Full Text
NM CO UT Housing Needs Assessment Farmington Metropolitan Statistical Area Of The AZ December 2008 ---PAGE BREAK--- Contents Table of Contents Executive Summary i Purpose i Introduction i Area of Report and Data Sources i Key Housing Needs Concepts i Greatest Need i Affordability ii Housing Needs iii Recommendations iii Summary Table of Projected Housing Needs 1. Population 1 a. Population Data 1 b. Racial Breakdown 2 c. Population Age 3 d. Population Projections 3 2. Income 5 a. Minimum Wage 5 b. Income by households 6 c. Median Family Income by groups 7 3. Poverty 8 a. Federal Poverty Rate 8 b. Poverty Rates by Age, Race, and Sex 9 c. Ratio of Income to Poverty Level 10 4. Housing Expenditures 11 a. Mortgage Costs as a Percentage of Household Income 11 b. Gross Rent as a Percentage of Household Income 13 5. Housing 14 a. Current Housing 14 b. Housing Values 15 c. Housing 16 6. Building Permit Data 18 a. City of Farmington Building Permit 18 b. San Juan County Building Department Data 18 7. San Juan County Board of Realtors Data 23 a. County and National Sales Comparison Table 23 b. Units Sold Chart 24 8. Assessor’s Data 25 a. San Juan County Price and Size by Type 25 b. Farmington Price and Size by Type 26 c. Dollars Per Square Foot for County and Cities 27 d. Mobile Home Sales Prices 28 9. Rental Housing 28 a. Daily Times Rental Data 28 ---PAGE BREAK--- Contents b. Rental Contracts ACS 2006 36 c. Rental Contracts 2000 and 2006 37 10. Current Affordability 37 a. Rental Affordability 38 b. Housing Purchase Affordability 40 11. Projected Affordability 42 12. Housing Needs 43 a. Needs for Median Families by Race, Age, and Family Type 43 b. Housing Needs by Type of Unit 44 c. Needs by percent of Income Spent on Housing 45 d. Needs Projection for Crowding 45 e. Needs for Disabled in Poverty 46 13. Conclusions 46 a. Greatest Need 46 b. Affordability 47 c. Housing Needs 47 Summary Table of All Housing Needs 48 14. Recommendations 49 Terms and Acronyms 50 Sources 50 Appendix i 1. Introduction i 2. Annual Average Wages from 2001 to 2006 i 3. Wages by Occupation iii 4. Unemployment Rates 5. Poverty Rates by Age and Sex v 6. Poverty Rates by Educational Attainment 7. Poverty Rates for People with Disabilities vii 8. Median Value by Time Built viii 9. Vacancy viii 10. Age of Housing x 11. Housing Value by Mortgage Status x 12. Assessor’s Sales Data 13. Selected Population Statistics xiii ---PAGE BREAK--- Executive Summary i Housing Needs Assessment Executive Summary Purpose This report documents the number of families currently considered in “Greatest Need,” presents the current and projected affordability of housing, and projects the needs of housing development for the Farmington Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA). This report serves as a resource document for local policy makers on the issues of housing needs, affordable housing, demographic data, and for the application of grant funds for the development of affordable housing. This report will also be incorporated into Farmington’s next Consolidated Plan 2009 for the Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Entitlement Grant. Introduction This housing needs assessment begins with population data from 2000 to 2006, looking at growth to establish a population projection, which is key to all of the projected housing needs. The report then looks at the data that leads to housing affordability. Income, poverty, housing expenditures, housing and rental stocks, housing and rental costs, building permit data, and housing sales data are used to define the current (2006) affordability of rentals and housing ownership. Next, projected affordability is calculated by comparing income growth and the increases in housing and rental costs. Finally, the report provides a projection of housing needs by forecasting housing growth, the needs for the families in “Greatest Need,” and the needs for a variety of socioeconomic groups. In the appendix, there are additional related data tables that provide broader wage, poverty, and housing data that users of this report may find helpful but do not directly related to the projection of housing needs. Area of Report and Data Sources Many of the statistics in this report come from the American Community Survey (ACS), which is part of the US Census. The area covered by this data is described as the Farmington Metropolitan Statistical Area or the MSA. The Farmington MSA is identical to and interchangeable with the San Juan County borders. The ACS does not yet have specific data for the individual Cities and locations within San Juan County. Specific data from other sources is used, where possible, for Farmington, Aztec, and Bloomfield. In this report, the Farmington MSA means data for San Juan County that comes from the 2006 American Community Survey. Data that is presented as San Juan County is from the 2000 Census or other sources. Key Housing Needs Concepts There are three key concepts in this report, which are statistically explored. Greatest Need HUD defines those in the greatest need for affordable housing as “families and individuals whose incomes fall 50 percent below an area’s median income, who either pay 50 percent or more of their income for rent, or who live in substandard housing.” Substandard housing is defined as housing without ---PAGE BREAK--- Executive Summary ii complete kitchen or plumbing facilities or families who live in overcrowded conditions. Overcrowding is defined as more than one person per room in a household. The Farmington MSA has a significant number of households that are considered greatest need families. Any affordable housing project conducted in the Farmington MSA should directly affect the families in greatest need. Greatest Need Data Bytes from the 2006 Farmington MSA: • 12,169 households earned 50% or less of the median income • 2,486 households paid more than 50% of their income in rent • 828 households paid more than 50% of their income on their mortgage • 2,506 households did not have full kitchens or plumbing • 1,849 households were living in overcrowded conditions Affordability This report looks at the affordability of rental units and home purchases for various socioeconomic groups, family types, and for families that earn the median income, 80%, 50%, and 30% of the Median Family Income (MFI). In the Farmington MSA, current affordability has reached the point where the median family income can no longer afford to purchase the median price home, and can only marginally afford a townhome/condo. The median family income can still afford a mobile home, and this may be why 32.5 percent of all housing units in the Farmington MSA are mobile homes. Of all the groups shown on the Housing Affordability Table (Table 15), the only group that can afford to buy a median priced home is married couple families. American Indian, Hispanic, younger and older families, families with young children, and female headed households are all far short of being able to afford to purchase the median priced home. Rental affordability in the Farmington MSA is somewhat better than the home ownership affordability. The median rental prices for two bedroom units and apartments are affordable for all groups except for 15 to 24 year old households. However, American Indian, younger and older families, and female-headed households are unable to afford the median priced three-bedroom rental, house, or townhome/condo. This may be the reason why 12.1 percent of all renter occupied units are overcrowded, and why 42.1 percent of all rental households pay more than 30 percent of their income in rent. From 2000 to 2006, the median price for homes has increased 62 percent and the median overall rental cost has increased 76.5 percent, while the median family income has increased just 32.7 percent. If the current increases in housing costs continue to outpace the gains in wages, then housing in the Farmington MSA will become more and more unaffordable, even for rentals. ---PAGE BREAK--- Executive Summary iii Housing Needs For housing to keep up with the minimum demand from projected population growth while maintaining the current housing supply level, an average of 636 housing units should be constructed in the Farmington MSA every year to 2020. Of those units 358 should be single-family dwellings, 22 should be duplexes, 47 should be multifamily units, and 206 should be mobile homes, just to keep up with current housing stock mix, and to maintain the current level of housing supply. To improve the future housing stock mix, the greatest needs families must be addressed first. Housing must be developed that is affordable to low- and very low-income households and housing subsidy programs should be enacted so that families earning less than 50 percent of the Median Family Income (MFI) do not have to live in overcrowded conditions or in housing with incomplete kitchen and plumbing facilities. The following Summary Table of Housing Needs is a summary of all of the projected housing needs discussed in detail in the Housing Needs Section of the main report. The goal of these simple linear projections is to provide justification for the development of affordable housing projects and to give public service organizations an idea of future demands for their services. The column on the left shows all of the socio-economic groups, housing types, and special needs populations. The most recent 2006 data for the groups is shown, with projections to 2020, and the average increase per year. Recommendations Based upon the number of Greatest Need Families and the lack of housing and rental affordability for a variety of socioeconomic groups, City of Farmington CDBG staff recommends that a Strategic Plan be developed to address housing affordability in San Juan County. CDBG Staff also recommends that that during the creation of the new 2009 Consolidated Plan that housing affordability projects be given a high priority and that a variety of Action Plan projects be considered for future funding to address this important issue. ---PAGE BREAK--- Executive Summary iv Summary Table of Projected Housing Needs Summary Table of All Projected Housing Needs - Farmington MSA - 2006 to 2020 NEEDS BY HOUSHOLD TYPE Table 17 2006 2010 2015 2020 Total Change Average Change Per Year White alone, not Hispanic or Latino 19,549 20,586 21,959 23,424 3,875 277 American Indian 11,491 12,100 12,907 13,768 2,278 163 Hispanic or Latino origin (of any race) 7,018 7,390 7,883 8,409 1,391 99 BY AGE OF HOUSEHOLDER 15 to 24 years 1,697 1,787 1,906 2,033 336 24 25 to 44 years 13,419 14,130 15,073 16,078 2,660 190 45 to 64 years 16,233 17,094 18,234 19,451 3,218 230 65 years and over 7,172 7,552 8,056 8,594 1,422 102 FAMILIES EARNING 80% of MFI 6,935 7,303 7,790 8,310 1,375 98 50% of MFI 4,241 4,466 4,764 5,082 841 60 30% of MFI 7,928 8,348 8,905 9,499 1,571 112 With own children under 18 years 13,498 14,214 15,162 16,173 2,675 191 With no own children under 18 years 15,502 16,324 17,413 18,575 3,073 219 Married-couple families 20,365 21,445 22,875 24,402 4,037 288 Female householder, no husband present 5,332 5,615 5,989 6,389 1,057 75 Male householder, no wife present 3,303 3,478 3,710 3,958 655 47 NEEDS BY HOUSING TYPE Table 18 2006 2010 2015 2020 Total Change Average Change Per Year Total Occupied Housing Needs 38,559 40,604 43,312 46,202 7,643 546 Single Family 21,688 22,838 24,362 25,987 4,299 307 Multifamily Units 3,823 4,026 4,294 4,581 758 54 Mobile home 13,048 13,740 14,656 15,634 2,586 185 Owner-Occupied 28,415 29,922 31,918 34,047 5,632 402 Renter-Occupied 10,144 10,682 11,394 12,155 2,011 144 NEEDS FOR UNAFFORDABLE MORTGAGE HOLDERS AND RENTAL CONTRACTS Table 19 2006 2010 2015 2020 Total Change Average Change Per Year Unaffordable Mortgage Holders Percent of Income Paid on Mortgage 30.0 to 49.9 percent 3515 3,701 3,948 4,212 697 50 50.0 percent or more 828 872 930 992 164 12 Non-Affordable Rental Contracts Percent of Income Paid on Rent 30.0 to 49.9 percent 1507 1,587 1,693 1,806 299 21 50.0 percent or more 2486 2,618 2,792 2,979 493 35 NEEDS FOR OVERCROWDING Table 20 Owner occupied: 2006 2010 2015 2020 Total Change Average Change Per Year 1.00 or less occupants per room 27,789 29,643 31,620 33,730 1.01 or more occupants per room 626 668 712 760 134 10 Renter occupied: 1.00 or less occupants per room 8,921 9,516 10,151 10,828 1.01 or more occupants per room 1,223 1,305 1,392 1,484 261 19 NEEDS BY DISABILITY TYPE IN POVERTY Table 21 Population 5 years and over for whom a poverty status is determined 2006 2010 2015 2020 Total Change Average Change Per Year With any disability 3,289 3,464 3,695 3,941 652 47 With a sensory disability 1,133 1,193 1,272 1,357 225 16 With a physical disability 1,975 2,080 2,219 2,367 391 28 With a mental disability 1,034 1,089 1,162 1,239 205 15 With a self-care disability 504 531 566 604 100 7 ---PAGE BREAK--- Housing Needs Assessment 1 2008 Housing Needs Assessment 1. Population By looking at population growth from a number of sources, this report will establish a population projection, which is key to all of the projected housing needs. The racial and age breakdowns of the population are included in the needs projection. a. Population Data Table 1 shows population estimates from the U.S. Department of Commerce for New Mexico, the four state Metropolitan Statistical Areas, the total metro areas and the non-metro areas from 2000 to 2006. Displayed on the right are the total change in population, the total percent change, and the annual average percent change. An interesting point on this table is 96.9 percent of all growth in the state occurred within the four Metropolitan Statistical Areas. The non-metro portion accounted for only 3.1 percent of the total population growth. The Farmington MSA had the third fastest population growth in New Mexico and accounted for 9.2 percent of the total population growth in the state. Table 1 Total Population Estimates New Mexico Metropolitan Statistical Areas, 2000 to 2006 July1, July1, July1, July1, July1, July1, July1, 2000 r/ 2001 r/ 2002 r/ 2003 r/ 2004 r/ 2005 r/ 2006 p/ Area Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate Estimate New Mexico 1,821,656 1,832,783 1,855,353 1,877,598 1,900,620 1,925,985 1,954,599 132,943 7.30% 1.2% Metro Portion 1/ 1,150,736 1,164,236 1,186,866 1,207,954 1,228,682 1,253,444 1,279,579 128,843 11.20% 1.9% Albuquerque MSA 2/ 731,651 739,518 753,375 766,089 780,270 797,517 816,811 85,160 11.64% 1.9% Farmington MSA 3/ 114,237 116,196 119,940 122,235 124,072 125,820 126,473 12,236 10.71% 1.8% Las Cruces MSA 4/ 175,013 176,668 178,639 182,456 185,298 189,306 193,888 18,875 10.78% 1.8% Santa Fe MSA 5/ 129,835 131,854 134,912 137,174 139,042 140,801 142,407 12,572 9.68% 1.6% Nonmetro Portion 1/ 670,920 668,547 668,487 669,644 671,938 672,541 675,020 4,100 0.61% 0.1% p/ Preliminary. r/ Revised. 