City Limits Magazine, April 1981 Issue

8/3/2019 City Limits Magazine, April 1981 Issue

1/24


2/24

A Tenant Aid StationIn Bronx

Housing Courtby Susan Baldwin

Tenants seeking assistance and information at table in Bronx CountyCourthouse .

"Do you have anything to do with landlord harassment?" "How do I fill ou t this form?" "Can he lockme out? What are my rights?" These were some of thenumerous questions harri ed tenants ha d for the volunteer tenant advocacy booth early one morning in theBronx housing court.

Every day from 9:30 a.m. to 12:30 p .m. , members ofthe Bronx Task Force on the Housing Court help tenants understand what is happening to them in court.

.They explain the legal bureaucracy and the language

technicalities, tenant rights, and, most importantly,what a dispossess is. In short, they make it less hecticand more bearable for a tenant to come to court. And,their effort may lead to mor e frazzled low incometenants appearing in court to defend themselves. Sooften, unknowing parties stay away because they do nothave a lawyer and cannot deal with the legal machineryconnected with "one's day in court." Then, they are inevitably forced to face the worst - the eviction notice

CITY LlMITS/April1981

an d the marshal's wagon."What I always used to say when people came here

was, 'Welcome to the Bronx Zoo,' ' ' said IrmaRodriguez, a founding member of the task force, who iswith the city Human Rights Commission's Neighborhood Stabilization Program (NSP) in the Bronx. "It ' sstill chaotic here in cour t, bu t we are hoping that everyone will benefit from this information service - tenantsas well as landlo rds," she added.

Created by the NSP, the information table is alsooperated by members of some two dozen communitygroups. Benjamin F. Nolan, administrative judge for theCivil Court of Bronx County, gave permission for theservice and arranged for th e table and chairs for thebooth. His support was considered unusual as the overcrowded space problem in the Bronx with its huge volume of business was thought by many to preclude thistenant-related service area.

On this recent early Monday morning - the daydeemed to be the worst in the Bronx housing court -when droves of people were pacing the hallways of th edingy, subterra nean quarters of this housing court, one

woman, Marjorie Geraci of the Pelham Parkway area,exploded. She an d her landlord met at the informationcenter.

"How do we.have to put up with this . . . He just sendsou t eviction notices for no reasons," she asserted, adding, "I've never been in a courthouse before, and herehe is. He wrote up papers as i f he was selling th e building just to scare the people into some sort of agreement.

"There's a limit to what you pay for," she continued."He's a real cheapskate. He takes ou t lOO-watt bulbs inou r main halls and replaced them wi th seven-watt ones.Our boiler is on a clock on a computer. He delivers aslittle heat as possible."

Geraciis

calmed by the attending task force volunteer- Joanne Keanne from the Citizens Advisory Committee in the Bronx - and she is relieved to have such personal service. Moving away f rom the table, she said, " Iguess they really do care. I was lucky to find them."

Commenting on this special program, Nolan said, " Ithink it's great . . . We certainly hope this will turn thingsaround . . . We've only had one complaint an d that wasfrom a wild man (landlord) who hates most of thejudges, too." He also suggested that other housing courthouses should entertain the same program f ormat,noting that everyone can benefit. "We're no t pro-tenant, bu t we are interested in seeing people have a f air

time in court," he asserted.One of the major problems faced by th e Bronx hous

ing cour t is exemplified in the Kings County (Brooklyn)system : There are no t enough housing court judges.Community groups are interested in helping tenants bu talso would like to see more judges appointed.

"Some time ago there was an effort to do somethingwith HP D an d another community organization toclean up this court: ' said Fritz Sanchez, t he driving

2continued on page 22


3/24

EDITORIAL LIMITS

Federal Budget Cuts: The Task AheadWe find it diff icul t to restrict ourselves to a rational anal

ysis when thinking about President Reagan's Program forEconomic Repovery. What is called for, however, is action.Even the most cursory examination of the administration'sbudget leads to the conclusion that the proposed changeswill hurt poor people, middle income, the elderly, neighborhoods, environmental quality and conditions in the workplace. They will aid only those sectors of our SOCietyalready capable of doing very well for themselves: wealthyindividuals, big business, industry, and the military. ThePresident's statement that this budget will "protect theless fortunate members of society who need the compassion of the government for their support:' is, at best ab-surdly naive, and at worst, a callous lie. It knows nothing ofcompassion or humanitarian principles. The chances ofthis economic proposal succeeding, even in the way theadministration defines success - a "stimulated economyproducing new jobs and reducing inflation" - are high only in the eyes of those willing to overlook economic historyand the current British experience. (Similar cuts in government spending were imposed but have failed to restoreeconomic health and have contributed to enormousgrowth in unemployment.)

The administration has insisted that reducing thewelfare benefits of a low income wage earner, so that disposable income is dropped from $704 to $533 per month, isa "modest penalty:'One hundred and seventy-one dollarsper month - $2,052 per year - may be modest for some.But for a person already struggling to pay rent and utilities,

and clothe and feed two children on just $8,448 per year, itcannot be called anything but disastrous. Moreover, thecuts for this wage earner so diminish the differential be-tween her income and that of a non-wage eamer as to provide a strong "disincentive" to work - she would look likea fool to continue fighting rush hour crowds on the subwayto spend all day pounding a typewriter and bring home aliof $15 per month more than the non-earner.

Everyone recognizes that the proposed termination ofPublic Service Employment programs under CETA wilimean the elimination of jobs - over 300,000 - many ofthem for people who were formerly on welfare. Few realize,however, that cuts in other CETA titles plus programs ad-ministered by the Departments of Agriculture, Commerce(Economic Development Administration), Energy, HUD,Transportation, and others will result in the loss of another800,000, many of them in the supposedly sacrosanct private sector. This will obviously bring about greaterdemands for unemployment insurance payments anddecrease income and sales tax revenues in the short run. Ifthe proposed changes in unemployment insurance bene-fits are implemented and some of these people are forcedinto accepting minimum-wage jobs in the future, the longterm shortfalls in tax revenues will throw Mr. Stockman 'srosy predictions way off.

Maddening as it is to recognize that the burdens of thebudget cuts will fall most heavily on the poor people of our

3

country, it's even more infuriating to see statements lik"the taxing power of government must . . . not be used regulate the econ


4/24

Budget Cuts and Budget Shifts"W e challenge the outlook that says people have a

right to these services," said David Stockman, the Director of the Office of Management and Budget, and chiefarchitect of the new economic order being shaped inWashington.

Stockman's statement was telling, as have been otherpieces which help form a picture of the people shapinggovernment policies. I t raised few eyebrows that LynNofziger, a close and long-time aide to PresidentReagan, was revealed to own several dilapidated, heatless tenement buildings in Baltimore, purchased apparently as speculation.

And, while the slashes in the budgets of many agencies have formed a picture of "cuts", actually, as manyhave pointed out, what is being staged in Washington isnot so much budget cuts, but a massive shift in that

budget - toward defense and military spending andaway from the provision of basic human services.The administration has claimed the existence of a

"safety net" in its budget , which will snare the "trulyneedy", while allowing the "un-truly needy" to passthrough. Stanley Brezenoff, at the time still head ofHuman Resources in New York City, recently commented on the difference.

4

"It 's interesting to note," he said, "which programsin this regard are to be spared the ax and which are not.By amazing coincidence, it turns out that the politicallypopular ones are also t h o ~ ethat serve the so called trulyneedy - Medicare as opposed to Medicaid; Social Security and SSI as opposed to AFDC and Food Stamps;summer jobs as opposed to CETA public serviceemployment; Head Start as opposed to Title XX socialservices."

The results of the proposed budget cutting, for NewYork City, will be akin to a second fiscal crisis. Following are articles on just some of the cuts slated in areasthat strongly affect the neighborhood housing movement. Others, even more threatening in many ways tothe quality of life for low irleome New Yorkers, are notdetailed. A sampling of just some of those are: The reduction in Aid for Dependent Children (welfare) spells a $20 million loss in benefits for recipients. 50,000 New Yorkers will no longer qualify for foodstamps. The scaling down of Medicaid services due to a cap onfederal coverage. The closing of 96 daycare centers and 48 senior citizencenters. Large cuts in energy assistance for the poor. Reductions in health department services includingimmunization, venereal disease treatment, alcoholcounselling and closing of some health care centersprimary, den tal care and family planning.

Overall, the estimates on the total loss of federalfunding for New York City range - from $353 million(New York City Office of Management and Budget) to$530 million (Municipal Research Inst itute).

Delegations of New Yorkers who have journeyed toWashington to speak against the cuts repor t a dispiritedand disorganized opposition to the new economic plan.Some of this evidently stems from well-financed directmail campaigns to citizens soliciting letters to Congressin support of the administration's budget.

