Progress Made:

On Monday, March 7th, I emailed the Chinese Community Center of Flushing to ask for their opinion on the rezoning of Flushing West, but they have not replied.  

On Tuesday, March 8th, I called the Taiwan Center to ask for their opinion on the rezoning of Flushing West. However, the person who picked up the phone could not speak English and it became apparent to us that not many people at the center would be able to speak English or talk to us about the rezoning. That same day I called the MinKwon Center and was connected to Jung Rae Jang, the Organizing Fellow for Advocacy & Organizing team at the MinKwon Center for Community Action. He informed me of the Flushing Rezoning Community Alliance Meeting taking place that week. He also talked about his position on the rezoning of Flushing, which was repeated by James Hong at the meeting. Jung Rae Jang believed that more affordable housing should be guaranteed permanently, that there should be more senior centers because Flushing has an aging population, and that gentrification may be a real threat to Flushing residents.   

On Thursday, March 10th, most of our group attended the Flushing Rezoning Community Alliance Meeting. Panelists included Councilman Peter Koo, City Planner Joy Chen, and representatives from the NYC Department of Housing Preservation and Development. In the beginning of the meeting, the plans for the development of Flushing West were presented by the representatives from the NYC Department of City Planning (DCP) and the NYC Department of Housing Preservation and Development (DHP). Joy Chen stated that “[t]he goals of the Flushing West Neighborhood Planning Study is to craft a comprehensive plan that is responsive to what we’ve heard in the community and . . . [to] make Flushing a better place to live, work, and play.” She continued to say, “The plan’s objective will be to encourage new affordable housing, which is greatly needed, encourage walkability, support small business development, and help ensure that infrastructure and city services can align and meet the demands currently in Flushing as well as future growth.” Joy Chen from the DCP explained the overall goals of the development of Flushing West while the representative from the DHP went into the details of the affordable housing and development. The DHP representative stressed that there are many resources that residents can use if they are facing problems as tenants in NYC. Because many of the sites for development in Flushing are privately owned, it is difficult for the DHP to use their resources to have affordable housing in Flushing. Thus, they have to use Mandatory Inclusionary Housing (MIH) to require a minimum of 25% of the units developed on the waterfront of Flushing Creek to be affordable at an average 60% of Area Median Income (AMI) or 30% of the units to be affordable at an average of 80% of AMI. Both the DHP and DCP representatives made it a point to say that the DCP and the DHP are listening to the concerns of the community. It seemed like the DCP and DHP representatives understood that the community really cared about the affordable housing and tried to make sure that the community understood that they were working with them. During their presentations they also stressed that they will be working with the community in the future, before the plan is finalized.

After the DCP and DHP representatives explained the plans, people from the Minkwon Center and the Unitarian Universalist Congregation of Queens presented their concerns about the development plans. The Minkwon representative, James Hong, expressed the community’s desires of: “real permanent affordable housing targeted to the incomes of current Flushing residents, . . . low income senior housing for our elders and aging population, . . . good jobs for local residents and preservation and promotion of small businesses, . . . infrastructure and transportation improvements, . . . strong anti-harassment and anti-displacement policies to protect the community, . . . sound environmental restoration and preservation and access to open green spaces, . . . [and] real and meaningful community engagement and participation.” Afterwards, the Unitarian Universalist Congregation of Queens representative, Carol Blockmen, focused on the issue of affordable housing in the rezoning plans. She pointed out that the MIH proposal is not affordable to Flushing residents because “the median income for a family of three in downtown Flushing is about $34,000 . . . [but] the lowest median income addressed in the MIH proposal is $46,620. This will not help low-income residents of Flushing. Many members of City Council agree with [her]. It has been reported that there has been negotiations for a change in the MIH proposal to include 20% of apartments to be available to families with a median income of $31,080 annually. This is still not enough to adequately address the large number of low-income families in Flushing . . . [She is] actually recommending [that the developments] need 30% of new apartments to be for families making between $23,310 and $31,080 annually.” After she finished her presentation, the meeting was open to questions from the community members.

At the end of the meeting Claudia and I asked Joy Chen for her powerpoint presentation. I received her presentation on Friday, March 11th.

Interesting Findings:

No one at the meeting addressed the displacement of businesses along the now polluted waterfront. Most people seemed only to be concerned about the affordable housing in the rezoning plans. Councilman Peter Koo said at the Flushing Rezoning Community Alliance Meeting that he would vote against the MIH plan if the plan did not include an option of 40% AMI for deep affordability.

The attendees of the meeting were diverse; there were Spanish, Korean, and Chinese translators for the presentations.

Challenges Encountered:

The Chinese Community Center of Flushing has not yet to responded to my email.

Tasks Remaining:

We still need to decide on the format of our popular education material and white paper. I will continue to communicate with the Minkwon Center for Community Action and other any future community contacts. I will also try to obtain James Hong’s and Carol Blockmen’s powerpoint presentations. Wilian will continue to research small business growth and workforce needs in Flushing to understand MinKwon’s desire for the developments to provide good jobs for Flushing residents. Claudia will be researching the historical background of Flushing and looking at the significance of community centers in Flushing. Attending the meeting has given us some insight as to which organizations are really concerned about the rezoning. Christine will continue to research the problem of gentrification and its relationship to displacement because of the community’s fear of the lack of real affordable housing in the new construction. Brian will continue to discuss affordable housing, issues with the current rezoning plan, and the solutions that the representative from the Unitarian Universalist Congregation of Queens presented.

Group Dynamic:

Most of the group was able to attend the Flushing Rezoning Community Alliance Meeting. We are currently working together to split up the work evenly, including deciding on who will be posting the weekly report for each week.