Public housing fray: HUD says no Norris conflict of interest
-
Public Housing Association of Residents chair Latita Owens-Talbert reads a statement denouncing the housing authority.photo by lisa provence
Former mayor and City Councilor Dave Norris has made a career out of working for nonprofits dedicated to helping the disadvantaged. That's why it was so surprising to find in a recent report from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development note of a possible conflict of interest in his roles as chair of the public housing authority board and as a paid consultant for public housing residents. Norris calls it a distraction from the real problems with the housing authority, and the HUD report has festered into a verbal brawl between residents of public housing and those who run it.
"HUD has determined there is not a conflict of interest in the work I've done for [the Public Housing Association of Residents] and my work on the board," says Norris. "Unfortunately, some people are trying to take the focus away from the housing authority and drag PHAR's name through the mud and my name through the mud."
A HUD spokesperson confirms to the Hook March 25 that the agency has found no financial conflict of interest with Norris at this time.
HUD funds Charlottesville's 376 public housing units, which are managed by the Charlottesville Redevelopment and Housing Authority. CRHA has a board of directors– a group that is often in conflict, according to former board member Norris.
The residents of Westhaven, Crescent Hall, and other scattered units have their own association– PHAR– and pretty much all of the entities involved are pointing fingers at each other for the mess the city's public housing is in.
Last year, the housing authority requested the HUD review, and in February HUD returned a 41-page assessment citing numerous problems, including the housing authority's failure to adopt policies that ensure financial viability, reluctance to follow policy in rent collection, lack of trained and knowledgeable staff, and lack of support from the board of directors for policy enforcement.
Among those pages is one paragraph noting that the chair of the housing authority board of directors– at that time, Norris– had been paid by PHAR.
The residents association hired former city councilor Holly Edwards to administer a $150K grant from HUD to help residents access services in the community that could improve their lives, explains Norris. When Edwards asked for help in setting up the administrative procedures for the ROSS grant– Resident Opportunities and Self-Sufficiency– "I was happy to help out," says Norris. "I've served numerous roles at PHAR, both paid and unpaid. I was administrative director four or five years ago. I've been publicly associated with PHAR, and I'm very proud of that."
He was paid $9,200 for his work, and when the HUD field officer working on the assessment saw his name on the program, "They asked the legitimate question, was it a conflict of interest, and their superiors say it was not," says Norris.
"That assessment is just the tip of the iceberg," continues Norris. "It doesn't answer the bigger question: Is the housing authority a viable entity? It's hemorrhaging hundreds of thousands of dollars a year, it's poorly funded and poorly managed."
Board member Bob Stevens is openly critical of Norris' gig with PHAR, particularly because PHAR sued the housing authority, and board members Norris and Stevens were assigned to work on legal strategy. "If you're working for one of the plaintiffs, you don't sit in on legal strategy meetings," blasts Stevens.
"Disingenuous," returns Norris. "There were many, many months when I did no work for PHAR. He's trying to make it look like PHAR was trying to buy my support."
Housing board members knew of his work with PHAR and he disclosed his income from PHAR, adds Norris.
"I knew he worked at PHAR 12 or 15 years ago," says Stevens. "None of us knew he was doing work for them [currently]."
Regardless of the dispute over any conflict of interest, housing authority director Connie Dunn says generalizations that the authority is a mess are "way overblown" and that it's operating more efficiently than ever before.
She acknowledges the housing authority has been plagued with high turnover, and points out that housing directors in places like Waynesboro or Wytheville stay in their jobs 15 or more years.
In a March 22 letter responding to HUD and its finding on the lack of trained and knowledgeable staff, Dunn writes that PHAR and Legal Aid spend a lot of time challenging the housing authority's normal operations, "often forcing staff to operate in a hostile work environment."
Then there's the conflict between the housing authority when it attempts to enforce policy and the resident association. "Other housing authorities are not dealing with this constant push back on policy," says Dunn. "And our policy is lenient compared to other places."
She says she has no problem working with the residents association, with these caveats: "It doesn't mean that the housing authority can bend the rules and it doesn't mean I'm going to allow criminal activity. There's an expectation that if you apply [for public housing], you should be admitted."
