76th Street

To illustrate my point, I provide a clip from Monty Python. The skit is about a man, Dennis Moore, and his misguided and poorly thought out attempts to level economic justice by robbing from the rich and giving to the poor. It goes well in the beginning, but Dennis is a one-trick-pony and not a very critical thinker. So he keeps robbing and robbing until the rich are poor and the poor are rich causing him pause to say “this redistribution of wealth is trickier than I thought!”

His original actions may have been motivated by the believe in economic justice but lack of understanding of the deeper issues topped with his lack of creative problem solving and sticking to the only thing he could do well lead him to be a major (if unintended) player in carrying out major social injustices.

Richfield’s City Hall – Viva la 1980s!

Many of the Richfield movers and shakers have been around since the 1980s and 1970s. I know this because I went to high school back then and was a political cartoonist for the Richfield Sun (Now Richfield Sun-Current). I moved away when I went to college but came back and bought a house in 2002 and was amazed to find some of the same people in power and even more amazing was that while the world and Richfield had changed dramatically they had not nor had their policies.

One example was the love affair with senior citizen housing at 66th and Lyndale. By 2003 they had created a large fixed income/senior ghetto and were effectively cutting off the blood supply to the business community so that even a Dunn Bros. or Quiznos couldn’t survive there. However, they created a great climate for medical storefronts like a dialysis clinic or for discount dollar stores.

What worked well in the 1980′s with the Lake Shore Drive Condos didn’t work so well thirty years later when repeated over and over and over…

This is clearly going on with the affordable housing issue right now. Richfield 1970/1980 was very white and very middle class, diversity and affordable housing were clear issues that a progressive thirty or forty-something would have seen and should have been concerned about. But fast forward to 2012 when Richfield is now one of the most diverse suburbs in the metro area, even more diverse than many areas of Minneapolis and St. Paul. It also now has one of the most affordable home owner and rental housing stocks in the metro as well.

So the issues toward these should change. Instead of “how do me make Richfield more diverse?”, it should be “how can we understand each other better?” and more importantly, instead of “how do we make more affordable housing for those with low incomes?” The focus should be on maintaining the quality AND affordability of the existing rental stock not adding more and more low income housing when the older forty to fifty year old rental apartments are running down.

If being a champion of social justice is what is wanted then they need a better understanding of the deeper issues and to start creatively problem solve as well as take unpopular political risks by holding accountable the Metropolitan Council and wealthy cities like Edina who continue to shirk their responsibility of helping the poor with low income workforce housing.

“It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God.” Matthew 19:24

Are churches in Edina only for show?

One thing that has become apparent after working on the Pillsbury Commons project and looking into housing policy are issues of open goverment and transparency with City of Richfield, especially if you compare it with what other city governments are doing. Government transparency is important because it allows the public to be informed about what the government is working on as well as the policies they are trying to implement. Government transparency gives insight to the public on how decisions are made and hold elected officials or public servants accountable for their actions.

More and more people are expect to be able to access the information they need instantly online. Sometimes given the lack of resources and funding that expectation can be wishful thinking especially when it comes to historical data such as government records created in the pre-digital age. However, with newly created public documents there little reason they cannot be made available online and remain archived online for public accessibility.

The Matrix

Below is the result of some noodling around the city webs sites of Richfield, Edina, Bloomington, Eden Prairie and St. Louis Park. I was frustrated by what I precived as a lack of transparency and open government by City Richfield so I created a Matrix to compare the each city to one another. The results are interesting. Hands down, Edina is doing some of the best work in citizen participation. Not only do they open up their Facebook page to posts as well as comments from its fans but it has what it calls a Citizen Engagement blog where they actively seek out and engage comments on projects and budgets. Something not done by any of the other cities. The only one that comes close is Eden Prairie which does have blogs but has turned off comments on the “City Manager’s blog” the one blog they should be seeking comments on.

One common action across all web sites is live streaming of city council meetings. All cities provide a way for people to watch meetings live online. Most with the exception of Bloomington stream their Planning Commission meetings. However, one area Richfield does shine is livestreams its HRA meetings as well.

