E-HAG

Check out HAG on Facebook

2012-01-22T08:00:00.001-08:00

2012-01-12T21:40:00.000-08:00

Affordable housing in the center of Copenhagen...

Free-Spirited Enclave’s Reluctant Landowners Fear Capitalism’s Harness

Residents of Christiania, a 40-year experiment in communal living near downtown Copenhagen, are trying to buy the land they have squatted on, despite the ideological dissonance.
By SALLY McGRANE
Published: January 12, 2012

COPENHAGEN — Last summer, the Danish state offered to sell a good chunk of the 80-odd-acre former military base at the edge of downtown Copenhagen to Christiania, the alternative community whose residents had been squatting there illegally for four decades. For the residents, who fundamentally reject the idea of landownership, this presented an ideological quandary.

After a Supreme Court ruling that said the squatters had no legal right to remain on the land, the residents made a pragmatic decision to buy the property.
“Christiania has offered to buy it,” said Risenga Manghezi, a spokesman for the community. “But Christiania doesn’t want to own it.”

To resolve the contradiction, Mr. Manghezi and a handful of others decided to start selling shares in Christiania. Pieces of paper, hand-printed on site, the shares can be had for amounts from $3.50 to $1,750. Shareholders are entitled to a symbolic sense of ownership in Christiania and the promise of an invitation to a planned annual shareholder party. “Christiania belongs to everyone,” Mr. Manghezi said. “We’re trying to put ownership in an abstract form.”

Since the shares were first offered in the fall, about $1.25 million worth have been sold in Denmark and abroad. The money raised will go toward the purchase of the land from the government.

Justifying the transaction still takes some artful semantic twists. “According to their system, you are not an owner of a house, you’re a user of the house,” explained Knud Foldschack, the lawyer for the community who negotiated the purchase. “You don’t own the area, you care take the area.”

But after a rocky decade under a conservative-led government, during which the carless, hashish-friendly community faced threats of expulsion and a Supreme Court ruling that said the squatters had no legal right to remain on the land, the residents made a pragmatic decision to buy the property — or, as many would have it, to “buy it free.”

“People were afraid, and we had to respect this fear,” said Allan Lausten, a handyman who took part in the negotiations despite an aversion to bureaucrats.

The Danish state made it easy, too. Not only did officials offer to sell the land for about $14.5 million, a fraction of what it would be worth if sold commercially, but they also made several provisions to accommodate the Christianites’ way of life.

One sticking point was how to negotiate with a group run by consensus democracy, where a decision is made only if everyone who shows up at a meeting agrees. “Their system of government is very difficult to deal with from the perspective of the state,” said Carsten Jarlov, director of the Danish State Building Agency, who first began working on the deal in 2004. “What do you do with all these meetings, where everyone has a say and no one is responsible?”

The solution was to create a foundation, with a board made up of five residents and six outsiders, to act as owners on behalf of the Christianites.

Because it can be difficult for people who reject basic tenets of capitalism to get a loan, the Danish state also guaranteed the bank loan. Further, Danish officials stipulated that the land must remain open to the public. Lastly, any profit from the sale of the land or buildings would immediately revert to the state. “This is a nonprofit zone,” said Mr. Foldschack, who called the deal “fantastic” and its eight-year evolution “Buddhistic.”

Mr. Jarlov said the decision had broad-based political support. “Danish public opinion is very ambivalent, when it comes to Christiania,” he added. “If you ask if there should be space for Christiania in society, they say, ‘Yes, we love it!’ But if you say, ‘Is it a good idea to take over property you don’t own?’ they are against that. Every Dane has this split within himself.”

Jacob Ludvigsen, a newspaper editor who with some friends started squatting on the land the day after a fisherman told him about the unused space in 1971, welcomed the decision. “A 40-year-long conflict has been brought to an end,” said Mr. Ludvigsen, who no longer lives in Christiania but said that he carried a piece of Christiania in his heart. “This will give Christiania a real independence.”

Still, the sale makes many here uncomfortable. “I think it would have been better to remain squatters,” said a young man on Pusher Street as he sorted through a bag labeled “Outdoor Skunk.” “Pressure from the outside forces you to evolve, to stick together.”

Others point out that now the ramshackle, do-it-yourself community will have to come up with the money to pay for the land. But for many, the problem is less tangible.

“I have a feeling of sorrow that the state forced us to buy it,” said Ida Klemann, an artist who first moved to Christiania in 1971, then left to have a baby (at the time, there was no running water on the premises), before moving back in 1972. “I thought it was wonderful the Danish state was generous enough to allow this wild little thing to go on living inside itself.”

“When you say, ‘You have to buy it,’ you’re trying to throw it into normal conditions, in a way,” added Ms. Klemann, one of the progenitors of the Christiania share idea (she calls herself a “share carer”). “What do we do now? It’s not just money, but identity.”

In November, a small group traveled to the United States to promote the Christiania shares. They visited the Occupy Wall Street protest in New York, where they were greeted with cheers.

On Wall Street itself, they had less success. On a blog documenting the adventures of an anthropomorphic Christiania share — which would go on to have both an identity crisis and a love affair with a California road map — a video shows Mr. Manghezi performing on the street. “It’s not that there’s anything wrong with investing for profit,” he calls out. “It’s just so yesterday, and a little bit primitive, too!”

As a result of these efforts, the group sold two shares for $5 each on the steps of the New York Stock Exchange. But thanks to the publicity, sales here surged. “It’s a cultural difference,” Mr. Manghezi said. “We thought it was hilarious, and the Danish press thought it was hilarious, but Americans were like: ‘$10? That’s a total failure! You shouldn’t even talk about it.’ ”

“We’d like to be a speculation-free zone, an alternative to a society based on gambling and speculation,” Mr. Manghezi said. “Of course, if we have to take a loan, we will.”

FAIR HOUSING MEANS FAIR LENDING!

2011-11-08T10:11:00.000-08:00

In 1968 Justice Stewart writing for a majority of the U.S. Supreme Court stated "IF CONGRESS WERE POWERLESS TO ASSURE THAT A DOLLAR IN THE HAND OF A BLACK MAN WILL PURCHASE THE SAME THING AS A DOLLAR IN THE HANDS OF A WHITE MAN ......THEN THE THIRTEENTH AMENDMENT [BANNING SLAVERY] MADE A PROMISE THE NATION CANNOT KEEP."
Jones v Alfred H. Mayer

Today that promise remains unfulfilled for many Americans because of the color of their skin, their race, ancestry, religion or mental or physical disability. The most important consumer purchase a person will make in their life time is buying a home. Under the Federal and California fair housing laws you have the right to be treated in an equal and impartial manner by a financial institution.

What is prohibited?

When applying for a loan, refinancing a mortgage or home equity loan no one can take the following actions for reasons of race, color, national origin, religion, sex, martial or family status or disability:
- deny a loan
- establish terms, conditions, or privileges different for the giving of a loan, for
example giving the loan only with a higher interest rate or downpayment
- charge different costs for services like making an application, doing an
appraisal, closing costs etc.
- be targeted for a loan that has fees, terms or rates that are excessively high
i.e predatory

What Should I look for?

If you experience one or more of the following you may have been discriminated against.
- Property Standards: Does the bank have standards for lending based on the maximum age or minimum property value?
- Minimum Loan Amounts: Does the bank have standards for lending based on a minimum loan amount?
- Subjective Lending Criteria: Does the bank have standards for lending based on the property being well maintained? Is the bank asking vague questions about the applicants character or insisting that the borrower have excellent credit?
- Different Terms for Loan: Does the bank have higher fees on smaller loans; require different downpayments or offer higher interest rates for loans in Hispanic or an African-American neighborhoods?
- Employment Stability: Does the bank have standards for lending based on the applicant being on the job for at least two years?
- Credit Record: Does the bank have standards for lending which excludes from the credit history regular payment of rent, utilities, doctors or the local grocer?
- Appraisal Practices: Does the bank have appraisers that make downward adjustments on the value of a home for "functional obsolescence" because it or the neighborhood is over a certain age?
- Private Mortgage Insurance: Does the bank have insurance companies that reject coverage based on some or all of the underwriting standards listed above?

The problem of predatory lending practices.

This is a problem that effects middle class families, as well as the working poor, but such practices are most especially targeted to lower income families and the elderly that don?t usually qualify for well regulated loans. Faced with a crisis like the purchase of a car, a major repair to their home, or a hospital bill, many people are forced to apply for a loan from a finance company or subprime lender.

Some of these lenders require the payment of high annual interest and points, pad closing costs, add recording fees, bogus broker fees and the like. The applicant must often buy credit life insurance, often for excessive amounts and roll all the premiums up-front to be financed as part of the loan.

The purpose of these terms is to make a lot of money. Also, it is to make sure that the person will not meet the terms of the loan. This forces the person into another round of refinancing so more fees and charges can be assessed until the home is foreclosed on and the borrower?s credit is completely ruined.

Find out your credit score.

The most important information to get a mortgage is your credit score. Score a 750 and your excellent credit history will likely make your dream home a reality. Rate a 525 or lower and your only hope will be a subprime lender or finance company. Until recently, this credit scoring system was a secret. However, now for a small fee, Fair, Issac & Company and Equifax Credit Information Services will provide you your score, information on how it was arrived at and things you can do to improve it. If you want to get your credit score go to their web site (www.myfico.com) or write Equifax Credit Information Services at P.O. Box 70241, Atlanta, Ga. 30324.

Where can you get help?

Often, the only way you can find out if your a victim of housing discrimination or predatory lending is to contact your local Fair Housing enforcement agency and request that they investigate a particular lender and their loan officers.

For people with a disability, the U.S. Department of Housing & Urban Development (HUD) also has made a telephone number free of charge for the hearing impaired (1-800-927-9275), also interpreters, tapes, Braille materials and assistance reading and completing the forms. HUD?s web site also has information about filing a complaint (www.hud.gov)

Judge Rejects Napa Housing Element Challenge

2011-06-07T11:44:00.000-07:00

From the Napa Register, by James Noonan June 7, 2011
______________________________

Napa County has earned a likely victory in a lawsuit challenging its housing plan.

On Thursday, Napa County Superior Court Judge Ray Guadagni tentatively ruled that the county’s Housing Element — a long-term planning document — met the requirements of state law.

In his 2009 lawsuit, attorney David Grabill, representing Latinos Unidos del Valle de Napa y Solano, had asked that the court force the county to revise the document, claiming that it didn’t go far enough to provide housing to low-income residents in the unincorporated area.

On Monday, following the ruling, attorneys for both sides were back in court for additional arguments before Guadagni rules whether or not to make the tentative ruling a permanent one.

Guadagni could issue a decision as early as this week.

Grabill, on behalf of Latinos Unidos, first filed suit against the county in November 2009.

Much of Grabill’s complaint focused on the county’s housing plan, adopted by the Napa County Board of Supervisors in June 2009.

The plan provides for affordable housing at Spanish Flat, Moskowite Corner and Angwin as well as 20 acres, or about 300 units, at the former Napa Pipe site where developers are proposing a 2,580-home mixed-use development.

Three months after being approved by the board, the state’s Department of Housing and Community Development rejected the county’s housing plan, saying it was unlikely that affordable development would take place at the Spanish Flat, Moskowite Corner or Angwin sites.

Grabill filed suit shortly after, agreeing with the state’s assessment of the three unincorporated sites. “We think they’re totally infeasible for affordable housing,” he said.

While recognizing that the state had reached an opposite conclusion a year ago, Guadagni wrote that the sites in question satisfied the county’s obligation to plan for future housing.

“The court appropriately exercises its independent judgment in interpreting the relevant statute and concludes that the county’s identification of Angwin and Spanish Flat satisfied the requirement of deemed appropriate densities,” he wrote.

“We have not yet begun to fight,” Grabill said Monday.

In their lawsuit, Latinos Unidos is also claiming that a county ordinance offering a “density bonus” is invalid, and that the county has historically discriminated against low-income housing.

Grabill said he is seeking no monetary damages. He only hopes to see more low-income and farmworker housing constructed throughout the county.

The two sides will be back in court in mid-August to begin arguments on the remaining points of the lawsuit.

In past years, Latinos Unidos has successfully altered the course of county housing plans.

In 2003, the group filed a similar lawsuit that ultimately forced the county into costly housing deals with the cities of Napa and American Canyon.

Late last year, the group sued the developers of the proposed St. Regis luxury resort in the city of Napa, saying that the luxury project didn’t do enough to promote affordable housing. The suit was settled, with the developer agreeing to pay more than $4.4 million into the city’s housing fund once development starts.

New maps show segregation alive and well | Remapping Debate

2011-04-20T22:35:00.000-07:00

Why are so many people so nervous about having neighbors who are different from themselves? Different color, different income, different age, different religion, etc?

New maps show segregation alive and well | Remapping Debate

Santa Rosa Rejects Affordable Housing

2011-03-31T18:09:00.001-07:00

The Santa Rosa City Council overturned the Planning Commission's approval of the EIR for the Elnoka affordable housing project on Tuesday (3/29/11). This well-designed project would provide 41 units of much-needed lower income housing and 20 or more units of moderate income housing. The Housing Advocacy Group urged the Council to reject the appeal by an association representing a neighboring single-family seniors development. The Association complained that the project would block their views, and create bothersome noises from families living next door. Click here for a news article about the public hearing. The site was listed in the city's general plan is available for higher density multifamily housing as a result of a lawsuit settlement agreement between HAG and the City in 2002. We're looking into ways we can make the city abide by there agreement. Stay tuned.

Help: SR City Council to Hear Nimby Appeal of Elnoka Approval on Tuesday, March 8

2011-03-02T18:39:00.001-08:00

The EIR for the proposed 206-unit Elnoka development on Sonoma Highway just west of Oakmont was approved 6-1 by the Santa Rosa Planning Commission. Some residents of Oakmont have appealed that approval to the City Council. A public hearing is set for next Tuesday, March 8, at 5 pm on the appeal.

The developer, Oakmont Senior Living, has committed to make 20% of the units affordable to very low income households, and an additional 10% of the units affordable to moderate income households. This is an unprecedented affordable housing commitment by a market rate developer in Sonoma County. HAG has strongly supported the development. It is well-designed, economically integrated, and near shopping (Safeway / St. Francis), schools (Whited Elementary, Maria Carrillo HS), and public transit. The site is designated for multifamily development in the City's housing element. it will also serve as an example of what a developer can accomplish in terms of integrating affordable housing in a market rate development (at no cost to the city or to taxpayers). If this project succeeds, we hope other developers will follow its lead.

The opponents claim it will create more traffic, noise, and reduce air quality. but the EIR finds that all of these claimed impacts would be less than significant. In previous public hearings, opponents who live in Oakmont have asserted that the project should be restricted to seniors, because seniors live across the fence in Oakmont. Some said the noise from children playing in the streets in the project would be bothersome to them. We hope the City Council will not give much weight to these kinds of objections. The City badly needs affordable housing in general, and especially in this area which is heavily "segregated" with high end single-family homes at Oakmont, Skyhawk and Bennett Valley. Normally, this would be a "no brainer" but it's a big issue at Oakmont, and those folks tend to vote as a block. Here's an ad that ran in the Oakmont paper a couple years ago:

Some of these "vote for" folks are now on the Council, along with their allies Jake Ours and Scot Bartley. Most of those candidates that HAG endorsed are not on the Council (note: Michael Allen lives at Oakmont). The Oakmont NIMBY's have turned out in great numbers to oppose the project at previous public hearings. So we hope that some folks concerned about affordable housing can attend on Tuesday and speak in favor of this very worthwhile project.

Dick Latimer has written a wonderful article supporting the project that ran in today's Kenwood Press. CLICK HERE to read it. Thanks, Dick.

Give me a call or send me an e-mail if you have any questions.

David Grabill

707 528 6839

Squatters

2011-02-23T13:27:00.000-08:00

fyi ... from BeyondChron: San Francisco's Alternative Online Daily News » A Multi-Story Underground: Squatters in the United St

____________________

A Multi-Story Underground: Squatters in the United States
by Hannah E. Dobbz‚ Feb. 23‚ 2011

Matt Bruce is a magician. By this, I mean that he literally works kids’ parties for money and entertains friends with sorcery in his spare time. His room is bursting with occult paraphernalia and he has countless tricks up his sleeve. But Matt Bruce is no one-trick pony; he knows more than how to manipulate a deck of cards and how to have a quarter crop up behind your ear: Matt Bruce knows how to make rent bills disappear.

Bruce and his friends haven’t paid to live in their bungalow home in Salt Lake City, Utah, in over three years. How do they do it? While most magicians don’t reveal their secrets, Bruce is notably open about his illegal living situation. Squatting is not a new form of rent evasion, but it is an increasingly practiced one – and in light of the so-called “housing crisis” of the late 2000s, squatters are increasingly comfortable discussing their lifestyles.

He summed up their ability to maintain the property with the words of a city worker who learned of the squatters a few months after they moved in: “If you don’t say anything, I won’t say anything. You took the eyesore out of the neighborhood.”

Indeed, the rundown property that had once attracted drug addicts and other unseemly types by its ramshackle appearance now glows with life. The mere presence of the new caretakers drove away the seedy elements, and the small gesture of taking the boards off the windows spoke volumes for the mood of the property.

It is for this reason that squatting has become a popular discussion topic in a post–housing-bubble era. With 14 percent of living units in the United States vacant at the end of 2010, many people are questioning the logic of the real estate market, and some are bucking the system by occupying vacant but usable properties. Families and individuals who can no longer afford the high cost of living, then, are able to find homes in houses that are sometimes in better condition than rental properties. And neighbors often turn a blind eye to the illegality of the squatters’ methods since the move-in can actually increase the value of formerly unoccupied properties.

In this way, squatting in the United States is taking on more European overtones. Europe is famous for its squatting history, with its grandiose stories of squatted night clubs in England and squatted castles in Spain. Some countries enjoy what are often called “open” squatting laws, which encourage squatters to openly occupy abandoned buildings. Amsterdam, for example, is known for its comically straight-forward requirement of a chair, a table, and a bed in a squatted building for 48 hours to constitute a legal property transfer. In these situations, neighbors are often supportive. After all, abandoned properties are a symptom of a broken property system. Why not address it?

More recently, some European countries have begun tightening their formerly lax squatting rules, which some read as a slipping away of what was once part of a powerful cultural history. But while a legislative shift is happening now overseas, a cultural shift is beginning here in the States.

Rich countries such as the United States are accustomed to surplus. Just as consumers enjoy a surplus of food, clothes, and plastic trinkets in the U.S., they similarly enjoy a surplus of real estate. Even beyond the housing-bubble burst, developers continue to build new living units despite a surfeit of old ones. This is where the term “housing crisis” is farcical at best and downright inaccurate at worst. The term “crisis” implies a shortage -- an idea that Americans are rarely familiar with; instead, the American poor are victimized by a maldistribution of resources.

While there has never been a shortage of space in the United States, Americans have historically deluded themselves into a state of spatial urgency, moving further West and always developing more for fear of a shortage.

The same can be said of the “housing crisis” that began in late 2007: The most famous example of a wide housing gap is that of Miami, Fl., which was supposedly hit hardest by the economic implosion. But Miami had a 10-percent vacancy rate in affordable and public housing even before the alleged crisis. Further, the city had demolished 482 units of public housing, and, despite $8.5 million of city money allocated to the rebuilding of affordable units, the lot remained vacant until it was later offered to developers at no charge.

Such shenanigans inspired the Miami Herald’s “House of Lies” series, which highlights the corruption and incompetency of city politicians with regard to housing, as well as the well-known organized-squatting movement Take Back the Land.

But squatting was not born of the housing bust: Squatting has a long history in the United States, beginning with colonization, extending through Western Expansion land grants and land boom legislation, homesteading, and into modern housing justice movements like that of ACORN and Homes Not Jails. If nothing else, squatters have historically catalyzed property legislation reform by attacking with two prongs: (1) garnering public support by calling attention to the basic right to personal space and shelter, and (2) becoming such a nuisance to property managers, speculators, and law enforcement that legislators are compelled to create other options.

Unfortunately, little information is broadly available about squatters and squatting. Here and there is mention of them in historical texts, and during the height of the foreclosure crisis articles about down-and-out families cascaded into the news and then quickly evaporated. Perhaps this information firewall is in the nature of American squatting, which remains clandestine; like the tunnel dwellers of New York City and Las Vegas, squatting movements live underground. And while this invisibility is not unintentional, as squatting is indeed an illicit lifestyle, it is squatters’ invisibility that siphons their power and cripples their political sway.

When squatters and other property outlaws can again unite, organize, and step into the limelight to publicly demand housing justice (as they historically have), we may see surprising changes in the legal framework of our predatory property system. Many revolutions begin underground. But none of them can stay there for long.

Hannah Dobbz is the director of the documentary film Shelter: A Squatumentary. She is currently researching and writing a book [AK Press] on the history of squatting, land struggles, and property law in the United States. To view her Kickstarter page or to support her work, please visit: https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1578702306/the-history-and-future-of-squatting-in-the-us-the

To improve outcomes for poor kids, let them move to the suburbs

2011-02-10T21:19:00.001-08:00

By Robert C. Embry Jr.
Baltimore Sun
3:06 PM EST, February 9, 2011

One of the most important recent pieces of education research was released last year — and promptly ignored. The Century Foundation's report "Housing Policy is School Policy" confirms the seminal 1966 finding of Johns Hopkins University sociologist James Coleman: Namely, the school-based variable that most profoundly affects student performance is the socioeconomic composition of the school. In short, poor children do better if they attend schools with affluent children.

The "new" news in the report? It highlights the critical out-of-school influence of where the low-income children reside. Poor children attending an affluent school do even better, it turns out, if they also live in an affluent neighborhood.

In this study, researcher Heather Schwartz examines the impact of Montgomery County's economically integrated housing policies on the academic success of low-income families who live in federally subsidized public housing scattered throughout the county. Families were randomly assigned by the county's public housing authority to both affluent and relatively non-affluent neighborhoods.

The findings: Children who lived in neighborhoods where less than 20 percent of the neighborhood's elementary school's population was poor significantly outperformed similar low-income children who lived in neighborhoods with public schools that had more than 35 percent of students in poverty. In fact, poor children in the low-poverty schools were able to close the achievement gap with their wealthier suburban peers by 50 percent in math and one-third in reading. This was true even though the group of poorer schools received additional funding to implement the more traditional remedial programs to address the academic challenges of low-income students.

A wide body of research over the past three decades has documented the educational benefits of moving from high-poverty to low-poverty neighborhoods. Research on the remedy in the landmark 1976 Supreme Court housing decision in Hills v. Gautreaux demonstrated that children whose families moved from public housing and other inner-city Chicago neighborhoods to racially and economically integrated suburban neighborhoods were far more likely to succeed in school and go on to college or full-time employment than children whose families stayed in Chicago.

The key finding of this cumulative research is that the combination of living in a low-poverty neighborhood and attending a low-poverty school impacts educational performance of poor children more than traditional reforms and increased funding.

If the socioeconomic composition of the neighborhood and the school are so critical to the educational success of poor children, why have these factors been neglected in the federal Department of Education's reform agenda? Why is this remedy generally ignored in lawsuits attempting to obtain an adequate education for poor children? Why can one look in vain at state and local school board meetings to find any mention of the subject?

One reason is that, to date, there has been no legal compulsion to do so.

A second reason is the long-standing hostility of suburban jurisdictions that routinely oppose any efforts to economically integrate their low-poverty schools, even in small increments.

And finally, there is a shortage of affordable housing units in the affluent neighborhoods that would yield the biggest educational difference.

Given all that, if one agrees with the research on the positive impact of neighborhood and school economic integration, what might be done for Baltimore's poorest families?

One potential scenario: Maryland could enact legislation to permit state education aid to Baltimore City to be used as a rent certificate for families of poor children in failing schools to move to low-poverty neighborhoods in other school districts. It is of interest to note that the Maryland's state aid to Baltimore City schools is $12,191 per pupil, roughly the net cost of a rent subsidy needed to permit an urban family living in concentrated poverty to move to a low-poverty, suburban neighborhood.

Such a shift would give low-income children access to low-poverty schools on a voluntary basis, with the added benefits of living in the same community as their more affluent classmates. The good news is that there are at least 88 public schools in the counties surrounding Baltimore City that would qualify as potential sites, with less than 20 percent of children in poverty.

Clearly, there are many obstacles to accessing the opportunities posed by integrative housing and schools for our poorest families. Yet the research is persuasive: The answer to how to close the achievement gap between poor and rich kids may not be in the debates about class size, math curricula, and other school-based reforms, but in the state's facilitating the enrollment of low-income children in low-poverty schools and housing their families in low-poverty neighborhoods.

Now we must decide whether we continue to ignore the implications of this evidence or choose to find solutions that facilitate greater socioeconomic integration of low-income children.

Robert C. Embry Jr., president of the Abell Foundation, is a former member of the Board of School Commissioners of Baltimore City and former president of the Maryland State Board of Education. His e-mail is embry@abell.org.

NYT: Happy Endig to Foreclosure Tale

2010-12-04T22:51:00.000-08:00

BUSINESS DAY | December 04, 2010
Talking Business: A Happy Ending to a Raw, but Common, Tale
By JOE NOCERA
Lilla Roberts fell behind on her mortgage for a while over a paying history of around 20 years. But her modification was so sloppily handled, she could have lost her home.

HAG Endorses Haenel, Jacobi and Gorin for Santa Rosa City Council

2010-09-29T16:12:00.000-07:00

The Sonoma County Housing Advocacy Group (“HAG”) seeks to promote affordable housing and housing for persons with special needs such as farmworkers, seniors, persons with disabilities and the homeleess. Occasionally we make endorsements in local elections when we candidates who are extremely well qualified and who support our affordable housing goals.

In this year’s election for the Santa Rosa City Council, we are pleased to endorse Larry Haenel, Veronica Jacobi and Mayor Susan Gorin.

As a member of the Santa Rosa School Board for the past six years, Larry Haenel has been a strong and effective voice for excellence and equity in the City’s schools. He taught at Montgomery High School for 32 years where he was chair of the English Department, and he continues to mentor student teachers for Dominican University. He is a regular volunteer peer counselor at the Family Service Agency. He’s a real estate agent and understands the complexities of affordable housing development.

Veronica Jacobi has been a consistent and strong voice for affordable housing on the Santa Rosa City Council for the past four years. Her passion is protecting the environment for the people of Santa Rosa and for future generations. She understands that an essential component of environmental protection is social equity - affordable housing, shelters, transitional housing and programs to ensure that Santa Rosa addresses the needs of all its residents, regardless of their economic status.

Susan Gorin has been the City’s Mayor for the past two years, and has been an effective leader of the City Council. She has generally supported affordable housing efforts. As Mayor, she has consistently sought to find common ground with other members of the City Council, and to build consensus among competing interest groups in the City. We believe she deserves a second term of office, and HAG heartily endorses her candidacy.

Santa Rosa Budget Cuts Threaten Homeless Services

2010-09-17T09:20:00.000-07:00

To: Mayor Susan Gorin and Members of the Santa Rosa City Council
September 13, 2010

The City Council agenda for Tuesday (tomorrow) includes a proposal for reduced homeless shelter funding for 2010-2011. It's hard to figure out what's going on from the agenda materials, but the City appears to be reducing funding by about $40,000. We heard about this a couple months ago and learned that Catholic Charities, the shelter operator, was planning to close the Homeless Services Center on Morgan Street, supposedly in response to the City's funding cut. We learned later that the City will receive an an additional $15k in Federal CDGB funding for homeless services for the coming year, and Catholic Charities is getting about $1.3 million in "Homeless Prevention and Rehousing Program" funding - that's exactly what their Homeless Services Center does and does well. But the fate of the Homeless Services Center is still unclear.

The Homeless Services Center provides essential and even lifesaving services for homeless persons. These include showers, hearty breakfasts, job counseling and placement, mail boxes, guidance with social services, drug/alcohol counseling, occasional legal assistance, transitional housing, health care and respite beds for homeless who are seriously ill but not so ill that they have to be hospitalized.
We met recently with Larry Lakes, Director of Catholic Charities. He was cordial but vague about their plans, saying that they were considering moving the Center from Morgan Street to Samuel Jones Hall out on Fulton Avenue, but would probably keep Morgan Street as a "drop off and pick up" site, with actual "services" provided out at the Samuel Jones Hall on Fulton Avenue.

When asked why, he said 1) the "consolidation" would save money; and 2) some neighbors were opposed to the Homeless Services Center at its current location, although it’s been there for more than 20 years. But Fulton Avenue is a long way from downtown, where hundreds of homeless people spend their days (and nights). Mr. Lakes insisted that it would not be a problem for homeless persons to get out to Samuel Jones, and said Catholic Charities would provide shuttle bus service. He didn't explain how Catholic Charities could afford to buy/maintain a shuttle bus and pay a driver, but were having difficulty finding $25,000 to offset the amount of the city's proposed cut.

Funding is available to continue the services provided at the Homeless Services Center at its current location - from the business community that depends on the Center staff to help address problems in the downtown area when they arise; from other non-profits that have historically supported homeless services like the Community Foundation; and from various state/federal programs such as the Homeless Prevention and Rapid Resettlement Act ("HPRP") which is providing $1.3 million to Catholic Charities for 2010 and 2011. We're not aware of any efforts by Catholic Charities to seek additional funding to offset the $25,000 cut by the City. If funding is not the problem, why would the City Council be so callous and uncaring as to allow the Homeless Services Center to shut down on Morgan Street? The City closed the 40+ bed downtown shelter on Brookwood last year. Samuel Jones has been filled to capacity all summer. One homeless client of mine says he thinks the "progressive" City Council wants to curry favor with the NIMBY's who've been trying to force the Center to leave the Morgan Street location for years.
According to HUD, homelessness across the country has been increasing at an annual rate of over 10%. The annual homeless count showed an even greater increase in Sonoma County. Cutbacks in mental health services, high unemployment, foreclosures, and large numbers of veterans returning from the war(s) mean the numbers will continue to increase.

We hope the City will reconsider cutting the $25,000 from its homeless services budget so that Catholic Charities won’t have a convenient reason to shut down the Center, and we hope Catholic Charities will look a little harder for ways to offset any cuts the City has to make. Other cities, including Rohnert Park, have tapped their redevelopment funds to support homeless programs during the current budget crisis. Santa Rosa's spending millions on the AT&T building; millions on developing the Railroad Square area; millions on a cosmetic reconfiguration of Courthouse Sqare and more millions on "upgrading" the Coddingtown Mall. Surely they can find a measly $25,000 to provide essential services at the Homeless Services Center for another year. A few NIMBY votes shouldn’t be a factor in this. Surely the City and its largest charitable organization can find a way here.

Letter to Santa Rosa re Density Bonus Ordinance

2010-09-08T10:43:00.000-07:00

The City of Santa Rosa's updating its density bonus ordinance, supposedly to comply with state requirements set out in Government Code Sec. 65915. That section says, in a nutshell, that a developer who includes some affordable units in its residential development is entitled to a density bonus and various "concessions and incentives" to help recoup the cost of providing the affordable units. It's a great program to generate some affordable housing at no cost to taxpayers, while helping to integrate new developments with families of different incomes, etc. But the draft that the City's looking at adopting makes it really difficult or impossible for developers to get a density bonus or to qualify for concessions and incentives. Why? What are they thinking? Click here to see a letter that HAG recently sent to the City about the proposed ordinance.