Dunn offers a further perspective about public housing. "It's not suppose to be permanent housing," she says. "It's supposed to be transitional housing to allow residents to get their financial house in order."
Maybe that was the case at one time, responds PHAR vice-chair Joy Johnson. "It's about the only affordable housing in Charlottesville," she says.
Housing authority rents average $233 for a one-bedroom apartment, $274 for a three-bedroom and $341 for a five-bedroom, according to Dunn
PHAR jumps into the fracas with a four-page statement at a March 25 press conference, and complains that HUD made no effort to consult with residents for their perspective on the housing authority management.
"The report contains a number of misrepresentations, misunderstandings, and incorrect information," blasts PHAR staffer and one-time city council candidate Brandon Collins. "The CRHA seems to have embraced these lies as a way to deflect criticism from the public."
Continues Collins, "Our homes are crumbling, we are treated with disrespect, our rights are being violated, we demand a seat at the table, and we are tired of an out-of-control housing authority that is ignoring its own policies and procedures."
"Enough is enough," say sign-carrying residents at the press conference.
Both Collins and PHAR vice-chair Joy Johnson denounce the attacks on Norris and PHAR.
Norris has gotten a bad rap, says former councilor/PHAR service coordinator Holly Edwards. "He has consistently worked hard for low-income people over the years," she says. "He's consistently worked hard for PHAR."
She says that the tension between the housing authority and tenants is happening all over the country. "Urban renewal happened in the '60s," she says. "It's all crumbling."
Mediation between the two might be a good idea, she suggests.
In the midst of the controversy stemming from the HUD assessment, Edwards is one person who doesn't think it's so bad. "I'm hoping people will see the HUD report as an opportunity to create changes in the housing authority," she says.
"It's an opportunity to transform the city," says Edwards, "and the transformation can be in more viable and valuable housing stock for people across a wide spectrum of incomes."
45 comments
$341 for a 5 bedroom joint in Cville? What exactly is the complaint again? Cry me a river.
poorly managed yes, poorly funded NO.
5.9 million to manage 376 homes that are presumably paid for? Thats over 15,000 dollars a year per unit.
Why doesn't the hook do a story on where all the money goes, why people live there for generations and what the lifers are doing to get themselves out of the taxpayers pocket.
Are they REALLY tryng to help themslves?
Can I really be on the same side as these two guys who have welding shop bikini calendars on their kitchen walls?
They shouldn't have to take all that guff from those uppity management people. Rules n' thangs. You know it ain't right. I think the PHAR folks ought to threaten to up and go somewhere else.
And Brandon Collins, with enough presence of mind to run for City Council and the leisure time do a regular music gig at the Blue Moon Diner, does he really live there as implied by the text above? Shame on him if so, the little Portlandic parasite. Or is he just co-opting the people's struggle as his own, which is even more pathetic?
It might be a Catch-22 but really, once you've demonstrated all this organizational ability, energy, and the capacity to make an association and a campaign, haven't you demonstrated the wherewithal to get a dang job that pays and go fend for yourself off the dole like the rest of us working folk?
I pay for this nonsense and it just chaps my hide. Good Gawd Almighty, it's enough to make a man vote Republican. At least until you think about the welfare spent on General Dynamics.
RE: "Why doesn't the hook do a story on where all the money goes, why people live there for generations and what the lifers are doing to get themselves out of the taxpayers pocket."
Have you lost your damn mind ?????????????
These are questions that are not asked, and will *** N E V E R *** be asked by sensitive, socially-conscious progressives.
Mr. Norris' actions in this case are unethical.
The appearance of conflict of interest IS conflict of interest. No question: Norris is clearly in an unethical position and has chosen to risk Charlottesville's reputation with federal agencies. This has no small implications. It does however ensure that Charlottesville will be heavily scrutinized when applying for federal assistance with schools, roads and infrastructure, special projects...and, yes, services that benefit the poor.
Former Mayor Norris appears to care about no other Charlottesvillians EXCEPT the disadvantaged. Unfortunately this Robin Hood mentality has created a significant non-target hurdle for those who seek to sustain transparent and honest tax-supported work in defense of the poor. Robin Hood however was a rogue thief , not an elected official of the tax-paying citizenry.
