1
12
5
-
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/44124/archive/files/1d03a1412815cb558b28f711a50ccd4d.pdf?Expires=1712793600&Signature=YNgJLdRpCI8%7EGehL9eJ-j30UDSI6mzdwbFgbGJFh0cJTMcU4RZHao8ixJWZDf35ohwyztv26JQpZk0KmhOQMQ4FXFIPk79PcQt9p1LhbSsCZma7iEkscnmuQJnbSZH%7EYz6wDgXZYnGsNKquOZkRpMDWK-m6I2EHHsJGvZuYM2zgqvMMjZHwOlR6Wp9FGUou-0SluZlNQqSDe-5snjGOSo8lhGaex7cn8hVhJ-TigxLh2z%7EsOsDpOXRIw0gQV1KV8rjZvxvDBn6LOU6d9TPED1RhEkPDxU-kTR83rD8fVdi9uKC8MlGubV%7E%7EQE0NSkDszs4F7NMoRrfEvYFdW1mXI-w__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
aa56a0ef252823f6b2b840a1df0e3f7e
PDF Text
Text
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development
Office of Policy Development and Research
The BaHimore Plan
for Affirmative Marketing
in Real Estate
�THE BALTIMORE PLAN FOR AFFIRMATIVE MARKETllC IN REAL ESTATE
FINAL REPORT
u.S.
Department of Housing and Urban Development
Office of Policy Development and Research
Contract H-2348
August 1983
�This report is based on documents developed by the Baltimore
Plan, a cooperative venture in affirmative marketing of real
estate. This Plan was supported in part by the Office of
Policy Development and Research, U.S. Department of Housing
and Urban Development under Contract No. H-2348. The contact
for these materials is:
Mr. George B. Laurent
Executive Director
Baltimore Neighborhoods, Inc.
319 East 25th Street
Baltimore, Maryland 21218
(301) 243-6007
The cost of these items, including postage, are:
Bal timore Plan
Outline of BP given to sale associates
"How to do it" manual
House Hun ters Hand book
Manual for Steering Seminars
$2.50
$0.75
$2.50
$1.60
$2 .50
The views and conclusions contained in this report do not
necessarily reflect the opinions or policies of HUD or the
U.S. Government.
�FOREWORD
This administration has a strong commitment to voluntary affirmative
marketing efforts in fair housing. The following report documents a
broad ranging approach to voluntarism in the city of Baltimore.
Beginning in 1976, with HUD support, the Greater Baltimore Board of
Realtors, the Real Estate Brokers of Baltimore, Inc., and Baltimore
Neighborhoods, Inc. (BNI), joined hands in an experiment with innovative
approaches in which every step depended on the voluntary cooperation
between real estate firms and local private fair housing organizations.
Not all of the strategies and projects attempted in the Baltimore
Plan will be apppropriate for all jurisdictions or under all conditions.
The report does, however, offer other interested groups practical insights
and advice in the areas of fair housing, education, outreach, advertising,
monitoring, research and cooperation on projects of joint concern.
The principal lesson from this report is that the cooperation leveraged
in 1976 continued to exist until January 1983, long after Federal funding
had ended. The Baltimore Plan survived for years because all of the parties
involved recognized the importance of working together on behalf of equal
opportunity in hOUSing.
This report is addressed to fair housing groups and Canmunity Housing
Resource Boards across the country as they search for new approaches which
they can apply and support in their own communities. Each of the activities
described contains the germ of an idea that may bear fruit when undertaken
with the same commitment to voluntarism shown in Baltimore. We are pleased
to present the report for your use.
--1
2
~"A '2C;~~t~~l
;
~. ~
Benjamin • Bobo
Acting
sistant Secretary for
Policy evelopment and Research
~~'-7
Antonio Monroig
Assistant Secretary for Fair
Housing and Equal Opportunity
t
1
�INTROIJU CTlON
The Secretary of Housing and Urban Development, Samuel Pierce, addressing
a conference of housing and real estate industry representatives in 1982 said:
"I applaud the initiative and commitment of organizations (here)
who are taking the lead in voluntary efforts to further equal
housing opportunity. With you, we are working to build upon the
fo~ndation laid by enforcement to further voluntary cooperative
efforts for fair housing."
The National Association of Realtors, National Association of Real
Estate Brokers, and the National Association of Home Builders are principal
signatories to Voluntary Affirmative Marketing Agreements with HUD. These
Agreements, enacted pursuant to Section 809 of Title VIII of the Civil
Rights Act of 1968, as amended, obligate the national housing industry to
provide information and implement programs that will enable minority and
women buyers to make a free choice of housing location wi toout regard to
race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. They also provide for
the establishment of Community Housing Resource Boards to cooperate with
local real estate boards to implement the agreement and the working together
of real estate brokers and community leaders on specific projects.
The Baltimore Plan for Affirmative Marketing in Real Estate is an
example of cooperation by a fair housing agency and the real estate
industry to reduce racial discrimination in the housing market. The
Baltimore Plan came into being in the fall of 1975 when Baltimore
Neighborhoods, Inc. (BNI) signed a 2-year research and demonstration
contract with IUD. BNI had already entered into a voluntary partnership
with the area's two principal real estate groups, the Greater Baltimore
Board of Realtors (GBBR) and the Real Estate Brokers of Baltimore, Inc.
(Realtists) to spur affirmative marketing. Because of the preplanning
and Office of Management and Budget approval required, the implementation
and demonstration phase of the Plan did not start until March 1977. BNI
provided the staff support for the Baltimore Plan.
The Baltimore Plan was operated in conjunction with the Voluntary
Affirmative Marketing Agreement (VAMA) of the National Association of
Realtors, which obligates the national housing industry to provide
information and to implement programs that will enable minority and women
buyers to make a free choice of housing location without regard to race,
color, religion, sex, 'o r national origi n. The Baltimore Plan and VAMA
operated as a single plan and in this report will be referred to simply
as the Baltimore Plan.
The first step was to gain the commitment of real estate firms. Of
the estimated 295 firms based in Baltimore City and Baltimore County who
were members of the Central Maryland Multiple Listing Service (CMMLS),
60 did an estimated 80 percent of the CMMLS 1978 business. The decision
was made to urge all firms to endorse the Baltimore Plan but to concentrate
efforts on the larger firms. A considerable amount of time (6 months) was
required to sign up a significant numher of companies. The effort included
letters, telephone calls, and personal visits.
2
�Nearly 60 percent of CMMLS member firms endorsed the Baltimore Plan,
22 percent refused to do so, 11 percent considered endorsement, and 9
percent were not approached. In August 1979, it was estimated that firms
in the Baltimore Plan accounted for slightly more than 85 percent of the
dollar volume of CMMLS residential sales. Firm-by-firm volume figures
are no longer available, but there is no reason to believe that Baltimore
Plan endorsers did a smaller share of the dollar volume of business at its
conclusion than in previous years. Most non-endorsers were quite small.
While the principal thrust of the Baltimore Plan was directed toward
affirmative marketing, it also contained significant field work and
research components. The Plan sought to obtain the canmitment of the
individual real estate brokers and sales associates in order to educate
them about affirmative marketing and fair housing and to involve them in
efforts to enhance integrated housing opportunities and increase black
employment in the real estate industry.
The Baltimore Plan had a complicated and difficult set of tasks.
With the voluntary cooperation of the real estate firms, it demonstrated
a number of strategies and techniques for use by similar groups in other
communities. Each step, including initial endorsement of the Plan and
participation in its orientation seminars, required repeated invitations
and contacts. The activities included provision of information on housing,
housing finance, and real estate industry employment opportunities to
minorities; use of the lU 0 Equal Housing Opportunity logo and slogan in
newspaper real estate ads; and collection of records on housing integration.
The field work component of the Plan involved racially changing areas
where allegations of steering and other real estate practices were investigated. There was also an attempt to discover whether racial change was
taking place in predominantly white areas and to assess the community
reaction to such change. The principal research effort was a set of six
before-and-after studies on various aspects of housing discrimination
and integration in the Baltimore area.
The report that follows is in two parts. Part I sets forth in detail
the goals of affirmative marketing and the steps taken in Baltimore to
carry them out. Both productive and unproductive experiences are described,
so that fair housing groups can make informed decisions in drawing up their
own plans. Fuller descriptions of the activities summarized in Part I, as
well as supplementary materials and reports on research activities, are
included in a volume of appendices available from Baltimore Neighborhoods,
Inc.
In Part II, the lessons learned from the Baltimore Plan are generalized
into recommended guidelines for other fair housing groups wishing to implement
a "Baltimore Plan" of their own. A much fuller guide, Procedures for
Impl~menting a Cooperative Program for Affirmative Marketing Between a Real
Estate Board and a Private Open Housing Agency, is available from Baltimore
Neighborhoods, Inc. Part II also contains an overall assessment of the
Baltimore Plan based on the perceptions of participants and some special
research surveys.
3
�PART 1.
IMPLEMENTATION OF THE BALTIMORE PLAN
The implementation activities of the Baltimore Plan are presented here in
somewhat generalized form for use in other communities. This should be considered as a guide with the realization that as any plan is put into operation,
modifications will be needed along with constant review to ensure that the plan
does not become unbalanced; that is, the more difficult elements of implementation must not be neglected. The Baltimore Plan implementation experiences were
divided into three major categories: Activities With the Real Estate Industry,
Field Work, and Research and Evaluation Activi ties.
ACTIVITIES WITH THE REAL ESTATE INDUSTRY
The most successful involvement of real estate brokers can be expected to
occur when brokers are asked to assume specific responsibility for part i cular
tasks. To this end, committees should be set up to c~rry out the plan
activities. It was found that real estate people respond best to contacts
initiated by other real estate people. Maximum use should be made of this fact
in initiating committee activities. More committees may be created at the
beginning of an implementation than will be needed in the long run, and as
committees outlive their usefulness, they should b~ eliminated with the remainder
of their incomplete activities assumed by other existing committees. Each
committee should include members from all participating organizations, and it is
recommended that all endorsers of the plan be asked to serve on one of the
standing or special event committees. Obviously, 100-percent acceptance by
brokers is not realistiC, but if one-half of all brokers accept committee
positions, a manageable membership for each committee can be achieved in a community having from 200 to 300 real estate firms. Committees could be established
to handle the activities listed below.
CREATION OF A DATA AND RECORDKEEPING SYSTEM
The Goal
An affirmative marketing data system should be designed to provide ongoing information on the real estate industry, the process of plan endorsement
and, most important, on voluntary affirmative marketing goals. The objective is
to focus attention on companies on the basis of volume of business, since a major
portion of real estate business may be done by relatively few companies. Therefore,
the most promising approach will be to concentrate major efforts on involving
these companies in the full implementation of the plan.
The data or recordkeeping system should, therefore, as much as possible,
contain basic information about the local real estate industry -- the number of
firms (black-owned and white-owned) and sales associates, dollar volume, territory
served, etc. Data on size of firms might be received from a multiple listing
system or directly from the companies. However, many real estate people may
consider information about dollar volume and territory to be confidential. It
may still be necessary to create a rough, rule-of-thumb ranking of firms.
4
�The Baltimore Experience
The Baltimore Plan called for a recordkeeping system to monitor the performance
of sales associates in carrying out affirmative marketing objectives. Interviews
with brokers during the design phase indicated that this was a most sensitive
area. Most brokers have only a vague idea of how many minority prospects their
companies handle pe r month.
Early in 1978, discussions began between representatives of the Plan and
representatives of The Greater Baltimore Board of Realtors' (GBBR) Equal
Opportunity Committee (responsible for the VAMA) as to the implementation of a
recordkeeping system. Some time was spent modifying the VAMA's recommended
"Equal Service Report Form" to make it more practical. Then discussions turned
to the application of the form. Considerable skepticism was expressed by the
real estate leaders as to whether a significant number of sales associates would
actually use the form, whether a significant number of brokers would analyze
the forms on a regular basis, and how reliable such data would be. There was
also concern over the amount of work involved in getting this information from
so large a number of companies.
A real estate representative suggested that the "Final Sales Report Form"
filled out at the closing of a sale should be used instead of the "Equal Service
Report Form." The buyer's race could be indicated on this form. While this
method would not report handling of prospects, it would report the most critical
factor -- making a sale to a minority household. It would avoid the introduction
of a new form, relieve brokers from having to process data, and accurately
measure voluntary compliance with the affirmative marketing objectives.
The idea of recording race of buyer on the "Final Sales Report Form," which
was then filed with the Central Maryland Multiple Listing Service (CMMLS),
was discussed and approved at a meeting with representatives of the Baltimore
Plan and the Equal Opportunity Committee early in the initial implementation of
the Plan. Such data could be run through the CMMLS computer and give an ongoing
progress report of sales to minorities in different areas of Baltimore City and
County. Its implementation was assigned to the Equal Opportunity Committee (the
only aspect of the Plan to be handled in this way). After a year and a half of
negotiations the plan was approved, but was implemented with little emphasis
and essentially no compliance.
5
�KEEPING THE BROKERS INFORMED
The Goal
Send an initial letter, signed by the president of the real estate group,
to all endorsing firms indicating what will be asked of them in the near future.
Include the orientation of sales associates, an employment survey, use of RUD's
Affirmative Advertising Guidelines, and advise that follow-up calls on brokers
will be made by staff. Additional letters can be sent periodically, but not too
often, keeping the firms advised of progress and what additional requests will
be made of them.
The Baltimore Experience
The Baltimore Plan primarily used letters keyed to specific activities
and projects. Real estate brokers and sales associates regard themselves as
deluged with paper and generally dislike paperwork, so getting their attention
was difficult. Getting articles in the real estate board's magazine required
a long lead time and a general newsletter was not felt to be a good idea.
Operating in smaller communities might well permit different communication
patterns to be effective.
EDUCATION AND ORIENTATION
The Goal
Central to the success of a plan is its acceptance by individual brokers
and sales associates. Therefore, a series of orientation seminars should be
held at the offices of the larger firms with area meetings held for smaller
firms. Attendance should be recorded and those who missed should be asked to
attend later seminars. There is also a need to increase the awareness of the
general public about equal opportunity issues in the real estate industry.
The Baltimore Experience
The Baltimore Plan spnnsored a series of education and orientation programs
for brokers and sales associates of the firms that endorsed the BP/VAMA. These
programs included a briefing on the Baltimore Plan, a review of fair housing
laws, and instructions on how to use RUD's Voluntary Advertising Guidelines.
The programs stressed the fact that the real estate industry was as much a partner
in the design and implementation of the Plan as was BNI, and that this was not
a program imposed on the industry but something that its leadership wanted
and felt would be beneficial. (The endorsing firms accounted for 76 percent of
the real estate professionals in the entire area.)
Although a series of pamphlets on open housing laws and the Plan were to be
produced for brokers and sales associates to give to clients, buyers, and sellers,
it was concluded that alternative means of distribution would require fewer
copies and less cumbersome means of dissemination. Therefore, 13,000 copies of
a pamphlet entitled Buying, Renting, Selling were printed and distributed to the
black community through churches, the NAACP, the Urban League, and public libraries.
6
�a
GBBR held periodic house-buying seminars that were free to the public and
very well attended. The seminars covered such items as financing, the buying
process, closing costs, and the responsibilities of homeownership. A related
effort was the development of the House Hunters Handbook.
The Baltimore Plan Executive Committee recommended further education of
sales associates -- especially newcomers -and that GBBR should continue to
conduct orientation seminars for new sales associates that include a brief
session on affirmative marketing, the fair housing laws, and the Plan.
Testing in the Harbel area (an integrating area still basically white in
Northeast Baltimore City) indicated a need for an extensive and sophisticated seminar which would not only cover in a very practical way the fair
housing laws but, even more important, would cover the problem of steering.
A 3-hour seminar program was developed and a 44-page manual for the seminar
published. The manual contained the text of:
1. The 1968 Federal Fair Housing Law
2. The U. S. Department of Justice document on Fair Housing, Steering,
and Racial Disc rimi nation
3. The Civil Rights Act of 1866
4. The Maryland Fair Housing Law
5. The Maryland Real Estate Law on Fair Housing
6. RUD's Fair Housing Advertising Guidelines
7. The Realtor Guide to the Practice of Equal Opportunity in Housing
8. Civil Rights and the Real Estate Salesman.
The Real Estate Commission of Maryland granted the seminar an accreditation
of 3 credits toward the 12 credits of continuing education needed every 2 years
in order to maintain a real estate license. The Baltimore Plan staff conducted
the seminar under the auspices of the Plan and the GBBR. The courses were
open to all sales associates. Special efforts were made to gain laO-percent
attendance of the sales associates of all firms participating in local
homeowner/real estate councils that were established.
Initial sessions with about 100 sales associates from 2 real estate fi·rms
involved lively discussions and revealed that there was a considerable difference
of opinion between Baltimore Plan staff and at least a fair number of sales
associates as to what constituted steering and other forms of discriminatory
treatment.
AFFIRMATlVE ADVERTISIN:;
The Goal
Advertising plays a Significant role in the process of selling houses and
can also sell the idea of fair housing. It can indicate to all members of the
industry, to the general public, and especially to the black community, that
as far as the industry is concerned, fair housing is a reality. Therefore, one
goal of the plan should be to obtain at least a 90-percent compliance (100
7
�percent is unrealistic but 90 percent is obtainable) by real estate brokers
with HOD's Equal Housing Opportunity Guidelines for Affirmative Advertising In
Real Estate. All endorsing companies should be given written and illustrated
instructions for implementing the guidelines. The guidelines should be discussed
at the orientation meetings for brokers and sales associates to gain understanding
and support from as many real estate professionals as possible.
The plan should conduct a series of monitoring studies at various times
throughout the implementation process. Each study should be given to all participating companies with the encouragement to continue excellent compliance or
to improve compliance, with each firm's compliance recorded individually. In
between studies, a number of newspaper advertisements should be spot checked and
those ads not in compliance brought to the attention 6f the firms involved.
The Affirmative Advertising Committee should also examine the placement of
ads in minority and majority media to see whether there may be any evidence of
racial steering. For example, do certain firms advertise their listings in
integrated commQ~ities in minority papers but not in majority papers, or are
these properties described differently? Do certain firms advertise their
listings in predominantly white areas only in majority papers and not in minority
papers? Results should be shared with the brokers involved to bring about
corrections as needed.
The Baltimore Experience
The Baltimore Plan Affirmative Advertising Committee conducted six major
studies to determine the amount of compliance with HUD's advertising guidelines.
The first study conducted in 1977 showed nearly 80 percent of ads placed by
CMMLS firms in Baltimore City and County made no mention of Equal Housing
Opportunity. The results of the November 1978 study were mailed out in 1979
with a strong letter from the Advertising Committee expressing great disappointment over the signers' 52-percent usage rate during the 18-month demonstration
period -- the committee's goal was 90 percent.
Following the fourth study, based on ads in July 1979, letters urging greater
compliance with HOD's Advertising Guidelines were sent to 178 endorsers followed
by telephone calls. Of the 157 reached, 50 percent responded positively in the
sense of expressing commitment to comply, 34 percent responded negatively, and
16 percent were noncommittal. The additional cost of the advertising was the
reason most often given for lack of compliance.
A comparison of the fifth and sixth studies indicated a decline in some
usage (from 54 percent to 48 percent) and an increase in correct usage (from 59
percent to 68 percent). Both categories were below the high point of March 1978
(second study) when the Baltimore Plan was getting underway. Table 1 provides
general usage statistics and Table 2 indicates correct as compared with incorrect
usage information for the six studies.
To help assure the black community that all real estate profeSSionals seek
to serve them, the Baltimore Plan Advertising Committee designed a method to
assist signers ~o advertise their firm names and telephone numbers in the Baltimore
8
�Afro American. At that time (September 1980) the signers (209 CMMLS and 53
non-CMMLS) were asked to contribute from S10 to S100, depending on the company ' s
business volume, to cover the S180 cost of each ad containing the names of 18
companies and their telephone numbers. Ten dollars allowed the company to be in
one ad -- $100 got them in 10 ads. In response to letters and staff telephone
calls, 16 (32 percent) of the top CMMLS firms sent ad money as did 44 (28 percent)
of the 159 smaller CMMLS firms and 2 of the 53 non-CMMLS firms . In response to
the total money received (SI,820), the ads were revised to contain 9 firms and
their telephone numbers instead of 18, thus allowing more ads to be published
over a longer period of time. Three ads with 18 companies each were published
in 1980 and 14 ads with 9 companies each were published in 1981.
Early in the demonstration period the Advertising Committee met with the
Sunpapers and the News American and got the papers to use the "Publishers' Notice"
as is called for in the HUD guidelines.
The advertising studies showed the value of an ongoing educational and
monitoring campaign to encourage use of HUD's Advertising Guidelines (a study
per year sent to the companies and some spot-check monitoring). However it
appeared that a strenuous effort was ne eded to r'e ach the goal of 90
percent correct usage, and members of the industry complained about the
additional cost involved, especially at a time of economic difficulty.
,
9
�TABLE I
Summary of Results as to Some Usage of HUD Advertising
Guidelines versus No Usage by Firms Endorsing the BP/VAMA
HUD Advertising
Guidelines Used
Some Usage
Study 1
April 77
212
760
No Usage
22%
78%
Study 6
AUJ;(. 81
Study 2
March 78
Study 3
Nov. 78
Study 4
July 79
Study 5
Aug . 80
107
285
52%
287
43%
295
54%
124
48%
48%
379
57%
255
46%
137
52%
124
46%
54%
266
j
•
Total Ads
972
100%
231
100%
551
100%
666
100%
550
100%
261
100%
TABLE II
Summary of Correct Usage as a Percentage of Total
Usage by Firms Endorsing the BP/V AMA
HUD Advertising
Guidelines Used
Correct Usage
Incorrect Usage
Total Ads
Legend
Study 1
April 77
Study 2
March 78
Study 3
Nov. 78
Study 4
Julv 79
Study 5
Aug. 80
Study 6
Aug. 81
55
26%
80
75%
201
71%
176
61%
174
59%
85
68%
157
74%
27
25%
84
29%
111
39%
121
41%
39
32%
212
100%
107
100%
285
100%
287
100%
295
100%
124
100%
Correct: Properly used HUD's EHO Logo and/or Slogan
Incorrect: Some use of HUD's EHO Logo and/or Slogan but not in
accordance with Guidelines
No Usage: No mention of "Equal Housing Opportunity" in ads
10
�REVIEWIK; THE MULTIPLE LISTIK; SERVICE
The Goal
A well-functioning multiple listing service could be a major tool in
assuring open housing. The details of its operation should be examined to
see if any improvements to support open housing can be made and to find ways
to increase knowledge of the system in the black community. Black real estate
companies should be encouraged to become members of the system and this fact
promoted in the black community. For monitoring racial change in home-buying
patterns, the multiple listing service should be asked to require that sales
associates note the race of the buyer on the Final Sales Report Form. A study
of the extent to which the multiple listing service covers the entire housing
market should also be done. The potential for discrimination can be greater for
houses not made widely available through this vehicle.
The Baltimore Experience
Leaders in the Baltimore real estate industry claimed tha~ CMMLS was one of
the most comprehensive multiple listing services in the country. (CMMLS is a
wholly owned subsidiary corporation of the Greater Baltimore Board of Realtors.
It has its own board of directors and its own separate staff.) At the beginning
of the Baltimore Plan, these leaders estimated that 95 percent of the residential
sales in Baltimore City and County were handled by CMMLS. There had been no
complaints that black brokers had been kept out of CMMLS. Most were members.
A first project concerning CMMLS was to confirm its significance. When
an assessment of the extent to which CMMLS covered total residential sales was
made, it was found that only 30.1 percent of all residential transactions recorded
by Lusk Reports (a private service that records property transfers) in Baltimore
City and 48.3 percent in Baltimore County were found in CMMLS sales reports. It
was concluded that while CMMLS was the single most significant method of selling
homes, there were a significant number of real estate transactions going on outside
the sphere of operations.
The Multiple Listing Service Committee of the Baltimore Plan submitted seven
suggestions to CMMLS through the Plan's Executive Committee in February 1978.
They were designed to increase affirmative marketing in real estate. CMMLS
responded by accepting three suggestions, which were advisory and modest in
their consequences, deferring one, and rejecting three which involved information
on fees, representation of Realtists on the CMMLS, and the relative roles of
listing and selling agents. Since then the Executive Committee has attempted
unsuccessfully to persuade CMMLS to reverse its negative decisions.
j
MOR'lGAGE FINANCIK;
The Goal
•
Nondiscriminatory mortgage financing is an important element in the creation
of an open housing market. It is important to ensure that there are no conscious
or subconscious processes that discriminate against blacks or other minorities.
11
�Moreover, ways should be found to improve the use of various Id. nds of Federal
and State mortgage programs since minorities are likely to be less fortunate
financially. Since lack of knowledge in processing government loan applications
constitutes an impediment to their use, workshops should be held offering
instructions on how to process these loan applications.
The Baltimore Experience
A goal of the Baltimore Plan was to make sure that sales associates and the
public were made aware of the various governmental programs for financing the
purchase of a home. It was assumed that wider use of these programs would increase
homeownership opportunities for minorities. Two brochures were prepared that
described FHA, VA, and Maryland State housing programs. The first brochure was
considered too complex for the general public and insufficiently detailed for
sales associates. Therefore a second, simpler brochure directed to the public
was drafted and printed in July 1978, then updated in June 1979. The contents
were included in the House Hunters H~rldb_~o}~ and were distributed among minority
organizations. Rather than expanding the original brochure for sales associates,
the Executiv" Committee suggested getting a 1981 update of a booklet on government
financing programs being published under the ti tIe "Guide to Residential Financing"
by Claude Mascari, published by the Rouse Co. Brokers were surveyed regarding
their experiences with various kinds of Government-sponsored mortgage lending
programs, especially FHA. In consultation with others who have worked on this
problem in an effort to remove obstacles, the Plan developed recommendations for
making these programs more widely used by minority buyers and presented these
recommendations to HOD and to appropriate Congressional sources for implementation.
The Homeownership Finance Committee directed most of its efforts toward
getting Congressional action on the recommendations of its study of Governmentsponsored mortgage lending programs. Several meetings were held with the staff
of HOD's Office of Single Family Housing and of Maryland Senator Mathias' office.
After these consultations, the committee revised its recommendations and strategy
to propose national pilot programs for the most important of its recommendations.
In 1981, !IUD issued proposed regulations setting up a national negotiated interest
rate pilot program. Since this pilot contained the committee's most important
recommendation -- a dual interest rate for FHA -- the committee hoped that the
pilot would be implemented. It submitted a comment offering suggestions it
believed would make the program more effective.
In an effort to make minority buyers (and all buyers) aware of the best
possible financing terms, the Homeownership Finance Committee devised a scheme
that culminated in a weekly information sheet. This sheet contained the currently
most favorable interest rates, down payments, points, etc. It was prepared by
calling 40 to 50 lenders each week. Only the most favorable terms were included
on the sheet, which was distributed by CMMLS to all it, members. This service
began September 5, 1978, and continued through May II, 1979. Many favorable
comments had been received. A phone survey of nine black agents and brokers
revealed universal approval, with varying degrees of enthusiasm. After 6 months,
the committee did a cost estimate and discovered it was costing over $3,100 a
year. The committee decided to offer the service on a paid subscription basis
to cover the cost. Three efforts were made through CMMLS and one mailing to
brokers, but insufficient subscription orders were received. The service was
then discontinued.
12
�EMPLOY ME tIT
The Goal
An affirmative, equal opportunity recruitment and employment program for
the real estate industry and for individual companies needs to be encouraged. A
survey should be made of realty and brokerage firms to determine the extent of
"other-race" employment of salaried personnel and the use of other-race sales
associates. The survey should also seek to obtain the views of real estate
firms as to what is involved in obtaining sales associates of other races. The
survey is likely to reveal that very little integration exists in the industry,
that most companies are making very little effort to recruit other-race personnel,
that the companies are dubious as to how to undertake such recruitment, and they
are uncertain as to how successful other-race personnel would be in their firms.
A series of seminars for brokers should be set up to discuss the results
of the survey, to stress the need for increased integration, and to develop
techniques to achieve integration. The seminars should emphasize that the
ultimate responsibility for integration of a firm lies with the managers who,
given the will, can find a way to make reasonable progress.
"Career Opportunities Seminars" can be held to interest minority group
members in embarking on a career in real estate. One approach is to set up a
minority employment in real estate program. This requires a high level of
commitment from the industry and a well-thought-out, concentrated program of
recruitment, selection, and sponsorship.
An advisory committee composed of prominent black and white brokers and
fair housing people should be established. A program should be designed that
will include the fo llowi ng :
o
o
Widespread publicity.
o
Orientation sessions on what it means to be a real estate sales associate.
o
Screening by panels of real estate and open housing people to select
the best candidates.
o
1
A goal of recruiting minority persons into the real estate industry.
Loan funds to cover the cost of instruction, license fees, and trade
association fees. Such loan pro grams could exist in a format similar
to that of the student loan, whereby the loan is paid back but no
interest is charged.
o
A support and follow-through process providing extra discussion sessions
(in addition to the real estate course) on the more difficult aspects of
the real estate examination. The process continues until the candidates
are established as sales associates.
o
The signing up of firms that support the program, that are willing to
interview candidates, and that will make every effort to contract with
the candidates. Firm profiles should be provided to enable the candidates
to select companies with which they would like to interview.
13
�The Baltimore Experience
From eight seminars conducted for brokers, it seemed clear to the Fmployment
Committee of the Baltimore Plan that most brokers felt that integration in
employment, especially of sales associates, would be most difficult to achieve.
