Table of Contents

Executive Summary

• ES-05 Executive Summary

The Process

• PR-05 Lead & Responsible Agencies
• PR-10 Consultation
• PR-15 Citizen Participation

Needs Assessment

• NA-05 Overview
• NA-10 Housing Needs Assessment
• NA-15 Disproportionately Greater Need: Housing Problems
• NA-20 Disproportionately Greater Need: Severe Housing Problems
• NA-25 Disproportionately Greater Need: Housing Cost Burdens
• NA-35 Public Housing
• NA-40 Homeless Needs Assessment
• NA-45 Non-Homeless Special Needs Assessment
• NA-50 Non-Housing Community Development Needs

Housing Market Analysis

• MA-05 Overview
• MA-10 Number of Housing Units
• MA-15 Housing Market Analysis: Cost of Housing
• MA-20 Housing Market Analysis: Conditions of Housing
• MA-25 Public and Assisted Housing
• MA-30 Homeless Facilities and Services
• MA-35 Special Needs Facilities and Services
• MA-40 Barriers to Affordable Housing
• MA-45 Non-Housing Community Development Needs
• MA-50 Needs and Market Analysis Discussion

Strategic Plan

• SP-05 Overview
• SP-10 Geographic Priorities
• SP-25 Priority Needs
• SP-30 Influence of Market Conditions
• SP-35 Anticipated Resources
• SP-40 Institutional Delivery Structure
• SP-45 Goals Summary
• SP-50 Public Housing Accessibility and Involvement
• SP-55 Barriers to Affordable Housing
• SP-60 Homelessness Strategy
• SP-65 Lead Based Paint Hazards
• SP-70 Anti-Poverty Strategy
• SP-80 Monitoring

Action Plan

• AP-15 Expected Resources
• AP-20 Annual Goals and Objectives
• AP-35 Projects
• AP-50 Geographic Distribution
• AP-55 Affordable Housing
• AP-60 Public Housing
• AP-65 Homeless and Other Special Needs Activities
• AP-75 Barriers to Affordable Housing
• AP-85 Other Actions
• AP-90 Program Specific Requirements

Appendices

• Appendix-1 Citizen Participation

Executive Summary

ES-05 Executive Summary - 24 CFR 91.200(c), 91.220(b)

1. Introduction

The Office of Community Planning and Development (CPD) of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) requires that all jurisdictions entitled to receive funding under the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG), HOME Investment Partnerships (HOME), Emergency Solutions Grant (ESG), and Housing Opportunities for Persons with Aids (HOPWA) programs develop a Consolidated Plan for community development no less than every five years, and an Action Plan every year. The two federal grant programs included in this plan are 1) the Community Development Block Grant program and 2) the HOME Investment Partnerships program. Developing the plan is a collaborative process that relies on community input and provides an opportunity for strategic planning to ensure that actions taken at the local level are coordinated and comprehensively address priority housing and community development needs. The Action Plan is required annually to provide specific information on how the funds awarded will be used to meet the priority needs identified in the Consolidated Plan, and annual evaluation and performance reports are prepared to track progress and measure accomplishments.

A strategic plan must be submitted to HUD at least once every five years. This Consolidated Plan covers the time period of July 1, 2020 through June 30, 2025, and along with the Annual Action Plan, serves as Marin County’s application for CDBG and HOME funds for Fiscal Year 2020 (July 1, 2020 – June 30, 2021). The Housing and Federal Grants Division (HFGD) of the Marin County Community Development Agency (CDA) is the lead agency responsible for the submission of the Consolidated Plan to HUD.

Participation by the community, nonprofit organizations, and input by local public entities enriched the planning process for the Consolidated Plan and allowed the County to identify strategies for investments to support individuals, families, and communities countywide. The 2020 Annual Action Plan identifies current projects addressing priorities and strategies stated in the Consolidated Plan. All the proposed projects and activities are intended to benefit residents of Marin county who have extremely low, low, and moderate-incomes, and populations that have special needs, and members of protected classes which include race, color, national origin, religion, sex, familial status, and disability.  

2. Summary of the objectives and outcomes identified in the Plan Needs Assessment Overview

The County has identified the following goals for the planning period:

Create and preserve housing affordability, accessibility, and quality – Invest in the acquisition, new construction, and rehabilitation of rental and homeownership opportunities and assist first-time homeowners with down payment assistance to preserve housing affordability, stabilize residents at risk of involuntary displacement, and promote equitable access to housing options.

Assist populations with special needs – Invest in activities that help persons with special needs to access needed supportive services, facilities, and provide affordable and accessible housing.

Enhanced community and public facilities and spaces – Invest in rehabilitating and enhancing community facilities and public spaces in low-income neighborhoods and community facilities serving low-income residents including homeless populations.

Services to foster security and economic advancement – Invest in public services that support low-income communities including basic health services; children, youth, and parent support services; domestic violence services; education and job training; food security; housing support services; legal services; microenterprise business support services; and senior services.

3. Evaluation of past performance

In general, the community development and affordable housing activities that were implemented during the current Consolidated Plan time period served the identified needs. The five-year performance measures matrix and the one-year annual performance measures matrix in the County’s Consolidated Annual Performance and Evaluation Reports (CAPERs) show how the County performed against the goals that were set in the five-year strategic plan and the one-year action plan. The comparison of accomplishment data to goals indicate that the Consolidated Plan activities made a positive impact on the identified needs.

Marin County has funded a variety of programs and activities with HUD block grants and continues to work to address the greatest housing, community and economic development needs in the county. However, due to the complexity and extent of needs in relation to the limited resources available, these needs persist. Marin intends to continue funding programs and activities that make progress in ensuring safe, accessible, affordable housing and move residents towards economic security.

4. Summary of citizen participation process and consultation process

Marin County is committed to making local government open, accessible, and responsive to its residents. To this end, Marin County conducted extensive outreach efforts to provide meaningful opportunities for all county residents to participate in the process. In preparation for the Consolidated Plan, the County consulted with community members, nonprofit housing and service providers, advocacy groups, government and industry representatives to discuss housing and community development needs. Avenues for engagement included a stakeholder survey, one-on-one interviews, community meetings, workshops, and public hearings. These efforts resulted in the input of over xx residents and stakeholders countywide.

Additionally, prior to the development of the Consolidated Plan, the County of Marin began developing an Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice (AI), which included extensive community engagement in the form of a one-on-one meetings, community meetings hosted by community-based organizations and coalitions, and County led public hearings, steering committee, and community advisory group meetings. These efforts resulted in the input of over 900 residents and stakeholders countywide.

5. Summary of public comments

This will be completed after the public comment period.

6. Summary of comments or views not accepted and the reasons for not accepting them

This will be completed after the public comment period.

7. Summary

This will be completed after the public comment period.

The Process

PR-05 Lead & Responsible Agencies 24 CFR 91.200(b)

1. Describe agency/entity responsible for preparing the Consolidated Plan and those responsible for administration of each grant program and funding source

The following are the agencies/entities responsible for preparing the Consolidated Plan and those responsible for administration of each grant program and funding source.

Agency Role	Name	Department/Agency
Lead Agency	MARIN COUNTY
CDBG Administrator	MARIN COUNTY	Community Development Agency, Federal Grants
HOME Administrator	MARIN COUNTY	Community Development Agency, Federal Grants
ESG Administrator

Table 1 – Responsible Agencies

Narrative

N/A

Consolidated Plan Public Contact Information

Leelee Thomas, Planning Manager – lthomas@marincounty.org

Molly Kron, Planner – mkron@marincounty.org

Jillian Zeiger, Planner – jzeiger@marincounty.org

Genevieve Hahn-Kerr, Budget and Grants Analyst – ghahnkerr@marincounty.org

PR-10 Consultation – 91.100, 91.110, 91.200(b), 91.300(b), 91.215(I) and 91.315(I)

1. Introduction

The County of Marin’s Housing and Federal Grants Division (HFGD), undertook a new approach to Consultation for the preparation of the 2020-24 Consolidated Plan (Con Plan). Staff undertook a robust community outreach process to gather information to inform the Con Plan. This community engagement process capitalized on overlap with two (2) other County planning processes being conducted by Health and Human Services. This unique opportunity to collaborate on community engagement allowed each Division to reach a broader audience and address community concerns and issues in a holistic manner. Together the Community Development Agency (CDA) and the Marin Health and Human Services Department (HHS) collaborated to inform the following plans:

• Housing and Federal Grants Division’s 5-Year Consolidated Plan
• Mental Health Services Act 3-Year Plan
• Substance Use Services 5-Year Plan

This collective community outreach process to engage citizens provided a deeper understanding of community needs, which is essential to planning the use of federal grant funds. To engage the community, staff used various methods to gather information about housing, community spaces and infrastructure, and public service needs in Marin. The methodologies used include the following:

Community Survey - online and paper surveys available in English, Spanish, and Vietnamese were used to gather community input to inform funding priorities (survey is attached). Surveys were disseminated in partnership with local nonprofit service and housing providers and County departments including Health and Human Services and the Marin County Free Library. To enhance and encourage participation staff attended numerous community events, including weekly Health Hubs organized through the Marin Community Clinics in both Novato and San Rafael, the Canal Alliance food pantry, and events put together by local organizations, including Community Action Marin, the Marin Organizing Committee, and Performing Stars. A total of 322 surveys were collected, with 229 in English, 92 in Spanish, and one (1) in Vietnamese.

Services Provider Survey - an online service provider survey was distributed to over 50 organizations in Marin County. Twenty-five (25) surveys were completed by organizations that provide a wide range of services including childcare, senior, parent support, case management, basic health, and food security services. Survey respondents were asked about their biggest demand for services, funding gaps, and demographic information about their service population.

Community Meetings - in collaboration with Marin Health and Human Services, over the course of four (4) months staff lead seven (7) community meetings and focus groups to gather data. The meetings were held across the County including in Marin City, Kentfield, Novato, San Rafael, West Marin and one meeting in the Canal Neighborhood of San Rafael was held entirely in Spanish. Nearly 300 people participated in these meetings.

Interviews - staff reached out to 15 local government entities in Marin for interviews to garner insights into client and service trends, funding available, and demand for services. Of the interviews requested staff were able to conduct 11 interviews—two (2) cities, eight (8) County departments/divisions, and one (1) community service district.

In addition, staff interviewed other jurisdictions implementing federal grant programs to learn smart practices to improve impact and effectiveness of Marin County’s federal grants program. Nine (9) neighboring jurisdictions that administer federal grant programs similar to Marin’s were contacted. Of those, five (5) neighboring jurisdictions were interviewed to identify trends and practices that could be applied to Marin’s program.

All of these efforts have been an overlay on top of the County’s continuous work to collaborate across divisions and with local public agencies and nonprofit service providers to inform strategies and enhance impact of services for the County’s most vulnerable populations.

Provide a concise summary of the jurisdiction’s activities to enhance coordination between public and assisted housing providers and private and governmental health, mental health and service agencies (91.215(I)).

In preparing the Plan, the HFGD consulted with agencies and organizations that provide services to the community. These consultations were in addition to ongoing interactions between County departments and divisions, local Public Housing Authority, neighboring public agencies, and numerous nonprofit providers.

The County facilitates and participates in several committees and groups to extensively engage in strategy and planning discussions between public and assisted housing providers and private and governmental health, mental health, and service agencies. These forums allow public and nonprofit agencies to more effectively coordinate service programs, and include: the Homeless Policy Steering Committee, Youth Prevention Collaboration Steering Committee, Housing Acquisition Group, Fair Housing Advisory Committee, Fair Housing Steering Committee, Planning Directors Housing Working Group, Opening Doors Marin, Aging Action Initiative, Green and Healthy Homes, Alcohol and Drug Advisory Board, Marin County Mental Health Board, Mental Health Services Act Advisory Committee, Healthy Marin Partnership, and the Community Health Improvement Plan Steering Committee, among others. 

Describe coordination with the Continuum of Care and efforts to address the needs of homeless persons (particularly chronically homeless individuals and families, families with children, veterans, and unaccompanied youth) and persons at risk of homelessness

The County of Marin’s Health and Human Services Department (H&HS) plays the pivotal role of coordinating and implementing the Continuum of Care (CoC) and its efforts to prevent and eliminate homelessness. This work is overseen by the Homeless Policy Steering Committee (HSPC), which is the governing body of the Marin CoC and includes members representing homeless services and housing providers, faith-groups, veterans services, mental health, nonprofit social services providers, services users, city officials and county representatives, and other stakeholders who have a role in preventing and ending homelessness. The HPSC develops long-term strategic plans and facilitates year-round efforts to identify the needs of homeless individuals and families in Marin.  The core responsibilities include:

• Involving key local stakeholders in establishing a community-wide response to the complex problem of homelessness.
• Analyzing relevant data to identify the most effective mix of homeless services and housing for Marin.
• Setting priorities for programs and designing evaluation processes.
• Providing final approval for the Marin Continuum of Care application submission to the Department of Housing and Urban Development.
• Overseeing implementation of the Homeless Emergency Assistance and Rapid Transition to Housing Act (HEARTH) at a local level.
• Oversight of the CoC’s Homeless Management Information System (HMIS)
• Monitoring implementation of the CoC’s 10 Year Plan

The Marin CoC provides a full continuum of housing services to homeless persons including outreach and engagement, emergency and transitional shelter, rapid re-housing, and permanent supportive housing.

In past years housing and service providers focused on efforts toward prevention of homelessness because of the perceived cost-effectiveness of this approach. However, there has a been a shift nationally towards prioritizing resources to get people off of the streets and into housing. In 2017, the County along with other local public agencies and service providers adopted a series of new strategies for ending chronic homelessness including Coordinated Entry, Homeless Outreach Team, Housing First, and Whole Person Care. The vision behind these strategies is to build a sustainable, evidence-based, outcomes-focused coordinated system of care to efficiently and effectively house and serve Marin’s most vulnerable communities. As of March 2020, Marin CoC reports that 190 individuals have been housed since the launch of these strategies.

Describe consultation with the Continuum(s) of Care that serves the jurisdiction's area in determining how to allocate ESG funds, develop performance standards and evaluate outcomes, and develop funding, policies and procedures for the administration of HMIS

The County of Marin does not receive Emergency Solutions Grants (ESG) program funding from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). Marin Continuum of Care providers receive noncompetitive funding through the ESG Balance of State process, and participate in the ESG Balance of State regional competition for competitive funding. Marin Continuum of Care develops local performance standards in alignment with criteria outlined in the ESG Balance of State NOFA, evaluates applicant performance according to these standards, and recommends applicants to the ESG Balance of State process. CoC providers are awarded ESG Balance of State funding through grant agreements administered by the Department of Housing and Community Development.

