Gotham Gazette

The Place for New York Policy and politics

Opinion

Opinion

Universal Access to Music Education for All New York City Students Should Be a Top Priority


leg0club city

Music for all (photo: Michael Appleton/Mayoral Photography Office)


While Dr. Miguel Cardona, the US Secretary for Education says “music is a way for students to find themselves and learn critical thinking skills,” over 50% of New York City schools have no full-time music teacher. Cardona thinks—and I agree—that music education is integral to a well-rounded education and “one of the best ways” we can nurture students’ natural talents and interests. 

My entire education was centered around being in the school’s band. The fondness with which I look back on my time in school brought me to the conclusion that every New York City student should have access to high quality music education. It’s why I began serving on the Development Board of Education Through Music (ETM), a nonprofit that provides music education to tens of thousands of New York City students. It is our belief that by limiting access to music to the wealthiest districts and families, students in poorer schools and districts miss out on life-changing opportunities. 

Schools offering music have better academic outcomes. Studies show that students with music and arts education fare better academically than students who do not have access to it. In New York City, schools in low-income areas are often forced to cut their arts and music budgets. Thus these students, who are often Black and Latino, miss out on an aspect of education afforded to their wealthier, white counterparts.

Music is a wonderful way to build connections among students by supporting their social and emotional development. I was in the jazz band at my public school. We performed at school functions, and were an integral part of the school’s culture. Those of us in band were able to engage with the whole school community. I made all my closest friends through music, and even started a ska band with my jazz band friends. 

Building community like this can be harder in under-resourced schools with fewer field trips and extracurriculars, heightening the need for music. At Education Through Music, our teachers have found community building even more important in light of the pandemic. Playing together has helped students express their emotions. Taking the time to engage with music has given them the space to reset from the pressures of virtual learning. Beyond playing music, the classes teach students how to support one another, and listen to each other’s concerns outside of academics.

New York City’s economy depends on the arts and cultural sectors. Before the pandemic, the creative sector accounted for 13% of the city’s total economic output. Overall, one out of every eight dollars of economic activity in the city—$110 billion in 2017—could be traced directly or indirectly to the sector. We need to remember what goes into creating the next generation of artists and workers in the music industry, and give all students the skills they need to succeed.

By withholding access to music education from students in low-income areas we are holding these students back. Music opens the door to stronger community ties, better academic achievement, and the skills needed to thrive in one of the economy’s largest sectors. Music education should be thought of as an issue of equity, and approached with the same rigor and urgency as other educational initiatives in New York. Our children deserve better.

***
Arpan Somani is the co-chair of the development board of Education Through Music, a NYC nonprofit providing trained music educators to public schools who do not otherwise have them. On Twitter @ETMonline.

***
Have an op-ed idea or submission for Gotham Gazette? Email This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

Adults Need to Grow Up If We Want to Keep Our Kids Safe


schools chance porter

Back to school (photo: Ed Reed/Mayoral Photography Office)


We’ve all seen the news lately. It’s rife with images of chaotic school board meetings and rallies starring adults engaged in tantrums, which we would never tolerate from our children. Every parent wants what they believe is best for their children. However, if we want them to get back to school safely, the adults in the metaphorical room need to stop fighting and adhere to public health guidelines.

As health care professionals, our message is that children should safely return to the school setting. The needs of our children are best addressable in school as opposed to remotely. Children who require interventions such as occupational therapy, nutritional and safety assessments, behavioral counseling, etc., can be identified, and services provided. Children’s psychosocial and emotional development is also enhanced by interacting with peers and teachers in person. In short, the benefits of in-class learning are imperative, and we must focus on keeping the school environment safe, given what we know about the community spread of COVID-19.

How do we do that? Masks and vaccines work. Would you send your child to school without protection from rain or snow? Then, don’t send your child to school without a mask in the middle of this deadly pandemic.

The science is clear. Wearing a mask lessens the risk of COVID-19 transmission. In close indoor environments, we need to ensure that proper ventilation is available, appropriate social distancing is followed, and that we protect our school communities by wearing masks.

Eligible individuals who are 12 and older must get vaccinated. Vaccines lessen the risk of severe covid complications, including hospitalization and death, and help us protect vulnerable people who are not yet eligible for inoculation.

Two CDC studies published in late August conclude that covid cases, ER visits, and hospitalizations are lower among children from communities with higher vaccination rates. July data from 14 states indicated that hospitalizations among unvaccinated adolescents 12-17 years were nearly ten times higher than those who were fully vaccinated. A second study reported a nearly fourfold higher hospitalization rate among children and adolescents who were not fully vaccinated (August data).

These studies highlight the importance of vaccinating to protect ourselves and our children. Though chances of serious illness, hospitalizations, and death are low in children, it does occur, with a disproportionate number of Black and Latino children experiencing significant complications.

When I encounter a vaccine-hesitant patient, I routinely ask them if they know any cure for polio or smallpox. Invariably, the response is no. I inform them that we have no cure for these diseases and that they no longer occur due to the success of our vaccine initiatives. Smallpox vaccines became mandatory, resulting in a U.S. Supreme Court ruling that upheld the Boston Department of Health in 1905. Smallpox is now a historical footnote globally, and the vaccine is no longer needed.

Vaccine science isn’t new. The barrage of misinformation on social media comes with a political slant, while the science remains apolitical. Our mission is clear. We aim to discover best practices for keeping people informed and safe.