1/ Metropolitan and nonmetropolitan portions are based on current metropolitan statistical area (MSA) definitions. 2/ Bernalillo, Sandoval, Torrance and Valencia counties. 3/ San Juan County. 4/ Dona Ana County. 5/ Santa Fe County. Source: U.S. Dept. Of Commerce, Bureau of the Census, Population Estimates Program, Population Division. Data released April 5, 2007. Table prepared by: Bureau of Business and Economic Research, University of New Mexico. Total Change % Total Change Average Annual % Change ---PAGE BREAK--- Housing Needs Assessment 2 2008 b. Racial Breakdown This table shows the number of households and their percent of the total households by race. The data comes from the 2006 American Community Survey. The 2006 ACS does not publish the data for households of other races due to the sample size and the very small percentage of other races in San Juan County. White, American Indian, and Hispanic make up 98.7% of the total households. Chart 1 below depicts the ratio of the three most populous races. Table 2 Households 38,559 White alone, not Hispanic or Latino 19,549 50.7% American Indian 11,491 29.8% Hispanic or Latino origin (of any race) 7,018 18.2% Other 501 1.30% Source: 2006 American Community Survey Geographic Area: Farmington MSA Farmington MSA Race of Households Chart 1 Race of Households Farmington MSA 2006 Hispanic or Latino origin (of any race) 18.2% Other 1.3% White alone, not Hispanic or Latino 50.7% American Indian 29.8% ---PAGE BREAK--- Housing Needs Assessment 3 2008 c. Population Age Table 3 shows the changing age mix in San Juan County from 2000 to 2005 and the percent of population by age. At the bottom of the table is a comparison of the total population change (9.8 percent) with the change in the 65 years and over (16.21 percent) and the 85 years and over populations (80.4 percent). The total increase for the over 85 group was 835. The very large percentage increase indicates in-migration to San Juan County. Another item of interest in this table is the yellow highlighted population numbers of the under 5 years in 2000 and 5 to 9 years in 2005. This significant decrease can only be explained by out migration of families with young children. The second highest growth group is the 20 to 24 age group, which could represent both young workers and college students coming into the area. Table 3 2000 % of Pop 2005 % of Pop Total % Change Total Population 113,801 124,994 9.84% Under 5 years 9,149 8.0% 9,859 7.9% 7.76% 5 to 9 years 10,178 8.9% 8,434 6.7% -17.13% 10 to 14 years 10,890 9.6% 12,010 9.6% 10.28% 15 to 19 years 10,854 9.5% 10,351 8.3% -4.63% 20 to 24 years 7,427 6.5% 10,859 8.7% 46.21% 25 to 34 years 14,040 12.3% 15,923 12.7% 13.41% 35 to 44 years 17,963 15.8% 17,176 13.7% -4.38% 45 to 54 years 14,267 12.5% 17,183 13.7% 20.44% 55 to 64 years 8,707 7.7% 11,199 9.0% 28.62% 65 to 74 years 6,033 5.3% 7,120 5.7% 18.02% 75 to 84 years 3,255 2.9% 3,007 2.4% -7.62% 85 years and over 1,038 0.9% 1,873 1.5% 80.44% Total Population 113,801 124,994 9.84% 65 years and over 10,326 12,000 16.21% 85 years and over 1,038 1,873 80.44% Sources: 2000 Census, 2005 ACS Prepared by Farmington CDBG Percent Change from 2000 to 2005 San Juan County Population by Age d. Population Projections Central to this housing needs report is the population projection. Table 4 shows the population of the Farmington MSA, Aztec, Bloomfield, and Farmington from 2000 to 2006, along with projections for 2010, 2015, and 2020. The highlighted growth rates are simple linear projections of the population data from 2000 to 2006. Table 4 is a growth projection table for San Juan County created by Bureau of Business and Economic Research (BBER) in 2002 and revised in 2004. Even though the 2000 starting population is very similar, the growth rate ---PAGE BREAK--- Housing Needs Assessment 4 2008 assumed for 2000 to 2005 is significantly lower then the rates from the American Community Survey (ACS) results from those years and the rates for future growth are even lower. Table 4 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 San Juan 114,272 121,445 128,592 135,497 142,074 148,315 154,403 Growth % 6.3% 5.9% 5.4% 4.9% 4.4% 4.1% Average Growth Per Year 1.3% 1.2% 1.1% 1.0% 0.9% 0.8% r/ Revised. Source: Bureau of Business and Economic Research, University of New Mexico. Released August 2002 and revised April 2004. Projected Population San Juan County July 1, 2000 to July 1, 2030 Prepared by Farmington, CDBG Table 5 shows linear growth projections based upon population estimates from the ACS and BBER for the Farmington MSA, Aztec, Bloomfield, and the City of Farmington. The green shaded cells are the average growth rates from 2000 to 2006. These rates are well above the rates estimated by BBER for San Juan County in 2002. Table 5 Population Projections Farmington MSA and Cities 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2010 2015 2020 Farmington MSA 114,237 116,196 119,940 122,235 124,072 125,820 126,473 135,749 148,306 162,025 Annual Percent Growth 1.7% 3.2% 1.9% 1.5% 1.4% 0.5% Total Growth 10.7% Average Growth 1.8% 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Aztec 6,504 6,588 6,782 6,913 7,004 7,064 7,056 7,464 8,007 8,589 Annual Percent Growth 1.3% 2.9% 1.9% 1.3% 0.9% -0.1% Total Growth 8.5% Average Growth 1.4% Bloomfield 6,740 6,868 7,096 7,219 7,356 7,421 7,409 7,912 8,588 9,322 Annual Percent Growth 1.9% 3.3% 1.7% 1.9% 0.9% -0.2% Total Growth 9.9% Average Growth 1.7% Farmington City 38,472 39,091 40,432 41,350 42,214 43,032 43,573 47,554 53,046 59,172 Annual Percent Growth 1.6% 3.4% 2.3% 2.1% 1.9% 1.3% Total Growth 13.3% Average Growth 2.2% Average growth from 2000 to 2006 used for projections Sources: American Community Survey, Census Estimates, and BBER Prepared by Farmington, CDBG Projections CDBG Staff compared these population growth rates with San Juan County building permit data. Decreased vacancy rates, crowding, and an increase of occupants per dwelling were also factors looked at for the population projection, but the number of new residential dwelling units was a primary factor. CDBG staff concludes that an average growth rate of 1.3 percent is a best average, guess, or fit between the simple linear growth projections from the ACS population numbers, the BBER population estimates, and the building permit data. This 1.3% growth factor will be used in all of the needs projections in this report. ---PAGE BREAK--- Housing Needs Assessment 5 2008 2. Income Income is a key part of the affordability question for San Juan County. There are three main types of income statistics available - wages, household income, and family income. Wages refer to an individual’s earning power, and detailed wage data is provided in the appendix for a variety of industry sectors. Household income refers to the total earned income of all people living in a residence. Household income can be skewed by having multiple families living in a single residence and may mask the true income of very poor families. Family income is the sum of the wages of all individuals of a family living in a residence. Family income and the Median Family Income (MFI) are used extensively in this report. The MFI and percentages of the MFI are used by HUD to determine moderate, low and very low-income levels. a. Minimum Wage In 2006, the minimum wage was $5.15. Under the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA), the federal minimum wage for covered nonexempt employees was $5.85 per hour effective July 24, 2007; $6.55 per hour effective July 24, 2008; and will be $7.25 per hour effective July 24, 2009. However, in New Mexico, recent legislation (SB 324) changed the state minimum wage law effective January 1, 2008. Most New Mexico businesses will see the state minimum wage increase and will be required to pay a minimum wage of $7.50 per hour effective January 1, 2009. The 2008 Colorado College’s State Of The Rockies Report Card states a minimum wage worker must work at least 3 jobs in Colorado to afford an average apartment and that in San Juan County a minimum wage of $10 to $11.50 per hour for a full time job is required to afford the median two- bedroom rental. In the Rental Housing section of this Housing Needs Assessment (11, iii) the 2006 median rental cost of a two-bedroom rental was $550. A worker earning the 2006 minimum wage of $5.15 per hour would have to work 2.2 full time jobs to afford a median priced two-bedroom rental. A full time minimum wage worker in 2006 earned $9,888. A married couple with two children, both working full time minimum wage jobs in 2006, earned $19,776, were considered to be below poverty and earned less than 50% of the local Median Family Income. ---PAGE BREAK--- Housing Needs Assessment 6 2008 b. Income by households The number of households by income is shown on Chart 2. On the left are income categories and the bars show how many households are within each category. For reference, the green, yellow, orange, and red lines show the MFI and the 80%, 50%, and 30% of MFI income levels. The 80% MFI is used as an income qualification for the City of Farmington CDBG program. The 50% MFI, or lower, is one of the definitions of families in “Greatest Need.” Families that earn 30% MFI or less are considered very low-income. There are 7,928 very low-income households in the MSA. This table shows that household incomes do not follow a nice bell curve, but there are two large spikes. The largest single income group is in the lowest, less than $10,000, category with 5,018 households. This category is well below the 30% MFI or very low-income level. The second largest group is in the $75,000 to $99,999 category, with 4,901 households. Household income is not a perfect data comparison with the MFI but it was included to show the approximate number of families that exist in the MFI income levels. There are no other data sources that document exactly how many families fall within the MFI income levels. Chart 2 Number of Households by Income and MFI 80%, 50%, and 30% 2006 Farmington MSA 5,018 2,910 2,289 1,952 2,258 2,944 1,733 1,519 1,815 3,157 2,990 4,901 2,497 1,334 840 402 0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 6,000 Less than $10,000 $10,000 to $14,999 $15,000 to $19,999 $20,000 to $24,999 $25,000 to $29,999 $30,000 to $34,999 $35,000 to $39,999 $40,000 to $44,999 $45,000 to $49,999 $50,000 to $59,999 $60,000 to $74,999 $75,000 to $99,999 $100,000 to $124,999 $125,000 to $149,999 $150,000 to $199,999 $200,000 or more Median Family Income $50,069 80% of Median Family Income $40,055 50% of Median Family Income $25,035 30% of Median Family Income $15,021 ---PAGE BREAK--- Housing Needs Assessment 7 2008 c. Median Family Income by groups Table 6 shows the 2006 median income for households in the Farmington MSA broken down by race, age, and family type. The percent of the total households and the number of households is also given. The shaded line shows the base line Median Family Income called MFI. The most current available MFI is used in CDBG to determine eligibility of program participants. The information in this table is used in a number of places in the report as a comparison of income levels of the various groups with housing costs to determine affordability. The population of theses groups is also projected to look at future needs. This table also mixes Household and Family definitions. The race and age data are household related while the base line MFI and the family type data are family related. While there is some statistical danger in mixing these comparisons, these different groups are not available with just Household or just Family data and still it is important to look at them together. Table 6 Farmington MSA Median Income Percent of Households Number of Households Households 2006 38,559 White alone, not Hispanic or Latino 50,932 $ 29.8% 11,491 American Indian 23,767 $ 18.2% 7,018 Hispanic or Latino origin (of any race) 45,079 $ 50.7% 19,549 HOUSEHOLD INCOME BY AGE OF HOUSEHOLDER 15 to 24 years 18,466 $ 4.4% 1,697 25 to 44 years 47,100 $ 34.8% 13,419 45 to 64 years 50,418 $ 42.1% 16,233 65 years and over 23,364 $ 18.6% 7,172 FAMILIES Median Family Income 50,069 $ With own children under 18 years 46,912 $ 35.0% 13,498 With no own children under 18 years 52,398 $ 40.2% 15,502 Married-couple families 59,520 $ 52.8% 20,365 Female householder, no husband present 22,738 $ 13.8% 5,332 Male householder, no wife present 50,333 $ 8.6% 3,303 Source: 2006 American Community Survey HOUSEHOLD INCOME BY RACE, AGE, and FAMILY TYPE ---PAGE BREAK--- Housing Needs Assessment 8 2008 3. Poverty The National Center for Children in Poverty states, “that on average, families need an income of about twice the federal poverty level to meet their most basic needs.” “The United States measures poverty by an outdated standard developed in the 1960s.” In 2006, twice the federal poverty income level for a family of four was $40,000 and the 80% MFI for the Farmington MSA was $40,055. To put this in perspective the 80% MFI is the maximum income for eligibility for assistance from the Community Development Block Grant and that was just a little bit over twice the poverty level. While the poverty data in this report does not directly relate to affordability or the needs projections, it is important background information for this report as it helps to define the lowest income groups and is relevant data for many of the non-profit service providers who will use this report. Poverty data is also important to include for this report for its eventual inclusion into the next Consolidated Plan for HUD. a. Federal Poverty Rate Table 7 shows the 2006 poverty level income based upon the number of persons in a family or household. Table 7 2006 Poverty Guidelines Persons 48 Contiguous in Family or Household