Gotham Gazette

The Place for New York Policy and politics

Opinion

Opinion

5 Steps to Properly Combat Housing Discrimination in New York


court water board

(photo: Edwin J. Torres/ Mayoral Photography Office)


The landmark report on housing discrimination on Long Island recently published by Newsday requires action by government and the real estate industry in the region but also in Albany and statewide. The rampant discrimination revealed is not limited to Long Island and displays a dramatic failure by New York State government that must be corrected.

Newsday’s three-year investigation of real estate sales practices on Long Island – titled “Long Island Divided” – involved paired testers (one white, the other “of color”) and revealed widespread separate and unequal treatment of potential homebuyers who were black, Hispanic, and Asian, and of other minority communities. Black testers experienced disparate treatment 49 percent of the time, compared with 39 percent for Hispanics and 19 percent for Asian testers.

The results of Newsday’s investigation mirror those of an earlier investigation that our two organizations jointly conducted to determine whether black renters on Long Island were being discriminated against in the housing options that they were offered. Our similar use of paired testing revealed that in both Nassau and Suffolk counties property owners and management companies were showing apartments to white applicants and not to black applicants. Our findings led to successful litigation resulting in court-mandated settlements in 2014 and 2016 with the offending rental housing providers. 

The challenge for New York State government is that racial discrimination in housing in New York is systemic. The problem is not limited to the sales or rental market or to the real estate industry. It’s not limited to Long Island. The stark patterns of residential racial segregation evident across the state – and throughout the nation – were created by the intentional and coordinated actions of the federal and state governments, housing industry, and other institutions over many decades, and this segregation has been sustained by the same institutions.

The Fair Housing Justice Center and ERASE Racism have, therefore, developed a five-point plan to address this widespread pattern of residential racial discrimination.

First, fully utilize the licensing power of the State to better regulate real estate licensees. States possess the authority to regulate the behavior of licensed businesses and individuals. New York should more effectively exercise its authority to regulate the real estate industry. Among other actions, the New York Department of State’s Division of Licensing Services should review the results of the Newsday investigation to determine if any of the licensees engaged in conduct that warrants disciplinary action including possible suspension or revocation of licenses.

Second, create a well-resourced, proactive, and better coordinated fair housing enforcement strategy. The public agencies charged with enforcing local, state, and federal fair housing should coordinate efforts to review Newsday’s findings to determine if any warrant enforcement action to obtain compliance with fair housing laws. Greater emphasis should be placed on conducting investigations aimed at documenting systemic housing discrimination. While complaints still need to be investigated in a timely and thorough manner, significant resources must also be devoted to conducting proactive testing investigations. 

Housing discrimination has evolved over time. Before passage of fair housing laws, discrimination was overt. Housing consumers of color were frequently met with slammed doors and racial epithets. Now the “slammed door” has been replaced with a “revolving door” where people are often politely escorted in and then away from the desired housing. The victimized person is usually unaware that discrimination occurred, and this reality calls into question the efficacy of public agencies solely pursing a complaint-responsive approach to enforcing fair housing laws. 

Third, the real estate industry should take affirmative steps to ensure compliance with fair housing laws. The Long Island Board of Realtors has a special responsibility here, but industry-wide action is needed. The industry’s trade association should provide model fair housing policy statements – and explain the consequences of non-compliance – to member real estate firms and their agents detailing best practices in non-discriminatory real estate sales and marketing. Real estate companies should adopt affirmative hiring practices to create more diverse sales forces.

Fourth, affirmatively further fair housing in all housing and community development activities at the local, state, and federal levels. In that connection, New York State should amend its Human Rights Law in two ways. First, it should explicitly prohibit discriminatory action by local public agencies involved in housing, land-use and zoning, or community development to ensure that their efforts are not perpetuating segregation by making housing unavailable based on race, national origin, etc. Second, similar to what California did in 2018, the law should require state agencies and departments, local jurisdictions, public housing authorities, and other public entities receiving state or federal funds for housing and community development to “affirmatively further fair housing” and take no action that is materially inconsistent with this obligation.

Fifth, New York State should implement fair housing legislative initiatives, policy changes, and support for programs that expand access to housing opportunities in all neighborhoods. Among other actions, the State should allocate funding for regional mobility assistance programs that help families with rental subsidies to access housing opportunities in low-poverty neighborhoods with well-resourced schools. The State should enact a statewide “Equitable Share” housing plan and establish a minimum affordable housing goal for every community. The State should also create a Statewide Zoning Appeals Board to ensure that local decisions meet State standards.

The issues illuminated by Newsday’s investigation have been exposed for all to see. Legislative initiatives, policy changes, and enforcement action are now required to address the State’s widespread failings, which have become all too self-evident.

