0 Bewertungen0% fanden dieses Dokument nützlich (0 Abstimmungen)
137 Ansichten36 Seiten
Cover Story: Arson on the Hudson by Harriet Cohen.
Other stories include Tim Ledwith on the fall of the Corporate Transit Tax and the massive problems facing New York City's mass transit system; Susan Baldwin on the new Home Ownership Program and its getting to work on its initial housing project two years late; Yvette Moore on Starrett City tenants looking to know more about the toxic dumping in their area and the potential health risks they face; Tom Robbins on the fight over enterprise zones within the city; Part II of The 62-Acre Question by William A. Price, and more.
Cover Story: Arson on the Hudson by Harriet Cohen.
Other stories include Tim Ledwith on the fall of the Corporate Transit Tax and the massive problems facing New York City's mass transit system; Susan Baldwin on the new Home Ownership Program and its getting to work on its initial housing project two years late; Yvette Moore on Starrett City tenants looking to know more about the toxic dumping in their area and the potential health risks they face; Tom Robbins on the fight over enterprise zones within the city; Part II of The 62-Acre Question by William A. Price, and more.
Copyright:
Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
Verfügbare Formate
Als PDF, TXT herunterladen oder online auf Scribd lesen
Cover Story: Arson on the Hudson by Harriet Cohen.
Other stories include Tim Ledwith on the fall of the Corporate Transit Tax and the massive problems facing New York City's mass transit system; Susan Baldwin on the new Home Ownership Program and its getting to work on its initial housing project two years late; Yvette Moore on Starrett City tenants looking to know more about the toxic dumping in their area and the potential health risks they face; Tom Robbins on the fight over enterprise zones within the city; Part II of The 62-Acre Question by William A. Price, and more.
Copyright:
Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
Verfügbare Formate
Als PDF, TXT herunterladen oder online auf Scribd lesen
THE NEWS MAGAZINE OF NEW YORK CITY HOUSING AND NEIGHBORHOODS
Fall of the Transit Tax Battle Over Enterprise Zones
Starrett City's Toxic Worries MAY 1982 $1.50 The Neighborhood Front The Urban Homesteading Assistance Board's latest self-help update for April, 1982 is out and available. The newsletter contains information for tenant-managed buildings, including a list of Tenant Interim Lease program participants. Call 749-0602 . ... A project long advocated by Hope Community in East Harlem-the reno- vation of the IRT station at Lexington Avenue and East 103rd Street-is soon to commence. The MTA confirmed that $3 million has been set aside for the project and $30,000 of that for perma- nent, durable art. Hope Community collected 3,000 names on a petition for the changes last spring . . . apartments (also for $250 per unit) from the city. The building has been managed by Southside United Housing Develop- ment (Los Sures) for several years under its community management contract. l'he Northwest Bronx Community and Clergy Coalition is attempting to convince the Exxon Corporation that providing funds for low interest weath- erization loans makes good economic as well as energy sense. Exxon, thus far, remains unconvinced. The Coalition is interested in hearing from any Exxon stockholders. Call or write: NWBCC Energy Committee, 2656 Decatur Avenue, Bronx, NY 10458,933-3101 . . .. The Kingsbridge Heights Neigh- borhood Improvement Association, also in the northwest Bronx, filed a challenge with two federal banking regulators last fall to keep Citibank from closing a branch at Kingsbridge Road. Citing the Community Reinvest- ment Act, the group asked the regu- lators to prevent the closing. Rebuffed in that attempt, the group has since filed to prevent Citibank from opening a potentially far more lucrative branch on Park Avenue in midtown Manhattan. The People's Firehouse, along with Los Sures and St. Nicholas NPHRC, launched their North Brooklyn anti- arson project with a two-day conference in April. Funded with $75,000 in federal Community Development funds, the project will assist tenants and others in preventing arson and detecting its approach in the north Brooklyn area .. .. The N. Y. Neighborhood Anti- Arson Center has a computer print-out available of all structural fires by building address from 1978 to 1981 in all five boroughs. This data can help con- struct a fire history of a building or an entire neighborhood. Call 239-9414 for information. "Help for Owners of 1 to 4 Family Homes", a guide published by the Neighborhood Stabilization Program of the City's Commission on Human Rights includes summaries of resources and agencies needed for small home- owners. Info ranges from where to get tax appeal assistance to how and where to get the best prices for fuel and insurance. $1.00 by mail from: NYC Commission on Human Rights, 52 Duane St., NY, NY 10007. Attn: Ray Tuite .. .. The Manhattan Valley Dev- elopment Corporation on Manhattan's Upper West Side is scheduled to start the gut rehabilitation of 157 Manhattan Avenue, one of its Community Man- agement buildings. The building is part of a package of three including 153 Manhattan Avenuel, . which was sched- uled to be purchased by MVDC on April 29. The second Community Management building to be sold, MVDC's first, 951 Columbus Avenue, was bought in December, 1980 .. . The Trust for Public Land's NYC Land Project reports in its latest bulletin that its two-year-old efforts to help a group of Staten Island residents preserve a stretch of wooded hillside property with geologic formations dating back 400 million years have borne fruit. The Serpentine Art & Nature Commons, as the area is called, has been snatched back from developers' condominium plans, and through a combination of land donations and the forestalling of city auction, a nonprofit land trust formed to own and safeguard the :t:: land. O ~ The Neighborhood Front is a new In what Real Estate Weekly dubbed "one of the most intricate real estate transactions in recent New York City history" (That's saying something!) Vanderveer Estates, a 2,500 apartment community in Brooklyn's East Flatbush was sold to an investment group headed by Ivan Penson of Great Neck. The sale, for $50 million, was engineered by Helmsley-Spear Senior Vice President D. Kenneth Patton who has been trou- bleshooting for the complex since last year. The long troubled development is undergoing a difficult $25 million renovation (see City Limits, November 1981). Several community groups are watchdogging the rehab to assure con- tinued vitality as low and moderate in- come housing .... In North Brooklyn, tenants of 76 Richardson Street, a 20-unit building managed by the St. Nicholas Neighborhood Preservation and Housing Rehabilitation Corpora- tion in the Williamsburg section, have purchased their building for $250 per unit from the city. The sale is the first for the group out of its Community Management program for city-owned buildings. The group also purchased 586 and 586A Morgan Street from the city for the tenants residing there, said Development Director Sandra Abram- son. Tenants of 582 Morgan Street, another Community Management building, are also planning to purchase their buildings . .. In nearby south Wil- liamsburg, residents of 78 South First Street became the first to purchase their ~ feature of City Limits. Please send your ~ items of interest to NOTES, City ---.. ...., Limits, 424 W. 33rd St., NY, NY 10001. CITY LIMITS/May 1982 2 Dear Readers, It's been a good while since we used this space to talk about how we are doing, and where we are headed. In the past year, this Pllblication changed its format, expanded in size and increased its coverage of issues around the city. Like community groups everywhere, we are adjusting to changing times and (even) slimmer resources. Right now, we need to find out more about who our readers are, what they want and how we can grow if we're to stick around for the rest of the Reagan era and beyond. First, some facts: as our masthead tells you each month, City Limits is published by three groups-the Associ- ation of Neighborhood Housing Developers, the Pratt Institute Center for Community and Environmental Development and the Urban H.ome- steading Assistance Board. Each "spon- sor" contributes to the upkeep of the magaz!ne with yearly payments. These CONTENTS A Leffer to the Readers payments amount to roughly 20 percent of the approximately $90,000 per year it costs to staff, publish and promote City Limits. Our approximately 1,400 paid sub- scribers, monthly single-issue sales, and advertising revenue account for another 25 percent, and we rely upon a few 'Very helpful and loyal foundations and cor- porations to supply the larger half of our budget. Those funders have stood by us while giving afirm nudge to generate a bigger portion of our budget, and move closer to becoming a self-suf- ficient operation. That goal is elusive. but we have taken important steps-the ads you see are part of that effort as are our stepped-up promotional mailings to bring in new readers. We're also trying to reach out to a larger audience: energy, transit, health and economic development are all vital aspects of community life and we've begun to cover more of these and you will see . , , ..~ " more in thefuture. To give us a better idea of your interest in such expanded coverage, there's a reader survey questionnaire beginning on the back cover. We urge you to take the time to fill it out and send it to us. You will also be hearing/rom us in the near future with a larger request. We are establishing the "Friends of City Limits", a group of readers who can afford to make a contribution beyond the cost of a subscription. We hope you'l/ be as supportive of that effort as you have been as readers. Finally, we want to underscore once more that City Limits is an open forum: we welcome your letters, articles and calls. Thefeedback we get is that City Limits is an often co.,ntroversial, but useful and important publication. Let us know what you think. Regards, The City Limits Staff CCITYUMIlS) Volume XII Number 5 " The Neighborhood Front Short Term Notes Landlord's Return Stymies Rehabs Savings Bail-Out Arson on the Hudson Jumping the 1\unstile Small Homes Rising Starrett City's Toxic Worries Combat Over Enterprise Zones Penn Yards Debate NYC's Housing ltends Home Repair ~ Slow Cover Photo by AI Sacco 2 4 6 7 8 11 15 18 20 24 26 30 3 CITY LIMITS/May 1982
Short Term Notes . , MOre Housing Court Info Tenl,Ults in four of New York City's boroughs are making in Housing Court exhibiting more self -con- fidence and less trepidation as they are now armed with pertinent materials provided by tenant volunteer informa- tional services. Inspired by the creation over a year ago of the Bronx Task Force on Housing Court, the volunteer efforts iti Brooklyn, Queens, and Manhattan have begun to provide answers to questions from both tenants and landlords on subjects as diverse as how to understand what's happening in court, serve or answer a dispossess, secure a low-interest loan to repair a buildirig, or simply fill out bureaucratic court forms properly. "We're the1youngest of the volunteer groups," said 1 Betty Lorwin, one of the organizers of the Manhattan Volunteer Housing Information Service. first the judges were wary of us," she explained, "but now I think everyone agrees that we are l\elpful-we're another place to go to talk to people and calm down in court." Four -months-old, the Manhattan unit, operated on a tri- lingual basis (Englisl1, Spanish, and Chinese), is run by volunteers from a dozen community . . , "It's still a fmger in the dyke-type operation in Brooklyn, but I guess it's made a difference, at least in catching technicalities and lessening the number of defaults," said Michael Powell, one of the founding tenant organizers in Brooklyn, where some 22 organizations share in this service instituted in September, 1981. In the Bronx where an average of 50 tenants receive help each day (Monday through Friday), the task force has realized'substantial courthouse improve- ments, inCluding Written agreements between landlords and tenants, num- bered court cases on the daily calendar bilingual announcements on procedures, and denials of defaults against tenants unless the landlord is present.OS.B. elTY LIMITS/May 1982 April Fool's Day at Mobil About 300 welfare mothers and their allies-union, church, feminist and community groups-marched on the Mobil Oil Corporation's midtown headquarters on Aprill. The event was sponsored by the Downtown Welfare Advocate Center and the Redistribute America Movement, welfare organizing groups, One goal of the action, explained DWAC director Marq May, was "spotlight one of the most notori()us and able-bodied recipients on the dole. " The march on MobIl followed meetings in March between' welfare activists and several of the city's largest corporations, at which the companies were challenged to reinvest significant amounts of their federally mandated tax breaks into social programs. 0 Auctions Readied for Lower East Side The city's Department of Housing Preservation and Development is about to initiate an end run around Commun- ity Planning Board #3 on Manhattan's Lower East Side. The city is planning to disregard that board's 1979 moratorium on auction sales of all city-owned property within its borders. At that time the bbard affirmed the ongoing work of local housing organizations and actively encouraged them to designate selected properties for rehabilitation, sweat equity and new construction. That sales ban, similar to one voiced by Community Board #7 on the Upper West Side, has kept the city from auc- tioning foreclosed lots and buildings to the highest bidder. Auctions of other 4 city properties were reintroduced in the spring of 1980. Now, an internal HPD memorandum 119 vacant Lower East Side buildings for disposal; 64 to be sold at auction in the Fall of this year and 55 to be sold through a competitive proposal procedure. Many of the buildings designated are either parts of, Qr entire pieces for projects in various stages of planning by local groups. Cutbacks in federal funds and changes in city policies have stymied many of those schemes. The city's move, which will begin with the submission of properties for community review this Spring, is expected to spark a heated loral debate. 