All posts by zumanamiyfa

Project Update

The Future of Homelessness and the Shelter-Industrial Complex

As a group, we feel that the feedback that we received from Professor Krinsky’s class. Some of the questions the audience asked include: How will homeless people pay even the low rent to live in a CLT if they don’t have a job? Would CLTs offer any social services to homeless people? Do homeless people need social services? Why does the city pay so much for these shelters and then not check on them? These are the questions that we are collectively trying to answer in order to edit our white paper draft and include in our popular education piece. We all have the task of looking for sources to use as evidence and background information to support our policy proposals. However, we still have to meet and discuss what direction our proposal should take, in terms of how radical or how conservative our proposal should be in order to be effective. Here is a breakdown of what we have been working on individually.

Riley looked at a survey of CLTs that Picture the Homeless did with City College in 2011, in order to answer the question we received in class about how homeless people can afford to live in a CLT on very low or no income. (http://www.picturethehomeless.org/PTH_National_CLT_Survey_Findings.pdf) They studied urban CLTs and MHAs all over the country to look at how they were founded and run. 70% of them housed formerly homeless people, and 18% had housing set aside specifically for housing the homeless. Most CLTs in the survey got money from places besides tenants paying rent. They got funding through government housing assistance programs, foundation grants, and renting out commercial space in the buildings. Some of them also charged higher rents to some tenants to subsidize other tenants. Through these methods, 65% were able to house families that made less than 20,000 a year. The study did not say anything specifically about families that have no income at all, so Riley is still looking for information on that. To try to answer the question we received in class about how homeless people can afford to live in a CLT on very low or no income, she also looked at a survey of CLTs that Picture the Homeless did with City College in 2011. (http://www.picturethehomeless.org/PTH_National_CLT_Survey_Findings.pdf) They studied urban CLTs and MHAs all over the country to look at how they were founded and run. 70% of them housed formerly homeless people, and 18% had housing set aside specifically for housing the homeless. Most CLTs in the survey got money from places besides tenants paying rent. They got funding through government housing assistance programs, foundation grants, and renting out commercial space in the buildings. Some of them also charged higher rents to some tenants to subsidize other tenants. Through these methods, 65% were able to house families that made less than 20,000 a year. The study did not say anything specifically about families that have no income at all, so she is still looking for information on that. Furthermore, we were also asked if CLTs would provide social services. In the 2011 survey, 35% of the CLTs they looked at did include social services, so obviously CLTs are not incompatible with social services. As for the larger question of how much homeless people really need services, this research review from Florida State found that programs where people received housing and were offered supportive services but not required to use them had better outcomes then programs that required people to graduate from specific treatment or education programs before receiving housing. (http://www.wmich.edu/hhs/newsletters_journals/jssw_institutional/institutional_subscribers/40.1.Groton.pdf) This points towards the idea that housing is more important than social services. She could not find any information that Picture the Homeless had put out about this question, so she will ask our community contacts, Ryan Hickey and Eric Goldfischer, about it at our next meeting. Riley initially took on the task of compiling a list of 10-20 cluster-site shelters, their building code violations, and the payments they have received from the city. She plans to ask them if it would still be useful to make that list, or if it would be redundant.

In addition, Brett and Annalise are looking into the conditions of the cluster sites and homeless shelters because they are so unsanitary that if the public knew about the conditions, they may see the shelters themselves as an issue. They will also research into methods of motivating the homeless with programs, such as those for job assistance, in order to include problems like those to our white paper. Before we can propose new programs to motivate the homeless, we need to educate ourselves on the current programs available from the Department of Homeless Services, and their website is the main source for that information.

Moreover, Omar will focus more on solidifying our knowledge of how CLTs work and what can be done to access, maintain and even expand them (Specific task forces, Third Party Transfer program, Alternative Enforcement Program etc.). He also found a lengthy article on the importance of integrating social equity with community land trusts, which could answer some of the questions presented to us. The links below should be helpful for us to consider when answering the questions from the other class.

