HUD’s Plan to Destroy Property Values

Will Congress take on Obama’s racial preference housing policies? by Robert Romano

One Supreme Court decision flying under the radar at the moment is Texas Dep’t of Housing & Community Affairs v. Inclusive Communities Project. Yet the implications of this case are every bit as important as anything else before the nation’s highest court being decided this month, including the constitutionality of federal exchange subsidies under the health care law.

The Texas case involves the non-profit Inclusive Communities Project, which contends that low income housing tax credits are being disproportionately granted to developments within minority neighborhoods and denied to white neighborhoods, supposedly perpetuating segregation in violation of the Act.

This puts on trial the use of so-called disparate impact analysis under the Fair Housing Act.

Disparate impact is “a legal doctrine under the Fair Housing Act which means that a policy or practice may be considered discriminatory if it has a disproportionate ‘adverse impact’ against any group based on race, national origin, color, religion, sex, familial status, or disability,” according to the Fair Housing Alliance.

But, argues Texas, federal rules requiring disparate impact analysis violate the equal protection of the laws under the 14^th Amendment by requiring “a State’s qualified allocation plan to give preference to projects in low-income areas — and those areas will be disproportionately  populated by racial minorities.”

Such racial preferences, then, require states to discriminate on the basis of race in allocating the tax credits.

Should the Supreme Court reject the use of disparate impact under the Fair Housing Act as unconstitutional, its effects will be far-reaching into other areas of housing law.

For example, an adverse ruling by the Supreme Court would surely ensnare the “Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing” rule and the “Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing Assessment Tool,” which, when finalized, will empower the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) to condition eligibility for community development block grants on redrawing zoning maps to achieve racial and income integration.

In 2012, HUD dispersed about $3.8 billion of these grants to almost 1,200 municipalities. Conditioning those grants on rezoning will generate obvious political outcomes, namely, to turn what were once Republican districts — which tend to be higher income and white not because of racism but rather economics and regional demographics — into marginal, purple districts under the guise of providing “fair housing.”

In preparation for implementing the rule, HUD has released template racial rezoning maps and data tables to be used in each community development block grant recipient area.

The tool’s worksheet orders the assessing bureaucrat using the maps and data to “identify neighborhoods or areas in the jurisdiction and region where racial/ethnic groups are segregated and indicate the predominant groups for each.”

Additionally, the bureaucrat must identify the extent the following factors “contribute to segregated housing patterns” including “Land use and zoning laws, such as minimum lot sizes, limits on multi-unit properties, height limits, or bedroom-number limits as well as requirements for special use permits; Occupancy restrictions; Residential real estate steering; Patterns of community opposition; Economic pressures, such as increased rents or land and development costs; Major private investments; Municipal or State services and amenities; and Foreclosure patterns.”

According to HUD, the tool is “for use by each program participant to evaluate fair housing choice in its jurisdiction, to identify barriers to fair housing choice at the local and regional levels, and to set and prioritize fair housing goals to overcome such barriers and advance fair housing choice.”

Why, that sounds a lot like the very type of disparate impact analysis now in the Supreme Court’s crosshairs.

In the meantime, U.S. Rep. Paul Gosar (R-Ariz.) has offered an amendment to the Transportation and HUD appropriations bill that would bar the department from using any funds to carry out the rules.

Last year, the House passed a similar amendment offered by Gosar in a 219 to 207 vote.

As it stands, floor action on Gosar’s latest amendment is imminent. And since members cannot predict how the Supreme Court will rule, action in favor of the amendment is now that much more important.

Americans for Limited Government President Rick Manning issued the following statement urging support, “Racial quotas are unconstitutional, and yet that is exactly what HUD will use to redraw every neighborhood in America. This has nothing to do with housing discrimination, which has been illegal since the 1960s. Instead ‘Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing’ is based on a utopian goal of creating evenly distributed neighborhoods based on racial composition and income.”

Manning concluded, “The House must take a stand to preserve local zoning rights.” Indeed, who gets to draw the map of every neighborhood in America may be at stake. Will it be local communities, or faceless bureaucrats in Washington, D.C.? It’s up to the House to now decide.

