1 20 6 https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/44124/archive/files/c3e5e62f3da26290da6b1b023a149d6d.pdf?Expires=1789603200&Signature=kgVs5Md%7EhnyROKLIKu8XPcwd%7EO2-Oc0bmPoWhcJWadWAotNOVEzYz3fvLMrl4KmK6JoLZVaZQvA8YCsEiNbPVr%7EpK4gICfjtQ24wh717PdeZknIev2sJCDEOL-YmlHMPCZgapHKYNHwmn18Y8CiDDcXEjWGog85uvJbGEJQFh0ZPBlORenxSZ25qwfM7x-hBmPt48Cnj3K6d94afXp76XvX44N3H0mXPWNKPzavdtcof9TrtGue1Si7G0NORmTv-aj9Sb5tZBVEpyR6k8jan8o0Zy53t1l2UfYKAPRJyXJg4hNQyzAGeqoP4yI1PmZ9l4fXyogCMbYs5SFK6HpPGZw__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM da239224119edbd75f21a9977fe6ddf5 PDF Text Text BE • Tins 13 -,aAT YCC HAIJ: - - THY 4th Ar-lEND;{i,llT TO THE CONSTII'UTION TIIGHT OY SEt,1CH AiiD S3IZI."·£ fl.t:GULVi'iill : "The rigr.t of the naople to be sPcur€, in their persons, houses , papers , and effects, against unreasonable searcnes and seizures , shall not De violated, and no '\;arrants shall i3sue out :mon probahl!" cause , supported by oatn or affirJ'lati:m, and p.qrticularly describing the place to be searched, and the p"rsons or things to be seizpa . " U11der tte County C01..ncil cf Eo.~. tinore County ?!,2T Y. - H~S;ov.ISI3ILITI'::S OF HOUSING SILL If 12. (: age 13) All inspections conducted '.Hlder the ;;.uthori ty of this Code , eY-cent those r.E;ces5ary in ~n~' E:nergency rbsultL'1g fr'cm 0r ari3ing out of any CA.:'T;33 tnat endangers or t~r.ds to e~ng()r the n:lbli: health or Gafety, shall be-made only after the Ol·:ner Of sucl~ building or str ucture or person-rn cnar e of the building or structure, or part tLereof, and the occ'lpants of such building or structure, shall nave been notified in 1Vriting at least five days in advance of the scheduled inspection . Such notice of inspection shall contain the time and date of the inspection, and shall also state briefly the general class of iteM or items to hp inspected and the reasnn for said inspection . At such r2asonable tiJr,"s as !".ay l::a necessary in an emergency resulting from or arisIng out nf AllY CAUS:; thatendiillgers or tends to enaanger the public hea~or-safety , the BUildIDg~ =ngD~ or his authOr~renres~ntatives-or assistants , UDon eY~ibiting:-the Droper ~entIalS or proof of identity, fhall havethe rifht to enter and inspectany building, structure or premise3 for themrrprSe of perrcrmin" his dilles under this Code , ::,i~!t£.~t glvj,!l.,gthe ~.!::tten nollie QI. notices reauired by tnis subsection. T!lL:l :SJ,;;S t!:at YOUR rIm", may be entered ar.d inspected (searrhed) j{C'HC'Vl' A SiAHCH ':!ARi1Arl'l. r;o YOU \'JAHT THAT? IF toT, ATTEND TP-Z PU8LIC filAR I AIG 'I' ( J 1v1 ,/S ( J N "..-. r" I _ ...... ~/ "of _/ _ P-B _t . ) COUNTY CGUIJCIL CrlA:lBER, 1)1 ..) / 4 .. . ._ COUNTY OFFIC"; EUILDIilG ~:. Ci tisens of Baltimore County, /) 7-· ~ ..... P/'v1 * -:~ 30 . Rol\] ir.', Rd _, Catonsville, ;·Id . OVER �?LEASE :'HOllE, VISIT OR \·JF.ITE Y0lJ7. COUNCILHAlJ ?ROT::STING HOUSING BILL # 12 TODAY. BALTIir.v,tE COUlITY COUNCIL Councilmanic District ilo . Telephone 1. Frederick L. DeHberry, Jr . 753 \';est iIills furkwq (,9) RI 7-8309 2. Jervis Spencer Finney Stevenson ?O . 481;-1162 LF 9- 252') 3. G. "':al tor Tyrie, Jr . 25 Thornhill aoad Lutherville VA 5-07(:9 4. Samuel A. Green, Jr . 1')23 "iinsford Road TO',]son (4) VA 5-:1244 VA 3- 8465 5. Dale Anderson 339 :linor Avenue (36) !IO 5- 6978 VA 3- 7800 6. Josenh 1.. Schield 1530'Galena Poad (?l) :m 6- 4!.t48 7. [':allace l'iilliams 2 iJeHship Road D1.lndalk (?2) AT 4- 2767 CCUlICIL:AiIIC IJI:T?ICTS OF 2ALTB!O?.E :;OiJlITY 1st CO'1l1cilmanic district comprised of 7.he 1st and 13th election districts 2nd CO'.ll1cilllwnic district comprised cf the 2nd, 3rd and 4th electicn districts 3rd Co,mcilmanic district comprised of the 5th, 6, 7, 8, & 10th election districts 4th Councilmanic district comprised of the 9th election district 5th Co'.mcilmanic district ccm?rised of the 11th and 14th election districts 6th Councilmanic district comprised of precincts 2 thru 22, and 24 thru 28 of the 15th election district 7th Counci1l'lanic district compti sed cf the 12th election distric t and precir.cts 1, 23, and 29 thru 36 rf the 15th election district. Su?ervisors of Elections of Baltimcre County VA 3- 30')0, Ext . 262 � 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 Urban Renewal Files Description An account of the resource This exhibit presents documentation related to Baltimore's urban renewal efforts during the 1960s. The files include correspondence, speeches, editorials, newsletters, flyers, and maps from Baltimore City and Baltimore County. Renewal plans for the neighborhoods of Bolton Hill and Mount Vernon are highlighted, along with responses from neighborhood residents and homeowners' associations. The complete Urban Renewal Files (URF) collection at the University of Baltimore consists of 5 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, 20 documents have been selected from the complete collection. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource <a href="http://langsdale.ubalt.edu/special-collections/" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">Special Collections &amp; Archives, University of Baltimore</a> Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived <p><a href="https://archivesspace.ubalt.edu/repositories/2/resources/111" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">Urban Renewal Files</a></p> Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available <a href="http://langsdale.ubalt.edu/special-collections/" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">University of Baltimore Special Collections &amp; Archives</a> Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1961-1965 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. 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 R0124-URF Date Created Date of creation of the resource. 2019-09 Extent The size or duration of the resource. 20 documents Subject The topic of the resource Urban renewal Maryland--Baltimore Neighborhoods Eminent domain African Americans 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 Be Alerted!! Description An account of the resource Community circular urging Baltimore County residents to vote against the urban renwal demolition bond issue in the November 1964 election Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1964 Subject The topic of the resource Homeowners Local elections Citizen participation Political participation City planning Urban renewal Baltimore County (Md.) Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Baltimore County Citizens 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 urf01.01.09c Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Urban Renewal Files, series I, box 1, folder 9, 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 County (Md.) Citizen participation City planning Homeowners Local elections Political participation Urban renewal https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/44124/archive/files/e79b312be6896986549b94160a07f926.pdf?Expires=1789603200&Signature=H3408nzIwC4wbPN4XJt5IFvVmTEpRFzcaIStxW%7EH3hY04F5F-0IqXb8ieMcGCVCABDlVzDKq5O4O0FKN9Kmy-9qX8TyTR2nLLWV2KtfCqgPxuV6lqS57uPYZBIkw4--MCGzSG8PGL4fKvfQE9ht-pxYAuhCGuCC6U%7Ez%7E1qAslDLI1ubHNsEBKBLISqHSqzLlmkigHtzm8HXJZg33x5Hx6NbpUJX7GyUIDOd9yb8HkFFlKeV%7ErzzKEB0HQe5C6lE5WTHyd9bOROiXWRjFZ4oLA15vr9oYjf-xLhDq%7ELcV9NjxpBrUwkou4uHak-%7EjC-ls5J1L4uY%7ErafnIQpwdQHDBQ__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM 00021490b270e103305960f75ce96ba8 PDF Text Text r' I~ I f BALTIMORE MOUNT ROYAL-FREMONT OFFICE URBAN RENEWAL AND HOUSING AGENCY 1313 DRUID HILL AVENUE BALTIMORE 17, MARYLAND 669-3662 June 15, 1962 To Owners of Property in the ·1600 Block of Bolton Street : The urban renewal plan for Project I of the M ount Royal-Fremont Urban Renewal Area (Ordinance 912, approved July 3, 1961) includes the requirement that all structures not to be demolished comply with the standards of the plan. Inspections for the purpose of determining needed improvements have begun in the 1600 block of Bolton Street . I~. Bernard Scherr will make the inspections with ¥~. Francis Engle making the electrical inspections. ~ . The inspectors have been directed not to discuss your property while inspecting it. However, when you get a Rehabilitation Notice, please arrange a prompt meeting so 1that the inspector can interpret the notice . The Baltimore Urban Renewal and Housing Agency hopes that you will view this as an opportunity to do more than merely comply with legal requirements applicable to housing in this urban renewal area. There are many encouraging examples of a high quality of rehabilitation in this neighborhood. We believe that the increasing demand for houses of good quality in the inner city will justify an effort by all owners in this block to achieve a high standard of rehabilitation. The plans for Mount Royal-Fremont Project I (which is bounded by Dolphin Street, McCulloh Street, Laurens Street and Park Avenue and Bolton Street) call for a net expenditure of government funds of over $8,000,000 during the next several years. While owners of 442 structures are being asked to rehabilitate or improve their properties, the City will be purchasing and clearing less desirable structures to provide land for new private hOUSing, a new school and fire house, new parks , and new stores. M embers of our Mount Royal-Fremont Office staff located at 1313 Druid Hill Avenue will be glad to help you with any problems which may arise or answer your questions about the Project I plans or the inspection program. Our phone number is 669-3662 . We look forward to your cooperation and assistance in the improvement of the Project I neighborhood . Sincerely yours, ROSS W. SANDERSON, JR. Renewal Area Director � 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 Urban Renewal Files Description An account of the resource This exhibit presents documentation related to Baltimore's urban renewal efforts during the 1960s. The files include correspondence, speeches, editorials, newsletters, flyers, and maps from Baltimore City and Baltimore County. Renewal plans for the neighborhoods of Bolton Hill and Mount Vernon are highlighted, along with responses from neighborhood residents and homeowners' associations. The complete Urban Renewal Files (URF) collection at the University of Baltimore consists of 5 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, 20 documents have been selected from the complete collection. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource <a href="http://langsdale.ubalt.edu/special-collections/" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">Special Collections &amp; Archives, University of Baltimore</a> Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived <p><a href="https://archivesspace.ubalt.edu/repositories/2/resources/111" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">Urban Renewal Files</a></p> Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available <a href="http://langsdale.ubalt.edu/special-collections/" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">University of Baltimore Special Collections &amp; Archives</a> Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1961-1965 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. 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 R0124-URF Date Created Date of creation of the resource. 2019-09 Extent The size or duration of the resource. 20 documents Subject The topic of the resource Urban renewal Maryland--Baltimore Neighborhoods Eminent domain African Americans 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 Correspondece from Ross W. Sanderson, Jr. to property owners in the 1600 block of Bolton Street Description An account of the resource BURHA Renewal Area Director, Ross Sanderson, instructs Bolton Hill homeowners about housing inspections in the Mount Royal-Fremont Urban Renewal Area Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1962-06-15 Subject The topic of the resource Homeowners Urban renewal Urban policy Building inspectors Housing rehabilitation Bolton Hill (Baltimore, Md.) Baltimore (Md.). Urban Renewal and Housing Agency Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Sanderson, Ross W., Jr. 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 urf01.01.08a Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Urban Renewal Files, series I, box 1, folder 8, 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 (Md.). Urban Renewal and Housing Agency Bolton Hill (Baltimore Building inspectors Homeowners Housing rehabilitation Md.) Urban policy Urban renewal https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/44124/archive/files/d1f0a941853417730d0ea9dbde194d74.pdf?Expires=1789603200&Signature=TI-HkdO7hnH62GQdqd0yR41gdeHllQrvaPUWQS97s9uWxHMu8VjTHgQgfhdZWzYI8gE4qC5sU0jxmgsKJSMHqN3xoPJtLs1h7sJwRJhiRFixj-FVJf0jrhG3bdU6sSHBKY3NY9Iqk5lTbO31IBgErLdj07g9RY1ukWdTeRkhRGJLXzRNAtsONI9aQNxQKIeV-srP4wBnJL3695CB0tRGqAiQroGAKlqGdX77ehscgcLKKxZlOrpcn2wugSHrrW%7ErYBMpjoC2jKzVciNKWMP3OH%7ETXWNoX7hzAlUlfaFhO1YclQO-AcS7phrdAUTkdtu9cKBWKQFp1FHcih4We3Ya7w__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM 88ddd1cb1c142bd8d21041c5bf0c6b17 PDF Text Text 711,. ;.../TTL£ SIS )c.<!..., Sac.) ery' or ,{.c,;t/£~ Ot/L.. TOfl/ .n:.-1= BURHA GO HOME! By Sally Goodspeed Bolton H111 Homeowner Homeowners Who are beIng helped by a "BIg Brother" In the shape ot the Baltimore Urban Renewal and HousIng Agency sometlmts grow restless w1thin the contlnes ot their bene!lc~nce. HOw, they begIn to wonder, and why, did we ever get so lucky? we are urged to take our doubts and our Questtons to BORHA, as the agency Is tamiliarly MONn . TO a risIng note ot querulousness In the Quest1oning, BURHA Is prepared to soothe. Your property values are rIsing, it may croon. Should the Questioning become strIdent. should the homeowner Insist that he does not want to be upgraded (upgraded to what?) and that he would be rather lett alone the way he was betore, tree to s1nk or swim, but tr •• ,. BURHA m~ apply some d1sc1pl1ne. , see here. BURHA w111 say: You asked tor 1 t. and thl s Is it. And there he has us. Because we dld. People were 11 vlng in appalllng slums close by. BURRA wanted to halt the t11ght to the suburbs; BURMA "anted to ball out the skIddIng downtown busInesses and preserve the Cl~18 core. BURHA. It we could get Its attentIon. would save our neighborhood trom encroachIng blIght. BUt. to do thIs, It had to have a law wlth teeth In it. A law wIth WhIch 1t could control the slum landlord. II. law wIth teeth 1n It. That "as the tIcket, the pOlitIcally nalve Illld the mIsguIded liberal agreed. In 1966, with City Ordinance No. OgZ, BURRA got Its la", BURRA could ~ .