Another Shooting in Section 8 Housing Along Armour BLVD

On Sunday night, another man was shot inside an apartment building. The Building, part of the Kenwood Apartments, is one of several Section 8 Housing units along a 10 block stretch of Armour Boulevard between Gillham and Troost (the Kenwood is officiall on Locust, but borders Armour).

And this isn't the first shooting to happen in this stretch of apartment units this year.

Thus far, no fewer than 5 people have been killed along this stretch of Armour Boulevard -- with at least three of the victims actually being found inside the buildings - -including this incident in March, and a 7 month old girl killed in September -- not to mention this incident in September.

In all of the cases where the victim was found inside buildings, all occurred inside of apartments that were designated for project-based Section 8 housing.This also isn't the first incident that has occurred inside the Kenwood Apartments -- over Labor Day weekend, 2008, Gary McElroy was shot dead on the front steps leading into these apartments.

The purpose of project-based Section 8 is to provide safe, affordable housing for people who, because of low incomes, cannot afford it. However, it doesn't take much of reading the crime reports to realize that these project-based apartments are NOT safe for their tenants -- or for the surrounding neighborhoods.

Who's responsibility it is to solve the poblem remains somewhat elusive. There are a lot of people who could accept responsibility, but none who seem overly willing to. The buildings are all owned by out-of-town corporations. Most are managed by one of two major management companies. All are following Housing and Urban Development guidelines (although even HUD even acknowledges that project-based Section 8 housing -- where all units in a given building are designated for low-income housing and creating in the early 1970s, is not preferred to tenant based programs that allow tenants to live anywhere they want with assistance provided)*. And the city of Kansas City also needs to accept responsibility for its lack of a detailed housing plan that will provide for removing project-based section 8, and replacing it with tenant based programs.

* From the HUD website:

Most housing professionals agree that concentrating assisted-housing for low- and very low-income Americans in dense, urban areas is not an effective use of scarce affordable housing resources. Over the past decade, professionals in the affordable housing industry have turned increasingly to mixed-income housing as an alternative to traditional assisted-housing initiatives. Mixed-income housing is an attractive option because, in addition to creating housing units for occupancy by low-income households, it also contributes to the diversity and stability of American communities.

And while everyone seems more than willing to deny there is a problem (or at least, that it is THEIR problem), people are being found dead in these apartments and residents are living in fear and prisoners in their own home.

What makes this additionally troubling is that the problem is completely fixable -- if all of the vested parties would admit their is a problem and move forward, quickly , with a plan. This isn't a complicated social problem -- it is actually a problem created, in part, to bad housing policy that has ignored the opinion of experts in the field of public housing and concentrated low-income housing in these buildings.

It's time the city and all vested parties step up to do so. We cannot continue to ignore this problem any more.

For more reading:

Another murder on Armour, A Neighborhood Meeting, and a City Woefully Behind on Policy

Another murder on Armour -- if you care, make your voice heard

Even random shootings are somewhat predictable when bad public policy is at play

This is what happens when you consolidate project-based section 8 housing

Creating modern day ghettos

Update:  More from KCTV5 on the story -- I wish they had actually tried to find one of the residents of the buildings to talk too so it wasn't just a Hyde Park thing, but they've got the story.

Comments

[Kevin Sullivan]

HPNA has been in dialogue with the major players (owners, property managers, city council, police, federal representatives, HUD, MHDC) for nearly 2 years now. And we go round and round, fingers pointed to the party not in the room. The city allowed the concentration to happen and it will continue because the city does not have a housing policy. HUD and MHDC are under no obligation to change the situation as long as city policy (or lack of one) allows this. In the meanwhile, we need to constantly apply pressure to the owners to provide the necessary security. Amazingly, they deny the violence is a result of poor management. Instead, they try to blame the community as a whole - insisting the community help them pay for security for their properties.

[88]

Tom Coyle needs to be fired.

Keep in mind Wayne Cauthen hired him, and hasn't been able to stand the guy for the last two years, but he won't fire him.

[Al]

Brett,

We need to understand exactly what the city did here. They approved this in in spite of overwhelming evidence, research, policy and conventional wisdom.

This is negligence.

Why don't we sue the city for neglkigence in planning (or similar concept) to roll back the section 8?

We also need to understand what Jan and Beth were doing while all of this was going down.

How many employees of Hush Blackwell and Posinelli do we have in Hyde Park?

[Brent]

Al,

In fairness, the renewal of the two major apartments in question was passed through Mayor Barnes' office. Most are pointing to an insider into Barnes' staff, Donovan Mouton, as the person who signed off on this. Jim Glover, who was the head of the housing committee at the time and who lives two blocks from one of the buildings, says it never went through the Housing Committee.

So at this point, neither Jan nor Beth can be held accountable for this happening....however, we're on year two of them being in office and thus far, the city has not stepped up to do what it needs to do (create a comprehensive housing plan) in order to fix the problem -- and I know they're both very aware of the issue.

[RobyneT]

Do you really think a "comprehensive housing plan" will stop the murders on Armour? At best, the plan will disperse these folks and get them out of your neighborhood. What is needed is better security, jobs, and a cultural expectation in these apartment buildings of decorum. That can only be achieved in partnerships - with churches, with Neighborhood Services, with the Full Employment Council. Have they stepped up with "comprehensive plans" of their own? Have they been to your meetings? Get off the soapbox Brett and get moving on approaches to stop the violence.

[Brent]

Robyne,

Did you click through to the link from HUD and their thoughts on project-based section 8 housing? Even HUD doesn't agree with it, but they had to renew it because the city has no comprehensive housing plan.

It should be no secret to anyone that high concentrations of low-income people end up being crime-ridden areas. You can witness this every day in pockets on Kansas City's East side.

There are major social issues that play into this.

However, this is different in that these buildings are areas where the government (HUD, KCMO, Missouri Housing) have FORCED low income people to all live in the same vertical high-rise and consolidated the poverty. So while the same problems that inflict much of KC's east side are based on social issue, this one is 100% government-created.

Virtually every expert in the field notes that concentrating Section 8 does not allow people the same opportunities to get back on their feet as voucher-based systems. Listening to people who live in the buildings that are scared for their lives in their own homes is just tragic -- and no way for people to get back on their feet -- and so the cycle continues.

Yes, there are some things that need to be done to increase security, etc. But the long term solve is to end the use of project-based section 8 -- a system that essentially creates a place for poor people that was designed to keep them away from everyone else (circa the early 1970s when people were intentionally put in these buildings to keep them out of upscale neighborhoods.)

I'm on my soapbox on this because EVERYONE IS WANTING TO IGNORE THE PROBLEM! When we talk with the apartment owners, they deny it is their problem and point to the apartment management. When we talk to the apartment management, they deny it is their problem. When we talk to the city, they point to the apartment owners. When we talk to HUD, they point to the city.

There is a very real problem here -- but until poeple want to admit that it's a problem, it will continue to exist. Even when people point to there being a problem, they get ridiculed for supposedly trying to push the problem just out of their neighborhood and accused of being racist.

The crime statistics support that there is a problem.

Experts in the field indicate that project based Section 8 is not effective solution vs voucher-based systems.

And if everyone wants to ignore this, then I think I have every right to be on my soapbox.

[PAMM - People Against Mad Mothers]

Robyne didn't even read it close enough to get your name right.

DISPERSING SECTION 8 HOUSING IS PART OF THE PLAN ROBYNE.

[MichelleD]

More gunfire last night...