By Matthew Cardinale, News Editor, The Atlanta Progressive News (1/15/08)
(APN) ATLANTA – After seven hours of debate, the Community Development and Human Resources Committee of the City Council of Atlanta today approved two bills offered by Councilwoman Felicia Moore, District 9, to codify their oversight role in the Atlanta Housing Authority’s mass eviction and demolition plans for all remaining public housing in Atlanta.
Moore’s first bills seek to ensure the City Council has to approve of any demolition applications sent to the US Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD).
As revealed in documents obtained by Atlanta Progressive News through the Freedom of Information Act weeks ago, Mayor Shirley Franklin had signed off on five demolitions applications in 2007 without Council approval, consent, or awareness.
HUD requires AHA document in any demolition application how they consulted with all relevant local government officials.
Moore’s second bill asks AHA to hold off on demolitions for Bowen Homes, Bankhead Courts, and Hollywood Courts--three communities in the Councilwoman’s District which are family developments--until residents, Council, and the public could review and comment on the demolition applications.
Days after APN reported exclusively on this pending legislation, the Atlanta Housing Authority unleashed a campaign on Monday against Moore’s legislation.
Moore told APN she was furious that AHA’s spokesperson, Rick White, told the Atlanta Journal-Constitution newspaper, in their words, "Moore's motivation is that she mistakenly fears that the Housing Authority's plan will take voters out of her district who are likely to re-elect her in 2009."
Several Committee Members criticized White’s comments, in addition to Council President Lisa Borders and Mayor Franklin’s Chief of Staff, who also spoke at the meeting.
In addition to attacking Moore in the AJC, AHA hired a high-priced law firm, McKenna Long and Aldridge, to issue a nine page letter outlining why the City Council should not pass the legislation because they have no jurisdiction over AHA.
At the beginning of the meeting Chairman Maddox told the public their comment time would be limited to two minutes. This had not been past practice of the Committee. Also, no Committee rules have been set, so that the rule was completely arbitrary.
APN asked Chairman Maddox if the Committee had approved those time limits. He said that they had and that if anyone else blurted out comments they would be escorted out by police.
Later, Members Ceasar Mitchell and Lamar Willis took issue with Maddox’s rule, arguing that it was unfair to introduce the rule only when an issue was on the table that was of great concern to the public.
The Committee voted to allow the public to speak without time limit.
Before public comment, private attorneys hired by AHA as well as attorneys for the Mayor’s Office made presentations arguing why the bills were in their view problematic.
Attorneys for AHA and the Mayor argued that AHA is an independent agency and that the Council has no jurisdiction over the agency.
In regards to the letters Mayor Franklin has been sending in to HUD, the attorneys argued the Council was impinging on her authority to do that unilaterally.
Councilwoman Moore responded that she did not disagree with their contentions about AHA’s independence, but that AHA was still required by HUD to seek approval from local government officials.
The letters sent by the Mayor purported to express support on behalf of the City of Atlanta.
Moore stated that the Council had previously passed resolutions supporting HOPE VI demolition applications in the 1990s. Moore also cited the New Orleans City Council, which a judge ruled had to approve the demolitions before plans there could go forward.
The present writer distributed to Council Members copies of a document recently obtained by APN, showing where AHA has requested over $243 million–almost a quarter of a billion dollars–from the City for “revitalizations” of public housing communities during 2007 to 2015.
The source of these funds include Tax Allocation District (TAD) money, sewer bonds, General Fund, Opportunity Bonds, and other City funds which have to be approved by Council.
It is an apparent conflict of interest that AHA’s Executive Vice President Barney Simms also sits on the Atlanta Development Authority, which is asked to approve the TAD funds for AHA.
The present writer remarked to Council Members that Councilwoman Moore’s bill really was only asking AHA to do what HUD requires them to do already, that is, consult with residents, Council, and the public.
APN also informed the Council that according to a source familiar with the matter, HUD’s Inspector General contacted HUD to learn more about fabricated documents AHA sent to HUD purporting resident consultation in the 2007 demolition applications. APN discovered these documents weeks ago.
During the meeting, Councilman Willis asked why the Council should approve of funds for AHA projects if they are asserting they do not need approval from the Council.
Diane Wright, President of the Resident Advisory Board, read a resolution from the RAB Board opposing the demolitions, and condemning the lack of consultation with the residents and AHA’s previous actions.
Anita Beaty, Executive Director of the Metro Atlanta Task Force for the Homeless, reviewed a letter by Lindsay Jones, a law professor at Emory University representing the residents on an individual basis. Jones argued there is nothing legally inappropriate about Moore’s bills and that they are consistent with HUD regulations.
After much cross examination of the various City and AHA attorneys by Council Members, the attorneys admitted that the laws do not in fact prohibit the Council from seeking to have a voice in the demolition applications and that HUD allows cities to determine consultation processes on their own.
Chairman Maddox moved the first bill be held, then scratched that. He then moved the first bill be sent to Full Council without recommendation by the Committee, but this motion did not pass.
Councilwoman Moore urged the Committee not to hold the bill but to give the legislation an up or down vote.
The bills will come up again on Tuesday’s Full Council meeting.
If the current seven cosponsors on the first bill–Felicia Moore, Ivory Lee Young, Mary Norwood, C.T. Martin, Natalyn Archibong, Joyce Sheperd, and Ceasar Mitchell--plus Lamar Willis, who supported the bill in Committee, vote yes on the bill Tuesday, it will pass. If the first bill passes, it is likely the second one will as well. However, the Mayor and AHA will continue to push behind the scenes to prevent that from happening.
Wednesday, April 9, 2008
Resident Board Opposes Demolitions
By Matthew Cardinale, News Editor, The Atlanta Progressive News (January 09, 2008)
(APN) ATLANTA – The Resident Advisory Board representing Atlanta public housing tenants citywide voted today unanimously to oppose the mass evictions and demolitions proposed by Atlanta Housing Authority.
The resolution will be sent to US Department of Housing and Urban Development's (HUD) Special Applications Center so they are aware of residents’ opposition to the plan, and of AHA’s lack of consultation with residents even though consultation is required by HUD.
Atlanta Progressive News discovered a few weeks ago that AHA fabricated meeting minutes of the RAB Board from a February 14, 2007, meeting, where AHA represented to HUD that these minutes showed consultation by AHA with the residents.
In order to prevent any such misrepresentations again, the RAB Board formally resolved their opposition to the demolitions.
The RAB Board also passed two resolutions supporting recent bills presented by Members of City Council.
One RAB Board resolution supports the recent bills introduced by Councilwoman Felicia Moore. One bill, requiring the City Council to first approve any demolitions before Mayor Shirley Franklin signs off on them, has gained 6 co-sponsors, Moore told Atlanta Progressive News.
The co-sponsors are Natalyn Archibong, C. T. Martin, Ceasar Mitchell, Mary Norwood, Joyce Sheperd, and Ivory Lee Young. The bill and others will be considered in CDHR Committee meeting next Tuesday, January 15, 2008, beginning at 12:30pm.
Another RAB Board resolution supports a bill introduced previously by Council Members Ivory Lee Young and Kwanza Hall to create a Housing Relocation Task Force to study the effects of the demolitions on residents, with the stipulation that AHA not appoint members to the Task Force.
The full text of the RAB Board resolution opposing the demolitions is below:
The Jurisdiction-Wide Resident Advisory Board Of the City of Atlanta Hereby RESOLVES:
The resident leaders of public housing are OPPOSED to the demolition of our communities.
WHEREAS we disagree that the buildings are obsolete and have not yet had an independent assessment of this.
WHEREAS we believe that even though some residents are ready to go, the property still would be viable for people that are homeless.
WHEREAS we have a concern about seniors and persons with disabilities that are ill and have no families and who's going to make sure they're going to be taken care of and not put in a nursing home without them having any input.
WHEREAS we are concerned seniors and persons with disabilities won't be able to move somewhere where they can get transportation to their medical appointments and to get their prescriptions.
WHEREAS we haven't had the proper consultation with AHA, nor have we had any input in the decision-making, as required by HUD.
WHEREAS the resident association meetings at the senior highrises have been interrupted by AHA, whereas they can't have visitors in their meetings because they don't want the seniors to learn what is going on or have input.
WHEREAS AHA falsified sign-in sheets, minutes, and the agenda for the February 14, 2007, RAB Board Meeting in demolition applications they sent in to HUD.
WHEREAS we haven't been offered the opportunity to purchase the properties ourselves, as required by HUD.
WHEREAS AHA did not hold public hearings before sending the application in.
WHEREAS AHA refused to show us the applications before and after sending them in.
WHEREAS AHA asked the Court reporter not to release transcripts of recent meetings called by AHA in the communities.
WHEREAS we're concerned about residents being pre-moved without AHA having approval of a HUD application. Also, we're concerned relocation teams are already meeting with residents in some communities where no applications are submitted.
WHEREAS we have a concern of residents moving into homes and two or three months later, they're foreclosed on.
WHEREAS they have a high rate of evictions since the Quality of Life initiative has been put into place because they're refusing to issue vouchers to residents with criminal backgrounds up to 30 years in the past.
