Councilman Brad Lander at the first 39th Council District Participatory Budget Assembly in 2011.
Councilman Brad Lander at a Gowanus Planning meeting in 2014
3D model of a fully built-out Gowanus after rezoning
by New York Institute of Technology (NYIT) students
This week in the 39th Council District, thousands of area residents as young as 11 years old cast their votes to fund neighborhood projects as part of Participatory Budgeting, a "democratic process in which community members directly decide how to spend part of a public budget."
In all, local citizens can have a choice in how $50,000 of expense projects and $1.5 million in capital projects gets spent in our neighborhoods.
Whether one votes for diaper changing stations for nine parks and playgrounds, bilingual mental health First Aid training in Kensington, a down payment for an elevator at 7th Ave F/G Station, a Prospect Park sidewalk at Lichfield Villa for pedestrian safety, or a new all-gender bathrooms and water fountains, the projects are certainly all worthwhile.
Councilmember Brad Lander was one of the first New York City Council members to embrace Participatory Budgeting, Our 39th Council District was one of four to introduce it in New York in 2011.
Back then, Lander told the community:
"This is real grass-roots democracy. We are trying something new. This is a way to work together, identify what your community needs and turn the ideas into real projects."
Lander should be applauded for supporting this democratic process, giving residents an opportunity to shape their community.
However, he is not allowing the community to vote on a much more important issue that will reshape a big swath of his district, one that will have a huge impact on Gowanus, Boerum Hill, Park Slope, Carroll Gardens and even Cobble Hill: the massive up-zoning of Gowanus by the Department of City Planning.
Councilman Lander kicked off Bridging Gowanus, his "community planning process to shape a sustainable, livable, and inclusive future for the Gowanus neighborhood" with stakeholders in August 2013. Hundreds of people took part in the process in subsequent years,
Right from the start, there was skepticism that the Bridging Gowanus process could truly impact the resulting rezoning by the City. How could we, as a community, make sure that our wishes and suggestions would be reflected in the finished product?
Several stakeholders asked Lander directly at that first meeting in 2013 (and subsequently) for a community vote at the end of the process. Making sure that we got the rezoning right by allowing residents a final vote seemed 'democratic.'
Lander's answer was a categorical "NO".
As many suspected, New York City's upzoning of Gowanus, the densest rezoning currently proposed in the City, guarantees none of the things the community had asked for.
-a sustainable , resilient, healthy community
-a clean Gowanus Canal
-investments in new parks, new schools, and public transit
-sustain and strengthen Gowanus' manufacturing community
-keep Gowanus creative and support the existing artist community.
-keep Gowanus affordable for current, as well as future residents.
That is, sadly, not how planning happens in New York. Brad Lander knew that right from the start. He was also aware that the Department of City Planning did not have the tools in its toolbox to create a unique rezoning, respectful of Gowanus' unique character and sensible to the area's plethora of environmental challenges.
That's what made Lander's Bridging Gowanus such a sham right from the beginning. This is the same technique which is being used all over the city to convince citizens that they have a say in the future shape of our city and is then used to claim that the community supports the resulting proposal which merely pays lip service to the citizen's concerns.
So, let us ask Lander for a DEMOCRATIC COMMUNITY VOTE ON THE GOWANUS REZONING before the official Uniform Land Use Review (ULURP) begins.
Lander claims that his track record shows that "we can strengthen our democracy, make government work better, and build a city that reflects our values."
Let's take him by his word. After all, the Gowanus upzoning is one of the most consequential issue to ever face the 39th Council District.
Please leave a comment and add your voice, email Brad Lander at lander@council.nyc.gov and while you are at it, demand the same of Brooklyn Borough President at askeric@brooklynbp.nyc.gov.
And if you plan on voting at one of the Participatory Budget poling places this week-end, ask his staff directly.
-investments in new parks, new schools, and public transit
-sustain and strengthen Gowanus' manufacturing community
-keep Gowanus creative and support the existing artist community.
-keep Gowanus affordable for current, as well as future residents.
That is, sadly, not how planning happens in New York. Brad Lander knew that right from the start. He was also aware that the Department of City Planning did not have the tools in its toolbox to create a unique rezoning, respectful of Gowanus' unique character and sensible to the area's plethora of environmental challenges.
That's what made Lander's Bridging Gowanus such a sham right from the beginning. This is the same technique which is being used all over the city to convince citizens that they have a say in the future shape of our city and is then used to claim that the community supports the resulting proposal which merely pays lip service to the citizen's concerns.
So, let us ask Lander for a DEMOCRATIC COMMUNITY VOTE ON THE GOWANUS REZONING before the official Uniform Land Use Review (ULURP) begins.
Lander claims that his track record shows that "we can strengthen our democracy, make government work better, and build a city that reflects our values."
Let's take him by his word. After all, the Gowanus upzoning is one of the most consequential issue to ever face the 39th Council District.
Please leave a comment and add your voice, email Brad Lander at lander@council.nyc.gov and while you are at it, demand the same of Brooklyn Borough President at askeric@brooklynbp.nyc.gov.
And if you plan on voting at one of the Participatory Budget poling places this week-end, ask his staff directly.
"DEAR BRAD, I AM ONE OF YOUR CONSTITUENTS AND
I DEMAND A DEMOCRATIC COMMUNITY VOTE ON THE GOWANUS REZONING."
.JPG)
14 comments:
This is a horrible idea. Direct democracy went out the window thousands of years ago. Residents of one area can't be trusted to make the best decisions for society at large. Tragedy of the commons, but in reverse.
I don't agree that neighborhood residents should get a 'veto' on changes. It is called
city planning and it is done for future of entire city. Not on limited perspective of those who currently live closest.
