Author Archives: d.c. forrd

#IZFAIL

New Years Resolution 2025: Replace IZ with Social Housing

Leave a reply

The data and facts shared by the recent DC Auditor report on the failed 15-year Inclusionary Zoning program reveal the critical mismatch between the supply and demand for Inclusionary Zoning (IZ) units and systemic flaws in the program’s implementation, flaws that demonstrate that IZ should be replaced with Social Housing.

Here are the key points distilled from the the Auditor’s report and some broader implications:

Key Issues:

  1. Waitlist Disparity:
    • 18,000 households are on the IZ waitlist for only 2,000 units. This immense gap underscores the severe shortage of affordable housing options within the program.
    • Most waitlisted families require 3+ bedroom units, yet 65% of available IZ units are designed for single individuals, illustrating a misalignment between what’s being built and actual housing needs.
  2. Affordability Concerns:
    • Households participating in IZ are spending up to 50% of their income on housing, which is well above the affordability threshold and violates the program’s intent, showing the IZ program is not delivering truly affordable options for the targeted population.
  3. Vacancy Loopholes:
    • Developers gain the benefit of increased luxury density but are reportedly leaving IZ units vacant. This loophole undermines the purpose of the program and enables profit-driven motives to overshadow public interest.
  4. Lengthy Move-In Times:
    • The average 13-month waiting period to move into an IZ unit adds further strain on families and individuals already struggling to find stable housing.

Implications:

  • The Auditor’s Report demonstrates that the IZ program’s design and enforcement mechanisms are failing to address the actual housing crisis, favoring developer interests (providing lots more luxury density) over community needs (far too little “affordable” housing that isn’t truly affordable or targeted for families).

SO WHAT TO DO?!?

Focusing on social housing as the alternative to Inclusionary Zoning (IZ) will help address the structural issues highlighted by the Auditor’s startling IZ report. Social Housing, unlike IZ, prioritizes truly affordable, community-driven housing units that serves DC in the most efficient and reliable way.

Why Social Housing is the Solution

  1. Meeting Actual Demand:
    • Unlike IZ units, which are misaligned with household needs (e.g., 65% for singles while most families require 3+ bedrooms), social housing can be designed to cater directly to the demographics of the community, particularly families.
  2. Affordability Without Profit Motives:
    • Social housing operates outside the speculative market. Rents or costs are capped based on household income, ensuring no family pays more than 30% of their income on housing.
  3. No Vacant Units:
    • Social housing prioritizes occupancy. Units are not held vacant for profit-driven reasons but are allocated to households in need, ensuring that public resources are fully utilized.
  4. Community Stability:
    • Social housing fosters long-term stability by providing permanent, affordable housing rather than temporary or precarious arrangements like IZ units.
  5. Faster Access:
    • A well-managed social housing program avoids the excessive bureaucracy and delays of IZ, offering faster solutions to families on waitlists.
  6. Public Accountability:
    • Social housing is owned and managed by public entities or non-profits accountable to the community, rather than private developers prioritizing luxury profits.

Proposed Actions

  1. Advocate for Social Housing Pilot Projects:
    • Identify underutilized public land or existing properties that can be converted into social housing. Use these pilot projects (such as at 1617 U Street) to demonstrate the feasibility and effectiveness of social housing.
  2. Reallocate IZ Resources:
    • Redirect funds and incentives currently given to developers under IZ toward building and maintaining social housing units.
  3. Ensure Funding:
    • Leverage public financing (bonds, taxes on luxury developments, or inclusion of social housing in federal and state housing grants) to sustainably fund social housing projects.
  4. Prioritize Community Input:
    • Establish community boards to oversee social housing initiatives, ensuring developments meet local needs and maintain public trust.

Message for Advocacy

“Our current housing policies, like Inclusionary Zoning, are failing our communities. With 18,000 families on the waitlist for only 2,000 units—most of which are not even family-sized—it’s clear that the IZ program is not a solution. Social housing offers an alternative: truly affordable, stable, and community-oriented homes.

By moving away from developer-driven models and embracing public, accountable housing solutions, we can address the housing crisis and create a future where everyone has a place to call home. Let’s stop prioritizing luxury density and start prioritizing people. It’s time to invest in social housing.”

A PILOT AT 1617U STREET — See the latest filing here: https://app.dcoz.dc.gov/CaseReport/ViewExhibit.aspx?exhibitId=360852

HOW BAD IS IZ?!?

See the charts below to see IZ housing costs based on the DMV’s Area Median Income using the Auditor’s discovery that some IZ participants are paying 50% of their income to real estate developers for their “affordable” IZ unit.

I’m sorry Adams Morgan Fwd: Councilmember — Seeking Assistance —> Fwd: Thanks, One last clarification —> Re: Capricious & Harmful Re: [adamsmorgan] On the Col Rd plan: Class of People Most Impacted

Leave a reply
I'm sorry we don't have an Executive or Council that either listens or cares about our lived realities.

I'm sorry to all the seniors who won't be able “to adjust” to having less access to bus stops as our Councilmember suggests below.  Or for those with disabilities. Or families.

I'm sorry we now have less bus stops based on some arbitrary reading of statistics by some bureaucrats and interns at DDOT with no bearing on living in cities, let along a congested very busy commercial corridor like ColRd.

I'm sorry the DC Office of “Planning” has pushed #buildmore inducing substantial population growth (displacement & replacement) with no impact study all while cutting public transportation options.

I'm sorry that all of these fools have broken our city.

No thanks!

Chris O.

———- Forwarded message ———
From: Nadeau, Brianne K. (Council) <BNadeau@dccouncil.gov>
Date: Thu, Sep 19, 2024 at 4:55 PM
Subject: RE: Councilmember — Seeking Assistance —> Fwd: Thanks, One last clarification —> Re: Capricious & Harmful Re: [adamsmorgan] On the Col Rd plan: Class of People Most Impacted
To: Chris R. Otten <crotten2@gmail.com>
Cc: Meni, David (Council) <dmeni@dccouncil.gov>, Rivero, Niccole (Council) <nrivero@dccouncil.gov>, Nava, Maricela (Council) <mnava@dccouncil.gov>

Hi Chris. I received your message.


Whenever bus stops are change, it can be difficult for people to adjust at first. But this project will have a positive impact on bus riders because it is making the route more reliable and safe. There was a great deal of community engagement on the project, and I have been closely monitoring its implementation.