Urbanist Thinking at Burning Man

2010-09-06T21:49:00.000-07:00

From Planetizen
By Nate Berg, Staff writer 9/5/10

It's already disappearing. The temporary city that forms during the annual Burning Man event is fading away, as the tens of thousands of people who traveled out to live in the desert of northwestern Nevada for the past week have filed out of the void and returned back to the rest of the world. The event's organizers and volunteers are still erasing the traces of the event, from demolishing structures to removing fencing to picking up trash. Within another week or so, the entire city will have disappeared.

It's an interesting way for a city to exist -- just a few weeks at a time, once a year. But it's been working for Burning Man and Black Rock City, the name of that temporary city that forms and disbands almost as soon as it comes to full life. On top of what's already a unique experiment in citymaking, the theme of this year's event was Metropolis, which spurred the tens of thousands of people and artists who make up the city to think a little more about how their "party in the desert" is actually a little city and community (the fourth largest city in Nevada during its run), and how it relates to their world beyond the desert.

51,515 people had driven themselves into the far-off Black Rock Desert for the event by midnight last Friday, a new attendance record for the event, which has taken place every year in one form or another since 1986. The population has steadily increased over the years, a reality that has gradually turned the artist/anarchist/bohemian event into a temporary but perennial small-scale city. The Metropolis theme offered an interesting chance for attendees to think a little more about Burning Man's cityness, and the event's relation to real life in the "default world". Yeah, it's a party in the desert, but it's also an event that takes very seriously the community and civic experience it creates.

This year's theme was definitely an appropriate one for the event, and it inspired many city- and architecture-based art works and installations.

[See http://www.planetizen.com/node/45856 for some interesting photo's]

The art is a major part of the event, and its breadth and detail is almost overwhelming. It's visual saturation that makes grasping the entirety of the event almost impossible. That some of the art at this year's event was related to cities was interesting, but that recognition of the event as a city is not something unique to 2010. How Burning Man functions as a city, and how that function evolved, is what makes Burning Man so interesting to me. It's a topic I'll be exploring in much further detail in a future article, and something touched upon in various places, including this piece from the January 2009 issue of Architect Magazine, more recently by Greg Scruggs writing on this year's event for Next American City, the Burning Man organization's own Metropol blog series, and in this blog post from The Architect's Newspaper looking at some of the architecture-related artworks on display this year.

It was an especially interesting year to be at Burning Man because of the theme. Conversations with half-naked people about infill in the camping areas and pedestrian-scaled design were an unexpected departure from the typical desert camp conversation. Whether it's this year's theme that got those conversations going is hard to say. The event itself is becoming a metropolis, and it seems that people are increasingly drawing that conclusion and a connection to the cities they regularly experience. The good thing about this year's Metropolis theme is that the urbanist discourse on Burning Man -- and its impact on actual cities and communities beyond the event -- is likely to continue.

Nate Berg is a contributing editor for Planetizen and freelance journalist.

5th Anniversary of Katrina - A Tale of 2 Recoveries

2010-08-28T08:43:00.000-07:00

By Michael A. Fletcher Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, August 27, 2010; A13

IN NEW ORLEANS The massive government effort to repair the damage from
Hurricane Katrina is fostering a stark divide as the state governments
in Louisiana and Mississippi structured the rebuilding programs in
ways that often offered the most help to the most affluent residents.

The result, advocates say, has been an uneven recovery, with whites
and middle-class people more likely than blacks and low-income people
to have rebuilt their lives in the five years since the horrific
storm.

"The recovery is really the tale of two recoveries," said James Perry,
executive director of the Greater New Orleans Fair Housing Action
Center. "For people who were well off before the storm, they are more
likely to be back in their homes, back in their jobs and to have
access to good health care. For those who were poor or struggling to
get by before the storm, the opposite is true."

Louisiana's program to distribute grants to property owners whose
homes were damaged or destroyed by Katrina was found by a federal
judge this month to discriminate against black homeowners.

Meanwhile, in Mississippi, state officials refused to offer rebuilding
grants to property owners who suffered wind damage, explaining that
the property owners should have carried private insurance. That rule
hit low-income and black homeowners particularly hard, advocates say,
because many of them were uninsured, often because they owned property
that was passed down through the generations.

The $143 billion federally funded reconstruction effort, one of the
largest such projects in the country's history, fortified vulnerable
levees, rebuilt hundreds of public buildings, reconstructed miles of
roads and bridges, and provided tens of thousands of residents with
money to help piece together their shattered lives.

But there is a sharp disparity in how residents view the pace of
recovery. A recent poll by the Kaiser Family Foundation found that
while seven in 10 New Orleans residents say the rebuilding process is
"going in the right direction," a third say their lives are still
disrupted by the storm.

African Americans are more than twice as likely as whites to say they
have not yet recovered after Katrina, the survey found. And blacks in
the city are 2 1/2 times as likely to be low-income than whites.

"I just knew we had a rotten deal," said Edward Randolph, a disabled
Vietnam veteran who with his wife, Angela, has been struggling to
rebuild their duplex in New Orleans East. "We know we have a lot to
do, but we just do not have the money to do it."

The storm propelled them on a years-long odyssey through Port Arthur,
Tex., Houston and Arkansas. They did not return to their still-damaged
home until 2008.

The federally funded rebuilding program established by Louisiana
officials - called Road Home - offered homeowners grants of up to
$150,000. But homeowners could not collect more than the pre-storm
value of their homes, regardless of the cost of repairs.

The Randolph home was valued at just $135,000, although repair costs
were estimated by the state to be $308,000. The Randolphs were awarded
a grant of $16,649, to supplement just over $100,000 they received in
insurance payments.

This month, a federal judge ruled that the program's formula for
calculating grants discriminates against black homeowners, who tend to
live in neighborhoods with lower home values.

"We obviously disagree with the judge's action, which has stopped us
from paying out some grants, and already have appealed it," said
Christina Stephens, a spokeswoman for the Road Home program. "I think
it is worth noting that the state did not create this program in a
vacuum - the federal government signed off on the design of the
program and any major changes we made along the way."

She added that the state has modified the program to pay out an
additional $2 billion to more than 45,000 low-income homeowners.
Overall, Road Home paid $8.6 billion to more than 127,000 homeowners.

Many of these simmering issues will not be visible when President
Obama arrives here Sunday to mark the fifth anniversary of the storm
that killed more than 1,800, uprooted more than 1 million Gulf Coast
residents, and left 80 percent of this city submerged.

The visit is expected to underscore the president's support for a
region still reeling not just from Katrina but from the largest oil
spill in the nation's history, which is threatening the region's
immediate economic future. A regional group of business and political
leaders formed a coalition this week aimed at holding Obama to his
promise to restore the Gulf Coast.

Obama's visit will also underscore the strides made since the breached
floodwalls and overtopped levees left people here camping on highway
overpasses, cowering in attics and retreating to the squalor of the
Superdome and the Convention Center to escape the deadly waters.

The surreal landscape of grounded boats, washed-up appliances and
mud-choked streets is long gone, and many of the most obvious scars
from the catastrophe are healing. The Army Corps of Engineers has
rebuilt 220 miles of levees and floodwalls.

The school system, widely viewed as one of the nation's worst before
the storm, has been reborn with many charter schools. Though activists
have filed a lawsuit alleging that special-needs students are being
underserved by the new education structure, 59 percent of city
students are in schools that meet state academic standards - more than
double the number who attended such schools before Katrina.

The storm ravaged the city's hospital system, leaving many residents
in the largely black eastern part of the city a long ambulance ride
from emergency health care. At the same time, more than 90
neighborhood health clinics opened and are showing promise at
delivering preventive care and helping people manage chronic diseases
such as diabetes and hypertension.

But there is concern that many of the health centers, funded with
federal grant money that is winding down, are struggling to draw
enough insured patients to become self-sufficient.

"Everyone now has to transition to a more sustainable model of health
care," said Sarat Raman, associate medical director of Daughters of
Charity Services of New Orleans, which operates three clinics that
serve 15,000 patients in the area. "You have to have a balance of
patients."

Along Mississippi's Gulf Coast, where the violent winds and an
unprecedented storm surge overwhelmed homeowners, sheared off roofs
and splintered houses, the scene has also improved.

The waterfront casinos that provide a large chunk of this state's
revenue are humming. The vast majority of residents are back in their
rebuilt homes, although thousands are still struggling to find
affordable housing because their recovery checks did not cover the
cost of the damage.

Despite the improvements, many gaps remain.

The New Orleans area has regained more than 90 percent of its
pre-Katrina population, according to the Greater New Orleans Community
Data Center.

But in the city itself, just 78 percent of the population has
returned, and a growing share of the region's poor now reside in the
suburbs. The city's population drop has been most severe in black
neighborhoods, many of which absorbed Katrina's most brutal blows.

Despite well-publicized recovery efforts, including a plan led by
actor Brad Pitt to build 150 solar-powered homes, just 24 percent of
the Lower Ninth Ward's pre-storm population has returned. There, newly
rebuilt homes stand next to vacant lots or crumbling houses. Entire
blocks remain desolate five years after the storm.

In middle-class Pontchartrain Park, not far from historically black
Dillard University, just 55 percent of households have rebuilt,
according to the data center.

Beyond the problems with Road Home, New Orleans has experienced a
dramatic spike in rental costs since the storm.

"Many low-cost apartments are gone with the wind and the water," said
Laura Tuggle, the outgoing managing attorney of Southeast Louisiana
Legal Services. "Now, we're left with New York rents on New Orleans
wages."

In Mississippi, where Katrina severely damaged more than 101,000
housing units, many residents face what advocates call a similar
inequity. Praised in the aftermath of Katrina for his can-do attitude,
Gov. Haley Barbour (R) received a series of waivers from the Bush
administration that largely freed Mississippi from the requirement to
spend at least half of his state's $5.5 billion in federal block grant
money on low- and moderate-income residents. Barbour successfully
argued that the waivers were necessary to give the state flexibility
to deal effectively with the widespread devastation.

That allowed the state to divert close to $1 billion to help
devastated utilities rebuild, to subsidize residents' insurance
premiums and to help fund the port and other economic development
projects. Meanwhile, advocates say that more than 5,000 low-income
Mississippi families have yet to settle in permanent housing since the
storm.

State officials say they are expanding the number of public housing
units beyond pre-Katrina levels and establishing programs to encourage
development of affordable rental housing.

Still, advocates say the more than $3 billion distributed by the
state's housing recovery program went disproportionately to
more-affluent residents. The plan paid up to $150,000 to homeowners
whose properties were damaged by the unprecedented storm surge spawned
by Katrina, but nothing to those whose homes suffered wind damage.

To be eligible for the initial grants, families had to have homeowners
insurance, although the state later devised a program that paid grants
of up to $100,000 to low-income, uninsured homeowners whose properties
were damaged by the storm surge.

The rationale, state officials said, was that responsible homeowners
had no way to know that they should have flood insurance in areas that
federal experts deemed to be outside the flood plain.

"The storm surge was the priority," said Lee Youngblood,
communications director of the Mississippi Development Authority.
"Mississippi had no intention of compensating people who chose, for
whatever reason, not to have wind insurance."

That formula struck some advocates as discriminatory. "The criteria
discriminated against black storm victims, who more likely than not
were renters, or, if homeowners, more likely than not lacked
insurance," said Reilly Morse, co-director of housing policy for the
Mississippi Center for Justice.

The state's formula had the effect of freezing out people whose homes
were destroyed by the wind, which along much of the Mississippi coast
meant black residents who often lived in paid-off homes that had been
handed down through the generations. The expensive waterfront property
was mostly owned by whites, while inland property, which suffered more
wind damage, was owned largely by blacks.

In Gulfport, a railroad embankment that has long served as an informal
racial demarcation line became a levee when Katrina hit.

As the surging waters crashed through their patio door and rose five
feet in their home, a white couple, Ernest and Doreen Chamberlain,
gathered their family and sought refuge on the black side of the
tracks.

Coming upon an old, wood-frame house he thought was abandoned, Ernest
Chamberlain began trying to break the door down, only to be surprised
when it was opened by Irene Walker, an elderly black woman.

"She was like, 'Mister, what are you doing?' " he recalled. "Then she
invited us in."

That's where the Chamberlains rode out the storm, even as raw sewage
backed up into the Walker home.

Five years later, the Chamberlains are back in their sunny home.
Although they had to fight with insurers and contractors, they secured
a $150,000 grant from the state to help repair the flood damage, which
totaled nearly $200,000.

Meanwhile, the Walker home sits abandoned. A church group installed a
new roof, but the interior remains untouched. The 82-year-old Walker,
meanwhile, is living with family members a few miles away.

"She hasn't gotten any help from the government for the house," said
Occelletta Norwood, Walker's niece. "She got a little money from FEMA
at the start, but that was it."

fletcherm@washpost.com Research editor Alice R. Crites contributed to
this report.

Op Ed: Local prosperity is ADC's agenda

2010-07-24T12:07:00.000-07:00

HAG is a founding member of the Accountable Development Coalirion. This Op Ed is from the 7/24/10 Press Democrat.
_______________________________

GUEST OPINION: Local prosperity is ADC's agenda

By DENNIS ROSATTI
and JACK BUCKHORN

The Accountable Development Coalition has been in the news lately, and we recognized the need to clarify who we are, and what we stand for.

The ADC was formed in 2006 as a coalition of environmental, land use, labor, housing and social justice organizations to represent community interests in the important land use and development decisions that shape the economic life and environmental quality of our community.

Three key concerns dominated the formation of the coalition:

We want the community to be involved in setting good public policy and to participate in the earliest stages of planning in order to develop great neighborhoods and communities.

For example, we received a grant from the Hewlett Foundation to engage the local community in creating Santa Rosa's Railroad Square Station Area Plan. The community spoke out and persuaded the city to approve a plan that will create a friendlier environment for pedestrians and bicyclists, support public transit users and provide more affordable housing near shops and incentives for better-paying jobs.

We've also advocated for green building standards, which is the wave of the future as we cope with climate change.

As a growing coalition of 14 diverse local organizations and committed professional members, we are big enough to attract the interest of developers. We offer to work in collaboration with developers to make better plans that meet more of the community's needs.

For example, we collaborated with Sonoma Mountain Village to improve a re-use project to create good local jobs and strengthen green building standards, while providing a better sense of community with a mix of housing types close to shops and work. Three years of working together is documented in a community benefits agreement that acknowledges our support.

The current Wall Street business model, favoring out-of-state, corporate-owned retail stores harms our local small business retailers.

We believe in community prosperity. We go to bat for locally owned businesses that are active in our community, support local charities and are the drivers of local economic development. We cannot support big-box stores that do not embrace smart growth principles, which pay low wages and minimal benefits to their workers and siphon money out of the local economy to pay their corporate executives millions.

We helped fight off an effort to rezone land designated for affordable housing for yet another unnecessary big-box store near Santa Rosa Avenue. This victory will help retain Friedman's Home Improvement, a family-owned local business that pays living wages, built a prominent community center and continues to be a leader supporting local charities.

The ADC established the following seven founding principles for accountable development to describe a sustainable and equitable development path that will serve the common good and create shared prosperity.

• Create and enforce community standards through development that meets local and regional needs.

• Build mixed-income neighborhoods through the inclusion of affordable housing for all incomes in all residential developments.

• Promote good jobs through family-supporting wages and benefits, job security, the right to organize, job training and local hire.

• Ensure community health and safety through accessible health care, safe working and housing conditions and a healthy neighborhood environment.

• Be environmentally sustainable through good community design, particularly through pedestrian and transit-oriented development, by using green building and environmentally conscious design.

• Build participation and encourage meaningful community involvement and representation in decisions about development.

• Be smart growth and transit-oriented by directing development toward existing communities, creating bike-able, walk-able neighborhoods and providing a range of transportation options.

This is the agenda of the ADC. We are part of a national movement of accountable development advocates that represents an evolutionary advance in public policy we hope to see implemented across the region.

Our goal is to create a policy platform that informs the next generation of public officials and planning staff and helps broaden civic discourse on public policy issues.

Dennis Rosatti, executive director of Sonoma County Conservation Action, and Jack Buckhorn, business manager of International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Local 551, are co-chairmen of the Accountable Development Coalition.

Mayor Squashes Affordable Housing Agreement

2010-07-09T11:50:00.000-07:00

Remember this when Newsom claims he supports affordable housing. He quashed an agreement between developers and affordable housing advocates that would have provided $50 million per year for From the 7/9/10 New York Times (Bay Area edition)...

THE BAY CITIZEN
Despite a Rare Pedigree, Plan for Affordable Housing Collapses
By ZUSHA ELINSON
Published: July 8, 2010

The deal was brokered recently in private by an unusual team of rivals, including one of San Francisco’s most prominent developers and a vociferous housing activist. The result, by all accounts, was unprecedented: an estimated $50 million for affordable housing in the city each year.
Enlarge This Image

Adithya Sambamurthy/The Bay Citizen
Calvin Welch says politics was Mr. Newsom’s prime consideration.

A nonprofit, nonpartisan news organization providing local coverage of the San Francisco Bay Area for The New York Times.
Enlarge This Image

Justin Sullivan/Getty Images
Mayor Gavin Newsom scuttled a plan to provide money for affordable housing, saying it lacked broad support.
One developer who participated in the negotiations, which took place over the last six weeks in a City Hall annex, described the agreement as a “once-every-50-years alignment of the planets.”

Last week, however, the ambitious deal — which would have provided financing for affordable-housing projects, and would also have helped developers by subsidizing an affordable-housing requirement — came apart after running into opposition from an unlikely source: Mayor Gavin Newsom, the Democratic nominee for lieutenant governor.

The scuttled initiative, which has not been publicized, left a trail of bitterness and recrimination, much of it directed at Mr. Newsom, whose own aides had helped broker the deal. Three participants who were involved in the discussions said they understood that Mr. Newsom was reluctant to support what amounted to a new tax as he makes a run for statewide office.

“We came up with a plan that addressed a critical need,” said Calvin Welch, the housing advocate who helped broker the deal. “But the only thing that’s critical to Gavin Newsom is becoming lieutenant governor.”

Mr. Newsom, in an interview earlier this week, denied that politics played a role in his decision. The mayor said that he had tentatively supported the initiative, which would have been put before voters in November, as a “serious shift in the way we deal with affordable housing” but that proponents had failed to generate the kind of broad support necessary to gain approval.

“I’m just a convenient excuse right now,” Mr. Newsom said.

The crumbling of the innovative housing initiative underscores a tumultuous relationship between Mr. Newsom and the Board of Supervisors over several new tax measures its members have proposed — as Mr. Newsom campaigns for a statewide office, according to people who participated in meetings about the deal.

The talks, which were spurred by the recession’s crippling effect on new housing, began in May, several months after Mr. Newsom proposed a stimulus package to get development projects restarted.

Mr. Welch, the housing advocate known for his caustic criticism of gentrification, came to the negotiations seeking a fixed stream of financing for affordable housing, which has largely dried up during the recession.

One of city’s largest nonprofit developers, the Tenderloin Neighborhood Development Corporation, has suspended four big projects for low-income families because of a lack of financing.

Oz Erickson, the chief executive of the Emerald Fund, one of the largest developers in San Francisco, came to the negotiations seeking a break from the city’s requirement that developers designate at least 15 percent of all new units to below-market-rate housing.

Mr. Erickson argued that the cost of “inclusionary zoning” — a policy he and Mr. Welch had hammered out in the 1990s, the last time they worked together on legislation — was too burdensome for builders in a recession.

“Right now, it’s terribly difficult to get any financing, and the affordable-housing component is a significant charge,” said Mr. Erickson, whose condominium projects include One Rincon Hill and the Bridgeview Tower.

During the meetings, according to several participants, Mr. Welch thundered about the urgent need for affordable housing, according to participants. As he held forth, Mr. Erickson continually worked his fingers over his ubiquitous HP 12c calculator, crunching the numbers.

Gabriel Metcalf, executive director of the San Francisco Urban Planning and Research Association, a moderate public policy institute, said negotiators reached “an agreement that would’ve solved both problems.”

The complicated deal would have substantially raised the transfer tax — the tax paid when property is bought or sold — for any building over $875,000. For example, the transfer tax on a home sold for $1.1 million is currently $8,250. With the proposed increase, it would have been $12,650.

That money would have gone into a permanent fund dedicated to affordable housing: Half would have been used for affordable-housing projects, and the other half would have gone to ease the burden on developers by subsidizing the affordable-housing requirement.

The mayor said it was a political rarity for these two rival factions to work together.

“These are strange bedfellows, and they don’t always agree,” Mr. Newsom said. “What was intriguing was that there was a willingness to work this through.”

The negotiations took place in the Mayor’s Office of Housing, two blocks from City Hall, and were mediated by Doug Shoemaker, the office’s director.

Mr. Newsom acknowledged that some of his top aides supported the deal. In the end, he said, he did not believe the measure had enough broad support to succeed. Notably, efforts to placate groups representing landlords and Realtors failed.

“Folks were so consumed with getting something on the ballot for November,” Mr. Newsom said. “But in order to do this we have to build a broad coalition, and, with respect to my friends in the room, they’re not the whole city.”

But Mr. Welch and others familiar with the negotiations said the politics of the moment also weighed heavily. Since announcing earlier this year his entry into the race for lieutenant governor, Mr. Newsom has continued to oppose raising taxes, most recently a series of measures put forward by progressive members of the Board of Supervisors.

Mr. Newsom’s electoral success in November — and perhaps beyond — will depend in part on his ability to broaden his appeal to voters outside San Francisco.

“The mayor’s office sponsored the whole thing, and ultimately the mayor could have stepped up to make it happen,” said Lou Vasquez, a developer with Build, Incorporated, who was in the talks.

“The mechanics seemed to be working out,” Mr. Vasquez said, “but the politics seemed to get in the way.”

Last week, with Mr. Newsom still withholding his support, the deadline to place the affordable-housing measure on the November ballot passed quietly — with the public unaware of the potential deal.

There is now one other proposal from the Board of Supervisors intended to raise money for affordable housing, but it does not have the support of the mayor, the developers or their friends. Sponsored by Supervisor Chris Daly, who has been trying for years to get a permanent source of affordable-housing money, the measure is headed for the ballot in November.

Mr. Newsom said he hoped this idea for a permanent source of financing came back — whether or not he was in office.

“We were up against a deadline, and it wasn’t ready,” Mr. Newsom said. “This idea is not dead.”

His hopes were echoed by Mr. Metcalf, Mr. Welch and others who had tried to make the deal. But they said it had been a rare moment when everything seemed aligned: a recession hurting housing activists and developers enough to bring them both to the bargaining table.

“I personally will work to try to put this deal together again,” Mr. Metcalf said, “but you never know when your window of opportunity for social change will open, and you never know when it will close.”

YES IN MY BACK YARD! (From Mother Jones)

2010-07-08T17:39:00.000-07:00

ONE OF THE hottest pieces of real estate in the San Francisco Bay Area is a 1,500-acre expanse of concrete, landfill, and asbestos-stuffed warehouses. Shuttered since 1997, the Alameda Naval Air Station occupies one-third of Alameda, an island next door to downtown Oakland known as a time warp to 1950s architecture and Kiwanis Club folksiness. For nearly a decade, the well-heeled enclave has had its eyes on the old air base, now dubbed Alameda Point. And why not? It's smack on the eastern edge of the bay, with spectacular views of the San Francisco skyline, and just minutes from the cities to which suburbanites commute for an hour or more. It's a developer's dream—all the more so because building there would displace little more than a gigantic monthly flea market.

In 2007, developers announced a billion-dollar-plus plan to rebuild Alameda Point. SunCal Companies envisioned a complex featuring 1,000 detached single-family homes, 2,000 townhomes, and 1,000 condos in three-story buildings built with the latest in energy-efficient design: passive solar, geothermal heat pumps, and gray-water systems. Historic buildings would be preserved, and 25 percent of the units would be set aside as affordable housing. There would be 150 acres of parks, miles of trails, shops, and offices, and dedicated ferry and bus lines to Oakland and San Francisco. The local chapter of the Greenbelt Alliance endorsed it, calling it "the epitome of smart growth."

Yet despite its green bona fides—and the promise of adding desperately needed affordable housing in the heart of the Bay Area—environmental activists, the local historic preservation society, and even Alameda's mayor came out against the plan. They argued that the deal gave the developer too much power, could release toxic chemicals, and would "change the character of Alameda." Driving his BMW past the naval base's peeling hangars, David Howard, a 41-year-old Internet marketer and the head of Save Our City! Alameda, stressed that he's "not anti-everything about high density." But he felt that the Alameda Point project didn't go far enough environmentally. Instead, he envisioned transforming the base into a "green technolopolis" that would invent a silver-bullet solution to the climate crisis. His plan didn't include any housing, but there'd be a wind farm, a solar power plant, a factory for the electric carmaker Tesla Motors, and an "ecobranch" of the cash-strapped University of California. "It's a wonderful location," he concluded. "It's a problem that needs to be solved. Why not do it here, in Alameda?"

Advertise on MotherJones.com

The Alameda Point project also brushed up against a nearly 40-year-old density ban, which the Oakland Tribune has called "the 'third rail' of Alameda politics." The popular measure, which effectively caps growth on the island, has helped preserve the city's small-town feel; its population has hovered around 75,000 for decades. To get built, Alameda Point would need an exemption. When the matter was put before Alameda voters this February, an overwhelming 85 percent rejected it.

More than just another triumph of NIMBYism, the failure of Alameda Point is also a lesson in how fighting local growth can undermine the larger environmental values that many NIMBYs believe in. By 2050, the United States can expect to add as many as 200 million people. Demographers predict that they'll require 90 million houses and 140 billion square feet of office and other nonresidential space—the equivalent of replacing all the country's existing buildings. If we keep building in the way we do now, suburbs will gobble up a New Mexico-size amount of open space in the next 40 years. More suburbs mean more freeways and more cars, which means that by mid-century, Americans will clock 7 trillion miles per year—twice as much mileage as we do now. The alternative to this metastasizing, car-dependent sprawl is population density. And that means squeezing more people into cities and inner suburbs like Alameda. According to the Greenbelt Alliance, the Bay Area could absorb another 2 million residents by 2035 without expanding its physical footprint.

Cities are also essential to stemming climate change. As Kaid Benfield, director of the Natural Resources Defense Council's Smart Growth program explains, "The city is inherently energy efficient. Even the greenest household in an outlying location can't match an ordinary household downtown." Heating an apartment uses as much as 20 percent less energy than heating a single-family home of the same size. Promoting infill development—the practice of filling empty urban space or replacing older buildings with bigger ones—instead of building more subdivisions could effectively conserve the amount of energy produced by 2,800 power plants and could prevent some 26 trillion miles of driving. All told, if the United States focuses on increasing urban density, our greenhouse gas emissions in 2050 could be as much as 20 percent lower than they'd be in the sprawl scenario.

Yet infill development is often rejected by environmental and sustainability advocates. The chief opponent of a proposal to build taller buildings in downtown Berkeley also heads a group that urges cities "to take real action to address the causes of global warming." The San Francisco Board of Supervisors' hyperliberal wing recently proposed banning new high rises downtown—never mind that these mixed-use buildings would help finance a new public transit hub and a park that the same supervisors support. Last year, wealthy Seattle residents allied with an affordable-housing advocate to scuttle a plan to build new housing next to a light-rail line. Such knee-jerk NIMBYism isn't limited to the West Coast: New York's Long Island Pine Barrens Society is opposing a plan to build a compact, $4 billion "mini-city" on unused hospital grounds that would preserve one-third of its 460 acres as open space.

Walking the anti-density, pro-environment line can be tricky. "Our group is not the most progressive group out there in terms of promoting infill development," concedes Kent Lewandowski, chair of the Northern Alameda County Group of the Sierra Club, which declined to support Alameda Point. "But our group does get it in terms of climate change and the impact of sprawl. It's like we want everything. There is definitely—I won't say hypocrisy—but there is a contradiction of sorts."

ENVIRONMENTALISTS have long had an uneasy relationship with urban density. In what may be the first screed against infill development, Henry David Thoreau wrote, "Deliver me from a city built on the site of a more ancient city, whose materials are ruins, whose gardens are cemeteries. The soil is blanched and accursed there." The Sierra Club was born of a desire to escape what John Muir called "the death exhalations that brood in the broad towns in which we so fondly compact ourselves," where "we are sickly, and never come to know ourselves." That ethos fueled the "back to the land" movement, but a less-crunchy variation of it also drove the explosion of commuter suburbs that environmentalists love to hate. A postwar ad for a New York suburb invited buyers to "escape from cities too big, too polluted, too crowded, too strident to call home."

Determined to make cities more livable, environmentalists have promoted parks and public transit, fought freeways and factories, and portrayed developers as the ultimate bad guys. But these well-intentioned efforts to curb the Robert Moses-style excesses of urban development had unintended consequences. Strict limits on building height and attempts to squeeze ever-larger concessions from urban developers (but not suburban ones) drove up the cost of housing in many cities—sending builders and home buyers looking for open space. "It's a situation that has unfairly favored sprawl," says NRDC's Benfield. SunCal developer Pat Keliher says that many of his colleagues simply avoid the cost of battling urban skeptics by building on out-of-town farmland: "It's the old adage—cows don't talk."

Filling in cities instead of building suburbs could save the amount
of energy produced by 2,800 power plants and could prevent 26 TRILLION
miles of driving.

In the early '90s, a new movement of architects and planners known as the New Urbanism targeted sprawl by recognizing that cities should grow—but smartly and sustainably. In an effort to bridge the divide between developers and environmentalists, they replaced parking lots and tract houses with compact apartments and pedestrian-friendly streets. Yet some of the most vocal critics of sprawl have been reluctant to embrace this vision. Mike Davis, the author of City of Quartz and the Jeremiah of suburban Los Angeles, says, "What the New Urbanists tend to produce are projects that lack one of the pivotal elements of their whole philosophy—that there is no minority, or there is no economic heterogeneity, or there's no mass transit, or there are no jobs."

Holding infill projects to impossibly high standards is an easy way to block them. But NIMBYs' feel-good environmental objections to development can be proxies for less politically correct fears about traffic, low-income neighbors, and falling property values, says Jeremy Madsen, executive director of the Greenbelt Alliance. In the case of Alameda Point, he adds, "That's frankly why we wanted to come out with a strong statement of support."

Still, some cities and states have begun to recognize that urban development—even when it's imperfect—is inherently better than the alternative. Since 2007, California Attorney General Jerry Brown has sued or sent warnings to 45 cities for not following a law requiring them to account for their development plans' carbon footprints. He's forced San Bernardino County to mitigate its sprawl with green building technologies and gotten the Bay Area suburb of Pleasanton to lift a cap on new housing. In 2008, California passed a landmark law that provides incentives for municipal planners to promote climate-friendly land uses such as building apartments around transit stops. A two-tier permitting system that encourages building in more densely developed areas while increasing oversight on the suburban fringe is in use in Florida, Cape Cod, and Portland, Oregon. New York City now requires its planning commission to approve or deny new buildings in less than seven months, preventing costly, protracted showdowns.

