Archives

Search Archives

Transforming Secondary Education: New $100 million initiative to improve education quality across the nation.
Learn More »

Recent Spotlights »

View all Archives - Governance »

Innovating America







In 1986 the legislator representing all-white Parma in Cleveland's western suburbs threatened to block a gubernatorial appointment to the OHFA board unless the agency suspended integration assistance pending a ruling by the Ohio attorney general. The OHFA loan program was frozen while Attorney General Anthony Celebrezze, Jr., deliberated.

In 1987 Celebrezze issued an opinion upholding the legality of integration assistance. But within a month more complications arose. At an OHFA board meeting in January 1988, opposition to the 10/40 plan surfaced, not from white realtors and white suburban officials, but from a black board member, a Celeste appointee from Shaker Heights. Reducing the cost of borrowing for whites, said the dissident board member, would have the effect of denying blacks opportunities to buy. Despite his opposition, the board voted to renew integration assistance, but they left open the question of what percentages constituted underrepresentation of a racial group.

A MINORITY SET–ASIDE

A period of public debate followed, during which Richard Harvey on behalf of the Cleveland Association of Real Estate Brokers, the black trade group, mounted a campaign urging OHFA to set aside 25 percent of the mortgage assistance to help blacks move anywhere they chose. "It's not wrong if a neighborhood becomes all Jewish," said Richard Harvey," or if it is all Italian or all Polish. Why must it be a threat if it becomes all black?"

Winston Richie responded, "When people ask what's wrong with an all-black community, I ask them to explain what's right about an all-white community. We're not proposing quotas. No one is hindered in his or her efforts to buy anywhere he chooses. We just market to the race that is underrepresented."

In June 1988 the OHFA board adopted a policy statement on fair housing and integrated communities. The statement said OHFA "may respond to local preferences for...the purpose of encouraging residential integration, provided these activities are not coercive but voluntary and persuasive, and that they expand rather than restrict housing choice for minorities."

Finally, the board resolved the dispute with a compromise. It set aside nearly $11 million for prospective buyers willing to move to areas where their population group was underrepresented and allocated an equal amount to minority buyers to help them move anywhere they chose.

Although OHFA mortgage assistance helps foster balanced racial distribution in Cleveland suburbs with modestly priced housing, its $73,260 cap on the price of the eligible housing severely limits the program's use in communities such as Shaker Heights where the median house price is higher.