Transcript GALVESTON HOUSING AUTHORITY

CITY OF GALVESTON
A Bold New Approach to Subsidized Housing
By
The Galveston Open Government Project
Movement of the Population & Economic Center of Galveston County 1940 to 2008
(Map from Texas Windstorm, Risk Designation Areas for Galveston County)
Texas City Housing Authority
Galveston Housing Authority
La Marque Housing Authority
Migration path of economic/demographic center of county from
1940 to 2008.
Demographic Facts Since GHA Founding in 1940
1940 City Of Galveston % of County Population – 75%
2008 City Of Galveston % of County Population – 19.8%
1940 Economic/Population Center of County – City of Galveston
2008 Economic/Population Center of County – Dickinson Area
All 3 of Galveston County’s Housing Authorities are in southern portion of the county: Galveston, Texas City, La Marque
HUD Has Not Kept Up With the Economic & Population Shift!!
Result – Subsidized Housing Roll-Up
Housing Authorities
Sorted by Population
Galveston County
League City city (pt.)
Galveston city
Texas City city (pt.)
Friendswood city (pt.)
Dickinson city
La Marque city
Santa Fe city
Houston HUD
2008 Census % of County Public
Public
Estimate
Population
Housing
Section 8 Housing
288,239
100.0%
1100
1996
70,471
24.4%
57,086
19.8%
970
1516
44,488
15.4%
130
422
25,025
8.7%
17,886
6.2%
14,236
4.9%
0
58
10,479
3.6%
0
0
TDHCA
Public
Section 8 Housing
192
Total
Public
Section 8 Housing Section 8
1100
1996
0
0
970
1708
130
422
0
0
0
0
0
58
0
0
*Census Data from U.S. Census Website www.census.gov/popest/cities
*Public Housing and Section 8 Data from Housing Authority Profiles HUD website.
*Section 8 – Funded vouchers, 697 on island, 516 on the mainland.
*PH numbers from HUD HA profiles, GHA redevelopment plan said pre-Ike number was 979 https://pic.hud.gov/pic/haprofiles/haprofiledetails.asp
*TDHCA operates Section 8 vouchers in county. They have not responded to our ORR’s
For the number and distribution of vouchers.
HUD Has Not Kept Up With the Economic & Population Shift!!
Result – Concentration of Subsidized Housing
Total
Sorted by Population
Galveston County
League City city (pt.)
Galveston city
Texas City city (pt.)
Friendswood city (pt.)
Dickinson city
La Marque city
Santa Fe city
% of
Public
2008 Census % of County Public
County
% of
Housing Section 8
Estimate
Population
Housing Section 8
PH
Section 8 Burden
Burden
288,239
100.0%
1100
1996
70,471
24.4%
0
0
0.0%
0.0%
0.0
0.0
57,086
19.8%
970
1708
88.2%
85.6%
4.5
4.3
44,488
15.4%
130
422
11.8%
21.1%
0.8
1.4
25,025
8.7%
0
0
0.0%
0.0%
0.0
0.0
17,886
6.2%
0
0
0.0%
0.0%
0.0
0.0
14,236
4.9%
0
58
0.0%
2.9%
0.0
0.6
10,479
3.6%
0
0
0.0%
0.0%
0.0
0.0
*Census Data from U.S. Census Website www.census.gov/popest/cities
*Public Housing and Section 8 Data from Housing Authority Profiles HUD website. https://pic.hud.gov/pic/haprofiles/haprofiledetails.asp
*Section 8 – Funded vouchers, 697 on island, 516 on the mainland.
*PH numbers from HUD HA profiles, GHA redevelopment plan said pre-Ike number was 979
HUD Has Not Kept Up With the Economic & Population Shift!!
Result – Concentration of Minority Population
Sorted by % Minority
Population
Galveston County
La Marque city
Galveston city
Texas City city (pt.)
Dickinson city
League City city (pt.)
Friendswood city (pt.)
Santa Fe city
2008 Census % of County
Estimate
Population
288,239
100.0%
14,236
4.9%
57,086
19.8%
44,488
15.4%
17,886
6.2%
70,471
24.4%
25,025
8.7%
10,479
3.6%
2008
Minority
Population
(Census
Minority %
X Census
Population)
55,676
6,549
24,147
17,484
5,741
11,275
2,477
671
2008
Census
Estimate
Minority %
of
Population
19.3%
46.0%
42.3%
39.3%
32.1%
16.0%
9.9%
6.4%
County Minority Population within Housing Authority Cities
48,180
County Minority Population
55,676
% Of County Minority Population located in Cities with Housing Authorities
86.5%
*Census Data from 2008 Estimate U.S. Census Website www.census.gov/popest/cities
HUD Has Not Kept Up With the Economic & Population Shift!!
