the race for mayor: what's in it for low income new yorkers?

7/29/2019 The Race for Mayor: What's In It for Low Income New Yorkers?

1/36

T Unrd TirdVte 2013 | 1

The RaceoR MayoR

Whats in it

r lw-incmeNew Yrers?

MaRch

2013


2/36

abut t autrs

Nn Rnkin is Vice President r

Plicy Research and Advcacy at CSS,

where she leads the wr n labr,

husing, and yuth issues. She is the

under The Unheard Third survey

and has written widely n issues

aecting upward mbility r lw-wage

wrers and the challenges meeting

wr and amily respnsibilities. Nancy

Ranin is a graduate Crnell and

Princetn Universitys Wdrw Wilsn

Schl Public and Internatinal

Aairs.

apurv Mrtr is a plicy analyst

at CSS where he cnducts research

n issues aecting lw-incme New

Yrers. He recently c-authred

a CSS reprt n CUNY enrllment

trends. He received a Masters in Public

Administratin rm Baruch Cllege.

We thanT Nw yrk cmmunit

Trust r their generus n-ging

supprt which maes The Unheard

Third survey pssible. Lae Research

Partners cnducts the survey annually

r CSS.

Insid Tis Rprt

Wh Are The Unheard Third? 2

Findings 4

Summary 31

Endntes 32

Hw the Survey Was Cnducted 33

2013 marks a critical election year forNew York City, as voters will choosea new mayor and a slate of new publicofcials. CSS is committed to ensuringthat the voices of low-income NewYorkerswho make up one-thirdof the citys electorateare a part ofthe political debate. During the 2013election season, CSS will sponsorpublic candidate forums, issue a voterguide detailing the positions of thecandidates, and widely disseminatethe ndings of The Unheard Third,our annual survey of low-income NewYorkers. These efforts are intended toraise the visibility of issues of concernto our constituents, and to put the

candidates on record with their plansto help low-income New Yorkers andthe working poor.

www.cy./t2013

The Community Service Society ofNew York (CSS) is an informed,independent, and unwavering voice forpositive action on behalf of more than3 million low-income New Yorkers.CSS draws on a 170-year history ofexcellence in addressing the root causesof economic disparity. We respondto urgent, contemporary challengesthrough applied research, advocacy,litigation, and innovative programmodels that strengthen and benet allNew Yorkers.

www.cy.


3/36


In a city where more than one in ve

residents struggles to survive on anincome that puts them below thepoverty level, will the word povertyeven be uttered by the candidates?Where Manhattans long avenuesstretch from the nations wealthiestzip codes to some of its poorestneighborhoods where the workingpoor wait eight years to get into publichousing1 and city shelters overowwith a record number of homelessfamilieswill ofce-seekers proposeideas for affordable housing on thescale needed? While we applaud thevision for the future that is bringinghigh tech campuses to the city, willanyone running for mayor offer avision for the future of the 58,0002mostly black and Latino young peoplewho have left school without diplomasor jobs? Will the candidates competeon how to create opportunities forupward mobility for those strugglingto support their families on low-wage,non-union jobs at car washes, retail

chains, restaurant kitchens, and caringfor our children and elderlyor the348,000 unemployed New Yorkers3who are desperate to nd any jobat all?

These are some of the questionson the minds of low-income NewYorkers this election year. One out ofthree voting age citizens in New YorkCitya huge potential bloclives in

a family with an income below twice

the federal poverty level of $23,021for a family of four. They are theunheard third. Their voices are toooften ignored by candidates seekingpublic ofce.

More than a decade ago, theCommunity Service Society beganannually surveying these low-incomeNew Yorkers, with the goal ofelevating their concerns and views inthe public debate. Our 2012 surveyis based on telephone interviewswith 1,468 New York City residentsconducted by the national pollingrm, Lake Research. This past year,we asked low-income New Yorkersabout their priorities for the nextmayor. What issues would they wantcandidates to put front and center inthe campaign? Where do the poor andthose barely escaping povertys graspstand on proposals that will shape ourschools, the safety of our streets, andthe earning power of our workers?

And how do their opinions align withor differ from those of middle- andhigher-income New Yorkers, whomwe surveyed for comparison?

This report highlights the ndings ofour eleventh annual surveyndingsthat could decide the votes of one outof three New Yorkers.

Fr details n hw the survey was

cnducted see page 32.

This much is certain: a lt is at stae in 2013. New Yrers will

head t the plls t chse new leaders in a recrd number

highly cntested races where n incumbent is running: at least

19 51 City Cuncil seats, cmptrller, public advcate, ur

ut ve brugh presidents, and, mst imprtant, mayr.

What is ar rm certain are the issues that will determine the

utcmes these races.

T R r MrWhats in it for loW-income neW Yorkers?


4/36

2 | T Unrd TirdVte 2013

W ar T Unrd Tird?one-third of neW York citY citizens over the age of 18 live

in loW-income households, those earning less than tWice

the federal povertY level. thats more than 1.7 million

potential voters.

Where Do The UnhearD ThirD Live?

Gegraphic Distributin Vting-Age Citiens with Incmes

Belw 200% the Federal Pverty Level

SoURCE: AMERICAN CoMMUNITY SURVEY, 2011

BoroUgh The UnhearD ThirD

nUmBer o

PoTenTiaL voTers

The UnhearD ThirD as a

share o PoTenTiaL voTers

B 366,275 792,358 46%

Bly 601,629 1,546,690 39%

mtt 320,825 1,130,195 28%

Qu 365,194 1,314,556 28%

stt ild 65,175 328,577 20%

nw Y Cty 1,719,638 5,112,376 34%

Numbr Rsidnts12,905 - 19,999

20,000 - 27,999

28,000 - 35,999

36,000 - 42,999

43,000 - 54,830

Washingtn Heights/Inwd

50,855

Highbridge/S. Cncurse

47,725

Mrrisania/E. Tremnt

53,915Mtt Haven/Hunts Pint

54,830

Jamaica

43,086

East New Yr/

Starrett City

48,518

Lwer East Side/Chinatwn

49,154

Williamsburg/Greenpint

45,603


5/36


indinsindin on:Lw-incme New Yrers aremre liely t say things in the city are headed

n the wrng trac but all New Yrers are

wrried abut grwing incme inequality and

a shrining middle class. PAGE 4

indin Tw: Ecnmic wrries and

hardships persist amng lw-incme New

Yrers three years int the recvery. PAGE 6

indin Tr: While lw-incme New

Yrers put jb creatin at the tp their

agenda r the net mayr, they, alng withmderate- and higher-incme respndents,

d nt thin the slutin is maing the city

mre business-riendly. Rather, New Yrers

are united in avring plicies that help

wring peple get ahead. PAGE 9

indin ur:New Yrers believe that

the way r wring amilies t get ahead

is by raising the fr r lw-paying jbs,

attracting mre middle-silled jbs t the

city, and ensuring that yung peple have

the educatin they need t ll thse better-

paying jbs. PAGE 12

indin iv:Virtually all New Yrers

thin that it is imprtant r the net mayr

t put mre resurces int schls serving

pr students and ensure that high schl

students graduate well-prepared r cllege.

PAGE 18

indin Six: While New Yrers wantt see a greater investment in public

schls, views are smewhat mied abut

cntinuing sme the specic strategies

the current administratin. PAGE 20

indin Svn: Lw-incme New Yrers

avr plicies t widen access t higher

educatin r graduates the citys public

high schls. They als want t substantially

epand educatinal prgrams at all levels r

thse serving time in state prisns.PAGE 22

indin eit: Reducing crime, drugs,

and guns cmes in secnd n the list

tp pririties r lw-incme New Yrers.

Views are divided n stp and ris

tactics, but thse mst directly aected

want this plice practice reined in. PAGE 25

indin Nin: Maing husing mre

ardable rans in the tp cluster issues lw-incme New Yrers want the

mayral candidates t address. Lw-incme

New Yrers eperience requent husing

hardships and verwhelmingly thin that

it is very imprtant that the net mayr

pursue plicies t increase the availability

ardable husing as part his r her

agenda. PAGE 28

raCe/eThniCiTY The UnhearD ThirD aLL PoTenTiaL voTers

Wt, -hpc 28% 41%

Blc, -hpc 27% 24%a 11% 11%

hpc 34% 24%

BoroUgh

B 21% 16%

Bly 35% 30%

mtt 19% 22%

Qu 21% 26%

stt ild 4% 6%

md huld ic* $15,760 $52,200

ow Cld huld 41% 34%

W a (18-65 y ld) 78% 83%

n h scl Dpl 29% 16%

Uplyt rt 26% 11%

*BASED oN THE AGE AND CITIzENSHIP STATUS oF THE HEAD oF THE HoUSEHoLD

hw D T Unrd Tird cmpr wit otr Ptntil Vtrs?

DemograPhiC CharaCTerisTiCs o voTing-age CiTizens in neW York CiTY


6/36


Half of low-income New Yorkerssurveyed believe that the city is on thewrong track, with only 35 percentsaying that things are going in theright direction. This contrasts with theviews of higher-income residents, morethan half of whom see the city movingin the right direction, and moderate-income New Yorkers, whose views areevenly divided.

Yet, despite their somewhat greateroptimism about the overall directionof the city, nearly three out of fourmoderate- and higher-income NewYorkers say they are worried aboutwidening inequality between thewealthy and the poor in the citywith four in ten saying they are veryworried. Democrats and African-Americans, of all incomes, are among

the most worried about the growingchasm between the haves and thehave-nots. New Yorkersacrossincome groupsalso express worriesabout the citys disappearing middleclass, with over half saying they arevery worried about this prospect. Even

more troubling, opportunities forupward mobility are seen as limited.Barely half of New Yorkers, regardlessof income, think that it is possiblefor poor people to make it into themiddle class these days. The chasm isnot merely widening; it is becomingunbridgeable.

16% 44%34% 64%

Nw yrkrs rss inm

lins r wrrid but

widnin inqulit in t it,

wit mr tn 4 in 10 sin

t r verywrrid.

