City Limits Magazine, October 1983 Issue

2034
ANDY REICHER
UHAS/CATHEDRAL HOUSE
1047 AMSTERDAM AVE.
Nih YORK NY ~ 0 0 2 5
Contents
Opinion
Why Housing and Arson Programs Aren't Enough .. 3
How the Senate Took a Walk on Flynn-Dearie ..... 6
Short Term Notes
J-51 Battle Comes Home .... . . . ..... . ....... . . 7
Jersey City'S Friendly CDBG Loan .... . . . .. .. .. . 8
Prisons: The State's New Housing ............... 9
The City Reneges on West Side Housing ......... 10
What the City's Arson Study Didn't Say . . . .... .. 11
FOOD vs. SHELTER ... ... . ... . ....... . ... . . . 13
Raising the welfare rent limits is under consideration. But it won't
increase the poor's housing choice or quality, argue two welfare
advocates.
RUINS AND REVIVALS . ..... . ... . . . ...... ... 16
A photo exhibit on the inner city opens in New York.
PAYING
TOO
MUCH
FUNnING EFFORTS TO
HOUSE 'fUE- HOl\>IELESS . . .. .. . ............. 18
The state and city are working on plans for creating more shelters
for the homeless.
FINDING A WAY HOME AGAIN . .. .. .... . . . .. 20
'On the Lower East Side, homeless farnilies receive shelter and help.
REAGAN'S NEIGHBORHOOD ADVOCATES . . . 22
When a national neighborhood coalition lined up with the Presi-
dent's urban policies mar.:.' members voted no - with their feet .
Future Sketches
Electronic Free Speech ... . . . .... . ... ..... .. 24
Tenants' Tactics
Beat the Rent Challenge Deadline . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 6
Letters ... . . . . . .. ....... ... .. .... .. .. .. . .. . . 27
Resources/Events ...... . . . ... . . .... .. .. . . . . . . 28
Review
Brooklyn: A Selective History .. . . . .. .. .. . . . . .. 29
Workshop ....... . ... . .... . .. . .. . .......... . . 31
LOW COST ACCOUNTING
Financial Management Center, a subsidiary of
Accountants For The Public Interest-New York
is pleased to announce its new Low Cost
Accounting Program.
EaGh client will meet at ou r office with an
accountant with extensive non-profit
background. The cost is $720 for the
year, billed at $60 per month.
FOR
ACCOUNTING?
Each client will receive the following
services from our specialized
/ accou ntants:
Overall accounting/bookkeeping
evaluation.
For more information about Low Cost Accounting
contact Francie, Program Manager, or Buddy Meth,
Executive Director at

Set up books.
Prepare quarterly income and expense
statements.
Prepare quarterly tax filings.
Review ledger quarterly.
End of calendar year preparation of
W-2 and W-3 forms.
End of fiscal year preparation of 990
and other year end forms.
Prepare year end compilation .
ap.
ACCOUNTANTS FOR THE PUBLIC INTEREST-NEW YORK
36 West 44th Street, Room 1201
EEl (212) 575-1828
New York, New York 10036
.. , because your accountant should save you a fortune-not cost you one!
CITY LlMITS/October1983 2
tOlYUMITS)
Volume VIn Number 8
Cit)' Umits is published ten times per year. monthly
except double issues in June/July and August/
September. by the City Limits Community Informa
tion Service. Inc . a nonprofit organization devoted
to disseminating informalion concerning neighbor-
hood revitalization. The publication is sponsored by
three organizations. The sponsors are:
Association of Neighborhood Housing Devtlopers.
Inc . an association of over thirty community based,
nonprofit housing development groups. developing
and advocating programs for low and moderate in
come housing and neighborhood stabilization.
Prall Center for Community and Environ
mental Development. a technical assistance and ad-
vocacy office offering professional planning and ar
chitectural services to low and moderate income
community groups. The Center also analyzes and
monitors government policy and performance.
Urban Homesteading Assistallce Board. a technical
assistance organization providing assistance to low
income tenant cooperatives in management and sweat
equity rehabilitation .
Subscription rates are: for individuals and communi
ty groups. $9/0ne Year, $151Two Years: for
Businesses. Foundations. Banks. Government Agen
eies and Libraries. $25/0ne Year. $40/Two Years.
Reduced rates are available for low income readers.
City Umits welcomes comments and article contribu
tions. Please include a stamped. selfaddressed
envelope for return of manuscripts. Material in Cit,)'
Umits does not necessarily reflect the opinion of the
sponsoring organizations. Send correspondence to:
CITY LIMITS. 424 West 33rd Street. New York.
N.Y. 10001. Postmaster send change of address to:
City Limits. 424 W. 33rd St .. New York. NY 10001.
Editor ...
Secondclass postage paid
New York. N.Y. 10001
City (ISSN 0I99-U330)
(212) 2398440
Assistant Editor ... . .
. Tom Robbins
. Susan Baldwin
. . Jim Mendell
. . Loui s Fulgoni
Marketing Director .. .
Design and Layout .. .
Copyright 1983. All Rights Reserved.
No portion or portions of this journal may be
reprinted without the express permission of the
publishers.
Cover photos
by Jim Mendell and Elly Spicer
Why Housing and Arson
Programs Can't Work Alone
By Rodrick Wallace
V
AST AREAS OF NEW York City lie
in ruins. Many, many communities
have been dismembered by a decade-long
storm of fire and abandonment which, in
spite of a long litany of "arson prevention"
and "housing" programs, continues to
spread from origins in the South-Central
Bronx, Brownsville-East New York and
Central Harlem to threaten the entire
Bronx, much of Brooklyn and large parts
of northern Manhattan. Similar phenomena
are now appearing in other American cities,
including Yonkers, Detroit, Cleveland and
Boston.
Why have arson prevention and housing
programs failed to overcome the New York
City disaster? Why are other cities suffer-
ing similar crises?
For some years, Public Interest Scientific
has been using state-of-the-art methods
adapted from' community and population
ecology, environmental impact assessment
and from epidemiology to examine this
3
phenomenon. We have studied literally
reams of statistical and other data on this
crisis released by New York City agencies
under the Freedom of Information Act. We
have found that failure to provide adequate
levels of crucial municipal services, notably
fire protection, triggers community
destructive processes a kind of
ecological collapse. This collapse is similar
in pattern to that observed by geographers,
epidemiologists and ecologists during the
spread of infectious disease and other con-
tagious phenomena.
The Lack of Fire Services
New York City has not had fire "Se1:.vice
adequate to sustain communities with over-
crowded, undermaintained housing - i.e.,
minority neighborhoods - since the Lind-
say administration's 1m cuts, begun well
before the "fiscal crisis." Subsequent cuts
badly exacerbated the problem. These in-
cluded reduction of the number of engines
CITY LIMITS/October 1983
and ladders responding to fires, the clos-
ing of a total of 35 fire companies and
demanning of the rest, as well as elimina-
tion of crucial supervisory units. We found
these service reductions caused a collapse
of the ability to control and contain in-
dividual structural fires.
Between 1970 and 1976, fire department
manpower declined 29 percent. In that
period,structural fue worktime - the time
spent fighting building fires - increased
40 percent. The increase was concentrated
largely in areas with an already high fire
incidence. The result was the "burnout"
phenomenon that covered literally blocks
of neighborhoods.
How can such widespread burnout be
related to the collapse of ability to contain
individual fires?
Fires get out of hand because of an in-
adequate initial response. This frequently
takes in areas of undermanned fire units or
closed fire companies. The severe fires
mark the block, frightening both landlords
and tenants.
Other landlords then often withdraw
maintenance in preparation for abandon-
ment. Since most fires , outside of the kit-
chen, are maintenance related - trash,
boiler, electrical system and the like - this
causes more fires, many of which also get
out of hand and accelerate the process.
Buildings become abandoned. Individuals
with emotional or anti-social pathologies
begin setting fires instead of torturing cats
or abusing small children. The
neighborhood collapses in a wave of fire,
abandonment and fear.
The collapse in fact destroys two com-
munities: that which burns and that which
receives the demoralized refugees. No
community can absorb the population
pressure and overcrowding of an influx of
refugees from a burning area. The process
then spreads into the next neighborhood,
e.g., the West Bronx, and now into the
Northwest and Northeast Bronx. If urban
population densities could not be maintain-
ed in the South-Central Bronx because of
the lack of crucial municipal services, they
cannot be long maintained In
fact,the human ecological collapse of the
Bronx is found to be propagating like an
illustration from an undergraduate
geography textbook.
Housing Programs Not Enough
"Housing" and "arson prevention" pro-
CITY LlMITS/October1983
grams alone are not sufficient to stem this
kind of catastrophe. Alone they do not ad-
dress the inadequacy of municipal service
delivery. In fact, rehabilitated buildings in
burned areas are often more flammable
than the original housing which burned
from lack of fire protection. This is both
because of design (for example dropped
ceilings covering an entire floor) and the
use of toxic and flammable construction
materials: many rehabs and new homes
have plastic plumbing fiXtures or electrical
conduit, made of the same PVC or ABS
which is known to have caused massive loss
of life in the Stouffer's Inn and the MGM
Grand Hotel fues . Indeed, there are
already examples of rehabilitated housing
in the South Bronx, Crown Heights and
other areas without adequate fire service
which have, in fact, burned again.
Arson, while indeed a serious law en-
forcement problem, does not serve as an
explanation of a larger fue and abandon-
ment phenomenon which far subsumes
deliberate fire setting. Indeed, detailed pro-
jections were made by the New York City
Fire Department in 1970 of the fuestorm
Assembly Republican Task Force on Ur-
ban Fire Protection attributed New York
City's burnout explicitly to inadequate fire
service, and proposed bills which would
have provided the state funds needed to
reopen 45 ghetto fire companies. Those
bills were not supported by the Koch ad-
ministration or the housing lobby and did
not pass.
Without restoration of adequate fue-
related municipal services (fire, sanitation,
housing and water supply) the burnout will
continue. The decline in fires after the 1976
peak is characteristic of recurrent epidemic
phenomena: very little is left to burn in the
South Bronx and other devastated areas.
Now, new neighborhoods are "ripening" for
destruction and will be destroyed unless
sufficient numbers of firefighters and com-
panies are provided to promptly and effi-
ciently control individual building fires.o
Rod Wallace is an Upper Side resi-
dent and Technical Director of the Public
Interest Scientific Consulting Service.
to come in the Bronx, without invocation ,-------.......... ---______ -.
of "arson." Those projections, by then Drawing by Erica Weihs.
Deputy Chief Charles Kirby, relied on the
interplay between housing overcrowding,
undermaintenance and municipal services
to accurately predict the spread of burnout
from the South-Central into the West and
Northwest Bronx.
The very fire companies, by name, Kir-
by cited as crucial to keeping the lid on the
Bronx fire outbreak were precisely those
closed in 1972 and 1974.
Nowhere did Kirby use the word
There is an opinion that rehabilitated or
even "gentrified" housing is sufficient to PEACE AND FREEDOM CARDS
preserve or rebuild a neighborhood. But FROM WIN MAGAZINE
rehabilitated buildings are not ecological- FOR HOLIDAY GREETINGS ...
ly distinct from the surrounding communi- FOItYEARROUND CORRESPONDENCE
ty or communities. What does it mean to An assortment of 12 disarmingly beautiiulcards
rehabilitate individual buildings in a com- . original designs by talented progressive
munity which is dying from lack of ade- artIsts. Produced in the spirit of the holidays
they are also suitable for use as note
quate municipal services? Will the residents Matching envelopes included. No
of those individual buildings be somehow InSIde message! We've left that part to you!
exempt from the community agony? From 13 sets of 12 cards, assorted designs and colors
the threat of inadequate fire protection? for just $4.00 each (plus $1.00 postage and
From the need of places to shop, to gather handling). 4-9 sets for $4.00 each; 10 or more
in peace with their neighbors, to attend sets for $3.00 each (postpaid). Allow 4 weeks
for delivery.
church or synagogue? in Central Harlem
and the South Bronx even the churches are To order, or for further description write:
WIN Magazine, Dept. C. '
disintegrating. 326 Livingston Street
In 1978, after extensive hearings, the Brooklyn, NY 11217

