Social Engineering?? (New York, Yonkers, Bedford: 2009, apartments, to rent)

[markhunt]

Westchester Adds Housing to Desegregation Pact
By SAM ROBERTS
An agreement will compel New York's Westchester County to create affordable housing in overwhelmingly white communities and market it to nonwhites.

I used to live in Hartsdale and Scarsdale and have family in Mt. Kisco, Chappaqua, and Mahopac. Not even living there anymore, this is appalling to me. Does anyone think this will actually happen?

Opinions?

[mgt04]

Its no secret that "Affordable Housing" = Drugs, guns, violence, eventual downgrade in the area around it. I cringe everytime I hear the term affordable housing.

I'm not even white, but what an encroachment on that white community and the affordable housing will be marketed for non-whites? Talk about racism...

[dma1250]

According to the article, the income limit is $75,000 for a family to buy a house in the program and $54,000 for a family to rent. This is not about bringing in poor people, it is simply about increasing ethnic and racial diversity. So stop your Anti-American ranting.

[bmwguydc]

Race should never be inserted into something such as moderate income housing, since the key component is moderate income. Many communities across the country include such housing as part of development, or add to the stock of housing in that sector in expensive areas. In DC's suburbs, the MPDU (moderately priced dwelling unit) or ADU (affordable dwelling unit) are sold/rented to people who could not afford to live in the community by lottery. This includes teachers, firemen, EMTs, police, and other municipal employees that the jurisdictions need to survive in addition to others who are involved with the program.

Most people I know in Westchester, would not have an issue with moderate income housing, since there are some apartments and condominiums throughout the county. I have no problem with the plan, since people who are earning an income and would like to live in the community are more than welcome. This is not a proposal to create a welfare state to teach the wealthier suburbs a lesson. Rather, it's an integrated housing program that helps to solve the complex issue of affordable housing in some of the country's wealthiest communities.

Peronally, I think that race should not be a criterion for consideration, since I do not care one iota about an individual's ethnic background. Opening it to minority residents as per the invidual town/village is fine, but if there is going to be a quota per ethnicity, I take issue with that because it could unfairly exclude a deserving family who was not of a particular ethnicity.

Also, most of the ADU/MPDU communities that I have seen are largely indistinguishable from other forms of multi-family housing, especially for townhouses and other apartments, save that the individual units are smaller and may not have as many levels, or garages. Even in Bedford and Bronxville, there are apartment and condominium communities that coexist with larger homes and estates, without any sort of tension. Respectable people earning a living are not likely to cause any sort of radical cultural shift at all through this housing program. The problem could be zoning, however, in some areas of the county, but with the local municipalities on board, I am sure that land could be found to construct the housing units in a way that complements the area.

I'd go one step further and have the county call for an architetural contest per development, within cost parameters, of course, to get some new ideas on the subject. Who would want an ugly vinyl box of 30 apartments and an ugly asphalt parking lot when they could get a stunning architectural statement that respets the natural landscape and architectural styles of the community? This would help to instill a sense of pride in the community and in the residents who live in the units. Being mandated by settling a lawsuit may not be the best way for this to have come about, but at least the county is discussing the issue now. So, I say to take it to the next level, in true Westchester fashion, and really create some nice units for moderate income people that doesn't just fulfill the terms of the settlement, but redefines the moderate income affordable housing sector.

[IRONSHIRT]

Originally Posted by markhunt

Westchester Adds Housing to Desegregation Pact
By SAM ROBERTS
An agreement will compel New York's Westchester County to create affordable housing in overwhelmingly white communities and market it to nonwhites.

I used to live in Hartsdale and Scarsdale and have family in Mt. Kisco, Chappaqua, and Mahopac. Not even living there anymore, this is appalling to me. Does anyone think this will actually happen?

Opinions?

I hope it happens. Thats what they do in Toronto.

[ping pong ball]

Originally Posted by dma1250

According to the article, the income limit is $75,000 for a family to buy a house in the program and $54,000 for a family to rent. This is not about bringing in poor people, it is simply about increasing ethnic and racial diversity. So stop your Anti-American ranting.

It is not the business of government (federal or local) to "increase ethinic or racial diversity". There are laws against discrimination based on race, which should serve as the basis for furthering integration.

I however agree that this is not likely to bring in many "poor people" unless the county specifically targets them with direct or indirect subsidies beyond that already approved (e.g setting the price of housing way below market rates).