"If true environmentalists do not reject the NIMBYs that are preventing the densification and building of cities," says Andres Duany, the architect who designed Seaside, Florida, a project credited with launching the New Urbanism, "environmentalism itself is going to become questionable." Ultimately, the challenge is figuring out how to address NIMBYs' legitimate local concerns while encouraging them to see the bigger picture. "People have seen such crappy development for so many decades now that they have every right to demand that new development be as sensitive and green as possible," says Benfield. "But I do think the opposition is often misplaced."

By the time David Howard and I wrapped up our tour of the naval base, his green technolopolis pitch had given way to a sort of greatest hits of anti-development arguments: Alameda Point would increase crime and block views. It would displace the rabbits who live by the runway. It was racist, because increased traffic on the island would blow exhaust into minority neighborhoods on the mainland. Not to mention that the whole thing might be wiped out by a New Orleans-style deluge precipitated by our carbon-intensive lifestyle. The polar ice caps are melting, he explained, threatening low-lying areas like Alameda Point. "All the people in there—the low-income people—they're gonna be flooded out!"

Josh Harkinson is a staff reporter at Mother Jones.

HUD: Worst Case Housing Needs

2010-06-14T21:52:00.001-07:00

14 June 2010

Worst Case Housing Needs in 2007
The twelfth in a series of annual HUD reports to Congress, Worst Case Housing Needs 2007 finds that in that year, 5.91 million unassisted very low-income households ― or almost 13 million individuals ― paid more than half their monthly income for rent, lived in severely substandard housing, or both. Although relatively stable from 2005 to 2007, there was a 19.6% increase in worst case needs (WCN) households between 2001 and 2005. These families were located in all regions of the country and across central cities, suburbs, and nonmetropolitan areas. The report shows that the supply of affordable and available rental units was insufficient for meeting the housing needs of extremely low-income (below 30% of the area median income) renters.

Follow us on:

93% (5.48 million) experienced severe rent burden;

73% (4.33 million) had extremely low incomes;

37% (2.19 million) had at least one child under 18. Nearly half of these were working the equivalent of full-time and earning at least minimum wage. 404,000 of families with children had an adult with a disability;

20.5% (1.21 million) were elderly, 10% (602,000) were non-elderly disabled, and 32% (1.9) million were classified as other;

2.92 million were non-Hispanic white, 1.35 million were non-Hispanic black, and 1.23 million were Hispanic; and

More than 40% of the city dwellers lived in higher poverty neighborhoods, while those living in suburbs and nonmetropolitan areas were in low-poverty neighborhoods.

You were sent this HUD USER News update because you expressed interest in receiving a weekly email to stay informed of new HUD research and resources. If you no longer wish to receive this email, please send an email to hudusernews@huduser.org with "unsubscribe" as the SUBJECT.

HUD USER
P.O. Box 23268, Washington, DC 20026-3268
1-800-245-2691 | 1-800-927-7589 (TDD) | 202-708-9981 (fax)

This email was sent to mm@sonic.net by hudusernews@huduser.org.

Update Profile/Email Address | Instant removal with SafeUnsubscribe™ | Privacy Policy.

HUD USER | P.O. Box 23268 | Washington D.C | DC | 20026-3268

FYI - NY Times Editorial

2010-06-14T15:39:00.001-07:00

Excellent editorial in today's NY Times:

Washington too often looks the other way as state governments rob low-income victims of their fair share of federal disaster aid. The Department of Housing and Urban Development did the right thing recently in forcing Texas to revise a $3 billion spending plan for aid provided in the wake of the 2008 hurricanes Ike and Dolly.

The storms ravaged the coastal and near-coastal counties, especially Harris, Orange and Galveston. They destroyed thousands of homes, including a large number owned by poor families that didn't have the money to rebuild. Instead of directing the aid to the most-damaged regions and the people with the fewest resources, the Texas plan spread it across the state and gave local planning agencies near carte blanche on how to spend it.

Two prominent fair housing groups, Texas Appleseed and the Texas Low Income Housing Information Service, filed a complaint with HUD charging that the plan did not adhere to the most basic condition of federal disaster aid, which requires that half of the money be used to benefit low- and moderate-income people. They also argued that it would violate federal civil rights and fair housing laws.

After the HUD secretary, Shaun Donovan, took the extraordinary but justified step of rejecting the initial proposal, the state negotiated an agreement with the advocates. The new plan will ensure that 55 percent of the money will be spent to help low- and moderate-income families. More than half the fund will be spent on rebuilding homes, with a fair share allocated to the poorest residents.

The state will rebuild all of the desperately needed public housing units that were destroyed in Galveston. Local opposition groups had pressured the city not to rebuild. As part of the agreement, Texas will also create new programs to help low-income and minority residents find housing in less-segregated or storm-vulnerable areas.

Thanks to tough bargaining by Secretary Donovan, hundreds of millions of dollars will be spent as Congress intended and fairness requires: helping to rebuild devastated communities and helping the most vulnerable residents rebuild their lives.

David Grabill

Backyard Cottages as Affordable Housing?

2010-06-01T08:28:00.000-07:00

Seattle's backyard cottages make a dent in housing need
By Judy Keen, USA TODAY 5/31/2010
SEATTLE — John Stoeck is building a one-bedroom, 437-square-foot cottage on the spot where his garage stood before a tree fell on it. Construction costs: about $50,000. When the cottage is finished this summer, he plans to rent it for at least $900 a month, which will make a nice dent in his mortgage payments.
His is just one of about 50 tiny cottages sprouting in backyards across the city as it tries to expand affordable housing options in established neighborhoods without resorting to high rises and apartment complexes. The city changed zoning rules to allow cottages in single-family neighborhoods citywide, rejected a proposed cap of 50 cottages a year and helped organize a design competition to spur creation of reasonably priced plans. The point is not just to allow the cottages, but to encourage them.

"I want to preserve rural areas around Seattle, and I don't want the suburbs continuing to march on without any limits. One way to do that is to add more density to these inner-city neighborhoods," says Stoeck, 47, an architect.

Backyard cottages are a promising way to address the need for affordable housing without diminishing the character of urban neighborhoods, and they're creating more options for families who want to live near an elderly parent or adult child. "It's harder and harder for working people to live in the city," says former Seattle mayor Greg Nickels, now a fellow at the Harvard University Institute of Politics.

The backyard homes, he says, also help ease traffic jams and reduce pollution.

Seattle tested the backyard cottages initiative in the southeast part of the city starting in 2006, resulting in 28 cottages. It was expanded citywide in December, and 22 more building permits have been issued.

Other cities such as Denver and Faribault, Minn., are allowing for the first time or expanding programs that encourage backyard residences to accommodate growing demand for affordable housing in the wake of the recession and foreclosure crisis.

Unlike attached "granny flats" or basement apartments, backyard cottages are separate buildings, often just a few feet from owners' homes. Once built, owners such as Stoeck either rent out the cottage or rent out their main home and move into the cottage.

Besides expanding housing options, backyard cottages have another benefit: "It's really a way to help people hang on to their homes," says Andrea Petzel, senior urban planner for the city of Seattle. She expects about 40 to be built each year.

The Denver City Council votes next month on a zoning code that for the first time would allow "accessory dwelling units," including detached cottages, in some residential areas.

It would "balance our housing opportunities and at the same time add density" in areas where affordable rentals are scarce, says Peter Park, community planning and development manager.

Faribault, Minn., which has a rental housing shortage, began allowing freestanding backyard dwellings in October.

"It can be a good thing if you have the proper controls in place," zoning administrator Greg Kruschke says.

Santa Cruz, which has some of California's highest housing prices, encourages backyard cottages citywide, and about 40 are built each year. Santa Cruz "did not want to price people out of living here," says Carol Berg, the city's housing and community development manager.

The concept evolved from the carriage houses where employees or extended families lived near grand homes in the early 1900s, says Dana Cuff, professor of architecture and urban design at UCLA. That changed in the 1950s, she says, when the American dream meant owning a single-family home on a big lot.

"We need to adapt our living environment to the kinds of families we have now," Cuff says.

"We have two people working in nearly every household now, so people don't need as big a yard," she says.

Other benefits: Owners' rental income can help fend off foreclosure, and aging parents can move into cottages to maintain their independence, she says.

Backyard cottages "don't suit everyone, but they're really right for some people," Cuff says.

Her view is borne of personal experience: A decade ago, she and her husband moved into one on their property in Santa Monica.

Critics cite privacy concerns

Seattle needs room to grow: Almost two-thirds of the city is zoned for single-family homes. Its population rose from 563,374 in 2000 to 602,000 last year.

Houses are pricey here. The median cost in the fourth quarter of 2009 was $305,500, compared with the national median price of $172,900, the National Association of Realtors says.

Nickels had been intrigued by the idea of backyard cottages for decades before he became Seattle's mayor in 2002 and made it a priority. Opponents argued that it would double the city's density, he recalls, but he felt "there was no excuse other than political cowardice not to move forward."

After the first batch of cottages was built in southeast Seattle, a survey of people who lived near them turned up a surprise: More than half the neighbors didn't know they were there, he says.

Some critics of the Seattle initiative still worry that backyard cottages will clutter neighborhoods, clash with existing homes, create parking shortages and attract irresponsible renters.

Seattle architect and developer Marty Liebowitz says the cottages could rob neighbors of the privacy they want to "barbecue, entertain guests and walk around naked if they're kinky."

Seattle arborist Michael Oxman has another concern: If the idea catches on and many cottages are built, he says, they "would decimate the urban forest of Seattle." Inevitably, he says, trees will be removed to make room for cottages and parking spaces for owners and tenants.

Chuck Cady, who has sold Seattle real estate for 30 years, says cottages probably increase the value of lots where they're built but might hurt the value of homes adjacent to them.

"If you've got a lovely backyard that's totally private, it's worth more than one with a two-story, butt-ugly addition looking down on your backyard," he says.

In Seattle, "none of the worst-case scenarios happened," Petzel says. Getting city permits for a typical single-family home can take about three months, but for cottages the turnaround time can be as short as six weeks, she says.

Seattle City Councilmember Sally Clark, a proponent of the initiative, says design standards were written to help ensure neighbors' privacy.

Backyard cottages can be built only on lots of 4,000 or more square feet, height is limited based on lot width, and entrances must face away from neighbors. At least one property owner must live in the main house or cottage.

"Sometimes they actually improve the neighborhood," says Diane Sugimura, Seattle's director of planning and development. "We don't believe the majority of homeowners will choose to do this, but it really provides another option … and it allows you an income source."

'A great spot'

College student Laura Chamberlain, 20, would love to live in a backyard cottage. She's tired of overpriced apartments near campus, and the expansion of Seattle's light rail system makes living away from school more practical, she says.

"A cottage would be a great spot for me while I save enough money to buy a house, and unlike condo living, I might be able to grow my own vegetables," she says.

Stoeck, who shares the main house with his wife, Jennifer, and son Colin, 9, says that because the cottage is just steps from his back door, choosing the right tenant is important. So is keeping his neighbors happy: He gave them a tour of the cottage and assured the people who live next door that his tenant won't be able to see into their home.

"You have to be careful about the context and scale of the neighborhood, but I think the idea is great, and I'd do it again in a second," Stoeck says.

Clark says the economy helped prove cottages' value.

"In a recession people are definitely looking for ways to pay the bills and for lower-cost housing options," she says. "Seattle had an overheated rental market, so folks who had backyard cottages had something that was desirable."

Patrick Leigh, 57, took a different approach to the cottage initiative. He built a bigger new house in front of an existing tiny one on the back of his lot in West Seattle. The houses are for sale. "If people want affordable housing," says Leigh, a land surveyor, "this is one way to help.

"There are tough choices to be made as population increases. Do we really want to keep building out where people have to commute? I think we're better off getting more density in the city."

Less is more for some

Yolinda Ward and Lynn Watkins bought a four-bedroom Craftsman-style house in Seattle's Columbia City neighborhood four years ago after falling in love with its architectural details and expansive yard. Soon, the couple decided the house was too big, so they built a 600-square-foot cottage behind and over the existing garage and moved into it. They rent the "big house" to Ward's godson, Erik Norwood, his wife Rebecca and their two children. A friend rents the basement.

Although Watkins, 60, had to forfeit part of her garden space to build the cottage, she loves living in it. "It's easier to clean and everything's right here," she says. The bedroom is on the ground level; upstairs there's a kitchen and living room.

Original designs for the cottage included big windows facing the back door and deck of the "big house," says Ward, 61. They decided to move the windows to overlook the garden and eliminated them on the wall with a view of the big house.

Privacy is important, but being close to her godson's family is part of the appeal, Ward says. She can open a window near her desk and chat with almost-3-year-old Jaeda when she's playing outside. There's a big family meal every other Wednesday.

The cottage cost about $135,000, Ward says, and added about $200 to their mortgage payment — an increase covered by the rent they receive, which also covers increased property taxes. The property, appraised at $560,000 before the cottage was added, now is worth $710,000.

The only drawback the couple can think of is that they don't have room for overnight guests. Watkins still has room for a garden, and the "green" elements they added — including extra insulation, a water heater that kicks in only when hot water is needed and the recycling of runoff water — keep expenses low.

"It's a very easy way to get regular income, and it will pay for itself," Ward says. Strangers sometimes knock on their door to ask about the cottage — and how they can build one, too.

Find this article at:
http://www.usatoday.com/news/2010-05-25-cottages_N.htm

State Should Resist the 'Housing Cult'

2010-03-26T10:36:00.000-07:00

[Shigley's the co-editor/founder of a respected planning journal, the California Planning and Development Report]

18 March 2010

Gov. Schwarzenegger is going around the state urging lawmakers to approve a measure that would provide $200 million in tax credits for homebuyers. The governor claims the measure will save or add thousands of construction jobs.

His claim is hardly new. But is there any real basis for it?

Earlier this month, The Wall Street Journal’s Evan Newmark posted a blog with the headline, “Don’t Be Brainwashed by the Housing Cult” in which he questioned the assumption that homebuilding is a pillar of the economy. If Newmark is right, it demands a reconsideration of how the government subsidizes home construction.

Specifically, Newmark challenged the statement by Toll Brothers CEO Bob Toll that new home construction directly or indirectly provides one-fifth to one-quarter of all jobs in this country. It was the sort of boast that we hear frequently from the industry. Newmark, however, noted that homebuilding accounted for only 2.5% of GDP last year. Even in early 2006, when homebuilding was booming (and, as it turns out, we were overbuilding by a large amount) the industry amounted to 8% of GDP.

Newmark doesn’t think much of the homebuilding industry’s ongoing demand that the federal government provide subsidies to new home buyers, or of the industry’s pressure on Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and the FHA to continue supplying taxpayer-guaranteed mortgages to new home buyers. He notes that 14.5% of housing units in the country are sitting vacant, and he concludes, “It seems that the only Americans who really need more new houses are the American home builders.”

I might expect this sort of commentary from an environmentalist or a greenie masquerading as an academic. But Newmark, although a contrarian and a shit-disturber, is no tree-hugger or slow-growther seeking additional government regulation. He’s an unapologetic capitalist, and he has actual facts behind his argument here.

We Californians like to think our state is different. After all, California reliably adds about 500,000 new residents every year. Even last year, when the California economy was in worse shape than at any time since the Depression, the state population grew by 367,000 people, according to Department of Finance. California, the argument goes, will always need additional housing units.

I tend to accept that argument. But if Newmark’s economic analysis is to be believed, the home construction imperative is social, not economic. We should build housing because people need shelter, not in order to employ people.

One year ago, the California Building Industry Association convinced state lawmakers to provide a tax credit of up to $10,000 to buyers of new homes. About 10,000 buyers took advantage of the program, getting themselves an average credit of about $7,000. The CBIA, state lawmakers and Schwarzenegger touted the program as a job-booster. Heck, even I offered a qualified endorsement. Now the CBIA and Schwarzenegger are calling for $200 million of tax credits for the buyers of any home, new or not.

--------Update--------

The governor signed AB 183, the $200 million tax credit, into law on March 25.

-------------------------

However, all of the evidence says that last year’s program did nothing more than permit homebuilders to unload inventory. According to the Economic Development Agency, construction jobs fell by 18% to 570,000 in 2009. The CBIA itself bemoans that housing starts remained at the lowest level ever recorded in 2009.

I’m going to suggest that if the government wants to subsidize new housing, it should fund the units Californians actually need – and not simply toss money untargeted into the market.

And what we need are not the three- and four-bedroom single-family houses that are the specialty of the CBIA’s members. The average household size has been decreasing for years, and the fastest-growing household segment is one- and two-person households: seniors (by 2030, 20% of Californians will be at least 65 years old), singles, childless couples and single people sharing quarters. What these smaller households want are – this is not a big surprise – smaller housing units in convenient locations.

About 57% of California’s housing units are detached single-family houses, according to the Department of Finance’s 2008 California Statistical Abstract. It’s safe to assume that most of these are suburban-style houses that were originally designed for mom, dad and their two or three kids. But this sort of nuclear family will account for only about 25% of California households by 2020. The one- and two-person household is replacing the Leave It To Beaver family. Give these small households 800 to 1,000 square feet of well-designed living space (or un-designed living space, as in a loft), preferably within walking distance of the grocery, a coffee house, the library, a cinema and a park, and these people are as happy as clams.

If the government wants to subsidize new housing, it should aim squarely at the units that we truly need. And it should do so because people need decent shelter, not for any other reason.

– Paul Shigley

City redresses past discrimination - NY Times

2010-03-11T08:42:00.000-08:00

With New Homes, Town Makes Amends for Its Bias
By SUSAN SAULNY NY Times - March 10, 2010
HAMTRAMCK, Mich. — Even though more than 50 years have passed since Sallie Sanders was a confused little girl wondering why her family was kicked out of their house for being on the wrong side of the color line here, the pain seems fresh.

“Just abruptly, we had to end up staying with relatives and friends,” said Ms. Sanders, a retired state worker who is black and who, at age 60, still has trouble recounting the ordeal without breaking into tears. “It was kind of devastating. My parents tried to protect us quite a bit, but I knew something was wrong.”

And something was. In 1971, a federal judge found that this old manufacturing town, five miles from downtown Detroit, had deliberately used urban renewal projects throughout the 1950s and ’60s to obliterate black areas from its two square miles, displacing hundreds of families.

Although the judge, Damon J. Keith, ordered a remedy, and Hamtramck agreed to build new housing, it did not. For decades.

Now, though, in a time of deep recession and a housing slump in one of the most economically depressed states in the country, Hamtramck (pronounced ham-TRAM-eck) is at last fulfilling its legal — and what officials now call moral — obligation to provide affordable housing to the mostly poor families who were dislodged generations ago. And if the plaintiffs in the original class-action lawsuit are no longer living, as in Ms. Sanders’s case, children and grandchildren are eligible.

About 100 houses have been completed for rent or sale, and another 100 are on the way, paid for by a mix of local and state money.

In the last five years, the town began building the new houses, but the project stalled because of the recession. It is only now approaching the final stages of construction, thanks to a recent increase in federal stimulus money. The homes, mostly two- and three-bedroom models, cost $140,000 to $160,000, and subsidies can reduce the price to $100,000; most rentals are in the $400-a-month range, after government assistance.

But beyond the building, Hamtramck has changed in another way, too. According to the Census Bureau, it is now Michigan’s most international and diverse city, having evolved from a town that was 90 percent Polish just 40 years ago. With the changes came new attitudes about how to deal with the past.

Just weeks ago, Ms. Sanders moved into a new ranch-style house on the same street where her family once lived, and Gov. Jennifer M. Granholm personally handed over the keys. As a young lawyer, Ms. Granholm was a clerk to Judge Keith in the late 1980s.

“We went full circle, and it’s pretty wonderful,” said Ms. Sanders, whose parents, now dead, were among the 250 plaintiffs who sued the city. “To acknowledge that, O.K., they were wrong, that gives me a little satisfaction because my parents were mistreated so. I just wish they were here to see it.”

The home building is also what experts call a bittersweet finale to one of the longest-running housing discrimination suits to weave its way through court, having begun in the civil rights era. Beyond its age, the case is also distinctive in that it happened at all. While Hamtramck may be an extreme example, experts said housing discrimination against blacks in the mid-1900s was common, but class-action lawsuits were rare because of their expense and complexity.

Some contend that urban renewal projects were routinely used to demolish black areas, and that most of the housing was never replaced.

“This case is unusual in a good way,” said Victor Goode, a lawyer with the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People.

Michael Barnhart, an expert on fair-housing law and the lead lawyer in the Hamtramck case, agreed. “This kind of discrimination happened all over the country,” Mr. Barnhart said, citing Chicago, Detroit and other cities.

Over the last 10 years, as the settlement appeared to be coming to fruition, Mr. Barnhart and a local minister, the Rev. Joseph R. Jordan, met with surviving plaintiffs and their families just about weekly, spending hours trying to work out the details of moving hundreds of families back to town, most from Detroit.

“We had tried several times over the years to get something started, but really couldn’t find the funding,” Mr. Barnhart said.

Judge Keith, who now sits on the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, called the case “difficult” and “depressing” in an interview. But, he added: “I was there to see Sallie Sanders get the keys. It was meaningful to me as a human being.”

Charnita Monday, 64, is renting one of the new houses. She moved to Hamtramck from Bessemer, Ala., looking for factory work in the late 1960s. The home she bought was among those condemned.

“The judge just kept hammering on the case, and all those years, they wouldn’t let it go,” said Ms. Monday, who is black. “I think an injustice has been righted.”

“I had gotten physically tired, mentally tired and even tired of praying,” she said. “But now, it’s like you got a new life, you know?”

In his 1971 opinion, Judge Keith wrote that testimony showed that Hamtramck officials were well aware of the difficulties their actions caused for blacks, but that they “ignored their requests for assistance, failed to investigate complaints and in no way compensated such displacees for the loss suffered.”

He also chastised the federal Department of Housing and Urban Development for approving Hamtramck’s plans and failing to protect the plaintiffs’ rights.

After decades, Hamtramck has an opportunity, however painful, to come to terms with itself.

“Nobody with a conscience wants the burden of this enormous charge of racial discrimination to be hanging over them and who they are,” said Mayor Karen Majewski. “It’s important that we do whatever we can to redeem ourselves, our history and reputation.”

“And it’s been very hard to find a way to do that,” Ms. Majewski said, “because you know what this economy is like.”

Hamtramck, despite its size, has always had a large sense of self and pride — so much so that it refused to be annexed by Detroit like so many other small towns were in the early 1900s, forcing the city to grow around it. As a result, Hamtramck, originally a homogenous village, is now a city within a city, and in the last few decades it has become a first stop for immigrants from Bangladesh, Yemen, Albania and Lebanon, among a host of other countries. As of the 2000 census, 41 percent of Hamtramck’s population of 23,000 was foreign-born.

Alongside church bells, the Muslim call to prayer is broadcast by loudspeakers every day. Twenty-five languages are spoken in the public schools.

To Mr. Jordan, the minister, Hamtramck is almost unrecognizable as the same place that tore down his friends’ neighborhoods. “We have made tremendous progress,” he said.

Ms. Monday said she had been distraught after her house was demolished and she had to move her five young children into a small apartment in Detroit, where she lived until her new home became available in 2008.

“When I left, I was bitter,” she said. “It’s a different place now. It’s been good to me, and I’m happy.”

HUD Will Enforce Obligation to Affirmatively Further Fair Housing!

2010-03-01T08:12:00.001-08:00

Cities and counties that receive federal funding for housing and community development activities are required to sign a pledge to "affirmatively further fair housing." But that pledge has rarely been enforced by HUD in the roughly 40 years that it's been required. Recently, in a case brought by a fair housing enforcement group, a court found that wealthy Westchester County outside of NY city violated its pledge by allowing areas within the county to restrict development of affordable housing. The court ordered the county to develop a plan to build affordable housing in some of its more exclusive areas like Scarsdale, and to set aside $70 million in funding to assist with the development. The plan proposed late last year by the county provided for 750 units of affordable housing, but was unclear about where the housing would be located, and advocates feared that the county would continue to exclude affordable housing from wealthier neighborhoods, and that HUD would continue to look the other way.

But in a remarkable op ed piece in today's Westchester Journal News, Assistant HUD Secretary John Trasviña slammed the county for continuing to try to evade its affirmative housing pledge. This is a big step forward for HUD. From the op-ed:

"Our nation's commitment to equality can be found in many places in our society — in our history books, in our polling places and our places of employment. Among the most important places it can be found are our homes and neighborhoods, the latter of which fundamentally shape our futures by determining where our children go to school and what jobs are nearby.

"Diverse, inclusive communities offer the most educational, economic and employment opportunities to their residents. They cultivate the kind of social networks our communities and our country need to compete in today's increasingly diverse and competitive global economy. Indeed, studies have proved that students of all races and backgrounds are better prepared for the work force and engage in more complex and creative thinking when they learn in a diverse environment.
"Despite these documented benefits, we know that racially segregated neighborhoods of concentrated poverty resulted not in spite of government — but in many cases because of it. And not just at the federal level. That is why in order to receive federal funds local jurisdictions must analyze and take action to address residential segregation and discrimination. It is this obligation that the court found Westchester County failed to fulfill in a recent case brought by a civil rights organization. To ensure the county did not lose access to millions of federal dollars, the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development brought the parties together to reach an agreement in which Westchester would provide 750 affordable, accessible homes over the next seven years in neighborhoods with little racial diversity.

"In the settlement, Westchester agreed to use its legal and financial resources to end practices, such as exclusionary zoning, that limit diversity and follow through on its commitment to promote stable, inclusive communities. HUD expects the county to carry out the letter and the spirit of the settlement."

That's progress!

NJ Governor Tries to Block Affordable Housing, Fails

2010-02-20T15:31:00.000-08:00

From today's Philadelphia Inquirer. All praise to Fair Share Housing Center!

Gov. Christie's 90-day suspension of New Jersey's affordable-housing regulations has been lifted temporarily under a stay granted by the Appellate Division of Superior Court.
Judge Stephen Skillman yesterday granted a motion by the Fair Share Housing Center to stay the section of a Feb. 9 executive order that banned the Council on Affordable Housing from enforcing its rules for 90 days while a five-member task force develops recommendations on state policies for providing affordable housing.

The court will make a final decision after hearing oral arguments March 16.

Within hours of Christie's order, the center filed an appeal claiming a violation of separation of powers that went far beyond the governor's limited role in COAH, which was created by the Fair Housing Act in 1985 to enforce Supreme Court rulings that towns have a constitutional obligation to provide low- and moderate-income housing.

Legal papers filed by the center called Christie's move "a sweeping assertion of executive power" that "sets a dangerous precedent for the entire operation of state government."

"I think this is a recognition that what Gov. Christie has been trying to do in governing by executive order is out of the norm with past governors, both Democrats and Republicans, in New Jersey and is not consistent with our constitution and our laws," said Adam Gordon, an attorney for the Cherry Hill-based Fair Share Housing Center.

The governor's office did not return a message seeking comment yesterday.

Sharing the view of many local officials, Christie's executive order called state affordable-housing procedures "excessively complex and unworkable, resulting in delays, inefficiencies, litigation, and unreasonable costs to municipalities and the private sector without appreciable progress being made for our citizens."

COAH calculates the "fair share" of housing each town must provide. Municipalities that file plans with the council for how they will meet those requirements are protected from lawsuits by developers to force higher-density building.

The stay does not affect the task force, created under the executive order to assess the effects of New Jersey's affordable-housing regulations and their degree of success in meeting obligations under the Supreme Court rulings of 1975 and 1983, known as the Mount Laurel decisions.

Bill Dressel, executive director of the New Jersey League of Municipalities, expressed surprise at the stay.

His organization is awaiting a decision on a legal challenge it filed on behalf of many towns to the latest round of COAH rules in 2008, and Dressel said the league's attorneys were not told they could have filed a response to the Fair Share Housing Center filing.

"We think it was very reasonable for a newly elected governor to be able to do a review of what has transpired in the legislative area, to take a fresh look at the regulations and to . . . take 90 days, as he referred to it, a time-out, and come up with a plan of action on how to address the problems with COAH," Dressel said.

The court denied other motions by the Fair Share Housing Center, including a request for an appointment of a special master to oversee COAH's operations and "ensure that there are not attempts to surreptitiously accomplish what the executive order aims illegally to do."

COAH, for its part, shares Christie's view: the council's board voted, 5-2, in support of Christie's executive order on Tuesday.

NY Times Editorial on NY Housing Discrimination Case

2010-02-17T08:29:00.001-08:00

Westchester’s Word
NY Times - 2/17/10

Six months ago, New York’s Westchester County agreed to spend slightly more than $50 million in the next seven years to build at least 750 units of affordable housing — more than 600 of them in towns and villages where the black population is 3 percent or less and the Hispanic population is less than 7 percent.

It signed the deal to settle a federal lawsuit accusing it of violating the False Claims Act — that is, of taking tens of millions of federal dollars for affordable housing and other projects while falsely certifying that it was doing all that it must to promote integrated housing. It signed only after a federal judge declared that Westchester had ”utterly failed” to meet its obligations.

Last week, the monitor overseeing the settlement rejected the county’s affordable-housing plan, saying it was deficient on details, accountability and enforcement. Instead of specifying what the county would do to meet certain desegregation bench marks, Westchester had simply restated the bench marks. The plan didn’t specify where and how the money would be spent. It had no “concrete time frame” for finding and buying properties to develop and was “unnecessarily vague on the whole.”

Worst of all, the plan did not explain how or even whether it would overcome not-in-my-backyard resistance and compel cooperation by municipalities that have used exclusionary zoning laws and other devices for years to keep out lower-income people and minorities. The monitor also said the plan needed “real enforcement mechanisms” — “a clear strategy for how the county will employ carrots and sticks to encourage compliance by municipal governments.” We await the county’s response, which should be to fix the plan and then seriously and swiftly put it into action.

When one thinks about segregation, Westchester isn’t the first place that comes to mind. But the poor and minority residents desperately looking for an affordable place to live know the bitter truth. It is past time for Westchester’s leaders to do what they’ve promised.

UN Releases Report on Housing Rights Violations in the U.S.

2010-02-16T16:42:00.000-08:00

The United Nations has released the final report of the Special Rapporteur on the Right to Adequate Housing’s U.S. mission , making both broad and specific findings and recommendations about housing rights violations in the U.S.

The UN Special Rapporteur, Raquel Rolnik, visited six cities in the U.S. from October 23-November 8, 2009 in her mission, co-coordinated by National Law Center on Homeless Rights and Poverty, the National Economic & Social Rights Initiative, and local partners including
New York, NY – Rob Robinson, Picture the Homeless
Wilkes Barre, PA – Frank Sindaco, Northeast Pennsylvania Organizing Center
Chicago, IL - JR Fleming, Coalition to Protect Public Housing
New Orleans, LA – Sam Jackson, Mayday New Orleans
Pine Ridge, SD – Bill Means, Oglala Tribal Community
Los Angeles, CA – Becky Dennison, Los Angeles Community Action Network
Washington, DC – Debra Frazier, Family and Friends of Arthur Capers and Carrollsburg and Eric Sheptock

After an extremely participatory visit , many of the concerns homeless and low-income communities across the country expressed to her are included in the report.

