Poor Families Recieve 'Supervouchers' To Rent In City's Priciest Buildings (Chicago Gold Coast)

[big_dog]

Source: Crains Business Journal

The high-rise at 500 N. Lake Shore Drive is the second-most expensive in the city, with rents for a one-bedroom apartment approaching $3,000 a month, well beyond the reach of most Chicago residents.

But that's not too much for the Chicago Housing Authority, which has used federal tax dollars to pick up most of the tab for four lucky residents in the year-old building, with its sweeping views of Lake Michigan, a concierge and a dog-grooming center.

The tenants moved in over the past two years as part of a push by the CHA to expand its housing voucher program so that more low-income residents can leave the city's roughest neighborhoods and start a new life in places with low poverty and crime and close to good schools and jobs. Some building owners are happy for the business. Justin Elliott, principal at Chicago-based Marc Realty Residential, has few complaints after the CHA approved supervouchers for 36 leases this year and last in a 96-unit building Marc owned at 2300 S. Michigan Ave. Marc recently sold the building, which had the most supervouchers by far among all properties, according to the CHA. “All in all, we viewed this as a very positive experience,” Mr. Elliott says.

Read more: http://www.chicagobusiness.com/article/20140726/ISSUE01/307269984/poor-families-use-supervouchers-to-rent-in-citys-priciest-buildings

---

the masters of our universe looking for ways to legally hire some in house help?

[ForgoTheConsequence]

1. Breaking News!!!!

A few working poor people get to have nice apartments.


I'm outraged!

[pnwmom]

10. A few working people in luxury apartments means several more remain homeless

and on the waiting list.

Does that make sense?

[Gormy Cuss]

21. That's not true if CHA got a special allocation for this type of placement.

I don't know the particulars of this funding source but it may be part of a HUD income integration experiment. CHA participated in Moving to Opportunities ( http://wikipedia.org/wiki/Moving_to_Opportunity) one of the larger evaluations designed to allow housing voucher holders the opportunity to move to neighborhoods with lower concentrations of poverty as a way to improve the family's overall quality of life. Key quality of life findings from MTO include lower obesity and diabetes rates, lower reported stress and other mental health markers.

There's also a long history of using developer set-asides to offer lower income families the chance to live in mixed income communities.

IOW, there's nothing particularly outrageous about moving a few local income families into higher income rentals.

[pnwmom]

24. This wasn't a developer set-aside, according to the article.

And it didn't say anything about special HUD money.

But "lower concentrations of poverty" doesn't exclude middle class areas.

[Gormy Cuss]

29. In 2010 CHA got permission to exceed the reimbursement cap in certain neighborhoods

where there is little if any affordable housing. In certain downtown areas HUD will reimburse for up to 300% of the Fair Market Rent rate.
Again, I haven't found the enabling rule so I don't know the details but this appears to be a special circumstance exception and CHA is indeed getting ADDITIONAL funds to make these rentals possibles, therefore the number of successful families in the HCV (vouchers) program is either neutral or slightly higher because this special funding makes it possible for voucher holders to find units in these areas.

Evaluating HUD programs used to be my job. I know most of the key researchers who worked on MTO for example. Alas, I'm not working in that area anymore and don't have easy access to the current program information.

[pnwmom]

33. Okay, so it's the Federal taxpayers who will pay for luxury apartments instead of

middle class apartments for people on the list. Even so, they didn't have to go as high as 300% to qualify for the funds. They could have gone to 150% or even less and still qualified for the Federal funds.

There is something tone deaf about this decision.

What do you think the middle class Federal taxpayer from Cleveland, living in his $900 a month apartment, thinks when he hears a federal program is paying for Section 8 housing in $3,000 lake view apartments in Chicago?

This is the kind of issue that drives middle class voters into the arms of the Rethugs.

[zeemike]

34. And you can bet they will use it too.

I would bet that half the right wing sites have this story up by now...just another thing to show why we should do away with public assistance.

[pnwmom]

35. I don't think we should do away with public assistance, but we should spend it wisely.

I would support a minimum income, if that's what you're talking about.

[zeemike]

36. Well I would too.

But the right wants to eliminate all public assistance and will use this as an example of it not working and wasting money...