Q: Hw wrried are yu abut wideninginequality between the wealthy andthe pr in New Yr City? Are yu very

wrried, smewhat wrried, a little wrried,

r nt at all wrried? (Split Sampled

Questin)

15% 41%29% 70%

15% 39%25% 74%

NoT AT ALLWoRRIED

A LITTLEWoRRIED

VERYWoRRIED

SoMEWHATWoRRIED

ToTAL

LoW INcoMe

MoD-HIGH INCoME

| | | | | | | | | | | |40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70%

hl lw-inm Nw

yrkrs bliv tins v

ttn prtt sriusl n

t wrn trk.

Q: Generally speaing, d thin things inNew Yr City are ging in the rightdirectin, r d yu eel things have gtten

pretty seriusly n the wrng trac?

44% 42%

41% 41%

39% 52%

WRoNG TRACk RIGHT DIRECTIoN

DireCTion o neW York CiTY, BY inCome

50% 35%

ToTAL

LoW INcoMe

MoDERATE INCoME

HIGH INCoME

| | | | | | | | | | |50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%

indin onloW-income neW Yorkers are more likelY to saY things in the

citY are headed on the Wrong track but all neW Yorkers

are Worried about groWing income inequalitY and a shrinkingmiddle class.


7/36


hl blks nd nrl l

Dmrts r verywrrid

but widnin inqulit.

Q: Hw wrried are yu abut wideninginequality between the wealthy andthe pr in New Yr City? Are yu very

wrried, smewhat wrried, a little wrried,

r nt at all wrried? (Split Sampled

Questin)

NoT AT ALLWoRRIED

A LITTLEWoRRIED

VERYWoRRIED

SoMEWHATWoRRIED

| | | | | | | | | | | | | |50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80%

5% 41%29% 70%

20% 38% 68%32%

50%11% 78%20%

38%13% 72%27%

16% 38% 60%37%

47%9% 77%23%

17% 40% 73%26%

40% 16% 46%52%

ToTAL

WHITE

BLacK

LATINo

ASIAN

DeMocRaT

INDEPENDENT

REPUBLICAN

Tr ut ur Nw

yrkrs r wrrid but

dispprin middl lss,

wit vr l sin t r

verywrrid.

Q: Hw wrried are yu abut adisappearing middle class in NewYr City? Are yu very wrried, smewhatwrried, a little wrried, r nt at all

wrried? (Split Sampled Questin)

NoT AT ALLWoRRIED A LITTLEWoRRIED VERYWoRRIED SoMEWHATWoRRIED

| | | | | | | | | | | |30% 20% 10% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80%

23% 76%11% 53%

24% 74%11% 51%

22% 78%11% 54%

ToTAL

LoW INcoMe

MoD-HIGH INCoME

Brl l Nw yrkrs

tink it is pssibl r pr

ppl t mk it int t

middl lss.

Q: Hw pssible is it r pr peple tmae it int the middle class thesedays, very pssible, smewhat pssible, nt

very pssible, r nt pssible at all? NoT PoSSIBLEAT ALLNoT VERYPoSSIBLE

VERYPoSSIBLE

SoMEWHATPoSSIBLE

| | | | | | | | | | | |50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%

52%14% 15%46%

53%17% 18%45%

51%12% 13%47%

ToTAL

LoW INcoMe

MoD-HIGHINCoME


8/36


indin Tweconomic Worries and hardships persist among loW-income

neW Yorkers, three Years into the recoverY.

The ofcial word may be that therecession has ended, but more thanthree years into a limping recovery,low-income New Yorkers do not seeit that way. Nearly half (48 percent)of the poor and near poor wereconcerned that they or someone intheir household would be out ofwork in the coming year, with nearlya third very concerned, compared to14 percent of moderate- and higher-income New Yorkers who were veryconcerned they might lose their jobs.

Only 16 percent of low-income NewYorkers think the local job situationis starting to look up, a gure littlechanged from 15 percent a year ago.Moderate- and higher-income NewYorkers are more likely to see animproving jobs picture; 22 percentsay it is starting to look up, comparedto 13 percent who thought so a yearearlier.

The threat of job loss combined withthe sense that jobs remain scarceweighs heavily on families withlittle or no savings. Nearly half oflow-income New Yorkers reportedvirtually nothingless than $500tofall back on if tough times were tohit their families. More than fourin ten of the working poor told usthat they worry all or most of thetime that their incomes will not beenough to pay the bills. And aneven greater share of low-incomeworking mothers55 percentsaid

they worry all or nearly all the timethat their take-home pay will not besufcient to meet expenses.

When asked what problems theypersonally worry about the most,low-income New Yorkers most oftensay health care and prescription drugs(17 percent). The precarious situationof low-wage workers, with little

savings, in jobs that offer no healthinsurance and no paid sick leave, putsmany one illness away from economicdisaster.

Close behind health care, the otherthings that keep low-income NewYorkers up at night are nding orkeeping a job (15 percent), schoolsand college tuition (14 percent) andcrime (14 percent). While health alsotops the list of worries for moderate-and high-income New Yorkers,

retirement security is a close second.

Economic hardships,4 such as adrop in wages or job loss, rose forlow-income New Yorkers followingthe onset of the recession and havebeen slow to abate. In addition,over the past two years, low-incomeNew Yorkers reported an increasein health hardships, including notbeing able to get medical care, notbeing able to afford to ll a neededprescription, or going withoutinsurance.5 It is not surprising thatwith continued high unemployment

rates in the city and no increase inthe minimum wage since it went upten cents in 2009, many low-incomefamilies are struggling to make therent, buy groceries, and pay for theirmedications.

A minimum wage worker in NewYork is earning a poverty wage:$7.25 an hour, or about $15,080

for someone working full-time,year-round, is not enough to puta family of three above the federalpoverty threshold of $17,916. Forty-three percent of full-time workersearning poverty-level wages reportedexperiencing three or more serioushardships in the past year. Twenty-eight percent fell behind in the rent,nearly one in ve went hungrybecause they couldnt afford to buyfood, and almost a third had to cutback on buying clothes and school

supplies for their children.

The precarius situatin lw-wage wrers,

with little savings, in jbs that er n health

insurance and n paid sic leave, puts many

ne illness away rm ecnmic disaster.


9/36


hl lw-inm Nw yrkrs wrr but lsin b in t nxt r, nd ust 16 prnt s

t b mrkt in t it is lkin up.

Nrl l lw-inm

Nw yrkrs v lmst n

svins t ll bk n.

Q: I tugh times were t hit yu and yuramily, hw much mney in savingsd yu currently have t all bac n?

Mr tn 4 in 10 lw-inm

Nw yrkrs wrr ll r mst

t tim tt tir mil

inm will nt b nu t

p t bills.

Q:Hw ten d yu wrry that yur ttal

amily incme will nt be enugh tmeet yur amilys epenses and bills all

the time, mst the time, sme the time,

nce in a while, r never?

Q: Thining abut the net 12 mnths, hw cncerned are yuthat yu r smene in yur husehld will be ut a jb?(Split Sampled Questin)

Q: Thining New Yr City, d yu thin the jb maret isstarting t l up, is getting wrse, r is staying abut thesame? (Split Sampled Questin)

ConCern aBoUT Losing a JoB vieW o JoB markeT

| | | | | | | |80% 60% 40% 20% 0% 20% 40% 60%

| | | | | | | | | | |0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

37% 21%

32% 32%

40% 14%

ToTAL

LoW INcoMe

MoD-HIGHINCoME

ToTAL LoW INcoMe MoD-HIGH INCoME

$0-$100

$101-$500

ToTaL:

Working Poor

37%

13%

50%

LoW inCome

38%

11%

49%

MoD-HIGH INCoME

12%

3%

15%

20%16%

23%

55%

22%17%

50%

19%

52%

48%

37%

31%

60%

50%

66%

STARTING ToLook UP

GETTINGWoRSE

STAYING ABoUTTHE SAME

NoT AT ALLCoNCERNED

A LITTLECoNCERNED

VERYCoNCERNED

SoMEWHATCoNCERNED

NEVER oNCE INA WHILE

SoME oFTHE TIME

MoST oFTHE TIME

ALL oFTHE TIME

60%

40%

20%

0

27% 26% 20% 11% 16%

20% 19% 19% 16% 26%

15% 24% 17% 22% 21%

32% 30% 21% 10%7%

21% 19% 12% 43%5%

ToTAL

LoW INcoMe

MoD-HIGH INCoME

WoRKINg PooR

LoW-INcoMeWoRKINg MoTheRS

42%

43%

55%

17%


10/36


Nw yrkrs rss inms

mst tn itd lt r

nd prsriptin drus s tir

tp prsnl wrr.

Q:

Nw Im ging t read yu sme

prblems yu and yur amily may

ace. Please listen careully, then tell me

which oNE these yu persnally wrry

the mst abut.

ToP PersonaL Worries BY inCome

LoW inCome MoD-HIGH INCoME

17% - Health care and prescriptin drugs 20% - Health care and prescriptin drugs

15% - Finding r eeping a jb 19% - Retirement security

14%- Schls and cllege tuitin

16%- Schls and cllege tuitin

14% - Crime, drugs, and gangs 11% - Crime, drugs, and gangs

enmi rdsips v

bn slw t rd mn

lw-inm Nw yrkrs

sin t rssin; lt

rdsips v risn vr t

pst tw rs.*Includes nly thse hardships that were ased abutin every year rm 2006 thrugh 2012.

2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012

55%

50%

45%

40%

35%

30%

25%

nUmBer o harDshiPs* over Time among


11/36


Overall, New Yorkers think thismayoral race should be about fourissues: creating jobs, investing morein education, keeping the city safe,and making housing more affordable.While the top cluster of issues issimilar for low- and higher-incomeNew Yorkers, the emphasis differs.

