I'M A TOTAL SELL OUT

I have a new post on the politics of affordable housing in New Orleans right.... over.... HERE!

DeBerry hits it on the head

This column by Jarvis DeBerry is required reading.

The issues of the poor often intersect with those who are racially oppressed, but not always. We see the conflicts between the two groups when black people with money wage campaigns against those who are without.

Eastern New Orleans has often been a battleground for this kind of intra-racial class warfare because that part of the city has included beautiful mansions and huge unsightly apartment complexes -- one of which I used to call home. Councilwoman Cynthia Willard-Lewis gave the impression soon after Hurricane Katrina that she spoke for the entire area when she trumpeted the phrase "right to return."

She's fought mightily for homeowners -- that is, those who have already acquired some semblance of wealth. However, she has shown herself to be indifferent -- if not outright opposed -- to the interests of low-wage residents who require affordable-housing options to return to the city.

In leading the opposition against a developer looking to build 36 affordable single-family houses near Lake Carmel at an average cost of $200,000, Willard-Lewis said the interests of current residents are her chief concern. So much for everybody else returning.

The City Planning Commission voted 6-2 to approve the legal subdivision developer Harold Foley needs to start his project. The New Orleans City Council, however, voted 5-2 against the project. The only two members to show Foley support were James Carter and Shelley Midura.

In voting against the project, the City Council isn't showing itself to be any different than the St. Bernard Parish Council, which has twice been scolded by a federal court judge for violating the Fair Housing Act.

The judge found that St. Bernard officials have withheld a routine re-subdivision request for a developer planning to build apartments because parish officials are trying to keep out black people.

See Judge Ginger Berrigan's order.

The City Council is employing the same strategy St. Bernard officials have used. It's difficult to imagine a judge looking any more kindly on the city's blockade of this project. The federal court would be unfairly punishing St. Bernard if it allowed New Orleans to do the same thing.

The Census Progressive

Mayor Nagin was criticized by some fairly recently for calling on displaced New Orleanians to misrepresent their living situations on the 2010 census to boost the city's population numbers thus leading to more federal funding where dollars are distributed proportionally based on population.

I'd support Mayor Nagin's move around census standards if he considered his displaced neighbors to be something more than a statistical prop.

I'd have his back, if his policies did something - anything - to help displaced residents return home. Remember what this man's stance toward public and affordable housing has been and continues to be.

The treatment of displaced and poor New Orleans remains antithetical to the UN's standards on human rights.

Finally

I've been very critical of inflexible trailer eviction deadlines and have always been discouraged by the total lack of local leadership on the issue. This past Monday was another hard deadline that threatened to throw hundreds of poor and disabled individuals and families onto the streets.

So, I'm extremely heartened by the Obama Administration policy change that will keep roofs over the heads of our most vulnerable neighbors - seniors, the disabled, and the sick.

The Obama administration will announce plans today to virtually give away roughly 1,800 mobile homes to 3,400 families displaced by Hurricane Katrina who are living in government-provided housing along the Gulf Coast, officials said.

The administration also will make available $50 million in rental vouchers to income-eligible trailer occupants who move to targeted housing projects, and take over from Louisiana the job of helping residents find permanent homes, said a senior White House official, speaking on the condition of anonymity before the formal announcement.

"We knew we needed to bring this program to a close," the official said. "We also want to ensure a humane and secure transition for all of them."

This is a much better policy than closing our eyes and pretending that the threat of eviction is a magic bullet for moving people into permanent housing. Good stuff. This announcement is a step in the right direction.

"no major policy decisions"

From Transom:

“At times the city feels a bit paralyzed and daunted. You may feel that way too, looking at us,”she said, going onto to say that that the city’s master plan, which was unveiled online in draft form online today, would be “one of the guides to help us form policy” moving forward.

Aside from the master plan, Reed said, “no major policy decisions… would be coming out in the next year.”

And that, she said, “is because of the (coming in 2010) change in administration.”

Deputy Director for Housing Policy Victoria Reed also assured housing wonks in the crowd that the city had funding from a foundation to do a study of housing needs in the next year. “So we will know what the needs are and where we should be focusing development,” she said.

Four years after the storm is definitely the appropriate time to possibly start a study on what our affordable housing needs might be.

Find Nearest Wall

And bang your head against it.

Incompetence has consequences!

Big time props to Lee Zurik his latest report. The city is apparently ready to leave millions of dollars of federal HUD money on the table after years and years of failing to spend it on its intended purpose: affordable housing.

Remember, the lack of affordable housing is the biggest obstacle preventing displaced New Orleanians from returning home. City officials, though they have failed to implement anything close to their own coherent plan for the restoration of affordable housing, have continuously harped on the ongoing affordable housing crisis as a primary impetus for increased federal funding. And this whole time Blakely has just been sitting on close to $31 million.

All of the BS that we put up with - the incompetence, the gridlock, the lack of accountability, the lack of strategic vision - it ain't just politics. It's people's lives.

--

The worst part is when Blakely tries to spoon feed us this horseshit explanation for why the money has been spent. He claims that nonprofits and contractors aren't around to apply for it.

Thankfully, Lee Zurik doesn't leave it to us to just assume that that statement is an outright lie because he finds proof.

James Perry, the head of the New Orleans Fair Housing Action Center, said he runs a non-profit that requested money.

“That’s not true,” he said in response to Blakely’s statement. “The money we applied for is combined CDBG and home funding and we were awarded the money.”

Perry said that months later he received an e-mail saying the city put the money on hold. He said many non-profits have been ready to do work since the storm, but the city won’t spend the money.

“When you drive through Lakeview or Gentilly or the Lower Ninth Ward, the thing that stands out is the housing is not there. Imagine how much housing could be back in commission with that money; it makes no sense,” Perry said.

If I saw Blakely right now I'd have a hard time not spitting right in his face.

Get the hell out of here you asshole.

Kingdom of the Wicked part 1

Did cruelty live in the bones of this late pastel double joined shotgun -or is the world really this evil?
.
This unremarkable double shotgun was demolished yesterday by city contractors after being declared an imminent health threat in danger of collapse. The wrecking ball punctuated a pattern of neglect, and in the sharp tongue of the New Orleans Police Department, "slum conditions."
According to a 2004 police investigation, the son of the house's owner "willfully neglected to provide adequate living accommodations to a 76-year-old female who rented a home from him. The suspect refused to make structural repairs to the home. The home’s interior and exterior had unsanitary conditions and the City of New Orleans’ Health Department declared the residence unfit for human habitation."
Five years and one mama storm later, this house was still unfit, and still inhabited.
In the weeks before the bulldozers arrived, a homeless family had been squatting there, taking shelter inside the house's unsteady walls while they waited for transitional housing to open up. It was probably not a great place to be; on a recent Thursday night, a lone man stood in front of a nearby house, also unlit, waving his arms frantically at passing cars. Finally late last week, the city called Unity of Greater New Orleans , and requested the housing non-profit place the family in some kind of transitional housing. By Monday afternoon, the house was gone, a patch of mud in its place. By evening, the frenzied waver was likely back on site.
While confidentiality rules prevent Unity from providing any information on the family's whereabouts a case worker said today that they, at least temporarily, were staying somewhere more secure than the South Liberty Street house. The organization estimates there are thousands of people living in homes awaiting demolition. The Beck contractor who handled the eviction of the squatters on South Liberty, Justin Augustine, agrees.
"It’s very common that people are living in the structures we are demolishing,” said Augustine told a today.
Imagine spending your days traveling from decrepit house to decrepit house, sometimes finding extreme decay, other times a freshly made bedroll and on occasion, a family that you must evict. Now imagine doing that with relatively little support from the city. Unity, an umbrella of more than 70 social service providers and community organizations, relies on its vast network to point its outreach workers towards the 1619 South Liberty Streets in our midst. Last year it launched a program, "No One Suffers Alone" aimed at moving people from abandoned houses or the streets and into permanent housing that will be paid for with an increased number of supportive housing vouchers the organization is currently asking federal officials to approve. The organization is also advocating for the city to rewrite zoning policies to mandate developers to make a certain percentage of units in all new housing developments available to low to moderate income renters or buyers. The practice, known as "inclusionary zoning," is done in New York City, Washington DC, San Francisco, and other major cities.
But these progressive housing policies alone won't solve the problem of New Orleans' impatient wrecking ball.
Other tools are needed. One the most critical is an active and engaged City Council. District B Councilwoman Stacy Head was able to get three properties back on the tax rolls with a successful sheriff sale on the courthouse steps. Head said the sale netted the city almost $50,000. She plans to spearhead more of the sales in the future.
"Rampant demolition is NOT the answer," Head wrote (the caps are all her) in an email today. "If the properties are salvageable, the city should secure them and code enforcement should push the owners to compliance with codes, to sale or to expropriation."
Wise words. Maybe the next mayor will listen.


