City Limits Magazine, February 1985 Issue

SHARING
ENERGY
SAVINGS
QUEENS
MINI
LANDLORDS
THE REAL
HOUSING
FUND STORY
CITYLIMITS
LONG BEACH'S
2 CITY LIMITS February 1985
I I
CITY LIMITS
Volume X Number 2
City Limits is published ten times per year,
monthly except double issues in June/July and
August/September, by the City Limits Commu-
nit y Information Service, Inc., a nonprofit or-
ganization devoted to disseminating
information concerning neighborhood revitali-
zation. The publication is sponsored by three
organizations. The sponsors are:
Association for Neighborhood and Housing De-
velopmen t , Inc., an association of 36
community-based, nonprofit housing develop-
ment groups, developing and advocating pro-
grams for low and moderate income housing
and neighborhood stabilization.
Pratt Institute Center for Community and
Environmental Development , a technical as-
sistance and advocacy office offering profes-
sional planning and architectural services to
low and moderate income community groups.
The Center also analyzes and monitors govern-
ment policy and performance.
I l rban HomesteaJing Assistance Board, a tech-
nical assistance organization providing as-
sistance to low income tenant cooperatives in
management and sweat equity rehabilitation.
Subscription rates are: for individuals and com-
munity groups, $15/0ne Year, $251Two Years;
for Businesses. Foundations. Banks, Covern-
ment Agencies and Libraries, $35/0ne Year,
$501Two Years. Low income, unemployed.
$9/0ne Year.
City Limits welcomes comments and article
contributions. Please include a stamped, self-
addressed envelope for return of manuscripts.
Material in City Limits does not necessarily
reflect the opinion of the sponsorin!! organiza-
tions. 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, N:V. 10001.
Second-class postage paid
New York, NY 10001
City Limits (ISSN 0199-0330)
(212) 239-8440
Editor
Tom Robbins
Assistant Editor
Annette Fuentes
Circulation Manager
Paul Smith
Copyright " 1985. All Rights Reserved.
No portion or portions of this journal may be
reprinted without the express permission of
the publishers.
City Limits is indexed in the Alternative Press
Index and the Avery Index to Architectural
Periodicals.
Typeselling and Layout by Advance Graphics
Design by Connie Pierce
COJER PHOTO BY MARGARET SHRAGE
NEIGHBORHOOD NEWSSTAND
Truth in Advertising
FOLLOWING UP ON LASf MONTHS
Dail y News case ("News Plugs Devel-
oper, Ignores Tenants"). here are two
more examples of why the real estate
sections of the city's daily papers
should have the word "ADVERTISE-
MENT" emblazoned in 60-point type
over every page of their contents.
The first comes from News d ay,
one of whose reporters, Caryn Eve
Wiener, requested a copy of City Limits'
January '84 issue which details tenant
harassment and displacement in
Brooklyn's Borough Park. Local
Borough Park residents. the reporter
told us, had recommended it as back-
ground for a story she was working on,
Two weeks later, in Newsday's January
19th real estate section, the product ap-
peared: a full-page article under Wien-
er's byline on the Borough Park Town
House Condominiums at 52nd Street
and 18th Avenue_ These duplex and
triplex condos, selling at prices from
$122,000 to $165,000 have been creat-
ed out of the partial ruins of Midwood
Gardens, an ll-building complex from
which 700 ethnically mixed tenants
were driven amid harassment and 43
suspicious fires. Charges against
owner Lawrence Rezak and his part-
ners are still pending at the state's hous-
ing department as is a discrimination
complaint against the condos at the
state's human rights division, A total of
25 tenants are still in residence in three
of the buildings.
All this, along with information
on the role of the condo developer and
the Southern Brooklyn Community
Organization in forcibly emptying
Midwood Gardens, was spelled out in
the City Limits article, Yet Newsday
merely refers to the "blighted, crime-
battered 52nd Street of years past." But
whose crimes? There's not even a cau-
tious reference to neighborhood con-
troversy. Instead it focuses on the
conveniences the condo apartments
boast for the orthodox Jewish families
for whom they were built to accomo-
date and notes how a block-long mural
suggests how life will be in the build-
ings once they are renovated. That,
along with Newsday's pro-developer
coverage, effectively blots out the story
of how life was.
Entry number two is from the
Times' Sunday real estate section of
January 6 which carried a lengthy
front-page article titled, "Renter-
Occuped Co-ops: How Good a Deal?"
To answer that question the story was
loaded with investor-oriented informa-
tion and analysis but lacked even a sin-
gle paragraph on the effect this
practice (one of the stranger real estate
phenomenons of the eighties) can have
on rent regulated and protected tenants
who now have a mini-landlord with
plenty of reason to want them out.
Instead, writer Michael deCourcy
Hinds goes into detail about various
methods for curtailing tenant oc-
cupancy, and quotes the authority on
this sort of sponsor and owner maneu-
vering, Gerald Gutterman. It was Gut-
terman's Glen Oaks which pioneered
this co-op sales approach and the im-
pact this has had on tenants is
described in "Out-Organizing the
'Mini-Landlords.'" But the Times did
not find the state Attorney General's
orders to Gutterman to shape up his
operation and end his tenant harass-
ment worthy of a sentence, That sort of
information doesn't help sell
co-ops, DT.R.
Borough Parle's 52nd St.:
A mUNI to co_r po.t haN_."t.
INSIDE
FEATURES
Long Beach's War on Poverty 16
The tides have turned in this seaside city, but one per-
son's boom is another's bust.
Tenth Avenue Freeze Out 24
Could Clinton's urban renewal sites be a remedy for real
estate pressures?
February 1985 CITY LIMITS 3
DEPARTMENTS
Neighborhood Newsstand
Truth in Advertising ... .. .... '. . . . . . . . . . . 2
Short Term Notes
Hi-Rise Education . . . . .. .. ........ .... . 4
Chicagds Data Delivery .. . . . .. ... .. .. . . . 4
West Side's Broken Promises . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Association's Proud 10 Years .,.... .. . .... 5
Legislation
Community Housing Proposed . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Pipeline
Low Income Co-op's Taxing Problem. . . . . . . 7
Organize
Out-Organizing the Mini-Landlords . . . . . . . 8
Energy
Energy Savings Unequal Shares . ' .,... ... 10
City Views
The Other Housing Fund Story . . . . . . . . . .. 12
Review
New York's New Deal . .. ... ... ... . .. ... ' 27
Choosing a Neighborhood . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 28
Community Research. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 29
r.;;;;. ..... . Resources/Events . . .... . . .... .. . . .... . ... , . 30
II
..
. , :"
" '.:
t "::
Workshop. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
Tenth Avenue Freeze Out/24 "
'" CITY LIMITS February 1985
SHORT TERM NOTES
HI.RISE
EDUCATION
There is no rest for the
weary neighborhood activist
in the bottle against destruc-
tive development schemes,
especially on the Lower East
Side. Not six months after
residents thwarted developer
Norman Dansker's construc-
tion of two hi-rise apartment
buildings on Third Ave., they
have jumped into action to
stymie New York University
dormitories at 9th and 12th
Streets.
In June, Dansker had be-
gun excavating at 9th St.
after obtaining a permit for
a hotel, which residents dis-
covered was actually a resi-
dential apartment building.
Dansker, who was convicted
of bribing a Fort Lee, N.J.
mayor in 1980, tried to cir-
cumvent zoning rules
against such residential hi-
rises by calling it commer-
Cial (see City Limits, August/
September 1984).
This time, NYU is propos-
ing to build hi-rise dormito-
ries to house 1800 students
under a zoning code provi-
sion that would allow them
as a community facility. That
would be a disaster for the
area, say members of the
Third Avenue Tenants,
Artists and Businessmen's
Association. They held a
rally January 12 to demand
changes in the University's
plan. Some 200 community
members came out into the
bitter cold . .
'There have been many
proposals from developers
to get hi-rise buildings in
the low-rise zone," says
Association member
Raymond Spillenger. "NYU is
using another loophole in
the zoning code-a commu-
nity facility-to get double
what residential zoning
allows." According to
Spillenger, residential zoning
density for the area is 3.4
FAR (Floor Area Ratio)
allowing 34,000 square feet
of floor space. What NYU
wants is 6.5 FAR.
Third Avenue tenants are
not against dormitories, just
the massive scale of the
project. 'We want them to
keep it at the residential
scale," says Dean Corren, of
the Association. "If not, it
will encourage speculation
and push out low income
people."
He notes that an entire
block front on Third Avenue
between 11th and 12th
Streets has been sold and
could be knocked down to
build expensive apartments.
And diagonally across from
the NYU site, at the. corner
of Third and lOth St., Burger
King has an option on a
building.
The Association will do an
Environmental Impact Study
and push for a strict enforce-
ment of zone codes that say
a community facility may
not be high density if it will
damage the surrounding
community. Corren also says
that since the Dansker affair,
the Planning Commission
Council plans to hold NYU to
strict criteria on use of the
dorms to be sure they cannot
easily be converted tnto con-
dominiums or rentals.DA.F.
CHICAGO'S
NEIGHBORHOOD
HOUSING
DATA DELIVERY
Chicago's City Planning
Department has a new, in-
novative program that's a
housing activist's dream
come true, reports Neigh-
borhood Works, a Chicago
monthly. Called the Affirma-
tive Neighborhood Informa-
tion Plan, it pulls together
the housing information
neighborhood groups need to
know and sends it to them
regularly at no cost.
Initiated this fall, the pro-
gram takes housing-related
data from the city's law,
housing and inspectional
departments, arranges the
information 'by area and
sends it out in monthly and
Third Avenue'. partisan.:
The University a. dl.placer.
quarterly reports to organi -
zations. Each report identi-
fies an average of 20,000
housing court cases by
building, with court dates,
number and types of viola-
tions and information on the
owners. When the city has
been able to break a "blind
trust," which is possible
when a building is in court
for more than 180 days, that
information is also included
in the reports.
Behind the plan lay sever-
al months of effort by a
group at Northwestern Uni-
versity's Center for Urban
Affairs and Policy Research.
Representatives from the
Center met with personnel
from the four city depart-
ments to identify housing
information available in
their computers. They then
surveyed neighborhood
groups to find which data
would be most useful to
incorporate in the plan.
By having such valuable
research compiled for them,
small staff community
organizations will be freed
up to use more time work-
ing directly with landlords
and tenants rather than
treking to city offices and
plowing through mountains
of documents. Roberta
Warshaw of the North River
, Commission pointed out that
the infor'11ation gives groups
like hers an invaluable "early
warning system" to identify
buildings in trouble rather
than waiting until they are
drastically deteriorated or
abandoned.
In addition, citywide infor-
mation "will enable groups
to form a coalition to iden-
tify landlords holding build-
ings across the city that are
in trouble," according to
Nancy Jefferson of the Mid-
west Community Council.
Jefferson added, "I've been
working on .the West Side
for 39 years and we've
needed this kind of informa-
tion for 37 of those 39 years.
It's about time."
While critics have ques-
tioned whether the cost of
the operation is too much
for a financially strapped
city government, planning
department head Elizabeth
Hollander believes that
productivity increases
resulting from computeriza-
tion of city data will make
the information sharing pos-
sible at no additional cost
other than postage. If the
housing information pro-
gram proves successful, the
city says it may follow with
others that could include
