I LOVE my job... and I am SO busy. One of the staff members has been out for the past two weeks and I have taken over his duties of constituent correspondence in addition to trying to finish my main project (a report and some sort of publicity on 80/20 housing developments, 421-a tax incentives, and affordable housing policy in general).

I really enjoy working in the District Office (Gale's office on the Upper West Side). The staff member that runs this office, Rosalba Rodriguez, is in charge of housing issues (a huge area) and assists an enormous amount of individuals in the community on a daily basis. The District office is Gale's face to her community, and Rosalba, Anne Cunningham (another staff member in the District Office, in charge of Seniors), and Peter Goldwasser (the third District Office Staff Member, who is currently gone, and who is in charge of general quality of life issues and constituent correspondence) are really the individuals responsible for communicating with Gale's public and working with them on their individual problems on a day-to-day basis. I am ever impressed by the degree of accessibility in this office... Gale has, by far, the most active, involved constituents in NYC, and I believe this is because they feel that if they say something, they will be heard. And not only will they be heard, each person will be heard by Gale specifically. Gale is adament about seeing each piece of correspondence that comes in/out of the office. There is no issue that is dismissed as irrelevant - Gale will personally address all of her constituents issues, and it is a very heartening thing to witness.

She would not be able to do this, however, without Rosalba. Rosalba works almost as hard as Gale (who works seven days a week - sometimes until 2 am). Community members come in to speak to Rosalba thoughout the entire day - she sometimes acts as a lifecoach. Rosalba will do whatever she can to rectify housing injustices and to assist people in accessing all the services they are eligible for. She is an incredible resource for the community and, as she is the person I work with on a day to day basis, I have learned an immense amount from her, and from the individuals who come in to seek her help. This also creates an air of comedy in the office. As you can imagine, some of the individuals who come in are a tad nuts:-)

Similarly, as I have taken over writing/editing/oversight of correspondence in one of the staff member's absence (Peter)I have really gotten a feel for the vast spectrum of issues that people will come to Gale for assistance with. For example, in one batch of letters, I have written about construction, noise, traffic, housing, carriage horses, MTA issues, etc., etc. There are a lot of instances in which individuals have valid issues, in which agencies should respond, but without written support and backing from a body such as the Council Member, these issues would go unaddressed or would at least be addressed at a much slower pace. Even if our correspondence doesnt necessarily help the individual, it makes them feel attended to, listened to, and validated - which in many instances is almost as important (obviously there are many instances in which action is far more relevant than feelings). While correspondence has been a great tool for exposure, it has also been immensely time consuming, and I am beginning to panic at the reality of the summer's looming deadline (next Thursday:-/). I have not made the progress I would have like to have made on my housing project, and I have a feeling the next week is going to be insane.


I have leaned so much about housing policy during the 5 weeks I have been working for Gale Brewer… and yet, I know nothing. This fact became abundantly clear to me during a meeting I had last Tuesday with Council Member Gale Brewer and two women from the Settlement Housing Fund, Carol Lamberg and Susan Cole. The Settlement Housing Fund is a non-profit housing development corporation with the mission of creating and maintaining "economically and ethnically diverse affordable housing with community programs and neighborhood amenities." I would be informed that these women were two of less than a handful of individuals who truly understand housing in NYC, and that this was to be the meeting of my lifetime.

I had an opportunity to interact with Carol and Susan for a while until Gale arrived (she is the busiest person I have met in my entire life) and I immediately took to them. Carol informed me that she initially entered into the housing policy field after having done a program similar to CUSP and having written a thesis on housing projects on the upper west side (which was a very ethnically(and economically) segregated neighborhood). It was interesting to hear her critique her thesis as “young and arrogant” as she and Susan explained to me the absolute necessity of mixed income neighborhoods and housing and for support for the middle income bracket (~80-130% of median income). A mix of incomes "provides role models for upward mobility, financial stability for building operations and avoids the concentration of a very low income population in one location." Without this diversity, a ghetto-esque situation emerges, which is bad for schools, crime, quality of life, etc. Moreover, with current housing policy, there is no support for the people floating around in the middle; the City’s “working poor.” So, really the only people that can “afford” to live here are those who are poor enough to qualify for government housing assistance, and the very wealthy. This is a very dangerous situation, and while this emergerence of stark class division is occuring throughout the country (and especially in major cities) I have seen that it is an enormous problem in NYC, and how to maintain an economically diverse population within this city is and will be an issue of major concern.

