Monday, April 24, 2023
Partly cloudy. High 61 degrees.
Notices
Our calendar has lots of local events! Click on the link or the lady in the upper righthand corner to check.
For a list of Community Board 7 committee meetings this week and links to join, click here.
The Parks & Environment Committee is seeking public comments on the 79th Street Marina Dock House design. To comment click here.
Recommended Viewing
By Carol Tannenhauser
The scene is an office/den in a prewar apartment on the Upper West Side of Manhattan. Husband sits in front of a computer, fixated on the little circle rotating in the center of the screen. An image pops up: a checkerboard of faces. “Do we have a quorum?” someone asks.
Husband: It’s on!!
Wife (from the other room): I’ll be right there!
Husband: You’re going to miss the beginning!!
Wife: I’m coming!!
Is it the newest episode of The Diplomat? The final season of Mrs. Maisel? No….it’s a Community Board 7 committee meeting — the Upper West Side’s answer to reality TV — an inside look at the ground level of government, where passions run high and power is often accused of being illusory. There’s an episode on at least three times a week, and after a while, you get to know the characters and can follow the sinuous plot. Warning: episodes usually begin right at dinnertime and can run into unholy hours of the night.
Things have been heating up at CB7 lately, what with the safe haven, the marina dock house, the deliverista hub, and crosstown bike lanes on the agenda. Then there is the usual sturm und drang of human interactions: the factions, the alliances, the adversaries, the inherent biases, and potential conflicts of interest — the last being the most serious of transgressions when members put their own interests in front of those of the community they are appointed — not elected — to represent. This is tricky when you consider that they are chosen by their borough president, in part, because of their expertise and passion about issues often addressed by the board, such as transportation infrastructure and architecture — things that can one day appear or disappear in the neighborhood, leaving you wondering, “Who decided that, and why didn’t I have a say?”
If you care about what’s going on — and up — in the community, this will be screen time well spent. Oh, and in response to the old refrain that “they [community boards] have no power,” it depends on how you define power. Certain things cannot progress without being presented to the community board, where the public can weigh in; it’s mandated by the New York City Charter.
For example, you can’t get a state liquor license without appearing before the Business & Consumer Issues Committee and convincing them you won’t play loud music late at night. And you can’t tear down a 132-year-old landmark church and replace it with a luxury high-rise condominium without running it by the Preservation Committee first. In all cases — whether you’re against that new bar or for the preservation of the church — the community board is a vehicle for getting your voice and opinions heard in a more meaningful forum than the WSR comments section. Not to denigrate WSR commenters, but, for example, “when a community board submits an opinion (also known as a recommendation) to the Liquor Authority, this opinion becomes part of the record used by the Authority in deciding whether or not to approve the application being considered,” according to the city’s website.
Sometimes the community board — through written resolutions — initiates projects, like crosstown bike lanes. Sometimes, as in the case of the 83rd Street safe haven, resolutions serve to lobby an agency about aspects of a program, or to get the community’s stance on an issue on the record. The board recently issued a revised resolution about the safe haven, calling for a lower number of residents than the city is intending. It remains to be seen if the city responds to the community’s view.
Admittedly, Community Board 7 is one of those series that can take a while to get into, but once you do you, you’ll be hooked. Check for listings on the CB7 website. All past meetings are available on YouTube, so you can even binge!
# # #
Final Note: nominations are being accepted for Goddard Riverside’s Good Neighbor Awards, which celebrate people who voluntarily help build better communities. You can nominate someone online until April 30. A committee of past winners and longtime volunteers will choose this year’s honorees, who will be recognized at a festive event in June. To submit a nomination, go to https://goddard.org/goodneighborawards/.
Have a great week!
Although I don’t always agree with the positions or outcome, I appreciate the work of CB members.
However, I do not understand how the head of the restaurant lobby (especially now, given the restaurant shed issues) is permitted to be on the CB?
This is a concern
CB7 has 50 members. The position of a single member does not determine the outcome.
Lin, I agree. Anyone who has a leadership role in an organization that lobbies for a specific cause — restaurants and bicycles are the key examples — should not be on the community board.
Also, wouldn’t everyone’s time and effort be better spent with a properly conducted, statistically representative survey of the Upper West Side population regarding their opinion on each issue in front of Community Board 7? That’s the way to determine the will of the people. Not listening to the loudest or best-funded voice.
