Stein’s article is easily one of the most interesting, and easiest to read, pieces we’ve looked at so far. It talks about the issues we’ve studied so far: gentrification, affordable housing, displacement, and urban development. This content is not surprising, given Stein’s background in housing and labor. In the article, he paints a critical picture of DeBlasio’s “new” housing plan.
Stein starts off with a fairly unbiased recounting of DeBlasio’s plan: to use inclusionary zoning to create more affordable housing in a city desperately in need of it. And at first, Stein’s criticisms seem aimed at the broad inequality in the city rather than at the mayor’s “new” initiative. I can’t stop using quotes for the word new, because as Stein points out, this is not a wholly new plan. It’s a stepped up version of Bloomberg’s plan, replacing voluntary incentives with mandatory rules. And if one were to be considered better, it would be one requiring more of developers. But better does not necessarily mean good.
Stein outlines how this plan would lead to greater displacement, touching on concepts we’ve read before in this class. The required “affordable units” are priced according to a scale not actually in line with the average income of the city. For instance, units marked as “affordable” are noted as being priced for households making roughly $10,000 more than the average income in New York City. The other criticism leveled is that not enough affordable housing is created. The units created are unlikely to match the amount of affordable housing lost in the process. Stein specifically brings up rent regulated apartments in his argument. These apartments are priced to be more affordable than the so called affordable housing created by DeBlasio’s plan. Landlords of these units could easily be enticed to sell the buildings, and new owners could evict, demolish, and rebuild for greater profit. In addition, the number of wealthy people moving into the area would significantly outweigh the number of lower income people living in the affordable units. This would accelerate gentrification, driving up costs in the entire neighborhood and forcing low income residents out.
The author notes several alternatives that would be preferable to inclusionary zoning. The first seems obvious: for the city to own and properly maintain public housing; this would serve to stall gentrification. He also suggests an expansion of rent regulated housing, noting that it is far more universal and therefore more useful than simply cheapening a small number of otherwise expensive units.
Stein touches on elements of the housing system that by this point we are quite familiar with. However, he makes it seem more relevant than chapters from books set in what can seem like the distant past. By bringing the attention to issues going on right now, and explaining them in todays terms, he brings the issue to life. He also makes an important statement about profit: it shouldn’t, and really can’t, be king when it comes to housing. There isn’t a way to make affordable housing both truly affordable and profitable for developers. And at the end of the day, don’t we owe it to our citizens to at least house them?
