Testimony of Randi Weingarten before the Empire State Development Corporation’s Atlantic Yards Public Hearing: August 23, 2006

Aug 23, 2006 3:59 PM

My name is Randi Weingarten. I am the president of the United Federation of Teachers. I want to thank the Empire State Development Corporation for holding this hearing on the Atlantic Yards development..

I won’t pretend the project isn’t controversial. Any development on this scale will have benefits and downsides, along with vocal, committed supporters and honest critics. But I believe that the project’s advantages far outweigh its risks, and that building it is the right choice for our city.

Central to my support of the project is its affordable housing component. Affordable housing is a big concern for my members. Increasingly, teachers complain that while they want to live and work in New York, they cannot afford it. Housing costs are threatening to drive them out of the city and out of the school system.

This project offers a unique opportunity to bring affordable, quality housing to downtown Brooklyn. The opportunity to build 2,250 units of affordable, rent-stabilized housing for low- to moderate-income and professional families is one we cannot squander.

The UFT has been saying for years that the high cost of living in New York City is driving excellent teachers to other districts. It makes new city college graduates choose careers outside of New York, and exacerbates the shortage-area staffing crisis in middle and high school level math and science, as well as special education in all grades. That’s a brain drain the city recognized when it agreed to raise starting pay in the last two contracts.

In April, the city joined with the UFT to directly address the housing crisis for teachers. Together, we fashioned a memorandum of agreement as an addendum to our contract establishing The Housing Support Program for shortage-area teachers. It is being offered to certified, experienced middle and high school math and science teachers, as well as to special education teachers in all grades. Successful applicants will receive housing support in return for a three-year service commitment.

That connection between attracting quality city workers and controlling housing costs isn’t so startlingly new. For years, the city’s Housing and Preservation Department gave pride of place to city employees under the assumption “house me or lose me.” We cannot lose any more critically needed educators. This project, by granting preferences to city employees, will allow the best and the brightest to stay in New York as residents as educators.

Seeing this project through to fruition will also tell other developers that they can build affordable housing without loss to themselves.

There is one downside, however, that I am concerned about. That is the threat of school overcrowding in the area.

In its editorial supporting the project, The New York Times also raised this alarm bell. While the Draft Environmental Impact Statement foresees that “no significant adverse schools impacts are expected by 2010,” when the buildings are planned to be available for occupancy, it does acknowledge problems will crop up by 2016. That’s following the introduction of –and the growth of—thousands of families into the area. Their education needs must be planned for and met; 2016 is less than 10 years away.

The D-E-I-S itself lists several excellent recommendations that will meet that expected family-education need. It recommends not only moving students to schools with available capacity, but creating new satellite facilities in less crowded schools. It also suggests leasing school space to be constructed on the project site and/or building new school facilities off-site. And it notes that designating Building 5 on the project site as the site for a new school is currently under discussion with New York City Department of Education (DOE) and the School Construction Authority.

We, of course, favor building new schools in or near any new residential construction, because school overcrowding and large class sizes are big problems throughout the city. The D-E-I-S recommendations should be followed even though they are simply advisory.

With that said, I believe this project can be a community-building model by seamlessly integrating housing for low-income and middle income families and seniors. New York neighborhoods thrive when they are mixed-income communities; the schools are good, the streets are safe and the merchants do well. This benefits kids, their teachers and parents, and the city as a whole.

An added benefit of this building project is that its workers will be union members, all part of the New York City building trades. That means more union jobs at good union wages will be coming to Brooklyn. Affordable housing can’t get much better than that.

Thank you.