Alaska storm damage so bad many evacuees won’t go home for at least 18 months, governor says

posted in: All news | 0

ANCHORAGE, Alaska — Damage to remote Alaska villages hammered by flooding last weekend is so extreme that many of the more than 2,000 people displaced won’t be able to return to their homes for at least 18 months, Gov. Mike Dunleavy said in a request to the White House for a major disaster declaration.

In one of the hardest hit villages, Kipnuk, an initial assessment showed that 121 or homes — or 90% of the total — have been destroyed, Dunleavy wrote. In Kwigillingok, where three dozen homes floated away, slightly more than one-third of the residences are uninhabitable.

In this photo provided by the Alaska National Guard, Alaska Air National Guard Staff Sgt. Angel Reyes distributes hearing protection to passengers while evacuating Alaskans displaced in the aftermath of Typhoon Halong out of Bethel, Alaska, Wednesday, Oct. 15, 2025. (Alaska National Guard via AP)

The remnants of Typhoon Halong struck the area with the ferocity of a Category 2 hurricane, Dunleavy said, sending a surge of high surf into the low-lying region. One person was killed, two remain missing, and rescue crews plucked dozens of people from their homes as they floated away.

Officials have been scrambling to airlift people from the inundated Alaska Native villages. Hundreds of evacuees have been flown to Anchorage on military transport flights, with additional flights planned Friday and Saturday. Dunleavy said he expects more than 1,500 people to be relocated to major cities in the state.

Related Articles


Iowa superintendent detained by ICE falsely claimed he was a US citizen, indictment says


Indiana University fires student newspaper adviser who refused to block news stories


Trump administration asks Supreme Court to allow deployment of National Guard in Chicago area


Regional banks’ bad loans spark concerns on Wall Street


FEMA staff sound the alarm on disaster preparedness at rally in front of agency headquarters

In this photo provided by Jacqui Lang, volunteers help collect dogs in Kipnuk, Alaska, Wednesday, Oct. 15, 2025, to evacuate to an animal shelter in Bethel, Alaska, as their owners had evacuated. (Jacqui Lang via AP)

Opinion: November’s Ballot Proposals Would Unlock Housing for Older New Yorkers

posted in: All news | 0

“For older New Yorkers, these changes would be transformative. People are living longer than ever before, but our housing policies have not kept up.”

An early evening games of dominoes at Serviam Gardens, an affordable housing complex for seniors in the Bronx. (Adi Talwar)

Older New Yorkers deserve a safe, affordable place to live. Across New York City and State, our member organizations work daily with people living in homes they can no longer maintain—row houses and duplexes that feel impossibly large once children have grown or partners have passed away.

Meanwhile, younger families can’t find an affordable place to live. Someone in Kingsbridge told me recently that they wish they could move into a small apartment nearby to leave their house to a family that needs it, but they couldn’t find anything affordable. These are people who want to downsize, but who are stuck in place because there is nowhere else in their communities for them to go. This story is not unique. It is the story of tens of thousands of older New Yorkers.

The numbers are staggering: over 500,000 older New Yorkers are on the waiting list for affordable housing, with average waits stretching beyond a decade. For many, a decade is longer than they can afford to wait. Behind each number is a person facing the daily uncertainty of where they will live out their later years—whether they can age with dignity, or whether they will spend their final chapter in limbo.

This November, New Yorkers will have the chance to vote on a more stable, affordable future for housing in New York City. On the ballot are several proposals to reform our City Charter (essentially New York City’s constitution) that could accelerate the production of affordable housing. These changes won’t solve every problem overnight. But by voting yes, New York voters are taking an important step that cuts out the red tape that keeps desperately needed housing from being built.

Question 2 would fast track affordable housing. This measure would streamline approvals for publicly financed affordable housing. Right now, even projects with broad community support can spend years winding through a slow and cumbersome land use process. By moving applications through faster channels, this proposal would get homes built more quickly and ensure they are spread across every neighborhood.

Question 3 would speed up small-scale projects. In too many cases, modest housing developments, like small apartment buildings in lower-density neighborhoods, never get off the ground because the costs and delays of the review process are simply too high. This proposal would allow those smaller, much-needed projects to move forward, while still preserving opportunities for community input.

Question 4 would establish a housing appeals board. Too often, affordable housing proposals are sunk by politics. A mayoral veto or a single councilmember’s opposition can stop homes from being built, even when the need is obvious. This measure would create an Affordable Housing Appeals Board to ensure that good projects get a fair shot and aren’t derailed by political maneuvering.

For older New Yorkers, these changes would be transformative. People are living longer than ever before, but our housing policies have not kept up. Our seniors want to remain in their communities—close to friends, neighbors, faith institutions, and the neighborhoods that they call home—but they need affordable, accessible housing options to do so. Without that, they face choices no New Yorker should have to face: remain in unsafe or unmanageable housing, or leave behind the communities that sustain them.