data on economic develop-
ment, community energy
needs, crime and security
and various city programs. 0
For more information con-
tact Eric Nyblad or Peter
Bartoli, Dept. of Planning,
City of Chicago IL 60602;
(312) 744-3025. Adapted from
The Neighborhood Works.
WEST SIDE'S
BROKEN
PROMISES
One after another, the
veterans of the Upper West
Side's angriest and longest-
running housing dispute
trouped to the microphone
in the basement meeting
room on Columbus Avenue.
Each told part of a now
more than two decade old
battle: of the slum clearance
drive which razed thousands
of viable buildings, driving
some 12,000 low-income
families out of blocks be-
tween Amsterdam and Cen-
tral Park West in the
process; of organized com-
munity resistance, including
the occupation of the tene,
ments along Columbus from
90th to 91st Streets, a siege
which ended only with a city
pledge to provide affordable
replacement housing; of the
legal suit brought first by
the Episcopal Trinity School
and then picked up by a
local homeowner's group
which sought an injunction
against the "environmental
hazard" of low income hous-
ing; of the U.S. Supreme
Court's emphatic rejection of
that contention; of, finally,
the city's five-year-Iong
refusal , despite the Court's
green light and available
funds, to carry through its
promise.
Indeed, the plan the city
now insisted at the January
16th meeting of Community
Board Seven's Housing Com-
mittee was a final take-it-or-
leave-it proposition, would
. give those opponents of low
income housing the victory
they had been denied in
court, a point relentlessly
driven home by longtime
resident and activist Bill
, At the meeting, Robert
Reach, Manhattan planning
director of the city housing
department, treaded lightly
on volatile ground. The
urban renewal area was
"rather controversial" he
suggested in mawkish
understatement; many in the
audience knew the history
for better than he, yet this
latest plan was the result of
a "series of compromises."
But most of that compro-
mising was being demanded
of those who needed and
sought fulfillment of the
city's original, simple,
straight-out pledge for Site
30: 160 units- low income
families, first priority to
those who had lived there.
That promise was just part
of 2,500 replacement low
income units the city said it
would build in the renewal
area, less than 2,000 of
which are now there. Under
the gun of escalating land
values, few other low
income units are ever likely
to emerge on the West Side's
high-priced real estate.
Instead, what the Koch
administration offered was
87 public housing units for
the elderly poor and a 21-
story "mid-rise" buitding and
three townhouses holding
190 apartments, 40 of them
for low income families, the
rest for those paying rents
of $1 ,000 per month and up.
Building the mid-rise is
the leFrak Organization,
which sent former Koch De-
puty Mayor and now leFrak
development director Robert
Kandell to the community
board to pave the way for
what it hopes will be the
speedy approval of the plan.
Housing committee mem-
bers credited leFrak's design
for including a second tier of
commercial space above a
row of ground floor shops
along Columbus Avenue, a
move that acknowledged
shopkeepers as well as fam-
ilies are having a hard time
meeting soaring local rents.
The community's harsh
questions of the project are
not likely to force the city to
live up to its orginal pledge,
but they do reveal how
shaky the setup is which
City Hall has established to
provide the low-cost family
housing. This "self-subsidy"
program, under which
leFrak will 'subsidize" its 40
low income apartments from
the higher rents of the rest
of the project, will last for
an unspecified period of
time. The city says the owner
is mandated to maintain
them at low cost for a mini-
mum of ten years or one-
half the life of the tax-
exempt city bonds which will
provide project financing.
Reach acknowledged that
it was within the city's power
to extend the apartment
subsidies through the life of
the building, but had opted
not to for fear of putting too
much financial pressure on
the developer. West Siders
took that to mean that, just
like the city's original low-
income promise, this one
too would be short-
lived.Or.l.
,
ASSOCIATION S
TEN PROUD YEARS
Ten years of neighborhood
advocacy and assistance
was celebrated last month
by the city's largest com-
munity coalition, the Associ-
ation for Neighborhood and
Housing Development. At a
dinner and dance on Janu-
ary 25th, over 400 people,
among them the resi-
dents,staff and board mem-
bers of the loc"al neighbor-
hood organizations as well
as state and city housing
officials and elected
representatives, joined the
Association in noting its
decade of achievement.
The Association was
founded in 1974 at a time
when local grassroots
organizations were sprout-
ing in virtually every city
neighborhood. Today, the
group has 36 member
groups. "Our greatest
achievement," the group's
executive director, Bonnie
Brower, told the gathering,
"has been creating unity out
of diversity and forging a
common agenda for neigh-
borhoods whose needs and
problems are as varied as
the people who live there."
In conjunction with its
anniversary, the Association
has published a 130-page
journal which includes a his-
tory of the organization,
reminiscences of its early
members and many pages
of greetings. Available for $1
postage, from ANHD, 424
West 33rd Street, NYC
10001. 0 T_R_
LEGISLATION
COMMUNITY HOUSING PROPQSED
A MAJOR INITIATIVE WInCH THE
National Low Income Housing Coali-
tion will be promoting this year in
Congress is the Community Based
Housing Supply Program. Developed
through a year-long grassroots process
culminating in the Second National
Low Income Housing Conference last
June, this proposal would:
Provide direct capital grants to
finance the acquisition, substantial re-
habilitation and new construction of
housing. At least 75 percent of the
units would be occupied by low in-
come persons at rents or carrying
charges not to exceed 25 percent of
income.
Direct funding through state and
local governments (with 25 percent of
the funds held back at the federal lev-
el for direct distribution) to be passed
through for development undertaken
by community-based nonprofit hous-
ing providers.
.Require that projects include
very substantial resident or neighbor-
hood control in developing, managing
and setting policy for the projects.
Provide funding for technical
and management assistance to com-
munity based nonprofits to carry out
the program.
This program is designed to pro-
vide funds to groups working to create
or preserve housing for low income
people which will be controlled by the
residents and community. Too often,
federal housing programs are more
valuable to their owners as tax "com-
modities" to be traded like so many
pork bellies than as a valuable commu-
nity resource providing necessary ser-
vices to households. One objective of
the Community Based Housing Sup-
ply program is to break this cycle.
Another program goal is to pro-
vide a source of funds for community
based housing providers. Current pro-
grams discriminate against such
groups, which often have smaller
projects than larger, commercially
sponsored developments, need exten-
sive seed money to maintain staff, and
seek to serve very low income consti-
tuencies. These needs can make it very
difficult to compete against well-
heeled and expensively staffed de-
velopment companies which are seek-
ing scarce federal and city funds for
their own projects. The Community
Based Housing Supply Program recog-
nizes these problems, and requires
funds to be used to support develop-
ment through community based non-
profit sponsors and developers.
Legislation is being developed in
response to this proposal by several
members of the House Banking Com-
mittee. O
For more information on the
proposal, contact Barry Zigas, Presi
dent, National Low Income Housing
Coalition, 323 Eighth Street, N.E.,
Washington, DC 20002, 202 544-2544.
Low Cost Insurance!!
LET Os DO A FREE EVAWATION OF
YOUR INSURANCE NEEDS
~ have been providing low-cost insurance programs and quality service
for HDFC's, TENANTS, COMMUNITY MANAGEMENT and other NONPROFIT
organizations for the past 8 years.
Our Coverages Include:
FIRE LIABILITY BONDS DIRECTORS' fa OFFICERS' UABIUTY
SPECIAL BUILDING PACKAGES
"Uberal Payment Terms"
306 FIFTH AVE.
NEW YORK, N.Y. 10001
(212) 279-8300
Ask f o ~ Jean Canbonari
PIPELINE
Low Income Co-ops' Taxing Problems
BY CINDY COLTER
and TOM ROBBINS
WHEN THE KOCH ADMINI-
stration tangled with the tenant-
managers of its owner-abandoned, tax-
foreclosed buildings in 1982 over what
price apartments should sell for as co-
ops, the fierce fight which ensued
resulted in a compromise. Henceforth,
the Board of Estimate voted, city-
owned apartments in low income areas
would still sell for $250 - the price the
city had originally promised and
tenants had demanded. But for those
apartments still in the sales pipeline
and assessed at over $2,000, a city tax
of 40 percent would be imposed on
subsequent resales over a 25-year peri-
od. The balance of the net profit was
to be split between the seller and the
co-op.
What the Board didn't decide,
however, was how that resale tax was
to be collected. Now, after several
months of debate between the housing
department, tenants and the technical
assistance groups which have aided
them, a tenative agreement has been
reached.
Koch's demand for higher sales
prices was viewed as a punitive meas-
ure, aimed at reclaiming some of the
city's investment in maintaining and
repairing the buildings. Tenants coun-
persuasively that the lion's share
of maintenance and repairs in build-
ings which the private sector had left
for dead had been theirs, and that
higher prices effectively shut them out'
of buildings they had struggled to re-
vive. Taxing apartment resales became
the administration's fall-back position.
Without such a tax, the warnings went,
tenants would speculate wildly with
apartments. Although eloquent tes-
timony was presented which pointed
out that the city imposed no such tax-
es or restrictions on public investments
made for corporations, the resale tax
stuck.
More Buildings Affected
The one consolation for tenants
and their supporters was that most
buildings were considered unlikely to
reach the valuation of $2 ,000 or more.
That comfort didn't last long, however.
Soon it was not just apartments on
Manhattan's Upper West Side, or in
Clinton or Chelsea which reached the
$2,000 threshold, but those in Brook-
lyn's battered Williamsburg neighbor-
hood and the South Bronx as well.
Tenant concerns increased when
the city disclosed how it intended to
collect the tax from the coo'Jerative
corporation. Initial proposed regula-
tions from the city's Division of Alter-
native Management would have made
the city the holder of all cooperative
shares and proprietary leases, as well
as assuming the power of attorney over
the co-ops. Tenants angrily responded
that such policies would make them
co-ops in name only, with the city
holding power and control, while resi-
dents were burdened with upkeep.
Working along with the Associa-
tion for Neighborhood Housing and
Development, the Urban Homestead-
ing Assistance Board and the Commu-
nity Development Legal Assistance
Center, tenants set out to draft their
own version of how the recapture rule
should work.
Tenative Provisions
Now, a set of terms acceptable to
both city and tenants has been tenta-
tively agreed upon. Among the provi-
sions are:
A first lien would be placed on all
co-op shares for the city, giving the
city the right to collect its debts be-
fore anyone else, even the co-op
itself.
The city would certify all sales of co-
op shares, and sellers and pur-
chasers would sign affidavits con-
firming the purchase price.
While the city had sought a share of
the profits from sublets as well,
tenants agreed that there should be
no subleasing profit.
If approved, these regulations
would cover the almost 500 buildings
currently in the sales for low
income cooperatives.
But even if the provisions are ap-
proved, the broader question posed by
the city's insistence on sharing in re-
sale profits remains.

