Gotham Gazette

The Place for New York Policy and politics

Topics

Topics

Poll Workers And Better Elections


As the legislative session came to a close on June 24th, there was an unsurprising flurry of late-night, last minute activity that has become the hallmark of the New York State Legislature. Among the many bills that both houses passed was legislation that will direct New York’s long-awaited shift to a new election system. The legislation passed by the Senate and Assembly will allow each county in the state, and New York City as a whole, to be the final arbiter in what kind of new voting machines -- ATM-style or optical scan -- it will purchase.

However, in New York City, replacing the old and dilapidated Shoup 3.2 lever machines is only part of the problem. It’s not just machines, but humans that make a difference. Right now, there are too few poll workers, and those who do exist are too-often ill-informed. Things have to change in order to make sure these workers will be able to help city voters navigate the new system.

That is the conclusion of two new reports that focus on the experience both of voters and poll workers themselves on Election Day, 2004.

“All in all I was horrified that the staffing was so bad,” one poll worker told us.

Both Making Votes Count: 2004 Poll Worker Recruitment Program (in pdf format) from Citizens Union Foundation (which I co-authored), and Report from the Polls: A Survey Of Conditions At The Polls In New York City, Presidential Election November 2, 2004 , from the New York Public Interest Research Group, conclude that the city needs to do a better job of ensuring that their poll workers are better-trained and equipped to handle the onrush of voters.

Both surveys found that it is a common occurrence to experience:

  • Absent, inattentive or poorly-trained poll workers
  • Poll sites not completely set up to receive voters first thing in the morning
  • Broken machines
"Too many voters face too many problems at the polls on Election Day," said Neal Rosenstein of NYPIRG. These problems, he said, “continue to burden and disenfranchise voters.”

 

Mostly Competent

For certain, the large majority of poll workers is competent. These New Yorkers have performed admirably over the years, putting their time in from 5:30 a.m. to at least 9:00 p.m. each election for the greater civic good – and for the $200 paycheck, (a stipend amount that has not been raised in four years). They help first-time voters operate the lever machines, they assist voters with disabilities in and out of the polling locations, and they interpret materials and information for those voters that are not proficient in English. They do this each election and they get little in the way of thanks.

But according to the findings of the two organizations, a cadre of poll workers are not lifting their weight, and often times they don’t show up at all, or come and go as they please.

“Our poll site coordinator did not arrive till 5 minutes before the polls were set to open,” quipped a survey respondent, “that would explain why we opened late.”

The inability to have the poll site up and running first thing in the morning is cited as one of the factors that cause many of the long lines that voters experience on Election Day. For those voters rushing to get to the polls and vote before heading off to work this can be the deciding factor in whether or not they cast their ballots.

The Origin Of Incompetence: The Party Patronage System

Under federal law, New York has until September 2006 to revamp its voting system to comply with the Help America Vote Act (HAVA). Adopted in 2002, HAVA was passed after the flaws in our nation’s election system were exposed en masse to an international audience during the 2000 Presidential election. HAVA is intended to eliminate ‘hanging’ and ‘pregnant’ chads and to ensure that presidents are elected by the people, and not selected by the courts.

New York City waited all this time for word from the legislature in Albany on what our new voting machines and system would look like. It now turns out that the city’s Board of Elections must purchase them on their own.

This adds to the daunting challenges it already has -- not only to recruit the body of 30,000 temporary workers needed for Election Day, but also to train these workers adequately to carry out their jobs professionally. They are further hampered by their inability to appoint the most qualified poll workers throughout the city.

The power of party control over poll worker appointment, and the entire structure of the Board of Elections in general, is one of the last remaining vestiges of the party partronage system that is still codified in State law. Both the New York State Constitution and the State Election Law require a bipartisan election administration, with equal numbers of each of the two major parties. It is the same with poll workers; each poll site must have equal numbers of the two major parties. Republican and Democratic district leaders submit poll worker nominations to the board. The parties have until July 15th prior to the election to submit their nominations. At that point if these lists aren’t complete the board assigns workers.

