At the John Jay Educational Campus in Brooklyn, outgoing Manhattan Borough President Mark Levine, who will be the New York City Comptroller, met with voters and volunteers during the Yes on Affordable Housing campaign. The event took place on Election Day, when New Yorkers voted on several city ballot proposals. It included Ballot Questions 2, 3 and 4 which aim to make it easier and faster to build affordable housing in New York City.

As the new Comptroller, Levine said he hopes to invest 1% of the city’s $315 billion in pension fund assets to help pay for affordable housing.

Levine spoke about the housing-related ballot proposals, which he described as a chance to “fix inequality” in how housing is approved across neighborhoods. “Right now, if a community has enough money or influence, they can stop housing development,” he said. “They hire lawyers, they sue and they often win. We need a new system.”

In New York City, every large construction project has to go through a long public process known as the Uniform Land Use Review Procedure, or ULURP. The process gives local community boards and City Council members the power to review, delay, or block new housing proposals. Levine explained that wealthier neighborhoods often use this system to resist affordable housing by hiring attorneys, consultants, or lobbyists to oppose new developments.

As a result, poorer neighborhoods end up with most of the city’s affordable housing, while wealthier ones remain out of reach for lower-income residents. Levine said the housing proposals would help change that by streamlining approvals and focusing new projects in areas that have built the fewest homes. He described them as “a chance to end that era” of stalled development. Levine said, “It will make it harder to kill affordable housing projects and help create more balance across the city.”

At the Brooklyn site, volunteers with Assembly Member Zohran Mamdani’s campaign spoke about the housing issue.

Matthew Comeau, a volunteer who came from Washington, D.C., said, “This city is too expensive, bottom line. Affordable housing should mean that most of your income doesn’t go to rent.” 

Another volunteer, Karen Ho, shared her view as a former international student. “There’s a misconception that all international students are rich,” she said. “Affordable housing helped me stay in New York and start my career.”

Levine said the city needs to focus on truly affordable rent for all income levels. He pointed to a project in Inwood that combined a rebuilt library with 172 affordable apartments, some costing as little as $680 a month. “It proves that housing can be affordable if we put in the effort,” he said.

Levine hopes the new measure, if approved, will lead to half a million new apartments over the next decade.“If we do this right,” he said, “young New Yorkers won’t have to win a lottery just to live in their own city.

   Educational Housing Services (EHS), joined by U.S. Senator Kirsten Gillibrand, celebrated the completion of its third student housing campus, Hudson Yards, with a ribbon cutting ceremony. According to EHS officials, the ceremony was less about their newest building and more about preserving the idea of New York City being the city of dreams for the younger generation. As NYC continues to lack affordable living conditions for students, EHS provides an option for some students.   

   For the occasion, a ribbon-cutting ceremony, hosted by EHS President and CEO Jeff Lynford, was the public’s introduction to the building. Lynford and Gillibrand were joined by NYC Council Member Erik Bottcher. Lynford thanked those who lent their helping hands during the five year long construction of the project.

   EHS provides housing for college students and interns all around NYC. Their newest building is their third one, next to the Midtown location where they occupy five floors of the New Yorker Hotel, and their Brooklyn Heights location named St. George Towers. The Hudson Yards location opened up last August right before the 2024-2025 school year, whilst the team were still putting the finishing touches on the building. 

   In recent weeks, the EHS team had put the finishing touches on the building, ready to showcase it to everyone else. Students from any university are able to apply for housing and pay the costs that come with it. The prices for a room varies, as a single room for the current fall semester is $8,500. A room for next year’s spring semester sees a slight increase, with the price being $10,650. And for the entire year, excluding the option of staying during the summer, the price is $16,450. With the summer option, the price is $22,350. EHS provides multiple payment plans, and different rooming options to help lessen the price.

  Senator Gillibrand set the tone for the ceremony. “For decades New York has been the city of dreams,” she said. “We ask ourselves is this city still where dreams are achievable for every young person? For far too many students the answer is no. The reality is, it is a tough time to be a young person in this nation.” 

   Gilliband cited a recent study found that 350,000 New Yorkers left this city in 2022. “Ttime and time again they are stating the same reasons for leaving ‘New York City is just too expensive.’” Gilliband finished by saying “We can not let the dream of New York become a distant memory for the next generation.”

   Council Member Bottcher said  “When I moved to New York City in 2001, I rented a futon in this guy’s living room.” “All my stuff had to be put away before he came out to the living room in the morning. That was the New York City I was able to afford.” 

   Before the building housed students, the building provided housing for single women in the 1900s who looked to find their dreams in the city. “This building before it was shut down, used to be affordable housing for women” said Vice President Christy Chatfield. “This building had such a great story but that story had already been told. These women who came from all around the world. It was such a wonderful opportunity for them.” 

   Halle Zavlick, a current college student and one of the resident advisor for EHS New Yorker Branch took her first step into the Hudson Yard building at the ceremony. “The furniture here is much cleaner and has more of a neutral color palette than the New Yorker one” Zavlick joked. “I used to live with my grandmother but she’s getting older and to give her space, I decided to move into the EHS dorms. It’s a lot closer to my campus.” said Zavlick.

   As Jeff Lynford and Kristen Gillibrand cut the ribbon, it symbolised the unveiling of a new hope that strived to hold together the NYC dream.

The path to affordable housing is more clear for the Rockaways, as the New York City Council passed a new amendment to an existing project that would strengthen the waterfront community. On Wednesday, Oct. 8, the New York City Council Subcommittee on Landmarks, Public Sitings, and Dispositions voted to pass land use applications that refer to the Arvene East Project, which will “transform a 116-acre vacant, oceanfront site within the Arverne and Edgemere neighborhoods of Queens.” 

The project is located right on the Rockaway Peninsula and was described as “one of the most environmentally conscious developments in the United States,” in a press release by nyc.gov in December of 2021. 