0 Landlords Told to Stay Within the Law By JIM MENDELL City housing commissioner Anthony Gliedman responded last month to a 10-month-oid petition the state Attorney General by directing the Rent Stabilization Association, a landlord group, to refrain from activities "not essential to or directly related to the administration of the Rent Stabilization Law." The petition, med last June, had asked the city's Department of Housing Preservation and Development to order the RSA to "cease and desist" from illegally spending its funds for activities aimed at undermining the rent stabiliza- tion law. Pursuing such activities, the organization allegedly had spent $925,000 in member dues over a two- and-a-half year period. The RSA was created by law to administer the stabili- zation system, and its major task is to fund the Conciliation and Appeals Board, which rules on landlord-tenant disputes in over 800,000 rent stabilized city apartments. "Any reports prepared on behalf of the RSA should consist of the objective compilation of data necessary ' for proper enforcement of the RSL (Rent Stabilization Law)," said Gliedman in a letter to RSA Chairman Sheldon Katz. The housing commissioner issued his directive, based on the opinion of the city's corporation counsel, on April 1. Ten days earlier, Attorney General Robert Abrams med suit against the RSA on the same grounds raised in the then-unanswered petition to Gliedman. Minimal Impact Spokesmen . from ?n all sides of the issue said the directIve would have minimal impact on the way the RSA conducts business. Gliedman was just ordering the RSA to "comply with the law which it is already doing," said Arthur Rich- enthal, an RSA attorney. The order was made for "political reasons," Richenthal contended, noting that the day after he sent his letter to Katz, Glied.man appeared before the New York State Assembly Committee on Housing. William Rowen of the New York State Tenant and Neighborhood Coalition, which originated the complaint on which the Attorney General's legal action is based, was skeptical about what impact Glied.man's directive would have on the landlord group's activities. As an example of the RSA's con- tinued excesses, Rowen cited a suit brought by tenants against the Rent Guidelines Board that charged the rate- setting body had allowed excessive in- creases over the past eight years. The RSA still retains attorneys in the case to defend the board's actions, Rowen explained. Yet the petition called on the RSA to stop intervening in lawsuits in behalf of landlords. Rent Stabilization Association Chairman Sheldon Katz such as lobbying and public relations that favor landlords over tenants, but it will seek restitution of at least the $925,000 allegedly spent to advocate landlord positions, to be used instead to advocate tenant rights. "It is very important that wrong-doers pay a price for their wrong-doing as a deterrent effect," Leventhal emphasized. 0 Tenant Coop Workshop A full-day training workshop on ten- ant-initiated cooperatives will be presented on Thursday, May 27th by the Community Development Legal Assistance Center (CD LAC) of the ' Council of New York Law Associates. The conference will focus on case histories of tenant groups from a variety of income levels who have taken over ownership of buildings from city and private sources. The program will address methods by which tenants have successfully pur- chased buildings; steps to be taken for cooperative conversion under New York State law; analysis of tenant-initiated cooperative offering plans; representa- tion of tenant groups; rights of parties involved in a cooperative conversion. Conference speakers will include private and public agency attorneys and If tenant leaders from buildings involved E:l in tenant-sponsored conversions. It will be held at the Association of the Bar, 42 :s West 44th Street, New York, New York. "The whole issue," Rowen asserted, "is-can Mayor Koch's administration take steps against illegal acts of land- lords without affecting their campaign contributions for his race for Governor?' , The lawsuit against the RSA is going ahead on two fronts, said Melvyn Leventhal, Assistant Attorney General in charge of consumer protection. Not only will the suit seek to prevent the RSA from engaging in "illegal acts" 5 Registration is $20 for representatives of community organizations and tenant associations, $35 for Council members and legal service attorneys and $50 for all others. Group discount rates are available for two or more participants from the same organization. Advance registration is necessary and can be secured through the Community Development Legal Assistance Center. 36 West 44th Street. New York, New York 10036, or call 840-1541.0 CITY LIMITSIMay 1182 Former Owner's Return Stymies R ~ h a b T IME IS RUNNING OUT FOR the 44 low income homesteader families who, with the help of a $125 million loan from the National Con- sumer Cooperative Bank, had planned by now to be living in their rehabilitated homes in Manhattan Valley on the Upper West Side. Originally scheduled to close in Sep- tember, 1981, the loan has received several extensions, but, according to Philip S1. Georges, the bank's regional director, if the lengthy and byzantine lawsuit that has kept the homesteaders from securing title to the seven proper- ties on West 105th Street is not settled by mid-June, "We will have to shift the loan, and that's a shame." The vacant buildings, located near Broadway, are seven of the total IS in rem properties in Manhattan Valley that landlord Raleigh Davenport claims to still own even though they were taken by the city for nonpayment of taxes on May 2S, 1978. Davenport asserts that the city took title without properly informing him of the foreclosure proceedings, while the city claims that Davenport's ' charges, which resulted in the New York State Supreme Court's restoration of title to him in May, 1981, are invalid because it was never properly served by Daven- port, who won the judgment by default. . Following the latest rounds early in April, 1982, in both the state supreme and federal bankruptcy courts, the fate of these properties is- still up in the air because no trial has been held in either court to resolve the ownership question. According to city tax records, Daven- port owes at least $1.3 million in back ' taxes on 17 parcels. Following the hearing April 13 in U.S. Bankruptcy Court where Judge Edward J. Ryan said he could not rule on the ownership of the property and, as a result, annulled a six-month stay on interpreting this matter, Davenport obtained another stay from a second judge, which impedes furt'her movement at this time on Ryan's ruling. CITY LIMITS/May 1982 "Right now, I own the property, it's all mine," said Davenport, following this most recent court action. "Anyone's efforts to interfere are stayed, at least until next month." He has applied in U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York to have his case against the city and his former tenants heard as one trial before a jury. No date has been set for this case, but Davenport is hopeful that it will be heard sometime this year. In this lawsuit, Davenport hopes to prove he is the true owner of the property by establishing that the city failed to comply with its own regulation that stipulates that notice must be given 60 days in advance of the date in which redemption rights expire. Two former owners recently recovered the title to an East Side town house worth $1 million in a similar case in federal court. Under city law, a landlord with tax arrears has up to one year to repay back taxes. "What gO()d does it do to k ~ p going to court if the case can never be heard," queried Charyl Edmonds, who super- vises homesteading efforts at the Urban Homesteading Assistance Board, the technical assistance group that is helping the 44 families. "When we ' get our day in court," Edmonds asserted, "we can't lose, but in the meantime, what is he trying to do-make us lose our loan? He can't win this case and, besides, he owes over $1 million." According to Andrew Quartner, an attorney with the law fIrm of Debevoise and Plimpton who is handling the case for the homesteaders, his clients still expect to buy the buildings for the original price of $SOO-a-unit. "Davenport lost the buildings and doesn't have any legal right to them, and we intend to prove that whenever we get the chance," he said. Meanwhile, another Davenport building-59 West 105th Street, originally scheduled to be part of a self- help rehabilitation package to be carried out with moderate Section 8 funding- has been severed from this loan proposal which is about to close because Davenport still holds title to this vacant building. "There are too many' buildings at stake here, and all he can hppe to do is ruin plans for much needed housing for people in this neighborhood," conclud- ed Leah Schneider, program director at the Manhattan V alley Development Corporation, the nonprofit community group sponsoring this self-help housing. Tenant and community plans in the other seven Davenport holdings in ;:j Manhattan Valley, some of which are in ~ the city's alternative management ~ programs, are also still in limbo because ~ of this entangled legal hattIe between :::; Davenport and the city.OS.B. T RADITIONALLY THE FINAN- cial backbone of moderate income communities, the savings and loan industry is in trouble. Buffeted by high interest rates and banking deregulation, literally hundreds of savings and loan institutions collapsed or were absorbec;l through mergers during the past two years. The implications of this collapse for potential homebuyers and landlords are especially severe; the thrift industry is historically the principle mortgage' lenders for their communities, rather than the more diversified commerciai banks. f Responding to this downward trend, the housing sub-committee of the Con- gressional House Banking Committee is formulating a federal bail-out of the savings and loan industry. Larger than either the Chrysler or Lockheed bail- outs, bill H.R. 5568 would authorize $7.5 billion of federal capital assistance for all savings and loans institutions, or "thrifts," with a net worth of less than 2 percent of total assets and certifiable losses for two consecutive quarters. While the bill proposes that institu- tions receiving capital assistance must use 50 percent of their net new deposits to make mortgage loans at rates 1 per- cent below the Federal Reserve rate, a coalition of labor, consumer and hous- ing groups advocate for more stringent conditions. The coalition is proposing that 30 percent of each institution's mortgages must consist of carefully regulated adjustable rate or fIXed-rate mortgages. "This will be the largest bail-out of private industry in the history of the country," commented Alan Fishbein of the Center for Community Change and a member of the coalition. "The one- percent loans are a fig-leaf that means nothing in the real market." As defined in the bill, few, if any, savings and loan institutions will realize a net increase in savings accounts for several years. However, the bill's sponsor, Congress- man Fernand St. Germain, Democrat of Rhode Island, opposes too stringent conditions. Says Fishbein, "St. Germain fears that too many restric- tions on the savings and loans institu- tions will indirectly play into the hands Readying the Savings Bail'()ut By MICHAEL POWELL of the deregulators on the Senate side who wish to lift all restrictions on in- vestment. However, we believe that some changes are acceptable and must be instituted." One reason for this insistence is the permanent nature of the proposed bail- out. The bill would establish a standing fund to aid fmancially-ailing savings and loan institutions; it does not con- tain a termination date, known as a "sunset provision." The thrifts would be aided through capital guarantees insuring all transactions, rather than by more costly direct-cash infusions. The coalition takes the position that unless savings and loan institutions are forced to offer a sizeable percentage of loans pegged to socially stable indicators such as two-thirds the average wage rate, these institutions will increasingly abandon the moderate income mort- gage market. , A .further shift away from home mortgages by the savings and loans 7 would only exacerbate an already dan- gerous trend. While low and moderate income communities have historically maintained a stormy relationship with the thrifts, their mortgage activity is a key indication of neighborhood stabil- ity. Indeed, the last ten-to-fifteen years have witnessed an increasing take-over ,of the mortgage lending field by completely unregulated mortgage- lending companies leaving homeowners much more susceptible to fraud. Yet, ironically, as Fishbein notes, "The chairman of the Home Loan Bank Board said that had adjustable rate mortgages been around ten years ago, savings and loans could be showing a steady profit in the long-term mortgage field. Our coalition supports this view and wants to establish parameters for the adjustable rate and fIXed mortgages before they hurt, rather than help, the moderate and low-income home- owner."O CITY LIMITS/May 1982 City IJmits Focus ARSON ON THE HUDSON BylfARRTh7COHEN Hoboken's long-abandoned ferry terminal, where the east coast's largest film studio is to be built. H OBOKEN IS A STONE'S throw from Lower Manhattan and a cheap, fast train ride from Midtown. That city's uncontested, four-term Mayor has openly declared his intention to make the city safe for real estate development-in his.own words. the only growth industry that has a fighting chance in a town that has watched its factory jobs disappear south. If,New York City aims to become the inter- national corporate capita I. then Hoboken yearns to be its. senior dormitory. The old row houses and brownstones provide the raw materials for this future, and the low income, primarily Hispanic residents, the grist for the gentrification mill that empties worn-out, multi-family buildings and turns t h ~ into duplex and floor- CITY LIMITS/May 1982 through condominiums. The PATH train's first stop in New Jersey is downtown Hoboken. alongside the Old Lackawanna Terminal that once housed ferries running to New York. A conversion of this classic structure, assisted by federal grants, will house the biggest filmmak- ing studio on the East Coast. At a crowded public hearing before the City Council last Fall, the sponsoring entre- I preneurs unabashedly announced that part of the price of their seduction was the guarantee of "better restaurants and apartments". Within days a fire broke out in the nearby American Hotel. an old, half-sagging building now propped up by scaffolding and awaiting renova- tion. Once a rooming house for merchant seamen, the American Hotel 8 Photos by AL SACCOIPHOTONEWS was most recently a single-room-occu- pancy (SRO) home for transients who could sign month-to-month leases and a temporary place for families relocated from burned-out or unsafe buildings in other parts of town. The fire-officially termed arson by the city-turned a fully occupied building into an empty shell, leaving two dead, 16 injured and all 67 tenants homeless. Interior demolition was started immediately; a new sign now proclaims its condominium future. Washington Street is the main commercial strip in Hoboken, running from one end of town to the other. This thriving artery is a solid row of occupied goods and services stores with residen- tial units above. While some of the pubs and fast food places are being converted to cafes and gourmet restaurants, it is hardly the type of area one would expect to see charred roofs or burned- out shells. 1200 Washington Street is a big red brick building at the corner of 11th Street. In late October, a multiple alarm ftre there killed,II people and displaced the remaining nine tenants. Again, offtcials labeled the blaze arson. Five weeks later, the owner sold the building for $50,000 to real estate developers who already owned the vacant, soon-to- be-converted property next door .