As adults, we are our children’s protectors, and we owe it to them to make sure we are making the right decisions for their health, which means making sure we are vaccinated against COVID-19 and ensuring that our children, if eligible, are too.

We also need to make sure that they are up to date on their wellness check-ups, vaccinations, and, when in school, wearing a mask. The scrimmaging, silliness, and sideshows need to end, and our priority needs to be on keeping our kids healthy and safe.

***
Dr. Beverly Sheppard is the Chair of the Pediatrics Department at AdvantageCare Physicians (ACPNY), one of the largest primary and specialty care practices in the New York area.

***
Have an op-ed idea or submission for Gotham Gazette? Email This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

Seize the Moment to Modernize New York Democracy for the Digital Era


virtual place hearing

The digital era comes to government meetings (photo: Ed Reed/Mayor's Office)


In late June, more than 200 people packed into a church basement for a Manhattan Community Board (CB) meeting on the contentious proposed rezoning of parts of Soho and Noho. Representatives of the New York City Department of City Planning were scheduled to make a presentation, but opponents of the rezoning booed and shouted over the planners. 

This kind of scene is all too familiar to those who’ve attended community board meetings in the past. But it doesn’t have to be like this. Just ask anyone who attended these meetings virtually during the pandemic. 

As New York City’s covid cases spiked in March 2020, Governor Andrew Cuomo suspended aspects of the state’s Open Meetings Law, allowing the city’s 59 community boards to operate over Zoom or other platforms. Crosstalk and shouting became nearly impossible. Board members were able to stick to the agenda. Some boards say they prefer to meet this way and intend to keep doing so, even if they run afoul of current law.

Many feared that online meetings would be less representative because too many New Yorkers lack high-speed internet connections. This would be a problem for CBs, whose legitimacy is already in question because they attract audiences that are older, whiter, and wealthier than the communities they represent.

But the experiment in online meetings proved to be more inclusive, not less. In interviews Cornell Tech’s Urban Tech Hub conducted for its Rebooting New York report, representatives of 13 of 14 CBs reported that virtual meetings increased public turnout and engagement. One board member noted, “We are seeing more parents of young children, more youth, more cross-city interest, and yes, larger numbers of people, since capacity is no longer an issue.” Applications to serve on CBs in Brooklyn have surged since the meetings went virtual.

It turns out that many of the factors that have made CBs unrepresentative stem from the way they meet. People with work, school, or caretaking schedules that prevent them from getting to a meeting in person at 6 p.m. on a weeknight don’t often join; neither do people with limited mobility. Non-native English speakers, as well as people who are deaf or hard of hearing, can find the proceedings difficult to follow. For countless New Yorkers, a Zoom room is more accessible than a physical one. 

That’s why we recommend not only that community boards continue meeting virtually or in a hybrid format, but also that they make use of additional features of online meetings, such as automatic closed-captioning and transcription, computerized translation into multiple languages, and alerts for specific topics. 

In order to fulfill their promise, virtual or hybrid meetings will need to be modernized and standardized. You can’t hold a truly effective virtual meeting from a gym or basement without the right tools. Hybrid meetings require special attention to ensure that people in the room don’t drown out those who are attending online. 

High-speed internet is essential, along with quality sound and video systems. Community board members need comprehensive training to operate those tools and create new procedures that ensure full participation. And members of the public need access, through broadband connections at home or in venues like libraries that could be set up for virtual participation. It’s all going to require experimentation and support from the borough presidents’ offices, along with civic and digital literacy groups.

In Manhattan, Borough President Gale Brewer’s office funded virtual meeting solutions for the borough’s 12 CBs at the cost of almost $1,500 per district. BetaNYC, a civic tech group, worked with these boards and others throughout the city to ensure that the move to virtual platforms was as seamless and equitable as possible.

All that was just a beginning, though. Legislation introduced and later signed by Governor Kathy Hochul extended the ability to meet online through Jan. 15, 2022, but that is only a stopgap. Elected officials must act now to allow this new type of meeting to continue to evolve. While we don’t have final answers on what form CB meetings will take in the future, we can build a robust framework for their evolution.

Before January, the New York State Legislature should host hearings on how best to amend the Open Meetings Law to align with the needs of the digital era. New York Assembly Member Yuh-Line Niou is sponsoring a bill that would allow board members to convene virtually and require such meetings to be accessible to the public. With some modifications, Niou’s legislation would provide a solid footing for a new, more democratic type of community board meeting. The discussion is crucial for everyone who cares about representation in New York. 

The city and state should provide adequate funding and procurement support for the hardware and software needed to run meetings, along with training for board members through grants to community partners with relevant expertise. Packaged into a standard “webcasting kit,” these tools could be provided at better rates and with less administrative overhead. Crucially, the city should also press forward with initiatives to guarantee high-speed internet connections for all New Yorkers.

It’s likely that an all-virtual world wouldn’t be perfect. We need to experiment to get this right. Should there be alternating online and in-person meetings? Can hybrid meetings be truly inclusive? Should immunocompromised people have the option of participating from a separate room? These are all questions that can only be answered in practice.  

If we value democracy, we must modernize it for the digital era. The next mayor, City Council members, and borough presidents have the opportunity to lead the city into a more representative post-pandemic future, in collaboration with state lawmakers. Broadening public participation in collective decision-making will drive greater political legitimacy. 

We now have a rare opportunity to secure the accessibility gains prompted by this once-in-a-century crisis. Let’s not miss it.

