303 140 31 94 794
8219.03 1836 361 212 198 347 182 536 1475
8219.04 1398 293 337 403 240 59 66 1105
8220 153 46 4 0 60 40 3 107
8222 2358 1948 275 73 62 0 0 410
61 US Census, ACS 5-Year Estimates, Table S1101, 2013-2017 and 2006-2010. 62 US Census, ACS 5-Year Estimates, Table DP04, 2017 and 2010 63 Ibid.
74
FIGURE 19: NUMBER OF UNITS IN A BUILDING
Northampton has a competitive housing market as is indicated by the relatively low rental and owner vacancy
rates. A healthy rental vacancy rate is considered between 6-7%, low enough that prices are not increased due
to high demand and renters have choices that fit their needs. Northampton’s rental vacancy rate is
approximately 3.6%. In 2010 the rate was 3.8% having risen from 3.4% in 2000. A healthy ownership vacancy
rate is considered much lower- below 2% is ideal. Northampton’s rate is 1.5%. In 2000 this owner vacancy rate
was 1.0% and in 2010 it was estimated at 1.4%. The rental vacancy rate in Northampton is lower than in the
region and Massachusetts as a whole, though only slightly.64 It is approximately the same as Hampshire County
as a whole. This suggests that the housing market is very competitive in Northampton, both for renters and
potential owners. Competition can lead to higher prices that prevent some households from being able to
move to Northampton.
64 US Census, ACS 2013-2017 5-Year Estimates, Table B25004
6200
1461 1406 1342
773 965
0
1000
2000
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
Single-Family
Units
2 3 or 4 5 to 9 10 to 19 20 or more
75
FIGURE 20: VACANCY RATES
Homeownership
Northampton has a total of 6,229 owner occupied homes (54.6% of the total) and 5,177 renter occupied
homes (45.4% of the total). Renters in Northampton are disproportionately Latino or Hispanic in relationship
to the overall population of the city.65 Of the 916 Latino households in the City, 800, or 87.3%, are renters.
73.9% of Black households are renters, 54.6% of Asian households are renters, and 40.3% of White non-Latino
households are renters.
Housing Tenure by Race
Tenure White, not Latino or
Hispanic
Hispanic or Latino Asian Black
Total Owner Occupied 5836 116 158 48
Total Renter Occupied 3934 800 190 136
Total 9770 916 348 184
Percent Owner
Occupied
59.7% 12.7% 45.4% 26.1%
Percent Renter
Occupied
40.3% 87.3% 54.6% 73.9%
65 US Census, ACS 2013-2017 5-Year Estimates, Table B25003(B,D,H, and I)
Massachusetts Pioneer Valley Hampshire
County Northampton Pioneer Valley
Region
Rental Vacancy Rate 4.0%4.1%3.3%2.6%4.2%
Owner Vacancy Rate 1.1%1.1%1.0%1.9%1.1%
0.0%
0.5%
1.0%
1.5%
2.0%
2.5%
3.0%
3.5%
4.0%
4.5%
76
Foreclosures
In the lead up and aftermath of the real estate crisis of 2008, foreclosures became a major concern across the
United States. The number of foreclosures in Northampton rose drastically after 2008, and saw another spike
in 2016. These foreclosures may have been the outcome of sub-prime or predatory loans—those loans given
to those who do not necessarily qualify for typical mortgages.
FIGURE 21: FORECLOSURES IN NORTHAMPTON66
Cost of Housing
Amount Paid on Rent 2010 2017 Percent Change
Less than $500 823 907 10.2%
$500 to $749 961 352 -63.4%
$750 to $999 1384 1045 -24.5%
$1000-$1999 1600 2,527 57.9%
$2000 or more 23 223 869.6%
The AFFH uses Decennial Census and Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy data to show the
demographics of cost-burdened households. Due to the different data source, these numbers are slightly
different than ACS data. The chart below shows that cost burdened people of color are at higher rates than
White residents in Northampton as well as in the region in general. For example, over half of all Black
households in Northampton are considered severely cost burdened (paying more than 50% of their income on
rent). Larger households are also more likely to be cost-burdened. Over 25% of families with five of more
people are severely cost burdened, whereas only 9.28% of families with less than five people are severely cost
66 Warren Group
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018
All 3 6 9 10 19 8 8 5 8 3 18 4 12
Single Family 2 2 5 5 11 5 5 3 2 1 12 2 9
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
18
20
77
burdened. Large families in Northampton are also more likely to be severely cost burdened than large families
in the region in general.
Households with
Severe Housing Cost
Burden 67
(Northampton, MA CDBG) Jurisdiction (Springfield, MA) Region
Race/Ethnicity # with
severe cost
burden
#
households
% with
severe cost
burden
# with
severe cost
burden
#
households
% with
severe cost
burden
White, Non-Hispanic 1,380 10,170 13.57% 24,580 182,025 13.50%
Black, Non-Hispanic 95 179 53.07% 3,125 13,381 23.35%
Hispanic 120 615 19.51% 10,320 34,164 30.21%
Asian or Pacific
Islander, Non-Hispanic
75 429 17.48% 970 4,359 22.25%
Native American, Non-
Hispanic
0 14 0.00% 64 295 21.69%
Other, Non-Hispanic 35 114 30.70% 680 2,575 26.41%
Total 1,705 11,535 14.78% 39,739 236,815 16.78%
Household Type and
Size
Family households, <5
people
480 5,175 9.28% 16,849 132,444 12.72%
Family households, 5+
people
140 545 25.69% 2,599 18,050 14.40%
Non-family households 1,080 5,810 18.59% 20,275 86,320 23.49%
Percent of Income Spent on Rent 2017 Estimate Percent
Total Rental Households 5,177 100.0%
Less than 10.0 percent 234 4.5%
10.0 to 14.9 percent 441 8.5%
15.0 to 19.9 percent 553 10.7%
20.0 to 24.9 percent 649 12.5%
25.0 to 29.9 percent 433 8.4%
30.0 to 34.9 percent 682 13.2%
35.0 to 39.9 percent 369 7.1%
40.0 to 49.9 percent 495 9.6%
50.0 percent or more 1,092 21.1%
Not computed 229 4.4%
67 AFFH Table 10- Demographics of Households with Severe Housing Cost Burden; CHAS
78
The value of a home in Northampton has increased since 2010 by approximately 2.7%, taking into
consideration inflation.68 The chart below shows the shift in median home value between 2010 and 2017.
However, due to changes in value due to inflation, we must take into consideration the value according to
2017 dollars.
Median Home Value (Dollars)
Actual Value In 2017 Dollars
2017 $318,000 $318,000
2010 $279,000 $309,624
Percent Change 14.0% 2.7%
The housing stock in Northampton is quite old, with 45% being built in 1939 or earlier. 2,485 of those units are
renter occupied. Older units are more likely to be home to lead paint which, as has been discussed earlier in
this report, can lead to discrimination against families with children. For more information on this issue, see
Barrier 16.
Year Structure Built Owner
Occupied
% Owner
Occupied
Renter
Occupied
% Renter-
Occupied
Total % Total
All units 6229 54.6% 5177 45.4% 11406
Built 1939 or
earlier
2644 51.6% 2485 48.4% 5129 45.0%
Built 1940 to 1949 257 54.9% 211 45.1% 468 4.1%
Built 1950 to 1959 714 67.5% 343 32.5% 1057 9.3%
Built 1960 to 1969 443 53.9% 379 46.1% 822 7.2%
Built 1970 to 1979 649 43.4% 846 56.6% 1495 13.1%
Built 1980 to 1989 683 67.6% 328 32.4% 1011 8.9%
Built 1990 to 1999 327 48.8% 343 51.2% 670 5.9%
Built 2000 to 2009 391 68.4% 181 31.6% 572 5.0%
Built 2010 to 2013 94 67.6% 45 32.4% 139 1.2%
Built 2014 or later 27 62.8% 16 37.2% 43 0.4%
68 ACS 2013-2017 and 2006-2010 Table B25077
79
Northampton Housing Authority
As is discussed in Barrier 8, the population of people of color in Northampton Housing Authority units is much
lower than in the region in general. For example, according to the table below, those who identify as Hispanic
make up only 28.7% of public housing residents in Northampton, whereas in the region they make up a total of
76.6% of public housing residents. These discrepancies suggest that NHA’s applicant preferences may have a
disproportionate impact on people of color in the region.
