Outreach in the subways (photo: Michael Appleton/Mayor's Office)

Every day on the Lower East Side and throughout the city, teams of dedicated, trained outreach workers walk the streets, searching out folks who seem like they may need a helping hand.

Perhaps the people they meet are unhoused and would benefit from a hot meal, fresh clothes, or a medical check-up. Maybe they display signs of mental health issues but don’t know how or where to find the right services that would steer them away from harming themselves or others. Or perhaps they simply need a human connection.

Through proven methods, their own lived experiences, and endless reserves of patience and perseverance, these outreach experts help those who may be in crisis navigate the maze of social service agencies and programs. The end goal is as simple as it is essential: to connect people to voluntary services and support to help them flourish.

This “navigator” model has shown great success in the past, and represents a refreshing break from a failed status quo that has time and time again failed to provide a meaningful solution to our communities’ needs. For far too long, the default response to addressing unhoused people struggling with mental health or substance use challenges has been the criminal legal system — so much so that, in 2020, one in five people sent to Rikers was unhoused and experiencing mental health challenges.

But this isn’t a case of applying a band-aid to a gaping open wound, to use a common analogy: it's actually the equivalent of ripping open a deep laceration even wider. These individuals — so often our neighbors, our relatives, our friends — don't need jail; they need treatment, hospitals, and supportive programs. By tossing them into a carceral system that is incapable of addressing the root of these problems, their struggles and conditions will only worsen. To ignore their needs is to condemn people to an endless doom spiral between the streets, shelters, and incarceration that can – and has – resulted in catastrophic tragedy for themselves, or innocent bystanders around them.

Thankfully, there is a better way to dramatically improve — and often save — countless lives, and it's now getting a huge shot in the arm. A new program launched through the Criminal Justice Investment Initiative (CJII) will invest $6 million in a mental health initiative to immediately reach New Yorkers with deeply entrenched needs. The plan deploys networks of navigators like the ones described above who will build relationships – and trust – with people where they are. A rapport is first established by connecting people living on the streets with immediate needs, such as food. Growing the relationship leads to the next round of healthy support and engagement: connecting people to a wider range of wraparound services, like housing assistance and treatment for mental health and substance use disorders. This progression of engagement, fueled by emerging trust, ultimately makes them and their neighbors safer.

This effort, operated in a pioneering partnership between CUNY’s Institute for State and Local Governance and the Manhattan District Attorney’s Office, will build on the promising successes of similar past work. In a previous CJII program, created in partnership with the Silberman School of Social Work at Hunter College, community navigators in East Harlem were able to connect with more than 1,880 clients from late 2017 through August 2021. Navigators gave 68% of participants at least one referral, and among those people, 90% accessed one or more of these services referred to them. Since the program’s inception, 61% of participants had some or all of their immediate needs met.

Most promisingly, 39% of those who utilized services through fresh outreach had been disengaged from social services for at least six months prior to enrollment in the program — suggesting a powerful ability to connect with people who may have previously given up on seeking help. One participant noted that she “didn’t feel alone anymore” because she had a Navigator supporting her. 

This groundbreaking outreach also corrects a racial imbalance that infects our shattered criminal legal and health care systems. More than 60% of those incarcerated in New York City jails are Black, as are 56% of heads of household in city shelters (including single adults), even though Black people comprise just 25% of the city’s total population. Quite simply, a path forward to a brighter, healthy, more fulfilling future exists for people who right now are swept aside to the margins of society.

This approach is a vast improvement over the status quo. Rikers is no place for someone grappling with mental health or substance use issues; the notorious facility has descended into chaos and violence, and offers inadequate support for those in need. New York City must reduce its reliance on criminalization, and instead invest in services and programs that build safe communities and center humanity.

In addition to the moral and human value, there is an economic benefit to using community-based supports in lieu of incarceration. At a time when cities and states are experiencing budget crunches, the cost for community-based programs are exponentially lower than a bed at Rikers, ranging from $1,000 for some light-touch interventions to $50,000 for more intensive services per person, compared to more than $550,000 per year per person at Rikers.

But more importantly, there is no price tag that can be applied to turning a person’s life around — or saving it. The value of connecting people with touchpoints in their community can’t be

measured on a ledger sheet or in a budget book. Neighborhoods like the Lower East Side — and the others served by this trailblazing program—will be safer, healthier and more productive. And this is how we build a New York City that lifts up all its people, and gives everyone, no matter the challenges they face, the opportunity to live the life they deserve.

Michael P. Jacobson is Executive Director of CUNY’s Institute for State and Local Governance. City Council Member Carlina Rivera represents District 2 in Manhattan and chairs the Council’s Criminal Justice Committee. On Twitter @michaelislg & @CarlinaRivera.

