Making the Third Ghetto: Race and Family Homelessness in Washington, D.C., 1977–1999 A thesis submitted to The University of Manchester for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Faculty of Humanities 2020 Nicole M. Gipson School of Arts, Languages and Cultures Contents List of Abbreviations 3 List of Maps, Figures, and Tables 4 Abstract 5 Declaration and Copyright Statement 6 Dedication 7 Acknowledgements 8 Introduction – Something Must Be Done…But What? 9 Part I – The 1980s Chapter 1 – Making the Third Ghetto in Washington, D.C. 1977-1987 30 Chapter 2 – HOUSING WHEN? Family homelessness and the quest for 72 affordable housing in the District Part II – The 1990s Chapter 3 – Not in My Back Yard! Shifting Attitudes Toward the Homeless 114 Chapter 4 – Partnership, Privatisation, and Power in 145 Washington, D.C. Conclusion – Where Do We Go From Here? 190 Bibliography 198 Word Count: 81,068 2 List of Abbreviations AFDC – Aid to Families with Dependent Children ANC – Advisory Neighborhood Commission BID – Business Improvement Districts BUR – Black Urban Regime CAP – Central Atlanta Progress CCNV – Community for Creative Non-violence CoC – Continuum of Care DCHA – DC Housing Authority DHR – Department of Human Resources DHS – Department of Human Services DPAH – Department of Public and Assisted Housing EA – Emergency Assistance FEMA – Federal Emergency Management Agency HHS – Department of Health and Human Services HOPE – Homeownership and Opportunity for People Everywhere HUD – Department of Housing and Urban Development ICH – Interagency Council on the Homeless OBRA – Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1981 PRWORA – Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 PPP – Public-Private Partnerships PHA – Public Housing Authority NLCHP – The National Law Center on Homelessness and Poverty NCH – National Coalition for the Homeless SCLC – Southern Christian Leadership Conference SNCC – Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee SRO – Single room occupancy TANF – Temporary Assistance to Needy Families TCP – The Community Partnership for the Prevention of Homelessness URD – Urban Revitalization Demonstration VA – Veterans Administration 3 List of Figures, Maps, and Tables Map 1.1 – Washington, D.C. by Neighbourhood 35 Map 1.2 – Washington, D.C. by Quadrant 36 Map 1.3 – Between 1970 and 1990 Poverty Became More Concentrated in More Parts of the District 39 Table 1.1 – Poverty in the District of Columbia by Ward, 1970 – 1990 39 Map 2.1 – D.C. Ward Map 84 Table 2.1 – Percentage of Families with Children Headed by Single Mothers by Ward, 1970-1990 85 Figure 2.1 – Housing Now! Newsletter 102 Figure 2.2 – The second page of HUD Sec. Kemp’s Declaration of War Against Homelessness after the Housing Now! March on October 7, 1989 106 Table 3.1 – Typology of elements structuring perception of threat 131 Map 3.1 – Map of Ward 3’s First Homeless Shelter 132 Map 3.2 – Site of Foggy Bottom Incident in Ward 2 137 Table 4.1 – William H. Frey’s analysis of 1970, 1980, 1990 and 2000 decennial censuses 169 data. Map 4.1 – Persistent Racial Divisions in D.C. White/Black Concentration 1990 and 2010 169 4 Abstract This research project is a historical account of the effects of neoliberal economic, social, and urban development on the making of the third ghetto in African American communities, with a particular focus on homeless families in Washington, D.C. at the end of the twentieth century. Neoliberal policies of the early 1980s and 1990s promoted the deregulation, and marketization of social assistance services, as well as the privatization and commodification of public spaces, which fostered punitive measures that exacerbated the economic and social inequality of precariously-housed communities in general and criminalised street homeless activity in particular. The lack of affordable housing, the destruction of public housing, in addition to structural challenges such as inadequate welfare outlays perpetuated poverty traps and facilitated the creation of welfare hotels – notorious for their deplorable living conditions. Zero- tolerance policing, which sought to make way for the large-scale downtown development projects of the twenty-first century in the District, pushed homeless communities out of coveted public spaces in anticipation of this “Downtown Renaissance.” Analysing the impact of neoliberal policies and practices on housing precarity sheds light on the intersections of the second and the third ghettoes. The second ghetto refers to public housing. The third ghetto pertains to all forms of emergency shelter for the homeless. The emergency shelter system which emerged from urban areas of the mid-1970s, first as a burgeoning, shadow network of services provided by faith-based organizations and homeless advocates, then institutionalized through the McKinney Homeless Assistance Act of 1987 was Washington, D.C.’s third ghetto. The history of homelessness in Washington, D.C is essentially defined by its ghettoes which were built on the central fault line of race. However, understanding