WHEREAS we're not sure of the extent of the vouchers, if there's any money on the vouchers, because Congress does not guarantee funding and must decide every year whether to fund the vouchers. Therefore, we are concerned voucher-holders will have to pay market-rate rent if the vouchers run out.
WHEREAS we've been told conflicting information about the vouchers.
WHEREAS there is no listing of landlords that's going to take vouchers. We don't even have an understanding of where are we supposed to be moving.
WHEREAS we're concerned about options for families with more than three or four children.
WHEREAS we're also concerned about the decrease in unit sizes.
WHEREAS we're also concerned about the utility allotments because AHA has terminated vouchers for families who don't pay their utility bills and has not provided all families with sufficient utility allotments.
WHEREAS we're concerned about how residents on vouchers will pay their security deposit, first month's rent, and/or last month's rent where applicable.
WHEREAS much of the crime reported in Bowen Homes is coming from outside of the community.
WHEREAS we’re concerned the lack of transportation from outskirts to Atlanta where they have their jobs, to be noncompliant with work requirements.
WHEREAS AHA has been terminating vouchers for loss of income after 16 days, or for people who can’t pay rent from their own income even if receiving outside help.
RESOLVED, this 10th day of January, 2008. [sic: actually January 09]
About the author: Matthew Cardinale is the News Editor for the Atlanta Progressive News and may be reached at matthew@atlantaprogressivenews.com.
(APN) ATLANTA – The Resident Advisory Board representing Atlanta public housing tenants citywide voted today unanimously to oppose the mass evictions and demolitions proposed by Atlanta Housing Authority.
The resolution will be sent to US Department of Housing and Urban Development's (HUD) Special Applications Center so they are aware of residents’ opposition to the plan, and of AHA’s lack of consultation with residents even though consultation is required by HUD.
Atlanta Progressive News discovered a few weeks ago that AHA fabricated meeting minutes of the RAB Board from a February 14, 2007, meeting, where AHA represented to HUD that these minutes showed consultation by AHA with the residents.
In order to prevent any such misrepresentations again, the RAB Board formally resolved their opposition to the demolitions.
The RAB Board also passed two resolutions supporting recent bills presented by Members of City Council.
One RAB Board resolution supports the recent bills introduced by Councilwoman Felicia Moore. One bill, requiring the City Council to first approve any demolitions before Mayor Shirley Franklin signs off on them, has gained 6 co-sponsors, Moore told Atlanta Progressive News.
The co-sponsors are Natalyn Archibong, C. T. Martin, Ceasar Mitchell, Mary Norwood, Joyce Sheperd, and Ivory Lee Young. The bill and others will be considered in CDHR Committee meeting next Tuesday, January 15, 2008, beginning at 12:30pm.
Another RAB Board resolution supports a bill introduced previously by Council Members Ivory Lee Young and Kwanza Hall to create a Housing Relocation Task Force to study the effects of the demolitions on residents, with the stipulation that AHA not appoint members to the Task Force.
The full text of the RAB Board resolution opposing the demolitions is below:
The Jurisdiction-Wide Resident Advisory Board Of the City of Atlanta Hereby RESOLVES:
The resident leaders of public housing are OPPOSED to the demolition of our communities.
WHEREAS we disagree that the buildings are obsolete and have not yet had an independent assessment of this.
WHEREAS we believe that even though some residents are ready to go, the property still would be viable for people that are homeless.
WHEREAS we have a concern about seniors and persons with disabilities that are ill and have no families and who's going to make sure they're going to be taken care of and not put in a nursing home without them having any input.
WHEREAS we are concerned seniors and persons with disabilities won't be able to move somewhere where they can get transportation to their medical appointments and to get their prescriptions.
WHEREAS we haven't had the proper consultation with AHA, nor have we had any input in the decision-making, as required by HUD.
WHEREAS the resident association meetings at the senior highrises have been interrupted by AHA, whereas they can't have visitors in their meetings because they don't want the seniors to learn what is going on or have input.
WHEREAS AHA falsified sign-in sheets, minutes, and the agenda for the February 14, 2007, RAB Board Meeting in demolition applications they sent in to HUD.
WHEREAS we haven't been offered the opportunity to purchase the properties ourselves, as required by HUD.
WHEREAS AHA did not hold public hearings before sending the application in.
WHEREAS AHA refused to show us the applications before and after sending them in.
WHEREAS AHA asked the Court reporter not to release transcripts of recent meetings called by AHA in the communities.
WHEREAS we're concerned about residents being pre-moved without AHA having approval of a HUD application. Also, we're concerned relocation teams are already meeting with residents in some communities where no applications are submitted.
WHEREAS we have a concern of residents moving into homes and two or three months later, they're foreclosed on.
WHEREAS they have a high rate of evictions since the Quality of Life initiative has been put into place because they're refusing to issue vouchers to residents with criminal backgrounds up to 30 years in the past.
WHEREAS we're not sure of the extent of the vouchers, if there's any money on the vouchers, because Congress does not guarantee funding and must decide every year whether to fund the vouchers. Therefore, we are concerned voucher-holders will have to pay market-rate rent if the vouchers run out.
WHEREAS we've been told conflicting information about the vouchers.
WHEREAS there is no listing of landlords that's going to take vouchers. We don't even have an understanding of where are we supposed to be moving.
WHEREAS we're concerned about options for families with more than three or four children.
WHEREAS we're also concerned about the decrease in unit sizes.
WHEREAS we're also concerned about the utility allotments because AHA has terminated vouchers for families who don't pay their utility bills and has not provided all families with sufficient utility allotments.
WHEREAS we're concerned about how residents on vouchers will pay their security deposit, first month's rent, and/or last month's rent where applicable.
WHEREAS much of the crime reported in Bowen Homes is coming from outside of the community.
WHEREAS we’re concerned the lack of transportation from outskirts to Atlanta where they have their jobs, to be noncompliant with work requirements.
WHEREAS AHA has been terminating vouchers for loss of income after 16 days, or for people who can’t pay rent from their own income even if receiving outside help.
RESOLVED, this 10th day of January, 2008. [sic: actually January 09]
About the author: Matthew Cardinale is the News Editor for the Atlanta Progressive News and may be reached at matthew@atlantaprogressivenews.com.
WSB-TV Misreports on Public Housing Eviction Status
By Matthew Cardinale, News Editor, The Atlanta Progressive News (12/31/07)
(APN) ATLANTA – WSB Channel 2 television news program misled the public on the status of evictions for the Bowen Homes public housing community in two reports on December 27, 2007.
"Residents have until May 2008 to move so the City can demolish the complex," anchor Amanda Rosseter said after a daytime report by John Cater.
However, the US Department of Housing and Urban Development has not approved any applications for Bowen Homes, or several other communities in Atlanta, and thus no residents should be told at this time that they will be forced to move.
HUD spokeswoman Donna White reiterated to Atlanta Progressive News in a recent interview that AHA cannot pursue evictions and demolitions without HUD approval.
WSB repeated the false claim in its evening report. "Residents have until May of next year to move so the City of Atlanta can demolish the complex," Jovita Moore said.
AHA ALSO MISLEADS
WSB may have gotten the misleading information from AHA. "In the face of the delays caused by the opponents, families are scheduled to begin leaving the property in May 2006 [sic]," AHA spokesman Rick White, of the private Alisias corporation, wrote in a recent email to media obtained by Atlanta Progressive News.
Rick White appears to have made a typo writing 2006, which would be in the past, and likely meant 2008, which is AHA’s target date should applications be approved. Still, AHA does not have the authority to schedule evictions without approval from HUD.
RESIDENT LEADER RESPONDS
"They [WSB] don't know what the hell they talking about, do they? They are something else. I think they should cover the truth. And I think they should look deeper into what AHA's doing. And they don't have any applications in to even tell residents they should have to move," Diane Wright, President of the Resident Advisory Board told Atlanta Progressive News.
"They [residents] believe it, and it puts fear in them," Wright said.
Several residents from communities all over Atlanta called Wright asking questions about the WSB report, she said.
"Some of the presidents were saying, if they did that to their site, what will they do to ours?" Wright recalled.
AJC ALSO REPORTED UNAPPROVED EVICTIONS
Unfortunately, WSB is not the only organization improperly stating that residents have to move at this time.
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution newspaper, which like WSB is also owned by Cox Communications, repeatedly stated that residents of Palmer House were to start moving in January 2008, even though no applications are in for that community either.
AHA USING RELOCATION TEAMS EARLY
Moreover, the Atlanta Housing Authority has also stated they will be meeting with individual residents living in communities that they would like to demolish, beginning in January 2008, to prepare them to move. Barney Simms and Renee Bentley explained this to residents at a meeting they called at Hollywood Courts community attended by APN.
If they follow through on this plan, they would do so without approval from HUD.
"They're [AHA] doing business as usual, defrauding the people. Telling them, they have to move, and not telling the truth about there's no application in. They haven't had public hearings, they're not doing what they supposed to do. That comes from HUD's regulations, not ours," Wright said.
