Gotham Gazette

The Place for New York Policy and politics

CITY

City

Reports and Resources on the Economic Impact


The attacks added to New York City's tough economic times. Find out more with reports on the economic impact of September 11.


City Comptroller William Thompson's 2003 Report
New York City Comptroller September 2, 2003
The city comptroller found that New York City remained in recession during the second quarter of 2003, and that the "failure of the City's economy to recover after 30 months of recession, even though the national recession officially lasted only nine months, can at least in part be attributed to the lingering effects of 9/11."

City Comptroller William Thompson's Report on Fiscal Impact Of 9/11 on New York City
New York City Comptroller September 4, 2002
A report from the city comptroller's office detailing the economic costs of the September 11 terror attacks on the World Trade Center. Entitled "One Year Later, The Fiscal Impact of 9/11 on New York City," the report provides a comprehensive examination and analysis of the financial toll exacted by the attacks on the City's economy, budget and cash flow.

The Employment Impact of the September 11 World Trade Center Attacks: Updated Estimates based on the Benchmarked Employment Data
Fiscal Policy Institute March 8, 2002
An update to Fiscal Policy Institute's previous publication about the economic impact of September 11

Economic Impact of Terrorist Attack on New York City: A Fact Sheet (PDF format)
The Century Foundation January 28, 2002
A document summarizing the various reports and studies about the economic impact of September 11 on the city

Economic Impact of the September 11 Terrorist Attacks and Strategies for Economic Rebirth and Resurgence. (PDF format)
James Parrott, Fiscal Policy Institute, December 6, 2001
Fiscal Policy Institute's analysis of the effect of September 11 on New York's economy. Focuses on effects on low-wage workers.

Working Together to Accelerate New York's Recovery
Economic Impact Analysis of the September 11th Attack on New York City. From the New York City Partnership
A report from the New York City Partnership outlining the impact of September 11 on businesses throughout the city, specifically downtown.

Back to Work Since September 11 (PDF format)
The Community Service Society of New York releases a position paper which addresses the impact of 9/11 on low-wage workers.

Testimonies from the November 6 hearings on the Economic impact of the Sept. 11 Terrorist Attacks and Strategies for Economic Rebirth and Resurgence
Held by the New York State Assembly Subcommittees on Economic Development and on Small Business

Statements From:
Adam Friedman, NY Industrial Retention Network
James Parrott, Fiscal Policy Institute
David Jones, Community Service Society
Linda Dworak, Garment Industry Development Corporation

Is Time Warner Cable A Villain?


At a time when Time Warner Cable has announcedthat it is raising its rates once again, at more than triple the rate of inflation, it has lowered its standards of service to its customers.

That at least is the experience of one customer who called me irate and frustrated -- and since he had a good tale to tell (and also because he is my editor), I listened. He had telephoned Time Warner to send somebody to repair his cable, because the reception was full of snow. It took an astonishing nine appointments over a period of six weeks, about 60 hours of waiting -- four days home from the office -- conversations with about 30 representatives from Time Warner AND they accidentally cut his telephone lines while attempting to fix his cable service. Oops.

He wrote a letter to Time Warner Cable's director of customer service. The company claims that all complaints are answered within two business days of receipt and that matters are resolved within 10 days. But he did not receive any letter in response after more than a month of waiting, and matters were certainly not resolved. So he sent a second letter to the director - only this time, he sent a copy to three agencies: the New York Better Business Bureau, the New York State Public Service Commission, the New York City Department of Information Technology and Telecommunications (DoITT)

The response was swift and excessive. Not only has his cable been fixed, but representatives from two different departments of Time Warner Cable, customer service and public affairs, have been calling HIM on the telephone (rather than the other way around). Each time they make reference to "the letter you wrote to the city." It is the New York Department of Information Technology and Telecommunications, then, that is the hero of this tale. And there is some evidence that they will continue to be the heroes, with Michael Bloomberg's appointment on December 19 of Vincent La Padula, formerly the chief of staff of DoITT, as the Senior Advisor to the Mayor. His job will be in part to oversee DoITT.

Time Warner Cable, on the other hand, is clearly this tale's villain. As of this writing two months after his cable first broke down, he still has not received any written correspondence from Time Warner Cable in response to his letters, and this is not the only explicit company policy the company has broken in this case. It claims on its web site, for example, that it respects the schedules of its busy customers and aims to limit waiting around for appointment (In all but one of the appointments, they repair technicians showed up later than the latest time they said they would). The representatives also have told him that in their computers they only have a record of two appointments made with him, not the nine that the repair technicians actually made with him, which is contrary to Time Warner Cable's policy of recording all appointments in its customer database.