We add only one other point: the programs that arenow littering the floor of governmental agencies did notarise from the benevolence of any administration ofwhatever political stripe. They were achieved by years oforganizing and struggle in many different arenas on thepart of the same people they were designed to serve.Without a doubt only similar efforts can reverse thecurrent drift. 0


5/24

CETA and the Community:An Endangered Partnership

Under the CETA Public Service Employment titles, thousands of previouslyunemployed New Yorkers have provided services and material improvements inlow income communities, while at the same time picking up useful skills. Seriouslyimperiled in Congress, the death of the program would be a sobering lossfor neighborhoods. by Tom Robbins

Edwin Rosado , a former CETA apprentice , who no w work s with 24 other CE T A graduates in a no t-far -prof it construct ion compan y .

E dwin Rosado paused from the slice he was about toput in a half-inch sheet of plaster board andglanced at the finished walls he had already resurfaced."I didn't have any experience before I got a CETA job, "he said. " I learned a lot there - I picked up fast."

There, for Rosado, was a one-year stint as aCETA -Comprehensive Employment and Training Act -funded construction worker for Adopt-a-Building, acommunity organization on Manhattan's Lower EastSide, which has sponsored rehabilitation of several oldlaw tenements using the sweat of homesteaders andformerly unemployed residents working under thefederal program.

5

With the knowledge gleaned on the Lower East Side,Rosado was able to catch on with a large private construction firm for about three months doing finishing

work on a new building in Brooklyn. Then, after beinglaid of f at the job's close, he joined 24 other graduateof the CETA program in an enterprise called NehemiahCon st ruction Company, a not-for-profit rehab teamwhich has fully reconstructed some 20 apartments sincelast year in buildings around the city, including the West43rd Street site where Rosado is currently working.

Like large numbers of others who have emerged fromfederally subsidized employment into skilled slots inprivate industry, Rosado isn 't quite sure what he would

CITY LIM ITS/Apri I 19


6/24

be doing without the initial boost of a year's on-the-jobtraining. " I dunno, I dunno," he puzzled. " I had lots oftime to think about whattodo with my life," he said,while he was serving four years in upstate prisons on anassault conviction.

"When I came out, I had my mind set on training. Ispent a couple of months working for the Neighborhood Works Program [for ex-offenders] cleaning upabandoned . lots and buildings. We did some of thedemolition for Adopt-a-Building. And then I got theCETAjob."

With Nehemiah, Rosado earns an apprentice rate of$6 an hour. Since starting with the crew he said he hasbeen offered a number of other jobs. "I only wish Icould get a union card," he lamented.

The program under which Edwin Rosado learned therudimentary basics of carpentry and construction andwhich led to his first skilled employment in a non-subsidized, private job is the Public Service Employmentsector of CETA. I t is a program which, should theReagan administration have its way in the next few

months, will shortly disappear.It is also a program that has brought thousands of thestructurally unemployed - those without basic, marketable working skills - their first acquaintance withmeaningful work, and with a regular paycheck, while atthe same time providing services to communities thatmight otherwise well have gone undone.

R eagan and his staff have zeroed in on the publicservice employment program because, they say,"CETA must be returned to its original purposes" -improving the employability of low income people,something they charge PSE largely fails to do. Theirstand is buttressed by a widely held belief among Congressionallegislators that the program remains wrackedby the abuses that plagued its earlier years when municipalities used the federal jo b lines as patronage plumsand supplemented the federal salaries with large chunksof local money for middle income people. CETA advocates, on the other hand, counter that many of thoseearly problems in the program have been eliminatedboth through national legislation and local initiative.The program, they say, is today a well-functioning,meaningful and socially useful experience for participants and neighborhoods.

The enmity the program has earned, some say, is

more political than economic. With 95 per cent of the315,000 people n ~ t i o n a l l yparticipating under the twotitles Reagan would eliminate - Title VI and Title II-D- meeting the poverty-level criteria, how, they ask, is iteconomically justifiable to dismiss them? A high percentage of the discharged workers will be forced ontowelfare rolls, advocates insist, and will be unlikely tofind another niche in the new economic order today being devised in Washington.

In New York City some 11,500 jobs are currently in


jeopardy: 8,800 of those are municipal workers performing vital services in the police, f i r e ~sanitation, parksand health departments. Others work in libraries andfor the Board of Education. But many of these localgovernmental job postings have caught the ire of legislators who see cities such as New York filling positionswith federally-funded workers that would otherwise bestaffed using local tax-levy funds.

But another 2,700 participants in New York City areworking under the administration of local communitygroups. These workers perform a myriad of tasks thatotherwise, their backers say, could never be paid for.

CETA workers in New York have gutted the interiorsof abandoned buildings and built new ones to replacethem in Bedford Stuyvesant, Harlem, the South Bronxand the Lower East Side; weatherized windows anddoorways in Clinton, Flatbush and East Harlem;organized tenant, block and merchant associations; provided educational classes for women in Greenpoint; advocated for low income New Yorkers in welfare cases,social security and housing subsidy applications. They

have staffed day care centers in poor neighborhoodsand centers for senior citizens. In short, the social returnon the government's investment, in terms of improvingthe quality of life in low income areas, CETA proponents say, is enormous. And the social cost of the program's elimination, they insist, will be staggering.

T he National Urban Coalition's examination of theReagan budget cuts found that cutting the publicservice employment titles will have a disproportionateeffect on minorities and the young. Forty-eight per centof current CETA PSE jobs are held by minorities, theCoalition found, and 41 per cent by youths under 22years of age. Moreover, the Coalition and other proponents have pointed to a finding by the CongressionalBudget Office that fully one quar ter of the savings generated through elimination of the program will emergeagain, this time as costs, through loss of taxes and foodstamp, medicaid and welfare costs. That figure, however, will swell as former participants year-after-yearfail to find access to the private job market.

That gloomy projection is contrasted by an impactstatement prepared by the National Employment LawProject' which cited a recent manpower survey indicating that 53 per cent of CETA PSE participants wereemployed one month after graduating from the pro

gram, and, after one year, almost two-thirds of theformer CETA workers find work in the private sector.But despite those impressive statistics, the odds ap

pear long against a renewal of CETA PSE. So adamanthave White House budget trimmers been about achieving the savings from the program's total elimination inthe coming year, that they have called for one billiondollars to be lopped of f this year's current allocationand have implemented a hiring freeze that has alreadyput hundreds out of work, a figure that will grow to

6


7/24

thousands in a few weeks. CETA programs around thecountry are packing it in and passing out layoff slipsright and left.

While supporters of the program are scrambling tobuild some semblance of opposition to the proposedcuts among Democrats and others, few are choosing torecall that last year, under a Democratic administration,some of the same writing was on the wall boldly spelling

PSE's imminent demise. A lobbying conference of community groups participating in CETA was told lastspring, by then Secretary of Labor Ray Marshall, thatpublic service employment would be phased out in favorof greater emphasis on private sector employment.

In the wake of the California fiscal earthquake ofProposition 13, the Carter administration was also propounding "retrenchment:' and the then President calledfor severe cuts in PSE's 1981 allocation as well as chopping back on 1980's budget. This was despite the CarterUrban Policy which had, two years earlier, called for anenormous increase in public service employment jobsfrom 315,000 to 725,000.

At budget time last year, community groups werebusily attempting to wrest some of the controls of PSEaway from local municipal administrators, whom, theysaid, were gobbling up the lion's share of CETA slotsfor themselves. The balanced budget axe poised over somany different programs at the time left communitygroup participants as the most vocal supporters of theprogram as big city mayors attempted to save lessrestricted pots of money such as revenue sharing.

Now, support for the program is even less strong thanit was last year. Again, with so many other social servicecategories up for slashing or elimination, many politicians have prioritized their objections to cuts to avoidcharges of "local petty selfishness."

Should CETA public service employment be one ofmany social programs swept away in the current conservative tide, much of the impact from the loss of thelabor of CETA workers will be felt on a local, neighborhood level. Basic tasks will be left undone, and projectswill be left half-finished, at a stand-still until somefuture option is devised.

O ne such endangered project is the rehabilitation ofthree buildings in the Ocean Hill-Brownsville section of Brooklyn, where a crew of 26 CETA workershave been laboring for over a year to create 48 apartments for local residents who have also been contributing their own labor on a regular basis.

Frank Negron, director of the Ocean Hill-BrownsvilleTenants Association, sponsor of the project, said hisgroup is already searching out other ways to fmish thework should the CETA labor element be eliminated,which it is scheduled to be at the end of March.

" I f the buildings never get finished," said Negron,"then it's worthless. And, if we have to get an expensiveloan to finish, then the rents will be too high, and the

7

homesteaders will feel they've been had."The three buildings sit on Atlantic Avenue, a f

blocks below where the viaduct sweeps vehicles highover East New York's Pitkin Avenue. Surrounded by analmost total urban devastation, most of the viable houing in the area belongs to the City Housing Authority.The neighborhood is not one of the much-vaunte"pockets of poverty", but almost a sea of desolatio

where huge vacant lots, cleared for renewal, have sat forso long that trees with trunks wide enough for a twoarm embrace have grown unhindered.Inthemidst of that scene, the bustle at 2170-2176 Atl

tic Avenue stands out in sharp contrast. One buildingalmost completed - final electrical and finishing workis now going on. The two others are far from that stagand the community group estimates it will need antension at least to the end of September to finishMembers of the work crew shift uneasily when the subject of their looming lay-off is brought up.