z

!J
City Hall, 1982:
A .pecl,,1 city t". for low Income co-opers.
Measuring City Investment
Has the city, for instance, already
recaptured its investment in buildings
in the Tenant Interim Lease and Com-
munity Management buildings (the
two largest of the alternative manage-
ment programs)? And shouldn't any
funds the city claims from the resale of
those units go right back into the pro-
grams and the buildings?
If the city measures investment
only in dollars and cents, then the
more than $4,000,000 already received
in sales along with the taxes those co-
ops now pay have chipped away at the
monetary debt. But still more accurate
measurements are in hand: in build-
ings snatched out of the cycle of own-
er disinvestment, tax foreclosure and
auction, or in the infectious revitaliza-
tion which tenant-managed buildings
have brought to many blocks (a revitali-
zation which paradoxically threatens
the very tenants who bring it about) .
Based on performance, the highest in-
terest resale profits will earn is in the
buildings themselves. 0
Cindy Colter is director of training for
the Urban Homesteading Assistance
Board.
ORGANIZE
Out-Organizing the 'Mini-Landlords'
JUST PAST THE MAMMOTH WOOD-
side gas tanks where tie-ups on the
Long Island Expressway are immortal-
ized daily by radio traffic reports, for
much of 1982 and 1983 a beaming face
on a billboard announced to bored
motorists, "I'm a Landlord ... and I
Love It!"
That innovative sales pitch, which
ran in newspapers, magazines as well
as on the air for many months, spelled
trouble for tenants at the other end of
Queens in one of the borough's largest
two-story brick garden apartment com-
plexes. The sprawling 2',800-unit Glen
Oaks Village, which sits astride the
-Queens-Nassau County border beside
the Cross Island Exrressway, became
the subject of one 0 the city's biggest
cooperative conversions when owner
Gerald Gutterman filed to convert them
in 1981. It also became the site where
a new phenomenon in real estate
speculation was launched when Gut-
terman aimed his still occupied apart-
ments at individuals who would not
ordinarily invest in speculative
housing.
Gutterman's approach, as City
Limits described it in "The Story Be-
hind the Glen Oaks Sales Pitch" by Tim
Ledwith (February, 1983), was to lure
New Yorkers of modest means-like
the baker, the cab driver and the butler
featured in his prolific ads - to take on
occupied apartments in order to gain
a tax shelter and even some rental
income.
The campaign promised prob-
lems aplenty to Glen Oaks tenants, a
mostly lower middle income commu-
nity with many older residents who,
although they had seen their complex
decline in recent years as repairs went
untended, were unfamiliar with hand-
to-hand landlord-tenant combat,
much less a one-on-one between 2,800
tenants and an equal number of novice
owners. Most were longtime residents
and all were covered under rent
stabilization regulations. Many of
the 600 senior citizens were also
entitled to exemptions from the yearly
rent increases.
But within months of Gutterman's
co-op filing tenants had a series of
complaints ranging from building and
service neglect to harassment by out-
going and incoming owners.
One local realtor snatched up 30
occupied apartments and promptly
filed for hardship increases (a right
Glen Oak. Tenants Association'. P.nny LaFore.t:
Prolllding lin educlltlon fo, 'he new IlIndlord .
reserved for owners who have held
property at least three years). Another
new purchaser brought eviction
proceedings because the (sole) tenant
had wallpaper on the walls in techni-
cal violation of the lease; another cit-
ed a dining room being used as a
bedroom-also a violation. Tenants
charged that their new "mini-
landlords" neither sought nor received
any education about tenant rights and
owner responsibilities. The naive
ones, tenants said, didn't have any idea
what they were about; the clever
among them, however, with sponsor
encouragement, sought out loopholes
wherever they could be found. The
prize was a vacant apartment and a
possible market-level rent of $iOO per
month, while most of the Glen Oaks
tenants paid an average of $300 to $400.
With would-be buyers coming
and going constantly, "it was like a flea
market," recalled Penny laForest who
helped to form the Glen Oaks Tenant
Association in response.
Legal Turnaround
But now, in a surprising turn-
around following a successful rent
strike, three years of legal action and
the vigorous intervention of the state
Attorney General's office, the Glen
Oaks tenants have blunted Gutterman's
conversion drive. Some 855 units are
still unsold and 700 others still oc-
cupied by stabilized tenants. In-place
tenants have set some firm ground
rules on how both the new crop of non-
resident owners and Gutterman him-
self, who owns the remaining shares,
should behave. The 1,185 dues-paying
members of the tenants association
have won court decisions on how the
shares are to be marketed and orders
stipulating greater honesty in advertis-
ing (the attorney general's office
demanded a cautionary clause about
tenant rights be appended to the "land-
lord ... And I Love It!" ads, much like
warnings in cigarette advertising).
They also achieved an amnesty for sub-
leasing tenants, an eviction moratori-
um, as well as a schedule of repairs. To
date, the state housing division has
awarded over 150 rent reductions be-
cause of reduced services.
Tenants say that Gutterman has yet
to comply with many of the orders, but
the thrust of the harassment appears to
be largely over and the concerns of
many longtime residents quieted.
"It's hard to describe the kind of
fear which went through people,"
recalled Ida Pollack who has lived in
Glen Oaks for twenty years and pays
$300 per month for her apartment. Pol-
lack and her daughter, Penny laForest,
recount the three-year period preceed-
ing Gutterman's filiug of his co-op plan
when repairs went undone and many
neighbors left.
"We saw so many moving vans, we
knew it was time to get organizing,"
said laForest.
Picket at the Sales Office
The Glen Oaks tenants launched
their defense on two fronts. They began
a lengthy and successful rent strike
which amassed $1.1 million before it
was settled in June of 1982, and
brought rent overcharge and illegal
brokerage fee cases to court.
They also marched into the teeth
of Gutterman's sales drive, then at its
zenith. The group picketed the sales
office on Sundays - the big day for
home selling at Glen Oaks-for six
months, passing out flyers to prospec-
tive buyers describing repair problems
and structutal deficiencies. They held
up pictures of apartments in poor con-
dition and described the responsibil-
ities the would-be owners would be
obligated to should they buy occupied
apartments.
With vacant apartments selling for
prices from $60,000 to $90,000, and oc-
cupied units at 45 percent less, the
highly effective picket line took the
ball right out of the owner's hands. ~ n
raged, Gutterman filed an unsuccess-
ful $22 million lawsuit against the
tenant group for testraint of trade.
They also :made home visits.
"Every time someone called tip to make
an appdintment to see a tenant associ-
ation member's apartment for possible
purchase, we'd have a delegation wait-
ing to greet them when they showed
up," said Pollack. "We'd read them a list
of tenant rights and tell them what they
were entitled to in terms of rents. Ev-
ery one we've met has decided not to
buy:'
Tenant pressure was also brought
on the state attorney general's office
which is responsible for monitoring
co-op conversions. In response to the
massive number of harassment com-
plaints at Glen Oaks, Oliver Rosengart
of the office's conversion unit went out
to the complex to meet with tenants.
"Before we went there, things were
horrendous," recalled Rosengart.
"There was a constant effort on the part
of management to get people out." Ul-
timately, RQsengart's office issued an
injunction against illegal evictions and
nonpayment proceedings brought
against tenants before the eleventh of
the month. It also created an amnesty
for tenants who had become sub-
tenants before February, 1983 so that
"illegal" tenants "could come in out of
the cold," said Rosengart. In addition,
the attorney general ruled that oc-
cupied apartments could no longer be
shown as models and that information
on the rent regulations applying to the
apartments had to be included in the
advertising campaign.
Once mobilized, the tenants set
out to right some older wrongs as well.
They hired an attorney to bring a case
before the Conciliation and Appeal
Board over the mandatory brokers fees
which many had paid when they
moved in, to companies which actual-
ly were the owner operating under a
different name; a move which is ille-
gal in New York State. Attorney Ronald
J. Rosenberg won a major CAB ruling
in December, 1982 against the illegal
charges, and the right to reclaim the
fees. Rosenberg went on to win an es-
calating series of judicial opinions
against Gutterman as the owner sought
to avoid repayment. For the past year,
Rosenberg reports, Gutterman has
been in default of the order won
against him. Most recently, Acting
Supreme Court Judge David B. Saxe
labelled Gutterman's legal moves "a
bald attempt to retain illegally collect-
ed brokerage fees."
Meanwhile, Pollack and laForest
have become a kind of mother-
daughter speaking and training team,
travelling to other garden apartment
complexes to give help and advice to
tenants in similar straits.
"Gutterman does a lot of speaking
on conversion too," noted Pollack. "His
motto is 'Go in and turn it over quick:
He doesn't understand what went
wrong for him here. But we do.
"The purpose of a co-op is to
cooperatively own and manage your
home, not to have a piece of someone
else's home for your own profit:' she
added.OT.R.
CITY ENERGY
THE UNEQUAL SHARES OF ENERGY SAVINGS
BY MICHAEL BOBKER
THE STRUGGLE FOR OIL IN NEW
York City basements is heating up in
subtle ways. Oddly enough, most of us
are more familiar with international
events affecting oil supply than with
local policies and trends. We know that
the formation of OPEC in the early
1970s sharply increased prices, making
energy conservation a governmental
and personal issue. We know that the
long Iran-Iraq war again threatens the
availability of oil, despite a glut which
has held prices stable for the last two
years, causing recent production cur-
tailments by major producers. But lo-
cal strategies to save fuel-dollars get
less attention.
As the cost of oil has increased, so
too has the profit-incentive for reduc-
ing consumption, attracting a multi-
tude of organizations into the process
of conservation. Some of these organi-
zations are community-based, many of
which use federal and state weatheri-
zation funds to implement building
improvements without profit. But pri-
vate firms, too, have been increasingly
involved, with profit as their motive.
To make a profit such firms must over-
come their (potential) clients' reluc-
tance or inability to pay for
energy-conserving building improve-
ments. This barrier has led to the latest
rage in project financing: shared sav-
ings or performance contracting.
Taking the Risks and the Savings
The attractiveness of shared-
savings or performance contracting is
that the building owner (client) puts no
money up front. Instead, the technical
firm provides "turn-key" services-
assessing needs, savings-potential,
and costs and then going ahead with
improvements using its own (or a
third-party investor's) capital. Profits
come from a share in the energy-
savings, usually over five to eight years;
the lion's share of savings, up to 80 per-
cent, is kept by the energy company in
the first several years, gradually declin-
ing in the building owner's favor until
the end of the contract period when
any equipment installed can be pur-
chased at a depreciated price. The
energy company assumes the risk
involved - if savings are not achieved
the building owner pays no more than
a pre-determined base energy cost-
and also provides certain maintenance
and monitoring services.
Is this a case of actually getting
something for nothing, of the market
forces acting to benefit all concerned?
If it is, then sorely pressed low and
middle income housing should cer-
tainly take advantage of its benefits.
Over the last year the city's housing
department has decided that such
deals are too attractive to pass up. A
contract for a group of centrally-
managed city-owned buildings was
awarded to Benec Industries of New
York and another- complete with "no
one can lose" announcements in these
pages and those of the New York Times
Real Estate section - just for separate
"summer" water heaters was awarded to
Independent Water Heating of Ar-
monk, NY. Increase of such private-
sector awards for public-sector
management seems in the offing as
shrinking government budgets make
"creative financing" the name of the
game. But, as is repeatedly the case in
public policy decisions, the most im-
portant question for analysis is not "are
there benefits?" but "Who benefits?"
To answer this question a basic
principle of energy conservation must
be understood: the first savings are t I ~ e
easiest to achieve and deeper savings
z
z
~
~
z
Q
require progressively higher invest-
ment per gallon to be saved. The iron-
ic corollary ofthis principle is that the
worse the building conditions, the eas-
ier and less expensive are the first sav-
ings. For example, for a building with
loose, broken windows and a dirty,
soot-filled boiler, substantial savings
will be realized by basic repairs and
milintenance and some inexpensive
weatherstripping. Therefore, since the
shared-savings contractor's goal is to
maximize the ratio of savings to invest-
ment (as opposed to saving as much as
might be possible in the building), the
most deteriorated occupied buildings
in the city's inventory are the most at-
tractive targets.
Further, shared-savings "deals"
typically require that the "measures"
implemented (work performed in a
building) have three-year or better
"paybacks" (costs divided by savings)
to ensure adequate profits. Thus, major
system replacements (e.g. - replace-
ment windows, new boilers) are not
normally performed even if everyone
knows that such work will be required
in the foreseeable future. Here is a
major divergence in the interests of the
contractor and the building residents:
the contractor's interests are short-term
while the residents' interests are long-
term. In effect, the city is "contracting-
out" the maintenance it and previous
owners have deferred and, apparently,
cannot adequately provide.
Shifting the Burden
A second basic principle of the
situation is financial : the centrally
managed In Rem buildings are a
revenue/expense balance in the city
budget, specifically the operating
budget. A portion of fuel expense, nor-
mally paid for out of city revenues, is
displaced by the use of expensive pri-
vate capital (a three-year payback
equals a 33 percent annual dlturn-on-
investment) . Money saved in a build-
ing is not necessarily recycled back to
it or even to any other housing - it be-
comes just another set of figures in
budget-balancing. Thus, through
shared-savings contracts, the city and
the contractor can easily become part-
ners in a new, improved method of
"milking" poor housing.
Having confirmed our suspicion
of all strangers bearing gifts, are shared

