Author: Casey Sniffin (page 1 of 1)

While searching for the Capitol Hall Residence, I was surprised at the lack of a sign or any other marker which indicated whether I was about to enter the correct building. Upon entering, the building’s interior beauty was even more surprising. With the preconception that this visit was to a homeless shelter, I had not anticipated such a “normal” looking building. However, after listening to the speakers for only a few minutes, I felt bad for having expected so little of the residence.

I have always felt that homelessness was a glaringly huge issue in New York City, but before this visit, I did not have any true insight into what homelessness really meant for the homeless, the non-homeless, and the community at large. The residents of Capitol Hall are mostly elderly, many receive public assistance, and some are even employed. These people are actively working to improve their lives – just like every other person throughout the city. They have experienced unfortunate circumstances which have left them incapable of securing housing on their own, but that should not define their character. The residents and staff we met were so kind, giving, and willing to share their experiences with us.

The existence of SRO’s provides people with the opportunity to improve their lives in the safety and privacy of their own space. Whether or not someone was homeless should not affect the living standards and amenities they get in their building. Of course they deserve a clean and safe building with TV’s, a patio, medical services, and privacy, why not? The accessibility of social services is vital for keeping the homeless off the streets during and after their time in an SRO. The stigma around homelessness needs to be put to rest; it can happen to anyone, and there needs to be a sustainable way to help people once it happens to them.

-Casey

There is a reason that ideas and reality are two separate concepts. Broken Windows theory sounds feasible and promising by definition, but alas, it is only a theory. It seems logical that in order to decrease crime and violence on a large scale, you have to start small. An environment which frowns upon turnstile jumping, public intoxication, and loitering must also frown upon muggings, drug deals, and even murder. If police crack down on those smaller crimes, it creates a community where people feel safer, even if the crime rate is the same. However, when police are assigned quotas to give out summons and tickets, they must spend more time writing than policing. And when you tell someone that their job will be in danger if they don’t meet their quota, obviously they will meet it. But how will they go about it? Well, this is where Broken Windows theory falls apart.

As Bob Gangi brought to our attention, the statistical evidence clearly shows that minorities, especially African-Americans and Hispanics, are particularly targeted by policies such as Broken Windows. When a police officer must make a quick judgment about which citizens may be suspicious or possibly criminal, the unfortunate realities of racism and prejudice come out. It is sad that in today’s society, racism still drives many people, whether consciously or not, but it’s the truth. I believe that Broken Windows is a great theory, and perhaps could work in a more unbiased or smaller community, but legislation which perpetrates the theory simply does not work in New York City.

Casey Sniffin

Every day, the effects of Robert Moses’ expansive traffic structures can be seen and felt by New Yorkers. Drivers struggle to gain speed on city streets and bridges and tunnels are hubs of congestion, but it is not just those commuters who face traffic problems. Even those who utilize public transport are constantly stalled; they are not bumper-to-bumper, but body-to-body, packed into subway cars that cannot handle the large crowds of today’s New York City. Sam Schwartz’ MoveNY initiative seems to have a solution to this problem.

By reanalyzing out-dated tolling systems and rethinking the budget for transportation, there may be solace for New Yorkers who want to shorten their commute time. I thought that the idea of using the two-rule system for changing toll rates was ingenious. Places of high congestion with options for public transit are most contributing to problems of congestion and pollution, and therefore should be tolled. Currently, there are many high-traffic areas of the city which have low, or no, tolls. However, places where there is a lower volume of travelers or no public transport most require the bridges and tunnels, and therefore should have little to no cost. This common sense ideology runs through much of the MoveNY plan, and the revenue from this system could seriously help New York. With opportunities for expanded public transport, whether in trains or buses, or amenities like pedestrian bridges, “green” travel alternatives would be encouraged, further decreasing the harmful and stressful congestion of today.

Casey Sniffin

Whether or not Robert Moses’ actions were an asset or an impairment to New York, and the rest of the United States, is a question that has no right answer. In some ways, he ruined people’s lives; he displaced the poor and is the cause of the ubiquitous congestion that exudes from New York City. Although people were nervous and afraid of taking advantage of his creations at first, it is obvious that as time passes, the population is further and further separated from Moses’ influence. His name will always be remembered, whether on signs or in textbooks, and I believe that his evils are forgivable. Not because he was right for amassing such an incredible amount of power and using it for personal, and often selfish, gains, but because ultimately, his changes to New York have allowed it to flourish as a city. Perhaps the people of New York have not flourished in the way that they may have without him, but his highways, parks, and buildings have truly established New York as the metropolitan city. Robert Moses did not care about the people, but about himself and the physical influence he could exert. But isn’t anyone in great power the same way? His accomplishments may not have been an asset for the citizens of New York, but they were for the city itself.