The President's State of the Union Address on Tuesday night pleased some folks, angered some folks, and left many with questions.  As we ponder over the world and national issues we face today, we sometimes overlook or are never aware of decisions made in Washington, D.C. that could have a direct effect on our small communities.

            Back in January the Biden administration announced it will require all towns across America to submit "equity plans" showing how they will make it possible for low-income people to live there by providing affordable housing, transportation, and other resources.

            On the surface, it is nothing new.  For over 50 years the Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing (ADDH) mandate has been in existence but served up a dilemma: How can federal officials enforce an obligation for local leaders to proactively and voluntarily undo segregation?

            Initially, the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) was ordered to reject applications for federal funding from jurisdictions that promoted segregation.  But, that died because officials had trouble making decisions and enforcing it. 

            In 2015, formal guidance came for how localities could comply with the federal mandate, along with the message that they needed to start taking it seriously. This AFFH rule required cities, counties, states and public housing agencies to draw up detailed fair housing assessments; HUD also launched a tool designed to help small communities in particular fill out the report. Some jurisdictions complained that the process was too burdensome, and that it asked for a perspective that no single agency was able to provide.

            The process died again in 2018.

            Now, President Biden's proposed rule will swap out fair housing assessments for equity plans. Local and county governments, state governments and public housing agencies will need to produce equity plans every five years, with larger governments on the hook first. Instead of requiring detailed responses to questionnaires, housing officials said, the questions will be built into the rule itself, and local jurisdictions will have greater latitude in how they frame their response.

            Municipalities that fail to comply with the "cookie-cutter" requirements will lose federal funding.  And, yes, small communities do ask for federal funding when needed.

            The concern is: will small communities like ours, with little or no areas for development, be penalized if there is no room for affordable housing?  Some towns have no space to develop anything.  Will they be penalized?  Will small communities be forced to change their zoning laws to comply with the mandate, possible loosing commercial or industrial, space that could generate jobs and tax revenue?  What if the small community only has farm land or preserved open space available for affordable housing?  Will those open spaces disappear or will the community be penalized?  If small communities have no public transportation will they be forced to fund and provide it or will they be penalized?

            Affordable housing is a noble effort and must be addressed. 

            But, common sense must be exercised by our Washington D.C. officials before they run off and claim victory while destroying small town America.

            Something some of them haven't been quick to display lately.