•. enter upon and inspect any land, buIlding ,or property~ in a renewal area "to ascertain tor 1 ts own !UnctIon and tor makIng avallable to the approprIate offIcers, departments, bureaus and agencIes ot the cl ty Information wI th respect to the existence or condItIons In any renewal area whIch are dangerous to the publIC health, morals. safety or welfare .... n BJt the problem ot the tenement or slum Is a d1ttl cult one to solve It Is tar easIer to demolIsh a slum and relocate it outside a renewal area than · it Is to cure its prOblems where 1 t stands. ThIs redistributIon ot slums could hardly be In Ule best Interests ot the cl ty or ot . the people who l1ved In them. BU1ldlngs are not the only tlling involved. people cannot be pushed around w1thout sutterlng deterloration. BUt what BURRA lacks in wisdom, It is granted in power. In a renewal area, a slum block can dIsappear lIke magIc. For it has been considered consti tutlonal since 1954 under a renewal program to condF.!mn the property ot others i t the renewal agency deems the property a slum, or that the property mIght become a slum, or it it stands in the Nay ot the ci ty planners' dream. It has been cons1dered consti tut10nal sInce 1964 tor a renewal agency to seIze prIvate property tor resale to new pr1vate owners who can use the propertIes thus acquIred tor protlt-making enterprIses. It has been consIdered const1tutlonal sInce 1069 tor a health inspector to enter a private house without a search warran t. "A strange delet10n to make from the rourth Amendment," JustIce Douglas noted In dIssent. se tar, there are no known cases of morals 1nspectlons, but BURRA 1nspectors are health inspectors, bes1des being bull dIng and tlre inspectors, and they may gaIn entrance to prIvate houses wIthout a search warrant. #IJY housIng violatlon not clearly a matter ot anything else becomes a matter ot health. verm1n, It seems, can breed behInd loose wallpaper and In cracks In plaster. Chlldren may eat scalIng paInt. NObOdy wIll get out of palnt1ng at least some portIon at the outside ot h1s bouse. The violatIon Is agaInst Onels neighbor's property values, a newly entorceable ethIc In our society. BJt then. who ever thought "eld have block organIzatIons and block captaIns desIgned to toster a spirit ot cooperatIve compliance wIth BURBA? BloCk capta1~s are apt to spen~ a lot at tIme "orry1ng about the necessll4' that no one depresses anyone elsels property values. BURHA has recen tly e:xtended a pall1atl ve In the torm or an advlso~ revIew board composed ot top otflcials In the BUreau ot BUlld1ng Inspectlon, the Health Department and BllRHA. re" homeowners "ill have the stam1na to reach this court or last resort. ttle process ot appeal. alreactY available freQUently degenerates Into a Kafkaesque e:xchange ot letters, phone calls, IntervIews and re-Inspectlons during whIch the applicatIon of common sense 1s etfectively suspended by the renewal ordinances themselves. SInce the vIolator Is appeal1ng "Ithin the same departments that are chargIng him, it wIll bardly seem worth "hUe to approaCh the advIsory board. In a recent case InvolvIng a renewal Inspector, the supreme court tended to uphold the rIght ot 'entry. One just1ce abstained. The vote was tour to tour. One tears what their next deCision w1l1 be. BURRA w1ll never voluntarily return the homeowner to that dimly remembered past When he made his own designs and decisIons. BURRA Is sure we need It. Our pOInting across the border to the tree peoples ot the rest ot the ci ty does not conv1nce it that "e could also manage independence. They. 1t 1s deep do~ sure, need it too. So, the c1ty has proposed a neN Hous1ng code. The reQu1rements are much more demand1ng than those In the renewal ord1nances. All surfaces that ever have been paInted shall be pa1nted, tor Instance. AS the new code now stands, the heads ot the BBI, the F1re and Health departments and BURHA wlll be able to make any rule or regulat10n they see tlt in order to administer the code. A majorl ty decIsIon or those tour makes the rule a tact. ADd there Is a proposed new ZonIng Code. Homeowners w1l1 be required to obtaIn certIt1cates at occupancy renewable every year. There is no end to the help the c1ty wishes to be to the c1tlzens. BJt some way must be tound to reject 1t. I t It Isn't, we w111 all be lIving 1n utter--1t tlgbt--wal1papered-demoralizatIon. � 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 Urban Renewal Files Description An account of the resource This exhibit presents documentation related to Baltimore's urban renewal efforts during the 1960s. The files include correspondence, speeches, editorials, newsletters, flyers, and maps from Baltimore City and Baltimore County. Renewal plans for the neighborhoods of Bolton Hill and Mount Vernon are highlighted, along with responses from neighborhood residents and homeowners' associations. The complete Urban Renewal Files (URF) collection at the University of Baltimore consists of 5 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, 20 documents have been selected from the complete collection. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource <a href="http://langsdale.ubalt.edu/special-collections/" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">Special Collections &amp; Archives, University of Baltimore</a> Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived <p><a href="https://archivesspace.ubalt.edu/repositories/2/resources/111" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">Urban Renewal Files</a></p> Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available <a href="http://langsdale.ubalt.edu/special-collections/" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">University of Baltimore Special Collections &amp; Archives</a> Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1961-1965 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. 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 R0124-URF Date Created Date of creation of the resource. 2019-09 Extent The size or duration of the resource. 20 documents Subject The topic of the resource Urban renewal Maryland--Baltimore Neighborhoods Eminent domain African Americans 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 BURHA Go Home! Description An account of the resource A Bolton Hill homeowner expresses frustration with the Baltimore Urban Renewal and Housing Authority's activities Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource circa 1961 Subject The topic of the resource Homeowners City planning Slums Urban renewal Urban policy Baltimore (Md.). Urban Renewal and Housing Agency Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Goodspeed, Sally 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 urf01.01.05 Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Urban Renewal Files, series I, box 1, folder 5, 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 (Md.). Urban Renewal and Housing Agency City planning Homeowners Slums Urban policy Urban renewal https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/44124/archive/files/e4df3982ea67ca3d11574d4e60bf3852.pdf?Expires=1789603200&Signature=PDSTH1ngiXLOfgC9nmSHBiXp-m-d72pdEhMeLvibbcue6rHZv6h6VEJfEns9SzQI-enbztRiL6tfLSikClB3HX%7EpcSThR8OPLH-N14Y1mQ0CN42N24T7nmJ3vEtRaPTUHbu7VaLNYVxdk41F%7EP589-vtoml9IGJPHg8oyfJW-n4ixN100F34kDVff0tHg3%7EY2UAhGChqD59Kce-J-IBg%7EQYUF-xLOJt34YR2JRjOROyapk4D1IzngQFsLCLJZusKeunxNp4Pvo0wNEjVSsj6TJkinh4%7E4mC%7E%7EWtSLY%7EfLfoQRq35eLDWAOellNESuyr3N9pnQ%7E5YgKKfRuu2jVcqJw__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM 838278a1b713af3ccca41b3917f17643 PDF Text Text EXPRESSWAY BY-PASS FOR ROSEMONT QUESTIONS AND ISSUES These questions are only a "starter". The Movement Against Destruction (M.A . D. ) is interested in findlng out what people think about the By-Pass. How do you see the situation7 i. Do you think you should be asked about what you want before somebody plans a road for your neighbors? 2 . How can this be done with you? 3 . Should this be handled by talking about the segments of the expressway on the edge of the city before talking about the parts nearer to the center of the city? 4. I f you make the present streets better (like widen and improve of them) would this take care of traffic adequately? 5. Who will use this By-Pass? being built for? Who do you think the express~ay some is 6. How will the expresswa y hurt your neighborhood? - -which homes will be destroyed? --what businesses must close down or move to another place? --what parks, playgrounds, schools and other public facilities will be destroyed? 7. How much money will there be: --for residents who must move (both homeowners and tenants)? --for businessmen and merchants? --for residents who will remain near the condemned land? 8. How does a By-Pass affect the park land up in Leakin Park or thro ugh Gwynn Falls? 9. How does any kind of By-Pass further hurt the Franklin-Mulberry Corridor? 10. W ill this whole East-West Expressway increase the traffic jams downtown and all along the way? 11. How much air pollution and "noise" }:i>llution will there be from this expressway spur and By-Pass? 12. How will this By-Pass and other construction affect the tax base in the area? Will taxes go up? IF YOU NEED MORE INFORMATION OR WANT TO MAKE YOUR VOICE HEARD CONTACT: Mr. Joe W iles 947-4039 t Rosemont Neighborhood Mr . Ed Rosemond 947-3196 J Improvement Association Mrs. Esther Redd Relocation Action Movement 233-2705 Mr. Lin Butler Movement Against Destruction 669-0077 Mr. He.ekiah Morris Western Improvement Assoc.945-3982 ~~s.Phyllis Green La Burt Improvement Association �ROSEMONT BY-PASS QUESTIONS AND ISSUES 1. Why haven't citizens participated in the planning of this Expressway Spur and By-Pass? 2. How can citizens be consulted more effectively? 3. Shouldn't public hearings be held in a different sequence so that attention is given to outer segments first before making decisions on an inner segment such as Rosemont? 4. Can't improved surface streets, possibly a boulevard system, handle the traffic adequately? 5. Exactly who will the East-West Expressway serve? 6. How will the expressway hurt the neighborhood? --which homes will be destroyed? --what businesses must re-locate, or close down? --what park land, schools, and other public facilities will be destroyed? 7. What kind of compensation will there be: --for resident who must move (both homeowners and tenants)? --for businessmen? --£or residents who will remain near the condemned land? g. How does a By. Pass affect the park land up in the Leakin Park or through Gwynns Falls? 9. Doesn't any kind of By-Pass further exploit the FrantlinMulberry Corridor? 10. W on't this expressway spur increase the traffic jams in the central business district to an impossible level? 11. How much air pollution and noise pollution will there be from t his Expressway Spur and By-Pass? 12 . Ho", will this By-Pass and accompanying construction affect the t ax base in the area? Will taxes go up? � 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 Movement Against Destruction Description An account of the resource This exhibit examines community opposition to expressway construction in Baltimore during the 1970s through the organizational records of the Movement Against Destruction (MAD). Founded in 1968 as a coalition of 25 neighborhood and community groups, MAD's leaders included George and Carolyn Tyson, Barbara Mikulski, Walter Orlinsky, Norman Reeves, and Parren Mitchell. The complete MAD collection at the University of Baltimore consists of 9 linear feet of records, which are described in an online collection database. The complete collection has also been digitized at the folder level and is available in this guide. For this exhibit, 32 documents have been selected from the complete collection. Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource <a href="http://langsdale.ubalt.edu/special-collections/" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">Special Collections &amp; 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/80" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">Movement Against Destruction Records</a> Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available <a href="http://langsdale.ubalt.edu/special-collections/" target="_blank" rel="noreferrer noopener">University of Baltimore Special Collections &amp; Archives</a> Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1968-1983 Rights Information about rights held in and over the resource Use of these images 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. 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 R0062-MAD Date Created Date of creation of the resource. 2019-09 Extent The size or duration of the resource. 32 documents Subject The topic of the resource Express highways Maryland--Baltimore Urban renewal Highway planning Community activists 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 Expressway By-Pass for Rosemont: Questions and Issues Description An account of the resource From the Rosemont Public Hearings Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1969-08 Subject The topic of the resource Express highways Highway planning Homeowners Community life Rosemont (Baltimore, Md.) Creator An entity primarily responsible for making the resource Movement Against Destruction (Organization) 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 mad06.02.06 Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Movement Against Destruction Records, series 6, box 2, folder 6, 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. Community life Express highways Highway planning Homeowners Md.) Rosemont (Baltimore https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/44124/archive/files/3efafa1e6a56dae1ca7316abcbeeafcc.pdf?Expires=1789603200&Signature=Qyjay%7EU%7Ee0Vg5sKmVgOINb1N9mr4q-cbSrMxoPFkZVnxhWMuyy0LcvTjFHaJRmqH0o3crwrs2rvcHqD0OEVgWB5Sy7CrcXdntwnZH6TGi%7EtJJ1DtYt9xHzKxHeAsvA-i-L7U4Zb6rOVxjO7O3DMAUQjsklQCqZqYDJutGkeIO-%7ErSozwbwUpEOa8fjxfrumHuCAuGRMILzPy4w-iPsV-JXCsDyq0p56ApdkE7hx%7EmmfiH5qmO-aT3Adi1wSE5xgES6b87hClt5yQu99-SJa5y66KAvNPEGY0X6Ja95rAWz2qxE5R1MdLEqAtGFAxuKfTXtHj6T4TkmkLOX6w%7Ei83fw__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM 493aeab934b2034047e83b25d73a858a PDF Text Text ASSISTED HOUSING IN BALTIMORE COUNTY PUBLI SH ED BY: Baltimore Neighborhoods, Inc. Task Force on Low and Moderate Income Housing and HUD Committee 319 East 25th Street Baltimore, MD. 21 218 January, 1981 �ASSISTED HOUSING IN BALTIMOPE COUNTY Baltimore Neighborhoods, Inc. Task Force on Low and Moderate Income Housing and HUD Committee January, 1981 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page I. Introduction and Purpose 1 II. Summary of Findings and Conclusion 1 III. Recommendations 3 IV. Programs for Direct Housing Assistance to Low and Moderate Income Persons in Baltimore County 4 V. Location of Assisted Households in Baltimore County 6 VI. Interviews and Surveys 13 A. Managers of apartment developments with at least 15 assisted tenants 13 B. Principals of elementary schools near apartrr~nt developments with at least 15 assisted tenants 14 C. Community leader~' assisted tenants 16 near apartment developments with D. Section 8 tenant surveys VII. 20 The Process by which the Section 8 Programs Operate 22 VIII. Definitions of Terms 27 IX. 30 Appendix Tabulation of Programs For Direct Housing Assista nce To Low and Mocerate Income Persons in Baltimore Count y ACKNOI>lLEDGE~ENTS The work of the Task Force depended upon the kind cooperation of the Baltimore HUD Area Office, the Maryland State Department of Economic and Community Development, the Housing Office of the Regi o ndl Planning Council, the Baltimore City and County Section 8 offices, til e Baltimore County offices of Rehabilitation and Development Coordi n atio" the school principals, community leaders and apartment managers inte r viewed, and the Section 8 tenants who completed the surveys. Gratefu l appreciation is expressed to all of them. The BNI HUD Com mittee was established in 1972 to r e vi e w HUD p r ograms and acti vities significant for open housing a nd l ow and moderate i nco me hous ing. It has been working with th e Task Fo rce on Low an d Moderat e In c o m.e Housing on this report. �BNI itself operates in the Metropolitan area. Twelve of ~ts 32 board members reside in Baltimore County. Its current pres~dent and one vice-president live in Baltimore County. Two immediate past presidents are Baltimore County residents. PREFACE Baltimore Neighborhoods believes that decent shelter is of such importance to the individual and to the nation as a whole as to warrant continued federal, stat~ and local government commitment to increase the supply, especially for low and moderate income persons. ~ The high cost of housing, and the continuing inflation, are making it more and more difficult for low and moderate income families to find decent housing and for the private sector to provide such housing. Therefore, BNI feels that government help, such as is evidenced in the various assisted housing programs mentioned herein are more needed than ever before. (More help is actually given to middle and upper income homeowners through tax relief than is spent on assisted housing.) This fact must be recognized by the federal government and by the general public. In addition, Baltimore Neighborhoods recognizes that a good suppl y ' of housing for people of all income levels is a key factor in achieving open housing. For these reasons, BNI undertook the study described in this report. �-1- I. INTRODUCTION AND PURPOSE In 1978 the BNI Long Range Planning Committee established a s a high priority the issue of low and moderate income housing, chiefly because of the great gap between supply and demand. Following the Board's acceptance of this item, the Task Force on Low and Moderate Income Housing was established. In April 1979 the Task Force and the HUD Committee jointly began meeting to study this topic. The Task Force decided to focus on Baltimore County because of its past history of resistance to low and moderate inco~e housing, with the implications o f this resistance for open housing, its relatively small supply and its geographical significance in almost entirely surrounding the ci ty which has many low and moderate income persons. Although Baltimor e County was chosen for study as the most important suburban e x amp le, the Task Force recognizes that the problem is metropolitan in s c o pe. The Task Force subdivided its study into the following goals: 1 . To find out how well the housing assistance programs are working in Baltimore County, i.e., to discover their strong and weak points. 