" I t ain't easy to pick up a trade - it's hard to get intit," said Rafael Ortiz, father of a young daughter, who

has been learning and doing electrical wiring on the sitesince last May. "I 'm not a high school grad, so it's hafor me to get any job. Before I'd be out on the street,getting work where I could.

"Here," Ortiz insisted, "the pay ain't nothing, buyou get a trade. They'd do good to keep these programsgoing - they're just about the only thing that keeps theneighborhoods from going completely down." Likemost of his co-workers, Ortiz isn't sure exactly wherehe'll go for a job should this one end abruptly.

Some, however, feel there is one place they'll headwhere they know they can find work - the armed

forces."Me, I' m going into the service," announced ElwoodHarris, an eighteen-year-old who has been working onthe site since last spring. " I don't want to have to go androb nobody."

"That's the only opportunity they're leaving theseyoung fellows," said Otis Thomas, a heavy-set man inhis thirties who is a crew chief on the site. "I know mtrade. Won't have trouble getting work. But it's theyoung kids I' m thinking about," he said, gesturing atHarris. "They've just started learning and don't knoenough to go out and make their own way."

The service, said Otis, "i s not really a good move. But

it's all the option there is. These kids are interested indoing something with their hands, besides mugging oldladies. The whole thing, once you cut all the programs,be the world of survival. One of 'em be sticking theother one up. That's the worst thing you need." 0

CITY 'UMITS/April19


8/24

Targeted: Legal Services For The PoorOne of the more overtly political targets in the mas

sive budget shift recomm5nded by the Reagan administration is the federally-funded Legal Services Corporation,which is scheduled for elimination. The man whobattled, but lost, the fight to dismantle legal services forthe poor while governor of California, is now in a muchmore potent position to implement his will.

With a total budget of $321 million - less than thecost of one of two nuclear attack submarines currentlyon order - the Legal Services Corporation, which wasestablished in 1974, funds 300 autonomous legal serviceprojects nationwide. In New York City, funding is administered by the Community Action for Legal Serviceswhich operates 23 offices around the city in poor neighborhoods. It has a staf f of 175 attorneys and 150 paralegals, social workers, casehandlers and support personnel.

Last year, CALS handled some 50,000 cases, 40 percent of which were landlord-tenant disputes. In addi

tion, it handled legal problems involving family, consumer, labor, health and juvenile civil cases for incomeeligible families. An individual with a maximum yearlyincome of $4,738 is eligible for representation. A familyof four may make up to $9,313.

Under the present administration-proposed budget,legal services would be "effectively wiped out," saidJoan Slattery, a CALS spokesperson. Only a small par tof the gap left, should the program be eliminated, couldbe filled by Legal Aid attorneys, who handle some housing cases. But Legal Aid as well would be affected by thecut, losing locally $1 million which it presently receivesfromCALS.

The option left open to cities is to fund legal servicesout of the proposed block grants already crowded withother administration rejects.

Steve Dobkin, an attorney in the South BrooklynLegal Services office, currently has a caseload of 200 individuals, almost all of whom are tenants involved inrent strikes, dispossesses or harassment cases broughtagainst landlords in Brooklyn buildings.

Much of the fire aimed at legal services national ly hascome from conservative organizations and legislators.During the 1970s, a similar campaign was waged bymany of the same opponents, mobilized then in a "Na-

tional Committee to Defeat Legal Services." Conservative groups, such as the Heritage Foundation, whichhanded the Reagan transition team a mountainous pileof recommendations last November, have pushed forthe program's elimination, labelling it "soc ial engineering by lawyers." Reagan, however, may have needed little prodding to cut the program . In 1970, as governor ofCalifornia, he fought to have federal funding cut of f forthe California Rural Legal Assistance Project which hadraised the hackles of agricultural corporations and


others by pressing suits on behalf of the poor. AlthoughReagan didn't win that battle, he will, as President, thisyear appoint the entire 11 member board of the LegalServices Corporation.

fOur legal system is an adversary one. Itgenerates controversy. That seems partic-ularly true when it is used effectively onbehalf o f he poor.'

Much of the Corporation's defense so far has beenbased on attempts to defuse some of the charges againstit as an institutor of costly and needless suits againstgovernment and business. "We're swamped just withday-to-day legal problems of our clientele," said Slattery. "The 'crazy cases' that have been raised, haven'thappened in New York City:" But the Corporation has,

locally and nationally, joined and brought suits, which,looked at from any perspective, are controversial. Fairhousing, occupational safety, advocacy for the handicapped and on nutritional needs of the poor - all ofthese causes could and have cost governments and businesses dollars to counter them in court, and large expenditures to comply with judicial decisions against them.

One outspoken defender of legal services for the poorhas been Edward Brooke, the former Republican Senator from Massachussetts and now a Washington lawyer."Legal services," Brooke wrote last month in the Wash-ington Star, "are political. Our legal system is an adversary one. I t generates controversy. That seems particularly true when it is used effectively on behalf of thepoor."

Based on the latest census figures, . there is an eligiblepopulation of over 3 million people for legal services inNew York City. "That 's three million people who wouldnot have access to legal representation for civil cases,"said Slattery. "There aren't going to be too many goodhearted lawyers taking civil cases for little or nothing.And there's not even a tax incentive to do pro bono[without fee] work'.'

8

Strong support for the program has come thus farfrom national and local bar associations, judges, and

State Attorney General Robert Abrams. According toSlattery, some City Council members are considering introduction of a resolution in support of the program.However, in Mayor Koch's list of priorities of budgetcuts to oppose, legal services did not even earn a mention.

The Senate Budget Committee voted a reduced oneyear budget of $100,000 for legal services, but Slatterysaid CALS itself has not begun to prepare a muchscaled-down version that such a budget would require. 0


9/24

Housing and Development:Where the Bucks Could Stop

Federal housing assistance programs are targeted forthe stiffest cuts of all by the Reagan administration.And while the recommended slashes go deep into thefunds allot ted for housing programs, they may well sliceeven further before Congress has completed a finalbudget picture.

The number of federally subsidized housing units arescheduled for cuts of 17 per cent this year and 33 percent in 1982. This includes Section 8 - the government's major tool for creating IQw income housing - aswell as public housing. The total n u m b ~ rof dwellingunits slated to be funded in 1981 is 210,000, almost45,000 units below former P r e s i d e n ~Carter's alreadyreduced level for 1981. In 1982, the level would dropagain. The Reagan administration has sought a total of175,000 units for next year. The Senate Budget Committee, however, voted in mid-March to drop that leveleven further to 150,000 units. And, as the housingbudget moves next to the Senate Banking Committee,housing advocates fear there is a good chance the committee will pare that figure down to ~ o t h i n g .

"The Banking Committee is in support of ~ h eReaganlevel," said Kate Crawford of the National Low IncomeHousing Coalition. "W e are really scared we'll comeout with zero."

Last year, it was only at i ~

vote that defeated a motionto eliminate subsidized units altogether in 1981. Thisyear, under a Republican-controlled committee, therecould well be the votes to carry that motion.

Within those overall budget reductions are severalmajor program cancellations and funding shifts . A Congressional thrust last year to refocus federal policies,away from new and rehabilitated apartments to a greater emphasis on subsidizing the rents for families in ex-isting units, was narrowly defeated. A similar move nowhas backing from the administration. Reagan's 1982budget calls for 55 per cent of housing subsidies to go toexisting housing and 45 per cent to new and rehabili

tated units.In addition, the Reagan levels recommend the total

elimination of new subsidies in 1982 for American Indian public housing, a move that is expected to be opposed by Housing and Urban Development SecretarySamuel R. Pierce, Jr. Pierce also is expected to opposethe massive cuts in public housing operating subsidieswhich are slated for a 25 per cent decrease in 1982.Public Housing authorit ies, particularly in the frost belt,have major deficits already because of shortfalls in the

9

funding levels under Carter. With fuel costs spirallingfrom oil decontrol, the deficit will increase to the extentthat Mayor Koch told a Congressional committee that,ifNew York's public housing tenants had to cover the projected costs, it would mean a twenty per cent rent increase in one year.

Fo r those with Section 8 subsidies, the amount ofcome paid for rent would rise, over five years, to 30cent of income from the present 25 per cent. In NeYork City, the average adjusted income for a family in afederal project is $7,100 per year. A total of 148,0families would be, with the one per cent per year increment, paying a rental increase of $30 per month b1986. Opponents of the increase have characterized thias a five per cent income tax increase for all of the "trly needy" living in projects.

Using President Reagan's level of 175,000 units 1982, the Koch administration has estimated that NYork City would receive 14,525 units based on the city"fair share allocation." The city has said in its federalHousing Assistance Plan it will need 35,200 units.Under Carter's 1982 funding levels, New York wouldhave recei ved 21,580 units.Housing Financing

But, even those units of housing recommended fo

funding will be in severe jeopardy of never being builThe administration is pushing for elimination of the scalled "tandem" financing mechanism used to buildmany subsidized projects, particularly in New YorkCity. The "Government National Mortgage Association(known as Ginnie Mae), which buys privately originatedmortgages and reissues them to developers at a 7 Yz pcent interest rate, would cease to function under theReagan budget.