opposed? Not necessarily. There is
nothing wrong with saving energy and
money in a building or even paying
someone to do it . Shared-savings
financing is a tool which can be used
either well or poorly. Like any other
tool it is appropriate in certain situa-
tions and with certain restrictions.
Make It Work
First, if these arrangements are to
be part of "housing policy" and not just
"budget balancing," the savings should
be separately accounted and form the
basis of a fund for later capital im-
provements. Use of such a fund could
be coordinated with other finance
tools such as the weatherization pro-
gram, Article SA loans, New York State
Energy Office loan subsidies and the
like.
Second, such contracts should not
be used until other, direct means of ser-
vice by the city have been exhausted.
The risks and complicated nature of
the shared-savings transaction make it
a very expensive mechanism, although
the costs are hidden in the future value
of oil not used. Such arrangements
should not be allowed to substitute for
finding more direct and cost-effective
ways of providing energy-conserving
maintenance to its properties and
should not be used as a way of avoid-
ing the clear fact of major building sys-
tem deterioration which underlies
present high energy-use rates.
Third, shared-savings contractors
should be required to install a set dol-
lar percentage of major capital im-
provements so that the value of the
work done is not zero by the end of the
contract period. Similarly, contractors
should be required to train building
operators thoroughly so that monitor-
ing and maintenance functions do not
disappear when the contract ends.
Early in the development of
shared-savings contracts, the Internal
Revenue Service cited several firms for
inflating the value of-measures in-
stalled to increase the tax-shelters
available. Let the City of New York be
aware that the vendor of a service is
almost always in an advantageous po-
sition vis-a-vis the purchase and that
the city represents the interests of thou-
sands of tenants in its properties. Use
this tool, yes, but consider it carefully
in light of a comprehensive housing
policy. 0
Michael Bobker has worked with many
low income housing groups on energy
conservation. He currently works with
a private energy consultation
company.
Put the
community
housing
profeSSionals
to work for you
Richards and Fenniman, Inc., specialists in
insuring tenant and community groups all over
New York City, has some new and innovative
ways of helping you reach your housing goals.
For over 10 years we 've been committed to
helping community housing groups like yours
evaluate their special needs and requirements
and get the best insurance financing available
at the best prices.
For more information about how our new
programs can help your group call:
Ingrid Kaminski, Account Executive
(212) 2678080
Richards and Fennlman, Inc.
156 William Street, New York, New York 10038
Your community housing insurance professionals
CITY VIEWS
The Housing Fund Story the Times Didn't Tell
BY TOM ROBBINS
IN A FRONT PAGE EXPOSE WHICH
caught both city housing officials and
community development groups by
surprise, the New York Times launched
a late December broadside aimed at the
mismanagement of a little-known city
funding program.
The Times' target was a fund
which tapped just a small portion of .
the immense profits generated by the
now defunct federal Section 8 low in-
come housing production program
and which sought to channel it back to
other community projects. But while
Times reporter Marcia Chambers' reve-
lations of funds misused by a number
of local nonprofit organizations mere-
ly winged both those groups and the
housing department, the chief victims
were the dozens of legitimate organi-
zations which have toiled for years to
wrest some of the profit from usually
hit-and-run developers and sow it back
into their battered neighborhoods.
The Times article tarred these
groups with the same brush it used on
a number of community "sponsors"
who absconded with or misused
funds, leaving none of the promised
improvements behind. Times readers
were left with the inescapable impres-
sion that virtually all community
groups had practiced such scams. One
of the readers, a stunned Mayor Ed
Koch, turned reality on its head by
proclaiming, "We're not going to allow
people to rip off developers."
Totally absent from the article was
any recounting of the indispensable
spade work which preceeded many
projects, or the constructive applica-
tions groups have made with proceeds
from the program - from seed money
and cost reductions in other housing
projects to simply creating communi-
ty rooms where there would otherwise
be no facilities.
Absent too was any spotlight on
the strangely still unpunished default
by 30 participating developers who,
having pledged their contributions
and collected their profit, have so far
shortchanged the fund, the city and
community groups over $1.6 million.
Caught Napping
But in spite of its narrow and dis- .
torted perspective, the Times did catch
HPD napping. Program monitoring
was minimal. in some cases nonexis-
tent; fund supervision was slack. The
agency did not have a clear idea of how
much money it had or was supposed
to have.
Sleepy-eyed too were watchdogs
such as this publication which last
wrote about the program in 1981 (Com-
munity Group Profit Sharing, January,
1981, by Susan Baldwin). That article
cited both the haphazard manner in
which developer-community partner-
ships were being created, as well as the
restrictiveness of city regulations on
how that funding could be spent. In
the intervening four years, numerous
projects began construction and funds
generated; until the Times report,
however, no one was watching.
Briefly, the facts are these:
A combination of accelerated tax
depreciation, a deep and guaran-
teed rent subsidy and federal mort-
gage insurance made Section 8
housing an attractive and lucrative
investment. Most profitable was the
sale of the tax shelter which the
project represented to investors in
the fifty percent tax bracket. Typi-
cally, tax syndications were worth
25 percent of the project's mortgage.
In 1979 New York City landed 5,000
Section 8 subsidies under HUD's
then-new "targeted"Neighborhood
Strategy Areas program. While
HUD insisted that developers link
up with local nonprofit communi-
ty group sponsors, the city took this
a step further. The Dept. of Housing
Preservation and Development man-
dated that developers share a por-
tion of the proceeds from the sale of
the tax shelter with these nonprofit
"sponsors." The groups. who would
earn 2.75 percent of the mortgage
(this was later raised to 3 percent).
had to spend at least 80 percent of
the funds on physical community
improvements.
Despite the regulations. most
groups never signed agreements
with the city on disbursal of the
funds. and the city set up escrow ac-
counts into which developers were
to make payments pending ap-
proved spending plans by the spon-
sors. Developers too were prone to be
late with payments. and some none
at all.
Program's Origins
Well before the city's NSA wind-
fall (the 5.000 units represented an
astonishing 25 percent of the national
allocation) sophisticated neighborhood
development groups had struck deals
with developers to be paid set amount
of funds in exchange for work on the
project.
Frequently these groups initiated
the original project plan. won the set-
aside of subsidies. identified the site
commissioned architectural plans.
and negotiated with developers.
government agencies. lenders and con-
tractors. While projects wended their
way through seemingly interminable
HUD processing. groups took it on the
chin from justifiably impatient locals;
to the groups also fell bureaucratic
tasks such as making sure an over-
zealous buildings department didn't
demolish structures slated for rehabili-
tation. Many community groups also
resolved early 01"\ that. once built. their
new housing would not slip back into
mismanagement and decided to learn
how to run the buildings themselves.
The reasons the city decided to
make these informal deals mandatory
are not totally clear; certainly more was
at work than what the Times reported.
that officials were simply trying .to
short-circuit ongoing developer
payoffs to speed approval of their
projects. In the wake of the Times arti-
cle. Commissioner Tony Gliedman
told City Umits that the purpose of the
syndication sharing was to bring some
of the Section 8 profits beyond just
those technically proficient communi-
ty organizations.
But there was a major difference
after the city announced its regulation.
Instead of community organizations
chasing down developers. the NSA
sponsorship arrangement made de-
velopers the pursuers. Logically. these
businessmen did not seek out groups
which had honed their housing de-
velopment skills or even shown or-
ganizing capability. Instead they
sought out those malleable organiza-
tions least likely to meddle with ar-
chitectural drawings. ask troublesome
questions about local hiring or push
for minority contractors. Many of the
NSA Section 8 partnerships paired in-
experienced. incapable but political-
ly connected groups with developers.
, - LL.LLL
; ILL Ll..l
! I L..L.. LLL
, L L.I..LL
II II
\ I II I
\ \ I)
I t I I I
" \ I! )
Ii i :
: 1(' \
L LI..LL
L L. L \..l
L lolL L
L l LLL
L LLLL
I L'- LL.1.
L. L.L.I.L.
L L (. L.1..
L Ll.\..L.
( I II
\ I I I I
I
Little wonder that when plans for
syndication expenditures got turned
back for rewriting by HPD. or when de-
velopers balked at making promised
payments. that groups were poorly
poised to respond. Nor should it have
been surprising to the housing depart-
ment when some of these same part-
ners walked off with payments
illegally provided by developers.
How Groups Spent Funds
By the time a newspaper reporter
came to look. there were numerous ex-
amples of groups. some of which had
existed little but on paper at the time
of their "sponsorship" designation.
r""'-" . '!.. __
'"',....... .
- - . .;J
r , <. .,.
r r r'
r
r r
I I
rrr :;.. . \
rr I
rr ( \ = " I
,.. CITY LIMITS February 1985
which had failed to come through. But
there were far more numerous exam-
ples of groups which had made suc-
cessful and creative use of the added
funding. Somehow, the Times never
contacted them.
Had it looked, it would have
fo.und how, on Manhattan's Upper West
Side, the Manhattan Valley Develop-
ment Corporation took its proceeds
from three syndications and turned it
back to the city in order to reduce the
cost of moderate income townhouses,
bringing price tags down by more than
$14,000 each. Or, it would have seen
the buildings which Banana-Kelly
Community Improvement in the Bronx
turned from abandoned shells into
new, warm and affordable apartments
for its low income neighbors, using
only moderate rehabilitation funds
and its syndication proceeds as finan-
cial leverage.
There were many other, easily
locatable, stories of both the travails of
community groups relying on Section
8 funding and how funds were finally
spent.
East Harlem's Hope Community
decided in 1977 to concentrate its ef-
forts on getting rehab funds for a block
on East 103rd Street. Seven years, five
developers later (during which time
Hope workers literally pulled the
scaffolding from one building to block
its demolition), the group finally broke
ground for a project only one-half the
original scope last summer. Director
George Calvert said Hope won't know
how much it will receive out of the de-
veloper's syndication proceeds until
after other costs, such as relocation and
site acquisition costs, are deducted.
Bob Blank, who heads the Flat-
bush Development Corporation in
Brooklyn, said his nonprofit group not
only chose the buildings, won the sub-
sidies and ran through three different
development teams before it could pin
one down willing to take on its
projects, it also drafted the city's
proposal to have Flatbush made an
NSA. Last year, Blank's group took its
first payment of syndication proceeds
and plowed part of it into a sweat eq-
uity homesteading project and the rest
into two apartment buildings whose
moderate rehabilitation the group is
battling to keep affordable to tenants.
Los Sures, in south Williamsburg
in Brooklyn, took the nearly $200,000
it eventually received from two Section
8 gut rehab projects and, through us-
ing it in combination with other fund-
ing sources, made it worth five times
that amount. Former director Doug
Moritz explained how the group in-
jected nearly half the funds into the
management company the organiza-
tion has spun off which in turn raised
funds through management contracts;
some money went into a no-interest
loan to sweat equity homesteaders on
South 3rd Street. Los Sures also
grabbed the Section 8 opportunity to
launch its own construction company.
Interviews with these groups
might also have led to a very different
take on what constituted neighbor-
hood improvements. For while the
Times bought HPD's ' description of
fund uses which were not for physical
improvements as merely "self-
perpetuation:' community organizers
know beUer. The scramble to locate
sources to keep tenant organizers in
buildings, to staff phones and pay the
rent is the most difficult of fundraising
tasks, one that the city's restriction on
the use of syndication funds for "hard"
costs makes even tougher.
Taking the Wrong Picture
Ironically, when the Times article
did pause to acknowledge communi-
ty improvements, it chose a project that
occurred in spite of the syndication
sharing program, not because of it. The
article's accompanying photograph of
a playground on Decatur Avenue off of
Fordham Road in the Bronx alleged to
show how the builder of the adjacent
Section 8 project, in conjunction with
the community sponsor, had aided the
community. But the community spon-
sor of that project, the West Bronx
Housing and Neighborhood Resource
Center, selected its targeted buildings
for the NSA only days before the NSA
submission deadline and at the behest
of a developer, the Center for Housing
Partnerships. Even though the build-
ings were occupied, the community
group made no attempt to inform the
tenants, assuming the city would take
care of it.
Instead, the owner, once offered a
hefty option on his properties, took
care of it for them by walking away,
leaving services on a catch-as-catch-
can basis and waiting for the tenants to
run. They would have, hadlt not been
for the intervention of another group,
the Fordham-Bedford Coalition.
Without funds to do so, the Coalition
organized the tenants, embarassed the
developer in the press, and got the city
to push for interim repairs and relo-
cation.
Upon the project's completion,
the Coalition waited for the developer
to make good on a promise to build a
playground. He didn't and the Coali-
tion once again pressured the city. Fed
up as well, Commissioner Gliedman
told the developer he would be visit-
ing the site in the summer and expect-
ed to see a finished playground when
he did. The playground opened last
August.
Developer Defaults
Curiously, the Times altogether
avoided scrutiny of the developers who
have failed to pay into the fund. In its
report, HPD cited 30 different projects
currently in default totalling $1.6 mil-
lion. Several developers have default-
ed on more than one project. Henry
Roth, a developer convicted of tenant
harassment at buildings on 42nd Street
and in Brooklyn's Borough Park, with
his partners owes a total of $270,605 to
the fund on five projects.
Former housing department assis-
tant commissioner John Skelly, who
turned Section 8 developer immediate-
ly after leaving the agency, owes
$246,518 on four projects. Even though
HPD regulations call on its units not to
do business with developers who have
defaulted, part of Skelly'S development
team got a special dispensation from.
the rule, a move Commissioner Glied-
man now acknowledges to have been
a mistake.
The agency has brought litigation
against just one developer, Norman
Rappaport, who owes the city $124,969
plus interest on his sole Harlem
project. It says legal moves are being
contemplated against several other de-
velopers now as well.
Developers Roth, Skelly and Rap-
paport, along with former city Hous-
ing Authority chairman and last year's
Queens Congressional candidate
Simeon Golar, have defaults stretching
back to their first payments in 1981. De-
veloper Sylvester Leaks, a former
Crown Heights Democratic District
Leader and close associate of former
state senator Vander Beatty who was
j
1
convicted of perjury and vote fraud last
year, is also in default although he de- .
nied to City Limits that he had any Sec-
tion 8 projects where he owed funds.
According to HPD, Leaks owes $34,866
plus interest in missed payments since
1981.
Gliedman said that his agency had
been slow to move on suing to get de-
veloper funds because many projects
involve private buildings, as opposed
to formerly in rem projects, where the
city has far more legal leverage. He says
the city is now trying to create "a judi-
cial climate" conducive to ruling
against defaulting developers.
The Wrong Perspective
Certainly the Times did not have
to look much further than it had al-
ready to discover both the positive side
of community uses of Section 8 syndi-
cation proceeds or the housing depart-
ment's equally passive treatment of
developers who welshed on their com-
mitments. Indeed, some of the same
developers participating in the NSA al-
ready had default records in their earli-
er private commitments to community
groups.
Nor would it have taken much
more effort to find groups such as the
Parkway-Stuyvesant Housing Council
in Crown Heights which had to close
its doors on tenants needing services
for three months last year because it
lacked the funds to stay open, while
over $300,000 in developer contribu-
tions ultimately targeted to the group
languished in HPD's escrow account.
Or the Coalition of Hamilton Heights
Tenants Associations in Harlem which
shut down permanently after de-
velopers failed to corne through with
the promised funding, leaving the par-
ticipants of a sweat equity project
which was supposed to get a portion
of the funds hanging in the wind.
"They'll be saying now, 'It's back to
the bad old days: lamented Flatbush
Development's Bob Blank. "The word
will be, 'See, you can't trust the groups."
That's a perspective neither the city
housing department's enforcement of
its own program, nor the city's most
prestigious newspaper have done
much to correct. 0

< Futterman. lAwl$
Roth. Hen",
a,-.>. Cyril
ttoth. Henry
RDth. Henfy
Roth. Henfy

'I'oub. MogcIct

$ch ........ Scott
Duk .... Carl (dfb/ a
Wingate Dvlpmt, Corp.)

0eIgQda. lIuben
$kelly, John
SuIllan. Ke<!in ( ..... of)
Wlitich. IIoben
(Same 0$ cabaw.)
(Same 0$ abooie. pI"s:)
Barba. George GIld John
CoKei. John and Vincent
llino. Sal (d/b/a Tri.oty Corp.}
Stock. ShImsan
:i!>'
"-' of 0eI...at 10"'"
(5eft .... .,.,. 0.10)
$041,000 (IO/ 83)
171,9....
28.163
'$' (SI SA)
.:t.
28.252 (9/ 83)
11.691 (t2/ IM)
35,1 .... (8/ 83)
SU09 (10/ 111 )
82.276 (11/ 81)
itt
"

:c:<:,

:<.:
14,658 'to (9/ IMI

86.827
55.CWS
53,365
51.281
lAl,510
j12181)
(11/ 811
Jt. .,(2; 112} .:
(4/"')
*. (111M)
(to'/ 81)
(6f 82)
(12/ 82)
(1l / 82)

