CHIAVICNEWS...‘It’s been a safe haven from the private sector. It was certainly needed to be able to prevent someone from becoming homeless.’ Mr Panton says whilst the apartment

COMMUNITY HOUSING INDUSTRY ASSOCIATION VICTORIA NEWS SUMMER EDITION 2017

Community housing clients Pauline and Kim view the redevelopment plans with the Victorian Minister for Housing, Disability and Ageing, Martin Foley MP.

CHIAVICNEWS

ST KILDA APARTMENTS HEADLINE

Level 1/ 128 Exhibition Street, Melbourne 3000 T: 03 9654 6077 W: chiavic.com.au

2 | Community Housing Industry Association Victoria News Community Housing Industry Association Victoria News | 3

Welcome to the first edition of the CHIA Vic News.

Following feedback from members, this revamped magazine features news briefs, industry gossip, research articles, features, and profiles to keep you up-to-date with what is happening in Victoria’s community housing industry.

Launch Housing kindly opened its doors to our Editor to give us an insight into a day in the life of Transitional Housing, which would have to be one of the most challenging sectors within community housing.

You will read how Port Phillip Housing Association teamed with the State Government to purchase a St Kilda apartment block. The complex had traditionally housed low-income tenants and there were fears it would be sold to private developers.

Researchers outline an innovative precinct approach to the redevelopment of clusters of aged public housing stock in middle Melbourne. The concept not only improves the individual sites, but the amenity of the entire suburb – helping to negate anti-public housing sentiment along the way.

Our legal consultant clears up any misconceptions about the ability of community housing organisations to set rents at more than 75 per cent of the market rate – and calls on the industry to develop a

I am so lucky to work with very skilled and different people and the balance of our team will be wildly out of kilter with Steve Staikos leaving to pursue politics after seven years with us.

consistent rent setting policy.We hear about the remarkable life of

Eastcoast Housing’s Managing Director, Meigan Edmonson, who brings to the sector not only her own experiences of homelessness, but of literally building her own house.

Servants shares its joy at the results of a makeover one of its rooming houses underwent after winning a competition by popular vote.

Common Equity Housing Ltd provides an intriguing insight into how trailblazing members of the cooperative movement promoted gender equality in the 1800s, and how coops are continuing to empower women today.

Finally, Swinburne Professor Terry Burke argues there is no justification for the slowdown in the rates of building new social housing properties over the past decade, given Australia has ranked as second wealthiest country per capita in the world.

I trust you enjoy the new magazine and encourage you to send your story ideas and suggestions for the next magazine through to the Editor at [email protected]

You can also visit our website at chiavic.com.au to subscribe to our monthly eBulletin.

Chair - Haleh Homaei

Steve is a product of his generation – a phone in either hand and so much social media that even his dog Pepper has an Instagram account. He has an eye for detail and décor – Holly has suffered his wrath when the chairs in the training room didn’t match or the spoons were put in the wrong place.

Steve is the first one we call when technology plays up and when we want a document to look pretty. He and Mark educate us on the wonderful contributions (and sometimes not so wonderful) of the Greeks and the Croats. Holly doesn’t try to compete.

Our office is the cone of silence where we can say anything to each other without retribution. Steve is hilarious, passionate and appropriately impertinent. He has made a huge contribution to the sector and is valued by members and government alike. He gave us about 12 months’ notice of his departure because he knew that it would take that long for us to be weaned off him.

We all wish him the best and hope that he returns to the sector – perhaps in another role!! We advertised for another Steve but there simply is not another one out there.– Lesley Dredge

WELCOME FROM THE CHAIR

FAREWELL TO THE BOY

At last month’s glittering Australian Housing Institute Awards night, Community Housing Ltd’s Managing Director, Steve Bevington, took out the equivalent of the Gold Logie — receiving the ‘Outstanding Achievement’ award.

Steve was recognised for his significant contribution to the creation of a ‘strong, vibrant, diverse and competitive community housing sector’ in Australia for over 30 years. Steve is also noted for his work in providing affordable housing solutions beyond Australia, particularly in East Timor.

However, many may not know that, back in the day, Steve was a member of a merry rabble of housing enthusiasts who put their heads together and came up with a collective advocate for community housing, the Community Housing Federation of Victoria (CHFV), now CHIA Vic.

During CHFV’s formative period, Steve threw himself with characteristic energy and good humour into developing its membership, establishing an inclusive structure and representing the fledgling federation in sometimes sparky negotiations with government.

Appreciated for his incisive analysis, wit, and a very stylish tapestry suit, which he had tailored himself, Steve also played a leading role in the affairs of the National Community Housing Federation. – Fran Vinycomb

‘GOLD LOGIE’ FOR CHL’S MD

The St Kilda apartments have long been the accommodation of last resort for those experiencing tough times so, when it learned the complex was to be sold, Port Phillip Housing Association (PPHA) decided it needed to act.

PPHA’s General Manager Development and Assets, Jack Panton, says it was a classic situation where, ‘when these places are sold to the private sector, there is nowhere else for these people to go’.