1) http://www.hud.gov/offices/cpd/about/conplan/foreclosure/pdf/austincommtrust.pdf

2) “Testimony before the New York City Council Committee on Housing and Buildings and the Committee on Land Use by NYC Community Land Initiative” http://www.neweconomynyc.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/City-Council-11-17-2014-Affordable-Housing-FINAL-1.pdf

3) http://cltnetwork.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/2003-Integrating-Social-Equity-and-Smart-Growth.pdf

Omar will be analyzing these articles in order to share more information about how CLTs work, with the rest of the group. Our policy recommendation may include changing the system of CLTs in order to make them more effective to support those who are homeless.

Anna and I are researching the underlying causes and current homeless housing policies, while sharing that information with the group so that everyone is well informed about the problem before working on a solution. A goal for the upcoming weeks is to focus more on the solution and policy proposal after we pin down the causes of the problem. As for the useless services and expensive rent on shelters, families like the Podolskies and another man named Alan Lapes, who owned shelters himself and worked with them, have a big say in politics. They actually donated a lot to de Blasio’s campaign. (http://www.nydailynews.com/opinion/don-big-bill-article-1.1448237) One reason the city keeps giving them money is because they give large campaign donations and they get to have a say in policy. This is a fundamental flaw of American democracy and there is not much we can do about it, but we can propose a new policy for communities and the people to have a louder voice, in terms of housing and how shelters are run. Anna thinks we need to gather more evidence and show how it is a huge block in getting anything done. She would advise a full-scale poor class strike and homeless protest/ march through rich neighborhoods, like occupy Wall Street. That would get media attention, which is very important to get their voices heard. This kind of protesting would cause the routine of everyday life to be disrupted and eventually the rich would be forced to respond. She is also working on a more radical approach for achieving political justice, and she is considering the political disadvantages that the homeless and low-income people are at. I suggest that we reread parts of David Harvey’s “The Right to the City” to consider what forms revolution can take because there may be ways to attract attention without sparking chaos in society. We should also look at Sam Stein’s article “La Guardia’s Heir,” in order to analyze de Blasio’s current policies and how progressive he is since he plays a large role in affordable housing policy that the homeless are directly affected by. These class readings can also add depth to our white paper, by providing the perspective of individuals who have written about issues, such as zoning and community planning, which impacts the homeless population as well.

Corrin has also been researching possible solutions and policy changes that we can propose as a group. She found the Eagle’s Nest program, in St. Louis, which establishes a transitional housing facility for single-homeless men and women, focusing on the area’s veteran population. Volunteer members from Eagle’s Nest who worked at facilities that serve homeless veterans and other single homeless individuals came to the conclusion that temporary, emergency accommodations and services are no the solution. Together, they wanted to propose a transitional housing program that will support “these individuals in their struggle to self sufficiency and more permanent housing” (p.10). Ninety percent of 128 homeless veterans surveyed voiced strong support for this program. In this transitional housing program would commit an individual to a treatment plan (for substance abuse) “with required counseling and other services necessary to become self sufficient in a period of 24 months” (p.13). (http://www.eslarp.uiuc.edu/Research/Student/GregoryQureshy.pdf) In addition, there are education and training workshops that are uniquely designed by themselves and their case worker. These procedures are intended to get each participant economically independent and self-sufficient. Corrin’s findings include that idea that our proposal can use parts of the program, which plan to achieve the following: 60% of the project participants will be successful in obtaining full time employment within the two-year scope and 50% of program participants will successfully maintain a saving’s account within 18 months in the program, with an initial deposit of at least $50. As a group, we will determine if we can apply any of this information into a New York Transitional Housing Proposal. The questions we face are: how come shelters are running so inefficiently? Some of our policy recommendations could be from this legal end of changing what social programs are available based on what the homeless population wants/does not want. There is another housing alternative called micro-housing, which Corrin wants to look into as well.

