Beyond the Front Door: An In-Depth Look at Housing Affordability in Tampa Bay

Beyond the Front Door: An

In-Depth Look at Housing Affordability in Tampa Bay

SEPTEMBER 2024

Beyond the Front Door: An In-Depth Look at Housing Affordability in Tampa Bay

Authors:

Dr. Lucia Farriss, Senior Director of Research, Analytics and Public Policy, Tampa Bay Partnership

Contributors:

Dr. Elizabeth Strom, Associate Professor in the School of Public Affairs, University of South Florida

Courtney McDonnell, Senior Director of Programs, Tampa Bay Partnership

Shannon Kalahar, Senior Director of Strategic Communications, Tampa Bay Partnership

Nicole Mulrooney, Executive Associate, Tampa Bay Partnership

Andrew Pagnotta, Research Assistant, Tampa Bay Partnership

ABOUT THE TAMPA BAY PARTNERSHIP

The Tampa Bay Partnership is a coalition of regional business and non-profit leaders joined by a shared commitment to improving the personal and economic well-being of Tampa Bay residents. Formally incorporated in 1994 and re-established in 2016 as a regional research and public policy organization, the Partnership works with the region’s top employers, along with a diverse group of government and non-profit partners, to identify and address the most pressing issues facing our community, including education, housing affordability, transportation, workforce development, and other emerging issues.

FUNDING DISCLOSURE

This report was prepared by the Tampa Bay Partnership using grant funding from the Duke Energy Foundation. The statements, findings, conclusions and recommendations are those of the authors and do not reflect the perspectives or opinions of Duke Energy.

Methodology

The Tampa Bay Partnership conducted semi-structured interviews with industry, governmental, non-profit, and housing development leaders. A concerted effort was made to include strong and balanced representation from Pinellas, Pasco, and Hillsborough counties; 139 individuals were contacted, with a participation rate of 69.06%. Of the 79 interviews conducted:

34.18% were with local city and county government leaders (27 individuals)

34.18% were with local employers across 13 industries (27 individuals)

25.32% were with non-profits that serve families facing a housing need (20 individuals)

6.33% were with affordable housing developers and lenders (5 individuals)

Additionally, the Partnership held two listening sessions with 21 individuals from across all three counties who were in different stages of the homeownership process.

The questions were tailored for the organization being interviewed, for example business leaders were asked about the role of government and government officials were asked about the role of the business community.

Stakeholders provided a wide variety of perspectives from their shared lived experiences which were then analyzed across 13 broad themes, ranging from support for regional collaboration to interconnected factors of housing affordability. A further breakdown of these themes can be found in the appendix.

The findings presented throughout this report are a product of these interviews and listening sessions that were conducted from January – June 2024.

TERMINOLOGY

• Housing affordability loosely refers to the broader concept of access to housing at various income levels that would not incur costs of more than 30% of household income.

• When using the term “affordable” this report does not adhere to the strict guidelines associated with programs and income limits established by federal and state authorities. Often, the term “affordable” is used within the context of households earning below 80% Area Median Income (AMI) and who are eligible for public support. For the purposes of this report, when the term affordable is used, we are generally referring to households that are 30% or less cost-burdened. When referring to a program that is subsidized, it will be noted in the accompanying text.

• “Attainable” is often used to refer to households earning between 80%-120% AMI. This report refers to these households as “middle-income” earners.

• While we understand that attainable and workforce housing are sometimes used interchangeably, this report refers to “workforce housing” as anyone in the regional labor force, regardless of income level.

• We consider the individuals who participated in this study as “stakeholders” of our community. We will use the terms “stakeholders”, “participants”, and “interviewees” interchangeably.

Introduction

Housing is a primary indicator of economic stability and opportunity. Long-term solutions that address housing affordability are critical to the success of the Tampa Bay region.

On average, households in the tri-county region of Tampa Bay (Pinellas, Pasco, and Hillsborough) use 43% of their annual budgets to pay for housing expenditures.1 This is 13% higher than the general rule that housing should not account for more than 30% of a household’s budget.2 And when we add transportation expenses, the average household in Tampa Bay spends $0.57 of every dollar earned on those two categories.3

Pinellas, Pasco, and Hillsborough counties encompass the largest population density of our broader Tampa Bay region at 3.1 million residents.4 Population projections across these three counties by 2030 rise as high as 3.7 million.5

Substantial growth throughout the region has largely been driven by net migration from other states. The high demand for housing from this influx has led to an increase of close to 60% in residential real estate prices6 and close to 50% in rents in the span of four years since the start of the pandemic7 creating a market where affordable housing options, both for homeowners and renters, are in dwindling supply.

“We’ve done a great job selling the Tampa Bay region. There’s a lot of good things happening here, and I mean a lot. But that also means we have people wanting to be here. I mean, we live in paradise for God’s sake, what do you expect?”

One participant shared that as people are moving into the state, their higher incomes and asset bases mean that “a $500,000 house, or $2,500 a month rent is a bargain.” Stakeholders from the interviews felt that the Tampa Bay housing market is responding to the price points accessible to those moving to our area as opposed to our existing population.

1 Tampa Bay Partnership. (2024, January 30). 2024 Regional Competitiveness Summary Report.

2 Is the 30% homebuying rule still the rule? Truist. (n.d.). https://www.truist.com/resources/mortgage/articles/is-the-30-percenthomebuying-rule-still-the-rule

3 ESRI Business Analyst, Household Budget Expenditures (2023)

4 U.S. Census Bureau, Population Estimates Program, Annual Estimates (2022)

5 Rayer, S., & Comfort, C. (2024, January). Projections of Florida Population by County, 2025-2050, with Estimates for 2023. Gainesville; Bureau of Economic and Business Research.

6 Redfin Research, Monthly Housing Market Data (June 2022-June 2023)

7 Zillow Observed Rent Index (ZORI). Zillow. (2024, September 4). https://www.zillow.com/research/data/

Unfortunately, local wages have not kept pace with housing expenses and inflation, and as the demand for housing intensifies, more residents are finding themselves forced to expand their search to neighboring counties in pursuit of options that meet their budget. Some, as noted by interview participants, have even opted to leave the state altogether due to these pressures.

According to the U.S. Census, Pasco County averaged 70 new residents a day in 2023, while Hillsborough County had 47 and Pinellas County 13.8 As residents search for more affordable homes outside of the higher costs of the urban core, migration towards areas such as Pasco, Hernando, Citrus, Polk, Manatee, and Sarasota will have lasting impacts on the workforce, the culture, and demographics of the community.

While some interview participants celebrated that we are now a national hotspot and were excited about having their home values increase to unprecedented heights, they also expressed that they did not want to see the workforce priced out of the housing market. One participant expressed these correlating sentiments as creating “a tension between community values.”

With all the region’s growth, there is a concerted effort to increase the housing supply, yet many obstacles remain. This report will explore:

• Barriers to increasing housing supply,

• Opportunities within housing support services,

• Interrelated issues compounding affordability concerns,

• Concerning implications of housing on talent recruitment and retention and

• Suggested activities that businesses, governments, and non-profits can take to help address the housing crisis.

Metropolitan Statistical Areas (MSAs): Tampa, St. Petersburg, Clearwater

Homosassa Springs

Lakeland, Winter Haven

North Port, Sarasota, Bradenton

8 U.S. Census Bureau, Population Estimates Program, Annual Estimates (2022)

Sarasota Manatee

Polk

Hillsborough Pasco

Pinellas

Hernando Citrus

Housing Affordability Impacts Us All

Housing affordability relates to the ability of residents across various income levels to obtain safe, quality places to live. As one participant shared, “we have such a diverse workforce that affordability shows up differently, depending on where you are and your economic mobility pathway.”

Until recently, the housing crisis may have been considered a low-income problem, but now it has become a business problem: “Where are your workers going to live if they can’t find a place to stay? This is starting to really affect businesses in the community.”

While there is a focus on programs that support our most vulnerable populations, there is a risk that this triage-based approach creates blind spots for a growing number of families –the missing middle.

Throughout our interviews, we heard about challenges faced by teachers, bus drivers, police officers, nurses, retail workers and more.

First-time home buyers, families that also incur childcare expenses, college-aged students, and seniors are also greatly impacted by the market conditions. The number of two-income households that sought support services were also expressed to be a new and concerning trend.

This group includes essential workers like social workers, paralegals, plumbers, and electricians, as well as other professionals who are earning

too much to qualify for support programs but often not enough to qualify for a mortgage or rent in a safe, secure neighborhood.

By creating housing solutions that assist these individuals, we are ensuring adequate talent for a diversity of services needed for a community to thrive.

STAKEHOLDER SENTIMENTS

1

2

“It is not something to be afraid of, and it’s not something that’s going to hurt your neighborhood or community. It’s something that supports your quality of life, home values, teachers, hospital staff, and the diversity of services and professionals in your area. Housing affordability is something to be celebrated and embraced.”

“A first-year firefighter making $42,000 cannot afford a $400,000 mortgage,” a municipal representative noted. Even those making $80,000 to $100,000 are finding it increasingly difficult to pay rent, with some anecdotally paying $2,400 a month for a modest two-bedroom apartment “with no thrills or frills.”

4

3

5

“[Housing] is not only an issue for those less fortunate. It’s an issue of our children and our grandchildren who are graduating college potentially, and they don’t have a vehicle, or they don’t have a place to live. Do you want your 35-year-old still living with you because they cannot afford a place of their own, right? It’s beyond a low-income issue. It’s a community issue for everyone.”

Another stakeholder shared that workforce populations (often in the 80-120% AMI range) are earning a meaningful income but cannot find reasonable housing options, and that is a sign we have defined the problem too narrowly.

