Gotham Gazette Live Chat A Live Interviews Online Site Powered by Forum One http://chat.gothamgazette.com/ Sat, 07 Nov 2009 04:55:53 +0100 SyntaxCMS via FeedCreator 1.7.2 Talk About Sustainability http://chat.gothamgazette.com/content/interview/detail/654/
Gotham Gazette:
We've been talking today with Tom Angotti, professor in the Hunter College Department of Urban Affairs & Planning and Gotham Gazette’s land use columnist. Thank you so much, Tom, and those of you who "listened" in and submitted questions. An edited transcript of this conversation will be on our site next week. And for continued coverage of these issues check out 'Sustainability Watch' at http://gothamgazette.com/sustainability/, a collaboration between Gotham Gazette and the Hunter College Center for Community Planning & Development.

Thanks again!
Tom Angotti:
Thanks to everyone for your excellent questions!
Courtney:
For years, advocates have pointed to the city's overflow sewage system as a source of pollution in our waterways. What can the city do to solve this? Is a total overhaul even feasible given the cost and how does PlaNYC 2030 address this issue?
Tom Angotti:
PlaNYC acknowledges the problem but its solutions are fairly sketchy and could well be countered by other developments. For example, population growth combined with rainfall increases could yield a more dire scenario. The effect of sea level rise wasn't taken into account. And even if 90% of surface waters are cleaned up -- the quantitative goal -- the other 10% could be deadly. Where will that 10% be?
Courtney:
Some say the administration has been particularly aggressive in pushing for rezoning neighborhoods to keep them sustainable and to ensure their character remains for generations. Is this true? Has the administration equitably examined all five boroughs, and does serial downzoning address the needs of a growing population?


Tom Angotti:
Zoning isn't the answer to all of the complex questions about the quality of the environments we live and work in. Zoning only creates a regulatory framework, and the huge roll of rezonings has created as many development opportunities as it has preservation opportunities.
It seems to me that some of the rezonings are protecting very low density enclaves in the city, areas where there is potential for much more development. Some of these areas, because of their low density, are bigger energy consumers, auto-dependent, and contribute less to long-term sustainability if they are protected.
Gotham Gazette:
While much of the plan focuses on emissions from vehicles, as you know buildings are responsible for the lion's share of greenhouse gas emissions in the city. Beyond city-owned buildings the plan does not have much to say about that? Should New York be doing more in this area? What would you like to see?
Tom Angotti:
True, this is a big gap in the plan. A new building code may help but will not address the vast majority of existing buildings. A few things that can be done (by no means an exhaustive list):
- Promote solar. Reduce the red tape, increase incentives, provide capital, for solar in buildings of all sizes and shapes.
- Help homeowners and building owners create green interiors, healthier and less carbon-intensive.
- Work at the neighborhood level, with owners and tenants, to install energy-saving equipment, reduce heating needs, reduce air conditioning use (which also entails improving public spaces).
Gotham Gazette:
Here's another question from the Municipal Art Society.

Given the lack of an up-to-date comprehensive planning framework for New York City, how can community-based planners take advantage of the creation of the Long Term Planning and Sustainability Office and/or PlaNYC? In other words, are there any tangible opportunities for community-based planners derived from the existence of this new organism/initiative?
Tom Angotti:
By all means, PlaNYC should make sustainability planning legitimate, and communities can find support for many of their sustainability initiatives that began long ago -- for example the effort to deconstruct the Sheridan Expressway and create open space and affordable housing (see Melissa Checker's recent article on Sustainability Watch).
What remains to be done is to create a more open and transparent process whereby community-based and city-hall-based planners can talk to each other. That is sorely missing because the process is really still top-down.
Gotham Gazette:
You have faulted the administration for not involving community groups and others in the drafting of PlaNYC. But some people have countered that devising such an ambitious plan requires a top-down approach because individual communities tend to focus on their own narrow interests rather than those of the city as a whole. They cite NIMBYism, opposition by car-driving commuters to congestion pricing and so on. So how can you involve local interests and still come up with a big vision?
Tom Angotti:
Alas, if I could be assured that everyone in city government charged with planning for the city was more committed to the public interest than the city's own residents I would have to agree. But where is that evidence? In fact, there are many examples where city officials have enacted policies that dump on low-income neighborhoods, many of them communities of color, because they were fearful of confronting NIMBYites in wealthier neighborhoods. In my book that makes them NIMBYs.