“Arverne East is a true community-first and environmentally-friendly project that will bring much-needed housing, stores, community space and other amenities to a long-neglected neighborhood,” said Queens Borough President Donovan Richards Jr in the press release. 

According to the city, the project will see the creation of new affordable housing units, a nature preserve, and an urban farm across the waterfront. The project also sets out to create better storm resiliency for the Rockaways as new developments will be built “three to eight feet above the existing grade” and include storm buffers for the area. The project’s first phase in 2021 focused on the nature preserve, which will take up about 35 acres between Beach 44th Street and Beach 56th Place. The preserve will include a community center that is owned and operated by RISE (Rockaway Initiative for Sustainability and Equity), a non-profit organization that promotes civic engagement and hosts youth development programs. 

While the project was first given approval by the Committee on Land Use on March 25, 2021, these new applications were presented to the subcommittee on Tuesday, Sept. 30. District 37 Councilmember Sandy Nurse served as the acting chair for the portion, with Councilmember Selvena N. Brooks Powers, who oversees District 31, which includes Arvene East. Testimony was given by Kevin Parris, the director of Queens & Staten Island Planning at New York City Housing Preservation and Developments Project (HPD), and Justin Donlon, a project manager at HPD. HPD is involved in the project and submitted the new applications. 

The new applications look to expand homeownership on Arvene East. Where the original project designated that 5 percent of the units were to be cooperative homeownership units, the new proposal would increase that to 7 percent “with the remaining units to be rental units,” according to Parris. Cooperative homeownership units (or co-ops for short) are units where tenants own and share responsibility for the buildings. 

“Residents looking to purchase a unit within a co-op will own shares of the overall corporation rather than owning the walls-in unit itself. The number of shares a resident owns pertains to the size of the unit itself,” said Brian Shahwan, vice president and mortgage banker at William Raveis Mortgage to Architectural Digest. 

A co-op isn’t the same as if someone were to buy property themselves, rather they would be entitled to a share of the building. The idea of co-ops on Arvene East contributes to the ideas of community and collaboration outlined in the project, while giving community members a chance at homeownership. According to Parris, the project is set to be closed by the end of the calendar year. 

“Pathways to homeownership are critical in my district and across the city,” said Brooks Powers. “That is why I’m excited to see that there’s movement on homeownership units for the Arvene East development.” 

As federal housing protections weaken, New York City officials say they are stepping up local enforcement efforts to ensure tenants can still access fair and legal housing without facing discrimination based on vouchers or source of income.  

In an Oct. 3 City Council hearing, District 27 Council Member and Chair of the Committee on Civil and Human Rights Nantasha Williams stressed the urgency of addressing ongoing housing discrimination, particularly against New Yorkers who rely on housing vouchers. Her comments follow reports that two civil rights lawyers were fired from the Housing and Urban Development Department (HUD) for speaking out against the current administration’s effort to debilitate enforcement of the Fair Housing Act.   

“Some landlords continue to use tactics to sidestep the laws, while other landlords cease all communication with prospective tenants upon learning that they will use a voucher to pay their rent, and that’s true,” said Williams. “I actually did like a secret shopper thing and that happened to me as I pretended that I was looking for an apartment, and had that experience as well.”

Williams described the situation as New York City’s “worst housing crisis” and called attention to the layered forms of discrimination people face when looking for accommodations. She noted that this source of income discrimination disproportionately affects people of color, individuals with disabilities, and people with children.

City Council Member Rita Joseph of District 40, who also serves on the Committee on Civil and Human Rights, echoed these concerns, highlighting persistent voucher discrimination in her Brooklyn district. 

“I recall in 2022 when I first came into office, I got a report that my district was one of the districts that faced a lot of discrimination from landlords who did not accept vouchers,” said Joseph. “My neighboring council members have the same issue. We definitely would love to see more work done around that.” 

To address these concerns, the Council called on NYC’s Commission of Human Rights (CCHR), the agency tasked with enforcing the Human Rights Law, which prohibits housing and employment discrimination based on a wide range of factors such as race, gender, sexual orientation, citizenship status, and source of income.

At the hearing, representatives from CCHR discussed how they are taking steps to educate all New Yorkers on their housing rights. This includes housing rights workshops at adult centers, free courses for brokers through their collaboration with the Fordham Real Estate Institute, multilingual ad campaigns, and even educational theater performances. 

“In fiscal year ‘25, the commission achieved a new milestone engaging with more than 150,000 New Yorkers, which is the highest since I’ve been at the commission. One consistent and growing pathway of engagement is our free facilitated trainings,” said JoAnn Kamuf Ward, Deputy Commissioner of Policy and External Affairs at CCHR. “The commission works diligently to meet New Yorkers where they are across the five boroughs. This is increasingly important in the current time when there is a lot of government mistrust.”

Ward emphasized that community outreach is only part of the work CCHR does. Many discrimination complaints are resolved through settlements, which can result in broader benefits for tenants. 

“The commission is proud to have effectively utilized settlements and source of income cases to increase housing availability for voucherholders,” said Ward, “through set asides and broker incentive programs.” 

Kevin Farley, Associate Commissioner of Investigations and Operations at CCHR, explained how the agency conducts its testing to catch illegal practices in the housing market. 

“You will have an inquiry from someone posing as a voucher holder about the availability about renting an apartment, and then you have someone posing as someone with earned income trying to rent an apartment,” said Farley. “We’re looking for differential treatment there to determine if discrimination is happening.”

For many New Yorkers, the effects of housing discrimination are deeply personal. Muhammad Musah, Lead Community Organizer at African Communities Together (ART), testified at the hearing and shared his own experience of being removed from his apartment of three years.

“One day without warning, I discovered my name was no longer on the building’s virtual doorman list,” said Musah. “Despite paying my rent religiously, I could no longer access my home. Weeks went by before the management company finally told me the reason. The landlord had been illegally leasing the unit to me.”

He continued, “I’m Muslim and there’s not many Muslims in that building. I often had to wait hours outside hoping someone would let me in while worrying about how I might be perceived just for trying to enter my own home. I felt unsafe, I felt invisible, and I felt powerless.”