Job creation is the single most salient

issue for those struggling to makeends meet, with 43 percent of low-income New Yorkers mentioning it asone of the top two issues they wantmayoral candidates to address. Thenext three most mentioned issues forlow-income New Yorkers are reducingcrime, drugs and guns (31 percent),investing more in education (30percent) and making housing moreaffordable (26 percent). For moderate-and higher-income New Yorkers,investing more in education and jobcreation roughly tie as their top twoissues, mentioned by about a third ofthose asked. Despite the controversyand media attention surroundingthe citys aggressive stop and friskpolice tactics, it was not frequentlymentioned as a top campaign issueby either low- or higher-income NewYorkers. It may be that people feel thatthe issue has already gotten enoughattention, their views are unsettled, orthat it just gets pushed down by more

pressing concerns. Making the citymore attractive to business comes indead last, at four percent, for low-income respondents, and is at thebottom of the list, at seven percent forNew Yorkers overall.

For some business advocates, who seejob creation and pro-business policiesas nearly synonymous, these ndings

may seem bafing, or worse. In theireyes, the conventional wisdom is thatthe road to more jobs is paved withlower taxes and fewer regulationson business. New Yorkers, acrossincomes, do not see it this way. Ata time when inadequate consumerdemand is the main drag on economicgrowth, the public is simply not

buying the argument that the solutionto our economic problems is less

regulation and more tax breaks forbusiness. Rather New Yorkers wanttheir next mayor to support policiesthat help workers and their familiesget ahead. In this analysis, what drivesthe shoe store owner to hire the nextworker or open the next shop is not atax break, but a long line of customersat the cash register who can afford tobuy shoes.

Asked about their preferences for the2013 election, New Yorkersacrossincomes and by more than a three-to-one marginfavor a mayor whosupports policies that help workingNew Yorkers and their families getahead over a mayor who supportspolicies that make New York Citya good place to do business. Whenexamples of specic policies are

spelled out, New Yorkers preferworker-friendly over business-friendlypolicies by a similar wide margin.Seventy-two percent of all NewYorkers agree with the statement, Weneed a mayor who supports policiesthat help working New Yorkers andtheir families get ahead, like makinghousing more affordable, protecting

schools from cuts, and promotingbetter benets for workers. This

is compared to only 20 percent (17percent of low-income and 23 percentof moderate- and higher-incomerespondents) who agreed that, Weneed a mayor who supports policiesthat make New York City a goodplace to do business, like lower taxesand fewer regulations for smallbusinesses. These views conrmpolling results from the previous year.

In this analysis, what drives the she stre

wner t hire the net wrer r pen the

net shp is nt a ta brea, but a lng line

custmers at the cash register wh can

ard t buy shes.

indin TrWhile loW-income neW Yorkers put job creation at the top of

their agenda for the next maYor; theY, along With moderate and

higher income respondents, do not think the solution is makingthe citY more business-friendlY. rather, neW Yorkers are united

in favoring policies that help Working people get ahead.


12/36


Nw yrkrs wnt t nxt

dministrtin t us n

rtin bs nd invstin in

dutin.

Q:

Net year there will be an electin r

New Yr City mayr and ther city

cials. Thining abut the city electins

in 2013, what are the tw mst imprtant

issues that yu wuld lie candidates t

cus n?

Tp nd bttm tir ltin

issus r similr rss

inm rups, but lw-

inm Nw yrkrs r mr

likl t s b rtin

nd rdbl usin r

imprtnt.

Q: Thining abut the city electinsin 2013, what are the tw mstimprtant issues that yu wuld lie

candidates t cus n?

| | | | | | | |0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35%

mosT imPorTanT issUes

36%

32%

28%

21%

16%

15%

14%

7%

7%

7%

ToP CLUsTer o issUe ConCerns BY inCome


43% - Creating mre jbs 33% - Investing in educatin

31% - Reducing crime, drugs, and guns 32% - Creating mre jbs

30% - Investing in educatin 27% - Reducing crime, drugs, and guns

26% - Maing husing mre ardable 18% - Maing husing mre ardable

BoTTom CLUsTer o issUe ConCerns BY inCome


7% - Reducing stp and ris plicing 9% - Maing the city mre attractivet business

5% - keeping spending dwn 8% - Reducing stp and ris plicing

4% - Maing the city mre attractive tbusiness

8% - keeping spending dwn

CreaTing more JoBs

invesTing more in eDUCaTion

REDUCING CRIME, DRUGS, AND GUNS

MAkING HoUSING MoRE AFFoRDABLE

kEEPING LoCAL TAxES DoWN

PREVENTING CUTS To PRoGRAMS FoRCHILDREN AND SENIoRS

REDUCING THE GAP BETWEENTHE RICH AND PooR

REDUCING SToP AND FRISk PoLICING

kEEPING SPENDING DoWN

MAkING THE CITY MoREATTRACTIVE To BUSINESS


13/36


LoW MoD-HIGH LoW MoD-HIGH LoW MoD-HIGH

B mr tn tr-t-n

mrin, Nw yrkrs prr

mr w supprts pliis

tt lp wrkin Nw yrkrs

nd tir milis t d

vr pr-businss pliis.

Q:And thining abut ur netmayr, which the llwing twstatements d yu agree with mre?

Sttmnt a:We need a mayr wh

supprts plicies that mae New Yr City a

gd place t d business.

Sttmnt B: We need a mayr wh

supprts plicies that help wring New

Yrers and their amilies get ahead.

(Split Sampled Questin)

maYoraL PrioriTies

70%

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0

heLPing Working neW Yorkers

69%

heLPing Working neW Yorkers

gooD PLaCe To Do BUsiness

19%

gooD PLaCe To Do BUsiness

neiTher/BoTh/DonT knoW

12%

neiTher/BoTh/DonT knoW

18%20%

19% 20%

69%

69%

13%

69%

72%

11%

12%7%

WITHoUTSPECIFICS

WITHSPECIFICPoLICIES

WITHoUTSPECIFICS


WITHoUTSPECIFICS


Nw yrkrs prr mr

w supprts wrkr-rindl

pliis vr mr w

vrs businss intrsts b

t sm wid mrin wnspi pliis r inludd.

Q:And thining abut ur netmayr, which the llwing twstatements d yu agree with mre?

Sttmnt a: We need a mayr wh

supprts plicies that mae New Yr City

a gd place t d business lie lw

t d w ult ll

bu.

Sttmnt B: We need a mayr wh

supprts plicies that help wring New

Yrers and their amilies get ahead lie

u dbl,

ptct cl cut, d

pt btt bft w.

(Split Sampled Questn)

PreerenCe or maYoraL PrioriTies(aLL inComes)

80%

70%

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0


14/36


indin urneW Yorkers believe that the WaY for Working families to get

ahead is bY raising the floor for loW-paYing jobs, attracting

more middle-skilled jobs to the citY, and ensuring that Youngpeople have the education theY need to fill those better-

paYing jobs.

The ndings reect an underlyingcore value that people working hardshould be able to earn a decent living,and certainly at least escape poverty.Measures raising the oor of incomeand benets for low-wage workers,including increasing the minimum wageand requiring employers to provide at

least a few paid sick days, enjoy nearlyuniversal support from New Yorkers.Nearly nine out of ten respondents ofall incomes think its important for thenext mayor to pursue such policies.However, those with low incomes showreal intensity on this issue. Eight in tenlow-income New Yorkers say policiesto raise the oor are very important,in contrast to 62 percent of moderate-and higher-income respondents.

INcReaSINg The MINIMUM Wage

The New York State legislature hasbeen debating raising the minimumwage since last year. Most recently,Governor Cuomo called for anincrease from $7.25 to $8.75 inhis January 2013 State of the StateAddress. When asked specicallyabout the original legislative proposalto raise the minimum wage to $8.50with an annual adjustment to keeppace with ination, New Yorkers are

overwhelmingly in support. Ninetypercent of low-income respondents and88 percent of all New Yorkers favorthe legislative proposal, with the vastmajority strongly in favor. Supportcuts across party lines, with two-thirds of Republicans indicating theirsupport, along with the wide majorityof Independents and Democrats.Although the state minimum wage

is set by Albany, the mayor can be apowerful voice pushing for passage.Some cities, like San Francisco, SantaFe, and Albuquerque have gone a stepfurther and set their own city minimumwages above state and federal levels.(See CSS Policy Update, The Case forRaising New York States Minimum

Wage, for more on this issue.)

PaSSINg PaID SIcK DayS

While many of us take for grantedbeing able to take off a day or twofrom work when illness strikes, thisis far from the case for 43 percentof working New Yorkers, includingthe majority of low-wage workers inindustries like restaurants and retail.Sixty-two percent of low-income,working New Yorkers reported thatthey do not have a single paid sickday to use if they or a family memberneed to recover at home or seekmedical care. That puts workers livingpaycheck to paycheck in the impossiblesituation of choosing between theearnings and the job they need andtheir own or their childs health. Theimpact this has on public health wasbrought home this winter during oneof the worst u seasons in years, whenmany workers were forced to go in

sick or send ill children to school,worsening the epidemic and crowdingemergency rooms. But lack of paid sicktime is a continuing challenge for low-income workers who literally cannotafford to get sick.

Passing a law that would requireemployers to provide a minimumnumber of paid sick days for workers

has been hotly debated over the pastfew years in New York City. As thepublic has listened to both sides andlearned more about the issue, supporthas grown from 74 to 83 percent infavor in the last year, while the numberof undecided has shrunk from 17

percent in 2011 to just 4 percent now.New Yorkers of all income levels favorthe idea of passing a law requiringemployers to offer workers a minimumnumber of paid sick days. Support isintense. Nearly two out of three NewYorkers strongly favor passage of thepaid sick days bill originally before theCity Council that would have requiredsmall businesses to provide ve paidsick days and larger businesses of 20or more workers to provide nine days.The bill has since been amended to

exclude mom-and-pop shops withfewer than ve workers from havingto provide paid sick days, but theseestablishments would not be allowed tore a worker for being out sick for upto ve days. Other amendments reducethe amount of required sick time to justve days regardless of business size,effectively exclude seasonal workers,and allow for voluntary shift changesin lieu of paid time off. All theseprovisions respond to concerns voicedby those opposed to a law. It is likelythat polling on the amended languagewould boost already high support evenfurther.

