Daily News Summary
With No Clear Winner on Election Night, Ranked Choice Voting to be Put to the Test in District 31 Special Election
Queens County Politics
Feb. 23, 2021
The city's first true test of ranked-choice voting began to take shape Tuesday, Feb. 23, as results from the special election in City Council District 31 began to trickle in.
Though Selvena Brooks-Powers currently leads the count as of 10 p.m. Tuesday night, as it currently stands, none of the nine candidates in the race – Brooks-Powers, Nancy Martinez, LaToya Benjamin, Latanya Collins, Sherwyn James, Nicole Lee, Pesach Osina, Shawn Rux or Manuel Silva – have secured more than 50 percent of the vote, triggering a ranked-choice voting recount.
Brooks-Powers secured 39.5 percent of the vote, with 93 percent of scanners reported as of 10 p.m. Tuesday night, while Osina is close behind with nearly 33 percent of the vote, according to unofficial results from the city's Board of Elections. Silva is the only other candidate to have received more than 10 percent of the vote (10.1).
The candidate with the fewest votes, which at this time appears to be Lee, will be eliminated and the second round of counting will begin in the coming weeks. The approximately 60 voters who selected Lee as their first choice will see their ballots go to the candidate they marked as their second choice. The new totals will be counted and the process will repeat itself until a candidate surpasses the 50 percent threshold.
"I want to thank all those who voted today and participated in our democracy, and I want to thank all of my supporters who made this possible. I am a daughter of southeast Queens, and the momentum and support for my candidacy has been so empowering," Brooks-Powers said Tuesday night. "While there was substantial confusion about ranked-choice voting, these early results are promising and I look forward to all of the votes being counted. Our community deserves to have a fighter in City Hall to ensure we can recover from this pandemic and finally get our fair share. Today we have completed the campaign for the special election, and now we must move forward, complete the counting and make sure every voice is heard."
During a Zoom party after the polls closed Tuesday night, Brooks-Powers expressed confidence that she would be named the winner of the election.
"I'm so excited at the fact that I am going to be elected into the City Council and I feel humbled, I feel blessed [and] I feel appreciative," she said, adding that she will "wait through this process for all the votes to be counted."
Osina, who finished second in the special election to fill the seat in 2013, when he lost by fewer than 100 votes, again found himself in second place Tuesday night. However, unlike in 2013, Osina could see himself bounce back in the race once the second round of counting is completed.
"We're watching the returns and we feel we've run a great campaign and we await the final results," Osina said in a statement Tuesday night.
The winner of the Feb. 23 special election will unlikely be determined anytime soon, as the city's Board of Elections won't begin the next count until they've received all absentee and military ballots. Only then will the second round of counting begin, a process that will be open to the public to watch.
Though Tuesday's election is not the first in the city's history to utilize the new voting system – that distinction goes to the special election in District 24 – it is the first to go into the second count.
City Councilman James Gennaro received around 60 percent of the vote during the District 24 special election on Feb. 2, negating the need for a second round of counting. The results of the race were certified on Feb. 18 and Gennaro was sworn in to the seat he held from 2001 until 2013 that same day.
Candidates in both Tuesday's election and the Feb. 2 election in District 24, expressed concerns over the extent to which the public has been informed about the new system.
Brooks-Powers noted that she heard the two Queens races referred to as "guinea pigs," a term she found alarming.
"I find that problematic, obviously," Brooks-Powers told QNS before the polls closed Tuesday. "These are races that will impact the day-to-day quality of life of hundreds of thousands of people."
The entire city will utilize ranked-choice voting during the June primary elections, which will feature a large slate of candidates for mayor, comptroller, public advocate and more than 110 candidates for City Council in Queens alone.
Turnout in Tuesday's election was relatively low, with around 7,000 ballots cast in-person and around 1,700 cast early, accounting for around 7 percent of the approximately 102,580 registered voters in the City Council district.
However, voters will get a second and third shot at voting for a council member in the district this year.
The winner of the special election will serve until the end of 2021, when Richards' council term was set to end. A primary election in June – likely to feature many, if not all of the candidates who ran in Tuesday's election – and a general election in November will send a council member to the seat to serve until 2023.
The race for District 31, which covers parts of Arverne, Brookville, Edgemere, Far Rockaway, Laurelton, Rosedale and Springfield Gardens, was first triggered when Richards, who has served the district in the council since 2013, won the special election for Queens borough president.
Mayoral Candidate Dianne Morales Says Her Basic Income Proposal Wouldn't Only Be Cash Payments
Feb. 23, 2021
The city's first true test of ranked-choice voting began to take shape Tuesday, Feb. 23, as results from the special election in City Council District 31 began to trickle in.
Though Selvena Brooks-Powers currently leads the count as of 10 p.m. Tuesday night, as it currently stands, none of the nine candidates in the race – Brooks-Powers, Nancy Martinez, LaToya Benjamin, Latanya Collins, Sherwyn James, Nicole Lee, Pesach Osina, Shawn Rux or Manuel Silva – have secured more than 50 percent of the vote, triggering a ranked-choice voting recount.
Brooks-Powers secured 39.5 percent of the vote, with 93 percent of scanners reported as of 10 p.m. Tuesday night, while Osina is close behind with nearly 33 percent of the vote, according to unofficial results from the city's Board of Elections. Silva is the only other candidate to have received more than 10 percent of the vote (10.1).
The candidate with the fewest votes, which at this time appears to be Lee, will be eliminated and the second round of counting will begin in the coming weeks. The approximately 60 voters who selected Lee as their first choice will see their ballots go to the candidate they marked as their second choice. The new totals will be counted and the process will repeat itself until a candidate surpasses the 50 percent threshold.
"I want to thank all those who voted today and participated in our democracy, and I want to thank all of my supporters who made this possible. I am a daughter of southeast Queens, and the momentum and support for my candidacy has been so empowering," Brooks-Powers said Tuesday night. "While there was substantial confusion about ranked-choice voting, these early results are promising and I look forward to all of the votes being counted. Our community deserves to have a fighter in City Hall to ensure we can recover from this pandemic and finally get our fair share. Today we have completed the campaign for the special election, and now we must move forward, complete the counting and make sure every voice is heard."
During a Zoom party after the polls closed Tuesday night, Brooks-Powers expressed confidence that she would be named the winner of the election.
"I'm so excited at the fact that I am going to be elected into the City Council and I feel humbled, I feel blessed [and] I feel appreciative," she said, adding that she will "wait through this process for all the votes to be counted."
Osina, who finished second in the special election to fill the seat in 2013, when he lost by fewer than 100 votes, again found himself in second place Tuesday night. However, unlike in 2013, Osina could see himself bounce back in the race once the second round of counting is completed.
"We're watching the returns and we feel we've run a great campaign and we await the final results," Osina said in a statement Tuesday night.
The winner of the Feb. 23 special election will unlikely be determined anytime soon, as the city's Board of Elections won't begin the next count until they've received all absentee and military ballots. Only then will the second round of counting begin, a process that will be open to the public to watch.
Though Tuesday's election is not the first in the city's history to utilize the new voting system – that distinction goes to the special election in District 24 – it is the first to go into the second count.
City Councilman James Gennaro received around 60 percent of the vote during the District 24 special election on Feb. 2, negating the need for a second round of counting. The results of the race were certified on Feb. 18 and Gennaro was sworn in to the seat he held from 2001 until 2013 that same day.
Candidates in both Tuesday's election and the Feb. 2 election in District 24, expressed concerns over the extent to which the public has been informed about the new system.
Brooks-Powers noted that she heard the two Queens races referred to as "guinea pigs," a term she found alarming.
"I find that problematic, obviously," Brooks-Powers told QNS before the polls closed Tuesday. "These are races that will impact the day-to-day quality of life of hundreds of thousands of people."
The entire city will utilize ranked-choice voting during the June primary elections, which will feature a large slate of candidates for mayor, comptroller, public advocate and more than 110 candidates for City Council in Queens alone.
Turnout in Tuesday's election was relatively low, with around 7,000 ballots cast in-person and around 1,700 cast early, accounting for around 7 percent of the approximately 102,580 registered voters in the City Council district.
However, voters will get a second and third shot at voting for a council member in the district this year.
The winner of the special election will serve until the end of 2021, when Richards' council term was set to end. A primary election in June – likely to feature many, if not all of the candidates who ran in Tuesday's election – and a general election in November will send a council member to the seat to serve until 2023.
The race for District 31, which covers parts of Arverne, Brookville, Edgemere, Far Rockaway, Laurelton, Rosedale and Springfield Gardens, was first triggered when Richards, who has served the district in the council since 2013, won the special election for Queens borough president.
Mayoral Candidate Dianne Morales Says Her Basic Income Proposal Wouldn't Only Be Cash Payments
NY1
Feb. 23, 2021
Democratic mayoral candidate Dianne Morales says her plan for a guaranteed minimum income would not only be measured in cash support, but also on providing more resources to New Yorkers in need.
"This is not something that we're talking about that would be provided in lieu of critical services and support, and it's not necessarily calculated by just sort of providing cash support," Morales said in a Tuesday night interview with Inside City Hall. "It's really the idea of raising the floor for some of the most vulnerable and marginalized people in New York City."
Morales, a former executive of nonprofit organizations, told NY1 political anchor Bobby Cuza that basic income could be a combination of services and access to resources.
Morales did not provide details in the interview on how she would calculate this combination, and she did not provide further details on which specific services and resources she would want low-income New Yorkers to receive through basic income. In general, she has campaigned for increased services, including rent relief for tenants and small businesses, and housing for homeless New Yorkers.