New Yorkers getting help (photo: Edwin J. Torres/Mayor's Office)

I was a teenager in the 1980s when I learned firsthand what it meant to face eviction and landlord harassment. Three different landlords, but they all used the same playbook: they failed to provide adequate heat, thinking they could take advantage of my family’s difficult economic situation. Allowing dangerous living conditions is a form of eviction in which landlords don’t even need to sue their tenants in court. Instead, they push tenants out with threats to their health and safety. Each year, countless tenants across our state are forced to self evict and countless others endure unsafe conditions in fear of asserting their rights and facing retaliation, or leaving their homes and finding nowhere affordable to go.

My family’s landlords were bullies who took advantage of how poverty and our court system make it tough to fight back when tenants’ rights are violated. My family faced intimidation and pressure not to defend ourselves and I was even assaulted by one of our landlords. But by the third landlord, my parents decided to stand their ground. They withheld the rent and put it in escrow. Unfortunately they were outmatched: the landlord had lawyers, while my parents couldn’t afford one. The courts allowed us one year in our apartment, but then we had to move, and pay back the rent we owed our landlord for all the months we had lived without heat. 

This experience drives my belief in the absolute need for a comprehensive, universal right to counsel for New Yorkers facing eviction. No one should face eviction without counsel in any form or venue – whether it be in a lawsuit brought by a landlord, neglect of repairs, a subsidy termination or an illegal lockout. With 92,000 homeless New Yorkers and the harms of eviction well-documented, the stakes are too high for us not to ensure that tenants have a fighting chance. 

The Statewide Right to Counsel (bill A.1493/S.2721) would remedy this with the guarantee of a free attorney for all New Yorkers in all types of court cases that could result in displacement. The state must act this year to pass and fund Right to Counsel through the budget, to help tenants fight to stay in their homes.

In 2021, tenants in 8% of privately-owned rental units in the city suffered under serious housing code violations, the New York City housing department’s “class C” violations that are “immediately hazardous” and violate a tenant’s legal right to safe and livable conditions. And this injustice is worse for Black and Latino New Yorkers, who are more than twice as likely to live in units with three or more maintenance deficiencies than white New Yorkers.

Unsafe and unfit housing stock plagues tenants across the state. In a 2020 study conducted by the Partnership for the Public Good in Buffalo city court, 59% of tenants reported problems with maintenance. Yet, until last year’s passage of the Tenant Dignity and Safe Housing Act (TDSHA), tenants in most localities outside New York City lacked an easy way to sue landlords for repair problems or secure rent abatements. 

Building on TDSHA, a fully funded Statewide Right to Counsel would ensure tenants the right to counsel whether they are the plaintiff or defendant. Attorneys will have the time and training to litigate cases fully and counter-sue for dangerous conditions when tenants’ rights have been violated. The funding for attorneys and community organizers that advocates are calling for would also provide tenants critical support in tracking and documenting habitability violations.

The legislation is particularly important for New York City tenants, most of whom are already eligible for the city’s local Right to Counsel, which was established through a historic grassroots victory in 2017. NYC’s Right to Counsel has been tremendously successful at stopping evictions and keeping tenants housed, yet since pandemic-era eviction protections expired, courts have been pushing tenants’ cases forward at a rate that outpaces legal services capacity.

Courts have a moral obligation to uphold tenants’ Right to Counsel, but have so far been unresponsive to advocates’ demands to ensure due process for tenants before cases proceed. Given that the New York City Council does not have the power to regulate courts at the municipal level, the solution is clear: our state legislature must pass Statewide Right to Counsel, not only expanding Right to Counsel across the state, but mandating that courts enforce the right both locally and at the state level.

Because my family couldn’t afford a lawyer when I was a teenager, we ended up having to leave the city. While I returned after two years of high school, New York lost my parents for good. We can’t lose any more of our neighbors to a housing system that prioritizes profit over people, and a court system that’s stacked against tenants. Too many New Yorkers are threatened by dangerous living conditions and other forms of eviction for us to wait any longer. We must pass Statewide Right to Counsel this year to keep New York state tenants in their homes. 

***
Assemblymember Tony Simone represents parts of Manhattan. On Twitter @TonySimone.

Greening buildings (photo: Michael Appleton/Mayor's Office)

This winter had a lot of erratic weather for New Yorkers, including the second-warmest January ever. While less frigid temperatures may be a relief to some, they serve as a reminder that our climate is changing and these changes are having devastating impacts. Between 2017 and 2021 the U.S. experienced $765 billion in losses and 4,500 deaths related to extreme weather events, eight times higher than in the 1980s. New York alone experienced over $13 billion in losses over the same period and is considered one of the most vulnerable cities in the world to climate extremes.

New York City is attempting to take dramatic action to reduce carbon emissions through Local Law 97, but opponents are threatening to delay its implementation by seven years. We can’t afford to wait to act because climate change will continue to have unimaginable effects on our planet, our city, and our way of life if we don’t act swiftly to reduce our carbon emissions.