After being subjected to his Tea Party-influenced political tactics over the past many months, Charlottesville voters should now find it apparent that this costly, one trick pony can't be out of office soon enough. Unfortunately, I fear that the kicking-and-spitting denial of true intentions despite clear evidence otherwise will only continue from Norris until his elected power has officially ceased.
The Policy we want is when your income goes down, such as losing your job, we want the rent reduced instantly. Mrs. Ayers, a resident of 20 years, lost her job last year and her rent wasn't reduced instantly to $25 so she couldn't pay at her old rate. After 6 months they put Mrs. Ayers out,(a 20 year resident). They still put her out after 6 months despite going to Brandon/Norris/City Council. They at least put a temp. stop to evictions. Every time a resident gets a better job, we always report it instantly so our rent will go up, so why can't our rent go down instantly when we lose our job?
Just another day in C'ville. The clique that runs things up to its usual tricks.
In the first place, the City has no business being a landlord! All public housing should be sold off to the private sector who would develop it as they saw fit, likely increase the tax base, and maybe eliminate a lot of the social problems like crime, drugs, and welfare dependency.
The whole idea of urban renewal and public housing turned out to be a disaster.
"A HUD spokesperson confirms to the Hook March 25 that the agency has found no financial conflict of interest with Norris at this time." "...at this time" is the operative phrase here
So Norris and Edwards have a cozy"scratch my back" relationship. What's the difference between this and the good ol' boy network?
I believe Brandon Collins is a full time paid employee of PHAR and has purchased a home this past year. He's living better than the residents who are paying him. I do not know how he got the job since PHAR is supposed to be an association of residents, tenants of public housing. It seems that when there's money to be had the opportunists show up and the low income do not benefit financially. Norris certainly has. Has Edwards? Legal Aid?
@Hollowboy, public housing is owned by HUD and Charlottesville has no right to dispose of the property.
@Follow The Policy, the finance director reports every month the renters that are in arrears, many of whom did not report their increase in income for months.How do you know what Mrs. Ayers assets are? Did she receive severance pay?
There are conflicts and then there are appearances of conflicts. In this case, the latter is enough to cast a stench over Norris and the agency. No credible organization like this should ever hire the chairman of the board as a staffer or contractor. Norris - and I know you're reading this Dave - is using a public position for personal financial gain which may not be a conflict but unquestionably has the appearance of one, and there was nothing done to mitigate that appearance. His actions affect the organization's credibility, legitimacy, and, most importantly, its governance which he was charged with overseeing as the chairman.
Why has Mrs. Ayers been there for 20 years? Even a fallen trapeze artist has to climb out of the net sometime or they can no longer be called a trapeze artise; they are just a squatter in the circus owner's net.
@Hollowboy...You really stated the nub of the issue: Public housing since the 1960s has been a sheer disaster. Look at the big cities: crime, corruption, indefinite occupation, lining of pockets. Norris is just a small town version of the big city corruption. Classic liberal: keep working on a problem, make a career of it, fail at it, and keep making a career of it despite your failed record.
@Dolemite...I would much rather the portion of my check allocated to "welfare" go to General Dynamics than to public housing. I could find very few approved mortgage applications in this country where the applicant listed "welfare" as their source of income, but I can find thousands where the applicant listed "General Dynamics" or "Pfizer" or "Tyco" or "Astra Zeneca" as their source of income. Try voting Republican!
@Holly Edwards..."Urban renewal happened in the 1960s...it's all crumbling." What is crumbling. By the late 1970s, large cities like Philly, Detroit, St. Louis, Baltimore were already in a downward spiral that continues to today. The center cities thrive with suburbanites visiting (at least some of them do) while most low income neighborhoods are, well, still low income. The family has disintegrated, the value on education is gone, taxpayers have been replaced with the "takers," drugs are rampant, life has no value, teenage pregnancy rates skyrocket, murders occur in numbers that gun-haters like to blame on guns, etc., etc. Why is that occurring? The cycle of poverty.
Teach the kids the following...
