Atlanta recognized as national leader in public housing; CL gets shout-out
June 22, 2009 at 12:04 pm by Scott Henry in News
The demolition of Atlanta's Bowen Homes earlier this month
Atlanta is often, and rightly, seen as being well behind the curve when it comes to anything resembling progress. Trends — be they related to culture, social issues, business or, god knows, politics — typically take a couple of years to filter through here after they’ve already become old news in New York, L.A., London, Seattle or wherever.
In other words, it’s rare to see Atlanta taking a leading role on the national stage. But that’s exactly what’s been going on the past few years as Dr. Renee Glover, director of the Atlanta Housing Authority, has pursued an ambitious plan to make us the first large American to completely do away with public housing projects in favor of rent subsidies for privately owned, mixed-income properties.
Yesterday, the New York Times had a prominent news story that details how Atlanta has set the pace for the rest of the country when it comes to this important aspect of public policy. Quoth the Gray Lady:
Mixed-income developments oriented toward families, with trendy shops, golf courses and Y.M.C.A.’s, are emerging where bleak, uniform towers once stood. Displaced residents are receiving vouchers to move to private housing. And a landmark experiment in housing the urban poor in large government-run facilities that began under the New Deal is being undone.
And, a little later:
“Atlanta’s plan signifies in a very clear way that the social contract that cities and citizens have with the poor has fundamentally changed,” said Sudhir Venkatesh, a sociologist at Columbia University who studies urban neighborhoods. “We’ve decided that the market can function to create housing and the role of government should be to move people into the market.”
Now, as with any type of progress, the demolition of public housing has its critics. Certainly, the jury is out on whether the voucher program will eventually be regarded as an overwhelming success, as CL’s Mara Shalhoup has previously reported. In fact, the NYT cites Mara’s reporting in noting that “a large majority of displaced residents settle in 10 of Atlanta’s poorest ZIP codes.”
Still, the argument in favor of vouchers rests on the principle that it’s better to have poor people scattered throughout mixed-income communities — better for them and for society in general — than for them to live in concentrated, poor-only neighborhoods. Exhibit A for the failure of the latter system is the situation on Boulevard.
If housing vouchers continue to be seen as the new model for dealing with urban poverty, Atlanta will get the credit for leading the way.
(Photo by Joeff Davis)
June 22nd, 2009 at 2:27 pm
as someone who works with housing related issues i have to say that i am not pleased in the least with Atlanta Housing Authority in general or for tearing down public housing. sure it sounds like a great idea—-integration based on income (which is so often connected with other groups like race, national origin, etc). the voucher system sounds like an excellent idea for that. it doesn’t work, though. for one, if someone has a criminal history that person doesn’t qualify for section 8 and so they (and their household) are stuck trying to find affordable housing OR moving to another area where public housing is still in existence. i’ve seen an elderly man who has been released from prison, having served the entire sentence being denied section 8 (it’s at the discretion of the administrating organization for some convictions) in spite of decades of living as model citizens. since section 8 is federal, AHA doesn’t exactly have control over this aspect, though if they maintained some public housing they would be able to avoid the problems this exclusion causes. so that is one issue i find troubling. another—-the amount AHA is paying for/ has determined they will pay to, “encourage property owners of quality rental housing in great neighborhoods to lease to AHA renters.” they’ve divided atlanta into 7 submarkets: North, Mid-Atlanta, Central, Northwest, East Atlanta, Southeast, Southwest. so how much would the encouragement fee be (which is based on the average amount AHA has determined said housing to be—market rate) for say, an efficiency? in respective submarkets for a one bedroom their understanding of market rate would be: $1,100 in the first 2 submarkets, $1,000 for Central, $941 for Northwest, $1,075 for East Atlanta, $1,100 for Southeast and $780 for Southwest. that seems off—-a little inflated? thirdly, if someone is living in a home with their section 8 voucher and the home fails inspection (even if something happens to the home at no fault of the renter) AHA will no longer provide the subsidy. that’s fine except that the renter still has a binding contract with the landlord (slumlord he may be) who can then take the renter to court for whatever is stipulated in the lease should it be broken. this happens. it could be prevented if AHA would only provide a clause in their contract with the landlord or if the landlord were provided a standard lease. relocation counselors are supposedly there to help residents through this process, though i’ve not met a resident who felt they could rely on the help of AHA employees to aid them during this transition. seniors and those with different abilities are being displaced as well. these residents could use a little more help and they aren’t getting it. for this population of AHA residents moving to another part of the city means moving away from the doctors and support they have built over the years in their neighborhood. relocation staff should help in this. i can’t say that they actually do. i can say that AHA farms out as much as possible to community groups, volunteers and non-profits for whatever reason—-underfunding, lack of compassion, poor practices, etc—-and this switch from public housing to complete dependency on the section 8 voucher is a disaster for anyone who is a resident, anyone who works with residents, and ultimately anyone who lives in atlanta. working with the cluster f*** that is city of atlanta is at best a challenge and at worst it is AHA.