Was all this just a fluke, or is this the norm in cable customer service?

In fact, the number of complaints against cable companies in New York City went up 50 percent from August to September, and surged once more in the month of October, according to the New York State Public Service Commission. Time Warner Cable's complaints in Brooklyn alone more than quadrupled from September to October. In fairness, these Brooklyn October complaints numbered only 21 (up from four in September). In the whole state, in the month of October, the cable company Cablevision received 84 complaints and Time Warner Cable received 135, 39 of them in Manhattan. And the New York Better Business Bureau, based on the small number of complaints it receives, lists Time Warner Cable as having a satisfactory record, meaning in part that it is free of an unusual volume of complaints.

Anecdotal evidence suggests many customers do not go to the trouble of making official complaints to the relevant regulatory agencies, so these numbers may not reflect the true level of dissatisfaction . But they are all we have to go on. Still, even accepting the official complaints as an accurate gauge, it is clear that the numbers have gone up dramatically in the last few months. The level of dissatisfaction is on the rise.

Is this a reflection of anti-consumer policies, or is there another explanation?

The cable company offers another explanation. Harriet Novet, a spokeswoman for Time Warner Cable, explained the surge in complaints in Brooklyn, for example, to the fact that many technicians were borrowed from that borough to aid in the round-the-clock efforts at the Mayor's Command Center in Manhattan. And, in general, the events of September 11th resulted in significant increased requests for cable, and that is what caused busy phone lines and extended waits for appointments. According to Time Warner Cable's web site, they are in need of more technicians, and they are hiring them.

This is of course a compelling response. Cable is widely regarded as the savior of news and information following September 11 as a result of interrupted broadcast and radio transmissions. (Many broadcast stations used the antenna on top of the Twin Towers.)

But this does not explain how, despite reduced customer service (for whatever reason), the cable companies can justify their decision to raise their rates by up to seven percent on February 1. This means that Time Warner Cable customers will pay about $2.70 more for standard cable service. According to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), last year, cable rates were increased by as much as 5.8 percent. So, why is the government backing Yet another rate increase now during a period of recession and low inflation (and poor service)?

Time Warner Cable attributes the increase to increased programming costs. Last year, the FCC reported that programming costs accounted for 41.4 to 44.1 percent of increases. But a Time Warner Cable's spokeswoman has claimed in the press that 85 percent of the current increase comes from "purchasing programming, especially sports," referring to an increase in the cost of ESPN programs. This is roughly double the amount of the rate increase justified by programming in 2000. What about customers who do not even watch sports?

Keeping prices reasonable is not the only priority of consumers. We also expect good quality service. As a member of the New York Better Business Bureau's 2001 Honesty Campaign, Time Warner Cable is officially committed to business integrity, trustworthiness and good standing in the community. So are they reneging on their commitment? Are we going to be paying more but getting less in customer service?

Their customers are the ones who know. And you must report your complaints to the appropriate local, state and federal agencies (the addresses of some of which are on your cable bill). In the future, New York will benefit if more customers set aside their status as passive consumers and take action as citizens.

Why not tell us too?

Corporate Complaints:
Waiting weeks for utility installation? Spending hours on the phone waiting to speak with a customer service representative? Who would you nominate as the Worst Corporate Citizen of New York? Did the city do anything to help? Tell us your story. Please e-mail with subject head "Corporate Complaints" to This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.. Thank you.

At a time when Time Warner Cable has announcedthat it is raising its rates once again, at more than triple the rate of inflation, it has lowered its standards of service to its customers.

That at least is the experience of one customer who called me irate and frustrated -- and since he had a good tale to tell (and also because he is my editor), I listened. He had telephoned Time Warner to send somebody to repair his cable, because the reception was full of snow. It took an astonishing nine appointments over a period of six weeks, about 60 hours of waiting -- four days home from the office -- conversations with about 30 representatives from Time Warner AND they accidentally cut his telephone lines while attempting to fix his cable service. Oops.

He wrote a letter to Time Warner Cable's director of customer service. The company claims that all complaints are answered within two business days of receipt and that matters are resolved within 10 days. But he did not receive any letter in response after more than a month of waiting, and matters were certainly not resolved. So he sent a second letter to the director - only this time, he sent a copy to three agencies: the New York Better Business Bureau, the New York State Public Service Commission, the New York City Department of Information Technology and Telecommunications (DoITT)

The response was swift and excessive. Not only has his cable been fixed, but representatives from two different departments of Time Warner Cable, customer service and public affairs, have been calling HIM on the telephone (rather than the other way around). Each time they make reference to "the letter you wrote to the city." It is the New York Department of Information Technology and Telecommunications, then, that is the hero of this tale. And there is some evidence that they will continue to be the heroes, with Michael Bloomberg's appointment on December 19 of Vincent La Padula, formerly the chief of staff of DoITT, as the Senior Advisor to the Mayor. His job will be in part to oversee DoITT.

