City Council Election 2021: Sara Lind Has Found Her Place and Wants to Make It Better

Sara Lind at the playground at PS 166 where her son goes to school.

By Carol Tannenhauser

Sara Lind likens herself to an immigrant on the Upper West Side. She came here seven years ago from a small, conservative town in Wisconsin. She had dreamed of moving to New York City since she was a child, and when she had her own children, the dream became reality. She and her family moved to the Upper West Side to be near his mother. It did not disappoint.

“When I came here it was the first time I ever felt like I was where I belonged, the first time I ever thought, this feels like home,” she said in a phone interview with WSR. She threw herself into the community, becoming a member of Community Board 7, chair of the Broadway Task Force, an elected parent leader at PS 166, among other volunteer endeavors.

Lind, 38, is the fourth candidate of six for the District 6 City Council seat, representing most of the UWS, who we are profiling. The primary is on June 22nd, and could well decide the race in this heavily Democratic district.

“I’m not alone,” Lind continued. “Census data shows that something like 40% of Upper West Siders weren’t born in New York State. They’re ‘immigrants’ from other countries and other parts of this country. They’re here for the opportunity the UWS provides, for this bustling, beautiful neighborhood. It’s an amazing place and I think it’s important to recognize that. But I wouldn’t be running for office if I thought everything was perfect as is. I’m running because I think there’s lots of things that could be better.”

West Side Rag: What would you do in your first 100 days?

Sara Lind: Well, there are the easy things. For example, there are some simple street improvements that can be made to make intersections safer. I’ve seen at the community board how things get stalled. I’d want to push the Department of Transportation (DOT) on moving that forward.

I also love the One Block initiative (a nonprofit enlisting neighborhood volunteers to each clean one street, also employing the homeless). How might I support them until we can fund DOT’s budget to make the neighborhood cleaner?

WSR: I like that you want to start, literally, at street level.

SL: Well, every New Yorker is a pedestrian; that is our shared experience of the city. So, how can we make it better, especially for kids, seniors, and those who are mobility-impaired?

WSR: That brings up the question of street homelessness, which was increasing in the neighborhood even before the pandemic.

SL: Certainly I’ve seen what people have described. I live on 86th and Amsterdam. I wanted to be here, surrounded by all different kinds of people. It bothers me morally to see people experiencing homelessness, but it doesn’t make me feel like they need to be out of my sight. We need to have more mental health treatment, more resources for them, because they need help!

WSR: You’ve been a vocal proponent of the shelter at The Lucerne, even as some Upper West Siders have said that it was implemented in a way that wasn’t good for the community or the men. As a council member, would you have handled the situation the way Councilmember Rosenthal did? If not, what would you have done differently?

SL:  Let’s set the record straight on whether this was good for the men. I believe it was, both in terms of safety during a public health crisis and the fact that dozens of the men have already been moved into permanent housing.

In terms of Councilmember Rosenthal, people need to understand this was a federal program paid for by FEMA that was sprung on her at the last minute with no warning. Given the extraordinary circumstances of a global pandemic, I think she did what she could to manage it.

WSR: What’s your approach to solving the problem of homelessness?

SL: The ideal solution is more housing that we can get people into in ways that work for them. Let’s be clear: the vast majority of people experiencing homelessness in the city are families, children, women escaping domestic violence, people with jobs who have been evicted or cannot find housing. It’s a housing problem. Street homelessness is different and relates to mental illness and drug addiction. Even then, there’s a lot of evidence that getting them into stable housing first and then providing treatment is better for their long-term ability to stay in housing and out of the shelter system.

WSR: Are all homeless people housing-ready?

SL: Yes, they are, but let me clarify: in a housing-first model, much of that housing does need to be supportive housing. So they’re still getting direct services and mental health and addiction treatment. The idea is to put them into a permanent place of their own rather than in shelters that are really destabilizing.

WSR: You also want to build affordable housing. Can you explain your plan?

SL: My plan is to rezone underutilized areas on the Upper West Side to create and preserve the affordable housing we need. I would work with a group of community stakeholders to form a Community Land Trust to ultimately control affordable portions of the new buildings to ensure the homes are permanently affordable, well managed, and to hold developers accountable. The rezoning would also include implementation of the infrastructure we need now — like new schools and enhanced transit options — and going forward, like green roofs and other sustainable, energy saving measures.

