NYCHA community rejects de Blasio's blueprint for displacement

 

Queens Eagle

New York City Housing Authority residents and advocates released a letter Monday in opposition to a scheduled public comment period on a plan to reform NYCHA that the groups say has already been shut down by the community.

The public comment period for the Draft Significant Amendment is slated to open July 27, but advocates say that the proposed plan is based on the Blueprint Plan, which was withdrawn following opposition. The groups added that the public comment period was rushed and that residents are largely unaware of the details of the plan or now face barriers to participating in the hearing.

“It is disrespectful to NYCHA tenants and stakeholders, and does not show a faithful or genuine interest in tenant feedback or democratic participation by NYCHA,” organizers wrote.

The letter was signed by Save Section 9, Justice For All Coalition CAAAV Organizing Asian Communities, Sunrise NYC, Ojala Threads Inc., New York Communities for Change, Holmes-Isaac Coalition, Gun Hill Houses, St. Mary's Park Houses E.Roosevelt Resident Council and Brooklyn West Council of Presidents.

Save Section 9 Co-lead organizer Ramona Ferreyra, a resident of Mitchel Houses in the Bronx, said that organizers only heard about the hearing after learning of an email sent to local elected officials “so the average tenant doesn't know.”

“It's a sham,” she said. “For the last year we have made it clear we do not support Blueprint.”

“When the plan was born… we communicated to the federal monitor that we would not accept it; obviously the federal monitor and NYCHA leadership continued to ignore tenants and undermine our ability to participate in what should be a democratic process,” Ferreyra added. “They're ignoring the process, ignoring our right to participate in the process and most infuriating is that since December at every stage of the plan we said no.”

In addition to alleging limited access for technologically-challenged residents who would otherwise participate, they say that instead of drawing a plan that faced significant opposition, the housing authority should prioritize resident input — which they have allegedly failed to do.