HFGD staff sit on the CoC oversite committee to provide better coordination between the two processes. 

2. Describe Agencies, groups, organizations and others who participated in the process and describe the jurisdictions consultations with housing, social service agencies and other entities

Will be updated with attendees of Application Review meeting and upcoming PSC and BOS public hearings.

The County made an effort to contact and consult with a wide variety of agency types and partnering organizations interested in affordable housing, homelessness, persons with special needs, and community/economic development in the preparation of the 2020-24 Consolidated Plan. No agencies were intentionally excluded from consultation.

Other local/regional/state/federal planning efforts considered when preparing the Plan

Name of Plan	Lead Organization	How do the goals of your Strategic Plan overlap with the goals of each plan?
Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice	Marin County Community Development Agency	Both address housing and service issues in the County for member of the protected classes. Findings directly inform broader goals of the Consolidated Plan and prioritization of funding.
Continuum of Care Strategic Plan	Marin County Health and Human Services	Both address housing and service issues in the County
Housing Element	Marin County Community Development Agency	Both address housing issues in the County
General Plan	Marin County Community Development Agency	Both address housing and development issues
2019 Agency Plan	Housing Authority of the County of Marin	Both address housing issues in the County

Describe cooperation and coordination with other public entities, including the State and any adjacent units of general local government, in the implementation of the Consolidated Plan (91.215(l))

In preparation for the Consolidated Plan, the County engaged its established committee that oversees the implementation of the CDBG and HOME federal grant programs, the Countywide Priority Setting Committee (PSC). The PSC consists of one elected Councilmember from each city and town in Marin, a member of the Marin County Board of Supervisors, and 7 community members representing racial and ethnic minorities and people with disabilities. The PSC provides direct coordination with the councils of each neighboring city and town in Marin and ensures cooperation among these public entities in the implementation of the Consolidated Plan. In addition, HFGD staff work directly with staff from the County’s two largest cities, Novato and San Rafael, to partner on projects receiving federal grant funds and to ensure priority impact and effectiveness.

In addition, the County consulted with representatives from a broad range of organizations including, but not limited to those focused on the following needs: basic health services; child, family, and youth services; fair-housing; housing support services; legal services; older adult services; mental health services; public housing; transportation, and community resiliency to withstand and recover from adverse situations. These agencies were specifically invited and encouraged to participate in the public input process and to share with their client’s surveys and notices of meetings and hearings. Entities that participated in the public input process are listed in section PR-10 Consultation.

Additionally, prior to the development of the Consolidated Plan, the County was in the process of developing its Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice (AI). Many organizations and public entities serving the County participated in this process. This analysis established both regional goals to address the contributing factors that are limiting housing choice, and were approved by the PSC, which contains representation from each City and Town in Marin.

Draft ConPlan will be submitted to State. Additional text to be added here if response received.

Narrative (optional):

N/A

PR-15 Citizen Participation – 91.105, 91.115, 91.200(c) and 91.300(c)

1. Summary of citizen participation process/Efforts made to broaden citizen participation

Summarize citizen participation process and how it impacted goal-setting

Beginning in May 2019 the County of Marin conducted extensive outreach and consultation for the Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice and the 2020-24 Consolidated Plan.

Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice Outreach and Consultation

Staff met and consulted with 972 individuals through one-on-one meetings, community meetings hosted by community-based organizations and coalitions, and County led public hearings, steering committee and community advisory group meetings.

2020-24 Consolidated Plan Outreach and Consultation

Staff conducted a multi-strategy outreach campaign to inform the 2020-24 Consolidated Plan. Staff engaged the community using a community survey, service provider survey, community meetings, and interviews. A summary of each methods engagement is detailed below:

Community Survey -

Online and paper surveys available in English, Spanish, and Vietnamese were used to gather community input to inform funding priorities. Surveys were disseminated in partnership with local nonprofit service and housing providers and County departments including Health and Human Services and the Marin County Free Library. To enhance and encourage participation staff attended numerous community events, including weekly Health Hubs organized through the Marin Community Clinics in both Novato and San Rafael, the Canal Alliance food pantry, and events put together by local organizations, including Community Action Marin, the Marin Organizing Committee, and Performing Stars. A total of 322 surveys were collected, with 229 in English, 92 in Spanish, and one (1) in Vietnamese.

Services Provider Survey -

An online survey for service providers was distributed to over 50 organizations in Marin County. Twenty-five (25) surveys were completed by organizations that provide a wide range of services including childcare, senior services, parent support, case management, basic health, and food security services. Survey respondents were asked about their biggest demand for services, funding gaps, and demographic information about their service population.

Community Meetings -

In collaboration with Marin County Health and Human Services, over the course of four (4) months staff lead seven (7) community meetings and focus groups to gather data. The meetings were held across the County including in Marin City, Kentfield, Novato, San Rafael, West Marin and one meeting in the Canal Neighborhood of San Rafael was held entirely in Spanish. Nearly 300 people participated in these meetings.

Interviews -

Staff reached out to 15 local government entities in Marin for interviews to garner insights into client and service trends, funding available, and demand for services. Of the interviews requested staff were able to conduct 11 interviews—two (2) cities, eight (8) County departments/divisions, and one (1) community service district. In addition, staff did outreach to nine (9) neighboring jurisdictions that administer federal grant programs similar to Marin’s. Of those, five (5) neighboring jurisdictions were interviewed to identify trends and practices that could be applied to Marin’s program.

Countywide Priority Setting Committee Meetings -

The initial public meetings for the 2020-2024 Con Plan were held on October 17, 2019 and December 5, 2019 with the Countywide Priority Setting Committee, which is comprised of community members representing protected classes and city, town, and County elected officials representing the entire county. At these meetings findings form community outreach and strategies identified for the Con Plan were discussed along with the potential impact for each planning area. At the December 5, 2019 meeting the PSC approved the Goals for the 2020-24 Con Plan and the 2020-21 funding application timeline. Subsequently, an application workshop for PSC members to learn more about and provide feedback on the submitted applications was held on February 20, 2020. Next, three local planning area public hearings were held on March 16, 24, and April 2, 2020 to elicit public comment and make decisions about the use of CDBG and HOME funds. Finally, the Board of Supervisors held a public hearing to receive public comment and adopt the final Con Plan and funding recommendations for submission to HUD on May 12, 2020. Public comments were received regarding the Con Plan, funding amounts, funding trends, prioritization of funds for members of the protected classes, and eligibility for CDBG/HOME funded projects.

Formal notice of the 30-day comment period for the Con Plan, Annual Action Plan was published in the Marin Independent Journal on April 12, 2020. The comment period began on April 14, 2020 and concluded on May 15, 2020.

Funding Application Outreach -

On December 31, 2019 staff presented at the ISOJI community meeting in Marin City; January 15, 2020 two (2) bidding conferences were held in San Rafael, CA, one focused on Public Service projects and the second focused on Capital and Housing projects; and on January 22, 2020 staff presented at a West Marin Collaborative community forum in Point Reyes Station. These meeting were all intended to inform the public and prospective applicants about the opportunity to apply for CDBG and HOME funds, elicit project ideas, and to discuss CDBG and HOME eligibility requirements.

Citizen Participation Outreach

Sort Order	Mode of Outreach	Targe tof Outreach	Summary of response/ attendance	Summary of comments received	Summary of comments not accepted and reasons	URL
1	Community Needs Public Meeting 6/18/2019	Non-targeted/ broad community   Residents of West Marin	27 community members participated.	See 2020-24 ConPlan Outreach Findings Attachment.	N/A	N/A
2	Community Needs Public Meeting 7/22/2019	Non-targeted/ broad community   Residents of North Marin	45 community members participated.	See 2020-24 ConPlan Outreach Findings Attachment.	N/A	N/A
3	Community Needs Public Meeting 8/1/2019	Non-targeted/ broad community   Residents of Central Marin	56 community members participated.	See 2020-24 ConPlan Outreach Findings Attachment.	N/A	N/A
4	Community Needs Public Meeting 8/5/2019	Non-targeted/ broad community   Residents of Southern Marin	58 community members participated.	See 2020-24 ConPlan Outreach Findings Attachment.	N/A	N/A
5	Community Needs Public Meeting 8/14/2019	Non-targeted/ broad community   Residents of Central Marin	26 community members participated.	See 2020-24 ConPlan Outreach Findings Attachment.	N/A	N/A
6	Community Needs Focus Group 8/28/2019	Non-targeted/ broad community   Spanish Speaking Residents of Marin	22 members of community-based organizations participated.	See 2020-24 ConPlan Outreach Findings Attachment.	N/A	N/A
7	Community Needs Public Meeting 9/26/2019	Non-targeted/ broad community   Spanish Speaking Residents of Marin	49 community members participated.	See 2020-24 ConPlan Outreach Findings Attachment.	N/A	N/A
8	Community Needs Tabling 8/20/2019 – 9/27/2019	Non-targeted/ broad community   Residents of Marin	Staff tabled at 15 community events across Marin county administering a community survey in 3 languages and answering questions about community resources.	See 2020-24 ConPlan Outreach Findings Attachment.	N/A	N/A
9	Community Needs Survey	Non-targeted/ broad community   English, Spanish, and Vietnamese Speaking Residents of Marin	322 surveys were collected with 229 being in English, 92 in Spanish, and one (1) in Vietnamese.	See 2020-24 ConPlan Outreach Findings Attachment.	N/A	N/A
10	Draft Con Plan Public Hearing 10/17/2019	Non-targeted/ broad community	County held an informational session about the Consolidated Plan process. # community members attended	See 2020-24 ConPlan Outreach Findings Attachment.	N/A	N/A
11	Draft Con Plan Public Hearing 12/5/2019	Non-targeted/ broad community	County held a session identifying the Consolidated Plan priorities. # community members attended	See 2020-24 ConPlan Outreach Findings Attachment.	N/A	N/A
12	Application Workshop	Non-targeted/ broad community	County held 2 information sessions regarding the application process and eligible projects. 34 community members attended.	Comments consisted of project eligibility, total funding available, and process for allocating funds.	N/A	N/A
13	Draft Con Plan Public Hearing 5/07/2020	Non-targeted/ broad community	County held a session regarding finalizing the Consolidated Plan report. # community members attended.	See 2020-24 ConPlan Outreach Findings Attachment.	N/A	N/A
14	Draft Con Plan Public Hearing 5/12/2020	Non-targeted/ broad community	County held a session approving the Consolidated Plan report. # community members attended	See 2020-24 ConPlan Outreach Findings Attachment.	N/A	N/A
15	Press Releases	Non-targeted/ broad community	County issued 2 press releases regarding the Community Needs Public Meetings and Community Survey to 1,350 subscribers and 90 news agency contacts on 7/22/2019 and 9/10/2019.	See 2020-24 ConPlan Outreach Findings Attachment.	N/A	N/A
16	Community Fliering	Non-targeted/ broad community	Staff posted and distributed flyers to post-offices, laundry mats, markets, community centers, and libraries in each city/town and surrounding community where Community Needs Public Meetings were held.	See 2020-24 ConPlan Outreach Findings Attachment.	N/A	N/A
17	Social Media	Non-targeted/ broad community	Staff posted and distributed social media notices through Facebook, Twitter, Nextdoor, and the Patch for the Community Needs Public Meetings and Community Survey.	See 2020-24 ConPlan Outreach Findings Attachment.	N/A	N/A
18	Newspaper Ads	Non-targeted/ broad community	County published notices in the Marin Independent Journal announcing public hearings on 8/23/2019, 11/6/2019, and 1/21/2020   County published notice in the Marin Independent Journal announcing the draft five-year Consolidated Plan was available for public review on 4/12/2020.	N/A	N/A	N/A

Table 3 – Citizen Participation Outreach

Needs Assessment

NA-05 Overview Needs Assessment Overview

This section of the Consolidated Plan examines housing, community, and economic development needs of residents. As required by HUD, the assessment is based on an analysis of needs tables—discussed below—and informed by resident input, stakeholder consultation, and the Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice.

The Consolidated Plan’s projected housing needs in Marin County for the five-year period between Fiscal Years 2020 and 2024 is based on the 2015 ACS figures for extremely low income, very low income, and low-income households. Across the County housing and service providers believe that these projections understate the total housing need over the period covered by this report. The ACS data provided through the IDIS tool does not reflect dramatic increases in market rents which have occurred since then in the past few years. Local social service agencies also believe that minority households are under-reported in the ACS data and these households tend to have larger families and more serious unmet housing needs than the county average.  Additional data was gathered by the Marin County Department of Health & Human Services as Lead Agency for the Continuum of Care (CoC). 

On average, median incomes are rising in Marin County; the 2018 ACS estimated Marin’s median income at approximately $110,217 for a family of 4. However, as demonstrated in the AI, people with disabilities, families with children, older adults, people of color and the local workforce are experiencing more challenges to sustain life in Marin, especially families that rent.

NA-10 Housing Needs Assessment - 24 CFR 91.205 (a,b,c)

Summary of Housing Needs

Marin County has attractive residential environments due to its unique combination of natural beauty and proximity to San Francisco, the coast, wine country, and large percentage of land restricted as open space. Many of the housing problems that exist today, such as low vacancy rates, escalating housing prices and rents, and the overall demand for housing and pressure for growth, are a result of these qualities. Housing needs have continued to increase in Marin over the past decade, and particularly in the last few years. The need for additional housing supply and in particular subsidized rental housing has grown since the 2008 recession.

The National Low Income Housing Coalition’s 2019 “Out of Reach” report ranked Marin as tied for the most expensive places to rent in the nation.[1] The report notes that tenants must make $60.96 an hour to afford to rent a modest, two-bedroom home estimated to cost $3,170 a month.

The 2018 ACS statistics indicate that the median contract rent has risen from $1,587 in 2015 to $2,072 in 2018[2]. According to the 2018 ACS, there is a 99.7% occupancy rate in homeowner housing and a 97.5% occupancy rate in rental units in the County.[3] Those in need of housing include people with mental and physical disabilities, single parent households, singles with no children, large households, agricultural workers, people experiencing homelessness, older adults, and the local workforce which is increasingly service based.