"They should be able to have consultation with the residents. They're not doing that. They pull us together and tell us it's a consultation and tell us to do what they want us to do, which is to get out," Wright said.
2007 YEAR END UPDATE
APN previously reported that AHA sent in fabricated documents to HUD for applications for five communities in 2007. HUD promised APN’s report would be forward to the Director of Public and Indian Housing as well as the Office of the Inspector General.
To this date, APN has not received any communication from HUD about the information, nor a request for the supporting documents.
APN also made the documents available to the Atlanta Journal-Constitution and faxed them to NBC’s 11 Alive News, although they have not reported the information to date.
APN has provided the documents to Council Members Moore, Ivory Young, and Mary Norwood.
City Councilwoman Felicia Moore and Ms. Wright tell APN that HUD did have representatives in Atlanta at a recent meeting between AHA and resident leaders, a sign they have increased scrutiny of the agency.
At least one HUD official told AHA in that meeting they were not doing enough to consult with the residents and they improperly already had their plans in place, Moore and Wright told APN.
Resident leaders and advocates are preparing to file an injunction in the new year against the AHA, based in part on the information discovered by APN.
Also, Councilwoman Moore plans to offer at least one resolution to the Council concerning public housing in January.
Pending in the Council’s CDHR Committee is a resolution by Members Ivory Lee Young and Kwanza Hall to create a task force to study the public housing demolitions.
Young has moved to hold the bill several times now, even though it already passed Committee. Part of the problem now is that Mr. Hall appears to have symbolically backed out of the resolution in his initial plans to offer a different bill as a substitute. Hall’s bill, which passed Committee separately, is to find affordable housing for the seniors who would be evicted in his District.
(APN) ATLANTA – WSB Channel 2 television news program misled the public on the status of evictions for the Bowen Homes public housing community in two reports on December 27, 2007.
"Residents have until May 2008 to move so the City can demolish the complex," anchor Amanda Rosseter said after a daytime report by John Cater.
However, the US Department of Housing and Urban Development has not approved any applications for Bowen Homes, or several other communities in Atlanta, and thus no residents should be told at this time that they will be forced to move.
HUD spokeswoman Donna White reiterated to Atlanta Progressive News in a recent interview that AHA cannot pursue evictions and demolitions without HUD approval.
WSB repeated the false claim in its evening report. "Residents have until May of next year to move so the City of Atlanta can demolish the complex," Jovita Moore said.
AHA ALSO MISLEADS
WSB may have gotten the misleading information from AHA. "In the face of the delays caused by the opponents, families are scheduled to begin leaving the property in May 2006 [sic]," AHA spokesman Rick White, of the private Alisias corporation, wrote in a recent email to media obtained by Atlanta Progressive News.
Rick White appears to have made a typo writing 2006, which would be in the past, and likely meant 2008, which is AHA’s target date should applications be approved. Still, AHA does not have the authority to schedule evictions without approval from HUD.
RESIDENT LEADER RESPONDS
"They [WSB] don't know what the hell they talking about, do they? They are something else. I think they should cover the truth. And I think they should look deeper into what AHA's doing. And they don't have any applications in to even tell residents they should have to move," Diane Wright, President of the Resident Advisory Board told Atlanta Progressive News.
"They [residents] believe it, and it puts fear in them," Wright said.
Several residents from communities all over Atlanta called Wright asking questions about the WSB report, she said.
"Some of the presidents were saying, if they did that to their site, what will they do to ours?" Wright recalled.
AJC ALSO REPORTED UNAPPROVED EVICTIONS
Unfortunately, WSB is not the only organization improperly stating that residents have to move at this time.
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution newspaper, which like WSB is also owned by Cox Communications, repeatedly stated that residents of Palmer House were to start moving in January 2008, even though no applications are in for that community either.
AHA USING RELOCATION TEAMS EARLY
Moreover, the Atlanta Housing Authority has also stated they will be meeting with individual residents living in communities that they would like to demolish, beginning in January 2008, to prepare them to move. Barney Simms and Renee Bentley explained this to residents at a meeting they called at Hollywood Courts community attended by APN.
If they follow through on this plan, they would do so without approval from HUD.
"They're [AHA] doing business as usual, defrauding the people. Telling them, they have to move, and not telling the truth about there's no application in. They haven't had public hearings, they're not doing what they supposed to do. That comes from HUD's regulations, not ours," Wright said.
"They should be able to have consultation with the residents. They're not doing that. They pull us together and tell us it's a consultation and tell us to do what they want us to do, which is to get out," Wright said.
2007 YEAR END UPDATE
APN previously reported that AHA sent in fabricated documents to HUD for applications for five communities in 2007. HUD promised APN’s report would be forward to the Director of Public and Indian Housing as well as the Office of the Inspector General.
To this date, APN has not received any communication from HUD about the information, nor a request for the supporting documents.
APN also made the documents available to the Atlanta Journal-Constitution and faxed them to NBC’s 11 Alive News, although they have not reported the information to date.
APN has provided the documents to Council Members Moore, Ivory Young, and Mary Norwood.
City Councilwoman Felicia Moore and Ms. Wright tell APN that HUD did have representatives in Atlanta at a recent meeting between AHA and resident leaders, a sign they have increased scrutiny of the agency.
At least one HUD official told AHA in that meeting they were not doing enough to consult with the residents and they improperly already had their plans in place, Moore and Wright told APN.
Resident leaders and advocates are preparing to file an injunction in the new year against the AHA, based in part on the information discovered by APN.
Also, Councilwoman Moore plans to offer at least one resolution to the Council concerning public housing in January.
Pending in the Council’s CDHR Committee is a resolution by Members Ivory Lee Young and Kwanza Hall to create a task force to study the public housing demolitions.
Young has moved to hold the bill several times now, even though it already passed Committee. Part of the problem now is that Mr. Hall appears to have symbolically backed out of the resolution in his initial plans to offer a different bill as a substitute. Hall’s bill, which passed Committee separately, is to find affordable housing for the seniors who would be evicted in his District.
Moore, Maddox in Testy Dispute as Council Stalls Again on AHA
By Matthew Cardinale & Jonathan Springston, Atlanta Progressive News (12-16-07)
(APN) ATLANTA – Atlanta City Council Members Felicia Moore and Jim Maddox engaged in a testy dispute on Tuesday, December 11, 2007, as the Community Development/Human Resources (CDHR) Committee voted to hold a resolution that would create a Task Force to study the effects of relocation on public housing residents.
It is unclear how many Members voted to hold the resolution, but could be few as three, as Council Members Ivory Lee Young and Mary Norwood had walked off the floor just prior to the vote.
About 20 public housing residents and advocates spoke against AHA’s proposed public housing demolitions, including several high school students who are current or former residents, in addition to Chioke Perry, John Timberlake, Terence Courtney, Dave Walker, Ted Brodek, APN’s Matthew Cardinale, Ben Howard, Shirley Hightower, Diane Wright, Ronnie Galvin, Carl Hartrampf, and Anita Beaty.
APN’s News Editor distributed copies of the documents forged by AHA in recent demolitions to HUD, to Council Members Young and Norwood [due to limited number of photocopies on hand]. APN reviewed the lack of consultation with residents, the Council, and the public as part of the demolition applications. APN also reviewed many problems involved with the voucher program and explained AHA has other options than demolishing all public housing.
Mayor Shirley Franklin’s Chief of Staff also made a presentation to the Committee asking that the Mayor’s name be removed from legislation to appoint a Member to a proposed Housing Relocation Task Force which would study the impacts of demolitions and evictions. Franklin does not want to participate in the Task Force.
MOORE, MADDOX DISPUTE SPEAKING PRIVILEGES
Moore, who represents the communities where Bankhead Courts, Bowen Homes, and Hollywood Courts are located, approached the microphone to address the Committee after it bizarrely voted to hold the resolution which had already passed Committee in its last meeting.
Maddox, Chairman of the CDHR Committee, had not allowed Shirley Hightower, President of Bowen Homes, to address the Committee before the vote beyond her initial public comments.
"I do want to say something because Ms. Hightower is a... respected member of my community," Moore said.
"We respect her here but we have to run it orderly," Maddox replied. "We have to run the meeting orderly, Ms. Moore. We have to run it orderly."
"When Mr. Maddox is ready to let me have the floor, I’ll go. Are you through, Mr. Maddox?" Moore asked.
"I know, but I’m saying the meeting has to be run orderly," Maddox said.
"Then let’s have order and allow me to speak," Moore said.
"I know but don’t, this Committee hasn’t disrespected anybody," Maddox said.
"Mr. Maddox, are you giving me the floor to speak?" Moore asked.
"Well, not if you’re going to talk about that. We have already voted on that issue," Maddox said.
"So you’re gonna now tell me as a Member of Council what I can talk about? If you talk about somebody getting out of order, we’re about to go way out of order in just a minute... You’re messing with the wrong person, Mr. Maddox," Moore said. "So now I’m a Council Member elected by the citizens of the City and you’re not gonna allow me to speak and say what I choose to say?" Moore said.
"We’re going to move on with the agenda, that’s what we’re gonna do," Maddox said.