Musah’s experience was one of several presented at the hearing as examples of how housing discrimination continues to affect tenants across NYC. Council members expressed support for expanding CCHR’s capacity to investigate and enforce the law, especially as federal regulations continue to get rolled back. While CCHR is not federally funded through HUD, changes at that level can still impact local enforcement.   

“That work must be visible and accessible so that every New Yorker understands their rights and trusts that we are standing with them,” said Williams. 

Activists and elected officials rallied at City Hall to urge Governor Kathy Hochul to sign the ban on the 100-foot rule for new natural gas pipeline connections. Lisa Marshall, Organizing Director for New Yorkers for Clean Power, introduced “We know the utilities are not going to stop this practice that is so good for their corporate profits until lawmakers and the governor act to change the law.” said Marshall.

The 100-foot rule bill was originally part of the much larger New York Heat Act, which the legislature did not pass. The legislature did approve the ban on the 100-foot rule, which requires gas utilities to connect new construction with existing pipelines with ratepayers footing the bill. But the governor has yet to sign the bill. If the new bill is signed into effect the cost of new gas pipelines will be solely on the owner of said property.

Various climate advocacy groups participated, including the Association for Energy Affordability, Food and Water Watch, Sane Energy Project, 350Brooklyn and Climate Families.

“One in four New York households already cannot afford to pay their energy bills, but that isn’t stopping Con Ed and National Grid and other utilities from raising rates so they can continue to build new gas pipelines, dirty gas pipelines, and we are paying the bill,” said Marshall. 

Senator Liz Kreuger, who sponsored the bill in the state Senate, pointed out that other states are not stalling on the push for green energy. She mentioned Texas’ recent investments on renewables. “Texas is moving to sustainable energy, [they’ve] sped up the amount of solar energy and battery storage and wind. Even in the last year under their favorite president, Donald Trump, they’re not stepping back. They’re not stepping away. They’re moving forward, because they understand with the impact of climate change, their future is in green energy, they’re doing it. We better well damn do it, too.”

Assemblywoman Joanne Simon spoke about the misconception that rising rates are due to investment in renewable energy. “You keep hearing that my rates are going up because of green energy. They are not going up because of green energy. They are going up because of fossil fuels.” said Assemblywoman Simon. “The cost of putting in those pipelines and repairing those pipelines are very expensive.”

New Yorkers for Clean Power hope that Governor Hochul will sign the bill before Climate Week ends on September 28th. However, activists are scheduling further events to pressure the governor, including an electric candlelight vigil outside the War Room in Albany on December 11th.

East New York residents fear the “City of Yes” housing reforms will contribute to overdevelopment in their community while not addressing infrastructure concerns. 

The New York City Council voted 31-20 on December 5th to approve Mayor Eric Adams’ amended “City of Yes” plan. The measure that passed included amendments added on  November 1st, 2024, addressing affordability issues beyond zoning, infrastructure, and housing protections; the measure won a Council majority.

But Councilmember Chris Banks (D-NY), who represents East New York, voted against the bill to reflect the will of his constituency. In a November 19th town hall hosted by Banks and Councilwoman Sandy Nurse (D-NY), who represents Bushwick and surrounding areas, Banks referred to the pending vote as “the hardest vote I’ll ever have to take.” He also addressed partial and misinformation regarding the proposal he felt his constituency was unaware of. Banks said all four community boards in the 42nd councilmanic district voted against the City of Yes. He also stated that some of the districts felt the proposal needed adjustments.

Community activist John Joyner agrees.  “Mayor Eric Adams’ housing plan throws all the weight on struggling businesses, property owners, and landlords while protecting people like Donald Trump and other wealthy building owners from doing their part,” said Joyner. Joyner, a community activist from Say No Irresponsible Development in East New York, added that New Yorkers need a more comprehensive plan to achieve housing equity. 

On November 1st, 2024, The City Council announced a $5 billion plan to address further the issues the City of Yes did not tackle. After securing capital funding from Mayor Adams (D-NY) and Governor Kathy Hochul (D-NY), the council put together a housing plan to address the root causes of the housing crisis beyond zoning through policy and investments. They wanted measures to increase affordable home ownership and housing preservation and provide more affordable housing options. 

Speaker Adrienne Adams said, “New Yorkers need more housing, but affordability, homeownership opportunities, housing security and stability, and neighborhood investments are equally important to help working-and middle-class residents in our city,” she said.

New York City is experiencing a housing crisis with a 1.4% vacancy rate citywide – the lowest since 1968. Most New Yorkers are currently paying more than 30% of their income towards rent. In East New York, Brooklyn, where the poverty rate is higher than the city as a whole, the housing vacancy rate in East New York in 2022 was 3.4%, and the average rent had increased from $1,260 to $1,450 within 16 years.

Some East New Yorkers felt the original proposal didn’t do enough. At the Brooklyn Community Board 5 meeting, Brother Paul Muhammad, a local activist, stated, “This was not designed to empower this community. It was designed to give access to people to get at our homes and our properties.”

Mayor Adams advanced The City of Yes as a housing program to reform zoning laws and create more housing in every district. It will allow developers to reserve 20% of space in new developments to create affordable options and to lift the restrictions on zoning and allow conversion of underutilized buildings to housing. It will allow more housing types, including the conversion of basements into apartments, and reduce parking mandates. 

However, critics believe the proposal was a way to get developers to take over low-density areas. Critics also worry that the new housing will lack enough parking.

“One of the modifications states they would ease or somewhat roll back the parking requirements in the four zones that were created for each council district to possibly qualify,” said Councilmember Banks. “Every zone had a reduction in parking, and in my district, my issue was that why wasn’t there consideration for zones that needed more parking.” Banks stated.

According to the new bill, there will be a multi-zone system to address parking for new developments. Parking for new developments will be eliminated in Manhattan (with the exception of Inwood), Long Island City, parts of Brooklyn, and parts of western Queens. Parking will be reduced in areas that are accessible by transit while maintaining parking in areas that are further from subway service. 

