DETAILED SUMMARY PAGE

Kevin Powell, candidate for New York’s 10^th Congressional District, has been of late bombarding readers of the Huffington Post with an angry tirade against the incumbent, Congressman Ed Towns. Through tags this post will appear on the Huffington Post; some readers of Huffington know me from posts here on Room 8, and I’ve been comfortable expressing my opinions and fact finding here. Up to now, I’ve focused my writings solely on issues of policy: proper reporting of crime stats, Hispanic issues of the day, and an essay about being a District Leader that has become (arguably) the de facto job description used by many political clubs around the state when vetting candidates for that job. However, I believe now is the time to break away from the relatively safe position of criticizing policy—not candidates—and that’s because what is potentially at stake: not just losing our local congressman, but also the chair of the powerful government reform and oversight committee, and his seniority that is matched by few in the House of Representatives.

I’d like to begin with the issue that Mr. Powell seems angriest with: the petitioning process, and what he says has been a waste of time and money to taxpayers a petition challenge has been. There is another side to this story, one that has been partially expressed in some of the replies to his posts. While it is true that Mr. Powell’s petitioning team collected over 8,000 signatures, it is also true that a great many of these names were challenged for two significantly serious reasons: the signer was not a registered voter, or the signer lived outside the 10^th congressional district. In regards to these two reasons, we are talking about thousands of signers. Mr. Powell focuses on the fact that over 2,000 signatures were not challenged, so why should he even have to defend himself? He also uses words like “democracy” to invoke a sense of outrage from you, the readers of his blog. Constituents of the 10^th Congressional District should be frightened by what Mr. Powell is suggesting and I’ll explain why.

In the vast majority of cases, his petitions had ten addresses from ten different points of the borough (and in some cases, other boroughs). This means one of two things: His petitioners had the superhuman ability to crisscross the borough ten times per sheet while completing several sheets per day, or, the likely case, his petitioners were gathering signatures at events, street corners, and train and bus stops, with the most likely case being events, since street corners and train/bus stops would still produce a sheet that had addresses in reasonable proximity to each other.

So with so many signatures being collected at events, Mr. Powell’s question of why 2,000+ valid signatures wasn’t enough to immediately get him on the ballot is the wrong question for voters to ask. The right question is “Why were so many persons from outside the district asked to sign a document that can impact the lives of the residents of the 10^th Congressional District?”

I have a serious problem with that. Mr. Powell’s petition organizers know full well that this is the reason why the Board of Elections publishes books and data sets with the registered Democrats listed within them. Why wasn’t this data used? And most importantly why, of the 8,000+ signatures collected, were 70% of them given the opportunity to have a say in our local congressional race despite the fact that they didn’t live in the 10^th Congressional District or even registered to vote? Mr. Powell, this is a question that requires an answer and you owe it to the voters of the district.

Mr. Powell often sites President Obama in his writings and often likens himself to him, which is a strange and curious notion. President Obama did not seek the presidency on his first entre into public office. Before that, he was U.S. Senator Obama of the Great State of Illinois, and before that served in that state’s legislature. Years before that he worked as a community organizer (something that the president and I have in common). A common question that Mr. Powell has been asked and has not delivered an adequate answer to is, why run for Congress when you have no legislative experience of any kind? Let me get back to that in a bit. I want to elaborate on community involvement first.

Community involvement is a way that organizers use to empower people, giving people the opportunity to gain and maintain control of their lives. This involvement can come in the form of block and tenant associations, as well as attending the local precinct council and/or community board meetings. Those that want to go further and be part of their community’s leadership often apply to be a voting member of the community board, or run for their precinct council’s executive board. Some volunteer or go to work for local nonprofits, others work in the public sector at the district offices of their elected officials, and in this capacity also attend the local district cabinet meeting, having direct input and oversight in the delivery of government services to the neighborhoods served.

Over the past few years I’ve attended many different community board, district cabinet, and precinct council meetings. I know others that have attended even more than I have. We’ve compared notes and have concluded that we have never, I mean never, seen Mr. Powell attend these meetings, much less be an active participant. Where has he been? Where has this “21^st Century Leader” been when we’ve needed him to fight the good fight on behalf of his community? Has he tried to work within these structures to influence local policy, or joined his local board to become part of the guiding leadership there? There seems to be a fundamental lack of respect for these structures by Mr. Powell and that too should concern any voter of the 10^th Congressional District because he hasn’t taken the time to learn how to lead from a small legislative body like the community board, nor has he run for city council, state assembly or state senate, each a legislative district significantly smaller than a congressional one. Voters are taking the chance that Mr. Powell will learn what he needs to know through on-the-job training.