The Rapporteur’s report recommends, among other things:
Increasing resources for public and affordable housing;
The Protecting Tenants At Foreclosure Act should be extended beyond its 2012 sunset;
Vacant properties should be made available to housing organizations for the provision of affordable housing;
Constructive alternatives to the criminalization of homelessness should be developed, and where adequate shelter is not available, homeless persons should be allowed to shelter themselves in public areas;
The HUD definition of homelessness should be expanded to include those living doubled up with others due to economic hardship.

Congress should pass H.Res. 582 and devote increased resources to the Family Unification Voucher Program.

The Rapporteur will present her report to the UN Human Rights Council on March 5th in Geneva, Switzerland.

Next steps for advocates should include 1) publicizing the report, 2) demanding and action plan from legislators and HUD for implementing the report’s recommendations, and 3) using the report recommendations and findings in local advocacy.

Napa needs affordable housing...

2010-01-05T21:27:00.001-08:00

From the Napa Valley Register, 1/3/10.

____________________________________________

Providing places for workers to live

By Hector Olvera

Thousands of people who work in Napa County have to drive here each day from other counties. These are the workers who pick the grapes, the dishwashers and waiters in our restaurants, the store clerks, the office workers, construction workers, truck drivers, house cleaners, auto mechanics and many others. They live in Vallejo, Clearlake and other places where housing is more affordable and commute many miles back and forth each day.

The economy of Napa County depends on these workers. Our local governments have approved dozens of expensive new hotels, wineries, restaurants and other businesses in recent years but have done nothing to make housing available for all the people who work in these businesses. Wineries provide some bunkhouses where farmworkers can sleep, but the workers have to leave their families behind. That's a big hardship for the farmworkers and for their families. It's also not fair to the other counties that have to provide schools and public services for the families of workers in Napa County. And anyone concerned about the environment should ask why thousands of cars are driving all those miles back and forth to work each day. More than 20,000 cars commute into the county each day to work. That's a lot of greenhouse gas.

Many of the workers who are driving long distances to work in Napa's vineyards, hotels and restaurants are Latino. Our group, Latinos Unidos de Napa, has been trying for years to get more affordable housing built in Napa County. The county promised us in 2004 that they would provide sites for affordable housing, but most of the sites they designated were not allowed to have water service, so no housing could be built there except for million-dollar mansions. Not a single unit of affordable housing has been built in the unincorporated areas of the county in many years, and very few affordable units have been built in the cities.

The lack of affordable housing discriminates against Latinos and the thousands of other lower-income families who would like to live in Napa County but can't afford to do so. Latinos Unidos has filed lawsuits to try to stop this discrimination. Persons working in Napa should be able to live here, also. We harvest the grapes, clean the hotel rooms, prepare the gourmet restaurant meals and contribute in so many other ways to the economy of this county. We shouldn't be forced to live somewhere else because there's no affordable housing allowed here. Housing choices should be available to all persons working in the county — whatever their income or their race. We hope the courts and elected officials in the county will agree.

This letter is written on behalf of Luis Vera, Ignacio Garcia, Oscar Caceres and others.

(Olvera lives in Napa.)

The Revolution Will Be Mapped

2009-12-29T16:39:00.000-08:00

By: Bob Burtman Miller-McCune Journal 12/28/2009

To get to the headquarters of the Cedar Grove Institute for Sustainable Communities, visitors have to navigate a lengthy dirt road past white picket fences, grazing horses and a variety of outbuildings in various stages of disrepair. Set in a one-room former Primitive Baptist church on a 43-acre spread in rural Orange County, N.C., the institute holds a collection of old, ergonomically incorrect wooden desks and metal filing cabinets. The only signs of modernity are computers atop the desks.

Institute founders Allan Parnell and Ann Joyner, who live in a modest country house a stone's throw from this office, are dressed in their everyday summer attire, T-shirts and shorts. But when they begin pulling maps off printers, Parnell and Joyner step decidedly out of the last century. "Our daughter tells people we work for the CIA, because what we do is so hard to describe," Parnell says, only half-joking.

Joyner displays a series of maps showing the Coal Run neighborhood, a handful of streets located just outside the city limits of Zanesville in central Ohio. The first map provides a simple baseline, showing the city water plant and the boundary between the city and Coal Run, a part of Muskingum County. The second map adds water lines, which serve only the northern half of Coal Run. Successive maps add the residences in Coal Run, note which residences have water and which don't, and break down their occupancy by race.

The last map puts all the data together, and the picture suddenly comes into sharp focus: Almost all the white households in Coal Run have water service, while all but a few black homes do not.

The institute's maps played a vital role in a federal jury's decision last year to award the excluded Coal Run residents almost $11 million in damages from the city of Zanesville and Muskingum County. The supporting evidence was strong on its own: African-American residents without water had made repeated requests over a period of almost 50 years to remedy the inequity, to no avail. Instead, they had to haul water from the plant or pump it from wells contaminated with sulphur and oil from old mining operations. In the interim, Zanesville had extended its water lines on numerous occasions to new, predominantly white developments that were farther away from the water plant than Coal Run.

But the maps provided something that the narrative and statistics lacked, says civil rights attorney Reed Colfax, who represented the Coal Run residents. "We could articulate the case in words," Colfax says. "But when you'd put up the maps, they'd stop listening to you and look at them [as if to] say, 'Is this really possible?'"

The Cedar Grove Institute has been using maps to exhibit patterns of municipal discrimination against low-income and minority communities for almost a decade. The patterns, rooted in the days when residential discrimination was supported by law, have been reinforced under the cover of such contemporary land-use mechanisms as annexation, zoning and extra-territorial controls.

To produce the maps, the institute employs geographic information systems technology, a computer-based tool for organizing, analyzing and displaying data in a spatial or geographic context. While the maps seem simple, producing them is anything but. Data must be collected from a host of sources, including government databases, door-to-door surveys and Global Positioning System devices. The data is digitized, analyzed, converted to images and layered together in various combinations.

Once the exclusive province of government, industry and academia, GIS technology has evolved rapidly since the 1980s, paralleling exponential gains in computer power and capacity. Affordable, user-friendly GIS software, online-mapping systems and the explosion of government data available on the Web have combined to speed the spread of GIS into the public arena.

This democratization of GIS has spurred new thinking about its potential application at the grassroots, rather than institutional, level. University of North Carolina School of Law Dean Jack Boger has worked with the institute on some of its municipal discrimination cases and concluded that the phenomenon of exclusion knows few geographic boundaries. "This is a problem of nationwide scope," Boger says. "The evidence is, in effect, irrefutable."

The exclusion of poor and minority communities from municipal services is but one social ill that GIS mapping can illustrate and help alleviate. Today, an increasing number of academics, attorneys, nonprofits and community groups are using maps to identify social problems, devise solutions and leverage change. GIS is being deployed to combat discrimination and inequities in education, health care access, housing, employment opportunities, transportation and law enforcement. "You're not up to date in social justice advocacy if you don't know how to use GIS maps," says Anita Earls, director of the Southern Coalition for Social Justice in Durham, N.C.

Still, GIS is in its relative infancy as a popular science, and public awareness of its attributes and capacity is relatively low. Although most people have been exposed on the Internet to such GIS-based products as Google Maps, few can identify the technology behind them. Sarah Elwood, a geography professor at the University of Washington who has spread the GIS gospel to community groups, often encounters a baseline ignorance of the concept. "You say 'GIS' and people say, 'Oh, yeah, I have one of those in my car,'" Elwood says.

The dots on the GIS-awareness map may be sparse, but those who have experienced the transformative power of GIS mapping have no doubt that the technology will eventually become firmly entrenched in the public consciousness. "People are jaded with statistics, and even more jaded with pie charts and graphs," says Keith Ernst, research director at the Center for Responsible Lending in Durham, which has used maps to identify patterns of predatory lending in low-income communities. "But if you put the information on a map, people are more willing to hear what you say. We're visual creatures, and seeing is believing."

Allan Parnell recalls the day he first grasped the sweeping potential of GIS-based advocacy. Parnell was giving a talk at the University of North Carolina law school about the institute's first municipal discrimination case, which involved his hometown of Mebane, N.C. As in Zanesville, residents of largely minority neighborhoods outside Mebane's boundaries lacked water, sewer and other basic town services, despite decades of requests for relief.

Meanwhile, the town had annexed and provided services over the years to a hodgepodge of overwhelmingly white, affluent satellite developments that were farther away from the town center than the minority neighborhoods. This pattern of annexation and exclusion, dubbed "municipal underbounding" by University of Tennessee geography professor Charles Aiken, created virtual islands of poverty and neglect within the town.

After the presentation, a group of black students approached Parnell with similar stories of their own. "They told me, 'This is happening in my grandmother's town,'" he says. "That was the light-bulb moment: This isn't just one case; it's a pattern."

A geographer by training with advanced degrees in sociology and demographics, Parnell had used GIS in health-related studies for the National Academy of Sciences and other agencies beginning in the late 1980s. He and his wife, Ann Joyner, formed a company in 1999 that specialized in GIS-based health research. But Parnell, a self-described "conflict-avoiding academic," had had little opportunity or inclination to agitate on behalf of the disadvantaged.

One day in 2001, Parnell took a call from a community organizer in Mebane who was trying to stave off a highway bypass that would run through the heart of his neighborhood. Would Parnell assist him with a grant application? He met with the organizer, who detailed Mebane's methods of using town boundaries to disenfranchise the neighborhood while controlling its destiny through the use of extra-territorial jurisdiction, an area adjacent to city limits over which municipalities can exert some influence. "I just sat there with my jaw on the floor for three hours," Parnell says.

Parnell and Joyner agreed to create a visual and statistical profile of the town using standard GIS methodology. The first task was to gather the mountain of data that would be relevant. A former journalist and real estate developer, Joyner knew where to find comprehensive land-use and infrastructure information. Mebane's public works department provided the locations of water and sewer lines. From the planning department they obtained historical annexation documents. Federal census data broke out racial and economic variables at the block level. They reviewed city council meeting minutes for evidence of action and inaction on service and annexation requests.

Using stock GIS software, Parnell and Joyner digitized the mass of data in compatible formats — a major undertaking in itself — and analyzed it. To produce the maps, they enlisted Bucknell University GIS expert Ben Marsh, a former graduate school classmate of Parnell's. The three published a case study of Mebane in 2003 and shared it with Jack Boger, then-deputy director at the UNC Center for Civil Rights. "What was immediately apparent was how clear the relationship was between the exclusion of services and the racial makeup of the community," Boger says.

Inspired by the Mebane study and law school experience, Parnell and Joyner formed the nonprofit Cedar Grove Institute for Sustainable Communities and in 2004 won a foundation grant to map communities throughout North Carolina. They found patterns of exclusion similar to those identified in Mebane across the state.

The institute's maps of Moore County, home to some of the nation's most prestigious and affluent golfing communities, were among their most dramatic examples of underbounding. The maps show the boundaries of three county municipalities, Pinehurst, Southern Pines and Aberdeen, a tortured maze of red lines that zigzag in all directions, creating angular amoebas.

A batch of dark brown blotches stand prominently outside the limits of all three towns, though they are hemmed in or virtually surrounded by the three towns. The blotches represent communities with overwhelmingly African-American populations and names — Lost City, Monroe Town and Jackson Hamlet — that evoke images of the Jim Crow era.

The maps also show the distribution of sewer lines in the county, which either stop at town borders or go through them but provide no hookups beyond, so the communities outside the town limits have no sewer service. Annexations over the years have swallowed acreage all around the three towns but carefully avoided the minority neighborhoods.

Parnell and Joyner add a sobering narrative to the maps that magnifies the extent of the exclusion of the communities outside town limits: Septic systems have routinely failed, spilling raw sewage next to homes. Residents lack the garbage service enjoyed by people who live in town and must instead pay for a costly private hauler or burn their trash at home. In the Midway community, neighbors watch garbage trucks cut through their main street to serve the citizens of Aberdeen, who live to either side. Police protection is provided by the county sheriff's department, which must travel as much as 15 miles to respond to emergencies — even though municipal police stations are much closer, in some cases just blocks away.

The maps became an integral part of a successful campaign to eliminate the most odious aspects of exclusion in Moore County, and not just in terms of educating decision-makers. For the community groups involved in the campaign, the maps offered a kind of external validation that their narrative alone could not provide. "For me, they were a verification of what I've always known," says Maurice Holland, president of the Midway Community Association and a lifelong resident of the neighborhood.

Since then, the institute has extended its reach beyond state lines. Presentations at conferences and workshops have connected the institute with attorneys working on municipal discrimination cases in California, Virginia, New York, Florida and Texas. While some of the cases center on underbounding, others address additional ways by which municipalities discriminate. In the Florida case, Guatemalan residents in the city of Lake Worth demonstrated that selective code enforcement resulted in the targeting of Latinos for eviction. An analysis of redevelopment efforts in Portsmouth, Va., showed that white residents and developers were the primary beneficiaries of the city's largesse, while black communities were systematically wiped from the landscape to make way for land uses that generated more tax revenue.

And in Dallas, African-American and Latino residents in the inaptly named community of Cadillac Heights sued the city for using zoning regulations to segregate them in an industrial sector — a pattern that traced back to the 1940s, before the influx of Latinos to the city, when land records denoted minority residential areas with the letter "N." Living next to industrial facilities had predictable consequences for residents: chronic health problems, a dearth of public services and permanently depressed property values.

In each instance, GIS maps have proven instrumental in either making the case that discrimination had occurred or influencing the outcome of a government decision about the discrimination. The city of Dallas, for example, settled with the residents and agreed to relocate them to more hospitable environs. Attorney Mike Daniel, who represented the plaintiffs, credits the maps with tipping the balance. This was the second suit brought by residents for the same cause, he notes, but the first one had ended with a nominal settlement that did not remedy the problem. "The history of the two cases was the same," Daniel says. "The only difference was Cedar Grove's work."

Most of the Cedar Grove Institute's recent GIS work has been for attorneys in support of municipal discrimination lawsuits, but the law offers few remedies in such cases. Provisions in the federal Civil Rights, Fair Housing and Voting Rights acts prohibit discrimination based on race and other factors, but local circumstances don't often fit neatly into one of those provisions, and proving that the law was violated is no simple endeavor. Moreover, to win in court, plaintiffs must prove that the discrimination was intentional.

Only a handful of states offer similar protections against discrimination. Further constricting the playing field is a counterintuitive reality: Local government practices that result in exclusion and inequity are, for the most part, legal. Annexation laws, for example, usually permit municipalities to make annexation decisions based on economic considerations. If an annexation provides a net economic benefit, the city can move forward; if the costs of providing services to the annexed territory exceed new tax revenues, the city is free to say no.

And the time and expense of a legal case — often measured in years and millions — are prohibitive for the communities most likely to be the object of discrimination.

Because of these hurdles, some advocacy groups with a GIS focus deploy their maps in the service of less adversarial strategies. The Kirwan Institute at Ohio State University engages in "opportunity mapping," which begins with the assumption that opportunities for high-quality housing, employment, education, health care and other key indicators should be distributed equally throughout a given metropolitan area. Kirwan maps identify disparities in the distribution of opportunities, which in turn provides direction for policymakers to correct those disparities.

In a similar vein, the Los Angeles-based Advancement Project takes a solution-oriented approach with its mapping initiative, the Healthy City Project. An interactive, online compendium of demographic, economic and health data for Los Angeles County, Healthy City also pinpoints the location of services for referral purposes and lets users create maps to identify concerns in their own neighborhoods. Developed in collaboration with an innovative GIS lab at UCLA, the Healthy City platform is so advanced that stakeholders often consult with project staff to inform policy debates and decisions.

Healthy City was hired by the city to produce maps in conjunction with an initiative to shift the approach to gang violence from enforcement and suppression to prevention. Healthy City produced maps that showed gang hot spots as well as services available to young people; the maps helped the city target areas where services were in shortest supply for additional investment. "We don't only want to show problems," says John Kim, who has directed Healthy City since its inception in 2002. "We want to show ways to solve those problems."

Historians cite ancient cave paintings of migratory game routes as a primitive geographic information system, the superimposition of data on a geographic image. An English physician mapped the location of London residents sickened by cholera during an outbreak in 1857, which he analyzed to identify the source of the disease. Advancements in photographic processes in the early 20th century enabled the creation of translucent images of geographically ordered demographic data that could be layered atop a map, a technique pioneered by the Roosevelt administration during the Depression.

Though these antecedents arguably combine geography and information into a kind of system, GIS is most commonly associated with sophisticated computer hardware and software, its origins dating back to the days of mainframes and punch cards. In 1962, the Canadian government unveiled the Canada Geographic Information System, a prototype that mapped select land-use variables throughout the country for planning purposes.

Private vendors began to sell off-the-shelf GIS software in the 1980s; a decade later, further refinements in those packages combined with a steady drop in hardware prices made GIS available to anyone with sufficient technical background and skill. The runway was clear for takeoff.

Commercial users were among the first to take advantage. Market researchers mapped demographic data on household income, population density and the location of competitors to choose optimal sites for retail expansion. Engineering firms mapped roads and infrastructure to streamline their projects.

Federal, state and local government agencies also found GIS an invaluable way to increase efficiencies. The time spent on planning, permitting and conducting environmental or health assessments could be cut to a sliver with accurate databases and maps. Law enforcement agencies mapped crime incidence; few government operations, in fact, did not benefit from a GIS application. One of the largest single repositories of government data, the U.S. Census, has likely launched more GIS maps than any other single data source.

Much of that government data has now been posted to the Web. For advocates using GIS, the flood of data has been a boon. Parnell says the Cedar Grove Institute would never have emerged from the conceptual phase without the ability to obtain government data. "We realized that there's a critical mass of data out there," he says. "Five years earlier, we couldn't have done it."

Not all local governments appreciate the rise of GIS-driven advocacy, especially when their own data is used as a hammer against them, and they have begun to restrict public access. Some have pulled data off the Web in the alleged interest of national security; others charge exorbitant fees to produce it or deliver jumbled masses of data that are difficult to manage or decipher.

Mebane, the Cedar Grove Institute's first case study of municipal discrimination, passed an Infrastructure Information Security Policy shortly after the study was published; the policy limited infrastructure data access to qualified engineering firms and town agencies. The city of Modesto, Calif., locked in a legal underbounding battle, pulled its infrastructure data off the Internet after the lawsuit was filed, citing national security grounds. "There's no conceivable national security interest in where the traffic lights are in Modesto," scoffs Ben Marsh, the institute's chief mapmaker. A recent appellate ruling in California rejected a similar national-security rationale, as well as a copyright argument by Santa Clara County, but whether that opinion stands as precedent remains to be seen.

Though restrictions on access to government data could prove troublesome, advocacy groups that use GIS have already been finding data sources outside of government. In particular, data collected by community residents have become an effective supplement to the "official story," as University of Washington professor Sarah Elwood calls government data.

Elwood has used GIS not only to map problems but to build the capacity of underserved and disadvantaged communities to advocate on their own behalf. Simple walking surveys that catalogue infrastructural deficiencies — potholes in sidewalks, missing stop signs, burned-out streetlights — fill gaps in the public record that mask actual conditions on the ground. With locally produced data, Elwood says, "You can tell a very detailed and very current, compelling story about neighborhood needs."

One of the few brakes slowing the GIS freight train, at least from an advocacy perspective, is the shortage of people who understand it well. "Obviously, there is a much greater demand for GIS than there are practitioners," says attorney Eric Schultheis, who coordinates The Race Equity Project for Legal Services of Northern California and counts himself among the GIS crowd. "You could probably count the number of people who are actually doing this work on both hands."

But given the leaps that GIS technology and applications have taken in the political and legal advocacy sectors, it's hard to imagine the GIS trend reversing. By January of next year, Healthy City plans to cover the entire state of California, and Kim says he's received expansion requests from other cities. Healthy City uses free, open-source GIS software that can be customized as needed. The ready supply of cheap hardware and software can only hasten the arrival of the day when GIS mapping is as universal as photo or music editing.

"The technology will soon become ubiquitous," Kim says simply.

Disabled Woman Fights To Keep Therapy Dog

2009-11-12T16:50:00.000-08:00

fyi...

SAN FRANCISCO—A woman suffering from post-traumatic stress syndrome is suing to keep her therapy dog under Fair Housing and disability laws as she fights eviction from her mobile home park residence of 19 years.

Represented by the Animal Legal Defense Fund (ALDF), Bay Area Legal Aid and solo attorney David Grabill, Concord’s Theresa Huerta has filed a lawsuit in U.S. District Court against the owners of Willow Pass Mobile Home Park who are attempting to evict her after 19 years of residence because her canine companion Manny’s breed is not approved by the mobile home park.

According to her doctors at Contra Costa County Health Services, 52-year-old Huerta suffers from post-traumatic stress disorder, depression, and other health impairments qualifying her as “disabled” as a result of being violently assaulted in 2007, and they assert that Manny’s companionship provides important treatment for her illnesses, removing stress and comforting her.

After recently reporting to governmental agencies certain conditions in the park which appeared to violate health and safety regulations, Huerta received a letter from the Willow Pass managers telling her she either had to get rid of Manny or be subject to eviction.
Huerta adopted Manny in January 2009, taking him into her home and nursing him back to health after he’d been abandoned by his owner and hit by a car, suffering serious injuries. His parentage is unknown, though the defendants claim he appears to be a mix that includes one of the several breeds colloquially referred to as a “pit bull.”

Manny has a very friendly disposition, is obedient to commands, and has never exhibited aggressive behavior towards people or other animals, the Animal Legal Defense Fund spokespeople say. Most importantly, Manny is critical in relieving the effects of Huerta’s health impairments, allowing her to feel safe in her home and qualifying him as a “reasonable accommodation” for her disability. Huerta had owned another mixed breed dog who looked like Manny for 10 years prior to adopting Manny, and many other residents of the mobile home park own dogs of a range of breeds, including ones appearing to be “pit bulls.”
Huerta worked over 13 years as a bilingual instructor for the Oakland and Mount Diablo School Districts, but has been unable to work since her attack, and she will likely become homeless if she is evicted from her Willow Park home of 19 years. “Both Federal and California state fair housing and civil rights laws provide that Ms. Huerta should be allowed the ‘reasonable accommodation’ of her beloved companion Manny, who is providing her with crucial therapeutic value and helping her live with a sense of security, something she was so unfairly robbed of on the day she was assaulted,” says ALDF attorney Bruce Wagman, lead counsel in Huerta’s case.

“Our laws guarantee that disabled Americans must be protected from housing discrimination, and health care providers confirm that the support of a beloved animal companion like Manny can make the crucial difference in allowing disabled persons like Ms. Huerta to move forward with dignity.”

For more information, see www.aldf.org 11-12-09
If you have questions, contact news@northcountrygazette.org

'Humanure' Victory: Green Toilet Wins Austin City Approval

2009-11-10T20:09:00.000-08:00

Composting commode is first to gain official stamp.
by Asher Price 11/9/2009 Austin American-Statesman (Texas)

It took more than four years of negotiations and construction, but this month an Austin Water Utility inspector gave final clearance to a glorified outhouse that is on the vanguard of down-and-dirty environmentalism.
Known as a composting toilet, the East Austin commode relies on the alchemy wrought by bacteria to transform human waste into a rich trove of soil. Specialists in so-called humanure have hailed the approval of the toilet as a watershed moment for common-sense environmentalism.
Users flush not with water but with a scoop of sawdust from a nearby bucket, saving the drinking-water-quality water used by conventional toilets, not to mention the energy and money required to pump and clean the wastewater.
"It's the ecologically sound thing to do," said David Bailey, 32, an itinerant carpenter and puppeteer who spearheaded the project. "Rather than using purified drinking water for a waste stream, we're using naturally occurring, ambient bacteria to create soil, one of Earth's least renewable resources. You have more water to drink and bathe in, and you end up with topsoil that's every gardener's dream."
The technology, simple as it is, is unlikely to become widespread. City code bars any property within 100 feet of a sewer line from having a composting toilet. There's also the "ick" factor. And despite issuing its first such permit, the city does not sound especially keen on composting commodes.
Austin Water Utility spokesman Kevin Buchman said the composting toilet is "not something! we're endorsing or even recommend. It's an option for people building homes and trying to do what they believe to be environmentally sound."
The state delegates regulatory power for on-site sewage facilities, which include composting toilets, to local authorities, said Terry Clawson, a spokesman for the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality.
The permitted outhouse sits about 4 feet off the ground on a 9.8-acre former landfill in the Montopolis neighborhood that belongs to the Rhizome Collective, a group that puts in practice off-the-grid sustainability, or living in ways that require little in the way of nonrenewable sources of energy.
There is no water hookup to the screened-in, cottage-like outhouse, which cost about $3,000 to build and has a small porch in front and a stall with two commodes inside. Only one functions at a time, for about a year; once the vault beneath it, which is matted with straw, is full, the vault and commode will be sealed for a year. Then the contents are usable as compost, Bailey said.
While one commode is sealed, the other will be used.
Mismanaged sewage and bad sanitation have been blamed for outbreaks of a variety of diseases, among them cholera. But heat created by bacteria in the vault destroys pathogens and coliforms, Bailey says, making the soil "totally benign, environmentally speaking."
The airy outhouse sports views of a pasture of cacti and smells mostly of sawdust. A small fan, powered by a solar panel affixed to the outhouse, keeps fumes moving through a PVC exhaust chimney. A hand-sanitizer dispenser sits beside the screen door. In keeping with the sympathies and orientation of the Rhizome Collective, the toilet-side books include "Malcom X Speaks," the Marxist sociological text "Society of the Spectacle" and the prison novel "Iron City."
The permitting and final approval for the outhouse took four years, but "it's a testament to the openness of the city to allow us to build it," said Bailey, who says he has built more than a dozen composting toilets in Texas, the Northeast and overseas.
At least a handful of composting toilets exist in Austin covertly, but Bailey said the Rhizome Collective wanted to win city recognition for the project to persuade officials to broaden the ways residents can cut their water use. On average, toilets use as much as 3 gallons per flush, Buchman said.
As part of the permit application, members of the Rhizome Collective included material from two of the seminal toilet-construction texts, "Lifting the Lid" and the "Humanure Handbook."
"I know of no other cities that officially recognize humanure toilets," said Joseph Jenkins, author of the "Humanure Handbook." "It is little understood by regulatory personnel, and it falls into a gray area - somewhere between what people typically consider 'sanitation' or 'waste treatment' and 'composting.' "
Benefits include the production of a valuable fertilizer, savings in water use, and the prevention of treated effluent, possibly laden with chemicals, from being discharged into waterways, said Lauren Ross, a civil engineer who worked on the project.
"In our current culture, it's not a technology for most people," she said. "But there is a significant part of Austin's community ready to take some radical steps for environmental protection. Composting toilets are no crazier than a lifestyle based on living somewhere in suburbia and commuting 15 miles for a downtown job. That's also not for everyone, but it gets planned for and is accepted as a normal, ordinary way of life."
Flush toilets also contribute to the enormous amounts of energy required to pull water out of the Colorado River, treat it to a drinkable standard, flush it through the sewage system, and treat it again before it can be discharged back into the river. Austin Water Utility uses as much electricity as all other city departments combined, not including Austin Energy, said David Greene, energy and resources engineer with the water utility.
"It's a major energy issue," Greene said.

Copyright 2009 The Austin American-Statesman

Blogs for a change

2009-10-08T21:21:00.001-07:00

100 best blogs for those who want to change the world!

[thanks to Sabrina for passing this along to us from DC]

Attorney provides downtown Sacramento site for homeless camp

2009-08-24T22:23:00.000-07:00

From the Sacramento Bee ( Nice try, but I hear the cops shut the site down yesterday - DG)
By Cynthia Hubert chubert@sacbee.com
Saturday, Aug. 22, 2009 - 12:00 am | Page 3B

A Sacramento attorney who has championed the rights of homeless people is opening his private property to campers who need a place to sleep at night.

Mark Merin, who for years has challenged the city's and county's treatment of the homeless, is leasing a parcel of land in downtown Sacramento to an association of people seeking to establish a legal "safe ground" campsite. Three advocacy organizations are leading the "safe ground" effort.

Merin would not disclose terms of the lease but said the vacant lot is on C Street between 12th and 14th streets and should accommodate 20 to 30 tents. Campers had already begun to move in Friday.

The arrangement, Merin said, would prevent police from ticketing homeless people for trespassing and from seizing their property. It would not, however, stop officers from enforcing a city ordinance that prohibits camping in non-designated areas for longer than 24 hours.

Merin said he hopes police will look the other way on the camping ordinance, which is not strictly enforced against anyone other than homeless people. If they continue to enforce the ordinance, he said, he will challenge them in court.

Sgt. Norm Leong, a spokesman for the Sacramento Police Department, said officers would "consider taking enforcement action" against campers only if the site was "unsafe or unsanitary" or if neighbors or others complained.

"We would step back and look at it," he said. "We wouldn't feel the need to jump in as soon as someone pitches a tent and break it down."

But Leong questioned why Merin and others would open a campsite on their own even as city and community leaders are working toward establishing a legal campground that would offer the homeless such services as garbage pickup, sanitation and social support.

"Why would you initiate it now, when the mayor is trying to figure out a legal solution?" he asked.

Joan Burke of Loaves & Fishes, which provides a variety of services to homeless people in a complex within walking distance of Merin's property, said Mayor Kevin Johnson's task force is doing potentially groundbreaking work. However, "we can't wait" for the political process to play out, she said.

"The winter is coming, and people have no place to sleep," said Burke, who served on the task force. "The current situation is intolerable."

Merin said he would like to see other private property owners offer vacant land so that several small campsites with basic services could be established, perhaps with the city's blessing.

"We need to take care of those less fortunate than us," said Merin, who lives in the area where the campsite is to be established. "It's as simple as that."

Still more on the Westchester County Settlement

2009-08-19T09:23:00.000-07:00

[This is an LTE from one of the attorneys in the Westchester County housing discrimination case settlement]

The Court Is Right About Westchester County Housing

Your description of the landmark settlement that emerged from the Anti-Discrimination Center's lawsuit against Westchester County as "the government deciding where it wants people to live" ("Color-Coding the Suburbs," Review & Outlook, Aug. 15) bears no relation to the actual terms of the agreement nor to the history of residential racial segregation in Westchester County.

Westchester is deeply, deeply residentially segregated. A dozen of its municipalities have African-American populations of less than 1%. Nine more municipalities have African-American populations of less than 2%. The principal indices of segregation show, remarkably, that Westchester was more segregated in 2000 than it was in 1950.

One should not be fooled into thinking that it is only poorer African-Americans who are living separately from whites. The most widely used measure of segregation has demonstrated that African-American households earning more than $150,000 per year are more segregated from whites than are African-American households earning less than $50,000 per year.

