Thesis Silvia Fuca

Silvia Fuca-TomescuMasters studentPratt Institute – Graduate Center for Planning and the Environment

[email protected]

May 2006

Population-Based Approach to Planning for

Communities of Immigrants.

A Community Building Project for the Romanian

Community in New York

Primary Advisor: Laura Wolf-Powers

Secondary Advisor: Ayse Yonder

1

CONTENTS

I. INTRODUCTION 5

Overview 5

Goals and objectives 6

Literature review 7

Participatory planning theory 7

Economics of immigration 14

Organizational literature 16

Relevance of the recent Hunter College’s study

on Sunnyside, Queens for the present study 20

Research methods 22

II. THE ROMANIAN IMMIGRANT COMMUNITY

IN NEW YORK CITY: COMMUNITY ASSETS AND NEEDS 25

Short history of the Romanian-American community 25

Social and demographic profile 27

Romanians in Queens Community District 2 31

Short history of Sunnyside and Woodside 31

The location of Romanians in Sunnyside 33

Romanian businesses in Sunnyside 36

Internal capacities of the community (community assets) 41

Human capital 41

Professionals 42

2

Professionals’ unemployment and underemployment 43

Institutions, organizations and physical assets 46

Cultural organizations 46

Churches 46

Other cultural organizations 49

Professional groups and workers networks 49

Social capital 54

Community initiatives 55

Needs and problems of the community 56

Relationship of the Romanian community to local organizations 57

III. RECOMMENDATIONS 62

Overview 62

Likely impact on the Romanian community of the strategies

proposed in “Creating Community in Sunnyside” 63

Building an organization for the Romanian community 66

Communication and community outreach 66

Mission 67

Long-term goals and objectives 68

Stakeholders 69

Ways to engage the stakeholders 73

Short-term activities agenda for the new organization 75

Further studies 77

Conclusions 79

3

References 82

Appendix 86

GRAPHS

Romanian Immigration in the US on 10-year intervals 1860-2000 28

Romanian Immigrants admitted in fiscal years 1998-2003 29

Romanian non-immigrants admitted with temporary visas 1998-2003 31

TABLES

Romanian community in New York: SWOT analysis 52

Romanian community in New York: strong ties-weak ties 54

4

I. INTRODUCTION

Overview

The Romanian community in New York is one of the hundred small ethnic

communities that do not have and probably will never have the sufficient size to form an

enclave or a majority minority in any of the city’s neighborhoods. There is very little

literature on the effects of lack of participation in the civic life of the Romanians or other

ethnic groups similar in size. The gap in knowledge of the impact of social isolation on

small immigrant communities is doubled by the inability of the mainstream planning

practice to deal with immigrant newcomers’ socio-economic problems. A recent

comprehensive community building study clarifies many aspects of the immigrants’

social problems in a neighborhood where the Romanian group is a significant presence.

Adding to this opportunity, the stabilized social conditions in the sending country

produce a relatively predictive immigration in New York and a settlement pattern

documented by the last two decennial censuses makes possible a comprehensive

community development plan for this ethnic group.

The tendency of inward growth of any ethnic group and the lack of participation

in local decision making can be corrected through a growth strategy that eliminates or

mitigates the conditions that stimulate separation. A community development plan for the

Romanians will try to bond different groups inside the community, and will create

bridges with other ethnic communities and with the local stakeholders and planning

entities. Better information and organization are emphasized as important in this

reiterative process of capacity building. The present paper develops a population-based

5

community planning project for the Romanian immigrant community in New York. The

project promotes social change and economic development through building community

capacity.

Goals and Objectives

The research’s primary goal is to evidence the need of institutional support for the

inclusion of immigrants in community decision-making. Immigrants’ needs are specific

and cannot be addressed by the traditional planning tools without the recognition of what

makes immigrant community participation different from the one of the native-born

population. The experience from the current community planning practice and research,

corroborated with sociological knowledge of immigrant communities’ social organization

and dynamics, will lead to a more inclusive community planning approach where

immigrants are active participants in making local decisions that affect their own lives.

Because it is not possible to generalize planning strategies from the case study of

the Romanians to other ethnic groups, and an isolated development effort of the

Romanian community cannot be effective, I focus on the possibility of opening the

Romanian community planning practice to include other ethnic communities. At the same

time I suggest solutions for creating links with the existing planning entities within the

territory of maximum concentration of Romanian ethnics.

One objective of the study is to gain a better understanding of the socio-economic

implications of under-representation in local decision-making and lack of civic

engagement inside the Romanian community in Queens.

The main client of the study is the Romanian community, specifically the

stakeholders whose interests are directly related to community capacity. The most

6

important stakeholder is the Romanian Orthodox Church from Sunnyside that in the past

two years has proved to be really devoted to developing community programs.

Also, the study extends the Sunnyside comprehensive planning research1 with an

in-depth analysis of the Romanian community, with the intention of interpreting the

consequences of the proposed community building projects’ implementation on this

community. The recommendations made and the conclusions reached through switching

the point of view from a place-based to a population-based analysis, add more details to

the knowledge of this neighborhood.

Literature Review

The domains of literature used to outline the importance and complexity of

immigrant community building today are:

participatory planning theory

economics of immigration

organizational literature

Participatory planning theory

Community participation through civic individual or collective activities has

always been an American feature. As early as 19th century, Tocqueville noted that

Americans “are forever forming associations.” Being models for community organizing

even for advanced Western democracies, the principles of participatory planning and

inclusiveness have been implemented by developing and post-communist countries to

increase civic engagement as a means of stimulating local economic development

(Fisher, n.d.). Though, ironically, immigrant people coming from less developed

1 “Creating Community in Sunnyside” (Meiklejohn et al., 2006) is the only planning study dedicated to this neighborhood.

7

countries, when in America, do not have a voice in local decision making while waiting,

usually for decades, for full citizenship rights, or frequently falling out of status and

becoming undocumented.

Although isolated attempts in community organizing initiatives to capture their

voice were made (for example, Singh (2003) mentions small empowerment projects

developed to bring pockets of immigrants and refugees to participate in neighborhood

associations, in Louisville, Kentucky), immigrant groups are heavily underrepresented in

common decision making practices. Reasons for lack of participation range from high

territorial mobility, language barriers, and conflicts inside the community, to

apprehension of assuming a public role coming from a tradition of civic exclusionism in

their country of origin, and plain social apathy and marginalization (Corderro-Guzman et

al., 2001). Whereas their role vis-à-vis the civil society seems to be weak, this weakness

is overcome by their notable ability to form job networks (Waldinger and Lichter, 2003).

These networks create strong ties of emotional support, sometimes to the detriment of

their own social integration and with an isolating effect (Green and Haines, 2002). The

vicious circle of social isolation and lack of economic opportunities perpetuates poverty

among immigrants. They can escape this circle only by individual effort and tearing

themselves away from the doomed community (Corderro-Guzman et al., 2001).

Planning for immigrant communities today

Immigrants today face a very different set of integration and assimilation

problems than the ones at the beginning of the century, regarding job opportunities,

economic gains and the possibility to step up the social ladder. The industrial sector used

to provide heavy and dirty jobs, but decent remunerations. Often unionized, these jobs

8

offered the possibility of promotion within the same company. Today, the low-bid

services sector, which absorbs large numbers of immigrant workers, and the labor-

intensive formal and informal manufacturing jobs lack unionization and provide wages

that confer the families that are dependent on such jobs a below poverty-level status

(Sassen, 2001). The upward mobility of the employee inside the same company and

eventual attempts to create unions are deterred by patrons who either fire or threaten the

worker with deportation. Considering that the present wave of immigration is almost as

big as the one at the turn of the century, the integration problems seem to have more

social impact now. On one hand, we have the positive effects of increasing consumer

demand and stimulating the economy, while on the other hand, there are the negative

effects of thinning the American middle class by dragging down wages for native-born

employees, who have to comply with the same working rules as the immigrants, or

otherwise are thrown out of the industry and replaced by other immigrants (Drum Major,

2005).

Another radical change brought by the 21st century is a redefinition of the role of

local political authority in a period of intense globalization and redistribution of power

between local governments and community-based organizations. The devolution of the

state from the traditional role of making decisions to a regulatory role led to an increased

participation of communities in planning. Localities are invited to bring their input of

valuable knowledge of the reality on a block and lot level, to fine-tune the

implementation of the state-crafted development policies and to ensure a more efficient

spending of the public funds. As an example, the Empowerment Zone and the Enterprise

Community initiatives, designed to support in low-income communities through tax

9

concessions to firms in specially designated areas (usually these communities have high

rates of minority and ethnic groups), requires by law the community participation as a

measure of equitable representation and fair share of benefits (Green and Haines, 2003).

Also, since the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act

(PRWOR) was passed in 1996, community-based organizations are more active in

providing services for welfare recipients and designing programs for their reintegration

into the labor force. The main beneficiaries of these programs are also immigrants. The

institutionalization of public participation in federal and state programs has increased,

and also the proliferation of types of organizations, from community-based organizations

(representing the diversity of social networks and population groups inside a

neighborhood), to community development corporations (made up of stakeholders with

economic interests), to local development corporations (LDCs with a focus on

geography).

This change in the distribution of power and decisional roles between

administration and localities has also transferred the institutional help for immigrants

from settlement houses to LDCs. The activities of charitable movements were seen as a

counterweight to the decisions of a centralized state power which at the turn-of-the-

century were characterized by economic predictability of capital accumulation and

unionization. These charitable movements have contemporary equivalents in the LDCs

that now often serve neighborhoods with large immigrant groups and deal with concepts

of ethnic consumer markets, immigrant labor and entrepreneurship, in a 21st century of

intensified global relations and increased local community participation.

10

Today planners are the beneficiaries of much more sophisticated tools for

analyzing, communicating and implementing knowledge through advanced

communication and information technologies. Especially through Geographic

Information Systems (GIS), as a standardized form of communication between state

agencies and communities, planners create small revolutions every day by showing the

invisible relations between immigrant population demographic characteristics and the

place occupied by the same population. So finally urban myths regarding immigrants’

impact on the city’s economy can be confirmed, infirmed or disregarded as insignificant,

and also new comprehensive strategies of immigrant integration can be formulated (The

New Neighbors, 2003).

Though, the planning practice lags behind the technological capabilities, and the

mainstream planning knowledge, as promoted by schools and main professional

associations, has not incorporated important global planning issues, among which

immigration is an important one (Globally Planning Task Force, 2003). Politicians also

do not regard the immigrant non-voters with due consideration (Bedolla, 2003; Earnest,

2003; Hayduk, 2004; Tactaquin, 2004). Planners’ ability to deal with immigration issues

is problematic on three levels.

Theory:

heavy sociological literature on immigration with little application on community

planning practice

community studies are labor intensive, requiring university-community

collaboration (Hum, 2005)

Practice:

11

planners do not have the tools to outreach immigrants and establish sustained

dialogue with them (M. Narciso, personal communication, April 2006)

immigrants lack the ability to self-organize (they do not have the time and

knowledge of local reality) (as cited in Meiklejohn et al., 2006)

positive effects of immigration not sufficiently explored (Carter & Sutch, 1999;

Drum Major, 2005; Friedberg & Hunt, 1999)

Policy:

today local policies do not respond to immigrants’ needs (overcrowded houses,

ethnically incongruent public space, lack of opportunities for start-up businesses,

low-standard or non-existent community facilities designed for their needs, scarce

public services) (Cordero-Guzman et al., 2001; Drum Major, 2005; Foner, 2000;

Sassen, 1989)

large masses of tax-paying immigrants are underrepresented in local decision

making (Earnest, 2003; Hayduk, 2004; Hum, 2002; Raskin, 1993; Wucker, 2004)

Even if immigrants tend to form geographical concentrations, the percentage of

naturalized citizens able to vote on a national level is only around 40% from the total of

legal immigrants (The New Neighbors, 2003). Active participants to the local budget –

the average immigrant and their immediate descendents pay $80,000 more in tax

contributions over the course of their lives than they receive in benefits (National

Academy of Sciences website, 2006) – immigrants’ voting right is postponed endlessly

by a long immigrant visa application process. This situation inequitably makes the legal

and illegal immigrants an easily taxable population with no representation in the

democratic process. The chance for an immigrant group to have political representation is

12

even smaller if the group is spread in more than one electoral district (Bedolla, 2003;

Earnest, 2003; Hayduk, 2004; Tactaquin, 2004). Considering the language and cultural

barriers that usually impede immigrants’ communication and organizing, many groups

often cannot form communities of interest. In times of rapid immigration and racial

segregation, gaps between the represented and the under-represented become more

extreme even economically (Hum, 2001).

Studies of communities of immigrants

Community development studies of ethnic enclaves in the US cities have

evidenced the particularity of the enclave economies of occupying niches that are

increasingly irrelevant to the growth trajectories of the post-industrial city: low-wage and

low-skill service and manufacturing industries. Communities’ isolation is underscored in

a study of Sunset Park, Brooklyn (Hum, 2001) where the Asian and Latino enclaves

created small businesses that improved the neighborhood’s economy, but they also

created economic inequity, low wages and poor working conditions: “…The qualities of

immigrant economies suggest important limitations to creating meaningful economic

opportunities especially for workers” (p. 17). Hum’s key finding on assessing growth

strategies is that in order to develop immigrant neighborhoods one needs to integrate

capacity building along with asset building strategies. Thus, the entrepreneurial base of

the community needs to be developed by means of better matching skills with the

external market opportunities, and with identifying and capturing new markets.