"And then you’re going to move on the agenda and you’re not gonna let me as a Council Member... But if you were to come to any Committee as a Council Member you would be able to speak your mind and then move on," Moore said.
"After we’ve passed the issue, you want to go back with the issue... If you wanted to speak on this issue, we could’ve spoke before we voted," Maddox said. "Are you going to speak on the same issue?"
"I’m gonna speak on what I choose to speak on... Now if you gonna tell me... you’re not going to be allowed to speak, you say that. Is that what you’re saying?" Moore asked.
"No, I’m just saying the motion has already passed," Maddox said.
"But you’re not gonna tell me what I can say and what I can’t say. So you just let me know, are you going to censor my comments?" Moore asked.
"No what I’m saying to you, if you wanted to speak on that issue, you’ve been around here for over an hour. You could’ve spoke on that issue. But we have voted, now you want to speak on that issue, I’m not gonna let you do it... No, I’m not gonna let you speak on that issue because that issue has already passed," Maddox said.
"Well you’re not gonna have a rest of the meeting because I’m gonna stay here and disrupt the hell out of it," Moore said.
"Mr. Chair, it is not uncommon, though, that we allow Council Members to come and speak even if we dispose of an issue. And I think in the interest of moving this meeting forward, I think it’s all right if Ms. Moore speaks her mind," Councilman Ceasar Mitchell said.
"We’ll take a vote..." Maddox said.
"You need a quorum... So now as a Council Member, I need a quorum of a Committee to vote to allow me to speak... I don’t even think we need a vote. I think it’s disrespectful that I’m an elected official of this City and I require a vote in order to speak," Moore said.
"All right you go ahead and speak. I’ll be right back," Maddox said.
MOORE'S REMARKS
In her comments, Moore took issue with Young and Hall’s claims that there is not much the City Council can do to control what the AHA does or does not do.
"Yes, the Housing Authority is a state-ran Authority. But many things the Housing Authority does, they need local approval. They don’t operate in a vacuum. They don’t operate on another planet. We approve or disapprove of millions and millions of dollars to go to the Housing Authority. We partner with the Housing Authority on many things," Moore said. "So we do not totally have no say... We have a heck of a lot of influence... Because if they didn’t care, they wouldn’t be sitting here today... So I wish we could get away from... taking the power out of our own hands that we actually do have."
"I think there are some very clear things that we’re gonna do. So I’m gonna roll up my sleeves and I will be coming back the first of the year with a resolve and with some legislation. And I want to see if we’re really committed as a Council to doing those things that we can do. So I’ll be working on some legislation that I think is going to address some of the issues, maybe not all of them... that concern me," Moore said.
Moore also took the chance to call out the AHA on its communication problem while AHA’s External Affairs officer Barney Simms and contracted spokesman Rick White were in attendance.
"If I talk to you on one day, and you know you’re working on something else, don’t wait to make a decision. Then I have to hear from someone in the news media to find out that something’s going on in my own community. Or to find out you’re going to be meeting with my very people in my community... You shouldn’t step foot in District 9 without letting me know your foot’s coming. Ever. Again," Moore said. "That’s the kind of thing that adds to the problem."
Councilman C. T. Martin made remarks in support of Moore’s ability to have the floor.
THE HOUSING RELOCATION TASK FORCE RESOLUTION
The Committee made no further changes to the Housing Relocation Task Force resolution, coauthored by Councilmen Ivory Lee Young, Jr. and Kwanza Hall, that the Full Council voted to amend and send back to Committee on December 03, 2007.
Young said the resolution needed more work; however, in explaining his decision to hold the resolution–which already passed the last CDHR Meeting–Young did not list any specific issues which needed work.
"I heard these mixed statements, to say well Task Force but if it is it should be this, others say no Task Force, other want us to do something that’s not legislatively on the table right now. A moratorium is not before us today... The Task Force could result in that decision but it does not say that’s what the decision ought to be. I can guarantee you many of your concerns are not the desire of many of my colleagues to address. No one Council Member does anything by themselves," Young said.
Young was referencing comments by Courtney and Hightower when he said that some members of the public spoke against the Task Force, although these comments need to be seen in context.
"We find ourselves very skeptical about where this Task Force is going. We want to say, the community, the students, the residents of public housing are the Task Force, and those are the people who need to be consulted. We don’t need to create any new bodies," Courtney said. "Cancel the creation of a new Task Force."
"You all said you would set up a Task Force to watch over what AHA is doing. And then you decided to put AHA on that Task Force so then whatever they’re doing, they’re going to continue to do it. We’re asking that that Task Force with AHA being on that Force is not gonna work. We are the Task Force. We’ve been watching our back for the longest," Hightower said.
"Something is before us today... that could be morphed, could be changed, could be amended to make a meaningful impact... It’s nice to hear flowery statements by those that would call themselves advocates on the Council. We can sound real articulate. But what are we doing? What are we going to do? And that’s what this Council Member wants to know, what are we gonna do, Committee? The issue is bigger than just senior housing... We can start somewhere," Young said.
One issue raised in the Full Council meeting was how the Task Force would be appointed and who would be a part of it. Council Members Martin and Moore took issue with Young’s amendment that would give Atlanta Housing Authority (AHA) Executive Director Renee Glover and the AHA’s Board of Directors each one choice for the Task Force.
Hall introduced his own legislation proposing that the Atlanta Housing Authority work with the Old Fourth Ward Master Plan process to come up with affordable housing for seniors who would be displaced from Palmer House and Roosevelt House senior highrise communities. This bill passed the Committee unanimously.
"My colleague [Mr. Hall] has offered to introduce legislation that at first was to be a substitute to what’s before us, to deal just with seniors. And now he graciously, what I’m hearing is, you’re agreeing to introduce it independent of this legislation as a separate piece... I still say there could very well be a place for the Task Force that’s in front of us," Young said.
"We do have a problem, we do have issues that have to be resolved," Young said.
The CDHR Committee will not meet again this year. The Full Council will convene again on January 07, 2008.
(APN) ATLANTA – Atlanta City Council Members Felicia Moore and Jim Maddox engaged in a testy dispute on Tuesday, December 11, 2007, as the Community Development/Human Resources (CDHR) Committee voted to hold a resolution that would create a Task Force to study the effects of relocation on public housing residents.
It is unclear how many Members voted to hold the resolution, but could be few as three, as Council Members Ivory Lee Young and Mary Norwood had walked off the floor just prior to the vote.
About 20 public housing residents and advocates spoke against AHA’s proposed public housing demolitions, including several high school students who are current or former residents, in addition to Chioke Perry, John Timberlake, Terence Courtney, Dave Walker, Ted Brodek, APN’s Matthew Cardinale, Ben Howard, Shirley Hightower, Diane Wright, Ronnie Galvin, Carl Hartrampf, and Anita Beaty.
APN’s News Editor distributed copies of the documents forged by AHA in recent demolitions to HUD, to Council Members Young and Norwood [due to limited number of photocopies on hand]. APN reviewed the lack of consultation with residents, the Council, and the public as part of the demolition applications. APN also reviewed many problems involved with the voucher program and explained AHA has other options than demolishing all public housing.
Mayor Shirley Franklin’s Chief of Staff also made a presentation to the Committee asking that the Mayor’s name be removed from legislation to appoint a Member to a proposed Housing Relocation Task Force which would study the impacts of demolitions and evictions. Franklin does not want to participate in the Task Force.
MOORE, MADDOX DISPUTE SPEAKING PRIVILEGES
Moore, who represents the communities where Bankhead Courts, Bowen Homes, and Hollywood Courts are located, approached the microphone to address the Committee after it bizarrely voted to hold the resolution which had already passed Committee in its last meeting.
Maddox, Chairman of the CDHR Committee, had not allowed Shirley Hightower, President of Bowen Homes, to address the Committee before the vote beyond her initial public comments.
"I do want to say something because Ms. Hightower is a... respected member of my community," Moore said.
"We respect her here but we have to run it orderly," Maddox replied. "We have to run the meeting orderly, Ms. Moore. We have to run it orderly."
"When Mr. Maddox is ready to let me have the floor, I’ll go. Are you through, Mr. Maddox?" Moore asked.
"I know, but I’m saying the meeting has to be run orderly," Maddox said.
"Then let’s have order and allow me to speak," Moore said.
"I know but don’t, this Committee hasn’t disrespected anybody," Maddox said.
"Mr. Maddox, are you giving me the floor to speak?" Moore asked.
"Well, not if you’re going to talk about that. We have already voted on that issue," Maddox said.
"So you’re gonna now tell me as a Member of Council what I can talk about? If you talk about somebody getting out of order, we’re about to go way out of order in just a minute... You’re messing with the wrong person, Mr. Maddox," Moore said. "So now I’m a Council Member elected by the citizens of the City and you’re not gonna allow me to speak and say what I choose to say?" Moore said.
"We’re going to move on with the agenda, that’s what we’re gonna do," Maddox said.
"And then you’re going to move on the agenda and you’re not gonna let me as a Council Member... But if you were to come to any Committee as a Council Member you would be able to speak your mind and then move on," Moore said.
