Sunday, March 13, 2016

Close to Home - Don't Sell Chanate Short!

Press Democrat 'Close to Home' by the Housing Advocacy Group:

Housing advocates welcome the initial steps taken last week by Sonoma County supervisors to increase the availability of affordable housing.
But we’re concerned by the request for proposals issued last month by the county for its 100-plus-acre site on Chanate Road in Santa Rosa. If the supervisors select the proposal submitted by the highest bidder, we’ll likely see dozens more million-dollar homes there. Will the supervisors walk their talk and come up with a development plan that helps address this unprecedented housing shortage?
For a century, the county land at Chanate has been devoted to serving the health and housing needs of economically disadvantaged residents. There are many perfectly usable buildings on the site. Most, like the mental health facilities, the Wellness Center and the well-designed shelter for women and children, are currently in use. County officials claim the two former Sutter hospital buildings are not earthquake safe and want them demolished. But earthquake standards for hospitals are much stricter than they are for residential uses. Repurposing older buildings is normally vastly less expensive than tearing them down and starting from scratch. (more)

Wednesday, January 21, 2015

Wednesday, August 13, 2014

Excellent editorial from the Aug. 12, 2014 NY Times... integration of our neighborhoods, schools and communities is so important:

The Death of Michael Brown - Racial History Behind the Ferguson Protests:
The F.B.I. may be able to answer the many questions surrounding the death of Michael Brown, an 18-year-old black student from Ferguson, Mo., who was a few days from heading off to college when he was shot by a police officer on Saturday. The shooting of Mr. Brown, who was unarmed, led to three days of protest, some of it violent, and several tense confrontations between residents of the St. Louis suburban town of 21,000 and the police.
But it doesn’t take a federal investigation to understand the history of racial segregation, economic inequality and overbearing law enforcement that produced so much of the tension now evident on the streets. St. Louis has long been one of the nation’s most segregated metropolitan areas, and there remains a high wall between black residents — who overwhelmingly have lower incomes — and the white power structure that dominates City Councils and police departments like the ones in Ferguson.
Until the late 1940s, blacks weren’t allowed to live in most suburban St. Louis County towns, kept out by restrictive covenants that the Supreme Court prohibited in 1948. As whites began to flee the city for the county in the 1950s and ’60s, they used exclusionary zoning tactics — including large, single-family lot requirements that prohibited apartment buildings — to prevent blacks from moving in. Within the city, poverty and unrest grew.
By the 1970s, many blacks started leaving the City of St. Louis as well. Colin Gordon, a professor at the University of Iowa who has carefully mapped the metropolitan area’s residential history, said black families were attracted to older, inner-ring suburbs like Ferguson in the northern part of the county because they were built before restrictive zoning tactics and, therefore, allowed apartments.
As black families moved into Ferguson, the whites fled. In 1980, the town was 85 percent white and 14 percent black; by 2010, it was 29 percent white and 69 percent black. But blacks did not gain political power as their numbers grew. The mayor and the police chief are white, as are five of the six City Council members. The school board consists of six white members and one Hispanic. As Mr. Gordon explains, many black residents, lacking the wealth to buy property, move from apartment to apartment and have not put down political roots.

The disparity is most evident in the Ferguson Police Department, of which only three of 53 officers are black. The largely white force stops black residents far out of proportion to their population, according to statistics kept by the state attorney general. Blacks account for 86 percent of the traffic stops in the city, and 93 percent of the arrests after those stops. Similar problems exist around St. Louis County, where earlier this year the state chapter of the N.A.A.C.P. filed a federal civil rights complaint alleging widespread racial profiling by police departments.
The circumstances of Mr. Brown’s death are, inevitably, in dispute. Witnesses said he was walking home from a convenience store when stopped by an officer for walking in the middle of the street, and they accused the officer of shooting him multiple times when his hands were raised over his head. The police said Mr. Brown had hit the officer. State and federal investigators are trying to sort out the truth.
What is not in dispute is the sense of permanent grievance held by many residents and shared in segregated urban areas around the country. Though nothing excuses violence and looting, it is clear that local governments have not dispensed justice equally. The death of Mr. Brown is “heartbreaking,” as President Obama said Tuesday, but it is also a reminder of a toxic racial legacy that still infects cities and suburbs across America.

Friday, June 20, 2014

New Federal Regs re Duty to Affirmatively Further Fair Housing - Atlanta Journal Constitution

Good news:

By Ariel Hart - The Atlanta Journal-Constitution

Forty-six years after the Fair Housing Act took aim at racial segregation and poverty in America, the federal government has declared the effort half-hearted and is setting out to fix it.

