St. Bernard Redevelopment Rumored To Be Halted

Sources tell me that the redevelopment of the St. Bernard public housing complex has come to a screeching halt due to the Louisiana Housing Finance Authority's (LHFA) inability to secure investors to purchase the tax credits allocated to finance the project. I'm hoping this is not the case even as I write this because if true, we have been misled in the most egregious manner by our city officials. As I recall it, the riotous city council meeting at which the council voted to unanimously approve demolition, they and Mayor Nagin assured us that demolition could not proceed until all stipulations of the provisos attached to the order allowing demolition were met; and I believe one of the provisos was that the developers had to first prove that financing had been secured.

The Times-Picayune reported that enough funding was in place to "launch" the 1st phase of construction.

"the Bayou District Foundation has secured $62 million through low-income tax credits and $27 million from federal block grant money. That's enough to launch the first phase of 465 apartments next year."

Then again, it's the T-P. These are the same people who fervently endorsed Jindal for governor. However, to their credit, the same article reports that many had doubts about the reality of getting people to invest in tax credits for such an ambitious project -- twice the scope of the Atlanta East Lake project after which the St. Bernard plans are modeled.

Another few key points:
The redevelopers of the St. Bernard, Columbia Residential, are closely tied to the allegations of corruption that directly led to HUD Secretary Alphonso's firing or resignation or whatever the feds called it. This was reported by the OB Rag Blog on December 27, 2007, mere days after the council's vote to demolish the projects:

A report today in the online publication Government Executive details mounting evidence from federal investigations linking HUD Secretary Alphonso Jackson to scandals in New Orleans-including the demoliton contract for the St. Bernard public housing complex.

"the feds are going after Scott Keller, described as Jackson’s “right arm,” for his role in steering the St. Bernard demo contract towrds Colombia Residential, a company Jackson once worked for, and which still owes him hundreds of thousands of dollars."

In June 2006, Sec. Jackson put Keller in charge of HUD. “Keller was smack in the middle of the HANO decision to award the $127 million redevelopment to the team that included Columbia Residential to restore [sic] the St. Bernard public housing projects”

“Internal HANO records show that the Columbia Residential team barely won the evaluation, 68 points to 67.”

One more thing. I'm also told that Columbia has already been paid $9 million dollars for demolition (also reported on the OB Rag Blog) compared to the $4 million dollars the developers of the other 3 housing projects were paid for demolition.

but DO you have a right to property that's not yours?

I can't believe it's been almost a month since I posted. Where the fuck have I been?! Seriously, if you know, tell me where I was.

In hindsight, though, not posting probably had much more to do with K-fatigue than I realized. At first, it was hard to keep up with the goings-on because of work, being busy with life's responsibilities, etc. Just didn't have the time to post what I wanted to. Then I didn't have time to watch or read much news, and what happened next was probably like getting that first hit of crack for free: it felt so good I wanted more of it! Actually, it didn't feel "good," just less stressful.

I also fell victim to what I've experienced (at least in my own head, so humor me) as another round of communal K-fatigue, this time more potent than earlier rounds. But maybe what really happened is that Mardi Gras did lift spirits and take away cares for a bit. I don't know, just a thought.

Oh, and I almost forgot that I was also horribly ill for a week until about 2 days ago. I got that "respiratory thing" that has been going around, followed by that "stomach thing" 48 hours later. I'm pretty sure I saw "The Light" at least once. Moreso than I am about the city having collective moods, I'm sure the stress has taken a toll on our immune systems. It just seems like so many people have been ill in the past month, or having physical symptoms that are bothersome. I'm sure mold, high amounts of trash and rodent feces in the environment, contaminated ground water and rusted subterrace pipes, and the dust from crumbling streets have NOTHING to do with it!

Considering that we're strong enough to survive our cultural diet and health habits day after day after day, whatever the cause, if it's dangerous enough to make folks here sick, it's likely fatal to most other humans.


And what the fuck does this have to do with property rights, you're probably asking. The answer is nothing. Sorry, I went on a tangent. What I intended to post were my reactions to this whole public housing fiasco, and now the "Section 8" fiasco in N.O. East. I know some of my liberal friends disagree with me, and I consider myself pretty far left. My position, which I don't think even falls outside of liberal or progressive ideology, is this: RENTERS DO NOT HAVE PROPERTY RIGHTS. Don't get me wrong; I know there are exceptions but that's pretty much the way it is.