4
How the Senate Took a Walk On Flynn-Dearie
By John McKean
T
HIS IS WHAT REALLY happened
to tenants in the last frenzied hours of
the last all-night session of the New York
Legislature between 3: 30 and 5 A.M. on the
night of June 26- Tl.
Tenants got:
Protection for roommates and for institu-
tional and hotel tenants; triple damages -
but only on certain future overcharges;
reduced status for the Rent Stabilization
Association. But all of these tenant protec-
tions were known to be too valid and well
supported to be ignored. They were used as
sugar-coating to carry the landlord plums
in S.6959, the 1983 extender of the
Emergency Tenant Protection Act which
reached the floor much too late for
reasonable consideration, as New York's
regular session of the Legislature expired.
Talking Points,
Not Considered Substantive
I. State administration of rent stabiliza-
tion: not important because the entire system
of Rent Guidelines Boards, annual max-
imum base rents etc., continues unchanged.
2 . No Passalongs. Applies only to
stabilized tenants; but more important, door
remains wide open for whatever guidelines
the Boards see fit to impose at their regular
meetings.
Tenants Lose:
I. Three-year leases, escalating rents
faster.
2. A very long and important battle
against , including mortgage interest in
calculating eligibility for rent increases.
Will add 6 percent per year additional rent
for many tenants and will force some
tenants to pay more rent so landlords can
buy more buildings, or whatever.
3. Start of erosion of the Warranty of
Habitability. Protection for landlords who
fail to furnish services during employees'
strikes. May cause long angry building
employees' strikes, with tenants in the
middle.
4. Bargaining power in court because
judges, in certain cases, may require deposit
with court of full landlord-calculated rent.
5. Millions of dollars of potential refunds
for overcharges. Attorney General Robert
Abrams has already forced the return of
millions of dollars of overcharges, and his
office has publicly stated that at least half
of all stabilized tenants are now being il-
legally overcharged. New law neatly gets
landlords out from under most of this liabili-
ty by establishing a four-year statute of
limitations in place of IS-year liability, and
tenants get only 90 days from April I, 1984,
to file claims.
6. Sanctification of illegally high
registered rents. Incredibly, when the At-
torney General's Office has stated at least
half of all stabilized tenants are now being
illegally overcharged - under the new law
tenants have only 90 days from July I, 1984
to contest landlord registration of rent.
Tenants will need rental histories to check
and to protest overcharges. The new law is
silent on requiring landlords to supply ren-
tal history during the 9<Hlay protest period.
Thus, unless tenants already know the ren-
tal histories of their apartments, the only
way they can protect themselves from future
overcharges would be to start now to get ren-
ta! histories for use after July I, 1984 - very
difficult , perhaps impossible to motivate.
On the Senate Floor
When S. 6959 finally reached the Senate
floor at about 3:30 A.M. Senator Franz
Leichter moved to amend it. He offered, as
an amendment, substitution of Flynn-
Dearie for the Extender of ETPA.
In the ensuing vote, Flynn-Dearie re-
ceived 29 votes to Z7 votes against. Thirty-
one votes are required for passage. There
were some interesting votes.
Two upstate Democrats, Senators An-
thony Masiello and William Stachowski,
both from Buffalo, voted against Flynn-
Dearie. Another upstate Democrat, John
Perry, of Rochester "took a walk." He was
in the chamber both before and after, but he
5
was not there to vote on Flyn!l-Dearie.
This was curious because all three voted
in favor of Flynn-Dearie only three weeks
before on June 6, 1983, on a motion to sus-
pend the rules to bring it to the floor; and
both Buffalo Senators listed themselves as
sponsors.
Democratic Leader Manfred Ohrenstein
was one of several who made strong
speeches for Flynn-Dearie. It was
frustrating to listen to Senator Ohrenstein's
rhetoric, and then to watch three Democratic
Senators, who voted for Flynn-Dearie on
June 6, pull away and not vote for it, when
their votes would have meant certain
passage. Senator Ohrenstein's constituents
may want to know how this curious scenario
could have happened, and why Senator
Ohrenstein's well-known leadership failed
him at a time so disastrous for tenants.
In the Assembly, Flynn-Dearie never
reached the floor, after assurances it would
be passed early in the session, and with
sponsorship by over half of the members of
Assembly. Something happened late in the
session to cause Assemblyman Pete Gran-
nis to hold Flynn-Dearie from the floor.
The response of tenant leaders in the
organizations supporting Flynn-Dearie was
remarkable. Late-at-night phone calls from
Albany during the final weekend of June 25
and 26, asking for phone calls to key
members whose votes were needed, were
responded to immediately and effectively.
The effect on members of the legislature
was clear. None of them thought we had any
chance of bucking an arrangement worked
out by Senators Warren Anderson, Fred
Ohrenstein and Speaker Stanley Fink, with
the all-important backing of the landlord
lobby. Nobody can buck this kind of power.
But we did, and came very close to winning.
Tenant calls to legislators were so effec-
tive that the issue was in doubt for two days,
and nearly two nights. Only an enormous'
amount of arm twisting finally beat us. They
know we will be back.
Flynn-Dearie in 84
Tenants are more determined than ever to
go all out for passage of Flynn-Dearie in
1984. This is why: automatic across-the-
board rent increases for landlords already
making enormous profits will continue
under the new rent law. Only after we get
Flynn-Dearie passed will landlords have to
open their books, and prove they aren't get-
ting a reasonable return before they get rent
increases.
Landlords, and their allies, argue that
Flynn-Dearie, as a building-by-building
system isn't workable. Don't believe them.
Modern computers can handle the job, even
though the old punch-card system tried by
the city for the m'aximum base rents
couldn't.
Early in the 1983 session, Flynn-Dearie
survived an attempt by some of itS
Subscribe to the
to slip into its legal preamble language that
probably would have caused it to be declared
unconstitutional . The little game was un-
covered, and the bill has been brought back
to language that has been court tested and
upheld many times.
1984 is an election year for every member
of the Legislature. The 1982 election results
showed clearly what organized tenants can
do when they watch for and report to voters
on little games like the one tenants call
"Sponsor and Kill
n
(sponsor bills for tenant
protection and kill these same bills in com-
mittee. Undetected, this keeps both tenants
votes and landlord campaign contributions
coming).
One Senate district changed hands, and
there were massive voting shifts in several
others as the result oftenant observation and
reports to voters.
Nothing is certain, of course. But we
believe Flynn-Dearie has a chance in
1984.0
J(Jhn McKean is co-chairman o/the Coali-
tion Against Rent Increase Pass-Alongs.
Association of Neighborhood Housing
Developers'
a digest of late breaking information on: Legislative
Developments, Housing, Budget News, Neighborhood
issues, Economic Development and Fundraising.
Each weekly issue also carries a calendar listing
critical hearings, demonstrations, conferences and
workshops.
o Individuals and community groups: $20/1 year.
o Citywide nonprofits, banks, foundations,
government agencies: $35/1 year.
Please send me a subscription to The Weekly Reader:
Name
Address/Zip
Make check payable to:
Association of Neighborhood Housing Developers.
Send to: Weekly Reader, ANHD, 424 W. 33 St.
New York, NY 10001.
Sorry. combination subscriptions 10 Week/y
Reader and City Limits are n(l longer ami/ah/e.
6
The J-51 Battle
Comes Home
to the Council
T
HE LONG DEBATE over the city's
controversial 1-51 tax incentive pro-
gram for housing is coming back home
after over a year's sojourn in Albany . .
The state legislature made substantive
changes in 1-51 at the end of the legislative
session last lune (WHow 1-51 Was Curbed,"
August/September, 1983) . Although the
changes did not go as far as many com-
munity and low income housing advocates
had wished and lobbied for, they did alter
the thrust of the tax breaks the city has
routinely granted since the 1-51 law was
passed in 1955.
Rather than the full 12-year tax exemp-
tion that many of even the biggest luxury
housing developments were previously
awarded, the new law reduces the amount
of tax forgiven the higher the value of the
housing. Now, where the final assessed
valuation is more than $38,000 per dwell-
ing unit , the housing gets a tax reduction
but not an exemption. However, building
improvements that result in an assessed
value below that level get the full property
tax abatement plus a substantial exemption.
The effect of this policy, it is hoped, will
be to deny a tax break - which is a public
subsidy - to high income projects which
do not need it.
To Open or Close the Loopholes
Since the 1-51 debate took almost a year
to resolve, and split City Hall and
legislators wider than any other issue of the
past few years, it is not surprising that there
are a few potentially major exceptions to
the rules. The legislature has left it up to
the City Council to decide how large or
small to make some of those loopholes.
The first is automatic: the rules are
waived when any nonprofit organization is
making the renovation, or where govern-
ment funding is involved. The assumption
there is that such projects are going to
create the improvements in low and
moderate income housing the 1-51 law was
set up to encourage.
The other loophole is that the city's hous-
ing commissioner, currently Anthony
Gliedman, has the right to waive these
restrictions on a case-by-case basis when
additional low and m<;>derate income hous-
ing will result. The commissioner must ,
however, notify the local community board
and ask it to hold a public hearing.
Also, the legi slature left open the
possibility for entire Neighborhood Preser-
vation Areas - sections of the city that
have been designated as needing subsidized
loans and mortgage insurance - to also be
excluded from the rules. These areas were
also to be exempted on a case-by-case basis
by the Council, acting in consultation with
the community board.
Instead, the Koch administration is seek-
ing to exclude all 36 Neighborhood Preser-
vation Areas - a move that would in one
fell swoop'exempt a third of the city from
the stricter new limits, Because many
Preservation Areas include neighborhoods
undergoing a tightening market pressure on
iriexpensive housi ng and gentrification, it
is likely this would mean a continuation of
the abuses which have marked 1-51 in re-
cent years. Numerous reports have
documente'd how owners eager to cash in
on tax-exempted rehab for luxury housing
have used arson and harassment to vacate
buildings.
Those neighborhoods, say critics, would
shortly become "free-fire zones" in New
York City's ongoing housing war.
Sending a Muffed Message
Meanwhile, City Council leadership has
been in a rush to get the matter out and
voted upon, and have sent some confusing
messages to community leaders.
-7
City Council majority leader Tom Cuite
and Chairman of the Housing Committee
Thomas Manton have called for hearings
on the issue and set a Labor Day deadline
for comments. The two sent out a late luly
memo to community boards which said
that the Council would have to act to ex-
tend 1-51 eligibility to all areas. Actually,
all areas are eligible for 1-51 benefits; the
issue before Manton's Housing Committee
and the Council is which areas will get
waivers. The debate should get underway
this month,and the movement that pushed
for the 1-51 reforms is warning that should
every Preservation Area be exempted,
Community Boards will lose the oversight
the legislation intended them to have, and
render much of the rules new teeth
harmless.OT.R.
J-Sl Fact Sheet Available
The New York Public Interest Research
Group has issued a question and answer
sheet explaining the new 1-51 legislation.
If you wish a copy, send a stamped, self-
addressed envelope to: 1-51 Fact Sheet ,
City Limits, 424 W. 33rd St. , New York,
NY 10001.0
New J-Sl Rules Get First
Abuse
In our article in the August-September
issue, "What's In the New I-51?," we
seriously erred in describing the new law's
provisions. As our current articJe"correctly
states, the new law sets a cap on tax ex-
emptions for units whose final assessed
value is over $38,000, not on per-unit rehab
costs of $38,000 as we wrote. We apologize
if anyone else's ignorance was compound-
ed by this error. 0
Jersey City's
Friendly
COBG Loan
By Rick Cohen with John Nettleton
T
HE ADMINISTRATION OF Jersey
City Mayor Gerald McCann has
perfected a little used technique for
reallocating unspent federal Community
Development Block Grant funds away from
low and moderate income projects to sub-
sidize luxury developers. The formal name
of the process is "temporary use of CQPG
letter of credit balances", but developers and
municipal officials use the term "float
loans."
The recipients and sizes of Jerse
v
City
float loans of CDBG funds range f,s')m: a
$90,000 loan to renovate the local Boy's
Club, $1.6 million for market-rate apart-
ments sponsored by one of Jersey City's
more controversial developers, Shayna
Enterprises, and a planned $10 million float
for the lUXUry office, commercial shopping
mall, and condo revitalization of the Jersey
City waterfront across from Lower
Manhattan (already the beneficiary of a $40
million UDAG and a $25 million federal
loan).
The Shayna Enterprises float loan caught
fire in the Hudson County press in June
when members of the Jersey City Council
denounced the subsidy as "welfare for the
rich." Shayna, one of the more active
developers of lUXUry condominiums in the
rapidly gentrifying historic districts of
Downtown Jersey City, had recently weath-
ered a storm of protest over its proposal to
raise the rents of its apartments at 247
-Montgomery Street from $200 to $700 per
month. And, just before word of the float
loan leaked out to the public, Shayna had
sent eviction notices to the predominantly
low income Hispanic tenants at 89-95
Wayne Street, announcing that the 46-unit
building was to be "permanently retired
from the rental market;' presumably to go
condo.
Shayna's co-partners, Stanley Rothman
and Arthur Abba Goldberg, have been cen-
tral characters in the real estate revival of
downtown Jersey City for over a decade.
Goldberg, in particular. is also nationally
well known as a Vice President of the New
York-based bond house, Matthews and
Wright a member of the editorial board of
and Development Reporter, the bi-
ble for city redevelopment officials, and a
founder of the highly publicized Commit-
tee for the Absorption of Soviet Emigres
(CASE), a conduit for the resettlement of
hundreds of Soviet Jews and other Eastern
European refugees in Jersey City.
. Benefits of a 'Float Loan'
The idea of a float loan using Communi-
ty Development funds is actually
Cities having problems in spendmg theIr
CDBG funds quickly can use float loans
- temporary loans of unspent money -
to support other develop-
ment activities. When the preVIOusly ap-
proved CD activity comes on line, .the float
loan is called back. In the meantIme, not
only does the float loan support a new pro-
ject, but the interest earned can be used for
future CD-eligible projects.
Fairfax County, Virginia, for example,
used a CDBG float loan to save a Section
8. rental housing project which had been
threatened with federal recapture.
Syracuse, New York,proposed a float for
a hotel development project, the interest on
which would go to a local homesteading
program. Miami , Florida used CDBG
floats to support economic . development
projects sponsored by neighborhood-based
nonprofits.
Jersey City, in contrast, had the for-profit
lUXUry sector in mind for its float loan ac-
tivity. But the Shayna Enterprises loan ap-
pears to have been more than just a creative
temporary use of unspent CDBG moneys.
In 1982, the city came up with a plan for
a commercial shopping on a site
previously set side for 143 units of low in-
come large family housing in the Mont-
gomery Gateway Redevelopment Project.
After trying to scuttle the housing develop-
ment, the city relented in the face of legal
action by 472 families displaced by the
Gateway project, and chose two nearby
sites for the public housing. On one of these
sites, Shayna Enterprises held a develop-
ment option.
Although Shayna's 18-month option on
the site had lapsed in the summer of 1982,
the board of the Jersey City Redevelopment
Agency inexplicably extended Shayna's
hold on September 16, 1982, despite the
8
knowledge that the city needed the Shayna
block for housing. Therefore, the city had
to ffild a way to buyout Shayna's revived
option. On December 23rd, a little
publicized contract was signed between the
city and Shayna's Arthur Abba Goldberg
which returned to Shayna its development
deposit in toto plus 10 percent interest and
promised Shayna a $1.6 million loan "for
acquisition and renovation or other uses in
any property(s) chosen by it within the City
of Jersey City." Shayna would be allowed
to borrow funds in minimum $100,000 in-
stallments between January 1, 1983 and
December 31, 1985 and not begin repay-
ment until 1986 at the below market interest
rate of 8 percent .
Jersey City solved the problem of how
to "legally" transfer the money to Shayna
by offering a float loan to subsidize
Shayna's 135-141 Morgan Street project,
the renovation of an underutilized
warehouse in downtown Jersey City into 32
apartments at rent levels of $825 to $975
per month. None of the apartments will go
to CDBG-eligible low and moderate in-
come families, who would have to earn
close to $50,000 a year to afford those
rents. The construction cost of the Morgan
Street development coincidentally turned
out to be $1.6 million,according to cor-
respondence between Stanley Rothman and
the City, none of which ever referenced the
unpublicized December 23rd agreement.
Outraged by the subsidization of 32 lux-
ury apartments for a developer who was
simultaneously displacing the 32 remain-
ing families at 89 Wayne Street, community
leaders representing those tenants as well
as the members of the Jersey City Tenants
Committee and the Federacion por Vivien-
do. Adecuada de Jersey City brought an ad-
ministrative complaint to HUD calling the
Shayna float loan "an unwise and inap-
propriate use of CDBG funds, clearly in-
consistent with the purposes of the Com-
munity Development Block Grant
program."
National Significance
Jersey City's Shayna Enterprises float
loan has national significance. If the
Reagan Administration allows CDBG floats
for luxury development , municipalities
around the country will have an incentive
not to spend their Community Develop-
ment grants for low and moderate income
properties, but to slow down spending rates
and then claim that they have a favorite lux-
ury developer or two who deserves the tem-
porary use of CO moneys. There are far
more condo developments than Section 8
projects waiting to take off with COBG
float loans ill this economy.
Where the float loan issue will go is dif-
ficult to determine. HUO's track record in
the Reagan era of responding positively to
administrative complaints about COBG
low and moderate income benefit is pretty
weak, though the Shayna deal is such a-
developer's boon that even HUO's relatively
lax float loan instructions appear to have
been ignored in this case. At the local level,
there is a groundswell of protest against the
Shayna float loan with some backing from
anti-McCann City Council members. But
in two months, the 89 Wayne Street tenants
will have been put out onto the streets,
unlikely to be able to afford either Shayna's
condos at that address or the float loan
financed lUXUry apartments on Morgan
Street. 0
Rick Cohen is a planner working in Jersey
City and writes frequently for City Limits.
John Nettleton works for the Community
Service Society and previously was prin-
cipal planner for the Jersey City Redevelop-
ment Agency.
Prisons:The State's New Housing Plan
L
OW INCOME NEW YORKERS lost
the services of the state's largest con-
structio'n authority, the Urban Oevelopment
Corporation. when that quasi-independent
state agency defaulted in the mid-I970s. Up
until then, the UOC, which was launched
by then Governor Nelson Rockefeller in
1968 in the wake of the assassination of
Reverend Martin Luther King, Jr., had built
almost 32,000 units of housi ng, most of it
for low and moderate income citizens.
Faulty construction and mortgage
foreclosures prompted state officials to cur-
tail the UOC's low income residential
building and to use it in other ventures. Its
major enterprises since have been as senior
partner in big downtown commercial
development projects such as the West Side
Convention Center and the 42nd Street
Redevelopment Plan.
But the agency which was created to aid
blighted inner city areas is planning on get-
ting back into the business of building
housing for the poor. This time, however,
it will be building jail cells.
Under the Urban Oevelopment Corpora-
tion Prison Construction Act of 1983, the
agency has been given legislative approval
to sell $380 million in bonds to finance the
construction of new prisons around the
state. Currently, one of the prisons is slated
for the South Bronx.
That legislation, however, says a large
coalition of organizations seeking criminal
justice alternatives, not only perverts the
original intention of the UOC but is also
a crude end run around the 1981 voter
defeat of the state's prison bond
referendum.
The New York State Coalition for
Criminal Justice, which includes the New
York State Council of Churches, the For-
tune Society and the National Association
of Black Lawyers, has filed suit against the
bond issue charging that , under state law,
it should have been submitted to voters for
approval.
Unlike other bond issues the UOC has
undertaken, such as the convention center,
the suit argues, the construction of prisons
will generate no revenue for the debt ,'md
responsibility will be the taxpayers'.
At a preliminary hearing on September
9 in Supreme Court, state lawyers argued
that the UOC would be leasing the prisons
to the Oepartment of Corrections and not
creating a separate state debt.
"What happens if one year the legislature
decides not to appropriate enough money
to cover the rent and the bondholders are
not paid their interest?" asked Oorothy
.Keller. a spokesperson for the Coalition.
Overcrowding: Prisons or Programs?
The issue behi!1d both the legislation,
which was strongly backed by Governor
Mario Cuomo, and the lawsuit, is what is
to be done about serious overcrowding in
the state's prisons. Prisons are currently at
117 percent of their capacity and the inmate
population is growing ahead of state
estimates. The state's projected level of
30,100 inmates by March of 1984 was
reached on May 20th of this year.
One group, the Citizen's Committee on
Prison Overcrowding, warned early this
summer that many Ossining-type prisoner
revolts were brewing in the state's correc-
tional facilities. The group argued that the
8,800 new cells the UOC iii slated to build
would not be ready in time to alleviate the
problem. Overcrowding has grown steadi-
ly worse, it said, in spite of a growth over
the past decade of 10,000 new prison
spaces, 9,500 additional correctional per-
sonnel and a 500 percent increase in the
annual prison operating budget.
The. group argued that a series of steps,
