Showing posts with label economic segregation. Show all posts
Showing posts with label economic segregation. Show all posts
Wednesday, September 02, 2015
Thursday, July 24, 2014
Deed restrictions and discrimination as "ethical"
My good friend, Randy Mayeux writes in a most revealing way about a problem that persists in other, more respectable forms even today.
Read what he has to say here.
Read what he has to say here.
Monday, August 12, 2013
Detroit and hard lessons. . .
[The demise of Detroit, Michigan provides a fairly terrifying story for other large urban areas to consider, study and evaluate in view of local challenges. This is certainly true for Dallas, Texas as we search for a new City Manager, Housing Director and City Attorney.
The following essay from Joseph E. Stiglitz offers much food for thought.
As always, I'd love your reactions. What does Detroit have to teach us all? LJ]
The Wrong Lesson From Detroit’s Bankruptcy
When I was growing up in Gary, Ind., nearly a quarter of American workers were employed in the manufacturing sector. There were plenty of jobs at the time that paid well enough for a single breadwinner, working one job, to fulfill the American dream for his family of four. He could earn a living on the sweat of his brow, afford to send his children to college and even see them rise to the professional class.
Cities like Detroit and Gary thrived on that industry, not just in terms of the wealth that it produced but also in terms of strong communities, healthy tax bases and good infrastructure. From the stable foundation of Gary’s excellent public schools, influenced by the ideas of the progressive reformer John Dewey, I went on to Amherst College and then to M.I.T. for graduate school.
Today, fewer than 8 percent of American workers are employed in manufacturing, and many Rust Belt cities are skeletons. The distressing facts about Detroit are by now almost a cliché: 40 percent of streetlights were not working this spring, tens of thousands of buildings are abandoned, schools have closed and the population declined 25 percent in the last decade alone. The violent crime rate last year was the highest of any big city. In 1950, when Detroit’s population was 1.85 million, there were 296,000 manufacturing jobs in the city; as of 2011, with a population of just over 700,000, there were fewer than 27,000.
Click here to read more.
Monday, June 02, 2008
The gap
Wednesday, thanks to a bit of a glitch in the agenda, I sat in the Dallas City Council meeting for almost seven hours. Quite an experience to take in almost all of the entire meeting! My hat is off to our mayor and our council members for their willingness to do so for the common good.
During the afternoon session, the meeting room filled with very well-dressed people, well over 100 of them. When their time on the agenda came, it became very clear that the group was divided between those who favored the development of a luxury hotel/condo project down along the Katy Trail and those who were against it.
The testimony was interesting. The project fairly amazing. The conversation among council members very civil. The project was approved unanimously over the judgment of the City Planning Commission.
When our business was completed (the council voted to award our citywalk project $1.5 million in bond funds for homeless housing), I decided to drop in on The Bridge, our new homeless assistance center Downtown. I walked in and began roaming around asking folks how they liked the new facility.
Lots of honest conversation ensued. There are some bugs in the new building and the staff is working hard to resolve them. One fellow told me he believed the whole project was to provide a place for the homeless to be hidden from the rest of Dallas. Almost everyone I spoke with was grateful for the place.
The overriding impression I received was that of an extremely welcoming place.
The numbers seem to back up my impression. The Bridge is seeing about 1,000 people a day! I expect that is about 50% more than anyone planned for. But, that brings me back to that welcoming thing.
The place could just as easily have been named "The Oasis," because that is what it feels like to lots of people who are coming there. Just a place to sit down, to rest, to regain one's legs, to feel as if someone really cares. . .unconditionally. Clearly, The Bridge is not a place of condemnation, but a place of hope and friendship.
Not surprisingly, I ran into a number of men that I knew, guys who had passed through my world at CDM. Felt like a reunion!
As I drove away, I couldn't help contrast the two worlds I'd experienced in just a few hours. Two very, very different worlds. Two worlds that are drifting apart quickly, as the economic gap between the two widens daily.