2. To make recommendations as to ways in which these programs may be improved. 3. To provide a factual educational report for those intereste d i n knowing more about the housing assistance programs in Baltimore County, both to educate the public and to provide a resource for those who might want to apply for housing assistance. Assisted housing is defined as a public subsidy provided to assist with housing payments. Assisted programs are those which require th a t eligible households have incomes below a certain limit. Moderate income households are those with annual incomes below 80% of the medi a n in the S.M.S.A. Very low income households are those with annu a l incomes below 50% of the median in the S.M.S . A. 11. SUMt-1.ARY OF FINDINGS AND CONCLUSLON A. There is an undersupply of assisted housing in Baltimore Coun t:!. according to the Baltimore County Housing Assistance P lan. Th is undcr.supp ly is not caused by the lack of utilization of assistance p r o g rams, since Baltimore County has accepted all allocations available to it . Although there is a wide variety of programs assisting home owners and renters with payments, rehabilitation, and with oth er se r v ices , th ese programs in many cases are funded only enough to serve a f ew househo l ds each. They d o not meet existing needs and are not well understood b y the public . There is considerable community r e sista n ce to l ow a nd moderate income persons and to programs which help them. B. Assisted housing is distributed widely but unevenly throughout the urbanized parts of Bal timore County. As sis ted hous ing fo r families is almost entirely lacking in the North Central portion of t h e County. In c ontras t, the Reisterstown-Owings Mi lls and Essex-Mi ddle �- 2 - River areas show disproportionately high concentratio~s when compared with other urbanized parts of the County. However, in absolute terms, no Re gional Planning District is excessively impacted with assis ted housing. Four thousand six hundred and eighteen rental and owneroccupied households are receiving assistance. An additional 19,472 are estimated to need such assistance (1980 Housing Assistance Plan ) . The needs of about 13% o~ these are expected to be met over the next three years. C. The Task Force's survey of apartment managers of developments in which assisted tenants live indicated they are well satisfied with the programs. Paradoxically, Section 8 recipients often felt that landlords are unwilling to participate in the programs. Turnover and vacancy rates in assisted units are the same as or lower than in private units. This information contradicts the opinions expressed b y some community leaders and principals that assisted tenants are more transient than others . D. Most principals of elementary schools near apartments in which assisted tenants live report that they are unaware of which children receive housing assistance, and are therefore unable to assess their impact on the school or community. E. Community leaders near apartments havi ng assisted tenants have had favorable, unfavorable and no experience with assisted tenants. Many are unaware who are assisted tenants and who are not. Leaders reporting favorable experiences most commonly say that assisted tenants are no different from other renters. Leaders reporting unfavorable experiences most often cite destruction or neglect of property, transience, disruptive behavior and negative attitudes . The need for services and better apartment maintenance are the problems most often cited by community leaders as those which assisted tenants face. Community leaders report very few positi ve effects of the program. on the communities themselves and indeed, it wo uld be reasonable to expec t communities to view unfavorably the addition of more renters or owners, especially if they are low or moderate income. Most community leaders regard the programs as beneficial to recipients. About half of the leaders cite negative effects, the most frequent being on the schools, but also cite increased crime and general damage to the community . The programs themselves are seen by a few leaders as permitting fraud, as marked by overconcentration of assisted units , as having inadequate prior planning in regard to transportation and services, and as not providing enough assisted units. The Task Force made no attempt to verify the factual basis for the statements made b y community leaders, school principals, or apartment managers, nor does it necessarily agree with these statements. The statements are recorded here because of their significance as indicators of how the respondents view the assis tance programs. �- 3 - F. Assisted tenants have had difficulty finding housing, and are divided about equally as to whether they live in the community of their first choice or not. The most frequently cited reasons, in order of importance, for di ffic ulty in finding hous i n g are the unwillingness of landlords to participate in the program, transportation problems, and distance from services. Over one third of the assisted tenants feel they have been discriminated against in some way, most commonly merely because of their participation in a government program and by their receiving Public Assistance. Satisfaction with their present unit is high (but less so for those ten ants living in the County on City certificates). (See Section VI D for discussion of City certificate holders living in Baltimore County). The tenants feel that the move improved their housing. They check the si ze of their present unit, the lower rent paid, and the new neighborhood as the three best-liked features of their present housing. Transportation and distance from services and friends, and poor maintenance are the items they like least. They rate the Sectinn-S staff as very helpful. They regard their relations with management as good or satisfactory, and in general feel that they receive the same services from management as do non-assisted tenants. CONCLUSION In general, the ass isted housing programs (specifically, Section S and Section 236) while insufficient in number of units assisted are meeting recipients' needs for improved, affordable housing, are distributed fairly well, and are viewed as workable by management. However,community reaction is mixed between neutral and negative in terms of effect upon the community, with a very few favorable accompanying reactions. Community reaction to additional tenants would probably not be expected to be favorable. Most community leaders view the programs as beneficial to recipients. III. RECOMMENDATIONS 1. Because maintenance problems were indicated both by HUD and by a significant number of Section S tenants anc community leaders, BNI recommends that Baltimore County set up a Housing Authority or Agency and a Housing Code. A Housing Code is needed not only to protect the County's housing stock but all of Baltimore County's estimated 251,000 renters. The County is probably one of the largest jurisdictions in the United States without a Housing Code. 2. Because services and transportation to services were cited as problems for assisted tenants by many of the tenants themselves and by community leaders, BNI recommends that the Baltimore County Executive establish a Task Force consisting of the County Department of Social Services, appropriate County agencies, leaders of community organizations, and assisted tenants, to devise a plan for correcting this situation and a means for implementing the plan. �- 4 3. Because there appears t o be widespread lack of knowledge about t he housing assistance programs, BNI recommends that increas ed educat ional outreach be undertaken by the County government, HUD and other appr opriate organizations. This report is intended to help serve this purpose. The Baltimore County Community Relations Commission could playa very significant role in this endeavor, and needs to be strengthened. 4. Because there is a serious insufficiency of assisted units and certificates, BNI calls upon HUD to increase these allocations. ' 5. BNI also recommends the establishment of one or more cooperative trailer parks in Baltimore County to help meet the needs of low and moderate income owners. 6. Because the insufficiency of assisted housing may be in part related to the difficulty of getting landlords to participate in the programs, BNI recommends that the Homebuilders Association of Maryland be asked to work with Hun .to determine whether an increased outreach to potential landlords is needed and, if so, to plan such an approach . 7. Because the Regional Section 8 program is an incentive to increase choice of housing location for low and moderate income renters, BNI recommends the expansion of this program. Because certificates may not alw~ys be equally available in all jurisdictions, BNI recommends that a study be done by the Regional Planning Council to consider establishing still another Existing Section 8 program in which certificates would be usable anywhere in the Region. This program would not necessarily replace the other programs. The present Regional Section 8 program is available only to persons who indicate they they wish to move to another jurisdiction. Baltimore Neighborhoods is willing to act as a facilitato r in implementing these recommendations. IV. Programs for Direct Housing Assistance to Low and Moderate Income Persons in Baltimore County. The Task Force, realizing the lack of public awareness of various programs which address housing needs, has assembled a list of those programs which are operative in Baltimore County. (See Section IX, Appendix). Where information is available, the number of units or house holds as of April, 1980 is noted beside each program. phone nuwbe rs to call for more information are included. Summary There are Federal, State, County and private programs to assist homeowners with purchase, with rehabilitation, weatheri zation and utility cutoffs and to provide counselling. There are programs to ass ist tenants directly with rent payments, with repairs,weaL~eri­ zation, evictions, and utility cutoffs, tenant-landlord problems and to provide counselling. There are programs which directly ass ist developers so they may build units which rent f or less than they would wi thout the subsidy. �- 5 - This broad spectrum of programs is inadequate to meet t he h ous ing assistance needs of Baltimore County. The Housing Assistance P l an estimates that about 19,500 County households currently are in need of housing assistance . The needs of about 13% of these a r e e xpec ted to be met over the ne x t three years . The listing in the Appendi x is intended to serve as a referenc e fo r those persons wishing more information about the programs . Fol l owing the listing of programs are tabulations of income limits for the v arious programs and fair market rents or costs for units . Discussion The listing contains a rather large number of programs , and one might get the impression that the needs of low and mode r ate income persons are being adequately met in the County. Such a conc l u sion would be seriously in error, due to the fact that most programs are sparsely funded, with the result that in many cases only a few un its are assisted. There are several general indicators of the magnitude of t h e unmet needs. The Existing Section 8 waiting list has been recently clos e d due to the large number of applicants (about 6,000). Many as s i sted tenants surveyed reported great difficulty in finding affordabl e units. Also, an amendment to the 1980 Housing Assistance Plan h a s been r equested of HUD by the County which would allow the County to meet less th a n t he HUD-required 15% of estimated housing assistance needs. The ma in reason given for the requested amendment is the small Section 8 allo c a ti o ns which are anticipated in future years. Besides serving an educational purpose, the Task Force wished to find out whether there are any available sources of assistance which could "be used in Baltimore County and which are not now being us ed . The County recently has been declared eligible as a n En ti t leme nt County for Community Developme nt Block Grant (CDBG) funds due to the fact th a t the State Housing Authority may us e its u r b an r e n ewal power s i n Baltimore County with the consent of the local governmen t. The pos session of Entitlement status allows Baltimore Count.y to rec eive about $6 million a year instead of the previously awarded $600,000 dis cretionary f u nds . In general, CDBG funds may not be used to build assis ted hou sing . However two eligible activities which directly encourage the c o ns truction of assisted housing are to use some of the funds to buy l and and resell i t to a private developer, who could then build assisted housin g, and the CDBG funding of site improvements on land intended for as s is t e d housing . Only one Federal source of funding is not avail able in Baltimore County. This is Public Housing, wh i ch requires a loc al hou sing authority . While the County Council has the power to establish o ne, it has not done so. Fe4e r al housing policy is not to build more traditi o nal pub lic housing for famili e s . It does provide public h o using for the elderly and handicapped, as well as scattered-site housi ng , and the v acant hous i ng program. The r e are s eve r al advantages t o a loca l pub lic h ous ing authority �- 6 It could raise and receive funds, buy and sell land, and manage housing (for example, 100% Section 8 New Construction and Substantial Rehabilitation developments). It could also administer the Existing Section 8 program, now handled by the State Housing Authority which subcontracts the actual work to a real estate office in Baltimore County. Other advantages of a local housing authority are the elimination of the need for profit, and more uniform quality of management and maintenance. Wi th respect to State programs, 'Baltimore County participates in all that are available. The County provides some funds for couselling, information and referral services, and assistance with evictions and