“Walden, who is black, said the schools in Southern Pines have the most concentrated number of black students in the county, many from the nearby public housing projects, which have had crime and drug problems,” The Pilot reported. “The test scores are the lowest among Southern Pines schools, because of the large percentage of low-income children concentrated here, he said.”
Walden went on to say, “We don’t want to become like an inner city in the North. We were told companies have trouble selling homes in Southern Pines. By limiting the number of apartment complexes we allow, we’ll limit the number of low-income people moving here.”
While I’m sure Mr. Walden has only the best of intentions, to prevent Southern Pines from becoming like an inner city in the North, he has, in my opinion, done more damage than good.
Will Mr. Walden’s suggestion curtail low-income people from moving to his municipality? Of course not. They will still come, try to find a job, and then look for housing. Are we to gather that Mr. Walden speaks officially for the town of Southern Pines? I would hope not, as his suggestion also smacks of stereotyping a class of people, and generalizing what problems they will bring because of their low income status.
His statement also appears to be elitism or a “not in my backyard” mentality. What Mr. Walden failed to say is that Southern Pines will use this ban as a method to garner higher taxes. Tax revenue from low-income housing simply is not going to be as high as high-price condos and townhouses.
Another method some communities use to get higher tax revenues is the process of eminent domain, forcing a private property owner to sell and then giving or leasing the property to someone else. There is a case before the Supreme Court now, about a city trying to buy out waterfront housing. The city supposedly is offering fair market value to people who don’t want to sell. If they succeed, it is the city’s plan to lease the waterfront property to a pharmaceutical company for a dollar a year. Sadly, eminent domain tactics are on the rise, and individuals often lack the funding to appeal on a legal basis.
Also, I would like to address Mr. Walden’s statement about test scores of the children who live in public housing projects or low income housing. Shame on him for bringing children up as a deciding factor in this apartment ban issue!
When this moratorium was discussed a little over a month ago, a woman from West Southern Pines repeated the misinformed assumption that just because you live in low-income housing you will do poorly academically. I talked to several administrators, who disagreed with this lady’s take on these students’ test scores and academic performance. I was also informed that their test assessments were noteworthy. Tim Lussier of the Moore County school system told me essentially the same thing.
Now Mr. Walden brings up the same misinformed information. One has only to check out the North Carolina public schools’ Web site for the local schools’ report cards to see for themselves.
At what point do children learn self-esteem and self-respect? What are they to think about themselves and their families if they are able to comprehend Walden’s words? Do children have a choice where they live or whom they live with? Is this inclusion of innocent children crucial to Southern Pines’ goal of banning affordable housing?
Crime and drug use is not restrictive to public housing areas. All communities, including affluent communities, battle crime and drug use. I would dare say that not every individual who lives in a Southern Pines public housing unit or other low-income housing is selling drugs or committing crime.
There are those who work hard, who try to provide for their families, and whose children make decent grades. These citizens are an asset to the town of Southern Pines. They might work at a fast food restaurant for minimal wage, yet some of their customers are those living in those high price condos, houses and townhouses, and if they want a hamburger and fries, where do they expect the person preparing their meal to live?
Lastly, Mr. Walden’s unfortunate choice of words might confuse businesses that want to relocate here. These firms might get the idea that enrolling their children in Southern Pines’ schools would not be a sound decision, that affordable housing would not be available for their workers, and — what is even worse — that the town is biased against those making minimum wage.
Mark J. Barber lives in Pinebluff.
