| |
Harrison, Young, Park Go Toe To Toe
By ELLEN THOMPSON
New York State Assembly Democratic candidate Julia Harrison may not have been pleased with the time slot of last week’s debate with her District 22 opponent Ellen Young at the LaGuardia East Sheraton in Flushing. Or maybe it just wasn’t her week all together, but at this week’s debate held Monday night at Flushing Public Library, Harrison was on the ball and eventually ran away with it, leaving her opponents Young and Terrance Park, who is back on the ballot, in the dust.
The Library’s auditorium was filled to capacity – yes to capacity, there was actually a security guard at the door turning interested constituents away. He was assuring them, though, that if they waited once a seat opened, there would be a chance to sit in on the action, which was hosted by Queens Civic Congress and Citizens Union.
Opening the debate, Harrison basically reiterated her statement from last week, touching on her early work with the district’s schools and her ties to her co-op board, adding in accomplishments as a civic leader and political activist. This time though, she presented her legislative experience with the Assembly in 1983 and the City Council in 1986 in a less-winded manner, ending her opening by saying, “I was chosen over all challengers time and time again, and I am once again ready to serve all my district’s residents.”
Taking the microphone, Park, without wasting a second, invited a call for celebration as he proudly said, “Yes, I am back on the ballot,” into the microphone, filling the audience with a surge of applause from the audience made up of a mix of white, black and Asian voters of all ages.
“Since I have been challenged by my opponent, I have been encouraged by the community I intend to support when elected to Assembly,” continued Park, who went on to mention his working class immigrant parents and his service under former Mayors Ed Koch, David Dinkins and Rudy Giuliani.
Young’s opening statement was focused around her interest in affordable housing and her previous experience through Councilman John Liu’s office regarding constituent services. Just as in last week’s debate, Young discussed her past 27 years of community service, starting with her acceptance to the NYPD as the first female Asian auxiliary officer.
After getting a sense of the candidates what was on their minds, the first question was asked: “What makes you more unique than your opponents?”
“I can’t compare myself to Mrs. Julia Harrison with her legislative experience and being the first woman elected to City Council, but my experience working with the former mayors sets me apart,” said Park, as he finessed the first question. Park impressively discussed his efforts to bridge gaps between civic associations and city agencies through grass roots efforts.
Building on Park’s response, Young tossed the “grass roots” keyword into her reply as she once again noted her work in Liu’s office.
Harrison, being the only previously elected official, offered the most substantial answer, aptly pulling from her experience in Albany and the City Council. “I have accomplished a lot during my involvement,” she said, rattling off a list of community improvements spanning from traffic lights, support of cultural associations to senior issues, which played extremely well to the audience.
The second question regarded the State Law that requires that the Legislature vote on any transfer of park property from state to city, which seemed to have caught Young and Park off guard as Harrison confidently listened to her opponent’s responses.
Young responded by simply saying there should be an inclusive law that would keep the general public more informed while Park went on a mini ego trip saying, “Park should be protected, Park should be shared and Park should prevail,” never touching on the issue of state law but rather exercising his wit and namesake.
Prepared to discuss the impact such a law could have on city residents, Harrison expressed the importance of “precious” parkland. “It shouldn’t be subjected to an individual whim of the state,” Harrison said. “Once it is transferred it cannot be replaced and should not be commercialized.” She added that she would extend provisions to the city for state parks on city land, once in Albany.
Once again digging into her bag of legislative knowledge, Harrison answered the third question on developing affordable housing by citing laws that allow owners to charge high rents and receive relief taxes as they up their rents.
“It would be a long, drawn-out hard-fought battle to develop affordable housing,” Harrison said, “but I would be willing to battle commercial developers and discus the option of placing ‘x’ amount of middle and low income housing in new developments.”
Providing just a good, if not equally impressive response, Park said, “A working relationship between the City Council, the mayor and the federal government, as in HUD, is what is needed to develop for funding for affordable housing,” which he believes would be the start to acquiring housing for constituents.
Before Young could interject her own opinion she said, “yes we need funds, but who can get those funds, who can get those funds from the City Council and federal government?”
“I think I am the one who is more than capable to fight for those funds, but if elected I would also require a count of empty apartments in the government housing projects and match the empty apartments with community constituents that are in need,” she continued.
The last question from the hosts was: “If elected to office, what would your top three priorities be?”
Parks responded with contextual zoning, parking in downtown Flushing and better education. Young’s response was just as short and simple. “Within the first three months I would visit all schools, senior centers and hospitals to see what needs to be fixed,” she said.
Harrison decided that she would look at heath and zoning, but would focus her attention to the Legislature to restrict eminent domain and the private projects that could benefit from it. She would also support a pending bill that would hold contractors responsible for damages to surrounding properties while projects are underway and a state tax credit bill for homeowners.
|
|
|