WSR: Retail vacancies?

SL: I’m focused on Broadway right now. I know that there are empty storefronts and small businesses struggling all around the district, but I think Broadway is the epicenter of our commercial crisis. I have a detailed plan to make Broadway between 59th and 110th Street a 21st Century thoroughfare that is safe, accessible, and prosperous. This plan is completely within reach. We’ve seen success with plans like this across the city. It’s time to reimagine Broadway from blocks of empty storefronts and blight to a grand boulevard with bustling stores, attractions, and foot traffic.

WSR: Would revitalizing Broadway include closing all personal vehicle traffic to that avenue?

SL: I envision there would be local automobile access, but this plan is a proposal to be considered by the community for input.

WSR: How do you feel about tall buildings?

SL: I actually love tall buildings. I love the skyline. It’s a symbol of human progress. There’s something hopeful about reaching up to the sky. I’m not opposed to tall buildings, but they should take into consideration context and include affordable housing. I don’t think they should be luxury condos with only 50 people living in them.

WSR: What do you think of the buildings at 200 Amsterdam and 50 West 66th Street? Are the people fighting them “NIMBYs”?

SL:  I’ve been called a NIMBY and a YIMBY within a 24-hour period of time — so who knows? For me, the problem with these buildings is that there’s no affordable housing.

WSR: What’s your take on the ending of testing for the Gifted & Talented Program in NYC public schools?

SL: The model we use at PS 166, my son’s school, is called ‘differentiated instruction.’ You have a mixed classroom. Some kids need extra help and some need more challenge. The teachers break them into small groups and give extra help to some and more challenges to others. That, essentially, provides a gifted and talented option in every classroom, and that’s what I believe we should be doing. The problem with the G & T program now is that there aren’t enough seats, so there are thousands of kids who should be getting that extra challenge and they’re not.

WSR: What’s your position on defunding the police?

SL:  Some people say, “Oh, Sara’s anti police” and I just want to make it clear that that is not true. I have enormous respect for our police officers. The thing is, we’ve been asking them to do a lot; it shouldn’t all fall on them. For example, police shouldn’t be social workers. I have called for the police budget to be rolled back to 2010 levels, a time we can recall as safe. Any budget cuts would be commensurate with taking some of that responsibility away, and then it would need to be reinvested into other things that will help prevent crime, like job training programs for youth, and making sure our schools are really good and have guidance counselors, so they can identify kids with problems before things get too bad.

WSR: What sets you apart?

SL: One of the things we haven’t talked about is climate change and what we’re doing to take that on. The people of my generation and younger really do see climate change as an existential threat that we need to be taking very seriously and taking very bold action on — like housing, for example, retrofitting or building new housing that’s super sustainable, and focusing on making sure we have excellent public transit so people don’t have to use private vehicles.

WSR: What do we need to know about ranked-choice voting (RCV) and your alliance with Jeffrey Omura?

SL: All voters need to understand is that they should rank the candidates in their order of preference. You can rank up to five, but you don’t have to. As far as Jeffrey, it’s a good strategy to use because we share values and are aligned on a lot of things, so if not me, I think he’d make a great councilmember. That’s basically what I tell my supporters: rank me first and rank Jeffrey second, and he does the same for me.

WSR: Your thoughts on running against Gale Brewer?

SL: I have enormous respect for Gale and what she’s done for the neighborhood and the city. I think we have a lot in common. There are many policy issues we agree on, and we’re both relatively progressive Democrats. But I think the district is ready for new leadership and I have a vision of bringing it into the 21st Century. Gale is a formidable competitor with a lot of experience. No matter what, I’m sure she would continue to serve the city in some capacity, because that’s who she is and that’s her passion. I’m just going to run my race.

Lind announced on Monday that she has received the endorsement of Melissa Mark-Viverito, the former Speaker of the City Council. Lind was the chair of 21 in ‘21, an organization co-founded by Mark-Viverito, to elect 21 women city council members in 2021.

This interview was condensed and edited for clarity.

Click on their names to read WSR’s profiles of other candidates: Gale Brewer, Maria Danzilo, and David Gold.

