RE: [Mpls] Section 8
A lot has been written about the pros and cons of Section 8. Here's some more information and two questions about what Minneapolis should do about it: *With vacancies rising, the affordable housing problem is as much an income shortage as a housing shortage. Most voucher holders earn less than $10,000 per year and are not income-qualified on their own to rent the vast majority of vacant apartments - even those financed with tax credits. To provide affordable housing for these families, their out-of-pocket rents need to be under $350 per month. *The National Multi Housing Council is pushing Congress to fix the Section 8 program so that more landlords would be willing to accept vouchers. The recommendations include reducing the paperwork, eliminating HUD's duplicative inspection process and eliminating HUD's special lease provisions that create two sets of rules for landlords - one for voucher holders and one for all other tenants. *Contrary to some postings, landlords do not have to accept vouchers -- unless the project was publicly financed with tax credit, bonds, etc., in which case it's part of the deal. *A 2001 GAO report examining the total per-unit costs of various housing assistance programs found that production programs are more expensive than vouchers. However, it did not recommend replacing production programs with vouchers on a national basis because in many markets production programs are the only source of new affordable rental units. In others, they are an integral part of revitalizing distressed communities. *Congress is likely to cut Section 8 funding by at least 10% this year. So my questions are these: Can the city/county invest some of its affordable housing dollars in a local voucher program to supplement Section 8 or is all of the money from federal programs specifically targeted toward new development (CDBG, HOME funds, etc.)? If the city/county can establish a local voucher program, should it? John Rocker Calhoun TEMPORARY REMINDER: 1. Send all posts in plain-text format. 2. Cut as much of the post you're responding to as possible. Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest, and more: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
[Mpls] Section 8;Hiawatha;Panhandling
David Wilson wrote: One other story. There is a panhandler who works Nicollet and Grant. He rode the bus with me once. He put the touch on the passengers and then got off at Franklin Liquors. I never give he any money. He replied once when I said no :So you don't participate? My reply was Put me on your 'Do not ask List. I know. Thats why I no longer hand out money on the street. Even if their need is totally legitimate, it seems to me they might not fill it with my money. I give money to organizations that have a record of filling the needs so that people can get them met without begging on the street. I once had little coupons to hand out to go to one of the places I give to, so I could hand them one and say Go get a meal. I also started using my bus card down to where it had one ride and then would hold onto it until someone said they needed money for a ride. Then I would hand them the one-ride bus card and say Heres a ride for you. I have a story about being hit twice by the same person with a lame story, but it happened in St Paul. - Steve Meldahl writes: He told me that he averages 3 to 4 calls per day for service or maintenance. Thats 40 times more aggravation than I have to endure. Now I ask you, which scenario sounds like the best way to run a business??? Well, but thats due to the neglect of the building, not Section 8. - Jeff Carlson wrote: Hiawatha Avenue is a death-trap to cross either by bike or foot and is way too wide for the 35 mile-an-hour speed limit mandated by MnDOT's promises to ourneighborhoods. Death-trap is stronger language than I would use, but it does make me glad I dont have mobility problems. As before, the solution to me is tunnels underneath where people would have to cross to a transit station. -- Jim Mork--Cooper War is cruelty, and you cannot refine it; and those who brought war into our Country deserve all the curses and maledictions a people can pour out. Gen. William T. Sherman (1864) Letter to the Mayor of Atlanta. Get your free Web-based E-mail at http://www.startribune.com/stribmail TEMPORARY REMINDER: 1. Send all posts in plain-text format. 2. Cut as much of the post you're responding to as possible. Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest, and more: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
[Mpls] Section 8
I've read the posts concerning Section 8. Twenty five years of participating with the program has taught me a few things. 1. For legit to discussion to occur, everyone has to understand and agree that about 95% or better of the landlords who do business in the city are law abiding and solid business people. Failure to grasp this knowledge, makes discussion useless. 2. Good landlords are defined by their tenants. Good tenants are defined by their landlords. 3. Bill Cullen points out the higher vacancy rate right now. It's come to my attention that the rate is actually higher then that. Throw in the free rent and bonus' being given, and the rate is even higher. Bill also notes the pure amount of units available. I've said it many times, there is no shortage of housing. That issue is over. Take those precious resources and spend them somewhere else. Henn County should shut down it's newly created housing department before it grows roots and stays forever. 4. There are 10,000 plus units avail in the metro right now, with over 3,000 on-line for occupation in 2003. Those who say those are too expensive and luxurious to help out are not paying attention to econ 101. The financiers of the new place will not allow the owners to lose money. They will force the A+ (new bldg) owner to fill her building with tenants. Take them from A- or B buildings if you must. The B building owner then chases C building tenants and so forth and so forth. End result, rent is going down, not staying even. The same report from GVA says rents are staying about even. Not true, the posted rent is staying even, but if you give a free month away, the rent just fell by one month or 8.5 percent. This is looking like 1988-1993 all over again. Great time to be a renter with bargaining position. 5. Bill Cullen asks if landlords are discriminating. Section 8 is a voluntary program. Regardless of tenants advocates protestations. The program is voluntary. 6. Bill Cullen asks if applicant's histories are preventing them from renting. YES. The city, county, state have made renting to high risk tenants ( Julie Sabo's term not mine) a potentially dangerous proposition for the small part time landlord. BTW it is the small part time landlord that has the most desirable units for families. Duplexes and houses. 7. Bill's final point is apt. Let's understand the problem before we start proposing solutions. 