|
Imagine, if you will, a
parallel universe where the snow falls in gross tons, the summer is alive
with heat and the fall turns foliage into a spectacular display. The
grocery stores are the size of football fields and in turn football is
king. Now comes the deviation. People in this parallel universe live,
for the most part, in pure harmony. Different races, cultures, religions
and belief systems are peppered throughout each street and municipality.
Government representatives spend their days thoughtfully discussing
funding allocations for new roads, education initiatives, recreation
centers and public safety.
Flashback to the real
Buffalo…
After a public hearing on August 15th, Mayor Anthony M.
Masiello has determined that Buffalo voters will have the opportunity to
decide the fate of the Common Council in November. Many political issues
are highly charged in some way or another, and this one is no exception.
The downsizing plan for the council has floated allegations of racism to
the surface while fiscal and policy concerns have been submerged.
The premise of the plan
began innocuously enough—the population of Buffalo has diminished along
with its finances and there is a desperate need to recoup funds in as many
areas as possible. After major cuts in our educational and public safety
programs, focus shifted to the Common Council, which operates on a budget
of nearly three million of the city’s $370-million-dollar budget. The
Buffalo Council currently boasts 13-members: one president, three at-large
members and the representatives of the nine districts. The new plan would
cut four seats, none of which are directly responsible for a district: the
three at-large members and the Council President.
In a 7-6 vote that was
split across racial lines, the Common Council approved the hotly contested
plan in late June. Now it is up to the voters to decide the final
outcome. If Buffalonians approve the Council-backed plan, minority
representation will be cut in half and Council President James W. Pitts,
who The Buffalo News asserts has long been seen as “the de
facto black mayor,” will have his position eliminated.
Due to the
controversy involved in this plan many significant issues have been left
unaddressed. Buffalo is in a crisis situation financially yet this plan
was born out of alliances and attitudes rather than reason. The result is
a plan that has destroyed not only the community's confidence in city
government, but also upsets the system of checks and balances between two
of its branches.
Scott W. Gehl, HOME’s
executive director and a former councilman explains. “At-large was a
reform of the Progressive era. If you eliminate at-large representation
you not only deprive the council of members who must by virtue of their
constituencies take into account the entire city’s perspective, but you
also do away with a council president which will have the effect of
shifting relative power to the executive branch."
Segregation by design
While the news of the
Common Council’s downsizing has been digested and regurgitated in
virtually every publication in Buffalo, what is rarely discussed as a
contributing factor to the racial debate is one of the major issues that
Insight is famous for reporting on. Buffalo is one of the most
segregated cities in the entire nation and much of this is due to a
staggering history of housing discrimination.
Back in 1963 when HOME
was founded, housing discrimination was widespread and overt. Over the
years some of these practices have become more closeted but no less
insidious. In addition to individual landlords or sellers denying housing
to certain groups, there are also three forms of institutional
discrimination that have had lingering effects on the city’s racial
landscape.
One such practice,
redlining has been prevalent through the decades and served to
disenfranchise minority communities. Redlining is a process in which
financial institutions do not issue mortgages, or spike the price of
mortgages in a certain area based on its racial composition. This makes
owning a home difficult if not impossible for many in our community. While
redlining by major financial institutions has tapered off over the
decades, it is now manifesting itself through insurance redlining and
predatory lending schemes that are ravaging our city.
Blockbusting is another
historic tactic that has created racial disparity in Buffalo
neighborhoods. Real estate agents would inform homeowners that their
home’s value was about to decline because minorities were moving into
their area. Panicked white homeowners would then sell their home at a
lower cost to the agent. Then, in turn, the agent would resell the home
to a minority client at a steep price increase.
While blockbusting is
less prevalent today than it was in the 1960's, steering continues to be a
persistent threat to diversification. Steering is a practice of limiting
housing choices to certain people based on things like race, national
origin, or disability. Early on, steering was often done by not making all
the listing available to certain people or telling people outright that
they would not be welcome in certain areas.
Today, the practice of
steering involves more subtle language, which belies the underhandedness
involved. “I am sorry, our property (in the suburbs) is completely
rented, but we do have a wonderful unit available in (the inner-city).”
“I think you would be much happier in our other (read inner-city)
property.”
The
aftermath
As we enter our 40th
year, HOME has seen many cases of housing discrimination-- some blatant
some more subtle—all of which contribute to our segregated landscape. For
Buffalo, the fact that government was created to represent and resemble
its people is a double-edge sword. Our government indeed represents us,
yet in doing so, it mirrors our segregation.
The fact that the Common
Council is seen as a racial entity speaks volumes for the lack of
integration in Buffalo and is a reflection of the rest of the region.
More shockingly, many Buffalonians view these districts as districts of
race. The
Buffalo News,
in an article published
a day after the last public hearing on the downsizing dilemma stated:
“Supporters of the nine-member model insist that plan is racially
balanced. Four districts would be predominately white, while four would
be predominately black. The ninth district—Niagara—would have a nearly
equal percentage of white and minority residents.” Curiously based on
this premise we are comfortable with the fact that our districts are
segregated racially, just as long as when combined, the city balances.
While the racial
inequity in some districts (see chart) are subtle, other districts are
shockingly disproportionate. Yet these inequities, great and small, tell
nothing of the sharp racial divide within neighborhoods that are contained
by the borders of those districts. Years of discriminatory practices have
led to neighborhoods that are racially imbalanced in 2002. This lack of
balance is cheating our neighborhoods from flourishing with the richness
that diversity brings to all of us.
While HOME fights hard
and has gained a great deal of ground in the struggle for fair housing,
there is still a great deal of work to do as evidenced by this most recent
political debacle. HOME’s goal of insuring that our neighborhoods are open
to everyone is lofty, but together with support from members like you, we
can continue to slowly and steadily make integration a reality. Then and
only then, big or small, will our government truly represent us all
equally. |
