From USDA's perspective, preservation of existing affordable housing is of paramount importance. Owners that use USDA financing are subject to restrictions that spell out how long the building must be maintained as affordable housing – sometimes 20 years, sometimes for the life of the loan. We have 45 properties (838 apartments) in Region 5. About 45% are—or soon will be—free of those restrictions and at risk of going to market-rate rents. Finding funds for rehab & other physical maintenance is also a problem. It’s important that we get community input on which buildings are a priority to preserve as affordable housing.

Hi everyone. I’m Michael Olson, editor of Minnesota Today from MPR News. Thanks for joining the chat. A point on chat etiquette.

If you are asking a question, or directing a comment to someone specific place a “@” before their name. Example: “@Deanna how many affordable housing units are needed in central Minnesota?”

I should have introduced myself first! I'm Deb Parker, Deputy State Director of USDA Rural Development in Minnesota. Our agency provides funding for affordable housing apartment buildings, and we also make direct and guaranteed loans for low to moderate income homeowners.

Let me ask you both, Deb and Deanna, to start by giving a sense of significance to this. How do you know this is a problem that needs attention in central Minnesota?

@Dave & Michael. USDA has one of the largest portfolios of affordable rental housing in Minnesota. We have 45 properties in region five, with 838 apartments. Loss of these units would have a substantial impact on the region.

So there seems to be demand when these units are available. What about measures of how much people spend on housing? How many people are spending more than 30 percent of their income on housing?

@Deb -- What are the possibilities there? Are we talking about local government? Nonprofits? Private companies?

Funding for development and preservation of affordable housing has been cut and is very competative. As for how many people pay more than 30% of their income - I do not have statistics on that at this time.

I think the U of M had numbers that said 45 percent of low-income people were paying more than 30 percent of their income. That sound right?

@Dave. That sounds about right. There is real debate about how to allocate resources to serve this population -- new units or homeownership opportunities vs. preservation of exisitng rental properties & keeping our low income borrowers in their homes.

From what we're hearing in our regional housing dialogues (held with MN Housing Finance Agency and Greater Minnesota Housing Fund), preservation of existing, affordable rental properties is a huge concern.

I agree with Deb. Because resources are becoming more limited it is hard to determine which should be the priority, creating new affordable units or preserving existing.

Initial poll feedback leans towards "No" on additional government spending on affordable housing. For those of you who say "No" it would be great to hear why you feel that way.

Preservation in my opinion (especially RD 515 projects) is very needed because they serve the very low income households and provide rental assistance (in most cases). new construction may be more expensive - but increases the number of needed units.

@Pam thanks for joining. How difficult was it to get a loan for your project?

@Pam. I think for a lot of reasons, preservation & rehab of current housing stock is key. In some cases, it's less expensive to tear down old housing and build new in its place.

@Pam and Dave. What we at USDA need is input from individual communities. Where is preservation important? Where does demand exceed available units or homes available?

Rick Podvin commented on the Ground Level page: "The private sector will be part of the solution if they can see a way to make an honest dollar while making housing as affordable as the fair market allows." Can that be made to work?

@ Deb, That would be good to have additional resources available to properties within region 5..