Where are the poor supposed to go?

[Hannah Bell]

WHEN CHICAGO Housing Authority (CHA) board members held their meeting on October 19, it was to a packed room--with 150 tenants gathered.... Lathrop residents turned out to the Douglas Field House on Chicago's South Side to demand a "no market rate" claim on 50 percent of the Lathrop units, which are being taken over, renovated and sold as market-rate condos by an opportunistic group of private builders.

The city's "Plan for Transformation" has been displacing public housing residents since 1996. The "Transformation" project was initially slated for residents living in what the city called "dangerous and dilapidated" high rises--which is the government's standard "this-is-for-your-own-good" language of pillage and conquest.

Lathrop Homes is a low-rise complex, so when the tenants were informed that their homes would go the way of high-rise developments, like Cabrini-Green and Robert Taylor Homes, they were taken by surprise.

Scott addressed the packed audience and the board. "The city is saturated with market-rate condos, and guess what--they aren't being bought! Thousands are sitting completely empty," she said. "We need more public housing. I have lived at Lathrop for 25 years--I shouldn't have to leave because someone thinks they see a business opportunity--I raised my kids here!"

The crowd erupted in applause as residents and action committee members from Lathrop Homes and the Chicago Anti-Eviction Campaign stood behind Suarez, Scott and Davidson, holding posters that read "No Market Rate!"

They then watched CHA director Lewis Jordon and his board don an ill-worn mask of "representative democracy," as they took up an "official" vote on the matter. The residents' call was flatly denied. The board agreed to go ahead with plans to turn Lathrop into all market-rate condos.

http://socialistworker.org/2010/10/28/where-are-the-poor-to-go


Lathrop Homes is a 1938 Public Works Administration project, i.e. has historic value. And it's riverfront.

[grasswire]

1. well, that's the problem

River front property. Follow the dollar.

[WestSeattle2]

27. I thought the same - city wants that property generating property

taxes.

[bobbolink]

41. No, the PROBLEM is that poor folk don't have "progressives" speaking up for them.

[BeFree]

2. Talk about ugly

That is ugly. Messing with these families just for a few coins. Ugleeee.

[scarletwoman]

3. Obviously, the poor are supposed to go away and die - quickly. (nt)

[Skittles]

4. yup

my immediate thought was, "They're not supposed to GO anywhere, they're supposed to just DIE."

[scarletwoman]

5. The Shining City on the Hill has no panhandlers - they're dead.

Gawd forbid we actually look into the root causes of poverty, or do anything to prevent it.

[maryf]

26. I'm very worried about one of our own here...

:(

[dkf]

6. You would think there is a ton of available housing...

If the Government subsidized market rent wouldn't that be better than having projects? The problem is in getting rid of housing and giving no other options.

[WinkyDink]

16. You must be living in pre-Reagan America.

[ashleyforachange]

7. This has the ball rolling...

oops

[ashleyforachange]

8. This has the ball rolling...

This is terrible that people worry more about money than about the livelihood of Americans. It would be better to rebuild the public housing for the people than build these condos that nobody will buy.

[ProfessionalLeftist]

9. Here...

Mind you *I'm* not saying they should go there but the money-mongering corprats who want to toss them out to build market-rate condos obviously think so.

[Dr Morbius]

18. Not that it's terribly important, but I think that sign is pointing the wrong way.

Hell is to be found on your right, I believe. I tend to see it when I look in that direction, anyway.

About the OP: Riverfront property is indeed valuable, and I can understand why a city might want to maximize real estate. But at the very least, one would expect that new scattered-site public housing (at the same price) should be made available nearby as the city upgrades the riverfront area.

Chicago has been undergoing a distressing tendency of late to gentrify, fixing up dilapidated areas of the city and moving the poor folks (who've lived there their whole lives) out. These new areas are lovely and slowly get filled with the rich and pretentious. The complexion of entire neighborhoods turns white overnight.

[leftstreet]

10. 'building an economic wall around..manufactured real estate markets'

Yep

[Hannah Bell]

21. looks like they've been refusing to lease units there for some time --

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0A64zjD0Ca8&feature=fvw

Why are these units vacant? shouted Cynthia Scott, as she gestured behind her to the boarded-up apartments at the low-rise Lathrop Homes public housing development. Keeping these units empty, in the midst of an economic and housing crisis, is a terrible waste. CHA, open them up for people who need housing!

Scott, a member of the Lathrop Leadership Team, spoke to 200 residents and supporters at a rally October 23. Under the Teams proposal, CHA could house families, including military veterans with children who need affordable housing. That would generate rental income, keep Lathrops buildings in good condition and prevent crime by leasing the units.

