..,. :_ :_ : mm

 

PLACE IN RETURN Box to remove this checkout from your record.
To AVOID FINES return on or before date due.
MAY BE RECALLED with earlier due date if requested.

 

DATE DUE

DATE DUE

DATE DUE

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2/05 C‘Elfiwateouejndd-pj 5

 

’W”
I .

n

. 3u1.~.. p-

. ' , u.
g
*‘1‘W*Oflw"l
. -... -N ..,..

'6'-‘.'.".“'."--“VD§-

O o _' co

£22:
r5
-9

; was: 'mamm.

M” W
1" a
v ‘ I.
V'; .v‘.&v"’T'7?§fl-'.1r¥~"‘$¢:‘.

.r_1 .
; A. f':

\r

- ‘..

U.S. Department-of. Hou5ingfangxgyg. evelogggen ' ,3

d

 

./€‘ \., .
a - "' . .
50:14" “a“

RETURNING MATERIALS:
'Iace in book drop to
~mo"e this checkout fro'

-A-.-l U' ‘

£9.34“,

.‘w‘-

."'-"‘UUCOOUOOVVV‘OUOUU“-OU‘---"."D-""-U"-‘

Impacts of Public Housing:
The American Dream or Nightmare that leads to the
Dehumanizing of Residents

By

Celestine Starks

Submitted to
Michigan State University
In partial fulfillment of the requirement
For the degree of

MASTER IN URBAN AND REGIONAL PLANNING/
URBAN STUDIES

Urban and Regional Planning Program

Spring 1999

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Table of Contents i
Dedication ii
Acknowledgements iii
Chapter I: Introduction to Topic 1

Purpose of Study

Organization of Paper 3

History of Public Housing 5
Chapter H: Implementation of Housing Programs 10
Chapter HI: Public Housing Policies Influence 19
Chapter IV: New Direction in Urban Public Housing 30
Chapter V: Theoretical Conception Framework 38

Self-Esteem 38

Black Self-Esteem 40

Case Study 45
Conclusion 51
Bibliography 53

Appendixes:

Appendix A: Public Housing in Michigan

Appendix: B: Public Housing A uthorities in Michigan

Appendix C: Pictures of Public Housing throughout the United States

Appendix .D: Map of the State of Michigan with locations of Public Housing Authorities
Appendix E: Family Self-Suficiency Contract

Appendix F: Thirty-F our Reasons for Public housing

Appendix G: Housing Characteristics for Housing in the State of Michigan

I I. A
_ ‘ E (w .I‘
I la. It"... 6. am

.1 1; in. [I

.t . ., rm! f. AW

.r ‘3'! .lIIwIW 4!” Au}. ‘m‘

. L. t I III

v ‘3' “Mo AWN“ ‘Inlluv “i.” Ari a.

.. I 9.... .TLJ 9L4 4,... fl.

_ .V E all r...

.. .1...‘ Fit f 4n

. I M. a”... an... l

at Ant. nut. .H‘ any a.

Dedication

In honor of the memory and love I was given by
both my parents
Mr. & Mrs. Lauderdale Greer
I dedicate this work to the both of them
who watch me daily from above

Even than that biddest me from afar
I long for the time when we meet again
Come thou that are mine
And taste the sweetness
of our love so divine
As we watch you so closely
From above

t‘.‘fi‘is““‘(€“;“““‘-¢¢¢Uffl¢¢tt“““.““U“

'OOO--'-'OUCOO'COOOUOO‘OOOOOOU0-900----0UU’.‘UW.

Acknowledgements

 

I will praise thee for I am fearfully and wonderfully made in the image and likeness of my
Heavenly Father: The Lord Jesus Christ. I wish to take this time to acknowledge the person (5)
who not only took a chance on me, but also made it possible for me to gain confidence, and trust
in myself as I reached potential I never thought possible. First and foremost, Dr. June Thomas
Director of Urban and Regional Planning not only imparted a sense of greater determination in
my desire to become a planner; she also exemplifies the true spirit of a planner possessing the
spirit to serve. I would like to acknowledge and thank Dawn and Bets for their support and
encouragement and their ability to permit me to get things ofi‘ my shoulders so I could continue
my studies. Tom, the Urban Planning Librarian for all the kindness he showed me and making
sure I had the necessary books needed for this project. Holly, for helping me at the final hour.

I am grateful to Dr. Rex LaMore, John Melcher and the entire Center for Urban Afi‘airs and
Community Economic Development Program for trusting me with an assistance ship that not
only reinforced my commitment to pursue the field of planning; but it afforded me the
opporttmity to work directly with human beings in public housing situations that needed a voice. I
would like to thank Dr. Zenia Kotval for an early Christmas present (smile). Dr. Maxie Jackson
and his family. Fran Fowler and Dr. William Huang, Dr. Bruce Pigozzi, Dr. Harry Reed, Dr.
Richard Thomas and Sgt. Florene McGlothian-Taylor for providing me with the extra hours
needed as a Greencoat to keep my personal needs met. Dr. John Schweiter and Ms. Mary Ellen
for letting me hang out with them on the trips we took. Ms. LaTonyia Wade for the many nights
of support and understanding. My Friends from ORCBS (Judy, Clare, Pat).

I would like to thank Kathy Smith for being one of my new fi'iends, Kassandra Ray-Smith for the
many hours of help and Linda Waltz. Last, but not least. Dr. Glynda Moorer, since the first day
we met at Olin Health Center, you have been a star and a friend to me, I shall never forget how
she helped my family during the time of my baby brothers death. My husband Preston who
helped me stay focused and made sure I had the necessary books on time and the small change I
needed until I get a (real) job. My four children (Chelsea, Christina, Michael and Preston Jr.) and
my grandkids that kept me on track by reminding me that it was all possible. I cannot forget my
entire church family, New Jerusalem and the Pastor's Charles & Fran Bicy for their support and
numerous outfits I needed for special occasions.

My sisters (Carol & Sharon & Netta & Joyce) and brothers (Lonnie & Michael & Kenneth &
Dennis who watches me fi'om above) and Mary Starks (mother-in-law) who loved me dearly, my
brother in-law Ozell Starks, my number one cheerleader. My sister—in-laws who love me and
helped with my books. Doshia Ann and Stan for being my friends of more than 36 years. Linda S.
my fiiend for life, who trusted me one day with $900.00 so I wouldn‘t have to stop my education.
I am grateful for her friendship. Randall Gillespie who helped me with my books. Patricia Potter-
Smith who listens for hours on the phone, Angie Hill and her family and the Lady: Mrs. Nettie
Taylor for being there with words of encouragement, and Richard, who through thick and thin
will remain my friend. Dr. Richard Thomas, he believed in me when I doubted it ever possible.

INTRODUCTION

 

“ ..................................... .‘.....

Int.flv.tflv‘¢€.¢((£‘_.l.£€w‘¢alE‘w'.tQ“¢.¢I¢¢¢¢‘¢_“‘e“-‘i“-l

 

Introductign
Pu se 0 he Stud

Public housing and the role of the federal government in this particular housing market are
two of the major concerns of this study. The third concern is how this relationship of government
involvement has received criticism rooted in ideological objections to government providing
housing. A more pragmatic concern exists as to whether government had the experience to be
involved, and whether residents of public housing have been negatively affected. Few citizens
realize that public housing is owned and operated by a government agency. It is also no secret
that "housing policy" which has effected public housing can be defined as encompassing (1)
government expenditures, (2) loans and loan guarantees for investment in structures, (3) zoning
regulations, (4) land allocation and how it's used, (5) building and housing codes, (6) legal
provisions concerning property rights and tax treatment of residential real property or of income
from it.

All these ambient factors that surround public housing can serve as one of the purposes for the
study and practice of Urban and Regional Planning. Attempts are constantly being made to
change the nature of public housing, and perhaps the most dramatic efl‘orts in six decades has now
begun. Under a program known as Hope IV, authorized by Congress in 1993, the Clinton
administration had started to tear down 100,000 of the nation's 1.3 million public-housing units.
Even though progress had not moved at the paced hoped for in 1993, still, Michigan public
housing, which is the focus of this paper had 45,000 people who lived in public housing during
1997. Of the 23,516 households located in the state of Michigan it was reported that females and
a large percentage (44%) headed the majority (77%) were senior citizens age 62 years and over.

The average household size was about 2 and the average annual income was $9,100. Only
17% of these households earned the majority of their income fiom wages. Slightly more than
(52%) of all households indicated that their race was white, (48%) indicated that it was blaclg
(1%) Mei-man Indian, and (1%) Asian or Pacific Islander. Two percent of all households were

t‘fwtfv‘AIvSIEn!!€““€££‘tt‘flu¢.¢aflvfit¢fr“tf‘te““"-I

7-000UUUUOUUC------‘------U0--.}--‘UUUUOU‘UU‘U’UW‘U

Hispanic. Please see Appendix A of this research report for an extended account of Michigan
Public Housing.

The concept that public housing grew as a solution from two major housing reform
movements, (1) the model tenement movement, which sought enlightened investors who would
build decent housing, designed to provide adequate shelter and adequate profits. (2) The second
was the efl‘ort to regulate housing by setting minimum legal standards and thereby prohibiting the
worst type of housing where a large percentages of single females with 2 or more dependents and
senior citizens have been the dominant occupants of public housing in the state of Michigan. The
State of Michigan has a total of 140 Public Housing Authorities, from as far away as Ironwood
Michigan, and as close as Lansing Michigan. See Appendix B for a listing of all the Public
Housing Authorities in Michigan. See Appendix D for a map of Michigan with the locations of
the Housing Authorities. Programs are constantly being implemented in the different housing
authorities in Michigan to attempt deal with the disillusionment that surrounds residents who have
succumbed to the environmental, structural, and economical and political conditions that plague
them.

While it may appear that public housing in Michigan is on trial, I assure the reader this is not
the purpose of this research. As a future planner, it is my desire to serve the public housing
population the best way I have been trained. There is evidence and documentation that supports
that the rise and fall of public housing has been based on the process of policy implementation. I
believe in my life time as a planner, positive changes can be made at the state and federal level that
could move public housing towards a more balance and stable place of residency for human
beings. I also believe that as a planner I have the responsibility to help find ways to preserve the

enviromnent so there is a fixture for the next generations to look forward to.

C..Q.C..CT¢LCC£.¢(finalifffff‘tt‘tfiouan...“‘..¢.¢.¢.¢f.‘f‘€(‘tlc‘i'tf

'U’OOOUUO0"0-0-0-0---‘0'UOOUUOUOO-‘U900bo0.-“

 

Quanta tion of: Paar

The theoretical constructs of public housing is a mammoth subject encompassing many subtopics
that not only affect the role of the federal government, but, residents who occupy many different
types of structures classified as public housing units. Some of the concerns expressed about public
housing deal with location, environment, land, social constraints, safety and affordability. In the
interest of developing an intelligent research topic that would allow me to connect my
Interdepartmental studies in Urban Afl‘airs along with Urban and Regional Development, I had to
look closely at urban populations and how they get characterized by racial and ethnic minorities,
large numbers of poor people and the circumstances that surround public housing.

I have narrowed my focus to issues such as a brief history of public housing, programs
implemented by HUD and the implementation of housing policy and the new direction in urban
housing policy. In addition, I have done personal interviews with females who dwell in public
housing in order to gain insight into the assumed negative stereotyping associated with their
residency in public housing.

This progressive research method was utilized to bridge theory and practical public housing
issues. The paper is organized into five chapters. The first chapter looks at issues regarding the
creation of public housing in the United States. Chapter two looks at implementation of two
programs from a federal and local level. Chapter three reviews the influences of housing policies.
The fourth chapter looks at the direction of new public housing policy.

The fifth chapter will introduce the brief research methodology used in collecting data from those

interview. The fifth chapter also contains a partial “literature review”that allows me to set the

'OOOOOUUOOOOOOOOO‘OOO-0-0-1.0----‘O‘ODOOOUUWUUUIn.

stage for a theoretical conceptual framework. This framework is intended to illustrate if there is
any evidence to support my concept that a loss of self-esteem, or isolation or black self-esteem
are factors that do hinder residents of public housing from obtaining self-suficiency. The
framework will also attempt to demonstrate how policy and programs do bear a significant
relationship between what residents of public housing attribute as reasons for their success or
failure at achieving total independence and moving into mainstream America. The findings of this
particular chapter may be used to provide a better understand of how housing policy, social and
economic distribution, environment are all major factors which are embedded deeply in process of
how residents not only view themselves. But it may also demonstrate how few residents
understand the concepts of empowerment. Empowerment can be used as a vehicle to escape the
self-defeating condition so residents can rise to a new level of sufliciency. I will explore the results
of a small percentage of interviews conducted in the summer of 1997 with eight Afiican—American
females. They are residents of public housing, and their lives have been afl‘ected due to some of
the findings of this brief research.

The interviews done in this work are not meant to be an exhaustive collection of the total
population of female residents of public housing. Rather, they are representative of a small group
of females who allowed me the time to hear the sentiments of their heart concerning their
residency in public housing. Throughout the United States public housing residents are beginning
to question the role of government and how it has been a major contributor to many of the
obstacles that have hinder progress. They are organizing and forming resident councils where
training and education have become the central focus. I will attempt to reach a conclusion in
chapter five bridging the previous chapters demonstrating how each has the potential to strength
the other if one of the central issues, decent and affordable public housing, not just a dream, but a

reality.

‘(tst‘ttil‘r(teetatttlt‘r‘ctffiflr‘tét‘f“‘.¢f‘€“‘ltl“ul

 

CHAPTER ONE

t t L erg t. E .‘w t ”c; _t c. .1.‘ f. c c. f f t G (at. I! first r.£.l¢v-€ ‘ f .‘1‘ .E‘ f. 7‘ f f ‘ fl‘l‘u‘l.‘

History of Public Housing: United States

When a problem develops that afl‘ects the public welfare, it is the responsibility of the
government, at some level, to do something about it. However, since there must first be a
problem, any government legislation or regulations attempting to alleviate it must come afterward.
Sometimes the legislation comes promptly, as during war or other crises, but usually it comes
slowly, because of the normal character of the democratic process (Beyer 1965 pg. 488). This
may appear to be the case in the United States concerning public housing.1

In order to understand how public housing has operated in Michigan. I looked briefly at
where public housing first started. I will look at some of the history from a broader scope (United
States) and then narrow in on Michigan. In 1964 Charles Abrams introduced a work entitled, fie
Future of Houmg, Abram’s work served as an indictment of the America people for not taking
the issues concerning housing and public housing more seriously. Abrams declared, “a law, any
law, even a promising preamble (still fashionable in housing legislation), allays the clamor for
action. " “For a hundred years, housing history has repeated the same sequence, long periods of
apathy were interrupted by emotional agitation for reforms for residents, soul stirring literature
abounds; no program emerges that would serve residents of public housing that could afi‘ord them
the opportunity to moved into mainstream America”. (Abrams 1964 Pg.64) This has been one of
the outcries of residents of public housing that has prompted the Clinton administration to change
its present strategies nationwide. They have agreed to enter into partnerships so communities
where public housing once became deteriorated, can now become revitalized with vibrant

neighborhoods in our inner cities and rural areas.

 

‘ with a total population awarding to the 1998 United States Bureau of the Census 270,002,845. Public
housing serves over 44% of senior citizens and single patented homes headed by females.

Since its inception, the United States public housing system has been mired in controversy.
President Franklin D. Roosevelt realized that United States had a social responsibility to the
citizen afler 1933. The government intervened into the housing program after the financial and
economic diasters of the Great Depression provided the occasion for the first sustained, overt
federal interventions in the housing market (Mitchell 1985 pg. 6). One of the reasons for
governmental adoption of the housing policy was to alter the distribution of income. The crux of
the housing problem in the United States was economic. Mitchell stressed in his work than under
the ordinary law of supply and demand, it is unsolvable, as long as people need decent housing,
money would be the driving force.

In our modern industrial civilization, the distribution of income is such that a substantial
proportion of the population cannot pay market prices for rent, much less public housing prices,
and much less a market-rate purchase price of a home fulfilling the minimum health and decency
requirements. This is not a local or transitory phenomenon. It is universal and permanent to the
extent, at least, that our economic system is universal and permanent. Carla Ravaioli understood
these powerful and truthful words when in her work, Economist and the Environment concerning
environmental sustainability which is becoming very detrimental to public housing residents who
are surrounded by drug, gangs and crimes sometimes so hideous that life itself becomes
unbearable, she states, . "The basic meaning of sustainability is the capacity for continuance
more or less indefinitely into the future. It is clear that, in agregate, current human ways of life
do not possess that capacity, either because they are destroying the environmental conditions
necessary for their continuance, or because their environmental effects will cause unacceptable

social disruption and dwnage to human health " (Ravaioli 1995 pg. 186). We see this played out

 

everyday in public housing environments, destruction, crime, and loss of life, loss of housing and
no sustainable capacity for most of the residents to continue.

In addition, Marsden & Oakley, in their work, Evaluating Social Development Projects
suggest, all people are entitled to human dignity, irrespective of economic status, ethnic origin,
color, or caste. "A society has little claim to have developed where some sections can offer or
abuse the human dignity of others and get away with it by virtue of their social power and
position. One has not developed fully as a person, we would suggest, if one does not consider an
ofi‘ence to the human dignity of any person to be an offence to one' s own dignity; without this
basic identity with human race one is not human oneself" Marsden & Oaldey 1990 pg. 48). For
years residents of public housing had no advocate or voice to speak out on their behalf. They
were sectioned ofl‘ in many cities and cut ofl‘ from main stream America, only to be reminder of
their inability to function as human being. It became more evident when President Roosevelt
stated, "A third of a nation is ill-housed" (Abrams 1964 pg. 12). The United States had the land,
labor and materials-more than enough for housing, yet , home building lagged, housing shortages,
slums, and insecurity of housing and home ownership stood out in bitter contrast to their wealth
and industrial vigor in production. The emergence of the first major housing assistance program,
public housing, occurred in the United States in response to the widely shared perception of an
acute need for a supply of good housing for lower-income persons, although considerations of the
need for construction jobs also played an important role in the developing of public housing
(Hayes 1995 pg. 279). America's present physical pattern was the end product of a sequence of
attitudes prevalent in separate phases of its history. During each phase physical patterns were
formed. Each pattern reflected the dominant social atmosphere of its own time. If prevailing
attitude favored strong state control, then housing policy would impose rigid regulation upon the

private builders where housing was concern. When attitude veered toward greater economic

Gals? 5?... film-m a? is. en! -Erfi‘. ‘11.“. E ‘f‘. Iv. ‘. ‘11.! In. (__.._..G‘I‘..-‘ ‘ I. ‘1‘ ‘ ‘. c (v I... t! (-‘a‘ ['14.

liberalism, the builder was given more freedom to do as he was pleased, public housing was left

on the back burner (Abrams 1946 pg. 3).

In the richest country in the world-in the country which boasts the greatest know-how and the
best industrial technology in the world-there exists a housing famine (Hawley 1978 pg, 3). In
1971, some 27 years ago, an estimated 13 million families in this country suffer "serious housing
deprivation" (Hawley 197 8 pg. 3) With this great outcry for decent public housing, the growing
inadequacy of the present housing conditions throughout the United States and the entire land,
have together with the efforts of legislation and the rising voice of reformers, have succeeded in
making this country "housing-conscious" (Ebenstein 1940 pg. 1).

The complex history of public housing can best be understood in terms of four basic issues
which were the focus of early debate and struggle between its opponents and proponents some
sixty years ago as well as today. There are: site selection, the target population, financial
problems, and problems of administration and project design. (Hayes 1995 pg. 92). In each
of these areas, the political balance of focuses created contradictory pressures, which made it
difficult for the program to meet its objectives. Today, some of these contradictions continue to
affect later alternatives to public housing.

Due to the enormous amount of literature on the above-mentioned issues, time won’t permit
the writer to give a fill] account, but, briefly I would like to expound on the importance of these
issues. Site selection arose as a problem very early. This was due to the fact that the precursor to
the public housing program, the Housing Division of the Public Works Administration, ran a
centralized progranr, in which the federal government itself brought and developed project sites.
Because of the political appeal of decentralization and because of legal challenges to the federal
govermnent’s right to use eminent domain for such a purpose, proponents of a permanent public
housing program opted for local control. Local housing authorities would be created by special
legislation in each state to develop and administer the federally financed projects. In addition,
local governments would be given a role in site selection through a cooperation agreement
between the public housing authority and the local government regarding payments in lieu of taxes
for fire, police, and other public services (Hayes 1995 pg. 92). (2) The Target Population served

was a second major problem for public housing. In other industrialized countries, publicly owned
or subsidized housing serves a broad segment of the population (McGuire 1981).

In the United States, in contrast, it was assumed from the beginning that only the lowest
income persons, those so desperately poor as to have no chance of obtaining housing on the
private market, should be served. (3) Financial problems: In his work, The Rise; and F all of Public
Hon—sing, Eugene Meehan made the financial problems of the public housing program central to
his analysis of what he considers its widespread failure. He contends that over most of its
existence, the program was forced by financial starvation to provide a limited number of units and
a declining quality of service, and he documents convincingly the important role played by lack of
funds. Funding was used to restrict the program in several ways. The most obvious was through
the appropriation of funds for construction. Congress consistemly firnded far fewer units than
authorized. Lastly the issue of (4) Physical designs , here, too, the program was caught between
conflicting pressures from liberals for improvement and from conservatives for containment. See
Appendix C for pictures of public housing. The issue of public housing design touched directly
on a central problem common to all such programs-what level of housing quality should be
enjoyed by those whom the government assists? In some instances there have been documentation
of how residents have reacted to there surroundings in such negatives ways that HUD is

constantly looking for new monies and programs to help residents take back their communities.

h.l..rl.1'..r‘t .IM. ful‘l‘urwm me ‘. ‘w ‘.. ‘1 Q .. c. n.. -1... ‘l‘. ‘1..- ‘l‘v‘. ‘ .I‘ ‘1‘ I! 4‘. ‘v ‘ t l. ‘ _‘. ‘1‘ I.

1 .H'rii II I. ... .
m . ' e

VUUUUUUU'OOUUUOOUUOUU-CUUU‘UOOUWUU‘U‘UW‘UW‘UWU‘WU‘UO

CHAPTER 2 IIVIPLEMENTATION 0F SING P OGRAMS

In the United States the first major subsidized housing program was not enacted until the need
for better housing could be coupled with another national objective: the need to reduce
unemployment resulting from the Great Depression. Section 1 of the Housing Act of 1937 made
clear the dual objectives of the legislation; "to alleviate present and recurring unemployment and
to remedy the unsafe, and unsanitary housing conditions and the acute shortage of decent, safe,
and sanitary dwellings for families of low income" (Abrams 1946 pg. 325). Although the need to
stimulate the economy was key to creation of the program, other forces determined its shapes.

The most important factor that contributed to the design of the public housing program was
the extent of the opposition to it. Although the 1937 Housing Act promised jobs and apartments
for the "deserving poor", there were still many dissenters. President Roosevelt himself had to be
coaxed because a large-scale public housing program had not been part of the first phase of the
New Deal (Friedman 1968). Organized opposition came from interest groups, such as the US
Chamber of Commerce and the US Savings and Loan League. Also in the forefront of the
opposition was the National Association of Real Estate Boards, whose president summarized the

views of the private home-building industry as follows:
Housing should remain a matter of private
enterprise and private ownership. It is
contrary to the genius of the American
people and the ideals they have established
that government becomes landlord to its
citizens. Ihere is sound logic in the
continuance of the practice under which
those who have initiative and the will
to save acquire better living facilities
and yield their former quarters at modest
rents to the group below (Keith 1973).

Congress conservative members labeled public housing a socialist program and opposed it
on the grounds that it would put the government in competition with private property (F riedmann
1968 and Keith 1973). Michael Stone disagrees with Congress, in his work, Shelter Poverty: New
Ideas on Housing Afl‘ordabilgy’ , he states, "I think its possible, first, for the United States to have

a social movement behind housing like that of the women ’s rights or civil rights. In this country,

10

there must be a major impetus to get a movement underway and at present time, I believe
America has lost her values and morals when it comes to caring about her own. We no longer
hold the truths to be self-evident, support for decent public housing is not there. This movement
would need a framework for analysis, a developed vision of an alternative model of housing
provisions and the willingness and ability to connect peoples direct experience in an eflective
way to forcefully propound the dominant cultural institutions (Stone 1990 pg. 278).

Largely as a concession to the private housing industry, the public housing legislation included
an "equivalent elimination" provision requiring local authorities to eliminate a substandard or
unsafe dwelling unit for each new unit of public housing built. Public housing could replace
inadequate units, but it was not to increase the overall supply of housing, since doing so could
drive down rents in the private market. The argument that public housing should not interfere
with the private market logically led to the view that public housing should be clearly
differentiated. This had important implications for its physical design. Public housing, with its
austere appearance, is usually easily distinguished from the overall housing stock. World War II

soon interrupted the short lived public housing program.

World War H interrupted all non-war war related programs, and public housing construction
fell victim to the defense needs. Thousands of units were "pipelined" before the war, but it was
not until 1944 that production virtually stopped. Prior to reactivation by the 1940 Housing Act,
the real estate lobby launched as all-out attack on public housing. The familiar cry of socialism
and the warning that public housing in the United States would destroy the private building
industry were heard again.

President Truman, a supporter of the program, responded with this pointed counterattack: "I
have been shocked in recent days at the extraordinary propaganda campaign that has been
unleashed against this bill (Housing Act of 1949) by the real estate lobby. I do not recall even

having witnessed a more deliberate campaign of misrepresentation cmd distortion against

11

'o’dddddddddvvdvddvvcdccvvvooU‘OUO”O‘wvluurabwwowwwor

legislation of such crucial importance to the public welfare. The propaganda of the real estate
lobby consistently distorts the facts of the housing situation in the country" (Keith 19 73).
Ultimately, proponents of public housing prevailed, but the legislative intent was clear: public
housing was only to serve those who could not compete for housing in the private market. Private
interest groups were willing to tolerate public housing as long as it was explicitly serving a
difi‘erent consumer. Yet not all low-income people were eligible for a public housing unit.

From the program's inception, it was aimed at providing housing only for the deserving,
temporarily poor-the "submerged middle class"(Friedman 1968). The program therefore targeted
those who could not find decent, afl‘ordable housing on the private market, but not the so-called
unworthy poor and those with no means to pay rent. The exception that tenants should pay their
own way expressed itself in the formula the federal government devised for financing public
housing. Tenant’s rents were to cover all operating expenses, exclusive of debt service. Only the
federal govermnent through annual contribution contracts paid the principal and interest on bonds,
which floated by the local authorities to construct the buildings. Thus, the federal government
covered the long term debt financing while ownership and management were vested in local
public agencies. This arrangement worked well during the early years of the program.

After World War 11, public housing expanded adding nearly 200,000 units of worker
housing that was needed near factories or military bases. After the war, as the pent-up demand
from the depression and war years was about to produce a suburban housing boom, the powerful
real estate industry did not want to compete with public housing. Their claim centered around the
issues of public housing was opening the wedge of socialism, the industry was able to convince
Congress in 1949 to limit public housing to the very poor. Soon not only did the country’s

demographic picture began to shift, but the realities of public housing changed radically, with the

12

'Udddddddd‘dUUO-OOOdOOOOUUOUUUUOUUUUwUUw'U'&“O'-O"d'0

income of residents falling from 57% of the median income in 1950 to about 20% in 1988, and
the percentage of minorities rising from 26% in 1944 to more than 75% today.

These changes afl‘ected public housing in at least two ways. First, it meant that rent covered
less and less of the operating costs, especially when Congress in 1969 (in response to protests by
residents) required that residents pay only 25% of their monomial incomes for rent. This led to the
need for larger and larger “operating subsides”, which was money that could not be spent on
rebuilding deteriorating developments or building new public housing. Second, this change meant
that those who live in public housing became increasingly isolated, both in terms of income and
race. This fact made it easier for governments, politicians and businesses to ignore public housing.
It also made it harder for residents to become part of mainstream economy, and so did the
population served by public housing. As Federal Housing Administration (FHA) and Veterans
Administration (VA) mortgages insurance and guarantee programs became available to vast
numbers of new home buyers, the interstate highway system took form and most of the
submerged middle-class residents of public housing surfaced to assume full-fledged suburban
middle-class status.

As firrther concession to the private construction industry, the 1949 Housing Act limited
public housing to very-low-income people by requiring that the highest rents be 20% lower than
the lowest prevailing rents for decent housing in the private market and authorized the eviction of
above-income families (United States Department of Housing and Urban Development 1979).