Hoboken is a small city of 42,000 . people, half of whom are Hispanic and one-third of whom are poar. All told, there are 1,352 units of public housing and 1,200 units with federal Section 8 subsidies. Whatever else is available for low and moderate income people is in the city's crumbling buildings where rents are too high and basic services, too low. Disinvestment crossed the river from New York some time ago, narrow- ing decent and affordable housing choices for the city's poor. Five years ago, these dismal housing conditions gave birth to a grassroots organization called Por La Gente. Originally formed to protect tenants against displacement from buildings which, ironically, were being gutted for Section 8 development, Por La Gente received its ftrst battle scars waging a losing campaign for the right of former tenants to return. Now, a new real estate dynamic is unfolding. This one, too, forces tenants out, and the struggle to return is foreclosed by a book of matches and a subsequent renovation process that results in expensive condo- miniums few can afford. W HILE HOBOKEN SHUD- dered in horror at the Washington Street and American Hotel ftres, a small group of residents armed with pencils and pads sought to follow their hunches and ferret out the ftrebugs. Working along with Por La Gente, they re- searched the ownership and sales trans- actions of properties experiencing sus- picious fires. They quickly discovered that the burned buildings already had telltale signs of arson risk, having been milked by successive owners who racked up long lists of code violations, tax arrears, smaller fires, and one too many title transfers in a short period of time. Moreover, the research showed that . an unusual number of buildings with suspicious ftres were all slated for condo conversion. Some had legal sales agree- ments requiring buildings to be . delivered empty; one gave $1,000 bonuses for vacant units and reimburse- ments for the lost rents. 9 In the American Hotel deal, a sales contract with a $625,000 price tag was signed in early October, 1981, with an agreement' 'to deliver the entire build- . ing in a vacant condition at the Feb- ruary I, 1982 closing." The newly drafted mortsage indicated condomin- ium conversion; the general alarm ftre broke out on November 21, 1981. The research group documented at least ftve other cases similar to the American Hotel; in all but one the CITY LIMITS/May 1982 buildings were totally cleared of tenants. According to Sister Norberta Hunnewinkel, a Franciscan sister who has spearheaded the anti-arson and dis- placement actions, the group is frustrat- ingly short of having built a closed case. Their sleuthing has revealed a handful of names which reappear, apparently interchangeably, as seller, buyer, developer or lawyer for deals. Many are present or former business partners. frequently each other's managing agent. The signs of one realty outfit can be seen on many of these properties and almost three-quarters 'of the buildings in Hoboken slated for condo conversion. But while law enforcement agencies appear to be waiting to find a hired "torch" with gasoline-soaked rags in hand, Por La Gente has taken a more direct path as well. The group has led the response to the fires with street demonstrations and a series of demands addressed to the 10 Mayor and City Council. They have continued to call for rental protections. strict code enforcement, in-depth arson investigations, increased police surveil- lance, mandatory smoke detectors and delayed insurance pay-offs. The official city response has been meager. A fire safety program was introduced into the schools and some beefed-up building inspections made. But, as Por La Gente has found to be the pattern in Hoboken, no real commitments have been made to redress grievances and protect lives and hoines. The Hoboken residents are deter- mined to continue their fight. Already their actions have cooled the heat. The weekly winter fire wave slowed, and then stopped, although it is likely not in permanent remission. As one resident observed, "The fire pattern is connected to the housing market and sales are slow now. When they pick up again, someone may again strike the match." 0 Harriet Cohen is director oj the NY Neighborhood Anti-Arson Center. Jumping The Turnstile The Fall of the Corporate Transit Tax A s MILLIONS OF NEW YORK- ers rushed last month to register their yearly tribute to Uncle Sam, the Governor signed into law a bill that revoked a special tax on million dollar real estate deals here. That tax was originally enacted to aid the city's debilitated mass transit system. The new law-initiated by the Koch Administra- tion, backed by Chairman Richard . . Ravitch of the Metropolitan Transpor- tation Authority and passed by over- whelming majorities in both state legis- lative houses-granted Manhattan developers a return the likes of which working taxpayers can only fantasize: a retroactive repeal which could result in a full refund to 58 individuals and cor- porations who tnanged to pay the "un- By TIM LEDWITH collectable" transit tax since its inception last October. The total poten- tial windfall from the city to some of its most affluent citizens: $9 million. The running start that led to this ul- timate turnstile-jump gained most of its momentum from the influence of the real estate industry, senior partner in New York City's permanent govern- ment. Ready .. . The now-defunct tax in question was passed in Albany last July as part of a package of five tariffs designed to shore up the bus and subway system's shaky fmancing and, in the bargain, save the 75-cent fare. The transit tax itself was a '10 percent charge on the capital gains 11 (profits) derived from property sales of a million dollars or more. Most such sales, it was predicted, would occur in Manhattan, and the tax was based on what City Councilmember Ruth Mes- singer recently called "a logical argu- ment-that one of the reasons people profit from having mid-town locations is that they're served by mass transit. Therefore, people who buy and sell highly profitable land in the City of New York should pay a capital gains taxi on those sales that would go directly to. mass transit." The measure's support- ers estimated it would raise at least $30 million a year, and perhaps much more. But such estimates were based on the level of million-dollar-plus transactions to be expected under normal circum- CITY LlMITSlMay 1982 after the- - &0 ..... 11, it became dtar ..... would face an extraordi- .... in praetice. / ... w ... Ant. with the help of the Mayor's oftIce. the tax's effective date was ........ ""* more than two months, to ace.a- 1.1a tile I'IIIl estate machine moved into biIh .... , .... nearly twice as ..., .,.,....., &Gable .... it ha44'i1riaa , ................ 'Notsur- ...... , the.leYet of .... fen off stated: "The City's proposed replace- In October, when the meat rOal estate tax will do tr8DIit duty rlDllly took effect. ' more for tile MTA tt.n the CUI'J'CIlt Then. in November. Koch's capital pins tax it would be 8PPJO- ,..tiYe offtce a biD to ftOJD our to have tile npeal - puIS. IDd cIJ.IIIP is place to Jtoer8te lIIIIldI\Ium r..,a. it with mcreues In two ..... revenues. .. In closilJl.. Ravitcb, .. .... the - real former real estate developer, urpd the CI&ate tIaIIIfer taxes. But the new pro.. Jeaillators to "take action on this .... was to sales of S5OO.000 ___ as.n..t..1. ... as ..-..;"' ... " tb bhirriDa the oriaiDal . a-. .. ---.., ....---. . Ul ti 1 _.; _::.1. Heaclf ltuff from the man wIao. - --.7 lOCUS , OIl U"a-..ve uuu- responding to a questkm at the Strap. t.frh .... n cIevelopment. hanaers Campaian's IlIIIlUal .. transit EQtranced le8isIative. carrot speakout" in April, said: "We (the "..... buqry eyes, MTA) don't want the leaislature to tell real eAate I most affluent SCl- us bow to run the subway system. and ODS held oft 0Jl sales, .and we don't want to teU them what the tax the level of transactlOns f th 'State of u-.. York -; .... t relatively pitiful durina the enswna ;-:;-- 0 e u.ueu months. From January 1 to mid-March, . as the transit tax approached its demise, ' about 80 miUion-doUar-plus sales were Gol CODSUIDIIl.ted in Manhattan; during the About two weeks after Ravitch ,sent comparable period last year, such deals his letter to Albany, the Mayor's repeal- totaled around 140. and-replace bill hit the Senate floor. 1be Mayor'I ' leaillative aides and Much of the debate in that body pur- otbcr supporters of the repeal pointed ported to revolve around the poIiticaUy to this slowdown as evidence of the sacrosanct goal of preserving the capital pins tax'i nature. In a current transit fare. "If you care about MIIrdl17 letter to Assembly and Senate In Seaator .. Muhmn, .. KaclrI8aYitdtlQooclmaa :.__ tbat the capital pifti bIbereDtly unworkable. " occurred, II be asserted, "II beI:auIe as soon as the tax was then was an ;mnwtiate effort _ .'- ', real estate iDdustry, the Iaqe dewIi--'_ pmicuIarly. by bIDIDDa ..., to cbaaae this tax, that 1JeOII " 1IcId bICk OIl tnaDIIIdions." The an .... t lived up to expectl Leicb_ aqued. "because of (be cataiaty. wbetba' the taX was gom. ..... '. OoocIman's reply WIll revea1iIJa. dres8iDa Leichter. be said, " ... wbIt invite yOQ to C".lidlr most the Iona-l1lllll effect of havina on tit' books taxes wbicb are geared to die' chiIIiDa of buIineIs enterprise ... You limply caanot. in my ' judgement. Senator, and I think history will ampb' prove this point, create this kind of taxation penalty and expect any weU- run busiDess not to pick up its affairs and vamOOle (lie)." Leichter diIputed the specter of multi-national corporations leaving Manhattan because of the capital gains tax, and aDOtber member aruaed that, leaden, MfA Chairman Ravitch neatly summarized the City's line. Refenina to the increases in exisUng property traDlfer taxes the Mayor's proposal called for, Ravitcb wrote: "The city b.Hev. that the taxes will be simpler to collect and more reliable in their reveoue-pneratina capacity tban the capital pins tax. It And, the CbairmaD "the public interest wiD .,. be served by the dedication of IOUI'eeI which an stable, reliable, and rcspoasivo to risin& prica in tho iCODaaIy." Gettina to the point. he The CaIe of the $15 MiUion SI. The repeal of the transit tax must have been met with joy in the boardrooms of the American Express Corporation, even more so than those of its other corporate beneficiaries. The reason? Under the now-defllDCt tax, American Express's impending S240 million sale of its beadquarten at 12S Broad Street in Manhattan would have resulted in a tp bill of $18 miIIioo-IO pel'4'eDt of the S 180 million profit on the deal. The new tax increuea that replaced the capital gains duty, on the other band. MIlcOlst American Express, at the very most, $3 million. Thus, with help its friIIids. the ICoeh Administration bas forfeited at least SIS million in operatina subsidies for the transit system, this on a single transaction. 0 12 because they were applicable to sales of $500,000 or more, the new increases would spread the tax burden to already shaky industrial enterprises in the other boroughs. But despite this opposition, once the debate ended and the Mayor's bill was called to a vote, it passed the Senate by a margin of 48 to nine. A week later, the Assembly approved the new measure, 118 to 24. And on April 13, when the Governor signed the repeal, the transit tax was no Over the Top! In the immediate afterglow of the tax's repeal, the business climate not only warmed up, but got downright toasty. The two most immediately gra- tified benefactors were the General Motors and American Express corpora- tions. GM had transferred its Fifth A venue headquarters for $500 million last year in a complex deal that, the com- pany claimed, did not constitute an actual sale and so was not taxable under the transit levy. Mayor Koch made fleeting headlines in January with the announcement that GM would be sued for its failure to pay the tax, but the suit never materialized. Once the measure was repealed, a city Corporation 13 Counsel spokesperson explained, the issue of legal action against GM became "mute." Back at American Express, a late March announcement had revealed that the financial giant would sell its lower Manhattan corporate headquarters for $240 million, in conjunction with the company's plan to build a new, 5t.-story tower in Battery Park City. An article in the March 29 issue of Real Estate Weekly confidently understated the point: "The sale will not be finalized until June and it is expected that the State Legislature may repeal the 10 per- cent capital gains l tax by then, saving American Express as much as $18 million." Besides taking the chill out of these two celebrated cases, the newly-passed repeal's radiating warmth spread to the nearly three-score sellers who actually paid the transit tax. Of the total $9 million collected, about $3.5 million had filtered down to the MTA by early April, according to a spokesperson for that agency. Regardless, under the terms of the city's bill, all revenue collected under the transit tax in its lackluster six-month existence would be refunded. Commissioner Phillip Micha"el of the City's Finance Department explained that none of the funds collected would be refunded directly to corporate taxpayers. Instead, he noted, the first $9 million raised through the new tax increases, which the City expects will raise $42 million annually, will be directed toward refunds father than the transit system. A Shaky Landing? The prospect of an unconditional refund of this sort was the crux of opposition arguments after the repeal became law. Said Gene Russianoff, a New York Public Interest Research Group attorney who had lobbied for the transit tax since it was first proposed: "Those people who already sold their properties and paid the tax undoubtedly passed along the cost to their commer- cial tenants or co-op buyers. What's unfair is to make riders pay for this windfall to real estate developers." In the same vein, gubernatorial hopeful Mario Cuomo told the New York Times the repeal amounted to "blatant special interest legislation." con/mUftI on CITY LIMITSIMay 1982 On April 14, in response to such charges, the Mayor called for yet another law regarding the transit tax. In effect, the new proposal would give real estate developers who paid the levy the option to instead pay the increases in existing taxes which replaced it. That, the city projected, would result in cutting the refund by about half. It was clear the City's new bill was being hurriedly drafted in late April. (Just a few days before this newest proposal was announced, Claudia Wagner, a top aide in Koch's legislative ofice, offered an impassioned defense of the fuU tax refund's fairness. "We thought it would just be more equitable to refund the money and avoid the CITY LIMITS/May 1982 questions of whether the tax was uncon- stitutional or uncollectable," she stated, adding that the Mayor simply "wanted to start with a clean slate." Wagner offered no suggestion about limiting the return.) At month's end, the new proposal remained immobile in A l b a n ~ Opponents of the repeal were equally immobile, insisting that any refund at all would be unjustifiable. And despite the questions raised by a City-backed real estate windfall in this, an election year, the Finance Department stood ftrm in the contention that tax returns filed under the capital gains measure, and any other information about indivi- dual refunds or their recipients, would remain secret. ' Repairs on the IRT at 207th Street Yards. 