(http://www.thirteen.org/metrofocus/2012/07/whod-live-here-micro-apartments-and-nyc-housing-needs/) Ultimately, we still have the task of fine-tuning one policy recommendation to compliment the work of Picture the Homeless.

Bethany has been looking more into CGCs, the MHA, and CLT to see how the three can work together to provide a solution for what we believe is the problem. Questions brought up at the presentation class taught us that we need more understanding of how exactly each of these work, mainly regarding the community involvement, and how homeless people can be both represented and accounted for. She attended the “Uneven Growth: Tactile Urbanism for Expanding Megacities” and was pleasantly surprised that many great urbanists too believe in the power and potential of PLT, and the exhibit had a great video and diagrams explaining how the process works and who is involved, as well as projections for the costs, which she thinks we need to include to be realistic about this plan. The next step is consolidating information and creating a coherent explanation of how this process works with relation to the homeless, as well as thinking about the public education piece, which she feel may involve a very simplified version of how this process works, maybe with clear simple colored diagrams. Getting the public to understand this “abstract” and “liberal” concept is the challenged, but we think it will be possible with just a change of perspective and presentation.

I, myself, will edit the current homeless policy section of the white paper that I worked on, since we want to include some of the long-term programs and services that the homeless are offered to get back on their feet. Simply having a place to stay for the night is not enough to prepare a homeless person for a job interview, so the shelters should provide job assistance and possibly even therapists to help the people through the process of getting their lives back on track. These suggestions may be included in our policy recommendation and our solutions to the problem. (http://usich.gov/plan_objective/pathways_to_employment/how_to_build_employment_programs_that_prevent_and_end_homelessness) I found this source to be helpful because it outlines plans to create employment programs that could benefit the homeless, who need jobs to afford rent and live in New York City. I am also going to work on editing the final white paper to make it more concise because for our popular education piece, we are planning to possibly publish an article outlining the topics discussed in our white paper, along with a few words from our community contacts, in order to educate the public about the issue of homelessness and the current shelter system we have now. Once we have an article written and edited by everyone in the group, we plan to send it to the NY Times, Picture the Homeless’ newsletters, the CCNY student newspaper, and several other publications to spread the information about homelessness and how it is such a huge problem in the city.

After we each fully understand and find sources about the questions that we should consider in our white paper, we plan to meet one day and sit down to edit our white paper draft as a group. We need to incorporate more long-term solutions that the homeless need in order to be motivated and rejoin the workforce because their ultimate goal is to achieve financial stability and never return to shelters. On Monday, April 13th, half of our group will meet with Ryan and Eric to update them on what we have been working on so far and get their feedback/ input. They may also answer some of our questions of how CLTs work and share some of their policy recommendations, so we can take their work into account and build on it.

Reading Response #5

Community, Part 1: Development and Control

The first chapter “Communities Develop” by James DeFilippis and Susan Saegert brought up some very interesting ideas that I had thought about before as well. The first theory mentioned was that communities do not truly exist in urban settings. That is a debatable concept because although cities, like New York, are more individualistic than collectivistic, communities still form within neighborhoods in parts of cities. These communities are groups of people who associated with each other, based on similar ethnicity and socioeconomic status. Jane Jacobs may argue that community development cannot flourish in New York because of the continuous zoning and rezoning that takes place. I think that is why she emphasized how neighborhoods should be preserved and sidewalks should maintained for many years since they used to be the meeting point where small groups of communities could enjoy each other’s company. However, gentrification disrupts the growth of communities by introducing outsiders to an area that they may not feel like they belong in right away. Therefore, it may appear as if communities are nonexistent, but they do exist and they do matter. This chapter also discussed the significance of communities because in a capitalist society, one may believe that communities do not contribute to the economic and social progress within a city. However, there are instances in which communities come together to fight against urban renewal and gentrification through protests, with organizations like Picture the Homeless, and protests we saw in Harlem, in the film “Whose Barrio?” Furthermore, the chapter states that communities “play the vital role of reproducing the labor power that is needed for capitalism to survive” (DeFilippis & Seagert, 2012). This highlight of how communities are essential to a capitalist society would be the strongest argument that anyone could provide against urban renewal and the relocation/ breaking up of many communities because gentrification has been used as a tool for finding more space for private investors to build. Therefore, they would care about the harm that tearing down communities produces if it is a fiscal matter.