1. Graduate high school first.
2. Find a vocation you love and work at it.
3. Establish yourself in that vocation (e.g., spend a few years in plumbing, electrical, auto mechanics, etc.).
4. If you have a boy/girlfriend, marry them after completing the above steps.
5. Get established in your marriage (a year or two, maybe).
6. Then have a child, if you want one or more.
Pretty simple formula, solves the problem. The "I want mine now" mentality has sent those who can into high debt (credit cards, etc.) and those who can't into drugs, theft and crime.
R.I.P.: Ennis Cosby
Boy, pull back the sheets and see how MANY people are living on the dole in this community.
Lifetime permanent residents paying $341/month for a 5-bedroom home.
Non-profit "leaders" playing politics and holding paid city positions.
It reminds me of The Sopranos. There are conflicts everywhere.
POLITICIANS fund and administer the very programs that give them a living, sometimes by clipping small payments from multiple organizations to, in aggregate, give them a living. Of course they scratch each other's backs and put each other on the payrolls of their various organizations. They go along and get along.
The Charlottesville Democratic Party is the kingmaker that makes this all possible ... it ain't just Norris - it's business as usual. Poverty is a business ... with LOTS of cash flowing through many small streams.
RESIDENTS find a permanent government teat to clamp onto and take a subsidized life FOREVER.
Yes, Charlottesville is expensive and most of us have to behave responsibly by learning skills, finishing school, limiting our family sizes and living within our means. But, clearly not ALL of us. And the spirit of "we deserve to be taken care of" is sickening. Just being born into a town doesn't give you lifetime privileges to be kept there.
The little bit about participating in legal discussions on both sides of the aisle being okay sounds like Wall Street logic. Goldman Sachs would be proud.
The Hook should really take a look at the intertwined web between our government, the local non-profits, and the funders that keep it all going. And take another look at the giveaway of the old Jefferson School. That one stunk to high heaven and was an outright gift to former Charlottesville employees and politicians who took no risk and will collectively reap millions in rewards.
It's not just Route 29 that imitates New Jersey.
I wonder what would happen if wefare was unavailable to anyone who drops out of school?
Perhaps the dropouts would commit more cimes, but the tax money saved by those that stuck it out and became productive members of society would be paying taxes to build more jail cells for those who dropped out and went into a life of crime.
So the money would be a wash but we would have net less dropouts and fewer total criminals on the streeet.
Asking why someone cannot get off of welfare in 20 years is a reasonable question and should be asked. If nothing else to shut up the naysayers. Let the sunshine.
Whoa, hold thy horses. I just re-read the article. Let me get this straight...PHAR "hires" Edwards to administer at a $150k HUD grant (a rather small amount to manage, administer and allocate). She hires Norris to help "the administrator hired by PHAR to administer this small grant." And Norris charges PHAR $9,200, which is 6.1% of the grant's value.
Of course Norris was "happy to help out." With his experience in public housing, I bet he could have done the work in, say, 40 hours total (at least I hope it would not take more than 40 consulting hours to map out a plan to manage a small grant). Not bad work for $230 per hour.
And people wonder why public housing gets a bad rap.
R.I.P.: Lawanda Page
So, I assume Edwards received a salary from PHAR, correct? I also assume that the ongoing administration of that money will have overhead costs.
At best, PHAR only received 93.9% of their money because someone decides to charge them $9,200 to administer a small grant. But we need to remove Edwards's cut as well. Crikey.
If I am wrong on these assumptions, correct me please.
R.I.P: Lawanda Page
BS on instantly getting rent reduced. The rest of the world has to keep paying their same mortage and that is what pushes them to find employment quickly. This insane thinking that the world should instantly take care of them is really kind of pathetic and sad.
If you home is crumbling get off you butt and fix it.
Not everybody pays that low a rent in public housing. I have several coworkers that live in "public" housing and they are paying more than I am for rent and they do work. Others do the same thing.
As a renter, I too would want mold issues addressed, leaky faucets repaired, and access to community rooms.
I guess the reason some people live in "subsidized" housing for 20 years may relate to the fact that incomes have not kept up with housing costs.
Maybe that is why other people purchase homes so that the government can subsidize them through the mortgage interest deduction and real estate tax deduction.
Subsidy is as subsidy does. Just 2 different groups of people.
