Historical April–May 2019 article. Dates, prices, services and contacts describe the source period; current availability has not been established.
Obfuscation?
In early December of last year, SDCC board member Mike Stephens gave a report to the Board on the status of the Skinker DeBaliviere Housing Corp.
He had been asked to make this report based on queries concerning its relation to the SDCC because of a proposed dog park. Stephens found mounting deficits and a very changed mission.
The report was well-received and people talked about working together in the future. JoAnn and I asked Mr. Stephens to submit his report for publication in the Times.
We ran it as submitted in our last issue.
It created a brouhaha.
The SDCC Director challenged having a board member published without board approval. At the February board meeting, a few members questioned the name of an individual who had redeveloped a house on DeGiverville under accounts receivable in the report. Why was he singled out?
The answer was because he was the only individual in the list of receivables.
The rest were property names.
The loan had been repaid in January but, regrettably, the story had not been updated.
The editors regret that.
There is considerable irony here.
The redoing of the DeGiverville house was most in keeping with the Housing Corp’s original mission, namely restoring problem properties to home ownership.
This was a fine restoration and sold quickly. Otherwise, the Corp has been unable to absorb a loss of federal funding and has made investments that did not produce the intended income.
The Corp has not impeded speculators from purchasing single families and turning them into student housing. Its critics see the need to return to restoration of existing historic homes.
It may be too late.
The Corp has produced deficits the last few years and has taken good-sized bites from its capital. Stephens predicts that at this rate it has only a decade left to function. Discussion of a name listed in Stephens’ report was regrettable and we are sorry for the discomfort it caused.
However, we are also saddened by the obfuscation of the causes and conditions described in that report.
We are losing homes because the entity set up to save them has moved away from a still needed mission. Kudos to other developers who attempt to fill the breach. But, the housing corps is still needed to preserve the neighborhood.
We now in effect have 2 selfperpetuating boards attempting to make policy without much transparency.
The neighborhood still needs action on a variety of fronts. Let’s concentrate on the bottom line.
After all, deficits are being incurred by both organizations. Both should be serving Skinker DeBaliviere residents and their historic habitat.
Finally, it should be reiterated that, since our first issue in 1970, we have been an independent institution and not a voice for the Council or any other entity.
Originally published in The Times of Skinker-DeBaliviere, April–May 2019.
Read this article in the original newspaper issue.
Original source: SD_Times2019_04.pdf, printed page(s) 2; PDF page(s) 2.