 

All the best,


Brianne

 

From: Chris R. Otten <crotten2@gmail.com>
Sent: Thursday, September 19, 2024 4:39 PM
To: Nadeau, Brianne K. (Council) <BNadeau@dccouncil.gov>
Cc: Meni, David (Council) <dmeni@dccouncil.gov>; Rivero, Niccole (Council) <nrivero@dccouncil.gov>; Nava, Maricela (Council) <mnava@dccouncil.gov>
Subject: Re: Councilmember — Seeking Assistance —> Fwd: Thanks, One last clarification —> Re: Capricious & Harmful Re: [adamsmorgan] On the Col Rd plan: Class of People Most Impacted

 

Will anyone at least acknowledge receipt of the email?

 

On Wed, Sep 18, 2024 at 11:48 AM Chris R. Otten <crotten2@gmail.com> wrote:

Dear Councilmember Nadeau,

I hope you are well and settling back into the fall Council session.

I’m reaching out regarding the Columbia Road Bus Priority project, which has generated significant concern among Ward 1 residents. I’ve been following this issue closely, as reflected in my correspondence with DDoT (included below), and I am troubled by the proposed elimination of bus stops along this busy commercial corridor.

The removal of these stops will have a particularly harmful impact on our most vulnerable neighbors—seniors, people with disabilities, and families with young children—many of whom rely heavily on accessible public transit. Given these concerns, I’m wondering if you might be able to weigh in on the issue.

It’s difficult to reconcile the city's push for increased housing density with simultaneous cuts to public bus access and services, which seem to run counter to the needs of a growing population. 

Your perspective and involvement could make a meaningful difference in addressing these concerns, and I hope you are working to assess the impact this project will have on our community.

Thank you for your time and consideration.

Chris Otten
Adams Morgan

 

 

 

 

 

 

———- Forwarded message ———
From: Chris R. Otten <crotten2@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, Jul 29, 2024 at 5:57 PM
Subject: Re: Thanks, One last clarification —> Re: Capricious & Harmful Re: [adamsmorgan] On the Col Rd plan: Class of People Most Impacted
To: Harrison, Kevin (DDOT) <Kevin.Harrison@dc.gov>
Cc: Carrington, James (DDOT) <james.carrington@dc.gov>, Sandra Reischel <sandrareischel@yahoo.com>, Virginia Johnson <dcvirginia@hotmail.com>

 

I'm sending this one last time. Mr. Harrison,

 

Are you ok?

 

Hoping to get one last answer below.

Please clarify perhaps why again you and DDoT may be using the “average” bus stop spacing number universally across the city regardless of “land uses” and density of any given area.  The result is less bus access to the very busy dense commercial corridor along Columbia Road for example.

 

Chris Otten

 

 

 

 

On Thu, Jul 25, 2024 at 1:33 PM Chris R. Otten <crotten2@gmail.com> wrote:

Kevin?

 

On Mon, Jul 22, 2024 at 1:52 PM Chris R. Otten <crotten2@gmail.com> wrote:

Kevin, Hi.

 

Please if you can rebut or send me an answer to what appears as my conclusion:

 

DDoT seems to be suggesting (through you as their representative) that the average bus stop spacing number is somehow a universal number to be applied anywhere in the city similarly, making the average bus stop spacing the absolute bus stop spacing for the whole city.

 

Whereas the report you cited doesn't reference averages to be used universally across the city. Rather, “The addition or subtraction of bus stop locations need to take into consideration the existing transit network, trip generators, land uses, and pedestrian infra structure. Bus stops need to have adequate sidewalk connections and roadway crossing amenities (i.e. marked crosswalks, median islands, curb ramps, pedestrian signals, etc.).”

 

Please clarify perhaps for the last time why again you and DDoT may be using the “average” bus stop spacing number universally regardless of “land uses” and density of any given area.

 

This is a concern, because you are eliminating bus stops on the very busy commercial Columbia Road corridor making it harder to access the bus services for elders, families, and others.

 

Thanks.

Chris

 

 

 

 

 

 

On Mon, Jul 15, 2024 at 4:32 PM Chris R. Otten <crotten2@gmail.com> wrote:

Thanks Kevin. For the explanation.

 

Ok, So I've read the link you've given me from 15 years ago.

 

At page 6. I think is the rub:

 

Accessibility Factors
The recommended bus stop spacing should serve as a guide. The addition or subtraction of bus stop locations need to take into consideration the existing transit network, trip generators, land uses, and pedestrian infra structure. Bus stops need to have adequate sidewalk connections and roadway crossing amenities (i.e. marked crosswalks, median islands, curb ramps, pedestrian signals, etc.).

 

The above section of the 2009 report you've given as substantiation for eliminating bus access in Adams Morgan is very important.

 

It explains why most jurisdictions including DC up to now don't simply average bus stop spacing and apply it universally across the whole city independent of land use needs (busy denser commercial corridor versus less denseresidential thru way).  

 

DC and most cities reference an average number for their bus spacing.  So in more dense areas the bus stop spacing is shorter and in more residential less dense thru ways the bus stop spacing is greater and they come up with an average.

 

But now, DDoT seems to be conflating this average numbers as some sort of holy grail number. That is DDoT and you seem to be suggesting the average spacing is somehow a universal number to be applied anywhere in the city similarly, making the average bus stop spacing the absolute bus stop spacing for the whole city.

 

The result as suggested at page 6 is a reduction in accessibility esp along DC's commercial corridors, thus forcing residents to choose other transit than bus. Likely a car. Thus defeating the whole point of a “Better Bus System.”

 

Please tell me I'm wrong and that you won't be eliminating bus accessibility along Columbia Road.

 

Thank you.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

On Mon, Jul 15, 2024 at 4:10 PM Harrison, Kevin (DDOT) <Kevin.Harrison@dc.gov> wrote:

Hi Mr. Otten,

 

Here are responses to you questions:

 

  1. Wait, we were just emailing, now you aren't at your desk until Monday?

Sorry, I leave work at about 5:30 most days and I was off on Friday.

 

  1. Would it be the DDoT's position that the same bus stop spacing applies to say upper 16th street north of Arkansas, versus Columbia Road between 18th and 16th?

For the S2, yes. The S9 is limited stop service so the spacing is longer.

 

  1. And, that the singular universal number bus stop spacing in DC is grounded because NYC does it that way?

No.