The second chapter “Swimming Against the Tide” by Alice O’Connor focused on the history of federal policy changes pertaining to communities in poverty. She pointed out policy contradictions, in which small-scale interventions are supposed to revive poor communities, but large-scale federal policy does not allow those communities to survive. I believe that zoning is one of the large-scale strategies that focus on rebuilding and building larger, which drives up land values, so it essentially pushes poor people out of their homes. Moreover, as the years pass by in this post-industrial city, New York continues to become more commercialized and it seems as if there will be no place for poor communities to reside in after a few more decades. Perhaps, the problem is the way that the American federal government aspires to work with local organizations and activist groups to benefit everyone without directly providing for the poor, as an ideal. However, in reality, that is not always the case. In terms of our project relating to homelessness and the shelter industrial complex, the Picture the Homeless is working hard to bring about change and stop the criminalization of the homeless. The federal government allows certain spaces to be used to build homeless shelters, but if more direct help was provided to this group of people, many of them would be able to get back on their feet and contribute to society.

Chapter three “Community Control and Development” by James DeFilippis discussed the history of federal laws that aimed to fight “The War on Poverty,” which were deemphasized in the later years. Therefore, community development corporations (CDCs) formed in order to advance community development by putting more control in the hands of the community. However, the Model Cities Program was designed to give control over poor communities to city governments. This shows a battle between who should decide what happens over communities: the government or the people who make up those communities. It is a very interesting debate that is relevant to this day, and I can understand why certain communities want to empower their people, such as the “black power” movement. However, when private developers run out of space to build and contribute to the economy, they turn to poor communities to refurbish them with little regard for the people. At the end of this chapter, DeFilippis brought up challenges that communities face in order to fend for themselves. However, I feel that most people are not educated enough on the issues, such as race associating with poverty or the history of federal government policy, to achieve the goals of using race as a strategy to shape policy decisions and promote antipoverty policy in general.

Discussion Questions: How can communities become more educated to come up with resourceful solutions to the issues of gentrification and poverty? What would community development look like in New York if the trends of urban renewal continue to raise land value and the poor are forced out of the city altogether?

Reading Discussion #4

The Capital of Capital, Part 2

Scott Larson’s fifth chapter on urban planning as a narrative is clearly relevant to the community board meeting shown in the film “Whose Barrio?” In the meeting, the planners and building developers were trying their best to convince the community that it would be beneficial for everyone to allow luxury apartments to be built in Harlem. However, the community members knew that the median income in that neighborhood was too low for anyone from the community to be able to live in the new apartments. This relates to Robert Moses and how he used the power of persuasion to shape the future of New York City because convincing the community to the tearing down and rebuilding of buildings is a significant aspect of urban planning. Moses’s method included delivering creative assumptions as facts (Larson, 2013). However, aggressive urban planning/ renewal is necessary to pull a city out of recession, such as the one in 1989 to 1992. Yaro and Hiss, the authors of “A Region at Risk” also agree that rebuilding the city to attract wealthier individuals is needed for economic growth and to engage in global competition. For example, the Third Regional Plan proposed by the Regional Plan Association (RPA) was based on the prediction that New York’s population would double to 20 million. Therefore, more parks, highways, and bridges should be constructed to accommodate the growing number of urban dwellers.