The block has been home to tenants on low incomes and at risk of homelessness, for decades. Support service providers such as Launch Housing have had a long-standing arrangement with the management to support women and families in need of crisis or transitional accommodation. Launch was also providing other services for tenants, including a playgroup and walking school bus.

With the generous assistance of a $5 million grant by the Department Health and Human Services (DHHS), PPHA purchased the property last year for $10.1million, as Trustee of the Port Phillip Housing Trust.

‘Once we settled the purchase of the property, we applied for funding to upgrade

the buildings and the Consumer Affairs Victorian Property Fund provided a grant of $8 million,’ Mr Panton says.

PPHA has formalised a partnership agreement with Launch Housing and Unison that will see clients provided with much needed support services.

Mr Panton says the big picture plan is to demolish the 1950’s building and replace it with new purpose-built accommodation for women and babies. PPHA is working with the Royal Women’s Hospital seeking funding to set up a program for new mums who are homeless or at risk of homelessness. The other two buildings on the site, a heritage-listed mansion and art deco apartments will also be renovated.

PPHA Coordinator Housing Services, Katheryn Atkinson is managing the property during the transition period. With the knowledge that the property will need to be shut down for a period of 12 to 18 months during the redevelopment, tenancies are only short-term for the time being, Ms Atkinson says.

‘It’s not salubrious but it’s a safe place for our residents,’ Ms Atkinson says. ‘The people here are so grateful.’

Ms Atkinson says the apartment complex was fully tenanted when PPHA purchased it and there are still some tenants who are eligible for community housing who have stayed on.

‘One resident has lived here for 30 years,’ Ms Atkinson says. ‘It’s been a safe haven from the private sector. It was certainly needed to be able to prevent someone from becoming homeless.’

Mr Panton says whilst the apartment complex is a special project, it is not PPHA’s biggest. ‘The Ashwood Chadstone Gateway project has 282 dwellings – the St Kilda complex is a 50 apartment project,’ he says. ‘The new St Kilda complex is significant for us because of the tenant cohort of women and children and the partnerships we have to provide support services. This, together with the financial support from the Victorian State Government provides a sound model for delivering housing and support to vulnerable people.’

PPHA plans to lodge a town planning permit application with Council before Christmas, with approval expected in 2018. It is hoped the project will be completed in 2019.

ST KILDA APARTMENTS

An artist’s impression of the redevelopment.

Port Phillip Housing Association’s bold decision to step in to secure the fate of a neglected apartment block that caters to low-income renters has paid off. The future of the St Kilda complex is now assured, with plans in place to create safe accommodation for women and children at risk of homelessness.


It was clear from the signs on the shopfront in Melbourne’s inner north that the community consultation process taking place inside was purely hypothetical, but that didn’t stop locals flocking to take part.

The consultation was part of a joint research project by Monash University’s Architecture Studio, Swinburne University of Technology, the Office of the Victorian Government Architect and MGS Architects. Monash researcher Nigel Bertram says the aim of the research was to gauge the impact of taking a precinct-wide approach to public redevelopment instead of the standard ‘inefficient, piecemeal infill housing development currently prevalent in middle suburban areas’.

And if the enthusiasm of the locals was anything to go by, the concept of considering how to improve the functionality and infrastructure of a community when redeveloping public housing, was a hit.

Mr Bertram says researchers targeted Reservoir as one of their study areas, as an estimated 40 per cent of the suburb’s housing stock is aged public housing, dotted

throughout the suburb as single lots of low density housing, or in small clusters.

Unlike large public housing estates, the traditional approach to the redevelopment of these small holdings has been to treat each lot as a standalone property and adopt the private developer model of subdividing them to create dual occupancies – or sell them off.

‘Almost a quarter of the Victorian Government’s public housing portfolio is located in precinct clusters in well-serviced middle suburbs of Melbourne,’ Mr Bertram says.

Researchers developed three speculative precinct designs for specific public housing sites in two of Melbourne’s middle suburbs.

The design scenarios delivered two to four times the number of dwellings over 12 lots when compared to business-as-usual dual occupancy outcomes.

‘We wanted to look at how we could redevelop the sites more effectively and efficiently by creating a variety of development options for sites, with different density, dwelling types and sizes, and parking options,’ Mr Bertram says.

‘At the same time, we were viewing each cluster in relation to its local precinct, to see

how we could make existing infrastructure and community assets work harder.’

For example, one proposal looked at ways to open the new houses to parkland and improve the lighting, paths and related infrastructure to make the park a safer, more inviting area for the whole community.

‘By increasing access and connectivity in this way, parks and gardens not only act as destinations but can provide incidental meeting places for residents,’ Mr Bertram says.

The precinct designs tackled the existing car-dominance of the street network by creating a new layer of connector-lanes through the redeveloped sites and upgrading existing streetscapes by providing new spaces, uses, building interfaces and furniture that offer moments for stopping and encourage interaction between precinct residents.

