Does Section 8 Housing Overpay for Lakewood Doubles?

[Bill Call]

The average rent for a two family home in Lakewood is around $625 per month.

The Section 8 housing program is assuming about $750 per month for average rent for a double in Lakewood.

That is about 20% more than the average market rates.

The Section 8 guidelines require the program to pay market rates. If they are paying more than market rates in Lakewood:

Why?

Is this a good thing or a bad thing?

[Jim O'Bryan]

Why?

Is this a good thing or a bad thing?

Bill

Another couple other interesting things that should be looked at:

1) when we were had our single for rent we got more than one person that was wondering if we would take three Section 8 families, or two into the single. Of course we said no, but how many absentee or other landlords would have jumped at the chance to take the quick cash?

2) I know of at least two groups of people whose "job" it is to find homeless people Section 8 housing, and for some reason they seem to be focusing on Lakewood not, Rocky River, Bay, Fairview, North Olmsted, etc. My biggest problem is that the naivete of some think "we must find them homes" without every looking at the impact on social and city services.

There has to be a way to implement limits on the amount of Section 8 allowed in Lakewood. I have been working with landlords and friends to just say no. The best suburb in the most livable region should be raising rents and home values not allowing others to devalue our investments.


FWIW

[Bill Call]

Why?

Is this a good thing or a bad thing?

Bill

Another couple other interesting things that should be looked at:2) I know of at least two groups of people whose "job" it is to find homeless people Section 8 housing, and for some reason they seem to be focusing on Lakewood not, Rocky River, Bay, Fairview, North Olmsted, etc.

My own hunch is that Lakewood has been targeted.

If the City had a policy on housing and a housing department, that department would have some power to demand answers about the possibility that:

1. Lakewood is a special target and
2. Section 8 is overpaying for Lakewood properties.

If the City had a housing policy, which it doesn't.

If I wanted to live in a community full of people who were all the same I would move to Bay. On the other hand I want to live in a City with working people who maintain community standards in education and behavior.

With the proper leadership and plan of action Lakewood would be on the cusp of great things. If we had leadership, if we had a plan.

[Lynn Farris]

Jim,

Section 8 housing has proven to be more successful than projects. Actually one of the offices I was in for a long time was Lake Shore Towers which was a senior citizen section 8 builiding. So is the Westerly I believe. I would love to have almost any of these people renting from me and living beside me. Likewise a lot of handicapped people live in Section 8 housing. These aren't bad people - but they may have a little more trouble than you and I do paying rent. There are single mothers who have been left high and dry and need a safe place to raise their children.

Again, no one wants people taking advantage of the system around, but there are a lot of people in today's society that have been downsized and just need a little help. My mother always said "there, but for the Grace of God, it could be you or me."

Be picky about your tenants sure, but don't give a blanket no section 8. JMHO. BTW, Jim, you can't fool me, you are one of the kindest people I know. You would be the first person to help someone who was in need.

[David Anderson]

Can landlords call the CMHA, or whomever administers the Section 8 program, to gain information on the perspective tenant? For example, should a Section 8 recipient and I complete the paperwork to consider leasing one my houses, is there a Section 8 officer I can call to obtain the applicant's rental history or other relevant information?

Anyone can see where I'm going with this. If an applicant's history is available and complete, I should weigh the application as I would any perspective tenant's.

I think this is an important issue for Lakewood and I look forward to reading thoughtful feedback.

Thanks.

[Kenneth Warren]

Bill:

There is no good reason for rates to be higher than the market.

There are two measures that are used to establish the rates.

Effective 10/1/05 to 9/30/06 the official HUD Fair Market Rent rates for Cleveland – from Elyria to Mentor, containing Cuyahoga, Lake, Medina, Lorain, Geauga counties are as follows:

Studio – $524
One Bedroom - $598
Two Bedroom - $728
Three Bedroom - $954
Four Bedroom - $1025

Again, there is a second step required in the Rent Reasonable Study to ascertain that the above rates are reasonable given the local market conditions.

Request a copy of the Rent Reasonableness Study from CMHA and determine whether there is any discrepancy or flawed methodology.