credit: Ariella Cohen.
Ariella is a freelance journalist and a contributor to the New Orleans Institute

Politics, Race, Class, and Building Permits Collide in New Orleans East

Yesterday, State Rep. and current Mayoral candidate Austin Badon, State Senator Ann Duplessis, and State Rep. and erstwhile candidate for Congress Cedric Richmond held a press conference to blast Mayor Nagin's decision to halt the issuance of all building permits in New Orleans East for 30 days or more.

Within hours, the City of New Orleans reversed its policy and agreed to once again issue permits.

Very interesting stuff, since the City of New Orleans had originally adopted the policy to halt building permits in the East as a result of a law put in place by those very same group of legislators, with support from Councilwoman Cynthia Willard-Lewis.

It all stems from the controversial Levy Gardens project under construction directly adjacent to the wealthy enclave of Eastover. Levy Gardens is controversial because it is a multifamily, mixed-income development, which means that there will be low income residents directly right next to an exclusive golf course community.

It lead to the establishment of the Eastern New Orleans Neighborhood Advisory Commission and the passage of a state law last year by Duplessis, Richmond, and Badon that gave that commission the power of review for before the city can building permits in the area.

It's a fascinating controversy on many levels. For one, there is the city's acute affordable housing crisis and its impact on poor and minority communities:

James Perry, head of the Greater New Orleans Fair Housing Action Center, said Duplessis is missing the point. The Fair Housing Act covers a policy's impact, not its intent, and blocking multifamily housing disproportionately hurts minorities, he said.

Perry also doesn't buy the argument that multifamily housing causes concentrations of poverty. He said apartment complexes thrived in the east until the local economy, once humming on NASA and oil industry jobs, tanked.

"The role of community leaders has to be to show we're open for business and say, 'If you come here with your business, we have enough rental housing for your employees, ' " he said. "But for now, it's been that New Orleans East is open if you bring homeownership, and that says, 'Don't come here, don't come here, don't come here.' "

But the intersection of race and class doesn't break down into the too-typical poor blacks v. rich whites paradigm. Residents of Eastover, the aforementioned cooperative between Richmond, Badon, Willard-Lewis, and Duplessis, and the Eastern New Orleans Neighborhood Advisory Committee are primarily black but also primarily wealthy. The developers of the Levy Gardens are white and wealthy but the future residents would likely be poor and black.

The other element is planning policy. Aren't residents supposed to have some say over the types of developments built under the zoning master plan being put together by Goody Clancy? Does the fact that building permits for Levy Gardens had already been issued prior to the zoning master plan ordinance make moot the right to review being asserted by Eastover residents?

The whole thing seems wrought with double standards on all sides. How do we solve the city's affordable housing crisis without building affordable housing units? What what are the different development restrictions on multifamily construction in places like Uptown and the French Quarter? With so much hurricane damage in the East, shouldn't all residential construction be welcome? Hasn't New Orleans East been the slowest neighborhood to recover population? Plus how do you handicap the politics of the situation? Badon, Richmond, Willard-Lewis, and James Perry are running for higher office or were running for higher office as this controversy has unfolded.

A lot to consider, no?

HANO Destroys More Houses

Sad article.

The list of 500 properties includes more than 50 units at HANO's Christopher Park development on the West Bank, another 50 at the Press Park development in the Desire area, dozens in Gentilly and in the Irish Channel, and hundreds in eastern sections of the city and in the Lower 9th Ward.

The targeted properties have been untouched since Katrina, despite Walker-Woodfork's personal campaign for a restoration program. For at least the past year, Walker-Woodfork has addressed the HANO board at each monthly meeting with a list of scattered-site addresses in her hand.

"Can you tell me when Imperial Drive will be rebuilt?" she would ask. And she would similarly ask for information about plans for Dale Homes, Painters-Lesseps and other residential developments in the HANO inventory.

Once, the board chair told her that she'd asked the exact same questions the previous month.

Walker-Woodfork said that she was asking the same questions because she "never got any answers."

On Wednesday, Walker-Woodfork said she and other residents had met with HANO before the board meeting and had seen the list of homes to be demolished. She was glad to at least know something about the fate of the properties, after three years of asking questions.

But she still has no repair timetable for the remaining scattered-site inventory, saying she has only heard of plans for repairs to about 40 apartments.

Stall, stall, stall, then demolish, then come up with a plan to house people.

Nagin Endorses Historic Preservation?

Karen Gadbois highlights President-Elect (it feels so good) Barack Obama's policies on cities, affordable housing, and historic preservation:

The response of some to these statistics is to call for still more demolition, abandonment and neglect of older and historic neighborhoods. In the last three decades we lost from our national inventory of older and historic homes 6.3 million year-round housing units. Over 80 percent of those units were single-family residences. The vast majority of them were simply demolished – were thrown away as being worthless. These demolitions occurred at the very same time that the number of units of affordable to low-income households has fallen. In essence, America has been worrying about how to dismantle the barriers to affordable housing and the same time it has been dismantling the very homes that are, or could be, affordable.

For a variety of reasons, a better way is to revitalize our older and existing neighborhoods. For starters, studies show that repairing older homes, even those with moderate or server physical problems is a cost effective way to create housing. While rehabilitation isn’t the only solution to the affordable housing crises, there are as many as 3 million vacant older and historic housing units that could be brought back to use. These homes can be put back into service – either in homeownership or scattered site rental projects – through market forces and the wise use of CDBG and HOME funds as well as the enormously successful technique of twinning federal Low-Income Housing Tax Credits and federal Historic Rehabilitation Tax Credits.

Expect Mayor Nagin to announce tomorrow a total reversal of his entire recovery policy to this point in order to match the directives of the new Obama administration. After all, Ray Nagin wholeheartedly endorsed Barack Obama and his vision for revitalizing America's cities. He certainly wouldn't want to be an obstacle to change and progress by continuing policies antithetical to those for which Barack Obama stands. Also look for the Times-Picayune to more forcefully differentiate between Barack Obama's urban vision and that of the Nagin-Blakely syndicate in its articles and editorials. You'll recall that the Times-Picayune endorsed Barack Obama specifically because

He knows cities -- historic cities, gritty cities. He came by his knowledge pounding the streets of Chicago's South Side as an organizer, grappling with the needs of poor people. For our own great and complex city, we could use a national leader who appreciates that we are more than a sentimental memory of a college romp on Bourbon Street; that we are a culturally rich American treasure, filled with resilient citizens and worth protecting from the encroaching forces of nature.