Banks felt that the parking mandates should have been protected to avoid leaving parking at developers’ discretion. That way, any new developers building in the district would be mandated by the city to provide parking to residents. He also felt that infrastructure was not considered, especially in his district, where there is a lot of development, even though there are existing infrastructure issues such as flooding, sewage, and transportation that need to be recognized. 

Val Hunter, an East New York activist, was unhappy with the passage and believed it would only allow the city to overdevelop the community without addressing existing infrastructure issues.  “I understand progressive measures, but until current infrastructure issues are made a priority, then why would monies be allotted anywhere else,” Hunter said, “especially to over-develop a city that should be a model city offering diverse living options.”

East New Yorkers also point out that the plan offered no pathway to homeownership. “Homeownership was something I stressed over and over again that the plan was empty on, especially in a community like mine, which just had a large housing expansion in the most Southern part of the district,” Banks said. “However, we also need those middle-class folks who, according to our AMI, make $50-$100,000 and want to stay in the district. There’s no housing for them.”

Eu Shaw, an East New York resident, shared this sentiment and thought that the housing search in New York City is a joke. “Take a minute and look at the Housing Connect website,” he said. “Most apartments you have to earn $80-to-$100,000 per year or be very low income. How many people earn that?”

Activists and advocacy groups in other areas of Brooklyn also were displeased by the proposal passage. Sunset Park Votes, an advocacy group that promotes civic engagement for residents of Sunset Park, said in a statement that “the NYC Council’s recent passage of the modified City of Yes legislation has left the working-class disheartened. While it includes $5 billion for housing, $200 million to reduce NYCHA vacancies, $187 million for CityFHEPS rental assistance, and $2 million for parks, these measures fall short of addressing the housing crisis for many who need it the most.”

According to Banks, the capital funds allocated for the plan are only commitments and have not yet been budgeted. He fears those commitments may change in the future but hopes that the city sticks with those commitments.

“We know in this city, in this climate of politics, things change. So I’m praying, and I’m hoping that those commitments stay in place,” he said.

Overall, with the proposal now passed, the Councilmember looks forward to seeing how those modifications will be incorporated into East New York with the zoning changes. He also plans to remain observant of all changes and will continue to advocate for his district on the council.

On Tuesday, Idaho’s Department of Health and Welfare (DHW) announced it will stop using hotels and short-term rentals to temporarily house foster children with complex needs, citing a decline in incoming foster youth. Instead, children and teens entering the foster care system will be placed in a new care center staffed by professionals trained to provide comprehensive support. The announcement follows the signing of an executive order by Idaho’s governor aimed at removing barriers making the process faster and more accessible for prospective foster parents. However, some critics are raising concerns about the potential risks involved in the expedited process.

“The number of children coming into foster care rose in 2020 and 2021, and the department established the temporary housing program to keep kids safe,” said DHW Youth Safety and Permanency Administrator Jean Fisher. “The department’s goal was always to phase this program out as soon as possible.”

The program primarily housed newly enrolled foster children with health conditions, developmental disabilities, and teens, who are more challenging to place in foster care than their younger counter parts. 

In a 2021 interview with Idaho CBS 2 News, Cameron Gilliland, the former administrator of the Division of Family and Community Services, acknowledged using an office building to temporarily house the growing number of foster youths.

“We didn’t have a place for them, so sometimes we’ve had to keep them in the office overnight,” said Gilliland. “Other times we’ve gone to hotels and short-term rentals. Most of them are there in that situation for 10 or less days. Although we have some that have been a little longer.”

In May, the Health and Welfare department opened a new 16-bed assessment center, the “Payette Assessment and Care Center” (PACC), in Treasure Valley, Idaho, which instantly reduced the reliance on temporary housing. The center was built over the course of six months with the help from state funding and dozens of donations from local organizations 

“One of the important things that we find is a lot of kids that come to us have never experienced the ability to have their own room,” said Stacy Corbett, program manager for child welfare. “The rooms are big enough to fit two beds so siblings can remain together.” 

The focus on maintaining sibling connections and offering a sense of stability is crucial as many of these children come from environments of trauma. These efforts are aligned with larger state initiatives aimed at supporting foster families and children in the child welfare system.

In June, Idaho Governor Brad Little signed Executive Order 2024-05, the “Promoting Families and Protecting Children Act,” and announced additional steps his administration is taking to remove barriers for foster families and better protect youth in the child welfare system.

“There is no category of children more in need of protection than those in the child welfare system. Through no fault of their own, children in foster care in Idaho face enormous challenges. Governor Little said in a statement. “They need our support, and so do the foster families who step up to care for them, love them, and provide them safety. The Promoting Families and Protecting Children Act will accelerate the improvements we know we need to address in our child welfare system in Idaho.”

One barrier that has been removed to “accelerate” the placement of children in foster homes was making a pre-service trauma informed training course optional for caregivers. which was once mandatory, according to DHW. A report by the National Library of Medicine stated that, approximately 90% of children in foster care have experienced trauma, whether it be from abuse, neglect, or other adverse situations. Foster parents are still required to attend the ‘Reasonable and Prudent Parent Standard’ and ‘Fostering Idaho Resources & Skills Training’ course, which teaches them to “make careful and sensible parental decisions,” according to DHW.

“This is terrifying,” said Barbra Decker, an Idaho native, who adopted a child that she fostered in 2019. “Trauma informed care is the core of keeping kiddos from jumping placement to placement. I understand the need for more foster parents, but this is not the way to go.”

While Decker finds this ‘terrifying,’ she remains hopeful that adults who are considering fostering will make the right choice and complete the pre-service trauma-informed training course.

“I trust that they (adults) will take the time to have the proper training to learn how to care for these kiddos,” said Decker. “Bless their hearts.”