The Association of Bay Area Governments’ Regional Housing Need Plan for the San Francisco Bay Area allocated the following number of units needed in Marin during the 2015–2023 period:

Very Low AMI	Low AMI	Moderate AMI	Above Moderate AMI	Total
618	367	423	890	2,298

     Table 4 – Anticipated Housing Needs in San Francisco Bay Area by Income Level

Data Source:

2015-2023 Association of Bay Area Governments

 

Demographics	Base Year: 2009	Most Recent Year: 2015	% Change
Population	252,409	258,380	2%
Households	101,086	103,675	3%
Median Income	$87,728.00	$93,257.00	6%

     Table 4 – Anticipated Housing Needs in San Francisco Bay Area by Income Level

Data Source:

2015-2023 Association of Bay Area Governments

Newer data illustrates a significant increase in median income in Marin County. According to the American Community Survey table S1903 5-year estimates, the median income in Marin was $110,217 for a family of 4 in 2018, representing an increase of 25.6% from the base year of 2009, as opposed to 2015, which showed a 6% increase from base year and with a median income at $93,257.

Number of Households Table

		0-30% HAMFI[4]	>30-50% HAMFI	>50-80% HAMFI	>80-100% HAMFI	>100% HAMFI
Total Households		16,131	12,403	16,119	9,988	49,055
Small Family Households		4,136	3,717	5,345	3,624	24,318
Large Family Households		850	763	861	454	2,443
Household contains at least one person 62-74 years of age		3,905	3,062	4,397	2,684	13,243
Household contains at least one person age 75 or older		3,568	2,704	2,801	1,317	4,639
Households with one or more children 6 years old or younger		2,012	1,596	1,721	1,355	3,609
Table 6 - Total Households Table
Data Source:	2011-2015 CHAS

Housing Needs Summary Tables

1. Housing Problems (Households with one of the listed needs)

using Problems Table

2. Housing Problems 2 (Households with one or more Severe Housing Problems: Lacks kitchen or complete plumbing, severe overcrowding, severe cost burden)

Table 8 – Housing Problems 2

3. Cost Burden > 30%

Table 9 – Cost Burden > 30%

4. Cost Burden > 50%

    Table 10– Cost Burden > 50%

5. Crowding (More than one person per room)

Table 11 – Crowding Information – 1/2

 

Table 12 – Crowding Information – 2/2 – the County does not maintain such data

Describe the number and type of single person households in need of housing assistance.

Approximately 30% of households in the County are composed of people living alone, significantly higher than the 23% recorded statewide[5].  The need for workforce housing for those at or below the 2018 median single person household income of $52,781 is critical.[6] In order to afford market rate rental housing in the county, it would require two incomes at the 80% AMI level. Particularly at risk are people with disabilities, families, members of the workforce, and older adults in the very low to low income range.

Estimate the number and type of families in need of housing assistance who are disabled or victims of domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault and stalking.

The Marin Center for Independent Living (MCIL) estimates that there are approximately 46,029 people living with disabilities in the county. One quarter of people with disabilities in Marin live in poverty. In addition, 38% of individuals with disabilities are homeless or housing insecure.  MCIL serves 683 people with all types of disabilities (including older adults) in 2018 throughout Marin County; of these, over 60% were facing a lack of affordable accessible housing. Approximately 75% of their clients live under the poverty level.

The mental health division of Behavioral Health and Recovery Services provided treatment services to 2,819 unduplicated people with Serious Mental Illness in FY18/19, including 2,187 adults. Approximately 597 people received housing assistance ranging from permanent supportive housing to short-term emergency housing. Anecdotally, mental health case managers report that the demand far exceeds the limited available supply of housing and services, and cost of housing continues to increase well in excess of the income of public mental health clients. Affordable housing is a major issue for their clients.

The Center for Domestic Peace (C4DP) estimates that it helps between 3,700 and 4,500 victims of domestic violence each year. During 2017/2018 C4DP received nearly 4,500 hotline calls and housed 435 adult and children victims of domestic violence. The 2019 Point in Time Count set the number of active domestic violence victims at 73 or 7% of the surveyed homeless population. Although, this data includes only those currently experiencing domestic violence or partner abuse, not those who have a history of domestic violence.

What are the most common housing problems?

The predominant housing problems in Marin County are cost, availability, and quality. There is a shortage of affordable rental housing including multi-family, single family, second units, and Single Room Occupancy (SRO) units as well as smaller moderately priced ownership units for singles, older adults and lower income families. The median single-family home price is consistently over $1 million with median townhome or condominium prices reaching $698,279 in 2018[7].  Basic rentals are typically more than $2,000 a month- the median rental cost in 2018 was nearly $3,663 per month[8].  This leaves low-income workers priced out of the housing market, forcing them to double up in units or commute from lower priced housing market, which are increasingly further away from Marin County. In 2018 approximately 52% of renters and 26% of owners in Marin were paying more than 30% of their monthly income for housing[9]. These low-income residents are also more likely to live in and be relegated to poor quality housing. Housing quality refers to the habitability of a housing unit.  Habitability issues include, but are not limited to pest infestation; electrical, plumbing, and heating problems; and mold and dampness.  

There is great need for additional and substantially improved full-time housing for farm and ranch workers in West Marin. The Countywide Plan and Development Code limit multi-unit residential development in agricultural zones.  Another complicating factor is that a considerable amount of West Marin ranch land is under the jurisdiction of the National Park Service which governs the Point Reyes National Seashore and whose purpose it is to limit human development in the natural environment. In this area, the problem is compounded because many of the existing single-family dwellings in the Bolinas, Point Reyes Station and Inverness areas are now used as second homes or short-term rentals. Anecdotal evidence ranks the number of homes used as full-time residences between 25%-45% of all existing homes in the Point Reyes Station and Inverness areas. According to the 2018 ACS, about 60% of housing units in the Point Reyes and Inverness area are occupied, compared to 93% of housing units in the whole County that are occupied.

Are any populations/household types more affected than others by these problems?

Due to historic and on-going discriminatory practices and government policies, members of protected classes, specifically people of color and those with disabilities, are more affected by the most common housing problems in Marin County, which include cost, availability, and quality. In addition, these individuals are less likely to have access to living in areas of opportunity in the County.

Over 60,000 workers commute from surrounding areas to work in Marin County because they are unable to find affordable housing in the County, according to Marin Economic Commission figures. These workers, who have an average annual salary of $59,400, are unable to find housing in the County due to a lack of housing options including multi-family rentals and SRO units.

The population of Marin is aging. While many older adults own their homes, often, they are over housed, because they cannot find affordable smaller and/or assisted housing alternatives. The 2016 census recorded more than 16,000 or 16% of households countywide were extremely low income[10]. These numbers include a growing number of older adults and those with mental or physical disabilities.

Describe the characteristics and needs of Low-income individuals and families with children (especially extremely low-income) who are currently housed but are at imminent risk of either residing in shelters or becoming unsheltered 91.205(c)/91.305(c)). Also discuss the needs of formerly homeless families and individuals who are receiving rapid re-housing assistance and are nearing the termination of that assistance

According to the 2020 Marin County Analysis of Impediments, in 2017:

9.2% of Marin’s total population had a disability. The average person with a disability needs 200% of their monthly Social Security income to afford a one-bedroom apartment in Marin. 

30.4% of households in Marin have children, with 23% living below two times the Federal poverty level and 712 students were experiencing homelessness.  

The County’s older adult population of residents age 60 and above totaled 70,063 which represents 27% of the total population. 5.4% of Marin’s 65+ population were living below the Federal poverty level and in some of the County’s wealthier communities. 

In addition, according to the 2020 Marin County Analysis of Impediments

The County’s 2015 Housing Element, there are an estimated 1,072 agricultural workers living in West Marin, and the majority of whom are not seasonal workers.  According to the Community Land Trust Association of West Marin’s (CLAM), a farm worker in Marin is likely to earn an annual salary of no more than $28,000.

According to the 2019 Point in Time Count and Survey, the number of individuals experiencing homelessness in Marin were 1,034, which represents a 7% decrease from 2017. However, these numbers do not include families and individuals without permeant housing who are “couch surfing” or staying temporarily with friends or family.

There are significant race-based income disparities in Marin County that directly impact access to housing and financial burden. In 2018, non-Hispanic Whites in Marin earned a median annual income of $121,310[11], while Black/African American and Hispanic/Latinx residents earned roughly half that amount, at $66,316 and $64,367 respectively. With a median contract rent of about $2,072 a month in 2018[12], non-Hispanic Whites spend about 20% of their monthly income on rent, in comparison to 38% and 39% for Black/African American and Hispanic/Latinx residents, respectively.

There is a need for every type of affordable housing for extremely low-income persons and families. This need includes rental assistance to reduce severe cost burden, overcrowding, and enable people to obtain appropriate housing; group homes for people needing supervised living quarters; multifamily housing; accessible housing for people with physical disabilities and environmental sensitivities; emergency shelter for the homeless; emergency housing for individuals experiencing domestic violence; transitional housing for those at risk of becoming homeless; housing for the independent elderly, the frail elderly; and housing with support services for persons with mental illness, physical illness, or other disabilities.  In addition, housing code enforcement, housing counseling, mediation services for tenants and landlords, and fair housing enforcement are also priorities for serving extremely low-income persons.

This fact has been confirmed by Homeless Management Information System (HMIS) data and the Marin Housing Authority (MHA) waiting list data, and in conversations with numerous nonprofit service providers.  There are active 793 applicants on the Housing Choice Voucher/Section 8 waitlist. Marin Housing Authority has housed 124 applicants from the waiting list over the past 24 months and currently there are 31 applicants searching for housing with an issued voucher. Most are struggling to find rental units with rents that fall within the payment standard and landlords willing to accept Section 8 vouchers. The Marin Housing Authority's Housing Choice Voucher/Section 8 waitlist opened in September 2008 and 11,200 applications were received. More than 6000 of the applicants were removed from the waiting list due to lack of current mailing address and/or non-eligibility.  Additionally, Marin Housing Authority has 734 applicants on the Public Housing waiting list that last opened in early 2013.

In its waiting list for assisted housing for the extremely low income, MHA applies local preferences by giving priority to those in following situations: 

• Involuntarily Displaced Families;
• Victims of Domestic Violence;
• Victims of Natural Disasters;
• Victims of Eminent Domain;
• Participants in a witness protection program;
• County residents who live, work (at least 32 hours per week), or have been hired
• to work within the limits of Marin County;
• Veterans or current military personnel and their families;
• Families who are homeless or living in substandard conditions;
• Chronically homeless;
• Homeless;
• Graduate of Supportive Housing programs;
• Mainstream; non-senior disabled, currently homeless;
• Family, elderly or disabled households;

Individuals and families receiving rapid re-housing that are nearing the end of their assistance often have an ongoing need for increased income, education/vocational training that could lead to higher paying employment, affordable childcare, ongoing budgeting and money management support. Linkages to community resources is especially important as the end of assistance approaches in order to assure that households are able to access the supports, they need to be self-sustaining in the future.

If a jurisdiction provides estimates of the at-risk population(s), it should also include a description of the operational definition of the at-risk group and the methodology used to generate the estimates:

About 9,943 (or 26%) of Marin renter households are severely rent-burdened and are considered an at-risk population[13]. Severely rent-burdened households are defined spending more than half of monthly income on rent.

Specify particular housing characteristics that have been linked with instability and an increased risk of homelessness

Housing characteristics most commonly linked with instability and an increased risk of homelessness include housing costs rising more quickly than wages, job loss and/or hours being cut back due to local emergencies and/or reduced demand for services, housing conditions, and tight housing market. In addition, those individuals and families that are living in over-crowded and/or doubled up housing and those who are extremely rent burdened are particularly vulnerable.

Discussion

This one-day Point In Time Count (PIT) provides valuable insight into the needs and demographics of the population experiencing homelessness and those at risk. Through the work and commitment of community partners, service providers and advocates, efforts to reduce the number of those experiencing homelessness may have contributed to the progress made. However, this Count does not provide a complete picture of those effected by housing instability and homelessness in Marin County.

As noted earlier, the Marin PIT Count does not include those “doubling-up” or couch surfing in their definition of homelessness. In fact, there are many families with children in Marin that experience this form of homelessness. For example, according to the California Department of Education, which utilizes the McKinney-Vento Act definition of homelessness of those that “lack a fixed, regular and adequate nighttime residence”, there has been an increase from 712 homeless youth in the 2017-18 academic year to 1,026 in the 2018-19 year[14]. According to Kidsdata[15], a program of the Lucile Packard Foundation for Children's Health there are racial disparities in which families are faced with this housing instability. In 2015-17, 97.6% of non-Hispanic White students lived with at their parent or guardian’s home, in comparison to 86.4% of Hispanic/Latinx students and 82.3% of Black/African American students. Additionally, while 0.1% of non-Hispanic White students live in a multiple-family household, 6.2% of Hispanic/Latinx students and 3.1% of Black/African American students live in a household with many families.

NA-15 Disproportionately Greater Need: Housing Problems – 91.205 (b)(2)

Assess the need of any racial or ethnic group that has disproportionately greater need in comparison to the needs of that category of need as a whole.

Introduction

Housing problems are defined as a household having any one of the following: a cost burden greater than 30% of income, more than one person per room, and/or housing without complete kitchen or plumbing facilities. Disproportionately greater need exists when the percentage of persons in a category of need, who are members of a particular racial or ethnic group, is at least ten percentage points higher than the percentage of persons in the category as a whole.

0%-30% of Area Median Income

Table 13- Disproportionally Greater Need 0 - 30% AMI

* The four housing problems are:  1. Lacks complete kitchen facilities, 2. Lacks complete plumbing facilities, 3. More than one person per room, 4. Cost Burden greater than 30%

30%-50% of Area Median Income

     Table 14 - Disproportionally Greater Need 30 - 50% AMI

* The four housing problems are:  1. Lacks complete kitchen facilities, 2. Lacks complete plumbing facilities, 3. More than one person per room, 4. Cost Burden greater than 30%

50%-80% of Area Median Income

Table 15 - Disproportionally Greater Need 50 - 80% AMI

* The four housing problems are:  1. Lacks complete kitchen facilities, 2. Lacks complete plumbing facilities, 3. More than one person per room, 4. Cost Burden greater than 30%

80%-100% of Area Median Income

Table 16 - Disproportionally Greater Need 80 - 100% AMI

* The four housing problems are:  1. Lacks complete kitchen facilities, 2. Lacks complete plumbing facilities, 3. More than one person per room, 4. Cost Burden greater than 30%

Discussion

This section discusses the income categories in which a racial or ethnic group has a disproportionately greater need.