"After we’ve passed the issue, you want to go back with the issue... If you wanted to speak on this issue, we could’ve spoke before we voted," Maddox said. "Are you going to speak on the same issue?"
"I’m gonna speak on what I choose to speak on... Now if you gonna tell me... you’re not going to be allowed to speak, you say that. Is that what you’re saying?" Moore asked.
"No, I’m just saying the motion has already passed," Maddox said.
"But you’re not gonna tell me what I can say and what I can’t say. So you just let me know, are you going to censor my comments?" Moore asked.
"No what I’m saying to you, if you wanted to speak on that issue, you’ve been around here for over an hour. You could’ve spoke on that issue. But we have voted, now you want to speak on that issue, I’m not gonna let you do it... No, I’m not gonna let you speak on that issue because that issue has already passed," Maddox said.
"Well you’re not gonna have a rest of the meeting because I’m gonna stay here and disrupt the hell out of it," Moore said.
"Mr. Chair, it is not uncommon, though, that we allow Council Members to come and speak even if we dispose of an issue. And I think in the interest of moving this meeting forward, I think it’s all right if Ms. Moore speaks her mind," Councilman Ceasar Mitchell said.
"We’ll take a vote..." Maddox said.
"You need a quorum... So now as a Council Member, I need a quorum of a Committee to vote to allow me to speak... I don’t even think we need a vote. I think it’s disrespectful that I’m an elected official of this City and I require a vote in order to speak," Moore said.
"All right you go ahead and speak. I’ll be right back," Maddox said.
MOORE'S REMARKS
In her comments, Moore took issue with Young and Hall’s claims that there is not much the City Council can do to control what the AHA does or does not do.
"Yes, the Housing Authority is a state-ran Authority. But many things the Housing Authority does, they need local approval. They don’t operate in a vacuum. They don’t operate on another planet. We approve or disapprove of millions and millions of dollars to go to the Housing Authority. We partner with the Housing Authority on many things," Moore said. "So we do not totally have no say... We have a heck of a lot of influence... Because if they didn’t care, they wouldn’t be sitting here today... So I wish we could get away from... taking the power out of our own hands that we actually do have."
"I think there are some very clear things that we’re gonna do. So I’m gonna roll up my sleeves and I will be coming back the first of the year with a resolve and with some legislation. And I want to see if we’re really committed as a Council to doing those things that we can do. So I’ll be working on some legislation that I think is going to address some of the issues, maybe not all of them... that concern me," Moore said.
Moore also took the chance to call out the AHA on its communication problem while AHA’s External Affairs officer Barney Simms and contracted spokesman Rick White were in attendance.
"If I talk to you on one day, and you know you’re working on something else, don’t wait to make a decision. Then I have to hear from someone in the news media to find out that something’s going on in my own community. Or to find out you’re going to be meeting with my very people in my community... You shouldn’t step foot in District 9 without letting me know your foot’s coming. Ever. Again," Moore said. "That’s the kind of thing that adds to the problem."
Councilman C. T. Martin made remarks in support of Moore’s ability to have the floor.
THE HOUSING RELOCATION TASK FORCE RESOLUTION
The Committee made no further changes to the Housing Relocation Task Force resolution, coauthored by Councilmen Ivory Lee Young, Jr. and Kwanza Hall, that the Full Council voted to amend and send back to Committee on December 03, 2007.
Young said the resolution needed more work; however, in explaining his decision to hold the resolution–which already passed the last CDHR Meeting–Young did not list any specific issues which needed work.
"I heard these mixed statements, to say well Task Force but if it is it should be this, others say no Task Force, other want us to do something that’s not legislatively on the table right now. A moratorium is not before us today... The Task Force could result in that decision but it does not say that’s what the decision ought to be. I can guarantee you many of your concerns are not the desire of many of my colleagues to address. No one Council Member does anything by themselves," Young said.
Young was referencing comments by Courtney and Hightower when he said that some members of the public spoke against the Task Force, although these comments need to be seen in context.
"We find ourselves very skeptical about where this Task Force is going. We want to say, the community, the students, the residents of public housing are the Task Force, and those are the people who need to be consulted. We don’t need to create any new bodies," Courtney said. "Cancel the creation of a new Task Force."
"You all said you would set up a Task Force to watch over what AHA is doing. And then you decided to put AHA on that Task Force so then whatever they’re doing, they’re going to continue to do it. We’re asking that that Task Force with AHA being on that Force is not gonna work. We are the Task Force. We’ve been watching our back for the longest," Hightower said.
"Something is before us today... that could be morphed, could be changed, could be amended to make a meaningful impact... It’s nice to hear flowery statements by those that would call themselves advocates on the Council. We can sound real articulate. But what are we doing? What are we going to do? And that’s what this Council Member wants to know, what are we gonna do, Committee? The issue is bigger than just senior housing... We can start somewhere," Young said.
One issue raised in the Full Council meeting was how the Task Force would be appointed and who would be a part of it. Council Members Martin and Moore took issue with Young’s amendment that would give Atlanta Housing Authority (AHA) Executive Director Renee Glover and the AHA’s Board of Directors each one choice for the Task Force.
Hall introduced his own legislation proposing that the Atlanta Housing Authority work with the Old Fourth Ward Master Plan process to come up with affordable housing for seniors who would be displaced from Palmer House and Roosevelt House senior highrise communities. This bill passed the Committee unanimously.
"My colleague [Mr. Hall] has offered to introduce legislation that at first was to be a substitute to what’s before us, to deal just with seniors. And now he graciously, what I’m hearing is, you’re agreeing to introduce it independent of this legislation as a separate piece... I still say there could very well be a place for the Task Force that’s in front of us," Young said.
"We do have a problem, we do have issues that have to be resolved," Young said.
The CDHR Committee will not meet again this year. The Full Council will convene again on January 07, 2008.
AHA Deceives Residents, Prepares Evictions without HUD Approval
By Matthew Cardinale, News Editor, Atlanta Progressive News (December 16, 2007)
(APN) ATLANTA – Having moved up the demolition dates of three family projects serving mostly poor, Black families, Atlanta Housing Authority (AHA) has begun notifying residents of their eviction plans and are deceiving them in the process, Atlanta Progressive News has learned.
The senior high-rise demolitions for Palmer House and Roosevelt House were postponed to 2009, while Bankhead Courts, Bowen Homes, and Hollywood Courts, were moved up to 2008.
"They didn’t want the City Council to go against [them] because remember the whole issue was about the seniors. Because the resolution was gonna be drawn up for seniors, not for the family developments. I think all of it should have been taken into consideration because we have children," Diane Wright, President of the Resident Advisory Board (RAB), told Atlanta Progressive News.
"Most of the public housing is predominantly Black, and we’re the ones they’re trying to move out," Wright said. "The Council came up with this resolution because these are seniors and they feel that they vote. They say it’s not enough of the family developments [are] voting."
AHA’s Barney Simms told residents at Hollywood Courts apartments on Wednesday, December 12, 2007, "No," when asked if it was possible that funding for vouchers would be cut.
The resident–named Nicole according to Wright–asked, "How long will the voucher last?"
"They don’t end," Simms replied. "If you follow Congress, the funding trend is with the vouchers."
"Is it possible you could run out of funds?" Nicole later asked.
"No," Simms replied. "We know they’re going to continue, but they have to approve them every year."
Nicole then asked, "What if HUD decides they no longer want to fund the vouchers, where are we going to go?" It is actually US Congress, though, not HUD, which funds the vouchers.
"They might freeze them," Simms replied. But they won’t go below current levels, Simms asserted.
City Council Member Felicia Moore said she remembered the exchange.
"You can't ever guess what Congress will do," Moore told Atlanta Progressive News in a phone interview. "To give anybody the indication the money for vouchers will always be there, is not something you can do because you just don't know."
"It's a yearly thing. It's not a guarantee. I heard that they were about to cut some vouchers. I think they need to make it clear to residents that it's based on an annual appropriation. So they can anticipate that the funds are going to continue, but can't guarantee that the funds are going to be there. So if they do cut the funding for the vouchers, at least they've provided correct information," Moore said.
Linda Couch, Deputy Director of the DC-based National Low Income Housing Coalition, said Simms’s statement was untrue as well. Couch added that 150,000 vouchers were cut between 2004 and 2006 and that the current budget in US Congress would cut 25,000 vouchers.
"Barney Simms is purposely misleading residents, and that’s a part of their tactics to get the residents on board to take vouchers. I think it’s a outright lie. Because Mr. Simms read the paper just like everybody else. and remember, he said he follows the trend of Congress. So if you follow the trend of Congress, you already know those vouchers have no value to ‘em," Wright told APN by phone.
AHA had a court reporter present from Steven Ray Green and Associates. The court reporter offered APN a copy of their transcript. However, the next day, Mr. Green told Atlanta Progressive News AHA did not want the transcript released.
"Because they don’t actually want the public to know that residents are not pleased with what AHA is doing to them. They want everyone to think that residents are going along with the program. And not that residents are asking questions about where are they going to live," Wright said.
