By Gabriela Godinez Feregrino In our American society today we often hear praise surrounding the idea of working hard, so much so that we’re often teased about it internationally. The “American Dream” is known around the world as picking yourself up by your bootstraps and making the most out of your situation to eventually rise into economic comfort and perhaps even the possibility of a life of luxury. This was rarely seen as a true possibility. Many people in our country live paycheck to paycheck and even with a job many fall into homelessness every year. After the 2020 COVID-19 pandemic the cracks in our society were only made larger. While millions of jobs were lost during the pandemic, lead economist at Oxford Economics Nancy Vanden Houten told Insider that “there’s a risk that labor force participation won’t return to what it was prior to the pandemic. We might still experience shortages of workers.” On Saturday, May 22nd Kings Island had to close 30 minutes early because of several fights that broke out inside the park and at the parking lot. Out of this debacle came the comments from patrons expressed to the Cincinnati Enquirer that the park felt understaffed. However, a spokesperson from Kings Island told the Enquirer that they were well staffed for weekends but would like to hire more staff before opening for weekdays. Staff shortages could be for many reasons, but I’m sure it doesn’t help that when confronted with a global crisis most Americans were left to fend for themselves and they realized that the economic powers at be see the labor force not only as replaceable, but as completely disposable. Currently, we are seeing an increased shortage of employees, not because people don’t want to return to work, but rather because people don’t want to return to jobs where the work does not match the pay. Jobs that were lost to the pandemic were exchanged for an unemployment check that provided a more livable wage. It simply does not make sense for people to return to such emotionally taxing positions when they could hold off for a better job that provides higher pay and hopefully better conditions. Some corporations like Cosco and Target have already raised their minimum wage to entice more applicants. However, wouldn’t be seeing this problem if all corporations paid their employees a livable wage and waiters across the board didn’t have to rely on tips. A woman previously employed as a waitress, who is currently enrolled at University of Cincinnati, told Streetvibes that working as a waitress affected her mental health on a daily basis. Even still, because of her work experience, she would likely return to waitressing should the circumstances call for it and therefore asked Streetvibes to change her name. Kathy, as we will call her, shared some of her stress surrounding waitressing. “There was this one time where it was really busy and around the holidays, we had multiple huge parties where only half had reservations, and one man became very belligerent with me and made a huge scene, said I was terrible at my job- and even though it was clear this man was intoxicated and being rude, my manager made me and my peers feel like we were in the wrong. But I had to work my hardest because I needed to live off of tips. Any mistakes that were made in orders, that was out of my control, it would come out of my tips. It didn’t matter what I did, I was always in the wrong. It really messed with my mental health. I felt like I had no voice and no power.” Kathy makes it clear that the customers aren’t always the same, but because of the sexism already in the food industry it “makes it easy for sexist patrons to make the environment stressful and at times unsafe.” She also shared that the tipping system was often held over the waitresses’ heads. “People would do that, they would hold it over you. If the kitchen makes mistakes, the servers would get the anger and lose the tip .” Kathy expressed that if people got paid a livable wage and didn’t have to rely on tips, “this type of job would be worth it,” but as it stands that isn’t the case. That stress goes home with the worker. “I used to have anxiety dreams all the time! I would be anxious at work, before work, and stressed walking home wondering if the tips I made will even cover my rent.” Many states have responded to this lack of service industry workers by proposing to cut unemployment payments rather than addressing the larger problem of livable wage. These states hope that by removing unemployment checks, people will be forced back into stressful work environments at a wage that isn’t reasonable for the working conditions that come with this line of work. We have to remember, however, that while this situation is as a result of the pandemic, the circumstances that lead to this moment were created long before and were preventable.

God is good, not some of the time but all the time 24/7 I believe that be the reason we live on earth and god lives in heaven Looking back on my life and the so many changes that i went through Learning from repeated mistakes good and bad until i learned what to do Realizing today knowing what to do and how to do it plus the method to use I see now that having knowledge doesn't determine the route we choose I know now that everyday above ground is a day to take heed and learn I know now that my choices will determine whether i live with god or i burn Today, knowing, understanding with the realization that yesterday is pasted Praying and hoping my words will linger in your memory making a change to last If you haven't paid attention to your life may you look back and see That a new beginning is what's up for the politicians and that includes you and me By Willa D. Jones

By Bill Woods The last year has been an unusual time for Cincinnati City Council. In the midst of the pandemic, Council was rocked by corruption charges involving three of its members. Not only were these members replaced, but four others will retire at the end of 2021 due to term limits. At the May 20th Community Issues Forum, Councilmember Jan Michele Lemon Kearney talked about her first year on City Council during this far from normal time. Councilmember Kearney reviewed her involvement in a series of issues facing Council in recent months. She began by discussing Council's process for allocating the funds the City will receive from the major federal pandemic relief bill that was passed in the first months of the Biden Administration. She emphasized that much of the money will pay for traditional City services in order to makeup for the loss of City revenue during the pandemic. "These federal dollars," she declared, "will help the City balance its budget." When asked by a Forum participant, Kearney admitted that the process had been confusing. For instance, Mayor John Cranley had unilaterally announced a series of large community grants he wanted to be funded by this federal relief package. Council then got involved, and Kearney and Councilman Greg Landsman organized a series of public meetings concerning how these funds should be used. Kearney, herself, had proposed that $50-million be allocated for the Affordable Housing Trust Fund. All this was done before the City knew the federal guidelines and restrictions related to this relief bill. The actual restrictions, according to Kearney, greatly reduced what the City could fund from the relief bill. For one thing, the money will be allocated to the City over a two-year period. It also cannot be used for capital expenditures. When it came down to making actual decisions about how to spend the current federal relief money only $29-million was available for community projects while the rest will pay for regular City services. The upside of this, noted Kearney, "is that we will receive a second installment of federal dollars next year." A question was asked about the results of the council's recent deliberations on establishing a process for determining a development project's impact on a neighborhood. The Peaslee Neighborhood Center has created a "Rubric" for evaluating how major developments will either improve or diminish the lives of people living in a neighborhood, and it advocated that the City adopt this process for any project seeking a tax abatement or public funds. Kearney praised the work of Peaslee and said that the plan put forward by Councilmember Greg Landsman did borrow some of the Center's approach. She noted, however, that this step represents only a beginning that needs further work, but that it does include some critical questions for Council to pose to developers requesting City support. Kearney is currently working on one important aspect of this issue. Unlike Columbus and many other cities, Cincinnati does not have an ordinance that requires a major housing development seeking City approval to include a percentage of affordable housing units in its plan. She and her staff are currently drafting an ordinance that would mandate an affordable housing percentage in any big development receiving a tax abatement or public funding. Impressed with the Columbus model, her initiative follows that City's guidelines. She plans to introduce her proposal very soon. The City Manager's proposed 2022 budget is now completed, and Council will soon be reviewing it for adoption. Kearney stressed that citizens who wish to participate in the budget deliberations need to mark June 3rd and the week after that as times to make plans to come to City Hall. She also said that people will be able to testify or make comments via Zoom, but they have to inform the Clerk of Council's office if they wish to utilize this process. Asked about her approach to serving on City Council, Kearney emphasized being a good listener. When she asked her husband Eric, who had served in the Ohio General Assembly, for his advice, he had stressed both hearing and trying to understand the two sides of an issue. She finds this approach to be helpful in resolving neighborhood disputes that emerge from time to time. She also thinks that an important part of her job is to listen to what citizens in various neighborhoods believe to be the problems and issues that deserve City attention. "Collaboration" is also a key element in her approach. Often the City can find ways to collaborate with neighborhood projects or civic endeavors. In the past, she noted, many people thought the City wasn't listening to them or interested in their issues. She concluded that holding the public hearings on how to spend the federal relief funds taught her a lot about how to actually serve her constituents by listening to them and seeking ways to collaborate with them. Jan Michele Lemon Kearney was appointed to Council in March 2020, and she will campaign to retain her seat this fall.

