WHITE PLAINS CITIZENETREPORTER SETS RECORD VISITS FOR YEAR 7,017,658 VISITS! 2,098,003 VISITORS MADE 6 VISITS A DAY EVERY DAY. 63,330 UNIQUE VISITORS MADE 133,730 VISITS IN DECEMBER. WPCNR AVERAGED 17,284 VISITORS A WEEK, VISITING 31,270 TIMES.

Hits: 313

ON WHITE PLAINS WEEK THIS WEEK EVERY WEEK

FOR 22 YEARS

Hits: 253

20% DOWN PAYMENTS ON MORTGAGES MAKE FIRST TIME BUYERS UNABLE TO BUY WITHOUT ENOUGH AFFORDABLE RENTALS, CONDOS, CO-OPS, SINGLE FAMILY HOMES.

WPCNR COUNTY-CLARION LEDGER. By John F. Bailey. March 16, 2023:

The Westchester County Executive proposed an alternative to Governor Kathy Hochul’s Housing Compact proposal that would override local zoning power of communities.

The County Executive said   local control of zoning is the right of every hamlet and metropolis. He felt you could still set quotas per community for affordable “workforce housing,” that would preserve town, village and city control of their own zoning, that the Governor has said is preventing New York State from meeting housing needs.

Currently the legislature responding to suburban community leaders’ outcries at the overriding of zoning codes by the Governor’s proposal, has pronounced the plan dead on arrival, rejecting overriding of local zoning to build affordable housing stock, and the requiring a 3% percentage of affordable housing building in communities lagging behind the percentage.

Dan Murphy of Westchester Rising asked County Executive George Latimer in the Q. A. portion that usually ends Mr. Latimer’s Monday News conferences, asked him to “comment” on Governor Kathy Hochul’s proposed Housing Compact bill and the County Executive gave a solution:

https://youtu.be/wYruzmzOgAQ

The County Executive introduced something completely new. See his complete remarks on the Governor Hochul Housing Compact and how he thinks the zoning issue can be resolved Click the red box and watch.

He said he is aware that many families are upset their children cannot afford housing in the towns they grew up in.

He said the Governor’s goals  could be achieved without overriding zoning. He suggested the governor turn it over to the communities to come up with deciding how the communities could add affordable housing in their communities and where they would be built without compromising the character of the communities.

The effect:  turning  over the decisions on how affordable housing goals could be met  (in keeping with the character, land availability and infrastructures of each town) by challenging the communities that lag in affordable housing to come up with their plans.  How much time would they be given? How does the governor feel about this? How do the “anti-Hochuls” in her own party feel about that?

He is right.

The current state of the “recovery” where financial conditions change day to-day, where advisories are changed 100% from  the day before, and stats are pumped out every week, up one day, down the next from Washington affects people trying to improve their lives and build a living profoundly.

The bank mortgages have risen dramatically by the Federal Reserve raising interest rates. Let’s take a look.

Professionals such as teachers, police, firefighters and young workers starting their careers (burdened additionally by student loan debt) do not have the incomes to save the money to  afford the Westchester housing market.

The down payment on a 30 year mortgage is 20% in the metropolitan area according to Mortgage lenders statistics. What do you need to buy a 2-4 family home, condo, co-op and single family home on s 30 year mortgage?

Can you save a year’s salary to get a downpayment?

The average price of a 2-4  Family home at the end of the third quarter of 2022 Hudson Gateway Association of Realtors statistics was $735,000, requiring a down payment of $147,000 upfront.

The average cost of a single family home,  at a median price of $872,000 at the end of the third quarter, (meaning half of single family homes sold below the median price of $872,000 in the July-August-September third quarter 2022) can be as much as a couple’s two salaries combined.

Say you want to get a 30 year mortgage at 6% for a single home priced at $500,000 that’s a down payment of $100,000.

 A $650,000 home requires a $130,000 down payment.

An $872,000 (middle market price!) the down payment of 20% is $174,000.

The condominium average selling price was $546,861, requiring a down payment of $109,372. However the median sales price of condos was $460,000 showing there are  more in-range condos available on the market than half-million dollar condos. Nevertheless, the down payment on a $400,000 condo mortgage of 6% would be still be $92,000.

Co-ops were the best buy in the third quarter, averaging $239,000, but as with all of these ballpark quotes on down payments banks could be making better down payment terms or worse depending on how sound the banks feel about the property. Still raising $40,000 for a down payment on a Co-op is less a burden to raise for a couple than the condo, the mult-family or the coveted single family.

Affordability of the mortage depends on whether you can swing over $2,000 a month ($25,000 a year out of a $100,000 income, with the burden of  property taxes, living expenses, loan debt, car ownership and food.

That first foray in home ownership is a nightmare of financial worry for the twenty and even 30-somethings.

You are at the mercy of the banks, the sellers.

Even if you rent, locally you are paying $2,000 and up studios, $3,000 and up for two-bedrooms. That is still $25,000 in rent…equivalent to a mortgage payment.