***
Rit Aggarwala is a Senior Urban Tech Fellow at the Jacobs Technion-Cornell Institute and a member of Manhattan Community Board 8. Noel Hidalgo is Executive Director of BetaNYC. On Twitter @Rit_Aggarwala, @noneck@BetaNYC.

***
Have an op-ed idea or submission for Gotham Gazette? Email This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

Addressing the Rise in Mental Health Challenges Among Hispanic Youth


heal ment hyg com leadership

Students at school (photo: Michael Appleton/Mayoral Photography Office)


Young people are often uncomfortable asking for help. Now imagine there is a language barrier as well. Children, teens, and young adults are currently battling social isolation, loneliness, and mental illness in increasing numbers, and the language barrier greatly exacerbates this for Spanish-speaking youth and their families. 

Access to mental health services has traditionally been lower for this community. More than half of Hispanic young adults ages 18-25 with serious mental illness may not receive treatment, according to the National Alliance on Mental Illness, (NAMI). The organization also reported that approximately 34% of Hispanic adults with mental illness receive treatment each year compared to the United States average of 45%.

Right now, there is a shortage of mental health providers in the U.S., regardless of language, and more so of bilingual mental health providers. USA Facts estimates that an additional 6,398 mental health providers, including psychiatrists, social workers, and therapists are needed to fill in the gaps. At Astor Services for Children & Families, we are feeling that lack acutely given that we work with a high percentage of Spanish-speaking families in our out-patient programs in the Bronx.

For the first time in my 13-plus years at Astor, we had to suspend intakes. We simply did not have enough clinicians, particularly in our out-patient clinics, to provide the level of care that’s needed for this population. We must make sure everyone is getting quality service, and we can only do that if we have the right family-to-clinician caseload ratio.

While we are coming out of the pandemic, our children and families still require an increased level of care and support. Clients who were socially isolated are coming to us with multiple diagnoses; for example, they may come in with depression and then also be diagnosed with anxiety and post-traumatic stress. We are also seeing widespread trauma and anxiety about returning to in-person school. Many of our families also have multiple stressors around the economy and employment. 

As we continue to assess needs and prioritize the most critical cases on our wait-list, how can we best address this shortage of caregivers across our industry and better serve our community? The first solution is to be able to hire more bilingual family advocates. A family advocate provides strong support to a family, and many can be high school graduates. If the city provided funding for mental health non-profits, including Astor, to be able to hire more family advocates, they could be that bridge between the family and the mental health provider until they are ready to support them with a licensed clinician. 

New York City is looking to hire 500 social workers over a three-year period. However, the city should not be in the business of hiring social workers; and must leave that to the experts in the field and who are already helping the city’s youth deal with their mental health challenges and emotional needs every day.

Let us do the work and collaborate with the schools. Astor already works in 35 schools in the Bronx, so it makes most sense that the city should step back and provide Astor and all agencies that are already working with mental health the funding to do what we are the experts at, for the greatest good of the youth.

With trust and critical funds, mental health nonprofits across the city can do what they do best. In fact, by investing in the support and care of all our youth today, we are paving the way for a better and more hopeful and healthy future.

***
Yvette Bairan is Chief Executive Officer at Astor Services for Children & Families. On Twitter @AstorServices.

***
Have an op-ed idea or submission for Gotham Gazette? Email This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

New York Gerrymandering: When the Puzzle Pieces Don’t Fit


demo redistricting1a

The #DrawDemocracy NY gerrymandering jigsaw puzzle


The 2020 Census data is out, and redistricting of legislative boundaries has officially begun. While state leaders should see the new data as a chance to understand how New York’s changing communities can be better represented, historically, our elected officials have used redistricting to favor themselves and special interests. It’s time for this tradition to end -- New Yorkers cannot wait another decade for fair representation.

To show New Yorkers just how ugly our state’s gerrymandering is, the #DrawDemocracy campaign has developed what we believe to be the first-ever Gerrymandering Jigsaw Puzzle based on electoral districts – in this case, the New York State Senate (yes, you can get one for yourself).

The New York State Senate’s lines were drawn by Republicans as part of a power-sharing agreement with Democrats, who were allowed to draw their own Assembly districts. One reason both parties maintained such strong grips on their respective chambers for so long is gerrymandering.

Since the Democrats now have a supermajority in both houses, the power-sharing agreement no longer exists. That means that this year’s redistricting, occurring under several new parameters for the first time, is an opportunity to win lines that are more representative of actual communities. During this summer’s hearings, many advocacy groups like APA-VOICE and the League of Women Voters have powerfully demonstrated how gerrymandering has impacted communities around the state.

A prime example of this is South Brooklyn’s State Senate District 19, which is so badly gerrymandered that we had to change the shape of its puzzle piece, making the district look less gerrymandered than it actually is. This happened with one district after another -- it was impossible to create a puzzle that was an exact replica with so many districts where certain areas are the size of a single city block.

demo redistricting

The little chunk on the bottom left of District 19 above – which looks like a puddle of tea spilled from a pitcher – was once part of District 27, just west. Lew Fidler, a popular Democratic City Council member, ran for State Senate in a special election there, losing by just a hair. Rumor had it that he planned to run again.

But the GOP – which then controlled the State Senate – wanted to create a district for conservative Democrat Simcha Felder. So they drew a district that in the northwest had Borough Park, which had more of Felder’s likely voters. Then, to keep Fidler from running in District 27 as he’d planned, they expanded the new District 19 lines so that he was now a resident. Fidler now lived in a district where he had no base – knowing he didn’t have a chance, he declined to run.