Race/Ethnicity 69
(Northampton, MA
CDBG) Jurisdiction
White Black Hispanic Asian or Pacific
Islander
Housing Type # % # % # % # %
Public Housing 73 67.59% 3 2.78% 31 28.70% 1 0.93%
Project-Based Section 8 85 100.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%
Other Multifamily N/a N/a 0 0.00% N/a N/a N/a N/a
HCV Program 293 63.42% 36 7.79% 126 27.27% 3 0.65%
Total Households 10,170 88.17% 179 1.55% 615 5.33% 429 3.72%
(Springfield, MA)
Region
White Black Hispanic Asian or Pacific
Islander
Housing Type # % # % # % # %
Public Housing 421 13.45% 292 9.33% 2,398 76.61% 18 0.58%
Project-Based Section 8 1,243 27.35% 693 15.25% 2,592 57.04% 13 0.29%
Other Multifamily 135 73.77% 27 14.75% 18 9.84% 3 1.64%
HCV Program 2,129 20.88% 1,643 16.12% 6,363 62.42% 32 0.31%
Total Households 182,025 76.86% 13,381 5.65% 34,164 14.43% 4,359 1.84%
Note 1: Data Sources: Decennial Census; APSH; CHAS
Note 2: Numbers presented are numbers of households not individuals.
69 AFFH Table 6: Publicly Supported Households by Race/Ethnicity; Decennial Census; APSH; CHAS
80
Appendix C: Public and Private Sector Characteristics
Public Sector
HUD Requirement—“municipalities must also ensure that municipal policies and programs do not have a
disparate impact (negative impact) on members of a protected class compared to the general population.
Disparate impact is an important legal theory in which liability based upon a finding of discrimination may
be incurred even when the discrimination was not purposeful or intentional. The municipality should
consider if the policy or practice at hand is necessary to achieve substantial, legitimate, non-discriminatory
interests and if there is less discriminatory alternative that would meet the same interest.”
The City of Northampton has made significant strides in the last 5 years to try to figure out how to facilitate
infill and smaller house development in the city and the region, along with the previously documented efforts
to expand multi-family housing by right and to allow Accessory Dwelling Units. These actions by the city have
been taken deliberately with the goal of expanding housing choice focused on affordable home options.
When analyzing Northampton’s current zoning with respect to best practices nationwide to promote mixed
use, affordable housing and promote and preserve housing choice, the city is doing everything one would
expect (STAR rating and “Zoning for Sustainability” Journal of APA Summer 2014). The city is:
• encouraging higher density development by facilitating and promoting infill,
• using Transfer of Development Rights (TDR),
• permitting small lot residential development, and
• is encouraging mixed use development by allowing housing in all business districts and some industrial
districts, permitting live/work units, and
• is working to increase housing diversity and affordability by allowing accessory dwelling units, and
density incentives for affordability.
The City has also expanded its Smart Growth Overly (40R incentive district), which requires an affordability
element, at the former Northampton State Hospital and also to a district just outside the Central Business
District.
Zoning
Housing costs in MA are considered some of the highest in the country and in our region Northampton is
routinely identified as one of the most expensive places to live. Given this context, it is important to look at
what the city is doing to keep existing affordable housing affordable and also—what the city is doing and could
be doing to affirmatively further fair housing, that is, try to undo the lasting effects of racist discrimination
against people of color in the United States.70 The city of Northampton has made a deliberate choice to
70 https://thelensnola.org/2019/01/18/how-to-undesign-the-legacy-of-racism-and-redlining-that-still-shapes-new-
orleans/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2018/03/28/redlining-was-banned-50-years-ago-its-still-
hurting-minorities-today/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.7cbaf47d2740
https://www.wbur.org/artery/2019/04/25/redlining-exhibit
81
concentrate development where there is infrastructure to support it and where people will have access to the
necessities of daily life, including grocery stores, parks, schools, restaurants and shops.
The 2012 AI suggested that the city consider expanding the “by right’ designation to the construction of half-
way homes and multi-family dwellings. In 2013 the city completed a long-term effort to overhaul the city’s
zoning which resulted in expanded by right options for residential development as well as other changes that
made it easier to develop housing in the city. The changes to the city’s zoning are summarized as:
• Doubled and in some cases tripled the density allowed in some zones within core urban areas
• Moved toward permissive dimensional requirements… ( 3,750 sq. ft. lots allowable for residential
dwelling units)
• Up to six units are allowed by right with site plan review
• Two family structures are allowed by right
• Simple standards for larger multi-family structures
• Accessory dwelling units allowed by right in every zone
• No traffic mitigation required downtown for residential construction
• Downtown Mixed Use Housing
o Notation/ 7,000 people = 26% of the city’s population is within walking distance to the
downtown (4/10ths of a mile)
• Mixed Use housing allowed by right with site plan review
• No parking requirements in the downtown zone
• No Floor Area Ratios, setback or frontage requirements in the downtown zone
• No first floor housing <30 ft. from street frontage is allowed, but it is allowed behind that distance
within the downtown zone.
Also the city changed the zoning to allow more flexibility for multi-family development within historic churches
and schools if an historic preservation restriction is created -- no matter how low the density in the
surrounding neighborhood is.
A review of the current zoning shows that a variety of multi-family configurations are allowed by-right.71 They
are: 2 and 3-family units in the URB and the URC, 3 family units in the NB, and townhouses with 6 or fewer
units in the URC. It is important to view the city’s zoning districts to realize that these zones comprise the vast
majority of land area in the city that is served by city infrastructure and is in walking distance to grocery stores,
schools, parks and the center of the city. In addition to the uses that are allowed by right in the large URC zone,
townhouses up to 6 units are allowed with site plan review. Units of 7 or more require special permit review.
In addition, in all residential zones attached accessory dwelling units are allowed by right and detached ADUs
71 https://ecode360.com/13265306
82
are allowed with either site plan review or a special permit. The city now requires site plan review submission
requirements for any residential development greater than 2,000 sq. ft. and this could still be a cost barrier as
site plan review requires preparation of plans by a professional and attendance at Board meetings. The city
Office of Planning and Sustainability is always balancing the desire to maintain and improve the quality of life
for residents with respect to creating a healthy built environment that fits in with what exists, while not
creating a burden for developers with respect to application costs and time. The 2012 AI also recommended
considering making halfway houses “by-right”. While this is not the case, the city has a very broad
interpretation of the “educational mission exemption” included in Chapter 40A sub-section 3, which has
allowed most proposed ‘halfway homes’ to be developed by right in the city.
The comprehensive overhaul of city zoning that was researched, planned, and implemented from 2008-2012 72
has yielded significant success with respect to the growth of affordable housing in the community. As noted,
the city revised the land use regulations to allow by-right development of up to six units of housing throughout
the core urban neighborhoods of the city. Further these districts do allow more than seven dwelling units by
special permit, which is a much more rigorous permitting process. The city reduced total lot size throughout
the city to enable possible 2 or 3-family dwellings on existing lots. The city is committed to building a healthy
community where people can walk or bike to destinations and as a result implements regulations that
concentrate development in and around the city center, Commercial Business District (CBD) and Florence
center, General Business District (GB) where there are grocery stores, schools, shops, and bike paths and
sidewalks. In the city center (CBD) and downtown Florence (GB) the city determined that there was no need
for a minimum lot size and also eliminated all parking requirements. Eliminating parking requirements seems
to have had the desired effect as there are two new large affordable housing developments, 70 and 55 units, in
the city center for the first time in over a decade.
72 http://www.northamptonma.gov/DocumentCenter/View/1011/ZRCPublicForum_2232?bidId=
Zones 1 family
attached
ADU
detached
ADU 2 family 3 family 4-6 family 7 + family
any
constr
other
than 1
family
reuse of
hist
ed/rel
bldg for
res cluster
townhou
ses w/ 6
or <
townhou
se 7+
any res
use
above 1st
floor
RR A A site No No No No site site SP No No N/A
SR A A site No No No No site site SP No No N/A
URA A A ZBA No No No No site site SP No No N/A
URB A A ZBA A A Site SP site site SP site SP N/A
URC A A ZBA A A A SP site site SP site SP N/A
CB No No No N/A site N/A A
EB No No No N/A site N/A A
GB No No No N/A site N/A No A
HB No No No N/A site N/A A
NB PB A ZBA PB A PB N/A site N/A PB A
M No No No No No No No No No No No No No
GI No No No No No No No No No No No No No
OI No No No No No No No No No No No No A
SC No No No No No No No No No No No No No
PV A A A A A A A A A N/A A A A
WSP A A site No No No No No No SP No No N/A
FP
SG 40R Review40R Review40R Review40R Review40R Review40R Review40R Review40R Review40R Review40R Review40R Review40R Review40R Review
Above 1st floor or to the rear of sites
Above 1st floor or to the rear of sites
Above 1st floor or to the rear of sites
Above 1st floor or to the rear of sites
Above 1st
Above 1st
Above 1st
83
Building Code
The City of Northampton adheres to the State Building Code, but because Northampton is a certified Green
Community, the City has adopted the Stretch Energy code that requires slightly more energy efficient building
practices and that necessitates a Home Energy Rating System (HERS) rater to certify the effectiveness of the
energy efficiency measures, thereby modestly increasing the up-front costs of building new homes while also
dramatically reducing the cost of heating and cooling the home over time.