14 What is not a secret, at least to anyone who rides the subway, is the aging transit system's desperate need for infusions of additional funding. Regardless of his or her knowledge about the byzantine world of financing and tax policy, the average straphanger knows full well where the system's next 7S-cents is corning from. And as a fare increase looms larger in the months ahead, it's likely that any funding-even $9 million-will look increasingly attractive to the elected and appointed officials charged with admin- istering mass transit. Mter all, they are the ones who will eventually have to answer the question: Who gets a free ride in New York City? 0 A s FUNDING FOR A ONCE popular, low-interest, federally subsidized small homeowner program comes to a halt on the national level, New York City, after more than two years in the planning, is gearing up belatedly to build some 2,000 new homes and condominiums under the saple subsidy program with construc- tion scheduled to begin on several of the city's 16 designated sites within the next few weeks. Had plans followed the original time- table, some of the projects would have been completed by now. Known locally as the new Home Ownership Program, the federal Section 235 program of the Housing Act of 1964 permits eligible buyers to purchase reasonably priced homes using a conventional 30-year, FHA-insured mortgage at reduced interest rates of as low as 6 ~ percent, but somewhat higher than the four percent rate available two years ago. "This program is dead in terms of Site of Coney Island small homes development. future funding, but it seems fairly secure now for those projects already in the works," said housing official Tim Flanagan, when asked to predict the future of New York City's delayed and specialized implementation of the 235 program. "We are not talking about big numbers in New York City, but with the granting of the [administrative] exten- sions, we are talking about 2,000 to 2,200 units of 235 and mixed 235 housing, and we're pretty pleased about that." Flanagan is director of the 235 program at the city's Department of Housing Preservation and Develop- ment. On the national level, funding for the Section 235 program, one of the major housing casualties of the Reagan budgetary cuts, ended March 31. In New York City, however, all but one of the projects in the pipeline-76 town house condominium units in Manhattan Valley-were extended until September 30, 1983. The subsidy for these 76 "recaptured" units expired March 31 15 because these units were not reassigned ~ for Section 235 use until early Decem- ~ ber, 1981, several months after the ~ September 30, 1981, deadline. ~ As a result, the developer-Manhat- ~ tan Valley Development Corporation, the community-based, nonprofit organ- ~ ization-has guaranteed 235 subsidy funds for 48 of these units but is still lining up eligible 235 buyers for all but three of the remaining units in the hopes that the federal deadline might be extended retroactively past March 31, 1981, by special Congressional legis- lation. Right now, according to HPD's cal- culations, the most the city stands to lose from its special 235 package is just over 100 uriits. Through special legislation and dogged lobbying in Washington, the New York Congressional delegation was able to secure this 18-month extension primarily because the housing will be developed on land that is city-owned. Under the terms of the extension, the CITY LIMITS/May 1982 city is also committed to spending at least $1,000 per unit in Community Development funds and $2,000 in additional city capital grant monies to assist this housing. In some cases, the expenditure will be much higher because sewers and streets must be installed or expensive engineering and architectural surveys must be done to correct hazard- ous building conditions. Commenting on the federal govern- ment's commitment to honoring New York City's 235 program, Housing and Urban Development official Philip Cuiffo said, "This is a program de- signed for your average working Joe to buy a home, and everybody in this of- fice is anxious to make this dam thing go. We are talking to Washington on a daily basis, and, with the clout this city has, Washington listens." Cuiffo is acting supervisor for single family operations at HUD's area office. "We are looking at the program on a site-by-site basis, and not anyone site has been shoved in the comer," Cuiffo explained. "If there are 2,000 units, we want to get them all going because we are the catalyst. If this is what it takes, we'll do it to get lenders to end up in those neighborhoods that need help." Vacant Lots and Dormant Urban Renewal Traditionally a suburban program, Section 235 is being used to develop vacant lots and dormant urban_renewal sites around the city in an effort to stem the tide of urban blight a.1d deteriora- tion in communities such as East New York, Brownsville, Bushwick, Prospect Heights, Bedford Stuyvesant, Red Hook and Coney Island in Brooklyn; four selected areas outlined in the revitalization plan for the South Bronx; a portion of South Jamaica in Queens; and, in Manhattan, the st. Nicholas Park area near the town houses on Harlem's Strivers Row, Manhattan Valley, and the Two Bridges urban renewal site between the Williamsburg and the Manhattan bridges on the Lower East Side. More than 1,100 of the units are planned for Brooklyn, with 450 of them to be constructed in Coney Island. Some 300 units, with 250 underwritten by the SeCtion 235 mortgages 'subsidy CITY LlMITSIMay 1982 and a $3.7 million Urban Development Action Grant (UDAG), will be built in the South Bronx. In Manhattan, the two sites in Manhattan Valley and the Lower East Side were originally slated for low . income housing under the Section 8 program, but these plans were abandoned when the city failed to secure firm commitments for this subsidy program. Alluding to the role of the 235 program in Coney Island, Alice Paul, executive director of the community- based, nonprofit Astella Development Corporation, said, "This is not a low income housing program, and there are no low income families moving in here. But these are, by and large, working class people who want to own a house and stay in this area and who have expressed interest because it means 450 new houses in a very devastated neigh- borhood." According to Paul, Astella has already accumulated a mailing list of some 1,000 names-60 percent are local residents-without having adver- tised the availability of the housing outside the community. Also popular with prospective buyers is the Columbia Terrace development in the Columbia-President Street section, which must be built on vacant, urban renewal land on the waterfront in South 16 Brooklyn. The market for the proposed 165 row house condominiums was tested in January, 1981, and, according to developer Ted Hilles, the waiting list is informal but also "very, very long ... People can't wait for us to get started." A Tougher Sale in Brownsville On the other hand, the demand for the proposed 441 u n i t ~ of housing planned for the more devastated neigh- borhoods of East New York, Browns- ville, and Bushwick has not been so great because these areas are less desirable and the prospective home buyers, many of whom already live in the vicinity, find it difficult, if not impossible, to come up with the minimum, required down payments of $9,500 and $11,000 for three- and four- bedroom houses, respectively. But, according to HPD's Flanagan and Jesse Epps, the marketer for the M.M.R.R. Construction Company, the houses here are larger and offer much better fea- tures-completed basements, attached garages, fenced-in backyards-than a number of the model homes being offered on more attractive sites in other parts of the city. "Irving Reuben [head of M.M.R.R.] is used to building $200,000 homes, and several folks in the community got him involved here by convincing him of his social responsibility," said Epps, noting that Reuben, as a result of this pressure, is building homes with special amenities on all these sites, "including the one in Brownsville, which happens to be a block away from where he was born." In the South Bronx, a special federal Urban Development Action Grant has kept the down payment price at $3,500 for the three-bedroom house, selling at $51,000 and at $5,500, for the $60,500 four-bedroom I)ne. "Two-thirds of the people here are not on welfare. This is, in fact, a very good rental market,; ' said Joe Cicciu, project director for the Section 235 program at the South Bronx Develop- ment Organization. "They are people who make $20,000, $22,000, $25,000, but their savings are not that great. If we were forced into asking for more of their disposable income-$9,500 or more-we would be losing a great deal of our market." In Central Harlem, the lOS-unit, two and three-bedroom condominiums known as Landmark Houses will be designed to complement the handsome, late nineteenth century homes on Strivers Row. Located on West 138 and 139th Streets, just off Adam Clayton Powell Boulevard, only 25 percent, or 27, of them will be subsidized with 235 funds. The remaining 75 percent will sell for between $90,000 and $100,000 each. "I don't know why only 27 will be assisted through the 235 program," said Judith Smith, of the firm of Myers, Smith, and ' Granady, the marketing agent. "But we see no problem with this higher price tag for the conventional sales," she added. "These will provide a viable alternative to those seeking brownstones-the black professionals who want to return here." Under 235, the same-styled units will sell for up to $57,000, with $10,000 as the down pay-' ment. On both the Lower East Side and in Manhattan Valley the hope is to sell all the units-57 and 76, respectively-with the full 235 subsidy in order to keep the units within the price range of moderate income families. In Southeast Queens and Brooklyn, however, where developer Randy Lee is building 300 single family homes-all with four bedrooms-the price will be between $62,000 and $64,000 and the 17 interest rates will reflect what the buyer can afford. "We want to encourage everyone to buy," said !-ee, asserting that all the units have been approved for the subsidy if no one in a higher income bracket comes forward. The consultant firm of Philip Johnson and James Robinson is conducting the outreach program for the homes, which are targeted primarily at buyers in the $18,000 to $35,000 income bracket who frequently do not qualify for Section 8 or 236 subsidies. "All I can say is that we hope this housing will be built and that we won't have a repeat . of the housing moratorium under Nixon," concluded Priscilla Boyles, district manager for Community Board ~ in the Bedford Stuyvesant section of Brooklyn where Lee plans to build the one and two- family, 7l-unit Fulton Park project on Herkimer Street between Schenectady and Troy Avenues. "Before this, the Boys and Girls High School adjacent to this site was delayed for ten years be- cause of this freeze," she asserted. "Let's hQpe we're not headed for a repeat of that under Reagan. We're tired of vacant lots and dumping grounds." 0 CITY LIMITS/May 1982 .LAST YEAR, RESIDENTS OF BROOKLYN'S sprawling Starrett City apartment complex became < concerned about chemical waste disposal in the area when a seven-year scam involving a waste disposal company and City Sanitation Department supervisors was uncovered. For some time prior to that revelation, some area residents had complained of irritating physical symptoms of unknown origin. Armed with increased knowledge about chemical dumping activi- r ties, Starrett City residents have started taking action to deal with the issue, and in April, about 950 of them signed petitions in support of two state bills that would enable communities to protect themselves from illegal chemica,l waste dumping on local landfills. The conspiracy that brought their concern to a head occurred from 1974 to 1981, when about $100-per"truck was allegedly paid to a New York City Sanitation Department supervisor by Kenneth Mans- field, a former oil-refining plant manager, to allow toxic waste dumping at four city landfills. One of them, the Pennsylvania Avenue landfill, is a throw from Starrett City. Mansfield, who pleaded guilty to federal conspiracy charges in late March, will be sentenced on May 28 and faces up to five years in jail. i . Meanwhile, although dumping on the contaminat- ed sites has ceased, residents m.ust now rely upon Sanitation Department and federal Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) investigators for any ina . depth information about which chemicals were dumped and the consequent environmental or health . impact. These agencies are presently trying to calm local fears. But residents are skeptical about the validity of such information. The Starrett City Tenants Association and tile New York Public Interest Research Group, which is conducting a statewide campaign on the dumping issue, recently expressed their dissatisfaction with tests on air quality and surface land content recently carried out by EPA at I' the Pennsylvania Avenue site. NYPIRG staff scientist Walter Hang, who has co-authored reports on pollution in the Niagara and Hudson Rivers and chemical contamination of Long Island's drinking water supplies, charged that the agency should do more comprehensive testing on the site. That, he said, would mean drilling, pumping out watery materials and examining them for toxic waste. The EPA tests were unacceptable, Hang said, because they were simply air tests conducted from helicopters over the landfill. . The Sanitation is currently testing for ground water and other water at the landfill and EPA is offering technical advice. But Hang still deemed this 'inadequate: "What I'm saying is that EPA has CITY LIMITS/May 1982 18 by YVETIE MOORE Entrance to landfill station at Pennsylvania Avenue near Starrett City. the necessary experience and technical resources to do an efficient, co;-- : . ..,; .ensive study on the site. The city could bumble through-hire outside firms-but EPA already has the facilities. At minimum, the city will have to do tens of thousands of analyses to get to the bottom of that site's problem. " And, Hang said, "Unless the city is prepared to do a comprehensive study, we can't know that the site is all right." Some locals have also suggested that asking the Sanitation Department to handle the investigation is like asking Nixon to get to the root of Watergate. . Concerning EPA's report on the Pennsylvania Ave- nue landfill and other sites it monitors, the scientist said, "It's a political problem, .not a technical problem. It takes a lot of money, time and staff to conduct a comprehensive study. They (EPA) have a . handfull of sites that they've tested and 13,052 dumping sites. Lots of time they do windshield inspections." T o AVOID SUCH UNCERTAINTIES IN THE FU- ture, Starrett City tenants and NYPIRG members throughout the state are lobbying for state regulatory legislation. The two proposed bills that Starrett City residents supported through April's petition drive would, it is hoped, both prevent future toxic dumping and help clean up the damage already done. The first proposal, the "Community Right to Know" law, would require industries to identify what chemicals they have dumped in the past and where they currently dispose of their waste material. It would also require industries to file statements with state environmental authorities identifying substances used, stored or transported in the communities where they do business. This information would be available to the public. The second bill calls for a state "superfund" to be used in cleaning up abandoned waste sites when already available funding sources have been depleted. The superfund would consist of fees imposed on industries that create hazardous wastes and of fines collected from hazardous waste disposal violators. 0 Starretl City in background. - . ~ . " . ~ . )0 :--.. :. \ \ . ~ CITY LIMITS/May 1982
