October 8, 2019

Episode 23 – Former NYC deputy mayor Alicia Glen on future-proofing cities

Former NYC Deputy Mayor for Housing and Economic Development Alicia Glen joins guest host and Urban Lab Director Steven Pedigo to discuss ways policymakers can leverage public-private partnerships to future-proof cities.

Guests

Alicia GlenFormer New York City Deputy Mayor

Hosts

Steven PedigoProfessor at the LBJ School of Public Affairs and Director of the LBJ Urban Lab at The University of Texas at Austin

This is policy on purpose. A podcast produced by the LBJ School of Public

0:02

Affairs at the University of Texas at Austin. We take you behind the scenes of policy

0:07

with the people who help shape it. For more, visit LBJ, Texas studied

0:13

you, however one. I’m Stephen Pedigo. I’m your special guest

0:18

host. Today for the podcast, I direct the LBJ Urban Lab. I’m excited

0:23

to have our guests with us today, Alicia Glenn, the former deputy mayor for housing economic development for the city of New York

0:28

Daily Show. Great to have you. Thanks for having me. Thanks for joining us. Oh, he’s just someone who’s

0:33

worked across all publics, all sectors, the public, private and government. The ultimate city builder, as

0:38

I would say. So, you know, Alicia, let’s just jump jump right in. How did you find

0:43

yourself as deputy mayor? Wow. Well, that’s a long story, but I’ll try to make it a little shorter.

0:48

I’m incredibly lucky that I grew up in a family of parents who had always been involved in the public

0:54

sector in different ways. They were a civil rights lawyers. They were legal services lawyers. My father went to work for the city of New

0:59

York. My stepmother ran city planning. I mean, I really grew up thinking that, like, what

1:04

people do in their life is help build cities and serve their cities. So, you know, a lot of people

1:09

thought you would like to be a banker or an astronaut or a doctor. I thought you grew up and you tried to make cities better. So,

1:14

you know, I’ve had a very long career both as a lawyer and in the public sector and the private sector. But if you’re into

1:20

building cities and making cities the great opportunity places and

1:25

petri dishes, that they are being the deputy mayor for New York City, it’s probably about the best job

1:30

anybody could have. So I got there and I had the greatest five years in my life. That’s awesome.

1:35

So one of the things that’s obviously one of the largest accomplishments that you had and you are an expert in the space,

1:41

is affordable housing. You helped design and build one of the largest affordable housing programs

1:46

across the country. How do you do it? Well, I mean, in addition to more ice coffee

1:51

than I thought was possible to buy even in hipster coffee bars in New York. You know, we did

1:56

it by taking a lot of work that had already been done in the city of New York. I always like to be

2:01

really honest about the fact that, you know, really good city government and city policy builds

2:06

on the work of your predecessors. You know, unless there’s a big revolutionary moment in a city where they had

2:11

no housing policy. But that wasn’t the case in New York. In New York City has always been the leader in recognizing

2:16

that cities need to take housing as seriously as they do fire safety, education,

2:21

the traditional things that people think of as the services that cities provide. And. And starting about 35 years

2:27

ago, the city of New York began to put housing front and center and was the first jurisdiction to ever go out

2:32

and actually raise capital specifically for affordable housing. And it was incredibly

2:37

important that the city do it, particularly at a time when people were talking about New York City’s being a shrinking city,

2:42

sort of like the Detroit of today was in a New York City in the late 70s and early 80s

2:47

when people were talking about a real shrinking city plan. And so at the time, thinking about housing

2:52

was also about economic development and community reinvestment and saying we have

2:58

a housing crisis. But what we really have is also a neighborhood crisis. And so the city made the decision that a strategy

3:03

to help the city grow and revitalize was to invest in housing. And so that work was built

3:08

on for years and decades. And when we got there, we said, look at we’ve been doing amazing work.