0-30% AMI: All groups have relatively high rates of housing problems in this income category, but no single group experiences a disproportionately high rate of need relative to the jurisdiction as a whole (apart from Pacific Islander and American Indian, Alaska Native households, both of which experience higher rates than the jurisdiction as a whole, but the total numbers are too low to accurately assess disproportionate needs). At this income level, 79% of households experience at least one of the four identified housing problem.

30-50% AMI: In this income category, while all groups again have relatively high rates of housing problems, the Hispanic/Latinx community experiences disproportionately greater need: 88% of Hispanic/Latinx residents experiences at least one of four housing problems, in comparison to 77% of the jurisdiction.

50-80% AMI: In this income category, the Black/African American community experiences disproportionately greater need: 73% of Black/African American residents experiences at least one of four housing problems, in comparison to 56% of the jurisdiction.

80-100% AMI: In this income category, the Black/African American community experiences disproportionately greater need: 60% of Black/African American residents experiences at least one of four housing problems, in comparison to 39% of the jurisdiction.

NA-20 Disproportionately Greater Need: Severe Housing Problems – 91.205 (b)(2)

Assess the need of any racial or ethnic group that has disproportionately greater need in comparison to the needs of that category of need as a whole.

Introduction

This section discusses severe housing needs as defined by HUD, using HUD-prepared housing needs data. The tables show the number of Denver households that have severe housing needs by income, race, and ethnicity. Needs are defined as one or more of the following housing problems: 1. Housing lacks complete kitchen facilities, 2. Housing lacks complete plumbing facilities, 3. Household has more than 1.5 persons per room, 4. Household cost burden exceeds 50 percent.

0%-30% of Area Median Income

Table 17 – Severe Housing Problems 0 - 30% AMI

* The four housing problems are:  1. Lacks complete kitchen facilities, 2. Lacks complete plumbing facilities, 3. More than one person per room, 4. Cost Burden greater than 50%

30%-50% of Area Median Income

Table 18 – Severe Housing Problems 30 - 50% AMI

* The four housing problems are:  1. Lacks complete kitchen facilities, 2. Lacks complete plumbing facilities, 3. More than one person per room, 4. Cost Burden greater than 50%

50%-80% of Area Median Income

Table 19 – Severe Housing Problems 50 - 80% AMI

* The four housing problems are:  1. Lacks complete kitchen facilities, 2. Lacks complete plumbing facilities, 3. More than one person per room, 4. Cost Burden greater than 50%

80%-100% of Area Median Income

Table 20 – Severe Housing Problems 80 - 100% AMI

* The four housing problems are:  1. Lacks complete kitchen facilities, 2. Lacks complete plumbing facilities, 3. More than one person per room, 4. Cost Burden greater than 50%

Discussion

This section discusses the income categories in which a racial or ethnic group has a disproportionately greater need.

0-30% AMI: All groups have relatively high rates of severe housing problems in this income category, but the Hispanic/Latinx community experiences disproportionate greater need: 80% of Hispanic/Latinx residents experience at least one of the four severe housing problems, in comparison to 68% of the jurisdiction. Again, here the Pacific Islander and American Indian, Alaska Native households also experiences higher rates than the jurisdiction as a whole, but the total numbers are too low to accurately assess disproportionate needs.

30-50% AMI: In this income category, Hispanic/Latinx community experiences disproportionately greater need: 60% of Hispanic/Latinx residents experiences at least one of four severe housing problems, in comparison to 49% of the jurisdiction.

50-80% AMI: In this income category, the Hispanic/Latinx community experiences disproportionately greater need: 39% of Hispanic/Latinx residents experiences at least one of four housing problems, in comparison to 23% of the jurisdiction.

80-100% AMI: In this income category, 10% of the jurisdiction as a whole experience at least one of four severe housing problems. No single racial/ethnic group experiences a disproportionately high rate of need relative to the jurisdiction as a whole.

NA-25 Disproportionately Greater Need: Housing Cost Burdens – 91.205 (b)(2)

Assess the need of any racial or ethnic group that has disproportionately greater need in comparison to the needs of that category of need as a whole.

Introduction:

This section provides data on households with disproportionate levels of housing cost burden. Housing cost burden occurs when households pay more than 30 percent of their gross household income toward housing costs, which includes utilities. Severe housing cost burden occurs when housing costs are 50 percent or more of gross household income. 

Housing Cost Burden

Table 21 – Greater Need: Housing Cost Burdens AMI

Discussion:

This section discusses the income categories in which a racial or ethnic group has a disproportionately greater need.

Rent-Burden (30-50%): Black/African American residents experience a disproportionate cost burden in comparison to the jurisdiction as a whole: 32% of Black/African American residents are rent-burdened, while 20% of the jurisdiction is rent-burdened.

Severe Rent-Burden (50%+): Hispanic/Latinx residents experience a disproportionate severe cost burden in comparison to the jurisdiction as a whole: 33% of Hispanic/Latinx residents are severely rent-burdened, while 20% of the jurisdiction is severely rent-burdened. Additionally, American Indian, Alaska Native residents also show a higher rate in those severely rent-burdened than the jurisdiction as a whole, but the total numbers are too low to accurately assess disproportionate needs.

NA-30 Disproportionately Greater Need: Discussion – 91.205(b)(2)

Are there any Income categories in which a racial or ethnic group has disproportionately greater need than the needs of that income category as a whole?

As discussed previously, disproportionately high needs exist for Hispanic/Latinx and Black/African American communities.

Differences in housing needs by race and ethnicity can also be assessed by differences in homeownership and experiences finding housing. As indicated in the County’s AI, homeownership rates for Hispanic/Latinx and Black/African American residents are substantially lower than for non-Hispanic white: while 70.1% of non-Hispanic White Marin residents are homeowners, 25.3% and 29.3% of Black/African American and Hispanic/Latinx residents are homeowners, respectively.

If they have needs not identified above, what are those needs?

The needs of the Black/African American and Hispanic/Latinx community differ. Marin City, the County’s historic African American community, has experienced increasing displacement pressures that have been in effect since at least the 1980s. According to a UC Berkeley report on Marin City published in 2015[16], while African American residents made up 76% of the population in this community in 1980, this number has decreased to 27% in 2018.

In the Canal neighborhood which has a higher percentage of Latinx households and recent immigrants; many families and individuals have relied on cohabitating in order to maintain housing affordability. The proportion of households experiencing overcrowding in this community, which is defined as more than one occupant per room, has increased dramatically over the past decade. In 2010, 28% of Canal residents experienced overcrowding, which has increased to 53% in 2018.

There are a significant number of families supported by service industry jobs who often cannot afford to live in the County at all, with many living in lower-cost areas outside Marin County, resulting in commute times exceeding 60 minutes each way.

Are any of those racial or ethnic groups located in specific areas or neighborhoods in your community?

Areas of racial and ethnic concentration include the Canal neighborhood of the City of San Rafael (census tracts 1122.01 and 1122.02). The Canal is home to the largest concentration of low-income Hispanic/Latinx families. Here rental units tend to be moderately priced and bus transit is available.  The Canal area has a very high degree of overcrowding (defined as over one person per room).  According to the 2018 ACS, in the Canal area (Census Tract 1122.01 and 1122.02), 53% of households were overcrowded, compared to only 4% of households in Marin County as a whole. 

In addition, Marin City (census tract 1290), an unincorporated community in Marin County is home to the County’s historical Black/African American community. Marin City has traditionally had a high concentration of African American residents, but recent census figures show that Black/African American population has experienced sharp declines, making up approximately 27% of the area's population.

Introduction:

Non-homeless special needs populations include households containing persons with a disability (hearing/vision limitation, ambulatory limitation, cognitive limitation or self-care/independent living limitation), elderly households, large families, female headed households with children, limited English proficient households, and those at risk of homelessness

Describe the characteristics of special needs populations in your community:

Residents of any age, especially those of limited incomes, facing a wide variety of challenges, including those with physical, cognitive and/or behavioral health issues; elders; at-risk youth; victims of violence; veterans; people in need of long term care to live in the community, rather than in institutions, persons with limited English proficiency, persons who are unemployed or underemployed or at risk of homelessness and those with special barriers, such as criminal backgrounds, that make accessing housing and employment more difficult. While the County’s largest growing population is the elderly, due to the limited supply of adequately sized units to accommodate larger households, large families often face significant difficulty in locating adequately sized, affordable housing. In addition, female-headed households can have lower incomes and higher living expenses and may lack the resources needed for adequate childcare or job training services, often making the search for affordable, decent, and safe housing more difficult. 

What are the housing and supportive service needs of these populations and how are these needs determined?  

The housing and supportive service needs of the non-homeless special needs populations vary by the population and circumstance. There is the ongoing need for programs for ensuring that persons with disabilities and/or returning from mental and physical health institutions receive appropriate housing with supportive services. There is the need for assistance to allow older adults to age in place and to provide transportation options as well as the need for additional multi-family housing units affordable to and for older adults and assisted living facilities. There is the need for accessible housing that is affordable to lower-income persons, and appropriately located near public transportation and with access to supportive services. Services needed can include income supports and assistance with basic needs like food and clothing, substance abuse and mental health treatment, care for chronic medical conditions, trauma services, emergency assistance to prevent homelessness, legal assistance, skills training, employment, childcare and ESL classes. 

Needs are determined through information gathered by County departments, nonprofit partners, and community outreach conducted to inform the AI and Consolidated Plan.

Discuss the size and characteristics of the population with HIV/AIDS and their families within the Eligible Metropolitan Statistical Area:

In Marin County, the HIV/AIDS epidemic has reached virtually all racial and ethnic groups.  Yet, data shows the largest proportion of AIDS cases is among gay white men with the second highest racial or ethnic group being Latinx/Hispanic.   The vast majority of people with HIV/AIDS in Marin County live alone or with another adult.  A relatively small number of people with HIV/AIDS live with dependents.  However, anecdotal information about the housing needs of families that include an adult living with AIDS suggests that they face more severe housing affordability problems than people living with AIDS who do not have children.

Since the first Marin County AIDS case was reported in 1982, 1,442 people have been diagnosed with HIV or AIDS in Marin County - 607 of whom are still living. In 2016-17 there were 38 new cases, with the average number being 18 annually over the previous 10 years[17].

Of the people living with AIDS/HIV in Marin, 85% are Male, 14% are female, and 1% are transgender; 63% are White, 22% are Hispanic/Latino, 8% are Black/African American, 3% are Asian, 2% are multiple races, and 1% is Native Hawaiian/Pacific islander; 1% are between the ages of 15-24, 8% are between the ages of 25-34, 12% are between the ages of 35-44, 27% are between the ages of 45-54, 33% are between the ages of 55-64, 16% are between the ages of 65-74, and with 3% over the age of 75[18].

Discussion:

The County of Marin works with The Spahr Center, the only nonprofit HIV/AIDS community provider in the County. The Spahr Center assists individuals and families dealing with HIV/AIDS to access services including medical, housing case management, benefits advocacy, counseling, psychiatric evaluation, emergency financial assistance, linkage with other services, support groups and a food pantry. As the population demographics of those living with HIV/AIDS changes so has the outreach required to serve the community. The Spahr Center provides all services available in English and Spanish.

NA-50 Non-Housing Community Development Needs – 91.215 (f)

Describe the jurisdiction’s need for Public Facilities:

The availability of public facilities greatly influences the general appeal and function of Marin's communities. Support for facilities that provide services to the homeless, the disabled, children and youth, older adults or other populations is necessary for a healthy community. 

Top needs for public facilities include improved community centers for all age ranges, social groups, and needs, including childcare facilities, youth centers, senior centers, LGBTQ centers, as well as homeless shelters/facilities.

Marin City, a community of minority concentration, prioritizes homeless facilities/shelters, community gardens, and improvements to nonprofit facilities.

West Marin, Marin’s rural and agricultural community, prioritizes a need for community facilities across age groups and needs, including homeless shelters/facilities, and childcare centers and older adult centers.

The Spanish speaking community which has a large population in the Canal neighborhood of San Rafael, pinpointed the need for youth centers, childcare centers, and the need for accessible facilities for persons with disabilities.

How were these needs determined?

These needs were determined through review and analysis of extensive community engagement over the course of six months. The outreach utilized 4 methodologies to reach different community stakeholders and included community meetings, focus groups, surveys, and interviews.  

Describe the jurisdiction’s need for Public Improvements:

The availability of quality public amenities is vital to maintaining quality neighborhoods 

Low-income neighborhoods, which in Marin are also communities of minority concentration, typically have less adequate infrastructure in place, so more assistance to address issues including block beautification, parks and playgrounds, adequate parking, elimination of slum and blight is necessary, and adequate infrastructure to address natural disasters.

Top needs for public improvements include well-maintained parks, public spaces, and informal community gathering spaces; transportation infrastructure improvements related to transit route frequency and reliability; safety measures such as adequate sidewalks and lighting were noted; and improving infrastructure to withstand natural disasters such as sea level rise, earthquakes, and wildfires.

Marin City, a community of minority concentration, prioritizes more community gardens and outdoor gathering spaces. In addition, Marin City has public infrastructure needs that greatly impact resident’s ability to access basic services. For example, Phillips Drive a roadway and sidewalk that connects residents with the community center, health clinic, primary school, and public safety services is in dire needs of improvements.

The Spanish speaking community which has a large population in the Canal neighborhood of San Rafael, highlights the overall need around improved or new community gathering spaces, especially for youth in the Canal neighborhood of San Rafael and improved parking in the Canal. In addition, a growing concern by residents, advocates, and the City of San Rafael is ensuring the infrastructure to protect against flooding and sea-level rise is adequate. 

In light of several years of wildfire caused by deteriorating power lines, the local public utility, PG&E, has instituted Public Safety Power Shutoffs (PSPS). During a PSPS, a community loses all power and in some cases access to natural gas. In 2019, two PSPS events affected Marin City, leaving low-income, vulnerable residents without power for a total of nearly two weeks combined. The entire County lost power during one PSPS event, leaving some resident without power for upwards of a week. From these incidents it has become clear that cell-towers need back-up generator power. Community charging stations were well utilized in the last PSPS, therefore an increase in community charging stations is needed.  

How were these needs determined?

These needs were determined through review and analysis of extensive community engagement over the course of six months. The outreach utilized 4 methodologies to reach different community stakeholders and included community meetings, focus groups, surveys, and interviews.  