Within months, the Obama administration is expected to require local governments to devise new strategies to give people in poor, racially segregated areas better access to jobs, transportation and, particularly, good schools.

At stake locally are tens of millions of dollars in federal grants distributed across the region, from Atlanta to Marietta to Gwinnett County. If governments fail to satisfy the mandate, they could lose that money.

To date, few outside of Washington have even heard of the proposal. Where it is known, it tends to draw sharp reactions across the political spectrum: Liberals, who have waited decades for an administration with moxie enough to confront the issue, cheer it; others blast it as an assault on local communities.

"It's really a major coup, provided that it has some teeth in it," said Gail Williams, executive director of Metro Fair Housing Services in Atlanta, an advocacy group that helps local governments comply with such rules. "I?ll wait and see," said Cobb County Commission Chairman Tim Lee, although he added that from what little he has heard, "I think it flies in the face of local control and home rule." If the feds use grant money to try to force change, he said, "they can take their money and put it somewhere else."

Officials at the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development ? who would only talk about the new rule anonymously ? insisted that they merely want to provide better demographic data for local jurisdictions to plan with. They said they?re only formalizing a process to achieve what the law promised decades ago.

The Fair Housing Act of 1968 was one of that decade?s signature civil rights laws. Its intent, confirmed in some subsequent court decisions, was not just to prevent obvious discrimination, such as refusing to sell or rent homes to racial minorities. It can be read to take broad aim at the American ghetto, on the understanding that where a group of people lives can affect much more than the quality of their residences. Where they live can determine their opportunities in life: access to good jobs, quality schools and societal expectations that lift up or hold back children throughout their lives.

By that definition, things that may stand in the way of "fair housing" might include zoning that keeps apartments or affordable houses out of good neighborhoods. It might include a lack of public transportation from poor neighborhoods to the areas with jobs that pay well. It might include fewer and shabbier parks or weaker police protection in poor areas than affluent ones, or benign neglect of troubled public schools.

Rising above

Renee Elmore and Stephanie Flowers are case studies in why HUD says local governments need to do more to help those who want to help themselves.

Both are single mothers of young sons, living in the Pittsburgh neighborhood south of downtown Atlanta. In very different ways, each is going to extraordinary lengths to keep the neighborhood from holding her son back.

Elmore used to live in Atlantic Station. But she said the $2000 she made each month bar tending could not cover her $1,350 rent, after-hours day care for her 7-year-old son, Kovan, and classes at a trade school where she is studying to become a radiology technician.

"I needed to cut all of my bills in half," she said, "so my future could be better than my present."

She looked hard, and finally found an ad for a house that was affordable, thanks to federal subsidies and an active neighborhood association. She pays $672 a month ? a typical rent for Pittsburgh ? for a three-bedroom, two-bathroom house, energy efficient to boot.

The catch is Pittsburgh: piles of trash; more vacant homes and lots than occupied houses; an elementary school with abysmal test scores. By day, men gather outside and lounge in armchairs. By night, as she drives home after work with her sleepy 7-year-old, women come and go from the house around the corner, occasionally buck naked.

Virtually every child lives with a single mother and lives in poverty. Fewer than one person in 10 has a college degree. Elmore's home, like most, is a fortress. "The bars make me feel better," she said "I am so thrilled with this bubble."

Fight or flee?

But that?s partly because she has constructed a life where she and her son spend hardly any time in the bubble. From 7 a.m. to past midnight during the school year, she is driving him between his prized slot in a charter school near Turner Field and a 24-hour day care she found in Smyrna, then driving herself between radiology courses and tending bar, with naps in between when she can.

There was no way Kovan was going to Gideons Elementary, she said. She's seen how some students behave, and which groups aren't represented there.

"Every year of his life he's moving forward," Elmore said. At the charter school "he's learning Chinese." More importantly, she said, there are white kids in his classes; if he wants a corporate job later in life, he?ll know how to talk to white people.

None of it would be possible without a car ? something that roughly one-third of her neighbors lack.

A few blocks away, on Metropolitan Parkway, Stephanie Flowers has chosen to send her 8-year-old son, Marcus, to a local public school, Dunbar, which she believes is a bit better than Gideons. During the school year, she pays about $700 a month for extra tutoring to keep his math and reading skills up to acceptable levels.

She can only afford it because she lives in the house her grandmother bought and pays nothing on it.

She went to technical school to learn administrative skills and now has a decent job. She could leave Pittsburgh. But, she said, "Do you run - Or do you fight? I decided I was going to stay in the race."

