Bill Overview
Title: Affordable CO-OP (Collective Opportunities for Owning Property) Act
Description: This bill expands access to financing through zero-interest loans and federally backed mortgages for, and otherwise supports, limited equity cooperatives. These are models of affordable homeownership in which residents purchase a share in a residential development and commit to resell their share at a price that maintains affordability.
Sponsors: Rep. Bowman, Jamaal [D-NY-16]
Target Audience
Population: Low- and moderate-income individuals seeking affordable homeownership through limited equity cooperatives
Estimated Size: 1000000
- Limited equity cooperatives (LECs) typically target low- and moderate-income households that are seeking affordable homeownership options.
- This bill provides financial support mechanisms like zero-interest loans and federally backed mortgages, implying its target is the economically disadvantaged population who struggle with traditional home financing.
- The benefit of LECs is the collective ownership model, attracting people interested in shared living spaces and community-focused housing solutions.
- Globally, housing affordability is a prominent issue, potentially impacting millions of people who can benefit from such initiatives.
Reasoning
- To ensure the interviews are representative of the target population for the Affordable CO-OP Act, I included a variety of individuals from low- and moderate-income backgrounds. The main criterion was individuals struggling with traditional homeownership options and who might consider or be eligible for limited equity cooperatives (LECs).
- Given the budget constraints of $1 billion in the first year, it is important to focus on individuals living in areas with high housing demand and affordability issues.
- Considering the 10-year budget of $12.25 billion and the estimated target of 1,000,000 low- and moderate-income individuals, I included some diversity in geographic distribution and occupation to mirror where housing crises are most severe and where LECs could be particularly impactful.
- Not all interviews demonstrate high impact, to represent population variety including those who may not find the program beneficial or whose lives would not significantly change under this act.
Simulated Interviews
Teacher (San Francisco, CA)
Age: 35 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I think the CO-OP Act could be a game changer for people like me who are struggling to find affordable housing in San Francisco.
- Having a stable place of my own would provide peace of mind and security for my child.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 5 |
Factory Worker (Cleveland, OH)
Age: 50 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 3
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I like the idea of having a co-op option because it might help me secure a home even with my current financial struggles.
- I'm worried about paying the mortgage after being laid off.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 4 | 3 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 3 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 3 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 3 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 4 |
Freelancer (New York, NY)
Age: 27 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The CO-OP Act seems promising, but I am curious about its implementation in big cities like New York.
- A zero-interest loan sounds amazing considering my current gig income doesn't easily qualify for traditional loans.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 6 |
Healthcare Worker (Jackson, MS)
Age: 40 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 20.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm really interested in community-based living, and LECs seem to fit that vision perfectly.
- Buying a house has been a dream for me, but doing it in a collective setting feels more social and feasible.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 9 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 9 | 7 |
Musician (Detroit, MI)
Age: 25 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 12/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I love the communal aspect of co-ops, it fits well with the lifestyle of artists and musicians.
- Currently, renting takes up too much of my income, making it hard to focus on my music.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Retired (Phoenix, AZ)
Age: 65 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 15/20
Statement of Opinion:
- As a retiree, a secure and affordable home is very appealing, especially if I can retain some equity.
- I'm interested in downsizing but maintaining a quality living environment is important.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Software Developer (Seattle, WA)
Age: 30 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- While my current situation is stable, I think co-ops could be a great option for those who struggle with the housing market in Seattle.
- For people in different financial situations, these programs might provide new opportunities.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 7 |
Student (Austin, TX)
Age: 22 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I find the idea of a co-op intriguing since buying a house seems far out of reach right now.
- It might be a reasonable alternative for someone just entering the workforce with student loans.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Construction Worker (Denver, CO)
Age: 45 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 15.0 years
Commonness: 14/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Homeownership has felt unattainable with the fluctuating work in construction.
- A zero-interest loan through a cooperative seems like it could help me finally settle down.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 8 | 7 |
Farmer (Rural Kansas)
Age: 32 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- The appeal of co-ops for me is less about affordability and more about community.
- As someone living rurally, having a community-oriented housing model would enhance my living experience.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 7 | 6 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $1000000000 (Low: $800000000, High: $1200000000)
Year 2: $1100000000 (Low: $880000000, High: $1320000000)
Year 3: $1150000000 (Low: $920000000, High: $1380000000)
Year 5: $1250000000 (Low: $1000000000, High: $1500000000)
Year 10: $1350000000 (Low: $1080000000, High: $1620000000)
Year 100: $1500000000 (Low: $1200000000, High: $1800000000)
Key Considerations
- How demand for zero-interest loans may evolve and the potential need for adjusting financial assumptions.
- The coordination with existing federal housing programs and potential overlaps or interdependencies that might alter the projected cost.
- Long-term maintenance of affordability could potentially fall into conflict with rising property values.