In summary, the position of many brokers was that:
1. Most whites were reluctant to deal with blacks either in looking
for a house or in giving them a listing. (Some companies sent a white along with
the black to get the listing when the black made the initial contact . )
2. Floor time did not produce enough contacts for anyone to make a living.
Sales associates must make their own contacts primarily in the area they live
in. Many firms were based in predominantly white areas. They claimed they get
their sales associates from these areas.
3. If a firm took on black sales associates, it cannot favor them over
white sales associates. If the blacks were not successful, they may feel it was
due to discrimination.
4. Integration of the industry threatened the survival of black real estate
companies since black sales associates working for white firms depended primarily
upon black clientele. At the same time, it was doubtful that white customers
would patronize black firms.
Few brokers had any new ideas, and there was little response to some of the
general ideas offered by the committee as discussion starters. The Employment
Committee therefore decided to sponsor a workshop entitled "Integration in the
Real Estate Industry." The committee chose three brokers from successfully
integrated firms to serve as resource people . Two hundred invitations were sent
out at random. The workshop was attended by representatives of 20 firms, 5 of
which had not attended the previous employment seminars. The integration seminar
was interesting but produced little in the way of tangible ideas or facts. The
integrated firms stated that they had achieved integration without significant
problems and that their black sales associates were doing "all right . " The only
way they knew to integrate was to simply do it. They felt that some firms,
either because of size or location, would be in a better position to integrate
their employees than others.
The seminar might have benefited from a trial run to ensure that the panelists
were prepared to be candid about the issues involved. Also, using sales associates
rather than brokers might have brought other perspectives to bear.
The Employment Committee had the strong feeling that the basic responsibility
for integration was that of each individual firm and that the responsibility
for achieving integration in the industry should not be placed upon the committee.
So at the end of the seminar program, all real estate firms were sent a letter
outlining the results of the employment survey. It stated:
We feel that the lack of significant integration in real estate
firms could lead the public and the Federal Government to believe
that there is widespread discrimination in employment in the real
14
1
�estate industry in this area •••• The Employment Committee can and
will try to help where possible, but we feel strongly that the
solution lies in the individual initiative of each broker and
real estate firm.
At that moment the committee was not sure what to do next. It was sure
of one thing, however -- employment and contracting are the basic responsibility
of each real estate firm and "where there is a will, there is a way." The
committee saw its role as that of pressuring and sensitizing the industry to do
better. It wanted to make it very plain that the committee in no way would let
the industry off the hook -- that integration was still the industry's
responsibili ty.
The Baltimore Plan sponsored a seminar, "Career Opportunities in Real Estate,"
at Morgan State University in February 1978. Representatives of the real estate
industry were panelists (white from white firm, black from white firm, black
from black firm, and white from black firm) and keynote speakers. Five thousand
flyers and 250 posters were distributed in the black community beforehand, and
the seminar was advertised on radio and television and in the Baltimore newspapers.
Despite a great deal of effort made to get a good attendance at the careers
seminar, only 64 people attended, a fair number of whom had only a passing interest
in real estate (based on conversations during the conference with attendees).
This poor turnout reinforced the Employment Committee's stand on the responsibility
of real estate firms to seek out other-race associates.
In view of the modest results achieved by the preceding programs, a need
for a concentrated program to promote integration in real estate became clear.
The staff investigated a program to stimulate minority real estate employment
funded by the Ford Foundation in Washington, D.C. The BP and the Regional Planning Council (RPC) proposed a similar program in the Baltimore area. A partnership between RPC and the Baltimore Plan was formed in July 1979 that established
the Minority Employment in Real Estate Program. The program goal was to recruit
and assist 40 to 50 minority people to become sales associates (preferably with
non-integrated white firms). In August 1979, program staff conducted a mass
media advertising campaign throughout the region (Baltimore City, Baltimore
County, Anne Arundel, Howard, Harford, and Carroll counties) to recruit program
applicants. A total of 308 preliminary applications were received, mostly from
Baltimore City. In October, a series of information seminars was conducted to
give the initial applicants basic knowledge of the real estate industry and aid
them in deciding if real estate interested them as a career. These were attended
by 158 persons, and 128 final applications were submitted. In November, the
final selection of 45 program participants began. Ninety-five persons were
interviewed by panels consisting of three real estate brokers and one BNI or RPC
person each.
Those selected were enrolled in a basic real estate course at Morgan State
University. The 45 class hours required by State law were completed in midFebruary by 38 students. Participating real estate firms agreed to interview
one or more of the graduates for possible employment. Later the firms were
asked to complete canpany profile forms. These were canpiled into a manual,
"Real Estate Profile Information," given to the graduates to assist them in
selecting a firm with which to affiliate. Of the 38 students who remained in
the first round of the program, 32 failed the State real estate examination as
many as 6 times (despite tutoring sessions) and thus were terminated from the
15
�program. The main problem that participants seemed to have was that most had
been out of school for some years, were rusty in math, and had problems with the
alleged ambiguity of the examination questions. Many real estate people believed
the real estate exam was an obstacle course to keep the number of licensees at a
low level rather than a practical test of what made a successful real estate
associate. Concern about the current professional involvement of the instructor
was corrected in the subsequent two rounds by locating the seminars at the
University of Maryland. The six students who passed the real estate exam were
affiliated with white real estate firms in the Baltimore metropolitan area.
An additional 2 rounds were carried out in October 1980 and June 1981 with
91 persons selected using the same process as in the first round. Each person
then attended a 45-hour basic real estate course taught by the University of
Maryland. A greater emphasis was placed on the quality of instruction, and very
rigid attendance was required. To ensure a higher degree of quality, project
staff attended each class session, provided more supervision, and offered many
more opportunities for tutoring sessions taught by real estate practitioners.
The greater emphasis on quality produced a near record-perfect class attendance.
The university provided a special all-day session to help the students pass the
State licensing examination.
Of the 91 persons selected from rounds 2 and 3, 6 withdrew during the real
estate course, 14 failed the course, and 24 failed the State examination as many
as 3 times and were terminated from the program. Of the remaining 47, 18 were
affiliated with real estate firms, 13 passed the State examination and were in
process of becoming affiliated, and 16 were attempting to pass the State exam.
So far, 24 minority persons were affiliated -- 16 with 11 white firms and 8 with
3 black firms.
Early in the program's ioplementation, a questionnaire was designed for
completion by students already enrolled in real estate courses at area colleges
and universities. The questionnaire gave the Baltimore Plan a better understanding of the career plans of these students. From April to June 1981, 94 completed
questionnaires were received from 3 area colleges that teach the 45-hour basic
real estate course. The study showed that most respondents were between the
ages of 18 and 35, enrollment was nearly equal between men and women, blacks
constituted 56 percent of total enrollment"and 80 percent of the students
intended to become licensed within 1 year. While most wanted to become licensed,
80 percent of the students had very little knowledge of the real estate industry
nor had they spoken to anyone about it.
A draft of a recommended Equal Opportunity Hiring policy for GBBR and
CMMLS was proposed by the Baltimore Plan in October 1978 and adopted by both
groups in February-March 1979. The Baltimore Plan Employment Committee
reviewed the progress made after the equal opportunity policies were adopted.
16
�PUBLIC RELATIONS
The Goal
A number of activities are important to promote public awareness of equal
housing opportunities. These may include:
o
Seeking as much free time on televi sion and radio as possible to make
goals of the plan known to the public -- especially the black community.
o
Designing television and radio spots to support open housing and to make
the multiple listing service, House Hunters Handbook, and home-buying
seminars well known to the black community.
o
Using as much newspaper publicity as possible.
It is important in all these activities to keep the real estate industry well
informed as to what is planned.
The Baltimore Experience
Even though the major thrust of the Baltimore Plan was directed toward the
real estate industry, preliminary efforts were undertaken to increase the black
communi ty' s awareness of housing opportunities and to encourage blacks to seek
housing in the entire market, not just in "safe " and receptive integrated or
bla ck neighborhoods.
Two television spots were produced and shown as public service messages
from September 1978 through January 1979. The station used pictures, scripts,
and personnel provided by the Baltimore Plan. Months of effort were spent
preparing these messages, yet the actual use of the spots was relatively limited.
It was concluded, therefore, that seeking further pro bono spots was worth only
a limited effort in the future. The Baltimore Plan's primary effort was to
influence change in the industry, not in the public. An emphasis on implementing
HUD's Voluntary Advertising Guidelines was felt to be more effective over the
long run, for both the real estate industry and the public.
While the Baltimore Plan Education Committ e e was asked to consider ways
of increasing communication with the black community that were within the current
resources of the Plan, the effort needed to have an effective communication
program to the black community should not be underestimated. The Baltimore Plan
contacted over 130 significant black groups in the hope of having the members of
the groups informed about the activities of the Plan. Almost all the groups
indicated that it was not their policy to invite outside speakers. A few indicated
that they would accept a speaker but had difficulty in actually scheduling the
speaker. BNI distributed 6,000 flyers door to door in black middle-class
neighborhoods asking people if they or their friends had faced housing
discrimination and if they would be interested in helping test for discrimination.
If the second answer was "yes," they were to contact BNI. A random telephone
survey to 60 people was made 2 weeks later using a criss-cross telephone
directory. Of those contacted, 75 percent indicated they remembered the flyer.
The response to the flyers was negligible, yet BNI testing indicated that a
substantial amount of racial discrimination still existed both in apartment
house rentals and in real estate sales.
17
�In addition, in the first year of the demonstration, Baltimore Plan field
staff prepared 20 profiles of nonminority areas to be distributed in a handbook.
The profiles were expanded to cover all sections of Baltimore City/County with
the idea of making the House Hunters Handbook available to all. Special emphasis
was given to its distrihution in the black community. The House Hunters Handbook
was reviewed by 15 readers in the real estate industry, approved by the Baltimore
Plan Executive Committee, and published in Msrch 1979. Publicity efforts began.
Letters were sent to black organizations to introduce the handbook and to request
the opportunity to speak to the groups on open housing. The handbook was sent
out and follow-up calls were made. In July and August 1979, six groups were
addressed having s total estimated audience of 2,100. Survey forms were distributed
to get black perceptions of many neighborhoods as appealing pIsces in which to
buy homes. WBFF-TV broadcast public service radio spots.
INCREASING THE OUTREACH OF BLACK REAL ESTATE FIRMS
The Goal
This effort seeks to increase the extent to which black real estate firms
list and show houses in nonminority areas. Since real estate sales associates
are sometimes reluctant to show houses in unfamiliar areas, a cooperative working
relationship involving fair housing sympathizers in these neighborhoods and
volunteer sales associates could be established to familiarize black firms with
these communities. Interviews with as many black brokers as possible should be
conducted to measure the extent to which these firms operate in predominantly
white neighborhoods and where they are located. A follow-up procedure should be
included to find out the results and to deal with any problems. While not done
in the Baltimore Plan, that experience suggests the value of this approach.
Working cooperatively with black brokers, a program can be set up to carry out
this activity.
The Baltimore Experience
The BP staff studied the potential of the black-owned real estate firms,
i.e., their share of the market, where they operated, and number of sales
associates. Thirty black real estate brokers were interviewed; the principal
findings were that black firms operated in one or two integrating areas at most,
had roughly 4% of the total business, and were small or very small firms with
one exception. One item of discussion in the BP Executive Committee was the
possibility of broadening the territories of black firms by providing their
sales associates greater familiarity with other areas. One major white broker
offered informally to provide such assistance, but the proposal was not
enthusiastically received or followed up on, so the project was dropped from
further consideration.
FIELD WORK AND RESEARCH
The Goal
The field work and research had two goals. The first was to discover what
was happening in integrating areas versus nonintegrating areas and why. The
18
�second was to find out i f certain negative real estate practices (by commission
or omission) were occurring and then to make basic changes to correct them in
cooperation with real estate firms.
Field staff may then be involved in two somewhat different kinds of
activities:
o
working in racially changing areas to research or investigate
allegations of steering and other real estate practices
o
working in predominantly White areas to discover whether any racial
change is taking place and assessing community reactions to such change
should it occur.
In an integrating area, community leaders are usually disturbed by what
they perceive the real estate industry to be doing (e.g., soliciting the area
with a thought to selling to blacks only, steering whites away from the area and
blacks to it). Real estate people in turn feel that they are being hindered
in carrying out their legitimate activities and that they are the victims of
white reluctance to buy in an integrated area and of the fear and prejudice
of the whites already there. Therefore, both community people and real estate
people have reason to communicate and work together.
The Raltimore Experience
In the first year of the demonstration period, Baltimore City/County was
divided into six areas. Field work staff became familiar with their areas by
developing material for area profiles, later complied in a House Hunters Handbook,
and by talking to key brokers and community leaders to find out what was happening
in regard to racial integration. Some 56 brokers and 62 clergy and community
leaders were interviewed. For the most part, it appeared that racial integration
was occurring mainly in two areas, (the Liberty Road corridor with some along
the Bel Air corridor). One difficulty in achieving widespread integration is
that the great bulk of the black population is in west Baltimore adjacent to the
Liberty Road corridor. Liberty Road is a large area of newer, detached, and
attractive housing in a good price range, located in pleasant communities; it is
most convenient to the amenities of the black community of Baltimore City and was
the first area opened to blacks in Baltimore County. Thus the Liberty Road area
has great attraction for black families as opposed to the white areas of the city
and county.
loURKII{; IN INTEG RATII{; AREAS
The Goal
In racially changing areas, coalitions of brokers and community leaders can
be set up to deal with real estate problems having racial implications and to
work to enhance the positive image of the areas.
o
Codes of agreed-upon acceptable and unacceptable real estate
practices could be established and complaints heard and
resolved by voluntary, cooperative conciliation.
19
�o
A survey of the extent of real estate solid tation/
prospecting practices may be done for all zip code or
census tract areas to determine the extent and kind of
such practices in areas with substantial integration
and in those that are predominantly white. The purpose
of the survey is to determine whether integrating areas
are being excessively solicited or prospected.
It is generally agreed that communities that successfully maintain stable
integration are ones in which a strong community organization has worked, not
only to curb disturbing real estate practices, but also to develop public and
industry awareness as to the positive features of the area. To this end,
community leaders and real estate professionals should undertake a number of
activities. Some of these are to develop:
o
workshops to educate sales associates about how to stress the positive
features of the area
o
a brochure about the area made widely available to real estate firms
o
meetings between residents and real estate persons to discuss mutual
concerns and plan projects
o
an office center containing information about the community to which
real estate agents can bring their buyer clients
o
special events of cultural or social interest
o
articles in the general media and in local newspapers
o
a traveling slide show and tape presentation
o
art contests for school children and the general public for graphic
material about the community.
The Baltimore Experience
The most prominent integrating area in Baltimore County is the Liberty
Road corridor which extends from Baltimore City to Howard County. Efforts
to improve relations between residents and real estate people began in November
1977. Three kinds of problems had to be faced in accomplishing this goal:
1. Long-standi~ resident distrust of the real estate industry, which is
seen by many active community leaders as guilty of steering and other
discriminatory practices. Real estate persons, for their part, feel that many
residents are racist and "paranoid." They appear to blame the industry for all
racial housing problems and they are unwilling to do anything but complain.
2. Rivalries between the two umbrella community organizations which,
together with the large area and population and rapid commercial and residential
expansion, have impeded concerted efforts to deal with the problem of maintaining
a stable, integrated area.
20
�3. The belief of some members of the Executive Committee that a coalition
of white homeowners and well-established white real estate firms would hinder
the operations of black real estate firms in the area and keep out blacks .
I
t
~
Improving relations between the community and the real estate industry
in the Liberty Road area involved extensive field work. It began with getting
the leadership of the area's community associations together with realtors to
form the Greater Liberty Road Homeownership/Real Estate Council . The Council
consisted of five brokers and five community leaders who sought to further
communi ty-realtor rela tionships, handle complaints, and commun icate positive
information about Liberty Road. Its first major activity was devel~pment and
accept ance of a Code of Acceptable and Unacceptable Real Estate Solici tation/
Pr ospecting Practice. Despite a later conflict with some community association
lead 2rship, the Council was reorganized to include alternative community
asso c iations and continued its work.
The Baltimore Plan systematically studied portions of Baltimore City and
Baltimore Count y . The areas were selected based on zip codes (CMMLS maintains
sales data by zip code), territories of community organizations, and by natural
boundaries. Research consisted chiefly of (1) identification of sales during a
6-month period, checking the race of about 95 percent of the buyers, and (2)
real estate testing. The Baltimore Plan then worked with the most active area
realtors to promote affirmative marketing.
The BP staff studied Harbel and Liberty Road, two large integrating areas
in the city and county, respe c tively. The intent was to go to other areas of
the city and county - even all white areas - checking real estate transactions.
WORKI~
IN
NONINTe::;RATI~
AREAS
The Goal
Open housing can be achieved only if black and white families are willing
to move to nonminority areas (not necessarily to create open housing or
integration but because they find the housing and the areas themselves attractive).
Families will move to those areas as they become aware of them, possibly through
a house hunters handbook and a public relations programs associated with i t . They
also should r e ceive assurances from the real estate community of equality of
treatment and assurance in various ways that these communities will not be
hostile to integration. For example, friendship committees could be established
in white areas composed of people knowledgeable about their area and willing to
"tour" black families. A homeowners real estate council could also be deve.loped
for each area.
A house hunters handbook should be developed that will be of benefit to all
homeseekers but especially to minority homeseekers. The handbook should contain
general information on various residential areas, charts on recent sale prices
of homes in the area, information on what to look for when purchasing a home,
information on home financing, etc. The housing prices in the handbook should
be updated twice a year .
21
�An outreach program, using the handbook, should be directed to the minority
community. The handbook should get as much general publicity as possible, and
pro bono time should be sought on radio and television stations oriented to
the black community. Opportunities should be sought to have plan people speak
hriefly in black and white churches and before civic groups urging people to
consider the full housing market when considering the purchase of a home. It
should be ~phasized that the handbook and multiple listing service are excellent
tools in homeseeking, given that the real estate industry indicates it will
give equal treatment to all clients.
The Baltimore Experience
Large areas of Baltimore City/County are all or nearly all white, and others
are all or nearly all black. What to do about this situation was the most difficult
challenge the Baltimore Plan faced.
Staff studied black owned real estate business and found that 29 black-owned
firms did an estimated 5 percent of the 1978 CMMLS business of Baltimore City/
County. Hardly any of their business was done in all-white areas. On the whole,
the black firms did not report any significant problems in dealing with white
firms. The past president of the Realtists has stated that the Realtists get
about one-third of the black business. It was proposed that white-owned firms
working in predominantly all-white areas be encouraged to advertise listings in
the local black paper. In addition, blacks were encouraged to make full use of
the housing market when seeking housing via the distribution of the House Hunters
Handbook and the program accompanying it.
RESEARCH AND EV ALUATION ACT IV ITIES
The Goal
Three research efforts appear to be important:
1. before-and-after research,
2. descriptive studies of the real estate market, and
3. interviews in predominantly white areas.
1. Before-and-after Research
The ef fect iveness of an affi rma tive marketing plan should be assessed by
investigating certain conditions a plan could be expected to change -- before
and after. Ideally, the same measurements should be made in a canmunity not
having an affirmative marketing plan. This control community should be the same
as the plan community in all important respects. Such an experimental design
will no doubt be extremely difficult to achieve. The question arises, Is it
possible really to evaluate the effectiveness of the Plan without a "control"
community, and if not, is there any value to before-and-after research? The
answer to the first part of the question, logically, is "no." The answer to the
second part, however, is a qualified "yes." It will be useful to know what
changes have occurred during the plan period and whether they are in a direction
consistent with the established goals.
1
22
�Since contract ing wi th research professionals is expensive, efforts
should be made to engage university or college students who could receive
academic credit and work under professional supervision. It is also a good
idea to use trained volunteers to collect some data. Before-and-after information
helps evaluate oft-heard allegations about how "the real estate industry" or
"the black community" or other identifiable segments of the community are
changing or not changing. Research can provide valuable clues about the development of plan programs, such as:
!
r
o
Changes in attitudes of real estate sales associates toward aspects of
open housing (their perceptions of blacks' willingness to buy in
nonminority neighborhoods and whites' receptiveness to black buyers,
whether stable integrated neighborhoods are increasing, whether they
think whites understand open housing laws, their contact with other-race
clients, etc.)
o
The black home buying coomunity could be surveyed on their before-andafter perceptions of nontraditional areas as being acceptable places
in which to buy, their beliefs about the extent of steering, their
reasons for choosing a home and what kind of neighborhood they would
like, their opinion of the extent of conformi ty to open housing laws,
and the understanding of these by the public.
o
Recent black and white buyers in racially mixed areas could be interviewed
about their reasons for buying their present home and for the kinds of
real estate contacts they hsd hsd.
l
2. Descriptive Studies Of The Real Estate Market
These studies should be directed toward a more complete understanding of
the housing situation in a particular area and should be dictated by local
needs and the amount of available information. Some examples are:
o
the extent to which the multiple listing system covers house sales;
o
the appreciation in value of houses in integrating areas compared to
that in predominantly white areas; and
o
the extent that soliciting/prospecting practices by real estate
firms are concentrated in integrating areas.
3. Interviews In Predominantly WIli te Areas
To assist in outreach to potential black buyers, it will be useful to
have information about the experiences of blacks who have bought or are renting
in predominantly white areas. Using various sources (such as the local Board
of Education and open housing organizations), these persons should be identified
and interviewed. Their experiences, positive and negative, should be summarized
and communicated to the black community.
23
�The Baltimore Experience
In addition to before and after research done by an outside professional
research firm, two special studies were directed to the issues mentioned above
by the Baltimore Plan and its staff. One focused on interviewing community
leaders and realtors and the other tried to locate blacks already living in
nonminority areas. For the first study, field staff interviewed some community
leaders, clergy, and real estate people to gain their perspectives on open
housing in their areas and to solicit their ideas for overcaning any perceived
obstacles. The interviews were later extended to leaders and realtors in the
all-white areas to see if any significant integration was known to be going
on in the areas and to measure receptivity to integration, at least in the
minds of community leaders and realtors. The consensus was that more blacks
were renting than buying in nonminority a r eas, and few realtors saw any obstacles
to blacks buying in these areas except for the blacks' own fear of rejection
or dislike of being "the first." While residents and clergy also minimized
white hostility (most of them said it would be covert), a few residents were
very clear that they anticipated considerable hostility by at least some whites
should blacks move into their neighborhoods.
The second study attempted to find out if there was a significant number
of black "pioneers, " unknown to either the white or black communities, who
bought homes in nearly all-white areas. If this were so and their experience
in living there was a good one, this might be publicized as an encouragement
to further integration. Early in 1978, the Baltimore Plan received names of
black children attending schools in Baltimore County where minority enrollment
was less than 4 percent. An initial list representing 227 households was
obtained. Of these households it was determined that 106 resided in apartment
units, 69 lived in black "pocket ghettos," 38 were not verified, and 6 lived
in institutions or in Baltimore City, leaving a known number of 8 homeowner
households to interview. Their experiences in the community were generally
favorable, but the number seemed to be too small to have much impact. An
attempt was made later to interview some of the apartment dwellers to see if
their experiences in the nonminority areas were satisfactory and to see if
they would be interested in homeownership in the area.
24
�PART II.
LESSONS LEARNED
As the experiences described in Part I show, success did not come surely or
easily in Baltimore's effort to stimulate voluntary compliance with affirmative
marketing principles. The following is an attempt to draw out of the Baltimore
Plan's experiences and research some general conclusions and guidelines that may
be helpful to fair housing groups and real estate boards in other communities
that wish to initiate similar efforts.
Some of the things tried in Baltimore worked; some did not. Whatever the
case, the lessons learned can be passed on to other groups in other places which
may be able to apply them successfully to their own situations. The lessons
learned have been put in the form of specific recommendations to other groups
just starting out. They are suggestions only. Each fair housing group in each
community should assess its own situation, select those guidelines that apply,
and modify those that do not.
GENERAL PRINCIPLES
1.
Gain an understanding of the motivations and styles of operation of the
groups to be involved in the plan. Three different kinds of groups may be
involved -- the real estate industry, fair housing groups, and the general
community. Each has its set of needs and its own set of problems.
Understanding and facing these differences from the outset will bring about
a more fruitful cooperative venture.
2.
Choose people to serve on the key committees who are deeply committed to
the Plan. Often the people most likely to serve are those who are already
heavily committed to their professions or involved in realtor organizations
or other community activities. These activities in themselves make the people
obvious candidates to help implement the plan, but they should understand
and be willing to devote the time necessary for success.
3.
Involve as many brokers and sales associates from the jurisdiction as
possible in the various activities of the program. Not only will the
real estate community have more input, but it will also have a greater
commitment to the program.
4.
Establish a mechanism to facilitate communication and participation from all
parties. This mechanism should make it possible to implement activities as
well as clear the most critical issues with the presidents and boards of the
sponsoring organizations.
5.
Be creative in finding ways to communicate with individuals and groups.
Do not rely on the mail as the sole means of communication to brokers. Follow
up on the telephone. You may wish to issue brief progress reports for each
group's journal or newsletter.
6.
Keep accurate and comprehensive records. A significant affirmative marketing
plan will require a number of forms, letters, and documents. Record who
got what so you can accurately measure compliance, progress, and accomplishments.
25
�7.
Learn about the size of the industry and the area or areas to be served before
you begin. It will have an impact on the design and implementation of your
program.
8.
Before seeking funds, consider the size of territory to be covered and the
number and volume of firms involved; the amount of time to accomplish goals
usually a minimum of 3 years; possible use of existing staff of a fair housing
group or real estate trade association to implement the program; and the
cost of acquiring additional staff.
9.
Develop a staff adequate to the job you want to do . Implementation of an
affirmative marketing plan requires a great deal of time, energy, and lengthy
follow-through. In relatively smal l geographic areas you may be able to
depend upon a pool of existing or volunteer staff from sponsoring organizations . If not, you should make a realistic assessment of what you can
accomplish with limited resources. In larger areas a considerable
staff commitment will be needed . Decide whether existing staff can be used
exclusively and hire additional staff if necessary . Be aware that training
may occupy a significant amount of the period for which you are recruiting
new staff.
10. Allow enough time to implement the plan successfully. A realistic time
period is 3 to 5 years or until the sponsoring groups are convinced there is
no need for any further affirmative marketing activities. It takes time to
build an effective relationship between real estate people and fair housing
advocates.
DESIGN OF THE PLAN
I.
Interview a cross-section of real estate people from small and large companies,
white-owned and black-owned firms, and key fair housing and community people
to determine what an affirmative marketing program might contain. Among the
useful resources available to assist in the design of a plan are the Baltimore
Plan itself and the Voluntary Affirmative Marketing Agreement approved by
the National Association of Realtors and HUD. If litigation or administrative
actions on housing discrimination have taken place locally, you may be able to
get the consent decrees or conciliation agreements . Copies of consent decrees
may be obtained from the U.S. Department of Justice or from a local U.S.
Court, if such a decree has been filed locally . Conciliation agreements
between real estate firms and HOD or State Human Relations Commissions are
usually confidential, but a real estate firm may be willing to give a copy
to a responsible group. Such documents may well contain useful material for
the design of a plan.
2.
Get the official endorsement of each sponsoring group to the general idea
of the plan and to the final draft of the plan. Submit the draft to an executive
committee or a design committee appointed ~y the sponsoring groups that
includes a number of responsible representatives of the sponsoring groups.
These representatives should seek the approval of the final draft from the
sponsoring groups.
26
�INITIATION OF THE PLAN
1.
Do a careful selling job to assure that the plan is not only endorsed by
each prospective sponsor but that the endorsement is unanimous or nearly
so. The fair housing agency should respond with dispatch and indicate to
the industry groups the strong hope that the industry do likewise. It may
be helpful to seek the advocacy of some key people on each board before
the plan is officially presented.
2.
Analyze individual real estate companies, ranking them according to sales
volume. Seek out the more sympathetic brokers of the larger firms and ask
them to endorse the plan the moment the endorsement campaign gets underway.
If the larger companies lead the way, it will be easier for the many small
companies to follow.
3.
Send a letter out on behalf of the sponsoring real estate organizations to
the key brokers of each company inviting them to an orientation program. At
the orientation, distribute copies of the plan, explain the need for the plan,
and answer any general questions. The orientation meeting should provide a
positive setting to the plan. Ask the brokers to give careful consideration
to the plan and designate people to be available to answer their questions.
Urge brokers to endorse the plan as soon as possible. Encourage sympathetic
brokers to speak up for the plan. Send copies of the plan to all brokers
not in attendance at the meeting. Send an article to trade publications
explaining the plan and encouraging its support.
4.
Get the endorsement of key brokers and companies that do a significant amount
of business. When a good start has been achieved (ideally within 2 weeks)
ask the president of the real estate group to send a letter indicating that
certain companies doing a total of so much percent of the business have
endorsed the plan and encouraging all companies to sign up as soon as possible.
5.
Have staff follow up the letters with a telephone call asking if there are
any questions and urging the endorsement as soon as possible. The real estate
organizations' equal opportunity committees (or a special endorsement committee)
can do the initial calls in place of the staff or follow them up a couple of
weeks after the staff makes the initial telephone calls.
DIRECTION OF THE PLAN
1.
Establish an Executive Committee consisting of representatives from
the sponsoring organizations. Take care that the real estate members are
prominent representatives of the industry from large, medium, and small firms.
Representatives of fair housing groups should be well experienced in fair
housing activities and be strong representatives of the goals of their
agency and members. Carefully brief all representatives as to the realistic
extent of commitments required.
2.
Select the chairperson from the Board of Realtors since this is the largest
group affected by the activities of the Plan. The vice-chairperson could
be a representative from the realtists or a fair housing group.
27
�3.