Right? We can expect these things to happen, can't we?

Evaluating the School Facilities Master Plan: 2nd Grade

I have the demographic projections informing facilities master plan. The master plan is based specifically on the moderate scenario.

This document has the neighborhood-specific raw data for low, moderate, and high projections.

This document has the general summaries for each scenario.

It is interesting to note how contingent the low and moderate scenarios are on the "notion that affordable housing will not be replaced on a one-for-one basis."

-

Francine Stock has mapped all the schools to be 'land-banked' or already demolished under the master plan.

-

Thinking further about the upcoming process...

The master plan needs to be accepted or rejected by BESE and by the OPSB. The clock begins ticking on the 30 day public comment period tomorrow. Mr. Pastorek indicated that while no date has been set for a vote by either BESE or the OPSB, it would most definitely occur sometime this fall. When I heard that I assumed that the statement left some degree of wiggle room in terms of whether or not the OPSB vote would occur before or after the election. This was critical in my mind because 5 of 7 incumbents are not running for reelection and would therefore their decision on this monumental matter would not be accountable to voters. Yet I realized that if the vote is to occur this fall, it will not matter whether or not it occurs before or after the OPSB election because the new OPSB will not officially take office until 2009.

Thus, we cannot count on the OPSB vote to reflect public opinion on the master plan. Unless the RSD and the State Dept. of Education will accept waiting for the new OPSB to be seated all the way in January, the only fair solution is to put approval of the master plan directly to the voters as a ballot referendum.

-
I'll republish later with more thoughts.

Good Idea, Now What About Rent Relief?

If it's administered with any kind of competence. (Link.)

I'll Bite - It's Entrapment

This is a great article in City Business. Big props to Richard Webster. Big time props.

A pack of Kool cigarettes, a can of Budweiser and a box of Boston Baked Beans sat on the dashboard of an unlocked car with the windows rolled down at 1732 Canal St.

Somewhere nearby two New Orleans Police Department officers watched and waited for someone to reach into the bait car and snatch the items.

They wouldn’t have to wait long, as the police parked the car just one block away from a homeless encampment under the Claiborne Avenue overpass, where dozens of desperate, hungry and addicted people lived in a makeshift village of tents.

Absolutely repugnant, but there's more:

For stealing less than $6 in items, the police charged the two homeless men with simple burglary, a felony that can carry up to 12 years in prison. Neither suspect had any prior arrests in Orleans Parish.

A month later, the men remain in Orleans Parish Prison awaiting court dates and the possibility they will spend the better part of the next decade in state prison.

“I don’t know what the policing justification is for such an action,” said Pamela Metzger, associate professor of law at Tulane University Law School. “But on a fundamental human level, it smacks of a meanness, a pettiness, a spitefulness that has no place in a city as broken as this one. It’s a way of manufacturing offenses that may not have otherwise existed.”

Well said by Professor Metzger.

--

Mr. Webster goes even further to extend his article beyond sensational outrage to discuss the racially and socio-econimically loaded implications of the use of Kool Brand cigarettes and beer.

Further, Webster leaps away from sensational discussion to point out how fiscally irresponsible the policy is:

The district attorney has 60 days to accept or refuse the charges against a suspect. It costs $23.39 per day to house an inmate in Orleans Parish Prison. If it takes the district attorney 60 days to decide the fate of the eight people arrested in the sting, the cost to the taxpayer for incarcerating them in parish prison would be $11,227.20.

Should anyone be convicted, the cost of housing an inmate in state prison for one year is $14,815.

It's a sickening story but it's great journalism. Kudos to Mr. Webster and shame on the NOPD.

It is part of a three part series that examines the utility of Police Superintendent Riley's ideological comitment to catch-and-release style policework. I discussed this at length at a few different junctures earlier this year and I look forward to seeing the rest of Mr. Webster's series unfold. I'll also take the opportunity to reiterating my request for Mr. Riley's resignation so that we can ideologically realign the department to better reflect community policing practices and the desires of the great majority of NOPD officers on the beat (obviously excluding the jerks entraping the homeless).

Also I'd like to point out that the cost of housing a homeless man in prison for a year is significantly less than renting them their own apartment in high-rent New Orleans for a year. I'd like to point out that Unity's model for housing the homeless has been proven effective throughout other urban communities in the United States and is much cheaper than jail. Finally, let me also point out that our affordable housing crisis has never been addressed by the Mayor or City Council and is the biggest contributor to New Orleans' large homeless population.

Right of Return Lip Service Trumped By Bureaucratic Practice

Just in case you missed it, Katy Reckdahl wrote an essential piece for yesterday's paper. It is absolutely critical reading for anyone that has been following housing and the plight of displaced New Orleanians who, by the way, still number in the hundreds of thousands.

Through the experiences of two displaced New Orleanians, the article details the inability or refusal of HUD to close bureaucratic loopholes that allow local housing authorities to refuse to pay to transfer residents back to New Orleans due to higher rent.

This has caused a standoff between HANO and housing authorities in other cities, particularly in Texas, which took in many Katrina evacuees. The Housing Authority of New Orleans can't afford to pay for any incoming vouchers, said HUD spokeswoman Donna White. So many out-of-town housing agencies -- facing the prospect of paying rent for all transferring vouchers -- have invoked the "higher rent" exception to refuse New Orleans transfers, including Martin's and Egana's.

(Never mind the fact that HANO is under the direct control of HUD)

Let's take this opportunity to remind ourselves of HUD's record in New Orleans and around the country over the last 7 and a half years.

While there is both corruption and incompetence, let us not overlook the troubling ideological ends reached as a consequence of bureacratic inaction.

Hedge-Morrell's Amendment Makes Sense

I have long criticized the upcoming FEMA trailer eviction deadline policy as poorly planned and hastily executed.

Today's T-P article indicates that the process is problematic for many:

Davida Finger, an attorney with the Loyola clinic, said many of her clients still in trailers continue to tussle with the Road Home program and can't rebuild their homes. Finger said the city should halt any plans to cite people after July 1, as well as possibly evict them from trailers, until it has set up a clearer process.

"I understand they want to do something if there are a lot of unused trailers sitting around and concerns about people's health," said Laura Tuggle, an attorney with New Orleans Legal Aid. "But they need to explain how the process will work to people, so people don't panic."

Tuggle said she's also concerned that the federal rental assistance program for Katrina victims isn't running smoothly enough to accommodate a new influx of people leaving trailers.

I have long argued that the affordable housing crisis and the lack of inexpensive rentals makes the eviction policy untenable.

There are an estimated 4,700 trailers. That's an awful lot of people that could require rental assistance.

Cynthia Hedge-Morrell has proposed extending the eviction deadline to September 30th for trailer residents in Districts D and E, which were more heavily damaged by the flood.

This is a solid idea that should have been included in the original policy. Not only does it give more time for people to complete renovations, find their own permanent housing solutions, or compile the documentation necessary to exempt themselves from eviction, but it also allows the city to concentrate on fairly vetting exemption applications from trailer residents elsewhere in the city where eviction proponents claim trailers have outlived their necessity.

So this actually happening

It is at these moments that I feel most feeble in my attempts to bring about positive change in my community.

The city is moving forward with their self-imposed FEMA trailer move-out deadline.