8. HUD is now again requiring full year leases as Keith has pointed out. HUD seems determined to never address this issue until 10's of thousands are in such desperate situation. Month to month leases are the only way management can deal with a situation that has gone bad. Mr. Meldahl points out, rightly so, that most Sect 8 renters are judgment proof. 9. Winning a judgment isn't easy, it's a pain in the a--! For those of you on the list who have gainful employment with no projected end date or desire to leave, you will never risk a judgment if you know your in the wrong. Those who have nothing to lose, or un-reliable income have nothing to fear. I.E. renting to someone with a rock solid income for 12 months or more at a crack is sensible. 10. Paper work, paperwork, paperwork. Oh and btw, don't let a Sect 8 Administrator say something like the rent's guaranteed, or it's simple, or they just don't know what their talking about. It doesn't wash. Ask the landlords. I refer you to item #2. Landlords and tenants decide if Section 8 is a good program. Not the administrators. Most of the landlords just hate it, I'll bet a large majority of the tenants wished there was a better way. 11. Jason Sittko asks two questions. Two answers. 1. The landlords are not professing more of it will cure the housing problem. More units solves the problem. His question number two I refer all to my point #1 12 Mr. Meldahl points out that there is higher maint cost on sect 8 units. Someone professed that older less maintained buildings are more likely the cause. Sect 8 certificates and vouchers go to any building, not by date or location. All things being equal and two 2-bedrooms next to each other on the same side of a building. The Section 8 one will likely need more work, a lot more. This is not a guarantee in every situation. But is something I will bet on. Like insurance actuarial tables, the facts just can't be argued. 13 We've played blame the landlord for too long in Mpls for housing needs. We have vacant units coming out of our ears. We have Executive Directors, and govt programs to choke all the kings horses. It's time to pursue completely different directions. Craig Miller Former Mpls Landlord Living in Rogers - Original Message - From: Bill Cullen [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wednesday, February 05, 2003 8:10 PM Subject: RE: [Mpls] No Longer the Giveaway County Board It seems that many of us equate homelessness with lack of housing. This
Re: [Mpls] Section 8 and Boarded Up Houses....
(WM) I've never much cared for HUDs notion that as soon as a family earns enough they have to leave. That makes it very tough for public housing to become a neighborhood because people aren't allowed to stay once they earn more than a certain amount. I think it's very defeating to the formation and maintenance of community. (VF)Long term public housing especially if not needed, is taken up spots to obtain the same chance as others had , a head start. I for one was never proud of the fact that I had to live in public housing, so I set my goals and dreams on owning a home. I looked at welfare and housing as a stepping stone to reach my dreams and goals, and the best thing I got out the programs, was a letter telling me, I am now making to much money. I made it! Secondly, with the way things are now in public housing or section 8, you can move anytime and anywhere, any city or any state. So you still would not have much neighborhood participation. hmm Let's see, Zero below Mn, or Sunny Fl. or Ga (WM) I've never much cared for HUDs notion that as soon as a family earns enough they have to leave. That makes it very tough for public housing to become a neighborhood because people aren't allowed to stay once they earn more than a certain amount. I think it's very defeating to the formation and maintenance of community. (VF) I am into to upward mobility not into regression, otherwise we would be faced with a lot more people homeless and not being able to obtain housing. I do believe that HUD can do more. Hud and mortgage companies like North side and Southside housing can team up with each other, to educate resident's on opportunities to own their own home, help them qualify to loans or even help with down payment assistance. I believe in teachable moments, Each one Teach one. We have to stop coming up with excuses to regression and come up with solutions for mobilities, upward. May I suggest good reading Who Moved My Cheese. a book about changes and how we deal with those changes head on. In order to achieve things in life we have to make and face difficult problems dead on to find solutions dead on. Vanessa Freeman Hawthorne From: WizardMarks [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: V.L. Freeman [EMAIL PROTECTED] CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Mpls] Section 8 and Boarded Up Houses Date: Sun, 05 Jan 2003 14:24:51 -0600 V.L. Freeman wrote: Oh those boarded houses are just a pain in the you know what. I wish that the city would think outside of the box for a change. WM: In a story last week in the Strib, Steve Brandt quoted MCDA's Earl Pettiford, I think, as saying that city-owned vacant/boardeds are almost all dealt with. Those remaining are in private hands. Some of those are also in probate court because the owner died intestate and it takes a long period of time for property to go through probate. The court has to find heirs to the person who died, etc. Then, if the heirs don't live here, they have a tricky time selling the property from wherever they are. Last but not least, I think Minneapolis needs to look into Public Housing. The number would just surprise to you know that there have been some on public housing assistance for 10-15 years. As long as they are not being asked to leave, they will not be serious as to finding permanent housing or non assistance housing. I think this is one reason why the homeless population is so great, a back log in our public housing.. WM: Public Housing is for those people who do not make enough money to afford to live in other types of housing. So long as the family makes less than that amount, they can live in public housing. For many that will not change since their earning power is so small. For others, the arrival of new babies changes the amount they can earn and still live in public housing. The drawback, which I watched on my block about a decade ago, was that if a family loses a child--child dies, for example, they will get moved out of their public housing because they no longer qualify for the size of house they had before the child died. That's a terribly wrenching thing to happen to a grieving family. I've never much cared for HUDs notion that as soon as a family earns enough they have to leave. That makes it very tough for public housing to become a neighborhood because people aren't allowed to stay once they earn more than a certain amount. I think it's very defeating to the formation and maintenance of community. WizardMarks, Central ___ Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest, and more: http://e-democracy.org/mpls _ MSN 8 with e-mail virus protection service: 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus ___ Minneapolis Issues Forum
Re: [Mpls] Section 8 and Boarded Up Houses....