Several of Morales's opponents — including Brooklyn Councilman Carlos Menchaca and entrepreneur Andrew Yang, who popularized the call during his Democratic presidential run last year — have also called for some type of basic income. But Yang calls for direct cash payments, giving New Yorkers living below the poverty line an average of $2,000 per year, and told NY1 he would like people to use that money to support "small businesses that are struggling to stay open, especially locally owned minority- and women-owned business." The program is projected to cost at least $1 billion in city money and require additional private-sector funding. It's not clear how much Morales's basic income pledge would cost.
Unpaid Property Taxes Leap in New York City as Tenants and Landlords Struggle
Feb. 23, 2021
Democratic mayoral candidate Dianne Morales says her plan for a guaranteed minimum income would not only be measured in cash support, but also on providing more resources to New Yorkers in need.
"This is not something that we're talking about that would be provided in lieu of critical services and support, and it's not necessarily calculated by just sort of providing cash support," Morales said in a Tuesday night interview with Inside City Hall. "It's really the idea of raising the floor for some of the most vulnerable and marginalized people in New York City."
Morales, a former executive of nonprofit organizations, told NY1 political anchor Bobby Cuza that basic income could be a combination of services and access to resources.
Morales did not provide details in the interview on how she would calculate this combination, and she did not provide further details on which specific services and resources she would want low-income New Yorkers to receive through basic income. In general, she has campaigned for increased services, including rent relief for tenants and small businesses, and housing for homeless New Yorkers.
Several of Morales's opponents — including Brooklyn Councilman Carlos Menchaca and entrepreneur Andrew Yang, who popularized the call during his Democratic presidential run last year — have also called for some type of basic income. But Yang calls for direct cash payments, giving New Yorkers living below the poverty line an average of $2,000 per year, and told NY1 he would like people to use that money to support "small businesses that are struggling to stay open, especially locally owned minority- and women-owned business." The program is projected to cost at least $1 billion in city money and require additional private-sector funding. It's not clear how much Morales's basic income pledge would cost.
Unpaid Property Taxes Leap in New York City as Tenants and Landlords Struggle
The City
Feb. 23, 2021
Unpaid property taxes in New York City are soaring as homeowners struggle and the pandemic recession slashes the rents landlords are collecting from both commercial and residential tenants.
The arrears rose to $1.3 billion in February — 4.5% of the almost $30 billion due, according to figures released Monday by city Comptroller Scott Stringer.
By comparison, unpaid property bills for the fiscal year that ended in June 2020 equaled 1.8%. Even in the aftermath of the 2008 financial crisis, owed property taxes peaked at 2.17% or half February's figure.
"We have been warning about the inevitability of this since the start of the cancel-rent movement," said Jay Martin, executive director of the Community Housing Improvement Program, which primarily represents owners of rent-regulated buildings. "Something is giving way in the fabric of property ownership in the city."
Commercial properties represent just over half the unpaid taxes. With tourism paralyzed, the delinquency rate for hotels citywide is 10%, with Brooklyn hotels double that at 20%.
Manhattan commercial properties have a lower default rate than those in the other four boroughs. While Manhattan properties have seen the biggest fall in occupancy, many tenants are still paying rent and large landlords have so far had the financial resources to weather the crisis.
City officials and some real estate experts are divided on whether unpaid property taxes will increase in the months to come amid an eviction moratorium that goes through at least May 1 and widespread economic suffering among New Yorkers.
Stringer expects the delinquency rate to finish the year at 3%, with late payments cutting the amount owed. The de Blasio administration's budget is also based on 3% going unpaid.
Both expect higher unpaid bills and lower assessments for commercial buildings to reduce overall property tax revenues for the next fiscal year by 4.5%, to just over $29 billion, the first decline since 1996.
'Only Get Worse'
Meanwhile, the unpaid percentage for all residential properties — apartment buildings, coops, condos and one- to three-family homes — is 4.9%.
"We would expect delinquencies to only get worse," Martin predicted. "Property taxes make up 50% of operating expenses for smaller landlords of rent-regulated buildings, and a large percentage of multi-family rent-regulated owners are operating at a loss."
Martin called on the state to accelerate the distribution of rent subsidies. The federal aid bill passed in December would provide $1.3 billion to help residential tenants in the state.
A previous effort by the Cuomo administration was botched: By the end of December, only $40 million of the $100 million program administered by the state Division of Homes and Community Renewal, had been disbursed to 9,600 households. The program closed on Feb. 1 but no update has been released on the amount provided.
Stringer called on the state Tuesday to void rent for those affected by the pandemic, at a briefing on his analysis of the proposed city budget. He has previously called for spending $2.2 billion to help renters and said aid should be extended first to small mom-and-pop landlords.
"We must cancel rent for the hundreds of thousands of New Yorkers who have fallen behind through no fault of their own," Stringer, who is running for mayor, said earlier this month.
He left unclear what would happen to rent owed to large property owners.
Penalty Box
The Real Estate Board of New York is pushing for passage of a bill in the state legislature to reduce the 18% penalty on unpaid taxes to 3% given the impact of the pandemic. The Hotel Association of New York is asking for no penalties on taxes owed by its members.
"In normal circumstances you need a big enough stick to make sure people pay their bills," said Paimaan Lodhi, senior vice-president of the Real Estate Board of New York. "But these are unprecedented times. The 18% interest rate is onerous and punitive."
REBNY also supports direct aid to tenants. The group has opposed other measures that would change lease terms that would void personal responsibility clauses in leases or institute arbitration in rent increase disputes.
"The percentage increase in unpaid taxes is pretty astonishing and goes to show you that it's not just residents and businesses that are in trouble," Lodhi added. "We are all in this together and owners need some relief as well."
The mayor's office does not back the interest rate reduction.
"The city relies on property tax revenue to pay for essential services like education and public safety, and due to the pandemic, our overall revenue has declined by billions," said Laura Feyer, a spokesperson for Mayor Bill de Blasio. "We are committed to exploring ways to help taxpayers and businesses recover to ensure New York City comes back stronger than ever before."
New York's Homeless, Foster and Jailed Teens Now Eligible for COVID Vaccine
Feb. 23, 2021
Unpaid property taxes in New York City are soaring as homeowners struggle and the pandemic recession slashes the rents landlords are collecting from both commercial and residential tenants.
The arrears rose to $1.3 billion in February — 4.5% of the almost $30 billion due, according to figures released Monday by city Comptroller Scott Stringer.
By comparison, unpaid property bills for the fiscal year that ended in June 2020 equaled 1.8%. Even in the aftermath of the 2008 financial crisis, owed property taxes peaked at 2.17% or half February's figure.
"We have been warning about the inevitability of this since the start of the cancel-rent movement," said Jay Martin, executive director of the Community Housing Improvement Program, which primarily represents owners of rent-regulated buildings. "Something is giving way in the fabric of property ownership in the city."
Commercial properties represent just over half the unpaid taxes. With tourism paralyzed, the delinquency rate for hotels citywide is 10%, with Brooklyn hotels double that at 20%.
Manhattan commercial properties have a lower default rate than those in the other four boroughs. While Manhattan properties have seen the biggest fall in occupancy, many tenants are still paying rent and large landlords have so far had the financial resources to weather the crisis.
City officials and some real estate experts are divided on whether unpaid property taxes will increase in the months to come amid an eviction moratorium that goes through at least May 1 and widespread economic suffering among New Yorkers.
Stringer expects the delinquency rate to finish the year at 3%, with late payments cutting the amount owed. The de Blasio administration's budget is also based on 3% going unpaid.
Both expect higher unpaid bills and lower assessments for commercial buildings to reduce overall property tax revenues for the next fiscal year by 4.5%, to just over $29 billion, the first decline since 1996.
'Only Get Worse'
Meanwhile, the unpaid percentage for all residential properties — apartment buildings, coops, condos and one- to three-family homes — is 4.9%.
"We would expect delinquencies to only get worse," Martin predicted. "Property taxes make up 50% of operating expenses for smaller landlords of rent-regulated buildings, and a large percentage of multi-family rent-regulated owners are operating at a loss."
Martin called on the state to accelerate the distribution of rent subsidies. The federal aid bill passed in December would provide $1.3 billion to help residential tenants in the state.
A previous effort by the Cuomo administration was botched: By the end of December, only $40 million of the $100 million program administered by the state Division of Homes and Community Renewal, had been disbursed to 9,600 households. The program closed on Feb. 1 but no update has been released on the amount provided.
Stringer called on the state Tuesday to void rent for those affected by the pandemic, at a briefing on his analysis of the proposed city budget. He has previously called for spending $2.2 billion to help renters and said aid should be extended first to small mom-and-pop landlords.
"We must cancel rent for the hundreds of thousands of New Yorkers who have fallen behind through no fault of their own," Stringer, who is running for mayor, said earlier this month.
He left unclear what would happen to rent owed to large property owners.
Penalty Box
The Real Estate Board of New York is pushing for passage of a bill in the state legislature to reduce the 18% penalty on unpaid taxes to 3% given the impact of the pandemic. The Hotel Association of New York is asking for no penalties on taxes owed by its members.
"In normal circumstances you need a big enough stick to make sure people pay their bills," said Paimaan Lodhi, senior vice-president of the Real Estate Board of New York. "But these are unprecedented times. The 18% interest rate is onerous and punitive."
REBNY also supports direct aid to tenants. The group has opposed other measures that would change lease terms that would void personal responsibility clauses in leases or institute arbitration in rent increase disputes.
"The percentage increase in unpaid taxes is pretty astonishing and goes to show you that it's not just residents and businesses that are in trouble," Lodhi added. "We are all in this together and owners need some relief as well."
The mayor's office does not back the interest rate reduction.
"The city relies on property tax revenue to pay for essential services like education and public safety, and due to the pandemic, our overall revenue has declined by billions," said Laura Feyer, a spokesperson for Mayor Bill de Blasio. "We are committed to exploring ways to help taxpayers and businesses recover to ensure New York City comes back stronger than ever before."
