Voters were planning to go to the polls on September 11 to choose among scores of candidates who had pledged to increase funding for parks. Now the political and financial landscape of the city has been drastically altered. The city is projecting a $1 billion shortfall for this fiscal year, and a $4 billion gap for the next. Even as New Yorkers turn to the parks for community, comfort, and to commemorate the dead, will the promises for parks be another casualty of the terrorist attacks?

Parks supporters saw an opportunity in the 2001 election because of the large turnover of elected officials. After years of frustration with the low level of public funding for city parks - even when the budgets of other city departments were restored during the boom years of the 1990s - they organized to educate the new candidates and win political support for parks. Their coalition, Parks 2001, included block associations, athletic and law enforcement groups, community gardeners, and park advocates as well as prominent civic and business leaders. By the end of the primary season, five of the candidates for mayor and most of the other candidates had pledged to work to commit one percent of the city's budget (more than double the current amount of $160 million) to operating and maintaining the parks. They also promised to distribute resources equitably to all parks, to establish citywide minimum maintenance standards, and to give exclusively to the parks budget the $60 million in fees the city receives from park concessions, which now go into the city's general fund.

After the attacks, however, when the campaign came back into focus, questions were raised about how the candidates would be able to keep their promises on parks. Before the runoff, a New York Times editorial called Fernando Ferrer "borderline irresponsible" for insisting that he still planned to increase the parks budget. Mark Green seized on that phrase as ammunition, using it in the campaign's first negative ad. Neither Green, the Democratic nominee, nor Republican Mike Bloomberg have commented specifically on whether they will uphold their promises to increase funding for parks, although Green has said that many of his previous plans would have to be put off.

Mike Klein, co-campaign manager of Parks 2001, says he remains hopeful that the candidates will be able to honor their commitments to parks. "If they mean what they say about rebuilding, rebirth, revitalizing, you cannot do that without the parks system," he says. "I think New Yorkers will be more aware of just how much they depend on these parks and want them to be equal across the board."

According to Klein, the coalition plans to work with the new mayor, and keep a close watch on the budget process. "This constituency will be much better prepared to have a unified voice on a citywide level, and more clout on a local level. When bad ideas come up in the future, there will be more people organized to speak up."

Bridge Park another victim?

Supporters of the Brooklyn Bridge Park are concerned that plans for the park will be put on hold because of the city's projected budget shortfall, as well as changes in funding priorities from the state. The city had recently promised to spend $10 million to tear down a city-owned warehouse on a key section of the park. The Port Authority of New York and New Jersey, which owns the piers on which much of the park would be built, was to provide more than half of the projected $150 million cost of building the park. Joanne Witty, president of the Brooklyn Bridge Development Corporation, said, "We really don't have much of a reading as to where things stand, other than the fact that we know both the mayor and governor were strongly committed to the park before Sept. 11." A spokeswoman for Governor Pataki, Suzanne Morris, said, "It's something the governor continues to support. But obviously, in the light of what's happened we're taking a look at everything, re-evaluating the entire budget."

What about Governors Island?

Representatives Carolyn Maloney and Jerrold Nadler and the Governors Island Group are calling on Congress to help the recovery efforts in New York City by stopping the sale of Governors Island. Legislation passed in 1997 required the General Services Administration to sell the island, a former Coast Guard base, at fair market value. Before September 11, a state and city plan for public use of the island had stalled, and the federal agency had been preparing to auction the island in the coming fiscal year.

Joined by 15 members of New York's congressional delegation, Maloney and Nadler sent a letter to the chairmen and ranking members of key House committees. The letter notes that the Federal Emergency Management Association, the Coast Guard, and the National Guard have been in discussion with the General Services Administration about using Governors Island to aid the recovery efforts.

Governors Island has also been suggested for temporary commercial and residential use for people displaced from the World Trade Center area. The island has 500,000 square feet of office and commercial space both within and outside its historic district. There are also 1200 residential units, 640 of which are outside the historic district and would be most feasible to use for housing. The island has been well maintained by the General Services Administration since the Coast Guard closed the base in 1996.

In their letter, Maloney and Nadler asked that legislation to repeal the sale include two additional provisions: the ratification of President Clinton's designation of the island's historic forts and surrounding land as a national monument; and a requirement that the city and state fully participate in long-term planning for the island.

Anne Schwartz is a freelance writer specializing in environmental issues. Previously, she was the editor of the Audubon Activist, a news journal for environmental action published by the National Audubon Society, and an editor at The New York Botanical Garden.

The day after the terrorist attack on the World Trade Center, it was a classic September day - warm, with golden sunshine, blue above and a breeze that hinted of fall. In one Brooklyn neighborhood, everyone seemed drawn to the park. As if by instinct, they sought the comfort of community and of nature.

People walked quietly by themselves or in pairs. Parents sat on the grass talking while their kids ran around or played ball. "It feels like a town square," someone said.

People talked of the horror they had witnessed from their rooftops and windows. They recounted close calls, what they had done that day, how they had walked home over the bridge.

They shared their grief and fear and shock. They traded information about what people could do to help. As they learned of who in the community were missing and dead, their pain and sadness deepened.

For many people, the meadows, the encircling trees, the sound of the wind in the leaves, provided some spiritual solace.

As the Project for Public Spaces noted on its website, throughout the city, friends and strangers gathered to mourn and comfort one another in the public parks - in Union Square, Washington Square, the Brooklyn Heights Promenade, and undoubtedly wherever else there were neighborhood parks or community gardens.

New York has the reputation of a hurried city, where people are too busy to make connections. But if anything could characterize the aftermath of this unspeakable tragedy, it has been the coming together of neighbors. The events of the past week make us value even more the public places that draw us together, and the parks that give us contact with nature for consolation and contemplation.

Anne Schwartz is a freelance writer specializing in environmental issues. Previously, she was the editor of the Audubon Activist, a news journal for environmental action published by the National Audubon Society, and an editor at The New York Botanical Garden.

As the deadline for selling Governors Island draws closer, the federal government has made it clear that New York State must fill in the details of its draft plan for the island by October 1st, and that the state legislature must approve the plan as law.

The state's plan calls for a new civic space on Governors Island, including a 50-acre park, sports fields, museums, and educational facilities, as well as a large hotel and conference center, offices, and restaurants. The plan would preserve the historic forts and buildings on the former Coast Guard base, while creating a new visitor destination in the harbor.

