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.
Not sure what you mean, but my boyfriend is on Section 8 (he is disabled and his social security disability income is very low). His building is roughly 1/3 section 8, and the vast majority of tenants are decent and courteous. He went through some changes to get it, but he's very happy he did.
I see many Bronx apt listings that say "programs ok," and many landlords just cannot charge market rate rents in these areas. Unfortunately section 8 can be hard to get onto.
As far as Mitchell Lama, there is a gov't website that will show you the various coops and rentals available throughout the city. The thing is that there's generally a waiting period of 1 to 3 years, so you have to be patient. Some Mitchell Lamas are also opting out, but if you can afford to get into a coop, vs. rental you will probably be exempt from possible eviction as long as you follow the coop by-laws.
As I stated before, if you look in the classifieds there are announcements of new buildings with income ceilings. Again, rather than assuming there is no chance to get in, you have to put in an application. Many people either don't know about these apts or assume there is no chance to get in, which makes the odds better for those who do apply.
I don't understand your comment Jrock...what does "if you want to get on you need to know people and be able to cut a check" mean? I don't think they are necessarily a scam, but I think they are doing more of a disservice than beneficial at this point. I understand that a mother of two earning a low wage and with 2 kids cannot afford to really live anywhere in this city without governmental welfare of some sort. My question is, why if you cannot afford to live in NYC on your own merit, do you expect/demand the governmant to subsidize your lifestyle?
This mentality boggles my mind. I do not the demand that the goverment pay for all or part of my $2,500 a month rent in a 1 bedroom in Chelsea..and they would laugh at me if I were to request government assistance. And really, they should laugh at me, because I should just move somehere else that I can afford, because I do not have the right to live there if I cannot afford to. Simple. However, a single woman earning $22,000 a year (or nothing at all) with 2 kids will get a plethora of entitlements and welfare benefits, and a voucher that will provide her X amount to go live whereever that voucher can afford to take her in this city. I am unclear why her plight is justifyable and mine is ridiculous? She cannot afford to live in this city due to her income and choice to have children on her own merit, so why can she not also move somewhere else that she can afford? Does she have the right to live somewhere in this city no matter what the rents go to while I , along with others, must move away to places we can afford?
section 8, mitchell lama are a scam. If you want to get on you need to know people and be able to cut a check.
I think he's referring to the "greasing of palms," that supposedly occurs to be able to get some of these section 8 apartments and mitchell lama's.
I've wondered about this because some of the mitchell lama co-ops/condos have waiting lists that stretch for years. Maybe people have ways of climbing up those lists?
NooYorker..I can tell you from firsthand experience that the greasing of palms for apartments, whether it be section 8 or free market, is alive and well. That is how many people on section 8 especially get apts...that little extra goes along way.
I agree with part of your posting Hustla. The opting out of LL from government programs is happening slowly, but it is happening, and is shrinking the pool of available apts for these poor families. I also agree that the older walkups and new buildings are affordable housing for the most part, however they have income MINIMUMS, which means they are not just moving people from the projects to new, nicer projects.
Read and learn about what the requirements are for all the new affordable housing in the Bronx, as the building in my neighborhood of Mott Haven has the same requirements as all the other new affordable housing units, and clearly by the income restrictions, these are targeted at working/middles class, not the poor:
I also agree that gentrification is exaggerated, and in fact in many cases it is wongly applied, as in the Bronx. It is not gentrification that is happening, it is really a resurgence/revitalization that is coming from the inside (though as of late it has shifted from the outside). Nonetheless, the new development is geared more towards lower/middle income families, rather than yuppies, or any other demographic. I am pleased to see that the Bronx is making inroads in providing safe, secure housing for the working and middle classes, however the poor will continue to either be pushed out, remain in the housing projects, double-up, or move out altogether, which alot have been doing recently...off to Pennsylvania, Florida, and Atlanta for better lives..and I salute them.
I also agree that the Bronx is the people, as is every other community of any color. I would also rather see low income people have a roof over their head than be on the streets.....no rational person would disagree, and it is not good for the overall health of the city either, which is why there are soooo many welfare programs to get people off the streets and in some sort of stable housing. Unfortunately people are finding all those vouchers are becoming useless pieces of paper, as more LLs are refusing to accept them for free-market alternatives so they move to other areas outside of the city.
And for the last time, I am not "happy about Manhattanites moving into the Bronx, or the Bronx becoming the LES." Your accusations are as baseless as your doom and gloom of the Bronx, I merely provide my assessment as a long-time Bronx resident, the changes I have seen, and the progress that has been made. I am happy to see new faces in my community, becuase the 30 years of segregation have been detrimental to the health and growth of the community. There is room enough for everyone to come to the Bronx, and the affordable areas of Mott Haven/Melrose/Hunts Point, whether it be the current working poor, the yuppies, professors, immigrants, city workers, or white collar professionals. I choose not to exclude, but to include...and that's what this city is about.
