Does HUD Need To Be Modernized?
Professor Sudhir Venkatesh of Columbia believe it is time for HUD to be replaced by a more nimble agency capable of responding to the 21st century city.
"With the nation embroiled in a housing crisis, one would expect the Department of Housing and Urban Development to be playing a central role. But HUD is a marginal player. Although its Federal Housing Administration division has agreed to underwrite new mortgages, it is merely following the leadership of the Federal Reserve and the Treasury Department.
This is no accident. HUD’s sidelined role is a product of its anachronistic approach to both housing and cities. It might be best to simply close the agency and create a new cabinet-level commitment to urban development."
- Login or register to post comments
- Email this page
Related News Stories
Black Flight or White Gentrification? - Jul 22, 2008
Developer To SF: Let's Make A Deal On Affordable Housing - May 20, 2008
HUD Seeks Dollar House Buyers - Nov 07, 2008
Which Cities Stretch Dollars The Farthest? - Oct 18, 2008
Affordable Housing Needs Affordable Land - Oct 16, 2008
Problem is...
Proposals for HUD to be dismantled or replaced have already come and gone over the years. The most recent blog post on Grant Writing Confidential is called Reformers Come and Go, But HUD Abides, as it deals with some of the history behind reform attempts and why those failed—as well as why future ones are likely to as well.
Some interesting takeoffs
I wouldn't mind the FHA being run under another umbrella. I also find it interesting they acknowledge the failings to some degree of HOPE and other programs because legislators didn't acknowledge that the "undesirables" had to go somewhere.
Here's a thought on the urban development side. Why not revenue share with MPOs, but only those whose members agree not to practice exclusionary zoning, cede some authority on project approval, not fiscalize zoning, only have one combined economic development agency, keep development types on a level playing field, and force new and old development to pay for its infrastructure use.
It would be a catch 22 for some municipalities. Many won't want the changes, but enough may be enticed by the money to the region. I think something like this could pave the way for better urban development.
extended comments by Xav Briggs and Peter Dreier ...
... on the Venkatesh op-ed have been posted in the Urban Planning Research blog.