Meiklejohn et al. (2006) researched Sunnyside, Queens – a highly diverse

neighborhood with no dominant ethnic group. The neighborhood is one of newcomers,

with more than half of the foreign-born population coming in the last 10 years, therefore

13

with integration problems – from limited English proficiency, to lack of knowledge of

jobs and social programs, overcrowdedness, high rents, and separated families. The

research is comprehensive, based on demographic, social and economic data analysis,

and also on in-depth interviews of a wide range of community stakeholders – immigrants,

community organizations, community leaders and decision makers. The research

methods employed are time- and resource-consuming and elaborate. They are crafted for

immigrant neighborhoods where typically available data from traditional sources, census,

INS, American community survey, Title III, public school registration data, do not show

the reality accurately, due to difficulties in counting immigrants. Based on the same

concept of increasing community capacity through a set of bridge-building projects, the

study emphasizes the reiterative community building process where the stages of

community development on one hand, and creating new coalitions between

organizations, ethnic groups and community stakeholders on the other, succeed one

another.

Economics of immigration

New York’s long-standing economic growth strategy relied historically on the

international financial and business sector to assure its position as a world-leading global

center, exposing its economy to ample market fluctuations. The current administration

accepts a shift of attention toward the more stable small businesses sector, as a

counterbalancing economic solution. Immigration is caught at the crossroads of the two

policies. It is stimulated by the global trends of liberalizing the markets that displace

people from their workplace in unemployment or attract them to better employment

opportunities in countries with advanced economies. Immigration is also shaped by New

14

York’s economy as a global center, that creates many services sector jobs with low wages

for the newcomers (Sassen, 2001). Many immigrants who do not find employment

because of lack of skills or education frequently become entrepreneurs, owning

businesses that provide them and their families minimal subsistence wages in enclave

economies. How the economic power of immigrants is perceived in this dualist

development plan of corporate welfare and entrepreneurial encouragement becomes less

a matter of corporations-government decisions. By gradually gaining its own political

momentum, as inscribed in the 2005 local election debates of Bloomberg and Ferrer,

immigrant economy starts to be seen as a solution to local development (Griffith, 2005).

Portes (1997) explains how a global economy creates channels of communication

and investment with third-world countries. This intensification of the transnational

aspects of the immigrant economic life is visible in the entrepreneurial patterns. Many

immigrant businesses rely on import-export and retail activities; however, the high real

estate market in Manhattan, where immigrants would find the needed skill concentration

to grow economically, is a hurdle to the development of small businesses (Engine

Failure, 2005). In the outer boroughs, on the other hand, entrepreneurs do not feel

encouraged by the city’s sometime cumbersome regulations and taxes, even with the

Business Outreach Centers playing as intermediaries between the administration and the

small business community (Center for an Urban Future, 2005c).

Recent research shows that many American cities that were deepened into the

economic crisis of the 80s and suffered demographic losses, LA and Houston in

particular, outperformed New York because they knew how to use the social resources of

their newest citizens as a means of recovery (Center for an Urban Future, 2005b). Ethnic

15

enclaves are motors of economic development that need to be integrated into the

neighborhood and regional economy (Hum, 2001).

New York continues to lose jobs to its immediate periphery and to other parts of

the nation partly because the city did not find ways to encourage the development of the

small businesses sector, as a way of reducing service expenses for the large companies.

The lack of business infrastructure in the boroughs, difficult conditions for start-ups, and

heavy bureaucracy affect all small businesses (Center for an Urban Future, 2005b),

though a certain category of immigrants, more precisely the immigrants lacking the

access to employment because of their level of education and proficiency in English,

predisposed to open new businesses, are hit harder. They do not have access to capital

and found their businesses with cash savings or contributions from relatives. Also,

because they do not have a business education, they do not understand the importance of

keeping proper records to demonstrate their firm’s success, thus cutting their access to

credit. This group of small businesses requires simple solutions through community

outreach, but most of all, a change of perception at the level of the city’s economic

development officials (Center for an Urban Future, 2005a).

Organizational literature

Social capital

The propensity for community life in America has been widely debated. The

question is whether it eroded in the past three or four decades under the pressure of

societal changes. The feminist revolution, the development of communication,

entertainment and transportation technologies and the implied population mobility and

consolidation of networks with a weak link to place are found by Putnam (1995) as

16

reasons for this erosion. Nonetheless, a noticeable reduced membership in community

organizations affects the community planning process by impeding horizontal ties and

community outreach. Putnam also notes that the decline in intolerance and open

discrimination is in complex relation with the erosion of social capital, a positive trait

explained by the theory of bridging social capital. That is, weak ties and strong ties, the

components of social networks, dictate the value of a network life by the way they

interplay inside the group. Weak ties, instrumental in developing social relationships –

acquaintanceship, material aid and services, information and social contact – have the

capacity of bridging networks and creating horizontal ties of egalitarian and robust

democratic structures, whereas strong ties ensure emotional support, advice and

friendship. At the same time – when they are too strong – strong ties could evolve in

isolationist factors by fragmenting the community and weakening the social capital

(Green and Haines, 2002).

Immigrant groups are exceedingly cultivating strong ties, due to their social

vulnerabilities as new-comers. This way, the groups isolate themselves, creating informal

job networks, ethnic niches and enclaves (Green and Haines, 2002, Waldinger and

Lichter, 2003). An ethnic economic niche can be limitative when isolated from the

mainstream economy and when underusing its development potential in a narrow market

(Green & Haines, 2002), but it can have a thriving evolution if opened to new resources.

Putnam (1995) stresses that closely knit social, economic and political organizations are

prone to inefficient cartelization by offering a limited universe and restricted ability to

enter new markets outside ethnic niches. Social capital of networks may be least effective

17

in the cases where there are primarily strong ties and an absence of weak ties (Green &

Haines, 2002).

The concept of building social capital makes use of the principles of social

network, strong and weak ties, horizontal and hierarchical ties, to construct a theory of

community development through planning for collective strategies of increasing

community capacity. “Community capacity is the interaction of human capital,

organizational resources, and social capital existing within a given community that can be

leveraged to solve collective problems and improve or maintain the well-being of a given

community. It may operate through informal social processes and/or organized effort.”

(Chaskin, 2001)

If a community’s social capital is not invested, instead of increasing community’s

resources it consumes and stores resources without creating new ones. Flora and Flora

(1993), in a study of communities in rural America, address isolated communities where

closely protected social networks cut off communication and acceptance of outsiders,

thus maintaining its social capital at the expense of other community capitals, i.e.

financial and built capital, and human capital. They also find that the entrepreneurial

social infrastructure is linked to the economic development success on the community

level, and is influenced by the level of diversity of networks and mobilization of internal

resources. Their study points to the necessity of communities to work together, to build a

more positive collective future.

The visible disparity between the participation in the community life of different

ethnic groups and the gap between new-comers and the established communities suggest

an incomplete use of planning tools or an incapacity of these tools to include different

18

types of communities. By taking as a datum the commonality of the social capital and by

not distinguishing among fundamentally different social dynamics of networks, important

community resources are left aside. 2

Hum (2001) notes that an essential difference in community development for

immigrant communities is the increased role of social capital. Capitalizing on social

assets like networks, cultural and professional elites, norms and values, is a starting point

in community building (Chaskin, 2001; Green & Haines, 2002). Advocacy groups

dealing with immigrant problems have often succeeded in building inter-ethnic bridges

inside neighborhoods (Sandercock, 2003, Singh, 2003), and their experience in

organizing events, community meetings and associations provides valuable information

on opportunities and the limits of dealing with ethnic networks.

Organizations that address immigrant problems

There are a few planning entities that can make substantial contribution to

improving immigrants community participation. Community boards, with their intimate

knowledge of the neighborhoods on the street and block level, and exercise of local

decision making and relation with policy makers, have a say in the dynamics of the

networks, and in identifying important actors inside communities.

The Department of Small Business Services has intensified the efforts to create a

better business environment for self-starters, through lighter bureaucracy and better outer

borough outreach through its Business Solution Centers (Griffith, 2005). The economic

potential of immigrant communities is acknowledged by policy makers, but it is still

2 The unsuccessful attempts of Pratt Center for Communities and Economic Development to organize visioning sessions in neighborhoods with an immigrant majority in NW Queens in February 2006 suggest that immigrant community participation requires special outreach tools. These new tools would take into consideration the above mentioned differences.

19

important for them to gain more in-depth knowledge of the needs of the business

community (Hum, 2001, Meiklekohn et al., 2006).

Immigrant Affairs Office (IAO) is the counterpart of SBS in determining a

community building agenda for an ethnic group. It does not start from the needs, but from

the assets – cultural values that can be commoditized, immigrant rights and opportunities

(IAO, 2006).

Planning schools, especially those with an interest in outer boroughs community

development, created a few important development plans for communities with large

concentrations of foreign-born population, among which the most important for Queens

are the Business Outreach Centers (BOC) coordinated by LaGuardia Community College

(BOC, 2005), and the recent studies on immigrant entrepreneurship in Jackson Heights

(Leonard, 2006) and community capacity building in Sunnyside (Meiklejohn, 2006).

Relevance of the recent Hunter College’s study on Sunnyside, Queens for the

present study

After a labor-intensive research done by Susan Turner-Meicklejohn with the help

of planning students from Hunter College, finalized in March 2006, the conclusions

drawn by the comprehensive study of Sunnyside reinforce the need for interviewing as a

primary method of investigation of immigrant needs. Overall, Sunnyside is outlined as a

neighborhood of first-generation immigrants and as a point of departure for newcomers.

Many small ethnic groups in New York form enclaves in Sunnyside. This mosaic of

small communities of foreign-born population where no single group is predominant

impregnated a multicultural environment with exceedingly numerous types of ethnic

restaurants, specialty stores and services. This original feature is probably the reason for a

20

more intensive weekend life in the neighborhood noticed by the authors of the study.

Interestingly, this is a conclusion I reached regarding the Romanian community in

Sunnyside individually, following the path of my own research.

Getting inspiration from similar experiences elsewhere, the study proposes a set

of six community building projects as a measure of strengthening in residents a sense of

membership to the local community and of immigrant integration into the public life. The

School Playground Greening Renovation project identifies the actors who can carry out

the proposed redesigning of the only public open spaces in the neighborhood, the PS 150

and PS199 school playgrounds. 24/7 schools: Getting the Community Together in an

already-Integrated Place is an initiative to rent school building space after school hours,

with the help of a local community organization, namely Sunnyside Community

Services, which has the capacity to search and apply for grants. Involving Area Youth:

Creating Community through Volunteerism is designed to create links between ethnic

communities through young members as well as their parents. Organizing and Enhancing

the Retail Sector, a joint effort of the Sunnyside Chamber of Commerce and LaGuardia

Community College Business Administration students, is aimed at increasing

membership of new and immigrant entrepreneurs in the Chamber. The Creation of an

Ethnic Market proposes two kinds of street events: multi-ethnic fests, celebrating the

cultural diversity, and theme events, highlighting a specific nationality or ethnicity on a

given day.

Among the findings involving the Romanian community in Sunnyside in

particular are the following. There are around 2400 Romanian-born people in Sunnyside

(4.4% of neighborhood population), the seventh group in size (p.30). Along with the

21

interviewing process taking place on the streets, there were frequent encounters with

Romanian residents and business owners of different histories and backgrounds, from

recent newcomers to long time residents. Also, among the few immigrant community

organizations, the Romanian Information and Referral Center is mentioned as a typical

advocate group for immigrant legislation and programs only. The immigrant

organizations in Sunnyside lack the local dimension in their strategies, targeting a

population larger than the one in the neighborhood and being only distributors of state

and federal programs.

Although the study approaches many other aspects of community planning, like

land use, housing and landmark preservation, the most important findings of

Meicklejohn’s paper regarding the present study are the incredible fragmentation of the

neighborhood’s ethnic map, the lack of open and public space, inappropriate and not

easily available public programs (youth programs, immigrant specific programs),

outreach of community organizations and associations (e.g. weak immigrant small

businesses’ membership in Sunnyside Chamber of Commerce). All projects proposed

could have an equal effect on the Romanian community as on any other ethnic group in

the neighborhood.

Research methods

Rely on community leaders interviewing as a primary method of data

collection. The interviews focus on topics related to community organizing, economic

development of the Romanian immigrant group and the relationship of the community to

external institutions in the city (LDCs, city government agencies, civic groups)

22

Information gathered on the field (survey, personal observation) to

identify civic actors and establish characteristics that individualize networks)

Review of the existing literature

Analysis of census, INS and other sources of demographic data on the

Romanian population in New York

The primary geographic area of concern is Sunnyside, the neighborhood with the

largest concentration of Romanian population, ethnic businesses and organizations.