Home Modification Loan Program
Through the efforts of the Massachusetts Rehabilitation Commission (MRC), the Home Modification Loan
Program (HMLP) was established by the Massachusetts legislature in 1999. HMLP was created to provide loans
in amounts between $1,000 and $50,000 for modifications to the primary, permanent residence of elders, and
individuals with disabilities. HMLP also lends from $1,000 to $30,000 secured by a promissory note and
security agreement to individuals who own manufactured or mobile homes. These loans allow homeowners in
Massachusetts to remain in their home and must specifically relate to a person in the household’s ability to
function on a daily basis. The program is funded through a state-bond and the loan is secured by a mortgage in
order to guaranty repayment. These repaid loan funds will be lent out to other borrowers in the future.73
Lead Paint
According to Massachusetts General Law Chapter 111 Section 197, any owner of a property in which a child
under the age of 6 resides must abate lead paint that exists at dangerous levels. This law may have the
unintended consequence of dissuading landlords from renting to families with young children due to the
potential cost of lead paint abatement. This may limit the housing choices for families with children. In 2016
Massachusetts dropped the threshold for lead poisoning to 10 micrograms per deciliter, and the de-leading
requirements were simplified – for the most part to friction surfaces and “accessible” surfaces (window sills,
railing caps). While deemed ‘not perfect’ by advocates, this move was seen as a good step towards ending
discrimination based on lead paint. However, there is not enough public funding for lead paint remediation on
a large scale.
The City’s Housing Rehabilitation program is administered by PVPC and has a $45,000 cap per unit in order to
accommodate for the high costs of lead remediation since 2016. This Community Development Block Grant
(CDBG) funded program helps to remediate lead from between 3 to 5 units per year. So far, 13 units have been
rehabbed and five more are in the pipeline.
73 https://www.wayfindersma.org/home-modification-loan-program-faq
84
Municipal Programs/Policies Analysis
Just Big Enough
In 2013 Northampton, in collaboration with the Western Mass American Institute of Architects (AIA) launched
the Just Big Enough-- Small Lots | Small Units | BIG IDEAS design competition, the City's effort to encourage
development in the most sustainable areas of the city; the places where people can walk to work, shop, and
play.
The Just Big Enough- Green Housing for ALL design, was a follow-up on a design competition in 2018 designed
to highlight how it is possible to create very small and very green housing that is affordable to people typically
left out of the green housing market. The competition was also used to find design solutions for limited
development land that had been carved from conservation land in Northampton.
The city has looked at neighborhoods and found that in many cases, the neighborhoods with the greatest
density are most desired by the market. Design may be more important than density in determining what
makes a neighborhood great. Increasingly, city staff are seeing the kinds of small lots and small dwelling units
that this project envisioned being created in Northampton.
Inclusionary Zoning
Inclusionary zoning was researched as a potential way to increase the affordable housing stock in
Northampton for several years. The City monitored the experiences of other communities and concluded that
it was too difficult for small private developers to navigate the complex implementation of affordable housing
requirements, and instead opted to focus on the creation of affordable units by non-profit housing developers.
Density bonuses and other incentives were also prioritized to create naturally occurring affordable housing.
Inclusionary zoning works better in the eastern part of the state, where a number of affordable units can easily
be incorporated into very large ( 100+ units) developments. If instituted in Northampton, where smaller scale
projects are more the norm, mandated inclusionary zoning could actually be a deterrent to unit creation.
Property Tax Programs
Northampton has a senior and veteran property tax work-off program, designed to help seniors and veterans
who may be struggling financially stay in their homes. The Senior Citizen and Veteran Tax Work Off Programs
function similarly. Veterans and senior citizens (60 years of age and older) who own property in and pay real
estate taxes to the City of Northampton must complete 125 hours of service in the program year, which runs
from January 1 to October 31, and are eligible to receive a $1,500 property tax credit minus the required
withholdings. This credit is then applied to the participant’s real estate tax bill in the following fiscal year.
Applications are available in November of each year. 74
Expiring use properties
This “expiring use” problem stems from the financing of two of the biggest rental development programs in
the 1970s – the State 13A program and the Federal 236 program. Many apartments throughout the
Commonwealth, including some in Northampton, were built by private owners utilizing state and federally-
74 https://www.northamptonma.gov/1455/Veteran-Property-Tax-Work-Off-Program
85
funded mortgage programs with 40 year terms. In return for the publicly-assisted below market rate loans,
project owners were required to comply with long-term affordable housing use restrictions. Unless these
developments have other subsidies, when the affordable mortgage matures, the owners can begin to convert
the affordable housing to market rate units. Virtually all of these mortgages will have matured by March
2020. And in a real estate market such that exists in Northampton, it is easy to understand why owners would
be tempted to convert.
Massachusetts is actively supporting affordable housing preservation. Since 2015, the Department of Housing
and Community Development (DHCD) and its partners have preserved the long-term affordability of over
15,000 Massachusetts affordable housing units. In 2017 alone, more than 4,400 units maintained their
affordability and the state’s funding decisions, including significant capital investments in affordable housing
by the Baker Polito administration, have been key.
Chapter 40T is a law that establishes public notification provisions for tenants and state and local officials,
provides purchase rights through a right of offer and right of first refusal for DHCD or its designee, and
provides modest tenant protections for projects with affordability restrictions that terminate. Since enacted in
2009, the state has helped to preserve almost 30,000 units of affordable rental housing in Massachusetts with
the investment of federal, state and local resources also aiding the effort.75
The current Subsidized Housing Inventory (which is not up to date) reports Northampton having 1,376 total
subsidized units out of 12,604 total units for an overall percent of 10.92%. The majority of developments
expire between 10-30 years and some are affordable in perpetuity. However, the development with the
closest expiring use date is The Florence Inn, fourteen units of affordable housing managed by ServiceNet set
to expire in 2025.
Recent Affordable Housing Production and Projects in the Pipeline
The following section outlines affordable housing production that has occurred in the last few years as well as
projects that are in the pipeline.
Live 155: Developer – Way Finders
Project Description: Demolition of an existing 58 unit SRO and new construction of a 4 story, mixed use, mixed
income building located at 155 Pleasant Street. 70 rental units; 28 studios and 42 one bedroom units; 47
affordable (20 studios and 27 one-bedrooms), 23 market rate (6 studios and 17 one bedrooms). 65,000 sq. ft.
total including 2,500 sq. ft. of first floor commercial space as required by zoning. Project began in 2016 and
opened for occupancy in June of 2018. The total project cost is roughly $20,000,000.
Income levels: 23 units at 60% of the area median income (AMI) as defined by the U. S. Department of Housing
and Urban Development (HUD) for the Springfield Standard Metropolitan Statistical Area (SMSA) for incomes
of $41,280 or below; 4 units at 50% AMI for incomes $34,400 or below; 20 units at 30% AMI for incomes of
$18,600 or below. The 23 market rate units have no income eligibility requirements.
75 https://cedac.org/blog/massachusetts-is-successfully-tackling-the-expiring-use-housing-problem/
86
Units for Special Needs populations: All units at Live 155 are disability accessible/visitable with roll-in showers.
4 units (one per floor) are fully handicap accessible. 10 units are set-a-side for homeless or formerly homeless
(at the 30% of AMI or less level); 5 apartments are set aside for clients of the Department of Mental Health and
4 units are designed to accommodate visually and/or hearing impaired residents.
Rents/Subsidy Source: Way Finders is able to offer the affordable units through participation in the Federal
Low-Income Housing Tax Credit program, with the 30 percent of area median income apartments having a
subsidy attached to them through the Massachusetts Rental Voucher program. This means the tenants pay 40
percent of their gross income toward the rent, with the subsidy paying the difference. The rents for these
apartments are $701 for the studio units and $844 for the one bedroom units. The 50 percent area median
income apartments rent for $700 and $750 a month for studios and one bedrooms respectively, while the 60
percent area median income apartments rent for $840 and $900. The rent includes all utilities, and tenants
have the option of purchasing Wi-Fi from Way Finders for $30 a month. The market-rate studio apartments
rent for $900 a month, while the one-bedroom apartments rent at $1,000 a month.
LumberYard Apartments/ Valley Community Development Corporation
Project Description: Demolition of a former lumber yard, retail building and various outbuildings and new
construction of a 4 story mixed use building located at 256 Pleasant Street. 55 affordable rental units will be
comprised of 14 one bedroom units, 34 two bedroom units and 7 three bedroom units. Just over 70,000 sq. ft.
total including 5,400 sq. ft. of first floor commercial space as required by zoning. Project began in 2014 will be
completed in June of 2019. The total project cost is roughly $19,200,000.
Income levels: 43 units are available for households earning at or below 60% of the area median income and
12 units are for households earning at or below 30% of area median income. The 12 unit breakdown is 1 one
bedroom unit, 9 two bedroom units and 2 three bedroom units.