June 22nd, 2009 at 2:30 pm
the rate i gave for the submarkets is not for an efficiency and is instead for a 1 bedroom. the efficiency rate is as follows: $760 (for the first 4 submarkets) and $500 (for the last 3 submarkets). sorry about that—-should have proofed better!
June 22nd, 2009 at 2:33 pm
AHA may have a model solution for dealing with public housing, but the best solution is to not have public housing, not have section 8 housing – we should be doing everything we can make it too expensive for these dregs to live in our city
June 22nd, 2009 at 2:42 pm
Bankhead 4 Life shawty! Westside- Zone 3!
June 22nd, 2009 at 4:24 pm
Lulubelle, Good to hear from someone like you who clearly knows what she’s talking about and is not peddling the PR line.
June 23rd, 2009 at 10:49 am
As a former owner in the NE market, I have a slightly different perspective than lulubelle.
Sec. 8 generally excludes people with criminal records, and even when it accepts them, the apartment community reserves the right to exclude residents with criminal records. So there are two hurdles someone with a criminal record must clear. In the example of the elderly gentleman, perhaps a sunset provision would be appropriate?
Most insurers and lenders have limits on the number of Sec. 8 voucher residents you can accept. Insurers maintain that higher rates of crime exist when the ‘voucher’ population rises above 40%. I haven’t seen the studies so I don’t have any insight into their policies. Lenders impose similar restrictions because property damage (and therefore expenses) and increased personnel (to respond to Housing Agency inspections, applications, etc.) increase the overall costs.
It has been my experience that when a unit fails inspection AHA may stop paying, but we can’t evict if the resident is current on their portion of the rent. If the unit is deemed habitable, it is generally not a major violation; I’ve been penalized because residents put dressers in front of windows or dinged up appliances.
Finally, to the extent that I could, I liked having Sec. 8 residents on site, because it gave me additional reassurance. I knew I could count on a portion of the rent on time, each and every month (from AHA). I knew that if we had problems (long-term visitors, housekeeping standards, etc.), we could call on AHA to bring additional resources and assistance. Taking a voucher is both a benefit (hopefully a better place to live) but also a contract to abide by certain behavioral conditions. Because of these conditions, vouchers are worth more than the actual amount to owners and residents, and should (but obviously doesn’t always) lead to a better relationship.
June 23rd, 2009 at 11:19 am
AHA does not permit the percentage of residents on section 8 to make up more than 40% of an apartment complex. they also monitor the amount of section 8 participants in a specific area which is also limited in housing only 40% or fewer within said area (this varies in size dependent upon proximity of homes, etc).
good to know someone has had success with section 8 vouchers being administered by AHA. hopefully more tenants will have success in that. communication with AHA is at best a challenge for residents who utilize vouchers.
i cannot begin to count the number of residents who have faced eviction due to AHA deeming a property unfit or failed. this is a problem that really effects the residents who are trying to get their credit in order—-that too effects their ability to get section 8. if a resident cannot get utilities turned on they lose their home and without decent credit this is a problem.
June 23rd, 2009 at 12:08 pm
Lulubelle:
Thank you for adding some additional information on AHA. My experience is via the property management company, so it’s not direct contact.