The Ginnie Mae "window", through which its transactions are conducted periodically, is closed now anwill not reopen, said Kate Crawford. An increase in thebudget for 1981 and 1982 will allow Ginnie Mae to buyup everything in its current loan pipeline that had received commitments as of February 14th - a total874 projects.

"That increase is essentially to help out the developers," said Crawford. "But many of them have alreadread the writing on the wall and are getting out of tbusiness. They'll just shift to building shopping centers."

But, while developers can shift their bulldozers andcontractors to other, less endangered schemes, thoselooking to have new and rehabilitated housing created

CITY LlMITS/April19


10/24

in their communities will have to wait and see whatother financing mechanisms are created.

"There aren't too many other options," commentedJanet Charlton of the National Leased Housing Association,which represents dev:elopers of subsidized housing."States can try to back projects with local tax-exemptbond issues, but with rates so high now it doesn't seemfeasible."

In New York City, the picture could be even bleaker,as local developers have been turning almost unanimously to Ginnie Mae in recent years and many projectsare still without financing.

Secretary Pierce has announced a Presidential Commission on Housing to examine the future of the Section8 program and to recommend possible alternatives.That report is not due until the end of the year, and,asCharlton commented, "Most everything will be in limbo until then."Section 312 Loans

Low interest loans for single and multi-family homesunder the Section 312 program are to be cut back sharply

in 1981, and eliminated in 1982. Nationally, the cutswould spell a decrease of 5,500 loans made this year,

and 7,858 in next year. The three per cent loans havebeen used in New York City for a variety of purposes,including sweat equity projects. I t is also presently theonly subsidized loan program available to purchasers ofcity and federally owned homes bought at auction thatneed substantial renovations. The 312 program hasalready suffered cuts, and in New York City only $4million has been received so far this year. According toformer city housing Assistant Commissioner JeffHeintz, the city has between $7 million and $10 millionin its loan pipeline in some 100 applications from localhomeowners. The city has estimated that the loss willspell $7.2 million in each year and an end to any hopefor the 1,500 loan requests totalling $48 million that areoutstanding.Neighborhood Self-Help Grants

A program lobbied for extensively by, and largelywon with the help of neighborhood organizations twoyears ago, appears almost certain to be eliminated in1982. The N e i g h b o r h o o d ~ S e l f - H e l p Development Program has provided grants and technical assistance to

community organizations to help develop housing, economic and community development projects. The pro-

An Easter Message for CongresspersonsMany Congresspersons return to their districts

on weekends. Virtually all will be home over theEaster recess (Senate: April 16-26; House: April13-20). Use these opportunities to present yourcase against the Reagan program face-to-face. Thefollowing suggestions may be useful for those whohave not lobbied extensively .

Assemble a DelegationThe purpose of the meeting is to influence and

persuade the Congressperson. Try to include people whose knowledge of the issues, verbal skills orclout will advance your cause. Seek out representatives of major organizations or institutions (e.g.,religious, business, labor and community leaders).Involve political supporters of the Congressperson. Avoid known opponents. Make sure the.group is committed to your objectives.

Getting the AppointmentHave the person with the best connection or

most clout seek an appointment. -Call the districtoffice. Talk to the senior staff person who dealswith appointments. Offer several times and datesand indicate a willingness to meet the Congressperson's schedule. Ask for a short time (15-30minut.es). Phrase vour request in non-threateningterms. ("We want to share our views and get his/her evaluation of the budget debate"). Indicatethe breadth of your delegation. Keep pushing for a

CITY LlMITS/April1981 10

meeting. I f necessary, call the Washington office.Stick by the ground rules (e.g., time, number ofparticipants, etc.).

Develop StrategyThe delegation should meet in advance to devel

op a strategy and divide roles. You need to agreeon approaches and priorities. Who will lead thegroup, open discussion and press for commitments? I f necessary, divide up the issues. Settledifferences now, not in the Congressperson's office.

Anticipate Responses and QuestionsWhat is a realistic objective - informing the

Congressperson, pressuring him or her, obtaininga commitment, etc.? What will he ask the group- more facts, alternative cuts, political or publicsupport? You can expect to be asked - " "I f wedon't cut here, where should we?"

Press for Follow-throughThe meeting should lead to a c.ommitment or,more often, a continuing channel of communication - a key staff member for on-going contact.Don't leave without some mechanism to share additional information (and pressure).

From: The Center fo r Community Change, 1000Wisq:Jnsin Ave. N. w., Washington, D.C. 20007.(202) 338-6310.


11/24

gam's grants have also leveraged other public andprivate funds.

Eight New York City groups received a total of over$800,000 last year in the first two cycles of grants. Athird cycle, scheduled for this year, is to be eliminated.Community Development Block Grants

Virtually every program the Reagan administrationhas moved to abolish has been recommended to be

funded by localities if they so choose ou t of blockgrants . Social Services are to be placed in a "super blockgrant" to be tapped for existing programs. The modelfor that scheme comes from the Community Development Block Grants created in 1974. And, as programsare d e e p ~ s i x e d ,localities are being told to "take it ou t ofCDBG." There, however, intense competition is predicted to be the result, with communities, governmentand business vying for chunks of a decreased fundingpot.

The Reagan administration has responded to a loudoutcry from mayors around the country by backing of ffrom its threat to eliminate the Urban Development Action Grants. Instead, they are to be "folded" into thecommunity development grants. This move would comeon top of a ten per cent decrease in CDBG funding in1982, and a 13 per cent cut in the proposed UDAG allocation.

Of most concern to community groups has been theprospect of battling for neighborhood needs against thesame interests that are currently funded by UDAGs.New York City has so far received 24 UDAGs totalling$49 million. That figure may soon jump as the PortmanHotel, a $22 million UDAG project, gets funding fromthe Reagan administration. Waiting in the wings are 19

other city UDAG applications worth $54 million manyof which would not get separate funding before the programs are rolled into one later this year.

The city presently expects to receive $255.4 million inits next community development grant, beginning inSeptember - a drop from $270 million this year. I t isdifficult to chart the final figure the merged programswill yield for New York; however, UDAG will be basedon a set allocation as opposed to the national competitiononwhich it has been based thus far.

The city's entire maintenance effort for its tax-foreclosed buildings is funded from the community development grants and the Koch administration has steadilywhittled away at funding for these programs# particularly for buildings in alternative - community, privateand tenant - management.Economic Development Administration

The politics of budget cutting show up fairly clearlythrough some of the flip flops the Reagan administration has performed over federal funding for projectsthat involved private industry-related schemes. As inUDAG, the budget cutters decided against opposingsome of the large economic development grants already

11

in the funding pipeline.However, Reagan has maintained his plan to total

eliminate the Economic Development Administration- rescinding all funds for 1981 and abolishing it i1982. New York City has received a yearly allocation o$625,000 in planning funds under EDA and $265,00for technical assistance. In addition, the city has received a total of $4.6 million for a revolving loan fund

which is the city's primary mechanism for making belowmarket interest rate loans to small businesses.

Co-op BankAnother program which community groups around

the country played a vital role in bringing to birth juthree years ago, the National Consumer Co-operativeBank, is also scheduled to bite the fiscal dust. An initia1981 cut would drop its allocation of $136 million to $million, followed by elimination in 1982.

The justification for this move stems from an overadministration effort to limit government's involvemenin the economy through loans an d loan guarantees. Thkilling of the Co-op Bank, however, is ironic because, athe Municipal Research Institute has commented, it isviewed by many as a model for stemming inflation bylowering the distribution costs for housing, fuel, foodand other necessities. In addition, it recycles investmencapital by promoting local community ownership in majo r enterprises.

Already, the Co-op Bank, which opened a Mid-Atlantic office in New York City last month, has made localloan commitments worth $10 million, and of $50 milliostill uncommitted in the bank's present budget, the citis expected to receive $15 million. 0Sources:Municipal Research Institute; Pratt Institute CenterCommunity and Environmental Development; NationalLo w Income Housing Coalition; Office of Managementand Budget, City of New York ; Center fo r CommunitChange.



12/24

SALVAGING SRO H -OUSINGSingle Room Occupancy housing is an endangered species in New York City, andthose trying to preserve it confront the large profits owners can get from conver-sions. StilI, some have managed to hold on and provide needed shelter.

by Susan Baldwin

St. Patrick's Day had passed an d with it, for most, allof the scattered remains - the green paper hats and thetinseled shamrocks, but still there were some who continued to observe the Saint's day in a neat, cheerfuldining room where the tenants feel secure. They haveshelter, a crystal clean community dining area in al00-year-old renovated apartment house known tomany as an SRO (Single Room Occupancy) building butto all the occupants as home.