Carol and Susan stressed the need to re-define the definition of "substantial government support" in terms of housing, to develop housing support for the moderate income bracket, and to formulate affordable housing programs that incorporated mixed income commnities in order to ensure stability, good schools, etc. These women literally knew everything in the world about housing. It was fascinating to hear them speak. It was equal parts history, social and political lesson as it was a housing tutorial. Beyond that, they were quite cool.

Last week was very eventful. Wednesday (6/27) I represented Council Member Brewer at a report release and panel discussion commissioned by the Citizens Budget Committee and the New Yorkers for Parks. The report was titled: "Making the Most of Our Parks" and involved an examination (beginning in 2006)of all NYC's parks in terms of acceptability of conditions, generated revenue, staffing, etc. The goal of the report was to examine the progress and change within NYC's park system since its worst point (the early 90's). The report emphasized the enormous positive change in NYC's parks and the significant increase in the size of the park system - but also highlighted some structural issues that contribute to lingering shortcomings and failures in the park system

The meeting commenced with a summary of the report findings and the associated conclusions. Emphasis was placed on: a) the persistent discrepancies in quality of park maintenance between higher income and lower income neighborhoods (though this gap has narrowed between 1994 and 2006); b) potential for greater revenue to be made in parks, and the need to create incentives to increase park-generated revenue; c) lack of, and need for, a comprehensive (inclusive of all types of park space) strategic expansion and development plan; d) the lack of, and need for, an objective, standardized measure of park use and efficiency; e) the importance of the private non-profit and Department of Parks and Recreation relationship (non-profits spend over $100 million on parks and contribute to oversight and maintenance of parks), and the need to have consistent guidelines for dealing with non-profits and revenue sharing, maintenance efforts, capital funding, and funding for operation and maintenance staff.

Following the presentation of the report results there was a panel discussion during which members of the audience and members of the panel discussed the implications of the findings and raised questions about the recommendations offered by the report. Central issues were: a) the issue of encouraging revenue making in parks and the possibility of allowing parks to directly keep a portion of that revenue (at what point do you draw the line? What will the impact be on park experience? What will the revenues be used for?); b) How will the status of the parks be impacted by Bloomberg leaving? How can we ensure the continued progress over the next 10-15 years?; c) Need to bring all parks up to acceptable status and to focus on lower income neighborhoods; d) the issue of capital spending versus expense maintenance spending – why is there not more money spent on maintenance to prevent the need for larger capital investments?; e)issues with turning parks into a source of revenue (could possibly increase the discrepancies in resources between parks in high versus low income neighborhoods, could significantly alter the park experience if boutiques, advertising, etc were to invade).

After this meeting (which was really interesting - I have never examined parks through a social/economic/political lens), I went to a Stated Council Meeting in City Hall. Stated meetings occur about twice a month and are mandatory for all Council Members. During the meeting there is opportunity for Proclamations and Citations to be made for notable citizens, organizations, etc., and then the Council votes on local bills. The bills up for vote are presented and there is time to voice concerns and arguments against/ for the bills. During this meeting there was a revolutionary campaign finance bill up for vote (which incidentally was signed into law this Tuesday by Mayor Bloomberg-and I was there:-)), which would drastically limit the amount of campaign contributions candidates are allowed to accept. While the bill aimed to level the playing field for candidates with less money, the minority in opposition to the bill felt it would do the opposite by favoring candidates with large personal wealth to put into their campaign. Other bills which passed included a complete revamping of the city's building code (this was also signed into law Tuesday morning).

