From Legacy Admissions to Merit

We all understand the concept of legacy admissions-and Wikepedia has a nice synopsis. But while some defend the practice as a necessity for the culture of elite institutions, critics make a telling point: "Opponents accuse these programs of perpetuating an oligarchy and plutocracy as they lower the weight of academic merit in admissions process in exchange of financial one. Another criticism is that the wealthy are given an insurmountable advantage which hinders economic mobility within the society."

Well, Mike Bloomberg has his own legacy program of mega development, and the Observer's Eliot Brown raises some points that could be seen to parallel the critique of the university program cited above-particularly in the perpetuation of a plutocracy. This is especially true in a time of scarcity and retrenchment.

As Brown highlighted: "Mayor Bloomberg's presentation of his budget last week was not an uplifting one. Standing before a room packed full of reporters in the West Wing of City Hall, he clicked through a PowerPoint presentation that made it very clear how bad the city's fiscal problems are. Under Mr. Bloomberg's proposed budget, the city would need to reduce its workforce by more than 10,000 jobs; teachers would be fired; firehouses would be shuttered-the kind of things people really don't like, and the kinds of things that draw noisy protests to the steps of City Hall. Mayor Bloomberg's presentation of his budget last week was not an uplifting one. Standing before a room packed full of reporters in the West Wing of City Hall, he clicked through a PowerPoint presentation that made it very clear how bad the city's fiscal problems are. Under Mr. Bloomberg's proposed budget, the city would need to reduce its workforce by more than 10,000 jobs; teachers would be fired; firehouses would be shuttered-the kind of things people really don't like, and the kinds of things that draw noisy protests to the steps of City Hall."

Firefighters and school teachers don't make it over the legacy bar-and Willets Point/Coney Island stand out in regard to the disregard of merit that is a feature of all legacy decisions: "There's a pattern here. Last year, even as the capital budget underwent a major cut of about 15 percent, the Bloomberg administration pushed ahead on many of the larger (and more expensive) plans already on the drawing board. Indeed, the city's economic development funds saw less of a reduction than other areas, such as housing, according to figures from the Office of Management and Budget. And the top two projects, Coney Island and Willets Point, which, respectively have $130 million and $380 million listed in the budget, noticeably were not cut at all."

Now let's keep in mind that the money allocated for Willets Point is not for any kind of capital improvement at all-and the use of proceeds,as it were, is redolent with the elite pretension and favoritism that has an Ivy League flavor to it: "But with the city, it's significant that for the largest projects-Coney Island and Willets Point-much of the money currently budgeted is for acquisitions, buying up property that the city doesn't even own. Given that the money goes into the pockets of a few landlords and businesses, it's not stimulating much immediate economic activity. Instead, the city is relying on the hope that the projects will be carried out, eventually."

This is hope that is a questionable economic strategy when "draconian" cuts are on the table-as the Citizens Budget Commission has pointed out: "But with the city, it's significant that for the largest projects-Coney Island and Willets Point-much of the money currently budgeted is for acquisitions, buying up property that the city doesn't even own. Given that the money goes into the pockets of a few landlords and businesses, it's not stimulating much immediate economic activity. Instead, the city is relying on the hope that the projects will be carried out, eventually."

Ah, in the long run-but, as for the absence of documentation that the payoff for the city will ever come to fruition, all EDC needs to do is to ask AKRF to do a study and, voilà! the justification will appear like magic. But it's not only that the capital money is taking away from allocations that could go to essential services; it's that the actual capital needs of the city are being neglected. As the CBC's Carol Kellerman points out-linking the poor policy decisions directly to Willets Point: "He's got Willets Point, and he wants to have a big vision and he wants to have a legacy of changing the face of New York, which is understandable, and a good thing to do if you have a lot of resources," Carol Kellerman, president of CBC, said of Mr. Bloomberg. "But if resources are scarce, which everyone concedes they are, you have to be more parsimonious. "You've got to let state of good repair be the highest priority."

The Bloombergistas, for their toady part, of course demur: "In response, the Bloomberg administration says that now is not the time to be backing off on big, transformative projects, which, so often in New York's history, have been derailed by recessions and budget cuts. (See: Moynihan Station.) "One of the reasons major, long-term projects so often stall is they occur over multiple economic cycles, and it's easiest for officials to postpone the projects that won't be completed until long after their term is up," Andrew Brent, a spokesman for the mayor, said in a statement. "This Administration is committed to making the long-term investments that will help accommodate the City's future economic and physical growth, while maintaining a record-high capital budget that is creating thousands of jobs for New Yorkers right now."

Of course, there's an argument that the current plans for Willets Point doesn't so much as, "accommodate the city's future economic and physical growth," but actually impedes and/or exacerbates it. It is time for more judicious elected officials to step forward and call for a moratorium on Willets Point and other developments that aren't affordable at this time and, frankly, make no sense at any time. It's time, therefore to replace legacy with merit.