Gotham Gazette
Gotham Gazette Web
Baruch School of Public Affairs
- SERVING MIDTOWN EAST, MURRAY HILL, STUYVESANT TOWN AND THE UPPER EAST SIDE -

Major Issues for District 4




Upper East Side: Losing the Silk Stocking District

June 3, 2004

By Jennifer Sabella

In a city overwhelmingly dominated by Democrats, Republicans for decades could at least count on support from Manhattan's Upper East Side. Nicknamed the Silk Stocking District, a reference to the affluence of its voters, the area's congressional and state senate seats were held predominantly by liberal Republicans for much of the past 30 years. However, since the mid 1990s, this has begun to change - due, some observers say, to the increased conservatism of the national Republican Party.

Going back at least to the 1958 election of liberal Republican John Lindsay to Congress, Upper East Side Republicans have tended to be more liberal than other Republicans. Lindsay represented the area from 1959 until 1965, when he became the 103rd mayor of New York City. (Another congressperson from the district, Democrat Ed Koch, also went on to become mayor.)

Now the district, which has been redrawn to include more Democrats, is represented in Congress by Democrat Carolyn Maloney. She ousted Republican Bill Green from the seat in 1992 and has held onto it ever since.

A similar change has taken place in the area's 26th state senate district, which elected Republican Roy Goodman for three decades. Goodman was considered a "Rockefeller Republican" - a Republican who takes conservative positions on fiscal questions and liberal stands on social issues. He resigned in 2002 to take a post in the Bloomberg administration and was replaced by a Democrat — Liz Krueger.

Republicans also once represented the area in the City Council. But after Andrew Eristoff, now state budget director, resigned in 1999, Democrat Eva Moskowitz defeated a Republican candidate who spent $1 million of her own money. Moskowitz has won twice since then. Republican Eristoff meanwhile tried unsuccessfully to become state senator from the district.

While the area's politics have gone through a shift, the district remains affluent - its median income ranks the highest among all the New York City council districts - and white.

But while the district has not changed, some observers say, the Republican Party has. In an interview, Krueger indicated this might explain the apparent loss of Republican support in the area. "The state Republican Party has moved to the right, while our state has not," she said, adding that national Republicans tend to be "anti-choice, anti-labor and anti-rent regulation." Because of this, Krueger said, "Manhattan Republicans have … been forced into pretending not to be Republicans in order to get elected."

Even then, the voters may hold them responsible for the actions of their party. "New York City Republicans are at a disadvantage because their upstate colleagues are so anti-New York City" on issues such as education spending, Krueger said.

But Republican consultant Bill O'Reilly sees the absence of Republicans more as a question of individuals than policies. "Just a few years ago, there were four East Side Republicans in office," he said. "Today there are none. But it's important to note that not one of those elected officials — Roy Goodman, John Ravitz, Andrew Eristoff and Charles Millard — were defeated at the polls. Each of them left office to pursue other challenges. Had they not, they would continue to hold office today."

Councilmember Moskowitz takes the opposite view - that the Republican dominance of the area is the aberration, not the current situation. "Historically, these seats have been Democratic seats," she said. "For a brief period of time, perhaps partly because of ideology and partly because Republicans took advantage of special election mechanisms, these seats went to Republicans."

Regardless of the reasons for their apparent demise in the area, Republicans remain optimistic. "The Republican Party is alive and well in Manhattan," said O'Reilly. "There is simply too much talent and thoughtfulness in our ranks to allow us to fade away."





Proposal Replaces Robert Moses Park with New UN Building

July 30, 2003

The United Nations Building complex, started in 1947, is sorely in need of renovation. The UN in planning to perform this work is looking to build an expansion building next door to house dislocated personnel during construction. Unfortunately this location is currently the site of one of the few pieces of open space in the neighborhood, Robert Moses Park. Robert Moses Park surrounds one of the ventilation shafts for the midtown tunnel. It is a patchwork of asphalt areas sectioned off in chain link and wrought iron fencing. There are a few trees, but not much other greenery. It contains some of the few sports courts and the only dog run for 20 blocks in any direction. In exchange for the community space taken for the new building, the UN has proposed a 20 foot esplanade, over the East River, from 41st to 42nd St. Their proposal calls for an expanded hockey field and an adjacent passive park. This plan may raise environmental issues and involve several Federal Agencies because of building over the water. This plan would obviously take so much time, that it would not be complete before construction of the new building could begin. It would also not satisfy the need of the community for another park equal in size and function to the Robert Moses Park. The Turtle Bay Neighborhood Association and the East Midtown Coalition for Sensible Development are promoting the use of an abandoned Con Edison parking lot as a replacement The Con Ed parking lot at 685 First Avenue is presently being cleared in preparation for the pending sale of the Con Ed properties in this area. It is also being used as an access area for the Third Water Tunnel. This lot sits between St. Vartan’s Park and Esplanade Park and would provide a natural extension between the two. To become the replacement park, New York City would first have to condemn the lot and then deed the lot to the public for use as a park. Condemnation requires that market value be given for the lot. The value of the property is presently under negotiation between Con Edison and the designated developer of the 5 blocks of property being sold by Con Ed. Again designating this lot as a replacement for the Robert Moses Park, would not happen swiftly. While rumors abound that the UN may not currently have the funding to renovate the Secretariat Building on the main UN , the head of the land use committee of Community Board 6, has been asked to get involved in the selection of architects for the UN Building. The two neighborhood groups are bird dogging the issue and additional information may be found at http://www.eastmidtowncoalition.com/index.html & http://turtlebay-nyc.org/index.html.




Homepage of the Community Gazette for District 4

Gotham Gazette's Community Gazettes
Community news, views, and potholes for each council district










ALL DISTRICT 4 MAJOR ISSUES
Upper East Side: Losing the Silk Stocking District
(Jun 03, 2004)

Proposal Replaces Robert Moses Park with New UN Building
(Jul 30, 2003)

Sites of Interest from Collegester:
Online Casino | Wireless broadband | Place Your Link Here!