Next: Jeffrey Omura.

NEWS | 77 comments | permalink
    1. Otis says:

      She’s saying nothing. She’s not taking any stances and she’s straddling the fence on contentious issues facing the neighborhood.

      And all this nonsense about creating “affordable housing” and providing housing for the homeless is boiler plate liberal nonsense we’ve all heard hundreds of times before.

      We need leaders who are not afraid to take a stance.

      • MAD says:

        Agree, Otis. Just a lot of talk. She is banking on all her “ideas” to get her elected. We don’t need more of this.

    2. UWSTaxPayer says:

      I saw the graph on the Lucerne … an immediate No Thanks.

      • Nevets K says:

        Whoever can move the Citibike docking stations off Riverside Drive at 91st Street and in the 80s and onto the really wide walkway that parallels the park gets my vote — and probably the vote of many other middle class reverse car commuters, including teachers like myself and hospital workers. Bikes are fine, but parking places are needed too. Moving the bike racks onto the walkway will ease some of the stress by restoring some spaces. (And getting rid of that redundant protected electric bike lane along CPW will do even more to restore necessary balance.)

        • Ponald J. Plump says:

          Lol what? Move the bike docks to make 3 parking spaces? Every day all of the bikes at 91st are used. Also multiple people were killed on CPW which is why that bike lane exists.

          • Nevets K says:

            Not three parking spaces, dozens.
            The bikes aren’t always used; the number of bikes placed there daily by the Citibike van varies widely. Don’t be fooled by those “empty docks.”
            Moreover, the docking stations CAN BE MOVED, harming no one, helping some.
            And, hate to say it, but more protected electric bike lanes will encourage more people to ride bicycles in a crowded, competitive congested city. This will inevitably lead to the deaths of more bicyclists.
            Soon the fad will end. But the damage will have been done.

            • CarAndBikeOwner says:

              “the fad will end” you mean the climate crisis fad? “protected electric bike lanes will lead …to the deaths of more bicyclists”??? cycling as a means of transport in much of the world is far from a fad. I have a car and struggle to find a space…I also take citibike everywhere I can…so I appreciate the struggle on both sides. But it’s time to evolve…

              As a side note, supporting bike lanes doesn’t make one progressive. There’s no direct correlation between cycling and politics.

            • Dave says:

              I can’t stand those citi bike stations and the way they take up dozens of spots when they could be placed on sidewalks. Drivers always being punished and spots being permanently taken for new bike lanes, etc. car owners are not millionaires who can pay 1k per month for a garage.

            • chuck d says:

              The fad will end. By that I mean, owning a car that only you drive and park. Soon some type of automated Uber will do it all for you. There will be no need for street parking.

            • Kevin says:

              I am happy to send you video of cars never moving in front of my apartment and line it up to Citi Bikes getting checked in and out every day. The docks belong in the street – people over the age of 12 are not allowed to ride on the sidewalk, so they don’t belong there unless there is no alternative. Frankly, the city should be looking at creating a CPW style bike lane on Riverside Drive on the park side.

              Also what electric bike lane on CPW? Those don’t exist in NYC – have no idea what you’re talking about.

            • Nevets K says:

              Citibike docking stations CAN be moved off Riverside Drive and onto the wide adjoining walkway, as currently done on the wide walkway along Central Park and Fifth Avenue.
              Second major point: Nearly all existing protected electric bike lines in Manhattan run parallel to, or directly above, EXISTING BUS AND SUBWAY LINES!
              So let’s stop with the nonsense about cutting down on pollution by riding bikes in Manhattan. The buses and subways will continue to run, though slightly less full, until the next rainy, snowy day. It’s just that some people in Manhattan PREFER riding bikes! But, unlike many reverse commuters who depend on their cars, including teachers and hospital workers, these Manhattan bike riders have a CHOICE!

    3. JurgenVest123 says:

      She’s running “because there’s lots of things that could be better.”

    4. Concerned UWSMom says:

      OMG a HARD NO on this one…After reading this I am not only going to vote for Maria Danzilo but donate and volunteer for her, too. If most homeless are women escaping domestic violence and families, etc. why are we ground zero for drug-addicted and mentally ill men? No cars on broadway? Her ideas on police budgeting?? NOPE.

