 |
Community development is a complicated business. This comes as no surprise to observers of urban America, but it's reality has been brought home in recent years time and time again. As Mayor Bosley has articulated on numerous occasions -you can't have successful neighborhoods without renovated or new housing, and that requires income made possible with jobs, which in turn requires education that works and so on. A holistic or comprehensive approach is absolutely required. Success in one or two areas, without progress on other fronts, will not be sustainable.
The Consolidated Plan builds on a record of citizen outreach that has been unsurpassed in recent years. The findings and recommendations that are contained in this chapter build on about 50 meetings held during the spring as part of the Empowerment Zone planning process, another 6 meeting held during the summer in conjunction with the Human Development Corporation and about a dozen meetings held this fall. Collectively, this has been an opportunity to hear from most corners of St. Louis. Many of the ideas expressed by citizens have been heard before, but over the past year they have been expressed with a new clarity and urgency.
This Plan also builds on the recommendations of the Mayor's Neighborhood Development Strategic Planning Task Force, and the five transition team reports that it synthesized, as published in January 1994. It is worth summarizing the "guiding principles" articulated in that report, for they apply equally to this Plan.
Earlier chapters of this document have summarized concerns expressed by the citizens of St. Louis, and the major conditions and trends that characterize our City. Using this information, this chapter looks to the future and describes programs and projects that are recommended over the next five years.
In keeping with the HUD regulations, many topics relating to community development are examined with the purpose of identifying our priority needs. For each of these topics, there is a description of the services that are currently available, an analysis of the needs that must be addressed, recommended actions for the coming years, and a summation of available resources. During the next five years, progress will occur in many ways:
Housing will be the focus of a re-energized Citywide Residential Development Strategy designed to strengthen neighborhoods. Adopted in September 1994, the strategy focuses on a combination of rehabilitation, new construction and aid to homeowners in targeted neighborhoods (A map will be included in the final plan). The scope of this program will be to use a mix of financial resources, both public and private, to concentrate efforts, achieving a significant neighborhood impact and facilitating neighborhood stability. A major goal will be to strengthen the conventional housing market.
At the same time, renewed efforts will be made to help those with the most severe shelter problems -those who are homeless, living in unsatisfactory public housing, troubled with mental or physical disabilities, living with HIV/AIDS, or simply too poor to afford decent housing. While both public and private resources are insufficient, the City accepts its historic role to facilitate as much progress as possible.
Economic reinvestment must complement new housing activity. People want to live in relative proximity to places to shop and to work. Neighborhood viability is dependent not only on quality housing stock, but also on the neighborhood's accessibility to goods and services. Conversely, they do not want to live near land that has been partially or wholly abandoned by commercial and industrial interests.
Economic activity must be promoted at many different levels -major retail services that can bring convenience shopping back to neighborhoods from which it has disappeared; 21st century industries such as telecommunications or biotechnology which can create jobs for future generations; and assistance to small and start-up businesses run by St. Louis residents. ( A map will highlight potential development sites in the final plan).
Public Services and Facilities are essential to the health of the City. In an affluent community, many families do not have to rely on public services. That is not the case in St. Louis where high quality, professionally run recreation, health, safety, and other services are fundamental. In the face of limited resources, these services need to be expanded and delivered in a manner that is responsive to the needs of neighborhood residents.
The Plan examines the basic utilities, streets and other public infrastructure upon which all who live, work or visit the City depend. While taken for granted in our daily life, it is clear that the long term prosperity of St. Louis depends upon a constant reinvestment in this part of our community.
Progress in all of these areas is necessary. Neighborhoods that are not just stable but desirable places to live and work, can be achieved. It can't be done, however, by any one or two groups. Progress over the coming years will take partnerships between all the institutions in St. Louis - private businesses, non-profits, public employees at all levels of government, the volunteer community, and above all the citizens.
The recommendations that are outlined in this Chapter will require resources from many sources, both public and private. Each of segments describing priority needs within the City includes a section on appropriate resources. In some cases a multi-year program is in place or there is a reasonable expectation as to anticipated award. In other situations there is little knowledge as to the size of a future appropriation, or the probable success of a competitive grant. Especially difficult are those situations where federal legislation is still in question.
Attacking poverty in a concerted manner is a central goal of the City. Given the size and depth of the problem, it is a goal that cannot be achieved, certainly in the near term. The eradication of poverty will take far more in the way of resources and the commitment than City government is able to provide by itself.
Unhappily, the U.S. Census Bureau reports that even as the nation came out of its recession, last year the number of people living in poverty (less than $14,763 for a family of four) increased. The lowest 20 percent of U.S. households saw their income decrease; those without health insurance rose to almost 40 million. Nearly 23 percent of all children lived in poverty.
The rest of this chapter describes many of the policies and programs designed to reduce poverty. As described in past documents, including the Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy and the Empowerment Zone Proposal, the goals are familiar -increasing available jobs, conveying skills to secure employment, strengthening the "safety net", and helping provide shelter, food, and other basic staples of life.
Empowerment. Helping individuals to find ways to help themselves is a central goal. This is done by providing more opportunities for education at Community Education Centers (formerly Community Schools), at Recreation Centers, in Public Libraries and in many of other settings, over and above publicly supported schools. Empowerment also implies building confidence through mentoring and leadership programs, providing access to information, and above all listening to those in need.
Neighborhoods. Poverty can be fought in part by neighbors helping neighbors. Street watch, mobile patrols, clean-up and many other organized activities can supplement the informal supervision of children and helping the elderly that good neighbors have always done. The City's Neighborhood Stabilization Task Force (formerly Operation Conserv and Neighborhood Liaison Office) plays a vital role in helping neighborhoods organize themselves, and receive responsive municipal service.
