Gotham Gazette

The Place for New York Policy and politics

Opinion

Opinion

A Vote to Protect Tenant Data Privacy


affordable remarks affordable

Housing (photo: Michael Appleton/Mayoral Photography Office)


If you live in a New York City apartment building, chances are you don’t use a traditional metal key to open the front door. 

In recent years, countless residential buildings have converted to so-called “smart access” systems that rely on key fobs, pin codes, and smartphone apps for entry. These technologies can offer safety and convenience to residents.

They also pose a potential threat.

The reason is simple: every time a tenant taps their keyfob or enters their access code, it generates a piece of data that logs their entry. 

What will your landlord do with this data? Will they use it to pry into your personal life? Will they sell it to marketers? Could it be used as an eviction tool? Will it be kept forever? 

At present there are no laws that control how this data is used, in New York City or elsewhere in the nation. Your landlord is free to use this sensitive information however they please.

Time logs of when you or family enter the building could indicate patterns of work, travel, socializing, even walking the dog. This is no one’s business but your own.

Tenants need to know — with certainty — that the data generated by smart entry systems will never compromise their privacy and safety, nor make them vulnerable to abusive landlords bent on eviction.

That’s why we are fighting to pass legislation known as the Tenant Data Privacy Act (officially Intro. 1760) in the New York City Council. The bill is up for a vote in front of the full Council on Thursday, April 29. 

The bill would prohibit landlords from ever using a tenant’s building entry data for purposes of eviction or harassment. It would also specifically ensure that smart access systems are never used to collect information on the relationship status of tenants and their guests.

The legislation ensures that a landlord can’t share entrance data with third parties without express permission from residents. The bill has extra protection for minors, to ensure that even the most basic information is not collected on them without explicit permission from a guardian. 

And it obligates landlords to provide tenants, upon request, written policies about the type of data being collected, how long it’s kept, and the process for tenants to add additional household members or guests to the smart access system. And, critically, it requires that tenant data be permanently deleted after 90 days. 

The bill also includes similar protections against misuse of utility data by landlords in buildings that track usage of heat, electricity, and Wi-Fi.

What about smart entry systems used not for the front door but the entrance to your apartment? Our law would mandate that tenants have a right to a traditional metal key for their personal unit if that’s what they prefer.

This law would have teeth: landlords would be liable for a penalty of up to $6,000 for each violation.

Yes there are benefits to smart entry systems. Traditional mechanical keys can be lost, stolen, or easily copied, creating safety concerns for neighbors. Tenants with an access system that uses a smartphone app are able to maintain a record of who enters their home and when and, in some cases, even have the ability to easily grant and revoke guest access. 

This technology can also serve as a tool to detect if a super or other member of the building staff is entering your apartment without your consent. It can help domestic violence victims keep abusive partners out of their homes.

The Tenant Data Protection Act strikes a balance, allowing tenants the benefits of smart entry systems while protecting against the potential for abuse. The legislation has quickly gained momentum in the City Council, with 27 sponsors, and support from a growing coalition of tenants rights advocates and other leaders.

No one should ever worry that the simple act of opening their door could compromise their safety or privacy. We can and must take action now to keep tenants in New York City safe and vote to pass the Tenant Data Protection Act.

***
City Council Member Mark Levine represents District 7 and is Chair of the Council’s Health Committee. He is currently running for Manhattan Borough President. On Twitter @MarkLevineNYC.

***
Have an op-ed idea or submission for Gotham Gazette? Email This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

Second Chance Efforts Must Center Incarcerated Women Who Never Had a First Chance


second comm hosts

Incarcerated women visit with family (photo: Michael Appleton/Mayor's Office)


This April, as we do every year, we hear about the need to offer system-impacted people a “second chance” to re-enter society and live their lives freely. But to realize true, transformative change, we must acknowledge the reality of our country’s incarceration crisis: many people entangled in the criminal legal system never had a first chance to begin with. This is especially true for incarcerated women, who are so often left out of the conversation.

