Chester, N.Y.'s Dilemma: What Would You Do?

[BoomerD]

Just imagine the uproar if they were planning a similar community for Muslims...

 

[Exterous]

I'd make sure they vaccinate themselves and their children before being allowed in there and in condition of maintaining residency, then I'm mostly cool with whatever.

I did consider that there is a legitimate health concern depending on the ratio of vaccinated residents moving in. That seems like a more legitimate objection (if they are largely unvaccinated) and one that is based on science and not "infrastructure", poor people, race etc

While too late for many who died for an absurdly stupid reason but fortunately we seem to be getting to a tipping point in that insanity.

 

[fskimospy]

Just imagine the uproar if they were planning a similar community for Muslims...

As someone who lives near both large Islamic communities and large ultra orthodox communities I would take the Muslims any day.

 

[1prophet]

If it was a bunch of white misogynistic evangelicals or KKK types using tax payer funded welfare to increase their numbers along with religiously instructed block voting, multicultural diversity loving liberals would be up in an uproar, but since it is those other white people with the antisemitism card in their back pocket they dance around the situation gingerly like the liberal leaning NBA and China human rights concerns.

Growing Up Hasidic — and Racist

On April 22, 1987, my mother was rushed to Interfaith Medical Center, situated on the outskirts of Crown Heights in Brooklyn. My mother was new to this country, without anyone to guide her about things like where to give birth to her firstborn, me. She claims I was the only white baby in the...

forward.com

Growing Up Hasidic — and Racist

At home, nothing had changed. Goyim were out to get us. Black people were referred to as “shvartses” at best, “animals” at worst. When my family sat around the table during the Sabbath, the word “shvartse” was tossed around freely, about the neighbors, the rude policewoman or the throngs of people at the West Indies Parade near our home.

The Journal News

As the ultra-religious community grows, Ramapo becomes a flash point in conflict over what it means to be suburban.

www.lohud.com

. In New Square, there are signs directing men to walk on one side of the street and women on the other, for modesty's sake. [/quote]

Hasidic leaders sharply limit members' web, smartphone use: 'It's like we're in North Korea’

The father of five was summoned to a meeting with leaders of his ultra-orthodox Hasidic Jewish sect in Kiryas Joel, N.Y., a village of some 22,000 about 50 miles north of New York City.

www.foxnews.com

Many Hasidic communities, though not all, are highly insular, determined to shut out as much of the outside world and its perceived deviancy as possible. Education at yeshivas emphasizes the Torah and other religious teachings, particularly for boys, who are being prepared for possible futures as rabbis. This faith-centric instruction doesn't leave vast amounts of time for math and English.

For the rabbis, who can wield enormous influence over the smallest details of followers' lives -- including such intimate matters as the use of contraceptives, which is nearly always prohibited -- technology is a threat: It enables personal connections and access to views and information from non-Hasidic sources.

Yep let's pump out low secular information religious voters on the tax payer dime who are taught contraceptives and technology are bad, what could possibly go wrong.

Seriously, if this doesn't offend you stop calling yourself liberal.

https://www.richarddawkins.net/2016/11/i-had-to-take-my-dirty-panties-to-a-rabbi-and-so-has-every-orthodox-jewish-woman/

I Had to Take My Dirty Panties to a Rabbi, and So Has Every Orthodox Jewish Woman

A: According to Jewish law, women can’t be judges and can’t make legal rulings. Once vaginal discharge is darker than tan, a legal judgment is required. However, the minority left-leaning sect has, in recent years, certified some women to make these judgments. The center and right-leaning majority, however, does not recognize their certification because they are female judges, for all intents and purposes.


That’s right. Women encouraging other women and their daughters to painfully violate themselves for God, instead of listening to their bodies and protecting themselves. Further, these are the least extreme of the bunch! More here: http://www.yoatzot.org/taharat-hamishpacha/?id=603

 

[ch33zw1z]

Reading the NYT article, it doesn't seem like the town has any concerns that aren't based on bigotry.

 

[pauldun170]

With any community, a project like this raises concerns of capacity and overall impact to existing residents.
Water, sewers, impact to traffic, impact to school districts (class size increase...additional bonds to build new schools) services etc etc.
Usually, politicians will ram new developments down the throat of whatever community is there and they simply adapt to the reality of more people, more traffic, high taxes and whatever.
Shit like this is not newsworthy.

If ANY developer proposed 400+ units in our community there would be push back as well. Unfortunately, the PR plan for something like this is to label anyone who pushes back as anti-semitic.

The issue here is a very local issue. The Hasidic community in NY have a lot of baggage they are bringing to the table. From unvaccinated kids to discriminatory practices to unreported crimes to reports of rampant abuse of the welfare system.
Take the normal complaints about rapid expansion of communities and now add in a fringe religious sect with the record that that the Hasidim have and people are going to push back hard.

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

1) The people in the community definitely benefit from the new units, it makes their housing more affordable.
2) The people who move in to those units pay taxes which in the end far exceed the costs of new infrastructure.

The right approach in almost all cases is that infrastructure is made the way it always is, with tax money.

Didn't work that way in my area. The amount paid by developers didn't nearly cover a development and taxes went up by thousands. It depends on the fine print

 

[fskimospy]

Didn't work that way in my area. The amount paid by developers didn't nearly cover a development and taxes went up by thousands. It depends on the fine print

So to be clear you're saying the infrastructure costs of new development exceeded the long term tax receipts from the residents there? That seems... unlikely.

Infrastructure costs are one time expenditures with modest ongoing maintenance. New taxpayers are eternal revenue sources. I mean think about it, if it were true that adding new residents was a net burden then communities losing residents would be better off financially than those gaining them. Does anyone really think that's true?

 

[Fanatical Meat]

So to be clear you're saying the infrastructure costs of new development exceeded the long term tax receipts from the residents there? That seems... unlikely.

Infrastructure costs are one time expenditures with modest ongoing maintenance. New taxpayers are eternal revenue sources. I mean think about it, if it were true that adding new residents was a net burden then communities losing residents would be better off financially than those gaining them. Does anyone really think that's true?

In my city it was misty about the schools. A large rental unit converted to Condos. There was a concern about how the schools would handle more kids. There were around 200 units. I don’t remember the stat but owners are like 35% more likely to have kids vs renters. The concern was the middle school was at capacity.
New school build was already funded for so it wasn’t much of an issue but if that funding was not in place there likely would have been a problem because the state helps with building new schools, the city pays for the teachers.
So yes infrastructure gets built and it’s not 100% local funding but the support is.
Housing questions are amazingly complicated because there are so many parts and so many unknowns until the units are sold. Even then there are unknowns, Will the units be bought by investors and become rentals again, will they perpetually turn over as first time buyer homes.

 

[IronWing]

So to be clear you're saying the infrastructure costs of new development exceeded the long term tax receipts from the residents there? That seems... unlikely.

Infrastructure costs are one time expenditures with modest ongoing maintenance. New taxpayers are eternal revenue sources. I mean think about it, if it were true that adding new residents was a net burden then communities losing residents would be better off financially than those gaining them. Does anyone really think that's true?

Your just-so story wasn't believed the first time you told it and it stinks with age. Communities with stable populations are much better off than communities subjected to decline or cancerous growth.

 

[fskimospy]

Your just-so story wasn't believed the first time you told it and it stinks with age. Communities with stable populations are much better off than communities subjected to decline or cancerous growth.

What is your basis for this?

 

[zinfamous]

If it was a bunch of white misogynistic evangelicals or KKK types using tax payer funded welfare to increase their numbers along with religiously instructed block voting, multicultural diversity loving liberals would be up in an uproar, but since it is those other white people with the antisemitism card in their back pocket they dance around the situation gingerly like the liberal leaning NBA and China human rights concerns.

Growing Up Hasidic — and Racist

On April 22, 1987, my mother was rushed to Interfaith Medical Center, situated on the outskirts of Crown Heights in Brooklyn. My mother was new to this country, without anyone to guide her about things like where to give birth to her firstborn, me. She claims I was the only white baby in the...

forward.com

Growing Up Hasidic — and Racist

The Journal News

As the ultra-religious community grows, Ramapo becomes a flash point in conflict over what it means to be suburban.

www.lohud.com

. In New Square, there are signs directing men to walk on one side of the street and women on the other, for modesty's sake.

Hasidic leaders sharply limit members' web, smartphone use: 'It's like we're in North Korea’

The father of five was summoned to a meeting with leaders of his ultra-orthodox Hasidic Jewish sect in Kiryas Joel, N.Y., a village of some 22,000 about 50 miles north of New York City.

www.foxnews.com

Yep let's pump out low secular information religious voters on the tax payer dime who are taught contraceptives and technology are bad, what could possibly go wrong.

Seriously, if this doesn't offend you stop calling yourself liberal.

https://www.richarddawkins.net/2016/11/i-had-to-take-my-dirty-panties-to-a-rabbi-and-so-has-every-orthodox-jewish-woman/

I Had to Take My Dirty Panties to a Rabbi, and So Has Every Orthodox Jewish Woman

A: According to Jewish law, women can’t be judges and can’t make legal rulings. Once vaginal discharge is darker than tan, a legal judgment is required. However, the minority left-leaning sect has, in recent years, certified some women to make these judgments. The center and right-leaning majority, however, does not recognize their certification because they are female judges, for all intents and purposes.


That’s right. Women encouraging other women and their daughters to painfully violate themselves for God, instead of listening to their bodies and protecting themselves. Further, these are the least extreme of the bunch! More here: http://www.yoatzot.org/taharat-hamishpacha/?id=603

so...you totally misread the OP, and a lot of what other people are thinking about this issue.

but carry on with your virtue-warrioring about a subject where you think you are the only informed human on the planet--but obviously only insomuch as it allows you to keep painting that "look at all the hypocrisy from all the evil liberals even though I am clearly very independent!" facade.

 

[jameny5]

Also the infrastructure argument has always been specious. Infrastructure is built and expanded as community needs expand. The idea that we should only build new housing in communities that randomly decided to wastefully overbuild their infrastructure in the hopes that new development would someday show up is absurd.

The ultra orthodox are somewhat of a unique case in that they are often low income and use large amounts of public services but generally speaking more development funds its own infrastructure.

If the Hasidic women produce the population to fill those 450 homes they will need to increase services and utility output. Those that protest this overdevelopment are doing so in anticipation of the growth. Do they already have enough gas or water to supply such an enormous development? You can't just use environmental studies or just studies and approve it. I am sure Chester looked in neighboring towns and counties and have seen how these Jewish communities have expanded and put a strain on services.

 

[fskimospy]

In my city it was misty about the schools. A large rental unit converted to Condos. There was a concern about how the schools would handle more kids. There were around 200 units. I don’t remember the stat but owners are like 35% more likely to have kids vs renters. The concern was the middle school was at capacity.
New school build was already funded for so it wasn’t much of an issue but if that funding was not in place there likely would have been a problem because the state helps with building new schools, the city pays for the teachers.
So yes infrastructure gets built and it’s not 100% local funding but the support is.
Housing questions are amazingly complicated because there are so many parts and so many unknowns until the units are sold. Even then there are unknowns, Will the units be bought by investors and become rentals again, will they perpetually turn over as first time buyer homes.

I'm not sure it is that complicated. Sometimes new schools must be built, etc., yes. That certainly costs money in the short term but population increases also increase the tax base and those kids in school today are taxpayers tomorrow.

This argument is brought up frequently though, and so it's been subject to empirical analysis.

https://www.mhp.net/writable/resources/documents/Cost_Benefit_new_housing_3-15-16.pdf

Overall, we find that only 31 percent of the net new state tax revenue generated by the developments would be needed to completely offset the negative fiscal impacts experienced by three of the six communities. This suggests that the positive state fiscal benefits of new housing development are more than sufficient to support a state fund to guarantee that communities will be made financially whole in the event they allow the development of housing that meets regional and statewide needs, but find themselves fiscally disadvantaged as a result.