The tenants of this building in Lower Manhattan at125 East 24th Street live in a model SRO, which lodgespeople in need of housing who would otherwise beliving on the streets or in the subways had they not beenfortunate enough to meet Father John McVean, aRoman Catholic priest with the Franciscan order whois committed to housing the homeless.

McVean's shelter is a unique effort in keeping verylow income residents, who are constantly plagued bythreats of eviction and eventual displacement, in theirneighborhoods. The job is not easy, and the suggestedanswers, though prolific, may be hard to sell becausethe city finds it more profitable to involve itself in tac

tics to remove this source of housing, uproot these tenants most in need of housing, and offer this same housing with very few repairs as ll)dging for those who canpay the higher rents. This city policy has helped keep atleast ,36,000 shelterless people roaming the streets withno place to go.

Once a housing mainstay in New York City, the SROis an endangered species. And, developers who convertthis housing stock to Class A or the higher residentialcategory stand to make a substantial prof it by claimingi m p r o v ~ m e n t stha t will wipe out taxes for 12 years.

"This is such an uphill battle, a major process to savethis ,housing," said Judi th Spektor, head of the city's office on SROs. Labeling the SRO situation as a "crisis,"she continued, "This housing problem is horrendous,not to mention the illegal evictions and harassment.There is no doubt that wonderful work is being done bysome, but more needs to be done . . . There is a very greatneed for this housing in the city ."

The East 24th Street Beechwood Hotel is keeping 100persons in shelter, and; according to McVean, his association - St. Francis of Assisi for the Poor - wouldlike to become more involved with homeless New York


City residents and would eventually like to purchaseanother SRO hotel.

On Manhattan's Upper West Side a group of tenantsand homeowners are attempting to save the Capitol HallHotel, at 166 West 87th -Street, as a low income housingresource. They have committed t h e m ~ e l v e sand haveraised the money to buy this facility, except that theowner has dropped his offer to sell.

"A lot of people have-problems with understandingour involvement in this hotel, but we have been hereworking with the residents for more than four-and-onehalf years and want it to stay," said Mig Boyle, of theWest 87th Street l00-Block Association. "W e knowthere is a money angle : - what you might call a goldplated Manhattan angle - that keeps this populationalways worried about where to live. The irony is that wefind them to be extremely good neighbors, and we wantthem here."

Boyle and her neighbors raised $20,000 last year as adown payment on the 250-unit SRO, only to find theowner reneging on the purchase price when he foundthat a developer would be able to turn a greater profit

by upgrading the hotel.Possible SaleAsked about the possible sale to the block associa

tion, Ralph Miller, the owner, insisted his plans wereconfidential. His last advertised price for the CapitolHall was $2 million.

The neighborhood quest to purchase the Capitol HallHotel raises a number of issues, not the least of which

is solid community support and eventual ownership ofa bona fide SRO.

Loss of lower priced hotels has escalated in the lastyear. According to figures from the Crisis Interventionunit, of the city's Human Resources Administration, 50hotels and 8,557 rooms were lost between July, 1979,and September, ,1980. Also, according to their figures,only 79 buildings housing people in single rooms charge$35-a-week for this communal ,living space, ~ h i c halsoincludes 19 Lower East Side Bowery-type lodginghouses.

12

At the present time, most subsidized residents ofSROs receive their income from . the Department ofSocial Services _an d are limited to just over$300-a-month. Rent frequently runs at least $50-a-week, _


13/24

75-year-old Rosali nd Wirth in her new room at the Beechwo od Hotel.

leaving about $100 for food, transportation, and othernecessities. And, more often than not, with the dissappearance of this low-cost housing stock, tenants are being asked to pay more than $50-a-week.

"W e searched for a long time before we got thishotel," McVean said of the Beechwood. "Five yearsago, we could have bought our old place for nothing.But things have changed. They are renovating it into abetter class hotel, and they're not even using the city'stax incentive J-51 program. The rooms are probably going to be $35-a-night." McVean's church used to run ashelter ~ p r o g r a mat the Aberdeen Hotel on 32nd Streetand is in the process of relocating its remaining tenantsto the Beechwood.

J-51Known as J-51 of the city's administrative code, this

tax incentive program has figured noticeably in theundercutting of low-cost SRO housing. Under the current provisions, owners of SRO's or Class B hotels androoming houses and other properties upgraded to stan-

dard housing can realize a 12-year real estate tax exemptionon the increased property valuation resulting from this"rehabilitation. " I t also permits a 20-year abatementfor the "certified reasonable cos t " at 100 per cent value,to be computed, as current law provides, at 8 YJ per

13

cent equalling about 95 per cent of the actual rehabilitation cost.

For almost two years, concerned community groupsand politicians have been attempting to introduce legislation supporting a moratorium on J-51 conversions inareas where scarce SRO housing i ~ under attack. Manyhearings have been held at the City Council, j md mosrecently, Mayor Koch has introduced a bil! J mown athe B-to-B, or Intro. 951, viewed by many as "too littletoo late," which would reward owners for improvingSROs by permitting them the same tax-incentive advantages provided in the J-51 legislation . Currently, anowner of an SRO cannot receive benefits for improvingon this housing.

One of the political leaders against the ' traditionaJ-51 hotel conversions is Councilwoman Ruth Messinger (Democrat of Manhattan), who has been a proponent for some time of stronger versions of the mayor'legislation . Commenting on Intro. 951, she said, "W ejust hope he isn't grandstanding. And we also hope thathere will be a serious limiting of B to A?'

'Leadership Role'In a letter dated January 29, 1981, and signed by

some 120 community organizations, politicians, andresidents, Mayor Koch was called upon to recall his



14/24

The Capitol Hall Hotel, an SR O at 166 West 87th Street . Neighbors want to save it .

"leadership role more than ten years ago in the CityCouncil in developing the Rent Stabilization Law,which established tenant rights and legal protection forresidents of hotel s, SROs, and rooming houses .

"The conversion to middle income and high-renthousing of low-rent residential hotels, the majority ofwhich are located in Manhattan," the letter read, "hasbrought about the loss of an average of 460 low-rentsingle-room units per month, totaling 31,000 units from1975 through 1980. We have now reached a zero vacancy rate in the remaining 140 low-rent hotels, identifiedby the city's Crisis Intervention Services ."

The communique also mentioned recent "terror tactics" to empty SROs that included the bodily removal ofan 83-year-old man from his low-rent to a high-renthotel after he unknowingly signed a release for the land

lord."What we are going to have here in this fair city,

which some have called the 'Tale of Two Cities' is20,000 people displaced and Koch going to cut the ribbon for the successful model SRO that will house 200 ofthe needy and poor," said the Rev. Richard Virgil,pastor of Grace and St. Paul's Lutheran Church andchairman of the SRO Tenant Rights Coalition. Virgilemphasized that Koch was only speaking to one city -"the rich and the gentrified." But, he stressed, "thiswon't work forever because the other part of the city is

CITY LlMITS/April1981 14

ou t there and must be listened to."Many solutions have been offered for saving this

housing, including using Section 8 monies under eitherthe existing program, or proposing an innovative onethat would permit the building to be rehabilitated withmoderate Section 8 funds. The problem with this latterstrategy is that HU D would have to modify its regulations as congregate housing does not conform to itsguidelines. Moderate Section 8 regulations insist thateach apartment unit must have a self-contained kitchenand bathroom.

$3 MillionOn the state level, Governor Carey's office is seeking

$3 million for demonstration work in SROs that wouldguarantee $2 million to nonprofit organizations to purchase and rehabilitate this housing. The $1 million

would go to underwriting shelter expenses .Carroll Kowal, former coordinator of special housing

programs for the state, who is now heading up the SROunit at the state' s Division of Housing and CommunityRenewal, has pointed out that these New York City SROhousing problems should be seen as national ones andthat there is a need to build a national coalition to savethis housing stock. She is echoed by the city's SpecialProjects Commissioner Janet Langsam . Both haverevealed that o ther cities, namely Por tland and Seattle,have been successful in obtaining special Section 8 fund-


15/24

ing to underwrite the incomes of hotel residents."The answer to this major dilemma has to be found.

It is just bizarre when you look at the hotel tenants'rights. There are no written leases so each living case is aspecial one," said Edward C. Wallace, Councilman-atLarge for Manhattan and attorney for the SRO TenantRights Coalition. ". It's not believable how the SROpeople are asked to live, and the rest of the people inNew York don't want to hear about it. When the time

comes, it's very easy to empty out these hotels to makeway for luxury conversions . . . There are the guns andthe roaming dogs. Anyone would be afraid and wouldmove out. Forget the basic human rights to shelter."

City Limits attempted to enter the Capitol Hall Hotelto rent a room and find out how the tenants were fairing. The visitor was turned away. A resident, who refused to be named because he feared eviction, said,"You really should try hard to get in here to see what'shappening. People are afraid to tell what's really goingon because they are convinced the owner will pu t themon the street."

SRO as a concept goes on. About 140 hotels are stillin business, and, according to all parties who havestudied the subject "endlessly and to death," this formof housing, generic to New York City, probably will disappear, maybe as soon as 1984.