The LAMP program is far from the only low income housing program in the Bronx. Section 8 has reopened and yes although some landlords are opting out, plenty more will take section 8 vouchers becuase no one will live in their buildings for the market rate these days. Yes this applies to many landlords in especially terrible buildings or on especially terrible blocks. The Bronx is full of these. There are also many programs with no minimum incomes. The NYCHA is expanding in the Bronx for example. There is a low income housing shortage, but thank gentrification in other parts of the city. There is too high a demand for low income housing in the Bronx. BTW, the income limits for LAMP are low income as it is. I don't see the big difference you are talking about...
And although some people are leaving, a good number are staying. Family, careers, familiarity. Those who live under low income housing programs always stick around, and those are the same families that more often then not cause the most problems. In order to cope with the market rate many families who don't live in low income housing are doubling and tripling up. In the end though, when someone does get displaced, it is usually a poor working family. A lot of drug dealers make enough money to keep their head above water. They will help their families pay off the rent. If they do get displaced, due to status they will still hang out in the old neighborhoods. They usually don't move far either.
The future of the South Bronx is more of the same. A group of very low income communities in need. In South Bronx communities, most of the population already lives in low income housing of some kind. This low income population is only growing and more low income housing is being built. I honestly see no changes up ahead.
LAMP is clearly not the only low income housing program in NYC..this is NYC after all..the land of "programs." I agree that there are some buildings that are in such dire straights, or is such undesireable areas, that it is easier to just rent them out to section 8 tenants, than to take the time, invest, and improve the building and community. Many people take the easy road....that is human nature.
However, the big difference that I am talking about is that the traditional housing projects place the homeless, welfare mothers, and hard lcuk cases in these gargantuan holding cells (aka the projects). However, the new affordable housing takes a compltely diffent approach, and only accepts those that meet strict income guidelines with Maximum incomes of $42,000 for the largest apts, and $26,000 for the smallest (1 bedroom). How can you say that is not a huge differnece from the housing projects? You are bringing in an entirely different class of people, the working/middle class to be exact, versus the desperately poor in the housing projects.
I agree that there are both a good number leaving and a good number staying. There is somewhat of a divergence, versus a clear pattern of people leaving or staying. I am aware of many desperately poor people taking their section 8 vouchers and movin em masse to places like Pennsylvania and Florida. I also know an equal number who are staying...so who knows.
I believe the future of the South Bronx is not more of the same, but a change in mentality, a change in dynamics, and a change is policies. The view on the Bronx has changed from one of poverty, to the last resource for affordable housing in NYC for the working and middle class. The new housing being built is specifically for that group, and further development will reinforce the borough as the only affordable place in the city, especially for working/middle income people. I suspect the poor will likely move, or just be hold up in the housing projects, with the working/middle taking over everything else.
I don't understand your comment Jrock...what does "if you want to get on you need to know people and be able to cut a check" mean? I don't think they are necessarily a scam, but I think they are doing more of a disservice than beneficial at this point. I understand that a mother of two earning a low wage and with 2 kids cannot afford to really live anywhere in this city without governmental welfare of some sort. My question is, why if you cannot afford to live in NYC on your own merit, do you expect/demand the governmant to subsidize your lifestyle?
This mentality boggles my mind. I do not the demand that the goverment pay for all or part of my $2,500 a month rent in a 1 bedroom in Chelsea..and they would laugh at me if I were to request government assistance. And really, they should laugh at me, because I should just move somehere else that I can afford, because I do not have the right to live there if I cannot afford to. Simple. However, a single woman earning $22,000 a year (or nothing at all) with 2 kids will get a plethora of entitlements and welfare benefits, and a voucher that will provide her X amount to go live whereever that voucher can afford to take her in this city. I am unclear why her plight is justifyable and mine is ridiculous? She cannot afford to live in this city due to her income and choice to have children on her own merit, so why can she not also move somewhere else that she can afford? Does she have the right to live somewhere in this city no matter what the rents go to while I , along with others, must move away to places we can afford?
Just my 2 cents....
