AFFH, What Is It & HOW BAD IS IT????????

This article was written by Bill Bigelow, who keeps track of what the county commissioners and administrators are doing to Charlotte County, Florida.  For those not in Charlotte County,  don't let this happen to your county or city.

At the end of the first article is the 2nd one How Obama Stole Dubuque, which explains a lot more about AFFH.

All:

I am sending you an e-mail which I sent to Janet Knowlton today regarding the HUD AFFH regulation discussed in a Charlotte Sun news article, which was buried on page 17 of last Saturday’s edition---when it was Page 1 news.

Last week, I received a phone call from a county Commissioner to discuss an e-mail I sent on 1-22-16 to every member of the Charter Review Commission, stating the many reasons why the County Administrator job should be an elected office, not a BOCC appointed office. In that e-mail, I cited four compelling reasons why the current Administrator should have been terminated long ago; but, the circling of the wagons by the five Commissioners around the Administrator, assured the Administrator would remain in office forever. I thought it most curious and damning that an e-mail sent to each member of the Charter Review Committee by a citizen proposing a Charter change would end up being forwarded to any BOCC commissioner, especially given the content of that e-mail.

During the phone conversation, it was apparent the Commissioner and I have a major disagreement on whether the $750K HUD grant money should have been accepted, especially given the massive information readily available to show that AFFH (approved in July 2015) now sets up all HUD grant recipients for mandated change by HUD of the societal makeup of the area governed by the grant recipient. I told the Commissioner the e-mail he had called me about contained the attachment of a recent National Review article outlining the totally unconstitutional actions that HUD has taken against Dubuque, IA to mandate societal change in that city; and therefore he should read that article for all elements of AFFH are now embedded in the HUD grant agreement Charlotte Government has now executed. The Commissioner advised me that the agreement represents nothing but standard legal boilerplate, which it does not. The Commissioner closed the phone conversation by stating the Commissioner’s plate was full and the Commissioner would have no time to read what HUD did to Dubuque, IA. That article is attached to the Knowlton e-mail I am sending you.

Bill Bigelow

From: Bill Bigelow
Sent: Monday, February 01, 2016 2:57 PM
To: Knowlton Janette
Cc: Truex Bill ; Constance Chris ; Duffy Tricia ; Deutsch Stephen R ; Doherty Ken ; Sandrock Ray
Subject: AFFH

Ms. Knowlton, ESQ

I read your comments in the Charlotte Sun last Saturday, which inferred that your idea of the new HUD regulation, AFFH, is merely that “it is pretty benign.”

Given the massive analytical critiques of AFFH available from many, many credible investigative news sources throughout the country, I can only conclude from this quoted statement that any review of AFFH you made was superficial at best. To show you how wrong you, Mr. Herbert, Mr. Sandrock and the five Commissioners are on your closed, collective mindset that HUD is nothing but a good intentioned federal agency (and we need HUD’s money), I am attaching National Review’s recent article entitled “How Obama Stole Dubuque”. While reading this article, you should bear in mind the financial/societal demographics of Charlotte County closely mirror those of Dubuque, IA and that Charlotte County is now buying into the Agenda 21 strategy of Regionalism.

Ms. Knowlton, as the highest paid bureaucrat in Charlotte County, it is your and the second highest paid bureaucrat’s (Ray Sandock) responsibility to quickly identify and then critically analyze all major problems which could potentially harm the county and its citizens. AFFH has extreme potential to negatively impact the county’s societal demographics and BOCC governance power, as established under the Charlotte County Charter; and that power play could occur from HUD, which now has an open door to act against Charlotte thanks to local government action of accepting the $750K “blood money “ HUD grant----which agreement incorporates all aspects of AFFH without specifically identifying the regulation; and, therefore, the dangers of AFFH are now operative in Charlotte County, if HUD chooses to act against us. Dubuque is only the tip of HUD activism iceberg as evidenced by HUD’s creation of problems now being faced by other municipalities (Dubuque and Westchester County are only two examples). HUD lawsuits are now rampant under the Obama Administration and are geared to attack existing American Society, under Obama’s interpretations of the Fair Housing Law and its embedded regulations. Most municipalities cave early under such pressure/law suits for they do not have the resources to finance a long drawn out HUD lawsuit.

As Deborah Thornton, an analyst for the Iowa’s Public Interest Institute stated after analyzing the probable impact of AFFH and concluding AFFH could spell the end of local government in America, “If you take their money, you play by their rules.” HUD’s regulations are an attack on the American people, and, therefore, are not acceptable to all vigilant Americans, which you have shown us you are not.                   

When last June at the BOCC meeting, you were warned the acceptance of the $750K HUD grant could have major negative impact on the county if the county accepted this grant, you and Ray Sandrock chose to totally ignore the warning and, as a consequence, you have let down the citizens of this county and the Commissioners (who rarely read or analyze anything they are asked to vote on) by not deeply delving into the potential negative impact AFFH could have on Charlotte’s societal makeup, as chosen by our citizens. No, you chose to side with your HUD consultant (who obviously had a financial conflict of interest) to ignore the warnings out of hand; and, therefore, you have potentially put this county in harms way.