Starting from needs specific to immigrants in general, the study tests them, as well as the

advanced solutions, against the reality inside the Romanian community. The testing

involves also the questioning of the role of planning practice and policy in problem

solving. In other words, the study attempts to answer the question: How are the problems

endemic to immigrant groups reflected inside the Romanian community, what are the

possibilities of addressing them using the community’s resources, with an improved

organization and with the cooperation of the existing planning entities (community

organizations, community boards, advocacy planning organizations, city agencies)?

The Romanian community formed an enclave in Sunnyside, Queens due to a

combination of advantageous conditions generated by the history of the neighborhood, its

geographic position and a good connection with other parts of the city. Romanian

businesses are opened with predilection in this neighborhood. Even though the biggest

Romanian group does not live in this neighborhood, the most visible manifestations of

this ethnic group take place here.

As highlighted by the study “Creating Community in Sunnyside,” neighborhood

development projects depend on building the capacity of this immigrant community. The

23

Romanian group is one of the many small ethnic groups comprising Sunnyside that has a

low level of formal organization and relies primarily on ethnic networks for providing

practical support for its members. In order for the development projects to become

successful it is necessary to create bridges of communication and cooperation inside the

community. These bridges need to build on the existing reality, taking into consideration

the strong ties that are established inside the immigrant groups and the particularities of

the present community organizations.

This paper offers recommendations for the Romanian community stakeholders to

improve their group’s organization through collective action that integrates all internal

resources, as well as through the use of the neighborhood’s resources. Also, it

recommends that planning entities and schools with an interest in Sunnyside’s

development to continue the study of this neighborhood with an analysis of the

immigrant groups’ characteristics. While there are signals that the neighborhood plays a

key role in the life of several small immigrant groups, little is known so far about the true

relationship of Sunnyside with other neighborhoods in Queens from the point of view of

the distribution of ethnic population and businesses.

24

II. THE ROMANIAN IMMIGRANT COMMUNITY IN NEW YORK

CITY: COMMUNITY ASSETS AND NEEDS

More than 150 languages are spoken by the diverse ethnic groups that reside in

New York City. Many ethnic groups are too small to impact the life of the city in a

significant way and have little literature written on their behalf. One of these small but

fast-growing communities of newcomers that emerged in the dawn of the post- Hart-

Celler Act is the Romanian community.

Short history of the Romanian-American community

A decisive factor in the formation of the Romanian-American community is the

history of Romanian immigration and its syncopated stages dictated by the break in 1924,

which was caused by the Immigration Reform. The Great Depression that followed right

after discouraged immigration even farther. From this first wave of immigration came the

founding of a Romanian Jewish synagogue on the Lower East Side and a Romanian

Christian Orthodox church on the Upper West Side. Before WWI, the Romanian Jews

were an urban population in Europe, so they found it easy to settle and find jobs in New

York, primarily on the Lower East Side in Manhattan. Moreover, because they were

Yiddish-speakers, they integrated into the eastern European Jewish community already

present in the same dense neighborhood.

The great majority of the non-Jewish Romanians who immigrated to the US

before WWI came from the countryside and had difficulty finding urban jobs. Most of

them arrived alone or were temporarily separated from their families, working in the

25

coalmines in the Rustbelt states, primarily in Ohio and Illinois. The time spent in

America was an average two years before they returned to their families with the money

they saved to buy land and build a house in their native villages. There is a saying among

the oldest members of the community who remained in America, “make a thousand and

hit the road”. With a remigration of 56% (Daniels, 2002), a true community could hardly

be imagined before WWI.

From WWII to the late 1970s immigration maintained very low rates, and the

result was a small community with a very high human capital. The community members

ranged from persecuted old political elites, to intellectuals and college professors who

were victims of ideological purges of institutions and schools of higher education, to

civically engaged individuals who refused to subscribe to the doctrine of the communist

regime. They formed strong ties in order to create a political opposition to the communist

government back home. The Romanian immigration suffered disruption after the Big

Crash in the ‘30s, as almost all eastern European groups did. Unlike the western

European groups, Romanian immigration declined after the economic crisis passed in the

aftermath of WWII because the Cold War kept the US borders impenetrable even for the

victims of war. There was no refugee status conferred to people coming from Romania. It

was not until the second half of the ‘70s, at the beginning of Ceausescu’s harsh

dictatorship that the borders opened again to receive refugees. But because Romania was

a closed country, with emigration severely controlled, the immigration to America was

very low. As the dictatorial regime became more and more unbearable, people found

ways to escape the country. The number of Romanian immigrants in the US increased

rapidly from 12,393 in 1971-80 to 30,857 in the next decade. The sharp increase

26

continued after the opening of the Romanian borders in 1990, the 1991-2000 decade

numbering 51,203 newcomers.

Among conditions that stimulate emigration from Romania into the US are:

economic inequality – a very small elite of nouveau riche and a thick layer of low-income

population with a big percentage of unemployment or underemployment; a housing crisis

in Bucharest (its population equals 10% of the country’s population) that spans more than

two decades and hits the young and poor hardest; the distrust in government structures

due to corruption; and, equally important, an ineffective social welfare system (Kligman,

2005). Remittances are important contributions to the GNP. Therefore, the governments

in the past 16 years did not develop effective policies for discouraging emigration. The

present administration has greater support from the masses and is improving the

bureaucratic system. It also benefits from an increase in popularity that followed from

the acceptance of the country into the EU political structures. This factor probably

contributed to the slight decrease of the emigration growth rate in the past two years.

Social and demographic profile

The 2000 United States Census lists 367,310 persons of Romanian ancestry.

Several western European countries absorb a greater share of Romanian émigrés.

More than 53% of the foreign born Romanian-Americans entered the United

States between 1980 and 1990, the highest proportion among all European-American

ethnic groups. From 1980 to 2004, a median of 4,147 people born in Romania entered the

US annually. The annual entry growth rate fluctuated, reaching its peak in the 1980s and

slightly decreasing after 2000. The New York- northern New Jersey -Long Island area,

27

with 64,475, or 0.2% of the total area population, make up for 17.5% of total Romanian

population in the United States.

R o m a n i a n i m m i g r a t i o n i n t h e U S o n 1 0 - y e a r i n t e r v a l s1 8 6 0 - 2 0 0 0

6 , 3 4 8

1 2 , 7 5 0

5 3 , 0 0 8

1 3 , 3 1 1

6 7 , 6 4 6

3 , 8 7 11 , 0 7 6 1 , 0 3 9 2 , 5 3 1

1 2 , 3 9 3

3 0 , 8 5 7

5 1 , 2 0 3

0

1 0 , 0 0 0

2 0 , 0 0 0

3 0 , 0 0 0

4 0 , 0 0 0

5 0 , 0 0 0

6 0 , 0 0 0

7 0 , 0 0 0

8 0 , 0 0 0

p o p u l a t i o n

Graph 1Source: INS data

New York City has a population of 30,360 Romanians, almost half of which

(14,120) live in Queens. Between 1990 and 2000 the Romanian foreign born population

in New York increased from 12,724 to 19,280, while the population in New York of

Romanian ancestry (born in the US, first generation and up) decreased from 38,858 to

30,360.

An average of 13,000 people enter America annually through New York City,

which remains the main port of entry for the Romanian immigrants. Lately, a part of the

population growth was absorbed by the greater metropolitan area, especially by Long

Island and northern New Jersey.

28

R o m a n ia n n o n im m ig r a n t s a d m it t e d in f is c a l y e a r s 1 9 9 8 -

2 0 0 3

3 3 ,3 0 73 7 8 9 6

4 3 ,2 4 7

4 9 ,5 6 8 4 8 ,4 6 1 4 8 ,3 2 5

12 ,8 8 2 13 ,0 2 2 12 ,7 3 4 13 ,17 5 12 ,8 4 4 13 ,3 18

0

1 0 , 0 0 0

2 0 , 0 0 0

3 0 , 0 0 0

4 0 , 0 0 0

5 0 , 0 0 0

6 0 , 0 0 0

19

98

19

99

20

00

20

01

20

02

20

03

a l l p o r ts

N e w Y o r k

Graph 2Source: INS data

There is a trend toward greater concentrations of Romanians in New York City,

especially in North-West Queens. This increased concentration explains the growth of the

businesses that cater to the community, ethnic restaurants and food stores, travel and

parcel agencies, and doctors’ and lawyers’ offices.

Queens is a strong magnet for the new immigrants. The 2000 census counts a

majority of 44% second ancestry Romanians (i.e. persons born in the US) in the borough

of Manhattan, while 61% of the population born in Romania (i.e. newcomers) is in

Queens. The borough of Queens is the host of most of the concentrations of Romanian

ethnics, but important clusters are found in southern parts of Brooklyn, in Manhattan and

in the South Bronx. Queens Community Districts 1, 2, 5 and 6 contain 30 percent of the

total Romanian population in New York City. The greatest proportion of Romanians to

total community district’s population is in Community District 5, Ridgewood/Maspeth

(2.13%).

29

Map 1: Romanian population in New York 1990-2000Source: INS data

There is a rapid increase in specialty occupation visas for the Romanians in the

past 8 years, showing a 356% growth of the young professional segment. The slight

decrease of the specialized work visas after 2002 is explained by the severe caps imposed

by the US immigration services after World Trade Center attack of September 11, 2001,

rather than by a decrease in demand from the Romanians.3

3 The weak employment opportunities after graduation in Romania displace a large number of educated young people toward developed countries.

30

R o m a n i a n n o n i m m i g r a n t s a d m i t t e d w i t h t e m p o r a r y v i s a s 1 9 9 8 - 2 0 0 3

1 9 9 0

2 8 5 7

4 2 3 7

5 9 4 7

7 3 7 6 7 0 9 2

5 7 5 8 1 5 1 1 2 5 1 3 5 5 1 4 7 6 1 5 7 11 , 1 7 1

1 , 7 5 7

2 7 2 7

4 , 0 4 1

5 , 3 4 84 , 7 3 8

0

1 0 0 0

2 0 0 0

3 0 0 0

4 0 0 0

5 0 0 0

6 0 0 0

7 0 0 0

8 0 0 019

98

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

t o t a l

s p e c ia lt y o c c u p a t io n s ( H 1 - B )

e x c h a n g e v is it o r s ( J 1 )

Graph 3Source: INS data

The Romanian population in the US is young, with an estimated 80% between 18

and 65 years, very similar to the foreign-born population per total (79%), but much

younger than the US born population in New York (56%). The segment of professionals

in this community is increasing rapidly, but its ratio is far smaller than the national

median4. Explanations for this small number of specialty visas can be found in the

international agreements that determine more restrictive visa quotas offered by the US

government to the Romanians, as well as to many other developing countries.

Romanians in Queens Community District 2

Short history of Sunnyside and Woodside

In 1908 the swamps covering the present Sunnyside were filled and the land

leveled by Pennsylvania Railroad. In 1910 the Sunnyside Yards opened, just one year

4 In 2003, a ratio of 1.93 – which is the number of specialty visas to number of ethnic population – for Romanians, compared with 4.08 for all US foreign population, and even more different than the European median (9.98) ( US Census and USCIS data).

31

before the Queensborough Bridge was completed. The rail hub brought industry, and the

introduction of the IRT#7 train along Queens Boulevard in 1917 brought residents. In

1924-29 a complex of attached houses of two and a half stories, named the Sunnyside

Gardens, was built in an English Garden City style. The first American planned

community, the Sunnyside Gardens complex was developed by philanthropists to provide

middle-class workers affordable housing with high quality amenities and semi-private

green space. In the1940s and 1950s the neighborhood became white middle class,

predominantly Irish. Surrounded by industrial sites built along the railroad, Sunnyside

supported many local jobs. In the 1960s it attracted artists with their families coming

from the crowded Greenwich Village neighborhood. Sunnyside and Woodside

experienced their own version of white flight in the’70s – the displacement of the middle-

income population after the massive loss of industrial jobs – that led to large housing

vacancies. The 1980s witnessed major upsurges of immigration coming from Ecuador,

Colombia, Mexico, China, Bangladesh, the Philippines, India, Ireland, Romania, Peru,

and many other countries, that formed a dense demographic mosaic. These immigrants

found plenty of vacant and affordable housing in the neighborhood. The native white

population – the three largest groups of an Irish, German and Italian ancestry – thinned

even more, as reflected by both the 1990 and the 2000 Census.

32

Prepared by Hunter College

The location of Romanians in Sunnyside

The biggest concentration of Romanians in Queens Community Board 2 is in the

heart of Sunnyside, along Greenpoint Avenue, approximately between Hunterspoint

Avenue and 53rd Street. The community spills equally on both sides of Queens

Boulevard, living in compactly built high-density apartment buildings on side streets

bordering Queens Boulevard, as well as in lower-density high-quality row-house

buildings north of Skillman Avenue. Another Romanian cluster is located south of the

BQE in the southeast corner, but this portion of Sunnyside is physically more connected

with Elmhurst neighborhood due to the separation created by the highway.