Of all the initiatives and policies and "undevelopment" schemes hatched by our municipal government, this one frustrates me the most.

In my mind, the unintended negative impacts of this policy are so obvious that they come off as very much intended.

I have, again and again, pointed out the problematic consequences of this policy.

Of course, we would like to get rid of all FEMA trailers. They are an unsightly reminder of tragedy and many have come to be rented illegally. They are not fit to withstand hurricane winds.

Most importantly, they are an immediate public health risk to all that inhabit them. They are contaminated with dangerous levels of formaldehyde.

So of course, it is important that we work to get people into permanent housing. Remaining in the trailers is not a truly viable option.

Yet look at the policy created to do that:

Trailer occupants should first contact FEMA to get the trailer removed. Then they need to file an affidavit with the city, included with the flier posted by FEMA, that certifies they asked the federal agency to remove the trailer. This affidavit also grants the city of New Orleans permission to contact the agency to request trailer removal. Filing the affidavit protects the resident if the trailer has not been taken away by July 1.

While FEMA notified trailer occupants about the return to the old city ordinance, the regulations also will apply to people who bought their own trailers after the storm, said James Ross, a Nagin spokesman.

If residents are not done rebuilding their flooded homes, they can ask the city Department of Safety & Permits for permission to continue living in the trailer. However, residents will have to show that they meet specific criteria to obtain an extension and provide the city with records that show they intend to rebuild a flooded house, according to the application. The request for an extension must be filed by July 1.

These criteria include documentation that there is ongoing litigation between a resident and insurance company or documentation that the resident applied for Road Home grants but has not received the money. Other records that may be required include loan papers or data that show repairs are ongoing and telling the city the anticipated completion date.

That's an awful lot of bureaucracy in 30 days just to keep from being kicked out of your trailer. That's an awful lot of bureaucracy for a city incapable of meeting its own notification laws for the demolition of private homes. That's too much bureaucracy for a city known to "mistakingly" tear down people's homes.

Just 30 days notification...

That's a lot to ask of the people struggling the most to rebuild. It puts all of the responsibility onto the shoulders of the victims of formaldehyde poisoning.

City policy does nothing to address the affordable housing crisis that forces many to illegally rent poisonous FEMA trailers because reasonably priced apartments are not available or forces many more to remain in their own poisonous FEMA trailers while home repairs hit bureaucratic walls of resistance.

Thus:

The 30-day notice to vacate their trailers has left a lot of people wondering what to do, said Davida Finger, an attorney handling housing cases for the Loyola Law Clinic.

"It has left people shellshocked," Finger said, noting that most of the people receiving the notices are those who have struggled the most to rebuild their damaged properties. The 30-day timeframe is simply too short, she said.

Many of the dozens of people who have called the Loyola clinic since the weekend are still wrangling with the Road Home program to receive grants to rebuild and aren't prepared to find new places to live, she said.

Finger said the city needs to give homeowners more specific information about the the extension process, such as when they can expect to hear back from the city and who will be deciding whether to grant the extensions.

Shell-shocked may be an understatement. One poor soul reached a tipping point.

I would argue that the city needs to do SOMETHING, ANYTHING to address the affordable housing crisis.

Instead the affordable housing crisis only exists when it is the federal government's policies that are negatively impacting poor New Orleanians. When it is our own policy, there is no affordable housing crisis.

Why is that?

Here is, briefly, a sketch of the We Could Be Famous policy toward FEMA trailers:

At the end of last summer, I would have realized that FEMA was not competent enough to develop a coherent trailer policy and had long abandoned their ethical obligations to address the formaldehyde allegations.

It is at this time that I would have empowered inspectors to go around and evaluate the validity of trailer occupancy, giving deadline removal notices to trailers no longer needed and calculating the affordable housing needs of those in a bad spot with their insurance company or the Road Home program.

In February, when FEMA finally admitted formaldehyde contamination, I would have filed a lawsuit on behalf of the city of New Orleans in the hopes of negotiating the procurement of federal funding for the award of tax incentives for the construction and rental of affordable units or for a two year rental subsidy program.

By March, caseworkers would be working to move trailer residents into permanent affordable housing alternatives and removing empty trailers from city streets.

By the end of May, there would be no more trailers because everyone would have gotten the necessary assistance to find permanent housing on their own.

Easier said than done, I know. But my policy was written in five minutes off the top of my head. The city's policy was a "well-studied and thoughtful discussion" that took place over the course of months and was then hastily unveiled with an immediately impending deadline and a malicious disregard for the negative consequences.

Stacy Head:

"And especially with the beginning of hurricane season, it's good to remind people that FEMA trailers are dangerous places - trailers in general are dangerous places to live - and more permanent housing is a much better long-term solution."

I'm sorry Councilwoman, but you have been one of the most hostile municipal officials toward solutions designed to alleviate the affordable housing crisis.

The Nitty Gritty of our Unfair City

Time to update my constituents on the state of the city and all that . . .

I've been working hard! I am a hard worker! Things are moving in the right direction! Federal funds! Fighting crime! Construction! Economic development! Jobs! Mildly self-depreciating joke! Reform efforts are working! Long term vision! The city is working! I have been working hard! Optimism!

--

So what really stood out?

A few things. Here is the TP report on the speech.

Mayor Nagin's site selection is interesting. He delivered his speech from the Port of New Orleans Cruise Terminal. A well-used public space and a symbol of community, no? Certainly, it is not at all indicative of Mayor Nagin's private-sector base.

-

. . .Nagin joked often Wednesday and focused almost exclusively on the positive signs he's seen since the storm.

He cited surveys saying most New Orleanians believe the city is moving in the right direction. He also touted reports that the city has the sixth-fastest-growing real estate market in the country and record low unemployment, not mentioning the fact that the storm's impact has inflated the number of housing sales and construction jobs.

Okay, let's talk about the Mayor's positive signs:

1. "Surveys saying most New Orleanians believe the city is moving in the right direction"

Really? Most New Orleanians? What surveys?

It couldn't be the same surveys that you discussed in this article:

Referring to a recent poll by researcher Verne Kennedy showing that nearly one in four New Orleans voters think the city is "moving in the right direction," Nagin said he has faith in such positive results.

"We like these polls that say 23 percent of people think the city is headed in the right direction," he said. "Y'all keep these coming. We'll pay good money for them."

Oh! One in four! That's most of us, alright. We'll keep 'em coming.

2. "the sixth fastest growing real estate market"

The free market recovery is yielding results there, huh? In a toxic national real estate climate, people are making money off a city that lost a huge chunk of its housing stock to the storm? No kidding.

In the paper edition of the T-P, the jump headline on page A-7 is "Nagin notes housing market."

And my eyes jumped out a little bit because I thought that maybe he was going to make mention of the gigantic affordable housing crisis that has been the foremost issue facing the city since December of 2005.

This surprised me because he doesn't ever seem to mention it.

In the end, I was brought back down to earth because the "note" on the housing market Nagin made was the one above. So while the city's affordable housing developments are precariously close to failing, the Mayor is proud to report that money is being made by ultra wealthy.

3. "record low unemployment"

Which, of course, is very similar to the endemic underemployment at a minimum wage of $5.15 per hour.

Kudos to the T-P for it's immediate refutation of the the Mayor's citation of housing and employment stats as positive recovery signs.