‘Melbourne’s middle suburbs have substantial community assets but, like the surrounding housing

stock, are often physically run-down and lack relevance to current needs. For instance, facilities common in the 1940/50s, such as tennis and bowling clubs, may need to be rethought as multi-purpose centres and adapted to suit a broader range of ages and cultural backgrounds,’ Mr Bertram says.

By making these facilities ‘work harder’ for the community, it will improve the suburb’s amenity and increase its capacity to support a higher density population.

Increasing housing types, with well-designed, smaller dwellings supported by good public amenities, will also assist in increasing housing affordability, and reduce the operating costs of the properties for the tenants, he says.

Community consultation was a key part of the project, and Mr Bertram says locals in the research areas who were frustrated by the rundown aspects of some of their community were very happy to take part in the process – even if it was hypothetical – contributing their ideas and feedback on the proposals.

‘Residents are far less resistant to urban change than one might expect,’ Mr Bertram says.

‘In fact, redevelopment is welcomed if it contributes to local community building, improvements to public amenity and basic services. Typical sticking points, such as overshadowing, overlooking and parking were considered important, but local residents were open to how these issues could be resolved through careful design and siting.

‘Once these concerns had been addressed, increased density and height were no longer seen as negative attributes, and larger developments were mostly deemed acceptable if they contributed to physical neighbourhood upgrades or responded to specific community needs.’

Given the barrier negative community reactions often present to public housing redevelopments, the project showed the potential for reducing opposition to increased public housing density in their suburb, he says.

Mr Bertram says a precinct redevelopment approach is clearly able to achieve benefits that are not possible on a lot by-lot basis. Given the significant number of sites currently under the single-ownership of the Victorian Government, the state has a unique window of opportunity to use this approach to realise the full value of public housing assets in the middle suburbs and achieve the broadest range of public benefits.

The Victorian Government plans to transfer the management of 4,000 public housing properties to the community housing sector and packaging some of the transfers into precincts would allow this type of creative redevelopment.

Mr Bertram is hopeful a pilot project will

be funded to be used as a vehicle for further development, enabling governments to provide market leadership, demonstrate the long-term value of innovative infill development approaches, and creative finance and procurement arrangements.

Victoria’s public housing portfolio is valued $17.8 billion

There are over 23,500 public housing assets in metropolitan Melbourne More than half of these are located in the middle regions of the city. 75 per cent of public housing in metropolitan Melbourne was built in the 45 years following 1950. Around 60 per cent of public housing in Melbourne’s middle suburbs are single houses on a lot.

Note: all quoted figures are from 2012

You can download a copy of the AHURI report, Processes for developing affordable and sustainable medium-density housing models for greyfield precincts, from the AHURI website, ahuri.edu.au

Some of the proposed micro interventions included planting vegetables on the nature strip, traffic calming, expanded verges, and reclaiming the space of the street as community sports courts. Image: Radoslaw Buczek

A project by researchers and architects has found taking a precinct approach to the redevelopment of pockets of aged and underutilised public housing spreads the benefits to the entire community.

BY MAKING THESE FACILITIES ‘WORK HARDER’ FOR THE COMMUNITY, IT WILL IMPROVE THE SUBURB’S AMENITY AND INCREASE ITS CAPACITY TO SUPPORT A HIGHER DENSITY POPULATION.

AGED PUBLIC HOUSING TO BENEFIT FROM PRECINCT APPROACH

Local residents enthusiastically

took part in the faux consultations.


What is Transitional Housing?Transitional housing provides tenants with short-to-medium term accommodation linked with a support program that includes actively working towards securing long-term public, community or private housing.

Often transitional housing tenants have suffered an adverse event that has impacted on their accommodation options, such as losing their job, a relationship breakdown, family violence or substance abuse.

Day in the life of a Transitional Housing WorkerDealing with complaints from neighbours, owners’ corporations and real estate agents about tenants in relation to noise, family violence, and misuse of common areas are all in a day’s work for a Transitional Housing worker.

‘It tends to take up most of your time. Some of the neighbours don’t realise we have to work within the Residential Tenancies Act and they want the matter resolved yesterday,’ says Launch Housing’s Cherie Bekesi.

Sometimes the complaints can be unwarranted - neighbours who are unhappy about having a THM property next door sometimes make unfair complaints about tenants’ behaviour, she says.

‘They all know its transitional housing and they know it’s for low-income earners and there’s usually other baggage apart from homelessness that is coming with these people,’ she says.

‘Our properties are mainly flats, so we even get complaints of people walking on floorboards, playing music and flushing toilets.’

However, Launch Housing does have sympathy for those neighbours with genuine issues.

‘We have a few tenants that can be quite aggressive and quite intimidating,’ Cherie says.

Aaron Williams, Launch Housing Tenancy & Property Service Coordinator, says the factors that have led someone to be at risk of homelessness are never simple. The issue is never simply a lack of somewhere to call home – it could be gambling, family violence, drug issues or even a family breakup.

Transitional housing tenants must have a support worker assigned to them to assist with those issues, with the aim of working towards securing long-term housing – usually public or community housing.

‘The role of a support worker in this is key; it is a three-way relationship between the tenant, (Launch) as the landlord, and the support worker. The expectation is that the client and support are engaging on a regular basis at least every couple of weeks,’ Aaron says.