Publicly provided housing was now to be available only to the very poor. Once public housing
was reactivated and could no longer claim to be a depression-stimulated support for the
temporarily poor, it became clearly defined as a permanent housing for people who were
separated from society's mainstream. There is no question that public housing has made a

considerable contribution to addressing the low-income housing problem in this country. Millions

l3

of low-income families have been provided with decent, affordable housing with units with which
the great majority of tenants appear to be satisfied. Moreover, the majority of the public housing
developments have been reported to be in good condition. But still, public housing in the United
States has also been a disappointment. It has not promoted racial integration, often designs of the
building have been bleak, accessibility has been poor and management has been problematic. Yet,
many of public housing's failings have been due to opposition by private-sector critic's attempts to
kill the program. While public housing cannot and should not be ”let off the hook" (with regards
to racial integration and management) these problems are correctable and do not reflect inherent
flaws in the basic concept of the public housing program. In view of the real achievements of
public housing, why do completely negative stereotypes persists? First, some of the most
problem-laden projects clustered in large cities and are readily observable to many people. The
vast numbers of successful projects are more dispersed and are often in small cities and towns.
The reality that a handfirl of projects are in serious difficulty may have created the myth that all
public housing has failed. Second, the notion that public housing has been a failure is certainly
what interest groups want to believe and propound. Thirdly, generally speaking, the poor have not
been political activists. This inevitably lessens the thrust of such progam public housing and
blacks are much more likely than whites to be poor. Their average income is considerably lower
and non-whites, especially Negroes, are discriminated against.

The United States Civil Rights Commission declared in its 1959 report that ”housing...seems
to be the one commodity in the American market that is not freely available on equal terms to
everyone who can afi‘ord to pay" (Freedman 1968 pg. 134). Nonwhites are charged more than
whites for equivalent housing even at the public housing level. "The dollar in a dark hand”, said
the Commission, does not "have the same purchasing power as a dollar in a white hand", and

much of the housing market is closed to blacks at any price (Freedman 1996 pg. 134).

I4

Public ownership of housing is still not a popular concept, and a successful program that
bypasses the private home-building industry would be just as unwelcome among the private sector
today as it was when the program was enacted. And the final reason for the negative public
housing stereotypes is that the media tends to cover the failures within the public housing
community to a far greater degree than they have the success. Something happen in the United
States in the early sixties to change the position the Federal Government played in providing
opportunities for individuals of public housing status to participate in programs that would
successfully bridge their economic, social and environmental status.

The creation of the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) by Congress in
1966 marked the first Cabinet position that sought to administer directly to urban problems.

Urban programs that supported health, education and employment training were fimded by
HUD, but by far the largest increment in spending was on programs associated with community
development and housing (Judd 167) Public housing was now finally on its way for a change in
how the social development of residents could change due to programs that would offer
accessibility to firnds, education, better health and documentation that Congress wanted to be
involved. In their work, Evaluating Social Development Projects, Marsden & Oaldey state that
"If some form of social development is to become the objective of an particular development
program or project, then it is reasonable to assume that, at some stage in the project ’s.
Evolution, we may wish to evaluate its outcome or impact " (Marsden & Oakley 1990 pg. 27).

The United States Department of Housing and Urban Development initiated Project self-
suficiency as a national demonstration in late 1984. Project self-sufliciency used Section 8
Existing Housing certificates as an incentive for communities to develop public-private
partnerships that would provide a comprehensive program of housing, child care, transportation,

personal and career counseling, education, job training, and job placement assistance to help

15

families break the cycle of poverty. Project self-sufficiency was designed to encourage
communities to take the initiative in planning and implementing their local programs and to be
creative in testing a variety of approaches.

Both of the programs implemented by HUD (Operation Bootstrap & Project self-sufficiency)
lapsed. HUD then mandated that all Public Housing Authorities (PHA) implement the Family
self-suficiency Program in November of 1990 to promote the development of strategies to
coordinate Federal Public Housing, Indian Housing and Section 8 Rental assistance with public
and private supportive services that would enable lower-income families to achieve economic

independence and self-sufficiency. Participation in the Family self-suficiency (F arnily Self-
Sufliciency) program was strictly voluntary and HUD discovered reasons behind the low
participation rates of families. Some families opt not to participate in the program for "fear of
governmental contracts, fear of failure and low self-esteem" (Covel March 20, 1997). The
program (F SS) have been evaluated for the success and weakness and duration of participation of
residents and their ability to change their economic, social, and educational goals as a result of
participating in these programs.

America' 5 public housing system had embarked on a period of firndamental change.
Some of the most dangerous and dilapidated urban public housing projects are being replaced.
The Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) has always intervened to improve
the operation of chronically mismanaged Public Housing Authorities (PHAs). Regulations that
govern public housing are being overhauled and streamlined to provide a new flexibility for Public
Housing Authorities and new opportunities for residents. Public Housing Authorities (PHAs)
must find ways to help residents re-enter the economic mainstream if they are to remain viable as

providers of affordable low-income housing. The primary goal of these reforms is to ensure that

16

.1.“‘r‘w-“r‘£“€“““"‘.¢"v‘““““¢“-‘4.“"-l

public housing will no longer be a permanent residence, but a platform for families and individuals
to achieve Self-Sufficiency.

Achieving the social and economic objectives of self-sufficiency programs will be no easy
task due to the characteristics of the public housing population. Many face multiple and serious
barriers to employment and independence. Public housing families are among the poorest
residents of America ' s poorest urban neighborhoods. Household income in public housing
averages seventeen percent of the area median. In many of the nation ' s larger housing
authorities, a single female with beads more than eighty percent of non-elderly families
children. A growmg share of public housing residents has a long history of dependency (although
the median length of public housing residence is four years) and twenty-nine percent of public
housing residents remain for ten years or more. See Appendix A

Perhaps most serious, however, is that public housing is located disproportionately in
areas of concentrated poverty which are frequently plagued by social ills such as crime, drugs,
teenage pregnancy, high drapout rates, and chronic unemployment. Numerous factors have made
reduced dependency on public assistance both a political and practical necessity. Provisions of
recently enacted Federal welfare reform impose work requirements on able-bodied adults and
time limits on welfare benefits will affect most public housing families.

And now, under President Clinton and former Secretary Cuomo, the major emphasis of
the Department of Housing and Urban Development is building home ownership zones to
revitalize depressed communities. In a speech to the White House Conference on Community
Empowerment, President Clinton made the following commitment, "If we really want all of our
communities to be revitalized again we not only have to create opportunities for poor people, we
have to make the environment so that middle-class people will want to live in them again, and

that poor and the middle-class will live side by side, as they did in the neighborhoods when I

17

grew up. We have to do that. We have to be committed to helping all Americans achieve this
large part of the American dream known as home ownership " (United States Department of
Housing and Urban Development 1996).

The Department of Housing and Urban Development is a strong supporter of low income
families and to ensure that homeowners will be created from those now on public assistance,
HUD mandated that all Public Housing Authorities (PHA) implement a Family Self Sufficiency
(F SS) programs. The Family Self-Sufficiency (F SS) program was established by the National
Affordable Housing Act (PL. 101-625), November 28, 1990), and was amended in October 1992
by the Housing and Community Development Act of 1992 (PL. 102-550). The program’ 5
purpose is to promote the development of local strategies to coordinate federal housing assistance
with public and private resources in order to enable lower-income families to achieve and maintain
economic independence and self-sumciency. Michigan's Family self-sufficiency Programs
flourished when first implemented. Participation in the Family self-sufficiency Program required
residents to meet with a family service coordinator. The coordinator then had the responsibility of
working with the participant to generate an action plan. The purpose of this action plan was to
serve as a gauge where the resident would decide if he/she wanted to enter into a plan that could
last up to five years.

The coordinator assists in outlining the steps participants should follow, the resources they could
utilize and they set target dates for completion of the program. Next, the participant would sign a
five-year contract with the federal government agreeing to adhere to the federally mandated
guidelines for Family self-sufficiency. See Appendix E for a example of what a contract contains.
Many who participated became socially and economically independent of public
welfare institutions, many were able to save enough fimds to purchase a home and move

out of public housing. Some entered into institutions of higher learning and advance their

18

Qr‘r-‘t‘.-.‘r‘¥r“..£"““.“"“t-lv.t[-t-..“‘:“‘a““..“.‘.‘f1‘

educational status. Recently due to the lack of participation on the part of the residents the
program has come under attack from the HUD Administration. Lack of communication
and trust was said to be some of the key factors that hinder residents from participating in
the program. Recently efforts have resorted in many Public Housing Authorities to using
income-mixing strategy to include the development of families reaching economic self-

suificiency and becoming less dependent on federal subsidies.

l9

‘4--.’ ‘ fl-.. ‘. {'1‘_‘ .‘. _- I! ll. .‘. ‘-‘-“ I. It. I- I: ‘.'..I.. ‘u‘....! 5! f-‘ s... 1! I ll ‘2 it-.. Ip.‘ '{twrt-

 

CHAPTER THREE Y...

l.D3--.]...0...’b.,3i.,tv.”.3.|y.’lylr‘.‘;'-“-‘S"-."ivls.‘tvivlvlyt

‘u‘-‘t‘tttl‘. ‘f““.€“€ .i f.'fvcff‘r-c-'ff“f“tr.‘.lv.€i‘-:lell

CHAPTER 3 PUBLIC HOUSING PQLICIE’S INFLUENCE

Harvard University's Joint Center for Housing Studies 1995 Report lists, among its
"unmet needs", housing for the ill-housed (primarily the poor, although not only the poor) has
never been the central feature of United States housing policy, not even of public housing policy.
Historically, public housing has always been the tail of some other dog. The study provides eight
difl‘erent key issues that support the finding. First, of the effort to create jobs, in the original
United States Housing Act of 193 7; (2) the need for war production, during World War I]; (3)
the demands of returning veterans for decent housing alter the war ended; (4) the relocation and
slum clearance requirements of urban redevelopment and urban renewal; programs; (5) the anti-
poverty program and attempts to still the racial unrest in the ghettos; (6) the ideologically driven
effort to extricate the government from housing for the poor, in production, management, and
ownership; (7) the pressure to reduce social expenditures by decentralization and the passing of
responsibilities so far as feasible to nonprofits and residents; (8) the general drive for privatization
of governmental firnctions and the reduction of "big movement”.

The following chapter will discuss how public policies simultaneously help and hindered
progress toward economic independence and self-sufficiency for a number of programs initiated in
the public housing sector. The sustainability of housing policies have always been dependent on
the role the federal government adopts as financial and economic distress continue to develop, it
appears that housing policies implemented today might not serve the public housing population in
altering the distribution of income. They first must have an income that afl‘ords them the same
opportunities as they compete with mainstream.

In a article by George Stemlieb and James W. Hughes they state an important and realistic

fact concerning housing. "Housing is not merely a refirge from elements; it is an essential tool

20

‘r‘ftuet.’ tin..-‘ "fi‘rb‘fl 1. 1“-..“ '1'. ‘-.‘--f£¥-“f“f ‘11!IV. 4'. it‘ll

binding together an America of enormously varied humanity, housing and homeownership glues
people to the system, and the United States is in the process of dismantling the very apparatus
that has woven together our social and political fabric since the Great Depression"(1997 pg. 143).
It is said that "Housing policy" is a similarly ambiguous term. Housing policy can influence the
number and kind of new structures built and the maintenance, conversion, and removal of old
structures. In a larger sense it can influence housing services-the quality of the housing stock and
of the individual units and the cost of housing services (Mitchell 1985 pg. 21).

The study of “policy” and the study of “power” are closely related. Power is usually
operationally defined in terms of policy outcomes-that is, as the ability of a political actor to
influence the behavior of others in such a way to gain a preferred outcome. Mary K. Nenno, the
author of Ending The Stalmatg, focuses her attention on the process of urban and housing
development and how it played a major role in shaping the lives of the American poor and low
income. Nenno's work presents evidence and documentation that indicates how these problems
contimie to grow and face opposition in maintaining housing. Nenno also address the social and
economic stability for occupants of public housing. Nenno’s works investigates several ineffective
systems implemented that have failed to develop strategies. They have failed to encourage state
and local govermnent and private interests to help implement national goals, so housing and urban
development needs of the nation could be recognized an integral and continuing component of
national well being (N enno 1995 Pg. 14). Nenno work examines how the role of the Federal
Govermnent has helped in the past five decades implement/alter or even reduce policies where
housing is concern. Nenno has been quite accurate as she points out the difl‘erent repercussion the
housing legislation has encountered during the difl‘erent administrations,many times causing the
debate surrounding the issues to pass fi'om one administration to another. Nenno suggest that

until a national urban policy is created that can meet the needs of housing and urban development,

21

51-..-.. 1|. ‘1‘. a! Li... .. 11.11.... C .t I... 1.. I. t I_l. is .I an! I... i! 1. Iftw‘. .t! 6-.....1 t! _..._! I! It. .1? .lw [I 1!..- IV...

this cycle of frustration and missed opportunities will continue to rob this nation. Nenno focuses
on the Cabinet-Level Department and its History to the Framework of a National Policy, towards
the end of her work she takes a shift in how she perceives that it is necessary for a National Urban
Policy should be an International Policy.

In addressing the concerns raised by Nenno’s work, I looked briefly at several of the issues
raised by Nenno that has effected residents of public housing, starting with the Johnson’s
administration that was geared at stabilizing the housing issues, (Model Cities & Metropolitan
Development Act of 1966 ) and the (Housing and Urban Development Act of 1968) bringing the
government into the fiont, and how Johnson saw these as important features that could help
change the direction for urban America. Nenno points out that it was this administration that
proposed and got accepted by the Congress an approved cabinet-level Department of Housing
and Urban Development (HUD), with high aspirations and a broad mission to bring new direction
and resources to the demands of urban change (Nenno 1995 pg. 3).

The creation of HUD came a secretary (Weaver) who recognized the need to consolidate the
constituent units of the HHF A, which had often operated as separate entities (Nenno 1995 pg.6).
Weaver set out to also combine the financing fiinction in the same Cabinet department with an
expanded
capacity to integrate physical and social planning and housing rehabilitation, increase the
production of housing, and develop a policy of land purchase authority to facilitate fixture urban
deveIOpment. Nenno looks at the different administrations and failure of the HUD structure. First,
a number of past and current HUD assisted housing policies ran counter to the goal of achieving
sound and livable housing developments. (N enno 1995 pg. 213 ) . These included, first, a well
intentioned but failed policy to concentrate assistance on the poorest households, which made it

difficult to locate assisted housing developments with this concentratrated occupancy in many

22

-1 .1 C 4'-.. ‘ $11.. ‘11! ‘v f-.. f-‘;-‘.f- t! __I. I: ‘1Y1rle5' I‘lsl.l.u!..lv is Is 1! I." 1! 1‘13}... ‘1' 1......

'0'-dd--OUUCOUOUUOOOOOU'----U----UOOO‘U‘U--.’O"

communities. Management of housing developments with concentrations of very-low-income
residents is particularly difficult in large cities with an inventory of large public housing
developments located in areas that are severely distressed. Secondly, HUD housing policy that
needs new attention is an explicit effort to encourage housing settings and structural designs that
respond to diverse household needs. This kind of approach has not been encouraged by federal
policy, Nenno believes, except in the case of developments for the elderly, and to a lesser extent,
for the disabled or homeless persons. Thirdly, Nenno suggest that HUD policy needs new
attention in an expanded effort to make housing developments place opportunity for residents to
achieve maximum independence. (Nenno 1995 pg. 212)

Throughout her work, Nenno uses two terms that should be embedded in any policy
regarding housing and urban development (linkage and empowerment). She illustrates that there
is strong evidence of a lack of systematic linkage between the different administrations that
failed to comprehend the urgency for political support and implementation of housing policies to
stay foremost at the front of the housing mission statement. If there is no direct linkage between
the role of the federal government and housing/urban development, the cycle will continue to
repeat itself. Empowerment acts as a catalyst, and Nenno’s work brings to the forefront I believe
several instruments of power held in the hands of the government that could turn the situation in
housing around, promoting the necessary changes needed for the restructuring of many housing
conditions that should change.

One of the key factors needed to promote this was resources and strong political leadership.
These two forces were brought to a halt during the Johnson’s administration due to the United
States involvement in Vietnam War, never to surface at the level Johnson had demonstrated
possible. Nenno’s work points out that it took some twenty-five years, along with scandal,

mismanagement for HUD to attempt to return to the former mission statement of providing

23

t. C 5.-.... 1.. .1. 6., ¢.-Q C. :1 4!. 1.. C. C t. 12.1. f 1., I :1. 1. 1.-.! 1. 1.3.1-1. 1.. ‘2‘. .1. 1.. i. A... at 11-1... .0 1.1.1.1..

'J'C'O'U‘U'CC'OWCUU‘OOOUUUUOUUUUU‘UWUU‘UOU‘.0'--C‘.

affordable home for low and moderate income families. In her attempts to demonstrate the role
of the government, Nenno never points the finger at them, she only gives strong answers as to the
solutions they could have used to bridge other programs that were in force during these times.
Nenno's work submit that the national housing and urban development initiatives had been only
piecemeal, raising and falling with the emergence and decline of national crises and changes in
political leadership. The only way for housing and community development to get the fill] support
of whatever administration that is in action, Nenno believes that there should be a National Urban
Policy .

In addition to the work on housing policy documented by Mary K. Nenno, I would like to
introduce some of the concepts concerning housing policies written by R.Allen Hays. Some of his
concerns parallel along the same lines as Nenno. Hays’ work concerning some of the factors,
which describe the role of federal government and urban housing, is very innovative and
informative. Hays believes that since the Great Depression, and even more since World War II,
the federal government has assumed the responsibility of deliberate macro economics intervention,
in order to minimize the peaks and valleys of prosperity and recession to which the market system
is subject. Other new issues such as welfare reform and the position HUD has taken in the last
several years will affect not only the standard of housing for residents of public project type
housing and section 8 type housing, but the fimds allocated to provide sites for additional housing.

Hays’s work implies also that power and policy are closely related, so much so that one
(power) is usually operationally defined in terms of policy outcomes- that is, as the ability of a
political actor to influence the behavior of others in such a way to gain a preferred outcome.
While Hays’s work offers an important contribution to the concepts of power and policy-making
where the Conservative and Liberals intervene, he does argue later that the viewpoints are not

accurate reflections of their actual operational values. It is clear he states that these two terms

24

I.q ‘. 1! .. Ct“. E-‘. ‘1‘. (a £1.11. 1“ ll.-.“ 4“ .I. (.13.... 1. (4‘1... .1: 4..-! r. t. I. 1... .1: .l. .0. 1..; .1! (Ill...

"d‘O‘OOCOCOOUCUUUUUO’UUUUUUOUUW'UWOW”a..--1"

symbolize distinct interpretation of a common ideology, “democratic capitalism”, which dictate
different solutions to common problems. He also suggests another area, which
Liberals/ Conservative split, emerges over the scope and direction of community development, a
area where government plays a powerful role. Policy concerning community development have
been dominated by two distinct, but interrelated sets of issues that are so closely related that they
appear confusing at times, they are, the role of local government vis-a-vis and the private sector in
the control of economic growth and physical development. The other issue relates to the changing
distribution of power between federal, state, and local governments as they have assumed
differing roles in the local community development process. At one time the prevailing paradigm
among political scientist was the pluralist model. In this model, power is not controlled by a single
ruling elite, but by fiagmented elite groups, which are divided both geographically and
fimctionally. Based on these findings, as a planner, I would then argue that if ideology is the main
driving force behind political behavior, what factors change the actors in making decisions that
change the behavior of the individual that policy-making decisions will affect the greatest, public
housing residents).

The key words “power and policy” become one of the guiding forces that help stimulate the
outcome of issues that surround housing, community development and the plight of public policy.
Hays outlines the role of several key political entities that shape policy-making among people of
power. There has to be a structure set it places for power to operate. At one time this was seen
as the pluralist model (one who holds more than one office) the prevailing paradigm among
political scientist. In this model, power is not controlled by a single ruling elite, but by fragmented
elite groups, which are divided both geographically and functionally. One of the most important
areas of concern that Hays emphasizes is the relationship of government involvement in urban

housing policy over the last fifty years. I believe like Hays that the role of government has been

25

Iuflffilf. 9.0.! 9.121.. C!!! 111.. t 1!... .Ir 1...]! .wa. it (I... [1.lrufllmlfilfletmftrf 171‘. 1'1... _‘lf..-£_

that of a “catalyst”. Always there in some way building or breaking up what should have been a
foundation solid enough to bridge the gap fi'om the inception of the first housing act till the
present. Private enterprise throughout its history, turned to government for financial and legal
support, business interests have not hesitated to manipulate public power for private purposes.
Numerous industry groups demand government intervention to stabilize or enhance their
economic position. While sometimes Hays find inconsistisces in the position taken by both
Liberals and Conservatives, they both play ofi‘ each other in some ways.

Liberals favor an increased government role in all areas of social and economic life, while
conservatives favor holding the line or decreasing governmental activity. Sometimes Hays' work
on policy gives readers the impression that without the backbone of governmental involvement,
policies influenced such as housing, social welfare needed government intervention. The great
depression was an even greater catalyst for increased government activity. I look at the federal
government involvement in community development programs and issues related to urban renewal
and model cities, gradually reduced federal administrative role in housing and community
development signaled the beginning of a long-term reduction in federal involvement in these
problems.

Hays’s work provided a close up witness of difi'erent Presidential Administrations involvement
in housing programs. Nixon took the lead in criticizing them. Ronald Reagan proposed he would
"turn the country around", and he did just that. His proposals for economic stimulus followed the
supply philosophy in calling for deep tax cuts targeted mainly investors accompanied by
substantial reductions in domestic spending, amounting to approximately $40 billion in FY 1982.
In achieving such cuts, the Reagan Administration utilized its political resources skillfirlly to
influence Congress. Housing programs were the primary target cuts. Housing efforts carried out

under Community Development Block Grants were also afi'ected, though they proved somewhat

26

6.-...- 1..-f. ‘ 1.. ‘1‘. AI. 2.... C... 1..-1: 1.. C_ 11-1! 1. .1. .1? i... 1... 1..-.1. 1v-l_.rl..-.I.-1E-‘.rlc-1v f 1' t... 1.. 1'1! .1... -1... [Ilia-l

less vulnerable. These actions by Reagan's Administration supports Hays' concept of "Ideology"
and how it is a set of interrelated assertions about the world which guides the behavior of
individuals and group.

Presently, the Clinton Administration has not been attracted to the issue that surrounds
housing policy enough to make a significant difference. The outcome does not match the concept
of "democratic capitalism" seeing how housing is allowed $35 billion to guarantee decent housing
with a commitment in a $5 trillion economy. It would appear that many of the
actors in the school of "ideology" play only when it's safe and convenient. I would agure as a
planner just as Hays, that if housing is to be considered a physical resource and housing policy
decisions are influenced by environment, why then is it so difficult to implement policy that should
counteract the potential detrimental impact this country continues to face regarding issues such as
these.

The Ford Administration continued Nixon basic approach, and the Carter Administration
followed. Hays suggest that a period that began with an active and relatively well-firnded federal
role in urban areas also encompassed a slow, “strategic” withdrawal from that role. I underline
strategic because I think it was well planned and demonstrated throughout the past administration
as well as the one we are presently involved in. As a fiiture planner I would also agree with Hays
when he states, “imderlying changes in the values and perspectives of those public oficials in key
national decision-making roles, and changing economic conditions help to produce a changing
climate of opinion, particularly among political elite’s”. (pg. xi).

Hays’ suggests that policy and the study of power are closely related. Hays suggest also that
political actors have influence and the ability to change the behaviors of others in such a way as to
gain a preferred out come. Hays focuses on the concept of “ideology”, a set of interrelated

assertions about the world, which guides the behavior of individuals and groups. Hays work

27

Litre! QI‘I!‘ ..‘.I1.- ‘11:..-.‘ .l. {vigit 1.....1‘311‘. ‘. (J‘s-.. 4!...‘thtfl‘lkvfifl‘. ft. ‘ [I I... ‘i‘v 1' J. (inf-.1

'0'00’00!U‘OOUOOOGUOOUOOUUOCOOOOOU‘OO‘-OUOO'DW’OU4'.

manages to link his definition of ideology to the position the Liberals and Conservatives take
towards housing policies. Although there seems to be some inconsistencies where both parties
give support to how they view public housing. Hays stress that both have had other influences
that shape their views of capitalism. Some he feels have incorporated socialist's ideals, while many
conservatives adhere to notions of government enforcement. Whatever the case, housing

from the first inception of government involving has numerous attempts at changing the social and
economic stability of low-income residents of public as well as private sectors.

Hays does provide an account of the role government has played in implementing policies that
have changed the way housing programs such as FHA, HUD, CDBG, and other community
development programs have been funded. Presently, Hays suggest, we are still surrounded by
neighborhoods with families that don’t possess substantial housing or funds to obtain housing. We
have passed through five presidential Administrations and still housing policies remain the center
of attention. Reagan’s overall economic and budgetary goals may have been instrumental in
setting in motion much of what has continue to this present era. The responsibility of housing and
the policies that shape the outcome still lay with the powers that be. Hays’s key words are
“ideology” and "power" and "policy", which should influence and change the behavior of
individuals and group. Hays suggested that most people associated with housing in some form or
another are just merely waiting for the government to back down and provide fimds that will
allow housing policies to change. I realize there are many more scholars who have documented
work on housing polices. I selected Hays and Nenno's work due to the large amount of housing
programs they were able to expound on regarding public housing and public housing policies.

I was able to secure some information regarding federal housing policy from the National
Center for Housing Policy Analysis. Policy makers contend that they will avoid the failures of the

past by building townhouse type units, rather than high-rises, and locate them in higher-income

28

(list its... .I. in ‘3‘... alt--1! I! .5. lv. ‘.1... a... .‘v- Gain 51v luv-‘1‘! ‘1‘..J!F‘. ‘JIvnlYlA-v f 4.. 1! ll flit-l .‘ ....l. 1..-I'll

Vdddd‘ddJJUUUOddcvvvvdvvvdvdfidvvfivvU’UOOUWUO‘

areas. They suggest that from a federal spending budget these are some of the issues regarding
public housing policy that plague their center. (1) They are attempting not to repeat the past
failures, federal public housing policy consists of mixing voucher subsidies, which allow some
families to select where they want to live, with construction of new public housing units, even as
old edifices are being torn down. The old projects had become havens for drug sellers and users,
as well as monuments to crime, joblessness and hopelessness. (2) Nationwide, more than a million
families now live in housing constructed at government expense. (3) The new policy would allow
more working poor families into public housing projects, which have become predominately
occupied by very poor welfare families.

The idea, the center believes is that working families can be role models for their neighbors,
help stabilize projects and pay higher rents to help housing authorities financially. The center has
faced opposition from Secretary (Andrew M. Cuomo) of Housing and Urban Development
regarding this plan. He thinks its revolutionary” because the poorest tenants tend to be black and
Hispanic while more of the working poor are white. Ideally, he says, every building should reflect
the racial makeup of each city’s public housing system. ( Source: Randy Kennedy, “Mixing up the
Projects,” New York Times, November 15, 1998) This new concept has raised the eyes of critics
who suggest that this approach will distance tenants fi'om supportive family members. Also the
stress the costs would increase to build a house much more than provide a poor family with
vouchers. Units being constructed in Dallas and Michigan, for example, will cost $60,000 to
$82,000 each. For roughly the same amount of money it cost to build 75 units, the Dallas Housing

Authority could have provided 200 families with $5,000 a year in housing vouchers for six years.

29

1.... I: G. _l- ‘ .‘ Q .I. .t (I .1... a. t. .0. xi... t. ‘. ‘.‘. I. ‘1... ‘1-.‘..‘r.t1f“c‘l‘ ‘ ‘ ‘. .I. (1“. ‘ .‘I‘.-.’

'diddd'dvddd'UUCOdcvvvoddovdvvrbflUs.--U-W‘-'-U'O'--O'

Regardless of the language that surrounds this new effort to change the sitiuation for public
housing residents, federal housing policy will have to take the lead in the initial implementation

process.

30

1..-.71.. in.‘ I. I! I... .91..-- 1.. ‘11.. .0. ‘41.... 1...... I...“ .Ivl.I.‘¢-lv-‘v“u‘l.“tvlr1‘wfv1v(wt-v-1.

{1-.- ‘N-‘t.‘.‘lfif‘f“€f¢it“.1.1“...tic..fifv‘v€fl‘v“l'lff-‘€((11.14!

'vvdcdvdvvv'------C‘UUUUU‘--0--‘UU‘U‘v'U‘.'00-6-C’I

Chapter Four; Ngw Directign in Urban Public Housing

For those of us who believe we are guided by a supreme being, I borrow a few of his wisdom
words from the book of Proverbs. God declares to King Solomon, "Better is the end of a thing
than the beginning there of". (King James Verison Proverbs)

As a nation we are fast approaching the Millennium and people are busy gathering supplies and
seeking places of shelter and safety. Public housing has been around a brief time, sixty-one years.
What direction will urban policy take if all the rhetoric we hear about the millennium is in fact
correct. Lawrence J. Vale's work, Public Housing Redevelopment. injects a powerful statement
from the work of a fellow writer of housing policy, "he declares that much of the research and
writing about public housing in the United States has stressed the intractability of its problems, yet
has frequently focused on the search for a solution that emphasizes the transformative power of a
single factor. (Bauman 1994 ). For some of the actors involved it has been the architectural
design, some it has been management reform, service provision and family self-sufiiciency
programs, drug prevention, resident satisfaction or public policy initiatives and home ownership.