Today, 600 of Lathrops 900 units are empty. In 1999, when CHA began its Plan for Transformation of public housing, it listed Lathrop as TBD to be determined. Nine years later, there is still no plan. Meanwhile, the CHA has refused to lease any new units. But many units are still in good shape.

Leasing 300 of the empty units now would be a positive first step toward the long-term revitalization of Lathrop Homes, community leaders said.

The Lathrop Leadership Team, a coalition of residents and agency leaders organized by LSNA to preserve the affordable Lathrop apartments, has championed a vision for the development as a mix of public housing, affordable rental and affordable home ownership without market rate.

Lathrop is surrounded by market rate homes. Theres no need for more condos here, said Juanita Stevenson, president of the Lathrop Homes Local Advisory Council. Theres only greed for more condos here.

A low-rise development, Lathrop is the citys most diverse public housing neighborhood, with a blend of African-American, Latino and white families both low-income and working class. It served as a port of entry to Chicago for Puerto Rico migrants, and a gateway to the North Side for African-American families.

[Radical Activist]

11. CHA wants to keep a third of the units as public housing.

I just wanted to throw that in since the linked source has a history of leaving out important facts. There's a good case for keeping the Lathrop homes 100% public housing instead of a mix, but that's no excuse for telling half the story.

I'm astounded that a supposedly socialist website is defending the epic fail of Cabrini Green style public housing that corrals low-income people in a virtual human dumping ground where they're contained and ignored. I get the feeling that the editorial was written by a middle class socialist who has never spent time inside Chicago public housing.

For anyone who's interested in what's really happening, here are two informative article that don't withhold information in an attempt to manipulate the reader like the OP's source frequently does.

http://www.chicagonow.com/blogs/chicago-muckrakers/2010/10/cha-commissioners-hesitant-over-lathrop-homes.html

http://www.suntimes.com/business/2824786,CST-NWS-lathrop22.article

[Name removed]

12. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Radical Activist]

13. Leaving out important details to mislead people is not a left wing value.

At least not for me. It shows a lack of respect for the reader.

[Panaconda]

29. You are way off the mark

Now I've got some first-hand experience with this sort of thing so I'll guide you through it. Afterwards you can apologize to the person who posted the OP for the insult.

Taking a systemic analysis of the situation is a left-wing method that will allow you to interpret the details accurately. I suggest you try it.

[Radical Activist]

31. Facts are facts

and this story gets them wrong.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=9418777&mesg_id=9419925

[Hannah Bell]

14. socialist worker has a history of leaving out important information? link?

can you link me to someone else who says socialist worker leaves out important information -- other than yourself, that is?

btw, the article's author, rory fanning, lives in chicago. from 2009:

On Friday, May 15th, Rory Fanning came to the end of his journey – Ocean Beach. He had just finished his 8 month, 2700 mile walk across the USA in memory of his friend Pat Tillman. He had started in Virginia Beach, Virginia, on September 17, 2008. Fanning had been a US Army Ranger with Tillman. Now he finished his journey to raise money for a foundation in his friend’s name. He raised $35,000.

http://obrag.org/?p=7508

iso also in chicago:

ISO National Office
P.O. Box 16085, Chicago, IL 60616
Telephone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
E-mail address: [e-mail]



As for cabrini-green, the point -- as with lathrop homes -- is that low-income housing is being lost & replaced with nothing.

part of chicago's ongoing ethnic & economic cleansing program.

http://www.chicagohomeless.org/files/images/CCH_TIF_Report_Ka.pdf


as for the designation of 30%, the paper above reveals the scam they're using: they include the suburbs to calculate median income, which brings it up to $75K. but median inside chicago proper = $43K.

you do the math.

the meeting reported in the op occurred on the 19th.

the 30% change apparently occurred between the meeting on the 19th & the 22nd.

[Radical Activist]

30. There are at least two significant factual errors.

The writer claims the group wants 50% devoted to public housing units, but I found four other sources that all say they want it at 100%.
The article does not mention that CHA wants to keep 1/3 of the units as public housing, which is a significant fact. This is not a recent change. There are articles both before and after the socialist worker editorial that confirm this. The writer just got it wrong.
So your link is in the comment you're responding to.

If he's from Chicago then why is one of his recent articles about applying for unemployment in Michigan? The fact that ISO is in Chicago is one more reason to be disappointed in their sloppy reporting.