The court reporters have gone to the Georgia Board of Court Reporting to get their opinion on whether the transcript can be released.
And that wasn’t the only problem. AHA also admitted sending in "not complete" versions of the minutes from previous resident association meetings to HUD. Atlanta Progressive News recently broke the story that AHA sent in forged meeting minutes to HUD to show what they purported to be resident consultation.
AHA had no relocation plans available for the residents to inspect. AHA admitted they would be meeting with residents individually to "prepare" them for the upcoming move even though no applications were in to HUD for the demolitions.
Additionally, AHA ignored the demands of residents that they be allowed to return to the properties.
AHA ADMITS "INCOMPLETE" MINUTES
Wright stood up at the meeting, with documents obtained from Atlanta Progressive News in hand, and asked, "First of all, these are the documents that came from HUD. Who typed up the meeting minutes? These are not ours," Wright said.
"These are not the complete minutes. These are the minutes that impact what we did," Simms said. In doing so, AHA admitted sending in "incomplete" documents. Implicitly, they also admitted sending in their own version of the minutes, even though this was not specified to HUD and they presented in the application that they were the official minutes.
Also, "incomplete" is a bit misleading because the fabricated minutes are not based at all on the real minutes from the association, and contain completely different language that appears to contain agency legalese.
AHA ADMITS PREPARING RESIDENTS TO MOVE WITHOUT HUD APPROVAL
AHA’s Renee Bentley told residents in her presentation that they would begin working with the residents in January 2008 to "prepare" them for relocation. "Human service providers are going to begin working in January to begin reaching out to help prepare for relocation," Bentley said.
In response to questions from Wright and the Hollywood Courts Parliamentarian–who Wright says is named Ann–Bentley explained that the January meetings were to "prepare residents for relocation," but in August the relocation would start.
Wright then asked why the relocation teams would begin work in January 2008 without HUD approval.
"Because we anticipate submitting an application in December [2007]. It takes 60 days. We expect them to approve it. And we want the residents to be ready," Bentley said.
"It’s illegal," Wright told APN by phone. "Because first of all, it don’t have approval. It’s an intimidation tactic. It’s like I’m saying you’ve gotta move. They said you have 60 days to move, if HUD okays it, even if you don’t want to move. How are we going to know if it’s been passed or not if they got the okay from the application to tear down these properties, because they’re not gonna let us see it."
Wright also predicted they would begin evicting residents for other reasons because many won’t qualify for the vouchers, including those with criminal backgrounds, poor credit histories, and those who are unemployed.
"They’re gonna weed the ones out they want to weed out. They’re going to start evictions. It’s intimidation, but it’s also about the criminal background checks, it’s about their rental [credit] checks, and it’s about several things. And the main thing, it’s about those [lease] addendums, they weed ‘em out from that, check and see if they got jobs... That’s what they’ve been doing on every site," Wright said.
Simms told residents during the meeting that there were "special programs" to assist residents with those kinds of issues. However, Simms did not specify what the programs were.
Wright tells APN that she understands that some residents with those issues may qualify for a one-time cash payment, but no voucher, and she does not know how many eligible residents would receive the assistance.
DOES AHA HAVE A PLAN?
Attorney Lindsay Jones, who was only there for part of the meeting, asked whether AHA had a relocation plan for residents.
"We have the brochure and the applications," AHA’s Renee Bentley replied.
Therefore, no, AHA did not have any relocation plans available for residents to inspect at the meeting.
And while a brief pamphlet explaining some basics of the relocation process was distributed, AHA did not have a copy of the demolition application available for the residents to inspect either.
Simms also promised the residents could have a copy of the application in the future.
AHA IGNORES RESIDENT CONCERNS
Despite the fact that AHA will likely send these applications in to HUD as evidence that residents are on board with the demolition campaign, AHA did not take resident concerns into account as part of their purported "consultation" with residents.
For example, one resident asked, "Will we have the opportunity to return?"
"This is not HOPE VI. No, I don’t know what will be," done with the properties to say whether residents will be able to come back, Simms replied.
"Why we got to move if you don’t have a plan for this property? We want them to tell us. I want to be able to return," the resident said.
Simms ignored this resident’s concern.
AHA has been holding meetings last week and will hold some next week--announced at the last minute–for Bankhead Courts, Bowen Homes, Herndon Homes, Hollywood Courts, Palmer House, Roosevelt House, Thomasville Heights, and the RAB Board. However, AHA has called many of these meetings themselves and are not meeting with the actual associations in some cases, including Hollywood Courts and the RAB Board.
"We got a flyer Monday evening about a quarter to five [pm]. I didn't get it, the office did and security passed them out. We're the representatives for the residents, we speak for the residents, and it's like they disrespecting us. They're acting like there's no association at all. They should notify the Chair, and the officers of the resident association should be able to come and talk and let the residents know what's going on [at these meetings]. It's more of a demand from them. They act like they're the Gestapo, they're coming in with scare tactics," Wright said.
"This is our meeting!" Simms reminded residents who wished to make statements at the meetings inconsistent with the agency's message.
(APN) ATLANTA – Having moved up the demolition dates of three family projects serving mostly poor, Black families, Atlanta Housing Authority (AHA) has begun notifying residents of their eviction plans and are deceiving them in the process, Atlanta Progressive News has learned.
The senior high-rise demolitions for Palmer House and Roosevelt House were postponed to 2009, while Bankhead Courts, Bowen Homes, and Hollywood Courts, were moved up to 2008.
"They didn’t want the City Council to go against [them] because remember the whole issue was about the seniors. Because the resolution was gonna be drawn up for seniors, not for the family developments. I think all of it should have been taken into consideration because we have children," Diane Wright, President of the Resident Advisory Board (RAB), told Atlanta Progressive News.
"Most of the public housing is predominantly Black, and we’re the ones they’re trying to move out," Wright said. "The Council came up with this resolution because these are seniors and they feel that they vote. They say it’s not enough of the family developments [are] voting."
AHA’s Barney Simms told residents at Hollywood Courts apartments on Wednesday, December 12, 2007, "No," when asked if it was possible that funding for vouchers would be cut.
The resident–named Nicole according to Wright–asked, "How long will the voucher last?"
"They don’t end," Simms replied. "If you follow Congress, the funding trend is with the vouchers."
"Is it possible you could run out of funds?" Nicole later asked.
"No," Simms replied. "We know they’re going to continue, but they have to approve them every year."
Nicole then asked, "What if HUD decides they no longer want to fund the vouchers, where are we going to go?" It is actually US Congress, though, not HUD, which funds the vouchers.
"They might freeze them," Simms replied. But they won’t go below current levels, Simms asserted.
City Council Member Felicia Moore said she remembered the exchange.
"You can't ever guess what Congress will do," Moore told Atlanta Progressive News in a phone interview. "To give anybody the indication the money for vouchers will always be there, is not something you can do because you just don't know."
"It's a yearly thing. It's not a guarantee. I heard that they were about to cut some vouchers. I think they need to make it clear to residents that it's based on an annual appropriation. So they can anticipate that the funds are going to continue, but can't guarantee that the funds are going to be there. So if they do cut the funding for the vouchers, at least they've provided correct information," Moore said.
Linda Couch, Deputy Director of the DC-based National Low Income Housing Coalition, said Simms’s statement was untrue as well. Couch added that 150,000 vouchers were cut between 2004 and 2006 and that the current budget in US Congress would cut 25,000 vouchers.
"Barney Simms is purposely misleading residents, and that’s a part of their tactics to get the residents on board to take vouchers. I think it’s a outright lie. Because Mr. Simms read the paper just like everybody else. and remember, he said he follows the trend of Congress. So if you follow the trend of Congress, you already know those vouchers have no value to ‘em," Wright told APN by phone.
AHA had a court reporter present from Steven Ray Green and Associates. The court reporter offered APN a copy of their transcript. However, the next day, Mr. Green told Atlanta Progressive News AHA did not want the transcript released.
"Because they don’t actually want the public to know that residents are not pleased with what AHA is doing to them. They want everyone to think that residents are going along with the program. And not that residents are asking questions about where are they going to live," Wright said.
The court reporters have gone to the Georgia Board of Court Reporting to get their opinion on whether the transcript can be released.
And that wasn’t the only problem. AHA also admitted sending in "not complete" versions of the minutes from previous resident association meetings to HUD. Atlanta Progressive News recently broke the story that AHA sent in forged meeting minutes to HUD to show what they purported to be resident consultation.
AHA had no relocation plans available for the residents to inspect. AHA admitted they would be meeting with residents individually to "prepare" them for the upcoming move even though no applications were in to HUD for the demolitions.
Additionally, AHA ignored the demands of residents that they be allowed to return to the properties.
AHA ADMITS "INCOMPLETE" MINUTES
Wright stood up at the meeting, with documents obtained from Atlanta Progressive News in hand, and asked, "First of all, these are the documents that came from HUD. Who typed up the meeting minutes? These are not ours," Wright said.
"These are not the complete minutes. These are the minutes that impact what we did," Simms said. In doing so, AHA admitted sending in "incomplete" documents. Implicitly, they also admitted sending in their own version of the minutes, even though this was not specified to HUD and they presented in the application that they were the official minutes.