In relation to the previous chapters from Larson’s book, Jane Jacobs would have a huge problem with this boom of development because the city would become more commercialized and there would not be a focus on the people who were already living in the city. Along with the older generations being displaced, communities would be broken up. The RPA’s plan also has neoliberal ideals with a shift away from big government to a more laissez-faire economic system. This includes a smaller group of officials making the decisions of where to build the parks and public institutions, while offering the community incentives to promote less vandalism and better quality of life. Jacobs would argue that the culture of the communities would still be stripped away, especially through displacement and gentrification. Gentrification, through social policy of the Bloomberg administration, is an urban strategy aimed to push out people of lower income minority groups who have service jobs in order to make room for more elite consumers. This idea also connects to “Whose Barrio?” because foreign and domestic investors are buying out the building with lower rents and rebuilding them as luxury apartments, which are only ideal for wealthier individuals. It is unfair that landlords deliberately worsen the living conditions for the residents in Harlem to force them to leave on their own, in order to sell the buildings to be reconstructed. Larson mentions that a part of the strategy of gentrification includes having famous designers build the luxury apartments so that their status and aesthetic attracts more high-class people to move to poor neighborhoods. I think that the strategy has been working well for the goal that it aimed to accomplish, but at the cost of those of the lower class.

In chapter six of Larson’s book, he discusses how today’s society would side with Jane Jacobs instead of Robert Moses on how cities should be developed. However, Bloomberg focused on “Moses-scaled” planning through the use of zoning, which is meant to include the diversity of uses that Jacobs thought was lacking. The characteristic of neighborhoods would be preserved through downzoning while rezoning would produce new developments of large scales. New jobs that would be created would be in the rezoned “business districts,” and this is an issue for the homeless because if they are not educated enough to attain these occupations, then they would be forced to return to shelters even if affordable, permanent housing gives them the motivation to search for a job. We will have to discuss this problem in our project and conduct more research.

Bill de Blasio’s plan of inclusionary zoning consists of private developers buying a few units below market price and incorporate them with investments in luxury development in order to keep rent low for certain communities. However, the plan sounds too good to be true. Private developers may not feel that using a portion of their investment to accommodate people with lower incomes as an incentive, especially since gentrification has been such a useful strategy to attract the wealthy to different neighborhoods. Another problem is that the estimates of a community’s income are the median incomes, but medians are not very reflective of the income gap between the poorest person and the richest. Therefore, income should be evaluated and generalized by using other measures instead of the median.

Discussion Questions: Can a capitalist economy exist without a significant income gap? What are the economics behind wages, and why are minimum wages so low that people cannot afford “affordable” housing (under de Blasio’s plan) without working 139 hours a week?

Reading Response #3

Roots of Community Planning

“Root Shock: The Consequences of African American Dispossession” by Mindy Thompson Fullilove is an article that brought up topics I discussed in my previous anthropology and sociology classes. I have read numerous texts about how African Americans today are still confined to ghettos although the United States has been desegregated years ago. It was interesting that the article highlighted the new urban ghettos, in which African American culture flourished, especially with the Harlem Renaissance. However, in 1949, the Urban Renewal Act was enacted, and the plan was to clear out slums by selling the land to private developers in order to attract people who had more money. This led to the dispossession of many African American communities. When a specific race or class of people are targeted and indirectly forced to migrate elsewhere, the communities that replace certainly shape the future of New York City. The city and the nation, in general, were built on the foundation of democracy and the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. However, forcing the lower class and minority class to relocate does not reflect democracy.

The urban renewal projects aimed at attracting middle class individuals while pushing out the poor reflect how economics and class distinctions shape the future of the city. Since cities resemble big business and capitalism, a wealthy businessman or politician may believe that a city can only continue to grow if the city dwellers are able to compete in the job market. In other words, a misconception may be that the poor do not belong in a city; therefore, it is right to get rid of slums and disregard providing affordable housing and welfare to people. The issue is that this results in an oversight of the lower class. Perhaps, a person living in poverty has the potential to contribute to the growth of the city by obtaining a high-wage job, but he/ she does not have the opportunity to attend college. These are real problems that individuals continue to face in America today. There is great debate about whether a government should provide welfare to level out the playing field for the less fortunate or if those people should only rely on their own hard work to achieve success in society.

