Open Government Project
A Government Watchdog Group
State of Texas
City of Galveston
Public Interest Groups
"Public Housing and Section 8 have been Segregated and Discriminatory since
their creation, despite Laws to the Contrary!"
by David Stanowski
23 November 2011
Our most recent article addressed the question "Why is HUD allowing the GHA to implement a plan that will blatantly violate the Fair Housing Act".
The following article presents excerpts from "Long Overdue: Desegregation Litigation and Next Steps To End Discrimination and Segregation in the Public Housing and Section 8 Existing Housing Programs", by Professor Florence Wagman Roisman, of Indiana University, an excellent review and summary of HUD's long history of allowing local housing authorities to maintain segregated Public Housing schemes like the one currently proposed in Galveston.
As Catherine Austin Fitts explained in our previous article, since the real purpose of HUD is to generate "fees for our friends"; there is little institutional concern or commitment to desegregation!
Excerpts from "Long Overdue: Desegregation Litigation and Next Steps To End Discrimination and Segregation in the Public Housing and Section 8 Existing Housing Programs", by Professor Florence Wagman Roisman:
Despite this plethora of legal requirements, housing programs administered by Federal, State, and local government agencies consistently have been characterized by pervasive racial discrimination and segregation. In particular, residents of both public and Section 8 Existing housing still suffer separate and unequal treatment on the basis of race. (Coulibaly, Green, and James, 1998). HUD has acknowledged the existence of “a profoundly disturbing pattern of racial disparities within the public housing system:” Most African-American public housing residents live in largely African-American and poor communities, whereas Whites, living in elderly housing, typically live in areas with large numbers of Whites who are not poor. (U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, 1994a: Foreword, 1995.) Page 1
In general, HUD has helped to create and exacerbate these conditions (Coulibaly, Green, and James, 1998; Massey and Denton, 1993; Roisman, 1995a, 1995b). The few desegregative steps HUD has taken generally have been motivated by civil rights suits filed against the Department. Page 2
Several more courts held HUD liable for intentional racial segregation and for failing to perform its duty “affirmatively to further” fair housing. Page 2
Second, HUD often has not performed
specific obligations imposed by settlements and court orders and has undercut its professed interest in desegregation in many other ways. Third, the relief HUD has provided has been inadequate in both quantity and quality. Page 3
Most HUD desegregative action has been taken where lawsuits were filed. These locations are determined not by where the need or violations are greatest but by serendipitous factors, notably the availability of counsel with skill, vision, and commitment to civil rights work (Kushner, 1992). Page 3
The Department has taken small desegregative steps relative to the need in each community and the harm that segregation has done. Page 4
Moreover, HUD frequently does not do what it has agreed or been ordered to do. Even after Clinton administration officials professed their dedication to desegregation, plaintiffs have found that HUD does not comply with consent decrees and court orders. Page 4
HUD has been egregiously derelict in enforcing the Affirmative Fair Housing Marketing Plans required in its own programs (Lazarus, 1993; U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, 1990; Goering, 1986; Office of Management and Budget, 1982; and Rubinowitz et al., 1974). The Department has not promulgated regulations implementing its duty affirmatively to further the policies of Title VIII and it has failed completely to carry out its obligation to assure fair housing in programs administered by other Federal agencies. HUD’s failure affirmatively to further fair housing in Low Income Housing Tax Credit developments is particularly important, since this program is the principal
source of new subsidized housing and its sponsors are forbidden to discriminate on the basis of Section 8 status.
Public housing and Section 8 have been segregated and discriminatory since their creation, despite laws to the contrary. It is long past time for HUD to act firmly, directly, and swiftly to undo and redress the shameful and destructive segregation and discrimination that it has fostered in its own programs. Page 8
HUD’s recent Title VI review of the Housing Authority of the City of Galveston (GHA) Texas, takes a different view. HUD found that GHA had “failed to meet its duty to take affirmative measures to remove the effects of siting its large, originally de jure segregated, family public housing projects in neighborhoods that either shared the racial and national origin characteristics of the projects or were uninhabited....”
“Once Title VI became effective,” HUD determined, “GHA had, and continues to
have, an obligation to take reasonable action to remove or overcome the consequences of its previous segregation.” HUD found that “the failure of GHA and GRACE [its subsidiary] to promote the development of public housing opportunities outside minority-concentrated areas and their recent sale of properties outside such
areas substantially impairs their ability to provide housing in a manner which is consistent with Title VI and HUD’s implementing regulations. Through its failure to provide family public housing in non-minority areas and its sale of properties located in non-minority areas, GHA ... subjects its tenants to segregation and separate treatment ... in violation of 24 C.F.R.”1.4(b)(1)(iii). and violated 6(i) and (ii). (U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, 1997b: 1–2–1–5.) Page 11
Desegregation Suits in Which HUD Is a Defendant Page 24
Lists 28 cities including Galveston’s 1997 Etheridge v GHA
Read Entire Article: