Submitted by VICTOR J. PAPA, PRESIDENT, TWO BRIDGES NEIGHBORHOOD COUNCIL, Nov 20, 2007 16:30

Your editorial position on housing projects is shocking. And I thought only the NY Times editorials could get me upset. But your "Politicians Against Progress" beats them all. You use terms like "reclaim", "stagnation", and "breeding grounds for crime", terms which are all callously indifferent to the fact that they are associative descriptions reflecting upon families who live in housing projects. Or maybe you don't care. You imply that the only value land has is when it doesn't detract from the values of nearby properties; that the dynamism and life of a city is defined exclusively to real estate deals, art galleries and bars, and that crime in this city is bred only within the "stagnant" precincts of housing projects, and by implication, low-income families.

Knowing the composition of housing projects, especially on the Lower East Side, are HUD and the NY Sun willing to write off one of the best housing experiments in the nation because, in their view, they cannot be "integrated" with the rest of the neighborhood? Why? Is the rest of the new neighborhood having a problem integrating with low-income families? Do we now associate the term "integrate" with an economic value? Does it no longer apply to a mix of Americans who live in the most integrated housing in the nation? And all along I thought the main attraction for the Lower East Side was how "charming" it was to live among the immigrants.

Your position is callous at best, but unwise. It ignores that enduring New York value: economic and racially integrated housing can only enrich the urban experience in economic, cultural and social terms. It ignores history as well. Your vision is tantamount to that tenacious historical tendency to remove families who are thought to "impede" progress and property values. It started with the Pilgrims.

Frank T. Modica, Chairman

Victor J. Papa, President

Two Bridges Neighborhood Council

Note: Comments are screened, and in some cases edited, before posting. We reserve the right to reject anything we find objectionable.