There is also a big difference between NIMBYism and just caring about a better quality of life in your neighborhood. It really is insulting for people in government to paint everyone who cares about their communities as NIMBYish.

If the city had started with a better plan to address real concerns throughout the city (and not just Manhattan) about traffic congestion, it might have had a better chance on congestion pricing.
yh:
To follow up on the congestion pricing comment -- I'm wondering how much of PlaNYC incorporates building support statewide, not just within the city. In the congestion pricing example, it seems that the plan lacked consideration and cooperation from entities outside of the mayor's coalition. How important do you think it is that PlaNYC reaches beyond NYC to secure its many goals?
Tom Angotti:
Clearly an ability to work with Albany is key. But the other missing element is the region, including three states, hundreds of municipalities and thousands of independent authorities. It may be mind-boggling, but after all how to reduce the city's carbon footprint when the city is a fraction of the region's population and land? For example, how to reduce traffic when Jersey and Connecticut are widening freeways? What about the city's waste being burned in the incinerator on the Jersey side? The task of even starting a regional discussion is a daunting one but NYC is the most important player and the one most likely to kick it off. Missing in PlaNYC is even a modest start.
Gotham Gazette:
Is it too late for the mayor to reach out and invovle community boards to ensure the survival of the plan? What could he do to improve its chances of survival in the 18 months hae has left?
Tom Angotti:
Excellent question. I can't think of a better way to use the next 18 months than to launch 59 discussions, one in each community board, about long-term sustainability. They could and should go far beyond existing community board membership. Community boards can be the hosts of a wide-open, inclusive dialogue that will certainly lead to many new ideas. The mayor's office could challenge each community to come up with its own priorities for long-term sustainability, affordable housing creation, open space, and transportation. Let the communities speak!
Gotham Gazette:
Congestion pricing aside, what do you think the successes and failures were in the first year of PlaNYC?
Tom Angotti:
It is really tempting to list presumed successes and failures, but to do that we would have to suspend an belief that this is a long-term plan that deals with fundamentally critical problems like air and water quality, transportation, energy, and housing. There have certainly been some steps forward in every area, but then the question arises whether they have anything to do with the 2030 plan or would have been made in any case. The real test is whether the ambitious goals of creating a greener and healthier NY will be achieved, and that just defies quick fixes and short-term solutions. Voila the real benefit of a long-term plan: it's can't be just a platform for the next election or two.
Gotham Gazette:
While you've written that the mayor's plan might have had better chances of surviving the end of his administration if he had involved local residents more, that's now a done deal. What do you think the plan's likelihood of survival is? And how can New Yorkers who support the plan, or at least parts of it, increase those odds?
Tom Angotti:
The next mayor could well disown the whole plan. Projects and programs already funded would obviously continue, but those are only beginnings in what is supposed to be a 23-year effort.
I think the mayor's office needs some "tough love." It does no good to continue praising the plan for its obvious virtues, but some serious critical challenges need to be made that will force the question: if you're not around, who is going to do all the things that are supposed to be done? You can't cut community boards and at the same time expect them to carry forward the banners of NYC2030. With all new agency heads in a new administration, where will the plan's supporters be in government?
Gotham Gazette:
This question came from the Municipal Art Society Planning Center: Rumors have been flying about the possible agenda for the next Charter Revision Commission. Should PlaNYC be made part of the city’s charter? If so, which parts would be most relevant, in your mind, for achieving sustainability? If PlaNYC isn’t on the agenda for the Charter Revision Commission, what reforms do you think should be?
Tom Angotti:
It would be more important for the mayor and future mayors to observe more diligently the existing mandates for long-term planning already in the charter. PlaNYC could have been presented as a city-wide plan and put through the review process outlined in Section 197-a of the charter. It wasn't. That deprived community boards, the city council and the borough presidents of an opportunity to engage in the process. I am skeptical that putting more enabling language in the charter by itself will make the executive office care about having a sustainable planning process. More useful would be a series of changes to local law that require the executive to plan in cooperation with other levels of city government. That could be combined with a charter change, but again, by itself there's no guarantee it will mean anything.
Gotham Gazette:
How damaging was the demise -- at least for now -- of congestion pricing to the mayor's overall plan?
Tom Angotti:
The loss of congestion pricing was serious both because of the real value it would have had towards reducing traffic in the city but also because of the political momentum it could have started towards significant traffic reduction. Congestion pricing's benefits to Manhattan were real but compared to the huge task of reducing traffic in the city, it was a very small step. Now it will be harder to get back on track. But missing from the start was a serious comprehensive plan to reduce traffic, so maybe now there will be more political space to put forth such a plan.
Gotham Gazette:
Welcome to Gotham Gazettes's Live Chat. We're talking electronically today with Tom Angotti, professor in the Hunter College Department of Urban Affairs & Planning and Gotham Gazette’s land use columnist, about Mayor Michael Bloomberg's PlaNYC for a bigger and greener New York. What do you want to know about creating a sustainable city? What do you think? If you have questions now, please send add them.
Tom Angotti:
I'm happy to have this conversation. This is the city's first long-term sustainability plan, and a rare adventure into the future.
]]>
Tom Angotti Tue, 03 Jun 2008 18:00:00 +0100
New York City Housing and Neighborhoods http://chat.gothamgazette.com/content/interview/detail/588/
Gotham Gazette:
We're speaking on-line this afternoon with Vicki Been and Ingrid Gould Ellen of the Furman Center at NYU. Every year, the center puts together a report on State of New York City Housing and Neighborhoods, filled with fascinating data about where we live and how we live in New York. You can examine citywide trends, look at the highest and lowest ranked neighborhoods for a variety of statistics and check out your own neighborhood.