Of course, building more affordable housing also benefits the city as a whole. When an older adult can move into a safe, affordable apartment, a family can move into the larger home they leave behind. That’s how we create a healthier housing pipeline that works across generations. 

Of course, production alone is not enough. We still need targeted investments for older New Yorkers. Despite 20 percent of our city’s residents being over 60, housing funding does not adequately address older New Yorkers’ needs. Programs like the Senior Citizen Rent Increase Exemption (SCRIE) are lifelines that keep older adults in their homes, and LiveOn NY is actively working to maximize the program’s potential to benefit older New Yorkers, but even the best SCRIE programs will always fall short of our demand.

Our city government must continue to work to ensure that our housing budget serves older New Yorkers, and as we rethink our charter, we must also commit to equity in resource allocation.

But here is the truth: none of those supports matter if there are no homes available in the first place. The first and most urgent step is to unlock more affordable housing, faster. Questions 2, 3, and 4 will help us do exactly that.

Our community doesn’t want special favors. New Yorkers want fairness, dignity, and the ability to remain part of the communities we built as we age. We want the security of knowing they will not spend the last decade of their lives on a waiting list. 

This November, I urge every New Yorker to vote yes on Questions 2, 3, and 4. A vote for these proposals is a vote to cut red tape, unlock affordable housing across neighborhoods, and give all of us the dignity of a home that we can count on, today and tomorrow.

Allison Nickerson is the executive director of LiveOn NY, a not for profit focused on senior services and aging in New York City and throughout New York State. 

The post Opinion: November’s Ballot Proposals Would Unlock Housing for Older New Yorkers appeared first on City Limits.

Trump administration asks Supreme Court to allow deployment of National Guard in Chicago area

posted in: All news | 0

By MARK SHERMAN, Associated Press

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Trump administration on Friday asked the Supreme Court to allow the deployment of National Guard troops in the Chicago area, escalating President Donald Trump’s conflict with Democratic governors over using the military on U.S. soil.

Related Articles


Obama, aiming to boost Democrats in New Jersey and Virginia, endorses Sherrill and Spanberger


FEMA staff sound the alarm on disaster preparedness at rally in front of agency headquarters


With no takers yet, White House sets meeting with colleges still weighing an agreement with Trump


New York Republicans suspend Young Republicans group after release of offensive group chat


Trump called Digital Equity Act ‘racist.’ Now internet money for rural Americans is gone

The emergency appeal to the high court came after a judge prevented, for at least two weeks, the deployment of Guard members from Illinois and Texas to assist immigration enforcement. A federal appeals court refused to put the judge’s order on hold.

The conservative-dominated court has handed Trump repeated victories in emergency appeals since he took office in January, after lower courts have ruled against him and often over the objection of the three liberal justices. The court has allowed Trump to ban transgender people from the military, claw back billions of dollars of congressionally approved federal spending, move aggressively against immigrants and fire the presidentially appointed leaders of independent federal agencies,

In the dispute over the Guard, U.S. District Judge April Perry said she found no substantial evidence that a “danger of rebellion” is brewing in Illinois during Trump’s immigration crackdown.

Trump administration asks Supreme Court to allow deployment of National Guard in Chicago area

posted in: All news | 0

By MARK SHERMAN, Associated Press

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Trump administration on Friday asked the Supreme Court to allow the deployment of National Guard troops in the Chicago area, escalating President Donald Trump’s conflict with Democratic governors over using the military on U.S. soil.

Related Articles


Obama, aiming to boost Democrats in New Jersey and Virginia, endorses Sherrill and Spanberger


FEMA staff sound the alarm on disaster preparedness at rally in front of agency headquarters


With no takers yet, White House sets meeting with colleges still weighing an agreement with Trump


New York Republicans suspend Young Republicans group after release of offensive group chat


Trump called Digital Equity Act ‘racist.’ Now internet money for rural Americans is gone

The emergency appeal to the high court came after a judge prevented, for at least two weeks, the deployment of Guard members from Illinois and Texas to assist immigration enforcement. A federal appeals court refused to put the judge’s order on hold.

The conservative-dominated court has handed Trump repeated victories in emergency appeals since he took office in January, after lower courts have ruled against him and often over the objection of the three liberal justices. The court has allowed Trump to ban transgender people from the military, claw back billions of dollars of congressionally approved federal spending, move aggressively against immigrants and fire the presidentially appointed leaders of independent federal agencies,

In the dispute over the Guard, U.S. District Judge April Perry said she found no substantial evidence that a “danger of rebellion” is brewing in Illinois during Trump’s immigration crackdown.