Units for Special Needs Populations: 6 units are set aside for homeless or formerly homeless; 2 two bedroom
units for Mass Rehab Commission Community Based Housing Program; 3 fully accessible handicap units; 1 unit
for sensory impaired residents.
Rent/Subsidy Source: Maximum rents for the 60% of area median income eligibility levels will be $908 for 1
bedroom units, $1,090 for 2 bedroom units and $1,259 for 3 bedroom units. Twelve of the units come with
project based rental assistance subsidies.
Friends of Hampshire County Homeless Individuals
In the year 2000 through the leadership of Yvonne Freccero, volunteers formed a 501(c) 3 non-profit
organization called Friends of Hampshire County Homeless Individuals, Inc. with the mission of providing
financial and volunteer support for the Interfaith Winter Shelter. In addition to fulfilling that mission every year
since, the Friends purchased 3 homes and partnered with 3 different service providers to create housing for
populations in need in Northampton. The Friends chose an organization most suited to serving the tenant
population selected, fundraised to locate and purchase suitable houses, then transferred ownership to the
partner service providers for on-going operation.
Yvonne’s House – Straw Avenue - Purchased in 2008 through the financial support of Northampton’s
Community Preservation Committee and the Friends, Yvonne’s House provides a permanent residence for six
people who have experienced long- term homelessness. ServiceNet, Inc. owns and manages the duplex and
87
offers supportive services. Residents pay rent based on their income. Yvonne’s House exemplifies the
movement known as Housing First as well as the unwavering determination of Yvonne Freccero.
Gandara-Friends House - Maple Avenue - Purchased in 2011 with major financial support from the
Northampton Community Preservation Committee, as well as MassHousing’s Center for Community Recovery
Innovations Program, the Charlesbank Homes Foundation, and the Friends private fundraising efforts. This
duplex provides permanent housing for six previously homeless individuals who are committed to sober living.
It is owned and managed by the Gandara Center, a regional agency that includes in its’ mission housing and
services for recovery from substance abuse.
Northampton Teen Housing – Hatfield/Locust Street - The third project, Northampton TeenHousing, will create
permanent supportive affordable housing for unaccompanied homeless young adults ages 18-24. The partner
in this project is Dial/Self, a nonprofit agency that has provided housing and support services to at-risk youth
since 1977. This development is being implemented in two phases. An existing home was purchased and
renovated on Hatfield Street is now home to 4 young adults. New construction of an additional building on an
adjacent parcel that fronts on Locust Street will see completion in the fall of 2019. The new building will
provide 4 additional residential units, common space and office space for conducting case management
functions.
Sergeant House Renovation and Expansion: Valley CDC/Way Finders
Project Description: This stately historic building located at 82 Bridge Street has been owned and operated by
the Valley Community Development Corporation since 1990. Currently, the building is composed of 15 single
room occupancy units (bedrooms only) with a common kitchen and 4 common bathrooms. Eight (8) of the
units have been served by rental subsidy through the Section 8 Mod Rehab Program for 50% area median
income tenants. Currently, construction is set to begin to accomplish a gut rehab, historic restoration, and
construct an addition. This work will more than double the size of what is now called, Sergeant House. The 31
new units will be enhanced SROs, meaning every unit will include a bathroom and kitchenette. Renovations
will also include a new elevator, a handicapped-accessible entryway, improved common areas, and an office
for on-site property management. A new part-time Resident Services Coordinator will be on-site.
Income Levels: Sergeant House will offer housing units to people earning less than 60 percent of the average
median income for the Springfield metropolitan area, which is $33,900 for an individual. Eighteen units will
serve 30% AMI residents and will have project based rental subsidies. Existing tenants will be relocated during
the construction period that will begin in May of 2019. Project completion is slated for March of 2020. 25
percent of the Sergeant House’s new units will be set aside for people coming out of homelessness, and two
units will be reserved for clients of the Department of Mental Health. Total project cost is $8.4 million.
Village Hill Northampton/ former State Hospital Property
Project Description: Village Hill Northampton is a 126-acre master-planned community based on New Urbanist
principles. It combines commercial, R&D/light industrial and residential uses with open space to support
regional job creation, housing, business development, and recreation. MassDevelopment is the managing
partner overseeing the revitalization effort that has been ongoing for 20+ years. When build-out is complete,
the former Northampton State Hospital campus will feature approximately 300,000-square feet of commercial
space comprised of retail, office, and light industrial uses; 350-mixed income market rate affordable homes
and rental units; and ample protected open space.
88
Christopher Heights Northampton
Assisted Living: In February 2016, the Grantham Group opened an 83-unit assisted living facility on the former
State hospital campus, 43 units of which are affordable and designated for low-income seniors. Residents
enjoy private apartments, prepared meals, social activities, personal care assistance, medication reminders,
and staff available at all hours.
Affordable Housing: The Community Builders has been the developer of the affordable housing created on site
to date. Two of the first projects undertaken in the campus redevelopment early on transformed two existing
buildings into 33 affordable rental units at the Hilltop Apartments (2006) and 40 affordable rental units at
Hillside Place (2008). TCB, in partnership with Valley CDC, is currently moving forward on creating 65 units of
mixed income housing on two parcels – one at the far north end of the campus (North Commons/ 53 units)
and one infill lot located near the main entry (35 Village Hill Road /12 units plus 2,500 s.f. of first floor
commercial space). TCB is committed to sustainable design and energy efficiency and is in the process of
securing funding. The addition of these developments will promote economic diversity within this planned
community.
North Commons
Project Description: This project will create 53 residential units in 1 three story structure and provide common
outdoor areas on the northernmost campus parcel. The 30 acres of open space will include a playground,
walking paths, linkages to area trails and permanent riverfront conservation protection. The building will
contain 8 studios, 19 one bedroom units, 22 two bedroom units and 4 three bedroom units.
Local CPA and CDBG funding has been awarded but the project awaits the DHCD One Stop Funding decision on
an application submitted in February 2019. The total project cost is estimated to be $19,153,000.
Income levels: There will be 12 units at 30% AMI or below; 27 units at 60% AMI or below and 14 units at 120%
AMI, combining affordable and work force housing components.
Units for Special Needs Populations: 8 units will be set-aside for clients of the Department of Mental Health
and 4 units will be Community Based Housing units for people currently institutionalized or at risk of
institutionalization.
Rents/Subsidy Sources: Rents at the 120% of AMI level will be $1,100 for studio units; $1,350 for the one
bedroom units. Rents at the 60% AMI level will be $908 for the 1 bedroom units; $1,090 for two bedroom units
and $1,259 for three bedroom units. The rents with subsidies will be $847 for a studio, $928 for a one
bedroom and $1,163 for a three bedroom unit, although tenants in these units will only pay approximately
30% of their income for rent.
35 Village Hill Road
Project Description: This smaller project will see 5,400 square feet of new construction creating 12 residential
units and 2,500 sq. ft. of first floor commercial space. Overall composition will include 2 studio apartments, 8
one bedroom apartments and 2 two bedroom apartments. This project has received local funding as well as an
award from the State’s newly created Community Scale Initiative geared towards smaller scale projects in
more rural areas across the Commonwealth. The project gained site control in August of 2017 and will be
completed in the fall of 2020. Total project cost will be roughly $4,000,000.
89
Income levels: There will be 6 units at 80% of AMI (1 studio, 2 one bedroom units and 3 two bedroom units)
and 6 units of 120% AMI work force housing (1 studio, 4 one bedroom units and 1 two bedroom unit). There
will be one unit set-aside as a Community Based Housing unit.
Rents/Subsidy Sources: 80% of AMI rents for a studio will be $1,100, $1,200 for a one bedroom unit and
$1,454 for a two bedroom unit. For incomes at the 120% of area median income level (work force housing)
rent for a studio will be $1,100, $1,350 for a one bedroom unit and $1,700 for a two bedroom unit.
Pioneer Valley Habitat for Humanity: Homeownership Units
Verona/ Garfield Avenue – This home ownership development, underway for several years is approaching
completion. Pioneer Valley Habitat staff, volunteers and Habitat families have successfully built five homes on
the Garfield Avenue site between 2008 and 2016. The first construction was townhouse style, with the wall
dividing the homes running along the property line – two homes, not a condominium. The first family has been
living in their home since fall of 2010. The second family moved in in June of 2011. The third home is a
detached single-family home and it became occupied during the summer of 2012. Work began on the fourth
house during the fall of 2012 and occupied in 2014. The next home to be constructed began in 2014 and
occupied in January of 2015. The final home, nearing completion, is a 650 square foot 1 bedroom home,
exemplifying the results of a design competition called Big Enough, from which PVHH is piloting the best of the
small home revolution. The home features a simple energy efficient design and solar panels donated from
community partner PV Squared. Smith Vocational and Agricultural High School students contributed
construction, plumbing and electrical labor on all the homes.