While the Board of Elections does have the ability to weed out some incompetent poll workers, those appointed by the parties are difficult to remove or sanction because they are protected by party leaders. These are the troublesome poll workers that should be replaced. It is not just irksome when poll workers show up late, or do not show up at all, or when they are inattentive or uninformed. This also creates long lines and turns voters away from the polls on Election Day.

While both groups agree that the board has made strides in improving the quality of New York electoral processes, several key recommendations have been advanced, outside of the elimination of the patronage system, to ensure a more efficient Election Day poll worker operation.

Some Recommendations

Among our list of recommendations, Citizens Union Foundation and NYPIRG urge the board to collaborate with the city to institute a pilot program that would allow non-emergency municipal workers to volunteer to work as poll workers on Election Day while receiving their normal pay plus a poll-worker bonus, as well as increasing the compensation for poll workers and voting machine technicians. The groups also recommend that all poll workers go through proper training programs and that all polls are completely set up and ready to receive voters at least 20 minutes prior to the opening of the polls on election days.

As the Board of Elections makes preparations to move to the era of new machines, these suggestions might help make that transition less burdensome for New York City voters.

Doug Israel is the public policy and advocacy director of Citizens Union Foundation, which publishes Gotham Gazette 

Audience Dissatisfaction


Lifelong New Yorker Janet Hague moved to Portland, Oregon, and was immediately struck by how much better the audiences are treated there.

"We get the same shows," she said from Portland -- and she meant concerts, art exhibitions, musicals, plays, films -- "except you can get into them here."

Her judgment may carry an extra sting because Hague happens to be the daughter of Tony Award-winning Broadway composer Albert Hague, who was best-known for his role as the bad-tempered music teacher Mr. Shorofsky in the popular TV series, "Fame" -- which was all about making it as an artist in New York City.

New York is still a great magnet for artistic talent, and (despite Hague's newly-found Portland patriotism) it is easy to argue that New York is home to more shows, and better shows, than anywhere else on Earth.

But how many do you get to see?

The crowds are too big; the wait is too long; the tickets are too high, or the seats are too high up. The people at the box office or Ticketcharge or Ticketmaster are too nasty to have to deal with, or they politely tell you there is nothing available until 2007. The "handling fees" and other miscellaneous charges get your goat. Your timing is never as perfect as it must be -- you get to the phone a half hour after tickets go on sale for your favorite band, say, but that is 20 minutes too late to get anything; or you arrive at the movie theater in what seems like plenty of time for the showing you want, only to discover that the movie is sold out straight through until 1 a.m.

Two new pieces of legislation -- one the governor just signed into law about ticket scalping, the other pending in the City Council about movie commercials -- address specific aspects of audience dissatisfaction, in effect taking as a given that audiences in New York are mistreated. While it is unlikely either will solve the problems, they at least offer hope that the way things are, is not the way things have to be.

Movie Commercials

Movie commercials, which began in earnest in about 1997 (when Regal Cinemas, the world’s largest movie chain, started showing them) irritate people everywhere; one woman in Chicago filed a (failed) class action lawsuit against them, according to a recent article in the Washington Post, “Shhh! The Ads Are About to Start: Pre-Movie Commercial Creep Is Nothing New, But Some Folks Aren't Taking It Sitting Down.”

But movie commercials seem especially irksome to New Yorkers. This is not difficult to explain: It is tough enough (and expensive enough) just getting a seat for a movie in New York. Why then do we have to sit through commercials for credit cards and candy and cola and cars?

Among those irritated is New York City Councilmember Gale Brewer, who has introduced a bill to require movie theaters to disclose the actual time that movies will begin. Right now the advertised movie times are at least 15 minutes before the movie starts, that time being filled with previews (to which nobody apparently objects) and commercials. I had to sit through nine commercials, a public service announcement hitting the audience up for contributions, and six movie previews for some very lame-looking summer flicks before "Batman Begins" actually did.

