I know it is easy to be impressed by nice pictures, but did anyone read Peabody's proposal for 64 Durfee Street? Because all evidence indicates that FROED/RDA/Correia have not. They are vigorously arguing that this proposal will not be low income housing.
“I take exception to the opponents coming to their conclusion that this will be a low-income housing project,” Redevelopment John Almeida said of Councilor Cathy Ann Viveiros’ description. Mr. Almeida, I suggest you and your cohorts read Peabody's proposal...page 7 for example which states, "To finance the re-development of this project we intend to apply for Low Income Housing Tax Credits." Page 7 also indicates that Peabody will be using other sources of low income housing funds to develop this property, such as "Housing Innovations Fund," a program for the creation and retention of alternative forms of housing for low income and extremely low income persons and families.
Peabody's proposal states that they will look to the Fall River Housing Authority, the Department of Housing and Community Development, and the Department of Transitional Assistance (aka welfare) to pay the rent on many of the units.
If this isn't low income housing, I don't know what is; but with the likelihood that 64 Durfee with be sold to Peabody Properties, I am looking on the bright side, maybe someone will get arrested over this.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
16 comments:
Hey Mayuh.......Low income housing and public housing are the same #@$%ing thing.
another oversight
You hit another one Shamrock. In 2001 and 2002 the city said it had too much affordable housing. The study that was done claimed that between public housing and section 8 etc, we had too much affordable housing. The whole idea for Watuppa Heights was to create more single family homes.
Now you have proof that Correia is changing his tune. Now he states that there is a difference between affordable and public and then goes on to state one you have the government paying the other not.
MMMM?? Affordable housing is called that because there is government money going into it. Yep the mayor is lying again!
So in less than a year this is what we have.
1. Mayor Correia in 2002 promised 26 single family homes (this was his plan - Lambert's plan was for 23 single family homes)
But as soon as he becomes mayor he signed an agreement with the state for "at least" 60 units on the site and an additional 20 units offsite.
Even Rep David Sullivan said during the mayoral debate that he would obey the law that was passed that called for 26 single family homes. Not Correia!
2. Now he is pushing for another increase of affordable units at 64 Durfee Street. He now says affordable housing is alright, 8 years after the report, that he agreed with, said we had too much affordable housing.
If he does not know that affordable housing is housing paid for by the government then he is an idiot. But more likely he knows fully well that affordable housing is tax payer supported, which means he is a liar.
This guy could debate himself at a forum and end up with 20 different opinions! GEEEZZZZ
affordable vs. subsidized
Read definitions here:
http://www.housingpolicy.org/getting_started/what.html
Sorry -- here is the
complete address
http://www.housingpolicy.org/
getting_started/what.html
I know exactly what we being told in 2001 and 2002. We were told we had too much affordable housing.
The key we were told was to create more single family housing. More home ownership. That is what Correia said. Not me, not you, but Correia.
Then he tried to change the whole Watuppa Heights plan and instead of 26 single family homes that he promised, he tried to sneak through 60 units! Plus we had to put in, the taxpayers of Fall River, at least $4million.
I cannot believe Fall River. On one hand you have the artist utopia band looking for a free handout and on the other you have the mean spirited kick the low income to the curb band. Make up your mind people are you liberal DO GOODERS or conservative HATE MONGERS/
I have no problem with the concept of low income housing. I have a problem with the already excessive and increasing amount of low income housing we have in Fall River.
The visionaries we have in power seem to think low income housing is a business plan that will bring growth to the city and that myth needs to be debunked. What we are doing with our low income housing is unfair to the poor.
The Kirwan Institute did
"opportunity mapping" in Massachusetts. The opportunity mapping initiative was to understand how low income groups and racial and ethnic populations were situated in Massachusetts’s geography of opportunity. The map can be found here http://
4909e99d35cada63e7f757
471b7243be73e53e14.gripelements.com/
publications/
final_summary_ma_oppcomm_
kirwan_
jan2009.pdf
It is color coded according to opportunities we afford our poor. Fall River didn't earn a color. We warehouse our poor and this Durfee project is more of that.
And where is the local demand for more low income housing? I don't know of any.
First of all, low income housing should not be placed smack dab in your business zone. What successful cities have done is this:
They have created areas in their worn out business sections that attract middle class professional people. These type of people have the cash and the ability to stay up past 6pm.
Let us face it, if you place more elderly housing in our business district what does it do...answer nothing.
Plus, it was Correia and Fiola who said in 2001 and 2002 that we had too much affordable housing. They said it, now what has changed their mind, or were they lying just to get votes??? MMM?
Or maybe they were paid off by an unscrupulous builder who claims he will get money from the state to build this project but at the same time is under investigation for stealing mass housing money on another project http://www.wickedlocal.com/
braintree/news/x418531115/
Town-seeks-answers-on-Turtle-Crossing-profits
Shamrock,
Keep an eye on boston and the same 'developers" here:
Keep an eye on this in Boston where Winn and Edward A Fish aka Peablody are involved:
FBI informant in bribe cases says more suspects are likely to surface:
http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2008/11/25/fbi_informant_in_bribe_cases_says_more_suspects_are_likely_to_surface/
You know what else stinks of nepatism! I think Carol Fiola Kens wife is the real estate agent selling that property. I am not 100% sure, but if true isn't that a conflict of interest?
NO WAY, which property durfee st?????
Ken Fiola is the president of Carole's real estate agency http://www.fiolarealestate.com/agents.htm
Super conflict of interest.
and a liscensed agent there.
Isn't durfee st out to bid by the froed and redevelopment authority without a real estate agent???
The real estate transaction will eventually be listed publicly and the agent named. Is it posted for sale anywhere now???
Post a Comment