States and D.C. 1 $ 9,800 2 $ 13,200 3 $ 16,600 4 $ 20,000 5 $ 23,400 6 $ 26,800 7 $ 30,200 8 $ 33,600 For each additional person, add 3,400 SOURCE: Federal Register ---PAGE BREAK--- Housing Needs Assessment 9 2008 b. Poverty Rates by Age, Race, and Sex Table 8 shows the number and percent in poverty from 2000 to 2006 for age, sex, and racial groups, and compares total poverty rates for the four New Mexico MSA’s. The Farmington MSA has made positive gains in reducing poverty in all socio groups except for the over-65 age group. While the Farmington MSA had a higher poverty rate than Albuquerque or Santa Fe MSA’s, the Farmington MSA poverty has decreased 3.4 percent while Albuquerque and Santa Fe have both increased 1.2 percent. In the percentage below poverty level columns, you can see that in both 2000 and 2006 Farmington has the second highest poverty level of the four State MSA’s. The green shaded cells show groups that have less poverty than the total population and the yellow shaded cells show groups with poverty levels higher than the total population. The last column shows the change in the percent of poverty by group. An important change in this report for the area is the 6.5% decrease in poverty for the American Indian population. As a note: the Hispanic 2006 poverty level is not available from the ACS, so the rate of change cannot be calculated. Table 8 Subject Total 2000 Total 2006 # Below Poverty Level 2000 # Below Poverty Level 2006 % Below Poverty Level 2000 % Below Poverty Level 2006 Change in % Below Poverty Farmington MSA 112,410 125,194 24,196 22,704 21.5% 18.1% -3.4% Albuquerque, NM Metro Area 701,336 801,871 96,640 119,812 13.8% 14.9% 1.2% Las Cruces, NM Metro Area 169,559 187,573 43,054 45,751 25.4% 24.4% -1.0% Santa Fe, NM Metro Area 145,254 140,157 15,775 16,844 10.9% 12.0% 1.2% AGE Under 18 years 37,133 36,655 9,886 8,726 26.6% 23.8% -2.8% 18 to 64 years 66,342 76,768 12,511 11,893 18.9% 15.5% -3.4% 65 years and over 10,326 11,771 1,799 2,085 17.4% 17.7% 0.3% SEX Male 56,405 62,182 11,214 10,655 19.9% 17.1% -2.8% Female 57,396 63,012 12,982 12,049 22.6% 19.1% -3.5% RACE White alone, not Hispanic or Latino 52,141 53,554 5,542 5,546 10.6% 10.4% -0.2% American Indian and Alaska Native 41,414 48,497 14,920 14,293 36.0% 29.5% -6.5% Hispanic or Latino 16,712 3,422 20.5% Change in Poverty from 2000 to 2006 Above Poverty Level for Total Population Below Poverty Level for Total Population Source: 2006 ACS Farmington MSA and Census 2000 San Juan County ---PAGE BREAK--- Housing Needs Assessment 10 2008 c. Ratio of Income to Poverty Level Chart 3 shows the ratio of income to poverty level and the percent change from 1999 to 2006. As stated at the beginning of the poverty section, twice the poverty level is $40,000 per year for a family of four. All of the people earning twice the poverty level per year, or more, are represented in the far right column at the 2.0 or more ratio. Remember that according to the National Center for Children in Poverty, only the most basic needs of a family are met at twice the poverty level. The 1.0 to 1.24 column represents people whose income is at the poverty level or a little bit more. The under 0.5 column represents people who earn half or less of the poverty level in a year. Therefore, this table details the income levels of those who cannot meet the basic needs of their families, those who earn less than twice the poverty level in a year. The left side of the chart and the blue bars show the number of people in a particular ratio category. The right side of the chart and the red triangles show the percent change for each category from 1999 to 2006. The dashed line across the chart shows the zero point for the percent changes. Remember in Table 8 above that the poverty level for the Farmington MSA fell from 1999 to 2006 by 3.4 percent. While that is a wonderful result to report, Chart 3 tells us a different story about the lowest income level families. This chart shows a stratification of income levels with growth in three areas. Even though the overall poverty level is going down in the Farmington MSA, there is 23.3 percent growth in the 0.5 poverty ratio and a 39.6 percent growth in the 1.25 to 1.49 ratio. Therefore, there are more people in the poorest category and even more growth for people who are just outside of poverty. The growing poorest category represents people who are falling off the grid, becoming homeless, and are on severely fixed incomes such as Social Security. The growing category that is just above poverty may be trapped in low paying or minimum wage service jobs. ---PAGE BREAK--- Housing Needs Assessment 11 2008 Chart 3 Ratio of Income to Poverty Level and Percent Change from 1999 to 2006 0 10,000 20,000 30,000 40,000 50,000 60,000 70,000 80,000 Population by Ratio Group -60.0% -50.0% -40.0% -30.0% -20.0% -10.0% 0.0% 10.0% 20.0% 30.0% 40.0% 50.0% 1999 Census San Juan County 9,246 6,927 8,023 7,049 7,786 6,093 3,240 3,519 60,527 2006 ACS Farmington MSA 11,401 3,802 7,501 7,557 10,868 5,141 1,745 2,692 74,487 Percent Change 23.3% -45.1% -6.5% 7.2% 39.6% -15.6% -46.1% -23.5% 23.1% Under .50 .50 to .74 .75 to .99 1.00 to 1.24 1.25 to 1.49 1.50 to 1.74 1.75 to 1.84 1.85 to 1.99 2.00 and over 4. Housing Expenditures Housing expenditures for mortgage costs and rental costs are used to determine the number of households paying more than 30 and 50 percent of their income on housing. If a family pays more than 30 percent, they are not in the affordable category. If a family pays more than 50 percent, they are considered to be in “greatest need.” a. Mortgage Costs as a Percentage of Household Income The HUD recognized standard for affordable housing is expending no more than 30% of a family’s income on housing. This amount spent includes the mortgage, insurance, taxes, and utilities. Across the bottom of Chart 4 are expenditure percentage groupings and the bars showing the number of households. The percentage of all households is shown for each grouping. The vertical dashed line shows where the median percent of gross income (20.2%) falls on the chart. Of all households, 26.9% are paying more than 30% of their incomes on housing, which is considered unaffordable. There are 828 greatest need households that pay more than 50% of their income on their mortgage. ---PAGE BREAK--- Housing Needs Assessment 12 2008 Chart4 MORTGAGE COST AS A PERCENTAGE OF HOUSEHOLD INCOME Number, Percent, Median, and Percent of Total >30% of Income Farmington MSA 2006 ACS 1,518 3,220 3,221 2,796 1,045 1,252 1,029 1,234 828 5.1% 7.6% 6.4% 6.5% 17.3% 20.0% 19.9% 9.4% 7.8% 0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 3,000 3,500 4,000 Less than 10.0 percent 10.0 to 14.9 percent 15.0 to 19.9 percent 20.0 to 24.9 percent 25.0 to 29.9 percent 30.0 to 34.9 percent 35.0 to 39.9 percent 40.0 to 49.9 percent 50.0 percent or more # of Homes 0.0% 5.0% 10.0% 15.0% 20.0% 25.0% 30.0% % of Total Homes The Median Percent of Gross Income Spent on Mortgages Is 20.2% 26.9% of All Home Owners with A Mortgage Pay More Than 30% of Their Gross Income ---PAGE BREAK--- Housing Needs Assessment 13 2008 b. Gross Rent as a Percentage of Household Income Chart 5 shows the number of people by percent of income for rental households. This amount spent includes the rent, insurance, and utilities. The number and percent of households are shown by the percent spent on rent. Of all the rental households, 42 percent or 3,993 families, are paying more than 30 percent of their income on rent, and 26.2 percent or 2,486 are paying more than 50 percent and are considered to be at “greatest need.” Chart 5 GROSS RENT AS A PERCENTAGE OF HOUSEHOLD INCOME Number, Percent, Median, and Percent of Total >30% of Income Farmington MSA 2006 ACS 621 1,071 598 1,327 1,878 346 481 680 2,486 19.8% 14.0% 11.3% 6.3% 6.5% 3.6% 5.1% 7.2% 26.2% 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 Less than 10.0 percent 10.0 to 14.9 percent 15.0 to 19.9 percent 20.0 to 24.9 percent 25.0 to 29.9 percent 30.0 to 34.9 percent 35.0 to 39.9 percent 40.0 to 49.9 percent 50.0 percent or more # of Rentals 0.0% 5.0% 10.0% 15.0% 20.0% 25.0% 30.0% % of all Rentals The Median Percent of Gross Income Spent on Rent Is 28% 42% of All Renters Pay More than 30% of Gross Income on Rent ---PAGE BREAK--- Housing Needs Assessment 14 2008 5. Housing The housing section looks at current housing stocks, number of bedrooms, and housing facilities that are all part of the projections of housing needs. The housing values chart shows the distribution and number of homes by value to look at what makes up the median price of housing. For a broader look at housing information, there are more topics in the Appendix. a. Current Housing Stocks Table 9 shows that 56.2 percent of all dwelling unit are site built single- family detached structures. Mobile homes make up another 32.5 percent of dwellings. The other 11.7 percent of dwellings are a mix of multi-family structures with the majority, 4.6 percent, being 3 and 4 unit structures. The ratio and number of housing types is used in the housing needs section of this report. Table 9 Estimate Percent Total: 44,940 1, detached 25,274 56.2% 1, attached 584 1.3% 2 935 2.1% 3 or 4 2,063 4.6% 5 to 9 869 1.9% 10 to 19 317 0.7% 20 to 49 0 0.0% 50 or more 38 0.1% Mobile home 14,584 32.5% Boat, RV, van, etc. 276 0.6% Table Prepared by City of Farmington, CDBG Farmington MSA Number of Units and Percent of Dwelling Types Source: 2006 American Community Survey ---PAGE BREAK--- Housing Needs Assessment 15 2008 b. Housing Values i. Number of Owner Occupied Housing Units By Value Chart 6 shows the number of owner occupied housing units by value for 2006. The housing units are all types including RV’s, mobile homes, and single-family dwellings. The red line on the chart shows the median housing value at $126,700. This table has an expected bell curve, except for a large spike of 2,251 units in the under $10,000 category. The 14,584 mobile homes and the 276 RV housing units, shown on Table 9, could explain the spike in this category. Theses very low value units significantly outnumber the top three value categories and effectively skew the median value lower. Chart 6 Number Owner Occupied Housing Units by Value Farmington MSA 2006 ACS 2,251 715 696 0 622 144 225 539 389 567 1,094 1,484 1,319 3,984 2,638 3,290 2,093 2,472 972 2,119 557 100 0 145 0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500 3,000 3,500 4,000 4,500 Less than $10,000 $10,000 to $14,999 $15,000 to $19,999 $20,000 to $24,999 $25,000 to $29,999 $30,000 to $34,999 $35,000 to $39,999 $40,000 to $49,999 $50,000 to $59,999 $60,000 to $69,999 $70,000 to $79,999 $80,000 to $89,999 $90,000 to $99,999 $100,000 to $124,999 $125,000 to $149,999 $150,000 to $174,999 $175,000 to $199,999 $200,000 to $249,999 $250,000 to $299,999 $300,000 to $399,999 $400,000 to $499,999 $500,000 to $749,999 $750,000 to $999,999 $1,000,000 or more Median Value of Owner Occupied Housing Units $126,700 ---PAGE BREAK--- Housing Needs Assessment 16 2008 c. Housing Characteristics i. Number of Homes by Number of Bedrooms Chart 7 shows the vast majority of all existing residential uses have three bedrooms. This table is included in this report to show the relative mix of the number of bedrooms and to provide justification for the development of new affordable housing with 3 and 4 bedroom units, not just less expensive 2 bedroom units. Affordable housing must avoid creating overcrowded conditions by developing units to house larger families. Chart 7 Housing By Number of Bedrooms and Percent of Total Households ACS - Farmington MSA - 2006 1,443 4,135 9,976 23,107 5,336 943 51.4% 3.2% 9.2% 22.2% 11.9% 2.1% 0 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 25,000 No bedroom 1 bedroom 2 bedrooms 3 bedrooms 4 bedrooms 5 or more bedrooms 0.0% 10.0% 20.0% 30.0% 40.0% 50.0% 60.0% ---PAGE BREAK--- Housing Needs Assessment 17 2008 ii. Housing Facilities One of the key defining factors for considering a family to be in “greatest need” discussed, at the beginning of this report, is whether a home has complete kitchen or plumbing facilities. Table 10 shows the percentage of owner occupied and renter occupied housing that have complete plumbing, kitchens, telephone service, home heating methods. Even with San Juan County’s rural areas, this type of “greatest need” is a minor concern. Table 10 Occupied housing units Owner-occupied housing units Renter-occupied housing units With complete plumbing facilities 96.9% 96.0% 99.7% With complete kitchen facilities 96.6% 95.4% 100.0% TELEPHONE SERVICE AVAILABLE With telephone service 80.0% 84.9% 66.4% HOUSE HEATING FUEL Utility gas 65.7% 61.8% 76.7% Bottled, tank, or LP gas 15.0% 18.1% 6.4% Electricity 4.3% 2.9% 8.1% Fuel oil, kerosene, etc. 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% Coal or coke 0.6% 0.8% 0.0% All other fuels 14.5% 16.4% 8.9% No fuel used 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% Source: 2006 American Community Survey Geographic Area: Farmington, NM Metropolitan Statistical Area Percent of Housing Units with Plumbing, Kitchen and Telephone Facilities and Type of Heating by Owner and Renter Occupied Housing COMPLETE FACILITIES ---PAGE BREAK--- Housing Needs Assessment 18 2008 6. Building Permit Data Building permit data was collected from the City of Farmington, and San Juan County. San Juan County issues building permits for all areas outside of Farmington. The number of new residential building permits was looked at when working on the population growth factor. a. City of Farmington Building Permit Data The City of Farmington permit valuation does not reflect the actual sales price of a home. A fixed dollar amount $70 is applied and multiplied by the square footage of the residence and may be a better indicator of the size of home being built. For instance, notice in 2006, in Table 11, a larger number of smaller homes brought down the average permit valuation. In addition, in 2004 there were a large number of bigger and speculative homes being built especially in the San Juan Country Club. The number of permits per year, each representing a new family or household, is a good measure of population growth. Table 11 Site-Built New Residential Permit Valuations - City of Farmington 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 Permits Issued 103 105 118 166 192 260 236 219 % Change 1.94% 12.38% 40.68% 15.66% 35.42% -9.23% -7.20% Average Permit Valuation* $140,310 $135,300 $138,085 $142,762 $162,009 $176,565 $158,363 $161,099 % Change -3.57% 2.06% 3.39% 13.48% 8.98% -10.31% 1.73% *Permit valuations do not reflect actual sales price or construction cost.