Live Streaming is one thing but what if you want to view an older meeting? All web sites do offer some way of archiving their older city council meetings and all but Bloomington archive their past videos of Planning Commission meetings. Since Richfield is the only one filming its HRA meetings it stands to reason it is the only one that can archive it which it does.

However, Richfield does have one big fail when compared to the other cities. It has a policy to only archive older videos of meetings for two months before pulling them down. Edina, Bloomington and Eden Prairie all have video archives of their council meeting going back several years. Given the plummeting cost of digital storage it is odd that Richfield would continue such a policy. It is important to note that all cities including Richfield have their meeting minutes (in PDF or HTML form) posted online going back several years.

One the things the matrix does not measure is the time it takes post agenda notices and the meeting minutes after they are approved which for Richfield seems to be a cronic problem. Other sites like Egan allow people to sign up with their email address to get the agendas and minutes automatically emailed to them like an e-newsletter subscription.

Civic Engagement

Social media is more than just claiming a Facebook account and posting information on it, it is about dialog and focusing on the “citizen” not the “customer” by seeking to engage its citizens as owners of and participants in the creation of public services, not as passive recipients of services.

The matrix reveals each cities thoughts on citizen engagement. Edina, Eden Prairie and St. Louis Park all have policies that allow its “fans” to post directly to the cities Facebook page. However only Edina and Eden Praire have “view all posts” as the default view rather than only posts by the city which going the extra mile for citizen participation. Unfortunately both Richfield and Bloomington do not allow their “fans” to post to their page. Ironically both Edina and Eden Prairie are affluent communities. It may stand to reason that they have less controversial 100% density low-income projects Pillsbury Commons that they have to wrangle by their citizenry like Richfield does or West Bloomington has to with East Bloomington.

South Metro Open Government/Transparency Matrix

The City of Richfield has just hired Stantec Consulting Services Inc. to conduct a Rental Housing Inventory and Needs Assessment and are paying them $24,750 to do so. And for the cost of $0 will I will give you the Needs Assessment answer and much earlier than Stantec:

1. the market for for-sale housing had decreased significantly from recent years
2. while Richfield has a good supply of affordable rental housing for efficiencies and units with 1 or 2 bedrooms, there is a critical gap in the supply of affordably-priced rental housing for units with three or more bedrooms.

Richfield has affordable rental housing, lots of it. In fact, it has so much (55% affordable) that the Metro Council did not require Richfield to build any affordable rental housing. THE CITY STILL DID.

You see, Richfield has an amazing amount of Class C Rental housing, that is apartments that are 30-40 years old and considered to be less desirable than Class A or B apartment housing. More so, many of those units are one bedroom or efficiency. So while we have a 55% affordable rental housing market it is lacking in rental units of three or more that can support large families.

I can tell you this because the city is paying Stantec $24,000 to answer a question that is already well known. However, Stantec’s report will make it “official” and it comes from an authoritive source and they can once again commence with building low income housing.

However

What probably won’t be discussed in the report is the appropriate thing to do. The City of Richfield will simply try add more affordable housing to a fill a multi-family niche in an already swelled low income housing market in Richfield. Instead the appropriate thing to do is what has been done in other cities and that is to rehab some of those older rundown Class C apartments from one bedrooms and efficiencies into 3 bedroom units. This results in more multi-family housing which the Metro Council wants and the rehabbing of marginal rundown Class C apartment buildings (if done right) will improve the surrounding neighborhood. There would be a loss of one bedroom and efficiency low income units but with Richfield at 55% low income rental it actually still wouldn’t hurt Richfield’s affordable housing standing. Edina could then pick up the slack and build one bedroom or efficiency low income rental units to offset the loss since they have most of the low wage jobs and a large waiting list for low income housing anyways.

But which Apartment Buildings should be Rehabbed?