Despite support from 37 of 51 Councilmembersa veto-proof majorityCity Council speaker and mayoralcontender Christine Quinn hasprevented the bill from coming to theoor for a vote. She argues that nowis not the time to pass a law that coulddestroy jobs in a still weak economy.

Proponents of the measure, along withleading economists, have counteredthat there is simply no evidence tosupport such fears. They point toresearch on the impact of minimumwage increases and the experience oflocalities that have already put paidsick days laws in effect to show thatsuch laws have not had any negativeimpact on employment. Small costs


15/36


of the magnitude being consideredcan easily be absorbed by minoradjustments in operations or pricesonce a law provides a level playing eldso that no business is at a competitivedisadvantage. (See CSS Report, TheImpact of Paid Sick Days on Jobs:

Whats the Real Story?) It dees logicto think that businesses in the servicesector, those most likely to be affected,will abandon their customer baseand incur the much greater costs ofrelocating to avoid paying for a fewpaid sick days. Moreover, to focus onlyon the small costs to businesses ignoresthe substantial savings on the publichealth side. These include reductionin u cases and other contagiousillnesses, fewer emergency room visitsby workers unable to get needed care

during normal work hours, decreasedworkplace accidents, and greaterlikelihood of workers getting cancerscreeningsall of which have beenshown to be related to access to paidsick leave.6

With Speaker Quinn blocking actionon paid sick days and other mayoralcandidates urging passage, paid leavehas already emerged as an issue inthe race for City Hall. We looked atlevels of support among critical votinggroups. Paid sick days is favoredby New Yorkers across party lines,including 87 percent of Democrats,77 percent of Independents, and 69percent of Republicanswith supportrising over the previous year for everygroup. Nearly eight in ten New Yorkerssay they are more likely to vote for amayoral candidate who supports paidsick days and the majority would beless likely to vote for someone opposedto passage. Black and Hispanic

Democrats, in particular, say they aremuch more likely to vote for a mayoralcandidate who supports paid sickdays. (See CSS Policy Update, PaidSick Days: Support Grows for a Work

Standard Most Low-Wage Earners Still

Lack in New York City, for more onthis issue.)

BRoaDeNINg The joBS BaSe

The Bloomberg administrationsactions to reinvent New York Cityas a high tech center are hugelypopular. A global competition won byCornell University in partnership with

Technion-Israel Institute of Technologywill bring the city a world-classgraduate academic center designed tospawn new inventions and technologycompanies. Columbia and New YorkUniversity have since announced plansto expand their engineering schools aswell. Nearly nine out of ten of thosepolled want the next mayor to continuepolicies that bring high tech jobs to thecity.

But equally popular are strategies to

attract more middle-skill jobs, which,to date, have not been part of ahighly-touted plan. Over the past threedecades, changes in technology andglobalization have led to an increasingpolarization of job opportunitiesand wagesin the United States.

Job growth has come at both endsof the skill spectrum, among highly-trained workers who use technologyto increase their productivity and forlow-skilled workers in service jobsthat require physical proximity andbenet from increased demand fromhigh-paid workers for services likechild care and restaurant meals. Manymiddle-skill jobs have been automatedor shipped overseas to less expensivelabor markets. These national trendsare even more pronounced in theNew York City area. According to ananalysis by New York Federal ReserveBank economists Abel and Deitz,7 from1980 to 2010, upper middle-skill jobs,like repairing and installing equipment,

construction, and teaching increasedby just 38 percent in the New Yorkdownstate area compared to 46 percentnationally and lower middle-skill jobs,such as administrative support andmachine operators, actually fell by 7percent downstate compared to a 20percent increase in the United States.

We found near-universal supportfor expanding the mayoral agendato include attracting more middle-skilled jobs that pay decent wagesbut do not require advanced degrees.Greater investment in infrastructurethat would put people to work in jobs

such as upgrading subways, publichousing, schools, and parks drawswide and strong support. Nine out often low-income New Yorkers favorboth these latter job creation strategies,which are also supported by similarpercentages of moderate- and higher-income respondents. These positionsare consistent with our other ndings.Most of the recent job growth in NewYork City has been at the extremes:high-skill and high-paid or low-wageservice sector jobs. It stands to reason

that New Yorkers worried aboutwidening economic disparities and adisappearing middle class would belikely to favor strategies to bolster themissing middle: jobs that pay goodwages and provide basic benets.

eDUcaTINg NeW yoRKeRS So They caN

ILL hIgh- aND MIDDLe-SKILL joBS

At a recent mayoral forum, businessleaders representing the citys largestcorporations described the city as amagnet attracting the best and brightestcollege graduates from around thecountry to ll their jobs. Glaring in itsomission was any praise for home-grown hires. How do we strengthenthe pipeline of well-qualied graduatesfrom New York City public schools tothe jobs of the future? In responses to aseries of questions, New Yorkers acrossincome lines show strong support forputting more resources into education,especially schools serving poor

children, and to doing more to expandaccess to higher education for groupsthat are now underrepresented.


16/36


Nw yrkrs r tt it is

imprtnt r t nxt mr

t pursu pliis tt lp

lw-w wrkrs t d;

wvr, lw-inm Nw

yrkrs r mu mr likl

t s it is vr imprtnt.

Q: Hw imprtant is it t yu persnallythat the net mayr pursue this aspart his r her agenda? Very imprtant,

smewhat imprtant, a little imprtant, r

nt at all imprtant?

PromoTe measUres To heLP LoW-Wage WorkersgeT aheaD, Like raising The minimUm Wage

anD reQUiring PaiD siCk DaYs

90%

80%

70%

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0

ToTAL LoW INcoMe MoD-HIGH INCoME

69%

80%

62%

87% 89% 85%

VERY IMPoRTANT SoMEWHAT IMPoRTANT

B wid mritis, Nw

yrkrs ll inms strnl

vr risin t minimum

w nd indxin it t kp

p wit inftin.

Q: The New Yr State legislatureis cnsidering raising the stateminimum wage rm $7.25 an hur t

$8.50 an hur and then adjusting theminimum wage each year t eep pace with

the cst living. D yu avr r ppse

raising the state minimum wage t $8.50

an hur?

oPPose | avor

STRoNGLYoPPoSE

SoMEWHAToPPoSE

STRoNGLYFAVoR

SoMEWHATFAVoR

78%

83%

74%

| | | | | | | | | | | |20% 10% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90%

ToTAL

LoW INcoMe

MoD-HIGHINCoME

6%

6%

7%

88%

90%

85%

10%

8%

12%

53%

72%

86%

78%

Supprt r minimum w

inrs is spill strn

mn Dmrts, but tw-

tirds Rpublins ls

vr it.

Q: The New Yr State legislatureis cnsidering raising the stateminimum wage rm $7.25 an hur t

$8.50 an hur and then adjusting the

minimum wage each year t eep pace with

the cst living. D yu avr r ppse

raising the state minimum wage t $8.50

an hur?

oPPose | avor

STRoNGLYoPPoSE

SoMEWHAToPPoSE

STRoNGLYFAVoR

SoMEWHATFAVoR

| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |

40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

ToTAL

DEMoCRAT

INDEPENDENT

REPUBLICAN

6%

9%

22%

2% -

88%

94%

84%

66%

10%

4%

14%

33%


17/36


as t publi s lrnd

mr but t pid sik ds

issu, wr r undidd nd

supprt s rwn.

Q: The New Yr City Cuncil iscnsidering a prpsal that wuldrequire emplyers in New Yr City t

prvide wrers with at least ve paid sic

days a year i they are a small business,

and nine paid sic days a year i they are a

business with 20 r mre emplyees. Wuld

yu strngly avr this prpsal, smewhat

avr, smewhat ppse, r strngly ppse

this prpsal, r are yu undecided?

avor

oPPose

UnDeCiDeD

STRoNGLYFAVoR

2011

2011

2011

2012

2012

2012

SoMEWHATFAVoR

STRoNGLYoPPoSE

SoMEWHAToPPoSE

UNDECIDED

| | | | | | | | | |0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90%

74%

83%

9%

13%

4%

17%

65%

54%

5%

7%

Nw yrkrs ll inm

lvls vr pssin t pid

sik ds prpsl wit rl

intnsit; but tw-tirds

strnl vr Nw yrk cit

lw.

Q:

The New Yr City Cuncil is

cnsidering a prpsal that wuld

require emplyers in New Yr City t








oPPose | avor UnDeCiDeD

a mrit lw-inm

wrkrs in Nw yrk cit62

prntlk pid sik lv.

Q:Which the llwing benets dyu receive rm yur emplyer?

PerCenT o Workers saYing TheY Do noT reCeive PaiD siCk Leave

70%

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0ToTAL LoW inCome

(200% PL)MoDERATE INCoME(201%-400% FPL)

HIGHER INCoME(>400% FPL)

43%

62%

45%

29%

2011

2011

2011

2012

2012

2012

STRoNGLYoPPoSE

SoMEWHAToPPoSE

STRoNGLYFAVoR

SoMEWHATFAVoR

| | | | | | | | | | | |20% 10% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90%

ToTAL

LoWINcoMe

MoD-HIGHINCoME

74% 17%

83% 4%

70% 21%

84% 5%

77% 13%

83% 4%

54%

65%

50%

67%

57%

64%

5%

7%

6%

6%

4%

8%

9%

13%

9%

11%

10%

14%


18/36


44%

arss prt lins, Nw

yrkrs vr mkin pid sik

ds n mplmnt stndrd.

ovr tw-tirds Rpublins

supprt pid sik ds s d

tr-qurtrs Dmrts

nd Indpndnts.