Hearings on Brewer's bill earlier this month attracted international attention. Sheryl McCarthy dedicated her entire column to it in Newsday, politely suggesting that such a law would not do very much on a practical level - "in Manhattan you have to get to the theater half an hour early to get a decent seat" - but that it was worthwhile symbolically: "This is a revolt against a slew of indignities" (including ticket prices that have climbed in some Manhattan movie theaters to $10.75), a "power struggle between the increasingly greedy theater owners and the city's movie lovers."

The reaction to the proposed legislation from those theater owners was predictable, but entertaining nonetheless. “There should be no legislation on this issue; it is not necessary,” testified Robert Sunshine of the National Association of Theater Owners of New York State. Sunshine said that “consumer complaints associated with pre-show programming and advertising are exceptionally low” and that “legislation will only make the situation more complicated, create potential safety hazards associated with irate customers, cause theater chains to lose revenue and will add additional administrative headaches.”

This might be news to one of the association’s members, Loews, which until earlier this month was the world’s third largest chain of movie theaters, headquartered in New York City. Loews was already telling movie-goers when the films actually begin in their movie theaters, albeit only the ones in Connecticut. Presumably, once they had worked out all those potential safety hazards and headaches, Loews was planning voluntarily to bring the revolutionary practice to the 14 theaters it operated in the city. It is unclear what will happen now that Loews has announced it will be merged into the second-largest movie chain, AMC, which seems much more in denial about audience dissatisfaction.

Whether or not movie-goers take the time to register formal complaints with theater managers, and despite a study by Arbitron (conducted "in consultation" with the theater owners' association and the Cinema Advertising Council)that found that younger moviegoers in particular do not mind commercials(in pdf format), a more recent survey found that 53 percent of moviegoers nationwide believe that movie theaters should stop showing commercials.

One especially adamant opponent of movie commercials is a thoughtful movie-goer named Jason Thompson, who has created a (one-man) organization called CMPAA (Captive Motion Picture Audience of America) and a Web Site, Captive Audience, which offers a sign that you can print out, and leave on your seat while you wait out in the lobby: "Reserved. This patron is avoiding cinema advertising and will return when the feature begins."

In an e-mail exchange with me, Thompson wrote, “the major chains have claimed that they have to show commercials or ticket prices would be dramatically higher. However, ticket prices have continued to rise (about three percent a year on average) despite the introduction of commercials.

”I think that because of annoyances like commercials, parking, giant multiplex crowds and rising prices, people are staying home more often.” Movie attendance, he points out, has declined steadily over the past two years.

Thompson, I should point out, lives in Portland. “Audiences are probably treated better here because there are fewer of us,” he said. “I saw Spider-Man 2 last summer in NYC and the theater was jammed.” (On the other hand, he says, Portland too has to put up with commercials in movie houses, thanks to the “practical monopoly” of the Regal Cinema chain).

Ticket Scalping

New York passed its first anti-scalping statute in 1920, and it has been renewed and debated ever since (including in an article on ticket scalping on Gotham Gazette when the law was up for renewal four years ago) -- a debate that (to oversimplify) pits those who want to make tickets more affordable against those who want to make them more available.

Governor George Pataki has now signed an updated anti-scalping law that is reportedly something of a compromise. Scalpers will be able to sell tickets for shows at venues with 6,000 or more seats at up to 45 percent above a ticket's face value, which is an increase from the previous cap of 20 percent. But that 45 percent will now include all “handling" and other fees that ticket sellers charged to get around the previous, 20 percent cap.

For smaller venues, the cap will remain as before: Scalpers will be permitted to charge no more than 20 percent above face value, or five dollars, whichever is greater.