***
Elaine Gross is President of ERASE Racism, the Long Island-based civil rights organization. Fred Freiberg is Executive Director of the Fair Housing Justice Center, a regional fair housing organization based in New York City. On Twitter @EraseRacism & @FredFreiberg.

***
Have an op-ed idea or submission for Gotham Gazette? Email This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

King Saga Shows Need to Bring Real Ethics Reform to the City Council


council andy king

Council Member Andy King (photo: William Alatriste/City Council)


Another day, another egregious ethics violation, and it’s still business as usual in the City Council. Last week, the Council’s Committee on Standards and Ethics announced yet another investigation, the third to be precise, into Council Member Andy King’s behavior.

New charges allege that King actively tried to circumvent the Council-imposed ‘monitor,’ seemingly a glorified babysitter since he could not be trusted to act appropriately with his staff, and violated a majority of the disciplinary provisions imposed by the Council in the fall. New allegations include misappropriation of city funds for his personal benefit. 

The Council had every chance to remove him this fall, yet in an appalling 34-12 vote on his expulsion, the Council decided to punt, and in a separate vote opted to suspend him instead. Here begins a renewed round of flimsy excuses and attempts to hide behind precedent from those who voted against his expulsion.

I of course support restorative justice and giving people a second chance, but this is a Council member who has been warned for the umpteenth time and is clearly more emboldened to do whatever he wants. 

The Council is long overdue to rethink ethics oversight. Time and again the Council is asked to police its own members. And time and again, we’ve seen just how ineffective, broken, and inequitable this process is. There’s a better way.

The theory of change is not radical: remove ethics oversight from the political power structure and start a meaningful process to build a system, with input from staff members and aides, that will  protect workers and restore the public’s faith in the Council. This, out of necessity, will require a truly independent ethics oversight body.

But that’s just the first step. No New Yorker should face harassment on the job. It is unacceptable to protect Council members who have demeaned and harassed their employees, like King, who should have been expelled, and avoid severe repercussions for their behavior. The lack of accountability only creates a perverse permission structure that allows this type of deplorable behavior to flourish. That’s why I stand with Harassment Free NYCC, a courageous group of current and former City Council staffers, in their fight for a safe and inclusive work environment.

It’s simply not good enough to do the bare minimum. City Council staffers must be given the same opportunities and benefits as millions of other city employees and be allowed to unionize. I remain hopeful that the burgeoning union, the Association of Legislative Employees, is able to make significant progress on their unionization drive over the next year.

But this kind of reform also requires that the ‘but-this-is-how-we’ve-always-done-it’ mentality is shoved aside. In Albany, we’ve already seen the impact of what can happen when a group of insurgent candidates run, win, and create the space to upend antiquated norms for the better. As someone who used to work in City Council, I know there are many short- and long-term changes that can be made if we empower the staff themselves.

The looming realignment and wave of brand new councilmembers coming to New York City politics and government in 2021 is fertile ground for such structural change. Which is why we need an energized and ambitious cohort of new elected officials to capitalize on this unique opportunity to reimagine how the Council does business. It’s vital that independent reformers, not those beholden to a calcified Council culture and party bosses, are part of the new wave. 

***
Brandon West is a candidate for City Council in Brooklyn’s District 39 and is the former president of the New Kings Democrats (NKD). On Twitter @btwest.

***
Have an op-ed idea or submission for Gotham Gazette? Email This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

Colossal Failures by New York Budget Division Bring Turmoil and Danger to Medicaid Program


Cuomo state budget

Gov. Cuomo & Budget Director Mujica (photo: Governor's Office)


The New York State Division of the Budget surprised the public this past November with an announcement the State faced a $6.1 billion deficit to close for the 2021 budget due by April 1, 2020. The DOB disclosed in its Mid-Year Update that Medicaid costs were exploding -- dramatically more than anticipated -- in both the budget adopted in April 2019 for the current year (fiscal year 2020), as well as for the next one (FY 2021). The budget agency said the situation demanded immediate cuts to both Medicaid and the overall budget.

The Cuomo administration, in its January 24 submission to the Legislature of the new budget plan, proposed $2.5 billion in new reductions to the Medicaid program for FY 2021, as well as incorporating almost $900 million in cuts for the current budget year that began being implemented in November.

The governor’s $2.5 billion cut to projected Medicaid spending would be implemented through the appointment of the Medicaid Redesign Team, which includes representatives from providers, unions, and some other groups, and is tasked with reconfiguring services to achieve savings that would reach the target reduction. If unsuccessful, or if the Legislature fails to adopt the MRT redesign, the Cuomo budget plan includes a fallback to an across-the-board $2.5 billion cut. At a joint legislative budget hearing on January 29, the Greater New York Hospital Association testified that those cuts would amount to 10% of the entire Medicaid program in New York.