You are forced to share apartments if you are single.

To handle a rental of up to $2,000 a month for a studio or $3,500 a month for a two-bedroom apartment (in White Plains), or purchase a median single home even by the time they hit their early 30s, plus commuting costs, car payment,  rent payment it requires a great deal of discipline to save for a down payment today.

They need about a 25% down payment to take out a mortgage for a median price home and $400 3 to 4 family homes just burdens them with a massive $300,000 mortage. The banks are reaping the market.

The very lack of homes on the market keeps prices going up or not coming down.

The Home Compact bill is the Governor’s plan to jumpstart funding and building affordable housing construction and setting mandates and quotas for New York State towns villages and cities which the state finds to be short in the availability of housing for young persons, professionals starting out, professionals such as teachers, police, firefighters “work force” housing.

The County Executive said that he felt Westchester has “moved beyond” the time 50 years ago when community zoning prevented housing in the county. He said he would vigorously defend the Westchester record still ongoing of providing housing for persons who could not afford current prices of homes.

Hits: 255

WESTCHESTER ACHIEVES 12^TH CONSECUTIVE WEEK OF DECLINING COVID CASES AS OF SATURDAY

WPCNR COVID SURVEILLANCE. Statistics, NY STATE COVID TRACKER. NYS HEALTH DEPARTMENT. Observations. Observation & Analysis by John F. Bailey. UPDATED 11:00 EDT March 13, 2023:

As of Friday Westchester County had recorded 322 lab-verified persons with covid.

Saturday cases should be reported Monday afternoon and should amount to 351 cases, making the 12^th consecutive week of the New Year that the county had reduced total new cases of covid.

 The first week in January, 1,896 county residents had tested positive for covid, and that has declined to last week ended Friday March 10 at 322.

Hospitalization admissions for treatment of covid are up the last 25 days at White Plains Hospital.

In the 2.3 Million people Mid-Hudson Valley region on Friday, 1,418 persons were reported hospitalized in  the 7 counties: Westchester, Orange, Rockland, Dutchess, Ulster, Putnam and Sullivan counties.

The average 7-day Hospital admissions rate per 100,000 segment of population in the 7 counties (2,363,622 or 23.6 100,000 “segments” ) was 139 persons a day across the 7 Mid-Hudson Counties, which is 969 hospitalizations a week and in one month 3,878 hospitalizations over 7 counties.

These hospitalizations are going to hurt hospital staff morale and effectiveness, in my opinion,  with the sheer number of patients coming in for covid symptoms serious enough to be admitted.

The sobering numbers computed with the state’s own average per 100,000 admissions, mean if you do not have covid now you are likely to come in contact with someone who does.

In the 31 days of January in Westchester County there were 5,973 new cases of covid or 193 a day.  Last week in Westchester there were approximately 53 new covid cases a day.

Locally in White Plains, White Plains Hospital Medical Center shows hospitalizatons for treatment of covid accounting for 52% of all those officially admitted to the hospital for treatment of covid.

In the last 25 days since February 15 when 8 of 20 though persons suffering seriously enough from covid to be admitted,  covid cases have accounted for 52% of patients admitted to the hospital, that does not included emergency room visits.

Of 298 persons admitted to White Plains Hospital in the 25 days (through Friday, March 10),156 or 52% were admitted for treatment of covid.

Hits: 517

District 92 | News You Can Use Westchester County Senior Law Day Westchester County is offering senior citizens the opportunity to have a private, 15-minute Zoom consultation with a lawyer or other professional, at no cost and no obligation. These sessions will be held from 10 a.m. to 12 p.m. on Thursday, March 16. Sign-up opens at 7 a.m. on Wednesday, March 15, at www.seniorlawday.info.

Hits: 316

Reprinted with permission. March 8, 2023

The House Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Pandemic has started to convene on everything from COVID-19 origins to vaccines. Last week, they called in four scientists to discuss policies, including lockdowns.

COVID-19 control measures are important to discuss. We still don’t know what policies worked best and why.

Pandemic health protections had benefits AND harms. There were trade-offs, just like with any health policy. Governments around the world used a wide variety of policies before vaccines were developed. 

However, a nuanced discussion of the trade-offs inherent in pandemic control measures was not achieved last week. The Great Barrington Declaration (GBD), for example, dominated the conversation.

It looks like we are entering a new phase of the pandemic—revisionism. 

Great Barrington Declaration

In October 2020, the GBD advocated for a distinct approach: isolate the vulnerable while allowing infections to spread among lower-risk members of the population. It claimed this would ultimately achieve herd immunity without the economic and social toll of lockdowns.

The authors of the GBD didn’t include any scientific evidence or models, and it was never peer-reviewed.

The idea went viral. A few influential people listened. Trump met with the GBD authors in the Oval Office. Trump’s coronavirus czar, Scott Atlas, embraced and adopted the GBD—for example, he successfully curbed federal testing programs. Florida governor Ron DeSantis was advised by the GBD. But scientific consensus rejected the idea.

