Posted on

Fight For NYCHA group filed an objection with HUD and HPD over NYCHA’s Environmental Review Record for Harlem River I and Harlem River II

The New York City Dept. of Housing and Preservation Development submitted an Environmental Review Record for NYCHA that glossed over environmental issues at Harlem River I and Harlem River II.

A member of the group, Fight For NYCHA, filed on Monday an objection with the U.S. Dept. of Housing and Urban Development (“HUD”), arguing four (4) alternative reasons why the Environmental Review Record submitted by the New York City Department of Housing Preservation and Development (“HPD”) as applicant on behalf of the New York City Housing Authority (“NYCHA”) should be rejected.

Under HUD regulations, an applicant can, on behalf of a public housing authority, claim an exception to the requirement that an Environmental Impact Statement or an Environmental Assessment be submitted for public housing developments undergoing changes due to the Rental Assistance Demonstration (“RAD”) scheme. Under RAD, the management of public housing developments can be transferred to private sector landlords, who would collect the rents and HUD subsidies. From those monies, the private sector landlords would pay for the back log of capital repairs that accrued due to decades of racist divestment of public housing.

Harlem River I and Harlem River II are public housing developments located in Manhattan. They have undergone RAD/PACT conversion. Part of the administrative process that would allow for the release of HUD funding to the private sector landlord taking over is the filing of an Environmental Review Record, which would identify the environmental issues with the site. The objection filed by Fight For NYCHA asks HUD to reject the Environmental Review Record and to stop the release of funds.

The first part of the objection alleges that :

  • The exception that HPD claimed for NYCHA was based on the incorrect claim that no extraordinary circumstances exist. NYCHA is at a turning point, and the disposition of public housing assets through RAD/PACT conversion promises to end public housing as we know it. These are extraordinary circumstances, and NYCHA was wrong to claim that no ordinary circumstances existed.
  • NYCHA suspended inspections during the Coronavirus pandemic, and that suspension has interfered with NYCHA’s ability to perform an environmental review and submit the Environmental Review Record.
  • Even if NYCHA was not required to prepare and submit a more detailed Environmental Impact Study or Environmental Assessment, the Environmental Review Record was defective, because NYCHA failed to consider HUD environmental standards when the sole environmental consideration disclosed in the Environmental Review Record was noise abatement.
  • The objection argues that what would normally be excluded activity (the repairs made through RAD/PACT) will certainly have a significant impact on residents. This would nullify the exception from preparing an Environmental Impact Study or an Environmental Assessment.

The second part of the objection alleges that NYCHA made omissions in the Environmental Review Record, such as the extraordinary circumstances faced by NYCHA, NYCHA’s suspension of inspections, NYCHA’s failure to fully-consider HUD’s environmental standards, and the effect of NYCHA’s suspension of in-person meetings. Furthermore, NYCHA deliberately down-played the circumstances, risks, and dangers of environmental conditions at Harlem River I and Harlem River II, including the presence of hazardous waste, water and steam mains, and flammable or combustible fuel tanks. Because NYCHA failed to conduct appropriate studies, NYCHA must reëvaluate the environmental conditions at Harlem River I and Harlem River II.

Because NYCHA did not appropriate study important environmental conditions, like hazardous waste, broken water or steam mains, and fuel storage tanks, these issues were never discussed with public housing residents.

The third reason the Environmental Review Record must be rejected is the failure to hold meetings for public housing residents.

  • NYCHA’s claim for an exception to having to prepare a more formal Environmental Impact Statement or Environmental Assessment meant that public housing residents were denied information about the horrific environmental conditions at Harlem River I and Harlem River II. If NYCHA did have any meetings, those meetings didn’t cover the true environmental conditions.  As a result, public housing residents were denied opportunities to review and discuss the true magnitude, risks, and dangers of the RAD/PACT construction that they face. Hazardous waste was found in two locations in the soil at Harlem River I and Harlem River II, and the possibility of having to replace broken water or steam mains and fuel storage tanks would certainly disturb the soil. At one location, the amount of hazard lead waste was estimated to be as large as 5,100 lbs.
  • Besides the environmental risks, NYCHA has never been transparent about its intention to end all of its obligations to public housing residents following RAD/PACT conversion. This has not been explained to public housing residents. What is more, NYCHA has not provided the kind of public discussion formats — for example, a Mayor’s Working Group — like was provided to residents of Fulton Houses prior to their selection as a site for a future RAD/PACT conversion. The unequal treatment under the law should be considered discriminatory and, as a result, unlawful.
  • If any meetings were held virtually, they should have been considered unlawful for having no basis in law and, in any case, defective, due to NYCHA’s inability to hold virtual meetings with any real integrity.

