Is Westchester Resisting Integration?
I usually agree with what I read in the New York Times, but two recent editorials on the affordable housing settlement left me wondering if the authors know their turf. One was an editorial called “ The Battle for Westchester,” that appeared in the Sunday N.Y. Times on May 13, 2012 and the other was a column by Peter Applebome on April 3, 2012 . Both pieces discussed the August 2008 affordable housing settlement where Westchester County was ordered to spend $51.6 million to build 750 affordable housing units by 2015. The ruling is punishment for misdeeds during the Spano years when his administration received funds from HUD for affordable units that were never built.
Current Westchester County Executive Rob Astorino inherited the consequences of the suit, as well as a mandate from taxpayers to cut county taxes, which are the among the highest in the country. The state exacerbated the county’s money troubles by enacting the 2 percent tax cap that prevents municipalities and counties from raising taxes above 2 percent, while at the same time, billing them for state-mandated programs whose costs grow beyond 2% per year.
Given the economic straits Westchester towns and villages now face and what I know about Scarsdale, where I have lived for 22 years, I thought the Times assertions were off base and ill informed.
Westchester County is ahead of schedule on the construction of affordable units with 206 approved and 196 financed. But that’s not good enough for the NY Times who charges that the units in Chappaqua will be built in a “no-man’s land between railroad tracks, a highway and a bridge,” and in Rye, near “largely minority Portchester.” In Larchmont, they complain that 46 units will be built behind a strip mall, squeezed against railroad tracks and Interstate 95.” What the articles do not mention is that residents of these units will enjoy town and county services and recreational facilities and their children will be “integrated” into fine public schools, all at a very reasonable cost. Since the settlement requires that the units be accessible to public transportation, it is odd that the Times objects to their proximity to the train station.
As a Westchester resident, it’s no wonder to me why the units have been placed in these locations. In Scarsdale we are built out and there is virtually no open space for construction. In order to build a new unit, an existing unit would need to be demolished. Furthermore, when property does become available, it is priced at a premium. First-rate schools and an easy commute to Manhattan make living here highly desirable. It is difficult to imagine how it would be economically feasible to build apartments or homes for $68,000 each when the average home sale price in Scarsdale in 2011 was $1,529,000. Furthermore, the settlement stipulates that for a family of four, the rent plus utilities cannot exceed 60% of the AMI of $63,900 in 2011. This translates to rents just below $1,600 per month.
According to the Times, it’s not good enough that Chappaqua, Rye and Larchmont have found ways to finance, build and incorporate these very affordable units into the community. The Times wants them located among “the Tudors and the glades,” in single-family neighborhoods on prime plots of land.
In November 2011 in an effort to comply with the settlement, Scarsdale adopted the model code recommended by the monitor. The new code requires the inclusion of an affordable unit in developments of 5-9 units and 10-14 units and the inclusion of 2 affordable units in developments of 15-24 units. And even before the code was adopted, the Village Board required the developer of a property at 2-4 Weaver Street in Scarsdale to include an affordable unit. However, one unit will do little toward appeasing HUD.
Even more startling was the NY Times claim of racial discrimination. The editorial states that the case is about “doing something to end deeply embedded segregation patterns and “affirmatively furthering fair housing,” The editorial calls for the county to take “communities to court to stop them from blocking integration through restrictive zoning” and “rental discrimination.”
In my 22 years in Scarsdale I have seen no evidence of racial discrimination. The Scarsdale schools are attended by children of every skin color and nationality. Asians, Indians, African Americans and Hispanics are fully integrated into the community ---in fact, this diversity is a given that is rarely discussed. Foreign cultures and traditions are celebrated in the schools with international fairs and special events. On the tennis courts I find people keeping score in many languages and the Scarsdale Golf Club, once an exclusionary country club welcomes members of every race and background and is a model of diversity.
If this perceived “racial discrimination” is really a stepchild of economic discrimination, then there needs to be a feasible way to pay market rates for affordable housing. The community is already stretched to the limit to finance schools and services and there are no extra funds available to subsidize affordable housing. To me, this suit seems to be more about economics than race. To charge Westchester towns with racism because housing prices are steep, seems off the mark to me.
Subscribe to this comment's feed
written by FACTCHECKER, January 05, 2013
-
- +0
-
-
written by FACTCHECKER, January 05, 2013
You further state that "they" , am I , nowhere did I talk about the units of themselves, is it possible to build 750 units that are three bedrooms for $55 million, prob, although that is not what I talked about it is possible, given it isn't really being sold at market value anyways, instead of being rude calling and arrogant and quoting things I didn't say and expressing an attitude does not help your cause.
-
- +0
-
-
written by lostinyonkers, June 05, 2012
-
- -1
-
-
written by Factchecker, May 31, 2012
the talk of social engineering is used by the gop, but the reality is america is becoming more diverse anyway, in fact many suburbs are becoming more diverse and poorer, but to answer your question in manhattan minorties and whites who are affluent live in the same building and get along, not every white sends there child to private school, astorino is playing politics, there are several mixed neighborhoods that have less restrictive but still keep the community style in tact with regards to zoning and single-family size homes with lots sizes.