But whilst some of the tenancies are problematic, Aaron says the vast majority run smoothly and the program fulfils its purpose of being the bridge between homelessness and somewhere for someone to live long term.

‘For a lot of the people we work with, they haven’t had the opportunity to have their own private safe place before. If you never

had your own place, and you have always lived in dysfunctional arrangements, then signing the lease and getting the keys can be a very symbolic moment for tenants,’ Aaron says.

‘These aren’t just keys, this is an opportuni-ty, this is your own safe place to be able to get stable and get back on top of things.

‘Sometimes in the early stages of tenancies, some of the issues we have are simply around the fact that nobody told them that this is how to use a gas stove, nobody told them they can’t have three-hour long showers. They have never had a shower in their own place because they have never had their own place before.’

Tenants are at the heart of the program, he says, and treating them with respect and dignity is non-negotiable. Everyone, including high-flying executives on a six figure salary and their own property portfolio can lose everything when a few key things in their life fall apart – they lose their employment, develop a mental health issue, a drug problem, a gambling problem or their relationship breaks down, he says.

‘We can’t provide everything for a person, but we can provide them with the respect they deserve.’

TRANSITIONAL HOUSING

Tenancy & Property Service Coordinator Aaron Williams.

Tenancy Workers Kathie McConnell and Cherie Bekesi.

FAST FACTS 12 THM providers in Victoria 19 THM programs 3,552 properties within the

program Potential capacity of 3,811

tenancies at capacity 12-18 months is the target

tenancy length*as at July 2017

Frank’s storyHigh density living is a major issue for TH properties, with most of Launch Housing’s stock being single flats within bigger blocks. They are usually older properties with no sound insulation, so noise is a major cause of complaints.

Launch Housing tenant Frank* used music to self-medicate his mental health issues. The loud bass serving to drown out the voices he would otherwise hear in his head. Unsurprisingly, neighbours in his 60s block of flats were unhappy with his preferred volume.

‘It was disturbing the neighbours with the noise vibrating through the walls and the floors – it was vibrating their furniture,’ says Tenancy Worker Kathie McConnell.

‘The neighbours were really good, they didn’t want him evicted they just wanted the vibrations to go away.’

Launch had already secured a compliance order from VCAT for Frank to turn down his music, which he had ignored, and they were looking at the next stage – eviction.

‘But we solved it by getting the supports on board and getting a really good $300 pair of headphones for him,’ Kathie says.

‘He was very happy.’*Not his real name.

“THESE AREN’T JUST KEYS, THIS IS AN OPPORTUNITY, THIS IS YOUR OWN SAFE PLACE TO BE ABLE TO GET STABLE AND GET BACK ON TOP OF THINGS” - Aaron Williams


Late last year CHFV (now CHIA Vic) published data demonstrating that, factoring in projected household growth, Victoria would need to add a minimum of 3,000 social housing dwellings a year to house the most disadvantaged, plus an additional 3,000 affordable rental properties each year to assist low income families who are facing housing stress.

This rate of growth would resolve unmet housing need by 2031 but, even then, another 1,900 plus social housing dwellings are required every year to keep pace with the projected household growth to 2051.

A common reaction to the data has been that those figures are just pie in the sky; there is no way we can afford this. But history tells us otherwise.

Between 1958 and 1972, Australia constructed an average of 16,000 public housing dwellings per annum. Roughly a quarter of those dwellings, or 4,000, were in Victoria. And this was when the population of Australia was only about 12 million.

Even in the 1980s, Australia was adding 8,000 social housing dwellings per annum, reflecting a commitment by the then future Prime Minister Bob Hawke in 1982 to ensure social housing made up 10 per cent of all housing stock.

Australia’s population is now 24 million, yet on average over the last 10 years, the annual rise in the number of public and community housing dwellings has been only 3,100. Over that time, Victoria has averaged only 800 additional dwellings per annum.

Even this data needs qualification; social housing was a key part of the Rudd Labor Government’s economic stimulus package, which was created to stave off the impact of the Global Financial Crisis. Of the 31,000 dwellings created in Australia over the last

decade, the bulk (20,000) was built in the four years from 2009-2012.

At the moment Australia, is only providing around 1,200 dwellings per annum compared to the 16,000 in the 1960 and 1970s. It is not that we cannot afford it; Australia’s national income per head is almost three times what it was in the 1960s and, in 2015, Australia was ranked the second wealthiest country per capita in the world.

This means we have chosen not to support and fund social housing at the levels required to meet need. Why have we done this? A large part of the reason is that social housing, particularly public housing, does not fit the

values of small government, free markets, self-help, and individual choice that are embodied by Australian politicians and policy makers.

Social housing conflicts with all of these values as it is outside the market, is government funded and, until community housing emerged, also government managed. In addition, social housing tenants are bureaucratically allocated rather than market chosen. Much better to pour money into rent assistance and negative gearing than social housing!