Local Law 97 aims to curb the carbon footprint of large buildings, which account for nearly two-thirds of greenhouse gas emissions in New York City. The law requires buildings larger than 25,000 square feet to meet growingly stricter emissions limits beginning in 2024 or face hefty penalties. Beyond reducing New York’s carbon footprint, Local Law 97 is intended to promote investment in building upgrades which will improve the quality of life of New York City residents and create new job opportunities in construction and manufacturing.

The policy is receiving backlash from building owners, real estate developers, and some local officials over the current lack of guidance and planned penalties for non-compliance with the law. While the Department of Buildings has finalized some rules, they have yet to provide clarity on several elements key to implementation. Rules regarding the purchase of renewable energy credits and how penalties will be altered for those who make good faith efforts to reduce emissions have not been finalized. For building owners who would need to start preparing for compliance now, many claim they will end up paying fines regardless of whether they attempt to make improvements. Concern over the impact of the law on building owners has led some legislators to introduce a City Council bill to delay implementation by seven years.

Even if efforts to delay Local Law 97 are defeated, the law as currently written still lacks the teeth to properly incentivize enough building owners to engage in retrofitting. Without including a cap on the number of renewable energy credits or RECs a building can purchase, property owners can maintain compliance with the law without lowering emissions.

It’s estimated that 25% of multi-family properties and 66% of office properties currently above 2030 benchmarks can achieve compliance solely through purchasing RECs. Also of concern is whether the Department of Buildings will have the resources to enforce the law properly. The Department of Buildings was among many agencies to have its funding reduced in proposed budget cuts by the Adams Administration.

The desire of building owners to rely on RECs makes sense since rules on penalty adjustments for good faith efforts have not been finalized and potential investment in building improvements may not lead to the necessary emissions reductions required by the law. New York has established financing structures such as CPACE to remediate these concerns. Through the program, property owners can recoup the money spent on green upgrades made over a three-year period. But the city should do more to provide property owners with assurance that investing in building improvements is the correct decision.

In the current drafted rules, the Department of Buildings has offered a one sentence solution for how good faith efforts to retrofit buildings will be taken into consideration when deciding on penalties for not meeting emissions standards. However, to property owner advocates, such as the Real Estate Board of New York, this is an underwhelming solution. 

If we want the retrofitting of buildings to occur, the finalized rules need to encourage groups like REBNY to get on board. One potential strategy is to enact a moratorium on fines for those that demonstrate good faith efforts (which also needs to be defined) to retrofit buildings to meet emission standards whether or not their buildings meet 2024 targets. Doing so would further encourage investment by building owners in upgrades rather than choosing to pay fines or purchase energy credits. 

For Local Law 97 to be effective, implementation must incentivize building owners to take action to reduce emissions instead of accepting fines and to do so through building upgrades rather than the purchase of RECs. Because, while fines can act as an incentive, they won’t reduce our emissions; only making intentional building improvements will. Ultimately, it is vital to the City’s carbon emissions goals that Local Law 97 makes the impact of fines felt for those who don’t comply, is forgiving of those who make good faith efforts to retrofit buildings, and that the Department of Buildings has the resources needed to properly implement the law.

Local Law 97 is at risk of failing because it is our nature to discount the cost of the future and to think of climate change as a future problem. But we are running out of time to develop solutions that will reduce our carbon footprint and Local Law 97 is an opportunity to do so. Without a robust implementation of the policy, our buildings will continue to deteriorate, our emission levels will remain unchanged, and instead of the future of our city being in our hands it will be in the hands of our climate and forces out of our control.

***
Noah Brook is a graduate student specializing in policy analysis at NYU’s Wagner Graduate School of Public Service.

Welcoming migrants to NYC (photo: Michael Appleton/Mayor's Office)

As Passover begins this week, it provides us with a critical opportunity to reflect on immigration, freedom, and the holiday’s relevance for Jews and non-Jews alike. Today more than ever.

“When strangers reside with you in your land, you shall not wrong them. The strangers who reside with you shall be to you as your citizens; you shall love each one as yourself, for you were strangers in the land of Egypt.” Leviticus 19:33-34

So the Bible reminds us as we celebrate Passover. We look back to the persecution and enslavement of the Jews in Egypt, and remember their flight to freedom. We are urged to reflect on what it means to be a stranger, and recommit to welcoming and caring for the strangers in our midst.

Let’s remember that we, as Americans, were once strangers in this land, and not so long ago. Let’s remember that our forebears took risks to come to unknown shores. Please, this Passover, tell that history to your children and grandchildren; teach them their immigrant story. I urge each of us to find an artifact from our ancestors and include it on our Passover tables as a reminder that we are all immigrants.

