We pointed out that this isn't all that welcome an idea, at least according to Gazette reporting of remarks by the head of the local Civic Association.
As the County government itself pointed out in 1999 "Montgomery County's Affordable Housing, Chapter 4", MNCPPC, 1999:
Aspen Hill Planning Area has the largest
supply of family assisted housing, almost 980 units.
Aspen Hill also has a comparatively large
total number of housing units so that its
percentage of family assisted housing is
not unusually high.
County Executive Isiah "Ike" Leggett pointed out at a Germantown "town hall meeting" forum on January 12, 2009 that "it is important to make investments during 'tough times' and said he plans to urge the County Council to put more money into the Housing Initiative Fund so the county can buy properties while values are down," according to the Gazette (Leggett: Residents may ‘feel some of this pain' in budget, Tierney, Meghan, Gazette, Jan 14 2009).
Thus, to strike while the iron is hot, so to speak, now would be the time when the County rushes into action.
But for whom, exactly, will these rental properties be bought?
Back in the late 1990s, the County government had bought a fairly large number of properties under the auspices of the Housing Opportunities Commission, following the ideal of scattered-site housing.
As mentioned above, Aspen Hill was one of the communities considered "best", in part because of its aging housing stock, which was generally priced at rather less than comparable properties closer in to the District such as downtown Silver Spring, where homes might be available for comparable prices, but where they generally were significantly older stock. Aspen Hill was thus considered a "best fit" for most of the objectives: fairly old homes, but not too old, and well-served by transit, schools, and retail.
This was one of Aspen Hill's first experiences with subsidized housing, and also its first step to starting to consider itself a dumping-ground in the eyes of the County government, whether or not that was an accurate perception. Various community groups in Aspen Hill began to oppose "group homes" in general, and specific scattered-site residences, as well, all on the grounds that group homes lead to property decline. This expectation is a common and widespread misconception (Scattered-Site Housing: Characteristics and Consequences, Hogan, James, 1999, HUD press).
There is, generally speaking, no greater possible "lightning rod" for community opposition than proposals for a "scattered site" facility for the mentally ill, especially if the housing is specifically intended for recently homeless mentally ill persons with criminal conviction records. Since probably most such persons were convicted for drug offenses (botched self-medication in many cases, leading to homelessness and arrest), a community rallying cry of "we don't want crazy homeless dopers in our neighborhood".
In the timeframe of 1996 or so, there had been a facility housing exactly such persons, located at 14111 Georgia Avenue, immediately behind 7-11 store number 11713 which fronts the street at 14101 Georgia Avenue. That building is currently the media center and child-seat inspection facility operated by the Montgomery County Fire and Rescue Service.
At about this time, a Federal decision excluded "addiction/substance-abuse" from the list of disabilities which would be supported by Social Security's Retirement, Survivors and Disabled Individuals program. The facility closed down, and the County was in a bit of a hurry to find housing for many of these individuals, who had managed to get a bunk at the group-home/shelter only after protracted stays on the streets. The perception in the neighborhood was that the County government was jamming bona-fide dope fiends and criminal maniacs into the single-family detached residential homes part of the community, and not giving the community time to respond through channels. With the perception that the County government had overstepped the bounds of propriety, various groups and individuals in Aspen Hill decided that if the County could just put its foot down and "do what it wanted", so could groups and individuals in Aspen Hill.
To be continued!
0 comments:
Post a Comment