utility eutQjfs. Project "Homes" (see Appendix) provides rehabilitation assistance to older BaltimoreCou~tyresidents. The County provides no other funds for housing assistance and does not even have a housing office. It has announced its intention to provide financial incentives to developers of mixed income Section 8 housing. Some other jurisdictions have allocated local funds directly to provide housing assistance. The City has its own mortgage lending program, and other kinds of loan programs for rehabilitation. Montgomery County, using local money, in 1980 provided direct rental assistance funds and help for elderly and handicapped persons displaced by condominium conversions. The advantage of using local funds lies in greater local control in determination of use, less red tape, and more flexibility in combining with other sources of funding to meet needs not covered by other programs . v. Location of Assisted Housing This section shows locations by Regional Planning of assisted households in Baltimore County as of July, reason for presenting this information is to determine holds are well distributed, or whether they tend to be certain areas. Districts (RPD 's) 1980. The whether the house~ clustered in Fig. 1 is a map of all assisted housing in Baltimore County as of July, 1980. It includes Section 8 Existing, New Construction and Mixed Income for elderly, disabled, and handicapped households and for families, built or under construction, tabulated by Regional Planning Districts. The figures include those persons with Baltimore County Section 8 certificates, Baltimore City certificates residina in the County, and holders of Regional Section 8 certificates. Section 235 (ownership) units are shown in brackets. Those RPD's outside the Urban Rural Demarcation Line (URDL), shaded in Fig 1, should be excluded from consideration as being unlikely areas to house large numbers of assisted persons. The relatively urbanized RPD's are by no means evenly occupied by assisted households, Of the 22 RPD's inside the URDL , the mean number of assi sted households is 219. Five RPD's have more than twice the mean and 13 have less than one-half the mean number of assisted units. Assisted households are relatively �- 7 - concentrated in Essex, Lansdowne, Middle River, Reisterstown and Towson. The Reisterstown-Owings Mills RPD has by far the highest concentration. A great number of units in these RPD's are Section 236 , not Section 8. The legend accompanying Fig 1 shows that most of the Towson units are for elderly persons and homeowners, about half for elderly and ' half for families in Essex, mostly for families and homeowners in Lansdowne, mostly for families in Middle River, and almost entirely for families in Reisterstown . Measures are needed to create a more even . distribution, especially for rental families, in Baltimore County.. The greatest concern expressed publicly is usually fear of overconcentration of assisted units for families. It should be noted that even in the areas of greatest concentration in Baltimore County, the proportion of assisted units for families to all units is relatively small in all Regional Planning Districts. The current Baltimore County Housing Assistance Plan officially prepared for adoption in Decembe r, 1980, includes a tabulation of the assisted units for families as a percentage of all units for each RPD in Baltimore County. These figures were used to define areas where no additional family assisted housing should go until assisted housing increased in other RPD 's. FOr the 22 RPD's inside the URDL, these percentages, as of July, 1980 are shown in TABLE 1. Relative to other County RPD's, Reisterstown-Owings Mills and Middle River are overly concentrated. This imbalance should be corrected as much as possible, so that no community sees itse lf as without assisted housing. within each RPD there may be areas of even greater concentration. But these figures show that no large areas in Bal timore County can be considered in absoIUte terms to be impacted with assisted housing. Of the 243,254 total housing units in Baltimore County , excluding vacant, deteriorated and summer units, 2,857 were assisted family units and 1,761 were ass isted elderly, disabled and handicapped units. The HAP estimates 19,472 households in need of assistance, which is 8% of the total year-round units. Therefore, 24,090 or 9 . 9% of all households are receiving assistance or are in need of assistance . From a practical standpoint, it is reasonable to expect that assisted tenants will be more numerous in RPD's that have relatively greater numbers of renta l units. However, investigation did not bear this out. Census data for 1980 were provided by the Baltimore County Office of Planning for County RPD's showing total occupied units. The 1979 Baltimore County Population Report gives the number of owner-occupied and the number of rental units in each RPD. The percent of rental units in 1979 has been applied by the Task Force to the 1980 Census figures to obtain an estimate of the 1980 number of rental units in each RPD. ('rABLE ..:) Column B gives these figures and column C shows the assisted family units as a percent of all rental units. Column D shows ranks in terms of absolute number of rental units, and column E ranks RPD's in terms of percent of assisted family units as percent of all rental units. �- 8 Fig. 1 . Location or assisted housing in Bal t i more County built or under construction as o r July, 1980 x I~oo~~xx~oo~~xx~oo~x .~ooxx~~~oo~~~xx xxx Figures include Existing Section 8 certiricate holders rrom both the County, Baltimore Ci ty, and the Region, Section 236 ror ramilies the elderly, disabled and handicapped , Section 8 New Construction ror ramilies. Figures are units. Section 235 . units (home ownership) are in brackets. l>ooaOC){xXJ<:\Cross hatched areas are X;~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ _ outside the Urban Rural Demarcation "Line. OVERL£A ," DUNDAL.;K. +.... ; _ BALTIMORE C\lllNTY OFFICE or PLA N N~N~ AND ZONING �- 9 - Legend to Accompany Fig. 1. Regional Planning District !RPD) Communit;t: Name No. Assisted Units for Elderly, dis abled & handicapped No. Assisted Units for Families Total Assisted Units 192 0 174 1 426 19 0 24 0 407 211 0 1 98 1 833 Fork Fowblesburg Harrisonville Hereford Jacksonville 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 0 2 0 0 1 0 3 0 *318 325 319 308 327 Kingsville Lansdowne Lochearn Lu therville Middle River 0 10 58 1 77 0 302 30 1 503 *302 330 320 316 317 Mt. Carmel Northpoint Overlea Parkville Perry Hall 1 14 0 7 3 1 6 16 35 32 2 20 16 42 35 Pikesville Randallstown Reisterstown Rosedale Ro ssvil l e 9 23 43 4 3 1 34 1100 0 44 10 57 1143 4 47 U U C 0 105 409 20 180 0 41 20 39 199 1 761 2857 324 *307 329 331 328 Catonsville Chestnut Ridge Dundalk Edgemere Essex *310 *303 *311 *301 *305 313 312 306 326 321 3 14 *304 309 315 322 323 liux Lun Sparks Timonium Towson Windlass Woodlawn Totals 0 312 + 143 Sec. 2 35 88 2 580 0 146 429 + 63 Sec. 235 59 379 46 1 8 + 206 Sec. 235 * indicates that these RPD's are outside of the Urban Rural Demarcation Line. Figures are as of July, 1980. Of the total family assisted units in 198O,2367were Sec . 236 developments. Some Sec. 236 tenants also receive Section 8, Rent Supplement, or Rental Assistance payments, (239) . In such cases the units are counted only once. �- 10 - TABLE I ASSISTED FAMILY UNITS AS PERCENTAGES OF ALL UNITS AND OF ALL RENTAL UNITS IN REGIONAL PLANNING DISTRICTS Assisted Family Units as % of all Units in RPD* Total No. of Rental Units in RPD est. 1980** Assist~d Ranks of Ranks of Family Units RPD in RPD in as % of all re total re % o f all ren t Rental Units Rental in RPD 1980* Units al units 1980 assiste.d No. -1L 1 980 RPD Communit:;t: 306 327 325 323 328 Reisterstown Middle River Lansdowne Woodlawn Essex 9.36% 5.99 2.22 1.75 2.44 6356 4028 5426 4123 8909 1100 503 302 199 407 321 322 317 312 320 Rossville Windlass Perry Hall Randallstown Overlea 1.14 0.75 0.35 0.36 0.27 2384 2160 1912 3121 1931 316 309 324 329 319 Parkville Timonium Catonsville Dundalk Lochearn 0.26 0.41 0.18 0.15 0.15 315 330 308 313 314 Towson Northpoint Lu therville Pikesville Ruxton 0.08 0.06 0.01 0 0 326 331 Rosedale Ed gemere totals 0 0 17.00% 12.50 5.60 4.80 4.60 5 11 6 10 2 44 39 32 34 16 1.80 1.80 1.70 1.00 0.80 15 16 18 13 17 4550 6583 3337 5264 8333 35 41 19 24 30 0.70 0.62 0.60 0.50 0.40 9 4 11 12 ).2 13 8 3 14 15 10993 3055 1020 5276 727 20 6 1 1 0.20 0.20 0 0 0 1 14 19 7 21 16.5 16.5 20 20 20 398 853 0 0 22 20 20 90739 2853 0 0 0 20 Please' note that these are family assisted units, and do not include units for the elderly, or disabled and handicapped persons. *Baltimore County Housing Assistance Plan, draft October, 1980 . **1980 Census data provided by Baltimore County Office of Plapning. Except for the RPD's with the fewest ren tal units, there is Ii ttle relationship between the number of rental units and percent of units for family assistance. For example, RPD 306 , Reisterstown, which h~s 17% of its rental units assisted for families, ranks 5 in number of rental units, while RPD 315, Towson, which has only 0.2% of its rental units assisted for families, ranks 1 in number of rental units. It is clear that there needs to be a more proportionate djstribution of assisted units in terms of total rental units. 1 2 3 4 5 6 .5 6 .5 8 9 10 �~ 11 - There are a number of possible reasons for the discr~pancy petw;en units and number of rental units i n some RPp '~ . It of this report to do a study to dete rmine the relative importance of all of these factors. However, in an effort to d~rect future wprk, brief interviews were conducted with the HUD Econo~ist, the Directpr of the County Section 8 office , and the Executive Director of the Homebuilders Association of Maryland, all of whom are obviously very Well informed about assisted housing and the rental situation in Balt~more GQunty. They were simply asked what, in their opinion, were the re~sons tOt the discrepancy. p~rcent of assisted i~ beyond the scope From these interviews several factors which might be ipentified. resppnsi~le ~ere 1. High rental vacancy rates in some RPD's (such as Es~ex a~d ~idple River) would tend to make landlords mo re interested in particip~tin g in the program. 2. RPD's which had developable land when the Sec. 236 progr~ flour~shed in the early 1970's (such as Reis terstown-Owings Mills and Essex-M~dcle R~vef~ became the sites for these developments. In contrast, Towson apd Dpndalk, for example, had little suitable developable land, being well puilt-up. 3. High land costs, as in Towson, for example, would also. work locating Sec. 236 developments · there. ~g~~nat 4.. Rents exceed the HUD Fair Market Rents i n some areas, eQP~qia~lY, fOr exampie, in Cockeysville , even with the FMR increase recently, gr ~ nted by HUD to North Baltimore County. 5. Low density zoning in some areas constitute an obstacle to Section 9 New Construction and Section 236. 6. In some RPD's, such as Dundalk, although there are a fairly large number of rental units, many o f these are located in individual hpmes. Tpere are few apartment developments. Tenants in the individual ~ome~ do not tend to move very often. 7. Unwillingness of landlords to participate in the prpgram is a factor very diffi cult to assess. This item wa s no t men t ione d by the HUD Economist . It is included here because it was checked by a substantial p~oportiQn of Section 8 tenants surveyed as being an obstacle to findin9 hQ~sing. It was the opinion of the County Section 8 Dire ctor that there was reluctqnce to participate early in the program. This reluctance has now been lar9~ly overcome, at least among managers of the larger apartment developm~nts. Currently the only important reason for lack of participation by mangers qf developments is due to their units being priced above the Fair ~arket Renta. The Director believes that the 93 manage rs of developments currenuly (Dec~ ~er, 1980) participating in the progr am represent virtually ' 411 of th ose w~th units at or below the FMR's. The of fi c e i s making 0~trea6h efforts to continue to recruit the smaller landl ords into the program ; 'The section 8 office advises prospective tenants to go in person rat~~r th~n simply to ask over the phone whether an apartment accepts Section 8 tenants. The Task Force is unable to resolve without e xtensive study the cQn~ flict between recipie nts' opinions th at l andlords are u~will~ng to parti~ cipate with the statement of the County Di r ect or that al~ ellgible land~ lords, at least of larger comp l exes , are i n fact now participating. , �... ~2 - References for Section IV and V . • . \' \ \. 1. Baltimore County Housing Assistance Plan, 1980, dfaft. 2'. A L:j.stinq of Low and Moderate Income Housin Reg~on, Reg~ona P ann~ng Counc~l,Jan., 8 3. Proqrams of HUD, U.S. Depar'tment of Housing and Urbil.n Development, May, 1978. 4. House Hunters Handbook, Baltimore Plan for Affirmative Marketi~ . in Real Estate, Dec., 1979 (available at Balti~ore Neighborhoods) · 5. Housing Programs that Work, Community DeveloPlllent Admil'\istrat~on Annual Report, 1978-79, Maryland Department of Econpmic anq Community Development. 6, and Services Available to t~more County Development Coor ;in the Baltimore 7. Self Help Guide: Information and Referral List, Baltimpre County Commission for Women, 1978. 8. Baltimore County Energ~ Programs, Baltimore County Departmen~s of Social Services, Ag~ng and the Human Resour~es Developm~nt Agency of Baltimore County, 1979. 9. , Human Res~urces Development Agency of Baltimore Gounty brochure of programs and Housing Report, 1979. 10. Federal Register (FR), October 12, 1979. �- u VI. _ Interviews a nd Surveys The Task Force decided that the most direct way to find out how well the assisted housing programs were working was to i~terview five groups of people who are involved with these programs. Three grqups are directly involved: managers of apartments in which assi$ted tena~ts . live; Section 8 tenants themselves; and officials of the Bal~imore Area HUD office. Two other groups are indirectly involved; principals of eleme~tary schools near apartments with assisted tenant$; and community leaders, ,c lergy, and PTA presidents living near these apartments. A. Interviews of Managers Managers of 13 apartments were ~n t erviewed either face-to-f~ce, by telephone" or by mail, if they p r efer red. All apar~ent developments ' wh~ch were chosen had at least 15 secti on 8 tenants who had been living there a minimum of eight months at the time of the interviews. two apartments were under the Section 236 mode rate income progrqm, w~th some of their ,tenants receiving rental assistance in addition to the benefit of the Section 236 subsidy, or who were rece~ving Section 8 in the private units not under the Sect ion 236 subsidy. Results : Fig 2 shows the location of the apartments with the letter "M" denoting specific apartment man agers. The results of the interviews are summarized below. 1. Assisted tenants constitute a smalle r percentage of all tenants than the" HUD guidelines permit. The percentage of assisted units in <\11, 13 .developments ranged from 3% t o 18 % with a median of 8%. The two section 236 apartments had 33 % a nd 8 3% of their units assisted. , 2 • . Seven managers r eported Section 8 tenants to be scattertTd throughout their developments. The managers of the two Secti,on 23~ devlillopl\lepts reported clustering of assisted tenants, which is mandateq by the program. One other manage r reported clus tering, a nd three did not knQw . 