Result – School Districts of the 3 HA Cities Have The Highest Concentration of African-American Students
Student
Population
African
Americ
an
%
African
Americ
an
HA
%
White
La Marque
3625
2527
69.7%
Yes
10.8%
Galveston ISD
Galveston
7903
2395
30.3%
Yes
23.9%
Texas City ISD
Texas City
5899
1150
19.5%
Yes
41.8%
Dickinson ISD
Dickinson
8228
1251
15.2%
No
39.8%
Clear Creek ISD
League City
36314
3232
8.9%
No
61.1%
Friendswood ISD
Friendswood
5865
129
2.2%
No
82.5%
Santa Fe ISD
Santa Fe
4517
32
0.7%
No
85.8%
School Districts by
% African American
Students
City
La Marque ISD
* All school data from ISD websites.
HUD Has Not Kept Up With the Economic & Population Shift!!
Result – School Districts of the 3 HA Cities Have The Highest Concentration of African-Americans
HUD Has Not Kept Up With the Economic & Population Shift!!
Results – The 3 HA Cities Have the Lowest Income per Capita in the County
N to S
2008
Inc.
(1999
$'s)
1940
1950
1960
1970
1980
1990
2000
2008
81,173
113,066
140,364
169,812
195,940
217,399
250,158
288,239
Friendswood
0
0
0
5,675
10,719
22,814
29,037
25,025
28,615
League City
0
1,341
2,622
10,818
16,578
30,159
45,444
70,471
27,170
Dickinson
0
2,704
4,715
10,776
7,505
11,692
17,093
17,886
19,785
La Marque
0
7,359
13,969
16,131
15,372
14,120
13,682
14,236
17,518
Santa Fe
0
0
0
0
5,413
8,429
9,548
10,479
20,396
Texas City
5,748
16,620
32,065
38,908
41,403
40,822
41,521
44,488
17,057
Galveston
60862
66568
67175
61809
61902
59067
57247
57,086
18,275
Galveston
County
* The solid line represents the northern migration of the population center of the county.
*Census Data from U.S. Census Website www.census.gov/popest/cities
HUD Has Not Kept Up With the Economic & Population Shift!!
Results – The 3 HA Cities Have the Lowest Income per Capita in the County
The Proposal
We propose that the county’s three housing authorities merge, and
immediately petition the County Government for recognition as the
“Galveston County Housing Authority”.
The overriding principle should be that subsidized housing should be deconcentrated out of the City of Galveston. Housing, educational and
employment opportunities need to be addressed from a regional
perspective. HUD through it’s local Public Housing Authority, the Galveston
Housing Authority (GHA), has a statutory obligation to affirmatively further
fair housing by ensuring that the GHA’s plan has a regional perspective, and
furthermore, that GHA’s regional plan is in alignment with the regional plans
of Houston HUD and surrounding Housing Authorities.
Legal Basis – Thompson v. HUD, U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland, MJG-95-309
Academic Basis – Geography of Opportunity, Communities of Opportunity (Suggested links on last
slide)
The Proposal
Thompson v. HUD – Summary from NAACP Legal Defense Fund Website
“The ACLU of Maryland filed the lawsuit in 1995 on behalf of a class of approximately 14,000
African American tenants, former tenants, and prospective tenants of Baltimore City public
housing developments. Plaintiffs alleged that HUD denied Baltimore's African American public
housing residents opportunities to locate throughout the region and instead concentrated them in
predominantly minority areas within the city limits in violation of the Fair Housing Act.
In January 2005, the District Court found HUD liable for failing to take affirmative steps to
implement an effective regional strategy for desegregation and poverty de-concentration in
Baltimore. The court found that HUD's programs "failed to achieve significant desegregation in
Baltimore City." As Judge Marvin J. Garbis explained, "Baltimore City should not be viewed as
an island reservation for use as a container for all of the poor of a contiguous region."
The Proposal
Thompson v. HUD – Decision Memorandum
“In light of HUD’s statutory duties and the fact that its jurisdiction and ability to exert practical
leverage extend throughout the Baltimore Region, it was, and continues to be unreasonable for the
agency not to consider housing programs that include the placement of a more than insubstantial
portion of the Plaintiff class in non-impacted areas outside of Baltimore City limits.”
“In sum, the Court finds that HUD failed to consider regionally-oriented desegregation and
integration policies, despite the fact that Baltimore is contiguous to, and linked by public
transportation and roads to, Baltimore and Anne Arundel Counties and in close proximity to other
counties in the Baltimore Region.”