Two of the GBD authors were invited to testify last week. One congresswoman said: “History is proving [them] to be right.” But were they right?

The committee would have benefited from looking into the scientific evidence against the GBD and why, ultimately, public health dismissed their ideas.

Epidemiological problems with GBD

Last year mathematicians published epidemiological models to answer the question: What would it have looked like if we had actually deployed the GBD?

They found that in a town of 1 million people in England:

• Doing nothing (i.e. no shielding of the vulnerable) would have resulted in 415 deaths per 100,000—equivalent to 230,795 total deaths in England.
  • This is likely a conservative measure, given that the model didn’t take into account the collapse of healthcare. 
• “Perfect shielding” (i.e. the GBD approach) would have resulted in 87.6 deaths per 100,000—equivalent to 50,000 total deaths among younger populations.

So, in theory, perfect shielding would save lives compared with no shielding. But theory is very different from practice. There are three major issues:

1. It is impossible to 100% shield vulnerable adults. In England, 3 in 4 vulnerable people live with other people. There is no “them,” there is only “us,” so shielding them would not be perfect. If shielding had been 80% effective (instead of 100%), the researchers found that there would be massive outbreaks among the vulnerable, resulting in 221.7 per 100,000 deaths. Shielding entire populations worked in some countries in the short term (averting mass death, hospitalization, and orphanhood). It also worked in some Alaskan villages in the 1918 flu pandemic. But trying to shield sub-populations would spark superspreader events. Research shows that infection in younger people led to infections and deaths in older people.

2. The GBD relied on large numbers of lower-risk individuals becoming infected to build up immunity in the population, yet many people would have likely still changed their behavior to avoid getting infected and sick. Even before England’s first lockdown, there were dramatic changes in behavior—people voluntarily reduced their contact with others. And if health services had been under strain, people would probably have reduced their contacts even further. This would make it even harder to reach herd immunity.
3. Herd immunity from infection would only have conferred indirect, temporary protection to the shielded vulnerable people. We see this today—although a large proportion of the population has immunity, older adults are still vulnerable to death. 

Ethical and logistical problems with GBD

The modeling above assumes that it is actually logistically possible in the U.S. to somehow isolate tens of millions of Americans. This assumption has problems: 

1. How would we have rapidly and accurately identified “the vulnerable”? The U.S. doesn’t have a universal healthcare system or registry.   
2. How would we have cared for so many isolated people for such a long time? This would have been a LOT of people. Where exactly would they have gone? The GBD made some vague suggestions about “empty hotel rooms.” Did we really have enough rooms for around 100-130 million people? 
3. What about long COVID-19 among the population with infections?

The need for better discussion

Many countries regrouped after the 2003 SARS pandemic, and it was incredibly helpful for their future preparedness and response. We do need to reflect on what went right during the pandemic, what went wrong, and how to do better in the future, like:

• Did some states do better than others? What does “better” mean?
• What steps should states have taken to mitigate the harms of shelter-in-place orders? Why didn’t all states provide generous food, social, and financial support to those living under such orders?
• What is the decision framework for closing and reopening schools in future pandemics?

The discussion has to be serious, genuine, and balanced.

Thus far, this has not been the case.

It’s clear that achieving a healthier and smarter future isn’t the goal of this Subcommittee.  

We should be very wary of those trying to rewrite history. As Zeynep Tufecki said: 

“There’s an attempt to relitigate 2020 under the comfort of 2023 vaccines, treatments, [and] population immunity by people… whose policy suggestions were catastrophically wrong. They’re pretending 2023 exonerates the deaths they would cause (did cause). I find that awful.”

This Subcommittee is a huge use of resources, which, thus far, has not helped move the conversation forward. The outcome of these rabbit holes do not get us to a better place.

Bottom line

We need to learn lessons from the pandemic to be better and smarter next time.

But discussions need to be balanced and informed. For example, recognizing the trade-offs must include recognizing the horrors of uncontrolled transmission. Epidemiological, ethical, and logistical details can’t be left out. 

Can we please have a serious conversation about the COVID-19 pandemic and how to prepare for the future? Our lives depend on it.

Love,

YLE and GMY 

---

Dr. Gavin Yamey is a Professor of Global Health & Public Policy at Duke University and Director of the Center for Policy Impact in Global Health. 

“Your Local Epidemiologist (YLE)” is written by Dr. Katelyn Jetelina, MPH PhD—an epidemiologist, data scientist. During the day she works at a nonpartisan health policy think tank and is a senior scientific consultant to a number of organizations, including the CDC. At night she writes this newsletter. Her main goal is to “translate” the ever-evolving public health science so that people will be well equipped to make evidence-based decisions. This newsletter is free thanks to the generous support of fellow YLE community members. To support this effort, subscribe below:

Subscribed