In short - new development creates vastly more revenue than it costs. If we have cases where communities are being left worse off that's a problem with other public policies, not with new development.

 

[jameny5]

Yes - but they have more information about this 450 home development than those reading this. This is like a second phase of development or new development. The local government has all the details and the residents too. We all can see the big picture of why there is opposition from both government and residents.

 

[jameny5]

Call me skeptical since the town previously entitled the land for development then are now trying to block it since it got sold to the orthodox Jews. Weird how the infrastructure is suddenly not sufficient for what was already approved huh?

Well the settlements in the West Bank are illegal, unlike attempting to build houses in the United States.

Yes though, this appears motivated by animus against the ultra orthodox. I mean I get it, the community is not a pleasant one to live around, but you don’t get to exclude people from your town using the law because you don’t like how they act. (When those actions are legal)

You have a point there!

 

[Fanatical Meat]

I'm not sure it is that complicated. Sometimes new schools must be built, etc., yes. That certainly costs money in the short term but population increases also increase the tax base and those kids in school today are taxpayers tomorrow.

This argument is brought up frequently though, and so it's been subject to empirical analysis.

https://www.mhp.net/writable/resources/documents/Cost_Benefit_new_housing_3-15-16.pdf

In short - new development creates vastly more revenue than it costs. If we have cases where communities are being left worse off that's a problem with other public policies, not with new development.

That’s my point which I didn’t mention
These decisions are best left to be local decisions.

 

[fskimospy]

That’s my point which I didn’t mention
These decisions are best left to be local decisions.

I disagree, that's how we do things now and it has led to a housing crisis on both coasts. Local communities have failed.

 

[K1052]

As an aside people often bring up schools even when certain developments will attract a negligible number of children.

I once witnessed several people oppose a 20 unit apartment building on the basis that it would overwhelm the local elementary school and that there were no kid amenities as part of the development (a park, playground, etc) with certain city council members nodding sagely along. The units were about 350 sq ft each...

It's almost like it's not really about that lol.

 

[Fanatical Meat]

I disagree, that's how we do things now and it has led to a housing crisis on both coasts. Local communities have failed.

Hey don’t be jealous my City is run pretty well. We have smart people in charge.
Similar concerns have come up with senior 55+ housing. Reality is 15 years from now there will be too much 55+ housing, they will convert to under 55 and there will be kids. Last 55+ builds had to finance some sort of 25 year bond thing to off set costs if it converts.
I wish I remember what the perfect ratio is. One meeting there was a consultant that had numbers like 30% affordable houses, 40% family and so on.
55+ housing are great values for cities. No kids and over engineered homes for safety. All profit for cities but as previously mentioned there needs to be balance otherwise problems occur.

Now to P&N stuff. Blue areas are much better at managing this stuff vs red areas. Blue thinks long term, red thinks short term.

 

[s0me0nesmind1]

Good ol' liberals. Kings of NIMBY.

Fighting oppression by being what they proclaim to condemn.

It's easy, just price people out of the market.

 

[fskimospy]

Good ol' liberals. Kings of NIMBY.

Fighting oppression by being what they proclaim to condemn.

It's easy, just price people out of the market.

Where did you get the idea the people in Chester are liberal from?

 

[[DHT]Osiris]

Good ol' liberals. Kings of NIMBY.

Fighting oppression by being what they proclaim to condemn.

It's easy, just price people out of the market.

Great addition to the conversation. Care to contribute, or are you just here to insult posters?

 

[Atreus21]

Here in the U.S. we specifically do not have the right to choose our neighbors. This is not the first time this situation has come up and it is illegal to stop progress simply due to ones own prejudices.
This is a free country. If you don't like it, you can leave. /s

 

[Starbuck1975]

I disagree, that's how we do things now and it has led to a housing crisis on both coasts. Local communities have failed.

The failure is placing the burden of solving the housing crisis on small local communities. Chester is a small former dairy town in a part of NY that is very rural. Why should Chester have to absorb the planning failures of Albany and NYC? The Hasidic community probably got pushed out to Chester due to the Nimbyism of the more affluent communities between it and NYC.