“It is high time that HUD live up to its statutory mandate to consider the effect of its policies on the
racial and socio-economic composition of the surrounding area and thus consider regional
approaches to promoting fair housing opportunities…”
The Proposal
Thompson v. HUD – The Map that Got the Baltimore Housing Authority in Trouble
Maryland 1990 Census – 24.9% African-American Population
The Proposal
Galveston County’s Map
Galveston County 2000 Census – 25.5% African-American Population
The Proposal
Baltimore Program Achievements (From Oct. 2009 Report)
Families & Children Helped
1500+ families moved to low poverty, integrated suburbs or city neighborhoods (17% of total HA families)
88% of these families moved from the inner city to the suburbs
1200+ children are now in suburban school districts
Dramatic Changes in Environment
Origination neighborhoods 80% black & 33% poor; destination 21% black & 7.5% poor
Origination median income $24,182, destination $48,318
83% said their new neighborhood is better than their old.
70% listed their favorite positive features as better schools, less crime and drugs, friendly people, and a
mix of different races and cultures
School Improvements
Origination student population 83% qualify for reduced lunch; destination 33%
25% of participants live in neighborhoods where less than 10% of students qualify for reduced lunch
88% say they are very satisfied with new schools
89% say their children are learning better or much better in their new schools
The Proposal
Baltimore Program Achievements (From Oct. 2009 Report)
Enhanced Quality of Life
80% say they feel safer, more peaceful, and less stressed
60% say they feel more motivated
40% say they feel healthier
Housing Stability
62% stayed in their new unit when they became eligible to move
Only 19% of those eligible to move chose to move back to the city
Families who made a second move, moved up to even less segregated and significantly less poor areas
The Proposal
Benefits to the Stakeholders
Subsidized Housing Residents
Choice of location that matches up with current job skills.
Choice of location for educational opportunities for new skills.
Choice of location for parents to choose schools.
Choice of location based on risk tolerance of storm damage.
Opportunity for residents to tie in to the employment and
educational opportunities of Houston via the Houston Metro Park &
Ride located right across the county line in Webster.
The Proposal
Benefits to the Stakeholders
Housing Authorities
Combined operation would be more cost efficient.
Larger HA would carry greater weight with HUD.
Site selection opportunities would increase exponentially.
Maximize client’s opportunities to graduate out of system.
Would have the expanded resources of a region to
address housing issues, and the issues of the clients.
The Proposal
Benefits to the Stakeholders
Current HA Cities
Reduced total number of Public Housing units would increase the
amount of property on City tax rolls.
City residents and businesses would no longer have to make up lost
taxes due to exempt properties.
Restored tax equity would put these cities on better footing for
rebuilding viable middle class populations.
Socio-economic burdens would be carried by all County residents
equitably.
Proposed Countywide Housing Authority
Current Structure
HGAC
County (AI)
(Westchester)
City (AI for each)
HUD
Galveston (AI)
(Thompson)
GHA (Plan)
Administration Count
Contracted Mgr (Plan)
14 Assessment of Impediments (AI)
2 Plans
2 Managers
Proposed County Wide Housing Authority
USA v. Westchester County, NY
The settlement reached in U.S. v. Westchester County noted that
“As part of its applications for funding under the HUD grant
program, between 2000 and 2008 the County periodically
certified that it was meeting its obligations to affirmatively
further fair housing.” DOJ Press Release, Page 2. The complaint
alleged that Westchester County had made a false claim that
they were in compliance.
The Court agreed, and in the settlement, Pages 2-3, the County
was forced to spend $30 million to ensure the development of
750 units of fair and affordable housing in areas with low racial
and ethnic diversity, to repay $21.6 million to HUD, pay the
whistle blower $7.5 million, and to submit to the oversight and
enforcement authority of a court-appointed Monitor.
Proposed Countywide Housing Authority
Proposed Structure
HGAC
HUD
County (AI)
(Westchester
& Thompson)
Administration Count
1 Assessment of Impediments (AI)
Galveston County Housing
Authority (Plan)
1 Plan
1 Manager
Proposed County Wide Housing Authority
Impediments to be Included in AI
Entry Level Jobs – Not an issue. Statistics from the State Controllers
office show that revenues in North County for food service, retail, and
hotel industry are 3 times higher than in the City of Galveston. The
more seasonal nature of these businesses in the City of Galveston
makes earnings in North County more consistent.
Healthcare – Minor issue. UTMB currently has 21 clinics located in the
northern part of the county. The county has 2 4C’s clinics which could
be moved or added to serve the target population.
Transportation – Medium issue. The county currently has 3 proposals
aimed at obtaining federal funds in order to connect the population
centers of the major cities of the county together, and to Houston.