New York's Homeless, Foster and Jailed Teens Now Eligible for COVID Vaccine
The City
Feb. 23, 2021
New Yorkers 16 and older in juvenile detention, youth shelters and foster care facilities can now receive the COVID-19 vaccine, according to new guidance from the Cuomo administration.
The Office of Children and Family Services sent a letter to provider agencies Monday night emphasizing that older teens in residential programs licensed or certified by the state are eligible for vaccine distribution.
The memo is an attempt to clear up confusion that has existed for the past few weeks over whether kids in juvenile facilities could get a dose.
"Our document yesterday clarifies to providers that the [state Department of Health] guidance from February 15 opens the vaccine prioritization for youth in congregate settings," Melissa Mahaffey, an Office of Children and Family Services spokesperson, said in an email to THE CITY.
While questions about consent still linger, an Administration for Children's Services spokesperson called the move "a game-changer."
"Just as we did for frontline staff, we have been advocating for eligibility to be expanded to youth in our congregate facilities, and we're pleased that the state has heeded this request," said the spokesperson, Marisa Kaufman
About 636 eligible kids are in ACS facilities, she said. About the same number of teens over 16 are in youth homeless shelters, according to the city's Department of Youth and Community Development.
The Pfizer vaccine can be used for those 16 years of age and older, while the Moderna vaccine is for adults 18 and up, according to the state's guidance, which cites the FDA.
Confusion and Inaction
January guidance from the state child welfare agency focused only on vaccination for staff, and the wording in the Feb. 15 memo did not make it clear that teens could be included, lawmakers and advocates say.
On Feb. 9, Dawne Mitchell of The Legal Aid Society — the city's largest public defender organization — issued a letter to Office of Children and Family Services Commissioner Sheila Poole urging the agency "to amend the OCFS guidance to allow these young people age 16 and older to receive the vaccine."
In a Feb. 19 letter to Poole, State Senator Brad Hoylman (D-Manhattan) pointed out how "a 19-year-old residing in an adult homeless shelter would be eligible for the vaccine now, but if that same 19-year-old was residing in a [homeless youth] facility, they would not be eligible."
Advocates for homeless youth say the confusion and resulting delay was unnecessary — and that the kids should have been explicitly prioritized from the start.
"Why is this population always an afterthought that needs additional advocacy?" asked Jamie Powlovich, executive director of the Coalition for Homeless Youth. "For a long time NYC has taken this position of quite frankly gaslighting the needs and the reality of what is and isn't given to youth experiencing homelessness in this city."
In her letter, Mitchell noted children in these settings are continually going through disruptive quarantining, and experience higher rates of adverse health conditions that can lead to COVID-19 complications.
Mitchell also noted that Black and Hispanic children and young adults make up the majority of youth held in OCFS-overseen facilities — populations that have both borne the brunt of the COVID-19 pandemic and vaccine distribution inequities.
At a Friday City Council hearing, legislators questioned child welfare officials on COVID-19's effect on juvenile justice facilities.
Administration for Children's Services officials testified that 17 children in juvenile detention have tested positive for the virus since last March.
More than 40 detention center staff have contracted the virus, Darek Robinson, vice president of grievances and legal services at SSEU Local 371, the union that serves many ACS workers, told the Council hearing.
ACS officials said that four of those workers have died.
At the peak of the pandemic, many young detainees were released following a Legal Aid lawsuit which cited reporting by THE CITY.
"It's unrealistic to think that you can socially distance," Robinson told THE CITY on Tuesday, noting that the coronavirus typically enters facilities via adult staffers.
"It's a great, great thing that youth [will] receive their vaccines to help prevent the spread of the virus."
More Complications to Navigate
For youth now eligible for vaccines, a shot won't necessarily come quickly. For anyone under 18, providers will be grappling with complicated issues of consent.
"Young people's relationship to legal guardians, whether their birth parents or other, you know, other guardians in their lives really vary," said Powlovich.
Kaufman said that "written, informed parental consent" will be needed for children under 18 to get a vaccine, with certain exceptions for anyone pregnant or parenting and foster kids who are freed for adoption.
She added, "While routine care vaccines do not require parental consent for most youth in ACS's care, we do not think that these can yet be considered as part of routine care."
According to the city Department of Youth and Community Development, which oversees homeless youth shelters, the agency will work with providers to help with vaccination efforts, but did not specify how.
"At this time, DYCD has not heard of plans" for vaccination sites at homeless youth shelters, Mark Zustovich, an agency spokesperson, told THE CITY Tuesday in a written statement.
Despite clear speed bumps ahead, Hoylman said that he was "heartened that among young people there isn't vaccine hesitancy as much as there's vaccine impatience."
"And that's a good sign in the months ahead as we expand the vaccine to younger parts of our population."
Redmond Haskins, spokesperson for The Legal Aid Society, said lawyers cheered the news that their young clients now have access to the vaccine — but questioned why adult prisoners were still excluded.
"COVID-19 still rages at these facilities throughout the state, and any further delay will only result in more infections and more loss of life. We urge Governor Cuomo to grant this essential relief now."
Comprehensive Planning Would Create Obstacles for Housing
Feb. 23, 2021
New Yorkers 16 and older in juvenile detention, youth shelters and foster care facilities can now receive the COVID-19 vaccine, according to new guidance from the Cuomo administration.
The Office of Children and Family Services sent a letter to provider agencies Monday night emphasizing that older teens in residential programs licensed or certified by the state are eligible for vaccine distribution.
The memo is an attempt to clear up confusion that has existed for the past few weeks over whether kids in juvenile facilities could get a dose.
"Our document yesterday clarifies to providers that the [state Department of Health] guidance from February 15 opens the vaccine prioritization for youth in congregate settings," Melissa Mahaffey, an Office of Children and Family Services spokesperson, said in an email to THE CITY.
While questions about consent still linger, an Administration for Children's Services spokesperson called the move "a game-changer."
"Just as we did for frontline staff, we have been advocating for eligibility to be expanded to youth in our congregate facilities, and we're pleased that the state has heeded this request," said the spokesperson, Marisa Kaufman
About 636 eligible kids are in ACS facilities, she said. About the same number of teens over 16 are in youth homeless shelters, according to the city's Department of Youth and Community Development.
The Pfizer vaccine can be used for those 16 years of age and older, while the Moderna vaccine is for adults 18 and up, according to the state's guidance, which cites the FDA.
Confusion and Inaction
January guidance from the state child welfare agency focused only on vaccination for staff, and the wording in the Feb. 15 memo did not make it clear that teens could be included, lawmakers and advocates say.
On Feb. 9, Dawne Mitchell of The Legal Aid Society — the city's largest public defender organization — issued a letter to Office of Children and Family Services Commissioner Sheila Poole urging the agency "to amend the OCFS guidance to allow these young people age 16 and older to receive the vaccine."
In a Feb. 19 letter to Poole, State Senator Brad Hoylman (D-Manhattan) pointed out how "a 19-year-old residing in an adult homeless shelter would be eligible for the vaccine now, but if that same 19-year-old was residing in a [homeless youth] facility, they would not be eligible."
Advocates for homeless youth say the confusion and resulting delay was unnecessary — and that the kids should have been explicitly prioritized from the start.
"Why is this population always an afterthought that needs additional advocacy?" asked Jamie Powlovich, executive director of the Coalition for Homeless Youth. "For a long time NYC has taken this position of quite frankly gaslighting the needs and the reality of what is and isn't given to youth experiencing homelessness in this city."
In her letter, Mitchell noted children in these settings are continually going through disruptive quarantining, and experience higher rates of adverse health conditions that can lead to COVID-19 complications.
Mitchell also noted that Black and Hispanic children and young adults make up the majority of youth held in OCFS-overseen facilities — populations that have both borne the brunt of the COVID-19 pandemic and vaccine distribution inequities.
At a Friday City Council hearing, legislators questioned child welfare officials on COVID-19's effect on juvenile justice facilities.
Administration for Children's Services officials testified that 17 children in juvenile detention have tested positive for the virus since last March.
More than 40 detention center staff have contracted the virus, Darek Robinson, vice president of grievances and legal services at SSEU Local 371, the union that serves many ACS workers, told the Council hearing.
ACS officials said that four of those workers have died.
At the peak of the pandemic, many young detainees were released following a Legal Aid lawsuit which cited reporting by THE CITY.
"It's unrealistic to think that you can socially distance," Robinson told THE CITY on Tuesday, noting that the coronavirus typically enters facilities via adult staffers.
"It's a great, great thing that youth [will] receive their vaccines to help prevent the spread of the virus."
More Complications to Navigate
For youth now eligible for vaccines, a shot won't necessarily come quickly. For anyone under 18, providers will be grappling with complicated issues of consent.
"Young people's relationship to legal guardians, whether their birth parents or other, you know, other guardians in their lives really vary," said Powlovich.
Kaufman said that "written, informed parental consent" will be needed for children under 18 to get a vaccine, with certain exceptions for anyone pregnant or parenting and foster kids who are freed for adoption.
She added, "While routine care vaccines do not require parental consent for most youth in ACS's care, we do not think that these can yet be considered as part of routine care."
According to the city Department of Youth and Community Development, which oversees homeless youth shelters, the agency will work with providers to help with vaccination efforts, but did not specify how.
"At this time, DYCD has not heard of plans" for vaccination sites at homeless youth shelters, Mark Zustovich, an agency spokesperson, told THE CITY Tuesday in a written statement.
Despite clear speed bumps ahead, Hoylman said that he was "heartened that among young people there isn't vaccine hesitancy as much as there's vaccine impatience."
"And that's a good sign in the months ahead as we expand the vaccine to younger parts of our population."
Redmond Haskins, spokesperson for The Legal Aid Society, said lawyers cheered the news that their young clients now have access to the vaccine — but questioned why adult prisoners were still excluded.