But Mr. Powell’s “activism” is not an adequate substitute for the experience that he could have gained in these structures over the past few years. He speaks of his activism work in the form of concerts, forums, and events are annual at best, and in the 364 days in between there remain the less sexy, less neat, (less self-aggrandizing) tasks of day-to-day life in our community, tasks undertaken by community boards and precinct councils. So the next question that Mr. Powell needs to answer for his constituents is: If you haven’t taken the time to work within existing structures of leadership that affect smaller groups, what makes you ready for the big time, representing 600,000 people in the House of Representatives? In one of your recent essays attacking Congressman Towns you wrote about people dying of AIDS and any number of other conditions. These people don’t have the luxury of waiting while you figure out your way around public policy. Some of these people are my family, my friends, and my colleagues. Will one of your essays help cure them?

Mr. Powell’s lack of respect for existing structures of our local communities goes much further and now becomes ironic. The right to vote, and the responsibilities that it carries are always a core issue in the 10^th Congressional District, as many persons of the civil rights era know all too well. Voting, as an issue for persons of color, is of tremendous importance because of how hard our ancestors had to fight to get the right to cast a ballot, so aside from how it reflects upon us as citizens of this nation, it really is a shameful disgrace when those of us that know better don’t show up to vote. And voting is what this is all about right? A vote in the Democratic Primary for the incumbent, Congressman Ed Towns, or his challenger, Kevin Powell? Mr. Powell writes prolifically about a number of substantive issues, and as a writer his stuff’s not bad. I’ve read quite a few of his essays. But when it comes to the responsibility of voting and respecting what that means, Mr. Powell’s writings don’t mention something of particular importance in any election.

I’m talking of course about Mr. Powell’s own voting record. I’m going strictly by Board of Election records, which are public records and go back as far as 1992 on the data disks, further I believe at the Board of Elections itself. Let’s take a look at both Mr. Powell’s and Congressman Towns’ public voting record from 1992 to 2009:

 We need to expand on a few of the above line items. There are several significant standouts in Mr. Powell’s voting record, for example:

• He’s never voted in a Presidential Primary before, not until 2008. Think about what was going on in the country and who was running in the Democratic Primary in 1992, 2000, and 2004 and you see how disturbing this point is.
• Carl McCall, Democratic candidate for Governor in 2004 sure could have used Mr. Powell’s vote.
• As could Bill Thompson, Democratic candidate for Mayor, and whose loss was much narrower in last year’s mayoral election, definitely could have used Mr. Powell’s vote in last November’s General Election.
• 2001 was the most significant year in recent city elections, when long-time incumbents had to step down because of term limits. Mr. Powell, who writes about putting fresh faces in government, could have put his money where his mouth was by voting in that year’s Primary Election (which, because of its constituency, was tantamount to winning the General Election).
• And where on earth was Mr. Powell during the years 1993, 1995, 1997, 1998, and 2007, when he didn’t bother to show up at all for any election?

Anyone that thinks a candidate’s voting record isn’t important during an election should give Kathleen Rice’s campaign office a call. They’ll be sure to help you understand why this is indeed relevant. Regarding personal voting, where has Mr. Powell been on election day, and what does this say about showing up for voting, which is one of the principal, most fundamental role of a legislator?

Mr. Powell also has some explaining to do regarding his fundraising, particularly when in his April – June 2010 filing there is a lack of support from constituents of the 10^th Congressional District. Where is this groundswell of support that he constantly blogs about? Even small donations from the 10^th were absent. Anyone that thinks that this is not an important way of vetting a candidate’s strength in the community need only look back to 2007, when then-Senator Obama was quietly building a powerful base through small donors, even while the media was still painting him as the underdog. Donations are a time honored way of assessing how a community is taking to a particularly candidate, and while far from being an exact science, surely it is suspect when there is an absence of support from the very district a candidate is running in. So that’s the next question for Mr. Powell: Where are your local donors (defined as living in the 10^th Congressional District)?