Recipients of federal community development funds have long been required to identify and act to overcome barriers to fair housing choice. Indeed, recipients can only receive grant funds if they represent that they have done so. From 2000 to 2006, Westchester received more than $50 million by making such representations. Earlier this year, a federal judge granted the Anti-Discrimination Center's motion for partial summary judgment, finding as a matter of law that Westchester had "utterly failed" to meet its affirmatively-furthering-fair-housing obligations, and finding as well that every one of Westchester's representations that it had done so was "false or fraudulent."

The only "social engineering" involved in the case was the evidence of Westchester County having perpetuated segregation by not using its authority to overcome artificial barriers to affordable housing development in its whitest municipalities while at the same time channeling such development into areas of concentrated African-American population.

The settlement is designed to overcome the rigid exclusionary zoning that has prevented both for-profit and not-for-profit developers from constructing the type of context-sensitive affordable housing in Westchester towns and villages that they have built elsewhere in the country. By creating these opportunities in communities where they have been absent, and by making it clear for the first time that people of all races and backgrounds are welcome throughout the county, the settlement both creates real consumer choice and, 41 years after the passage of the Fair Housing Act, takes an important step toward ending the legacy of "two societies, one black, one white, separate and unequal."

Craig Gurian, Executive Director
Anti-Discrimination Center
New York

More on the Westchester settlement

2009-08-11T09:14:00.001-07:00

Excepts from the U.S. District Court decision granting partial summary judgment to the Anti-Discrimination Center and against Westchester County in the housing discrimination case; the decision was the precusor to the settlement announced yesterday

o The court found as a matter of law that the county "made a claim, to the United States government, that was false or fraudulent, seeking payment from the Federal treasury." [Decision, p. 54]

o Given the "explicit statutory and regulatory scheme, it is easy to find that federal law conditioned payment of the housing and community development funds on compliance with the duty to AFFH [this refers to a required certification by the county that a grant recipient is "affirmatively furthering fair housing"] and that each time the County submitted a request for payment of those funds it made an impliedly false certification." [Decision, p. 43] Note: over six years, "Approximately 25 payment vouchers per month were approved for payment." [Decision, p. 26]

o "No reasonable jury could conclude...that the County appropriately analyzed race in conducting its AIs or that it maintained the required report of that analysis." [Decision p. 34]

o "[T]he County's AIs [this refers to a required 'analysis of impediments to fair housing choice] during the false claims period utterly failed to comply with the regulatory requirement that the County perform and maintain a record of its analysis of the impediments to fair housing choice in terms of race. This failure is only compounded by the County's failure to follow the guidance provided by HUD." [Decision, p. 35]

o "The AFFH certification was not a mere boilerplate formality, but rather was a substantive requirement, rooted in the history and purpose of the fair housing laws and regulations, requiring the County to conduct an AI, take appropriate actions in response, and to document its analysis and actions. The County's motion for summary judgment is therefore denied" [Decision, pp. 50-51]

o "Westchester was aware of the racial makeup of its municipalities (as reflected in the relevant censuses) when it prepared its 2000 and 2004 analyses of impediments to fair housing. According to the 2000 census, over half of the municipalities in the Consortium had African-American populations of 3% or less." [Decision, p. 24]

o "As a matter of logic, providing more affordable housing for a low income racial minority will improve its housing stock but may do little to change any pattern of discrimination or segregation. Addressing that pattern would at a minimum necessitate an analysis of where the additional housing is placed." [Decision, p. 39]

o "The County admits that it did not undertake an analysis of whether the production of affordable housing between January 1, 1992 and April 1, 2006, had the effect of increasing or decreasing racial diversity in the neighborhood in which the housing was built."

o The regulation "requires an analysis of impediments to fair housing choice, not to affordable housing." [Decision, p. 21, n.5] The County knew this: "[T]he County had its own internal documents from before the false claims period relating to its AFFH obligations and the preparation of AIs. One such document, which is an outline of the County's Fair Housing Plan ("FHP"), sets forth the requirements that the County conduct an AI, setout actions to be taken, and maintain records. The end of the outline contains the following reminder: 'Remember: This [the FHP] is not a report on affordable housing, but FAIR HOUSING!!!'"

o "[T]he statutes and regulations require not just any AI, but one that analyzes impediments to fair housing that are related to race." [Decision, p. 31]

o As in the 2000-2004 AI, the 2004-2008 AI "makes no explicit reference to race, or race discrimination or segregation as an impediment to fair housing other than as described above. Race discrimination or segregation are not identified as one of the thirteen obstacles to fair housing." [Decision, p. 23]

o "A review of the 2000 and 2004 AIs demonstrates that they were conducted through the lens of affordable housing, rather than fair housing and its focus on protected classes such as race. Both AIs are devoted entirely to the lack of affordable housing in the County and related obstacles...Despite the regulatory obligation to maintain records reflecting the AI, there is simply no evidence that either of the County's AIs during the false claims period analyzed race-based impediments to fair housing within its jurisdiction." [Decision, pp. 31-32]

o "The focus of the AI is to be on 'actions, omissions or decisions' which 'restrict housing choices or the availability of housing choices,' or which have the effect of doing so, based on 'race, color, religion, sex, disability, familial status, or national origin,' including '[p]olicies, practices, or procedures that appear neutral on their face,' and HUD suggests that the AI contain a housing profile describing 'the degree of segregation and restricted housing by race, ethnicity, disability status, and families with children; [and] how segregation and restricted housing supply occurred. (Emphasis supplied). There is no dispute that the County's AIs did not contain this analysis of segregation and the housing supply." [Decision, pp. 34-35].

o "Without a targeted analysis of race as a potential impediment to fair housing, the County was unprepared to grapple with the second component of its AFFH duty to take appropriate action to overcome the effects of any racial discrimination or segregation it might identify as an impediment." [Decision, pp. 32-33]

o "On July 13, 2007, this Court denied the County's motion to dismiss, rejecting its contention that it had no legal obligation to consider race when it analyzed impediments to fair housing in connection with its certifications." [Decision, p. 2]

o "While the County argues that the actions it took to address the barriers to affordable housing should be considered actions promoting fair housing and specifically redressing racial discrimination in housing, for the reasons already described, the County cannot defeat this summary judgment motion with this post-hoc analysis. It was required to maintain records reflecting that analysis and those actions and it did not." [Decision, p. 39, n.9]

o "The County weakly asserts that the AIs were not devoid of any analysis of race because the references in the 2000 and 2004 AIs to an obstacle described as 'local opposition' or 'NIMBY' should be understood to include local opposition to new affordable housing on several bases, including on the basis of race. ADC disputes that the County used the term NIMBY to refer to a municipality's opposition to integration or to anything other than an individual homeowner's opposition to low-income housing being built in her neighborhood. Even assuming the County's contention to be true, however, such a veiled reference, buried within a finding that local opposition was an obstacle to affordable' housing, does not reflect any analysis of how race-based opposition impeded fair housing, as distinct from other forms of local opposition. Nor does this reference reflect an analysis of how race-based local opposition might be an impediment to fair, and not just affordable, housing." [Decision, p. 32]

o_The County's argument that it did not have to conclude after an analysis of data that there were race-based impediments to fair housing "might carry more weight if it took the position that neither discrimination nor segregation nor any other race-based factor was an impediment to fair housing during the false claims period. Tellingly, it does not assert that. Instead, its brief in opposition to the ADC's motion for summary judgment asserts that the information it received 'did not reflect that racial discrimination constituted a significant barrier to fair housing and that it did not find that 'any race-based impediments wereamong the most challenging barriers to fair housing.' (Emphasis supplied.) Moreover, even if grant recipients were excused from the obligation to take actions to overcome the effects of minor impediments to fair housing, the County was still obligated to record its analysis of race-based impediments and it has been unable to point to any record of a contemporaneous analysis, much less one that embodies the conclusions recited in its summary judgment memorandum. Without such a contemporaneous analysis and record, the certification that one existed was false. (Decision, pp. 33-34, n. 8]

o "When the County considers where to acquire land for affordable housing, it seeks the concurrence of the municipality where the land is situated, and during the false claims period the County would not acquire any such land without the municipality's agreement. The County produced no documentation showing that during the false claims period it funded or assisted the production of affordable housing in any municipality where the municipality opposed such production." [Decision, pp. 25-26]

o "The County set a goal in a 1993 Affordable Housing Allocation Plan to create 5000 affordable housing units; however, as of July 2005, at least 16 municipal units in the County had not created a single affordable housing unit." [Decision, p. 26]

o "Westchester entered into Cooperation Agreements with municipalities participating in the Consortium. The agreements pertained to, inter alia, CDBG grants, and provided that the County is prohibited from expending community development block grant funds for activities in or in support of any local government that does not affirmatively further fair housing within its jurisdiction or that impedes the County's action to comply with its fair housing certifications." [Decision, p. 6] Nevertheless, "the County has not withheld any funds or imposed any sanctions on any participating municipalities for failure to AFFH." [Decision, p. 25]

o The False Claims Act "is intended to police the integrity of those claims submitted to the government for payment, and the materiality of statements made in those claims is tested as of the time of submission to the government and in the context of the regulatory requirements. Thus, the assertion that certain HUD bureaucrats reviewed the County's submissions and continued to grant the County funding cannot somehow make the false AFFH certifications immaterial, where the funding was explicitly conditioned on the certifications." [Decision, p. 53]

To read the settlement agreement, and the background of the case and Judge Denise Cote's February decision, see the Anti-Discrimination Center of Metro New York's Web site, www.antibiaslaw.com

Fair Housing Comes to Suburbs - NY Times

2009-08-11T08:10:00.000-07:00

New York Times Editorial August 11, 2009
Fair Housing in the Suburbs

When one thinks about segregation, the suburbs of New York’s Westchester County don’t immediately come to mind. Unless, of course, you’re a minority resident searching in vain for an affordable place to live.

Westchester County has now announced an agreement to spend more than $50 million to build or acquire 750 affordable housing units — 630 in towns and villages where the black population is 3 percent or less, and the Latino population is less than 7 percent.

The agreement, which needs to be ratified by the county Board of Legislators, settles a 3-year-old federal lawsuit, filed by the Anti-Discrimination Center, accusing the county of taking tens of millions of dollars in federal housing grants while falsely certifying that it was living up to its legal requirement to provide affordable housing without reinforcing racial segregation.

At the time, the county called those accusations “garbage,” and said it was powerless to force communities to integrate. But in February, Judge Denise L. Cote ruled that between 2000 and 2006 the county had, indeed, misrepresented its actions and had made little or no effort to place affordable homes in overwhelmingly white communities where residents objected.

Those objections have been fierce. And we fear the battles are far from over. In the 1980s, Yonkers nearly bankrupted itself trying to fight a federal judge’s order to integrate public housing. There are currently 120,000 acres of land in Westchester where integration is lagging, including in Bedford, Bronxville, Eastchester, Hastings-on-Hudson, Harrison, Larchmont, Mamaroneck, New Castle, Pelham Manor and Scarsdale.

Westchester County officials insist that they have invested a lot of money and effort to identify potential affordable-housing sites and invite communities to do the right thing. But toothless plans setting community-by-community targets clearly will not be enough. With federal help and forceful oversight, the county must use all appropriate power, including lawsuits if necessary, to make sure that its communities work to solve a problem that has been too long ignored and resisted.

$65 million settlement in NY housing discrim case

2009-08-11T08:07:00.000-07:00

Westchester Adds Housing to Desegregation Pact
By SAM ROBERTS
NY Times - August 11, 2009

Westchester County entered into a landmark desegregation agreement on Monday that would compel it to create hundreds of houses and apartments for moderate-income people in overwhelmingly white communities and aggressively market them to nonwhites in Westchester and New York City.

The agreement, if ratified by the county’s Board of Legislators, would settle a lawsuit filed by an antidiscrimination group and could become a template for increased scrutiny of local governments’ housing policies by the Obama administration.

“This is consistent with the president’s desire to see a fully integrated society,” said Ron Sims, the deputy secretary of housing and urban development, which helped broker the settlement along with the Justice Department. “Until now, we tended to lay dormant. This is historic, because we are going to hold people’s feet to the fire.”

The agreement calls for the county to spend more than $50 million of its own money, in addition to other funds, to build or acquire 750 homes or apartments, 630 of which must be provided in towns and villages where black residents constitute 3 percent or less of the population and Hispanic residents make up less than 7 percent. The 120 other spaces must meet different criteria for cost and ethnic concentration.

The county, one of the nation’s wealthiest suburbs, has seven years to complete the construction or acquisition of the affordable housing.

Affordable housing is defined by a complex formula, but generally it is meant to help working families keep from spending more than a third of their gross income on housing. A family of four could make up to $53,000 as a tenant and up to $75,000 as an owner and still qualify.

There is no minimum income level, “but it’s not going to be no-income,” said Craig Gurian, executive director of the Anti-Discrimination Center, which filed the lawsuit. “This agreement is not focused on facilitating housing for the poorest of the poor.” The center is a nonprofit anti-bias advocacy and litigation group based in New York City.

Mr. Gurian said that while black and Hispanic residents have a disproportionate need for affordable housing, “this is an opportunity-creating agreement, not a guarantee” that the homes would go to minority members.

“Residential segregation underlies virtually every racial disparity in America, from education to jobs to the delivery of health care,” said Mr. Gurian.

No communities have been chosen to receive the homes, officials said. But according to the Anti-Discrimination Center, more than two dozen predominantly white towns or villages are eligible, including Bedford, Bronxville, Eastchester, Hastings-on-Hudson, Harrison, Larchmont, Mamaroneck, New Castle, Pelham Manor, Rye and Scarsdale.

A federal monitor, James E. Johnson, has been appointed to ensure that the county abides by the settlement. Given that 120,000 acres in the county meet the criteria, the monitor “should have no difficulty making sure that Westchester ends its policy of allowing affordable housing to be off-limits in the most highly white neighborhoods in the county,” Mr. Gurian said.

The lawsuit, filed under the federal False Claims Act, argued that when Westchester applied for federal Community Development Block Grants for affordable housing and other projects, county officials treated part of the application as boilerplate — lying when they claimed to have complied with mandates to encourage fair housing.

A Westchester official originally dismissed the suit as “garbage.” But the county was largely repudiated in February when Judge Denise L. Cote ruled in Federal District Court that between 2000 and 2006 it had misrepresented its efforts to desegregate overwhelmingly white communities when it applied for the federal housing funds.

Judge Cote concluded that Westchester had made little or no effort to find out where low-income housing was being placed, or to finance homes and apartments in communities that opposed affordable housing.

As part of Monday’s agreement, the county admitted that it has the authority to challenge zoning rules in villages and towns that in many cases implicitly discourage affordable housing by setting minimum lot sizes, discouraging higher-density developments or appropriating vacant property for other purposes. Westchester agreed to “take legal action to compel compliance if municipalities hinder or impede the county” in complying with the agreement.

It was unclear Monday to what extent localities could thwart the agreement, if any chose to do so. Mary Beth Murphy, the town supervisor of Somers, which is among the possible locales for new housing, said that while she was unaware of the agreement, “we certainly are committed to affordable housing and have amended our zoning legislation in recent years to create more opportunities.”

The agreement could spark challenges to suburban county governments across the country that have resisted pressure to undo decades of residential segregation.

Andrew J. Spano, the Westchester County executive, attributed the settlement to “a historic shift of philosophy” by federal housing officials. He said he had signed the agreement to avoid further litigation and possible penalties.

The county admitted no wrongdoing, attributed the judge’s ruling to a technicality and argued that since it had previously invested in affordable housing, “what is different is the locations where the housing must be built.”

“We are settling the lawsuit because we have no choice,” Mr. Spano said.

The suit by the Anti-Discrimination Center applied to towns and villages in Westchester. The federal government deals directly with the county’s larger cities, among them Yonkers, which nearly went bankrupt before capitulating in a housing segregation case that began in 1980 and dragged on for years. That city, which had concentrated public housing in its southwest, was forced to build on the east side, where more whites lived.

The agreement is subject to approval within 45 days by the county’s Board of Legislators, which is also required to approve a $32.9 million bond sale to help finance the housing. Without legislative approval, the litigation would resume and the county would be faced with having to prove at trial that it did not knowingly file false claims.

Most of the homes would be new construction, although some existing houses and apartments could qualify if the county made them permanently affordable.

The case was litigated by Mr. Gurian and the center’s lawyer, John Relman, and supported by testimony from Andrew A. Beveridge, a sociologist at Queens College of the City University of New York.

Dr. Beveridge found that “racial isolation is increasing for blacks, falling slightly for whites” and that “income level has very little impact on the degree of residential racial segregation experienced by African-Americans.”

Mr. Gurian said that the 750 homes called for by the agreement “represents only a small percentage of need,” but that “it’s designed to be practical.”

You're Not an Environmentalist if You're Also a Nimby

2009-07-14T11:03:00.000-07:00

From the July 1, 2009 East Bay Express:

Global warming is changing far more than just the climate. It's altering the way environmentalists view development. For years, city dwellers who consider themselves to be eco-conscious have used environmental laws and arcane zoning rules to block new home construction, especially apartments and condominiums. In the inner East Bay, liberals have justified their actions by railing against gentrification and portraying developers as profiteers. But the lack of urban growth in Berkeley and in parts of Oakland during the past few decades also has contributed to suburban sprawl and long commutes. And all those freeways choked with cars are now the single biggest cause of greenhouse gas emissions in the region.

Environmentalists who think globally say suburban sprawl and the destruction of rural farmland must stop. Indeed, the threat of the coming global warming crisis makes the growth of urban areas an imperative. And some activists who have fought developers for years are now embracing them and calling for so-called "smart growth" or "infill development" — dense urban housing near mass transit. And they note that downtown Berkeley and Oakland, along with the major transportation corridors between the two cities, are nearly perfect for transit-oriented development. [Click Here to read full article -- highly recommended!]

SR Press Democrat: City seeks funding to develop foreclosure properties

2009-07-13T22:40:00.000-07:00

By MIKE McCOY THE PRESS DEMOCRAT: 7/12/2009

Twenty acres once planned for market-rate housing in Santa Rosa’s southwest and southeast quadrants — projects now in foreclosure — are being targeted by city officials for potential development of nearly 400 low-income apartments.

The City Council on Tuesday is expected to apply for $80 million in federal stimulus funds to purchase the three parcels and provide builders with the bulk of money needed to construct affordable housing.

Besides providing housing for the city’s poorest residents, the proposal could generate 550 construction jobs, said David Gouin, the city’s economic development and housing director.

The $80 million is being sought from a $1.9 billion federal package established so that states and local governments could acquire and develop abandoned and foreclosed residential properties. Santa Rosa’s ambitious request represents 4 percent of the $1.9 billion available nationwide.

“What are our chances? We have no idea,” said Nancy Gornowicz, the city’s economic development and housing manager. “They could give us all of it, part of it or none of it.”

Gouin said California and a few other areas in the country may have a competitive edge because of loan default rates.

“We are suffering the most from foreclosures and we anticipate HUD (Housing and Urban Development) will consider that,” he said.

Since the stimulus package was passed by Congress in February, the city has been asking real estate agents, banks and land owners what foreclosed properties might become bank-owned, the criteria the city must meet to qualify for the federal funds.

The search has resulted in three properties being selected for the proposal. They are:

-- Kawana Terrace — 2.8 acres on Kawana Terrace once planned for 39 homes by Das Homes. The property has been taken back by Exchange Bank.

-- Village Gardens — 8.7 acres on the southwest corner of Sebastopol Road and Boyd Street once planned for 110 condominiums by Christopherson Homes. The lien-holder is Wells Fargo Bank.

-- Sundance Village — 8.3 acres at the western end of Sebastopol Road originally proposed for 51 homes by MetroPacific Properties. The lien-holder is Comerica Bank.

Gornowicz said the city does not know the asking prices for the properties.

Two of the properties are in the city’s southwest section, an area that some residents have complained is being forced to accommodate a excessive share of the city’s low-income housing.

“We are sensitive to that,” said Gornowicz.

But she also said that the two Sebastopol Road projects have roads and utilities installed, giving them a greater chance of meeting federal stimulus-spending deadlines.

“We looked at which projects would be the closest to shovel-ready,” she said, noting that the city would have to spend half the money within two years and all of it within three.

The amount of money allocated, if any, would determine whether the city proceeds with one, two or all three of the projects, or none at all.

The developments would be intended for the city’s lowest-income residents, individuals and families making between 30 and 60 percent of median income. For a family of four that would represent a combined $24,050 income for a family of four at the 30 percent level and $48,120 at the 60 percent level.

The possible addition of nearly 400 units for very-low income residents is critical to meeting state-mandated housing goals. These goals outline how many very-low, low and affordable residential units must be built in each city and county in the state.

From 1999 through 2006, nearly 4,100 lower-income units were built in the city, the third-highest total among the 101 cities in the nine-county Bay Area.

While Santa Rosa easily met its low- and moderate-income housing goals, it fell more than 900 units shorts of the amount of rentals to accommodate very-low income residents.

Community Development Director Chuck Regalia said the three parcels, which already have city-approved plans to develop 208 homes and condominiums, would have to be rezoned to accommodate the 396 apartments the city wants.

Road to Ruin: Burned by Brokers

2009-04-16T17:07:00.000-07:00

Economists, politicians, and pundits refer to "toxic assets" as if they are some unspeakable stew bubbling in a barrel behind an old warehouse. But "toxic assets" are actually mortgages and, by extension, houses and the people who live in them. Sandra Berrios is one of millions facing the prospect of ballooning loan payments forcing her and her family from their home. The bank that lent her the money is getting hundreds of millions in TARP money, but the federal dollars flowing to the bank show no sign of trickling down to Sandra's level.

Click here for more....

Santa Rosa's Draft Housing Element Lacking

2009-03-10T22:46:00.000-07:00

All cities in the ABAG region ( 9 counties in the SF Bay area ) must revise and update the Housing Elements of their General Plans by July 1, 2009. Before adopting the revised plan, they must allow the California Department of Housing and Community Development ("HCD") to review and comment on the final draft.

HCD is currently reviewing a draft element submitted by Santa Rosa. HAG and the Non Profit Housing Association of Northern California ("NPH") have submitted comments to HCD pointing out some deficiencies in the draft. All this sounds rather dry and technical, but a good housing element vastly simplifies the job of building affordable housing in a community. And a weak housing element makes the process much more difficult.

Community Wins Affordable Housing Near Transit

2009-03-05T09:14:00.001-08:00

First TOD Development Approved for San Leandro's Downtown

On March 2nd, after over a year of public meetings, the San Leandro (CALIF) City Council approved the construction of 100 units of affordable housing in the downtown. "The Alameda" is the first component of the first TOD development (called The Crossings) to be approved since the Station Area Plan was adopted in late 2007.

At full build-out, Phase I of The Crossings (a 5+ acre development that straddles the downtown BART station) will also include a 200-unit market rate condominium complex, a 324 space BART parking garage to replace spaces lost to the new development, a new pedestrian and bicycle pathway to eventually connect to the East Bay Greenway, and improved pedestrian and bicycle access to the downtown BART station from the East and West. Both residential projects will be built LEED certified and the landscaping will include bioswales to reduce pollution in the runoff from the buildings.

The Alameda will be the first affordable rental housing development geared toward very low income families built in over twenty years. The families will have incomes ranging from $22,000 to $46,000. And 40% of apartments will have 3 bedrooms, 35% will have 2 bedrooms and 24% will have1 bedroom. This housing is incredibly needed, as more than half of San Leandro residents cannot afford to purchase a median-priced home and an estimated 250-350 students attending San Leandro schools are currently living in overcrowded conditions, in home where families are doubled and tripled up.

While redevelopment funding still needs to be approved for The Alameda (vote on April 6th) and funding is yet to be secured for a child care center within the Alameda, we are confident that by this September, Bridge Housing, the developer, will be breaking ground on The Alameda.

Monday's vote was the culmination of two and a half years of organizing community support for a downtown transit-oriented development (TOD) plan that includes housing affordable to families of all incomes - particularly low-wage working families. Congregations Organizing for Renewal (COR), a faith-based, grassroots community organization made up of thirteen congregations representing 25,000 families across South Alameda County, has been working closely with Urban Habitat to educate, organize, and mobilize residents in support of the TOD plan and affordable housing. Most recently, COR held its own town hall meeting on February 24th with three City Council members and over 100 San Leandro residents to support The Alameda and ask that childcare be included in the project (photos seen here are from that event).

COR and UH have been joined by members of the Great Communities Collaborative- most notably Greenbelt Alliance and TransForm, as well as by social welfare and environmental groups such as the Interfaith Homelessness Network, Davis Street Family Resource Center and the Sierra Club's Northern Alameda County Group. Their support has proven invaluable to add legitimacy and weight to what San Leandro is undertaking with The Alameda, The Crossings and its entire TOD Plan.

COR and UH also continue to partner with Alameda County Building Trades to strategize ways to ensure that the construction of The Crossings and future TOD developments be done by union labor that maximizes employment for San Leandro residents and provides apprenticeship opportunities.

Thank you all who have played a role in Monday's victory. We have accomplished something major in a city that has never provided public funding for a family, rental housing development and a city that has produced 12x's more for-sale (mainly market-rate) housing than rental housing over the past 10 years.

The City Council will vote on providing a $9.1 million low-interest loan in Redevelopment Housing Set-Aside funds in early April.

Contact Lindsay Imai at: Lindsay(at)urbanhabitat.org or Chris Belluomini at chris(at)corcommunity.org for more information

For additional information, see the Sierra Club Yodeler's Article about The Crossings: http://sanfranciscobay.sierraclub.org/yodeler/html/2009/03/article13.htm

Gov shafts renters (again)

2009-02-23T10:33:00.000-08:00

After defunding the renters' and homeowners' tax assistance program (known as the "renters' rebate") on grounds that the state could not afford to make any tax rebate payments to low-income senior, blind and disabled Californians, the Governor has signed legislation to give $100 million in new tax credits to people who buy homes between March 2009 and March 2010.

The Governor's move is another slap in the face to low-income Californians. The Governor prefers to give $10,000 each to individuals who are well off enough to be buying new homes in the current economy, rather than continue a program that provides an annual $347.50 payment to low-income senior, blind and disabled Californians.

Full story at www.RentsandRants.org

Work

2009-02-15T14:49:00.000-08:00

The workmen over and above the fence
fit bricks, lift mortar, slap it accurately
in place. Guilty by sitting idle, I
imagine they envy my luxury
of doing nothing until I remember
the days I had my hands full of shovel,
the dragline plowing the ditch of a sewer
through a future subdivision and how
I pitied those who walked by our work
with no apparent occupation,
denied the pleasure of making something,
piece by piece—even if it would soon
be buried—they would depend upon.

- Robert King (from www.rattle.com)

NY Times Urges Affordable Housing Funding in Stimulus Package

2009-02-08T18:29:00.000-08:00

A Stimulus for the Poor

February 7, 2009

NY Times Editorial

The stimulus package taking shape in Congress does little to provide affordable housing for the country's poorest families. That is grim news. Affordable housing has been hard to find in recent years. It's even harder now that many Americans have lost their jobs and homes.

Congress could help low-income Americans find homes — and create jobs doing it — by providing money for the National Housing Trust Fund, a worthy program it created last summer but has so far failed to finance. The Senate and House versions of the stimulus bills do not now contain such money, but funds could and should be added in the conference committee that must reconcile the bills.

The trust fund was originally envisioned as a project that would encourage developers to build 1.5 million affordable housing units in mixed-income developments. The government-backed mortgage companies, Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae, were to provide the money. Both, however, ran into financial trouble.

Congress can take up the slack. The need for affordable housing has increased dramatically in the last six months, and the Department of Housing and Urban Development has already done a lot of advance planning.

Estimates by the National Low Income Housing Coalition suggest that a Congressional down payment of $10 billion for the fund, plus $3.5 billion in housing vouchers under the Section 8 program, could produce affordable housing for up to 400,000 people. New construction would, of course, spawn new jobs right away.

The Senate's stimulus bill would give home buyers a tax credit of 10 percent of the price of a primary residence, up to $15,000. This would help middle- and upper-income buyers, but not the elderly, poor and disabled who don't earn enough to qualify for this break. Congress can help them by reviving the National Housing Trust Fund.

ADA Case vs Shelter Providers Settled in DC

2009-01-06T09:51:00.001-08:00

(A settlement agreement in an ADA case brought in Washington DC by lawyers for the US Department of Justice [yes, the same DOJ that says it's OK to torture prisoners] has nationwide significance for shelters and homeless services providers. Here's some details.)

On December 10, 2008, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) entered into a settlement agreement with the District of Columbia to improve the accessibility of D.C. homeless shelters for people with disabilities after numerous complaints about the District's widespread violations of Title II of the American with Disabilities Act (ADA). The agreement covers all severe weather, low barrier, and temporary shelters run directly or through contractual arrangement by D.C. The settlement will remain in effect for three years for all terms except the physical accessibility provisions, which will remain in effect for five years. The full settlement can be found at http://www.ada.gov/dc_shelter.htm#settlement.

The press releases from the Department of Justice and the D.C. Attorney General summarize the settlement as follows:

"The terms of the settlement require the District to increase the accessibility of its shelter program by:

Developing a comprehensive plan to ensure that persons with disabilities have equal access to the District's homeless shelter facilities;
Implementing specific policies, practices and training to ensure that individuals with disabilities have equivalent access to all services and activities of the shelter program;
Improving notice and procedures to ensure that shelter applicants and residents are aware of their rights under the ADA;
Enhancing effective communication with shelter applicants and residents who have disabilities related to speech, vision or hearing; and
Enhancing oversight of private contractors and subcontractors that provide homeless shelter services in the District."

http://www.usdoj.gov/opa/pr/2008/December/08-crt-1096.html; http://dc.gov/mayor/news/release.asp?id=1438&mon=200812.

Major findings and requirements contained within the settlement:

D.C. must make changes to its policies and procedures to allow for greater programmatic accessibility, including the following:

Notifying shelter applicants of their rights to request reasonable modifications to rules, policies, practices, or procedures because of a disability.
Individuals are not required to use specific forms or procedures to make requests, and requests cannot be denied for failing to follow a preferred procedure.
Shelter providers shall only request verification regarding the reasonable modification request if it is necessary and tailored to verifying the disability or the need for the request. Such verification can usually come from the requester or another person in the know.
Shelter providers must respond promptly to requests for reasonable modifications. In addition: "Reasonable modification requests shall be granted immediately where the denial of the request is reasonably likely to cause serious harm to an individual with a disability." (Paragraph 21(a)(iii)).

DOJ surveyed 15 shelters for physical accessibility, 10 of which D.C. claimed met ADA standards. DOJ found that none of the shelters complied with the ADA, thus D.C. does not operate a single homeless shelter that is accessible to persons with physical disabilities. There is a detailed appendix to the settlement listing the violations.

D.C. must draft and implement an interim and comprehensive physical accessibility plan to bring the shelter system into compliance with the ADA. The first drafts of the plans are due no later than ninety (90) days from December 10^th. The shelters must be brought into compliance within two (2) years of the completion of the comprehensive plan. The public will have an opportunity to comment on these plans in writing and at a public hearing.