Combat Over The 20 Enterprise Zones By TOM kOBBINS F ROM THEIR PERCH ON THE 35TH FLOOR OF the World Trade Center, a sun-spackled vista of the Hudson River and New York harbor helped to lull the mixed group of civil servants, bankers and community advocates who had gathered to listen to speakers and discuss the topic of enterprise zones. So it was that when a city economic development policy planner stated that "Sweatshops would be one form of success" for the city's zones, a few listeners had to assume they'd been caught napping and had heard wrong. But coming from the administration of Ed Koch, who publicly welcomed dropping the minimum wage in any New York zone, the criterion shouldn't have sounded strange. One of the few givens about this lone urban revitalization proposal of the Reagan administration is that if the enterprise zones are ever launched at all, one will land on the shores of the South Bronx. And whether one envisions the high-rises of downtown Singapore rising in Mott Haven, or the vast miles of miserable shantytowns that stretch behind them, the issue is rapidly becoming less academic. While the city planner's remark seemed to slip past most of her lunchtime audience, it was later angrily challenged by one South Bronx community activist. "What kind of definition of success are sweat shops?", demanded Dana Driskell, a former district manager of a South Bronx com- munity board. "And how far is the -city planning on going in giving away tax revenue to get an enterprise zone?" All those questions, city officials are saying, are still premature. While other proposals have been around for almost two years, most notably that of Democratic Congressman Robert Garcia of the Bronx, and upstate New York Republican Jack Kemp, the Reagan administration's own bill is just a few weeks old, and the city hopes a markedly different bill will ultimately emerge from Congress. Enterprise zones, the Reagan administration's sole and long-promised salve for urban wounds, are only now being examined in Senate hearings. And there remains the threat that before any free enterprise zone flag is planted on the shores of the Bronx or anywhere else, the entire concept will collapse under the accumulated weight of the analyses it has generated. The zones idea has prompted a slew of articles, essays, speeches, forums and conferences. Critics on the left have seen in its no-holds-barred capitalism an opening for "colonialism brought home," while business opponents have labeled its tax credits and write-offs, "coercion of businesses which should be free to locate where they want. " But while the words used to describe the enterprise zones are anything but peaceful, the local version of this debate is fairly muted. Although some Bronx activists such as Dris- kell, are militating strongly against the zones, most seem to be waiting, dubiously, for their arrival. The Promise What goes into an enterprise zone anyway? The answer depends upon whose zone you are talking about, for they've become, as Driskell calls them, "a moving target." The genesis of the born-again capitalism-in-the-rough program stems, ideologically, from the U.S. government's Operation Bootstrap in Puerto Rico in the early 19505 or, program- matically, from a British plan launched in 1980 for ten en- terprise zones in urban areas. Here, the Kemp-Garcia Urban Jobs and Enterprise Act was the best known domestic version. That first bill aimed at the economic revitalization of distressed communities through tax incentives to businesses which expand or locate in a zone. To qualify, a zone has to have at least 4,000 people, an employment rate three times the national figure or substantial percentages of its people living below the government's Lower Living Level. Localities would have to permanently drop property taxes by 20 percent. Businesses would qualify for enterprise zone breaks if they had half their employees living and working in the zone. Once qualified, businesses would get cuts of 15 percent in corporate income taxes, 50 percent in capital gains taxes, the 20 percent in local property taxes, a social security tax reduction of $2,000 per-worker, per-year, as well as a highly 21 accelerated tax write-off, expanded- tax credits. and eased accounting rules. That piece was fashioned out of the much more drastic regulation-slashing advocated by Dr. Stuart Butler of the Heritage Foundation who proposed that minimum wages be scrapped and a new teenage wage rate set, a" suspension of rent control laws and business-hobbling safety rules. Although Reagan campaigned with the zones as his only urban program, Congress and communities waited in vain until late March of 1982 to see what specifics the president's bill would include. The new bill carries the same objectives as other zone legislation, except it is expanded to include rural areas. The Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) is to pick up to 25 zones yearly for three years from state and local submissions. The tax incentives include: a three to five percent investment tax credit for machinery and equipment, ten percent for con- struction or rehab of buildings including rental housing, ten percent income tax credit for wages to disadvantaged (this credit, which would decline in yearly stages, is targeted only at those of welfare elibility level), elimination of the capital gains tax, and the promise that while Industrial Revenue Bonds may be outlawed for the rest of the country, zone businesses could continue to use them. Also, the bill allows these tax credits to be carried over into years when less- profitable businesses could make better use of them. The administration drew back from waiving such regulations as the pro-union Davis-Bacon law, minimum wage or OSHA. Both Kemp and Garcia had announced they would oppose any bill with those items excluded. Not to be outdone, the odd couple of Congress reintroduced their own legislation, this time, having lined up the support of one nationwide job-training group, Dr. Leon Sullivan and his Opportunities IndustrialIzation Centers, calling for a larger role for community groups and for job training. A number of states and municipalities have already drawn up their own enterprise proposals. In New York, Democratic State Senator from the Bronx Joseph Galiber has called for the state to set up a $3 million fund for grants to businesses which set up in zones and add new employees. That bill, however, is bottled in the commerce committee and isn't expected to emerge. What Will They Yield? " ... implementation (of the Enterprise Zone Act) could at worst leave those targeted for assistance in a condition overall no worse than they were prior to enactment," wrote Dr. Gerald Jaynes of Yale University in a paper for a study of urban issues affecting the Black community which was released in February, 1982, by Representative Parren Mitchell of Maryland. The program did not come, however, wrote Jaynes, with all other government assistance remain- ing the same. The bill is seen as a substitute for a plethora of federal aid programs, and that, every onlooker from Mayor Koch to his left agrees, is the largest of several maior flaws. Numerous Congressmen have snorted derisively at the zones bill and, most recently, the AFL-CIO announced it CITY LIMITS/May 1982 was targeting the bill for defeat. (Among other threats, labor unions in the deregulated zones would have little role) . . The president's major urban initiative, therefore, faces a fight, although its low cost-$4 billion in foregone taxes through 1987-is a major attraction. The Threat Opponents of the zones seem to fall into two categories. One' group believes the zones fail on their face because of too little job training, venture capital for small businesses, direct housing subsidies and mismatched tax credits (too much for those large, profitable businesses moving in, and too little for the small, borderline enterprises already there.) The second group sees enterprise zones as a fairly insidi- ous frrst step towards forging a permanent rearrangement of power between employers and employees, communities and corporations. This last group has developed a number of wide-ranging analyses. A sampling of these helps indicate just how stimulating the zones have been, if not to small businesses, at least to critics. . " ... one way to understand the enterprise zones proposal," wrote Philip Mattera in an article last fall in the journal Radical America, "is as an attempt to .. .in- stitutionalize the underground economy .... The sweatshop proprietor would no longer be a villain, but the protagonist of a new era of economic growth." A number of critics have {ocused on the role zones play in recreating the conditions of cheap abundant labor and CITY LIMITS/May 1982 22 tax incentives aimed to please international businesses which prevail in much of the Third World. The zones, warned William W. Goldsmith in a recent article in Working Papers, while creating a dual labor market, "would not stay contained. Once industry became accustomed to lower wages, lower taxes, and limits in workers' rights in enterprise zones, provisions would tend to spill over elsewhere. " The lesson driven home by a wealth of foreign and local experiences, inCluding the factories and warehouses the zone bill aims to tejuvertate, is that businesses are mobile, their employees much less so. Those cities, most represented by the sunbeltlfrostbelt axis, are already "locked in mortal combat for footloose companies looking for greener pastures," argued Stanley Aronowitz and Carey Goodman of the Urban Research and Strategy Center based in the Bronx in The Nation in February, 1981. The zones, they suggested, "would simply add the South Bronx to the bidding game ... " Just about every analysis has pointed ominously to the ' experience of Puerto Rico's Operation Bootstrap. , (Curiously, some of the zone's proponents have also cited the Puerto Rican example, but only its early period and not recent years.) Edward Humberger of the Resource Group for Community Development in Washington, D.C., which is working on developing an alternative enterprise. zones program, desQed the ultimate results of that t.ax boosting experiment in the Journal of CommUitity Action.
, "After thirty years, it Was' evident that the free trade zone's economy Was' stagnant, needing yet another transfusion of industrial investment at a still higher price for local development. By now, seventy percent of the population Was' below the poverty line, and sixty percent were on food stamps. Inflation Was' up forty percent and unemployment Was' about thirty-five percent. Fully twenty- five percent of the families earned less than $J,OOO a year. " Local Reactions Many in the flrst category of opponents 'Youldn't quarrel with those long-range pessimistic predictions. But on a more immediate level, the zones are found wanting. The South Bronx Development Offlce, the quasi-offlcial agency charged with planning and developing the area, received the one million federal dollars it needed to operate on the same day that R e a ~ a n announced the speciflcs of his zones policy. HUD, having threatened SBDO's funding the week previous, presumably envisions a large role for it in any South Bronx scheme. The agency has been quiet about the zones, however, and director Edward Logue is said to be lukewarm about the concept. Xavier Rodriguez, chairman of South Bronx's Commun- ity Planning Board #3, is outspokenly cool. Rodriguez doubles as President of the Bathgate Coalition, a commun- ity group working to develop the Bathgate Industrial Park, along with SBDO. The park has attracted two new busi- nesses and has some 70,000 square feet of space looking for tenants. "Once people start looking at the bill," he said, "they see the pieces aren't there." The two companies successfully lured to the industrial park are good examples of businesses, he said, which would need more than the bill offers. Air- craft Suppliers, a defense contractor, and Majestic Shapes, a garment plant, were aided by some tax breaks as well as bonds issued by the Job Development Authority. "The tax breaks they don't really need," asserted Rodriguez. "They need working capital at three to five percent interest. The little companies can't tie up their own cash flow, they need outside help-loans. That's something the zones bill won't do." Housing needs, he emphasized, would also go wanting. "Bathgate was built on the premise of 'walk to work,' " he said. But without a substantial amount of subsidized housing-which is being stripped in other administration bills-there won't be housing available. "Certainly not at $3.35 an hour," he said. "Not without some really heavy housing vouchers."