Some broad questions that occur to me are: 1) who determines the geography of the local market; 2) and how is the local market rent determined for the Rent Reasonable Study; 3) how does one appeal that the rents posited by the Rent Reasonableness Study are unreasonable.

I hope you will get on the case and give the matter critical scrutiny and review.

Kenneth Warren

[Jim O'Bryan]

Ken

Prices change drastically in this town. A half of a house on Hopkins might be $450 but on West Clifton could be $850-$950.

Right now the homes on the Westside of Lakewood are enjoying a large popularity with the younger crowd that LOVE the ability to walk to the bars.

Which drives up prices people will pay.


FWIW


.

[Ed FitzGerald]

Although its a sensitive subject to many, I think we need to have a real community dialogue about Section 8 in Lakewood. To me, the question is not whether Section 8 should exist at all- we don't have any control over that. The question is whether Lakewood is absorbing more than our proportional share of Section 8, while cities like Rocky River are not pulling their weight. Incidentally, more and more of our units are going to non-senior citizens. For instance, Lakeshore Towers now has Section 8 residents who are not senior citizens.

[Jim O'Bryan]

Ed

I am not so sure it is as sensitive as it once was. I know many that are seriously talking about the subject of "fair share" because of the huge influx which can completely be laid on the feet of groups that have as Ken says "targeted" Lakewood.

I remember listening to Ken Warren talking about how the "Regionalists" want to lay hands on the Lakewood Library, his response was, "I will consider it as soon as the rest of the region take their fair share of Section 8." There is a huge difference between helping those down on their luck, and it being used as a weapon to break up communities, while those doing it have big fancy homes away from the Section 8 buildings they fill.

I think some of us have done enough of a drill down to realize that Lakewood is under attack from Regional Powers, and it can be seen in many various parts of day to day life in Lakewood.

To me the single biggest problem and one that needs to be studied is how Section 8 affects city services like police, health and human services, etc.

Can a city demand money from the Federal Government to help offset the burden from these pay for groups that try to fill us up?

Is it possible to crack down on absentee landlords that buy and then fill with anyone.

Just thoughts.


.

[Phil Florian]

Price aside, do we have any real data about Section 8 renters vs. non-Section 8 renters? As others have pointed out on this site, there is a significant bias on the Deck against renters in general and Section 8 has the benefit of not only being renters but also a political football since it is a government subsidy program.

There is a general bias based on what? Is there real data that houses that are left in disrepair are a) absentee landlords and b) Section 8 recipients? What is the percentage of Section 8 renters compared to the rest of the renter market? What is the difference between County seeking out homes in Lakewood vs. landlords, who may have a harder and harder time filling homes, seeking Section 8 eligiblity? Who is responsible for bad tenants?

Section 8 tenants are, in the eyes of the law, no different than non-Section 8 tenants. I believe if there is a legal eviction that the landlord also has to inform the local Housing Authority but there is nothing that makes them any different than other tenants. Tenants still have a portion they should pay and responsibilities for the property.

So I guess I want to know why Section 8 is such a whipping boy and if it is actually just a general bias against renters in general (often cited as a problem in Lakewood). We are a rental town and Section 8 is a way to ensure that homes are filled and landlords are making money. If anyone has any real data vs. anectodal data that show that as a rule Section 8 tenants are bad lets see it.

Otherwise, what are we talking about? If we stick tenant issues aside, this is a way that landlords can get more money in a dry market and more people living in the city and spending money is a good thing, right? Even if is government money it is still money. If we deal with tenant issues, then lets look at some real numbers and determine is this a Section 8 issue or a more general renter issue. If that is the case, who is responsible when a property is not maintained and there are issues with people who live in them?

As for "targeting" Lakewood, how is that an issue? Do a certain amount of landlords HAVE to be Section 8 landlords? Can the Housing Authority tap a landlord in any city and say, "You must be a Section 8 landlord...so be it!" ? If not, is it our fault that Rocky River landlords seem to have enough non-Section 8 business to not have to seek out the apparently more difficult Section 8 tenant? Could a person on a fixed income afford a Rocky River or Bay apartment and if they could, could they afford to live and shop there? Rocky River isn't nearly as friendly for a non-car person, a point we in Lakewood continually pat ourselves on the back about. We are supposedly a walkable city with access to lots of bus routes vs. a Rocky River or worse in Bay and Westlake. Your typical Section 8 family or individual probably doesn't have a car...why would they want an apartment in Bay with no easy to access public transportation?