"It 's a shame that there is not more force to keep theSROs going because it can work," said Elizabeth Tre-bony, executive director of Project FIND, an organiztion that runs a successful 320-room SRO known as the

Chemical Bank's

Woodstock Hotel for senior citizens in the Times Squarearea. "This type of housing is very profitable and ittaking care of people who need us . . . But, it is not easy.

Most observers believe that the SRO housing, certainly in Manha ttan, will disappear because there is so mucincentive to convert it to luxury housing. But, they contend, if the city and federal government would bend olegislation to save this housing then at least what is lewould continue as low-cost shelter.

The efforts in San Francisco, Portland, and Seattle tohold the line on conversion of SRO housing and alsoprovide additional rent subsidy money should be lookedat carefully by New York City, because, according tomany interviewed, the often mentioned figure of 36,00homeless may be low, with the shelterless populationgrowing apace .

In the meantime, tenants at the Beechwood continueto enjoy their special and secure housing. Through theefforts of the church they have also received new bedding and furniture . Their rooms are spotless.

"W e can do it. We can save SRO housing and whave to do it," Trebony concluded. "But, we do noneed to hear that a developer, not a community group,can do it . . . We don't want to hear of a developer doinga model SRO. What we need are the HUD waivers, 'anwe'll take care of the rest."

The City Council is expected to support the B-to-Blegislation, but many critics believe that this is jus"window dressing" and that the tenants of this precarious housing should be wary. 0

Urban Finance Representatives:caring for you as you care foryour most important clients.

Services for small businessesan d housing concerns: SBA Certified Lender Construction Financing for Low

an d Moderate Income Housing

Chemical Bank'sUrban Finance Department140 BroadwayNew York, N.Y . 10015

C H : M I ~TH E a a . Tr ' S JUSTRIGHT AI CMBICAL.Member FDIC


16/24

Rent Subsidy Certificates:Some Snags in the Works

by Sara Effron

In January, 1980, a Queens mother of three wasforced to flee the one-family house she rented after thelandlord cut of f essential services during sub-freezingtemperatures. The woman doubled up with relatives andwent to work to find a solution to her homelessness. Shepromptly filed two applications with the New York CityHousing Authority: one was for admission to publichousing; the second was to receive a rent paymentsassistance certificate which would pay the differencebetween 25 per cent of her income from her jo b with thecity and the rent charged by the landlord.

But, because a vacate order had not been issued bythe city for the house she fled and, because the househad not been foreclosed upon, her case did not warrantemergency status for public housing. And, because shewas no longer paying rent, she was not in a rent hardship category, i.e., not paying more than 40 per cent ofher income in rent which is a priority for obtaining arent payment certificate.

In the meantime, the woman, who is a black, singleworking mother, found a high rental apartment to temporarily accommodate her until, she hoped, her certificate would be processed. Then, for the second time in ayear, because the new landlord wanted the apartment

for his own use, the woman and her children had toleave their home and once again move in with relativesin December, 1980.

The woman appealed to the elected legislativerepresentatives in her area, as well as to her union, forassistance. Why, she wondered, was it taking the Housing Authority so long to act on her application?

The elusive certificate sought by the Queens woman isissued under the federal Section 8 Housing AssistanceProgram for Existing Housing. Established under theHousing and Community Development Act of 1974, theprogram was part of a double-hinged effort to providedecent shelter for the elderly, handicapped and thoseliving in substandard housing. The program differedfrom earlier plans in that qualifying tenants with renthardships would be issued certificates payable to landlords whose buildings passed inspection criteria andwho agreed to enter into a Section 8 lease agreement.The tenant was to have freedom of choice in housingselection.

The program was backed by a socio-economic theorythat held tenants could "trickle up " into better apartments as these were vacated by upwardly mobile fami-

CITY LIM ITS/Apri I 1981 16

lies. Rather than the much greater costs involved in theconstruction of new and rehabilitated dwelling units,the existing housing program incurred a far smallerfederal cost.

Now, in a change sought by the Reagan administration, the amount of federal dollars available for the program would increase at the expense of funding for newand reconstructed units. But, as the Queens mother ofthree discovered, the housing assistance payments program often works a lot better in theory than in practice.

Presently, the New Yol'1c City Housing Authority,which administers the Section 8 certificate program,lists some 29,000 families currently enrolled in the program. But it also has a backlog of 100,000 applicationsand expects to receive 50,000 more in the coming year.As is usual, the need for subsidized housing of this kindis far greater than the funds allotted. In 1979, for instance, the city estimated that over 870,000 households- the majority earning less than $10,000 a year -needed some type of subsidy assistance.

When the NYCHA goes to the federal depar tment ofHousing and Urban Development each year for approval of its plan for use of the Section 8 funds, it isdecided how many certificates will go to different sized

apartments and what percentages will be marked forsenior citizens and the very low inoome category, whichby law must constitute at least 30 per cent of the familiesassisted by the program. The proposal submitted toHUD is based on estimated housing needs in New YorkCity and the goals set forth in the city's Housing Assistance Plan. About half of all certificates go to the city'ssenior citizen population. This year the Housing Authority will have roughly 2,100 certificates to distribute,making the selection process fiercely competitive.

But, while everyone who is in need cannot receive thesubsidy, what happens to the "neediest" who are luckyenough to receive certificates?

The Queens mother finally received her Section 8 certificate in February, 1981, one year after the date of herapplication. But, even before she actually received certification, she began her search for housing. She encountered real estate brokers and landlords who had notheard of Section 8 and queried whether it was "anotherwelfare program." She located apartments of the sizeshe needed, but the rents were greater than those allowed by HUD.

When the woman got her certificate she was given in-


17/24

formation about landlords who already accepted thecertificates. At least 10 of those she contacted had novacancies. She then considered areas that were doublecar fares from her jo b and areas that she considered unsafe. She recontacted her Housing Authority assistantwho provided additional listings, all with no vacancies.

There are other pitfalls as well. Section 8 certificateholders encounter discrimination as minorities, thehandicapped, and single parent households. The"finders, keepers" task of a prospective tenant becomesan arduous, frustrating, and , frequently impossibletask. On the one hand, Section 8 certificate holders areelated by the slides of attractive apartments shown tothem at the briefing session staged by the HousingAuthority. But, they are also forewarned in the briefingmaterials that "just as important as the condition of thebuilding is the neighborhood in which it is located.Make sure that the building in which you select anapartment is in a decent neighborhood and not in a slumarea,"

One Section 8 certificate holder commented that after

the briefing session, "I was under the impression I couldgo anywhere . . . When I went ou t to look at the placesthat would accept Section 8 . . . you wouldn't want tolive there . . . . you wouldn't feel safe. The choices arevery limited,"

Although the Housing Authority contends that anag:gressive effort is made to match tenants with the

U.s. o.p.rtmentof HoueIng end Urben ~IIice 01 HouIIng

A Good Place to Live!

almost 6,000 landlords who participate in the program,no computerized list is kept and it is impossible to knowwhen vacancies occur in particular buildings. The assistance is limited at best and hindered by the system forreferrals.

The Housing Authority may give a tenant information about a few apartments but is forced to add the discouraging information after repeated contacts that,"This is all we have to give ou t." The news is even moredistressing because certificate holders are in a race withtime once it is awarded: a six month time limit is placedon the holder to use the subsidy before it expires.

The Open Housing Center, a private, non-profit advocacy agency for those encountering housing discrimination, receives about 15-20 calls a week from Section 8applicants and certificate holders. Sandra Parrish,Associate Director of the cen ter, said that a Bronxwoman with three school-aged children had come toseek help after she had contacted 53 different placessuggested by the Housing Authority which had no vacancies or apartments to accommodate her family size.

For the handicapped there are multiple roadblocks.The Center for the Independence of the Disabled,is one group that has been instrumental in bringing thespecial needs of the handicapped in housing to the attention of the NYCHA. Paula Nesoff, Housing Specialistfor the Center, described some special problems ofhandicapped Section 8 certificate holders. The unavail-


18/24

ability of referrals specifically geared to the mobility -impaired, often makes the program useless for thosetenants. For them, the "use it or lose it " situation iscompounded.

Racial discrimination is also an inhibiting factor. TheOpen Housing Center has assisted Section 8 certificateholders in finding housing by setting up appointmentswith landlords of smaller buildings and houses - often

found through ethnic newspapers.Faced with discrimination, the high cost of rentalunits in desirable neighborhoods, and the low vacancyrate in general, it is not surprising that one out of everythree certificate holders fails to utilize the certificate.

Harold Sole, director of the Housing Authority'sLeased Housing Department, defends the program andits high default rate. He suggests that many of thosewho fail to use certificates do so ou t of personal choice."Some people want to remain where they are," he said,"and upon inspection we find their apartments do notmeet the requirements. Others also want to stay wherethey are, but their landlord doesn't want [thecertificate]. And some don't want to accept the referralsthey were given." Lastly, Sole insisted that the elderly,who comprise a majority of certificate holders, drop outbecause of the effort required to utilize the program.