The gap is sad to me. The people aren't all that different, though they may all think they are. But, they aren't.
Discovering beauty in both worlds is the challenge. Putting an end to the divide, slowing the division, the call.
And then, there is the small matter of justice, human dignity and simply loving "Lazarus."
.
During the afternoon session, the meeting room filled with very well-dressed people, well over 100 of them. When their time on the agenda came, it became very clear that the group was divided between those who favored the development of a luxury hotel/condo project down along the Katy Trail and those who were against it.
The testimony was interesting. The project fairly amazing. The conversation among council members very civil. The project was approved unanimously over the judgment of the City Planning Commission.
When our business was completed (the council voted to award our citywalk project $1.5 million in bond funds for homeless housing), I decided to drop in on The Bridge, our new homeless assistance center Downtown. I walked in and began roaming around asking folks how they liked the new facility.
Lots of honest conversation ensued. There are some bugs in the new building and the staff is working hard to resolve them. One fellow told me he believed the whole project was to provide a place for the homeless to be hidden from the rest of Dallas. Almost everyone I spoke with was grateful for the place.
The overriding impression I received was that of an extremely welcoming place.
The numbers seem to back up my impression. The Bridge is seeing about 1,000 people a day! I expect that is about 50% more than anyone planned for. But, that brings me back to that welcoming thing.
The place could just as easily have been named "The Oasis," because that is what it feels like to lots of people who are coming there. Just a place to sit down, to rest, to regain one's legs, to feel as if someone really cares. . .unconditionally. Clearly, The Bridge is not a place of condemnation, but a place of hope and friendship.
Not surprisingly, I ran into a number of men that I knew, guys who had passed through my world at CDM. Felt like a reunion!
As I drove away, I couldn't help contrast the two worlds I'd experienced in just a few hours. Two very, very different worlds. Two worlds that are drifting apart quickly, as the economic gap between the two widens daily.
The gap is sad to me. The people aren't all that different, though they may all think they are. But, they aren't.
Discovering beauty in both worlds is the challenge. Putting an end to the divide, slowing the division, the call.
And then, there is the small matter of justice, human dignity and simply loving "Lazarus."
.
Tuesday, May 27, 2008
Race and community value
Whenever I address the subject of race or racial prejudice here, I brace myself. I always get negative feedback, some of which suggests that I should leave the subject alone. The assumption of many of my critics is that race and racism are no longer problems in our society.
Oh, the bliss of wishful thinking.
Last week I attended the first few minutes of a seminar dealing with property values in neighborhoods as an index for determining "livability" or more comprehensive measures of community health. The presenters were accomplished academics, people who really knew their stuff. I'm sure the seminar was brilliant and full of at least some useful insights.
But, I left after the first twenty minutes.
One of the presenters made this statement about real estate values in South Dallas, "We controlled for many factors in our comparisons between this part of Dallas and other more affluent parts of the city. We were surprised to discover that race is still a significant factor affecting property values."
Say what?
"Surprised to discover that race is still a significant factor affecting property values"--are you kidding me? Anyone who is surprised by that fact of life in the inner city has just lost the ability to command my presence for the remainder of the presentation. Thus, my early departure.
Race and racism remain powerful forces and factors in the dynamics of life, economics, opportunity, hope and justice in every inner city in the United States.
The entire ugly reality reminded me of a story I ran across recently. It seems a white preacher visited a black congregation and, during his sermon, suggested that in heaven there must be a Jim Crow partition that separated the white saints on one side from the black saints on the other. At the end of the service, one of the church's deacons led the congregation in a closing prayer that went like this:
". . .O Lord, we thank thee for the brother preacher who has spoke to us,--we thank thee for heaven,--we thank thee that we kin all go to heaven,--but as to that partition, O Lord, we thank thee that we'se a shoutin' people--we thank thee that we kin shout so hard in heaven that we will break down that partition an' spread all over heaven,--an' we thank thee that if the white fokes can't stand it, they can git out of heaven an' go to elsewhere!"