3. Turnover amo ng as s isted tenants is estimated t o be e qual to or less than ' turnove r i n private un its in the s ame deve lopll)e nt. Estimated ~edian percent tur nover for Se cti o n 8 and RAr (Rental ,Assistance Program) was 5% (range near 0 t o 40 %) . Estimated ' med i an pe r cent turnover f or conve ntiona l units was 10% (r ange near P t o 57 % . ) 4 . .Vacancy rates were reported to b e ver y l ow (between 0 and l % ) for Section , S a.nd RAP and b e t ween 1% and 2% fo r conventional units. 5. Secti on 8 tenants are most often obtained by Baltimore County and Baltimore City. referra~s from 6. Managers overwhelmi ngly regard assisted programs favorably. Th~ most common l y reported pos iti ve feature s were th a t the prog~am helps people and t he opportunity it provides t o ma nagement for tenqpt selectiop. �_ 14 _ 7. When asked to identify negative features, four manage~s felt that",the programs had no negative features, three said ass~!/ted tenant,/! sometimes cause problems, two thought the programs should not help able-bodie.d people, one would like higher rents, one objected to the inability to raise rents for one year, and one complained of the lack of management opportunity to screen tenants, this last statement be~pg contradictory to the views expressed by some other managers. B. When asked to suggest improvements, seven managers fett the programs need ' no improvements, two felt the programs should not help able-bodied people, one thought the Sec. 236 paper work shou14 be simplified, one thought more money should be put into the prpgrams to cut the waiting list, and one thought more cooperation from the Coun~y Section B office was needed in screening tenants. 9. Eight of the managers thought assisted tenants were sati~fied and the others had no idea about tenant satisfaction 9r did not answer, 10. Managers' assessments of community reactions to assisted tenant;l!l ranged widely from one favorable, four neutral (or no problems), two negatives, and six who did not know or did not answer. B. Interviews 'of Principals of Elementary Schools Near Apartments With Assisted Tenants Fourteen principals of elementary schools near apartments with assisted tenants were interviewed by telephone. Fig.2 shpws ~e 10catiQn of these schools, with principals' locations desgnated bf "P". The most important findings are summarized below. The ~ripc~palF. were asked open-ended questions about their experiences w~th assiste~ tenants, what impact assisted tenants had upon their school or community, ,!nd ,' how . assisted tenants differed from other renters. They w~re als9 aSKed to indicate what they thought were the most positiv~ anp n~gat;':lfe features of the housing assistance program and to suggest so~utions to any problems they had mentioned. The most outstanding findin g was th a t almost; all principals stated that they had no idea who among their pupils received housing assistance (12 principals). They were therefore unable to indicate any differenp~s between these children and others or to describe any impact of ~ss~sted tenants. Comments were made by several principals to the effect that low income families in general tended to have more problems than others. Most of the principals (10) had nothing to say about the pqsitive or negative features of the assistance programs. The others made comment~ about the , assistance programs meeting human needs, providtng a more pleasant environment or providing a suburban environment to a wider economic range of people. The few who pointed to negative fea~4fes referred to assisted families as having more problems, being more trallsi, ef\t;~ and to the programs as not addressing the persons' total need, as nee~ing checks for fraud, and as being insufficiently integrated. �Fig. 2 Location of apartment manage rs, elementary school principals and community leaders interviewed managers (13) principals (~4) community leaders (31) m: p: c: xxx BAl.TIMORE COIlNTlr r;r-n'::E - 15 - Of RPD's outs~de of the Urban Rural Demarca tion Line Pi.AHNIN\, .\NI! ZONINC �- 16 - Since s o few responde~t s had any negative comments, most ma~e n~ repl ies when asked fo r solutions (11 principals) . Solut ~ ons s~ggeste~ by t he others, even though few, were important for ~e Task Force's pur poses, and are consistent with many of the suggestions made by commun ity leaders, des c ribed in the next section. These sugges~ion~ were : a social worker near apartments with assisted ~enantp; ~amily couns e lling; an insti tuti.onal o utreach to low inoome persons to help them become contributing members of society; and avoiding very ~igr concentrations of assisted fami lies. . Of the comments not made in response to particular questions, several contained val uable suggestions for improving the assist~nc~ pro~ grams' functioning. These were : schools in such flreas should h elVe more resources availabl e t han schools in more affluent are as with consequently fewer pupils needing additional services; assistep fami1ies l i ving in one very large isolated development have many prOQlems I scl'\601s are trying to cope with some of the assisted children's prob~ems Py recreation and Scouting programs; it is possible to have the ~inq of relationship with t he management of apartments to anticipate school popUlation changes accurately . A few comments were made that the community has been open to the "new comers," that children get along well riding the bu,?es, Gino. that th e re was a strong integrated PTA in a predominantly white area. C. Interviews with Community Leaders Near Apartments with Assisted '/ i Tenants Thirty-one community leaders, including two clergr, 14 PT~ pre~i~ dents, 9 presidents or pas t presidents of community associations, apd three persons heading s pecial social interest groups (BaltimoFe poun~y Tenants Association, Human Resources Development Agency, DUPQalk ~AACP) were . interviewed, using an open ended interview, by seven Task Forc~ members . Four res pondents were Bla ck. The RPD's in which the respondents live are: '32 5 (Lans downe ) 2 328 (Ess ex) 3 316 (Parkville) 2 2 320 (Ove r lea ) 3 329 (Dundalk ) 32.1 (Middle River ) 4 315 (Towson) 3 See .Fl.g 2 for map locations in which "Cit 321 324 330 319 322 306 (Rossville) (Catonsville ) (Northpoint) (Lochearn) (Windlass) (Reisterstown) de notes community 2 2 1 2 2 3 ~~pd~rs. The rep lies we re class ified into f our admittfildly somewhat over-;lapping catego ries . 1. Comme n ts about ass is ted t enants themselves, positive app neg~ti¥el �- 17 _ 2. Comments about their i mpact on the community, school or congregation; 3. Positive or ne gative comments about the programs; ~ousing ' a~5i~tan~e 4. Proposed solutions t o any ne gative features mentionep. lao Comments about assisted tenants: positive or neut+a~ Twenty-five respondents reported ei~er som~ ~avqrable ex~ periences, no experience, or saw no differenc ~ betw~en as s isted tenants and non-assisted tenants. Ten leaders reported generally favorable experiepqes wi t 9 assisted tenants, or made specific favorqble ~~mmen~s, su~r as: good behavior of tenants apd chi~dren; ha~ relatfves benefitting from the program; housing lookS, the ~ame, il!iststep tenants more involved in PTA, Scouts or chuJ;ch a9t~vi ti~i>. Six of the respondents in this group alsq sa~d they saw ~o difference between assisted and unassisted te~ants ! E~g~t other leaders perceived no difference between as!i~sted and. non-assisted tenants, or did not know who is aSllistep and wpo is not, but two of these added the comme~t ~h~t ~ey ~ave n~ e xperience with assiste d t e nants. Seven othe~ lead~rs simply said th ey h ave h a d no experience with as~isted tenant!!. lb. Comments about ass i sted tenants: negative ~~ prob~emm~t~cal Some of the respondents making positive or pelltraJ,. comments also made nega t i ve or p r obl emmatical one~, Six resj?Qndentll made only negat ive comment s. ' The most often made comments dealt with assisted ten~nts being perceived pS destruct ive of p r operty (7) or a~ beinS tran~~ent ( 9). Five respondents thought ass is ted j:;enants h ad fl qrej\t.er need for se r vices or transportation to servi ces . 5i>\ refe n;ed to negative .at ti t udes on the part of assi sted t e fl i:'\ n ts or t o di!l, ruptive behavio r . Three respondent R said a Ssis~ed t ~n a nt6 face ma intenance or landlord prob lems. A number of miscellaneous coroments '\-Tere made ~ a.ch P¥ Olle r espondent. Six of thes e refe rred to problem!! e xp~~ien~~d b y. ch'ildr e n . �-, 18 _ 2a. Impact on community, school or congregation: neutral f pc;>sitive 011 , , ' Eleven respondents reported that there was no effect or no negative effect either on the community or the sehooi. Three others reported 'that they did not know whether thelie h~d been any effect due to assisted tenants . .There were very few reports of a positive effect. Four ref3~ pondents said the presence of assisted tenants had helped to get Title I programs in the schools. One person commented that the assistance program probably held down the crime rate. Another person said that people already in the community ~r~ receiving housing assistance, and this same person describe9 community efforts to help burned-out familie~ in an assisted development and other kinds of community help. 2b. Impact on community, school or congregation: negqt~v~ A total of 16 respondents cited one pr more negative eff~cts. , The most frequently cited negative effect related to sch~ol~. Nine r~spondents reported such items as 10werin9 the quality ' of the schools or level of pupil performanc~, an extra dr~~n on school services, high pupil turnover, other parents putting their children in parochial schools, discipline prpplems and vandalism, curtailment of extra curricular activities because assisted children cannot afford them, and fights or int:j.midatioJl. General negative community effects w~re meqtioneq by fou~ respondents who used such words as degraded, stigmatized, or bringing in lower elements . . Some responqents were more specific in their cit!i~iops of n!lga~ tive effects on the community. Four referred to an :j.n~rea~~ in .crime or .to fear of crime. Three persons cited Proble~s with unsupervised children, or assisted childr~n being p~ a different background from the others. A number of other Jlega~ tive impacts were cited, each by one or twa respondents, and these comments do not fall into a few categories . . In sum,. the respondents were clearly split between those who cited one or more negative effects (about half), a~d the othen~ . half of whom saW' no negative impact on the ,coll'~ul1ity pr !!chool, or who did not know whether there was an impact! or who cited positive enfects. Since this last group is very few in number (four), one conclusion is that community leaders se'e very fev, posi tive effects on their communities attributable to assisted tenants. This conclusion is further substantiat1~ by the aJlsw~r~ asking for positive and negative features pf th!l as~is~anp~ programs themselves. Very few persons saw posit;ive ~ea'jn~+e!> related to the community, but many saw ben~f~ts to recipiehts (see section 3a). �I 1,9 I It is probably not reasonable to expect that a comm¥nity ~ould view favorably the addition of many people, especially if they had low or moderate incomes. On the other hand, almost half o~ the respondents identified no negative effects, general or specific. 3a .. Comments about tl).e housing assistance, program: posit~ve Twenty-one community leaders made v arious kinds of positive statements about the programs. Most of these statements referred to benefits to the recipients. Only two of these comment? referred to benefits to others besides the recipients. The othe~ ten respondents did not know whether there were any good features or ~id not· answer. Two stated there were no goOd feature? 3b.. Comments about the housing assistance , program: ~egative Eight respondents either said there were no negative aspects \ fha~ th,e y did not know whether there were any negativ~ aspects ( or did not answer .t he question. I The other 23 respondents ' made one or more negative commepts. ,of these 23 also made positive comments. Some, . There were a number of miscellaneous negative co~ents ma~~ op+y once. However, some common themes were apparent ~n s F~dy ~ng the ,replies, with the first item being mentioned more often tpan any of the 'others; - fraud or misuse of funds, either by the tenant or management - overconcentration of assisted ho using and lack ofi prior plarining for support services; - in adequat~ supply of units; - inadequate screening of tenants by manag~ment; - the program may discourage independence on the part of r ecipients; lack of a ccurate and updated information on where <;lssisted housing is located. 4 . Propos ed solutions Among the most important aspects of the community ~eader int~rv~ew~ from th e Task Force's perspective were the suggest~on~ m~de for improving the programs and dealing with problems. Eighte e n respondents made one or more suggestions cpvering a wide range of topics, which are grouped into several ca~ egqr~es . Providing services to recipients Such items as social ~ervice~, f local social service center, transportation, recreation, couhselling, consideri ng re cip ients' preferences for location, smaller clas$e~ and mor e teachers i n schools, control o~ vandalism, a nd g~idance ' regarding person al mainte nance were specifica lly mentioned . �_ ;10 _ Increasin reci ients' involvement in the commu~it and edu~a~in t e commun~ty. T ese poss~b~ ~t~es ~nclu e ~nvb vement ~n PT~'s, churches, community associations, and recreatio~ programs. Assurin'i' that assisted tenants should be scattered, not clustered .· One add~tiona l respondent felt that the idea of scatter should be ', re-evaluated since it breaks up Black communities, and qlso felt more assisted housing should be built closer to t~e City for the same reason . Providin better h sical maintenance of buildin s and communities, or a ous~ng code. the HUD rograms in th~ fallowin Closer a ercnce to gu~ e 1nes no further specification, but the statement was made in a context o~ fraud); better monitoring to insure income eligibilitl of recipients; better planning to avoid placing an assisted proje,ot in a 'comfortable" are·a causing it to go downhill; keeping flux of assisted tenants manageable; better screening of tenants; continuing ~unds to recipient~ for a longer period to help them become self sufficient; building housing for middle income families, especially young fam~lies; hiring tenants to help bui:!.d their own uni ts ~lhich they would then live in at a very low rent; the County itself buildi~g Ipw in~ome ho~sing. VI. D. SURVEY OF SECTION 8 TENANTS LIVING IN BALTIMORE COUNTY One of the most important aspects of the review of housing assistance in Baltimore County is an evaluation of the experienc~s of assis5ed tenants. Through the cooperation of the staff of the Regional Plan~ing Council's Regional Section 8 program, surveys returned by 49 tenantp by April 21, 1980 were analyzed. Using the same form with the add~tion of two questions and the deletion of part of one question, surveys were subsequently sent to 186 Section 8 tenants housed in Baltimore County using City certi ficates (surveys mailed in June and July 1980) supporte~ by a letter from the City's Housing Commissioner. Surve¥s were al~o ~ent to 137 tenants in Baltimore County under the County's ~ocal section 8 program with a supporting letter trom the County's Sect, 9n ~ office (surveys mailed June and July, t9 80) . Replies we re received from a total of 224 people . . The surveys were not al'.onymous (althol,lgh ~onfid!'ln.., tiality was assured) because RPC had wanted to know of any problems which were reported by particular tenan ts. The percentage of returns was fairl y high, being 49% for City certificate .holders, 61% for County Certi ficate holders, and 66% for Regional certificate holders. Detailed tabulations are available upon request supporting the following summary of results of these surveys. , �- 21 - 1. Tenan ts i n all thre e subgroups tend to be distr ib u ted wi de l Y through out th e urb a ni zed are a s of the County. However, five z i p code areas c ontained 55 % of ~e tenants surveyed. The zip code are as of g rea test concentrat i on are 21207 (Lochearn) , 21220 (Middle River ) , 2 1117 (OWing s M ills), 21221 (Es s ex) and 2 1234 (Parkville). Thi s d istrib ution and th e di stribut ion of all assisted housing in t he County ( see Section I V) a re s i mi lar in showing Reisterstown-Owings Mil l s , Essex, and Middle Ri v er 1:"0 be the areas of greatest concentrati on . 