U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > New York > New York City
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 10-15-2016, 03:21 PM
 
1,015 posts, read 687,554 times
Reputation: 888

Advertisements

Why are affordable housing advocates not fighting to bring Mitchell lama back? It was obviously New York's most successful housing program. 421-a lotteries are a joke, produce just a couple of units for a small income bracket.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 10-15-2016, 04:07 PM
 
Location: Eric Forman's basement
1,940 posts, read 2,046,438 times
Reputation: 998
Where did the Mitchell Lama funding come from? I assume that source doesn't exist anymore. But I agree we need something on that scale.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-15-2016, 07:12 PM
 
282 posts, read 632,970 times
Reputation: 134
I agree. If it was so successful, why not recreate it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-15-2016, 10:17 PM
 
20,339 posts, read 13,459,090 times
Reputation: 14059
Mitchell-Lama much like other federal housing "projects" only worked when there were large tracts of land easily (and somewhat cheaply) available for development or redevelopment. That is not the case for NYC today, and besides neither the city nor state own enough land for such a project.


One of the main tools that produced both Mitchell-Lama and "project" housing was urban renewal/slum clearance schemes. Both relied heavily upon eminent domain and were responsible for many of the sites where ML and "projects" sit today.


Urban renewal got a very nasty name in the day (famous African American writer James Baldwin called it "negro removal"), because many saw the application of "blighted" as a way to clear out poor but otherwise stable and functioning communities (of color or otherwise), to build new housing.


Developers having seen what happens when getting into bed with NYS or NYC likely wouldn't fall for the exact same ML scheme again without some built in protections in their favor.


As originally designed ML projects were free to come out from under subsidized rents/co-op ownership after 20 years (usually by paying off the underlying mortgages). Politicians then didn't worry about the consequences but things hit the fan one by one places like Rupert Towers (built on the site of a former brewery), paid off their financing and left the program. This turning into market rate housing enraged some sections of local and state government and community "activists". So now all are attempting in various ways to change the rules during the middle of game. Things such as forcing ML units that come out of the scheme to go under RS laws and such.


If you look at what ML did or does, the 80/20 schemes coupled with rezoning pretty much acts as an replacement. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mitche...ousing_Program


Only thing is the state isn't stepping in and condemning/taking land from private owners. Rather working with them to provide some measure of affordable housing.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-16-2016, 08:13 AM
 
Location: Manhattan
21,361 posts, read 28,114,892 times
Reputation: 9680
Mitchell Lama, or something very much like it, will stage a comeback. All it takes is a severe recession with building projects going bust and falling into City and State hands through foreclosures and tax liens. Don't for a minute ever think that every building boom (like we are having now) isn't followed by a building BUST, and experience has shown, the bigger the boom the bigger the bust.


Nobody has ever repealed the boom-bust cycle. If anything the swings have become greater.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-16-2016, 04:53 PM
 
Location: Harlem, NY
4,540 posts, read 3,959,214 times
Reputation: 1797
Nah. Not gon happen
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-16-2016, 05:02 PM
 
2,818 posts, read 3,741,777 times
Reputation: 3327
They just need to upzone the city and stick with the 80/20 ratio. 20% of permanent middle class housing is pretty generous and balanced. Tax the market rate units extra and use the proceeds to build low income housing on NYCHA land.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-16-2016, 05:22 PM
 
20,339 posts, read 13,459,090 times
Reputation: 14059
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shizzles View Post
They just need to upzone the city and stick with the 80/20 ratio. 20% of permanent middle class housing is pretty generous and balanced. Tax the market rate units extra and use the proceeds to build low income housing on NYCHA land.

Excuse me? You are being rather generous with your taxation.


Middle class and above are already taxed to death in NYS and NYC to fund various welfare or whatever schemes. It is one of the reasons why so many of the former at least are busting a move out of this city or state. How much more do liberals want to dig into other people's back pocket to fund their various wealth redistribution schemes?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-17-2016, 06:17 PM
 
2,818 posts, read 3,741,777 times
Reputation: 3327
Quote:
Originally Posted by BugsyPal View Post
Excuse me? You are being rather generous with your taxation.


Middle class and above are already taxed to death in NYS and NYC to fund various welfare or whatever schemes. It is one of the reasons why so many of the former at least are busting a move out of this city or state. How much more do liberals want to dig into other people's back pocket to fund their various wealth redistribution schemes?
I'm far from a tax and spender, we can certainly cut elsewhere to offset this.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-17-2016, 07:16 PM
 
Location: Beautiful Pelham Parkway,The Bronx
8,465 posts, read 20,276,291 times
Reputation: 6338
Quote:
Originally Posted by BoogeyDownDweller View Post
Why are affordable housing advocates not fighting to bring Mitchell lama back? It was obviously New York's most successful housing program. 421-a lotteries are a joke, produce just a couple of units for a small income bracket.
Mitchell-Lama is still with us and there are lots of Mitchell Lama buildings around the city that have short waiting lists.Why don't more people who are playing the affordable housing lotteries put their names on Mitchell Lama waiting lists? Even the ones that have longer waiting lists like 3 to 5 years? The time goes by quickly.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:



Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > New York > New York City
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. | Please obey Forum Rules | Terms of Use and Privacy Policy

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top