AFS Cinema
A Neighborly Cause
RECEIVED Sun., Nov. 6, 2016
Dear Editor,
I was reading your article recently on Reedy Spigner's attempt to sell his home ["A Historic Lack of Compassion," News, Nov. 4]. I feel the real problem is not the city's desire to preserve small urban homes, but the inability of fellow Austinites to make a financial investment to benefit the lives of all Austinites.
Like many neighborhoods in Austin, my street also rapidly increased in value since my childhood. My parents were able to invest in repairing and remodeling our home, and eventually sold the house to pay for my college education. If we, as Austinites, want to create a future where this is an option for all homeowners, then we need to invest our tax dollars in all neighborhoods.
While Austin does have several home repair programs to aid low-income residents, such as NHCD [Neighborhood Housing and Community Development], we have never done enough to truly fight the housing inequalities in our city. We, as taxpayers, should give individuals the ability to improve their own homes instead of being forced to leave the city. Programs that give money to homeowners to repair their dwellings also create more job opportunities in our city. Hopefully those homeowners we invest in will support local business by hiring local contractors to improve and repair their housing.
Furthermore, Austin needs to invest in better infrastructure in our lower-income neighborhoods, maybe finally lobby the state to move many of their offices closer to the people who work in them? There are several different ideas to help establish a historic district that also meets the needs of its residents. Why not work with Austin Community College to expand its campus to new locations, and provide adult education classes to underserved communities? Instead of investing in public housing, we should be spending our tax dollars on successful programs like Section 8 vouchers and having a comprehensive citywide rental registration program. We could also fight sprawl by transforming our urban prairies into public parks, or shopping centers in food deserts.
Large- and small-scale improvements in our poor neighborhoods is a better long-term strategy than demolishing the structures we want to preserve. Large-scale improvements, like the ones mentioned earlier, increase the value of homes, while small-scale incentive programs give residents the ability to maintain their homes, despite the rising property taxes. Maybe we should invest in these ideas, instead of another animal shelter?
I was reading your article recently on Reedy Spigner's attempt to sell his home ["A Historic Lack of Compassion," News, Nov. 4]. I feel the real problem is not the city's desire to preserve small urban homes, but the inability of fellow Austinites to make a financial investment to benefit the lives of all Austinites.
Like many neighborhoods in Austin, my street also rapidly increased in value since my childhood. My parents were able to invest in repairing and remodeling our home, and eventually sold the house to pay for my college education. If we, as Austinites, want to create a future where this is an option for all homeowners, then we need to invest our tax dollars in all neighborhoods.
While Austin does have several home repair programs to aid low-income residents, such as NHCD [Neighborhood Housing and Community Development], we have never done enough to truly fight the housing inequalities in our city. We, as taxpayers, should give individuals the ability to improve their own homes instead of being forced to leave the city. Programs that give money to homeowners to repair their dwellings also create more job opportunities in our city. Hopefully those homeowners we invest in will support local business by hiring local contractors to improve and repair their housing.
Furthermore, Austin needs to invest in better infrastructure in our lower-income neighborhoods, maybe finally lobby the state to move many of their offices closer to the people who work in them? There are several different ideas to help establish a historic district that also meets the needs of its residents. Why not work with Austin Community College to expand its campus to new locations, and provide adult education classes to underserved communities? Instead of investing in public housing, we should be spending our tax dollars on successful programs like Section 8 vouchers and having a comprehensive citywide rental registration program. We could also fight sprawl by transforming our urban prairies into public parks, or shopping centers in food deserts.
Large- and small-scale improvements in our poor neighborhoods is a better long-term strategy than demolishing the structures we want to preserve. Large-scale improvements, like the ones mentioned earlier, increase the value of homes, while small-scale incentive programs give residents the ability to maintain their homes, despite the rising property taxes. Maybe we should invest in these ideas, instead of another animal shelter?
Hank Morgan