Clearly, as the needs of public housing residents and public housing authorities have expanded,
more and more specialists have been called in for consultation (Vale 1992 pg. 142) For example,
many of the past designs and location had been developed in such a manner that public housing
was always separate from the surrounding neighborhoods. Isolating the residents as their
environment became plagued with criminal activity, including fiequent thefts and muggings.
These conditions only reinforced the problems associated with this type of distressed housing. It
is commonly recognized that the problems of severely distressed housing-often thought of as a
matter of ill-conceived and deteriorating buildings-are also fully entwined with the socio-
economic problems of severely distressed public housing residents (Vale 1992) It's not enough to
realize that eighty percent of the non-elderly public housing population lives below the poverty

line, and a majority of households in big city public housing developments are headed by

31

’Ud'd'ddd-‘U'UUUUUUCUUUUUUV‘COOUCU.--‘U‘."’-“U"O*‘.(0

unemployed single parents and report incomes below 20 percent of the local median . The
question that should be asked of planners, policy-makers and those who have the capacity to build
a stronger housing legislation should ask, where do we go fiom here as a country with the power
to change legislation concerning public housing policy?

Judy A England-Joseph, Director, Housing and Community Development Issues spoke before
the Housing and Community Opportunity Subcommittee regarding federal housing programs. I
would like to incorporate part of her testimony in this research and illustrate just how significant
policy implementation is related to residents. “Current federal housing programs are seen as
overly regulated and leaning to warehousing of the poor, and Congress is asking state and local
governments to assume a larger role in defining how the program works’, she states “Congress is
now reconsidering the most basic aspects of public housing policy—whom it will house, the
resources devoted to it, the amount of existing housing stock that will be retained, and the rules
under which it will operate”.

These statements provide GAO’s views on legislation pending before Congress—S. 1260 and
HR. 2406—which would overhaul federal housing policy. GAO testified that the two bills
contain provisions that will likely improve the long-term viability of public housing, such as
allowing mixed incomes in public housing and conversions of some public housing to housing
vouchers or
tenant based assistance when that makes the most sense.GAO also supports provisions to
significantly beef up the Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) authority to
intervene in the management of troubled housing authorities, but GAO cautions that questions
remain about the reliability of the oversight system that HUD uses to designate these agencies as

“troubled”. So where does public housing go from here? I would like to look at what has been

32

1“!““‘(Q‘€f‘t£€€11“.“!!!tttyff‘v'l““f“t‘."1!

done in the past to change the direction of public housing and also look to the fixture and see if
there are any programs implemented that can change the direction of public housing.

David P. Varady & Wolfgang F .E. Preiser and Francis P. Russell, in their work, New
Direction in Urban Public Housing suggest several critical components needed in our nation and
our housing market for every community to benefit. (1). Private for-profit organizations, (2).
Private nonprofit entities, and (3). Public agencies. They believe that in most cases each of these
entities focuses on serving the needs of a particular part of the population in the community (pg.
238)

At any given point in time, the effectiveness of each sector is shaped by the financing available
to it, (both public and private), the subsidy dollars available to it (direct or through the tax code),
and the leadership of the organizations in that sector. When one of these sectors “fails”, it is
important that there be other alternatives that can take over where there is a vacuum. (pg. 238).
They suggest that if there is no longer a public agency that can manage housing units, then the
community has lost one-third of its ability to respond to certain housing needs. And certainty, its
no secret that many Public Housing Authorities have failed residents in the past. Many residents
have been left homeless due to the lack of intervention on the part of person(s)
in position of power stepping beyond the traditional role and reshaping the focus of the community.
The image public housing has provided has sometimm had unconscionably bad environments for its
residents. Between intolerable physical conditions, woefully inadequate services, and very real dangers
to life and limb, these properties could reasonably be consida'ed by all decent people to be disaster.
Because of the image issue, the federal mandates regarding who is to be admitted, the local politics
whichalso slmpeadmissionspolicy, andotherfactors, thepopulation ofpublichousinghasbecome
increasingly poor, increasingly dominated by single-parent-headed households and families of racial

ethnic minorities, and increasingly troubled ( pg.242). In the current political and social climate in this

33

00OOUOdUOO‘CUU'OUUOU'UOOU‘OUO'.0O-.-'OO'O-UOU"“UOla

nation, such families have fewer and fewer advocates and allies. Social facts like these do not make
public housing worse, but they make it less popular. These factors make it easier for politicians and
bureaucrats to ignore this constituency.

Public housing has suffered fiom financial starvation because federal fimds for public housing have
always been less than adequate. In a mnnber of cases over the past decade, Congress has not even
appropriated the fimding levels “guarant ” by the Performance Funding System, a formula which
was created to determine how much money PHA’s should receive to conduct their normal property
management operations (pg.242). Coupled with residents who have lost their sense of identity and feel
isolated,&iswandefirndinghasmemnMneededrepahshavebempostpone¢hardchoices
have been required, and fiequently this has led to more low-maintenance, capital improvements have
been, and still are, severely underfunded. As documented in many studies throughout the United States,
the package incentives that emerge fi'om regulations surrounding programs for public housing that
serve the poor Americans such as welfare, food stamps, Medicaid, and public housing, tends to drive
these families away from the economic mainstream rather than toward it.

Irealizelot ofnegativeissueshavebeensharedconcemingpublichousing. Iwouldliketobriefly
share what James G. Stockard suggest are the Ten Points on Which to Build Public Housr_ng' Over the
Next Sixty Yfl Mr. Stockard believes these points can help guide policymakers and administrators
as the programs of public housing are reshaped. Point (1) Housing is especially important to children in
shaping their view of the world and their ability to control their firture. This research provided data
regarding the number of children who reside in public housing. Mr. Stockard firrther explains that
poficymakemwmefimeslosefimkoffifiveyfacgmeafl‘easmemomdmgsmmvimmnm
contribute to the livelihood of the next generation, our children. Point (2) Poor people cannot afford to
paythelegitimatecostsofdecenthousing. Inmostcitiesofanysizeandmanynualareas, asubstantial

portion of the population (as much as 20% in many locations) (Joint Center for Housing Studies 1996,

34

tw“‘1““‘.‘.‘.‘a‘““‘“““v¢“C““l“(£('€“‘l‘ll

0660UdvdU'UCUUUOUOOCOOCCOOUOOOOOOOOO‘OUOO‘OD0‘4

Tables A-1 and A-12) simply does not earn enough money to pay for the fair costs ofhousing (land,
materials, labor, financing and operations) produced by the marketplace. The third point is that the
marketplace will not sort out housing needs and provide appropriate housing for everybody. The
fourthpointisifpeople do not havedecent housing, otherbadthingshappeninthdrlivesastheyfind
way in coping with these problens, society incurs other costs-mental health,crime, divorce, family
abuse, fire’s, and so on Because housing is so important, people almost always find some way to cope
with meeting their needs. They double up with some relative or fiiend; they live in very inadequate and
unsafe housing; they move to a remote location where no jobs are accessrble; they "live" in shelters
withtheirchildren Thefifthpointisitisbetterforpeopletoliveinthemidst ofeconomicallyand
demographically diverse communities than to live in isolated developments of only a single category of
residents. He feels that if people live in mixed developments they would be less likely susceptible to
stigma, less likely to be isolated and underserve, and easier to integrate into normal fabric of the
community.

The six point is that none of the three basic forms of organizations (private for-profits, private
nonprofits, public agencies) has a record of total success or total failure at developing and managing
housing, especially for those who cannot afford to pay the full costs of that housing. The seventh point
is that resident-based subsidies are a good idea, but they will not work for everybody, and they are
often more costly than site-based subsides, especially over the long lunl. The eighth point is over the
long term, decent housing for low-and moderate-income people will thrive only if it develops a broader
constituency. I would like to expand Mr. Stockard's points on this particular issue. He suggest that
programsthat serveonlypoorpeopleorothermarginalizedconstituencieswillalwaysbefragileinour
society, a primary reason for this is that some ofthe individuals in these categories are not the ones

who are naturally seen as "deserving" by the public at large.

35

t‘-“-““.(‘tt“.t.“‘Y“‘f€€“t“€f1‘(€f‘.‘f‘[“l

ddddOdddOUUrdwdvvvvrvvcvOOUOOUOOUDUUOOUUU‘OUO'O

In addition, poor families and individuals are a minority of our population, and they typically do not
vote in high numbers. For this reason, it is an easy population to write off, both electoral and
financially. The ninth point suggest that the biggest single problem in the implementation of affordable
housing programs over the past sixty years has been the lack of consequences for failure (to anybody
except the residents). If the public is to support housing for those who cannot afford to pay for it,
someone must be accountable to ensure that success in providing this form of housing is rewarded and
failure is punished. He goes on to address how unconscionable it is that a housing authority such as the
Department of Public and Assisted Housing in Washington, DC, could remained on the "Troubled
Housing Authority" list for more than seventeen years with no signifieant sanctions. Neither the city
nor HUD was willing to take the actions necessary to preserve the rights of the 12,000 households
who deserved better. I‘m not aware of any studies done to investigate how this must have effected the
self-esteem of those resident, or the self-esteem of those who were small children that have now
become adults. The tenth and final point suggest that the important goal is maximum affordable-
housing-unit—months over the long term-not the preservation of any particular institution, program, or
financialstructure. GiventhesetenpointsbyMr. Stockardwhatdoldoasafirtureplarmerto help
develop strategies that would help public housing residents as well as public housing practitioners,
policymakers, community based organizations. The first thing, I accept the responsrbility that comes
along with being a planner, Accountability and Integrity. These are two most valuable characteristics I
can possess. Ifwe do survive the rhetoric surrounding the millermium, God is not going to reproduce
any more land. I would like to share some of the ideas I think could help change the situation where
publichousingisconcern (1)HUDand Congressneedtositatthesarnetableandcomeupwitha
plan where money that has been allocated for housing is not reduced. (2) Planners need to find ways to
preserve the land we have to work with by becoming involved in the planning process of zoning,

development and other areas. (3) Planners need to see residents of public housing as human beings that

36

OdddUOMUUUOF‘UOWOOUUOU'UOOOOOUO.000.0Us.“00‘0"0'.‘.(0

don't need to be isolated fiom mainstream America. (4) Develop new ideas where housing that is built
can mix lower income housing into higher incomes housing, everybody needs the opportunity to be
account for and involved. (5) Work with community based organizations as they implement programs
that can help residents reach self-sufficiency. (6). Seek employment where you can make the greatest
difference.

The previous four chapters have helped create the backbone for the fifth chapter. I strongly believe
that the eight females in this briefcase study who shared their experiences ofliving in public housing
with this research have helped me develop a fiamework in which I can have a better understanding
how closely related policy and power go hand in hand. This framework will demonstrate how the loss
of self-esteem due to isolation or treatment received by living in conditions described in this work can
be changed if all the actors mentioned are at the table. The whole purpose of this research was to seek
ways to examine all the issues that surround public housing and see if there is a solution that could help

change the perceptions residents have regarding self-esteem.

37

CHAPTER FIVE

 

0.0000000000000000000 00000000000000000000000

ddddd'dcdcdvcovcucooccvcfivdwobowvbvwofivwwoww‘b

Theoretical Conceptional Framework
Introdugg'on:

According to the United States Connnission on Civil Rights, millions of members of ethnic and
racial minority groups have suffered, and continue to suffer, fiom deprivation and injustice in America
due to low self-esteem and isolation. Many factors contribute to this situation Among those noted by
the commission were: historical development, economic and physical conditions, technical and
population trends, long-established institutional structures and practices, political forces, social and
personal customs, attitudes, and racism (United States Commission on Civil Rights, 1970).

Itisirnportantto studyracialattitudesincomnnmity, schoolandothersocialareasbecauseofits
importance in relationship to those institutions touching the lives of practically all Americans. The
Commission on Civil Rights defines racism in operational terms. "Racism" may be viewed as "...any
attitude, action, or institutional structure which subordinates a person or group because of his or their
color" (pg. 5). Even though "race" and "color" are not the same, in America it is the visibility of skin
color and of other physical traits associated with particular colors or groups that marks individuals as
"targets" for subordination by members of society. These actions many times lead to feelings of low
self-esteem and worthlessness.

Gergen (1971) viewed the development of the self-structure as occurring through the learning and
weighting of "concepts". Erickson (1959) likewise theorized that a "learned need” to categorize leads
the person to develop a set of concepts of self. Although the person may learn a variety of ways to
view self, certain views are learned more thoroughly than others (Gergen, 1971 p. 31). One such
learning is the evaluative weighting of a concept. Ifbehavior (as applied to a concept brings pleasure,
that concept will become positively weighted (Gergen 1971 pg. 34). The person tlms learns the

evaluative significance of concepts fiom experience with the surrounding culture.

38

'UO‘UUOOOOOUOUOUUUUUU‘UO‘UO'fiUUU‘UUU‘U‘UUUOOUUU0-04.

Evaluative weighting thus learned "forms an integral part of the person's self-esteem" (pg. Gergen
1971 36). "Self-esteem can be thought of as the evaluative component of self-concept" (Gergen 1971
pg 37). It is a "person's perceptions of his worth... (Which are) assumed to derive fiom ...self-other
comparisons" (Long & Henderson & Sillier 1970, pg. 10). Wily (1974) referred to this idea as
"positive self regard." She contended that "self-estean congruence between self and ideal self means
being proud of one's attributes highly”. Like wise, Rosenberg (1956) contended that self-other
appraisal is very irnportant to the specific nature ofsocial influences upon self-estean Gergen (1971)
contended that if one is viewed in negative ways by the society one may come to accept these concept
learning, and to view one's self in terms of negative evaluative weightings. Some researchers have also
advanced the hypothesis that if groups of persons are differentially esteemed by the broader culture, the
individual group members who internalize this value system may judge themselves accordingly
(Brown, 1967; Clark & Clark, 1947; Garza, 1977; Henley, 1974; Kardina’ & Oversey, 1951; Lewin,
1948; Rosenberg, 1965; & Stevenson & Stewart, 1958). Mead (1934) saw the self as a social
phenomenon made possible through communication of language. The use of language allows the
persontoreflectuponhirnasanobject. Thepersonslookuponhimasanobject muchashelooks
upon other objects. The development of self is possible through generalizing the expectations of the
"significant others" in society.

Rosenberg (1965) contended "that different social groups are likely to be exposed to characteristic
reactions fiom others which may be decisive in the formation of self-esteem" (Rosmberg, 1965, p.
15). Many studies lmve shown that different races, nationalities, social classes, and religious group
differin self-esteemhasbeen showntobe relatedto theprestige rank ofthe group. Cartwright (1950)
expressed this position. The groups to which a person belongs serve as primacy deterniners of his self-

esteem To a considerable extent, personal feelings of worth depend on the social evaluation of the

39

01(QCC‘QQGCQQIECC.{gtlvltlvf‘tlettis‘fletr-‘f‘“lv11““-1

Ud‘d'4d0'i‘0'UUC‘OUUUOU-‘O'UUUUUUUUUUUUUO‘--."‘--fl

groups with which a person is identified. Self-hatred and feelings of worthlessness tend to arise fiom
membership in underprivileged or outcast group's (p. 440).

Rosenberg (1965) noted that when an individual is faced with some major decision, and that decision
is most likely to depend upon his own view of what he is like, then his self-image is likely to be at the
forefront of his attention Rosenberg saw this self-image as an attitude. Direction of the attitude is one
of its features. How favorably or unfavorably does he feel about himself?

The origins and development of self-esteem are thus a matter of attitude formation developing from
the interaction of the personality of the individual and his social experiences. U'Ren (1971) noted that
social behaviors resulting from self-esteem are influential in development of personality and social
effectiveness. The level of self- esteem is correlated to the person's behavior in social situations.
Mossman and Ziller (1968) made the point that self-esteem is the component of individual self-system
most closely associated with consistency of self-response. According to Brisset (1972), self-esteem
encompasses the two sociopsychological processes of self-worth and self-evaluation.

ck -E

In 1903, WE. Burghardt DuBois published his monumental work on the "Negro Problem" in
American society - Souls of Black Folk Like contemporary scholars, DuBois focused a great deal of
attentiontotheBlack'sdiflicultyinattemptingtogainapositivesenseofselfinaraceconscioussocial
milieu. DuBois, himselfa Black, related how as a child at school one day "it dawned upon me with a
certain suddennessthatlwas differentfrom others; orlike, mayhap, inheartandlifeandlonging, but
shut out fiom their world by a vast v ' " (DuBois 1903 pg. 16). DuBois' contention is that the major
problem that the Black must solve is to reconcile his double-consciousness... One ever feels the
twoness~an American, a Negro, two souls, two thoughts, two unreconciled strivings." (DuBois 1903

pg. 17).

40

0A1‘.‘ ‘11... ‘z-‘ {-11. ‘3‘: ‘. .‘v ‘. .‘. ‘ ‘..‘.. 1!. 1‘. ‘E It In. I! ‘1‘. ‘ ‘1‘ ‘ ll. ‘1‘ ‘ .‘U ‘. f... n‘ .c‘. ‘1‘ c.‘ .‘11

COO'O’O'OUC'O'OOU'UGO'O'U‘OUUOOOUUUOU0.0--..-‘O‘O‘Uwu

The difficulty, as DuBois saw it, was that the individual's identity is tied to the "problem of the color
line." Dai (I953) documented the accuracy of DuBois' assessment. The color of one's skin becomes an
issue of primary importance, and often creates difliculty for the personality development of the child
This colorcast system is tied up with the "white is good, black is bad" concept which is flashed to the
child by most of the socializing symbols of his worid (Grambs, 1965, pp. 13-17). However, in recent
years there has been a growing current of thought among Black's groups as to the need to awaken a
fellingofethnicidentityandpride. ThistrendfirstnotedinthegreatexpansionoftheBlack
Nationalists in the middle 1950's and the Black Power" movement in the early 1960's. It is found today
in the "Black is Beautiful" appeal. Gordon (1974) concluded that the "Black is Beautifirl" movement
had been influential in changing some dimensions of self-concept among Blacks, especially color
preference. However, he also concluded that Black American is likely to be plagued by low self-
esteem. This is due to the reality that in most interactions with Whites, the Black is engaged in
activities, whichrequireabilities orexperiencesmorelikelytobepossessedbytheWhitesthanBlacks.

Many investigators have examined the effects of segregation and self-esteem in Black children.
Brunner (1965) summarized the effects ofsegregation as having "serious damage to the selfirnage on
the part of both individuals and groups." Ausubel and Ausubel (1963) contended that Black children
have lower self-esteem because of their status and caste position in society. Dai (1961) described the
particular difficulties the Black child experiences in developing consistency during adolescence.
PoussaintandAtkinson(1968)wmmdedflratthegma’afizedothapresansajudgananforthe
Black child that says he is inferior. This produces negative self-esteem because the child's contact with
symbols ofsocial inferiority, such as segregated school settings, neighborhoods, and inferior jobs.
McCandless (1960) found societyorganizedinsuchawayasto leadtheBlack childto devalue, and

perhaps ever reject his own ethnic group (MoCandless 1960 pg. 38). Clark (1963) contended that

41

‘r-‘-.“‘.I...‘Gv‘{cs-eta!‘.1t.-‘.-‘.1rit‘.1v.‘-““‘-‘“.w1r‘.‘.1.t‘.1t.‘.‘lvl‘.rs:0-..-

Black children in segregated settings react with feelings ofinferiority. This conflict leads to self-hatred
and thus to a negative self-esteem and self-evaluation.

According to Rosenberg (1979), self-esteem is defined as self-respect; that is, how one feels about
oneself as a person of worth. Self-esteem is alo characterized as a sense of personal competence by
which people tend toward accomplishment (Wells and Marwell, 1976). In addition, the construct of
internal-external control is considered to associate with self-esteem (Fitch, 1970). How one's ability is
evaluated relies on mastery of environment and control over reward contingencies. Then, home and
workplace are the two primary social contexts where we spend most of our time of our life. Favorable
conditions at workplace or home such as great autonomy, self-direction on the job, and control over
marriage are considered to have positive effects on self-esteem through the main processes of self-
concept formation. These conditions enable more favorable reflected appraisals and social
comparisons, as well as positive self-attributions (Gecas and Schwalbe, 1983; Gecas and Set}; 1989;
Rosenberg and Pearlin, 1978). From this theoretical position, we would expect strong positive
relationships between home control and self-esteem, and between job control and self-esteem.

Someresearchemphasizesthatageisacfificalvmiabletoselfesteanmemo,1992;Demoand
Savin-erliams, 1983; Rosenberg and Pearlin, 1978; Wiltfang and Scarbecz, 1990), and problem-
solving in real life (Denney and Palmer, 1981), job involvement and job satisfaction Adulthood is a
major concern. Basically, adulthood is divided into three periods; early adulthood (during ages 18-40),
middle adulthood (during ages 40-65), and late adulthood (during ages 65 and older) (Demo, 1992).
People in different adulthood periods have different levels of self-esteem

The transition into early adulthood coincides with enhanced problems-solving and peek intellectual
abilities. These new skills and abilities enable stronger feelings of self-worth and more complex self-
definition A number of studies report increasing self-esteem during important transitions into early

adulthood (Bachrnan and Kanouse 1980; O'rnalley & Bachman, 1983). During middle adulthood,

42

0.1“...1‘ ‘.“‘“““““““‘.‘““u“‘z‘|“fi!‘r“‘(ffe‘l‘

'OOCO‘UOOUOCUOOUCUOUOUOUCCGOOOOOO‘OOOO0-0-00-

individuals' job involvement and job satisfaction are found to be highest (Bray & Howard, 1993).
Herzog (1982) report that age-related improvements at work housing, and comrmmity are important
in explaining increasing levels of subjective well-being with age. Other studies report increasing self-
esteem for a competence, and coping skills through the middle adult years. In addition, Morganti
(1988) compare different age groups and find the older the group, the higher the level of self-esteem.
Genderdifi‘erencesinself-esteeminanotherconcern. 'I'hedifi‘erencesinself—esteemcanresultfi'omthe
following reasons (Schwalbe & Staples, 1991, p. 161): Gende‘ socialization may shape personality
needs and facilitate development of particular esteem-enhancing skills; culture prescribes different
criteria for self-evaluation for men and women; and the role into which men and women are channeled
may offer unequal opportunities for deriving self-esteem fiom various sources. Research evidence has
shown that females have lower levels of self-esteem than males (Dukes & Martinez, 1994; Feingold,
1994; O'Brien, 1991; Raymore, 1994). Generally, research on gender and self-esteem has overlooked
the operation of home control and job control. The pattern of control over job and home between men
and women may different due to various gender role exceptions.

Traditionally, men are expected to be occupational, agents, and instrumental, while women are
expected to be domestic, communal, and expressive (Bakan, 1966; Parsons, 1955). Although role
behavior is not strictly classified in families, society still expects men to give priority to occupational
goals, and women to familial goals (Cross and Rokofi; 1971). In addition, males have more prestige,
power, and fieedom than females. In Vaughter's terms (1976; 128), "the theme that masculinity of
menismorehighlyvaluedthanfemininityofwomenis one ofthemost consisterrtthernestobefound
in current research data " Consequently, the levels of home control, those of job control, and those
self-esteemcanbedifferentbetweenmenandwomen Thewriterofthiscasestudychosetolookat
females of Afiican-American race, located in the state of Michigan for this brief work When this

research was first done these numbers reflect the amount of residents. Numbers imve changed for

43

‘r.-‘l‘.-‘.‘. ‘_“P.I‘.‘.“““r“““‘.".‘.“n“‘-.‘..“¢.‘c‘.‘.-“-‘ts‘cf

'U‘cddvdccdodoododvvdudvocovvovvovvso-.-000U0b

1997-1998; the new numbers have been included in the report. Public housing in Michigan during a
15-month period in 1995-96 approximately provided writs for 54,000 residents. Of that number, 45%
were of Afiican—American descent, with an average annual income between $7,000 and $14,000,
household size ranged from 2-4 persons.

It is intended this study will shed some light and a topic that could change the lives of hundreds of
residents and the outcome will create significance and an awareness of the severity of the effects those
residents in public housing face as the deal with labeling and stereotyping assigned to residents. Due to
the exploratory nature of this preliminary study 8 females were selected based on their geographical
location and accessibility. The following criteria were used in determining how these women selected
also (age income, education and income). Between the 8 females who responded, we have a total of
170 years ofresidency inpublic housing. Our ages ranged from 24 years to 72 years. We were able to
have 2 sets of second and third generation mother and daughter public housing residents. Each female
was asked her perception about self-esteem, self-identify and what it has beer like living in public
housing. The writer of this work relayed the am wgrds of each female not to defame or humiliate

anyone,buthantedtokeeptheactualtext.Thismadeitsorealforthewriter.

H---‘.‘l‘ ‘. ‘ ‘1‘.‘w-‘ ‘.... l! ‘. ‘. ‘-.. ‘. .1!‘ ‘ ‘ ‘ 1.....‘1 .‘v..‘ .‘v ‘1‘ ..I. (Isl-‘2‘ ‘ 1‘. ‘. n'. 5" f! (5‘1‘3‘

Case Studies

Age

Gender

Income

Education

Length of stay in public housing

In order to gain better insight into how the self-esteem of eight female residents of public
housing were being affected due to low self-esteem, a telephone questionnaire was designed and
conducted in the summer of 1997 at the River Rouge Public Housing Authority, River Rouge,
Michigan and Lansing, Michigan to collect the relevant data. The interview schedule included
questions, which are used to measure the independent variables: age, gender, income, education
and length of stay in public housing. The dependent variable is self-esteem.

A questionnaire/telephone survey interview is the research method used to collect the
data. The population of interest selected is public housing residents of Afiican—American descent.
Females, living on fixed incomes in Lansing, Michigan and the surrounding area. The females
were selected randomly fiom a list that contained women who met the criteria.

May listed several types of interviewing methods applicable to this research. There are
four types of interviews used in social research, although May states that these characterizations
appear to be strictly to demarcate one method from another, research may not simply be the one
following, but a mixture of two or more types (May 1993 pg. 92). The four types are (l)
Structured interviews, these are associated with survey research and the method used most often.

(2) The semi-structured interview, this type is said to be in between the focused and structured

45

’Uddd'fld'd'vdvdddddUU'UO‘OOUUOU'OVDUU'WUU‘UUUWUH"-

method, and it utilizes techniques from both. Questions are normally specified, but the
interviewer is more free to probe beyond the answers in a manner, which often seems prejudicial
to the aims of standardization and comparability. (3) The focused interview; this one is said to
provide it with an ability to challenge the preconception of the researcher. Some might regard
this is a license for the interviewee to simply talk about an issue in any way they feel like. (4)
Group interviews. These interviews constitute a valuable tool of investigation, allowing the
researcher to focus upon group norms and dynamics around issues, which they wish to
investigate. (May1993 pg.94.)

The extent of the control of a group discussion will determine the nature of the data
produced by this method (May1993 pg. 94). Gebremedhin and Tweeten in “Research Methods”
state, “The scientific methods is a way of thinking about problems and solving them, it helps to

9’

explain the problem and its alternative solutions in an orderly way, it focuses research, it
provides common ground for inquire by those attempting to understand reality (May 1993 pg.
3 5).

Gebremedhim and Tweeten suggest scientific method has at least six major checkpoints:
(1) stating the problem; (2) formulating the hypotheses, or, alternatively, stating the analysis; (3)
developing the method of analysis; (4) data collection and analysis; (5) interpreting results; and (6)
drawing conclusions (p.).

Shafiir, Stebbins and Turowetz reported that “fieldwork experience is said to sometimes
cause feelings of uncertainty and anxiety (Schaflir fieldwork 1985 pg. 3). Researchers’ fieldwork
accounts typically deal with such matters as how the hurdles blocking entry were successfully
overcome and the emergent relationships cultivated and maintained during the course of the

research; the emotional pains of this work are rarely mentioned. From another perspective, the

desire to do fieldwork is founded on motives that drive few other kinds of scientific investigation.

'COOCOOCCCCCOCCCCC-OOCOOOOOOOOOOOOOO'.--OO-04

To be sure, field researchers share with other scientists the goal of collecting valid, impartial data
about some natural phenomenon. In addition, they gain satisfaction, perhaps better stated as a
sense of accomplishment from successfully managing the social side of their projects, which are
more problematic than any other form of inquiry (Spector 1981 pg. 5).

Spector’s work examines the basic principles of experimental and non-experimental design
in the social sciences. He looks at the meaning of such elementary concepts as variables, control
randomization, and confounding variables (Spector 1981 pg. 5). Again, the actual wgrds of each
female who participated in this case study were used. This was done not to defame or humiliate
any of those females, but I wanted to keep the actual text. This provided much insight into the

fiustrations and pains each resident experiences.

