Netroots and Grassroots, Looking to Tap into Parks Department
Without meetings or dues, 200+ Friends of NYC Parks’ email list aims to influence city policy
June 11th, 2007
During a luncheon last June, six friends griped about their problems with city parks. Gary Papush’s complaint was the clandestine way the Parks Department handled the contract renewal of a food vendor in Dag Hammarskjöld Park. Carol Greitzer did not want the pavilion in Union Square Park to be turned into an outdoor café.
Annoyed by the bureaucracy and lack of transparency in the Parks Department, five of them drafted four principles they wanted the Parks Department to adopt. As their doctrine circulated the internet, supporters were slowly added to the mailing list. Eventually, they were calling themselves 100+ Friends of NYC Parks. Now they are up to 200+ Friends of NYC Parks.
“This is truly information dissemination,” said Carol Rinzler, one of the original five.
The group rarely takes sides on issues.
“We support giving every community board and every community group full information and disclosure and transparency about how to come to a decision on a recommendation,” said Papush, who also chairs Manhattan Community Board 6’s Parks and Landmarks Committee.
Their advocacy for parks reform has ruffled a few feathers, say Papush and Greitzer, who claim that city officials have asked some on the list to remove their signatures.
Informing communities is one part of their goal.
“It’s a matter of changing the culture of city government in the sense that, historically, the Parks Department gets a lower level of funding, even in good times,” Papush said.
An early supporter, Assembly Member Richard Gottfried (D-Manhattan) has noticed that the Parks Department is becoming more open and responsive.
“I think that is, in part, because of this activism,” he said, referring specifically to the list. “I think it has helped prod the city Parks Department to do a lot more, to do more outreach and be more open.”
Helen Foster (D-Bronx), chair of the Council’s Parks & Recreation committee, said she approved of the group’s efforts. “We’re looking to extend the net of people responsible for their parks,” said Foster.
The 200+ Friends of NYC Parks (which will be renamed again when the list reaches 250) has no office, board of directors or a CEO. There are no regular group meetings. They exist purely as an e-mail list.
“The internet offers the ability to put people together without stamps or phone calls,” said Rinzler. “I can do this without leaving the house.”
By remaining an e-mail list, Papush said, the group will not succumb to the kind of bureaucracy group members feel has overtaken the Parks Department.
Rinzler helped run a similar list in 1993 called the Manhattan Neighborhood Council, which advocated homeless shelter reform. That list predated common email access, and it relied on the post office to reach out to its members. The price of admission was just seven stamps a year.
The unorthodox organization allows information to flow freely and establish a truly grassroots efforts.
Despite their small organization, they have large ambitions. Rinzler said that they are already preparing for the many open races for city office in 2009, aiming to influence candidates to pay more attention to their issues. “It is a hope that as we make the issue of parks more important,” Rinzler said, “that candidates running for office will understand this is serious.”
Annoyed by the bureaucracy and lack of transparency in the Parks Department, five of them drafted four principles they wanted the Parks Department to adopt. As their doctrine circulated the internet, supporters were slowly added to the mailing list. Eventually, they were calling themselves 100+ Friends of NYC Parks. Now they are up to 200+ Friends of NYC Parks.
“This is truly information dissemination,” said Carol Rinzler, one of the original five.
The group rarely takes sides on issues.
“We support giving every community board and every community group full information and disclosure and transparency about how to come to a decision on a recommendation,” said Papush, who also chairs Manhattan Community Board 6’s Parks and Landmarks Committee.
Their advocacy for parks reform has ruffled a few feathers, say Papush and Greitzer, who claim that city officials have asked some on the list to remove their signatures.
Informing communities is one part of their goal.
“It’s a matter of changing the culture of city government in the sense that, historically, the Parks Department gets a lower level of funding, even in good times,” Papush said.
An early supporter, Assembly Member Richard Gottfried (D-Manhattan) has noticed that the Parks Department is becoming more open and responsive.
“I think that is, in part, because of this activism,” he said, referring specifically to the list. “I think it has helped prod the city Parks Department to do a lot more, to do more outreach and be more open.”
Helen Foster (D-Bronx), chair of the Council’s Parks & Recreation committee, said she approved of the group’s efforts. “We’re looking to extend the net of people responsible for their parks,” said Foster.
The 200+ Friends of NYC Parks (which will be renamed again when the list reaches 250) has no office, board of directors or a CEO. There are no regular group meetings. They exist purely as an e-mail list.
“The internet offers the ability to put people together without stamps or phone calls,” said Rinzler. “I can do this without leaving the house.”
By remaining an e-mail list, Papush said, the group will not succumb to the kind of bureaucracy group members feel has overtaken the Parks Department.
Rinzler helped run a similar list in 1993 called the Manhattan Neighborhood Council, which advocated homeless shelter reform. That list predated common email access, and it relied on the post office to reach out to its members. The price of admission was just seven stamps a year.
The unorthodox organization allows information to flow freely and establish a truly grassroots efforts.
Despite their small organization, they have large ambitions. Rinzler said that they are already preparing for the many open races for city office in 2009, aiming to influence candidates to pay more attention to their issues. “It is a hope that as we make the issue of parks more important,” Rinzler said, “that candidates running for office will understand this is serious.”