3:13

The Kotch plan, Dinkins. Even Rudy Giuliani, who I worked for, you know,

3:18

had had an interest in housing. And then the Bloomberg administration did a lot of interesting work in housing as well, particularly

3:23

as the city was beginning to prosper so much and population was returning. We

3:29

began to see this sort of interesting dynamic, which is we have an amazing infrastructure for affordable housing.

3:34

We have great agencies, we have great policy, and the market is going crazy. And now we have a different

3:39

kind of problem, which is there’s no more city on property. There’s no more vacant blocks and blocks and blocks

3:44

in the Bronx. Right. That’s done. We did all of that. And now we have to think about new strategies

3:50

because we want to be a pro-growth city. If we want to continue to be a city that’s eight and a half million,

3:55

nine million people, nine and a half million people and keep the momentum, we have to build housing

4:01

for everybody. And we have to think about new strategies. So how did you get the private sector on board? Well, the private sector

4:06

is, you know, in one sense they get on board and on some ways you push them onboard. It’s a two

4:11

way it’s a two way thing. Right. So in order to really capture the value

4:16

that the city had created by the Renaissance post 9/11, post Lehman and really

4:21

the economic indicators of the city were so strong, we had to figure out a way to get the private

4:26

sector to actually start contributing in a way that was not purely voluntary. Right. A lot of

4:32

people in a lot of jurisdictions around the country use density bonuses or use incentives

4:37

in order to get the private sector to do the work of the government. And those programs are important

4:42

and they’re part of a comprehensive plan. But the fundamental game changer was to say, you know what, everybody? The

4:48

housing market and the real estate market is so strong in New York, we’re going to actually capture

4:53

some of that. Value creation and put it into permanent affordable housing. And that’s what mandatory

4:58

inclusionary housing really is. Which is saying if you’re gonna be building housing in New York City

5:04

now, we’re going to give you the tools and the density and the jurisdiction to do that. You need to give us something

5:09

back in return. There has to be more of a real contract with community. And that was a fundamental

5:14

game changer as one of the main pillars of our plan. So now when neighborhoods are up, zoned

5:19

or re zones so that residential development can occur or when big

5:24

developers come in and want to take their building from 50 storeys to 80 storeys into an upsetting. They

5:29

have to do affordable housing. And that really changes the dynamic, both in terms of the conversation

5:34

with community, but also it allows the city to actually capture some of the wealth that’s being created in the city.

5:40

So that’s an instance where the private sector isn’t exactly voluntarily getting

5:45

on board, except they are, because now we have data to suggest that the quid pro quo,

5:50

the intensity of density and the additional FFR has not

5:56

made it impossible to build. Right. And that’s what all the naysayers may say. If you overregulate it, you’ll ruin the market.

6:01

Nobody will build a building, go back to the way it was exactly the opposite. We have more starts

6:06

and more activity than we ever had before. So we obviously got it right. We’re getting that share of the market

6:12

correct. We get permanent affordable housing and developers get to make money and build great building. So how do cities like

6:17

Austin and Denver, these smaller cities, take these ideas and apply them to their place into their communities?

6:22

I mean, that’s an issue that we have here in Austin, particularly, is around affordable housing and getting the private sector

6:27

because some of the the ideas are an inclusionary. Zoning is we can’t do some of those things here in Texas. How do we do

6:33

it? Well, I mean, some of it’s jurisdictional in terms of what you’re allowed to do by statute. I think there are techniques about

6:38

ways to make these these programs constitutional. And if you have the right enabling legislation, I my sense is there’s a real

6:43

momentum here in Texas around that. But I think it boils down to what I would call future proofing your city. Right.

6:48

A lot of people say we don’t want to put too many requirements on developers. Now, the market’s not

6:53

hot enough or we don’t want to set aside our city owned property to have to have affordable

6:58

housing. We just want development. We want development. And I think that’s a really shortsighted

7:03

view, because before you know it, you’re gonna wake up and suddenly you’re going to have a real affordable housing crisis on your hand.

