newYou can listen to Fox's news articles!
Pullbacks from diversity, equity and inclusive programs in governmental agencies and businesses focus on employment or university admissions, including impacts at the individual level. However, the Biden administration's Housing and Urban Development Agency's under the radar initiative has planned a DEI for communities around the country. We do so through the necessary “stock plans” (emphasising changes in planning and zoning) for almost every community that receives HUD funds.
Now, with the name “cutting red tape that is costly to locally and returns decision-making power to state and local governments,” new HUD secretary Scott Turner has repeated the mission. HUD has replaced all the complexities of the “promoting fair housing” regulations with the simple requirement of “unique accreditation” for the region, complying with the Fair Housing Act. It's just as important a change that Washington is making, affecting local governments around the country.
The Fair Housing (AFFH) program (first adopted by the Obama administration and subsequently stopped by Trump 45 before Biden took it home) required communities receiving HUD funding to submit “stock plans” based on answers to 92 questions.
HUD ends Obama-era housing rules that Trump warned that he would “destroy” the value of his home
Despite its name, AFFH went far beyond the common sense idea of protecting minority renters and home buyers from racism. The required “stock plan” details have been the equivalent of a federal acquisition of local zoning for purposes far beyond obvious housing discrimination.
The positively promoted fair housing program was promoted by both former Democrats Barack Obama and Joe Biden. File: Obama and Biden in October 2020. (Credit: Joe Biden/Instagram)
According to Biden HUD's account of the program, “AFFH's mission requires agents and their program participants to take positive and meaningful actions to overcome patterns of separation, promote fair housing choices, eliminate disparities in opportunity, and cultivate inclusive communities without discrimination.”
This means that in order to qualify for federal community support, the community will not only open the door to “affordable” (i.e. subsidized) homes, but also take steps to ensure that residents of such homes have access to good schools, recreational services, supermarkets and even other “community assets.”
In other words, it allows affordable housing and allows the community to find it in “high opportunities” (read, wealthier) areas. The impulse here is the impulse to “enrich poverty” and assumes that doing so will raise the poor despite the obvious practical limitations of relocating large numbers of households.
The scope of the rules was as broad as its goal. HUD distributes Community Development Block grants aimed at supporting low-income communities for purposes ranging from infrastructure to health and safety. These included all major metropolitan cities, cities with a population of over 50,000 and urban counties with a population of over 200,000 (cities excluding eligible urban populations).
To approve the stock plan by HUD's funding gatekeepers, local governments had to be aware of the Biden administration's HUD's broader “stock action plan.” We are experiencing homelessness and housing instability. ”
For more information about Fox News, click here
In demonstrating how to take steps to “positively” housing discrimination, communities were called with plans that could not only demonstrate their ability to identify “barriers to fair housing” that could not face housing discrimination and include everything from school district lines to local zones, but also implement up to hundreds of pages.
This becomes clear to the local government from the “rejection letter” of HUD to inform the local government that they were unable to hand over the convocation of affh. For example, one county in Georgia County reported that it wanted more affordable housing to help low-income households get better jobs. That wasn't enough for HUD. This wrote that the county was “unclear as to how it intended to use this goal to address the issue of racial/ethnic concentration of poverty.” Furthermore, the county did not deal with “skilled school locations.”

HUD was the source of the Biden administration's efforts to take over local zoning to promote Dei across the country. File: Robert C. Weaver Federal Building, 451 Seventh Street, SW, Washington, DC (Photo: Carol M. Highsmith / Byenlarge / Getty Images)
The idea of adding affordable housing – when defined as a dense, privately built home, it is not inherently misguided to different communities. In fact, a community where two acres of zoning is the standard risk of zoning the workforce needed by their children, local businesses and government.
A modest change in zoning – what Edward Pinto and Tobias Peters call “light touch density” – could go a long way towards such a purpose. But that's not like subsidized low-income housing. Rent is cheap, but it is expensive to build (a California tax-funded “affordable units” cost an estimated $708,000 to build).
Click here to get the Fox News app
More broadly, AFFH is based on misguided assumptions. The so-called “highly-opportunistic areas” are not reverberating privilege and discrimination, but rather are the product of residents' commitment and citizens' efforts. Life choices that lead families to a well-functioning community – marriage, work, savings – are the end of their own.
It simply moves poor households to wealthier communities, and shortcuts in that process do not provide guarantees that these households will be headed for the better in the long run. Not so is the HUD directive to change demographics and zoning for communities across the country.
For more information about Howard Fusock, click here