Opposition to Habitat?

C-Ville (who doesn’t have an easy way to link to
their articles) has an interesting story this week on the plans to build a
couple of Habit
for Humanity
houses in the Holmes Avenue
area.

This is the part that concerns
me – the residents were not given an opportunity to purchase the lots.
‘…but the City wants to donate them to
affordable-housing advocates and builders Habitat for Humanity. … According to
the City, the two lots are assessed at $32,000 apiece; City Planning Manager Ron
Higgins, however, says the City could probably get much more. ?Vacant lots
in the City have been selling for as much as $60,000,? says Higgins.
Habitat for Humanity director Overton McGehee says he?s willing to pay
$15,000 apiece for the lots. …”
Far be it
from me to criticize Habitat and I’m not. The City has a responsibility to not
give away its property; they have an obligation to maximize their potential
revenue.

A resident
says
“Some welcomed him, others asked him to
not ?take it personally? as they fretted for their property values.
?Some people think Habitat for Humanity is a great thing, as long as the
houses are somewhere else,? says Scott, who works as an assistant manager
at the Salvation Army. ?But I understand?they worked hard for what
they have, and they want the area to be clean. It?s natural.”
Now that’s just silly. Those who take the
initiative to qualify for an purchase a home should be given the benefit of any
doubt that may arise. If they couldn’t get their stuff together, they would
still be renting. Habitat and other groups in the region help those who
otherwise would not be able to purchase their own homes.

(Visited 9 times, 1 visits today)