7:08

And you’re gonna wish that maybe some of those sites you had auctioned off or those sites read the development agreements

7:14

where the obligations around affordable housing weren’t that enforceable. You’re going to really

7:19

look back and go, [INAUDIBLE], we blew it because now we don’t have those assets in those

7:24

resources. And so what I extoll all cities that are either on the verge or already beginning

7:29

to feel a heated market, put these tools into place now. And by the way,

7:35

you know, I think this notion that developers now will never do a deal or never want to bid on a on a city site

7:40

or never want to build a building if they have to do 10 or 15 percent affordable housing, it’s just not

7:46

true. You have such strong market dynamics in places like Austin and Denver and Portland

7:51

and Nashville and these cities that are experiencing extraordinary high wage job growth.

7:56

These markets can and should be leveled in such a way that

8:02

affordable housing becomes baked into the blueprint, out into the ether. Enzyte guised

8:07

of all public policy. Because I may tell you something, it’s much harder to retrofit these problems than get it right.

8:12

Going into it. So housing is one of the issues, obviously, as we deal with inequality in our cities.

8:17

You know, you look at you look at New York, your former mayor, your former boss is

8:23

still the man. Stoma. Mayor de Blasio said that New York was a tale of two cities. We

8:28

see that playing out in Austin and other places. There was an article in The Statesman today about how income in the city is growing,

8:33

but our poverty numbers are increasing. Housing is one piece of that. What are some other levers that city

8:38

builders can think of beyond housing to think about how we push up this idea of inclusive growth in our cities?

8:43

Yeah, I mean, you’re right. I mean, housing is for most people, their largest expanse of hits right at it. But you have to tack it from both

8:48

ends. And I think there’s no there’s no one size fits all or sort of instant strategies. You have to look

8:54

at it as a comprehensive approach. So one of the things that we did are short term investments and long term

8:59

investments. The greatest long term investment, you might argue, is universal pre-K and now universal pre-K

9:04

beginning to give kids the skills they need to compete in the 21st economy, 21st century economy.

9:09

Raising your minimum wage, thinking about living wage. These are controversial issues. But as the cities themselves become more expensive,

9:15

you have to rebalance what minimum wage and living wage looks like so that people can income up

9:21

real strategies about how to develop pipes for local people

9:26

to get the jobs in the innovation economy. Tell us more about that. If you also want to check investments, you know,

9:32

I mean, I think a lot of people think of economic development as like a race to the bottom of just incentives to bring

9:37

companies, bring companies. And, you know, for some companies and for some cities, it’s OK to offer some packages.

9:42

I’m not saying that that is the world’s worst strategy, but if you’re going to be doing that kind of incentive

9:47

based economic development, you must link it to real investments in what I guess you would

9:53

think of as. 21ST Century, a skills based training that can

9:58

be at a high school level, can be really interesting industry partnerships and apprenticeships. I mean, what we think

10:03

of as education now or, you know, you should be investing in community

10:08

colleges that are providing people with basic digital and computer engineering skills

10:13

and saying to companies that are going to be building in cities. You know what? Newsflash, if you want a tax

10:19

abatement or you want an incentive, you have to make best efforts or even possibly you must hire 20 percent

10:25

of your incoming engineering staff from our community college. I mean, the there are hooks

10:30

that you can begin to put with your packages, that you’re not being uncompetitive with other

10:35

regions. But you’re being very clear that the companies here, not just for their own, but to engage

10:40

with the current population and allow the workforce here to represent the diversity

10:46

of the city. I think that’s the connection linking workforce training, workforce development, skills training, education

10:51

to what people think of as classic economic development. And some of the things I love about what you all did in the city

10:57

of New York is that you also made a commitment to help maintain that manufacturing was going to be present

11:02

in this city, not just thinking about those knowledge in those, quote unquote, creative class jobs or even those pipelines, those jobs. But you

11:07

all made a commitment to manufacturing. Is that important for cities to think that about that as well? Well, I do. I think and

11:12

I think, again, it varies by jurisdiction and what’s going on in terms of the diversity of your economy. But as much

11:17

as I am a pro Howser and talk about why, you know, we really need to focus on housing. Your point is exactly

11:22

right, which was for too long and had been housing versus jobs. Right. And in many ways, that played

11:28

itself out in New York and in a lot of coastal cities with what we do with our industrialized waterfront. Right.

