Economy
Affordable Housing Spirals Down
NEW JOURNAL AND GUIDE — A recent study by the Urban Institute reports that in communities across the nation home prices and rents are exceeding the reach of an increasing number of households.
By Christopher G. Cox
A recent study by the Urban Institute reports that in communities across the nation home prices and rents are exceeding the reach of an increasing number of households.
“For every 100 extremely low-income households, there are only 29 adequate, affordable, and available rental units. That means two parents who both work minimum-wage jobs might wait years to find a safe, affordable place to live with their two kids,” the report states.
According to Michael Washburn, president at Exit Realty of the Carolinas, based in Charleston, S.C, there are a number of troubling factors that contribute to this problem.
“Rules and regulations that govern where and how housing developments can be built,” Washburn said, “vary widely from one municipality to another. Government and the private sector have to come together to streamline the process of building homes and apartments,” he adds.
One possible solution to dealing with this problem, says Washburn, is offering developers property tax incentives that make it possible to reduce the cost of land acquisition. Another more long-term answer is expanding public transportation. Modern light rail systems enable residents to have a reliable, economical commute from areas where housing is more affordable to areas where their jobs might be located.
“It doesn’t help much to have an affordable rent,” Washburn said, “if you have to buy a car and pay all the costs associated with buying gas, maintenance and insurance.”
This growing lack of affordable housing is particularly acute in Charlotte, NC, said LaWana Mayfield, who represents District 3 on Charlotte’s City Council, because of rapid population growth fueled largely by individuals who have relocated from high-cost-of-living cities hoping to find a more affordable lifestyle.
Mayfield also notes that hosting the national nominating conventions of the nation’s two major political parties puts a city in the national and international spotlight, spurring massive growth and sudden attention that can be disruptive. Charlotte hosted the Democratic National Convention in 2012 and has been selected as the site for the Republican National Convention in 2020.
Other important factors contributing to the lack of affordable housing, said Mayfield, are the expanding wage gap between corporate executives and their employees and the ongoing assault on labor unions, which for decades helped to insure wage growth and better working conditions for their members.
Despite these external historical factors, Mayfield strongly believes there is an important role for personable responsibility when weighing the many elements that go into purchasing a home.
“Home buyers need to take the time to do the research on an area where they are considering buying and understand the current market trends,” she said. “We are bombarded in the media with the idea that we should spend money, but it’s important to understand the long-term impact of your investment for both your family and your community.”
Mayfield emphasizes that just because a buyer qualifies for a mortgage at a certain level, does not mean that obtaining that budget-stretching mortgage is the best decision in the long run. “Just because you can pay it,” she adds, “does not mean you should.
“For example,” she continues, “suppose a couple qualifies for a $500,000 mortgage. Rather than buying a home for that amount, they might do better to buy a house that costs $150,000 and spend $50,000 fixing it up. That would give them more financial flexibility to consider other investments or to cope with an unanticipated event such as the loss of a job.”
This article originally appeared in the New Journal and Guide.
Activism
OPINION: Your Voice and Vote Impact the Quality of Your Health Care
One of the most dangerous developments we’re seeing now? Deep federal cuts are being proposed to Medicaid, the life-saving health insurance program that covers nearly 80 million lower-income individuals nationwide. That is approximately 15 million Californians and about 1 million of the state’s nearly 3 million Black Californians who are at risk of losing their healthcare.

By Rhonda M. Smith, Special to California Black Media Partners
Shortly after last year’s election, I hopped into a Lyft and struck up a conversation with the driver. As we talked, the topic inevitably turned to politics. He confidently told me that he didn’t vote — not because he supported Donald Trump, but because he didn’t like Kamala Harris’ résumé. When I asked what exactly he didn’t like, he couldn’t specifically articulate his dislike or point to anything specific. In his words, he “just didn’t like her résumé.”
That moment really hit hard for me. As a Black woman, I’ve lived through enough election cycles to recognize how often uncertainty, misinformation, or political apathy keep people from voting, especially Black voters whose voices are historically left out of the conversation and whose health, economic security, and opportunities are directly impacted by the individual elected to office, and the legislative branches and political parties that push forth their agenda.
That conversation with the Lyft driver reflects a troubling surge in fear-driven politics across our country. We’ve seen White House executive orders gut federal programs meant to help our most vulnerable populations and policies that systematically exclude or harm Black and underserved communities.
One of the most dangerous developments we’re seeing now? Deep federal cuts are being proposed to Medicaid, the life-saving health insurance program that covers nearly 80 million lower-income individuals nationwide. That is approximately 15 million Californians and about 1 million of the state’s nearly 3 million Black Californians who are at risk of losing their healthcare.
Medicaid, called Medi-Cal in California, doesn’t just cover care. It protects individuals and families from medical debt, keeps rural hospitals open, creates jobs, and helps our communities thrive. Simply put; Medicaid is a lifeline for 1 in 5 Black Americans. For many, it’s the only thing standing between them and a medical emergency they can’t afford, especially with the skyrocketing costs of health care. The proposed cuts mean up to 7.2 million Black Americans could lose their healthcare coverage, making it harder for them to receive timely, life-saving care. Cuts to Medicaid would also result in fewer prenatal visits, delayed cancer screenings, unfilled prescriptions, and closures of community clinics. When healthcare is inaccessible or unaffordable, it doesn’t just harm individuals, it weakens entire communities and widens inequities.
The reality is Black Americans already face disproportionately higher rates of poorer health outcomes. Our life expectancy is nearly five years shorter in comparison to White Americans. Black pregnant people are 3.6 times more likely to die during pregnancy or postpartum than their white counterparts.
These policies don’t happen in a vacuum. They are determined by who holds power and who shows up to vote. Showing up amplifies our voices. Taking action and exercising our right to vote is how we express our power.
I urge you to start today. Call your representatives, on both sides of the aisle, and demand they protect Medicaid (Medi-Cal), the Affordable Care Act (Covered CA), and access to food assistance programs, maternal health resources, mental health services, and protect our basic freedoms and human rights. Stay informed, talk to your neighbors and register to vote.
About the Author
Rhonda M. Smith is the Executive Director of the California Black Health Network, a statewide nonprofit dedicated to advancing health equity for all Black Californians.
Activism
Oakland Hosts Town Hall Addressing Lead Hazards in City Housing
According to the city, there are 22,000 households in need of services for lead issues, most in predominantly low-income or Black and Latino neighborhoods, but only 550 to 600 homes are addressed every year. The city is hoping to use part of the multimillion-dollar settlement to increase the number of households served each year.