Welcome Vicki and Ingrid and all you Gotham Gazette readers at your computers.
Gotham Gazette:
Welcome Vicki and Ingrid and all you Gotham Gazette readers at your computers.
Gotham Gazette:
To start off, maybe you could briefly describe a few of the key trends you found in this year’s report.
Ingrid Gould Ellen:
1. Dramatic declines in affordability of housing, both among owner-occupied and rental stock, due to combination of rising prices and rents on the one hand, and stagnant incomes on the other.

2. The jump in rate of subprime lending – from 6.5% in 2002 to 22.9% in 2005.

3. The sharp racial and ethnic disparities in homeownership rates in NYC. We found the low homeownership rates among Hispanic New Yorkers the most striking. Only 16 percent of Hispanic New Yorkers owned their homes in 2005, as compared to 43.8 percent of non-Hispanic white New Yorkers.


Gotham Gazette:
Your report describes a housing squeeze both for renters and for people buying their own homes. But there also is a lot of new construction. Can you describe what type of construction is taking place and what effects it’s having on peoples’ ability to find and afford a place to live.
Vicki Been:
Residential construction activity has risen dramatically in recent years. In 2005, 31,599 units were authorized by new building permits. That is more than four times as many units as the average of 7,020 that were authorized by permits each year during the 1990s.

But even that level of construction has not been sufficient to erase the gap created by low levels of construction in the 1990s, and by the swelling population and demand for housing.
Sara Stuart:
Downtown Brooklyn is changing very rapidly as luxury apartments are being built opposite the jail and construction is rampent. How does this compare to other neighborhoods and other periods of time?
Ingrid Gould Ellen:
There were more units authorized by new residential building permits in Brooklyn than in any other borough in 2005 - the number was nearly double the number authorized in 2002. So there has been a dramatic increase in construction in the borough as a whole. In terms of downtown Brooklyn in particular, we didn't see that much construction activity being completed in 2005, but we expect we will see more in our data this year.

Lauren Harrison:
I am reporting on seniors in Harlem and their quality of living. Have you found a difference in acquiring affordable housing between seniors and younger groups?
Ingrid Gould Ellen:
Good question. We didn't look separately at the affordability of rental housing for seniors and for younger groups.
Gotham Gazette:
There has been a lot of talk about improvement in the Bronx. But the statistics still show that Bronx neighborhoods have the highest levels of poverty, unemployment and asthma, for example, and the lowest educational levels. What, if any, signs of progress do you see?
Vicki Been:
The Bronx saw considerable improvements in at least the following areas:

-- construction activity (certificates of occupancy moved from 1220 in 2002 to 1755 in 2004 and 1434 in 2005, and new building permits increased from 2626 in 2002 to 4937 in 2005.

--The percent of students performing at grade level in reading increased from 28% to 39.6% betweeen 2002 and 2005

--The percent of students performing at grade level in math inreased from 24% to 41.5% during that time.

--Felony crime dropped from 32.8 per 1000 residents in 2002 to 29.4 in 2005

--Elevated lead blood levels fell from 11.6 per 1000 children tested to 8.3 during those three years.