Anybody who has tried to get into a hit show is aware, of course, that these legal caps have just about zero connection to reality. A recent check of a popular Internet site showed scalpers offering a ticket for the Broadway musical “Spamalot” (which is playing at the Shubert, with just 1,521 seats) for as high as $1,000 – which is about 1,000 percent (not 20 percent or even 45 percent) above face price of the ticket. Out-of-state ticket brokers also offer tickets to NYC shows at whatever price the market will bear.

This was one of the arguments used for getting rid of the caps in New York altogether. Eliminating any restriction on the price of tickets to venues with more than 6,000 seats, Assemblymember Joseph Morelle maintained in the bill he sponsored, would "allow for free market economics to take hold. Consumers will ultimately benefit from the increased supply of tickets and prices will decrease."

The governor rejected this argument, and so does Russ Haven. “There is no 'free market' when it comes to ticket sales in New York, so long as bribery and corruption are part of the system of ticket distribution,” says Haven, who as legislative counsel for the New York Public Interest Research Group has been following the issue of ticket gouging for about eight years.

Haven points to a 1999 report by the Office of Attorney General Eliot Spitzer, entitled “Why Can’t I Get Tickets?”, which details a “corrupt,” “deceptive” system shrouded in secrecy and tainted by “outright criminality” (in the words of the report) that “diverts the most desirable sports, concert and theater tickets away from the general public.”

”There is no reason to believe anything has changed since 1999,” Haven says. “If I’m Joe Fan and I want to see Eric Clapton, I’m competing against multimillion-dollar businesses that are willing to pay anything so that their visiting out-of-town clients can see a good show. That’s why scalping is unfair. It allows wealthy people to drive the prices out of range for everybody else. It's very hard to buy a ticket for anything in New York where you actually pay just the face price.”

What’s A Show-Goer To Do?

The struggle is enough to make you want just to stay home. And, that is increasingly what New Yorkers seem to be doing – witness the rise in DVDs, video games, online activity.

But New York, home of the gouge and the crowds, is also renowned for its alternative culture, and there are alternatives –- out-of-the-way, hole-in-the-wall, independent.

That, anyway, is the pitch of places like Film Forum on Houston Street, which shows no commercials, even though, as general manager Dominick Balletta testified at the council hearing, “we must raise one million dollars every year in order to keep our doors open." But to force its viewers to see commercials, "would reflect unfavorably on the films we are presenting.’’

That was the come-on as well to attend the opening night June 17th of the IFC Center, the new movie theater that replaces the Waverly Theater near West Fourth Street. The Waverly may have been the most famous movie theater in America (thanks to its mention in a song from the musical “Hair,” and its launching of midnight screenings of “The Rocky Horror Picture Show,” which it turned from a studio flop into a cult classic), but it had been shuttered for four years.

Now, the IFC Center was promising a showcase of independent cinema, a hip aura, a cool cafĂ© next door, even a question and answer session with the film’s director – and no commercials, ever.

What the new movie theater delivered on opening night was a sold-out show, a wait for the next show in the "Waverly at IFC" cafe, which charged $14 for "fingerlings" (little fried potatoes), and a giant rat. The rat -- really giant, at least a story tall, and inflated -- was in the curb, next to some screaming union projectionists. “Shame! Shame! Shame!” one kept on shouting on a picket line right next to the movie line. The picketers, from Local 306 I.A.T.S.E., were protesting the failure of IFC to use union projectionists. "We're at the Film Forum, at the Landmark Sunshine Cinema, at all the art houses,” the projectionist explained. “But IFC won’t even sit down and talk to us." ("We're not trying to get jobs where none existed -- we had people at the old Waverly, and we have people at every one of the other theaters in Greenwich Village," union president Michael Goucher told the Voice later.)

Sometimes it really is best to stay home.

 

City Council Stated Meeting - June 23, 2005


Every two weeks the New York City Council meets for its Stated Meeting to introduce and pass legislation. As a regular feature, Gotham Gazette covers these meetings and posts a summary of the bills passed.

QUOTE OF THE DAY:
"If we can take private property for purposes of a [basketball] arena in Brooklyn, then we can take private property to preserve affordable housing," – Councilmember Leticia James, voting in favor of a bill allowing tenants of subsidized housing to purchase their buildings.