Q: The New Yr City Cuncil iscnsidering a prpsal that wuldrequire emplyers in New Yr City t








oPPose | avor UnDeCiDeD

2011

2011

2011

2011

2012

2012

2012

2012

STRoNGLY

oPPoSE

SoMEWHAT

oPPoSE

STRoNGLY

FAVoR

SoMEWHAT

FAVoR

| | | | | | | | | | | | |

30% 20% 10% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90%

ToTAL

DEMoCRAT

INDEPENDENT

REPUBLICAN

17%

4%

15%

4%

18%

14%

4%

6%

54%

65%

59%

71%

47%

55%

47%

5%

7%

3%

5%

6%

10%

11%

14%

74%

83%

77%

87%

74%

77%

66%

69%

9%

13%

7%

9%

9%

19%

20%

25%

23% 16%

22% 21%

36% 18%

33% 17%

17% 35%

48%

56%

52%

Nrl 8 in 10 Nw yrkrs r mr likl t vt r mrl

ndidt w supprts pid sik ds nd mrit wuld

punis n ppsd t t prpsl.

Q:Wuld yu be mre r less liely t vte r a candidate r mayr wh [ppsed/supprted] the prpsal which requires emplyers in New Yr City t prvide theirwrers with paid sic days? (Split Sampled Questin)

Less LikeLY To voTe or | more LikeLY To voTe or

MUCH LESSLIkELY

SoMEWHATLESS LIkELY

MUCH MoRELIkELY

SoMEWHATMoRE LIkELY

| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90%

ToTAL

DEMoCRAT

INDEPENDENT

REPUBLICAN

IF MAYoRAL CANDIDATE SUPPORTEDREQUIRING EMPLoYERS To PRoVIDE PAID SICk DAYS

IF MAYoRAL CANDIDATE OPPOSEDREQUIRING EMPLoYERS To PRoVIDE PAID SICk DAYS

4%

5%

5%

81%

78%

76%

66%

28%

27%

34%

35%

8%

10%

9%

23%

54%

58%

43%

43%

ToTAL

DEMoCRAT

INDEPENDENT

REPUBLICAN


19/36


34% 20%

37%

37%

22%

36% 18%

69%

64%

56%

56%

Blk nd hispni Dmrts

r prtiulrl likl t vt

r mrl ndidt i

r s supprtd pid sik

ds.

Q:Wuld yu be mre r less liely tvte r a candidate r mayr wh

[ppsed/supprted] the prpsal which

requires emplyers in New Yr City t

prvide their wrers with paid sic days?

(Split Sampled Questin)

Less LikeLY To voTe or | more LikeLY To voTe or

MUCH LESSLIkELY

SoMEWHATLESS LIkELY

MUCH MoRELIkELY

SoMEWHATMoRE LIkELY

| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90%

ALL DEM.

WoMEN DEM.

BLaCk Dem.

hisPaniC Dem.

ALL DEM.

Women Dem.

BLACk DEM.

HISPANIC DEM.

IF MAYoRAL CANDIDATE SUPPORTEDREQUIRING EMPLoYERS To PRoVIDE PAID SICk DAYS*

IF MAYoRAL CANDIDATE OPPOSEDREQUIRING EMPLoYERS To PRoVIDE PAID SICk DAYS*

4%

3%

5%

3%

81%

82%

87%

85%

27%

28%

30%

34%

8%

9%

5%

8%

58%

60%

57%

57% 26%

Nrl 9 in 10 Nw yrkrs

s t nxt mr suld

ntinu t urrnt

dministrtins pli

brinin i t bs t Nw

yrk cit.

Q: Shuld the net mayr cntinue rdiscntinue this plicy and d yueel that way strngly r nt s strngly?

invesTing in Bringing high TeCh JoBs To neW York CiTY

CoNTINUESTRoNGLY

VERY IMPoRTANT

CoNTINUE NoTSo STRoNGLY

SoMEWHAT IMPoRTANT

ToTAL LoW inCome MoD-HIGH INCoME

100%

80%

60%

40%

20%

0

73%

89%

73%

89%

73%

89%

Nw yrkrs r unitd in nr-univrsl bli tt it is imprtnt r t nxt mr t mk

pliis r rtin middl-skill bs prt is r r nd.

Q: Hw imprtant is it t yu persnally that the net mayr pursue this as part his r her agenda? Very imprtant, smewhat imprtant,a little imprtant, r nt at all imprtant?

ToTAL LoW inCome MoD-HIGH INCoME ToTAL LoW inCome MoD-HIGH INCoME

100%

90%

80%

70%

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0

100%

90%

80%

70%

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0

88% 90% 87% 90% 90% 91%

69% 73% 67%58%62%

69%

aTTraCT more miD-LeveL skiLLeD JoBs To neW York CiTY ThaTPaY DeCenT Wages BUT DonT reQUire aDvanCeD Degrees.

CreaTe JoBs BY UPgraDing sUBWaYs,PUBLiC hoUsing, sChooLs, anD Parks.


20/36


indin ivvirtuallY all neW Yorkers think that it is important for the

next maYor to put more resources into schools serving poor

students and ensure that high school students graduateWell-prepared for college.

Over 90 percent of New Yorkerswant the next mayor to invest moreresources in schools serving poorchildren; 81 percent of low-incomerespondents and 76 percent of thosewith moderate and higher incomessee this as very important. Similarlyhigh levels of support are seen forbolstering college-readiness, now atdismally low levels. Only 21 percent

of New York City students startinghigh school in 2006 graduated in2010 with high enough scores on statemath and English tests to be deemedready for higher education or well-paying careers.8 For both blacks andHispanics it was only 12 percent. Thiscompares with 40 percent of whitegraduates and 51 percent of Asian-Americans who achieved the college-readiness standard.9 Moreover, morethan half the college-ready graduatescame from just 20 of the 360 highschools that were included in theanalysis.10

Although a majority of those surveyedfavored increasing the age whensomeone is allowed to drop out ofhigh school, support for this ideawas greater among moderate- andhigher-income respondents (70 percentin favor) than among low-incomerespondents (58 percent in favor).However, nearly everyone supportsthe idea of launching a massive

publicly-funded campaign, on thescale of the citys anti-smoking efforts,to encourage young people to nishhigh school. This effort could build onand go well beyond the Ad Councilscurrent Boost Up campaign, whichfeatures a stack of desks 12 EmpireState Buildings high, representing the7,000 high school students who dropout every school day in the UnitedStates.


21/36


65%

83%

72%

16% 51%

22% 46%

12% 53%

Nrl tw-tirds Nw

yrkrs vr risin t

wn smn is llwd t

drp ut i sl t 18;

supprt is strnr mn

ir-inm Nw yrkrs.

Q:

D yu avr r ppse raising the

age when smene is allwed tdrp ut high schl t 18? (split sample

questin)

Virtull ll Nw yrkrs s

it is imprtnt tt t nxt

mr pursu pliis tt

wuld put mr rsurs int

sls srvin pr studnts

nd nsur tt i sl

rduts r prprd r

ll.



nt at all imprtant?

Tr is nrl univrsl

supprt r rtin mssiv

publi mpin t nur

studnts t nis i sl.

Mr tn 8 ut 10 lw-inm Nw yrkrs strnl

vr su prpsl.

Q: D yu avr r ppse creating apublicly-unded campaign, similar insie t the anti-sming erts, designed

t encurage children t nt drp ut and

nish high schl? (split sample questin)

ToTAL LoW inCome MoD-HIGHINCoME

ToTAL LoW inCome MoD-HIGHINCoME

100%

90%

80%

70%

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0

100%

90%

80%

70%

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0

93% 94% 92% 96% 96% 95%

VERYIMPoRTANT

SoMEWHATIMPoRTANT

PUT more resoUrCes inTosChooLs serving

Poor ChiLDren anD Teens

ensUre high sChooL graDUaTesare WeLL-PrePareD

or CoLLege

78% 81% 76% 83%85%

81%

STRoNGLYoPPoSE

STRoNGLYoPPoSE

NoT SoSTRoNGLYoPPoSE


STRoNGLYFAVoR

STRoNGLYFAVoR

NoT SoSTRoNGLYFAVoR

NoT SoSTRoNGLYFAVoR

| | | | | | | | | | | |40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70%

| | | | | | | | | | | | |20% 10% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%

ToTAL

LoW INcoMe

MoD-HIGHINCoME

ToTAL

LoW INcoMe

MoD-HIGHINCoME

65%

58%

70%

87%

91%

84%

28%

34%

24%

11%

7%

13%

7%

9%

4%


22/36


29% 41%

27% 41%

28% 35%

indin SixWhile neW Yorkers Want to see a greater investment in public

schools, vieWs are someWhat mixed about continuing some of

the specific strategies of the current administration.The emphasis on standardized testshas been criticized by some educatorsand many progressives, but it doeshave the support of a fairly widemajority of New Yorkers, includingtwo-thirds of low-income parentswho strongly favor continuing thepolicy of focusing on testing in thepublic schools. New Yorkers, however,are divided over whether or not tocontinue the policy of closing low-performing schools and opening new

schools in shared buildings. Fifty-fourpercent of low-income parents wouldcontinue this policy, while 38 percentthink it should be discontinued.This approach clearly remains

controversial, especially comparedto the near-universal support forincreasing resources to schools servingpoor children.

Gifted programs in the public schoolshave also been controversial, withsome arguing access is fairly basedon merit and others arguing that theprograms, which disproportionatelyserve white children, reintroducesegregation within schools and dont

provide enough opportunities forchildren of color. Low-income NewYorkersincluding 68 percent of low-income parentsfeel strongly that thenext mayor should expand access to

gifted programs. Support is especiallyhigh among blacks and Latinos; 75percent of low-income blacks and74 percent of low-income Latinosstrongly favor broader access togifted education.

Expanding and improving high schooltechnical education that preparesstudents for careers like healthoccupations or construction drawseven greater support than expandingaccess to gifted programs, with 94percent of low-income respondentssaying it is important for the nextmayor to pursue this, including 83percent of low-income blacks and 82percent of low-income Hispanics whosay it is very important. Clearly thereis a strong interest in strengthening the

job high schools do preparing youngpeople both for college and for careersbeyond the low-paid world of retailand fast food.