Empower the Executive Committee to guide the progress of the plan, approve
all committee activities and reports before they are implemented, represent
the plan to the public, and handle relationships between the plan and its
sponsoring organizations. One of the first tasks of the committee is to
establish rules of procedure.
4.
Give the staff the responsibility for the day-to-day implementation of the
plan. They are chosen by and are responsible to the Executive Committee.
The Executive Director of the open housing agency should be the Executive
Director of the Plan . Staff will have to be able to plan, administer, organize,
conduct interviews in the field, staff committees, carry out special events,
assemble statistical information, do research, and write reports. A great
deal of clerical work and recordkeeping is needed. Therefore, keep these
skills in mind when selecting staff .
5.
If possible, depending upon the local situation, recruit volunteer staff
who would be willing to make a part-time commitment to the plan.
In conclusion, hard work and a spirit of cooperation is essential if a
voluntary affirmative marketing plan, like the Baltimore Plan, is to succeed.
Trial and error, persistence, plus good faith efforts on the part of all
members are essential.
OVERALL ASSESSMENT
The Baltimore Plan Executive Committee, consisting of representatives
of real estate firms and Baltimore neighborhoods, met in a special meeting in
1980 without staff present in order to evaluate progress at the close of the
first 2 years of the demonstration. The committee came to the conclusion that
none of the specific results or achievements would have occurred without the
Baltimore Plan. These include:
o
the stress on affirmative advertising;
o
the extensive orientation and education of real estate associates;
o
the
o
the bringing of brokers and homeowners together in a large
changing area (where hostili ty beween the two groups had been
intense for more than a decade) to work affirmatively for the
benefit of the community; and
o
increasing cooperation between Realtors and Realtists .
challe~e
to the industry on integrated employment;
The committee also concluded that if the Baltimore Plan should not continue,
there was a high probability that these and s imilar activities would also not
continue. There was a unanimous feeling at that time that some form of the
plan should continue beyond the period initially planned for the demonstration;
and, In fact, the plan was continued until December 1982, at that time, a
decision was made to end the formal relationship established by the Plan, but
the members of the plan resolved to continue to cooperate in efforts of mutual
concern and benefit.
28
�The staff met separately from the Executive Committee and came to these
conclusions:
o
The Baltimore Plan was a good plan.
o
The overall impact of the plan was of benefit to the real
estate industry, the community at large, and the fair housing
movement. Probably its main accomplishment has been to keep
the issue and responsibility of open housing before the real
estate industry and to have pressed the industry for increased
affirmative marketing efforts.
o
The programs would not have been undertaken by individual
members if something like the Baltimore Plan had not been
devised. Funding for implementation was important, but
more important was the spirit of cooperation and the
access to real estate firms because of the Baltimore Plan's
existence.
o
A strong plus was the assistance of a number of dedicated
Realtists and Realtors who provided leadership .
o
The concept of a working partnership between real estate
interests and open housing interests is as valid an approach
to the achievement of open housing as is confrontation or
conflict between the two interests.
o
A negative factor was the widespread resistance of many in
the industry to the implementation of many parts of the program.
The specific research performed by contractors and by Baltimore Plan
staff provided additional information on Plan impact, however, the absence
of appropriate control groups limits this research to indicative rather than
conclusive results.
The changes and improvements noted by researchers were quite mixed. The
most positive was a marked decline in perceived discrimination against black
home buyers in surveys of recent buyers. This finding was, however, offset by
a significant increase in the number of sales associates who believed steering
went on (possibly a consequence of greater sensitivity to the issue) . Field
work in the Harbel community suggested new evidence of substantial discrimination
and steering . This also raised questions about the accuracy on the belief of
95 percent of blacks that they felt no restriction in selection of housing
because of racial discrimination. Employoent surveys conducted by the Baltimore
Plan revealed that real estate employment of minorities was very low in whiteowned firms and that this area needed considerable improvement.
Finally, it has been noted that strenuous efforts were needed to sign up 195
firms (65 percent) doing 85 percent of the residential sales made through the
Central Maryland Multiple Listing Service in Baltimore County/City . Moreover,
involving the industry in the implementation of the Baltimore Plan required
additional strenuous effort, including meetings, introductory and follow-up
29
�letters, and follow-up telephone calls. Additionally only 45 percent of those
endorsing the Plan returned 1979 employment questionnaires, and, after 2 years
of effort, compliance wi th IUD's voluntary affirmative ad vert ising guidelines
resulted in only 52-percent usage of the Equal Housing Opportunity slogan
logo.
The Baltimore Plan was not systematic but rather involved a trial and
error process, learning what works and what does not in a specific community.
Not all the strategies and projects attempted in the Baltimore Plan will be
appropriate for all jurisdictions or under all conditions. This report does,
however, offer other interested groups practical insight and advice in the
areas of education, outreach, advertising, monitoring, research, and cooperation
of projects of joint concern. The accomplishments were substantial and even
the areas of limited success or failure can be instructive to those concerned
with achievi~g fair housing goals by voluntary means.
","u.s.
30
GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1983-417-786
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Baltimore Neighborhoods, Inc.
Subject
The topic of the resource
Discrimination in housing
Nonprofit organizations
Citizens' associations
Baltimore Metropolitan Area (Md.)
African Americans
Housing
Baltimore (Md.)
Community organization
Reports
Correspondence
Newsletters
Description
An account of the resource
This exhibit provides an introduction to the work of Baltimore Neighborhoods, Inc. (BNI) around issues of racial integration in housing and tenants' rights from the 1950s to the 2000s.
Established in 1958, Baltimore Neighborhoods, Inc. was formed to promote an open housing market and viable integrated neighborhoods in the Baltimore area. It was established by several neighborhood associations and supported by civic organizations like the Greater Baltimore Committee. The early focus of the organization was to obtain open housing and stable neighborhoods during a period of widespread white flight and blockbusting in Baltimore City. Through education and advocacy, it sought to counter racial prejudice, to fight discrimination in the real estate industry, and to combat neighborhood deterioration resulting from segregated housing. More recently, BNI has focused on tenant-landlord relations and renters' rights.
The Baltimore Neighborhoods, Inc. (BNI) collection at the University of Baltimore consists of 22 linear inches of archival records, which are described in an online collection database. The complete collection has also been digitized at the folder level and is also available in the collection database. For this exhibit, 32 documents have been selected from the complete collection.
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
<a href="https://langsdale.ubalt.edu/special-collections/" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">Special Collections & Archives, University of Baltimore</a>
Source
A related resource from which the described resource is derived
<a href="https://archivesspace.ubalt.edu/repositories/2/resources/14" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">Baltimore Neighborhoods, Incorporated Records, UB Special Collections & Archives</a>
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
<a href="https://langsdale.ubalt.edu/special-collections/">University of Baltimore Special Collections & Archives</a>
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
circa 1958-2009
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
This material may be quoted or reproduced for personal and educational purposes without prior permission, provided appropriate credit is given. When crediting the use of portions from this site or materials within that are copyrighted by us, please use the citation: "Used with permission of the University of Baltimore Special Collections & Archvies." Any commercial use of this material is prohibited without prior permission from the Special Collections & Archives, University of Baltimore. Commercial requests for use of the images or related text must be submitted in writing to: Special Collections & Archives, University of Baltimore, H. Mebane Turner Learning Commons, 1415 Maryland Avenue, Baltimore, MD 21201
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
text/pdf
Language
A language of the resource
English
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
R0015-BNI
Date Created
Date of creation of the resource.
2019-09
Extent
The size or duration of the resource.
32 items
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Original Format
The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data
Paper
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
The Baltimore Plan for Affirmative Marketing in Real Estate: Final Report
Description
An account of the resource
A federal housing report on affirmative marketing of real estate in the Baltimore metropolitan area
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1983-08
Subject
The topic of the resource
Housing
Real estate business
Discrimination in housing
Baltimore Metropolitan Area (Md.)
United States. Dept. of Housing and Urban Development
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Office of Policy Development and Research
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
University of Baltimore Special Collections & Archives
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
bni06.01.36a
Source
A related resource from which the described resource is derived
Baltimore Neighborhoods, Incorporated Records (R0015-BNI), series VI, box 1, folder 36, Special Collections & Archives, University of Baltimore
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
Use of this digital material is governed by U.S. copyright law. The University of Baltimore Special Collections and Archives makes digital surrogates of collections accessible if they are in the public domain, the rights are owned by the University of Baltimore, the Special Collections and Archives has permission to make them accessible, or there are no known restrictions on use. Due to the nature of archival collections, rights information is not always discernible. The Special Collections and Archives is eager to hear from any rights owners wishing to provide accurate information. Upon request, material will be removed from view while a rights issue is addressed. Contact the Special Collections and Archives for more information regarding this image.
Baltimore Metropolitan Area (Md.)
Discrimination in housing
Housing
Real estate business
United States. Dept. of Housing and Urban Development
-
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/44124/archive/files/1f4ec2db14788367b1c6424731c5c27e.pdf?Expires=1712793600&Signature=JuU4B7EztSQlfOJMTOA6uwARvGX3QoElf-2UzKIbIAb6o-1wE9-26h3CRqJV2OR-PaTx8r%7E6zmQpk4stDsXD8vUWU4NCmgMdiZzQqi5OxFqfKaISlmLqIqcax7wgP4NcGiKZoC3B8nwVCtGauR5h7WWuc1UBqDU9A87U2HtsuQRpLm15GJaxQU0rI6FfGGo-KZ1D-YdihmRhPGWJxwIlGV%7Epn0YprQeehZ1d6AxpolkanXH1zPNY07gx5HDT8B%7EJdv3yof6jJ8PM8MZgo5cxQrLT1cE-3YZ1r01K7xF3js3hKvwceFGjbZ%7Ejqh0CNNqcPoCilOlu1rCvosk4hiux2g__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
4e5737c4bdda67ea550f30f7030ba381
PDF Text
Text
A REPORT ON FEDERALLY FUNDED REGIONAL HOUSING
OPPORTUNITIES FOR LOW-INCOME RENTERS IN THE
BALTIMORE METROPOLITAN AREA
prepared by the Task Force on Low and
Moderate Income Housing and the HUD
Committee of Baltimore Neighborhoods, Inc.
August, 1980
Baltimore Neighborhoods, Inc.
319 East 25th Street
Baltimore, Maryland 21218
301/243-6007
�SUMMARY OF THE POSITION OF BALTIMORE NEIGHBORHOODS, INC.
Baltimore Neighborhoods, Inc. has examined the Regional Section
8 portion of the Areawide Housing Opportunities Program (AHOP),
and
sees it as a valuable tool for open housing and increased
mobility of low and moderate income families, black and white.
Therefore BNI urges an expansion of the program locally and
throughout the nation.
BNI makes this recommendation based on its experience since
1959 as a metropolitan open housing agency. It has a great
interest in helping to expand, on a metropolitan-wide, fairshare basis, the supply of housing available to low and moderate
income persons. BNI is concerned that the benefits of open
housing and increased mobility be available to low and moderate
income persons as well as to middle and upper income people.
BNI realizes that there is always room for improvement in
any program, has made severalsuggestions~n this regard, but
maintains that any constraint or lack of choice in housing
location is due to the severe lack of housing for low and
moderate income persons and not because of any defect in the
design or administration of the Regional Section 8 program.
BNI's investigation does not conclude that AHOP is part of
a conspiracy against black people or poor people.
BNI recognizes that certain critics of AHOP have raised
valid concerns about other issues. To raise these issues in
direct reference to AHOP only makes it more difficult to make
a fair appraisal of the AHOP program.
�TABLE OF CONTENTS
I.
Introduction
II.
Addres sing the Issues
A.
B.
C.
D
.
Does AHOP force people out of the City? ....... . .. ... .. . .. . . . . . ..... 2
Is the movement of people only out of the City? .... ........ .. ...... 3
Is there a need for increased services and transportation? .. . ... . . . 4
Is AHOP a conspiracy to force poor city Blacks to other
jurisdictions?..... . . ...... . ..... .......... .. . ... ..... . . . . ......... 5
E. W
here are the Baltimore City Re~i onal Sec. 8 Families Relocating . ... 8
F. Are City residents who move to Baltimore County
satisfied? ... . ........... . ... ... . . ................................. 10
G. What are the major constraints on choice of housing? ................ 11
H. Are the recommendations of the Kerner Report intended
to suppress uprisings? .. .. . ........................ .. .............. 11
III.
Summary and Conclusions ...................... ...... ... ..... ............. '13
IV.
Recommendati ons ..... . ........... .. .... ..... . .......... . ....... ....... . . 14
V.
Response to the Demands of the Coalition to Save Urban
Communi ties ... . .............. . . ... . .. . . . .. . . ... .. ..... . .. .............. 15
VI.
Appendices
Table
Table
Table
Table
Table
Table
Table
Table
I Respondents' Satisfaction . .... . .. . .. . ..... . .......... .. . .. . . ....
II Respondents' Leasi ng in Community of First Choice .. . ..... . ....
III Best Features of Respondents' Units ....... .... .... . ..... . ....
IV Worst Features of Respondents' Units .. . . . .. . ....... . ..... . ... .
V Respondents' Present Housing an Improvement .................. . .. .
VI Respondents' Rating of Secti on 8 Staff ........................
VII Responden ts' Difficulty in Finding Housing . .. . . ..............
V Respondents' Reasons for Not Leasing in Community
III
of First Choice ................. . .. ...... ............. ......
Table IX Units Provided in Baltimore City to Assist Very Low
Income Residents in the City 1969-79 .......... . .. . .. ........
Letter from City Housing Program to Section 8 Applicants, AHOP
Application . . . . . ..... . . . .. . .. . . . ... ........... .. .. .... . . ....
18
19
19
20
21
21
21
22
23
24
�1.
A.
I NTRODUCTI ON
Definition of the Regional Section 8 Program of the Areawide Housing
Opportunities Program (AHOP) .
The Regi onal Section 8 program must be understood against the bac kground
of the general Section 8 program . This program was created by the Federal Housing
and Community Development Act of 1974. primarily to replace public housing. It.
however. prov ides assistance to moderate as well as low income families . Under
it the tenant pays up to 25% of his/her adjusted income for rent. with the U.S.
Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) paying the difference between
this amount and the actual rent of the unit. Because many Section 8 uni ts are
in existing apartments. with HUD stating a preference that approximately 20%oft~ e
units in apartments be assisted. the program encourages a scattering of assisted
households. Between 1976 through 1979. 6.666 Section 8 units were provided in the
Baltimore Region. with 3.737 provided for use in Baltimore City and 2.929 in the
five surrounding counties ("A Listing of Low and Moderate Income Housing In the
Baltimore Region." The Regional Planning Council. January. 1980.) The allocation
for each jurisdiction each year is determined jointly by the Regional Planning
Council (RPC) and HUD based on t he needs of each jurisdiction and the princirle
that each jurisdiction should provide its fair share of assisted housing to meet
the Region's needs.
In 1978 the Areawide Housing Opportunities Program was begun. It constitutes an addition to the general Section 8 program described above.
AHOP consists of several different programs. including the Regional Section
8 program. AHOP uses "bonus" money awarded to the Regional Planning Council
derived from additional Section 8 funds. Community Development Block Grant funds.
and 701 Planni ng funds. It "addresses areawide housing assistance needs and goals
in accordance with the program objective of providing for a broader geographical
choice of housing opportuniti es for low income households outside areas and
jurisdictions containing undue concentrations of low-income and minority households . " (FR. Vol. 43. No. 10. Monday. Jan. 17.1979). It increases the number
of assisted units available in the Region. as well as provides support activities
such as counselling and relocation assistance. These funds are not regularly
allocated but are awarded on a competitive basis to regions that have an areawide hous ing plan. HUD approved the Baltimore Region's Plan in 1978.
B. Challenges to the Areawide Housing Opportunities Program
These challenges have consisted chiefly of allegations that AHOP forces poor
Blacks to live in other jurisdictions and that a national conspiracy. beginning
with the report of the K
erner Commission in 1968. exists to reduce the number
of Blacks in the cities. thereby reducing possibilities of uprisings . diffusing
the Black political power base. and making room for Whites to reinvest in City
housing. Assertions are made that services to residents moving to other jurisdictions under this program are inadequate.
The Board of Baltimore Neighborhoods. Inc. (BNI) believes that the Regional
Section 8 program plays an important role in providing housing choice for low and
moderate income persons and minorities . It instructed its Task Force on Low and
Moderate Income Housing and its HUD Committee to study this issue. to address the
challenges to the program. and to make recommendations. The remainder of this
report consi sts of the results of the work of the Task Force in carrying out
these instructions. The report was adopted by the BNI Board at its August. 1980
meeting.
�-2-
II.
A.
ADDRESSING THE ISSUES
Does AHOP Force People Out of the City?
AHOP DOES NOT FORCE PEOPLE, INCLUDING POOR INNER-CITY BLACKS, DUT OF
BALTIMORE CITY. ONLY APPLICANTS ON THE CITY'S SECTION 8 WAITING LIST WHO
STATED A DESIRE TD MOVE TO ANOTHER JURISDICTION WERE CONSIDERED FOR REGIONAL
CERTIFICATES. REGIONAL CERTIFICATES AND OTHER SECTION 8 CERTIFICATES HAVE
BEEN ALLOCATED FOR THE USE OF CITY DISPLACEES TD USE IN THE CITY. AS OF
JUNE 30, 1980 EIGHTY OF THE CITY'S REGIONAL SECTION 8 CERTIFICATES WERE USED
IN THE CITY.
The Task Force concluded that the program does not force people out of
the City, based on the following observations:
1. The formal procedure for identifying those applicants on the City's
Section 8 waiting list who wished to move to another jurisdiction included no
"either/or" ultimatum. There was no indication given to prospective certificate holders that Regional Section 8 certificates would be easier to get than
Existing Section 8 certificates. Applicants were asked to check the jurisdiction in which they wished to reside (See form and cover letter in the Appendix).
The manner in which the initial selection of applicants for AHOP was conducted appears to have made a real choice possible. All persons on the City
Section 8 waiting list (and other jurisdictions as well) were sent letters asking
if they were interested in moving to a jurisdiction other than their present
location. They were asked to check the appropriate block on a card and if they
indicated a wish to move, to give a reason. They were not told that Regional
certificates were easier to get than local certificates. Of the 2D,971 persons
on the City Section 8 waiting list at the time, 1D,506 cards were not returned,
3,240 were returned by the post office as undeliverable, and 7,045 were returned
by the applicants. Of these 7,045, 3,033 checked Baltimore City only and 4,012
persons checked another jurisdiction (3,500 checked Baltimore County). (RPC
"Quotes" June, 1980). The 4,012 persons served as a pool from which to issue
Regional certificates or be put on the Regional waiting list. These applicants
also remained on the City's Section 8 list. Should a client be unable to find
a unit by the time his/her Regional certificate expired, he/she would go to the
bottom of the Regional list, but would not lose his/her place on the City's list.
The Task Force believes that choice possibilities were maximized by this
procedure. The acute shortage of assisted housing, not the Regional program,
is chiefly responsible for any pressure to move felt by clients. Presently,
a client could face the possibility of a City certificate being unavailable.
All applicants, Regional or local, go on very long waiting lists. Presently,
as-new persons apply, they are asked to indicate the jurisdiction they wish to
consider and are put on the appropriate waiting list.
2. Regional and Section 8 units are set aside specifically for the City
displacees to use in the city.
While there are many factors contributing to displacement, AHOP was not found
to be one of them. In regard to the charge that poor City residents are displaced from their homes by public or private action and forced to move outside
the City, the following facts are relevant: as of June 3D, 1980 there were 340
�-3-
Regional certificate holders from Baltimore City. Eighty remain in Baltimore
City. Of these, 28 received city units because of displacement. In addition,
the city has asked for and been promised by HUD 170 certificates to aid displaced persons from Somerset Court to find City housing.
There is another way in which City Section 8 clients have moved to Baltimore County. Since the latter has no housing authority, the City may use its
authority within a 10 mile radius of the City. All City certificate holders
are told they can use their certificates either in the city or in Baltimore County.
As of June 3D, 1979 183 City Section 8 certificate holders resided in Baltimore
County. Some facts about this group are:
TABLE I
FAMILIES MOVING INTO BALTIMORE COUNTY USING CITY SECTION 8 CERTIFICATES
(as of 6/30/79)
White
-60
Black
123
Elderly, disabled
and handicapped
57
Famil i es
126
TOTAL
183
29 of these assisted "in place"
Current practice is to give a City certificate holder who moved to Baltimore
County a Regional certificate.
It may happen, again due to the acute assisted housing shortage, that some
persons in the local Existing Section 8 program have felt compelled to take a
County unit. Although the clients are told that they may use their certificates
in either jurisdiction, if they cannot find a unit in the City where the management accepts Section 8, or which is up to Code, is at or below the Fair Market
Rents, or is the right sized unit for the family, the County may be their only
alternative. The reverse situation may also occur.
B.
Is the Movement of People Only Out of the City?
THE REGIONAL SECTION 8 PROGRAM PROVIDES OPPORTUNITIES FOR LOW AND
MODERATE INCOME PERSONS TO MOVE INTO THE CITY AS WELL AS OUT OF IT. AS OF
JUNE 3D, 1980, THIRTY TWO FAMILIES, 21 OF WHICH WERE BLACK, HAD MOVED INTO
BALTIMORE CITY FROM OTHER JURISDICTIONS (MOSTLY BALTIMORE COUNT~ ON REGIONAL
CERTIFICATES. (Source: RPC printout as of June 3D, 1980)
�-4-
TABLE II
FAMILIES MOVING INTO BALTIMORE CITY USING REGIONAL SECTION 8 CERTIFICATES
(as of 6/30/80)
Moving to Baltimore
City from:
Annapoli s
2
Anne Arundel Co 4
Balt imore
80*
City
Balti more
County 23
Carroll Co.
o
Harford Co.
1
Howard Co.
2
32
C.
(1 Black)
(2 Black)
* already in City using
Regional certificates
(15 Black)
(1 Bl ack)
(2
Black)
(21 Black)
Is There a Need for Increased Services and Transportation?
THERE IS A NEED FOR INCREASED SERVICES AND TRANSPORTATION TO THOSE SERVICES
BY SECTION 8 TENANTS LIVING IN BALTIMORE COUNTY. DISTANCE FROM SERVICES WAS
INDICATED AS ADISADVANTAGE OF THEIR PRESENT HOUSING BY 20% TO 24% OF RESPONDENTS
SURVEYED. THE PERCENTAGE WAS VERY SIMILAR WHETHER THE RESPONDENTS WERE PREVIOUS
CITY DWELLERS OR HAD ALREADY LIVED IN BALTIMORE COUNTY.
BNI in its study of low and moderate income housing in Baltimore County
soon to be released, analyzed surveys mailed by the Regional Planning Council
to Regional certificate holders in Baltimore County and mailed and analyzed
surveys to other Section 8 tenants living in the County.
Replies from the three groups of Sect ion 8 tenants surveyed by the Task Force
to two questions relevant to this concern are tabulated below.
"What do you like best about your present apartment or house?"
(Q.14)
Regional Certificate Holders
in Baltimore
County
Ci ty Certi ficate Holders
in Baltimore
County
County Cert ificate Holders
in Baltimore
County
No .
No.
%
No.
%
16
49%
(01358)
40%
%
More convenient to shopping 13
27%
and other services (day
(of 49)
care, health care, etc.)
(of 41)
�-5-
"What do you 1i ke 1east about your present apartment or house?"
Regional
Certificate
Holders in
Baltimore
County
No.
%
Too far away from services
I need (shopping, day care,
health care, etc.)
TOTAL living in
Baltimore County
10
(of 49)
312
20%
City certificate
Holders in
Baltimore
County
No .
%
10
(of 41)
183
24%
(Q .15)
County
Certificate
Holders in
Baltimore
County
No.
%
12
(of 58)
21%
855
Although 20% to 25% of the Regional and City Section 8 tenants cited distance from services as a negative feature, an even larger percentate checked their
present neighborhood as convenient. Possibly these divergent results may be
explained by the location of the units and kinds of services needed by the
respondents.
D.
Is AHOP a Conspiracy to Force Poor City Blacks to Other Jurisdictions?
AHOP IS NOT A CONSPIRACY TO FORCE POOR CITY BLACKS TO OTHER JURISDICTIONS,
BUT RATHER IS A SMALL SCALE PROGRAM TO INCREASE CHOICE. THE FEDERAL REGULATIONS
ESTABLISHING THIS PROGRAM STATE THIS CHOICE EXPLICITLY. THE NUMBER OF CITY
REGIONAL SECTION 8 CERTIFICATES IS SUCH A SMALL PERCENTAGE OF THE CITY'S SECTION
8 WAITING LIST (3.3%) THAT IT COULD NOT EFFECTIVELY RELOCATE LARGE NUMBERS OF
PERSONS. OVER THE YEARS THE NUMBER OF ASSISTED UNITS PROVIDED FOR USE IN THE
CITY BY CITY RESIDENTS IS 22 TIMES GREATER THAN THE NUMBER PROVIDED FOR CITY
RESIDENTS TO USE OUTSIDE THE CITY . THE NUMBER OF REGIONAL CERTIFICATES CONSTITUTE ONLY 16%OF THE ASSISTED UNITS PROVIDED FOR CITY RESIDENTS TO USE IN
THE CITY IN 1978 AND 1979, THE YEARS SINCE THE REGIONAL PROGRAM HAS BEEN IN
OPERATION. THE FORMULA BY WHICH SECTION 8 UNITS ARE ALLOCATED EACH YEAR TO THE
CITY WEIGHTS LOCAL NEED MORE THAN FAIR SHARE DISTRIBUTION GOALS. PRELIMINARY
1980 CENSUS FIGURES SHOW TOO LARGE AN INCREASE IN THE PROPORTION OF BLACKS IN
BALTIMORE CITY TO BE EFFECTIVELY COUNTERBALANCED BY THE REGIONAL PROGRAM SO AS
TO SERIOUSLY ERODE THE BLACK POLITICAL BASE. THE COUNTIES ARE INCAPABLE OF
ABSORBING VERY LARGE NUMBERS OF LOI~ AND MODERATE INCOME PEOPLE FROM OTHER JURISDICTIONS DUE TO THE LOW VACANCY RATE AND OTHER FACTORS.
No evidence has been found to support the conspiracy allegation . On the
contrary a number of facts support the idea that AHOP is a program designed to
give choice to low and moderate income families, not to force massive relocation.
1. The Regional Section 8 program presently can serve only a small percent
of those on the Section 8 waiting list (677 units out of 20,791 or 3.2%) and
obviously is not relocating large number of the city's poor.
2. The City has provided far more additional units to assist tenants in the
City (14,955 units 1969 through 1979) than are provided throu9h AHOP (667 units
or 4.5%of the units to be used in the city), which points to a much qreater
local commitment than to a Regional distribution commitment. The City has
�-6-
obviously demonstrated a past commitment to local needs over the years. If one
compares only local units provided 1978 and 1979 with AHOP (since AHOP began
officially in 1978, but units are still being leased out of this allocation)
AHOP constitutes only 16% of the local units allocated in these two years.
3. The formula by which assisted units are allocated to each jurisdiction
by the Regional Planning Council and HUD weights local need more than fair share
or Regional distribution requirements: 71% for local need and 29% for fair
share distribution.
4. Preliminary 1980 figures show an increased,not a decreased proportion of Blacks in Baltimore City from 46.4% in 1970 to 57% in 1980. which
trend appears to be continuing,and present and anticipated Regional allocations
are too small to affect this trend in any way that could erode this increased
political base of City Blacks .
5. Most of the loss in City population between 1970 and 1980 is attributable to white middle and upper income persons leaving the City and has not
been counterbalanced by the relatively small number of persons recently reinvesting in the City's housing.
6. Due to the very low rental vacancy rate in the Counties surrounding
the City, the reluctance of many landlords to participate in Section 8, the
large number of County units having rents above the Fair Market Rental Rates,
and the County's stated opposition to building new developments of more than
50 subsidized units for families, the County cannot, nor will it, in the near
future, accommodate large numbers of Section 8 residents from Baltimore City.
7. Since the conspiracy is alleged to have begun at the time of the Kerner
Report (Report of the National Advisory Commission on Civil Disorders, 1968,
Otto K
erner) which is also the time HUD was created, the City's units for
housing assistance from 1969 through 1979 n1 years) were tabulated. The source
was "A Listing of Low and Moderate Income Housing in the Baltimore Region,
January, 1980," The Regional Planning Council. All programs helping very low
income persons (Public Housing Conventional Public Housing Vacant, Public
Housing Used, Public Housing Turnkey, Rent Supplement, Rental Assistance Payments, Section 8 Existing, Section 8 New and Section 8 Rehab and Moderate
Rehab) were included. Excluded were Sec. 236, 221-d-3 and 202 since they do
not benefit very low income persons, and homp. ownership programs. However,
Rent Suppl ement, Renta 1 Ass i stance Payments and Secti on 8 are often awarded to
persons living in a Section 236, 221-d-3 or 202 development. These units have
been included.
Between 1940 and 1963 the City built 10,280 units of Conventional Public
Housing for families. In 1967 and 1968, 428 units of assisted housing for very
low income people were added.
Since 1969, 120 Section 8 units were assigned to Sec. 221-d-3 development
for families and 69 units were assigned to a Section 202 development for the
elderly. There was no information in the source used as to when they are allocatted. These units have arbitrarily been tabulated as of 1979. All other
Rental Assistance Program (RAP), Section 8 and Rent Supplement units provided
�-7-
to persons in Section 236, 202 and 221-d-3 developments from 1969 on have
been tabulated by the year in which the building was constructed because there
is no information as to the year they were actually provided.
The following table lists the number of units allocated in the City for
very low income persons by year, divided into assistance for elderly only and for
families. The Appendix contains a detailed tabulation according to the various
programs.