She's clear on what happens to those who lack her resources and her determination, and especially to their kids: "You fall by the wayside."

That's what HUD hopes to change, to make it possible for those who lack advantages like cars or fully paid housing to get a leg up. For people like Elmore and Flowers, the new rule is supposed to make the climb at least a bit easier.

Tangled roots

One huge irony is that before 1968, a long string of federal actions fed black poverty and segregation in neighborhoods like Pittsburgh.

Beginning in the 1930s, the government promoted home ownership by insuring home loans for ordinary workers. But the Federal Housing Administration discouraged "the occupancy of properties except by the race for which they are intended." The FHA also discouraged lending in neighborhoods with "inharmonious racial groups." Maps it used marked in red many black neighborhoods considered too risky for loans.

Starting in the 1950s the construction of the interstate highway system gave people who could afford cars a viable commute to suburban homes, aiding white flight. Those same highways often plowed through black city neighborhoods, as the Downtown Connector went through Atlanta?s Sweet Auburn, producing blight. Blacks who could afford it moved to their own suburbs, but they were less likely to have the means.

Elizabeth Leeks, now 80, remembers a Pittsburgh years ago that wasn?t rich but wasn?t destitute either, offering grocery stores instead of convenience stores and a slew of businesses catering to working-class families. "All that's gone, completely gone," she said. "People that used to live here moved out of the area."

By the time the federal government tried to do an about face, it faced fierce resistance to shaking up the patterns it had helped create.

Two years ago the investigative news organization ProPublica exposed how Richard Nixon's HUD secretary, George Romney - Mitt Romney's father - waged a secret, doomed campaign to enforce the provisions that are the target of the new HUD rule. Northerners and Southerners alike protested, and Nixon shut the effort down.

And now that HUD is trying again, even the rule?s biggest advocates can?t say how it will play out.

"I'm very passionate about this stuff, but I have to be honest with you that nobody quite knows in great detail what happens if the rule is finalized," said Michael Allen, a Washington, D.C. lawyer who won an important fair housing lawsuit in Westchester County, NY. He believes that victory was important in forcing HUD to formulate its new approach.

Helping hand or iron fist?

For its part, HUD will provide reams of new data and an internet mapping tool for local jurisdictions to measure patterns of segregation and access to "valuable community assets." The agency has not yet revealed the final criteria for defining which areas will be covered, but a preliminary map shows pockets in Cobb, Fulton, DeKalb, Gwinnett and Clayton Counties, with a large swath across the southern part of the city of Atlanta.

Atlanta Housing Authority Interim CEO Joy Fitzgerald was one of hundreds of people to comment on the proposed rule. She doesn't think desegregation is always necessary.

"If the goal of fair housing is to provide housing choice and not to force integration on all individuals, an individual?s right to choose to live in a segregated neighborhood should be respected," Fitzgerald wrote.

Fitzgerald said the agency has affordable housing sprinkled throughout the city, even in Midtown. AHA could not provide a map of its units.

Once HUD sets the final criteria, local governments will have to draw up an assessment of disparities in the designated areas, followed by plans to address the disparities.

Those could take many forms: zoning changes to allow apartments and other affordable housing in areas where they have been excluded; new investments in low income housing; better transportation options; additional resources for struggling public schools.

Opponents, especially alarmed about the implications for zoning, call this a massive federal over-reach, trampling the rights of one group in favor of another.

But HUD officials emphasize, anonymously, that the process will be collaborative, with each local jurisdiction suggesting its own solutions. However, if HUD doesn?t approve a given approach, grant money could stop flowing.

In the last fiscal year, at least 13 metro Atlanta jurisdictions got such grants, many of them in the northern suburbs.

Not your grandmother?s ghetto

The money has flowed to the suburbs because, in many places, segregation and poverty have moved to the suburbs. At least two of the potential trouble spots identified by HUD?s mapping tool are in Gwinnett County.

Like most local officials interviewed, U.S. Rep. Rob Woodall, a Republican from Lawrenceville, had not heard of the proposed HUD rule when The Atlanta Journal-Constitution asked him about it.

"I can?t imagine what that looks like,? Woodall said. ?But I?m from Gwinnett County. So go into one of our schools ? all you see is diversity. All you see is success. I can?t imagine what the federal government could do to improve on what we are doing there."

State data tell a more nuanced story.

In Gwinnett County, the bottom five elementary schools last year were each more than three-quarters black and Hispanic. In four of them, more than 90 percent of students were poor enough to qualify for reduced-price meals. In contrast, at the five best-scoring schools, a majority of students were white or Asian and fewer than a third of students qualified for reduced-price lunches.