The final reason given that asks HUD to reject the Environmental Review Record has to do with the ULURP Process.

  • As NYCHA’s applicant, HPD is facing HUD in the request for the release of HUD’s funding. but HPD is a City Agency, and when City Agencies take the lead on real estate development projects, they take the lead on ULURP Process when they act as applicants. That’s according to the New York City Planning Commission. When looking to the City Charter, a ULURP Process must govern the disposition of City real property or urban renewal plans that RAD/PACT represent. However, HPD did not follow the ULURP Process for Harlem River I or Harlem River II.
  • The ULURP Process also calls for public meetings, but, as we know, NYCHA either did not hold public meetings, or else the virtual meetings NYCHA held had no basis in law or were defective.
  • As a result, HPD engaged in an unlawful process as NYCHA’s applicant.

For the foregoing reasons, HUD was asked to reject the Environmental Review Record and to reject the Request the Release of Funds for Harlem River I and Harlem River II.

Source Document

Posted on

Andrew Yang is a Class Enemy : He’s a Liar Liar Privatizer !

Andrew Yang is a political enemy of the working class.

Andrew Yang is a class enemy of working families, retirees, and people earning low incomes. Like a true neocon big tech honcho, he’s focused on cutting welfare during a pandemic and the greatest economic crisis since the Great Depression. He proposes a miserly universal basic income (“UBI”) plan that won’t be enough to pay for Obamacare premiums and your rent. Meeting healthcare and housing needs during a pandemic is critical. What is worse, Andrew Yang has intentionally stayed silent as Mayor Bill de Blasio (WFP-New York City) wrecks NYCHA public housing with the privatisation schemes known as RAD/PACT and the Blueprint.

Yang has also remained mum about the evictions happening after RAD/PACT conversions. We believe that fully-funding capital repairs at NYCHA without resorting to privatization remains a good-faith effort at making a deposit on reparations owed to POC after centuries of slavery and discrimination. Why is Andrew Yang so quiet ?

If we keep quiet about how horrible Andrew Yang is, there’ll be nothing of NYCHA left after Mayor de Blasio finishes his last year in office. This is where Andrew Yang truly reveals himself to be a class enemy : He’s permitting the plundering of strategic public assets — our public housing stock. We can’t afford Andrew Yang as our next mayor !

[siteorigin_widget class=”WP_Widget_Media_Video”][/siteorigin_widget]

Recommended Reading

Posted on

VIDEO : Andrew Yang is a Liar Liar Privatizer

Public housing residents protested mayoral candidate Andrew Yang.

Public housing residents from multiple NYCHA apartment complexes turned out on Sunday to protest mayoral candidate Andrew Yang. He proposes a miserly universal basic income (“UBI”) plan that won’t be enough to pay for Obamacare premiums or your rent. What is worse, he plans to pay for his plan, in part, by “consolidating some welfare programs.” Amongst the social support that Mr. Yang would force recipients of his basic income to forego would include housing vouchers.

The New York Times has described his UBI plan as “a Trojan Horse” to shred the social safety net.

We can’t afford Andrew Yang as mayor !

[siteorigin_widget class=”WP_Widget_Media_Video”][/siteorigin_widget]

Recommended Reading

Posted on

Andrew Yang is keeping quiet, as Bill de Blasio wrecks NYCHA in his last year with RAD/PACT and the Blueprint

Andrew Yang is letting Bill de Blasio privatise NYCHA public housing with RAD/PACT and Blueprint. This is dangerous !

When tech industry titan Andrew Yang finally announced he was running for mayor, he had within his reach powerful political and public relations consultants. These people exert a great deal of influence over the media, who regularly reprint press releases sent to them by expensive consultants. These presstitutes, as they are called, have provided Yang with a bonanza of free media hits.

Yang can’t tell a bodega from a Whole Foods supermarket, and he often gives wrong subway directions. His handlers hope that if he creates the impression of a bumbling idiot, that voters will think that he’s harmless. But Yang is anything but harmless.

Yang has proposed cutting off housing vouchers and “consolidating some welfare programs,” and replace them with a Mickey Mouse universal basic income (“UBI”) plan that the New York Times called “a Trojan Horse” to shred the social safety net.

What most dangerous about Yang is that he’s intentionally staying silent as Mayor Bill de Blasio (WFP-New York City) wrecks NYCHA public housing with the privatisation schemes known as RAD/PACT and the Blueprint. NYCHA has gone into Court and admitted before U.S. District Court Judge William Pauley III that NYCHA intends to end all obligations to providing public housing residents with safe and sanitary housing after RAD/PACT and Blueprint conversions. The threat that public housing residents face is imminent.

