Who knew politics could be such fun?
On Saturday I attended the Dazzle Me Forum, a chance for the citizens of Carroll Gardens to see and hear the candidates for the City Council in the 39th District at the Carroll Gardens Public Library.
I was really looking forward to the event because I loved the name of it and the spirit in which it was conceived. Some candidates joked that they might sing or tap dance. But nothing like that happened. Still, I was not disappointed.
"These
men all want to work for us as our representative on the NYC Council," the organizers wrote in their press release. "Do you have questions you would like to ask? Do you have concerns and
want to choose the best person for this job? Here is your
opportunity!!: They invited members of the community to submit questions.
Rita, one of the organizers and a member of Community for Respectful Development (CORD), introduced the forum and was one of the moderators. She said the idea was to think of the candidates as hungry job applicants and the community as the boss.
"If I'd known they were hungry I would have brought Italian food," one community member yelled out. Much laughter ensued.
On the small, make-shift stage in the basement of the library sat the five Democratic candidates and the Green candidate (who will face the winner of the democratic primary in the general election in November). Present were Gary Reilly, John Heyer, Josh Skaller, Bob Zuckerman, David Pechefsky (Green) and Brad Lander. They all wore Dazzle Me buttons and seemed in good spirits. On the wall behind them, there was a spiffy handmade sign created with purple magic markers and sparkles that said, Dazzle Me Forum. The questions submitted by members of the community were wrapped like fortune cookies and came out of an Easter basket with colorful dangling ribbons.
The format was interesting. The moderators asked each candidate an individual long question. The candidate was given about five minutes to respond. Then the others were able respond or add their thoughts in one minute or so. There was also time for audience questions.
Probably the most discussed issue was Superfund designation for the Gowanus, a subject near and dear to the Carroll Gardens neighborhood. Public Place, a large affordable housing project planned for the south bank of the Gowanus was also discussed in depth. Other hot issues included ULURP, the city's land use process; the MTA; ways to keep the community involved in the political process; bridge tolls; reform of the City Council and whether to accept campaign money from developers and lobbyists. Economic support of local businesses and industry was briefly touched on. Education was barely discussed at all.
Were there winners and losers? It's hard to say. It was a friendly event where all the candidates were able to shine. It was not contentious or nasty at all as most of the candidates are more or less in the same ballpark on most of the issues.
There are differences, of course: differences in approach, differences in style, personality and personal history. Perhaps the most contentious moment came after Josh Skaller criticized what he called a lack of community involvement in the development of Public Place and compared it to the Atlantic Yards project. Brad Lander, who has been involved in the development of Public Place, strongly disagreed and countered with "It was one of the best processes I've seen. Community members reviewed it. Several people in this room reviewed it It is night and day from Atlantic yards. Let's use the right examples as models."
That's about as contentious as things got. But there was a lot of subtext there, too. Skaller and Lander are often mentioned as the front runners but there are significant shades of difference between them in terms of personality and approach. Lander has a statesmanlike quality and is tremendously likable when he speaks about issues. Skaller, a community activist and former president of Central Brooklyn Independent Democrats, is more of an outsider/provocateur and probably the more rebellious and strident of the two. Unlike Lander, he has little experience actually working on grassroots community development and affordable housing. But from the outside in, he knows the subject well and has been endorsed by Develop Don't Destroy Brooklyn and Norman Sigal of the Civil Liberties Union.
I knew that Lander and Skaller would be the strong candidates to watch. But this is an impressive group and they all had something to offer. John Heyer was probably the biggest surprise. He is impressive in his ability to connect with an audience. Articulate, easy to listen to and engaging when he speaks, he had some members of the Carroll Gardens crowd in the palm of his hand quite a few times during the forum (a local boy, maybe he brought a lot of friends and family). He is probably the most conservative of the group. An assistant to Borough President Marty Markowitz, he manages to be both old school and new school Brooklyn. A fifth generation Carroll Gardener he honors the history and character of that neighborhood. On issues like Superfund, he's wary of the federal governments ability to actually pay for the project and come through in a timely manner. He wants the Gowanus cleaned quickly and seems to trust the developers to do the job.