including parole procedure reforms, revi-
9
sion of sentencing laws - particularly tor
nonviolent offenses - and allowing more
community and victim restitution programs
could reduce the pressures on the prison
population without expensive jail
construction.
Few of these measures are being attemp-
ted, prison construction opponents point
out, and, instead, current plans call for
even more state dollars to be spent on
prisons than the $500 million bond issue
defeated in 1981 . In addition to the $380
million for the UOC's prison construction
program, the legislature voted $320 million
in capital budget funding for the Depart-
ment of Corrections, said Robert Gangi ,
who coordInated a statewide effort to defeat
the 1981 bond initiative.
"Prisons are obviously a form of hous-
ing for the poor," said Gangi. "It's a
dramatic example of the shift in social and
governmental priorities. In the 1960s there
was a recognition of the need for help for
the plight of poor people." Creating the
UOC was an example of that concern, he
said. "The change in the focus of the UOC
is a telling example of that shift ."OT.R.
The City
Reneges on a
West Side
Housing
Commitment
A
FTER 13 TEMPESTUOUS years,
the saga of the controversial Urban
Renewal Site 30, once the home of 200
squatters and now a rubble-strewn lot on
Manhattan's Upper West Side, is drawing
to a close.
The New York City Housing Authority
is proposing to give up its longtime com-
mitment to 160 units of low income family
housing and instead build 80 units of elder-
ly housing adjacent to a 220-unit luxury
complex.
Located along Columbus Avenue be-
tween West 90th and 91st Streets, Site 30
has stood vacant for years. It is one of the
last site to be developed in the 25-year-
old West Side Urban Renewal Area and has
become symbolic of the struggle to vin-
dicate the displacement of 9,500 families
from the area.
Almost four years ago, the city won the
right in a landmark decision in the United
States Supreme Court to build low income
housing there. The lawsuit to block it began
13 years ago.
But the community that supports keep-
ing at least 2,500 low income families in
the area is not dormant. It turned out in
force at the local Community Board #7's
Housing Committee meeting on a rainy
September night and let representatives of
both the Housing Authority and the city's
housing department know the fight is not
over.
During a heated public hearing, punc-
tuated with outbursts about "progress" and
"five-room, $90 apartments:'city officials
told the audience that it was not economic-
ally feasible to build low income housing
on this site. Its real estate value had risen
so high, they explained, it was potentially
one of the most valuable sites in the city.
Federal Funds Recapture
They also warned that the federal govern-
ment would recapture the $6 million
reserved to build 160 units of low income
family housing on this site, if they do not
go ahead with the ll-story senior tower that
will complement. a 19-story luxury
building.
If it is built, this new edifice will be the
highest in the urban renewal area. In ef-
fect, it will be in violation of the current
planning and zoning for the area.
"We're aware of the long history on this
site ... and also aware that things don't re-
main the same; said Robert Reach, direc-
tor of Manhattan planning at the city's
Department of Housing Preservation and
Development. "Programs change, govern-
ments change, architectural designs
change." He also asserted that the city is
looking to make as much money as it can
get to go into the General Fund.
Questions were raised about building low
income family housing in stages, while
waiting for more funding for subsidized
housing to materialize. The officials said
this wasn't feasible but didn't explain why.
Several asked the city representatives to
explain why the low income, Housing
Authority-owned senior units could not be
integrated with the market-rate building.
Weren't there going to be seniors living
there? Officials responded that the Hous-
ing Authority would be unable to identify
its units.
The Housing Authority was queried
about its choice of elderly housing over
family housing. It's cheaper, and there
would be more of it, they said.
In short, low income senior citizens and
low income families were pitted against
each other.
According to Lynn Shea, an assistant
general manager at the Housing Authori-
ty, if her agency were to build low income
family housing on the site, there would be
room for only 50 units. "Qreat, great.
10
Beautiful:' roared the audience.
At one point, Stella Adler, head of Board
#7's Senior Issues Committee, exclaimed,
"Seniors are families, too."
Two of the former squatters, attending
the meeting, reminded the board of its
moral commitment to low income housing
on the site.
"This is an absolute betrayal of everyone,"
said Charyl Edmonds, adding, "The [last]
40 families were blackmailed off this site."
Donna Peacock, the other site survivor,
asked why the city hadn't built on the site
four years ago (after the Supreme Court
decision) when it could have built
"something more socially acceptable."
There were those who agreed with the
City's plans.
"I find it very refreshing that HPD wants
to make money. Then we can rebuild the
infrastructure," said Philip Rudd, a member
of the Board's Housing Committee and a
realtor. "Housing is needed for everybody.
There's no place for the rich to go."
As the crowd grew more restless, and the
room, hotter and smokier, one woman rose
to speak. "I have lived here 23 years and
believe it was better before:' she said."1t
may be the rich who own the land, but as
a community, we are rich."
Asserting that she would like to be able
to live in the area long enough to become
senior citizen, Blanche Gandalf, a
schoolteacher, added, "I don't think city
sites should be used to subsidize the
rich ... We don't need any more luxury
public housing for the rich."
The room was silent and then broke in-
to loud applause.
The board had submitted written ques-
tions to both agencies prior to the meeting
but found the answers from both lacking
in details. In particular, the housing depart-
ment's survey of the already existing low
income housing in the area was found to
be obsolete, often erroneous, and even
bogus.
The matter of Site 30 was scheduled to
be before the board again in early October.
In the meantime, Reach said the proposed
plans had not been certified, but was
evasive about how soon that could happen.
A community delegation was invited to
have further talks with officials from both
agencies.
The last chapter is yet to be writ-
ten.OS.B.
.,
.... ,
What the City's Arson Study Did-
and Didn't - Say
By Harriet Cohen
O
N THE SLOW, HOf Friday before
the Labor Day weekend, when most
New Yorkers were jockeying to leave their
jobs and the city far behind, the city's Ar-
son Strike Force quietly issued its long-
awaited, 18-month study detailing the links
between arson and suspicious fires and
publicly assisted housing rehabilitation pro-
grams. After assuring questioners that it
would be released after Labor Day, the
summary and conclusion chapters of the
report were placed in the Press Room in
City Hall. Later, the missing contents and
a hasty, unplanned press briefing
materialized.
Newly appointed Arson Strike Force
Coordinator Patrick Hoey and his Deputy
Angelo Pisani, stood with City Housing
Commissioner Anthony Gliedman and
answered the press' pointed questions for
almost an hour. While the findings in this
125-page document clearly put the city on
the hot seat in terms of the administration
of its rehab programs, the official
disclaimers desperately tried to mask its ex-
plosive content.
The Strike Force study examined two
city programs, the Article SA and Par-
ticipation Loans, which use federal Com-
munity Development funds to make low in-
terest loans to private owners and
developers. It also looked at low income
projects developed with federal Section 8
rent subsidies and mortgage insurance as
well as the city's tax abatement and exemp-
tion program, J ~ 5 1 .
With the exception of SA loans, which
make the least amount of funds available
for rehabilitation and where the report
found little incentive or evidence of arson,
the study contains some important findings,
recommendations and implicit warnings for
any neighborhood undergoing change, and
any community group involved in the direc-
tion or implementation of revitaIization
work.
Needed Study
It is to the Arson Strike Force's credit that
it recognized over two years ago the poten-
tial for landlords to use arson as a means
to exploit government rehab programs. The
agency proposed to do an in-depth study
of the problem and was subsequently
awarded a $120,000 grant by the federal Na-
tional Institute of Justice to carry it out.
But although Strike Force coordinator
Hoey kicked off the press briefing by say-
ing that his office had produced a signifi-
cant study with important findings, he all
but disowned what is perhaps the Strike
11
Force's most important work to date. He
criticized the report's methodology and
cautioned that "it doesn't accuratelY'deter-
mine statistical significance." Commis-
sioner Gliedman further threw water on the
study's findings and claimed that his agen-
cy had already corrected many of the
abuses it cited.
But despite these disclaimers, most
readers of this study will understand, as did
the press, that what is really important here
is what is revealed in the raw figures, or
as City Council Member Ruth Messinger
has said in response to the study's J-51 fin-
dings, "We would do much better to cor-
rect the fundamental flaws in the program
than to debate the statistics."
Findings and Recommendations
Because of the demise of the Section 8
program under the Reagan Administration,
the most important sections of the study for
future programmatic changes are those
concerning Participation Loans, currently
the city's major rehab contender, and the
J-51 program.
But in examining the Section 8 program,
the study did find significant problems with
buildings selected for the program. The
Section 8 Substantial Rehabilitation pro-
gram was targeted for vacant buildings and
was initially announced some 15 months in
advance of the deadline for project submis-
sions. This provided some owners ample
time to illegally empty their properties in
order to qualify. In 1979, acknowledging
abuse and seeking to reduce the oppor-
tunities for further program exploitation,
HPD targeted city-owned properties.
Despite this attempt at control, privately
owned buildings, buildings in specific
neighborhoods and some in designated
Neighborhood Strategy Areas, experienced
significantly more suspicious fires than
other similar buildings. Buildings submit-
ted for rehab in Crown Heights and Sunset
' Park in Brooklyn, and West Harlem in
Manhattan showed increased fire activity.
And, despite its own policy, HPD con-
tinued to allow privately owned buildings
into the program, asserting that there was
a lack of city-owned properties in the
targeted areas.
Since then, a number of examples have
surfaced of buildings that were owned by
landlords later indicted for arson which
both burned and received Section 8
subsidies.
The study recommends nine measures to
contfol for past abuse. These include:
targeting and selection of city-owned
buildings, improved owner and developer
disclosure statements, eligibility only for
buildings vacated legitimately, agency
review of owner abandonment motives,and
the exclusion of convicted harassers and
their corporate entities from receiving
public rehab loans.
Participation Loans
The study asserts that the Participation
Loan Program does not prpvide an incen-
tive to commit arson fires and states that
the receipt of a loan does not itself appear
to increase a building's susceptibility to
suspicious fires. Instead, it singles out two
classes of PLP buildings that have ex-
perienced a greater than expected incidence
of suspicious fires - buildings in Flatbush,
Brooklyn, and buildings owned by three
specific Brooklyn owner-<ievelopers. While
the study does not cite owners or building
addresses and the Strike Force has attemp-
ted to prevent their disclosure, Commis-
sioner Gliedman confirmed in response to
a direct question, that one of the three is
landlord Lawrence Rezak, the controver-
sial owner of Midwood Gardens in
Borough Park and at least 70 other
Brooklyn properties and the recipient of
over $9 million in Participation Loans.
Gliedman stated that his agency has put
a hold on doing any further business with
Rezak until the results of various city in-
vestigations are complete. The two other
landlords are believed to be David Salomon
and Abraham Salomon, two related
developers who now operate independent-
ly. A City loan to David Salomon closed
this spring and a loan to Abraham Salomon
is pending.
The study makes only two recommen-
dations for the loan program, both aimed
at improving the owner screening process.
The most important of these (and perhaps
in the entire study) identifies the need for
guidelines for applicant evaluation and
grounds for denial . It is suggested in the
accompanying commentary that review
standards should detect developers who
have consistently defaulted on their respon-
sibilities as landlords with practices such
as harassment and discrimination, inten-
tional withdrawal of building services, ar-
son, lax security, minimal or no
maintenance and related forms of neglect.
J-Sl
The report's J-51 section begins with a
strong cautionary note which states that the
sample used is too small to really prove
anything. Despite such statements, the raw
data still reflect long-known program
abuse. J-51 buildings, for example, were
three times as likely as similar buildings
to have had at least one suspicious fire; 12
12
times as likely to have had more than one
suspicious fire.
An important, but somewhat buried find-
ing on J-51 is that there was a higher in-
cidence of arson and suspicious fires in the
economically viable buildings. This differs
. markedly from the usual patterns in arson-
prone buildings that show high tax ar-
rearages and vacancy rates. Also, the
number of suspicious fires increased in
buildings as rehab costs per apartment
increased.
The study makes only three J-51 recom-
mendations in part because the City believes
that the new J-51 legislation jtlSf passed in
Albany will correct for most past abuse.
The recommendations include: that tenant
harassment findings and owner-instigated
arson be grounds for denial ; that owners
be required to give advance notice of their
intent to do rehab, and that such a notifica-
tion trigger a complete review.
A coalition of community groups, along
with the New York Public Interest Research
Group and state and city legislators have
already criticized the new J-51. They have
pointed out that the new regulations do not
require a project or developer to be
screened, but rather that an owner file a
statement that he has not been found guil-
ty of harassment; and that the only grounds
for benefit denial are a court finding of
harassment before the time of application.
The Arson Strike Force study has been
widely distributed in response to telephone
requests, despite the agency's efforts to
squelch it. The study itself, the way in
which it was released and its official or-
phaning, is a challenge to the community
groups, local residents and responsible
public officials who are committed to an
equitable revitalization of the city's
neighborhoods. It is important for them to
provide their own critique and recommen-
dations for how loans can be administered
so as to exclude landlord exploitation by
fire or any other means. The city's ~ f f o r t s
to make this an underground document
have already been subverted. Instead it is
fast becoming a best seller. D
Harriet Cohen is director of the New York
Neighborhood Anti-Arson Center.
. 'I . - --
Copies of the Arson Strike Force report are
available upon request. Call (212) 566-1332
FOOD vs. SHELTER
Helping the Poor Pay More for Less
- - -
Raising the amount welfare recipients can get in their rent checks won't increase
their h"ousing choice or quality. It will just mean more rent dollars for landlords.
What's needed is an increase in the basic grant - and the right for recipients to
choose what they will spend on" rent.
N
EW YORK STATE'S PERIODIC DEBATE as to what
to do for - or to - the poor is once again upon us.
Recent exposes on the homeless have focused the most re-
cent incarnation of this debate on increasing the amount
welfare families receive for rent (their "shelter allowance")
as opposed to raising the basic grant (dubbed the "pre-
added allowance").
Most of the participants in the debate have little direct
contact with welfare recipients, and fewer still have ex-
perienced life as one. The Downtown Welfare Advocate
Center, a ten-year-old welfare rights organization made up
of recipients and their supporters, believes that such a
choice clearly pits food against shelter. "Any increased funds
should be put where they will do recipients the most good
and cause the least harm. Raising the basic grant - not the
shelter allowance - is the way to do it.
New York City is "home" to nearly 70 percent of the
state's welfare recipients. Their welfare grant is divided into
two parts. The basic grant for a three-person family -
usually a mother and two children - is $230 per month
anywhere in the state. This is about $2.46 per person per
day to cover most food (food stamps cover significantly less
than half the food needs of a family, a fact acknowledged
by city Consumer Affairs Commissioner Bruce Ratner in
1979), some medical expenses (medicaid does not cover
everything) , and all utilities, furniture, clothing, utensils,
tools, personal care items, baby bottles, diapers and
transportation. The mother taking a round-trip subway ride
in search of the elusive job uses more than half her daily
allowance. If she lives in a two-fare zone, she dips into her
children's share.
This basic grant has increased less than thirty percent
since it was tied to a spuriously determined "standard of
need" for goods and services deemed essential by the New
York State legislature at 1969 prices. (There are items
. which some other people would deem essential - like
reading materials - for which there is no allowance in the
basic grant) . Given increases to date, this represents, at
best, the prices of those same goods and services in about
mid-l973 (as calculated by the Consumer Price Index.)
In 1975, the present shelter maximums were set at the up-
per end - the 95th percentile - of rents paid by welfare
recipients at that time. These shelter maximums vary from
county to county and within county by household size. Out-
side the city, families face a similar dilemma, but shelter
allowances are set differently because of direct payments for
heating fuel.
The shelter maximum in New York City is $194 for a
three-person family. The shelter maximum is only granted
to a recipient whose actual rent is at or above that ceiling.
If the rent is $180, the recipient gets $180 in her check; if
the rent is $215, the most she gets is $194. Any difference
13
By Theresa FunicieUo and Tom SanziIJo
Maximum Shelter Allowance
For New York Public
Assistance Recipients
(For Shelter With Heat)
Family Size Monthly Maximum
1 $152
2 183
3 194
4 218
5 226
6 249
7 303
8 317
between the shelter maximum and the actual rent must
come from the basic grant, i.e., the food allowance.
The major group pushing for an increase in the rent
allowance - the Ad-Hoc Coalition to Raise the Shelter
Grants - contends that fully 64 percent of New York City's
welfare recipients were paying rent at or above the shelter
maximum as of December, 1982. It is their general assump-
tion that most of the 64 percent are paying above the
maximum.
In short , the present welfare check received semi-monthly
by recipients doesn't cover doodly squat.
1. Food VS. Shelter
Yet , proponents of a shelter grant increase exhibit little
understanding of the interactive effects of various entitle-
ment programs. As such, they have remained silent on the
issue of food stamps. Because of federal guidelines estab-
lished during the Carter Administration, and sustained by
the Reagan Administration, any regularly recurring increase
in the welfare grant will cause a decrease in food stamps.
Generally, a three dollar increase in the grant will cause
about a one dollar decrease in food stamps. While this ef-
fect on food stamps would occur no matter where the in-
crease is designated, there are significant differences. If the
increase is put into the basic grant, there is a clear and im-
mediate substantial net gain for the recipients. It would then
be up to them to make individual decisions as to where best
to apply it. In some cases recipients might choose to spend
it on increased rent if they felt they could get a better deal,
but they would not be mandated to use it that way. Or, if
they were already paying rent in excess of the shelter max-
imum, this increase would help defray that expense. On the
other hand, they could also determine for themselves which
need was most pressing for them, like food, clothing, etc.
There would be no such flexibility in a raised rent pay-
ment. This increase would be designated by bureaucratic
fiat to be assigned ultimately to the landlord. The folly is
that such an assignment would signal all landlords - the
city and myriad nonprofit managers as well as private ones
- that the grab is on.
Hungry children do not sleep better at night knowing that
the landlord is well-fed or that the housing department is
balancing its budget. And, if history tells us anything,
there's ample evidence that many of these children will go
to bed cold as well as hungry despite the increase.
For a welfare mother, there is no such thing as a "hous-
ing perspective" as separated from a survival perspective.
There is only juggling meagre resources, robbing Peter to
pay Paul. She is always Peter,and someone else is always
Paul. Neither the grocer nor the department store nor the
landlord is willing to accept half the payment for the whole
bill, and one shoe will not accommodate two feet. More
money is needed. The question of how much more is irrele-
vant since the State of New York is not about to institute a
guaranteed adequate income. The question is: if any more,
then where?
2. More Rent for Poorer Housing
Two of the chief proponents of raising the shelter max-
imum, Clara Fox, director emeritus of the Settlement Hous-
ing Fund and Bruce Gould, executive director of the Office
of Program and Management Analysis at HPD, the city's
Department of Housing Preservation and Development ,
argue that there is a "housing perspective" to be taken into
CITY LIMITS/October 1983 14
consideration independent of other needs in this debate. In
a nutshell, they argue that the artificially low shelter max-
imums for recipients are a major cause of housing
deterioration and that an increase in the shelter maximums
will begin to turn the housing problem around, or, at the
very least, help stem the tide of further deterioration.
A report issued by Gould's office in September of 1982
asserted that the shelter maximum, "While not acting as a
rent ceiling ... has a depressive effect on rent increases
asked by [welfare recipients'] landlords, since the owners
are aware of these levels [emphasis added]." Because they
are aware of the maximums, the report adds, owners often
tailor rents to fit, thus forgoing increases deemed necessary
by the Rent Guidelines Board. "Therefore," it concludes,
"the public assistance tenant is less likely to occupy a unit
or building whose rents are sufficient to maintain the
residence."
Oddly, the same report ("Rent Levels and Housing Condi-
tions in New York City: A Comparison of Public Assistance