That Yang keeps quiet means he’s hoping Mayor de Blasio will finish off NYCHA in his last year in office, so there’s nothing left but RAD/PACT eviction notices for Yang to hand out, should he become the next mayor. We can’t allow this to happen !

Recommended Reading

Posted on

Andrew Yang’s UBI plan is a Trojan Horse to shred the social safety net ; He’s a “Liar, Liar, Privatizer” !

Andrew Yang’s proposal for a $1,000 universial basic income comes with strings, like having to give up housing vouchers. His UBI plan is “a Trojan Horse” to shred the social safety net.

At our protest yesterday, public housing residents, housing activists, and members of Fight For NYCHA denounced Democratic Party primary candidate for New York City mayor, Andrew Yang. He has proposed a $1,000 Universal Basic Income (“UBI”) plan that has been attacked by critics.

Bryce Covert is an independent journalist and a contributing opinion writer for the New York Times. In an editorial published by the Times last week, Ms. Covert reported that Mr. Yang plans to pay for his UBI plan, in part, by “consolidating some welfare programs.” Amongst the social support that Mr. Yang would force recipients of his basic income to forego would include housing vouchers. This aspect of Mr. Yang’s plan is racist and classist. Based on this “trade-off” alone, we cannot afford Mr. Yang as mayor.

Not only do housing vouchers keep people in their homes, but they also cap tenants’ rent at 30% of their incomes, like those lucky enough to receive Section 8 rental assistance vouchers. Furthermore, people receiving Section 8 rental assistance vouchers also receive civil rights protections under the Fair Housing Act. No basic income should eliminate rent caps or deny recipients civil rights protections.

Based on the danger that Mr. Yang’s UBI plan represents, our protest called out Mr. Yang. We also noted how Mr. Yang had yet to denounce the plan by Mayor Bill de Blasio (WFP-New York City) to sell-out NYCHA public housing with RAD/PACT and the Blueprint.

Andrew Yang is a liar, liar, privatizer !

Recommended Reading

Posted on

March to stop RAD/PACT/Blueprint conversions

NYCHA has admitted in Federal Court that they want to abandon their obligations to public housing residents after RAD/PACT/Blueprint conversions. This is unacceptable ! Please join our march to stop anymore privatisation of public housing.

We are planning a protest march to stop Mayor Bill de Blasio (D-NYC) and NYCHA from abandoning their obligations to public housing residents after RAD/PACT/Blueprint conversion. It has been revealed in the Federal class-action Baez case that the de Blasio administration is using privatisation as an excuse to walk away from environmental protections and basic responsibilities they owe public housing residents. This is unacceptable ! Please join the social movement to save public housing and to fight for your civil rights ! We need your participation.

At our protest march, we will call-out politicians, who betrayed their campaign promises or continue the neglect.

Date : Sun., March 21, 2021

Time : 12 Noon (start-time)

Place : 344 E. 28th St., Manhattan

Accessibility : We meet outside of the front doors at 344 East 28th Street, Manhattan. Get ready to make noise and plan to march about 30 blocks. If you need transportation, we will try to arrange limited car pools by taxi. We can only pay for taxi service from what we can raise through our Go Fund Me for supplies expense. Please make a donation to support this march.

Rain Day : If it rains, we hold our march the following day — on Monday, Mar. 22 at 12 noon.

[siteorigin_widget class=”WP_Widget_Media_Image”][/siteorigin_widget]

R.S.V.P.

Posted on

Fight For NYCHA filed amicus curiae application in Baez class action mold case

Civil rights attorney Michael Sussman, applied to U.S. District Court Judge William Pauley III to accept Fight For NYCHA as amicus curiae in the Baez class action mold case.

After Plaintiffs in the Baez class action mold abatement case learned that the New York City Housing Authority, or NYCHA, planned on using the disposition of public housing under the controversial programmes as an excuse to abandon NYCHA’s obligations to provide habitable living conditions to residents, issues about the controversial conversion programmes, known as Rental Assistance Demonstration, or RAD, and Permanent Affordability Commitment Together, or PACT, came to the fore in the class action case.

However, the Parties to the case, as will as their counsel, were unable to answer many questions before U.S. District Court Judge William Pauley III during Oral Arguments over a motion filed by the Baez Plaintiffs to compel the application of the Revised Consent Decree in that case on public housing developments that NYCHA had converted under RAD/PACT. The motion papers also referenced the RAD/PACT conversion of the Manhattan Bundle, which included the public housing development located at 344 East 28th Street in Kips Bay, Manhattan. Plaintiffs’ and Defendant’s counsel attempted to speak to issues of RAD/PACT conversion, but the source of Federal rental assistance was not a selection factor in the Court’s certification of the class of residents represented by Plaintiffs’ counsel. Some members of Fight For NYCHA resident at 344 East 28th Street, and they were in the best position to offer critical information for the Court, but their interests were not properly represented during the motion practise before the Court, particularly since at least one member of Fight For NYCHA was a third party beneficiary of the Revised Consent Decree in Baez, which Defendant NYCHA was attempting to deny residents of RAD/PACT-converted housing.