I think we as a city should embrace the needs of the County and do it right instead of shunting off certain people in our population that make us uncomfortable, as discussed in other threads (like the Youth Re-Entry thread). Instead of putting up barriers (which, at best, hinder and slow the inevitable and make working with these programs successfully that much harder) we should grab and run with it and develop positions within the city (if they don't already exist) to work as liaison with these programs on a weekly or at least monthly basis. And to boot, you make these programs (Section 8, DCFS, County Courts, whatever) help pay the city for this position(s).

We can truly say Lakewood is "A great place to live and make a fresh start" vs. "A place where we hope there aren't too many sex offenders and Section 8 vouchers."

Gah...I rambled again. I need to learn to edit myself. One day, I surely will...

[Jim O'Bryan]

Price aside, do we have any real data about Section 8 renters vs. non-Section 8 renters? As others have pointed out on this site, there is a significant bias on the Deck against renters in general and Section 8 has the benefit of not only being renters but also a political football since it is a government subsidy program.

Phil

I will digest this later have a meeting to run to. This idea that there is a biased against renters come from ONE thread where I pointed out that I thought I had more of a vested interest in Lakewood than renters. This is when Doug added his rent hater signature to his posts.

My only point was not that I was better, but owning two homes and three businesses in Lakewood make it hard for me to just get up and move. Not that renters are evil, or that Lakewood hates renters.

As you know I am not only a landlord(that would be someone that enjoys renters) but I am also a renter myself with my business space.

This thing that the board hates renters is about as true as this board hates windmills.

We really have to stop that whole angle, that I admit was my fault.

peace.



.

[Phil Florian]

Jim, consider that portion of my post retracted! Or modified, anyway because there is, in general, OUTSIDE of the Observer a bias against renters and that is a fact (well, more likely anyway). People just don't seem to have as much faith in folks who don't have solid roots.

That said, that isn't the point of my post (as you noted) because there IS a large bias against Section 8 tenants and landlords that I really wonder if there is any factual basis or if it is "gut level" feeling that harkens back to the Welfare Queen of the Reagan years.

Anyway, thanks for the clarification, Jim. Maybe if there were more pro-renter discussions it would make more of an impact. Typically if there is talk about renters it is usually about a) not enough to fill what we have, b) poor condition of rental property and/or c) poor behavior of the tenants. Yes, there is the person who posts that counter this but actual discussions are around the bad, not the good or the positive. Just a thought.

[Jim O'Bryan]

Phil

If the discussion is about empty rentals. That would indicate that the owners are the problem, not the renters. Most of this is being reversed very quickly thanks to the Feds, Banks and Wages.

If the discussion is about poorly maintained rental property, again it is on the owner not the renter. I noticed yesterday that we had trees growing in our rental gutters. I give them a discount for cutting grass and maintaining the property but often I am out cutting the grass. As they have not cleaned the gutters again it is on me. I am the one that gets cited not them. It all falls on my shoulders.

However the behavior of the renter falls on both of us. I live in the neighborhood, my neighbors are well my neighbors. I have to look them in the eye, and I take the heat. My renters had a big party on the 4th, no problem. At 3 am they set off 1,000 firecrackers, the neighbor next to them has a new baby. The next day I read the renters the riot act then walked to the other house and apologized. I also told the renters to do the same.

-----

As for the Welfare Queen I agree that it is over rated and as a flaming liberal I would rather loose to the pros than to let anyone fall through the cracks.

HOWEVER

I think you have to agree that in general low income people rely more on emergency care than preventive medicine, so they tax health services. They generally need more food and help. Also it would seem that a great many people without any vested investment in a rental take less care. This is not ALL but a pretty good percentage it would seem.

As I listen to the police scanner a great many calls go to Section 8 apartments, and to the apartments featuring the elderly. Too much of either would seem to tax the systems and programs that a city offers. When outside groups then get paid for bringing more in, it gets harder and harder for all very quickly.

I am not for outlawing Section 8 in Lakewood, I just think that River, Bay, Fairview, North Olmstead, Westlake should step up to the bar and help with the burden.