and Other Poor Tenants") contains some curiously conflic-
ting information.
Although rents paid by the poor who get public assistance
and those who do not are in most cases similar, Gould's
study found the median rent level for families on welfare,
$205, to be 13 percent higher than that paid by non-welfare
poor tenants. Yet , in spite of those higher rents, the report
shows that the housing conditions of the two groups differ
significantly. Public assistance households are shown to be
living in considerably worse housing than those not on
welfare. The study, however, does not ask nor answer the
critical question of how landlords are able to supply better
housing to the non-welfare-aided poor at rents comparable
to shelter maximums.* Had it asked, it might have also in-
quired how welfare families, already paying more money for
poorer housing, would benefit from a boost in their shelter
allowance?
3. The Cost of Inflation ... and Bungling
The argument continues that since many recipients are
paying above the shelter maximum, the frequency with
which they fail to fulfill their rent obligation increases as
they must periodically "borrow" from their rent dollars to
cover the short-fall in their basic grant. An increase in the
shelter maximums would therefore restore the full basic
grant to its intended uses.
Two points are lost in this argument. First, as long as the
basic grant remains ten years out of date (vis-a-vis infla-
tion), juggling to pay bills is inevitable. If Con Ed has sent
out a shut-off notice, but the landlord hasn't yet sent out an
eviction notice, the decision of which bill to pay is obvious
- and vice versa next month. So it goes with all
necessities.
Secondly, they ignore the overwhelming evidence of
welfare cutoffs that occur without respect to changes in
recipient income. Through bureaucratic bungling, New York
City's welfare department manages to wipe out income to
hundreds of thousands of needy recipients each year for
anywhere from one to three months. If this does not inter-
rupt rent payments, nothing wilL There is no reason to an-
ticipate a change in this practice which the welfare
ment refers to as "churning."
4. All Low Income Tenants Will Pay More
Will increasing the shelter maximums cause a concommi-
tant increase in the rental market particularly for all low in-
come families - welfare and non-welfare poor alike? Most
certainly. If the present ceilings have had a depressive effect
on low income housing market rents, an increase in the
ceilings will have an equal and opposite effect. Presently,
welfare tenants in in rem buildings are charged the current
shelter maximums. When asked at a recent meeting if he
would move for rent increases for in rem welfare tenants if
the maximums were increased, Bruce Gould replied "yes".
Clara Fox implied the Settlement Housing Fund would do
the same, to make up for losses from withdrawn federal
subsidies. If non profits would increase their rents im-
mediately, is there any reason to expect that landlords
would practice more restraint?
A 1981 Urban Institute study found that "recipients' rents
are strongly influenced by the existing shelter allowance."
We can be certain that property owners will raise the rents
for welfare recipients as high as they can - as soon as they
can - if the shelter maximum is increased.
5. An Increase May Be Too Much, or
Much Too Little
Brushing aside such concerns, the proponents of a sht:lter
grant increase assert that additional rental income will im-
prove the current supply of housing. Even the
good faith of the landlord in such an undertaking, the ques-
tion must still be asked: Is raising rents the most prudent
use of public dollars to improve housing?
For an apartment needing moderate rehabilitation (be-
tween $3,000 to $8,(00) simply bestowing a rent increase
without looking at whether or not it is justified or needed
detracts from any rational analysis of rental property. It also
distorts any conception of less costly means of rehabilitating
a building from the position of owner, tenants and govern-
ment alike.
For properties in need of substantial rehabilitation, a rent
increase like the one being contemplated .for recipients
would never leverage even low-interest capital in sufficient
quantity to make a difference in building qUality. Other,
deeper subsidies are required. A program of direct capital
grants can effectively rehabilitate a building without per-
manently raising the rents. .
Shelter allowance increase advocates also contend that the
current rent ceilings do not provide sufficient income to
cover operating and maintenance expenses. Yet there is am-
ple evidence that, given a judicious use of the rent roll and
careful management, shelter maximums can cover operating
costs. As reported in the June-July edition of City Limits,
the well-maintained tenant-owned building at 414 East 10th
Street on the Lower East Side continues to rent at levels
below the current shelter allowances. And a recently con-
structed project in the Northside area of Brooklyn has a
current monthly operating cost, excluding management, of
approximately $100 per month for a apart-
ment, including utilities. These examples need to be studied
and others identified for their potential replicability.
6. The Welfare Hotel Syndrome
Perhaps the issue of welfare hotels provides a more graphic
counterpoint to this whole discussion. There, landlords are able
to collect in some instances upwards of $3,000 per month for
one family. Despite this vast amount of money, welfare mothers
and their children are still living in housing that only a tornado
could improve upon. Yet some continue to say: give the landlords
more money and they will provide better housing. How much
money? And when?
7. Nowhere To Run To
Advocates for a shelter increase also insist that with more
money for rent, a tenant has a broader selection of housing to
choose from in the rental market. A $60 (a commonly suggested
figure) increase would raise the rent for a family of three to $254
15
Median Monthly Gross
Rents in New York City
1975 current shelter allowances
were set)-$I71
1978 - $210
1981- $265
".
.
".
'.
c.,.:
, .......
, .
,0'
r"-
"
.:.: .....
...
"Ruins and Revivals" is an exhibition of color photographs and text documenting and analyzing both the devastation of
urban inner city communities, as well as the ways in which neighborhoods and their residents have adapted and
been resurgent. The photos focus on New York City, Philadelphia, Camden, Newark, Chicago and other cities. A co-effort
of photographer and researcher Camillo Vergara and Professor Kenneth T. Jackson of Columbia University, the show is on
view at the Municipal Arts Society'S Urban Center (457 Madison Avenue) through November 3.
/
I
February, 1979. Park Avenue, the corner of East 181st Street in the Tremont section
of the Bronx. All four of these two-family houses have enclosed front porches, and
three of the four have been refurbished with new siding as well as new metal frames
for the windows and doors. The houses are across the street from the New Haven
Railroad line.
December, 1981. Both houses in the mi
The city has taken title. A tenant living ir
had been abandoned because the land
on the other hand, was able to
the110use into single rooms and thus inc
per month. According to Professor Michael Stegman's, "The
Dynamics of Rental Housing in New York City," the vacancy
rate for housing in this range is 1.8 percent, below the 2.13 per-
cent rate for the entire city. It is Stegman's conclusion that given
the scarcity of housing in New York, the poor, if compelled to
pay more, will pay more for the same inadequate housing. Given
the current critical housing shortage, it Can hardly be imagined
that raising the rental payment capacity for several hundreds of
thousands of individuals and families at the same time will allow
them to move into better quarters.
Second, it is not so simple to be on welfare and decide to move
as a way of improving your quality of life. A new landlord might
require a security deposit , which welfare as a rule does not pro-
vide. There are moving costs, which welfare also generally does
not provide.
A more glaring obstacle is the fact that whole neighborhoods
where the poor reside have been ravaged. It is these
neighborhoods to which a welfare recipient is confined by
reasons of income, race, welfare status and the modicum of sociai'
bonds that may mean an occasional babysitter or friend next door.
8. The Larger Housing Issue
The issue of raising shelter allowances in New York State in
1983 is part of a larger issue facing the housing movement. What
are appropriate ways to produce decent, safe and affordable hous-
ing in this country for the poor?
16
On this point, the present political system provides no room
for consensus. Interest rates on mortgage and construction loans
prohibits building for all but the rich under unsubsidized con-
ditions. The tax system makes even intended low income hous-
ing a boondoggle for developers, syndicators, accountants, and
lawyers rendering it so expensive as to not be affordable without
further government subsidy. The extortion-like tactics of local
real estate interests bleed the tax coffers and burn down homes
when the benefits are exhausted. The list is endless, the pro-
blem endemic. In light ofthese factors, which are most definitely
independent of the level of rent paid by a tenant to a landlord,
rasing shelter allowances is little more than handing out
snowballs in a blizzard.
The discussion comes full circle when the issue of low rents
is confronted directly. For hundreds of years progressive forces
have become involved in housing issues. Many have taken on
this fight in response to their own deprivation and as a mode
of opposition to the more generalized system of economic in-
justice that runs this country. Historically, the housing move"
ment has understood the "heat-or-eat" syndrome of the poor and
sought to fight for quality housing at affordable rents. Demand-
ing that the poor eat less in exchange for of questionable
quality is a travesty of that history. When unions and unemployed
councils of the thirties organized to stop evictions, they did so
understanding that housing was one of several basic human needs
and not one to be traded against food or any other necessity.
lUINS aDd REVIVALS
Vergara's determination to capture the process ot abandonment led him back to the same scene not just once but several
times. Over a period of three years, he recorded the transformation of this block on Park Avenue in the Bronx (below). The
final picture, which could not be shown here, was taken in October, 1982 and showed only one home remaining after fires
and demolition claimed the rest of the block.
have been abandoned and stripped.
I the first house on the left said that they
lords could not afford taxes and oil. His
pay these costs because he had divided
:reased his revenue.
March, 1982. One of the houses (and the tree which once stood in front) has been
leveled to the ground. The homeowner on the right owns property in
section which he rents and fixes. He has kept up his house and made minor repairs
such as painting the fence.
9. A Full Grant Increase Can Be Won
Finally, there is the matter of political feasibility. A sizeable
network of social welfare and religious institutions who main-
tain that a raise in the basic grant is clearly in the best interest
of the poor are also convinced that it is not politically feasible.
They argue that the paltry 15 percent increase achieved in 1981
makes another increase in that form impossible. A self-fulfilling
prophecy?
Inflation has already eroded that increase. Governor Cuomo
insists that he is not going to run this state at the expense of
the poor. If he remains uninformed as to the issues, he can hardly
be faulted if the so-called "helping hands" have not bothered to
inform him or any other key political operatives based on their
analysis of "reality." Nothing is politically feasible for the poor
that isn't struggled for."
On the other hand, if a shelter increase goes through and
'spurs inflation in the low-rent housing market causing fur-
ther reductions in food stamps, what then? If the legislature
raised the basic grant in 1981 and raises the shelter
allowance in 1984, how many years will have to pass before
the "right" response is politically feasible? In the meantime,
we live in a city with a rapidly rising incidence of female-
headed households, in a city where one out of every three
children is on welfare and with a youth empl0:9ment rate
that suggests impending disaster.
17
As Uncle Wilfred (pronounced Wooferd) says: "One
thing's for sure, if ya don't try to fix it; it'll stay broke."O
Theresa Funiciello and Tom Sanzillo both work with the
Downtown Welfare Advocate Center.
* The report suggests that the reason for the difference is
discrimination by public assistance status and race.
Welfare rules require recipients to reveal their source of
income to landlords. While changing this rule would not
begin to solve the discrimination problem. if Gould's data
is to be believed, it would help. Poor Blacks not on
welfare are shown to be living in better conditions than
those on public assistance. The pattern is consistent for
Hispanics and whites. also.
HC?using Authority Waiting List Grows
THE WAITING LIST of those families seeking apartments in
New York City'S public housing has now grown to 170,000, said
a Housing Authority spokesman last month. The level is a 14 per-
cent increase over eighteen months ago. There are approximately
150,000 public housing units in New York, but turnover is now down
to less than 6,000 apartments a year. The Housing Authority has
no major building program underway, and officials have long main-
tained that if it had, the number of applicants would be vastly
increased. 0
The Dolman family has lived at the Martinique for Ph montbs. Left to right: Barbara, Fabian,
Jr., Adam and Fabian.
T
AKING WHAT ADVOCATES for the homeless term op-
timistic steps, both the city and state have adopted
budgets totalling $32.3 million to provide low-cost housing
for the homeless population. Under two separate programs,
several thousand homeless individuals and families in the city
should move to permanent shelter in the foreseeable future.
The city's Board of Estimate September 15 unanimously
approved a special $20 million grant from the capital budget
to provide jobs for the unemployed to some 1,200
units of city-owned housing that will provide shelter tor the
homeless. Another $8 million, also from the capital budget ,
was allocated for building and refurbishing city parks
the same work program.
At the same time, New York state has received 144 grant
proposals from applicants, including five from New York
City government totalling $6.3. million, to develop plans for
both temporary and permanent shelter. According to Nancy
Travers of.the state Division of Social Services, the total ap-
plication request was for more than $57 million with the
lion's share coming from New York City. Requests also came
from Westchester, Nassau, and Suffolk Counties. There were
none from Upstate.
According to the Mayor's Office of Construction, the city
hopes to let contracts as soon as the City Cpuncil approves
the package as there is pressure to produce the housing by
wintertime.
The city had hoped to have the program in place two
months ago, but political haggling over what one observer
called "pork barrel" caused the delay.
The original list of possible sites submitted by the city's
housing department was substantially altered to satisfy local
18
councilmanic political needs.
Jobs or Housing?
Now, there are' also questions about what kind of pro-
gram it really is since it was developed hastily after being
removed from the board's calendar several times.
"Is it a jobs program or a housing program?" asked Ellen
Weissman of City Council President Carol Bellamy's office.
She said that funds for the program had apparently been
drawn from a line item of $28 million in unspecified public
works projects which the Mayor placed in his Executive
Budget last April.
Then: IS also concern about the city's definition of
unemployed. Some are fearful that unemployed construction
workers, for example, rather than those chronically in need of
work from disadvantaged neighborhoods will end up with the
jobs.
But most parties who often quarrel over city programs
are willing to put their objections aside and lend their
support.
According to information circulated by the Mayor's of-
fice, the $20 million housing component is slated to be used
as follows:
to renovate four tax-foreclosed buildings in Central
Harlem as the New Harlem Family Shelter for $3 million for
100 units;
to add 64 units in two vacant, city-owned buildings ad-
jacent to the existing Amboy Street Shelter in East Brooklyn
for $1.9 million;
to provide emergency shelters for homeless families,
creating 164 additional units for $4.92 million;
to rehabilitate apartments for homeles.s families in II
partially occupied buildings for 580 units for $9.7 million;
to rehabilitate vacant single-room occupancy (SRO)
units for homeless individuals for 200 units for $1 million;
and
to rehabilitate vacant scatter-site units for homeless in-
dividuals and families for 320 vacant studio apartments for $4
million.
Individual Homeless Shortchanged?
Objections to the proposal have been voiced by
of the homeless individuals, charging that they have Deen
neglected in favor of families. These critics cite the city's r e-
cent bad publicity in the press as a strong motivation for
rushing to develop plans for housing homeless families; they
believe the individual homeless are being shortchanged.
As it stands now, the proposal only guarantees 200 units
and the expenditure of $1 million for SRO housing for the
homeless indivjduals. But it does suggest that they will share
in the $4 million to be spent to rehabilitate 320 units of
scatter-site studio and one-bedroom apartments.
"It's obvious why they favor said Robert Hayes
of the Coalition for the Homeless. "There is not as much con-
troversial mythology [about them] as there is about single
[homeless] people and disturbed people. Generally, there is
broader sympathy for families because of the
Hayes is the attorney who represented the homeless in
the lawsuit against the city which led to the 1981 court deci-
sion ordering the city and state to honor the rights of the
homeless and provide shelter.
The Coalition is a citywide advocacy organization that
grew up several years ago to advocate for the rights of the
homeless.
Members of the Coalition and numerous other social ser-
vice organizations that work with the disabled and. with de-
institutionalized mental patients are also worried that the pro-
gram will be either lacking in needed social services or
possibly too overburdened with expensive ancillary care.
The Rev. Donald Sakano of Catholic Charities !lnd a
founding member of the Coalition warned of the problems,
particularly in the hotds, where no on-site services are
p1anned. "It's just kind of crazy," he said, "not to have the
necessary social service support ... It's the same old story,
like in the projects .. . This is why the public becomes resis-
tant . .. And it doesn't have to happen if there is some close
and careful coordination between the agencies concerned -
in this case, HRA and HPD."
The city's Human Resources Administration and the
Department of Housing Preservation and Development will
be the major agencies involved in the rehabilitating and ser-
vicing of the buildings and people in the program.
Most observers agree that a simple and inexpensive SRO
model, like the St. Francis Residence in Manhattan's Murray
Hill area, would be ideal.
Run by the Franciscan order, it houses approximately 100
individuals in rooms renting for $140 to $200 a month. It of-
fers permanent housing to primarily former psychiatric pa-
tients, who, although they had spent years in state hospitals,
are learning to function independently. The St. Francis an-
nual budget is also only $228,000.
Women's Housing
Another program cited as an affordable solution for
housing more independent individuals is the model nine-
month-old shelter care program for homeless women.
Under the direction of the Mayor's SRO Task Force, the
city's housing department .is fixing up apartments in already
occupied city-owned rooming houses or SROs with funds
that , to date, have not exceeded $2,200 per unit . The women
who have come from the street to the women's shelter are
then screened by HRA and placed in an apartment. This
agency then provides minimal follow-up care, such as month-
ly visits to the site.
According to Jaye Pershing of the SRO Task Force, about
90 women have been housed to date, and some 120 units have
been repaired. Their rent is the basic shelter allowance of
$152 a month. Most of the buildings currently in this program
are located in Harlem, East Harlem, and the Bronx.
One problem with this program, however, is the small
budget. "We can only do cosmetic repairs, and sometimes
there are problems that are building-related or
said Pershing. In some cases, namely ones where the city has
repaired a substantial of units in the building, more
extensive work has been done.
Earlier this year, the Coalition for the Homeless
developed a plan to rehabilitate 1,200 units. Based on a
model similar to the women's shelter and other cost-saving
examples, it would have cost $11,580,000 - not $20 million
- to produce.
It was to have provided the following housing:
. 200 rooming house units, at $3600-per-unit, $720,000;
600 scatter-site apartments (family size) , at $6800-per-
unit , $4.08 million;
300 clustered apartments (in underoccupied consolida-
tion buildings) at $17,000-per-unit, $5.1 million; and
100 vacant building rooms, at $16,800-per-unit , $1.68
million.
This proposal was unique in that it also called for the ac-
tive involvement of many public and private agencies as well
as the city and state to function. In addition, the city, state,
and private sector would underwrite expenses with the city
and state each responsible for $5 million; the private sector.
$2 million.
The Coalition circulated its proposal widely. Many
showed a great deal of interest , including the city, but nothing
materialized.
still think it was a successful effort because there's
money coming, and many of our ideas, like the jobs program,
are there," said Howard Burchman, consultant to the Coali-
tion. Referring to the city's proposal , he added, a
substantial commitment, the first one to the homeless. Who
knows? Maybe some units will get created."
Meanwhil\!, some innovative plans have been presented to
the state by local housing and social service groups.
One example is the plan from the Youth Action Program
in East Harlem. It proposes to rehabilitate 39 units of housing
for homeless youth that would eventually become low income
cooperatives. Rents would start at a low $100 and go to $195
for the cine-bedroom apartments. Renovations would be car-
ried out by teenagers who would learn construction skills in
the process. Construction costs are estimated at $28.000 per
unit.
Alluding to the state's and city's newfound interest in the
homeless: one longtime supporter. Nick Bollman of the Com-
munity Council of New York, concluded, "If they can co":,- .
pete to do better in funding programs for the homeless, thiS IS
wonderful. We are dealing with a very. very complex set of
social issues, hoping to create a new supportive environment
for people who have had a terrible way of life."O
19 CITY LIMITS/October 1983
I
The Lower East Side's Urban Family Center Finding a Way 10
I
T COSTS $41 PER DAY to shelter a
homeless family of four at the Hotel
Martinique off Manhattan's Herald
Square. This buys: a sparsely furnished