11:33

Where people are no longer actually using the waterfront to make cars. Right. And heavy manufacturing. And

11:38

it’s a false it’s a false dichotomy, if you will, because if you actually do smart densification

11:43

and start mixed and smart mixed use planning, you can also preserve real industrial zones. Right.

11:49

Not necessarily for noxious uses, but manufacturing has changed so much right now.

11:55

Right. I think that old fashioned zoning classifications, you don’t have to separate manufacturing

12:00

from residential commercial anymore in the way you used to, except for very, very few uses. And so we

12:05

did. We said, you know what? We’re basically going to say these are real no fly zones for residential developers. And just

12:10

stop the debate and say it is really important that we have places and spaces in New

12:15

York City where Baker’s furniture maker is the new blue collar. Not

12:20

only can have jobs, but know that they’re going to be protected and not be bid up by a condo

12:25

developer. And places like Austin, where land is less of an issue, I think it’s incredibly

12:31

smart policy to be very deliberate about areas where you’re not going to have the market

12:36

of residential versus manufacturing competing with each other because you just take it off the table.

12:41

And that’s a really good long term planning. Again, this is what I call future proofing. Just zone it

12:47

for no residential. And make smart capital investments in those assets and in that

12:52

land. So that actually modern manufacturing can take root and grow. So tomorrow you

12:57

are participating in a panel about the idea. Are, you know, this question? Are Progressive’s killing our cities?

13:02

I think the Tribune’s giving it a nicer, more polished name. But the original idea was that this idea had politics in our cities

13:07

maybe swung a little too far to the left. What’s your take on on where we are and sort of this idea of antigrowth

13:13

anti development in our cities perspective olma? Yeah, I mean, also, I hate the sort of left versus

13:19

non leftist because I grew up. I think I’m a big lefty. Right. But now all these lefties think that I’m

13:24

a right of Attila the Hun. So I think that our nomenclature around left and right is very, very I’m off

13:30

right now. I think my my biggest thing is, you know, a progressive is supposed to be pro. Right.

13:35

Think about what the word starts with and what is become. I think the calling card of the progressive left

13:40

and a lot of cities right now is anti everything. Right. It’s antigrowth. It’s a. High

13:45

tech jobs. It’s anti density. And what they want and it’s not there are like very

13:51

laudable goals. Yes. We all want cities where people don’t live on the street, of course.

13:56

But the notion that you in order to attain those goals of

14:01

a fairer, more just a more inclusive economy is to say we need to beat

14:06

up on and be against the economic engines that drive the success

14:12

of cities. To me, why is it so throwing the baby out with the bathwater? That I don’t understand it. So how do we

14:17

how do we elevate the conversation? How do we get that narrative that you’ve just described into our neighborhoods, into

14:22

our community board meetings, etc.? We’re sort of seeing this push back? Well, I think it goes to the old adage, which is, you know, don’t tell me.

14:27

Show me. Right. There’s a lot of talk, but at the end of the day, you know, doing the

14:32

kinds of projects where there are seniors, there are cops and teachers, there are

14:37

the missing medal. There are actually, God forbid, tech brose. But you know what? Not all tech pros are the worst.

14:42

And tech growth pay taxes so that your kids can go to universal pre-K. Right. I live

14:47

next door to a tech, bro. So there it is. You seem like you survive. Not all the great neighbors,

14:52

actually. I think the part of the challenge here is that, you know, people are being vilified for what they do.