Representatives Jerrold Nadler and Carolyn Maloney, co-sponsors with Rep. Ben Gilman of a bill to turn the island over to the state at a nominal cost, have called on the Pataki administration to step up its efforts to secure the island as a public space. Nadler and Maloney said they were only recently made aware that state legislation would be necessary, but that the state had been informed as long as six months ago.

Rep. Maloney said, "In five months, the federal government plans to sell Governors Island to the highest bidder and we are running out of time. It is time for Governor Pataki to get personally involved in this effort before it is too late."

COMMUNITY GARDENERS GET POLITICAL

Community gardeners marched to City Hall August 1 to present petitions for a referendum on turning community gardens over to the parks department. The gardeners also sought to call attention to the community garden legislation proposed by Ken Fisher and Adolfo Carrion that is stalled in City Council. The More Gardens! Coalition fell short of gathering the 30,000 signatures needed to get the proposal on the ballot. But Aresh Javadi, who helped start the coalition, says the last-minute referendum effort gathered 23,000 signatures in two months, showing widespread support for gardens. It also educated New Yorkers about the issue. "A lot of people thought that Bette Midler had saved all the gardens," Javadi said.

Two years ago, as the city was about to sell off more than 100 community gardens to developers, Bette Midler's New York Restoration Project and the Trust for Public Land stepped in to purchase them. But more than 400 gardens on city-owned lots are living on borrowed time. The city allowed residents to clean up and plant the vacant lots, but reserved the right to reclaim the land. The only thing holding off the bulldozers at a number of sites is a temporary restraining order won by State Attorney General Eliot Spitzer, who has filed a lawsuit to stop the city from razing the gardens.

State Supreme Court Justice Richard D. Huttner recently denied a request by the Giuliani administration to lift the restraining order. After the decision, Mayor Giuliani said it was "absurd" to block development on the lots. "There are people who don't have homes." The following week, responding to reports of a rise in homelessness in the city, the mayor blamed the gardeners for holding up the development of housing.

The Coalition for the Homeless issued a statement objecting "in the strongest possible terms" to the mayor's comments: "Given that the city has other parcels of land at its disposal, it is simply not necessary to encroach on the precious few remaining green spaces for new development of affordable housing. The technology, community commitment and manpower exist to deliver significant numbers of newly constructed homes. What has been lacking over the past few years is the fiscal commitment by the local government."

Gardeners plan more political theatre later this summer to identify support for gardens among the candidates running for office this fall. They have also gotten involved in the Parks 2001 campaign, which seeks to get candidates to pay attention to parks and open space and commit to increasing parks department funding to one percent of the city budget.

A MAYOR WHO CARES ABOUT PARKS

Imagine a mayor of New York City who talks about parks as a way to make his citizens happier. Who sees a park in every parcel of vacant or underutilized land -- even the rooftop of City Hall. Who believes parks are as essential as the water supply to the physical and emotional health of the city.

Speaking at a conference recently held by the Institute for Urban Parks in New York, two mayors - former mayor Enrique Penalosa of Bogota, Colombia, and Mayor Richard Daley of Chicago - actually said these things.

To a New Yorker, it was amazing.

As Joyce Purnick pointed out in her New York Times column about a mayoral forum held on the same day that Mayor Daley spoke, "In New York, parks are seen as a frill. The last four mayors have concentrated resources on core services, especially education and the police, and as a result, parks spending has been in decline." Of the six men running for mayor, only Peter Vallone has pledged to increase parks department funding to one percent of the budget, as a coalition of parks supporters has been advocating. The others say they believe funding for parks should be increased -- if the city can afford it.

The two mayors who spoke at the conference see it differently. To them, parks are a core service. Parks and public space are woven into the fabric of the city, furthering other important goals like education, public safety, and economic vitality.

As mayor, Penalosa added or restored 1200 parks for the rapidly growing yet poor population of his city, reclaimed the sidewalks from cars, and persuaded the voters to approve a future ban on cars in the city. Mayor Daley showed slide after slide illustrating the changes in Chicago: 300,000 trees planted, new riverfront and lakefront parkland, landscape ordinances requiring developers to install and maintain plantings around their property and in the public ways, and on and on.

Both mayors believe that if you want to improve the quality of life in a city (or as Penalosa plainly put it, to make its citizens happier) parks and public spaces should be high on the list of priorities.

They also believe that a better quality of life leads to a stronger economy. Mayor Daley said, "By and large, the places that are doing well today are places that are pleasant to live," noting that jobs follow people -- and companies -- where they want to live. Penalosa said, "A city is better not when it is richer but when it is happier. But something interesting happens. If it is happier, then it will get richer.... The most important competitive advantage a society can have in this new age of information is quality of life."

With the change in political leadership, it is time to change the old attitudes toward parks. The would-be mayors should start thinking more creatively about how green and public space can revive neighborhoods, boost the economy, and make New York City of the 21st century a happier, healthier, and more prosperous place to live.

Anne Schwartz is a freelance writer specializing in environmental issues. Previously, she was the editor of the Audubon Activist, a news journal for environmental action published by the National Audubon Society, and an editor at The New York Botanical Garden.

While environmentalists pursue legal action to stop the construction of a 175-acre golf course on the former municipal landfill at Ferry Point Park in the Bronx, city officials are trying to interest golf officials in making the Jack Nicklaus-designed course a PGA tournament site, the Daily News reported recently.

Mayor Rudy Guiliani, an avid golfer, has been talking up the idea of a tournament-level course at Ferry Point, and course developer Pierre Gagne recently met with officials from the PGA tour. There has even been discussion of annexing adjacent parkland to expand the course to 27 holes.

Meanwhile, environmental groups and residents of a nearby housing project, the Throggs Neck Houses, say the city went ahead with the project without thoroughly investigating the potential environmental problems of the site. Ferry Point was closed in the 1960s before laws regulating landfills were passed. The groups say the old dump contains toxic chemicals and explosive and possibly contaminated methane gas, and that the golf course construction is increasing residents' exposure to these hazards.

The mostly black and Hispanic residents of the housing project are also upset that the golf course is being walled off on their side of the park, preventing access to a 19.5-acre public waterfront park that is also part of the golf course development.