 

47

..LAI‘-‘ f-‘ ‘. ‘. ‘i‘ ‘.l‘. .‘. ‘r ‘. (It! .‘ ..‘ e‘ i ‘V ‘. ‘ ‘l‘l‘. ‘.! ‘1‘ ‘.-‘,!‘L‘. 2‘. r.‘. f. ‘ i‘. ‘r “.a‘. ‘i‘

"--CCUOCUCUCOCCCU-UUUUOUUOOUWUUUOU‘OOUU‘U"l.UUU

Female#1

69yearoldfernale9thgndeeducation,livedinpublichousinginthestateofAlabamabeforerelocatingto
MichiganWasaresidentofpublichmsingforwyearsRaised8children. Hadonlyalothgradeeducation,aelf-
anployed bearficianforltsyears.livedinpmjectfiykhars’ngforfiyumfimflymovedmfingleunit-acattered
demumu4ymmmmdmmmmmmmmmmmmam
tosecnrelocalseniorcitizcnsaparunentthrmghmbidedpmgram.

Hercommentsaboutwblichousingareasfollows. "Iwasboundbyfearandthoughtsofmynotbeingableto
surviveoutsideofwblichousing Ihad8lddsandmyinoomewasdependentuponotherwomengettingtheirhair
done. There was no where else I could live and pay the amount of rent I had to pay. Ifelt like a slave because the
managementcoulddowhatevertheywantedtodo. Wheanouldspeakout, therewasfearofbeingremoved,l
hadtoreporteverythingthatsurroundedmeandmykids. Iwantedtopaintonce,andbecauseldidn'tget
permission, they sent me a letter of intent to evict me. For 30 years off and on, I convinced myself that I was stuck
and couldn't do any better, Iwasn't ever going to accomplish anything worthwhile, my surrounding made sure of
that. I lost my scattered site home, after years of waiting on the list for section eight because one of my sons moved
backhome,thatchangedmyincomeandbecauseofrulesIwasaskedtogiveupmyhome. Iwasforcedtoleave
accordingtotherules, I'mnow69yearsoldandforthefirsttimeinyearslhavepeaceandlcanbegintoseethatI
lostmyselfinpublichousingIstilldohairfromtimetotime,Imissmynicespacioushome,butlenjoynot
havingtoliveinfear".

Female#2

ssywmrmemmmmmmmmmmm-dgmymmamum
agedfihtnyflmnhemlddaAmfivedhbdmmbficbuflngwubfighmduduinemmm
beganhtakewerfihemwflveshaflvo—floryinglex‘tueddteflacmmflmufoflowm

'Eventhoughmyhomewasrundown,itwasmine,beforemyhnsbanddied,wemanaged,aflerhisdeath,1
couldn‘tprovideforallmykids,sopublichousingprovideduswithaplace. Ithoughtatfirstthiswasthebest
thingthatcouldhavehappentous,butafierlivingheralltheseyears,thereisnowhereelseformetogo.Ihave
gottenusedtothewaytheytreatme,andsometimesldon'tletitgetmedownbutthenlhavethosedayswhenl
wish I could just get up and leave, but my age and my level of education keeps me bound right here. [once had
shadetressonthesideofmyhome,managementhadthemremovedandlhadtogetpermissiontoplantasmall
gardenonthesideofmyhome.I'mtooldtofightmanagement,somostofthetime,lkeepmydoorcloseandstay

to myself".

Female“

wymmmmmmmrormmmmwmmmmmm
finmlocalmiverdty.MmedmwhuhmwpnbfichminnghgdlephanofUrbaanewaL Homeswerebuilt
wadeMrhkmmbyhmfingmfiofiq.Umhmmmmdmemdd
securityrhetoillness.

Hercomments,Wheyflmcabaatmdownwhmlfimmokddflwasbednddmmrawmywmadmwdrhdpfim
WdWWJmmmflmmmymlymldtmmmbmefimfimflwsym
beameheMsbemhbdedleaMngdimbbdlrwdvedfmduampsfmawwehnlmntanyme Whenlbeginto
mmmwmmemlmmmMmmmmmmmmmgm

48

..L-l... ‘-‘.n‘. ‘.-‘. ‘1! ‘I‘. .1... ..1! .‘. .‘ ‘-‘-£! 5.! it... .1! 5!. I... 1! a! ‘...-I.. ‘1‘.‘-‘lt!-.‘ .1! 4‘. 1.! 1! f! 1w. 1! ‘lr-I‘ut!

moniahavebeensetasidefortbweunitsandyet,fliemidentmanagermfearandsw'etactim'I‘heytwatuslike
mule,movingusfiomunittounitwhemverdxeygetrmdy.I'mtlmnkfidtohavethishombmlrefusetobeueatedlike
mismymme.lhawbeenuymgmgaflwmdemsmorgamze,hnmanyofmemammedIttookmealongtimeto
befieveinmyselfagaimandldon'twamtolosewhatlhavemtkedsohaxdtoget,hnl‘mpreparedtofiglnuntil
Whatsusandbeginstoumtmlikelnnnanbeings”.

Funale#4

Mwahuflvedinpubflchafingforflymnised4kidsandmisnfinggnmdkidxflgrade
WWWMF‘IAmdbaby-fitsonflleside.

PhrmmmmSmmhflomfllflmgmmebwminngfldmmawomnWMmymmdeW
phfichansingltymybasttonevergivethempmblemgldon‘tlflcethenfls,ifIwanttohavepeoplecomeoverand
stayforawhile,Ihavetogetpennissionifitsgoingtobemorethanthreedays.Imvercomflaimthereisnowhereelse
formemfivefortheammnnofinoomelhavefinoneminglmustsayflmhmtsmeis,ifywviolatethemlanget
evictedMyymmgersonisnotallowedtoevenstepfootonthispmpeny,hegmhisselfinumbleandmacbthc
mwspapermowmanagenwmwon'taflowhimtoevenspendthenightwithm.Ihavelivedinseveraloftheunitsmnd
tlnlwstomllikedwerethepmjeots,Imflylostfieedomlivingthetewewemtodosetomchothcr,ywcumhae
whatwentoninfllenextunitIdoniflkemeidwmatmamgememmjustwmemanydmeflcyflke,hnlgtmwhm
thisisflnebcflymmndoywjustaooeptandmkethebwtofwchchy.Imedtogotomeefingsatthelocalofficqflley
madeussomanyp'omiswandlhaveyettoseememcomemne.Ididhaveafixeandtheymmcinandpaimedatthis
stageofmylife,Mtoonnachisgoingtochange,rvebeenlleresolong,lknowmwhaedsemfiw'.

Female#5

ummlmmmmzmmmmmmmtmmm Presently
wofldngatoneafthehcalglwerym.

Hercommmtsabanptflictnlsing,'Becauselwmddmfistenmmeadvioedmymmlmdedupfigmbadsmm
projectsldmppedomdschoolafierhavingmyfirstchfldlintelivinghereandllntefeelinglflceanobody.ljust
mcenflygotofl'socialsaviowandwofidnguyingmchangesomeflfingsinmyfife.Idon'tlflsethewaymanagemutalks
tomewhenlmlljusttoaskqlmflons.Ikeepmylddsinmetxmsemostofthetimeoratmymom‘shouse,it'sncflsafe
hemanddglnmehavemchoicaTheystanpmgramsandneverfoflowmmgh,Imfldliketofinishhighschool,
butlhavetoworkSonwfimwljuaMshmnageWdebeonthemherddeandwewMfifedsfikembeueamd
flnwayflnyuwmmddentgwmefimlwammspmkmhnmeykmwjuafikeldo,Itavenowhereelsemlive
fightnow,solmakethebwtofwhatlmI‘mnotdnanjustmadesomebadchoiow".

Female!“

46ywd¢9figndeedncaflumflyflfingmmficflMfityfivedhmpmjeamfifw25ym
RaisedonemNowliveuinsmiorunithetodiubilifiu.

HammnSaanprMudng”HlmbemhaemElmgmthdlymmMngmmlm
nowhereelsetogo,Pmnotabletowoxk,theyptuthisbagonmeabmnlSyearsagntgosevelywhaeIgy.Istqped
dreamingafierthefirsttenymrsoflivinghere.Theprojectsisnotflneplaoetobeifywhavedrmmgtheygakinedhete,
thenameofthegameisnotletfingmanagemnttakethelitfleyoum.Everythinghastobempofledeveninflme
WywarenotmwdwithmJustafewwedcsagolhadmyxexficheckstolenufiofflneboxwhenlmpmwd
mflmyasalmedlwasnmmmummmwavefivedhemalongfimeandfigasmbater.Thewallamtothinand
repairstakesolongtogetfixedIwishlhaddommmgsdifiamtlusedmuyandhavemeedngssothemm
gfiW,mmgeMWMfigMaway,wawmfiMmmmfifinghflanmmw®d
inlikeanimalsjustmamingmndwithnoflacetogo'.

Female“

52yearold.Whpubflchwfingforfiymkaked4kids$mmeofhmquDCudhabyfitfing9m
mmmmmmbmdmmmmmmdmmmm

49

9.. '3‘... Pt... I...“ A“ .11.... L1! .‘r. ‘4‘ l- .. t .1. ‘. ‘. t .l‘ I: 1'. HI! ‘1‘ ‘. ..lv.-‘:x‘. I! {IN ‘ I r‘. 4.. ‘-t-‘nl

'4'charc-Docdaemon-vac-deovcooavvobooowoovwovv0a-

dings-

Heroomnnmg'Afialhadeassiwmokgmywholefifechangeilwasmpabled‘ protectingmyselfandsomeof
themsidentsfiomlosingthereunits.Iwemwagainstnmagemmnmgardingsomeunfairummhnsimemeymld
nelhadtoleavemyhomethattookmeywrsofwaitingtoget,Ilostmychsiretoevmhopeofthingschanging'Iheydid
helpmcfineanmhcrmfiisaseniordfizensmmplexhnitsmtthcm. Itrynottocausetrouble, mysonisnot
permittedtooomeonthwegrmmdgldomisshim, hegetinvolvedwiththemongcmwdandafiermysuukgljust
oufldn‘tkeepupwithhimsonowljustprettymmhdowhatthqtellme.Ifoflowfllenflwandmostofthetimljust
dommrefmfllankfiflfllatmeydidnisendmemoneofthosepmjeaunits'.

Funale#8
72yearoldfemale.livedinpmjecthmsinghstmyeanmmdecmseininmmem4ldds9thgnde
ethicafionSmmeofincomesocialmflty.

Hummus,"Whmywhavebemhwedfikellmvedommmghtheymymgausedmfimdymlmmwhmw
spakmMydaughtamnMOfmyfighmnmwlminkflwyijUmfingmfikewaeammhmg Mymughteris
dwayshyinngMngemingsAhedomalmoaloaherflmemimbemuseshcspwksun,Imnikmwmuchabmtakx
ofthings,bmldoymlwasm6dbetterthanthisdown8mnh,hnatmyage,Iain‘tgmtomanyplmlmncallhoml
mindmyownbusinws”.

50

..a.‘..‘ F - ‘. ... ‘....1vl‘. t_ 1! .1! ‘Ifin‘v ‘» at .1... ...l. l. 1!. .. 1! cl..4r 11" ‘. *Jtp.‘ .‘. .‘u l! f .r‘lmu ‘ .Iv .r--.‘l..l

'U“'U'OU'UC’"-CO‘U-OU----O'vc----*-"'-‘U‘.‘.‘."."-'Ofl

CONCLQ§ION:
1hispreliminaiyeasesmdyisjustonePhaseofwhatfliewriteroffliispapeishopestomedaydevelopintoa

moreintensesmdyforamoreindepthlookathowresidentofpublichwsingmnmoveuptoflieAmerican
dreamfiompublichousing.Preparafimsarebemgdevelopedthatwaddpennitdiewrhertoeiqilomhowfliis
sameeesemidycouldbeusedtodetermineifflierehasbem aseemlying'ananimfionWfi‘ectanhiteand
Hispanic residents of public housing miits. For the pastthree years the writerhas been deeply involved in working
withfemaleresidmlsofpublichwsmg.Ihavewilnessedregularbatflesfliesefemaleencmmerasdieydealwilh
crime,drugs,tempregnancymdflieefi‘eaithashadmfliewmnumitywhemflieyreside. Iwassurprisedatflie
numberofseniorcifizmswhohaveobtainedresidmciesinpublichousingbeeauseofthefixedincomeflieynow
receive. Manyoftheseniors havehadanacfivevoiceinpardcipafingmmanyorganimfiagtheyhavestared
residmtcamcils,flieyhavepaificipatedmdenmsu'afionsn1Wasliingtm, D.C.voicingtheirconcemstoHUD,
andtheir local represanatives, but dotothe fear of losing their public housing residency, they shut down. [was
limitedinflierangeofyoimgerfemalesmadeavailabletoparticipateinfliiseasesmdyduetofliefearfliatmany
ofdianexpefimcewhmflieanmpttospeakmuonfliemjusficesflieyfice.
Immempomnywmdmmedngswhaemidanswmsdcmmsabwmganimgymmw
neverhavebeenabletomaketheneededcomminnmttofoflowfluough.Someofthelanguagesoffliefedelal
pohciesthatarepassedbeounedificuhformanyoffliemsidanstomdermdThispresentsproblemswhenit
pmsflieresidmtsatadisadvantagewhmyoustanmnnottmderstanding.Iwitnessedsomeoftherepercussims
facedbyresidmtswhodidattetmttospeakom.Iwwldliketobtieflysharesomeofflieexpefimcesoffliose
residents who have been able to successfully organize. One housing development of residents were able to come
Wmdfimmedamhshmgofmeummbygammgmenemsmmmofsmmgaa
petitionto secure a court injection. Today, that development stands. Conputertraining centers have been placed
mmanyhousingsites,fimdshawbemsewmdfiunHUDmpmvidetechnimlassistance'ssomsidanseanhaw

flieopporumitytofindenploymmtandsomereedi self-suficiency.

51

~uu Q ‘. t ‘. ‘ ‘. ‘ffl‘. IV... .1“ ll {‘1‘}; ‘...f f ‘ ‘ f ( ...lv 1.! t «(.." ‘1 I! 1.. f f It In! (IF 4.... (JrWA‘lrl

'U'U"U'UCUCU‘CCUUUUUUWOO---U.-'-.-".-.0‘00'0'UW‘5'

hkfiedesimoffiemedanmmatemmmdaalwhhmeaddofsemofmemsmfieshgedm
the bibliographythatthereareindimtorsthatwillhelp determined low-selfesteemandhigh self-eaeemineech
casestudypresartedinthisphaseofflrework,somatraceisnotfliecritieelissuefordiiseasesmdy. Although,
Afiican-Ameriean residmts of public housing institutions appear to sufi‘er to a greater degree. The writer, in
Phasetwooffliissmdywillexaminelabelingandstereotypinganditsefl'ectmalargernmnberofresidmts.In
closingfliissmdyregardingdreamsandhopes ofthoseeightfmmlwwhopennittedmetimeandspaceintoflieir
livesbriefly,lwiflalwaysbegratefidandtoUrbanAfiirsforflietimetopreparefliiswork.

Padreswdidanmsnatesmatfliisisaommnmphgmofmoapubfichwsmgreddans. Thishappensto
mostpeopleofpublichousing. Oncehbelhghasbemassigriedmdstereaypmgsasnflieyloseflieirabihtym
dreamfliedreamlflreflieraisindfiesupandfliefeelingsofworthlesmecs.hifer'iorityandobscureidaititiessain,
fielfingrefldafisupafidpfiwmbbmmwmonmAmfimbemusemecmmmsofeconomic
andsocialandhistoricalartitiesaremorepowerfirlflmfliedream.lwouldliketoleavewithflieaudimcescmeof
flielastfewpowerfiilworckofngstonfhrghes. Itexpressessomeofcmcemsfliatfliewonmsharedwithme
mmwwmflleirmdisappear
mmmamgemd?

Doesitdryup?
LikeaRaisinintheSun?
Orfesterlikeasore—
Andthener?
Doesitstinklikerottenmeat?
Orcrustandsugarover-
LikeasynrpySweet?

Wybeitjustmgs
Likeaheuvyload.
Ordoesitexplode?

52

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Abrams, Charles. 1946. The Future of Housing. New York: Harper & Bros.

Aronovici, Carol. 1934. America Can’t Have Housing. Published for the Committee on the Housing
Exhibition by the Museum of Modern Art, 11 West 53" Street, New York.

Ausubel, D.F., and Ausubel, P. Ego development among segregated children. In A. H. Passon (Ed),
Education in depressed areas. New York: Bureau of Publications, Teachers College, Columbia University,
1963.

Baldwin, Joseph A., Raeford Brown and Reginald Hopkins. 1991. "The Black Self-Hatred Paradigm
Revisited: An Africentric Analysis." Pp.l41-165 in Reginald L. Jones (Ed) Black Psychology. Berkley
,Califomia: Cobb and Henry.

Beyer, Glenn H. 1965. Housing and Society. MacMillian Company: Collier-MacMillian Limited, London.
Brissett, D. Toward a clarification of Self-esteem. P_sygh__iatry, 1972, 35, 225-263.

Bnmner, C. Deprivation-its efl‘ects, its remedies. Educational Leaders_hrp' , 1965, 2}, 103-107.

Castells, M. & Goh, L. And Ry-W. Kwok. 1990. Pion Limited, 207 Brondesbury Park, London NW2 SJN.

Clark, KB, and Clark, M.K. Racial identification and preference in Negro children. In TM. Newcornb
and EL.

Covel, Diane. Jackson Public Housing Self-Sufficiency Coordinator. Personal Interview: March 20, 1997.

Cross, WE. Jr. 1971. "The Negro-to-Black conversion experience: Towards a Psychology of Black
Liberation". Black World, 20 (9), 13-27.

Hartley (Eds), Readings in Social Psychology. New York: Holt, 1947.

Dia, G. Minority group membership and personality development. In J. Masnoka and P. Valien (Eds),
Race Relations: Problems and Theory. Chapel Hill, NC: The University of North Carolina Press, 1961.

Demo, David H. , and RC. Savin-Williams. 1983. "Early adolescent self-esteem as a function of Social
Class: Rosenberg and Pearlin revisited”. American journal of Sociology, 88:763-74

DuBois, W.E.B. Souls of the black folks. Greenwich, Connecticut: Fawcett Publications, Inc., 1953.
Ebenstein, William. 1940. The Law of Public Housing. Madison: The University of Wisconsin Press.
Erikson, EH. Childhood and Society (2“l Ed.) New York: Norton, 1963

Fisher, Robert M. 1959. Twenty Years of Public Housing: An Economic Aspects of the Federal Program:
Greenwood Press, Publishers: Wesport, Connecticut.

Freedman, Leonard. 1906. Public Housing: The Politics of Poverty. Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc. New
York, Chicago, Alanta, Dallas.

53

961...... 9‘. 1! 11‘. .1! 1-1.91.11111-‘1! 1! (.1!1!1111(1! (Ff-(‘F-‘Ittlrf‘. .rJ‘. .‘.1!-rro‘n.al

’U'UUdvvdvvd'U'UUUCUUUU-UO'UU.U--.U--.‘U‘.-‘.“UU"I“

Friedman, Lawrence. 1968. Governmait and Slum Housing, Chieago: Rand McNally.

F itts, W. 1965. Tennessee Self-Concept Scale Mangl. Nashville, Tam: Counselor Recordings and Tests.

 

Gebmedhin Tesfa G. And Luther, Tweeten: Research Mflods and Communications in Social Science:
Praeger Westpoint, Connecticut 1994.

Gecas, V. And ML. Schwalbe. 1983. "Beyond the looking glass: Social structure and eficacy—based self-
esteem." Social P chol ua rl 46:77-88.

Gergen, K.J. The Cgm of Self. New York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston, Inc., 1971.

Gordon, V.V. The self-concept of Black Americans (Doctoral Dissertation, University of Virginia, 1974).
Dissertation Abstracts mmational, 19/5, 35 (8), 5552-5553.

Grambs, J.D. Negro Self-Conggt: Implications for school and citizenship. New York: McGraw-Hill
Book Co., 1964.

Hawley, Peter K. 197 8. Housing in the Public Domain: The Only Solution. Metropolitan Council on
Housing. 24 West 30 Street, New York, New York.

Hays, Richard A. 1995. The Federal Government and Urban Housing. State University of New York Press.
Hsu, Shu-Yao. 1997. Doctoral Student. Michigan State University: Self-Esteem

Judd, Dennis. 1994. City Politics. St. Louis: Harper Collins

Lind, J. E. "The Color complex in the Negro " Psychoanalgg'c Review, 1 (1): 404-414.

Keith, Nathaniel S. 1973. Politics and the Housing Crisis Since 1930. New York: Universe Books.

Marsdai, David and Peter Oakley. Evaluationg Social Development Projects. Oxfam. ISBN 0-85598-147-
4

Martin, Mike W Self-mum and Understangng' Self. New Essays in Philospohy and Psychology.
University Press.

May, Tim. Social Research Issues Methods and Process: Open Press University 1993, Buckingham,
Philadelphia.

 

McCandless 1960. Psychology Report

Mitchell J. Paul. 1985. Federal Housing Policy & Programs Past and Present. Rutgers, The State
University of New Jersey.

Michigan Resident Leadership Network: Public Housing in Michigan. Lansing 1997.

Nenno, Mary K. 1996 Ending The Stalemate: Moving Housing and Urban Development into Mainstream
of America's Future. Lanham: University Press of America.

54

41£€€€.€‘o‘lw“u1t‘1v-‘l‘g‘tc1.C(‘I‘v‘fv1‘C‘u‘((‘ttf‘lvcttl'tl.

it!"CUGUUO‘O'UOUOO‘OCUOOOUUUU-DU0-0U“-U‘OUV“U‘0’U‘UE

Porter, Judith R. 1971. Black ChiMhite Chil_c_l. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press

Porter, Judith R. And Robert E. Washington. "Black Identity and Self-Esteem: A Review of Studies of
Black Self-Concept, 1968-1978". Annual Review of Sociologyfi:53-74.

 

Poussiant & Atkinson 1968. Psychology Report.

Rosenberg, Morris, C. Schooler, C. Schoenbach, and F. Rosenberg. 1995 Global Self-Esteem and Specific
Self-Esteem: Difl‘erent Concepts, Difi‘erent Outcomes". American Sociological Review, 60:141-156

Rosenberg, Morris. 1979. Conceiving the Self. Malabar, Florida: Basic Books. 1989. Socigy and the
Adolescent Self-Image. Weseyan University Press.

Stone, Michael E. 1993. Shelter Poverty: New Ideas on Housing Afi‘ordability. Philadelphia: Temple
University Press.

Sparrow, Kathleen H. And Thomas Durant J. Jr. Race and Class-Consciousness among lower-and middle
class blacks. Journal of Black Studies. Jan 1997, v27, n3, p334 (18).

Specter Paul E. Research Designs: Quantitative Applications in The Social Sciences. Sage University,
1981.

Schwalbe, ML. and CL. Staples, 1991. "Gender difi‘eraices in sources of self-esteem". Social Psychology
Quarterly.

Schamr, William, Approaches to Social Research: Fieldwork Experience.
Stemlieb and James Hughes

Stockard James G. Jr. 1998. Public Housing- The Next Sixty Years: Partner in the Consulting Firm of
Stockard & Engler & Brigham.

Stone, Mitchell E. 1990. One Third of A Nation: A New Look at Housing Afi‘ordability in America.
Economic Policy Institute, Washington, DC.

United States Department of Housing and Urban Development: Exploring New Strategies for Improving
Public Housing Management. Washington, 1997.

United States Department of Housing and urban Development: New American Neighborhoods.
Washington, 1996.

United States Department of Housing and Urban Development: Multifamily Tenant Characteristics
Support Systems. Washington, 1997.

United States Department of Housing and Urban Development: Promoting Self-Suficiency in Public
Housing. Washington, 1996.

Vale Lawrence J. 1998. Associate Professor Urban Studies Program Massachusetts Institute of
Technology.

55

s‘.1.... 1! Q 1... ‘w a... ‘E 1... 1W! 1‘... 1..-t. .11‘1‘1‘. f. I... 1..-1‘ «.1! (I413... f tit-r. flit. 415‘ ‘. 1.. ...l! (.11.? .1! ..lv.fr-..-ltl.f

'UU'U"U"'-U'U'U'UUUUUUU'U'"-.UUU’UU.-W--"O--b

Varady David P. and Wolfgang FE. Preiser and Francis P. Russell. 1998. New Direction in Urban Public
Housing. Center for Urban Policy Research. CUPR Press.

Wells, L. Edward, and Gerald Marwell, 1976. Self-Esteem: Its Conceptualization and Measurement.
Beverly Hills, CA: Sage

Wiltfang, Gregory L., and Mark Scarbecz. 1990. “Social Class and Adolescents’ Self-Esteem: Another
Look”. Social Psychology Quarterly, 53 (2)2174-183.

56

1.1.! 1! ‘w 1!. f e G. [-..-C ‘1 1!..‘.. ‘. C..‘_.1!_.'! t ...1v .1... f! .‘m 41.! frfirtlf m. (It 4‘. e .41.. titling“ f. (at (-1-

APPENDIXES

APPENDIX A
PUBLIC HOUSING IN MICHIGAN

3.0....9...9.9....’91.”.’3”,lv1’..’.’.’"”--’"D-”--Ivhv-s

1..-s!1f‘.‘t‘[ff‘.¢.1«.¢.‘51.1.1.1.1.119.C1...‘.P..ffit1.:1‘(‘1..‘.1!.(.f.‘-1 31.1.1111.

Michigan State University Center for Urban Affairs
Community and Economic DevelOpment Program

Public Housing in Michigan

 

During 1997 approximately 45,000 people lived in Michigan public housing. Of the 23,516 households, the
majority (77%) were headed by a female and a large percentage (44%) were senior citizens aged 62 years
and over. The average household size was about 2 and the average annual income was $9,100. Only 17%
of these households earned the majority of their income from wages. Slightly more than half (52%) of all
households indicated that their race was white, 48% indicated that it was black, 1% American Indian, and
1% Asian or Pacific Islander. Two percent of all households were Hispanic.

 

 

Michigan Public Housing—1997 Demographic Information
Number Percent

Residents 44,680 100
Households 23,516 100
Average Household Size: 1.9

Distribution by Age of Household

 

Age 25 and under 1,646 7
> Age 25 and <Age 62 11,523 49
Age 62 and over _ - 10,347 44 V
Distribution by Family Status ?
Both Spouses andl or more Dependents 941 4
One Spouse and lor more Dependents 6,820 29
Female Headed l8,lO7 77
Distribution by Race and Ethnicity
White 12,228 52
Black 1 1,288 48
Hispanic 470 2
American Indian 235 1
Asian/ Pacific Islander - 235 1
Average Household Income: $9,100l
Distribution by Major Source of Income2
Wages 3,998 17
Welfare 3,527 15
Distribution by Age and Disability Status
Disabled and less than age 62 4,2 I4 18
Disabled and greater than age 62 1,552 7

 

"' Source: US. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Office of Policy Development and
Research, 1997 Public Housing Data State Summary (wwwhuduser.org/data/statedata97/index.html)

'By comparison, Michigan median household income was $38,364 in 1996 (US. Bureau of the Census).

2 Major source is defined as 50% or more of total income coming from either wages or welfare; other major
income sources, such as pensions and Social Security, were not available.

Prepared by Janet Owens, Returned Peace Corps Fellow, Community and Economic Development
Program, Michigan State University Center for Urban Affairs, 180] West Main Street, Lansing, MI 48915-
I 09 7. Phone: 517-353-9555 Fax: 517-484-0068, May 1998, with partial support from a statewide
Tenant Opportunities Grant from the US Department of Housing and Urban Development.

{111‘1!.1!.1!.1.1.n1!1!‘.1!1(“i1.t“.‘f‘1.“‘l‘if‘l1v‘6f‘llr‘-fr-ftf

APPENDIX B
PUBLIC HOUSING AUTHORITIES IN
MICHIGAN

.P M DRE

Albion Housing Commission
P. O. Box 630
Albion, MI 49224

Algonac Housing Commission
1205 St. Clair River Drive
Algonac, M] 4800]

Allen Park Housing Commission
17000 Champaign
Allen Park, MI 48101

Alma Housing Commission
400 E. Warwick Dr.
Alma, MI 48801

00000000000000.1000

Alpena Housing Commission

3 2340 South 4‘“ Street

’ Alpena, MI 49707

3 Ann Arbor Housing Commission

. 727 Miller Avenue

. Ann Arbor, MI 48103

3 Baldwin Housing Commission
P. O. Box 337

b Baldwin, MI 49304-0337

D Bangor Housing Commission

. 820 Second Street

. Bangor, MI 49013

9 Baraga Housing Commission
' 416 Michigan Avenue
. Baraga, MI 49008

1 Bath Charter Township Hsg. Comm.

. 14379 Webster Road
. Bath, MI 48808

. Battle Creek Housing Commission
. 250 Champion St.
. Battle Creek, MI 49017

. Bay City Housing Commission
D 1200 North Madison

. Bay City, MI 48708

D

D

5

PUBLIC HOUSING COMMISSIONS

Fax

Fax

Fax

Fax

Fax

Fax

Fax

Fax

Fax

Fax

Fax

Fax

TELEPHO N .