14:58

And the bottom line is that communities do have a legitimate fear of

15:03

change and displacement. But if you have smart preservation strategies, if you are building

15:08

new projects that include housing for everybody and making investments

15:13

in things like education and the pipes of how people can get jobs. These are not like you’re not going to see

15:19

this in six months. Right. And this urgency, I understand. But by the same

15:24

token, the urgency is making the politics so toxic that you’re undermining the long term strategies

15:29

that will actually allow cities to grow equitably. And this is what freaks me out. It makes me really

15:34

worried about things are going beating up on Amazon because Amazon somehow

15:40

is in them in the ether as being the bad guy is is really a misplaced

15:45

approach. Amazon, whether they’re New York City or they’re in Omaha or whether

15:50

they’re in Atlanta, they’re they’re union politics are they’re union politics. Right. I mean, by

15:55

kicking them out of New York, you didn’t really do anything about the issue if your issue is about labor. Right.

16:00

All you’ve done is now forgone an opportunity to have a major corporation that was

16:06

going to make huge, huge investments in New York City and commit to things that would

16:11

actually, in the long run, help build a more inclusive city. You’d never run them out of town. So

16:16

who have you helped? I mean, it was a great soundbite, but what was the strategy

16:21

of what to do after you’ve got rid of them? Right. The strategy appears to be to maintain the status quo.

16:27

And the one thing we know for sure is that the status quo does not help

16:32

inequality. All right. You have to have interventions because the left to its own devices,

16:38

the market is going to continue to support very high wage job growth and low wage workers. And so it requires interventions

16:43

and smart strategies. And I think the notion that keeping things the way they are is better

16:49

than doing something about it is really misplaced. So you’re at a public policy school today. You’re visiting

16:54

the LBJ scorn, and we’re excited to have you. And you’re gonna have a roomful of

16:59

policy students and future policymakers come. What advice would you have for them to say, you know,

17:04

you’re at a policy school, gain these skills, these experiences? You know, what would you have liked to have known maybe

17:09

earlier in your career, perhaps? That’s always a great question. You could do it all over again. What would

17:15

you have known if you knew then or five? I really wish that I had gotten better sleep patterns

17:20

because it’s exhausting work to be in the middle of that battle. But it’s incredibly

17:26

exhilarating when I say to students is, you know, a lot of people think you have to be ideologically pure. You have to

17:31

be pure in your own career about how I will only do public health or I will only do affordable housing.

17:36

I think that the really best policymakers, politicians and

17:42

doers are people who love the space, are absolutely committed to the work,

17:47

but are not so impractical that they can’t understand the other side’s point of view. And I know that sounds

17:52

almost too trite to say, but I was a much, much, much

17:58

better deputy mayor and got way more done for the public because I had spent

18:03

time at Goldman Sachs, because I know exactly how those guys think. I know how capital markets work. I

18:08

understand the give and take. And so I have found in my own career, and I always tell kids

18:13

this. For me, it’s been about housing and city building and how you make cities great and fair. But you could have

18:18

different seats at that table. Pick your table, but either take different seats or at least have some

18:23

sympathy and understanding and appreciation for the other people who are sitting at the table. Strict

18:28

adherence to doctrine. Basically is a bad strategy. I’m glad some of those folks

18:34

are out there and they should be academics and they should protest, and that’s great. But if you really want to be a change maker, you

18:39

have to have an appreciation for the other side’s point of view and understand the balance between the public and private sectors

18:44

and how when you get that balance right, you’re actually able to create so much more impact

18:49

than if you just out on your soapbox and yelled at everybody. That’s great. We’ll leave it there. Thanks for joining us. Thank you. Cheers.

18:54

This is Policy on Purpose, a podcast produced by the LBJ School of Public Affairs at the University

19:00

of Texas at Austin. We take you behind the scenes of policy with the people who helped shape

19:06

it. To learn more, visit LBJ, you, Texas, studied you and follow

19:11

us on Twitter or Facebook at the LBJ School. Thank you for

19:16

listening.

19:21

Tags

alicia, cities, economic development, glenn, Housing, new york city, policy