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