One participant compared the housing crisis to a classroom where there is no concern for the “C students.” The A and B students are succeeding without additional help, and the D and F students may receive additional support through tutoring or afterschool support. But no one really pays attention to the C students. In this analogy the middle market households earning 80-120% of the Area Median Income (AMI), are the C students. And there are virtually no programs or resources designed to help them overcome their challenges.

The State of Housing in Tampa Bay

“In broad strokes... the housing situation is bad.”

The concept of the traditional starter home has all but vanished in Tampa Bay.

This struggle is compounded by rising costs in other areas, such as rising property taxes, insurance and maintenance costs. Rising home insurance costs were mentioned by

45% of participants as a major factor undelying home affordability

“My homeowner’s insurance went up 43%,” one person noted. They added that they felt lucky to be able to retain insurance, as others in the state are being priced out or losing their insurance provider altogether.

“Folks are coming up with more and more creative ways to carry a level of debt in order to finance their ongoing living, which is the worst possible thing you can do is try and finance your dayto-day living out of a debt vehicle.”

The market conditions also reflect a lessening number of listings, as homeowners who benefited from historically low interest rates are reluctant to move. Participants also shared examples of households who could not afford to leave what they had intended to be a starter home because of increased costs.

These factors have driven the popularity of build-to-rent developments as people search for alternatives in the housing landscape. The build-to-rent sector has experienced rapid growth in the past few years, attracting investors looking for high returns, and now makes up a significant share of new construction. “Speculators and international investors, cash buyers, institutional businesses that are publicly traded, and others that are just scooping up real estate, and those things contribute to the problems we have.”

While this trend adds to the much-needed supply of homes, it also diminishes the generational wealth building capacity of families through homeownership. Although unprompted, 50% of participants mentioned the importance of homeownership in creating generational wealth. Given that a question

was not asked directly of all participants, the figure likely undercounts the significance. This sentiment was echoed among the lived experience interviews. Prior to finding support for a home through Habitat for Humanity, many residents shared that they experienced sub-par living conditions with mold, pests, and crime. After securing their homes, they found that their mortgage payment was less than their prior rent and that they could go immediately from living paycheck-to-paycheck into saving for their families. One of their primary goals of homeownership was stability for their children and generational wealth opportunities.

Furthermore, several participants mentioned gentrification in East Tampa, South St. Petersburg, Clearwater and beyond. Present day areas with a majority of Black homeowners, a legacy tied to redlining, are under heavy pursuit from investment companies offering quick cash for generational homes, especially if the properties are within close proximity to the urban core.

Even for organizations seeking property, the reality of the housing market is harsh. We heard anecdotes of non-profits and community organizations that build affordable and workforce housing being outmatched and outbid by market-rate developers. Even when boards of these organizations nearly double their investments, the escalating costs of land and construction make it impossible to compete. All affordable housing developers interviewed for this study agreed that rising construction costs, including the price of land, are a major obstacle to developing more affordable housing.

Waiting lists for affordable housing have grown longer, with some spanning up to five years, indicating a deep and persistent need for more

inclusive housing policies. Comprehensive strategies are needed to ensure that counties can grow in a way that benefits all their inhabitants, with an eye to strengthening their workforce.

“Everywhere we’re building, there’s going to be shortages. Immediately there’s a waiting list, and we pretty much rent out every single unit we create within a couple of weeks.”

This trend is also reflected across county housing authorities throughout Florida that offer housing subsidies. One participant shared that Jacksonville left their waiting list wide open, and they have a waiting list of 100,000 people on it. “We manage our waiting list, and eventually close it. Our waiting list is about 4,000 names long. If we open it up for a week, we’d have another 10,000-15,000. If we advertise the program, we’d have another 80,000.”

This highlights another poignant reality. Residents who need support often feel it is not well advertised, and they mostly learn of programs by word-of-mouth. Despite the lack of broad public awareness, demand for support is skyrocketing without enough funding to meet the needs of residents. As a result, the marketing and promotion of these programs becomes a priority.

FORCED TO ADAPT

While there is a latent understanding that vulnerable populations such as disabled individuals, unhoused persons, those with blemished records, and low-income households may have more housing obstacles, there is a growing concern that previously stable units of the population are facing crisis, including two-income households.

As one employer stated, “We have team members that make everything from $15 an hour up to the highest point, and some of them are eligible for local subsidies or incentives, but many of them are not. Many of them are within that segment of people who could use some financial assistance to be able to manage escalating rents or purchase of their first house.”

Subsequently, many individuals are working several jobs to afford basic housing. However, their efforts cause a catch-22 because the additional income pushes them beyond the qualifying ranges for assistance. Residents become trapped in an unsustainable pattern of being overworked to keep a roof over their head, and yet unable to access support resources which would enable them to enter into a more sustainable housing situation.

As a result, residents are having to pursue creative adaptations to retain shelter. Some participants shared that they have seen an increase in intergenerational households, where multiple family members, including elderly parents and siblings and/ or adult children, live together to make ends meet. Others are leaving their cities and counties or exiting Florida altogether.

Interview participants also shared that there has been a rise in families facing eviction or experiencing homelessness. Alternative living arrangements for these populations include resorting to extreme measures like converting storage units into makeshift homes or sleeping in their cars as they use health club memberships for access to basic amenities like

showers. As one participant shared, “We were homeless for several months and went from living in a car, to a hotel, to another hotel, back to the car. I felt worthless. I had three children at the time, and I couldn’t get out of [this circumstance.] I felt stuck.”

When speaking to residents about their worst living situations, they expressed how housing challenges affected their livelihood. Some experienced water shutoffs and fires in previous apartments, as well as health issues due to mold and apartments “overrun with roaches.” They faced high rent and uncertainty about future living arrangements, difficulty managing children’s needs, and general instability affecting all aspects of life. One household lived in a mobile home during hurricane season and said they had to “hunker down” and pretend they had evacuated because they could not afford to leave, even despite the dangers of flooding and wind.

While these experiences are harrowing, the impact of transitioning to homeownership is equally compelling. Families that were planning to leave Florida due to escalating rents, were able to stay in their communities once a “Habitat Home” became an option. Households expressed feeling secure, empowered, safe, and with power and control over who entered their dwelling and how long their family members could stay. Many of the homeowners we spoke with were so moved by the experience of obtaining a home through Habitat for Humanity that they became part of the cause and now work for the organization itself. Access to secure housing is a conduit for economic opportunity and upward mobility.

STAKEHOLDER SENTIMENTS

1

2

“The most vulnerable [population] is definitely low income. The further they have to move away from their jobs the more they’re stretched thin, their dollar can’t go as far.”

“We’re on the front lines. We get the calls. We see the people. We see their pain,” shared a community worker, describing the desperation that leads to delivering checks late at night to prevent evictions the next morning.”

3

4

“If you’re at the bottom it’s tougher, but more than likely or not, there are other resources to help.... In the middle is where all the crunch comes.”

“The $40-60,000 worker is what is being affected the most. Under $40,000 they are probably not the main income provider, a partner is making the money, or there’s retirement income. At $40-60,000, we see they are doing second jobs or jobs under the table to make ends meet.”

Challenges with Existing Public-Facing Housing Support Programs

GAPS IN DOWNPAYMENT ASSISTANCE

The realities of the housing crisis are not always reflected in existing qualification and income limits for downpayment assistance programs.

For example, qualifications may be based on the number of dependents in the home without taking into account the full financial burden a household faces. One county-level participant shared that in their area, childcare expenses were not considered as a qualifying expenditure. A resident who applied for support also shared that “I got my house four years ago, and to see the numbers now it’s heartbreaking. Being a single mother, I almost didn’t qualify for a [Habitat] house… you can’t house your children, and every single dime goes to paying rent.” For context, according to Care. com, the starting average weekly cost for infant childcare working a 40-hour week in Tampa, FL, is $749.9 There is also an opportunity to work collaboratively to streamline or simplify the process of obtaining support. Residents who have utilized downpayment assistance programs shared that the applications are very complicated and that needs vary based on location. One individual remarked, “if I had just a drop less drive, I would have given up… it feels unattainable.”

ADDITIONAL STEPS ARE NEEDED TO SCALE UPWARD HOUSING MOBILITY

Some participants remarked that one goal of housing support should be to help families stabilize enough to eventually own their homes or move into market-rate housing. As one stakeholder said, “If we are supporting the same family or person for 20 or 30 years without progress, we have not addressed the housing affordability issue. The goal should be to provide housing that allows individuals to put their lives together, pursue education, get better jobs, and eventually move to their own place, free from the restrictions of affordable housing programs.” He also remarked that this is often not the case. Once people find an affordable option, they tend to stay, making it difficult for others to access those units. “People stay in subsidized units until they unfortunately pass away. No one leaves,” one participant explained. This creates an opportunity for more targeted support to help residents upskill in their professions and transition into market-rate units, freeing up affordable units for those who need them most.

9. How much does infant child care cost in Tampa, FL?. Care.com. (n.d.). https://www.care.com/cost/infantchild-care/tampa-fl

Challenges Faced by Developers

Affordable housing developers face numerous challenges in addressing the housing crisis, many of which are exacerbated by rising costs and market dynamics. As one stakeholder poignantly noted, “One of the things that we cannot make any more of is dirt.”

One developer shared that taxes, insurance, and utilities are their three largest expenses, with no control over them in terms of their operating costs. Where it used to cost $200,000 per unit for an apartment development project, one developer stated, the cost is now closer to $300,000 per unit “even on the affordable side.” He shared how construction costs for an 81-unit building are expected to be $30 million, which comes to nearly $340,000 per unit, a number he felt was “just crazy.” The subsidies needed to make these developments happen can be prohibitive.