Shannon Candler, the consultant who will deal most closely with Gwinnett County?s compliance with the new rule, is comfortable with it.

"We definitely are looking towards [the rule] as a positive,? she said. ?It?s really bringing structure and clarity."

It?s not her sense, she said, that HUD will require Gwinnett to move people out of poor minority neighborhoods into a more affluent ones.

"No," she said. "I wouldn?t say there?s been any focus or clear outlined plan to move forward in that direction."

Wednesday, May 28, 2014

HOW TO CREATE A MORE INTEGRATED SOCIETY

Author: Douglas S. Massey, Princeton University
May 21st, 2014

Fifty years after the Civil Rights Era, the United States remains a residentially segregated society. Although some progress toward racial integration has been made in recent decades, the largest declines in black-white segregation have occurred in small, newer metropolitan areas where relatively few blacks live. In the large, dense, older metropolitan areas that house most African Americans, progress has been slow—and in some cases, nonexistent— and a majority of urban blacks still live under conditions of hypersegregation, an intense form of segregation that isolates African Americans on multiple dimensions simultaneously.

As for Hispanics, their segregation from whites has slowly but steadily risen while levels of spatial isolation have increased sharply, producing conditions of hypersegregation in the two largest Hispanic urban concentrations in New York and Los Angeles.

Overlaying these persistent and often rising levels of racial-ethnic segregation is a pattern of increasing class segregation on the basis of income. In many ways, spatial inequalities by race and class are as wide as they’ve ever been.

Research indicates that spatial inequalities in the United States are generated by three principal factors:

Ongoing prejudice and discrimination
Increasingly restrictive zoning regulations
Rising levels of inequality

A variety of strategies has been offered to combat segregation in American society, but among the most effective tried so far are housing mobility programs that promote the dispersal of affordable housing units throughout middle- and upper-class communities. The dispersed construction of affordable housing can be achieved in two ways: encouraging set-asides of affordable units within larger market rate developments, or by scattering new, 100 percent affordable housing complexes across affluent areas.

The former strategy has been implemented in a variety of locations with considerable success, including the states of New Jersey, Massachusetts, and Maryland. These studies show that set-aside programs constitute an effective means not only of enhancing the social welfare and economic mobility of low-income minority families, but a powerful tool for the promotion of racial and class integration.

Set-aside programs also have the advantage of making affordable housing less visible because it is embedded within market rate developments, and thus less likely to become the target of political resistance by community residents and local officials. Proposals to construct a free-standing affordable housing complex are typically met with strong local opposition, delaying and at times preventing construction and often reducing the number of units finally allowed.

My research on the opening of Ethel Lawrence Homes, a 140-unit development of fully affordable housing in the affluent Philadelphia suburb of Mount Laurel, New Jersey suggests, however, that community fears surrounding affordable housing are unfounded when the development is well-designed and well-run. When we compared tax burdens, crime rates, and property values in Mount Laurel to those in nearby communities that did not experience the opening of affordable housing developments, we found no detectable effects on trends before and after the project’s opening .

For the low-income families who moved into the development, however, the benefits were great: dramatic reductions in exposure to social disorder and violence, far fewer negative life events, significantly improved mental health, higher rates of employment, greater earnings from work, lower levels of welfare receipt, and higher family incomes. At the same time, children benefited from huge improvements in school quality, large reductions in exposure to social disorder within schools, greater parental involvement in education, far greater study times, and greater access to a quiet place to study. And although students moved from very uncompetitive to very competitive schools, their grades did not suffer.

Thus, the construction of a properly designed and well-executed affordable housing development in a middle- or upper-class community constitutes a potentially important and powerful tool in promoting the twin goals of desegregation and poverty reduction, one that complements the construction of market-rate projects with affordable set-asides. Research in Mount Laurel suggests that such projects are a win for all concerned: motivated low-income families get a pathway out of poverty; communities get new solid citizens who impose no negative externalities with respect to tax burdens, property values, or crime rates; and citizens of the state get a successful anti-poverty program that turns dependents into taxpayers at very low marginal cost.

Rather than opposing such developments, community residents and officials are better advised to assure their proper design and implementation, looking to the Ethel Lawrence Homes in Mount Laurel, New Jersey as a model for how it should be done.

