No, I’m not talking about the residents who live there, I’m talking about the City of Madison. So, we’re probably going to bid at the auction for the “Hauk Properties”. (It still needs council approval.) That is likely a very responsible decision given the alternatives. I feel comfortable with that decision. Problem is, what if we end up with the properties, then what?
The City and private property owners have a pretty long history of taking a low-income area, doing wholesale evictions for any infraction, enticing people to move with relatively low “incentives”, creating housing that people who previously lived there can’t afford or rehabbing the properties, moving people around until they get too frustrated to stay and then if they are persistent, making tenants re-apply to live in their old apartments and then denying them based on strict screening criteria. Essentially, destroying the sense of community that exists and the support networks of the people who live there.
My memory starts with the Vera Court project . . . and stings most over the Broadway-Simpson area with the Waunona Woods one-time affordable condos that the city poured money into. Now doctors live on the lake and former residents received up to $100,000 or more in profits after living in the housing less than 5 years . . . all because of the City’s affordable housing efforts.
So, how are we going to handle Allied Drive? That still remains a mystery.
Homeownership vs Rental/Level of Affordability
Everyone seems to agree we need some level of homeownership in order to get more stability in the neighborhood – I’m not sure that is the only way to obtain stability – but it is one way. The bigger questions are:
a. What percentage of housing will be homeownership and what percentage will remain rental?
b. Will any of the homeownership opportunities be affordable to the people who currently live in the rentals on Allied Drive? Or will new people have to move to Allied Drive to replace the displaced renters? (Or will the City just define the “Allied Drive area” as a much larger area to give the appearance of serving people in the “area”?)
c. Will the rentals being torn down (a large amount of three bedrooms) be replaced with similar bedroom sized rental units? Or will they be replaced with one and two bedrooms so we reduce the size and number of families that can live on Allied Drive, displacing more residents? (And if we do that, what is the point of investing in the infrastructure for Boys and Girls Club and other programs for youth?)
The staff and Alder Golden assure us that the answers to these questions will come this summer after a design charette they are doing with the residents in July. I agree, we need to get input from residents. However, that gives little comfort to many of us on all ends of the political spectrum. Some believe we should buy the properties and just tear them all down immediately cuz there is crime!! Others, like me, believe we need a solid plan so we don’t just do what we’ve done to the other low-income neighborhoods.
Management Plan
So, what will that management plan look like? If we buy the properties, what happens to the people who live in those units right now? Will those residents remain in the neighborhood? How long will we hold and manage the properties? What kind of repairs will we need to make and what will that cost? Will we be seeking new tenants to fill the vacancies or non-renewing and letting people go as their leases expire? Who will manage the properties, the CDA or a private company that we hire? Where will the operating costs come from to keep these properties? etc. etc. etc.
While there are many questions, one thing is clear: We have a tremendous opportunity before us. But also a tremendous opportunity to screw this up. Let’s hope we get it right this time and not, once again, rearrange the placement of one of our “pockets of poverty” within the City of Madison.