2 . Eighty p e rc e n t of all households surveyed were headed b y women, 1 1% were couples , and 8 % were headed by men. Thirty-five perce nt of all househo l ds surv e yed were elderly, disabled, or handicapped . Most o f t he families with c hildren had one or two; on l y 11% of f ami l ies with ch ildr en had thr e e or more . 3 . Of a l l City c ertificat e holders in the Co u nty as of 6/80 ( total 1 83) 67 % were Black and 31 % were elderly, disabled or handicapped. Of all County certi f icate ho lders (t otal - 855) 21 % were Black and 46 % we re e lderly , disabled or hand icapped. 4 . Al l three g r oups reported difficulty in f inding housing a n d to about the same d e gre e ( 71 % to 82 % r eporting hous i ng very or some wh at diff icult to find ) . 5 . Sligh tly mo r e of the Regional ( 4 7% "No;" 4 1 % " Yes") and City (50 % "No; " 41% "Ye s") certi ficate holders answe red " No " to t he ques t i on, " Did you find h ousing in the community of your first choice ? " Thirty one percent of Bal timore County certificate holde rs an s we red " No " to th is quest ion , a nd 60 % a n swered "Yes". A substantial proportio n of Sec t ion 8 tena n t s in Balt imo r e Coun ty are not living in the conununities of the ir f irst c h oice . When a s ked why hous i ng was difficu ~ t to f ind o r why th ey di d no t l ease in the commun i t y of their f i rst choice, 106 of th e 224 (47%) checked "landlords unwil li n g to part icipa te in the p r ogram;" 54 ( 24% ) checked "unit too far f rom t r a nspor tation; " and 42 (1 9 %) c hecked "uni t t oo far f r om s hop p ing or oth er s e r vi ces I n ee d . " Th e thre e s ub groups showed some d iffere n ce regarding th e i r se l ect ion of t hes e ~h r e e responses . Many more City ce rtifi c at e holder s (6 4%) than Regio nal ( 39 %) or County (35 %) c e rtif i ca te h o lders f e lt that l and1 0rd 9 were unwilling. Reg ional c erti fi cate h o l de r s ( 29%) we r e somewhat more l ikely to check "unit too far ... " than th e City ( 1 9 %) or County (13%) certificate holders. 6 . Fe e li n g d iscriminated against was r e po r t ed b y 82 of t h e 2 2 4 re sponde nts ( 3 7%) and th e three subgroups were simi lar to ea c h o t her in this respec t. The mo st frequently che c~ed re ason wa s p ar ticip a ti on in a gove rnment h ousin g p r ogram (54 or 24 %) followed closely by " re c eiving Public Assistance ( 41 or 18%) . Race wa s checked b y on ly 17 (7 % ). �- 22 - 7. Forty-nine percent (llQ) of all those surveyed reporte d be i ng "very satisfied" with theil;" present unit and 25% (57) ,reported peing " somewhat satisified. " City certifica4e holders report: much less satisfaction (64 % reporting very and somewhat satisfied, compared to Regional (78 % and ) local County certificate holders ( B4%). Seventy-three percent (163) o , all respondents reported that t h e f Regior.al ' c ertimove to their present unit had iI!lproved their housing. ficate holders checked "Yes" to this question more than City C' e rtif i c " t;:~ , holders (71%) or County certificate holders (6q ~ ). It should te kept in mind that 45 of the B4 in the last group were assisted "in l? l a c e." B. When asked to check as many as they wished of nine i te--ms t h ey liked best about their present unit, 104 (46%) checked the sh,e of the unit1 99 (44%) checked paying leijis rent1 92 (41%) liked the nE 'ighborhood or neighbors better than the old neighborhood; and 75 (3 3%) f e lt their present unit was more convenient t9 shopping and other se rvi ces . The three subgroups were similar in their priorities except ti,at the Regional and City certific:ate holders checked "better sehools " as the fourth ranki~g item, while County certif+cate holders placed ' conven i enye to shoppin g and other servioes" fourt04, 9. When asked to check what they liked least about thei .r presen t unit, the five top ranking it~ms a~l related to transportation (transportation not as convenient; further from friends and relativEl s; further from services and further from jobs or job opportunities). The "o t her" category was checked by 2?% of all responpents. Items listed unde r "other" tended to be clus1:ered qround complaints of poor Il'.ain t:enance, and vermin, espeyially for the City and local County certificate ho l de;rs. 10. Staff was rated as very helpful by almost all respondtmts. 11. Almost all respondents found little or no difficu l t y i n und e rs tand i ng the f o rms used in Section 8 processing . 12 . Seventy-four p ercent of City c e rtificate ho l ders r a ted t he ir r e l ations with management as ~ither "yery g00 d " or "satisfa ctory . " The comparable figure for County certificate holders wa s 88%. 13. W hen asked whe th e r they rec e ive d the same se r v i c e s from management as did non-assisted tenants, 6 8% o f City cert~ficat e h olde rs and 90% of County certificate holders che c ke d "Yes." There ~I e re a f ew scattered co~nts that service was poo r fo+ assisted and non - a s s i sted tenants. This and the p!:"eceding items we r e not a sked of Reg i on a l Certi ficate holders. VII . THE PROCESS BY WHICH THE SECTI ON 8 PROGRAMS OPERATE Persons d e si~ing spec i fi c de ta i ls a bout tpe progr am shou ld con tac t th e Section 8 of fic e s i n t he jurisdicti pns in which theY l ive o r wish to live. Thi s s ection qOnt a ins information abou t t he g eneral p rinciples under which t h e progr am oper a t~s. The in f or ~a t ion was p r ovided by th e Baltimore HUD Ar e a Office a nd th e Re giona ~ Planning Co u nci+ a n d b y re ference to "A Housi n g PI a l) for t he Baltimore Reg i ,>n, 19 7 7 , Regiona l �- 23 - Planning Council, to the HUD Handbook 7420.7, Nov., 197 9 , "Pub . i c· Housing Agency Adrnin ist r~tive Practices Handbook for the Sectio n 8 Existing Housing Program ," and by the Baltilrore County Section 8 office. A. Allocation of Section 8 Units ~ n~eds factor and a deconcentration factor go into the formula for assigning the percent of assisted funds for the various jurisd ;. c tions . (1) The Ipcal housing assistance needs as a proportion o f t h e Region's needs (minus units alr~ady assisted) are computed and updated annually for changes ip housing stock. (2) The proportion of the jurisdiction's assisted housing s tock is computed and compared to the Region's proportion oJ; a ss iste! housing stock. The regional propqrtion in +976 Was 4.9 %. Balti more CJunty 's percent of assisted housing was 1.4% which is actually 3.5% le;s t h an the Regional proportion. This difference was divided by the total of all differenc ~ ~ f o r jurisdictions falfing below the regional p~rcentage of 4.5%. \l l 5 counties were below it, and Baltimore City was above. This r€3u l t produced the deconcentration factor. The needs factor (1) (i.e., the percent of hpus e holds neEjin~ as ~ sistance in Baltimore County) was we~ghted 71% to give high pIiori ty to unmet needs locally, and the qeconc~ntration factor was we j ~h te d 29%. This procedure resulted in 20.6% ~eing the ~ecommended f =rcen t of available assistance funds to be allocated to Baltimore COlnty . Certain modifications are th~n made to allow for adequate pro:' ect size for new construction and local administrative and market capatity. All of the above is done by the Local Plans and Policies Committee of the Area Housing Council, wh~ch has a representative of each juri s, diction on it, and HUD, and any deviatioqs must be approved b~ both. Any funds unused by a jurisdiction are redistributed to the olher jurisdictions. B. Tenants' Processing: Righ ts and Responsibilities An important principle of the Existing Section 8 program i s to maintain thE1 anony.mi ty of assisted tenants. The program. permits tenants to have greater choice and prevents stigma. . The local Section 8 office provides counselling about th e care of a u~~t. If a t~nan~ ha~ a problem, the housing a ssistance aide will r efer h~m/her to an appr?pr~ate agency, or will even send the name o f the tenant to the appropr~ate agency requesting the agency to contact the tenant . The tenant should be given a copy of the leas e. The tenant is r e c 7r ified each year ~or his/her contribut ion to gross rent whi~h includes ut~l~ty allowance by the Public Housi ng Auth ority. 7 �-0 - 24 - If there is a tenant-~andlord problem, the tenant is firsc asked to try to resolve it wi th the landlord. That failing, the tenlnt may appeal to the PHA, which, if it sulilstantiates the violation, glves the landlord a reasonable time to correct it. If the violation is uncorrected, the tenant may be given .,nother certificate an-d may look for another unit. In Baltimore County, if the tenant and landlord do not resolve the problem (which is usually over maintenance) the tenant is advised t o send a letter to management, carbon copy to the Section 8 office, a:ter whichthe office will contact management to correct the situation. [f the complaint is uncorrected and there are other valid unco r recte d management complaints the County Section 8 office will refuse to all)w the offending apartment development to continue to participate in ~e program. There is no outreach from the HUD Area office for measuri1a tenant satisfaction. HUD has to respond within five to ten day s to a complaint. Tenant complaintii' to the HUD Area office currently average abOlt one a week. HUD makes referrals to appropriate sources when it ca1, de pending on the nature of the complaint. The County section 8 office informed the Task Force that there are very few tenants against whom any complaints are made abouc damaging property and an even smaller numbe;r against whom complaint; arc made for amounts lar~er thqn the security deposit. In the pas t year less than $1000 was paid out to landlords in damages no t cover~d by a security deposit. The County Section 8 Director reported that there have b e~ n only about half a dozen evictions since the program began in the CClnty and most of these were for n9n-payment Of rent. Since both community leaders and school pr;i.ncipals sometines commented about transience as being characteristic of assisted tenants, the Task Force checked this matter out with the Baltimore County Section 8 office. As stated in Section VII of this re~ort, Se::tion 8 tenants sign a one to three year l ease , and are recert1fied each year for elig i~ili ty . At that time some choose to move and/or a~e ineligi ble for continued assistance, us ually due to increased income. When aSked specifically how many assisted County tenants leave without notice before the lease is up, the estimqte was giyen that no more than 15 tenant,s do so each year . This is a little more than 1 % of the more than 1,20 0 assisted tenants living in Baltimore County under the various Section ? programs. About the Same number each year move with notice. Tenants ar~ permitted to break their lease if the manager agrees not to ho l d the Section 8 office responsible for the balance of the term of lease. In - such cases tenants are issued another certificate and lOOK for another unit. The County Section 8 Director estimated that lease breaking is more common in rentals in the private s~ctor than among Secti on 8 tenants . �- 25 Following application for Section 8 assistance the tenant is oriented to the requirements of the program and given suggestions as to \o,here to ' seek a unit. The tenant's contribution to the rent is computed, based on all sources of income, family size, and unusual medical or other expenses. The tenant's gross income must initially fall within the income limits established by the HUD Area Economist's office. The tenant's cqntribution is up to 25 % of his/her gross adjusted income, and the PHA pays the balance directly to the landlord. The market rent of the unit p lus . utilities must be at or below the level of the fair market rentf; es tablished by HUD. C. Landlord's Rights and Responsibilities The Section 8 Rehabilitation program provides landlords wi t:h an incentive to upgrade their properties. The landlord has a right not to renew a lease, but in Section 8 New Construction and Section 236 developments, in order to rema i n in the program, management must "give cause" for failure to renew. If a unit becomes vacant, the PHA is liable for up to two months' contract rent minus the security deposit for delinquent rent and tenant damages. If the unit remains vacant, starting with the first dey of the following month, the landlord is also entitled to 80 % of thE' contract rent for an additional 30 days. The security deposit is ~; 50 or one month's gross family sontribution, whichever is greater. A difficult feature of the programs is the maintenance of units at standard quality. The quality of management is cruci al to the fuccess of the programs. HUD spot checks the County inspections. Another difficulty of the program according t o the County Eection 8 Director is the requirement laid ~pon management for the evict jon process. It is more cumbersome than that required of private sector land lords and should be made comparable. Both the Area HUD Director of Housing Management and the CCoUnty Section B Director thought the strongest feature of the program was the . help it provided to peo~le. The County Director also felt the experiences as a Section B tenant promoted the seek~ng of employment for a number of persons. Both agreed that maintenance was a serious problem . The County Director said that staff has little information about fraudulent practices which may be carried out by te nants and would like to have more me ans for tightening up this aspect of the program. D. Administrative Policies Existing Section B: The PHA is required to do an inspection prior to execution of t~e Housing Assistance Payment contract. The tenant initially is required to inspect the unit. Two inspection sheets are completed and the tenant is given a "kit" of documents. The Baltimore County Ins pector's office does the actual inspections for the PHA. Then HUD is r equired to inspect a sampling o f units on a periodic basis . �- 26 - Fair Market Rents for New Construction and Substantial Rehabi l ita~ tion Section 8 are based on a sampling of rents paid for comparable newl~ constructed units of a modest price. A rental rate sufficient to pay back mortgages id determined. Amenities in the proposed d e velopment are based on what prevails in the SMSA. Rates are published in the Federal Register for comment. Developments most similar to the proposed development are pooled. A suggestion was maqe by an official in the HUD area o ffi ve elat there should be reciprocal certificates natiom~ide. Mobility nee d s to be greater. NOw, certificate holders from other jurisdictions mus 1 go ; to the rnttom of the waiting list if they apply for a local Se"tion 8 certificate in another jurisdiction, unless they are moving from o n e jurisdiction in the Region to another and are working in the n e w j u r is diction. The local Public Housing Authority (PHA) guarantees that 1be tenant does not lose his/her subsidy. The PHA does not termin; ,te i\ lease, only the Housing Assistance Payment. The subsidy goes ~lith the tenant, not with the unit. HUD