Carole Gardens
I applaud you blog post and your vision! Indeed the process was fatally faulty by which Brad Lander conducted his "democratic" survey. However the idea remains a good one. Yes let us do it again and tackle the real issues! So, let us ask Lander for a DEMOCRATIC COMMUNITY VOTE ON THE GOWANUS REZONING before the official Uniform Land Use Review (ULURP) begins.
This is a HUGELY important vote and decision. To say taxpaying citizens should have no power in this vote is to leave our future in the hands of oligarchs and politicians often one and the same.
I don't think people who already own homes in an expensive neighborhood should get to vote to keep other people out. Brooklyn needs more housing now.
No one is talking about a Vito. My suggestion was a vote to see if rezoning reflects the hard work the community put into Bridging Gowanus. Personally, I spent hours going to different meetings and sub-committee meetings. So did others.
Most who took part in Bridging Gowanus probably are renters, like many NYCHA residents who participated. We need more housing, but should consider if the infrastructure of a neighborhood can absorb an up-zoning the size proposed here. I will repeat what I have said so many times: Gowanus is a flood zone, the canal is a Superfund and still needs to be remediated and the City has not addressed CSO outflows in any meaningful way for current conditions.
Yet, Brad Lander roped local residents into this community planning excercise and made us believe our voices mattered and democracy was alive and well.
We should be able to vote on wether the vision for Gowanus expressed by the community is reflected in the proposed rezoning.
Anon April 05, 2019 2:54 PM appears to be one of those mean spirited democrats that aim to control people by dividing them into smaller groups that democrats like to pit against each other to maintain power. Besides the majority of the apartments at the Lightstone development rent at rates that few in the surrounding areas can afford. The rezoning is more of the same, not affordable to people in the area.
So was that 25,000 grant Brad secured for his former employer, the Pratt Center, to facilitate Bridging Gowanus a. waste of public money and his constituents’ time? And where did all the other electeds who were cheerleaders for Bridging Gowanus disappear to?
The community has requested and deserves a meeting with Brad Lander and not a glorified CB6 vent session.
It certainly feels like bait and switch. Theres another City-sponsored scoping meeting on 25 April, where feedback is supposed to be taken, and an open comment period, so concerns should be voiced:
https://www1.nyc.gov/site/planning/plans/gowanus/gowanus.page#navigation
Many people who already own home in this expensive neighborhood here bought homes 15 or 20 years ago when thing were still affordable. So they are not the"rich"I
n addition, the "poorer" people in the Public Houses and elsewhere in the neighborhood will be voting as well.
Moreover many renters will be voting as they cam mot afford to but a home here anymore either. A new vote will include ALL of these people.
PS Putting poorer people in apartments in harms way along raw sewage in the canal is much MUCH worse than voting for a new re-zoning. That sounds like a crime to me.
to the first two commenters here:
Please explain why Landers agreed to follow the will of the "local" people, of the Cobble Hill section of his district when they were confronted with the LICH rezoning a couple of years ago.
CHA took a vote of their community, affirming a collective will of NO to the rezoning. Landers stood with the community which has been his primary donor-base for election, and that rezoning was stopped. They weren't even being confronted with a new Power Plant, sewer treatment facility, and a vet to be completed Superfund Cleanup.
Gowanus and the impacted communities abutting this rezoning deserve an equal say in their rezoning, which will have significant impacts on them. Otherwise it we be clear to all that Landers is just another democrat who gives political favors to his better-off donor base while making the less well connected communities bear the burdens more excessive city-driven development impacts.
Such hypocrisy makes the councilman's community representatives claims sound hollow as they try to frame those against the Gowanus rezoning as people "keeping out the poor". Was that what Lander was doing when he stopped the LICH rezoning?
There are just so many real reasons for the community to be more than apprehensive about the Gowanus Zoning impacts. And none of them are about poor people, especially given there are no places to house the homeless anywhere in this plan.
As a long time resident of Gowanus, I took part in the Bridging Gowanus process and was alarmed at one meeting by what I saw happening. Tables of mixed participants including developers, realtors, many pro-development people, some residents, both owners and renters. Very few people from NYCHA housing. Most attendees were white and appeared to be middle class or above. The process was heavily directed. I sat at a table with Buddy Scotto who monopolized the discussion and worked to convince a young couple they should be pro-development because they could buy an apartment. We were told to look at a printed list of options that included an a la carte menu of amenities we would like such as schools, art galleries, parks, etc. and for each one, we had to add multiple stories to the zoning. The lowest option possible was 8-10 stories, well above the current zoning for the area. There wasn't a soul in the room who was a resident who wanted the 28-story towers they are now proposing. What we currently have are a bunch of speculative developers who have paid hundreds of millions of dollars for land around the Gowanus and are waiting, gnashing their fangs to get at developing it into towers that will make the building on Bond between 2nd and Carroll look like a single family home. While Lander claims he is shepherding a democratic process. The representative of Pratt who was at my table (and every table had one or someone from Lander's office) was not shepherding democracy. They were directing us what to do. "Do you want a park? Do you want new schools? Transportation?" Oh and by the way, that will cost you 12 more stories. There was no option for keep it the same, make it a historic district, make it an arts and industry area. It was also clear from how the questions were phrased that keeping the area above 3rd Street industrial was out. The language only included south of 3rd Street (a much smaller area) as industrial. Shame on you Brad Lander.
I was at that meeting but at a different table. People saw through the disingenuous excercise. We were also told several times that Pratt and Brad would NOT be utilizing the results in any official capacity.
As for that young couple at Buddy’s table I am sure that he neglected to mention that they will still be able to buy an apartment because to lender will provide mortgages for properties atop a Superfund site.
Post a Comment