      • Brandon says:

        Maria Danzilo is a joke. Lind has actual proposals, not half-baked plans to think about developing proposals.

        If you want cars, cops, and no homeless in sight, move to the suburbs, “Concerned” UWS mom.

    5. Bob Lamm says:

      Great comments about the Lucerne. I respect every politician who supports those men and everyone in our neighborhood who does.

    6. Will says:

      You all claim you want someone moderate, well here she is. You’re not going to get your way on “quality of life” so why not come to the table and negotiate something in the middle?

    7. Bruce Bernstein says:

      I was impressed. And anyone who claims Sarah Lind is “saying nothing” is either biased or didn’t read the interview very carefully. She gave very detailed responses, especially on homelessness.

      i wish she had been asked about school desegregation as a whole, particularly the screening of middle schools in the district. The latter has more to do with ongoing school segregation than the G&T programs, which are much smaller in numbers. But i liked her answer on G&T. testing kids as age 4 and then segregating them is ludicrous.

      • Leon says:

        Segregation is a loaded word to describe the current situation. There is not malicious intent. If anything, it is segregation of intellectual ability. Parents want their children to be with children with similar academic profiles – they don’t care about race, gender, class, etc.

        It will be interesting to see how the largely randomized MS process this year turns out. It is sad that current 5th graders are being used as guinea pigs during a pandemic, which is stressful enough. I think despite eliminating screens, schools will end up being less diverse than they were.

        • JSW0 says:

          It is not separation of intellectual ability; it is separation of intellectual preparedness. Some children enjoy the benefits of a wealthier and more highly educated family background. How do you protect those important and societally valuable benefits without “segregating” out those who don’t have those advantages? Very difficult problem. The tracking the candidate mentions seems highly problematic to me – students who aren’t given extra challenges will suffer from loss of esteem, and teachers will be hopelessly overburdened.

          • UWS is the Best says:

            “Some children enjoy the benefits of a wealthier and more highly educated family background.”

            Maybe some but it has been well documented over and over again that specialized HS are disproportionately attended by Asians, most of whom are immigrants living well below the poverty line.

            Race is not a metric used for many of these screened middle and high schools – test scores, grades and attendance records are. The resulting racial make up is a result of other causes. And those causes are what we should be focused on correcting.

        • Bruce Bernstein says:

          Reply to Leon:

          “segregation” is an accurate word, and it’s a good word because it causes people to deal with the reality that’s been created. yes, created: it didn’t happen naturally.

          it is appalling to describe 5th graders who will attend integrated schools and integrated classrooms as “guinea pigs”. Seriously? do you think this is some sort of experiment? and schools with classrooms of mixed learning levels are the norms all over the country, including in most areas of NYC and the NY suburbs.

          Brown v. Board was 1954. Isn’t it embarrassing that we are still talking about this?

        • chuck d says:

          My response keeps getting rejected, but this comment is so, so indicative of the problem. “Segregation is a loaded word to describe the current situation. There is not malicious intent….”

          It is as though you are saying that segregation isn’t segregation when it happens as a result of parents wanting to provide something for their children. This is exactly the problem.

    8. NoThanks says:

      Hard pass, like everyone else just empty promises no actual plan. Not to mention has only been here 7 years, I have socks older than that

      • Anyone who receives an endorsement from Melissa Mark-Vivereto is a no-go as far as I’m concerned.

      • Michella Robbins says:

        How did she even get on CB7 just shortly after immigrating here from Wisconsin? If she wins, we move.

        • Bruce Bernstein says:

          reply to Michella Robbins:

          the local councilperson seems to have an immense amount of influence on your life decisions.

    9. nyc10023 says:

      I have had three children in an oversubscribed, gen ed UWS K-5 school. Differentiated instruction is what the DOE claims to offer to all children, in all schools. Given my experience of 16 classrooms (and 10+ teachers), I have yet to experience this “differentiated” instruction that Sara speaks about with such authority. It doesn’t happen. Never seen it, never heard anyone talk about it other than DOE officials.

      • UWS Voter says:

        I support the “differentiated” classroom strategy, but this is a perspective that should be heard. I went to a high school where such a strategy did work for many students and parents–but that school was not in NYC.