Glendale Road – Pioneer Valley Habitat for Humanity broke ground in 2018 on three zero-net energy homes
that share a common driveway off Glendale Rd. Two of them will be built with modular construction
techniques through an innovative partnership with the Vermont Energy Investment Corporation (VEIC), the
MA Dept. of Energy Resources and a modular homebuilder called Vermod. The home being built on site will be
adapted to have a first floor fully handicap accessible bath. This project has received local CDBG and
Community Preservation Committee funding awards, in addition to other awards. The first 3 homes are under
construction with future homeowners contributing sweat equity. The two modular homes will finish
construction in the summer of 2019 and the third home being built on site is slated to be finished by December
2019. Smith Vocational forestry students have begun tree clearing for the fourth and final building lot which
fronts directly onto Glendale Road.
Other Habitat Projects In Northampton
• A duplex condo home on Pine Brook Curve in 1993
• A single family home on Cahillane Terrace in 1999
• A duplex condo home on Vernon and Forbes Avenue in 2000
• A duplex condo home on Ryan Road in 2002
• Three duplex condo homes on Westhampton Road 2003-2007
City Supported Housing Rehab Projects
Grove Street Inn Homeless Shelter Improvements
90
The City has financially supported physical improvements to the Grove Street Inn Homeless Shelter for
Individuals over the years. The farmhouse, located on former Northampton State Hospital property was
deeded to the City for use as a shelter, in the early 1990’s, via a land disposition agreement. The City owned
the building for many years while ServiceNet, Inc. administered the program. Improvements included
installation of an electrical fire alarm system, boiler replacement, site drainage work and exterior painting. The
City recently transferred ownership of the building to ServiceNet, Inc. The shelter has capacity for 21 homeless
men and women.
New South Street Apartments Rehabilitation
Home City Housing received $250,000 from the Community Preservation Committee and $130,000 of
Community Development Block Grant funds to do exterior rehabilitation work at this downtown affordable
housing property in 2014. The historic building, located at 22-34 New South Street contains 18 affordable
apartments.
Alliance for Sober Living/Gandara Center
The City supported, with CDBG dollars, physical improvements at a property located on Summer Street. This
program has serves 6 individuals committed to sober recovery. Several CDBG allocations have been made over
the years, the most recent in 2016 for roof and interior repairs.
Housing Rehabilitation Program
The City re-created a Housing Rehabilitation Program in 2016. (An earlier program was discontinued several
years ago). The Pioneer Valley Planning Commission administers the program for the City. The program is fully
supported by Community Development Block Grant funds and focuses on single family homeownership units.
To date, 16 properties have been qualified, 15 are under contract and 11 units have been completed. Several
new homeowners are in the process of being qualified. The goal of the program is to address 3-5 units per
year. Total project costs are allowable up to $45,000 to accommodate lead paint abatement if needed. All
units are lead tested.
Other Housing Support Services Projects
Access to Housing Initiative
ServiceNet, Inc. applied for and received $10,000 in 2013-2014 from the Community Preservation Committee
to administer a pilot program geared towards facilitating movement out of homelessness. The funds were
allocated to eligible individuals to utilize for first and last month’s rent and security deposits. Lack of access to
these sums is a barrier for those trying to exit homelessness.
6 people benefitted from the pilot program and were able to secure housing in Northampton. All 6 were still in
those homes at the end of the grant program. 2 of the participants made repayments to the program, in order
to create a small revolving fund.
Community Housing Support Services Program
Northampton’s Housing Partnership, a mayoral appointed board of volunteers charged with addressing the
City's affordable housing needs, designed and obtained local Community Preservation funds in 2015 to create
the Community Housing Support Services Project. The Center for Human Development (CHD) was selected to
administer the program following a public bidding process. For the last four years CHD staff have provided
91
assistance to Northampton residents that has included budget counseling and financial literacy, income
maximization, linkages to education and employment training, referrals to food, health, child care or other
eligible benefits and assistance with the timely payment of rent. 89 households have participated in the
program and tenancies have been preserved for 86, yielding a 97% success rate for keeping people stably
housed. The initial three year grant was renewed by the CPC for one year beginning April 1, 2019. Longer term
funding sources will need to be identified and secured for the program to continue upon exhaustion of the CPC
funds.
Relevant Plans
The following section outlines plans that are relevant to fair housing in Northampton that have been written in
the last several years. Some of the content of these plans serves to contextualize Northampton’s fair housing
issues within the greater region.
City of Northampton Consolidated 5 Year Action Plan, 2015-2020
Fourteen areas of priority that were identified within the Consolidated Plan include:
“Homelessness prevention, support for the emergency shelter system, creation of new rental housing for
individuals, creation of new rental housing for families, preservation of existing rental stock, housing
rehabilitation for homeownership units, affordable homeownership opportunities for families, housing for at-
risk and special populations, economic development activities focused on economic empowerment and
income maximization, housing support services for those at risk of homelessness, addressing basic needs such
as food, shelter and health care, elimination of slums and blight to facilitate development of new housing and
economic opportunities, improvements to public facilities and public infrastructure.”
Northampton Housing Needs Assessment and Strategic Housing Plan, 2011
This strategic housing plan identifies three priority housing needs following a visioning analysis, public forums,
and special meetings and interviews: homelessness prevention, shelters and rapid re-housing, and producing
and preserving affordable housing. Within the affordable housing category, the plan outlines several sub-
priorities: rental housing for individuals and families, the preservation of existing affordable rental stock,
housing rehabilitation resource, affordable homeownership for families, housing for at-risk and special needs
populations, and research into options beyond traditional housing models.
Pioneer Valley Regional Housing Plan, 2014
The Pioneer Valley Regional Housing Plan identifies regional housing issues impacting the cities and towns of
Hampden and Hampshire counties. It identifies the geographic areas of concentrated poverty and racial
segregation and acknowledges that the Valley includes areas of both strong and weak housing markets. Some
of the issues identified in this report that are relevant to Northampton’s Analysis of Impediments include: a
lack of accessible housing for people with disabilities, older housing stock with lead paint issues, limitations
and lack of programs for public and private income-restricted housing, and landlords who are unaware of their
responsibilities under federal, state, and local regulation. Aspects of this plan were used to inform much of the
regional analysis included in this AI.
92
Sustainable Knowledge Corridor Fair Housing Equity Assessment, 2014
This regional assessment completed in 2014 by the Pioneer Valley Planning Commission intended to “identify
opportunities related to housing market stability, housing affordability and fair access to housing in the
Pioneer Valley in order to create a region in which all residents are able to choose housing that is affordable
and appropriate to their needs.” The plan outlines a total of 54 recommendations throughout the region, three
of which pertain specifically to affirmatively furthering fair housing:
• Strengthen education to landlords, tenants, banking and lending institutions, and general public about
fair housing laws
• Support advocacy, monitoring, reporting and enforcement of fair housing laws
• Strengthen connections between analysis of impediments and consolidated plans.
This Assessment also identifies intervention points where local governments can address issues pertaining to
fair housing and affordable housing:
“State & local planning documents that do not address fair housing; lack of coordination & funding for
programs that promote mobility; inadequate fair housing enforcement & education to address discrimination
& barriers that limit housing access; too few legislative solutions to overcome impediments; lack of
collaboration among governmental entities, zoning regulations that prohibit affordable and multi-family
housing and/or make the creation of those units prohibitively expensive; lack of data to determine if entities
receiving Federal financing are meeting their goals to affirmatively further fair housing. It adds the following
components at the more macro level: lack of affordable housing in a variety of locations and predatory
lending, redlining and other housing discriminatory practices, especially against persons of color. At the
housing provider level, landlords that refuse to make modifications or reasonable accommodation, those who
refuse to accept housing subsidies as a source of rental payment, linguistic profiling, and rental discrimination
against families with young children due to presence or potential presence of lead-based paint hazards.”
Private Sector
Banking and Lending Policies
Mortgage Denials by Race and Ethnicity
The Home Mortgage Disclosure Act (HDMA) requires every financial lending institution to provide the federal
government with information regarding their loan practices including acceptance and denial rates. This data
was reviewed to determine if certain racial or ethnic groups were disproportionately denied a home loan. The
chart below shows denial rates by race for Northampton between 2014 and 2017.
From 2014 to 2017, a total of 2,913 households applied for either a home loan or a refinance in Northampton.
297 of those applications, or 10.2%, were denied. The vast majority of applications were completed by
households described as “White” (2,282) and/or” Not Hispanic or Latino” (2,376). Denial rates over this four
year time span were almost twice as high for households defined as “Hispanic and Latino”. Of the 58
applications submitted by this group, 11 or (19%) were denied. Other racial and ethnic groups showed denial
rates similar to those of the entire public.