“Governments can’t keep up. They may be able to give $40,000 a unit, but $100,000 a unit is impossible.“

In addition to the increased cost of supplies, competition for skilled workers has also increased, and regulations (unique to each county) can cause additional hurdles. These obstacles can extend the timeline for new developments. One participant explained that when they speak to potential clients,

they always advise that it could be up to five years before they can bring a new set of units online, if not longer.

Insurance costs are also affecting developers, with one participant estimating increases from $500 per unit to upwards of $2,500 per unit. These rising costs mean that the economic feasibility of affordable developments is under question.

Developers noted that residential developments typically cost more in services than they generate in property taxes. Without a mix of commercial and industrial development, along with residential developments, as well as proper infrastructure for jobs closer to employment centers, residential construction will be cost-prohibitive and place residents further out from their place of work.

“Three years ago, banks were lending 65% to experienced developers on apartment developments. Today that’s probably 50 or 55%. So, there’s another gap in resources that’s out there. All those things are kind of leading to difficulty in developing market-rate multifamily and that spills over into the affordable space too. And if Florida Housing [Finance Corporation] can’t fill that void, then it’s difficult to fill.”

NIMBYism

The “Not in My Backyard” (NIMBY) mentality is a further barrier to growth in affordable development. As populations increase, affordability concerns will only be exacerbated if density is not addressed.

Local incentives, such as changes to land use, are beneficial but not easy to implement. Large-scale projects that require land to be rezoned open up the developer and the local government to community concerns during public hearings. One of the biggest challenges politically is overcoming the NIMBY mentality that resists increased density in neighborhoods not already zoned for it. While some residents may be open to the idea of mixed housing types, such as duplexes next to singlefamily homes, others are less receptive.

“It felt like a developer was just taking the opportunity to use a piece of land that they got for really cheap, without fully understanding what they were trying to plant in that spot.... if you try to just drop something in, it’s like you’re landing a UFO in that neighborhood. It’s not going to go over well, and you’re not going to have an easy time building. You’re going to get resistance.”

Some developers have shared that public feedback can stagnate or stall projects over a small volume of community members with NIMBY mindsets. Effective communication and thoughtful design play crucial roles in easing these fears and encouraging a more accepting attitude toward density, which can include changes in zoning, density bonuses, height restrictions, etc. Development should have an eye toward increasing density while retaining the character of a neighborhood.

Interconnectedness of Affordability

“Policy decision-makers need to be cognizant that they’re all linked together: Transportation, affordable housing, [and] employment need to be thought of in some kind of interdisciplinary conversation.”

The interconnected facets of housing, transportation, and childcare costs are drivers that shift how our workforce makes important choices.

FOR EXAMPLE,

57%

of participants mentioned transportation, without being prompted, as imperative in addressing housing affordability.

48%

of participants directly tied transportation costs and commute times as intrinsically linked to overall well-being.

35%

of the number of participants that shared that childcare costs were an added constraint on families’ budgets. Access to food and quality education were referenced by 23% of respondents.

Solutions that alleviate burdens in one area are likely to have positive correlations across the other categories. Cohesive strategies that address one or more issues simultaneously are needed.

Transportation

As housing costs continue to rise, many spaces. As one participant put it, the decision to move further from the urban core is often about maximizing value—getting more space or better amenities for the same money. However, this displacement introduces new challenges, primarily in the form of extended commute times and inadequate public transportation, which together exacerbate the economic strain on individuals and families. Numerous interviewees also cautioned that longer commutes could translate to qualityof-life considerations such as additional stress and less time spent with loved ones.

“More than 259,000 residents are estimated to commute across Pinellas, Pasco, and Hillsborough County lines for work annually.10

To remain competitive in retaining and attracting talent as a driver for inclusive transportation accessibility must be addressed in our community.

A LACK OF PUBLIC TRANSIT

“The thing that we do the very worst in Tampa Bay is public transportation.”

The Tampa Bay region’s vast geography makes the current county-led systems fall short, with

limited bus routes and no commuter rail lines to connect distant suburbs with urban job centers around the Tampa Bay region.

“When (the) employee draw is from Pinellas, from South Hillsborough, from Pasco, all of a sudden you realize that our transportation gap, or abyss some would argue, leads to workforce access being limited because there’s not a transit alternative, there’s not a rideshare alternative. And in some instances, we had stories of line employees leaving their homes at 2 in the morning to walk to get to their hotel or placement appointment by 5 a.m. to be available for banquet service for early morning conventions or early morning breakfast meetings hosted at our hotels.”

Participants from Pinellas County expressed that they are losing workforce to Pasco County, especially logistics and distribution talent that connects to eastern Hillsborough County and the I-4 Corridor. According to one participant, “Only 23% of residents within the city of Clearwater work there,” and that they are

of jobs to other areas where there’s a lower cost of housing.”

This sentiment is echoed by one representative from Pasco County, who is seeing the migration headed even further north:

10 U.S Census Bureau, OnTheMap Application and LEHD Origin-Destination Employment Statistics (2019)

“We’re losing residents and contributors to our wellbeing and economy here in Pasco because they can’t afford to live. Our job shed has gone to Citrus County because people are forced to live north; 43% of our employed labor force is working in Hillsborough and Pinellas, migrating every day. Pasco has become the job shed housing area for our neighbors to the south. Hernando and Citrus are providing us with the housing to support our indigenous labor force. You’ve got people commuting two hours a day, and their quality of life is impaired.”

However, residents from Hillsborough, Pasco, and Pinellas counties are not just moving to the east or northern counties. Over the last year, Manatee County has seen nearly doubledigit in-migration of young adults compared to Pinellas County, and they are continuing to invest in infrastructure that supports growth from households choosing to relocate.

As one local leader pointed out, the region’s failure to implement light rail or other premium transit solutions has restricted options for many residents. Without significant investment in mass transit, Tampa Bay risks perpetuating a cycle where housing is increasingly out of reach for residents and workforce, not because of cost alone but because of the time and resources required to access it.

“When would you have thought that we’re going to have people commuting two hours to Tampa, right? I mean, that’s Boston. That’s New York. That’s some of those other places, and it may just be that we are one of those places now, and that might be the new norm.”

The lack of public transportation options also has broader economic consequences, including access to talent. This issue has led employers to explore alternative solutions, such as rideshare programs or even purchasing buses to transport employees to and from work. However, these measures are often insufficient to bridge the transportation gap given the vast geography of the tri-county region.

As one stakeholder pointed out, the inability to efficiently move people between where they live and where they work limits the labor pool available to businesses, particularly those located in urban cores like downtown Tampa or St. Petersburg.

A CALL FOR INTEGRATED PLANNING

Ultimately, the narrative emerging from these interviews underscores the need for an integrated approach to housing and transportation planning in the Tampa Bay region. Addressing housing affordability without simultaneously improving transportation infrastructure will only perpetuate the cycle of displacement and extended commutes. Conversely, investing in transportation without considering the location and affordability of housing will limit the effectiveness of these improvements. Residents and workforce do not see municipal boundaries when searching for work or places to live.

“I don’t know if they [the counties] can come together and do a coordinated system. Maybe whatever they do in terms of bus service is something that they could do on a regional basis.”

Stakeholders called for a long-term vision that includes modern, efficient mass transit options, as well as strategic land use planning that encourages the development of housing near transit corridors. This approach would not only alleviate traffic congestion and reduce commute times but also support more sustainable and equitable growth across the region.

TRANSPORTATION-ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT

One potential solution to these intertwined issues is transportation-oriented development (TOD), which aims to create housing near transit hubs, making it easier for residents to access public transportation.

As one participant pointed out, a family with two wage earners can spend up to $20,000 annually or more on car payments, insurance, maintenance, gas, and fuel. The average amount spent by Tampa Bay households on transportation in 2024 is $10,600.11 These costs can be prohibitive when on a limited budget, underscoring the value of linking housing development subsidies to properties constructed near transit lines.

While there has been some movement toward TOD in parts of the region, stakeholders communicated that the lack of a coordinated, regional approach to transit planning is piecemeal and currently does not have a broad impact on the overall transportation landscape.

An interviewee from Hillsborough County discussed their use of TOD bonuses in unincorporated areas of the county below:

“We

put a TOD bonus in an area of the unincorporated county called Centers and Connections. These are corridors that we know the Hillsborough Area Regional Transit Authority (HART) has routes on today, or that have the makings of a good HART route in the future. We want to keep promoting density, including mixed use developments, in those corridors so they are walkable and bikeable. If we can create the right development pattern when HART has more resources, we will have set up routes that will have good ridership.”

11. ESRI Business Analyst, Household Budget Expenditures (2023)

Childcare

The intersection of housing affordability and childcare is becoming increasingly critical as families grapple with difficult choices due to rising costs of living. As housing prices and rents continue to climb, many are forced to choose between more expensive childcare options to retain proximity to work or more affordable options that may be farther from their homes or places of employment.

Several industries shared that impact is evident as employees are reluctant to accept promotions or work overtime because it affects their childcare arrangements, which may rely on forms of subsidized care. This shift towards attaining a better work-life balance and the prohibitive costs of childcare are major factors contributing to this trend. The situation is particularly challenging for parents who rely on pre- and post-school care, as they struggle to balance their work hours with the logistics of getting their children to and from care facilities. One respondent highlighted this challenge, saying, “If we can’t get the affordable housing as quick as we need it, then we need to find ways to subsidize the childcare portion, to allow their parents to get to and from work.”

Discussions are beginning amongst employers about how to provide or expand childcare initiatives. However, providing on-site childcare facilities is a challenge due to space and regulatory requirements. Corporate partnerships, like those with R’Club for drop-in childcare and flexible spending accounts for childcare expenses, are examples of initiatives attempting to ease this burden, but there is a clear need for broader, more accessible solutions.

