When is the last time you heard the President mention housing? In all of his State of the Union addresses and stump speeches combined, the issue of housing simply never comes up. While it’s obvious that Mr Bush has other priorities such as the war and tax breaks for the wealthy, he has been known to at least give lip service to some issues that are important to working people such as health care, jobs and social security. Even if we on the left don’t like what he has to say about these issues, the President does invite them into the national debate. Housing doesn’t even seem to be on the administration’s radar screen, however, despite the critical importance of the issue to most Americans. The administration’s public discussions of federal policy ignores talk of high housing costs or plans to address the growing housing needs of the working poor.
National media coverage of federal policy debate reflects the issues that the President or high profile members of congress have defined as most important and timely. It took Hurricane Katrina to push the discussion of government’s role in providing housing for the poor into the national media for the first time during the Bush administration’s reign. Suddenly, public housing became an issue that people paid attention to. But just as much of the country has moved on from serious thought about New Orleans, so the press has left behind the issue of public housing (as 5,000 units of public housing are slated for demolition in New Orleans).
All of this would give the impression that no policy developments related to federal housing programs have occurred. But nothing could be further from the truth. In fact, the avoidance of White House comment on housing issues only serves as cover for the increasing stealth attacks on the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and the programs it operates.
The sad truth is that under this cover of invisibility, the operating budget for public housing alone has been slashed by over $1 billion dollars since 2001. In the last three years, HUD has continued to drain these funds from local agencies that provide public housing. In 2004, Housing Authorities were funded at only 89% of their actual need. In 2005, while an improvement, agencies were still seriously under-funded at only 91%. This year, it gets worse. Due to a rise in utility costs, HUD announced in June that it will pro-rate operating budgets at 85.5 % of the need. This translates into a $600 million loss for public housing.
And it only gets worse. Next year, if this funding formula is not revised, the pro-ration will be the lowest ever at 78%.
And these operating budget cuts are only one thin slice of the pie when it comes to the recent history of cuts to all public housing programs. The San Francisco Housing Authority has a backlog of $245 million in immediate capital needs, yet for the sixth straight year HUD proposed no increase in its Capital Fund Program but rather chose to decrease it by 8%. The only resource available for new development, the HOPE VI program, was reduced from $500 million to $145 million last year and is expected to be de-funded altogether. The HUD Drug Elimination Program, which funded security-related improvements, was also cut to pieces, which has meant a loss of $1.4 million for the SFHA.
These increasing funding cuts are devastating public housing agencies nationwide. With the new round of cuts announced in June, we have begun to hear horror stories from around the country.
One of the scariest illustrations comes from Salt Lake City, where the Housing Authority is making plans to sell off their public housing units because it has simply become to burdensome and expensive to operate. In Trenton, New Jersey the community is in an uproar after 33 maintenance workers were laid off while serious repair needs plague residents. In Philadelphia, the Housing Authority’s director has said that he will be forced to terminate between 300-500 maintenance and security workers, up to a third of the total employees, if funding is not restored. Anger about the inability of being able to do more with less (since housing needs and costs continue to rise) is being heard from communities large and small throughout the U.S. since the latest round of cuts were announced.
San Francisco will be especially hard hit by this year’s budget cuts. The San Francisco Housing Authority is slated to lose $7 million dollars in operating funds for 2006, a 23% reduction. This cut reduces the amount of subsidy per unit by $112, from $452 to $342.
In an effort to stop the loss, the SFHA is taking steps to convert their management operations to an “asset management” model. HUD has determined that this new model, which mimics private market property management, will be more efficient and much less expensive to run. In a “nutshell”, the conversion means a de-centralization of SFHA management. Each project will now be run as an individual “asset” with their own operating budget, assigned management staff, etc. While the verdict is still out, housing advocates believe that this is simply another example of HUD’s attempts to force privatization at the expense of low-income residents.
As has been the pattern during the Bush administration, both the carrot and the stick are being used to dismantle of housing programs for the poor. At the same time that funds are cut, new HUD policies are authorized or in some cases required that provide cost-cutting solutions. The squeeze is put on local housing authorities to adapt to each new funding crisis by using the only tools provided by HUD, regardless of the ultimate impact on residents.
In San Francisco, there is a backlog of serious repair needs at the oldest buildings (the “big four” Bayview/HP properties), and murder is a daily fact of life at the family projects in the Western Addition, Bayview and Visitacion Valley, as evidenced by the local news headlines. Yet cuts in maintenance and security personnel are inevitable if Congress does not act to restore funding. In fact, all eleven of the SFHA employee union’s bargaining units have contracts which expire this year. Layoffs or staffing reductions, as we have seen in other cities, are certain.
From New York City to Millville, NJ, the message is the same. If the cuts are implemented, residents will suffer. Security services will be cut back, which will lead to an increase in violent crime. Repairs will be slower than before and many essential repair needs will remain unaddressed. Health and safety violations will multiply.
Tim Kaiser, Executive Director of the Public Housing Authority Directors Association (PHADA) has said that, “the shuttering of some properties and bankruptcies are inevitable if Congress does not act”. The impact will surely be disastrous.
Housing advocates are pushing for Congress to restore this year’s cuts by enacting a budget supplemental when they reconvene in September. They are also asking that the proposed budget for 2007 be adjusted to account for utility increases so that the same problem does not occur next year. The Housing Rights Committee of San Francisco has gathered nearly 500 postcards from public residents urging a reversal of the cuts. Tenant leaders will deliver the cards to Senators Feinstein, Boxer and Congressmember Pelosi. Please help this effort: Send a letter online to your member of Congress today by visiting www.local-impact.org.
Sara Shortt is a Housing Organizer with the Housing Rights Committee of San Francisco. She can be contacted at sara@hrcsf.org.