(9/ 111)
1
,
FEATURE
T
here's a whole lot of change
going on these days in Long
Beach, a city on Long Island's
south shore. In just the past two years,
it has received such a massive face lift
that some of its own residents scarce-
ly recognize the place. A monster
shopping plaza, anchored by Waldba-
urns, now greets you as you drive down
the main street into the heart of town.
The Long Island Railroad station is be-
ing restored to its former splendor and
a Burger King recently opened on the
commercial strip-a sure indicator
that Long Beach is on the upswing.
Dubbed the long Beach renaissance by
city officials, the rapid development
underway in this beachfront commu-
nity may be the greatest thing since
home video recorders hit the market.
Or it may be one of the slickest real es-
tate scams around that's displacing
people left and right with the sensitiv-
ity of a bulldozer. It depends on whom
you talk to.
long Beach is a unique city situ-
ated on a huge sand bar that encom-
passes the wealthy Nassau County
communities of Atlantic Beach to the
west and Lido to the east. A three-mile
boardwalk faithfully follows the
beachfront to the south linking the
well developed East End, with its
predominantly single family, middle
class homes, and the West End. There,
past New York Avenue, is a colony of
small bungalows, most converted to
year-round use for their working class
owners. To the north, on the bay side
and behind city hall, lies North Park
where long Beach's black population
lives in several housing developments.
For a small city, long Beach has many,
varied components.
By the Sea
The beach dominates and dictates
long Beach's destiny and has since it
was founded at the turn of the century
by Senator William Reynolds as a sum-
mer playground for the rich and fa-
mous. Valentino, Flo Ziegfield,
Diamond Jim Brady, Gloria
Swanson - they all frolicked at the sea-
side resort many thought one of the
world's most beautiful. In fact for de-
cades, long Beach's reputation held
fast until the 1960s rolled around and
. suddenly air travel made Puerto Rico
and the Bahamas exciting and afford-
able alternatives to long Beach or At-
LONG BEACH'S
WAR ON POVERTY
BY ANNETIE FUENTES
lantic City. From the mid-60s to 1979,
long Beach was a city on the skids.
Tourism plummeted and with it the ci-
ty's economic base. The grand hotels
and gracious guest houses in the
oceanfront area experienced high
vacancy rates and their owners scout-
ed around for a solution.
What they found were two groups
of people who could be attracted to a
low rent city and more important, were
financially exploitable while making
few demands on either the owners or
the city government. Senior citizens,
many of whom used to vacation on the
city's sunny shores, came there to re-
tire on fixed but steady incomes. But
the most I ucrati ve sector of that popu-
1ation was the bedridden elderly who
required some care. Seeing a great
need for nursing homes in Nassau
County, hotel owners converted their
buildings to "adult homes" and took in
thousands of people, a large chunk of
them on public assistance and sent by
the county's department of social ser-
vices. By 1977, long Beach had 86 per-
cent of all the county's beds in adult
homes while the elderly made up one-
third of the city's population. Twenty
homes were reaping $4 million a year
in profits for their owners.
The other group that moved into
long Beach was sent by the state when
it began its deinstitutionalization of
mental patients in the mid-70s. The
once threatened hotel and boarding
house owners thrived from the subsi-
dies paid by the state to maintain ex-
patients in what increasingly became
abominable conditions. Most long
Beach residents can recall stories of
mental patients wandering the streets,
unattended, unclothed until the local
police would return them to a home
that was usually worth escaping from.
The Paradise, the lla Manor and the Ro-
yale Manor were such places, operat-
ed by an owner who was finally
convicted of endangering the health
and welfare of residents through
numerous building and fire code vio-
lations. In 1978, there were as many as
2,000 former mental patients housed
in legal and unlicensed homes, often
alongside elderly people with health
problems who could not afford better
arrangements.
Low Rent City
Other things were happening in
long Beach that made many long time
residents uncomfortable. And ner-
vous. They saw the county directing
many welfare clients to the cheap ren-
tals of long Beach and called it dump-
ing of yet another dependent
population on their city. Minorities
grew as a percentage of residents, too,
reaching 13 percent in 1981. Blacks
comprise a tenth of all people there
and Hispanics a growing number - up
to V percent. From Puerto Rico, the
Dominican Republic and Central
America, these residents have brought
a culture and language that is very
different and perhaps incomprehensi-
ble to Long Beach's affluent white
homeowners. For despite the growth of
low income and elderly groups, the
average income in long Beach still ex-
ceeds 92 percent of the county average,
according to a city study, indicating
substantial affluence. These subur-
banites watched from the East and West
Ends as blacks were installed in pub-
T
he tides have turned in this seaside city
as investors pour in and condominium
development booms. But one person's boom
is another's bust in Long Beach where official
policy is survivial-of-the-richest and low in-
come people are being squeezed out.
The Broad_y Manor:
Angry t.nflnt. hung th.l, Iflndlonl/n .ffigy Dec_b.r 19.3.
February 1915 OTY LIMITS 17
lie housing projects at Channel Park
and as low income people of all races
filled rooms in rundown boarding
houses and hotels which slumlords
milked and neglected. Many middle
class residents near the ocean front got
out when the going got rough, taking
whatever they could get for their
homes in a quickly depressed market.
"The city was dying," says Glen
Spiritis, deputy city manager and
director of planning and management.
"We were bankrupt.-and couldn't pro-
vide services to anyone. It wasn't safe
to walk down the central business
district:'
City manager Edwin Eaton, who
has spent 30 years in Long Beach has
equally dismal memories about the ci-
ty's recent past. "A community that was
prosperous and middle class sudden-
ly had a large welfare population. Peo-
ple that were a drain on the
community. Once in a while someone
would go to the sixth floor of a build-
ing and do a swan dive. And John John-
son from Channel 7 would come down
here to do a story."
City Council member Ira Thpper
was succinct and graphic in his anal-
ysis, given to a local paper last Decem-
ber: "Four years ago, the downtown of
Long Beach looked like part of the
South Bronx." Hannah Kamanoff, for
12 years the city representative on the
Nassau County Board of Supervisors
spelled out her views, "For years, Long
Beach has been plagued by an over
abundance of welfare families."
A Developer's HaveD
But all the indignation and civic
concern in the world was not enough
to change the course of events. An in-
flationary economy throughout the
19'iUs had put a halt to new construc-
tion in the oceanfront area, property
values were depressed and mortgages
were difficult to obtain. Only when
market conditions began to improve by
1W9 with interest rates falling and in-
flation subsiding did the condition fOr
change become ripe. Slowly, young
couples, the "yuppies" as Eaton labels
them, started to filter into Long Beach.
Sixteen room mansions sold for
$50,000. The city provided loans for
homesteading for 75 federally fore-
closed homes from 1W9 and the seeds
of the Long Beach renaissance were
sown. Manhattan developer Michael
"Long Beach has paid its dues. For 20 years we were dumping
ground for every state agency."
Lazar has a summer house in Lido and
"saw the movement back to develop-
ment and stability four years ago." He .
likes the changes and as the new own-
er and developer of the historic
Promenade Hotel, Lazar, a fomer New
York City Councilman and Lindsay
aide, is now part of that process.
"People are coming in with a mind
to enjoy the fruits of the area. Gentrifi-
cation is a poor word to use. Its really
upscaling the community. Long Beach
has paid its dues:' he asserts. "For 20
years we were the dumping ground for
every state agency." .
The Paracll .. Manor:
Shortly before Lazar purchased
the Promenade, over 100 residents
there were evicted, according to Mary
Ellen Klein of Nassau-Suffolk Legal
Services. The majority were ex-mental
patients and were placed by social ser-
vices outside the city. Long Beach offi-
cials sought a $3 million Urban
Development Action Grant to assist La-
zar in turning the Promenade into lux-
ury condominiums. But despite UDAG
requirements City planner Spiritis re-
fused to relocate residents within the
area or do an impact study of the de-
velopment on the low income commu-
nity, Klein reports. The UDAG
application is still pending.
Dfwe/oper Arnold Simon will conlfert the former adult home to luxury condos.
But even a friendly development
climate, and an official desire to bring
in affluent residents was not sufficient
to shift Long Beach's expansion into
high gear. Long Beach needed a
government ready, willing and able to
promote gentrification as the best hope
for the city. In 1979, heavily Democrat-
ic Long Beach elected a coalition city
council for the first time with lawyer
Bruce Bergman endorsed by both
major parties. Ira Tepper, Pearl Weill,
Harvey Wisenberg and Kevin Braddish
were also elected. Bergman's developer
connections were exposed during the
campaign when a Long Beach paper
reprinted a letter he and his partner
sent to local realtors soliciting proper-
ties for purchase by a consortium of in-
vestors with $1 million to sink into the
city. He got electedatiYway.
The Master Plan
One of the council's first impor-
tant steps was to commission Tischler,
Montasser and Associates of Washing-
ton nc. to do an economic and market
analysis of the city in 1979. The find-
ings were incorporated into the Com-
prehensive Plan for Long Beach,
prepared by Paul Tischler the follow-
ing year. The plan is soon to be adopt-
ed by the city council with few
changes. At the same time, the coun-
cil adopted a whole new zoning code
that lifted a 15-year moratorium on
high rise construction along the board-
walk, created 16 special zones
throughout the city, restricted hi-rises
from the West End and opened the
door for development of 28 vacant and
29 underutilized acres, primarily near
the oceanfront. The Tischler analysis
notes "the new [zoning] regulations are
expected to make development of new
condominiums economically attrac-
tive to the private sector."
The Master Plan, as it is not so
fondly referred to by many, calls for the
construction of 3-4,000 condominium
units along the oceanfront with sever-
al hundred rehabs of vacant units as
well as new apartments or townhouses
near the central business district. The
targeted market is "the young profes-
sionals and middle aged couples with
no children."
To facilitate this kind of develop-
ment, the council began an aggressive
policy of acquiring and demolishing
deteriorated properties. In the past four
years, $350,000 in federal funds were
budgeted for that purpose. Zoning var-
iances were given freely to developers
who lacked the required amount of
parking space and properties were
auctioned off in a process that was
often already prearranged before any
bids were made. The Promenade got a
parking variance as well as one for
mixed, commercial-residential use,
just so it could qualify for a federal
UDAG. One thousand rental units were
lost on the boardwalk since the late
1960s.
Adult homes, anomalies in a peri-
od of condo fever, were all but elimi-
nated as unlicensed ones were closed
down and the state forced to divert its
mental patients elsewhere by the end
of the 70s. Illegal multiple dwellings
and even rent stabilized apartment
buildings where low income people
have found shelter in the exorbitant
and scarce Long Island rental market,
are now the focus of concern. How
does a city go about evicting a segment
of its population?
It's pretty easy, actually. As a city,