33

The Romanian concentration is located within a 10-minute walking distance from

the 40th Street and 46th Street stops on the number 7 Train, with a 10-15 minute commute

to Midtown Manhattan and a relatively good bus connection with other parts of Queens –

Astoria, Greenpoint, Middle Village, Forest Hills, Rego Park and Corona. Six restaurants,

a club and a pastry shop offering Romanian food are found here, placed on the green

Skillman Avenue, with a view along the street ending with the Manhattan skyline, on

Greenpoint Avenue or on the massively trafficked Queens Boulevard, along with many

other types of ethnic restaurants that make Sunnyside proudly assert its international

character. Among other Romanian-owned businesses are delis with eastern European

food and products, two lawyers’ offices, two parcel service stores, two travel agencies,

cosmetics salons, and doctors’ offices.

Source: US Census data

34

Prepared by Hunter College

In Sunnyside, Queens (1.56% of the total population of the neighborhood) one

can feel the presence of the Romanians through the small clustering of businesses

catering mainly to Romanians. The presence of Romanian businesses and organizations

in this neighborhood has an historic explanation, but is also explained by geographic

reasons. Here is where the families immigrating in the ‘70s and the ‘80s (the beginning of

the new immigration wave) first settled. Sunnyside is also centrally located for many

Romanian clusters in Queens – Ridgewood, Middle Village, Forest Hills, Rego Park,

Astoria and Steinway – and is easily accessible by the number 7 train even from Midtown

Manhattan. The mixed character of Sunnyside and the lack of any predominant ethnic

group also make Romanians’ manifestation of identity more visible.

35

Romanian businesses in Sunnyside

I found 20 Romanian businesses in Sunnyside. Some of them are advertised in the

Romanian-American Yellow Pages, a website that lists businesses located in the US. I

relied on information from peers and friends to locate firms that do not have a storefront

space. A great majority are new businesses (5-10 years old).

The most visible type of businesses are the restaurants and coffee shops located

on Skillman Avenue, Greenpoint Avenue and Queens Boulevard. Most of them have an

overwhelming Romanian customer base with the exception of the two restaurants on

Queens Boulevard which benefit from the tourist flow along the number 7 train and claim

just a 40-60% Romanian clientele. The restaurant managers adapt the menus: the genuine

Romanian food is found on Skillman and Greenpoint Avenues, while on Queens

Boulevard one can find a more international menu.

The restaurant businesses flourished after 1990 with the new wave of immigrants.

Nita, the owner of Nita pastry shop, which sells creamy French pastry that doesn’t appeal

the American tastes as much as the Romanian tastes, started his business in the early

36

‘80s. He consolidated his business and noticed a big leap forward in profit in 2005

(interview with Nita, 2005).

Nita’s Bakery on Greenpoint Avenue

Other Romanian businesses dependent on Romanian customers are a parcel

agency, a travel agency, and two tax and insurance consultants. The parcel and travel

agencies offer good rates for Romania and parts of Eastern Europe and have a strong

eastern European clientele. The tax and insurance consultants started off as businesses for

Romanians not proficient in English in the ‘80s and continued as consultants for

Romanian-owned businesses in the larger metropolitan area. They do not limit their

services to the Romanians but the power of recommendation induced this ethnic pattern

of development for their businesses. Medical and dental offices (I found three offices, but

it is probable that there are more than three in Sunnyside) also follow the same pattern,

having more Romanian patients than non-Romanians.

37

These two tax and insurance agencies are in competition for the same Romanian customer base.

An interesting exception is the hair salon on Skillman at 47th Street owned by a

Romanian who never advertised inside the Romanian community, either in the newspaper

or on the Yellow Pages site, and has an affluent American clientele. Most of her

employees are Romanian young women schooled and trained in Romania, and also

include other European immigrants.

This is an example of business owned by a Romanian who does not seek Romanian clientele. Though part of the personnel is Romanian.

All Romanian businesses hire Romanian employees at least in the visible

positions, as waiters or cooks in the restaurants, but some of the businesses have other

ethnic employees (e.g. Mexicans usually in labor intensive, less remunerated jobs like

chef help or for delivery).

38

One larger restaurant on Greenpoint Avenue at 41st Street is very interested in

developing the business. The owner invested in other two locations in Sunnyside before

opening a third restaurant, and is well known locally for spectacular debuts. All three

locals were “the place to go” for months after the restaurants opened.

Although the restaurants were popular in the 1990s, profits did not increase. S.

Standish from Stantax tax and insurance consulting (2006) explains this by pointing to

the increased competition that came with the increase in population. While his firm was

the only one on this profile in the ‘80s, his Romanian ex-partner’s new firm absorbed

whatever increase in customer base the population growth brought. The small Romanian

businesses are rather a form of self-employment made to provide enough benefit for a

decent living and money for kids’ school, but they do not generate sufficient profit for

reinvestment. One striking particularity of the Romanian business environment is the plan

of many interviewed business owners to retire in Romania. Their business plans are

affected by this decision since they are thinking about selling the business profitably, and

not about maximizing or stabilizing its profit.

39

Businesses usually change hands inside the community. Most of them are

partnerships with other Romanians. However, many owners regard other Romanian

businessmen with circumspection and perceive Romanians as not trustful. This

skepticism, despite obvious cartelization, is what stops owners from creating formal

organizations for Romanian businesses.

Some restaurant owners heard of the advantages of being members of the

Sunnyside Chamber of Commerce, and are in the process of becoming members. The

reason for not already being members is that the owners couldn’t find the time to go

through the literature and complete the required paperwork since their businesses are

relatively new. Other businesses are self-sufficient without any plan for growth, therefore

they do not seek membership in the Chamber of Commerce or any other organization.

Since Sunnyside is not the neighborhood with the biggest Romanian population

(Ridgewood comes first) it was interesting to hear what the business owners in Sunnyside

have to say regarding the choice of their business’ location. Ridgewood is a market with

no chances for good profits, while Sunnyside has the upper side of the market. While in

Ridgewood small family eating places proliferated, larger restaurants opened only in

Sunnyside. Sunnyside’s biggest advantage is its central location in Queens and its easy

accessibility by car or subway, from Manhattan or even from New Jersey and Upstate

New York.

40

Romanian businesses in Sunnyside.

Internal capacities of the community (community assets)

Human capital

The Romanian community in Sunnyside is diverse, even though most of the

people immigrated in the same short period, after 1990, and confronts integration

problems to some degree or another. From financial analysts working for major

corporations with offices in Midtown, to undocumented construction workers,

41

Romanians hold a wide variety of occupations matching the variety on the New York job

market.

There are no reliable data available to show the level of job turnover,

unemployment and underemployment for this ethnic group, but from personal

observation I assess high levels of all three problems. The people affected tend to be in

greater number the less educated, but also professionals who are undocumented or “in

limbo,” with visa pending and going through periods of uncertainty.

Professionals

Professionals, with an undergraduate degree or higher, belong most often to a

citywide, if not national labor market (Green and Haines, 2002). They are proficient in

job hunting and know where to find information about employment opportunities. Often

they earn a degree in the US and take advantage of the information available for them in

schools. Some professionals come to the US because they got a hint about job

opportunities in a particular field from friends who came here first. They are computer

literate and obtain their job requirement information – job location, skills required – from

Internet. Sometimes, if the nature of the occupation allows, they are interviewed over the

phone and come to the US with a job and a visa secured. Among these occupations are

the high-tech jobs (computers, information technology, and telecommunication) and

financial jobs (investment banking, portfolio and asset management, financial analysts)5.

New York as a global center attracts a great number of financial and high-tech specialists

working in the financial and insurance sector. Other Romanian professionals with a

heavy representation in the New York job market are attracted to the construction

5 The predominance of these occupations is visible in the composition of Romanian Business Professional Association (description of this organization is on page --).

42

industry – as architects, structural and specialty engineers – in the rich Manhattan market;

graphic designers in advertisement; and fashion designers in the 7th Avenue garment

district. Medical doctors, physician assistants and physical therapists, displaced from

Romania by a badly organized health system, immigrated in large numbers to the US in

general, and to New York in particular.

Professionals’ unemployment and underemployment

Often, because of the cumbersome and long process of transferring professional

degrees, doctors accept jobs for which they are overqualified (as physician assistants or

nurses). Underemployment among professionals often occurs because of a lack of

English proficiency, of knowledge of how industry is organized, information on

requirements for career advancement, and also because they have poor contacts, as

newcomers, among professionals of the same occupation. There are architects working as

draftspersons, information technology specialists working as IT developers, accountants

working as bookkeepers etc.

Immigrants seldom find themselves drawn into their new environment for reasons

other than economic. Later they discover that there isn’t any demand for their skills.

Thus, geologists, philosophy high-school teachers, nuclear power plant designers,

professionals in fields unheard of in the New York urban area, have to change industries

completely. Especially in the case of immigrants coming from ex-socialist countries,

these instances are frequent. Specialists displaced by high rates of unemployment from

newly privatized mammoth state-owned companies do not find the exact equivalent of

their industry in the free market. Many times these professionals in industries without

demand in the job market fall easily out of status. They become undocumented, because

43

they are compelled by the time limitations of visa applications to immediately find jobs in

fields for which they are less qualified, and sometimes they fail to adapt fast enough.

The persistent unemployment and underemployment inside the Romanian

community as well as in many other immigrant communities, have many sources that

represent interrelated challenges regarding workforce development. For example people

who qualify for creative or technical jobs are not required to have high levels of English

proficiency, but because of their limited English they do not perform well in the job

hunting process and are less skilled for interviews. Considering today’s large number of

immigrants, they usually find themselves in competition with other immigrants for jobs

with lower wages, which are segregated from the jobs requiring excellent communication

skills (Drum Major, 2005). Limited English sometimes hinders the skill matching

research by limiting the candidate’s knowledge of employer’s skill requirements and the

ability to locate jobs (Green and Haines, 2002).

If workforce development means matching the demand for jobs with the supply of

jobs (i.e. matching employers’ access to qualified workers and to basic information on

the characteristics of immigrant population – like education background, work

experience, needs, commuting behavior – with workers’ ability to assess employer’s

needs for workers in certain positions and the required prerequisite experience, wages

and benefits for entry-level positions, industry and organizational structure) – then the

New York market established an artificial equilibrium that favors workers less than

employers. Plenty of supply in the labor market makes the worker more in need to be

knowledgeable about employer’s characteristics. Without this knowledge, immigrants’

wages drop to the level artificially imposed by the employer. The employers keep the

44

wages low to maximize their profit by threatening the immigrants with visa application

processes. The lack of information on immigrant labor market is made less detrimental,

or less risky, by keeping the immigrants in an entry-level position for longer times or

even in positions for which immigrant workers are over-qualified, thus justifying the low

wages they offer. Thus in the dense market of Manhattan, the poor employment

information circulating both ways is more detrimental to employees than to employers.

Native employees are also affected, because the wages for their technical positions drop

artificially as well, or else they are replaced by other immigrants (Drum Major, 2005).

Outer boroughs’ economies rely more on entrepreneurship, especially self-

employment and small businesses, and many times immigrants become employers. This

situation makes skill-matching information vital for local economic development.

There are other sources of unemployment and underemployment inside the

immigrant community, like the lack of on-the-job training. For small companies it is too

expensive to provide, so many newcomers find fewer opportunities in the boroughs.

Another factor that hinders entrepreneurship and entering into the labor force for

Romanians as a very young community, with 37% or over 10,000 people between 25 and

34 years old, is the lack of affordable day-care centers.

Often young mothers from low-income families prefer to work from home, but

cannot enter any venture because of lack of knowledge either of managing small

businesses or tapping into the local market.

Also, wages of local jobs do not allow a decent living in dense neighborhoods of

immigrants where rents increase rapidly due to small-scale gentrification induced by high

concentrations.

45

A serious factor that limits the community members from obtaining better jobs

and entering new business partnerships is that immigrants rely excessively on their own

social networks. This undermines the job searchers’ ability to know the job market and

impedes the enterprises growth and their ability to expand to a large buyers’ market (in

other words, opening the businesses, whose formations were nurtured by the ethnic niche,

to the larger local economy) (Green and Haines, 2002).

In summary, persistent unemployment and underemployment sources are:

- skills not matching the market demand entirely

- limited English proficiency

- lack of knowledge of successful job hunting strategies

- insufficient information on job training programs

- lack of job training offered by employers

- absence of affordable day care centers

- wages of jobs in outer boroughs not enough to live on, which forces workers to

find jobs in Manhattan

- reliance on ethnic networks limits chances to find good jobs.

Institutions, organizations and physical assets

Cultural organizations

Churches

Important cultural aspects of the country of origin are forged into the social

constituency of the immigrant groups. The polarization “communist-anticommunist”

46

created separate cult establishments coalescing real steering committees for political

activities back home.

The persistence of this spirit of the 1970s and 1980s reverberates today into a still

polarized grouping of institutions: the major separation is between the Romanian

Orthodox Church under the patronage of the Patriarchate in Bucharest, and the

Romanian-American Orthodox Church under the independent Metropolitan in Detroit.