By Alula Nugese There’s a saying: same old, just a different day. During the midst of the pandemic in 2020, the country witnessed a movement like no other. This, of course, being the Black Lives Matter movement. Especially in May and June, protests were nationwide, and it felt like there could be change. It felt as if there would be an effect. Nearly a year later, and the tragic cases are still present, and there seems to be no hope for change. This week the George Floyd family (and the whole country) reacted to the news of the Derek Chauvin trial. He was convicted of murder on all three charges and his sentencing is soon to follow in eight weeks. Even a year after the horrifying video, there are still those such as Virginia senator Amanda Chase, who say the conviction ‘makes me sick.’ The question then becomes, why? Why can some people not sympathize or understand with these victims? In the era we live in today, everything is filmed, everyone has a camera. We are beginning to see the exact situation unfold. People saw Chauvin press his knee to Floyd’s neck for more than eight minutes, and this still is not enough to convince others’? A study done by Harvard concluded that black people are three times as likely to be killed during police contact as opposed to white people. This number can spike up to nearly six times as likely in certain metropolitan areas like San Francisco, New York and Milwaukee. Hispanic Americans are also killed by police at disproportionate rates compared to white people. According to the Washington Post, a Hispanic person is killed nearly twice as often. Meanwhile, a survey done before last year’s election found that 93% of black people in the U.S. considered police treatment of black people to be an important factor in their vote for president. It has been more than three months since Joe Biden was inaugurated, and the lawmakers in Washington D.C. have done close to nothing to solve this issue. During just the month of April, we can see that police are still brutalizing young adults or in some cases mere children. Daunte Wright was a 20-year-old black man who was killed during an altercation with police in Minnesota. Wright attempted to resist arrest after being pulled over for outstanding warrants. The police officer, who in the video yelled “I’ll tase you,” proceeded to shoot Wright with a pistol. The police chief then said it was an accident, because the police officer with over 20 years on the force, didn’t know the difference between a gun and a taser. Another case involving a 13-year-old boy in Chicago, Adam Toledo, resulted in a death as well. Toledo was encountered by a single police officer after running in an alley. The policeman asked Toledo to ‘drop it’ referring to the gun he had. Toledo attempted to put his hands up, and the officer shot him less than a second later. In Columbus, there was a case involving a 16-year-old girl being killed by a police officer. This case is not similar to the others however, due to the nature of the scene. Ma’Khia Bryant, the victim of the shooting, had a knife in her hand and attempted to stab another girl before she was shot and killed by the police officer. Nonetheless, this garnered protests of more than 100 people in downtown Columbus. Many celebrities, such as Gabrielle Union, spoke out against this saying, “we didn’t get justice.” Although all three of these cases put the police officers in tough positions, does this excuse the deaths of Wright, Bryant and Toledo? Thousands of protestors stormed the streets of Saint Paul, Minnesota, Chicago and Columbus to once again protest the injustice they felt was evident in these videos. Here in Cincinnati, we have seen police brutality rear its ugly head. Samuel DuBose was an unarmed black man who was fatally shot in the head in 2015 after being stopped for not having a front license plate. According to police officer, when he tried to open his door, DuBose closed it and put the car in drive. Somehow his arm got stuck in DuBose’s vehicle, which made the officer fear for his life, so he shot him. In this case, the police officer lied in his report, because the bodycam footage that was later revealed did not show him being dragged. In the future, is the country just going to see this cycle reoccur countless times, or will real change actually take place? It is a fair question to ask, because the support for police is still strong no matter who they shoot, and the politicians in Washington D.C. are having trouble agreeing on anything. This is a recipe for disaster, and as a country, we can only hope that a solution is arriving sooner rather than later.