Reading Mr. Powell’s blog and you see that he has wanted a debate on “issues” for some time now. Constituents of the 10^th Congressional District shouldn’t be too quick to believe some of Mr. Powell rants, because there are a few things you need to know: the organizers of the event didn’t consult with Congressman Towns office, and had they, they would have been told that the congressman was scheduled to be in session that day. This was no ordinary session as the extension of unemployment benefits was the hot topic of the week on the floor of our congress. It leaves constituents with two choices then, either the event organizers were so inexperienced in organizing these types of events that they never bothered to consult the legislative calendar, or worse, that this was done deliberately. I would much rather believe the former of the two. We elect legislators to legislate, we do not elect them to be “community social worker” of their respective districts, and the human services side of their work is the responsibility of their district office staff, so the argument that the forum was more important than being in session is ridiculous, and if you want proof, ask someone from the 10^th whose benefits were just renewed what he/she thinks about that.

In a recent blog post Mr. Powell writes about his own personal issues regarding domestic violence, and violence in general. He phrases this issue as though it was something already vetted and that should be put to bed, yet as a candidate he should know better, particularly when some of his incidents of violence were not that long ago in the past, and that overall there have been several repeated incidents, mostly against women. Like it or not Mr. Powell, this issue is fair game in any election, and the public has a right to question you on it, regardless of what you say on the matter. We really do have the right to ask if there have been any recent incidents. We have the right to ask how many incidents there were overall, and over what time span. 2010 is an excellent year for you to set this record straight once and for all. Violence, particularly domestic violence, has taken center stage this year and it’s about time. It’s why Hiram Monserrate is no longer Senator Monserrate. It’s the principal reason why Governor David Patterson is not running for reelection, thanks to one of his senior aides. It’s why the Puerto Rican Day Parade came within days of losing its female Grand Marshal, Congresswoman Nydia Velázquez, in protest to the parade committee's original choice to have a woman beater as the male Grand Marshal. And why my fellow Room 8 blogger just tonight highlighted Senator Kevin Parker’s own issues of violence. Mr. Powell, be fair to the constituency of the 10^th Congressional District and stop being so defensive and evasive on this subject. Be humble and come clean about this part of your life.

I’ve lived in East Brooklyn the majority of my near-45 years of life. I’m an active voter, as are all the members of my family and most of my friends. We discuss local political races over dinner or drinks, and frame the discussions based on pertinent issues of the day, and how well a candidate or incumbent has handled those issues. We can do this with every incumbent and candidate in East Brooklyn, except for Kevin Powell, and that’s because when his name comes up, one of my friends inevitably asks, “Who is Kevin Powell?”

Kevin Powell has not be involved in the leadership of our communities. He’s ignored playing a role in our community boards. He’s ignored playing a role in our precinct councils. His personal voting record is cavalier at best. His past history of violence is not nearly as vetted as he thinks. No one from the 10^th Congressional District has been donating to his campaign. All that, and he had no problem allowing thousands of persons from outside the 10^th Congressional District sign a petition that can affect our very lives.

Who indeed is Kevin Powell?

---
Manny Burgos,
Brooklyn, New York
"Más vale morir luchando, que vivir muriendo."

No words ever written can better explain the life and times of being a Puerto Rican.

Many of you have been egging me on to write a piece on statehood through blog call-outs, emails, and phone calls. Not to worry, it's here. As for why I took so long, all I can say is "Calmate piojo que el peine llega".

Statehood has been a hot issue for all Puerto Ricans, on the island and throughout our entire Diaspora. I make no secret as to my standing on this issue, as has been expressed on this blog and pretty much anyone that gives me five minutes of time. I am a statehooder. I make no apologies for it, and here today I'll begin to lay out my reasons why. It will take me 2 or 3 takes, and I fully plan to take my sweet time in writing them. Mañanismo is one of our traits, so expect the posts when you see them. I promise it won't be a case of "del dicho al hecho hay un gran trecho".

Before I get into specifics, tenemos que limpiar la casa un poco--a bit of housekeeping is in order. Fellow blogger, Rock Hackshaw, has written on the subject of Puerto Rican statehood twice now, as he often reminds me. Over this and the next few posts, let's take a look at some of the statements, accusations, and what appears at a quick glance is an informed opinion, many of which can be summed up with the two words often used by my mom when I tried to give that day's explanation for breaking one of her ceramic animals, destroying a new pair of Catholic school uniform pants, or stealing a dozen slices of freshly-fried sweet plantains before my family could eat them: "disparates y tonterias". A good way to think of Rock's essays is "aparecer hasta en la sopa".