* Source: City of Farmington Builidng Department b. San Juan County Building Department Data i. Permit Data for SJC and All Cities This data came from the County and Farmington Building Departments. Table 12 details changes in new single-family residential building permits from 2000 to 2007 for Farmington, Aztec, Bloomfield, and the County. The number of new permits issued and the average permit valuation along with their percent change is tracked. In the right column is the total change from 2000 to 2007. In 2006 and 2007 there has been a decrease in the number of permits issued for most locations. Farmington went down 10.31 percent in 2006 and back up 1.73 percent in 2007; however, the total change is 113 percent since 2000. The total county row shows a decline of 14.48 percent in 2007 after a 2.11 percent gain in 2006, with a total gain of 98 percent from 2000 to 2007. *Average Permit Valuation is not an accurate indicator of the value of the new homes but can be used to track changes. The County and ---PAGE BREAK--- Housing Needs Assessment 19 2008 Farmington Building Departments use different systems to estimate a homes valuation for the purpose of calculating permit fees. Due to the small number of permits issued in Aztec and Bloomfield there are dramatic percent changes from year to year. However, the total change percentages appear to be in line with the total growth of Farmington and San Juan County. Table 12 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 Total Change Farmington Permits Issued 103 105 118 166 192 260 236 219 113% % Change 1.94% 12.38% 40.68% 15.66% 35.42% -9.23% -7.20% Average Permit Valuation* $140,310 $135,300 $138,085 $142,762 $162,009 $176,565 $158,363 $161,099 15% % Change -3.57% 2.06% 3.39% 13.48% 8.98% -10.31% 1.73% Aztec Permits Issued 11 10 16 21 15 16 48 22 100% % Change -9.09% 60.00% 31.25% -28.57% 6.67% 200.00% -54.17% Average Permit Valuation* 186,982 $ 126,527 $ 126,584 $ 150,032 $ 144,063 $ 154,175 $ 190,631 $ 167,556 $ -10% % Change -32.33% 0.05% 18.52% -3.98% 7.02% 23.65% -12.10% Bloomfield Permits Issued 7 11 12 20 30 31 19 17 143% % Change 57.14% 9.09% 66.67% 50.00% 3.33% -38.71% -10.53% Average Permit Valuation* 135,289 $ 148,319 $ 123,159 $ 116,115 $ 133,844 $ 150,871 $ 193,874 $ 145,929 $ 8% % Change 9.63% -16.96% -5.72% 15.27% 12.72% 28.50% -24.73% San Juan County Unincorporated Permits Issued 67 62 77 94 106 119 132 114 70% % Change -7.46% 24.19% 22.08% 12.77% 12.26% 10.92% -13.64% Average Permit Valuation* 135,393 $ 169,633 $ 156,657 $ 169,390 $ 171,300 $ 206,077 $ 192,569 $ 204,990 $ 51% % Change 25.29% -7.65% 8.13% 1.13% 20.30% -6.56% 6.45% San Juan County Total Permits Issued 188 188 223 301 343 426 435 372 98% % Change 0.00% 18.62% 34.98% 13.95% 24.20% 2.11% -14.48% Average Permit Valuation* 141,102 $ 146,918 $ 142,870 $ 149,814 $ 161,632 $ 182,098 $ 173,854 $ 174,238 $ 23% % Change 4.12% -2.76% 4.86% 7.89% 12.66% -4.53% 0.22% New Single Family Residential Permit Valuations ---PAGE BREAK--- Housing Needs Assessment 20 2008 Chart 8 shows a summary of all residential building permits in Table 12. The pie chart shows where single-family residential growth has occurred since 2000. This chart will lend justification to the allocation of new affordable housing projects in San Juan County based upon past development trends. Chart 8 All New Residential Permits From 2000 to 2007 The number and percent of total growth Farmington, 1399, 56.5% Aztec, 159, 6.4% Bloomfield , 147, 5.9% San Juan County Unincorporated, 771, 31.1% Total San Juan County Residential Building Permits, 2476 ---PAGE BREAK--- Housing Needs Assessment 21 2008 ii. Farmington, Bloomfield, and Aztec Residential Permits Chart 9 depicts data from Table 12 on the significant growth in new building permits and the decline for Farmington in 2006 and 2007. Aztec and Bloomfield are included for comparison. Chart 9 Number of Single Family Residential Building Permits San Juan County and Farmington Building Department Data 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 Farmington 103 105 118 166 192 260 236 219 Aztec 11 10 16 21 15 16 48 22 Bloomfield 7 11 12 20 30 31 19 17 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 ---PAGE BREAK--- Housing Needs Assessment 22 2008 iii. San Juan County Number and Valuation of Permits Chart 10 depicts data from Table 12 on the total San Juan County Building Permit Data from 2000 to 2007. The total number of permits issued climbed until a dip in 2007 with a total gain of 98 percent. The total San Juan County average permit valuation had significant swings with a total increase of 58 percent. Chart 10 Total San Juan County Building Data 2000-2007 Number of Single Family Residential Permits and Average Valuation 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 [PHONE REDACTED] Total Change +98% Total Change +58% $20,000 $40,000 $60,000 $80,000 $100,000 $120,000 $140,000 $160,000 $180,000 Permits Issued 188 188 223 301 343 426 435 372 Average Permit Valuation* $110,084 $117,582 $106,432 $72,115 $82,140 $132,144 $173,854 $174,238 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 ---PAGE BREAK--- Housing Needs Assessment 23 2008 7. San Juan County Board of Realtors Data This section explores data from the San Juan County Board of Realtors and compares it with recent national sales data. Data through 2007 is included in this section. a. County and National Sales Comparison Table The San Juan County data in Table 13 came from the San Juan County Board of Realtors and represents all sold single-family residential homes, site built and manufactured. The national housing market data come from the US Census Bureau New Residential Sales December Press Releases. The number of residential units sold, average and median sales price, and the annual percent change is shown from 2000 to 2007. The County median price was not available prior to 2003. The matching colored rows compare the county and national data. The green shading compares the number of units sold, the blue shading compares the average sales price, and the yellow shading compares the median sales price. The comparison of the number of units sold shows that while the national market in 2006 and 2007 fell, -17.24 percent and -27.05 percent, the county market fell only -2.96 percent and -6.60 percent. This shows that while San Juan County is following the national housing market, the county is well insulated from the dramatic downturn. Table 13 San Juan County 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 Number of Residential Units Sold SJC 718 843 898 [PHONE REDACTED] 1015 948 Annual Percent Change Units Sold 17.41% 6.52% 6.35% 1.99% 7.39% -2.96% -6.60% Average Residential Sales Price SJC 118,217 $ 123,285 $ 130,075 $ 141,629 $ 151,941 $ 174,234 $ 195,805 $ 209,141 $ Annual Percent Change of Average Price 4.29% 5.51% 8.88% 7.28% 14.67% 12.38% 6.81% Median Residential Sales Price SJC 125,000 $ 134,000 $ 153,000 $ 169,000 $ 186,800 $ Annual Percent Change of Median Price 7.20% 14.18% 10.46% 10.53% National Housing Market 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 Number of Residential Units Sold Nationally 898,000 900,000 976,000 1,085,000 1,183,000 1,282,000 1,061,000 774,000 Annual Percent Change Units Sold 0.22% 8.44% 11.17% 9.03% 8.37% -17.24% -27.05% Average Residential Sales Price Nationally 205,100 $ 225,400 $ 238,500 $ 261,100 $ 276,600 $ 272,900 $ 290,100 $ 267,300 $ Annual Percent Change of Average Price 9.90% 5.81% 9.48% 5.94% -1.34% 6.30% -7.86% Median Residential Sales Price Nationally 155,100 $ 170,200 $ 186,400 $ 197,000 $ 222,000 $ 221,800 $ 235,000 $ 219,200 $ Annual Percent Change of Median Price 9.74% 9.52% 5.69% 12.69% -0.09% 5.95% -6.72% Housing Sales and Price Data, 2000 Through 2007 San Juan County and National Housing Market Source: San Juan County Board of Realators and US Census Bureau New Residential Sales December Press Releases SJC Median Sales Data is only available from 2003 forward. ---PAGE BREAK--- Housing Needs Assessment 24 2008 b. Units Sold Chart Chart 11 depicts data in Table 13 above and shows the county and national trends from 2000 to 2007 for the number of units sold and the annual percent change. The left scale of this table shows the number of site built and manufactured units sold, tracked by the dark blue and red lines. The National data is on the same scale as 1,000’s of units sold. It turns out that SJC makes up just about one thousandth of the total national housing market. This makes it very convenient to compare the sales data on the same table. The dark blue national line shows a steeper climb in home sales through 2005 but a much steeper decline through 2006 and 2007. The red county line is doing the same thing as the national line, but climbs and falls slower. The scale on the right of the chart shows the percent change in the sales data. The dashed line shows 0% on the percent scale. The light blue national line shows solid growth from 2001 and then the dramatic declines of 2006 and 2007. The yellow line shows how limited the decline is for SJC in comparison to the national housing crises. Chart 11 San Juan County and National Residential Units Sold and Annual Percent Change 0 200 400 [PHONE REDACTED] 1200 1400 Units Sold -30% -20% -10% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% Residential Units Sold SJC 718 843 898 [PHONE REDACTED] 1015 948 Units Sold Nationally (1,000's) 898 [PHONE REDACTED] 1183 1282 1061 774 SJC Annual % Change 17.41 6.52% 6.35% 1.99% 7.39% -2.96% -6.60% National Annual % Change 0.22% 8.44% 11.17 9.03% 8.37% -17.24 -27.05 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 ---PAGE BREAK--- Housing Needs Assessment 25 2008 8. Assessor’s Data The San Juan County Assessor’s office provided data on the reported sales prices of all residential units sold. This is the only sales data available that gives a breakdown of different types of dwellings. Therefore, this data is used for the affordability and projected affordability tables. a. San Juan County Price and Size by Type Chart 12 shows the changes from 2000 to 2007 in median price and median square feet for single-family dwellings, town home/condos, and mobile homes. The left scale shows the price by type of housing with the red, green, and blue lines. The right scale shows the median square feet of the housing by type. Townhomes have the greatest increase in the median sales price and the only growth in median size. The median size of both single-family dwellings and mobile homes has decreased from 2000 to 2007. This size reduction trend may be a result of the high increase in the cost per square foot of construction. Chart 12 Median Sales Price and Size by Housing Type San Juan County 2000 to 2007 - County Assessor's Office Sales Data $0 $20,000 $40,000 $60,000 $80,000 $100,000 $120,000 $140,000 $160,000 $180,000 $200,000 Median Square Feet 1,000 1,200 1,400 1,600 1,800 2,000 2,200 2,400 2,600 2,800 3,000 SFD Median Price $116,600 $120,000 $133,000 $133,000 $144,000 $161,207 $168,000 $188,900 Townhome/Condo Median Price $90,200 $78,500 $90,000 $118,000 $112,500 $147,000 $164,100 $194,100 Mobile Home Median Price $78,000 $99,500 $100,000 $111,000 $115,700 $115,000 $130,000 $138,000 SFD Median Sq Ft 1,702 1,630 1,625 1,582 1,591 1,588 1,544 1,594 Townhome/Condo Median Sq Ft 1,276 1,276 1,308 1,559 1,404 1,448 1,394 1,603 Mobile Home Median Sq Ft 1,777 1,818 1,656 1,644 1,650 1,648 1,542 1,686 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 ---PAGE BREAK--- Housing Needs Assessment 26 2008 b. Farmington Price and Size by Type Chart 13 shows the same information as Chart 12 but for the City of Farmington. The mobile home data has some unusual data in 2003 that seems out of place for both the price and size lines. Around 2002 to 2003 there was a decline in the price of mobile homes sold and a very sharp decrease in the size of the mobile homes sold. Chart 13 City of Farmington 2000 to 2007 County Assessor's Office Sales Data - Price and Size by Type $0 $20,000 $40,000 $60,000 $80,000 $100,000 $120,000 $140,000 $160,000 $180,000 $200,000 1,000 1,200 1,400 1,600 1,800 2,000 2,200 2,400 2,600 2,800 3,000 SFD Median Price $120,000 $120,000 $140,750 $137,700 $145,000 $165,000 $174,300 $190,000 Townhome/Condo Median Price $92,000 $79,000 $96,500 $121,000 $127,000 $147,000 $165,000 $194,100 Mobile Home Median Price $108,000 $94,250 $96,250 $86,500 $111,000 $112,500 $114,650 $125,000 SFD Median Sq Ft 1,728 1,601 1,687 1,599 1,600 1,610 1,560 1,585 Townhome/Condo Median Sq Ft 1,292 1,276 1,372 1,562 1,440 1,448 1,394 1,603 Mobile Home Median Sq Ft 1,907 1,752 1,693 1,095 1,637 1,382 1,419 1,503 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 ---PAGE BREAK--- Housing Needs Assessment 27 2008 c. Dollars Per Square Foot for County and Cities Chart 14 shows the median price per square foot for new site built single- family units, comparing San Juan County, Farmington, Aztec, and Bloomfield. Data is only available for 2006 and 2007 for Aztec and Bloomfield. The price per square foot is on the left scale. The Farmington and San Juan County lines are in very close alignment for both price per square foot and percentage change. An encouraging item on this table is the percentage increase in the price per square foot has slowed in 2007. The increase in the per square foot construction cost still went up but it was a much lower increase. Chart 14 Single Family Residential Price Per Square Foot and Percent Change SJC Assessor's Data $50.00 $60.00 $70.00 $80.00 $90.00 $100.00 $110.00 $120.00 $130.00 $140.00 0.00% 5.00% 10.00% 15.00% 20.00% 25.00% 30.00% 35.00% 40.00% 45.00% 50.00% Farmington $69.44 $74.95 $83.43 $86.12 $90.63 $102.48 $120.18 $128.49 SJC Total $68.51 $73.62 $81.85 $84.07 $90.51 $101.52 $117.53 $125.87 Aztec $117.91 $123.76 Bloomfield $111.70 $116.62 Farmington % Change 7.9% 11.3% 3.2% 5.2% 13.1% 17.3% 6.9% SJC % Change 7.5% 11.2% 2.7% 7.7% 12.2% 15.8% 7.1% 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 85% Total