This is the second part of my testimony on the Housing Trust Fund. During the course of the hearings Councilwoman Blackwell complained about how district Council members did not have enough control over housing project in their district.
This issue will definitely come up again, as Councilwoman Blackwell has proposed an ordinance that would require the Trust Fund advisory board to report to Council as well as the Administration.
This might not be a bad idea as the advisory committee does make recommendations about how Housing Trust Fund money should be distributed between, for example, new construction and the rehabilitation of existing housing units. As Councilwoman Tasco pointed out during I interchange I had with her in the hearing, this does seem to be a role for Council. However whether Council should approve each project is, I think, a different matter as I explain below.
Is Council Shut Out of Trust Fund Spending Decisions?
I want to address the question of whether Council is being shut out of the decision-making in distributing the resources of the Housing Trust Fund.
The Housing Trust Fund Process Is Not New.
I am not expert on housing policy. But it seems clear that the decision-making process in disbursing housing trust money is essentially the same as is used with most of the CDBG money that goes for affordable housing project. A request for proposal is put out. Council members who are interested in new affordable housing projects in their districts can—and frequently do—inform agencies within their district of the RFP. Proposals are put forward and the Council members again play a role in the process, by encouraging the administration to support certain projects rather than others.
The Influence of Council Members
I think we all know that Council people are very influential in this process. While I live in Councilman Nutter’s district, the community organization I once headed is in Councilwoman Donna Reed Miller’s district. We frequently heard from Councilwoman Miller about opportunities for local CDCs and other developers to submit proposals for new projects. And when such groups submitted proposals, we asked Councilwoman Miller to support them. There is no question that, at least in the 8th Council District, Donna Reed Miller plays a major role in all development decisions. I have no quarrel with this system. But give our current practice, I do think it is completely misleading to think that our district council members will be shut out of any influence on the distribution of money from the Housing Trust Fund.
The Proper Balance Between District Council Members and the Administration
We could, of course, give district council members even more authority over what happens in their districts. But, for two reasons, this would not be good public policy.
First, something that happens in each district has an effect on other districts or the city as a whole.
And second, many of the decisions that affect each council district should also meet general criteria that apply throughout the city, should be prioritized in accord with some a plan for the whole city and, in addition, have a technical component. Thus it is appropriate that the administration make these decisions in keeping with the general rules, priorities, and the technical guidelines administrative agencies have established. Certainly district council members should play a role in this process as well. But they should not be the only ones who make these decisions.
Here is an example. Right now there is a sewer being constructed in front of my house on Wissahickon Avenue. Councilman Nutter played an important role in encouraging the administration to build the sewer. But it also had to meet the criteria and priorities of the Water Department and it had to be properly planned by that department.
Do we want District Council members to decide, by themselves, where sewers and water mains should be built and rebuilt? Do we want them to decide where we need new sidewalks and road beds? Should the decide where every school and recreation center is built, without any general rules provided by the Administration.
Don’t Go Back to the 19th Century
That is the way cities in America worked in the 19th century. The result was enormous waste, corruption, and technical failure. The progressive reformers of the early 20th century played a major role in changing those practices for the better. I don’t see any reason to go back to the practices of the 19th century now.