A lawsuit by the New York City Environmental Justice Alliance and the New York Public Interest Research Group to require a full environmental impact statement for the project was dismissed when the judge ruled that the suit did not meet the statute of limitations. The groups plan to appeal.

In a move to nullify another lawsuit filed by environmentalists and residents, the City Franchise and Concession Review Committee recently voted to approve, retroactively, a 35-year concession for the development company, Ferry Point Partners. City regulations require the unanimous vote of the committee for a concession contract longer than the usual 20 years. The second lawsuit charges that the Parks department had signed the contract and allowed construction to begin without getting this approval.

The Francise and Concession Review Committee consists of mayoral appointees except for the presidents of the affected boroughs and the city comptroller. Comptroller Alan Hevesi, who had previously refused to register the project, and Bronx Borough President Fernando Ferrer voted with the mayors' appointees to make the approval unanimous. Calling the vote a "back-room deal," Leslie Lowe, executive director of the Environmental Justice Alliance, said, "What is particularly disgraceful about what Hevesi has done is that this is a terrible deal for the city." She noted that the city's contract indemnifies the developer from lawsuits for environmental problems, even if the developer has made it worse. She said, "If the people of Throggs Neck sue, the taxpayers pay." Calls to Hevesi's office for comment were not returned.

Ferrer's press secretary, John Melia, said that the borough president voted to approve the concession "with reservations," entering a statement into the record urging Ferry Point Partners and the state Department of Environmental Conservation to "fully and completely investigate the potential environmental and public health impacts" of the plan. "The environmental concerns are valid and the borough president wants to see that they addressed properly," Melia said. "This project, and any project of large scale, is going to cause controversy. Do you not go forward after two decades of nothing getting done or do you make a decision when someone wants to invest a lot of money and create recreation for the people of the Bronx?"

Melia also insisted that the side of the park next to the housing project will be open. "The borough president was very sensitive to charges of exclusion. Of all people in the world he is not going to let that happen. The people of Throggs Neck Houses will have their concerns addressed and have access to the park just as any other person who wants to use it will."

Additional environmental concerns have surfaced as construction has proceeded. To cover the landfill and shape the contours of the golf course, the developer is trucking in 1 million cubic yards of construction and demolition debris. Lowe compares the trash layer underneath to a sponge filled with methane gas produced by decomposing garbage. She says the heavy fill is squeezing the methane out of the sponge toward the residential areas. In February, monitoring of test wells showed that methane levels were too high, and the developer was required to build a five-block-long gravel-filled trench to vent the gas before it accumulates underground at explosive levels. The trench is right next to a community park used by residents of the housing project. "They have not tested what is coming out of that venting trench," Lowe said.

There have also been reports that the developer is using possibly contaminated fill. The state permit granted to the developer allows only certain types of construction and demolition debris. Residents have reported finding asphalt grindings, which are not allowed, and in fact, the developer has applied for a waiver to allow the use of asphalt.

Tom Kunkel, Special Assistant at the Region 2 office of the state Department of Environmental Conservation, said the agency has not yet dealt with the developer's request to allow asphalt. He said, "The developer has been following the permit, has been very agreeable so far with the trench and with monitoring the issues. We have been in constant contact with them since the beginning of the permit."

Anne Schwartz is a freelance writer specializing in environmental issues. Previously, she was the editor of the Audubon Activist, a news journal for environmental action published by the National Audubon Society, and an editor at The New York Botanical Garden.

In the last budget of his administration, Mayor Giuliani is again proposing to reduce the operating funds allotted to the parks department. The proposed $12 million cut would affect tree pruning and recreation programs, as well as eliminate 42 fulltime staff positions and replace them with seasonal workers.

In past years, the City Council has restored many of the mayor's proposed cuts. Capital spending - borrowed money earmarked for park acquisitions and renovations - has also increased. But public funding for parks maintenance and recreation has been on a long downward trend. The parks operating budget is 25 percent lower than it was 1991, and 40 percent lower than in 1986, and the parks department now has less than half the fulltime staff it had in 1986.

This year Council Speaker Peter Vallone has called not only to restore the mayor's cuts, but also for additional funding. At a news conference held with park advocates and members of Local 1505 of District Council 37, the union representing the largest number of park employees, he condemned the funding decline over the last decade. "We can't have the administration come in and tell us we need no more money for parks," he said. "The mentality that supposes there are people out there who are going to adopt parks and supplement funding is not true for most parks."

Asked why he is only now making the park staff cuts a priority, Vallone said that the situation had been continuing and had reached the point of urgency. He noted that large staff reductions were made directly after the recession, and that other city agencies had seen their funding restored, but not parks. "The time has come to catch up," he said.

At the City Council committee hearing on the parks budget, Parks Commissioner Henry Stern said that ratings of park conditions, which have improved greatly over the past eight years, were beginning to slump. He requested more money for park workers, attributing the slip in ratings to the loss of 3,000 part-time Work Experience Program workers, who had been cleaning parks in a temporary program designed to get welfare recipients into the job force. In questioning Stern, committee members discussed maintenance problems in parks outside of Manhattan and the need for more park enforcement officers. They also expressed concern that park conditions could get markedly worse if staffing levels were not increased.

Park advocates are asking the council not only to restore the mayor's cuts but also to increase the parks budget by at least $10 million, to pay for basic services like enforcement, recreation, gardening, and lawn and ball field maintenance. Looking toward the next administration, Parks 2001, a coalition that includes advocacy groups as well as business, real estate, sports, youth, labor, and law-enforcement organizations, is campaigning to increase funding for parks to 1 percent of the city budget from the current 0.4 percent.

Anne Schwartz is a freelance writer specializing in environmental issues. Previously, she was the editor of the Audubon Activist, a news journal for environmental action published by the National Audubon Society, and an editor at The New York Botanical Garden.

It has been two years since Mayor Guiliani attempted to auction off more than 100 community gardens to developers. Those gardens narrowly escaped the bulldozers when the Trust for Public Land and the New York Restoration Project worked out a deal with the city to buy the land. But about 500 similar gardens (no one seems to know the exact number) remain in limbo.

Gardeners from all over the city held a rally at City Hall to protest the lack of permanent protection for most of the city's community gardens.