 

  1. If at all possible, please explain more and I will most understand what you are saying.

I recommend taking a look at WMATA’s “Guidelines for the Design and Placement of Transit Stops” from 2009. Page 5 provides more information and also some related research for further reading about bus stop spacing standards.

 

Thanks!

 

Kevin

 

 

From: Chris R. Otten <crotten2@gmail.com>
Sent: Friday, July 12, 2024 1:56 PM
To: Harrison, Kevin (DDOT) <Kevin.Harrison@dc.gov>; Carrington, James (DDOT) <james.carrington@dc.gov>
Cc: Sandra Reischel <sandrareischel@yahoo.com>; Virginia Johnson <dcvirginia@hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: Capricious & Harmful Re: [adamsmorgan] On the Col Rd plan: Class of People Most Impacted

 

CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the DC Government. Do not click on links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know that the content is safe. If you believe that this email is suspicious, please forward to phishing@dc.gov for additional analysis by OCTO Security Operations Center (SOC).

 

Please respond Mr. Harrison or Mr. Carrington if at all possible.

 

Thank you.

 

On Thursday, July 11, 2024, Chris R. Otten <crotten2@gmail.com> wrote:

 

 

Wait, we were just emailing, now you aren't at your desk until Monday?

 

Please Mr. Harrison, I truly want to understand DDot's position.

 

Would it be the DDoT's position that the same bus stop spacing applies to say upper 16th street north of Arkansas, versus Columbia Road between 18th and 16th?

 

And, that the singular universal number bus stop spacing in DC is grounded because NYC does it that way?

 

If at all possible, please explain more and I will most understand what you are saying.

 

Thanks,

Chris

 

 

 

 

 

———- Forwarded message ———
From: Harrison, Kevin (DDOT) <Kevin.Harrison@dc.gov>
Date: Thu, Jul 11, 2024 at 6:25 PM
Subject: Automatic reply: Capricious & Harmful Re: [adamsmorgan] On the Col Rd plan: Class of People Most Impacted
To: Chris R. Otten <crotten2@gmail.com>

 

Hi, I'm out of the office and unable to respond to email, but I will reply when I'm back at my desk— Monday, July 15.

 

If it's urgent, please email james.carrington@dc.gov.

 

Kevin

 

 

Kevin Harrison
Transportation Planner

Transit Delivery Division
District Department of Transportation
250 M Street SE
Washington, DC 20003

m. 202.848.8829

f. 202.671.0617
e. kevin.harrison@dc.gov

w. ddot.dc.gov

 

On Thu, Jul 11, 2024 at 6:21 PM Chris R. Otten <crotten2@gmail.com> wrote:

So I want to understand as best I can Mr. Harrison.

Are you saying that parts of DC are not more residential and not more commercial?

Compare say upper 16th street north of Arkansas, versus Columbia Road between 18th and 16th.

Yet, would it be the DDoT's position that the same bus stop spacing applies?

 

And it seems you are comparing DC to New York, is that right?

 

 

 

 

 

 

On Thu, Jul 11, 2024 at 5:35 PM Harrison, Kevin (DDOT) <Kevin.Harrison@dc.gov> wrote:

Hi Mr. Otten,

 

As I previously stated, the basic geometry of how people get to a bus stop does not change with increased population density. It remains a balance areas of duplicative coverage (slow) with coverage gaps (fast). I know that many jurisdictions have different stop spacing standards for suburban and urban locations, but that is primarily to account for sparse development and poorly connected street grids in suburban places. Take a look at Colesville Rd in MD or Wiehle Ave in VA for example.

 

New York City is implementing the same stops spacing as the District. The spacing between stops may increase for certain bus service types (local, express, etc.), but for local service they are recommending ¼ miles spacing, about the same as WMATA, regardless of land use. Except in some cases (similar to my description above) the distance may increase because , “The surrounding land use makes adding a stop infeasible (e.g. large parks, bridges, tunnels, busy or extensive driveways).”

 

I hope this information is helpful.

 

Thank you,

 

Kevin

 

 

 

From: Chris R. Otten <crotten2@gmail.com>
Sent: Thursday, July 11, 2024 5:13 PM
To: Harrison, Kevin (DDOT) <Kevin.Harrison@dc.gov>
Cc: Sandra Reischel <sandrareischel@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Capricious & Harmful Re: [adamsmorgan] On the Col Rd plan: Class of People Most Impacted

 

CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the DC Government. Do not click on links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know that the content is safe. If you believe that this email is suspicious, please forward to phishing@dc.gov for additional analysis by OCTO Security Operations Center (SOC).

 

Mr. Harrison,

You have explained that DDoT is using an universal standard for bus stop spacing — about one stop every 322 meters or 1057 feet (5 bus stops every mile); So according to the DDoT claim, there is some universal standard requiring one stop every 322 meters.

 

And that this singular universal standard is being applied to Columbia Road NW and the result between 18th and 16th Street is an elimination of an existing bus stop from 2 down to 1.  Thus shrinking access to bus services along this dense commercial corridor.

 

My question is why is DC using this singular universal standard for bus stop spacing citywide no matter the density of any given route (commercial higher density corridor versus more residential pass thru corridor) when most major cities use a formula with a direct relationship of bus stop spacing to density as shown here: https://findingspress.org/article/27373-distributions-of-bus-stop-spacings-in-the-united-states

 

 

 

On Thu, Jul 11, 2024 at 4:12 PM Harrison, Kevin (DDOT) <Kevin.Harrison@dc.gov> wrote:

I’m sorry. I don’t think I understand your question:

 

“Why is DC the only city I can find that has some universal standard regardless of the types of use of the areas being served. Im curious?”

 

Can you please clarify?

 

Thanks,

 

Kevin

 

From: Chris R. Otten <crotten2@gmail.com>
Sent: Thursday, July 11, 2024 3:40 PM
To: Harrison, Kevin (DDOT) <Kevin.Harrison@dc.gov>
Cc: Sandra Reischel <sandrareischel@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Capricious & Harmful Re: [adamsmorgan] On the Col Rd plan: Class of People Most Impacted

 

CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the DC Government. Do not click on links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know that the content is safe. If you believe that this email is suspicious, please forward to phishing@dc.gov for additional analysis by OCTO Security Operations Center (SOC).

 

Including now. 

