Westchester affordable housing: Appeals court ruling against county puts $7.4M in aid at risk
Photo credit: Rory Glaeseman | Westchester County Executive Rob Astorino speaks with residents in Somers about his efforts and dealings with the federal government over affordable housing in the county. (Feb. 27, 2013)
In the decision from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, the judges said that they would not allow the county "to shirk its voluntarily agreed to obligations, made less than four years ago," a reference to Westchester's landmark court settlement with federal officials regarding access to affordable housing.Westchester is running afoul of a key point in the court-mandated agreement to build affordable housing, according to a ruling Friday morning from a federal appeals court, which puts at risk $7.4 million in federal aid that was earmarked for the county.
The federal government has been pushing the county to create what is known as source-of-income legislation that requires landlords to not discriminate against prospective tenants based on how they would pay rent. Such a law would require landlords to accept tenants who pay their rents using sources such as Social Security benefits or any form of state or federal public assistance, including Section 8 vouchers.
In its ruling, the court chastised Westchester County Executive Rob Astorino for his June 2010 decision to veto a source-of-income bill that came across his desk. The ruling also brushed off Astorino's argument that passing the legislation would have negatively affected the sovereignty of municipalities to govern themselves in a county that supports home rule.
"The County Executive remains free to veto the legislation, but if he does so, the County will be in breach of the consent decree and must live with the consequences of that choice," the judges warned in their decision.
COUNTY POLS PUT BLAME ON ONE ANOTHER
In response to the ruling, Astorino said in a statement that his opposition to a source-of-income legislation is the broad scope of such a law.
"My objection has been turning this worthwhile voluntary program into a mandatory one that would compel every owner of a house or apartment to do business with the federal government . . . upon a tenant's presentation of a Section 8 voucher," Astorino said. "I also felt that the source-of-income legislation would be detrimental to the housing settlement because it would act as a disincentive for developers to build affordable housing."
The Republican county executive added that last August, he asked for the bill to be reintroduced and that has not been done, so "the matter is now in the hands of the Board of Legislators."
Catherine Borgia (D-Ossining), who is chairwoman of the Legislature's Government Operations Committee, countered that the board never acted on Astorino's request because "it seemed like a foolish exercise for us to reintroduce legislation that he already vetoed."
"After today's ruling, I think it's really clear that the ball is back in the county executive's court," said Borgia, whose committee provides oversight on housing issues.
She added that it would be a "disaster" to lose the $7.4 million federal Community Development Block Grant Funds, which are used for infrastructure improvements in areas of Westchester with the highest numbers of low income residents.
HUD officials declined to comment.
HUD SETTLEMENT LED TO MULTIPLE DISPUTES
Last month, officials from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development threatened to withhold $7.4 million in aid unless Astorino complies with their interpretation of the county's settlement with the agency by April 25. By that deadline, HUD wants Astorino to present how he plans to advocate on behalf of source-of-income legislation and to supply an analysis of segregation in Westchester that offers solutions for addressing the issue.
The provision involving the housing subsidy isn't the only portion of the settlement that HUD and Astorino have disagreed on.
HUD also contends Astorino is legally obligated to take action against Westchester County communities that have exclusionary zoning -- for example, zoning codes that require large lots, which tend to make housing too expensive for working-class families. They want Astorino to agree to sue cities, towns and villages that won't cooperate in changing their zoning laws.
Astorino and his lieutenants tend not to dispute what is in the settlement. Rather, they say there aren't any Westchester communities with exclusionary zoning, so no action is warranted. The county has submitted documentation supporting that stance. HUD has rejected the documentation as misleading.
County officials have said that they are ahead of schedule in regard to a third part of the settlement: An agreement to facilitate construction of as many 750 affordable housing units in 31 mostly white communities by 2016. The county already has built 305 units, which is more than the settlement requires, at this point, Astorino's office contends.
Astorino won the county executive job four years ago in part by campaigning aggressively against the HUD settlement, which had been signed by incumbent Democrat Andy Spano in 2009.
No comments:
Post a Comment