The gardens were originally vacant lots that had been claimed by the city for non-payment of taxes. Beginning more than 20 years ago, the city encouraged residents to clean up and plant the lots, eventually leasing them to the gardeners under the GreenThumb program, but with the understanding that it could eventually reclaim them. Over the years, however, the gardens have come to serve an important public function in their communities, which tend to be low-income, minority areas lacking parks and open space. In many cases, the gardens have been catalysts for reducing crime and turning around a block or neighborhood, as people came together to clear out trash, haul in dirt, plant flowers, and create a place for children to play and neighbors to gather.

The gardens are protected under a temporary restraining order while a lawsuit filed by State Attorney General Eliot Spitzer makes its way through the courts. The lawsuit contends that state law requires the city to conduct an environmental review when it proposes to sell off the gardens. It also claims some of the gardens have been functioning as public open space for so long that they are essentially public parkland, which cannot be sold without the approval of the state legislature. A hearing on the city's motion to dismiss the case is scheduled for May 23rd in State Supreme Court. At the hearing, the state will also argue its motion to compel the city to provide information on the gardens that it previously requested.

Meanwhile, the city has been going through the process of getting gardens ready for sale and development. If the restraining order is lifted, the city is ready to proceed with developing 50 sites, including 20 in Brooklyn and the Bronx under a home ownership program that offers a streamlined process for developers building one- to four-family homes.

City officials say that the gardeners always knew that the land could be reclaimed by the city at any time, and that the lots are needed to address the city's acute housing shortage. Garden advocates agree that more housing is essential, but claim there are hundreds of truly vacant lots in good locations that should be developed first, and that the housing being built on gardens is rarely affordable to most people who live in those communities. At the rally, speaker after speaker stressed that affordable housing and gardens are not mutually exclusive. "What we say to the Mayor, to Speaker Vallone, and to all of those who would like to be mayor: We want parks and gardens and housing, too," said Leslie Lowe, director the New York City Environmental Justice Alliance.

Last year, City Council members Kenneth Fisher and Adolfo Carrion introduced legislation that would establish a review process to protect community gardens and give gardens a way to seek permanent protection. But Council Speaker (and mayoral candidate) Peter Vallone has not yet scheduled hearings on the bill. On the state level, there has also been little action on a number of bills that would give the gardens more permanent protection or require a review process. None of the mayoral candidates have taken a position on the issue.

As for the gardens that were purchased in 1999, the usual work and politics of building a community-run green space continues. The New York Restoration Project, the organization founded by Bette Midler to clean up and maintain public spaces in New York City, will retain official ownership of its 41 gardens. Joseph Pupello, the organization's president, says the group has been getting familiar with its sites and their gardeners, as well as addressing basic liability issues, like sidewalk and fence repairs. While leaving the running of the spaces to the gardeners, it is working with them to increase the number of hours the gardens are open to the public and to build membership.

The Trust for Public Land, which helps preserve land but does not own or manage it, is working with gardeners to set up three non-profit land trusts, in the Bronx, Manhattan and Brooklyn/Queens, to ultimately assume the ownership of the 63 gardens. It is something that has not been done before on as large a scale in other cities, according to the trust's spokesperson, Susan Clark. In addition to handling liability and insurance issues, the trust is also assisting individual gardens in democratic decision-making, conflict resolution, and increasing membership and public access. Those involved are finding it a complex and time-consuming process as gardens with their own rules and decision-making style come together to create the more formal structure of the borough-wide trusts -- "a little bit of democracy in the making," as one gardener describes it.

Anne Sounds Off

In spite of opposition by environmental groups, the city's final environmental impact statement has given the green light for ball fields to be built in Bloomingdale Park on Staten Island. Construction could begin as early as May 17 or 18.

It is understandable why politicians and residents in south Staten Island are clamoring for ball fields on a 38-acre section of the 138-acre natural area. A highway edges one side of the park; typical Staten Island-style new houses, closely built together, crowd another. Ball fields and playing spaces are in short supply because of the area's rapid growth, and the developers of housing are not required to include these amenities for the families they attract.

Many people do not understand the benefits of protecting natural areas, especially wetlands: that they soak up rainwater to prevent flooding of houses and businesses downstream, harbor native plants, and provide habitat for animals and migrating birds. Most people also do not know that clearing se ctions of native vegetation provides a foothold for weedy species, allowing them to invade the parts of the forest that are left alone. They don't realize that some local and migrating bird species nest only in the interior forest habitat of large 100-plus acre forests -- few of which are left in the metropolitan area.

Bloomingdale Park was originally purchased with state environmental protection funds to protect the watershed of Lemon Creek, and ultimately the water quality in Raritan Bay, as well as to prevent flooding downstream. Moreover, it is completely forested, with hilly terrain, poorly draining soils, and many wet places as well as numerous areas with wetland "indicator" trees, whether or not the state has officially designated the areas as wetlands. Walking around the woods (and looking at the topographical maps), it is hard to imagine where a total of ten soccer and baseball fields and basketball and tennis courts would fit, and how they would stay dry once built. Putting ball fields into this forest will involve significantly altering the terrain and cutting thousands of trees (even if many of the oldest are left, as promised). The dirt road that divides the two sections of the park will be paved, and parking spaces put in. And as anyone who has ever seen this sort of construction project knows, no matter how many promises are made by the politicians, there will undoubtedly be a great deal of unintended damage as bulldozers punch their way into the ball field sites and drag out soil and felled trees.

A study done by a consultant to the parks department found that ball fields in Bloomingdale Woods would cost two to three times as much to build as similar fields on other nearby sites. The parks department initially opposed the plan, until Mayor Giuliani silenced it and transferred the project to the Department of Design and Construction. And with parks department budgets inadequate to keep up the city's existing parks, will these high-maintenance fields end up useless and decommissioned?

Unquestionably, Staten Island's children need more sports fields (as do the children in all of New York City!). But there are several flat, well-drained sites nearby that could be made into ball fields, just as quickly and for a lot less money -- if the political will was there. Why is the city rushing ahead to build on one of its few remaining natural areas?

Anne Schwartz is a freelance writer specializing in environmental issues. Previously, she was the editor of the Audubon Activist, a news journal for environmental action published by the National Audubon Society, and an editor at The New York Botanical Garden.