Also, "incomplete" is a bit misleading because the fabricated minutes are not based at all on the real minutes from the association, and contain completely different language that appears to contain agency legalese.
AHA ADMITS PREPARING RESIDENTS TO MOVE WITHOUT HUD APPROVAL
AHA’s Renee Bentley told residents in her presentation that they would begin working with the residents in January 2008 to "prepare" them for relocation. "Human service providers are going to begin working in January to begin reaching out to help prepare for relocation," Bentley said.
In response to questions from Wright and the Hollywood Courts Parliamentarian–who Wright says is named Ann–Bentley explained that the January meetings were to "prepare residents for relocation," but in August the relocation would start.
Wright then asked why the relocation teams would begin work in January 2008 without HUD approval.
"Because we anticipate submitting an application in December [2007]. It takes 60 days. We expect them to approve it. And we want the residents to be ready," Bentley said.
"It’s illegal," Wright told APN by phone. "Because first of all, it don’t have approval. It’s an intimidation tactic. It’s like I’m saying you’ve gotta move. They said you have 60 days to move, if HUD okays it, even if you don’t want to move. How are we going to know if it’s been passed or not if they got the okay from the application to tear down these properties, because they’re not gonna let us see it."
Wright also predicted they would begin evicting residents for other reasons because many won’t qualify for the vouchers, including those with criminal backgrounds, poor credit histories, and those who are unemployed.
"They’re gonna weed the ones out they want to weed out. They’re going to start evictions. It’s intimidation, but it’s also about the criminal background checks, it’s about their rental [credit] checks, and it’s about several things. And the main thing, it’s about those [lease] addendums, they weed ‘em out from that, check and see if they got jobs... That’s what they’ve been doing on every site," Wright said.
Simms told residents during the meeting that there were "special programs" to assist residents with those kinds of issues. However, Simms did not specify what the programs were.
Wright tells APN that she understands that some residents with those issues may qualify for a one-time cash payment, but no voucher, and she does not know how many eligible residents would receive the assistance.
DOES AHA HAVE A PLAN?
Attorney Lindsay Jones, who was only there for part of the meeting, asked whether AHA had a relocation plan for residents.
"We have the brochure and the applications," AHA’s Renee Bentley replied.
Therefore, no, AHA did not have any relocation plans available for residents to inspect at the meeting.
And while a brief pamphlet explaining some basics of the relocation process was distributed, AHA did not have a copy of the demolition application available for the residents to inspect either.
Simms also promised the residents could have a copy of the application in the future.
AHA IGNORES RESIDENT CONCERNS
Despite the fact that AHA will likely send these applications in to HUD as evidence that residents are on board with the demolition campaign, AHA did not take resident concerns into account as part of their purported "consultation" with residents.
For example, one resident asked, "Will we have the opportunity to return?"
"This is not HOPE VI. No, I don’t know what will be," done with the properties to say whether residents will be able to come back, Simms replied.
"Why we got to move if you don’t have a plan for this property? We want them to tell us. I want to be able to return," the resident said.
Simms ignored this resident’s concern.
AHA has been holding meetings last week and will hold some next week--announced at the last minute–for Bankhead Courts, Bowen Homes, Herndon Homes, Hollywood Courts, Palmer House, Roosevelt House, Thomasville Heights, and the RAB Board. However, AHA has called many of these meetings themselves and are not meeting with the actual associations in some cases, including Hollywood Courts and the RAB Board.
"We got a flyer Monday evening about a quarter to five [pm]. I didn't get it, the office did and security passed them out. We're the representatives for the residents, we speak for the residents, and it's like they disrespecting us. They're acting like there's no association at all. They should notify the Chair, and the officers of the resident association should be able to come and talk and let the residents know what's going on [at these meetings]. It's more of a demand from them. They act like they're the Gestapo, they're coming in with scare tactics," Wright said.
"This is our meeting!" Simms reminded residents who wished to make statements at the meetings inconsistent with the agency's message.
In New Orleans, Plan to Raze Low-Income Housing Draws Protest
By LESLIE EATON - New York Times - Published: December 14, 2007
NEW ORLEANS — At a moment when the shortage of low-income housing in the city is causing significant hardship, the federal government is beginning this week to tear down thousands of apartments in the city’s four biggest public housing projects.
The plan is producing sharp opposition, which has escalated to include raucous demonstrations and, perhaps, threats of arson and other violence.
On Thursday, outside City Hall and opposite a park where homeless people are living in dozens of small tents, about 100 demonstrators chanted “Stop the demolitions now!” A few were displaced public-housing residents; most were activists and public housing advocates from here and cities from New York to California.
Though local and federal housing officials say the storm-damaged projects were inhuman places to live and should not be rebuilt, some protesters accused the government of a darker motive behind the demolition plan. They contended that the government’s real aim was to keep the poor, mostly female, almost entirely black residents of public housing from returning to their city, to their homes.
“They don’t want this city to be for the poor, working-class people,” said Sharon Sears Jasper, a former public housing resident who says she is now living in a “slum house.” Government policies favor the wealthy and tourists, she continued after the demonstration. “Everyone else, kick them to the curb.”
Meanwhile, James Bernazzani, special agent in charge of the Federal Bureau of Investigation office here, confirmed that its domestic terrorism unit was investigating the source of small posters reading “For Every Public Housing Unit Destroyed a Condo Unit Will Be Destroyed.”
Lawyers for former residents continued to ask the courts to stop the plan, by the federal Department of Housing and Urban Development, to demolish buildings containing 4,500 units, about 3,000 of which were occupied before Hurricane Katrina.
The government said private developers would replace them with about 3,300 subsidized housing units in developments that will also include homes for people with higher incomes, but others said there would not be that many low-cost units.
The debate over the plan has become a political issue. On Wednesday, John Edwards, the former North Carolina senator who is seeking the Democratic presidential nomination, urged the government to build replacement housing before bulldozing the projects.
Demolition began on Wednesday night at one housing project that had been scheduled to be destroyed before the storm and will begin on two other projects this weekend.
Federal officials say the barracks-style complexes were substandard before Hurricane Katrina and were badly damaged by the storm. New subsidized housing, and vouchers for existing and new apartments, will ensure that no one who lived in the demolished projects will be left homeless, they said.
“The goal was to rebuild it, build it better, and move people into new homes,” said Jereon M. Brown, a spokesman for the housing department.
Mr. Brown said of the protesters: “Ask how many of them have lived in public housing, have been to public housing other than to protest.”
But the protesters, including some former residents of the projects, say the sturdy apartment buildings could be rehabilitated, especially at a time when little low-cost housing is available in New Orleans.
Hurricane Katrina destroyed more than 50,000 rental units here, and damaged thousands more apartments, affecting two-thirds of the city’s rental stock. Rents have soared for the apartments that remain habitable.
Adding to the pressure on the rental market, almost 3,000 families living in government trailer parks in Louisiana must find a new place to live in the next few months, as the Federal Emergency Management Agency closes the sites it manages. By the end of the year, it will stop paying for 3,700 trailers in private trailer camps.
Some residents of the complexes and many who lived nearby said that they were delighted the projects were going to disappear and that they believed they would be replaced with something better.
Stacy S. Head, a City Council member whose district includes two of the complexes, said she had heard from many who welcomed the new plan.
“The vast majority do not want to go back to the way it was,” Ms. Head said, adding that the old projects were run-down and dangerous, and that the new buildings would help the working poor.
As for the protesters, she said, “I wish that all these people, particularly from out of town, would just leave us alone and let us improve our city.”
Some advocates for the residents said they did not oppose changes or improvements but wanted a guarantee that there would be a place for former residents in the new developments, a promise that they said had not always been kept in previous redevelopments of public housing here.
“Many residents are not against redevelopment but want an interim housing plan that gets them home,” said Judith Browne-Dianis, a director of the Advancement Project in Washington, a civil rights group that is involved in the legal fight against the demolition plan.
At the project where demolition has begun, the B. W. Cooper Apartments, not far from the Superdome, residents were almost unanimous in wanting the government to finish tearing down some of the four-story blond-brick buildings that had been erected in the 1950s and closed before the storm.
“I know people need places to stay, but these places aren’t for living,” Trina Davis said, as a group of women sitting on a nearby porch talked of their hopes of moving into the new buildings that are to replace the old ones across Erato Street.
But Gertrude Luster, who was moving in nearby, said that public housing was needed for people of her age living on fixed incomes. She is 79 and receives $643 a month.
“I don’t think they should tear none of it down,” Ms. Luster said. “People need a place to come back to.”
NEW ORLEANS — At a moment when the shortage of low-income housing in the city is causing significant hardship, the federal government is beginning this week to tear down thousands of apartments in the city’s four biggest public housing projects.
The plan is producing sharp opposition, which has escalated to include raucous demonstrations and, perhaps, threats of arson and other violence.
On Thursday, outside City Hall and opposite a park where homeless people are living in dozens of small tents, about 100 demonstrators chanted “Stop the demolitions now!” A few were displaced public-housing residents; most were activists and public housing advocates from here and cities from New York to California.
