Obama HUD housing policy conference excludes affordable housing advocates

by: Paul Rosenberg

Mon Aug 16, 2010 at 10:30


Three theories on this one:
    (1) Obama replaced by evil twin.
    (2) Someone's punking Robert Gibbs.
    (3) Business as usual.

From Alex Pareene at Salon's War Room:

The Obama administration will prove that they have a plan to do something about the housing crisis by holding a housing conference next week, in DC. The event, called the "Conference on the Future of Housing Finance," has been organized by the Department of Housing and Urban Development and the Treasury Department. Panelists include... well, a bunch of economists, finance industry representatives, bank officials, think tankers, and an academic or two. Not included: Any actual consumer advocates or community group representatives.

We've got PIMCO, Wells Fargo, the goddamn American Enterprise Institute, the MacArthur Foundation, Moody's, and Bank of America. But:

    "Apparently being a community organizer qualifies you to be president, but it's not good enough to be part of HUD and Treasury's think tank on housing," said [National Community Reinvestment Coalition] chief executive John Taylor, whose group works with hundreds of community organizations to promote access to financial services for low- and middle-income people.

The fact that the Obama administration is assembling a bunch of credentialed but cloistered experts to solve the housing crisis without input from people actually on the ground with those affected by the housing crisis is, sadly, not that surprising.

Why is not surprising?  Because the HUD Secretary has qualifications barely more impressive than Education Secretary Arne Duncan.  Well, not really. He's got a master's in architecture, and he worked for HUD in the Clinton administration, so he actually has some relevant experience.  But just like Arne, he's presided over a big-city neo-liberal public/private disaster under New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, "Which should've immediately disqualified him," Pareene noted, going on to explain:

The Bloomberg administration has a wretched and largely ignored history of promising affordable housing and never delivering. (Not to mention the worst failure of the Bloomberg era: homelessness. It was at historically high levels even before the great financial crisis and no serious attempts at ameliorating it ever developed.)

The Bloomberg housing plan was to give land to private developers, for pennies, in exchange for the promise to build affordable housing for middle and low-income families, and then just not do anything, at all, when the developers simply ignored their promises and built nothing but luxury units. This happened on the Williamsburg waterfront, and it's happening right now near my neighborhood at the Atlantic Yards. Those developments are the norm, not exceptions. Shaun Williams never should've been appointed to run housing policy for the entire nation.

The link there goes to a Daily News article from a year ago Friday:

The Bloomberg administration never checked to see if developers who got discounted city land in exchange for building affordable housing kept their end of the deal, the Daily News has learned.

The Cornerstone Program was supposed to transfer vacant city-owned land to private developers who promised to build 2,191 homes there, with 1,510 units designated for low-or middle-income New Yorkers.

Yet the Department of Housing Preservation and Development has not followed up to see whether developers complied with those terms, an audit obtained by The News found.

What could possibly go wrong???

Paul Rosenberg :: Obama HUD housing policy conference excludes affordable housing advocates

Tags: , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email
Ironically, and unsurprisingly (4.00 / 3)
many if not most of these developers lost everything due to the meltdown, having taken out huge loans and invested their own capital in these overpriced white elephants before the meltdown, which are now sitting half-built or otherwise unoccupied in the softest market in decades, and totally underwater.

Guess who now gets to take ownership of these projects, with the financial backing of taxpayers? Banks!

Who could have predicted it!

"Those who stand for nothing fall for anything...Mankind are forever destined to be the dupes of bold & cunning imposture" -- Alexander Hamilton


Now I get what they mean by "scaling up" (4.00 / 6)
All the crackpot ideas being used to destroy our public schools are going to be "scaled up" into all areas of the public sector. First schools, then public housing. Then maybe let's give private developers a shot at the national park system?

Save Our Schools! March & National Call to Action, July 28-31, 2011 in Washington, DC: http://www.saveourschoolsmarch...

And Here I Thought It Had Something To Do With Plant Blight! (n/t) (0.00 / 0)


"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3

[ Parent ]
LOL (4.00 / 1)
or a foot disease (ewww)

Save Our Schools! March & National Call to Action, July 28-31, 2011 in Washington, DC: http://www.saveourschoolsmarch...

[ Parent ]
The Achilles Heel, No Doubt! (n/t) (4.00 / 1)


"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3

[ Parent ]
I thought the National Urban League (0.00 / 0)
were some sorta community group representatives, no? And the McArthur Foundation guy is good, isn't he? Not to mention that one of the academics is a board member of the Settlement Housing Fund.

The 'ooh, they invited all the Ivory Tower experts instead of usin the good ol American common sense of Joe the Community Organizer' bullshit is just as stupid as when the right does it. But c'mon, how hard can it be to find a more diverse group of experts? And the AEI? What the fuck?  