For me, the Passover story is a story about human rights, about the intrinsic right of every person to flee harm at the hands of an oppressor – and about the fundamental responsibility each of us has to see those from another land not as “aliens,” but as human beings worthy of our concern, compassion, respect, and love.  

Tragically, our country has not learned this enduring lesson. When President Biden took office, he ended the Trump-era practice of detaining immigrant families fleeing war, gang violence, discrimination, and poverty when they arrive at our border. But in March, the Biden Administration began taking steps to return to this cruel practice, and days later announced plans to implement a transit ban that will bar families with children and all adults from being able to seek asylum in the U.S. Outrageous!

We’ve all read about the warehousing of immigrants – including children – in overcrowded, regimented, inhumane places where they are denied access to medical care, adequate food and drinking water, and even basic hygiene items like soap or toothpaste. The lifelong harms associated with detention, particularly for children, are dire. The ban on seeking asylum will inevitably lead to more migrant deaths and family separations. In the process, it will put more immigrant children at risk of ending up in dangerous jobs that violate child labor laws, as recently reported in The New York Times.

Last year, New York City saw a huge influx of buses arriving at the Port Authority carrying thousands of immigrants shipped like cargo on the orders of Texas Governor Greg Abbott. (Surely a new low in ruthlessly exploiting human suffering for political gain.) I have been one of many volunteers on site to welcome these strangers to our city. The location has become a hub where immigrants, who after they arrive often end up living in city-run shelters, come looking for food, clothing, and services. And what they want more than anything is jobs.

The volunteers have been extraordinary. They have donated more clothing than is possible to imagine, are engaging houses of worship in the shelter effort, and are now signing up additional volunteers to do even more. What troubles me, however, as I stated in an op-ed in Urban Matters published by the Center for New York City Affairs at the New School, is that Mayor Adams, who continues to take credit for being welcoming, does not recognize or truly partner with the volunteers and organizations that are actually on the ground and making a difference. His administration must do more, starting, very simply, by ensuring that every new New Yorker has an NYC ID card.

As a lifelong New Yorker, I can say with confidence that the Port Authority Bus Terminal is on nobody’s list of great travel destinations. But as I think about the meaning of Passover, about the lessons it has to teach us about freedom and the moral obligation that every Jew and non-Jew shares to do right by strangers, this maligned New York City location feels sacred. It has become a beacon for the strangers among us – a place to get clothing, a cup of coffee or something to eat, and a helping hand from people who see new arrivals and do not look away.

This Passover season I will continue to volunteer at Port Authority. I will remind myself that despite the inhumanity of immigration policy at every level of our government, good people find a way – and sometimes in the most unlikely places.    

***
Ruth Messinger, former Manhattan borough president and Democratic nominee for Mayor, is a global ambassador for American Jewish World Service and a social justice consultant.

Mayor Adams wants housing (photo: Michael Appleton/Mayoral Photography Office)

2023 began with the promise that both the State and the City of New York would finally get their acts together and take on a housing crisis that may already be handicapping our ability to recover fully from COVID-19 and certainly threatens to hamper our growth.

The good news is that Governor Kathy Hochul and Mayor Eric Adams share substantially similar visions and that the Governor, through the housing plan in her Executive Budget, is seeking to give the City the tools critical to achieving its goals. The bad news is that the State Legislature has placed key parts of New York City’s plans to expand housing opportunities at risk by threatening not to pass those very portions of the Executive Budget.

The Governor’s budget contains legislation that would give the City authority to legalize basement apartments, grant tax abatements to buildings converted to residential use that include affordable apartments, and amend the State Multiple Dwelling Law to expand eligibility for residential conversion under special and more flexible bulk controls to non-residential buildings constructed prior to 1990. It also includes the repeal of the cap on residential floor-area-ratios (FARs) in excess of 12 – a cap that today limits the floor area of a building to 12 times the area of its lot (such as, on a 5,000 square foot lot, a building with 60,000 square feet of floor area).  

Expanding the number of buildings eligible to use special rules that ease residential conversions should be a no-brainer. It gives hundreds of office buildings that may no longer be operationally feasible because of reduced demand for office space a second chance at life through adaptive reuse. It gives the City the raw material to create thousands of new apartments and make a dent in its unbalanced housing market and, if married to appropriate property tax relief, to expand the supply of affordable apartments into neighborhoods where there are almost none today.

It ensures that the City’s Central Business Districts evolve from their pre-covid lives as vital centers of commerce into active 24-hour communities; it provides long-term support for the City’s tax base; and it conserves both the natural resources that have gone into the construction and maintenance of the converted buildings and the natural resources that will not have to be spent on demolition of the existing building and its replacement structure.  

The elimination of the 12 FAR cap on residential floor area has been a part of State housing proposals for many years. And for just as many years it has been quietly killed by legislators who have bought into the canard that repeal of the cap will immediately open the floodgates to out-of-scale development that will overwhelm the City’s neighborhoods. Nothing could be further from the truth.  