By Taylor Killens Savannah Ape is a fourth-year student at the University of Cincinnati. She began as an early childhood education major and then decided to switch to social work. She ended up combining social work and early childhood education and went into interdisciplinary studies. Ape is expected to graduate this spring. Growing up, her parents were divorced. There was a huge contrast between her mother and father's house. Her mother ended up remarrying and her mother's husband ended up being a huge Trump supporter. Savannah stated, "I feel like a lot of conservatives have this mindset that if you work hard, you are going to be okay, you're going to have a happy life, you don't have any reason to be anxious and my mom was a very anxious person." Pre-COVID, Savannah was a social butterfly. She would describe herself as outgoing, a morning person, she felt productive and motivated, friendly, and considered herself as a person with a lot of energy. She would usually wake up an hour before class, make herself breakfast, and ease into her day. Savannah said, "I think I was really optimistic, and I had the idea in my head, "Oh this is just going to be a few months and then when it started reality set it and this could be a really long time." She also participated in three or four sessions with CAPS. "It was alright, I haven't really reached out throughout COVID." She didn't continue with CAPS because she didn't have a connection with her therapist, she didn't find the sessions to create change in her life and didn't see CAPS as something worth paying for. During-COVID, now that COVID has been going on for nearly a year Savannah hasn't endured much excitement, her daily life is repetitive, students aren't able to go to class or enjoy campus life, increased sleep, and there's a lack of social interaction. "Today for example, I woke up 30 minutes ago, and that's a routine with me. It's a good day if I wake up before 10 o' clock. Just because I don't have to go anywhere, all my classes are online. I do have one-person class, but that's once a week. "Savannah hasn't seen a lot of people except the people she works with, the people she currently lives with, and occasionally her family. During COVID she found herself to be an anxious person. If she felt anxious, she decided to smoke. A typical day for her is to wake up, smoke a bowl of marijuana, rest while she's high, after her high goes down she's typically very tired and decides to take a nap and anticipates work throughout the day, and the endless cycle continues. When asked if she always smoked marijuana or if it was a habit she picked up during COVID she said, "I definitely smoke more now because of COVID, but I started in high school and when I got to college my friend group and I did it together". When asked what campus is like now, she said, "It's a ghost town. There are still some people walking on campus, but in between classes those 10 minutes where there would be the wave and the crowd of people that you would have to navigate around, that's just gone, you might see someone way up the road. It's kind of lonely, feels weird, and like a dream. Apel stated, "Now that we're getting close to a year, I feel exhausted and drained." She is enrolled in one in person class this semester that meets once a week on Monday's."I find myself not wanting to go more often. I'm used to being able to sleep in longer and not get up. Even though it would be wonderful to go to class, I don't know if my motivation is different to actually go". During COVID Savannah also found it hard to take care of herself. She did not receive the support from her family during her mental health crisis. Her parents shied away from working through her mental health issues because they didn't want to face their own. Due to the lack of social interactions that she's had during COVID, she finds it hard for her to push herself to talk to someone because of her increased social anxieties. It is important that colleges provide an efficient role in their student's mental health, especially during COVID-19. Playing a better role will not only increase the performance in the classroom, but also begin healthier lifestyles for students.

By Bill Woods The campaign to pass Issue III is coming down to the wire. When this issue of StreetVibes goes to press only a few days will be left until Primary Election Day on May 4th. At the Zoom Community Issues Forum on April 22nd, Josh Spring, Executive Director of the Greater Cincinnati Homeless Coalition, and Peg Fox, Executive Director of MARCC ( Metropolitan Area Religious Coalition of Cincinnati) presented persuasive arguments why this City Charter Amendment Proposal to fund the Affordable Housing Trust Fund is so badly needed. Josh Spring began the Forum by both discussing the critical need for Issue III and explaining the basic elements of the proposed Amendment. He noted Cincinnati at present has a need for 28,000 affordable housing units, and that this need did not emerge out no where. This crisis has grown worse for years, and the City's economic policies have contributed to it. While the City and private developers invested $1.5-billion in Over-the-Rhine during the last fifteen years, 2,300 affordable units were lost in this neighborhood alone. These numbers add up to tragic situations for real people. This lack of permanent housing, according to Spring, has made it very difficult to assist the homeless. Because people in shelters remain for much longer periods of time, approximately 90-percent of new homeless individuals and families with children cannot find a place to stay at a shelter on an average day. He also cited that "on any given day approximately three thousand Cincinnati Public School children do not have a permanent place to live." This growing crisis, according to Spring and Peg Fox, finally prompted Advocates for Affordable Housing, MARCC, and the Homeless Coalition to initiate the current Charter Amendment proposal that the City fund the Affordable Housing Trust Fund with $50-million annually. In 2019, these groups had successfully lobbied the City to establish the Trust Fund, but it has never received more than token funding from the Administration and Council. Discouraged by their negotiations with City Council, the coalition pushed forward even during the pandemic and collected over 9,000 petition signatures to qualify their proposal for the May 4th ballot. Peg Fox described how MARCC organized a drive-by collection of signatures involving its interfaith members. She noted that addressing the affordable housing crisis has been a top MARCC priority for a number of years, and that its Christian, Jewish, and Muslim judicatories see Issue III as a reasonable response to this crisis. Passage of this Proposal will provide sufficient funding for rehabbing and building five-hundred units of affordable units a year. Josh Spring explained the details of the proposed Amendment including the citizen board established to oversee the projects of the Trust Fund. He then took on some of the anti-Issue III rhetoric that is currently circulating in flyers mailed to Cincinnati residents. In lurid detail, these flyers proclaim that basic City services such as trash collection and emergency services provided by the Fire and Police Departments will be cut to the bone if Issue III passes. Spring refuted these scare threats about the gutting of regular City services. For one thing, the Amendment says that the $50-million can be drawn from both the City's general and capital budgets, and this allocation represents approximately 3.8-percent of those combined budgets. Furthermore, the Amendment language suggests other ways of raising the money. One source suggested is the $17-million annual revenue that the City receives due to its ownership of the Southern Railroad. A user fee for major commercial or residential developments is another suggestion, and other user fees are also possible. Although the City is now saying that it cannot use these revenue sources for the Trust Fund, Spring declared that it has already used money from the Railroad and the capital budget for its token funding of the Fund. He emphasized: "The last thing advocates of Issue III want to happen is the slashing of basic City services." From the beginning, Issue III has been a grassroots initiative supported by the human service agencies, religious groups,and neighborhood and civic organizations that comprise the Homeless Coalition, MARCC, and Advocates for Affordable Housing. Recently, the NAACP and the Urban League also endorsed this proposal. A modest campaign budget to date of $38,000, that includes $25,830 in in-kind contributions, was reported last week by the Issue III proponents. Counting primarily on a well organized volunteer effort, Issue III leaders urge citizens to go to the "Cincinnati Action For Housing Now" website to volunteer or to read about the proposed Amendment. Meanwhile, opponents of Issue III reported donations of $90,000 to defeat the proposal. Contributed primarily by the AFL-CIO and various public employee unions, this money is paying for the slick flyers filled with misinformation that Cincinnati residents are currently receiving in their mail boxes.