On Thursday, July 11, 2024, Chris R. Otten <crotten2@gmail.com> wrote:

Will you please respond Mr. Harrison?

 

I'm including an elder who will be harmed.

 

Please respond.

 

Thank you.

 

Chris Otten

On Wednesday, July 3, 2024, Chris R. Otten <crotten2@gmail.com> wrote:

Why is DC the only city I can find that has some universal standard regardless of the types of use of the areas being served. Im curious?

 

On Tuesday, July 2, 2024, Harrison, Kevin (DDOT) <Kevin.Harrison@dc.gov> wrote:

Hi Mr. Otten,

 

WMATA’s Bus Stop Guidelines (page 5) recommend four to five stops per mile, which equals 1,060’ to 1,320’ between stops. I’ll also note that this standard is being rolled out across the District through the Bus Network Redesign as described here: https://betterbus.wmata.com/downloads/Bus%20Stop%20Consolidation%202024-05.pdf

 

I think this article provides a useful description of the geometry around stop spacing: https://humantransit.org/2010/11/san-francisco-a-rational-stop-spacing-plan.html

 

That basic geometry does not change with increased population density. It remains a balance areas of duplicative coverage (slow) with coverage gaps (fast). I know that many jurisdictions have different stop spacing standards for suburban and urban locations, but I think that is primarily to account for poorly connected street grids in suburban places where there is no reason to have a stop for very long stretches along Colesville Rd in MD or Wiehle Ave in VA for example.

 

One interesting anecdote is that I have been told, but cannot confirm is that the bus stops on Columbia Rd were established when the streetcar was operating there. During that time, the streetcar only had to be faster than walking to be an attractive option. Now that the city is larger and the travel environment has changed, it only makes sense to update the spacing.

 

Thank you,

 

Kevin

 

From: Chris R. Otten <crotten2@gmail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, July 2, 2024 12:07 PM
To: Harrison, Kevin (DDOT) <Kevin.Harrison@dc.gov>
Subject: Re: Capricious & Harmful Re: [adamsmorgan] On the Col Rd plan: Class of People Most Impacted

 

CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the DC Government. Do not click on links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know that the content is safe. If you believe that this email is suspicious, please forward to phishing@dc.gov for additional analysis by OCTO Security Operations Center (SOC).

 

You don't often get email from crotten2@gmail.com. Learn why this is important

Mr  Harrison,

Thanks for this response

Plesae help ne understand how you derived a standard of:

 
1,060’ to 1,320’ between stops.

 

Where does this source from.

 

Alsodoes this standard change at all basedon the land use description of the area the bus maybe serving at any given time, i.e. a bus traversing a residential thruway versus a denser mixed use commercial area?

 

Thanks forhelp.

 

Chris

 

 

 

On Tuesday, July 2, 2024, Harrison, Kevin (DDOT) <Kevin.Harrison@dc.gov> wrote:

Hi Mr. Otten,

 

DDOT takes bus stop locations very seriously and recognizes that these new bus stop locations will be an inconvenience for some people. However, there will still be a bus stop within a block and a half of any location on Columbia Road and this relocation will reduce travel time and improve reliability for all bus riders.

 

National best practice and WMATA bus stop placement guidelines recommend four or five stops per mile (i.e., 1,060’ to 1,320’ between stops) for local bus service to balance easy access to bus stops with efficient service. The proposed bus stop rebalancing would increase average stop spacing from 760’ to 1,140’, which is a distance that optimizes access to bus stops and reduced bus travel times. These bus stop moves also support safety goals of the project by placing the stops near signalized intersections, which are easier for crossing the street, and at the far side of intersections to improve visibility for people riding bikes and reduce right-turn conflicts.

 

The image below shows the current and proposed location of bus stops on Columbia Road NW and the NOI contains more information about the relocations.

Graphical user interface, diagram, application Description automatically generated

 

Thanks,

 

Kevin

 

 

From: Chris R. Otten <crotten2@gmail.com>
Sent: Monday, July 1, 2024 6:53 PM
To: adamsmorgan@groups.io
Cc: Harrison, Kevin (DDOT) <Kevin.Harrison@dc.gov>
Subject: Capricious & Harmful Re: [adamsmorgan] On the Col Rd plan: Class of People Most Impacted

 

CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the DC Government. Do not click on links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know that the content is safe. If you believe that this email is suspicious, please forward to phishing@dc.gov for additional analysis by OCTO Security Operations Center (SOC).

 

You don't often get email from crotten2@gmail.com. Learn why this is important

I'm hoping Mr. Harrison, who I've cc'd and have been looping in prior emails can weigh in here.

 

So Lance's issues aside, I agree that more bike (rollerblading) lanes are great if they are planned as part of an overall strategy to INCREASE multimodal access to get around our city safely.

 

To the point I was raised when starting out this thread: 

 

I simply cannot find nor fathom I will find any documentation or anyone who says decreasing bus access (i.e. eliminating bus stops) makes any sense especially along this busy commercial mixed use stretch of Adams Morgan. 

 

So while bike lanes benefit the public generally, what is harmful is eliminating bus stops while increasing growth/density (see 1617 U Street for example). This isn't so smart and hurts those pedestrians who rely on bus stop proximity.

 

I believe those who have bad feet, or a creeky back, or are using walkers or have any kind of disability whatsoever should be as prioritized as those able to ride bikes.

 

Instead, what we are witnessing is a DECREASE in bus service access (bus stops) that harms the class of people in our neighborhood that I describe above.

 

As the APA explains: “Despite good intentions, planners and architects tend to design for the mythical five-foot-10, 175-pound, nondisabled male.” https://www.planning.org/planning/2016/mar/designforeverybody/

 

This is especially troubling because the other great bus planning ideas of putting buses in their own lanes and having bus stops projected out and situated across intersections is already known to speed up the trips.  So then why eliminate access to those speedier bus trips especially for those who rely on that access now.

 

It seems wildly capricious and out of balance.

 

Chris O.

 

 

 

 

 

 

On Mon, Jul 1, 2024 at 6:11 PM jeffrey w comer via groups.io <comer.jeffrey=gmail.com@groups.io> wrote:

Lance's argument is that bikes are toys that are better suited for weekends and bike trails. Bicycles are not part of the multimodal transportation model that is common in growing, thriving urban areas. He has said as much here multiple times. 

 

More generally, the take is that WABA — the cycling lobby — is severely criticised for lobbying for cyclists. I still can't figure that one!?!