Thank you Vanessa Freeman for your wonderful letter this morning. Sometimes people who were drowning in a sea of poverty hold on to the bottom rung of a ladder that they grab and have a hard time letting go to move up a rung. They have to be prodded to get them to take that next step, because compared to being homeless it seems awful good. They need to be reminded that others are also drowning and need that first rung more than they. Jason and Don Jorovski remind us that there are a thousand desperate souls in Minneapolis tonight, needing and waiting to grab that same bottom rung. We also need to build a wider more comfortable ladder with more than just bottom rungs. The key to such is Affordable Homeownership. All the talk of affordable housing has by and large left out the most viable method of stabilizing families and giving them a chance to keep climbing that ladder. Supportive homeownership is so much easier and more beneficial than supportive rental housing. It takes much less energy to stabilize a family in housing that they own than in transitional rental housing. Because it takes so much less energy, (you only have to give support for a short period, not the rest of their lives), it is much less expensive. Some powerful non-profits, who make their money from supplying subsidized rental property, do not like homeownership because it permanently removes their clients as a market. Also the profits from supportive services to stabilize a family in a home they own are far less than the seven or eight hundred dollars a month for a mat on the floor of a shelter. Far less than the up to $1200 to $1300 end cost they get for a supportive housing apartment. The costs to the taxpayers for a subsidized rental apartment are greater than the full monthly cost of a middle class home. My choice is to give the family the down payment, the support and a declining monthly subsidy for the first seven years. Then the family is on its own with not only a stabilized family, but also with seven years of equity in a house. That equity translates into small business loans and college educations for children as well as a family that is integrated into society and who can help others grab the ladder. Sharon Sales Belton had a plan to subsidize housing costs on three or four hundred thousand dollar town houses in order to, in her words, attract the middle class back into Minneapolis. She was on the right tract that housing was the key to having more middle class in Minneapolis, she just did not understand that the home grown kind are better than imported ones. She just did not understand that affordable homeownership is the key to taking poor people and making them Middle Class. A few Non-profit housing developers and providers are beginning to understand, and caring more for people than profits are starting programs for affordable homeownership. They understand that this process takes supportive services and training for the individuals, but that it is a long-term solution. NOT a quick fix that has to be re-fixed on an ongoing basis forever. The difference is empowerment and giving someone freedom from the temporary vagaries that afflict us all, but impact the poor in devastating ways. American Indian Housing Corporation is a good example of a Non-profit that is willing to construct such housing and create such a training program. They are looking at building such housing and supplying such support to create homeownership in the community. I think Marx meant this when he talked about Control of Capital Goods. We should empower people, not keep them in economic slavery. The old adage is true, we should teach people to fish rather than giving them temporary handouts that aren't temporary but lifelong. It costs no more to help someone to permanently OWN a house than it does to help someone to always be at the mercy of others for housing. It just takes a little more commitment and a little more care. People should call their Council Member and the Mayor and tell them to start talking about affordable homeownership of housing, not just institutionalized poverty in large affordable rental projects. People drowning in poverty are glad to grab even the Institutionalizes ladder, but we need to put in a couple of additional rungs. Homeownership is a ladder that leads up and out of the muddy riverbank of poverty, not just out of the cold water and drowning. Jim Graham, Ventura Village - someone who swam a few years in that cold river. We can only be what we give ourselves the power to be - A Cherokee Feast of Days (Remind someone of this) ___ Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest, and more: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
Re: [Mpls] Section 8 and Boarded Up Houses....
