February 1998  -----------Volume 8, Issue 1

Table of Contents

Our 15th Year! UNHP Wins Neighborhood 2000 Grant Clarification on the Retroactive Transition Program Federal Budget: What Did the President Propose on Housing? Carving Up the State Surplus UNHP Family Health Meetings Continue Lead Certificates Issued

Back to Top.

Back to Top.

---

UNHP Wins Neighborhood 2000 Grant

The Fifteenth Year of UNHP got off to a great start with word that we had won a grant award from the Neighborhood 2000 Fund at New York Community Trust. A consortium of 28 banks and foundations capitalized the fund to assist community groups to build their capacity for the 21st Century. UNHP and 29 other groups around the City received the Fund's award, which will result in up to 4 years of funding to support the organizations' community development activities. Donors to the Fund cited several economic factors affecting the city's poorer neighborhoods as the primary reasons for developing the new fund. Specifically, they noted that the City's stock of low cost housing is continuing to decline, welfare reform is creating uncertainties for low income families, and a 20% increase in the number of families living below the federal poverty line since 1990. UNHP will use the funds to develop its' work on vacant 1-4 family homes and economic development work related to housing.

Back to Top.

---

Clarification from our Last Issue on the Retroactive Transition Program
We reported in our December 1997 issue that the DEP retroactive transition program was ending. DEP Deputy Commissioner Schatt contacted NOTES to correct our information. The transition program will continue. However, it will no longer be retroactive to the time that the meter was installed; rather, it will be prospective.

Back to Top.

---

Federal Budget: What Did the President Propose on Housing

According to the Center for Community Change, the budget President Clinton proposed to Congress includes $1.8 billion in new housing money. Specifically, the proposal includes 100,000 rental subsidy vouchers; most of the vouchers are aimed at supporting welfare to work and homeless programs. This, however, represents the first increase in rental subsidy units in the past several federal budgets. The President also proposed a 40% increase in the low income housing tax credit. (The Low Income Housing Tax Credits has been used extensively in the Bronx to renovate vacant apartment buildings. More recently, the tax credit has been used in moderate renovations with tenant in place.) The Center for Community Change reports that the proposal would increase the amount of federal tax credits that can be allocated by states from the current $1.25 per person to $1.75 per person. Several Congress people including Senator D'Amato and Congressman Rangel have previously sponsored legislation to increase the tax credit and to index the amount of credit to inflation. The ultimate decision on budget and the tax credit proposals are up to Congress. Now is the time to contact congressional representatives to emphasize the importance of the housing budget.

Back to Top.

---

Carving Up the State Surplus

The Governor and the legislature have been discussing how to utilize the anticipated state surplus. One idea being pushed by a number of people includes increased money for state housing programs through the Building New York affordable housing initiative as proposed by Assemblyman Vito Lopez. Community and housing leaders gathered in Albany on February 24th to express support for the proposal. There will be a lot of talk in the next couple of months about the state surplus. Starting last year and continuing for the next 4 years, one of the sources of state income became the windfall money that comes to the state as part of welfare reform through the TANF (see next column) block grant. We have taken a shot here at trying to explain the windfall money. The Windfall Back in August of 1997, Governor Pataki signed the Welfare Reform Act of 1997, which represents the state's response to Federal welfare reform and a substantial reshaping of New York's public assistance program. Since then, there has been very little mention of the $730 million "windfall" that NYS received in federal dollars last year as a result of the replacement of AFDC with the new welfare block grant. Reportedly, the state used approximately 57% of the $730 million for state and local fiscal relief. Once again this year, Housing Works reports that Governor Pataki wants to use $408 million of this year's $593 million welfare windfall for the same purpose. Given the importance of adequate child care availability and innovative job training and education programs to the ultimate success of welfare reform, New York's application of federal welfare dollars will only make this success more difficult to achieve. What is the windfall? Prior to welfare reform, the federal government reimbursed New York State half of the cost of the aid that it provided to the Aid for Dependent Children program. The so called "welfare windfall" is the difference between the amount of federal aid that New York receives under the new TANF (Temporary aid to Needy Families) block grant (2.4 billion per year) and what it would have received under the AFDC program if that program had continued at the same financial levels. Under the AFDC program, New York's federal reimbursements had reached an all time high during FY95; since then the number of New York families receiving aid has decreased more than 10 percent. Therefore, for New York, the TANF grant is far greater than the amount it would have received under the old law. This difference constitutes the windfall. In order for any state to receive its full TANF grant, it must continue to spend 80% (maintenance of effort) of what it spent on those programs from it's own money in FY94-95 or 75% if it meets the federal work participation rates. New York State is counting on meeting those rates. If a state does not maintain its Maintenance of Effort level, the federal grant will be reduced dollar for dollar. NYS substituted TANF dollars for State dollars that it had been spending on aid to the needy in previous years. There is a strong feeling in the social service community that NYS's actions are not well thought out. By redirecting state money from the state's social services program to support tax cuts and other programs, the state is diverting critically needed resources from child care, social services and jobs training that might make the various time limit requirements built into welfare reform viable. New York should be crafting effective plans for welfare reform to help families leave welfare for work, rather than simply reducing state spending. The federal welfare law gives the states the flexibility to design new welfare programs that meet their unique needs and circumstances. There appears to be little awareness that the law provides states with an important opportunity to provide higher quality daycare, training and education programs, and to create wage paying jobs in the private, non-profit, and public sectors for those who cannot otherwise find work. Other states have designed programs that have helped in lifting families out of poverty and off of welfare. Some programs creatively define what work activities entail, and incorporate as much training and education into their options as possible. Two current initiatives-the state of Vermont's Community Service Employment Program and Milwaukee's New Hope Project are particularly noteworthy. Both are comprehensive work programs that are designed to ensure that adults who are trying to get off of welfare are provided with the tools that are needed to move from welfare to work. Programs such as these fulfill this guarantee through a combination of wage supplements, child care, training and education and health insurance for its' participants. State investment must be made in order for these programs to be effective and viable. The welfare windfall money that New York received last year and this year should be used to make these investments, instead of being used to reduce state spending.

Back to Top.

---

UNHP Family Health Meetings Continue

On a dark and stormy February 24th night, UNHP sponsored a workshop on asthma with guest speaker Dr. Kishore Ahuja for tenants in several community controlled buildings. The timing for the meeting could not have been better with the Daily News running a week long series on Asthma starting on February 2nd. On a prior dark and stormy January night, UNHP sponsored a meeting at St. Brendan's Church on 207th Street. Several parishioners braved the weather to attend the workshop that covered lead poisoning and asthma. Organizations interested in working with UNHP on such workshops can contact Regina Kirk or Elba Mercado at (718) 933-3101.

Back to Top.

---

Lead Certificates Issued and Review Session Held

Using excerpts from a video on proper lead poisoning prevention techniques, UNHP sponsored a review session at its certificate presentation program in January. The video, which was developed by the National Environmental Training Association, shows both good and bad examples of repair work when lead paint might be present. The audience is invited to point out errors in the procedures they see in the video. The response was impressive. Repeatedly, the audience of supers, handypersons and contractors picked out the problems and spoke eloquently about the importance of the new practices they have employed since completing the UNHP trainings. People interested in participating in UNHP's lead trainings should contact Regina Kirk at (718) 933-3101.

Back to Top.