Nw yrkrs r dividd vr

wtr r nt t ntinu

t pli lsin lwprrmin sls nd

pnin nw sls in srd

buildins. a smll mrit

lw-inm prnts vr

ntinuin t pli.

Q: Shuld the net mayr cntinuer discntinue this plicy [clsinglw perrming schls and pening new

schls in shared buildings] and d yu eel

that way strngly r nt s strngly?

41%

38%

38%

50%

54%

55%

DISCoNTINUESTRoNGLY

DISCoNTINUENoT SoSTRoNGLY

CoNTINUESTRoNGLY


| | | | | | | | | | | |50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%

a wid mrit Nw

yrkrs, inludin vr 8 ut

10 lw-inm prnts,

vrs ntinuin t pli

usin n tstin in publi

sls.

Q:Shuld the net mayr cntinue rdiscntinue this plicy [cusing ntesting in public schls] and d yu eel

that way strngly r nt s strngly?

DISCoNTINUESTRoNGLY

DISCoNTINUE NoTSo STRoNGLY

CoNTINUESTRoNGLY


| | | | | | | | | | | | |30% 20% 10% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90%

26%

14%

29%

68%

84%

66%

ToTAL(ALL INCoMES,PARENTS ANDNoN-PARENTS)

LoW INcoMePaReNTS(WITh chILDReN

< 18)

MoD-HIGHINCoMEPARENTS(WITH CHILDREN< 18)

ToTAL(ALL INCoMES,PARENTS ANDNoN-PARENTS)

LoW INcoMePaReNTS(WITh chILDReN< 18)

MoD-HIGHINCoME PARENTS(WITH CHILDREN< 18)

18% 55%

67%

18% 55%

9%


23/36


amn lw-inm Nw

yrkrs, blks nd Ltins r

mu mr likl tn wits

t s it is vr imprtnt tt

t nxt mr xpnd ss

t itd prrms in sls.

Q: Hw imprtant is it t yu persnallythat the net mayr pursue this[epand access t gited prgrams in the

schls] as part his r her agenda? Very

imprtant, smewhat imprtant, a little

imprtant, r nt at all imprtant?

Lw-inm Nw yrkrs,

spill blks nd Ltins,

nd prnts wit ildrn

undr 18, s it is vr

imprtnt tt t nxt mr

xpnd nd imprv i

sl rr nd tnildutin.

Q: Hw imprtant is it t yu persnallythat the net mayr pursue this[epand and imprve high schl technical

educatin that prepares students r careers

lie health ccupatins r cnstructin] as

part his r her agenda? Very imprtant,


nt at all imprtant?

expndin nd imprvin i

sl rr nd tnil

dutin drws vn strnr

supprt tn xpndin

ss t itd prrms

rss inm lvls, wit

mr ppl sin it is vr

imprtnt.


smewhat imprtant, a little imprtant, rnt at all imprtant?

VERY IMPoRTANT

VERY IMPoRTANT

SoMEWHATIMPoRTANT

SoMEWHATIMPoRTANT

100%

90%

80%

70%

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0

100%

90%

80%

70%

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0

exPanD aCCess To giTeD Programs in sChooLs

exPanD aCCess TogiTeD ProgramsexPanD aCCess Tohigh sChooL CTe

ALL LoWINCoME

LoW-INCoMEPARENTS

LoW-INCoMEWHITE

LoW-INCoMEBLACk

LoW-INCoMELATINo

ToTAL LoW inCome HIGH INCoME

87%

93%

85%

94%87%

92%

84%

90%80%

92% 91%

65% 68%52%

75% 74%

71%58%

77%67%

55%65%

100%

90%

80%

70%

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0

exPanD anD imProve high sChooLTeChniCaL eDUCaTion

LoW-INCoMEPARENTS

(ALL RACES)

ALL LoW-INCoMEASIANS

ALL LoW-INCoMEWHITES

ALL LoW-INCoMEBLACkS

ALL LoW-INCoMELATINoS

94% 92% 91%96% 95%

78%65% 69%

83% 82%

VERYIMPoRTANT

SoMEWHATIMPoRTANT

VERYIMPoRTANT

SoMEWHATIMPoRTANT


24/36


indin SvnloW-income neW Yorkers favor policies to Widen access to

higher education for graduates of the citYs public high

schools. theY also Want to substantiallY expand educationalprograms at all levels for those serving time in state prisons.

geTTINg INTo cUNy

One consequence of the GreatRecession that didnt draw muchinitial notice was the increaseddemand for CUNY four-year colleges,especially among white students andtransfers from private colleges lookingfor a more affordable alternative. As

applications from students with higherSAT scores have increased, the numberand proportion of black and Latinostudents in the entering freshmanclasses, especially at the most selectiveCUNY senior colleges, have fallen.(See CSS Report, Unintended Impacts:Fewer Black and Latino Freshmanat CUNY Senior Colleges After theRecession.) Black and Latino studentswho make up 72 percent of citypublic high school classes lled only28 percent of the freshman seats atCUNYs ve top-tier colleges in 2011.As recently as 2008, black and Latinostudents had made up 36 percentof freshman enrollment at thoseinstitutions.11

Given these trends, we asked NewYorkers whether or not they favoredusing afrmative action to achieveracial and ethnic diversity at CUNY,the citys public university system.The policy is supported by 58 percent

of moderate- and higher-incomeNew Yorkers. Lower-income whitestend to oppose it (57 percent opposewhile 36 percent favor) whereas low-income communities of color favorafrmative action by similar, modestmajorities (54 percent of blacks, 53percent of Latinos, and 53 percent ofAsians). However, when presentedwith the argument that afrmative

action will ensure that the mix ofstudents at the top CUNY four-yearcolleges resembles the mix of studentsin the citys public schools, supportdramatically increases among low-income respondents to 68 percentoverall and rises for all groups.Support among low-income whitesrises to a majority of 56 percent, and

reaches 74 percent for blacks, 72percent for Hispanics, and 68 percentfor Asians. Some low-income NewYorkers may be wary that othergroups will be the beneciaries ofafrmative action at their expense.Bringing in the notion that each groupwill be fairly represented appears toallay those concerns.

A far more popular policy, however, isguaranteeing admission to a four-yearCUNY college for any New YorkCity public high school students who

graduate in the top quarter of theirhigh school class. That draws supportfrom 82 percent of moderate- andhigher-income New Yorkers and 89percent of low-income respondents,including 77 percent who stronglysupport this policy idea.

geTTINg oUT o PRISoN WITh

eDUcaTIoN aND TRaININg

New Yorkers across incomes supportthe idea of providing signicantlymore education and training to peopleserving time in state prisons. Three-quarters of lower-income respondents,as well as eight out of ten moderate-

and higher-income respondentssupport the idea of providing muchmore GED and vocational trainingthan is currently offered. Whencollege-level education is included,the idea also draws wide support,with three out of four in favor acrossincome groups. It makes sense. NewYorkers know that most of those

coming out of prison will be returningto their old neighborhoods, and theywant them armed . . . with skills andeducation.

A ar mre ppular plicy, hwever, is

guaranteeing admissin t a ur-year CUNYcllege r any New Yr City public high

schl students wh graduate in the tp

quarter their high schl class.


25/36


17% 53%

25% 39%

16% 57%

15% 58%

57%

30% 36%

46% 23%

25% 41%

26% 41%

22% 32%

21% 38%

30% 35%

25% 37%

Lw-inm wits tnd t

pps rmtiv tin, but

lw-inm blks, Ltins,nd asins vr it b mdst

mritis.

Q: Sme universities use armativeactin t achieve racial and ethnicdiversity. D yu avr r ppse using

armative actin at CUNY, the city public

university system? (split sample questin)

Nw yrkrs vrll vr

rmtiv tin t cUNy;

lw-inm Nw yrkrs,

wvr, r smwt

dividd vr t issu.

Q:Sme universities use armativeactin t achieve racial and ethnic

diversity. D yu avr r ppse using


university system? (split sample questin)

hwvr, wn ivn t

rumnt tt rmtiv

tin will nsur tt cUNys

tp sls will mr lsl

rsmbl t mix studnts

in t its publi sls,

supprt mn lw-inm

Nw yrkrs inrss

drmtill.

Q: Sme universities use armativeactin t achieve racial and ethnicdiversity. D yu avr r ppse using


university system, to ensure that the mix o

students at the top CUNY 4-year colleges

resembles the mix o students in the citys

public schools?(split sample questin)

STRoNGLYoPPoSE


STRoNGLYFAVoR

NoT SoSTRoNGLYFAVoR

| | | | | | | | | | | |50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%

ToTAL

LoW INcoMe

MoD-HIGHINCoME

ALL LoWINCoME

LoW-INCoMEWHITES

LoW-INCoMEBLACkS

LoW INCoMELATINoS

LoW-INCoMEASIANS

38%

41%

57%

34%

39%

35%

24%

33%

22%

21%

18%

42%

34%

55%

49%

36%

54%

53%

53%

68%

56%

74%

72%

68%

48%

58%

STRoNGLYoPPoSE


STRoNGLYFAVoR

NoT SoSTRoNGLYFAVoR

| | | | | | | | | | | | |60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%

ALL LoWINCoME

LoW-INCoMEWHITES

LoW-INCoMEBLACkS

LoW INCoMELATINoS

LoW-INCoME

ASIANS

STRoNGLYoPPoSE


STRoNGLYFAVoR

NoT SoSTRoNGLYFAVoR

| | | | | | | | | | | | |40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80%

9%


26/36


64%

65%

64%

70%

77%

65%

Nw yrkrs rss inmlvls vr mu mr

dutin nd trinin r

ppl srvin tim in stt

prisns. Nrl tw-tirds

Nw yrkrs strnl vr

su prpsl.

Q: Sme peple have prpsed thatpeple serving time in state prisnsshuld get much mre educatin r training,

including GEDs and vcatinal training thanthey get currently. D yu avr r ppse

mre educatin and training r peple

serving time in prisn, r are yu unsure?

(split sample questin)

Nw yrkrs rss inm

lvls vr pli

urntin dmissin t

ur-r cUNy ll r n

Nyc publi i sl studnts

w rdut in t tp qurtr

tir i sl lss.