"COVID-19 still rages at these facilities throughout the state, and any further delay will only result in more infections and more loss of life. We urge Governor Cuomo to grant this essential relief now."
Comprehensive Planning Would Create Obstacles for Housing
Politico
Feb. 23, 2021
The de Blasio administration argued Tuesday that a City Council proposal to mandate comprehensive planning would add bureaucracy and create new obstacles for housing. The legislation, sponsored by Speaker Corey Johnson, seeks to overhaul the way the city approaches land use and planning initiatives, with a multi-year, citywide plan that proponents say would help ensure zoning changes are more equitable. Department of City Planning Director Marisa Lago warned that a comprehensive planning mandate would be costly and time-consuming without actually furthering growth or reducing political obstacles to development in wealthier areas
City Council, De Blasio Administration Clash Over Comprehensive Planning Legislation
Feb. 23, 2021
The de Blasio administration argued Tuesday that a City Council proposal to mandate comprehensive planning would add bureaucracy and create new obstacles for housing. The legislation, sponsored by Speaker Corey Johnson, seeks to overhaul the way the city approaches land use and planning initiatives, with a multi-year, citywide plan that proponents say would help ensure zoning changes are more equitable. Department of City Planning Director Marisa Lago warned that a comprehensive planning mandate would be costly and time-consuming without actually furthering growth or reducing political obstacles to development in wealthier areas
City Council, De Blasio Administration Clash Over Comprehensive Planning Legislation
Gotham Gazette
Feb. 24, 2021
City Council members and officials from Mayor Bill de Blasio's administration clashed at a Tuesday hearing over proposed legislation to overhaul, consolidate, and in some ways expand the city's planning processes into a singular ten-year procedure that would align budget, policy, and land use decisions.
The proposal was released by City Council Speaker Corey Johnson in December and seeks to replace what he calls redundant, antiquated, inequitable, and ineffective existing planning procedures by taking a more holistic approach to planning. It would create a centralized process for examining and budgeting for the city's long-term infrastructure and community needs, with an eye towards correcting long-standing racial and socio-economic disparities while also equitably meeting the city's transit, housing, open space, school seats, shelters, and other needs.
The Council's Committees on Governmental Operations and Land Use and Subcommittee on Capital Budget convened on Tuesday to hear from the de Blasio administration about its concerns and objections to the idea, while also pressing mayoral officials to answer for the many failures of the current siloed planning processes that are spread across various city agencies.
"For decades, the city has relied on a piecemeal and ad hoc approach, muddling through its planning exercises one neighborhood, topic, and project at a time," said Johnson, a Democrat, in his opening remarks. "That planning has largely neglected people of color, immigrants, people with disabilities, and low-income New Yorkers. That has also led to serious inefficiencies. Our budget documents often simply don't relate to our city's policy and land use priorities. And as we enter a period of fiscal stress, we have no rational system for prioritizing our community's most urgent budget needs to reduce disparities and combat climate change."
Early on, Johnson sought to dispel "misinformation" about the bill, noting that it would not amend the city's zoning laws, mandate any zoning requirements or specific zoning actions, or change the Uniform Land Use Review Procedure (ULURP). Rather, he emphasized that it "requires the city to provide community boards and the public with new resources, new data and new analyses to support proactive community-based plans." It would encourage proactive rather than reactive approaches to development and encourage the city to pursue new growth away from neighborhoods at risk of sea-level rise and other forces of displacement including gentrification and real estate speculation.
Council Member Fernando Cabrera, a Bronx Democrat who chairs governmental operations, pointed out that the current planning process is enshrined in more than a dozen Charter-mandated documents that do not currently involve sufficient coordination between and among city agencies. "There's a fundamental disconnect here that cannot be overstated," he said. "How can we as a city plan for our future when we only have fragments of the full picture of the city's current needs and assets?"
Testifying on behalf of the administration, City Planning Commissioner Marisa Lago sought to dissuade the Council from advancing the bill, opposing it because of concerns about "its feasibility, its costs, and its ultimate impact."
She estimated that the bill's requirement of a Generic Environmental Impact Statement (GEIS) for each community district would cost about $500 million over ten years. "We're concerned that the ultimate impact of that time and money would be counter to our shared goals," she said. "That it would make it more difficult, not easier, to build affordable housing or to site essential city facilities."
Johnson had already countered that argument in his own statement. "That cost estimate is both inaccurate and absurd. It indicates that this administration is not engaging in this conversation with us seriously. There is nothing about this bill that will amount to that price tag," he said, arguing that it could actually end up saving money for the city and for developers pursuing land use applications.
Lago and Johnson had a fundamental disagreement about the language of the bill. Lago said it would create a "heavily top-down" planning process and give City Council members even greater influence in changing land use applications near the conclusion of ULURP. Instead of streamlining planning, she said it would add an additional layer of bureaucracy to an already lengthy land use procedure.
"The bill also underestimates the importance of focused topic-specific planning efforts," Lago said, "such as those for the waterfront, greenhouse gas emissions reduction, environmental justice, food policy or resiliency." She pointed to the city's OneNYC strategic plan created every four years as a "better model" than the Council's proposal and said the city's ability to adapt to changing circumstances is necessary for long-term planning. She cited the city's ten-year food plan released on Monday, a pending coastal resiliency zoning plan, and the proposed SoHo-NoHo rezoning as examples of how the current processes are working towards goals of equitable growth.
In particular, she said the comprehensive planning bill would increase rather than limit the ability of affluent communities to forestall projects that are in the city's interest, which has been a wrench in some of Mayor de Blasio's agenda, though he has often done little to counteract those forces.
Later during the hearing, Johnson took exception to Lago's interpretation of the bill. "It's not top-down. We're empowering local communities to actually engage in planning, instead of being reactive to [City Planning Commission's] certifying of private applications and public applications," he said. He said he was "flabbergasted" at Lago's "complete and total misrepresentation" of the bill.
Lago also worried that a new planning process could place a "chill on development." "That would be so unfortunate, at a time where the pandemic has made crystal clear the need to provide more housing and, in particular, affordable housing, the need to kickstart the economic recovery," she said.
Council Member Brad Lander showed frustration with the administration for critiquing the Council's proposal without offering any solutions of its own to fix the city's broken land use process. "We are the frog in the proverbial pot. We are watching the water boil, the temperatures are rising and the seas are rising, our affordable housing crisis is growing, our infrastructure is aging," he said. "And it is clear that our land use process has become toxic and broken and unable to deliver thoughtful conversation about the very future of our city."
If Lago was going to oppose the Council bill, what is the de Blasio administration's plan to improve how the city does planning and growth, he asked.
Lago struggled to give a straight answer, and instead pointed to what she sees as another deficiency with the bill. "The speaker himself noted that this proposal would not require any rezonings," she said. "And there may be many communities who would anticipate having no growth and this bill does nothing to change that."
Lander responded with frustration. Later on, Council Member Keith Powers asked Lago to name areas of the city with good transit options that could be home to significant housing growth. Lago only pointed to the Soho-Noho and Gowanus rezonings, which are currently in process, and declined to name any other neighborhoods. This, despite the fact that the de Blasio administration has not achieved rezonings in the neighborhoods it targeted early in the mayor's first term, thus far only rezoning a series of lower-income communities of color. Lago instead again said that the city looks to work with Council members who want to work with the city. The exchange was one of several where the two sides appeared to point to each other as broken or talk in circles.
Lago repeatedly noted the Council's informal policy of member deference, which allows Council members to veto land use projects that need Council approval and rezonings in their district. Because of that, she said, often the only projects that succeed are those that have active support and participation from local members.
"So member deference is the problem?" Council Member Antonio Reynoso asked her.
"I think that that is a challenge," she said. She added, "I think, were the Council to adopt a citywide lens rather than looking exclusively to Council member deference that that could be tremendously helpful in achieving our shared goal of more equitable land use," she said.
"That's exactly what this legislation is trying to do," Reynoso responded.
Several advocates and experts also testified in support of the bill, though some suggested that it could be improved. They included Manhattan Borough President Gale Brewer, Barika Williams, executive director of Association for Neighborhood and Housing Development, which is part of the Thriving Communities coalition; Maulin Mehta, senior associate at Regional Plan Association; Spencer Williams, director of advocacy at the Municipal Arts Society; Adam Friedman, director of the Pratt Center for Community Development, among others.
The Citizens Budget Commission, a fiscal watchdog group, raised some concern about the legislation though it has long supported overhauling the city's capital planning process. In testimony submitted to the Council, CBC Senior Research Associate Sean Campion said tying capital plan reforms to land use reforms is not necessary, that changing the structure and timing of regularly issued capital budget reports would make them less useful, and that capital budgeting power should remain in the hands of the mayor. "[A] strategic plan is only as good as its implementation design," his testimony reads. "Extreme care should be taken when adding new processes, requirements and organizations since they could slow or thwart progress towards those outcomes or unnecessarily increase costs."
Similarly, testimony from the Municipal Arts Society noted that the current proposal leaves land use decisions under the purview of the Mayor's Office of Long Term Planning and Sustainability, which would be in charge of the ten-year comprehensive planning process. "MAS counters that a successful comprehensive plan for New York City must balance bottom-up and top-down planning through meaningful, ongoing community engagement strengthened by effective coordination and commitment from involved City agencies," the testimony reads. "As written, Intro 2186 would reinforce the current structural imbalance in the City's planning process."
Op-Ed: New York City needs a fair and simple property tax system
Feb. 24, 2021
City Council members and officials from Mayor Bill de Blasio's administration clashed at a Tuesday hearing over proposed legislation to overhaul, consolidate, and in some ways expand the city's planning processes into a singular ten-year procedure that would align budget, policy, and land use decisions.