Unfortunately there is no shortage of Class C apartment buildings in distress in Richfield. One set of apartment buildings that would be good candidates ironically are right next to the proposed Pillsbury Commons site on Not-So-Pleasant Avenue and 76 Street. The apartments have been suffering from the lack of good maintenance for years and have been a headache for nearby neighbors. They are the right size/density and if converted and manged by a respected, qualified non-profit property management company that specializes in affordable housing, they could be an asset to the neighborhood rather than a blight. Oddly enough the city staff, Planning Commission and HRA appear to look at projects like Pillsbury Commons in a vacuum with little interest about the surrounding issues with problem housing as if it would have no impact on the development.

Very interesting to compare the Richfield Corridor Housing Initiative with the Grandview small area plan. Even though Edina received a Metropolitan Council Livable Communities grant of $100,000 for the planning process. I can find nowhere in their minutes, agendas and meeting notes any mention or thought given to helping out the less fortunate with affordable housing. It seems like an ideal situation for creating affordable housing since the city already owns a good chunk of the site.

The Metro Council and the City of Richfield seemed to have stacked the deck in the Richfield Corridor Housing Initiative inorder to set the agenda to make it seem like the creation of affordable housing was a given in the planning process.  They brought in the organization “Twin Cities Local Initiatives Support Corporation” to help facilitate the meetings with the Corridor Housing Initiative. Looking over their web site (http://www.tclisc.org) they appear to be more of a organization that does community planning for social services rather than an urban design agency like say; Close Landscape Architecture and Cunningham Group Architecture, which were selected to be co-lead consultants on Edina’s Grandview project. I am a strong believer in not just doing brick and mortar improvements but to help the lives of people as well. It is interesting that Edina in all of their planning process completely ignored that.

Richfield Corridor Housing Initiative:

http://bit.ly/y3Oqu6

Grandview Small Area Plan:

http://bit.ly/jUTuCk

The following was a message emailed to the Richfield City Council on the proposed development by Ron Clark Construction on the former city maintenance facility site.

I am writing to clear up a misunderstanding by some City of Richfield workers and City Council members that the protests to the Pillsbury Commons project is a NIMBY reaction by the neighbors not wanting the poor in their neighborhood.

Their reaction is due to two issues:

1. Disregard to the planning work and out come done by the neighborhood with Richfield Corridor Housing Initiative

2. Metropolitan Council’s Formula for Allocating Affordable Housing which lets wealthy communities like Edina off the hook for their share responsibility

Background

Back when the City did its “Richfield Corridor Housing Initiative” in 2007-2008 what came out of it was plan for the 76th Street and Pleasant Avenue site  was low to medium density  residential mix (2 – 3 story height limit) that included different household sizes and incomes (low and moderate income families). This is what the neighborhood told the City and what the planners said would economically work. The neighbors understood and were fine with the development including a mix of affordable and market rate housing. It was supposed to be designed for public safety, including “eyes on the street.” (1)

Unfortunately Ron Clark Construction’s proposal meets none of the criteria developed by the neighborhood in the guidelines. The proposal is now for a high density development which is out of character of the neighborhood. Instead of mixed income it is made up completely of low income housing units. By making the development all low-income, the renters there will wind up being stigmatized as the people living in a “low-income” development. One of rationals for having mixed income developments to prevent stigmatization and to help integrate people into the community.

Livable Communities Act

The Affordable Housing Goals through 2010 set by the Livable Communities Act (LCA) for Richfield was 757 units for owner occupied housing of which Richfield produced 262 obtaining 34.6% of the goal. For rental none was required (55% of Richfield’s existing rental units are considered affordable, one of the highest perentages of affordability in the South Metro – In Minneapolis 67% rental units are considered affordable) however Richfield produced 43 units of affordable rental housing in spite of the fact that none were required.

However during that same time Edina the Affordable Housing Goals through 2010 set by  LCA for Edina was a modest 170 units for owner occupied housing of which Edina produced 3 obtaining 1.8% of the goal. For rental  the goal set by LCA for Edina was 31 units of which Edina produced 8 units obtaining 25.8% of their modest goal.