The lack of adequate counsel to properly represent the interests of public housing residents following RAD/PACT conversions placed public housing residents in jeopardy, and that required the intervention of members of Fight For NYCHA, who were solely able to answer the Court’s questions about RAD/PACT. As a result, civil rights attorney Michael Sussman sought leave from the Court to submit a letter, providing information, answering questions that were before the Court, and promising further assistance with the Court’s permission.

The Parties in Baez complied with the Scheduling Order set by the Court to complete the submission of motion papers, and Fight For NYCHA’s letter, informally referred to as an amicus curiae, was submitted to the Court. The Parties await a decision by Judge Pauley III on Plaintiffs’ motion.

The amicus curiae was also seen as a required move by members of Fight For NYCHA, since many other groups which purport to be “NYCHA preservation groups,” like Movement School, refuse to challenge the privatisation of public housing by Mayor Bill de Blasio (D-NYC). That refusal has misled public housing residents into believing that Elected Officials are on their side. This disinformation has permitted politicians, like U.S. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY 14), who permits organising for Movement School out of her office like a nonprofit political arm, to exploit public housing residents out of political expediency. The political deception has been made worse by the attempts of some unscrupulous groups, like Justice For All Coälition, to offer low-impact methods, such as petitions, as viable forms of activism to save public housing, despite the urgency revealed in the Baez case, where facts were submitted to the Court that the de Blasio administration was acting to end all Section 9 public housing “soon” with dire implications for public housing residents.

Featured Reading

Source Documents

Posted on

NYCHA Mayoral Forum

NYCHA Mayoral Forum hosted by Fight For NYCHA (25 Jan 2021)

Despite our invitation reaching dozens of the 2021 mayoral candidates, only Aaron Foldenauer ; Isaac Wright, Jr. ; and Joycelyn Taylor appeared.

The mayoral forum was hosted by Melanie Aucello, president of the resident association of 344 East 28th Street, which has undergone RAD/PACT conversion. The forum was co-hosted by Louis Flores and Diane de Jesus. Aucello, Flores, and de Jesus are core members of the activist group, Fight For NYCHA.

[siteorigin_widget class=”WP_Widget_Media_Video”][/siteorigin_widget]

Reference Document

Fight For NYCHA are maintaining a public spreadsheet of the 2021 mayoral candidates’ positions in relation to NYCHA, RAD/PACT, the Blueprint, and other issues.

Posted on

Mayoral Forum on NYCHA

Join us for a Mayoral Forum on NYCHA. We will address RAD and the Blueprint.

Fight For NYCHA are hosting a Zoom forum of the 2021 New York City mayoral candidates on the issues facing residents of the New York City Housing Authority (“NYCHA”), like the Rental Assistant Demonstration scheme (“RAD”) and the Blueprint to sell-out public housing. Please make sure to register to attend our Zoom conference.

We are keeping a public spreadsheet of the 2021 NYC mayoral candidates’ positions on NYCHA public housing issues. We will provide a summary from the Q&A during our Zoom mayoral forum.

Registration Required

All 2021 NYC mayoral candidates, their team members, and NYCHA public housing residents can register to attend.

Reference Document

Posted on

Protest on 34th Street, hoping for a miracle this Holiday Season to stop RAD conversions of NYCHA public housing

Banner protest in front of Macy’s Herald Square flagship store

Activists trying to save public housing from privatisation protested in front of Macy’s flagship store in Herald Square in Manhattan on Sunday afternoon. Using a bullhorn, the activists announced that Mayor Bill de Blasio (WFP-New York City) was planning on ending public housing as we know it. One of the activists speaking was a resident of a public housing apartment building, which faced privatisation on 30 November 2020, when her building would join 15 other complexes in a privatisation scheme known as Rental Assistance Demonstration, or RAD. The activists described some of the dangers and risks of eviction, rent hikes, and other forms of civil rights violations typical of privatisation schemes. One previously unknown risk includes the ability of a RAD Landlord to petition the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development to deregulate public housing apartments, should apartment buildings not generate enough profits for greedy, private-sector landlords, as was revealed in a press release issued the Fight For NYCHA.

[siteorigin_widget class=”WP_Widget_Media_Image”][/siteorigin_widget]