[Hannah Bell]

39. Because the MSM says residents want 100%, that must be the truth?

I'd trust ISO to get what the residents want right over the chicago MSM. You just *assume* the report you linked *must* be correct.


the writer's earlier article was about applying for unemployment IN ILLINOIS, not michigan:

"She was holding 133 and pointed to the phone number, posted in big, black print on the wall, recommending we call the IDES (Illinois Department of Employment Security) hotline for updates on claims. She said, "The number has been connecting to a busy signal, nonstop, for a week."

some posters *assumed* it was michigan because the picture illustrating it was from michigan.


as for the 30%, the article you link came out on the 22nd, & cites a decision made the 21st. this article is from the 19th & cites an earlier community meeting.

you don't know what happened between, & i have not found the earlier reports you cite saying that the 30% figure was widely known.

unless you link them, i will think you just made them up.

[Radical Activist]

40. One article was not the MSM.

It was a local progressive publication. There are other non-corporate news sources that say the same thing.

One of the articles was also from an earlier date and contains the same information. So your argument about the date has no relevance.

Your cookie-cutter arguments don't apply in this case. You're in denial. And it's not about one article. It's a recurring problem with that website.

[Hannah Bell]

42. link? already proved you wrong on one of your silly "critiques," are you afraid

that linking another article will show you're wrong on a second, i.e. your "100%" contention?

[Radical Activist]

43. No, you really didn't disprove anything.

You speculated based on nothing that maybe the 100% number has changed. But I already linked articles dated before AND after the one you posted that contradict the socialist worker. You can easily find others that prove I'm right with a google news search.

Seriously, this is when you admit you're wrong and apologize, or at least just leave the conversation. Insisting that you're right doesn't make it so. Why don't you find other sources that reaffirm the Socialist Worker is correct about the two factual errors I already pointed out? Link?

[TBF]

22. I read both of the articles you linked to, and understand

they don't think "concentrated poverty" works. Whatever the hell that means. But there is no explanation of where the folks will be moved. They just want that riverfront property - this wouldn't be happening if they were out in the western burbs somewhere.

[Radical Activist]

32. Some people will stay

and some people will have to find their own apartment and get section 8 vouchers. Personally, I think more of the unites should remain low-rate public housing. Only 1/2 or 1/3 should be market rate units. The group in the article wants it to stay at 100% public units.

But for me, that doesn't excuse an editorial that gets the basic facts wrong and/or leaves out important information in an attempt to support the writer's opinion. Every time I read about an event in the socialist worker I have to do a google search for other sources to get the whole story. The editors obviously don't respect me, the reader, and so I don't respect them.

[Hannah Bell]

38. They're saying they can use housing vouchers. But landlords who accept vouchers

are concentrated in two slum areas on the opposite side of the city. away from the water.

[WinkyDink]

15. The grave. I do not jest or exaggerate. Republicans hate the non-wealthy, as we are all leeches to

them, keeping them from a dime they must have.

[pinboy3niner]

17. K&R

The same thing is happening in cities all over the county.

Whatever hapened to "The least of my brothers...."?

[butterfly77]

19. Kicked&Recommended...

:kick:

[xchrom]

20. Recommend

[TBF]

23. K&R nt

[blindpig]

24. Enclosure all over again

The Capitalists have been doing this for 500 years, why should they drop a winning game plan?

It's the Capitalism.

[maryf]

25. The number one cause of homelessness is lack of affordable housing...

the du'r who taught me this is having trouble finding a place to park her "home" (her car)...and people ask why she's angry and maybe a little too sensitive...

keep telling this truth HB, K&R

[baldguy]

28. The poor are supposed to be silent & invisible.

Since they are necessary for the economy to function (being available to do those min-wage or sub-min-wage jobs that nobody else wants) they can't be killed and can't be driven away. So they're expected to live in increasingly scarce and increasingly substandard housing at higher & higher prices - and mostly be quiet.

[maryf]

44. But they are being killed...

by being forced to endure harder and harsher conditions...

[Starry Messenger]

33. Here's why they are being pushed out.

http://skylinenewspaper.com/News/01-13-2010/New_approach_to_Lathrop_criticized

While most CHA developments were initially concentrated in poverty-level neighborhoods with limited access to employment and educational opportunities, Lathrop has long enjoyed proximity to upscale neighborhoods occupied with a number of schools, retail corridors and grocery stores.

Pure condo bait. Public housing will be turned into another yuppie enclosure.

[TBF]

34. It's also riverfront property. nt

[Starry Messenger]

35. A twofer.

These will probably be converted to "lofts" faster than you can say "goat cheese".

[TBF]

36. Yup, with urban gardens. nt

[Starry Messenger]

37. Won't little Brittney look so sweet picking berries?

It's like a return to Real America©