Workforce Recruitment and Retention Challenges

Housing is fundamentally tied to the success of a robust economy. Without adequate affordable housing for service workers, the entire economic ecosystem is at risk. As one leader succinctly put it, “It doesn’t matter how many businesses we recruit, or how much we invest in retention and expansion opportunities; if we don’t have the employees and workers there, the economy won’t survive.”

“Where people move to is always an indicator where the jobs will go.”

Because the workforce is regional, the need for adequate, middle-income housing is also a regional need. This issue is severely impacting local businesses’ ability to recruit and retain talent across industries, career levels, and wage ranges.

Unsurprisingly, employers have noted particularly high turnover in lower-income, entry-level positions, which are often the hardest to fill and maintain. But increasingly, interviewees expressed concern in the rising trend of middle-income workers rescinding employment acceptance letters once they explore housing opportunities in the region.

Some companies are proactively addressing these challenges by focusing on employee retention and fostering a strong workplace

culture. As one leader explained, “Intervention is always more expensive and less effective. Prevention is always more effective and less expensive.”

“We hired a person just dedicated to employee rewards, so that we’re always at kind of the forefront of what we should be doing, what employees want, so that we can try to fight against that attrition battle.”

Even companies that offer competitive wages are finding it difficult to retain employees when the cost of living outpaces earnings. As one participant noted, “When you can afford to stay, the culture in an organization makes a difference. But if you are earning below $75,000, it’s nothing. It’s not that you don’t care, or you don’t love the culture. It’s just that your household needs outweigh your desires.”

Even more surprisingly, higher level roles who were not typically swayed as much by rising costs, often still seek amenities which require a location with an unfavorable commute, or without proximity to good schools, leading to a growing difficulty in recruiting for these positions.

“As

we make offers, we start to see candidates who are saying, “Can I have 24 to 48 hours just to review? Because I’m still looking at housing opportunities and understanding…” the counters that we’re getting are like “you know (it’s) going to be difficult for me to live in Tampa. Can you offer a bonus, or can you increase the salary?”

“Florida is not (considered) an enhanced market, despite being close to California in context. We are getting close to what we are seeing in California.” And another employer noted, “We’ve actually had to pay more (in Tampa) than we pay in South Florida.”

Additionally, as the desires and priorities of the younger workforce are shifting, there is a growing emphasis on work-life balance. This trend makes it challenging to recruit young talent with the prospect of earning “enough” with additional hours.

Employers are seeking solutions to many interconnected issues related to workforce recruitment and retention, which ultimately impacts their bottom line.

To read recruitment and retention efforts currently being deployed by our interviewees, please view Supplement A at the end of the report.

Housing Focused Solutions

Solving the housing affordability crisis requires more than just financial resources and policy changes; it demands a shift in mindset, relationships, and a collective bias towards the urgency of action. These intangible elements are crucial in creating an environment where solutions can be effectively implemented. At the heart of any successful initiative is the strength of regional relationships among stakeholders. The willingness to collaborate, the desire to see change, and a shared commitment to act are foundational. As one stakeholder put it, “We’re not going to debate something for six years and never really get anything done. We’re going to make our best plan, get it on the street, and then make tweaks if we must. But let’s get things done.” This proactive attitude is essential for progress.

“This problem is going to be solved by intellect, not dollars. Dollars come after the intellect. But we’re going to have to have a will for people to do this - that’s what I call intellect.”

An Appetite for Regional Collaboration

Housing must be viewed through a strategic lens that considers what the community will look like in 10, 20, or 30 years. This longterm vision requires regional collaboration, as the challenges and solutions related to housing, infrastructure, and our workforce are interconnected across county lines.

Numerous efforts for greater collaboration have been made in our region over the past two decades. However, these attempts have often been hindered, in part, by the complex politics of the area. Despite these challenges, there is a growing recognition that operating regionally is essential, particularly in addressing the housing affordability crisis, and that our success depends on the mindset of each leader who enters the collaboration.

“I think that’s the key to any successful partnership. You don’t go in with your hand out. You go in with what you can give.”

When asked whether the housing affordability crisis was a local or regional issue, there was strong consensus that it is not unique to each county or even to just our region, but rather a problem that is reflected across the nation. When asked the question, “Do you think regional collaboration is necessary for addressing the crisis?”

91.94%

of participants responded ‘yes’ or ‘yes’ with some nuances around local identity. ‘Yes, with nuances’ responses were largely tied to supporting the importance of regional collaboration while ensuring the unique factors of each local area were also taken into consideration.

Stakeholders also emphasized the value of creating centralized repositories of information and templated models for enabling small-unit dwellings within single-family areas. Such resources could streamline processes for local governments, allowing them to adapt existing models to their codes rather than starting from scratch. This could lead to significant efficiencies and more rapid implementation of housing solutions.

Existing Collaborative Efforts and Opportunities

Expanding existing collaborative efforts within specific industries and housing departments across different cities and municipalities is a tremendous area of opportunity for our region. For instance, colleagues from the three counties mentioned communicating regularly with their counterparts across county lines. As one local government interview participant noted, “Part of my professional public responsibility is to share and collaborate. And so that’s just part of my planning practice to do that.”

While each county has its unique regulations, zoning laws, and permitting processes, there is a consensus that regional cooperation could help streamline some of these policies, where they best meet both local and regional priorities. Convening regular workshops among the Board of County Commissioners, city planners, and community development teams from different counties and municipalities could foster communication and learning, allowing for more unified approaches to our housing challenges.

“We shouldn’t all be reinventing the wheel and rewriting our own land development regulations from scratch. We each have a piece and need to pull those pieces together. We should do that regionally as well.”

However, collaboration must be approached tactfully, respecting the complexities and autonomy of each municipality. Collaboration must be multi-sector, regional, and be mindful of ways to incorporate wrap-around services into the planning process. Housing developers mentioned the need to coordinate between city and county governments within a given jurisdiction.

Will a Regional Housing Leader Please Stand Up?

Several participants highlighted the need for well-defined leadership to galvanize regional collaboration and change. Interviewees showcased several innovative efforts from Pinellas County, including a nod to the Pinellas Housing Compact. Participants also highlighted individual champions who were able to enact great changes within their local vicinity through their leadership, yet a regional champion has not yet been identified.

“The thing that strikes me the most is we don’t really have an authority on this topic, in our state or in our region. You’ve got all these well-intentioned organizations and government partners that are all kind of doing it on their own, and sometimes they come together under the Tampa Bay Partnership, or United Way or others, to share what they’re doing. And that’s great, but there’s no regional strategy around this, right? They’re micro strategies based on what that municipality wants to do and it’s really hard to turn this around when there’s no real regional coordination.”

The Importance of PublicPrivate Partnerships

Public-private partnerships are the lynchpin in making housing developments economically viable by acquiring land and securing subsidies. This was one of the biggest findings from the interviews.

One participant shared that successful communities require the collaborative action of three distinct bodies: non-profit organizations, the business community, and government entities. In their example, they felt that:

• Non-profit groups are responsible for thoughtfully providing essential services and stepping into gaps where needed.

• Businesses, particularly those with significant profits, must take greater responsibility for ensuring the well-being of their employees and customers by investing in the communities they serve.

• Government needs to implement policies promoting holistic solutions that consider how housing interconnects with transportation, schools, and childcare programming.

EXAMPLES OF PUBLIC-PRIVATE PARTNERSHIPS

Community Redevelopment Areas (CRAs) CRAs offer tangible examples of public-private partnership. For example, in East Tampa, a CRA is working with the Black Business Investment Fund to finance new builds for homeowners with existing land and facilitating the logistics for mortgage repayment that includes prospective rental income from the development. This kind of partnership exemplifies how public and private entities can unite to address housing needs at a community level.

Moffitt Cancer Center Campus in Pasco County

The Moffitt Cancer Center’s upcoming campus in Pasco County is set to create approximately 15,000 jobs, dramatically reshaping the region’s workforce landscape. This development is more than just an employment center; it’s a carefully strategized integration of workforce, education, and residential planning. The Pasco Economic Development Council (EDC) has been working closely with educational institutions to scale programs in artificial intelligence, computer science, robotics, and engineering entrepreneurship, all aimed at preparing a future workforce for Moffitt’s needs. The partnership between Moffitt and Pasco-Hernando State College to establish a biomedical program is particularly noteworthy, ensuring a pipeline of skilled professionals.

What makes Moffitt’s approach unique is its foresight in locating this massive employment hub adjacent to a residential area that is already under development. This strategic positioning is enhanced by the Ridge Road extension, a critical infrastructure project. The careful planning extends to transportation, with the campus being accessible via main arteries, facilitating

easy commutes for both local residents and those flying into the region.

Furthermore, Moffitt has envisioned a largescale, mixed-use planned urban development (MPUD) that not only provides space for its own facilities but also for partners in research and academia. This approach prevents the common issue of research centers being encroached upon by non-compatible developments. The inclusion of the Angeline STEM school within the MPUD is another strategic move, offering employees the convenience of quality education for their children within close proximity to their workplace. This alignment of employment, education, and residential facilities makes the Moffitt campus a model for future developments in the region.

Pinellas County Schools

Pinellas County Schools has embarked on an innovative initiative to provide affordable housing options for school board employees. Recognizing that many school-owned properties are unsuitable for new school construction due to their size, the district has explored alternative uses for these parcels, such as developing affordable housing. For example, a piece of property in Clearwater that is less than an acre in size is being considered for such development. This initiative is not just about providing housing; it’s about leveraging community partnerships to achieve broader goals.