In fact, the elimination of the cap by itself will not change any of the zoning rules affecting new construction. Any change must first be incorporated into the City’s zoning law, which can only be done after long and very public land use and environmental review processes. Nor will it overwhelm the City’s residential neighborhoods; the areas certain to benefit from the change are the City’s Central Business Districts, where development is already permitted at more than 12 FAR and where substantial buildings are already permitted. And it need not lead inexorably to super-tall buildings. As demonstrated by some of the most admired and contextual 12+ FAR buildings in the City, including such landmarks as the Beresford and Carlyle Hotel, building form is primarily a function of envelope controls and not of FAR.  

The elimination of the cap is also critical to the success of the expanded residential conversion program, because so many of the newly-eligible buildings were developed to more than 12 FAR. This will encourage the use of the recently-adopted floor-area bonuses for transit improvements by allowing all bonus floor area – both generated by affordable housing and generated by a subway improvement – to be used for residential use; and it offers a framework for incentivizing affordable housing in the City’s Central Business Districts, where there is virtually none today.  

The gravity of the housing crisis and the importance of a revitalized, post-covid New York City have led to an almost unheard of agreement between a Governor and a New York City Mayor – an agreement that can give the City tools it needs to create new housing, recover, and grow. At the same time, the actions of the Legislature in stalling these initiatives, all of which should be beyond controversy, demonstrates the measure of our political dysfunction today. The Legislature should give the City the help it needs by passing the City-oriented housing proposals in the Executive Budget without further ado.   

***
Paul D. Selver is co-chair of the Land Use Department at the Manhattan law firm Kramer Levin.

Looking for shelter (photo: Michael Appleton/Mayoral Photography Office)

As an Upper West Side resident, I’ve heard a lot of discussion recently about plans for a Safe Haven on West 83rd Street. While many of my neighbors have expressed excitement about this new neighborhood resource, others have voiced concerns about its potential impact on the safety of our neighborhood.

I’m a former prosecutor and an advocate for survivors of crime and their families. I’m also a mom of three — two in New York City public schools and one in diapers. Believe me: I care about community safety. Yours, mine, my children’s — everyone’s. And there is nothing about this project that makes me feel unsafe.

This Safe Haven, which will be run by Breaking Ground, a pioneer of solutions to end homelessness, will provide shelter and robust on-site wrap-around services for single adults who are currently living on the streets. The Safe Haven will offer psychiatric and medical care, case management, and housing and harm-reduction specialists, among other services for residents.

Importantly, it will provide more privacy than typical shelters do, with one-, two-, three-, or four-person rooms, instead of the possible 30 or 50 cots to a giant room that might be found at some of the larger shelters. Lack of privacy and dignity is one of the main reasons why folks hesitate to enter traditional shelters, as is losing belongings or being separated from service animals, another thing that won’t happen at this site (residents will be allowed to keep their animals as long as space allows).

It’s no surprise, then, that the Safe Haven model has proven more effective at getting people inside and connected to services. From 2020 to 2022, as city data on the outcomes of end-of-line subway outreach showed, 63% of individuals offered Safe Haven beds stayed there long-term, compared to just 24% of individuals placed in traditional shelters.

If we want to prevent crime, this is exactly the kind of community investment we need, alongside investments in permanent affordable housing. Contrary to the idea that a Safe Haven is dangerous for the surrounding neighborhood, research shows that investing in housing and mental health services decreases crime.

Which is why I find the arguments against this site so cynical. Those making them, most recently on the Fox and Friends television program, know that blocking this Safe Haven will not do anything to make New York safer or stronger. They’re just hoping that they can displace poverty and need to someone else’s neighborhood. They want to use their wealth and political power to do what white Americans have been doing for centuries: keeping opportunity for themselves, and keeping Black and brown New Yorkers out.

As I prepare to move into a home in the West 70s from my current home in the West 90s, knowing this Safe Haven will be nearby provides me peace of mind. Homelessness already exists in our city and our neighborhood. Right now, when my family crosses paths with neighbors who are unsheltered, we have few nearby options to offer them. 

Folks who want to come inside are required to travel to large intake shelters in the Bronx and Midtown, where they often sleep in rooms with dozens of people and are subject to onerous restrictions and curfews. Some decide it’s not worth it. The addition of this Safe Haven changes things: it will give people an option to connect with nearby shelter and services. With this Safe Haven, people will be referred directly by street outreach teams — allowing them to come straight inside to a smaller setting. It provides low-barrier entry, wrap-around support, and helps address problems that can feel intractable, including providing access to care for people living with mental illness.

And, far from feeling as though this shelter is some kind of threat to my children, I view it as an opportunity for them to learn to exist in a world of deep injustices. Trying to seal our children off from the reality of these inequalities doesn’t make them go away. My family is so lucky — we have so much.