Churches, besides offering religion, culture and emotional support, are also prominent

services providers in the community. At the same time churches are essential sources of

information regarding jobs, housing and social contacts. As much as we can talk about

organization, the new immigration is gathered around cult and professional organizations.

Saint Nicholas Church in Sunnyside, Queens has 130 active members in a

church that became more and more crowded as the community grew. It has an e-mail list

of approximately 80 entries, a parochial newsletter and a solicitous priest who maintains

active social connections with the members around the metropolitan area through

summer events, projects of a collective interest and a successful Sunday school. Because

it was built with the support of the Romanian communist government in 1984, the church

is informally labeled “communist”. Members’ ages vary. A survey of 15 members

randomly chosen on a regular Sunday shows that people are uniformly distributed in low

family income brackets, from $10,000-20,000 to more than $60,000.

47

Saint Nicholas Romanian church in Sunnyside on a typical Sunday. The people gather on the sidewalk for a talk because of the lack of space inside.

The above mentioned St. Demetrios Church in Uptown Manhattan and St. Mary

Church in Elmhurst, Queens are perceived as being at the opposite end of the political

spectrum and attract a predominantly eldery, slightly smaller population that does not

communicate through e-mails, preferring direct contact.

There are a few peripheral churches with smaller numbers of parishioners, that

have ecclesiastical affiliations other than the two mentioned6. These churches also include

people from outside clusters and historically took strong political positions. While the

church in Woodside does not organize events outside the church and does not use any e-

mail list, the one in Astoria, which uses a rented space, conducts a substantial outreach

through a poetry-reading initiative, English as a Second Language (ESL) classes taking

place in public schools spaces and libraries on weekends, and also a monthly publication

(Lumina Lina magazine).

6 The Romanian Orthodox church in Woodside belongs to the Greek Archdiocese, and another church in Astoria, known after the name of its priest (Father Damian’s church) has an unclear affiliation and rents sermon space in different places.

48

St. Mary Catholic Mission in Astoria brings Catholic and Orthodox people

together, predominantly young, in a rented space; it has an e-mail list.

The Holy Virgin Ukrainian Church on the Lower East Side also gathers a small

number of Romanians, organizes a lot of cultural events of a multiethnic nature, and has

elegant social and exhibition spaces; it communicates through an e-mail list and a

parochial paper. Its events are popular beyond the Romanian community, but Romanians

only participate occasionally.

Other cultural organizations

The Iuliu Maniu Foundation (named after an inter-war prime-minister) is

comprised of political émigrés. The foundation’s most intense activity took place

immediately after the war, providing orientation and support for social integration to the

Romanian war refugees. Currently the foundation makes symbolic donations to

humanitarian non-profits in Romania, and also organizes in New York two or three

cultural-political events yearly that gather a broad range of intellectuals. It has a mailing

list, but no e-mail list or website.

Romanian writers in New York form a strong network and have frequent

meetings for poetry reading and lectures. They network around the prospect of

recommendations to publishers and literary critique; there is a book that features

Romanian writers called Scriitori Romani la New York (Romanian Writers in New York),

published in 1998. The magazine where they frequently publish articles and short essays

is Origini/Romanian Roots from Northfork, Virginia.

Visual artists network for group shows and auctions, but their meetings are

infrequent; they meet at the Ukrainian church on the Lower East Side.

49

The Romanian Cultural Institute from NY, functioning in the Romanian

Consulate’s building, is a branch of an international organization sponsored by the

Romanian government. It organizes cultural events for artists en tour in New York,

sponsors inter-cultural programs and has an e-mail list of over 3000 names.

Professional groups and workers networks

Romanian Business Professional Association (RBPA) is a growing Yahoo!

group of more than 400 young Romanian professionals, primarily from New York City,

but also includes smaller groups in Washington DC, Toronto, London and Paris. Most of

the group from New York have jobs in financial and IT sectors. They meet once a month

in clubs and bars, mainly for career information and social acquaintanceship. They have

above average incomes. A survey of 15 respondents taken at a regular monthly meeting

shows a median of over $60,000 of annual income for mostly unmarried young people.

Discussion forums, carried most often in English, on Yahoo! Group’s forum, center

around aspects of Romanian economic development and job hunting in New York and

elsewhere. Usually the monthly meetings gather approximately 20-30 new participants,

among whom one or two international guests are from similar professional networks of

other ethnicities.

50

RBPA members in a networking meeting.Image taken from the group’s web site.

Restaurant and hotel workers, mostly but not exclusively undocumented, share

knowledge about jobs and hiring agencies. They create job networks by recommending

each other and trying to keep certain jobs inside their group. Their networks are not as

strong as the Hispanic family networks since a greater proportion of Romanians working

in these kinds of jobs are single or have small families. They tend to share apartments.

They change jobs frequently, so they often meet in the very few hiring agencies’

hallways. They do not interfere or compete with Hispanics in either restaurants or hotels7.

Truck drivers are a group with strong ties. The nature of their work requires trust

because they share the same trucks on different shifts and confront great risks. Truck

drivers who own one or more trucks rent their trucks to their co-ethnics. The partners

communicate through cell phones and meet as a group at the companies’ annual party.

Professional groups with a significant informal component and a strong tendency

to network are physical therapists, architects, web designers, housekeepers, fulltime

babysitters, handymen, and cab drivers.

7 They predominantly take jobs “on the floor” as waiters, while the Hispanics work in the kitchen. In hotels, although the Romanians accept lower-rung jobs, they are preferred in other types of hotels than the Hispanics. Waldinger’s coined term of ‘job queue’ is applicable here.

51

I did not have access to all the existing networks. I described only groups that are

most visible, and need because of the very nature of their activity, to make their presence

manifest inside of community. These needs are grouped around aspects of job hunting

(information share), job cartelization (i.e. keeping certain jobs inside the community) or

career advancement information.

Table 1 shows how each group’s features play a positive or vegative role in

creating cohesion inside the community. Strengths are considered assets and

characteristics that have a general and open addressability, and do not limit larger

membership. Opportunities are those features that can lead to a socially integrative role of

the organization in the future by attracting more members through better exposure and

publicity, or through any other kind of social intervention. Weaknesses are the features

that currently limit larger participation of Romanians to that particular organization or

group. Threats are features that could impede collaboration with other organizations or

lead to exclusionary practices against new members, and therefore need special attention

in a community building plan.

52

Table 1: Romanian community in New York: SWOT analysis

Group Strengths Weaknesses Opportunities Threats

St. Nicholas Church (Sunnyside)

-civically active members-community programs-various ages-uncontested community leader-own space-dynamism

-not enough space and little money for more programs-low income members

- institutional support from Romania-e-mail communication-free-of-charge access to local newspaper-new ideas about social programs

-the older members act exclusionary-community divided by age

Iuliu ManiuFoundation

-respected name-organizes cultural events-experienced speaker

-old generation-no high-tech communication- lack of dynamism

-contacts among more established, wealthier Romanians- free-of-charge access to local newspaper -no younger generation

Romanian Business Professional Association (RBPA)

-young and educated-cluster in finance and IT-well paid-fluent English and socially integrated

-lack of space or amenities-no “church goers” (lack of contact with much of community life)

-can lobby-e-mail and Yahoo group forum-contacts around the world

-busy members (long working hours)-weak entrepreneurial tendencies-high rate of return to Romania-tend to stay apart from the rest of community

writers &artists -have their own publication

-no formal, recognized organization

-communication with American public

New York RomanianCultural Institute (NYRCI)

-large e-mail list (over 3000 names)-space for small concerts and events

-new in New York-bureaucratic-priority for artists from Romania

-communication with non-Romanian public-access to newspaper and TV-leverage from Romanian institutions and gov’t agencies

-bureaucracy slows down the projects (needs approval from Romania)-it is an institution and not a network

St. Mary church in Elmhurst

-community space available and underused-open for inter-church activities

-small community-scandals & conflicts-no e-mail list

-share space for small community events- free-of-charge access to local newspaper

-not an easy commute to church

other professional networks

-contact with churches (usually with more than one church) -many undocumented

- link between different churches-tendency for entrepreneurship or self employment

-difficult to formalize the networks

Lumina Lina club andmagazine

-active in Queens-popular culture-services for community (ESL classes)-owns publication

-lack of space and capacity-limited to Christian Orthodox orientation -practice of some dangerous informal activities (at least rumor)

- popular among young immigrants

peripheral churches

-gathers pockets of Romanian population -highly politicized

-present in peripheral8 clusters of Romanians -exclusionary members

Source: Author’s observation and interviews

8 Considering Sunnyside the center of the Romanian community, periphery means Manhattan, Astoria, Greenpoint, Middle Village, Forest Hills, Rego Park, Corona and Brooklyn.

53

Social capital

The myriad of communication problems within the Romanian community due to

fragmentation render the communication outside the ethnic group even more problematic.

While strong in terms of networks, the community is affected by the lack of coherent

organization and knowledge about resources and development potential in terms of

capacity building. As Putnam (1995) suggests, density of associational life, understood as

individuals’ participation in collective activities, determines the formation of social

capital. Ethnics’ main characteristic is membership to networks. As a premise for

collective action to achieve a common good, the network membership needs to be

developed into social capital.

Networks, as carriers and preservers of human capital in the absence of

institutional public providers, and community organizations and groups, especially

churches built on one or multiple networks, remain the only consistent vehicles of

communication among ethnics. Romanian-language newspapers have a transient fate, and

the quality of information is not always something one can strive for. They compete for

the same small reader market and are vulnerable to the political whims from back home.

NY Magazin, one of the two existing New York newspapers in Romanian, is somehow an

exception in longevity and independence, but is far from being ubiquitous inside the

community.

The informal networks, in the absence of owned space, have their regular

meetings (a necessary condition for their social existence and reproduction) either in

conjunction with other regular events (e.g. church sermons, cultural and sport events) or

independent (e.g. RBPA’s first Tuesday of the month meetings, IMF biannual events).

54

The human capital these networks carry behind their modest appearance is confined to

minimal manifestation, but is by no means less instrumental in covering the immigrant

newcomers’ needs.

Table 2 shows how often strong ties of mutual affective support add to the weak

ties, instrumental in providing information on services, jobs and housing, to create and

sustain the networks. Space ownership is not directly correlated to the existence of strong

and weak ties.

Table 2. Romanian community in New York: strong ties – weak ties

Group Strong ties Weak ties Space

St. Nicholas church (Sunnyside) yes yes Owned, but insufficient

Iuliu ManiuFoundation no yes

Rent, 3-4 times per year for public eventsUses church’s social room for council gatherings

RBPA yes yes Once per month gatherings in informal spaces

writers &artists yes yes NoRomanianCultural Center no yes Uses Consulate’s space

St. Mary church (Elmhurst) yes yes Owns large social room

other professions no yes NoLumina Lina literary club andmagazine yes yes

Regular meetings in off-hours Romanian restaurants and public libraries

peripheral churches yes yes Some of them own space

Source: Author’s observation and interviews

Community initiatives

Romanian Information and Referral Center (RIRC) in Sunnyside, Queens,

founded in 1995, offers ESL, computer literacy and resume writing classes to all

immigrants. It is founded with grants from the New York Foundation and two city

agencies. Although it advertises its openness to other ethnicities, the organization makes

55

itself known mostly inside the Romanian community through ads in the Romanian

language newspapers, fliers in churches, restaurants and the consulate.

A more promising initiative comes from the church in Sunnyside: the

announcement of the initiation of a project to build a community center was well received

and raised the interest of church members. The Romanian Orthodox Church recognized

the needs of a growing New York community and is adding one more level to the

organizational structure by changing the New York region from eparchy to episcopate.

The change officially took place in July this year. This change exposes the need for more

space and more diversified activities.

Fundraising activities are conducted by RBPA members affiliated with charitable

organizations, with the participation of large numbers of other RBPA members.

Fundraising objectives that commonly make Romanians coalesce are usually related to

problems in Romania, such as sponsorship for orphanages or grants for communities

affected by flooding.

Needs and problems of the community

Space is the most stringent need for almost all organizations and networks that

foster community participation. Among churches, two out of six rent space from

congregations of a different rite, while one is too small to host more community

initiatives and at times is overcrowded during the sermons. Cultural events organized by

NYRCI take place in rented space in colleges, theaters and concert halls.

New community initiatives such as day-care, professional organizations, and

cultural events, do not enjoy support from more established organizations because of the

same problem: lack of space.

56

Virtual networks like RBPA are not hindered by lack of physical space, but the

availability of formal space will probably lead to intensified activities.

Communication between various networks and organizations is weak. There

is no umbrella organization created in the spirit of inter-network communication, and no

organization or institution, with the exception of the consulate and NYRCI, is assuming

this role of linkage even nominally. The Romanian consulate in New York, as an

extension of the bureaucratic system from Bucharest, has a cumbersome and almost

irrational functioning that repels the trust of the population. NYRCI is less burlesque, but

remains the voice of the governmental counterpart from Bucharest. Its one-way approach

of promoting the Romanian culture has little to do with the local reality, less with the

community in Queens.

