New Haven Independent: Jackson-Brooks Vows Affordable Housing Fixes

Jackson-Brooks Vows Affordable Housing Fixes

by Melissa Bailey | May 22, 2007 7:50 AM | Permalink | Comments (14)

In a time when property values have shot up and high-end condos are popping up left and right, Hill Alderwoman Andrea Jackson-Brooks (pictured) used the annual Black and Hispanic Caucus State of the City Address to support initiatives for affordable housing. Also Monday, aldermen moved along the Street Outreach Workers program and the bike-friendly re-envisioning of the city traffic and parking department.

Delivering the caucus’ yearly speech before the Board of Aldermen Monday night, Jackson-Brooks called for universal health care, an end to the achievement gap, and a shaping up of public works services so that potholes get filled. Click here to read her full speech. (Click here to read a story on last year’s speech, delivered by Hill Alderwoman Jackie James.)

Jackson-Brooks focused on affordable housing. She foretold the topic would soon be addressed by “some of the most important legislation in decades,” to emerge from the aldermanic Affordable Housing Committee.

“In order for our city to survive and thrive, we must have a stable core of residents who are homeowners and renters who have access to affordable housing units,” said Jackson-Brooks.

“While we applaud the new development downtown and across our great city, we must also ensure that we do not lose our existing homeowners in the process,” she said. Renters are getting squeezed, too: “Of the 33,153 renter households in the City of New Haven in 2000, 44 percent reported that their rent exceeds 30 percent of their income,” said Jackson-Brooks. “In fact, 25 percent of all renters pay more than half of their household income toward housing costs.”

Initiatives being crafted by the aldermanic Affordable Housing Committee would address that problem, she said. Proposals include: “mandating that affordable housing units be a part of subsidized developments, new inclusionary zoning ordinances, and supporting credits toward building permit fees for developments that include affordable units. Our caucus supports these efforts, and looks forward to the passage and implementation of these ideas.”

On PERF, the audit team the mayor brought in to examine the police department in the wake of the Billy White narcotics theft and bribery scandal: “There needs to be clear and transparent opportunities for public comment and input,” said Jackson-Brooks. “It is regrettable that the administration … lacked diversity opinion with the hand-selected Independent Accountability Team,” designed to oversee the audit.

(Community forums hosted by PERF will be held this week — Tues., May 22, 6 p.m. at Career High School, or Wed., May 23, 6 p.m., at Wexler/Grant School.)

Jackson-Brooks’ speech was followed by a regular meeting of the Board of Aldermen.

Street Outreach Workers $$

At that meeting, aldermen approved acceptance of $375,000 in private funds for the street outreach workers’ program for June 1, 2007 to May 31, 2008. Funds, drummed up by Downtown Alderwoman Bitsie Clark and approved Monday by unanimous consent, have been donated by the Community Foundation from Greater New Haven, Yale University, Casey Family Services, Empower New Haven and United Way of Greater New Haven.

Curfew Meets Grave

The youth curfew ordinance, long considered dead on arrival, was officially put to rest Monday by a unanimous vote of leave to withdraw.

While the proposal to keep kids inside after 10 p.m. flopped, our committee’s work has been a catalyst, has “stimulated a community dialogue” on youth violence and youth needs, said Alderwoman Clark, who chaired a committee examining the ordinance. Clark further proposed repealing the outdated curfew lingering in city books.

“This is not the proper time” for a curfew, agreed Dwight Alderwoman Joyce Chen, who originally proposed the idea. She stressed the need to find ongoing funding for programs like the Street Outreach Workers Program.

“I’m not quite sure that we’ve done all that we need to do,” urged West River Alderman Yusuf Shah. “Let this leave to withdraw not be a leave to” examine and address youth violence, he said.

Traffic Czar Becomes Transit Czar

It’s official: Mike Piscitelli’s new job, director of Traffic and Parking, has been redefined to adopt a less car-dominated vision. A resolution that would reorganize the Department of Traffic and Parking to examine transportation as a whole — including modes that don’t involve cars, such as bikes and walking — gained unanimous approval. No additional funding or positions were included in the request.

“We’ve surrendered our most important public space, our streets, to cars,” said Fair Haven Alderwoman Erin Sturgis-Pascale, supporting the proposal. The lack of public bike lanes in the city, she said, “is a shame.”