Increasingly frustrated after a decade of Parks Department budget cuts, greening groups have begun organizing to increase their political clout. In February, the 80 groups that make up the Brooklyn Park Advocates held a rally at Borough Hall, and introduced their petition drive, which has collected 10,000 signatures so far. The coalition has been meeting with City Council members and is broadening its base to others who have a stake in the parks, from business leaders to sports leagues. Similar efforts are starting in the other boroughs as well. Citywide, the Parks Council, a nonprofit parks advocacy group, is launching its Campaign for Parks and Recreation 2001 to increase the visibility of park issues during the forthcoming election. The council has already begun informational sessions with the candidates running for city office in September, and will launch a public education campaign next month.

The goal of all these efforts is to double the city's budget allocation for parks to $300,000,000 about 1 percent of the total city budget. This would allow the city to restore basic park services, said Richard Greene, the coordinator of Brooklyn Park Advocates. "We're not talking about anything esoteric or extravagant," he said, "We're talking about essential." He noted that there are four park rangers to patrol all 406 parks and playgrounds in Brooklyn. The coalition is calling for the return of the "parkies," the neighborhood-based employees who watched over their parks and ran recreation programs. In the 1970s, there were 2,000 people in the recreation division of the Parks department, most of them working in the community parks and playgrounds. Today there are just 100 recreation employees, who staff the city's 35 recreation centers. Also needed are more park rangers, say the park advocates, as well as more staff to coordinate volunteer and education efforts, and increased horticultural and forestry services.

Since 1986, the parks operating budget, which pays for maintenance and recreational programs, has declined almost 40 percent, while fulltime staff has dropped nearly 60 percent. The city has relied on privately funded groups, neighborhood volunteers, and WEP workers to fill the gap. Nevertheless, park advocates say, neighborhood park facilities and even expensive new capital renovations are not adequately maintained. For next year's budget, Mayor Guiliani again has proposed to cut the Parks department's allocation. (He has, however agreed to assign 350 new workers to help clean up city parks because the latest Mayor's Management Report showed a decline in maintenance of small parks and playgrounds due to the loss of 2,000 WEP workers.) In the usual budget game, the City Council restores most of the cuts, which merely leaves park funding at the level to which it was cut in the early 90s. Park advocates are working to get an actual increase over existing funding. For the longer term, advocates are targeting the September elections, in a non-partisan effort to educate candidates about the importance of public parks to the communities they seek to represent, and about the need for better public funding.

Anne Sounds Off

Six years ago, Bay Ridge residents rescued a neglected 4-acre section of city parkland, cleaning it up and planting gardens of roses, lilies, and native plants. Joan Regan, one of the volunteers, says she and her neighbors do all of the work in the garden, including mowing the lawns with a home lawnmower purchased through their fundraising efforts. The Parks department has been as helpful as it could be, Regan says, given its acute shortage of funds. But volunteers can only do so much. Sidewalk and fence repairs, security, basic maintenance -- these are all things the Parks department should be doing.

There are thousands of volunteers like Regan all over the city taking care of parks and playgrounds the city won't take care of itself. Nonprofit organizations like the Partnership for Parkshelp them out with information and small grants. But for all the volunteers' hard work, they can't replace the services that a first-rate parks department should provide. Leaving the care of parks to volunteers -- and depending on private fundraising -- has also worsened the inequalities between poor and rich neighborhoods. Central Park, which is funded and run by the private Central Parks Conservancy, has set a magnificent example of what a park can be. Private funding allows Central Park to hire 81 gardeners, while the rest of the system makes do with only 28. So neighborhoods with fewer resources have ended up with the most poorly maintained parks.

Virtually every segment of the community has a stake in the parks: educators, the police, businesses, sports groups, families, senior citizens. Yet somehow, we have lowered our expectations for the park system, and by our political inaction have tacitly accepted the premise that parks can be maintained by the private sector. The growing movement to organize advocacy for the parks is good news. If all those volunteers -- as well as other community members who use and benefit from the parks -- direct some of their incredible energy toward creating a new culture of public support for our parks, amazing things could happen. Anne Schwartz is a freelance writer specializing in environmental issues. Previously, she was the editor of the Audubon Activist, a news journal for environmental action published by the National Audubon Society, and an editor at The New York Botanical Garden. 

A passerby would never guess that the empty space on three sides of a highrise on Third Avenue is an officially designated public plaza. Part of it is a block-long staircase. The rest consists of two small vacant slabs, one sunken and one raised. Everything about them screams "keep out," from the lack of seating to a forlorn row of discarded furniture and appliances.

Nearby, at the entrance to a residential building called the Future, is another official public plaza. This one is strikingly different. There are granite benches, planters filled with trees and shrubs and flowers, a drinking fountain, trash receptacles, even a sign that welcomes the public to the space.

These two places, across the street from each other in the East Thirties, illustrate the problems and potential of a special type of open space in the city. There are 503 such privately-owned "public spaces" in 320 buildings in New York, all but a few in Manhattan, and they are coming under increasing scrutiny. They owe their existence to zoning laws, passed in 1961 and amended numerous times since, that allowed developers to build taller structures in exchange for creating and maintaining plazas, atriums, passageways, and other spaces, all supposedly open to the public. Together, they amount to 82 acres, one-tenth the size of Central Park. In exchange, developers were permitted to add on an extra 16 million square feet of floor space.

Until recently, there has been no comprehensive inventory of these public spaces, and no way of telling how many were successful -- or indeed, how many were even open to the public. "It is slowly entering the zeitgeist as something that really has to be looked at," said Jerold Kayden, a professor at Harvard's Graduate School of Design, who conducted an in-depth study of the city's so-called bonus plazas together with the Department of City Planning and the Municipal Art Society. The study, Privately Owned Public Space: The New York City Experience, looked at each and every one of the spaces (the list available online, listed by neighborhood). It concluded that 41 percent of these spaces were of marginal value, particularly those created before zoning law amendments in the mid-1970s. Moreover, it found that almost half of the buildings were not in compliance with legal requirements meant to make the spaces accessible and attractive to the public.

Critics of the current zoning resolution say that the plaza bonus, along with loopholes in the law like the one that allows the transfer of air rights from existing buildings, has encouraged the proliferation of apartment towers that have ruined the charm and continuity of many low-rise neighborhoods.

Last year, City Planning Commissioner Joseph Rose proposed a complete overhaul of the zoning code, a plan known as the Unified Bulk Program. Among many other things (such as setting the height of a building in keeping with the character of the neighborhood that surrounds it), the reforms would eliminate the plaza bonus for residential, but not commercial, districts.