(517) 629-2511
(517) 629-6004

(310) 794-9369
(310) 794-9433

(313) 928-5970
(313) 928-3830

(517) 463-4200
(517) 463-1448

(517)354-4144
(517) 356-2177

(734) 994-2323
(734) 994-0731

(616) 745-7411
(616) 745-3533

(616) 427-5535
(616) 427-3376

(906) 353-6432
(906) 353-7637

(517) 641-6244
(517) 641-4474

(616) 965-0591
(616) 965-3347

(517) 392-9531
(517) 392-5313

EXEC 91:12; DIREQEQB
Mr. James D. Amett

Mr. Nelson Stinger

Mr. James A. Hinds

Ms. Marcia Zimmerman

Mr. James J. Stosik

Ms. Elizabeth Lindslcy

Ms. Sylvia Calas

Mr. Dave Markel

Mr. Michael T. Wadaga

Ms. Ann Schoals

Mr. Kenneth Dey

Mr. Philip E. Lopez

t-‘x‘e‘MQQCGQ-lr‘.“1“1111(“f(“'€i“€(-“‘.‘(‘tp‘iltl‘f

Bay County Housing Commission
798 North Pine Road
' Essexville, MI 48732

Bedford Housing Commission
8745 Lewis Avenue
Temperance, MI 48182

Belding Housing Commission
41 Belhaven
Balding, MI 48809

Benton Harbor Housing Commission
925 Buss Avenue
Benton Harbor, MI 49022

Benton Township Hsg. Comm.
1216 Blossom Lane
Benton Harbor, MI 49022

Bessemer Housing Commission
P. 0. Box 46
Bessemer, MI 49911-0033

dvvovvvovvvoovowoob

) Big Rapids Housing Commission
‘ 9 Parkview Village
1 Big Rapids, MI 49307
i. Boyne Housing Commission
829 S. Park
. Boyne City, MI 49712
D Bronson Housing Commission
P. 0. Box 33
. Bronson, MI 49028
. Cadillac Housing Commission
111 S. Simon Street
. Cadillac, MI 49601
. Caseville Housing Commission
. 6925 N. Caseville Rd, Box 1128
. Caseville, MI 48725

. Calumet Housing Commission
One Park Avenue
.' Calumet, MI 49913

. Charlevoix Housing Commission
I 210 W. Garfield St.
. Charlevoix, MI 49720

Fax

Fax

Fax

Fax

Fax

Fax

Fax

Fax

Fax

Fax

Fax

Fax

Fax

(517)395-3191
(517) 395-7419

(734) 347-3950
(734) 347-1332

(616) 794-1740
(616) 794-4311

(616) 927-3544
(616) 927-6112

(616) 927.3541
(616) 927-3567

(906) 667-0288
(906) 667-0696

(616) 796-3639
(616) 796-8696

(616) 582-6203
(616) 532-3797

(517) 369-6265
(517) 369-3315

(616) 775-9491
(616) 775-0722

(517) 856-3323
(517) 356-2552

(906) 337-0005
(906) 337-3740

(616) 547-5451
(616) 547-9636

Mr. Robert Shimkus

Ms. Susan Soda

Ms. Sharon Carlson

Mrs. Dancthel Whitfield

Mr. Sammie Smith

Ms. Deanna Beaudette

Mr. Mark Sochocki

Mr. Todd Sorenson

Ms. Mary Puthofi‘

Mr. Dan Peterson

Ms. Barbara Novack

Ms. Gail Perala

Mr. Edwin Gregory

ovvvvvvwwiovvwvb

!

'Cheboygan Housing Commission

P. O. Box 5069

‘Cheboygan- MI 49721

Clinton Township Hsg. Commission
34947 Village Road
Clinton Township, MI 48035

Coldwater Housing Commission
60 S. Clay
Coldwater, MI 49036

Covert Housing Commission
P. O. Box 66
Covery, MI 4903 4-0035

Dearborn Housing Commission
13615 Michigan Avenue
Dearborn, MI 48126

Dearborn Heights Hsg. Commission
26155 Richardson

’ Dearbom Heights, MI 43127

O
D
i
D

i
3

Detroit Housing Commission
2211 Orleans
Detroit, MI 48207

Fax

Fax

Fax

Fax

Fax

TDD

Fax

Fax
88

Low Rent

Dowagiac Housing Commission
100 Chestnut St.

D Dowagiac, MI 49047

D
O
D
D
9

Dundee Housing Commission
501 Rawson Road
Dundee, MI 48131

East Jordan Housing Commission
451 Water St.

9 East Jordan, MI 49727

D
D

Eastpointe Housing Commission
15701 E. Nine Mile Road

3 Eastpointe, MI 43021

D
D
D
D

D

"'

East Tawas Housing Commission
304 W. Bay Street
East Tawas, MI 48730

Ecorse Housing Commission
266 Hyacinth
Ecorse, Ml 48229

Fax

Fax

Fax

Fax

Fax

(616) 627-7139
(616) 627-5772

(310) 791-7000
(310) 792-6735

(517) 273-2660
(517) 279-9499

(616) 764-3331
(616) 764-8881

(313) 943-2390
(313)943-3042
(313) 943-3021

(3 13) 277-7344
(313) 274-3350

(313) 877-8639
(313) 377-3305
(313) 377-3670
(313) 377-3670

(616) 732-3736
(616) 732-2309

(734) 5292323

(616) 536-2051
(616) 536-2051

(310) 445-5099
(310) 445-3097

(517) 362-4963
(517) 362-0225

(313) 331-9393
(313)331-1503

Mr. Dorene Stempky

Mrs. Alice Shell

Ms. Nancy Rockwood

Ms. Irma Gregory

Mr. Floyd Addison, Jr.

Mr. Carmine C. Oliverio

Ms. Irene Hannah

Ms. Wanda Pritchard

Ms. Patricia J. Sabo

Ms. Jean Pardee

Ms. Jody Lynn Ray

Ms. Janell Reed

Ms. Thomasine King

3.

’ Elk Rapids Housing Commission

‘ 701 Chippewa St.
Q Elk Rapids, MI 49529

Eseanaba Housing Commission
110 S. Fifth St.
9 Escanaba, MI 49829

9

Bvart Housing Commission
601 W. First St.
9 Evart, MI 49631

Femdale Housing Commission
’ 415 Withington
D Ferndale, MI 48220

. Flint Housing Commission
3820 Richfield Road
D Flint, MI 43506

Gladstone Housing Commission
217 Dakota Avenue
9 Gladstone, MI 49337

Gladwin Housing Commission
215 South Antler
Gladwin, MI 48624

-0-

. Grand Ledge Housing Commission

200 East J efl‘erson
’ Grand Ledge, MI 43337

. Grand Rapids Housing Commission

1420 Fuller Avenue, S. E.
. Grand Rapids, MI 49507

. Grayling Housing Commission
P. O. Box 450

’ Grayling, M] 49733

D

. Greenville Housing Commission
308 East Oak Street
I Greenville, MI 48838

Hamtramck Housing Commission
. 12025 Dequindre
Hamtramck, MI 48212

. Hancock Housing Commission
1401 Quincy St.
' Hancock, W 49930

1
l
5

Fax

Fax

Fax

Fax

Fax

Fax

Fax

Fax

Fax

Fax

Fax

Fax

Fax

(616) 264-5331
(616) 264-0310

(906) 736-6229
(906) 786-9411

(616) 734-3301
(616) 734-6454

(243) 547-9500
(243) 547-1137

(310) 736-3050
(310) 736-0153

(906) 423-2215
(906) 423-1677

(517) 426-5721
(517) 426-6944

(517) 627-2149
(517) 627-9796

(616) 235-2600
(616) 23 5-2660

(517) 343-9314
(517) 3411-3225

(616) 754-7179
(616) 754-1393

(313) 363-7445
(313) 363-0521

(906) 432-3252
(906) 432-2450

Ms. Barbara George

Ms. Mary Lynn Sweeney

Ms. Laurie Derevage

Ms. Deborah Wilson

Mr. Reginald Richardson

Mr. Robert Mineau

Ms. Sheila M. Hall

Ms. Janice Jones

Mr. Carlos Sanchez

Mr. Guy Quigley

Ms. Lorri J. Spencer

Mr. Renard Slomka

Ms. Marie Gagnon

Hermansville Housing Commission
‘W557‘7 129 W. Third Fax
Hermansville, MI 49847-0129

Highland Park Housing Commission
13725 John R. Avenue Fax
Highland Park, MI 48203

Hillsdale Housing Commission
45 N. West St. Fax
9 Hills-dale, MI 49242

, Houghton Housing Commission
‘D 401 E. Montezuma Avenue Fax
D Houghton, MI 49931

D Ingham County Housing Commission
D 3332 Dobie Rd. Fax
1. Okemos, MI 48864

UOOUOO'OV-H

Inkster Housing Commission
. 1500 Inkster Road Fax
D Inkster, MI 48141
b Ionia Housing Commission
‘ 667 N. Union St. Fax
D Ionia, MI 48846

. Iron County Housing Commission
210 N. Third St. Fax
D Crystal Falls, MI 49920

. Iron Mountain Housing Commission

401 East “D” Street Fax
. Iron Mountain, MI 49801
D
. Iron River Housing Commission

236 Third Avenue Fax
D Iron River, MI 4993 5
D
.Ironwood Housing Commission

515 East Vaughn Street Fax
.Ironwood, MI 49938
D

ackson Housing Commission

3 01 Steward Avenue Fax
.Jackson, MI 49201-1132
D

ent County Housing Commission

.74 1 East Beltline Avenue Fax

Grand Rapids, MI 49505-6045

(906) 493-2141
(906) 493-2377

(313) 868-4500
(313) 868-5727

(517)439-1210
(517)439-9577

(906) 432-0334
(906) 437-5936

(517) 349-1643
(517) 349-1697

(313) 561-2600
(313) 561-2393

(616) 527-9060
(616) 527-3333

(906) 375-6060
(906) 375-3430

(906) 774-2635
(906) 774-6261

(906) 265-4393
(906) 265-4398

(906) 932-3341
(906) 932-0322

(517) 737-9241
(517) 737-6143

(616) 336-4200
(616) 336-4205

Ms. Mary Talbert

Mr. William C. Flanagain

Mr. Alton D. Cousino, II

Ms. Virginia Monroe

Mr. Bruce Johnson

Mr. Floyd B. Simmons

Ms. Brenda Hoover

Mr. Steve Gagne

Ms. Jeanne K. Allard

Ms. Francis Wills

Ms. Bonnie Pelto

Mr. Phillip Fracker

Mr. Ronald G. Stonehouse

Kingsford Housing Commission

' 1025 Woodard Avenue Fax
Kingsford, MI 49801
L’Anse Housing Commission
110 S. Sixth St. ' Fax
L’Anse, MI 49946

Lake Linden Housing Commission
210 Calumet St. Fax
Lake Linden, MI 49945

Lansing Housing Commission
310 Seymour Avenue Fax
Lansing, MI 48933

Lapeer Housing Commission
576 Liberty Fax
Lapeer, 1W1 48446

Ubvvvtveb‘O‘UWUD‘OUQ

. Laurium Housing Commission
125 Lake Linden Avenue Fax
D Laurium, MI 49913

9 Lincoln Park Housing Commission
1356 Electric Fax
D Lincoln Park, MI 43146

, Livonia Housing Commission
19300 Purlingbrook Fax
D Livonia, MI 43152-1902 TDD

, Luce County Housing Commission
P. O. Box 54 Fax
D Newberry, MI 49363

3 Luna Pier Housing Commission

10885 Ellen Street Fax
3 Luna Pier, MI 43157
D
‘ Madison Heights Housing Commission
' 300 Thirteen Mile Road Fax
3 Madison Heights, MI 43071
D
Mackinac County Housing Commission
‘P. 0. Box 150 _ Fax
Curtis, MI 49320-0163

Manistique Housing Commission
400 E. Lakeshore Drive Fax
Manistique, Ml 49854

'UU’U’UUU

(906) 774-2771
(906) 774-4553

(906) 524-631 1
(906) 5244311

(906) 296-0713
(906) 296-0780

(517) 437-6550
(517) 487-6977

(310) 664-5231
(310) 664-2610

(906) 337-2306
(906) 337-2944

(313) 388-4660
(313) 333-7453

(243) 477-7036

(248) 477-0172
(243) 477-5494

(906) 293-5933
(906) 293-3310

(734) 343-23 55
(734) 343-2714

(243) 533-0343
(243) 533-4143

(906) 536-3414
(906) 586-3414

(906) 341-5451
(906) 341-2763

Ms. Cynthia M. Carlson

Ms. Ruth Hoopengarner

Ms. Sandra Goodall

Mr. Chris Stuchell

Mr. Matthew Modrack

Ms. Marion Ingersoll

Ms. Patricia Bragenzer

Mr. James M. Inglis

Ms. Jean Foley

Mr. Kenneth A Derbeck

Mr. Herbert Herriman

Mr. George Martindale

Ms. Kathy Schuetter

L.“‘V“Qt‘fl¢¢¢“t(‘tc‘IC'w‘ILI-‘vl'"lrilvfirlvarl‘fwfirifiif

Manistee Housing Commission
‘ 273 Sixth Avenue Fax
Manistee, MI 49660

Marquette Housing Commission
316 Pine Street Fax
Marquette, MI 49855

Marysville Housing Commission
1100 New York Avenue Fax
Marysville, MI 48040

Melvindale Housing Commission
3501 Oakwood Blvd. Fax
Melvindale, NH 48122

-‘U---".-------t

Menominee Housing Commission
, 1801 Eighth Avenue Fax
0 Menominee, MI 49359-0414

. Midddleville Housing Commission
500 Lincoln Street Fax
D Middleville, MI 49333

’ Montcalm County Housing Commission
P. O. Box 249 Fax
D Howard City, MI 49329-0249

Q Monroe Housing Commission
20 North Roessler Street F ax
D Monroe, MI 43161

D

, MSHDA
401 S. Washington Square - 4'” floor Fax
Lansing, MI 48909

,
.’ MSHDA

(616) 723-6201
(616) 723-7177

(906) 226-7559
(906) 226—8633

(310) 364-4020
(310) 364-3940

(313)331-0012
(313) 333-7372

(906) 863-8717
(906) 863-8081

(616) 795-7715
(616) 795-0032

(616) 937-4241
(616) 937-4657

(734) 242-5330
(734) 242-3562

(517)373-9134
(517) 373-4627
(517) 373-9344

(517) 373-7537

401 S. Washington Square, Box 30044 Fax ,(517) 335-4797

3 Lansing, MI 43909
D
Mt. Clemens Housing Commission
50 Church Street Fax
I. Mt. Clemens, MI 48043
D
Mt. Pleasant Housing Commission
.. One Mosher St. Fax
Mt. Pleasant, MI 48858

Munising Housing Commission
200 City Park Drive Fax
Munising, MI 49862

10006

WHO

(310) 463-1434
(310) 463-6232

(517) 773-3734
(517) 772-3937

(906) 393-4034
(906) 393.4034

Mr. Jay Wisniewski

Ms. Joan Mason

Mr. Wayne Pyden

Ms. Elizabeth A. Longley

Ms. Bonnie Ruleau

Ms. Lisa Finkbeiner

Ms. Arlene Cook

Mr. Paul Wickenheiser

Mr. James E. Logue

Mr. Larry Valencie

Mr. Robert Fox

Ms. Judith M. Green

Mr. John Oas

. Muskegon Housing Commission
1823 Commerce Street
Muskegon, MI 49441

615 East Hovey Avenue
Muskegon Heights, MI 49444

Negaunee Housing Commission
98 Croix Street
Negaunee, MI 49866

New Haven Housing Commission
30100 John Rivers Drive
New Haven, MI 48048

Niles Housing Commission
251 Cass Street
Niles, MI 49120

0--------------'

’ Northville Housing Commission
401 A High Street
Northville, MI 48167-1271

D

. Ontonagon Housing Commission
100 Cane Ct.
Ontonagon, MI 49953

3 Paw Paw Housing Commission
205 Miller Ct.

: Paw Paw, MI 49079

, Plymouth Housing Commission
1 160 Sheridan

3 Plymouth. MI 48170

, Pontiac Housing Commission
’ 132 Franklin Blvd.
Pontiac, MI 48341

Port Huron Housing Commission
’ 905 Seventh St.
. Port Huron, MI 48060

3 Potterville Housing Commission
-, 210 E. Main St.
Potterville, MI 48876

. Rapid River Housing Commission
10570 N. Main
Rapid River, MI 49878

V'UUU

Fax

Muskegon Heights Housing Commission

Fax

Fax

Fax

Fax

Fax

Fax

Fax

Fax

Fax

Fax

Fax

Fax

(616) 722-2647
(616) 722-9503

(616) 733-2033
(616) 733-3206

(906) 475-9107
(906) 47545225

(310) 749-6570
(310) 749-9037

(616) 633-6235
(616) 633-7435

(734) 349-3030
(734) 349-0259

(906) 334-2253
(906) 334-2204

(616) 657-4776
(616) 697-7925

(734) 455-3670
(734) 455-2429

(243) 3334551
(243) 338-7996

(310) 934-6416
(310) 934-6430

(517) 645-7076
(517) 645-7330

(906) 474-93 70
(906)

Mr. McKinley Copeland

Mr. Joe L. Mattox

Ms. Marcia Waters

Ms. Lorraine White

Mr. Leon J. Smith

Ms. Frances R. Hopp

Ms. Sally Jarvey

Mr. Harvey Hop

Ms. Sharon L. Thomas

Mr. Walter Norris

Mr. Gerald E. Schock

Ms. Jean Robinson

Mr. David Goymerac

Redford Township Hsg. Commission
1212] Hemingway Fax
Redford, MI 48239

Reed City Housing Commision
802 S. Mill St. Fax
Reed City, MI 49677

River Rouge Housing Commission
180 Visger P. O. Box 18174 Fax
River Rouge, MI 48218

Rockford Housing Commission
59 S. Main Street Fax
Rockford, MI 49341

Rockwood Housing Commission
32409 Fort Street Fax
Rockwood, MI 48173

Rogers City Housing Commission
643 West Erie Avenue Fax
Rogers City, MI 48779

Romulus Housing Commission
34200 Beverly Road Fax
Romulus, MI 48174

UUUUUOUdovbv‘vvw'cvvfivbc

3 Roseville Housing Commission
18330 Eastland Fax
Roseville, MI 48066

9 Royal Oak Housing Commission

211 Williams Street Fax
’ Royal Oak. MI 48068
D

9 Royal Oak township Hsg. Commission
, 21312 Wyoming Fax
Femdale, MI 48220
D
Saginaw Housing Commission
2811 Davenport St., Box “A” Fax
’ Saginaw, IVII 48602

Saranac Housing Commission
. 203 Parsonage St. Fax
Saranac, MI 48881

D Sault Ste. Marie Housing Commission
. P. 0. BOX 928 Fax
Saulte Ste. Marie, MI 49783

7".

(313) 337-2735
(313) 337-2776

(616) 332-2762
(616) 332-2330

(313)332-1414
(313) 332-0223

(616) 366-0371
(616) 366-7133

(734) 379-9700
(734) 379-9270

(517) 734-7303
(517) 734-

(734) 729-5339
(734) 729-0005

(310) 778-1360
(310) 773-0724

(243) 544-6644
(243) 546-1546

(243) 393-3101
(243) 393-7771

(517) 755-3133
(517) 790-0996

(616) 642-9332
(616) 642-9020

(906) 635-5341
(906) 63 59500

Ms. Rochelle Katz

Ms. Mona Y. Peny

Mr. Michael J. Sloan

Ms. Karen Harig

Ms. Janet D. Dallwig

Mr. Peter Ardini

Ms. Christine Anderson

Mr. Leonard Schweitzer

Mr. Richard R Beltz

Ms. Mary Hemdon

Mr. Richard Massa

Ms. Christine Randall

Ms. Patricia M. Shimmens

V'UVU'UUUU‘GUU'UUUUOUVO'O'U00vw0060000000-b----t

Schoenberr Terrace

337500 Schoenherr

Sterling Heights, MI 48077

Schoolcrafi County Housing Commission

900 Steuben St.
Manistique, MI 49854-1219

Southfield Housing Commission

Fax

2600 Evergreen Rd., P. O. Box 2055 Fax

Southfield, MI 48034

South Haven Housing Commission
220 Broadway
South Haven, MI 49090

South Lyon Housing Commission
432 Washington Street
South Lyon, MI 48178

St. Clair Housing Commission
400 South Third
St. Clair, MI 48079

St. Clair Shores Hsg. Commission
1000 Blossom Heath Blvd.
St. Clair Shores, MI 48080

St. Louis Housing Commission
308 8. Delaware, P. 0. Box 117
St. Louis, MI 48880

Starnbaugh Housing Commission
P. 0. Box 458
Stambaugh, MI 49964

Sterling Heights Hsg. Commission
40555 Urtica Rd.
Sterling Heights, MI 48311-8009

Sturgis Housing Commission
128 S. Nottawa St.
Sturgis, MI 49091

Taylor Housing Commission
15270 Plaza South Dr.
Taylor, MI 48180

Traverse City Housing Commission

10200 E. Carter Centre
Traverse City, MI 49684

Fax

Fax

Fax

Fax

Fax

Fax

Fax

Fax

Fax

(906) 341-5052
(906) 341-5052

(243) 354.4935
(243) 354-2644

(616) 637—5755
(616) 637-9197

(243)437-1155

(310)329-9141
(310) 329-0319

(310) 773-9200
(310) 776-3231

(517)631-5100
(517) 681-5374

(906) 265-5540
(906) 265-9572

(310) 977-6123 ext. 112

(310) 977-6239

(616) 641-3772
(616) 651-5795

(73 4) 237-9460
(734) 237-2050

(616) 9224915
(616) 922-2393

Mr. Jim Dikin

Ms. Dixie Klagstad

Ms. Edith Budyk

Mr. Dennis DeVinney

Ms. Cheryl L. Bateman

Ms. Beverly E. Ayer

Ms. Mary Walsh

Ms. Kerry Marsh

Ms. Shirley Mullen

Mr. Norman Birr

Mr. Robert J. Knorr

Ms. Diana M. Trent

Ms. Lorri Burtt

L- f .I.‘ ..4 ‘- - l. ---1‘ .‘4 .II.‘ S. at. ‘2 ‘2 I If S 4.. Li. it... cl! f err-Islet! ‘1‘ ‘1‘ f. a... ‘1‘ f.-‘,f‘-.‘.-rl‘llr

Wakefield Housing Commission
200 Pierce St.
Wakefield, MI 49968

Wayne Housing Commission
4001 South Wayne Rd.
Wayne, MI 48184

Wayne County Planning Division
600 Randolf, Suite L-14
Detroit, NH 48226

West Branch Housing Commission
200 S. Valley Street
West Branch, MI 48661

Westland Housing Commission
32715 Dorsey Road
Westland, MI 48185

Wyoming Housing Commission
2450 36‘“ Street, 5. w.
Wyoming, MI 49509

00000000100100-0061600

’ Ypsilanti Housing Commission
60] Armstrong Drive
Ypsilanti, MI 48197

vvvccccvvcvvvvvvvvvcov

Fax

Fax

Fax

Fax

Fax

Fax

(906) 229-5204
(906) 229-5204

(313) 721-3602
(313) 723-2159

(313) 224-5013
(313) 224-0322

(517) 345-0360

(734) 595-0233
(734) 595-1630

(616) 534-5471
(616) 534-1770

(734) 432-4300
(734) 432-5515

Mr. Fredric Francis

Ms. Karen Drcws

Ms. Tina Dortch

Mr. Steven E. Steinhauser

Mr. James Gilbert

Ms. Michelle Scott

Ms. Janine Scott

* HC's with Section 8 Program

00-1.6-1

,PflA NAME AND ADDRESS

 

,Albion Housing Commission
.P.O. Box 630

1300 Cooper Street
’Albion, MI 49224

FAX

Algonac Housing Commission
D1205 St. Clair River Drive
,Algonac, MI 48001

FAX

DAllen Park Housing Commission
.17000 Champaign
.Allen Park, MI

,Alpena Housing Commission
2340 South 4th Street
DAipena, MI 4 9707

.Ann Arbor Housing Commission
D727 Miller Avenue
’Ann Arbor, MI 48103

D

‘Bangor Housing Commission
820 Second Street
JBangor, MI 4 9013

48101

FAX

FAX

’Battle Creek Housing Commission

’250 Champion Street FAX
iBattle Creek, MI 49017

,Bay City Housing Commission

1200 North Madison FAX

DBay City, MI 48708
Bay County Housing Commission
D798 North Pine Road
fissexvillc, MI 48732

bedford Township Housing Commission

£745 Lewis Avenue
iennperance, MI 48182

D

I"."I‘U"'1' .7

12/03/97'

PUBLIC HOUSING COMMISSIONS - MICHIGAN STATE OFFICE

TELEPHONE NO. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR

 

Section 8

FAX

(517) 629-2511 * Mr. James D. Arnett
(517) 629-6004
(810) 794-9369 Mr. Nelson Stringer
(810) 794-9488
928-5970 Mr. James A. Hinds
(517) 354-4144 Mr. James J. Stosik
(517) 356-2177
994-2828 Ms. Elizabeth Lindsley
994-4891 *
FAX 994-0781
TDD 994-0718
(616) 427-5535 Mr. Dave Markel
(616) 427-7919
(616) 965-0591 * Mr. Kenneth Dey
(616) 965-8847
(517) 892-9581 Mr. Philip E. Lopez
(517) 892-5818
(517) 895-0191 Mr. Robert Shimkus
11 H 77.317
847-3950 Ms. Susan Soda
Voice & TDD #
(313) 847-7809

1.4.19.

’Bronson Housing Commission (517) 369-6265 Ms. Mary Puthoff
P.O. Box 33 FAX (517) 369-8315

D318 5. Ruggles Street

.Bronson, MI 49028

,Caseville Housing Commission (517) 856-3323 Ms. Barbara Novack
6925 N. Caseville Rd., Box 1128

Osaseville, MI 43725 FAX (517) 856-2552

D

Clinton Township Housing Commission (810) 791-7000 * Mrs. Alice Shell
D3494? Village Road FAX (310) 792-6735
,Clinton Township, MI 48035

.Coldwater Housing Commission (517) 278-2660 * Ms. Nancy Rockwood

’60 8. Clay FAX (517) 279—9499
Coldwater, MI 49036

3Covert Housing Commission (616) 764-8881 Ms. Irma Gregory
P.O. Box 66

.73860 Lake Street
.Covert, MI 49043

.Dearborn Housing Commission 943-2390 * Mr. Floyd Addison,Jr.
,13615 Michigan Avenue TDD (313) 943-3021
Dearborn, MI 48126 FAX (313) 943-3042
.Dearborn Heights Housing Commission 277-7844 * Carmine C. Oliverio
26155 Richardson FAX (313) 274-3850
DDearborn Heights, MI 48127 (Administered by Plymouth HC)
‘Detroit Housing Commission 877-8000 Mr. Carl Greene
.1301 East Jefferson 877—8639
Detroit, MI 48207 FAX # (313) 877-8805
. ' FAX # (313) 877-8769
Detroit Housing Commission Section 8 877-8670 *
Deeetion 3 Office Low Rent 877-8670 Administrator
301_Jefferson FAX (313) 393-3229
DDetroit, MI 48207
’Dowagiac Housing Commission (616) 782-3786 * Ms. Wanda Pritchard
100 Chestnut Street FAX (616) 782-2809
owagiac, MI 49047
’Dundee Housing Commission 529-2828 Ms. Patricia J. Sabo
1501 Rawson Road (village FAX) (313) 529-2379
UDundee, MI 48131
.Sastpointe Housing Commission (810) 445-5099 * Ms. Jody Lynn Ray
5701 E. Nine Mile Road TDD (810) 445-0903
astpointe, MI 48021 FAX (810) 445-8097

"U‘C""CV1'1.'C7

3 .
9

.Hast Tawas Housing Commission
’304‘W. Bay Street
.Bast Tawas, MI 48730

.Ecorse Housing Commission

.266 Hyacinth TDD
Fcorse, MI 48229 FAX
.Ferndale Housing Commission

415 Withington FAX
.Ferndale, MI 48220
‘Flint Housing Commission
Q3820 Richfield Road FAX
,Flint, MI 48506

aladwin Housing Commission

215 South Antler FAX
kladwin, MI 48624

Hamtramck Housing Commission

2025 Dequindre FAX

flamtramck, MI 48212
highland Park Housing Commission
3725 John R Avenue (Bank)
Highland Park, MI

FAX
48203

.illsdale Housing Commission
45 N. West Street
‘iillsdale, MI 49242

FAX

inkster Housing Commission
‘ISOO Inkster Road
:Enkster, MI 48141

FAX

yackson Housing Commission
01 Steward Avenue
ackson, MI 49201

FAX

apeer Housing Commission
76 Liberty
)apeer, MI 48446
zincoln Park Housing Commission
‘356 Electric

. FAX
Sincoln Park, MI 48146

TDD
FAX

9300 Purlingbrook

{ivonia Housing Commission
48152-1902

ivonia, MI

"V‘V‘UVIU‘UV‘I1'

(517)

(313)
(313)

(248)
(248)

(810)
(810)

(517)
(517)

(313)

(313)

(517)
(517)

362-4963

381-9393
381-3430
381-1508

547-9500
547-1137

736-3050
736-0158

426-5721
426—6944

868-7445
868-0521

868-4500
865-5520

439-1210
439-9577

561-2600

(313) 561-2893

(810)

(313)

(248)
(248)
(248)

' 3‘; QJM{A..
(517)
(517)

787-9241
787-6143

664-4553

388—4660
388-7458

477-7086

477-5494
477-0172

Ms. Janell Reed
,“Jh fiLIN G
“flank “plfi4lk”/
- C'L‘Ar2f.“ ‘ni
* Ms. Deborah Wilson

* Reginald RichardsoanJ‘f
bqkuflw..IfLé

(1749-9-05?