My main concern however with this decision is in what it says about the rights of individuals. The major cost of running the services offered by most villages and towns is borne by the individual property tax payer. When new developments are proposed, it seems only fair that those who carry most of the tax burden be those who have the major say in the decision. No town or village should be forced to have "affordable housing" if they do not see it is in their interest to have it.

There are towns which have, for instance, specifically developed affordable units for their own municipal workers because they see it as being to their own benefit. There are also those who, for reasons of guilt or morality, support the notion of paying higher taxes so that the "less-privileged" can live amongst them. To each his own, however at the communal level, there has to be broad agreement amongst those who will be burdened with supporting others with their taxes.

If I lived in any one of these communities (I wish), I would have a problem with the notion of "affordable housing" that expects me to subsidize others with my taxes without first soliciting my consent.

[dma1250]

Originally Posted by ping pong ball

It is not the business of government (federal or local) to "increase ethinic or racial diversity". There are laws against discrimination based on race, which should serve as the basis for furthering integration.

I however agree that this is not likely to bring in many "poor people" unless the county specifically targets them with direct or indirect subsidies beyond that already approved (e.g setting the price of housing way below market rates).

My main concern however with this decision is in what it says about the rights of individuals. The major cost of running the services offered by most villages and towns is borne by the individual property tax payer. When new developments are proposed, it seems only fair that those who carry most of the tax burden be those who have the major say in the decision. No town or village should be forced to have "affordable housing" if they do not see it is in their interest to have it.

There are towns which have, for instance, specifically developed affordable units for their own municipal workers because they see it as being to their own benefit. There are also those who, for reasons of guilt or morality, support the notion of paying higher taxes so that the "less-privileged" can live amongst them. To each his own, however at the communal level, there has to be broad agreement amongst those who will be burdened with supporting others with their taxes.

If I lived in any one of these communities (I wish), I would have a problem with the notion of "affordable housing" that expects me to subsidize others with my taxes without first soliciting my consent.

I couldn't disagree more. It is indeed the role of government to increase diversity. And the idea that paying taxes means that you should decide exactly what the town does on every level is, in my opinion, beyond silly. I totally disagree with the idea that there should be "broad agreement" about exactly how tax dollars are spent. The point of government is to have people who can see the big picture and are not completely ruled by petty self-intrerest. Obviosuly govrment often, if not usually, fails--but giving tax payers any more say is the stupidest possible thing we could do.

Indeed this is the perfect example of that problem. If taxpayers had less say and if local government had more backbone and were not so scared of upsetting voters then we would already have adequate affordable housing and a reasonable degree of diversity and the courts would not have been forced to mandate this program. So if you don't like the decison, you have no one to blame but yourself.

[samyn on the green]

They should force those with the big college indoctrination to live in the worst part of Yonkers to desegregate those communities. Mandate the little Aiden's with the hyphenated last names currently attending private/the best public schools to transfer to the public schools in the Bronx and Yonkers to get the full diversity experience. Just being indoctrinated into diversity from the safety of a school classroom does not go far enough, you need to get those whiteboys down and dirty to give them experience along side the indoctrination.

[mgt04]

Originally Posted by dma1250

According to the article, the income limit is $75,000 for a family to buy a house in the program and $54,000 for a family to rent. This is not about bringing in poor people, it is simply about increasing ethnic and racial diversity. So stop your Anti-American ranting.

$75,000 for a family is poor in that area. You should stop your socialist attitude thinking everyone deserves everything anywhere and everywhere. Why do we need to increase ethnic and racial diversity...it happens on its own. Look at how many towns have changed over the past 50 yrs. Its stupid to force it upon a community.

[mgt04]

Originally Posted by dma1250

I couldn't disagree more. It is indeed the role of government to increase diversity. And the idea that paying taxes means that you should decide exactly what the town does on every level is, in my opinion, beyond silly. I totally disagree with the idea that there should be "broad agreement" about exactly how tax dollars are spent. The point of government is to have people who can see the big picture and are not completely ruled by petty self-intrerest. Obviosuly govrment often, if not usually, fails--but giving tax payers any more say is the stupidest possible thing we could do.

Indeed this is the perfect example of that problem. If taxpayers had less say and if local government had more backbone and were not so scared of upsetting voters then we would already have adequate affordable housing and a reasonable degree of diversity and the courts would not have been forced to mandate this program. So if you don't like the decison, you have no one to blame but yourself.

Wow....just wow....

Where oh where does it say it is the governments job to increase diversity in communities?