By
 |
| Right-wing RhodeMap rage is distorting the value of the plan |
We all know the story of the
police murder of Mike Brown in the St. Louis suburb of Ferguson, MO, the high profile demonstrations from
the black community in response, and the heavy handed, militarized police
reaction.
The US Department of Justice released a shocking report of systemic racism and economic
exploitation of the black citizens of Ferguson, but the report from the EPI
provides insight into how a racially segregated, predominantly low income
African-American community like Ferguson can develop in the first place.
Rothstein
begins by blaming racial prejudice and racist public policy. “No doubt, private
prejudice and suburbanites’ desire for homogenous affluent environments
contributed to segregation in St. Louis and other metropolitan areas.
But these explanations are too partial, and too conveniently excuse public policy from responsibility. A more powerful cause of metropolitan segregation in St. Louis and nationwide has been the explicit intents of federal, state, and local governments to create racially segregated metropolises.”
It’s
important to understand that the policies Rothstein exposes in his report are
not located only in the immediate area of St. Louis, these policies existed
across the nation, and even where such policies no longer officially exist,
their effects can still be felt today. These policies, according to Rothstein,
include:
- Government subsidies for white suburban developments that excluded blacks, depriving African Americans of the 20th century home-equity driven wealth gains reaped by whites;
- Denial of adequate municipal services in ghettos, leading to slum conditions in black neighborhoods that reinforced whites’ conviction that “blacks” and “slums” were synonymous;
- Boundary, annexation, spot zoning, and municipal incorporation policies designed to remove African Americans from residence near white neighborhoods, or to prevent them from establishing residence near white neighborhoods;
- Urban renewal and redevelopment programs to shift ghetto locations, in the guise of cleaning up those slums.
RhodeMap
RI was developed with an understanding of many of the problems Rothstein cites.
The public review draft of RhodeMap has a section at the end concentrating on social equity that explicitly called on the plan to “implement a new economic model based on equity, fairness, and opportunity.”
It is this part of the plan, the part that seeks to undo the kind of problems that plague communities of color like Ferguson, that seems to most bother RhodeMap opponents.
The public review draft of RhodeMap has a section at the end concentrating on social equity that explicitly called on the plan to “implement a new economic model based on equity, fairness, and opportunity.”
It is this part of the plan, the part that seeks to undo the kind of problems that plague communities of color like Ferguson, that seems to most bother RhodeMap opponents.
Rothstein
takes a shot at offering possible solutions towards the end of his report,
writing, “Many practical programs and regulatory strategies can address
problems of Ferguson and similar communities nationwide.”
For instance, governments might
“require even outer-ring suburbs to repeal zoning ordinances that prohibit
construction of housing that lower- or moderate-income residents – white or
black – can afford. Going further, we could require every community to permit
development of housing to accommodate a ‘fair share’ of its region’s low-income
and minority populations…”
Rhode Island has something of a fair share law (as
part of the Rhode Island Comprehensive Housing Production
and Rehabilitation Act of 2004 and Rhode Island Low and Moderate Income Housing
Act (Rhode Island
General Laws 45-53)) which sets a 10% goal for each of the state’s cities and
town to meet—the goal being that 10% of the units in a town are “affordable.”
Most of
the pushback against RhodeMap comes from communities that have very little
affordable rental housing and are predominantly White.
Legislation to undermine
existing laws requiring cities and towns to plan for affordable housing is part
of that pushback , such as House Bill 5643,
which would “eliminate the mandate requiring cities and towns to include an
affordable housing program in their comprehensive plans” or House Bill 5644 which “would remove the mandate
requiring cities and towns to include an affordable housing program in their
comprehensive plans and would provide an opt-out provision regarding any
provision in the state guide plan regarding affordable housing and any related
land use provisions” are naked attempts to keep affordable housing, and those
who need it, out of their communities.
The
legislators who are introducing and supporting the bills are all Republicans,
or in one case a pseudo “Independent” (Blake Filippi), who represent primarily
suburban and rural communities like Richmond (Note: part of Rep. Justin Price’s
district), West Greenwich (part of Rep. Sherry Robert’s district) Coventry, Hopkinton, Charlestown, Portsmouth, Exeter and East Greenwich. Note that Richmond
and West Greenwich have made “no progress” and
East Greenwich has made “no significant progress”
in meeting the 10% goal.
Undoing
the damage of decades of racist housing policy and preventing future Fergusons
requires a plan. RhodeMap RI isn’t quite that plan, it’s more a collection of
guidelines to help communities develop a plan, but it’s a good step in the
right direction.
Those opposed to RhodeMap like to put on their “free market” hats and declare that any government intervention into housing is some sort of fascist violation of property rights.
However, racially segregated housing is the product of just the kind of government sponsored social engineering that RhodeMap opponents complain of, and many of those opponents have also waged fights to prevent construction of affordable rental units in places such as Barrington and East Greenwich.
Those opposed to RhodeMap like to put on their “free market” hats and declare that any government intervention into housing is some sort of fascist violation of property rights.
However, racially segregated housing is the product of just the kind of government sponsored social engineering that RhodeMap opponents complain of, and many of those opponents have also waged fights to prevent construction of affordable rental units in places such as Barrington and East Greenwich.
To be
consistent these defenders of the free market should be calling for a repeal of
all zoning restrictions in their communities, but of course they will not.
Instead, they will zealously guard the status quo by defending zoning laws that
the prevent construction of low income housing too close to their safe suburban
enclaves.
Opponents of RhodeMap object to being called racists, but when their claims of defending property rights are not equally applied to property owners who want to build affordable housing on their land, what else are we to think?
Opponents of RhodeMap object to being called racists, but when their claims of defending property rights are not equally applied to property owners who want to build affordable housing on their land, what else are we to think?
In
February, Author Steve Ahlquist made $213.12 in February writing for RI Future (and zero
for being reprinted in Progressive Charlestown). Consider supporting his
efforts through PayPal to the email below:
Steve
Ahlquist is a writer, artist and current president of the Humanists of Rhode
Island, a non-profit group dedicated to reason, compassion, optimism, courage
and action. The views expressed are his own and not necessarily those of any
organization of which he is a member.
His photos
and video are usable under the Creative Commons license. Free to share with
credit.
"We
must take sides. Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim. Silence
encourages the tormentor, never the tormented.” - Elie Weisel
“If you
are neutral in situations of injustice, you have chosen the side of the
oppressor." - Desmond Tutu