Relocation of less wealthy African Americans through urban renewal projects also disregards the lives of those people and their history of living in a specific neighborhood. For example, the article mentioned how two communities in Roanoke, Virginia were subject to dispossession after a federal urban renewal program was set into action. Those two communities were very tight-knit, and they had been living in the same location for generations. Therefore, the urban renewal project was devastating to their culture since they were forced to leave behind the shops, religious institutions, and houses that were familiar to them. White people also avoided the neighborhoods that African Americans would live in. In today’s world, the segregation may not be as dramatic as it was in the 20th century, but it shaped the society we have now. This means that urban renewal projects will continue to shape the future of how divided neighborhoods are, in terms of ethnicity and class.

In “From Dislocation to Resistance: The Roots of Community Planning,” a chapter from Tom Angotti’s book, the historical moments in which African Americans expressed their anger for being excluded within cities are highlighted. The ongoing feud between wealthy white Americans, who want to limit the amount of affordable housing in cities, and African American and immigrants, who refuse to be displaced by urban renewal projects, continues to shape the city we live in to this day. We can say that the city has a problem when affordable buildings are torn down, and the inhabitants stand in front of the bulldozers that are knocking their homes down. These acts of resistance shape federal policy as well as the social atmosphere, which will have a lasting impact on the future of the city.

Discussion questions: Are urban renewal projects doing more harm than good when they cause an entire group of people to relocate? How can social stigma against the lower class and minority groups be eliminated? Is it even possible to change the stereotypes that have developed in society against distinct ethnicities and classes of people?

Reading Response #2

"The Patron Saint" and "The Git'r Done Man"

In the introduction of “Death and Life of Great American Cities,” Jane Jacobs emphasizes how cities in North America have been creating a mirage through investment when the areas that need money, such as the projects, are underfunded. She makes a great point here because instead of building another skyscraper in the city for a wealthy businessman, city planning should be focused on getting the elevators to run in the projects. Jacobs also believes that that “urban renewal theory” is fueling decay within the city. I agree with this as well because surrounding public housing with lavish parks, restaurants, and other establishments does not make it any easier to live with an income below the poverty line. This is an issue that definitely shapes the future of New York City since urban renewal can be an amazing plan if it includes the lower class more. Instead of hiding those who live in poverty, they should be integrated into the city. This also relates to the project of providing permanent housing to the homeless instead of building more shelters. If the homeless were placed into permanent homes rather than shelters, they could learn more skills and the positive environment may even influence them to strive for better. Therefore, they could enter the workforce and help build the city since it seems as if the city is always growing and expanding. However, this growth fosters more competition in the job market, and once a person earns a large sum of money, he or she can afford to live in a neighborhood that separates itself from the poorer neighborhoods.

In addition, it was very interesting that Jacobs interviewed people about North End, which was deemed as a slum. From the outside, North End appeared to be an extravagant place to live, but the inhabitants painted a different picture. Furthermore, bankers selectively choose which areas to invest in by taking the income of the people into account. Since the bankers and investors theoretically have the most say in urban planning due to the money they put forward, they will always shape the city because they decide which parks and theaters get to be built where. I personally feel that it is strange that large theaters are often built in poor neighborhoods because the people who live next to the theater cannot afford to buy a ticket to see a show there. It is as if the theater is there to mock them and remind them of what they cannot experience even though they live in the city.

