http://www.marketplace.org/topics/wealth-poverty/lottery-jackpot-spot-public-housing
(Text follows)
by Craig LeMoult
Marketplace Morning Report for Tuesday, February 7, 2012
TRANSCRIPT
David Brancaccio: Now to a special kind of lottery in
The prize isn't cash, but it's something awfully valuable: a place to live. Winners will get to move into a brand new public housing community.
Craig LeMoult was there as people lined up to apply.
Craig LeMoult: Richard Estrada says winning this lottery
would mean a lot to him.
Richard Estrada: A great deal. Because I got two little
boys, one is autistic. So I need a larger space for him.
Estrada’s not the stereotypical public housing tenant. He’s
got a good job, running maintenance for the city’s police stations. But it’s
still tough to make ends meet.
Estrada: Everything’s
counted for on my part. So, you know. Hopefully, hopefully it goes well.
If it does go well, he’ll get to live in a brand new public
housing community -- not a project.
Karen Dubois: We’ve given up that word.
That’s Karen Dubois Walton, the housing authority’s
director. That change is more than just semantics. These are individual homes
with front and back yards. This lottery is for the city’s working poor. The
idea is to get people with different incomes living together.
Dubois: It stabilizes communities. It is helpful for
communities to see and benefit from people getting up and going to work every
day.
The federal government funds hundreds of mixed income
communities like this around the country. New
Haven
Bob Ellickson, who teaches property law at Yale, says these
mixed income communities are way better than the old model of clustering the
poorest people in massive projects.
Bob Ellickson: But I
think inferior to portable housing vouchers which are much more flexible and
provide aid to twice more families than these projects do, and also can be targeted
to the families that are most in need.
Federal housing officials say rent vouchers can only do so
much. This project is a brand new development with built-in social services,
like job training. Add in the lottery to mix things up economically, and, they
say, you may have created a community that can make some progress against
poverty.
In Connecticut
About the author
Craig LeMoult is a news reporter for National Public Radio
member-station WSHU in Fairfield ,
Conn.
6 comments :
I would like for you to explain why you think it would be more beneficial to your community and its members, to have public housing. I am sure most would disagree with you on the long term " benefits" you suggest it brings. I read most of the comments on your blog and realize that is not what the people of Mont Belvieu are asking for. Most would rather see commercial growth rather public housing. Nearby communities have more than enough public housing to offer the growing population.
This is a great point. I'm not sure who the "most people" you refer to are. I think it's interesting that people, when they find themselves speaking to a specific point, like to invoke the idea that their opinion is in the majority, whether or not it it substantiated. The mythical "most people" is a very fluid thing. Statistical reports can be skewed by the particular wording of a question, and when the numbers ARE reported one can usually determine what the bias of the reporter is.
But rather than snipe at your anonymous logical fallacies, I will address your point. To reiterate what I wrote, "People who have housing choice, as the article correctly points out, are more likely to remain in the community and help it to grow. They create and maintain the character of the community." I agree that public housing projects in the past have failed to be good components to add to the community. That's why I relish articles such as this - it is a demonstration that positive steps are being taken to address the potential problems surrounding this kind of development, creating attractive, if efficient and low-cost, housing choice for people. Because that's really what we're talking about. People. Our fellow human beings. Our brothers and sisters, if you will. These people will not always remain in public housing. They will not always be subject to the same conditions they are currently in. The point of the best communities is to provide opportunity for people to move up and around without having to move out. Successful communities allow chances for each member to remain and to contribute to the quality and diversity of life. Just as any/every biome is benefited by diversity, so our communities are richly enhanced through the inclusion of many different kinds of folks, from the poor to the rich, from the ignorant to the educated, from sea to shining sea.
Commercial growth is a function of market processes. The City is somewhat limited in what we can do to promote growth of business in the area. We are doing what we can, including more than $40M in local funds to improve the infrastructure in anticipation of eventual and inevitable growth and investment. Ironically, it is population that will drive the growth of commercial development in the City, so the public housing that you disparage would actually be an asset to a community desiring commercial growth.
I have to agree with my fellow community member, I completely disagree that public housing is a benefit. I have lived in many different areas with this very "Great Idea" and I can assure you at first it seems great, but it never ends up that way. People are people and not all of them produce the same amount of respect for their community as those of us that contribute a lot of our time, labor, and money to keep our community looking great and providing a great environment for our children. We actually do need a little bit more commercial growth, not over growth because we obviously do not want to smother our great community to death with over crowding, but some options would be nice.
I'm not sure I understand your point, anon. People are people. That's a truism. Not all people produce the same amount of respect for their community. That is an opinion. This is not based in fact. There was a bit on the radio this morning about this phenomenon. check this link: http://www.npr.org/blogs/itsallpolitics/2012/05/09/152287372/partisan-psychology-why-are-people-partial-to-political-loyalties-over-facts
I think you'll find it interesting. People form opinions not based on fact or reality, but on emotion. This emotion is often based on an underlying fear or lack of self-respect. Those who are able to get over their fear of the unknown, the fear of the other, and who are able to feel better about themselves, may find themselves in positions of greater acceptance of and for things outside of their current ability to accept. And in general, this is a good thing, I think.
I have given a lot of thought about your responses to the comments and I find both of them to be arrogant and somewhat detached from the views of our/your community. Cut out the "fluff" from all the articles you read. I am sure you feel the need to offer concrete examples to back up your views, but they are not a true representation of the people you serve. What you should be focused on are the actual needs and desires of the people who trust you to plan a community that reflects them, not some other community in another state. I will say this again and again, "most people" do not want Public Housing and 'most people' in OUR community will agree with me...sorry Mr. Cobabe.
I am always grateful for thoughtful responses. Thank you, Anon.
You may very well be correct. But I'd suggest that you consider what your words mean. Who are these nebulous "most people" you cite? Do you have any concrete examples that bolster your opinion? Not that your opinion is invalid, but I'm always interested in the idea that the people who claim to speak for "most people" really do - and not just most of their like-minded friends and social circle...
There are some fairly impoverished areas of Mont Belvieu. While the number of folks living below the poverty line in our community is relatively low, they are still here. And there are folks who live in the immediate area (if not in the City limits itself) who struggle economically. Are we dealing these people out of our community? Because, when you say - most people do not want public housing - that's what you seem to be saying. And I honestly don't believe that reflects the values, needs, and/or desires of this incredibly generous, Christian community at all. I have found (in my granted very limited experience) that the people of this area are incredibly generous, charitable, and giving. They are welcoming and inviting, supportive and helpful. And I know for a fact that that has nothing to do with where someone lives, or what type of home they live in.
People may say they don't want public housing. But when they really pause to consider what that means, I think they will realize that that sentiment is short-sighted. Part of my job as a planner is to look at the big picture, to be tied to the community but to look at how local decisions impact the region at large. That is my highest obligation.
Post a Comment