Whether the zoning reform will succeed is, like so much of the city, up in the air. Many are predicting its demise because of lukewarm support from elected officials, and outright opposition from the real estate industry, although it is still moving ahead through the approval process; the City Planning Commission held a hearing last week. If the zoning reforms are approved, however, the city will be left without a mechanism for creating new open space in residential neighborhoods.

THE VALUE OF SMALL URBAN SPACES

The idea of creating small urban spaces in exchange for building rights was viewed as an innovation when it was first incorporated into the New York City zoning law passed in 1961. Since then, cities all over the world have seen the benefit of this trade-off.

Urban designers see these small spaces as providing something different than the larger parks, whose missions include recreation and an experience of nature. They are, first and foremost, places for people to gather and relax. William H. Whyte, in his book The Social Life of Small Urban Spaces, observed, "The best-used places are sociable places, with a higher proportion of couples than you find in less used places, more people in groups, more people meeting people, or exchanging goodbyes."

The most valuable public spaces create an atmosphere that invites people in, providing them, as Whyte wrote, with "people to watch, sun to bask in, trees to sit under, water to splash and listen to." Successful spaces often have food, drinking fountains, bathrooms, proximity to shops, as well as outdoor sculpture. Some of the best spaces are indoor atriums, usable year-round.

These bits and pieces of open space provide much-needed oases from the densely built Manhattan streetscape. They are places for office workers to eat their lunch and get a breath of air; for senior citizens to sit and socialize; for shoppers to take a break; and even for busy pedestrians to stop and talk on their cell phones. They make a city more livable.

AN ACCOUNTING OF PUBLIC SPACE

But how successful have the New York City public spaces been? The record is mixed, according to Privately Owned Public Space, which was the result of three and half years of researching dusty city files and visiting every single space. The project generated a database that will be kept up to date, and will eventually be available on the city planning department's web site.

Most New Yorkers would be surprised at some of the spaces included. How many people know that the landscaped semicircular driveways leading to East Side residential towers are bonus plazas? Extra-wide sidewalks and arcades at the edges of buildings also qualify. Certain gated plazas are supposed to be open to the public. The book has already begun to make people aware of the open space they are entitled to use.

The plaza incentive has been responsible for some of our best-used public spaces, like the Citigroup (formerly Citicorp) Building atrium and 590 Madison Avenue at 59th Street (still thought of as the IBM building). It has also produced some wonderful plazas, mini-parks really, in increasingly built-up residential neighborhoods.

The study found, however, that most of the privately owned public spaces were deficient in some way, especially those created from 1961 to 1975, before zoning amendments set higher standards. Some are forbidding open-air stretches of concrete, with no seating or other inviting amenities. These early plazas went hand in hand with the much-criticized "tower in the park" style of building. While it increased light and air, as it was intended to do, this style, exemplified by the succession of vast plazas along Sixth Avenue from 47th to 50th streets, ended up eliminating the "streetwall" and its storefronts that urban observers like William H. Whyte believed essential to a lively downtown.

But the study turned up numerous problems even with more recent plazas. Owners have removed chairs, plants and other amenities, locked gates to keep out the public, or turned plazas into parking areas or construction sites. A typical situation is "cafe creep," where restaurants appropriate public tables and chairs, making people who are not customers feel unwelcome. Very often, there are no signs informing the public that this is public space, though such signs are legally required.

WITH ENFORCEMENT

Many of the problems are the result of poor compliance with the law by building owners and lack of enforcement by the city. Already, now that information is available about places open to the public and the amenities legally specified for each, efforts at enforcement have increased.

At present there are almost 50 enforcement actions in various stages, including three lawsuits filed by the city. The lawsuits target three typical types of violations. At 40 Broad Street, a downtown office building, benches, planters, and trees were removed. One Worldwide Plaza, at 825 Eighth Avenue, is charged with letting restaurants take over public chairs and tables. A residential building, Parc East Tower at 240 East 27th Street, has locked a passageway leading through the middle of the block to a mini-park and waterfall.

There has been a marked increase in the number of calls reporting violations. "We think of it as an empowerment document," says Ellen Ryan of the Municipal Art Society, who directed the research project. Members of the public with complaints about specific spaces can contact the Department of Buildings, or the Department of City Planning.

The Municipal Art Society recently organized volunteers to visit 200 of the public spaces, to update the study. The society called it the "Holly Watch" in honor of William H. Whyte, who was known as Holly, and plans to do it every year

ZONING REFORM

The Unified Bulk Program proposed by Planning Commissioner Joseph Rose would eliminate the "as of right" plaza incentives in residential areas, so that developers would no longer automatically get to build extra floors in exchange for providing public space. The bonus plaza provision would be retained for residential buildings in commercial areas, by special permit, and for commercial and community buildings.

In a speech on zoning reform, Rose said, ". . . the concept of providing incentives to real estate developers to provide public open space on private properties produces largely unsatisfactory results. This is especially true in residential neighborhoods, despite repeated attempts at reform."

Many civic organizations and community boards are in favor of the reforms proposed by the Unified Bulk Program, including scrapping the residential plaza bonus. But some people argue that this is a drastic solution. In an Op-Ed piece in the New York Times, landscape architect Thomas Balsley wrote, "if the problem is poorly designed or maintained open space, surely the solution isn't to have no open space at all." Balsley, who designed a number of public plazas, says that with better design and enforcement, poorly functioning spaces "can be pulled from the ashes and turned into spectacular public amenities."

Dave Lutz of the Neighborhood Open Space Coalition, an advocate for open space, says "there should be public space tucked around" to make a city more livable and more aesthetically interesting. He says, "We're about to say than an experiment that has provided Manhattan with more public space since perhaps Central Park is a failure because some owners and the buildings department failed to meet their obligations." The spaces can always be improved, he says. "But if you don't have the space, you can't go back and do it right."

List and assessment of the privately owned public spaces, neighborhood by neighborhood (in pdf format): http://www.ci.nyc.ny.us/html/dcp/pdf/poptab.pdf

In the News: Playing hardball in Bloomingdale Woods. Also, Parks embattled by accusations of prejudice and arbitrary fees; court victory over a water filtration plant underneath Van Cortlandt Park.

