Genuine question: what is the non municipal bond approach on the table?
Show this thread
-
Many democrats in congress too
Right. And it’s also that - to the extent that section 9 is not very flexible and bars you from getting other types of subsidies - maybe it puts us in a politically stronger position if there is a way to stay public, but be funded through section 8.
-
-
Dems don’t like funding section 9 not just for ideological reasons (though there are plenty) but because it’s political loser: big lift to bring Rs to table, no delivery for their district (it’s really mostly concentrated in NY)
-
So one argument for the preservation trust is that by keeping NYCHA public but creating a workaround that makes the agency eligible for section 8 funding streams, we strengthen our hand politically both in DC and in Albany.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
It definitely does imo, if for no other reason than it would make public housing residents part of a broader constituency that both has more political and organizing power than public housing residents currently have and would have even more with their inclusion in the coalition.
-
Right. So the answer to Jenny’s original question is yes and no. YES, some people (besides just Dems and R’s in Congress, some socialists!) see Sec 9 as a liability to keeping NYCHA public. But also NO, no one I know or have seen is OPPOSED to more Sec 9 funding
- Show replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.