By Vanessa Larkins & Katelyn Lusher What do we want to be better for the next generation? People who are involved in activism will say that we march for causes that we feel will make life for the people who come after us. In truth, it is likely for that reason that many of the same people who marched for affordable housing and racial equality decades ago are still doing it now. But the real question is, how have we failed to do better for the next generation despite our best efforts? Why do the same people have to keep fighting for the same causes? One Streetvibes archive researcher, Vanessa Larkins noticed some parallels from 15 years ago: “In an article from Streetvibes’ February 2006 article, the late Jimmy Heath, the Streetvibes editor at the time and long time photography contributor, wrote an article about this called “The Future Suffers.” In it he essentially talks about what we need to do for the future generation and how we can break cycles of violence and division between citizenry and the police/policymakers who are supposedly on our side. He talks about breaking the cycle of school to prison and actually investing in education. He mentions moving away from doing the “same old” things and having the media show more than just ‘if it bleeds, it leads.’ He additionally talks about how this affects his neighborhood of Over the Rhine. When reading this article, I immediately thought of the things that are still happening today and how the future generation that he was talking about is my generation. In 2006, I was just entering high school and I remember being told how Over the Rhine was a dangerous place to be in and to not get caught down there at night. All of these things he talked about trying to prevent in the future, my generation”s future, never actually changed though. The media still adheres to the same values of showing the worst in any given situation. Over the Rhine was taken over by gentrification and rebranded into OTR to signal that this new thin layer of paint was enough to mask all of these things regarding displacement, housing/racial discrimination, and ineffective policy change that led to Over the Rhine being made out to be something that it was not. Knowing all of this, and living all of this, it is apparent to me that the future that Jimmy Heath was hoping would not happen to my generation, only became worse. Tensions are even higher than before and living in the middle of a pandemic only added more fuel to those flames. So now I have to think, what are we giving to the future generation? Their future is already suffering before it has barely begun. Their future suffers because we seemingly cannot leave this cycle of toxicity and refusal to actually do something about these ‘same old’ issues. Education is still not a priority and with online schooling during the pandemic, it has become less of a priority. School-to-prison cycles still exist to this day with prisons being overcrowded and overlooked during this pandemic. More cops and more violence have been the answers to cries of pain during a time where the color of your skin can negatively impact your life expectancy. Jimmy wanted us to work to break the cycle, but all we did was make it worse.” While many activists have been pushing for police reform for decades, it has become apparent that reform does not happen like it’s supposed to, if it happens at all. Heath even wrote in his article that “more cops and more punishment won’t address the roots of violence,” and this is especially true when we consider how police violence is so often racially motivated and police leadership poorly disguises its contempt for people of color. The people who gentrify are ostensibly “invested in community” but that community does not necessarily include lower income people who have been living in Over-the-Rhine for decades. Activists are consistently burned out because City Council refuses to listen to them--take the Affordable Housing Trust Fund, for example. For how long do we have to sit in the fire before we realize that it’s burning us?

By Dr. Mark Mussman, Staff Writer Now is not the time to be burnt out on politics. With looming crises barely exposed by the pandemic, the wealthy and controlling class are going on like the pandemic never happened - already back to business as usual. We are hearing politicians talk about data showing rental prices decreasing after the pandemic as if it's over. We cannot rely on the powerful interests to decide how we should be able to live our lives - we have to step up and take action. Voting May 4th for the Affordable Housing Trust Fund is one way that we can take the power back to the people, where it belongs. Cincinnati's Affordable Housing Trust Fund was created in 2018 after decades of grassroots organizing efforts around increasing affordable housing and decreasing homelessness. The effects of homelessness are evident in healthcare and education: far too many people face chronic health conditions due to their homelessness and inability to recuperate in safe housing, while more than 3000 Cincinnati Public School students experience homelessness each year. This means that likely tonight, even during the pandemic, a CPS student doesn't know where they are going to sleep tonight. Which means they also don't know where they will wake up tomorrow. To combat this type of neglect, Affordable Housing Advocates (AHA), an advocacy group of individuals and organizations devoted to creating and sustaining affordable housing in the region, with a specific focus on households at, or below, 30% AMI (essentially, families who have the lowest incomes and are in the most need of housing support,) did extensive research, and put on several community events, including panel discussions with people from other cities with successful trust funds in place, to learn more about affordable housing trust funds, but also to engage our community right here in Cincinnati to ensure the best trust fund would be created for us, by us. Legislation was crafted and presented to city councilmembers, and some of the legislation was adopted in late 2018. The initial legislation included provisions to 1. set up one or more affordable housing trust fund accounts to collect funds; 2. create an oversight board, since the funding technically can't be spent by the city; and 3. create a dedicated funding source. Unfortunately, only the first provision was adopted, which created the actual accounts where money could go for affordable housing, but ultimately no way to fund it or spend it. A one-time contribution of around $600,000 was placed in the account. After community pushback against the negative impact short-term rentals (AirBnB) began having on our neighborhoods, city council agreed to a short-term rental tax, which the city collects, and at the end of the year, is able to put that money into the affordable housing trust fund. It remains to be seen how little the city chooses to put into the trust fund, but estimates have it less than $500 since the inception of the program. In addition, because no oversight Board was created, the Affordable Housing Trust Fund was forced to languish without any mechanism of accessing those funds. The city will be quick to respond that they are doing all that they can to create affordable housing. They will cite the NOFA program, which is the primary way the city helps affordable housing efforts within the city. The city's actual contribution to NOFA's approximately 6 million dollars used each year, is very little compared to the federal government's contribution through HOME and CDBG (federal funding dedicated to fair-housing and community development.) NOFA funds are not used to create whole housing units, rather they often serve as "gap financing," which means they only attach themselves to projects that already are mostly funded and the city provides this a way to help a project with their financing. When the city says they have created 350 units a year, what they mean is that they provided financial assistance, likely less than 5% of the funding for the project, not that they actually built a unit of housing that someone could live in today. NOFA funds often attach themselves to Low Income Housing Tax Credit (LIHTC) projects, like Willkommen or the Arts Apartments. The Arts Apartments are in the West End, abutting I75 at Ezzard Charles Drive, and had been around 250 units of organically affordable housing for years. Organically affordable simply means that the apartment rents are low enough that the residents don't have to pay more than 30% of their household income on their rent and utilities. A few years ago, the buildings were sold and a new owner, after tenants organized and involved Legal Aid, agreed to keep the Arts