Anti-Discrimination Center

The history provided by the AI manages to spend more space on the 17th and 18th centuries than on the 20th, and manages to leave out the pervasiveness of public sector and private sectordiscrimination and segregation after World War II, asserting only that Westchester has continued to be characterized by "diversity" (see pages 9-11).  A good example of the misleading nature of the AI is demonstrated with the statement that. "Within individual census tracts, the concentration of Blacks ranged widely, from 0.3% in Tract 50.01 (Eastchester) to 90.9% in Tract 33 (Mount Vernon)."  What the AI chose not to mention in its narrative is that more than 1/3 of census tracts have African-American, non-Latino populations of less than 3%, and that more than 25% of the County's African-American population resides in just 12 of the County's more than 200 populated census tracts.

Nothing other than the plan contained as part of Westchester's March 12, 2010 (second) Implementation Plan submission - a submission rejected by the Monitor as inadequate.

Nothing other than the plan contained as part of Westchester's March 12, 2010 (second) Implementation Plan submission - a submission rejected by the Monitor as inadequate.

Nothing other than the plan contained as part of Westchester's March 12, 2010 (second) Implementation Plan submission - a submission rejected by the Monitor as inadequate.

Nothing other than the main body of Westchester's March 12, 2010 (second) Implementation Plan submission - a submission rejected by the Monitor as inadequate.

A set of Census tables that, among other things, provide NO analysis of data.  The data is sorted simply in Census Tract order (as opposed to, for example, from least African-American, non-Latino to most African-American, non-Latino).  As such, patterns in the data are concealed, not illuminated.

Data again presented only in Census Tract order.

Listing of fair housing complaints.  Note: neither the Appendix nor the main body of the AI contain any analysis of the efficacy of the Westchester Human Rights Commission, and entity that, during the litigation (in 2008), acknowledged that it was "just beginning" to look at the issue of residential segregation.

Municipality, Municipality Special District, and School District tax rates.

A survey of riders, not of those who might want or need mass transportation services but did not have them available.

A County Planning Department report showing land use in Westchester municipalities.  There are some very useful maps and tables contained in this appendix.  Unfortunately, rather than following the data, the AI itself goes out of its way to excuse exclusionary zoning (e.g., on page 122 of the AI, the exclusionary zoning that characterizes much of Northern Westchester County is described as "policy was crafted that best fit the needs of the community and the characteristics of the land itself").

An October 2009 summary and listing of what are called "fair and affordable housing" ordinances (the phrase that the Monitor has described as obscuring Westchester's obligations under the Consent Decree.  It appears that there are ordinances dealing with affordability, with no analysis in the Appendix or in the AI itself of the potential segregation-perpetuating or segregation-reducing potential of locating housing in particular municipalities or in particular parts of municipalities.

Including information on different types of districts permitted.  Note: the information on "affordable housing regulations" is missing is unanswered (in whole or in part) for some municipalities.

Thinking about the region in a Westchester/Connecticut-centric way.

A list most notable for the stark absence of any consultation with a single regional or national fair housing organizations, for the lack of any consultation with any affordable housing developers or organizations outside of Westchester who have overcome municipal resistance to affordable housing development that maximizes desegregation potential, and for the lack of consultation with any organization or official from New York City (where a significant portion of regional affordable housing need exists, where the Consent Decree requires Westchester to market, and where there is the demographic "risk" -- from the point of view of a County seeking to maintain the status quo -- of finding large numbers of income-eligible African-American and Latino households).

Surveys of individuals, municipalities, housing choice voucher providers, and public housing authorities.  The limitations and deficiencies of the surveys are too numerous to list.  There does not appear to be any documentation of how individuals in New York City were solicited to participate in the surveys (which apparently garnered a grand total of 132 responses in all of New York City).  Note, too, the less than robust responses to the Spanish language survey: two responses from all geographical areas combined.

In Excel format.  Notice that each tab represents data relating to a different question.

In Excel format.  Notice that each tab represents data relating to a different question (and that not all tabs report data).

Municipalities, not surprisingly, overwhelmingly continue their see no evil, hear no evil, speak no evil approach when it comes to segregation and discrimination.

In Excel format.  Same survey as Appendix 16, Part 1, but in Spanish.  As noted above, there were only two responses.   Either there was no attempt to engage in outreach, or outreach that was conducted was entirely inadequate.