If the comprehensive physical accessibility plan does not require that every shelter be accessible, "it must ensure that:

the locations of the accessible Shelters are at least equivalent to the locations of the inaccessible Shelters with regard to the Shelters' proximity to various forms of public transportation and non-Shelter services that are frequently used by individuals residing at Shelters including, but not limited to, meal programs, employment assistance programs, health clinics, legal clinics, and government offices that administer or distribute benefits to low-income residents of the District;
individuals with physical disabilities are not subjected to Shelter rules or requirements more burdensome than those used at inaccessible Shelters;
individuals with physical disabilities have access to the Shelter Program in the most integrated setting appropriate to the needs of such individuals; and
individuals with physical disabilities otherwise have equivalent access to the services, programs, and activities of the Shelter Program." (Paragraph 20(c)).

D.C. must develop the means to effectively communicate with shelter applicants and residents with speech, vision, or hearing-related disabilities, including acquiring necessary equipment, alternative formats, and oral and sign language interpretation services.

D.C. must draft and implement a plan for accessible transportation among shelters and services.

D.C. must have at least one ADA Coordinator to oversee ADA compliance in the shelter system, resolve complaints, and monitor the adherence to the terms of the settlement. Currently, Rhonda Stewart at DHS is the ADA Coordinator (671-4422).

D.C. has to post notifications of ADA rights and complaint procedures in all shelters and places where shelter residents might use services.

D.C. must develop and implement procedures to improve monitoring and oversight of the ADA compliance of its contractors and subcontractors to "include, but not necessarily be limited to:

review of contractors' or subcontractors' written rules and procedures;
scheduled and unscheduled visits to intake sites and Shelters. Such visits shall include inspection of clients' files and interviews with Shelter clients and applicants;
review of Shelter denials;
strict time limits for corrective action for any deficiencies discovered during monitoring; and
sanctions for contractors or subcontractors." (Paragraph 24).

D.C. must develop, through the D.C. Office of Disability Rights, a comprehensive training program for shelter staff on the ADA, reasonable modification policies and procedures and the requirements of the settlement.

No Furnaces but Heat Aplenty in ‘Passive Houses’(Germany)

2009-01-06T09:23:00.000-08:00

The Energy Challenge - No Furnaces but Heat Aplenty in Innovative 'Passive Houses' - Series - NYTimes.com

By ELISABETH ROSENTHAL - NY Times 12/27/08

DARMSTADT, Germany — From the outside, there is nothing unusual about the stylish new gray and orange row houses in the Kranichstein District, with wreaths on the doors and Christmas lights twinkling through a freezing drizzle. But these houses are part of a revolution in building design: There are no drafts, no cold tile floors, no snuggling under blankets until the furnace kicks in. There is, in fact, no furnace.

In Berthold Kaufmann's home, there is, to be fair, one radiator for emergency backup in the living room — but it is not in use. Even on the coldest nights in central Germany, Mr. Kaufmann's new "passive house" and others of this design get all the heat and hot water they need from the amount of energy that would be needed to run a hair dryer.

"You don't think about temperature — the house just adjusts," said Mr. Kaufmann, watching his 2-year-old daughter, dressed in a T-shirt, tuck into her sausage in the spacious living room, whose glass doors open to a patio. His new home uses about one-twentieth the heating energy of his parents' home of roughly the same size, he said.

Architects in many countries, in attempts to meet new energy efficiency standards like the Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design standard in the United States, are designing homes with better insulation and high-efficiency appliances, as well as tapping into alternative sources of power, like solar panels and wind turbines.

The concept of the passive house, pioneered in this city of 140,000 outside Frankfurt, approaches the challenge from a different angle. Using ultrathick insulation and complex doors and windows, the architect engineers a home encased in an airtight shell, so that barely any heat escapes and barely any cold seeps in. That means a passive house can be warmed not only by the sun, but also by the heat from appliances and even from occupants' bodies.

And in Germany, passive houses cost only about 5 to 7 percent more to build than conventional houses.

Decades ago, attempts at creating sealed solar-heated homes failed, because of stagnant air and mold. But new passive houses use an ingenious central ventilation system. The warm air going out passes side by side with clean, cold air coming in, exchanging heat with 90 percent efficiency.

"The myth before was that to be warm you had to have heating. Our goal is to create a warm house without energy demand," said Wolfgang Hasper, an engineer at the Passivhaus Institut in Darmstadt. "This is not about wearing thick pullovers, turning the thermostat down and putting up with drafts. It's about being comfortable with less energy input, and we do this by recycling heating."

There are now an estimated 15,000 passive houses around the world, the vast majority built in the past few years in German-speaking countries or Scandinavia.

The first passive home was built here in 1991 by Wolfgang Feist, a local physicist, but diffusion of the idea was slowed by language. The courses and literature were mostly in German, and even now the components are mass-produced only in this part of the world.

The industry is thriving in Germany, however — for example, schools in Frankfurt are built with the technique.

Moreover, its popularity is spreading. The European Commission is promoting passive-house building, and the European Parliament has proposed that new buildings meet passive-house standards by 2011.

The United States Army, long a presence in this part of Germany, is considering passive-house barracks.

"Awareness is skyrocketing; it's hard for us to keep up with requests," Mr. Hasper said.

Nabih Tahan, a California architect who worked in Austria for 11 years, is completing one of the first passive houses in the United States for his family in Berkeley. He heads a group of 70 Bay Area architects and engineers working to encourage wider acceptance of the standards. "This is a recipe for energy that makes sense to people," Mr. Tahan said. "Why not reuse this heat you get for free?"

Ironically, however, when California inspectors were examining the Berkeley home to determine whether it met "green" building codes (it did), he could not get credit for the heat exchanger, a device that is still uncommon in the United States. "When you think about passive-house standards, you start looking at buildings in a different way," he said.

Buildings that are certified hermetically sealed may sound suffocating. (To meet the standard, a building must pass a "blow test" showing that it loses minimal air under pressure.) In fact, passive houses have plenty of windows — though far more face south than north — and all can be opened.

Inside, a passive home does have a slightly different gestalt from conventional houses, just as an electric car drives differently from its gas-using cousin. There is a kind of spaceship-like uniformity of air and temperature. The air from outside all goes through HEPA filters before entering the rooms. The cement floor of the basement isn't cold. The walls and the air are basically the same temperature.

Look closer and there are technical differences: When the windows are swung open, you see their layers of glass and gas, as well as the elaborate seals around the edges. A small, grated duct near the ceiling in the living room brings in clean air. In the basement there is no furnace, but instead what looks like a giant Styrofoam cooler, containing the heat exchanger.

Passive houses need no human tinkering, but most architects put in a switch with three settings, which can be turned down for vacations, or up to circulate air for a party (though you can also just open the windows). "We've found it's very important to people that they feel they can influence the system," Mr. Hasper said.

The houses may be too radical for those who treasure an experience like drinking hot chocolate in a cold kitchen. But not for others. "I grew up in a great old house that was always 10 degrees too cold, so I knew I wanted to make something different," said Georg W. Zielke, who built his first passive house here, for his family, in 2003 and now designs no other kinds of buildings.

In Germany the added construction costs of passive houses are modest and, because of their growing popularity and an ever larger array of attractive off-the-shelf components, are shrinking.

But the sophisticated windows and heat-exchange ventilation systems needed to make passive houses work properly are not readily available in the United States. So the construction of passive houses in the United States, at least initially, is likely to entail a higher price differential.

Moreover, the kinds of home construction popular in the United States are more difficult to adapt to the standard: residential buildings tend not to have built-in ventilation systems of any kind, and sliding windows are hard to seal.

Dr. Feist's original passive house — a boxy white building with four apartments — looks like the science project that it was intended to be. But new passive houses come in many shapes and styles. The Passivhaus Institut, which he founded a decade ago, continues to conduct research, teaches architects, and tests homes to make sure they meet standards. It now has affiliates in Britain and the United States.

Still, there are challenges to broader adoption even in Europe.

Because a successful passive house requires the interplay of the building, the sun and the climate, architects need to be careful about site selection. Passive-house heating might not work in a shady valley in Switzerland, or on an urban street with no south-facing wall. Researchers are looking into whether the concept will work in warmer climates — where a heat exchanger could be used in reverse, to keep cool air in and warm air out.

And those who want passive-house mansions may be disappointed. Compact shapes are simpler to seal, while sprawling homes are difficult to insulate and heat.

Most passive houses allow about 500 square feet per person, a comfortable though not expansive living space. Mr. Hasper said people who wanted thousands of square feet per person should look for another design.

More on Shaun Donovan

2008-12-15T10:43:00.002-08:00

From the 12/15/08 Progress Report ( http://pr.thinkprogress.org/ )

In his weekly address on Saturday, President-elect Obama named New York City housing commissioner Shaun Donovan as his pick to run the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), saying that few departments would be "more essential" in his effort "to stem the rising tide of foreclosures and strengthen our economy." "With experience that stretches from the public sector to the private sector to academia, Shaun will bring to this important post fresh thinking, unencumbered by old ideology and outdated ideas," said Obama. Before New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg tapped him to run "what has been called the nation's largest affordable-housing plan," Donovan served at HUD in the Clinton administration, as both acting federal housing commissioner and deputy assistant secretary for multifamily housing. Politicians and housing advocates widely hailed Donovan's nomination. "Shaun Donovan is a brilliant choice for HUD. He is an expert on the full range of housing issues and has a proven track record of getting things done," said Sheila Crowley, president of the National Low Income Housing Coalition. "Thankfully, President-elect Obama has chosen a HUD secretary that is uniquely qualified to take on this task," said Sen. Patty Murray (D-WA), who chairs the subcommittee that controls HUD appropriations. If he is confirmed, Donovan will be a lead player in addressing "the worst economic climate in decades" as "American homeowners are reeling from plummeting home values and rising unemployment."

Full Article: http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=df7q7cfm_91hhm2bqvk

Obama: HUD Pick Central Part of Economic Blueprint

2008-12-14T22:08:00.001-08:00

by: Philip Elliott and Jim Kuhnhenn, The Associated Press Saturday 13 December 2008

President-elect Barack Obama selects New York City Housing Commissioner, Shaun Donovan, to lead the Department of Housing and Urban Development. (Photo: James Hamilton / The New York Observer)

In naming his choice for housing secretary, President-elect Barack Obama on Saturday rounded out his economic team and gave new prominence to the mortgage crisis that has dragged the country into a recession.

The selection of Shaun Donovan as secretary of Housing and Urban Development puts the current New York City housing commissioner at the forefront of one of the more nettlesome economic challenges confronting the new administration - the soaring foreclosures that are threatening homeownership nationwide.

The Federal Reserve estimates that lenders are on track to initiate 2.25 million foreclosures this year, more than doubling the annual pace before the crisis set in. What's more, falling housing values and a plunging stock market have contributed to $2.8 trillion in lost household wealth in the third quarter.

Donovan joins a team led by Tim Geithner, Obama's nominee for Treasury secretary, and Larry Summers, who will chair Obama's National Economic Council. Obama has his team working on an ambitious economic recovery plan that includes saving or creating 2.5 million jobs over the next two years.

Stemming foreclosures and stabilizing the battered housing market will be daunting tasks that have already bedeviled Congress and the Bush administration.

"We need to approach the old challenge of affordable housing with new energy, new ideas, and a new, efficient style of leadership," Obama said upon naming Donovan during his Saturday radio address. "We need to understand that the old ways of looking at our cities just won't do."

Donovan will inherit various tools to confront the problem. Obama wants to use the second half of a $700 billion financial industry rescue plan to help stem foreclosures. Congress this year also put in place a $300 billion program designed to let troubled homeowners swap risky loans for more affordable ones, though few have applied. Moreover, homeowners have continued to default on mortgages despite government efforts to lower interest rates and modify repayment terms.

With one in 10 U.S. homeowners delinquent on mortgage payments or in foreclosure, Obama said Donovan will bring "fresh thinking, unencumbered by old ideology and outdated ideas" at the Housing and Urban Development Department to help resolve the housing and economic crisis.

Donovan, head of New York's Housing Preservation and Development Department, is a former Clinton administration HUD official with a national reputation for curtailing low-income foreclosures, developing affordable housing and managing the nation's largest housing plan.

"Mr. Donovan's background prepares him to address the extremely difficult challenges our country faces in helping Americans find affordable housing," said Sen. Christopher Dodd, D-Conn., chairman of the Senate Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Committee.

If confirmed by the Senate, Donovan would become the nation's top housing official in the midst of the worst recession in decades. Falling home values and stricter lending standards have ensnared millions of U.S. households. More than 259,000 homes received a foreclosure-related notice in November, up 28 percent from a year earlier.

Conrad Egan, president of the nonpartisan National Housing Conference, said Obama's selection of Donovan signals that he recognizes HUD can play a big role in the economic recovery.

"It really needs to be a seat at the Cabinet table that is the principal point where housing and community development issues are brought together and resolved successfully," Egan said. "HUD has been perceived as a second-tier participant in meeting that challenge."

Obama's housing plans, as spelled out during his campaign and the current transition, include:

_Enacting a 90-day foreclosure moratorium for homeowners "who are acting in good faith."

_Getting Treasury and HUD to coordinate with state housing agencies to restructure mortgages.

_Reforming the bankruptcy code to help homeowners.

_Enacting a 10 percent refundable tax credit on mortgage interest.

"This plan will only work with a comprehensive, coordinated federal effort to make it a reality," Obama said. "We need every part of our government working together from the Treasury Department to the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, the agency that protects the money you've put in the bank."

Right now, the Bush administration's Treasury Department is resisting an effort by FDIC chairwoman Sheila Bair to use $24 billion in financial bailout funds to help 1.5 million borrowers avoid foreclosure by guaranteeing modified mortgages.

Donovan, a 42-year-old New York native, told the Senate Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Committee in May that HUD's programs have led to "a feast-famine cycle, in which our program grows to the allowed size and then contracts so we don't go above our authorized level."

As New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg's top aide for housing, Donovan kept foreclosures to a minimum in the city's low- and moderate-income homeownership plan, with just five of 17,000 participating homes falling. He oversaw the creation of the $200 million New York Acquisition Fund, a collaboration involving the city, foundations and financial institutions. It is intended to help small developers and nonprofit groups compete for land in the private market.

"He has moved our focus beyond the old public sector driven solutions by giving the starring role to the private and nonprofit sectors," Bloomberg said Saturday. He said Donovan "has shown that we can do more with less - especially in these difficult times."

Sheila Crowley, president of the National Low Income Housing Coalition, said Donovan "enjoys high regard across the spectrum of housing interests, from low income housing and homeless advocates, public officials, developers, and financiers alike

Housing Is Bad Enough, but Wait - It'll Get Worse

2008-11-29T17:57:00.000-08:00

by: Kevin G. Hall, McClatchy Newspapers

Washington - If you think the housing slump can't get much worse, Martin Feldstein thinks that both home prices and the broader economy can - and very likely will - get a whole le lot worse.

The Harvard University professor and former chief economic adviser to Ronald Reagan isn't part of the crowd that continually forecasts doom. For two decades, he's headed the National Bureau of Economic Research, which officially determines when U.S. recessions begin and end.

So when he spoke on Monday night at the annual dinner of the National Economists Club, a gathering of like-minded wonks, Feldstein's grim calculations were noteworthy.

"There are now 12 million homes in the United States with a loan-to-value ratio greater than 100 percent. That's one mortgage in four. The aggregate amount of that is some $2 trillion," said Feldstein. "If you look at the median (midpoint) loan-to-value ratio in that 12 million group of underwater mortgages - mortgages with negative equity â€€" the median loan-to-value ratio is 120 percent."

That means about 25 percent of all U.S. mortgages are exceed the value of the homes the mortgages are financing. In the case of half the homes that are underwater, homeowners are paying a mortgage that's now 20 percent higher than the value of the home.

That's bad - but it's likely to get worse.

A recent rreport by First American Core Logic, a real-estate data firm in Santa Ana, Calif., estimated that as of Sept. 30, 7.5 million mortgages, or 18 percent of all properties with a mortgage, had negative equity. The group thinks there are another 2.1 million mortgages that are within 5 percent of going underwater.

Together, these two categories account for 23 percent of all properties with a mortgage. Nevada led all states with 48 percent of homes with negative equity. Florida and Arizona each had 29 percent of homes with underwater mortgages, while 27 percent of mortgages in California were upside-down, the group said.

If home prices fall another 10 to 15 percent, as measured by the Case/Shiller Home Price Index, then four out of every 10 mortgages in the U.S. could be underwater, Feldstein said.

"At those levels, it's hard to see how many people are going to be willing to keep up with their mortgages," Feldstein said.

The implications for many homeowners are staggering. Before the recent housing boom of 2000 to 2006, homes increased in value at a historical annual rate of about 2.3 percent when adjusted for inflation.

That means that for homeowners who owe 35 percent more than their homes' value, it would take, at historical averages, about 15 years just to break even on their home investment. They won't build equity. It would be a huge incentive for millions to hand the keys back to the lender and seek cheaper housing.

Not all real estate experts buy Feldstein's stark numbers.

"That's the highest percentage I've heard from anybody, by quite a bit," said Rick Sharga, senior vice president for Realtytrac, an Irvine, Calif., company that publishes foreclosure data.

More conservative forecasts, though still dismal, point to a smaller drop in home prices of 5 percent to 7 percent, he said.

Added Jay Brinkmann, chief economist for the Mortgage Bankers Association in the nation's capital, "If you generalize the numbers too far, I think it leads to some incorrect conclusions."

The Case/Shiller Index is driven by home sales that have taken place. It doesn't reflect the stability in older, established neighborhoods, Brinkmann said. The vacant and for-sale rates nationwide for homes built before 2000 - that is, pre-boom - is js just 2 percent. The delinquency and foreclosure problems are concentrated mostly in a handful of states, such as California, Florida, Arizona and Nevada, which had overbuilding and weak lending standards.

"Those states have about 25 percent of the mortgages and 50 percent of the foreclosure starts" in the latest association survey, Brinkmann said. Nationwide, 6.4 percent of all mortgages were delinquent through June, but the number of delinquencies and foreclosure starts are breaking records every quarter, the most recent MBA survey said.

Brinkmann's own rough guess is that somewhere between 6 million and 8 million mortgages are underwater, still a very high number. He doesn't see the national outlook getting better any time soon, framing his estimate of when that happens in the form of a question: "When does the influence of these massive declines in California and Florida go away?"

Realtytrac's forecast isn't any brighter.

"The best-case scenario in terms of the real estate market is we probably bottom out between mid-year and the end of 2009. And that's the best case from where we're sitting," Sharga said. "The only reason it could happen that soon is because of how rapidly and how severe the downturn has been in the housing market."

A lot would have to go right to reach that best-case scenario. Government and industry efforts would have to step up efforts to forgive or make up the difference between the value of the mortgage and the value of the home.

The final batch of subprime mortgages scheduled to reset to a higher interest rate will have done so by the end of the first quarter of 2009.

In a rare bit of relief for one segment of the housing market, the interest rates that determine the monthly payments for some adjustable-rate mortgages are falling.

Sharga said, however, that the next problem is the $60 billion of adjustable-rate Alt-A mortgages, which fall between subprime and prime loans. Millions of these loans are scheduled to reset next year to higher interest rates. That could bring monthly mortgage payment increases of $1,000 or more if the loans aren't modified or refinanced.

All this is happening amid what now clearly is a deepening recession, with the highest job losses and deepest drops in consumer spending in decades. The Labor Department reported on Thursday that weekly jobless claims jumped to 542,000, a 16-year high, last week. That suggests a fast-deepening recession.

The White House Thursday acknowledged for the first time that it now supports efforts in Congress to extend unemployment benefits for longer periods to the millions of Americans who can't find work in the downturn.

Consumer spending drives about two-thirds of U.S. economic activity, and as unemployment mounts and consumers retrench, that leads to even more unemployment, mortgage delinquencies and foreclosures.

"The problem now is what will be happening with jobs," Brinkmann said.

Condo owners and the homeless co-exist in Bellingham

2008-11-13T10:23:00.001-08:00

From THE BELLINGHAM HERALD November 12, 2008

BELLINGHAM -- With a fierce stare, Pastor Chuck Sargent describes how homeless people he's feeding have slashed his tires, only to come back later and apologize. He says one is threatening to kill him. The rules prevent sleeping on the property, but drunks still pass out on the front porch.

From the log-cabin-style building in Old Town, Sargent and his Church on the Street Bellingham practice tough love for the homeless. But he's first to admit it's not easy.

That's why he doubts the city's plan to transform the industrial area -- Bellingham's Skid Row, as one neighbor calls it -- into an urban village with commercial-residential buildings and a mix of people. He doesn't believe the homeless and condo owners will blend.

"If they can't co-exist with the people ministering to them, how are they going to co-exist with the people who give them nothing?" he asked. "You're asking for trouble if you develop this into high-rises."

The city's plan calls for redeveloping Old Town, which is between and includes parts of the Lettered Streets neighborhood and downtown.

Will the homeless and condo owners mix like peanut butter and jelly, or oil and water? Will their presence slow redevelopment? Or will redevelopment simply push them out?

Opinions vary. But city officials and a New York-based group specializing in public spaces say successful redevelopment has been done elsewhere and can work in Old Town.

"Design for your hopes, not your fears," said Ethan Kent, a vice president at New York-based Project for Public Spaces, which in 2006 advised leaders in Whatcom County. "Building a city out of fear of that population is not going to create a great city."

The City Council in March approved the Old Town plan, which calls for adding between 860 and 1,120 housing units and up to 400,000 square feet of commercial space by 2022.

The city already has invested about $8 million in local, state and federal money in Old Town, and it has committed to millions more. Money has been spent on environmental restoration of Whatcom Creek and improvements to Maritime Heritage Park and Holly and Central streets.

The city is now waiting for redevelopment to happen.

Stakeholders disagree on how a visible homeless population will affect those efforts.

Developer Fred Bovenkamp is optimistic that redevelopment can happen with the homeless there. He owns land and is planning projects in or near Old Town. "I would walk that area any time of the day or night and not feel unsafe," he said.

One of his projects includes 63 housing units and 5,000 square feet of retail/office space at the former site of Hempler's meat company at F and Astor streets. That's across from the Lighthouse Mission, which provided nearly 9,000 meals in August. But in the more than three years Bovenkamp has owned the site, he's never had vandalism.

Bovenkamp said the city erred in letting Lighthouse Mission Ministries take over three corners of F and Holly streets -- the gateway to Old Town. Lighthouse is now building that third part -- a $1.5 million, 25-bed shelter opposite its main facility.

Still, he said, the mission provides crucial services in the community, and redevelopment could co-exist with the homeless.

Lighthouse Executive Director Ron Buchinski hung up on a Bellingham Herald reporter and didn't respond to several follow-up messages. He did not comment to the city during creation of the Old Town plan, said Tara Sundin, who managed forming the plan.

Bovenkamp points to Seattle's Belltown as an example where condominiums successfully moved in next to homeless services. Belltown has more than 8,600 housing units, at a density of about 40 per acre, and the city of Seattle wants 4,700 more units there by 2024.

Bellingham officials hope redevelopment will attract more people to what some people have nicknamed "Maritime Homeless Park."

"That will, I think, really help the comfort of the park and will bring more people down there," Sundin said. A planned playground there will also draw families with children, she said.

Others aren't so confident.

Old Town property owner John Lemperes last year told city staff he was concerned about the impact to the homeless and that redevelopment might be limited by their presence.

Michael McAuley, vice chairman of the Lettered Streets Neighborhood Association, said the homeless create "a redevelopment challenge for that part of town."

The Lighthouse Mission has done a fantastic job of helping homeless, he said, but the more it expands the less businesses will want to locate in what he called "Bellingham's Skid Row." He suggested the city help the mission relocate.

"The city is optimistic, I think, in glossing over some of the problems," he said, "because they just don't know how to deal with it."

What will happen to the homeless amid redevelopment?

Developer Ken Imus remembers when Fairhaven was empty lots, stray animals, taverns and drugs. In the early 1970s, he bought his first building and spruced it up. He's also constructed new buildings. It took years, he said, but he eventually helped create a new atmosphere.

Redeveloping and cleaning up Old Town means the homeless have to go, he said. But he doesn't have a solution.

"You can't have it both ways. You can't have transients and homeless and expect grandma to bring the grandkids and come shopping," he said. "It's been proven around the country. It just doesn't work."

Chris Grabber, a homeless man who volunteers at Church on the Street Bellingham, fears the homeless will be pushed out.

"What the city will do is put the high-rises in, and that will be the reason to boot the homeless out of here," he said.

Others say a blending of demographics will benefit everyone.

In successful redevelopments, no one demographic dominates the public space, said Kent, of the Project for Public Spaces. The best way to handle areas with homeless is to bring in other people with new developments designed to create attractive, vibrant shared public spaces, he said.

Using those spaces actively -- with outdoor concerts, vendors and outdoor cafe seating -- also helps make the area feel safer, he added.

NY Times: Affordable Housing Deals Are Stalling

2008-11-12T08:24:00.001-08:00

By TERRY PRISTIN November 12, 2008

At a time when projects all over New York are being canceled or postponed, a development team that plans to transform a weedy site in East Harlem into a 12-story rental apartment building had cause to celebrate last week. Despite the economic downturn, the partners were able to complete the financing for the $65 million building and schedule a groundbreaking for next Tuesday.

The building, which is to rise on a site at 124th Street and Second Avenue that is a patchwork of 10 city-owned and private lots, will be known as the Tapestry. Half of its 184 apartments will rent at the market rate, while 30 percent will be set aside for people whose household income is less than 130 percent of the New York area median income, which is currently $74,600, and 20 percent for people who earn only 50 percent of the median income.

Getting a project like this under way is usually a time-consuming exercise. The developers — Jonathan F. P. Rose and Nicholas and Gerard Lettire — had to stitch together a daunting array of tax credits, tax-exempt bonds, loans and grants.

But even these days, money is available for well-structured projects, said Mr. Rose, who has been developing affordable housing around the country for 19 years. “The developer has to have a good track record, and financial strength, and the project has to be well thought-out,” he said in an interview in his Fifth Avenue office.

He said he hoped to close the financing next month for two more income-restricted projects — one in Albuquerque and another in Harlem, on 140th Street and Riverside Drive, to be developed in partnership with the Fortune Society, a nonprofit organization that provides services to ex-convicts.

Affordable housing is said to do better than other real estate sectors in a bad economy because government subsidies are available, land and construction costs fall and demand for the apartments rises.

But because of the toll that the credit squeeze has taken on financial institutions, busy developers like Mr. Rose may be more the exception than the rule. Though the need for affordable housing is likely to grow as unemployment worsens, specialists in mixed-income rental housing say that many developers — especially outside of New York, Los Angeles, San Francisco and Chicago — are finding it difficult or even impossible to put their deals together.

“We think there is an enormous slowdown in the production of affordable housing that’s happening right now,” said Richard Paul Richman, the chairman of the Richman Group, a company based in Greenwich, Conn., that develops affordable housing nationwide. “We believe that the shortage of equity is so severe that even qualified developers won’t get funded.”

To read full article, CLICK HERE

Cut the Sprawl, Cut the Warming

2008-10-07T10:14:00.000-07:00

NY Times Editorial - October 6, 2008

For years, while Washington slept, most of the serious work on climate change has occurred in the states, and no state has worked harder than California. The latest example of California's originality is a new law — the nation's first — intended to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by curbing urban sprawl and cutting back the time people have to spend in their automobiles.

Passenger vehicles are the biggest single source of carbon dioxide in California, producing nearly one-third of the total. Meanwhile, the number of miles driven in California has increased 50 percent faster than the rate of population growth, largely because people have to drive greater distances in their daily lives.

The new law has many moving parts, but the basic sequence is straightforward. The state's Air Resources Board will determine the level of emissions produced by cars and light trucks, including S.U.V.'s, in each of California's 17 metropolitan planning areas. Emissions-reduction goals for 2020 and 2035 would be assigned to each area. Local governments would then devise strategies for housing development, road-building and other land uses to shorten travel distances, reduce driving and meet the new targets.

One obvious solution would be to change zoning laws so developers can build new housing closer to where people work. Another is to improve mass transit — in woefully short supply in California — so commuters don't have to rely so much on cars.

The bill contains significant incentives, including the promise of substantial federal and state money to regions whose plans pass muster. In addition, and with the consent of the environmental community, the state will relax various environmental rules to allow "infill" — higher-density land use in or near cities and towns.

The bill's architect, State Senator Darrell Steinberg, worked closely with developers and environmental groups like the Natural Resources Defense Council. The measure is the latest in a string of initiatives from the California Legislature, including a 2002 law that would greatly reduce carbon emissions from automobiles, and a 2006 law requiring that one-fifth of California's energy come from wind and other renewable sources.

Given California's size, these and other initiatives will help reduce global greenhouse gas emissions. Even more progress would be made if others follow. New York and 15 other states have already said they will adopt California's automobile emissions standards when the federal government gives them the green light — which the Bush administration has stubbornly refused to do.

There is, of course, no substitute for federal action or for American global leadership on climate change, both of which the next president will have to deliver.

Santa Rosa Affordable Housing

2008-09-18T20:29:00.000-07:00

From Northbay Biz (September, 2008)
By Sarah Campbell

Santa Rosa’s efforts to create ample affordable housing aren’t without their limits, but they’re getting noticed throughout the Bay Area.

Is “affordable housing” an oxymoron? In Santa Rosa, the puzzle of how to answer “no” to this question has always been difficult. And although prices have dropped 26.47 percent over the last year, median home prices still hover around $375,000—a hefty amount for many families in Sonoma County, the majority of whom earned between $50,000 and $74,999 in 2006. With an annual income of $61,500 for a family of four currently considered low income in Santa Rosa, this means a significant percentage of the community—teachers, nurses, firefighters, bank tellers, students trying to start a career or raise a family, and the people who harvest our grapes, carry our mail and serve us coffee—are working in a place they can’t afford to call home.

The situation isn’t going unnoticed. As the fifth-largest city in the Bay Area, Santa Rosa has recently gained attention as one of the region’s largest producers of affordable housing, ranking third only behind San Francisco and San Jose, according to the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG).

“ABAG’s low income housing goals for cities in the Bay Area are quite ambitious,” says Bill Arnone, a lawyer with Santa Rosa-based Merrill, Arnone and Jones, who’s also a member and past chairman of the Santa Rosa Housing Authority. “Few cities meet them. We’re one of the few that does.” Between 1999 and 2006, the city subsidized the production of 1,787 low-income housing units in Santa Rosa, which was 138 percent of the 970-unit goal projected for them by ABAG. “We’re proactive in letting developers know what our affordable housing budget is each year—how much money we can give them—and let them come to us,” says Arnone. And over the last nine years, this method has been working. Within the last fiscal year (2007/08) alone, 320 units were completed, up from 279 in 2006/07 and just 31 in 2005/06. The city celebrated the dedication of its 4,000th affordable housing unit in January 2007 and ended its 2007/08 fiscal year in June with 1,200 units in various stages of production; 389 units should be completed by the close of the 2008/09 fiscal year, which began July 1.