(2) (3)

Richfield Working Class Takes Low Income Housing Burden for Edina Upper Class

At 70 units, Pillsbury Commons takes the creation of affordable housing burden off the neighboring community of Edina since is the proposed development is being used as a dumping ground for low income housing in Richfield with little regard for them or the neighborhood around them.

Attached is a page from “Metropolitics” a book written by Myron Orfield, Professor of Law; Executive Director, Institute on Race & Poverty at the U of M and a former State Representative. He writes about Exclusionary Zoning – a zoning practice to make it impossible to build housing for anybody but the affluent effectively cutting out the working poor by adding budget busters zoning requirements like large lot sizes, large street sizes, 2-3 car garages, custom built kitchens, etc… In his book he points out that Edina was one of in the eight communities in the Twin Cities area practicing Exclusionary Zoning.

Oddly enough while the Metropolitan Council’s own 2006 Report to the Minnesota Legislature on Affordable and Lifecycle Housing  stated that within the City of Edina zero affordable rental units were created between 1996 to 2005. Currently they say that Edina (the home of Ron Clark Construction and Design) only needs 212 units while Richfield needs 765.

Flaws in Metropolitan Council’s Formula for Allocating Affordable Housing

This is number is arrived at by a very flawed and inherently biased formula that makes sure the poor stay out of the areas of the wealthy. (4)

Here it is:

Affordable housing needc = (HH growthc * K1) *

{ 1 + (Jobs/Workersc – 1) + (0.30 – Existing aff housingc) + (Transit Adjustmentc) } * K2

In a nut shell, if your community diversifies its land use by having commercial or industrial and creates jobs OR is progressive and has mass transit the guidelines say you need to have more affordable housing units in your city. However, if you keep mass transit out or build your city to be a gated bedroom community and let your neighbors build commercial/industrial your community gets rewarded with little to no affordable housing units in your city. Another piece of the formula is Growth. How many housing units do you plan to build in the future. Edina, did much of its low/medium/high density housing development (between York and France) during 1996 to 2005 the years they built zero affordable housing units according to the Metropolitan Council.

Jobs is another part of the Metropolitan Council’s formula for allocating affordable housing.  Edina has low wage jobs and lots of them. Attached is a map created using data from the U.S. Census Bureau, Center for Economic Studies which shows where the low-wage jobs actually are – and not many are in Richfield. Both Edina and the area round the  Mall of America are the hot spots for those jobs and yet, both are virtual ghost towns when it comes to low-income housing.

You will find that now Edina is open to affordable housing and at least willing do it lip service now that they have shut the housing development door. This is because the Metropolitan Council’s affordable housing program has been criticized for rewarding participation rather than results. Critics of the Metropolitan Council say that focusing on the LCA ignores the state Land Use Planning Act, which they believe requires the council to determine the region’s affordable housing needs and each city’s fair-share allocation to meet that need. (5)

Conclusion

I have discussed this with many of my neighbors and given that the City so wontedly disregarded the careful and costly planning done with the 76th Street neighborhood during Richfield Corridor Housing Initiative currently there is little good will or trust with City Hall that they will behave in a ethical or transparent manner on this project. Still, I am hoping that the information here will open some eyes on the true nature of this conflict which is one of the wealthy communities such as Edina, not taking their fair share of affordable housing and instead doing community planning that shuts out the working poor. This is also an issue of a flawed Metropolitan Council formula for affordable housing which lets these wealthy communities off the hook.

1. http://www.corridordevelopment.org/pdfs/richfield/CHI_Richfield_DevGuidelines_042108.pdf

2. http://www.tchousingpolicy.org/act_locally/index.php?strWebAction=city_detail&intCityID=33

3. http://www.tchousingpolicy.org/act_locally/index.php?strWebAction=city_detail&intCityID=17

4. http://www.metrocouncil.org/planning/housing/affhousingneedjan06.pdf

5. http://www.huduser.org/portal/publications/PDF/regional_app_aff_hsg.pdf