First, Rock makes a stunning accusation that deserves highlighting: "Puerto Ricans need to stand up and demand independence. Only then can they make full decisions over their lives and livelihoods. Only then would they be fully respected by other Caribbean peoples."

Says who? Los XXI Juegos Centroamericanos y del Caribe (the XXI Central American and Caribbean Games, coincidentally held in Puerto Rico) just wrapped up yesterday, and los XVI Juegos Panamericanos 2011 (the 16th Pan American Games 2011) both feature the best of the Americas. The annual West Indian Day Parade features Puerto Rican marches each year. Many Caribbean folk call Puerto Rico home, enjoying the benefits of living in the United States without giving up their year-round summer weather. Since when are we not respected? I've searched for some kind of statistic to support Rock's remarkable claim and for the life of me, I come up dry. Perhaps someone did un "mal de ojo" on me, preventing me from finding out some kind of reference that goes beyond the word on the street, where often these cited references actually come from.

As for Rock's clarion call that we Puerto Ricans stand up and demand our independence, I say "tranquilo, cojelo con take it easy". Are all Caribbean nations truly independent ? Not at all. There are some, yes. But many others are still part of other nations, for example, a quick trip to Wikipedia shows that under the British Protectorate are Antigua and Barbuda, the Bahamas, Belize, Grenada, Jamaica, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, and Saint Vincent and the Grenadines. These nations are autonomous--to an extent. Here's what Wikipedia says about this:

Unlike some of their continental European counterparts, the Monarch and her Governors-General in the Commonwealth Realms hold significant "reserve" or "prerogative" powers, to be wielded in times of extreme emergency or constitutional crises usually to uphold parliamentary government. An instance of a Governor General exercising his power was during the 1975 Australian constitutional crisis, when the Australian Prime Minister of the time, Gough Whitlam, was effectively fired from his position. This led to much speculation as to whether this use of the Governor General's reserve powers was appropriate, and whether Australia should become a republic.

Luckily Wikipedia had a good reference to put this in context. Back in 1975 there was the "Constitutional Crisis in Australia". Short story: the Queen's Governor-General stepped in to prevent a melt-down of government.

Great Britain also has territories that don't fall into the above category, like the British Virgin Islands. Other European nations still have some hold over the Caribbean, for example, the Netherlands with Aruba, Curaçao, and Bonaire, and France with Saint Martin. Besides Puerto Rico, the United States also has St. Thomas, St. Croix, and St. John. There are others still, but you get the idea: Independence as a definition in the Caribbean is not a simple thing.

My point: PLEASE someone tell me when you have ever read in some kind of academically-collected reference that any of these places was less respected than the other? The West Indian Day Parade is a good example that shows the exact opposite, as all these entities, plus their Spanish-speaking neighbors like Puerto Rico, all enjoy a great and powerful Pan Americanism that is a testament to how much we share in common versus our differences.

But enough of eviscerating Rock's essay. That could take another three essays of my own and ultimately digresses from the point. He meant well, and that's really all that's important. Besides, I gotta save some for the next post.

On to statehood then--in a roundabout way.

I was born in 1965, in an East New York hospital no longer standing today, to two parents who met here in la gran manzana. I was what was known, both affectionately and derogatorily, as a Nuyorican. First generation Boricuas of that era can fill endless pages of what that life was like: here in New York City, we were the spics to the whites, and the porto rocks to the blacks. Many whole or partial summers were spent on la isla del encanto, where we were called gringos, yanquis, or nuyoriqueños. We lived one foot in each world, never fully a part of either, and the butt of many jokes and taunts. In short, we were fodder for Rodney Dangerfield because "we get no respect".

This was a confusing world that I and my generation grew up in. In Puerto Rico you went to the local colmado, here to the bodega. There you worked in a fabrica, here la factoria. You ate your almuerzo at noon there, and here you lonchaste. And of course, today's event in Puerto Rico was el desfile, here la parada. Besides that, we had a long list of words unique to New York City that you didn't hear on the islands. You went downstairs to el beihmen in the winter to make sure el estin was on. You took your clothes to wash at el londri.