Informal networks’ communication is efficient, many times high-tech (cell

phones, e-mail, websites, internet forums etc.) and are fit for the type of activities in

which the groups are involved. Truck and cab drivers need instant, 24-hour

communication, therefore they best communicate best with cell phones; RBPA uses e-

mail groups and forum talks. NYRCI uses e-mail lists and newspaper ads. Some churches

have e-mail lists and websites, while others communicate with the parishioners

exclusively through low-tech methods: through spoken word or billboard notes. Also,

IMF uses a mailing list and newspaper ads.

Usually information circulates only inside one network or in a limited number of

networks. An example of network isolation is the Sunnyside church’s unsuccessful

attempt to raise funds for a general cause. A $50,000 pledge from the Romanian

community would have leveraged a $5 million grant from USAID for orphaned children

57

in Romania (interview with I. C. Tunaru, June 5, 2005). This case illustrates the church’s

limited means of communication with Romanian ethnics outside the eparchy.

Network communication is instrumental in strengthening associational networks

and mobilizing participation. Successful community capacity building relies on the

cumulative efforts of community actors to exert their influence on public policy, and of

organizations to connect to opportunity and resources in order to produce certain public

goods. Inter-network and inter-organizational communication plays a pivotal role in this

process, not as a focus of a community building project, but as an iterative process of

community involvement (Chaskin, 2001).

Communication between the Romanian community and the neighborhood is not

facilitated by any existing organization inside the community. RIRC is the only

organization that tackles issues not exclusively Romanian, but has a citywide and

statewide civil rights orientation. It has little capacity to address problems rising on a

local level (Meiklejohn et al., 2006).

Relationship of the Romanian community to local organizations

Social services

New-comer immigrants of any ethnicity simply have no idea they are entitled to

social services. As iterated by Meiklejohn’s study, they do not know how to navigate the

information and the bureaucratic system. Social services that offer childcare, educational,

youth and job training programs, and health programs could substantially improve the

prosperity of the young working population by increasing their chances for better

employment.

58

City agencies providing social services, in turn, would benefit from better

information about new immigrants’ needs. The gentrification reflected in the 2000 census

data underreported service needs among immigrants. As a result, there were cuts in youth

programs in the past years, despite a visible scarcity of recreational, sports and after-

school options (Meiklejohn et al., 2006). Young children in families of immigrants need

extended-hours programs because their parents frequently have long-hours jobs.

Two main providers, Sunnyside Community Services (SCS) and YMCA, are open

to any ethnic community members (SCS website, 2006).

Meiklejohn’s study points to the specific problems of immigrants in Sunnyside.

The repeated encounters with Romanian interviewees suggest that the Romanian

community is not an exception to the general situation. Among these problems, the ones

regarding educational and healthcare services are salient.

There are not enough educational services for the newly-arrived, either young or

adult immigrants, such as ESL classes, American cultural norms learning programs, and

banking and loan processes learning sessions for both individuals and small business

owners. Job training programs are made unavailable to immigrants by the Bush

administration’s new requirements for social security cards.

Healthcare services are considered unsatisfactory by many Sunnyside residents.

There isn’t any hospital in the neighborhood. In case of emergencies, the residents are

served by hospitals in Astoria, Elmhurst and Manhattan (Meiklejohn, 2006).

Local religious communities

Cross-ethnic communication between the Romanian congregation and

congregations of other ethnicities and denominations is proved viable by a few attempts

59

of mutual help. One involves a solution for the ever present space problem of the

Romanian church in Sunnyside: St. Raphael’s church donated the space for a fund-raising

concert (interview with I. C. Tunaru, March1, 2006).

Immigrant rights groups

There are many immigrant rights organizations focused on city- and state-wide

issues, targeting specific ethnic groups – the Latin American Integration Center,

Romanian Information and Referral Center (RIRC), Nodutdol, Emerald Isle Immigration

Center etc. RIRC is not well known among those interviewed for this study. The few

people who heard of the organization are not familiar with the services provided.

Public schools in Sunnyside are ethnic-diverse and integrated, reflecting the

mosaic composition of the neighborhood’s demographics.

Public open space is very scarce (0.11 acres / 1,000 residents) (Meiklejohn et al.,

2006). Ethnic manifestations for this reason are limited to the use of occasional street

fairs in Sunnyside Plaza and on Greenpoint Avenue, where the Romanians have a weak

presence so far. In combination with the lack of community space in the Romanian

community, the scarcity of green space becomes a real obstacle for event organizing.

Planning entities and partnerships

LaGuardia Community College (LCC) has shown constant interest in community

development in immigrant neighborhoods in Queens. LCC and Sunnyside Chamber of

Commerce have developed internship programs for Business Administration students.

Also, the Hunter College Urban Planning program has conducted a comprehensive

planning study for this neighborhood, that further enables ethnic communities to establish

guidelines for their own community capacity building plans.

60

Sunnyside Community Services is instrumental in applying for grants for the

rental of school building space on behalf of local groups. For the green space problem,

the Trust for Public Land City Spaces Playground Program is willing to partner with local

groups to renovate school playgrounds (Meiklejohn et al., 2006).

The community board in Queens Community District 2 that includes Sunnyside

could be very active in community building initiatives. For now it includes just a few

foreign-born members, and it does not include a wide variety of ethnicities (Meiklejohn

et al., 2006).

Most of the ethnic businesses are not included in the Chamber of Commerce and

do not take advantage of the benefits offered by the Small Business Services

Administration. This is a generalized situation in a lot of immigrant neighborhoods in the

boroughs (Hum, 2005). Reasons for the weak participation in local associations are still

to be investigated. Better information on why businesses do not create street associations

and do not take advantage of the incentives offered by the City’s Small Business Services

is necessary for assessing immigrant business owners’ needs and for including them in

local development efforts.

Greenpoint Avenue displays stores serving the wide variety of ethnicities in Sunnyside.

III. RECOMMENDATIONS

61

Overview

The Romanian foreign-born population in New York is growing at a relatively

constant pace of 300 newcomers a year, with Queens absorbing the biggest share, of over

60 percent. Clusters of Romanians are found all around the city, but the entrepreneurial

level from Sunnyside, Queens is not equaled by any other neighborhood. The most

plausible explanation for this distribution of population and businesses is that Sunnyside

functions as a center that captures the buying power of areas of concentration distributed

around the neighborhood. Considering that we find Romanian concentrations in other

neighborhoods in Queens, as well as at larger distances in south Brooklyn and the Bronx,

the activities in Sunnyside can accordingly be divided between seven-day and weekend

activities. Seven-day businesses serve the population living in North West Queens, while

the weekend activities bring people from distant places to the religious services as well as

the restaurants and clubs in the neighborhood.

It is interesting to find out from the report done by Meicklejohn and Hunter

College students, “Creating Community in Sunnyside” (2006), that not only the

Romanian community from Sunnyside has an increased community life participation on

the weekends, but also the neighborhood as a whole. It is possible that the unique

combination of advantages of this neighborhood – small immigrant groups, a central

location in North West Queens and an easy commute to Manhattan – induced in other

ethnic groups a similar radial geographic distribution and also a concentration of their

businesses, services and organizations in Sunnyside, which serve other neighborhoods.

But in the absence of a population-based study evidencing the true relationship of

62

Sunnyside with other immigrant neighborhoods in Queens, what the Romanians’ case

illustrates is that a larger population than the one living in Sunnyside would benefit from

immigrant services and an enhanced immigrant small business environment in

Sunnyside; also, Romanians from outside the neighborhood contribute to the

community’s economy through their buying power and business and employment

relations.

Considering Sunnyside the epicenter of Romanian community in New York, a

comprehensive plan for community development needs to take into consideration the

community profile – Romanians’ demographics, distribution, employment and

entrepreneurship, needs and opportunities – as well as Sunnyside’s development

guidelines traced by the recent study done by Hunter College.

Likely impact on the Romanian community of the strategies proposed in “Creating

Community in Sunnyside”

The study “Creating Community in Sunnyside” renders the immigrant reality in

the context of a community development plan, and furthers proposals for strengthening

the cooperation of the community’s stakeholders.

The six community planning projects proposed by the Hunter students are school

playground greening, 24/7 schools, involving youth through volunteerism, organizing and

enhancing the retail sector, creating a Neighborhood Services Information Center and

creating an ethnic market (see pp. 16) In this section I discuss the prospective impact of

each of these project on the Romanian community in Sunnyside.

1. The school playground greening renovation project

63

Considering the already mentioned lack of space inside the Romanian

community, open public space, if designed to fit the desired uses, is a good alternative for

organizing more community events, such as movie projections or cultural events during

summers. Cultural events would build on the weekend clientele’s predilection for

recreational activities. Members of the Romanian community with a stake in organizing

these kinds of events (e.g. Lumina Lina club, the owner of the video store carrying

Romanian movies, or artists and singers) can participate with suggestions on how they

would like the green space to be.

2. 24/7 schools: Getting the community together in an already-integrated place

This project can surely attract the Romanian church and Lumina Lina as clients.

Programs such as a Sunday school, Romanian writing and reading classes for kids, and

ESL classes gather people of different ages and backgrounds together, creating links

between networks inside the Romanian community. Another positive effect would be the

establishing of collaborative relations between the church or Lumina Lina and SCS.

3. Involving area youth: creating community through volunteerism creates links outside

the community for the young members as well as for their parents. This is a very

effective way of strengthening inter-ethnic relationships.

4. Organizing and enhancing the retail sector. A joint effort of the Sunnyside Chamber

of Commerce and LaGuardia Community College Business Administration students with

the intent of increasing membership of new and immigrant entrepreneurs to the Chamber

would benefit the Romanian businesses greatly. The Chamber would be a vehicle for the

information needed to open the business to a larger, multiethnic market. It would gather

information on the Romanian merchants’ needs, as well as of other ethnics, in order to

64

develop an economic development plan for the neighborhood integrated into the capacity

building strategies. In turn, a community development plan would inform the business

owners of potential growth strategies and help them develop skills that better match the

external market opportunities.

A community economic development plan needs to set guidelines and establish

bridges for intra-ethnic partnership. Romanian business owners with renewed skills for

tapping into the larger market will further look for opportunities to open new businesses

in other neighborhoods with Romanian concentrations and develop them to capture the

multi-ethnic markets there. Consequently, a Romanian small business development plan

to create sustainable bridges with the outer market and partnerships with local economic

organizations (e.g. the Chamber of Commerce) is made possible at least in theory.

Sunnyside as a center of the Romanian community would have an extra benefit from a

stronger Romanian New York business environment of intensified entrepreneurial

activities.

5. The creation of the Neighborhood Services information Center with resources from

service providers like SCS, LCC and the Chamber, accessible to all immigrants is an

initiative with plenty of direct and indirect immigrant benefits, ranging from improving

job opportunities to access to public services, as more broadly discussed in chapter 2.

6. The creation of an ethnic market is a project that feeds directly into the retail

improvement plan from project number four. The study proposes two kinds of street

events: multi-ethnic fests, celebrating cultural diversity, and theme events, highlighting a

specific nationality or ethnicity on a given day. These markets would give Romanian

vendors an opportunity to build new relationships inside and outside the community.

65

Also, new enterprises can be tested or built here, at a low starting cost. The Romanian

events will bring Romanians from other parts of the city and will make the event

organizers known, thus attracting new members.

The Sunnyside Municipal Parking Field can be used as public open space.Prepared by Hunter College

New proposal: a permanent structure attached to the train underpass which would allow the parking field to remain functional at all times.

Building an organization for the Romanian community

Communication and community outreach

For now, the communication inside the community between different groups is

obstructed by fragmentation. A new organization with a main purpose of incorporating

the membership of different networks and advocating their various needs and problems

will improve communication.

Effective communication inside the community is essential in facilitating

collective action (Chaskin, 2001), from successful fundraising to programs for the youth

or the elderly, to organizing educational programs. A new organization with a manifest

openness for large membership, with the participation of various community leaders

whose stakes are closely linked to the community’s capacity – like business owners,

church and organization leaders – will play the role of liaison within the community. The

66

goal of the organization is to establish relationships of trust and collaboration between

networks, rather than competition and mistrust. One way of building trust is by

disseminating information about local resources.

The new organization will have the role of creating bridges between the

Romanian community and local community organizations and decision making entities in

Sunnyside. The study developed by Hunter College (2006) shows many instances in

which the volunteering of ethnic organizations as a starting point for local development

and organizing is welcome. The new Romanian organization may very well play the role

of a steering force. The professional support invested into it by specialists from planning

schools and local planning organizations interested in organizing a community-wide

coalition will be a valuable acquisition for the community, while the neighborhood will

benefit from an increased Romanian participation to induce involvement of other ethnic

groups.

Mission

The organization’s mission should be to create a cohesive Romanian community

in New York, where the talent of the individuals, the assets of the community and the

values of the host society are integrated to produce a better life for everybody.

The organization will develop two kinds of plans: a long term plan, or a strategic

plan, based on the recognition of community assets and resources, as well as needs, and

an action-oriented plan, based on short-term objectives, insisting on community

participation in planning and implementing development activities.