Gotham Gazette:
This is maybe a question for would be real-estate speculators. Looking at the lists of neighborhood where housing prices have appreciated the most since 1994, are there any characteristics they share? Any clue as to where the next ”hot” neighborhoods will be?
Ingrid Gould Ellen:
This is a question we're really interested in and are currently researching. We're examining what characteristics of neighborhoods tend to be correlated with subsequent change, and we're most interested in learning how various public and private investments can shape a neighborhood's trajectory.
Nelson Alexander Smith:
I actually contacted the Furman Center about this previously, but thought it wouldn't hurt to ask again.

I am a writer looking for any books or sources that provide a broad historical overview of land ownership and the real estate business in Manhattan. Who owns what? What families or companies or governments are the largest owners? What have been the historical trends? I only seem to find uninterpreted data or biographical pieces of a jigsaw puzzle. Any ideas on how I can grasp a "big picture" profile of land ownership in the city? Thanks.
Ingrid Gould Ellen:
Unfortunately, we don't have any obvious sources to recommend. New York is probably a little different than other places because of the long-time involvement of a few families. But we do not have historical data on land or property ownership in the city. Get back in touch when/if you find the perfect source!
Carlos:
Given the current less-than-favorable fiscal condition of the New York City Housing Authority, and considering that NYCHA is an important segment of New York City's affordable housing market, this area of urban policy seems to be a timely opportunity for the scholarly community to inform policy. Furthermore, this activity may be best pursued by taking stock of comparable public housing strategies that are occurring nationally.

What is the academic/scholarly community doing to explore options for the city to enhance the viability and sustainability of such a vital housing resource. What would such options include (such as public-private partnership opportunities, etc.)?
Ingrid Gould Ellen:
good question. unfortunately, the academic community has not paid as much attention to the public housing program as one might like. Some researchers are now working to examine how the public housing program as a whole is structured, and whether affording additional flexibility to local housing authorities -- including allowing them to refinance existing developments to get an infusion of equity for capital improvements -- would help them to more effectively manage their housing. Others have explored the efficacy of using HOPE VI funding to rehabilitate public housing developments and convert them to mixed income developments. One challenge with HOPE VI is ensuring that existing residents are all placed in alternative, affordable housing. Researchers have also found these efforts to be very expensive.
Ken Dircks:
Do the goals of HPD's Marketplace Plan align with the needs/trends you found?
Vicki Been:
The Mayor's ambitious affordable housing plan targets more than 2/3 of the rental units to households earning $50,240 or less. It is certainly appropriate to target the lowest income groups, but also necessary to try to help keep New City affordable for middle class families.
Jane:
How will growing numbers of foreclosures among subprime mortgage holders affect the market for affordable housing in the city (supply, demand, and government support)?
Ingrid Gould Ellen:
We're not seeing foreclosed homes sitting vacant as often in New York as we are elsewhere in the country. There still seems to be substantial demand. But we are doing further research right now on the impact of foreclosures on local neighborhoods. It is also possible that the growing foreclosure crisis and the tightening of credit markets will push households to the rental market, thereby bidding up rents.
Lauren Harrison:
Luxury condos seem to be everywhere in Central Harlem. How does this affect the rates of rent in the areas? Do renters have a valid fear of being pushed out by $1.5 million 2 bedrooms?
Ingrid Gould Ellen:
While dramatic changes are clearly taking place in Central Harlem, they seem to be mostly affecting the market for owner-occupied units. Rents still remain relatively low (the median monthly rent in 2005 was $600, one of the lowest in the city), and 70 percent of all the rental units in the neighborhood are rent-regulated.
Harold Shultz:
Do you think the subprime lending meltdown will have an impact on affordable/rent stabilized multifamily buildings? either through neighborhood deterioration or through reduced availability of funding for rehabilitation?
Vicki Been:
The subprime lending (and broader mortgage) meltdown may impact affordable/stabilized mf housing in several ways:

--Evidence suggests that mortgage foreclosures have a negative effect on the surrounding properties, and lead neighborhoods to decline. It's not clear that New York City will follow the same path as other cities, because the evidence of the foreclosure effect comes from weak market cities in which foreclosures lead to vacancies. Foreclosures may not result in vacancies here. We're studying the effect of foreclosures in NYC now, but don't yet have results.

