ULURP is just a community engagement process. absent a plan i suppose it's a terrain on which organized groups compete to get resources for their interests (more affordable housing, capital $$ for NYCHA, etc)
-
-
Replying to @ceaweaver @bdlimm
but even if we were a lot more comfortable with municipal/state debt (NYCHA? lol) we would still need a democratic public engagement process for land use decisions. so maybe you have a problem with whether or not ULURP is THAT, but still don't grasp the MMT connection.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @ceaweaver
The connection lies in the very first step (developer proposal), which prioritizes private developer & investor choices from the start, thereby discouraging the public from investing more time and energy into fighting the proposal. I'd like to add many steps before step 1.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @bdlimm
Cea Weaver Retweeted Cea Weaver
yeah but that to me still is here:https://twitter.com/ceaweaver/status/1471869259907272711?s=20 …
Cea Weaver added,
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @ceaweaver @bdlimm
i mean i think i basically agree with you re: the municipal debt and public projects but i don't agree that it really has anything to do w ULURP
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @ceaweaver
Ah ok I see. So here's one example of something I have in mind: flip the order of steps of the process by having the city proactively fund local public engagement processes before any specific developer app is submitted to build more local political power over the developer.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @bdlimm
FWIW this was basically the norm under deBlasio neighborhood rezoning processes. Bushwick, ENY, East Harlem, Jerome Avenue, Gowanus ... etc
1 reply 0 retweets 5 likes -
Replying to @ceaweaver
To some extent yes, but the Council could pass a process that creates more leverage for organized local input than previously. (One example: a rezoning process in which locally derived expectations come first & become app preconditions, as opposed to mere factors in negotiation.)
0 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @bdlimm
Bright - this is an *extremely* troubling thing to suggest when you take even a surface level look at how communities have leveraged zoning to exert local preferences on who is allowed to live where.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @ceaweaver @bdlimm
we need to move forward towards a citywide plan with social housing/public housing goals as well as towards a robust, democratic planning process that reduces power imbalances and race/class inequality - and really quite far from “local deference” as a proxy for the second
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes
I am a big believer in participatory democracy and figuring forms for working class / collective governance over political processes and decision making but “local” = a problematic shorthand for that in a society as ridiculously segregated as ours.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.