    10. Juan says:

      For many of the moderate Democrats in the neighborhood (and yes, we are also Democrats, so stop calling us otherwise – we manage to both have a social conscience but also be pragmatic), the term “progressive” makes her an immediate non-starter. She has some decent ideas but aligning herself with that mentality is not a positive.

    11. nemo paradise says:

      “I have called for the police budget to be rolled back to 2010 levels, a time we can recall as safe.”

      Why stop there? We could roll them back to 1955 levels, when the city was even safer.

      • LongtimeNYer says:

        By my count, since Lind has been in NYC seven years, 2010 was four years before she arrived.

    12. Ben David says:

      If you want to see crime continue to rise on the UWS, then by all means vote for Sara Lind.
      She favors cutting the NYPD budget. Her brilliant solution to muggings, stabbings, shootings, etc:”making sure our schools are really good and have guidance counselors … ”
      If you want to see less police on our streets and trains, vote for Sara!

    13. UWSWasp says:

      Everything she said sounds good to me. She’s got my vote!!

    14. UWS Voter says:

      Go Sara. You’ve likely got my vote. Great answer on the mixed alternative to the gifted program, especially.

      Unsolicited advice, for whatever it’s worth: I agree with you about pedestrianizing Broadway, but this is a long-term goal and I think you need to win some hearts and minds first. In a similar vein, I also recommend not starting interviews with talking at such length about being an outsider. Focus on your smart, detailed approaches to real-life issues like education and zoning; I think you could bring some people over to your side. Rooting for you!

      • UWS Voter says:

        Oh–and not mansplaining! I’m a woman, and not one with any political experience either. So take my advice with as many grains of salt as you feel is appropriate. 🙂

      • Steve.G says:

        Her idea to cut the police budget to 2010 levels, while increasing commensurate support services is laughable.
        Her time on the transportation committee of CB 7 was as a rubber stamp for transportation alternatives. Broadway having local auto access and the community then decides? How can we believe her after her voting record on CB 7? I can’t wait to vote,……for anyone else.

    15. Buddy M says:

      What Sara Lind isn’t saying is that she is pushing an anti-car agenda at the behest, and with the financial backing, of a wealthy bike lover. She’s soft pedaling that now that she’s openly a candidate. But those of us who saw the way in which she spoke to and treated others with a different point of view at Community Board meetings were appalled at her relentless insistence on her preferences and her dismissal of others.

    16. Concerned Small Business Owner says:

      As a small business owner ON BROADWAY, she is absolutely not helpful. The troubling (not all) SRO and street individuals who are aggressive are hurting our businesses. ASK ANY of us. She is totally against the police as she demonstrated during a viral Community Board 7 meeting and publicly bashed the police and belittled another domestic violence survivor (look it up). The 24th precinct are the ONLY ones helping us. Laws on loitering and the mentally ill need to change, they are ruining the businesses and neighborhood. You don’t know until you open a business, ask us.

      • Lisa says:

        “Laws on loitering and the mentally ill need to change, they are ruining the businesses and neighborhood.” 100% agree and I will not apologize for having high standards for civic behavior. We did not used to tolerate this behavior, and we do not have to accept it now. The candidate who has the courage to voice this will win, because it’s the single most important issue in the election, and the one people are most heavily criticized for supporting.

      • Paul says:

        She thinks that more food trucks and open sitting areas along Broadway will help restaurants.

        That’s an amazingly bizarre take.

    17. David K says:

      “I’ve been called a NIMBY and a YIMBY within a 24-hour period of time — so who knows?” — this is extreme dishonesty. In fact, Sara is the preferred candidate for Open NY for All, the aggressive developers front for real estate interests.

    18. 40 year UWS resident says:

      I have attended many community board meetings and have heard Sara Lind speak. She hasn’t listened to our community concerns . She, like Rosenthal, talk about the homeless and seem to turn a deaf to our upset over the drugs, crimes, public lewdness, predatory behavior. We can’t go out at night. We are afraid. Advocate for the elderly, the families and the residents of the UWS. We can’t just move. We are all sympathetic to the homeless population but they have not been truly served (note the # if police cars and ambulances in front of the Lucerne almost daily). History has shown housing addicts and mentally ill in hotels fail the community and the homeless e.g., UWS in the 70s.
      I also hope that New York will come back and tourism will come back . The city desperately needs the revenue. Hopefully the hotels will again be alive with out of towners- vital to the revival of our city especially as many taxpayers are moving away.