Meanwhile, in Britain, where zones were launched with much fanfare in 1980, the flrst reviews are coming in. Ten zones there have been operating for a year, and recently a Times of London correspondent, Peter Watson, warned on the New York Times' QP ed page: "Do not expect too much of enterprise zones." Pointing out that there is at least one major difference between the British version and those proposed by Reagan 23 (their's were aimed at urban industrial wastelands, ours at blighted neighborhoods) Watson wrote that the majority of the firms attracted by similar tax breaks required few workers. Warehouses have predominated: "One prediction by early critics appears to be coming true: The financial incentives do not provide the capital new frrms need; instead, they make moving in desirable for profitable firms that need property rather than labor and that can benefit from the tax breaks. '.' Which are the domestic flrms that will be attracted to the South Bronx as a haven from taxes and regulations, and what will be the spin-off effects on local communities? As the legislation now stands, said Rodriguez, echoing the analyses of dozens of others, it will be the high-technology, capital-intensive corporations who will add little to the area's skills bank because they will import what few skilled workers they need. If so, not only will South Bronx residents have been short- changed, but the city as a whole will have to gnash its teeth over tax revenue lost to firms that don't need it. Still, the Reagan administration, and a number of unlikely allies, insist they have seen the future-and it is enterprise zones. And in Congress, partially based on that premise, the largest budget shifts of the century are being carried out: away from those who need it and to those who don't. Community organizations are being asked to give their approval, and the zones are supposed to represent the reward. Could this be the place to draw the line? 0 . , . a quarterly ;ournal for housing activists and community organizers, The pages 01 SHEL TERFORCE contain information. news and analysis that can ' t be found in any other housing publication, . ANALYSIS: HOW TO: REPORTING: PLUS: Rent Control. Conaomania, Displacement. Government Programs, Housing Court ... Building a Tenant Union. Negotiating with Landlords, Winning Rent Control. Pulling a Rent Strike ... News and Analysis of housing struggles around the country and abroad Book Reviews. From the Grassroots. Facts and Figures. Legal Developments, Films, Jobs ... SUBSCRIPTION: $8.00 for 6 iS8ues SAMPLE COPY: $1.50 name ______________________________ __ address, ______________________________ _ city _____________ state ____ -'-_zip __ _ SHELTERFORCE, 380 Main St . East Oranle. N ,J . 07018 CITY LIMITS/May 1982 i I ~ I Penn Yards The 62Acre Question I've studied men jrom my topsy-turvy Close, and I reckon, rather true. Some arejineje/lows: some right scurvy: Most, a dash between the two. -George Meredith, 1828-1909 . A FTER MONTHS OF DEALING with a planning process for the fu- ture of the 62-acre Penn-Central rail- road freight yards on the West Side of Manhattan that seemed to do every- thing backwards, the meeting-hall joke was that it was all TOFC-turvy. TOFC is an acronym for Trailer-on-Flat Car facility, a freight yard with the e q ~ p m e n t to lift truck-drawn trailers onto flatbed rail cars. A plan to use the Penn Yards for this purpose stands in CITY LIMITS/May 1982 Second oj two articles. sharp contrast to a billion-dollar proposal for 4,850 units of luxury hous- ing on the site whiCh would include cooperatives to sell at $275 a square foot-an average of $400,000 per apart- ment. This proposal, put before the West Side's Community Board In by an Argentina-based consortium, was named Lincoln West because it is almost adjacent to Lincoln Center for the Per- forming Arts-though it may soon be nicknamed Falklands North. The Penn Yards site runs 13 blocks along the Hudson River from 59th to 72nd St. and is the largest 'piece of undeveloped land in Manhattan. The Lincoln West proposal slid neatly 24 By WILLIAM A. PRICE into a vacuum left by city inaction in planning for any alternatives that might have long-term benefits for the people of New York City. The area could have been made into an extension of Freder- ick Law Olmsted's Riverside Park which abuts the property to the North. It could have been developed with spe- cific waterfront uses, but although the staff of the Department of City Plan- ning has developed a comprehensive Coastal Zone Management Program, that program has been side-tracked by legislative and fiscal restraints. But the main issue (See City Limits, March, 1982) was the question of whether the existing rail yard could be transformed into a Trailer-On-Flat-Car (TOPC) terminal, a rail facility which might have a profound effect on New York's light industries which have been hard hit by a number of factors-loft conversions prominently among them- but especially by high transportation costs in a truck-dependent town without direct rail facilities. In the confusion presented by the Lincoln West proposal, it was hard to tell the "fme fellows" from the others "right scurvy." Or was a solution possi- ble as a "dash between the two?" The TOPC terminal was not placed by" the city on the agenda of Community Board In, but to its credit, the Board saw the conflict and switched the luxury housing proposal-at least temporar- ily-to a siding. It recommended that no action be taken on the Lincoln West proposal until the city had studied and made a decision on the TOPC terminal. On March 24, the City Planning Com- mission conducted a public hearing re- quired under the 1975 City Charter's provision for a Uniform Land Use Review Procedure (ULURP) , which showed increasing support for the TOFC terminal which was not even on the agenda. The ULURP process- lias a precise time schedule so that things don't drag on interminably. So the Planning Com- mission convinced Lincoln West to withdraw its applications and resubmit the same proposal on April 6 which would start the "ULURP clock" over again and still give Lincoln West a final answer before the clock ran out in the Board of Estimate by mid-September when Lincoln West's option to buy the land expires. At the same time, it com- missioned an environmental impact study on the TOPC alternative. But by April 20, almost a month after the March 24 hearing, a contract was still to be signed by the city with an indepen- dent research company which would be mandated to produce such a study before the end of May in order for Community Board In to review it and make a recommendation before the board's June 14 ULURP deadline. It was still TOPC-turvy. As City Council member Ruth Messinger commented on the City's actions: "Every time they've done anything, they've stood everything on its head." Her comment is almost a verbatim quote from the Oxford Universal Dictionary's definition of Topsy Turvy: "With the top where the bottom should be."
T HE TOPC ISSUE IS ONE THAT goes far beyond the interest of railroad buffs. The emphasis given to the Lincoln West proposal at the expense of a TOPC alternative indicates the city's responsiveness to its own image of the future as "a world city ... attested to by the growth of interna- tional finance and management" (City Planning Commission's report on its Midtown Development Project, 1980) and the lower priority city officials give to protecting blue-collar jobs. Walter Mankoff of the International Ladies Garment Workers Union which supports the TOPC terminal says it "would enhance any industry that is labor-intensive," especially those that employ the ILGWD's 150,000 workers in the apparel industry. In a study of the market demand for a TOFC terminal prepared for the New York State Urban Development Corporation, the indepen- dent consultant firm, Harbridge House Inc., estimates that there are 450,000 jobs-12.6 percent of the New York City work force-in what it describes as "TOPC-related industry sectors." Those jobs in the small loft industries -they are not all so small-have tradi- tionally gone to population groups new to the city, originally Europeans, many Jewish. More recently, these jobs have gone to Blacks, then Hispanics and now also Orientals. The jobs provided for many their first entry into the main- stream of U.S. life. These groups are also those who find the most difficulty with housing and certainly without jobs, housing becomes even more diffi- cult if not impossible. As of now, trailer trucks of shipments to and from the city firms which employ this work force must drive through city streets five miles beyond the Penn Yards site to the George Washington Bridge, then South. to a TOPC terminal at North Bergen, N.J., almost directly across the Hudson from the Penn Yards behind the Hudson palisades. Harbridge House 25 estimates the hauling cost per trailer to North Bergen to be $180, whereas the cost to a TOFC terminal at the Penn Yards would be $30. This cost differential can be the cutting edge of a decision by a small industry to stay in New York or relocate elsewhere. Par those concerned about pot-holes, the same study notes further that "a single tractor-trailer is responsible for the equivalent wear and tear damage to street pavement of 9,600 automobiles." Estimating that a TOPC terminal could remove as many as 83,407 heavy trucks annually from the streets of upper Manhattan, the removal of these trucks would eliminate "the wear and tear effect of 800,707,200 automobiles"- repair of such wear and tear, of course, being paid for by the New York City taxpayer. To say nothing of air pollution from deisel exhausts. On the other hand, the real estate industry talks glowingly of "changes in the fabric of New York's economy" which has been "catapulted into position of the financial capital of the world", as an April New York Times real estate advertising supplement ex- pressed it. The question is who plans for whom? New Ybrk State Democratic Assem- blyman Jerrold Nadler, long an advocate of rail freight facilities and especially of the TOFC terminal, says that on the Penn Yards site "The City has tried to accommodate the develop- er, not the people of the city." In an urban development process, not all happens by natural growth. In New York City, the planning process favors the developer of luxury housing and facilitates to create "the world city" through tax expenditures such as tax abatements and through other mechanisms. But planning can be for people as well as profits and the issue is drawn along the abandoned railway tracks on the West Side. The issue should be one of interest to housing organizers and community activists throughout the city. Housing is difficult to achieve for people without jobs. 0 William A. Price is a long-time Upper West Side resident and a member oj Community Board #7's housing commit- tee. CITY LIMITS/May 1982 NOVACANCY New York's Housing Trends Reveal a Widening Gap Between and Nots; By BRIAN SULLIVAN Photos by MARC JAHR Brian Sullivan is Senior Planner at the Pratt Institute Center for Community and Environmental Development. CITY LIMITS/May 1982 26 I T SEEMS LIKE YOU CAN'T SPIT OUT THE WIN- dow lately without hitting somebody reciting some statis- tics about New York City housing. Not only has the U.S. Census Bureau released some preliminary 1980 figures, but New York's own comprehensive housing and vacancy survey was recently published, as it is every three years under New York State Law. In theory, the law requires the preparation of a vacancy survey for New York City every three years to ascertain whether the vacancy rate is still below five percent, thereby justifying the continuation of the rent control and rent stabilization programs. The vacancy rate, however, hasn't been above five percent since before World War II. But the vacancy survey is still eagerly awaited because it usually provides some insights into the direction in which the city's housing stock is moving. It also contributes ammunition for the never-ending debates over whether rent control and stabilization help or hinder New Yotk City's tenants or landlords. This year's edition, written by Professor Michael Stegman of the University of North Carolina, contains ample portions of both. Housing numbers can't be understood outside the context of the broader demographic and socio-economic trends affecting the city. Some major fmdings from the U.S. Census set the stage: New York City's population (putting aside for the moment the "undercount") continued to decline. From 7,895,000 in 1970 to 7,071,000 in 1980, a drop of 10.4 percent. New York City households, however, hardly de- creased at all. There were 2,778,000 households in 1980, a drop of only 1.7 percent since 1970. Although the mass exodus of whites seems to have ceased, almost half the city's population is now composed of minority groups. percent are white; 25 percent are Black; 20 percent Hispanic and three percent "other". These overall demographic trends are reflected to some extent in the specific features of the rental housing stock and its occupants as described in the housing survey report, "The Dynamics of Rental Housing in New York City." The total number of housing units (there are 2,800,000, of which 1,980,000, or 72 percent are rental units.) has hardly changed at all over the last three years. New additions to the stock Ooft conver- sions, etc.) combined with rehabs, have more than offset the 81,000 units lost through abandonment, demolition, fires etc. through 1978. The overall vacancy rate remains well below the five percent "public emergency" level required to justify continued rent regulation. In fact, the vacancy rate decreased significantly, from 2.95 percent to 2.13 percent during the three-year period , 1978 to 1981. New Yorkers continued a long-term trend toward living in smaller households. The average house- hold size in rental housing fell to 1.88 persons in 1981. The number of rent controlled apartments con- tinued to decline (dropping by 29 percent in the last three years), but they still make up almost 15 percent of the city's rental units. Rent stabilized units, however, increased during the same period by about ten percent and now make up almost half of the rental units. The loss of Old Law tenements from the housing stock seems to have abated. They have leveled off at 185,000 dwelling units. But the loss of New Law tenements-generally considered a better class of residential construction-continues. Even after suffering a 1978-81 loss of 22,000 dwelling units, they still contain 553,000 dwelling units, or 28 percent of the total rental stock. , Rents increased along with everything else during the last three years, but the overall rate of increase was surprisingly high-up 26.2 percent to $265 per month. But even more surprising was the 30 percent increase experienced by rent controlled tenants during the same period, raising their average to $213. Stabilized rents, meanwhile, had a slightly more moderate 25 percent increase, up to an average of $262. These are the type of numbers you can find in the Mayor's press releases and the city housing