Apartments affordable but this would require a LIHTC subsidy. The tenant organization agreed this was the better option, even though some resident income was too high, and would require them to move out because of the LIHTC restrictions. Because these do not represent a net gain of affordable units, the city should not claim that they created the 250 units at the Arts Apartments. In addition, half of the remaining units of the city's claim to 350 affordable units in 2019, represent a net loss of housing, as the Willkommen project mixed use, mixed income development has displaced already existing LIHTCs onto already existing units. What this means is that the buildings where Willkommen is coming in already had LIHTC agreements on them, and in order to get the FHACT50 funding for Willkommen, those existing unit agreements were added to other existing units held by other organizations (which presents other issues.) Finally, Willkommen's "affordable" units go up to 80% AMI, well above the 60% AMI limit, because "income averaging" is allowed on projects, meaning that some higher income units can be offset by lower than 60% units. When we are talking about affordable housing, we are really talking about people making under 60% AMI. AMI is determined by choosing the household who is in the middle of all other households, based upon their household income. 100% AMI means that half of the households make more, and half make less. AMI is generally used for a region, county, city, or neighborhood, but it can also be used to look at households based upon race. In Cincinnati, the AMI for white households is more than double the AMI for Black families. This means that we need to take a more nuanced approach when we look at data such as AMI. We also need to know that anything over 60% AMI is "market rate" housing, including "workforce" housing, which is 60%-120% AMI. The City of Cincinnati, which is functionally led by the City Manager's office, has adopted positions on affordable housing which contradict our lived experience. For example, the city claims that if they encourage more market rate housing, affordable housing will follow. They believe that it is a simple question of supply and demand, which dangerously excludes important factors such as race, poverty, and lack of access to a livable wage. We have seen in many neighborhoods, such as Walnut Hills, Over-the-Rhine, Corryville, and Mt. Auburn, who have seen substantial increases in market rate housing, the loss of affordable housing, and certainly very little new affordable units. In addition, sharp raises in rent have been noted in each of the neighborhoods, and I think you'd be hard pressed to find someone whose rent has gone down. The studies that the city manager's office cite explicitly exclude cities like Cincinnati that have an aged housing stock and deep issues of prolonged disinvestment. The same author promotes corporate welfare - or how corporations can maximize public subsidy. Ultimately, this ideology limits the way the city can respond to the affordable housing crisis. Another fallacious argument made by pro-market rate housing ideology is that density and height restrictions limit affordable housing. Cincinnati routinely gives out variances for density and height, yet we have never seen this equate to any additional affordable housing. Recently, councilmembers made the claim that if Elm and Liberty could have the density they wanted, they could create affordable housing; however, they received every density and height variance they requested, and still created no affordable housing
. The developer simply did not want to include affordable housing, but in the end, due to public outcry and community organizing, they agreed to put $750,000 into the Affordable Housing Trust Fund. Ultimately, the city is going to move to remove zoning restrictions and the necessity of variances, removing the need for community input on projects. Variances are often ways in which community councils can weigh in on a project, and should be seen as a valued public good
. Another faulty premise that the city relies upon is around the abatement. An abatement essentially allows the property owner to dodge an increase of city property taxes when they improve the property. Our tax abatement program began with the hopes of attracting outside investors into Cincinnati's housing market. A developer can, for instance, buy an affordable building, kick everyone out, update the property, and raise the rents to "market value" and receive a benefit, a tax abatement, from the city for doing so. The city routinely approves tax abatement requests without prejudice, which incentivizes flipping affordable units into market rate. We have seen this happen in more desirable neighborhoods, such as in the downtown area and uptown, but also in Hyde Park and Mt. Lookout. Abatement debates have loomed over the city for years, with the schools arguing that they are shortchanged, and recent changes to the property value that warrants an abatement. While there is a regional housing crisis, the majority of people in our region who are cost burdened are in the City of Cincinnati. This means that people are paying more than 30% of their income towards their housing, some of those paying more than 50% of their income towards their housing. This means that people don't have the ability to participate in community life, save for the future, or send their children to the best colleges. When you are cost burdened, you are limited in how you can function in society, and it has real impacts on individual and community health. Black households in Cincinnati are more likely be cost burdened, with half of all Cincinnati rental households paying more than 30% of their income towards their housing. (Nearly a quarter of all Cincinnati homeowners are also paying more than 30% of their income towards their housing costs.) Our shelters operate above overflow capacity, 365 days a year, 24 hours a day. Unfortunately, due to the widespread lack of affordable housing, on an average day, more than 90% of families are turned away from the CAPLINE without any assistance. Even with the CARES ACT funding, families are still struggling to identify support. Across the country, less than 25% of people who qualify for housing assistance actually receive it because programs are underfunded and often have long lines and strict compliance. This means that elderly neighbors, people with disabilities, and families with children are more often without the support that they need than actually receive it. We have also seen increasing numbers at the food pantries and community meals. Overall, Cincinnati loses more than 1000 Black residents each year to displacement. This should be alarming enough to want to act. We are in desperate need of housing protections. Every day we encounter people who have been removed from their home because the new owner or developer has received a city incentive to flip their building to market rate. We should not give developers benefits for removing people from their homes. We need strong policies, such as Pay-to-Stay, Just Cause Eviction, a county-wide housing court, anti-discrimination, rent increase caps, and even rent control. The housing crisis also exists because the form and value of work has changed dramatically over the past few decades. Minimum wage jobs, paying $8.80 per hour, only provide about $460 in month to pay for housing, including utilities. There is no place in the United States that a person making minimum wage can afford a 2 bedroom apartment. This means families are forced to take housing that is not safe, nor affordable, and children are sleeping on floors, couches, or sharing a bed with multiple people. Even the way we calculate how much someone can pay towards their housing is flawed, as it's based upon your gross income - meaning that it's based on what you make before taxes are removed, before your healthcare premium, or any other deductions are taken out of your paycheck. Your net income is what you actually get after taxes, and is often 20-30% less than your gross income. Since the last economic recovery, low-wage jobs saw the biggest gain, forcing people to take on more than one job just to survive. Black workers in Cincinnati do not have upward mobility, and often are expected to take and subside on low-wage jobs. Issue 3 is our opportunity to ensure funding for affordable housing. It will guarantee that at least 50 million dollars will go into the affordable housing trust fund each year, and that the fund will be responsive to the community. There are many funding sources available, but the housing crisis is more likely a billion-dollar issue. Estimates show that the funds will be able to create 500-1000 