pays an administrative fee of 8.5 % of the monthly r e n ~; based on the fair market rent of a two bedroom unit to the State De p artrn,mt of Econornic and Community Development, which in turn pays tQe Balt i mor e County Section 8 office a portion of that amount. HUD's policy for Existing Section 8 is that no more than f i ve un i ts or 25% of the units in a building (not total developme nt) ma y h e S ' ~ ct i o" 8. This means that in buildings with five or fewer units, all c o uld b e assisted. For example, if an apartment complex has ten bu ildi ngs , each with five units, all could be assisted. If the ten bui ld ings ,~ach h ad 100 units, only 25 in each building could be assisted. This regulation is sometimes not strictly enforced becaus l! o f the difficulty of getting landlords into the program and the n e ed t o g e t tenants located as quickly as possible. Fair Market Rents are not determined i~ the Are a Office for Existing Section 8 units. A national survey is done by HUD every four y e ars o n a rotating basis in cooperation with the CenEus Bureau. The average rent of recent movers is determined and the fa ir market r ents are based on this figure (which means about half of the units are ineligib le.) Proposed fair market rents are published in L;e Federal Register for comment. The Area office may request chanses if new data are p roduced that are inconsisten t with proposed F~1R' s. For example, a sepa ra te market area has been established for north Baltimore County, which has higher private rentals. Section 8 New Construction Section 8 New Construction may be 100 % as sisted or any percentage (mixed income) depending on allocations to the County and what th.e County Housing Assistance Plan recommends. �- 27 - VIII. DEFINITIONS OF TECHNICAL TERMS Areawide Housing Opportunities Program (AHOP). This is a combination of several programs and was awarded as a bonus by HUD to the Baltimore Region in 1978 because it has an approved Area Housing Plan for the Region. A second allocation was awarded in 1980. It includes the Regional Section 8 program, counselling and referral, mortgage assistance, and increasing minority ·sales associates in the real estate industry. It provides additional assisted units for use in the Region. Co•. .munity Development Block Grants. These were established by the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974 to replace most of the older categorical programs, such as Model Cities, Urban Renewal, and Sewer, Water, and Open Space grants. Choice of activities is left to the local jurisdictions, so long as certaj.n civil rights and citizens participation assurances are made, ~he jurisdiction has the administrative capability of carrying out the programs, and the activities proposed are eligible, under a very broad definition of eligibility. Activities should either principally benefit low and moderate income persons, remove or prevent slums and blight, or meet an urgent need which has recently arisen. The most important kinds of ineligible activities are income maintenance, building public housing, hospitals, large libraries, government buildings and other such edifices used by the entire jurisdiction, and the continuation of existing services. U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). The Federal agency which allocates funds and regulates the assisted housing programs. Human Resources Development Agency of Baltimore County. A private agency which specializes in various services to low i n c ome County residents. Income Assistance. El igibil jty is limited to lower ~ncome fam~l~es also def~ned as low and moderate income families). Th ese are families receiving less than 80% of the median income of the area. The exact amounts depend on family size. Very low income is defined as less than 50% of the media n income of the area . Ne ighborh00d Strategy A17.ea (lISA). This is a community upon which a number of community development activities are focu s ed, funded in part or entirely by CDBG funds. Public Housing. There are several kinds, all of \-lhich l1'.Ust be administered by a local housing authority. Since Baltimore County has none, the administration of the County's local Existing Section 8 program has been subcontracted to a Realtor, whose office serves as the Publi c Housing Authority (PHA) for this purpose. See the Appendix o f this report ("Program s forDirect Housing Assistance to Low and Moderate Income Persons in Baltimore County ") for information about other programs. �- 28 - Regional Planning Council (RPC). It was established by the Maryland General Assembly in 1963 to provide an in te rjurisdict ional forum through which the six major jurisdictions (Bal t imore City, Anne Arundel, Baltimore,Carroll, Harford and Howard Counties) can work to resolve mutual problems and to devise a General Development Plan for the Baltimore Region. Regional Planning Districts (RPD). These a re multiples of census tracts. Each political jurisdiction in the Region is subdivided into RPD's. There are 31 in Baltimore County. Section 8 . Under this form of assistance a tenant eligible by income pays up to 25 % of his /her adjusted annual i ncome for rent and utilities in developments with rents at or below the fair F~rket rents for the area. There are four Section 8 programs: Existing, including Regional, New Constr u ction : Mixed New Construction; 100%; and Substantial and/or Moderate Rehabilitation. In New Construction, mixed, 20% of units in a development are assisted. In the Ne~l Construction and Rehabilitation programs, 100% of the un its may be assisted. The Existing and Regional programs provide assistance in existing apartments on a scattered basis. Section 8 tenants may be living in Baltimore County under three Existing Section 8 programs: they may hold local County certi f icates; they may hold Regional Section 8 certificates, indicating that they moved to the County from other jurisdictions; or they may hold City certificates, which may b e used either in Baltimo re City o r Baltimore County because the City may extend its housing authority ten miles into the County, since the County does not have its own Housing Authority. If a HUD-insured development is experiencing financial difficulties because tenants' incomes are insufficient to pay the rent 'lithout exceeding 25% of their incomes, with resulting high vacancy rates, then the manager may enter into an arrangement with HUD for eligible tenants to rece1ve Section 8 assistance. These tenants are not processed through the County Existing Section 8 office, but apply directly to the apartment management. There are 175 (12/80) tenants in Baltimore County under this arrangement. They are included in the figures previously given in Section V. Standard Metropolitan Statistical Area (51·1 51'.). For Baltimore, it consists of Baltimore City, Baltimore County, Anne Arundel County, Carroll County, Har ford County and Howard County. Education Act. It provides Fede r a unc.s to loca sc 00 1str1cts 1n or er to mee t the special educational needs of educationally disadvantaged children. Eligibility is based on the proportion of low income families in the community served by the school. Title I provides a variety of ki~ds of as~istance l including instructional aides, resource teachers, spec1al mat 7r1als, and supporting services, such as health care, food, and cloth1ng. Public Ho using . Authori ty. It is. an aut<;ll1omous governroental e ntity which is able to own and operate pub11c hous1ng. �- 29 - Entitlement Status. Certain communities are entitled to Community Development,Block Grant funds by virtue of their size (200 ,000 for urban count1es and 50,000 for cities) and possession of certain essential powers. Housing Assistance Plan (HAP). It is a jurisdiction's three-y ear plan for meeting th e housing needs of its low and moderate income residents. It is approved annually by the local jurisdiction and by HUD. A co~munity must have an approved HAP to be eligible for CDBG funds of any kind. The HAP identifies the condition of its existing housing ,-tock, the housing assistance needs of its lower income h o u seholds, and sets up ' goals for providing housing assistance to rough various programs. Als o included is a narrative describing actions to be taken to facilitate the provision of assisted housing and to furthe r fair housing for minorities and women, and designation of areas suitable for assisted housing. �- 30 IX. APPENDIX PROGRAMS FOR DIRECT HOUSING ASSISTANCE TO LOW AND MODERATE INCOME PERSONS IN BALTIMORE COUNTY Table of Contents 31 32 Programs to Assist Homeowners with Rehabilitation a nd Other Services 32 Federal programs 32 Sta te programs 33 County programs 34 Programs to Assist Renters 34 Di rectly to the tenant 34 Directly to developers 35 Federal programs 35 State programs C. 31 S t a te programs B. Programs to Assist Homeowners with Purchase Federal programs A. 36 Note : A household may receive assistance from more than one program. Some programs, marked with an asterisk (*), are available both to homeowners and to renters. �PROGRAMS FOR DIRECT HOUSn;Gt\SSISTANCE TO LOW AND MODERATE INCOME PERSONS IN BALTIMORE COUNTY rl M Source of fu nds & units ass iste d in the County Desc r ip t ion of Program Office and Phone Number A. Assis tance cO Homeowners for Purchase Unless noted , all programs have income l imits for eligi bility. * denote s programs also availabl e to renters . FeLieral 1. HUD Home Financing Programs 20.~ units sirce 1971 a. Sec . 235. Moderate income homebuyers receive a mo rtgage loan a± lower interest rates and smaller do\~ayments than with most private conventional programs. There is an upper- limit on the amoun t of the mortgage. HUD Area Office Mor t gage Credit 962-2917 No figures available b. Sec . 221 -d-2. This program is geared to low and moderate income buyers, but there are no fixed income limi ts. I i offers lower interest rates and downpayments as low as O. It has an upper limit on the size of the mortgage. HUD Area Office Mortgage Credi t 962-2917 No figures a vailable c. Sec. 237 . This program offers lower interest rates anc downpayments as low as 0, plus counseling, and is intended for persons with credi t history problems. I t has an upper limit on the size of the mor"gage. HUD Area Office Mortgage Credit 962 - 2917 Federal 2. I"'? rIT,Q"'-C u""')""E:" l\dIni.~:"S t:::~ tiar: !'"':::.:.;;~o. ... ::-=;~. :'C2-:t:.:. 'I:::'s pr'-''JTnm ; s fOT l ow and moderate inccr.'.E :,uyers i:: ::;-;r?,l "'Teas. It offers lower interest rates and CC'\.\J·lr.JC.~Jm<=:nts RS low a~ o. There i~ ar. upper liffiit CD -::- e Eize of the mo!:'tgage . oalLill1ore Coun ty O:e.f .i.c;e 838-9227 Long dis "ance irom City & Balto. Co . �'" M Source c· fund s 6 units assi s t ed in th e County A. Assi s tanc e to Homeowners for Purchase (cont'd) Scace of Maryland Housing Programs 3. a. S-t:a -re _"'\ and 3b a re ~"<DeC tl2.1 Office and Phone Number Description of Program Maryland Home Financing Program. It offers low inte rest, low downpayment loans to first-time homebuyers. Maryland Home Financing Housing Fund Pilot Program. It insures single family loans up to 100% of loan-to-value ratio. There is an upper limit on the mortgage amount. Maryland Housing Fund Baltimore County DeveloplTEnt Coo rdinator 494 -331 7 269-3524 to assist ~OO households over a 3 year pe r" od. b. S tate no figures a '"ailable c. Mor tgage Purchase Program offers low interest low downpayment loans through banks. The buyer a ppl ies directly to a lending institution. State 15 units prior t ~ 1980. Expected to as sis t 145 households over a 3 year period. d. Home Ownership Development Program. This program sets aside mortgage money for loans to prospeccive low and moderate income buyers in specified housing developments. The developer obtains these commitments . ~~ ry land 269-2875 Home Owne rship Development Program 269-3524 - - ---- - ------ --------------~.------------------------- ---- ------------------------------------------- B. Ass ist ~nc e Federal Programs 1. Fe c-c::: do.: a. E..,<pec te t. ~.:. ..... 6\.5si. s t to Homeowners for Rehabilitatio n and Other Services Sec. 312 Home Improvement Loans in Neighborhood Strategy Area s. These are l ov,' interest ( 3%) loans. 1 5 'J nits over '" 3 ye ar pe =iod. 494-31 24 Ccrt.In\';.!j'::" t!,.- Fe de r ... l E:~~€C .: l: :.; te"": w .... i:..s~i ... o..:u."1i t~ .:I(..~~ }::..;;,.-..:.. .... .:.:. Baltimo rr,.> County F:ehabilitation Office .... t .:.i'!.at.L....... 1 .. ~v(.l,-,p:men :r~LS ~ ;ji::-lc ' cr -r t nlc,ck C-Z\ .... "t r '·~ds -For r(lh3t-.i t'L .s.,?r..l. 1--:1-) , it7!l pr On:-; in("'l~t~ a f forc Se"'" '112 ::: ~~ r.~.l.ryl·v,d ~~ ll unab ~e State P''''tlsirg !?,,:r,abilf..l.t-+-':0r .. (',- ....·s Str"tegy Areas . iT""' l>.J("i<;hl-..f')rl-1("--d &,,1 ti;:!ore -i--y Rr.>habi.- ("'o~n- li tati':"" Office 94-312-' �M M Source o.f funds & un its assiste d i n the County Office and Phone Number Description of Program B. Assiscance to Homeowners for Services (cont ' d. ) Rehab~litation and Other Federal No figures available c. Tltle I, Sec. 2 provides insurance for mobile home parcr.ases. HUD Area Office 962-2128 F('deral 6 unit" in TUrners Station expected 1981 d. CDBG fun ds for rehabilitation and purchase of v acant 110uses in Neighborhood Strategy Areas and resale to new low and mode ra te income owne rs • Bal timore County Rehabilitation Office 4 94-3124 Federal * e. Maryl and Energy Assistance Program. It is administered by the Baltimore County Department of Social Services and the County Department of Aging. It provides up to $250 to pay utility bills and emergency grants for necessities. County Social Services 494-2795 and 494-2B63 Federal 128 persons in FY 1979; 60 per month anticipated. * f. Weatherization Program. It is administered by the Baltimore County Human Resources Development Agency, & provides a team of workers to do up to $500 worth of insulation free of charge. Human Resources Development Agency (HRDA ) 285-4674 Federal 532 perso~s assisted in FY 1 979 * g. Housing Counseling. It is administered by HRDA and provides information, referral and counseling. The counseling includes pre-purchase, default, delinquency, rental, relocation, tenant-landlord relations, property care and money management. HRDA 285-4674 Federal .. h. FmP'\ 504 Rehabilitation Loans. The program aesists ("ural homeowners with critical repairs. Baltimore County Office 838-9227 State 40 units prio= to 1980. Expected to a~sis"t 2..2- ~0t!,Se .... ,o lds ov~r a 3 year pe riod. 2. ______ ___________ ~ ____ d Sto. ~e of \:F.~:!::,;lar.c! litation P~oc=a~. :..r'·E'?.40-0 ..... ~ 01.A;ners, 0btdin __ • pr';_v~t~ ________ - Prograrr: It makE'S '3.r,l sm~ '] , .,. "~:;lan d '0\1." u'-"'le-inr intprp~i: l--."c;,..,o~ !=pc:: f'inanC"'inn . _________ _ R0hC\~i­ loans to wh"i("'h C"ilnnot Ea.l tim0!"e County Rehabilitation Office 494-3124 ______________ _ -~ --~------------ ----- ---- --------- - �... C"'l Source of runds & units assisted in the County Orfice and Blone Numbe r Description or Program B. Assistance to Homeowners ror Rehabilitation and Other serVI'CeSTcOnt'id) . 