Jamaica is an interesting pocket of Queens. There’s something about the neighborhood that feels somewhat self-contained as an area with 80,000 residents, 97% of whom being nonwhite and 57% having been born outside of the country. It’s not hard to see how it stands apart from other dense, metropolitan areas in NYC. This is exactly what New York Times writer David McAninch found when covering the neighborhood in a 2007 article, writing, “They are signs of a street life that, though distinctly urban in its grit and rough edges, is more villagelike than cosmopolitan, a life lived beyond the reach of large-scale gentrification” 

Unfortunately, it’s starting to feel like that last sentence is in danger of aging poorly.

It’s becoming increasingly common to hear Queens natives lamenting on how much the neighborhood has changed. Oftentimes you might even hear a particular buzzword: gentrification. 

This is not a particularly new concern. You can find articles and think-pieces from as far back as 2016 where people express fears that their beloved neighborhood may be falling victim to the dreaded g-word. This mostly stems from relatively small, superficial concerns like a new Shake Shack or the closing of beloved businesses like the Jamaica Multiplex Theater, which has been a landmark since its opening in May 2002. It seems somewhat frivolous to dread the opening of a new restaurant or mourn some movie theater but to some people, a new burger restaurant location serves as warning that they may be getting pushed out.

This flurry of sudden (and somewhat unwelcomed) changes can be tied back to one man: Mayor Eric Adams.

Since taking office in 2022, the Adams administration has had one clear and consistent goal: bringing large sweeping changes to neighborhoods all across the city. It took only his second State of the City Address for Adams to announce his “Working People’s Agenda”, which included an action plan to explicitly execute a “full reconstruction of Jamaica Avenue from Sutphin Boulevard to Merrick Boulevard in Jamaica.” 

Since then there’s been a slew of actions and plans announced by Adams that would drastically change areas all over the city, like “Get Stuff Built” and the controversial “City of Yes” Proposal. There are even multiple plans that are specifically centered around Jamaica, like the “Jamaica NOW Plan” and the “Jamaica Neighborhood Plan”. The latter of which is a plan that seeks to “expand housing opportunities, create space for jobs across economic sectors, plan for growth with key infrastructure investments, and improve Jamaica’s public realm.” Although it’s not healthy to be scared of change, there is a lot of concern that all this change may end up doing more harm than good.

Referred to as “the most pro-housing zoning proposal in New York City’s history”, Adams’ City Of Yes proposal makes Jamaica one of the many targets of rezoning and new housing units. Along with City of Yes, The Department of City Planning intends to “deliver more than 50,000 units over the next 15 years in Midtown South in Manhattan and in Long Island City and Jamaica in Queens.” 

These numerous plans and proposals have some residents feeling a bit uncertain about their place in Jamaica’s future, but the Department of City Planning asserts that there is nothing to worry about. “With a 1.4% vacancy rate citywide, New York City is in the midst of a severe housing crisis – and that includes Jamaica, Queens. This is the result of housing production not keeping up with demand,” says DCP Deputy Press Secretary Joe Marvilli.

“When that happens, rents go up and the risk of gentrification, displacement, and tenant harassment increases. Through the Jamaica Neighborhood Plan, we can deliver thousands of new homes and ensure, for the first time, that new buildings in Jamaica include a significant amount of permanently income-restricted, affordable housing. This will help existing residents and their families remain and thrive in this community.”

The New York City Housing Authority (NYCHA) is grappling with a staggering $80 billion in repair needs while also facing rising evictions and growing rent debts due to the COVID-19 pandemic. On September 18, 2024, City Council Public Housing Committee Chair Chris Banks raised concerns about whether NYCHA is doing enough to support its residents, especially as funding from the Emergency Rental Assistance Program (ERAP) continues to fall short.  

Banks noted that while many market-rate renters received help during the pandemic, public housing residents did not, leading to increased rent arrears. NYCHA officials, including Chief Operating Officer Ava Trimble, testifying at the hearing, stressed their commitment to keeping evictions low. “Eviction is always our last resort after we have exhausted all other ways to resolve tenant issues,” Trimble said. 

The NYCHA officials said they are reaching out to residents through door knocks, letters, and phone calls, and offering payment plans to help them manage their arrears. They also encourage tenants to update their income information during recertification to ensure rent is based on current financial situations. However, Chief Financial Officer Annika Lescott-Martinez acknowledged that operating without stable funding makes it difficult to keep up with repairs.

When Banks asked about strategies for collecting rent and supporting residents in arrears, Trimble reiterated their focus on keeping people housed. “We have payment plans and encourage residents to come into the office and work with us,” she said.

Councilmember Pierina Ana Sanchez raised concerns about how NYCHA is handling tenant recertification, noting that many constituents were not receiving termination letters even as deadlines approached. She pressed for clearer communication but received vague answers. Sanchez also called for an audit of the Office of Impartial Hearings to ensure proper procedures were followed, but NYCHA did not provide a clear response.

Sanchez expressed frustration when asking about recertification timelines for Section 8 tenants, as Trimble admitted they did not have that information readily available. This was concerning, especially since many NYCHA tenants are currently in rent arrears.

Councilmember Darlene Mealy called for more transparency regarding denied rental assistance applications, highlighting that understanding these denials is crucial to prevent tenant displacement. She criticized NYCHA for possibly outsourcing important responsibilities, which could harm residents, and urged better coordination with social services.

As the meeting wrapped up, Banks emphasized that NYCHA’s future relies on increased public investment and ongoing support for tenants. While NYCHA plays a vital role in providing affordable housing, its ongoing issues with repairs and rent debt raise significant concerns about its effectiveness. 

In New York City, the high demand for housing, coupled with financial requirements, has placed a spotlight on the critical role credit scores play in renting or purchasing property. Recent data underscores the significant hurdles faced by certain demographic groups, particularly minorities and low-income individuals, in securing housing due to credit score disparities.

According to statistics provided by the New York City Department of Housing Preservation and Development (HPD), nearly 30 percent of all applicants for rental and housing applications face rejection due to inadequate credit scores. In response to this, Mayor Eric Adams announced in October 2023 the elimination of unnecessary credit checks for low-income households buying with a city voucher.