One of the huge problems I see with the Regionalists is that they all begin to stutter when members from all the communities are in the same room and Section 8 pops up. This is because it becomes harder to say, "We will dump them all in Lakewood, Cleveland, Cleveland Heights, etc." and they will NEVER talk about sharing that burden.

Funny huh?


.

[Kenneth Warren]

Phil raises a good point about data. What are the facts?

Is City Council tracking or studying the matter?

From the public policy argument, the selling point for the generous voucher check is to ensure that the landlord maintains the property and ensure its continued valuation as real property.

Does this public policy principle check out in actual Lakewood practice?

What is actually happening in Lakewood?

I do believe that the first line of inquiry is to probe the Rent Reasonableness Rate for Lakewood, because an inflated rate can create conditions for unscrupulous landlords to milk the program and turn decent neighborhoods into slums.

I think one needs first to look at the matter through price point to satisfy ourselves that the rate is in fact the market rate for each Lakewood neighborhood.

CMHA should be able to satisfy the community that their administration and method for setting this rate is competent.

That said, a program such as Section 8 is designed to provide a subsidy for housing and change the social form of the city and region.

The spatial stratification of class and race beyond Cuyahoga County has created de-stabilizing conditions in the inner ring suburbs such as Lakewood and to a lesser extent Rocky River where the quality of life – few abandoned properties, little drug and gang activity – attracts the attention of CMHA and fair housing advocates for increasing entry into the voucher market for properties.

CMHA and fair housing advocates have an interest in placing clients in clean and safe communities with decent schools. Here Lakewood’s amenities create an affordable attraction.

How many members from a disadvantaged class a community can sensibly integrate at any given time is the big question?

How does City Hall manage such a process?

How do neighborhoods and institutions respond to the demand to integrate behavior formed through material and social disadvantage into a functional norm?

This is what we are facing.

We need to organize an effective practice.

As homeowners become anxious, opportunities are created for unscrupulous realtors and landlords to profit from a generous voucher check.

I know of one situation where one house seller was low-balled by a realtor who has turned around and rented the house.

Typically, as rent vouchers expand in a community the long-term residents will increasingly claim that Section 8 is responsible for poorly kept properties, littering, vandalism, noise and crime.

Are slum conditions actually occurring in Lakewood as a result of the Housing Choice (Section 8) Vouchers?

If so why?

How is the communication and coordination between CMHA and the Lakewood Building Department?

Is Bill Call suggesting that CMHA is not responsive to Lakewood and that Lakewood should take and manage the Housing Program?

Kenneth Warren

[Chris Trapp]

Jim,

Forgive me if I've missed the answer to the following questions in the previous posts. What outside group is getting paid to bring Section8 tenants to Lakewood? And how exactly do you do that?

Is it not the individual landlord that decides (1) whether or not to accept Section8 tenants? and (2) which tenants from the pool of applicants to rent to?

It seems to me that the fault for an abundance of low quality tenants in Lakewood lies with the landlords who have chosen to take the easy rental check each month instead of being a responsible member of the community and waiting for a quality tenant.

As a landlord, I currently do not accept Section8 tenants...not because I have anything against them, but because I haven't felt that my need to expand the market for potential tenants has outweighed the effort to go through the process of having approved Section8 housing. It is my understanding that if I did go through the process, I would still be able to screen the potential tenants as I would any other (non-Section8) tenant.

Screening - not the choice of whether or not to accept Section8 tenants - is the key.

In these tough times for rental property owners (low interest rates/sluggish economy), some landlords have been forced or have chosen to accept tenants of poor quality in order to pay the mortgage. This may be because they have poor quality housing and can't attract the quality tenants. It may be because they are not doing a good job of managing their business. It may be because they are basing their decision solely on short-term economic factors.

The original topic of this thread: the fact that 'market' rents paid by CMHA are too high, seems to contribute to the appeal of Section8 when selecting tenants purely on an immediate financial basis. For that reason, I agree that these rents should be reviewed.

I don't think that you can fault anyone for choosing to accept Section8 tenants in their rental housing. I do think that you can fault landlords for having little (or no) selectivity when they make the choice to collect an easy rent check without considering the implications to the community.