--

There was one more interesting tidbit that I think is important to rememberL

After weeks of fence-sitting, he took a position for the first time on proposed state legislation to transfer control of Louis Armstrong International Airport from the city to the state in exchange for at least $500 million. The city would cede the airport's daily operations but would expect the state to significantly upgrade the facility. The deal would give the city much-needed cash for a long list of city infrastructure projects, Nagin said.

The mayor called for exploring a sale of the airport during his 2002 campaign.

"Remember my phrase: Sell that sucker," Nagin said.

But the mayor offered one caveat: He doesn't support the legislation's proposed creation of a new agency with both mayoral and gubernatorial appointees to control the cash for city infrastructure. Instead, he wants the existing New Orleans Building Corp., which is comprised of the mayor, his appointees and City Council members, to handle the money.

Now this is important. What are the city infrastructure projects we need to raise money for?

Is it for roads or schools? Is it for hospitals or public transportation? Is it for NOPD facilities or parks?

I made the connection a few weeks ago but now the Mayor has made it perfectly clear. The Mayor's caveat for supporting the sale of a precious, revenue-generating public asset is that the sale money go under the direct control of the New Orleans Building Corporation.

The NOBC's signature initiative is the stupid Reinventing the Crescent giveaway.

So literally, the Mayor's plan is to sell off a major revenue provider for the city for $500,000 so that Sean Cummings, CEO of the NOBC, can spend a quarter of it on his own pet project - one that the Louisiana Board of Ethics is already suspicious of because of Cummings' extensive property holdings near the proposed riverfront redevelopment.

This is the first paragraph from the initial T-P report about the airport sale proposal:

Business leaders from across the metropolitan New Orleans area and Baton Rouge have crafted an audacious proposal that calls for City Hall to hand over ownership and governance of Louis Armstrong International Airport to the state, in return for heavy state financial support for city redevelopment projects.

So who are these business leaders again? Might one of them wear two hats? Might one of those hats be CEO of the New Orleans Building Corporation?

--

Time to update my constituents on the state of the city and all that . . .

I've been working hard! I am a hard worker! Things are moving in the right direction! Federal funds! Fighting crime! Construction! Economic development! Jobs! Mildly self-depreciating joke! Reform efforts are working! Long term vision! The city is working! I have been working hard! Optimism!

We Could Be Famous' "We Can" Weekend Roundup

There were a lot of stories that piqued my interest over the weekend.
There were some absolute nuggets of wisdom that I just have to briefly lasso together:


The Saturday T-P had a number of interesting articles.

1. The weekly New Orleans politics segment routinely makes my Saturday. I've canceled my TP subscription for a lot of different reasons but I still buy the Saturday paper, mostly just for this article. This weekend's piece elaborated on the Mayor's absolutely hilarious wisecrack about kicking all of the homeless people out of town.

"I'm not suggesting that they were dumped here, but we have a lot of people from a lot of different places around the country, and you may be helping one of your citizens," the mayor said.

"Maybe we can even find some bus tickets. We'll see," Nagin said, drawing uneasy laughter from parts of a crowded ballroom at the Sheraton New Orleans Hotel. "One way."

Since I've never given my thoughts on those comments, I'll just say that the reason they are offensive is because Mayor Nagin has, at times, been openly hostile to concrete solutions for combating chronic homelessness. They are offensive because Nagin has routinely deflected the homelessness issue by blaming to "outsiders" when he himself continues to support policies that exacerbate rather than alleviate the affordable housing crisis. To contextualize the quote, Mayor Nagin was just kidding, his substantive answer to the question on helping the homeless was to donate to Unity or the Mission. This doesn't help matters much because the Mayor has generally been hostile to Unity's proven approach. As you'll recall, the Mayor's solution earlier this year was to round up the homeless into a giant barracks at the New Orleans Mission. This policy was seen as so reactive that the Bush administration sent an official to try to convince the Mayor to reconsider a more humane approach.

2. There was a second pearl from Nagin in that same TP article:

At other points, Nagin displayed his lighter side, responding to a question about whether local leaders trust the science of polling.

Referring to a recent poll by researcher Verne Kennedy showing that nearly one in four New Orleans voters think the city is "moving in the right direction," Nagin said he has faith in such positive results.

"We like these polls that say 23 percent of people think the city is headed in the right direction," he said. "Y'all keep these coming. We'll pay good money for them."

While I can believe that local poll numbers might be unreliable, I'm afraid that the percentage of people that think the city is headed in the right direction may be lower. If there's one measure of the city's recovery that is more important than any other, it is the one that represents how the residents of New Orleans themselves feel about the direction of their city. If New Orleans residents do not feel as if the city is heading in the right direction than the city is not heading in the right direction - period. This cavalier attitude toward his own unpopularity reminds me of that of another totally unaccountable and unapologetic golden god:




New Orleans residents don't think their needs are being met? So?

It is the job of historians to evaluate what a tragedy your Mayoral administration has been.

3. Also from the TP: Recovery School District behind in its bills

State Superintendent Paul Pastorek estimated that the district is delinquent in paying 10 to 20 vendors. The district did pay out more than $30 million to vendors during the past 60 days, he said, paying off every vendor who was owed $20,000 or less in full.

Yet as the school year draws to a close, officials say finances still remain one of the thorniest problems facing district Superintendent Paul Vallas and his team.

"I don't think anybody, including me, anticipated the difficulties of not having a cash reserve account," Pastorek said.

Well done Paul and Paul. Want to know who anticipated the difficulties?

The Times Picayune did. From the same article:

Recovery District officials have not responded to repeated inquiries over the last month as to which vendors have outstanding, overdue bills.
--
The district did not respond to a specific question asking what their 10 largest overdue bills are. It also did not respond to an April open-records request for copies of all invoices marked overdue.

So in other words, it was such a surprise that you spent weeks stalling out public records requests beyond the legally permissible three day wait?

No kidding. Know who else thought the RSD might run into some "surprise" budget issues?

Know who else gets routinely stonewalled by the RSD legal team on public records requests?

He has a blog.


4. Sad.

Over the weekend, our fearless President went to Saudi Arabia to plead with King Abdullah to make more oil. President Bush reads the internets and has heard that gas prices are too high so he went over to ride horses with the King and beg him to help US consumers buy more consumer electronics by reducing oil prices. King Abdullah said no.

Earlier in the week, Saida Mohammed Afrah left her children for two hours to scavenge for food and water. When she returned, her two babies had starved to death. High gas prices contributing to high food prices have exacerbated the effects of a drought in East Africa. Famine is upon Somalia, Eritrea, and Sudan. It approaches Kenya.

Our President's crawling on his knees routine with the Saudis is an embarrassment on so many levels. While it was very nice of the man to go to bat to Americans under legitimate pressure from high gas prices, it is so insulting to go begging the Saudis for help as US oil corporations reap windfall profits as a direct result of the high prices that are literally killing people in Africa.

Par 5, Split Fairway

This is the fifth part of my series called Demolishing and Redeveloping Alphonso Jackson.

I wanted to leave that out of the title because this post extends Jackson's reign at the Federal Department of Housing and Urban Development very concretely to the city of New Orleans. It's not just about him because of its consequences for us.

In part 1, I describe how Alphonso Jackson not-so-subtly explained to minority vendors that contracts from HUD would be awarded partially based on the political affiliations of the bidders.

Part 2 briefly describes how the city of New Orleans lost independent dominion over the Housing Authority of New Orleans, how HANO came to be under the direct control of HUD.

