Ryder Kessler, a lifelong West Village resident and Manhattan Community Board 2 member, speaks in support of the City of Yes for Housing Opportunity initiative. He emphasizes the urgent need to address New York City's housing affordability crisis by increasing housing supply across all types and neighborhoods.

• Kessler highlights personal experience with rising housing costs in Manhattan, citing a 1.4% vacancy rate and average rents over $5000.
• He argues that the current zoning regime, in place for over 60 years, has contributed to the housing crisis and displacement of residents.
• While supporting the City of Yes initiative, Kessler suggests that more comprehensive measures are needed to ensure New York remains affordable, equitable, and sustainable.

• The current housing crisis is due to not creating enough homes to keep up with population and job growth
• The city is stuck in a 60+ year old zoning regime that needs to change
• There is a crisis of housing affordability, not just affordable housing
• New York needs to add housing of all types across the city
• The City of Yes for Housing Opportunity is necessary but not sufficient to address the crisis
• Dense, walkable neighborhoods are important for fighting climate change
• Making the city affordable, equitable, and sustainable is crucial for maintaining New York's vitality

[EXPERIMENTAL]

Which elements of City of Yes for Housing Opportunity were discussed in this testimony?

I was not able to tie quotes from the testimony back to specific elements of the proposal. Check out another testimony here.

About this analysis:

This analysis is done by AI that reasons whether or not a quote from the testimony discusses a particular element of the proposal.

All the prompts and data are open and available on Github.

You can search for testimonies that mentioned a specific element in the table on the main meeting page.

When an element is explicitly stated in the testimony (e.g. "Universal Affordability Preference" or "UAP"), the analysis is accurate.

But the connection between a quote from the testimony and an element of the proposal is sometimes implicit.

In these cases, the AI might eagerly label a testimony as discussing a proposal when the connection is tenuous, or it might omit it entirely.