deteriorating room which is apt to be in-
fested with roaches and worse, windows
with no child-protecting gates, and a hotel
corridor for recreation space.
What it doesn' t buy is: cooking facilities
(so families use a $2.23-per-day restaurant
allowance) , daycare, laundry or a common
space for families to gather.
About two miles to the southeast, at a
97-unit shelter called the Urban "Family
Center, the same $41 buys: a clean,
renovated two-bedroom apartment,with full
kitchen, access to a laundry room, clean
' linen and a battery of social services; in-
cluding a social worker with a maximum
caseload of 12 clients, a teen violence
prevention unit, vocational training, home
management courses, a family nursery, an
on-site junior high school as well as use of
all the programs and facilities of the near-
by sponsoring settlement house.
Each time the plight of homeless
families makes the news - as it has lately
- almost as confounding as the squalor
surrounding the "welfare hotel families," is
the amount of money the government pays
to rent those dilapidated rooms.
Thcked away on the easternmost reach
of the Lower East Side, between Baruch
Houses and the FDR Drive sits the Urban
Family Center, a project of the Henry
Street Settlement and the New York City
Housing Authority. Since its opening in
1972, the Center has provided a clean,
warm and encouraging shelter for over
2,500 families who have been evicted,
burned or frozen out of their homes.
While the city and state continue to
ponder how to cope with a homeless
population that is expected to swell to 6,000
families this winter, it is little wonder that
people look to Henry Street's UrbJUl Family
Center as an example of what can - and
should - be accomplished. What remains
so remarkable is that in its eleven years of
existence, so few efforts have been made
to match its program.
In a report by the Citizen's Committee
for Children of New York called, "No One's
In Charge: Homeless Families with
Children in Temporary Shelter," published
this spring, the comittee stated that "the Ur-
ban Family Center presents a model of ser-
....
vice to homeless children and families
which should be replicated at other tem-
porary shelters. It is significant that this
program is able to provide a wide range of
quality services out of the same income the
other facilities receive. In other words; the
report concluded, "it doesn't cost more to
give good service than bad."
How is it that the same dollars buy that
kind of shelter when they can't buy a
bedbug-free mattress in a midtown hotel?
In fairness to skeptics, the Urban Family
Center's buildings came to the Henry Street
Settlement for a $1 a year lease and mort-
gage free, so the buildings carry no debt
service. And, a recent $3.7 million renova-
tion by the Housing Authority was paid for
out of funds from the federal department
of Housing and Urban Development. But
the Center managed to pay back a $300,000
loan from the city to cover start-up costs
in the first two years after it opened ;and
since it plows all its earnings back into ser-
vices and staff it's not clear how much debt
it could carry.' Using the same emergency
shelter payments and city-owned housing,
groups such as the Citizens Committee
believe good services and decent shelter
can be provided.
Formerly Lavanburg Homes
The Urban Family Center has a long
history of providing shelter for low income
families. Built in 1927 by the philanthropic
S Lavanburg Foundation as a prototype of
is public housing, the buildings were designed
: even then to accommodate residents' social
::; needs as well as their housing needs. In
1956 the buildings were given to the city
Day care center at the Urban FamUy Center. Left to npt: MoIIes, ,,-, ChrIIdna, AaaeI. Uriel
and Ana. Above, Jose.
20
Gel Back Bome Again
which operated them as auxilliary housing
to the much larger Baruch Houses
surrounding it.
In the early 1970 s, when stories of
welfare families sheltered at the Waldorf
Astoria were creating an earlier scandal,
then-Housing Authority head Simeon
Golar began aggressively searching out
other housing options for the homeless
families. The Henry Street Settlement was
asked to look at the prospects of a shelter
which could both house and help troubled
families. Danny Kronenfeld, who had
worked for Mobilization for Youth on the
Lower East Side for five years before go-
ing to Columbia to teach social work, was
brought in to do a feasibility study.
After 19 months of planning and prepara-
tion, the Center opened with twenty
families (some of whom had lived there
since its beginning in 1927) in residence
and the rest of the apartments set aside for
families referred from local welfare offices.
A major part of what set the Center off
from other shelters was not just the quan-
tity of social services it provided but its in-
sistence on a strong commitment to the
shelter from the staff as well . The Center
sought and got that commitment, not just
from its social workers but from clerks and
janitorial staff as well.
"We know that what a maintenance
worker does with a family in crisis is just
as important as a social worker - maybe
sometimes more so because they have more
contact," said Kronenfeld.who was hired as
director. Social workers are required to live
in the facility, a rule that included
Kronenfeld until last year. "We want to have
a capacity to deal with crisis-ridden
families ," he said, "and you've got to be
there when something happens. That's been
our cornerstone."
Although it applies to some of the
Center's residents more than others, the
majority of the families that make their way
through the six-story, brick walk-ups have
multiple problems. They are those who, for
whatever reasons, haven't been able to seek
or get help on their own. The stay at the
Center is an opportunity to confront those
problems. "We contract with families;' ex-
plains Kronenfeld. "You have to see a social
worker at least once a week. We ask them
to identify the things they want to work on.
One is housing - finding a place to live;
two are their choice, whether its home
management or help with the kids."
For many of the families coming
Danny Kronenfeld, Urban Family Center direc-
tor, right. Below, Junior High class at tbe
Center: left to right: Eddie Lectora, Jr., Yvette
Olavarria, Miguel Coraballo, Denise Ortiz.
through, the Center is the best housing they
have gotten or are likely to get. Going out
to rent less quality housing is a hard shift
to make. The Center, however, requires
families to be out by three months. If they
are not, a dispossess notice is served. The
early notice, says Kronenfeld, is based on
the amount of time it will take to move the
dispossess through housing court. At the six
month point in emergency shelter pay-
ments, the city becomes responsible for the
entire amount and it is not likely to make
payment.
"Bec-orning a landlord," says Kronenfeld,
"was one of the things we had to resolve
when we started out. The hotels deal with
it by changing the lock cylinders on the
doors. We go to landlord-housing court."
Other Centers?
The Housing Authority, which acts as a
kind of trustee for the Urban Family
Center, is now looking into ways to create
other centers along similar lin s. The
Authority would like to build at least two
21
other projects of about 100 umts with
a settlement house acting as a sponsor.
Two other nonprofit community-run
centers which were inspired by the Urban
Family Center's example several years ago
are the Fox Street Shelter in the South
Bronx and the Amboy Neighborhood
Center in Brooklyn's Brownsville, although
neither has been able to provide the level
of care achieved by Henry street's shelter.
Meanwhile, numerous organizations and
churches which have not previously been
involved in housing for the homeless are
applying under a state program. Part of the
question they face is how much and what
kind of services to offer.
"If you only see it as a problem of
homelessness, you're missing something;
says Kronenfeld. "Homelessness just
describes a general symptom. If you set up
a shelter without services, it won't work.
It's the old debate: is it housing or is it other
stuff. Even with all the services we pro-
vide,we have to work pretty hard."OT.R.
'REAGAN'S NEIGHBORHOOD
. . .
ADVOCATES
When the leadership of a fIscally-ailing national neighborhood coalition lined up
with the President's urban policies many member groups voted no - with their feet.
N A T l O N ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ O N
Of NEIG Steven Glaude, NAN Director.
T
HE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION of Neighborhoods,
one of the major organizations to have emerged from
the neighborhood movement of the 1970s, has been wracked
by an internal controversy over the past year which has cost
it most of its members and perhaps its national prestige as
well.
The controversy has erupted amid angry charges that cur-
rent leaders of the organization have "sold" the group by
lining up as strong supporters of the Reagan Administra-
tion's urban policies, in particular its urban enterprise zone
proposal,in exchange for government contracts.
Although NAN Executive Director Steven Glaude declin-
ed to give current membership figures, he acknowledged at
a board meeting last May that paid member groups had
shrunk to 25 from several hundred organizations that had
once belonged.
The group is currently dependent for funds on a $300,000
contract from the Department of Housing and Urban
Development's Office of Community Planning and Develop-
ment. Under the contract NAN is providing technical
assistance to groups in eight cities attempting to replace
municipal services, such as trash pick-up, with their own
for-fee efforts. Former NAN board members have charged
that the contract is NAN's reward for the support and
credibility the group has given the Administration in an
area in which it has few friends.
So far the dispute has included an office takeover, a
court-ordered board meeting and the dismi ssal - followed
by the rehiring - of the Executive Director. Despite these
internal fireworks, the controversy seems to stem from an
old and familiar dilemma of nonprofit neighborhood groups,
one that has sharpened during the Reagan years: how do
organizations go after, and perform under, government fun-
ding and still draw the line between service and support?
Neighborhood Control
Begun in 1970, the National Association of Neighborhoods
Charted a somewhat different course from other national
groups such as the National People's Action and ACORN -
the Association of Community Organizations for Reform
Now. Jan Peterson, a NAN founding member and co-
director of the Brooklyn-based National Congress of
Neighborhood Women, said NAN's founders believed it
could have its effect on government "in not necessarily
hostile ways. We spent a lot more time working things out.
At conferences, you wouldn't hear many speeches denounc-
ing people."
Neighborhood control has been at the center of NAN's
perspective since its start , a concept it hammered away at
but also carefully safeguarded by insisting it be carried out
without racial discrimination; similarly, it was early to de-
nounce the displacement of low income people from their
neighborhoOds, calling it a "calculated effort by corpora-
tions, banks and real estate, with the cooperation of the
federal government, to resegregate the cities along racial
and economic lines."
A "Neighborhood Bill of Responsibilities and Rights:
which called for neighborhoods to have their own govern-
ments as well as a fair share of resources, was adopted in
1976. And, in 1979, after 50 local sessions contributed their
concerns, a comprehensive "National Neighborhood Plat-
form," containing positions on issues from crime prevention,
displacement and redlining to employment, the arts and
energy was published.
Although a survival strategy and a lean budget were
adopted by the group for the Reagan years, by 1981 it was
in serious financial trqubles following the departure of
founding Executive Director, Milton Kotler. As one way of
raising funds, the group decided to hold a major conference
to evaluate enterprise zones, one Reagan proposal some
neighborhood groups thought could be made to work.
Begging to Help
At $150 a head the conference was not aimed at
grassroots people, but NAN board members thought that
the pros and cons could be fairly laid out.
Executive Director Steven Glaude. however. thought sup-
port for the enterprise zone proposal should be more forth-
right. In a vain effort to get Vice President George Bush to
speak at the conference, he wrote to various members of
the Admini stration pledging the support of himself and his
organization.
To top White House aide Edwin Meese. Glaude wrote in
January, 1982: "Do we have to beg to help?'Our plan is to
have a conference ... that in essence will be a pep rall y for
enterprise zones." He added: ~ .. our association. represen-
ting nearly 2,000 neighborhood organizations, is ready. will -
ing, and able to help the Administration rally support for
enterprise zones." And to Republican National Committee
chairman Richard Richards. Glaude proclaimed. "I repre-
sem an Association that has a history of being on the left of
the political spectrum that under my leadership has moved
to the center and is now looking to the right."
Following the conference, a press release and letters on
NAN letterhead went out to House and Senate leaders ur-
ging them to work to pass Reagan's enterprise zone bill
because ."Blacks and poor can benefit tremendously."
Unfortunately, few board members of NAN were aware of
these avowals of support for the Administration, and even
fewer shared the sentiments. Glaude, who explained later
that he had been too involved straightening out the
organizaton's debt, called few and irregular executive com-
mittee or board meetings.
One of the first public indications that things were chang-
ing at NAN came after the Conservative Digest printed an
apology for having included NAN in a list of
organizations it said were receiving federal support.
Unrehabilitated organizations on the Digest's list were
groups like the Federation of Southern Cooperatives, which
at the time was embattled in a white-controlled section of
Alabama, and soon lost all its funding from the govern-
ment. Glaude wrote Digest editor Howard Phillips describ-
ing his own organization's "change in direction," prompting
the retraction.
Zan White, director of the Hancock-Hawkins Community
Housing Association in Sneedville, Tennessee, and NAN
Rural Vice President, became alarmed. At an executive
committee meeting a majority voted to oust Glaude, and
White and others led a takeover of the organization's offices
where they changed the locks on the doors and examined
the files. After leaving the office, White and other board
members managed to get a court-ordered board meeting
convened.
Twenty of 44 board members were at that May 21, 1983,
meeting ,but after six hours of debate, a narrow majority of
ten to eight voted to reinstate Glaude as director. The ma-
jority, headed by board chairman Reverend Charles Koen of
the United Front in Cairo, Illinois, said that Glaude had
done what was necessary to. keep the organization afloat
even if they didn't like how he had done it. Sacking Glaude
would mean losing the HUD contract since Glaude had the
political connections that had won it. This, they said, was
the most important consideration because, without it, NAN
would be flat broke.
By the same 10-8 margin, the board also voted not to
clarify its public position regarding Reagan's urban policies,
and it resolved that the board was in charge of determining
NAN policies - a move that, dissenting board members
felt, by implication, made them partners in Glaude's
pronouncements.
Resignations
One of the first to dramatically bail out was board
member Charley Young, coordinator of the Bois d'Arc
Patriots, a Dallas, Texas group, who resigned in a letter to
Rev. Koen recapping his disagreements and concluding that
"NAN has shown through its actions over the past two years
that it is only able to concern itself with issues rdated to
the survival of its own central organization."
In August, a press release was issued by Zan White who
was joined by 11 other departing board members (including
Sally Martino Fisher of the National Congress of
Neighborhood Women, Adam Veneski of the People's
Firehouse and Geraldine Miller of the Bronx Household
Technicians) charging that Glaude and Koen had "failed to
call board and national membership meetings and in general
ignored the very principles and purposes of the organiza-
tion." NAN, the statement said, was dead, having become
"little more than a technical assistance program."
Glaude, however, believes differently and says the
organization will be resurgent. A new national convention
was planned for late September at Tougaloo College in
Mississippi, hosted by the Southern Rural Women's Net-
work. His actions on behalf of NAN, Glaude insists, will
be borne out. Unlike other Washington organizations, his
did not have a "kneejerk response" to Reagan's policies. "We
instituted a policy of not signing on to all the denunciations
of Administration policies that came our way;' he said. ')\
lot of the board members who resigned would have had us
condemn the Administration. We decided to try and in-
fluence it. It's made our advocacy stronger. They see we
can be constructive. Those dissenting groups have weakened
their role."
Asked where NAN's impact had been made on Ad-
ministration policies, Glaude points to the two areas it
targeted: enterprise zones and neighborhood service delivery
p'rograms.
NAN'S HUD contract runs out at the end of the year and
Glaude said he was looking towards a bigger one-to two-
year contract to replace it, although he wouldn't say how
much he woul9 seek. Former board members have charged
that Glaude has been promised far more in Administration
funds, as much as $1.5 million.
The money, ays Glaude, has been part of the problem.
"When I came in, staff and I were without salary for seven
months. And we came to work everyday. Where was the
board then? When the money came back was when the peo-
ple came back."
It was "blatantly untrue, " he said, that any deals had
been cut with the Administration to get the funding. As to
his solicitous letters to Reagan bigshots, he explained, "You
have to understand Washington talk."
NAN's battle, however, Glaude says, is "a very symbolic
struggle. It's one that is significant for the neighborhood
movement as a whole."
Zan White, who is considering forming a new national
organization with other former NAN members, concurs.
The differences gr0!1P, he said "were part of the
growing up on tl\e part of the neighborhood movement. We
had this fight before Steve came along."
Other major gr'oups, he said, had established their base
and earned their funds through doorknocking. "It makes it
difficult to knock them out. We've been a demonstration at
the end of a trend:' he suggested. "We've proved [the
government funding] was a disastrous move. I hate to be the
demonstration for it, but we were."OT.R.
ELECTRONIC FREE SPEECH
By J ~ Dobovy
G
OVERNMENT DEREGULATION
has had a multitude of negative ef-
fects on the low income urban popula-
tion. However, it is having one positive
side effect that is fast changing life in' ur-
ban America. As a consequence of
deregulation, the FCC - Federal Com-
munications Commission - which once
ruled the electronic media with an iron
fist, is now paving the way for revolu-
tionary changes in neighborhoods and
communities.
The electronic media, once the sole
property of big business, is now being
opened to community access. The new
low power television service has TV sta-
tions popping up in community centers,
in schools, and in apartments across the
country. The FCC now gets 10,000 ap-
plicants a month for low power TV, and
promises to double that amount monthly
once its processing computer is on-
line.
Ways to Get the Word Out
There are five modes of electronic free
speech available to the community.
These are cable access, carrier current,
LPAM (low power AM), LPFM (low
power FM) and LPTV (low power TV) .
Each has distinct advantages and disad-
vantages. Cable access does not cost the
community any money, if the cable
operating company is kind enough to
lend a community media center expen-
sive video equipment,such as modulators
and cameras. This is being done in small
rural areas where the cable company
seeks to encourage community media
participation to create relevant program-
ming in order to increase their
subscribers.
However, in New York City, cable
franchises once given, will not hold the
entrepreneur responsible for services
delivered to the community. Another
disadvantage of cable is that many low
income people do not have cable. Also,
the cable operator tends to give com-
munity programs extremely undesirable
time slots and limited time segments.
Rather, the cable operator seems to side
with groups who seek status quo in the
community. He cannot afford to tolerate
programming which might offend city
agencies and jeopardize his cable fran-
chise. Thus, hopes of electronic free
speech via cable access have been
frustrated in many cities as the cable
operator became just one more elec-
tronic gatekeeper.
Radio Broadcasts
The oldest mode of electronic free
speech available to communities is car-
rier current radio. Borrowed from col-
lege cakpus radio, it became popular in
the sixties because it required no anten-
na. A small transmitter is plugged into a
power receptable and sends a radio
signal over ordinary power lines. The
Black Panthers used carrier current to
advise citizens how to protect themselves
against police harassment. Parents for
Better Playgrounds used carrier current
on West 103rd Street and St. Nicholas
Avenue to broadcast programs by
Manhattan Valley Development Corpora-
tion on sweat equity housing.
roof. Its range is ten to fifteen blocks; its
cost is only $250. Its disadvantage is that
"nighttime skip" (distant broadcast sta-
tions) on the AM band will clobber your
flea-power station after sunset. LPFM
(low power FM) overcomes this pro-
blem. Its range can be a city mile or
two. It uses the meager spectrum space
at the bottom end 88 MHz) of the FM
broadcast band. The sole drawback of
LPFM is its sophisticated electronics,
which means that the community cost is
$600.
Low Power TV
Advanced technology has created a
new mode of community media which
appears to overcome all of the previous
drawbacks. LPrV (low power TV) re-
quires an inexpensive antenna and
transmitter. For a range of six city
blocks, a UHF, LPTV station without
camera would cost $300. This would be
a complete radio station which would be
received on a selected UHF-TV channel.
Its range could be increased up to a mile
Carrier current cost only $200, but it with an amplifier that would cost $100
has a serious weakness. Using the power more. By simply adding a $130 camera,
line as a cable, its range is limited to a you have a black and white TV station.
city block. Low Power AM overcomes By adding a $400 camera, you have a
this weakness. LPAM uses a loading coil color TV station for broadcasting live
and a twenty-foot vertical antenna on a programming. A $400 video cassette
24
recorder will enable you to broadcast
taped material .
Community media has been used for
about as many applications as an active
imagination can conjure up. In the six-
ties, it was used to broadcast the daily
price of marijuana. It has been used to
broadcast telephone conversations with
inept politicians, with nonperforming
community agency officials, and with
irate neighbors with a lot on their minds.
Community ractio was used to organize
tenant groups and explore housing rights
issues. It has been used to reduce inter-