Given the enormity of this issue, I now challenge you to a public debate on the issue. You can bring in your experts and I will bring in my experts and we will debate in a pre-announced public forum whether the county is now vulnerable under HUD’s AFFH activism becaue Charlotte government accepted in October 2015 the first grant offered to us after AFFH was formalized in July 2015. What say you?

Oh, one more thing. Because the County accepted HUD money, HUD is now allowed to run their 2 minute “feel good” Fair Housing commercials on our local radio stations. Such type of marketing is done to either sell a product or to dumb down the listeners to pre-condition them about unpleasant things that are about to come. Thanks, for bringing this very disingenuous federal government department, which is famous foralways going well beyond federal laws, into our community.

Bill Bigelow

The writer is STANLY KURTZ,  and published in  NATIONAL REVIEW.   Let this be a lesson what can happen by accepting a GRANT  from HUD.   WGB Commerts: are inserted by Bill Bigelow AS they relate to Charlotte County, Florida which has already accepted a GRANT from HUD.

   

NATIONAL REVIEW

The Corner

How Obama Stole Dubuque

by Stanley Kurtz January 13, 2016 9:53 AM

What state is Dubuque in? If you answered Chicago, you are correct. Chicago’s no state, you say? Don’t be so 18th century — so “constitutional.” Dubuque is in Chicago, which is now a kind of state. Or to put it differently, the Obama administration is in the process of replacing our entire system of government — made up of nested local, state, and national, levels — with a regional framework. In Obama’s new dispensation, suburbs, small towns, and modest-sized cities like Dubuque will be turned into subordinate satellites of regional mega-cities like Chicago, regardless of which state these local governments are formally a part of.

Welcome to the world of “Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing” (AFFH), President Obama’s transformative new regulation. How will AFFH work? The city of Dubuque gives us one of our best and most frightening previews yet. I hope the presidential candidates are watching, because Obama’s new AFFH regulation and the Dubuque fiasco ought to be an issue in this year’s Iowa caucuses. I also hope American citizens pay attention to the travesty in Dubuque, because it’s not too late to save your hometown from Dubuque’s fate. (I’ll tell you how to do this below.)

An account of Dubuque as a forerunner of a post-AFFH world comes to us courtesy of a stunning report by Deborah Thornton, a policy analyst for Iowa’s Public Interest Institute. The report tells the story of how Dubuque was pressured to cede large swathes of its governing authority to the Department of Housing and Urban Development, which has forced the city to direct its limited low-income “Section 8” housing resources, not to its own needy citizens, but to voucher-holders from Chicago.

Unlike the more familiar forerunner of AFFH, Westchester County, Dubuque is not an upper-middle-class suburb but a small and economically struggling city (WGB Comment: Just like Charlotte County). At $44,600, median income in Dubuque (WGB Comment: Realtor. Com sites $53,388 as being the annual median family income in Dubuque as compared to Charlotte County's medium annual family income as being $44K) is well below the state median of $51,843. Like other nearby Mississippi river towns with aging populations, Dubuque is hard-pressed to provide good jobs and decent housing for the low-income people already there: poor families with children, retired elderly, and disabled adults.(WGB Comment: Mirrors Charlotte County's experience) The city’s priority is to revive its economy by keeping its young people from moving away, and by attracting new residents who are willing and able to start businesses. (WGB Comment: Wow, Dubuque is a Clone of Charlotte County in all such problem areas) Like any city, Dubuque’s first obligation is to see to the needs of the citizens who already live there, vote, and pay taxes. Or so it was in pre-AFFH America.

Our story begins about eight years ago. Just as Dubuque was reeling from the effects of the 2008 recession and dealing with an uptick in its own low-income housing needs, the city was hit with a wave of “Section 8” low-income housing voucher applicants from Chicago. A few years earlier, Chicago had systematically demolished its most drug- and crime-ridden high-rise public housing facilities, using grants from HUD. Yet through its own mismanagement, Chicago had failed to properly replace its now depleted low-income housing stock, leaving many Chicago residents looking to use their Section 8 vouchers elsewhere.

With many more Section 8 applicants than it could house, Dubuque instituted a low-income housing point system granting preference to Dubuque residents, county residents, state residents, and out-of-state residents, in that order. Although HUD’s rules ostensibly allow localities to craft their own housing priorities, Dubuque’s point system was deemed unacceptable by HUD. The feds undertook a review of Dubuque’s housing policy that effectively treated the city as part of greater Chicago.

This, of course, is ridiculous. Dubuque is 200 miles and a four-to-five hour drive away from Chicago, even without traffic. And of course the two cities are in different states. But by effectively treating Dubuque and Chicago as part of the same “region,”(WGB Comment: Regionalization is a Agenda 21 concept/tactic) HUD was able to declare Dubuque’s low-income housing point system discriminatory. Since the vast majority of Section 8 applicants from Chicago were African-Americans, Dubuque’s preferences for citizens of its own city, county, and state were deemed racist. HUD insisted that Dubuque would have to admit housing applicants in conformity with the demographics of the larger (HUD-defined) region. Somehow Dubuque had become a satellite of Chicago.