[Gormy Cuss]

38. If the middle class apartment owners would take vouchers, there'd be no need for these.

Where there is tone deafness is in the link at the OP, presenting this as if CHA actually wants to house people in expensive lake shore units. Far from it. They want to house people in all city neighborhoods, not just the racial and economic ghettos. Chicago had an ugly history of this and was one of the first big cities to try novel remedies (Google "Gautreaux v. Chicago.&quot

One of the biggest problems with housing vouchers is that after waiting for years to make your way to the top of the waiting list, many potential tenants find no housing available. It's a crisis and that's exactly how it should be presented to Mr. $900 in Cleveland who probably thinks HUD pays too much in all the expensive metros. Comparing Cleveland rents to Chicago rents is an apples to oranges exercise. There's need for many, many more affordable housing units in most of the country. Currently housing voucher programs are the largest programs by HUD to address that.

There is no public or political interest in the government developing low income housing on a wide scale again because of the failures of some high density, post-WWII public housing developments in Chicago, St. Louis, and a few other big cities. All agree that lower density public housing is better for communities and most agree that mixed income, lower density housing is the current best practice. The problem is lower density housing costs more per unit to produce and maintain than high density, and that means that even in the existing programs to replace old high density housing, the newer subsidized housing contains far fewer units.

[pnwmom]

40. . The average rental in Chicago is less than $900. How would those renters feel

if they knew that people on section 8 were being subsidized for $3,000 apartments?

Who do you think they'll blame? The government for "wasting money"?

Or the owners of apartment buildings?

[zeemike]

42. My prediction above came true.

I just received this from a right winger in email...they did not take long to make an outrage out of it...

Luxury Section 8 Housing on Chicago Lakeshore

A piece in Crain’s Chicago Business illustrates how liberal “fairness” is applied to housing:

The high-rise at 500 N. Lake Shore Drive is the second-most expensive in the city, with rents for a one-bedroom apartment approaching $3,000 a month, well beyond the reach of most Chicago residents...bla bla bla you know the rest.

[pnwmom]

43. Yup. Progressives, especially well-off progressives, can be incredibly tone deaf. n/t

[Gormy Cuss]

45. You can't please everyone.

Why should those renters BLAME anyone, unless they're blaming poor people for stealing their money already?

Over several decades I've explained the hows and whys of poverty assistance programs to people who started from a position that the government was wasting money or the low income people shouldn't get help because the "middle class" people are struggling to pay their own way. Sometimes people understand it, sometimes they need someone else to explain it. Sometimes they just hate people who get assistance or hate the government.

[pnwmom]

46. There isn't a good way to explain to most non-wealthy people why you should spend $9K

to give luxury housing to three families when you could use the same money and get nice apartments for six -- and there are tens of thousands of people on the waiting list.

[Gormy Cuss]

48. You're missing the point: the money wouldn't get six nice apartments

because there aren't enough units in the neighborhoods available to tenants with vouchers. If there were CHA wouldn't have a prayer of getting special permission to do this. In fact, the waiting list demonstrates that there aren't enough units available period.
What CHA did was leverage funding to increase the available housing stock.

As far as not being able to explain it to "non-wealthy people," sorry but that's assuming that all middle and lower income people aren't intelligent enough to understand it. That's just silly and untrue.

There certainly are some people who are unwilling to listen but they exist across all income levels.

[pnwmom]

49. If by neighborhood you mean, the "other lake view apts. in Lake view", you may

be right. But there are plenty of neighborhoods in the city of Chicago with middle class apartments. If Lake View is too expensive, they can live in many other areas.

I give enough credit to middle and lower income people to believe they would realize that.

[Gormy Cuss]

50. Are there plenty of other neighborhoods with landlords just waiting to sign up HCV tenants?

Ask people on the waiting list. I'm sure they know that the answer is no.

[pnwmom]

51. The waiting list is also caused by lack of funds. So when they spend the money on luxury

apartments, there is that much less money available for the rest of the people on the list.

[Gormy Cuss]

55. Again, once and for all, there aren't enough units available period.

The only way the waiting lists will be shortened significantly is to increase the number of rentals. Increasing the dollars per rental would help some (and if these Lake Shore drive placements are successful that's some ammo for increasing voucher caps) but the main problem is and always has been convincing enough owners to participate in the program and abide by its rules for habitability standards.

IMO expecting the private market to fill the affordable housing gap is wrong-headed. We need large scale, government-backed production of subsidized rental housing. After public housing construction waned, HUD sponsored such privately owned, publicly subsidized rental under programs such as section 236. That approach again would help fill the gap.

[pnwmom]

56. We wouldn't need much subsidized housing if the minimum wage was $15 or more.

That's the real solution -- not spending money on subsidies that wouldn't be necessary if employers were required to pay a living wage.

[jamzrockz]

53. Who apart from the rich landlords

of these apartment buildings are you pleasing? Even the poor families being helped would wish the govt didn't spend that much money on them for housing. The vast majority of people wouldn't live in those places even if they had the money. This is just bad policy that will hurt govt programs in the future.