 

It's not a convincing argument at all and given the number of cyclists I see on a daily basis, it's myopic. Moving people through the network, no matter the mode, and with a minimal carbon footprint, should be the priority. 

 

 

On Mon, Jul 1, 2024, 17:13 Maria Felenyuk via groups.io <maria.felenyuk=gmail.com@groups.io> wrote:

Lance, 

 

What is your actual argument? All the bike lanes, except for one block in front of Safeway, already exist. Do you want DDOT to get rid of them? 

 

 And the official project name is Bus Priority AND Protected bike lanes. It's not a secret, and they aren't trying to sneak anything. 

 

 

On Mon, Jul 1, 2024 at 4:56 PM lance via groups.io <salonial=aol.com@groups.io> wrote:

A bus priority project that doesn’t prioritize buses but is used instead as an excuse to stealthily build more bike lanes isn’t a compromise.  It’s a sham.  

And you’re going to have to accept that because it’s a sham, we’re going to stop it like we stopped the shams on K Street and Connecticut Avenue.  You’re going to have to accept that you’re no longer going to get things just because you want them.  Spoiled child days are over. 

 

_._,_._,_

Groups.io Links:

You receive all messages sent to this group.

View/Reply Online (#65367) | Reply To Group | Reply To Sender | Mute This Topic | New Topic

Welcome to the Adams Morgan listserv, founded by JB Fields and Josh Gibson on October 26, 1999. RIP, J.
Onelist begat EGroups begat Yahoo Groups begat Groups.io
List Administrators: Josh Gibson and George Schmitt.
In Adams Morgan we trust.

Your Subscription | Contact Group Owner | Unsubscribe [crotten2@gmail.com]

_._,_._,_

PRESS RELEASE AND NEW REPORT FROM AUDITOR’S OFFICE ON INCLUSIONARY ZONING

Leave a reply
This November 20, 2024, report by the Office of the Auditor on DC’s Inclusionary Zoning program is an indictment of the Smart Growth urbanists who say that building more luxury housing with a required handful of IZ units would be an answer to our unaffordable housing crisis.  The numbers in the official report below show quite the opposite.
 
WE NEED AN ALTERNATIVE THAT DECOMODIFIES HOUSING AND AFFIRMS THAT HOUSING IS A HUMAN RIGHT!
 
biznassman_profiting_from_luxury_housing_on_public_land1.jpg
Part of the IZ failure is because the so-called YIMBY urbanist originators of this alleged “affordable” housing policy chose to never highlight the lack of accountability and enforcement of their developer real estate friends in any of their testimony to the Zoning Commission and to the Council over the years.
 
For more than a decade now, IZ has been used as the soapbox for YIMBYs to cheer on upzoning such as at 1617 U Street.  IZ has been the guise for luxury overdevelopment since 2009 and destroyed affordability in the District by setting the definition of “affordable housing” so high as to be out of reach of most working people and families in our city.
 
Resources/Background:
Below find my highlights from the Auditor’s Report including the two big takeaways showing the dire and acute need for an alternative like social housing:
  • 18,000 people on the waitlist for 2000 IZ units!
  • Of the 2000 IZ units, 1300 of them are for single individuals (65%).
  • Most of the IZ waiting list consists of family-sized households needing 3+ bedrooms.
  • Some of the current IZ participating households are spending 50% of their income on housing costs (this is unlawfully not affordable).
  • IZ units are allowed to sit vacant allowing the developers to gain luxury density while keeping empty the pitiful handful of IZ units they are required to fill.
  • Of the IZ units that are being filled, it takes an IZ participant on average 13 months to move-in to the unit.

The Auditor’s press release was rosy compared to the actual underlying data, see screenshots of major findings directly from the report:
 
Screenshot_2024-11-22_20-02-24.jpgScreenshot_2024-11-22_20-05-02.jpgScreenshot_2024-11-22_20-06-01.jpg
Screenshot_2024-11-22_20-06-38.jpg

Screenshot_2024-11-22_20-07-15.jpg

Screenshot_2024-11-22_20-07-49.jpg

Screenshot_2024-11-22_20-111.jpg

 

On Fri, Nov 22, 2024 at 7:48 PM Debby Hanrahan <debbyhanrahan@yahoo.com> wrote:
Hello all,
The only thing I can say after a quick read of this City Auditor’s new report is that the inclusionary zoning (IZ) program is as bad as we have suspected and have witnessed on an anecdotal and individual project basis. The financial abuses of the program were not highlighted, but I hope that will come soon. After you have a chance to read this, I hope you will feel free to walk into your nearest IZ-participating project and ask about subsidized units.
Best,
Debby
—– Forwarded Message —–
From: Patterson, Kathy (ODCA) <kathy.patterson@dc.gov>
To: Debby Hanrahan <debbyhanrahan@yahoo.com>
Sent: Wednesday, November 20, 2024 at 12:56:46 PM EST
Subject: FW: New report: Stronger Oversight Needed for Inclusionary Zoning Program to Reach Housing Goals

Just posted; thanks for your interest!

Kathleen Patterson  |  D.C. Auditor

she/her/hers

Office of the D.C. Auditor

1331 Pennsylvania Avenue NW 8th Floor

Washington D.C. 20004

Direct: (202) 727-8982  | Office: (202) 727-3600

Email: kathy.patterson@dc.gov

Website: www.dcauditor.org

From: Shinn, Diane (ODCA) <diane.shinn@dc.gov>
Sent: Wednesday, November 20, 2024 12:48 PM
To: Shinn, Diane (ODCA) <diane.shinn@dc.gov>
Subject: New report: Stronger Oversight Needed for Inclusionary Zoning Program to Reach Housing Goals

Good morning. Attached please find our newest press release and report entitled Stronger DHCD Oversight Needed for Inclusionary Zoning Program to Reach Housing Goals.

Despite a lack of enforcement that has enabled a culture of non-compliance at some of its properties, the District’s Inclusionary Zoning program—

one of the many pathways toward the city’s affordable housing goals—has already implemented or is implementing many recommendations of a new audit published today by the Office of the D.C. Auditor (ODCA).

The IZ program’s purpose is to use market-rate development to increase affordable unit production and ultimately create a full range of long-term housing choices for each District household regardless of size and income. Mayor Muriel Bowser is aiming to achieve the affordable housing goal of producing 12,000 new affordable units for D.C. residents by 2025.