Tuesday, April 16, 2013

HUD AND HCD SAY ABAG'S NEW HOUSING NUMBERS MAY DISCRIMINATE AGAINST LOWER INCOME FAMILIES

Here's a LINK TO AN APRIL 9 LETTER from the U. S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) to ABAG expressing serious concerns about ABAG's proposed Regional Housing Needs Allocations ("RHNA") for the upcoming 2014-2022 planning period. HUD says that 1) by concentrating new multi-family housing in communities with already high concentrations of lower income housing; 2) by limiting the affordable housing which certain communities with very little affordable housing must plan for; and 3) by ignoring the housing needs of farmworkers in rural areas (like Napa, Sonoma and Marin), ABAG may be violating fair housing laws. HUD points out that as a recipient of federal funding, ABAG has agreed to affirmatively further fair housing in the bay area, but the proposed RHNA may actually worsen patterns of residential segregation in the region. This follows a February letter to ABAG from the California Department of Housing and Community Development sent to ABAG late last year pointing out that ABAG's methodology (which cuts new housing numbers for Marin and Napa Counties and some jurisdictions in Sonoma County by 50% or more) didn't comply with state laws governing the allocation process. Here's a LINK TO THE HCD LETTER. Various public interest advocacy organizations have written recently to ABAG expressing grave concerns about the new regional housing numbers. Links to those letters will be posted shortly. Let's hope that ABAG listens.

Friday, July 13, 2012

Farmworker Families Struggle for Decent Housing

Farm worker families struggle for decent housing Farmers, chefs and workers share a locally grown meal to support the cause By Chloe Vieira 07/12/2012 Ventura County Reporter In one year, a farm worker who harvests and packs produce makes less than $10,000, according to the National Agricultural Workers Survey by the United States Department of Labor. That’s not enough money to rent an apartment in this county. According to the National Low Income Housing Coalition, “A renter household needs an annual income of $37,960 in order for a two-bedroom rental unit … to be affordable.”

That equation just doesn’t work. It didn’t work for 21-year-old Mayra Amezcua, who lived in one room with her parents, two sisters and one brother in an apartment in Fillmore. They shared the apartment with two other families. Mayra’s father picks lemons and oranges for various ranches. Her mother is a crossing guard who also does ironing and cleans houses. Mayra and her siblings had trouble doing their schoolwork in the crowded Fillmore apartment. Sometimes one family member would want to sleep, and the others would have to go outside to find light to study by.

“It was very chaotic and stressful,” she said. Her parents tried to move the family to a bigger place.

“We were one of the families in line waiting. It took about seven years of attending meetings and asking, practically begging for low-income housing,” she said.

In 2009, Mayra’s family moved into the Central Station Farmworker Family Apartments on Main Street in Fillmore. Central Station is a community of 21 rental homes provided by the Cabrillo Economic Development Corporation (CEDC), which builds affordable housing for low-income families.

“I felt like I was in a dream and I was scared of waking up one day and being back in that one room,” said Susie Amezcua, Mayra’s 19-year-old sister. The family’s new apartment had a living room and a kitchen. Both sisters currently attend Calfornia State University, Northridge. Mayra is a liberal studies major and Susie is double majoring in Chicano studies and sociology. Her parents have inspired Susie to continue with her schooling. They taught her that if she has an education, she will be treated better in life.

“Ideally I want to be one of those people who kept pushing for those [housing] projects to be approved,” said Susie.

House Farm Workers! is an advocacy group in California working to rid people of the mentality that having low-income housing in your community devalues your home.

“Which is totally false,” said Gail Weller Brown, committee chair person for House Farm Workers! “These people are screened. They have to document that they are farm workers, that they meet the minimum salary requirements. It’s quite extensive; they have a lot of work to do to prove that they are worthy of being in those homes.”

Brown said the area around the Meta Street Farm Worker Family Apartments, another CEDC project, this one in Oxnard actually became safer, cleaner and better-lit as a result of the low-income housing there.

“They’re wonderful people who work very hard, and all they want is to have some privacy for their children to study and a safe place for them to grow up,” she said.

Monday, March 5, 2012

Sonoma County Fails Fair Housing Test

By STEPHEN HARPER and DAVID GRABILL
SANTA ROSA PRESS DEMOCRAT - March 4, 2012

Housing discrimination takes many forms. It can be blatant, as when an ad for an apartment rental states “no children.” Or it can be subtle, as when a lender offers to lend at a slightly higher mortgage interest rate to a Latino homebuyer than the normal rate offered to similarly qualified Caucasians.

A recent report prepared for the cities of Santa Rosa and Petaluma and the county of Sonoma finds that these and other forms of housing discrimination may be a bigger problem in Sonoma County than other areas.