Describe the jurisdiction’s need for Public Services:

Public services needs are diverse and speak to the broad safety net required for low-income residents to survive and thrive in a high cost community like Marin County. One of the key broad categories of service identified is homeless services that benefits those who are homeless and in danger of becoming homeless. Due to the wide range of demographics that face homelessness the services needed to support these individuals and families is vast. Some of the most common identified needs include housing support services; legal services; services for families including children’s services and parent support services; basic health services for all age ranges, senior services, services for domestic violence survivors, and access to food. In addition, language acquisition and education along with job training and microenterprise business are identified public service needs.  

Marin City, West Marin, and the Spanish speaking communities’ priorities follow a similar trend to the County as a whole with slight variations. Marin City’s also specifies a need for food security and employment readiness are highlighted. West Marin expressed a need related to mental health services and fair housing activities. Spanish speaking residents highlight a need children’s services, basic health services, fair housing activities, homelessness services, and housing support services. It is critical to note that many survey respondents in Spanish indicated that they are a one income household, largely due to the high cost of childcare. 

How were these needs determined?

These needs were determined through review and analysis of extensive community engagement over the course of six months. The outreach utilized 4 methodologies to reach different community stakeholders and included community meetings, focus groups, surveys, and interviews.  

---

Housing Market Analysis

MA-05 Overview

Housing Market Analysis Overview:

In Marin, housing affordability is a common issue that has affected many Marin residents, across the rental and homeownership housing markets. The lack of affordable housing and its effects is apparent throughout the Bay Area and the State of California.

Survey data that was collected as part of outreach for this Consolidated Plan demonstrates the pervasive need for more affordable housing in Marin: about 71% of respondents indicated the need for more construction of affordable housing, and approximately 70% indicated limited availability of affordable housing as their greatest barrier. According to 2018 ACS data, 52% of renters in Marin and 26% of owners in Marin were considered housing-burdened, meaning they spent over 30% of their income on housing.

In addition, low-income households and residents of color, particularly the Black/African American and Hispanic/Latinx community, face greater housing problems and financial burden than non-Hispanic White households. Additionally, residents of color continue to face low rates of homeownership in comparison to non-Hispanic White residents.

Across the county, there is increasing divergence between rents and incomes: while the median renter income in Marin has increased by 26% from 2011 to 2018, the median rent has increased by 45%.[1]

Rental Housing

Lower income renters face a greater affordability gap in housing, which is defined as the difference between affordable rent and market-rate rent. According to HUD standards, renters earning 50% AMI, or $80,600 for a four-person household, should pay 30% of their gross household income on rent, which equates to $2,015 for a 3-bedroom rental. The current market-rate rent for a 3-bedroom in Marin County is more than double that at $4,153. The following table details this gap for extremely-low-, very-low-, and low-income households.

Table 28: Rental Housing Affordability in Marin by Income Level

Data Source:

2019 HUD Income and Rent Limits

While this data shows that those earning 80% AMI do not present an affordability gap with market-rate rents for all bedroom categories, the lack of availability of rentals in Marin attributes to a tightened housing market and less rental inventory, making the rental market extremely competitive. Currently, rental housing makes up roughly 36% of Marin’s housing, and holds a vacancy rate of 2.5%, lower than most parts of the Bay Area: San Francisco County has a rental vacancy rate of 3.2%, Sonoma County is 3.0%, and Contra Costa is 3.9%[2]. Additionally, the median household incomes in Marin are some of the highest in the State, but do not reflect the incomes of a large number of renters in the County who have a lower median income than the County as a whole. According to the 2018 ACS, the median household income of renters was $69,047[3] . In time, Marin’s median income has skewed upward, largely due to the fact that more wealthy people are able to afford living in Marin, while low and moderate-income households are priced out.

Insufficient Rental Housing for Vulnerable Populations

As noted previously, the rental housing stock in Marin County is not sufficient to house larger households: while 19% of the County is comprised of households over four people, only 6% of Marin’s housing stock has four or more bedrooms to adequately accommodate the needs of this population.

Additionally, there is increasing discrepancy between rents and incomes, which makes renting in Marin without some type of affordability restrictions prohibitive. This divergence is only larger for more vulnerable populations. While the median family income in Marin County was $118,400 in 2018 ($136,800 in 2019), about 1,800 families (about 6%) fell below the federal poverty line, earning less than $24,000 a year for a family of four[4]. Additionally, 63% of families in poverty are renters[5]. In Marin’s two largest low-income communities of the Canal neighborhood of San Rafael and Marin City, nearly a quarter of families fell below the federal poverty line[6]. Many of these families spend well above 30% of their income on rent: in fact, many families in these communities are considered “severely rent-burdened,” with 42% of renters in the Canal and 33% of renters in Marin City spending more than half of their income on rent[7]. 

Ownership Housing

The majority of Marin’s housing stock is made up of single-family homes (63%). Similarly, the majority of the housing stock is occupied by its owner (64%). However, homeownership is becoming increasingly unattainable for low- and moderate-income households.

In 2018, the median sale price of a single-family residence was $1,183,816[8]. Assuming a 20% down payment of $236,763 and approval of a 30-year fixed mortgage with an interest rate of 4.6%, purchasing a home in 2018 would have required an annual income of over $275,000.

In 2018, the median sales price of a condo or townhouse was $698,279[9]. Assuming a 20% down payment of $139,655 and approval of a 30-year fixed mortgage with an interest rate of 4.6%, purchasing a home in 2018 would have required an annual income of over $160,000. This calculation does not factor in HOA fees or special assessments. In 2018, the median income of owner-occupied households was $142,545[10].

Additionally, Marin continues to experience the effects of exclusionary housing policies, as seen by racial disparities in homeownership in the county. In 2018, while 69% of non-Hispanic White residents were homeowners, 29% of Hispanic/Latinx residents and 29% of Black/African American residents were homeowners[11].

MA-10 Number of Housing Units – 91.210(a)&(b)(2)

Introduction

Marin’s housing stock is largely composed of single-family homes with over 110,000 units by the end of 2018. Approximately 78% of the existing housing stock throughout the County were built prior to 1980. Nearly two-thirds of Marin’s housing is owner occupied with three or more bedrooms, whereas renter occupied housing tends to be smaller in size, with about 76% of all units containing two bedrooms or less[12].

All residential properties by number of units

Property Type	Number	%
1-unit detached structure	69,990	63%
1-unit, attached structure	9,256	8%
2-4 units	8,683	8%
5-19 units	11,748	10%
20 or more units	10,238	9%
Mobile Home, boat, RV, van, etc.	2,045	2%
Total	111,960	100%

Table 29 – Residential Properties by Unit Number

Data Source:

2011-2015 ACS

Unit Size by Tenure

	Owners		Renters
	Number	%	Number	%
No bedroom	169	< 1%	2,436	6%
1 bedroom	2,105	3%	12,238	31%
2 bedrooms	11,636	18%	14,553	37%
3 or more bedrooms	50,780	78%	9,679	25%
Total	64,690	99%	38,906	99%

Table 30 – Unit Size by Tenure

Data Source:

2011-2015 ACS

Describe the number and targeting (income level/type of family served) of units assisted with federal, state, and local programs.

There are approximately 6,125 existing affordable housing units that have received some combination of local, federal, or state assistance. These units typically target renter households earning 60% of area median income or below and serve populations including low and very low-income families, households with disabilities, formerly homeless adults, and older adults. Affordable homeownership units typically serve moderate income and below. Affordable housing developers and developers with nonprofit arms manage approximately 4,100 of these units. Nearly 3,000 of these units are assisted through the Marin Housing Authority’s Section 8 and public housing programs. Of the public housing units, 296 units serve families and 200 units serve senior and disabled households. The 6,125 units consist of the following types:

Public Housing	496
Seniors	1126
Family Housing[13]	2791
Disabled	207
Home Ownership	832
Permanent Supportive Housing	337
Transitional & Shelter	336
Total	6125

Provide an assessment of units expected to be lost from the affordable housing inventory for any reason, such as expiration of Section 8 contracts.

The California Housing Partnership Corporation annually assesses the conversion risk of federally and state subsidized affordable rental properties. These include properties financed or assisted by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), the U.S. Departments of Agriculture (USDA), and the Low-Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) program administered by the California Tax Credit Allocation Committee (TCAC). According to the 2020 report Marin County is at risk of losing 10 deed restricted affordable units over the next 10 years.

The Marin Housing Authority manages 340 Below Market Rate (BMR) home ownership units throughout Marin County that are preserved by deed-restriction, of which 90 units are in the unincorporated County. The Marin Housing Authority processes all sales of new units, resales of existing units, refinances, capital improvement evaluations, down payment assistance, and monitoring of the portfolio for compliance with BMR Program requirements.  MHA also works with developers at the initial stage to formulate Developer Agreements determining the affordability range and construction requirements for these BMR units. There are an additional 408 BMR units in the City of Novato that are managed by Hello Housing in a similar manner.

At this time MHA does not have any anticipated Section 8 contract expirations.

Does the availability of housing units meet the needs of the population?

The current housing available does not meet the demand. The problem is particularly critical for low-income renters. With over 40% of units priced above $2,000 a month, renters making below $75,000 a year, which comprises 52.9% of renters, are faced with limited affordable housing options, a primary driver for the overcrowding rates seen in some communities[14].

Renter Income	Number	Percent	Maximum Monthly Affordable Rent
0-$24,999	7,330	19.3%	$625
$25,000- $34,999	2,923	7.7%	$875
$35,000-$49,999	4,152	10.9%	$1,250
$50,000 - $74,999	5,718	15.0%	$1,875
$75,000-$99,999	4,657	12.2%	$2,500
$100,000-$149,999	5,877	15.4%	$3,750
$150,000+	7,401	19.4%	$3,750+

Table 31: Rental Maximum Monthly Affordable Rent by Income Level

Data Source:

2013-2018 ACS

Increasing rents and home prices have caused many Marin households to be cost burdened or severely cost burdened and forced many longtime Marin residents out of county. With over 28,000 Marin households making 50 percent or less of the AMI and only 6,000 deed restricted affordable units, 52% of renters are cost-burden or severely cost-burdened. Households making 50 percent or less of the Area Median Income are disproportionately cost-burdened. 

Affordable homeowner units which are predominantly Below Market Rate units, are very rare in Marin’s competitive market. Most of these homes are not for sale, and when they do come on the market it is not uncommon to receive upwards of 100 offers. 

The county’s renters with the greatest needs include families with children; older adults living on fixed incomes; transitional age youth; and special needs populations including homeless, those at-risk of homelessness, persons with disabilities, and victims of domestic violence.

Describe the need for specific types of housing:

Marin’s housing stock is composed of 634% single-family residences, which leaves less than half of the housing stock for multifamily development. With over half of renters earning below 80% AMI for a household of four, there is an extreme need for affordable rental housing, made more difficult by the lack of general rental housing stock. Additionally, there is an even larger dearth of family rental housing. While about 6% of Marin’s rental housing is composed of four bedrooms or more, 19% of Marin’s renter households are comprised of more than 4 persons; indicating a need for more rental housing with larger bedroom counts. There is also a need for more accessible housing for households with disabilities and assisted living for those recovering from illness/injury and those unable to care for themselves.

Within Marin’s home ownership market, homes prices are unattainable for a large number of residents, including those on fixed-incomes, and those who are already cost-burdened by other expenses, such as childcare. There is a need for more moderately priced homes to serve lower-income families, singles, and seniors. In 2018, the median price was $1,107,656 for a 3-bedroom home, $835,745 for a 2-bedroom, and $676,786 for a 1-bedroom[15].

Discussion

Marin’s limited rental housing contributes to the affordability issues witnessed by a majority of renters, where over half were considered housing burdened, and nearly a quarter considered “severely rent-burdened” and had spent at least 50% of their income on rent. There is a need for more multifamily housing development, and especially those with units large enough to house the number of large families in the County. Homeowners in Marin are also cost-burdened by housing, with nearly a quarter spending over 30% of their income on housing. Additionally, those looking to purchase are faced with extremely limited affordable options, with those looking to purchase a 1-bedroom in 2018 requiring an annual income of about $157,000 with conventional financing[16]. In 2018, the median income was $52,781 for a one-person household and $128,357 for a two-person household[17].

MA-15 Housing Market Analysis: Cost of Housing - 91.210(a)

Introduction

The Marin County housing market is exceedingly expensive for prospective homebuyers, renters, and developers. The factors causing high housing prices and rents include restrictive zoning primarily for single family homes, community and local government opposition to new development, high cost of developing housing, a lack of awareness of potential housing sites, high demand resulting from job growth in the region, and relatively high incomes of households.

Marin’s housing prices are among the highest in the nation for both renters and homeowners. According to ACS 5-year estimates noted below, the median home value for a single-family home in Marin in 2018 was $959,200 and has risen by 18% since 2015. Similarly, the median contract rent for Marin was $2,072 in 2018 representing a 23% increase since 2015.

Cost of Housing

	Base Year: 2009	Most Recent Year: 2015	% Change
Median Home Value	880,000	815,100	(7%)
Median Contract Rent	1,406	1,587	13%

Table 32 – Cost of Housing

Data Source:

2005-2009 ACS (Base Year), 2011-2015 ACS (Most Recent Year)

Newer data illustrates a significant increase in both median home value and contract rent in Marin County from the 2015 data presented in IDIS. According to the American Community Survey 5-year estimates, the median home value in Marin was $959,200 in 2018, representing an increase of 9% from the base year of 2009, as opposed to the 7% decrease and median home value of $815,100 that was noted for 2015[18].

According to the American Community Survey 5-year estimates, the median contract rent in Marin was $2,072 in 2018, representing an increase of 47% from the base year of 2009, as opposed to the 13% increase and median contract rent of $1,587 that was noted for 2015[19].

Rent Paid	Number	%
Less than $500	3,934	10.1%
$500-999	3,643	9.4%
$1,000-1,499	10,839	27.8%
$1,500-1,999	10,183	26.2%
$2,000 or more	10,302	26.5%
Total	38,901	99.9%

     Table 33 - Rent Paid

Data Source:

2011-2015 ACS

Examining rental data through the American Community Survey, both contract and gross rent[20] illustrate a significant increase in the proportion of rents that are above $2,000 a month. In 2018, according to 5-year estimates, 46% of renters paid above $2,000 in gross rent a month[21]. Additionally, according to 5-year estimates, in 2018, 42% of renters paid above $2,000 a month in contract rent.[22] Both depict a significant increase from the 2015 data presented by HUD, which notes only 26% paid above $2,000 a month on rent.