Fast forward 45 years later. We Puerto Ricans have enriched this city that sometimes scorned us and treated us as second class citizens, the "Puerto Rican Problem" as the New York Times once wrote. We've helped shape city, state, and federal policy, and also helped pave the way for other Latino groups to enter our city. We gave you your beloved corner Bodega. We continually give you exciting culture, music, and food. And for African-Americans, a Puerto Rican gave you a source of pride and heritage in The Arthur Schomburg Center for Research in Black Culture, named after Arturo Schomburg, one of our many great historians, writers, and activists. We've fought in numerous wars for the US, with great honor and courage. Many of them were members of my family. Take all these together and no one can ever accuse of not making significant contributions to our society and way of life.

It flies in contrast to the stereotypes of that era, that we were freeloaders of society.

This point plays out in a different way in current times, as current politics of the state; we (on this blog), the newspapers, TV news channels, etc. will focus on single entities of Latino descent as though that person is the best we can do or produce amongst ourselves. It's a double insult because it also attacks us, like "en el país de los ciegos, el tuerto es rey".  

On a broader scale, things are very different now in the United States since the mid-60's when I was born. The demographic shift is pronounced, and experts far and wide have predicted Hispanics to be in the majority within the next few decades. I haven't studied those predictions closely, I admit, so I am not sure if they factor in things like draconian measures being considered, like those circulating in some southwestern portions of the USA, declaring children born here of illegal immigrants as not US citizens. For now, I'll take the predictions at face value. And that's my primary point regarding Puerto Rican Statehood.

A new argument for Statehood has emerged, one that didn't exist during the statehood debate of the 60s-90s:

If Puerto Rico became a state, it would be the first Latino state of the union. Wouldn't that put it at the forefront of Hispanic issues nationally? Wouldn't that set the stage for the demographic predictions of this country? And finally, wouldn't that be the ultimate irony, that Puerto Ricans, once the disrespected colony passed from Spain to the US "como una bolsa de papas" was now setting the leadership stage of this country?

It's a deep and complex thought that requires some thinking through, and should give pause especially to the English-First whackos of this country. Those of you that believe in this, be very careful: In a few decades that can easily change to "Español Primero", or better put, "A cada puerco le llega su sábado". 

Puerto Rico has a freely elected governor. We also have a freely elected legislative body and together handle insular affairs. On the federal side, federal programs and initiatives operate like any state of the union in terms of application, oversight, and administration. "si parece un pato y grazna como un pato..." In other words, Puerto Rico already operates very much like a state.

The economic impact of each scenario needs to be weighed out. Puerto Rico's economy needs to be developed properly no matter what the scenario. It has to be something more than manufacturing, putting millions of people a notch above poverty. Dozens of brownfields exist all over the island, abandoned, rusted relics of the sugar industry. Can agriculture be better developed to improve the local economy, if for no other reason than to feed the island's residents, who currently have about 80% of their food imported from elsewhere? Tourism is about 8% of the island's economy right now. It's unlikely that it can be grown much more than that, but even if it did, to what extent? There's 4 million people there, and they can't all be working for the service industry. One answer to these economic questions is to try to grow local businesses, maybe through "Main Streets" types of initiatives. The economy is the key issue in addressing status, I think. I would like to hear from economists on this issue.

As a state, Puerto Rico would put a huge strain on the federal government because of the EITC. Let's not even get into the "serves the United States right" argument and focus solely on the practicality of so many million dollars now depleting the tax coffers. What gets done with that money on the island? Most will spend it of course, which will enrich the local economy, but for how long?

I think the easy answer is to leave things alone. Commonwealth has been working so far, why not leave it? Take a look at the unemployment numbers, the suffering in the large cities, the rampant violent crime and drugs, and you have all the answers you need for why things need to change. Statehood would be the easiest transition of the different options. It would give a solid congressional delegation real voting power. It would give the island a position of leadership as Hispanics continue to grow in population. The claim that it would somehow lesson Puerto Rico's respect amongst other Caribbean nations has no basis other than casual conversations presented as evidence when in fact it's conjecture. When I write again on the status issue, I will focus more on the economic impact of statehood to the island, New York, and the country.

But that's for another time.

For now, I have no doubt that my fellow Puerto Ricans will figure out what's best for them whether it be now or beyond my lifetime. We are a people of great surprises and resourcefulness.

Let's use a bit of recent history to illustrate this point: On August 17, 2004, during the Summer Olympics, Puerto Rico soundly defeated the United States "Dream Team" in Men's Basketball, delivering a stunning upset that continues to be referenced in sports today.

The lesson here: Never underestimate the Puerto Ricans.

