Sean Campion, Director of Housing And Economic Development Studies at the Citizens Budget Commission, testifies in support of the City of Yes initiative, emphasizing its potential to address New York City's housing crisis. He highlights the economic and fiscal benefits of increased housing production, including potential tax revenue gains and improved quality of life for residents.

• Campion cites CBC research showing that negative out-migration due to housing issues cost the city over $300 million in tax revenue in 2022.
• He notes that allowing growth could potentially boost city tax receipts by over $2 billion annually.
• According to a CBC resident survey, housing ranks among top issues for New Yorkers, with fewer than 1 in 10 feeling their housing needs are being addressed well by the government.

• City of Yes takes the right approach to New York City's housing crisis by proposing to build more housing everywhere of all types for everyone
• Housing production in NYC has failed to keep pace with demand due to policy actions intended to slow new construction
• Housing scarcity degrades New Yorkers' quality of life and is bad for the city's economy and fiscal health
• Negative out-migration caused by housing affordability and availability crises cost the city over $300 million in tax revenue in 2022
• Allowing growth could potentially boost city tax receipts by over $2 billion a year
• In CBC's 2023 resident survey, housing ranked among the top issues facing New Yorkers, with fewer than 1 in 10 feeling that government is addressing their housing needs well
• Building more housing will improve affordability, quality of life, strengthen the city's economy and competitiveness
• The final zoning text needs to result in a meaningful increase in development capacity citywide to improve affordability and quality of life
• The housing crisis is a citywide problem that demands a citywide response

[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.