I think the deacon knew more than the academic who came to town last week. How about you?
.
Oh, the bliss of wishful thinking.
Last week I attended the first few minutes of a seminar dealing with property values in neighborhoods as an index for determining "livability" or more comprehensive measures of community health. The presenters were accomplished academics, people who really knew their stuff. I'm sure the seminar was brilliant and full of at least some useful insights.
But, I left after the first twenty minutes.
One of the presenters made this statement about real estate values in South Dallas, "We controlled for many factors in our comparisons between this part of Dallas and other more affluent parts of the city. We were surprised to discover that race is still a significant factor affecting property values."
Say what?
"Surprised to discover that race is still a significant factor affecting property values"--are you kidding me? Anyone who is surprised by that fact of life in the inner city has just lost the ability to command my presence for the remainder of the presentation. Thus, my early departure.
Race and racism remain powerful forces and factors in the dynamics of life, economics, opportunity, hope and justice in every inner city in the United States.
The entire ugly reality reminded me of a story I ran across recently. It seems a white preacher visited a black congregation and, during his sermon, suggested that in heaven there must be a Jim Crow partition that separated the white saints on one side from the black saints on the other. At the end of the service, one of the church's deacons led the congregation in a closing prayer that went like this:
". . .O Lord, we thank thee for the brother preacher who has spoke to us,--we thank thee for heaven,--we thank thee that we kin all go to heaven,--but as to that partition, O Lord, we thank thee that we'se a shoutin' people--we thank thee that we kin shout so hard in heaven that we will break down that partition an' spread all over heaven,--an' we thank thee that if the white fokes can't stand it, they can git out of heaven an' go to elsewhere!"
I think the deacon knew more than the academic who came to town last week. How about you?
.
Thursday, December 06, 2007
Income distribution and generations
On November 13, 2007, The Economic Mobility Project, an initiative of The Pew Charitable Trusts issued a report on economic mobility in the U. S. Included in the findings was the fact that two-thirds of American families are earning more today than their parents did a generation ago, yet the likelihood of these younger families moving up—or down—the economic ladder still depends in large measure on their parents’ position.
Researchers for the study included a group of experts from The American Enterprise Institute, The Brookings Institution, The Heritage Foundation and The Urban Institute. The project issued three research reports. One reports on family mobility over the past three decades, while the other two investigate differences in mobility by race and gender.
According to the first report, “Economic Mobility of Families Across Generations,” two-thirds of Americans saw increases in income, adjusted for inflation. the report also notes that Americans live in smaller families today, so higher incomes are spread over fewer people. In percentage terms, income gains were highest for children born to parents at the bottom of the income distribution.
An extremely significant aspect of the findings centers in the fact that Americans’ ability to move up or down the economic ladder is tied closely to their parents’ economic position.
Forty-two percent of children born to parents at the bottom of the income distribution remain at the bottom, while 39 percent born to parents at the top, stay at the top.
“Two out of three Americans have higher family income than their parents,” report author, Julia B. Isaacs of The Brookings Institution, noted. “Individuals can surpass the income of their parents either because economic growth has boosted all incomes or because individuals have moved to a higher step on the income ladder. So, there is considerable mobility but it’s also the case that a child’s economic position is heavily influenced by that of his or her parents.”
Looking at economic mobility outcomes by race calls into question whether the American Dream is a reality for black and white families alike. In every income group, blacks are less likely than whites to climb the ladder, and the majority of blacks born to middle-income parents are slipping out of the middle class, according to the research data analyzed in the report, “Economic Mobility of Black and White Families.”
While black children are experiencing some of the income gains that all Americans do—63 percent make more today, after inflation, than their parents did—there are dramatic differences between blacks and whites at each income level. The report found that only 31 percent of black children born to parents in the middle-income group have family income greater than their parents, compared to 68 percent of white children in the same circumstance. Almost half (45 percent) of black children in the middle-income group fall to the bottom of the income distribution in one generation, compared to only 16 percent of white children. In fact, for every parental income group, white children are more likely to move ahead of their parents’ economic rank while black children are more likely to fall behind.