"Norris has gotten a bad rap, says former councilor/PHAR service coordinator Holly Edwards. "He has consistently worked hard for low-income people over the years," she says. 'He's consistently worked hard for PHAR.' "
"He was paid $9,200 for his work."
Cognitive dissonance much?
"That assessment is just the tip of the iceberg," continues Norris. "It doesn't answer the bigger question: Is the housing authority a viable entity? It's hemorrhaging hundreds of thousands of dollars a year, it's poorly funded and poorly managed."
Hemorrhaging hundreds of thousands and poorly funded? Thank goodness it isn't better funded.
@Cvillian: Since when does a deduction equal a subsidy? "I'll take $10 and let you have $2 back as my gift to you for putting your head down and working and saving to buy a house." Now let me me just shake out the piggy back, and get that City of Charlottesville real estate tax together for another year.
Wow, I feel so subsidized.
When is the $100 million check coming in to redo all of public housing like they have been talking about. Are they having money trouble in Washington?
1) landlords get to write off their mortgage interest too which is a direct subsidy to renters through lower rents. don't think so? Take it away and see how quickly rents escalate.
2) If people are paying more rent IN subsidized housing then for aviaiable outside of public housing then why do we have public housing? I thought it was because there is no "affordable" private stock to be had. No wonder HUD is investigating.
3) HUD properties drive UP rents as people with section 8 vouchers use their free money to compete. for housing with those that do not get free money.
4) 20 years is simly too long for smeone to live off the publc dole unless they have a damn good reason. Having a gaggle of kids isn't a good enough excuse.
Dave will never measure up to my boy Sherman.
He needs to practice the left hand never sees the right hand much more.
The business of poverty is as much a fine art , and magic as it is the daily grind.
Those that hope to succeed need to make us believe , for the best marks are
those that give willingly ,true believers.
I wonder what's going to happen when there's also a Human Rights Commission at the table here?
@dolemite...so you've seen the calendar eh? That calendar was brilliant advertising, it's the talk of the town.
Follow The Policy March 28th, 2013 | 9:01am
The Policy we want is when your income goes down, such as losing your job, we want the rent reduced instantly. Mrs. Ayers, a resident of 20 years, lost her job last year and her rent wasn't reduced instantly to $25 so she couldn't pay at her old rate. After 6 months they put Mrs. Ayers out,(a 20 year resident). They still put her out after 6 months despite going to Brandon/Norris/City Council. They at least put a temp. stop to evictions. Every time a resident gets a better job, we always report it instantly so our rent will go up, so why can't our rent go down instantly when we lose our job?
That post is wrong in so many ways....:(
Follow The Policy March 28th, 2013 | 1:37pm
When is the $100 million check coming in to redo all of public housing like they have been talking about. Are they having money trouble in Washington?
You might want to move on FTP. Remodeling your apartment probably isn't on any to do lists in Washington.
@Follow The Policy, the original estimate for redevelopment was $155 million.
@WhoaNelly, the government has helped with remodeling housing all over the country. The city got on the path of rebuilding when HUD sponsored a program call HOPE VI which was designed to replace massive urban apartment complexes with one and two story homes. That program is now non-existent. Norris needs to answer why cinder block, cement and brick construction needs to be torn down after 40 years and replaced with wood and wall board? Will the new housing have a life time of 10 years? Norris needs to explain why the tax payer is being asked to pay for housing that is in better condition than what he lives in. Why don't we put them up at the Omni instead?
And the residents rights policy is that all existing residents get first dibs on all the new places when they are built. Thanks Joy Johnson
I will shock you Bill Marshal by saying I agree with much of what you say. The only thing about the gaggle comment is I have known a few women who were disabled but working, and their well employed husband decided to walk out. It can take 20 years to see all your kids off to college.
Old Timer,
I understand your points and they are well taken. My thoughts were more to the women who keep having kids once they have secured the home. I also would not mind it if they took some money out of this program and used it to clobber deadbeat dads to do their duty.
I say this with each article on this circus:
We must all scream loudly if they ever propose building any more public housing here. Westhaven is perfectly serviceable and NOT HIGH DENSITY, which gives it a somewhat humane sensibility with ample green space, mature trees, and parking per family. The federal government has it all wrong in wanting to replace a development like that. GIANT WASTE OF MONEY... BRING ON SEQUESTRATION AND GOD BLESS IT> I agree,too, there should be some ultimate limit to how many years you can live there. It was never intended as a permanent lifestyle.