Fidler died a few years later, never holding office again despite his wide popularity, being an inspiration for local figures from Jumaane Williams to Justin Brannan (he recently had a street named after him). It’s another tragic story of how gerrymandering lets politicians choose their voters, instead of the other way around.

This year, elected officials have an opportunity to not repeat the wrongs of the past. They can draw districts that serve those in power or draw districts that allow communities to have the representation they serve. We hope they choose the latter – the last thing we want is to have to make another Gerrymandering Jigsaw Puzzle in 2031. 

***
by Karen Young of the #DrawDemocracy Campaign, a partnership between True Democracy NY and RepresentUS NYC to educate New Yorkers about the anti-democratic practice of partisan gerrymandering and organize them to advocate for fair district maps. On Twitter @drawdemocracyny.

***
Have an op-ed idea or submission for Gotham Gazette? Email This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

Ubiquitous Surveillance and Civil Rights Infringements: A Tragic Legacy of 9/11


comm coun bureau

NYPD counterterrorism (photo: Ed Reed/Mayoral Photography Office)


The tragic impacts of the September 11 attacks stretch far beyond the nearly three thousand people who lost their lives that day 20 years ago. 

Over the last two decades, government forces have trampled on civil rights and liberties in the name of 9/11. Deeply entrenched aspects of our society like the ubiquitous surveillance state that follows us wherever we go, the military mission creep that’s infected our domestic law enforcement, and the unbridled police power that departments wield are all direct results of actions taken in the name of preventing another attack. 

Arab, Middle Eastern, Muslim, and South Asian communities were the first to feel the repercussions of that fateful day. They were illegally mass-arrested, beaten, and killed in the days and weeks immediately following September 11.

Eventually, the abuses justified by 9/11 impacted all of us – though they still fall disproportionately on AMEMSA communities and other Black and Brown people. Many of the things we don’t think twice about today would have seemed unimaginable to Americans before the twin towers fell. 

Here in New York, it’s now taken for granted that tens of thousands of cameras watch nearly every move we make. The same is true in cities and towns across the country. 

The New York Police Department – the largest police force in the country – proudly touts its all-seeing Domain Awareness System as “one of the world's largest networks of cameras, license plate readers, and radiological censors, designed to detect and prevent terrorist acts, but also of great value in criminal investigations” [emphasis added].

Those last eight words reflect a key component of the 9/11 legacy. Attacks like the ones on September 11 are incredibly rare, but that doesn’t mean tools purportedly designed to stop them are used sparingly. Instead, nearly all of the weapons, laws, and agencies ostensibly created to stop attacks inevitably get wielded for other, much broader uses.

The military equipment deployed during two decades of endless war, for example, always comes back to the streets of America, most often in poor Black and Brown neighborhoods. Whether it’s mine-resistant tanks that rumble through our neighborhoods, drones that hover above us, Stingrays that spy on our cell phones, or x-ray vans that can see through our walls, the military’s tools of war are now used to brutalize and keep tabs on Americans.

Whole agencies that were created to defend national security are now deployed against people without any even alleged ties to violence. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, for instance, was created in 2003 to “better protect national security.” But that mission is hard to square with ICE agents raiding work places, staking out courthouses, and invading the homes of mostly Black and Brown immigrants who – by ICE’s own admission – rarely pose a threat to national security.

While new bureaucracies like ICE quickly broadened their mandates, police departments seized on 9/11 to accumulate more power and cloak their actions in increased secrecy.

Raising the specter of terrorism, the NYPD successfully convinced a judge in 2003 to weaken the rules meant to prevent the department from surveilling New Yorkers engaged in lawful activities. 

Then in 2012, the Associated Press revealed that the NYPD had dispatched undercover officers into predominantly Muslim neighborhoods and used informants, known as "mosque crawlers," to monitor sermons, even when nothing illegal was taking place.

The NYPD put entire neighborhoods, hundreds of mosques, and numerous student groups under surveillance based on their demographics, not on any evidence of criminal activity. After six years of this unlawful spying, the NYPD admitted this work never produced a single lead or sparked one terrorism investigation.

After a lawsuit brought by the ACLU and the New York Civil Liberties Union, the rules preventing unlawful spying by the NYPD were strengthened and the unit responsible for snooping on Muslims was disbanded. But the message was clear: 9/11 fears can and will be used to justify police power grabs. 

Blanket surveillance is not just invasive and ineffective, it’s actively harmful. Communities targeted by surveillance are publicly criminalized and vilified, which can lead to physical abuse by law enforcement, incarceration, deportation, and other life-shattering consequences.

While the occasional act of law enforcement overreach gets exposed and reigned in, it’s far more common for police activities to remain hidden, with national security trotted out as the excuse. This means the harmful consequences of law enforcement overreach are often hidden as well.

The NYPD reacted to proposed legislation that would force it to reveal the invasive surveillance technology it uses to spy on New Yorkers by promising – without any evidence – that this information would be used by terrorists. Now this legislation is the law of the land, but the NYPD is still using the fear of terror to subvert it.

The NYPD also uses this rationale to cover up its tracking of protesters. The department is not alone. Across the country, law enforcement agencies know that evoking September 11 is a tried and true strategy for hiding what they’re up to.

What the aftermath of the 9/11 attacks has made abundantly clear 20 years later is that the freedoms and rights we trade away in the midst of an emergency are exceedingly difficult to claw back once that emergency has faded from the headlines.

***
Toni Smith-Thompson is a Senior Organizer at the New York Civil Liberties Union (NYCLU). On Twitter @mstonij & @nyclu.