      • Brandon says:

        Everything about our current system locally and nationally is geared to favor the elderly. It’s the young and working-age people who could really use the advocacy.

        • Paul says:

          Everyone who’s lucky enough will reach an age where a fall at speed results in a broken bone.

          With luck, you will get there too.

          Where will you exile yourself?

          • Brandon says:

            Regressive policies that prioritize the interests of generationally wealthy savers (i.e. the elderly) all but guarantee that we younger generations will be forced to exile ourselves from the UWS long before we reach that happy age where our bones embrittle and the streets start to teem with imaginary boogeymen.

      • Peter says:

        Is tourism coming back? Probably not. All those people from the flyover states who voted for Trump are likely never to return. They will visit Florida and Texas and the Carolinas etc. They arent coming here. The mayor and city council dont care about public safety No bail, catch and release, closing rikers. Its going to get much worse before enough people are going to vote for someone who will do something. It may be too late.

        • Paul says:

          Yes, tourism will come back. It will take time but it will happen.

          Your characterization of the people in the flyover states is absurdly ignorant, by the way. People who come to NYC come because of culture and dynamism, and there are plenty of people, in every state, who are attracted to what NY has to offer.

          The difference between a “red” and a “blue” state is, in most cases, no more than 10 – 15% of the population of each.

    19. Michella Robbins says:

      I believe well intentioned, but, like much of the radical liberal progressive scene these days, a bit too naive and too idealistic. She has called for defunding the police on many occasions and given the increase in crime and shootings, a defund is a no no. She has called for increasing taxes on the wealthy, which given the upper middle class demographic of the UWS, makes many wonder why she believes she represents us. The fact of the matter is that this candidate looks at the UWS not as a beautiful finished object with a rich history, but as an empty canvass awaiting her artful touch—her touch being a dose of affordable housing on every corner, more shelters, more havens, more social services, more nonprofits. If you’re looking to live a peaceful life here with little government intrusion look elsewhere. This is a Socialist, big government candidate.

    20. Sue says:

      What space on the UWS us “underutilized “? Property is scarce and expensive.What about the concept of “fair share?” There are 5 boroughs. The Dept. of Buildings make it difficult to construct anything. My husband has been involved in building affordable housing in Brooklyn-lovely but the amount of red tape and delays were unbelievable. Many developers are going out of the city-less of a headache and projects are doable and also provide nice living space for a range of diverse and socio-economic groups. And local governments are welcoming these projects.
      We all need affordable housing- a city- wide issue. My grown children can’t afford to live on the UWS of where they grew up.
      We also need to help our own neighbors and repair all the issues with NYCHA and Section 8 houses in our district. They are in dire shape and require high cost maintenance. The complaints this winter at the community board meetings were heartbreaking. Why not start by fixing what’s broken in our community and address those needs- the conditions are shameful and dangerous (no heat, broken elevators, etc.). Again, these are our neighbors.
      You allude to different supportive housing-some with addiction and mental health services included on site.Hotels are not suited for this. Small group homes in more affordable less populated areas would help immensely.
      The city is verging on bankruptcy and many taxpayers are moving out.

      • Jordan says:

        Here are the areas Sara is referring to for building affordable housing:

        • Paul says:

          Thank you for posting this. What she’s proposing would require the City to usurp property held by private owners and would likely cost a billion dollars just to acquire the land.
          The litigation to get these parcels would last longer than a councilperson’s two terms.

          • Boris says:

            No property would be usurped, the rezoning is designed to encourage the private property owners to redevelop their property or sell it to someone who will. As you pointed out, property on the upper west side is very expensive, which means that one can use market rate units to cross-subsidize affordable units, at no cost to the taxpayer. This is exactly what the city should be doing and Sara proposing it is one of the many reasons she has my vote. Sara is proposing actual solutions to the neighborhoods problems, not just complaining or exporting the problems to poorer neighborhoods.