Increase for Farmington 84% Total Increase for San Juan County ---PAGE BREAK--- Housing Needs Assessment 28 2008 d. Mobile Home Sales Prices Chart 15 depicts the changes in the median sales prices of mobile homes on permanent foundations from 2000 to 2007 for San Juan County, Farmington, Aztec, and Bloomfield. The right side of the chart shows the percent change in price for Farmington and the County. The change in the median price has fluctuated, and does not follow the site built trends. The overall change in the median price is 76.9 percent in San Juan County, but only 15.7 percent in the City of Farmington. This table also shows some unusual 2003 data. The sales price of mobile homes dropped -10 percent in Farmington but climbed 11 percent in the overall county. Chart 15 Mobile Homes on Permanent Foundations Median Sales Price and Percent Change San Juan County Assessor's Sales Data $30,000 $50,000 $70,000 $90,000 $110,000 $130,000 $150,000 -20.00% -10.00% 0.00% 10.00% 20.00% 30.00% 40.00% 50.00% 60.00% 70.00% 80.00% 90.00% 100.00% County $78,000 $99,500 $100,000 $111,000 $115,700 $115,000 $130,000 $138,000 Farmington $108,000 $94,250 $96,250 $86,500 $111,000 $112,500 $114,650 $125,000 Aztec $115,000 $124,000 Bloomfield $105,000 $118,750 County % Change 28% 1% 11% 4% 13% 6% Farmington % Change -13% 2% -10% 28% 1% 2% 9% 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 76.9% Total Growth in SJC 15.7% Total Growth in Farmington 9. Rental Housing a. Daily Times Rental Data The City of Farmington has been tracking the Farmington Daily Times rental advertisements as an ongoing survey of rental activity. CDBG staff selected the month of April somewhat arbitrarily but it has been used consistently, year to year, to track changes in the market. On each April 1st, all rental ads appearing in the classifieds are selected. On each of the remaining days of April, only the ads appearing in the First Look section of the classifieds are selected. This method ensures that ads are not counted twice. The distribution of the Farmington Daily Times does go beyond the boundaries of ---PAGE BREAK--- Housing Needs Assessment 29 2008 San Juan County, but virtually all of the rentals advertised in the paper are for Farmington, Aztec, Bloomfield, and the developed surrounding areas. This survey method does not guarantee that some rental price data from outside of the county gets into the paper, nor does it cover rentals that are not advertised in the paper, however, the methodology is consistently applied year to year. In addition, this data is more current. By looking at advertised prices as opposed to a survey of rent paid by all renters, the most current rates are reported. i. Number Available and Price Chart 16 displays the number of advertised rentals available, the average price, and the median price for all rentals. The left axis and the green line track the number of units available. The right axis displays the median cost of rentals. The average and median prices have climbed from 2000 to 2007, 78.9 percent and 76.5 percent, while the total number of units available has fallen 60.6 percent. Both the cost increase and drop in availability are dramatic changes. San Juan County and Farmington have long had a tight rental market but within this period, there has been very little apartment development. Apartments are virtually nonexistent in the unincorporated areas and most rentals are mobile homes and older houses. This table alone shows the need for significant rental development. Chart 16 All Rental Types # Available, Average Price, and Median Price Farmington Daily Times Data 2000 to 2007 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 $100 $200 $300 $400 $500 $600 $700 $800 $900 Total Available 246 137 119 115 71 104 83 97 Total Average Price $445 $515 $513 $661 $618 $701 $759 $796 Total Median Price $425 $450 $450 $575 $550 $675 $650 $750 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 +76.5% Total Median Change +78.9% Total Average Change -60.6% Total Units Number Available ---PAGE BREAK--- Housing Needs Assessment 30 2008 ii. One Bedroom Rentals Chart 17 displays the average price, median price, and the number available for one-bedroom rentals. The supply of one-bedroom rentals fell from 53 to 12, similar to the overall supply, yet the rental cost has gone up more slowly. This indicates a lower demand for one bedroom units. Chart 17 One Bedroom Number Available, Average, and Median Costs Daily Times Data 2000 to 2007 - 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 $100 $150 $200 $250 $300 $350 $400 $450 $500 $550 1 Bed Available 53 27 25 16 11 15 10 12 1 Bed Average Price $363 $361 $354 $439 $369 $408 $484 $471 1 Bed Median Price $350 $360 $350 $438 $400 $390 $450 $475 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 Number Available ---PAGE BREAK--- Housing Needs Assessment 31 2008 iii. Two Bedroom Rentals Chart 18 displays the average price, median price, and the number available for two-bedroom rentals. The rental supply for two-bedroom rentals fell from 137 to 34 and the price has risen similar to the overall data. Chart 18 Two Bedroom Number Available, Average, and Median Costs Daily Times Data 2000 to 2007 - 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 $200 $250 $300 $350 $400 $450 $500 $550 $600 $650 $700 2 Bed Available 137 57 53 37 30 38 30 34 2 Bed Average Price $424 $445 $498 $484 $515 $603 $573 $643 2 Bed Median Price $425 $450 $450 $450 $513 $563 $550 $608 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 Number Available ---PAGE BREAK--- Housing Needs Assessment 32 2008 iv. Three Bedroom Rentals Chart 19 displays the average price, median price, and the number available for three-bedroom rentals. Contrary to the one and two bedroom units, the availability of three-bedroom rentals has remained steady from 2000 to 2007, but at a low level of 44 to 47. Chart 19 Three Bedroom Number Available, Average, and Median Costs Daily Times Data 2000 to 2007 - 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200 $200 $300 $400 $500 $600 $700 $800 $900 $1,000 3 Bed Available 44 42 27 52 21 46 30 47 3 Bed Average Price $605 $629 $632 $805 $781 $863 $917 $979 3 Bed Median Price $600 $617 $550 $759 $820 $875 $875 $900 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 Number Available ---PAGE BREAK--- Housing Needs Assessment 33 2008 v. Four Bedroom Rentals Chart 20 displays the average price, median price, and the number available for four-bedroom rentals. The number of four-bedroom rentals has been steady but very limited at 10 or less units each April, from one fifth to one tenth of the three-bedroom availability. This shows a very tight rental market for larger units and a high demand for four-bedroom rentals. Chart 20 Four Bedroom Rentals Number Available, Average, and Median Costs Daily Times Data 2000 to 2007 - 5 10 15 20 25 30 $200 $400 $600 $800 $1,000 $1,200 $1,400 4 Bed Available 6 10 7 8 7 4 10 3 4 Bed Average Price $604 $885 $952 $1,072 $1,042 $963 $1,193 $1,100 4 Bed Median Price $550 $800 $775 $1,088 $1,050 $925 $1,200 $1,275 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 Number Available ---PAGE BREAK--- Housing Needs Assessment 34 2008 vi. Median Rental Costs by Number of Bedrooms Chart 21 compares the median rental costs by the number of bedrooms from 2000 to 2007. The median rental costs have increased in order of the number of bedrooms, with a 57 percent increase in the price of four bedroom rentals. This shows a significant increase in the demand for larger units. Chart 21 One, Two, Three, and Four Bedroom Rentals - Median Costs Daily Times Data 2000 to 2007 $200 $400 $600 $800 $1,000 $1,200 $1,400 1 Bed Median Price $350 $360 $350 $438 $400 $390 $450 $475 2 Bed Median Price $425 $450 $450 $450 $513 $563 $550 $608 3 Bed Median Price $600 $617 $550 $759 $820 $875 $875 $900 4 Bed Median Price $550 $800 $775 $1,088 $1,050 $925 $1,200 $1,275 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 + 57% + 33% + 30% + 26% ---PAGE BREAK--- Housing Needs Assessment 35 2008 vii. Median Rent by Type of Rental Chart 22 displays the changes in median rent by type of rental from 2000 to 2007, and their total percent change. Townhomes/Condos/Duplex has had the greatest increase and the largest swings of all the types of housing. In 2005 and 2007, a significant number of new town homes were completed, and their larger size, quality, and new condition significantly increased the median price in this category. As a note, there were no townhomes available in April of 2001 hence the missing data point. It is interesting to see the contrast between Chart 22 and Chart 21. The median rental prices appear to have a much stronger relationship with the number of bedrooms then they do with the type of structures. Mobile homes and apartments have very similar lines and townhomes have bounced above homes and below mobile homes. Chart 22 Median Rent by Type of Rental Farmington Daily Times Data 2000 to 2007 $200 $400 $600 $800 $1,000 $1,200 Rooms for Rent $312 $200 $300 $325 $325 $275 $500 $375 Apartments $402 $414 $405 $428 $496 $543 $563 $629 Townhomes/Condo/Duplex $617 $523 $625 $400 $985 $708 $1,099 Houses $571 $710 $803 $891 $811 $860 $925 $960 Mobile Homes $416 $455 $498 $525 $421 $555 $563 $594 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 +20.2% +56.5% 42.8% +68.1% 78.1% ---PAGE BREAK--- Housing Needs Assessment 36 2008 b. Rental Contracts ACS 2006 Rental contracts data from the American Community Survey represent a sample survey of all current renters in all types of rentals. Some of which may have been in their units for many years. While the information and tracking its changes is informative, the median rental contract does not reflect the going rate of rentals that a new resident would find looking for a new home. If a family is looking for a new home or apartment to rent, the Farmington Daily Times data is going to give a more accurate look at current available rental costs. Chart 16 above shows the median advertised rental price in 2006 was $650, which is higher than the 2006 ACS median rental contract of $486. Chart 23 shows the number of households by price group of their rental contract. The data is from the 2006 American Community Survey. The green dashed line shows the median rental contract at $486, also from the 2006 ACS. In comparison to the nice bell curve of Chart 6 above, which shows housing values in a similar manner, the rental cost groups have many peaks and valleys with two separate large spikes in the middle. Chart 23 Contract Rental Costs for Renter Households Farmington MSA - 2006 ACS 405 537 497 129 377 613 552 852 1,410 488 1,207 529 84 678 180 635 0 445 80 446 0 200 400 [PHONE REDACTED] 1200 1400 1600 Less than $100 $100 to $149 $150 to $199 $200 to $249 $250 to $299 $300 to $349 $350 to $399 $400 to $449 $450 to $499 $500 to $549 $550 to $599 $600 to $649 $650 to $699 $700 to $749 $750 to $799 $800 to $899 $900 to $999 $1,000 to $1,249 $1,250 to $1,499 No cash rent Median Rental Contract $486 ---PAGE BREAK--- Housing Needs Assessment 37 2008 c. Rental Contracts 2000 and 2006 Chart 24 compares 2000 and 2006 rental contracts. The bars show the number of households by price range. The median contract rent in 2000 was $384, and in 2006, it was $486, representing a 26.5 percent increase. These contract rents and the percent increase are significantly lower than the prices and percent increase shown in the Farmington Daily Times data shown on Chart 16. One difference between the two types of rental data is the contract rent data from the ACS is from a sample of all current renters, while the Farmington Daily Times data is just for newly advertised rentals, which would capture the newest price increases. A very noticeable change from 2000 to 2006 is the very significant increase in the number of rental contracts in the $550 to $1,249 cost ranges, six to eight times as many. This shows a huge shift in the rental market. This price range is similar to typical mortgage payments. Chart 24 2000 and 2006 Contract Rent Number of Rentals by Price and Median Contract Rents Census 2000 and 2006 ACS 0 200 400 [PHONE REDACTED] 1200 1400 1600 Less than $100 $100 to $149 $150 to $199 $200 to $249 $250 to $299 $300 to $349 $350 to $399 $400 to $449 $450 to $499 $500 to $549 $550 to $599 $600 to $649 $650 to $699 $700 to $749 $750 to $799 $800 to $899 $900 to $999 $1,000 to $1,249 $1,250 to $1,499 $1,500 to $1,999 $2,000 or more No cash rent San Juan County 2000 Farmington MSA 2006 2000 Median Contract Rent $384 2006 Median Contract Rent $486 10. Current Affordability Current affordability is a key element of this report, which shows the health of the community housing market and points to socio-economic groups that are in need of affordable housing. ---PAGE BREAK--- Housing Needs Assessment 38 2008 This analysis compares median rental and purchase prices with the median income of various groups to determine affordability. In the Housing Expenditures section, charts 4 and 5 look at full expenditures for housing that include, mortgage or rent, taxes, insurance, and utilities. That data is provided by the American Community Survey but the extra expenses are not broken out or available. Any attempt to estimate median taxes, insurance, and utilities for all of the housing types in the affordability tables would be inaccurate. Therefore, the rental and housing purchase portions of this section just compare the rental or mortgage costs. To address the difference in methodology, this section uses Marginal Affordability set at 25 percent of the income, so affordable in this comparison becomes less than 25 percent of the income expended on the rent or mortgage alone. a. Rental Affordability Table 14 below compares the median family incomes of socioeconomic groups and the median costs of rentals by number of bedrooms and the type of rental. On the left side of the table are the different family groups and types of households, with their median incomes. The cells shaded grey show the overall median family income and the 80%, 50% and 30% MFI income groups. The next column shows the affordable (30 percent of gross income) rental payment for each group. Across the top of the table are the number of bedrooms and the type of rentals along with their median rent. In the comparison cells