The district has already been approached by organizations like Habitat for Humanity and Blue Sky Communities, who are expressing interest in collaborating on these projects. The Pinellas Education Foundation, an independent entity supporting public schools, has been instrumental in this process, providing expertise and potentially exploring relocation bonuses

as additional incentives for employees. The involvement of experienced developers, such as the Sembler Corporation, has been crucial in guiding the district through the complexities of workforce housing development.

This initiative is a model of how public entities can creatively utilize their assets to address housing challenges, particularly for employees who are essential to the community’s well-being.

There is also significant potential when for-profit entities partner with large non-profits and housing authorities. For instance, the State of Florida incentivizes affordable housing developers to partner with non-profits by offering better financing deals, such as reduced interest rates through programs such as the State Apartment Incentive Land program (SAIL). By creating a public-private partnership, interest rates for development can drop as low as one percent. This also may open the door for local funding available to non-profit partners, such as forgivable grants.

This model has been successfully implemented in large-scale redevelopment projects, such as the collaboration between Related Group and the Tampa Housing Authority, which transformed deteriorating properties like the Mary McLeod Bethune apartments into fully refurbished housing units for seniors at subsidized rates.

Additionally, innovative collaborations like those between a local non-profit and private industry partner highlight the potential for supporting employees through financial wellness and housing navigator tools, which help workers access housing resources. These examples underscore the importance and effectiveness of public-private partnerships in addressing the housing affordability crisis.

Strategies to Increase Housing Supply

Adaptive Reuse represents a strategic opportunity to address housing shortages by converting nontraditional properties (such as malls in decline) into residential units or repurposing underutilized land. This approach involves transforming underutilized commercial, educational, or faith-based properties into affordable housing. Adaptive reuse can also extend to converting older market-rate units into restricted affordable housing, which can be particularly effective in maintaining community stability and ensuring housing affordability. As urban landscapes evolve and the demand for different types of space shifts, adaptive reuse offers a flexible solution to repurpose existing buildings that might otherwise fall into disuse.

“I have property owners calling me right now, saying, ‘Hey, I own this property. It’s not restricted, but it’s 50 years old... I need to do some renovations. Would the City be willing to provide some funding toward those renovations in exchange for some affordable restriction?”

Through adaptive reuse, communities can harness the potential of underutilized properties to address critical housing needs while preserving the architectural heritage and reducing the environmental impact of new construction.

REPURPOSING OFFICE SPACE

Since the COVID-19 pandemic, many commercial spaces, particularly office buildings, have seen reduced use, with employees only working on-site a few days a week. On one hand, this shift presents an opportunity to downsize the commercial footprint while repurposing portions of these spaces for residential use, childcare or other wrap around services which could lessen cost of living for employees. On the other hand, some participants cautioned that transitioning commercial and industrial land into residential areas could cause areas to lose employment centers.

ZONING REGULATIONS

Furthermore, reimagining zoning regulations and reducing unnecessary requirements can make housing development faster and more feasible. Questions should be asked about whether zones need to be exclusive, whether large setbacks

are necessary and relevant in the face of our population growth, and if the current parking requirements are justified.

“Zoning and land use play a big role. We often call it the Commonsense Committee around here, where we run into an issue in a municipality, and it’s usually a zoning that everyone looks at and agrees it makes sense, but the process to get there is six months at best.”

For example, one participant explained how in unincorporated Palm Beach County, outdated parking requirements stalled a senior affordable housing project until a traffic study demonstrated that fewer parking spaces were needed. Understanding the local population and the economic reality of our time is imperative. Updating these codes to reflect current needs now could remove barriers to development and allow for more efficient use of space down the road, as well as a faster time horizon to construction.

“We should encourage our central business district to embrace density, and to get a little bit more aggressive with parking reductions. You know we’re spending between $30-$35,000 dollars for every parking space we’re building. We should be focused more so on putting people in homes than putting cars in slots.”

The City of St. Petersburg has made significant changes to its zoning requirements, including reduced parking mandates for units under 750 square feet. This shift has had a notable impact on development costs, as parking can be one of the most expensive components of a project, with costs ranging from $7,500 for surface parking to $30,000 for podium parking (a type of parking garage). By lowering these requirements, the City has incentivized the construction of smaller, more affordable units, which helps increase housing stock without the need for direct financial subsidies. The City has also established a new zoning category to allow a variety of housing types with up to four units on a standard lot along the City’s major corridors.

A SHIFT TO MORE MODEST HOMES COULD LOWER COSTS

Another pathway to increase supply is through density. For example, by revising development regulations, counties and municipalities can accommodate smaller, more flexible housing units such as modular units, container homes, and smaller lot subdivisions, which can be built more quickly and at lower costs. These approaches, particularly when applied to infill development and multifamily projects, allow for more efficient use of space and help create economies of scale. Subdividing larger lots to accommodate more housing units not only makes the best use of available land but also supports the development of more cohesive and affordable communities.

FACILITATE THE CREATION OF ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS (ADUS)

Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) present another opportunity to increase density without

significantly altering neighborhood character. ADUs have gained traction because they can be integrated into existing neighborhoods, offering flexible housing options that are especially beneficial for seniors who need to live close to family and young professionals who cannot afford housing options on a starting salary. These smaller units, often around 580 square feet, are an affordable and practical solution for increasing density.

“We really could have some relief when it comes to ADUs and zoning and where they can be built. It serves two purposes. You can put your parents in there, or if you don’t have parents and you want to rent it out, it brings rental [income] to that household, which helps them in today’s economy… then you have somebody that is being housed.”

SLIDING SCALE INTEREST LOANS

Stakeholders discussed the potential of offering sliding scale or reduced low-interest loans to developers, especially small-scale ones, as an incentive to build affordable housing. Despite some skepticism about the feasibility of smallscale developments like triplexes or quadplexes, there is an argument to be made for supporting small developers who can creatively utilize smaller parcels of land. This could help address the land shortage in certain municipalities.

LAND BANKING

Land banking and strategic land purchases are also critical to maintaining an affordable supply of housing. For instance, the Pinellas County Commission’s creation of a local trust fund in the mid-2000s highlights the importance of intentional land acquisition for future housing needs.

Land banking strategies can be linked to municipal planning projects to ensure communities are thoughtfully planned around access to schools, bus stops, and within proximity to grocery stores. This helps to scale livability and what one participant called “quality wellness.”

Pathways to Protect and Extend Existing Supply

EXTEND LURA

Preserving existing affordable housing, particularly naturally occurring affordable housing (NOAH), is a critical strategy in maintaining the supply of affordable units in the face of increasing development pressures.

One effective approach is the use of Land Use Rental Agreements (LURAs) combined with rehabilitation financing from county governments. By offering favorable financing terms for property rehabilitation, counties can incentivize developers to extend the lifespan of rent-controlled and affordable units, ensuring they remain accessible to low-income residents for longer periods.

For units protected under affordability restrictions, programs are being developed to incentivize property owners to extend existing affordability restrictions and convert marketrate units to affordable ones. This is a proactive approach to preserving affordable housing stock, which is often more cost-effective than building new units. For instance, with the same amount of funding needed to construct a single new home, organizations can repair multiple existing homes, keeping several families housed and stabilizing communities.

NOAH

A significant portion of Naturally Occurring Affordable Housing (NOAH) includes older rental buildings and mobile home parks, which play a vital role in housing extremely lowincome individuals. However, mobile home parks are highly vulnerable, especially since most are owned by entities outside the state, and many operate on a lot-rent-only model where tenants do not own the land their homes sit on. This makes them particularly susceptible to redevelopment, which could displace large numbers of residents. While mobile home parks are not without their critics due to their vulnerability to severe weather events, they represent one of the most prevalent forms of affordable housing for lowincome populations outside of government voucher systems.

Continued (and increased) funding to support non-profit organizations that work with residents to repair and maintain older homes and buildings is critical. Their intermediary support improves the safety and lifespan of existing residences.

The Role of Government

Participants were asked, “What can the government do to help move the needle on housing affordability issues?” Responses encompassed both expanding the accessibility of existing programs and introducing innovative regulatory reforms to boost the supply of affordable housing.

RECOMMEND TAX REFERENDUMS TO SUPPORT HOUSING

In Pinellas County, the “Penny for Pinellas” program is a voter-approved, one-cent sales tax that has been instrumental in funding a wide range of infrastructure and community projects throughout Pinellas County since its inception in 1990. The revenue generated by this tax is allocated to essential public services and improvements, including roadways, bridges, public safety facilities, parks, and affordable housing initiatives. By providing a consistent and reliable source of local funding, the Penny for Pinellas program has enabled the County to invest in long-term capital projects without relying solely on state or federal funding, thereby enhancing the overall quality of life for its residents.

RETHINKING HOUSING CHOICE VOUCHER PROGRAM

The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) plays a crucial role in distributing federal dollars to municipalities and counties, primarily through programs like Housing Choice Voucher Program (Section 8). While these vouchers can be transferred across county lines through portability, they typically remain within

the issuing county. This localized funding model helps address housing needs within specific areas, but it also imposes certain restrictions that can limit broader flexibility and impact.

Additionally, despite the availability of housing vouchers, systemic barriers often prevent their effective use. For example, several stakeholders representing local governments shared that many voucher recipients end up returning them because few landlords are willing to accept them. This is an area ripe for innovative solutions. Strategies must be developed to overcome these barriers and ensure that every voucher fulfills its purpose.

“We have a choice: we can either subsidize the end user, or we could subsidize the developer in today’s market. With how expensive everything is, we frequently have to do both.”

When it comes to subsidies, layering multiple funding sources—such as government subsidies, bonds, and private financing—is essential to maximize impact to address the broader housing crisis.