93
FIGURE 22: MORTGAGE RATE DENIALS BY RACE & ETHNICITY
Steering and Other Discriminatory Housing Practices
Housing advocates who weighed in on the development of the Regional Housing Plan expressed the following
discriminatory housing practices that are prevalent in the Pioneer Valley regional housing market, especially
against persons of color. The most prevalent issues include:
• Active steering towards certain areas of a community and/or the region based on race/ethnicity,
economic characteristics, and familial status.
• General rental discrimination against families with minor children.
• Rental discrimination against families with young children due to the presence or potential presence of
lead-based hazards. This is usually a result of landlords not understanding or not being willing or able
to comply with their obligations under Massachusetts laws to abate lead paint if a child under the age
of 6 years old is occupying the unit and to not deny families with children under the age of 6 just
because there is lead paint present in the unit. The Massachusetts Fair Housing Center identifies this
as a top area of concern based on their statistical data.
• Linguistic profiling in both the rental and homeownership markets, especially against persons of Latino
origin. Linguistic profiling is the practice of using auditory clues—usually over the telephone—to
identify race, ethnic origin, or other characteristics, and discriminating based on those characteristics.
0.00%
10.00%
20.00%
30.00%
40.00%
50.00%
60.00%
2014 2015 2016 2017
All Applicants American Indian or Alaska Native
Asian Black or African American
White Hispanic or Latino
Not Hispanic or Latino
94
• Discrimination against individuals with Limited English Proficiency (LEP) in regards to landlords denying
rentals to individuals with LEP and in entities with federal funding failing to accommodate such
individuals with written or oral translation services.
• Landlords who refuse to make reasonable accommodations (changes in rules or policies to allow equal
opportunity to use and enjoy housing) or reasonable modifications (structural changes) to allow
individuals with disabilities equal opportunity to use and enjoy housing.
• Landlords have an obligation to allow such reasonable accommodations or modifications upon
tenant’s proper request.
• Landlords who refuse to accept housing subsidies as a source of rental payment is a main area of
concern in our region.
This group of Pioneer Valley fair housing experts also felt that there was a need for more formal studies and
reports to be conducted in the region on discriminatory housing practices, in order to draw public attention to
the above noted issues as well as to illuminate additional issues and work toward solutions.
Private Rental Market Analysis
In March of 2019 Craigslist rental postings for Northampton were gathered from over the course of a single
week. 45 posts were made for individual apartments or houses for rent ranging from studios to 4-bedroom
homes. Of those rentals listed, 11 were for apartments with three or more bedrooms. 30 of the 45 posts (2/3
of all posts) mentioned a broker fee. These fees tend to be a percentage of one month’s rent that must be paid
to the rental agency upon move-in. Most fees were at or above 60% of one month’s rent. While none of the
posts included any directly discriminatory language, two of the posts had some veiled language that could be
considered discriminatory possibly against families with children or perhaps trying to discourage college
students from applying. For example, a 2-bedroom apartment listing stated that the landlord was looking for a
“mature, quiet person (e.g. visiting faculty, etc)” and required a “quiet period” between 10pm to 8am. This
language suggests that children are not welcome in this unit. Another post mentioned that a second room
would be “ideal as an office or guest bedroom” as opposed to a child’s room. Some posts ask for a higher
monthly rent for more than one tenant.
The average rent for a studio or 1-bedroom apartment from these listings was $1,234.33 per month.
The average rent for a 2-bedroom was $1,603.16 per month.
The average rent for a 3-bedroom was $1902.11 per month.
The average rent for a 4-bedroom was $2287.50 per month.
95
Appendix D: Current Fair Housing Profile
Fair Housing Organizations
Massachusetts Commission Against Discrimination (MCAD)
Contact: 413-739-2145
The Massachusetts Commission Against Discrimination (MCAD) serves as the state’s chief civil rights
enforcement agency. The MCAD works to eliminate discrimination on a variety of bases and areas, and strives
to advance the civil rights of the people of the Commonwealth through law enforcement, outreach and
training. The MCAD has offices throughout the state, including a Springfield office that serves the Pioneer
Valley. MCAD provides fair housing education, testing, enforcement and the ongoing monitoring of
discriminatory practices that are key to eliminating bias in housing choice. The MCAD was established by the
1968 Civil Rights act and has served as one of the oldest civil rights enforcement agencies in the country.
Massachusetts Fair Housing Center (MFHC)
Contact: 413-539-9796
The City of Northampton is also served by the Massachusetts Fair Housing Center located in the City of
Holyoke. The Massachusetts Fair Housing Center (MFHC) was established as the Housing Discrimination
Project in 1989 and is the oldest fair housing center in Massachusetts. MFHC provides free legal services for
individuals who have experienced housing discrimination on the basis of federal and/or state law. They receive
complaints online, over the phone, through referrals from service providers, and during walk-in hours. When
an individual reports suspected housing discrimination, MFHC will counsel him or her, investigate the
complaint and, in appropriate cases, provide legal representation. MFHC’s legal work helps to promote
housing choice, preserve tenancies, avoid homelessness, create lead-safe housing for children and provide
disabled tenants with equal access to housing.
MFHC also engages in extensive educational activities. MFHC conducts outreach to individuals and families at
high risk of discrimination to make them aware of the fair housing laws and illegal housing practices. MFHC’s
staff visit local social service agencies to present workshops on fair housing rights, teach first time homebuyers
about their rights, counsel homeowners about their mortgages and publish and distribute informational
materials in over 10 languages. MFHC also provides programs for landlords and property managers on the fair
housing laws to prevent discrimination before it occurs. MFHC is constrained in the amount of work they can
do based on their current funding and affirm that there is much more work they could do if they had expanded
funding given the number of complaints they receive.
Community Legal Aid of Massachusetts
Contact: 413-781-7814
CLA provides free legal services to low-income and elderly residents, victims of crime, and to the survivors of
homicide victims in Western Massachusetts. CLA’s Housing and Homelessness Unit helps tenants avoid
eviction and helps homeowners avoid foreclosure. They also help families access shelter programs and get into
affordable housing and have run a housing discrimination testing and enforcement program. They have an
office in Northampton.
96
Stavros
Contact: 413-256-0473
Stavros is the regional advocacy agency for people with disabilities in the Pioneer Valley. In the past, the City of
Northampton has partnered with Stavros to host workshops on fair housing laws with the populations served
by Stavros. These workshops are intended to help people with disabilities learn how to access reasonable
accommodations and to be aware of their rights.
Reports of Discrimination
Below is a chart showing the total complaints received by Mass Fair Housing for Hampden and Hampshire
Counties from 2014 to 2019. In both counties, the most reported type of discrimination was due to disability
with a total of 597 cases. 195 reports were made regarding racial discrimination, 173 regarding familial status,
and 74 regarding public assistance.
Problem Code Hampshire
County
Hampshire
Percentage of
Total
Hampden
County
Hampden
Percentage of
Total
Race 35 16.06% 160 14.29%
Age 1 0.46% 6 0.54%
Sexual
Orientation/Gender
Identity and
Expression
2 0.92% 6 0.54%
Public Assistance 15 6.88% 59 5.27%
Religion 1 0.46% 1 0.09%
Sex 2 0.92% 52 4.64%
Familial Status 18 8.26% 155 13.84%
National Origin 5 2.29% 45 4.02%
Disability 127 58.26% 470 41.96%
Marital Status 1 0.46% 1 0.09%
Other 11 5.05% 165 14.73%
Total Cases 218 100.00% 1120 100.00%
97
Assessment of Current Public and Private Fair Housing Programs and
Activities in the Northampton
2012 Analysis of Impediments
Below is an outline of proposed Actions from the 2012 Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice,
prepared by the Massachusetts Fair Housing Center. The chart includes follow-up actions taken to date.
98
Action Plan 1a) Increase the supply of affordable housing in Northampton and take steps to prevent the loss of
affordable units in the city.
212 units of various types constructed since 2012, with 85 currently in the pipeline. Worked with
owner/manager of Leeds Village Apartments to preserve affordability there. No other units in danger of being
converted to market rate in the near future.
Action Plan 1b) Because Northampton is a desirable place to live, a strategy will need to be employed that
ensures that members of protected classes who are disproportionately affected by the high cost of housing in
Northampton are the ones who access newly created affordable units.
Difficult strategy to create and implement, due to state funding “packages” that come with assigned numbers
of units for homeless, clients of the Department of Mental Health, disabled. Local preferences do not facilitate
regional mobility. Creating family housing at the Lumber Yard apartments increased inventory for larger sized
affordable apartments.
Action Plan 2a) Create an incentive plan for the development of multi-bedroom rental units.
Multi-bedroom rental units created at the Lumber Yard Apartments and will be at North Commons, Village Hill,
but not as a result of an incentive plan.
Action Plan 3a) With a suitable LGBT advocacy organization, host an education session with landlords and
lenders to inform them about this new protected class status.
Information was made available at the annual landlord workshops sponsored by the Northampton Housing
Partnership. No LGBTQ advocacy organization was identified with which to partner.