,
Long Beach's rent stabilization is deter-
mined by the city council, unlike
towns in Nassau County which follow
the county's Rent Guidelines Board
rules. "In Long Beach, buildings with
10n units and up were covered under
rent stabilization until 1979 when it
went down to 60 units:' says Jeanne
Kippel, Housing Commissioner in
Great Neck, President of the Nassau
Tenants Association and recently ap-
pointed member of a state advisory
council. "Everything under 60 units is
deliberately not under control because
they'd like to empty and develop them
as condominiums:' City manager Ed-
win Eaton confirms that theory when
asked why the council hasn't enacted
stabilization to protect the majority
with rent stabilization." We feel we
have more than our share of low in-
come people living in Long Beach.
And we don't want to propagate it."
In a city where almost two thirds
of households are renters and only 19
percent of all people live in rent stabi-
lized buildings, the lack of protection
is tantamount to open season on the
poor and those just keeping their
heads above water. In the four federal-
ly funded buildings for seniors and a
lOB-unit family housing complex, the
vacancy rate is zero, and there's a four-
year wait in senior housing.
"It's a renaissance of unbelievable
proportions," says Alan Meisel, the fed-
eral. Commissioner of the Long Beach
Housing Authority, "and it will be
eliminating low income people:' Of
people living in the buildings he ad-
ministers, most are working people.
Maybe ten percent of the families are
on welfare and very few of the seniors,
he says. Obviously there's no room in
public housing for people bumped by
condo fever .
Rents in the rest of the city in con-
verted one- and two-family houses in
the West End and the canal area of the
East End have doubled and trebled in
a giddy climate that says anything
goes. As Eaton explains, "Suddenly the
area is revitalized. Rents that were $250
for a five-room apartment are now'
$550. Suddenly the person on a mar-
ginal income or public assistance can't
afford it. That person:' he concludes,
"can't afford to live in the city of Long
Beach any longer. So that person
moves out."
"Four years ago, the downtown of Long Beach looked like the
South Bronx."
Tenants Take A Stand
Or that person gets very disturbed,
then angry and decides that somehow
the Long Beach renaissance just' isn't
what its cracked up to be. Sure the nice
new paved main road - Park Avenue-
and its revitalized commercial strip are
attractive, but the landlord hasn't done
repairs in six months and wants to jack
the price up $150 a month while the ci-
ty's building department turns a blind
eye. And all those nice townhouses on
Broadway are beautiful, but who has
$160,000 (last year they were going for
$100,000)1 It's also wonderful the city
finally foreclosed on the notorious
drug haven, the old Granada Towers,
and has sold it to a development con-
sortium for $375,000 in back taxes. The
city even saw to it that the Granada got
federal designation as a historic land-
mark and with it a package of tax in-
centives for the owners. But one
bedrooms there are going for '$61,000
or $750 a month to rent.
Joan Donnelly is the kind of per-
son who picks up on such ironies of
life that lately are a daily occurence in
Long Beach. A renaissance implies a
fresh burst oflife, growth and prosperi-
ty, bu t for her and thousands of other
Long Beach residents, the city's resur-
gence means hardship, dislocation
and for some, homelessness. She got
her first apartment in Long Beach four
years ago and immediately tangled
with her landlord and an un-
scrupulous broker both of whom tried
to overcharge her. Soon after her un-
savory experience she was inspired to
form the Long Beach Tenants Associa-
tion, the only citywide organization to
address the needs of those not benefit-
ing from the Long Beach miracle.
Vic Scutari, owner of a bookshop
and chair of the city's Mental Health
Review Board, is an ally of Donnelly
and critic of city policies. "A lot of the
wealthy people in this city sold to the
slumlords in the 70s. Others made
money off ex-mental patients. Now
they want to make money off the gen-
try." He sees a desperate need for ren-
tal housing at all levels, a strict
enforcement of building code viola-
tions and rent stabilization to protect
most tenants.
At Circulo de la Hispanidad, the
main advocacy organization for Long
Beach's Latino residents, Gil Bernardi-
no concurs with his fellow members of
the tenants association. "Many of our
people live in 15-20 unit buildings
where rent stabilization doesn't apply;
he said. "In fact , most of the rent stabi-
lized units are in a handful of well-
maintained buildings on Shore Road,
where tenants are seniors with stable
incomes. But there are rent stabilized
buildings that the city will try to close.
Four to six of them are on Broadway,
opposite empty lots where a developer
has plans to build condos. How they
will displace resident,<; will be to allow
violations to continue without enforc-
ing codes. In general, the city has not
been enforcing building codes for the
last five years."
While the creation of the Tenants
Association signals a growing cons-
ciousness among low income resi-
dents of the underside of Long Beach's
revitalization, it wasn't until November
1, 19B4 when a fire hit the rent stabi-
lized Prince Edward that things really
started to heat up.
The Prince Edward
Nothing grabbed the spotlight and
focused it on the plight of Long Beach's
dispossessed like the fire at 101 Nation-
al Blvd. It killed a year old child and
left 300 people, the majority Hispan-
ics, homeless while the city stood by
indifferently and county agencies
moved in slow motion to place some of
the victims in a variety of accommoda-
tions outside the city. Six days after the
disaster, close to half of the Prince Ed-
ward's residents were still without per-
manent shelter. "I drove down to the
boardwalk after the fire and found peo-
ple huddled together, wrapped in plas-
tic garbage bags," says Lucy Centeno, a
member of the tenants association. She
picked up many victims and helped
them find shelter. One woman and her
child slept in Centends car.
Finding immediate housing was
only the first challenge facing the
tenants. Although fire damage was res-
tricted to three or four apartments on
the second floor, the city's Building
Commissioner, Pratap Narsu, ordered
it closed until the owner, Sigmund
Rawicki, completes repairs that go well
beyond fixing what the fire destroyed.
The building commissioner cited or-
namental masonry on the building'S
exterior and window frames as need-
ing replacement. The owner, however,
had no intentions of repairing the
building and sent notices to many
tenants advising them their leases
were terminated in early December.
According to Narsu, "We heard rumors
the building was for sale before the fire.
Having an occuped building depress-
es the price. He took advantage of the
fire:' For tenants of the Prince Edward
it is problematic whether they will ever
get back into their affordable
apartments.
On December 13, the tenants as-
sociation held a meeting to address the
situation at Prince Edward. A handful
of the displaced tenants showed up.
Many have scattered to other towns or
have given up hope of returning to the
building. "Some of us feel it's a losing
battle:' remarked Christine Schwab as
she craddled her month-old baby, born
shortly after the fire. "If you don't fight
for your rights you will lose:' declared
Gil Bernadino. He reminded the group
that as rent stabilized tenants, they
were entitled to many rights and pro-
tections.
Charles Theophan, an attorney,
was there to provide legal advice. A
former employee of the city's Corpora-
tion Counsel, Theophan agreed to
represent the tenants of Prince Edward
at a reduced fee. "Violations on the
building date back to 1983. There have
been a lack of smoke detectors and a
lack of concern by the city since then,"
he said. Theophan outlined a legal
strategy of pushing the city to obtain a
repair agreement with the owner. Fail-
ing that, he would take him to court to
force building repairs and seek puni-
tive damages for the inconveniences
tenants have suffered. The tenants as-
sociation has also filled complaints
with the state Division of Housing and
Community Renewal as the adminis-
trator of rent stabilized buildings.
According to one source, the
Prince Edward has already been sold
to a speculator who is biding his time
until he can make a juicy deal with de-
veloper Michael Lazar whose
Promenade Hotel, to be converted to
160 luxury condos, sits directly across
the street from the Prince Edward. City
Manager Eaton said that Lazar will
need a parking lot to accommodate the
condds future residents.
The Park Avenue Shuftle
Selective enforcement of building
codes is an interesting game the city
plays. For tenants in deteriorated hous-
ing, it's a nerve wracking one as they
wait for the ax to fall. At 38.West Park
Avenue, the ax fell October 1, 1984
when the city slapped a vacate order
on the building ordering 100 people to
leave at the end of the month. Commis-
sioner Narsu had inspected the
premises and declared it unsafe be-
cause it lacks a second fire escape - a
condition existing for all of the build-
ing's 60 years. There are other substan-
dard conditions at 38 Park like faulty
wiring, plumbing and poor security.
Several vacant apartments remain un-
locked, an invitation to squatters and
drug users. Landlord Philip Kaplan, a
realtor in Hicksville, has a long histo-
ry of tenant neglect.
Why did the city decide to finally
enforce the law on fire exits? One rea-
son is that the apartments at 38 W. Park
are the last remaining residential units
on that main commercial street. Locat-
ed across from City Hall, they are a
galling reminder to officials that the
avenue's rehabilitation needs a finish-
ing touch. During a visit to the city's
Community Development office, a city
specialist in rehabilitation was heard
reassuring a potential investor that ren-
tal housing had been done away with
in Park Avenue's shopping area. It used
to be bad, she said, with people loiter-
ing outside their buildings, discourag-
ing shoppers.
Nobody was evicted at the end of
October due to the efforts of lawyers
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ~ I
-,
Tenants rally at City Hall October 1984:
"They call It rent"uance, _ call It displacement."
February 1985 CITV LIMITS 21
The city doesn't act against serious building code violations at 80
Riverside because it would hinder their handpicked developer.
Judy Hirschorn and Edward Luban of ,.------------------------------.
the Nassau-Suffolk Legal Services.
They filed suit to keep the building
open and force the city to make repairs
if the owner refused. Under section
13-25 of the city code, the city is em-
powered to make repairs and take a lien
on the property if necessary. But the
strategy suffered a set-back January 17
when Kaplan pleaded guilty to viola-
tions in Supreme Court and agreed to
let the city close down the apartments.
Hirschorn intends to continue their at-
tempts to get the city to repair 38 W.
Park and keep it open.
Mary Donohue, 72, has lived in the
building for 12 years and in Long
Beach for 30 years. She's been on the
waiting list for an apartment in one of
the City's four senior citizen buildings
since 1975. "I know a woman who got
in after a three-year wait. It's all a mat-
ter of who you know," she informs. Like
all the residents of 38 W. Park, she does
not know where to turn for affordable
housing. .'
~
z
~
~
If that wasn'{ enough to worry
about, she and others are keeping an
arson watch. From January 5 to the 13
there were two small fires in vacant
apartments. One, according to social
worker Adele Jack, was started in the
stuffing of a chair that had been placed
in a previously empty room. ''An emp-
ty liquor bottle was propped up against
the chair. It looked like a real set up."
For residents like Irma Rodriguez, Tom
Hanson, Christine Schwab and her
brother and husband and child,
another fire would be too devastating
to contemplate. They survived the or-
deal at the Prince Edward and are still
trying to get back on their feet. If the
city pushes them from yet another
building, it may be the last straw.
City Man .... r E.ton, right. with Sen. Alphon .. D'Am.to. Congo R.y McGrath and City J ~
Council members Inltl.te a renovation of the rallrood station:
Take a Walk on the Boardwalk
Just when you think you've heard
the most outrageous story of landlord,
neglect and city machinations, there's
another Long Beach story to top it . .The
garden apartments at 80 Riverside
Blvd. perched at the boardwalk's edge
is a case in point. Its a forty-unit com-
plex built 20 years ago and owned by
a series of slumlords who have let it
crumble, while siphoning off profits
and defaulting on property taxes. The
process of decay accelerated in 1980
when Izak Fremd sold the building to
Arnold Simon, a realtor in Rockville
''MIlt "(1'" more '''(In our ."(lre 0' low Income 1H'0ple,"
Center with allies in city council and
development interests in the Paradise,
a vacated adult horne. As waterfront
property, 80 Riverside is hot now and
city council has consciously chosen to
permit building code violations of the
worst kind. Anxious to remove another
"blight:' the council even found a de-
veloper to hasten the process.
Since April, 1984. there has been
no superintendent at 80 Riverside and
no repairs have been done. Lights in
the court yard and the hallways are per-
manently out. Broken windows go un-
replaced except in several apartments
where the owner has had them entire-
ly boarded up while people continue
to live inside. And in the dark. caver-
nous basement all apartments are emp-
ty but one tiny two-room where tenant
Kelly Wright lives with her three kids
and a host of rats and cockroaches. She
was apathetic about conditions but got
angry and joined the building'slenant
association after a cockroach became
lodged in her daughter's ear and the
owners had all the heat turned off,
causing her kids to become ill. Walk-
ing down the pitch-black hall to her
apartment, Kelly holds a flashlight and
hopes nobody jumps out at her from
the shadows. The vacant basement
apartments are a favorite hangout for
alcohol and drug users, she says, and
squatters are living in several of them.
The mail carrier refuses to deliver
down in the basement because it's so
dark causing yet more trouble for
Wright who depends on having wel-
fare checks sent to her. "I wasn't ready
to do anything about conditions here
until my kids got sick;' she says, "then
I got mad. I have an electric heater
down there. My daughter burnt herself
on it. I have to put my kids to bed with
three sweaters and they cry because
they're so cold:'
Like other tenants at 80 Riverside,
22 CITY LIMITS Februarv 1985
Tenant activists stroll on the boanl_lk:
"Why m"ke people home Ie .. when they "',.,,dy h"ve" home'"
Wright turned to L. Johnson for help
when things got unbearable. As head
of the tenant organization, he has been
organizing residents since last year
and pursuing actinns against the own-
er. Sweeping an opping of hallways
is done by him, other tenants now.
When the post office refused to deliver
to the entire building in the fall, he
ended up calling the head office in
Washington, nc. to get action and did.
He also filed a complaint with the
county's Bureau of Consumer Frauds
and Protection when owner Simon
told him none of the tenants security
deposits were being held in escrow ac-
counts. "They told me the owner as-
sured them the apartments were rented
on a month-to-month basis and he
never held more than five deposits at
one time," Johnson recounts frustrated.
"That's an absolute lie. He has deposits
from all tenants here."
Johnson and half the tenants have
been on rent strike since June. They are
being represented by legal aid lawyer
Vic Ambros in a suit against the own-
er for sending eviction notices on Janu-
ary 1. "We're saying he sent those
3D-day notices in retaliation for form-
ing a tenant association," explains
Johnson. The owner tried to evict him
and Leon Mack, vice president of the
tenants group, in August for non-
payment but was unsuccessful. On
January 11, Johnson received a 72-hour
evict order. It was stayed a week later
but there's little hope of preventing a
mass eviction at the end of the month.
New owners just bought 80 Riverside,
according to city manager Eaton, and
want to clear it out to demolish or fix
up. Eaton knows this because the city
council located buyers. Eaton recent-
ly met with them to discuss develop-
ment. "There's talk on that block of a lot
of development. The city owns a lot of
property there and the new owner
would like to take part in it," said Ea-
ton. Asked why the city doesn't enforce
code violations there, Eaton replied,
"When we found the new owners were
going to vacate the building, we
stopped and said, okay, if that's your in-
tention, we don't want to hinder you."
Tenants at 80 Riverside would like
the city to care as much about their
rights being hindered. "Things are go-
ing backward; Johnson states, "the guy
with the bucks is running everything
and those without have to go to the
streets. Owners are making a travesty
of the law." He has a dream. He thinks
the tenants should obtain title to 80
Riverside, rehabilitate it and run it as
cooperative apartments. And there's no
reason they couldn't except that poor,
working people aren't supposed to be
right on the boardwalk once a develop-
ment boom has struck. "Sometimes the
sky is so interesting down here;' John-
son muses, looking to where the ocean
meets horizon, "the sunsets are so
beautiful. I love being by the water:'
Time seems to be running out for
tenants and activists in Long Beach
who.would stem the tide of evictions
and displacement. The city is acting
fast to condemn properties, vacate and
sell to developers. The Prince Edward
fire did serve to unify many people like
Joan Donnelly, Johnson, Gil Bernadi-
no, Lucy Centeno and Christine
Schwab. But with their meager
resources, how can they hope to find
justice in a city without conscience?
"It's the landlords turned slumlords,
the politicians, the moneymongers
who deteriorated conditions in Long
Beach. They don't want to do anything
for my class of is the
hard-working people," says Centeno.
She reflects the mood of anger and
despair but like the others, she has not
given up and laid down. Joan Donnel-
ly thinks the city's management of fed-
eral funds - both Community
Development Block Grants and Urban
Development Action Grants - should
be scrutinized. "They commissioned
an $85,000 comprehensive plan with
CD money. It's supposed to be tied to
low income housing." The city's use of
"It's the landlords turned slumlords, the politicians, the money-
mongers ... They don't want to do anything for my class of
people - that is the hard working people!'
hundreds of thousands of CD dollars
to wipe out low income rental units
also is a questionable use given Ute fo-
cus on luxury condom inurn construc-
tion. The city's method of demolishing
and auctioning off property' may also
bear close inspection.
As hell-bent on evicting the sur-
plus low income population as city
hall is, there does exist a middle
ground, a course of action that would
give the yuppies their condos and yet
let Mary Donohue and Kelly Wright
live comfortably and affordably.
Even architect developer Richard
Banks, who's heading the Granada
Towers project, thinks the city has gone
a little haywire. "Everyone is talking
luxury, luxury, luxury because they're
buying high, renovating high and sell-
ing high. The main factor;' he sur-
mises, "is buying high. That means
reaching for the upper of the
market. I don't know if it's there.
They're concentrating too much on the
upper strata and not enough on the
strata below." He predicts a glut of con-