But the city’s efforts don’t just stop with development. “There are different needs, beyond affordable housing,” says Arnone. “It’s not enough to get units in the ground, people also need rental assistance. The Section 8 voucher program assists people with rent subsidies for units they normally couldn’t afford.” The Section 8 voucher rental assistance program, which serves 1,800 families annually and puts $1 million a month back into the local real estate economy, is just part of what Arnone calls the “Santa Rosa Housing Continuum,” which, on top of addressing affordable housing needs, provides transitional and special needs housing, and addresses homelessness for “people who don’t have housing at all, much less affordable housing.”

David Gouin, executive director of Santa Rosa’s Department of Economic Development and Housing, also feels that, while Santa Rosa’s third-place ranking is something to be proud of, the numbers don’t reflect the whole picture. “ABAG doesn’t formally recognize other programs that assist low income households, such as the city’s Housing Accessibility Modification program that provides funding for wheelchair ramps, grab bars, and the like. The city also isn’t recognized for its investment in the acquisition and rehabilitation of existing units, or for special needs facilities.”

Gouin also cites the two city-owned and operated homeless shelters, Brookwood and Samuel Jones Hall, as well as a recent project the city worked on with Community Development Corporation of Santa Rosa in collaboration with Vietnam Veterans of California to acquire an existing-but-vacant residential care facility on West Hearn Avenue that will be used as a 12-bed transitional housing facility for homeless veterans. Gouin says homeownership options, like Santa Rosa’s homebuyer’s assistance program are also overlooked.
Plain and simple

David Grabill, who’s the lawyer for the Sonoma County Housing Advocacy Group, also thinks a critical part of the affordable housing reality in Santa Rosa is being overlooked, but for completely different reasons. “Per capita, Santa Rosa’s efforts haven’t been so good,” Grabill says. “They’ve done a reasonably good job of encouraging affordable housing, as have most cities in Sonoma County, but I can’t say they’re the best, because so many factors come into play.” Grabill points to Santa Rosa’s lack of affordable housing for the very low-income (those making less than $38,900 a year, or just 50 percent of the median income). While Santa Rosa is exceeding its ABAG goal in terms of low-income units produced, like many other cities in the Bay Area, it’s far behind in production of very low-income housing, issuing just 1,539 permits between 1999 and 2007—only 47 percent of its regional need (an additional 295 very low-income units are in various stages of production, though, bringing the city up to 65 percent). “It’s certainly more challenging to provide very low-income housing,” agrees Gouin. “It requires more subsidies to make the rent affordable. It’s as plain and simple as that.”

And, in plain and simple terms, when it comes to affordable housing in Santa Rosa, efforts are dependent on political will, the availability of funding, land suitably zoned for multi-family residential, certainty in the entitlement process and developers wih expertise to combine a variety of specialized financing. “The Santa Rosa Housing Trust acts like a lender,” says Gouin. “It’s a sum of money gathered from a variety of sources—pooled from federal, state and local levels—to be put toward affordable housing development.”

According to Arnone, in addition to federal money from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), which averages roughly $5 million a year, the Santa Rosa Housing Authority also reroutes 20 percent of revenue raised from redevelopment project areas (roughly $2 to $3 million annually) to the Housing Trust Fund for affordable housing. Both Arnone and Gouin reference the Southwest Redevelopment Project Area, which stretches 2,000 acres south of Highway 12 and west of 101, and the Gateways Project Area, approximately 1,100 acres surrounding downtown and Railroad Square. They say they’re good examples of current redevelopment projects that, on top of redeveloping neglected infrastructure, roads and sewer systems, have the potential to generate new revenue for the city and give a boost to funding for future affordable housing developments.

When asked what’s made Santa Rosa’s affordable housing efforts so successful, both Arnone and Gouin agree the inclusionary ordinance and in-lieu fee structure of Santa Rosa’s housing policies have helped maintain the incentives and funding for would-be developers to produce affordable housing units. The premise is simple: Santa Rosa’s inclusionary ordinance requires developers of 15 acres or more to provide 15 to 20 percent of housing units for lower income households. For less than 15 acres, developers can choose to pay an in-lieu fee, which goes into the Housing Trust Fund. As of June 2007, the fee (which varies based on project density and size) starts at $0.97 per square foot and was responsible for raising roughly $1 million during the 2007/08 fiscal year. Critic Grabill admits Santa Rosa’s inclusionary ordinance is unique in Sonoma County, but also feels the 15-acre threshold needs to be much lower, because, “developers usually split proposed projects up into smaller parcels to avoid including affordable units. The city granted exemptions to the requirement when approving those that couldn’t be easily split, such as Oakmont. At this time, there are almost no undeveloped 15-acre parcels in Santa Rosa.”

Gouin admits the in-lieu fee may not be playing the same strong role it once did. “The first year of the housing downturn, we saw a lot of opportunities to secure and develop affordable housing,” he says. “In 2007, 30 percent of all building permits issued for residential development were for affordable housing. However, building has stopped, and in-lieu fees have gone down. If it can’t be paid, it can’t be loaned. And if the development of market rate units goes down, our ability ot make loans to developers of affordable housing is impacted.”

In 2007/08, the Housing Authority’s budget was $22.5 million. This fiscal year, which started July 1, it will jump 37 percent, to $30.9 million—but only because of a short-term $11.5 million bond against projected tax increment revenue from the Southwest Redevelopment Project Area. The most recent city of Santa Rosa 2008/09 fiscal year budget report states, “This revenue source will be allocated to homeless shelter operations, homeless service contracts and federally mandated fair housing services,” which isn’t good news for padding the available funds in the Santa Rosa Housing Trust.

Over the course of the next year, Gouin says the Department of Economic Development and Housing plans to “sustain the units already in preconstruction and, ideally, be in a position to assist new development…if we have the capacity.” But with a budget 30 percent smaller than the previous year, Gouin admits the “focus is to keep the projects already underway going. We’ll be entertaining less new development proposals [this fiscal year].”
Changing times, same needs

John Lowry, executive director of Burbank Housing, a leading nonprofit developer of affordable housing in Sonoma County, is acutely aware of what rising costs and smaller budgets may mean for future affordable housing projects. “We have a business plan to develop 300 units a year, and we reached that goal. But now we’ve had a little bit of a cutback,” says Lowry, pointing to Colgan Meadows, an 84-unit affordable apartment development on Dutton Meadow, which will be completed this fall. “There’s a constraint for rentals, because costs are up and we need more subsidizeed financing, but there’s greater competition for [this resource].”

This burden of costs isn’t just affecting the affordable housing sector. According to Lowry, over the last 30 years, as more costs have been shifted to developers (both of affordable housing and market rate developments), costs have increased dramatically. It’s a trend that’s ultimately reflected in the price of housing. These spiraling costs include land, which is influenced by availability, construction (public fees, environmental mitigation), design, permit processing and finance. Higher development and construction costs mean higher housing prices, which only complicates the affordable housing situation. At the same time, Santa Rosa’s affordable housing budget is reduced because of decreased development.

Lowry readily agrees there’s no easy fix (nor one that will please everyone) to this problem, but adds that continuing to raise fees in hopes of generating more income isn’t a viable policy at this time. “Right now, most of the proposed housing developments are no longer feasible, so [developers] are waiting around for the market to shift—but the fees are still going up. Developers have always protested fee increases, but now that building has stopped, a serious conversation on this issue is needed.”

Grabill agrees that, even with current budget constraints, this shouldn’t be a closed issue. “We need the same amount of affordable housing that we needed before the housing prices took a tumble. The need is continuing regardless of the city’s budget problems, regardless of the housing downturn. It’s a fact of life. We need to keep building, tapping into creative funding and encouraging private developers to voluntarily build affordable housing.”

In stark contrast to Lowry, however, Grabill suggests the city consider adding another fee, often called a commercial-linkage fee, to provide additional funding for affordable housing and offset the impact of the new, large-scale commercial developments (like Wal-Mart) on the city’s limited affordable housing supply. A commercial-linkage fee, also called a jobs-housing linkage fee, would require larger commercial developers to pay a fee, determined by the size of a proposed building, that would be used toward developing affordable housing along with its commercial development. The idea is, if a commercial development draws workers to Santa Rosa, it should support the city in providing those workers with a place to live. Although commercial-linkage fee proposals have been met with opposition in Sonoma County in the past, it can be argued that it’s one way to ensure employers take responsibility for their role in alleviating (or aggravating) the city’s affordable housing problem.
Employer education

Educating employers about the importance of employees living close to work is what the nonprofit Northbay Family Homes (NFH) does best. Located in Novato, NFH works throughout the Bay Area, including Marin and Sonoma counties, providing innovative loan programs, access to grants and onsite workshops to facilitate workforce home ownership whenever possible. “Education needs to happen,” says Carrie Pierson, vice president and director of real estate and finance for NFH. “We go to employers directly and educate them and their workforce about buying housing closer to the workplace.”

A nonprofit that specializes in facilitating the home buying process for both low-income and existing housing stock, Pierson adds, “We’re a Nonprofit Buyers Broker. Builders enlist our help to sell homes to the workforce. We don’t do the construction, but we help facilitate the development outreach and purchase process with an emphasis on education and reaching undeserved markets.”

Northbay Family Homes and Stewart Title Company are spearheading the Employers Empowering Homeownership (EEH) initiative, which was launched in 2007 by the Northbay Leadership Council. This innovative program, born in Marin and Sonoma counties, is set to launch statewide through Stewart’s Community Forward efforts.

NFH was a partner in the development of the mixed-income Meadow Park community at the former Hamilton airfield, and Pierson says she’s seen an increase in employers interested in providing close-to-work home ownership for employees. As a result, the amount of homeownership Northbay Family Homes has been able to facilitate is growing. And although she can’t reveal its location or name (just yet), Pierson says NFH has a Sonoma County development project on the horizon that will include both below market rate and market rate homes.
Model efforts

Both Arnone and Gouin emphasize that, for its size, Santa Rosa is doing a commendable job. “Santa Rosa has one-third of the county’s population,” says Gouin, “yet the city develops more than half of the affordable housing in Sonoma County.”

“We’re doing such a good job, our program models are being replicated by other communities,” he continues, citing Berkeley and Walnut Creek among the Bay Area cities that have been in contact with him regarding their own affordable housing models. Arnone is optimistic that the Southwest Redevelopment Project Area and the currently stalled Gateways Project Area (due to a pending lawsuit), will reinvigorate affordable housing development efforts in Santa Rosa.

Lowry concedes that, despite his other concerns, “The city of Santa Rosa has provided staffing, support and a huge amount of effort, and I think it deserves a lot of credit for that.” And while Grabill says “optimistic” is too strong of a word. “City councils in the county seem to recognize the importance of affordable housing to their communities, and we’re seeing a broader range of housing types in the approval porcess. That’s encouraging, but we’re still a long way from our goal: decent, attractive, affordable housing for all in sustainable, livable neighborhoods in all cities in Sonoma County.”

“It’s time we think of housing not as a problem,” wrote Lowry in an editorial to the Press Democrat last year, “but as a critical component of a healthy community.” Gouin, Arnone and, certainly, Grabill would be unlikely to quibble with him.

“There are reasons a city should pay attention to whether people can afford to live there,” says Arnone. “If teachers and policemen can’t afford to live there, the city will suffer. It’s in a city’s best interest economically, but also socially.”

The question of where Santa Rosa has been and what it’s accomplished in regard to affordable housing is much easier to answer than where the city is headed. But one thing is certain: The debates over rental units or square footage have great consequence, and the importance that city officials, advocate groups and residents place on the availability of affordable housing will have a direct correlation to the future of the city socially, culturally and economically.

Stockton agrees to GHG lawsuit settlement

2008-09-11T14:28:00.000-07:00

Over a year ago, the California Attorney General and Sierra Club sued the City of Stockton claiming that that city's General Plan did not adequately address Greenhouse Gas ("GHG")impacts of future planned development and thus violated the California Environmental Quality Act and other laws.

On September 9, after a contentious public hearing, the city approved a landmark settlement agreement which requires among other things:

1. Regular GHG emission monitoring
2. The formation of an advisory committee consisting of representatives from
environmental. non-profit, labor, business and developer interests
3. The reduction of per capita Vehicle Miles Traveled ("VMT")
4. Target reductions in GHG emissions in accordance with AB 32
5. The implementation of a Green Building Program, including:
-Build It Green - residential '
-LEED Silver- phased 'approach
-Review requirement to stay among top 25% of ordinances in State
-Green Building retrofit w/50% remodel (18 months) ,
-Explore local assessment district to help fund retrofits
-Explore retrofits for CEQA mitigation
6: A Transit Gap Study, including "
-Strategies for reassessing transit use and funding
-Configuration of developments for all transportation modes
-Developments to provide funding or other support for transit
-Developments to have density to support transit use
7. The Support of Downtown Development
-Baseline number of new housing units in Greater Downtown and within
City limits
-Incentives for infill (e.g. reduced fees/limits)
-Incentives for districts and corridors

8. A strategy for the Edge and Downtown to Grow Together
-Minimum infrastructure requirements
-Milestones for infill in balance before new entitlements
-Finance mechanisms to assist infill
9. The Regular Monitoring of VMT

The settlement is expected to serve as a model for other cities in California to incorporate into their general plans. The full agreement and staff report to the City Council are here:

http://stockton.granicus.com/MetaViewer.php?view_id=12&event_id=357&meta_id=203941

http://stockton.granicus.com/MetaViewer.php?view_id=12&event_id=357&meta_id=203943)

Mortgage Crisis Spawns Class Action Alleging Harassment of Minorities

2008-08-31T14:08:00.001-07:00

The mortgage crisis has spawned an unusual federal class action by African-Americans in Antioch, Calif., a San Francisco suburb, alleging city intimidation and harassment of minorities who rent homes using federally subsidized Section 8 housing vouchers in an effort to force them out of the area.

"There is no question that the city and its police department are targeting Section 8 families, particularly African-American recipients," said Brad Seligman of the Impact Fund, a public interest law firm in Emeryville, Calif.

The real estate foreclosure crisis hit Antioch hard. In response, landlords and homeowners turned to renting homes to pay mortgages, often renting to tenants using federal rent subsidy vouchers, known as Section 8, according to Seligman.

By 2006, the inability of homeowners to sell homes allowed Section 8 participants to use their benefits to move out of urban centers to the suburb 40 miles west of San Francisco and to larger homes that might otherwise sit vacant, according to the suit.

The suit, Williams v. City of Antioch, No. C08-2301BZ (N.D. Calif.), states that the number of Section 8 Housing Choice vouchers grew in Antioch from 1,049 in 2003 to nearly 1,600 by 2007, representing more than 4 percent of the city's households. Many of the vouchers there are used by African-Americans, according to the suit. In the last five years, the number of African-Americans in Antioch has doubled, but still represents less than 15 percent of the city's total population.

During this period, Antioch officials began blaming city problems and crime in the city on Section 8 participants, according to the suit. The city council created a unit in the police department called the Community Action Team, to address "quality of life" issues in the town.

The suit, brought by five African-American women who rent homes using Section 8 vouchers, alleges that the city and police focused attention on people renting homes using the vouchers. The women say police looking for Section 8 violations subjected residents to warrantless searches of their homes. Police allegedly made threats to landlords who continued to accept the vouchers and they also allegedly intimidated renters with potential loss of benefits.

Along with the Impact Fund, the five women are represented by the ACLU of Northern California and Public Advocates, a public interest firm.

The city denied the suit's claims. "We emphatically reject the allegations by Public Advocates and the ACLU regarding our city's community-based policing efforts," said Lynn Tracy Nerland, Antioch city attorney in a prepared statement.

"We believe that any objective review of our city's policing efforts will reveal that these efforts are focused exclusively on criminal and/or dangerous behavior. Claims of other, sinister motivations are untrue and irresponsible," she said.

The suit seeks to enjoin the city and police from alleged targeting of Section 8 renters for investigation or threats. The suit also seeks damages and a declaration that the city actions violate state fair housing law.

Pamela A. MacLean
The National Law Journal
August 18, 2008

Mobile Home Wars

2008-08-18T11:57:00.000-07:00

Even with Prop. 98 shot down, some mobile-home owners may still have to buy their lots. What can low-income residents do?

From: The 8/14/08 Bohemian: By P. Joseph Potocki

Sonoma resident Sam DiGiacomo is worried about losing his home. "We are currently under a total frontal attack—senior citizens and low-income families alike," he says.

DiGiacomo retired in 1996, after 30 years serving as a maintenance instructor with the Department of Defense; these days he's passionate about protecting mobile-home park (MHP) rental spaces for persons of limited means. DiGiacomo, a chapter president for the statewide organization Golden State Manufactured-Home Owners League, also sits on the Tri-Park Committee, representing the city of Sonoma's mobile-home owners.

"If it [MHP condo conversion] should happen here," DiGiacomo says, "I am sure that 80 percent of our residents would almost immediately be classified as poverty level."

Last September, California AB 1542, a bill sponsored by Santa Rosa assemblywomen Noreen Evans, was passed, only to be vetoed by the governor. Had the legislation been signed into law, it would have allowed manufactured-home owner-occupants statewide to retain their rent-controlled status, even if neighboring homeowners choose to purchase their lots.

Then came Proposition 98, which was designed to wipe out rent control altogether and pave the way for massive condo conversions of apartments and mobile-home parks across the state. Heavy hitters like Chicago developer Sam Zell, cited in the May 21 issue of the Bohemian as a major financial backer of the Prop. 98 initiative, tried to convince voters to pass the proposition in order to presumably protect basic property-ownership rights. But it got cold-cocked in this past June's primary, garnering just 39 percent support, while over 65 percent of the voters gave the nod to rival Proposition 99, conceived specifically to counteract 98's draconian strictures.

But even with Prop. 98 dead and buried, manufactured-home owners still face hurdles in a seemingly inexorable drive by the MHP industry to sell as many asphalt lots as mobile-home park owners care to offer. Present state law provides fewer protections to manufactured-home owners than do many county and municipal ordinances. This is certainly the case in Sonoma County, where over 50 percent of a mobile-home park's resident owners must first opt to purchase what lies below them in order to convert, or, in the parlance that has emerged, condoize the entire park.

Now the fight to preserve low-income MHP rental space has shifted back to a municipality, in this case to Sonoma. On Wednesday, Aug. 20, the Sonoma City Council will vote on an ordinance that DiGiacomo claims will be "a tiny bit stronger" than the present Sonoma County protections. The ordinance is expected to pass, perhaps unanimously, but that doesn't mean DiGiacomo or the city of Sonoma are out of the woods yet.

L. Sue Loftin is a San Diego County–based attorney for Preston Cook, the owner of Rancho de Sonoma mobile-home park. Cook's park is situated just inside the city limits, and his intentions are clearly stated. "What I want to do with my park is make it a resident-owned community," he says, "so the residents of Rancho de Sonoma have an opportunity to own the land, instead of just their homes."

To realize his goal, Cook filed a claim on Aug. 6 against the moratorium on condo conversions. This claim appears to be the first step in a process that could lead to a lawsuit demanding big bucks from Sonoma, if, Loftin says, "we can't resolve the issues with the city."

Loftin says that Cook's conversion plans include $2 million in park renovations, affordable loans to low-income residents choosing to purchase and continued rent control for those who choose not to buy until such time as they either die or move away.

Meanwhile, the media have portrayed a divided MHP population, the majority of whom are over 55 years of age and living on fixed incomes. An ABC television report that aired last month, as well as articles in various regional newspapers, stress that there are mobile-home owners who either favor or will consider purchasing the property beneath their units.

DiGiacomo says there's no such rift. "It is notorious that they come up and try to disrupt the homeowners organization, and that is exactly what happened," he explains. "An ad hoc committee got together to unseat the current board and the current president—which never happened."

Close to 700 persons live in Sonoma's three mobile-home parks. Monthly rents range from $350 to $800. But, DiGiacomo says, "We have heard quotes that they'll charge upwards of $225,000 per space." Whether that figure is inflated or not, one thing is sure: by adding monthly condo fees to mortgage payments, this once affordable form of housing is, as Cook himself told the Sonoma Index-Tribune recently, "an endangered species. I would say there will be thousands of park closures in the next 10 to 20 years."

Santa Rosa City Council Approves Zoning Change for Affordable Housing

2008-07-19T11:36:00.001-07:00

The Oakmont opponents of a medium to high density development at the Elnoka site on Sonoma Highway turned out in full force on July 1... more than enough to pack every seat in the Santa Rosa city council chamber, plus several dozen on the balcony and some outside. Their purpose was to protest a rezoning to allow a higher density project on the site that would have about 30% of the units affordable to low and moderate income households. Speaker after speaker denounced the proposal and the audience responded with cheers and waiving arms. Some cited potential traffic impacts; some cited "incompatibility" with their neighborhood. Some were more blatant in their nimbie-ism.

Four of the six council members are running for election this fall and speakers pointedly reminded them that 93% of residents voted in the last election. It was looking grim.

Then Dick Latimer stepped up to the podium and talked about the shortage of affordable housing in Santa Rosa and how this site is one of the 20 designated for development at 18 units per acre "by right" as a result of HAG's housing element lawsuit in 2002, and the city should have rezoned it years ago. Then David Rosas approached the podium. He's running for city council and this would have been a golden opportunity for him to nab several hundred votes by siding with the Oakmonters. Instead, he said he lived in the Southwest quadrant of the city which has had 15 or so affordable housing developments. He pointed out that the area around the Elnoka site had only a few affordable developments, and that the city needs to have diversity in all its neighborhoods. He urged the council to approve the rezoning.

The crowd cheered briefly for Dick until the full realization of what he had said sank in, then there were loud jeers and shouts of "no...no." David's remarks were followed by glares and stony silence.

Both David and Dick showed amazing courage in speaking out in favor of the Elnoka rezoning in front of neighbors and all those voters. And to the utter amazement of the crowd, the developer and myself, the City Council went on to unanimously approve the rezoning... the PD will have more details, but probably won't mention the important role that David and Dick played in this. Thanks you guys!

Sac Bee Editorial: Speed up 1-C funding for affordable housing

2008-06-25T11:33:00.001-07:00

Sacramento Bee Editorial: Speeding up grants for housing makes sense

June 25, 2008

Proposition 1C projects are ready, and the state's economy could use the stimulus

California's real housing problem has little to do with the mortgage meltdown. The real problem is the giant gap between incomes and housing costs.

While housing prices rose dramatically between 2000 and 2006, incomes did not. Yet sales volumes were at record levels and first-time buyers were entering the market in record numbers. Aggressive marketing of risky, high-cost, no-documentation mortgage loans allowed people to buy houses at prices way beyond what they could afford. That, in turn, kept prices going up and up.

But as everyone knows only too well, that bubble burst. So we're back to the basic problem: California is not producing housing that residents can afford.

Fortunately, when California voters approved five bonds in November 2006 to update the state's increasingly outdated infrastructure, one of those bonds (Proposition 1C) was targeted at increasing the overall supply and affordability of housing.

The state has scheduled three rounds of funding, for June 2008, June 2009 and June 2010. This year's round of project applications produced more strong applications than there was money to support them. So now the Department of Housing and Community Development is recommending that the amount of money in the first round be increased to allow the state to get a full complement of strong projects under way. Legislators should heed that suggestion.

At this time of economic downturn and high gas prices, increasing the supply of affordable housing in urban infill areas and near transit hubs will provide jobs, transportation options and housing close to jobs.

Assembly Bill 1252 is the vehicle. The Senate passed it 35-0 on Monday. The Assembly should do the same today.

For the 2008 round, legislators originally had allocated $240 million for infill infrastructure grants (for sewer, water, roads and so on). That money ran out after 27 projects, which received amounts based primarily on the number of housing units that will be produced and the affordability level of those units. The railyard project in Sacramento was one of two projects that received the maximum $30 million funding.

The department would like to fund 19 more grants for infill infrastructure and add more money to four already funded projects. The Triangle project in West Sacramento would be a beneficiary of the change. That project was originally awarded $16.7 million and would get $6.3 million more if AB 1252 passes. The Township 9 project in Sacramento would get $19.1 million. Broadway Lofts at 19th and Broadway in Sacramento would get $4.4 million.

For the 2008 round, legislators also had originally allocated $95 million for transit-oriented development grants. That money ran out after 11 projects. Again, The railyard in Sacramento was one of only two projects to win the maximum award of $17 million. The department would like to fund five more transit-oriented development grants and add more money to a project in San Diego.

While it will reduce the funding available in the 2009 and 2010 rounds, speeding up the grants is justified. These strong projects are ready, and the economy needs the stimulus. The Assembly should pass this bill and the governor should sign it into law without delay.

Gas prices getting you down? Search AOL Autos for fuel-efficient used cars.

2008-06-23T23:45:00.000-07:00

New York Times June 23, 2008

Home Not-So-Sweet Home

By PAUL KRUGMAN

"Owning a home lies at the heart of the American dream." So declared President Bush in 2002, introducing his "Homeownership Challenge" — a set of policy initiatives that were supposed to sharply increase homeownership, especially for minority groups.

Oops. While homeownership rose as the housing bubble inflated, temporarily giving Mr. Bush something to boast about, it plunged — especially for African-Americans — when the bubble popped. Today, the percentage of American families owning their own homes is no higher than it was six years ago, and it's a good bet that by the time Mr. Bush leaves the White House homeownership will be lower than it was when he moved in.

But here's a question rarely asked, at least in Washington: Why should ever-increasing homeownership be a policy goal? How many people should own homes, anyway?

Listening to politicians, you'd think that every family should own its home — in fact, that you're not a real American unless you're a homeowner. "If you own something," Mr. Bush once declared, "you have a vital stake in the future of our country." Presumably, then, citizens who live in rented housing, and therefore lack that "vital stake," can't be properly patriotic. Bring back property qualifications for voting!

Even Democrats seem to share the sense that Americans who don't own houses are second-class citizens. Early last year, just as the mortgage meltdown was beginning, Austan Goolsbee, a University of Chicago economist who is one of Barack Obama's top advisers, warned against a crackdown on subprime lending. "For be it ever so humble," he wrote, "there really is no place like home, even if it does come with a balloon payment mortgage."

And the belief that you're nothing if you don't own a home is reflected in U.S. policy. Because the I.R.S. lets you deduct mortgage interest from your taxable income but doesn't let you deduct rent, the federal tax system provides an enormous subsidy to owner-occupied housing. On top of that, government-sponsored enterprises — Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and the Federal Home Loan Banks — provide cheap financing for home buyers; investors who want to provide rental housing are on their own.

In effect, U.S. policy is based on the premise that everyone should be a homeowner. But here's the thing: There are some real disadvantages to homeownership.

First of all, there's the financial risk. Although it's rarely put this way, borrowing to buy a home is like buying stocks on margin: if the market value of the house falls, the buyer can easily lose his or her entire stake.

This isn't a hypothetical worry. From 2005 through 2007 alone — that is, at the peak of the housing bubble — more than 22 million Americans bought either new or existing houses. Now that the bubble has burst, many of those homebuyers have lost heavily on their investment. At this point there are probably around 10 million households with negative home equity — that is, with mortgages that exceed the value of their houses.

Owning a home also ties workers down. Even in the best of times, the costs and hassle of selling one home and buying another — one estimate put the average cost of a house move at more than $60,000 — tend to make workers reluctant to go where the jobs are.

And these are not the best of times. Right now, economic distress is concentrated in the states with the biggest housing busts: Florida and California have experienced much steeper rises in unemployment than the nation as a whole. Yet homeowners in these states are constrained from seeking opportunities elsewhere, because it's very hard to sell their houses.

Finally, there's the cost of commuting. Buying a home usually though not always means buying a single-family house in the suburbs, often a long way out, where land is cheap. In an age of $4 gas and concerns about climate change, that's an increasingly problematic choice.

There are, of course, advantages to homeownership — and yes, my wife and I do own our home. But homeownership isn't for everyone. In fact, given the way U.S. policy favors owning over renting, you can make a good case that America already has too many homeowners.

O.K., I know how some people will respond: anyone who questions the ideal of homeownership must want the population "confined to Soviet-style concrete-block high-rises" (as a Bloomberg columnist recently put it). Um, no. All I'm suggesting is that we drop the obsession with ownership, and try to level the playing field that, at the moment, is hugely tilted against renting.

And while we're at it, let's try to open our minds to the possibility that those who choose to rent rather than buy can still share in the American dream — and still have a stake in the nation's future.

NY Times Op Ed: Home Not-So-Sweet Home

2008-06-23T08:42:00.001-07:00

The holy grail of home ownership drives a whole range of public policies... transportation, land use, and taxes to name a few. Krugman points out that there are some serious downsides to this. -- David Grabill

June 23, 2008

Home Not-So-Sweet Home

By PAUL KRUGMAN

But here's a question rarely asked, at least in Washington: Why should ever-increasing homeownership be a policy goal? How many people should own homes, anyway?

In effect, U.S. policy is based on the premise that everyone should be a homeowner. But here's the thing: There are some real disadvantages to homeownership.

Op Ed - 40th Anniversary of the Fair Housing Act

2008-06-03T17:02:00.000-07:00

IS LOCAL HOUSING REALLY "FAIR"?

SANTA ROSA PRESS DEMOCRAT, April 26, 2008

This month marks the 40th anniversary of the Fair Housing Act, which prohibits discrimination in the sale and rental of housing. President Lyndon B. Johnson signed the bill April 11, 1968, one week after the murder of Martin Luther King, and said "fair housing for all -- all human beings who live in this country -- is now a part of the American way of life."

The bill outlawed the common, open practice of denying housing and home loans based on race, and was later amended to ban discrimination based on religion, national origin, gender, age, disability and family status. So 40 years after the law was signed, do people in Sonoma County have equal housing opportunities? Overt discrimination is rare. Realtors and landlords are generally careful not to indicate discriminatory preferences. They face serious penalties if they violate the law.

But how does it happen that students in a few public schools in Santa Rosa are overwhelmingly Caucasian, while other schools are overwhelmingly non-white? Clearly a school's students reflect the characteristics of the neighborhoods the school serves, but how did those neighborhoods get to be mostly white or mostly non-white? The answer may be in the zoning code. One area -- Fountaingrove -- is dominated almost exclusively by large-lot expensive housing. Other areas of the city are zoned for high-density apartments. De facto segregation wasn't necessarily the goal of city officials who approved the zoning, but it's the result.

Another factor contributing to the racial disparity is the city's "inclusionary zoning ordinance," which actually operates to exclude affordable housing from new developments. Most cities in the county require developers to include some affordable housing in their projects, helping integrate neighborhoods. Developers in Santa Rosa are allowed pay an "in lieu fee" instead. The money is used to build affordable housing, but usually in neighborhoods which have lots of affordable housing.

Santa Rosa is not alone. Healdsburg is considering a proposal to build a 130-room luxury hotel and 70 elegant houses on 250 acres known as "Saggio Hills." The hotel will employ about 250 low-wage workers, and more will be employed as gardeners and maids in the fancy homes. The developer has offered to donate some land to the city which could be used for affordable housing at some future date, but the proposal does not include affordable housing for any of these workers. Nor is there housing affordable to them elsewhere in Healdsburg. So they'll have to commute from Santa Rosa or Ukiah.