Unquestionably, the program could not work at allwithout the cooperation of landlords, and the most active participants have been the owners and managers oflarge developments. Many of these, notably the hugeLefrak Organization, Inc., have voiced appreciationand satisfaction. Jerome Belson, whose Jerome BelsonAssociates manages 24,000 units in New York City,more than 5,000 of which are occupied by Section 8

tenants, says the certificate program and the HousingAuthority's administration of it has been "competentand effective." Belson's participation in the Section 8Existing Housing Program has, in fact, been somewhatoverzealous in the past. In 1976, while renting out thehuge Independence Plaza in Lower Manhattan , employees of his firm - ADAM, Inc. ,- were accused of having falsified the income levels on numerous Section 8applications.

Another landlord, Myers, Smith, and Granady, aHarlem-based agency, which manages 6,000 units inBedford Stuyvesant, Brownsville, the Bronx, Harlemand Yonkers has participated in the Section 8 programfor about four years and is "pretty satisfied" with theprogram. Edward Myers, a partner in the firm andPresident of the Real Estate Management Brokers Institute, a national organization, said the program hashelped "close the gap" where they've had vacancies."This way, we know we're going to get our rent," Myersnoted.

Although Myers views the program as beneficial forboth landlords and tenants, he sees obstacles which impede its operation and serve as disincentives to other

CITY LIM ITS/Apri I 1981 18

landlords. Most notably, he said, is the HousingAuthority's exclusion of certain buildings from Section8 acceptability because of general neighborhood deterioration.

On Powell Street in the Brownsville section of Brooklyn, one Myers, Smith, and Granady building has notbeen approved for Section 8 subsidies because the immediate surroundings have been deemed undesirable.No doubt, abandoned buildings are fire hazards and vacant lots are constant reminders of neighborhood deterioration, but, Myers insisted, this particular building ismodern, near to transportation and playgrounds, andvery desirable for the tenants who live there. The"ironic thing", Myers added, is that this -building is verclose to a New York City Housing Authority project.

Other participating landlords have not been as enthusiastic, while still others simply will not participate atall. Owners of small apartment buildings wait monthsfor the building to be.inspected and approved, and thenwait again for up to four months for the subsidy moneyto come through. During that time the tenant is held

responsible for the full rent (with promise of a retroactive refund), while the landlord waits for the approvalhe ultimately may not get.

Some landlords believe the program would be moreattractive if they had more choice in the tenant-selectionprocess, feeling that the Housing Authority sends "un-desirables and rejects to them for apartments. "Andmost would like to see the monies owed them paid morepromptly. A more basic dilemma arises when the FairMarket Rent ceilings established by HUD are below thelevels set by landlords. Myers pointed out that rent ceilings established by different governmental agencies arenot well coordinated and that the state Division ofHousing and Community Renewal may set rents whichexceed the Fair Market Rent allowed by Section 8.

Community groups as well as managers of buildingsparticipating in the whole range of city housing programs have met with difficulties which both affect thetenants and themselves as m a n a g ~ r s .Although subsidieshave allowed continued occupancy by tenants facedwith restructured rents they cannot afford, others havehad problems being subsidized in the apartments theymay have lived in for years because the number ofrooms exceeds the amount allowed for family size, orthe number and size of rooms do not pass the Minimum

Property Standards set l?y HUD.While there is general acclaim for the program whichis aimed at providing "decent, safe and sanitary" housing to tenants with a much more shallow federal subsidythan other programs, it is also acknowledged that untilthe delays and inconsistenicies are eliminated, the certificates will have little more than marginal impact. D

Sara Effron works fo r the Municipal Employees LegalServices Plan o f District Council 37 o f the AmericanFederation o f State, County an d Municipal Employees.


19/24

Conference Call

PROGRESSIVE PLANNING: THE FOUNDINGCONFERENCE: Washington, D.C., May 8-10 . Sponsored by Planners Network, the conference will initiatea national planner's organization. Workshops include:Housing and Neighborhoods; Urban Fiscal Crisis; Affirmative Action; Reindustrialization and Urban Policy;

Community-Labor Coalitions and more. At the National4H Center. For more information contact: Bob Beauregard, Dept. of Urban Planning; Livingston CollegeRutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J. 08903. (201)932-4053.0NEW PERSPECTIVES ON URBAN POLITICALECONOMY: Washington, D.C., May 22-24. Sponsored by The American University, Department ofEconomics. The conference will include three days ofworkshops and speakers on a broad range of urbantopics, including: Gentrification as an Economic Process; Decline of the Frostbelt; Race and Sex; UrbanHousing in an Age of Austerity; the Theory of Rent andUrban Development; Third World Cities; Strategies forHousing Movement and the Economic Restructuring ofThe U.S. and the Fate of the City. For further information, write: Professor Larry Sawyers, Dept. of Economics, American University, Washington, D.C., 20016.0COMMUNITY BASED ALTERNATIVES ANDWOMEN IN THE 80s: A NATIONAL SYMPOSIUM.Washington, D.C., May 17-20. Co-sponsored by TheWomen's School of Planning and Architecture. Theconference will focus on community-based initiativesfrom a feminist perspective in the areas of housing,economic development, education, employment and

cooperatives. Resource persons for the conference willrepresent a broad spectrum of professionals and community-based practitioners in each area. For information, contact: Kati McDonald (202) 333-6475 or writeWomen's School of Planning & Architecture, 1000Wisconsin Ave., N .W., Washington, D.C 20007.0JOBS FOR TH E EIGHTIES: Washington, D.C., June16-18. Sponsored by the Center for CommunityChange. This conference will help inform communitybased organizations about emerging trends in federalprograms and policies to create jobs for low income andunemployed people. Workshops and speakers will focus

on the 1981 and 1982 federal budgets for training andjob creation; changes in CETA; reintroduction of theYouth Employment Act of 1980 and how communitygroups can incorporate private sector initiatives andeconomic development programs into job creation. Keypolicy makers from the White House, Congress and theLabor Department have been invited to answer questions. At the International Inn. For more informationcontact Ronnie Jill Kweller at (202) 338-4712 or338-6484, or Robert Laurence Coates at (202) 333-5700.o

COMMUNITY ARSON PREVENTION: Brooklyn,N.Y. April II . Sponsored by the National Arson Prevention and Action Coalition, the conference will provide information and analysis on arson as well as modelprograms on how to combat it. Current anti-arson legislation will be reviewed as will program funding sourcesand alternative strategies for housing. At Our Lady ofConsolation Church, 184 Metropolitan Avenue. For information and directions call NAPAC (617) 482-4477,or the People's Firehouse, (212) 388-4696. 0

RESPONDING TO BUDGET CUTS: New YorkCity, May 8-9. A broad coalition of groups andagencies affected by projected federal budget cutswill share information and formulate a jointresponse to funding reductions in New York Cityservices alrady suffering from six years of cityfiscal crisis. The conference will be held Fridayevening, May 8th, and Saturday, May 9th. Atpress time the location had not been confirmed.For place and information contact Judy Wessler,Community Action for Legal Services, (212)431-7200. 0

WE ARE MOVING IN MAY. As of May 1st,City Limits' new address will be: 424 West33rd Street, New York, N.V. 10001

19

Statement of Ownership,

Management and CirculationTitle of publication: City Limits. Date of filing: March 17, 1981. Frequency of issue:monthly. except June / July. August / Spe:tember bimonthly . Number of issues published annually: 10. Annual subscrip. ion price : 59.00 individuals, 52S .OO corpora.erate. Location of known office of publication: li S East 23rd Street, New York,N.Y., 10010. Edi.or: Tom Robbin s, liS Eas. 23rd Slrce., New York, N .Y 10010.Owner / Publisher : Assoc ia. ion o r Neighborhood Housing Developers, li S Eas.23rd Slrce., NY, N.Y., 10010; Urban Homesreading Assisrancc Board, C hedralHouse, 1047 Amsr erda m A venue , NY, N.Y., 1000S; Prall Insri.u.e Cen.er For Community and Environmental Development, 275 Washinlton Ave . , Brooklyn . N.Y ,II20S. Known bondholde rs, mortgagees, and other security owning or holdin, J percent or more of 10lal amount of bonds, mortgages, or other securities: none. Forcompletion by non profit organizations authorized to mail at special rates (Section132 . 122, Postal Service Manual) : The purpose, function, and "Onpront stat us ofthis oraanizalion and the exempt status for Federal income tax purposes have notchanged during the preceding 12 months .

EXlenl and Nature of Circulation: Average number of copies each issue duringpreceding 12 months. Acutal number of copies of single issue published nearest tofiling date : Total number of copies printed : 2,CXJO; 2,OCJO. Paid Circulalion : I . SalesIhrough dealers and carriers, st reet vendors and counter sales : 260: 235 . 2. Mailsubscriptions : 1.200; 1,265. 3. Total paid circulation 1.460; 1,500 . Free distributionby mail carrier, or other means: samples . complimentary, and other (reecopies : SO;SO. To.al distribution : I ,SIO; I,SSO. Copies no. dislribu.ed : I. Office use,ler.over,unaccounted for , spoiled after printing : 350; 330 . 2. Returns (rom newsagents : 1.0;120. Total: 2,000; 2,000 . I certify that the statements made by me above are correcta.nd complete . Ronnie Spence, Business Manager .