Reading your post made me wonder how fair the system of how the city works. Than I had to look at the community and the way people are living and moving. Yes, the woman did have two children by choice but her way of living more than likely is not by choice, and the way you are making the statement it seems as if your saying she is not entitled to live in the city because she cannot afford it and you should because you can afford the $2500 rent in Chelsea that you choose to pay because you can afford if. This sounds like the classic "the survival of the fittest." Why would her plight be ridulous when she is tryna take care of her family and give her kids a good life. Most people do not expect are demand anything, because I am almost sure if you could get the "government help" and not have to pay you whole $2500 in rent you would be right on the bandwagon.
I am so tired of people not looking out for one another, just full of critsism when they don't even know what a persons story is. It is sad that in this day in age we have people making comments like this when in reality they just wish they can have the same. You should count yourself blessed to be able to sustain your way of living without help, because there are so many who can't.
I am not full of harsh criticism, nor am I envious of her government hand-outs, her circumstances, or her poverty. I do all I can to look out for people who are trying to help themselves, and improve their circumstances....I also recognize that there are some that are content to just sit, do nothing, and live off public assistance because they can, there is no accountability, and the city makes it too easy to do so. Clearly that is not everyone, but it happens, and we can agree on that.
That being said, my point was only to demonstrate that the city bends over backwards to make accomodate those that essentially contribute the least, require the most support, use the most resources, and are the heaviest burden. While those that are working class must compete for the same apts, and same resources that are so freely handed out to the chronically poor, but are more useful to the working/middle class who are contributing members of society.
Clearly the system is not fair, and is helping create a city that will be full of either wealthy, or desperately poor (and completely subsidized by the governement), because nobody else will be able to live here. I say grant subsidies to those that are willing to go somewhere else in this great country..where they can provide a beter life for their kids (like you insist is all they really want to do), a better life for themselves, and out of the chains of poverty hopefully.
Yes, there seems to be a huge stigma attached to Section 8 programs. My b/f's experience has been different--folks in his building are, with a few exceptions, very decent people (and I think the bad apples have since been ousted). And again, if you have a poorly paying job, it is very possible that you can't afford to pay full rent plus utilities even in the cheaper apts in the Bronx. My b/f has no children, and gets social security disability (not SSI, since he worked for many years), but utilities alone eat up virtually all his expenses each month.
Also, some folks are elderly and/or disabled and I don't think they should be turned out esp if they've been living in NYC for all or most of their lives.
This gets into other territory beyond the scope of this forum, I suppose. I think that the incentives for welfare/public assistance are getting a little stricter. However, Section 8 also provides housing for single mothers trying to escape abusive spouses/partners. I'm sure some people cheat the sytem, but all I can say is many people cheat the system in some way or another, rich, poor, and middle class--including city/government workers. Talk about no accountability...
My b/f gets yearly section 8 inspections, and a few times he had a second inspection. Seems like the inspectors were inspecting the inspectors or something. That's the only explanation I can think of. So more city money wasted due to corruption.
LAMP is clearly not the only low income housing program in NYC..this is NYC after all..the land of "programs." I agree that there are some buildings that are in such dire straights, or is such undesireable areas, that it is easier to just rent them out to section 8 tenants, than to take the time, invest, and improve the building and community. Many people take the easy road....that is human nature.
However, the big difference that I am talking about is that the traditional housing projects place the homeless, welfare mothers, and hard lcuk cases in these gargantuan holding cells (aka the projects). However, the new affordable housing takes a compltely diffent approach, and only accepts those that meet strict income guidelines with Maximum incomes of $42,000 for the largest apts, and $26,000 for the smallest (1 bedroom). How can you say that is not a huge differnece from the housing projects? You are bringing in an entirely different class of people, the working/middle class to be exact, versus the desperately poor in the housing projects.
I agree that there are both a good number leaving and a good number staying. There is somewhat of a divergence, versus a clear pattern of people leaving or staying. I am aware of many desperately poor people taking their section 8 vouchers and movin em masse to places like Pennsylvania and Florida. I also know an equal number who are staying...so who knows.
I believe the future of the South Bronx is not more of the same, but a change in mentality, a change in dynamics, and a change is policies. The view on the Bronx has changed from one of poverty, to the last resource for affordable housing in NYC for the working and middle class. The new housing being built is specifically for that group, and further development will reinforce the borough as the only affordable place in the city, especially for working/middle income people. I suspect the poor will likely move, or just be hold up in the housing projects, with the working/middle taking over everything else.
You dream too much? A change in mentality? Where are you pulling that from? You are either not a South Bronx native or you live in a sound proof shell... Have you listened to the Bronx youth? The "future". The adults that are raising them are just as bad.
Look. All the housing built in the Bronx was originally built to house "working" people. From the crap tenements to the hell hole housing projects. These new buildings are NEW. That is why they are in great shape. Perfect example, Mitchell Lama complexes. I belive most of these were built in the 1970's. They have a "minimum" income requirment. Look at how horrible some of those are. You can't tell them apart from the NYCHA buildings.