The developer says the project will feature "green design." But color-wise, its residents will be mostly white. And any benefit from solar panels will be dwarfed by the huge environmental impact of hundreds of workers commuting on Highway 101.

A member of the Sonoma City Council recently objected to efforts to provide affordable housing which would serve farmworkers and other low-income, mostly non-white families. He derided it as "subsidized housing" and equated it to housing common in Eastern Europe. Nevermind that he and other wealthy homeowners get a huge housing subsidy -- in the form of mortgage interest tax deductions.

All of our city councils favor economic development. They want an abundance of workers, but they aren't ready to accept these workers -- who tend to be non-white -- as neighbors. Cities that welcome exclusive developments like Saggio Hills often have to be pushed to approve affordable housing developments which will be occupied mostly by non-white families.

But there are signs of hope. Petaluma has been more successful than most cities in encouraging diversity in its housing development. Affordable housing is integrated into single-family housing areas; schools have a good socio-economic balance. Can they do better? Of course. Can all of our cities do better, in order to make the promise of "equal housing opportunity" a reality for all persons regardless of race, national origin, disability, age, family status, religion and income source? Yes, and let's hope it doesn't take another 40 years.

David Grabill, Attorney with the Sonoma County Housing Advocacy Group
(www.hagster.org)

Affordable Housing Progress Report

2008-05-14T10:57:00.000-07:00

Our Affordable Housing Progress Report has summaries of how each of the cities in Sonoma County, as well as the unincorporated County, have progressed in meeting their affordable housing needs during the last planning period (1999-2007).

No on 98 - Sample Letter

2008-05-03T10:26:00.000-07:00

Please copy/paste this into an e-mail or letter and send it to as many friends and neighbors as possible urging them to vote NO on Prop 98 (but 99 is fine). Do it soon... absentee ballots for the election will be mailed out in a few days - DG
______________________

Dear Friend,

I'm emailing you today to make sure you are aware of a dangerous ballot measure on the June 3rd statewide ballot. Proposition 98 is a deceptive measure that a group of wealthy landlords spent millions to put on the ballot. These landlords want you to believe the measure is only about "eminent domain," but Prop. 98 is full of hidden provisions that would hurt all Californians.

• Prop. 98 attacks renters by eliminating renter protections and rent control.

• Prop. 98 guts important environmental protections like laws we need to combat global warming, and protect our land, air, water and coasts.

• Prop. 98 jeopardizes the quality of our drinking water and our ability to secure new water sources to protect our environment and fuel our economy.

• Prop. 98 will result in frivolous lawsuits, higher taxpayer costs, and hurt our economy.

That's why a broad coalition including AARP, League of Women Voters of California, the Coalition to Protect California Renters, California Professional Firefighters, California Alliance for Retired Americans, California Teachers Association, California Police Chiefs Association, California Chamber of Commerce and dozens of others all oppose Prop. 98.

Many of these same groups are also supporting a real eminent domain reform on the June 3rd ballot. Proposition 99 is the straightforward solution we need to protect against eminent domain abuse. Prop. 99 prohibits government from using eminent domain to take a home to transfer to a private developer. Unlike the landlords' Prop. 98, Prop. 99 is eminent domain reform with NO HIDDEN AGENDAS.

Please be sure you have the facts and vote NO on 98 and Yes on 99 on June 3rd

Visit http://www.no98yes99.com/ for more information.

Thank you!

Affordable Housing - Green and Beautiful

2008-04-30T09:56:00.000-07:00

This article, from the 4/3/2008 NYTimes, shows an affordable development in NY city that was built to the highest "green" building design standards. Construction costs were essentially the same as conventional buildings. - DG

Here's an article from the American Planning Association journal about the developer, Jonathan Rose: Click Here

Escondido city council bans 4 bedroom condo's

2008-04-19T11:43:00.001-07:00

The Escondido City Council recently voted to prohibit a developer from including some

4 bedroom units in his proposed condo complex, apparently concerned that some of

those beds might be occupied by (oh help us!) illegal immigrants. Here's an editorial

from the San Diego Union Tribune about the council's concerns... - dg

U-T EDITORIAL: NORTH EDITION
Big Brother in your (fourth) bedroom

April 19, 2008

Recently we opined on D.R. Horton wanting to offer four-bedroom townhouses at its Paramount project in downtown Escondido. The City Council was aghast, fearing apparently that illegal immigrants would start buying $400,000 condominiums or that families doubling up would result in the affluent buyers' BMWs taking up all the on-street parking spaces.

The city asked Horton to return with none of those sinful four-bedroom floor plans.

Horton, notorious for not speaking to either media or even city managers, cannot possibly make money on this project, some real estate observers believe. It bought the land at the height of the real estate boom, endured a catastrophic fire and more delays, and eventually will come to market when all prices have been pushed into the bargain basement. Horton, the observers say, simply wants to fulfill its civic obligation in Escondido, complete the project and move on.

Horton did return to the council and acquiesced. The condominiums offered will still have four bedrooms, though one may be opened somewhat instead of having floor-to-ceiling walls.

Buyers, to satisfy Big Brother Escondido, will have to sign that they will use the fourth room as a den, an office, anything but a bedroom. What's more, that provision will be written into the covenants, codes and restrictions for the complex.

Presumably, any buyer of a four-bedroom townhouse would choose to use one as a den or office, anyway. So, no harm, no foul?

Not so fast. Big Brother Escondido has now passed a law telling you what you can or cannot do in your own bedroom. It is no longer your choice. The vote was 5-0, with even Sam "I believe in the least government regulations on our citizens" Abed voting to interfere in a decision that really should be between willing builder and willing buyer.

There was no mention of what the penalty for violators will be, which sends our imagination soaring.

Perhaps, offenders will be deported just outside the Escondido city limits. Or, maybe they will be forced to register with other cities as "serial bedroom occupants."

Escondido's council majority clearly is caught up in an anti-immigration backlash and is swinging at even imaginary targets. This ordinance outlaws a market product quite popular in a number of California cities. In its paranoia, the Escondido City Council is actually taking away freedoms from American citizens.

This ordinance is both silly and sad. Sad in that this passes for "less government" in Escondido. Sad in that this restriction inevitably will pit some homeowner against a relentlessly rigid homeowner association. So much for harmonious quality of life in Escondido.

Next Saturday: Big Brother Escondido in your overnight parking space.

Need a new ride? Check out the largest site for U.S. used car listings at AOL Autos.

HAG Teach-In May 13, 2008

2008-04-18T11:51:00.000-07:00

A New Home for Less Than $13,000?

2008-04-09T09:38:00.000-07:00

CALIFORNIA RENTAL MARKET FAILING TO MEET NEEDS OF WORKING FAMILIES

2008-04-08T14:10:00.000-07:00

$24.01/Hour Needed to Afford
Average Two-bedroom Apartment

Washington, D.C. -- According to a report released yesterday, a family in California needs to earn at least $24.01/hour -- working 40 hours a week, 52 weeks a year -- to be able to afford rent and utilities in California's housing market. This represents an increase of 44.3% since 2000.

This year, California is the second-most-expensive state in the nation for renters. The typical renter in California earns $16.67, which is $7.34 short of what's needed to afford even a modest apartment.

Working at the minimum wage, a California family would need 3 wage earners working full-time -- or one full-time earner working 120 hours per week -- to afford a modest, two-bedroom apartment.

"Throughout the state, we are hearing stories of families who are becoming homeless because their paychecks aren't keeping pace with rental costs. The foreclosure crisis is further increasing pressure on the rental market, because families that were once homeowners are now competing alongside other renters to find an affordable place to live," said Julie Spezia, Executive Director of Housing California. "This report clearly illustrates why we need to build more apartment homes that working families can afford."

About 57% of California renters do not earn enough to afford a two-bedroom apartment in today's housing market.

The report, Out of Reach 2007-2008, was jointly released by the National Low Income Housing Coalition (NLIHC) -- a Washington, D.C.-based housing advocacy group -- and Housing California. The report provides housing expense and wage data for every state, metropolitan area, and county in the country. Nationally, a household needs to earn $17.32 to meet their basic needs for housing.

About Housing California
Housing California is the leading advocate in the state Capitol on affordable-home and budget policy for homeless and low-income people. We are a statewide coalition of more than 1,000 nonprofit developers, homeless-service organizations, and regional and local housing and homeless advocates. Our mission is to prevent homelessness and to increase the supply of decent, safe, accessible and permanently affordable homes for homeless and low-income Californians. For more information, visit www.housingca.org.

For additional information about the National Low Income Housing Coalition's Out of Reach 2007-2008 report, visit www.nlihc.org/oor/oor2008/.

Planning your summer road trip? Check out AOL Travel Guides.

Infill development in San Rafael approved over NIMBY opposition

2008-03-26T13:25:00.001-07:00

82-unit condo plan in San Rafael approved

Jennifer Upshaw - Marin Independent Journal 03/12/2008 01:00:14 AM PDT

A controversial plan to tear down an old office building and construct an 82-unit condominium complex near the Marin County Civic Center was approved in the wee hours after a long meeting of the San Rafael Planning Commission Tuesday.

Commissioners voted 4-2-1 to approve the project, with conditions related to frontage improvements, construction hours and pedestrian access, city officials said. Demolition of the existing office building is expected to begin next spring.

Commissioners Daniel Sonnet and Gayle Wittenmeier-Mills voted against the project, citing concerns about transitions with adjacent structures and the narrowness of the existing street. Commissioner Larry Paul was absent.

Tuesday's meeting drew dozens who spoke passionately both for and against the proposal at 33 San Pablo Ave.

Jenette Erven, a 23-year resident of San Pablo Avenue, said the building just doesn't fit the neighborhood.

"I feel this project has been put on a fast-track from the beginning," she said. "None of us are against affordable housing. What we are concerned about is the scope and the size of this project and the height and the density - it's huge."

Housing advocates, and community groups such as the League of Women Voters and the San Rafael Chamber of Commerce, lauded the endeavor as a prime example of responsible growth.

"Everyone says that infill is what we want," said Elissa Giambastiani, a 20-year housing advocate. "No one wants to build on open space. If we want infill, we're going to have to accommodate that in all sections of the city."

Concerns about height, mass and the number of units have delayed approval for some time. The project has been before the Design Review Board several times, and made a previous appearance before the Planning Commission.

City planners at one point recommended the proposal be rejected for aesthetic reasons. The plan was reworked, and the number of units reduced from 93 to 82.

Plans now call for a four-story complex with a stepped design. Sixteen units would be set aside as below-market-rate affordable housing. State law allows for a denser development if a certain amount of affordable housing is included in the project.

Jeff Hutchinson, project manager with San Rafael-based developer Monahan Pacific, said he believes his group has bent over backward to please the neighbors.

"What we've done is shoved the building up the hill and away from the neighbors as much as we can," he said. "We feel we've gone a long way to accommodate people's concerns here."

But neighbors disagreed, saying they felt they were being taken advantage of.

"I feel our neighborhood has been called upon over the years to carry a big burden for San Rafael and we've done our fair share," said Charles Cacciatore, a 14-year resident of Laurel Glen Terrace. "There's this arrogance that they (the developer) know what's better for our neighborhood than we do."

Affordable Housing Doubled at Old UC Site in SF

2008-02-08T11:53:00.001-08:00

San Francisco Chronicle 1/18/08 - by Heather Knight

City and state officials announced an agreement Thursday with developers of the former UC Berkeley Extension site in San Francisco to include more affordable housing - more than doubling the number of such dwellings for the 413-unit project at 55 Laguna St.

While 66 of the 328 rental apartments for families had been designated as affordable, the new agreement makes an 85-unit complex for seniors - most of whom are expected to be gay, lesbian, bisexual or transgender - affordable as well. The units for seniors previously were to be rented at the market rate.

Supervisor Ross Mirkarimi, Assemblyman Mark Leno, state Sen. Carole Migden, the mayor's Office of Housing and gay rights and housing activists pushed to increase the percentage of affordable dwellings in the project from 16 percent to 37 percent. On Thursday, they celebrated the agreement with the University of California and A.F. Evans, the development company hired for the project.

Mirkarimi said Thursday at a news conference on the steps of City Hall that he had previously viewed the UC system as "an inflexible juggernaut" but was pleased that "patience and smartness prevailed."

"This is a major milestone," he said. "We have made critical progress."

Planning for the development has been going on since UC Extension moved out in late 2003, citing budgetary concerns.

In addition to the apartments, the development is also due to include a 25,000-square-foot park where the asphalt parking lot now sits and a 10,600-square-foot community garden. Both are intended to be accessible to the public, as is a planned 12,000-square-foot community center.

The city's Planning Commission was expected late Thursday to approve the environmental impact report for the development, another important step before the entire plan goes to the Board of Supervisors for approval.

Foreclosures harm renters - SF Chronicle

2008-02-07T10:13:00.001-08:00

Foreclosures leave renters in the lurch

Carolyn Said, Chronicle Staff Writer Thursday, February 7, 2008 (SF
Chronicle (http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2008/02/07/MN4NUOE27.DTL)

At first, Adriana Diharce ignored the envelope taped to her front door because it wasn't addressed to her. Then she saw the words "trustee sale," so she opened it. The letter said the modest, ranch-style Hayward house rented by Diharce and her husband would be sold at a foreclosure auction. When Diharce called the phone number on the letter last month, a representative told her the house was slated for auction on Feb. 8 - Friday - and said the couple and their two young children would have to vacate almost immediately after that. Diharce called her landlady, but her phone had been disconnected.
"The landlady owes us our deposit, and we cannot locate her," said Diharce, 29, who is expecting a third child in March. "I am so upset. As a tenant, we have no rights, no deposit and nowhere to go."
Her situation is not unusual. As the mortgage crisis claims more homes - more than 11,000 Bay Area residences were repossessed by lenders last year - an increasing number of tenants are facing rapid evictions by banks eager to partially recoup their losses by selling the properties. In November, a Chronicle analysis of Bay Area foreclosures showed that about one-fifth had nonresident owners. Presumably many of those investor-owners rented out their properties to produce income.

Foreclosure-related evictions of renters show how fallout from the mortgage meltdown can spread even to people who don't own houses. "We pay our rent on time every month; we figured everything would be all right," said Jesse
Vasquez, Diharce's husband.

Tenants' rights in such situations are minimal. If they live in a city with rent control, they are covered by its eviction regulations. Hayward, where Diharce and Vasquez live, does not have rent control for single-family residences. Otherwise, renters are subject to state law, which generally requires 30 days notice. A foreclosure usually invalidates an existing lease, legal experts said.

Late last month, the state Senate narrowly defeated a bill sponsored by Sen. Don Perata, D-Oakland, that would have required banks to give 60 days notice to tenants in foreclosed properties. It also would have required lenders to provide homeowners with four months notice before mortgage payments increase by 10 percent or more.
Legislation pending at the federal level also would require lenders to give more notice to tenants in foreclosed properties.

"For folks who have been paying their rent on a regular basis, to simply be evicted without cause because the owner has been unable to maintain their mortgage payment is a real problem," said Paul Leonard, director of the California office in Oakland for the Center for Responsible Lending. "In an already flagging market, the idea that foreclosures displace renters without adequate notice creates a level of upheaval and distress that could be mitigated with more reasonable notice provisions."

Nobody tracks how many tenants have faced foreclosure evictions, but anecdotal evidence suggests the number is high. "We see it all the time," said Elaine Brooks-Cox, housing counselor supervisor at Pacific Community Services, a Pittsburg nonprofit that helps consumers with housing issues. "It's becoming a very common problem now. Most of the time, the renters are not aware the property is in foreclosure until after the trustee sale or right before the trustee sale when the notice is actually placed on the property that the auction is going to happen."

In Oakland, the city attorney's office "hears a ton of anecdotes" about foreclosure-related renter evictions, said Alex Nguyen, director of the Neighborhood Law Corps. "We hear (lenders) send out brokers first being nice and saying we'll give you some cash if you're out in 10 days. When people don't go for it, then they threaten them and tell them they will get evicted."

Nguyen said the city attorney's office is currently writing up protocols for banks to govern how they must treat renters in foreclosed Oakland properties. It will send the provisions to banks and make them available to renters. "We're trying to protect people from having their lives just blatantly disrupted," he said. "They have a right not to be harassed and bullied by so-called agents of these banks."

Because Oakland has rent control, "generally speaking (tenants) have a right not to be evicted for no cause," he said.

Frances Harris, a landlord-tenant counselor at Oakland nonprofit Sentinel Fair Housing, said she's seen lenders and their property managers do end runs around Oakland's just-cause eviction rule to force tenants in foreclosures to move. "An agent has gone out and said the tenants don't need to pay rent. Several months later, they get a 'three-day notice to pay or quit' for $6,000 and the tenant leaves at that point," she said.

Foreclosing banks often don't know about local rent-control laws, she said. "It seems like it's a paper mill of 30-day notices without finding out what the ordinance is, if there is one."

Lenders or their agents often offer home occupants "cash for keys" - an up-front payment to move out by a certain date. Nguyen said tenants should not necessarily take the first offer. "We tell tenants they need to be thoughtful about what is the true cost of moving. It isn't going to be $1,000. It's definitely (more than) one month's rent when you think of what the new rental will cost - moving costs,
a new security deposit ..."

Ken Carlson, an Idyllwild (Riverside County) attorney specializing in tenants' rights who maintains a Web site at www.CalTenantLaw.com, said there are several strategies tenants can pursue to extend their occupancy of a foreclosed house.
First, if there were any mistakes in serving the 30-day notice, they can
appeal it. Such notices must be in writing; must be served on the tenant either
in person or by mailing plus posting to the front door; and cannot be issued until the lender has recorded a trustee deed certifying that it has repossessed the house.

"Tenants are often told by the real estate agent or the bank that if they're not out after 30 days, the police will come and arrest them," he said. "That's not true at all." If the tenant does not move out after 30 days, the lender must file for
unlawful detainer (the formal name for eviction) and get a judge's permission to
proceed with an eviction, he said. "If the tenant has still not found a place to live, he can contest the (unlawful detainer action). It's possible by fighting unlawful detainer for a tenant to get another two or three months. For a tenant surprised by a foreclosure eviction, that additional time can often mean the difference between homelessness for the family and a smooth transition."

Carlson said tenants who agree to "cash for keys" should make sure to get that agreement in writing signed by an authorized bank representative, because he's aware of cases where the tenants moved out and got stiffed on the agreed-upon payment. The bank that forecloses is obligated to repay any security deposits, Carlson said, but doesn't always follow through.

As for Diharce's security deposit, because it is equivalent to one month's rent, she said an attorney advised her to withhold the February rent and let the deposit cover it. Diharce is wistful about the house her family has lived in since August, 2006. "We love it; it has just the right layout for the kids," she said. "My mom lives five minutes away and she does day care for our kids." Jesus is a year and a half old, Dalilah 4.

Diharce, a human resources coordinator for a medical office, and Vasquez, who does electric motor repairs, have been saving to buy a house and would love to stay in their current home until that happens. Moving to a rental and then to a purchased home would be disruptive, she said. "Especially with children and another one on the way, it makes it more of a big deal to move," she said. "If push comes to shove, we might have to rent" temporarily. Meanwhile, they are trying to speed up their home-buying process but have not yet begun to pack. Despite what the customer representative said on the phone, the couple know they are entitled to at least 30 days written notice - which they have not yet received.

"This is stress I don't need," Diharce said.

Where renters can seek help: Resources for people facing foreclosure-related eviction:
-- California tenants' rights: links.sfgate.com/ZCIU
-- A free foreclosure workshop in Oakland on Saturday includes information
on renters' rights. 9 a.m. to 12:30 p.m. at Faith Presbyterian Church, 430
49th St. (at Webster St.), (510) 653-9752 to register. Sponsor: Housing
and Economic Rights Advocates ( www.heraca.org)
-- Renters can consult a local housing counseling agency approved by HUD.
See list at links.sfgate.com/ZMW, (800) 569-4287
-- You can check your city's rent control ordinance. Information is
generally on city Web sites, listed under "housing," "city attorney" or "city
services."

HUD Demolition in New Orleans

2007-12-26T22:41:00.001-08:00

The New Orleans, LA low income housing demolitions: ONE OF 'GREATEST CRIMES IN U.S. URBAN PLANNING'
HUD's arguments for the demolition of thousands of public housing units in New Orleans echoes the worst of the "tabula rasa" approach to urban renewal of the 1960s, writes Nicolai Ouroussoff in the Dec 21 2007 New York Times. To view the full article, CLICK HERE.

New Tent City in LA

2007-12-23T14:33:00.001-08:00

Tent City in Suburbs Is Cost of Home Crisis
By Dana Ford Reuters Thursday 20 December 2007

Between railroad tracks and beneath the roar of departing planes sits "tent city," a terminus for homeless people. It is not, as might be expected, in a blighted city center, but in the once-booming suburbia of Southern California.

The noisy, dusty camp sprang up in July with 20 residents and now numbers 200 people, including several children, growing as this region east of Los Angeles has been hit by the U.S. housing crisis.

The unraveling of the region known as the Inland Empire reads like a 21st century version of "The Grapes of Wrath," John Steinbeck's novel about families driven from their lands by the Great Depression.

As more families throw in the towel and head to foreclosure here and across the nation, the social costs of collapse are adding up in the form of higher rates of homelessness, crime and even disease.

While no current residents claim to be victims of foreclosure, all agree that tent city is a symptom of the wider economic downturn. And it's just a matter of time before foreclosed families end up at tent city, local housing experts say.

"They don't hit the streets immediately," said activist Jane Mercer. Most families can find transitional housing in a motel or with friends before turning to charity or the streets. "They only hit tent city when they really bottom out."

Steve, 50, who declined to give his last name, moved to tent city four months ago. He gets social security payments, but cannot work and said rents are too high.

"House prices are going down, but the rentals are sky-high," said Steve. "If it wasn't for here, I wouldn't have a place to go."

"Squatting in Vacant Houses"

Nationally, foreclosures are at an all-time high. Filings are up nearly 100 percent from a year ago, according to the data firm RealtyTrac. Officials say that as many as half a million people could lose their homes as adjustable mortgage rates rise over the next two years.

California ranks second in the nation for foreclosure filings - one per 88 households last quarter. Within California, San Bernardino county in the Inland Empire is worse - one filing for every 43 households, according to RealtyTrac.

Maryanne Hernandez bought her dream house in San Bernardino in 2003 and now risks losing it after falling four months behind on mortgage payments.

"It's not just us. It's all over," said Hernandez, who lives in a neighborhood where most families are struggling to meet payments and many have lost their homes.

She has noticed an increase in crime since the foreclosures started. Her house was robbed, her kids' bikes were stolen and she worries about what type of message empty houses send.

The pattern is cropping up in communities across the country, like Cleveland, Ohio, where Mark Wiseman, director of the Cuyahoga County Foreclosure Prevention Program, said there are entire blocks of homes in Cleveland where 60 or 70 percent of houses are boarded up.

"I don't think there are enough police to go after criminals holed up in those houses, squatting or doing drug deals or whatever," Wiseman said.

"And it's not just a problem of a neighborhood filled with people squatting in the vacant houses, it's the people left behind, who have to worry about people taking siding off your home or breaking into your house while you're sleeping."

Health risks are also on the rise. All those empty swimming pools in California's Inland Empire have become breeding grounds for mosquitoes, which can transmit the sometimes deadly West Nile virus, Riverside County officials say.

"Trickle-Down Effect"

But it is not just homeowners who are hit by the foreclosure wave. People who rent now find themselves in a tighter, more expensive market as demand rises from families who lost homes, said Jean Beil, senior vice president for programs and services at Catholic Charities USA.

"Folks who would have been in a house before are now in an apartment and folks that would have been in an apartment, now can't afford it," said Beil. "It has a trickle-down effect."

For cities, foreclosures can trigger a range of short-term costs, like added policing, inspection and code enforcement. These expenses can be significant, said Lt. Scott Patterson with the San Bernardino Police Department, but the larger concern is that vacant properties lower home values and in the long-run, decrease tax revenues.

And it all comes at a time when municipalities are ill-equipped to respond. High foreclosure rates and declining home values are sapping property tax revenues, a key source of local funding to tackle such problems.

Earlier this month, U.S. President George W. Bush rolled out a plan to slow foreclosures by freezing the interest rates on some loans. But for many in these parts, the intervention is too little and too late.

Ken Sawa, CEO of Catholic Charities in San Bernardino and Riverside counties, said his organization is overwhelmed and ill-equipped to handle the volume of people seeking help.

"We feel helpless," said Sawa. "Obviously, it's a local problem because it's in our backyard, but the solution is not local."

-------

See AOL's top rated recipes and easy ways to stay in shape for winter.

Housing Element Updates

2007-12-03T21:51:00.000-08:00

All jurisdictions in the San Francisco Bay Area (and parts of the rest of the state) are gearing up to revise the housing elements of their general plans for the upcoming 5-year planning period. All cities and counties have these general plan housing elements, and there are a whole range of state requirements which the plans must meet. They have to identify specific sites where multi-family housing can be built by right; they have to address special housing needs of seniors, farmworkers, homeless persons and persons with disabilities; and they have to set out programs to facilitate development of affordable housing. The housing element gets reviewed by a state agency - the Department of Housing and Community Development - to determine if it complies with state mandates. Persons and groups interested in promoting more affordable housing in their areas should consider getting involved in the housing element update process. It can make a huge difference in whether any affordable housing will be built. Contact the person in charge of your local planning departments. Ask to be put on mailing lists and e-mail lists to get notice of local public hearings on the housing element update. Consider sending a letter to your local planning department urging them to adopt programs such as inclusionary zoning ordinances, commercial linkage fees, reasonable accommodation ordinances, and other programs to meet the jurisdiction's need for various kinds of affordable housing. CLICK HERE to see a letter that HAG recently sent to the City of Santa Rosa about its housing element update process.

Grey Panthers on Affordable Housing

2007-11-14T18:59:00.001-08:00

Admiring their strong advocacy efforts in Sacramento on behalf of not just seniors but everyone getting screwed by the system these days, I recently joined the Grey Panthers (ok, I lied and told 'em I was over 50). Here's an article from their upcoming newsletter that's of interest to Hagsters... - DG
__________________________

The Elephant in the Corner....

The press, the airwaves and the internet are full of the very serious mortgage crisis and the rising tide of foreclosures. When it comes to getting keeping a home, the credit crunch is hitting Middle America hard.

But after proper attention goes to predatory lending practices, spiking monthly payments, foreclosures and loss of property, is anyone paying attention to our fellow Americans who don't earn enough to have a mortgage to foreclose? That's the `elephant' in the room that no one wants to talk about!

The housing crisis goes beyond the battering of Middle America; blue collar America is getting stomped by sky-high rent increases and growing shortages of even remotely affordable apartments. The Center for Housing Policy (go to http://www.nhc.org) lays out the facts:

* The number of working family renters paying more than half of their income for housing has doubled (103%) since 1997.

* This is an even sharper increase than among working family homeowners, who showed a 75% increase.

* The Center for Housing Policy working family households as those with at least one full time job paying at the least minimum wage but no more than 120% of the local average (median) income.

* In all, the number of working families who paid more than half their income for housing and/or lived in severely dilapidated conditions rose from 3,000,000 in 1997 to 5,200,000 in 2005.

* The affordable housing crunch is a national problem, not limited-for instance-to well-known high cost areas such as New York, Boston and San Francisco. Large numbers of working people in places like Denver, Kansas City, Pittsburgh and Indianapolis are also paying more than half of their incomes for housing, and often that housing that is in bad repair and otherwise neglected.

Gray Panthers have always called for policies and programs to address these needs. Our voices have not been heard, particularly at the national level.

It is time try again-this time, it's not only seniors and the very poor who are hurting: more and more, the problem is engulfing the middle class, who are not used to being ignored. We can:

* Start the conversation about affordable housing in our home towns. Local policies-zoning, redevelopment of rental units into condominiums, etc-affect the ability of teachers, nurses, firefighters, police, technicians, service employees and many other voters to find and keep homes for their families. They have a reason to work for policies which protect their homes. We can work together.

* Make sure that local government addresses the whole problem-it's not just the credit crunch. Helping stressed home OWNERS is not enough; RENTERS must be at the table, too.

* Don't accept the untruth that "nothing can be done." Point to communities which are grappling with this problem and succeeding. If our current crop of officeholders can't do anything, find some who can and will.

* Get commitments from local officials to maintain the rental housing stock. Don't allow condominium conversions unless the renters have somewhere to go in the same area.

* Don't stop with local government. Continue to besiege Congress and the White House and all State officials about affordable housing. Displaced renters and housing-stressed families should not be the only ones who are unhappy about this situation.

* Enlist allies. In some areas, communities of faith have taken on the affordable housing issue and have forced politicians to pay attention. Unions, neighborhood associations and others also have a stake-moral and/or financial-in this fight.

* Be an ally. Support those who are working for affordable housing by joining in their campaigns.

Peace,

Susan Murany
Executive Director
Gray Panthers

The Building's Green, But What About The Commute?

2007-10-09T08:45:00.001-07:00

Here's excerpts from an article in Environmental Building News, which discusses how energy required to get workers from home to work often far surpasses that of the workplace itself. So building affordable housing close to employment centers (i.e. in the SAP and the area along Airport Boulevard) makes eminent sense environmentally. - DG

___________________________________

"Designers and builders expend significant effort to ensure that our buildings use as little energy as possible. This is a good thing—and very obvious to anyone who has been involved with green building for any length of time. What is not so obvious is that many buildings are responsible for much more energy use getting people to and from those buildings. That's right—for an average office building in the United States, calculations done by Environmental Building News (EBN) show that commuting by office workers accounts for 30% more energy than the building itself uses. For an average new office building built to code, transportation accounts for more than twice as much energy use as building operation."

"'Transportation energy intensity' is a metric that has long been used to measure such things as how efficiently freight is transported. We're proposing it here as a metric of building performance. The transportation energy intensity of a building is the amount of energy associated with getting people to and from that building, whether they are commuters, shoppers, vendors, or homeowners. The transportation energy intensity of buildings has a lot to do with location. An urban office building that workers can reach by public transit or a hardware store in a dense town center will likely have a significantly lower transportation energy intensity than a suburban office park or a retail establishment in a suburban strip mall."

"In addition to these direct emissions from transportation, there are many other environmental impacts associated with the infrastructure needed to support transportation and with development patterns. Our roadways create impervious surfaces that result in significant pollutant runoff into waterways—in fact, non-point source water pollution from stormwater runoff is now the nation's leading source of water pollution to estuaries and the third largest to lakes. Highways fragment ecosystems and wildlife habitat. Paved areas, including roadways and parking lots, absorb solar energy, contributing to localized heat islands that exacerbate smog and increase air-conditioning requirements in urbanized areas. And stormwater runoff from these surfaces creates thermal pollution that makes many waterways unsuitable for trout and other cold-water fish."

Source: Environmental Building News, Sep 01, 2007