is a calculated percentage, which represents the percent of the group’s median income, which must be expended to pay for the median cost by bedroom and type of rental. For example, the median income American Indian Family would have to pay 44.18 percent of their income to rent a median priced three- bedroom rental, and this type of rental would be unaffordable. The resulting comparison cells are color coded by the percent of the income required to pay for the rental. Families with the “greatest need” pay over 50 percent and are shaded purple. Families that pay 30 percent or more are considered unaffordable and are shaded orange. Families that pay 25 percent or more are considered marginally affordable and are shaded yellow. The green shaded cells are considered affordable. The four-bedroom category is not affordable to any socioeconomic group and is only marginally affordable to 6 of 16 the groups. One-bedroom units and rooms for rent are the most affordable but are still not affordable to young families and those earning 30% MFI. The median three-bedroom rental price is affordable to those making the median family income of $50,069, but is not affordable to those making 80% MFI or less. This table shows that to combat overcrowding, families need affordable housing assistance to afford larger rentals. ---PAGE BREAK--- Housing Needs Assessment 39 2008 Table14 Farmington MSA Median Income 30% of Gross Income Households 2006 1 Bed 2 Bed 3 Bed 4 Bed Houses Town Homes/ Condos Apartments Mobile Homes Room For Rent $ 450 $ 550 $ 875 $ 1,200 $ 960 $ 708 563 $ 563 $ 500 $ White alone, not Hispanic or Latino 50,932 $ $ 1,273 10.60% 12.96% 20.62% 28.27% 22.62% 16.68% 13.26% 13.26% 11.78% American Indian 23,767 $ $ 594 22.72% 27.77% 44.18% 60.59% 48.47% 35.75% 28.43% 28.43% 25.25% Hispanic or Latino origin (of any race) 45,079 $ $ 1,127 11.98% 14.64% 23.29% 31.94% 25.56% 18.85% 14.99% 14.99% 13.31% HOUSEHOLD INCOME BY AGE OF HOUSEHOLDER 15 to 24 years 18,466 $ $ 462 29.24% 35.74% 56.86% 77.98% 62.38% 46.01% 36.59% 36.59% 32.49% 25 to 44 years 47,100 $ $ 1,178 11.46% 14.01% 22.29% 30.57% 24.46% 18.04% 14.34% 14.34% 12.74% 45 to 64 years 50,418 $ $ 1,260 10.71% 13.09% 20.83% 28.56% 22.85% 16.85% 13.40% 13.40% 11.90% 65 years and over 23,364 $ $ 584 23.11% 28.25% 44.94% 61.63% 49.31% 36.36% 28.92% 28.92% 25.68% FAMILIES Median Family Income 50,069 $ $ 1,252 10.79% 13.18% 20.97% 28.76% 23.01% 16.97% 13.49% 13.49% 11.98% 80% 40,055 $ $ 1,001 13.48% 16.48% 26.21% 35.95% 28.76% 21.21% 16.87% 16.87% 14.98% 50% 25,035 $ $ 626 21.57% 26.36% 41.94% 57.52% 46.02% 33.94% 26.99% 26.99% 23.97% 30% 15,021 $ $ 376 35.95% 43.94% 69.90% 95.87% 76.69% 56.56% 44.98% 44.98% 39.94% With own children under 18 years 46,912 $ $ 1,173 11.51% 14.07% 22.38% 30.70% 24.56% 18.11% 14.40% 14.40% 12.79% With no own children under 18 years 52,398 $ $ 1,310 10.31% 12.60% 20.04% 27.48% 21.99% 16.21% 12.89% 12.89% 11.45% Married-couple families 59,520 $ $ 1,488 9.07% 11.09% 17.64% 24.19% 19.35% 14.27% 11.35% 11.35% 10.08% Female householder, no husband present 22,738 $ $ 568 23.75% 29.03% 46.18% 63.33% 50.66% 37.36% 29.71% 29.71% 26.39% Male householder, no wife present 50,333 $ $ 1,258 10.73% 13.11% 20.86% 28.61% 22.89% 16.88% 13.42% 13.42% 11.92% Source: 2006 American Community Survey and Farmington Daily Time Rental Adds Greater than 50% of Gross Income Greater than 30% = Unaffordable Greater than 25% = Marginal Affordability Affordable 2006 Median Rental Price by Bedrooms 2006 Median Rental Price by Type Affordability - Median Family Income by Race, Age, and Family Type Compared with Rental Prices by Bedrooms and Type The percentage of the gross income is displayed. ---PAGE BREAK--- Housing Needs Assessment 40 2008 b. Housing Purchase Affordability Table 15 compares the median family incomes of socioeconomic groups and their ability to purchase the median priced home, townhome/condo, or mobile home. On the left side of the table are the different family groups and household types with their median incomes. The cells shaded grey show the overall 80%, 50% and 30% median family income levels. The next column shows the recommended maximum home value for each group. This value was calculated with the assistance of a banking loan officer and research on a number of internet loan calculators. A number of assumptions were made in this calculation: first time buyer, 5% down, 6.5% interest rate, PPI mortgage insurance, typical property insurance, and taxes. A number of mortgages were calculated for home values around the median prices and an average ratio of income to value was created. The final calculation used for this table is, a family’s income is 29 percent of the recommended maximum home value. For example, if a family’s income is $45,079 (Hispanic), divide the income by 0.29 and the recommended maximum home value is $155,445. Utilities are still not included for this estimate so like in the rental affordability section above, the concept of Marginally Affordable is used. In the comparison cells, the median price for houses, townhomes/condos, and mobile homes is subtracted from the recommended maximum price by family and household groups. The green cells are positive numbers and represent affordability. The yellow cells are positive numbers but are less than $10,000 and are considered to be marginally affordable. If there are even minor changes in the terms of the loan or a family’s income, that type of housing could become unaffordable. The orange cells show negative numbers and by how much a family cannot afford the type of home. In Table 15, you see far less green affordable cells for housing purchases then in the rental table above. Only married couple families with the MFI of $59,520 can afford to purchase the median priced home. American Indian, young and old families, those making less than 50% MFI, and Female Householders, cannot even afford the median priced mobile home. ---PAGE BREAK--- Housing Needs Assessment 41 2008 Table 15 Farmington MSA Median Income Recommended Max Home Cost Households 2006 Houses Town Homes/ Condos Mobile Homes $ 174,600 $ 165,000 114,650 $ White alone, not Hispanic or Latino 50,932 $ $ 175,628 1,028 $ American Indian 23,767 $ $ 81,955 (92,645) $ (83,045) $ (32,695) $ Hispanic or Latino origin (of any race) 45,079 $ $ 155,445 (19,155) $ (9,555) $ HOUSEHOLD INCOME BY AGE 15 to 24 years 18,466 $ $ 63,676 (110,924) $ (101,324) $ (50,974) $ 25 to 44 years 47,100 $ $ 162,414 (12,186) $ (2,586) $ 45 to 64 years 50,418 $ $ 173,855 (745) $ 8,855 $ 65 years and over 23,364 $ $ 80,566 (94,034) $ (84,434) $ (34,084) $ FAMILIES Median Family Income 50,069 $ $ 172,652 (1,948) $ 7,652 $ 80% 40,055 $ $ 138,121 (36,479) $ (26,879) $ 50% 25,035 $ $ 86,326 (88,274) $ (78,674) $ (28,324) $ 30% 15,021 $ $ 51,796 (122,804) $ (113,204) $ (62,854) $ With own children under 18 years 46,912 $ $ 161,766 (12,834) $ (3,234) $ With no own children under 18 years 52,398 $ $ 180,683 6,083 $ Married-couple families 59,520 $ $ 205,241 Female householder, no husband present 22,738 $ $ 78,407 (96,193) $ (86,593) $ (36,243) $ Male householder, no wife present 50,333 $ $ 173,562 (1,038) $ 8,562 $ Source: 2006 American Community Survey and San Juan County Asessor's Sales Data Unaffordable Marginal Affordability = within 10k Affordable Affordability - Median Family Income by Race, Age, and Family Type Compared with Median Housing Prices by Structure Type 2006 Median Housing Price by Type ---PAGE BREAK--- Housing Needs Assessment 42 2008 11. Projected Affordability Affordability from 2000 to 2020 Table 16 shows a simple linear projection of a combination of housing and rental affordability data with Median Family Income data to look at the future of affordability. The Median Family Income, housing costs, and rental costs rows are labeled on the left side of the table. The known data from 1999 to 2007 is shown in the middle. The right side of the table shows the total change and the average annual change along with projections to 2010 and 2020. The affordability shading is consistent with Tables 14 and 15. If housing prices and incomes continue to rise as they have since 2000, all median priced housing will become unaffordable for the median family income even mobile homes and rentals. The projections to 2010 and 2020, based upon the past seven years of price increases, show ridiculous prices for all housing types. The total change for housing over the last seven years has far outpaced the increases in wages and median family income. The main lesson from this projection of affordability is that this type of housing price growth relative to wages and incomes is not sustainable. In the last year, we have seen the housing crisis playing out around the nation and some level of correction will have to occur in San Juan County. Table 16 MFI and Wage Growth 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 Total Change Average Change 2010 2020 Average Wage All Industries $ 29,411 $ 29,472 $ 30,556 $ 32,281 $ 33,695 $ 36,220 37,897 $ 23.2% 4.6% 43,409 $ 68,257 $ Median Family Income San Juan County, HUD User Data Sets Estimates $33,300 $34,000 $34,100 $35,700 $41,500 $44,200 $44,200 46,611 $ 49,154 $ 32.7% 5.5% 57,646 $ 98,052 $ SJC Median Housing Costs and Rent Single Family Dewlling Med Price $116,600 $120,000 $133,000 $133,000 $144,000 $161,207 $168,000 $188,900 62.0% 8.9% 243,677 $ 569,407 $ Affordable Amount - Med Price $641 -$2,414 -$9,897 $10,103 $8,414 -$8,793 -$7,271 -$19,403 -$44,898 -$231,296 Townhome Condo/Duplex Med Price $90,200 $78,500 $90,000 $118,000 $112,500 $147,000 $164,100 $194,100 115.2% 16.5% 306,553 $ 1,406,389 $ Affordable Amount - Med Price $27,041 $39,086 $33,103 $25,103 $39,914 $5,414 -$3,371 -$24,603 -$107,774 -$1,068,277 Mobile Home on Perm. Foundation Med Price $78,000 $99,500 $100,000 $111,000 $115,700 $115,000 $130,000 $138,000 76.9% 11.0% 188,677 $ 535,203 $ Affordable Amount - Med Price $39,241 $18,086 $23,103 $32,103 $36,714 $37,414 $30,729 $31,497 $10,102 -$197,092 Total Median Rental Price $425 $450 $450 $575 $550 $675 $650 $750 76% 10.9% 1,024 $ 2,887 $ Med Rent as a % of Med Income 15% 16% 15% 17% 15% 18% 17% 18% 21% 35% Greater than 50% of Gross Income Affordable Farmington Daily Times Rental Data Projection Calculation Affordability from 2000 to 2020 Sources: US Labor Department, Federal Reserve Bank, Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages, San Juan County Assessors Office - County Data Greater than 30% = Unaffordable Greater than 25% = Marginal Affordability ---PAGE BREAK--- Housing Needs Assessment 43 2008 12. Housing Needs The Housing Needs portion of this report provides more than just a snapshot of current problem areas in the housing market. A simple linear projection based upon the population projection is applied to a variety of socioeconomic groups, housing types, greatest needs populations, and special needs populations. These projections will provide some justification for affordable housing project development, for nonprofit service providers seeking grants, and for the development of strategic plans to address affordable housing and other needs. a. Needs for Median Families by Race, Age, and Family Type Table 17 shows the projected number of families by race, age, family type, and percentage of MFI. The growth rate used for all groups is 1.3%. The population of the group is projected to 2010, 2015, and 2020. The total change and average change per year for all groups is also shown. Table 17 Projected Households at 1.3% growth Total Change Farmington MSA Median Income Percent of Households Number of Households 2010 2015 2020 2006 to 2020 Households 2006 38,559 40,604 43,312 46,202 7,643 546 White alone, not Hispanic or Latino 50,932 $ 50.7% 19,549 20,586 21,959 23,424 3,875 277 American Indian 23,767 $ 29.8% 11,491 12,100 12,907 13,768 2,278 163 Hispanic or Latino origin (of any race) 45,079 $ 18.2% 7,018 7,390 7,883 8,409 1,391 99 HOUSEHOLD INCOME BY AGE OF HOUSEHOLDER 15 to 24 years 18,466 $ 4.4% 1,697 1,787 1,906 2,033 336 24 25 to 44 years 47,100 $ 34.8% 13,419 14,130 15,073 16,078 2,660 190 45 to 64 years 50,418 $ 42.1% 16,233 17,094 18,234 19,451 3,218 230 65 years and over 23,364 $ 18.6% 7,172 7,552 8,056 8,594 1,422 102 FAMILIES Median Family Income 50,069 $ 80% 40,055 $ 18.0% 6,935 7,303 7,790 8,310 1,375 98 50% 25,035 $ 11.0% 4,241 4,466 4,764 5,082 841 60 30% 15,021 $ 20.6% 7,928 8,348 8,905 9,499 1,571 112 With own children under 18 years 46,912 $ 35.0% 13,498 14,214 15,162 16,173 2,675 191 With no own children under 18 years 52,398 $ 40.2% 15,502 16,324 17,413 18,575 3,073 219 Married-couple families 59,520 $ 52.8% 20,365 21,445 22,875 24,402 4,037 288 Female householder, no husband present 22,738 $ 13.8% 5,332 5,615 5,989 6,389 1,057 75 Male householder, no wife present 50,333 $ 8.6% 3,303 3,478 3,710 3,958 655 47 PROJECTION OF HOUSEHOLDS BY GROUP Source: 2006 American Community Survey Average Change Per Year ---PAGE BREAK--- Housing Needs Assessment 44 2008 b. Housing Needs by Type of Unit The Table 18 shows the projected housing needs for different housing types. The only available breakdown of housing types is based upon occupied housing. Single Family, Multifamily, and Mobile Home are shown with their relative percentages and projections to 2020. The renter-occupied line shows the needed development of rental units just to keep pace with our very tight rental market. If improvement is to occur, even more rental units should be developed. The right side of Table 18 shows the total change and the average change. The average change per year shows the number of units by type that will need to be constructed through 2020 to keep up with minimum housing needs in this community. Table 18 2006 2010 2015 2020 1.3% 38,559 40,604 43,312 46,202 7,643 546 Single Family 56.2% 21,688 22,838 24,362 25,987 4,299 307 Multifamily Units 9.9% 3,823 4,026 4,294 4,581 758 54 Mobile home 33.8% 13,048 13,740 14,656 15,634 2,586 185 Owner-Occupied 73.7% 28,415 29,922 31,918 34,047 5,632 402 Renter-Occupied 26.3% 10,144 10,682 11,394 12,155 2,011 144 Source: 2006 ACS Prepared by Farmington CDBG Total Change Total Occupied Housing Average Percent Growth Average Change Housing Needs by Type of Unit Farmington MSA 2006 to 2020 ---PAGE BREAK--- Housing Needs Assessment 45 2008 c. Needs by percent of Income Spent on