I want my children to grow up with a sense of empathy and care for the people around them who have less.

In a deeply unequal city, I want my children to understand that every person deserves respect and compassion. And I want them to fight for a world where that vision is fully realized — a world where no one has to sleep outside.

***
Ilana Turko is an Upper West Side mother of three children and former employee of the New York City Mayor's Office of Criminal Justice. Her last role in government was as the founding Executive Director of the country's first municipal Office of Crime Victim Supports.

Celebrating housing policy (photo: Darren McGee/Governor's Office)

Of the almost 600,000 people experiencing homelessness in the United States on any given night in 2022, more than half of them were in one of four states -- New York, California, Florida, and Washington -- with New York alone accounting for 13% of the total homeless population, over 90,000 people. Some 30,000 of this population are families with children in New York City. And rising homelessness isn’t just a problem in the Big Apple but across our state: homelessness has nearly tripled in Syracuse since 2022, for example.

Taken together, these figures show that over the past year, what was abundantly clear already has become even plainer: New York is in the midst of a historic homelessness crisis, with tragic consequences for huge numbers of New Yorkers, and a disproportionate impact on communities of color. 

Aware of New York’s crushing affordability issues, Governor Hochul released the New York Housing Compact earlier this year, which seeks to halt exclusionary housing practices and spur new housing development over the medium- and long-term. But New Yorkers experiencing homelessness tonight surely feel little consolation in imagining homes that may be available several years or even a decade from now.

This crisis demands both long-term and immediate actions, and the Governor and Legislature must move policies forward that provide rapid relief for New Yorkers experiencing homelessness or on the brink of eviction now. One way our state leaders can and must provide this support is by funding the Housing Access Voucher Program (HAVP) in the upcoming state budget.

HAVP is a rental assistance supplement that would allow New Yorkers experiencing or at risk of homelessness to either secure housing or pay their rent. In this regard, HAVP not only helps those currently homeless to find and afford housing, but it helps those on the brink of eviction from becoming homeless and entering the shelter system. Given that re-admission to homeless shelters too often becomes a permanent cycle, helping New Yorkers avoid shelters in the first place is critical to reducing the overwhelming demand on the system.

The far-reaching benefits of rental assistance programs like HAVP are well-documented. As the NYU Furman Center explains, the “existing literature points to a robust array of [likely] positive outcomes.” A separate federal study from Housing and Urban Development finds that among families receiving housing vouchers, fewer children were removed from homes and separated from their families, there were fewer school and childcare absences, and less evidence of alcohol or drug problems, 20 months later.

The research also suggests that vouchers helped facilitate exits from violent relationships, decreasing the prevalence of domestic violence and psychological distress. And additional federal research reaffirms the connection between housing stability and broad positive outcomes, including educational, employment, health, and family outcomes. Conversely, children lacking stable housing are “more vulnerable to mental health problems, developmental delays, and poor cognitive outcomes,” while youth with stable homes are less likely to repeat a grade or drop out of school.

The Furman Center has also conducted a thorough economic analysis of the proposed HAVP program, which shows that given its expected benefits, both in the short- and long-term, HAVP is a cost-effective — and crucial — investment. Ultimately, rental assistance programs like HAVP reduce the burden on our public shelter system, and the costs associated, by preventing the need for such stays before they begin. The impact of this type of program has been nationally recognized and is in alignment with the Biden-Harris administration's call for states to set plans to reduce homelessness 25% by 2025.

As our state and its communities work to combat the worst homelessness crisis since the Great Depression, our solutions need to include long-term solutions and programs that will yield results in the near-term. With the Housing Compact, the Governor has designed a plan to create more housing across our state in the decade ahead. The Governor and the State Legislature have each proposed plans to create more affordable housing and protect existing affordable housing across our state into the future.

To support our neighbors who are experiencing or at risk of homelessness now, we encourage the Governor and State Legislature to enact HAVP, a program that would immediately change the lives of many New Yorkers, right away and for generations to come.

***
Baaba Halm is vice president and New York market leader at Enterprise Community Partners, and Barika Williams is Executive Director at the Association for Neighborhood and Housing Development. On Twitter @BaabaKHalm of @Enterprise_NYC & @barikaXw of @ANHDNYC.

Seeking opportunity (photo: Michael Appleton/Mayor's Office)

This year, New York has an opportunity to move away from perpetual punishment by passing the Clean Slate Act, legislation aimed at erasing the scourge of a criminal record by providing for automatic sealing of prior misdemeanor and felony convictions after a waiting period.

The challenges that a conviction can pose for those seeking to reintegrate into society following involvement with the criminal legal system makes passing Clean Slate essential.

A criminal record is just one of the many consequences that can flow from interaction with the criminal legal system, but it carries with it outsized importance. Criminal records too often have the effect of marking the bearer as a second-class citizen unable to move beyond the label of criminal. They can prevent those who have paid their debt to society from obtaining what they need to move beyond their past: housing, employment, and education. 