(Feb '01) A plan to put ball fields in Bloomingdale Woods Park is rolling ahead, in spite of opposition by Staten Island's leading environmental group, Protectors of Pine Oak Woods. The project raises the question of whether it is acceptable to build recreational fields in a city park set aside for its natural values.

Many people see the dizzying pace of development in south Staten Island as the underlying problem. So much new housing has been built and continues to be built without any planning for recreation or other community needs. Staten Island is actually one of the most biological diverse areas in the state, and environmentalists are trying to preserve some of the last unprotected scraps. Yet there is such an acute shortage of playing fields that kids are on waiting lists for sports, and sports groups are clamoring for the use of existing open space.

The project's supporters say that only the park's eastern section would be affected -- just 38 of a total of 138 acres, with actual construction on 11.8 acres. Baseball and soccer fields, as well as tennis and basketball courts, would be fitted in among the hills, to use the most level spots, save 70 percent of the mature trees, and avoid the officially mapped wetlands scattered about, although significant earth-moving would also be required.

The environmentalists say that they want ball fields, too, but argue that other potential sites would be more appropriate and cost-effective. They say that the wetlands in this section of the park are actually much more extensive than the official maps show, and that the project will fragment a rare native-species forest, allowing invasive species to come in. They note that the City Department of Environmental Protection originally designated this section of the park for its Bluebelt stormwater management plan. They also insist that it doesn't make sense to put ball fields in a hilly, wet site with poorly draining clay soils, predicting problems with muddy and eroded fields. A feasibility study done for the Parks Department in 1999 determined that creating sports fields in Bloomingdale Park would cost four times more than putting those fields at several other sites, with higher maintenance costs as well.

The political pressure to build is huge: Borough President Guy Molinari, Councilman Stephen Fiala, and Mayor Guiliani are all lined up behind the $5.8 million project, along with many other local officials. The Staten Island Advance editorialized against Protectors, saying the group was unreasonable in its opposition to altering even a fraction of the park. The Parks department resisted the idea at first, but has kept its silence since. The city transferred the project to the Department of Design and Construction, which intends to finish the required Environmental Impact Study by March. The department is accepting written comments on the issue until February 21.

Embattled at Parks

Parks Commissioner Henry Stern has been under siege recently, criticized for setting arbitrary fees for events in the parks and for discriminatory promotional practices within the department. Many of the criticisms focus on free-market strategies he has used to compensate for budget cuts by the city. The parks chief, who has a reputation for politically incorrect comments, eccentric behavior, and an abrasive management style, has also been called one of the best parks commissioners the city has ever had. Most recently, City Council members attacked his policy of charging high fees to homeowners who want to cut down established street trees.

In the discrimination case, the federal Equal Employment Opportunity Commission found that there was "reasonable cause" to believe that the department had discriminated on the basis of race and national origins in the promotion and assignment of employees. The commission also said that the department had retaliated against three workers who complained of discrimination. Twenty black and Hispanic current and former "parkies" filed complaints with the commission, saying they were passed over, some of them numerous times, for promotions that were given to younger, less experienced white colleagues. They also charge that job locations were assigned along racial lines.

A lot of the resentment focuses on a program (called the "Class of" program) instituted by Stern in 1994 to recruit top college graduates the way businesses do. Participants don't follow union rules and typically work long hours for little pay, but are given a lot of responsibility and have access to top department officials. About 80 percent of the young people who have signed on have been white. Although most program participants leave after two years, some have stayed and been promoted to permanent senior jobs - some of which were never formally posted -- ahead of career employees.

The day after the discrimination finding was released, Commissioner Stern appeared before the City Council with 46 boxes of financial data subpoenaed in an inquiry into the way the parks department set fees for companies and charities to stage events in the parks. This long-standing parks practice came under fire last fall when the Catholic Museum balked at paying $20,000 to stage a fundraiser in a Harlem park.

A few days later, Stern was back before the council testifying against a bill that would substantially lower what the department could charge homeowners who cut down trees on their sidewalks. Homeowners must pay the cost of planting a certain number of saplings, depending on the size of the original tree. This issue comes up mostly when a tree needs to be removed for a construction project -- a homeowner can't cut down a healthy street tree just because he or she doesn't like it. The parks department has collected $1.5 million in replacement tree costs in the last seven years, with the money going into a special tree trust. Council Speaker Peter Vallone said the fees "appear to be another set of arbitrary charges imposed by the Parks department." At the hearing, Deputy Parks Commissioner Alan Moss said that the number of replacement saplings was calculated from an accepted forestry standard based on the diameter of the tree.

Filtration plant blocked at Van Cortlandt Park

A decision by the state's highest court has essentially killed the city's plan to build a water filtration plant in Van Cortlandt Park. The plant was the city's solution to a federal order to filter the part of the city's water supply that comes from the Croton watershed. The court affirmed that state law requires permission from the legislature to use a park for another purpose, which is unlikely given the wide opposition to the plant by Bronx legislators, including Assemblyman Jeffrey Dinowitz and State Senator Guy Velella, who represent the district the park is in.

There has been speculation that the new administration might allow the city to avoid filtration through new measures to protect the already heavily developed Croton watershed. The New York Times reported that Charles Sturcken, chief of staff of the city's Department of Environmental Protection, said that the agency would pursue every avenue with the federal government. But Environmental Protection Agency spokeswoman Mary Mears was quick to squelch that notion. "Our bottom line is that the Croton watershed must be filtered in order to protect public health," she was quoted as saying. "That bottom line isn't one that comes from any particular administration." If the filtration plant is not built soon, the city faces millions of dollars in fines.

Anne Schwartz is a freelance writer specializing in environmental issues. Previously, she was the editor of the Audubon Activist, a news journal for environmental action published by the National Audubon Society, and an editor at The New York Botanical Garden.

If anyplace is a paradise paved over into a parking lot, it is the Hudson shore of Manhattan. For two generations, parking apparently was the best and highest riverside use from the Battery to 59th Street, followed by homeless encampments and dumps.

Green is returning to the Hudson shore through efforts of the Hudson River Park Conservancy, its successor, the Hudson River Park Trust, and the community. By late 2001, recreation paths will connect Battery Park to Riverside Park. In Greenwich Village, the park has trees and a grassy lawn heavily used by sunbathers. Pier 40 houses a soccer field, batting cages and a cafe. On Piers 25/26, there is a day camp, a river research facility and a boathouse for human-powered craft. In season, the Trust sponsors movies and concerts.