The same small government values created a government debt mantra to nurture, in the public’s mind, notions of an economic crisis and the need to keep government spending down, notably in areas of welfare spending, which includes social housing.

Such spending, according to these ‘market liberal’ values, undermines incentives and

is unproductive. After repeatedly being told the big lie about excessive government debt, Australians broadly accept it and believe cuts to areas such as social housing are a necessity. This is, of course, a big untruth. Of the 36 OECD rich countries, Australia is ranked 30th in terms of government debt as a proportion of Gross Domestic Product. Countries with more than five times our proportion of debt, such as Japan, Singapore, Canada, Austria and the USA, are not actually economic basket cases.

Compounding all this is the small size of the sector itself, which means the political base to defend social housing is minimal. Only four per cent of Australians are in social housing, and most of them are poor, so their ability to mobilise political support to hang onto, yet alone expand, social housing is

limited. It would be a different political story in Hong Kong, Austria, the Netherlands, and Scandinavia, where largish proportions of the population (and not just the poor) reside in social housing.

But perhaps out of crisis comes resurgence. The growing awareness by governments of housing affordability and homelessness as a political issue, which is attracting almost daily media coverage, is prompting questions to be asked and steps being taken in the right direction.

The Commonwealth Government’s Housing Affordability Taskforce and the State Government’s Homes for Victorians strategy are indicative of new thinking. We cannot give up. We need to push for 3,000 plus social housing dwellings per annum with the argument we have done it before — so why not now?

LIES, DAMNED LIES, AND STATISTICS

CHIA is not just an omega-rich superfood, it’s also the new name for Victoria’s supercharged community housing industry association.

After 20 years of representing the sector as the Community Housing Federation of Victoria, CHFV’s Board made the decision to adopt a state version of the national peak body’s moniker. The move reflects the increasing professionalism of the sector and a desire to present united and consistent messaging on the issues that impact on it on a federal as well as state level.

To celebrate the name change, the Board enjoyed a cake emblazed with our new logo, with our CEO Lesley Dredge and Chair Haleh Homaei doing the honours.

The CHIA Board celebrate the name change.

REFERENCESCHFV (Community Housing Federation of Victoria) chiavic.com.au/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/CHFV-Housing-Needs-Estimates.pdf Central Intelligence Agency, 2016, The World Fact Book cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/fields/2186.htmlForbes, 2015, forbes.com/sites/ranisingh/2015/11/08/new-study-finds-a-better-way-to-measure-the-worlds-richest-countries/#c70acb75075cDepartment of Social Security, 1995, Housing Assistance Act Annual Report 1994-95, Canberra Table A1-06Productivity Commission, 2107, Report on Services; Housing Melbourne Ch 17 Table A3Troy P (2012) Accommodating Australians; Commonwealth Government involvement in Housing. The Federation Press, Sydney

Swinburne Professor Terry Burke wades through the numbers to ask why Victoria has added an average of only 800 social housing properties a year over the past decade when it was able to add an average of 4,000 a year in the 1960s.

AT THE MOMENT AUSTRALIA, IS ONLY PROVIDING AROUND 1,200 DWELLINGS PER ANNUM COMPARED TO THE 16,000 IN THE 1960 AND 1970S.

NEW NAME TAKES

THE CAKE

10 | Community Housing Industry Association Victoria News

Community housing organisations are almost always registered charities. This charitable status allows our sector to access a range of vital taxation concessions, such as exemptions from income tax and stamp duty.

The 75 per cent rule actually comes from GST legislation1, which provides that charities can claim back from the Commonwealth a GST credit on things used to supply housing if that property is rented out at less than 75 per cent of its market value. This includes both the purchase price of newly-constructed property as well as other costs associated with managing the property that attract GST, such as maintenance, insurance and office rent.

This concession is a big bonus to our sector, meaning that community housing organisations can effectively buy or develop property 1/11th cheaper than other landlords. Non-charitable landlords (both public housing and private landlords) cannot claim these GST credits since residential rents themselves do not attract GST.

A ruling of the Australian Taxation Office (ATO) gives charities two options for determining market rent.2 The charity can get each property valued and adopt the valuer’s assessment of market rent. Alternatively, charities can choose benchmark rates for long-term accommodation set by the ATO.3 For Victoria, these are currently:

This give charities flexibility in setting the maximum rent payable by households. In essence, when setting its maximum rents, the charity can go up to 75 per cent of the higher of:

• the actual market rent of the property; and

• the ATO benchmark rate that applies to the property.

Take a two-bedroom property, which a valuer assesses as having an open market rent of $400 pw. If the organisation adopted this valuation for GST purposes, then this would give a maximum rent of $300 pw. However, if the organisation adopted the ATO benchmark rate, this would give a maximum rent of $346 pw (just under 75 per cent of $462 pw).

Indeed, an organisation could even decide to forgo the GST credits by not meeting the ATO requirements and setting higher maximum rents. Many of the expenses that community housing organisations incur in managing properties, such as staff wages and council rates, do not attract GST.