I know firsthand how our country harms and excludes women who are incarcerated from living free and full lives. I spent 27 years behind bars in a New York maximum-security prison — more than two of which were spent in solitary confinement. And while the contours of my story are unique, the theme is all too common: our country’s crisis of mass incarceration locks hundreds of thousands of women away from loved ones, discards lives, and rips apart entire communities. This is true in New York and every other state across the country. 

I went to prison at the age of 20, and quickly came to understand that many women shared stories like mine — abused and traumatized by relatives and adults we’d trusted, and did terrible harm that rippled outward. But that realization was cold comfort, as I quickly absorbed how violence behind bars is in the very fabric of incarcerated life. Incarceration compounds trauma, trapping women in a near-endless cycle of abuse, harm, and the constant devaluation of our lives.

The vast majority of women who are incarcerated are survivors of violence — including sexual assault, domestic violence, and child abuse — prior to incarceration. The majority of women in prison are also mothers. I can’t overstate the magnitude that cruelly keeping families apart has on children, impacting every aspect of their lives, like whether they’re able to concentrate in school or live with financial stability. Incarcerating mothers virtually guarantees that we will perpetuate trauma and pain across generations. 

If we as a nation are serious about rehabilitation before a person re-enters society, then we can’t reasonably expect it to happen in a dangerous place like prison. The simple truth is that we can’t incarcerate and punish our way to safer and healthier communities, and this holds true for offenses we deem violent and nonviolent alike. Everyone is more than the sum of their worst mistake, and true healing can only come from the grace of offering second chances to people who may never have had a real first chance. 

Behind every statistic of a woman locked behind bars is a person. But all too often, society strips away their humanity once they interact with the criminal legal system. I’m thinking of my friend Rosslyn Smith, who was just 17 when she was first incarcerated, and served a staggering 39 years prior to her release. I think, too, of my friend Valerie Gaiter, who served 41 years in prison before passing away behind bars two years ago. These and all women deserve to be treated with dignity and respect, and this fundamental truth can’t be realized as we cage tens of thousands of women with little concern for their actual well-being. We should instead be implementing policies that help incarcerated women return home and re-enter their communities. In addition to saving lives, creating meaningful pathways for release will save taxpayer dollars that are infinitely better spent on investing in our communities.

There are many common sense solutions right in front of us, in New York and across the country, that would save lives, rekindle communities, and ensure children can stay together safely with their moms and loved ones.

Some of the reforms to the system as it exists now are being considered by New York elected leaders this year, including ending reincarceration for technical parole violations (Less Is More), creating more meaningful and fair opportunities for parole release (Fair & Timely Parole), and expanding parole eligibility for older New Yorkers in prison (Elder Parole). 

We need to act immediately to safely reduce the number of people trapped in prison and begin the work of rebuilding our communities. And I encourage us to think even bigger — what would it mean to live in a country without a brutal prison system that doles out more harm than it solves? How much further could the hundreds of billions of dollars we spend on incarceration go if invested in job training, education, housing, healthcare, and a true social safety net that addresses the root causes of poverty and violence? 

This would be a world that is infinitely safer for all women and families, and one that isn’t as unimaginable as many would have us believe. This month and beyond, I hope you’ll join me in supporting the right of all women to live in freedom and safety, including the most vulnerable and least protected among us. 

***
Donna Hylton, founder of A Little Piece of Light, is an activist and author who advocates for the rights of system-impacted women. She is a founding member of The National Council for Incarcerated and Formerly Incarcerated Women and Girls and an alumna of the first cohort of Leading with Conviction Fellows of JustLeadershipUSA. Donna was incarcerated for over 25 years. On Twitter @DonnaHylton.

***
Have an op-ed idea or submission for Gotham Gazette? Email This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.

