Astorino outlasts HUD, reaches Westchester housing settlement: Editorial

“HUD capitulates,” boasted a headline on Westchester County’s website, which serves as a p.r. arm for all things Rob Astorino.

"This is vindication," Astorino said at a July 18 news conference, as the small-government Republican announced that finally, finally the feds had accepted a county report that was a key requirement of Westchester's 2009 federal housing settlement.

Sounds dramatic. Sounds definitive. It is neither.

Yes, Monday's news was significant, if not anti-climactic. Finally, the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Renewal approved Westchester's "Analysis of Impediments" to fair housing. This was a key part — and major sticking point — in the settlement of a lawsuit, filed under the False Claims Act, that accused Westchester County of grabbing millions of federal dollars for community development, but failing to comply with the rules for such grants.

It only took seven years and 11 barely halfhearted tries by the county to fulfill this one aspect of the settlement.

What Astorino succeeded in doing was decidedly unexciting — dragging out Westchester's "compliance" until he got a change in White House administrations. It's an approach to policy implementation that will not often work. 

ASTORINO: 'Vindication' for Westchester in affordable housing deal

DONE DEAL: Westchester says it completed affordable housing deal

MORE: Court finds 'total obstructionism' by Westchester in housing case

The housing settlement —  complex, the result of Westchester's own blunders, and unclear in its real goals — was agreed to by former County Executive Andrew Spano shortly before Astorino defeated him and took office. It turned out that the deal was a handy adversary for Astorino, who could cry “federal overreach” and use the specter of high-rise apartments looming in bucolic northern Westchester during campaign season.

So, what changed to "vindicate" Westchester and bring the feds to their knees? Trump won.

HUD had long demanded that Westchester acknowledge that restrictive zoning codes had contributed to racially segregated housing in municipalities, something Astorino was loathe to do. So Westchester submitted report after report that would not say that local zoning codes in any way obstructed fair housing. In rejecting Westchester's 10th report in April, HUD Regional Director Jay Golden chided the county's findings as "highly suspect" and "not supported by the data."

This time around, though, Golden accepted the county's findings, praising Westchester's "commitment to reaching an amicable resolution in this matter.” And yet, the main difference in Version 11 was that Westchester removed many of its most antagonistic statements that resisted any link between zoning and demographics. For example, this line in the 10th AI about the Village of Port Chester got zapped in the 11th: "...there is no pattern between where minority populations live and zoning for multi-family housing."

The final AI report's conclusion also dropped an emphatic statement that "there is no clear distinguishable pattern" between zoning districts and minority housing, preferring to emphasize that factors like household income and housing costs ultimately determine where people live.

So, why was this accepted now? The Trump administration finally appointed a regional administrator for HUD — Lynne Patton, a former Eric Trump Foundation event planner. Surely, wrapping up this nasty dispute was at the top of her to-do list. Poof, HUD dropped its objections and Astorino was vindicated.

So the settlement may be crawling to the finish line, like the last runner who hobbles across after most have gone home. It's unclear whether a federal judge overseeing the settlement will simply sign off on HUD's approval.

Astorino says this "vindication" means it’s time to get rid of a court-appointed monitor for the settlement. The county's on its second monitor, former federal Judge Stephen C. Robinson, who was appointed in February. Robinson, who the county must pay $675 an hour, has been mostly silent, including on this newest development, so far. If the monitor has nothing to say, he may be making Astorino's point. 

It's easy to forget that the settlement deal came after an NYC nonprofit sued Westchester for taking $52 million in federal grants but blowing off a requirement to analyze impediments to fair housing. The county was caught. HUD joined later to make sure the county lived up to the deal.

The settlement included meaningful objectives. But many balked at the idea that Westchester was expected not only to analyze zoning but intervene, even if it meant suing municipalities to get them to change their zoning codes. This radical shift in HUD's goals — from giving Westchester millions without enforcing its own requirements to demanding intervention at local levels — made many suspicious of the whole project and distracted attention from the real need to analyze Westchester's lack of affordable housing.

Astorino easily raised the specter of forced desegregation and portrayed HUD's demands as social engineering. It didn't help that HUD sent mixed signals from the start about what it really wanted.

The key to the deal is that Westchester had to build 750 units of affordable housing in 31 communities with small populations of African-Americans and Hispanics. The county says it's up to 790 units built or approved (with 425 units occupied), and more units are on the way.  Applicants for the housing, according to the county, have been diverse: 35 percent African American; 35 percent white; 29 percent Hispanic; and 8 percent multiracial. 

And many municipalities deserve credit for reviewing their codes and working out plans for housing, even as the county resisted calls to influence localities.

There were other problems along the way. HUD had to go to court to force the county to sign source-of-income legislation that banned landlords from considering where people got their money — disability payments, for example — when considering whether to rent to them.

Westchester is also supposed to promote fair housing through an education campaign. The county says it has spent $1 million so far in marketing and outreach. But its vague ads promoting diversity generally fail to even include the word "housing." Adversarial to the end.

Astorino used the settlement effectively for political gain, but what did he accomplish for Westchester? The county sacrificed about $25 million in federal grants, thanks to its stubbornness, while having to spend millions on legal and other fees. Westchester lost numerous court decisions, with a federal appeals panel in April blasting the county for "total obstructionism."

The lack of affordable housing, of course, remains one of the major problems in Westchester and the region. Business leaders regularly say they can't find employees because housing costs are too high. Working-class families can't afford rents. Developers keep putting up luxury buildings, hoping to attract well-heeled folks from the city. Westchester continues to be known nationally for having rich and poor communities, side by side. If the county had cooperated with HUD from the start, maybe we would know a bit more today about how to address one of our greatest challenges.