Minorities are disproportionately affected in the competition for housing, advocates say. Studies conducted by housing advocacy groups such as the Urban Institute reveal disparities in credit scores among racial and ethnic groups. African American and Hispanic populations tend to face challenges in achieving higher credit scores, the Institute said, with averages notably lower than their white counterparts. On average, African Americans in NYC have a credit score of 660, while Hispanics average 670, compared to the citywide average of 690.

Ernesto Gonzalez, a 39 year old Latino, says, “ I don’t want to say score number but I have not been able to buy my own property. I work very hard but I came here from South America and started with 0 dollars.” Ernesto is one of the many Latinos in New York who struggle with a low credit score that prevents them from purchasing homes.

Low-income individuals also encounter barriers in accessing housing due to credit score limitations. According to the Community Service Society, an advocacy organization, individuals earning below the city’s median income often grapple with lower credit scores. Approximately 4 percent of low-income applicants experience housing denials due to creditworthiness concerns, hindering their ability to secure affordable housing options in a city notorious for its high cost of living.

In a city where the median home price hovers around $680,000 and the average monthly rent for a one-bedroom apartment exceeds $3,000, the significance of a high credit score cannot be overstated. Landlords and property management companies heavily rely on credit checks as a determinant of an applicant’s reliability in meeting rent or mortgage obligations.

These realities have sparked discussions among policymakers and housing advocates about how to address systemic issues contributing to credit score disparities. Efforts are underway to promote financial education programs aimed at improving credit literacy among underserved communities and advocating for alternative assessment criteria to evaluate housing eligibility beyond credit scores.

In response to the growing concerns, organizations such as the NYC Commission on Human Rights have initiated campaigns to combat discriminatory practices in housing and lending, striving to ensure fair access to housing regardless of demographic backgrounds. Mayor Adams’ elimination of credit score checks for city voucher holders on October 5, was one effort to combat the housing struggle in NYC.

Rafael Reyes, a loan officer at Compass, says, “I really try to highlight the different resources out there that can help. For example, I have a lot of videos on my social media targeting the Latino community and offering them help in order to buy their dream home.”

“So, when it comes to working with a loan officer, at least for me, one of the first things I tell my clients is how sensitive their spendings will be during the application,” Reyes pointed out. “The bank is watching and any action that makes them double take will affect their loan approval. Which is the first step to achieving that dream home.”

Frustrated tenants gathered at the Flatbush Public Library in Brooklyn to meet with representatives of tenant-based organizations to learn how to protect themselves against landlords. The August 31st meeting was the second in a series of six free workshops on tenants’ rights and tenant organizing.

This series is a collaboration of Tenant Union Flatbush, Flatbush DSA, and the Legal Aid Society. The workshops, held every other Thursday, cover a range of topics such as researching landlords, organizing to get repairs made, and calling for a rent strike.

“There’s power in numbers,” said Nell Hirschman-Levy, 43, a Supervising Attorney for the Housing Justice Unit called Group Advocacy for the Legal Aid Society. “Part of why we do the work that we do in representing groups of tenants is because we really want to see the relationship between a landlord and tenants change.”

The Legal Aid Society is a non-profit legal aid provider for low-income New Yorkers. Hirschman-Levy stated that her unit works with groups of tenants in multiple buildings who’ve been abused by landlords to come together and take them to court instead of being on the defensive side.

Tenants’ complaints include landlords not making repairs, mold, leaks, no heat or hot water, harassment, and illegal rent increases. Hirschman-Levy’s unit also examines the rent history of buildings to catch illegal rent increases.

A tenant named Wendy, who chose to give only her first name, lives in a co-op apartment which isn’t a rent-stabilized apartment (defined as an apartment in a rental building of six or more units built before 1974). “People think ‘Oh, I just pay my maintenance, the rent basically, and we don’t have to be concerned about anything,’ and that’s not how it works, you got to stay informed.”

The workshop leaders explained key tenant rights: tenants have a right to a safe and habitable home, the right to bring a case in Housing Court, to be free from discrimination, and the right to organize without landlord interference.

Tenants are also entitled to a written lease. The lease can’t be changed while it’s in effect unless both parties agree. They have a right to a lease renewal when their initial lease ends. Landlords are expected to deliver a renewal between 90 and 150 days before the current lease expires.

“We do have rights, the trick is it’s up to us to enforce them,” said David Jenkins, 37, a volunteer organizer with Tenant Union Flatbush.

This is important because about one million apartments are covered by this rent regulation system established in 1969. It keeps families in their homes and in stabilized apartments.

On a 5-4 decision vote from the Rent Guidelines Board in June, building owners will be allowed to increase their monthly payments by up to 3% for a one-year lease. For two-year leases, they can increase the rent by 2.75% in the first year and then another 3.2% in the second year. These increases would apply to leases issued or renewed from October 1st through September 30, 2024

“We live in a city that often gives a lot of breaks to people with money and doesn’t consider low-income working-class folks,” said Hirschman-Levy. “We should be focusing on what are the resources that are needed to prevent these evictions and what’s going on in our city that these evictions are taking place at the rate that they are.”

Since the pandemic, Flatbush residents have struggled to keep up with rent hikes and
landlords failing to make needed repairs. Three community groups–Tenant Union Flatbush,
Flatbush DSA and the Legal Aid Society–are hosting a “Tenants’ Rights Workshop Series” on a
bi-weekly basis to provide the residents with resources on tenants rights violations.

There’s another reason why Flatbush residents need this information. On June 21, 2023,
the RGB(Rent Guidelines Board) came to an official vote on new rent guidelines. It was a 5-4
decision allowing building owners to increase monthly rent by up to 3% for a one year lease.
This will take effect between October 2023 and September 2024.

A resident of the upper Kensington area bordering Coney Island said that her landlord
neglected to make repairs no matter how many times she asked. The landlord even raised the rent
of one of her neighbors because she made complaints.

