HUD Official Speaks the Unspeakable: Selling The Projects
As we’ve mentioned before, rumors about the privatization of certain public housing projects in parts of rapidly gentrifying areas of Brooklyn have been circulating for a couple of years. Most recently, we wrote about the theory that the Ingersoll and Whitman Houses in Fort Greene were being emptied in anticipation of such a move; it’s…
As we’ve mentioned before, rumors about the privatization of certain public housing projects in parts of rapidly gentrifying areas of Brooklyn have been circulating for a couple of years. Most recently, we wrote about the theory that the Ingersoll and Whitman Houses in Fort Greene were being emptied in anticipation of such a move; it’s also not hard to imagine something similar happening at the Farragut Houses, given their close proximity to Dumbo, the most expensive neighborhood in Brooklyn. Given what a politically and emotionally charged issue this is, however, no public official has ever said anything in its favor, as far as we know. But, on Tuesday, Sean Moss, the regional administrator for the federal Housing and Urban Development Department, went out on a serious limb. In light of the New York Housing Authority’s dismal financial position (an annual shortfall of $200 million), he said, selling public housing buildings in the most upscale areas could make sense. “It may displace some people, and that is a concern,” Moss said. “That is not necessarily a bad thing if you can create more housing [elsewhere] with that.” We’ll see whether political pressures force him to backpedal in the coming days.
Feds Eye NY Building Sale at Housing Projects [NY Daily News]
Bye Bye Public Housing, Hello Luxe Condos? [Curbed]
What’s Really Going on at the Ingersoll Houses? [Brownstoner]
Benson,
Thanks for your share on all this…but I think the Welform “Reform” Act, what it came out of, why and what it has led to was ill-addressed by your comment. We could have a whole discussion on it.
FG/GL
Last thing I’ll say (I’m 1:18): I never said housing projects were ideal, just that Chicago’s tear-em-down and give them vouchers policy isn’t working as well as the accounts on this thread claim. If anyone has information that contradicts Venkatesh’s research, from any source (academic or otherwise), then I’m interested, sincerely, in hearing it.
Sorry about the assumption re: your living situation, FG. How about giving the next five units of your condo/coop/rental to low-income tenants for $200 a month?
Thanks for your collaboration and doing your part to achieve econimic justice in Brooklyn!
There are academic and economic arguments on ALL sides of this issue. Everyone weighs in and data is used selectively to prove one’s point. There is no right answer.
1.18;
Classic “limousine liberal” response. You put forth a report by an advocacy group which is dedicated to the whole idea of government-run housing. When someone calls you on the fact that the report is entirely anecdotal, with no footnotes,your response is to note that one of the co-authors is an Ivy league professor. In other words, we mere mortals should shut up because one of the elite has spoken. The fact that this report is nothing but an ill-researched advocacy piece should be of no concern to us. The elite know what they are doing (or, at least they think they know what they are doing)
You do not speak about the realities and data of these projects. A simple walk around any project will give someone a quick education about their realities.
I said it above: these projects were well-intentioned experiments, but they have failed. The more you deny it, the greater the chance that they will be torn down. it is exactly what happened with welfare reform in the 90’s.
Keep denying reality, and you will see the next President sign an order to completely wipe away the system, if if her name is Hillary (just as her husband had to sign a welfare reform bill becaue the illusion could no longer be maintained.
Sooner or later, these monstrosities will be torn down. Socialism no longer has a grip on the mind of NYC.
benson
1:18 here: co-author Sudhir Venkatesh is a prof. at Columbia, author of the heavily footnoted book American Project, about the Horner homes in Chicago, and the focus of a chapter in Freakonomics. His credentials and research are solid.
Thank you 1:18 for the link and for doing a bit of research. Also, to those thinking we need to look at these other cities that have razed low-income buildings: Yes, we need to…BUT, remember these cities range from smaller than NYC to MUCH smaller to the point of not giving any decent comparison.
1:13PM,
Thanks for suggesting Montrose Morris and I rent “units” at $200…but you’re jumping to conclusions. I can say for myself, I don’t have any “unit” to rent out unless I can rent out my bathroom…Hello! I guess I could share my bedroom. Heck, there are one-bedroom apartments in NYC with 8 and 10 people living in them so I guess I ought to get with the program.
Jimmy Legs, Park Slop is already a vast low-density project…just not a “low-income” one. 😉
FortGreener/GrammarLady
1.18;
Do you consider a paper by an advocacy group that is dedicated to the whole proposition of government-run housing to be “data”. Note the lack of footnotes in this paper. It relies on an anecdotal interview with a resident.
Time is running out…..sooner or later, these monstrosities will be torn down.
Benson
can the city use eminent domain to take brownstones in park slope and turn them into low-density projects? voila! problem solved!