[Fred Sanders]

12. Hold the phone, those were poor people I was living beside these past months? They seemed like

Very nice people, not like real poor people at all.........I want them out!

[Wait Wut]

2. Or...

...giving a few families a chance to live in a safer neighborhood with better schools. If they get hired by any of the wealthier tenants, they'll be saving money on transportation to work along with the travel time that they can use to spend with their kids.

[big_dog]

3. or the whole family will be working 24hrs a day taking care of rich folks kids at sub minimum wage

i hope there is a really thorough review process on the paperwork so the reciepients dont get exploited

[Wait Wut]

4. They probably aren't forced to live there.

I think the pros far outweigh the cons. Their kids will have less of a chance of getting shot while they sleep. They'll be safer playing at a playground.

Your scenario sounds farfetched. You assume that these families are idiots and can't make decisions for themselves. I disagree. There are other job opportunities in the areas, as well. From what I've read, no one is forcing them to be nannies. You seem to be reaching for a conclusion that all wealthy people are evil.

[big_dog]

5. who knows in these types of situations

Last edited Mon Jul 28, 2014, 08:11 PM - Edit history (2)

i've had family members mugged at the U of Chicago so there areas that are really bad, but is this really the best way to run the program? i find it hard to believe that there are no other housing options, how about north before you get up by Evanston and Northwestern U. very nice neighborhood lots of meat plant workers etc.

[Wait Wut]

7. The one was a new building.

Probably a lot of vacancies at the beginning. Location probably has a lot to do with it. Being closer to downtown offers more employment opportunities than the North Shore. My grandmother and aunt both lived on the North Shore. The only jobs available to would have been housekeeping, nanny, gardener, etc. If you're going to give a family a second chance, you should probably take everything into consideration. It looks like they're trying to do that.

I hope it catches on and more families get this chance. It may not be tearing the walls of class separation down, but it is installing a window.

[big_dog]

8. good points all, but should the Chicago Housing Authority be an employment coach as well?

Last edited Mon Jul 28, 2014, 07:37 PM - Edit history (1)

i guess this fits with the 'one stop shopping' approach that have got a lot of the working poor and veterans out of homelessness. it seems that the CHA will have to dovetail qualified applicatants to this situation, and force folks who dont have such attributes or backgrounds to sub standard living areas... makes me nervous as who will picking and choosing who gets these super vouchers, why not give first to domestic violence survivors, child gun violence survivors, Purple Heart reciepients, Medal of Honor winners and Gold Star Moms who have been living through hard times?

[Wait Wut]

18. It isn't a perfect world.

I wish it was possible to take all low income and poor families and give them a second chance. Fact is, the circle of violence, abuse, etc. is difficult to break. When I see 50 year old women encouraging their children to beat the crap out of each other, I'm going to assume they wouldn't be a good candidate for the program. Parents on YouTube getting their kids high? Nope. On the other hand, a single mom with two kids that are both good students living in one of the most dangerous areas of Chicago, get them the hell out of there. Hopefully, they'll be part of the team that finds a realistic fix in the future.

It isn't perfect. But, it could be as close to perfect as we can get for a handful of families.

It's a giant mess, BD, and depressing as hell. I like seeing small victories and pieces of progress. It tells me that people are paying attention and are trying to come up with solutions. They won't all work. The projects themselves had good intentions, but it didn't work out the way everyone had hoped.

We're losing too many kids. If this saves 5, it's worth it. I'm tired of seeing the faces of babies in the Trib.

[pnwmom]

13. For the families who sit on the waiting list, while federal money is wasted on apartments with

lake views for others, the cons of this policy strongly outweigh the pros.

[Gormy Cuss]

39. The families are living in their own units, not in-laws.

They aren't there to be maids and sitters for the market rent tenants.

[Sam1]

6. Or is this like the deal in New York where

the owner gets tax breaks for reserving a few apartments for poor people and gives them a separate entrance on the side of the building and no access to the amenities. see the link

http://wemeantwell.com/blog/2014/07/28/the-poor-door-building-has-separate-entrances-for-rich-and-poor/

[Lucky Luciano]

44. Very similar, but Chicago seems to pay the rent directly whereas nyc

...gives generous tax breaks.

[pnwmom]

9. Why would they do that instead of using the $3K to put 2 families in $1500 a month apts?

(Or, if average rents are close to $2K, then using $6K for 3 families) They have a waiting list for subsidized housing. So why would they use precious dollars in this way?

It just doesn't seem like a sensible use of dollars, and will make ordinary local taxpayers, who could never afford the rents themselves, resentful.