Of course, there are limits to this. Where a community housing organisation claims a GST credit on the purchase price, it should hold and rent out the property at 75 per cent of market rent for at least five years (or 10 years if the property cost more than $500,000). Otherwise, a proportionate

share of the GST credit claimed needs to be refunded to the ATO.4

There are other elements of good rent-setting policy outside of the ATO requirements. No community housing organisation should charge more than 100 per cent of the actual market rent of the property, since a tenant could challenge this under the Residential Tenancies Act. In addition, for most households, organisations charge much less than a maximum rent to ensure that it is affordable for households. However, setting maximum rents at an unnecessarily low level can also reduce rental income for the organisation from households that have the capacity to pay more.

Ultimately, whether or an organisation claims GST credits does not affect its charitable status. Charitable status is determined by being able to demonstrate to the Australian Charities and Not-for-profits Commission (ACNC) that what the organisation is doing is consistent with charitable purposes of advancing public or social welfare by providing relief of poverty or disadvantage. In this regard, a 2014 interpretive statement from the ACNC helpfully provided that:

In the context of housing, relieving poverty therefore is the provision of housing assistance to those who cannot afford, from their own resources, such accommodation as would give them a modest standard of living in the Australian community.5

This statement should give considerable assurance to the community housing industry that the range of assistance provided to households comes under the umbrella of charitable activity.

MYTH BUSTER: MARKET RENT AND CHARITABLE STATUS

emerged triumphant — with the highest number of votes and a clear run to the grand prize (the runners up each received a more modest $1,000 makeover).

The ensuing revamp at Servants includes new dining and lounge settings, as well as a remodeled kitchenette and separate reading and television ‘nooks’. CEO Amanda Donohoe says the makeover has proved to be a big hit with residents: many have taken pride in their snazzy surroundings, displaying a new found impulse to clean up.

While there is always some sore loser questioning the legitimacy of a popularity poll such as this, Amanda is emphatic that she only voted once, and that the win is indicative of Servants’ colossal fan base.

– Fran Vinycomb

REALITY CHEQUE FOR ROOMING HOUSE

You may have heard it said that community housing organisations cannot charge more than 75 per cent of market rent, or risk losing their charitable status. But where does this rule come from? Consultant and lawyer Michael Smith explains.

1 A New Tax System (Goods and Services Tax) Act 1999, section 38-250(1)2 Australian Taxation Office, Goods and Services Tax Industry Issues Charities Consultative Committee, Non-commercial activities of charities, cost of supply and market value tests3 Australian Taxation Office, GST and non-commercial rules - benchmark market values, Table 5: Long-term accommodation – weekly4 Australian Taxation Office public ruling: Goods and services tax: new residential premises and adjustments for changes in extent of creditable purpose (GSTR 2009/4)5 Australian Charities and Not-for-profits Commission: Commissioner’s Interpretation Statement: Provision of housing by charities (CIS 2014/02)

Four or more bedrooms

Three bedrooms

Two bedrooms

One bedroom

$800 per week $606 per week $462 per week $325 per week

Community Housing Industry Association Victoria News | 11

LOUNGE POST-

MAKEOVER

Think Survivor and then The Block, and you will have an idea of how bijou community housing provider, Servants, beat its competitors - and rallied its supporters - to win a free makeover for one of its Hawthorn rooming houses.

Servants was one of several community organisations to enter an IKEA competition which offered as first prize an $8,000 interior makeover. Staff of the flatpack megastore were then asked to vote on their preferred entry, resulting in a shortlist of three competitors.

In an environment reportedly charged with mounting suspense and rising hysteria, IKEA went on to place the fate of the finalists in the hands of the general public. Servants

LOUNGE PRE-

MAKEOVERResident Geoff, thanking IKEA

and supporters


Meigan grew up in a small town called Boolarra in Gippsland, the third of seven children. She developed a passion for reading and words early: ‘By age seven I had read all of my parents’ 16th Century encyclopedias. Odd, I know.’

Meigan’s first job was at the lolly counter in Coles, Morwell – unsurprisingly, she loved this job. But, on the brink of turning 16, she decided it was time to head for the big city and once on the train to Melbourne she didn’t look back.

She trained as a nurse’s aide and worked in geriatric nursing for several years, before marrying and having two children. When her first marriage ended, ‘I looked around at my peers who waited by their letterboxes for their pension cheques to arrive each fortnight, and I made a conscious decision that there had to be something more – somehow.’

In fact Meigan took on a lot more. One day she was driving down the highway and spotted a timber yard in Darnum. She knew that the old ‘bushy’ who owned the yard built log cabins, so she pulled in and told the bloke with his wild red hair that she wanted to build a house (as per her philosophy that there is nothing anyone cannot do – you just have to learn how).

‘He asked if I’d ever built anything before, to which I said, “Yes - a letterbox”. I often look back and wonder, why did he agree to supply the timber and show me how to build that house?’

It was several more years before Meigan could convince a bank to lend a single parent $24,000 to buy land and build a house —infuriatingly, some banks even wanted her ex-husband to go guarantor. She finally bought seven acres in the Strzelecki Ranges and built her first section of wall. The bushy came to inspect it, promptly telling her to pull it down and buy herself a spirit level; 18 months later she and her three children, moved in.