“They jammed my bedroom window open, so it doesn’t close. It’s been like that for three
years,” she said. “The woman who probably had the best shot at fighting it and she was clearly in
a rent stabilized apartment, they doubled her rent. It went from $1,800 to $3,000 something. She
just said I can’t deal with this.”

The upper Kensington resident said her neighbor filed noise complaints and part of that
increase in rent was “they wanted to push her out because she was complaining about things and
she was filing official complaints.”

At the second event in the series on August 31st, attendees learned about a term that
could change the game. It’s called “rent stabilization.”
One Legal Aid Society lawyer said “If you live in a building built before 1974 that has
six or more apartments, you are rent-stabilized. Anyone that is rent-stabilized pays a rent price
that is decided by the state, not by their landlord.” A tenant has a right to be notified when their
rent is going to be increased. A tenant that has lived in the unit for six months is required to get
30 days notice of an increase in their rent, for one year 60 days and for tenants of 2 years, 90
days.
If tenants notice suspicious changes in their rent, they can request their unit’s rent history
by contacting DHCR (New York State Department of Homes and Community Renewal). The

Legal Aid Society encourages tenants to testify as a group so that unjust landlords are more
likely to be held accountable. “There’s power in numbers,” said Nell Hirschman-Levy of the
Legal Aid Society.

College students, workers, advocates and politicians are skeptical about NYC Mayor Eric Adams’ subway safety plan  that was put into effect on Feb 21.

“Repeating the failed outreach-based policing strategies of the past will not end the suffering of homeless people bedding down on the subway,” said Shelly Nortz, Deputy Executive Director for Policy with the Coalition for the Homeless.

The plan consists of three specific goals to address subway violence, as transit crime has increased 86.8% from 2021, according to NYPD data.

Response teams would be sent throughout the city to meet up with homeless individuals residing in the subway, ensuring that the unsheltered will be provided with housing and care, and working with government agencies to help improve housing and mental health services.

Five outreach teams will be deployed at Penn Station, the West 42nd Street corridor, Grand Central Terminal, West 4th Street, the Fulton Street Corridor, and Jamaica Center to provide alternative shelter to people living on trains.

Teams will include medical staff and psychiatric health clinicians to refer people to mental health services. In addition, teams will be stationed at a train’s final stop to engage with unsheltered New Yorkers and place them into shelter settings such as stabilization beds.

On March 28, just a month after announcing the subway plan, the mayor implemented further measures against the homeless, by removing homeless encampments from the streets of New York.

Many New Yorkers oppose Adams’ approach to the homeless.

Nortz stated that the mayor is trying to criminalize the homeless. “It is sickening to hear Mayor Adams liken unsheltered homeless people to a cancer,” she said. “Criminalizing homelessness and mental illness is not the answer.”

She continued, “We urge great caution with respect to any regulatory or statutory expansion of involuntary commitment or outpatient treatment standards, including Kendra’s Law.”

Kendra’s law was legislation that was put into effect in 1999 after a woman named Kendra Webdale was pushed onto the tracks of an on-coming N train by a schizophrenic man named Andrew Goldstein, killing her.

The law gives judges the power to issue orders requiring people who satisfy certain requirements to receive mental treatment on a regular basis.

But “expansion of the legal criteria will not solve the problem and could result in pushing people in need further away from care,” the Coalition for the Homeless deputy director said. ”It will also not solve the problem of premature discharges or access to care when people seek it. It will not solve unsheltered homelessness.”

Another individual had a similar sentiment in regard to the plan. A 24-year-old Brooklyn College student, who referred to himself only by his first name, Vern, said, “These people need to be housed, not in jail cells. The cops are just pushing people away into these jails by these summons and these tickets.”

Brooklyn College student Alliyah Biggs wanted the mayor to put enough funding into providing services to the homeless and mentally challenged.

“They should find a plan to help the homeless people better,” the 22-year-old senior said. “Funded shelters, job recruiters for the homeless, personal care assistants, counselors for the homeless.”

One major criticism that the mayor received was the funding for social services.

It was reported that Mayor Adams’ budget plan cuts $615 million from homeless services, decreasing the Department of Homeless Services spending from $2.8 billion to $2.15 billion for the 2023 fiscal year, according to City Limits.

Brooklyn Councilman Chi Ossé commented on the budget cuts when asked by the New York Daily News.

“I’m kind of confused as to how that plan will be carried out when there have been no significant investments in … street outreach,” he said to the Daily News. “Do you believe that the preliminary budget that is proposed is adequate enough for addressing … our unsheltered neighbors that are seeking shelter on the subways?”

The Metropolitan Transportation Authority conducted a survey which found 29 homeless encampments within the subway tunnels and an additional 89 encampments in the subway stations, according to the New York Post, which estimated there are over 350 people living within these spaces.

One MTA worker weighed in on the matter. “It doesn’t surprise me,” Monita Jordan, Power Distribution Maintainer with the MTA said. “We have a large homeless population (in NYC) and they find ways to make some place home. Sometimes it’s by all means necessary for them.”

She urged the mayor to take a humane approach. “You do have many crimes that are done by homeless people, but it’s not all homeless people,” she said. “Some people need mental health services and independent living services. They need to come up with some type of better services such as job placement and low-income housing for the homeless.”

In his March 25 announcement, Mayor Adams said a two-week operation would remove homeless encampments and place individuals in healthy living conditions.

“We can’t stop an individual from sleeping on the street based on law, and we’re not going to violate that law,” the mayor told The New York Times. “But you can’t build a miniature house made out of cardboard on the streets. That’s inhumane.”

Jacquelyn Simone, Policy Director for the Coalition for the Homeless, was sharply critical. “Once again, Mayor Adams is demonstrating his lack of understanding of unsheltered homeless New Yorkers,” she said. “His administration has no plan to provide safe, single rooms where they can stay inside, and is relying instead on the tired and cruel old tactic of chasing those without shelter out of Manhattan.”