Manny Burgos,
Brooklyn, New York
"Más vale morir luchando, que vivir muriendo."

I have to say the article really bothered me a lot because it singles out the 75 Precinct and East New York. I live in the area covered by the 75th Precinct for 40+ years, and I've seen similar articles like this over the years, so while not surprising, it still bothers me all the same.

First some background info:

• The area covered by the 75th Precinct is huge compared to others around the borough and the city. If you want a graphical representation of this, click here.
• It's 5.4 sq. miles, and the little that is undeveloped is quickly getting new homes (I am referring to the Gateway project, near the Gateway Center strip mall).
• Large parts of the area have a serious vertical landscape, from Starrett City to several NYCHA developments, Lincoln Plaza, and others.
• The 75 Precinct and Brooklyn Community District 5 are near identical in boundaries. For wanna-be statisticians like me, this helps a lot.
• We have several major entry/egress points from outside the community--The Jackie Robinson Parkway, the Belt Parkway, Conduit Avenue, Atlantic Avenue, Pennsylvania Avenue and Linden Blvd.
• Since 1990, the area covered by this precinct has seen a huge increase in population. By the mid 80s, East NY had lost 20% of its housing stock. You could walk for several blocks with not a single home obstructing your view in some cases. Fast forward to 2010 and you'll see that vacant land is scarce and there are thousands of new homes all under 20 years old.

The above points only tell part of the story however. Perhaps the most important untold story is a continuation of the last bullet point. Now that the vacant land has been reclaimed for housing, there are as many as 25,000 new residents in the neighborhood. So, with a substantial population increase, the precinct has shown an overall drop in crime of 75% in 20 years.

You simply can't base crime by precinct when their populations vary so greatly. When you make that adjustment, you will see that the 75 Precinct comes in around 4th or 5th place in Brooklyn. So much for being "a world apart from the borough and the rest of the city" as the article states. But I digress...The population numbers are based on Census data, sampling, etc. East NY is a severely undercounted neighborhood in any census, so it's possible that the true rank is even lower once you make even conservative adjustments for this.

It's important to remember that although I know much of the above by heart, I also went online and timed my fact-checking, not just to make sure I knew what I am writing about, but also to see just how long it would have taken a reporter to find the same info. It took me all of 35 minutes, using a variety of websites (Google, nyc.gov, and some others).

A year and a half ago New York Magazine did a good job with a graphical representation of the above point on crime relative to precinct populations. Click here to view it and be sure to go to the PDF version, page 2, which shows the 75 Precinct. What's  important to consider is that New York Magazine used Census 2000 data, so keep in mind that although it used 2007 crime stats, the population in 2000 is way lower than it was in 2007. 

It is so easy to paint my neighborhood's precinct with a wide brush as the wild west of East Brooklyn. And believe me, I don't kid myself that we still have very serious crime issues here in ENY. BUT...Reporters need to stop being lazy when they write articles about ENY. We have our challenges, but there's so much more to ENY than just a set of crime stats:

• We are a community with two Weed & Seed initiatives, one new and one 15 years old, both working to fight crime, solve problems, and partner with law enforcement, prosecutors, residents, merchants, clergy, and neighborhood groups. 
• ENY laid the groundwork for the Community Safety Initiative, a collaboration between the precinct and community that had a significant impact on violent crime. This program, pioneered and tested in ENY, now exists in over a dozen cities, and has influenced Weed & Seed programs all over the country. What's most important to remember is that it happened here first. 
• We have a commanding officer at our precinct that makes it a point to personally attend community meetings in the area, and also comes out to public events of all kinds. It is not unusual to see Inspector Maddrey working 7 days a week, morning, afternoon, and night. He is responsive to the community, courteous, respectful, and compassionate. He truly cares about our well-being.
• The Brooklyn DA has a long list of programs serving ENY that focus on preventing the creation of a new offender, or giving a 2nd chance to someone who may have made a misstep (this is not to say they are unwilling to prosecute those that are a danger to our community). DA Hynes' representatives also attend and participate in every meeting and event.

Back in 1996, 1998, and 2000, we did a lot of "quality of life" and "perceptions of fear and crime" surveying in ENY, in partnership with the 75 Precinct. In 2009, I worked on similar surveying in the area at the behest of Assemblyman Darryl Towns (FYI: I now work for him full-time as his communications director). In 1996, 33% of respondents said they feel safe walking around the neighborhood. In 2009, 47% said they feel safe. Even when you factor in margin of error, etc. this is still a pretty steep increase (even more when you add in the numbers for "somewhat safe"). Some of the other questions don't match up exactly but the overall results are the same: people are starting to feel better about living in the area covered by the 75 Precinct.