the “new” visible homelessness of this period remains challenging, due to a narrow definition of the “old” homelessness which has traditionally excluded African American alley dwellers who were eventually displaced through slum clearance policies by 1970. Moreover, examining the public housing system of the second ghetto as a gendered space, historicized within the context of the policy paradigm of displacement, dispersal, and demolition, further elucidates the making of the third ghetto in the District, where homeless families were one of the fastest- growing subpopulations of the new homeless era. This study posits that redefining old homelessness along racial lines and re-examining the second ghetto of public housing in terms of race, gender, and housing precarity are essential to understanding the new homelessness of the third ghetto in Washington, D.C. 5 Declaration No portion of the work referred to in the thesis has been submitted in support of an application for another degree or qualification of this or any other university or other institute of learning. Copyright Statement i. The author of this thesis (including any appendices and/or schedules to this thesis) owns certain copyright or related rights in it (the “Copyright”) and she has given The University of Manchester certain rights to use such Copyright, including for administrative purposes. ii. Copies of this thesis, either in full or in extracts and whether in hard or electronic copy, may be made only in accordance with the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 (as amended) and regulations issued under it or, where appropriate, in accordance with licensing agreements which the University has from time to time. This page must form part of any such copies made. iii. The ownership of certain Copyright, patents, designs, trade marks and other intellectual property (the “Intellectual Property”) and any reproductions of copyright works in the thesis, for example graphs and tables (“Reproductions”), which may be described in this thesis, may not be owned by the author and may be owned by third parties. Such Intellectual Property and Reproductions cannot and must not be made available for use without the prior written permission of the owner(s) of the relevant Intellectual Property and/or Reproductions. iv. Further information on the conditions under which disclosure, publication and commercialization of this thesis, the Copyright and any Intellectual Property and/or Reproductions described in it may take place is available in the University IP Policy (see http://documets.manchester.ac.uk/DocuInfo.aspx?DocID=487), in any relevant thesis restriction declarations deposited in the University Library, The University Library’s regulations (see http://www.manchester.ac.uk/library/aboutus/regulations) and in The University’s policy on Presentation of Theses. 6 This thesis is dedicated to my supervisory team: Dr David Brown, Dr Eithne Quinn, and Dr Kerry Pimblott for inspiring me in the writing of it and for helping me find my own voice. 7 Acknowledgements I would be remiss if I did not use this platform to write to BAME students and members of other marginalised communities in their struggle to achieve in academia and in life. Being from a BAME or marginalised community requires that we face a few regrettable facts: merit alone does not guarantee success and we do not have access to the traditional networks needed to achieve it. The unlevel playing field, which deprives us of equal access to financial, institutional, digital, and social support, means that in terms of achievement we must accept the unfortunate truth that in order to be equal we must be better. This is the tragedy and opportunity of life on the margins. As I am fond of telling my students: the transformation of strong emotion experienced during adversity into critical thinking is a powerful thing indeed. I submit this thesis as proof of this assertion. Although we are not handed the privilege of access to certain networks, we can and must inspire others to help us create our own. I would like to acknowledge those people who have answered my call in this endeavour. The first living person that comes to mind is my friend and personal champion, James Shabazz. He not only invited me into his home during my second research trip in 2018 but also shared his wisdom about the District with me, as a street vendor, D.C. resident, and respected community elder. Although my father, Arthur James Gipson passed away in 2015, he remains a constant inspiration. He understood my intellectual curiosity and encouraged me to develop it, particularly in my writing. I also owe a great debt to my best friend Agnès Michel-Skorupka for helping me get well again and for being everything a friend and a big sister should be. I am also indebted to the manuscript and archival staff of the following institutions: the Special Collections Research Center at George Washington University, the Moorland-Spingarn Research Center at Howard University, the Washingtoniana Collection at the D.C.