Action Plan 3b) Produce or revise fair housing outreach materials to include this protected class.
Done by the Massachusetts Fair Housing Center; disseminated by the City at appropriate venues.
Action Plan 4a) Create a database on the city’s website that lists those homes that have been de-leaded.
Being undertaken by the City’s Health Department, updated regularly for public perusal.
Action Plan 4b) Provide outreach to landlords and homeowners about the programs and financial assistance
available to them to de-lead their homes.
Information made available in an annual letter from the Mayor to all City landlords; at the informational
workshops sponsored by the Housing Partnership and on the City’s website. Abatement activities are carried
out when required for units participating in the City’s CDBG funded Housing Rehabilitation Program,
administered by the Pioneer Valley Planning Commission.
Action Plan 5a) Host a community meeting to inform members of the public about the recently passed CORI
reform law to ensure that landlords are following the requirements for CORI checks and denials based on a
CORI record and to inform renters of the ways in which they can seal their CORI records.
Updates were provided at training sessions conducted by the Mass Fair Housing Center in 2018, 2019 for
property managers and service providers.
Action Plan 6a) Work with disability rights and disability advocacy groups to host a workshop to help those
with disabilities assemble the types of documents and identification papers needed to complete a rental
application.
Conducted a workshop in joint sponsorship with Stavros Center for Independent Living in 2014. Should repeat
99
regularly.
Action Plan 6b) Examine the types of disability housing discrimination complaints filed over the past few years
and look for patterns and opportunities for targeted outreach and education.
This research and analysis occurs annually in preparation of the Annual Action Plan required by HUD, as a
Community Development Block Grant funded entitlement community. Outreach is conducted annually to the
Stavros Center for Independent Living. City’s Office of Planning and Sustainability recently completed a report
entitled “Increasing Accessibility for People with Disabilities at Northampton Greenways, Parks and Recreation
Areas” in 2019, and the Northampton Disability Commission completed an ADA Self-Evaluation and Transition
Plan Update in 2019.
Action Plan 7a) All agencies that receive housing discrimination complaints will participate in a process of
information sharing across agencies while still maintaining client confidentiality.
Northampton Human Rights Commission and Northampton Housing Partnership encouraged to work with the
Mass Fair Housing Center and Community Legal Aid for complaint intake and processing, rather than City
agencies getting involved with enforcement activities.
Action Plan 7b) Fair housing agencies will work together to better define their respective roles regarding
receipt, referral, and investigation of housing discrimination claims.
Not within the City’s control for implementation, although that coordination is encouraged.
Action Plan 7c) The MFHC will meet regularly with representatives from Northampton’s community
organizations in order to hear, from the ground up, the challenges to fair housing that their constituents face.
Education and outreach does occur, but the presence of the MFHC in Hampshire County is not as apparent as
perhaps it is in Hampden County. The City used to award CDBG funding to the agency, in order to formalize a
scope of work, and guarantee that work would take place here, but the agency no longer applies for the funds.
Action Plan 8a) Consider expanding the “by right” designation to the construction of halfway homes and multi-
family dwellings.
Allowing multi-family home construction by right in all zoning districts is currently being examined by the
Zoning Sub-Committee of the Northampton Housing Partnership and the Office of Planning and Sustainability.
Halfway homes are usually exempt from zoning due to the educational use categorization, and therefore are
permitted in most locations.
Action Plan 9a) Work with rental housing advertisers to inform them of the fair housing laws in Massachusetts
and their obligation not to print discriminatory ads.
Mass Fair Housing Center undertakes this work and conducts periodic monitoring and follow up.
100
Appendix E: Housing Projections
The total population of Northampton is not projected to increase or decrease drastically over the coming
years. However, the characteristics of the City’s population are likely to change. In order to best understand
the future housing needs of Northampton we have calculated approximate projections for households with
children, households at different income levels, and households that may need accessibility features. If the City
of Northampton is to reach its goal of becoming a more inclusive and welcoming community, its population
must more accurately reflect that of the general region. Currently, the population of Northampton differs from
that of the region as a whole in terms of income and household make-up.
Households with Children
In order to serve the needs of the Pioneer Valley region, Northampton must attract or provide housing for
specific populations of people and household types to better match the population of the area. For example,
Northampton has a much lower percent of households with children than the rest of the region.76 23.8% of
households in Northampton have children, whereas 29.7% in the greater region have children. This may
indicate that there are barriers for families interested in living in Northampton, especially considering that
qualitative data gathered for this report suggests that Northampton’s schools are highly sought after. In order
to match the regional average, Northampton would need to attract over 1,550 families with children. It is also
important to note, however, that some of these population trends may be due to Northampton’s higher than
usual college student population.
Pioneer
Valley
Region
Northampton
% HH with Children 29.7% 23.8%
Total # HH w Children 70,701 6,282
Total increase to keep up
with regional trend
1,558
Accessibility
As the population of Northampton is aging, the need for accessible housing will increase. The number of
individuals ages 65 and above is projected to increase by 94% by 2035 and the population of those with
disabilities will thus also increase.77 It is expected that by 2035, 32.5% of the population over 65 will have a
76 US Census Bureau, 2013-2017 ACS, Table S1101 77UMass Donahue Institute Population Projections
101
disability, or an increase of 1,496 individuals.78 In order to meet the need for accessible units within the City,
Northampton must prioritize the production and conversion of accessible homes.
Current Population with a Disability
Total With a
Disability
% with
disability
65+ 4,106 1,173 28.6%
65-74 2,744 490 17.9%
75+ 1,362 683 50.1%
Projected Population with a Disability 2035
Total With a
Disability
% With a
Disability
Projected
Increase From
2017
65+ 7,498 2,642 35.2% 1,469
65-74 3,434 615 17.9% 125
75+ 4,046 2,027 50.1% 1,344
Household Income
The breakdown of households in different income categories in Northampton differs from those in the region.
The charts below show the incomes associated with the regional area median income (AMI). The data shows
that in order to meet regional trends, Northampton must attract households in each income group.79
Northampton, MA
Income at
AMI
Current #
of HHs in
Income
Bracket
Current % of
HHs in
Income
Bracket
HH Increase
needed to meet
Regional
Trends
Under 30% AMI $22,800 2,264 19.8% 211
Under 80% AMI $60,800 5,451 47.8% 628
78 US Census Bureau, 2013-2017 ACS, Table S1810 79 US Census Bureau, 2013-2017 ACS, Table S1901
102
Under 120% AMI $91,200 7,265 63.7% 548
Pioneer Valley Region
Income at AMI Current # of
HHs in Income
Bracket
Current % of
HHs in Income
Bracket
Under 30% AMI $22,800 51,561 21.7%
Under 80% AMI $60,800 126,770 53.3%
Under 120% AMI $91,200 162,932 68.5%
Housing needs by income: Renters and Buyers*
The table below80 shows housing needs associated with different income levels. As is demonstrated by the
data, there are not enough rental units available for those making less than $30,000 annually to meet the
need. Approximately 858 more homes that cost less than $750 are needed to ensure that these lower-income
renters are not cost-burdened.81
Projected Housing Needs by Income Category: Rental Units
Income Rental HHs in
Income Level
Affordable
Monthly Rent
# of Units
Affordable to
Rent within
this Income
Level
Difference
Between
Availability
and Need
Less than $10,000 720 Less than $250 280 -440
$10,000 to $19,999 883 $250 to $500 627 -256
$20,000 to $29,999 514 $500 to $750 352 -162
$30,000 to $39,999 491 $750 to $1,000 1045 554
$40,000 to $49,999 398 $1,000 to 1,250 1030 632
80 These numbers are approximations. The data in the table is derived from two different Census datasets which have
different income level categories. Due to differences in the income level categories, some of the income level data does
not match up completely. 81 US Census Bureau, 2013-2017 ACS, Tables B19001 and B25063
103
$50,000 to $74,000 912 $1,250 to 1,875 1297 385
$75,000 to $99,999 631 $1,875 to
$2,500
372 -259
$100,000+ 627 $2,500+ 51 -576
This chart shows how the income levels of those in Northampton compare to the housing values reported by
the US Census Bureau (note that these are values not actual listing prices). This table considers all households
who live in Northampton, as opposed to just homeowners.82
Projected Housing Needs by Income Category: Ownership Units
Level of
Household Income
Number of
Households
in Income
Level
Value of Ownership
Units Affordable to this
Level of Income
Value of
Ownership
Units*
Estimated
Number of
Units in
Northampton
by Value of
Home
Less than $20,000 2047 Less than $60,000 Less than
$60,000
117
$20,000 to
$29,999
789 $60,000-$90,000 $60,000-
$90,000
25
$30,000-$39,999 1085 $90,000-$120,000 $90,000-
$125,000
136
$40,000-$49,999 751 $120,000-$150,000 $125,000-
$150,000
125
$50,000-59,999 779 $150,000-$180,000 $150,000-
$175,000
176
$60,000-$74,999 1,091 $180,000-$225,000 $175,000-
$250,000
1299
$75,000-$99,999 1,445 $225,000-$300,000 $250,000-
$300,000
948
$100,000-1,048 $300,000-$375,000 $300,000-1,603
82 US Census Bureau, 2013-2017 ACS, Tables B19001 and B25075
104
$124,999 $400,000
$125,000-
$149,999
782 $375,000-$450,000 $400,000-
$500,000
762
$150,000-
$199,999
766 $450,000-$600,000 More than
$500,000
1038
$200,000 or more 823 More than $600,000
105
Ap pendix F: Terms and Definitions
Accessible Housing Housing is “accessible” if it has been designed to allow easier access for
people who are physically disabled or vision impaired. Federal law
requires that a housing provider make reasonable modifications to the
design of a structure, such as installation of a ramp into a building or
grab bars in a bathroom. Terms that are related to accessible housing
include the following:
• Adaptable housing is housing that can be modified to the changing
needs of the people living inside it without the need for significant
reconstruction. It provides people with a larger opportunity to stay
in their own home as their mobility changes due to age or illness.
