HUD is Planning a Slum Near You

HUD Proposal Slammed As Fair Housing Act Overreach

By PAUL SPERRY, FOR INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY

Posted 12/30/2013 07:25 PM ET

U.S. mayors have asked HUD to scrap a proposed housing regulation requiring them to "reduce segregation and promote integration" in their cities, arguing the agency is overstepping its legal authority under the Fair Housing Act.

Individuals also have flooded the agency with comments objecting to the plan, which is expected to be finalized early in 2014.

The 1968 Fair Housing Act prohibits racial bias in the sale, rental and financing of housing. HUD, the Department of Housing and Urban Development, which enforces the civil rights law, appears to be expanding it to include policing neighborhoods for racial diversity.

The agency has proposed to add a 33-page rule titled "Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing," which would give it a blunt instrument for social change in cities it identifies as "segregated." Metropolitan areas that show the worst segregation — such as Dallas; Los Angeles; Chicago; Cleveland; Houston; Atlanta; Memphis; Charlotte and Raleigh, N.C.; Indianapolis; and Cincinnati and Columbus, Ohio — will be aggressively "targeted" for enforcement action.

Specifically, it blames "exclusionary zoning," which it defines as any local zoning code that limits development of affordable housing. The proposal says such laws erect geographic barriers to success for urban minorities.

But critics claim HUD fails to recognize people may choose to live in a homogeneous community without any action or intent to exclude others. In comments submitted to HUD, groups representing cities and counties argue that racial clustering often occurs naturally, such as in Los Angeles and other cities with majority-minority populations.

'Exercise Of Choice'

"The term segregation is a politically and emotionally loaded term," the National Association for County Community and Economic Development and the National Community Development Association jointly wrote in a 17-page letter. "HUD needs to recognize that some clustering of racial/ethnic groups has been a result of exercise of choice by a household, not because of (zoning laws)." The U.S. Conference of Mayors and the National Association of Counties endorsed their comments.

HUD plans to map every U.S. neighborhood by four groups — white, Asian, black or African-American, and Hispanic/Latino — and publish "geospatial data" pinpointing racial imbalances. The agency proposes using nonwhite populations of 50% or higher as the threshold for classifying segregated areas.

Cities deemed overly segregated will be forced to change their zoning laws to allow construction of multifamily and other affordable housing to bring more low-income minorities into suburban and predominantly white areas. HUD's maps, which use dots to show the distribution or density of races, will be used to select affordable housing sites.

Chicago is one of several cities named by HUD as "segregated."  HUD's goal is to "reduce disparities in access to key community assets," such as quality schools, jobs, transportation, parks and recreation, and even fresh air and groceries.

Its new rule would require cities to conduct a "disparities analysis" that would include "comparing the employment numbers for African-American and white households." Lower employment for blacks, it says, suggests "this population might be hampered by a lack of access to important job centers."

To overcome such disparities, the agency explicitly advises "modifying local regulations and codes, constructing new developments, creating new amenities and facilitating the movement of people."

U.S. cities taking HUD housing development grants would be required every five years to submit plans detailing steps they'll take to integrate suburban or predominantly white neighborhoods and increase minority access to "vital amenities."

HUD would have 60 days to review the plans and decide whether to renew federal funding. City officials complain the rule goes beyond the requirements set by Congress.

"We do not agree that requiring grantees to examine data surrounding access to education, employment, transportation and environmental health are required as part of the Fair Housing Act," Tommy Battle, mayor of Huntsville, Ala., wrote.

"The FHA is an inappropriate vehicle for pursuing these policy goals," Houston Housing Authority President Tory Gunsolley said.

These complaints were among 884 comments HUD has posted on its website since opening the rule up to public comment last summer. A solid majority — 57% — of comments opposed the sweeping new rule, according to a study conducted this month by the American Enterprise Institute in Washington.

Fair-housing compliance lawyers agree that HUD is essentially rewriting the 1968 law. "Including access to community resources and addressing concentrations of poverty is beyond the scope of the FHA's protections," Sharon Wilson Geno of Ballard Spahr LLP, a Washington law firm, wrote in a two-page letter to HUD.