Every child that grows up in a family like that, has the worst possible role modeling. The worst.
@amigo1, the federal government is not planning to put in higher density. The feds prefer scattered site housing so that ghettos of poverty are not created or perpetuated. This is a purely local initiative that is championed by Norris and his dwindling supporters. Public housing is not crumbling. That is why people are moving in every month and others are begging not to be kicked out. They simply want safe, decent, and affordable housing and the city want the low income in middle income housing for twisted idea dealing with some kind of "justice.," social primarily and economic. Norris is not an expert on housing nor is he an expert on social issues. Charlottesville has een many Norrises in the past and will continue to. Fortunately the federal and state governments have been there and done that. Ask yourself the question "Would you rather live in public housing in the city or a trailer court in the county"? Norris will most likely use the knowledge he has gained from his stint in Cville, get a doctorate and move on.
But our city doesn't have any money to build high rise public housing, so won't they being trying to get federal money or HUD grants etc. to achieve their goals?
Is it racist or bigoted for me to think that all the hard work I did to get out of a bad neighborhood is for naught since the city wants to build homes in my neighbothood and let the guys who sat in the back of the class move next door (and I have to subsidize it?)
Whats the use in trying?
@Mr. Silk, nobody is recommending the build of high rise public housing. Other than remodeling Crescent Hall, the recommendation is to tear down existing housing and build two story apartments and single family homes. We will not be getting better housing, just newer.
Building that newer housing will also line a few developers pockets with cash if their friends have their way. THis looks like another scheme for one of those public/private partnerships that does more for the private sector than the public.
http://www.dailyprogress.com/opinion/guest_columnists/article_f7f08f54-5...
"By adding market-rate housing into redeveloped neighborhoods, CRHA can create new revenue without losing any of the existing 376 public housing units."
"By adding market-rate housing into redeveloped neighborhoods, CRHA can create new revenue without losing any of the existing 376 public housing units."
So far no developers seem to be interested in partnering with the dysfunctional CRHA financially. They are not going to provide housing for people who do not pay their rent. It's a question of credit-ready tenants. No one I know will want to pay for market-rate housing the way public housing is today.
Cville Eye, Southern Development has done pretty well using that same scheme with Habitat for Humanity. They've even snookered the city into giving them land to do it on based on the laughable notion that housing the poor is their real aim.
@not buyin' it, "Cville Eye, Southern Development has done pretty well using that same scheme with Habitat for Humanity" No, actually they have not developed anything with Habitat. The ground has yet to be broken. How well the partnership goes remains to be seen. I believe I heard Mayor Huja at last night's City Council meeting say that each low income house in the 10th & Page in partnership with Piedmont Housing Alliance required a $50k to $60k subsidy for each home. Habitat has enough on its plate in trying to develop Southwood Mobbile Park. The seven homes it plans to build with Southern Development 43 in Burnet Commons Phase II is a small project with very little impact on affordably subsidized housing. Of course the City provided the land for those houses and no one knows how much the city's financial subsidy will be. In other words, there really isn't any partnership, just the usual giveaways. Again, only time will tell. If anything will be3 profitable to anybody.
Cville Eye, most of the project at Sunrise Park is actually Don Franco's baby. That's the same Don Franco who's involved in the cemetery scheme. My mistake for assuming he was actually part of Southern Development.
Sunrise is by far one of the ugliest developments I've seen in this town but it gained approval with a clever design competition that made it seem as though it would be a showcase for innovative approaches to planning and housing design. Nothing could be further from the truth in the end. Nothing they have built has anything to do with the competition and there is absolutely nothing innovative about the completed project other than its use of Habitat's reputation to move forward a project that would have faced opposition otherwise. Nor is it really a project to house the poor. It's a clever gentrification project that will ultimately displace far more of the surrounding residents than it will ever house. In the process several historic structures were destroyed as well.