I think home ownership would almost always be preferable to rental housing - both for the occupant and the neighborhoods looking for stability. But (and this is especially true of the older housing stock in Minneapolis) how do you insulate the "affordable home owners" from the unpredictable and perhaps unmanagemable expenses that come with owning a house vs renting? New boiler? Pipes leaking? Roof problems?Hiring professionals to deal with these problems is very expensive, and if you are looking at first generation home owners it is likely they don't have the history of growing up in a "handy" family to tackle these themselves. If one of these events occurs around the time of a car problem, or a medical bill, and they need a subsidy for a period of years to make the home financially feasible, the financial pressure can be brutal. You may end up with either a rate of default or the need for a second program that either covers these housing related costs or provides loans - but servicing the loans and the housing costs may also be a killer for the occupants. Of course for example if you get a brand-new house built like a Habitat house some of these maintenance problems can be expected to be a long time off, but then the subsidy you provided up front just jumped a lot from a down payment . Perhaps the focus of affordable homeownership should be establishing what the criteria would be for someone to as you said get up to that next rung of the ladder to make sure they were not biting off more than they were capable of handling. As long as you are proposing a government subsidy of some kind what about a rebate on part of the rent paid prior to home ownership, or a generous "Rent to Own" plan where you start out renting the home and after 5 or 7 years your payments have accumulated to cover a down payment? I'm sure variations on these approaches have been tried in the past, I'm not familiar with all the programs offered from public and private organizations. Mike HessKingfield From: "JIM GRAHAM" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "V.L. Freeman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> CC: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: [Mpls] Section 8 and Boarded Up Houses Date: Mon, 6 Jan 2003 14:23:23 -0600 Thank you Vanessa Freeman for your wonderful letter this morning. Sometimes people who were drowning in a sea of poverty hold on to the bottom rung of a ladder that they grab and have a hard time letting go to move up a rung. They have to be prodded to get them to take that next step, because compared to being homeless it seems awful good. They need to be reminded that others are also drowning and need that first rung more than they. Jason and Don Jorovski remind us that there are a thousand desperate souls in Minneapolis tonight, needing and waiting to grab that same bottom rung. We also need to build a wider more comfortable ladder with more than just bottom rungs. The key to such is "Affordable Homeownership". All the talk of affordable housing has by and large left out the most viable method of stabilizing families and giving them a chance to keep climbing that ladder. Supportive homeownership is so much easier and more beneficial than supportive rental housing. It takes much less energy to stabilize a family in housing that they own than in transitional rental housing. Because it takes so much less energy, (you only have to give support for a short period, not the rest of their lives), it is much less expensive. Some powerful non-profits, who make their money from supplying subsidized rental property, do not like homeownership because it permanently removes their clients as a market. Also the profits from supportive services to stabilize a family in a home they own are far less than the seven or eight hundred dollars a month for a mat on the floor of a shelter. Far less than the up to $1200 to $1300 end cost they get for a supportive housing apartment. The costs to the taxpayers for a subsidized rental apartment are greater than the full monthly cost of a middle class home. My choice is to give the family the down payment, the support and a declining monthly subsidy for the first seven years. Then the family is on its own with not only a stabilized family, but also with seven years of equity in a house. That equity translates into small business loans and college educations for children as well as a family that is integrated into society and who can help others grab the ladder. Sharon Sales Belton had a plan to subsidize housing costs on three or four hundred thousand dollar town houses in order to, in her words, "attract the middle class back into Minneapolis". She was on the right tract that housing was the key to having more middle class in Minneapolis, she just did not understand that the home grown kind are better than imported ones. She just did not understand that "a
Re: [Mpls] Section 8 and Boarded Up Houses....
V.L. Freeman wrote: (VF)Long term public housing especially if not needed, is taken up spots to obtain the same chance as others had , a head start. I for one was never proud of the fact that I had to live in public housing, so I set my goals and dreams on owning a home. I looked at welfare and housing as a stepping stone to reach my dreams and goals, and the best thing I got out the programs, was a letter telling me, I am now making to much money. I made it! Secondly, with the way things are now in public housing or section 8, you can move anytime and anywhere, any city or any state. So you still would not have much neighborhood participation. hmm Let's see, Zero below Mn, or Sunny Fl. or Ga WM: Well, it's clear that I sent another muddled e-mail. Sorry list. My notion is that when people are making enough money that they must leave public housing, then they should be eligible to buy the particular unit of public housing they live in rather than move. That would mean public housing would have to have more going for it than, say, the late Glenwood projects and others like the one I grew up in. Then achievement does not been you're forced out, but that you opted out. WizardMarks, Central (WM) I've never much cared for HUDs notion that as soon as a family earns enough they have to leave. That makes it very tough for public housing to become a neighborhood because people aren't allowed to stay once they earn more than a certain amount. I think it's very defeating to the formation and maintenance of community. (VF) I am into to upward mobility not into regression, otherwise we would be faced with a lot more people homeless and not being able to obtain housing. I do believe that HUD can do more. Hud and mortgage companies like North side and Southside housing can team up with each other, to educate resident's on opportunities to own their own home, help them qualify to loans or even help with down payment assistance. I believe in teachable moments, Each one Teach one. We have to stop coming up with excuses to regression and come up with solutions for mobilities, upward. May I suggest good reading Who Moved My Cheese. a book about changes and how we deal with those changes head on. In order to achieve things in life we have to make and face difficult problems dead on to find solutions dead on. Vanessa Freeman Hawthorne From: WizardMarks [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: V.L. Freeman [EMAIL PROTECTED] CC: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [Mpls] Section 8 and Boarded Up Houses Date: Sun, 05 Jan 2003 14:24:51 -0600 V.L. Freeman wrote: Oh those boarded houses are just a pain in the you know what. I wish that the city would think outside of the box for a change. WM: In a story last week in the Strib, Steve Brandt quoted MCDA's Earl Pettiford, I think, as saying that city-owned vacant/boardeds are almost all dealt with. Those remaining are in private hands. Some of those are also in probate court because the owner died intestate and it takes a long period of time for property to go through probate. The court has to find heirs to the person who died, etc. Then, if the heirs don't live here, they have a tricky time selling the property from wherever they are. Last but not least, I think Minneapolis needs to look into Public Housing. The number would just surprise to you know that there have been some on public housing assistance for 10-15 years. As long as they are not being asked to leave, they will not be serious as to finding permanent housing or non assistance housing. I think this is one reason why the homeless population is so great, a back log in our public housing.. WM: Public Housing is for those people who do not make enough money to afford to live in other types of housing. So long as the family makes less than that amount, they can live in public housing. For many that will not change since their earning power is so small. For others, the arrival of new babies changes the amount they can earn and still live in public housing. The drawback, which I watched on my block about a decade ago, was that if a family loses a child--child dies, for example, they will get moved out of their public housing because they no longer qualify for the size of house they had before the child died. That's a terribly wrenching thing to happen to a grieving family. I've never much cared for HUDs notion that as soon as a family earns enough they have to leave. That makes it very tough for public housing to become a neighborhood because people aren't allowed to stay once they earn more than a certain amount. I think it's very defeating to the formation and maintenance of community. WizardMarks, Central ___ Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest, and more: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
Re: [Mpls] Section 8 and Boarded Up Houses....
