Board of Trustees Approves Fair and Affordable Housing Amendment

The Board of Trustees held a public meeting in Village Hall last evening to pass a resolution passing the Fair and Affordable Housing amendment into law and to respond to queries posed by attendees of previous Board meetings.

Explored issues included whether incentives would be offered to individuals living in or constructing affordable housing units, whether service employees such as teachers, police and firefighters would be given preference or would be recruited to live in units and whether the Board passing the amendment into law was an admission that Scarsdale's housing code had previously been unfair. 

Village resident Martin Kaufman had compiled a list of 10 questions for Trustee Stacey Brodsky to answer following a Board meeting held on Oct. 25 examining various nuances of the affordable housing amendment. Assistant to the Village Manager John D. Goodwin sent Brodsky's accompanying responses to Scarsdale Patch. 

According to Brodsky, the Fair and Affordable Housing Amendment:

• Advances the public health, safety and welfare by creating housing options for people from a variety of income ranges and ethnic backgrounds. In addition, providing housing for persons in service-oriented industries, such as home health care, police, fire and education, and acting cooperatively with the County of Westchester, are benefits to the community.  

Brodsky's reasons for the Board passing the Fair and Affordable Housing Amendment into law included the following: 

• The Board is voting on the proposed amendment now because the Village has an existing obligation to further fair and affordable housing, irrespective of Westchester County’s implementation of the Stipulation of Settlement. 
• In addition, the Village is seeking to be proactive and cooperative with Westchester County’s efforts; and the issues in dispute between the County and HUD do not impact Scarsdale’s ability to move forward to provide fair and affordable housing.  

On providing incentives for Fair and Affordable Housing, Brodsky offered the following statements: 

• The proposed amendment includes as many of the model code provisions as possible. However, it has been tailored by the Village Board and the Planning Board to account for Scarsdale’s unique characteristics. Both the proposed amendment and the model code have been and are currently available to review and identify the distinctions. The distinctions have previously been reviewed and discussed at length at publicly noticed Planning Board and Law and Land and Land Use Committee meetings, which were open to all interested persons, resident and civic organizations, who had to opportunity to comment and to ask questions.
• Neither the model code nor the proposed amendment to Scarsdale’s zoning code contains incentives. The County has suggested that municipalities might provide incentives to further fair and affordable housing. However, the Village Board and the Planning Board determined that incentives are not necessary at this time. 
• It is the Board's assessment that excluding incentives in the proposed amendment will yield no negative consequences. Additionally, the proposed amendment does not include incentives because it has been determined that incentives are not necessary at this time. 
• A future proposal to included incentives would constitute a change to the Village’s zoning code, which would have to be approved by the Village Board. The inclusion of incentives is a County suggestion, not a mandate. 

When asked whether the Board's passing the amendment into law was an admission that Scarsdale's own housing codes had previously been unfair, Brodsky said:

• Neither the Village Board nor the proposed amendment concedes that housing in Scarsdale has been unfair.
• The Board hopes to enhance the Village’s ability to provide fair and affordable housing in the community.