***
Have an op-ed idea or submission for Gotham Gazette? Email This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

Banksy Takes on NYC: Genius or Vandal?


vandal art fever

From the 'Genius or Vandal' exhibit on Banksy (photo: Julia Vitullo-Martin)


Like many of Banksy’s drawings, Fever’s “Banksy: Genius or Vandal?” is a title that hits its subject square on the head. This exhibit, which is well worth seeing, should hit home with New Yorkers since New York is where the contemporary art-or-vandalism controversy began in the 1960s. (There are those who argue that graffiti dates to the Paleolithic Lascaux cave paintings in southwestern France, but we’ll put that aside.) 

Much early subway art-or-vandalism was crude and surly—Mayor John Lindsay, for one, loathed the tagging, and vowed to wipe it off the face of the IRT. But tagging soon evolved to a much higher level. In the 1970s African-American and Latino writers and artists, many from the Bronx and Northern Manhattan, began covering subway cars with elaborate paintings, made possible by the widely available aerosol can. Meant to be viewed in motion, the painted cars roared through stations, astonishing and often infuriating commuters. What many commentators regard as subway art seriously took off during New York’s fiscal crisis. The MTA yards were virtually unpatrolled, and crews of writers painted freely, producing the peak of what historian Martha Cooper called “outlaw art.”

Banksy’s Local Sojourn
Thought to have been born in 1974 in Bristol, England, Banksy has clearly held New York in a special place in his heart. He entitled his month-long 2013 “residency” in New York “Better Out Than In,” re-asserting his preferred outsider status while simultaneously intimating his privileged education. The title is after Paul Cézanne’s decree that “all pictures painted inside, in the studio, will never be as good as those done outside.”

Banksy announced that he would create one new piece on New York streets each day in October, including “elaborate graffiti, large scale street sculpture, video installations, and substandard performance art.” He told the Village Voice that his plan was “to live here, react to things, see the sights—and paint on them. Some of it will be pretty elaborate, and some will just be a scrawl on a toilet wall.”

Why New York? He wrote, “New York calls to graffiti writers like a dirty old lighthouse. We all want to prove ourselves here. I chose it for the high foot traffic and the amount of hiding places. Maybe I should be somewhere more relevant, like Beijing or Moscow, but the pizza isn’t as good.”

What to Make of Banksy’s Art
Despite his thousands of artworks through the decades, Banksy has managed to keep his identity unconfirmed. He is clearly a man of the left, concerned about issues of equity and justice, immigration, pollution, war, authoritarianism, defiance, and popular culture. His work can be brilliant, even electrifying, and also deeply offensive.

The exhibit does a good job of displaying the full range of Banksy’s approach in what it calls an “unprecedented immersion” that includes a VR session that’s compelling but a little unnerving. You sit still as his handiworks meander and lurch around you in 360 degrees. 

Using his website and Instagram, he has distanced himself from the Fever exhibit, posting: “You know it’s got nothing to do with me, right? I don’t charge people to see my art unless there’s a fairground wheel.”

Of the 80+ works in Genius or Vandal, some have been borrowed from international private collections and have seldom been seen publicly before now. Others, such as Banksy’s etchings on the Bethlehem Wall and his “Walled-Off Hotel” across the street, have been photographed and slightly enlarged for display. Arranged in a large, dark room of their own, the Palestinian photographs draw diverse visitors.

P1

 His work in New York has mainly been appealing, even conciliatory—no Virgin Marys labeled “toxic” or dying princesses in Cinderella carriages. On the shuttered door of Larry Flynt’s Hustler Club on West 51st Street, he painted a dapper man in a dinner jacket holding flowers (now removed). Nothing vulgar.

One of Banksy’s more endearing New York pieces is “Boy with a hammer” on West 79th Street, across from Zabar’s, which has helped preserve it and protect it from vandalism. Mostly “Boy” maintains a solitary presence but also attracts visitors to pose beneath the hammer, head on the hydrant.

P2

But Then There’s Banksy’s Speech
There’s Banksy’s art, which is one thing, and then there’s his speech, which tends to be without nuance. He enraged many New York fans in 2013 when he wrote on his website about One World Trade Center that “The biggest eyesore in New York isn’t the graffiti, it’s under construction at ground zero. That building is a disaster. Well no, disasters are interesting. One World Trade Center is a non-event. It’s vanilla. It looks like something they would build in Canada.”

Having insulted our neighbor to the north he had worse to say: “You currently have under construction a one thousand foot tall sign that reads, ‘New York – we lost our nerve.’ One World Trade Center declares the glory days of New York are gone.”

Many progressives found themselves defending 1WTC, which few actually loved. Others were simply dumb-founded. Journalist Errol Louis wrote, “New York is a city long accustomed to attention-seeking huckster-artists who push–and exceed–the limits of decency and good taste. But even in a town that gave the world Warhol, Madonna, Diddy and Lady Gaga, the Banksy screed against the World Trade Center site was a bit much to bear.”

Genius or Vandal, which will let you decide for yourself what you think, takes roughly two hours to explore. Adult tickets are $34.50. Limited availability. Location: 526 6th Avenue (SE corner of 14th Street at 6th Ave)

P3

***
Julia Vitullo-Martin is a long-time editor and writer on cities. On Twitter @JuliaManhattan 

***
Have an op-ed idea or submission for Gotham Gazette? Email This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

Youth are New York City’s Best Economic Resource, Let's Invest in Their Career Success


may chancellor richa

NYC Youth (photo: Michael Appleton/Mayoral Photography Office)


As New York City emerges from the pandemic and prepares for a new Mayor and City Council, elected officials must pursue policies that will make our city more equitable and prosperous. This is the moment to collectively invest in the talent and professional skills of New York City’s home-grown, diverse, and dynamic young people and to shift how we think about the relationship between schooling and workforce development.