Although the Romanian community is young, certain patterns of development are

already visible, making it possible to project population size and distribution, consumer

67

patterns, and use of community services and space. Immigration data is available from

decennial censuses and CIS annual records. Depending on the length of the community

project, population projections could use spans of less than ten years for short-term plans,

while longer-term plans can use census data as a basis of analysis and planning.

The new coalition, as any other organization, is an entity defined by its own life

cycle. The formation stage demands the rational use of the existing resources and the

problematic situations whose solutions involve the participation of multiple stakeholders

(Chaskin, 2001). While short-term projects support the first stage of development of the

new organization by introducing stakeholders to each other and making their needs

acknowledged, the long-term plan provides continuity between the formation and the

consolidation stage.

It is essential to establish the stakeholders, the actors and the types of actions

pertaining to each of these two types of projects, and to envision strategies of

collaboration and project implementation. Following is a list of suggested long-term

strategic plans and short-term action oriented projects.

Long-term goals and objectives

Thirty percent of the Romanians who enter the US come through New York City.

Romanians need to feel that the location of their first choice, New York City, is a viable

place to spend the rest of their lives. The organization should strive to combine

newcomers’ need for orientation and support, established Romanian New Yorkers’ need

for a vibrant community life, and the city’s need for an integrated use of social resources,

into a holistic vision.

68

This endeavor of life improvement and social development can be accomplished

by means of building bridges on three levels:

Communication:

- Between organization and community members

- Between segments of the community

- Between the Romanians and the rest of the NY society

Socio-cultural and educational:

- With public services

- Through cultural events, education programs

- By disseminating information

Consolidating inter-organizational cooperation

- Between the Romanian Community and other ethnic groups

- With CBOs and LDCs in neighborhoods with Romanian concentrations

- With city agencies

Stakeholders

Stakeholders to be invited to take part into organization are:

community leaders: leaders of organizations and networks; priests and board

members of churches from all denominations

business owners

community institutions and ethnic organizations: the Romanian Information and

Referral Center (pp.54), the Romanian Cultural Institute in New York (pp.55)

newspapers, the Romanian TV channel

members willing to volunteer time

69

Stakeholder Roles

Stakeholder #1: Romanian Orthodox Church

The Romanian Orthodox church is the oldest community establishment and

obviously has a constant interest in keeping the community together. It is representative

for a large number of Romanians since the last census in Romania counts 87 percent

Orthodox Christians. As mentioned in the second chapter, the church as an institution has

been divided by historic conflicts and grew divided over the past four decades, though in

the past few years, there were attempts to reunite the churches under the same

administration, and the churches engaged in common activities, for example fund raising

campaigns. Even divided, the church – providing emotional support as well as the

practical support of supplying information to people in search of jobs or apartments – is a

place where many networks intersect. Also, the churches placed in different

neighborhoods in Queens and Manhattan are able to strengthen the links between

Romanian groups within these neighborhoods by playing the role of community centers.

For these reasons and because these churches frequently have free access to newspapers

and other media, they are best equipped among community organizations to facilitate

intra-community communication.

Through educational programs provided by neighborhood planning organizations

or planning schools, church leaders and board members can learn about the

administration system and the existence of public programs, and become proficient in

establishing links between their institutions and organizations outside the RC.

By the very nature of its activities and owing to the trust invested in it by the

community members, the Orthodox Church is a major stakeholder in long-term programs

70

because it needs a long-term vision. As such, the initiative of increasing community

capacity through improving communication will have a better chance of success if

initiated by this church, and continued in partnership with other religious institutions,

public service providers and cultural organizations.

Next steps for the Church:

• Extend and update the SWOT analysis of the community organizations and

networks to increase its accuracy. This analysis allows for developing a community

outreach plan.

• Church leaders: use the annual meetings of the episcopate and inter-church

consultation committees to develop a stable community outreach plan

Stakeholder #2: Cultural organizations

An increased cultural life in areas of Romanian concentration (Sunnyside,

Astoria), realized by bringing ethnic artists together, organizing art festivals and events,

cultural exchanges between institutions from here and Romania, would make the

presence of the community felt in this diverse borough and would create links between

the many established arts nonprofits from Queens and the Romanian artists. New

initiatives like the arts festival from Jackson Heights coordinated by New Immigrant

Community Empowerment are good starting points.

The Romanian Cultural Institute in New York

The Romanian Cultural Institute in New York (RCINY) needs to connect better

with arts foundations and organizations in Queens

The philosophy of RCINY is that the Romanian culture has cumulated artistic

values that do not find ways to make themselves known internationally because in

71

Romania they lack the exposure of an international culture. By exporting talent the

Romanian government understands the need to create a marketing infrastructure through

strengthening inter-institutional and inter-organizational links. Therefore the market they

are prone to tap into is the one that traditionally guarantees success – from Broadway

theatres to large art galleries and concert halls, to established cultural organizations in

New York.

It would be to the advantage of RCINY to give pure international cultural

exchange programs a community orientation by searching for a Romanian audience for

their art features. By developing a relationship with a steady audience the organization

can secure minimal revenue for the expenses supported by the Romanian government.

This revenue can consolidate into a fund for acquiring owned space.

To develop such a relationship the institute must have basic information about

where the Romanians live, what kind of tastes and consumer patterns they have, and

subsequently include this information into the institute’s cultural strategy. As a possible

start, Queens could host a second representation of a recent play with a social theme

inspired from the life of immigrants in this borough, written by a Romanian playwright

and played by actors from an experimental off-Broadway theatre9. Even if Queens is not

a prime location for art and theatre shows, current initiatives of bringing art events in the

borough, like the aforementioned 7 International Arts Express in Jackson Heights10,

would be able to create the necessary bridges for ethnic artists.

RCINY can use the help of other international cultural program organizations for

prospecting a real market for its arts events in Queens; events organized in partnership

9 Saviana Stanescu’s “Lenin’s Shoe” was played at Larkin Theatre in October 2005.10 http://www.seveninternationalartsexpress.org/

72

with Queens arts initiatives like the one in Jackson Heights can spark other initiatives.

The new organization could play the instrumental role of providing RCINY with

information about art events and initiatives in Queens and other boroughs.

Stakeholder #3: Community organizations, such as the Romanian Information and

Referral Center (RIRC)

The New Romanian organization can serve as a partner with RIRC and other

ethnic organizations to lobby for more adequate youth and after-school programs. The

Romanian organization can volunteer for the role of identifying and creating alliances

with other ethnic groups under the guidance of SCS, YMCA, churches with social

programs and activities, or other CBOs. The new organization can communicate through

existing networks or create an alternate technique (e.g. a website, marketing) to advertise

events.

Ways to engage the stakeholders

The long-term plans proposed generally require an important change in policy for

each actor involved or a substantial extension of their activities into an almost unknown

field. Besides the serious increase of the expenses, this also necessitates better

information about existing planning practices. The monetary problem can be addressed

by the new organization by searching for the availability of funds (grants, advantageous

loans) from foundations that traditionally sponsor community activities and from

government agencies. The informational basis can be supplied by experienced planners of

existing private and public agencies, and also by providing planning education to ethnic

leaders and stakeholders through free educational programs at convenient hours11.

11 This idea was previously proposed by Suzanne Singh (2003) in her study “Neighborhood Strengthening through Community Building.”

73

Any of the churches can facilitate annual (or multi-annual) meetings with

community organizations to discuss a long-term agenda:

- Needs and resources for educational programs and cultural events involving the

Romanian consulate and public agencies

- Ways to disseminate information on public services using the community

outreach plan already mentioned

The groups and organizations would act in a different manner inside this

coalition, according to their goals, visions and existing organizational structure. RCINY

is a young organization sharing the dynamic visions of the new and ambitious

administration from Bucharest. It aims at an elite public, but it lacks a community

orientation in a larger sense. Moreover, the bureaucratic approach that requires approval

from Bucharest for every new initiative hinders the development of projects crafted on

the local reality.

RIRC’s activity is to some degree conditioned by the visions of its sponsors, and

the organization has relatively small impact inside the community. Its autonomy from

public structures and its location in Sunnyside, though, should be considered advantages

for the community.

The Orthodox Church is the oldest institution and has direct contact with the

community. It has a democratic organization in which church members are invited to

share their personal opinions in public meetings. Although the church’s administration is

divided and often the social networks inside one church act independently (e.g. groups

are divided by age or income12), it is still the single biggest stakeholder inside the

community.

12 Author’s personal observations and interviews.

74

Short-term activities agenda for the new organization

1. Coordinate use of public schools built space on behalf of church, cultural and

community groups

The availability of the public schools space to the Romanian church, the poetry

club or artists from Romania touring in Queens can easily increase the participation rate

to these organizations and stimulate new initiatives. Thus existing and new organizations

would increase their membership base until they reach a certain level of development and

can acquire a space of their own.

Next steps for the new organization:

- gather information from SCS and YMCA on grant application procedures

- inform community members and artists of the availability of space

2. Get involved in the design for school playgrounds to incorporate functions for cultural

events

During summers, the outdoor space is proper for ethnic manifestations, from

concerts to movie projections and theatrical representations. These manifestations have a

certain ‘openness’ by not limiting the participation to the Romanians and allowing the

curious neighbors to participate. Therefore open spaces that are fit for this type of

activities have an integrative role in the neighborhood for all ethnic groups.

Next step for the new organization:

- research the existing organizations’ need for space according to their types of

activities.

3. Maximize the FAR for the existing church site to create more community space

75

The church on 48th Street presently uses only a 0.7 floor area ratio (1762sf), but

the allowed buildable area is 3125 square feet (1.25 FAR). If built to the maximum

allowed limit, the church can add a naturally ventilated basement (2500 square feet) and

two extra floors of approximately 700 square feet each. This building can include,

besides sermon space, a generous community and activity space, two offices and an

apartment. With a lot of effort from the congregation and other Romanians, and a real

estate project that takes into consideration revenues from event rentals, the investment

can be made feasible. Thus, the solution for the church’s need for space has the potential

to become a community-wide project that would coalesce many stakeholders.

4. Facilitate a relationship between RCINY-SCS and RIRC-SCS for grants for renting

school space

RCINY and RIRC do not have a community orientation for now. They both have

a unilateral view. RCINY’s institutional approach and RIRC’s federal and citywide

programs orientation can extend and diversify to incorporate the community planning

component. Even if this is a drastic change in policy requiring supplemental funding, it

would be for the benefit of these two organizations to build a lasting relationship with

community members through direct contact with them. The expenses involved will be

paid off over a long span of time by securing an audience for RCINY’s events and a

target group easier to reach for RIRC.

5. Develop inter-church alliances around use of space and cultural events

Churches have the potential to create alliances outside the community by seeking

solutions for general problems (space for events, improving street parking). The

76

Romanian church in Sunnyside can initiate a contact list of churches willing to participate

in the 24/7 schools project.

6. Sponsor Public education programs for immigrants

– Career development

– Entrepreneurship

– Public programs for immigrants

The role of the proposed ethnic organization in these kinds of programs is to

extend the communication capacity of the immigrant group by means of connecting the

community members with the neighborhood’s new initiatives. The community outreach

plan developed with the help of the churches will be an indispensable tool for

establishing this connection.

The new coalition of stakeholders can begin to build the organization around

either one of the projects proposed here. The arts and ethnic initiatives involve RCINY,

the literary club or the churches as main actors. The creation of community space is a

project that interests the church in Sunnyside, Queens more than any other organization at

the present moment. The informational and educational programs would potentially

involve the churches and RIRC equally.

Further studies

Sunnyside’s privileged position on the map of immigrant Queens might prove to

be an exceptional asset with important economic and civic development potential. The

notable diversity of ethnic businesses is inter-related with the distribution of new-comer

immigrants in the city. The businesses and ethnic organizations and institutions play an

important role in forming relationships and networks inside the ethnic community.

77

Signals that not only the Romanian community is so distributed in the geography

of the borough are present in Meiklejohn’s (2006) study. The Armenian and Turkish

communities form enclaves in Sunnyside13, despite their relatively low numbers in the

city. A hypothesis to be tested by future studies is the potential of better information

dissemination, education and civic programs, as an economic growth motor of Sunnyside.

As discussed in Chapter 2, basic employment information and education about

how the administrative system works will give immigrants a better chance of

employment and will encourage entrepreneurial initiatives. Improving the local labor

force and the neighborhood’s business environment can boost local economic

development. The main problem of such informational initiatives, the community

outreach, can be solved by the creation of the Neighborhood Services Information Center

proposed by Meicklejohn’s study (2006) and by encouraging the development of ethnic

organizations of the type proposed by this paper.

Another hypothesis is that Sunnyside can develop recreational and arts functions

to feed into its intensified weekend life. The existing restaurants and churches are

important magnets of ethnic population from outside the neighborhood. The ethnic

manifestations like street fairs, festivals and cultural events can bring important revenue

to the local economy while sustaining inter-ethnic bridges in the community.

Also, the study of the Romanian community should not stop at the borders of

Sunnyside. A very interesting segment of the community is located in Ridgewood, and a

community of lesser known concentrations will probably start to be visible in Brooklyn,

more precisely in Bensonhurst and Sheepshead Bay. These neighborhoods do not present

13 “Creating Community in Sunnyside”, pp 31.