The scandal that most directly brought about the resignation of Alphonso Jackson resulted from his actions against the Philadelphia Housing Authority. In part 3, I detail the spat between minority developer and Republican contributer Kenneth Gamble and PHA's Executive Director Carl Greene. Gamble, after failing to meet the terms of his non profit's contract with the PHA, called in Alphonso Jackson to intervene. When Jackson and his people at HUD began to retaliate against Philadelphia by attempting to withhold federal funding, Carl Greene filed suit. The suit became public and the heat of the subsequent congressional investigations prompted Mr. Jackson to resign.

In part 4, I interviewed PHA Executive Director Carl Greene in detail about his experience with Alphonso Jackson and HUD. He had some impressive insights into the public housing demolition controversy from late last year and spoke to the problems that arise as a result of ceded municipal authority.

Why have I been slowly releasing research on Alphonso Jackson and HUD? What does it all mean? How does the scandal in Philadelphia tell us about New Orleans?

I hope to connect the dots for you today. I will draw a lot on the previous four posts of the series to help illustrate the big picture. I encourage you to read those if you can but I hope that this is clear enough to stand on its own.

I can tell you now that this is going to be really long, but I promise it'll be worth it. Take your computer into the bathroom with you.

--

Most rewarding thus far, was my interview with Carl Greene. I had hoped that discussing his legal authority to file suit against HUD on behalf of the residents of Philadelphia's public housing would help illuminate the problematic alliance between HUD and HANO in the housing decisions that have occurred here.

Mr. Greene was willing to be so forthright with me about his view of things. His perspective on the operational philosophy of Alphonso Jackson was thought-provoking and was way more frank than I had envisioned when I contacted his office.

There was one thing that really had me thinking for some time after I'd posted the interview.

. . . I think Alphonso Jackson somehow felt as though he was the king of black people and his job was to somehow [benefit] these black contractors at the expense of the law. . . . [I]t's not just African American because I don't think it's just about black. I would say black-hyphen-socially-elite black. There's still a lot of poor black people out there that I'm in the business of serving every day. [Jackson] wasn't doing nothing for them. He went to Congress and said 'oh yeah give them 75%, give them 76% funding, take away all of their money.' But on the other hand, for one guy who can make some records, or some guy that makes contributions, or some guy that hangs out at the right golf club, I mean, the whole socially elite type that he was interested in - he would sacrifice the whole program for the purposes of benefiting the social elite. And that's what it came down to. It came down to the self-ascribed country club social contacts that he had, and he didn't care about the rules when it came to these folks.

--

I think Jackson was left to his own discretion to do whatever he wanted at HUD and he used that discretion - he abused that discretion - to take care of business and personal friends who became part of an elite social and business network. This was done at the expense of the city of New Orleans and its Housing Authority and if the City Council or the Mayor tried to object then he could always threaten to withhold the money or not give the money. [T]hat was his normal M.O. 'If you don't go along with me then you won't get the money.' It's a 40 billion dollar agency and he's doling out money - he used it as a political weapon to force you to go along with his policy. With the compromising of the political infrastructure [in New Orleans], you had a guy [Jackson] that was in charge of the agency who would beat you over the head with the power of his office if you didn't really vote the way he wanted you to vote on the demolition application, so, effective advocacy for the very very poor folks down there, an effective, professional housing advisory to the Mayor and the Council and the housing authority board was not present. [H]e kind of hijacked that for his office and made it an organization that put on a front of taking care of affordable housing and public housing when at the same time, it was always the people that were part of the social and business elite crowd that he was associated with, that were getting the work.

Now, Mr. Greene of course knew firsthand about Jackson's favors for socially connected elite African American business people through HUD's attempts to retaliate against the Philadelphia Housing Authority on behalf of 2000 RNC speaker and Republican donor Kenneth Gamble.

But there was something else there that really stuck out in my mind and it took me awhile to really put a finger on what it was.

I had to think on it.

-

Stroke 1: The philosophy of black capitalism as applied in New Orleans

Black capitalism in general is not bad or dangerous at all. In fact, I like it. Basically, it argues that for African Americans to rise as an oppressed minority, they must accumulate wealth by building their own businesses. Essentially, it's a large-scale "buy local" campaign to keep African American money in the African American community and away from large corporations that contribute to the larger economic system that has cemented aspects of structural racism.

In some instances, however, some African American business leaders have lost their way. They come to exploit the African American communities they purportedly assist by obtaining wealth. I can even see the justification. For example, though Kenneth Gamble was bilking Philadelphia Housing Authority residents, most of whom are poor African Americans, by failing to build the houses his contract with PHA demanded, he could sleep at night because the profits he and his company received from the market rate development he wanted to build would remain in African American hands - his own.

Now let's take a New Orleans example.

In early November, the Times-Picayune wrote about our sanitation contracts with Richard's and Metro disposal. I think everyone remembers that one, it sparked a lot of outrage and a City Council investigation. The gist was that two minority-owned sanitation companies, Richard's Disposal and Metro Disposal, were receiving suspiciously cushy treatment from the city. While Jefferson Parish receives full sanitation service including "unlimited bulky waste" for about $8 from each taxpayer, New Orleans tax payers receive less service for at least $10 more per resident.

Additionally, as you'll recall, the original contracts with Richards and Metro actually did call for the removal of all "unlimited bulky waste," but after the fact, Nagin drafted an amendment that was sponsored in Council by Cynthia Willard-Lewis that eliminated this requirement from the contract.

*To be fair, Councilwoman Willard-Lewis' amendment was approved unanimously by all members of City Council, save for Stacy Head, who was not present. Councilwoman Head has an ideological opposition against funding certain city services for residents and believes that the city should not pay for debris removal at all. This reflects very poorly on the functioning of Council as a whole and on the individual culprits.

Of course, Richard's and Metro are owned and controlled by Alvin Richard and Jimmie Woods, respectively. Since 2006 alone, Richard's and Metro, or their owners or partners, have given thousands of dollars to the campaigns of Ray Nagin and Cynthia Willard-Lewis.

That's not the end of the story, however. As you might remember, when City Council got around to investigating their prior mistake, Richard's and Metro organized a protest of chambers. They alleged that the investigations into their contracts, which were quite clearly taking advantage of the population of New Orleans, amounted to racism against minority-owned firms. They stacked council with their employees and brought in officials from what could once be called a civil rights group, SCLC, which threatened a comically ridiculous boycott of the city.

Never mind that the inflated garbage collection contracts were hurting predominantly African American New Orleans taxpayers, our neighbors most disproportionately hurt by any form of economic exploitation or tax revenue waste. Never mind that a boycott by any group would disproportionately harm African Americans at the bottom rungs of the service industry economy. The warped interpretation of the black capitalism philosophy allowed Cynthia Willard Lewis, Sanitation Director Veronica White, Ray Nagin, Jimmie Woods, Alvin Richard, and Spiver Gordon of the SCLC to sleep well at night because they were working to keep the money in the hands of African Americans: two sets of hands, those of elite African American multimillionaires Alvin Richard and Jimmie Woods.


Stroke 2: Alphonso Jackson and William Hairston in New Orleans

While HUD Secretary Alphonso Jackson's retaliation attempts against the Philadelphia Housing Authority yielded the political pressure that ultimately caused him to step down, Mr. Jackson was also under investigation for his role in steering contracts to his friends here in New Orleans. In October, the National Journal's Edward Pound reported on some nefarious relationships between Mr. Jackson and the firm that ultimately won the contract to redevelop the St. Bernard housing complex. The Times-Picayune also picked up the story. The allegations, at that time and as they developed, were two-tiered.