Let’s cultivate our best resources -- New York City youth -- to compete in today’s jobs marketplace and expand our city’s competitive advantage in job talent by devoting attention to those who have been historically left behind.

COVID-19 unmasked pre-existing disparities in New York, where our bustling economy disproportionately benefited the highest earners. A deeper trend is that individuals born and schooled in New York, particularly people of color, have not been able to compete for the best jobs in the city against U.S.-born workers from out of state. 

New York is missing out by not having a strategy to develop the talent of these young people and to create pathways to meaningful careers for the 1.6 million students who attend New York City Department of Education schools and the City University of New York, CUNY. At the same time, employers, including those in high-paying industries like tech and finance, report struggling to find entry-level candidates with the relevant and “soft” skills today’s workplaces require.

As a Bronx business owner and recent graduate of New York City public schools, respectively, we see the exposure of these deep inequities and the skills gap as both a challenge and an opportunity. New York businesses want to hire more diverse local talent and students want better pathways to successful careers. We must first move away from our outdated, binary way of thinking about school and work, and discard conventional notions about technical/vocational education. Both educators and employers, together, need to support students to prepare for the workforce and access pathways to pursue their career goals.  

There is a growing movement in New York City—supported by employers, schools, nonprofits, researchers, students, and parents—who understand that the typically envisioned linear system of “high school, then college, then a good career” is not a given in today’s economy and doesn’t work for many students. That’s why New York’s leading companies are beginning to work with the DOE and CUNY to design rigorous, college accredited, paid internships and apprenticeships that equip high school and community college students with real-world professional skills needed to land in-demand, well-paying 21st-century jobs. 

For me, Jessica, as a local employer leading a company based in the Bronx for 60 years, investing time and resources into young people is a way to have a tremendous impact on the future workforce. My grandparents founded the company and my grandmother, a public school guidance counselor, was a believer in pairing work with education. I aim to continue that tradition by bringing in young people as paid interns while they are still in school and introducing them to the skills necessary to succeed in business.

New York City businesses, like mine, can join the movement and build a system of work-based learning that includes co-op and internship opportunities for academic credit and for pay. It’s a win-win strategy that enables students to earn and learn, while developing social capital that leads to gainful employment as they embark on adulthood. 

While higher income families rely on their networks and connections, many Black and Latino students often miss out on the high-quality internships, apprenticeships, and mentoring that lead to career success. These experiences are vital. New York City public school students like me, Naseem, need work opportunities that connect back to the classroom.

For me, it only took one internship with Madison Square Garden during high school to change my life. From there I took advantage of every opportunity to explore different career paths so that when I arrived at college I knew what I wanted to major in. I graduated this spring from George Washington University and am headed to law school, and having internships helped give me direction and mentors that I needed. All students should have access to these opportunities, not only a select few.

New York City has long attracted talent from across the world. However, by failing to nurture the potential in the young people who are born and schooled here, our city is wasting a tremendous opportunity.

We need our next Mayor and City Council to champion work-based learning models that braid learning from work into traditional academic pathways by providing employers and educators with incentives to participate and invest in collaboration. By transforming our local talent development system and linking relevant skills to education, we can launch our young people into promising careers, ensure our employers have a diverse talent pipeline to draw from, and power a thriving, inclusive economy.

***
Jessica Johnson is CEO & President of Johnson Security Bureau. Naseem Haamid is a recent graduate of George Washington University, a Community Organizer at Youth Ministries for Peace and Justice, and a graduate of Fannie Lou Hamer Freedom High School who will be starting law school at the University of the District of Columbia. On Twitter @msbigjess & @NaseemHaamid.

***
Have an op-ed idea or submission for Gotham Gazette? Email This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

The Major Problems with New York City’s School Reopening Plan


chancellor rising off

Mayor de Blasio and school kids (photo: Michael Appleton/Mayoral Photography Office)


Despite New York City Department of Education officials’ claims during this past week’s City Council hearing that the city’s school reopening plan for this fall represents “the gold standard,” the reality is that the plan is riddled with profound flaws.

First, and perhaps most egregiously, the DOE refused to dedicate a single penny of the additional $8 billion in federal and state education funds to lower class sizes, despite the City Council advocating for $250 million to be spent for that purpose, and despite DOE’s own surveys showing that smaller classes are the top priority of K-12 parents. 

Lowering class sizes would ensure a safer and more productive learning environment for students. This is particularly critical now, given the need for social distancing and stronger academic support due to the disruption of the learning environment caused by the pandemic.

In place of the $250 million the Council proposed for this purpose, the DOE allocated only $18 million for a small program targeting 72 elementary schools, while encouraging principals to use the funds for push-in teachers rather than actually forming new classes to lower class sizes. This could lead to more overcrowding and an even less safe classroom environment and would not have the same positive impact on learning.

The DOE’s refusal to specifically allocate any of the additional $530 million in state Foundation Aid funds for smaller classes is especially flagrant because these funds resulted from the Campaign for Fiscal Equity decision. In this case, New York’s highest court concluded excessive class sizes denied New York City students their right to the sound, basic education guaranteed under the state’s constitution, yet class sizes have risen since then. Further, if principals choose to use Contracts for Excellence (C4E) funds for this purpose, they will actually be forced to spend 40% extra to cover teachers’ pension and benefits, which DOE usually pays for centrally.

