Recent Blog Posts

Politicians Against Progress

Editorial of The New York Sun | November 20, 2007

No sooner had the top official for the Northeast at the federal Department of Housing and Urban Development made some comments about possibly selling off some of the housing projects that are occupying prime Manhattan real estate than the local reactionaries started trying to stop the idea. We sketched the rationale for the idea of an asset sale — and some of its history — in an October 25, 2007 editorial headlined "Sell the Projects." It was only the latest in a series of articles in the Sun on the topic, which, as we wrote, "offers a chance to reclaim hundreds of buildings of housing projects on hundreds of acres of prime real estate in the city, land now locked in stagnation, that could be integrated with the surrounding neighborhoods and become part of the cycle of dynamism and improvement and transformation and building that makes New York City today such an exciting and vibrant place."

The politicians against progress are apparently so worried that this might actually happen that they have stirred to action, writing a letter earlier this month to the secretary of housing and urban development, Alphonso Jackson, deriding the idea of selling any projects as "blind reasoning." The letter, a copy of which is posted at Brownstoner.com, where we first saw it, is signed by 14 members of the New York State Assembly. They are Keith Wright, Ivan Lafayette, Rhoda Jacobs, Jeffrion Aubry, Joan Millman, Daniel O'Donnell, Ellen Young, Joseph Lentol, Aurelia Greene, Vivian Cook, Deborah Glick, Felix Ortiz, Karim Camara, and Hakeem Jeffries.

These politicians against progress are pandering to the residents of these housing projects, who have lived for years — the average stay for a tenant in the New York City Housing Authority is nearly 20 years — at rents far below market rates for Manhattan. That pandering is the politicians' choice. But many of these politicians also represent voters who pay a market rate for their housing and resent having their tax dollars subsidize housing projects in Manhattan's priciest neighborhoods, projects that are often breeding grounds for crime and that lower the property values of nearby buildings. If the politicians are going to curry favor with project residents by resisting progress, it's only logical that they also be exposed to negative feedback. Many New Yorkers work hard to pay market prices for property and think a policy of devoting valuable real estate to a lucky few beneficiaries is inefficient and nonsensical. They vote, too.


Reader comments on this article

Comment By Date

America must be the land of the "affluent and selfish" as opposed to the "land of the free, home of... [MORE]

CW 

Nov 20, 2007 10:28

If the goal is to provide maximum "affordable" housing; it seems that the sale of prime real estate in Manhattan... [MORE]

Chris 

Nov 20, 2007 10:42

I agree completely with this editorial. [MORE]

tony 

Nov 20, 2007 11:26

This is the most brilliant editorial I have ever read! [MORE]

Derek 

Nov 20, 2007 12:04

I stand behind the decision of these politicians. Areas that people with lower incomes were forced into because no one... [MORE]

Tiffany Murchison 

Nov 20, 2007 12:06

THANK YOU NY SUN!!! Thanks for having the courage to stand up to these politician. Sell the projects in expensive... [MORE]

Doug Peterson 

Nov 20, 2007 14:03

Your editorial position on housing projects is shocking. And I thought only the NY Times editorials could get me upset.... [MORE]

VICTOR J. PAPA, PRESIDENT, TWO BRIDGES NEIGHBORHOOD COUNCIL 

Nov 20, 2007 16:30

...Can't we all just get along...Housing for all. [MORE]

FreeMan 

Nov 23, 2007 12:05