Comments

Posted by: charlie | May 22, 2007 10:22 AM

What our city needs is LESS affordable housing, not more. We need more expensive housing, because that is what will produce the tax revenue our city needs. Affordable housing is largely a drain. Don't get me wrong, I'm all for it, but New Haven has WAY more than its fair share compared to the surrounding towns. We could gradually phase out 50% of our affordable units over the next 10 years, and we would STILL have more than our fair share. There should be a ban on all affordable housing construction in New Haven, with the exception of a handful of units in any of the new condo towers downtown (if the developer wants to add them), and any existing subsidized housing should gradually be phased out. Neighboring towns should be forced to build it themselves. Otherwise we are all going to be in deep trouble.

Posted by: Ned | May 22, 2007 10:29 AM

You would think that cities like New Haven, Hartford and Bridgeport, with a greater percentage of subisdized housing than most towns in CT, would be thriving, but the reality is the reverse. It seems that cities with the highest housing costs, Stamford, New York, San Francisco, Seattle, Boston, etc. have strong economies. Do affordable housing advocates have any research to support their claims that affordable housing stimulates economic growth, rather than keeping low income/underemployed/unemployed people geographically tethered to a city, New Haven, with virtually no employment growth? Stamford has a 10 percent affordable housing rule, with a buyout option, for projects over a certain size (I'm not sure about the specifics), which appears to work well; however, there has to be some private development and available jobs for this scheme to work.
I'll believe the "less car-dominated vision" when I see it. New Parking garages encourage more traffic. The roads are in terrible shape, for all users. Trying to ride a bicycle, close to the curb, in New Haven is a losing proposition. Some sections of the existing bike paths have to be seriously reconsidered: Following the bike route, from Humphrey St. onto Whitney is like fulfilling a death wish - high speed traffic, and a jarring, pot hole filled disintegrating road surface - yikes. Also, the one way streets, downtown (directing traffic out of town) are a perpetual irritant. I know there was a study, which recommended changes in the one-way traffic patterns - yet, with the exception of Church St. and part of Chapel, nothing was ever done...
http://www.urbanstreet.info/1st_symp_proceedings/Ec019_f2.pdf

Posted by: TrueBlueCT | May 22, 2007 11:06 AM

The answer to the crisis is affordable loans. Like the one detailed here:

"On Jun. 10, the New Haven Advocate revealed that DeStefano had approved a loan to Executive Assistant Andrea Jackson-Brooks that violated federal policies. The terms of the $58,750, interest-free loan required no payments for 10 years and forgave half the sum at the time of payment. The money belonged to New Haven's federally-sponsored Livable City Initiative (LCI), a program organized by DeStefano to assist low-income families.

According to Paul Bass, the Advocate Associate Editor who uncovered the Jackson-Brooks fiasco, this misuse of federal money took funds away from needy citizens, sabotaged one of the mayor's best programs, and confirmed the notion that with politicians,"patronage is often placed above policy."

Jackson-Brooks ostensibly received the money to remove lead paint from her home after her grandchild suffered lead poisoning. The loan is particularly appalling because Jackson-Brooks does not qualify as low-income and should not be eligible for LCI loans. Mishandling of LCI money may have prevented New Haven residents who are truly low-income residents from securing loans for removal of lead paint from their own homes. Indeed, the Advocate reported that Jackson-Brooks is the only recipient ever of an LCI loan designated for lead paint removal."

What the article didn't detail was the because Ms. Jackson-Brooks' salary was so high, (over $70,000), she was in no way eligible for the loan program.

Amazing to me that this person can be an Alderperson!

Posted by: Wjay | May 22, 2007 12:02 PM

Not to worry..
The Black and Hispanic Caucas rarely follows up on it's own words. For Example read ( above) last years speech by Jacquline James, the initiatives mention there fell flat on it's empty face. As you can see from this current speech, there is nothing mentioned about last years progress against goals. Rather, this year you see at whole new set of initiatives without bench marks or even outlines about how they will be accomplished. More importanly, this crew has even failed to allott itself any funds in the BOA's budget to further it's objectives.
Soooo... not to worry, this is just more hot air.

Posted by: charlie | May 22, 2007 12:21 PM

Fantastic report, Ned! Also, I agree that all affordable construction in New Haven should be banned. How can we lobby Aldermen to stop flooding our city with unsustainable units for the poor and lobby the State to do more to build it in suburban areas?

Posted by: Wjay | May 22, 2007 3:40 PM

To:TrueblueCT
That response is way over the top and below the belt. Try to keep your comments to the point of the story, rather than attempt to garner the ghost of the past and relate it to today.

