Some New Yorker’s don’t want to #FlipTheBallot
Three ballot proposals aim to make New York City more equitable. Not everyone agrees with them.
BROOKLYN, NEW YORK — On September 20th, during a voter registration drive, Harold Miller, executive director of the NYC Racial Justice Commission (RJC), spoke at CUNY-Medgar Evers College to inform the public on three ballot proposals for the upcoming election this November. The goal that day was to promote listeners to register to vote and convince them that his commission’s new proposals matter, so that they will vote “yes” on election day and pass the proposals.
“You have families, you have young people, people of color, and other vulnerable groups that are always faced with significant barriers when it comes to wealth building and advancement,” Miller later said when speaking about the issues with unaffordability in NYC and the disproportionate impact it has on New Yorkers of color. His commission came up with a solution.
For months, the RJC has been promoting the three proposals that they formed. They speak about changing the city for the better and creating a difference in uprooting structural racism and enacting better racial equity into city planning. Racial equity is when people of all races are treated equally in every place of society, no matter how they may appear physically. The RJC aspires for this in order to create a better New York.
After a great deal of research and work with former mayor, Bill de Blasio, the RJC put together their three proposals. They spoke to fellow New York residents to get their feedback and implement proposals that they thought would benefit the majority. It took various drafts and reports to get to where they needed to be, but Miller worked closely with his colleagues, forming what they saw to be three transformative proposals for the city.
The commission, in December of 2021, marched to the office of the city clerk and delivered their final report, hoping to get their proposals adopted for the November election. It looked as though their continuous efforts throughout the past months paid off and the proposals were adopted and will appear in front of New Yorkers on their ballots this coming November. Once adopted, the next goal was to educate the public on the proposals in order to get them passed.
The proposals are neatly laid out in the order of aspiration, action, and accountability, the “3 A’s” as the RJC describes them. The first one calls to add a preamble to the city charter. The second would form a Racial Equity Office, Plan, and Commission. And the third would require the city to measure the true cost of living in NYC and work with the commission to better adjust benefits to local residents of all communities.
Miller explained that he ultimately believes in the importance of these proposals, “so people can actually live with real dignity here in the city, no matter no matter what their income level is.”
The RJC, through press conferences, interviews and social media posts using the hashtag “FlipTheBallot”, has been sharing with the public information about what these proposals mean. But, to many, it looks as though they have only hit the surface.
Upon reading about and listening to these proposals, it appears as if not everyone agrees that voting “yes” will really do anything at all. Some even believe that it will only help those who didn’t need extra support in the first place.
NYC based architect and writer for White Rose Magazine, an online liberal publication, Benjamin Marcus (@BenjaminRMarcus), recently tweeted in response to these new proposals. He wrote, “All 4 props are grift. Even if their purposes were good… they’ll result in handouts to agency friends and not do a single thing to advance any of their professed causes.”
The Racial Justice Commission has been explaining to the public an ideal view for the future of New York City. Based on what some viewers are saying, it seems as though they might need to reach further than just the goals. It is what comes after these goals that New Yorkers really want to see. From Twitter posts to their website to public events, the RJC has been providing the same information over and over again. In simple terms: ‘The city is built on racism. It needs to be changed. ’
In press conferences they speak deeper about these proposals, using statistics and real situations to prove what they are saying. However, to find these, it takes time and research from the voters. Not everyone is present at those meetings, so they are not getting the full package of information.
Nina Evans, a local New York student, spoke about her thoughts on the proposal. She said,“I do believe that it is a step in the right direction to establish a racial equity office, but the government can get caught up in bureaucracy a lot and I do get a little skeptical that they would enact meaningful change.” She then explained that her “mom was on some sort of board for Democrats in [her] hometown after Trump was elected, and just hearing how many hoops they had to jump through for anything was astounding. After a while they had to dilute a lot of the things they were attempting to do.” She wants to believe that these proposals will work, but feels it is difficult to hold a lot of faith in them.
With the election less than a month away, will Miller and the rest of the Racial Justice Commission be able to convince New Yorkers that these proposals mean real change and persuade them to vote yes on their ballots?