TABLE III
ASSISTED UNITS ALLOCATED FOR USE IN BALTIMORE CITY (1969-1979)
Total Assisted Units
for very Low Income Persons
provided in Balto . City
Year
1969
1970
1971
1972
1973
1974
1975
1976
1977
1978
1979
Units for
Elderly only
Units for
Famil ies
410
579
1,557
606
1,312
1,364
596
2,208
1,995
1,113
3,026
TOTALS
0
161
708
0
509
925
325
1,238
610
333
1,896
410
418
849
606
803
439
271
970
1,385
780
1,319
14,766
6,705
8,250
TABLE IV
UNITS ALLOCATED FOR USE IN JURISDICTIONS IN THE REGION OTHER THAN BALTIMORE CITY
(1969 - 1979)
Total Assisted Units
Uni ts for
Units for
for Very Low Income
% of Region's
Elderly Only
Families
Persons 1969-79
Totals
Jurisdiction
Anne Arundel County
including Annapolis
Baltimore County
Carro 11 County
including Westminster
Harford County
including Aberdeen
and Havre de Grace
Howard County
TOTALS
Baltimore City
GRAND TOTAL
2,424
1,696
11%
8%
779
668
1,645
1,028
340
2%
250
90
970
5%
214
756
962
6,392
14,955
21,347
5%
30%
70%
271
2,182
691
4,210
�-8-
A total of 14,955 units of housing assistance were provided for very low
income City residents to use in Baltimore City. These figures do not include
the 677 Regional Section 8 certificates allocated in 1978. These Regional
units constitute only 4.5% of the local units provided over the past eleven
years. Total units provided for City persons to use in the City for 1978 and
1979 were 4,328. The Regional certificates are only 16% of these. The
Regional units were allocated in 1978 and are still being rented in 1980 . It
seems obvious that the City's allocations for its own people to use in the City
so far outweigh its Regional allocations (22 to 1) that the charge that large
numbers of poor City residents are being moved out by the Regional program is
unsubstantiated.
Examination of units provided to the five other counties and four cities
shows the great imbalance between the city and the rest of the Region in this
regard . (See Table IV)
If one adds to the 21,347 units provided in 1969-79, the Baltimore City
10,280 units of conventional public housing built in the City between 1940 and
1963, the 428 units supplied in the City in 1967 and 1968 and the 672 units
provided in Annapolis between 1942 and 1968, the grand total for the Region,1940
through 1979,is 32,727 units. For this longer period, Baltimore City has supplied
25,664 of the Region's total of 32,727 or 78%, while the other jur~sdicti?ns
have supplied 7,064 ,units or 22%. It should be noted that the~e flgures lnclude
assistance available to very low income households and do not lnclude programs
principally benefitting moderate income households. Sec. 8 is available to
moderate as well as very low income persons .
The City has a larger need for assisted housing than does the rest of the
Region, and it is appropriate that it should receive more assisted units. The
rest of the Region has been providing relatively scanty assisted housing opportunities for its own citizens or for persons from other jurisdictions who
mi ght need or want to move to it.
In 1972 the Area Housing Council's Plan for the Baltimore Region (approved
by RPC in 1972 and revised and approved in 1977) documented the fact that the
Counties were not providing their "fair share" of the households needing assistance in the Region. The Plan was developed in part to remedy this imbalance
by providing a formula for the allocation of assisted units each year to the
various jurisdictions. The formula was not based solely on the need to achieve
a fairer Regional distribtuion of assisted households but also recognized that
local need had to be a factor in the allocation of assisted units. The Plan
formula weighted local need at 71% and fair share requirements at 29% Thus
.
the formula allowed local need greatly to outweigh Regional fair share requirements. For this reason, the City with its much greater need, always receives
more of the assisted units than the other jurisdictions, but not as many units
as it would without the fair share component. The fact that local need outweighs fair share requirements in allocating assisted units each year argues
that the RPC and HUD are not sacrificing local need to the goal of dispersing
poor people throughout the Region.
E.
Where are the Baltimore City Regional Section 8 Families Relocating?
MOST CITY RESIDENTS USING REGIONAL CERTIFICATES ARE RELOCATING IN BALTIMORE
COUNTY (62% AND IN THE CITY ITSELF (24% IN BALTIMORE COUNTY THE DISTRIBUTION
)
).
�-9-
OF REGIONAL CERTIFICATE HOLDERS SURVEYED IS FAIRLY BROAD, BUT THERE ARE CLUSTERS
IN MIDDLE RIVER, OWINGS MILLS, RANDALLSTOWN, LOCH EARN AND REISTERSTOWN, WITH
VERY FEW ASSISTED TENANTS IN THE NORTH CENTRAL AREA OF THE COUNTY.
The present location of Regional City certificate holders in all other
jurisdictions is shown in the following tabulation. (source: RPC printout of
Regional Section B program 6/30/80).
340 Regional certificates have been leased
to date to City residents.
TABLE V
LOCATION OF REGIONAL CITY CERTIFICATE HOLDERS
(as of 6/30/80)
Jurisdiction
Total No.
entering each
Juri sdi ct ion
No.
%
Annapo lis
Anne Arundel Cty 17
Balto . City*
80
Balto. County 212
Ca r ro 11 Cty .
a
Harford Cty
2
Howard Cty
28
.4
5.0
24.0
62.0
No. Black
No.
%
No. Elderly
No. Wh i te
No.
%
.6
8.0
340
0
4.5
3
23.0 9
63.0 18
309
a
0
14
71
194
0
2
28
31
a
a
.5
9.0
0
0
& handcEd
No.
%
3.0
10.0
29.0
58.0
0
1
18
38
0
2.0
31.0
67.0
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
a
0
*i ncludes set aside for di sp laced and handicapped persons.
No. Fami lies
No.
%
16
62
174
.3
6.0
22.0
61.0
a
a
2
28
.7
10.0
283
57
If this present locational trend continues, most city Regional tenants will
find housing in Baltimore County and in the City using the certificates set aside
for displaced and handicapped persons .
The Task Force has tabulated the zip codes of residence of the 49 Regional
tenants in its sample living in Baltimore County. Thirty-four of them came from
the City. The 49 are located in the following zip codes:
TABLE VI
LOCATION OF 49 REGIONAL CERTIFICATE HOLDERS SURVEYED LIVING IN
BALTIMORE COUNTY
Middle River
Dundal k
Parkvi 11 e
Owi ngs Mi 11 s
Reisterstown
Gtr . Lochearn
21220
21222
21234
21117
21136
21207
13
1
1
8
5
6
( 27%
)
( 2%
)
( 2%
)
(17%
)
(10%
)
(12%
)
Randallstown
Cockeysvi 11 e
Essex
Loch Raven area
Rosedale
Catonsvi 11 e
21133
21030
21221
21239
21227
21228
7
1
1
3
2
1
(14%
)
)
( 2%
( 2%
)
( 6%
)
( 4%
)
( 2%)
�-10-
The tabulation shows that most AHOP tenants reside in four western zip
codes (Owings Mills, Reisterstown, Randallstown, and Lochearn) and one eastern
zip (Middle River). These trends are similar to those reported in Baltimore
County's Housing Assistance Plan. The finding most important for the Task
Force is that there is a reasonably broad dispersal with many persons not
living close to the City line. Blacks are not being re-ghettoized or "forced"
into certain areas . The north central area is sparsely inhabited by Section
B tenants.
F.
Are City Residents Who Move to Baltimore County Satisfied?
THE LEVEL OF SATISFACTION OF SECTION 8 TENANTS IN BALTIMORE COUNTY IS HIGH.
A SAMPLE OF PERSONS LIVING THERE ON REGIONAL CERTIFICATES SHOWED THAT 53%WERE
VERY SATISFIED, &25% WERE SOMEWHAT SATISFIED. CITY SECTION B CERTIFICATE
HOLDERS IN THE COUNTY WERE NOT AS WELL SATISFIED (20% VERY SATISFIED AND 37%
SOMEWHAT SATISFIED). LOCAL CERTIFICATE HOLDERS WERE THE MOST SATISFIED
OF ALL (69% VERY SATISFIED AND 17% SOMEWHAT SATISFIED).
As part of its study of assisted housing in Baltimore County, the Task
Force surveyed Regional Section 8 certificate holders living in Baltimore County
(49 replies) the jurisdiction to which 212 out of the 260 (82%) City Regional
certificate holders have moved. The Task Force also surveyed City certificate
holders living in Baltimore County on City certificates (41 replies) and a
sample of Baltimore County Existing Section 8 certificate holders (5B replies).
Replies to the survey indicated a high level of satisfaction for all three
groups of Section B tenants living in Baltimore County, with Regional certificate
holders displaying greater satisfaction than City certificate holders living in
the County. About half of both the Regional and City groups report not having
moved to the community of their first choice. Liking the new neighborhood better
than the old neighborhood, better schools, and convenience were the items most
often checked by both the Regional and City tenants living in Baltimore County.
Transportation, distance from friends and relatives and from services were the
three things least liked by both the Regional and City certificate holders
living in Baltimore County. Both groups felt strongly that the move had affected
their housing for the better. Staff were rated as very helpful by a large
proportion of both groups.
See the Appendix Tables I through VI for detailed tabulations.
The survey did not ask whether respondents had felt forced to move or
whether they had felt they had no choice. Scattered spontaneous comments to
this effect were made by both Regional and City certificate holders. Six
of the 49 Regional respondents made comments about being forced or having no
choice, but one person commented she liked the opportunity to move out of the
City. Two of the City certificate holders indicated a feeling of no choice,
but one other said the move got her out of a bad house and bad neighborhood.
None of the Baltimore County Existing Sec. 8 tenants spontaneously indicated
a feeling of being forced.
�-11-
G.
What are the Major Constraints on Choice of Housing?
THE MAJOR CONSTRAINTS ON HOUSING CHOICE ARE NOT THE AHOP PROGRAM BUT THE
ACUTE SHORTAGE OF ASSISTED HOUSING AND LANDLORDS' RELUCTANCE TO PARTICIPATE
IN THE PROGRAM, AS REVEALED IN THE SURVEYS. NINETY PERCENT OF REGIONAL
CERT IFICATE HOLDERS IN THE COUNTY REPORTED HDUSING DIFFICULT TO FIND (EITHER
VERY, OR SOMEWHAT). WHEN ASKED IF THEY LEASED IN THE COMMUNITY OF THEIR C O
H ICE,
37% THOSE WHD DID NOT CHECKED LANDLORDS' UNWILLINGNESS TO PARTICIPATE AS THE
OF
REASO .
N
The surveys analyzed by the Task Force showed that 35%of the Reqional certif i cate holders living in Baltimore County found housing very difficult to find and
45% fo und it somewhat difficult to find ; comparable figures for the City certifi cat e holders living in the County were 39%and 32%. Of the Regional certificate
holders in the County 47% of the sample said they did not lease a unit in the
community of their first choice ; 54% of the City certificate holders living in
the County also did not lease in the community of their first choice. When
asked for reasons the Regional group and the City group both checked landlords'
unwi l lingness to participate as the most common reason (37% and 41% These
).
findings support the Task Force's conclusion that difficulty in finding was
a great constraint on the clients' choice . See Appendix Tables VII, VIII and
IX for complete tabulations.
Another constraint on housing choice stems from HUD ' s Project Site Selection
Criter ia, promulgated in 1972 . One important purpose of these regulations was
to promote a wider distribution of assisted housing and greater choice outside
of areas of minority and low income concentration. One criterion prohibited
the building of assisted units in areas of low income or minority concentration.
This principle soon was contested by those tho felt that areas needing assisted
housing were often ones of minori ty and low income impaction.
The end result of this pol icy is that clients may have fewer housing choices
in areas of minority or low income concentration, such as some inner city areas,
but more housing choices in suburban areas . Again, this constraint is not
attributable to the Regional Section B program.
However, it should be kept in mind, as previous figures have shown, the
City contains a much larger number of assisted units than does the rest of the
Region. In addition, more private units affordable by low and moderate income
persons are available in the City than elsewhere. These units are relied upon
by all those besides the 9%or 10%of City residents who receive housing assistance. The City Department of Housing and Community Development, in its
relocation program to assist displacees, maintains an inventory of affordable
units in the city's private rental market, to which it refers displacees. This
kind of assistance is not publicized widely enough.
H.
Are the Recommendations of the Kerner Report Intended to Suppress Uprisings?
THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THE K
ERNER REPORT ARE NOT INTENDED TO SUPPRESS UPRISINGS. THE REPORT SPECIFICALLY CAUTIONS AGAINST SUCH AN INTERPRETATION AND
SUGGESTS MANY PROGRAMS TO ALLEVIATE THE CONDITIONS OF POOR BLACKS. THE WELLDOCUMENTED RESISTANCE OF SUBURBAN COMMUNITIES TO BLACKS AND POOR PEOPLE AND
WHITE RACISM IN GENERAL HAVE BEEN AND ARE THE MOST IMPORTANT SINGLE CAUSE OF
RESTRICTED OPPORTUNITIES FOR BLACKS.
�-12-
The charge has been made that the recommendations of the Kerner Report
were motivated by a national desire to suppress justified uprisings. The
Task Force asserts that, on the contrary, the Kerner Report recommendations
are based on the desire to remove the conditions which cause the uprisings.
The Kerner Report identifies White racism as the most important cause and
makes a number of recommendations similar to those of the Coalition to Save
Urban Communities.
As stated in a summary, the Report cautions that "programs not be viewed
as short-termed anti-riot efforts, (or) as merely today's stop-gap remedies
for cooling already inflamed situations. These programs will have little
chance of succeeding unless they are part of a long range commitment to action
designed to eliminate the fundamental sources of grievance and tension."
(B. Ritchie, The Riot Report, 1969 p. 198).
are:
•
Some recommendations of the Kerner Report similar to those of the Coalition
"Expand opportunities for ghetto residents to participate in the formulation of public policy and the implementation of programs affecting them through
improved political representation. Creation of institutional channels for
community action, expansion of legal services, and legislative hearings on
ghetto problems." (Re ort of the National Advisor Commission on Civil Disorders, Bantam Books, 1968, p. 16 .
Develop neighborhood act ion task forces with government and community
members to promote citizen participation in decision making;
Establish effective grievance response mechanisms;
Sponsor meetings of legislative bodies and ghetto residents.
In addition, the Report makes many recommendations for improving the police
department and police-community relations, the court system, education, social
services ("Provide more adequate social services through neighborhood centers
and family-planning programs," Ibid, p 27), housing programs, and for inner city
enrichment and at the same time opportunities for integration.
If one looks for evidence for a theory that there is a national conspiracy
to manipulate poor people out of the cities, one finds rather more evidence for
a conspiracy that prevents poor people from living in jurisdictions outside the
cities and forces them to live in the cities. Most suburban jurisdictions have
either done very little to encourage low income housing or have done much to
discourage it. In this endeavor they have been greatly helped by sharply rising
land and house prices (thus making it very unlikely that there will be any housing available to accommodate large numbers of low income persons).
Meanwhile many new job opportunities are occurring in areas outside the
citi es. . Suburban areas are 1ike ly to have more money per capita for school s
and social services. More low income people shou ld have the benefit of these
resources.
�-13Furthermore an unhealthy and discriminatory situation is developing in
America in which our country is dividing into two apartheit communities;
suburban with most of our middle to upper income population, and the central
cities with most of our poor population. In 1969 the Kerner Report recommended that the nation pursue at the same time strategies to improve non-white
communities and to integrate white communities. Actually, not enough of either
has been done.
III . SU~1MARY AND CONCLUSIONS
A. AHOP does not force people, including poor inner-city Blacks, out of Baltimore City. Only applicants on the City's Section 8 waitin~ list who stated a
desire to move to another jurisdiction were considered for Regional certificates.
Regional certificates and other Section 8 certificates have been allocated for
the use of City displacees to use in the City. As of June 30, 1980 eighty of
the City's Regional Section 8 certificates were used in the City .
B. The Regional Section 8 program provides opportunities for low and moderate
income persons to move into the City as well as out of it. As of June 30, 1980,
thirty two families, 21 of which were Black, had moved into Baltimore City from
other jurisdictions (mostly Baltimore Count~ on Regional certificates.
C. There is a need for increased services and transportation to those services
by Section 8 tenants living in Baltimore County. Distance from services was
indicated as a disadvantage of their present housing by 20% to 24% of respondents
surveyed. The percentage was very similar whether the respondents were previous
City dwellers or had already lived in Baltimore County. About one fifth of the
community leaders interviewed specifically referred to assisted tenants' needing
more services and/or transportation to them.
D. AHOP is not a conspiracy to force poor City Blacks to other jurisdictions,
but rather is a small scale program to increase choice. The Federal regulations
establishing this program state this choice explicitly. The number of City
Regional Section 8 certificates is such a small percentage of the City's Section
8 waiting list (3 . 3% that it could not effectively relocate large numbers of
)
persons . Over the years the number of assisted units provided for use in the
City by City residents is 22 times greater than the number provided for City
residents to use outside the City . The number of Regional certificates constitutes only 16% of the assisted units provided for City residents to use in
the City in 1978 and 1979, the years since the Regional program has been in
operation. The formula by which Section 8 units are allocated each year to
the City weights local need more than fair share distribution goals. Preliminary 1980 Census figures show too large an increase in the proportion of Blacks
in Baltimore City to be counterbalanced by the Regional program so as to
seriously erode the Black political base. The counties are incapable of absorbing very large numbers of low and moderate income people from other jurisdictions
due to the low vacancy rate and other factors .
E. Most City residents using Regional certificates are relocating in Baltimore
County (62% and in the City itself (24% . In Baltimore County the distribution
)
)
of Regional certificate holders surveyed is fairly broad, but there are clusters
in Middle River, Owings Mills, Randallstown, Lochearn and Reisterstown, with
very few assisted tenants in the north central area of the County .
F. The level of satisfacti cn of Section 8 tenants in Baltimore County is high .
A sample of persons living there on Regional certificates showed that 53%were
very satisfied, and 25%were somewhat satisfied. City Section 8 certificate
holders in the County were not as well satisfied (20% very satisfied and 37%
somewhat satisfied). Local certificate holders were the most satisfied
of all (69% very satisfied and 17% somewhat satisfied).
�-14-
G. The major constraints on housing choice are not the AHOP program but the
acute shortage of assisted housing and landlords' reluctance to participate in
the program, as revealed in the surveys. Ninety percent of Regional certificate
holders in the County reported housing difficult to find (either very, or somewhat). When asked if they leased in the community of their first choice, 37%
of those who did not checked landlords' unwillingness to participate as the
reason.
H. The recommendations of the Kerner Report are not intended to suppress uprisings . The Report specifically cautions against such an intrepretation and
suggests many programs to alleviate the conditions of poor Blacks. The welldocumented resistance of suburban communities to Blacks and poor people and
white racism in general have been and are the most important single cause of
the restricted opportunities for Blacks.
IV.
RECOMMENDATIONS
1. ThatAHOP be continued and expanded, with the provisions that additional
supports are added to aid clients' free choice, to increase local opportunities
for assistance, and to assist clients in finding suitable housing and in dealing
with problems which cause distress to them and sometimes to the communities
in which they live.
2. That the counties increase support services in areas where assisted tenants
live.
3. That Baltimore City continue to encourage private developers to undertake
Section 8 rehabilitaion and new construction in areas undergoing reinvestment
with consequent displacement of Blacks, thus directly providing assisted housing
in these areas in which property values are rising.
4A. That Baltimore City expand its relocation resources program to the agency's
full capability in which private rental units are inventoried and used as a referral for displacees, establishing the vacancy rate, and maintaining an ongoing
survey of vacancies at suitable rental rates, and publicizing this program.
B. That HUD relax site selection criteria in areas of minority and low income
impactaion where displacement is taking place, if the City's survey of vacancies
shows an inadequate supply of private affordable rental units.
5. That Baltimore City, the surrounding counties, and the Regional Planning
Council conduct an educational program to acquaint citizens with the assisted
housing programs, to encourage landlords and managers to particioate in the
programs, and to encourage cooperative efforts with the Homebuilders Association
of ff,aryland, especially to increase Section 8 tenants in the areas where they
are not locating.
�-15-
6. That the Regional Planning Council reactivate the Area Housing Council
to act as a review board which incl udes recipients of assisted housing,
technical specialists, and agency r'epresentatives to monitor housing assistance
programs .
7. That increased allocation of federal funds be sought for housing assistance
to help alleviate the acute housing shortage for low income persons.
V.
RESPONSE TO THE DEMANDS OF THE COALITION TO SAVE URBAN COMMUNITIES
The Task Force was requested by the BNI Board to respond to the challenging list of demands presented to t e Regional Planning Council Board meeting
on June 20, 1980, by the Baltimore Coalition to Save Urban Communities. The
Task Force's response is as follow ~ :
Demand #1:
"Cancellation of A
reawide Housing Opportunity Program (AHOP)':
BNI has concluded that this program is beneficial and should not be cancelled for reasons presented in this report.
Demand #2:
"Appointment of equal low income and Black representation on
Regional and City Planning Councils and sUbcommittees."
BNI agrees that there should be increased representation of lower income
and black persons on these bodies.
Demand #3:
"Use of Section 8 - if at all - within Baltimore City."
BNI has concluded that there 1 S a reasonable balance between local needs
and fair share requirements t o justify the continuation of offering City
residents a choice of living i n other jurisdictions. The Task Force
acknowledges that there is a grossly insufficient number of Section R
certificates available, of landlords willing to participate in the
program, and of units available below the fair market rents in all jurisdictions, thus requiring tenants to make hard choices. For the reasons
already given, the Task Force believes that permitting only local certificates would not remedy these conditions .
Demand #4 : "Halt destruction of city's public housing and poor neighborhoods and displacement of poor inner city residents."
This demand does not seem to be directly related to AHOP. While it has
merit and warrants serious di scussion, a separate context is indicated.
Demand #5:
"Better publicity and public examination of low income housing
programs. "
BNI supports this demand because of the great need for public awareness
and scrutiny of all housing programs to insure maximum citizen input.
�-16-
Demand #6:
"Public interviews of persons already rroved to counties 'by
neutral oversight team. tt,
The Task orce has surveyed Section 8 tenants living in Baltimore County.
the jurisdiction to which 212 out of 260 (82%) City Regional certificate
holders have rroved. The Task Force also surveyed City certificate holders
living in Baltimore County on City certificates and a sample of Baltimore
County local Existing Section 8 certificate holders.
Assuming that Demand #6 is related to such items as tenant satisfaction.
problems with present housing. problems with services and feelings of being
forced to live in the County. several Task Force survey items are relevant.
These have been summarized in Section II F.
The Task Force does not feel that additional surveys are necessary because it believes that the ones completed have been reasonbly impartial.
We understand that other groups such as the Urban League and the Regional
Planning Council are planning surveys of Regional Section 8 tenants .
Demand #7:
"Creation of public advisory board for all low income housing programs."
BNI supports this demand and suggests a detailed study of the purposes
and composition of such a board . (See Recommendation #6) .
Demand #8:
"Release of all federal, state, city documents dealing with
AHDP and related low income housing programs."
BNI agrees that all such documents should be made available except those
that would infringe on the privacy of the clients.
Demand #9:
"City Council hearing on historical and ongoing effects of
AHOP and other low income housing programs on poor people."
This comment applies to Demands # 9. 10 and 11. BNI understands that
hearings are planned and wishes to support them in any way possible.
It is essential to examine the direct and indirect consequences of
housing programs and their administration upon the people they are designed to assist.
Demand #10:
"City Council hearing into role played by Baltimore City
planning council under AHOP and related low income housing
programs."
Demand #11:
"City Council heari ng into use of HCD Community Block Grant
and UDAG monies."
Demand #12:
"Evaluation of low income access to comrrunity corporations
serving various poor communities in Baltimore City and metro
area."
BNI supports this demand. recognlzlng the need to utilize informed citizen
input to the maximum extent possible.
�-17-
Demand #13:
"City Council enactment of rent control."
This does not seem to be directly related to.AHOP. While it has merit and
warrants serious discussion, a separate context is indicated.
Demand #14 : "Congressional investigation of HUD's involvement in the
deve 1opment of U s. low income hous i ng programs."
.
While this idea has merit and warrants serious discussion, a separate
context is indicated.
Demand #15:
"Provide wide ranging human services for low income communities developed by relocating residents to the counties;
ensure that 'grassroots' public guidance be given in the
design and follow through of those services."
While BN! recognizes that the number of low income families relocating is
small and does not find new communities being developed, nevertheless it
is appropriate to encourage jurisdictions to develop social services commensurate to meet the needs of this population. Grassroots input into
the implementation of such services is essential.
�-18-
VI. APPENDIX
TABLE 1
RESPONDENTS' SATISFACTION
Would you say that you are satisfied or not satisfied with the apartment or
house you moved into (your present location)? (Q. 11)
Regional Certificate Holders
in Balto. Co.
n = 49*
Ci ty Certi ficate Holders
in Balta Co.
n = 41
very satisfied
26 53%
somewhat satisfied
12 25%
somewhat dissatisfied
5 10%
not at all satisfied 4 8%
No answer
TOTAL # in County
2
312
Existing
Sec. 8 certificate Holders
in Balto. Co.
n = 58
40 69%
10 17%
8
15
14
3
34%
7%
5
3
9%
5%
1
4%
20%
37%
2%
o
0
183
855
* 34 moved from Baltimore City
The highest leval of "very satisfied" was reported by Baltimore County
Existing Section 8 residents , the next by Regional Residents, and the lowest by
City residents. Combining "very and somewhat" satisfied shows Baltimore County
Existing Section 8 to be 86% the Regional program, 78% and the City program in
,
Baltimore County, 57%
.
The conclusion is that the level of satisfaction is high for all 3 groups,
but City tenants who could have used their certificates in either jurisdiction
show by far the lowest level of satisfaction . One can only speculate about the
reasons. Perhaps the extra counselling provided in the Regional program helped
the tenants find a unit and neighborhood more suitable to them; perhaps this
group had a greater initial preference for the County; perhaps many City certificate holders had moved to the County as a last resort because they had been
unable to find housing in the City .
�.'.
-19-
•
TABLE II
RESPONDENTS' LEASING IN COMMUNITY OF FIRST CHOICE
(Q. 7)
Did you lease in the community of your first choice?
Ci ty Certificate
Holders in
Balto. Co.
n = 41
Regional
Certifi cate
Holders in
Balto. Co.
n = 49
Yes
No
Had no community
preference
no answer
TOTAL # in County
Existing
Section 8
Certificate
Holders in
Balto. Co.
n = 5B
20
23
41%
47%
17
22
41%
54%
37
15
64%
26%
3
3
6%
6%
2
0
5%
0
3
3
5%
5%
312
1B3
855
The pr.oportion of "no" is greater for both the Regional and City tenants.
This question is somewhat ambiguous since community could have been interpreted
as a neighborhood and not as a jurisdiction. But the "yes" and 'no" answers
are almost equal for both groups indicating that 41% found housing in the
community of their first choice.
TABLE III
BEST FEATURES OF RESPONDENTS' UNITS
What do you 1i ke best about your present apartment or house?
Better transportation
Nearer to work or other job
opportuni ti es
Nearer friends/relatives
More convenient to shopping
&other services
Like neighborhood (or neighbors) better than old
nei ghborhood
Lived in area previously
Better school s
Pay 1ess rent ,
Size of apartment. (more
room, etc . )
.
Regional
n = 49
B 16%
Cit~
n
2
(Q J14)
Count~
= 41
5%
n
9
= 58
16%
5
7
10%
14%
3
5
7%
12%
2
14
3%
24%
13
27%
16
39%
23
40%
22
45%
19
46%
23
40%
2
19
23
4%
39%
47%
4
14
19
10%
34%
46%
9
B
24
16%
14%
41%
29
59%
20
49%
29
50%
�L
-20-
Liking the neighborhood better was the item most often checked by
Regional and City certificate holders (aside from lower rent payments). Better
schools was next for Regional certificate holders while convenience was second
for City holders and better schools was third for City certificate holders.
TABLE
IV
WORST FEATURES OF RESPON
DENTS' UNITS
What do you 1ike 1eas t about your present apartment or house?
Regional
n = 49
Transportation not as convenient 20
Further away from present j ob
or other job opportunities
6
Further away from friends or
relatives
15
Too far away from services
I need (shopping, day
care, health care , etc)
10
Do not li'ke nei ghborhood
or neighbors
2
Miss m old neighborhood/
y
neighbors/friends
8
Feel I do not fit in the
neighborhood
2
Di d not fi nd the type of
housing I wanted
9
Size of apartment (too
small, etc)
3
Citl
n = 41
(Q. 15)
County
n = 58
41%
12
29%
14
24%
12%
6
15%
9
16%
31%
10
24%
10
17%
12
21%
5 12%
8
14%
16%
5 12%
4
7%
1
4%
1
2%
6
10%
18%
9 22%
2
3%
10%
3
5%
20%
4%
6%
10 24%
4
Regional certificate holders ranked transportation, distance from friends and
relatives and from services as their chief dislikes. City certificate holders
also rated these three as their chief dislikes.
�-21TABLE V
RESPONDENTS' PRESENT HOUSING AN IMPROVEMENT
(Q. 13)
Did moving to this unit improve your housing?
Regiona 1
43
4
1
1
Yes
No
About the same
No Answer
Counti:
.f.:Ltr
n=41
n=49
n=58
30 73%
1 2%
6 15%
4 10%
88%
8%
2%
2%
42
3
8
5
72%
5%
14%
9%
NOTE:
time of residence is les; under Regional program, proportion of
elderly may not be the same in all three programs, and some in the County were
assisted in place .