Mike, that is where the Supportive comes into Supportive Homeownership. You have training sessions to teach people these skills and how to cope with problems. Poor people, many times, also have worked as laborers, and as such might have more maintenance skills than say your average social worker or lawyer. Those skills they don't have are easily trained, heck issue them a license for being a Certified Home Maintenance Specialist at the end of the training session. Teach the class using real people's houses. (I hate that, so they can practice on mine. Any other volunteers?) The cost of emergency repair to an important element of a house, such as a roof or new furnace, is always a potential problem. So my suggestion would be a small amount escrowed in an account for that purpose, (for a limited time). Or a fund set up for such a purpose that is paid into each month by a number of people in the program. Sort of like insurance without the profit to shareholders built in. Payments on a $125,000 house today (thirty year loan) without down payment is $709 per month. Almost exactly what Hennepin County pays for a mat on the floor? Take the subsidy for a four bedroom apartment and subtract this amount and you still have several hundred dollars for insurance, heat, a hundred dollars a month for the emergency repairs escrow, and still save money for the County, State, etc. (The payment amount is not subisition, it is a direct quote made by a mortgage company today) Strange isn't it? You can give a family a house, and stabilize several lives, for less than the amount to keep them in poverty. As an investment it also looks great. Look at the increased tax revenue that each of the children will put into the system over their lives. Look at just the savings on social services over the lives of each member of the family, let alone social costs for additional policing and trips to the emergency room at Hennepin County Medical Center. Think of the savings at detox, at area clinics, etc. Gosh maybe we should rebate even more. Buy them a more expensive house where the kids could get an even better education and make even more tax money for the State? Well lets not get carried away. Lets just say we can be caring enough to actually help people out of poverty, and have it cost less than it would have cost anyway to keep them in poverty. The only losers would be the poverty industry that has grown up around providing services and very expensive subsidized rental affordable housing in large apartment complexes. Like the Asbestos Industry the Poverty Industry needs to go away. It may have seemed like a beneficial thing at first, but now we know it is BAD for people and eventually costs society too much. Jim Graham, Ventura Village If you would not be forgotten, as soon as you are dead and rotten, either write things worth reading, or do things worth the writing. - Benjamin Franklin ___ Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest, and more: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
[Mpls] Section 8 and Boarded Up Houses....
Oh those boarded houses are just a pain in the you know what. I wish that the city would think outside of the box for a change. In Des Moines, Ia, there is a program that helps people that are homeless with children. It is a church organization, they buy up abandon/boarded property to rehab them and use as a short term shelters. While a family is there, they are provided with numerous services to help and support them along the way. One of those services, being budget counseling, how to shop for groceries, etc. One cool thing about it is that, every single place is fully equipped, the only thing needed to buy is food and personals. Anyway, resident's are required to look for work and attend support group's, while finding permanent housing. Another program is to place resident's in new homes that are being built, while staying there the renter has the option of buying the house. The house is equipped with a tool shed that has everything for up keep of the house. What is mandatory is that resident's must do community service and be involved in the community in order to take place in this programming. After about 24 months, the person either has the option of buying or moving to non assistance rental unit. As the goal is to get people into their own homes. Last but not least, I think Minneapolis needs to look into Public Housing. The number would just surprise to you know that there have been some on public housing assistance for 10-15 years. As long as they are not being asked to leave, they will not be serious as to finding permanent housing or non assistance housing. I think this is one reason why the homeless population is so great, a back log in our public housing.. I often call myself the poster child of homeownership. When people ask me how I got it, I go a step further and give them the numbers to Northside Housing or Southside Housing, going one more step to give a contact name and follow up afterwards. (Many have went on to own their own home) Vanessa Freeman is stepping down from her boxin Hawthorne _ The new MSN 8: smart spam protection and 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail ___ Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest, and more: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
Re: [Mpls] Section 8 and Boarded Up Houses....