CITY LlMITS/ApriI1981


20/24

Insurance Study CancelledrCharge Industry Pressure

One quick impact from the changing climate inWashington was felt in Chicago by a neighborhood research and training organization whichhad a half-million dollar federal contract to assessinsurance availability abruptly cancelled . Thegroup has charged that industry pressure wasresponsible for the cancellation.

The group, the National Training and Information Center, an arm of National People's Action,was awarded a research contract of $488,000 inOctober of last year to examine and document thecurrent availability of insurance in 22 of the nation' s urban areas. On February 9th, the FederalEmergency Management Agency terminated thecontract for what it termed "convenience ofgovernment. "

Gale Cincotta, Executive Director of NTIC,charged that the contract was actually cancelled at"the convenience of the insurance industry whichclearly feared that the results of the project woulduncover practices so abusive as to demandreform."

The purpose of the study was to research the effects upon insurance availability of the UrbanProtection and Reinsurance Act of 1968. The Act,which is up for congressional reauthorization laterthis year, authorizes the sale of state sponsoredFair Access to Insurance Requirements (FAIRPlans) property insurance to inner city residentsunable to secure conventional coverage.

The unhappiness of insurance industry executives with the awarding of the contract, which wasdone under competitive bidding, was made widelyknown. Reportedly, industry representativesurged the Reagan transition team last December tobring the study to a halt. Insurers have also calledfor the wholesale dismantling of the Federal Insurance Administration. Following the cont ract's termination, Robert Reynolds, President of the Independent Insurance Agents of America, said, "Thedecision to quietly end what could have become an

embarrass ing and abusive exercise in anti-businesspolitics is laudable."Cincotta quoted 'her telephone conversation with

George Bernstein, Chief Counsel for the American Insurance Association duringwhich Bernstein said, " I can't tell you how personally happy and pleased I am that your contractwas cancelled. They should never have given it toyou in the first place. Let's face it: Our boy is inand yours isn' t." 0

CITY LIMITS/April 1981 20

To the Editor:

Certain points of clarification should be made withregard to the February, 1981, City Limits article, "TheChill-Deep Freeze in New York. ".The "well-publicizedinvestigation" referred to in the article has continuedthis winter. The indictments obtained were a directresult of that investigation - a fuel monitoring program created and conducted by the Office of the Inspector General of the Department of Housing Preservationand Development. I t was an investigator from this office who posed as a corrupt official and was bribed bythe two fuel suppliers to prevent detection of their shordeliveries. The case was initiated and developed by thisoffice with the aid of the Department of Investigationand then turned over to the Manhattan District Attorney.

Through the fuel monitoring program's field inspections, Housing Preservation and Development officialsknew the amount and extent of the short deliveriesNeither of the two companies is still supplying fuel forthe city, one was not delivering on January 22, the datementioned in the article, and neither has been fully paid.

Stephen N. Shapiro,

Dept of Housing Preservation and Development

Both the Commissioner o f the Department o f PropertyManagement and the Department's Public Affairs of-fice confirmed to us that both delivery companies werecontinuing to supply fuel on the date mentioned, and noplans Had been made to cancel either contract. Editors.

To the Editors:I t was reported in the February, 1981, issue that a

former 7-A at 50 West 105th Street absconded with agreat deal of money - reportedly several thousanddollars. In fact, the money was taken by the president othe tenants association, not the administrator.

Frank Lalley7 -A AdministratorManhattan


21/24

Brooklyn Development Plan Omits Rental SubsidiesA large vacant lot in the lower Park Slope section of

Brooklyn will be turned into a combination of housingand commercial development, the city has announced;however, provisions in the city's request for proposalsfrom developers have failed to satisfy the demands oflocal residents.

The release of the formal proposals request lastmonth brought an end to a long period of suspensefulwaiting in the neighborhood where widely differingplans had been offered by a local community organization and the office of Borough President Howard Golden. An offer to build a large shopping center on the siteby Rentar Developers Inc. was dropped when it becameknown that the city preferred a mix of residential andcommercial for the city-owned lot. A considerable controversy was generated locally as to which -was the area' smost pressing need - a suburban-style shopping centeror additional housing.

But while the all-commercial option has been eliminated, the housing department failed to include in its

provisions for the site any pledge of subsidized rentalassistance. The Fifth A venue Committee, a local community group, has received a pledge of financing fromthe Aetna Life and Casualty Company to help it build150 owner-occupied homes with two federal Section 8rental units in each building.

The refusal of the city to provide assistance for lowincome renters has left the organization and the com-

City Management ProgramsAre Reorganized

A major reorganization planned to streamline opera

tions in the Division of Alternative Management atHP D has been instituted.Joan Wallstein, Assistant Commissioner of Alterna

tive Management, will remain in that position and willoversee three new units. They are: Bureau of Rehabilitative Programs, which will include Community Management, Management in Partnership, Section 51O/Section8; Bureau of Special Projects, with Housing AuthorityManagement Program , Private Ownership Management, Weatherization and homesteading under its jurisdiction; and the Bureau of Leasing with control over theTenant Interim Lease and Article 7-A Leasing. The respective heads of the Bureaus are Bruce Dale, formerlyhead of MIPP; Richard Heitler; formerly director ofPOMP and William Smith, formerly head of TIL.

Community Management and MIPP will remainseparate units in the Rehabilitation Bureau. MichaelSimon will coordinate Community Management, whileDenise Caldwell will be responsible for MIPP.

Other units in the department are Sales, underMonica McAdams's direction; Rehabilitation Monitoring, Michael Henry; and Technical Services, Robert Biviano. 0

munity in a quandary as to whether to submit a proposal which would call for the construction of homebuilt with federal low interest purchase mortgages attached, which is allowed under the city's proposal, or twash its hands of any further involvement with the lot.

At a public meeting called to discuss the issue,members of the Committee presented both sides of thdilemma. "The city has vast plans for this neighborhood," said Michael McComiskey, "and they don't include any of the people who live here now. And it wasplanned that way." Realistically, he pointed out, thefunds to build under the subsidized mortgage plan -Section 235 - won't be around, because of pendinfederal cuts. "What we'll be left with is conventionahousing, which is what the city wanted in the first place."

The presentation in favor of submitting a proposalurged community people to take advantage of what little there was and salvage whatever can still be gainedfrom the project.

The Fifth Avenue area is experiencing rapid changeand displacement of long-time lo.w income residents ashomes in the upper Park Slope area become more andmore expensive. A group opposed to any low incomesubsidized housing in the area fought vigorously onbehalf of the shopping center proposal and issues in theneighborhood have been sharply focused on the displacement issue since that time. 0

The Co-op aa.,k MakesA West Side Loan

Low income homesteading families on Manhattan's

Upper West Side on March 27th received a loan of $1.2million from the National Consumer Cooperative Bank,officially marking the opening of the bank's MidAtlantic Regional office.

The 44 tenant families will purchase their apartmentsin seven buildings at 206-208 West 105th Street for $500each and, in addition to the Co-op Bank loan, willreceive moderate Section 8 funding for the rehabilitation. Real estate taxes will be abated for twenty years .

they applied to the Co-op Bank in the fall o 'f 198when they realized that no sweat equity funds would beavailable for their projects.

In his remarks at the site, Mayor Koch said he wasproud to present the leases to the tenant families, notinthat it was regrettable that Washington has plans toreduce the dollars available for "low, . moderate anpoor people . . . This assistance should not dry up."

21

Demolition is, expected to begin in April. The loanshould close by June. 0

~ : . . .'

.CITY LlMITS/ApriI198


22/24

Tenant Aid StationContinued from page two

force behind the Bronx information center's formation,,who has since moved to an NSP office in Brooklyn"But this table can rise or fall, and it's up to the com-munity to make it succeed."

Sanchez and some housing groups in Brooklyn are at-tempting to set up a similar informationa l effort inBrooklyn, and the NSP offices in Queens are contem-plating the same.

Plans for the center's future in the Bronx abound."W e are hoping that more people with diverse back-

grounds will get involved in the project," Rodriguezsaid, noting that the informat ion center could be used toorganize tenants to fight to save endangered housinglegislation. "W e could reach a much bigger audience,"she explained. "W e certainly should be keeping peopleinformed on the status of rent control and rent stabiliza-tion . . . And 'the people up here should learn how towrite to their legislators. We could do this, and should ."

Judge Nolan presided at the center's official openingMarch 16 an d stressed the importance of instituting thiskind of informationa l booth in the other borough hous-ing courts.

Meanwhile, legal buffs who are tired of hearing thehousing court called the Bronz Zoo are hopeful thattenants will learn how to fill ou t forms, fight back, andavoid the early morning eviction calls from the marshal.

"W e are swamped with cases up here and who knowswhat will finally be left when Reagan and the Congressget th

Documents

City Limits Magazine, April 1981 Issue