•
All three groups answered "yes" overwhelmi ngly.
TABLE VI
RESPONDENTS' RATING OF SECTION 8 STAFF
Please rate the staff in the Section 8 offices (Q .18)
Regional
n = 49
Very helpful
Somewhat helpful
Not hel pful
No answer
36
8
4
1
Counti:
n = 58
Citi:
n " 41
73%
16%
8%
3%
32
8
0
1
78%
20%
2%
53
3
1
1
91%
5%
2%
2%
TABLE VII
RESPONDENTS' DIFFICULTY IN FINDING HOUSING
In general, would you say it was difficult or not difficult to find a place
to live? (Q. 4)
Very dlffi cul t
Some difficulty
Very little difficulty
-- No difficulty
No answer
Regional
n = 49
17 35%
22 45%
6
4
0
12%
8%
Citi:
n = 41
16 39%
13 32%
5
7
0
12%
17%
Counti:
n = 58
26 45%
16 28%
4
9
3
6%
16%
5%
�-22-
TABLE VIII
RESPONDENTS' REASONS FOR NOT LEASING IN COMMUNITY OF FIRST CHOICE
If you did not lease in the community of your first choice, why not?
City
Regional
Could not find information
about units there
Units I looked at were not
within the rent limits
Landlords were not willing
to participate in this
program
Could not find the right
size unit
Units I looked at were too
far away from transportation
•
County
5%
2
3%
8 20%
7
12%
41%
12
20%
7%
0
6 15%
4
1
2%
2
8
16%
18
37%
17
3
6%
3
14
29%
7%
(Q . 8)
�-23TABLE I X
UNITS PROVIOED IN BALTIMORE CITY TO ASSIST VERY LOW INCOME RESIDENTS IN THE CITY
Pub. Hse.
Conv.
Pub. Hse .
Vacant
Pub . Hse.
Used
Year
Bu i I t
1969
0
2
54
579
0
88
1971
1, 557
606
945
1972
I
410
1970
1
TOTAL
1973
Pub . Hse.
Turnke:t
Rent
Supp I .
RS,RAP or
Section 8
in assisted
deve lo~men ts ,.
Sec . 8
Moderate
Rehab.
0
~
Sec. 8
Exi st.
0
0
Sec. 8
New
318
163
35
161
46
121
0
0
0
438
4
0
109
61
0
0
0
0
196
0
0
125
285
0
0
0
1,312
152
210
0
357
0
593
0
0
0
1974
1,364
0
101
0
0
730
0
0
0
1975
304
0
157
0
0
0
0
135
82
0
1976
596
2,208
533
0
0
1, 462
0
74
0
0
1977
1,995
0
98
0
0
0
782
0
590
1 , 11 5
1978
1 • 11 3
232
120
0
0
0
434
0
327
0
1979
3,026
363
203
0
570
0
184
828
247
631
TOTAL
14,766
1 .996
1,673
3.118
598
3. 422
828
2,279
631
221
0
(source: Regional Planning Council. listing of low
and Moderate Income Housing in the Baltimore Region,
January. 1980)
*In Sec. 236, 221-d-3 . 202 and 221-h developments. which are primarily for moderate income
households or elderly persons .
�- 24 -
DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
CITY OF BALTIMORE
M
.J. BRODIE, Commissioner
Willian Donald Schaefer, Mayor
Housing Assistance Payment Program
Room 36 - Equitable Building
127 East Fayette Street
Baltimore, Maryland 21202
Dear Section 8 Applicant:
The Section 8 office now has a limited number of certificates
for families who want to move outside Baltimore City. Families who
are eligible will be able to move into any of the following counties :
Anne Arundel, Baltimore, Carroll, Harford, or Howard.
If you are interested, please fill out and return the enclosed
post-card as soon as possible. If you do not wish to move out of the
city, write it on the post card and your name will stay on the Section
8 waiting list.
Please telephone 396-4086 if you have any questions.
Sincerely yours,
W. Warren Brooks
Program Coordinator
Enclosures
As a Section 8 applicant, I would like to move to another locality.
I would like to move to: (Check one box only)
Baltimore County
Carroll County
Ba lt imore Ci ty
Anne Arundel County
Harford County
Annapolis
Westminster
Howard County
I want to move because ___________________
Name:
Street:
city
County
Zip Code
(RETYPED EXACTLY AS ON ORIGINAL STATIONERY)
�Baltimore
Neighborhoods
Inc.
319 East 25th Street
'Baltimore, Maryland 21218
243-6007
BN I also works with and monilDn the activities of
federal and state agencies which have a responsibility to end discrimination in housing and to help
create an open housing market.
How does BNI handle
Complaints of Discrimination?
The complainant will be asked to provide a wrinen
statement. Through testing and other means BNI
tries to confirm or disprove the allegations. If con·
firmed, BNI will help the complainant 6Ie a
complaint with an appropriate agency or 6nd him a
volunteer lawyer who will 61e a civil suit. BNI on
its own initiative also 6les complaints.
What are BNI's Goals:
I. To maintain viable interracial communities;
2. To create an open housing market;
3. To fight prejudice and discrimination;
4. To expand the rights of tenants and improve
tenant-landlord relations.
How does BNI help
Integrated Communities?
What is BNI doing in the field of
Tenant-Landlord Relations?
BNI receives hundreds of au' e::ch year from
tenants with problems. Complaints may involve
advice, information and the use of voluntec;r
lawyers. Qualified tenants may be referred to Legal
Aid. BNI puhlishes for Baltimore City "A Guide
To Laws Covering Tenant·Landlord Relations in
the City and the State," and similar guides for the
surrounding counties.
By fighti ng blockbusting, racial steering, racial
harassment. For example, BNI stands ready to help
in cases where the coming of integration is causing
racial tension and/or harassment of the newcomers.
A member of the BNI staff will visit the neighborhood, explain the law, help calm fears, and help
protect the rights of the newcomers.
In the area of legislation BNI's Executive Director
serves on the Governor's Landlord·T enant Laws
Study Commission. BNI has helped to coordinate
support for laws improving the rights of tenants
drafted by the Commission.
For neighborhoods already integrated or integrating
BNI has published a manual "Neighborhoods and
Inregration" on how to maintain stability.
tenant movement.
How does BNI work for an
Open Housing Market?
The Federal and Maryland Fair Housing laws
forbid discrimination in the sale or rental of housing
on the basis of race, color, creed, national origin
or sex. State law also forbids discrimination on
the basis of marital status or physical or mental
handicap.
BNI monito" the practices of the housing industry
in this area and has puhlished a number of studies
showing the extent of non-compliance.
BNI is a partner with the Greater Baltimore Board
of Realtors and the Real Estate Broken of Baltimore
in the Baltil'llOle Plan for Affirmative Marketing in
Real Estate. BNI stds the Plan which seeks to
encourage the affirmative marketing of real estate
and also to inform minorities of their rights under
the law.
BNI helps to organize individual tenant associa·
tions and is also working to set up a metropolitan
What Geographic Area does BNI Serve?
BNI works in the whole Baltimore metropolitan
area- Baltil'llOle City, Baltimore County, and adjacent areas of Anne Arundel, Howard, Carroll and
Harford counties. BNI members and volunteers
come .from all parts of this area.
Gl
EQUAL HOUStNG
OPPORTUNITY
A Private Non Profit
Civil Rights Agency
Working For
Fair Housing and
Tenants' Rights
In The Baltimore
Metropolitan Area
A United Way Agency
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Baltimore Neighborhoods, Inc.
Subject
The topic of the resource
Discrimination in housing
Nonprofit organizations
Citizens' associations
Baltimore Metropolitan Area (Md.)
African Americans
Housing
Baltimore (Md.)
Community organization
Reports
Correspondence
Newsletters
Description
An account of the resource
This exhibit provides an introduction to the work of Baltimore Neighborhoods, Inc. (BNI) around issues of racial integration in housing and tenants' rights from the 1950s to the 2000s.
Established in 1958, Baltimore Neighborhoods, Inc. was formed to promote an open housing market and viable integrated neighborhoods in the Baltimore area. It was established by several neighborhood associations and supported by civic organizations like the Greater Baltimore Committee. The early focus of the organization was to obtain open housing and stable neighborhoods during a period of widespread white flight and blockbusting in Baltimore City. Through education and advocacy, it sought to counter racial prejudice, to fight discrimination in the real estate industry, and to combat neighborhood deterioration resulting from segregated housing. More recently, BNI has focused on tenant-landlord relations and renters' rights.
The Baltimore Neighborhoods, Inc. (BNI) collection at the University of Baltimore consists of 22 linear inches of archival records, which are described in an online collection database. The complete collection has also been digitized at the folder level and is also available in the collection database. For this exhibit, 32 documents have been selected from the complete collection.
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
<a href="https://langsdale.ubalt.edu/special-collections/" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">Special Collections & Archives, University of Baltimore</a>
Source
A related resource from which the described resource is derived
<a href="https://archivesspace.ubalt.edu/repositories/2/resources/14" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">Baltimore Neighborhoods, Incorporated Records, UB Special Collections & Archives</a>
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
<a href="https://langsdale.ubalt.edu/special-collections/">University of Baltimore Special Collections & Archives</a>
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
circa 1958-2009
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
This material may be quoted or reproduced for personal and educational purposes without prior permission, provided appropriate credit is given. When crediting the use of portions from this site or materials within that are copyrighted by us, please use the citation: "Used with permission of the University of Baltimore Special Collections & Archvies." Any commercial use of this material is prohibited without prior permission from the Special Collections & Archives, University of Baltimore. Commercial requests for use of the images or related text must be submitted in writing to: Special Collections & Archives, University of Baltimore, H. Mebane Turner Learning Commons, 1415 Maryland Avenue, Baltimore, MD 21201
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
text/pdf
Language
A language of the resource
English
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
R0015-BNI
Date Created
Date of creation of the resource.
2019-09
Extent
The size or duration of the resource.
32 items
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Original Format
The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data
Paper
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
A Report on Federally Funded Regional Housing Opportunities for Low-Income Renters in the Baltimore Metropolitan Area
Description
An account of the resource
A BNI report on the Areawide Housing Opportunities Program (AHOP) and its Regional Section 8 program
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1980-08
Subject
The topic of the resource
Housing subsidies
Rent subsidies
Low-income housing
Baltimore Metropolitan Area (Md.)
United States. Dept. of Housing and Urban Development
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Baltimore Neighborhoods, Inc., Task Force on Low and Moderate Income Housing and HUD Committee
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
University of Baltimore Special Collections & Archives
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
bni06.01.29a
Source
A related resource from which the described resource is derived
Baltimore Neighborhoods, Incorporated Records (R0015-BNI), series VI, box 1, folder 29, Special Collections & Archives, University of Baltimore
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
Use of this digital material is governed by U.S. copyright law. The University of Baltimore Special Collections and Archives makes digital surrogates of collections accessible if they are in the public domain, the rights are owned by the University of Baltimore, the Special Collections and Archives has permission to make them accessible, or there are no known restrictions on use. Due to the nature of archival collections, rights information is not always discernible. The Special Collections and Archives is eager to hear from any rights owners wishing to provide accurate information. Upon request, material will be removed from view while a rights issue is addressed. Contact the Special Collections and Archives for more information regarding this image.
Baltimore Metropolitan Area (Md.)
Housing subsidies
Low-income housing
Rent subsidies
United States. Dept. of Housing and Urban Development
-
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/44124/archive/files/367c172062f8f9f8bf55b51ec63f6de8.pdf?Expires=1712793600&Signature=YEydRM%7EBniHYFghWbwPtBsjjTFdoQtt8OReXhx-qJh5ReABcGMD2VihwWjzKASdRJ--nAqPmdsO5mb0CGI5bZzWE2L16aDKTZWsEMZWOSTTkDm2mFY6Qagns7qZOg2ljmWy1dAtfEnbkuw2048L8ttmLJvCIx2nKEgAEPFHVEIFEYCtXl9g5uk0ExzT3kNAie2l9-CXIRnO%7EVzMB1tk2Zsy0dMj6m6EOOF2Nit7iLZkJdzB-ghxpsVnJ60pluZv1ADSaZsXhBQkWEdnj3jo92KeCITKeE4rrvOQDs9a6dqNGDHT6fie-5ctk42eFEbMwfER8NEoP%7E0dwGL0ooQqbJQ__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
e1cc775c995ed8fd6eea006e80196b4d
PDF Text
Text
APARTMENT
DISCRIMINATIml
IN
BALTIMORE COUNTY
AND
CITY
1977 - 78
FOLLOW-UP TO
1972 APARTMENT AUDIT
published by;
Baltimore Neighborhoods, Inc.
32 West 25th Street
Baltimore, Maryland 21218
(301/243-600])
May,
1978
EQUAL HOUSING
OPPORTUNITY
�I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Baltimore Neighborhoods, Inc. (BNI) is a private,
non-profit civil rights agency organized in 1959
working for viable interracial communities, fair
housing, and tenants' rights in the Baltimore
Metropolitan area.
One part of BNI's program activity is the handling
of housing discrimination complaints and the monitoring of the local housing industry for compliance
with fair housing laws.
Fair housing IS and HAS BEEN the law of the land
since Congress passed the Civil Rights Act of 1968
and the U.S. Supreme Court upheld an 1866 Civil
Rights Act which proclaimed:
All citizens of the United States
shall have the same right, in every
state and territory, as is enjoyed
by whi te ci ti zens thereof to i nheri t,
purchase, lease, sell, hold, and
convey real and personal property.
Therefore, "all racial discrimination, private as
well as public, in the sale or rental of property"
is prohibited.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Many thanks not only to the testers who participated in
this apartment audit but also to Paul Knefel, a Vista
Volunteer, who did most of the ground work and helped
see the audit through to completion. Appreciation must
also be noted for the compilation of this report by
Carolyn Boitnott, Testing and Compliance Committee
Chairperson and Don Miller, Associate Oirector of BNI.
�I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SUMMARY
•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••• • Page
TESTING:
Purpose •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••
Method
•••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••
1
1
Table I: Geographic Distribution ••••••••••••••••
2
RESULTS:
Surrrnary of
Table II:
Table III:
Table IV:
Resul ts •••••••••••••••••.••••••••••••
2
Difference of Treatment •••••••.••••••
Comparison to the 1972 Audit ••••...•.
Presence of Equal Housing Opportunity
3
Poster ..••..•..••••••.•.•..•
3
CONCLUSION •••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••••
4
Corrrnent on National Fair Housing Audit ••••••••••
4
APPENDICES:
A.
B.
C.
D.
E.
F.
G.
Surrrnary & Conclusions of 1972 Audit
Sources of Apartment Lists
Size and Price Range of Apartment
Complexes Tested
Testing Report Form
Difference of Treatment Examples
Map showing Locations of Apartment
Complexes
HUD's Equal Housing Opportunity Poster
3
�I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
APARTMENT DISCRIMINATION
IN BALTIMORE COUNTY AND CITY
1977 - 78
SUMMARY
From October
conducted an
metropolitan
was found in
1977 to April 1978, Baltimore Neighborhoods, Inc.
audit of 51 randomly selected apartments in the
area. Overall, a Difference of Treatment of Blacks
39% of the apartment complexes tested.
PURPOSE
This audit was conducted to determine if there has been a decrease in discriminatory treatment against Blacks as reported
in a similar audit conducted by Baltimore Neighborhoods, Inc.
in 1972. (Appendix A)
METHOD
Apartment Selection Process--From various sources Baltimore Neighborhoods, Inc. compiled two separate lists totaling over 650 apartment
complexes. One list contained Baltimore City apartment complexes and
the other, Baltimore County (Appendix B). Eliminated from consideration were those complexes operated or regulated by a government
agency (i.e. public hou sing and HUD subsidized apartment s), those
under 30 units in size, those having a majority Black population,
co-ops, condominiums, and student housing units. Those remaining
on each list were placed in alphabetical order and then numbered
sequential ly. Fifty numbers from each of the two lists were selected at random using a table of random numbers. It was intended that the study would cover these 100 apartment complexes. However, it was found that nearly half of these complexes were not
open on the weekends. By selecting only those apartment complexes
where rental offices are open on weekends the results are possibly
understating the amount of discrimination. Of the 51 complexes,
49 were successfully tested. (Appendix C gives size and price range)
partici~ants--Approximate1y
50 White testers and 40 Black testers
formed 4 and 21 pairs respectively with each pair testing from
one to six complexes.
Testing Procedures--Each apartment complex was assigned to a Black
palr and a Whlte pair of trained testers. Each of these sets was
given identical backgrounds in terms of income, type of apartment,
when desired, and by whom it was to be occupied . Testers visited
the apartment complex within the hour of each other. Immediate1 y
after testing the complex each pair completed a report form to
insure all pertinent information was documented in a comparable
fash i on (Appendix D). With th e exception of two complexes all
tests were completed and counted in this report. The two complexes unsuccessfully tested were not considered becau se in one
instance the pairs inadvertently asked for different types of
apartment units, and in the other one pair was unable to fulfill
its assi gnment.
-
,-
�I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Geographic Distribution--The geographic distribution of the
developments both by number of complexes and by number of units
(impact) is shown in Table I.
TABLE I
Summary of Geographic Distribution
of 49 completed tests
Apartment
Complexes
Apartment Dwelling
Units
Baltimore County
Baltimore City
31 (63%)
18 (37%)
11 ,013
4,424
(71 %)
( 29%)
Tota 1 :
/0
49 ( 100" )
15,437
(100%)
SUMMARY OF RESULTS
In the 49 completed tests of apartment complexes four categories
of Difference of Treatment were found: (Appendix E gives some
s pecific examples)
1.
Rental agent displayed a less satisfactory
demeanor (includes amount and manner in which
information was given) toward Black testers.
(l~ by number of complexes).
/o
In two of the
complexes tested, the agent made derogatory
comments about Blacks to the White testers.
2.
Rental agent indicated earlier availabiltiy
to White testers (12% by number of complexes).
3.
Rental agent made economic inquiries of Black
testers and not of White testers (2% by number
of complexes).
4.
Agent showed different apartment units to each
pair and/or gave different addresses of available
apartment units or referred to different apartment comp1exes--raising the question of "racial"
steering within or outside of the apartment complex tested (16% by number of complexes).
Table II shows geographic distribution of Difference of Treatment
combining all four categories above. (Appendix F)
-2-
�I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
II
TABLE I I
Summary of Di ffere nce of Treatment
Apartment
Com121exes
Difference of
Treatment
Baltimore County
Baltimore City
31
18
(
(
63%)
37%)
11
8
(35%)
(44%)
Tota 1 :
49
( 100" )
10
19
(39%)
Apartment Dwelling
uni ts (i ml2act l
Difference of
Treatment
Baltimore County
Bal timore City
11 ,013 ( 71 %)
4,424 ( 29" )
10
3,618
2,277
(33%)
( 51 %)
Tota l:
10
15,437 ( 100" )
5,895
(38%)
Table III below shows a comparison between kinds of Difference of
Tr eatment in 1972 and 1978.
TABLE III
Comparison to the '972 Audit
Number of
Com121exes
Number of Apt. Dwelling
uni ts (iml2act)
~
1972
1978
1972
Overa 11 Difference of
Treatment
49"
10
39"
10
53%
38%
Less Satisfactory
Demeanor
Ea r 1i er Avai 1abi 1i ty
Economic Inquiry
Possible racial steering
29"
10
22%
27%
-- *
18"
10
12%
2%
16%
23%
26%
25"
10
21 %
12%
2%
16%
-- *
*Racial steering was not considered in the 1972 Audit.
ADDITIONAL OBSERVATIONS
Presence of the Equal Housing 0l2l2ortunity Sign--Federal law requires
the Department of Housing and Urban Development's EHO poster to be
posted (Appendix G) in all rental and real estate offices. During
the audit testers were asked to check for the presence of the poster.
Table IV shows the degree to which the complexes were in compliance.
-3-
�I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
TABLE IV
Presence of EHO Poster
Baltimore
City
Baltimore
County
Sign posted
No sign
UnknONn
6 ( 33%)
11 ( 61 %)
1 ( 6%)
15
16
(
( 48%)
52%)
( -- )
21
27
1
(
(
(
Total:
18 ( 100" )
/0
31
( 100"/0)
49
/0
( 100" )
Total
43%)
55%)
2%)
CONCLUSION
Difference of Treatment of potential apartment seekers by race is
s till widely practiced in the metropolitan area. HONever, the
degree is somewhat improved--3~ compared with 4~ in 1972. The
/o
/o
Difference of Treatment and/or discriminatory discouragement which
still occurs seems to be more subtle as most Black testers felt
t hey could have obtained an apartment in the complexes tested; it
was only in comparing the treatment and/or information given Blacks
and Whites that the differences were found.
Although difficult to compare because of the different manners in
which they were conducted, this recent BNI audit is not inconsistent
with HUD's release in April of preliminary information on a nationwide audit of discrimination in housing (40 different metropolitan
areas but not the Baltimore area). The preliminary information
from the HUD audit as to apartment testing indicates : 49.4% White
favored response, 30.3% equal treatment and 20 . 3% Black favored
response. HUD subtracted 20.3% from 49.4% to come up with a
29.1 % level of discrimination. BNI used extensive lists of apartment complexes, eliminating predominately Black complexes from its
audit base, while HUD tested apartment complexes that advertised.
~I found only one incident of a Black favored response.
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
Foo tnote to National Fair Housing Audit:
A national audit of real estate offices and apartment complexe s
was conducted by the Department of Housing and Urban Development
f r om June to July 1977, in 40 metropolitan areas across the country
at a cost of one million dollars with 300 Black and 300 White teste r s participating. Some 1609 tests were made of rental properties
and 1655 tests of sale housing. This represents HUD's preliminary
r es ult s . HUD is in the process of computerizing the results and
ove r th e next six months will release specific reports covering
varying aspects of the audit.
-4-
�I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
APPENDIX A
SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS
1972 Apartment Audit
Summary
Under the auspices of Baltimore Neighborhoods, Inc., a study
was conducted in February and March, 1972 to evaluate racial discrimination as practiced by apartment developments in the Baltimore
Metropolitan Area. A random selection of 93 developments which included a wide range of locations, sizes and rental costs was tested
by 45 bi-racial teams. These tests indicated that Blacks will encounter in the total of all categories tested, even prior to making
an application, a pattern of discriminatory discouragement 45 to 55
per cent of the time. The study correlates these various forms of
discrimination with location, size and rental.
Conclusion
Discrimination exists and is practiced extensively among rental
agents throughout the Baltimore Metropolitan Area. Discrimination is
both overt and subtle; varies with economic level, development size
and geographic location; and represents violations of the spirit if
not the letter of Federal and local law. On the basis of this sample
the report indicates that the Black person who atempts to rent a unit
in a predominatly White apartment complex has 1 chance out of 2 in the
City, and 3 chances out of 5 in the County, of encountering discriminatory discouragement. "Seeing" an apartment is only the first step toward occupancy. Further opportunity to discriminate is possible in the
processing of the application.
�I
I
I
APPENDIX B
SOURCES OF BALTIMORE COUNTY AND CITY
APARTMENT COMPLEX LISTS
1.
Baltimore City and Baltimore County
Stewart Directories, 1977 Edition
2.
Metropo litan Baltimore Apartment and
New Home Guide, May-July, 1977
3.
Baltimore Metropolitan Area Telephone
Directory, November, 1977
4.
Baltimore City Yellow Pages, June, 1977
I
5.
Baltimore Suburban East and West
Telephone Directory, February, 1977
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
6.
Baltimore County Office of Planning
Zoning
I
I
I
�I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
APPENDIX C
SIZE AND PRICE RANGE OF APARTMENT
COMPLEXES TESTED
Area
No. of Dwell i ng
Units per Complex
Price for 2
Bedroom Unit
Bi3ltimore County
74 - 876
$181 - 347
Baltimore City
80 - 667
$174 - 410
74 - 876 uni ts
$174 - 410
Over all
�~J,1. j1!f';. P'
l':t: .
·:F.:r. -! fV
~f'~.n(
i<;.
"' l:~a
J]
i :. rt,
lfl,.·.·!
2.llu=or • • ~,J rll.nd 111U
14J·6007
! INS1D~
RENTAl. ('fn'::f> ]
1 . HUle em;.l:Jlle.~(.) "".'),:) Ilcl~ 110\1:
E
rES r 1 N C
1...
~
£ CO R 0
volun t eered
~
...,
1...
o
0-
Apt
loc.t~
In :
0 1 ArrJ. ... J I
Q)
0:
0>
C
.~
Her f ord
Howu'd
. . Co
1':'_
CJtv
•• lto. CO .
.:.:. (;1 7 !J1 1t :
Oth.r
,. Describe rece ption upon .nterJng eh. ottl ~ and/ or ~.l :
Gfflce
Aen~J
. ~dr" .
,
rentAl
J.
1"'. "';-0/ ollie. .t tnou..,. not 011 aJt.
Ict.-:It Iwr.
. w.:
:~~=~£7
__________________________________________________
11
0//1«
co.pJ •• ,
I ...., ____________________________________
UiJr . . . _____ _ ___
~r
of (:0#11'1 .. Jnter •• te I n
I
J . we. tll.-r., e lIOdel ept to N .een:
"co _______
- - - - - - - '"
-----
"co _______
rtJf'FaS l _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __
Apt. ,
.... _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ __ __ _ _ '"
_ _ __
H_ ...... _
_ ___
Ojd
e
......
e
Z
UJ
a.
a.
I.
1.
1I.~de.crJ N
...
. . . s .odel spt.
vhet vs. . . .n1
Ha.e rhono _ _ _ __
Work Phon. _ _ _ __
of .
X
~
It
Wo rk rhotNI ____ __
..,
roo
cqu.1 Hou.Jttg OpportunJtloi' po.C#'T ve. _ (v •• I'lo)C ___, ~:.~. : ! "....
d •• c r J N vM re J c v•• .post.d and Jt In e -~IMrnC or L"OlVpJcJ06P- ;J_.J
MUD'.
"'I'" 01 -"e.
~
Apt
to reqwU. ____________________
t. w.nted __________________________________________________
occvpJed brill __________ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __
I.
Apt. CD k
••
1.a:tIU _/01. tAt.,
_j I'
<[
{lbte - .,.trente t ""~III •• l~uJr. "'hltlV •• l.c!!'.
hfor. t • ••• • to ftqu.,l the IIIOntlv rent.}
IAPARTH tHT AVAILABILITY
I
IlUJll~D t
.~..,.,
tilt.
eve,-v 1 w. .~
eo.bJt-'
II} l ' SIr.;U
l~
:'::::::::~.=.:.:'~'::::::::::
,____
1 , HurnlMr of .pu snd edduu of .pt. sve J lAb ~ e and det .. of . ,'.,U.&!>,UJty:
St.rHt A!dr_ ...
T\' ptt
'Ie.,. $, _ _ _ _ __
IIIonthly .Rsce
of Apt
GIlt MJrtlh
•• eYe",
1
......u , ____
v··,. ,
,. Of the spU s.,s.ilsb1 •• o r ~ng s .,sHAbl., s • • tat-.;f
.,.ro ectuelly . . .n ~ t.'ou1
"'/ut ..... t.~e:,. condJtion'
sbo_. wlUc::b
~
r..
I I ~ . d_~rJ " eAe -nl.", _
..-1
j'N~"
ta. . ' " . -
Jl\IC'h.~•
..nv
n/.r~
t·,
C.,IOII"_lt\ll.
I'. ",,"'..'M,
~""1"AI.
~.
,/ft'f NUUtThlfl
I
wng'tb of Jor ••• __________________
1 . ~rJt t.' ".po.Jt: J.
I i. ,.,... r
, ,. ...1.1 ,,......., .
would be ~.pt . .l . ;ICA sppJ Jc.cJon :
J . u tlHcJ ... sr.
the
e st i ~ t ed
" 1l""·',lIr. ,,,
_(.r.
oan~:v
,w ,.i: .."r,,:
(I t 10' I ' thl
, ... ·.·I",VOl " ' III".,
... ~ '
:1. 11''', . .;J.u.. .a.C
Mt_' " "dud'" In nMC .
co.t. ______________
,'",.
...
\.,-
.",.
No,'
,'It,'
:t not ~:IMI"
~ . . c ....-c
u.
,....c w:Mt
t-
�....,
c
o
I
~.:ts:lCAS AS~
Did agent -.k qu. . eJon.
IT .L:01:I'f
r~.rdlng
'lour
f~lW
.1z •• pl.ce and
OTHIIf
l~ o~ .-pJoy~t •
u
~
and
_oil'
•• lary, oth.r~ I f It'" .t.t ....Me If• •
!IO'I g • .,..
flf no qu •• tlon c /'t«1c here _ _,
E
L.
~
....,
L.
o
a.
cr
Av.1J.~1.'
...
ort.r~
No
"PO~ ,,";II . . t
No
1 . •".lne•• C.r.
--
4i
r.calved
Ol
C
(Attac h card to t.ILb fora)
....
.~
VI
6e.e.
4i
ill
t-
""'t
llJfor..tJ.on
ItO J.AfO~UOll
flU
ottnM
bv
ott.u4 cIwci IN,..
ag.nt w1thout wou .u.tJII9.
----1
J. Dld .g.nt •• Ie tor vour n... ,
ro.
addr • •• r
r ••
r ..
.....
Cl
,
..,
..,
...
4. OTIIU CO/UaIl1'S,
x
.....
Cl
z
w
!1CSTDI AST-ZD
a..
a..
<I
_...", t,leatlJV .,., COUrt.o.M'
_"j..,J• .."
CDurt _ _
__ I'oJlte but not owrJv 11J..,wU"
ODDJ
.~
d l et.nt
,..,r.on.JJw
and
..cr.
q~rw4
k t or. . .