            • Paul says:

              The northernmost parcel shown on website is part of the property Disney sold to Silverstein for over a billion. Why do you think the buyer paid so much? Answer, the right to build under the zoning in effect.

              She’d turn the parcel from a luxury high rise (as SHE depicts) to something much smaller with lots of affordable.
              On what planet is that not a usurpation?

    21. David Zelman says:

      I am also a candidate for the district 6 Council. I would like your endorsement and to do that you need to hear why. Please do not forget to include me in this series.


    22. brandonsos says:

      Sara is our best chance to defeat Gale Brewer!

    23. Chocolate sugar queen says:

      We need parking! Get the cars off the street by converting huge EMPTY stores with basements ( Michael’s)into high rise PARKING!!! MAKE IT CHEAP AND PEOPLE WILL PARK . More jobs to run garages and less congestion! Seriously it could be done all over the city ! Those huge office buildings can become parking garages where business has fled for the hills!!! A win win for real estate!!

    24. Ittai Hershman says:

      The incessant whining about parking in these comments got me to look it up. Only 24% of Upper West Siders owns a car in the city.

      For those of you who are so wedded to cars that it drives all your political choices, maybe you ought to consider a suburb — they’re designed for cars. Just sayin’,

      • Orlando says:

        24% is a significant number. A good amount of that 24% also votes and tends to live either on the UWS or somewhere else in the NYC area a lot longer than many of the 76% of people who don’t own cars. That 24% of people can vote to keep Gale Brewer in office, as she’s someone who will listen to car drivers more than Lind would.

    25. Elder says:

      Jordan- I clicked on your link. The land you referred to may be “underutilized” but the price per square foot fir development and land purchase is astronomical.
      Replacing Brewer with Lind is like going from the frying pan to the fire. I appreciate her idealism but she has no understanding of economics or the history of the UWS in terms of solutions that have been tried and failed re: homeless back in the 70s.
      I agree that she has “turned a deaf ear to her constituents “ who have been long term, taxpayers if the UWS many of whom are facing their own challenges.

    26. Ian Alterman says:

      Based on some of the comments here, all I can say is that it’s a good thing that Republicans, even when combined with conservative Democrats, only make up 15% of the population of the UWS, and so thankfully will never elect someone who shares their selfish, regressive and often hateful views.

      • dakhaleezal92 says:

        The amount of write in votes the 67th and 69th Assembly district got last year with the Safer Streets group writing in Adam Herbst for Assembly is about the maximum that Maria Danzilo can get. This is pretty much a primary election between Sara Lind and Gale Brewer at this point because the only way Gale Brewer gets defeated is if Lind cuts into her vote share either through 1st choice votes or 2nd choice votes.

      • dakhaleezal92 says:

        Ironically, if anything that 15% that would vote for Maria Danzilo takes away votes that Gale Brewer would have gotten and actually “spoils” the election to help Lind win.

        • UWSishome says:

          Ironically, if anything that 15% that would vote for Maria Danzilo takes away votes that Gale Brewer would have gotten and actually “spoils” the election to help Lind win.

          This is exactly the type of thought that is going to elect the wrong person. Maria Danzilo can certainly win. These are difficult times for NYC. Safety has always been important, but it hasn’t been an issue like it is now for many years. People see it. You walk around and you see it. Maria Danzilo, up until 3 weeks ago, wasn’t even a thought in my head. Now she’s the only solution to this mess.
          Lind wants to reduce the amount of money going to the police?!? Really? How is anyone for that? How can you live on the UWS, and feel safe right now. Tell me. 5 years ago I could walk around anywhere I wanted at 9pm and I’d feel safe. Same for my kids. Now it’s different. It shouldn’t feel this way. The fact that none of the other candidates are even addressing this just shows that Danzilo can win.

          • Jay C says:

            Nope, Danzillo can’t win any more than Trump could have won New York’s Electoral votes in the presidential race. Fortunately for folks like Ms Lind who I support, and the vulnerable people scapegoated and unfairly vilified by proponents of reactionary Giuliani style measures, such closed hearts and closed minds are a distinct minority in the district.