By Magaly Muñoz
The City of Oakland’s Housing and Community Development Department hosted a town hall in the Fruitvale to discuss the efforts being undertaken to remove lead primarily found in housing in East and West Oakland.
In 2021, the city was awarded $14 million out of a $24 million legal settlement from a lawsuit against paint distributors for selling lead-based paint that has affected hundreds of families in Oakland and Alameda County. The funding is intended to be used for lead poisoning reduction and prevention services in paint only, not water or other sources as has been found recently in schools across the city.
The settlement can be used for developing or enhancing programs that abate lead-based paint, providing services to individuals, particularly exposed children, educating the public about hazards caused by lead paint, and covering attorney’s fees incurred in pursuing litigation.
According to the city, there are 22,000 households in need of services for lead issues, most in predominantly low-income or Black and Latino neighborhoods, but only 550 to 600 homes are addressed every year. The city is hoping to use part of the multimillion-dollar settlement to increase the number of households served each year.
Most of the homes affected were built prior to 1978, and 12,000 of these homes are considered to be at high risk for lead poisoning.
City councilmember Noel Gallo, who represents a few of the lead-affected Census tracts, said the majority of the poisoned kids and families are coming directly from neighborhoods like the Fruitvale.
“When you look at the [kids being admitted] at the children’s hospital, they’re coming from this community,” Gallo said at the town hall.
In order to eventually rid the highest impacted homes of lead poisoning, the city intends to create programs and activities such as lead-based paint inspections and assessments, full abatement designed to permanently eliminate lead-based paint, or partial abatement for repairs, painting, and specialized cleaning meant for temporary reduction of hazards.
In feedback for what the city could implement in their programming, residents in attendance of the event said they want more accessibility to resources, like blood testing, and information from officials about lead poisoning symptoms, hotlines for assistance, and updates on the reduction of lead in their communities.
Attendees also asked how they’d know where they are on the prioritization list and what would be done to address lead in the water found at several school sites in Oakland last year.
City staff said there will be a follow-up event to gather more community input for programming in August, with finalizations happening in the fall and a pilot launch in early 2026.
Bay Area
State Orders Cleanup of Former Richmond Landfill
There is no immediate public hazard at the fence line of the site, which is located on the city’s southeastern shoreline, at the foot of S. 51st Street. However, the “site’s wastes pose an unacceptable long-term risk,” according to a CDTSC statement. Also, since the uncapped site sits along a creek and the Bay, wastes can wash off during each rain and high tide, the agency stated.

The Richmond Standard
The California Department of Toxic Substances Control (CDTSC) is ordering Union Pacific Railroad Company (UPRR) and Bayer CropScience, Inc. to clean up the former Blair Southern Pacific Landfill in Richmond due to findings of elevated levels of lead, banned pesticides like DDT, and radioactive material at the site.
There is no immediate public hazard at the fence line of the site, which is located on the city’s southeastern shoreline, at the foot of S. 51st Street. However, the “site’s wastes pose an unacceptable long-term risk,” according to a CDTSC statement. Also, since the uncapped site sits along a creek and the Bay, wastes can wash off during each rain and high tide, the agency stated.
Bayer and UPRR were ordered to clean up the site as it is their predecessor companies that are deemed responsible for the hazardous waste. The site was used from the 1950s to the 1980s, before modern environmental laws were in place, according to the CDTSC.
“During this time, the site was leased to landfill operators, who developed and operated the site as a series of landfills for disposal of industrial and non-industrial wastes,” the CDTSC stated.
The state’s order requires Bayer and UPRR to safely remove and dispose of the radioactive materials and includes penalties of up to $25,000 per day for noncompliance.
“There will be opportunities for public involvement during the development of the cleanup plan and at the Richmond Southeast Shoreline Community Advisory Group (CAG) meetings, which meet on Zoom the second Thursday of every month,” said Richmond City Councilmember Soheila Bana.
-
#NNPA BlackPress4 weeks ago
MLK Bust Quietly Removed from Oval Office Under Trump
-
Activism4 weeks ago
Oakland Post: Week of May 7 – 13, 2025
-
Activism3 weeks ago
After Two Decades, Oakland Unified Will Finally Regain Local Control
-
Activism3 weeks ago
Oakland Post: Week of May 14 – 20, 2025
-
Activism3 weeks ago
New Oakland Moving Forward
-
Alameda County3 weeks ago
Oakland Begins Month-Long Closure on Largest Homeless Encampment
-
Barbara Lee3 weeks ago
WNBA’s Golden State Valkyries Kick Off Season with Community Programs in Oakland
-
Activism3 weeks ago
East Bay Community Foundation’s New Grants Give Oakland’s Small Businesses a Boost