Housing Table 19 shows the projected needs of rental housing and owner occupied housing for those who pay more than 30 percent and 50 percent of their family income for housing. Those paying more than 50 percent are considered greatest need families, and there is a projected need to provide an average of 35 new rental units and 12 single-family dwellings every year through 2020 that can accommodate these families. For families paying more than 30 percent of their income on housing, there is a need for an average of 21 new rental units and 50 single-family dwellings every year through 2020. Table 19 Unaffordable Mortgage Holders ACS Data Projection of Households 1.3% Needed Affordabe Housing Units Percent of Income Paid on Mortgage 2006 2010 2015 2020 Total Increase by 2020 Average Units Per Year 30.0 to 49.9 percent 3515 3,701 3,948 4,212 697 50 50.0 percent or more 828 872 930 992 164 12 Non-Affordable Rental Contracts Percent of Income Paid on Rent 30.0 to 49.9 percent 1507 1,587 1,693 1,806 299 21 50.0 percent or more 2486 2,618 2,792 2,979 493 35 Projection of Households with Unaffordable Mortgages and Rental Contracts d. Needs Projection for Crowding Table 20 provides a needs projection to address crowding in owner occupied and rental housing. Families, which live in crowded situations (over 1.0 occupants per room), are considered greatest needs families. In 2006 only 2.2 percent (626) of owner occupied housing was overcrowded, while 12 percent (1,223) of renter occupied housing was overcrowded. The number of families living a crowded condition is projected to be 2,244 by 2020. The Average Per Year number shows how many units on average per year of larger homes which could be established to meet this demand. There is a need for 9.56 homes and 18.68 rentals every year out to 2020 that are affordable with three, four, or more bedrooms. Table 20 Farmington MSA 2006 % of Total 2010 2020 Total Change Average Per Year %Crowded Total Occupied 38,559 Owner occupied: 28,415 74% 1.00 or less occupants per room 27,789 29,262 33,297 1.01 or more occupants per room 626 2.2% 659 750 124 8.86 Renter occupied: 10,144 26% 1.00 or less occupants per room 8,921 9,394 10,689 1.01 or more occupants per room 1,223 12% 1,288 1,465 242 17.31 Crowding - Number of Occupants Per Room 2006 to 2020 Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2006 American Community Survey Projection based upon 1.3% growth. ---PAGE BREAK--- Housing Needs Assessment 46 2008 e. Needs for Disabled in Poverty Table 21 projects the needs for the disabled residential community by type of disability. The With any disability row shows the total disabled population. There are some people with multiple types of disabilities, so the sum of the types is greater than the total. The annual average column shows the average needs for housing by type of disability. Table 21 POVERTY STATUS Population 5 years and over for whom a poverty status is determined 2006 2010 2015 2020 Total Change Annual Average With any disability 3,289 3,464 3,695 3,941 652 47 With a sensory disability 1,133 1,193 1,272 1,357 225 16 With a physical disability 1,975 2,080 2,219 2,367 391 28 With a mental disability 1,034 1,089 1,162 1,239 205 15 With a self-care disability 504 531 566 604 100 7 Source: Farmington MSA American Community Survey Number of People In Poverty Needs for Disabled Persons in Poverty 13. Conclusions a. Greatest Need The Farmington MSA has a significant number of households that are considered greatest need families. The current greatest needs families deserve attention and assistance through public service projects and affordable housing projects. The potential growth in these groups to 2020 shows the priority housing project needs in this community. Any affordable housing project conducted in the Farmington MSA should directly affect the families in greatest need. In 2006, in the Farmington MSA: • 12,169 households or 31.6% earned 50% or less of the median income • 2,486 households or 26.2% paid more than 50% of their income in rent • 828 households or 5.1% paid more than 50% of their income on their mortgage • 2,506 households did not have full kitchens or plumbing • 1,849 households or 14.2% were living in overcrowded conditions In 2020 in the Farmington MSA: • 14,581 households will earn 50% or less of the median income • 2,979 households will pay more than 50% of their income in rent • 992 households will paid more than 50% of their income on their mortgage • 2,244 households will be living in overcrowded conditions. ---PAGE BREAK--- Housing Needs Assessment 47 2008 b. Affordability In the Farmington MSA, or San Juan County, current affordability has reached the point where the median family income can no longer afford to purchase the median priced home and can only marginally afford a townhome/condo. The only group that can afford to buy a median priced home are married couple families. American Indian, Hispanic, younger and older families, families with young children, and female headed households are all far short of being able to afford to purchase the median priced home. Rental affordability in the Farmington MSA is a little better than the affordability of home ownership. The median rental prices for two bedroom units and apartments are affordable for all groups except for 15 to 24 year old households. However, American Indian, younger and older families, and female-headed households are unable to afford to rent the median priced three-bedroom unit, house, or townhome/condo. This may be the reason why 12.1 percent of all renter occupied units are overcrowded, and why 42.1 percent of all rental households pay more than 30 percent of their income in rent. The median price for homes has increased 62 percent and the median overall rental cost has increased 76.5 percent, while the median family income has increased just 32.7 percent. If the current increases in housing costs continue to outpace the gains in wages, then housing in the Farmington MSA will become more and more unaffordable. c. Housing Needs For housing to keep up with the minimum demand from projected population growth, an average of 636 housing units must be constructed in the Farmington MSA every year to 2020. Of those units, 358 should be single- family dwellings, 22 should be duplexes, 47 should be multifamily units, 206 should be mobile homes, just to keep up with current housing stock mix, and to maintain the current level of housing supply. To assist the current families in greatest need there is a current demand for rental assistance for 2,486 households that pay more than 50 percent of their income on rent, and 12,169 households that earn less than 50% MFI. To address just the needs of future growth of greatest needs families, an average of 172 affordable rental units should be constructed every year to 2020. To improve the availability of affordable rental units for the current residents even more units need to be developed specifically for those in the greatest need. ---PAGE BREAK--- Housing Needs Assessment 48 2008 Summary Table of All Housing Needs Table 22 Summary Table of All Projected Housing Needs - Farmington MSA - 2006 to 2020 NEEDS BY HOUSHOLD TYPE Table 17 2006 2010 2015 2020 Total Change Average Change Per Year White alone, not Hispanic or Latino 19,549 20,586 21,959 23,424 3,875 277 American Indian 11,491 12,100 12,907 13,768 2,278 163 Hispanic or Latino origin (of any race) 7,018 7,390 7,883 8,409 1,391 99 BY AGE OF HOUSEHOLDER 15 to 24 years 1,697 1,787 1,906 2,033 336 24 25 to 44 years 13,419 14,130 15,073 16,078 2,660 190 45 to 64 years 16,233 17,094 18,234 19,451 3,218 230 65 years and over 7,172 7,552 8,056 8,594 1,422 102 FAMILIES EARNING 80% of MFI 6,935 7,303 7,790 8,310 1,375 98 50% of MFI 4,241 4,466 4,764 5,082 841 60 30% of MFI 7,928 8,348 8,905 9,499 1,571 112 With own children under 18 years 13,498 14,214 15,162 16,173 2,675 191 With no own children under 18 years 15,502 16,324 17,413 18,575 3,073 219 Married-couple families 20,365 21,445 22,875 24,402 4,037 288 Female householder, no husband present 5,332 5,615 5,989 6,389 1,057 75 Male householder, no wife present 3,303 3,478 3,710 3,958 655 47 NEEDS BY HOUSING TYPE Table 18 2006 2010 2015 2020 Total Change Average Change Per Year Total Occupied Housing Needs 38,559 40,604 43,312 46,202 7,643 546 Single Family 21,688 22,838 24,362 25,987 4,299 307 Multifamily Units 3,823 4,026 4,294 4,581 758 54 Mobile home 13,048 13,740 14,656 15,634 2,586 185 Owner-Occupied 28,415 29,922 31,918 34,047 5,632 402 Renter-Occupied 10,144 10,682 11,394 12,155 2,011 144 NEEDS FOR UNAFFORDABLE MORTGAGE HOLDERS AND RENTAL CONTRACTS Table 19 2006 2010 2015 2020 Total Change Average Change Per Year Unaffordable Mortgage Holders Percent of Income Paid on Mortgage 30.0 to 49.9 percent 3515 3,701 3,948 4,212 697 50 50.0 percent or more 828 872 930 992 164 12 Non-Affordable Rental Contracts Percent of Income Paid on Rent 30.0 to 49.9 percent 1507 1,587 1,693 1,806 299 21 50.0 percent or more 2486 2,618 2,792 2,979 493 35 NEEDS FOR OVERCROWDING Table 20 Owner occupied: 2006 2010 2015 2020 Total Change Average Change Per Year 1.00 or less occupants per room 27,789 29,643 31,620 33,730 1.01 or more occupants per room 626 668 712 760 134 10 Renter occupied: 1.00 or less occupants per room 8,921 9,516 10,151 10,828 1.01 or more occupants per room 1,223 1,305 1,392 1,484 261 19 NEEDS BY DISABILITY TYPE IN POVERTY Table 21 Population 5 years and over for whom a poverty status is determined 2006 2010 2015 2020 Total Change Average Change Per Year With any disability 3,289 3,464 3,695 3,941 652 47 With a sensory disability 1,133 1,193 1,272 1,357 225 16 With a physical disability 1,975 2,080 2,219 2,367 391 28 With a mental disability 1,034 1,089 1,162 1,239 205 15 With a self-care disability 504 531 566 604 100 7 ---PAGE BREAK--- Housing Needs Assessment 49 2008 14. Recommendations Based upon the number of Greatest Need Families and the lack of housing and rental affordability for a variety of socioeconomic groups, City of Farmington CDBG staff recommends that a Strategic Plan be developed to address the development of housing affordability in San Juan County. CDBG Staff also recommends that that during the creation of the new 2009 Consolidated Plan, that housing affordability projects be given a high priority and that a variety of Action Plan projects be considered for future funding to address this important issue. ---PAGE BREAK--- Housing Needs Assessment 50 2008 Terms and Acronyms • CDBG – Community Development Block Grant • ACS - American Community Survey - Similar to the US Census • MSA - Metropolitan Statistical Area - Cities and their surrounding areas with a minimum population of 50,000. • Farmington MSA – Data from the ACS with the same boundaries as San Juan County • Metro and Non-Metro – Populations can be defined as inside or outside of an MSA • BBER - Bureau of Business and Economic Research • SJC – San Juan County • - San Juan County Board of Realtors Data • MFI - Median Family Income • 80% MFI - used as an income qualification for the CDBG program. • 50% MFI – Low Income • 30% MFI - Very Low-Income. Sources 1. The American Community Survey - The US Census conducted its first American Community Survey (ACS) in the Farmington Metropolitan Statistical Area in 2005. The ACS uses a sample, unlike the Decennial Census, which is based upon 100% data. The users of this data are cautioned that there are margins of error associated with the size of the samples taken. For full details of the methods of collection and data accuracy, please consult the American Community Survey website http://www.census.gov/acs/www/ 2. The US Census provides detailed decennial data and can be found at http://www.census.gov/ 3. Bureau of Business and Economic Research of the University of New Mexico (BBER.) The BBER web page summarizes data from a number of sources into usable information for New Mexico communities. http://www.unm.edu/~bber/ 4. San Juan County Assessor – The City of Farmington would like to express its gratitude for the cooperation of the County Assessor’s office in providing detailed data on the reported sales of residential properties. As a note: no privileged or personal data was disclosed or used in the creation of this report. 5. San Juan County Building Department – The City of Farmington would like to express its gratitude for the cooperation of the SJC Building Department in providing the building permit data. 6. San Juan County Board of Realtors – The city of Farmington would also like to express its gratitude for the cooperation of the Board of Realtors for providing data from the Multiple Listing Service. As a note: no privileged or personal data was disclosed or used in the creation of this report. 7. Farmington Daily Times Rental Data – All rental data was collected from the classified section of the Farmington Daily Times. That data is limited only by the geographic distribution of the newspaper delivery and advertising. The data roughly approximates the San Juan County area. The City of Farmington would like to express its gratitude for the cooperation of the San Juan College Library staff for allowing significant access to the microfilm reader. 8. New Mexico Department of Labor - http://www.dws.state.nm.us/ 9. Housing and Urban Development, HUD - www.hud.gov 10. U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analysis - www.commerce.gov 11. National Center for Children In Poverty – NCCP http://www.nccp.org/profiles/NM_profile_8.html 12. 2008 Colorado College State Of The Rockies Report Card - http://www.coloradocollege.edu/stateoftherockies/08ReportCard/AffordableHousing.pdf ---PAGE BREAK--- Appendix i Housing Needs Assessment Appendix 1. Introduction A wide range of related data was collected during research for this project. While some of the data does not directly relate to the issues of affordability and housing needs, this data has been placed in this Appendix for the benefit of the wide variety of groups that may make use of this report. This additional data also provides a wider view of the economic and housing situation. 