Housing Affordability

% Units affordable to Households earning	Renter	Owner
30% HAMFI[23]	2,773	No Data
50% HAMFI	6,904	1,519
80% HAMFI	21,130	3,946
100% HAMFI	No Data	6,880
Total	30,807	12,345

    Table 34 – Housing Affordability

Data Source:

2011-2015 CHAS

Monthly Rent

Monthly Rent ($)	Efficiency (no bedroom)	1 Bedroom	2 Bedroom	3 Bedroom	4 Bedroom
Fair Market Rent	1,822	2,255	2,809	3,663	3,912
High HOME Rent	1,818	1,949	2,341	2,695	2,986
Low HOME Rent	1,411	1,511	1,813	2,095	2,337

Table 35 – Monthly Rent

Data Source:

HUD FMR and HOME Rents

Is there sufficient housing for households at all income levels?

There is insufficient housing across the spectrum. However, households that earn lower incomes have more difficulty locating housing. As noted in the 2020 Marin County AI, “according to the Marin Economic Forum, beginning in 2019, rent prices started increasing at a faster pace than home prices – and renters do not get the advantages homeowners do when interest rates are lower, they do not receive multiple tax deductions, and they do not receive appreciation and equity over time”[24].

The cost of housing has become increasingly prohibitive, across both the rental and ownership markets: as noted earlier, with a median sales price of a single-family residence, which is higher than the median value noted previously, was $1,183,816 in 2018. It would require an annual income of over $275,000 with conventional financing to afford. In 2018, the median household income for homeowners was about half that, at $142,545[25].

According to Zillow rental data, the median price to rent a house in Marin in 2018 was $3,663 for all rentals with multifamily rentals being $3,040 per month[26]. This did not include any rental deposits which could be up to an additional $6,536. Assuming an affordability rate of no more than 30% of household income, it would require an annual income of nearly $122,000 to afford the median apartment rental.   The median income for a renter of a house or of an apartment in Marin in 2018 was to $69,047[27].   

The lack of adequate housing stock contributes to the growing affordability issues seen across both the rental and owner housing markets. Marin’s rental vacancy rate in 2018 was 2.5%, while the owner vacancy rate was just 0.7%. Marin, in addition to neighboring counties across the Bay Area, are seeing increased competition in housing.

How is affordability of housing likely to change considering changes to home values and/or rents?

Housing costs and rents are expected to continue to rise with the on-going housing crisis across the State of California, which is particularly prominent in the Bay Area. This combined with the county’s overall slow growth model and limited development of housing and in particular higher density housing will exacerbate housing costs. For these reasons, housing construction in the private market has focused on high-end single-family homes, townhouses, condominiums, and age restricted developments serving older adults.

The high cost of land and construction make affordable housing development in Marin difficult without substantial subsidy. Projects tend to be small in scale due to local zoning which favors lower density development and community opposition to larger housing projects. Small projects are not competitive for many State funding sources and are not able to benefit from economies of scale. This results in higher development costs per unit, and it also results in higher ongoing management costs per rental unit. An example of high development costs is a project currently developing 54 1-bedroom units of affordable housing in Marin with a per unit cost of over $650,000. 

Marin’s low rental vacancy rates puts increased pressure on the county’s lowest income households, widens the rental affordability gap, and increases rental cost burden identified previously.

How do HOME rents / Fair Market Rent compare to Area Median Rent? How might this impact your strategy to produce or preserve affordable housing?

The HOME and Fair Market Rents are generally lower than the median rents in Marin County, with HOME rents being substantially lower. Published rents for a two-bedroom unit in 2018 include a HOME High rent of $2,126, a HOME Low rent of $1,650, and a Fair Market rent of $3,121[28]. Whereas the median multi-family rental during the same timeframe was $3,186. Given this, it is reasonable to assume that new rental developments based on HOME rents will be challenging to pencil out without additional assistance. Preservation of housing as affordable is considerably less expensive and can be easier to pencil out, however the need for additional units in the market is a strong driver of funding allocations across all local funding sources.

Discussion

Marin County housing is in great demand, with high prices and rents as the primary indicators of this demand. The county’s rental vacancy rate of 2.5% demonstrates a high demand for housing, and upward pressure on home prices and rents. Other contributors to high demand are a regional and statewide housing crisis, growing regional economy, and the desirability of Marin County as a place to live. Marin County has good public schools, a beautiful landscape, plenty of recreational opportunities, and is in close proximity to the coast, wine country, the East Bay, and San Francisco.

MA-20 Housing Market Analysis: Condition of Housing – 91.210(a)

Introduction

The condition of Marin’s housing stock ranges from poor to excellent. The community engagement piece of this Consolidated Plan surfaced many habitability issues faced in the county, primarily by renters. The survey that was conducted as part of this Consolidated Plan engagement illustrates that 44% of respondents believed that there needs to be rehabilitation of existing multi-family units, the second highest response after the need to construct new affordable housing. Additionally, several community meetings brought to light issues around mold, trash, and water seepage, specifically in areas of the Canal, Marin City, and West Marin, the county’s identified low-income communities and communities of color.

Definitions

Standard Condition: A dwelling unit that is not deemed substandard as defined by local code.

Substandard Condition: All buildings or structures which are structurally unsafe or not provided with adequate egress, or which constitute a fire hazard, or are otherwise dangerous to human life, or which in relation to existing use constitute a hazard to safety or health, or public welfare by reason of inadequate maintenance of the building, plumbing, mechanical or electrical systems, or by dilapidation, obsolescence, fire hazard, disaster damage or abandonment, as specified in the codes adopted by Section 19.04.010, or California Health and Safety Code Section 17920.3, are for the purpose of this section substandard and/or unsafe buildings. In California Code, GOV § 65584.01 this is defined as more than one person per room.

Substandard but Suitable for Rehabilitation: A dwelling unit that is substandard structure, that has basic infrastructure (including systems for clean water and adequate waste disposal) that allows for economically and physically feasible improvements and upon completion of rehabilitation meets the definition of a “standard” dwelling unit.

Condition of Units

This table displays the number of housing units, by tenure, based on the number of “conditions” the units has. Selected conditions are similar to housing problems in the Needs Assessment and are (1) lacks complete plumbing facilities, (2) lacks complete kitchen facilities, (3) more than one person per room, and (4) cost burden greater than 30%. The table also calculates the percentage of total units that the category represents.

Condition of Units	Owner-Occupied		Renter-Occupied
	Number	%	Number	%
With one selected Condition	21,652	33%	18,372	47%
With two selected Conditions	282	0%	2,381	6%
With three selected Conditions	35	0%	102	0%
With four selected Conditions	0	0%	35	0%
No selected Conditions	42,750	66%	18,037	46%
Total	64,719	99%	38,927	99%

     Table 36 - Condition of Units

Data Source:

2011-2015 ACS

Year Unit Built

Year Unit Built	Owner-Occupied		Renter-Occupied
	Number	%	Number	%
2000 or later	3,605	6%	2,094	5%
1980-1999	9,836	15%	7,746	20%
1950-1979	38,173	59%	22,676	58%
Before 1950	13,086	20%	6,404	16%
Total	64,700	100%	38,920	99%

     Table 37 – Year Unit Built

Data Source:

2011-2015 CHAS

Risk of Lead-Based Paint Hazard

Risk of Lead-Based Paint Hazard	Owner-Occupied		Renter-Occupied
	Number	%	Number	%
Total Number of Units Built Before 1980	51,259	79%	29,080	75%
Housing Units built before 1980 with children present	3,410	5%	1,466	4%

     Table 38 – Risk of Lead-Based Paint

Data Source:

2011-2015 ACS (Total Units) 2011-2015 CHAS (Units with Children present)

Vacant Units

	Suitable for Rehabilitation	Not Suitable for Rehabilitation	Total
Vacant Units
Abandoned Vacant Units
REO Properties
Abandoned REO Properties

Table 39 - Vacant Units - The County does not maintain such data

Through examining vacancy data made available through the ACS, 6.7% of Marin’s 112,868 housing units in 2018, about 7,610 units, were vacant. The rental vacancy rate in 2018 was 2.5%, and the homeowner vacancy rate was 0.7%, substantially lower than the overall statistic. The prevalence of short-term rentals in Marin has grown substantially since the preparation of the last Consolidated Plan and has severely limited the already limited housing stock in the County. In 2018, 36% of vacant units in Marin were used as seasonal, recreational or occasional use, while 13% were active for rent, and 6% were active for sale.

	Number	Percent
Vacant - for rent	999	13%
Vacant - rented but not occupied	292	4%
Vacant - for sale only	476	6%
Vacant - sold but not occupied	257	3%
Vacant - seasonal, recreational or occasional use	2753	36%
Vacant - migrant workers	0	0%
Vacant - other	2833	37%
Total vacant	7610

Table 40: Vacancy Status of Vacant Housing Units in Marin County

Data Source:

2013-2018 ACS

The condition of these units varies by the community in which it is located. As noted previously, through community engagement meetings, housing habitability issues were identified by Marin City, the Canal, and West Marin communities.

Need for Owner and Rental Rehabilitation

Based on the survey gathered for the community engagement of this Consolidated Plan, 44% of respondents indicated the need for rehabilitation of multi-family housing, as opposed to 20% for single-family housing. However, given that the majority of the County’s housing stock is over 40 years old, there is considerable need for rehabilitation across all segments of the housing market.

Estimated Number of Housing Units Occupied by Low- or Moderate-Income Families with LBP Hazards

As shown in the table above, an estimated 3,410 owner occupied, and 1,466 renter occupied housing units in Marin were constructed before 1980 and have children under the age of 18 living in them.

If these units contain a proportionate share of families in poverty by housing tenure as the overall County proportion (5.2% of families with children in owner occupied households are in poverty, while 15.5% of families with children in renter occupied households are in poverty), then as many as 177 owner occupied and 227 renter occupied housing units in Marin could be occupied by low income families with children and contain lead based paint hazards[29].

Discussion

N/A

MA-45 Non-Housing Community Development Assets – 91.215 (f)  

Labor Force

Total Population in the Civilian Labor Force	136,858
Civilian Employed Population 16 years and over	129,030
Unemployment Rate	5.73
Unemployment Rate for Ages 16-24	15.40
Unemployment Rate for Ages 25-65	4.09

Table 46 - Labor Force

Data Source:

2011-2015 ACS

According to the American Community Survey 5-year estimates, the overall unemployment rate in Marin decreased from 5.7% in 2015 to 3.8% in 2018[35]. Additionally, 5-year estimates of the American Community Survey show a decrease in the unemployment rate amongst those 25-65, from 4.1% in 2015 to 3.0% in 2018[36]. Amongst those 16-24, the unemployment rate increased, from 15.4% to 16.4% between 2015 and 2018.

However, a decrease in unemployment rate does not necessarily correlate with an increase in employment or a healthy economy for all. ACS 5-year estimates illustrates disparities in employment across racial lines. In 2018, non-Hispanic White Marin residents held a 61% employment/population ratio, in comparison to 48% of Black/African American residents[37].

Occupations by Sector	Number of PeopleMedian Income
Management, business and financial	46,951
Farming, fisheries and forestry occupations	4,568
Service	11,208
Sales and office	29,400
Construction, extraction, maintenance and repair	7,155
Production, transportation and material moving	3,662

Table 47 – Occupations by Sector

Data Source:

2011-2015 ACS

Travel Time

Travel Time	Number	Percentage
< 30 Minutes	59,910	53%
30-59 Minutes	37,514	33%
60 or More Minutes	15,517	14%
Total	112,941	100%

Table 48 - Travel Time

Data Source:

2011-2015 ACS

Education:

Educational Attainment by Employment Status (Population 16 and Older)

Educational Attainment	In Labor Force
	Civilian Employed	Unemployed	Not in Labor Force
Less than high school graduate	6,313	793	3,754
High school graduate (includes equivalency)	11,129	692	4,050
Some college or Associate's degree	25,994	1,673	7,543
Bachelor's degree or higher	63,474	2,609	12,416

Table 49 - Educational Attainment by Employment Status

Data Source:

2011-2015 ACS

According to the ACS 5-year estimates, there have been notable changes to educational attainment by employment status from 2015 to 2018. Most significantly, the number of those unemployed decreased by roughly half across all four educational attainment levels: from 793 to 386 for those with less than high school, from 692 to 344 for those with a high school diploma or equivalent, from 1,673 to 888 for those with some college/associates degree, and from 2,609 to 1,738 for those with a bachelor’s degree or higher[38].

Educational Attainment by Age

	Age
	18–24 yrs	25–34 yrs	35–44 yrs	45–65 yrs	65+ yrs
Less than 9th grade	344	2,044	1,847	2,051	1,181
9th to 12th grade, no diploma	1,939	1,491	1,289	2,101	1,419
High school graduate, GED, or alternative	4,137	4,463	3,389	8,041	6,507
Some college, no degree	7,008	4,677	5,484	15,858	9,513
Associate's degree	423	1,719	1,854	5,731	2,976
Bachelor's degree	1,995	6,750	12,531	26,863	13,313
Graduate or professional degree	183	2,762	8,087	21,524	13,641

Table 50 - Educational Attainment by Age

    Table 51: Total Educational Attainment for the Population 25 and Over

Data Source:

2013-2018 ACS

Educational Attainment by Age table illustrates some differences from 2015 and more recent 2018 ACS data. Most notably, there is an increase in those who have attained a bachelor’s degree or graduate/professional degree across all age groups, except for those 33-44: for those 18-24, those who received a bachelor’s degree increased by 883; for those 24-35, there was an increase of 906 and 442 for those who received a bachelor’s degree and graduate/professional degree, respectively; for those 35-44, there was an increase of 535 in those who received less than 9^th grade education, and a decrease of 1,289 that received a bachelor’s; for those aged 45-65, those who received a bachelor’s increased by 2,064 and for those over 65, there was an increase of 2,123 and 1,984 who received a bachelor’s degree and graduate/professional degree, respectively.

Educational Attainment – Median Earnings in the Past 12 Months

Educational Attainment	Median Earnings in the Past 12 Months
Less than high school graduate	409,678
High school graduate (includes equivalency)	999,140
Some college or Associate's degree	1,785,108
Bachelor's degree	2,197,489
Graduate or professional degree	3,323,941

Table 52 – Median Earnings in the Past 12 Months

Data Source:

2011-2015 ACS

The data presented for median earnings in 2015 is significantly incorrect across all educational levels from more recent 2018 data. Based on the 2018 ACS 5-year estimates, the median income for those with less than a high school degree was $22,733, $34,681 for high school graduates or equivalent, $44,417 for those with some college or associate’s degree, $78,195 for those with a bachelor’s degree, and $97,673 for those with a graduate/professional degree.