Many residents point to the importance of expanding programs like the Low-Income Housing Tax Credit and the Housing Choice Voucher program, which currently targets households earning low or very low incomes. Such expansions could include reimaging these critical federal and state programs towards broader eligibility

criteria to accommodate a wider range of income levels, reflecting the actual economic pressures faced by residents.

EXPAND LIHTC PROGRAM

Participants in the study emphasized the importance of programs like the Low-Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) as important pathways to funding, claiming they facilitate the greatest creation of new construction. Distributed by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and managed by the Florida Housing Finance Corporation, the LIHTC program allows developers to receive tax credits in exchange for setting aside units for households earning below a certain income threshold. They are often more expensive due to stringent quality standards from the Florida Housing Finance Corporation (FHFC), requiring concrete block construction and green-certified buildings. However, as a benefit, these high standards mean that developments financed by LIHTC are constructed to higher quality standards than many market-rate developments, and this eases the process through local government.

LIHTC supports the construction and rehabilitation of low and very low-income rental housing units by subsidizing either 30 percent (at the 4 percent tax credit) or 70 percent (at the 9 percent tax credit) of units in a development. Once a project is approved, community development lenders purchase tax credits at around $0.90 on the dollar, as well as tax-exempt bonds. Those funds are then lent to developers as loans with very favorable terms. Given the highly competitive process for LIHTC funding, existing allowances are insufficient to meet demand.

PRESERVE SADOWSKI ACT FUNDING FOR HOUSING

State funding sources for affordable housing, which fall under the umbrella of the Sadowski Act, such as the State Housing Initiatives Partnership (SHIP) program and the State Apartment Incentive Loan (SAIL) program, play a critical role in supporting housing development. SHIP provides funding to local governments to incentivize partnerships to produce and preserve homeownership opportunities and multifamily housing, but it comes with various restrictions that can complicate their use. SHIP requires funds to be allocated across several “buckets,” including reserving 30% of funds for very lowincome households (up to 50% AMI) and another 30% for low-income households (up to 80% AMI). While SHIP may help fund emergency repairs, rehabilitations, down payment assistance, and more, the need almost always exceeds the means. SAIL offers low-interest loans (typically set at 1%) to help bridge financing gaps, making it easier for developers to construct affordable units for very low-income families.

EXPAND FUNDING OR REFOCUS THE HOMETOWN HEROES PROGRAM

The Hometown Heroes Program was designed to support frontline workers by offering housing assistance. It was initially focused on a targeted group but was later expanded to include a broader population. While the expansion allowed more people to benefit, it also diluted the program’s impact. The demand was so high that funds were quickly exhausted, making it difficult for many intended beneficiaries, such as essential workers, to access the support they needed. There is a growing sentiment that the program

should return to its roots, focusing more on those frontline heroes who are vital to the community’s functioning, or that funding should be increased to support this critical workforce.

REIMAGINE HOMEOWNERSHIP STRUCTURES

Reimagining homeownership structures could be a potential game-changer. One stakeholder suggested exploring alternative ownership models, such as trusts or shared ownership between the government, individuals, and employers. This could fundamentally shift the way homes are bought and owned, providing new opportunities for investment and reducing the barriers to homeownership for many.

STAKEHOLDER SENTIMENTS

1

2

“On the 9% tax credit program, typically Hillsborough County, the large counties, which would be Hillsborough and Pinellas, only get one deal a year. So, we’re talking about 80 or 90 units a year. And the medium counties, for example, in your market, Sarasota, Manatee, Pasco, Hernando, even Citrus, won’t even get a deal a year. It’s a competitive process, but it’s entirely possible that those counties may not get a deal at all, or once a year, and of course, the demand far exceeds supply.”

4

3

“We could do 20 deals a year in Hillsborough County, we could do 20 deals a year in Pinellas, but the resources are not there.”

“The tax credit program is absolutely the best tool that we must deliver instant equity into affordable housing projects, but it’s only available at 80% AMI and below. So, what is very, very difficult to produce is the workforce housing strata in the 80 to 120% AMI range.”

5

“Frankly, with the inflation that we’ve seen..., the amount of housing that’s being produced by that tax credit program is going down. The amount of credits that are available are not keeping up with the pace of inflation. So, for the same subsidy, you’re basically getting fewer, fewer and fewer units built. There’s probably much more market-rate housing that’s being built, far more market-rate housing than affordable.”

“Although $200 million over ten years may seem substantial, the reality is that, with subsidies exceeding $100,000 per unit, this amount barely makes a dent in the growing need. To truly address the housing shortage, it is imperative to involve not just non-profits but also large-scale production home builders and multifamily developers to achieve the scale required to meet demand.”

LIVE LOCAL ACT

Initiatives like the Live Local Act mandate that local governments catalog and publish lists of surplus land online, making these resources more transparent and accessible for housing development. Some participants raised a question about transparency regarding available land reporting and how accuracy could have a transformative impact on potential development partnerships. Greater emphasis on prioritizing surplus land for affordable housing could significantly reduce the cost of development and ensure longterm affordability.

MORE ABOUT THE LIVE LOCAL ACT

The Live Local Act was introduced to help address gaps in the market, particularly the 80-120% Area Median Income (AMI) range—a group that has traditionally been underserved by existing affordable housing programs.

“In Tampa, I think the density

is 100 units an acre under Live Local,

so that’s

high.

I think

City

[of St. Petersburg]’s

82 units an acre which is great. So, you can not only take an industrial piece of property, and you can transform it with Live Local, which you can do a relatively high density on it,

which is really helpful.”

While there are potential benefits through real estate tax abatements, zoning density bonuses, and other incentives, the Act’s impact on affordability remains uncertain. For instance, the rents capped at 120% AMI under the Live Local Act often do not appear affordable to many. One participant shared that “one-bedroom units may rent for around $2,000 per month, with two- and three-bedroom units at $2,400 and $2,800, respectively.” As of September 2024, the average rent in Tampa for a one-bedroom apartment is $1,600,12 and for two bedrooms is $1,823.13 These rates are close to market

12. Tampa, FL Rental market. Average Rental Price in Tampa, FL & Market Trends | Zillow Rental Manager. (n.d.). https://www.zillow.com/rentalmanager/market-trends/tampa-fl/?bedrooms=1 13. Tampa, FL Rental market. Average Rental Price in Tampa, FL & Market Trends | Zillow Rental Manager. (n.d.). https://www.zillow.com/rentalmanager/market-trends/tampa-fl/?bedrooms=2

levels in some areas, raising concerns about whether what is being built is actually what is needed to move the needle on this issue.

Further, the Live Local Act’s effectiveness is hampered by limitations on its incentives, such as mandatory parking reductions that are difficult to qualify for unless a development is near a major transit hub.

Additionally, the Act’s preemption of local laws has sparked debate, with critics arguing that it misses key opportunities to address long-term challenges, such as the ongoing burden of property taxes on developers. Without specific tax breaks or funding support, the Act may fall short in significantly boosting the production of workforce housing.

In some counties, there has been significant pushback against the Live Local Act, particularly concerning its provisions allowing residential development on industrial land. Local stakeholders argue that this could undermine efforts to build a strong industrial base, which is crucial for job creation and economic development. The concern is that converting industrial land to residential use, especially under the tax abatements provided by the Live Local Act, could exacerbate financial pressures on the county. Residential developments typically generate less tax revenue than they cost in services, and without a balanced industrial base, the tax burden could shift more heavily onto residents, driving up costs of living and potentially leading to population decline.

Overall, while the Live Local Act presents some innovative solutions for increasing housing supply, its implementation has raised concerns about its long-term effectiveness and

the unintended consequences it may have on local economies and community development. The Act’s allowance for higher AMI ranges and its provisions for industrial land use have sparked debate about whether it truly serves the populations most in need and whether it could lead to adverse outcomes, such as the creation of residential areas lacking essential services and infrastructure.

LESSEN RESTRICTIONS FOR TAX INCREMENT FINANCING (TIF)

TIF dollars, managed by Community Redevelopment Agencies (CRA), represent another critical funding source for housing development. These funds are derived from the increase in property tax revenue within a designated area.

“TIF is funded by increments. For example, if a property is valued at $100, and it increased to $150, that $50 increment is what we keep in the CRA.”

While TIF dollars can be used to incentivize developers to include affordable and workforce housing within CRA boundaries, they come with strict limitations on how they can be utilized. In Hillsborough County, for instance, TIF funds are restricted by an agreement between the County and the City of Tampa, which dictates their use across eight different defined redevelopment areas. Additionally, it should be explored if there are opportunities to expand CRA classification to other concentrated areas of need.

PROVIDE INSURANCE, IMPACT FEE, AND PROPERTY TAX SUBSIDIES

Suggestions from participants also encompass fiscal strategies such as offering insurance and property tax subsidies for those below certain income thresholds, which could alleviate some of the financial strains on homeowners.

The subsidization of impact fees for affordable developments can help ensure more of these projects can afford to be built. One participant noted that “Per home, it’s not a lot of dollars, but every dollar counts for us. We’re building a 23 [affordable] home subdivision in Brandon. We’re working on getting the infrastructure bids and everything to get that going, and we estimate that impact fee relief that got taken away is probably about a $200,000 hit for our organization.”

“That’s where we’re talking about tax credits and subsidies, because the thing is when we give away our tax revenue, that’s in essence charity. It’s like making a donation. We don’t need to make a donation to build a $350,000 house; we just need to make sure there are places to build it. But to build something for $100,000, subsidies are needed to incentivize construction because the market requires it.”

Developers must stack funding to make projects viable, and counties often create financing deals using both federal and state resources. For example, one county shared that they received approximately $7 million per year in Community Development Block Grants (CDBG), which they stacked with $4 million from the HOME Partnership Initiative and $500,000 from Emergency Solutions Grants (ESG) to support services for unhoused residents.