In contrast to Jane Jacobs, who was called the “patron saint,” Robert Moses was the “master builder.” He expanded the cities infrastructure by laying down more roads, bridges, tunnels, parks, and urban renewal projects. Moses represents industrialization and how society was changing rapidly to include larger industries, which meant that the city was generating more money. He also used federal policy in order to shape the market through planning. Therefore, in his view, businesses and how quickly they could grow would shape the future of the city. I agree that economics and businesses play a role in a city’s development, but the issue in North American cities is that as businesses grow, the gap between the rich and poor also grow. Therefore, economics cannot shape the future of a city without having a dramatic influence on the people who live and work in the city. We need a happy medium between the two extremes that Jane Jacobs and Robert Moses propose for urban planning. If we focus too much on the less wealthy individuals, then the city’s growth could be stunted. However, if there is too much emphasis on big business without considering the people who reside in the city, the wealthy may decide to move to suburbs to get away from the hustle and bustle, but the middle class and lower class would not have that option.

Discussion questions: Why would city planners rather hide poverty in the city rather than use a portion of their funds to eliminate that poverty? Can a higher class exist without the middle and lower classes? Is there an urban renewal project or city plan that could serve as the mediator between Jane Jacobs’ and Robert Moses’ view on urban planning?

Reading Response #1

What's Taking Shape?

The first aspect of American cities mentioned in chapter three of “Cities and Urban Life” by Macionis and Parillo is that they were founded when medieval Europe was experiencing industrialization. I believe that industrialization has truly shaped cities in the United States from the very beginning, which shaped the capitalist economy that we have now. American urban dwellers often inhabit crowded, bustling cities because they seek better jobs or to further their education. Gaining higher education would enhance a person’s skills, which he or she would need in order to compete in today’s job market. Therefore, this sense of competition is definitely a factor that shapes the city and perhaps, even caused the gap between the rich and poor to expand. But where did this competing spirit come from? I think it rooted in industrialization when job specialization was taking place at a rapid rate, and people were paid different wages in relation to how skilled their occupations were. Most of the cities were first founded on the basis that they would allow for freedom of religion, but they were actually “unabashed trading centers bent on profit and growth” (Macionis and Parillo, 65). The text also pointed out New York City in particular, which was first named “New Amsterdam.” It was interesting that the population of this city was much smaller when it was first founded, which resulted in a more collective social life. I feel that this is a different picture of New York than the one we have today. In today’s world, the city is separated into communities based on ethnicity and people’s cultures. Those communities may be tight-knit, but the city as a whole is not collectivistic anymore. There might be too much diversity between New Yorkers to have a truly collective society in the city. I believe that this diversity also shapes the city because tensions often arise between white Americans and minority groups. Therefore, the way racism is addressed and how individuals have stereotypes about others based on where they come from is a huge factor that shapes the city’s social policies and laws. Although there is a fighting spirit in New York to change the attitudes people have about race, action must take place from a legal position as well. If protests and rallies for ending the “broken windows” policy and quality of life policing are ignored by the government, there will be more social unrest, which will shape the city.

Another interesting point brought up in the text was that in the 1950s, decentralization began, which means that people started to move away from cities. I feel that the migration of populations certainly shapes the city. For example, if a majority of the people who live in New York today decided to move to other states to live in suburban houses rather than in apartments, but continued to travel to the city for work, we would be living in a very different New York. This city is always alive and not as mechanistic as it may have been when industrialization was first taking place. During industrialization, there were many factories, but today, there are numerous tourist attractions as well as businesses and industries. Furthermore, housing shapes the city because it determines which people congregate in which neighborhoods and what is available to one community varies from the stores and goods that are available for another. Political and economic corruption shapes the city as well. The text brought up William “Boss” Tweed, who stole millions of dollars in 1870 and felt invincible afterwards. This type of corruption continues to exist today, but in a smaller scale. Therefore, it is important to consider how much the public is informed about politics and how aware people are of corruption because when the city loses money, it impacts the inhabitants of the city who have to work hard to make a living.

Discussion questions: How would present-day North American cities look different if they were founded many years before Europe began industrializing? Could the United States have become such a great force in the international arena without the development of cities? How may people’s awareness of corruption and knowledge of American politics shape the city?