But many housing and civil-rights activists argued that "re-engineering" neighborhoods is necessary to remedy lingering effects of decades of overt, legalized discrimination.

"Patterns of segregation do not automatically disappear in the absence of the most brutal and overt manifestations of intentional discrimination," wrote Craig Gurian of the Anti-Discrimination Center of New York, which with HUD's help successfully sued Westchester County, N.Y., for housing discrimination. The county settled the 2009 case by agreeing to build 750 affordable-housing units in mostly white areas.

Entrenched Advantage?

"African-American households have fewer means than whites to purchase property today," Gurian continued. "Over the decades, those who were permitted to own property in what were racially restrictive suburbs (whites) were given a spectacular advantage over those who were kept out (African-Americans, and later Latinos): the amassing of capital via property appreciation."

He also claimed that "neighborhoods that are ultra-white continue to impose an 'inhibition effect' on African-Americans who would otherwise elect to live there if they did not perceive that they would not be welcome.

"Finally," Gurian said, "there is a powerful piece of segregation-perpetuating engineering that remains in place throughout much of the country today: exclusionary zoning," which is a term HUD uses repeatedly in its proposed regulation.

"Excessive limitations on density and the prohibition or discouragement of context-appropriate multiple-family dwellings make the development of affordable housing in many areas difficult or impossible," he explained. "That lack of affordable housing bears more heavily on African-American and Latino households."

Deputy Westchester County Executive Kevin Plunkett said HUD ignored several independent studies that concluded zoning in his suburban county is not exclusionary, as HUD insists. Experts analyzed all 853 local zoning district provisions in Westchester's 43 municipalities for "restrictive practices" and found every one complied with the Fair Housing Act, as well as New York state law.

Even so, HUD will not release $17 million in housing grants until Westchester accepts its finding that zoning in seven of its municipalities is exclusionary. It wants the county to sue those cities and towns to end "restrictive practices," including limits on size, type, height and density of buildings. Meanwhile, the Obama administration also is withholding Superstorm Sandy disaster relief from the county.

"HUD's decisions will be predetermined by their statistical data," Plunkett warned in a 12-page comment on the rule. "And grantees will find it difficult to have their (new Assessment of Fair Housing plans) approved if they disagree with HUD's numbers, interpret them differently, or fail to tailor their proposed actions to HUD's predetermined solutions."

He complained the HUD secretary will be "the final arbiter" of local housing decisions. "HUD's view completely oversteps constitutional boundaries for federal intrusion into local affairs," he said.

Others agree. "We feel these decisions are best left to local communities," the NACCED and NCDA said in their comment.

The groups noted that the mandate to close racial disparities in access to community assets could force localities to create new parks, schools and public transit lines that would have a "significant impact on local taxpayers."

Plunkett warned that even if HUD accepts local governments' Assessment of Fair Housing plans, it won't protect them from litigation, since it "does not mean that HUD has determined that the jurisdiction has complied with its obligation to affirmatively further fair housing."

He added: "The county's experience with HUD demonstrates that this could prove problematic."

The National Affordable Housing Management Association, which represents apartment owners and managers, urged HUD to add a provision that would "recognize grantees' efforts and hold them harmless for factors outside of their control."

Others said the rule is built on shaky legal ground.

HUD's definition of "segregation" rests on a civil rights theory known as "disparate impact," which relies only on statistics to indicate racism and does not require any intent to discriminate.

Roger Clegg of the Center for Equal Opportunity asserted that HUD's proposal violates federal law by discriminating in favor of certain racial groups. Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color or national origin in programs and activities receiving federal financial assistance.

"The government should not be requiring, encouraging, or permitting the use of racial and ethnic classifications and race- and ethnicity-based decision-making in order to achieve a particular racial and ethnic mix," Clegg wrote in a comment submitted to HUD.

Agreed the NACCED and NCDA: "HUD should be looking at poverty through a color-blind lens."

The National Affordable Housing Management Association complained to HUD that its focus on suburban housing development threatens billions of dollars of investment in urban areas.