The City of New York expressed alarm about another proposal in the governor’s budget proposal that would require local governments to pay for increased Medicaid costs that the State of New York has been absorbing in recent years. Mayor de Blasio testified in Albany on February 10 that the city has very little control over the state-run federal program and that this potential cost-shift could force the city to pay $1.1 billion more for Medicaid expenses in its own budget and warned the city’s public hospital system, Health + Hospitals, could be severely affected. The Cuomo administration has disputed the city’s estimates.

DOB Knew A Year Ago Medicaid Costs Were Escalating Rapidly
Despite the public’s lack of awareness of spiraling Medicaid costs, the Division of Budget and the State Health Department knew a year ago, before last year’s budget was adopted, that Medicaid spending was wildly out of control. The Empire Center for Public Policy, an Albany-based think tank and budget watchdog, accused the Cuomo administration of concealing the deficits in a detailed analysis released in December, following months of similar criticism from both the Empire Center and the Citizens Budget Commission. The Empire Center’s work helped blow open the Medicaid budget crisis and helped guide my own analysis.

DOB released documents after the budget was adopted last year that severely under-reported Medicaid spending, creating the impression there was no serious problem. The DOB’s Mid-Year Update was issued late, in late November, for the period April 1, 2019-September 30, 2019, seven months after the April 1, 2019 adoption of the 2020 budget. 

As the State Legislature and the governor were finalizing enactment of the 2020 budget in late March of last year, the State Health Department was informing the Division of the Budget that the payments of Medicaid bills were so much larger than anticipated that the State would violate a spending cap on the Medicaid program by $1.7 billion for the fiscal year ending March 30, 2019.

The DOB and the Health Department then deferred the payment of the $1.7 billion to Medicaid providers several days into the new fiscal year that began on April 1, 2019. The deferral meant that the State Medicaid budget for 2019 had run over its projection from a year earlier by 10%, and Governor Cuomo and the Legislature had just adopted a budget, with a baseline Medicaid spending for the start of 2020 that was already $1.7 billion higher than 2019. The whole budget was out of balance as well and not being reported as such.

Despite DOB and the Health Department’s decision to push the Medicaid payment into the new fiscal year, DOB’s 2020 Enacted Budget Financial Plan released in April 2019 contained Medicaid spending numbers that were obviously wrong, 

The FY2020 Budget Released by DOB in April 2020 was Clearly Erroneous
Below are the FY2019 and FY2020 DOH Medicaid spending projections taken from the Enacted Budget Financial Plans. The extra $1.7 billion deferred Medicaid payment, which should have been reported in either FY19 or FY20, is nowhere to be found in the excerpts of the Medicaid budget below:

     

FY'19 Enacted

FY'20 Projected

FY'21 Projected

DOH MEDICAID ENACTED 2019

20,358

21,490

22,535

           
     

FY'19 Results

FY'20 Enacted

FY'21 Projected

DOH MEDICAID ENACTED 2020

20,476

21,685

22,699

Instead, the deferral and the extra spending appear in the November 2019 Mid-Year Update all rolled into 2020, which now appears as $3.34 billion higher than FY19, bringing the expenditure to $23.82 billion.

   

FY'19 Results

FY'20 Updated

FY'21 Projected

DOH MEDICAID

20,476

23,821

26,193

       

Even though the $1.7 billion Medicaid payment was due in March 2019, meaning fiscal year 2019, it is not incorporated into the 2019 results. But DOB knew in April 2019 the payment had been deferred; after all, the agency had ordered it. The real result for FY19 should have been $22.1 billion, presented in April, with a correct projection for 2020. Instead, the Mid-Year Update put all the spending into 2020.

Following October 2019 New York Times reporting, and criticism by budget watchdog groups that the state had delayed Medicaid payments in 2019, DOB acknowledged major problems for the first time in a public document released on October 17, 2019, called the Annual Information Statement, intended for investors in state bonds. The State Comptroller reported on the problem a few weeks later, but it was not until the Mid-Year Update that the state was restating the problems as severe.

Going back to April 2018, the adopted FY2019 budget contained a colossal underestimate of the costs of the Medicaid program, which would affect the 2020 estimate and the 2021 estimate by billions of dollars. Medicaid spending projections simply had no basis in reality. Here’s the Mid-Year Update again, presented in November 2019 but this time with a serious Reality Check:

   

FY'19 Results

FY'20 Updated

FY'21 Projected

DOH MEDICAID

20,476

23,821

26,193

As stated above, the real baseline for 2019 was $22.1 billion after accounting for the deferred spending. And this made the spending forecasts for 2021 even more spectacularly mistaken. The Mid-Year Update forecasts what the spending would have been but for the abrupt and drastic curtailments implemented months ago and proposed for FY2021.