“Much of my research is focused on the challenges faced by low-income black families, but these data are very disturbing, because they suggest that most middle-income black families are having difficulty transferring their hard-earned gains to their children,” said Ronald B. Mincy, the Maurice V. Russell Professor of Social Policy and Social Work Practice at Columbia University and a member of the Economic Mobility Project’s Advisory Board.
“We are hopeful that this report will provoke some serious discussion about what is driving these very troubling findings.”
The report on the comparative economic mobility of men and women, spotlights the fact that the growth in family incomes is largely due to the fact that far more families now have two earners. Male earnings have been stagnant over the past generation. The report found that sons and daughters have approximately the same likelihood of moving up or down the economic ladder. The exception is women whose parents were at the bottom of the income distribution. Partly because they are more likely to be single mothers, nearly half (47 percent) of daughters born to parents at the bottom remain at the bottom, compared to 35 percent of sons.
The reports also introduce a new typology, developed by John E. Morton, Pew’s managing director of economic policy and director of the Economic Mobility Project, and Ianna Kachoris, senior associate at Pew, in collaboration with Isaacs, which describes how families experience mobility. According to the typology, thirty-four percent of Americans are upwardly mobile, meaning they surpass their parents’ family income and economic rank. Twenty-seven percent are riding the tide, children who surpass their parents’ family income but remain in the same economic position as their parents relative to others in society. Five percent of Americans are falling despite the tide, meaning they are making more than their parents’ family income, but are actually falling behind their parents’ relative economic position. Thirty-three percent are downwardly mobile, making less than their parents family income and falling behind their economic position.
“Today’s reports should give us both reasons for optimism and cause for concern,” said Morton. “The overall trends are generally upward and positive, but there are significant numbers of Americans for whom this is not the case, and for whom the American Dream seems to be out of reach.”
More information about the project is available at http://www.economicmobility.org/.
I've "lifted" the language for much of this post from the press release issued by The Pew Charitable Trusts. The report's significance for our work in Dallas relates to what we see among the growing urban underclass. The growing gap between the well-off and the urban poor continues to be a troubling and incredibly difficult reality in the inner cities of the United States.
Researchers for the study included a group of experts from The American Enterprise Institute, The Brookings Institution, The Heritage Foundation and The Urban Institute. The project issued three research reports. One reports on family mobility over the past three decades, while the other two investigate differences in mobility by race and gender.
According to the first report, “Economic Mobility of Families Across Generations,” two-thirds of Americans saw increases in income, adjusted for inflation. the report also notes that Americans live in smaller families today, so higher incomes are spread over fewer people. In percentage terms, income gains were highest for children born to parents at the bottom of the income distribution.
An extremely significant aspect of the findings centers in the fact that Americans’ ability to move up or down the economic ladder is tied closely to their parents’ economic position.
Forty-two percent of children born to parents at the bottom of the income distribution remain at the bottom, while 39 percent born to parents at the top, stay at the top.
“Two out of three Americans have higher family income than their parents,” report author, Julia B. Isaacs of The Brookings Institution, noted. “Individuals can surpass the income of their parents either because economic growth has boosted all incomes or because individuals have moved to a higher step on the income ladder. So, there is considerable mobility but it’s also the case that a child’s economic position is heavily influenced by that of his or her parents.”
Looking at economic mobility outcomes by race calls into question whether the American Dream is a reality for black and white families alike. In every income group, blacks are less likely than whites to climb the ladder, and the majority of blacks born to middle-income parents are slipping out of the middle class, according to the research data analyzed in the report, “Economic Mobility of Black and White Families.”