racial community tensions. Teenagers
have found electronic free speech to be a
valuable tool in expressing their creative
pursuits. Whether it be music, poetry,
writing, or merely teenage conversation.
If there is sufficient interest in the ap-
plication of the concepts ctiscussed here,
a seminar conducted by the author of
this article can be arranged. Write to .
City Limits for details. 0
Joe Vobovy has been assisting commu-
nity group electronic free speech since
the 1960s.
Energy Audits, SpecHiCations and technical
assistance, Investigated contractors. Complete line
of conservation projects at discount, Financing
_-- options. - - . - - - - - - - - - - - ~
BROOKLYN ENERGY COOPERATIVE 562 Atlantic Ave. (near 4th Ave.) 858-8803
Free Insurance Appraisal
Richards and Fenniman, Inc., specialists in insuring tenant and community
groups for over 10 years, is offering to the readers of City Limits a free insurance
appraisal of their building.
We know your needs, your requirements, and how to help you get insurance
financing. And most important, we can get you the best prices.
For a free insurance appraisal of your building and an evaluation of your current
insurance program call me:
Ingrid Kaminski, Account E*ecutlve, (212) 267-8080.
Richards and Fennlman, Inc.
156 William Street, New York, New York 10038
Beat the Rent Challenge Deadline
T
wo OF THE M O R ~ important
changes made in the state rent control
laws at the end of this year's legisJative ses-
sion will bring tremendous benefit to
tenants after next April 1, when the state
Division of Housing and Community
Renewal takes over administration of city
rent stabilization from the ineffective Con-
ciliation and Appeals Board.
First, no later than July 1, 1984 all
landlords must register with DHCR rents
charged and services being furnished. Lack
of registration has been the worst loophole
in the weak stabilization law of the past 14
years. Because no agency had a record of
the legal rent or required services, it has
been easy for landlords to overcharge and
curtail services. Rent overcharging has
been a basic part of the stabilization system,
and no one knows how many landlords have
gotten away with reducing services that
were being provided on the base date (the
date the apartment entered the stabilization
system) and which were therefore required
to be continued.
The second change is almost as basic:
There will now be penalties for landlords
who overcharge or reduce services. As of
next April, landlords found to have over-
charged face the probability of treble
damages where they will have to refund
three times the amount of overcharge, plus
interest. Until then, the old standard ap-
plies, where at worst the landlord will be
liable only for the amount of the over-
charge. And rent reductions, in the past
discretionary and rarely, if ever, granted by
the CAB, are now mandatory where the
landlord is found to have reduced services.
This provision is already law, having taken
effect June 30, the day the Governor sign-
ed the bill.
A Big Hitch
While these changes will result in more
effective tenant protections, there's a hitch.
The new legal base rent will be the rent
contained on the registration statement
which landlords must file with DHCR next
year. Because so many rent stabilized
tenants are paying rents that include one or
more overcharges built into their rents over
the past 14 years, this means that millions
of dollars in past overcharges will be
forgiven, and enshrined as new legal rents.
The New York State Tenant and Neig4-
By Michael McKee
borhood Coalition is launching a publici-
ty campaign to inform rent stabilized
tenants of the March 31, 1984 deadline for
challenging their rent as illegal, and to en-
courage then to file "Gray Form" com-
plaints with the CAB. As part of this cam-
paign, a special issue of Tenants &
Neighbors will be published which will ex-
plain the procedures and pitfalls.
Tenants can look to the CAB for no help
in challenging their rents. The agency (if
you can get through on the phone) gives
tenants misleading advice designed to
discourage them from filing. For example,
CAB staff tell tenants that before they can
file a Gray Form, they must first request
a rental history from the landlord, even
though there is nothing in the law or code
that required tenants to do so. Furthermore,
the landlord is required to attach to all
leases a rent history rider setting forth all
rents and leases back to the base date (the
date the apartment entered the stabilization
system), a requirement which the CAB has
never enforced, and to produce the rental
history upon demand by the CAB.
Too many tenants are under the mistaken
26
impression that they must prove that they
are being overcharged if they file a com-
plaint. In fact, the burden is on the
landlord, once a complaint has been filed,
to prove that he is not overcharging. With
overcharging so common, tenants have
nothing to lose by filing.
Tenants should also be encouraged to file
"Pink" (for individual apartment condi-
tions) and "Blue" (for building-wide con-
ditions) Form complaints when landlords
curtail services or fail to make necessary
repairs. The mandatory rent reduction now
in effect can be the best enforcement tool
for getting the condition corrected.
However, tenants should be warned that if
they do not specifically request a rent
reduction on these forms, the CAB will
probably not grant them one. This is
another example of the CAB's taking a law
designed to benefit tenants and turning it
on its head to let landlords off the hook. 0
Michael McKee works with the New York
State Tenant and Neighborhood Coalition.
For more information you can call NYSINC
at (212) 964-7200.
We Need 'Housing Sense'
To the Editors:
In the August-September 1983 Letters section of City Limits,
reader Sylvia Orans passes scathing judgement upon the "Hous-
ing Sense" program developed by H.P.D. for 5 to 13 year olds
in New York City Public Schools. I might also deduce by both
the amount of space given and the accompanying and interpretive
"I must not hate the landlord" cartoon, that the letter also passes
as the editorial viewpoint of your publication.
I will make my complaint brief. Many of the points raised
by Ms. Orans are valid. It is an absurd and brazen notion that
politicians should credit an educational tool with the direct poten-
tial for alleviating the housing shortage in a city with a 2 per-
cent vacancy rate. However, it is equally brash for another to
use the politicians' excesses as a rationale for terminating a poten-
tial learning experience for this City's children.
I have read the recommended curriculum prepared by Bruce
Goulds's office. It is an excellent starting point and has great
potential. It reviews neighborhood types, building types, building
systems, types of ownership (including not-for-profit and
cooperative ownership), types of fuel, and much more. I have
three children in the New York City School system,and I wish
the course was available to them at this time.
In closing, I believe that Ms. Orans's attack is misplaced. Is
her point that children should not learn and appreciate what
represents their own source of shelter and community interac-
tion? If so, then this would seem to suggest an elitist big brother
attitude that an ignorant population and an all-encompassing
government is the solution to all social problems. Or, is Ms.
Orans really just annoyed that certain politicians should use
(abuse) a simple educational program to shield public scrutiny
of their own irresponsibility in making every effort to assure
safe, affordable housing and neighborhoods for all the residents
of this City.?
Harry DeRienzo
Bronx, New York
Alas, J-51
To the Editors:
Regarding your "follow up" on grants for model SROs, it should
be noted that no grants or programs are available for middle in-
come housing ($100-$150 per room).
The one piece oflegislation which successfully encouraged new
middle income housing in New York City, namely, J-51, has just
been emasculated by the state legislature.
Unless funds are quickly made available for middle income
housing, thousands who wish to live here and keep the city grow-
ing will be shut out.
Marvin Sochet
W. l00th St.
Manhattan
Beantown Fan
To the Editors:
Please send a copy of your February, 1982, issue "We Won't
Move!" A friend of mine is involved with a local rent strike. I think
this issue would be of great interest to her and the tenants she's
working with. I only wish we in Boston had our own version of
City Limits. Keep up the good work. In appreciation,
Fran Roznowski
Boston, Mass.
The Landlord and the Loan
To the Editors:
Thank you for the article you wrote about how our tenants
dealt with the "renovation" proposal for our building. Not only
was it an accurate account of what happened, but it was written
in a manner that made us feel proud and appreciated. The arti-
cle will help our tenants and other tenants better understand the
need to be informed and to check things out . It will also serve
to make tenants more aware that City agencies, whom we fund
through our taxes, are creating serious problems for thousands
of tenants in the name of rehabilitation.
To bring you up to date:
We were informed by HPD that an 8-A loan for a boiler-burner
and for new windows was granted and that when this work was
completed, rents for rent controlled tenants would be increased
$24 per room, for rent stabilized tenants,ll percent. We called
HPD at 100 Gold Street and asked for a meeting. At that meeting
we said we would not pay those increases, that these two items
not to if new plumbing were
not Installed, If roof repairs were not made, and we again listed,
as we had in other meetings with them, the minimum services
that had to be restored to make our building habitable. Shortly
after this meeting, each tenant got a notice from HPD that new
plumbing would be included in the renovations at the same in-
creased rents listed in the previous notice. New windows and
new plumbing are now being installed.
A final note. On August 9 we met with our landlord and
worked out some problems. Later that afternoon, Mr. Eiges
called Miss Steinberg and told her that someone from HPD had
called him and told him about your article. He said he was very
disturbed about this, it was going to ruin him, that we had done
him in.
Again, we want to thank you for the article and for the
outstanding efforts you make to keep tenants well informed and
in pointing out ways and means that can lead to better housing.
Christine White, Chairperson
Bertha Marshall, Co-Chairperson
Bessie Steinberg, Secretary
486 Brooklyn Avenue Tenants Association
-------------
LEGAL GUIDES
FROM BROOKLYN
LEGAL SERVICES
.. LEGAL SERVICES BOOKLETS:
South Brooklyn Legal Services' 17 lawyers
and nine paralegals are still handling about
4,500 cases a year but federal funding cut-
backs are forcing it to tum away increas-
ing numbers of people. In order to get
needed information: to those who need it,
the agency has been publishing a series of
excellent informational booklets. How to
Force Your Landlord to Repair Viola-
tions: A Tenant's Guide to Housing (UP)
Actions is a 36-page booklet that provides
step-by-step instructions on how to force
i landlords to correct violations of the
building code. The guide explains both the
significance of HP actions, their liabilities
and' how to handle them in court. The
booklet includes copies of needed
documents and how to follow up for en-
forcement. A Welfare Handbook for Col-
lege Students offers advice to students who
receive public assistance benefits, ranging
from complying with work rules to pay-
ing for child care, obtaining grants for oc-
cupational training, and budgeting scholar-
ship awards. It also outlines how to handle
an appeal to the New York State Depart-
. ment of Social Services at a "fair hearing."
The booklet is 42 pages long. How to Get
Public Assistance - A Handbook for
Public Assistance Applicants and Reci-
pients is the heftiest of the guides published
by South Brooklyn. Its 72 pages provide
step-by-step instructions on how to
negotiate the system and get the benefits to
which you are entitled. It explains different
categories of assistance, how to complete
application forms, get documentation, han-
dle special problems (such as pregnancy),
calculate a budget and handle hearings.
Copies of all the booklets are free of charge
to those in financial need, but funded
groups are asked to pay SOC per copy for
the Tenants' and Public Assistance guides,
and 25C for the college students handbook.
Orders can be placed by calling Eleanor
Bader at (212) 855-8003, or by writing:
South Brooklyn Legal Services, l05 Court
Street, Brooklyn, NY 11201.0
.. TRILINGUAL CALENDAR:
A.R.T.S. - a Lower East Side organiza-
tion that helps teachers and students
preserve the cultural traditions of Chinese
and Hispanic peoples has published its se-
cond trilingual school-year calendar.
Brightly colored with motifs and illustra-
tions from Chinese and Hispanic therues,
the 10 x 14 inch wall or appointment
calendar is spiral bound with both western
and lunar dates. It costs only $3. To order,
write or call: ARTS Inc., 32 Market St. ,
NY, NY 10002, (212) 962-8231.0
.. SMALL BUSINESS MANAGE-
MENT COURSES: The Urban Business
Assistance Corporation, affiliated with the
NYU School of Business, offers an educa-
tional program geared towards the special
needs of small business owners. Courses
range from basic management, tax, ac-
counting and marketing to more advanced
courses in financing, microcomputers and
government procurement. Course fees are
nominal. Classes will be held in downtown
Manhattan, Queens ' and downtown
Brooklyn. The fall program begins the
week of September 22 and November 7.
Classes will meet one evening a week for
four, six or nine weeks. For further infor-
mation, call: (212) 285-6090.0
.. ANTI-ARSON GUIDES: Two infor-
mational guides on how communities can
fight arson have been published in New
York this year, and a Washington-based
research center has issued a report on civil
arson remedies that citizens can try. Ar-
son: Information and Guidelines for
Community Action is the sort of small
readable pamphlet that block associations
and tenant groups can pass out at meetings
and know that readers will easily pick up
some useful tips and information. That's the
kind of use the publishers and authors of
this 16-page booklet - the Office of
Brooklyn Borough President Howard
Golden and The Flatbush Development
Corporation's Arson Prevention Project -
had in mind. Although the guide's appen-
dix lists only Brooklyn groups and police
precincts, the basic facts and suggestions
are useful anywhere in the city. For in-
dividual and bulk copies call (212)
462-5300.
New York City'S Arson Strike Force, a
mayoral agency established in 1978, has
made its major contribution to arson-
fighting by making fire statistics and its Ar-
son Risk Prediction Index available to com-
28
munity groups. But it also has an active and
dedicated Community Outreach Unit
which has supplied important assistance to
neighborhoods. Much of that information
has been compiled into a manual published
earlier this year, Strategies: A
Guide for Community Organizations.
The 50-page book provides an overview of
the extent of the arson problem nationally
and locally and gives brief looks at some
of the organizing campaigns which have
been successful. It gives an explanation of
who sets fires, and why, and profiles typical
arson situations. For copies call the Arson
Strike Force at (212) 566-4500.
The Battelle Memorial Institute has
recently completed a Ford Foundation-
funded study on civil remedies to arson and
has published a report on its findings. The
report examines civil intervention suits and
enforcement of the "good repair" mortgage
clause and suits against landlords for
negligence, and utilizing anti-racketeering
statutes. The report is available from: Clif-
ford Karchmer, Battelle Washington Opera-
tions, 2030 M St., N.w., Washington, D.c.
20036, or call (202) 785-8400.0
.. HOUSING TRUST FUND'S LEGAL
ISSUES: A one-day symposium, "Inelu-
sionary Zoning Moves Downtown," will ex-
plain the constitutional issues raised by ap-
plication of suburban inelusionary zoning
techniques such as the proposed housing
trust fund for the central city. Co-sponsored
by the Center for Metropolitan Action and
CUNY Law School at Queens College,
Pratt Institute Center for Community and
Environmental Development and the
American Planning Association, the con-
ference will be held November 14 at
CUNY Graduate Center, 33 West 42nd St.
Registration rates are.: private firms, $35,
nonprofit groups $10, and students $5.
Please cOlitact Phil Tegeler or Michael
Zarin at the Center for Metropolitan Ac-
tion, Queens College, Flushing, NY, 11367
for advance
The Seleclive
Hisloryof
Brooklyn
By Rachel B. Gorlin
Brooklyn .... And How It Got That
Way, By David W. McCollough with
photographs by Jim Katlett, published
by The Dial Press, $19.95 hardcover.
You are what getting by
Has made of you; I
Am Canarsie. We have come
To ourselves in window envelopes.
The first star of twilight
Cannot be touched. Its twinkling
Blinds me and I fall alone
To my knees on Kings Highway.
I love you. Goodbye.
- from "In the Yellow Light
oUIDloklyn" by Al Lee
"D:>OR BROOKLYN, loved by so
C many who have forsaken you for
Manhattan's glimmering shore. Taking
leave of Brooklyn, in fact, seems for years
to have been the dominant theme in IDiddle-
class depictions of the borough. In works
as diverse as Walt Whitman's poem "Cross-
ing Brooklyn Ferry", Norman Podhoretz's
autobiographical Making It, and the film
"Saturday Night Fever", Brooklyn has been
mythologized as the provincial, early love,
outgrown and abandoned.
Until quite recently, that is, for gen-
trification has served to refurbish
Brooklyn's image, even lending it a genteel
mystique. It used to be considered exciting
only to desert Brooklyn, but the
"Brownstone Movement" (as it is referred
to in David McCollough's Brooklyn . . . And
How It Got That Ufzy) has given living
there an air of adventure. (Sample party
talk heard often in certain Manhattan
circles: "You're living in Brooklyn, how in-
teresting! We really must come out and see
what it's like.")
This year's Brooklyn Bridge Centennial
has given rise to an even more virulent
Brooklyn boosterism, of which this first
published social history of the borough is
but one of many manifestations. In a way,
the Bridge is an ironic symbol of Brooklyn
Ddert Street, FAIIIt New lbrk In Brooklyn, July 4, J907. From "Brooklyn !'
pride, since its construction clearly hasten-
ed what many at the time considered the
City of Brooklyn's shameful demotion to
the status of mere borough in the 1898 con-
solidation of New York City. But, at the
same time, the Bridge is an appropriate
symbol for a borough whose identity -
like it or not - has largely been based on
its alternately defensive, competitive, ad-
miring, independent yet dependent rela-
tionship to Manhattan. In a time when a
neighborhood like Brownsville has as much
in common with Bay Ridge as it has with,
say, Omaha, this ambivalent and charged
attitude toward the primacy of "The City"
(as Manhattan is known on the other side
of the Bridge) may be the only theme
uniting that varied borough.
How Did It Get That Way?
So any social historian attempting to deal
. with all of Brooklyn is left in a quandry:
how does one make the story cohere? The
answer, unfortunately, is not to be found in
Brooklyn. Though the book contains some
absorbing descriptive passages, and in-
teresting trivia .and anecdotes, David
McCollough has not illuminated the
borough's gestalt or captured its spirit. He
appears not to have much insight into
Brooklyn's recent history, which makes ex-
plicating "how it got that way" impossible.
How it got what way? Well, diversity, a
29
term that in itself explains nothing and
describes very little, is touted as Brooklyn's
main characteristic. The reader is left
without much understanding of what that
diversity means for Brooklyn, and what
social forces helped the borough become
polygenous.
McCollough is correct, obviously, that
Brooklyn is a remarkably varied place. But
he manages to miss the point that the story
of post World War IT Brooklyn is essential-
ly one of struggles between groups with
different interests and aims. From the
Canarsie and Ocean Hill-Brownsville
school battles, to blockbusting and "neigh-
borhood change" in East Flatbush, through
the gentrification and displacement
blems in Park Slope and elsewhere,
Brooklyn heterogeneity has frequently been
a source of tension and conflict. The book
only hints at some of these important situa-
tions, while ignoring others completely.
It seems incredible that the Ocean Hill-
Brownsville and Canarsie school uprisings
are never mentioned in a book titled
Brooklyn . . . And How It Got That Ufzy.
Racial tension in general comes up mainly
in historical references. Community-based
organizations and their significant role in
Brooklyn over the past (at least) twenty
years receive almost no notice. Though
McCollough draws an interesting portrait
of what remains of Brooklyn's waterfront
and industrial life, he fails to discuss
reasons for and the far reaching economic
and social consequences of their decline.
An explanation of why the borough's
population has decreased significantly in
recent years, and what the effects of the
drop have been, is nowhere to be found.
Politicians rear their apparently unseemly
heads only a few, unenlightening times over
the 350 years the book covers. And
residents of Prospect-Lefferts Gardens will
be surprised to find that "there are no grand
houses in (their) neighborhoods."
Even when the author tries to use an in-
ventive device, like describing in detail
Bedford Avenue's journey from Greenpoint
to SheepsheadBay, he gets and
loses his momentum. The ear1y history -
pre-1898 - is the best section of this
disorganized work, but even that chapter
rambles. Granted that any history of the
borough would have to be somewhat selec-
tive, Brooklyn remains disappointing.
Still, if one knows Brooklyn reasonably
well, Jim Kalett's photographs almost
redeem this undertaking. Included are
some of Brooklyn's most striking, but lesser
known scenes: the mansions on
Street in Crown Heights, the relief on the
outside of the Montauk Club building,
Plumg Beach's haunting dreariness, the
Bushwick-East New York subway yards'
multilayered intensity. Some of the older
pictures from various archives remind us
how much of present residential Brooklyn
was built by the first few decades of the
twentieth century. (The book spares us
from the presumably too disturbing sight
of housing abandonment, but one almost
shivers looking at several of the old photos,
.knoWing that today the placid scene may
wen be-a wasteland.)
Brooklyn is fascinating precisely because
it is "what getting by has made of it'!; much
of its beauty is not particularly glamorous,
or even pretty. Embodied in tenants
associations struggling to save their homes,
in East Brooklyn Churches' visionary
"Nehemiah" redevelopment plan, in com-
munity gardens planted in vacant lots, the
durable beauty of Brooklyn deserves bet-
ter celebrations than expensive coffee table
books like Brooklyn---And How It Got
That J-Jfly. But until the real thing comes
along, I hope we are spared a full realiza-
tion of the Back to Brooklyn theme's com-
mercial potential.
This past season has brought us a
theatrical funtasy about the return of the
Dodgers, "Brighton Beach Memories," and
an opera about the construction of the
Brooklyn Bridge. Next we may be seeing
a musical version of the life of Liz
After Emily Roebling's trilling
as the Bridge goes up, maybe "Don't Cry
for Me, Ocean Parkway," is not fur
behind. D
Rachel Gorlin is a freelance writer who
lives in Manhattan.
1It..1