Ms. Sheila M. Hall

Mr. Renard Slomka

William C. Flanagain
III

Alton D. Cousino,

* Mr. Floyd B. Simmons
Chief Executive Officer

155%} Pam§)fi

* Mr. Phillip M. Fracker
* Mr. Matthew Modrack

* Patricia Bragenzer

* Mr. James M. Inglis

) .
)
’Auna Pier Housing Commission
)10885 Ellen Street

FAX
’Luna Pier, MI 48157 '

848-2355 Mr. Kenneth A. Derbeck

(313) 848-2714

 

 

[Madison Heights Housing Commission (248) 588-1200 * Margaret P. Birach
300 Thirteen Mile Road
Madison Heights, MI 48071
arysville Housing Commission (810) 364-4020 Mr. Wayne Pyden
1100 New York Avenue FAX (810) 364-3940
’Ilarysville, MI '48040
Melvindale Housing Commission 381-0012 * Elizabeth A. Longley
‘3501 Oakwood Boulevard ext. 214
fidelvindale, MI 48122 FAX (313) 383-7872
onroe Housing Commission ’7‘ M 242—5880 Mr. Paul Wickenheiser
0 North Roessler Street FAX (915) 242-3562
(onroe, MI 48161
jRiount Clemens Housing Commission (810) 468-1434 Mr. Robert Fox
to Church Street FAX (810) 468-6282
Mount Clemens, MI 48043
33mm (517) 373-9184 * Mr. James E..-.Lo ue
01 South Washington Square, 4th Floor 373-7537 3* Law.LJv*“ 1o)
ansing, MI 48909 373-6806 ’ . _
d J“. ,370 PM“ 3.3!“ ”4‘54
‘SHDA ‘th (517) 373-1532 Mr. Larry Valencic
01 S. Washington Square, ox 3,044-~—‘_'*‘-————e Director
.ansing, MI 48909 ‘\%;FAX (517) 335-4797 Existing Housing
gew Haven Housing Commission (810) 749—6570 Ms. Andrea Champine
.0100 John Rivers Drive FAX (810) 749-9037 Property Manager
New Haven, MT 48048
e Fourmidable Group (248) 488-2236 Joanne Inglis
v'anagement Agent for New Haven HC FAX 488-5533 Property Supervisor
’ 32605 West 12 Mile Road, Suite 350
.armington Hills, MI 48333-9053
.iles Housing Commission (616) 683-6235 Mr. Leon J. Smith
1 Cass Street FAX (616) 683-7435
iles, MT 49120
rthville Housing Commission (248) 349-8030 * Ms. Frances R. Hopp
401-A High Street FAX (248) 349-0259
brthville, MI 48167-1271
zfld Paw Housing Commission (616) 657-4776 Mr. Harvey Hop
[Ms Miller Court FAX (616) 657-4776

iaw Paw, MI 49079

7"---

D
9' . . .
Plymouth HouSing Comm1551on
91160 Sheridan FAX gar?)
.Plymouth, MI 48170 '
.Pontiac Housing Commission (248)
132 Franklin Boulevard TDD (248)
.Pontiac, MI 48341 FAX (248)
’Port Huron Housing Commission (810)
905 Seventh Street
Port Huron, MI 48060 FAX (810)
’Redford Township Housing Commission
912121 Hemingway
’Redford, MI 48239 FAX (313)
’River Rouge Housing Commission
,180 Visger, 9.0. Box 18174 FAX (313)
River Rouge, MI 48218
,Rockwood Housing Commission
32409 Fort Street FAX (313)
,Rockwood, MI 48173
3Rogers City Housing Commission (517)
.643 West Erie Avenue
,Rogers City, MI 49779
,Romulus Housing Commission
34200 Beverly Road FAX (313)
’Romulus, MI 48174
Roseville Housing Commission (810)
318330 Eastland TDD (810)
.Roscvillc, MI 48066 FAX (810)
,Royal Oak Housing Commission (248)
’211 Williams Street FAX (248)
Royal Oak, MI 48068
.Royal Oak Township Housing Commission (248)
21312 Wyoming ’ FAX (248)
)Ferndale, MI 48220
DSaginaw Housing Commission (517)
.2811 Davenport Street, Box "A"
’Saginaw, MI 48602 FAX (517)
.St. Clair Housing Commission (810)
.400 South Third FAX (810)

St. Clair, MI 48079

'vvvvvc

'13 +455-3670 *

455-2429

338-4551 * F%$

338-4552
338-7996

984-3173 *
msousuyh(y+(0

/%

984-6430

531-3110 *
ext. 270

937-0580

382-1414 *

382-0228

379-9700
379-9270

734-7303

729-5389
729-0005

778-1360
445-5493
778-0724

546-8599
546-1546

398-8101
398-7771
755-8183 *
790-0996

329-9141 *
329-0819

Ms. Sharon L. Thomas

(9 “htzfij fl «f y

Charles M. Tucker,Jr
Interim Director

Me!

Mr. Gerald E. Schock

MS. Rochelle Katz
Administrator

Mr. Michael J. Sloan

Ms. Janet D. Dallwig

Mr. Peter Ardini

Christine Anderson

Leonard Schweitzer

Mr. Richard R. Beltz

Ms. Mary Herndon

Mr. Richard Massa
‘K W"

Beverly E. Ayer

l:

D
.St. Clair Shores Housing Comm. (810) 773-9200 *
91000 Blossom Heath Boulevard FAX (810) 776-8281
.St..C1air Shores, MI 48080
.Southfield Housing Commission (248) 354-4935 *
’2600 Evergreen Road,PO Box 2055
Southfield, MI 48034 TDD (248) 354-4831
’South Lyon Housing Commission (248) 437-1155
432 Washington Street ~ \( - 00
.South Lyon, MI 48178 oLQ$~ (4P9 (+3
:Sterling Heights Housing Commission (810) 977-6123 *
_40555 Utica Road ext. 112
.Sterling Heights, MI 48311—8009
(810) 264-6410
. Mr. David Brainin
National Church Residences
9 2335 North Bank Drive
; Columbus, OH 43220-5499
D
,Sturgis Housing Commission 3‘30 (616) 651-8772
128 S. Nottawa Street FAX (616) 651-5795
’Sturgis, MI 49091
.Taylor Housing Commission 287-9460 *
915270 Plaza South Drive FAX (313) 287-2050
‘Taylor, MI 48180
’Wayne Housing Commission 721-8602 *
34001 South Wayne Road FAX (313) 722-5052
Wayne, MI 48184
‘Wayne County Planning Division (313) 224-5018 *
Economic Develop. Corp. of Wayne Cnty.
.600 Randolph, Suite L-14 FAX (313) 224-0822
Detroit MI 48226
) r
'Nestland Housing Commission 595-0288 *
‘52715 Dorsey Road FAX (313) 595-1680
Jestland, MI 48185
D
'Ypsilanti Housing Commission (313) 482-4300 *
’601 Armstrong Drive 482-4546
prsilanti, Ml 48197 TDD - 487-1787

"U’WIVUVWV'C'WV10'17‘Oififl

FAX (313) 482-5515

Ms. Mary Walsh

Ms. Edith Budyk

Sec. 8 Coordinator

C(eryl L. Bateman

C(57*hxfie)
Mr. Norman Birr

Mr. Jim Dikin
Resident Manager
Schoenherr Terrace
37500 Schoenherr
Sterling Heights,
MI 48077

Mr. Robert Knorr
Ms. Diana M. Trent

Ms. Karen Drews

Ms. Tina Dortch
Section 8 Director

Mr. James Gilbert

MS. Janine Scott

APPENDIX C

PICTURES OF PUBLIC HOUSING
THROUGHOUT THE UNITED STATES

. f .
A 1 S .‘8’ ..
”M ’ ‘} 010%-
w -v n
i 65...," -“.'- ’T" 7.. “. -
4. fl _ “ ’vn - ,4, v - i p
‘3“ ' h “ "(1'3"ruu |‘ .

 

To (IL-'Old competing with the private housing industry, Congress in
effect required public housing to look dismal.

 

.1 . - . s _ 'o. ...‘,_ v J _ . . 'r .‘ '-
. .0 . Mil-{*1 »-- ..- a L; _I-. o ' I " -- ~
«'4' I #:a‘; ' . ’ . ’l‘ "1 .’ 3-75-‘51‘1‘aw ,4__-_.-._.. t -
M .0 ...“ J;"‘:7-’. a"- ..o—%;l- '-- .
-1, ' C

One of the buildings the coalition is m ing to saw.

_05
\.‘I‘xlv.

‘Q‘NV \\(‘

'\ }5\
:12“. (has;
“3):. ’1')“

A
“.l ..-
. ' ‘ :)4‘ l
.‘ 3‘: ~3.-..“.~
. ‘ . . '5-

 

' 0
' I -- \uov ...“...
...

‘ ’ -v 0
3w .4... "
.fi? -°u ‘

 
  

1
...
O

\ I
7’.
.5

Ii
'l

'W‘N-Vu
fi.‘ '

‘.

    

3.

{1‘72} I...‘ o; .
o "‘ “0.!- 4‘.

es

   
  
 

 

.’

 
 

; .
. 'r'.‘."-' ‘
: -I A".- “w-

- , “

A “v- ' A I. '
1 115:3: -_-_..
0'- _...- . .

    

 

 
  

    

   

 
 
   

  

.‘ '&I\ -

 
 

    
  

     

 

   

 

  

       
        
  

 

 

. $5, ...“..ggxpe- -
27.3
‘ 77.7e .Yeu'arh Housing Coalition has
_ g _ _ K ...idrsL s. .... forced the FHA to build replc‘zcentent
. 1-1.3,“, .g<sa..;.e,uann.<r-4-17‘2;—;EJ~'-=-* “""t'fi" housino before buildings like this one (it
—~-~:‘ff'”. . " j lit-[:“frf’lxul . g "' " ‘- ( “
«xx-{”3“ ...fi... , -~ _- a p . 54 to; n don n.
- , can‘t-reef; --.. . - -.-,“-"..
5 ".. ‘ . rggxn»‘- 6;.“'n-_- - —'

 

When many units are allowed to sit vacant and deteriorate—as at
this development in Chester. Pa.—is an authon’tv engaging in “de
facto demolition?"

a.
.’ ,-
; ‘o

mgr-«W-

 

 

 

.ijter_i'ears ofstruggle. at Newark) coalitionforced its housing
authoriti' to build hundreds ofnetr c’tpartntents.

 

 

-f. I . .
It I! I [I1 . I It! I
‘ ‘

iii:‘7‘7‘t‘.“‘.‘t‘.‘“-“t“ (‘71‘ (in

 

  
    
  
  
  
   
  
  
   
  

2. : T ,. .

r "£265 are put to work rehabilitating

n! apartments in their housing

7‘3.'~.~ o ment. Funds for the programs

. 351' {he out of HUD comprehensive grants.
'fl'i‘o find out more about how to get

“I. ‘éhnei’ and technical assistance to set up

' ~ " Up program in your neighbor-

”~,-“'~’step‘ .
flood c ntact the Labor Relations De-

.‘ 0 ,
A'
'J

' €33: .. ment, HUD, Washington, Dc.)

1.3x.

r

3 4

J

T—_ gsummer jobs programs
| '3 fir-"for youth
,‘j One way to prepare young people for
fjfadult life and keep them off drugs is to
7;?th them find summer jobs where they
can learn new skills and earn their own
' " monCY- Worried about the lack of local
job opportunities for at-risk youth,
f project HOPE convinced the mayor to
3 call an emergency meeting, which was
attended by residents, members of the
city council, other city officials, the
police and others. The group agreed to
set up a summer youth employment
program—SAY Yes.

In the program’s second summer,
1995, organizers held a successful jobs
fair. About 200 kids were placed in jobs
with private employers or in public
sector jobs. When expected federal
funding for youth employment did not
come through, SAY Yes was “forced to
get creative,” says Project HOPE coordi-
nator Louise Garrell. “We applied for
grants from both the city and the county,
for $15,000 each, and got them both.”
The grant from the city is to place
teenagers in various city jobs.

The county money is being used to
start a youth apprenticeship program.
Working with volunteer craftspeople,
teens are learning valuable skills such as
painting, carpentry and landscaping. The
county also “loaned” an abandoned
house to the project. “The kids will
f8furbish it,” says Garrell, “and turn it
into a showcase for their work.”

Involvement in the apprenticeship
PFOgram has had a positive impact on
bOth the 15 young participants and the
adult volunteers, says Garrell. “The kids,
Who were all selected from Project

HOPE’S sports program, feel as if they’re

,9
9 l
_D
D

¥

Improving Life

 

 

capable of doing something more than
sports—this is a real craft they can use
for the rest of their lives.” The response
from construction companies has also
been incredible, says Garrell. “We’ve had
lots of construction workers volunteering
their time to teach the kids.” Home
Depot, the nationwide chain of home
repair stores, has offered to train young
people to work in Home Depot stores or
even open their own franchises.

The SAY Yes program is also about
more than jobs, says Garrell. “We ar-
range for staff at local banks to hold
workshops for the kids to teach them
how to open and maintain checking and
savings accounts. We also encourage
them to bring their parents along for
financial counseling.” It all works to-
gether, says Garrell, the sports, the jobs,
the counseling. “Once you get kids
excited, parents get excited. . .it creates
such momentum in the community,
there’s no stopping it.”

Self-employment programs

Sometimes the best way to get a job is
to create your own. A number of resi-
dent councils have set up self-employ-
ment programs to help tenants develop
and operate businesses ranging from
hairstyling, lawn maintenance and
sewing to word processing and catering.

These programs can help residents get
past some of the barriers that may keep
them out of the job market: lack of day
care, transportation and marketable

 

 

“Once you get
kids excited,
parents get
excited...it creates
such momentum
in the community,
there’s no stop-

ping z't. ”

 

53

l-‘i‘. 0.. C. 5.-.... ‘1 ..I... Iv. fr 5? 1..-Iv 4! .5- iv 2.. .0. l- 1! It t 1w 7 Q ...I. ‘4 ..I 1.! ‘HI-‘ilv-hz 4' ...va 1F .lv. (it“s

 

-

 

'vvvvvvvvv'V‘V'v'W---_______v_

 

By July 1979, five years after residents
first sued, Judge Garrity felt he had no
choice except to take control of public
housing away from the BHA and place it
in the hands of a court-appointed re-
ceiver. The judge told the receiver, Lewis
H. Spence, to “take any and all actions
necessary, desirable and appropriate” to
bring the BHA’S housing units into
compliance with the State sanitary code
and other federal, state and local hous-
ing regulations. BHA appealed the
ruling, but the State Supreme Court sided
with the tenants—the first time a state
high court had approved a receivership.

Spence, whose experience included
administering city housing authorities,
had two main goals: to meet residents’
needs and to “demonstrate that public
housing can work . . . . We have a
fundamental political battle [to] get
people to understand that it’s not an
impossible task, that poor people can be
well housed.” To accomplish those
goals, Spence worked on several fronts:

+ He ordered repairs started on some of
the vacant units, as well as other
physical improvements, such as
replacing faulty heating and plumbing
systems.

+ He made extensive changes in man-
agement personnel, upgraded training
provided to managers, and decentral-
ized some of the BHA'S Operation,
allowing field managers to control
day-to-day affairs in their develop-
ments.

+ He sought to improve routine mainte-
nance.

+ He launched a series of programs to
recreate a sense of “order and com-
munity among residents of our
projects,” which included putting
more police and other security officers
on patrol.

* He evicted the most troublesome

residents and improved screening

procedures to keep such residents
from coming in.

He backed the development of a

series of programs designed to orga-

nize tenants in their individual

Pijects, including literacy, alcoholism

and job training programs. These were
programs that tenants could, with
technical assistance, direct themselves.

One was the Supportive Services
Program, funded by a $1 million grant
from the state. Resident task forces
would use the money to hire staff to
help them provide educational, employ-
ment, counseling and community orga-
nizing services.

Real progress

By the mid-19805, real progress had
been made in improving Boston’s public
housing. The number of vacancies had
been reduced by more than 500 units—
the first time BHA’S vacancy rate had
gone down in more than ten years. The
authority’s $5 million budget deficit had
been erased, and BHA had even man-
aged to accumulate a small reserve.
Existing resident organizations were
strengthened and new organizations
formed.

Since the receivership ended in 1984,

The judge told
the receiver to
“take _any and
all actions
necessary” to
improve Boston
public housing.

 

 

 

“

...L
1:.

v

 

a» _
.4- -..

.. .. . ”3.3,,
\h‘hkfi,¥r

. 9,, 3,;
521.335,,“

.‘N-K'fl—

. I
u! - ‘15,.
. .

 

 

COMMITTEE
FORBOSTON
P u a L I c
HOUSING

 

I9 81-
ANNUALREPORT

1991

COMMEMORATING
TEN YEARS or WORKING
’ WITH BOSTON PUBLIC

.,"_'-‘. HOUSINOTENANTS

0;:‘1. ‘.‘

- ”3»

,ca-fi".

§m

‘Q- a M .

 

 

 

Vacancies

‘

 

 

 

‘, ...m---.

tr-1tl-_3_-. It Ir ‘. ‘_ I. f. t‘ f... .l. t! ‘ ‘5... «I... I! I! It It 1% It! I! c. 1.. Iv. filmi-..tlv_u..lv.lfiv-‘nlvrruellvufll.ttI4-wd

f

tion member. He added that the NHA
“tried to stir up the residents by telling
them we [the coalition] didn’t represent
them since some of us weren’t residents
of public housing.”

Those tactics did not work. Residents
stayed committed to the effort, the
coalition and each other. “We had
residents willing to sign their names to
petitions and willing to take the pres-
sure. They knew this wouldn’t be a
short-term effort,” said Victor Deluca,
chair of the coalition and former director
Of one of its members.

Legal victory not enough

That court victory wasn’t enough,
however. A year after the agreement was
signed, the NHA still had not built any
new housing. In late 1991, the coalition
requested that HUD appoint a receiver.
HUD refused, instead creating a task
force made up of city, state and federal
agency officials to facilitate construction.

Still nothing changed. In August 1992,
the coalition returned to federal court tO
ask the judge to enforce the agreement.
Specifically, the coalition asked for a
receiver to ensure that construction
began and repair and rental of vacant
units occurred. The judge did not want
to go that far. Instead, he held hear-
ings-—12 in about one year—and issued
a series of enforcement orders. He
concluded that, “I don’t know anyplace
that has failed more than the Newark
Housing Authority” and that HUD also
had failed to monitor the agreement.

So far the judge has issued three court
orders. The first two lay out a schedule
for new construction and require an
explanation when deadlines aren’t met.
Finally, construction is nearing comple-
tion on three projects containing 266
units. Construction is about to begin on
another two projects with 393 units.

The third court order addresses
vacancy and repair issues. It requires the
NHA to: comply with its Memorandum
Of Agreement negotiated with HUD; rent

1280 units that had been vacant; inspect '

all apartments to make sure they meet
federal housing standards for safe and

 

decent housing; and make repairs within

an average of 30 days and, in the case of

emergencies, within 24 hours. The court
also ordered NHA to spend $30 million
in 1993 of the $78 million in moderniza-
tion funds it had been sitting on and
make plans for spending the remaining
$48 million. Finally, the order requires
NHA to re-rent vacant units within an
average of 30 days.

Stephen Finn, director of the Newark
Coalition for Low-Income Housing,
reports that although NHA has begun to
make repairs and fill vacancies, it is way
behind the schedule set by the judge.

Concerned about the continuing
violations, the Coalition urged the judge
to appoint a receiver to oversee NHA’s
vacancy reduction program. “It was
important for the court to appoint
someone to create the sense of urgency
which was missing at the agency,” said
Firm. The judge agreed the authority was
moving too slowly and appointed a
special master to evaluate the rental
program by November 1993.

Finally... change

The pressure from the Coalition and
the court seems to have lit a fire under
the NHA. In the past few months, the
authority has: contracted for rehabilita-
tion Of 969 of 1,280 vacant apartments;
increased the number of staff in the
resident selection Office; computerized

s
///,.
5:;
Q,/
/ _. ‘
’/.‘,/
/_ /
'4;
;,//
“/7,
%
/ -
/

, ‘\
....\.\

More of the new units being built in Newark.

 

“Having residents
accompany HUD
inspectors allows
them to become
part of the
process and
makes the
community an
official monitor
of public housing.
Communities
must be able to
make government
authorities
accountable. ”

 

 

Fighting Demolition

71

 

II II- ‘ ‘\ I ..l

. ...ili.-l.--li. .l: 1-..--- is l: l- l- l. l i- . - .I h
.5. limit.» ._ _ .-""‘vf‘-“‘-‘rtv
1 ‘-¢“‘G‘Q

V ‘ ‘ ' ' ‘ ‘ "'- ' V I ' V I. ‘ " U ~I .“v. . . L. . . ‘ '~.- . ‘

' ' " "- ‘ - " .- A. ‘-.»-‘w , a»? .. O. . ’ {W ‘ "l m" (i ‘ '5‘!» H "M" ‘9 .iq‘f f?“ \H“ u 2;”! \Vi‘tii‘fll'afv‘gdx‘f“, b‘..~v '

"'-,‘~v.-- ,-‘.'“L.-‘ .‘g. .fl.‘1"1.‘.+:.:“y;I-‘.fi- :Il‘irL‘ -'*§4£I.i¢§“"t.‘ >‘.I‘I"‘4~"‘"‘ ES” ' ' "75s- ’ it“*1 ‘1}.\ W' l .N" I,“ t," 3“ "(f ”5“";«1 r "5‘13 ' '

. . . °. . I . N. ‘.' 4. .r. .- .‘f. , . i, «.1, ',,f-‘.'v,}:.r‘ “A; ..‘ iii“ “an" ‘E I“? ff’ ( ‘H" .. ,. 1.. I. 33‘ )3 i (been. ‘1) .‘ N. ”1.3:... 3‘ “#1: .11; ' . ,1
I. I , ‘ '.'l~' ._ . . , ..‘ P . ‘ - '1' . .‘ _, ’ l

{U\" - I,

 

 

l
l
Chapter 4: HOW to deal With too many vacant units .............. 55
' If major repairs are needed ................................. 56
l Tiying to save public housing in Chicago ....................... 58
D - The need for media attention ................................... 60
j ' Using the media in Chicago ................................. 62
b - How to generate media attention ............................. 63
, - How the courts forced public housing to improve in Boston ........... 64
’ Chapter 5: Fighting demolition of your home .................. 67
i -- When can a building be torn down? ........................... 68
D _ Using the courts to stop demolition: The battle ofNewarle .............. 70
I
’ Chapter 6: Increasing the Odds—working in coalitions ........... 75
Should you form or join a coalition? ............................. 74
: PLAN-ing for the future of Detroit public housing: a case study ....... 76
Appendix I: Ifyou need help ................................ 79
Organizations ........................................... 79
Publications ............................................. 81
Appendix II: Preparing Council by-laws ....................... 82
Appendix III: What makes a good leader? ...................... 83
Appendix IV: Sample memorandum of accord .................. 84
Appendix V: Recruiting new members ........................ 86
Appendix VI: HUD field offices .............................. 87

“The amount of

 

   

    

, housing—
Ii I I I. especially public
g 2 I. I l I housing—that
in: I: ' - I sits vacant in this
:ul' . ' ' : country while
llll' I ' : I millions of
3:: : ' : I I families can’t find
u... . I I . decent housing
:3: |~ I. I thqycanafl‘ordis
.. ...m- . ' "nu—um I I I I anational
' ;;;;::::::::::::: . -=~r--' -— " '—-—-:—-—- ‘ " ‘ tragedy”

. _-7-——-..‘..‘.'.'_'.;.-Jt;.l..

Left: Vacant public

hmrcino in Nonwrb

t ..-Q Q .. ‘m C $7-10. ‘ ‘41... -..“ ‘1! .I. I... I... -- sf... [fir-1... tr-ll-tl:..l. are ‘t‘fh‘ Al. I'm-Vt f:l!r'.-£1{

 

 

 

 

INTRODUCTION

 

 

iow to improve

lublic housing

0 many people, the only thing to do
i public housing is admit failure and
.it off or demolish it. Most of these

le do not live in public housing.
fiose who do live there know that,

any families, public housing is a
.‘esort. It may not provide a great

e for its 3.4 million residents, in
ye cases it provides a terrible home,

t is a home. Indeed, in most of its

locations, public housing does not
resemble its public image: a crum-
. , drug- -infested, crime- -ridden high
‘see page 15). Often, public housing
uch better place to live than
arably priced, privately-owned
ments.
bst residents don’t want to demolish
iic housing, they want to improve it.
eir development is threatened by
donment and demolition, most
'ents focus on how to save their

:king public housing a better place
e—and preserving the 50,000 or so
ents that are in danger of being
.—is the purpose of this manual.

finy people have ideas about how
Eprove public housing. Some
you should make residents the
of their units. Some argue that
tints should manage their develop-
ps. Others believe that the existing
agers should be given more freedom
.noney, while their critics say the
should be on ways to reform the
gers. Still others focus on concrete
5 that residents and managers can

t
pduotion

 

do together to improve life at least a
little, such as starting resident patrols or
providing day care.

But whatever the exact approach to
improving public housing, the key is the
active involvement of residents, involve-
ment that is encouraged with direct
financial support and strong enforcement
of laws requiring resident participation
in decisions.

“Public housing never would have
gotten into the shape it’s in today if
residents had more control over their
environments,” states US. Rep. Maxine
Waters (D-Calif.), who has spent much
time working with residents of her LA
district’s many public housing develop-
ments.

 

 

 

“Public housing
never would have
gotten into the
shape it’s in
today if residents
had more control
over their
environments. ”

 

Most public housing does not at all resemble its public image: a
crumbling, drug- infested, crime-ridden high rise.

__- —-

a- ‘4‘» __.-

.‘_ -

 

v

w.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Unfortunately, HUD itself has
failed to force most authorities to
improve. They inspect far too seldom.
They have allowed clearly failing au-
thorities to muddle along for too long.
They accept far too much of what
authorities say at face value, without

making sure the information is accurate.

(In Philadelphia, the Inspector General
discovered that HUD had been paying
Operating subsidies on 495 units that no
longer existed!)

 

Who
lives

in

public
housing?

Only about a
fifih of residents
are white today
compared to
three quarters in
1944, but afiflh
still adds up to
about 500,000

people.

 

Most of those who live in public
housing are extremely poor, with a
median income of only $6,559 in
1988. about a fifth the national aver-
age. Only about a quarter of public
housing families rely primarily on
earned income; an estimated 43
percent receive welfare, according to
a survey done by three public housing
trade associations.

Residents are mostly minority (56
percent African American; 20.8 per-
cent Hispanic). Surprisingly, the
average family size is only 2.2 per-
sons. Less than a quarter of residents
who head households are under 25.

Approximately one third of units
are lived in by the elderly.

 

 

10

 

 

   
  
 
   
   
 
  
  
 
   
  
  
   
 
  
   
   
   
 
 
 
 
 
  
   
  
  
  
 
  
   
   
  
 
 
  

“In fact, meaningful HUD
does not exist,” states the N,,
Housing Law Project’s 1990
demolition of public housing

“rarely conducts an indepen
or ‘any in- depth analysis....”-J
oversight is also not timely, .'
says. “In practice, HUD usu.’
the process so late” .that the i
approve abandonment is oft;
gone conclusion.’ --

HUD has the power to ta 1.
management of a failing ho l
ity, but as of 1992, it had do
eight times in its history.