Still, most of the plan for the Hudson River Park remains on paper. The existing park is far more asphalt gray than it is green. And residents fear delay, or worse, a sellout.

At the heart of the debate is the plan for capacious Pier 40. Proponents of P3 the Pier, Park & Playground Plan seek to convert the 1.2 million square foot site to open space and neighborhood recreation. The Pier now houses freight transshipment, police barricade storage, and over two thousand cars. P3 hopes to build 20.8 acres of ball fields, running paths, and sunbathing areas intermingled with artistsÅó» studios, limited concessions and parking. The $120 million plan is financed by parking revenue and an assumed $30 million contribution from the Trust. Parking revenues would also pay operating costs. Tobi Bergman, P3's President, extols the "self-sufficient" plan as "the best opportunity to provide Lower Manhattan with open space and recreation". Community Boards 1 and 2 have endorsed the plan.

The Trust, the entity in charge, has no comment on P3. It plans to broadly seek proposals for pier development and operation. According to Noreen Doyle, Trust spokesperson, the proposal process will seek "compatible uses, open space and revenue consistent with the Hudson River Park Act of 1998".

Arthur Schwartz, Chairman of both the Hudson River Park Advisory Council and CB2's Waterfront Committee knows how important this site is to the locals. Residents of Chelsea and the Village have surprisingly little parkland. For decades, residents have seen waterfront plans come and go. Schwartz senses the time is now. "If we get the ball rolling this year, there will be a Pier 40 park by 2005-6".

Reaching goals and getting balls rolling differ. Assemblywoman Deborah Glick is concerned about the eventual magnitude of commercial space and the allocation process for using park space. Schwartz carefully defined his goals emphasizing his hope for "the greatest amount" of park, the "least noxious" commercial uses and the "minimal necessary" revenue. It is these "details" that will define how green (or gray) the park will be and how much revenue Pier 40 will contribute to the Hudson River Park. Glick argues that Pier 40 and its local users should not have to make up park-wide shortfalls at the expense of local green.

Sounding Off

The Trust's proposal process may yield concepts that kick off revenues to sustain the three-mile park while kicking out neighborhood uses and green. It's about balance -- political balance between Mayoral and Gubernatorial appointees, financial balance between revenue needs and open space for park uses and a balance among users - local, visitors, passive, and active.

Achieving balance depends on two key steps. These are the words the Trust puts into its proposal documents and the guidelines the Trust adopts for evaluating the completed proposals. The choice of words and criteria will likely color all that follows.

Glick's concerns are about values, community values. When the trust talks revenues, they also talk values, many fear -- financial values. Green is a color of many shades. To some it is the color of money, to others it is the color of paradise.

The question remains whose values will choose the words and criteria that create a park.

(Feb '01) If anyplace is a paradise paved over into a parking lot, it is the Hudson shore of Manhattan. For two generations, parking apparently was the best and highest riverside use from the Battery to 59th Street, followed by homeless encampments and dumps.

Green is returning to the Hudson shore through efforts of the Hudson River Park Conservancy, its successor, the Hudson River Park Trust, and the community. By late 2001, recreation paths will connect Battery Park to Riverside Park. In Greenwich Village, the park has trees and a grassy lawn heavily used by sunbathers. Pier 40 houses a soccer field, batting cages and a cafe. On Piers 25/26, there is a day camp, a river research facility and a boathouse for human-powered craft. In season, the Trust sponsors movies and concerts.

Still, most of the plan for the Hudson River Park remains on paper. The existing park is far more asphalt gray than it is green. And residents fear delay, or worse, a sellout.

At the heart of the debate is the plan for capacious Pier 40. Proponents of P3 the Pier, Park & Playground Plan seek to convert the 1.2 million square foot site to open space and neighborhood recreation. The Pier now houses freight transshipment, police barricade storage, and over two thousand cars. P3 hopes to build 20.8 acres of ball fields, running paths, and sunbathing areas intermingled with artistsÅó» studios, limited concessions and parking. The $120 million plan is financed by parking revenue and an assumed $30 million contribution from the Trust. Parking revenues would also pay operating costs. Tobi Bergman, P3's President, extols the "self-sufficient" plan as "the best opportunity to provide Lower Manhattan with open space and recreation". Community Boards 1 and 2 have endorsed the plan.

The Trust, the entity in charge, has no comment on P3. It plans to broadly seek proposals for pier development and operation. According to Noreen Doyle, Trust spokesperson, the proposal process will seek "compatible uses, open space and revenue consistent with the Hudson River Park Act of 1998".

Arthur Schwartz, Chairman of both the Hudson River Park Advisory Council and CB2's Waterfront Committee knows how important this site is to the locals. Residents of Chelsea and the Village have surprisingly little parkland. For decades, residents have seen waterfront plans come and go. Schwartz senses the time is now. "If we get the ball rolling this year, there will be a Pier 40 park by 2005-6".

Reaching goals and getting balls rolling differ. Assemblywoman Deborah Glick is concerned about the eventual magnitude of commercial space and the allocation process for using park space. Schwartz carefully defined his goals emphasizing his hope for "the greatest amount" of park, the "least noxious" commercial uses and the "minimal necessary" revenue. It is these "details" that will define how green (or gray) the park will be and how much revenue Pier 40 will contribute to the Hudson River Park. Glick argues that Pier 40 and its local users should not have to make up park-wide shortfalls at the expense of local green.

Sounding Off

The Trust's proposal process may yield concepts that kick off revenues to sustain the three-mile park while kicking out neighborhood uses and green. It's about balance -- political balance between Mayoral and Gubernatorial appointees, financial balance between revenue needs and open space for park uses and a balance among users - local, visitors, passive, and active.

Achieving balance depends on two key steps. These are the words the Trust puts into its proposal documents and the guidelines the Trust adopts for evaluating the completed proposals. The choice of words and criteria will likely color all that follows.

Glick's concerns are about values, community values. When the trust talks revenues, they also talk values, many fear -- financial values. Green is a color of many shades. To some it is the color of money, to others it is the color of paradise.

The question remains whose values will choose the words and criteria that create a park.

Peter B. Fleischer, currently writing a book on the New York City waterfront, was formerly a transportation and environment policy advisor to New York City Mayors David Dinkins and Rudy Giuliani.