dominiums when the dust settles.
Tucked away in the infamous
comprehensive plan done by Tischler
are repeated and insistent recommen-
dations which the city has chosen to
ignore. While everyone talks about
condo development, the study in fact
states firmly that although " ... current
conditions favor construction of multi-
family condominiums ... the preser-
vation of existing low-density and ren-
tal housing should also be considered
to maintain desirable housing diversi-
ty." The study goes on to layout a strate-
gy of preservation that includes rehab
lm'ns for multi-family buildings, im-
proved code enforcement and
homesteading. It also recommends the
city establish limited equity housing
developments to maintain affordable
housing. Under that plan, rental build-
ings would be converted to cooperative
ownership by tenants or others who
would agree to limit the resale price
and give up the chance for large capi-
tal gains, as in condominiums. It
sounds a lot like what the 80 Riverside
residents have in mind.
"With the help of state and feder-
al grants, our tenants can rehabilitate
the building;' Johnson insists. "Why
make people homeless when they have
a home already?" That's a good ques-
tion for city hall to ponder as they pre-
pare to shut down rental buildings and
send residents to find a dwindling
number of low-rent apartments in
other towns. It's not too late for officials
to inject some humanity into their
renaissance and see Long Beach real-
ly flourish. 0
Community Organizer. Renovation Supervisor. Weatherization Coordinator.
Urban Housing Specialist. Community Management Director. Policy Analyst.
Housing Paralegal. Business Manager. Housing Director. Loan Arranger. Project
Director. Construction Specialist. Activist. Accountant. Housing Attorney. Execu-
tive Secretary. Energy Specialist. Assistant Editor. Executive Director. Activist.
These are just some of the positions-recently advertised in CITY UMITS. The advertising choice of
housing professionals in government, non-profit organizp.tions and industry. Call 239-8440 to place
your ad.
CITY LIMITS JOB ADVERTISING GETS RESULTS.
2A CITY LIMITS February 1915
FEATURE
F
or more than a decade New York
City has been warehousing
almost 100 apartments on Tenth
Avenue' in Manhattan. The build-
ings - mostly old law tenements-
were taken by the city in the late 1960s
for Urban Renewal. Sonie subsidized
projects were built but five parcels re-
main undeveloped. Since then, the re-
maining tenants have been hoping that
redevelopment plans would include
them.
Now the city has a plan. Without
informing tenants or community lead-
ers, the city has ratified a well-
connected developer's proposal to
knock down an entire block front to
create 296 apartments - 80 percent of
them luxury, 20 percent for subsidized
housing - in a 20- to 24-story high-rise
on Tenth Avenue.
This approach radically alters the
whole concept of Urban Renewal. The
Clinton Urban Renewal Area - six
square blocks bounded by Tenth
Avenue, Eleventh Avenue, 50th Street
and 56th Street-was created to cut
through the barriers, both in terms of
economics and land ownership, that
made it impossible to produce quali-
ty low income housing. According to
the original plans, revised in April,
1984, 1I11'\d acquired through Urban
Renewal condemnation, "Will be di-
sposed of for the construction of low
and moderate income housing and for
commercial and community facilities
required to make Clinton a model
residential community."
Nonetheless the City Department
of Housing Preservation and Develop-
ment submitted a proposal on behalf
of developer Ruben Glick for $8.7 mil-
lion under a new Federal program
called Housing Development Action
Grant (HODAG for short) at extremely
favorable interest rates, somewhere be-
tween 1 and 3 percent. In return, Click
proposes to knock down the entire
block between 51st and 52t1d Streets
facing Tenth Avenue and, decking oWr
the old West Side railroad cut, create
townhouses on the side streets and a
tower on the Avenue. Under the terms
of the HODAG, he will reserve 20 per-
cent of the apartments for low income
tenants.
This proposal was not presented
to existing tenants before garnering
city approval and has never received
any blessing from the Community
Tenth Avenue
Freeze Out
BY ROBERT NEUWIRTH
~ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ~
a ..... Tenth avenue:
A __ /ty _ry 0' bullflozers.
Board. In fact, in three separate reso-
lutions, the most recent passed last
year, Community Board 4 urged HPD
to drop negotiations with private de-
velopers.
Developer Contributions
At the beginnins of the Urban
Renewal effort, the community might
have been less concerned about this
'knock it down and build it up new' ap-
proach. After all , most of the Urban
ReneWal work that was done - Hudson
View, Harbor View, Clinton Towers-
involved massive projects standing
apart from the rest of the community.
But all of these buildings are fully sub-
sidized low or moderate income
housing.
But todar the community is very
conscious a the way that massive
redevelopment can adversely affect lo-
cal businesses. And, in this era of
housing shortages and wildly escalat-
ing rents, there is a need to concentrate
a communIty's resources on keeping
low and moderate income tenants in
their homes.
The Glick organization, based in
Lake Success, is highly visible in New
York real estate. Its most recent major
project is Manhattan Place, a luxury
condominium tower on First Avenue.
Glick is also visible in politics. The
Glick family has already contributed
$27,000 to the 1985 Koch for Mayor
machine and the Glick organization
purchased an entire table for $10,000
at last year's testimonial dinner for
Mario Cuomo.
Glick's new construction propo'sal
means all tenants have to move out. But
this would not be the first change for
tenants on the site. Many of the resi-
dents of 501 W. 51st ptreet , a cozy
building on the corner of Tenth
~
:l:
~
b
'" u
ii
~
~
ii
<II
Avenue, moved there from other build-
ings in the urban renewal zone. Alice
Lang, who has lived in Clinton all her
life, has been there fourteen years. "Be_
fore 1 lived in 747, but I moved here to
make way for Hudson View Terrace.
Now they want to push me out again.
I don't think it's fair. You know, you've
. lived here all your life. 1 think I'd die."
New Housing
Damon Delston also lives at 501 W.
51st. He has resided in various urban
renewal buildings for 17 years. "The
city took my home in 1968, con-
demned it for low and middle income
housing, promised that all the resi-
dents would get into the buildings, that
we would have first dibs, and offered
all kinds of perks for us to move."
But the perks never came; instead,
their building has been neglected.
During the coldest week in January,
Delston, Lang and their neighbors had
no heat or hot water. They suffered
through the minus 35 degree wind
chill with lit ovens and space heaters.
"I was afraid," Alice Lang says, "that if
1 left the city wouldn't let me back in."
According to other tenants, the boiler
has often broken down. "We need a
new boiler," says one, "But typically, the
city doesn't want to put one in."
Tenants in the urban renewal
buildings need low rents. According to
a 1982 survey, the average income of
people in the remaining old buildings
was $6,572. They are, in general, long
term neighborhood residents: most
have lived in Clinton for over 20 years.
The city, however, will not guarantee
relocation at comparable rents.
"The fact is that current rentS hap-
pen to be very attractive," says Robert
Reach, Director of Manhattan planning
for HPD. '1 think they're considerably
below prevailing rentals for both com-
mercial and residential."
Reach offers some hope for
tenants: "Residential tenants will be
relocated to residential developments
within the neighborhood." He cannot
say if they will be able to afford the new
rents. "That 1 can't guarantee;' he said.
. Toward commercial tenants he is
less sympathetic: "It's a Catch-22. The
city basically rented to most of these
commercials on a month-to-month
basis. Redevelopment is to occur.
That's what month-to-month leases
mean;' says Reach.
Could Clinton's urban renewal sites be a remedy for real estate
pressures?
That doesn't leave Ozzie McInnis,
owner of the Lincoln Lite electrical
parts store, in a good situation. _"The
way they got us going now you can't
make plans. How can you run a busi-
ness when you don't know what's go-
ing on each day?" asks McInnis, a
20-year resident.
McInnis feels that HPD's com-
ments show that the city is not con-
cerned about existing tenants. "The
rent isn't relevant because if they'd give
us a fair market rent and leave us alone,
everything would be fine. Were willing
to pay our fair share."
Alternative Plans
The tragedy is that the tenants-
residents and merchants together- did
organize, forming a group to protect
their interests. Originally called COM-
BO (for Community Organized and
Managed By Ourselves) the group has
formed a local development corpora-
tion. Working together, they have de-
veloped a comprehensive plan for
urban renewal sites 8 and 9C, running
along Tenth Avenue from 51st to 53rd
Streets.
Their plan has four objectives:
creation of low and moderate income
Clinton', hn_1 Sit. I:
No proml_, of oHord"bl. ,./oc"tlon,
housing in Clinton; retention of
neighborhood-based businesses; cre-
ation of additional middle income
housing and commercial spaces;
retention of present jobs and provision
for new jobs.
For $37.6 million, says John Glynn,
the group's executive director, the
group can produce 278 housing units,
100 of them for low and moderate in-
come people. The businesses will be
able to stay, purchasing their stores as
condominiums. ''All-buildings could
be saved," Glynn asserts. "Out of that we
would produce three levels of owner-
ship. One would be commercial con-
dos. Another, moderate income
co-ops. And a third would really be
low income rental owned by the LOC,"
Glynn's group based their projec-
tions on "straight conventional financ-
ing which we feel would be able to
work, if the city would work with us,"
If the LDC could get subsidized low in-
terest financing, on the level the Glick
development has been promised, they
could substantially reduce the rental
costs,
Jim McPartlin, who owns the
Mobil gas station on the comer of 53rd
and Tenth, has been involved with the
Working together, Clinton residents and merchants produced
their own plan, one that could save existing buildings, create
commercial condos, moderate income co-ops and low income
rentals.
Jim McPartlin of Clinton:
"U.i"" dty-owned property lor luxury building I. the ref" ./n_"
LDC from the start and is now its presi-
dent. His family has owned the station
for three generations. "Our plan was
endorsed by all community groups
and elected officials. We were having
so-called good faith negotiations with ..
[Deputy Commissioner for Develop-
ment] Charles Reiss up until a month
ago. During that time HPD asked Glick
to apply with them for a HODAG,
which 1 don't consider in good faith."
Robert Reach, from HPD responds:
"The local development corporation
was established by certain existing
tenants on the site. That doesn't neces-
sarily represent the interests of the en-
tire community."
Reach cites financing, number of
units in the proposal and the fact that
the LDC wants to rehab buildings in-
stead of demolish them as problems
with the plan. But he refuses to discuss
it specifically. "I don't want to get into
negotiations in the newspaper." He
hasn't discussed it with the LDC or the
Community Board either.
And even though the HODAG has
been awarded, and the city intends to
start moving the proposal through the
land use review procedure, site tenants
still don't know the specifics.
"I live here," Damon Delston says,
''I'm affected. How come 1 haven't
received any information?" And over at
Sonny's Market, they could only say,
"We just live day by day:'
"The sin of it;' says Jim McPartlin,
"is with the 42nd Street project com-
ing in, there may be no way you can
stop luxury development on privately
owned property where zoning allows.
But it's a sin if it's going to be on city-
owned property."
As a developer, Glick defends his
proposal. "What you have there now is
not productive and that's what makes
it so vulnerable. 1 view this as a last
ditch proposal, before the marketplace
takes over. If the marketplace takes over
you won't have any control and the city
will auction it to a developer:'
Yet that's exactly what is about to
happen. The city has already allocat-
ed scarce federal dollars to a private de-
veloper to build a project that the
community doesn't want. And, ac-
cording to the latest project plan, the
city intends to start demolition by ear-
ly 1987.
Both McPartlin and Glynn say
they are prepared to go to court to stop
the development, protesting the
process by w h ~ c h Glick was
designated.
With enough neighborhood pres-
sure, however, tenants hope that the
whole urban renewal issue can become
a political one, especially since the en-
tire Board of Estimate is coming up for
election. One observer suggests that
the community might want to frame a
~ proposal that covers all of the remain-
~ ing development sites in the five-block
i3 Urban Renewal Area, to save the re-
maining homes and businesses.
What is really behind it?" John
Glynn muses. "Why is it so important
to demolish all of these buildings?"
These questions were brought into fo-
cus this past summer, when the four
other development sites in the Clinton
Urban Renewal Area suddenly sprout-
ed large city signs with a phone num-
ber to call "for information" about the
land.
So once again the city has taken
sides against the community. Clinton
is a community surrounded by hungry
developers - but it also has a record of
fighting for its people. "I anticipate;'
says Jim McPartlin, "that this will be
the next Clinton community battle." 0
Rob Neuwirth is a freelance writer who
lives and is active in the Clinton com-
munity.
REVIEW
NEW DEAL NEW YORK
NEW YORK PANORAMA: A Com-
panion to the WPA Guide to New York
City by Federal Writers Project with a
new introduction by Alfred Kazin,
Pantheon, 1984, 526 pages, $20.00.
Hardcover.
BY RACHEL B. GORLIN
THE YEAR IS 1938. NEW YORK IS
slowly coming out of the worst of the
Great Depression with a need to pat it-
self on the back for having made it this
far. Just as "I Love New York" buttons
and the Democratic National Conven-
tion were supposed to buoy up our
spirits in the wake of the "Fiscal Crisis," I
in 1938 New York is planning a grand
World's Fair: " 'Building the world of
tomorrow' is the bold theme of the fair.
The theme center. . . will consist of
the perisphere, a 200-foot steel-framed
globe (comparable in size to an 18-
story building occupying a city block);
and the trylon, a slender tapering three
sided pillar rising to 700 feet. These
stark structures . . . will cost
$1,700,000. They will be simple, strik-
ing, beautiful. Officially, the trylon
symbolizes the finite, the peri sphere
the infinite."
Paragraphs like that one from New
York Panorama serve as a reminder that
our collective sensibility as urbanites
has undergoile a dramatic transforma-
tion in the past forty-five years. Can we
even remember when "enlightened"
New Yorkers believed in progress as a
solution to society's ills, in the
supreme efficacy of the new? When
"slum clearance" meant not gentrifi-
cation but the construction of "attrac-
tive modern public housing?" When
Parks Commissioner Robert Moses'
ambitious public works were met not
with public outrage but public
acclaim?
The answer is: not without some
effort. The dawn of the atomic era on
Hiroshima in 1945 may have forever
altered our belief in the limitless
benevolence of technology. Other pop-
ular assumptions of 1938 have taken
longer to run their course. New York
Panorama is a detailed glimpse at a
crucial period in New York's "liberal ex-
periment": "There was acceptance of
the municipal government as a func-
tionihg agent for social welfare and
unemployment relief. There was evi-
dent approval of the large-scale public
works program, especially an increase
of recreational facilities, undertaken by
the municip'ality. There was recogni-
tion of the city's responsibility in labor
disputes, through appointment by the
Mayor of special fact-finding commit-
tees and his active intervention in
some disputes:'
The "World of Tomorrow"
Was New York naive or hopeful in
its belief in the "world of tomorrow?"
The temptation is to answer naive, but
perhaps the city was suffering from the
particular hope born out of despera-
tion. And, make no mistake about it,
the Thirties were a desperate time in
New York:
"Even more distressing . . . is the
closing of many industrial plants since
1929. By the end of 1935, when the in-
cidence of industrial production was
approaching its post-depression peak,
3,300 fewer plants were in operation in
New York City than when the financial
28 "'cITY LIMITS February 1985
REVIEWS
crisis began. Idle, along with these
plants, were more than 76,000 wage-
earners who had been working six
years before . . . the consequent
suffering and misery have probably
surpassed anything ever before ex-
perienced in a modem industrial com-
munity."
Of course, New York is no longer
an industrial community, and the jobs
lost between 1929 and 1935 seem few
compared to the number hemorrhaged
during the late 1960s and early 1970s.
The "world of tomorrow" turned out to
look astoundingly different from what
'the writers of New York Panorama
could have foreseen.
. Knowing where the story goes
'makes reading New York Panorama an
experience tinged with melancholy,
liKe watching the scene where the
union wins in "Silkwood." The exuber-
ance should be contagious, but instead
it seems a trifle beside the point. lit-
erary critic Alfred Kazin, author of
several moving memoirs about New
York in the 1930s, has written a beau-
tiful introduction to the new edition in
which he hints at this feeling. New
York Panorama itself, however, is far
from melancholy. A collection of
twenty-six essays on different aspects
of the city's civic culture, the book
covers areas from housing, social wel-
fare, politics and Harlem, all the way
to classical and popular music, litera-
ture and the theater.
Some chapters have worn much better
than others. The section on housing,
entitled "One Third of the City" (a refer-
ence to the proportion of the city's resi-
dents living in substandard
conditions), is a shocking reminder
that the more things change, the more
they stay the same. The "old law tene-
ment problem" is 'now a good fifty years
old and we don't seem a whole lot
closer to any "solutions" than they were
in 1938, except many of the buildings
are now abandoned. The urban plan-
ning section is extremely overwritten
in parts, not to mention overly optimis-
tic about the Regional Plan Associa-
tion's ability to put New York in shape
for 1999.
Politics and city history are fas-
cinating. New York, even when one ex-
cludes the "Tweed Ring," has had ~
tumultuous political history that
makes the present look tame by com-
parison. Some of the historic anec-
Choosing a
. Neighborhood
CONSERVING AMERICA'S NEIGH-
BORHOODS By Robert Yin, Plenum
Press, 1982, 195 pages, $25.00
Hardcover.
BY ALLEN HERSHKOWITZ
THE BASIC PARADOX ON WHICH
capitalist economies are based is that
self-interest, not compassion guide the
power brokers. Socialite real estate de-
velopers boast of their civic-
mindedness while they transform en-
tire city blocks and the people who live
there into assorted forms of concrete
and human rubble. Local landmarks
are tom down and small merchants are
~ driven out to make way for glossy new
~ construction projects which are quick-
' - ~ : ~ ~ ly depreciated and then demolished as
dotes are quite funny. The cultural
essays are timebound, but are useful as
historical documents and are engag-
ingly written.