The second major flaw in the DOE’s plan is that unlike most other districts, the DOE has refused to offer a remote learning option to New York City students, unless they fall into one of a limited number of vulnerable health categories. This is despite the advocacy of many parents, elected officials, and organizations who have been clamoring for a remote option.  

This is particularly troubling because the DOE’s planned safety precautions are simply insufficient.  While universal masking will be required and all school staff will (eventually) be vaccinated, the three feet of social distancing that the DOE has said would be provided at most schools will be impossible to implement at most schools, unless many students do not attend classes in person.

Originally, the DOE claimed only about 76 schools would not be able to achieve three feet of social distancing in the coming school year, though Mark Cannizzaro, president of the principals and administrators union, publicly disputed this and said the majority of  New York City’s roughly 1,700 public schools would not be able to achieve social distancing given crowding.  

Then the DOE altered its calculations by allotting less space per student in its formula, while also assuming principals’ offices and other administrative spaces could be used as classrooms. Frankly, this is highly unrealistic. The DOE now claims only about 50 of the most overcrowded schools will not be able to achieve social distancing, but they have refused to release this list of schools or say what these schools will do to avoid unsafe overcrowding. 

Rather than finding additional space by leasing closed parochial school buildings or moving more pre-K classes into community-based centers, the DOE has continued along its customary track for the last year and a half, pretending the need for social distancing does not exist.

Since March 2020, the city has co-located 26 additional schools in existing buildings, and tried to close an entire elementary school in the Bronx that was able to achieve social distancing, unlike overcrowded schools nearby, with plans to leave the building empty – until community and parent protest stopped it.  

Throughout the pandemic, the Department of Education has also continued to expand the number of pre-K and 3-K students in elementary school buildings. According to our analysis, about 230 elementary schools with pre-K and/or 3-K programs were already at or over 100% capacity. This fall, the DOE is adding 26 more 3-K programs to already overcrowded schools – despite the fact that this space could have been used to provide a safer environment for the rest of the student population.

In its new health and safety protocols, the DOE claims, “every classroom across New York City has been provided with two HEPA purifiers,” though many dispute this statement’s accuracy. While the CDC and most independent experts recommend air cleaners that use HEPA filters, the Intellipure model that DOE purchased for $43 million lacks these filters. Indeed, independent experts rank the model among the most expensive and least efficient on the market. 

But the biggest disappointment is the laxity of the DOE’s covid testing plan: only 10% of unvaccinated students whose parents have submitted consent forms will be tested – and then, only once every two weeks. This represents a sharp decrease in covid testing compared to last year, when 20% of all students were tested weekly. The loosening of the covid testing protocol in schools is indefensible, given that the Delta variant is far more transmissible and there will be far more overcrowding in classrooms, lunchrooms, and other spaces as fewer than 40% students attended school in-person last year. In addition, school-age children currently have the highest covid positivity rate in the city

The DOE’s new protocol also does not require quarantining or testing of vaccinated students or staff. Yet with Delta, breakthrough infections are on the rise. During the first week of August, here in New York City alone, there were nearly 3,000 reported breakthrough infections,. Many times that number were likely asymptomatic and able to transmit the virus. Given these facts, excluding vaccinated teachers and students from random testing seems extremely unwise.

The DOE’s extremely limited testing regimen is also not aligned with the CDC recommendations, which advise weekly testing for students in moderate to high transmission zones. 

Source: CDC

According to the CDC tracker, every New York City borough is currently a high transmission zone, ranging from 2.7% positivity rate in Manhattan to 4.8% in the Bronx.

In contrast, Los Angeles schools, the second largest in the nation after New York’s, are mandating weekly testing for all students and staff, vaccinated or not, as are some other California school districts. According to Education Week, “public health experts said the frequency and scale of LAUSD’s weekly testing is appropriate given the threat of the Delta variant.” Chicago public schools are offering weekly testing to all students and staff.

As reported in the Washington Post, a new study projects that testing half of all elementary school students every week would substantially reduce schools’ expected covid infection rate after three months from 49% to 22%. One can assume the rate would fall even lower if all students were tested weekly instead.

The Medical Advisory Group (MAG) of Newton public schools in Massachusetts is headed by Dr. Ashish Jha, Dean of the Brown University School of Public Health. This group also recommends weekly testing for all students and staff, and points out that if all asymptomatic students who are in close contact with infected individuals are given rapid tests, they might not have to be quarantined, which would be very helpful for preventing further disruptions to their education. They also recommend that all eligible students be mandated to receive vaccinations, as at least one California school district is doing.

The inadequate testing protocol that New York City has adopted is even more disappointing considering that the federal government has promised to cover the full cost of staffing and covid testing for any school district that requests it: “FEMA will fund 100% of COVID-19 testing costs and will not require non-federal matching funds through December 31, 2021.” Accordingly, Los Angeles expects FEMA to pay for most of the expense of its ambitious testing program. 

While the New York City DOE’s Covid testing regime is inexplicably weak, the city is mandating more standardized testing to be given at every school across the city, at a cost of $36 million – twice the amount it is spending to hire push-in teachers or lower class sizes. According to a DOE instructional manual sent to principals, these formative assessments will be required to be administered to all students three times a year, including Acadience in grades K-2, and either MAP or iReady online exams in the other grades. If schools want to use different exams, they must be approved by the DOE central office first. 