• Barrier-free Housing is housing that has been designed to
accommodate people with mobility restrictions and allow them to
navigate through their home. Barrier free characteristics include not
requiring the use of stairs and ensuring entryways are wide enough
for access by a wheelchair.
• Universal design is the utilization of principles that allow the use of
a housing unit or items within a housing unit by as many people as
possible. Facilities that incorporate universal design can be used by
both people with and without disabilities.
• Visitability, as defined by HUD, is “a very basic level of accessibility
that enables persons with disabilities to visit friends, relatives, and
neighbors in their homes within a community.” HUD has two design
standards for visitability: 1) providing a 32-inch clear opening in all
interior and bathroom doorways; and (2) providing at least one
accessible means of egress/ingress for each unit. HUD “strongly
encourages” incorporation of these standards, in addition to
required accessibility design.
Affordable Housing Housing is considered to be "affordable" if the household pays no more
than 30 percent of its gross annual income on housing. Households who
pay more than 30 percent of their income for housing are considered
cost-burdened and may have difficulty affording necessities such as food,
clothing, transportation and medical care. This is the generally accepted
definition of housing affordability in the planning field and is the
definition used by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban
Development's and the Massachusetts Department of Housing and
Community Development in the calculation of the Area Median Income
and promotion of income-restricted housing (see definitions below).
Area Median Income The Area Median Income (AMI) is the median family income for the
Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA), which includes all communities in
Hampshire and Hampden County. The U.S. Department of Housing and
Urban Development (HUD) calculates the AMI annually, based on the
American Community Survey's estimated median family income for the
MSA. The Springfield AMI in 2017 was $67,700.
From the AMI, "income limits" are derived based on family size (eg.
Income limits for a family of one are significantly lower than those for a
106
family of four) and used as the most common benchmark to determine
eligibility for federal and state housing programs. The three most
commonly used affordable housing benchmarks are:
• Low Income (LI) means no more than 80% of Area Median
Income (AMI).
• Very Low Income (VLI) means no more than 50% of AMI
• Extremely Low Income (ELI) is no more than 30% of AMI
Chapter 40B-Comprehensive
Permit Law
Massachusetts General Law Chapter 40B, alternatively called "the
Comprehensive Permit Law" or the "Anti-Snob Zoning Law", was
promulgated in 1969 specifically to address exclusionary zoning practices
as well as racial and economic segregation, shortage of decent housing,
and inner city decline. The Comprehensive Permit Law allows a limited
override of local zoning and other land use regulations in communities
where such regulations impede the development of affordable housing
and rental housing. The Law sets an affordable housing goal of 10
percent, or fair share quota or threshold, for all communities.
Communities below 10 percent must allow a streamlined zoning review
process for proposed housing developments under the condition that 25
percent or more of the proposed units are reserved for low or moderate
income households.
Conditional Tenancy An approach to keeping people who struggle to stay in affordable
housing that has been used more internationally than in the US. It is
based on the understanding that housing providers should be supporting
people to meet their ambitions and helping people migrate through
social housing. Conditional tenancies are being introduced in the United
Kingdom; they are promoting significant cultural shifts for both housing
providers and tenants. However, whilst all the pilots were demonstrating
initial success, no single “one size fits all” approach to sustaining a
tenancy long-term has yet emerged.
Entitlement Community
A principal city of a Metropolitan Statistical Area that receives
Community Development Block Grant funds directly from the federal
Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and not the
state. There are five entitlement communities in the Pioneer Valley:
Chicopee, Holyoke, Northampton, Springfield, and Westfield.
Fair Housing Fair housing means having equal and free access to housing regardless of
race; color; religion; national origin; sex; age; ancestry; military or
veteran status; sexual orientation; gender identity and expression;
marital status; familial status; the use of public assistance, housing
subsidies or rental assistance; genetic information; victims of domestic
abuse; and disability, blindness, deafness, or the need of a service dog.
These categories are protected by state and federal law. Examples of
policies or programs that restrict equal and free access include zoning
and discrimination in the real estate market. People should not face
discriminatory housing practices, such as zoning that creates segregation
and unfair mortgage lending standards. The Fair Housing Act of 1968 as
well as subsequent legislation and related court decisions firmly plants
fair housing as a civil right
High Opportunity Areas Areas that provide high quality or highly desirable employment,
educational, recreational, and service opportunities and that tend to be
accessible via public transportation systems.
107
Household The U.S. Census Bureau defines a "household" as all of the people who
occupy a housing unit. There are two types of households: family
households and non-family households. People not living in households
are classified as living in group quarters (includes dormitories, prisons,
nursing homes, etc.).
A family household consists of a household where a householder and
one or more other people living in the same household are related to the
householder by birth, marriage, or adoption. A family household may
also contain people not related to the householder. In the 2010 Census,
same-sex spousal households are included in the category, "same-sex
unmarried partner households" but may be either a family or nonfamily
household depending on the presence of another person who is related
to the householder.
A non-family household consists of a householder living alone or with
nonrelatives only, for example, with roommates or an unmarried
partner.
Income Restricted Housing Income- restricted housing is housing that is restricted to individuals and
families with low to moderate incomes. These are the people who
traditionally have various social and economic obstacles that make it
more challenging to find clean, safe and affordable housing. Income-
restricted housing typically receives some manner of financial assistance
to bring down the cost of owning or renting the unit, usually in the form
of a government subsidy. There are two forms of income-restricted
housing: public and private. Public housing is managed by a public
housing authority, which was established by state law to provide
affordable housing for low-income people. Private housing is owned and
operated by private owners who receive subsidies or zoning relief in
exchange for renting to low- and moderate-income people. Most
providers of housing assistance use HUD's Area Median Income (AMI)
limit thresholds to determine eligibility for their programs.
Low Opportunity Areas Areas with limited job opportunities or desirable employment as well as
limited educational, recreational, and service opportunities and
amenities. Low opportunity areas may have limited access to public
transportation systems.
Market rate housing Housing that has rent levels or sale prices that are consistent with the
housing market of the surrounding area. Market rate housing includes all
housing that is not income-restricted. It includes lower valued housing to
higher valued housing. Weak housing markets have market-rate rents or
sales prices that are lower than stronger market areas. Market-rate
housing may have tenants who pay a portion of their rent with a
voucher, such as a Section 8 (this is a housing subsidy in the form of
rental assistance that tenants can use to find rental housing in the
private market and is paid to a private landlord).
108
Non-Entitlement Community A city or town that does not receive Community Development Block
Grant funds directly from the federal Department of Housing and Urban
Development (HUD). In Massachusetts, the non-entitlement
communities apply directly to the Massachusetts Department of Housing
and Community Development for CDBG funding. Non-entitlement
communities in Massachusetts fall into one of three groups: Mini-
Entitlement Community (receive the highest level of state-distributed
CDBG funds due to their high statistical indication of need, poverty rate
and size), CDF I Community (communities with high statistical indication
of need), and CDF II Community (communities that are not eligible for
CDF I due to lower statistical need). A full list of the CDBG funding
eligibility categories can be found in the Appendix.
Non-family (household) A non-family household consists of a householder living alone or with
nonrelatives only, for example, with roommates or an unmarried
partner.
Pioneer Valley Hampden, Hampshire, and Franklin counties.
Pioneer Valley Region Hampden and Hampshire counties.
Springfield Metropolitan
Statistical Area (MSA)
The Springfield Metropolitan Statistical Area includes all communities in
Hampshire and Hampden County. A "metropolitan statistical area" is a
federally designated geographic region with a relatively high population
density at its core and close economic ties throughout the region. The
United States Office of Management and Budget designates
metropolitan statistical areas. The federal government uses this
geographic designation for statistical purposes, such as setting the Area
Median Income limits for the greater Springfield region.
109