Westchester NY is too white; forced to provide land and build cheaper housing

[homefront]

Don't bother to work hard; the nice neighborhood you busted your ass to move into will be irreparably changed via forced "desegregation".
I live in a nice, relatively safe area. If you live here, regardless of your race or color, it's because you worked hard to earn it. Regardless of your race or color, I'm glad to be your neighbor.
The precedent is being set for Obama to pay back many of his economically challenged constituents by forcing middle and upper class to live near "affordable housing" projects. Americans of every race should put a stop to this.


http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/11/ny...settle.html?hp


August 11, 2009
Westchester Agrees to Add Housing in Desegregation Pact
By SAM ROBERTS

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.

The county’s claims were largely repudiated in February when Judge Denise L. Cote ruled in Federal District Court that between 2000 and 2006 the county had misrepresented its efforts to desegregate overwhelmingly white communities when it applied for the federal 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 pact.

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. Mr. Spano 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 its approval, the litigation would resume and the county would have to prove at trial that it did not knowingly file false claims.

The case was litigated by Mr. Gurian and the center’s lawyer, John Relman, 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.”

The housing is available to eligible renters and buyers regardless of race, but the county agreed to market it specifically to residents of heavily nonwhite neighborhoods. “It would not do very much good to post a notice at the Chappaqua Public Library,” Mr. Gurian said.

Mathew R. Warren contributed reporting.

[Halftrack]

I say do it. Get this show on the road. However, one should always be careful what one asks for.

I say they need to piss off just as many people as possible in as short a time frame as possible. The less popular this administration becomes, the more interesting the elections become.

[Eugene V. Debs]

Don't bother to work hard; the nice neighborhood you busted your ass to move into will be irreparably changed via forced "desegregation".
I live in a nice, relatively safe area. If you live here, regardless of your race or color, it's because you worked hard to earn it. Regardless of your race or color, I'm glad to be your neighbor.
The precedent is being set for Obama to pay back many of his economically challenged constituents by forcing middle and upper class to live near "affordable housing" projects. Americans of every race should put a stop to this.
do very much good to post a notice at the Chappaqua Public Library,” Mr. Gurian said.

Okay, so assuming Federal housing programs continue to exist then what do you propose as the alternative? That new "affordable housing" created through Federal funds have to be in poor neighborhoods?

If the county hadn't lied in the first place when they applied for Federal funds, this wouldn't be an issue, now would it?

[Rundownfid]

If the county hadn't lied in the first place when they applied for Federal funds, this wouldn't be an issue, now would it?

Can anyone show me any part of the US Constitution that allows this type of intervention?

That should include offering grants to Counties to encourage minority housing as well.

[Eugene V. Debs]

Can anyone show me any part of the US Constitution that allows this type of intervention?

The OP didn't object to Federal housing programs in general, just this particular situation-- where the county was all too happy to take the money but didn't want to play by the rules. Tough shit for Westchester County.

[homefront]

The rules are dead wrong, and racist.
I see parts of Philly (just above the vine) being recycled very nicely.

Yes they lied, but they had good motivation. HUD's rules are ridiculous. If you earn the right to buy a $150,000 house, no matter what color you are you damn well go out and buy one. Nobody is going to stop you. This isn't the 50's.

I lost my job and eventually my home 15 years ago. I had to scratch and claw (read: work very hard) to get my family back into a nice safe home to live in.

I worked in advertising in NYC, as a type director. Type, as a craft, disappeared, as has much of print production. I couldn't get work in my area of expertise, so I did what I had to do and at age 31 went into construction - the only work I could find.

I worked 6 or 7 days a week for years; I framed houses, put on roofing, installed store decor, worked nights doing commercial remodeling, got into commercial trim work and eventually into construction management. In all that time I never shirked any of my old debt; I paid all my old credit cards and back taxes. I WORKED my way into this home, as millions of other Americans have done. This home, and it's surrounds, are what I want for my family and myself. If I wanted to live near the projects, I would have found some in Norristown or Reading.

By the way, my wife worked hard all those years too.

I pulled myself out by my bootstraps; I'm not the smartest guy in the world, nor the most able, but I stayed in harness and I PULLED for years - others can too.

I bitterly resent anyone using MY tax money to build housing for those who prefer to collect unemployment, or pay for other people's healthcare. Let them work for it as I did and continue to do. I'll fight any effort to take what's mine.

Do I feel for the poor, the so-called "underprivileged"? Hey I feel for everybody. Handouts should be done by private charities, churches and the Red Cross. Donate your money to them if you want to hel the "underprivileged". It's not the place of government, especially OUR government, to provide for the economic welfare of it's citizens - people have to compete in this competitive society. One of the things that makes America great is the freedom to choose how to live; you sink or you swim, or anything in between you choose to achieve. Making excuses should get you what you deserve - NOTHING.

You have to earn the right to live in my neighborhood.

[Eugene V. Debs]

Homefront, with all due respect, although you did put a lot of effort and thought into your response (and I do respect what you are saying), you did not answer my question. Assuming Federal housing programs continue to exist-- what do you propose as the alternative? That affordable housing be built ONLY in poor neighborhoods?

The rules are dead wrong, and racist.
I see parts of Philly (just above the vine) being recycled very nicely.

Yes they lied, but they had good motivation. HUD's rules are ridiculous.

Doesn't matter. Don't like the rules? Then don't take the money.

You have to earn the right to live in my neighborhood.

You obviously busted ass and overcame many obstacles to get where you're at, and I respect that, but living in a particular neighborhood is not a "right"-- it just isn't.

[homefront]

You're taking the expression too literally.

In America, people have to earn what they've got - if you've earned it, you have a right to it. Nobody's born entitled to anything. For a time in our history, many were owed much due to past injustices; now the field is wide open and nobody has an excuse. I have worked with men and women of all colors whom I really respect for their drive and willingness to achieve, and they all have felt as I do.

As far as where to put affordable housing, or low-income projects? Revitalize the urban areas that are currently otherwise unusable. City folk can stay in the city until they work their way out - if that's even what they want. I know lots of people who love NY and Philly and would never leave. All to the good - improve the cities by working hard.

[leeam]

So let me get this straight:

* the government is picking locations for this housing based on race
* the government is assuming that those who should benefit from reduced incoming housing are non-white
* the government is choosing how/who they marketing/advertise to based on race

Why is this allowed again?

[homefront]

Because our present administration is racist.