I agree that a poll of the population on key issues would be informative and worthwhile but I don’t necessarily agree with the idea of excluding key opinion holders or lobbyists from the board is necessary. In a board of 50 people it might actually be worthwhile to have a specific POV represented on the inside while at the same time, their individual vote will not meaningfully impact the overall count. Of course, ideally the board would also including a prominent opposing POV
Did you notice – they have no essential workers on CB7. No doctors. No cops. No firemen. No nurses. No teachers (does Berger teach right now?) there are also no small business owners like shopkeepers, bodega owners, smoke shop owners. I would really love to hear from the smoke shop owners. And for all the talk about helping ppl, I’d love to see an RETIRED emergency room dr, pediatrician or psychiatrist on there.
We saw with the West 83rd Safe Haven meeting where the Co-Chair silenced and selected who could speak. He has a vested interest in homeless shelters and services, heads up the mental health committee, and actively pushes his personal agenda. We are kidding ourselves to assume this Community Board is a voice for the neighborhood. And these Zoom meetings make it easier for them to shut down anyone who disagrees.
By that standard, anyone who owns a car should be excluded from the transportation committee for clear conflict of interest. Free parking is worth more than any nonprofit board membership.
Owning a car is fine. Owning a bike is fine. Being a renowned pro-biking/anti-car advocate with positions on multiple nonprofits for this purpose is an express conflict of interest. One that disables the person from seeing both sides of the story. The purpose of serving is for the greater good of the residents. Not to push your agenda. Anyone who’s a diehard on any topic IMHO shouldn’t be on there. We need a sampling of normal ppl with diff views. Not lobbyists.
Interestingly enough, one question on the application for a Community Board member is whether or not you own a car…..
Well put.
Why would you assume someone who owns a car in NYC parks on the street?
Because of all the cars that are parked on the street, and how the owners run out at different times when the times change to repark their cars. The streets are JAMMED with parked cars. I don’t think their owners live out of town….
When I owned a car, I paid monthly to park in a garage. If we want to eliminate unnecessary car usage, we need to charge for street parking, ‘not build bike lanes. Virtually no regular bikers own cars (yes, there are exceptions, so don’t come at me).
Making it safer to bike is the only reason to build better bike lanes. And that only works if bikers respect the laws of bike lanes, which present day experience shows they aren’t.
So — ironically — more bike lanes are making biking more dangerous, because they allow more people to bike recklessly. Until we establish a bike licensing system and properly enforce the law, with meaningful penalties, there is no point in building more bike lanes.
Elisabeth –
Actually there are quite a few workers who park.
For example guy who is a super for several buildings drives in from Yonkers.
And know of a bunch of restaurant owners/managers who drive in and park.
And LOL on weekends, bicyclists drive in from NJ – they park and then bike in Manhattan
Kevin,
I don’t drive.
Besides my concern about the restaurant lobby, I would agree with Lisa – the bicycle lobby should not be on the CB.
While the NYC CB model has its limitations, it does work to the extent that interested parties have a seat at the table when debating local issues.
Why are these meetings still on ZOOM?
bingo. No matter how you cut it though the Left has a problem with everything. If you ask for meetings to be in person, they say, this is voter suppression- not everyone can attend in person. If they don’t like the outcome of a decision, they say “the meeting is held at 7PM, when the agrarian workers are still on the farm,” and this is voter suppression. When you have a meeting in the morning and that takes a right hand then, which they do not agree with, they cry “democracy is dead, this meeting was held when the blacksmiths are still tending to the sheep.” In sum: The Left has a problem with everything – no matter what you do, it’s never enough. The meetings should be in person because that’s simply how human beings best communicate. And that’s the only way to make sure the YIMBYs from park slope and Minnesota or housing advocates from Pennsylvania with big hearts stop trolling our meetings and posing as West Siders when they’re not.
I agree 100%. While the Zooms are in some ways easier to attend, they are more manipulated. CB7 has found a way to silence dissenters through the restricted chat feature as well. That Safe Haven meeting chaired by Shelly Fine a few months ago was the Grand Finale. It’s time for fresh voices and perspectives that represent the UWS 2023.
A good read and well needed chuckle. I’ve watched a few CB meetings of other districts. They seem more business focused, represent the desires of the actual community residents, and less Reality TV. I often wonder if the UWS likes it this way vs. how it needs to be? Is it the leadership (seemed to be a lot more orderly when Steven Brown took over) or a by-product of those selected to serve? Is this their social hour? Many seem to keep getting reappointed ad infinitum and it would be great to have some different perspectives that maybe reflect more diversity and the way the UWS is today.
It’s the leadership, Carmen. Everything starts at the top (or is tolerated by it).
The problem is that this is not reality tv but is is real. Watching it one only feels powerless as the committee doesn’t seem response to its’ own community. Truly wish this was not the case.