The proposal was released by City Council Speaker Corey Johnson in December and seeks to replace what he calls redundant, antiquated, inequitable, and ineffective existing planning procedures by taking a more holistic approach to planning. It would create a centralized process for examining and budgeting for the city's long-term infrastructure and community needs, with an eye towards correcting long-standing racial and socio-economic disparities while also equitably meeting the city's transit, housing, open space, school seats, shelters, and other needs.
The Council's Committees on Governmental Operations and Land Use and Subcommittee on Capital Budget convened on Tuesday to hear from the de Blasio administration about its concerns and objections to the idea, while also pressing mayoral officials to answer for the many failures of the current siloed planning processes that are spread across various city agencies.
"For decades, the city has relied on a piecemeal and ad hoc approach, muddling through its planning exercises one neighborhood, topic, and project at a time," said Johnson, a Democrat, in his opening remarks. "That planning has largely neglected people of color, immigrants, people with disabilities, and low-income New Yorkers. That has also led to serious inefficiencies. Our budget documents often simply don't relate to our city's policy and land use priorities. And as we enter a period of fiscal stress, we have no rational system for prioritizing our community's most urgent budget needs to reduce disparities and combat climate change."
Early on, Johnson sought to dispel "misinformation" about the bill, noting that it would not amend the city's zoning laws, mandate any zoning requirements or specific zoning actions, or change the Uniform Land Use Review Procedure (ULURP). Rather, he emphasized that it "requires the city to provide community boards and the public with new resources, new data and new analyses to support proactive community-based plans." It would encourage proactive rather than reactive approaches to development and encourage the city to pursue new growth away from neighborhoods at risk of sea-level rise and other forces of displacement including gentrification and real estate speculation.
Council Member Fernando Cabrera, a Bronx Democrat who chairs governmental operations, pointed out that the current planning process is enshrined in more than a dozen Charter-mandated documents that do not currently involve sufficient coordination between and among city agencies. "There's a fundamental disconnect here that cannot be overstated," he said. "How can we as a city plan for our future when we only have fragments of the full picture of the city's current needs and assets?"
Testifying on behalf of the administration, City Planning Commissioner Marisa Lago sought to dissuade the Council from advancing the bill, opposing it because of concerns about "its feasibility, its costs, and its ultimate impact."
She estimated that the bill's requirement of a Generic Environmental Impact Statement (GEIS) for each community district would cost about $500 million over ten years. "We're concerned that the ultimate impact of that time and money would be counter to our shared goals," she said. "That it would make it more difficult, not easier, to build affordable housing or to site essential city facilities."
Johnson had already countered that argument in his own statement. "That cost estimate is both inaccurate and absurd. It indicates that this administration is not engaging in this conversation with us seriously. There is nothing about this bill that will amount to that price tag," he said, arguing that it could actually end up saving money for the city and for developers pursuing land use applications.
Lago and Johnson had a fundamental disagreement about the language of the bill. Lago said it would create a "heavily top-down" planning process and give City Council members even greater influence in changing land use applications near the conclusion of ULURP. Instead of streamlining planning, she said it would add an additional layer of bureaucracy to an already lengthy land use procedure.
"The bill also underestimates the importance of focused topic-specific planning efforts," Lago said, "such as those for the waterfront, greenhouse gas emissions reduction, environmental justice, food policy or resiliency." She pointed to the city's OneNYC strategic plan created every four years as a "better model" than the Council's proposal and said the city's ability to adapt to changing circumstances is necessary for long-term planning. She cited the city's ten-year food plan released on Monday, a pending coastal resiliency zoning plan, and the proposed SoHo-NoHo rezoning as examples of how the current processes are working towards goals of equitable growth.
In particular, she said the comprehensive planning bill would increase rather than limit the ability of affluent communities to forestall projects that are in the city's interest, which has been a wrench in some of Mayor de Blasio's agenda, though he has often done little to counteract those forces.
Later during the hearing, Johnson took exception to Lago's interpretation of the bill. "It's not top-down. We're empowering local communities to actually engage in planning, instead of being reactive to [City Planning Commission's] certifying of private applications and public applications," he said. He said he was "flabbergasted" at Lago's "complete and total misrepresentation" of the bill.
Lago also worried that a new planning process could place a "chill on development." "That would be so unfortunate, at a time where the pandemic has made crystal clear the need to provide more housing and, in particular, affordable housing, the need to kickstart the economic recovery," she said.
Council Member Brad Lander showed frustration with the administration for critiquing the Council's proposal without offering any solutions of its own to fix the city's broken land use process. "We are the frog in the proverbial pot. We are watching the water boil, the temperatures are rising and the seas are rising, our affordable housing crisis is growing, our infrastructure is aging," he said. "And it is clear that our land use process has become toxic and broken and unable to deliver thoughtful conversation about the very future of our city."
If Lago was going to oppose the Council bill, what is the de Blasio administration's plan to improve how the city does planning and growth, he asked.
Lago struggled to give a straight answer, and instead pointed to what she sees as another deficiency with the bill. "The speaker himself noted that this proposal would not require any rezonings," she said. "And there may be many communities who would anticipate having no growth and this bill does nothing to change that."
Lander responded with frustration. Later on, Council Member Keith Powers asked Lago to name areas of the city with good transit options that could be home to significant housing growth. Lago only pointed to the Soho-Noho and Gowanus rezonings, which are currently in process, and declined to name any other neighborhoods. This, despite the fact that the de Blasio administration has not achieved rezonings in the neighborhoods it targeted early in the mayor's first term, thus far only rezoning a series of lower-income communities of color. Lago instead again said that the city looks to work with Council members who want to work with the city. The exchange was one of several where the two sides appeared to point to each other as broken or talk in circles.
Lago repeatedly noted the Council's informal policy of member deference, which allows Council members to veto land use projects that need Council approval and rezonings in their district. Because of that, she said, often the only projects that succeed are those that have active support and participation from local members.
"So member deference is the problem?" Council Member Antonio Reynoso asked her.
"I think that that is a challenge," she said. She added, "I think, were the Council to adopt a citywide lens rather than looking exclusively to Council member deference that that could be tremendously helpful in achieving our shared goal of more equitable land use," she said.
"That's exactly what this legislation is trying to do," Reynoso responded.
Several advocates and experts also testified in support of the bill, though some suggested that it could be improved. They included Manhattan Borough President Gale Brewer, Barika Williams, executive director of Association for Neighborhood and Housing Development, which is part of the Thriving Communities coalition; Maulin Mehta, senior associate at Regional Plan Association; Spencer Williams, director of advocacy at the Municipal Arts Society; Adam Friedman, director of the Pratt Center for Community Development, among others.
The Citizens Budget Commission, a fiscal watchdog group, raised some concern about the legislation though it has long supported overhauling the city's capital planning process. In testimony submitted to the Council, CBC Senior Research Associate Sean Campion said tying capital plan reforms to land use reforms is not necessary, that changing the structure and timing of regularly issued capital budget reports would make them less useful, and that capital budgeting power should remain in the hands of the mayor. "[A] strategic plan is only as good as its implementation design," his testimony reads. "Extreme care should be taken when adding new processes, requirements and organizations since they could slow or thwart progress towards those outcomes or unnecessarily increase costs."
Similarly, testimony from the Municipal Arts Society noted that the current proposal leaves land use decisions under the purview of the Mayor's Office of Long Term Planning and Sustainability, which would be in charge of the ten-year comprehensive planning process. "MAS counters that a successful comprehensive plan for New York City must balance bottom-up and top-down planning through meaningful, ongoing community engagement strengthened by effective coordination and commitment from involved City agencies," the testimony reads. "As written, Intro 2186 would reinforce the current structural imbalance in the City's planning process."
Op-Ed: New York City needs a fair and simple property tax system
Bronx Times
Feb. 23, 2021
We all saw the SNL skit poking fun at Zillow, suggesting that 30-somethings in high priced cities treat it the same way others treat porn websites. And who hasn't felt the urge to throw something at their television while watching a couple go house hunting in another state? Whether through census data, moving company reports, and now even sketch comedy, one thing is clear: more and more New Yorkers are seeing the absurdity of New York City's housing market.
Since the beginning of the pandemic our neighboring states of New Jersey and Connecticut have reaped a tax windfall as young families fled New York. This is not only due to the pandemic, but because of the soaring costs to live, work, and raise a family in New York City. Real estate prices have skyrocketed in these adjacent states and their tax rolls have increased as New Yorkers found greener and cheaper pastures in the suburbs.
Not all taxes are equal, nor are all city homeowners taxed in an equitable manner throughout the five boroughs. Our arcane tax structure benefits neighborhoods like the Upper East Side and Park Slope to the detriment of "outer borough" neighborhoods like Bay Ridge and Tottenville. Our constituents are willing to pay their fair share to protect our streets, educate our children and keep our parks clean. But they are not willing to be unfairly taxed. This is why we demanded that Mayor de Blasio create a commission to study the inequities in the city's property tax system, which could issue recommendations to address this issue. That commission told us what we already knew—New Yorkers deserve a fair and simple property tax system.
But as tax revenues from tourism and other commerce dropped due to the pandemic, the city unfairly moved the tax burden to working class families across the city by adding interest to overdue tax bills. Instead of a hand up, the city gave residents struggling to get through the pandemic the middle finger.
Opponents to property tax reform have also used the pandemic as an excuse to freeze the recommendations from the commission and prevent hearing feedback from our residents. With mass vaccinations taking place and the movement back to normal progressing, it is incumbent on the city to immediately resume efforts to fix our broken property tax system.
What some seem to forget is that the city is not just Manhattan. The "outer boroughs" are full of essential workers who have borne the brunt of this pandemic through their service as nurses, transit workers, cops, firefighters, and EMTs. We owe it to them to ensure they are treated fairly when it comes to property taxes.
New Yorkers do not need another commission. New Yorkers do not need another report. New Yorkers do not need another analysis. New Yorkers need action—now.