Actions taken by the Department of Housing and Community Development (DHCD) included enforcement action against an IZ provider following a Management Alert issued by ODCA in June.

“We were pleased at the immediate action the agency took earlier this year,” said D.C. Auditor Kathy Patterson. “We are pleased with DHCD’s concurrence with nearly all 17 of ODCA’s recommendations aimed at improving the IZ program’s efficacy, including efforts to meet the 102-day target to fill IZ units from what an ODCA sample found was an average of more than 13 months.”

Findings in the report include that during the audit’s scope DHCD did not:

•            Ensure that annual reporting requirements were enforced, which meant they were not able to track which units were vacant or who was living in occupied units.

•            Ensure that IZ tenants’ incomes were recertified annually which potentially allowed participants to remain in IZ units for which they were no longer eligible because their income exceeded their units’ income requirement.

•            Ensure that properties submitted renewal leases annually. Of the IZ properties in the report’s sample, only one of 16 properties was found to have completed lease renewals in a timely manner. At six of the properties, some renewed leases were found and those, on average, were dated 147 days (five months) after the previous lease’s expiration date. The remaining properties had not renewed any leases at the time of ODCA’s site visits, putting the tenants into a month-to-month status on an expired lease.

•            Initiate enforcement action against property owners who violated IZ development covenant requirements and DCMR.

Please let me know if you’d like to speak to the Auditor about this report. Thanks for your interest in ODCA’s work.

 

 

Diane Shinn | Director of Communications

Office of the D.C. Auditor

1331 14th Street N.W., Suite 800 South

Washington, DC  20004

Direct: (202) 727-8991 | Office: (202) 727-3600 | Cell: 202-255-6717

she/her/hers

diane.shinn@dc.gov

dcauditor.org

Auditude

@ODCA_DC

 

 

YIMBYs and the continuation of the colonial project

Question: What Is a YIMBY? (Hint: It’s Not Good)

Leave a reply
A series of articles, resources, and videos discussing the so-called YIMBY-class of build-more activists.
What Is a YIMBY? (Hint: It’s Not Good)

By Patrick Range McDonald, Housing is a Human Right, July 14, 2021, Link: https://www.housingisahumanright.org/what-is-a-yimby-hint-its-not-good/

YIMBY Movement Is Not the Answer to Housing Crisis, Grassroots Activists Say

The answer to the U.S. housing crisis is simple and widely adopted elsewhere: more public housing.

By Laura Jedeed & M.K. Hawthorne,     Truthout, Published September 19, 2021, Link: https://truthout.org/articles/yimby-movement-is-not-the-answer-to-housing-crisis-grassroots-activists-say/

YIMBY, White Privilege, and the Soul of Our Cities

A common narrative being promoted about why there is a housing crisis ignores history and serves to assuage new residents’ guilty feelings. But we can craft a new narrative together.

By Fernando Marti, Shelterforce, Published: February 19, 2019, Link: https://shelterforce.org/2019/02/19/yimby-white-privilege-and-the-soul-of-our-cities/



Don't Fall Down the YIMBY Pipeline

By Radical Planning, Published February 8, 2022, Link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QHigcXE9ZzE

YIMBYism Is Code For Gentrification w/ David Fields

By Real Progressives, Published October 16, 2024, Link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7YMd0HZA4CE

biznassman2.jpg

YIMBY policies rooted in the royal “my” and paternalism is not new to the battle for equity in DC

Leave a reply
Taken from the Adams Morgan listserve here >>
https://groups.io/g/adamsmorgan/message/66398 

———- Forwarded message ———
From: William Jordan via groups.io <whj=melanet.com@groups.io>
Date: Sun, Nov 17, 2024 at 4:20 PM
Subject: Re: [adamsmorgan] What Do YIMBYs and Donald Trump Have in Common?

 

I’m an amateur genealogist, in building my family tree and working to better understand the stories of my ancestors, I’ve found complex and extensive connections to DC going back to the 1860/70s. 

 

In my genealogical journey, I’ve discovered as with my family, my ancestor’s lives generation after generation lives have been negatively impacted by some form of YIMBY-ism.  YIMBY-ism built around Black family displacement and the I-know-it all paternalistic hubris of the political and bureaucratic elite.   

 

Nadeau’s YIMBY policies rooted in the royal “my” and paternalism is not new to the battle for equity.

 

The attached November 21, 1854 article from the Evening Star features Ezekiel Cunningham my first cousin 3-times removed and DC SW shopkeeper describing 1950s version of YIMBY-ism as a “Passel of Joy and Sorrow”.   

 

Not only are there many parallels between YIMBY-ism of the 1950s and 2020s including the rationalizations, but some of the same Black families which were marginalized and displaced from SW to make room for out of town developers are some of the same families being marginalized by Nadeau’s Ward 1 policies for similar interests.

 

Source file: https://tinyurl.com/bddn5wnw

So we can debate Nadeau’s NW YIMBY-ism and Trump, there is little doubt about Ward 1’s YIMBY-ism roots in S.W.. 

 

William

 

—–Original Message—–
From: whj@melanet.com
Sent: Sunday, November 10, 2024 8:56pm
To: adamsmorgan@groups.io
Cc: adamsmorgan@groups.io
Subject: Re: [adamsmorgan] What Do YIMBYs and Donald Trump Have in Common?

YIMBY-ism for the most part is nonsensical rebranding of government backed Gentrification which is a  rehash of Urban Renewal/Negro Removal.  In particular it’s designed to con mainly younger people who are seeking progressive solutions to community ills into supporting big capital via high rents and consumption. Comparing this YIMBY-ism con to Trump is just an attempt to wake us up a little.

Under the very approaches so called YIMBY’s are pushing for 1/2 of Ward 1’s Black population has been displaced since 2000 and the racial equity gap has increased, especially the Black-White one primarily as a result of government policy/corporate-corruption.

Many YIMBYs are likely good people, who have been conned or mislead by people like CM Nadeau who know YIMBY-ism doesn’t work as touted.

William

 

 

ERAP Changes: City Council “Seeking a balance” on the backs of DC tenants

Leave a reply
B25-0994 – Emergency Rental Assistance Reform Amendment Act of 2024 :: https://lims.dccouncil.gov/Legislation/B25-0994

Screenshot_2024-11-16_19-40-31.jpg

 

City Council Cmte on Housing, Chair Robert White, Hearing on November 15, 2024 :: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IOdUfzpr45Q

Theme of the hearing from the Chair –> “Seeking a balance” on the backs of DC tenants.