The report, titled “Analysis of impediments to fair housing choice,” is posted on the city of Santa Rosa's website. Its findings are based on surveys conducted by a Denver-based consulting firm that specializes in housing issues and information provided by various stakeholders. About 25 percent of the residents surveyed believed they had been subjected to housing discrimination in renting or purchasing homes in this area. This is significantly higher than the 15 percent who report personal experiences with housing discrimination.

The report also makes some other disturbing findings:

Areas of Sonoma County are racially segregated. Some areas are more than 90 percent white. Other areas are mostly non-white. The predominately white areas have very little affordable housing, and the non-white areas have high concentrations of low-income housing. Almost three-fourths of the survey participants reported that the lack of affordable housing is a critical issue in Sonoma County.

The county lacks adequate transit opportunities and services, which makes it harder for lower-income families and people with disabilities to access housing, employment, schools and stores.

Latino applicants for home mortgage loans in the county are rejected at a significantly higher rate than non-Latino applicants.

This newspaper also recently reported that the U.S. Department of Justice has filed a lawsuit against the city of Santa Rosa and a homeowners association for housing discrimination. The lawsuit asserts that city officials violated laws prohibiting housing discrimination against families with children when they allegedly tried to force some families to move from their homes in a development on Colgan Avenue.

The site of the development was zoned for “seniors only” by the city when it was built in 2005, but when many units went unsold, the “seniors only” restriction was relaxed. Families with children moved in and the lawsuit alleges that city officials made no effort to enforce the zoning restrictions.

In 2009, after some senior residents complained about noise and other problems with the younger families, the city moved to enforce the restriction and force the non-senior families to move.

If the Justice Department proves the lawsuit's allegations, Santa Rosa could find itself under an injunction to stop discrimination against families with children and have to pay damages to the families who were told to move. The city may also have to send some city staff to training sessions about housing discrimination laws.

We don't know of any other city in California that's been sued by the federal government for housing discrimination.

The lawsuit and the fair housing analysis need to be taken seriously by city and county officials. The report recommends that the county and its cities acknowledge that housing discrimination is an ongoing problem and undertake a concerted effort to combat housing discrimination in all its forms.

Marin and Napa counties have long supported and funded fair housing enforcement. Their fair housing agencies investigate complaints of housing discrimination, do workshops for landlords, real estate agents, homebuyers and tenants and help inform the public about the requirements of state and federal discrimination laws.

Fortuitously, the Santa Rosa Housing Authority and the county Community Development Commission are considering a proposal to expand the small fair housing agency operated by Petaluma Peoples Services Center to serve the whole county. But will there be enough funding to run an effective countywide program?

Realtors, landlords and developers will benefit from stronger enforcement of fair housing laws and from strengthening the county's reputation as welcoming to all persons regardless of race, color, family status, sexual orientation, age or religion.

Who wants to live in a county where 25 percent of its residents report being subjected to housing discrimination? Let's make fair housing education and enforcement a priority.

Steve Harper and David Grabill are members of the Sonoma County Housing Advocacy Group. They are both Santa Rosa residents.

Friday, February 10, 2012

Designing a Fix for Housing (NYT Op Ed)

By JEANNE GANG and GREG LINDSAY
Published: February 9, 2012

RECENT efforts to fix the housing market — including Thursday’s $26 billion settlement with five of the nation’s biggest banks — have focused purely on the financial aspects of the slump. A permanent solution, however, must go further than money to address issues that have been at the core of the crisis but have been wholly ignored: design and urban planning.

Mortgage Plan Gives Billions to Homeowners, but With Exceptions (February 10, 2012)
Too often during the bubble, banks and builders shunned thoughtful architecture and urban design in favor of cookie-cutter houses that could be easily repackaged as derivatives to be flipped, while architects snubbed housing to pursue more prestigious projects.

But better design is precisely what suburban America needs, particularly when it comes to rethinking the basic residential categories that define it, but can no longer accommodate the realities of domestic life. Designers and policy makers need to see the single-family house as a design dilemma whose elements — architecture, finance and residents’ desires — are inextricably linked.

Take Cicero, Ill., a Chicago suburb that we studied as part of a new exhibition on the housing crisis at the Museum of Modern Art. The town may be infamous as the base of Al Capone or the site of anti-integration protests in the 1950s and ’60s, but today 80 percent of its residents are Latino, half of them foreign born.

Cicero is representative of a suburban transformation that went little noticed during the housing bubble and bust: suburbs have replaced inner cities as the destination of choice for new immigrants.

Indeed, nearly half of all Hispanics now live in suburbs, and new arrivals favor them over cities by two to one. Immigrants are one reason the number of suburban poor climbed 25 percent nationwide between 2000 and 2008. They’re also why Cicero was hit so hard by the housing crisis, with 2,049 foreclosures in 2009 alone — the second highest in Illinois, after Chicago.