By Council Members Justin Brannan and Joe Borelli
High-profile NYC politicians support noncitizen voting in Big Apple
Feb. 23, 2021
We all saw the SNL skit poking fun at Zillow, suggesting that 30-somethings in high priced cities treat it the same way others treat porn websites. And who hasn't felt the urge to throw something at their television while watching a couple go house hunting in another state? Whether through census data, moving company reports, and now even sketch comedy, one thing is clear: more and more New Yorkers are seeing the absurdity of New York City's housing market.
Since the beginning of the pandemic our neighboring states of New Jersey and Connecticut have reaped a tax windfall as young families fled New York. This is not only due to the pandemic, but because of the soaring costs to live, work, and raise a family in New York City. Real estate prices have skyrocketed in these adjacent states and their tax rolls have increased as New Yorkers found greener and cheaper pastures in the suburbs.
Not all taxes are equal, nor are all city homeowners taxed in an equitable manner throughout the five boroughs. Our arcane tax structure benefits neighborhoods like the Upper East Side and Park Slope to the detriment of "outer borough" neighborhoods like Bay Ridge and Tottenville. Our constituents are willing to pay their fair share to protect our streets, educate our children and keep our parks clean. But they are not willing to be unfairly taxed. This is why we demanded that Mayor de Blasio create a commission to study the inequities in the city's property tax system, which could issue recommendations to address this issue. That commission told us what we already knew—New Yorkers deserve a fair and simple property tax system.
But as tax revenues from tourism and other commerce dropped due to the pandemic, the city unfairly moved the tax burden to working class families across the city by adding interest to overdue tax bills. Instead of a hand up, the city gave residents struggling to get through the pandemic the middle finger.
Opponents to property tax reform have also used the pandemic as an excuse to freeze the recommendations from the commission and prevent hearing feedback from our residents. With mass vaccinations taking place and the movement back to normal progressing, it is incumbent on the city to immediately resume efforts to fix our broken property tax system.
What some seem to forget is that the city is not just Manhattan. The "outer boroughs" are full of essential workers who have borne the brunt of this pandemic through their service as nurses, transit workers, cops, firefighters, and EMTs. We owe it to them to ensure they are treated fairly when it comes to property taxes.
New Yorkers do not need another commission. New Yorkers do not need another report. New Yorkers do not need another analysis. New Yorkers need action—now.
By Council Members Justin Brannan and Joe Borelli
High-profile NYC politicians support noncitizen voting in Big Apple
NY Daily News
Feb. 22, 2021
Brooklyn Borough President Eric Adams and several lawmakers are pushing the City Council to revisit a bill that would give noncitizen immigrants who legally reside in the Big Apple the right to vote in city elections — possibly in time for this year's mayoral contest.
The current iteration of the Council legislation seeks to revise the City Charter to permit voting by those it describes as "municipal voters," a designation that would include immigrants with lawful permanent residency or work authorization who've been living in the city for 30 days or longer.
"We cannot be a beacon to the world and continue to attract the global talent, energy and entrepreneurship that has allowed our city to thrive for centuries if we do not give immigrants a vote in how this city is run and what our priorities are for the future," Adams said. "Especially now during COVID, as immigrant communities face inequities that have led to unequal death and devastation in their communities, it is our moral and democratic responsibility to enfranchise taxpaying, hardworking legal immigrants and give them the voice they deserve."
Adams, who is running for mayor, and City Councilman Ydanis Rodriguez, the bill's sponsor, are planning to make their renewed push for the bill's passage public Tuesday. Adams is calling on his opponents in the mayoral race to join him in supporting the proposal.
The bill would apply only to elections in the Big Apple and does not include contests for state and federal elected office.
Rodriguez, who represents Washington Heights, introduced the bill in 2020, but the idea has been percolating in the Council for several years.
Now, the bill has 30 sponsors — including Public Advocate Jumaane Williams — a majority in the 51-member Council. As it's written, it would take effect retroactively on Jan. 1, 2021, but that could change.
Rodriguez told the Daily News on Monday his proposal could get Council approval and go into effect before the June 22 Democratic mayoral primary — which would likely reshape the contest in a significant way.
"This is a way that we as a city should expand voting," he said. "I think New York City is the city to address the issue of taxation without representation."
On that point, Rodriguez offered himself as an example. Between 1983 and 2000, he worked as a teacher, a cab driver and a factory worker, and paid taxes, but was not able to vote in elections because he hadn't obtained U.S. citizenship.
He estimates that hundreds of thousands of immigrant New Yorkers who now can't vote would be given that right if his bill is approved by a full Council vote and Mayor de Blasio.
How exactly the bill would be implemented remains unclear, though. In its current form, it calls on the city Board of Elections to create a municipal voter registration form and "adopt all necessary rules and carry out all necessary staff training," but the bill doesn't specify what those rules and training might entail.
The bill does note, however, that the registration forms would have to make it clear that procuring a false voter registration or providing false information to the Board of Elections is a crime.
Opinion: With Immigration Reform on the Table, It's Time to Let NYC Immigrants Vote
Feb. 22, 2021
Brooklyn Borough President Eric Adams and several lawmakers are pushing the City Council to revisit a bill that would give noncitizen immigrants who legally reside in the Big Apple the right to vote in city elections — possibly in time for this year's mayoral contest.
The current iteration of the Council legislation seeks to revise the City Charter to permit voting by those it describes as "municipal voters," a designation that would include immigrants with lawful permanent residency or work authorization who've been living in the city for 30 days or longer.
"We cannot be a beacon to the world and continue to attract the global talent, energy and entrepreneurship that has allowed our city to thrive for centuries if we do not give immigrants a vote in how this city is run and what our priorities are for the future," Adams said. "Especially now during COVID, as immigrant communities face inequities that have led to unequal death and devastation in their communities, it is our moral and democratic responsibility to enfranchise taxpaying, hardworking legal immigrants and give them the voice they deserve."
Adams, who is running for mayor, and City Councilman Ydanis Rodriguez, the bill's sponsor, are planning to make their renewed push for the bill's passage public Tuesday. Adams is calling on his opponents in the mayoral race to join him in supporting the proposal.
The bill would apply only to elections in the Big Apple and does not include contests for state and federal elected office.
Rodriguez, who represents Washington Heights, introduced the bill in 2020, but the idea has been percolating in the Council for several years.
Now, the bill has 30 sponsors — including Public Advocate Jumaane Williams — a majority in the 51-member Council. As it's written, it would take effect retroactively on Jan. 1, 2021, but that could change.
Rodriguez told the Daily News on Monday his proposal could get Council approval and go into effect before the June 22 Democratic mayoral primary — which would likely reshape the contest in a significant way.
"This is a way that we as a city should expand voting," he said. "I think New York City is the city to address the issue of taxation without representation."
On that point, Rodriguez offered himself as an example. Between 1983 and 2000, he worked as a teacher, a cab driver and a factory worker, and paid taxes, but was not able to vote in elections because he hadn't obtained U.S. citizenship.
He estimates that hundreds of thousands of immigrant New Yorkers who now can't vote would be given that right if his bill is approved by a full Council vote and Mayor de Blasio.
How exactly the bill would be implemented remains unclear, though. In its current form, it calls on the city Board of Elections to create a municipal voter registration form and "adopt all necessary rules and carry out all necessary staff training," but the bill doesn't specify what those rules and training might entail.
The bill does note, however, that the registration forms would have to make it clear that procuring a false voter registration or providing false information to the Board of Elections is a crime.
Opinion: With Immigration Reform on the Table, It's Time to Let NYC Immigrants Vote
City Limits
Feb. 23, 2021
Last week Democrats and the Biden Administration introduced one of the most sweeping comprehensive immigration reform bills in decades. The US Citizenship Act of 2021 would be the largest reform of the U.S. immigration system since 1986, and offer a direct rebuke of the Trump Administration's relentless attacks on immigrants and refugees.
As we work to undo the damage caused by the Trump administration, and ensure that President Biden upholds his commitments to immigrant justice, New York City needs to account for its own role in criminalizing and disempowering immigrants in our city. From housing to policing, access to healthcare and the treatment of street vendors (who have only seen relief as of late), our city has chronically harmed the very same people that the Trump administration so violently targeted. It is our duty as a city, to chart a fairer future alongside the very groups that we've historically marginalized and barred from spaces of decision-making. Empowering our immigrant and non-citizen neighbors with the right to vote in municipal elections is core to doing just that.
New York City is home to 3.1 million immigrants. We represent over a third of the city's population and nearly half of its workers and small business owners. This city is powered by immigrants, and yet over a million immigrant New Yorkers don't have a voice in choosing their local representatives. The Municipal Voting Rights bill (Intro. 1867), currently waiting to be introduced by the City Council, would extend voting rights to non-citizen New Yorkers (Permanent Residents, DACA recipients, and those with work visas) in municipal elections and empower over 900,000 of our neighbors to elect the representatives whose decisions most directly impact their lives.
By allowing noncitizen voting in the municipal election, New York would be building on the work of other cities across the country, who have already extended the right to vote to noncitizens. The city of San Francisco has allowed non-citizen voting in school board elections since 2016 and voted to allow non-citizens to serve on advisory boards and commissions last November.
While the NYC Municipal Voting Rights bill would not extend the right to vote to all immigrant New Yorkers—undocumented immigrants are currently excluded—it would extend the right to the nearly 1 million non-citizens who pay taxes, have lawful status (as defined by the federal government), and are an essential part of our communities. The bill would energize voter turnout, force campaigns to be more inclusive of speakers of non-English languages, and invigorate the races for City Council, mayor, borough president, comptroller, and public advocate. But more importantly, the municipal voting rights bill would give a seat at the table.