Praise be! Vanessa, we agree on something. I would add to your list of excellent options, condominiums. Not every one has the desire, need or talent to keep up a home. Some of those boarded buildings appear to be multi-unit dwellings. If they were rehab and sold for condos at a reasonable price, people could share the expenses of upkeep, get the tax benefits of home ownership and govern their own buildings in owner associations. This has been tried in Chicago and apparently been quite successful. We have to get away from the one solution fits all. As far as Public Housing goes, I wonder what qualifies a person for public housing and if the most deserving are first in line. When Martha Donald was shot, it came out that although she lived in Horne Towers, she owned a house in Apple Valley or Eagan and ran her own business. I never heard how she still qualified for public housing. Anyone else know? Maybe I'm mistaken thinking that public housing is based on financial need. Anne McCandless Jordan - Original Message - From: V.L. Freeman [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Sunday, January 05, 2003 4:11 AM Subject: [Mpls] Section 8 and Boarded Up Houses Oh those boarded houses are just a pain in the you know what. I wish that the city would think outside of the box for a change. In Des Moines, Ia, there is a program that helps people that are homeless with children. It is a church organization, they buy up abandon/boarded property to rehab them and use as a short term shelters. While a family is there, they are provided with numerous services to help and support them along the way. One of those services, being budget counseling, how to shop for groceries, etc. One cool thing about it is that, every single place is fully equipped, the only thing needed to buy is food and personals. Anyway, resident's are required to look for work and attend support group's, while finding permanent housing. Another program is to place resident's in new homes that are being built, while staying there the renter has the option of buying the house. The house is equipped with a tool shed that has everything for up keep of the house. What is mandatory is that resident's must do community service and be involved in the community in order to take place in this programming. After about 24 months, the person either has the option of buying or moving to non assistance rental unit. As the goal is to get people into their own homes. Last but not least, I think Minneapolis needs to look into Public Housing. The number would just surprise to you know that there have been some on public housing assistance for 10-15 years. As long as they are not being asked to leave, they will not be serious as to finding permanent housing or non assistance housing. I think this is one reason why the homeless population is so great, a back log in our public housing.. I often call myself the poster child of homeownership. When people ask me how I got it, I go a step further and give them the numbers to Northside Housing or Southside Housing, going one more step to give a contact name and follow up afterwards. (Many have went on to own their own home) Vanessa Freeman is stepping down from her boxin Hawthorne _ The new MSN 8: smart spam protection and 2 months FREE* http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail ___ Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest, and more: http://e-democracy.org/mpls ___ Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest, and more: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
Re: [Mpls] Section 8 and Boarded Up Houses....
V.L. Freeman wrote: Oh those boarded houses are just a pain in the you know what. I wish that the city would think outside of the box for a change. WM: In a story last week in the Strib, Steve Brandt quoted MCDA's Earl Pettiford, I think, as saying that city-owned vacant/boardeds are almost all dealt with. Those remaining are in private hands. Some of those are also in probate court because the owner died intestate and it takes a long period of time for property to go through probate. The court has to find heirs to the person who died, etc. Then, if the heirs don't live here, they have a tricky time selling the property from wherever they are. Last but not least, I think Minneapolis needs to look into Public Housing. The number would just surprise to you know that there have been some on public housing assistance for 10-15 years. As long as they are not being asked to leave, they will not be serious as to finding permanent housing or non assistance housing. I think this is one reason why the homeless population is so great, a back log in our public housing.. WM: Public Housing is for those people who do not make enough money to afford to live in other types of housing. So long as the family makes less than that amount, they can live in public housing. For many that will not change since their earning power is so small. For others, the arrival of new babies changes the amount they can earn and still live in public housing. The drawback, which I watched on my block about a decade ago, was that if a family loses a child--child dies, for example, they will get moved out of their public housing because they no longer qualify for the size of house they had before the child died. That's a terribly wrenching thing to happen to a grieving family. I've never much cared for HUDs notion that as soon as a family earns enough they have to leave. That makes it very tough for public housing to become a neighborhood because people aren't allowed to stay once they earn more than a certain amount. I think it's very defeating to the formation and maintenance of community. WizardMarks, Central ___ Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest, and more: http://e-democracy.org/mpls ___ Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest, and more: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
[Mpls] Section 8 mention in Mckinsey
Messer's Hohman started and Lohman commented about the Section 8 housing program. Affordable housing should represent a component of virtually every commercial development effort in the City where public funds are committed. snip With regard to Section 8, I wish that someone would take on this issue. A greater and greater number of landlords opt out it. There should be an effort to find ways to make Section 8 more appealing by providing incentives and support to landlords who accept it. And nothing of what I just said says that landlords should have to tolerate bad tenants. What are the kinks in Section 8 that can be worked out? Who's the expert on this? This is not a Minneapolis specific issue, but a very large portion of Minneapolis rental housing is involved with the section 8 program. What would make Section 8 more appealing? Section 8 has made some worthy improvements in the past 4-5 years. Still not enough. Less paperwork as always. I know it sounds like a throwaway line, but it's the most common response from landlords who get fed up and quit. Inspection of unit should be done before agreements are made with Section 8. Currently you show, screen, agree, in writing, to rent with someone who likes the apartment. Not so fast. Section 8 does an inspection and can order $thousands of dollars of work. Guess what? You have to do it. Doesn't matter if the apartment is more then reasonably ready. Doesn't matter if your annual