units of affordable housing each year. The funds must be used to support households who make about $35,000 a year, or less, with at least half of the funding dedicated to households who are making 0-30% AMI. Depending on the need, funds can be used for rental or mortgage assistance, home repairs, build and maintain units, gap financing, debt or interest reduction, or other uses to directly support affordable housing. One of the benefits of Issue 3, is that it will ensure that rental units will remain affordable forever with deed restrictions. Issue 3 was written to give the city the opportunity to find the best options to fund the Affordable Housing Trust Fund. Since funding amounts can change with revenues taken in by the city each year, it is likely that new sources, such as reinstating the .3% earnings tax, will be combined with other funding sources, such an Impact Fee. When developers create Market Rate housing, whether that directly or indirectly displaces residents, or removes affordable housing, their development has an impact. An Impact Fee allows the city to collect a fee, if the developer does not include affordable housing in their development. This would only cover a portion of the 50 million, but would be most equitable and also a step forward for inclusionary zoning; however, it would require the city to change its ideology that market rate housing increases affordability. Unfortunately, with all of the research that went into crafting Issue 3, the city manager's office was asked by city council to write a report on what removing 50 million from the general budget would do to city services, such as trash removal, fire, and police. This report has been misused to characterize the amendment as one that will destroy the city. In a split decision, the Ohio Supreme Court allowed the adoption of altered ballot language where a claim was made that Issue 3 "could" reduce the city's ability to provide services. If the language read "would" instead of "could" the court would not have allowed it, but it is still leading language. Ultimately, it's a scare tactic because new funding sources will be identified, and services won't be cut. Last year, due to the pandemic, the city faced a 30 million dollar deficit and managed to not cut any basic services, and actually gave the police a raise. City Hall's affordable housing recommendations include taking on debt by re-enrolling in a HUD Section 108 program to establish a loan pool. Cincinnati's Section 108 program just expired last year, and is not limited to creating affordable housing. A recent example of a project that received Section 108: Build Cincinnati funding is the 4th and Race Tower. Section 108 funds can be used to build parking garages, businesses, and luxury housing, they are not restricted to build affordable housing, which is why the city's position on market rate housing increasing affordability, they will likely push the funding into market and luxury housing. City Hall's plan does not want to dedicate funding towards affordable housing. The funding sources they are calling for, both private and public, do not require funding to go towards affordable housing. This plan does not mark a drastic change in their current policies and it relies on trickle-down housing ideology. The city has determined that a governance board be chosen by the mayor consisting of bank lenders, for-profit builders, for-profit developers, real estate brokers, city councilmembers, and anyone else who can provide "balanced advice" on affordable housing. The board will be able to determine where the funding from the affordable housing trust fund will go, and this was passed by city council as an ordinance on April 14th, 2021. This board could include a person who is eligible to receive assistance from the trust fund, but the makeup is entirely up to the mayor. What we know is that City Hall's plan is not based upon the years of research and work we have put into the affordable housing trust fund and Issue 3. Issue ensures that the governance board is most effective by including people who are focused on fair housing and others who have experienced homelessness. Issue 3's board also includes professionals in the development and maintenance of affordable housing to ensure that the institutional knowledge is present. It is important to the people of Cincinnati to know that the funds will not be used for political posturing or as part of a political campaign. Many Cincinnati families have been displaced because white, generational wealth is returning to the city with incentives. Issue 3 ensures that tenants are protected with just cause eviction and it strengthens racial discrimination protections by providing additional oversight. Because Black women are disproportionately impacted by evictions, Issue 3 takes a racial equity position to ensure that the people who need support the most will receive it. Ultimately, only Issue 3 ensures that there is dedicated funding towards affordable housing, that our neighbors have additional eviction protections, and that it's community controlled. In addition, Issue 3 requires all jobs that utilize money from the trust fund provide a livable wage - something that city hall's plan completely ignores. It's clear that voting for Issue 3 is more than making sure that the best, most-researched, strongest affordable housing trust fund is available in Cincinnati, but it is also a way to ensure that city hall won't continue to enrich wealthy benefactors at the expense of the rest of us.

By Alula Nugese Recently, anti-Asian hate crimes and violence have spiked across the United States. The data suggests these increases are a result of the COVID-19 pandemic and the anti-Asian rhetoric this pandemic has brought upon the Asian population in America. According to the California State University’s Center for Hate and Extremism, in the 16 most populated cities in the United States, hate crimes increased about 150% from 2019-2020. This massive increase in hate crimes has led to protestors speaking out against this violence, creating relatively new widespread advocacy. The cause of this spike may be more than just the pandemic’s economic and social effects in the United States. Many people are pointing to the politicians’ constant blaming of China as to why we are seeing these crimes increase so dramatically. “I think the political leadership under Trump really put a target on the backs of people perceived to be Chinese. It’s Sinophobia,” said Chris Kwok, a board member of the Asian American Bar Association of New York, in an interview with VOA news. Kwok is referring to Trump’s sly comments towards China throughout 2020. Whether it was calling COVID-19 “China virus” or constantly blaming China for the pandemic’s effect on Americans, his comments may have resulted in an increase of hate crimes towards the East Asian population in the United States. On March 16, a series of mass shootings occurred at three spas/ massage parlors in Atlanta. Eight people were killed, six of which were Asian women. The senseless violence has led to nationwide protests against AAPI hate. (Asian-American and Pacific Islander) Stop AAPI Hate is a non-profit coalition founded in 2020 dedicated to standing against racism that Asian-American communities have faced more frequently due to the pandemic. On February 9, the co-founders of the coalition said, “These violent assaults have a devastating impact on our community as they are part of an alarming rise in anti-Asian American hate during the COVID-19 pandemic.” Hate crimes have become more frequent in recent years, which may be attributed to political events/ rhetoric. Since the 2016 election, The Center for the Study of Hate and Extremism reported a 12.5% increase in hate crimes from 2016-2017. Although there are usually spikes during election years, 2017 was the only year where hate crimes continued to rise after the election was over. Physical violence has been present during the last year, but so has the verbal harassment towards Asian people. Many Asian-owned businesses are receiving violent threats, making these employees fear leaving work at night. Oriental Wok, a Chinese restaurant with two locations in the Cincinnati area, posted a message on social media discussing the harassment they have endured during the past year. “Our homes and cars have been egged, we are pummeled with daily calls telling us to ‘Go back to China’ along with other crude and violent threats,” said the Wong Family. This issue has received recognition from the Biden administration, who have condemned all acts of violence against Asian-Americans. Prominent voices are speaking up about this issue, but it seems this country has a long way to go before real change is evident.