The thing that has most stuck out to me in my time working on Gale Brewer’s staff is the enormous amount of no-win situations that pervade policy making. It’s a good perspective to gain, because it is far easier to advocate for change and revolution when you are not the one responsible to the public once they go through. I think one of the most striking experiences I have had so far has been attending a Town Hall meeting last week. The topic of the meeting was housing – an issue which is extremely emotional for almost everyone in this City. There are a lot of issues in the District we represent (District 6 – the Upper West Side) surrounding affordable housing, illegal hotels, large-scale development, and housing for specific populations (the homeless, mentally ill, etc.). While the meeting was almost comical at some points, because of the colorful personalities the topic brought out, it was also frustrating viewed through the lens of policy making. There truly is no way to make everyone happy for a lot of these issues.

In one particularly interesting display, an obviously well known man, large in size and personality, presented an (in my non-expert opinion) extremely well researched argument in favor of a proposed development that would create affordable housing units for the mentally ill. The basis of much of his case was a refutation of the arguments presented in a flyer dispersed throughout the neighborhood, attacking this project. After this gentleman very forcefully, but factually, challenged this flyer and the protests of those against the project, another man, apparently equally well-known at these meetings, had a psychiatric nurse come to the front of the room and explain why she felt the project should not go through. From this point, the entire subject got emotional and passionate. Mothers feared that the development would attract drug dealers and criminality to the (very quiet, residential) neighborhood. Residents felt that, though they acknowledged the need for increased affordable housing for the general public and for special populations, that they were being asked to shoulder a greater amount of this burden than residents in other areas of the city. Others essentially called all of these people crazy, citing that the patients were not going to be “just released from institutions mental cases” but people who just needed additional support – support which would be provided. The crux of the issue seemed to be a lack of knowledge and understanding of the project.
In response to this, one of the panel members, Jessica Katz, from HPD, presented her view of the project (which HPD is supervising) and the facts of its development, and finished by offering to take anyone who wanted it on a tour of the site. What was interesting to me, however, is how clear it was that there was pretty much nothing she could say that would get those opposed to the project to look at it objectively and factually, there was too much emotion, passion and fear wrapped up in the issue.

Late in to the meeting, the Manhattan Borough President, Scott Stringer, arrived, and at the urging of the crowd presented an extremely well articulated and delivered summary of how he wanted to see the city progress into the future, with 2030 being the current year of focus – the year in which NYC is predicted to have increased by a million people. What was incredibly refreshing about Mr. Stringer was his emphasis on looking ahead at the need for sustainability and “greening” of the city, the need to shift focus away from targeting the extremely rich (which are needed to create a prosperous tax base, etc) and toward increasing the amount of affordable housing and opportunity available to the lower and middle classes, and the importance of keeping the amount of time and energy spent on relatively trivial matters of difference in perspective, in order to be able to make true progress. He got a huge applause from the entire room. I thought he was pretty fantastic at not catering to the crowd and maintaining focus on the issues that truly matter for the future of this city.

Though I feel everyday that I am playing catch up and trying to learn about various issues and ideas that have a million angles, I am consistently struck by how incredibly fantastic it is to be exposed to policymaking in this City at this point in time. There is so much change that has happened as of late, and will continue to happen into the future. Examining the different perspectives of constituents, officials, etc, and envisioning how in the world it might all come together to create something positive, is simultaneously fascinating and frustrating.

The City So Far....