Q: D yu avr r ppse a plicy whereany student wh graduates in the tpquarter their New Yr City public high

schl class wuld be guaranteed admissin

int a 4-year cllege in the CUNY system, the

citys public university?

Wn ll-lvl urss

r inludd, mr dutin

nd trinin r ppl srvin

tim in stt prisns ntinus

t drw wid supprt.

Q:Sme peple have prpsed thatpeple serving time in state prisnsshuld get much mre educatin r training,

including GEDs, vcatinal training, d

cll ll cu than they get

currently. D yu avr r ppse mre

educatin and training r peple serving

time in prisn, r are yu unsure? (split

sample questin)

STRoNGLYoPPoSE


STRoNGLYFAVoR

NoT SoSTRoNGLYFAVoR

| | | | | | | | | | | |

20% 10% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90%

ToTAL

LoW INcoMe

MoD-HIGHINCoME

13% 7%

5%

7%

9%

6%

8%

8%

16%

9%

11%

8%

10%

9%

10%

85%

89%

82%

78%

75%

81%

75%

75%

74%

STRoNGLYoPPoSE

STRoNGLYoPPoSE



STRoNGLYFAVoR

STRoNGLYFAVoR

NoT SoSTRoNGLYFAVoR

NoT SoSTRoNGLYFAVoR

| | | | | | | | | | | |20% 10% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90%

| | | | | | | | | | |20% 10% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80%

ToTAL

LoW INcoMe

MoD-HIGHINCoME

ToTAL

LoW INcoMe

MoD-HIGHINCoME

60%

61%

59%

8%

7%

9%


27/36


indin eitreducing crime, drugs, and guns comes in second on the

list of top priorities for loW-income neW Yorkers. vieWs are

divided on stop and frisk tactics, but those most directlYaffected Want this police practice reined in.

The citys leaders are proud to remindus that New York is the safest big cityin the nation. Many attribute the risein tourism, growth in business, andinux of new college graduates to therecord drop in crime that has changedperceptions of New York City. Thefears most often raised in connectionwith crime are about going back to thebad old days of murder, crack, grafti,

and squeegee men. Low-income NewYorkers are less likely to see crime asa problem of the past. Public safetyremains a large and present concern,as was made clear in their responses toquestions about personal worries andthe mayoral agenda.

The Bloomberg administration hasmade ghting crime and tougher guncontrol, in particular, high priorities.But the sharp increase in aggressivestop and frisk tactics, a police practiceof stopping, questioning and searchingpeople for suspicious behavior, hascome under legal challenge and attackby civil rights groups and communityleaders. They charge it amounts toracial proling that violates the rightsof those targeted. In 2011 alone,close to 700,000 stops were made.Eighty-seven percent of those stoppedwere blacks and Latinos, many ofthem young men.12 While the mayordefends the tactic as a deterrent to

crime and a way to get illegal guns offthe streets, critics point out that 88percent13 of all stops did not result inan arrest or summons being given andweapons were recovered in only onepercent of all stops. In January 2013,a federal judge ruled that the policedepartments practice of routinelystopping people for trespassing outsideresidential buildings enrolled in the

Clean Halls Program in the Bronxwas unconstitutional because it failedto meet standards for searches. Inresponse to mounting protests, thepolice began new training in March,which has led to a 22 percent declinein the number of stops to 533,042 in2012.14

A slim majority of New Yorkers say

the next mayor should discontinueaggressive stop and frisk policing,including 55 percent of moderate- andhigher-income respondents. The viewsof low-income New Yorkers, however,are more divided, perhaps becauseof their degree of concern aboutcrime. A lot depends on who is asked,where they live, and what argumentsare presented. When asked whetherthe next mayor should continue ordiscontinue aggressive stop and friskpolicing, low-income New Yorkersoverall were split down the middle,with 46 percent saying continue and46 percent saying discontinue, and therest undecided. Opinions differed byrace. Low-income whites were morelikely to support continuing overdiscontinuing (51 to 41 percent) andblacks were more likely to hold theopposite view (35 percent continueand 58 percent discontinue). Viewsof low-income Hispanics were inbetween, with slightly more for

continuing (48 percent) versus 44percent for discontinuing the tactic.

When presented with argumentsfor and against stop and frisk, 45percent of low-income respondentsoverall agreed with the statementthat the practice should be continuedbecause it acts as a deterrent bydiscouraging people from carrying

guns, helps reduce crime, and makesneighborhoods safer, as comparedto 39 percent who agreed with theview that stop and frisk should bedecreased because it mostly targetsyoung black and Hispanic men thatare not doing anything illegal. Once

again, the opinions of low-incomeblacks tell a different story. Sixty-onepercent of them say this police tacticshould be decreased. Low-incomeHispanics, the other group most likelyto be subject to this police treatment,are divided, with slightly more sayingthe tactic should be continued (46percent) compared to 38 percentsaying it should be decreased.

Views on this issue were differentwhen respondents were given the

argument that stop and frisk does notreduce crime or make neighborhoodssafer. Then more low-income NewYorkers (46 percent) thought it shouldbe decreased compared to 38 percentwho said it should be continued.When presented with the version ofstatements making the case that stopand frisk is not effective in reducingcrime, over half of both low-incomeblacks and Hispanics agreed thatstop and frisk police tactics should bedecreased.

Looking at the ndings for allincome groups, those who livein neighborhoods where a lotof people have been stopped andfrisked over the past year are morelikely to think that the next mayorshould discontinue the policy. Sixty-ve percent of them say aggressivestop and frisk policing should bediscontinued, including 55 percentwho strongly feel that way. Those

living in neighborhoods where stopand frisk incidents are few are fairlyevenly divided over whether or not thepractice should be continued.


28/36


30% 31%

38% 28%

34% 32%

41% 25%

amn lw-inm Nw

yrkrs, slim mrit

wits vr ntinuin stp

nd risk pliin, wil

mrit blks vr

disntinuin t pli.


a slim mrit Nw yrkrs

s t nxt mr suld

disntinu rssiv stp

nd risk pliin. Lw-inm

Nw yrkrs r vnl

dividd.


Wn prsntd wit rumnts n bt sids t issu, Nw yrkrs r dividd n wtr r

nt t NyPD suld ntinu stp nd risk. Lw-inm Nw yrkrs nrrwl vr ntinuin t

pli wil mdrt- nd ir-inm rsidnts s it suld drs.

DISCoNTINUESTRoNGLY

DISCoNTINUESTRoNGLY



CoNTINUESTRoNGLY

CoNTINUESTRoNGLY

CoNTINUENoT SoSTRoNGLY

CoNTINUENoT SoSTRoNGLY

| | | | | | | | | | | |60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%

| | | | | | | | | | | | |60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%

ToTAL

LoW INcoMe

MoD-HIGHINCoME

aggressive sToP anD risk PoLiCing

aggressive sToP anD risk PoLiCing

oPinion o sToP anD risk

51%

46%

41%

58%

44%

46%

55%

42%

46%

51%

35%

48%

46%

39%

ALL LoW

INCoME

LoW-INCoMEWHITES

LoW-inComeBLaCks

LoW INCoMEHISPANICS

34% 32%

33% 38%

47% 25%

Q:Which statement abut NYPDs stpand ris plicy is clser t yur view?Sttmnt a: Sme/other peple say

that it shuld cntinue because it acts asa deterrent by discuraging peple rm

carrying guns, helps reduce crime, and

maes neighbrhds saer.

Sttmnt B: Sme/other peple say that

it shuld be decreased because it mstly

targets yung blac and Hispanic men that

are nt ding anything illegal.

SHoULDCoNTINUE

SHoULD BEDECREASED

SHoULDCoNTINUE

SHoULD BEDECREASED

SHoULDCoNTINUE

SHoULD BEDECREASED

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0

ToTAL LoW inCome MoD-HIGH INCoME

41%49% 45%

39% 39%54%


29/36



that it shuld cntinue because it acts asa deterrent by discuraging peple rm





targets yung blac and Hispanic men that

are nt ding anything illegal.

Q:Which statement abut NYPDs stpand ris plicy is clser t yurview?

Sttmnt a: Sme/other peple say

that it shuld cntinue because it acts as

a deterrent by discuraging peple rm





targets yung blac and Hispanic men thatare nt ding anything illegal and d t

duc c bd

. (Split Sampled Questin)


that it shuld cntinue because it acts as

a deterrent by discuraging peple rm



Sttmnt B: Sme/other peple say that it

shuld be decreased because it mstly targets

yung blac and Hispanic men that are nt

ding anything illegal and d t duc

c bd .




SHoULDCoNTINUE

SHoULD BEDECREASED

SHoULDCoNTINUE

SHoULD BEDECREASED

SHoULDCoNTINUE

SHoULD BEDECREASED

SHoULDCoNTINUE

SHoULD BEDECREASED

SHoULDCoNTINUE

SHoULD BEDECREASED

SHoULDCoNTINUE

SHoULD BEDECREASED

SHoULDCoNTINUE

SHoULD BEDECREASED

SHoULDCoNTINUE

SHoULD BEDECREASED

SHoULDCoNTINUE

SHoULD BEDECREASED

SHoULDCoNTINUE

SHoULD BEDECREASED

SHoULDCoNTINUE

SHoULD BEDECREASED

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0

70%

60%50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0

ToTAL

ALL LoW INCoME

ALL LoW INCoME

LoW inCome

LoW-INCoME WHITES

LoW-INCoME WHITES

MoD-HIGH INCoME

LoW-INCoME BLACkS

LoW-INCoME BLACkS

LoW-INCoME HISPANICS

LoW-INCoME HISPANICS

41%

45%

38%

48%

39%

46%

38%

49%

47%

46%

34%

44%

42%

24%

31%

46%

32%

49%

61%

53%

38%

51%

amn lw-inm Nw yrkrs, wits nd hispnis nrrwl vr ntinuin t pli wil

wid mrit blks tink t pli suld b drsd.

hwvr, wn ivn t rumnt tt stp nd risk ds ntin t rdu rim r mk

nibrds sr, lw-inm Nw yrkrs tink it suld b drsd.