The challenges posed by a criminal conviction for those working to secure housing provides a helpful example. According to the Fortune Society, a 2015 report showed that over half of New York City landlords who are aware that an applicant has a conviction would not even allow that applicant to view a rental property. That forces people to invest inordinate time, energy, and resources into their housing search. They must apply countless times, incurring fees to pay for applications, background checks, and credit reports until they are met with success. This process does more than just upend their finances. Without the stability that comes with a permanent home, it is more difficult to find and maintain employment, or secure educational opportunities for their children. 

Consistent with the range of harms that the criminal system visits on its targets, the problem with criminal records is widespread and disproportionately burdens Black and Latino New Yorkers. More than 2 million New Yorkers are burdened by prior convictions. The racial dynamics make these numbers even more troubling.

A 2020 report of arrests and sentences by the New York State Division of Criminal Justice Services noted that people of color made up 73% of people with prison sentences, with Black and Latino people making up 48% and 23%, respectively. While these numbers only indicate the racial breakdown of the prison population in 2019, they indicate that there is a massive disparity among people living with convictions, particularly those living with felony convictions. A separate report by the Data Collaborative for Justice at John Jay College showed that roughly 80% of people in New York City with conviction records for misdemeanors and felonies are Black or Latino. No matter how we look at it, these convictions create a substantial barrier to reentry for Black and Latino New Yorkers.

The Clean Slate Act is responsive to these concerns. It is a broadly supported bill that will allow people who remain conviction-free to seal prior misdemeanor convictions after three years and felony convictions after seven years. The automatic sealing of these prior convictions will remove the barriers that far too many New Yorkers face in accessing the resources they need to successfully move forward with their lives after justice involvement, providing relief for approximately 1.4 million New Yorkers when it goes into effect. And it will advance racial justice by addressing a harm — the existence of a criminal record — that disproportionately burdens New Yorkers of color.

The legislation could also have immediate economic benefits for the state. By removing barriers to employment for New Yorkers with convictions, Clean Slate stands to yield up to $7.1 billion in annual increased earnings for New Yorkers. That revenue could help expand the state’s economy, and allow for investments in infrastructure, the environment, and other priorities that will improve the quality of life for all New Yorkers.

Last year, at a rally in support of Clean Slate, State Senator Zellnor Myrie, one of the bill’s sponsors, said, “The biggest crime-fighter we have is opportunity. It’s jobs, it is housing, it’s stability, all of the things we want our communities to be filled with.” That is emphatically true. Passing Clean Slate, making it the law of New York, will revitalize our communities and give countless people a fair and real shot at moving forward with their lives. Now is the time to pass Clean Slate.

***
Vincent M. Southerland is an Assistant Professor Clinical Law at New York University School of Law, where he teaches the Criminal Defense and Reentry Clinic, a seminar on race and the criminal system, and co-convenes a colloquium on race and inequality. On Twitter @vmsoutherland.

Thumbs up (photo: Michael Appleton/NYC Mayor's Office)

New York’s proposed Working Families Tax Credit has the power to lift up millions of mothers – it's time for Albany to pass it.

I am a single mother of four children between the ages of 5 and 17, all born and raised in New York just like me. I work extremely hard for my family each and every day. Like many mothers, I take my children to doctor’s appointments and the grocery store, help them with their homework, and much more. I have worked my way up to a management position at Wendy’s, a position I am very proud of. Despite this,  I have not always made enough to make ends meet, making it harder to support my kids, further my career, and contribute to my community.

And I’m not alone. Women in this country work hard for little pay and little support.

That’s why, when the federal government enhanced the Child Tax Credit, it was a much-deserved lifeline for families. It provided hundreds of dollars to families like mine every month. When you've been living paycheck to paycheck, that help meant not having to choose between paying bills, paying rent, and putting food on the table. In short, it changed my life, and it helped me provide for my children.

Unfortunately, the federal government chose not to renew that enhancement, and families like mine will be forced back down into poverty unless New York State takes action on our behalf.

There is a bill in Albany that would do exactly that: The Working Families Tax Credit (WFTC), led by Senators Gounardes and Cooney and Assemblymember Hevesi, could give my family what we need to keep going. The WFTC bill includes children 0-4 years of age for the first time, includes tax-filing families regardless of citizenship status, and eliminates the phase-in, providing those with the lowest income the largest credit.

The bill also increases the credit provided to all families to a maximum credit of $1,500 per child, provides a minimum $500 credit per child regardless of income, and eliminates the cap on the number of children eligible to receive a credit.

The data proves this makes sense. When Child Tax Credit programs are in place, moms use them to pay for childcare, food, clothing, and other basic needs. This is crucial given that the gap in childcare options, specifically, is one of the single biggest obstacles when participating in our economy.