Here’s where design comes in. Most of Cicero’s housing is detached, single-family homes. But these are too expensive for many immigrants, so five or six families often squeeze into one of Cicero’s brick bungalows. This creates unstable financial situations, neighborhood tensions and falling real estate values.

Too often, we see such mismatches as a purely financial issue. But instead of forcing families to fit into a house, what if we rearranged the house to fit them?

This doesn’t mean bulldozing Cicero’s housing stock. Instead, it means using existing, underused properties that might be renovated to provide a better fit. In Cicero’s case, that might mean turning to the scores of abandoned factories around it.

Such buildings are often no man’s lands thanks to fears of industrial contamination, which have left older suburbs pockmarked by blight while jobs and homes sprawl outward. But new techniques like “phytoremediation” — using plants like poplar and willow trees to absorb toxins — open the door to safer, less-expensive rehabilitation.

What remains is a wealth of steel, masonry and concrete that could be recycled into flexible live/work units. Rather than force Cicero’s residents to contort themselves to fit the bungalows, their homes can expand or shrink to fit them.

There’s one problem with such a plan: it’s illegal under Cicero’s zoning code. The town’s rules are typical of most suburbs, including the segregation of residential, commercial and industrial facilities; prohibitions on expanding and reusing buildings for new homes and businesses; and tight restrictions on mixed-use properties. Cicero’s code also defines “family” in a way that excludes the large, multigenerational groupings now common across the country.

This has been an issue for urban planners for years, but many of the proposed alternatives to suburban zoning merely swap one restrictive code for another. Only by loosening zoning to allow new combinations of home and work will we be able to bring innovative design to bear on the single-family house.

But new housing forms also demand new types of financing. Starting in the 1990s, subprime lenders targeted low-income and minority suburbs like Cicero, even when many residents would have qualified for prime loans. Latino homeowners tend to disproportionately invest savings in their homes, and as a result they lost two-thirds of their wealth between 2005 and 2009.

One long-term solution would be a type of co-op in which residents buy and sell shares according to their changing needs and circumstances. Unlike traditional co-ops, residents could purchase shares corresponding only to the units they occupy, not the land beneath, which remains in the hands of a “community land trust.” Such a structure would keep housing costs down while limiting residents’ exposure to the market. It would also provide a backstop for struggling homeowners, since the trust would have the legal right to step in and assist residents in the event of foreclosure.

Land trusts have thrived on a small scale in New York City and Chicago, among other places. The federal government should now scale up the efforts by transferring some of the nearly 250,000 foreclosed homes acquired by Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and the Federal Housing Administration into a national trust or a series of local trusts.

Even after the housing crisis is over, we will need to build connections among local government officials, policy makers, financial institutions, residents and architects. Solving the slump requires a multidisciplinary approach combining new design, new paths to homeownership and new zoning to support both — in Cicero and beyond.

Jeanne Gang and Greg Lindsay are, respectively, an architect and a visiting scholar at the Rudin Center for Transportation Policy and Management at New York University.

Sunday, February 5, 2012

Feds sue St Bernard Parish for housing discrimination.