While black children are experiencing some of the income gains that all Americans do—63 percent make more today, after inflation, than their parents did—there are dramatic differences between blacks and whites at each income level. The report found that only 31 percent of black children born to parents in the middle-income group have family income greater than their parents, compared to 68 percent of white children in the same circumstance. Almost half (45 percent) of black children in the middle-income group fall to the bottom of the income distribution in one generation, compared to only 16 percent of white children. In fact, for every parental income group, white children are more likely to move ahead of their parents’ economic rank while black children are more likely to fall behind.
“Much of my research is focused on the challenges faced by low-income black families, but these data are very disturbing, because they suggest that most middle-income black families are having difficulty transferring their hard-earned gains to their children,” said Ronald B. Mincy, the Maurice V. Russell Professor of Social Policy and Social Work Practice at Columbia University and a member of the Economic Mobility Project’s Advisory Board.
“We are hopeful that this report will provoke some serious discussion about what is driving these very troubling findings.”
The report on the comparative economic mobility of men and women, spotlights the fact that the growth in family incomes is largely due to the fact that far more families now have two earners. Male earnings have been stagnant over the past generation. The report found that sons and daughters have approximately the same likelihood of moving up or down the economic ladder. The exception is women whose parents were at the bottom of the income distribution. Partly because they are more likely to be single mothers, nearly half (47 percent) of daughters born to parents at the bottom remain at the bottom, compared to 35 percent of sons.
The reports also introduce a new typology, developed by John E. Morton, Pew’s managing director of economic policy and director of the Economic Mobility Project, and Ianna Kachoris, senior associate at Pew, in collaboration with Isaacs, which describes how families experience mobility. According to the typology, thirty-four percent of Americans are upwardly mobile, meaning they surpass their parents’ family income and economic rank. Twenty-seven percent are riding the tide, children who surpass their parents’ family income but remain in the same economic position as their parents relative to others in society. Five percent of Americans are falling despite the tide, meaning they are making more than their parents’ family income, but are actually falling behind their parents’ relative economic position. Thirty-three percent are downwardly mobile, making less than their parents family income and falling behind their economic position.
“Today’s reports should give us both reasons for optimism and cause for concern,” said Morton. “The overall trends are generally upward and positive, but there are significant numbers of Americans for whom this is not the case, and for whom the American Dream seems to be out of reach.”
More information about the project is available at http://www.economicmobility.org/.
I've "lifted" the language for much of this post from the press release issued by The Pew Charitable Trusts. The report's significance for our work in Dallas relates to what we see among the growing urban underclass. The growing gap between the well-off and the urban poor continues to be a troubling and incredibly difficult reality in the inner cities of the United States.
Monday, June 11, 2007
Housing challenge
The Dallas Morning News published the first of a two-part, front page series in yesterday's paper ( "Where are they all going to live?" ). Part two runs today ("Jump-starting change"). The subject: a crisis of affordable, workforce housing in our growing city. The report is worth reading for anyone who cares about the development of adequate housing in any urban area.
Check out part one at: http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/dn/
latestnews/stories/061007dnentapt_overview.2e85b2c8.html. You can find the second part on the paper's website today.
The challenge of providing adequate housing stock for the expanding population of a growing urban community like Dallas is enormous and requires a courageous public commitment to be successful. Political will, creative leadership, various, often complicated funding tools and the willingness to do the right thing for the entire community, no matter what the political consequences, are all essential ingredients to any successful housing strategy.
Our experience here at CDM in attempting to develop affordable units to meet part of the growing need has been very instructive. Here a just a few of the lessons we've learned over the past six years:
Just recounting a few of the most common hurdles we face in attempting to bring high-quality, affordable housing to our market makes me wonder why we stay at it!
Of course the answer is people, our neighbors. The report makes it clear that the economy of the entire community depends upon the continued and increased development of housing stock for our growing workforce.
A couple of important facts surfaced in the first part of the housing report. Both are extremely troubling.