MEETING SUMMARY:
COUNCIL ABANDONS GARBAGE VOTE
New York City Council Speaker Gifford Miller had scheduled a vote on the location of three marine transfer stations that are part of Mayor Michael Bloomberg's proposed waste management plan, but abandoned it when he could not secure the support he needed from other council members.

On June 8, the City Council voted against the three sites by a vote of 29 to 19. The mayor vetoed the council's action, but the speaker did not have the five additional votes needed to override the mayor's veto.

Bloomberg's waste management plan would require each borough to handle its own residential trash. The council was not asked to vote on the entire plan, only to approve three of the four marine transfer stations, slated for the Upper East Side at 91st Street in Manhattan and in Red Hook and Gravesend, Brooklyn. (The fourth location in College Point, Queens has already been approved.)

Speaker Miller, who is running for mayor, has opposed the plan, in large part because the 91st Street station is located in his district.

Last week in an effort to negotiate an agreement, Miller said he would allow a marine transfer station on the Upper East Side, as long as it is used only for recycled paper and would not accept trucks at night. He also proposed three sites on the West Side of Manhattan for handling the borough's garbage.

But the Bloomberg administration refused to negotiate.

"While the administration may feel they have won this battle, the war is far from over," Miller said in a statement.

The mayor's overall waste management plan must still be approved by the City Council in the future. Councilmember Michael McMahon, who chairs the council's sanitation committee, said he will continue to work on reaching an agreement with the administration over the summer.

TENANT EMPOWERMENT ACT
The New York City Council passed a bill (Intro 186-A), dubbed the "Tenant Empowerment Act," that would give tenants of certain kinds of subsidized housing the right to purchase a building if the owner tries to sell it.

Under the legislation, if the owner of a building in the Mitchell-Lama program or with a significant population of Section 8 tenants wants to sell a property, they must give residents 12 months notice. The tenants would then have the "first rights" to purchase the building at a fair-market value.

"If the landlord doesn't want to own a Section 8 building anymore - 'fine, leave,'" said Councilmember Margarita Lopez. "But sell it to the tenants."

While residents would still have to come up with the money to purchase the building, supporters hope that the bill will encourage non-profit community groups to help tenants with financing.

The bill passed by a vote of 47 to 3 with the three Republican members of the council (James Oddo, Dennis Gallagher, and Andrew Lanza) voting against it.

Some have argued that the legislation unfairly interferes with a landlord's right to sell a property as they wish, but council members said that owners will still have the ability to get market value for their properties.

Even if it does restrict a landlord's options, Councilmember Leticia James, who represents Central Brooklyn where developer Bruce Ratner is currently seeking to build a basketball stadium and a series of skyscrapers, said she didn’t see that as a problem. "If we can take private property for purposes such as an arena in Brooklyn, then we can take private property to preserve affordable housing," said James.

Mayor Bloomberg is expected to veto the legislation; the council has more than the 34 votes needed to override the veto.

EXPANDING FOOD STAMP PROGRAM
There are approximately 500,000 New Yorkers who are eligible for federally-funded food stamps, but do not currently receive them. This translates into $1 billion in food stamps that are not being claimed by residents, according to the City Council.

In an effort to expand access to food stamps, the council passed three bills to make it easier to apply and receive the benefits.

Intro 593-A allows people to submit food stamp applications online.

Intro 594-A ensures that food stamp applications are available in city-funded food pantries and shelters.

And Intro 615-A will require the city to accept food stamp applications by fax and allow applicants to skip in-person interviews in cases of hardship.

"We are talking about getting food to people who need it, particularly children," said Councilmember Bill deBlasio.

All three Republicans - James Oddo, Dennis Gallagher, and Andrew Lanza - and two Democrats (Madeline Provenzano and Peter Vallone, Jr.) voted against the bills. Some council members said they are concerned that less stringent application requirements could lead to fraud.