NUl 1. eN. 10,. 01 J_ cMt
�I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
APPENDIX E
DIFFERENCE OF TREATMENT
(Some Examples)
- White team told of an apartment available on December 1.
Black team told that nothing was available and the agent
suggested they call back and check in December.
- White team was shown vacant apartment and agent made derogatory comments about Blacks. Black team was not shown
vacant apartment.
- White team was shown vacant apartment and name was taken
by agent. Black team was not shown vacant apartment and
name was not taken.
- White team was told nothing was available in garden type
apartment, but that there was a vacancy in the high-rise.
Black team was told of availability in garden type; the
high-rise was only mentioned after a White .person inquired
during the Black team's visit.
- White team was told of availability, no questions were
asked about income and no referrals were made to other
complexes. Black team was given a later availability date ,
and was asked about income and told they might want to
check at another named complex.
- No apartment was available for either team, however, the
White team was told that they maintained a lon~ waiting
list which allowed them to pick and choose thelr tenants.
The agent also referred to other complexes which allowed
all sorts of people in - "drug addicts, Blacks, Chinese."
�APPENDIX F
49 Apartment Complexes Tested
TimooIiIm
--
\
_...
)( ®
)( X
@
X
N
I
Glen Ik.nie
CODE:
QD=
X
Difference of Treatment, i.e. discrimination
= no discrimination
�APPE N X G
DI
I
HUD's EHO POSTER
I
I
I
EQUAL HOUSING
OPPORTUNITY
I
We Do Business in Accordance With the
I
Federal Fair Housing Law
I
(Title VIII of the Civil Rights Act of 1968,as Amended by
the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974)
I
I IT IS ILLEGAL TO DISCRIMINATE AGAINST
ANY PERSON BECAUSE OF RACE, COLOR,
I
RELIGION, SEX, OR NA TIONAL ORIGIN .
I
• In the sale or rental of housing or residential lots
• In advertising the sale or rental of housing
I
• In the financing of housing
I
• In the provision of real estate brokerage services
I
Blockbusting is also illegal
I
An aggrieved person may file a complaint of a housing discrimination act with the:
I
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVElOPMENT
Assistant Secretary for Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity
I
Washington, D.C. 20410
I
I
HUD-'21 .1 17f 75) P,.. io" •• dltlon, Gr ••"$OI.t.
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Baltimore Neighborhoods, Inc.
Subject
The topic of the resource
Discrimination in housing
Nonprofit organizations
Citizens' associations
Baltimore Metropolitan Area (Md.)
African Americans
Housing
Baltimore (Md.)
Community organization
Reports
Correspondence
Newsletters
Description
An account of the resource
This exhibit provides an introduction to the work of Baltimore Neighborhoods, Inc. (BNI) around issues of racial integration in housing and tenants' rights from the 1950s to the 2000s.
Established in 1958, Baltimore Neighborhoods, Inc. was formed to promote an open housing market and viable integrated neighborhoods in the Baltimore area. It was established by several neighborhood associations and supported by civic organizations like the Greater Baltimore Committee. The early focus of the organization was to obtain open housing and stable neighborhoods during a period of widespread white flight and blockbusting in Baltimore City. Through education and advocacy, it sought to counter racial prejudice, to fight discrimination in the real estate industry, and to combat neighborhood deterioration resulting from segregated housing. More recently, BNI has focused on tenant-landlord relations and renters' rights.
The Baltimore Neighborhoods, Inc. (BNI) collection at the University of Baltimore consists of 22 linear inches of archival records, which are described in an online collection database. The complete collection has also been digitized at the folder level and is also available in the collection database. For this exhibit, 32 documents have been selected from the complete collection.
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
<a href="https://langsdale.ubalt.edu/special-collections/" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">Special Collections & Archives, University of Baltimore</a>
Source
A related resource from which the described resource is derived
<a href="https://archivesspace.ubalt.edu/repositories/2/resources/14" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">Baltimore Neighborhoods, Incorporated Records, UB Special Collections & Archives</a>
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
<a href="https://langsdale.ubalt.edu/special-collections/">University of Baltimore Special Collections & Archives</a>
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
circa 1958-2009
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
This material may be quoted or reproduced for personal and educational purposes without prior permission, provided appropriate credit is given. When crediting the use of portions from this site or materials within that are copyrighted by us, please use the citation: "Used with permission of the University of Baltimore Special Collections & Archvies." Any commercial use of this material is prohibited without prior permission from the Special Collections & Archives, University of Baltimore. Commercial requests for use of the images or related text must be submitted in writing to: Special Collections & Archives, University of Baltimore, H. Mebane Turner Learning Commons, 1415 Maryland Avenue, Baltimore, MD 21201
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
text/pdf
Language
A language of the resource
English
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
R0015-BNI
Date Created
Date of creation of the resource.
2019-09
Extent
The size or duration of the resource.
32 items
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Original Format
The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data
Paper
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Apartment Discrimination in Baltimore County and City, 1977-78
Description
An account of the resource
A follow-up report to the 1972 Baltimore Neighborhoods, Inc. apartment audit
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1978-05
Subject
The topic of the resource
Baltimore Metropolitan Area (Md.)
Discrimination in housing
Race discrimination
Rental housing
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Baltimore Neighborhoods, Inc.
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
University of Baltimore Special Collections & Archives
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
bni06.01.02a
Source
A related resource from which the described resource is derived
Baltimore Neighborhoods, Incorporated Records (R0015-BNI), series VI, box 1, folder 2, Special Collections & Archives, University of Baltimore
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
Use of this digital material is governed by U.S. copyright law. The University of Baltimore Special Collections and Archives makes digital surrogates of collections accessible if they are in the public domain, the rights are owned by the University of Baltimore, the Special Collections and Archives has permission to make them accessible, or there are no known restrictions on use. Due to the nature of archival collections, rights information is not always discernible. The Special Collections and Archives is eager to hear from any rights owners wishing to provide accurate information. Upon request, material will be removed from view while a rights issue is addressed. Contact the Special Collections and Archives for more information regarding this image.
Baltimore Metropolitan Area (Md.)
Discrimination in housing
Race discrimination
Rental housing
-
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/44124/archive/files/c8b8e4a50a0f58953dc09f3ffc5e34a1.pdf?Expires=1712793600&Signature=TqJpnjJA2W8iVctJruah5Gbk-HCahbKfOxCRtvKd6qRjTKVEHWGwVP1gLWnnVoUXBt4hqKNSuzl-HQNLb7BlxGA%7Eyp499AO3COebTExbh9QNbfvrOQjNGrerW1rK2KgJ6cEj7DpKgVFISFCp3UK2zGbYDPiHUe2HY1eqhZLVUZkqxtfCGDZ3XpJBWQLWmJoJAO0R3KOu1fX0MJN4xCJqsG49DvSSUsP9n2srdTR4ncddFQnc1vTJTo0-2QiaXSKOWBTKxNKTiRyZ0fluIvqsD6aSdxwa8fL91tltdz7jWW1SjzlnvE%7EelAXw2QVPA1q-q-03QMRpkRbjxLTJLk6ukA__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
88494bb9ed5dfb5b830b413e5154ec3f
PDF Text
Text
Study of
Baltimore Neighborhoods, Inc.
June,
Health and Welfare Council
of the Baltimo:re Area, Inc .
10 South Street
Baltimore, Maryland 21202
1965
�I!mIBERS OF TIlE STUDY CCHIITTEE
Roy Borom
James F. Miller
Howard Ofnt
Mrs. Henry L. Rogers
Charles L. Stout
Arthur Wyatt
Robert D. Myers, Chaiman
STAFF:
John M. Spence, Planning Director
Health and Welfare Council of the
Baltimore Area, Inc.
�TABIE CF CONTENTS
I.
Introducti on ... .. ... . ....... . . .... .... .. ... . .. . .. .. .. .. .... .. ...... . ..
1 - 3
A.
Request for the s tudy ............. ..• .... . . .. .... . . . •...• . ...
1
B.
fMC decision to engage in the study . .... ... .. ....... . .... ... ..
1
C.
Facets of Baltimore Neighbor hoods operati on with which
t he study was concerned . ......... .. ............... .. .........
1 - 2
.... .............. .. ......... ... ... .. ...........
2
D.
E.
II.
TIl.
IV.
Study method
Data collected and persons interviewed . ..•.•.. ..•.... • . . .•• • • 2 - 3
Open-Occupancy and the problem of changing neighborhoods in
the Baltimore area . .. ......... .. .................. .... ........ . . . .. .. .
Circumstances leading to the formation of Baltimore
Neighborhoods
,
........ ... ..... ....... . ...... ... ....... .. ........... .
4- 6
7 - 8
Findings and conclusions . .. ..... . ..... . .. . ....... . ... .... . . . ... . .. .. . 9 - 28
Appendices
�I.
Introduction
A.
Request for the study - In August, 1964, Baltimore Neighborhoods, Inc.
requested the Health and Welfare Council (HrVC) to undertake a study of
Baltimore Neighb orhoods.
In his letter of request, the Executive
Director of Baltimore Neighborhoods stated that his agency planned to
•
make formal application for membership in the Comnrunity Chest.
•
Before
proceeding with the application, Baltimore Ne i ghborhoods wanted the fWC
to conduct a study that would evaluate certain aspects of Baltimore
Neighborhoods I purpose and program activities.
B.
HNC decision to engage in the study - After a careful consideration of the
objectives sought by Baltimore Neighborhoods from the study and after
ccnsultation with that agency1s Executive Director,
11
plan for the study .
R~
staff developed a
Baltimore Neighborhoods concurred in the plan, and
at its December, 1964 meeting, the HWC Board of Dir ect?rs voted to undertake
tho study on this basis.
C.
Facets of Baltimore Neighborhoods 1 operation with which the study was
concerned - It was decided to limit the scope of the study to an evaluation of three aspects of Baltimore Neighborhoods I operation.
The
study dealt with:
1.
a determination of which services currently provided by Baltimore
Neighborhoods in the Baltimore metropolitan area are unique and
which (if any) are similar to those already being provided in
I
"Study Plan, Baltimore Neighborhoods, Inc. lI ,
Appendix A.
�- 2 -
the community under other auspices, either public or private;
2.
a consideration of what effect
(~f
any) membership in the Community
Chest might have on the current program activit;i:es and method of
operation of Baltimore Ne i ghborhoods;
•
3.
an evaluation of the degree of responsibility employed by Baltimore
Neighborhoods in its activities and a consideration of the acceptance
of its efforts by various segments of the community.
D.
Study method - The President of the fMC appointed a small connnittee of lay
people to conduct the study. While some committee members were active in the
real estate industry or had backgrounds in the field of housing, -nona
~as
a
paid employee of any public or private agency working in housing or civil
rights.
A staff member of the
}We
was assigned to provide staff services .
It was his responsibility to coll ect background information and necessary
data for the committee ' s use.
The whole committee met a total of five times
over a two and one- half month period.
E.
Data collected and persons interviewed - Information was compiled through
discussions with the Executive Director of Baltimore Neighborhoods and from
the agency's Bvlaws, the minutes of its Board meetings, budget statements,
and various brochures and descriptive literature.
In the course of its work,
the committee elicited (by questionnaire) informat ion from housing agencies
and United Funds in certain other cities, from local neighborhood improvement aSSOCiations, and from local agencies and organizations engaged in work
similar to that of Baltimore Neighborhoods .
In addition,
~he
committee met with the President and Executive Director of
Baltimore Neighb orhoods and with the representative of a neighborhood
�- 3 -
improvement association with which Baltimore Neighborhoods engaged in
program activities .
The presidents of other improvement groups were inter-
vieHed by telephone.
•
The findings and conclusions in Section IV are the result of a careful
assessment of this material.
�- 4II.
Open occupancy and the problem of changinli/: neighborhoods in the Baltimore area
Baltimore Neighborhoods works in the sensitive, even controversial, field of
housing and race .
Before discussing the agency1s evolution and its specific
services it would be well to provide a framework by considering two aspects
of the problem currently
fac~ng
Baltimore in the field in which Baltimore
Neighborhoods operates.
First, is the quest ion of open occupancy.
Neither Baltimore City nor the
state of Maryland has fair housing legislation.
The Mayor1s office recently
released the findings of the Baltimore City Housing Study Advisory Commission.
The Commission was established to study the availability of housing for rninor-
ity groups in Baltimore City and the overall problem created by disorimin3ticD in housing .
Its Report recommends ppen housing legislation for Baltimore
City but indicates a more ideal solution would be state-wide open housing legis-
2/
lation.-
The Mayor withheld introduction of any local legislation pending the outcome
of a state-Wide fair housing measure introduced in the 1965 session of the
General Assembly .
The Assembly failed to enact the legislation and the Mayo.:-
has introduced a local open occupancy bill as he had promised he would do if
no action were forthcoming at the State level.
The City proposal would cover
all structures with more than two housing units and structures with one or
two units if neither unit is owner-occupied.
The bill would ban discrimination by an owner or real estate agent through
false representation that hOUSing is not available for inspection, rental,
2 Recommendation, Report of the Baltimore City Housin,G!; Study Advisory
£.emmission, NoveIllber, 1961i
�- 5 -
or sale .
tiona.
It would also prohibit discrimination by lending or mortgaging instituPlans call for enforcement to become the responsibilit y of the Community
3/
Relations Conunission. •
Second, is the problem of neighborhoods undergoing rapid changes from white to
Negro occupancy .
This is caused in part by the great pressure exerted on
northern industrial cities to provide expanded housing facilities for Negroes.
A series of articles in the then Baltimore Nel",s - Post and Sunda.V American cited
the following reasons for this pressure :
"1.
the surging migration of Negroes in increasing numbers from the
South to the North in search of greater educational, social and
economic opportunities;
2.
the failure of Northern industria,l centers to provide housing
for migrants from the Southj
3.
the displacement of a sizable number of Negroes by urban renewal
projects;
4. the inability of the Negro to obtain new housing to fill his needs;
5.
the increased earning power of the Negro, resulting in pressures
on white neighborhoods surrounding traditional Negro neighborhoods
for
6.
adeq~te
space;
the fear of white residents of Negro neighbors, even in limited
numbers and their subsequent flight to the suburbs . 1/
The r apid change of residential neighborhoods from primarily white occupied to
predominantly Negro occupied has been accompanied by, and resulted in, unwholesome practices and conditions .
_wo
11
One evil that has been associated with this
•
•
Since this was written the City COuncil has ended its current session
without ac.t ing on this proposed Ordinance.
�- 6 -
change is blockbusting or lithe deliberate creation or exploitation by a real
estate broker, dealer, speculator, or owners of prejudice, fear, ignorance,
•
or panic designated to induce a rapid change of a block's population from white
4/
to colored. u- The City now has an ordinance making illegal certain real estate
practices associated \'lith blockbusting.
Efforts of farsighted improvement associations and other interested groups to
combat blockbusting and maintain racially stahle neighborhoods provided part
of the impetus resulting in the establishment of Baltimore Neighborhoods.
It
was realized that neighborhood groups working separately could not deal with
such a many-faceted problem.
41
- Baltimore Community Relations Commission
�- 7 III.
Circumstances leading to the fonnation of Baltimore Neighhorhooos
During the mid -1950's, th e northwest section of Baltimore was undergoing extensive change in the racial composition af its neighborhoods.
improvement associations
J
Ashburton arxi \iirxlsor Hills, began active campaigns
to preserve the high resi dential quality of the ir areas.
•
Two neighborhood
keeping Negroes out, but at maintaining
discouraging the wholesale flight of
racial~
~~hite
They aimed not at
stable neighborhoods both by
familie s from the neighborhoods
and by encouraging new white families to move into the areas.
While these individual efforts and others like them met with some success, there
was a realistic recognition that at the core this was a probl em of attitudes
r ooted in traditional market practices
am.
prejudices.
The achieV8rent of
l asting progress lo.rould require both an ext ere ive educational campaign arxl
skillful work wi th the group:; and individuals most affected.
The task was
thought to exceed the scope of individual neighborhocx1 gr oups, even those that
had
successful~
In the summer of
responded to crises in their own backyards.
1958, several improvement associations , the Baltimore Urban
League, the Citizens Planning and Housing Association, and tm Harylarxl Commis sion on Inte rracial Problems and Relations appealed to the Greater Baltimore
Conunittee for help.
The Greater Baltimore Committee was approached because it
was thought to represent the business community's concern about Baltimore
City's economic futur e am was considered influential enough to lend effective
support to the search for so luti ons to a hous ing problem with economic as well
as social conse quences.
The Greater Baltimore Committee agreed to J:8 r ticipate in
activities aimed at solving the problems of racially changing neighborhoods and
recommend the establislunent of a city-wide agency for that purpose.
�- 8-
In November, 1958, the Dreater Baltimore Committee sponsored a housing conference
which focused on problems accompanying rapid neighborhood change, the need for
new, adequate housing for Negroes, and the need to identify, mobilize, and make
•
effective use of a variety of neighborhood resources.
At the conc lusion of the
conference, James W. Rouse issued the following statement:
l'We find that the rapid conversion of neighborhood from all-white
to all- N
egro occupancy presents Baltimore with one of its most serious
economic crises in recent years .
The flight of the medium and upper
income families from the city limits and their replacement by persons
of both races of the lowest income levels is a threat not
on~
to
our municipal solvency b)It to the economic stability of the entire
metropolitan area.
It is therefore recommended that there be formed
a city-wide organization composed of representatives of civic and
labor organizations, improvement associations, the Real Estate Board
of Greater Baltimore, the Greater Baltimore Committee, the Association
of Commerce, the homebuilders, and the city and state governments .
During the preliminary stages and until the city-wide group is
well established, the Greater Baltimore Committee will provide clerical and professional staff assistance . II
The Housing Conference was followed by the formation of Baltimore Neighborhoods in
March, 1959 .
�- 9 IV.
Findings and conclusions
In this section are presented the findings and conclusions of the study committee
with regard to the three aspects of BaltilTlore Neighborhoods I operation which
•
it was asked to assess.
The committee ' s findings, on which the conclusions are
based, are the result of an evalnation of the Background Material, replies to
various questionnaires, and the personal and telephone interviews conducted by the
cOt1l!llttee .
There follows each charge, the committee ' s concluSion, and the findings
which led to that conclusion .
Charge 1
To define which services currently provided by Baltimore Neighborhoods in the
Baltimore metropolitan area are unique and which (if any) are silnilar to those
a lready being provided in the community under other auspices, either public or
private .
Conclusion
WHIlE IT IS EVIDElIT THAT SEVERAL OTHER AOElICIES AND OROANIZATIONS PERFORM
FACETS OF THE TOTAL JOB IN THE FIElD OF HOUSING AND RACE, BALTIMORE NEIGIIBORIIlODS IS UNIQUE IN TWO WAYS.
FIRST, IT ASSUMES RESPONSIBILITY FOR PERFORMING A FULL RANGE OF ACTIVITIES
AIMED AT: MAINTAINING THE RACIAL STABILITY AND HIGH QUALITY OF RESIDElITIAL
NEIGIIBORHOODS; D]MONSTRATING THAT SOUND, STABlE, INTERRACIAL CCMWNITIES OF
HIGH STANDARDS ARE DESIRABlE AND POSSIBlE; EXPANDING IDUSING OPPORTUNITIES FOR
MINORITIES THROUGIIJUT THE METROPOLITAN AREA .
SECOND, CERTAIN SPECIFIC ACTIVITIES IN WInCH IT ENGAGES AS PART OF TInS TOTAL
PROGRAM ARE NOT NOW PERFORMED ON A REGUIAR RASIS BY OTHER UX;AL AOElICIES.
�- 10 -
FindinB!
Baltimore Neighborhoods carries out its program through a series of separate
but interrelated acitvities .
All are aimed at achieving neighborhood racial
stabilization and an expansion of housing opportunities for minority groups .
It
\
should be noted at the outset that Baltimore Neighborhoods states that it provides
help in a neighborhood onlY after a r equest and after reaching a cooperative agreement nth some r esponsible group or or gani zation in that neighborhood.
There
follows a list of the specific activities in which Baltimore Neighborhoods states
it engages in the endeavo:' t o inform, to educate, and (when necessary) to negotiate
complaints of discrimination:
1.
plans and/or sponsors c onferences dealing with housing and race,
2.
conducts community educational pl'ograms focused on the facts of neighbor-
hood racial change,
3. conducts programs to help neighborhoods make orderly preparation for
imminent racial change,
4. engages in community relati ons work With individual families
and community
groups after a N
egro family has moved into a predominantly white neighborhood,
5.
engages in various activities with the r eal estate, banking, and home
building
i rxiustri~'s
to achieve increased acceptance of open occupancy,
6. disseminates infor mation about housing and race on an individual basis as
r equested ,
7.
maintains , and provides upon request, a list of homes and apartments available on a non-di scriminat ory b :,,:,ls .
8.
rec :~ve3
9.
receives and investigates complaints of illegal blockbusting practices and refers
to the
and at t empts to negot iate complaints of discrimination in housing,
appropriate enforcement a gency if other attempts at solution fail,
�- 11-
10.
within the limits of the law governing the political activities of
tax-exempt organizations, endorses and promotes legislation which supports
the concept of open housing and opposes any which might perpetuate
racial discrimination in the field of housing.
(The Committee wishes to point out that this list was provided by
Baltimore Neighborhoods and was not the subject of Committee investigation . )
In addition to Baltimore Neighborhoods Inc., there exist locally a number
of community organizations or groups of organizations, with programs in the general
fields of housing or civil rights.
Seven of them, both public and private,
state they have definite housing programs that can be compared with the program
of Baltimore Neighborhoods.
They are:
Baltimore Community Relations Commission,
Baltimore County league for Htunan Rights, Baltimore Urban league, Citizens
Planning and Housing Association, Maryland Commission on Interracial Problems and
Relations, neighborhood improvement associations, civil rights organizations.
As part of their own broader programs concerned with improved housing, planning,
or civil rights, they regularly engage in some of the same activities as those
engaged in by Baltimore Neighborhoods .
They occasionally engage in otper of
the actiVities carried out by Baltimore Neighborhoods ,but'.dp not consider them
regular parts of their programs.
Neighborhoods
The ten activities specified by Baltimore
are the core of its day-to-day program.
Table 1 shows the activities in which these other organizations regularly
engage compared with the regular activities of Baltimore Neighborhoods.
Except
where otherwise noted, the information contained in the table was supplied by
the agencies themselves .
�Table 1 - Activities of Other Organizations ComlBred With Those of Baltimore Neighborhoods
Organizations
Baltimore
Baltimore
Community
County
Re lat ions
League fer
Commission Human
Ri ghts ~
Specific T.ypes of Activities
Engaged in by ENI
Citizens
Planning
and Housing
Association
!Y
Planning - sponsoring conferences
dealing with housing and race
Yes
Yes
Corrrnission
on Inter racial
~~~ti'lli\sand
Ye.
Neighborhood
Improvement
Associations
!!I
Organizations Baltimore
Active in the Urban
League
Field of
Civil Righta
!I
Yes
Conducting community educational
programs focused on the facts of
neighborhood racial change
MlU'l'land
Engaging in community relations
work with individual families and
community groups after a Negro
fami~ has moved into a predominantly white neighborhood and
vice versa
Yes
.
cd
Yes
.
Engag ing in var i cus activities
with the real estate, banking, and
home building industries to achieve
increased acceptance of open
occupancy
Disseminating information about
housing am race on an individual
basis as requested
Yee
Yes
t1a1ntaining, and provid~ upon
request, a list of available
homes in open neighborhoods
Conducting programs to help
neighborhoods make orderlY
preparation far imminent racial
change
es
Y
Y
es
Ye s O
j
.
Yes
Yee
•
•
•
I
.
tes
�•
•
•
Receiving and attempting to
negotiate canplaints of discriminati on in housing
Yes
Receiving ani investigating canplaints of illegal blockbusting
practices and referral to the
appropriate enforcement a gency
if other attempts at solution f=ai=l=----I---_ _ __
Yes
+____-l _ _ _ __-f______f-______-I---_ _ _ _ _ _ II_ _ _ __
Endorsing and promoting legislation supporting the concept of
Yes
open housing - opposing any which
might p;trpetuate racial discriminati on in the field of housing
____________________________________L _________ _
!I
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
-- ----- -- .----- ------- ------------ ------------- -------------- ---------
This information was obtained from a review of certain descriptive material issued by the organization and from the
Executive Director of Baltimore Neighborhoods who irxlicates he has worked closely with the Baltimore County League for
Human Rights in its housing activities.
2,/ C.P.H.A. states : "All of our work deals
with housing and race but not on an intensive scale as Baltimore Neighborhoods,
Inc •.•• Since Baltimore Neighborhoals, Inc . .has been set up we try to refer intensive work of this kind. to them .. • . "
It
is important to note that C.P .H.A. indicates general agreement that Baltimore Neighborhoods should take leadership in
these specific activities.
sf
Since Maryland has no open housing statute, the Commission's activities in the field of housing are devoted largely to
educational programs and mediation of canplaints of alleged housing discrimination. The Commission states that 1£ the
act of discrimination occurred in a local community having a Biracial Committee or voluntary agency active in the housing field (such as Baltimore Neighborhoods) the Commission would ordinarily refer the complainant to that agency or
work in close cooperation with that agency in seeking a resolution to the problem.
c!/
This determination results fran the canmittee's contacts with representatives of numerous improvement associations. In
almost all cases, their activities are carrie1. out on behalf of the residents of a given neighborhood or clearly defined
geographic area.
,y
This is a composite of information supplied by CORE and the Baltimore Fr:lends of SNCC (Student Nonviolent Coordinating
Council), the two d.vil rights organizations which responded to the comml.ttee's questionnaire.
t::
�- 14 The committee lIas unable to discover additional agencies or organizations
that should be included in the above comparison .
The information i n Table 1
supports Baltimore Neighborhoods t contention that in the Baltimore Metropolitan
Area only it provides a full range of services dealing with housing and the
issue of rac e .
'1'uo other facts lend added <Height to these findings .
In w.any cases, even agencies or organizations nhich have indicated they
regularly perform or.e or
mo:.~e
of the
SilJ1e
activities carried out by Baltimore
rJeighborhocds state that they lacl{ sufficient time and staff J in view of
their other cOm::litmcnts, to
They indicate a
~dllingness
~':. ssign
such uork the priority they fee l it descrv€s .
to have Baltimore Neighborhocxis assume the leader-
ship Z'ole and define their own role as supportive to
~o lt:L
'!I0~e
Neighborhoods '
In discharging the ir r esponsibilities in the broader fielde
intensive efforts .
. of housing and civil rights they state the:r m."'ten refer situations to Baltimore
Haighborhoods or ,,'!ork cooperatively uith that agency .
While the Mayor ' s proposed Fair Housing Bill provides that enforcement
uould be the responsibility of the Baltimore Community Relations Connnission,
t.he existence of such legislation would, in all prob::!.b i lity
need for Baltimore Neighborhoods = services.
and intent as well
occur overnight .
fiB
incre~se
the
Community acceptance of the
spiri~.;.
the I1letter"of co.oy fair housing legislation would. not
On the contrary, it can be expected that complete acceptance " ouN
come very slowly and , es pecially for some sections in th9 metropolitan area ,
very painfuDy.
Neighborhoods and individuals
assuming their necessary responsibiltties .
~.j'ould
need he l p and support in
Because of its expc;icnce it is
expected that Baltimore Neighborhoods would play an important role in this
effort .
�- 15 Char•• 2
To consider what effect (if any) membership in the Community Chest
might have on the current program activities and method of operation of
Baltimore Neighborhoods.
Conclusion
EVIDENCE INDICATES BALTIMORE NEIGHBORIIlODS IS OPERATING IN A CONTROVERSIAL FIEID.
THE COHHITTEE IS COOVINCED THAT BALTIMORE NEIGHBCRlIJODS'
I'ROGRAM 13 AIMED AT RESOU'ING CONrROVERSY AND ELIMINATING CCHoIUNITY TENSION,
NOT AT CREATING OR SUSTAINING IT.
IT IS POSSIBLE THAT MEMBERSI!IP IN THE
CGlMUNITY CHEST, WHILE NOT AFFECTING THE BASIC PROGRAM OF BALTIMORE NEIGHBCRIIlODS,
MIGHr RESULT IN A LIMITATION ON SOME OF ITS ACTIVITIES IN SUPPORT OF J;llUAL
HOUSING OPPORTUNITIES .
Findings
The committee wishes to begin with a word of caution.
It has not
attempted to assess whether or not Baltimore Neighborhoods meets all of
the criteria established for membership by the Community Chest of the Baltimore
Area, Inc .
It does not recommend whether or not the Community Chest
should accept Baltimore Neighborhoods to membership, or deal with the possible
effect such membership might have on the fund raising potential of the Chest.
�- 16 -
The committee1s purpose was to use the facts available to it to arrive
at an opinion about the possible effect on Baltimore Neighborhoods' program
were it to become a Community Chest member agency and meet the requirements
for continuing membership .
The conclusion results from a consideration of
certain written principles which guide the Chest in the admission of agencies
to membership, the Bylaws of the Community Chest, and very limited information
from other cities where housing agenCies are, or have been in the recent past,
Community Chest. members.
In addition, the committee discussed this issue
With both the PreSident and Executive Director of Baltimore Neighborhoods.
This was done in an effort to learn the agencyfs reasons for considering
making application for Chest membership and to have benefit of its opinion
of the effect membership would have on the agency 1 s current program and method
of operation.
The Element of Controversy and Community Chest Membership Requirements One of the written principles which guides the Community Chest in the
admission of agencies to membership states:
tlNo propa.ganda organization in the field of controversial questions,
or organization which recommends in favor of or against the
election of individual candidates to _political - cffice shall be
admitted to the Community Chest."