VJe Co"et the
Other L,e\.V
-
o BIll ffle later
T
~ ~ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
ORGANIZER POSITIONS
Housing group seeks to fill two organizing
positions:
Community OrganizerlSupervisor:To .supervise
organizing staff, implement anti-arson project, organize
around community and housing-related issues. Re-
quirements: Bilingual (English/Spanish), good writing skills,
supervisory experience. experience in leadership
development and training. Salary $15,500 plus good
benefits.
Cooperative Market Coordinator
Person to coordinate formation of cooperative retail
market. Responsibilities: Organize 20 to 30 mer-
chants into cooperative, coordinate establishment
of cooperative, conduct surveys and interviews,
help train merchants to work in a cooperative
orgarlization, assist cooperative and merchants to
secure financing. Must be willing to learn to run a
retail market and to transfer that knowledge to coop
members.
Person must be bilingual (English-Spanish), have
an interest in cooperatives and in working with
small merchants. $20,000 plus fringe benefits.
Resumes should be sent to: Joseph Center, Ex-
ecutive Director, Valley Restoration LDC, 105 W.
106th Street, New York, N.Y. 10025.
CONSTRUCTION SUPERVISOR
Participants of 4 buildings in the Urban
Homesteading Program seek multi-skilled individual
for construction supervisor position. Candidate must
possess job experience in construction management
and supervision and must also train unskilled
homesteaders in various facets of construction work.
Please send resumes to: Save The Children Federation
(by Oct. 10th) Inner Cities Program
m U.N. Plaza
New York, NY 1002:j
Attn: Ms. Chris Heg
We are Equal Opportunity. Women and minorities
are encouraged to apply.
Housing Organizer: To do tenant and building organiz-
ing, housing court, work with 7 A buildings. bilingual,
knowledge of tenants rights and hOUSing court pro-
cedures, skills in building self-management. Salary:
$12,000 plus good benefits.
Send resume to: S. Abramson, St. Nicholas Housing Corp .
11-29 Catherine St., Brooklyn, NY 11211.
31
POSITIONS AVAILABLE
Community Organizer/Social Worker For Lower East Side
Housing Group. BSW and organizing experience necessary.
Some night meetings. Some typing. Spanish-speaking and
Lower East Side resident preferred.
Salary: $14,000 per year, plus good fringe benefits.

