between and among about 15 agencies who have some operational
role in food [and] on cooperation with New York State
and [. . .] similarly situated food policy advisors in cities nationwide.”
[Interviewee 9, City Hall]
An early internal review concluded that ‘‘although most of the
City’s food programs are developed within specific agencies, the
Food Policy Coordinator appears to have been able to promote
coordination between different agency initiatives, reduce programmatic
overlap, improve inter-agency communications, and
ultimately help bring the initiatives to fruition”. (NYC Center for
Economic Opportunity, 2008: 103). One initiative established
1000 permits for Green Carts, mobile food vendors providing fruits
and vegetables to underserved areas (Rules of the City of New
York; DOHMH, 2008b). It encountered unexpectedly harsh opposition
from bodega owners and other businesses. The Food Policy
Coordinator was credited in part with the eventual passage of this
bill, making it ‘‘more palatable to Council members because it was
part of a larger, coherent City food policy” and leveraging ‘‘relationships
with community based organizations [that] were critical in
the development of a coalition of more than 100 organizations that
supported the Green Cart legislation” (NYC Center for Economic
Opportunity, 2008: 6). Conversely, an Obesity Task Force, also convened
by the Food Policy Coordinator, assembled representatives
from across the executive, but not the City Council. Plans outlined
in its 2012 report (NYC Obesity Task Force, 2012) included a range
of activities related to healthy food access, but focused on the sugary
drinks portion cap for which legislative support was lacking. In
addition, there was a preference for executive solutions where legislative
political will could have been leveraged:
‘‘[For] the trans-fat issue and the calorie count, we had Council
members that wanted to pass legislation to do that. [. . .] After
the Board did it, we actually passed legislation to codify
[trans-fats only; a bill proposing alternative nutrition information
provision was introduced], so that if a future mayor wanted
to get rid of it they would have to actually repeal it.”
[Interviewee 6, City Council]
Overall, the perceived dichotomy between, on the one hand,
obesity prevention that was seen as unfairly targeting minority
populations by some and food access on the other hand put the
Bloomberg administration at odds not only with anti-hunger advocates
and minority organizations, but also with the City Council.
Ceding some control over strategic directions and integrating the
two issues through the Food Policy Coordinator helped DOHMH
maximize policy outcomes where political agreement could be
reached.