The rule could "inadvertently discourage preservation, rehabilitation or recapitalization of properties in distressed areas," the trade group said. "Under this standard, a (public housing authority) may be hard-pressed to justify capital improvements on a property that exists in a neighborhood lacking community assets."

Source:  Investor's Business Daily: http://news.investors.com/123013-684627-hud-proposal-called-fair-housing-overreach.htm#ixzz2p3WIhfmt 

 

HUD Zoning Rule Mostly Opposed In Public Comments

By Paul Sperry, FOR INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY

Posted 12/30/2013 07:25 PM ET

While nonprofit affordable-housing advocates overwhelmingly favor the Department of Housing and Urban Development's controversial desegregation proposal, most of the public comments submitted to HUD oppose it.

A whopping 91% of the opposing comments were filed by individuals, who mostly opposed new low-cost housing in their neighborhoods.

A common complaint concerned the higher crime rates and lower property values that might accompany subsidized housing. HUD recommends expanding the use of Section 8 housing vouchers in the suburbs "to reduce segregation."

"This is a bad idea," Thomas Ulrich said.

"How is it fair for people like myself that worked hard all their lives to finally get into a neighborhood that they're proud of only to have someone else get a government subsidy that will allow them to buy into a more affluent neighborhood?"

Property Value Impact Feared Continued Ulrich: "I came from a lower-income area in St. Louis, put myself through college, worked a full-time job and saved my money to buy a nice house in a neighborhood where there are good schools and I feel safe to let my kids run around. Now the government wants to subsidize housing in order to make my neighborhood more diverse in the name of fairness? What about fairness for me and my family?"

Echoed LaWanda Williams: "Don't bring that into my neighborhood! You will ruin the property values!"

An anonymous Virginia commenter suggested that federal housing officials target upscale liberal enclaves for integration, starting with their own.

"I have worked too hard to see Section 8 housing move in and drive my property values down (while) increasing crime in my neighborhood," the unnamed individual said. "Here's an idea — start diversifying Martha's Vineyard and Malibu, and the gated neighborhoods where our spineless congressmen, senators and other elitists/statists live, and then come to middle-class America to implement such nonsense."

Others protested that Washington bureaucrats don't know what's best for local communities.

"So you bureaucrats in D.C. know what the zoning laws should be in communities hundreds/thousands of miles away?" Michael Hoff wrote in a comment submitted to HUD.

"It's either hubris or a coordinated effort to stoke racial violence, given that you leftists have been lying to minorities for years about why they find themselves in poverty," he said. "You've been blaming white racism for years. Meanwhile you did it yourselves to get votes."

Others cited past government failures at forced integration.

"How well did forced busing work?" Elizabeth Clark asked. "This is a revolting idea."

Dolores Yvars added: "We are still reeling from the HUD affirmative-action mortgage debacle. This latest attempt at social engineering will fail as well." The few nonprofits opposing the rule complained it didn't go far enough.

They want to force cities and other HUD grantees to comply with tougher performance benchmarks and timetables for integrating suburbs.

The seven-page comment submitted by the National Community Reinvestment Coalition was typical. It recommends the agency enforce "specific action steps" including the outright repeal of "discriminatory ordinances."

State and local housing authorities, in their comments, mainly worried about higher compliance costs from the additional red tape.

With opposition running so high against the proposed mandate, will HUD shelve it, or at least amend it to address concerns?  Not likely.

'Quality' Comments Count. Quantity of opinion doesn't matter in the rules-making process. Only "high-quality comments" count, and professional advocacy groups have the edge over individuals in that contest. The National Community Reinvestment Coalition and the National Fair Housing Alliance, for example, wrote highly technical letters drafted by lawyers in support of the rule, and shared templates with their members and affiliated groups.

HUD may already favor their comments because it funds them and certifies them as "stakeholders" or "partners." Last year, for instance, HUD and the National Fair Housing Alliance launched a media campaign to "fight housing discrimination."

If anything, housing analysts say, the final HUD rule regulating suburban housing will be strengthened, not weakened.

Source:  Investor's Business Daily,  http://news.investors.com/123013-684626-most-public-comments-oppose-hud-proposal.htm#ixzz2p3XYTmkv