The only things that she had contracted out were cutting the site in, installing the water tank and laying the slab. She built the rest using hand tools and a chain saw. ‘My children were aged 12

months, nine and 10 years, and it taught them that it takes hard and often tedious work to achieve your goals — like having to dig a 150m trench to lay septic drains in the searing heat!’

Having finished her house, and with her youngest about to start school, Meigan needed a new challenge. She was accepted into Welfare Studies at the Gippsland Institute of Advanced Education and subsequently sold her house to fund her way through university.

Her studies complete, Meigan worked for Community Services Victoria in their Regional Planning Department, which was responsible for funding and monitoring community groups throughout Gippsland.

After several years in this role, Meigan felt the need to ‘jump the compound fence’ — and became the solo worker for Moe Narracan Accomodation Service, an emergency housing provider. Thus

began her career in the community housing sector.

Meigan reflects that the decades she has now spent working in housing and accommodation services continue to strengthen her belief that secure and safe housing is the most critical factor in a person’s life.

‘You can’t address your psycho-social issues if you are worrying about where you and your children are going to sleep tonight,’ she says.

This perception is reinforced by her own experiences: she had to move house several times to escape a violent relationship and, at one point, she and the children lived in her van and washed at the taps in Civic Park, Warragul.

‘The police and the legal system at the time were ineffective in protecting me,’ she says.

As if that wasn’t enough, Meigan again got to experience firsthand what it was like to become homeless when she received a phone call at work to say her house was on fire. She returned home to find nothing left but the burnt stumps.

Meanwhile her patch, the Latrobe Valley, has had its own particular

challenges in recent years with its traditional coal and power industries in decline and the economic and environmental fallout from the Black Saturday fires. But Meigan remains optimistic, describing Latrobe Valley residents as resilient. Having weathered the rural downturn decades ago, and more recently the experience of the mine fires, she’s confident that, ‘Its people will bounce back and continue to grow’.

You get the feeling that when Meigan describes the Valley community as tough and resilient, she is its true daughter…and a fitting successor to her fearless Greenie mum.

MEIGAN MAKES ANYTHING POSSIBLE

Founded on values of self-help, equality, and equity, co-operatives are well-placed to provide leadership on gender equality, Common Equity Housing Ltd’s (CEHL) Sandra Castro reports.

Being part of a co-op has been an empowering experience for Sharon Wadeson.

‘I joined the co-op about 12 years ago. I was living in one bedroom with my son and couldn’t find accommodation. It was a tough time. I was so excited when I got the house and joined the co-op. It gave us security. I’ve filled several director roles in the co-op; it gave me confidence and the feeling of being accepted. I can’t thank the co-op enough as my family were given a house we call home. I’m in the Bellarine Co-op now and work with a wonderful group of people,’ Ms Wadeson says.

The housing co-operative movement has a long history of empowering women, giving them an equal vote in co-operative leadership decades before they could vote for parliament. In 1846, Eliza Brierley became the first woman member of the Rochdale Pioneers Equitable Co-operative. At a time when women were still the property of their father or husband*, and

decades before women got the vote, Eliza handed over her £1 to secure equal voting status in the co-operative.

Although the Rochdale Pioneers trail-blazed equality in the co-operative movement in the 1800s, much is still to be done to achieve gender equality and empower all women and girls. Compared to men, women continue to earn less, are more likely to partake in unpaid labour, and are more often excluded from decent work and opportunities for advancement.1

The Business Council of Co-operatives and Mutuals, in conjunction with Per Capita, are undertaking Eliza’s Project to address issues around gender diversity and inclusion in the Co-operatives and Mutuals sector (CME), and to develop a strategy for leadership on this issue.

Prompted by Eliza’s Project, CEHL undertook an initial analysis of gender diversity and inclusion in our co-operative housing program, and across the organisation, and the findings are encouraging.

While the gender split between members is relatively even – 59 per cent are female – women take the majority of senior positions, with 80 per cent of co-op directors being women.

A recently published International Labour Organization report into employment and social outlook trends for women around the world has found, ‘Reducing gender gaps would significantly benefit women, society and the economy’.

CEHL will continue to provide leadership on this issue.

*In some countries this is still the case

CEHL would like to acknowledge BCCM and Per Capita for providing information regarding Rochdale Pioneers and Eliza’s Project

Inequality of employment and wages contribute significantly to the housing outcomes for women in single-headed households in metro Melbourne.

‘Only two in every 100 properties are affordable for a mum on a single parenting payment and a single woman on minimum wage can only afford three out of every 100 private rental properties.’2 Sourced from the Women’s Property Initiative

Empowered: Bellarine Co-op’s Sharon Wadeson (right) The trailblazing Rochdale Pioneers (above)

1 Guideline Advancing gender equality: The co-operative way; page 3, International Labour Organization 20152 Statistics provided by Women’s Property Initiative and DHHS Rental Report June quarter 2017, State Government Victoria

Eastcoast Housing’s Managing Director, Meigan Edmonson, laughingly recalls that her mother was the first Greenie in Gippsland. It was embarrassing to go shopping and watch her remove all the packaging from the goods she was buying. She washed out and reused every plastic bag that came into their house, so that the kitchen looked like a Chinese laundry with socks and plastic bags drying over the slow combustion stove.