Studies from the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities (CBPP) and Urban Institute and Humanity Forward also show that direct cash benefits like the federal Child Tax Credit help moms – especially single mothers – get back to work by alleviating the costs of childcare and transportation.

I am dedicated to taking care of my children and providing them with the best possible life, but I didn’t get here on my own: I got on my feet with the support of organizations like Healthy Moms in Rochester, Up Together, and Flower City AmeriCorps, and with the help of programs like the Child Tax Credit. Now, I am also working on my career by taking adult literacy classes at the Hart Street OACES and I’m proud to share that my son will be starting his first year of college – the first to go to college in our family.

Since the enhanced Child Tax Credit expired, however, my paychecks haven’t gone as far. Without it, every day is more stressful. When families like mine are given resources directly, we reinvest our time and our efforts to make our communities better, safer places for our children. New York should pass the Working Families Tax Credit — moms just like me all over the state deserve the credit.

***
Candace Cabral is a born-and-raised New Yorker and a mother of four. She lives and works in Rochester, New York.

Seeking health care (photo: Michael Appleton/Mayor's Office)

Over the past three years, New York has been the epicenter of a global pandemic, seen the outbreak of mpox, a reemergence of polio, and recently experienced spikes in flu, COVID, and RSV. Currently, an unprecedented number of asylum-seekers are looking to New York City and its safety-net health-care providers for care.

Come April 1, the state will face another potential crisis, as 7 million New Yorkers will have to undergo a difficult and error-prone process of recertification for Medicaid for the first time since the beginning of the pandemic. A study from George Washington University estimates that more than 180,000 New York Medicaid recipients could lose coverage starting July 1. This loss of coverage will put lives in jeopardy and undermine Governor Hochul’s commitment to advancing health equity. 

Despite all this, the state is proceeding with a radical change in how drugs are paid for in the Medicaid program. Moving the Medicaid pharmacy benefit out of Medicaid managed care plans and into the state-administered fee-for-service program will eliminate drug manufacturer discounts to safety-net health centers that are used to fill gaps in care. The timing is stunningly bad.

The pharmacy benefit carve-out will strip providers of the very funding they use to care for those who may lose their insurance during recertification. The carve-out must be repealed and replaced with a new alternative plan.

Historically, safety-net health providers have filled in gaps in coverage by using revenue from the 340B drug discount program to continue to see patients while their recertification issues are resolved, provide care to undocumented New Yorkers, and more. 

The revenue from 340B drug discounts will play a vital role in ensuring continuity of care throughout the Medicaid recertification process and in helping serve the influx of migrants New York is now seeing. Given this, it is extremely troubling that Governor Hochul is proceeding with the Medicaid pharmacy benefit carve-out.

This policy will strip safety-net clinics serving 2.3 million New Yorkers of more than $310 million in annual funding by removing the pharmacy benefit from Medicaid managed care. It would also fundamentally change how Medicaid recipients access their pharmacy benefit, causing certain disruption for patients. 

California implemented the pharmacy carve-out last year, and the results were disastrous. Patients faced life-threatening delays in accessing their medications, and providers are currently fighting for the distribution of funds to offset their lost drug discounts that were promised 12 months earlier. 

The carve-out will also exacerbate the very inequities in our healthcare system that Governor Hochul has pledged to address. Under this proposal, more than 15,000 New Yorkers who are members of HIV Special Needs Health Plans will lose access to a tailored formulary and specialty pharmacists with experience in HIV, mental health, and gender-affirming care who use data in real time to resolve problems. This impact would be especially felt in LGBTQ+ communities and communities of color. 

To complicate things further, the State Department of Health is under new leadership and faces unprecedented staffing vacancies and turnover. It is impossible to imagine they’ll be able to take on the carve-out and recertification, in addition to an ambitious public health agenda, without missteps that lead to New Yorkers losing coverage.

Thankfully, legislation has been introduced that would achieve the state’s policy objectives for the carve-out, including protecting community pharmacies from Pharmacy Benefit Managers (PBMs), while averting disruption to Medicaid beneficiaries, preserving the safety net, and saving the state money. This alternative legislation keeps the pharmacy benefit in Medicaid managed care and, in doing so, maintains the 340B drug discount mechanism that providers rely on. Creating an approach that protects safety-net providers while also protecting small pharmacies from PBMs is critically important.

By forging ahead with the carve-out, the state is making the already challenging recertification exponentially harder and putting lives at risk. As we’ve jumped from one public health crisis to another, a strong network of safety-net providers has been there protecting vulnerable New Yorkers. A perfect storm is brewing: recertification, a migrant crisis, and a financial crisis for safety net providers. Now is not the time to proceed with the pharmacy benefit carve-out.

***
Assemblymember Linda Rosenthal represents parts of Manhattan. On Twitter @LindaBRosenthal.