NEW ORLEANS (CN) - The United States claims St. Bernard Parish used a "blood relative ordinance" to deny African-Americans housing and keep them out of the parish after Hurricane Katrina.
St. Bernard Parish is just east of New Orleans' Lower Ninth Ward, which was devastated by Katrina.
A Louisiana parish is the equivalent of other states' counties.
In its federal complaint, the United States says St. Bernard Parish enacted an illegal "blood relative ordinance" after the hurricane to prevent homeowners from renting to anyone not related to them by blood.
Two other plaintiffs filed similar complaints this week: the Greater New Orleans Fair Housing Advocacy Center, and Nola Capital Group, of South Dakota.
All three plaintiffs accuse the parish of violating the Fair Housing Act, and ask the court to enjoin it from its "multiyear campaign to limit rental housing opportunities for African-Americans in St. Bernard Parish under the pretext of post-Hurricane Katrina recovery planning."
In his complaint, the U.S. attorney general says that in July 2005, before Hurricane Katrina, St. Bernard Parish was approximately 86 percent white and 10 percent African-American, and just 4 percent of the African-Americans were homeowners.
Neighboring Orleans Parish was 29 percent white and 67 percent African-American.
"As a result of the devastation of Hurricane Katrina, St. Bernard Parish and the surrounding communities lost, and have yet to fully replace, a significant percentage of their single and multi-family rental housing stock," the complaint states.
The average vacancy rate for rental housing in St. Bernard Parish from 2005 to 2009 was 6.3 percent.
On Nov. 25, 2005, two months after Hurricane Katrina, the parish imposed a 12-month moratorium on re-establishment or development of any multifamily dwellings without parish approval.
Uncle Sam says that in the metropolitan New Orleans housing market, including St. Bernard Parish, 52 percent of African-American households are renters, while just 25 percent of white households rent.
"The parish's moratorium was intended to and had the effect of limiting or reducing the supply of multifamily housing of more than five units and disproportionately disadvantaged African-Americans seeking to rent housing in St. Bernard Parish," the complaint states.
"On March 7, 2006, the parish passed another moratorium, this time prohibiting the rental of single-family homes in St. Bernard Parish allegedly to 'preserve the integrity of single-family neighborhoods ... until such time as the post-Katrina real estate market in the parish stabilizes.'" (Ellipsis in complaint.)
Four months later, the parish enacted an ordinance to restore single-family rentals, but required renters to obtain a permit from the parish. Not long after, the parish allowed renters who rented to persons "related by blood" to do so without a permit.
The United States says" "The parish's blood-relative exception disproportionately disadvantaged African-Americans seeking to rent housing in the predominantly white community of St. Bernard Parish."
"The parish's stated purpose in enacting the blood-relative ordinance was to reestablish 'preexisting neighborhoods,' and to maintain the 'integrity,' 'quality of life,' 'family atmosphere' and 'quiet enjoyment' of 'long established neighborhoods.'
"However, a council member who voted against the ordinance stated that it was passed 'to block the blacks from living in these areas.'
"Craig Taffaro, a member of the Parish Council at the time, drafted and sponsored the blood-relative ordinance. Taffaro admitted at the time that 'all we're doing is saying we want to maintain the demographics.'
"The parish's blood-relative exception was designed to be a proxy for race in order to artificially fix the racial composition of renters in St. Bernard Parish."
In August 2007, the parish issued a new renter permit process that included a $250 application fee, granted the parish discretion to deny permits, and allowed no more than two permits to be issued for every 500 feet in districts zoned for single-family use.
"The parish has denied homeowner-applicants, including African-Americans, permits to rent their single-family dwellings," the complaint states.
The parish rescinded its permit requirement in April 2011.
Between 2008 and 2011, 10 residents and homeowners complained to the Department of Housing and Urban Development that the parish racially discriminated through its permitting process. (g 35)
After investigation, the matter was turned over to the attorney general.
In 2009, the parish made comprehensive revisions to its zoning ordinances that eliminated multifamily housing as a permitted use in four zones. The revisions restricted new multifamily dwellings - defined as housing with three or more units - to just one zone.
"Through the comprehensive revisions, the parish reduced the land available for development of multifamily housing as of right by 99.3%, leaving only 109 acres for such developments," the complaint states.
The comprehensive revisions "severely limited or reduced the supply or availability of multi-family housing of more than three units and disproportionately disadvantaged Africa-Americans seeking to rent housing in St. Bernard Parish."
A federal judge in October 2011 ruled in a case brought in 2006 against St. Bernard Parish by the Greater New Orleans Fair Housing Action Center that the sequence of events surrounding zoning requirements in St. Bernard Parish "suggests the defendants have doggedly attempted to preserve the pre-Katrina demographics of St. Bernard Parish" and "presents ample evidence of intentional discrimination" against African-Americans.
"On January 28, 2011, John Trasvina, HUD's Assistant Secretary for Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity, filed a housing discrimination complaint on behalf of the HUD secretary ... alleging that the parish violated the Fair Housing Act by enacting and implementing the comprehensive revisions so as to continue to exclude African Americans from residing in the parish. On January 20, 2012, HUD referred this complaint to the Department of Justice as a potential pattern or practice violation of the Fair Housing Act," the complaint states.
In 2008, the parish and the Greater New Orleans Fair Housing Advocacy Center entered into a consent order settling the center's lawsuit against the parish.
Four months later, Provident Realty Advisors, a multifamily housing developer, approached Parish President Craig Taffaro with plans to develop four multifamily, affordable-housing developments in the parish at a cost of $60 million.
The parish was told that $34 million of the funding would come from low-income housing tax credits. The tax credits would expire if not used by 2010.
In response, the parish enacted a moratorium on new construction of multifamily housing.
"Between July 2009, and November 2011, the court repeatedly found the parish in contempt over its attempts to prevent or impede the construction of Provident's affordable-housing developments," the government says.
The U.S. seeks an injunction and civil penalties.