Robert Romano is the senior editor of Americans for Limited Government. http://netrightdaily.com/2015/06/will-congress-take-on-obamas-racial-preference-housing-policies/

HUD Targets Suburban Zoning As Racist, Official WarnsMon, Dec 16 2013 00:00:00 EA01_A1MON, by PAUL SPERRY, FOR INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY 12/13/2013

The Department of Housing and Urban Development plans to expand its view of discriminatory housing practices to include local zoning rules to control building in suburban neighborhoods, a New York county official battling the federal agency warns. Rob Astorino, the Republican executive of Westchester County, says his Manhattan suburb illustrates what the rest of the country can expect.

http://news.investors.com/121313-682910-hud-targets-surburan-zoning-as-racially-exclusionaryhtm#ixzz3cUjwfMxA

Housing Settlement Details Posted by Rob Astorino Last Updated on Friday, 20 February 2015

In August 2009, former County Executive Andrew J. Spano entered into an agreement with the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development to settle a housing lawsuit. The settlement was approved by a majority of the Board of Legislators.

Last year, working closely with the federal housing monitor, James E. Johnson, and his team, Westchester County, submitted an updated version of its implementation plan for building the fair and affordable housing and complying with other obligations required by the 2009 settlement. In October 2010, the monitor approved what he described as a linchpin of the implementation plan, the model ordinance.

The proposed model ordinance provisions, Appendix D-1(i): Model Ordinance Provisions, supplement existing zoning codes in Westchester County's municipalities.

On Feb. 29, 2012, the county submitted to the federal housing monitor a report titled “Review and Analysis of Municipal Zoning Ordinances in Westchester County.” The report responds to the direction given in the Monitor's Report and Recommendation Regarding Dispute Resolution (Amended), issued on November 17, 2011 and includes an Appendix - “Compendium Data Tables of 43 Municipal Zoning Ordinances.”

Related information and documents
You may read the HUD letter, dated May 13, 2011, that Astorino has cited as an example of HUD overreaching the terms of the settlement, along with the press releases issued by the Astorino administration related to the housing settlement matter.

View a map of locations of affirmatively furthering, fair housing developments currently underway, as of December, 2014.

Local zoning practices not exclusionary
On July 6, 2012, a comprehensive legal analysis conducted by Westchester County and supported by a leading expert and advocate for affordable housing further concluded that local zoning practices in Westchester are not exclusionary. The submission to the monitor and HUD included an Appendix – “Status of Comprehensive Plans.” The submission was sent in response to a letter from the monitor dated May 14, 2012.
Go to Zoning Analysis page to view detailed timeline of correspondences between the County and the Housing Monitor regarding the submission of Zoning Analysis materials.

Affirmative Fair Housing Marketing Plan
A crucial element in the Implementation Plan is the Affirmative Fair Housing Marketing Plan to promote the housing created under the settlement. The federal housing monitor convened an advisory team to provide advice, comments and recommendations on the original plan.

As a result of this collaboration, the monitor approved a plan with a two-pronged approach: one plan, the Westchester County Affirmative Fair Housing Marketing Plan will be implemented by Westchester County; and the second plan, the Housing Development Affirmative Fair Housing Marketing Plan, will be implemented by the housing developers. The revised, two-prong plan was approved in December 2011.

The Discretionary Funding Allocation policy is another important element of the Implementation Plan. This policy was finalized and approved by the monitor in January 2012.

Implementation Plan
Following the federal monitor’s approval and acceptance of the implementation plan, the plan shall be incorporated into Westchester County’s "Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice."

http://homes.westchestergov.com/housingsettlement

Comments

It’s time to close HUD and impeach Obama. HUD’s assault on Westchester County NY is into its 2^nd year.  Obama’s Alynsky style blitzkrieg is unsustainable. Families move to the suburbs for good schools. If this HUD attack continues, the schools will be ruined and families will take a hit on their property values. They will either homeschool or move out.

Norb Leahy, Dunwoody GA Tea Party Leader