Communication is often a challenge between owners/managers and AHA as well. Scheduling inspections, acknowledging residents have moved in, or unfortunately, addressing problems with residents all take a little extra time and planning. Inspections can be a particular problem for owners, too, since we have to make the repairs and corrections. We don’t always know what we’re being graded on…
Unfortunately, if CL is to be believed, the AHA waiting list is relatively unchanged since 2001 (can’t think of what happened at HUD the last 8 years) so people who need assistance simply aren’t getting it.
I’m broadly in favor of the AHA plan, but the challenge of affordable housing is far too big for any one program, especially when LIHTC is a complete bust.
June 23rd, 2009 at 12:10 pm
By the way, is there any data on the increase in RE tax revenue from these redeveloped sites? If the property values are higher, there has to be some measurable increase.
Would dedicating a portion of the increased revenues to housing assistance or AHA mitigate some of the problems prior residents have experienced?
June 23rd, 2009 at 12:17 pm
Good information here. I would add that I lived in a house behind a large, reasonably nice, apartment complex in Sandy Springs for 21 years. Management was responsive to the complaints of the single-family homes that bordered their complex. All my complaints and most of my neighbors’ turned out to be due to section 8 voucher renters. There was one murder involved. While the fundamental idea is a good one, it seems these renters are inserted into nice areas where they make their neighbors miserable. I finally moved away.
June 24th, 2009 at 1:25 pm
Bill and Lulubelle:
Have some very ligit points about AHA’s so-called “innovative” approach. It is my understand that the wait list for vouchers in Atlanta is 20,000 and this does not include the public housing residents being relocated. The public housing residents get priority over those on the wait list. In addition, less than 20 percent of the units in AHA’s mixed income properties are set aside for very low income residents. Thus few of the public housing resident relocated will ever have a chance to moved into one of these communities.
There is a study being conducted by several Georgia State University sociologists that has been following about 400 public housing residents as they are relocated. This study is paying particular attention the relocation process itself and where residents end up. Unlike Thomas Boston’s study, which is being done under contract with the AHA, the GSU iniative is an independent effort.
June 25th, 2009 at 3:50 pm
Lulubelle, where in the constitution does it guarantee free housing? No where. Most of the folks in public housing that aren’t disabled are really just parasites. They like to have taxpayers pay for housing, food stamps, welfare checks, etc. We need to tear down all public housing except for the diabled and elderly. I have rentals in Cobb County and would never consider renting to section 8. They are societies losers. People that are too lazy or unmotivated to care for themselves. Time to cut the welfare net. Time to get tough with these parasites.
June 25th, 2009 at 5:14 pm
Able-bodies people (meaning those who are not elderly or disabled) are required to work 30 hours per week to maintain their public housing. The AHA required this of those who get housing vouchers as well. Not complying with the work requirement results in eviction. This has been the case since 2003.
September 6th, 2009 at 8:17 am
In the situation of a unit failing inspection due to a landlord failure, there is a required HUD Tenancy Addendum. Under the Addendum (which included with all leases, either being Project Based or Tenant Based Section 8) it clearly states on Page 1, Section 5d “The tenant is not responsible for paying the portion of rent to owner covered by the PHA housing assistance payment under the HAP contract between the owner and the PHA. A PHA failure to pay the housing assistance payment to the owner is not a violation of the lease. The owner may not terminate the tenancy for nonpayment of the PHA housing assistance payment.” Therefore, when a unit fails inspection through no fault of the tenant, then the landlord can not evict them for non payment by the housing authority. This is also stated in the Housing Assistance Payment (HAP) contracts between the authority and the landlord.
I have gone through it once, where AHA failed a unit twice, through no fault of mine, and the management company decided they were going to try to evict me, I brought up the fact about the HUD Tenancy Addendum, showed it to the courts and it was determined that I did not violate the lease agreement because of the Tenancy Addendum. Here is a link to the HUD Tenancy Addendum for the Section 8 Program…
http://www.hud.gov/offices/adm/hudclips/forms/files/52641-a.pdf