--A tightening of credit may cause sales prices to drop because fewer buyers will be able to bid for the units. Also, a credit squeeze will reduce the ability of people to maintain their buildings and homes.

--REITs were buying up many of these buildings. To the extent that credit becomes tighter, and/or values drop, REITS may be less interested.
Gotham Gazette:
The racial diversity index is an intriguing one. Can you tell us a bit about that and what kind of neighborhoods in today’s city tend to be the most diverse?
Ingrid Gould Ellen:
We find it intriguing too!
In general, the most diverse areas are those that have high concentrations of immigrants.
Gotham Gazette:
At the beginning, your report has these lists of highest and lowest ranked neighborhoods by category. Some of them are for better or worse fairly predictable. But a few are startling. One is the ranking for felony crime where all the highest felony neighborhoods are high-end area of Manhattan, along with Brooklyn Heights. What explains that?
Ingrid Gould Ellen:
I think the high crime rates in some of these affluent neighborhoods are driven by the fact that they include commercial areas. The crime rate is based on the resident population; but clearly these neighborhoods have much larger daytime populations.
Dave Hanzel:
With rising construction costs, lack of buildable land, and a flat capital budget, how will the Mayor meet the production targets he set forth in the New Housing Marketplace plan?
Vicki Been:
The mayor is going to have to "create" buildable land through rezonings, innovative programs to identify underused development capacity, and pressure on government agencies to be more efficient in their own use of land. He'll also have to push the envelope in terms of creative financing options.

It's a huge challenge, to be sure, but we certainly hope the Mayor will rise to the task!
Gotham Gazette:
This concludes our chat on housing and neighborhood. Thanks so much to Vicki Been and Ingrid Gould Ellen for joining us today. And thanks too to our readers who sent in questions.
Gotham Gazette:

For further reading... looking for more information about housing and neighborhoods in New York City? Take a look at Gotham Gazette's housing archives and be sure to read the Furman Center's report: State of New York City's Housing and Neighborhoods 2006.

]]>
Gotham Gazette, Ingrid Gould Ellen, Vicki Been Thu, 27 Sep 2007 18:00:00 +0100
Using Technology to Watch Government http://chat.gothamgazette.com/content/interview/detail/532/
Gotham Gazette:
To start with one of your efforts to measure what is going on in the city, you have proposed a bill that would measure traffic congestion and set goals for reducing it. Everyone knows the city is crowded. Why was measuring congestion so essential to you plan?
Gale Brewer:
The Department of Transportation already measures traffic flow throughout the city, including potholes. But with everyone talking about congestion being a major problem, the DOT does not collect information with a focus on reducing congestion. That doesn't make sense to me. The Mayor is proposing congestion pricing as a solution, but we need to know the extent of the problem and where it is the worst. Congestion plagues Manhattan, but there are traffic problems in all five boroughs. A comprehensive congestion study would allow the City to better strategically target its efforts. That is why I introduced Int. No. 199.
Gotham Gazette:
How do the goals you set for reducing congestion fit in with the mayor’s 2030 plan that includes congestion pricing, transit improvements and other congestion reducing measures?
Gale Brewer:
If Int. No. 199 passes, some of the mandated information collected will be health statistics at busy intersections, type of vehicles on the road and alternative forms of transportation including pedestrians and bicyclists. All of this is not collected now.
This piece of legislation will require DOT to study these various forms of transportation and identify goals on how congestion can be reduced and transit improved throughout the City. DOT would then be required to report to the Mayor and City Council on a bi-annual basis with updates on how those goals are being met.
The information collected by DOT would better inform the City's strategic plans for congestion pricing, transit improvements, etc by pinpointing locations where fast and comfortable public transportation should exist before congestion pricing is implemented.
Gotham Gazette:
A few years ago you proposed a bill, which passed, that requires the city to make data available from its 311 call center. Has this bill been successful? What has the data told us?