First, Alphonso Jackson was accused of steering a no-bid contract via HANO to millionaire African American businessman William Hairston to the tune of close to $500,000 for work done as a construction manager over an 18 month period. Later, Edward Pound found that HSD, a Georgia company affiliated with Hairston received an additional $186,000 contract directly from HUD.

So who is William Hairston?

According to Pound, he is:

"a golfing buddy and social friend from Hilton Head Island, S.C."

Hilton Head Island, South Carolina, of course, is an extremely exclusive residence and elite vacation destination, where, according to the New York Times, Alphonso Jackson purchased a home in 2004. Hairston's wife, Starletta Hairston is currently running for the SC House from Hilton Head Island as a Republican.

Remember Mr. Jackson's contracting philosophy, as relayed to a conference of minority real estate executive in Dallas, from Part 1 of Demolishing and Redeveloping Alphonso Jackson:

"I said, 'What do you mean?' He said, 'I don't like President Bush.' I thought to myself, 'Brother, you have a disconnect -- the president is elected, I was selected. You wouldn't be getting the contract unless I was sitting here. If you have a problem with the president, don't tell the secretary.'

"He didn't get the contract," Jackson continued. "Why should I reward someone who doesn't like the president, so they can use funds to try to campaign against the president? Logic says they don't get the contract. That's the way I believe."

Here is a list of political contributions by William and Starletta Hairston over the years. I'm sure that there are more listed under Mr. Hairston's various business ventures.

(Democratic majority whip James Clyburn also plays golf with Jackson and Hairston and also has questions to answer about his role in steering the HANO contract.)

Stroke 3: Alphonso Jackson and Columbia Residential in New Orleans

Columbia Residential is the company contracted for $127 million to redevelop the St. Bernard housing complex. Its President, Noel Khalil is a multimillionaire African American contractor from Atlanta.

According to the Times-Picayune, Columbia Residential via its subsidiary Columbia Highlands LLC had history in New Orleans before the storm:

Last December, a Columbia Highlands employee pleaded guilty to accepting bribes from a HANO contractor he was supposed to be overseeing. According to a summary of the case filed by the government, James Lozano of Atlanta admitted accepting $45,000 from the owner of a construction company helping to build the Fischer Senior Housing Village in Algiers. The money was paid in increments starting in 2002, the records say.

Columbia Highlands initially received a small project management contract from HANO, Moon said. In late 2002, the firm got a much larger contract, essentially putting it in charge of overseeing the redevelopment of all of the complexes undergoing renovation at the time: Desire, Florida, Fischer and Guste. The value of that contract could not be determined Thursday.

Moon said the larger contract was awarded after a competitive-selection process, under which HANO would not have been bound to choose the lowest-priced vendor. She declined to continue the interview after being asked how Columbia Highlands first came to work for the agency.

Remember, HANO was directly controlled by HUD beginning in 2002.

Turns out, Alphonso Jackson and Noel Khalil are close:

At the same time, the secretary still has financial ties to one housing developer. According to Jackson's financial disclosure reports, an Atlanta-based development company, Columbia Residential, owes him $250,000 to $500,000. Before joining HUD, his spokesman said, Jackson was a "partner/consultant" for the developer.

According to his disclosure reports, Jackson is to receive periodic payments "for past services" under a separation agreement with the company. He has received only one such payment in the past six years -- $35,000 in 2003. HUD officials said that Jackson avoids any dealings with Columbia Residential. They released a memo he wrote in August 2001 in which he recused himself from HUD matters having "a direct and predictable effect on the ability or willingness" of the company "to satisfy its obligation to compensate me for prior service rendered."

Columbia Residential's $127 million contract to redevelop the St. Bernard projects was, of course, above-board because Mr. Jackson has agreed recuse himself from the panel that awarded the big four redevelopment contracts?

The four-member selection panel included Scott Keller, who was until recently Jackson's deputy chief of staff and who is often described within HUD as Jackson's "right-hand man." But in an interview, Keller said that because of the press of other HUD business he did not participate in, or influence, the selection of the Columbia Residential team. Keller left HUD in August to become a private consultant.

Nothing to see here, other than a follow-up by Pound that explains how Mr. Keller became a central figure in the investigations into HUD.

As it turns out, however, Keller not only helped choose the panel but also served as a member. The other panel members were another senior HUD official from Washington, a HANO official, and an executive from the Fort Worth, Texas, housing authority. Legal and financial advisers assisted the panel in the selection process.

According to three people with intimate knowledge of the selection process, Keller strongly favored the Columbia Residential team's proposal. Margaret (Peg) Stone, a private financial adviser who is now retired, sat in on the discussions and recalls that Keller promoted Columbia Residential's plan "from the beginning." Stone said: "He certainly liked them a lot.... He advocated strongly for the best solution to the project, which he thought was Columbia Residential."

Khalil, a registered Democrat and donor, certainly knew how to play ball the Alphonso Jackson way in 1999 when he contributed to George W. Bush's first-term campaign.

So to quickly sum up, Noel Khalil of Columbia Residential won a $127 million contract from the taxpayers of New Orleans after formerly employing Alphonso Jackson, who used his chief of staff to pick and serve on the panel that awarded the contract. Columbia Residential continued to make direct payments totaling at least $250,000 while Mr. Jackson served at HUD.

Stroke 4: Columbia Residential, Bayou District Foundation, and St. Bernard

A 501c3 nonprofit, the Bayou District Foundation, came to be the public face of the complicated web of companies and foundations working on the St. Bernard redevelopment:

St. Bernard Redevelopment is the same group of nonprofits and businesses that have struck a partnership that includes the Fore!Kids Foundation and the Baton Rouge Area Foundation, both established charities.

An affiliate of the Baton Rouge Area Foundation, Commercial Properties Development Corp., will manage commercial elements of the redeveloped St. Bernard site. A for-profit Atlanta company, Columbia Residential, will develop the apartment complexes. The Bayou District Foundation, formed earlier this year, acts as the public face of the complex partnership.

The Fore!Kids Foundation? I thought this was about building houses.

Why build affordable housing in a city with an affordable housing crisis when you can risk it and try to reach the green in two?

So the Bayou District Foundation is asking park officials to give up a portion of future revenue in exchange for the foundation's massive front-end investment in three golf courses, two of them of a quality that could lure PGA Tour events to the city. The foundation has proposed taking $500,000 from an expected $1.5 million in yearly golf revenue to finance educational and recreational programs at the St. Bernard complex. The plan's backers say they will assure City Park retains at least $500,000 in golf revenue.
-
Despite the obstacles, businessmen pushing the foundation plan have high hopes. Federal housing officials have endorsed the developers' broad vision. And the complicated agenda has advantages created, oddly, by Hurricane Katrina.

While they face criticism and questions from displaced St. Bernard residents, the Bayou District Foundation leaders don't face the wrenching prospect of relocating people. The more than 1,000 families living in the 52-acre complex before Katrina flooded the neighborhood are gone, and St. Bernard is shuttered.

Nope, no annoying residents to ask questions, the storm took care of them. Now that we have the backing of Federal housing official (Alphonso Jackson) that our primary housing partner (Columbia Residential) owes hundreds of thousands of dollars, we can just go ahead and build two PGA-caliber golf courses.

It gets even more ludicrous:

Golf and public housing may seem like odd bedfellows. But the plan uses as its model Atlanta's East Lake housing and golf development that replaced a notorious Atlanta public housing complex with what by all accounts has become a thriving mixed-income neighborhood. That unique project taps the golf revenue to finance education and recreation programs for families in subsidized housing.