Having previously accepted HUD funding through the Housing Choice Voucher (Section 8) program, as well as HUD’s Community Development Block Grant program, Dubuque was formally obligated to “affirmatively further fair housing” in whatever way HUD defined that obligation. Refusal to submit to HUD’s dictates would have led to the withdrawal of federal funding, a lawsuit for supposed discrimination, or both. The cowed elected officials of Dubuque accordingly signed a “voluntary” (in truth, forced) consent agreement that effectively ceded control of the city’s housing policy to HUD for at least five years.

Under HUD’s detailed oversight, Dubuque must now actively recruit Section 8 voucher holders from the Chicago area. In fact, as of January 2015, the percentage of African-American voucher users in Dubuque was larger than the percentage of African-Americans living in Chicago. The problem is that very few of these new public housing residents have ever lived or paid taxes in Dubuque, or even Iowa. The feds have essentially commandeered Dubuque to solve Chicago’s public housing shortage. HUD’s diktat also imposes a huge administrative burden on Dubuque, with monthly, quarterly, annual, and five-year plans to be filed and followed up on. (Yes, a “five-year plan.”) Having “voluntarily” consented to a federal takeover, Dubuque is now obligated to follow HUD’s every command for at least five years.

Thornton rightly notes that Dubuque is a template for the coming implementation of AFFH. The rule will make it easy for HUD to effectively annex other Iowa river-towns—like Clinton, Davenport, and Burlington—to greater Chicago, although those cities are no closer to Chicago than Dubuque. The same pattern will play out nationally under AFFH, Thornton warns.

In a post-AFFH world, every region of the United States will be compelled “to meet nationally determined standards for the management and makeup of every aspect” of local life, says Thornton. AFFH will also force local communities into regional consortia directed by what Thornton calls “unelected governing boards who do not represent the voters.” Those electorally unaccountable regional commissions, she continues, “will set targets for the desired percentage of ‘types’ of people to live in each area of the region.” Cities and businesses, “buried under mounds of paperwork,” will have no choice but to submit.

How can a housing rule control every aspect of local life? It’s far easier than you might imagine. AFFH redefines “fair housing” to include proximity to transportation, jobs, and schools. This will effectively extend the power that HUD now exercises over Dubuque’s housing policy to nearly every other aspect of local development and planning. Under AFFH, once a town takes HUD money, it effectively loses control not only over housing but schools, zoning, transportation, the environment, and business location. As Thornton concludes, “If you take their money, you play by their rules.”

Dubuque shows that, over time, Obama’s AFFH rule could spell the end of local government in America. Thornton rightly warns against the regional consortia provided for in AFFH. Once HUD pressures a municipality into such a regional governing entity, local control is lost. But the Dubuque case strikes me as an even scarier precedent than Thornton implies. A city may not even have to formally join a regional consortium to lose its capacity for self-government. After all, HUD didn’t need to force Dubuque to formally join a regional consortium in order to turn it into a satellite of Chicago. All the feds had to do was classify Dubuque as part of greater Chicago, then judge the city’s housing demographics as out-of-balance with reference to the racial and ethnic make-up of the region as a whole. At that point, a trumped-up charge of racism and threats to withdraw funding or file a lawsuit “logically” followed. Without joining anything, Dubuque is for all practical purposes now part of Chicago, essentially because HUD has declared it so.

AFFH makes this trick particularly easy to pull off because the rule instructs all localities in receipt of federal grants to analyze their housing practices with reference to “regional data” provided by HUD. By forcing every town, small city, or suburb (WGB Comment: Don't kid yourselves, a county HUD grantee is included) that takes HUD money to evaluate the “fairness” of its demographic mix with reference to the demographics of the nearest mega-city, HUD can effectively institute regional government in America by fiat. If the ethnic mix of your town is substantially different than the ethnic mix of a city even 200 miles, a five-hour drive, and another state away, you will have to recruit that city’s dominant ethnicities to populate your low-income housing, so long as HUD declares you to be in that “region.” As Iowa is to Chicago, so may New Hampshire soon be to Boston. Are you listening presidential candidates?

In its story on the announcement of AFFH, The New York Times quoted Secretary Julian Castro downplaying HUD’s intended enforcement efforts. Castro portrays the cutoff of federal funds as a last resort that he barely intends to use, if at all. Dubuque makes a mockery of Castro’s claim, unless you credit the absurd pretense that the Dubuque’s compliance agreement was in fact voluntary, rather than the response of a financially-strapped town (WGB Comment: and “Charlotte County”) to threats of federal defunding and/or lawsuits—threats levied on the basis of a thoroughly contrived “regionalist” premise. When it comes to housing, Secretary Castro is now forcibly controlling virtually every move Dubuque makes.

Come to think of it, Dubuque may not be in the state of Chicago after all. What state is Dubuque really in? If you answered H.U.D., you are correct.

If you don’t want your hometown to become the next Dubuque, there’s something you can do to prevent it right now. Organize your neighbors and force your local government to stop taking HUD money. (For more on how to do this, go here.)

— Stanley Kurtz is a senior fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center. He can be reached at comments.kurtz@nationalreview.com