By Bill Woods On May 4th voters will decide whether a Charter Amendment proposing that the City of Cincinnati spend $50-million annually to increase affordable housing will become law. This number is no small amount of money, and the City Manager and many members of Council publicly denounce this proposal as something that will wreck the general budget. They act like they have been blindsided by the affordable housing advocates who champion this Charter Amendment. As one of the organizations that support this proposal, Applied Information Resources offers its perspective on why this Amendment is long overdue. The affordable housing crisis that confronts Cincinnati did not suddenly emerge out of nowhere. It's a crisis that's as old as AIR, Inc. itself. In fact, the city's first homeless study conducted by AIR and paid for by the City of Cincinnati found that the lack of affordable housing was the number one reason why families were homeless in 1987. This study also cited the loss of affordable housing units in the city and major cuts in federal funding for housing programs. AIR followed up two years later with a report that focused on the loss of affordable units and grassroots efforts to counter this trend. Noting that almost every low-income neighborhood showed a loss of units from 1980-1989, the report concluded that local and state government funding and philanthropic contributions were needed to make up for the loss of federal support during this time frame. AIR completed its second homeless study in 1993. A quote from this update on homelessness draws the correlation between the lack of affordable housing and growing homelessness in Cincinnati. "There are numerous factors involved in the housing crisis confronting the homeless, but most of these factors relate to the clients' lack of income and the absence of affordable units." By that time, it could also be reported that federal funding for publicly assisted housing programs nationwide had decreased from $30-billion to $8-billion in one decade and that less than 30 percent of the Cincinnati households that qualified for federal housing assistance received it. In that same year, AIR did a report for the Greater Cincinnati Foundation that provided data on Cincinnati's affordable housing dilemma and examples of how best to address it. Two sentences quoted from this report capture this city's housing dilemma at that moment in time. "Cities such as Cincinnati were simply not prepared when the federal government slashed funding for housing assistance by over 70- percent in the 1980s. Communities have been playing catch-up ever since, and local leaders have been slow to admit that the affordable housing buck stops here." Twenty-eight years later, the City of Cincinnati has held to the position of not accepting "that the affordable housing buck stops here." Meanwhile, poverty and the lack of affordable units have increased, and several recent studies confirm this fact. A major study completed several years ago by LISC ( Local Initiatives Support Corporation) found that Cincinnati possessed a shortage of 28,000 affordable housing units. A year later, a second study, "Fair Housing Assessment," by Xavier University's Community Building Institute reinforced the grim reality of this city's ongoing and worsening affordable housing crisis. It documented how high-end economic development projects in neighborhoods such as Over-the-Rhine have actually decreased the number of affordable units, and how low wages and ever-increasing rents exacerbate this dilemma. It called for a change in "how we allocate resources and address long-term socioeconomic issues." Thus, an abundance of studies have documented this worsening crisis over three decades. Meanwhile, grassroots efforts led by non-profit neighborhood development corporations and supported by foundations and religious institutions have done their best to supply affordable units. Nevertheless, funding remains the key missing ingredient, and nothing has come close to replacing the huge loss of federal dollars for affordable housing programs that took place from the 1980s to the present. Other cities across the country have come up with policies that have provided more revenue for affordable housing such as requiring major housing developers to include a percentage of affordable units in their projects or by establishing affordable housing trust funds. Advocates for Affordable Housing (AHA) has pressed the City to adopt both of these reforms, and it finally convinced City Council to create a trust fund in 2019. However, this entity has never been adequately funded. This long-term lack of will by the City to address this crisis finally led Advocates For Affordable Housing, the Homeless Coalition of Greater Cincinnati, and the Metropolitan Area Religious Coalition of Cincinnati to launch their City Charter Amendment campaign in 2020 that mandates City funding for the trust fund. During this pandemic year that made signature gathering difficult at best, volunteers managed to collect 9,541 signatures to qualify this proposal for the May 4th Primary ballot. If one believes that a major responsibility of government is to address the critical needs of the people that it serves, then the case for passing the Affordable Housing Charter Amendment is very strong. Will the City confront initial problems absorbing $50-million into its budget? The honest answer is yes. A "yes" answer would also be appropriate to the question: "Isn't it sad that a citizen-initiated Charter Amendment is required to make the City respond to a long-standing crisis that has made life so difficult for so many individuals and families with children within its boundaries. Although not a panacea, this proposal would be a major step in providing some significant resources in addressing the 28,000 affordable housing unit shortage in Cincinnati.