Yet there is little or no research showing these standardized tests will help students learn or support their recovery. Few if any independent peer-reviewed evaluations have offered evidence for their validity or demonstrated that their use has any positive impact on student learning. One of the few randomized studies showed that administering the MAP exams had “no significant effect” on achievement. Many teachers have critiqued iReady exams, and many students despise them. 

The DOE’s insistence that schools require every student to take these exams at least three times a year also belies the claim in their instructional manual that they will be focusing on “creating and sustaining school cultures where students, staff and families can experience joy and thrive” this year, by creating a “welcoming and affirming school environment.” 

If the DOE really wants to ensure a more successful and safer school year, rather than require more ineffective and stressful standardized testing, the city should provide smaller classes and employ more rigorous health and safety protections, including weekly covid testing for all students and staff.

***
Leonie Haimson is the Executive Director of Class Size Matters. On Twitter @leoniehaimson.

***
Have an op-ed idea or submission for Gotham Gazette? Email This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

It's Time to End Substandard Working Conditions in Home Care


rad ag population us com average care

Taking care of people at their homes (photo: Michael Appleton/Mayoral Photography Office)


The rapidly aging population in the United States, combined with the global pandemic, has brought the issue of home care to national headlines. As evidenced by President Biden’s proposal of a standalone $1.8 trillion bill dedicated to caregiving, it’s clear the government is looking to address challenges in long-term care, especially as the sector faces one of its most urgent labor shortages ever. Against the backdrop of Labor Day – a time to celebrate workers and recognize the importance of unions in fighting for better working conditions – there is no better time to reform our home care system for workers and, ultimately, patients. 

Today, more than 800,000 individuals remain on the Medicaid waiting list for home care, a number that is only expected to increase in the future. Just consider seven out of 10 of us will need long-term care at some point in our lives. Yet, despite these increases, home care wages have steadily decreased over the last decade. In 2006, home care workers earned approximately 150% of the state minimum wage on average. Today, the same caregivers receive the minimum wage or slightly above. More than one in seven low-wage workers in New York City is a home care worker. One in four workers live below the federal poverty line, and more than half rely on some form of public assistance to make ends meet. These low wages have led to chronic staffing shortages in the industry (17% of home care positions were left unfilled between 2018-2019) and a projected overall workforce shortage crisis of 83,000 workers by 2025. 

At the root of this is a systemic devaluation of care work. Traditionally, this labor is undertaken by women, particularly women of color, and government Medicaid reimbursement rates have historically devalued these workers. Home care work is in fact highly skilled work and, as we have seen during this pandemic, often dangerous and heroic. By treating it that way and changing the system accordingly, we can make care work dignified, address the workforce shortage, create a thriving care economy and better serve patients.

In New York State specifically, the two most critical issues in the home care sector are chronic low wages and 24-hour live-in cases, where home care workers stay in patient homes for 24 hours. During this time, workers care for the patient for 13 hours, with the other 11 hours left unpaid for sleep and meals. With approximately 11,000 24-hour cases in New York alone, staffed by 33,000 home care workers, this is an issue that impacts far too many. However, for many in the home care sector, this disparity doesn’t come as a surprise, as nonprofits have historically faced inadequate state compensation, unfunded mandates, and longstanding labor negotiations. In short, state law ties non-profit home care agencies to low Medicaid reimbursement rates and antiquated rules that harm both patients and workers. 

The state has continually chosen to ration care rather than allocating the required $1 billion in Medicaid to provide better wages to workers with 24-hour shifts and higher quality care for patients. As CEO of nonprofit organizations that care for 3,000 home care patients and have a 56-year legacy of providing educational, social, and community services for Asian American and immigrant New Yorkers, I understand the impact these outdated policies have on workers, patients, and families alike.

I’m often left wondering: Why did lawmakers create a system that restricts equal pay for equal work? Labor Day is meant to commemorate the contributions workers have made to the strength, prosperity, and well-being of this country – and yet, many of those who care for others are not being cared for by our government. 

With the Biden Administration’s long-term vision for home care reform already paving the way for new bills on this issue, we as a community must seize this momentum and end 24-hour shifts. To do so, the New York state government must first create a system by which home care workers receive full compensation for every hour at a patient’s home on call for needed assistance, which starts by transitioning away from 24-hour shifts in favor of two 12-hour split shifts. However, no single entity can make this change alone.

Together, we can put enough pressure on officials in Albany to pass one bill -- A3145, sponsored by Assemblymember Harvey Epstein -- that would end 24-hour shifts in favor of two 12-hour split shifts, as well as another, Fair Pay for Home Care -- S5374/A6329, sponsored by Senator Rachel May and Assemblymember Dick Gottfried -- to raise home care worker pay to 150% of the highest area minimum wage across the state. Both pieces of legislation would allow for long-term investments in home care workers, so they can provide the best care possible for patients, such as new training structures, restructured certification, mentor programs, and more. 

If the COVID-19 pandemic has shown us anything, it’s the critical role healthcare professionals provide during times of significant need. For many years, these essential skilled workers have devoted their time and energy to supporting an increasingly aging population. This Labor Day, it’s time for us all to support them and advocate for meaningful, systemic change to build a more just and caring economy.

***
Wayne Ho is President & Chief Executive Officer of the Chinese-American Planning Council, Inc. On Twitter @cpc_nyc.

***
Have an op-ed idea or submission for Gotham Gazette? Email This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.



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