The COVID-19 virus has hit hardest in low-income communities of color and neighborhoods home to some of New York City's largest immigrant diasporas. Decades of disinvestment in healthcare, affordable housing, and protections for workers contributed to the high infection rates and disproportionate loss of life that we saw in outer borough and immigrant communities. Knowing this, we must ask ourselves whether the outcomes would have been different if elected officials were forced to be more responsive to the needs of immigrant voters.
As a naturalized U.S. citizen and candidate for New York City Council to represent the diverse communities of Sunset Park, Red Hook, and South Brooklyn, this issue is personal to me. We have a generation of damage to undo and an obligation to act boldly to pursue justice where it's been delayed or denied. Let's do our part, New York City.
Rodrigo Camarena (@Rodrigo4NYC) is an immigrant New Yorker born in Mexico and a candidate for New York City Council's 38th District which includes the communities of Sunset Park and Red Hook, and portions of Borough Park, Dyker Heights, and Windsor Terrace.
Dinowitz passes nursing home transparency bills in state senate & assembly
Feb. 23, 2021
Last week Democrats and the Biden Administration introduced one of the most sweeping comprehensive immigration reform bills in decades. The US Citizenship Act of 2021 would be the largest reform of the U.S. immigration system since 1986, and offer a direct rebuke of the Trump Administration's relentless attacks on immigrants and refugees.
As we work to undo the damage caused by the Trump administration, and ensure that President Biden upholds his commitments to immigrant justice, New York City needs to account for its own role in criminalizing and disempowering immigrants in our city. From housing to policing, access to healthcare and the treatment of street vendors (who have only seen relief as of late), our city has chronically harmed the very same people that the Trump administration so violently targeted. It is our duty as a city, to chart a fairer future alongside the very groups that we've historically marginalized and barred from spaces of decision-making. Empowering our immigrant and non-citizen neighbors with the right to vote in municipal elections is core to doing just that.
New York City is home to 3.1 million immigrants. We represent over a third of the city's population and nearly half of its workers and small business owners. This city is powered by immigrants, and yet over a million immigrant New Yorkers don't have a voice in choosing their local representatives. The Municipal Voting Rights bill (Intro. 1867), currently waiting to be introduced by the City Council, would extend voting rights to non-citizen New Yorkers (Permanent Residents, DACA recipients, and those with work visas) in municipal elections and empower over 900,000 of our neighbors to elect the representatives whose decisions most directly impact their lives.
By allowing noncitizen voting in the municipal election, New York would be building on the work of other cities across the country, who have already extended the right to vote to noncitizens. The city of San Francisco has allowed non-citizen voting in school board elections since 2016 and voted to allow non-citizens to serve on advisory boards and commissions last November.
While the NYC Municipal Voting Rights bill would not extend the right to vote to all immigrant New Yorkers—undocumented immigrants are currently excluded—it would extend the right to the nearly 1 million non-citizens who pay taxes, have lawful status (as defined by the federal government), and are an essential part of our communities. The bill would energize voter turnout, force campaigns to be more inclusive of speakers of non-English languages, and invigorate the races for City Council, mayor, borough president, comptroller, and public advocate. But more importantly, the municipal voting rights bill would give a seat at the table.
The COVID-19 virus has hit hardest in low-income communities of color and neighborhoods home to some of New York City's largest immigrant diasporas. Decades of disinvestment in healthcare, affordable housing, and protections for workers contributed to the high infection rates and disproportionate loss of life that we saw in outer borough and immigrant communities. Knowing this, we must ask ourselves whether the outcomes would have been different if elected officials were forced to be more responsive to the needs of immigrant voters.
As a naturalized U.S. citizen and candidate for New York City Council to represent the diverse communities of Sunset Park, Red Hook, and South Brooklyn, this issue is personal to me. We have a generation of damage to undo and an obligation to act boldly to pursue justice where it's been delayed or denied. Let's do our part, New York City.
Rodrigo Camarena (@Rodrigo4NYC) is an immigrant New Yorker born in Mexico and a candidate for New York City Council's 38th District which includes the communities of Sunset Park and Red Hook, and portions of Borough Park, Dyker Heights, and Windsor Terrace.
Dinowitz passes nursing home transparency bills in state senate & assembly
Bronx Times
Feb. 23, 2021
In the wake of the ongoing controversy regarding Governor Andrew Cuomo's "void" of reporting COVID-19 fatalities in statewide nursing homes, Bronx assemblyman Jeffrey Dinowitz just passed new legislation in both the assembly and senate to expand transparency in such care facilities.
Though, this legislation predates the pandemic back to 2019 and focuses on having all New York nursing homes display their most recent "star" inspection ratings from the U.S. Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services for all to see.
"Family members often do not have the resources or skills required to properly care for their aging loved ones and are reliant on professional nursing home facilities to provide the care they need," Dinowitz's office stated in a release.
Now such information must be "posted prominently" inside the facility itself as well as to be linked or posted on the nursing home's website in addition to the state's Department of Health site.
This five-star rating system factors health inspection results, staffing, and quality measures composed of 15 different physical and clinical measures for nursing home residents.
"We must keep our focus on what matters most – ensuring high-quality patient care at all nursing homes in New York. CMS ratings are an essential transparency metric that can help families choose the best home for their aging loved ones, and we should make it as easy as possible for families to find this information," Dinowitz said.
"As an added bonus, perhaps if we make it easier for families to vote with their feet – more nursing home providers will finally start putting people over their profits."
NY education officials propose removing Regents exams from graduation requirements
Feb. 23, 2021
In the wake of the ongoing controversy regarding Governor Andrew Cuomo's "void" of reporting COVID-19 fatalities in statewide nursing homes, Bronx assemblyman Jeffrey Dinowitz just passed new legislation in both the assembly and senate to expand transparency in such care facilities.
Though, this legislation predates the pandemic back to 2019 and focuses on having all New York nursing homes display their most recent "star" inspection ratings from the U.S. Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services for all to see.
"Family members often do not have the resources or skills required to properly care for their aging loved ones and are reliant on professional nursing home facilities to provide the care they need," Dinowitz's office stated in a release.
Now such information must be "posted prominently" inside the facility itself as well as to be linked or posted on the nursing home's website in addition to the state's Department of Health site.
This five-star rating system factors health inspection results, staffing, and quality measures composed of 15 different physical and clinical measures for nursing home residents.
"We must keep our focus on what matters most – ensuring high-quality patient care at all nursing homes in New York. CMS ratings are an essential transparency metric that can help families choose the best home for their aging loved ones, and we should make it as easy as possible for families to find this information," Dinowitz said.
"As an added bonus, perhaps if we make it easier for families to vote with their feet – more nursing home providers will finally start putting people over their profits."
NY education officials propose removing Regents exams from graduation requirements
Chalkbeat
Feb. 23, 2021
New York high school students may not need Regents exams this year to earn a diploma, state education officials announced Tuesday.
State officials plan to vote next month on a proposal to unlink New York's century-old high school exit exams from graduation requirements. The change would apply to students taking tests this year, and officials anticipate the proposal will look similar to last year, when Regents were canceled and students were required to pass only the related course.
The decision comes a day after the U.S. Department of Education announced that students must still take standardized tests this school year in order to gauge the impact of the coronavirus pandemic on student learning. However, schools won't be held accountable for test score results, and states will have broad flexibility in how to administer them.
In New York, students must typically pass five Regents exams to graduate from high school, on top of completing course requirements. Three of those tests — English, science, and math — are tied to federal standardized testing rules for high schoolers, and while the state can't cancel them, they would like to ensure they are untied from diploma requirements. For the other exams, which are not required by federal law, the Board of Regents will also consider a proposal to cancel them this year, according to Emily DeSantis, spokesperson for the state education department.
Earlier this month, New York state officials had joined several other states in asking the U.S. Department of Education to waive standardized tests and school accountability requirements for a second year in a row. With many students still learning from home full-time, and struggling to navigate remote school or access reliable internet, several states hoped to shelve the required exams.
DeSantis said the department was "disappointed" with the federal government's decision to mandate testing but said it was "the right call in affirming that no child should be made to come to school to take a state assessment."
The department is still deciding how to proceed with other standardized tests, including grades 3-8 reading and math exams administered in the spring. States will be able to shorten the tests, lengthen the window for which students can take the test, potentially pushing it off into the summer or next school year, or offer tests remotely, the federal guidance said. New York officials have said that it "will not be possible" to give exams remotely.
The federal government's recent decision to mandate the tests, even if schools won't be held responsible for the student's scores, could spark another wave of families opting out of the exam. This week's announcement from the Biden administration ignited immediate backlash from educators and advocates concerned that spending time and money on the exams would deflect attention from meeting students' great academic and mental health needs. In 2016, New York state was the epicenter of the testing opt-out movement as debates raged about Common Core and standardized testing, though opt out rates in New York City were relatively low.
Schools aren't expected to be penalized for students who don't take Regents exams, as the federal government is allowing states to apply to waive school accountability requirements — including the rule that 95% of students must take the required standardized test or otherwise risk being labeled as a school in need of improvement.
Along with other standardized tests, Regents exams were canceled last year because of the pandemic. Just under 14% of last year's seniors who passed a particular course received a Regents waiver in lieu to taking the exam. (Students take Regents starting in seventh or eighth grade, so many graduating seniors already had credits from previous courses.)
Graduation rates rose in 2020 across the state and in New York City, though state officials said it's impossible to know to what extent the cancellation of Regents exams played a role since they don't know how many students with waivers would have passed the exams.
Some advocates have long been pushing the state to unlink Regents exams from graduation requirements, and the state was in the midst of a major effort to rethink diploma requirements in New York as the pandemic took hold. Those calls have since grown louder during the public health crisis.
Ashley Grant, director of the Postsecondary Readiness Project at the nonprofit Advocates for Children, supported the decision to remove the Regents from graduation requirements.