In April 2018 (FY2019), the Enacted Financial Plan showed Medicaid spending rising from $20.35 billion that year to $22.53 billion in FY2021. But the Mid-Year Update shows Medicaid spending rising to $26.19 billion in FY2021, an increase of $5.7 billion, or 28%, in just two years.

Why the stupendous error?
Frankly, the State Division of the Budget did not have a handle on all the many forces the state had set in motion for the Medicaid program:

The minimum wage increased.

DOB knew in 2016 that the multi-step minimum wage increase enacted in that year would bring the wage floor from $9 an hour to $15 an hour in New York City by the beginning of 2019, while a phase-in toward $15 an hour continued to take place in the suburbs and Upstate New York in 2020 and 2021. The April 2019 budget for FY2020 estimated the impact for FY2020 would be $1.1 billion. The Mid-Year Update estimated the FY2020 impact would be $1.5 billion and for 2021 $1.8 billion. DOB underestimated the impact of the increase.

The Federal government’s 100% reimbursement for the Medicaid expansion for Obamacare was scheduled for reduction to 90% in 2020; Comptroller DiNapoli reported in a budget analysis that this reduction would cost the State Medicaid program $1.7 billion in FY2019 and FY2020.

The State increased Medicaid rates. 

This happened in 2018, adding $140 million to costs, as reported by the New York Times in October.

Obamacare implementation increased Medicaid enrollment significantly.

The administration of the Medicaid program was shifting. As Obamacare began to be implemented in 2014, New York State created a new platform to apply for Medicaid called the New York State of Health. Medicaid enrollment grew from 5 million people in 2013 to about 6.2 million today, a 25% increase in enrollment. As a result, the State of New York began to share responsibility with local governments for determining eligibility for Medicaid for persons applying through New York State of Health.

The state also created other avenues for Medicaid enrollment. 

The elderly, the disabled, the mentally ill, and persons with substance abuse problems were required to move into managed long-term care. This included home-care services for existing and new beneficiaries, and a new “consumer choice” program allowed beneficiaries to hire family members, frequently with the assistance of enrollment agents called Fiscal Intermediaries, who could apply for the program on behalf of the potential new recipients.

Applicants could also attest they needed immediate support. While the local government still had to determine eligibility and assess their need for care, beneficiaries were moved into managed long-term care right away. Concern has been expressed that people who are healthy are being moved into the “consumer choice“ program, called Consumer-Directed Personal Assistance, without adequate monitoring.

The state absorbed all cost growth in local government Medicaid spending. 

According to the Empire Center for Public Policy, the state, starting in 2015, has absorbed about $1.3 billion in local spending, with New York City the main beneficiary.   

All of these factors seem to have meant that the Division of the Budget and the Health Department just couldn’t keep track of the combined impact of so many new drivers of Medicaid spending.

What now?
The state (and the Medicaid program) got a lucky break at the beginning of 2020. Tax revenues were reported up by $1.5 billion over the April 2019 estimate, and the state used the money to absorb much of the added Medicaid spending and eliminate the need to keep deferring payments to subsequent years. The state also now projects tax revenue will rise by $2 billion more than anticipated for FY2021, allowing more of the FY2021 deficit to be covered without spending cuts.

The state is still sitting on $6 billion in reserves that could be used to mitigate spending cuts. Mayor de Blasio and others have urged consideration of tax increases on the wealthy. The state could increase assessments on Medicaid providers, and use the money as a way to leverage federal Medicaid dollars, another way to mitigate cutbacks. Negotiations with the Legislature on the Medicaid program and the overall budget will no doubt bring adjustments to protect the Medicaid program and protect recipients and providers.

The Health Department, DOB, the Comptroller, and the Legislature need to figure out what went wrong. The State also needs to bring more transparency to reporting on the costs of the Medicaid program, and go back several years step by step. The Comptroller may need to require a restatement of the state’s books, too, and make sure there is no repeat to the colossal mistakes by the Budget Office.

***
Jim Brennan was a member of the New York State Assembly for 32 years, where he chaired four committees. On Twitter @JimBrennanNY.

***
Have an op-ed idea or submission for Gotham Gazette? Email This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.



Print Friendly and PDF

Editor's Choice


Gotham Gazette: New York Voters Approve $4.2 Billion Environmental Bond Act
New York Voters Approve $4.2 Billion Environmental Bond Act
Gotham Gazette: 
New York City Voters Approve Racial Justice Ballot Measures
New York City Voters Approve Racial Justice Ballot Measures
Gotham Gazette: 
Housing Development in New York City Slows to a Crawl as Officials Debate Tax Incentives
Housing Development in New York City Slows to a Crawl as Officials Debate Tax Incentives
Gotham Gazette: 
City Council Examines Low Voter Turnout, Moving Local Elections to Even Years City Council Examines Low Voter Turnout, Moving Local Elections to Even Years