Monica, Andrea, Lindsey, Natalia and I in Chinatown

I really enjoyed orientation because it definitely allowed me to become familiar and comfortable with the city (at least a bit of it) and the subway. Moreover, I think it was really a good opportunity to become closer with the people in our group.
The ethnography experience and China Town were a ton of fun. I thought China Town was a really incredible place. I was especially struck by the age differences in the Asian population living there. I observed a lot of older men and women, and very few younger men. Moreover, during the time we were there we observed lots of younger women assisting elderly women (grandmother,aunt,etc?). I dont know why this is, or why it seemed that the population was getting older... but during the panel discussion I gathered that it might be due to a migration of younger people out of the area. This is particuliarly interesting to me from a policy perspective as for what it might mean for China Town, and for the areas that are now being populated by those who leave the China Town area....
I think I learned more during the Sunday walking tour than I have learned in some of my classes during an entire semester (not really... but close). Bob was incredibly knowledgable and interesting - it was amazing to me that he could know SO much about such an enormous range of topics and areas. I had never seen Ground Zero, and I thought he did a great job with details and with showing us the specific ways the city has structurally responded -- hardening, etc. I cant wait to go back to Stone St. and too the South Street Sea Port.
Last Tuesday I went to a Mets game with my cousin which was a great NY experience. Though the Mets lost in the 12th inning it was a great game and I got a great feel for what it is like to be a Mets fan. All baseball teams have different types of fans... and what I like most about Mets fans was that there was absolutely no negative cheering whatsoever. If someone on the Mets struck out/had a bad inning/etc. there was no negative comments from the stands, and the crowd was just so genuinely behind the team. It was cool.
This weekend I had another sporting experience in the area. I went to the Belmont Stakes Saturday in Elmont, NY (right off the LIRR). It was a ton of fun and I bet the winning horse:-) (I only won $10.50 but still...)
Last week and this weekend I also got to spend some time in the East Village, the Upper West Side, the Meat Packing District and Little Italy. I love this city so much. Everyday I kind of feel like I'm in Disney World.

This Summer....

This summer I will be interning for Council Member Gale Brewer. Gale Brewer has been the Council Member representing District 6 (Upper West Side and Clinton) since 2002. She was reelected to her current term in 2005. Gale chairs the Committee on Technology in Government and also sits on the following committees: Aging; Finance; General Welfare; Higher Education; Mental Health, Mental Retardation, Alcoholism, Drug Abuse & Disability Services; Oversight and Investigations, and Waterfronts.

This summer I will be gaining exposure to a great deal of what goes on in the Council Member's office (which is a lot). I will be involved with constituent and organization correspondence, allowed to sit in on hearings and meetings and press conferences, and gain exposure to the administrative processes in public office. I will also be working on a broader project for the duration of the summer that will address 80/20 Housing in the Upper West Side.

80/20 Housing is a program which provides tax-exempt financing bonds to finance the construction of residential buildings in which at least 20% of the residence units are affordably priced (with the remaining 80% rented at market value). These affordable units can be rented by individuals who make up to 50% of the area median income. My job this summer will be to research the location of all the 80/20 buildings in Council Member Brewer's district and make a complete, descriptive list. The goal of this project is to make the existence of these units known and also to fight to keep these units affordable.

Hellllllo

Welcome to my account of my summer in New York City. If the first week here is any sign of what is to come, this should be an incredible experience...
As for who I am, my name is Danielle Bangs. I am a senior Policy Analysis and Management major at Cornell University. I was born and raised in Ithaca, and transferred to Cornell from Boston University. My interests center around economic and social policy. I am moved by inequality (in all realms), poverty and injustice. I am particuliarly interested in minority and immigrant rights, the living wage movement and workers rights, health care reform and educational reform. I am potentially interested in pursuing politics, law or a career in policy analysis and/or advocacy. I hope to use my experiences at Cornell, in CUSP, and in future educational pursuits to impact the state of our nation and world - which i firmly believe is a wonderfull place, but one that is in need of serious reform.
I have a wonderful, incredible family, and friends that mean the world to me. I love children. People fascinate me and I love to meet/study/analyze them. I love to experience other cultures and countries, and I hope that traveling is always a significant part of my life. I am interested in theatre, literature, traveling, philosophy and religion, music, social justice, food and restaurants, history, psychology, human biology, economics, film and fashion...etc...
I am particuliarly excited to be able to work at New York City Council for Council Member Gale Brewer because it will be an invaluable opportunity to experience politics and policy making in a very diverse population. I am also thrilled to be able to see and experience everything this incredible city has to offer. I am extremely thankful for this opportunity.