department's public on the state of housing in New York City. When reported from these sources, the interpretation attached to them has been and positive: "Yeah, the vacancy rate is a little low but, in relative terms at least. we're better off now than we were three years ago." But are "we" really better off? Well, it depends on who "we" is. More than anything else, the numbers contained both in the census and in the housing survey underline the fact that there is no "we" anymore. Rather, there is a sharp division between the "haves" and the "have-nots", and they're getting farther apart with each passing year. A few examples illustrate the problem: Thirty-four percent of white households own their homes, compared to only 23 percent of Blacks and 8.6 percent of Hispanics. Homeowners have incomes almost twice that of renters, and the gap has widened significantly since 1978. Even within renter households, Blacks and Hispanics have respective incomes of only 68 percent and 48 percent that of white renters. CITY LIMITS/May 1982 28 The ratio between rent and income (the standard measure of affordability of housing, which is usually around 25 percent) increased for all house- holds during the 1978-81 period, but is dramatically higher for Black and Hispanic households at 29 percent and 36 percent. Of course, these are the same households whose low incomes have been eroded most seriously by general inflation during the same period. Similarly, while dilapidation has increased from three to four percent of the housing stock in the last three years, it is Black and Hispanic households who are most likely to occupy such housing. Almost six percent of the Black households and over nine percent of the Hispanic households live in dilapidated housing in New York. Finally, in the city's own tax-foreclosed, in rem housing, 60 percent of which is Old Law tenements, virtually all of which has been "milked" and abandoned by private landlords, lives another class of "have-nots." These tenants, over 80 percent minority, having only 62 percent of the median income of the city as a whole, endure an average rent/income ratio of 36 percent and have 58 percent of their households headed by female single parents. But even these are only very general, "across the board" numbers. They can't tell the whole story of how people really live in New York's neighborhoods. We've become very skilled at aggregating the lives of individuals and families into mass socioeconomic phenomena, but we're not very good at going the other way. The Census Bureau can't tell you what it's like to be a young, Black single parent looking for affordable housing in South Brooklyn, for example, even though they know all the relevant data. The ability to bridge that gap between "information" and "understanding" in regard to the problem of rmding shelter in New York City is, in large part, the skill of the neighborhood housing movement. In store- fronts and tenements throughout the city these a r ~ the people who not only know the numbers, they frequently are the numbers. After the statisticians and analysts have made their pro- nouncements and prognostications about the future of the housing industry in New York, it will still be up to the neighborhood groups to get the message across to the policy-makers and politicians. The gist of that message is -that housing-which has always been the fabric of our communities-is rapidly becoming a major symbol of divisiveness within this society. We can either keep it as a public resource in holding our neighborhoods and cities together or treat it as just one more demarcation line between "them" and "us."O Home Improvement Loans Slow As Federal Deadline Nears By SUSAN BALDWIN K ATHLEEN SAUVE AND HER HUSBAND, Marc, had no problem securing a ten-year, $10,000 loan for just over half the market interest rate-10Y2 per- cent-to fix up their newly purchased older hme in the St. George section of Staten Island. The Sauves were also the fust New York City family to close a loan under the city's special Home Improvement Program (HIP), a new lending plan designed to help small homeowners fmance the skyrocketing cost for home im- provements. But they are only one of a very few families who have been able to take advantage of this new loan program that may be short-lived if more loans are not closed in the next few weeks. Replacing the l?-year-old, three-percent, 20-year federal Section 312 loan program, which, died -last year under _ _ Reaganomics, HIP provides owners of one-to-four family homes in 16 selected areas of the five boroughs with ten-year loans of up to $10,000 each at 1OY2 percent, instead of the prevailing 19 to 20 percent. Underwritten by a $1.5 million federal Urban Development Action Grant (UDAG) and a $5 million private commitment from 12 local banks, this program is available to eligible participants whose homes are in need of new plumbing, wiring, roofs, windows, or energy conservation measures. To qualify for the loan, a family of four cannot make more than $39,900, while the maximum income permitted for the largest family-eight or more-is $52,640. Accord- ing to city statistics, the median income for loans processed to date has been $22,800, with most applicants earning between $22,000 and $34,000. Each loan recipient;must also pass a bank credit check, live in the building slated for improvements, and be deemed capable of making the monthly loan payments as well as keeping up with the regu- ,lar: househol9, But qualifying for the program and closing a loan are another story. And the family was the exception to the rule. "This was supposed to be a streamlined program with a minimal amount of paperwork and uniform criteria; but it's not happening that way," said Gary Hattem, director of St. Nicholas Housing Rehabilitation Committee, a nonprofit community-based group in Brooklyn's Northside section. "The banks are not geared up to handle this program ... HPD (Department of Housing Preservation and Develop- ment) has not gone after them to shape them-up, and now the community groups with consultant contracts (with the city) are expected to rulg on doorbells to'sell the program so it won't be lost." To speed up loan processing, HIP candidates go directly to the banks. rather than to HPD as they did with the 312 applications, to fill out the necessary forms. But, in numerous instan-ces documented by community groups as- sisting clients around the city, many potential recipients have been turned away because the local bank branches are unaware of the program or are unwilling to involve them- selves with the paperwork required for processing such small loans. In addition, some eligible homeowners have been told by banks that they do not live in the targeted area when they do. Others were turned away because their income was too high or too low, only to find the reverse was true. In short, observers maintain, the Program has a myriad of problems to overcome in a very short time if it is to be extended or refunded. Approved by the federal government in March, 1981, HIP was scheduled to be in operation by the early fall. But, due to bureaucratic delays, it did not get underway officially until mid-February, 1982, when the first six loans were closed. To date, according to housing official Jennifer Wallace, some 90 If>ans have been made, and there is intense pressure to close at least 200 more, or a total of 300, loans by May 31, 1982-the end of the fiscal year-if the program is to survive another year. According to community partici- pants, however, no more than 35 loans had been closed by early April. "We are talking to all the banks, and we would like to get these 300 loans in place, but I think it's outrageous for Washington to ask us for these 300 in this short time," said Wallace, who recently assumed responsibility for the HIP program at HPD. "But," she added, "I guess if I were in Washington's position and New York City came in with only 30 loans closed, I would say it doesn't look like you need it ... Also, no doubt they would rather have the money sitting in their treasury rather than in New York City banks." According to Wallace, the city has a total reservation of $4.2 million in UDAG funds for this year that enable it to make up to 600 ;')ans in the near future and up to a possible total of 1,300 if the program were allowed to continue into a second year. Asked to comment on the future of the HIP program, Housing Commissioner Anthony Gliedman said he thought Washington would continue the program and release the additional UDAG funds even if the city does not meet the federal deadline by processing 300 loans by May 31. 29 Community groups, pressed by the city to "sell" HIP, have charged HPD with "harassing and badgering" them CITY lIMITSIMay 1982 into participating in a program in which, they assert, they had no input in drawing the boundary lines or framing the eligibility criteria. They also maintain that the interest rates are too high, and the banks are accountable to no one. "Over two-thirds of our neighborhood is exCluded due to the boundary lines, and yet we're told to sell it in another neighborhood-Belrnont-where,just to the south, the government plans to build a lot of new (Section1 235 homes," said Frances 'Fuscelli, director of the Crotona Community Coalition in the Crotona section of the South Bronx. "Our people," she said, "could use this loan for improvements that would complement the new housing .. . " Another community leader finds HIP hard to sell in Coney Island. "I can't in good conscience go out and say to people, 'You can't turn this down.' There's not a sufficient write-down to make it a tempting carrot to people out here, particularly the elderly," said Alice Paul, director of the community-based, nonprofit Astella Development Corpor- CJTY LIMITS/May 1982 30 ation. "It isn't a good rate like the 312 was at three percent," she added. "We haven't closed one as yet, even though Coney Island was thought to be an ideal place for such a loan when its predecessor was conceived." Under the original proposal, homeowners were to repay the loan on a sliding scale of one to nine percent, and the program was to be concentrated in several specific neighborhoods rather than scattered among small tracts around the city. Rising interest rates laid that plan to rest. Asserted Michael Powell, a community organizer in East Flatbush, "We couldn't send anyone to the banks before March because they didn't know anything about it. At Chemical, 22 of 22 loan applications we screened and processed first were turned down. I think the banks. with the exception of the Dime Savings Bank, are only in this to process as few loans as possible just so they can get their CRA [Community Reinvestment Act] credit. HPD should be on top of the banks to find out why there are so many rejections ... A number of the groups have reluctantly promoted HIP, even when substantial numbers of their constituents do not qualify for the loan or do not live in the targeted area, ~ u s e they are fearful of losing their community contracts with the city. Several, which asked for anonymity, have stated that their contracts have been threatened. "At first we did accuse them [the groups] of not doing their jobs," countered Wallace. "But then we learned from them that some were not doing their jobs, others were, and that they were having problems with the banks. We think we have this under control now." Following a special meeting of representatives from the community consultant groups early in April, the Associa- tion of Neighborhood Housing Developers, the advocacy organization for the groups, sent Deputy Housing ' Com- missioner Charles Reiss a communique outlining the program's faults, suggesting some improvements, and asking for a meeting of top bank and city housing officials with representatives of the community groups to iron out the difficulties. "This was supposed to be an improvement because HPD was not doing the loan processing," said Bonnie Brower, executive director of the association. "But it took nine months for it just to get off the ground. Also, areas were included that don't need this loan, and now the city is putting the blame for the program's failure on the groups. It's ridiculous because the groups provided excellent education and outreach to small homeowners early last fall." She did, however, stress the importance of rolling over the program monies into a second funding year, noting that this UDAG and bank money could be used "with all sides cooperating to a much better benefit for all." Meanwhile, Roger Williams, a vice president with the Dime Savings Bank and one of the architects of the pre-HIP proposal, was more opitmistic about the present program's future. "We had to lobby hard just to get what we already have," he said. "I don't think the city should give up on the program now, and I don't think it should have any problems asking Washington for a second round based on the number of loans closed to date. After all, most banks don't do the bulk of their home improvement loans in the winter, and, in general, all loan applications are down all over. This year it's possible, folks don't have the confidence in their jobs and the future to take on more debt, and 10Yz percent interest is substantial. After all, you have to repay the loan with the income you have." "As soon as I heard about it, I ran down to get the loan because I live in Clinton Hill," said Barbara Washington, who is renovating a home at 39 Cambridge Place in Brooklyn. "Then I found out I lived in the wrong part of Clinton Hill, just a half block away from the boundary. This program stinks. I've been waiting since early September just to hear there's nothing in this program for me. But, believe me, I'm sure the city could unload 75 percent of its properties and provide homes if they had a program to help people. I know that with $10,000 I could be living in my house, not renting." 0 31 A Tribute to Bob Schur An evening dedicated to Bob Schur will be held Thursday, June 3, 1982, from 6 to 9 p.m. at Campbell Hall, Sacred Heart Church (Basement entrance) at 457' West 51st Street between Ninth and Tenth Avenues. A Buffet supper will be held and music and remembrances follow. A fund is, being established to commemorate and continue Bob Schur's work. All contributions are grate- fully accepted. Those attending are requested to RSVP to: Neighborhood Housing I:riends of Bob Schur, c/o Association of Neighborhood Housing Developers, 424 W. 33rd St., New York, NY 10001. 0 THE POLITICS OF PEACE, DEMOCRACY AND ECONOMIC RENEWAL: An International Forum of Political Exchange Workshops Forum Friday, May 28, 2.fl PM Sunday, May 30, 2-5 PM Prince George Hotel, New York City Participants: Wade Rathke (ACORN), Heidi Tarver (CISPES), John Lewis (Atlanta City Council). Representatives from the "Green" parties in West Germany, France, Holland, and England. For further information. contact: The Citizens Party, 853 Broadway, New York, N. Y. 10003 (212) 477-4627. VOLUNTEERS ARE DESPERATELY NEEDED For June 12th Nuclear Disarmament Campaign. Cal/6731808 Ask for Tom CITY LIMITS/May 1982 IS YOUR INSURANCE TOO EXPENSIVE?