4 Ways the Next Mayor and City Council Must Do Better on Street and Subway Homelessness


unbranded hra nycem

Homeless outreach in the subways (photo: Michael Appleton/Mayor's Office)


It’s easy to bash Bill de Blasio, and to be fair, he deserves it. When it comes to street and subway homelessness, Mayor de Blasio has failed in the same troubling pattern time and time again. When pressure mounts for him to act, he creates a “new initiative.” Examples include HOME-STAT, Outreach NYC, the since-terminated coercive Subway Diversion Program, and The Journey Home. Typically, these initiatives increase the role of the NYPD in homeless outreach, promise additional housing that doesn’t come to fruition, and show more creativity in their presentation than their implementation.

Homeless New Yorkers have had enough, as have many providers and advocates. Our next Mayor — to be elected this year and inaugurated January 1, 2022 — must lead with bold, transformative policies that reimagine homeless outreach from start to finish. Working with nine directly impacted homeless New Yorkers, we lay out a starting point here and through our new plan, the #HumanPlan.

The responsibility to implement the #HumanPlan may not lie solely at the feet of the next Mayor. If our next Mayor falls short as our current one has, the City Council must be more willing to use its legislative authority to protect homeless New Yorkers.

A bill introduced three years ago in the City Council, Intro. 146, is a perfect example of where the City Council could provide the leadership necessary to help people secure housing. It is desperately needed and truly transformative legislation, and if passed, it would increase the city’s virtually unusable housing vouchers to fair market value. The City Council, without the Mayor, could pass it today. It has a veto-proof majority and broad support from advocates and many politically-active homeless New Yorkers.

Enough is enough, and we cannot afford another four years of inaction and disappointing leadership. To truly address street and subway homelessness, we need commitments from the incoming Mayor, City Council, and Borough Presidents to create, fund, and implement an integrated housing plan that addresses the full need for permanent housing for all individuals experiencing street and subway homelessness, while also treating people with dignity.

To begin, here are four things our next Mayor, City Council, and Borough Presidents need to do to truly address New York City’s street and subway homelessness crisis. 

1. Reimagine Street and Subway Homeless Outreach
Seldom discussed in conversations around homelessness is the fact that, under the New York City Department of Homeless Services’ direction, the city-contracted outreach teams do not give people on the streets basic needs items like socks or water bottles.

The approach, under a motto “a hand-up, not a hand-out” falsely assumes that homeless people are making a choice to be on the streets, and if they were just a little bit more desperate, they would instead choose to come into shelters. This perspective quite literally equates socks, in the minds of officials, as a perverse incentive to stay on the streets. In reality, the only choice homeless New Yorkers are making is to avoid dangerous shelters.

The message from outreach workers, in moments of desperate need such as when someone is without socks, is that they cannot be helpful. Wet, cold feet? We can’t offer you something to warm them up.

How can people trust that outreach workers can secure them housing when they can't even secure basic necessities?

Outreach teams should not only be able to give out basic needs items, but they should build around it. Private programs like New York City Relief should be replicated by city-funded outreach teams, so homeless New Yorkers can come and see them while having a warm meal. 

2. Completely Remove NYPD from Homeless Outreach
Removing the NYPD from homeless outreach does more than just end the criminalization of homelessness. It helps outreach teams do their jobs better.

Nunu, who has lived on the streets for several years, explains why outreach workers should arrive with water bottles rather than with police officers: “Outreach teams come up to you in public with officers, and it looks bad. It makes us look like we’re doing something wrong on the streets because they’re not coming to us with food and water.” When outreach workers arrive with NYPD, Nunu and countless other homeless New Yorkers decline engagement because they feel this approach sends the wrong message — that they’ve done something wrong or that they’re in trouble.

Simply put, allowing the outreach teams to work independently of the NYPD allows them to build and maintain trust. Combining the removal of NYPD from homeless outreach with the introduction of giving out basic needs items will send the right message to homeless New Yorkers: Outreach workers are here to help you, not to criminalize you.