Here’s an abridged list of those who spoke in opposition to changes to the ERAP law that would allow landlords to evict DC residents faster with less protections despite ERAP applications that may be in process.
< Opposition speakers > 

2. Mr. Daniel del Pielago, Housing Director, Empower DC: https://www.youtube.com/live/IOdUfzpr45Q?feature=shared&t=1879

3. Ms. Andria Chatmon, Housing Organizer, Empower DC: https://www.youtube.com/live/IOdUfzpr45Q?feature=shared&t=2073

5. Mel Zahnd, Legal Aid Society of DC:https://www.youtube.com/live/IOdUfzpr45Q?feature=shared&t=2614

8. Damiana Dendy, DC Jobs with Justice: https://www.youtube.com/live/IOdUfzpr45Q?feature=shared&t=6715

9. Amanda Eisenhour, Tenant Support Specialist at the DC BAR Pro Bono Center: https://www.youtube.com/live/IOdUfzpr45Q?feature=shared&t=6995

10. Ms. Makenna Osborn, Policy Attorney, Children’s Law Center: https://www.youtube.com/live/IOdUfzpr45Q?feature=shared&t=7237

13. Adam Marshall, Neighborhood Legal Services Program: https://www.youtube.com/live/IOdUfzpr45Q?feature=shared&t=3397

21. Mr. Ed Lazere, Director of Legislative Advocacy, United Planning Organization: https://www.youtube.com/live/IOdUfzpr45Q?feature=shared&t=16317

28. Ms. Sierra Ramirez, Eviction Defense Committee Delegate, Woodner Tenants’ Union: https://www.youtube.com/live/IOdUfzpr45Q?feature=shared&t=26706

35. Mx. George Lander, Sr. Tenant Support Coordinator, Bread for the City: https://www.youtube.com/live/IOdUfzpr45Q?feature=shared&t=20852

40. Sunny Desai, Legal Counsel for the Elderly: https://www.youtube.com/live/IOdUfzpr45Q?feature=shared&t=21144

41. Saunya Connelly, Legal Counsel for the Elderly: https://www.youtube.com/live/IOdUfzpr45Q?feature=shared&t=21408

47. Joshua Drumming, Washington Legal Clinic for the Homeless: https://www.youtube.com/live/IOdUfzpr45Q?feature=shared&t=4220

49. Natasha Bennett, Esq., Supervising Attorney, Bread for the City: https://www.youtube.com/live/IOdUfzpr45Q?feature=shared&t=8262

63. Tamira Benitez, Public Witness: https://www.youtube.com/live/IOdUfzpr45Q?feature=shared&t=12786

65. Kymone Freeman, Co-Founder, We Act Radio: https://www.youtube.com/live/IOdUfzpr45Q?feature=shared&t=23942

107. Ms. Kate Coventry, Deputy Director of Legislative Strategy, DC Fiscal Policy Institute: https://www.youtube.com/live/IOdUfzpr45Q?feature=shared&t=22291

118. Mr. Kelechi Agbakwuru, Housing Justice Counsel, Washington Lawyers’ Committee: https://www.youtube.com/live/IOdUfzpr45Q?feature=shared&t=19462

124. Mr. Chris Otten, DC for Reasonable Development: https://www.youtube.com/live/IOdUfzpr45Q?feature=shared&t=22559

 

< ANC’s >

 

< DC GOVERNMENT WITNESSES >

 

— important to note — 

Screenshot_2024-11-16_19-42-46.jpg

Urbanist YIMBYs of course want to make evictions easier for the landlord-class, Cheryl Cort, Policy Director, Coalition for Smarter Growth :: https://www.youtube.com/live/IOdUfzpr45Q?feature=shared&t=12615


###

UBI: DC Nonprofits get it, why won’t the Blue-Dems of DC?

Leave a reply

Universal Basic Income is an idea that has come to the fore in recent years but has yet to break through the ruling-class gatekeeping of our working families.

UBI is becoming more real in DC. A local non-profit is set to give UBI a go starting this week for the next year.

DC-area nonprofit combines 2 policies that will give low-income families thousands per month

The “Pathway to Economic Mobility, Prosperity and Family Wellness” involves 100 families scattered around D.C. who currently receive subsidized housing from the District. For the next two years, they’ll be receiving $1,000 per month. On top of that, parents will get $1,000 they can put toward an IRA or emergency savings account. Their children will also get $1,000 put into a 529 college savings plan and $1,000 toward a Roth IRA.

As the DC Council funds billionaires to build new arenas and give rich downtown landlords tax breaks and grants to turn unoccupied offices into unaffordable housing, there are some thought leaders turning to UBI as a real alternative to evictions, homelessness, and despair for rooted residents and families struggling to keep up.

What Do YIMBYs and Donald Trump Have in Common?

Leave a reply

trump_yimby.jpg

 

What Do YIMBYs and Donald Trump Have in Common?

  1. YIMBYs and Trump are consistently complicit in the offloading of vast amounts of public property to friends in the speculative real estate market, prioritizing luxury housing for affluent singles while ignoring the affordability needs of working families. https://savedcpublicland.org/the1617project/2023/06/09/dcs-sordid-track-record-of-public-land-giveaways/ 


  2. Both Trump and YIMBYs ignore or dismiss genuine solutions that could provide DC and cities across the nation the truly affordable housing it deserves. Instead of deploying programs such as custom zoning and social housing, Trump and YIMBYs favor private developers doing the lifting and grifting instead of public initiatives, effectively spitting in the face of HUD and endorsing the privatization of public housing through “repositioning” programs. https://ggwash.org/view/97236/dcs-public-housing-agency-is-making-halting-progress-but-much-more-needs-to-be-done 


  3. Both YIMBYs and Donald Trump share a deeply troubling agenda that displaces people of color from their rooted neighborhoods without much concern or acknowledgement. This is seen vividly in Washington, D.C., where our city consistently ranks among the top cities for gentrification, with devastating impacts on longstanding Black communities with barely a blush by YIMBYs. https://journals.sagepub.com/eprint/EVDFHVYYVVSXWIYMPVQ9/full

     

YIMBYs don’t have to care about the impacts of their build-baby-build rhetoric because they are privileged enough not to bear the adverse brunt of their advocating to privatize public land and build more luxury units, this same policy that benefits the exact class of real estate players who fund campaigns of politicians like Donald Trump. 