21
Through various operating methods, Baltimore Neighborhoods openly and
actively supports the concept of "fair" or nopen" housing available to all
without regard to race.
The Committee is of the opinion that Baltimore
Neighborhoods f active advocacy of community wide open occupancy legislation
21
"General Information Form for Agencies Desiring Membership in the Community
Chest of the Baltimore Area, Inc . ", Community Chest of the Baltimore Area, Inc.
�- 17 -
might have to be de-emphasized were it to be admitted to the Community Chest at
this time.
(This statement is made With full awareness of the interrelatedness
of the activities in which Baltimore Neighborhoods engages . )
concept is legally endorsed in most other large cities.
The open housing
It may well be generally
accepted (therefore, presumably not controversial) as well as legally sanctioned
in these same cities .
Although acceptance is more difficult to document than legal
sanetion, the Report of the Baltimore City
Housin~
Study Advisory Committee states :
"Of the six largest cities in the United states only Baltimore and
Detroit do not have Fair Homing laws. In addition, cities most
silnilar to Baltimore - Washington, st . louis, Boston, and Pittsburgh
are all covered by open-occupancy laws •• .• None of these cities has
suffered panic, large exodus to the suburbs or big changes in
housing patterns. ~.any reports indicate that the move to suburbs,
started before World War .II, and picked up immediately afterwards,
has now, in the 60 1 s, reversed itself with a movement back into
the City. In other words, the patte~n of movement between the city
and suburbs seems to be the same in all cities, regardless of
whether or not there is open- occupancy legislation . • .• The CommiSSion
found that St. Louis, a city remarkably similar to Baltimore, has
not suffered any economic impairment after passage of legislation
for fair hOUSing and. that there is general acceptance of the
legislation by those who had most vigorously objected to it . Moreover, the moral climate of the community has benefited from the
enactment of legislation . 1\
Baltimore I s situation at present is different .
legislation.
There is no open-occupancy
The 1965 session of the Haryland General Assembly failed to act
on a statewide Fair Housing Bill .
The housing provisions were deleted from
the Civil Rights Act passed by the Baltimore City Council in 1964.
These
two events were prima facie evidence that disagreements exist among residents
of the Baltimore area as to the merits of open occupancy.
Although the
Mayor has introduced a Fair Housing Bill into the City Council, no final
acti on has been taken .
The committee can only conclude that the cause ' of
open occupancy is viewed as controversial in the Baltimore area at this time .
�- 18 -
Community Chest- Member Agency Relationships - Community Chest member agencies
enjoy a degree of autonomy.
Article V of the Bylaws of the Chest deals with
1
1Agency Member and Corr:munity Chest Relationships . "
Section 2 (d) of this
Article bears on the situation under discussion:
IIAgency Autonomy - Agency Member shall be independent and
self- gover ning . However, should an Agency Member take any
action or engage in any activity which in the judgement of
the Executive Committee adverse~ affects the interests of
the Chest or its Agency J.lembers, the Executive Committee may
request such lAgency Member, in writing, stating its r easons,
to discontinue such action or activity. Should the Agency
Member decline to complY with such request, the Executive
Committee may recorrmend the r emoval of such Agency Member
from the Chest pursuant to Article IV, Section 5, or thes e
By-laws . 11
The committee thinks it can be assumed that activities in controversial fields
could fall within the pr ovisions of this Secti on and could, therefore, have
the effect of limiting Baltimore N
eighborhoo.ds r advocacy of open occupancy.
Information from other Communities - Inforrnat ion was sought about the
6/
programs of Community Chest member housing agencies in other large cities .- '
No instance was found of a member agency whose program closely resembles
the program of Baltimore Neighborhoods.
However , the response fr om the
Community Health and. Welfare Council of the Cincinnati Area with regard
to the Better Housing league , a Chest agency, is very pertinent.
The
Council' s Executive Director said he believed Cbest member ship bas limited
the Better Housing League's program in only minor ways (the League is a
long time Chest member).
While the league has carri ed :>ut an educational
,
i j See questionnaire, Appendix B
�- 19 -
program for improved housing, it" ... has not assumed a role of aggressively
striking out for equal opportunities in housing, etc .... "
There is also a
voluntary non-Cheat member citizens group in Cincinnati, H.O.M.E. ( Housing
Opportunities Made Equal).
Representatives of individual agencies partici-
pate in its fair housing activities which
11, ••
would appear to eliminate
the possibility of tax-supported or Communtiy Cbest-supported organizations
being engaged too aggressively in fair-housing activities."
The United Good Neighbor s of Seattle responded that the CiVic Unity
Committee of that city had engaged in fair housing actiVities to a limited
extent but had gone out of existence, effective June 30, 1964.
The
United Good Neighbors withdreM its financial support based on the fact that
many of the activities of the Civic Unity Committee
~ere
assumed by the
newly created City of Seattle Human Rights Commission (public).
No other
city reported a Chest member agency engaged in fair housing activities.
Baltimore Neighborhoods' Own View - The President and the Executive Director
or Baltimore
Neighborhoods said they did not think the Community Chest's
membership criteria would have to affect the present operation of Baltimore
Neighborhoods.
Charge 3
To evaluate the degree of responsibility employed by Baltimore
Neighborhoods in its activities and consider the acceptance of its
efforts by various segments of the community.
�- 20 -
Conclusions
BALTIMORE NEIGHBORHOODS WAS FOOlED AND HAS DEVEIDPED IN A PROFESSIONAL
MANNER.
IT HAS CARRIED OUT RESPONSIBLY ITS PROGRAM WHICll HAS BEEN GENERALLY
ACCEPTED BY THOSE SEGMENTS OF THE COMMUNI TY WORKING TO IMFROVE HOUSING
CONDI TIONS AND TO MAKE HOUSING AVAILABLE TO ALL PERSONS WITHOUT REGARD
TO RACE .
BALTIMORE NEIGHBORHOODS HAS MET WITH
S(J1E
SU::CESS IN EFFORTS TO
GAIN THE SUPPORT OF THE LOCAL REAL ESTATE AND HOHE BUILOING IlIDUSTRIES .
IT HAS BEEN Ml£H LESS EFFECTIVE IN PROIlIDING DIRECT SERVICES TO
IMPROVEMENT ASSOCIATIONS IN NEIGHBORHOODS UNDERGOING, OR ABOUT TO UNDERGO,
RACIAL CHANCE .
Findings
Formation and Structure - As described in the historical review ,
Bal timore Neighborhoods was formed as an expression of the need felt by
part of Baltimore ' s bUSiness community and several civic and improvement
associations representing areas in northwest Baltimore .
"l.
2.
jJ
Its objectives are :
To maintain the racial stability and high quality of residential
neighborhoods in the Baltimore M
etropolitan area.
To demonstrate that neighborhoods do not have to either be al1-white
or all- Negro; that another alternative - sound, stable interracia l
communities of high standards - are not only desirab l e but possi ble . \I
Untit l ed descriptive folder prepared by Baltimore Neighborhoods, Inc.
11
�- 21-
Baltimore N
eighborhoods is structured in a manner consistent with the
structure of other, similar, non-profit, charitable and educational agencies .
It has a written set of Bylaws which govern its structure and operation .
Baltimore N
eighborhoods is composed of both general (voting) and associate
(non-voting) members.
General membership is limited to organizations .
Any
organization interested in the purpose and program of Baltimore Neighborhoods
is eligible for membership.
The Bylaws
stupulate that the following shall be
general members f Citizens Planning and Housing Association, Greater Baltimore
Committee, Real Estate Board of Greater Baltimore, Chamber of Commerce of
M
etropolitan Baltimore, Inc . , M
aryland Cou:mission on Interracial Problems
and Relations, M
ayor and City Council of Baltimore, and the Baltimore
Urban League.
As of May, 1965, there were 19 organizational (general)
members :
Alameda- Harford N
eighborhood Association
Allendale-Lyndhurst Improvement Association
Ashburton Area Association
Baltimore City Council
Baltimore Ethical Society
Baltimore Urban League
Citizens Planning and Housing Association
Fairmount A
ssociation
Greater Baltimore Committee
Joint Social Order Committee of Baltimore Friends ' Meetings
Kenilworth Park Neighborhood Association
Lauraville Improvement Association
Maryland Commission on Interracial Problems and Relations
Maryland Council of Churches
Mt . Washington Improvement Association
Public Affairs Comnittee, First U
nitarian Church
Real Estate Board of Greater Balti more
Real Estate Brokers of Baltimore, Inc.
Windsor Hills A
ssociation
�- 22 -
Baltimore Neighborhoods is goverred by a lay Board of Directors.
~
The officers of the Board consist of a president, two vice presidents,
a sec r etary and a treasurer.
The officers serve one -year t erms and
vacanci e s are fil l ed by the Board of Dire ctors.
consists of 22 .rrembers (includ i ng officers).
At prese nt the Board
The Bylaws provide that
15 of the directors shall represent varirus groups or or ganizations in
the Baltimore area .
The Board of Directors is responsible fa the pro-
perty, business , and affairs of the Corporation and discharges those
duties usually assuned by such Boards.
regularly scheduled monthly meetings.
The Board had been holding
There is a small Steering Com-
mittee composed of sene members of th e Board of Directors and the
Executive Director to conside r vari Qua agency problems arising between
regular mee tings of the Board of Directors .
This Steering Committee
was for mally es t ablished by the Board in September, 1964.
In addition to tohe Board of Directors there is an Advise ry Boord
to work with ani advise the Board of Directors as Ule latter shall re quire .
M
embers ar e designated by tre organizational (general) membe r s
of Balti more Neighborhoods.
An evaluation of the composition of the Board of Di rectors and the
Advisory Board leads to tre conclusion that the agency has made an effort
to have associated with it men and women who occupy roles of l eade rship in Baltimore ' s business, r eligious and civic activities .
8/ For tre Ol r rent composition of the Board of Directors and the Advisory
- Board , see Appendi x C.
�- 2) -
Many also serve in voluntary positions with other community service
agencies and institutions.
The real estate and horne building industries
and mortgage firms are we 11 represented on the Board of Directors.
Baltimore Neighborhoods makes use of persons in the community
with backgrounds and skills in r esearch as members of a Research
Advisory Con:mittee. This Committee concerns itself with research
pr~
jects aimed at providing Baltimore Ne ighborhoods with data essential
t o its program activitites.
To conduct its operation, Baltimore N
eighborhoods has a staff
consisting of an executive director, a part time staff assistant and
a secretary.
The executive director has had substantial experience
in the fair housing field.
He has worked in various positions in this
field for almost 20 years. Prior to assuming duties with Baltimore
Neighborhoo:ls, he was .for " hree years Director of the Housing Program
t
of the Chicago Orban League.
)0 hours per week .
The staff assistant has been working about
She fomerly held research positions with both the
Baltimore Housing Authority and the National Committee on Segregation
in the Nation ' s Capital.
The agency has not developed formal, written job descriptions for
staff .
The executive director, operating under the general direction of
the Board of Directors, is responsible for the administration and
program activities of Baltimore Ne i ghborhoods .
The internal operation
of the agency is his responsibility, and with the help of the staff
assistant , he carries out the program activities already described.
The executive director supervises the other members of the staff.
�- 24 The staff assistant performs those dutie s to which she is assigned by
the executive director.
She assists the executive director in furthering
the general purpose of Baltimore Neighborhoods.
The secretary performs the usual clerical duties recessary for the
operation of the agency.
Canmunity Acceptance of Baltimore Neighborhooos I Efforts - The committee
thinks the available evidence indicates that Baltimore Neighborhoods' goals
and methods of operation have been generally accepted by those in the
community who are striving for improved housing and for equal opportunities
for all without regard. to race .
In the course of its 'WOrk the coounittee
has elicited opinions from busiress men, representatives of the religious
community, and presidents of numerous improvement associations struggling
with the problems of racially changing neighborhoods.
necessarilY endorse
eve~
\'.ihile all did not
facet of Baltimore Neighborhoods' program, it
is clear that they accept the validity of Baltimore Neighborhoods
'
goal
of stable neighborhoods and general methcrls used to achjeve that goal.
Another measure of whettE r cr not a voluntary agency I s efforts are
accepted can be found in the willingness of segments of the community to
contribute to its financial support and participate in its activities .
As
indicated above, numerous responsible groups and organizations are nembers
of Baltimore Ne ighborhoods and t he agency has been able to develop an
ever-widening base of financial support.
E8t~tCB
The Baltimore City Board. of
provided $10,000 from ite contingency fund for Ea1timore Neighbor-
hoods' operation in 1965.
The Archdiocese of Baltimore has been a contributor
�- 25 for the past two years.
In addition, during 1964, 20 individuals, 19 business
firms, and seven foundations or organizations contributed sums in excess of
$lOO.
Over $1,700 was contributed in l esser amounts, averagi ng about
$12.00 per contribution.
Nume rous formal and informal groups have sought advice and counsel
fran the Baltimore Neighborhoods ' staff on problems of neigbborhocxl racial
change and related matters.
This informational and educational service
bas been provided to P.T .A. 's, church groups , clubs, and similar groups.
Baltimore Neig:hborhoods indicates that it would like to further expand
this servide as agency resources permit.
Work with the Real Estate and Home Building Industries - Baltimore Neighborhoods has devoted much effort to gaining the support of the real estate,
home building, and mortgage industries.
Baltimore Neighborhoods states
that part of this undertaking has been accomplished formally through participation in conferences and other planned program activities.
To an even greater
extent it states that it has been done through meetings and informal discussions
with key employees of business firms .
Several accomplishments with the real estate industry are worthy of note
here .
First, Baltimore Neighborhoods was he lpful in securing passage of a
city ordinance making it illegal for real estate brokers to engage in certain
activities usually associated With bl ockbusting.
�- 26 -
Second, with the encouragement of Baltimore Neighborhoods, the Real
Estate Board ( in 15'62) appointed a special committee to study the
facts and implications of neighborhood racial change and recommend positive
action that the profession could. take to solve problems c.&used by such
change .
A resulting policy statement, adopted by the Real Estate Board, asked
members to cease the practice of identifying properties by race in classified
advertising .
Subsequently, Baltimore newspapers adopted a policy of refusing
classified advertisements on "Houses for Sale" which bore racial designations .
The statement also requested that members of the Real Estate Board not relinquish
listings in neighbor hoods beginning to undergo change and asked that buyers
be sought for properties in such areas Without regard too race, col or, or creed .
Third, as noted, the Real Estate Board is a general member of Baltimore
Neighborhoods and several real estate firms and financial institutions are
represented on Baltimore Neighborhoods' Board of Directors .
Fourth, in February,
1965,
the Real Estate Board petitioned the President
to expand the coverage of the Executive Order on Equal Opportunity in Housing to
inc lude mQl\tgages granted by Savings and Loan Associations and commercial
banks whose deposits are insured by the Fereral government.
The President of the
Real Estate Board stated this action was taken as a result of the November, 1964,
Baltimore Conference on Equal Opportunity in Housing .
Services to Neighborhood Improvement Associations _ In working to promote
orderly racial change, Baltimore Neighborhoods states that it engages in
a variety of program activities With nei ghborhood aSSOCiations.
O form of
ne
such involvement is the presentation of factual data about racial change to
concerned residents, thereby preventing the spread of rumor that can result
�- 27 -
in turmoil and i nc reased ill feelings .
In other cases, Baltimore Neighborhoods '
staff has acted in ;""1 advisory capacity on such subjects as zoning r egulations
or new and improved services sought from the loca l government .
Since the committee thinks services to neighborhood associations,
especially those in "critica l rr areas .about to undergo or already undergoing
racial change, are among the most unportant taskn to be lh.dertaken by an
agency such as Baltimore
~"':: ighbor hoodl:j,
it lias surpriised that there was not
evidence of gr eater involvement vrith improvement n.ssociations.
The committee
is cognizant of the limited res ources at Balti mor e Ne i ghborhoods' command .
It cautions that it lTould be very ea sy to e."Cpect too much of Baltimore
Ne ighborhoods in vig;·J of its small staff and the enormity df the problem with
which it must struggle.
While it must r emain conjecture, it seems likely '..
that there would be more notable results in work with improvement groups
if Baltimore Neighborhoods had available more staff service .
Despite these recognized handica ps, the committee thinks it is ilnportant
to c onsider the results of this phase of Baltimore Neighbol'hoods ' work .
There are about 150 neighborhood associations in tbe Baltilnore area,
Baltimore Neighborhoods indicates it has carried out program activities with
16 of these during the last two yea.rs . \-lith f eu excepti ons these are
groups representing nei ghborhoods i n northeast and northHest Baltimore City.
The committee spoke to representatives of, or
two-thirds of these
n5sociation~ ,
he~d
in writing from, about
M
ost of t hs associations r a ported one to
three contacts with Baltimore Nejchborhoods durine the
p~s t
two years .
These usually took the form of speeches by Baltimore Nsighborhoods ' staff
about how to achieve and
maint~in
a racially stabilized neighborhood or
meetings with the officers of associations to offer advice on handling a
�-28variety of neighborhood problems.
W
ith two exceptions, there was not evidence
of long- time, meaningful contact between Baltimore Neighborhoods and the
associations.
Several associations mentioned that they considered the
Citizens Planning am Housing Association ani the Housing Conunittee of the
Real Estate Board !'more available" to them.
It is important to note that in cases where Baltimore Neighborhoods
had provided more than minimal services, the associations were usually
satisfied with the quality, if not the quantity, of such service.
Associa -
tions were aware that the nature of this work almost always precludes
dramatic successes or overnight changes in attitude.
Two associati ons were
more lavish in their praise of Baltimore Neighborhoods and indicated a
record of more extensive contacts with that agency.
Both these organizations
and the others reporting less involvement thought Baltimore Neighborhoods'
greatest value lay in:
1) the morale value of its very existence as a
symbol that neighborhood racial stability is an achievable goal;
2) its role in helping to outlaw certain undesirable r eal estate practices.
�APPENDICES
�Appendu A-l
November 19, 1964
study Plan
Baltimore Neighborhoods, Inc.
I.
BlICqrouncl one! reaaon for study request
On Auguat
14,
1964 the Executive Director of Baltimore Neighborhoods re-
quested the lIealth and Welfare CouncH OWC} to undertake a study ot
Balt.imore Neighborhoods.
The letter of request stated thet Baltimore
Neighborhood. planned to make appl1cation for membership in the Ca.ounity
Chest in the near future.
Before submitting ita formal application, the
agenoy wanted the IIIC to oonduct a .tudy aimed at evaluating certain
aspects of BaltJ»ore Neighborhood. f purpose and progr... related to el1gibil1ty fop Comaunity Che.t meDbership.
II.
Scope of the otudy
The study 1I1ll b. concerned 1I1th three aspects of the operation of
Baltimore Neighborhoods .
First, it 1I1ll atte..pt. to define which .ervice. currently provided by
Baltimore Neighborhoodo in the Baltimore motropol1 tan area are unique one!
whieh (if any) are .imilar to tho.e being provided by other ageneie. one!
organ1aatlons in the community.
This Will include a conelderation ot any
uniquene•• in the _hod(s} employed by Baltimore Neighborhoodo in prov1d1ng ito
oem.c...
�Baltimore Neighborhoods, Inc.
liovember 19, 1964
Secmd, it will consider what effect, if any, membership in the Community
Clest might have on the current programs of Baltimore Neighborhoods ~
the methods it employs in carrying out. those programs.
The study
~11 not
attempt to deal with how the possible membership of Baltimore Neighborhoods
in the Community Chest would affect the fund-raising potential of the
•
Comnmity
Ou~st.
It will not recommend vhether the Chest should accept
Baltimore Neighborhoods to membership.
These determinatIons are the
responsibility of the Community Chest.
Third, It will evaluate the degree of responsibility employed by Baltimore
Neighborhoods in its activities and consider the acceptance of Its efforts
by various segments of the community.
Ill.
Method
A.
Personnel
1.
Study Committee - the President of the HWC will appoint a small
committee to conduct the study and submit a report of its findings
to the Board of the HWC.
This cOlll!lI ttee will be c_osed of lay
people, some of whom . have backgrounds in the field of housing
real estate.
No committee member will be a paid employee of any
public or private
civil rigtts.
01'.
agen~
working in the field of housing or
Such people will be involved as needed as con-
sultants to the committee.
2.
HWC staff - a staff member assigned by the Executive Director of
the HWC will provide staff service to the committee.
He will be
responsible for collecting background Wormation and necessary
data to be used by the cOfllDittee.
He will handle all arrangelKflts
�Baltimore Neighborhoods J Inc .
Novelliler 19, 1964
connected with committee meetings and will discharge the usual
staff services.
B.
Data to be collected
\
1.
Baltimore Neighborhoo:is - a review of the history and present
structure and operation or Baltimore Neighborhoods.
This information
will be canpiled from material supplied by Baltimore Neighborhoods.
Such mterial could include Bylaws, an information manual prepared
by the agenc7 J minutes, annual reports, and other operating and.
budget statements .
The following aspects of the agency will be
c overed:
a.
b.
purpose
d.
structure
e.
current activities and methods used to carry them out
f.
method of financing
g.
staff
h.
advisory groups and consultants used. by the agency
i.
geographic area served
j.
Client-group served
k.
2.
auspices
c.
•
history
relationship to other conmnmity agencies
am
organizations
COIlD1'IWlity agencies arxi organizations With programs arxi interests
related to Baltimore Neighborhoods--information will be obtained
from the following concerning their general purpose and current
program:
�Baltimore Neighborhoods, Inc.
lIavember 19, 1964
a.
b.
Baltimore Urban League
d.
Citizens Planning and HouSing Association
e.
•
Baltimore County League for Human Rights
c.
•
Baltimore Community Relations Commission
Commission on Interracial PrOblems and Relations (State of
Maryland)
f.
g.
3.
A representative ne ighborhood Improvement association
other organizations working primarIly in the field of civil
rights, i.e., NAACP, CeRE, GIG.
Comrmmity Chest member agencies in other cities that are working
in the fi eld of housing - a questionnaire will be designed and
sent to Community Chests and/or these Chest member agencies in
other cities.
Chest and/or agency executives will be asked to
indicate whether or not the housing agencies engage in activities
similar to those engaged in by Baltimore Neighborhoods, and, if
they do, whether, in the opinion of these executives, Chest
membership has had aqy limiting effect on their program5 and the
methods of achieving their ob j ectives .
They will also be asked
what reaction there has been to the fact of Chest membership from
various segments of the conmunity •
•
4. The Bylaws and requirements f or membership in the COlllllUlity Chest
of the Baltimore Area, Inc . will be considered in relation to the
effect meeting such requirements might have on the operating
programs of Baltimore Neighborhoods.
c.
Sequence of study activities
1.
Secure Baltimore Neighborhoods' concurrence with this Study Plan
2.
(blain approval from the HWC Agency Services Committee to undertake the study on the basis of this Study Plan
�BaltImore Neighborhoods, Inc.
lIove~ 19, 1964
3.
ClJtain HWC Board approval for the study based on - his Study Plan
t
4.
Staff compilation of necessary background material to be used by
the Study Committee
5.
AppoIntment of a Study Committee by the President of the HWC
6.
•
Meetings of the Study Committee t o consider the issues and draft
a report
7.
Action by the HWC Board on the Committee report
8.
Transmittal of the HWC approved report to the Board of Baltimore
Neighborhoods
D.
Timing
If this Study Plan is approved and the Board of the HWC author ius
the study at its December, 1964 meeting, the final report should be
completed by June, 1965 •
•
•
I
•
I
�Appendix B-1
C'ONFIDENTIAL
Health and WellareCouncil of the
Baltimore Area, Inc.
Baltimore Neighborhoods, Inc. Study
January, 1965
10 South Street
Baltimore, Maryland
21202
Survey of
Community Chests with Member Agencies Engaged in Housing Programs
•
"_un1ty "nest or
. """a
1.
Address
N_ or 1lirector
, a member-agency of your Community
it mgage in fair hwsing
please answer all of the following questlC1ls.
chest, has a UCFtA service code designation #9909 . Does
activities?
Yes
No. If~,
If ~, pleasean-swer question S.
2.
As a requirement for membership in the Conrnunity Chest, was there a basic change in
that agency's: (1) overall purpose, (2) objec tives, (3) primary activity, (4) method
of operation ?
Yes
No. If l!:.! f or any of the above, please explain the
nature of the change( s ) . -
•
3.
Do you feel that Cheat membership has limited or restricted that agency's program
or method of operatioo?
Yes
No. If ~J explain.
�B-2
4. How did other agencies and organizaticns react to the fact of Chest membership
for that type of organization?
a.
b.
O her voluntary agencies
t
c.
Governmental canmi..ssians or departments
d.
Neighborhood organizatims or associations
e.
Business organizatioos or associations
f.
•
Camnunity Chest agencies
Civil rights organizations
g.
Civic t fraternal and women I s clubs
h.
Religious, ethnic groups
1.
Polltical groups
j .
Other ccmnunity groups,
•
Specify
�B-3
5.
Are there any other agencies in your CCJ!I!IWlity engaged in fair housing activities?
Yes
No. If l!!, please indicate:
Private
Member of Chest
Agency
Address
Public
Yes
•
6.
Ccmnenta:
•
•
Please retum en8 copy to:
Research Department
Health and Welfare Council of the SLLtimore Area, Inc.
10 South Street
Baltimore, Maryland 21202
No
�Appendix C
BALTIMORE NEIGInlCllJlO(lJS, INC.
BOARD OF DIRECTCllS - 1965
•
CFFICERS
•
President - Stanley I. Panltz
Vice-President - Frank T. Gray
Vice-President - Henry G. Parks, Jr.
Secretary - Robert J. Martineau
Treasurer - Miss Catherine Byrne
Miss Catherine Byrne
Richard L. Cover
Marshall Jones
Frank A. Kaufman
Robert J. Martineau
stan lay 1. Panitz
Henry G. Parks, Jr.
Mrs. John B. Ramsay, Jr.
Donald N. Rothman
Rev. Anthony P. Dziwulski
Rev. Herbert O. Edwards
Frank T. Gray
William B. Guy, Jr.
Sidney Hollander, Jr.
Guy T. O. HolJo>day
Dr. Alfred B. Starratt
Francis N. Iglehart, Jr.
Melvin J. Sykes
Rev. James C. Thomson
Roger J. Johnson
Rev. Fred Webber
ADVISCllY BOARD
G. Cheston Carey
•
George Carroll
Alaxander S. Coohran
Dr. Leon Eisenberg
Hsnry P. Irr
Louis B. Kohn, II
Edgar A. Levi
Rabbi Morris Lieberman
Grinnell W Locke
.
December
1964
Dr. Eugene Meyer
Mrs. Mary Meyer
George R. Morris
M. Peter Moser
Francis D. Murnaghan J Jr.
Henry E. Niles
James W. Rouse
Mal Sherman
Alexander stark
Hon. Robert B. Watts
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Baltimore Neighborhoods, Inc.
Subject
The topic of the resource
Discrimination in housing
Nonprofit organizations
Citizens' associations
Baltimore Metropolitan Area (Md.)
African Americans
Housing
Baltimore (Md.)
Community organization
Reports
Correspondence
Newsletters
Description
An account of the resource
This exhibit provides an introduction to the work of Baltimore Neighborhoods, Inc. (BNI) around issues of racial integration in housing and tenants' rights from the 1950s to the 2000s.
Established in 1958, Baltimore Neighborhoods, Inc. was formed to promote an open housing market and viable integrated neighborhoods in the Baltimore area. It was established by several neighborhood associations and supported by civic organizations like the Greater Baltimore Committee. The early focus of the organization was to obtain open housing and stable neighborhoods during a period of widespread white flight and blockbusting in Baltimore City. Through education and advocacy, it sought to counter racial prejudice, to fight discrimination in the real estate industry, and to combat neighborhood deterioration resulting from segregated housing. More recently, BNI has focused on tenant-landlord relations and renters' rights.
The Baltimore Neighborhoods, Inc. (BNI) collection at the University of Baltimore consists of 22 linear inches of archival records, which are described in an online collection database. The complete collection has also been digitized at the folder level and is also available in the collection database. For this exhibit, 32 documents have been selected from the complete collection.
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
<a href="https://langsdale.ubalt.edu/special-collections/" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">Special Collections & Archives, University of Baltimore</a>
Source
A related resource from which the described resource is derived
<a href="https://archivesspace.ubalt.edu/repositories/2/resources/14" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">Baltimore Neighborhoods, Incorporated Records, UB Special Collections & Archives</a>
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
<a href="https://langsdale.ubalt.edu/special-collections/">University of Baltimore Special Collections & Archives</a>
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
circa 1958-2009
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
This material may be quoted or reproduced for personal and educational purposes without prior permission, provided appropriate credit is given. When crediting the use of portions from this site or materials within that are copyrighted by us, please use the citation: "Used with permission of the University of Baltimore Special Collections & Archvies." Any commercial use of this material is prohibited without prior permission from the Special Collections & Archives, University of Baltimore. Commercial requests for use of the images or related text must be submitted in writing to: Special Collections & Archives, University of Baltimore, H. Mebane Turner Learning Commons, 1415 Maryland Avenue, Baltimore, MD 21201
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
text/pdf
Language
A language of the resource
English
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
R0015-BNI
Date Created
Date of creation of the resource.
2019-09
Extent
The size or duration of the resource.
32 items
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Original Format
The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data
Paper
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Study of Baltimore Neighborhoods, Inc.
Description
An account of the resource
Report written by the Health and Welfare Council of the Baltimore Area, Inc.
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1965-06
Subject
The topic of the resource
Greater Baltimore Committee, Inc.
Health and Welfare Council
Discrimination in housing
Neighborhoods
Baltimore Metropolitan Area (Md.)