Unfortunately, the new ad'
does not seem to be willing
problem, emphasizing the m;
local authorities more autonl"
more oversight (see page 13
seem unwilling to deal with -'
the problem: lack of oversig

Which is why residents f
organized are so crucial. B,
ing a strong organization that
represents most residents, by
alliances with others outside.
housing, resident organizatio
have!) forced management to“
more accountable, and that I
in better public housing. At '
time, they have forced cities ii
meet the needs of public ho k
dents. -

It’s not easy. It can take yvi
are no guarantees. But the re .1
be great. Individuals have oft—i
formed their lives, learning _
good at doing things like bu' .
organizations and communic
needs that they never thought
do. Isolated residents have C“:
know each other and build co
by working together.

And most concretely, resid'l.
accomplished things that ma ,
new or re-built homes, less 18"
more jobs, good day care pro.
faster repairs and much more '

This manual tells their insp'
and explains how they did it.

.;.-‘._ . .‘L- .' ‘u. 1.. ”1.- , .'

: «a ' 4314-: «was afarf‘év': ‘

t..-

fl-fikwf’ ‘~' nu

—- w.
n J‘

 

 

Int

 

 

 

 

 

 

£_ ,Jl' w i

Y)".
M. 's't.‘

.
i
.‘
‘.1
‘ c
l
.
I
P W o-
l t
‘ .
9". V
.
.
.
4
l

I‘
a
r." .‘ b 3". 1": ‘ -- I .
b" ... "-. A‘ 1 ‘1
\ . in - \ ,.,
O V .
1“ I. 'n . ‘ "'1 ’ ,""‘.
1‘ ; . ’ n.-
o‘ 1' ~ .

wk.
t

-. . u
.4.':\ ..o‘..‘ ..
\ ..r.gdm:’1

..
\

“...”-.1
\
1‘ ..

.. , .
..
C" ‘.
.-.U.’. -‘

\
. a.»
a

w"- .-
..acéxc ,‘
l: I.

‘L
D

 

Only about a
fifth of residents
are white today
compared to
three quarters in
1944, but afifih
still adds up to
about 500, 000

people.

 

 

 

 

10

 

 

 

 

Public housing deuelopment in South Central Los Angeles.

“As housing residents and tenant
activists became politically isolated—and
the middle class became increasingly
wary of programs to help the poor—no
one seemed to care that many public
housing agencies became rife with
waste, patronage and indifference,” write
Atlas and Dreier.

Interestingly, the one big city that
didn’t allow its public housing to be-
come inhabited exclusively by low—
income people—New York—is in better
shape, with a much lower vacancy rate
for example. (The average income in
New York public housing—$12,173—is
nearly twice the average in other public

 

 

 

 

 

 

promoted both in the cc

administration.” At first 3

requirement seems reasc

takes only a glance at m
housing developments tc
couraging result: often th
tively cheap and rundow;
or town you may be pass
when you see public hou
what it is.

“By constructing buildir
compared to warehouses,
stigmatized ‘government h
rendering it unattractive to
lower middle class, who Vt
instead on private builders
American Dream,” write At
Dreier.

The worst buildings were
high rises, which not only 1.
they didn’t work as commu:
cording to Atlas and Dreier,
New York public housing fo.
biggest factor linked to high
crime was not the number
welfare who lived in a buil
whether or not it was a big

“Wallow in your

own misery”

Several other historical fa
important. In the early days,
more than paid operating c
housing authorities were not
build up big reserves (reserl
exceed a half year’s rent). T
when the time came for big
major rehabilitation, they dig
enough money. The energyi
19705 also hit public housin;r
greatly increasing operating

The movement to give p";
minority people more rightS,‘
public housing. In the late 1,
dents and legal aid lawyers:

extremely strict rules enforC'
public housing authorities,
made many developments if";
like plantations They succcfl
forcing the authorities to en”
arbitrary evictions and puni '
some believe these change
to the virtual anarchy that 67‘

   
   
  
  
    
   
   
  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

.. . .. 1 ... ...1 . dig gfil‘éa ....4 F.
t-.-“-¢-'0".§9"0f"0'1

 

 

 

How Erie
residents
forced
their
housing
authority
to try
their
approach
to drugs

 

 

The first time members of the Erie
Tenants Council heard about their
housing authority’s plan to request
HUD funding for drug elimination
activities, the application was ready to
go. All it needed was the residents’
approval. Council officers signed off
on the application, even though they
had not been consulted and were
unhappy with some of the PHA’s
plans. Their development needed the
money to fight drugs.

But the council also sent a letter to
the HUD field office in Pittsburgh,
complaining that residents had been
left out of the application process. The
Pittsburgh office’s Resident Initiative
Coordinator, Jacqueline Thompson,
reminded the PHA of the importance
of resident participation in grant
applications.

When it came time for the Erie
housing authority to submit its annual
Comprehensive Grant application,
PHA staff involved Council members
from the very beginning of the pro-
cess, says Thelma Grady, the Council’s
president. Residents were invited to all
planning meetings. After the initial
meeting, says Grady, each resident
who attended surveyed their neigh-
bors to find out what kind of work

 

 

bI'
Al.

 

Erie residents used drug grant money to start a program to train

 

.\‘.

young people in housing repair and maintenance, similar to the
program that trained this Alexandria resident. -

 

  

 

their apartments needed. Residents
presented the PHA with the results «
those surveys at the next planning
meeting.

The FHA also made every effort I
involve residents the next time it
applied to HUD for drug eliminatior
funds.

The FHA is also responding to th
Council’s suggestions about how dn
elimination and comprehensive grar
money should be spent, says Grady
Although her initial recommendatiOi
that the PHA use some of the mone
to create a “Step-Up” program met
with resistance, Grady “kept putting
on the table.” Now, says Grady, the
PHA takes great pride in the Step-U
program, which combines hands-or
training in basic maintenance and
repair with classroom work to im-
prove educational skills. Apprentice
are paid while in the program. In
1992, ten men and women, recom-
mended by the Erie Tenants Counci
graduated from the program. They ;
now repairing vacant apartments in
local housing developments.

Jacqueline Thompson of HUD’s
Pittsburgh field office credits the
persistence and outspokenness of ti
Erie Tenants Council for the housin
authority’s renewed efforts to involi
residents. “The Council let the PHA
director know they wanted to work
cooperatively, that they wanted to l
a partner,” she says. Thompson alsc
credits the public housing authority
for the extent to which it has involx
residents in the application process
“HUD intended the grant applicatio
process to be a partnership betwee
PHAs and tenants,” she says.

Keep in mind that, as important
the grant application process is, it’s
only the first step. Residents need t
be involved in every step—“from tl
moment the first word is written or
the grant application until the last
dollar is spent,” recommends Thon‘
son. “Ideally, residents should be it
as involved in the implementation :
monitoring stages of a grant as the}
are in planning.”

 

46

Improving

..Illlt. ll.l1l1rl. b .l 1, ton-...! (Eli, LE. .....Hwfimwuwgwuilml .fi.
--f"“.‘v.-¢’-“-"¢'-'I-Iw§r“-l¢"( '0‘r.‘ilatwtt-bii

(C ..

 

[ beefing to volunteer. They recognize
L“ that it’s a matter of saving lives.”
LL" ‘. M05: of the people who attended the
ig-‘meeung, says Garrell, were young (23-
f, 28) and grew up in public housing
‘r lmmselves. Many had had difficult
i3. childhOOdS» but all now have steady
, jobS- In Garrell’s experience, mentorship
,1 programs work best when young people
can identify with their mentor, i.e.,
I sOmeone who is young, who grew up
n or and is doing okay, rather than a
much older person or star athlete who
i -. has a lot of money.
i ProjeCt HOPE envisions each mentor
' being more than a companion for the
. children. “They will also be an advocate
for the children and help them get jobs,”
I says Garrell. “Volunteer mentors will also
be walking advertisements for the
L - program, as they talk about the impor-
tance of mentoring to their friends and
j _" neighbors and at church.”
To find out more about Project Hope’s
I mentoring program, contact Louise
,_ Garrell, Project HOPE, 537 Maverick
Circle, Spartansburg, SC. 29302, 803-579-
" 1635.

. “y'—
,.
\

Recreation and

- sports programs
Many believe that a good way to keep

young people on a positive track is to
offer them opportunities to develop new
skills and self esteem—and to have fun.
. Sports and recreation programs can

combine all three elements.
, - In addition to its mentoring program,
i Project HOPE in South Carolina also
i ' Operates a highly successful year-round
i ' sports program. Before the program
. started in 1992, Spartansburg public
t y? housing offered no organized sports

;-_ activities for young people. Now kids
{f can Choose among baseball, basketball,
i football and track-and-field.
i3: . “When we started working with these
i; kldsi" says Louise Garrell, “they had no
“Sift Ope; now hope has been brought back
(‘1‘, 4; t0 their lives and into their parents’
fig: ,.es.” The volunteer coaches who work
‘3 Lymh the kids really care about them, she
_. fays, and participating in the teams has

 

  
  
 
 
 

 

given the children the pride, sense of
responsibility and self-discipline that
come from developing a talent and
working as part of a team.

Athletic activities are part of Project
HOPE’s recreation program, which is
directed by two former professional
athletes on a volunteer basis. Uniforms
and equipment are donated by local
corporations; the Spartansburg PHA pays
to send the young athletes to competi-
tions out of town.

The program is about more than
sports and winning, Garrell emphasizes.
It’s also about developing character. “We
treat these kids as if they’re top notch,”
she says. “They know we believe in
them and that helps them believe in
themselves.”

Project HOPE also uses sports to
enrich the kids’ lives. “When we take
them on the road to a competition,” she
says, “we tour the cultural spots in
whatever city we visit.”

Hurst-Bush Youth Sports

Program

Until 1992, the Hurst-Bush public
housing developments in Williamson
County, 111., had no organized recre-
ational or sports activities for young

“We treat these
kids as if they’re
top notch. They
know we believe
in them and that

 

people. Members of Concerned Neigh- helps them be-
bors of Williamson County and Southern lieve in them-
Counties Action Movement organized a selves.”

 

   
  
 
  
  

. '59“

A.
.-~

     

-' 1.0‘)’
- I
a. ‘3, .: "
he. '- 7

r. r I
l

      
   
    

4...

    
  

1.1.4

   

- 3;
'

 

V

    

'l -
u‘ '
a
' .
c -‘
: - ¢
O

a
- . N

   

-s

.*o‘

l

I
E J fQQH‘H,
.-,-—‘ -.S'z.z:-
- ._~ .. I )1- -,

. vi: .
. ' r‘ -

   

‘ 0‘ . .‘ ‘ . ,
‘I I g ‘ '< ‘ '
, ‘ ~. . ._ ‘nv ." ’, ’ : ._
. “o ".' .,“,« ‘- ‘. . \ " ..“)‘N... '- -
.- ' "' . ,9 o -- " v ~
‘ r ' '\ 0“ A ' I ‘ ' . -"'-\\ :AK‘...

Many councils use most youth’s interest in sports to involve them
in organized programs.

 

51

 

 

 

“Being able to
show that many
residents back
the council can
give you clout
with the PHA and
other government
agencies. ”

 

r ne nrst meeting

The most important goal at your first
meeting is to give people a chance to
get to know each other—and to identify
common problems a resident council
might be able to tackle. The more
comfortable a setting you create, the
more likely people will open up. Some-
times a social gathering such as a barbe-
cue will be better than a formal meeting
in somebody’s apartment.

Make a list of the problems residents
identify and talk about how setting up
(or jump-starting) a resident council
might help solve some of those prob-
lems. Tell people some success stories.
Use examples included in this guide or
ask your local legal services offices or
housing activists for examples (see page
79).

Also at that first meeting, if you are
starting a new resident council, ask
everyone who supports the idea of
forming a council to sign a petition,
assuring them that residents have a clear
right to form such a group. (Since new
people will probably show up at your
second and third meetings, pass the
petition around at those meetings as
well, to make sure you get everyone’s
signature and address.) Being able to
show that many residents back the

 

 

 

 

 

This resident has been organizing low-income people in Montana,
helping win a law requiring residents on PHA boards.

 

council can give you
and other governmei
Don’t end the first
setting up a second (
who comes to tell otl
resident council and -
come to the next met
meeting ends, ask pe-
want to accomplish a
and, if apprOpriate, a:
do before the second
might include doing r1
names and phone nur
allies in the communit
attorneys, housing org
telling other residents

Reach out for

By the time you hol«
third meeting, considei
“expert” such as a lega
or community housing
to help you in whateve

' Depending on their knt

experience, they can of

of areas:

+ How to create a “mis.
or overall purpose fo
tion.

+ How to write by-laws
organizations Operate
become “incorporatec
to), obtain “charity” ta
formal recognition fro

+ How to manage an or,

+ How to run meetings.

+ How to raise money.

+ What your rights are.

+ How to win improverr.
homes.

You can also invite res
from other local resident
meetings to talk about [ht
Ask legal services attorne‘
housing organizations for
resident activists. (See the
section in Appendix I for
contact legal services law1
helpful folks in your area.

Sometimes the PHA wil
one on staff, such as a res
who can help you develo
for your resident council.

 

20

. . .A , ".r
, 1 , 1 -u. 5am. 3'4»: W:\»b-'-“‘ ‘ Mr“ ;_L“‘
.. .a- - .v -.a " ‘

 

, Organiz

 

_—

 

{flitglx}... i .. ii. i i ._ 1 1i 1 1‘ _. M. -.. ii . ...i. i .. W:iu.tiw. j -, , . .... .
.-.-f---“-“.""'.-ri""“"a'fth‘lIr‘...I.JI.‘.._.....‘....I...-FD.a...

 

 

 

 

Getting
people
involved

“Successful
organizations
know how to
make people

feel welcome.”

22

 

 

/

 

 

Getting lots of residents involved in
your council is extremely important.
People are the source of your power
to win changes. If one or two peOple
complain about something, it’s easy
for public officials to ignore them. But
it is much harder to ignore a dozen
peOple, or 100 peOple.

The most successful organizations
are constantly reaching out to bring in
more people. They hold social events
like barbecues and sports days. They
sponsor educational events, such as
inviting a job-training expert to talk to
residents about how to prepare for the
jobs of the future. They post flyers

the resident council and the problems
the council is trying to overcome, as
well as to ask people about their
concerns. They go to local churches to
reach both residents and people from
the surrounding neighborhood.

And these successful organizations
know how to make new people feel
welcome. You don’t want your organi-
zation to become such a tightly knit
club that new peOple feel shut out.
Those people are not likely to come
back. New blood prevents community
groups from becoming too in-grown
and helps them stay strong.

  

.
I
L
4
.
a k
. ‘_ _..r
L .1

the Sonoma County Faith-Based Organiz-

 

/
/

a

Develop you

Once you have s
short-term goals, yc
strategies for reachii
example, a long-terr
repairs done faster. (
to let management k
be monitoring how 1
respond to requests.
residents to inform Y(
a request.

As you develop str:
several things in mine
be well thought out a1
are 1000 apartments ir
ment and. an average (
quests each day, moni:
may not be realistic; pc
on one or two building
should be flexible and
If residents aren’t inforr
repair requests, then de
strategy. Strategies shou
many of your members.
may be to hold a demor.
protest to get media atte:
members may not be rea
confrontation.

Finally, try to have a rt
frame. If you do decide t1
onstration, or simply put 1
social event like a barbecr
self enough time to plan it
always seem to take longe
think. And try to have a se
strategy over time. Often, g
everything into one event,
stration. But one event~or
for example~will seldom r
change. Know what comes

Once residents have deci
goals and strategies, write 6
down in an action plan. Thi:
include a list of specific task
do each task, and by when.
workplan not only gives you
measure your accomplishmer
to make sure your resident c(
keeping on track. Make sure 1
who has attended a meeting 1

copy.

Organize a

CHAPTER 2 j

 

1* U "c.

:Working with your
ipublic housing authority
3

Your local public housing authority
3 continuously makes decisions that affect
9 your development—and you personally.
. It is also the source of a lot of useful
information. The more you know about
. your PHA the better: how it works, its
3 responsibilities to residents and the
federal government, its track record on
H making repairs and filling vacancies.
3 This chapter explains how public
.1 housing authorities operate—and pro—
. vides advice on how you can get more
' detailed information from and about
:9 your PHA.
g, This chapter also will serve as useful
background for upcoming chapters:
9 improving the quality of life in your
3 development, reducing vacancies and
._ fighting demolition. The public housing
authority plays a major role in all three
issues.

How closely should you
work with your PHA ?

Learning more about how your hous-
ing authority actually operates and who
has power within the PHA will also help
you make a very basic decision about
your work. Is it best to work with your
PHA, jointly deve10ping needed services
and improving maintenance and secu-
rity? Or, because your PHA is doing such
a bad job and seems very unresponsive
to residents, is it better for you to play
an advocate’s role? This may mean
pressuring your PHA to improve its
performance, perhaps by telling the
public and federal officials how bad
conditions have become. These two
Options are not exclusive; the more
effective resident organizations often do
both.

There is a difference of opinion about
how closely to work with your PHA.

¥

Working with a PHA

_

vv—rv—rvvvvqrvkuuweuvoa

 

Some housing activists feel that working
with a PHA compromises a council’s
independence too much. They believe
PHAs can easily control resident councils
by giving them a little money and a little
say in minor decisions while the big
issues—getting repairs done on time,
eliminating excess vacancies, dealing
with crime, etc—never get addressed.
Others believe that resident councils
won’t accomplish anything unless they
develop a good relationship with their
PHA—which ultimately controls nearly
all the resources—and that resident
councils can have a relationship without

 

selling out. “Some believe

In our view, the answer depends PHAs can easily
mostly on the nature of your PHA. Those control resident
that have allowed their developments to councils by giving
deteriorate for years, that do little about them a little
vacancies, that are extremely slow to money and a little
make repairs—may be impossible to say in minor
work with. The most valuable role you decisions.”

fi

 

 

housing residents with the Alexandria ( Va.) public housing au-
tbority.

27

 

_ ...- ..-.. -~.-—.. .

 

‘ ”
$55 play may be to bring more public

3 ucntion to the PHA’s failures.

: -- For more responsive PHAs, the best
(33‘ 16 you could play may be to organize
(gmidents and help build more Of a sense

Community and develop programs

nth” address specific needs (better

5) security; recreational facilities, etc.). The
’ ke)’ is learning as much as you can
‘ ab0Ut your PHA.

All PHAs are supposed to help resi-
O dents develop councils and provide
' a55is,tance to councils that already exist.
9 Of course, housing authorities have their
. own agenda and it won’t always coin-
Q cide with yours. In some cases, PHAs
. have done their best to out-organize
. resident councils, so the councils would
0 not _— Or could not — make any
b “trouble” for the authority.
9 But as long as you’re aware of these
.0 different agendas and don’t involve
'0 pm too closely in your operations, in
‘ most places, you probably have more to
;. gain than lose in terms Of access to

. federal resources and expertise.
l

O

‘9 Who’s in charge?

3 Overall responsibility for building and
'- maintaining public housing rests with the
US. Department of Housing and Urban
Development (HUD). HUD turns over
most of the responsibility for managing,
maintaining and marketing public hous-
ing units to public housing authorities.
Each PHA, in turn, hires a property
manager(s) to handle the day-tO-day
Operations Of each housing development
in its area. )

HUD provides PHAs with about 95
percent of the money they need to
Operate public housing. Out Of this
“Operating subsidy,” the PHA is sup-
posed tO pay utilities and the salaries of
maintenance and management staff. The
money is also for maintaining develop-
ments’ heating, water and cooling
Systems and for keeping individual units
in good repair.

In addition to the Operating funds, PHAs
Can apply for HUD for large “grants” tO
Upgrade living conditions and make major
repairs. (More about this later.)

 

 

Through its network Of field offices,
HUD is supposed to keep close watch
on PHAs to make sure they are doing
their jobs. Field staff are supposed to
conduct regular inspections of conditions
in houSing developments and send
reports to the closest HUD regional
Office (which are being abolished). They
also provide technical assistance, mostly
tO housing authorities, but occasionally
to resident associations. (Every field
office is supposed to have a resident
initiatives coordinator, from whom you
can seek help and advice.)

 

To learn more...

There is a lot more inforrnation'
about how to organize a resident
council—and organizing in gen-.
eral—than we have space to. in!
clude here. But we have listed the '
names of organizing guides and.“ .
information about where to get '
them in Appendix I. HUD itself has .
published a detailed guide called, ., ,
Community Empowerment: A. Guide .. .
to Building Strong Resident Coun- ' :-

“The key is learn-
ing as much as
you can about
your PHA. ”

. . ‘
_.» 7
.¥ (Ah .

i

 

 

 

 

 

‘ - ~ -

f 1
- on I i}. i‘
'- J
- ’4' :‘zir."_ogtrq;l;:'t
, {'3‘ ,'..'r. In
\. ‘-’ ' ‘ '
\

, ..-“
O . .
...
' ~"',¢w. -. -
‘ - .' _ .. .‘”‘---g "“ " ,p-M
. ....: .—

—- __ ' 'g._ .....

 

“Tenants must own their own association, ” says Eugene Williams,
who has helped residents in Chester, Pa., organize. “If you ’re not
autonomous, you’ll be beholden to the authority. ”

 

vvv"-""""---'-'-_'

Working with a PHA

 

.-

29

 

 

L . 0.. ‘. 01.-.-.. ‘1. ..l. .. {... .‘. [tilt «Iv ‘w‘vi‘. t i {rifleitiiatteittta11.....-tilttl. (.i.‘r..-ltl‘r:llrllvl(!.‘id1t.

o
1

Psigned a legal contract.

I authority on your side. The PHA has

,warking with your

pflA’s board

’ Attending PHA board of commission-

, ch' meetings is one of the best ways to

.keep in touch with what your PHA is

‘ doing (or not doing)—and to have a say

i in decisions that affect the quality of life

' in your housing development.

’ These boards create the policies that

Sgovern the PHA and oversee its work.

, Anytime management wants to develop

0 a new program, pass a budget or submit

grant requests to HUD, it has to seek the

'4 approval of the board. Board members

i. (usually between five and nine) are

. appointed by the mayor or city council
and are supposed to reflect the people

1 living in the community where the

,0 housing development is located. Some

0 boards are more reflective Of their

‘ communities than Others.

1 Ideally, a representative Of your
resident council will be appointed to the
board Of commissioners—nothing your

b council does is more likely to influence

l decisions by the public housing authority

. than having a member on the board. At

’ this point, HUD regulations recommend

‘ but do not require that residents have a

’ seat on PHA boards, and more resident

D representatives are being appointed tO

, them. Work with your city council or
mayor, who choose the board members,

’ tO encourage them to appoint residents.

As we discussed in the introduction,
some cities don’t really want to see
public housing saved and improved and
don’t want residents to become more
active. This is why it is very important to
convince the federal government to
require residents on boards. Short Of
that, some resident groups have pushed

}
D
3
D
fl
3
’ their state government to require resi-
D
3
D
D
D
D
D

i

dents on boards. Each state has the right
to decide how public housing board
members are selected.

Even if your council doesn’t have a
Seat on the board of commissioners, you
Can still attend meetings. They are Open
to the public and notices are supposed

Working with a PHA

_

 

 

 

 

to be posted in pubhc p1aces severai
days in advance. Most PHA boards meet
about once a month.

Claudia Moore, a resident of
Nickerson Gardens in Los Angeles, is a
resident commissioner on the board of
the Los Angeles Housing Authority. Time
at each meeting is reserved for “public
comment,” when residents are invited tO
express their views. “We listen to tenants
during this period,” says Moore. “Then
we tell the executive director of the PHA
to lOOk into the issues tenants raise and
report back tO us.”

Whether you just plan to attend
meetings or want to get a resident
appointed tO your PHA’s board, you
should find out all you can about the
board first. How big is it? What are its
responsibilities? Who decides who
becomes a Commissioner? Start with
your PHA’s staff. Any information you
can’t get from the public housing author-
ity you, should be able tO get from a
local legal services attorney or housing
organizer.

ls your PHA meeting
HUD’s standards?

It would also be useful for your
resident council to find out whether your
public housing authority is meeting
performance standards set by HUD. Most
Of these standards require the public
housing authority to involve or at least
consult residents. If they fail to meet

 

 

 

“We listen to
residents during
this comment
period, then we
tell the executive
director to look
into the issues
residents raise
and report back
to us.”
—Resident and
board member
Claudia Moore

(below)

 

 

 

31

V’Kem , But it also reflects the fact that

JHUD lacks enough staff to perform
ections.
finSTPhe agency has developed a new tool,
Lathe public Housing and Management
3Assessment Program (PHMAP), tO mea-
asure the performance of public housrng
" nu[horities PHMAP is designed to enable
'~ ublic housing authorities to indicate
fihow they have done on 12 performance
astandards, including how much the
authority has done to involve residents
-1 in its Operations and management (see
:1 e 52)
3p after public housing authorities submit
.their assessments, HUD scores them,
Qusing a point system from 0 to 100.
PHAS that score under 60 are designated
“troubled” and required to make im-
‘ provements or risk losing some or all of
.their federal funds. SO far, however, most
9 housing authorities have scored in the 60
to 90 range.

The first assessments were conducted
in 1992, all for housing authorities with
more than 500 units. PHMAP scores are

. public information, so if your PHA has
D done the assessment, you should ask for
a copy Of its score.
You can find out all about PHMAP by
. Obtaining a copy of The Public Housing
. Management Assessment Program
. (PWP) Handbook, #74605, published
in March 1992 by HUD’s Office Of Public
and Indian Housing. The handbook,
which is free, includes the statute that
. established PHMAP (section 502(3) of
the 1990 National Affordable Housing
Act), the regulations created to imple-
ment it, and tips for understanding and
. using the program, including examples.
A word tO the wise: the PHMAP
. handbook is long and contains a lOt Of
legal jargon and officialese. If you decide
. to get a copy, you might want to ask for
help from a local housing organization
. 0r legal services attorney in identifying
. and interpreting the most important
Sections of the handbook.
Also keep in mind that since PHMAP
’ is brand new, it is probably too early to
. know whether it will be an effective way
. I: keep public housing authorities on
I eir toes.

 

 

 

Profile
of a

,h9uSing
“authority

that tries
to work with
residents

A lot of resident councils feel shut
out by their public housing authori-
ties. But some PHAs try harder than
others to involve residents in deci-
sions that affect them.

One is the Alexandria Redevelop-
ment and Housing Authority (ARHA),
which manages 17 public housing
developments, totalling 955 units,
scattered throughout this city just
south of Washington, DC. A represen-
tative of a resident council sits on the
Board of Commissioners (as does a
representative from the city’s tenant-
landlord board). At every meeting,
time is devoted to discussing the
concerns Of the resident council, as
well as issues raised by tenants at
large, according to research and
development director Sunia Zaterman.
Notice Of the monthly meetings is
posted in the Offices of the city gov-
ernment, the library and the PHA.

 

- .
‘ ~. - - I 1'
, a")?! ., .- ,
\ 7‘" .. '
~ ' .v , I I
. 5‘4 ... <'.. " _ 9.! '
‘ ' ‘ .I' .
‘ ~.\- .‘ . '.
. i . .
‘. ..‘h.’ > -

s
r.
Y ..
1“.
if“
q .
3.5

 

 

. ' .!.. ~v'. .‘ K-
. y I ' H'I , ' . . ,
. 4,»..21- ‘ . ~-
. .. om: - . ..“
a ‘ i
l

n
.1 «:«ri'h‘ii' i “’ ~ .1 ‘ H
.- :5“; _.A virgin... 3.6-" I 'l \

 

 

 

A resident council member sits on the authority’s board.

 

 

: Working with a PHA

\

_—

 

33

 

l
i}.

L f. (Array .0. t. L..- m. -.t. if -.L at. ....l. u f. “C "i. «I. -C it. .....I uCif..1C.iQ1€r§ géééégg _

 

"V's-fwd ‘0 V ‘10 "d U ‘0 ‘J ‘J U U ‘4 hr ‘4 ‘d u‘ 1.9 1.9 *d VJT‘r‘J-B’idfia‘w'io'wa‘w‘w‘b-aa-aflw

 

“In New York
City, every public
housing building
with a resident
patrol has less
crime and
vandalism.”

 

Residents and community leaders in Philadelphia hold a rally
against drug abuse.

Make your

presence known

Let drug buyers know that they are
not welcome in your neighborhood.
Public housing residents on New York
City’s East Side have strung a banner with
two big eyes painted on it across the en-
trance tO a local drug market. “We Spy”
and “Don’t Buy Drugs Here” the banner
warns; its presence has helped discour-
age customers from outside the area
from coming in tO buy drugs, according
to Winnable War (see appendix I).

Create resident patrols tO monitor
drug and criminal activity in your devel-
opment and report anything suspicious
to the police. Residents Of Grandview
Homes in Everett, Wash, had tried
everything to rid their development of
drugs. They had pressed for the eviction
Of drug dealers and increased police ‘
involvement. But it wasn’t until residents
Of this 148-unit complex initiated a foot
patrol and began walking the neighbor-
hood On a regular basis that they began
to see results.