Based on the Business Activity table above, what are the major employment sectors within your jurisdiction?

Marin’s economy is diverse, in that no one sector dominates the share of workers or jobs. The top four industries with the highest proportion of workers and shares of jobs are those in the Arts, Entertainment & Accommodations, Professional, Scientific & Management Services, Education & Health Care Services and Retail Trade sectors.

Describe the workforce and infrastructure needs of the business community:

According to the latest Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy (CEDS) report completed in September 2015, of the over 19,000 known businesses, only 327 are large employers with over 50 employees. This has been partially linked to the high cost of commercial and residential real estate. Ninety percent of the private sector businesses in Marin employ less than 20 employees. Marin County’s population commutes to and from other areas. Many service workers commute into the county from Contra Costa, Napa, Sonoma, and Solano counties, which contributes to the consistent traffic congestion seen on northern Marin’s portion of 101 Highway. This highway commute was ranked in 2018 as one of the 50 worst commutes in the Bay Area by the Metropolitan according to the Marin Transportation Commission (MTC).[39] A large segment of inbound workers struggle to find reliable and affordable transportation alternatives to and from work.

Additionally, the Marin Economic Forum, a local non-profit, non-partisan economic development organization, indicated in their 2015 CEDS report that:

Over 60 percent of Marin County’s workforce commutes in daily, a number that continues to increase. Not only does this stress the county’s transportation networks but shows employers are dependent on staff outside of Marin.

At the same time, many of Marin’s highest skilled professionals seek work outside of Marin because there are better opportunities in terms of pay and presence of firms in sectors like technology.

Small businesses represent over 80 percent of Marin’s total businesses yet the financial and regulatory demands on them to maintain or grow are increasing as is the competition from e-commerce and the gig economy[40].

Describe any major changes that may have an economic impact, such as planned local or regional public or private sector investments or initiatives that have affected or may affect job and business growth opportunities during the planning period. Describe any needs for workforce development, business support or infrastructure these changes may create.

Some of the major changes in the region include Marin’s aging population, that will result in needed health care demands in addition to a large exodus from the workforce altogether. The loss of Marin workers due to neighboring jurisdictions increasing minimum wages allowing workers to find commensurate employment closer to home. However, data tracking this will not be available until 2021. In addition, there is considerable need for the reconstruction of homes and communities as a result of wildfires in counties north of Marin for the past three consecutive years.

With a larger aging population, there is a growing need for health care workers to support the medical needs of this group. Additionally, workers will need to replace the large number of anticipated older adults that will be retiring in the upcoming years. As noted by the Marin Economic Forum, almost 30 percent of Marin’s population is aged 60 or older, this is expected to be 40 percent by 2035. With a significant wave of retirements looming, there will be bigger deficits in available workers. The percent of those employed over the age of 60 in Marin County is substantially higher than the State of California: 39% instead of 28% for the state Housing cost are also a deterrent for young and middle aged workers from settling and working in Marin, which must be addressed in order to successfully plan for this anticipated need of workers in the years to come.

Additionally, Marin County, which sits directly south of Sonoma, Lake, Napa, and Mendocino counties that have experienced devastating wildfires in the past several years, is anticipated to deal with this issue in the years to come through a need for skilled construction labor to rebuild the homes and communities as a result of the fires. According to a regional report by the Marin Economic Forum in 2019 “Forecasting the Future”, fire rebuilding labor will be much needed in the years to come. The following two sections will discuss these labor needs in more detail.

Jobs in this sector create greater opportunities for earning a livable income. Based on 2018 LEHD data, those in construction had an average monthly wage of $5,680 and those in health care had $5,629, which equates to $68,160 and $67,548 annually, respectively.

How do the skills and education of the current workforce correspond to employment opportunities in the jurisdiction?

The number of those earning a bachelor’s degree has increased substantially in the past five years, across all age groups and, overall, there is a trend towards attaining higher education.

However, this trend is not experienced by all communities. In the Canal, Marin’s predominant immigrant Hispanic/Latinx community, 86% of residents have less than a bachelor’s degree, and 37% have completed less than 9^th grade[41]. There are a number of programs targeted towards bridging higher education with low-income Latinx students in this community, to address the growing gap in college and career readiness. According to 2018-19 school data examined by Marin Promise Partnerships, a local partnership of over 100 school districts, community members and nonprofit organizations – in the San Rafael City Schools, where the majority of Canal students attend, there is a 41% gap in college and career readiness between higher-income and low-income students, as well as between white students and students of color. This is the largest gap of the four studied school districts.

Describe any current workforce training initiatives, including those supported by Workforce Investment Boards, community colleges and other organizations. Describe how these efforts will support the jurisdiction's Consolidated Plan.

The Workforce Alliance of the North Bay (WANB) is a multi-jurisdiction collaboration between Marin, Napa, Mendocino, and Lake counties. The WANB addresses common workforce challenges in a more comprehensive regional way including common industries, labor pools and workforce, and consolidates both administrative and planning functions from the counties into a single governance structure. The WANB consists of representatives from each geographical region.

WANB has established the Sonoma-Marin Health Care Industry Partnerships identifies key employers and establishing priorities in the health care industry. This initiative also responds to data from the U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, which indicated that 17 of the 30 fastest growing occupations will be in the health sector. As noted previously, with Marin’s growing aging population, this initiative responds to growing and projected needs.

Community Action Marin (CAM), a local nonprofit to supporting anti-poverty initiatives, has developed an Early Childhood Education Workforce Project, that engages low-income Marin residents in a one-year workforce training program to give them credentials to build a career in childhood education. Participants of this program take classes at the College of Marin, are able to take English language proficiency courses, if needed, and receive job training and a classroom internship. Currently in its second year, CAM has announced a 100% employment for participants as early childhood educators.

Other local organizations that are focused on workforce training initiatives include community-based organizations, such as the Marin City Community Development Corporation (Marin City CDC), and Canal Alliance. Both these organizations have established construction training programs to respond to the shortage of skilled construction labor in the Bay Area. The Marin City CDC currently has established a Construction Trades Pre-Apprenticeship Program, which consists of ten weeks job training program, in addition to job placement, and similarly, the Canal Alliance has established the Construction Skills Certificate Program to earn construction labor skills. The Canal Alliance program is part of the Education to Career (e2c) program, which is a partnership between the Canal Alliance, College of Marin, Marin Builders Association and Career Point Marin (WANB’s Marin provider). This initiative targets entry-level employment, provides basic skills for success in the construction industry, in addition to technical skills, career, financial and personal support, to help long-term career success. These initiatives directly address the growing need for skilled construction labor as it relates to the region’s push for more housing development across jurisdictions, in addition to the need to rebuild homes that were destroyed by the wildfires in the North Bay counties of Sonoma, Napa, Lake and Mendocino.

Does your jurisdiction participate in a Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy (CEDS)?

Yes, the Marin Economic Forum completed the last Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy in 2015.

If so, what economic development initiatives are you undertaking that may be coordinated with the Consolidated Plan? If not, describe other local/regional plans or initiatives that impact economic growth.

There are seven main ideas that the 2015 CEDS identified as strategic goals for Marin County:

Support and Grow Jobs and Businesses in Targeted Industries;

Wireless Access and Broadband Expansion;

Expansion of Tourism in a Sustainable Way for Marin County's communities;

Preservation of Natural Resources and Open Space;

Education and Workforce Development Enhancement;

Housing and Transportation Planning and Connections; and

Supporting and Expanding Marin County's Social Safety Net.

The goals shared and supported by this Consolidated Plan are:

Education and Workforce Development Enhancement,

Housing and Transportation Planning and Connections, and

Supporting and Expanding Marin County's Social Safety Net.

Discussion

While Marin County experiences growing annual median incomes, there is significant disparity. While Marin County reported an annual median income of about $118,000 in 2018, the median household incomes in Marin City was $37,292 and the Canal was $53,824.

Marin’s aging population and the wildfires that have affected many parts of Northern California have impacted Marin’s workforce needs, where there is a growing need for health care workers and for skilled labor in the construction industry, both of which can provide greater financial stability and opportunity for a livable wage. Marin’s service sector is still a major driver of employment in the County. Workforce development initiatives in Marin County, and specifically those in Marin City and the Canal, Marin’s identified low-income communities and communities of color, are responding to this need by supporting training and job placement in the health care and construction sectors.

MA-50 Needs and Market Analysis Discussion

Are there areas where households with multiple housing problems are concentrated? (include a definition of "concentration")

As previously discussed in the Needs Assessment section of this Consolidated Plan, low income households and residents belonging to a racial/ethnic minority group are more affected by housing problems.

Marin County has three areas that experience higher rates of housing problems the Canal Area of San Rafael, Marin City and West Marin. Both the Canal and Marin City have high numbers of minority residents and have higher concentrations of low-income residents in condensed communities. Whereas, West Marin is a larger region of rural and agricultural lands with a population of non-migratory workers that face higher rates of housing problems with fewer community resources to address them. 

Are there any areas in the jurisdiction where racial or ethnic minorities or low-income families are concentrated? (include a definition of "concentration")

The county has two areas of minority concentration: the Canal (located within census tracts 1122.01 and 122.02) has an area of two square miles and is governed by the City of San Rafael and Marin City (census tract 1290), which is located about 5 miles north of San Francisco and is part of the unincorporated area of the County. Both of these communities the highest incidence of poverty and the highest concentration of Black African/American (Marin City) and Hispanic/Latinx (Canal) residents.

What are the characteristics of the market in these areas/neighborhoods?

Canal Neighborhood of San Rafael

Originally developed in the 1950’s, the Canal area of San Rafael is a residential and industrial neighborhood that gets its name from the canal that was dredged along San Rafael Creek.  The Canal (located within census tracts 1122.01 and 122.02) has an area of two square miles and is governed by the City of San Rafael and is not in the unincorporated area of the County. According to the 2020 AI, the Canal area housing stock was first developed as apartments for young couples and new college graduates. "The housing stock was largely studios and small apartments not really intended for families," says Tom Wilson, former Executive Director of Canal Alliance. Today, the Canal’s population is almost 90% immigrants from Central and South American and Southeast Asia. There are large numbers of families (?) living in rental apartments and residents often live in overcrowded conditions. Educational outcomes are alarmingly low, with over half the adults lacking a high school diploma. The typical worker in the Canal neighborhood earns just over $21,000, about the same as an American worker in the late 1960s.

The Canal is served by the San Rafael City Schools district. As is often the case the schools serving this community have lower test scores than other schools in the district. Of the County’s 2018 high school graduates, Latinx students represented the highest number of students who did not complete high school in Marin. Twenty-five percent (25%) of Latinx students did not complete high school compared with 7% of White students.

In the Canal, 37.2% of households are considered Limited English Proficient, or LEP.  In general, these are individuals who do not speak English as their primary language and who have limited ability to read, speak, write, or understand English. In the Canal, 79.9% of households speak a language other than English, and 66.4% are considered Spanish speaking only.  In the entire County of Marin, only 4.3% of households are considered LEP, 23.3% speak a language other than English, and 10.5% are Spanish speaking only.

The number of Canal residents experiencing poverty in 2017 was 31%, which was an increase of 60.2% since 2010. Asian residents in the Canal experienced the greatest increase in poverty rates representing an 84.4% increase, followed by Latinx residents with an increase of 54%, and White residents increased by 31.4%.  African Americans living in the Canal showed a decrease in poverty rates by 64.3%.

Marin City

Originally developed to support the workforce of the World War II ship building industry, Marin City was once considered the most integrated community in the Country – and the County. After the war, Black veterans and members of the ship building community were restricted by government policy to living in Marin City, while their White counterparts were able to purchase homes with mortgages that were guaranteed by the Federal Government outside of Marin City. Marin City is home today to the county’s historical Black/African American community. In addition, it is the location of the county’s only family Public Housing site, Golden Gate Village, which provide 300 units in 28 apartment housing built in the late 1950’s and completed in 60’s ranging in size from one- to five-stories.

In the decades since more multi-family and affordable housing has been developed as part of the community’s master plan, Marin City USA.  Between 1995 and 2000, 255 apartments, 85 townhomes, and 30 homeownership units were completed. These developments have led to shifting demographics in the community and led to gentrification and displacement of the African American community.  The 2017 American Community Survey, the population of Marin City was 30% African American, 28% Latinx, 24% White, and 9% Asian.  Between 2010 and 2017, the population of Marin City increased from 2,359 to 2,686, a 13.9% increase.  The Latinx population represented the largest growth rate of 121.1%, followed by a 9.8% increase in White residents. Asian residents decreased by 9.8% and African American residents decreased by 18.5%. Thirty-two percent (32%) of the residents speak a non-English language and 85.2% are U.S. citizens.  In 2017, 14% of Marin City residents were identified as Limited English Proficient, or LEP, compared to 4% of the entire County.

The overall poverty rate for Marin City households in 2017 was 25%, which is a decrease of 19.5% since 2010.  White household poverty rates in Marin City decreased by 68%, and the poverty rates for African Americans went down by 59.4%.  During that same period of time, the poverty rate for Asian households in Marin City increased by 46.9% and the poverty rate for Latinx households increased by 743.9%.

Over the years, student enrollment in the Sausalito Marin City School District has changed significantly.  White student enrollment has increased by 375.7% from 2003 – 2018.  Latinx student enrollment has increased by 206.3%, and Asian student enrollment has increased by 683.3%. African Americans were the only race that showed a decrease in enrollment by 36%.

Most students from the Sausalito Marin City School District attend Tamalpais High School in Mill Valley. According to the AI, students of color from Marin City who attend Tamalpais High School consistently report not feeling welcomed or included. In 2016, 0% of African American students in Marin felt connected to their school.

After a 2-year investigation, in August of 2019, the California State Justice Department concluded that the Sausalito Marin City School District had “knowingly and intentionally maintained and exacerbated” existing racial segregation and deliberately established a segregated school and diverted County staff and resources to Willow Creek while depriving the students at Bayside MLK an equal educational opportunity.

Are there any community assets in these areas/neighborhoods?

Both the Canal and Marin City have strong nonprofits partners working to improve the lives of residents and advocate community needs to local and state government. Both communities have Federally Qualified Health Clinic’s (FQHC) and community centers providing activities and space for convening.