The Federal Writers Project, a New
Deal effort to employ out of work
writers of all varieties, was a valiant un-
dertaking. It produced at least a dozen
USA guidebooks (New York's was the
only two-volume effort) before it fell
prey to Roosevelt's right-wing critics
well before the US entered World War
II. Richard Wright, David Ignatow,
John Cheever, and Maxwell Boden-
heim were among those responsible
for New York Panorama. Pantheon
Books has done a great public service
resurrecting the New York Guides for
a new generation, which is largely ig-
norant of what the Great Depression
meant in the life of the city. If only
some of our hopes and innocence
could be resurrected as easily as the
prose that gave them voice. 0
Rachel B. Gorlin is a frequent contri-
butor to Cit,y Limits.
well.
Responding to the drive of profit-
hungry developers, thousands of
neighborhoods around our nation
have formed a variety of associations to
affirm their community and protect
their way of life. Much of that neigh-
borhood activism developed during
the 1970s, the so-called "me decade." In
Conserving America's Neighborhoods
Robert Yin seeks to specify and affirm
neighborhood activism. According to
Yin, "The purpose of this book is to
describe different approaches to
preserving the neighborhood as a so-
cial unit." Regretably, his book is bar-
ren. Much less than a guide to
preserving neighborhoods, Yin has as-
sembled a pastiche of short, dated es-
says of little interest or utility.
Where Conserving America's
Neighborhoods does succeed is in af-
firming the general truth that neigh-
borhood activism was a salient social
reality during the 1970s.
Yin's claim that Conserving
America's Neighborhoods chronicles
"different approaches for preserving
the neighborhood as a social unit" is
true only in a limited and academical-
ly abstruse sense. While one chapter
on "Neighborhood Fact-Gathering"
could be useful for activists, it turns
out to be a brief survey of academic
literature appropriate for a dissertation
proposal and not much else. For those
actually involved in struggling to
preserve a neighborhood's local flavor,
increasing services, protecting a com-
munity garden or a local merchant,
Yin offers little on how fact gathering
might be put to good use. His effort
clearly reveals how difficult it is to
write usefully about preserving neigh-
borhoods while pretending to have no
politics: "Too often, what passes for
good neighborhood research are ad-
vocacy statements .. :'
Two better chapters, "Correlates of
Power in Citizen Organizations" and
"Can Public Housing Help,?" written 12
years ago, offers some basic informa-
tion on the factors which affect social
conditions in public housing projects.
The most important of these which
housing managers might have control
over, according to Yin, involve site
selection (for new projects, of which
we currently have none), architectur-
al design and tenant selection. But
from the perspective of 1985, what use
can we derive from a chapter summary
which states: "Successful projects ap-
pear to require a mix among tenant
characteristics such as race, family
characteristics, and income, but these
and other considerations have become
less important because of external
changes in the 1960s." "External
changes in the 1960s?" This book is
more akin to a memoir.
Similarly, "Correlates of Power in
Citizen Organizations," another nosta-
gia piece written a dozen years ago,
offers some basic ideas on organiza-
tional structures for citizen groups
which lend themselves to achieving
goals. However, much has been written
on organizing since 1973 which, of
course, is missing. In fact. even Saul
Alinsky, father of grass-roots organiz-
ing, is mentioned only at the end of the
chapter as a reference.
The rest of the book is similarly
flawed and, above all, lacks coherence.
It reads like a collection of essays writ-,
ten long ago for other purposes. The
big question one is left with after read-
ing it is -Why was this book published
now? Or better yet, why was it pub-
-lished at all?O
Allen Hershkowitz, a political
economist. is a commentator on WBAI
radio.
Community Research
NEIGHBORHOODS, PEOPLE AND
COMMUNITY by Roger S. Ahlbrandt,
Jr., Plenum Press, 1984, 238 Pages,
$27.50 Hardcover.
BY JENNY HIXON
THE LOCAL COMMUNITY IN MOD-
ern industrial society has not become
obsolete, but instead has become one
of "limited liability." A neighborhood's
residents will "give it their time, their
loyalty, their energy" to the extent that
its features make it attractive for social
interaction, or personal circumstances
limit their access to resources beyond
its borders. In Neighborhoods. People.
and Community, Roger Ahlbrandt at-
tempts to isolate the elements of choice
and constraint which shape the rela-
tionship of resident to neighborhood,
and promote or disturb the "voluntary
construction" of local community in a
contemporary American city-
Pittsburgh.
Through a telephone survey of
5,896 Pittsburgh residents, Ahlbrandt
explored the relationship between the
age, household structure, race, ethnic-
ity and income of people, and the
degree to which they are involved in
and supported by their neighbor-
hoods. For the elderly, the poor (a dis-
proportionate number of whom are
black), and for households with chil-
dren, reduced mobility makes emo-
tional supports in the neighborhood
more important than for those whose
household structure, age or income
grants them mobility to participate in
networks beyond the neighborhood.
People in the latter group, however,
have the same means to choose neigh-
borhoods with features which en-
courage their involvement; thus, their
participation in their neighborhood
may be more extensive, if more super-
ficial, than that of those with fewer
options.
People tied to a place are more de-
pendent on their communities, but
have less control over choosing them
than do those with more mobility. So
although the number of relatives and
close friends within a neighborhood
generally increases as income
decreases, when external pressures
like those from urban renewal damage
the social fabric - as they have in sever-
al of Pittsburgh's low-income
neighborhoods - they can destroy peo-
ples' key support networks.
Ahlbrandt makes two policy
recommendations. Using the example
of moderate-income, tightly knit
Catholic neighborhoods where the
church is a cohesive force, Ahlbrandt
suggests that this effect be emulated in
non-Catholic neighborhoods by
strengthening other community or-
ganizations or services. Secondly. he
recommends that housing vouchers
which allow recipients to choose
where to live be given in lieu of site-
specific housing subsidies, thereby
releasing low income residents from
one of the factors which tie them to
particular neighborhoods.
Ahlbrandt does an admirable job
of conveying the complexity and sub-
tlety of the individual and institutional
factors affecting the quality of the rela-
tionship between resident and com-
munity. Despite one aberrant phrase
("mental health prevention"), his writ-
ing style is generally clear and acces-
sible. And while he is careful to
emphasize the uniqueness of each
neighborhood's situation. he commu-
nicates the universality which "choice"
and "constraint" imply in the lives of
residents in any city. 0
Jenny Hixon does research in New York
City.
RESOURCES/EVENTS
c::rCITYWIDE COALITION FOR
PUBUC HOUSING: Saturday, Febru-
ary 23rd, from 2 p.m. to 5 p.m. at P.S.
41 (West I1st st. and 6th Avenue) there
will be a forum on the state of public
housing in New York City. The meet-
ing has been called by a new coalition
of tenants and workers in public hous-
ing who are seeking to mobilize all seg-
ments of the community who want to
join the fight to maintain and expand
subsidized housing. 0
c::rREINVESTMENT CONFERENCE:
"Bucks for Bricks Revisited;' is the
name of a conference on how New York
State's new banking regulations-
which calIon lenders to make loans to
needy neighborhoods-will work in
practice. Sponsored by the Communi-
ty Training and Resource Center in
conjunction with the New York City
Commission on Human Rights, the
conference will feature representatives
of major banks who will describe how
their institutions will implement the
new regulations. Also, legislators and
public officials will explain how new
loans made under the regulations can
be leveraged with existing low interest
loans or grants. The conference will be
on March 12, from 10 a.m. to 2 p.m. at
New York University's Loeb Student
Center. For information, call
(216)4-7260. 0
c::rHOMELESS CHILDREN: The
Citizen's Committee conducted a
project monitoring the city's shelter
and hotel housing for the homelss. The
results are contained in a report enti-
tled, "7,000 Homeless Children: The
Crisis Continues." It is available from
the Citizen's Committee for Children of
New York, 105 E. 22nd St., New York,
NY 10010. The price is $5.0
c::rPEOPLE BEFORE PROFITS: The
East Side Service Providers Coalition
will hold a public hearing Thursday,
March 14 to address the interests and
housing needs of this city's poor and
working people. Members of the pub-
lic will speak, as well as politicians,
community organizers and activists.
The hearings will be held at Hunter
College School of Social Work, 129 E.
79th St. from 11-5 p.m. O
c::rHELP FOR VISUALLY IMPAIRED:
The Center for Independent Living
Self-Help Network has produced self-
study kits for persons over 55 years of
age with vision problems. The kits,
which contain cassette tapes and large
print books, offer skill training in in-
door mobility, housekeeping, personal
management and sensory develop-
ment. They are available for free to any
city resident from CIL Self-Help Net-
work, 318 E. 15th Street, New York, NY
10003; (212) 674-7580.0
- - ~
1
11
"'- .
. -
~
~
..,.
'rom: "He"" Kitchen Chronicle."
c::rUSING TAX INCENTIVES: The
Federation of Jewish Philanthropies is
conducting a professional workshop.
"Real Estate Syndication for Not-for-
Profit Organizations" that will explore
how to use federal tax incentives for
community development. The event
will be held on March 5 from 1:30 to
5:30 p.m. in the Warburg Room of the
Federation, 130 E. 59th St. There is no
admission charge. For more informa-
tion call (212) 980-1000, ext. 662 or
647.0
c::rHELI:S KITCHEN CHRONICLE:
The Muncipal Art Society will spon-
sor an exhibit of photography and film
on the Hell's Kitchen neighborhood
through February 16. Photos by Maren
Erskine set in sound environments
created by Reed Erskine capture the
spirit of that legendary area west of 8th
Avenue and stretching out from 42nd
Street. The Erskine's film, "Hell's Kitch-
en Chronicle;' will be shown February
8 at 6:30. Admission to the exhibit is
free. The gallery is at 457 Madison at
51st St.O
c::rPOUCY AT SIX: Network/Forum,
a monthly event sponsored by the NY
Area Planners' Network, the Forum on
Architecture, Planning and Society,
and the Center for Human Environ-
ments at CUNY, presents "Tax Policy:
A Tale of Two Cities" on February 15.
A slide show, "Subsidized Buildings:
Help for the Truly Greedy;' will be fol-
lowed by speaker Frank Domurad,
director of fiscal and economic policy
for City Council President Carol Bella-
my. The program begins at 6 p.m. at
CUNY Graduate Center, 33 w. . 42nd
St., in the third floor studio. Admis-
sion is free and donations will be col-
lected.O
c::rTHEY KNOW RENT RULES: The
state's Division of Housing and Com-
munity Renewal's Rent Program has
five rent specialists who are responsi-
ble for informing the public about the
laws and regulations governing their
housing accomodations. They are
available to answer questions at (212)
307-5760, ext. 729. Each specialist
covers one of the city's boroughs.
Bronx: David Joseph; Staten Island
and Lower Manhattan (below l10th
St.,): Elizabeth Hegy; Upper Manhat-
tan: Robert Acevedo; Brooklyn: Alfred
Mitzgaleski; Queens: Nicolas
Kastanis.O
WORKSHOP
Administrative Assistant ISecretary
Major Jewish philanthropic organization seeks self-
starter to -:liversified duties. will get
involved with neighborhood preservation projects
associated with housing and urban development pro-
grams. Requires 55 wpm typing.
Offers excellent salary and benefits. Please call (212)
486-2811 or 2812.
ANTI-ARSON SPECIALIST
Seeking person with experience in community work,
willing to learn arson education and deal with a vari-
ety of housing problems. Skills in writing and public
speaking, self-starting, will work on an organizing
team. Bi-lingual preferred. Salary $14,000-$16,000
yearly. Send resume to: Sandra Abramson at St.
Nicholas, N.P.C., 11-29 Catherine Street, Brooklyn,
NY 11211.
NEIGHBORHOOD NETWORK
COORDINATOR
Organizer, experienced in working with diverse
groups, who has or is willing to learn computer skills.
Will co-ordinate tenant/ homeowner neighborhood-
wide network. Bi-lingual preferred. Will be a part of
a staff team. Salary: $14,000-$16,000 yearly. Send
resume to: Sandra Abramson at St. Nicholas, N.P.C. ,
11-29 Catherine Street, Brooklyn, NY 11211.
COMMUNITY OUTREACH WORKER
Full-time health and housing educator/ organizer.
Candidate should have strong interpersonal skills as
well as group leadership abilities. Experience in com-
munity education or organizing required. English/
Spanish preferred. Interest in health and housing
advocacy. Salary range is $18-$22,000. Send resumes
to: Maxine Golub, Lead Poisoning Prevention Proiect,
Montefiore Medical Center, 771 E. 210th St., Moses 401,
Bronx, NY 10467.
YOUTH PROGRAM DIRECTOR
Community organization requires person experienced
in supervising youth programs. Must have knowledge
of government funding agencies. Background in delin-
quency prevention, after school and youth employ-
ment programs. SA plus 2 years' experience required.
Salary $18,000 per year. Send resumes by Feb. 11 to:
Executive Director, FECDC, 259 E. 43rd Street, Brook-
lyn, NY 11203.
URBAN HOUSING SPECIALIST
A motivated, energetic person sought for the position
of urban housing specialist for a local not-for-profit
organization.
Duties: Developing rehabilitation loan program for
multi-unit properties, monitoring of building condi-
tions and solicitation of voluntary agreements. Posi-
tion requires BA degree in urban planning or related
fields and 2 years' experience in housing. Knowledge
of HPD loan programs a plus. Salary high teens with
fringe bene.,ts Send resume and letters of recommen-
dation to:
Executive Director
Jackson Heights Community Development Corp.
3760 82nd Street
Jackson Heights, NY 11372
Organizing Position
For South Bronx People for Change, a church-based
organizing and leadership training group. Duties:
Recruit and train members in social action and group
meeting skills through workshops and leadership
sessions; work with local and area-wide groups to
research and take action on neighborhood'CInd South
Bronx issues-jobs, housing and crime; plan and par-
ticipate in Scripture reflection activities. Require-
ments: Two years' full-time experience in
neighborhood organizing, including involvement with
housing campaigns, preferably in New York City;
strong interest in working with a church-based organ-
ization; good bi-lingual communications skills, initia-
tive and a sense of teamwork. Must work five days,
four nights and occasional Saturdays or Sundays.
Salary: $15,000 a year, basic health benefits and two
weeks paid vacation to start. Contact: South Bronx
People for Change, 603 Morris Ave. , Bronx, NY 10451;
(212) 993-2053.
FOUR STAFF POSTIONS
Bi-lingual [English-Spanish] positions available at non-
profit housing agency. Program director, tenant
organizer, housing specialist, secretary. Send resume
to BHCO, 116 Smith Street, Brooklyn NY 11201.
ORGANIZER
For Lower East Side group. Two years experience in
tenant/community organizing; social work experi-
ence helpful. Lower East Side residents, college,
Spanish-speaking preferred. Salary $12- 14,000 based
on experience. Excellent benefits. Send resume to:
Valerio Orsel/i, Cooper Square Committee, 61 East
4th St., NYC 10003.
News for the other New York. CITY LIMITS.
Which City Do You Live In?
For some New Yorkers, times have never been better. Aided by
massive tax breaks, luxury housing affords the rich perhaps more
choices than ever before. And there is no shortage of eight color
magazines to help make life in the city a dream come true.
For other New Yorkers, times have never been worse. With the
vacancy rate for decent, affordable housing at about zero percent,
and entire neighborhoods under the gun of the greatest real estate
boom in the city's history, the rest of us face a housing crisis of
unprecedented dimensions.
Ope magazine covers the other New York. CITY LIMITS.Ten
times a year we bring our readers news and analysis they can't get
anywhere else:
How community groups across New York are organizing to
revitalize their neighborhoods and fight gentrification. Why fair
housing remains an issue, and how recent pro-tenant legislation
went down to defeat in Albany with the help of "pro-tenant"
legislators. Coverage of New York's byzantine housing programs
so good even landlords and the city's housing czars read us.
Plus resource listings. Book reviews. Editorials. How-to articles.
(Like how to conduct a rent strike. Research your landlord. Take
on the Board of Estimate.)

City Limits Magazine, February 1985 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, February 1985 Issue

Diunggah oleh

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

SHARING

Anda mungkin juga menyukai