Time Warner Cable, on the other hand, is clearly this tale's villain. As of this writing two months after his cable first broke down, he still has not received any written correspondence from Time Warner Cable in response to his letters, and this is not the only explicit company policy the company has broken in this case. It claims on its web site, for example, that it respects the schedules of its busy customers and aims to limit waiting around for appointment (In all but one of the appointments, they repair technicians showed up later than the latest time they said they would). The representatives also have told him that in their computers they only have a record of two appointments made with him, not the nine that the repair technicians actually made with him, which is contrary to Time Warner Cable's policy of recording all appointments in its customer database.

Was all this just a fluke, or is this the norm in cable customer service?

In fact, the number of complaints against cable companies in New York City went up 50 percent from August to September, and surged once more in the month of October, according to the New York State Public Service Commission. Time Warner Cable's complaints in Brooklyn alone more than quadrupled from September to October. In fairness, these Brooklyn October complaints numbered only 21 (up from four in September). In the whole state, in the month of October, the cable company Cablevision received 84 complaints and Time Warner Cable received 135, 39 of them in Manhattan. And the New York Better Business Bureau, based on the small number of complaints it receives, lists Time Warner Cable as having a satisfactory record, meaning in part that it is free of an unusual volume of complaints.

Anecdotal evidence suggests many customers do not go to the trouble of making official complaints to the relevant regulatory agencies, so these numbers may not reflect the true level of dissatisfaction . But they are all we have to go on. Still, even accepting the official complaints as an accurate gauge, it is clear that the numbers have gone up dramatically in the last few months. The level of dissatisfaction is on the rise.

Is this a reflection of anti-consumer policies, or is there another explanation?

The cable company offers another explanation. Harriet Novet, a spokeswoman for Time Warner Cable, explained the surge in complaints in Brooklyn, for example, to the fact that many technicians were borrowed from that borough to aid in the round-the-clock efforts at the Mayor's Command Center in Manhattan. And, in general, the events of September 11th resulted in significant increased requests for cable, and that is what caused busy phone lines and extended waits for appointments. According to Time Warner Cable's web site, they are in need of more technicians, and they are hiring them.

This is of course a compelling response. Cable is widely regarded as the savior of news and information following September 11 as a result of interrupted broadcast and radio transmissions. (Many broadcast stations used the antenna on top of the Twin Towers.)

But this does not explain how, despite reduced customer service (for whatever reason), the cable companies can justify their decision to raise their rates by up to seven percent on February 1. This means that Time Warner Cable customers will pay about $2.70 more for standard cable service. According to the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), last year, cable rates were increased by as much as 5.8 percent. So, why is the government backing Yet another rate increase now during a period of recession and low inflation (and poor service)?

Time Warner Cable attributes the increase to increased programming costs. Last year, the FCC reported that programming costs accounted for 41.4 to 44.1 percent of increases. But a Time Warner Cable's spokeswoman has claimed in the press that 85 percent of the current increase comes from "purchasing programming, especially sports," referring to an increase in the cost of ESPN programs. This is roughly double the amount of the rate increase justified by programming in 2000. What about customers who do not even watch sports?

Keeping prices reasonable is not the only priority of consumers. We also expect good quality service. As a member of the New York Better Business Bureau's 2001 Honesty Campaign, Time Warner Cable is officially committed to business integrity, trustworthiness and good standing in the community. So are they reneging on their commitment? Are we going to be paying more but getting less in customer service?

Their customers are the ones who know. And you must report your complaints to the appropriate local, state and federal agencies (the addresses of some of which are on your cable bill). In the future, New York will benefit if more customers set aside their status as passive consumers and take action as citizens.

Why not tell us too?

Corporate Complaints:
Waiting weeks for utility installation? Spending hours on the phone waiting to speak with a customer service representative? Who would you nominate as the Worst Corporate Citizen of New York? Did the city do anything to help? Tell us your story. Please e-mail with subject head "Corporate Complaints" to This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.. Thank you. Laura Forlano is a doctoral student studying communication technology policy at Columbia University.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Flailing After 9/11


"Artists may live for applause, but they can't live on it."