In fact no one was every held responsible by government investigators for wrong doing.

So bug off>>>>>>>>>>>

Posted by: MARYROSARIO | May 22, 2007 4:06 PM

I am so glad they moved the Steet Outreach Program and cant wait for its start in June.Thank you to Community Foundation from Greater New Haven,Yale University,Casey Family Services,Empower New Haven and United WAY of Greater New Haven.This is the first step to help our children.The talks to focus our youth should not stop but keep on going.We as a community need to reach out and insure this and many more programs for our youth succeed.Positive thinking for our youth talks and programs.

Posted by: cedarhillresident | May 22, 2007 8:38 PM

MARYROSARIO
I am with you I am truely excited to see this program starting up!! And Thank You to the groups that help fund it and thank you Bitsie!

But I am with the above posters on the fact that we need more revenue!! If we had turn the Becker and Becker project into Condo's right next to a train station we would be seeing a revenue. Wish Trump was setting up his baby in our city, Stamford is reaping now...but he see the unwise investments that are happening here.
And I see the need for affordable housing but how is that going to help the over burdend middle class home owner?? You lost me on that?? We need revenue..

Still saying "get our own power plant"

Posted by: MARYROSARIO | May 22, 2007 11:24 PM

cedar ya know its always been my thing to try to keep being positive but with all thats been going on im starting to go the other way ya know
people have to get together and realize with property taxes going up.the so called middle class will be no more.we have to fight for more revenue somehow.its to bad trump doesnt get to know people like us who try.just sounding off tonite i know i will get back to being me again.

Posted by: MARYROSARIO | May 22, 2007 11:29 PM

you are so right cedar we do need more revenue.maybe trump will feel sorry for us and try to help us out.wishful thinking again!!!!!!

Posted by: ericaholahan | May 23, 2007 1:51 AM

One of the things that makes NH great is the diversity of its population-ethnic, racial, economic. I keep hearing people complain about the need for a greater tax base and that high-end real estate is the way to accomplish this. Maybe, but why live in New Haven at all if you what you want is to be surrounded by the wealthy? There are plenty of (less diverse) wealthy suburbs right next door. There is much to be gained by living in an area with mixed-income housing-tolerance, acceptance, and the pursuit of a more egalitarian society.

Posted by: OES | May 23, 2007 7:00 AM

Erica-I think you miss the point. The people posting on this site obviously love NH and live here for a reason, quite possibly for the reasons you explain above. That being said, NH carries the burden of not just low income housing but also houses the bulk of non-profits in our region. What we need to think about is restructuring taxes on a State level. NH does not receive its fair share of PILOT (Payment In Lieu of Taxes) for its tax excempt property, in fact, the amount received each year has decresed substantially (NH has never received its full amount due). Yale University contributes voluntary payments, as do other non-profit entities, but it does not cover the loss we take on our PILOT dollars. What to do? We need to voice these concerns to our State Representatives. Tax reform across the State needs to happen. We as homeowners, and tax payers, can't take the burden of housing all the non-profits and allow Orange, CT to generate huge amounts of revenue with its big box stores. County taxes are the way to go. Think about all the people who use our roads to come to NH to earn their living and at the end of the work day go home to a surrounding town. What about a road levy for these people? It's a thought. I just don't see our State Reps doing much on this front and that is disappointing.

Posted by: ericaholahan | May 23, 2007 9:47 PM

OES,

I do not miss the point. There is a reason that there is not more low-income housing in Guilford and Hamden and Woodbrige-low-income people are not welcome there.

I agree that CT would be a better state if our town governments were restructured into regional governments, at least in terms of taxes and social services being more evenly distributed.

I also agree that this is not likely to happen any time soon. And even if living in Woodbridge or Guilford were more affordable, I would not want to live in those communities. They simply do not seem to me to be welcoming of diverse populations, and I mean this mostly on an economic basis.

Posted by: jms | May 23, 2007 10:45 PM

Regional restructuring has always seemed like a totally viable solutiuon to many problems if your perspective happens to be from where we all stand... here in New Haven or any large CT. city for that matter. Unfortunately it will likely never happen because...

New Haven Independent

Jackson-Brooks Vows Affordable Housing Fixes

Comments

Sections

Neighborhood News

Special Sections

Some Favorite Sites

Government/ Community Links

Legal Notices

Flyerboard

Sponsors

N.H.I. Site Design & Development

NHI Store

News Feed