By Katelyn Lusher and Shruthi Chidambaram In Streetvibes’ 24 year long history, the paper has undergone many changes. Technology became more accessible and affordable in 1999 with the advent of Adobe InDesign, making it possible for early staff members to move beyond the cut and paste method used in the first two years. Editors have come and gone as they moved on to other things, like Donald Whitehead, who became the executive director of the National Homeless Coalition in D.C. last year. The city of Cincinnati has changed tremendously as gentrification has aggressively taken over whole neighborhoods and changed the socioeconomic and racial makeup of its residents. Street papers at large have changed significantly with the times as well and have had to adapt to economic crises, like the 2008 recession, and more recently, the COVID-19 pandemic. With these changes, the content published in Streetvibes has changed as well. Early on, for example, the content in Streetvibes was almost exclusively centered on the everyday struggles of people experiencing homelessness within the Greater Cincinnati area. Until 2004, narratives of experiencing homelessness were one of the most prominent features in every issue of Streetvibes. Welfare was also a prominent topic since the 90s were a time of significant welfare reform under President Bill Clinton. In earlier issues of 1999, there were many stories on homelessness and an urgent call for welfare reform. As the issues progressed, more attention was given to the issue of gentrification. When the topic of conversation shifts from policy reform to fighting gentrification, we see a simultaneous shift in the position people are able to take on the issue of their own housing and economic situation. In earlier issues, writers, while pleading with a broken system, are pushing to improve their condition. Through their opinion pieces and activism, they are on the offensive side of positive reform. They are actively fighting for increased stability, and a better livelihood. When their attention is shifted to combating gentrification, such as fighting the demolition of the Drop-Inn Center to build the school for the arts, they are fighting just to keep what they have. The population is not able to move forward and up if they are spending energy to keep just the basic needs of food, housing, and shelter provided by the Drop-Inn Center (now known as Shelterhouse). Unfortunately, this theme of fighting just to hold ground rather than moving forward has been a common theme. When activists try to push for change, they are blocked. Recently, for example, City Council refused to acknowledge a charter amendment on the May ballot that would require Cincinnati to spend at least $50 million on affordable housing, despite the fact that there is a dire need for more affordable housing in the city. Projects that would inevitably lead to more gentrification, however, never seem to be turned down. Going back to the story about the Drop-In Center being displaced, there was a great fear in the community that the arts school in Over-the-Rhine would lead to more gentrification in the neighborhood, which did end up happening. Starting in 2004, there is an increased amount of gentrification stories in the Streetvibes archive, specifically regarding 3CDC. A trend we have begun to notice is that people’s reactions to these “development” projects are negative not just for affordable housing or displacement reasons, but due to an aversion to big corporate intervention in tight-knit communities. When the Drop-Inn Center was being displaced, there were many narrative-style articles published detailing the many services and impacts of the shelter. These deeply personal accounts were met with a corporate letter describing the developing company’s past experiences with similar issues and promised to provide adequate support to make up for the loss they caused. This dismissal of dialogue and unwillingness to cooperate with locals set an unpleasant tone regarding large-scale development that is clearly reflected in the community’s reception of 3CDC. The same is happening now with City Council members, who are more interested in throwing money into luxury housing units and encouraging gentrification around the FC stadium in the West End. While the look and thematic elements of Streetvibes have changed, the song remains the same: the people need a voice.

By Katelyn Lusher As some Streetvibes readers may already know, I (Katelyn) have been working on a digital archive for Streetvibes since 2018. During this process, I have unearthed a rich history that has always been present in Cincinnati but often dismissed or forgotten. While I had been told stories about activist history in Cincinnati, curating the Streetvibes archive has helped me see Cincinnati activism in a whole new light because it feels like I am experiencing these events as they happened. Rather than listening to secondhand accounts, I am able to read firsthand experiences and understand how people felt at the time. The archive’s content is so compelling that I felt it was necessary to highlight the most important themes within the archive, like affordable housing. To do that, I plan to construct exhibits on the archive website. In order to do that, I am working on coding the archive (in other words, sorting materials in the archive by theme) and looking for patterns within the archive. However, I quickly discovered that the Streetvibes archive has so much rich content that I could not possibly do it all on my own. Over the past month, I have been working with four undergraduate researchers at the University of Cincinnati who have coded the early years of Streetvibes, written memos on their observations, and have discussed possible new directions for the archive. Each researcher has described experiences similar to mine and highlight the importance of preserving local activist history. Dolly My time working with Katelyn and the team on the archive has been nothing short of an adventure. Going into this, Katelyn warned us all that it would be a lot of work, and I am very proud of her for doing as much as she did on her own, but she was not joking when she said it would be tasking. Although this is a lot of mental work and takes up space in my already busy day I am very glad to be doing the work. One of the initial things that drew me to this project was that it is about Cincinnati, a city that I love with all of my heart. Now that I am a part of building and cataloging the archive my love for the city and its people has only grown stronger. As a young child I was in the heart of the city often, particularly in the summer with my family and was able to see the community change over time. Now working with Streetvibes, I am given the opportunity to see the work that went into those community changes. I am able to see the progression of this city with more knowledge and through the eyes of our homeless population who are left out way too often. The team and I are still working out kinks within the project itself and every meeting I feel could go on forever but in the best way possible. I am elated to see where this project not only takes us as a group but also Streetvibes. None of this would be possible without the community and contributors that makes Streetvibes what it is today. Shruthi Working with the Streetvibes Archive has been an eye-opening glimpse into the history and hardships of a city I have always called my home, yet never fully seen. While statistics on homelessness and civic unrest have been beneficial to me in understanding Cincinnati’s roots, these stats do nothing to conceptualize the hardships that are faced in this city every day the way uncensored narratives and firsthand analyses published in the paper do. Compiling this archive has revealed to me patterns in discourse and incidents in the past that mirror current events and conversations. While it is alarming to see that some of these same difficult conversations are still being had decades later, it is heartening to see all that has been accomplished within the city of Cincinnati through grassroots activism and the perseverance of the community. Lauren Since starting the project with the Streetvibes Archive, my bubble of privilege that has already been deflating for some time is now deflating even further. Reading about community social justice issues and homelessness in Cincinnati allows me to continue to face the uncomfortable and harsh reality that life is not sunshine and rainbows for all people. On the other hand, the archive has shown me very positive material. It highlights the strong sense of community that the people of Cincinnati have, and the inspirational fight for equality and change through community activism. Working with the archive so far has been a very eye-opening experience for me, as someone with very little prior knowledge of the city of Cincinnati. Vanessa Before working on the Streetvibes archive, I had no experience with any type of qualitative research. I honestly did not know what Streetvibes was until I got the opportunity on this project. What I like most about this project, aside from the general coding software, is what I have learned about this city. I have lived here most of my life, yet I was unaware of the majority of the things that had happened in the years that I have been coding so far. Most of the topics in the articles that I have been reading are not topics that I have seen fully discussed elsewhere so I like getting to see what these topics are, why they are important, and who they are important to. Additionally, while each article is a contained story, each issue has a general theme while each year has an overarching theme. Watching all of these patterns emerge has been intriguing and I truly enjoy getting to pour through all of this history. Katelyn While the archive is still a work in progress, the similarities in our experiences show how important it is to make activist history accessible to all as an educational tool. Although the work is time-consuming and sometimes emotionally taxing, the potential impacts it may have on the community are enormous. If you would like to browse through the archive, please visit https://svarchive.omeka.net