I don't know where you get this idea working people are going to change the South Bronx. The South Bronx has always been a working class community. The difference between the working class community of the South Bronx and say Morris Park is a ton of low income people. That means people both living in poverty or near poverty. Ever heard the term "working poor"?
There is no change...
Quote:
Originally Posted by nmbeauty4
Reading your post made me wonder how fair the system of how the city works. Than I had to look at the community and the way people are living and moving. Yes, the woman did have two children by choice but her way of living more than likely is not by choice, and the way you are making the statement it seems as if your saying she is not entitled to live in the city because she cannot afford it and you should because you can afford the $2500 rent in Chelsea that you choose to pay because you can afford if. This sounds like the classic "the survival of the fittest." Why would her plight be ridulous when she is tryna take care of her family and give her kids a good life. Most people do not expect are demand anything, because I am almost sure if you could get the "government help" and not have to pay you whole $2500 in rent you would be right on the bandwagon.
I am so tired of people not looking out for one another, just full of critsism when they don't even know what a persons story is. It is sad that in this day in age we have people making comments like this when in reality they just wish they can have the same. You should count yourself blessed to be able to sustain your way of living without help, because there are so many who can't.
Exactly. Real estate is fueled by greed. This is why all you see especially in low income areas is residential overpopulation. Too many residential structures and no parks, no schools, nothing else. Make a fast buck.
No one helps each other. Landlords get greedy, stop maintaining the building, let the violations stack and the renters give up. They leave. Those who stick it out eventually get evicted due to code violations or old fashion arson. This is a huge problem in Harlem right now. Next thing you know, when everyone is gone the building gets renovated and rented out for a ton. Better then it ever was in the past. If not it gets vaporized and a luxury co-op goes up in it's place.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Guywithacause
I am not full of harsh criticism, nor am I envious of her government hand-outs, her circumstances, or her poverty. I do all I can to look out for people who are trying to help themselves, and improve their circumstances....I also recognize that there are some that are content to just sit, do nothing, and live off public assistance because they can, there is no accountability, and the city makes it too easy to do so. Clearly that is not everyone, but it happens, and we can agree on that.
That being said, my point was only to demonstrate that the city bends over backwards to make accomodate those that essentially contribute the least, require the most support, use the most resources, and are the heaviest burden. While those that are working class must compete for the same apts, and same resources that are so freely handed out to the chronically poor, but are more useful to the working/middle class who are contributing members of society.
Clearly the system is not fair, and is helping create a city that will be full of either wealthy, or desperately poor (and completely subsidized by the governement), because nobody else will be able to live here. I say grant subsidies to those that are willing to go somewhere else in this great country..where they can provide a beter life for their kids (like you insist is all they really want to do), a better life for themselves, and out of the chains of poverty hopefully.
Getting kicked out her building isn't going to help her... Yes there are abusers but most people honestly need the assistance. It may mess up the neighborhood but so be it. Move. Let the next generation in the ghetto work their way out of poverty, at least they will have a roof over their head. There are better ways to assist the community then boost the rent and get everyone kicked out.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elvira Black
Yes, there seems to be a huge stigma attached to Section 8 programs. My b/f's experience has been different--folks in his building are, with a few exceptions, very decent people (and I think the bad apples have since been ousted). And again, if you have a poorly paying job, it is very possible that you can't afford to pay full rent plus utilities even in the cheaper apts in the Bronx. My b/f has no children, and gets social security disability (not SSI, since he worked for many years), but utilities alone eat up virtually all his expenses each month.
Also, some folks are elderly and/or disabled and I don't think they should be turned out esp if they've been living in NYC for all or most of their lives.
This gets into other territory beyond the scope of this forum, I suppose. I think that the incentives for welfare/public assistance are getting a little stricter. However, Section 8 also provides housing for single mothers trying to escape abusive spouses/partners. I'm sure some people cheat the sytem, but all I can say is many people cheat the system in some way or another, rich, poor, and middle class--including city/government workers. Talk about no accountability...
My b/f gets yearly section 8 inspections, and a few times he had a second inspection. Seems like the inspectors were inspecting the inspectors or something. That's the only explanation I can think of. So more city money wasted due to corruption.
There is a stigma attached to it becuase section 8 destroyed neighborhoods block by block. This is not isolated to NYC. Your boyfriend is a good tenant, we get the picture. The fact is section 8 households are much more likely to lower quality of life in a neighborhood.
Surprised this hasn't been closed, way off topic.
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.
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.
youngster
