Community Land Trust in the United States

In Karen A. Gray’s text, Community Land Trust in the United States, I was fascinated by the concept of community land trust. This fascination stems from the connotations of what CLTs exemplifies regarding the mentality of people, as well as the role of government in resolving the affordable housing crisis.

In this text, Gray states that “Through that work, they [the community] started a school, daycare center, a hospitality house, and other projects, and over the years they realized that housing was a serious need. The housing need led them to form the CLT.” (Karen Gray, 72). This line reminded me of the trip taken to the Museum of Reclaimed Urban Space where the tour provided and expressed the initiative of the people within the area when faced with housing hardships. This ‘do it ourselves’ attitude demonstrates the ability of people to come together and tackle problems that otherwise would go unsolved. However, what is essential at the root of communities that need to act can be summed up in lacking actions from the government. By failing to expediently tackle problems, the government presents only two options for the community to choose from: either continue with the way things are or take action to alter the status quo. Ultimately when things are as dire as it is, people would finally choose the latter option.

Despite the government not playing the expedient problem-solver role as many would desire, they too cannot be characterized as the villain of this situation. Both the people, as well as the government, want to resolve this issue. As Gray states, “The number of CLTs have grown most rapidly in the last decade in part due to support from government entities.” (Karen Gray, 73). Government is indeed trying to play its part in mediating the problem while generating solutions; however, the root of the affordable housing crisis is the problem that the government must tackle. Community land trusts are a “…innovative form of community development.” (Karen Gray, 73), that act as a band-aid to the problem of some people having an inability to afford to house themselves. The government can support CLTs goals; however they must not place a heavy emphasis on CLTs being a solution, rather its true nature is only just a remedy. Gray states it best when she writes, “…CLTs have been criticized for focusing on small solutions to affordable housing rather than structural changes such as federal housing policies… Private-sector models cannot become the only providers of affordable housing.”  (Karen Gray, 74). Solutions to massive scale problems can be lessened by the involvement of the private sector; however, the government must take part in providing a framework towards the end goal solutions.

CLTs do provide an alternative to the default framework of how the real estate market operates, however in the very end the housing crisis cannot be stopped. “…housing costs are skyrocketing because of economic growth and the influx of high-paid labor.” (Karen Gray, 72) However, this would never change. The economy will always grow, and the demand for high-paid labor would be too. In my opinion to solve the housing crisis would ultimately not require the elevation of those in poverty into not a higher class. Instead, it requires those in the poverty class to be supported by the government in the sense of preventing natural poverty. There must be protections established to brace against falling behind with economic development, in the sense of inflation, as well as other factors that make the poor poorer.