inspection was passed two days ago. You have to do the work. Period. Secton 8 rental contract is still onerous and one sided. It takes away landlord options to deal with rule and lease violators. Don't listen when an advocate tells you you can use your own lease if you want. It's BS. Email me off line, I'll make an appointment with you and show you a blank Section 8 lease or HAP Contract. Section 8 and accompaning fed-state-local-non-profit agencies to make you keep bad tenants. They do this by deciding what a bad tenant is, and backing it up with taxpayer financed legal dollars. The experts are the landlords. Listen to them, incorporate their concerns. I'll repeat as I started. It's much better now then in the past. Oh, and BTW. More landlords are particapating then one year ago (fact). That's because the vacancy rate has gone back up the affordable housing crisis is over(opinion). Craig Miller Northside Landlord Currently providing over 13% of my space to Section 8 tenants. [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ Minneapolis Issues Forum - A Civil City Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest option, and more: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
[Mpls] Section 8 housing
I received a report that list both project-based and tenant-based Section 8 housing in the city by ward. Project based means a building or property is a section 8 property and is either owned by a private owner or MPHA. Tenant-based means the renter has a certificate to live where they want as long as the land lord will accept a section 8 certificate and can pass the section 8 inspection. Ward 1 - 126 Ward 2 - 106 Ward 3 - 475 Ward 4 - 315 Ward 5 - 534 Ward 6 - 435 Ward 7 - 364 Ward 8 - 371 Ward 9 - 199 Ward 10 - 96 Ward 11 - 64 Ward 12 - 81 Ward 13 - 10 Total3,176 I am told these figures are as of 6/10/01. Looks like Wards 12 and 10 - 13 have a ways to go to catch up to the rest of us. Just shows the disparity isn't just with the distribution of supportive housing. If all the wards had the same average of section 8 units just think how much more affordable housing would be available. Potentially, we could add another 2,000+ units if we added more section 8 units to the 6 wards with the lower numbers to equalize the distribution throughout all the wards. That would have a major impact on the affordable housing problem. Since, many private landlords don't want to participate in section 8 anymore, then MPHA can own the properties and operate them through their scattered site program. Perhaps, the Mayors affordable housing task force should look into this possibility. The structure is already in place to do this so it's one solution that could be launched quite rapidly. Barb Lickness Whittier __ Do You Yahoo!? Send FREE video emails in Yahoo! Mail! http://promo.yahoo.com/videomail/ ___ Minneapolis Issues Forum - A Civil City Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest option, and more: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
RE: [Mpls] Section 8 housing
These stats seem off to me, at least in Ward 2. Riverside Homes, a project-based housing entity, owns 103 Section 8 units in Cedar-Riverside. I just can't imagine there are only 3 other Section 8 units in the entire ward. The 103 that Riverside Homes owns are Section 8 designated--you can't live there unless you qualify for section 8, as I understand it. Where did these stats come from? Amanda Rondeau Ward 2 Cedar-Riverside ___ Minneapolis Issues Forum - A Civil City Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest option, and more: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
Re: [Mpls] Section 8 housing
All, While I usually find Barb's post informatative and well thought out. . . .I think the most recent listing of Section 8 housing and jumping to conclusions about catching-up with the rest of us is rather misleading. I live on 31st and Pleasant. In the Lyndale Neighborhood, in Ward 10. Next door is Findly Place Town Homes with more than 80 units of subsidize housing. Across the street is MPHA's Horn Terrace complex with 536 units. The house next door to me accross the alley is owned by a landlord that intentionally leaves the rent well below market -- (because he can) And fortuently my 800 square feet is affordable as well. . . . thought I am probably a problem tenant (of myself) While I don't disagree with the end conclusion that increased support for section 8, section 8 enforcement, and MPHA scattered site (Lyndale Neighborhood Development Coorproation made their interest in selling several of the units of its upcomming 31st and/or Nicollet development projects to MPHA) the operating assumption that section 8 could be or should be equally distributed throught the city seems to be a hasty conclusion based on one slice of data. I would proposed it is an assumption nor conclusion that helps the debate about affordable housing or the search to find consensus about real solutions. Sincerely, Joseph Barisonzi Lyndale, Ward 10 ___ Minneapolis Issues Forum - A Civil City Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest option, and more: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
Re: [Mpls] Section 8 housing
In a message dated 1/10/02 2:37:30 PM Central Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Since, many private landlords don't want to participate in section 8 anymore, then MPHA can own the properties and operate them through their scattered site program. Perhaps, the Mayors affordable housing task force should look into this possibility. The structure is already in place to do this so it's one solution that could be launched quite rapidly. Barb Lickness Whittier Would you propose that MPHA should begin a huge building program. Otherwise, they would have to purchase these scattered site residences from the pool of existing, privately owned housing in this town. That pool/market is extremely heated up and pricey. These residences are also occupied by individuals and families that would then be displaced/dumped to make room for the subsidized folks. Maybe we should be looking at why, Many private landlords don't want to participate in Sec. 8 anymore... and try to resolve the supply side of the equation before expanding government ownership and management of housing. Small business people called landlord/property owner could solve the rental housing shortage in a genuine free market environment. Someday, we may be allowed such an environment in this City. Till then, all manor of tax dollar subsidized contrivances will probably fall short of the growing need. Keith Reitman, Making a modest living as a poet, NearNorth ___ Minneapolis Issues Forum - A Civil City Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest option, and more: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
Re: [Mpls] Section 8 housing/Concentrating Poverty and Social Services