2. Annual Average Wages from 2001 to 2006 The wage data in Table 1 comes from the US Labor Department and is for San Juan County. Wages by sector by year is shown along with the percent increase from 2001 go 2006. The table is sorted with the highest percentage increase at the top. At the top of the table, shaded in blues, are the annual inflation rate and the average wage of all industries. This shows that San Juan County average wages have outpaced national inflation rates. However, if you look at the sector percent increases, the bottom seven sectors have not kept pace with inflation, Health Care and Social Assistance, Accommodation and Food Services, Retail Trade, Ag. For. Fish. & Hunting, Utilities, and Management. The red line shows the industry sectors above and below inflations. The two rows shaded green are the highest and lowest average sector wages, Utilities and Food Services. One clarification needed for this table is the Non-Classifiables at the bottom. There is significant volatility in this category with changing methodology over the years and the 211.9 percent increase cannot be accurately compared with other sectors. ---PAGE BREAK--- Appendix ii Table 23 SAN JUAN COUNTY AVERAGE ANNUAL WAGES, BY MAJOR INDUSTRIAL SECTOR Sectors Ranked by % Increase 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 Increase Inflation Rate CPI 2.8% 1.6% 2.3% 2.7% 3.4% 3.2% 17.1% Average Wage All Industries $ 29,411 $ 29,472 $ 30,556 $ 32,281 $ 33,695 $ 36,220 23.2% Transportation & Warehousing $ 35,535 $ 38,160 $ 37,405 $ 38,613 $ 43,521 $ 48,697 37.0% Real Estate & Rental & Leasing $ 30,070 $ 30,758 $ 33,317 $ 35,173 $ 37,423 $ 40,750 35.5% Professional & Technical Services $ 28,876 $ 30,099 $ 30,818 $ 32,926 $ 35,728 $ 38,390 32.9% Information $ 26,591 $ 27,797 $ 29,137 $ 30,112 $ 32,858 $ 35,276 32.7% Manufacturing $ 27,917 $ 27,854 $ 30,283 $ 30,793 $ 32,120 $ 36,506 30.8% Administrative & Waste Services $ 19,814 $ 23,341 $ 22,371 $ 20,889 $ 22,608 $ 25,089 26.6% Wholesale Trade $ 36,267 $ 37,627 $ 38,440 $ 40,842 $ 42,972 $ 45,475 25.4% Mining $ 54,556 $ 55,194 $ 56,319 $ 58,777 $ 60,906 $ 68,363 25.3% Educational Services $ 22,257 $ 24,129 $ 25,000 $ 24,824 $ 26,603 $ 27,616 24.1% Local Government $ 24,364 $ 25,393 $ 27,159 $ 28,485 $ 29,254 $ 30,042 23.3% Construction $ 29,771 $ 29,422 $ 30,565 $ 33,350 $ 34,080 $ 36,407 22.3% Federal Government $ 42,242 $ 41,951 $ 43,739 $ 47,076 $ 48,922 $ 51,502 21.92% State Government $ 29,923 $ 31,012 $ 31,666 $ 33,294 $ 33,907 $ 36,477 21.90% Finance & Insurance $ 28,752 $ 30,445 $ 31,977 $ 31,493 $ 32,789 $ 34,416 19.7% Other Services, ex. Public Administration $ 22,120 $ 21,885 $ 22,456 $ 23,381 $ 24,734 $ 26,115 18.1% Health Care & Social Assistance $ 29,712 $ 29,772 $ 29,995 $ 32,348 $ 32,774 $ 34,696 16.8% Arts, Entertainment & Recreation $ 14,982 $ 14,527 $ 15,043 $ 15,587 $ 16,424 $ 17,487 16.7% Accommodation & Food Services $ 9,536 $ 9,809 $ 9,783 $ 10,252 $ 10,507 $ 11,072 16.1% Retail Trade $ 20,898 $ 20,892 $ 21,025 $ 22,461 $ 23,131 $ 24,150 15.6% Ag. For. Fish. & Hunting $ 18,962 $ 13,436 $ 18,799 $ 17,056 $ 21,019 $ 21,542 13.6% Utilities $ 73,886 $ 70,245 $ 70,038 $ 71,864 $ 78,368 $ 81,926 10.9% Management of Companies & Enterprises $ 48,208 $ 46,106 $ 46,379 $ 44,738 $ 46,571 $ 50,850 5.5% Non-Classifiables $ 12,371 $ 9,063 $ 16,707 $ 16,607 $ 30,767 $ 38,584 211.9% Source: US Labor Department, and Federal Reserve Bank, Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages. Table prepared by City of Farmington Planning Department, CDBG Highest and lowest average wages Non -Classifiables have significant volatility in methodology and the % increase should not be used for comparison. ---PAGE BREAK--- Appendix iii 3. Wages by Occupation Table 2 has detailed wage data and employment for various occupation summaries for the Farmington MSA in 2006. The bureau of Labor Statistics web page has much more extensive occupation data for all types of employment. Table 24 Farmington MSA Bureau of Labor Statistics Occupation Code Occupation Title Employment Median Hourly Median Annual Mean Hourly Mean Annual 00-0000 All Occupations 49,970 $12.80 $26,624.00 $15.45 $32,130 11-0000 Management Occupations 2,280 $27.81 $57,844.80 $31.71 $65,960 13-0000 Business and Financial Operations Occupations 850 $20.34 $42,307.20 $23.12 $48,090 15-0000 Computer and Mathematical Science Occupations 190 $22.18 $46,134.40 $22.97 $47,780 17-0000 Architecture and Engineering Occupations 900 $25.61 $53,268.80 $26.59 $55,300 19-0000 Life, Physical, and Social Science Occupations 570 $20.10 $41,808.00 $21.23 $44,160 21-0000 Community and Social Services Occupations 750 $15.40 $32,032.00 $16.03 $33,350 23-0000 Legal Occupations 160 $21.68 $45,094.40 $24.48 $50,930 25-0000 Education, Training, and Library Occupations 3,410 $17.25 $35,880.00 $16.72 $34,780 27-0000 Arts, Design, Entertainment, Sports, and Media Occupations 210 $13.72 $28,537.60 $15.26 $31,750 29-0000 Healthcare Practitioner and Technical Occupations 2,120 $25.13 $52,270.40 $28.62 $59,530 31-0000 Healthcare Support Occupations 1,260 $10.36 $21,548.80 $11.19 $23,270 33-0000 Protective Service Occupations 1,140 $13.54 $28,163.20 $15.10 $31,420 35-0000 Food Preparation and Serving Related Occupations 4,810 $6.58 $13,686.40 $7.23 $15,030 37-0000 Building and Grounds Cleaning and Maintenance Occupations 1,430 $8.38 $17,430.40 $9.03 $18,790 39-0000 Personal Care and Service Occupations 1,500 $9.28 $19,302.40 $9.40 $19,550 41-0000 Sales and Related Occupations 4,400 $9.92 $20,633.60 $13.10 $27,250 43-0000 Office and Administrative Support Occupations 7,080 $11.39 $23,691.20 $12.23 $25,450 45-0000 Farming, Fishing, and Forestry Occupations 60 $9.84 $20,467.20 $11.54 $24,010 47-0000 Construction and Extraction Occupations 6,800 $15.02 $31,241.60 $16.24 $33,780 49-0000 Installation, Maintenance, and Repair Occupations 3,070 $15.44 $32,115.20 $16.55 $34,420 51-0000 Production Occupations 2,630 $16.25 $33,800.00 $17.80 $37,020 53-0000 Transportation and Material Moving Occupations 4,330 $11.24 $23,379.20 $13.02 $27,090 All Occupations May 2006 Wage Estimates ---PAGE BREAK--- Appendix iv 4. Unemployment Rates Unemployment Rates Comparing National, NM, and MSAs U.S. Department of Labor 2.0% 2.5% 3.0% 3.5% 4.0% 4.5% 5.0% 5.5% 6.0% 6.5% 7.0% National 4.0% 4.7% 5.8% 6.0% 5.5% 5.1% 4.6% 4.6% 5.4% 5.2% 5.2% 4.8% 5.2% 5.7% 6.0% 6.1% 6.0% 6.1% NM 5.0% 4.9% 5.5% 5.9% 5.7% 5.2% 4.3% 3.5% 3.2% 3.5% 3.7% 3.4% 3.7% 4.5% 4.6% 4.7% 3.8% 4.1% Farmington 5.8% 5.4% 6.2% 6.8% 6.1% 5.5% 4.4% 3.2% 2.8% 3.0% 3.1% 3.0% 3.2% 4.4% 4.6% 4.5% 3.4% 3.5% Albq 4.1% 4.3% 5.1% 5.5% 5.3% 5.0% 4.1% 3.5% 3.2% 3.4% 3.6% 3.4% 3.7% 4.5% 4.7% 4.8% 4.1% 4.4% Las Cruces 6.1% 6.1% 6.3% 6.6% 6.4% 5.8% 4.8% 3.9% 3.7% 4.0% 4.2% 3.8% 4.0% 4.8% 5.0% 4.7% 3.8% 4.1% Santa Fe 3.6% 3.6% 3.9% 4.4% 4.4% 4.2% 3.5% 2.8% 2.6% 2.9% 3.0% 2.8% 3.1% 3.7% 3.9% 4.0% 3.3% 3.5% 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 Jan 2008 Feb 2008 Mar 2008 Apr 2008 May 2008 Jun 2008 July 2008 Aug 2008 Sept 2008 Oct ---PAGE BREAK--- Appendix v 5. Poverty Rates by Age and Sex Chart 1 shows the poverty number and percent by age and sex. The green bars and scale on the left shows the number of people under the poverty level. The blue triangles and the scale on the right show the percentage of the group below poverty. Chart 25 2006 Farmington MSA Number and Percent of Group In Poverty Total Population, Age, and Sex 22,704 8,726 11,893 2,085 10,655 12,049 23.8% 15.5% 17.7% 17.1% 19.1% 18.1% - 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 25,000 0.0% 5.0% 10.0% 15.0% 20.0% 25.0% # Below Poverty Level 22,704 8,726 11,893 2,085 10,655 12,049 % Below Poverty Level 18.1% 23.8% 15.5% 17.7% 17.1% 19.1% Total Population Under 18 years 18 to 64 years 65 years and over Male Female ---PAGE BREAK--- Appendix vi 6. Poverty Rates by Educational Attainment Chart 2 shows the dramatic differences in educational attainment and poverty rates. The green bar and the scale on the left show the number of persons in poverty by the amount of school completed. The blue triangle and the percent scale on the right side of the chart shows the percent of the group in poverty. Chart 26 2006 Farmington MSA Number and Percent of Group in Poverty Educational Attainment - 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 6,000 0.0% 5.0% 10.0% 15.0% 20.0% 25.0% 30.0% 35.0% # Below Poverty Level 4,766 3,067 2,664 459 % Below Poverty Level 33.3% 12.0% 11.2% 4.3% Less than high school High school graduate Some college, associate's Bachelor's degree or ---PAGE BREAK--- Appendix vii 7. Poverty Rates for People with Disabilities Chart 7 shows the number and percent of people with a disability that are in poverty. Chart 27 Population in the Farmington MSA with Disabilities and the Percentage of the Group in Poverty 2006 American Community Survey Other, 33,533, 25% No disability, 102,207, 75% With a sensory disability, 5,126, 4% With any disability, 13,264, 10% With a physical disability, 8,405, 6% With a mental disability, 4,154, 3% With a self-care disability, 2,584, 2% ---PAGE BREAK--- Appendix viii 8. Median Value by Time Built Chart 4 shows the median housing value by the year the home was built. There is a significant jump in housing values from 2000. An interesting point in the chart is that the 1960 to 1969 category has the lowest median housing value. Chart 28 Median Housing Value by Time Built Farmington MSA 2006 ACS $2,000 $4,000 $6,000 $8,000 $10,000 $12,000 Built 2005 or later Built 2000 to 2004 Built 1990 to 1999 Built 1980 to 1989 Built 1970 to 1979 Built 1960 to 1969 Built 1950 to 1959 Built 1940 to 1949 Built 1939 or earlier 9. Vacancy Table 13 shows a surprisingly high vacancy rate for the Farmington MSA. CDBG staff has collected contrary rental data, which shows a very tight rental market in the area with limited availability of rental units. The 2000 Census showed: • San Juan County 13% • Farmington 7% • Aztec 8% • Bloomfield 11% Chart 5 shows some categories of vacancy types, for rent, for sale, seasonal use, and other. The other category contains 47% of the total vacancies. This shows that the seemingly high vacancy rates reported by the American ---PAGE BREAK--- Appendix ix Community Survey (ACS) cover many different reasons than for rent or for sale. CDBG staff will continue to monitor the disparity between reported vacancy rates and the very limited availability of rental units and look for better ways to track changes in the market. Table 25 OCCUPANCY STATUS Farmington MSA Estimate Percent Total: 44,940 Occupied 38,559 86% Vacant 6,381 17% Source: 2006 American Community Survey, B25002 Prepared by City of Farmington, Planning, CDGB Chart 29 Housing Vacancy Status Farmington MSA, 2006 Other vacant, 2,988, 47% For rent, 1,038, 16% For seasonal, recreational, or occasional use, 1,839, 29% For sale only, 516, 8% ---PAGE BREAK--- Appendix x 10. Age of Housing Chart 6 shows the number of housing units by the year constructed. Chart 30 Number of Structures by Age, Farmington MSA 2006 ACS 404 3,368 9,086 11,001 9,873 3,863 5,098 1,026 1,221 0 2000 4000 6000 8000 10000 12000 Built 2005 or later Built 2000 to 2004 Built 1990 to 1999 Built 1980 to 1989 Built 1970 to 1979 Built 1960 to 1969 Built 1950 to 1959 Built 1940 to 1949 Built 1939 or earlier 11. Housing Value by Mortgage Status Chart 7 shows the number of homes with and without a mortgage. A surprising number of homes in the Farmington MSA do not have mortgages. The inset chart shows the percentage of homes by mortgage value. ---PAGE BREAK--- Appendix xi Chart 31 Housing Value by Mortgage, Farmington MSA 2006 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000 4500 With a Mortgage 2,100 2,325 4,195 3,223 2,547 1,824 153 Not Mortgaged 3,092 2,528 2,427 2,160 897 852 92 Less than $50,000 $50,000 to $99,999 $100,000 to $149,999 $150,000 to $199,999 $200,000 to $299,999 $300,000 to $499,999 $500,000 or more Percent of Mortagages by Value of Home $500,000 or more 1% $300,000 to $499,999 11% Less than $50,000 13% $50,000 to $99,999 14% $200,000 to $299,999 16% $150,000 to $199,999 20% $100,000 to $149,999 25% 12. Assessor’s Sales Data a. Only 2006 and 2007 sales data was available for this report for Aztec. Table 18 shows the median price, size, and price per square foot for Aztec Table 26 Median Sales Price Median Square Feet Median Price Per Square Foot 2007 174,000 $ 1406 123.76 $ 2006 157,000 $ 1416 117.91 $ Median Sales Price Median Square Feet Median Price Per Square Foot 2007 124,000 $ 1,505 88.80 $ 2006 115,000 $ 1853 77.44 $ Source: SJC Assessor's Sales Data Single Family Dwellings Mobile Homes City of Aztec ---PAGE BREAK--- Appendix xii b. Bloomfield Only 2006 and 2007 sales data was available for this report for Bloomfield. Table 19 shows the median price, size, and price per square foot for Aztec Table 27 Median Sales Price Median Square Feet Median Price Per Square Foot 2007 149,950 $ 1,252 116.62 $ 2006 133,500 $ 1,232 111.70 $ Median Sales Price Median Square Feet Median Price Per Square Foot 2007 118,750 $ 1,789 69.42 $ 2006 105,000 $ 1,418 74.05 $ Source: SJC Assessor's Sales Data City of Bloomfield Single Family Dwellings Mobile Homes ---PAGE BREAK--- Appendix xiii 13. Selected Population Statistics 2006 Farmington MSA Estimate GRANDPARENTS SCHOOL ENROLLMENT Population 3 years and over enrolled in school 32,498 Nursery school, preschool 1,363 Kindergarten 2,043 Elementary school (grades 1-8) 14,544 High school (grades 9-12) 8,385 College or graduate school 6,163 EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT Population 25 years and over 75,099 Less than 9th grade 5,839 9th to 12th grade, no diploma 8,785 High school graduate (includes equivalency) 25,883 Some college, no degree 16,248 Associate's degree 7,711 Bachelor's degree 7,790 Graduate or professional degree 2,843 Percent high school graduate or higher 80.5% Percent bachelor's degree or higher 14.2% VETERAN STATUS Civilian population 18 years and over 89,651 Civilian veterans 9,579 RESIDENCE 1 YEAR AGO Population 1 year and over 124,323 Same house 105,459 Different house in the U.S. 18,577 Same county 11,587 Different county 6,990 Same state 2,248 Different state 4,742 Abroad 287 PLACE OF BIRTH Total population 126,473 Native 122,540 Born in United States 121,712 State of residence 73,967 Different state 47,745 Born in Puerto Rico, U.S. Island areas, or born abroad to American parent(s) 828 Foreign born 3,933 Selected Social Characteristics 2006 Data Set: 2006 American Community Survey