In Marin City, the Marin City Community Services District provides public parks and recreation, street lighting, and refuse collection services to Marin City residents. Further, the District provides public leadership in all matters that affect the community, including economic development, education, health and wellness, public safety, physical infrastructure, transportation, zoning, signage, land use planning, housing, and redevelopment. The Marin City Community Development Corporation (MCCDC) was established in 1979 to improve the economic quality of life for Marin City residents. Toward this end, MCCDC promotes business opportunities, creates income-generating programs, promotes full employment, builds skills, and promotes the concept of economic self-sufficiency. The Marin City Health & Wellness Center, an FQHC, provides primary health, dental and behavioral health care to residents. Performing Stars transforms the lives of low-income, primarily multicultural, children throughout Marin County by using enrichment programs to build pride, character, discipline and self-esteem.

In the Canal, Canal Alliance, incorporated in 1982, is a comprehensive community resource center that helps low-income, immigrants through access to health and social services, youth development, economic security, and citizenship. They provide the full spectrum of immigrant integration initiatives under one roof to address barriers to immigrant integration. Multicultural Center of Marin works with the community to provide youth & family empowerment, community resilience, and arts. The Marin Community Clinic, an FQHC, provides primary health, dental and behavioral health care to residents. In addition, the Canal was recently identified as an Opportunity Zone in the 2018 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, opening the door for outside investment in the community.

Are there other strategic opportunities in any of these areas?

Investing in childcare, preschool, and ongoing youth development programs will increase educational outcomes. Investing in education/job readiness and training programs are proven methods for lifting families out of poverty. Investing in parks, playgrounds, community facilities, and community infrastructure increase safety and adds to the overall quality of life for residents.

As new investments from outside investors come into these neighborhoods there is addition opportunities but must be done with a lens toward preventing gentrification. To this end it is important for local government to have strong renter protections and anti-displacement policies coupled with access to economic opportunity needs to be considered as part of public investments.

MA-60 Broadband Needs of Housing occupied by Low- and Moderate-Income Households - 91.210(a)(4), 91.310(a)(2)

Describe the need for broadband wiring and connections for households, including low- and moderate-income households and neighborhoods.

In Marin County, most households have access to broadband internet. According to the 2018 ACS, 90.5% of households had access to broadband of any type, while 9.2% had no internet access at all. Broken down by income levels, there are disparities in how many households are connected via broadband internet. For households making less than $20,000 a year, 73.3% had access to broadband internet, while 26.2% had no internet access. For households making between $20,000 and $74,999, 82.0% had access to broadband internet, while 17.5% were without an internet subscription. For households earning over $75,000, 96.3% had access to broadband internet, while 3.5% were without internet access.

In Marin’s identified low-income and moderate-income communities, the same drastic disparities are seen. In Marin City, 21.5% of household had no internet subscription, for those earning below $20,000 a year, 33.1% did not have access and for those earning between $20,000 and $74,999 a year, 26.0% did not have access. In the Canal, 24.7% of households had no internet subscription, for those earning below $20,000, 38.6% did not have access and for those earning between $20,000 and $74,999 a year, 27.7% did not have access. In West Marin, the connectivity needs are largely impacted by the spread out and rural nature of this part of the county. Here, 15.9% of households had no internet subscription, for those earning less than $20,000 a year, 35.9% did not have access and for those earning between $20,000 and $74,999 a year, 24.0% did not have access.

Describe the need for increased competition by having more than one broadband Internet service provider serve the jurisdiction.

There had been discussion in Marin County beginning in 2018 around the change to a 5G network in the county. This change would have created faster internet connectivity due to the higher-frequency waves that make up the 5G network. However, since these waves do not travel as far as 4G, there was a need to increase the number of transmitters throughout the county, which was met with much community resistance at several Board of Supervisors meetings, due to perceived health concerns.

Currently, in some Marin County communities, there are not many choices available for internet providers. In fact, depending on the area, there are large disparities in the number of options. For example, most of West Marin and Novato has a range of 0 to 2 providers, while most areas of Central Marin have 4-5+ providers [42].

MA-65 Hazard Mitigation - 91.210(a)(5), 91.310(a)(3)

 Describe the jurisdiction’s increased natural hazard risks associated with climate change.

The two greatest risks to Marin County from climate change are wildfire and increased flooding from sea level rise. Other impacts from climate change, such as drought and increased heat health days, also pose risks and are likely to exacerbate the risks from wildfire and sea level rise. Marin County’s 2018 Multi-Jurisdictional Local Hazard Mitigation Plan (MCM LHMP), and two sea level rise vulnerability assessments address these risks.

Wildfire - The MCM LHMP finds that, wildfire poses the greatest risk to human life and property in Marin County’s densely populated Wildland Urban Interface (WUI), which holds an estimated 69,000 living units. Marin County is home to 23 communities listed on CAL FIRE’s Communities at Risk list, with approximately 80% of the total land area in the county designated as having moderate to very high fire hazard severity ratings. The county has a long fire history with many large fires over the past decades, several of which have occurred in the WUI. To compound the issue, continuous growth (and overgrowth) of vegetation creates dangerous fuel loads.

The mix of weather, diverse vegetation and fuel characteristics, complex topography, and land use and development patterns in Marin County are important contributors to the fire environment. Weather in the county consists of warm, dry summers and cool, wet winters. Late summer to early fall is the driest time of year and can bring a shift in wind patterns that make wildfires particularly dangerous. Insect infestations and plant diseases, such as California oak mortality syndrome (sudden oak death), are increasing and threaten to change the structure and overall health of native plant communities in Marin County. These dead and dying trees have created large swaths of land with dense and dry fuel loads.

MCM LHMP includes mitigation measures that address the following:

Pre-fire planning.

Public education and outreach to promote and implement fire adapted community practices.

Vegetation management and fuel reduction at the county and community levels.

Reducing structure ignitability by promoting and enforcing building codes, ordinances, and statutes.

The State of California’s Fourth Climate Change Assessment found that “by 2100 the average annual maximum daily temperature is projected to increase by 5.6°F - 8.8°F,” where the highest increase would occur under a business as usual approach. The most important finding in this assessment related to wildfire is that if carbon pollution “continues to increase, the frequency of extreme wildfires would increase, and the average area burned statewide would increase by 77 percent.”

In addition to the immediate risk wildfires pose to public safety, wildfire smoke causes upper respiratory problems and long-term exposure can have lasting health impacts. This is of particular concern in Marin County, where the at-risk areas are located close to urban areas. Climate change will also increase the number of heat health events, which occur when temperatures are uncomfortably hot and induce health issues, such as heat cramps, heat exhaustion, heat syncope, and heat stroke. On average in the County, such events are projected to increase by 3-4 events per year, bringing totals in some areas to over seven per year between 2041-2060. These events typically occur during the hottest time of year, which also coincides with wildfire season. Where wildfires coincide with temperature extremes, the County’s emergency services could be strained well beyond capacity.

Sea Level Rise - Much of existing development sits along waterways, bays, or the open coast, and much of that is within the National Flood Insurance Program’s 100-year floodplain. Recognizing the potential increased risks to public safety and infrastructure maintenance costs, in 2016, the County completed the Collaboration Sea level Marin Adaptation Response Team (C-SMART) Vulnerability Assessment for Marin’s Pacific Ocean Coast. In 2017, the County completed the Bay Waterfront Adaptation and Vulnerability Evaluation (BayWAVE) to assess vulnerability to sea level rise along its San Francisco Bay shoreline.

Sea level in the San Francisco Bay Area has risen eight inches in the past century and could rise up to seventy inches by 2100. Marin’s coastline and shoreline are vulnerable to sea level rise and changing storm patterns that accompany climate change. Along the coast, a near-term scenario is considered to include 10 inches of sea level rise with a 20-year storm. The impacts included flooding of, 2,054 acres, 110 agricultural acres (mostly ranch), 569 acres of aquaculture, and 588 homes & businesses, which would impact 3,000+ residents plus tourists. The damages would further include, $561 million in assessed property value, 2.3 miles of wet road, 2 ports, 1 marina, 1 boat launch, erosion of beaches, tidal marshes, eelgrass beds, and estuaries. Others impacted include, property owners, County of Marin, Caltrans, Bolinas Public Utility, Stinson Beach Water, Fire Districts, National Parks Service, California State Parks, and AT&T. The medium-term scenario was considered to include 20 inches of sea level rise with a 20-year storm. The impacts include flooding of an additional 10 acres, 92 homes, 62 agricultural acres, as well as businesses, & institutions. Erosion could further impact beaches and impact 148 properties. The damages would increase in cost by $232 million in assessed property value.

Along the bay shoreline, where most of the County’s development and supportive infrastructure lies, a largely similar near-term scenario would flood 5,000 acres and as much as 8,000 acres flooded with a 100-year storm surge, 2,000 agricultural acres (mostly ranch), 4,500 homes, businesses, & institutions. Flooding would impact 200,000+ residents plus commuting employees and damage or inundate 30 miles of road, 3 ferry landings, 5 marinas, 4 boat launches as well as important habitats like beaches, tidal marshes, wetlands, and eelgrass beds. Others impacted include property owners, County of Marin municipalities, Caltrans, sanitary districts, water districts, fire districts, Sausalito Police Department, California Highway Patrol, Sonoma Marin Area Rail Transit, Golden Gate Bridge Highway Transportation District, Transportation Authority of Marin, California, PG&E, and AT&T. Under the medium-term scenario, additional flooding would occur on 17,00 acres and as much as an addition 5,500 acres with a 100-year storm surge, and 1,100 homes. Impacts to habitat areas would also worsen, leaving much or them beyond restorable.

The County has been actively working with local communities on sea level rise issues and its impending effect on communities. Through both C-SMART and BayWAVE efforts are being focused on sea level rise awareness, education and preparedness in key communities, such as West Marin, Marin City, the Canal District of San Rafael, and parts of Novato.

Describe the vulnerability to these risks of housing occupied by low- and moderate-income households based on an analysis of data, findings, and methods.

The Canal Neighborhood - located in the City of San Rafael, this densely populated urban community has the lowest incomes in the County. The median annual income is $30,481, which is lower than the median annual income in 92.5 percent of California’s census tracts. The Canal Neighborhood population is about 70 percent Central and South American in origin and Spanish or native languages are typically spoken at home. Compared to other communities in the study area, Canal residents are younger, families are larger, and residents are primarily renters (Census 2010). Almost one-half of residents are housing cost burdened, paying more than 30 percent or more of their income for housing.[43] Canal Neighborhood residents own fewer cars and depend on transit.[44] These residents are disproportionately vulnerable to sea level rise and are some of the first people impacted by sea level rise at their front doors. Flooding in the Canal area has a long history. Records identify 20 historical flood events. Two large events occurred in 1982 and 1983. Through the 2000’s the creek has experience smaller flood events during winter storm conditions. Much of the development in the Canal area is built near the creek or near the bay on fill or land that has subsided. It is already designated as part of the 100-year floodplain. Sea level rise will compound flooding issues in the area. The Canal Neighborhood with just 10 inches of sea level rise will put the majority of buildings at risk in addition to primary public transportation routes and roads that are also subject to flooding under the same scenario. Under the medium-term scenario, flooding in most of the Canal area would be six to eight feet deep[45].

While current and future flooding are the greatest natural hazards in the Canal area, any natural disaster that prevents low-income residents from getting to and from work or creates additional health challenges difficult for this population. A wildfire within the WUI on the opposite side of San Rafael Creek could close roads to through traffic or require evacuation due to dangerous air quality conditions. Low-income communities and communities of color are less likely to have the resources and capacity to prepare for and recover from extreme climate events. Evacuation alone can be expensive; given that fewer than 40 percent of Americans have enough savings to cover a $1,000 emergency, most families, and especially lower-income households, need federal, state, and local support for preparedness and recovery costs.[46]

Marin City - Located in unincorporated Marin County between the Tamalpais Valley community and the City of Sausalito, Marin City has a population of 2,666, about 27% of which are Black or African American. The median annual household income is $37,617, which is lower than 82.8 percent of California’s census tracts. The median annual household income in Marin County is $126,373. While Marin City’s median annual household income is in the 17.2 percentile, those of surrounding communities are in the 96.5 and 98 percentiles. Residents of Marin City are primarily renters and rely on public transportation. Donahue Street is the only road in and out of Marin City, which is problematic in any hazard event that requires evacuation. Additionally, Donahue Street connects at Bridgeway Boulevard at an intersection where on ramps and off ramps to Highway 101 are also located. Marin City is located adjacent to the WUI and in the event of a fire on the steep slopes above it, small residential roads offer the only fire breaks. Like the Canal area, wildfire in the area could require evacuation due to dangerous air quality conditions, not to mention the risk of fire itself. In an event where a quick evacuation is necessary, the residents of Marin City may face difficulties getting out.

Most of Marin City sits around 23 feet above sea level. However, the intersection of Donahue Street and Bridgeway Boulevard already floods during the highest tides of the year (King Tides). In events where King Tides are combined with storm events, the intersection can be impassable, leaving residents stranded. With just 10 inches of sea level rise, the intersection would be permanently flooded. In the medium-term scenario, flooding extends further up Donahue Street into the community. Only under BayWAVES’s long-term scenario do residences within Marin City begin to flood. However, without another route in and out of Marin City, residents will suffer loss of income for every flood event and such events will occur more frequently as sea level rises.

West Marin - The rural West Marin census tract covers a large area with a great deal of income disparity. Within the tract are a number of ranches and five coastal villages: Olema, Point Reyes Station, Inverness, East Shore, and Dillon Beach. The median annual household income is $49,375, which is below 66.3 percent of California census tracts. Low-income populations are spread throughout the area. One place identified as having low-income residents is Point Reyes Station. The area around Point Reyes station is one of the most susceptible to flooding that would impact roads and other supporting infrastructure. Lawson’s Landing in Dillon Beach at the tip of Tomales Bay is another area with low-income residents. The area itself is subject to flooding in the medium-term scenario and Highway 1, the major road in and out of the area, is subject to flooding and erosion from sea level rise under all scenarios.

Perhaps the largest population of low-income residents in West Marin is migrant farm workers who staff the ranches throughout the area. The ranches are located outside of areas subject to flooding. However, they are at risk from increased wildfire events. The ranches are located in West Marin’s grasslands, which have the potential to experience higher rates of fire spread. Grassland fires are dangerous even without extreme fire weather scenarios due to the rapid rate of fire spread: in some cases, fires spread so quickly that large areas can burn before response resources are able to arrive.

 

---