Wn ivn t rumnt tt it ds nt rdu rim r mk nibrds sr, mrit

hispnis tink stp nd risk suld b drsd, nd lw-inm wits r lmst vnl split.


30/36


55% 19%

45% 30%

36% 31%

35% 25%

35% 27%

indin Ninmaking housing more affordable ranks in the top clus-

ter of issues loW-income neW Yorkers Want the maYoral

candidates to address. loW-income neW Yorkers experience

frequent housing hardships and overWhelminglY think that

it is verY important that the next maYor pursue policies to

increase the availabilitY of affordable housing as part of his

or her agenda.

aoRDaBILITy

Nearly half of low-income NewYorkers consider being able to affordthe rent, mortgage, or maintenancecosts to be a serious problem; threeout of ten say it is a very seriousproblem for them. Affordabilitytrumps other housing problems fromrepairs to safety among low-incomeNew Yorkers overall. Over one-third

of low-income New Yorkers reportedat least one housing hardship over thepast year. Nearly a quarter fell behindin the rent, 15 percent had the utilitiesor phone turned off because of unpaidbills, and 12 percent were threatenedwith foreclosure or eviction.

These ndings are not surprising giventhe high and rising rent burdensthe

portion of household income spenton rentfor low-income households.Most of New York Citys low-income households live in private,unsubsidized rentals. If we excludethose who beneted from Section8 vouchers that limit their rents to30 percent of their incomes, theproportion paying at least half theirincomes in rent increased from 41to 49 percent from 2005 to 2011.

Eighty percent of the poor now payhalf or more of their income forrent. That leaves them, on average,with a meager $4.40 a day perhousehold member for everythingelse: food, clothing, MetroCards,and other necessities.15 Shelters areoverowing with a record number of48,694 homeless, including 20,000children.16 Growing numbers are now

the working homeless; the head of

the citys Department of HomelessServices, Seth Diamond, has testiedthat about a quarter of homelessfamilies have earnings.

New Yorkers, at every income level,agree on the importance of increasingthe availability of affordable housing,but low-income New Yorkers expressgreater intensity on this subject.Eighty-ve percent of moderate- andhigher-income respondents think itis important for the next mayor toincrease affordable housing, with 64percent saying it is very important.Over nine out of ten low-income NewYorkers think it is important thatincreasing affordable housing be onthe next mayors agenda, and eight outof ten think it is very important.

NeW yoRKS

PUBLIc hoUSINg

Unlike public housing elsewhere in

the nations largest cities, New YorkCity Housing Authority (NYCHA)units remain an extremely large andcritically important part of the citysrental stock, housing over 400,000New Yorkers in 334 developmentsthroughout the ve boroughs.NYCHA brings in over a billiondollars in annual federal housingsubsidies to the city; but federal

Ts w liv in

nibrds wr stp nd

risks r mmn r mr

likl t wnt t nxt mr

t disntinu t pli.

Q:Thining abut yur neighbrhd,hw many peple in yur

neighbrhd have been stpped and

rised ver the past year, a lt, sme, a

ew, nt t many, r nne?

58%

49%

49%

50%

65% 31%

39%

47%

46%

42%

DISCoNTINUESTRoNGLY


CoNTINUESTRoNGLY


| | | | | | | | | | | | |70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%

A LoT

SoME

A FEW

NoT Too MANY

NoNE

shoULD The nexT maYor ConTinUe or DisConTinUeaggressive sToP anD risk PoLiCing?


31/36


ovr n-tird lw-inm

Nw yrkrs, nd 4 ut 10

Nw yrkrs livin in publi

r tr subsidizd usin,

xprind t lst n

usin rdsip.

Q:In the last year have yu rany member yur husehld

[eperienced these prblems]?

Nrl l lw-inm

Nw yrkrs nsidr bin

bl t rd rnt, mrt,

r mintnn sts t b srius prblm, wit 3 ut

10 sin it is vr srius

prblm.

Q:And thining mre abut yurhusing, please tell me r each the llwing i they are a very serius

prblem, smewhat serius prblem, nt

t serius a prblem, r nt a prblem at

all where yu live.

operating support has not kept pacewith rising costs of an aging stockin a high-cost city. Moreover, about$100 million is siphoned off the topeach year and diverted to other cityagencies under past agreements.17Maintenance and management

troubles plaguing NYCHA havereceived a lot of recent mediaattention.

In comparison to low-income NewYorkers overall, NYCHA residents do

have far more complaints about theirhousing. Half or nearly half say theyhave serious problems with properlyworking elevators, door locks, buzzersor intercoms; major repairs likeheating and leaks; and feeling safe inthe hallways and public areas. A third

or more say maintenance is a veryserious problem. Among low-incomeNew Yorkers in non-subsidizedrentals, 29 percent say major repairsare a serious problem, and 21 percentreport serious problems with working

elevators and entry safety. Despite thefact that rents are kept at 30 percentof income for those living in publichousing, paying even that amount ishard for many poor NYCHA residentsbecause their incomes are so low.Thirty-six percent of poor families

living in public housing say meetingthe rent is a very serious problem, onpar with 35 percent of poor familiesliving in non-subsidized rentals whocite affordability as a very seriousproblem.

NoT AT ALL NoT TooSERIoUS

VERY SERIoUS SoMEWHATSERIoUSLY

| | | | | | |80% 60% 40% 20% 0% 20% 40%

Being aBLe ToaorD renT,

morTgage, ormainTenanCe CosT

heaTing, Leaks,or maJor

rePairs

eeLing sae inThe haLLWaYs anD

PUBLiC areas

ProPerLY WorkingeLevaTors, Door

LoCks, BUzzers orinTerComs

45%

62%

48

30%

LoWinCome

MoD-HIGHINCoME

30% 30%

48% 12%

62%

74%

32%

13%

LoWinCome

MoD-HIGHINCoME

47%

61%

19%

5%

61%

71%

27%

8%

LoWinCome

MoD-HIGHINCoME

43%

63%

14%

5%

59%

61%

24%

10%

LoWinCome

MoD-HIGHINCoME

46%

54%

15%

5%

LoW MoD-HIGH TYPE oF HARDSHIP

23% 8% FELL BEHIND IN RENT oR MoRTGAGE IN THE LAST YEAR

15% 5% HAD EITHER THE GAS, ELECTRICITY, oR TELEPHoNETURNED oFF BECAUSE THE BILL WAS NoT PAID

12% 5% MoVED IN WITH oTHER PEoPLE EVEN FoR A LITTLEWHILE BECAUSE oF FINANCIAL PRoBLEMS

12% 3% BEEN THREATENED WITH FoRECLoSURE oR EVICTIoN

34% 13% aT LeasT one hoUsing harDshiP

PUBLIC/SUBSIDIzED HoUSING oTHER RENTAL/oWN TYPE oF HARDSHIP

25% 12% FELL BEHIND IN RENT oR MoRTGAGE IN THE LAST YEAR

19% 8% HAD EITHER THE GAS, ELECTRICITY, oR TELEPHoNETURNED oFF BECAUSE THE BILL WAS NoT PAID

16% 6% MoVED IN WITH oTHER PEoPLE EVEN FoR A LITTLEWHILE BECAUSE oF FINANCIAL PRoBLEMS

16% 5% BEEN THREATENED WITH FoRECLoSURE oR EVICTIoN

41% 18% aT LeasT one hoUsing harDshiP


32/36


27% 35%

31% 37%

29% 36%evn tu tir rnts r

ppd t 30 prnt tir

inms, pr Nycha rsidnts

still nd rdin t rnt t b

srius prblm.

Q: Is the llwing a serius prblem,smewhat serius prblem, nt tserius prblem, r nt a prblem at al l where

yu live being able t ard the rent?

Lw-inm Nw yrkrs livin

in publi usin r mu

mr likl t rprt srius

mintnn nd suritprblms tn lw-inm

Nw yrkrs in nn-subsidizd

rntls, ws min mplint

is rdbilit.

Q:And thining mre abut yurhusing, please tell me r each the llwing i they are a very serius

prblem, smewhat serius prblem, nt

t serius a prblem, r nt a prblem at

all where yu live.

Nw yrkrs rss inm

lvls r n t imprtn

inrsin t vilbilit

rdbl usin, but lw-inm

Nw yrkrs r mu mr likl

t s it is vr imprtnt.

Q:Hw imprtant is it t yu persnally thatthe net mayr pursue this as part his rher agenda? Very imprtant, smewhat imprtant,

a little imprtant, r nt at all imprtant?

NoT AT ALL NoT TooSERIoUS

VERY SERIoUS SoMEWHATSERIoUS

PooR IN NYCHAPUBLIC HoUSING

PooR IN oTHER

SUBSIDIzED RENTALS

PooR IN NoN-SUBSIDIzED RENTALS

47%

47%

49%

51%

48%

41%

65%

66%

63%

45%

43% 53%

49%

51%

21%

22%

29%

54%

50%

47%

49%

51%29% 33%

36% 34%

32% 28%

34% 36%

26% 35%

49% 15%

47% 11%

51% 12%

LoW-INCoME NYCHA HoUSING

LoW-INCoME NoN-SUBSIDIzED RENTAL

BEING ABLE To AFFoRDRENT, MoRTGAGE, oRMAINTENANCE CoSTS

HEATING, LEAkS, oR

MAJoR REPAIRS

FEELING SAFE INTHE HALLWAYS ANDPUBLIC AREAS

PRoPERLY WoRkINGELEVAToRS, DooR LoCkS,BUzzERS oR INTERCoMS

BEING ABLE To AFFoRDRENT, MoRTGAGE, oRMAINTENANCE CoSTS

HEATING, LEAkS, oRMAJoR REPAIRS

FEELING SAFE INTHE HALLWAYS ANDPUBLIC AREAS

the race for mayor: what's in it for low income new yorkers?

Documents