She continued, “Like Giuliani, he will fail. Moving people to the outer boroughs will simply move them away from outreach workers, access to food, and the health and social services they need to survive,” she said. “If the Mayor is serious about helping homeless people, he needs to open thousands of new Safe Haven and stabilization rooms and offer them to those in need, not take away what little protection they have from the elements and other dangers on the street.”

Many people say that New York City is the center of the world, with its bright lights, noise and crowds. However, it was also an epicenter of the COVID-19 pandemic, and that has left its mark on the city that never sleeps.

As normalcy is coming back, many are left wondering how the city will recover. Will it ever be the same again?

Gilles Duranton, professor of real estate at the University of Pennsylvania’s Wharton School, and Jessie Handbury, assistant professor of real estate, addressed  the issue before a limited in-person crowd at the Federal Reserve Bank of New York on Thurs., Mar. 31. There were also 203 participants live streaming the event.

The COVID-19 pandemic has created a “donut effect” in the city, according to the two professors, hollowing out the middle. Many people left the city and moved out to the suburbs, where rent and house prices have risen. This has been attributed to more people working from home.

“Fewer days having to go to work makes the suburbs more effective,” said Handbury. Due to more people having the luxury of being able to work at home, Duranton said that some cities should push outward. One way NYC could do that is by establishing a home-office tax where people who work from home in the suburbs pay tax to the city where they are employed, he said.

With more people working from home, many restaurants and smaller stores servicing office workers have closed.

“If you want to work from home you’ll have to pay a tax,” said Handbury. Both Duranton and Handbury are adamant about applying the home-office tax in order to help cities recover from the effects of the pandemic on businesses.

While some are predicting the after-effects of the pandemic, other experts are suggesting that residents wait and see what happens with employees returning to the city for work.

“It’s too early to really draw a long-term conclusion,” said Marc Morial, president and CEO, National Urban League. “The city is just easing out of the pandemic.”

Kathryn Wylde, president and CEO of the Partnership for New York City, stated that of 10,000 office workers surveyed in the city, 82% responded that they are monitoring carefully what happens over the next year about whether to return to work in person.

As of late February, over 30% of office employees have returned to work in-person according to an article on thecity.nyc.

Land use—who gets to build what in New York City—is one of the most fraught processes for big time developers pushing for their projects to be built. Brooklyn Borough President Antonio Reynoso held a remote Uniform Land Use Review Procedure (ULURP) public hearing Feb. 17 providing positive recommendations to two widely discussed and controversial development projects in Brooklyn.

This hearing was the third step in ULURP for those two projects: Broadway Triangle, a building of 387 apartments where three neighborhoods—Williamsburg, Bushwick and Bedford-Stuyvesant meet and 840 Lorimer Street, a 31,377 square feet apartment building in Greenpoint.

If a developer wants to build, project applications first go through the Department of City Planning, then to the area’s community board. The community board then informs the public on the details of the application, reviews it, recommends changes and then sends it to the borough president for the hearing.

From the borough president, if it meets his or her approval, it goes ultimately to the city council and the mayor.

For each step in the process, applicants submit their proposals for their projects and explain why their developments are worthy enough to change the area’s zoning regulations. At this hearing developers applied for residential rezoning, meaning they’d want to build apartment buildings there.

The Broadway Triangle has been in the works since 2006, with two of the three proposed sites approved in 2019. Original developers, Mega Contracting Group and the Department of Housing Preservation and Development, faced serious scrutiny within the community. The Unified Neighborhood Partners (including the St. Nicks Alliance and Los Sures) filed a lawsuit that said that the original development designs favored the Hasidic residents in the area.

They stated that the development would “create dramatic racial disparities and increase existing severe segregation in the area.”    They explained that the original plans were going to favor the predominantly white Community District 1, noting that the designs called for exceptionally large apartments — which are typically favored in the Hasidic community — and the city’s choice of the United Jewish Organizations of Williamsburg, a group working with the developer. They charged that it neglected Community District 3, which is predominantly Black and Latino.

The lawsuit was settled in 2012 in favor of the UNP, a policy and social change organization who frequently advocate for neighborhood affordability. The organization then began collaborating with the original developers striving to provide 380 deeply affordable housing units on the property. Deeply affordable housing units target applicants that earn 25%-35% of the neighborhood’s median income instead of the usual 50%-60% that other affordable housing buildings ask for. There will be 30% preference in accepting applicants who were previously homeless, something that the neighborhood, which is widely criticized for being overly gentrified with a median income of $53,303, needs.

At this hearing, two representatives of the St. Nicks Alliance Frank Lang and Charlie Stewart, explained the final details and goals of the project. The St. Nicks alliance is a non-profit group in association with the Unified Neighborhood Partners that serves low to moderate income North Brooklyn Residents.

The new goals of the development include, “creat[ing] an integrated neighborhood,” as Lang said, which was met with smiles from Reynoso who when he was in the City Council, was a part of the development’s litigation in changing the development’s designs.

The Lorimer Street development on the other hand is still dealing with further issues.

The main pushback for the ten-story development, which would be used for ground retail and office space as well as about 74 apartment units, is affordability. At the hearing, Reynoso asked representative Richard Lobel about the percentage of units that would be used for affordable housing. Lobel said that at a previous meeting with the district’s community board, one of the recommendations made to the developer was to provide at least 35% affordable housing prices within the units.

“I think that’s a challenging number,” Lobel said. “That number came out– almost like ‘Well the applicant’s getting a lot here. Let’s ask them to do greater affordability.’” He said that the developer owns other buildings that have exceeded the mandatory 24-30% number of affordable housing units in their buildings so, people are expecting them to provide the public with more.

To this, Reynoso agreed with Lobel. “While I would love to see 35% affordability… a ton of requests are being made to this applicant in an effort to satisfy what they would think is a fair application.” He referenced the fact that a building on the same block owned by Jason Property Owners wasn’t required to meet that mark.

The next step for these two developers need is plead their case to the City Planning Commission and finally, the City Council and the mayor, which make the final decision.