LET THE FACTS SPEAK: "Landlords refused to even consider voucher holders, some candidly citing the low subsidies and their desire to cash in on a hot market."

Previously:

If local "progressives" aren't holding City Hall's feet to the fire about Housing Choice vouchers, are they really progressive?

We'll be reinforcing this point again and again as the 2019 primary draws closer, because at a time when the federal housing voucher program is only minimally effective, our Mayor Jeff Gahan, David Duggins and their hand-chosen takeover administrators at the New Albany Housing Authority continue to insist their plan to half-size public housing in our city is viable because those slated for displacement will be handed vouchers.

The real-world evidence differs rather dramatically from bunker dogma.

With Market Hot, Landlords Slam the Door on Section 8 Tenants, by Glenn Thrush (New York Times)

 ... For most of its existence, the main shortcoming of the Section 8 program, created in 1974 as an alternative to ghettoizing public housing projects, was its inability to keep up with demand. But the recent economic boom in Philadelphia, long one of the most affordable big cities in the Washington-to-Boston corridor, has led to rent increases even in poor and working-class neighborhoods, and many landlords are now refusing to accept the vouchers when they can get higher rents, without the bureaucratic red tape that plagues the program, on the open market.

A survey by the nonpartisan Urban Institute, commissioned by the Department of Housing and Urban Development and released in August, documented the problem in stark terms. It found that 67 percent of Philadelphia’s landlords refused to even consider voucher holders, some candidly citing the low subsidies and their desire to cash in on a hot market. The rejection rates were even higher in Fort Worth and Los Angeles, where three-quarters of landlords turned away Section 8 tenants.

Put at risk by these market forces is the future of a core federal housing program that now serves 2.2 million low-income families and was started with a simple goal: to enable those families to escape neighborhoods increasingly segregated along racial and economic lines for a place with decent housing and better schools, stores and transportation ...

Be Afwaid--Be Vewy Vewy Afwaid!!

Hmmmmm-let’s see!

Report on the eerily bizzare near sane Common Council Work Session concerning the city's budget (and alleged abuses)?

Or speak of an afterglow of Sierra Nevada Pale Ale accompanied by broccoli cheese soup, fried fish, and a lengthy conversation with Landlord Association founder Brian Haeseley topped off with an oversized portion of strawberry cheesecake?

Damn! I hate making these decisions!

OK! Since my good friend and able Tribune reporter Daniel Suddeath was present for the former, I shall leave it in his very capable hands for the moment. I reserve the option of coming back to it later however.

Instead I’ll dwell here on the latter.

So with my partner in crime Mark Cassidy & I having survived almost three hours of Councilmen v Professoress debate, we proceeded to Studio’s for nourishment and medication.

As I was pouring my first beer of the evening in walks Mr. Haeseley calls me by name and says he would like to have a one on one with me concerning rental property issues sometime soon.

I responded that I’d be glad to and Mark & I made our way into the dining room. As I sat down it occurred to me that there was no time like the present. So without further ado I invited Brian to join us.

He began the conversation by saying that although we seemed to be on opposite sides of the fence, he felt that we’d both misunderstood the point the other was trying to make and would like to discuss the issue to find where we could agree.

He seemed sincere and I’m all about finding allies as opposed to making enemies so we dove in head first.

We spoke frankly of registration, tenants rights, owners responsibilities, inspections, the city’s responsibilities, sheriff’s sales, property liens, foreclosures, evictions, rats, trash, weeds, and much more.

In the end although we still disagreed on what constitutes a “business” we did come to terms on cleanups. It is EVERYBODY’S job.

So much so that I think I got a commitment out of him to actively join us this weekend with the Uptown Neighborhood effort.

I also believe we came a better understanding of who is responsible for what at least in broad terms.

I explained to him the hurdles we’ve run into in dealing with city officials and he in turn schooled me on the differences between a tax lien sale and a sheriff’s sale in terms of who gets title when and how. Neither is simple nor quick but both are doable in terms of abandoned housing.

I came away encouraged that the lines of communication had been opened at least. Time alone will tell if either of us will be able to successfully put our money where our mouths are.

But hey! We gotta start some where!

There was much more detail to this first conversation but I’ve been going since 6AM and I’ve got to do it all over again in a few hours.

More to come later!

I'll Bring the Coffee, You Bring the Doughnuts, and the Beer?--Well You Know......

This began as a comment in response to a March 2nd post at the New Albany Eyesores blog: "You are all fundamentalists with a top dressing ...

His post coupled with a re-emergence of conversations about a unified co-operative voice within the various group thinks in New Albany led me to throwing it up on the marquee.

“If we were to set property value issues aside, and tax base issues aside, should we, as a community, at least not "stand together" against the practice of renting out homes that are known to be infested with rodents and/or insects?”

In reference to your last question, the answer is an unequivocal yes!

Unfortunately it leads directly into another question--how do we go about doing that?

And that splits off into at least three questions.

How do we convince the city to act?

How do we convince the "landlords" who are doing it right that we are not "out to get them" personally?

How do we get the various groups to come together, hang together, and present a unified front to be dealt with?

Everyone knows the problems mentioned are not specific to one block, one street, or one neighborhood.

Yet the turf wars wage on! Not in a violent way but in a passive/aggressive manner that does nothing but nullify any effort mounted.

If it's not boundary lines, its historic preservation!

If it's not on the other end of town, it's too political!

If it's not political, it's too personal!

And on, and on, and on ad-infinitum!

News flash! It's all political! It's all personal! It affects us all in one fashion or another!

I agree it is time to join hands, share a common kettle of soup and sing "Kum By Ya"!

However, for it to amount to anything we are going to have to agree to disagree on some of the specifics of how we get there and hang tough on the goals we want to achieve.

For those of us who have been self motivated, self employeed, independent thinkers all of our adult lives, that is a tough nut to crack.

But crack it we must lest all of our homes implode in on themselves and our grandchildren be taxed with this self same conversation thirty years hence.

We are blessed with a limitless cadre of varying talents to bring to the table.

How we get to the table is the 64 thousand dollar question!

Answers anyone???