“I think we certainly don’t have enough money for the needs that we have. That is what keeps us up at night. If we really look at addressing the need, we’re in the billions, not millions. We don’t have enough money, and we certainly don’t have enough land.”

CREATE GOVERNANCE FOR SHORT TERM RENTALS

Competition for homes is not only amongst individual people, investors, like private equity firms, are also seeking to purchase properties to use as short-term rentals. This scenario further depletes supply and drives up prices for residences. While overarchingly, this competition is seen as an obstacle, some participants did share that investment companies have increased the volume of rental properties available.

SHOULD SHORT TERM RENTALS BE LEGISLATED?

Short-term rentals are gaining attention, particularly as Florida continues to be an attractive tourist destination, but local governments are limited in their ability to regulate them due to state preemptions.

Affordable housing remains scarce although there are tens of thousands of vacant homes throughout the counties. Representatives from Pinellas shared that this may be partly due to a high volume of investment properties and the prevalence of second homes leading to limited supply and underutilization of properties.

Visitors provide important tax revenues for the area, but a balance must be found between the demand for short-term rentals and the need for affordable housing for our local workforce.

One of the participants shared this anecdote about the relationships and inter-reliance of neighborhoods:

“Their blocks are how they assimilate. When Mary moves into the neighborhood with her three kids, she creates relationships. Now she has Cynthia, who watches her kids when she goes to the grocery store. She has Daryl, who has a car.” The interviewee goes on to explain that the interconnectedness of the neighborhoods creates a safe space full of social capital and that when affordability constraints force these same households to move to a new area, they lose those essential relational supports that helped the household to function.

“But dial it down to a single-family home next door... people used to be a part of our community. But now it is a rental, and now a rental car rolls up and people pour in and then they are gone next weekend. And the owner’s probably making twice as much money. “

ADDITIONAL REQUESTS DIRECTLY FROM RESIDENTS

Participants felt branches of government could be influential in increasing access to financial education in public schools, expanding homebuying resources, capping interest rates, and providing tax or insurance relief.

Families that participated in the listening sessions also expressed they felt “there is a disconnect between upper government and us” which meant policymakers did not truly understand the financial pressures or obstacles faced by many working citizens. They offered up a request that government officials “walk a month or two in their shoes.” This could be synthesized through a budget exercise and/or with additional conversations with those navigating these obstacles.

The Role of Employers

The private sector has a critical role to play in addressing these challenges as well, as solutions originating from within companies can be more flexible and less encumbered by political and bureaucratic restraints than those driven by government initiatives. Furthermore, there is untapped potential within organizations to leverage their internal talent for initiatives traditionally expected to be government-led.

The business community’s engagement in solving the housing crisis will involve a multifaceted, collaborative approach, including advocacy and policy work, funding solutions, direct and indirect employee support, development, and stronger public-private partnerships.

60% of participants identified publicprivate partnerships as the greatest role the business community can play.

ADVOCACY

The business community serves as a powerful aggregator of stakeholder feedback. Leaders in this realm provide a valuable piece of the puzzle because they are at the intersection of critical information that makes them privy to the needs of residents (their employees), the economic market, and often government officials.

“If you came up with a top three housing priorities for Florida in 2025, and another top three in 2026, and use the political clout to push legislators to actually do something, that could be a real game changer in Tampa Bay, and also ripple all across the State.”

It is important to consider long-term project alignment among the highest levels of leadership within a region. Initiatives that benefit the community are sometimes lost when leadership changes occur because funds are rerouted to different priorities. However, elected officials are bound to the interests of their local constituents and may need continual encouragement and incentives from the business community to engage in regional collaboration. Business leaders are particularly well-poised to advocate on behalf of their workforce with elected officials, with

22.92% of participants indicating advocacy as a matjor role for the business sector.

“I’d like to see the Bay Area Legislative Delegation get behind it and make profound policy changes at the state level that can provide funding support, particularly at the extremely low-income level, that 30%, and at that workforce housing level, because we can’t subsidize enough.”

HELPING TO MITIGATE THE EVICTION CRISIS

The issue of foreclosure was another area ripe for creative solutions. The best-case scenario is to keep families and individuals housed, but foreclosures continue to occur across the region.

One participant pointed out the paradox where banks foreclose on homes, evict families, and then sell the homes at a lower price than what was owed—often at a cost the evicted families could have afforded.

This raises the question of whether there could be an intermediary step that allows families to stay in their homes by working with banks to reduce their financial return to a capped minimum, provided certain qualifiers are met.

Addressing the inefficiencies and delays of programmatic support can also deescalate crises. As one interviewee shared, by the time a household is approved for support it “may be six months down the line and by then rent is past due and water is turned off.”

“The fact is, if someone loses their home and becomes homeless. It’s expensive for everyone: absolutely for the tenant, probably for the landlord, for city services. And so, in a way, if you can help someone pay their rent that one month when they’re between jobs you could save everyone. Maybe the rent is $1,100, and you’ve just saved $11,000 by keeping them housed. So, I think some sort of last resort emergency rental assistance should be part of what we do at the local level.”

Keeping people affordably housed is not only good social policy but also good economic policy.

Getting into Development

ENGAGE IN AVAILABLE TAX INCENTIVE PROGRAMS RELATED TO HOUSING DEVELOPMENT

Initiatives such as the Community Contribution Tax Credit Program (CCTCP) provide businesses with tax incentives to support eligible housing or community development projects. Businesses that sponsor development can receive a tax credit of “up to 50 percent of the value of the donation.”14 One participant shared that the CCTCP program is often used in partnership with Habitat for Humanity homes. This is a low-risk, high-reward process that increases affordable pathways to homeownership and strengthens the community.

PROVIDE LAND OR DEVELOPMENT RESOURCES FOR WORKFORCE HOUSING

Another area of opportunity is for businesses to explore opportunities to contribute land to development, with 20.83% of participants indicating business-owned land as an opportunity for development. This includes considering how land already owned by businesses could be re-developed into housing, acknowledging a potential trade-off in immediate financial gains for long-term workforce stability. Additional consideration should be given to the pros and cons of creating a homogenous housing block of workforce housing instead of naturally occurring diversity in other housing situations.

14. Community contribution tax credit programfloridajobs.org. (n.d.). https://floridajobs.org/ business-growth-and-partnerships/for-businessesand-entrepreneurs/business-resource/communitycontribution-tax-credit-program

“Amazon has built some housing. Disney has built some housing. It’s great, but we want diversity. So, if Amazon builds housing and all of their workers live in one neighborhood, we haven’t really done enough for the entire area by having that diversity, having people, having those options to live wherever. So that’s why I like the idea of assisting them to buy what they want, where they want.”

ECONOMIES OF SCALE

Employers could also assist with negotiating volume discounts on materials needed for housing construction projects, lowering costs for developers and, ultimately, for homebuyers or renters. A partnership of employers could lead to scale cost reductions where smaller, local developers could benefit.

Exploring Innovative Financing Models

There is a great need for additional funding around residential construction, and 60.42% of participants, when asked how the business community could help, mentioned funding as the number one tool. However, as one participant shared, more players are needed at the table, “I feel like we tapped the same few philanthropic arms in Tampa Bay, and we don’t have a lot of (the) larger corporations that are willing to match or to help provide funding to help solve the problem.”

They felt this differed from areas like New York, Atlanta, and Boston where it is more common to have visibility from large companies that incorporate social change into their mission and contribute positive change. Leadership from the business community around housing strategies, including thought leadership, was mentioned by 22.92% of participants.

“Developers don’t really think that the business community will acquire or provide land or help promote new incentives. There is a perception that all they can give is money.”

More pointedly, beyond direct financial contributions there is a capacity for innovation. Interview participants had many recommendations of ways the business community could galvanize to help fund housing affordability solutions.

• Financial Contributions and Tax Options: Companies are advantageously positioned to facilitate the construction of workforce housing. For example, in developing a fund to promote affordable housing initiatives, a business tax could be an important funding mechanism that may also be supported by tax incentives.

“I think that that would really be a big help because it is businesses investing in their community the best way possible. But then putting the dollars in the hands of the folks who can get the affordable housing done, and it really benefits the businesses because it’s keeping their employees local and being able to live, work, and play here.”

• Shared Impact Funds: Inspired by models in Washington, D.C., Nashville, Charlotte, and Seattle, where businesses like Amazon have contributed to large-scale community funds, Tampa Bay’s business community could create a similar shared impact fund. This would pool resources from various corporate entities to invest specifically in local housing projects, amplifying the impact through collective action.

• Lending Consortium: An innovative model came from Miami-Dade County, which has “a consortium of business leaders to address affordable housing.” One of the most tangible outcomes from that was a lending consortium, and the different financial institutions banded together to make capital available for affordable housing development.

Direct Employee Support: Several participants identified additional ways in which employers can support their workforce in the face of escalating housing costs. Employers are uniquely positioned to assist their workforce with housing stability through their benefits and resource offerings. This can be achieved through several strategies:

· Employee Housing Benefits: Business leaders could partner with local housing providers to negotiate rental discounts near offices. Integrating housing benefits into standard employee benefits packages can help remove the stigma associated with seeking help, making it a normalized part of employee welfare.

Providing Housing Support for Employees Other Holistic Supports

· Education and Resource Awareness: Businesses should commit to educating their workforce about available housing resources and actively engage with organizations like United Way and Habitat for Humanity to ensure that employees understand how to access resources.

· Developing new financial instruments: Products such as housing investment funds similar to 401(k)s, where employers contribute towards employees’ housing needs, could revolutionize how workers access and afford housing.

· Buy Down Options: As a whole, private industry could work with lenders to consider supporting buy-down options as their employees apply for mortgages. In lieu of an

annual bonus, or a sign-on fee, a buy-down structure could greatly reduce the financial burden of existing interest rates, which grew to over 7% for a 30-year mortgage in 2024.