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Health and Welfare Council of the Baltimore Area, Inc .
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
University of Baltimore Special Collections & Archives
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
bni01.01.10a
Source
A related resource from which the described resource is derived
Baltimore Neighborhoods, Incorporated Records (R0015-BNI), series I, box 1, folder 10, Special Collections & Archives, University of Baltimore
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
Use of this digital material is governed by U.S. copyright law. The University of Baltimore Special Collections and Archives makes digital surrogates of collections accessible if they are in the public domain, the rights are owned by the University of Baltimore, the Special Collections and Archives has permission to make them accessible, or there are no known restrictions on use. Due to the nature of archival collections, rights information is not always discernible. The Special Collections and Archives is eager to hear from any rights owners wishing to provide accurate information. Upon request, material will be removed from view while a rights issue is addressed. Contact the Special Collections and Archives for more information regarding this image.
Baltimore Metropolitan Area (Md.)
Discrimination in housing
Greater Baltimore Committee
Health and Welfare Council
Inc.
Neighborhoods
-
https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/44124/archive/files/a13010e61c92ba1a77f8eba6af56caca.pdf?Expires=1712793600&Signature=P4YdNyzKyqpjh7LUsSLn4nSRg6x68Nf688UMuGzOXIYy2n6S8UZiNYTdFp4D38BzfMqAx0XU-p4Zwakl9bqmAHs9iZ663V35iwJeG5-w70IaE6Bt2CtyP7VQs4mKVi44o3i%7ERj2tSPcN9aGAblLXV7Dnw0239fw%7EVZomSnOqkTdqPFzwXuE838va1iUOP6ghOgjF67%7E%7EHWXXiGg-OaRxVrtbAcb6PP0wsGpamreb8xQyB94zuhnIZINN0Y301Z0J8xqb1gxHs8AMCae9VbJRfZ5Gb8mYPds3HnRSdinASbzvf2TUF5uAW1eo67TVs0jBUG5-UDU7bPbq0x4zUcsrag__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM
b519a0cea0deba8060dd4f85e3f6bdaa
PDF Text
Text
/
BALTIMORE NEIGHBORHOODS, INC .
32 WEST 25TH STREET
BALTIMORE , MARYLAND 21218
(2 4 3- 6007)
July 2 , 1968
PURPOSE : (A) T~ help preserve neighb~rh~~ds which are in transiti~n t~
a bi - racia l status; (B) T~ help establish an ~pen h~using market in the
metr~p~11tan Ba l tim~re
BACKGROUND :
area.
Baltim~re Neighb~rh~~ds,
Inc. was
f~rmed
in 1959 by the
Greater Baltimore C~mmittee and ~ther civic, neighborhood and re l igious
groups. On its B~ard of Directors are prominent representatives from
the religious community, labor, higher education, City go vernment, the
housing industry manufacturing, and the finance and insurance community.
UNIQUE OPPORTUNITY :
The recent passage ~f the Federal Civil Rights Act
sustaining by the Supreme C~urt ~f the Civil Rights Act
~f
~f
1968 and the
1866 has by
no means solved the open housing problem or has made the services of
ENI unnecessary. Rather tools have been provided that can help make
BNI
m~re
effective than ever
bef~re.
These
tw~
Civil Rights Bills will
need public acceptance and obedience by the housing industry.
functi~n ~f
BNI will be
t~
help in this
A major
pr~cess.
There can be wide - spread evasi ~ n, as has happened with the ~ther
Civil Rights Laws . If this sh~uld ~ccur, then we may ex pect an increase
af cynicism, bitterness and unrest within the Negr~ c~mmunity .
OPERATIONS :
A.
W~rking
t~
help stabilize r ac ially changing
can be subject ta panic
estate speculatars .
When asked
f~r
~r
unrest and
help by members
~f
a
t~
the
tr~ubled
neighb~rh~~ds - which
~perati~ns af real
neighb~rh~~d:
Church, civic, business and ne1ghb~rhaod gr~ups are
c~ntacted.
Their leaders are inv ited ta a joint meet ing to discuss the particular prablem and to determine
what course of action should be taken.
Clergymen are asked to make home visits to calm their
parishioners.
Real estate companies are asked to temporari l y cease
salic1ting and to remove signs if necessary .
H3me meetings are held throughout the area to dispel
rumors , convey fac t s and to help create a spirit of
acceptance .
Personal assistance in the form af ~upp~rt and encouragement is given to the new family. BN! works with
them until the situation normalizes.
�-2--
Areas that have required weeks
months are :
~f w~rk
within the last twel ve
Belair-Erdman; A Negr~ family m~ved in ~n July 6, 1967.
They were met with h~stilities ranging fr~m broken windows
to gun shots, abus i ve language, demonstr at ions and isolation by the general community. Clergymen made home visits,
neighborhood meetings were held and persons informed about
the facts. The police gave 24 hours protection. Members
of a loca l church social act ion committee spent many hours
with the m~ther and children while the father w~rked nights .
After many weeks of meetings, behind the scenes activ ity
and personal assistance to the family, the tensions began
to recede, people became friendly and today the situation
1s one of peace J calm and general acce ptance.
Stadium Area:
An elderly, white w~man was pressured b¥ an
selling her h~use t~ him f~r ~6,900
unscrupul~us br~ker int~
(she ~riginally asked $9 ,
000 f~r it and was t~ld that she
get what was ~ffered) . The h~use was immediately
r es~ld t~ a Negr~ family f~r $12,900.
A c~mplaint was file d
with the Real Estate C~mmission ~ f M ryland but unf~rtun.tely
a
the buyer and sel ler then backed d~wn and withdrew the complaint because ~f fear. BNI ca lled the attenti~n ~f the
SUN t~ such practices and newspaper c~ve rage was given . This
incident preCipitated a c~mmunity survey t~ determine the
am~unt ~f exp l~ itatl ~n g ~i ng ~n.
Neighb~rh~~ m etings were
e
held t~ inf~rm t he residents what t~ d~ sh~uld they be s~li
cited. Churches intensified their c~mmunity inv~lvement and
ha ve recently f~rmed a j~int cooperative parish action progr am gr~up . This gr~up . w1ll act as a c ommun1ty · watchd~g. In
addition to Bc l timore Neighborho~sl invo l vement 1n the r~ re
~o 1 ng ~ctivitic~ soce twenty-five indi vidual requests for
he lp were attended to .
was lucky
t~
Releterstown Road at Manchester : A repor t of eviction notices
to whites and increas ing rental rates for Negr~es t~uched ~ff
discussi~n (the h~lding ~f 12 parlor meetings) and resulted
in the realizati~n of the need to form a c~mmunity inprovement ass~ciati~n to protect both white and Negro residents.
The Northwest Baltimore Deve lopmen t Corp. has agreed to supply a community organizer to \,Iork full time in this area.
Other situations, not requiring as extensive aSSistance,
that were a ided in a similar manner lolithin the l ast twelve
months were located 1n Upper N-:Jrthw~od, Hunting Ridge, vlo~d
lawn, Pikesvi lle, N~rthw~od Pr~per, Kimberly, Lochearn, etc.
C~mmunities in racial transiti~n c~uld be great ly helped by
having full time c~mmunity ~rganizQtion staff available t~
the area who lo/ill help t he pe-:>ple: create a harm!lni!lus inter racial c';)mmunity, see that City services are maintained at
pr~per levels , and to see that the peop l e themselves kee p
up the neighb~rh-:>~d, etc . S';)me areas n~w ha ve such c~mmun1ty
organizati-:>n services. Other areas need help. EN! has been
�-3-
instrumental, 1n c~~perati~n with the Sch~~l ~f S~clal W~rk
~f the Uni versity ~f Maryland, in f~rmin@ an ad - hoc c~mmittee
to investigate the possibility of a comm~lty resource center
being created at the City Campus ~f the University . Dean
Thursz has submitted t~ the c~mmittee the pr~p~siti~n that
the res~urce center sh"uld include : (a) research; (b) training courses for community leaders and (c) most important a
small pool of professionals who could be assigned to troubled
communities for an extended period of time. Through BN! and
Archdiocesan initiative the Univcro1ty gracious ly r~n an eight
week pil"t leadership training c"urse f~r 40 leaders
neighb~rh~~ds in January- February 1968 .
B.
~f
tr"ubled
The establishment and servicing of fair housing councils in the
subur ban areas surrounding the City of Baltimore ;
Towson Area Fair Housing Council
Luthervi lle
Tim~nium
Fair H"using C"uncil
Loch Raven-Joppa Fair Housing Counci l
Parkville-Carney Fair
H~uslng
C~uncil
Cat"nsville Fair H"using C"uncil
(in partnership with West Baltimore Interfaith InterraCial C~.)
Dundalk Fair H"using C"uncil (actually established by
the Greater Dundalk Human Relati"ns C"mmittee but BNI
will support its activities).
The C"uncils are:
W~rklng
t~ ar~use the rellgl~us/dem~cratic c~nscience
their area as t~ the need f~r: ~pen h~using, the
bui l ding Qf mQderate c~st h~usin G , city- suburban cQ~pera
ti"n.
~f
Urging individuals tQ sell ~pen ~ccupancy, tQ list with
B Realt'Jr t'lh'J will handle 'Jpen Qccupancy listings in
gQQd faith, t'J alsQ list with BNI . C~uncil members tQur
areas with Negr" families t" help them find h"mes.
Ready t'J welcQme
Negr~
families t'J their area and tQ he l p
them adjust t" the c"mmunity.
H'Jlding various public educati~nal programs tQ gain understanding f~r Qpen hQusing and t'J clear away prejudice.
PrQgrams hnve been held on: hQW Negr'Jes are being f~rced
~ut 'Jf Baltim~re County and into Baltimore City; the
difficulties Negroes have in finding housing in BaltimQre
C"unty; the depth "r pre judice that exists in "ur s"ciety,
stere~types held by whites
and race, etc.
ab~ut
Negr~es,
property values
�-4Have called
~n
~pen h~using.
l~cal Realt~rs
S~me
174
urging them t~ stand f~r
in the suburban area
Realt~rs
the C1ty were sent a jQ1nt letter, w1th spec1discriminating practices, and were asked 85 a
see that such practices are dlsc~ntinued. On
July 2nd representatives fr~m all C~uncl1s will meet
with a c~mmittee ~f the B~ard ~f Real Estate t~ discuss
the present situatl~n, especially in light ~f the Federal
C1v11 R1ghts Laws Qf 1866 and 1968.
n~rth
~f
fics
~f
gr~up t~
The T~ws~n Area Fair H~us1n g C~unc11, earlier this year
made a c~nfr~ntat i ~n survey Qf 18 l arge apartment c~mplexes
in its area and f~und that 6 w~uld rent tQ Negroes, 5 pro bably w~uld,3 undec1ded and 4 WQuld n~t. The Dundalk
Fair Housing Council has been involved with the staff of
Fort Holabird in seeing that housing in the a rea was made
available f~r Negr~ military pers~nnel .
The
will be w~rking ~n a maj~r pr~ject ~f neighb~r
meetings in ~rder t~ try t~ reach th~se pe~ple
c~me t~ public meetings.
Y~uth gr~ups are being
and will have their ~\m pr~jects and pr~grams.
C~uncil5
h~~d
wh~
h~use
n~t
will
~rganized
A number ~f these activities have been publicized 1n the
press thus drawing general attenti~n t~ the need f~r ~pen
h~usin g in the suburbs .
The ab~ve activities have called f~r extensive services
BNI in ~rganizing the C~uncils, suggesting pr~jects and
grams and helping these be acc~mplished, etc.
C.
A Better
T~
has been undertaken :
H~u6ing Opp~rtunitie6 Pr~gram
inf~rm
Fair
the
Negr~ c~mmunity ~f
fr~m
pr~
the
w~rk
~f
the suburban
H~using C~uncils.
1nf~rm the Negr~ c~mmun1ty
C1v11 R1ghts legislat1~n .
T~
~f
1ts r1ghts under the Federal
T~ pr~vide
a listing service ~f
are available ~n an ~pen basis.
h~uses
warn of the damaging effects
pers::ms .
~f
T~
and apartments which
unscrupulous real estate
To convey technical as well as genera l
buy1ng.
inf~rmation
~n
home
To assist Negroes who feel that they are discriminated against.
An Advisory
is being created to help in the formati~n of
policy, pr~vide program suggestions and facilitate communicatl~n.
Organizations such as : the Urban League, Prince Hal l Masons,
Woman Power, Inc., Negro business, professional and church groups,
Fair Housing CounCils, etc. are beinG invited t~ have representatl~n
~n the Adv1s~ry C~unci l.
C~uncil
�- 5Pr~Jects
Underway:
A monthly publication of homes in all sections of the metropolitan area \'lhlch are available on a n:m - discrimlnatory
basis . The publicati~n is distributed t~ s~me 700 individuals
churches, fraternal gr::>ups, etc', (Such may not be necessary in
the months ahead because of recent civil rights legislation
but this remains t~ be seen) . In additi~n s~me 2500 Negr~
families were sent a notice of the listing service .
At least twenty telephone calls per day are being received
1n connecti::m \,lith the listing service Bnd h::mse seeking .
Public inf~rmati~n series: - On April 25th the first pr~gram
was held. It was attended by representatives from a broad
spectrum -=>f community groups. Entitled I1Inne r-Clty Financing,
Home Buying At Low Interest Rates ll , The pr'jgram informed
those present of existing government programs and the signi ficance ~f the recent billi::m dollar committment f::>r lnner-city
h::>me fingncing by the insurance industry . The progra m suggested
ways that Baltim~re c::>uld get its share such funds . Additional
programs are planned for the Fall .
D.
The establishment and the ' servicing ::>f the Leadership Council
F~r Fair H~using In l~aryland .
The C~uncil was f~rmed ~n April 29, 1967 t~ c~~rdinate and pr~m~te
fair housing activities ~n a Statewide basis (on the premise tha t
the Ba ltimore area needs help at the State le ve l as well as the
local level) . The Council includes 72 organizations : religi~us
denominations, human relations commissi~nsJ fair housing gr::>ups,
civi l rights groups, Leagues of Women Vo te rs$ etc .
The Council:
Has had a Conference to discuss means of implementing the
critical findings of the American Friends Service Committee
as t~ FHA and VA activities which hinder the struggle f~r
open housing .
Had an extensive discussion rlith General Ekman, former head
of the Defense Department's Prog ram on finding off-base
housing for Negro mi l itary pe rsonnel, on how the Program was
being implemented, and of the Council's concern f~r and supp~rt ~f the Pr~g ram.
M
ade plans for, and composed an instruct i::>n manual, to sustain
the State Open Housing Law in the November Referendum (now
made unnecessary by the unexpected passing of the Civil Rights
Act of 1968 and the Supreme Court deCision validatinrr the
Civil Rights Act ~f 1866) .
Met with Go vernor Agnew to urge that he take a stronger stand
f~r open housing.
�-6with the State Human Relati~ns C~mmissi~n in recruiting business, lab::>r, Federal G:lvernment witnesses, as well as
civil rights, church and housing groups to testify on behalf
of stronger open housing legislation as proposed by Senate
Bill #161 in the 1967- 68 State Legislature. The c~nduct ~f
the Hearing and prominence of witnesses received fa vorab le
editorial comment in the SUN.
W~rked
Made extensive efforts to have each member group contact
Senators and Congressmen on behalf of the recently passed
Federal Civil Rights Bill.
Kept member groups informed as to what was going on in the
fair housing field and passed on significant pieces of literature .
Future Activity:
W-:Jrking on a pr::>gram, hopefully in co::>peratlon \<l1th the Depart-
ment of Housing and Urban Devel~pment in Washlngt~n, f~r the
lmplementatiQn Qf the Federal H~using Laws in Maryland.
a prQgram with the C~mmunity Relati~ns Divisi~n
the Justice Department f~r tw~ Fall all day w~rksh~ps that
will c~ncern themselves with ways t~ strengthen ~ur State
HUman Relati~ns C~mmissl~n and ~ur l~cal C~mmissi~ns.
W~rkin g ~n
~f
Will ask f~r 8 meeting with the State Real Estate C~mmissi~n
tQ urge revisiQn ~f the Real Estate C~de Qf Ethics tQ bri~g
the C~de in line with the Civil RighmLaws ~f 1866 and 1968 .
The majQr PQrti~n Qf the wQrk
d~ne by BNI staff.
E.
The
Irvingt~n
~f
the Leadership
C~uncl1
is
Pr~ject:
In partnership with the West Baltim~re Interfaith Interracial
BNI has established the Irv1ngtQn Pr~ject. IrvinGt~n is
an Qld cQmmunity in SQuthwest Baltimore with a predQrninatly white
sectl~n,a predQminatly Negro sectiQn and a n area in transition.
C~unc1l,
House by house surveys were c~nducted 1n December 1967 - January
1968 and the foll~wing area-wide problems were determined:
H~using -
difficult
Specula tQrs are active in the area. MQrtgages are
t~ ~btain.
Rental property is neglected Qr deter-
i~rat1ng.
Crime--The incidence Qf crime is increasing.
crime is becQming m~re serious.
The type Qf
San1tation-- Public services are inadequate, especially in
the Negro area, and gross private negligence is increasing.
A seriQus rat pr~blem is developing.
�- 7Teenagers do n~t have j ~bs. Recreation facilities
are inadequate and beset with racial fricti~n .
Y~uth--
Resources-- Pr~grams needed in this area are for the most
part focused on the inner-city . The churches in the area
have, f~r the m~st part, absentee pastors and asbsentee
c~ngregations .
The older commercial section of the area
is deteriorating . The community grou ps which have developed
within the past ten years have disbanded because of repeated
failures and no successes.
Program :
Organization efforts have two goa l s :
Develo ping a leadership cadre of men who are residents, who
plan to stay in the neighborhood . and who are willing to engage in the I~ind of activity necessary to realize concrete
results .
Through this cadre , to deve lop projects which will engage a
large number of the residents in action, rather than meetln ~ s,
on
specific problems . Considerable contact was made "lith
the people of the community, leadership de ve loped and the
Irvington Neighborho~d Association was formed.
Pr"jects :
Crime- - Through repeated contacts tiith the Southwestern District
Pol ice substantial improvement in better police protection
has been realized .
Sanitation --Through repea ted contacts with the Department
of Sanitation some improvement in street cleaning has been
realized but thus far no help has been received on the r at
pr:lblem . Efforts are continuing '-lith the Sanitation Depart ment as well as t:l gain the c:loperati:ln :If the wh~le neighb~r
hO:l9 on these problems .
Jobs for Teenagers --Thirty-five teenagers were organized to
seek summer jobs. C~nsiderable c~ntact was made \,Iith employment
gr~ups
and the
Y ~ut h Opp~rtunity
Center but
t~ n~
a vail .
Efforts are continuing but the y:lung people are becoming
disillusi~ned
.
H:lusing - The object is to bring home buye rs rather than renters
into the area. Th~se who want to sell are being urged to
lis t with the h~usin g committee. The committee in tu rn is
seeking buyers from am~ng the renters in the area and among
outs ide gr~ups .
Recreati"n- - With the help
sixty
~f
neighborho~d . volunteers
St. Joseph's Monastery and
the Irvington Neighborhood
is conduc ting i ts own summer recreation program
fr~m June 25 t~ August It.
$1200 has been raised from the
community for the program.
Associati~n
�-8-
Staff and Financing:
A mature and very capable community organlzatl~n student from the
Sch~~l ~f S~cial W~rk, University ~f Maryland is d~ing his field
work in the Irvington area under the supervision of BNI and the
University. Mr. Waldman has worked on the Project on a tree
basis while in sch~~l fr~m September 1967 t~ May 31, 1968. He
will be empl~yed full time during the summer and be replaced by
an~ther student during the next sch~~l year.
$1700 ~f an $1800
summer budget has been raised (separate fr~m BNI).
F.
Literature and information center for open housing and problems
of stabilizing neighb~rh~~ds.
Over 80 different pieces ~f literature including reprints,
pamphlets and books are maintained in stock. These are distributed mainly th'rough fair housing c~unclls and neighb~r
hood groups. SChools , churches and cynagogue government
agencies, civil rights groups, and individuals are constantly
coming in f~r literature. BNI distributed t~ the Baltim~re
c~mmunity 1400 c~pies ~f the Rep~rt ~f the National Advis~ry
Commission on Civil Disorders.
with Enoch Pratt Library Film Department t~ preview
and publicize educational films in the area of human relations.
W~rk
Constantly telephoned for information on open housing)
of integration, and f~r program suggestions.
Staff has numerous speaking engagements :
and synagogues, college classes, etc.
G.
civic
gr~ups,
pr~blems
churche~
MiBcellane~us:
Sponsors a Human Relations Luncheon each month to which are
invited: civil rights pe~ple, human relations personnel,
labor representatives, GBC staff, urban affairs men of the
religious community, etc. The Lunche~ns aff~rd an ~pp~rtunity
for people primarily concerned "'ith human relati:ms to get
t~ kn~w one an~ther and t~ hear significant pe~ple speak ~ff
the-record on key issues. Guest speakers have included:
Mayor D'Alesandro; Police Commissioner Pomer leau; John Hopkins
(Baltimore Sch~~l system); General Gelst~nl Rev. William
Rutherf~rd (Sxecutive Director ~f 8:C .L. C. reo P~~I' Pe~ple"s March )
Mr. Yusef Karin~ (Ass~ciate Direct~r ~f Baltim~re CORE) .
Helped establish a l~cal chapter ~f the Panel ~f American
Women. This remarkable organization operates in more than
thirty cities and consists of panels of housewives: Negro,
white, Jewish, Catholic and Protestant who speak on religious
and racial prejudice fr~m their p~int ~f view. The l~cal
Panel has had numerous spealt:1ng engagements. BNI invited and
paid the expenses f~r the Nati~nal President ~f the Panel t~
come to Baltimore to he lo in settinG up the local Panel, helped
�I
- 9-
•
recruit local ",omen, provided literature, etc . and aids in an
inf-:Jrmal Hay when ever called up:m .
But BNI has n::> fur t her
with the Panel, which of necessity, is to be independent of any other group. By being so the Panel 1s ab l e to speak
before goups that would never invite BNI.
connectl~n
Works in various ways to make the real estate and housing industry more amenable to open occupancy .
Occasional special projects such as mediating bet\,leen Inndl::>rd
and tenants. An integrated apartment house in the Windsor Hills
area was sold. The tenants felt that the new landlord was leting the condition of the apartment house decline 1n order to
discourage present tenants, mostly white, and turn the apart ment house intQ an all Negr~ p r~ject. BN! succeeded in bringing landlQrd and tenant ass~ciati~n intQ fairly reasQnable
agreement .
G.
Staff and Funding
~f
BNI :
The challenge Qf Qpen hQusing and racially changing neighb~rhQ~s
is America' 5 mQst difficult and m~st "c~ntrQversial" s:lcial pr~blem .
Yet in spite Qf this, gr~ups such as BNI have always been grQssly
understaffed and grQssly underfinanced . The gQvernment, business,
fQundatiQns and the religl~us cQmmunity are cQncentratincr m~st 'Jf
their funds available f~r sQcial CQncerns 1nt~ the pr'Jblems Qf the
ghettQ. Yet unless SQme ettenti:ln is Biven tQ changing neighbQrh'J:>ds
and t'::> suburban attitudes" eff:>rts t;:, s;:,lve ghett::> pr'::>blems will be
great ly hindered. In the cQmlng years America will bec:lme m'::>re and
mQre a divided nati;:,n with Bl ack pe'Jple in the inner - city and white
pe'Jple in the suburbs . Surely m::>re than a small fracti~n ::>f l~ ::>f
t::>ta l s::>cial c;:,ncern m::>n cy sh~ uld be 3pe~t Qn t~e c r eati'::>n Qf an
Qpen h;:,us ing market , and up:>n stabl11zati'::>n Qf neighbQrhQQds.
The
w~rk
~f
BNI is carried
~n
primarily by
tw~
pr~fessi~nal
staff
and Qne secretary. The secretary ' s resPQns ibi11ty includes n:>t :>nly
Genera l secretarial duti es but that '::>f recepti:>n1st ( t he teleph:>ne
rings c~nstantly) and bQ::>kkeeper. This necessitates that the pr~
fes si'::>nal staff als~ d'::> SQme secretarial wQrk. The Executive Direct~r
has the majQr burden Qf fund ralsinrr . The w:>rk l:>ad Qf BN! indicates
that an additi~nal prQfes 9i'::>nal and an additlQnal secretary is a
reas~nab le gQal fQr the near future .
The 1968 budget ~f $36,000 is a minimal budget. A 1969 budget ~f
$50,000 w~uld all~w f~r a dd iti~n e~ ·stafT ~f.o pr~fessi0'nal an d a sec reta r~ an d ri sing CQst ~f QperatiQns .
This W
Quld still be a minimal
budget with a mQdest salary fQr a beginning secretary and pr::>fessi~nal
whQse experience and edu::.ati::>na l backgrQund is nQt extensive.
Every
effQrt is being made t~ c'::>ntinue a very ec~n'::>mical
Qperati~n and t~ gain as wide and diversified financial sUPPQrt base
as is PQssible. Investigati::>n is being made tQ see if Federal assist ance in s::>me f::>rm might be avai l able (but this will n~t be an easy
acc::>mplishment nnd \1111 take cQnsiderable time) .
p~ssible
�
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
Baltimore Neighborhoods, Inc.
Subject
The topic of the resource
Discrimination in housing
Nonprofit organizations
Citizens' associations
Baltimore Metropolitan Area (Md.)
African Americans
Housing
Baltimore (Md.)
Community organization
Reports
Correspondence
Newsletters
Description
An account of the resource
This exhibit provides an introduction to the work of Baltimore Neighborhoods, Inc. (BNI) around issues of racial integration in housing and tenants' rights from the 1950s to the 2000s.
Established in 1958, Baltimore Neighborhoods, Inc. was formed to promote an open housing market and viable integrated neighborhoods in the Baltimore area. It was established by several neighborhood associations and supported by civic organizations like the Greater Baltimore Committee. The early focus of the organization was to obtain open housing and stable neighborhoods during a period of widespread white flight and blockbusting in Baltimore City. Through education and advocacy, it sought to counter racial prejudice, to fight discrimination in the real estate industry, and to combat neighborhood deterioration resulting from segregated housing. More recently, BNI has focused on tenant-landlord relations and renters' rights.
The Baltimore Neighborhoods, Inc. (BNI) collection at the University of Baltimore consists of 22 linear inches of archival records, which are described in an online collection database. The complete collection has also been digitized at the folder level and is also available in the collection database. For this exhibit, 32 documents have been selected from the complete collection.
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
<a href="https://langsdale.ubalt.edu/special-collections/" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">Special Collections & Archives, University of Baltimore</a>
Source
A related resource from which the described resource is derived
<a href="https://archivesspace.ubalt.edu/repositories/2/resources/14" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">Baltimore Neighborhoods, Incorporated Records, UB Special Collections & Archives</a>
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
<a href="https://langsdale.ubalt.edu/special-collections/">University of Baltimore Special Collections & Archives</a>
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
circa 1958-2009
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
This material may be quoted or reproduced for personal and educational purposes without prior permission, provided appropriate credit is given. When crediting the use of portions from this site or materials within that are copyrighted by us, please use the citation: "Used with permission of the University of Baltimore Special Collections & Archvies." Any commercial use of this material is prohibited without prior permission from the Special Collections & Archives, University of Baltimore. Commercial requests for use of the images or related text must be submitted in writing to: Special Collections & Archives, University of Baltimore, H. Mebane Turner Learning Commons, 1415 Maryland Avenue, Baltimore, MD 21201
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
text/pdf
Language
A language of the resource
English
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
R0015-BNI
Date Created
Date of creation of the resource.
2019-09
Extent
The size or duration of the resource.
32 items
Text
A resource consisting primarily of words for reading. Examples include books, letters, dissertations, poems, newspapers, articles, archives of mailing lists. Note that facsimiles or images of texts are still of the genre Text.
Original Format
The type of object, such as painting, sculpture, paper, photo, and additional data
Paper
Dublin Core
The Dublin Core metadata element set is common to all Omeka records, including items, files, and collections. For more information see, http://dublincore.org/documents/dces/.
Title
A name given to the resource
BNI Overview
Description
An account of the resource
Organizational overview of Baltimore Neighborhoods, Inc.
Date
A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource
1968-07-02
Subject
The topic of the resource
Baltimore Metropolitan Area (Md.)
Social conditions
Discrimination in housing
Neighborhoods
Social change
Creator
An entity primarily responsible for making the resource
Baltimore Neighborhoods, Inc.
Publisher
An entity responsible for making the resource available
University of Baltimore Special Collections & Archives
Type
The nature or genre of the resource
Text
Format
The file format, physical medium, or dimensions of the resource
application/pdf
Identifier
An unambiguous reference to the resource within a given context
bni01.01.07a
Source
A related resource from which the described resource is derived
Baltimore Neighborhoods, Incorporated Records (R0015-BNI), series I, box 1, folder 7, Special Collections & Archives, University of Baltimore
Rights
Information about rights held in and over the resource
Use of this digital material is governed by U.S. copyright law. The University of Baltimore Special Collections and Archives makes digital surrogates of collections accessible if they are in the public domain, the rights are owned by the University of Baltimore, the Special Collections and Archives has permission to make them accessible, or there are no known restrictions on use. Due to the nature of archival collections, rights information is not always discernible. The Special Collections and Archives is eager to hear from any rights owners wishing to provide accurate information. Upon request, material will be removed from view while a rights issue is addressed. Contact the Special Collections and Archives for more information regarding this image.
Baltimore Metropolitan Area (Md.)
Discrimination in housing
Neighborhoods
Social change
Social conditions