The Green candidate, David Pechefsky, was also impressive and very likable. Knowledgeable on certain key issues, extremely smart, analytical and honest, he's the only candidate with any real experience in the City Council (he worked in the central office of the council for 10 years and has expertise in budget, economic and housing issues). When the subject turned to reform of the City Council David was able to intelligently stir up the conversation and contribute insight. I noticed that all of the candidates were really listening to him when he talked about some of the inherent problems in the CC. "There are structural problems with the Council," David told the audience. "The speaker has all the power and you have to contend with that." Perhaps the best exchange of the forum and a testament to how impressive David is on the subject of council reform, was when Lander told the crowd "If I'm elected I'm going to hire David to help me." David turned to him and said, "How much are you going to pay me?"
Pechefsky won the respect (and applause) of the crowd when he declined to speak about Public Place. "I know this isn't a great thing to say at a job interview but I haven't really done my homework on this and I need to study the issue more. I'd be happy for anyone to fill me in."
Bob Zuckerman, the executive director of the Gowanus Canal Community Development Corporation (GCCDC) and Gowanus Canal Conservancy (GCC), was asked by a member of the audience why that group honored the architect who is designing and developing Claret House on Court Street, an unpopular building project. That was a fairly uncomfortable moment for Zuckerman, who hedged by saying that they honored the architect for his work on Public Place and not Claret House. A member of Community Board 6, Zuckerman, while knowledgeable, is not
wonky when it comes to the brass tacks of housing, development and
transportation issues. He is, however, the candidate who likes to toss around creative, "out of the box" ideas. "When I'm elected I'm going to get a book mobile and I'll call it the Zuckmobile and every week I'll visit one of the neighborhoods in the district. It will be a mobile office."
"Will it sell stamps?" someone in the crowd shouted out.
"Stamps. That's a great idea." Zuckerman said.
"How about a mini-supermarket," someone else said.
"A mini-supermarket, too."
Gary Reilly, an attorney who has worked in environmental law, is a community activist with a passion for transportation and livable streets. He is not a forceful speaker but he does have a good command of the issues and is a very smart guy. There was not one moment in the forum when he seemed unprepared or unfamiliar — in detail — about the issues at hand. And he did show some fire when talking about not supporting Bloomberg's third term and transportation issues. While trusted and well-liked in Carroll Gardens, he was the least memorable of the group during the forum.
Discussion of Superfund status for the Gowanus was a real litmus test for the candidates. While all, of course, agree that the Gowanus Canal should be cleaned they don't all agree how it should get done. It is my impression that at this point in time NO ONE really knows what the EPA is promising yet and that's a key factor in all of this. I have the feeling that if the EPA promises the money in a timely manner, most of the candidates (except maybe Heyer) would support that.But that's a big if and it's a very complicated process.
Lander impressed me when he explained that the facts are still unclear and he's not sure what it all means yet. But about one thing he's sure: "Superfund without resources and without money is a lose lose," Lander told the crowd.
Skaller on the other hand seems ready to hand the process over to the EPA unequivocally as he doesn't trust the city or the developer to take care of it. He is adamant that the canal be cleaned before usage (residential or industrial) is decided. He believes that if usage is determined in advance there is an inherent conflict of interest that will seriously get in the way of getting the job done in the most thorough and safe way possible.
Heyer is definitely on the fence about the EPA. As someone who grew up next to the Canal, he wants it cleaned in the best and fastest way. Does he mean that it should be done by the city and developers? "I want it clean. I want it clean as soon as possible," he told the crowd.
He off-handedly expressed concern for the health hazards of living near the Gowanus Canal. "I've got all the fingers on my hands. But there have been three miscarriages in my family and quite a few members have succumbed to cancer."
This motivated a question later on from Tina, one of the organizers of CORD, who said, "Something you said really made me nervous. I live near the canal. Is anyone in the Health Department studying the health hazards of living near the canal?"