One of ENY's greatest challenges has been addressing negative perceptions of crime. The greatest contributor to those negative perceptions is the media. As long as reporters (tv and newspaper) continue to report only negative news about our area or worse, distort facts (like the Daily News did this week), we will continue to be perceived as the Wild West of the city.

The reporter in the Daily News article quotes a few residents whose concerns are to be taken seriously and not undervalued in any way. But the reporter takes those soundbites and presents them as though this was the feeling of the whole neighborhood, because his title ("...residents still afraid of crime") can mean 2 or 20,000 people. How did he go about asking the question? How many people did he ask? Was he fair and balanced or did he provide lead-ins? The article doesn't say anything about his method for making the blanket determination.

So here's a special 6-point message directed to the residents of ENY, Cypress Hills, Spring Creek, City Line and Starrett City:

COMPLAIN. When a newspaper runs a puff piece like the Daily News did this week, write to the editors but more importantly, page through the paper and see who is advertising inside. If any of the local businesses or chain stores with locations in ENY have ads, call them. Let the advertisers know that the very paper they are giving their money to is writing articles that are keeping its readers away from their stores. Believe me, you'll get their attention, and they will get the attention of their sales rep at the newspaper.

SUPPORT YOUR COMMUNITY WITH YOUR DOLLARS. We may not have Starbucks like many corners of Manhattan, but I can still get a great cup of coffee on Fulton Street (much better if you ask me). Our pizza shops can go one-on-one with the best shops in the Zagat guides, as most local residents will tell you. I can buy some great clothes in City Line sparing myself the headache of going to over to Macys. And I'm always hunting for home goods at the shops along New Lots Avenue. This point is important because more people shopping our community's stores helps people feel safer because of the crowds. It gives jobs to local residents, especially to young adults, and keeps dollars in the community.

GET INVOLVED. If you're a reader of this blog, then chances are you're already involved, but if not, get to a community meeting. We need you. For newbies and those already involved in community gatherings, try this at your next meeting: Don't just bring up what's going wrong in the area, bring up what's going right. It can impact how other attendees feel about the area if they hear about what went right.

SPREAD THE WORD. Good community-based communications is essential to fighting negative media. It's very important to let your neighbors know about the successes that go on here every day. For example, the block association that works closely with the police to chase out a drug dealer is worth talking about at the laundromat, beauty parlor, and barber shop. We also have a few community newspapers--call or email them and give them positive stories to write about. Community newspapers do a better job of reporting positive news, so be sure to support their advertisers--and when you do, tell the store owner why you gave them your money. Sometimes just a single comment is enough to keep that business adverising in a publication.

ATTRACT VISITORS. lots of East New Yorkers are online now, over 70% of households. There are many websites that report on leisure activities, like local restaurants. Write reviews on these establishments so people outside the community can give us business and see for themselves that they don't need to rent Kevlar vests before visiting. But there's more you can do online. There are websites and blogs about life in ENY, such as the ENY farms and arts in ENY, amongst others. Visit them and support them. We need to take charge of how people write about us online in every way possible if we are going to fight negative media and lingering perceptions of ENY.

BE PROUD. If you grew up here, went to school here, and lived through the tough times and good times, be proud. When people ask you about how it's possible that you turned out like you did despite everything you lived through, (politely) tell that person to go to hell. You can only be who you are because of your experiences here, not in spite of.

As I stated above, we still have a long way to go, and I am not implying that we don't have some serious problems to work on here in ENY. If that's what you're thinking then you're missing the point. Many of us--police, residents, businesses, clergy, community groups, elected officials, service providers--have fought and won many victories. We should be proud of what we've accomplished in a short amount of time.

1990 through 2010: As someone that lived and worked through the worst years, the differences between then and now are dramatic. However, as long as the media continues to be lazy and irresponsible in its reporting of ENY, we have to remain vigilant and correct their errors because no matter how much the area's crime stats show that crime is down, unless people feel things are safer and better, nothing really changes.

Spread the word.

Manny Burgos,
PROUD EAST NEW YORKER
"Más vale morir luchando, que vivir muriendo."