78

the same combination of advantages Sunnyside has, but nonetheless the concentrations of

population are an attractive feature for new Romanian businesses.

Hunter College and LaGuardia Community College specialists could include in

their future studies the goal of clarifying Sunnyside’s relationship with other

neighborhoods from the point of view of immigrant population’s and ethnic businesses’

geographic distribution.

Conclusions

The recent comprehensive plan of Sunnyside (Meicklejohn, 2006) allows the

development of comprehensive plans for ethnic communities inhabiting the

neighborhood. Not only does it establish guidelines for them, but it also – through the key

recommendation of creating a stronger neighborhood through promoting projects with a

large participation – requires further deepening of the study to the level of each individual

group.

A comprehensive plan for the Romanian community in New York has a strong

foothold in the mentioned study due to the distribution of the population and ethnic

businesses and organizations citywide that renders Sunnyside a key location. Also, the

size of the Romanian community and other group’s characteristics – like unemployment

rates, entrepreneurship and participation in public programs – make the Romanian

community one of the many ethnic groups with equal opportunities for community

79

participation in Sunnyside. This “common” profile is an advantage for creating alliances

outside the Romanian community because it confers it the power of a prototype,

attracting the attention to commonalities, rather than differences.

The comprehensive study of the Romanian community evidences the need for a

population-based planning research, to highlight the role of the Sunnyside neighborhood

in immigrant Queens. This type of research will take into consideration the development

potential brought by the strong ethnic networks whose interests intersect in the

neighborhood. It will also help the implementation of the proposed policies in two ways.

First, it will establish typologies of ethnic groups according to their settlement

patterns, and levels of entrepreneurship and organization. Grouping ethnic communities

by similarities facilitates the creation of alliances and coalitions. Ethnic groups with

similar geographic distribution with Sunnyside as the center of their community life can

and should be encouraged to create organizations that nominally have wide membership

and are strategically oriented toward establishing relationships outside the community.

Second, the study will allow ethnic groups to better organize themselves and

increase their own community capacity. The technical and informational support of

existing community organizations and public agencies can help communities become

self-supporting and make use of their internal capacities in a sustainable way. Human

capital can be increased by preparing the newcomers to become proficient in navigating

the administrative system, in job hunting or familiarizing themselves with their

professional field. It is also important for the communities to be aware of the possibility

of redirecting the money spent on rent for purchasing space that hosts community and

recreational events, and the accessibility of public funds to supplement their resources. In

80

addition, an improved relationship between ethnic businesses and local economic

corporations can produce development of ethnic groups’ economic assets.

Inside the Romanian community, a better internal organization necessitates a new

community coalition of stakeholders and community members to assume an advocating

role for the many needs of newcomer immigrants. The new organization will create better

links inside and outside the Romanian community and will facilitate the planning and

implementation of community projects.

Source: Creating Community in Sunnyside

81

REFERENCES

Carter, S. B. & Sutch, R. (1999). “Historical Perspectives on the Economic Consequences

of Immigration into the United States.” The Handbook of International

Migration: The American Experience. Hirschman, Charles, Kasinitz, Philip and

De Wind, Josh, eds. New York: Russell Sage Foundation. 319-341.

Center for an Urban Future (2003, September). Back to the Future. Retrieved January 28,

2006, from http://www.nycfuture.org

Center for an Urban Future (2003, September). Beyond the Boroughs. Retrieved January

28, 2006, from http://www.nycfuture.org

Center for an Urban Future (2003, September). If They Can Make it Here... Retrieved

January 28, 2006, from http://www.nycfuture.org

Chaskin, Robert. “Building Community Capacity. A Definition Framework and Case

Studies from a Comprehensive Community Initiative.” Urban Affairs Review, v.

36 (Jan. 2001). 291-323.

Cordero-Guzman, Hector, Smith, Robert C. and Grosfoguel, Ramon. Migration,

Transnationalization and Race in a Changing New York. Philadelphia: Temple

University Press, 2001.

Daniels, Rogers. Coming to America. A History of Immigration and Ethnicity in

American Life. Princeton: Perrenial, 2002.

Earnest, David C. (November 7, 2003). “Voting Rights for Resident Aliens. A

Comparison of 25 Democracies.” International Studies Association Northeast.

Retrieved December 2005, from http://www.odu.edu/~dearnest

82

Fisher, F. (n.d.) Building Bridges between Citizens and Local Governments to Work More

Effectively Together through Participatory Planning. Retrieved February 16,

2006, from http://www.gdrc.org/decision/BuildingBridges.pdf

Foner, Nancy. From Elis Island to JFK. New York’s Two Great Waves of Immigration.

New Haven: Yale University Press, 2000.

Friedberg, Rachel M. and Hunt Jeniffer. 1999. “Immigration and the Receiving

Economy.” The Handbook of International Migration: The American Experience.

Hirschman, Charles, Kasinitz, Philip and De Wind, Josh, eds. New York: Russell

Sage Foundation. 342-360.

Green, Gary Paul and Haines, Anna. Asset Building and Community Development.

Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications, 2002.

Griffith, M.W. (2005, September) Campaign 2005: Real Estate Boom; Corporate

Developments; Immigrant Entrepreneurs. Retrieved November 2005, from

http://www.gothamgazette.com/article/communitydevelopment/20050921/20/158

3

Hayduk, Ronald. “Democracy for All: Restoring Immigrant Voting Rights in the US.”

New Political Science, v. 26 (December 2004).

Hum, Tarry, 2002. Redistricting and the New Demographics: Defining “Communities of

Interest” in New York City. A/P/A Studies Working Paper. Retrieved November

2005, from http://www.apa.nyu.edu/coi/

Hum, Tarry, 2001. Immigrant Economies and Neighborhood Revitalization: A Case

Study of Sunset Park, Brooklyn.

http://www.newschool.edu/icmec/lucepaper5.html

83

Kligman, Gail. “Trafficking Women after Socialism: from, to and through Eastern

Europe”. Social Politics: International Studies in Gender, State and Society, v. 12

(Spring 2005). 118-140.

Portes, Alexandro. “Globalization from Bellow: the Rise of Transnational Communities.”

Latin America in the World Economy. W.P. Smith and R.P. Korczenwicz:

Westport, CN: Greenwood Press, 1996, pp. 151-168.

Putnam, Robert. “Bowling Alone: America's Declining Social Capital.” Journal of

Democracy. v. 6 (Jan 1995). 65-78.

Raskin, Jamin B. “Legal Aliens, Local Citizens: The Historical, Constitutional, and

Theoretical Meanings of Alien Suffrage.” University of Pennsylvania Law

Review, v. 141 (April 1993), p. 1394.

Sandercock, Leonie. Cosmopolis II. Mongrel Cities of the 21st Century. New York:

Continuum, 2003.

Sassen, Saskia. 1989. “New York City’s Informal Economy.” The Informal Economy.

Studies in Advanced and Less Developed Countries. Castels, Manuel and Portes,

Alexandro, eds. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press. 60-77.

Sassen, Saskia. The Global City. New York, London, Tokio. Princeton: Princeton

University Press, 2001.

Singh, Suzanne M (2003). Neighborhood Strengthening through Community Building.

Retrieved February 16, 2006, from

http://comm-org.wisc.edu/papers2003/singh.htm

Tactaquin, Catherine, 2004. “Voting Rights for Immigrants.” Poverty and Race, v.13

(Nov.-Dec. 2004). 5-7.

84

Waldinger, Roger and Lichter, Michael I. How the other Half Works. Immigration and

the Social Organization of Labor. Berkeley: University of California Press, 2003.

Waldinger, Roger and Perlmann, Joel. 1999. “Immigrants, Past and Present: A

Reconsideration.” The Handbook of International Migration: The American

Experience. Hirschman, Charles, Kasinitz, Philip and De Wind, Josh, eds. New

York: Russell Sage Foundation. 223-238.

Wucker, Michele. “The Perpetual Migration Machine and Political Power.” World Policy

Journal (Fall 2004). 41-49.

85

APPENDIX

R o m a n ia n s a d m it t e d b y a g e : f is c a l y e a r 2 0 0 4U n d e r 1 5

3 %

1 5 t o 1 9 3 %

2 0 t o 2 4 1 3 %

2 5 t o 3 4 3 0 %

3 5 t o 4 4 1 6 %

4 5 t o 6 4 2 5 %

6 5 +1 0 %

Source: INS Yearbook 2000 data

R o m a n i a n s b e c o m i n g l e g a l p e r m a n e n t r e s i d e n t s d u r i n g f i s c a l y e a r 2 0 0 4 ( 4 , 5 5 7 v i s a s )

U n d e r 1 8 y e a r s1 2 %

1 8 - 2 4 y e a r s1 2 %

2 5 - 3 4 y e a r s3 7 %

3 5 - 4 4 y e a r s1 8 %

4 5 - 5 4 y e a r s1 0 %

5 5 - 6 4 y e a r s6 %

6 5 y e a r s a n d o v e r5 %

Source: INS data

86

W o o d s i d e - S u n n y s i d e p o p u l a t i o n 2 0 0 0

E t h n ic g r o u p s 1 , 0 0 0 - 7 , 0 0 0

3 8 %

P e r s o n s b o r n in U S

3 3 %

E t h n ic g r o u p s u n d e r 1 , 0 0 0

2 9 %

Woodside-Sunnyside population, 2000

Total QCB2 population 109,570 100.00%Persons born in US 35,817 32.69%

Foreign-born groups of over 1,000people 41,558 37.93%Person born in Ireland 2,835 2.59%Person born in Romania 1,712 1.56%Person born in China 4,697 4.29%Person born in Bangladesh 3,908 3.57%Person born in India 2,752 2.51%Person born in Philippines 3,177 2.90%

Person born in Dominican Republic 2,652 2.42%Person born in Mexico 4,573 4.17%Person born in Colombia 6,184 5.64%Person born in Ecuador 7,305 6.67%Person born in Peru 1,763 1.61%

Source: US Census 2000 data

87

R i d g e w o o d - M a s p e t h p o p u l a t i o n 2 0 0 0

E t h n ic g r o u p s 1 , 0 0 0 - 8 , 0 0 0

2 3 %

E t h n ic g r o u p s u n d e r 1 , 0 0 0

2 0 %

P e r s o n s b o r n in U S5 7 %

Ridgewood-Maspeth population, 2000

Total QCB5 population 166,394 100.00%Persons born in US 95,098 57.15%Foreign-born groups of over 1,000people 37,766 22.70%

Person born in Ireland 1,750 1.05%

Person born in Germany 1,616 0.97%Person born in Italy 5,633 3.39%Person born in Poland 7,714 4.64%Person born in Romania 3,536 2.13%

Person born in Yugoslavia 3,947 2.37%Person born in China 3,339 2.01%

Person born in Mexico 1,374 0.83%

Person born in Colombia 2,350 1.41%

Person born in Ecuador 5,461 3.28%Person born in Peru 1,046 0.63%

Source: US Census 2000 data

88

R o m a n ia n s b y b o r o u g h f i r s t a n d s e c o n d a n c e s t r y 2 0 0 0

B r o n x5 %

B r o o k ly n2 2 %

M a n h a t t a n2 4 %

Q u e e n s4 6 %

S t a t e n Is la n d3 %

F ir s t a n c e s t r y R o m a n ia n s b y b o r o u g h 2 0 0 0

B r o n x4 %

B r o o k ly n2 3 %

M a n h a t t a n1 9 %

Q u e e n s5 2 %

S t a t e n Is la n d2 %

S e c o n d a n c e s t r y R o m a n ia n s b y b o r o u g h 2 0 0 0

B r o n x5 %

B r o o k ly n2 0 %

M a n h a t t a n4 4 %

Q u e e n s2 6 %

S t a t e n Is la n d5 %

Source: US census 2000 data

89

Persons reporting first and second ancestry as Romanian (cumulated)

1990-2000

0

5000

10000

15000

20000

25000

30000

35000

40000

45000

New

Yor

kC

ity Bro

nx

Bro

okly

n

Man

hatta

n

Que

ens

Sta

ten

Isla

nd

1990

2000

P e r s o n s r e p o r t i n g f i r s t a n c e s t r y a s R o m a n i a n 1 9 9 0 - 2 0 0 0

0

5 0 0 0

1 0 0 0 0

1 5 0 0 0

2 0 0 0 0

2 5 0 0 0

3 0 0 0 0

New

Yor

kC

ity Bron

x

Broo

klyn

Man

hatta

n

Que

ens

Stat

enIs

land

1 9 9 0

2 0 0 0

P e r s o n s r e p o r t i n g s e c o n d a n c e s t r y a s R o m a n i a n s 1 9 9 0 - 2 0 0 0

0

2 0 0 0

4 0 0 0

6 0 0 0

8 0 0 0

1 0 0 0 0

1 2 0 0 0

1 4 0 0 0

New

York

City Br

onx

Broo

klyn

Man

hatta

n

Que

ens

Stat

enIs

land

1 9 9 0

2 0 0 0

Source: USCensus 2000 data

90