NYC Housing Troubles
Housing protesters outside Gracie Mansion
“Housing for AIDS is the name of the game. HUD, HOPWA, shame, shame, shame!” That was the chant of 100 D.C.-based activists outside the U.S. Housing and Urban Development (HUD) offices on Monday, World AIDS Day. The group was protesting the 278-person HOPWA waiting list, which has grown by more than 50 people in the last two months.
“Housing for AIDS is the name of the game. HUD, HOPWA, shame, shame, shame!” That was the chant of 100 D.C.-based activists outside the U.S. Housing and Urban Development (HUD) offices on Monday, World AIDS Day. The group was protesting the 278-person HOPWA waiting list, which has grown by more than 50 people in the last two months.
Scatter Site II housing is, like all of HASA, a joint city/state funded venture, and it is meant to be a transition from congregate housing to regular apartments.
The city Human Resources Administration decided to end the contracts after the state Office of Temporary and Disability Assistance pulled funding. Fourteen of the city’s contracts with Scatter Site II providers will end in June 2009 and the remaining four will end in February 2010. The City and State will each save $1.3 million in 2009 and $4 million in the years afterwards.
Future HASA clients will be placed into supportive housing or Scatter Site I housing.
“As part of the long-term phase-out of Scatter Site II, each client will be assessed to determine what, if any, service he or she might be linked
to to promote the client’s continued housing stability,” said HRA Executive Commissioner Barbara Brancaccio. “Some clients will likely benefit from being voluntarily linked to COBRA case management.”
Scatter Site II has issues
Like Scatter Site I housing, the leases are in the tenants’ names. The difference is that Scatter Site I links tenants with community-based organizations that vouch for tenants to landlords and provide some supportive services. After a two year contract, leases switch to Scatter Site I housing, where tenants then live independently.
A problem with this system is that HASA assessments are often poor, and tenants are assessed incorrectly as needing Scatter Site II, when they qualify for more substantial services.
The New York City AIDS Housing Network organized a 50-people protest outside Gracie Mansion on World AIDS Day to demand that the cuts be restored. “Scatter Site II is an essential program to help HASA clients navigate the program,” said New York City AIDS Housing Network Co-executive Director Sean Barry. “If HASA were a functional program this wouldn’t be necessary, but HASA’s messed up.”
Housing Works Director of New York Policy and Organizing Kristin Goodwin disagrees with Barry’s assessment and says that Scatter Site II problems are numerous and have no easy fix. She said because initial assessments are so poorly done, people are often placed into Scatter Site II housing that need more intensive care, and that those who simply need help with housing can receive that through COBRA case management.
Another problem is that unlike with Section 8 housing, which caps the amount of rent a low-income tenant must pay at 30 percent of their income, HASA clients in Scatter Site programs often have to pay a substantial amount of their income towards rent. Barry said the average HASA client pays 48 percent of their income towards rent, and some pay as high as 86 percent. Because of this problem, tenants often go into arrears.
“The problems with Scatter Site II are structural,” Goodwin said.
SRO population going up
Also, in an echo of the HOPWA housing shortage facing D.C. ,the number of HASA clients in single-room occupancy apartments has increased from by 20 percent since June 2007, from 788 people in June 2007 to 998 in October 2008.
There are complex reasons for the SRO increase, including lack of affordable housing stock in New York, the recession, and the fact that HASA subsidies aren’t tied to the current market rents of apartments paying 30 percent less than Section 8 vouchers.
In addition, a recent New York City law says landlords can’t discriminate against people who use public housing vouchers but that the law has no monetary penalty against landlords, and has not been strictly enforced.
Posted on December 4, 2008 at 1:55 pm
Share
Donate Today
Join our healing community by becoming a member today