3. Baltimore County Assistance Programs County * a. Inrormation, rererral and assistance ror persons with housing complaints. Baltimore County Complaint Orrice 494 -3560 County Social Services * b. Assistance with evictions and utility cutorrs, and to homeowners with critical repairs. Baltimore County Dept. Social Services 494-2844 Coun ty Dept. or Aging * c. Project "Homes." It assists elderly low income homeowners with emergency home repairs. "Homes" 494-3282 ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------C. Assistance to Renters Directly to the Tenant 1. Federal Through 1979 1063 units or which 188 are in units also assisted un de r Sec. 236 a. Sec. 8 Existing. This program is for low and moderate income renters, defined as those with incomes below 80% of the median income for the Standard Metropolitan Statistical Area. The tenant pays up to 25% of his/her adjusted income for rent, and HUD pays the difference be tween this amount and the fair market rent of the unit. Units are leased in structures already built. Ross B. Diffenderfer 321-1400 Federal 244 units in Baltimore County as or June 30, 1980 b. Sec. 8 Reg ional Exis t i ng . ThIs program p rovi des a ddi t ion a l Sec. 8 oppor t un itie s for l ow a nd mo de ra te incc-mt r' r';C'ns wl;o wish t o IT!OVe to an,.., thc- r Ross B. Diffenderfer 321-1400 Bal timore Ci ty Sec. 8 Office 396-4052 j uri s di ctit'~ P ]annin ~ Cou (. Sec. 8 c ir t o incre J . ; . It.;c- admiT 1,....v1 l) p ),f { l.\.. r 1 r )i Ci t y Sec . ';s tt.~re(l v.C'?: S(~..L( h( b'). (...(,) !l t (02 ,I,. ~hf ~ [( "){ ~ )4 .r.( ~ ( • J. T hat 1.1\ ld~'" \.Or... E .j"T:y t the i :t:' c {. r ·~il ica t(' in t le Cou n ty aL '11 0/( Rpgi ona' -:e rti ..f -;r'a t e. J !"'e.-i(",r''1.1 1). ~ - S �It) M Source of funds & units assisted in the County Description of Program C. Assistanc~ Private 1306 County persons assisted in FY 1979/80 c. 2. Office and Phone Number to Renters, Directly to the tenant (cont'd) Free counseling, information, and complaint services to tenants and landlords with tenantlandlord problems. Baltimore Neighborhoods, Inc. B. N. I. 243-6007 Directly to developers, landlords and managers. The following programs offer various types of financial benefits so that the rental cost of units will be lower. Federal 2735 units assisted since 1971 a. Sec. 236 and Sec. 221-d-3. These programs make loanS to developers at below market interest rates. The tenant pays the basal rate or 25% of his/her adjusted monthly income, whichever is greater. No new construction is now being built under the Sec. 236 program, but there are nine Sec. 236 and two Sec. 221-d-3 developments in Baltimore County built since 1971. HUD Area Office Housing Management 962-2144 Federal In 1979 were allocated: 164 New 180 Under struction 523 planned 40 Moderate Rehabili ta tion b. Sec. 8 New Construction, Substantial Rehabilitation and ~10derate Rehabilitation for elderly persons and families. Tenant eligibility is as previously described under the Sec. 8 Existing program. Developers obtain contracts with HUD, which provides loans and insurance. HUD Area Office Housing Management 962-2144 for prospective tenants Multifamily Housing 962-3764 for prospective developers Federal 20 mixed income units built, 86 under construc tion in FY 1979 The Baltimore County Housing Assistance Plan states a preference for mixed income apartments, in which 20% of the units are Sec. 8. The County has set up incentives to encourage such developments. In addition there is a Federal Government ~{ational r-Iortgage Associa tio., (Gi'r.·~!I,) Tandem Program 25 which insures and finances at lower interest rates apartment~ in which at leas: 20<;"' of the 'l'1ito; are to be Sec. C. GNMA purchas.;s these mortgages from lenders. HUD Area Office ~1ul tifamily Housing 962-3764 �~ Source of funds & units assisted in the County Office and Phone Number Description of Program C. Assistance to Renter-s, directly to developers, etc. (cont'd) Federal 208 units under construction 1980 c. Sec. 202. This program provides loans at favorable interest rates to non-profit sponsors of multi-unit developments for the elderly and handicapped. At leas t 20% of the units must be Sec. 8, but there is no income limit for the other units. HUD Area Office Multifamily Housing 962-3764 Federal 95 units d. Sec. 101 Rent Supplement and Rental Assistance Programs. They pay the difference between 25% of the tenant's income and the cost of the unit. RS is a vail able only to very low income households who are, either elderly, handicapped, displaced by government action, victims of disaster, occupy substandard housing, headed by a person on active military duty, or have very large families. RAP is available to other families. HUD Area Office Housing Manage ment 962 - 2144 Federal 15 to 35 units; 4 neighborhood homes to house 12 persons e. CDBG funds (special) have been obtained t o allow prop- Bal timore County er t y owners to rehabilitate rental units eligible for Development Sec. 8 to make them suitable for persons with handiCoordinator capping conditions a!'1d for the partial acquisi tion 494-3317 and rehabi litation of neighborhood homes to ho~se persons with handicapping conditions who would otherwise be institutionalized. ----------------- ------------------------- ------ --- - -- ------------------ ------------- ---- -------l'-Iaryla..!1"': !:c ·-:~ :' :-_ ; ["~:1c!. ~:.s: ;--:- :=::. ..... i .... c' ....... pc: 1 0~ "'~ tn State Maryland f. develope::-~ ~~ ~c!"";.t~ l hOll£':'-: =:-".. ! ..... ,. t..:--.4 ....,'"'dt:"- ~+e ';"1 None in Coun ty Housing Fund come ':ar.. ::': ~ c;s. Inc c!'l'lc 1':'-:'&": ~.! -c ...... ..... _ ...... ~ I""\c:C' r:: ~ pl'l D. 269-2875 at end of 1979 g. Develop: ...... __ _ :-..:. .. _:1 .... '- f'J..o,:; c- .. -, ~ :: ~ E'-~ " State State Economic & opers o~ : __ : ~_.:. -_;:it ::er:-:~: . ~:..:===:::- . . . c..7 -,',~-- i;",·~""·-'c.&.. 200 units Com. Devel. Finrates. a nce 269-2122 State and h. The State COP_'lu:-Ji ty Deve:.c,~e ... ...... ,c!:-:. .... :.= -::--a:-i j!": ~·-':" !.l Federal provide :oans insu!."'ed by ~-_. :- tc ~e' 'e:,:>pe:s of :nu': ~i­ State Economic & family u::'::" t:5 ir: which a t :ei..~t 2::~, c -: ~'1e .lr-i ts ~~'il! Com. Deve!. Finbe for Sec. 8 tenants. ance 269-21 2 2 J:.& ._ _ .1.- ------------------------------------------_ .. _--------------- - ------ ---- ----------- ------------------ �- 37 - Income Limits and Cost of Units Section 8 and Section 236 Programs to Assist with Rental Payments Income Limits, August 1980 Upper Income Limit Size of Family $12,500 14,250 16,050 17,850 18,950 20,050 21,200 22,300 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8+ Rental Limits There are no fixed rental limits for Sec. 236. HUD must approve all rents. Fair Market Rents (including utilities) for Existing Section 8 as of March 26. 1980. Number of Bedrooms 0 1 Fair Market Rents (Bal timore area) $214 $266 Fair Market Rents (North Bal timore County) $241 $292 3 4 $306 $383 $422 $344 $428 $463 2 Fair Market Rents (including utilities) for Section 8 New Construction and Substantial Rehabilitation as of October 1. 1980. Kind of Unit N u m b e r 0 Detached Semi-det. row Walkup $333 Elevator 2-4 story $344 5+ story $381 1 o f 2 $409 $509 $588 $477 $471 $448 $470 $512 $599 B e d r o 3 $663 $566 $560 4+ $779 $129 $637 0 m s �_ 38 _ Section 235 (Ownership) and ~ection 221-d-3 (Be l ow M arket Interest Rate) Rental Assistance) Programs . Income Limits, August 1980 Upper Income Limit $14,850 16,950 19,05Q 21,200 22,500 23,£\50 25,150 26,500 Size of Family 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8+ Cost of Units and Rental Li mits " The Section 235 program is limited to new and s u bstantial l y rehabilitated housep costing no more than $44 ,00 0. There are no fixe~ rental limits fo r Section 22 1 -d-3 (BMIR). HUD must approve all rents. �_ 39 _ APPENDIX B (Tabulations of supporting data supplied upon request) Interview Questions for Managers Al Procedure for Management Interviews A2 Tabulations of Manager Interviews TABLE TABLE TABLE TABLE TABLE TABLE TABLE TABLE TABLE TABLE TABLE I ASSISTED UNITS II DISTRIBUTION OF ASSISTED UNITS I I I TURNOVER IV VACANCY RATE V PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION VI HOW SECTION 8 TENANTS ARE OBTAINED VII POSITIVE FEATURES OF ASSISTANCE PROGRAMS VIII NEGATIVE FEATURES OF ASSISTANCE PROGRAMS IX SUGGESTIONS FOR IMPROVEMENT X MANAGEMENT ASSESSMENT OF TENANT SATISFACTION XI MANAGEMENT ASSESSMENT OF COMMUNITY REACTION Details of Principals' Interviews Letter Sent to Principals and Community Leaders A3 A3 A4 A4 AS 1\5 A6 A6 A7 A7 A8 A9 - All A12 Details of Community Leader Interviews Al3 - Al6 Community Leader Interview Form Al7 - Al8 Tabulations of Replies to Section 8 Tenant Surveys TABLE I ZIP CODE OF RESIDENCE TABLE II DESCRIPTIVE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE SAMPLES TABLE I I I DESCRIPTIVE CHARACTERISTICS OF ALL BALTIMORE COUNTY SECTION 8 TENANTS (LOCAL) TABLE IV DIFFICULTY IN FINDING HOUSING TABLE V LEASING IN COMMUNITY OF FIRST CHOICE TABLE V A SPECIFIC DIFFICULTIES IN FINDING HOUSING TABLE VI REPORTED FEELINGS OF DISCRIMINATION TABLE VII SATISFACTION WITH PRESENT UNIT TABLE VIII FEELING THAT PRESENT MOVE IMPROVED HOUSINC; TABLE IX ITEMS LIKED BEST ABOUT PRESENT UNIT TABLE X ITEMS LIKED LEAST ABOUT PRESENT UNIT A19 A20 A20 A21 A21 A22 A23 A24 A24 A25 A26 � 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 &amp; 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 &amp; Archives</a> Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available <a href="https://langsdale.ubalt.edu/special-collections/">University of Baltimore Special Collections &amp; 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 Assisted Housing in Baltimore City Description An account of the resource A BNI report on public subsidies to assist with low and moderate income homeowners in Baltimore County with their housing payments Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource 1981-01 Subject The topic of the resource Baltimore County (Md.) Homeowners Housing subsidies Low-income housing 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 bni06.01.33a Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Baltimore Neighborhoods, Incorporated Records (R0015-BNI), series VI, box 1, folder 33, 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 County (Md.) Homeowners Housing subsidies Low-income housing https://d1y502jg6fpugt.cloudfront.net/44124/archive/files/a1960043fdacbc99d18891c5162a06a3.pdf?Expires=1789603200&Signature=mYXoEL6JTnhakJA7pfOh4oaJhsiW5xubMmItwByUzm%7EsxIjbw05Ahl0BpZ2iZ0bFOsh7mdt63GnK6wyA2-IIag-h6RsOQRGeoETFivsrBvsMMB7Q75HvWHl7pABckLnDs00Kpaqe8-f4IOoFo7yyoQexlBE9ycSVeFirdyweACnKEkvBv4i-%7EPquZD4-KjA1CifzS74Pp95owipSp7VlYdnRwvOpHliZZX1D2RlhsvswXB-M7DgamfnpstqBtiBYz%7EWfJt%7EUzmD%7EytmrxspoJ1DnYaCyYFTF40rqADbpwYtwDeif6Ff13cUt6i5zS179Ks1dVyk-Dy-TBdZ5owiaSg__&Key-Pair-Id=K6UGZS9ZTDSZM bc1a9c180156b5a1bb2487011375f3ad PDF Text Text HOW TO DEAL WITH REAL ESTATE PRESSURE TACTICS (should they arise) WHEN A NONWHITE FAMILY MOVES INTO YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD [Direct mail solicitation has been used by blockbusters· and speculators to panic neighborhoods. If this is done, it is a misuse of a legitimate business procedure. For most all reputable real estate firms, as well as most other businesses use the mails as ·one way to gain new business. Our new City Bill (Ordinance No. #34) excludes direct mail solicitation from its coverage.. If you feel that this business method is being misused, please draw this to Baltimore Neighborhoods"· attention that we might look into the matter further, and where warranted discuss it with the Real Estate Board of Greater Baltimore and/or the Real Estate Commission of Maryland.] A. ********* When you receive postal cards or advertising from real estate brokers: 1. 2. 3. B. Note date, name of broker, address of houses Cited as sold. Check to make certain that the house has actually . been sold as claimed; if not, report the misrepresentation to Baltimore Neighborhoods, Inc. Retain card for evidence. When you receive phone calls or personal visits from brokers: i 1. 2. 3. Before you listen to the solicitation, ask, "Who is this · speaking? ·· Are r,ou a licensed "real estate salesman?" If the reply is "NO", say, 'Then let me speak with a licensed broker of this firm. I do business only with licensed brokers." This may end the conversation, but note date, name of firm, name of person calling, any evidence r~ceived as to where a telephone call was made from (an office or ~ home). If you do talk with a licensed salesman or broker, you might explain: a. b. That if you occasion to sell, you will not use a firm that uses these tactiCS of .impersonal solicitation. c. That you be.l,ong to the (Neighborhood Association and/or other group) which opposes these paniccreating pressures. d. 4. That you object to this kind of solici'ation and ask him to see that his firm does not trouble you this way again. (For repeaters) That your records show (give history of calls from this firm) and that you propose to report this to the appropriate agency, Baltimore Neighborhoods, Inc. and your neighborhood association and/or other group. IMPORTANT: Note any misrepresentation of fact and report it 1mmeo1ately to Baltimore Neighborhoods, Inc. BALTIMORE NEIGHBORHOODS, INC. 32 WEST 25TH STREET - 2ND FLOOR BALTIMORE, MARYLAND 21218 PHONE: 243-6007 �(The following ~~:l£cerpts are from the "Code -of Ethics , of the Real Estate Commission, State of Maryland" as amended August 1, -1967 and is now law. This CODE covers every person who is licensed by the State to engage in the Real Estate business and MUST abide by it~ AND I QUOTE . ... .. .. . . . "Accepting this standard as his own, every licensee pledges homself to observe its spirit in all his activities and to conduct his business in accordance with the following Code of Ethics as adopted by the Real Estate Commission, State of Maryland : ARTICLE 3 It is the duty of the licensee to protect the public against fraud, misrepresentation or unethical practices in the real estate field. He should endeavor to eliminate in his community any practices which could be damaging to the public or to the dignity and integrity of the real estate profession .. . . ..... " (The following excerpts are taken from the City Ordinance #34 which became and covers every Real Estate person doing business in l aw May 3, 1968 the City of Baltimore.) AND I QUOTE Section 6 - "Make any untrue or misleading statements to induce the sale of RESIDENTIAL REAL OR LEA~EHOLD property, whether to the person making the representation or to any other person, knowing such statements to be false or misleading or knowing that the maker of the statement has insufficient knowledge of its truth or falsity to warrant making the statement." Section 7 - "Solicit properties for purchase or sale by general door to door solicitation in person or by telephone or by the mass distri bution of circulars. rI ANY REAL ESTATE PERSON WHO IS ENGAGED IN UNETHICAL PRACTICES AS MENTIONED ABOVE CAN LOSE HIS LICENSE TO DO BUSINESS . You are encouraged to report all such activity to your neighbor hood group or BALTIMORE NEIGHBORHOODS, INC . � 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 &amp; 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 &amp; Archives</a> Publisher An entity responsible for making the resource available <a href="https://langsdale.ubalt.edu/special-collections/">University of Baltimore Special Collections &amp; 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 How to Deal with Real Estate Pressure Tactics (Should They Arise) When a Nonwhite Family Moves into Your Neighborhood Description An account of the resource A BNI information bulletin for Baltimore City residents regarding ethical real estate practices and City Ordinance #34, passed May 3, 1968 Date A point or period of time associated with an event in the lifecycle of the resource circa 1968 Subject The topic of the resource Real estate agents Advertising Social ethics House selling Homeowners 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 bni03.02.09a Source A related resource from which the described resource is derived Baltimore Neighborhoods, Incorporated Records (R0015-BNI), series III, box 2, folder 9, 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. Advertising Homeowners House selling Real estate agents Social ethics