Support the Rev-elution: Cash App, $CMizzou, Venmo, @Carl-Kenney-1.
COMMENTARY – Supporters of Simplifying for Affordable Development (SCAD) argue it’s an effective tool in reducing housing costs in Durham.
My response, I’m reminded of promises made when 95% of Black Durham residents approved the Urban Renewal bond that dismantled the Hayti District.
It's a familiar tactic used to entice folks willing to bite the apple when hope for the future is tainted by obstacles no one can control. Last I checked, the lure of the forbidden fruit is what Christians and Jews believe led to humanity falling out of God’s favor.
Members of the Durham City Council need to be careful about biting too soon. History teaches many lessons. Durham’s Hayti’s tragic removal is an example of what happens when a few well-intentioned people pitch a promise that requires loads of trust in people positioned to make money.
I’m not saying these developers are gold diggers, but I don’t see them hanging with the broke ----. You know the song.
I’m weary of long proposals crafted by developers to radically change how Durham envisions long term development. Durham, like many communities across the nation, is swamped with gentrification - making it impossible for many residents to afford housing. The SCAD proposal offers no protections in securing real affordable housing.
How will the growing number of residents, with limited public affordable housing options, maneuver through the web of planned development if SCAD is approved? Where will residents of Liberty Street Apartments and McDougald Terrace rent now that one is already demolished and the other is slated to be razed within the next two years?
Where is the imagination for housing for the people living in Durham, versus planned housing for people moving to one of the fastest growing communities in America? SCAD isn’t a proposal to repair what aisles Durham the most. It’s a plan to make it easier for developers to maximize profit as land options dwindle.
The answer, according to SCAD proponents, is to build closer, higher and with no parking requirements. That’s not an answer. It’s a prescription for increased gentrification, poverty and the widening of economic disparities.
Welcome to the vision for Durham. The future home of economically privileged white people and the former home of the Black Wall Street.
When
did Progressives become Republicans?
Proponents of SCAD are schooled in a version of supply and demand economic theory taken directly from pages of the Republican Party play book. It’s a theory that roots for varied forms of deregulation with an assumption that the people who make more money will trickle the profits down to the people in need of help.
The promise – if we make it easier for them to make heaps of money after making it easier for them to make profit, everyone wins. Housing prices drop. Why? Because the decrease in cost automatically dribbles down.
Sorry to say it, and excuse my language, but I’ve been taught not to trust the white man with my future interest. By white man, in this context, I mean the people with the power to manipulate systems due to their greed.
In Durham, we’ve been shielded from corporate interest due to the power and influence of progressives elected to guard our communal identity. That has changed.
When did the progressives elected to serve on our city council take on the persona of republicans? How, why and when were Mayor Pro-Tem Mark Anthony Middleton, Jillian Johnson, Javiera Caballero and Leonardo Williams enticed into biting the rhetoric of Republican Party economic ideology?
Do we want to become Washington DC?
The SCAD proposal is simple. Their plan to simplify codes for affordable development (not affordable housing) will reduce housing costs.
How does it work?
It works by making Durham a microcosm of Washington D.C.
Imagine a city with limited parking and increased density. Imagine houses packed close. They are much taller than before. There are more people living in areas with limited greenery. The plan is to make Durham a place where owning a car is a luxury.
There’s a problem with the vision. Durham lacks an infrastructure to protect bikers. Durham public transportation lags far behind cities with the type of high density envisioned in the SCAD proposal.
The Durham City Council is trending in the direction of moving Durham toward becoming a city like Washington DC. Note the massive increase in parking costs. The city council disincentivizes cars without a solid plan to advance both local and regional public transportation.
Are we ready to become Washington DC?
Stop pimping my religion
Attachment H in the 86-page SCAD proposal mentions congregations who participated in a charrette to discuss the potential benefits to faith-based institutions. St. Stephens Episcopal Church, Bethany United Methodist Church, Grey Stone Church, Holy Cross Catholic Church and Duke Chapel participated in the charrette held on December 3, 2022.
Participation is not the same as an endorsement. During a presentation before members of the Durham Committee on the Affairs of Black People, supporters of the SCAD proposal hinted that churches did more than participate in a conversation. They suggested these congregation supported changes to codes in hopes of providing mission-based housing.
Having a conversation is not an endorsement. Bob Chapman, a Durham developer who assisted in writing the SCAD proposal, is accused of overstating Habitat for Humanity of Durham’s co-sponsorship of SCAD. According to reports in INDY Week, SCAD enacted an unauthorized agreement through a third party.
“The same third party has been speaking and negotiating on the behalf of Habitat for Humanity of Durham with members of City Council and others,” INDY Week reported in a letter received from members of the Durham Habitat board.
Chapman, and other proponents of SCAD, may be guilty of overstating support of faith-based institutions. This play signifying backing of the good folks at Durham Habitat and local congregations is an unearned endorsement of a plan with significant moral and ethical concerns.
You must do more than infer an endorsement. You must earn that support.
Please, stop pimping my religion.
Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.
SCAD is potentially the worse thing to happen to Black people living in Durham since the freeway shattered the dreams of Black residents and businesses in the Hayti district. Black voters supported that mistake. This time it’s in the hands of a Black majority on the city council and one Brown representative.
If
they pass SCAD, shame on them.
Wow Dr Kenney! Thank you for breaking this out in such a way that we can clearly see the moving parts here. We must demand plans that are beneficial to the people who have waited as housing prices have soared in Durham. The no parking requirement is ridiculous. I have friends who live in high density cities and experience parking 4 block from their home. Let me know what I can do to help in this work.
ReplyDeleteYour summation sounds reasonable. Furthermore, even if there is the claimed “support from churches,” I want to know since when over the past 25 years did Durham churches get involved with community issues?
ReplyDeleteYou mean to tell me, churches can be silent as Black businesses continuously close; SILENT as Black people/children die in the streets and killed by the unrelenting guns of homicide at their front door; SILENT as gentrification runs rapid and force the poor out of their homes to build skyscrapers and unaffordable condominiums; SILENT as the population homeless grows and sleep on their doorsteps; SILENT as Black children are pushed out of school into the hands of deadly gang recruiters - And the church supposedly/finally gets involved to “adopt” a plan that makes no guaranteed commitment to address any of the aforementioned systemic sins?