CO-OPERATIVES ON THE ROAD TO GENDER EQUITY

14 | Community Housing Industry Association Victoria News

Unlike public housing, community housing uses a variety of rent models that can see the amount tenants are liable to pay vary considerably between providers and programs. Lawyer and housing consultant Michael Smith argues it is time to bring some transparency and consistency to community housing rent policies.

Community housing’s footprint within Victoria’s social housing system is likely to grow, bringing into sharper focus the perceived and actual differences (and similarities) between public and community housing.

Homes for Victorians will see new funds grow the community housing portfolio and also transfers of public housing properties to be managed by the community housing sector.

The new Victorian Housing Register (VHR) will enable potential tenants to apply for public and community housing in the one place. Yet if any potential tenant of community housing were to ask the quite simple question, ‘How much rent will I have to pay?’, the answer, will be, ‘It depends’. Even the Housing Registrar’s information

sheet on the topic starts with: ‘Rent setting is a complex area with no single model applying across the sector’.

Most community housing organisations in Victoria base their definition of affordable rent on a percentage of gross household income, plus the full amount of CRA to which the household is entitled. This is subject to a cap on the maximum rent payable.

But this is where the similarities tend to end, with individual organisations approach to rent setting differing significantly, in terms of:

• the amount of household income assessed— sometimes it is 25 per cent and sometimes 30

• the types of household income assessed —some assess family payments at a concessional rate (12.5 or 15 per cent) and others do not include some special purpose payments from Centrelink (such as the Pensioner Supplement)

• capping the maximum rent that can be charged —some organisations cap all rents at market rent, some at 75 per cent of market rent, and others use the benchmark rent set by the Australian Tax Office (ATO).

Some organisations apply ‘bands’ that require tenants to pay a certain percentage of market rent depending on their household income. Others have tested discount-to-market rents (not linked to household income). There can even be differences in approaches about how organisations respond to changing circumstances, such as a loss of income, and hardship.

This complicated environment is due, in part, to government policy. Organisations managing public housing properties under a lease from the Director of Housing must use the public housing rent policy, which charges rent equal to 25 per cent of household income, plus CRA.

If the property is owned by the community housing organisation, government guidelines require only that net rent (i.e. excluding CRA) is no more than 30 per cent of gross household income — and even this only applies to low-income households.

The rules about rent being limited to 75 per cent of market rent actually derive from ATO rulings on GST concessions.

Within the boundaries of these rules, organisations apply their own approach. Some have decided not to take up the

option of rents of up to 30 per cent of household income for properties they own, leaving it at the lower 25 per cent rate.

To some extent, variance in approaches is entirely appropriate in a multi-provider model as organisations adjust their policy approaches to suit the needs of particular communities or cohorts. While there can be debate about whether assessing rent at 25 or 30 per cent (or otherwise) is fair or reasonable, tenants can at least make informed choices as long as rent policies are clear and transparent. For example, rents set at the 30 per cent rate are more likely to apply to newer properties, which may have additional amenity benefits.

However, there is no doubt that this complexity damages the brand of community housing by making it look murky

and inconsistent. It complicates how we can articulate our sector’s value proposition to tenants, government and the community. Compared to public housing, the inconsistency of approaches is perplexing and difficult to justify. In the VHR, a person can lose priority status for rejecting two reasonable offers of housing, so a clear and consistent approach to affordable rent across providers is no small thing.

Obviously, introducing a single rent policy would not be feasible without a radical shift in the way community housing is funded. Rents are fundamental to the financial viability of community housing organisations and, once a particular rent model has been set, it is hard to change without potentially impacting the way the organisation funds

its housing programs, including complying with debt covenants.

To clean up this thicket, I propose developing a set of common rent policies, enabling organisations to choose one off the shelf (or perhaps more than one for different programs within their portfolio). These policies should be able to achieve a uniform approach on how household income is assessed and the maximum rent that can be charged for a property.

Each organisation would then be able to publish its policies on its website, so potential tenants are clear on the rent model that would apply to them before an offer of housing is made.

This would be a modest first step towards a fairer and simpler social housing system, but one that is long overdue one.

HOW MUCH IS YOUR RENT?

Vic

We’re proudly lending for community housing.We’re proud to partner with the Community Housing Industry Association Victoria (CHIA Vic) to help its members increase the provision of safe, secure and affordable housing options in Victoria.

Jacob EdwardsCommercial Lending Manager

[email protected]

03 9854 4673

Get in touch today to discuss funding for your next project or refinancing with us.

Bank Australia Limited ABN 21 087 651 607 AFSL / Australian Credit Licence Number 238431.

Documents

CHIAVICNEWS...‘It’s been a safe haven from the private sector. It was certainly needed to be able to prevent someone from becoming homeless.’ Mr Panton says whilst the apartment