City Doesn't Have To Subsidize Rent For Homeless, Judge Rules

(Flickr User Hernan Hernandez)

When Governor Cuomo passed his belt-strangling budget back in April, one of the things that ended up on the cutting room floor was funding for the city's Advantage program, which helped 15,000 households with working family members by subsidizing up to $1,100 a month toward rent for up to two years. The state formerly paid $65 million toward the program, which has a budget of $140 million (out of which the feds pay $27 million and the city pays $48 million). With that money cut off, the city decided to scrap the whole thing, and now, after a court battle, a judge has give the Bloomberg administration the green light to do so.

Some advocates for the homelesswere never thrilled with Advantage, arguing that it resulted in homeless families living in apartments they couldn't afford without governmental subsidies. The Coalition for the Homeless has pushed for the "failed" program to be replaced with a less costly system. And Cuomo's office believed that the Bloomberg administration was bluffing about how much the program cost, with one aide telling the Times that "New York City has the funds to support the continuation of this program if it so chooses."

It's unclear what happens now for homeless families participating in Advantage. The Coalition for the Homeless website says "the appellate injunction requiring continued payments is still in place. The city paid or should have paid September rent payments for all Advantage tenants still in the program." Ultimately, however, the subsidies will end, and city officials have predicted that NYC's homeless family population will increase by 51 percent, requiring the city to build an additional 70 shelters. Paying to put a family in the shelter system for a month costs the city about $3,000, while the Advantage payments were $1,100 a month.

Steven Banks, chief attorney for the Legal Aid Society, which sued the city on behalf of Advantage recipients, tells the AP, "By winning, the city loses, since now thousands of formerly homeless families and individuals are at risk of losing their homes and flooding the shelter system." But in her ruling, Supreme Court Justice Judith J. Gische wrote, "The Advantage program, no matter how laudable its goals, is nothing more than a social benefit program, which (the city) had the right to terminate, based upon the lack of funding available for its continuation."

Contact the author of this article or email tips@gothamist.com with further questions, comments or tips.

By John Del Signore in News on September 14, 2011 7:05 PM

Comments [rss]

ANGRYGOD11

It might be a good time to wonder why these people choose to live in NYC. We have been and will continue to be an expensive place to live. It will sound cruel, but if if you cannot make it here, maybe you should consider living over there.
That said, I hope we don't just give one-way bus tickets to Florida since that's rather cruel.

meeneecat

Yes, that's what the city does. It will pay your one way ticket if you say you are going to leave. Regardless of whether you have somewhere to go. Also New York City is actually one of the better places to be homeless. There are places to sleep if necessary (subways, churches) and there's always food being gotten rid of by restaurants in addition to the food pantries and soup kitchens. Everything here is close together, whereas somewhere else a person might have to walk miles and miles just to get to some food, go to an organization or shelter or an ER if necessary.

rovingstorm

Isn't this the most salient point?

"Ultimately, however, the subsidies will end, and city officials have
predicted that NYC's homeless family population will increase by 51
percent, requiring the city to build an additional 70 shelters. Paying
to put a family in the shelter system for a month costs the city about
$3,000, while the Advantage payments were $1,100 a month."

Regardless of your feelings on whether or not homeless families "deserve" this subsidy, the City, ie, all of us taxpayers, are now going to pay MORE for the same people to live under WORSE conditions.

soothsayer

you should see the number of people on the streets collecting bottles and cans these days. it wasn't this bad.

Trustafarian

I've seen entire families (mother, father and two little kids) out picking through disgusting williamsburg bar trash for bottles. breaks my heart.

FU Boy

Even my neighbors are scrounging the trash bags for bottles / cans before DOS rolls down the street.

josegarcia333

http://www.pathwaystohousing.o... has an interesting and successful model

Lisanne!

It wasn't a good idea in the first place. How many of these people would be able to afford to pay their rent fully after two years? What was being done to help these people to become self-sufficient?

We need better answers, and a better system of ensuring that the homeless won't end up back on the street when support ends.

randomtransplant

How about rent people can afford and jobs that pay for it?

Lisanne!

But you have to find a way of making that happen.

randomtransplant

Its alot more plausible than most other suggestions.

m015094

The McDonalds around the corner from me is hiring. Minimum wage is $7.25. At 60 hours per week, that's $1740 a month (before taxes). Spend $700/month on rent and you have PLENTY left for food, clothes, etc.

And don't give me shit about working 40 hours. That is a luxury many of us (I work about 70/week) don't have.

Oh, but it's easier to just give the poor money rather than expecting them to work for it.

Fucking bums.

meeneecat

Not everyone in these shelters are able bodied. Have you ever visited a shelter or worked w/ homeless or at a soup kitchen? A good percentage of them have major health problems and/or are disabled and it prevents them from working. This is how this stuff happens. Joe falls on the job, hurts his back, can no longer do said job, ends up loosing his housing and turns up in a shelter. Many homeless are also vets. Do you know why so many vets are homeless, by the way? You really think everyone just ends up there because they are lazy and won't take a minimum wage job at that McDonalds around your block? Seriously, get out from under that rock you have been living under! It's embarrassing that there's people that think like this...but I know there's lots actually.

randomtransplant

Its so easy to expose your true colors.

Whoever pushed you around doesn't represent an entire economic class, no.

Damn - there's a Mc D's around the corner from you and you think your comfortable enough in life to be so elitist about others? They don't want you at their table, they want you bouncing the door from the anteroom.

unretrofiedforu

You're an infantile with no grasp on reality.

ANGRYGOD11

Companies like McDonalds don't want full-time employees. They don't have to pay benefits to part-timers. This is becoming a very common situation and a bad surprise to people who remember full-time work was often an option.

Guest

Then get two jobs. And a lot of jobs don't offer benefits (I'm assuming you're talking about health care) until you have worked there 1 year. When I was working for minimum wage at a restaurant a few years back, I had to get my own health insurance. I bought a high deductible plan and it cost me whole whopping $110 a month.

And if you're thinking of replying "It's not that easy to get two jobs," my preemptive reply is who the fuck said life is easy. Grow up.

whatidsay

Are you living in a cave? In case you hadn't heard, it's difficult enough to find and keep one job these days and you're talking about getting two. Hope you have extra room in that cave, because there's going to be a lot more homeless folks hitting the streets soon.

m015094

Keep pushing that bullshit. There are plenty of jobs - they are just shitty, minimum wage jobs. Somehow any High School kid can find these jobs, but it's beyond you?

Try again.