"No, I don't think so," Heyer answered.
There was a really interesting discussion about affordable housing and whether the candidates support ANY project that promises to have it.
Gary Reilly brought up the problem of developers building towers with promises of affordable housing "but in the fine print there are no promises." He also said that there is rarely any concern for infrastructure like fire, police, hospitals and schools.
Lander, who has devoted his life to affordable housing as the head of the Fifth Avenue Committee and currently working at the Pratt Center, believes that the community must be involved in the process to create affordable housing. "We must meet early and often. There's a need to preserve it and create it."
Skaller returned to his theme of holistic development and the need for community voices to be heard: "The road to affordable housing does not lie with luxury housing."
Pechefsky called the Atlantic Yards "the poster child for an awful project that was sold on the promise of affordable housing." He believes "that model needs to be revisited."
About transportation, the mild mannered (and pleasantly smart) Gary Reilly is at his most passionate. "Subway service cuts and fare hikes are the worst thing to happen to working people." He mentioned Robert Moses and the one thing he did right: "Making sure that there funds dedicated to maintaining infrastructure."
Zuckerman has a plan for residential parking fees. "It'll cost something like $10 a month to park in your neighborhood and the money will go to neighborhood jitneys that will get people from their homes to public transportation."
Pechefsky made the point that the $400 tax rebate promised to tax payers should have been put toward the MTA. "Now that could have been a real debate in the City Council. The city could have put that money (something like $250 million) into the MTA and it would have taken care of their problems."
Skaller, who believes that big projects like the Atlantic Yards and Yankee Stadium, are a big waste of city money, said that there is a "priority deficit" in the city and there's a need "to spread the pain around." He told the crowd: "The MTA is the heartbeat of the city and there should be no cuts to subways or buses. The city needs control of the MTA not politicians in Albany."
Heyer had strong feelings about this topic, too: "Does anyone trust the MTA? There's no oversight of the MTA. We pay enough in taxes, we should get public transportation," a sentence that got a big round of applause. "And about bridge tolls: only if you have money can you go to Manhattan in a car? Manhattan is not a luxury, it is one of the five boroughs."
About stimulus money for the Atlantic Yards, the candidates all agreed that it was a travesty. "It's absurd," Skaller stated forcefully. "The need for stimulus for small business is greater than any need for Atlantic Yards."
About small business and manufacturing in the district, Zuckerman thinks the Gowanus area should be turned into the first green business cooridor in New York City. "It's a perfect opportunity to create a place to manufacture products needed for green building, wind power, solar, etc."
And what to do about all the unfinished building projects, that in this economy, may go bankrupt and will remain unfinished for years to come. Ideas were bandied about.
Lander said that he'd recently met with the City Council and they're coming up with a plan about what to do with 23 Caton in Kensington, the residential tower that was fought by the community (and necessitated the closing of a horse stable there). He mentioned that there's a risk of overpaying developers. "But if you get the price right, it can be made into affordable housing."
Reilly concurred, "It's not right to pay someone out for their mistakes."
Probably the best question of all came from the community. "Are we just a bunch of whiners?"
Pechefsky tackled that one first and made the point that the 39th District does, in some basic areas, have smaller problems than other areas. "We have great schools where other communities have terrible ones." He thinks this enables the City Council representative to tackle some of the bigger, city-wide issues.
Heyer: "If a baby is whining there has to be a reason. It's the City Council member's job to listen to the voices of the community."
Reilly: "They call you a whiner only when they want to marginalize your opinion and your position
."
Skaller: "I am astounded when people say that. I thought that was the purpose of all of this."
And I must say, Lander had the best response of all: "It not whining, it's dazzling. What a great neighborhood we live in. The parks, the streets, we know our neighbors. We need to protect, defend and make our communities better."
Okay. Winners and losers. Hmmmm. I asked the elderly woman next to me if she had a favorite and she said, "I can't tell they're all so impressive." In another post I will be picking favorites and giving the candidates some advice…