Proposed County Wide Housing Authority
Initial Actions
1) City and County Attorneys should jointly review respective legal cases and provide initial legal
framework for new housing authority to operate, including legal steps to transform the City Housing
Authorities into a County Housing Authority.
2) City and County should work together to produce a detailed, accurate, and honest Assessment of
Impediments.
3) A revised 5 Year Consolidated Plan should be issued based upon the revised Assessment of
Impediments.
4) The new written plan for the County Wide Housing Authority should openly embrace the findings
of the legal cases. It should detail what actions will be taken specific to housing and overcoming
Impediments. It should detail the timeframe for which these actions will be taken.
5) Issue an early statement recognizing the moral hazard of having the only public housing for the
Elderly and Disabled located in the most vulnerable location of the county. Declare intent to address
this as a high priority issue for the newly established housing authority.
Benefits
Defined Mission – A clear signal to all interested parties that we understand our legal obligations and
that we have honestly identified our impediments.
Defined Scope – A clear signal to all interested parties that we have quantified our requirements, and
that we have a sound underlying basis for determining numbers and locations.
Defined Time – A clear signal to all interested parties that we have identified the time required to
accomplish our plan, and that we have a sound underlying basis for determining that timeframe.
Accountability – We hold ourselves accountable for doing what we say we are going to do, and this is
our basis for certifying that we are affirmatively furthering fair housing.
Planning Department Checkpoints
Any plan submitted to this committee should pass three checkpoints before a recommendation for
approval is given to city council.
Check Point 1 – Agree on the number of units. (Thompson v. HUD, de-concentration)
Check Point 2 – Agree on the location of units.
Check Point 3 – Agreement on the type and mix of units in the agreed locations.
Verification
*U.S. Census Bureau Population Estimate data.
*Texas Department of Housing and Community Affairs (State agency responsible for disbursing subsidized housing
funds, and tracking the number of units.)
Summary
•
The Housing Authorities of Galveston, Texas City, and La Marque should merge and become
the “Galveston County Housing Authority”. A regional approach should be used.
•
The expansion of the service area for the new County Housing Authority would benefit all
stakeholders.
•
HUD/GHA has not lived up to it’s statutory responsibility to expand regionally, when the
demographic data shows that the current working model results in concentration of public
housing units and minorities within a contiguous area.
•
GHA’s current plan does not live up to the location criteria of the signed Consent Decree
•
The city has the guidance of judicial rulings upon which to base it’s decisions, and to minimize
the risk of law suits to the city or delay in redevelopment.
•
A checkpoint system, using the judicial rulings and verifiable government data, can be used to
responsibly move the proposed redevelopment plan through the system.
1)
Agree to the number of units.
2)
Agree to the locations.
3)
Agree to the type and mix.
Research
The concept of taking a regional approach to housing issues is not new, but renewed focus has
come out of the Thompson v. HUD decision.
The following links connect to further reading on the Regional approach in regards to housing
issues:
Future of Fair Housing – National Commission on Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity
Geography and Opportunity – Kirwan Institue for the Study of Race and Ethnicity (The Ohio State
University), Director John Powell – Expert Witness Thompson v. HUD
Inclusive Communities Project
ACLU-MD's Fair Housing Department releases a report entitled "New Homes, New
Neighborhoods, New Schools: A Progress Report on the Baltimore Housing Mobility Program"
NAACP Legal Defense Fund – Thompson v. HUD Information
Legal Issues
Thompson v. HUD – HUD obligated to address housing on a regional basis. Outline of
Opinion. Analysis.
The Inclusive Communities Project, Inc. v. Texas Department of Housing and Community
Affairs – Current complaint that the way the TDHCA administers the Low Income Housing
Tax Credit program perpetuates racial segregation. GHA’s proposal relies heavily on the
LIHTC program.
Texas Appleseed Administrative Complaint to HUD – CDBG funds to Texas put on hold
because of non-compliance with Federal Regulations. TAA’s complaint includes that subrecipient City of Galveston cannot certify that they are affirmatively furthering fair housing
because the required AI is inadequate (pg 22)
Residency of Public Housing Clients – The issue of where Galveston’s Public Housing
Clients originated is a non-issue. Federal Regulations and GHA’s “Admissions and
Continuing Occupation” policy have no residency requirements (pg 9). As a federal
program, anyone from anywhere is allowed to apply to any HUD Housing Authority in the
country.
Galveston County, and all of the county municipalities listed as sub-recipients of the
County CDBG, as a recipient of that CDBG, have an obligation to affirmatively further fair
housing. Legal basis – USA v. Westchester County, NY.
CITY OF GALVESTON
A Bold New Approach For Subsidized
Housing
By
The Galveston Open Government Project
END