Westchester should not be using HUD funds and just sending them to new rochelle,
in fact people in scardsale, would probably prefer the funds sent to them since they pay a lot in taxes, if tax breaks for building affordable housing are ok, then so is taxpayer funding,
and your son or daughter could probably live there too, since many hud affordable houding
requirements or city and state housing states preference for nearby residents, the fact that
astorino and his allies put the homes near minority areas is suspect and defeats the purpose
-
- -1
-
-
written by jwg, May 20, 2012
-
- +1
-
-
written by lostin yonkers, May 19, 2012
-
- +1
-
-
written by Factchecker, May 18, 2012
legal occupation, its quite simple really, spread out the affordable housing with hud funds, you accept taxpayer funds, you comply , as for the racial issue it is complicated, hud felt that housing should not be concentrated, but many times even asians won't live in say marin county not because of discrimination, but because they desire a chinatown.
The zoning is another part of affordable housing what's wrong with your grandchildren renting a basement, time and time again has shown zoning to be overboard, the ami restriction
is partially reflected that usually, areas have wealthier expensive areas and middle class areas, I am pretty sure there are areas with middle class whites in westchester,
-
- -2
-
-
written by lostin yonkers, May 18, 2012
-
- +1
-
-
written by Calvin, May 18, 2012
-
- +1
-
-
written by Calvin, May 18, 2012
-
- +0
-
-
written by curious, May 18, 2012
spano's attorneys did a poor job. most cases settle. the problem is most attorneys do not prepare for the settlement - its rushed as everyone is happy the case is over and now we see the settlement was botched.
-
- +0
-
-
written by Factchecker, May 18, 2012
, if westchester is accepting hud funds to promote housing it needs to not just build it in white plains or new rochelle, but also areas like scarsdale, this is middle income not low income housing, its not different than offering housing to police officers and firefighters, who will not commute far distances either due to job duty or affordability.
I presume whites who are middle income will be eligible for the housing too and probably your children who may make less than you do, but still 50-75k, it isn't about giving a poor person a right to live in a mansion or exclusive country club.
Also, let's get to the issue, should schools, churches, and other organizations pay tax
even in affluent areas? The issue here is westchester accepted hud funds and hud felt it was using them just in lower income mostly minority communities.
-
- -2
-
-
written by lostin yonkers, May 17, 2012
-
- +1
-
-
written by BClinton, May 17, 2012
Scarsdale is a great place to live. It's great because the people really care about the community and their children. We're willing to pay an astronomical amount in housing and taxes to live here. Anyone who can pay is welcome. Why should we dilute our community and dumb down our schools by letting in people who can't pay the price?
-
- -1
-
-
written by curious, May 17, 2012
Is Westchester a bastion of racism? Lets be candid - it is to the extent that those of us in the white areas below 287 often heard white plains described as black plains or new rochelle as negro chelle.
but so what . thats tribalism and its found everywhere - i lived in greenwich village and had contempt for anyone living about 14th street. thats the way of the world.
-
- +0
-
-
written by A.Lindsey, May 17, 2012
Gee- I wish my "non-minority" son and daughter-in-law could be included in that lucky group who would be entitled to an "affordable house" in SCarsdale!!! They are the ones being discriminated against.
One of the previous writers said something that I have said all along. There is no discrimination here. As long as you can afford to buy- you can live here- no matter who or what you are!!!
Are those who are lucky enough to be given housing also going to be given a luxury SUV to go along with the territory?
This entire issue infuriating.
-
- +2
-
-
written by its all politics, May 17, 2012
-
- +1
-
-
written by lostinyonkers, May 17, 2012
-
- +2
-
-
written by Calvin, May 17, 2012
-
- +3
-
-
written by Scarsdale resident, May 17, 2012
-
- +0
-
-
written by lostin yonkers, May 17, 2012
-
- +0
-
-
written by Factchecker, May 17, 2012
There are conditions for accepting taxpayer assistance and westchester is not holding up its end of the deal, its not about a private citizen or realtor discriminating against someone.
-
- -1
-
-
written by Scarsdale Friend, May 16, 2012
I don't get your point Factchecker, you bring up minorities who are on assistance as if the planned housing which will be built here has anything to do with them. It doesn't. This is housing which will be sold, not rented (as far as I am aware). No one on assistance would qualify for them.
And as far as zoning goes, can you imagine what this community would look like without them? There would be buildings next to single-family homes next to commercial spaces. That doesn't work for our community, and the citizens here have voted to elect to have them all in certain areas. We work hard to make our community look good. Not sure how you feel that getting rid of zoning laws would help with integration.
-
- +2
-
-
written by Factchecker, May 15, 2012
that is there right but its silly, and it is discriminatory if you are receiving funds, affordable housing does not necessarily lower property values, zoning restrictions on single family homes only,
are a problem, there are many expensive homes that may have multiple units,
I don't dispute your view that Westchester is probably not racist, but politics and the fact that folks look down on minorities who receive govt subsidies and stereotypes exist.
In fact as regards to zoning, many conservatives would do away with it anyways, after all its a city not a private community.
-
- -2
-
-
written by Scarsdale Friend, May 15, 2012
I also agree with this article when the author states that Scarsdale is completely built out. Where exactly are we expected to place this type of housing? Is it the protected land next to the Bronx River Parkway? (Which would still not be good enough, of course) The small amount of green spaces we have are almost all protected in some way as parkland or wetlands.
As a Scarsdale resident, I must also add that if those properties were to be located close to my home, as much as one might try to reassure me, I know my property value would decrease.
Our society has really become a place where people truly believe that they are entitled to things- the constitution states certain inalienable rights. I am pretty sure those rights don't include the ability to live in a community you couldn't otherwise afford to live in.
When this discussion first started, it was all about allowing police officers and teachers to live in the community. Now, it has become about integration? Obviously these people are highly unaware of the wonderful cultural diversity in our area, and are instead focused on socioeconomic diversity.
-
- +2
-
-