Dan Rosenzweig and the local Habitat management have made no secret of their plans to continue making money for developers and with partners in powerful places like Norris, they are likely to succeed unless the public wakes up and realizes what going on. http://cvillehabitat.org/new-paradigm
@ not buy'in it...don't know where you get your information/opinions from but Sunrise NOT ugly, it will not displace residents, it moves them to updated housing. The builder did that project for a much lower than standard profit. The sub-contractors were beat down on price every step along the way. I know because I was one of them.
@ not buy'in it...Gentrification? The people living in the trailors next store are who got those units.
Holly Edwards says that the tension between the housing authority and tenants is happening all over the country. "Urban renewal happened in the '60s," she says. "It's all crumbling."
Technically, that's true. Like saying World War Two happened in the 1930s....uh, 1939 to 1945. In Charlottesville urban renewal happened from 1954 until 2013. It's still happening. According to the Hook's Annual Manual, the city has had more than its share of neighborhood clearing, "including" (but not limited to) Vinegar Hill in the '60s and Garrett Street in the '70s.
Why didn't the reporter point out the full truth if she was going to quote a misleading statement? Do you have a link to the full public housing archives? Why not? In Feb. 2009 Edwards said on the Schilling Show that she would help get the full history out there. But she was lying.
In Nov. 2006 the full City Council in a public, open meeting, refused to release the archives. No local paper recorded that history or reported that news. But I documented and published that history. On Mar. 25, 2004 the City, through its assistant city manager and director of the urban renewal housing authority, began blocking the full archives so the public wouldn't know the full truth. Rochelle Small-Toney eventually resigned, was hired and fired by Savannah, Ga. and now she's at Fayetteville, NC.
Not only was this recent history documented and published as it unfolded, BUT I also lobbied and wrote emails and posts letting local papers know what's going on. Now Lisa Provence can't say it was a mistake that she mislead the readers to think urban renewal happened only in the '60s and people are still mad about what happened only in one decade. While this seemed like an honest report, the doubling-down on false history reflects poorly on Lisa, The Hook and Charlottesville.
@not buyin' it, Southwood is in the county past the Holiday Inn. Sunrise is in the city. From Habitat's website: "When finished in 2013, Sunrise Park will have nine affordable rentals, 20 new Habitat Partner Family homes and 30 market rate units as well as commercial and community space. Sunrise Park is the first mobile home park in the country to be redeveloped without resident displacement. " It will be interesting to see how many of the homes actually sell at "market rate" implying no subsidy. Of course that information will not be public because we do not know who contributed to that housing.
Gentrification is always better than slumification.
In what Paul Harvey used to call the “For What It’s Worth Department”: When I unexpectedly crossed paths with a former Southern Development operative several weeks ago, he was eager to rehash just what’s under discussion here. In mid rant, and without the slightest prompt from me, he noted that he “wrote the City’s Affordable Housing policy.”
Otherwise, I would just note that none of the developers being named here – SD, PHA, Habitat – is now or ever have been in the business of providing housing to “the poor” or even of providing housing affordable to a wide array of would be buyers. All three are in the business of purveying Affordable Housing, that is, items of real estate priced according to a precise, public policy-dictated formula that excludes a wide array of would be buyers. (And I can attest personally that none of them has ever built anything I could afford.)
Habitat carefully vets future owners of its units to assure their ability to pay. And PHA seems to have a readymade clientele among U.Va. junior faculty members. As for SD, it has simply followed the money during a housing downturn. While qualified buyers have been few and standard lenders chary, the public sector has continued to dole out abundant development funding in a variety of forms – cash appropriations, grants, tax credits, low interest and/or soon forgiven loans, discounts on public property, outright gifts of public property, etc.
Then there’s that always valuable Affordable Housing bonus, i.e. “good will.” Despite the fact that nothing noble is going on in these situations, public spokespeople and the press can always be counted on to celebrate each and every new project as if it were the epitome of disinterested service to the neediest.
@Antoinette W. Roades, Subsidized housing is a multi-billion dollar business. Thanks for outlining how. Of course there are those "poverty pimps" who rise on the economic, political, social and academic ladders by advocating for the poor and providing ineffective services for the poor. PHAR is supposed to an association of public housing tenants. Who's mortgages are being paid from that luscious pot. Certainly not the tenants - they don't have mortgages and that money is not used to subsidize rent.