"This is great news and will allow teachers and students to focus on the work of teaching and learning, confident that students who meet all other graduation requirements will not lose their chance to earn a diploma because of COVID-19," she wrote in an email.
The backlash to the Cuomo backlash has begun
Feb. 23, 2021
New York high school students may not need Regents exams this year to earn a diploma, state education officials announced Tuesday.
State officials plan to vote next month on a proposal to unlink New York's century-old high school exit exams from graduation requirements. The change would apply to students taking tests this year, and officials anticipate the proposal will look similar to last year, when Regents were canceled and students were required to pass only the related course.
The decision comes a day after the U.S. Department of Education announced that students must still take standardized tests this school year in order to gauge the impact of the coronavirus pandemic on student learning. However, schools won't be held accountable for test score results, and states will have broad flexibility in how to administer them.
In New York, students must typically pass five Regents exams to graduate from high school, on top of completing course requirements. Three of those tests — English, science, and math — are tied to federal standardized testing rules for high schoolers, and while the state can't cancel them, they would like to ensure they are untied from diploma requirements. For the other exams, which are not required by federal law, the Board of Regents will also consider a proposal to cancel them this year, according to Emily DeSantis, spokesperson for the state education department.
Earlier this month, New York state officials had joined several other states in asking the U.S. Department of Education to waive standardized tests and school accountability requirements for a second year in a row. With many students still learning from home full-time, and struggling to navigate remote school or access reliable internet, several states hoped to shelve the required exams.
DeSantis said the department was "disappointed" with the federal government's decision to mandate testing but said it was "the right call in affirming that no child should be made to come to school to take a state assessment."
The department is still deciding how to proceed with other standardized tests, including grades 3-8 reading and math exams administered in the spring. States will be able to shorten the tests, lengthen the window for which students can take the test, potentially pushing it off into the summer or next school year, or offer tests remotely, the federal guidance said. New York officials have said that it "will not be possible" to give exams remotely.
The federal government's recent decision to mandate the tests, even if schools won't be held responsible for the student's scores, could spark another wave of families opting out of the exam. This week's announcement from the Biden administration ignited immediate backlash from educators and advocates concerned that spending time and money on the exams would deflect attention from meeting students' great academic and mental health needs. In 2016, New York state was the epicenter of the testing opt-out movement as debates raged about Common Core and standardized testing, though opt out rates in New York City were relatively low.
Schools aren't expected to be penalized for students who don't take Regents exams, as the federal government is allowing states to apply to waive school accountability requirements — including the rule that 95% of students must take the required standardized test or otherwise risk being labeled as a school in need of improvement.
Along with other standardized tests, Regents exams were canceled last year because of the pandemic. Just under 14% of last year's seniors who passed a particular course received a Regents waiver in lieu to taking the exam. (Students take Regents starting in seventh or eighth grade, so many graduating seniors already had credits from previous courses.)
Graduation rates rose in 2020 across the state and in New York City, though state officials said it's impossible to know to what extent the cancellation of Regents exams played a role since they don't know how many students with waivers would have passed the exams.
Some advocates have long been pushing the state to unlink Regents exams from graduation requirements, and the state was in the midst of a major effort to rethink diploma requirements in New York as the pandemic took hold. Those calls have since grown louder during the public health crisis.
Ashley Grant, director of the Postsecondary Readiness Project at the nonprofit Advocates for Children, supported the decision to remove the Regents from graduation requirements.
"This is great news and will allow teachers and students to focus on the work of teaching and learning, confident that students who meet all other graduation requirements will not lose their chance to earn a diploma because of COVID-19," she wrote in an email.
The backlash to the Cuomo backlash has begun
City & State
Feb. 22, 2021
Nursing home deaths remain the dominant topic of political conversation in New York state. Members of the Assembly are meeting today to discuss whether to repeal the emergency powers state lawmakers granted Gov. Andrew Cuomo last year, though any repeal appears unlikely to happen until next week at the earliest. A package of bills is expected to pass the state Senate this afternoon that would enact a litany of changes to congregate living facilities – including a new requirement that the state Department of Health report all deaths involving nursing home residents. The governor for his part is demanding that his own reforms should be included in the upcoming state budget.
While it remains to be seen how much the nursing home scandal might hurt the governor and his chances for reelection, some political countercurrents are already developing as some state lawmakers want to focus more on the pandemic and the budget rather than increasingly bipartisan calls to impeach the governor.
"Clearly there's more to do on the nursing homes," Assembly Member Patricia Fahy of the Capital Region told Politico New York. "But right now, people care first and foremost about jobs and vaccines." State lawmakers and activist allies are also looking to invest their political energies on raising taxes on the wealthy, legalizing recreational marijuana and reforming the criminal justice system.
Longtime political watchers meanwhile note how the ongoing political storm over nursing homes has brought more attention to Cuomo's personal political style that a growing chorus of critics liken to bullying. "(New Yorkers) have seen him get impatient with partisan politics and disingenuous attacks, and New Yorkers feel the same way," Cuomo spokesperson Rich Azzoparditold The New York Times. "They know you must fight to change the status quo and special interests to make progress, and no one has made more progress than this governor." Cuomo'srecent vow to be even more "aggressive" with his critics in the state Legislature suggests he is not going to change anytime soon.
Past scandals over an ethics commission, a bid-rigging scheme and Cuomo's reported interference in the inner workings of the Joint Commission on Public Ethics have highlighted how political problems have come and gone, yet Cuomo is still standing. "The 2022 Democratic primary for governor isn't until at least another 16 months," political consultant Bradley Tusk wrote in the Daily News. "Unless criminal investigations produce indictments just ahead of or in the middle of the primary, Cuomo's reelection will not be dominated by this one issue." The governor's ongoing popularity with voters highlights how a scathing report on nursing homes by state Attorney General Letitia James did not seem to damage his standing with the liberal voters who hold the keys to his political future.
And while Cuomo's critics on both sides of the ideological spectrum are keeping the nursing home scandal in the headlines, there is already the chance that they could overextend themselves. Democrats in the state Senate already got a taste of that weeks ago when someone among them reportedly floated the idea of using the threat of subpoenas as leverage in the state budget process, an idea that Cuomo quickly compared to extortion. Cuomo's recent attacks on Assembly Member Ron Kim have highlighted how the governor can counterattack by highlighting unflattering information about his critics. Some political insiders say some among them might even have it coming. "There are a lot of people living in glass houses right now," one legislative staffer told City & State of reports in the media of the governor's poor treatment of staffers. "It's really frustrating to see the hypocrisy."
If lawmakers focus more attention on the pandemic or the budget, they could divert political energy from ongoing efforts to investigate Cuomo or remove him from office. They might help Cuomo get through his political troubles relatively unscathed in the weeks and months ahead.
Feb. 22, 2021
Nursing home deaths remain the dominant topic of political conversation in New York state. Members of the Assembly are meeting today to discuss whether to repeal the emergency powers state lawmakers granted Gov. Andrew Cuomo last year, though any repeal appears unlikely to happen until next week at the earliest. A package of bills is expected to pass the state Senate this afternoon that would enact a litany of changes to congregate living facilities – including a new requirement that the state Department of Health report all deaths involving nursing home residents. The governor for his part is demanding that his own reforms should be included in the upcoming state budget.
While it remains to be seen how much the nursing home scandal might hurt the governor and his chances for reelection, some political countercurrents are already developing as some state lawmakers want to focus more on the pandemic and the budget rather than increasingly bipartisan calls to impeach the governor.
"Clearly there's more to do on the nursing homes," Assembly Member Patricia Fahy of the Capital Region told Politico New York. "But right now, people care first and foremost about jobs and vaccines." State lawmakers and activist allies are also looking to invest their political energies on raising taxes on the wealthy, legalizing recreational marijuana and reforming the criminal justice system.
Longtime political watchers meanwhile note how the ongoing political storm over nursing homes has brought more attention to Cuomo's personal political style that a growing chorus of critics liken to bullying. "(New Yorkers) have seen him get impatient with partisan politics and disingenuous attacks, and New Yorkers feel the same way," Cuomo spokesperson Rich Azzoparditold The New York Times. "They know you must fight to change the status quo and special interests to make progress, and no one has made more progress than this governor." Cuomo'srecent vow to be even more "aggressive" with his critics in the state Legislature suggests he is not going to change anytime soon.
Past scandals over an ethics commission, a bid-rigging scheme and Cuomo's reported interference in the inner workings of the Joint Commission on Public Ethics have highlighted how political problems have come and gone, yet Cuomo is still standing. "The 2022 Democratic primary for governor isn't until at least another 16 months," political consultant Bradley Tusk wrote in the Daily News. "Unless criminal investigations produce indictments just ahead of or in the middle of the primary, Cuomo's reelection will not be dominated by this one issue." The governor's ongoing popularity with voters highlights how a scathing report on nursing homes by state Attorney General Letitia James did not seem to damage his standing with the liberal voters who hold the keys to his political future.
And while Cuomo's critics on both sides of the ideological spectrum are keeping the nursing home scandal in the headlines, there is already the chance that they could overextend themselves. Democrats in the state Senate already got a taste of that weeks ago when someone among them reportedly floated the idea of using the threat of subpoenas as leverage in the state budget process, an idea that Cuomo quickly compared to extortion. Cuomo's recent attacks on Assembly Member Ron Kim have highlighted how the governor can counterattack by highlighting unflattering information about his critics. Some political insiders say some among them might even have it coming. "There are a lot of people living in glass houses right now," one legislative staffer told City & State of reports in the media of the governor's poor treatment of staffers. "It's really frustrating to see the hypocrisy."
If lawmakers focus more attention on the pandemic or the budget, they could divert political energy from ongoing efforts to investigate Cuomo or remove him from office. They might help Cuomo get through his political troubles relatively unscathed in the weeks and months ahead.
Comments
Post a Comment