Since the patrol was started in 1987,
drug dealing and crime are both down.
Far fewer calls are being logged from
Grandview Homes by the local police.
The neighborhood is quieter and resi-
dents report feeling safer. The city Of

 

“~—~

 

fl

Everett has named Grandview the M05
Improved Neighborhood and in 1991,
Neighborhoods USA named Grandvievr
“Neighborhood Of the Year.”

Members Of the foot patrol received
training from local people identified by
the resident council’s community out-
reach committee. The patrol works in
conjunction with the public housing
authority, the city council and the local
police, according to Resident Initiatives
(see appendix 1).

Resident patrols in

New York City

In New York City, every public hous-
ing building with a resident patrol has
less crime and vandalism than buildings
whose residents don’t patrol. Residents
also report a greater sense Of commu-
nity, neighborhood and trust.

The New York City patrols succeed
just by being there. Residents sit at a
table in the lobby of their buildings.
They greet their neighbors and talk witf
them. They get tO know the housing
agency’s roving police patrols and trade
information with them. They keep an
eye out for strangers who might be
acting suspiciously. They check on
unlocked exit doors. They help people
with small problems. And when they
spot what might be a big problem, they
pick up their phones and alert the
housing agency police.

For more information about the New
York City patrols, you can contact Charlt—
Owens, Director of Community Affairs,
New York City Housing Authority, 250
Broadway, New York, NY 10007.

Asking police to live in

public housing

Having police Officers living in your
development can help increase resident
feelings Of security. In Washington, DC.
Gilbert Webster, a police Officer, his wife
and three children sold their suburban
home tO move into Potomac Gardens,
once considered one of the city’s most
crime-plagued public housing develop-
ments.

 

42

4|

lmnrnwinn I if;

 

i u. lid-ii. 1.. ...im.“ .....i . .. .311.lll T 1
- 1 -. 3....» ....ii . .. ..“-aw; , . r

 

...vl'. .1 ll ‘ 5' I! .. ...-.... .... ... .... - l: - t ‘. ... t.‘ ... ... t-‘ . ‘.'....¢Ir.'..lt.l'rl!.il?t..lr1:lr.lr.r -ir'tlflal

   

 

Office, and a copy is sent to the ,, ,
president Of the resident council. E ven In A

ARHA and the resident council have exist betW1
developed and Operate several pro-

grams. ARHA has set up a joint selec- manageme
tion committee with the resident .
council to hire contractors to provide protesting ‘

resident services, including a resident demolish 0,
leadership program, running a day

care facility in the development, and authority’s 7
Offering training in small business
development. Management and
residents develop a request for pro-
posals from contractors. As the pro-
posals come in, residents as well as
management review them and then
interview the contractors. The contract
is signed with the housing authority,
but it stipulates that both the housing
authority and residents will monitor
the contractor’s performance. In the
case Of the day care center, ARHA and
the resident council meet monthly
with the contractor to assess progress.

Other joint programs include a

community campaign for safe neigh-
borhoods and a youth-Operated radio
station. Currently the authority is
working with residents to develop an

alternative learning center for youth
and adults.

DevelOping a
ship with your 1:
ity, says Zaterma
“way tO pass infr
forth that’s not C1
adds that it also 1
sense of cooperai
on both sides.”

For resident lea
says, “it’s really in
grasp Of how the l
Operates. Start by 1

- and executive dire
you want informati
goes on in the dew
to participate.”

One thing you c;
Zaterman, is ask yO
ity tO hold orientatit
new residents, as Al
doing soon. At thes<
says “housing autho.
describe how they 0
various departments
each one does. They
whom tO contact to t
problems, where the
from and how it’s spc
describe the role of ti
answer residents’ que

But even in Alexan
exist between residen
ment. Recently, for ex
in one Older developn
protested a plan tO de;

_ ‘ .1.'.. ~ -. .3 1 L
. . “,5. "“t'r I. , , .2 3' -. - .
' ‘- 3 '- I - 3. " ? apartments and move 1
‘ v'. ...‘. '3 i . '
A: 1:1: 7 . < _‘

residents believe they :

 

 

   
 
 
   
  

 

   

«111.;
"I < huffituianin 2.131;“ Aghxflfiani‘fi,“
..s

i to Royal Day Care Ce nter {7.7

u l
w v-.-D v ‘

J; _o .0}; .o‘ 3.": -' '

  
 

"9 f

11111

  
    
   

9
I.
U
9

se._r
a

1?

J

c u
D

_ moved because their Ct
"’5 2 “7,122 fr - . ‘ close tO Alexandria’s p<

1‘,I‘
, .
v
-Q

$11.9"? £15..

. r .
An on-site day care center is among the programs begun jointly Town tourist a ea
by the housing authority and the resident council.

 

 

34 VVOrkk

_..._——

 

 

 

   

1.1-1.1'w-J'Uv-JVVUUUUVUUUUUWUUU'W‘WVJ‘WUVJ’w’fi'WU‘U‘b‘ifi‘U‘i-Db‘iliulvf;

APPENDIX D

MAP OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN WITH
LOCATIONS OF PUBLIC HOUSING
AUTHORITIES

av‘1vaVIviUddvfldddu’«JulVU‘Uv1w'U'u-vu'wvvvvviawwb~vw¢ueuwg

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

b ‘ UPPER PENINSULA
:—
3,5 , A“,
a [ mount
1 ...,
sxnw l
W
"i ......
L I[1“ I
' \
‘ 1 * 110m
1
\\ - ‘\ x '
A“\\‘ \\ '
Il \\:\ a,"
I 0“ 0781“ W
m
‘ .
\
Law In «an urn-u
"In
m m use:
' EAST CE!
w: 11 mm: /
WEST CENTRAL “y. n9
m palm mum nu W
N M7 uc
man.’ mm m away

 

- _ aunt “m”
emu: m yam “Inn. near:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

mum '
aura: [an tam ..m until} I
“tyranny. m was“ ' ruin um
SOUTH WEST SOUTH
' EAST
am“: " um want
I "

 

 

 

tfiw¢mfit.t7t.:‘.frlyf.‘I.(...“...I.“‘¢£t¢‘.cltcrlrltlrlv1lttélvi‘¢:§

APPENDIX E
FAMILY SELF-SUFFICIENCY CONTRACT

.5...

was...3v.\J\J\a.v.stJ3.3.3.3..3..3.5.3an.)3.333.33333333).)\3)|l|7|7It’llIr.

.‘QéC‘CGQC‘sv"lv‘lvffli‘tlf‘lvttft‘ff{itréffrfiieitifi‘il

I‘l'UUU‘VIUVUU~JUiJrJiJiJiJ<JaJU'4Javidd..." w"U"U’U"U'§'U‘U'wWV‘VBUH—r‘v‘.’

US. Department of Housing and Urban Development
Section 8, Public Housingand Indian Housing Programs

FAR/IIIX SELF -SUFFICIENCY PROGRAM-
CONTRACT OF PARTICIPATION

This Contract of Participation for the Family SelfoSufiiciency (FSS) Program is between

 

J Housing Agency (HA),

and

. heed ofthe FSS family. The FSS
family includes everyone in the household, and is referred to in this contract as 'family'.
Type of FSS Program.
The family is a participant in the:
__ Section 8 Rental Certificate or Rental Voucher FSS Program
_ Public Housing FSS Program
_ Indian Housing FSS Program
Purpose of Contract

The purpose of this contract is to state the rights and responsibilities of the family and the HA,
the resources and supportive services to be provided to the family, and the activities to be

completed by the family.

Term of Contract

 

I This'contract will be effective on

 

'Thiscontractwinexpire on

The HA can extend the term of the contract up to 2 years ifthe family gives the HA a written
request for an extension and the HA finds that good cause existsfor the extension.

Rescurces and Supportive Services

Duringthe termofthecontract, theHAwillu-ytoprovide the resourcesandserviceslistedin
the individual training and services plans. If the resources and services are not available, the
HA will try to substitute other resources and services. However, the HA has no liability to the
family if the resources and services are not provided. '

5193

FSS Escrow Account

The HA will establish an FSS escrow account for the family. A portion of the increases in the
family' 3 rent because of increases in earned income will be credited to the FSS escrow account
in accordance with HUD requirements.

Listed below are the family's annual income, earned income, and family rent when the family
begins the FSS program. These amounts will be used to determine the amount credited to the
family’s FSS escrow account because of future increases in earned income.

Annual Income

 

Earned Income

 

Family Rent (Total Tenant Payment
or, for rental vouchers,
30% of monthly Adjusted Income)

 

The HA will invest the FSS escrow account funds in HUD-approved investments.

The HA will give the family a report on the amount in the family’s FSS escrow account at least
once a year.

If the family is participating in the Section 8 program and moves outside the HA's jurisdiction
under Section 8 portability procedures, the HA may transfer the balance of the family's FSS
escrow account to another HA.

Withdrawal of Funds from FSS Escrow Account

The HA may permit the family to withdraw funds from the FSS escrow account before
completion of the contract if the family has completed specific interim goals, designated by the
HA, and needs some of the FSS escrow account funds to complete the contract (example: to
pay for school costs).

The HA will pay the head of the family the amount in the family’s FSS escrow account, less
any amount owed to the HA, when:

(1) the HA determines that the family has completed this contract, and,

(2) at the time of contract completion, the head of the family provides written certification to
the HA that no member of the family is receiving welfare assistance. Welfare
assistance means income assistance from Federal or state welfare programs including
AFDC, $81 that is subject to an income eligibility test, Medicaid, food stamps, and general
assistance. Welfare assistance does not include transitional Medicaid or child care for JOBs
participants or 881 payments to guardians of disabled children.

If the head of the family leaves the assisted unit, the remaining family members may, after
consulting the HA, name another family member to receive the FSS escrow account funds.

Loss of FSS Escrow Account
The family will not receive the funds in its FSS escrow account if:

(1) the contract of participation is terminated,

2 5/93

(2) the contract of participation is declared null and void; or

(3) the family has not met its family responsibilities within the times specified as stated in this
contract.

Family Responsibilities
The head of the family must:

Seek and maintain suitable employment after completion of the job training programs listed in
the individual training and services plan. The HA, after consulting with the head of the family,
will determine what employment is suitable based on the skills, education, and job training of
that individual and available job opportunities in the area.

The head. of the family and those family members who have decided, with HA
agreement, to execute an individual training and services plan, must:

Complete the activities within the dates listed in each individual training and services plan.

Provide the HA and HUD with information about the family’s participation in the FSS
program in order to help the HA and HUD evaluate the FSS program. This could include

information regarding employment, job interviews, training, educational attendance, and other
FSS services and activities.

All family members must:
Comply with the terms of the lease.

If receiving welfare assistance, become independent of welfare assistance and remain
independent of welfare assistance for at least 12 consecutive months before the contract

expires.
If participating in the Section 8 program, live in the jurisdiction of the HA that enrolled the

family in the FSS program at least 12 months from the effective date of this contract and
comply with the family obligations under the Section 8 rental certificate or rental voucher

program
Corrective Actions for Failure to meet Family Responsibilities

If any member of the family does not meet his or her responsibilities under this contract, the
family will not receive the money in its FSS escrow account and the HA may:

1) stop supportive services for the family,
2) terminate the family's participation in the FSS program, and

3) if the family is participating in the rental certificate or rental voucher program, terminate
the Section 8 assistance, when allowed by HUD requirements.

3 5/93

HA Responsibilities —-

Attempt to obtain commitments from public and private sources for supportive services for.
families.

Establish an FSS escrow account for the family, invest the escrow account funds-and give the
family a report on the amount in the FSS escrow account at least once a year.

Determine which, if any, interim goals must be completed before any FSS escrow funds may be
paidto thefamily; andpayaportion oftheFSSescrowaccounttothefamilyiftheHA
determines that the family has met these specific interim goals and needs the funds from the
FSS escrow account to complete the contract.
Determine if the family has completed this contract.
Pay the family the amount in its FSS escrow account, if the family has completed the contract
and the head of the family has provided written certification that no member of the family is
receiving welfare assistance.

Completion of the Contract of Participation
Completion of the contract occurs when the HA determines that:
(1) the family has fulfilled all of its responsibilities under the contract; or
(2) 30 percent of the family’s monthly adjusted income equals or is greater than the Fair

Market Rent amount for the unit size for which the family qualifies.

Termination of the Contract of Participation

The HA may terminate this contract if:

(1) the family and the HA agree to terminate the contract;

(2) the HA determines that the family has not fulfilled its responsibilities under this
contract;

(3) the family withdraws from the FSS program;
(4) an act occurs that is inconsistent with the purpose of the FSS program; or
(5) the HA is permitted in accordance with HUD requirements.

The HA may declare this contract null and void if the resources and services necessary to
complete the contract are not available.

The HA must give a notice of termination or nullification to the head of the family. The notice
must state the reasons for the HA decision to terminate or nullify the contract.

4 5/93

JV VVVV‘JVUV‘JU‘J‘J‘JU'IJinJiJvlJ-eiun’ i"a)aJui'U‘U"a.’":J‘IJ‘U‘-u‘u‘tJ‘IJ‘sJ-‘AJ‘U‘Lv‘u'f.’

If the contract is terminated or declared null and void, the family has no right to receive funds
from the family's FSS escrow account. The HA must close the family’s FSS escrow account.
and may use the funds for purposes in accordance with HUD requirements.

If the family is participating in the Section 8 program. the HA will terminate the'contract if the

family moves outside the HA' 5 jurisdiction under Section 8 portability procedures and enters
the FSS program of another HA.

If the family is participating in the Section 8 program, this contract is automatically terminated
if the family's section 8 assistance is terminated in accordance with HUD requirements.

Conflict with the Public or Indian Housing Lease

If part of this contract conflicts with the public or Indian housing lease, the lease will prevail.

Compliance with HUD Regulations and Requirements

The contract of participation must be interpreted and administered in accordance with HUD
regulations and requirements. Terms and figures, such as the income and rent amount on
page 2, are subject to correction by the HA for compliance with HUD regulations and

requirements. The HA must notify the family in writing of any adjustments made to the
contract.

Signatures:

Family

 

(Signature of head of family)

 

(Date Signed)

Housing Agengy

Lansing Housing Corrlnission
(Name ofHA) '

 

(Signature of HA Official)

Executive Director
(Official Title)

 

(Date Signed)

5 ' 5/93

. ..— *1-—

APPENDIX F

T HIRTY-FOUR REASONS FOR PUBLIC
HOUSING

.... ‘3‘. it C. at Av. em. De. I: It. In. I. I. ls la. .0 I. t... t. I: .I. F. 1% a! ..l. fit-{It s... err-ell! r ..“-.l‘fVPVLEiIVIllPtLNILI

34 Reasons for Public Housing Page 1 of2

34 Reasons for Public Housing...

 

p—e

. Housing is a basic need. .

. Public housing is an efficient way to meet government housing objectives.
Public housing is a resource to the community.

Public housing is cost effective.

Public housing can be for everyone.

Public housing builds jobs.

Public housing provides major stimulus to economic growth.

Public housing can provide security of tenure.

PWSP‘SAPP’N

Public housing is an effective means of assisting people on low incomes. .,

10. Public housing can overcome problems found in private rental like
discrimination.

11. Public housing can lower rents in the private sector through competition.

12. Public housing can pioneer innovations in low cost construction, design,
energy efficiency.

13. Public housing can create jobs and enable the government to better manage
the economy at large.

14. Public housing gives the government an immediate tool to stimulate and
regulate cycles in the housing and building industries.

15. Public housing assists to alleviate housing related poverty.
16. Public housing can offer mobility and choice.

17. Public housing offers some control over housing though the opportunity to
input into decision making process.

18. Public housing is affordable.

19. Public housing can cater to individual or local needs, i.e. design for people
with disabilities.

20. Public housing enables management to be flexible and responsive to needs of
community and environment.

34 Reasons for Public Housing Page 2 of 2

21. Public housing allows tenants to have greater income disposal and therefore
greater access to opportunities and assists in enhancing quality of life.

22. Public housing provides an important stabilising core to community housing.

23. Public housing can encourage investment in other to control over investment
of private sector in housing.

24. Public housing is a viable tender.

25. Public housing enhances participation and involvement of public.
26. Public housing promotes social justice.

27. Public housing provides diversity.

28. Public housing demonstrates taxes as public assets.

29. Public housing adds to public wealth.

30. Public housing can set standards and lead the housing industry.

31. Public housing can influence or intervene in planning to promote a range of
density in housing types (i.e. medium density) and address particular issues in
inner, outer and rural areas.

32. Public housing provides a solution for those who are increasingly squeezed
out of home buying or private rental.

33. Public housing can provide the type of housing needed, where it is needed.

34. Public education, public transport, public hospitals and public housing!

 

 

 

A;
“.r
U'
\
I l
l
O
\“JI-r ’-
' Q

 

 

 

 

thhe Federal Government plans for Public Housing

‘w (1‘. G .l." a. ... 1F. ‘ ... ...... I? It. if t. .“ t t. f ... it ‘ {VI-v. Filiat ..Iv f. critic! a”. It!!! riflll‘fiflflfilr

APPENDIX G

HOUSING CHARACTERISTICS FOR
HOUSING IN THE STATE OF MICHIGAN

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

‘ o o o o o
fife: Housmg Characteristics for Mlchlgan
. Summary
; a”. HousinO
\ . Income
‘1 .Labor
,. . Social
I Michigan Home Page_] [ Search for City, Town, CDP ] I Search for CountyL] [Download Data 1
1990 Census of Population and Housing Page 1
Michigan
Total housing units ......................................... 3,847,926
YEAR STRUCTURE BUILT
1989 to March 1990 ................................................ 75,300
1985 to 1988 ...................................................... 232,299
1980 to 1984 ...................................................... 214,435
1970 to 1979 ...................................................... 785,613
1960 to 1969 ...................................................... 622.65%
* 1950 to 1959 ...................................................... 688,994.
‘ 1940 to 1949 ...................................................... 428,845
a 1939 or earlier ................................................... 799,790
‘u BEDROOMS
5 No bedroom ........................................................ 51,202
\ 1 bedroom ......................................................... 414,731
1 2 bedroom ......................................................... 1,144,196
3 bedroom ......................................................... 1,640,701
‘ 4 bedroom ......................................................... 496,708
‘ 5 or more bedrooms ................................................ 100,388
5 SELECTED CHARACTERISTICS
' Lacking complete plumbing facilities .............................. 32,492
\ Lacking complete kitchen facilities ............................... 34,613
Condominium housing units ......................................... 103,922
"\
N SOURCE OF WATER
Public system or private company .................................. 2,711,224
\ Individual drilled well ........................................... 1,064,011
Individual dug well ............................................... 57,055
3 Some other source ................................................. 15,636
“' SEWAGE DISPOSAL
\ Public sewer ...................................................... 2,724,408
Septic tank or cesspool ........................................... 1,090,481
\ Other means ....................................................... 33,037
\ Occupied housing units ...................................... 3,419,331
\
’ HOUSE HEATING FUEL
\ Utility gas ....................................................... 2,630,526
‘ Bottled, tank, or LP gas .......................................... 207,320
\ Electricity ....................................................... 185,631
\ Fuel oil, kerosene, etc ........................................... 236,335
Coal or coke ...................................................... 1,753
\ Wood ....................................................... . ....... 131,881
w .
lr3

4/7/99 10:59 PM

‘ Iv. II C In A. 114% I. .lvi.‘ Cr (.....- r in t! .... m! In. ...! ...! l... c.‘-..lvllz-‘lfit f_-flw.-€tflv..flr ..‘rzlrw. 6-1..‘i‘dllvl‘1fl

bf3

Solar energy ......................................................
Other fuel ........................................................
No fuel used ......................................................

1990 Census of Population and Housing
Michigan

YEAR HOUSEHOLDER MOVED INTO UNIT

1989 to March 1990 ................................................ 620,171
1985 to 1988 ...................................................... 949,630
1980 to 1984 ...................................................... 463,235
1970 to 1979 ...................................................... 690,720
1960 to 1969 ...................................................... 343,864
1959 or earlier ................................................... 351,711
TELEPHONE
No telephone in unit .............................................. 139,082
VEHICLES AVAILABLE
Occupied housing units .......................................... 3,419,331
None .............................................................. 343,826
1 ................................................................. 1,132,756
2 ................................................................. 1,332,965
3 or more ......................................................... 609,784
MORTGAGE STATUS AND SELECTED MONTHLY OWNER COSTS
Specified owner-occupied housing units ............................ 1,943,809
With a mortgage ..... ' ............................................ 1,235,196
Less than $300 ................................................ 35,03?
$300 to $499 ........................................... i ....... 302,966'
$500 to $699 .................................................. 362,936
$700 to $999 .................................................. 312,693
$1,000 to $1,499 .............................................. 155,889
$1,500 to $1,999 .............................................. 41,783
$2,000 or more ................................................ 23,877
Median (dollars) .............................................. 651
Not mortgaged ................................................... 708,613
Less than $100 ................................................ 11,604
$100 to $199 .................................................. 184,951
$200 to $299 .................................................. 310,745
$300 to $399 .................................................. 131,686
$400 or more .................................................. 69,627
Median (dollars) .............................................. 246
SELECTED MONTHLY OWNER COSTS AS A PERCENTAGE OF HOUSEHOLD INCOME IN 1989
Specified owner-occupied housing units ............................ 1,943,809
Less than 20 percent ............................................ 1,200,683
20 to 24 percent ................................................ 267,178
25 to 29 percent ................................................ 160,458
30 to 34 percent ................................................ 90,624
35 percent or more .............................................. 213,294
Not computed .................................................... 11,572
1990 Census of Population and Housing Page

Michigan

GROSS RENT

Specified renter—occupied housing units ...........................
Less than $200 ..................................................
$200 to $299 ....................................................
$300 to $499 ....................................................
$500 to $749 ....................................................
$750 to $999 ....................................................
$1,000 or more ..................................................

713
17,298
7,874

Page

966,241
82,051
123,415
432,375
241,667
40,809
13,839

4/7/99 10:59 PM

3f3

 

No cash rent .................................................... 32,085
Median (dollars) ................................................ 423
GROSS RENT AS A PERCENTAGE OF HOUSEHOLD INCOME IN 1989
Specified renter-occupied housing units ........................... 966,241
Less than 20 percent ............................................ 293,439
20 to 24 percent ................................................ 120,208
25 to 29 percent ................................................ 100,005
30 to 34 percent ................................................ 68,418
35 percent or more .............................................. 332,015
Not computed .................................................... 52,156
1 o o o o 0
fig IROP Housmg Characterlstlcs for Michigan
1 (P ERG”
w
[@3. Housing
. Income
.Labor

. Social

I Michigan Home Page I I Search for City, Town. CDP I I Search for Countyj [Download D573 I

 

 

 

Navigation to Other Databases ,

 

 

 

   

4/7/99 10:59 PM

H3

 

I Michigan Home Paggj I Search for Cit; Town. CDPJ I Search for County I @ownload Data I

General Profile for Michigan

K3”. Summag

. Housing
. Income
. Labor

. Social

 

1990 Census of Population and Housing

SEX

Male ...........................................................
Female .........................................................

AGE

Under 1 year ...................................................

Total population ............................................

Michigan

1 and 2 years ..................................................

3 and 4 years ..................................................
5 years ........................................................

6 years ........................................................
7 to 9 years ...................................................
and 11 years ................................................
and 13 years ................................................
years .......................................................
years .......................................................
years .......................................................
years .......................................................
years .......................................................
years .......................................................
years .......................................................
years .......................................................

10
12
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
25
30
35
4O
45
50
55
6O
62
65
7O
75
80
85

Percent of total population ....................................
65 years and over .................................................
Percent of total population ....................................

to
to
to
to
to
to
to
to

24
29
34
39
44
49
54
59

years .................................................
years .................................................
years .................................................
years .................................................
years .................................................
years .................................................
years .................................................
years .................................................

and 61 years ................................................

to
to
t0
t0
to

64
69
74
79
84

years
Median age .....................................................
Under 18 years ....................................................

years .................................................
years .................................................
years .................................................
years .................................................
years .................................................
and over ..............................................

HOUSEHOLDS BY TYPE

Total households ..................................................
(families) ...................................
Married-couple families .....................................

Family households

I

Page 1

9,295,297

4,512,781
4,782,516

129,255
292,304
280,93;

141,002.

136,188
415,057
277,565
262,321
126,484
130,377
131,266
135,951
142,306
156,903
150,757
143,173
411,388
764,262
810,291
749,062
657,087
523,730
424,389
392,787
160,021
241,915
369,111
286,727
212,494
133,222
106,907

32.6

2,458,765

26.5

1,108,461

11.9

3,419,331
2,439,171
1,883,143

4/7/99 11:02 PM

Jr 3

Percent of total households ..............................
Other family, male householder ..............................
Other family, female householder ............................
Nonfamily households ...........................................
Percent of total households ..............................
Householder living alone ....................................
Householder 65 years and over ............................
Persons living in households ...................................
Persons per household ..........................................
GROUP QUARTERS
Persons living in group quarters ...............................
Institutionalized persons ...................................
Other persons in group quarters .............................
RACE AND HISPANIC ORIGIN
White ..........................................................
Black ..........................................................
Percent of total population .................................
American Indian, Eskimo, or Aleut ..............................
Percent of total population .................................
Asian or Pacific Islander ......................................
Percent of total population .................................
Other race .....................................................
Hispanic origin (of any race) ..................................
Percent of total population .................................
1990 Census of Population and Housing
Michigan

Total housing units .........................................
OCCUPANCY AND TENURE
Occupied housing units .........................................
Owner occupied ..............................................
Percent owner occupied ...................................
Renter occupied .............................................
Vacant housing units ...........................................
For seasonal, recreational, or occasional use ...............
Homeowner vacancy rate (percent) ...............................
Rental vacancy rate (percent) ..................................
Persons per owner-occupied unit ................................
Persons per renter-occupied unit ...............................
Units with over 1 person per room ..............................
UNITS IN STRUCTURE
1-unit, detached ...............................................
l-unit, attached ...............................................
2 to 4 units ...................................................
5 to 9 units ...................................................
10 or more units ...............................................
Mobile home, trailer, other ....................................
VALUE
Specified owner-occupied units .................................
Less than $50,000 ...........................................
$50,000 to $99,000 ..........................................
$100,000 to $149,000 ........................................
$150,000 to $199,999 ........................................
$200,000 to $299,999 ........................................
$300,000 or more ............................................
Median (dollars) ............................................
CONTRACT RENT
Specified renter—occupied units paying cash rent ...............
Less than $250 ..............................................
$250 to $499 ................................................
$500 to $749 ................................................
$750 to $999 ................................................
$1,000 or more ..............................................
Median (dollars) ............................................
RACE AND HISPANIC ORIGIN OF HOUSEHOLDER

3,847,926

55.1
113,789
442,239
980,160

28.7
809,449
317,659

9,083,605

2.66

211,692
112,903
98,789

7,756,086
1,291,706

13.9
55,638
0.6
104,983
1.1
86,884
201,596
2.2
Page

.3:

3,419,331-
2,427,643

71.0
991,688
428,595
223,549

1.3
7.2
2.80
2.31
90,551

2,673,184

130,583
267,767
150,831
336,721
288,840

1,916,143

737,217
814,496
219,195
79,313
45,953
19,969
60,600

925,304
232,954
536,905
128,873
17,827
8,745
343

4/7/99 11:02 PM

I‘,“,_€.£f§filtrzgtcluf‘t‘.‘fluff?‘fff‘fftcff‘flf‘P‘Q‘iP

Occupied housing units ......................................... 3,419,331

White ....................................................... 2,907,741
Black ....................................................... 441,984
Percent of occupied units ................................ 12.9
American Indian, Eskimo, or Aleut ........................... 17,709
Percent of occupied units ................................ 0.5
Asian or Pacific Islander ................................... 28,204
Percent of occupied units ................................ 0.8
Other race .................................................. 23,693
Hispanic origin (of any race) ............................... 55,798
Percent of occupied units ................................ 1.6

 

General Profile for Michigan

 

I®§ Summary

. Housing
. Income
. Labor

. Social

I Michigan Home Page_I I Search for City, Town. CDP I I Search for CountyI I Download Dara}

 

Navigation to Other Databases

flmfifllfial

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

4/7/99 11:02 PM

‘1‘. ‘. ‘ ‘1 t. ‘q i... Q in. tn. 4.» ‘it c. ‘_ ‘u ..“ t. ( ‘1 t. I! ‘ ‘-¢-¢l‘u‘7¢ t ‘ c If 2‘. ‘1‘ ‘u‘i‘i‘z‘l‘ In

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

.
t
..
- .
.
.
\
1"
. ..
a
. .
,.
. .

 

 

 

 

 

 

Illllllllllllllllllll llllllIllIllllllllllllllllllllllllllll

31293 02656 8737

 

.
o
.
. .
..
.
.
-
. u
. . .
.. .. _
. . .
.
.
. u
. .
, . .. , .
. .
. . .
.' '
- . . . .
r . .
. .
. .. .
. . .
u . '
. u ..
u. .
4. . .
.
. . .
. , . ..
.~ g . . . v
. -
,. . . . - .-
. . .
l
, . .
. .
. .. ...