            • dakhaleezal92 says:

              Maria Danzilo’s support on the UWS is more or less capped at the number of people who voted for Adam Herbst in 2020. Based on comments from the safer streets group, those people don’t like Gale Brewer either & probably won’t be writing in second choice votes. Whereas Lind supports might vote Brewer as a 2nd/3rd choice and Brewer supporters might vote Lind as a 2nd/3rd choice. Danzilo may stop any one candidate from getting 50% which will lead to either Brewer or Lind winning because of ranked choice voting.

            • 78thstreetlady says:

              Closed hearts and closed minds? Please. I’ve lived on the upper west side longer than Sarah Lind has been alive. I’ve watched this city change directions so many times it would make your head spin.
              I voted for Biden, but I’m certainly not voting for Sarah Lind. Closed hearts and closed minds? I’ve seen the videos of kids playing with chalk outside of the Lucerne. It’s cute and tugs on the heart strings. But I’m not easily fooled. Those parents wouldn’t trust any of those kids 20 feet from that hotel if it wasn’t made for some ply luxury stunt. I’ve stood in line at Target and was told by the young cashier that I should leave because the man that came in two days ago and robbed the place was back. This was after he was arrested!!! Open hearts and open minds.
              If Maria Danzilo can get on the ballot, she can win. Rudolph Giuliani, now quite a laughing stock, cleaned this city up. He made it difficult to be a criminal. Now it’s too easy. Sarah Lind has the right answers to the wrong questions. Gale Brewer 2.0. Thankfully, a lot of New Yorkers see it.
              Also, I don’t even ride the bus, I’m a subway gal since 1949. This is the first time since the 70’s where I’ve felt not safe. Do you think I care about bus lanes? Open your mind to that please.

            • Stuman86 says:

              I completely disagree. If Danzilo gets on the ballot, she can win. She would have my vote. And I know a lot of people that feel the way I do.
              She can win BECAUSE she’s so much different than the other candidates running.
              Sara Lind and Gale Brewer are actually quite similar, or at least appear to be that way in paper. Neither one of them address the safety issues that are important to a lot of New Yorkers. I think Sara and Gale will split a lot of votes.
              Maria Danzilo can win. She just needs to get on the ballot.

            • dakhaleezal92 says:

              In 2013, 28,749 votes were cast in the CD6 primary election. Adam Herbst got 1,492 write in votes in the 67 and 69 AD during the 2020 GENERAL election and Curtis Sliwa got 76 write in votes in the 67 AD in the 2020 GENERAL election. That’s 1,567 votes. Assuming Maria Danzilo gets the same amount of votes in the CD6 primary or builds on that share slightly to about 2,000 or so votes, based on 2013 turnout, the fact that we have RCV, the fact that many Maria supports probably won’t be ranking other candidates. Lind, Omura, Brewer, Gold supporters probably will be ranking other candidates. This vote share is enough to force RCV in a multiple candidate field, which helps Gale Brewer or Sara Lind win, but not enough for Maria to win. I’ve worked campaigns and elections are a numbers game.

    27. ninjaqq says:

      Thank you for the comment, the article you wrote was very good and very useful, I wish you a long life

      • RyanWhitCFA says:

        Was Herbst on the ballot? I dont even know who Herbst is (whoops), but I am following Maria Danzilo amd that’s only from finding out about her two weeks ago at a brunch.
        I am registered, but I haven’t cared much until this election.
        I really don’t like the direction this city is taking, and I think a lot of people agree. Danzilo makes the most sense to me.
        Was Herbst on the actual ballot? If Danzilo gets on the ballot you still feel like she can’t win?
        Wanted to get your thoughts. Thanks!

        • dakhaleezal92 says:

          Herbst was a write in candidate, but the UWS is a politically involved area and UWS for Safer Streets was pushing people to write in ballots. In the 2013 open primary, CD6 got 28,749 total votes, the highest in the city. If Maria makes the ballot and even if she builds on Herbst’s write in support, it still won’t be enough to get her to 50% on the first round, which she MUST do in order to win. People who vote for Maria probably won’t rank other candidates, people who vote for Lind, Brewer, Omura, Gold will be ranking other candidates and probably wont rank Maria as a 2nd or 3rd choice, and that’s how she still can’t get 50% even after RCV is used.