Partnerships. The Empowerment Zone competition during 1994 was a reminder of the large reservoir of individuals and organizations that want to contribute. The City's Anti-Poverty strategy recognizes the importance of engaging businesses, non-profits, churches, fraternal groups, and other organizations from through out the region. The challenge is to match individuals and organizations that want to help with families and neighborhoods that are in need. To succeed, the resulting partnership must be one of respect, goodwill, and consensus.
Youth. It has become increasing clear that large segments of young City residents have been not received the attention, discipline and nurturing that children need. The results in certain neighborhoods are tragically evident. The City has responded to this situation with greater attention to job opportunities, summer recreation, volunteer services, and related initiatives. More needs to be done.
Public Funds. By definition, an anti-poverty strategy must pursue resources that can support new initiatives. Currently the City spends the maximum permitted under CDBG rules for social services; most of the other programs are also designed to support the low income residents. The same is true of Emergency Shelter Grants, Housing Opportunities for People with AIDS, and HOME Investment Partnership monies. An active program is in place to compete for support from state and federal government, foundations, and the business community.
Previous submissions of the City's Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy have addressed the question of barriers to affordable housing that may exist. The point has been made previously that a number of the City's ordinances have provisions that, in the short term, may translate into higher costs for low income families. Thus, to the extent that landlords pass through their costs that result from the need to comply with building and housing codes, rent levels may rise. On the other hand most observers believe that these codes are not only reasonable, but essential if the decay and abandonment of the City's housing stock is to be stopped. In the absence of codes that are enforced, the long term outlook would be one of substantially less available housing for low income households.
In the past year the City of St. Louis has initiated a variety of steps to improve the efficiency with which it carries out its priority needs. Foremost among these has been the establishment of a new Neighborhood Stabilization Task Force that will be based in the community. Members of Operation Conserv, the Neighborhood Liaison Office, and the Citizen Service Bureau have been combined into a group that will continue its "ombudsman" mission. The task force will work closely with neighborhood groups, and with both the operational and development oriented departments in order to resolve problems. By having these employees situated in four Community Education Center offices, rather than City Hall, the expectation is one of improved response to immediate needs. Greater responsiveness and communication were identified as high priority needs during the public involvement process.
A second institutional change will occur should the City of St. Louis be successful in the Empowerment Zone competition. If St. Louis wins either Empowerment Zone or Enterprise Community status, a thirty four person council will be formed. Consisting of four government representatives, twenty neighborhood representatives and ten advisory board representatives this council will oversee implementation of the Empowerment Zone strategic plan. Both the Council Members and staff are anticipated to work closely with all the prospective members of partnerships.
A third structural change is evident in the creation of the Missouri Family Investment Trust. This non-profit corporation exists to find new ways of delivering social services more effectively. The emphasis is on breaking down traditional department by department programs, and replacing them with more integrated service packages that are tailored to the individual needs of families. The success of the Walbridge Caring Communities provides a model for this kind of change.
The City of St. Louis is committed to improving coordination between governmental entities, other organizations that provide service in an area, and neighborhood residents. Evidence of that commitment is reflected in the public meetings, focus groups, neighborhood leaders workshop, communication with City departments and with other jurisdictions that were all part of the participation process associated with the preparation of this plan.
In recent years, the Community Development Agency has been increasingly active in joint efforts with the Public Housing Authority, the Missouri Housing Development Commission, and the local office of the Department of Housing and Urban Development. This cooperation occurs on specific projects such Vaugh Demonstration Project, Laclede Town redevelopment initiative, and the Police Home Ownership program. It also is reflected in more broad based projects such as the recent Public Housing task force.
Communication with health, mental and other service providers has been routinely conducted through organizations such as the St. Louis Homeless Network. The extent of communication expanded dramatically during the first half of 1994 with the collaborative effort to prepare an empowerment zone proposal. New connections were established with the Missouri Department of Social Services and other state departments; intense communication occurred between the City government and the non-profit service provider community. Additional coordination has occurred with various non-profit groups as part of the City-County analysis of impediments to fair housing.
Public housing residents have had opportunities for greater involvement in management. The Tenant Management Organizations are now represented on the Housing Authority Commission. Residents of public housing were active participants in the empowerment zone planning and as part of the Housing Authority Task Force. Members of Carr Square are involved in a home ownership experiment with support from the HOPE program. On-going coordination between the City and other groups concerned with housing will be a hallmark of the coming year.
An overall direction for addressing community development in St. Louis has been suggested. The discussion now turns to specific topics which the Consolidated Plan is required to address. Each of these topics is examined with emphasis on four considerations: the current services that are offered today by local government; the needs and challenges that are present today,and expected to intensify; recommendations for addressing the problems over the next three to five years; and resources that are available.
Complementing the narrative is the Priority Needs Summary Table. This required table portrays the relative priority assigned to the topic by designating one of four possible categories - high, medium, low, and no such need. The table also requires an estimate of the costs necessary to fix the problem, as it exists today, and as it is likely to change over the next five years. Given the complexity of these topics and the necessity of private, non-profit and public funds, these estimates must be considered preliminary, subject to further refinement.
Large cities in America have a huge array of problems. it is understandable that most local government effort must be devoted to the resolution of immediate problems; wide ranging, in-depth analysis of long range concerns is for many a luxury that has not received much attention. Moreover, in one document it is not possible to examine individual concerns in any detail. There is a danger that both the description of needs and recommendations will appear overly simplified.
There is also a danger that the required format of the Consolidated Plan gives an unduly pessimistic view. The regulations require a focus on major p[problems that exist, and how they might best be addressed. The reader is encouraged to recognize as well the many things that are positive about our city. The citizens of St. Louis face many challenges; there is also much for which to be grateful.
|
|