Do You Actually KNOW Any Housing Activists? (4.00 / 1)
Do you know anything about the perspectives and experience they represent?

Or is this just another example of Palinism?

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3


[ Parent ]
This is just Palinism, (0.00 / 0)
thanks for your willingness to engage in a good-faith conversation.

[ Parent ]
Good Faith (4.00 / 2)
requires something better than simply assuming that folks you know nothing about who've worked for decades aren't just clueless yahoos.

Palin has not one whit of such good faith.  And in your comment, neither did you.

I never assumed that everyone invited to the table was evil.  Or even that anyone necessarily was (though, with AEI, the odds are looking pretty steep).  I only thought it was a severe breech of Obama's campaign promise to assemble yet another expert panel that once again locked out those most intimately in touch with the policy outcomes being determined for against them

"You know what they say -- those of us who fail history... doomed to repeat it in summer school." -- Buffy The Vampire Slayer, Season 6, Episode 3


[ Parent ]
A Different Perspective (4.00 / 6)
The main problem with not inviting people in the trenches of the housing crisis is simply that the "experts" on this panel have so far proposed ideas that do not work. Speaking as someone who had to give up a home to foreclosure, I probably have more insight than many of these experts. It also should be noted, these experts have jobs and one presumes pensions, health care, and all the rest. While it would be nice, and it even is possible, that some of these people can feel and understand what people on the ground think and feel, their policies don't show any such concern.

Indeed, the solutions to date have been to not only preserve bank profits but also increase bank profits at the expense of homeowners and taxpayers. Witness the brainiac idea of extending mortgage terms from 30 years to 40 years. Who do you think benefits from that? The homeowner gets soaked another decade while the bank makes more money.

So while anyone can be an idiot, opening up this conference to people outside of the current experts probably can't hurt.


[ Parent ]
It's certainly possible (0.00 / 0)
that you (and of course Paul) know what Ingrid Gould Ellen has proposed, and that Michael Stegman and Marc Morial's policies show no concern. But somehow I'm not convinced.

Do you? Because if you and he have never heard of those people, you're talking out your asses.

I'm almost certain that there's a good point to be made here, but the combination of hair-trigger response and over-sensitivity (not yours, TSlavin) obscures it.


[ Parent ]
There's a key here... (4.00 / 2)
If I just think about it a little harder...

Let's see...

What could it be...

Gosh, I'm just not sure...

But one of you is talking about the outcomes of policies...

Indeed, the solutions to date have been to not only preserve bank profits but also increase bank profits at the expense of homeowners and taxpayers.

and the other is talking about individual people...

Because if you and he have never heard of those people [Ingrid Gould Ellen, Michael Stegman, and Marc Morial] you're talking out your asses.

I'm sure there's a clue in there somewhere...

Hmmmm.


[ Parent ]
"While it would (0.00 / 0)
 be nice, and it even is possible, that some of these people can feel and understand what people on the ground think and feel, their policies don't show any such concern."

That is referencing these people, these experts. Not vaporous policies.  


[ Parent ]
BTW (4.00 / 2)
If you're responding to my line, "So while anyone can be an idiot," I should have clarified that I'm talking about policy makers of any political party, at any level, whether politicians or think tank people or community activists. I'm not talking about commenters here. I assume, in this case, you're simply being a contrarian and asking people to think through their responses. Fair enough. But I still believe Paul has a point in here that the voices heard from so far have pushed policies that have not solved the problem. And, therefore, we need to include other voices.

[ Parent ]
Yeah, you're right. There's definitely (0.00 / 0)
an element of contrarianism. I just feel like I'm seeing so much reflexive certainty on OL these days, that even though I agree with most of it, it makes me quite uneasy.

But thanks for calling me on that. Completely true.


[ Parent ]
Housing action representatives? (4.00 / 1)
Let's assume every last one of the members on the board is reasonable and interested in resolving the housing crises (that's es). Well, surely we can agree the AEI rep and the banking reps should have to prove they are acting in good faith. But let's assume they do.

Can you think of a reason to not include housing activists, that is, people who devote all of their time fighting for regular folks? Just to round out the perspective. I'm not talking "Joe Community Organizer" I am talking about the advocates pulling $24K a year working 16 hour days on behalf of those facing foreclosure and those lacking safe housing or any housing at all.

If you want a panel of experts to address the housing crisis why not include experts drawn from that sector? National Urban League is fine but that is a different sector (and more political moderate).

Can you think of reason to exclude the advocates and activists entirely, that is, a good reason?  

Did they get you to trade your heroes for ghosts? Hot ashes for trees? Hot air for a cool breeze? And cold comfort for change?


[ Parent ]
stories like this make me wish NACA was hiring (0.00 / 0)
and they were a multi-issue group

USER MENU

Open Left Campaigns

SEARCH

   

Advanced Search

QUICK HITS
STATE BLOGS
Powered by: SoapBlox