· Deferred Loans: It was also proposed that employers could provide deferred loans to help employees purchase homes, with the option of recouping that investment through equity or forgiving the loan after a set period. This approach not only stabilizes employees’ housing situations but also aligns their financial interests with those of their employers, potentially fostering greater loyalty and reducing the need for frequent raises to keep up with rising costs of living.

• Wrap-Around Services: Businesses can amplify employees’ awareness of and access to resources and programs that indirectly impact housing stability, such as food security, childcare, utility assistance, and public transit solutions.

“We don’t ever have anybody that walks up to us and says, Hey, I’m food insecure. Folks come to us and say I am in a difficult circumstance. I have a variety of different pressures in my life. I must have food right now.”

• Transportation Flex Spending Accounts (TFSA): Since housing expenditures go hand-in-hand with transportation expenditures, employers could also work to lessen transportation costs by providing TFSAs. This is an Internal Revenue

Service (IRS) regulated, flexible spending account just like healthcare flexible spending accounts (HSAs).

• Investing in Education: Some employers are exploring expanding tuition reimbursement to cover the full cost of a four-year degree. This approach could significantly enhance wages and career progression, thereby mitigating housing expenses.

Additionally, employers could consider creating a new type of fund similar to a 401(k) but designated for paying off student loans. This would address the reality that many employees forgo retirement savings to manage their educational debt, rendering existing retirement benefits less effective.

• In-Kind Partnerships: Within reason, businesses should consider alleviating the affordability crisis by whatever means falls within their scope of influence. These best practices are not only good social policy but strengthen recruitment and retention efforts. For example, furniture donations from furniture retailers, or other “in-kind” offerings through increased private sector partnerships.

Closing Remarks

To understand the greater impact the housing crisis has on the community, Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs provides a useful lens, where a lack of stable, safe shelter becomes an obstacle to reaching our full potential as a region.

Access to safe, affordable housing expands individuals’ ability to focus on more than their immediate circumstances and envision a future they wish to live in and contribute to. This can lead to increased personal and professional growth for individuals, households, and their communities.

More than just providing shelter—it is about giving people the foundation they need to live their best lives. The personal stories shared by those who have faced housing struggles remind us just how much stable, affordable housing matters. Whether it’s dealing with skyrocketing rents, unsafe living conditions, or the stress of being one paycheck away from homelessness, these challenges affect every part of life. As one participant put it, “Serenity is the biggest one... you just come into your own home, and you come into your peace.” Housing stability gives families the chance to build a future, create generational wealth, and find peace.

Government, non-profits, and businesses all play a crucial role in tackling this crisis. By working together through public-private partnerships and regional collaboration, we can craft solutions that go beyond quick fixes. It’s not just about providing funding or building new homes—it’s about aligning resources, creating policy, and thinking long-term about what our communities need to thrive. Partnerships between businesses, housing advocates, and local governments can bring about the kind of real change that makes a difference in people’s lives.

As we move forward, it’s important to focus on the human side of this issue. Programs that help people overcome barriers, giving them a real shot at homeownership, can change lives. It’s not just about getting a roof over someone’s head—it’s about changing lives. For many, the journey from unstable housing to homeownership has been life-changing, not just providing stability but inspiring them to give back to their communities. By continuing to work together, we can ensure that more people have the chance to experience the security and peace that a home brings.

Acknowledgements

We are grateful to each of the following participating organizations for their time and insights during the interviews and listening sessions:

• Affordable Housing Services of Hillsborough County

• BayCare Health System

• BestSource Consulting

• Bright Community Trust

• CITY Furniture

• City of St. Petersburg

• City of Tampa

• City of Clearwater

• Corporation to Develop Communities of Tampa, Inc.

• DDA Development

• Feeding Tampa Bay

• Fifth Third Bank

• Florida Housing Coalition

• Forward Pinellas

• Green Mills Group

• Habitat for Humanity of East Pasco County

• Habitat for Humanity of Hillsborough County

• Habitat for Humanity Tampa Bay Gulfside

• HDR Engineering, Inc.

• Hillsborough County Government

• Hillsborough County Hotel & Motel Association (HCHMA)

• Hillsborough County Public Schools

• Urban League of Hillsborough County

• Housing and Education Alliance

• Housing Finance Authority of Hillsborough County

• Housing Leadership Council of Tampa Bay, Inc.

• InVictus Development

• JPMorgan Chase

• Lealman Exchange

• McKinsey & Co.

• Moffitt Cancer Center

• The Mosaic Company

• NeighborWorks Florida Collaborative

• Pasco County Government

• Pasco County Schools

• Pasco Economic Development Council

• Pinellas County Economic Development

• Pinellas County Government

• Pinellas County Housing Authority

• Pinellas County Housing Finance Authority

• Pinellas County Schools

• Pinellas County Sheriff’s Office

• Pinellas County Urban League

• Plan Hillsborough

• Rebuilding Together Tampa Bay

• Regions Bank

• ServiceSource (Duval Park-Lealman)

• Shumaker, Loop & Kendrick, LLP

• SOHO Housing Partners

• St. Petersburg Police Department

• Suncoast Housing Connections

• Tampa Bay Economic Development Council

• Tampa Bay Neighborhood Housing Services

• Tampa Bay Rays

• Tampa Housing Authority

• TECO People’s Gas

• Truist Bank

• University Area CDC

• Urban Land Institute Tampa Bay

• University of South Florida

• United Way Suncoast

• Vistra Communications

Appendix

Parent Codes

Demographics

Trends & comparisons

Interconnected well-being

Child Codes

Equity

Upskilling-better pay

Transportation

Health

Food access

Childcare

Quality education

Home affordability factors

Homeownership & renting

Development

Government toolkit

Transportation infrastructure

Role of business community

Advocacy

Leadership

Funding

Services to support employees

Land

Increasing wages

Public-private partnerships

Recruit-retain challenges

Actions taken to recruit & retain

Best practices

Regional collaboration

Yes to regional collaboration

Yes with reservations

No-local focus

Supplement A

WHAT BUSINESSES ARE DOING TO ADDRESS RETENTION ISSUES

Hiring and retaining employees is expensive, and turnover adds significant costs for businesses. Some companies are proactively addressing these challenges by focusing on employee retention and fostering a strong workplace culture. As one leader explained, “Intervention is always more expensive and less effective. Prevention is always more effective and less expensive.”

“We hired a person just dedicated to employee rewards, so that we’re always at kind of the forefront of what we should be doing, what employees want, so that we can try to fight against that attrition battle.”

Recognition, appreciation, and clarity of purpose tied to organizational goals are nontangible elements that may help with retention. However, these elements may not be enough to overcome the harsh realities of the housing market.

“You still have to retain them and let them know every single day: I’m glad you’re here. What do we need to do to keep you here?”

By conducting annual employee surveys and building action plans around the feedback, companies can address concerns before they lead to turnover.

Other leaders claim that “loyalty is built through showing that there’s growth with the organization.” This sentiment highlights the importance of upskilling, particularly in entry-level positions, where career paths can be developed to allow employees to advance to higher paying roles without needing advanced degrees.

In a candidate-friendly market where employers are competing for talent, organizations have shifted their negotiation strategies, “We’re looking (at the) much bigger picture. We’re not willing to lose them over a few thousand dollars.”

In response to the competitive labor market, some businesses are offering hybrid work schedules, relocation assistance, generous paid time off (PTO) packages, and other benefits to attract and retain talent. An example was given of franchise owners purchasing singlefamily homes to rent to employees in an area where housing was a significant issue. Another company provides daily meals, gym access, onsite health clinics, and mental health support as part of their benefits package. Others subsidize childcare or provide ride-sharing services.

Understanding the needs of each particular workforce is critical, as a one-size-fits-all approach is difficult.

“If you feed people, they stay happy. We provide breakfast and lunch every day. If you work [late], you get dinner. This is one of our employees’ most favorite benefits.”

Other benefits to attract and retain talent include offering flexible work hours, parental leave, in-house childcare services, elder care, and flex spending for transportation and childcare, which can all mitigate upfront living costs. Most employees have asked for continued hybrid and remote work options whenever possible, and the employers we spoke with agreed as to the importance of this when possible.

Remote work continues to hold a strong appeal for much of the workforce, but many positions are community facing and require an in-person presence. Moreover, the lack of in-person interaction in remote roles can create challenges in building relationships and developing the soft skills necessary for career advancement, particularly for new hires and early-career workers.

“Now they [can be nearly] 30 miles from the office, and we rarely see them. They haven’t been able to develop new skill sets and relationships; and if they had been developing the skill sets and the relationships, they would now be at a point where they’re ready to be promoted into that next role. It kind of freezes people’s careers in time. It either significantly decelerates their career, or maybe even stagnates it.”

Employers are also seeking opportunities to absorb fees connected to benefit cost increases, buffering their staff from rising health insurance costs. “We have not passed on a benefit increase in 10 years or so; even though they’ve cost us more, we’ve tried to eat that cost every year to keep the percentage reasonable for employees.” Another organization that self-insures has developed a benefit structure that is based on how much their employee earns. “A team member who earns $15 an hour should not, and does not, pay the same premiums for health insurance as a team member [who] makes $100 an hour.”

One leader shared that they have put additional emphasis on improving their organizational culture. They promote access to “people, process, and opportunities to develop into another role.” This can include access to recruiters, which links them to opportunities across the state, professional development stipends, mentorship and feedback loops with upper management, and more.

This ongoing challenge underscores the need for tailored innovative solutions, which allows an organization to remain flexible, with a continued focus on employee well-being to ensure longterm retention and success.