Senior Community Organizer For Lower East Side group.
. 3-Years of experience in tenant organizing and staff supervi-
sion necessary. Night meetings required. Lower East Side resi-
dent, college, Spanish speaking preferred.
Salary: $14,000 per year, plus good fringe benefits.
FOR BOTH OF THESE POSITIONS,
PLEASE SEND OR BRING RESUME TO:
At ten t ion: House Personnel Committee
Cooper Square Committee
61 East 4th St.
N.Y.C., N.Y. 10003
Deadly Connections - Latin American
Intervention, Nuclear Escalation and
Economic Crisis: A Socialist Response.
A public meeting opening the first convention of the
Democratic Socialists of America, with speakers
GUILLERMO UNGO, president of the Revolutionary
Democratic Front of EI Salvador, RANDALL FORS-
BERG, initiator of the Nuclear Freeze Campaign,
Congressperson RON DELLUMS, and BARBARA
EHRENREICH, feminist author and DSA Vice-Chair.
FRIDAY, OCTOBER 14, 8 P.M. $5.
WASHINGTON IRVING HIGH SCHOOL, AT
IRVING PLACE AND EAST 17TH STREET.
ODETTA CONCERT
SATURDAY, OCTOBER 15, 1983, 8 P.M.-$5 DONATION
FOR MORE INFORMATION, CALL DSA, (212) 260-1078
This Year,
Give
New York's
C)
a

a'. ..
. . ~ ~ .
a
Neighborhoods for the Holidays.
Give a SUbscription to City Liinits at the special
low holiday rate of 33% off the regular price .
.
Save 44% on each additional gift SUbscription.
To take advantage of this special offer, return the gift envelope inside the
magazine before it's too late. Your friends will receive the very next issue.

City Limits Magazine, October 1983 Issue

Diunggah oleh

Informasi Dokumen

Hak Cipta

Format Tersedia

Bagikan dokumen Ini

Bagikan atau Tanam Dokumen

Opsi Berbagi

Apakah menurut Anda dokumen ini bermanfaat?

Apakah konten ini tidak pantas?

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

City Limits Magazine, October 1983 Issue

Diunggah oleh

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

2034

Anda mungkin juga menyukai