But, the as that TP article indicates, there are two key differences. First, the Bayou District Foundation's plan will cost at least $240 million whereas the East Lake plan cost $128 million. The other difference is kind of shrugged off in the article, but I'm going to highlight it because it's actually a huge difference:

The New Orleans effort lacks a local "sugar daddy," a philanthropist like Atlanta's Tom Cousins, who spearheaded that project after buying and restoring the storied East Lake Golf Club. And so the proposal will have to rely more heavily on nationwide fundraising and federal financing.

Atlanta's East Lake development was financed by a single philanthropist! Our plan relies on taxpayer money and public lands. That's a huge difference.

"This is not a New Orleans fundraising effort. It has to be national," said Gerard Barousse, a real estate executive and managing partner of the Bayou District Foundation. "He (Cousins) told us he will introduce us to people, make some calls."

Genius! Not only are we going to melt our affordable housing tax dollars with a golf course redevelopment plan, but we're also going to rely on our big brother Tom Cousins to introduce us to his friends?

Well, Mr. Barousse, how's that fundraising effort going?

From an April TP story:

The rapid decline in financial markets has upset plans developers made last year to remake the public housing developments with a mix of public and private money. Since the City Council voted to demolish the complexes late last year, a spiraling credit crisis has made banks uneasy about making new loans. Meanwhile, the value of low-income housing tax credits that will be used to finance the projects has declined.

In recent weeks, the Louisiana Housing Finance Agency, the state entity handling the award of tax credits, has said that any affordable housing developers who have not yet closed on their financing plans may find themselves unable to do so.

-

Gerard Barousse, managing partner of the Bayou District Foundation, which is redeveloping the St. Bernard complex, said the market has gotten tougher, but he hopes to close on financing in July and begin construction at the end of summer. "There's a little bit of a gap that we're working with, but it's not an insurmountable number," Barousse said.

But Bayou District is still shopping for a lender and tax credit syndicator, making it harder to nail down figures. "We're still sorting through a lot of that," Barousse said.

So it's not working out so well? What happened to all of Tom Cousins' friends that you were going to get introduced to?

Stroke 5: Saving for Par?

Let's once again revisit the words of Carl Greene of the Philadelphia Housing Authority:

. . . I think Alphonso Jackson somehow felt as though he was the king of black people and his job was to somehow [benefit] these black contractors at the expense of the law. . . . [I]t's not just African American because I don't think it's just about black. I would say black-hyphen-socially-elite black. There's still a lot of poor black people out there that I'm in the business of serving every day. [Jackson] wasn't doing nothing for them. He went to Congress and said 'oh yeah give them 75%, give them 76% funding, take away all of their money.' But on the other hand, for one guy who can make some records, or some guy that makes contributions, or some guy that hangs out at the right golf club, I mean, the whole socially elite type that he was interested in - he would sacrifice the whole program for the purposes of benefiting the social elite. And that's what it came down to. It came down to the self-ascribed country club social contacts that he had, and he didn't care about the rules when it came to these folks.

--

I think Jackson was left to his own discretion to do whatever he wanted at HUD and he used that discretion - he abused that discretion - to take care of business and personal friends who became part of an elite social and business network. This was done at the expense of the city of New Orleans and its Housing Authority and if the City Council or the Mayor tried to object then he could always threaten to withhold the money or not give the money. [T]hat was his normal M.O. 'If you don't go along with me then you won't get the money.' It's a 40 billion dollar agency and he's doling out money - he used it as a political weapon to force you to go along with his policy. With the compromising of the political infrastructure [in New Orleans], you had a guy [Jackson] that was in charge of the agency who would beat you over the head with the power of his office if you didn't really vote the way he wanted you to vote on the demolition application, so, effective advocacy for the very very poor folks down there, an effective, professional housing advisory to the Mayor and the Council and the housing authority board was not present. [H]e kind of hijacked that for his office and made it an organization that put on a front of taking care of affordable housing and public housing when at the same time, it was always the people that were part of the social and business elite crowd that he was associated with, that were getting the work.

I've been thinking about what this all means for the city and for the children displaced by Hurricane Katrina and subsequently abused by the affordable housing crisis. It's just so shameful. Not only was Alphonso Jackson executing an increasingly blatant agenda to enrich his elite friends with lucrative HUD contracts or other favors using his political muscle, but our local leadership seemed something more sinister than ambivalent.

They seem complicit.

The racial implications of this are uncomfortable. We have a situation in which Alphonso Jackson and his friends, like Ray Nagin and his friends, have achieved a monetary and social status reserved for a select few.

Golf is symbolic in this sense. It is an exclusive game, a sport with prohibitive membership costs. To get in, the Mayor and his friends and Alphonso Jackson and his friends sold their souls. Their policies and practices have hurt the very communities they purportedly began careers in public service to assist.

Now they serve a different community. They serve Gerard Barousse of the Bayou District Foundation. They serve the Bayou District Foundation's design and construction team (click on 'management team'): Broadmoor LLC is a subsidiary of Boh Bros. Construction.

Now certainly there can be an argument made that the ascent of elite African American business people to country club status is an inspiring feat. Certainly those behind the Fore!Kids Foundation have a stated intention to make golf more accessible to a demographic historically barred from the game.

But I wonder if it's a game worth playing at all. I wonder if it's a game worth teaching our youth. And I'm not talking about golf the sport, I'm talking about the game played by the likes of Alphonso Jackson, Ray Nagin, Jimmie Woods, Alvin Richard, and William Hairston.

Is it really worth teaching a select few how to achieve "success" in a game systematically rigged to prevent the vast majority of their peers from ever playing? Especially when "success" relies upon one's ability to use that exploitive system for one's own selfish benefit at the expense of the larger community.

And that's ultimately what is happening with the St. Bernard redevelopment plan and with the city's larger affordable and public housing non-policy. Rather than address the incredible challenges that ordinary people face every single day in this city and the incredible risks to this city's long, medium, and short term viability, our state, local, and federal leadership has instead adopted a backward trickle-down approach to community development.

Let's not build housing or raise the minimum wage or provide hospitals or schools or public transportation.

Instead let's put up hundreds of millions of dollars for a "vanguard" river redevelopment and promise that the eventual revenue fallout will drip down to residents.

Instead let's demolish salvageable public housing units and install market rate homes to be sold at a profit with the promise that this will help spread neighborhood revival down the road.

Instead let's build three new golf courses and promise that the social benefits of accessibility will allow a few hundred to maybe learn sportsmanship and integrity. We promise that the small business economy will develop as soon as we can get PGA tour events to bring more high end business here.

NO NO NO NO NO.

They want to snooker us into believing that the economic development that follows upfront investment in ventures by and for elite business interests will eventually provide enough tax revenue to then go ahead and invest in the social services and infrastructure necessary to help middle and working class New Orleans families.

That's not what happens. Any increased tax revenue that might arrive will only be reinvested into another chic development project like a new stadium for the Saints or into tax abatements for more luxury condominiums.

That's why you say no right now.

All that initial startup investment they want to shower upon these wealthy developers, contractors, and construction companies might foster more economic development and eventual tax revenue if they put it into the programs, services, and infrastructure that we're frustrated with every day. Maybe instead of investing in a golf course that might eventually entice wealthy golfers to play here, the smarter strategy would be to directly invest into the community so that families will actually want to live here.

-
This week, we learned that our fearless President "gave up" the game of golf out of deference to military families suffering through the frustration of a difficult war sometime in 2003.

Yet, at the same time, President Bush's friend Alphonso Jackson was rounding up his own golf buddies for a Katrina aftermath tee-time.