MAKING IT MORE DIFFICULT TO TOW CARS
The council also approved legislation (Intro 312) that would reduce the number of cars that are towed for unpaid fines.

Currently, if a driver has $230 worth of unpaid tickets, city marshals or sheriffs can tow a vehicle. Under the new bill, a person can rack up to $350 in tickets before a car can be impounded.

Councilmember Erik Dilan, who drafted the legislation, said the measure is needed because the city doubled the fines for parking violations in recent years from $50 to $100. It is expected to cut in half the number of cars that are towed each year. The mayor supports the legislation and is expected to sign it into law.

VENDOR DISCRIMINATION
The most divisive vote of the meeting (if a vote of 42 to 8 can be considered divisive) occurred on Intro 491-A, a bill which restricts city officials from inquiring about a person's immigration or citizenship status when applying for a street vendor’s license.

Councilmember Charles Barron authored the legislation, and he argues that street vendors are unnecessarily harassed when applying for licenses to sell food or merchandise on the street.

The measure passed by a vote of 42 to 8; Tony Avella, Dennis Gallagher, Andrew Lanza, Michael McMahon, Michael Nelson, Madeline Provenzano, Peter Vallone, Jr. and James Oddo voted "no.”

"My forefathers came here legally; these folks are here illegally," said Councilmember James Oddo. "And we are setting a structure in place not to question it. We should not be rewarding - in any way, shape, or form – illegality."

WEST CHELSEA AND BENSONHURST REZONINGS
The council approved a rezoning of West Chelsea that officially preserves the elevated rail way, known as the High Line, as a future park. The High Line is a 22-block elevated railway on Manhattan’s west side that has been abandoned for a quarter century. In 2002, the city committed to turning the railway into a public space and officials began working together to select a design team.

The action also aims to create more affordable housing in the Chelsea area. It requires that 22 percent of new apartments built in the neighborhood under new zoning regulations be affordable.

In addition, the council approved a "down-zoning" of Bensonhurst, Brooklyn that limits the density of the housing in the area, restricts the height of new buildings, and preserves one- or two-family houses.

HOMELESS DEATHS
There are approximately 35,000 homeless people living in the city’s shelter system and approximately 4,400 people living on the streets. But the city currently does not keep specific statistics on how and where homeless people die in New York.

The council passed a bill (Intro 127-B) requiring the Department of Health and Mental Hygiene to track and report deaths of homeless persons to the mayor and the council in an effort to track exactly how many deaths occur and find ways to provide better health services.

SAFEGUARDING ANIMALS IN KENNELS
It will be safer for New Yorkers to put their dog in a kennel when they go on vacation under legislation that would require pet owners to provide proof of vaccination for certain diseases.

The bill (Intro 498-A) was dubbed "Jazzy's Law" in honor of New York Post columnist Cindy Adams' Yorkshire Terrier, named Jazzy, who died last year while in an upstate boarding kennel.

The bill aims to prevent the spread of diseases from one dog to another. It requires pet owners to show proof of vaccination using health certificates or receipts from a veterinarian, and requires business owners to maintain records including record of immunization, duration of stay, services provided and emergency contact information. Businesses that violate the law would be subject to a $250 fine.

 



Print Friendly and PDF

Editor's Choice


Gotham Gazette: New York Voters Approve $4.2 Billion Environmental Bond Act
New York Voters Approve $4.2 Billion Environmental Bond Act
Gotham Gazette: 
New York City Voters Approve Racial Justice Ballot Measures
New York City Voters Approve Racial Justice Ballot Measures
Gotham Gazette: 
Housing Development in New York City Slows to a Crawl as Officials Debate Tax Incentives
Housing Development in New York City Slows to a Crawl as Officials Debate Tax Incentives
Gotham Gazette: 
City Council Examines Low Voter Turnout, Moving Local Elections to Even Years City Council Examines Low Voter Turnout, Moving Local Elections to Even Years