Commentary

Westchester Case
More than six years after Westchester was forced to enter into a federal court consent decree requiring the dismantling of zoning barriers to affordable housing, very little is understood about the actual requirements of that decree. The confusion is evident in a recent editorial in the Westchester Journal News. Featuring a call to “finish housing settlement,” the Editorial Board is apparently not aware that compliance with the consent decree has barely begun. More
Westchester Case
Another example of the wrongheadedness of the strategy of the U.S. Attorney and the Monitor to pretend that, in the main, the Westchester consent decree is on track. More
Westchester Case
Westchester challenge to being cut off because it didn't conduct proper zoning analysis decisively rejected. But the failure of the Government and the Monitor to take seriously the obligation to enforce the consent decree in court (the normal place to do so) again made clear. More
Westchester Case
Supplemental report focuses on County's failure to take required actions in respect to one development and County's failure to have financing in place for a sufficient number of units. Monitor still not seeking action on broader issues. More
Westchester Case
Westchester groups, fed up with inaction on affordable housing, seek action. 10 percent of 463 units of proposed new housing in Harrison should consist of affordable units, they say. County Executive reminded of his obligation to take legal action against municipalities who retain zoning barriers. More
Westchester Case
Latest status report does begin to cite subset of County's violations, but remains wedded to the false narrative that "progress" continues to occur and adds additional "cheating units." Window-dressing changes to zoning that leave vast single-family areas highly segregated and untouched by affordable housing are lauded. Westchester's six years of across-the-board refusal to challenge municipalities who retain barriers to fair housing choice not discussed. More
Westchester Case
The Second Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled in favor of the unremarkable proposition that HUD decisions to withhold or withdraw funding are subject to judicial review. The decision in no way suggested that HUD did not have sufficient justification on the merits to deny Westchester funds because the County had failed to meet its obligation to affirmatively further fair housing. What the decision does do is to put into sharp relief the U.S. Attorney’s unwillingness to enforce directly the terms of the Westchester housing desegregation consent decree itself. More
Westchester Case
Failure to analyze different minority groups separately and focus on "clustering" instead of "segregation" among the problems identified. Monitor refuses to believe that HUD letter actually represents genuine or considered view of agency or U.S. Attorney; demands further "signal" from Government. More

Pages