3. Actually Adopt True “Housing First” Model in Supportive Housing
Yes, New York City says it does “Housing First,” but no, we absolutely do not.

A true “Housing First” model is predicated on the idea that everyone is housing ready, and the onus is on housing providers to be “consumer ready.” Believe it or not, in New York City, case managers prepare homeless New Yorkers for interviews to try to get them into supportive housing units they’ve already been deemed eligible for by the city’s Human Resources Administration (HRA). They do this because many providers screen out the most vulnerable clients instead of screening them in.

The Safety Net Project at the Urban Justice Center acquired the reasons for the rejections via the Freedom of Information Law (FOIL). The results were appalling, and showed the extent to which the Department of Social Services (DSS) and Department of Homeless Services (DHS) take a hands-off approach to the supportive housing application process. People were rejected because of their mental illness, the very reason supportive housing would likely have been a great fit in the first place. (Note: Intro. 147, a bill that would document and publicize the reasons for supportive housing rejections, has been sitting in the City Council for three years.)

Our incoming city government leaders must end this practice, often referred to as “creaming” or “cherry-picking.” The way to do this is simple: End the supportive housing interview process (again, people are already deemed eligible, they shouldn’t have to interview!). At the same time, they must expand the availability of supportive housing by proactively working to identify and open sites across communities. As it stands, there is only one available supportive housing unit for every five eligible applicants.

A supportive housing bill of rights would help supportive housing tenants too. The City Council introduced, but has not passed, Intro. 2176, which would require supportive housing providers to supply a supportive housing bill of rights to tenants.

4. Make the CityFHEPS Vouchers Work for Street Homeless New Yorkers 
The current CityFHEPS voucher, the city’s voucher that homeless New Yorkers can use to find housing, leaves voucher holders with virtually no options. The voucher amount is so low that even the smallest of apartments are often out of reach for them. A recent report from NY1 showed that month-over-month, just 4% of voucher-holders find apartments.

 Unsheltered homeless New Yorkers always point out that there are many homeless New Yorkers living on the streets who do not need the additional ser vices offered at supportive housing. Unfortunately, because the vouchers do not work, homeless outreach teams typically try to get their clients into supportive housing rather than find housing through a voucher. Outreach workers see the “one available supportive housing unit for every five eligible applicants” as better odds than finding housing through the CityFHEPS voucher.

If we bring the CityFHEPS voucher up to fair market rate or the Section 8 rate, educate outreach providers on how to house people through the voucher, and provide them the resources to do this, we would see an immediate drop in street and subway homelessness. This can be done through mayoral leadership or through the City Council’s Intro. 146.

The four recommendations above, if implemented alongside plans like “Right to a Roof” that ensure the right to housing for all New Yorkers, would set our next administration up for success. Homeless New Yorkers, advocates and many providers are sick of empty rhetoric. They want to see action and compassion, not police and empty promises.

One question remains: Will they be up to the challenge?

***
By an Anonymous Homeless Outreach Worker, an Anonymous Department of Homeless Services Official, and Josh Dean, Executive Director of Human.nyc. On Twitter @humandotnyc.

Two of the authors have been granted anonymity over fear of speaking publicly and risking their livelihoods.

***
Have an op-ed idea or submission for Gotham Gazette? Email This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.



Print Friendly and PDF

Editor's Choice


Gotham Gazette: New York Voters Approve $4.2 Billion Environmental Bond Act
New York Voters Approve $4.2 Billion Environmental Bond Act
Gotham Gazette: 
New York City Voters Approve Racial Justice Ballot Measures
New York City Voters Approve Racial Justice Ballot Measures
Gotham Gazette: 
Housing Development in New York City Slows to a Crawl as Officials Debate Tax Incentives
Housing Development in New York City Slows to a Crawl as Officials Debate Tax Incentives
Gotham Gazette: 
City Council Examines Low Voter Turnout, Moving Local Elections to Even Years City Council Examines Low Voter Turnout, Moving Local Elections to Even Years