 

 

#IZFAIL

#IZFAIL




But wait there’s more . . .

Find out why the YIMBY “affordability” program in DC, called “Inclusionary Zoning” or “IZ”, is an absolute fraud perpetuated to guise the overblown and continuing construction of mostly unaffordable market-rate luxury housing units despite the growing racial disparity and displacement in DC.


Other links of import::

 
 
 

 

DC Safety Net on Fire! Council Moves Quick on Social Welfare for a Billionaire Arena Owner While Longtime DC Families Left to Struggle to Meet Basic Needs

Leave a reply
Please take Action, use the Fair Budget Coalition social media kit among other resources out there to get the word out to friends, neighbors, loved ones: https://tinyurl.com/fbc-dc-2025-budget-toolkit


<press alert> DC for Reasonable Development, contact Chris Otten, (202) 656-5874

“The Safety Net Continues to Burn” as D.C. City Council Poised to Give a Billionaire Half-a-Billion Dollars in D.C. Taxpayer Dollars; Key Programs to Help DC's Families and Working Residents Remain Un- & Under-Funded

Washington, DC — The second vote on DC's 2025 Budget is upcoming this Wednesday, and it spells terrible news for DC's most vulnerable longtime residents and families. 

Here's what's at stake for DC's longtime families and residents struggling to survive in their city:
  • ERAP (emergency rental assistance to prevent eviction and housing insecurity) is funded at less than ½ of FY24 – yet the need has grown and the funds run out almost as soon as the portal opens each quarter. 

  • Housing vouchers for individuals and families experiencing homelessness are funded at less than 1/10th of the need, leaving us deeply worried about the trauma and hardship they will face in FY25 without housing. 

  • The Mayor is planning to evict 2200 families in the next 2 months (and another 1000 in FY25) from their housing in the Rapid ReHousing program. Without any housing solutions for where they will go, virtually no vouchers in the budget, and no way to pay market rate rent, these families are in immediate danger of homelessness. This is a horrific human tragedy awaiting the families and the city unless lawmakers take action.

  • SNAP benefits have not kept pace with the realities of struggling households. There were no new or improved investments in food/nutrition programs (outside of the schools) this year, even though several Councilmembers stated concern about senior hunger.


In contrast, social welfare for a billionaire (Ted Leonisis) was quickly made available by the Council who are primed to serve up half-a-billion taxpayer dollars for downtown arena funding.

“The safety net continues to burn, with the Emergency Rental Assistance Program (ERAP), housing vouchers to end homelessness, and nutrition assistance each horribly, shockingly underfunded. Thousands of housing-insecure families lack access to ERAP to prevent eviction, even as landlords have doubled the number of eviction filings compared to last year and rents have risen more than incomes. There are 3,200 families facing immediate homelessness with the Department of Human Services evicting them from the rapid rehousing program — 2,200 this summer, and another 1,000 starting in the fall. And unhoused individuals living on the street routinely face encampment clearance with no corresponding investment in housing and services to promote their health and well-being. DC’s seniors, both housed and unhoused, face the highest rate of older adult hunger in the country, yet their food assistance benefits are paltry, especially in the face of high, even rising, costs for food and housing.” –Niciah Mujahid is executive director of the Fair Budget Coalition.


Advocates for DC's working families and individuals making less than $55,000/year are asking the city to raise money on the classes of income earners who have gotten wealthier over the pandemic.

Chairman Mendelson's recently proposed property tax increase on high-value homes only raises $5.7 million in FY 2025, and while a step in the right direction, measured against all that is at stake residents are demanding the Council to improve the wealth tax proposal and consider higher taxes on those with incomes above $500,000/yr.

The budget vote is scheduled for Wednesday.

###

Please take Action, use the Fair Budget Coalition social media kit among other resources out there to get the word out to friends, neighbors, loved ones: https://tinyurl.com/fbc-dc-2025-budget-toolkit

More reasons to go SHIMBY and definitely not be a YIMBY or a NIMBY

Leave a reply
We want Social Housing in our Backyard as SHIMBYs.

Neither YIMBYs nor NIMBYs like social housing because it would decommodify shelter as we know it as human housing (hurting the pockets of the investor-class the YIMBYs serve) and bring in truly affordable housing (exposing the fragility of the racist & classist NIMBYs in their exclusive neighborhoods).

See the exploration below focusing on why YIMBYs are so dangerous to existing urban communities of working class families and neighborhoods of color.

YIMBYs & NIMBYs want the same thing!

YIMBYs & NIMBYs want the same thing!

What Is a YIMBY? (Hint: It’s Not Good)
By Patrick Range McDonald, July 14, 2021

 
Excerpts:

  • YIMBY stands for “Yes In My Back Yard.” It’s a clever twist on NIMBY or “Not In My Back Yard.” NIMBYs have a controversial reputation for fighting new development in their communities. YIMBYs try to capitalize on that by using a moniker that sounds inclusive and appealing. Don’t be fooled. 
  • YIMBYs embrace trickle-down economics or what’s now called “trickle-down housing” policy. As middle- and working-class people have long known, trickle-down anything doesn’t work — except to make the rich richer.

  • YIMBYs know developers built almost exclusively luxury housing, and that is okay with them. 
  • YIMBYs are NOT housing justice activists. But for political reasons, YIMBYs are desperate to own housing justice credentials. YIMBYs have co-opted messaging from the housing justice movement and joined housing justice coalitions. It’s a strategy that continues to this day. 
  • Despite their pro-gentrification agenda and clashes with housing justice activists, many Democratic politicians champion YIMBYism and the mainstream media too often touts the YIMBY cause. Why? Politicians take huge amounts of campaign cash from the real estate industry, and YIMBYism gives them political cover to deregulate land-use protections and allow developers to build more luxury housing — and to generate huge profits — under the guise of solving the housing affordability crisis 
  • “The YIMBY movement has a white privilege problem,” Anya Lawler, a policy advocate with the Western Center on Law & Poverty, told the Los Angeles Times. “I don’t think they recognize it. They don’t understand poverty. They don’t understand what that’s like, who our clients really are and what their lived experience is.” 
  • YIMBY leaders are consistently silent about the predatory practices of corporate landlords and developers. The silence speaks volumes.