The Bloomberg administration has quietly begun charging rent to homeless families who live in publicly run shelters. A flier posted in one shelter last week warned residents in bold, underlined type, “Failure to make the required contributions could result in the loss of your family’s temporary housing.”
City officials said the new rent requirement had been in the works since a 2007 state audit that forced them to pay back $2.4 million in state housing aid that should have been covered by homeless families with income. They argued that homeless people with income should be expected to pay for a portion of their shelter costs, a model that echoes the federal Section 8 housing voucher program.
Quote:
“They are taking money from them that could otherwise be used to help themselves get out of the shelter system,” agreed Arnold S. Cohen, the president and chief executive of the Partnership for the Homeless. “We’re dealing with the poorest people, the people who are the most in need, and we’re asking them to pay for a shelter of last resort.
“Families have been told to pay up or get out,” said Steven Banks, the attorney in chief for the Legal Aid Society. “The policy is poorly conceived, but even more alarmingly, it’s being poorly executed. What is happening is that we have seen cases of families being unilaterally told, without any notice of how the rent was calculated, that they must pay certain amounts of rent or leave the shelter..
Source: New York Times
Oppressing the poor is not good. Watch out, here comes trouble!
ReplyDeleteSick/Sad
ReplyDeleteA lot of people are going to be dying from starvation and hypothermia next Winter. :(
ReplyDeleteCharity will be flying out the window as those who used to give have to worry about themselves soon. Too bad all the resources go to invasions, death and occupations. Lies and cruelty instead of love and caring always.
If the people just would wake up to the banker BS all the poor could be clothed and fed tomorrow. This is 2009 and we are every bit as pathetic as humans 3000 years ago, or worse. Nothing has changed. Fake religions for the gullible masses, control, drum beating, flag waiving ... blah.
In almost all subsidized housing, the tenant pays 30% of their "adjusted" gross income, or 10% of their "gross income". There is such a thing as a "zero income tenant". In this case, the tenant pays no "TC" or tenant contribution at all. Under USDA Rural Development Rental Assistance (Section 515), the tenant even receives a utility allowance, which is either deducted from any TC they might pay, or is mailed to them. Under USDA-RD, and in some cases HUD, it is possible for a zero income tenant to live free, and get the utility allowance as well. Even a tenant with a tiny income, say $300.00 per month can live for next to nothing in housing if "Otherwise" qualified, and "otherwise" is very important! Being a drug dealer, or a doer of domestic violence or other non-social behavior is what cuts many of the "otherwise qualified" out. One bad thing about subsidized housing is that in a big city like New York, there is a lot more on the waiting list than housing that is available. In the outter reaches more rural areas, there are many apartment complexes that are either owned privately, or is co-opted with the city or county. So this all depends on the people's income (if any), and their ability to live in a social standing that is acceptable to a resident manager, or property management company. Bottom line: Income based housing is available for the deserving!
ReplyDelete"There are no free lunches."
ReplyDelete"One bad thing about subsidized housing is that in a big city like New York, there is a lot more on the waiting list than housing that is available."
ReplyDelete"Bottom line: Income based housing is available for the deserving!"
Which is it?