First, 42% of Dallas households are "cost-burdened,' that is they pay over 30% of their income on housing costs. That's an amazing number, especially in a city that is tearing down thousands of affordable units and replacing them with upscale, expensive homes, condos and luxury apartment developments.
Second, the current trend lines for median income and home values are not good news. Median income here in Dallas in 1990 was $27,469 with the median cost of a home at $78,300. By 2000, income rose to $37,628 and home values were up to $94,456. In 2005, median income actually slipped to $36,403 while home costs continued to rise to $120,900.
For things to change in Dallas, and especially in our inner city neighborhoods, free market forces must be supported by public plans and policies that make new development possible and feasible. At the same time, affordable housing units need to be built all across the community so that low-income persons do not continue to be segregated in the Southern Sector of the city.
Tom Leppert or Ed Oakley will be elected as our new mayor next Saturday. I hope they are reading these reports and paying attention. To be really relevant and effective our next mayor will need an aggressive plan to challenge our current very negative situation and to overcome it with bright new designs for our next generation as a city.
Check out part one at: http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/dn/
latestnews/stories/061007dnentapt_overview.2e85b2c8.html. You can find the second part on the paper's website today.
The challenge of providing adequate housing stock for the expanding population of a growing urban community like Dallas is enormous and requires a courageous public commitment to be successful. Political will, creative leadership, various, often complicated funding tools and the willingness to do the right thing for the entire community, no matter what the political consequences, are all essential ingredients to any successful housing strategy.
Our experience here at CDM in attempting to develop affordable units to meet part of the growing need has been very instructive. Here a just a few of the lessons we've learned over the past six years:
- Deals take too long--one of our largest, mixed use, mixed income projects that we are planning to build in East Dallas has been underway for over 5 years! The frustrations have been incredible and daily. Only non-profit developers like us will have the patience to stay with deals like this one, and the jury is still out on whether or not we will actually close into construction.
- Every project is enormously complicated from a financial standpoint. Layer upon layer of financing of various kinds are involved in all of our projects. Pre-development funds are scarce. Interim financing is complicated and permanent financing at the conclusion of projects is never easy or certain.
- Public involvement, usually essential for any successful project, is almost always a struggle to acquire and requires lots and lots of patience and determination. If and when it arrives, it is generally too little to assure a deal's success.
- Timing presents many challenges. Acquiring and holding property is difficult for non-profit developers in areas where for-profit companies just don't want to work due to the number of challenges that are not present in easier-to-develop, suburban areas. Marketing and property management services that are necessary to lease up projects and operate them in a high quality manner also add costs to projects that often come to market on razor thin profit margins.
Just recounting a few of the most common hurdles we face in attempting to bring high-quality, affordable housing to our market makes me wonder why we stay at it!
Of course the answer is people, our neighbors. The report makes it clear that the economy of the entire community depends upon the continued and increased development of housing stock for our growing workforce.
A couple of important facts surfaced in the first part of the housing report. Both are extremely troubling.
First, 42% of Dallas households are "cost-burdened,' that is they pay over 30% of their income on housing costs. That's an amazing number, especially in a city that is tearing down thousands of affordable units and replacing them with upscale, expensive homes, condos and luxury apartment developments.
Second, the current trend lines for median income and home values are not good news. Median income here in Dallas in 1990 was $27,469 with the median cost of a home at $78,300. By 2000, income rose to $37,628 and home values were up to $94,456. In 2005, median income actually slipped to $36,403 while home costs continued to rise to $120,900.
For things to change in Dallas, and especially in our inner city neighborhoods, free market forces must be supported by public plans and policies that make new development possible and feasible. At the same time, affordable housing units need to be built all across the community so that low-income persons do not continue to be segregated in the Southern Sector of the city.
Tom Leppert or Ed Oakley will be elected as our new mayor next Saturday. I hope they are reading these reports and paying attention. To be really relevant and effective our next mayor will need an aggressive plan to challenge our current very negative situation and to overcome it with bright new designs for our next generation as a city.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)