So begins "Going on with the Show," a recent report on how the arts have fared since September 11. Published on November 19 by the Center for an Urban Future, a nonpartisan policy institute that studies economic issues, the report seriously questions whether, for many arts organizations, the show will go on. "Most of the city's 2,000 arts organizations are gearing up for their rockiest period in 30 years," its authors, Neil Scott Kleiman and Suri Duitch, conclude.

The week of September 11 saw the sharpest drop in theater attendance in history, but that was only the beginning. Since then the three-legged base of government funding, charitable donations, and earned income has been kicked out from beneath arts groups. Of the 150 surveyed for this report, all have experienced or anticipate substantial financial losses. The city's Department of Cultural Affairs budget has been slashed by 15 percent, the New York State Council on the Arts by 10 percent, and line-item grants have been eliminated. Fully half of arts groups report that expected donations from individuals or corporations are being canceled or postponed. Foundations with suddenly reduced portfolios say that they won't be able to maintain their current levels of support much longer, either. An estimated 2,000 scheduled school trips to museums, theaters, and galleries have been canceled--a major loss of income for such places as the Staten Island Children's Museum, where fears about crossing the Verrazano-Narrows Bridge have resulted in an 80 percent drop in student visits. While widespread layoffs have not yet occurred, pink slips began to go out in November, and more are expected.

It's not just the smaller organizations that are flailing. The Times reported recently that the Guggenheim--long one of the city's cultural juggernauts--has announced 20 percent staff layoffs and scaled back plans. Other major Manhattan landmarks that are heavily dependent on tourists are experiencing enormous losses. The Museum of Modern Art, Lincoln Center, and the Brooklyn Academy of Music made ambitious expansion plans in flush economic times; they are moving ahead, though funding will almost certainly be curtailed.

However adeptly managed, non-profits cannot rely on insurance or government bailouts, and individual artists cannot easily apply for small business loans. It's also hard for arts groups to diversify their funding sources. "It's all connected," Glenn Lowry, director of the Museum of Modern Art, noted in the report. "If your attendance drops then you have fewer people buying merchandise, and then you are less visible and membership [dips.]"

Arts groups now find themselves in a difficult position; they don't want to be seen as competing for funds with those directly affected by the attacks, and they face the kind of hard-nosed skepticism that arises in austere times: Why should we care? Doesn't the city have greater problems to worry about than whether the symphony will play? The report's writers remind us that we--along with our city leaders--should care about the well-being of the arts because they are a major part of the city's strength, bringing $13 billion and 130,000 jobs into the local economy.

The good news is that New York has strong, homegrown audiences for its arts and cultural attractions. "Unlike residents of Las Vegas, Orlando or even San Francisco," Kleiman and Duitch write, "New Yorkers are the primary audience for their city's cultural attractions." New Yorkers now make up 52 percent of ticket buyers to Broadway shows, up from 39 percent a year ago. Community organizations such as the Staten Island Botanical Garden and the Queens Zoo have actually experienced spikes in attendance in recent months as New Yorkers stay closer to home and seek out diversion and solace.

Arts institutions are geared up to respond to their constituencies: In the past few weeks and months, galleries have mounted photography exhibits documenting the attacks; libraries have ordered books related to prejudice, Islam, and violence; and museums have laid plans for programs to discuss the many issues surrounding the attacks. Some threw open their doors in the wake of the attacks. "Of course we responded," Veronique LeMelle of the Jamaica Center for Arts and Learning said in the report. "We are a community institution, and we are in one of the most diverse neighborhoods in the nation."

Kleiman and Duitch close their report with a letter to Mayor Bloomberg, lending their voices to the many arts leaders asking that the city put the concerns of the arts and culture community on the table. It remains to be seen whether such voices will be heard among all those at City Hall in January who will be clamoring for attention.

 



Print Friendly and PDF

Editor's Choice


Gotham Gazette: New York Voters Approve $4.2 Billion Environmental Bond Act
New York Voters Approve $4.2 Billion Environmental Bond Act
Gotham Gazette: 
New York City Voters Approve Racial Justice Ballot Measures
New York City Voters Approve Racial Justice Ballot Measures
Gotham Gazette: 
Housing Development in New York City Slows to a Crawl as Officials Debate Tax Incentives
Housing Development in New York City Slows to a Crawl as Officials Debate Tax Incentives
Gotham Gazette: 
City Council Examines Low Voter Turnout, Moving Local Elections to Even Years City Council Examines Low Voter Turnout, Moving Local Elections to Even Years