Gale Brewer:
The current DoITT Commissioner, Paul Cosgrave, has met regularly with the Community Boards to discuss 311 data. The 311 data is now available on the web. We are hoping that the discussions will lead to real time data available at the Community Boards and that it will be available in a format (not PDF) that staff can manipulate and add in their own data. 311 needs the Community Boards and elected officials to help to solve the complicated issues. We become 311 follow up!
Gotham Gazette:
I know you’ve been involved in trying to bridge New York’s digital divide, particularly in the area of broadband access. How can government reach people who for whatever reason are not on line?
Gale Brewer:
In December 2005, I passed a law that mandated that the Mayor and the City Council jointly appointed a Task Force on Broadband and how it could be used to close the digital divide. The law calls for hearings in all 5 boroughs. The Task Force had its first meeting in the Bronx and the second is scheduled in Brooklyn on May 22, 2007, 12 noon-2 PM, Brooklyn borough Hall. All welcome. gale.brewer@council.nyc.ny.us. We learned (not surprisingly) that the cost of the current carriers (cable and telephone) is too much for many families, that the libraries are not open enough hours to provide books or use of computers, and that there is wireless access in schools (Via e-rate) but students are really only able to access 2 hours a week of computer use. We need more competition, less expensive or free access to Internet, and we need to include Instant Messaging and other forms of communication in the discussion in order to bridge the digital divide. The city's EDC is also conducting a study of how NYC should implement a wireless system. We are not LA or Philadelphia, but we are behind the rest of the world in access to low cost, fast Internet or other technology for communication.
Sara Stuart:
How do you see technology and the internet facilitating greater citizens participation in zoning and planning issues in the next few years?
Gale Brewer:
Great question! The Municipal Art Society has funding and staff who meet regularly with Community Boards to implement their 197-A planning efforts by using GIS technolgy (computer mapping). I was a member of a Community Board for years. Having a map of a zoning project at a meeting makes for a much more informed discussion.
Ralph:
You have advocated smart cards to improve bus transit times. Will you require that any smart card be anonymous to protect privacy and to avoid identity theft?
Gale Brewer:
Yes, I will advocate for the cards to be anonymous. The advantage to the cards is that they will allow passengers to move on the bus faster than with the metro cards. However, the technology used in the East side Manhattan pilot has had challenges and is not ready for wider implementation.
Iphigene:
What are some of the ways you think data collected by citizens (or nongovernmental organizations) can be effectively integrated into the city's efforts to track its progress? Could these kinds of partnerships work toward ensuring better city services or would it be too complicated? How could technology facilitate such collaborations?
Gale Brewer:
Another good question. The Fund for the City of New York has worked with community groups and block associations by giving residents hand held computers that have a preconditioned list of neighborhood issues, such as pot holes, vacant lots, graffiti, vacant tree pits. etc. Residents walk their neighborhood and punch in data for the issues that need to be addressed. The list could be expanded and residents could do this on a regular basis. In addition, with an expanded 311 system that can respond to residents and tell them if their problem is resolved (or not), the information on the handhelds could be integrated into the 311 system. I have had the pleasure of using the handhelds, and I hope that all block associations could utilize them! I also hope that data could be collected by 311 via an email and not just by a phone call.
Gotham Gazette:
To go back to the Smart Cards for buses for a moment, what were some of the problems with the East Side pilot project?
Gale Brewer:
It is our understanding that there may be security issues. Also only Citibank cards can be used on the current system. I assume that other cards will be used once the challenges are worked out.
Dick Dadey:
Gale - What has been the most successful technology project in watching government in your opinion?
Gale Brewer:
311 would be a good candidate for watching government if the data was divided up to reflect neighborhood issues. As you know, we are working with DoITT to develop a system that allows Community Board staff to get the information in a form that can be manipulated and integrated into their data. Currently the data comes in a PDF form that is too hard to work with.

I also think that the CFB's website is a good government watcher, but the website of the Board of Elections is hard to navigate. The sites of the City Clerk, CFB, BOE etc. need to be integrated.
Sydney:
How does New York compare with other cities in its use of technology to monitor government? and are there any particular models or programs elsewhere that you are interested in implementing or borrowing from?
Gale Brewer:
I know about the use of Broadband in other cities but I don't know how technology use supports monitoring government. I think it is a good question for an oversight hearing! We can ask representatives of states that have passed Clean Money Clean Elections laws to testify.
Gotham Gazette:
Thanks so much, Ms. Brewer, for talking with Gotham Gazette and our readers today, and thanks to our guests who joined us. We will be posting a transcript of this chat on our site shortly. And come to Gotham Gazette for notices of future chats.
Gale Brewer:
I enjoyed the discussion! I hope that your readers will join us on May 22 in Brooklyn for the 2nd Broadband hearing.
Gotham Gazette:
This concludes our live chat with Councilmember Gale Brewer.
]]>
Gale Brewer, Gotham Gazette Wed, 02 May 2007 20:00:00 +0100