Yet some landlords say it's a mistake to use scarce tax dollars to pay ultra-high rents for a fortunate few when more than 15,000 people sit on the CHA's voucher waiting list.

“This is nuts,” says landlord Tony Rossi, president of Chicago-based RMK Management Corp., who describes himself as a liberal Democrat. “In a situation where you're dealing with a low-income person, do they really need a 25th-floor apartment with a lake view? It just doesn't make sense to me.”

I agree. Better two or three families in safe, middle class apartments than one in a luxury building.

[big_dog]

11. the explanation was that there is no afforable housing left inside the City of Chicago

plenty in Evanston, Park Forest, Naperville etc. i am sure

[pnwmom]

15. The article only says there is a lack of affordable housing in Downtown and Lake View.

So put them in moderately priced buildings in other parts of Chicago. It's not as if everywhere in Chicago is a slum except for Downtown and Lakeview.

[alcibiades_mystery]

17. That's a lot of nonsense

There are condos renting as apartments sitting vacant all over the North Side.

Park Forest? For goodness sake. I could find folks a nice condo/apartment a few minutes walk from the Brown Line in 15 minutes.

[big_dog]

19. there were jobs cutting meat right off Lake Shore on Sheridan

but it is way away from Downtown

[alcibiades_mystery]

23. There are plenty of job openings in Chicago right now

I'm mystified by what you're talking about.

Jobs cutting meat? Downtown?

[whathehell]

30. It's a twenty minute ride on the express bus that runs down Lakeshore. n/t

[big_dog]

41. i know, ive been on that bus many times

mostly for cub games though when visiting friends

[closeupready]

28. As a former resident, that's them blowing smoke up your ass.

Chicago is big and there are plenty of areas with solid, affordable housing.

[Sam1]

54. Building owner may be somebodies "son-in-law."

[alcibiades_mystery]

14. The number of problems I have with this:

ZERO.

- Chicago resident and homeowner.

[pnwmom]

16. If you were one of the families on the long waiting list,

who knew that more families could have been housed in moderately priced housing with the same money -- and you could be closer to the top of the waiting list -- would you have no problem seeing the money spent on luxury apartments for a few, instead?

[valerief]

20. You know how rent-controlled apartments have always gone to the people who least need

rent control? I wonder if it's the same kind of deal. College students of the well-off.

Of course, maybe they're *real* people who need subsidies, but I'm too much of a skeptic to take that at face value.

[big_dog]

22. i would give some of them to families of innocent kids who survived gun violence

sure would make for interesting communal living along with the building concierge and doggie day care

[closeupready]

26. Yes, exactly, or people who want favors paid back.

[closeupready]

25. I'm sorry, but I think this is completely ridiculous.

And suspect.

[pnwmom]

27. Meanwhile, 47,000 families to be purged from the Chicago Housing Authority list.

So while a few get luxury apartments, 47,000 are purged.

http://www.thinkincstrategy.com/2013/09/12/47000-families-to-be-purged-from-chicago-housing-authority-wait-list/

The CHI housing coalition highlighted that despite receiving millions in federal and city replacement housing grants annually, there has been no accountability or transparency for where these funds are actually going.

SNIP

More than 13,000 Chicago families have been deprived of already-funded housing choice vouchers with no explanation.
More than 47,000 families are scheduled to be purged from the CHA housing waiting list.

74% of replacement units delivered by CHA during the Plan have been brought back into occupancy through rehabilitation compared with only 12% from new construction following demolition.

“I am not the only person struggling today. There is a growing gap between real incomes and real rents which is putting the squeeze on more and more families in Chicago. Currently, a worker needs to make $18.11/ hour to afford the average two-bedroom in Chicago, and 16,000 CPS students experience homelessness annually, which makes it more important than ever that the Agency deliver on its commitment to provide low-rent housing options,” said Mary Nelson, CHA waiting list, homeless.

[whathehell]

31. Just tell me they're not installing a "poor door" like they did in New York..

to keep the peasants from rubbing elbows with their betters.

[Brigid]

32. So what happened to all that property on the South Side . . .

Where the Robert Taylor Homes used to be? What happened to that?

[MiniMe]

37. Damn Obama vouchers

[DeSwiss]

47. This has Rahm-Stink all over it. n/t

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

52. I want everyone to go and look up a HUD program called the Family Self Sufficency Program.

Go look it up and report back, please.

Thanks.

[AngryAmish]

57. This being Chicago these apartments went to relatives and supporters

Of those who have clout.

Maybe a cha exec has a girlfriend.

It is the Chicago way.

BTW, there is no shortage of rental housing in Chicago.