Alls I know is that in every place I've ever rented, once my lease agreement was up or even up to 90 days before the lease expired, my landlords had every right to say: "Sorry pal, I like ya and all, but I'm selling the place and the new owner will tear it down to build nice condos; so you have to go." And I would've had to really leave! And every judge in America would agree with my landlord, and my friends, after validating my anger and being very supportive of me and telling my landlord he sucks, would pretty much throw their hands up with me and ask: "so when are you moving?"

I'm not supporting not letting people back in to even retrieve their things or bullshit like that. Housing units that were inhabitable after the storm should have been re-opened as soon as people in that zip code were let back in after the storm. HANO probably could have also put minimal effort into making small repairs on lightly damaged units to get even more units open.

That, however, is a separate issue from efforts to stop ANY effort to change public housing in any way at all. The housing advocates and the good folks down at ACORN are right about wanting to keep structures that are sturdy and in good structural condition, but renovating them is not exactly a wacky idea.

But after modernizing them, they have to be converted to mixed-income housing or something. There is absolutely no good reason that I can see why we should keep it like it is. Not one. Don't poor kids deserve decent homes too? And how dare we advocate returning people to homes we wouldn't want our kids to live in?

I think it's sad that public housing residents can't trust the government to honor their commitment to not abandon them after all these changes are made. They have every reason to fear they'll be shoved out of the picture, based on previous experience. I think it's a shame that HANO doesn't seem capable of responding to the people they serve in a respectful and empathic manner. Most of all, I think it's sad that the opposing sides are unwilling, if not incapable, of finding some sort of middle-ground in the vast expanse sitting between "tear it all down NOW and build anew!" and "don't change a thing!" This intransigence is our collective problem, our drug of choice, the monkey on our back -- the one thing we can't shake. The reason we end up back where we've always been is because people are so scared, or skeptical, of change that it stops us from getting anywhere at all.

Just Mah Two Cents

Maybe this will be a new segment: Just Mah Two Cents!

I'd like others' 2 cents on this too. A story in the T-P today about mixed-income housing brought this topic to mind. Folks should be pissed off that public housing hasn't reopened so they can come home; and HANO should have handled that much better. The apprehension and the skepticism towards promises is well-placed because promises to the poor and Black Americans have typically not been honored. People are afraid of losing their communities, their local support network, the familiarity. G Bitch wrote an excellent post about this and other public housing issues.

But I scratch my head when some folks oppose tearing down the projects to build mixed-income housing. Concentrated poverty, based on my opinion and observations, just doesn't seem to be a good idea. I think there is something beneficial for kids who grow up around professionals, college educated folks, etc. Those are the folks with connections to the scholarships, programs, internships that people need to succeed nowadays in many fields. Think of how many jobs you've found out about from a friend or colleague or from being in a certain organization. The more people that own homes around you, the more people there are who are invested in that neighborhood at a different level than people who rent; so there is more incentive to make sure that there are services, that street lights get fixed, that trash is picked up,etc..

There are a few experimental studies* that show that kids who moved to better neighborhoods did better in school, were more likely to go to college and less likely to be arrested than the kids in the control groups. There's also data to suggest that families who do move to "better" neighborhoods, Black families in particular, face a new set of problems like separation from support network, transportation issues, or social isolation because of race.

So i know there's no easy answer. This is a big issue and I can't put down all my thoughts about it today; but for me the bottomline is that we can't go back to the way housing was if the residents are going to have the same lack of resources and decent schools, and if their neighborhood is more neglected by the powers that be than other neighborhoods. Whatever the cause of crime or poverty or whatnot, I just haven't seen where big public housing developments have turned out to be a resounding success.

Should public housing residents be worried? Hells yes. But instead of opposing it all together, I think they should sit down with HANO and the developers and find ways to make this new way work and make sure the promises are kept. No matter how you look at it, most if not all of the old public housing units are old and shitty and need to be renewed anyway. I think there's much more for everybody to gain from cooperation in forging a better system than from having an all-or-nothing / don't-change-anything or tear-it-all down position.

So what's y'alls two cents?

*references on quasi-experimental or experimental neighborhood studies (Journal/Book is in CAPS):

• Briggs (1997) "Moving up versus moving out: Neighborhood effects in policy mobility programs." HOUSING POLICY DEBATE, Vol. 8, pp. 195-234.
  
• Rosenbaum, Kulieke, & Rubinowitz (1988). URBAN REVIEW, vol. 20, 28-41.

I can try to point people to more if you're like REAL psyched about reading this stuff. LOL