f For a modest fee we will evaluate your insurance program to see if you are getting the most for your . BROOKLYN ENERGY COOPERATIVE Energy Audits, Specifications and technical assistance, Investigated contractors. Complete line of conservation projects at discount, Financing options. 562 Atlantic Ave. (near 4th Ave.) . 858-8803 dollars. "Specializing in IVon-Pr0fit and Community Organizations" Contact: Paul Sourifman (212) 684-4770 Free Insurance Appraisal Richards and Fenniman, Inc., specialists in insuring tenant and community groups for over 10 years, is offering to the readers of City Limits a free insurance appraisal of their building. We ,know your needs, your requirements, and how to-he7p you get insurance finanCing. And most important, we can get you the best prices. For a free insurance appraisal of your building and an evaluation of your current insurance program call me: Ingrid Kaminski, Account Executive, (212) 2678080. Richards and Fenniman, Inc. 156 William Street, New York, New York 10038 CITY LIMITS/May 1982 32 A Discriminating Fine Fern Jones came to New York with a degree from Yale University to enter a management training program at Morgan Guaranty Trust Company, but she couldn't get an apartment until she med suit in federal court. Jones, who is Black, was awarded $38,000 in early March by a jury in the Manhattan District Court because of the discrimination she met in trying to rent an apartment on Manhattan's lower Fifth Avenue. Daniel Morgan of Morgan Builders and Thomas Halvey, a real estate broker of 6 West 9th Street, were found to have violated the federal Fair Housing Act by denying Jones the rental of an available apartment in October and November 1981. Miss Jones testified to her efforts to fmd housing in New York City for six months and her answer on October 10th to an ad in the New York Times for the Manhattan apartment. She said she was told by the broker that the landlord "really wanted to rent to a man" and that he "preferred someone who had been in New York longer." Her appli- cation was taken, but never acted on. The Open Housing Center, a fair housing agency which investigated, testified that the landlord and broker were ready to rent the apartment to a young white woman with similar credentials who said she had been in New York only a few months. Suit was flIed in November by Richard Bellman, attorney, of Steele & Bellman, and the defendants agreed to rent the apartment to Miss Jones who moved in on December 1. "Everything was all right when I called, until I went and they saw my face." She said that she had grown up in North Carolina and met a pattern of dis- crimination all her life. "But I never expected this in the cosmopolitan city of New York." Betty Hoeber, director of the Open Housing Center, pointed out that this verdict follows within a few months the $50,000 jury award made to a Black aide to Manhattan Borough President Andrew Stein in a similar housing dis- crimination case in Brooklyn. 0 IMlcrocomputer Services I let us: maintain & update your mailing lists produce your mailing Jabels provide computer consultant assistance reasonable rates extended to not-for-profit organizations 1857-91571 I::: ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ _ c : : c : -------------------------------------------- Name Moving? Address Don't leave town without City Limits! To make sure your SUbscription reaches your new address, simply attach your current mailing label below, and write your new address beneath it. Please allow 4-6 weeks for tb .. address change. City ____ State ____ Zip City limits 424 West 33rd St., New York, NY 10001 33 CITY LIMITS/May 1982 WorkShop CONSTRUCTION SPECIALIST The Neighborhood Housing Services, a non-profit community improvement program, seeks qualified individuals with strong backgrounds in construction and rehab contracting. Must be able to prepare accurate work specifications and cost estimates, explain construction process to homeowners, and assist Director.in marketing and administering the program. Knowledge of New York City building and housing codes is desirable. Salary range $17,000 to $20,000, depending upon experience and qualifications. Apply before May 15, 1982. State program preference: ,. East Aatbush (Brooklyn) * Kensington/Winq.sor Terrace (Brooklyn) * Laurelton (Queens) * Sound view (Bronx) * Williamsbridge/Olinville/Wakefield (Bronx) Send resume to: Construction Spec. Review c/ o Neighborhood Reinvestment 1500 Broadway, Suite 800 New York, New York 10036 EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER ASSISTANT PROJECT DIRECTOR Needed by non-profit housing development corporation to: 1. supervise and. coordinate construction of a large rehabilitation project 2. organize and supervise annual facade improvement program 3. develop new rehab projects in the community for low and moderate income residents Exciting opportunity for creative self-starter. Lots of responsibility, training and long hours. Experience: working knowledge of financing programs, construction scheduling, and supervision. B.A. or equivalent experience necessary. M.A. in Urban Planning or Architecture helpful. Salary: $15,000 to $16,500 depending upon experience. Send resumes to: Rebecca Reich, Fifth Avenue Committee, 94 Fifth Ave., Brooklyn, NY 11217 CITY LIMITS/May 1982 34 ACCOUNTANT Neighborhood Housing Services of New York, Inc., a non-profit' corporation promoting reinvestment in seven neighborhoods, seeks a full-time accountant for its central office. Responsibil ities include maintaining all books for operating fund and loan funds; preparing monthly financial reports and special reports; performing in-house monitoring functions including contract monitoring, reconciliation of accounts; assisting in budget projections; maintaining payroll records and benefit plans; advising Director and providing training as needed; carrying out miscellaneous administrative functions. Experience with non-profit corporations, familiarity with computers desirable. Salary to $22,000 depending upon qualifications. Starts immediately. ADMINISTRATIVE SECRETARY Wanted for central office. Responsibilities include acting as receptionist and typist; taking dictation; preparation of reports and drafting of letters and memos; managing a small office; assisting in bookkeeping; collecting data and maintaining files; scheduling and recording board and committee meetings. Excellent typing skills necessary. Experience with word processing desirable. Salary to $16,000 depending upon qualifications. Starts immediately. Send resume to Executive Director NEIGHBORHOOD HOUSING SERVICES OF NEW YORK . clo Neighborhood Reinvestment 1500 Broadway Suite 800 New York, NY 10036 Please reply by May 17, 1982. An Equal Opportunity Employer M/F MANAGEMENT POSmON WANTED MBA with five plus years of management, business analysis and planning experience seeks challenging job with progressive organization concerned with self-sufficiency. Cooperative spirit and responsible product or service most important; salary negotiable. Write: RC, 3118, CCN 56 West 22nd St. NYC 10010 10th Floor. ACTIVIST Wanted to work for ACORN, the largest grass- roots community organization in the country. Fight for social and economic Long Hours. Low Pay. Great Rewards. (212) 852-9360. . 16. OJleck your pref.rence for coverage of neigJdlorhood iuuu in CiV Iwan' I wan' Bo more Bouaing Ius chang. - oiVOWDed 0 0 0 - pubUc 0 0 0 ;;:; - hDan' righ'sl .-,' .... .... organiJing 0 0 0 .... .... !:!: - gzpoUcy 0 0 0 .... :.:. - tlnancing 0 0 0 .:.: :.:. - oo-opl condo :=:: .... conv.nion 0 0 0 ....
reiDveRmen' (redlining) 0 0 0 - historic pruerva'ion 0 0 0 - displacemenV g.n'rifica'ion 0 0 0 - sw .. 0 0 0 Inergy -a1Hrna'iv. energy 0 0 0 - u,W,iu 0 0 0 - w .. 'heriu'ion 0 0 0 lconomic dev.lopmen' 0 0 0 Co-operl'ivu 0 0 0 Invironm.n' pollu'ion 0 0 0 Imploymen' 0 0 0 Iduca'ion 0 0 0 BeaI'h-care 0 0 0 Day-care 0 0 0 W.lfare 0 0 0 rood programs 0 0 0 Mass 'nasi' 0 0 0 Pi .... dRach this qUeRiOJlDlire and drop i' in 'h. mall h: Limib, tH WeR SSrd S'reR, B .. York, B.Y. 10001. J 35 17. 0Jleck your preference for 'h. Qpe of OiV Limib n.ighborhood cov.rag. I wan' I wan' Bo more Ius chang. "Bow h" nories 0 0 0 lD'erviewl protUu 0 0 0 IDveRiga'iv anielu( g Transt, 'lax, Crown Beighb housing) 0 0 0 Bumor 0 0 0 ldiwrials 0 0 0 Issays 0 0 0 rim penon lcoounb 0 0 0 Loagr .. ,ure noriu 0 0 ShORn ... anielu 0 0 0 Graphics/phnos 0 0 0 LiRingsof .v.nbl caI.ndar 0 0 0 18. Which of 'h. following would you mod Iik. w see Idv'Rised in Limi's? (Bel," on. or more.) o nh.r pubUca'ioDS o I.isure produ"s o office equipm.nVsys'.ms o hom. h .. 'ing a: insula'ing d.vices o job openings o insurance o nh.r 19. Wha' nher pubUca'ioDS do you read regularly? 20. Do you have any observa'ioDS or SUggeRiODS for 'h. edi'on of Limi's you've been dying '0 divulg., bu' nev.r had 'h. chance? (Use 'h. space below, or I separa,. shIR.) CITY LIMITS/May 1982 1.Anyft: >, flllllll b 0 mal. , 'iow do 1ft dtIcrlbt yoanelt? Black 0 1Mt,;. p IIlspaJdc Otlltr .,...N ''' M of JI;';rormaliduoatloais: o scJlool 0 cOl1tgt 0 pod&nduw '1. hat; is you oooapadftt _____ J01l ap iD ,!jDlIat;loDs or l
,.,. P IaoublC ..... 0 .avtrlmmtnt:al 0 "Udeal part;y / OiHldaw .D ., .... '. $u 0 civil rljJlu .. 'CD 4isarmamtat; 9. Cheok t;M box t;b(1MIt; _bQa.your t:oiIl bouaeIlo14 iDeom. 'for. t:Ud iBl981. _41 tdOol' fro_rau ii lloUIebold m.mbe ... an4 au XA o un4tr 10,000 0 16-84,999 0 100,000 o 10,14,999 tiD SS-4e,999 +. otmort 0 15-19,999 AiD 60-74,999 10.. Do 1ft .. t;oQitJ LiJIaij.t 1[ 0 ,es ;jjp no 'iii ti;;:.b.; ... It DO, wbert 40 yft:'" issues' o aewut:u4 0' eolllJlUlJlit;j or,. omoe o frit1l4 0 ot:her" ___ ',%;* :,..:" 11. In .441t;loD t:o YOU1'ltlf, bow JIIaJll ot:her people read or + look t:JuoOagJlyour of 0i9 .LImlt:a? ____ _ .m"I:J!I.,DoY,!""pysprto ytl P DO iii! ..' bv.you b.eq readi,N Oit:y , ''*::;' 0 las t;haD oa.yar', 0 1 , .a,ean 0 IS or more 18. How much t;Im. do lOU spen4C1! leU t:IIaD an hour ,ii hoars'?', 'h ""\J., <:': x:::::: 14. Whtnyou're flaishe4 rih oftJ Llmlt:I,..: IIV. 0 _it; alon, .... y ":':':""\f:11/':"'::" 18. In rectJlt; isnes oit;J LbDlt:a Iw coven4 atigllborh004 issues dher t;haD housing. Do 1.-,want; ust:o apu4 our .ikcoverage, .whi1.keeJmghoubtgU' t;he" foousf o expu4 coverage ., 0 Just; houIng-relat:e4 This survey is entirely anonymous. Please just fill it out and send it in. (Continued on inside back page.) ," ,'. -. (.