Though local and federal housing officials say the storm-damaged projects were inhuman places to live and should not be rebuilt, some protesters accused the government of a darker motive behind the demolition plan. They contended that the government’s real aim was to keep the poor, mostly female, almost entirely black residents of public housing from returning to their city, to their homes.
“They don’t want this city to be for the poor, working-class people,” said Sharon Sears Jasper, a former public housing resident who says she is now living in a “slum house.” Government policies favor the wealthy and tourists, she continued after the demonstration. “Everyone else, kick them to the curb.”
Meanwhile, James Bernazzani, special agent in charge of the Federal Bureau of Investigation office here, confirmed that its domestic terrorism unit was investigating the source of small posters reading “For Every Public Housing Unit Destroyed a Condo Unit Will Be Destroyed.”
Lawyers for former residents continued to ask the courts to stop the plan, by the federal Department of Housing and Urban Development, to demolish buildings containing 4,500 units, about 3,000 of which were occupied before Hurricane Katrina.
The government said private developers would replace them with about 3,300 subsidized housing units in developments that will also include homes for people with higher incomes, but others said there would not be that many low-cost units.
The debate over the plan has become a political issue. On Wednesday, John Edwards, the former North Carolina senator who is seeking the Democratic presidential nomination, urged the government to build replacement housing before bulldozing the projects.
Demolition began on Wednesday night at one housing project that had been scheduled to be destroyed before the storm and will begin on two other projects this weekend.
Federal officials say the barracks-style complexes were substandard before Hurricane Katrina and were badly damaged by the storm. New subsidized housing, and vouchers for existing and new apartments, will ensure that no one who lived in the demolished projects will be left homeless, they said.
“The goal was to rebuild it, build it better, and move people into new homes,” said Jereon M. Brown, a spokesman for the housing department.
Mr. Brown said of the protesters: “Ask how many of them have lived in public housing, have been to public housing other than to protest.”
But the protesters, including some former residents of the projects, say the sturdy apartment buildings could be rehabilitated, especially at a time when little low-cost housing is available in New Orleans.
Hurricane Katrina destroyed more than 50,000 rental units here, and damaged thousands more apartments, affecting two-thirds of the city’s rental stock. Rents have soared for the apartments that remain habitable.
Adding to the pressure on the rental market, almost 3,000 families living in government trailer parks in Louisiana must find a new place to live in the next few months, as the Federal Emergency Management Agency closes the sites it manages. By the end of the year, it will stop paying for 3,700 trailers in private trailer camps.
Some residents of the complexes and many who lived nearby said that they were delighted the projects were going to disappear and that they believed they would be replaced with something better.
Stacy S. Head, a City Council member whose district includes two of the complexes, said she had heard from many who welcomed the new plan.
“The vast majority do not want to go back to the way it was,” Ms. Head said, adding that the old projects were run-down and dangerous, and that the new buildings would help the working poor.
As for the protesters, she said, “I wish that all these people, particularly from out of town, would just leave us alone and let us improve our city.”
Some advocates for the residents said they did not oppose changes or improvements but wanted a guarantee that there would be a place for former residents in the new developments, a promise that they said had not always been kept in previous redevelopments of public housing here.
“Many residents are not against redevelopment but want an interim housing plan that gets them home,” said Judith Browne-Dianis, a director of the Advancement Project in Washington, a civil rights group that is involved in the legal fight against the demolition plan.
At the project where demolition has begun, the B. W. Cooper Apartments, not far from the Superdome, residents were almost unanimous in wanting the government to finish tearing down some of the four-story blond-brick buildings that had been erected in the 1950s and closed before the storm.
“I know people need places to stay, but these places aren’t for living,” Trina Davis said, as a group of women sitting on a nearby porch talked of their hopes of moving into the new buildings that are to replace the old ones across Erato Street.
But Gertrude Luster, who was moving in nearby, said that public housing was needed for people of her age living on fixed incomes. She is 79 and receives $643 a month.
“I don’t think they should tear none of it down,” Ms. Luster said. “People need a place to come back to.”
Tenants in 2 AHA buildings get more time
By Eric Stirgus / The Atlanta Journal-Constitution / Published on: 12/12/07
Housing Authority won't tear down Palmer, Roosevelt until 2009 to give residents more time to adapt to change.
Tenants in two Atlanta Housing Authority buildings for the elderly and disabled will have more time before they'll have to move. The authority will push back the demolition dates of the buildings to 2009 "so that we have additional time to help seniors feel more at ease with the transition," AHA president and chief executive officer Renee Glover wrote in a letter Tuesday to Atlanta City Council President Lisa Borders.
Housing authority officials announced plans earlier this year to demolish the Palmer House, located near the Georgia Aquarium, by January. They planned to raze Roosevelt House, which stands a couple blocks north of Palmer House, in 2009.
AHA spokesman Rick White said Tuesday the agency will now move up the demolition date of other developments, such as Bowen Homes. AHA officials say there have been five slayings at the northwest Atlanta apartment complex since July. Agency officials say crime is out of control there and want to move residents to safer communities. Bowen Homes is now scheduled to come down in May, White said.
The new schedule still must be approved by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. Some tenants and community activists have criticized the authority's plan to demolish 12 older apartment complexes, called the "Quality of Life Initiative." Critics say many tenants will be forced to move to neighborhoods where it is tougher to get to public transportation and health services. AHA officials say most tenants have welcomed the plan and the residents will have the first opportunity to move into whatever is built afterward.
In response to the complaints, councilmen Kwanza Hall and Ivory Lee Young penned legislation urging the AHA to halt the demolition so a task force can study the process and make sure tenants find suitable housing. The council last week postponed a scheduled vote on creating the task force.
Hall said Tuesday he welcomed the revised plan and is working with AHA on other options for tenants in the two developments, which are located in his district. Young said he is still worried about the initiative.
"We've done great things in public housing, but we've left some people out," Young said during a meeting of the council's Community Development/Human Resources committee.
Eight students from South Atlanta High School's law and government program met with Young last week and asked to speak at Tuesday's meeting. They complained that AHA officials don't fully consider the impact demolition has on students who have to move during the school year. Sometimes, said ninth-grader Jermaunte' Lamar, students move with their families to areas where it is more difficult to get to MARTA and they have longer commutes to school.
The students also said some displaced tenants don't get federal vouchers to subsidize rent, called Section 8, and wind up homeless.
Brachell Kemp, 15, talked about the emotional toll. She said some of her relatives were forced to leave Jonesboro South, one of the properties in the Quality of Life Initiative. "Being a student and seeing my family not having anywhere to go was hard on me," the 10th-grader said.
Housing Authority won't tear down Palmer, Roosevelt until 2009 to give residents more time to adapt to change.
Tenants in two Atlanta Housing Authority buildings for the elderly and disabled will have more time before they'll have to move. The authority will push back the demolition dates of the buildings to 2009 "so that we have additional time to help seniors feel more at ease with the transition," AHA president and chief executive officer Renee Glover wrote in a letter Tuesday to Atlanta City Council President Lisa Borders.
Housing authority officials announced plans earlier this year to demolish the Palmer House, located near the Georgia Aquarium, by January. They planned to raze Roosevelt House, which stands a couple blocks north of Palmer House, in 2009.
AHA spokesman Rick White said Tuesday the agency will now move up the demolition date of other developments, such as Bowen Homes. AHA officials say there have been five slayings at the northwest Atlanta apartment complex since July. Agency officials say crime is out of control there and want to move residents to safer communities. Bowen Homes is now scheduled to come down in May, White said.
The new schedule still must be approved by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. Some tenants and community activists have criticized the authority's plan to demolish 12 older apartment complexes, called the "Quality of Life Initiative." Critics say many tenants will be forced to move to neighborhoods where it is tougher to get to public transportation and health services. AHA officials say most tenants have welcomed the plan and the residents will have the first opportunity to move into whatever is built afterward.
In response to the complaints, councilmen Kwanza Hall and Ivory Lee Young penned legislation urging the AHA to halt the demolition so a task force can study the process and make sure tenants find suitable housing. The council last week postponed a scheduled vote on creating the task force.
Hall said Tuesday he welcomed the revised plan and is working with AHA on other options for tenants in the two developments, which are located in his district. Young said he is still worried about the initiative.
"We've done great things in public housing, but we've left some people out," Young said during a meeting of the council's Community Development/Human Resources committee.
Eight students from South Atlanta High School's law and government program met with Young last week and asked to speak at Tuesday's meeting. They complained that AHA officials don't fully consider the impact demolition has on students who have to move during the school year. Sometimes, said ninth-grader Jermaunte' Lamar, students move with their families to areas where it is more difficult to get to MARTA and they have longer commutes to school.
The students also said some displaced tenants don't get federal vouchers to subsidize rent, called Section 8, and wind up homeless.
Brachell Kemp, 15, talked about the emotional toll. She said some of her relatives were forced to leave Jonesboro South, one of the properties in the Quality of Life Initiative. "Being a student and seeing my family not having anywhere to go was hard on me," the 10th-grader said.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)