Joe brought up an excellent point as have many others that posted to me off-list. I thank him for it because it provides a clear example of one of the issues we face regularly when dealing with the saturation problem. The list I posted contained only section 8 units. (as I knew them to be from a report I had from 6/01) The list I posted does not include public housing units, supportive housing units, halfway houses, transitional units, shelter-care units,etc. I have also been contacted by a planner who has been assigned to look at the supportive housing concentration issue. (YEAH) While the planning department has a great deal of data, it's hard to wrap your arms around it because there are so many different catagories of housing. Much of it is similar and serves the same kind of population, however, it may be catagorized differently because of a minor component of the project or service provided that makes it one type of housing instead of another. If it has this but not that, it is this type of housing. If it has that but not this, it's another type of housing and so on and so forth. The numbers are sectioned into so many catagories. Maybe that is intentional. It is always the hammer that gets used against us in these debates. It is hard to get a clear and measurable count of just how much supportive, special needs, transitional, shelter, etc. type of housing because they are all classified so narrowly. We had two very capable attorneys working full time to prepare the Lydia House report that shows the facility concentration. There is a wonderful map that shows all of it city wide. These people went door to door and surveyed the facilities in addition to using information available from the planning department and God knows where else. Advocates of Lydia house consistently tried to refute the numbers we reported saying they were wrong. I have yet to see a list of all of this type of housing that shows what the real numbers are according to the Minneapolis Planning Department and my guess is that a list does not exist at this point. Hopefully, the planner assigned to look at this issue will produce a new report as an outcome of her research. It is sorely needed by a great number of people including supportive housing advocates. I am advocating that the planning department work with neighborhoods like mine to map all the concentrated housing types once and for all. Perhaps the planning department can educate us about all the different housing catagories and what differentiates one type from another. My hope is that we can move to a classification that is more simplified and easier to deal with for the planners, the neighborhood folks, and the developers. I am also hoping it will strengthen the quarter mile spacing requirement and that our council members will see the need to enforce the law instead of ignoring it like they just did on CVI. I appreciated Earl Netwalls post on the spacing requirement issue. History is always nice. Suggesting somehow that Whittier, Phillips, Stevens Square and the other neighborhoods affected by the saturation issue are the sacrificial lambs for concentrating all the poor and special needs people in Minneapolis simply solidifies what I have been saying all along. This has been a policy of the city and county for at least 28 years if you use Earls date of 1974 and probably started before that. Please do not insult me by suggesting that I knew what I was getting into when I moved here, or that If I don't like it, I should move. I grew up in the Keewaydin neighborhood on Lake Nokomis ( a completely different neighborhood) and spent most of my life there until 1991. I moved to Whittier on purpose, not out of desparation. I LOVE my neighborhood and I am not moving anywhere. I am going to stay and work with my neighbors to shed some light on this policy once and for all. We will work through the system and attempt to change it. We can use all the help we can get. The current policy smacks of racism and classism and makes a strong case that segregation is alive and well AND intentional and purposeful in Minneapolis and Hennepin County. Not a pretty picture folks. Barb Lickness Whittier __ Do You Yahoo!? Send FREE video emails in Yahoo! Mail! http://promo.yahoo.com/videomail/ ___ Minneapolis Issues Forum - A Civil City Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest option, and more: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
Re: [Mpls] Section 8 housing
Data and analysis in Barbara Lickness' post (10 Jan 02 / 12:36) could be misleading. The report cited by Lickness is said to list both project-based and tenant-based Section 8 housing in the city by ward. A list is shown which has a number for each of the 13 Wards. It is represented that the number indicated for each Ward is the total of project-based plus tenant-based Section 8 housing units. Thus, for Ward 2, the number is 106. So, does this number 106 represent the sum of (a) the number of individual tenant certificates [i.e., one certificate for one apartment or SFD - single family dwelling], plus (b) the number of projects [i.e., Section 8 properties]? Let's call this Case 1. Or does this number 106 represent the sum of (a) the number of individual tenant certificates [i.e., one certificate for one apartment or SFD], plus (b) the number of individual Section 8 units [apartments] in all of the Ward 2 projects? Let's call this Case 2. Knowing that Riverside Plaza (on Cedar Ave between 4th and 6th Streets) has 1303 apartments which are heavily Section 8, and knowing that The Cedars (on Cedar Ave between 6th and 7th Streets) has 540 apartments which are at least preponderantly if not totally Section 8, makes it likely that the 106 number for Ward 2 is described by Case 2. If so, this is the same as counting a truckload of acorn squash mixed with watermelons as if it were all watermelons. If so, the Lickness analysis is defective. Robert Johnson Cedar Riverside West Bank ___ Minneapolis Issues Forum - A Civil City Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest option, and more: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
Re: [Mpls] Section 8 housing
Regarding my post with the same title at 19:37 today, there is a typo in the last paragraph. ...makes it likely that the 106 number for Ward 2 is described by Case 2. should read: ...by Case 1. Robert Johnson Cedar Riverside West Bank ___ Minneapolis Issues Forum - A Civil City Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest option, and more: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
Re: [Mpls] Section 8 housing
Barbara Lickness wrote: Since, many private landlords don't want to participate in section 8 anymore, then MPHA can own the properties and operate them through their scattered site program. Perhaps, the Mayors affordable housing task force should look into this possibility. The structure is already in place to do this so it's one solution that could be launched quite rapidly. [GDL] This is actually one of the stated proposed strategies of Mayor Rybak's 90-day plan. His administration has proposed, as a way to get more genuinely affordable units on the market, that the city borrow against MPHA properties and use the borrowed funds to purchase properties in the city, thus opening them up to Section 8 vouchers. Tom Streitz, formerly of Legal Aid but now Deputy Director of MPHA, is heading up this part of the plan. I think Keith Reitman spoke at the January 5 Housing Summit about/against this, saying that MPHA's entry into the market in purchasing properties may actually heat up the market further. Gregory Luce North Phillips (work) North Phillips Press is a publication of Project 504, a housing related neighborhood organization based in the Phillips neighborhood. ___ Minneapolis Issues Forum - A Civil City Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest option, and more: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
