Gotham Gazette

The Place for New York Policy and politics

Open Government

Open Government

The Latest On Term Limits


When term limits for New York City elected officials were approved by voters in the 1990s, it was hailed as a victory for voters and candidates alike. Under the new laws, passed in two separate voter referendums, city office holders could serve no more than two terms. The year 2001 marked a major change in New York City politics, as all the city wide officials and 37 of 51 city council members were term limited and unable to run again. The city council was almost entirely replaced, and a new council speaker was elected.

But now Speaker Gifford Miller and five other council members find themselves faced with the prospect of leaving office at the end of the year. And the result could set off a surprisingly involved chain of events.

The reason why these six council members are affected, and not the others, is so complicated it has challenged every political writer in the city to explain. We have tried to explain it previously in Gotham Gazette and I'll make another attempt. (Those who already understand it, or would rather be eating hot coals than try to figure it out, can skip the next paragraph).

The term limits law allows members of the City Council to serve two terms. Normally, those terms are for four years each. But every ten years they are shortened to two-year terms when council lines are redrawn with new census data. Five of the six affected council members are scheduled to have served for less than eight years because they won office in special elections in 1997. (Miller won in 1996). They will have served one four year-term, and then one two-year term, which would complete their two terms at the end of this year. (The reason why the other council members were not affected is because the law states that one of the two terms an official serves in office has to be for four years. But the elections of both 2001 and 2003 are for two-year terms. So, somebody who first got elected in 2001 can run again in 2003 and then again for a four-year term in 2005).

In order to try and give the six affected members the eligibility to run for another two years, and thus have the ability to serve for eight years total (actually in some cases it winds up being a little more than eight years), the council passed a law to change that particular portion of the term limits legislation. Local Law 27, passed in September 2002, was vetoed by Mayor Bloomberg but the city council easily overrode the mayoral objection.

Last month, on March 19th, a State Supreme Court judge in Brooklyn struck down the newly passed legislation, stating it was a violation of Municipal Home Rule Law and the City Charter. Justice Gerard Rosenberg argued that the voters had passed the law, and any changes to the law would also have to come from the voters.

The decision, which is being appealed, represented a major setback for the Speaker and a real dilemma for New York City voters. Who will be allowed to run for re-election in a few months? The petitioning process begins in June for ballot access. The uncertain outcome of the pending appeal, which is expected to come sometime in May or June, raises a number of implications for the city, in the courts, the city council, and the political scene.

As Jonathan Hicks in the New York Times explained, "candidates who were planning for their campaigns to begin in earnest in early 2005 have to raise money and devise strategies quickly in the event the court ruling is upheld. 'It's put a lot of people into a holding pattern,' said Daniel R. Garodnick, a lawyer who is considering running for a council seat from the East Side of Manhattan."

The Political Battle

The struggle for resolution represents more than just the balance of power between the legislative and the judicial branches of city government. The charismatic Gifford Miller, the young City Council Speaker, accomplished a major coup when he was elected to the top leadership post at the beginning of the 2002 session. He immediately became one of a handful of top tier Democratic candidates for the 2005 mayoral campaign.

Miller has already raised one million dollars in anticipation of a challenge to incumbent mayor Mike Bloomberg, who would be eligible to run for re-election. It is an impressive sum, but it becomes even more impressive when viewed against the backdrop of Miller's first sixteen months as speaker. Miller has inherited the mantle of a New York City Democratic party still largely divided over brutal primary battles in 2001 and 2002. He has led the city council in a time of tremendous financial strain for the city, and worked side by side with the mayor during the all-important budget negotiations.

He is an impressive political leader, but he is also clearly aware that his political future could depend on his ability to remain in office beyond the end of 2003. The advantages of incumbency are well known to any candidate: increased visibility, free media coverage, access to staff and organization, support of party leaders, a record of accomplishments on which to run, and even the subtle authority of a title: "former Speaker" just doesn't have the same ring to it.

There is one man who carries the title of former Speaker who might have some advice for Miller and his colleagues. In 1994, U.S. House Speaker Tom Foley found himself subject to term limits laws passed in his home state of Washington. Rather than retire, he filed suit and successfully fought the newly created laws, which were thrown out as unconstitutional. But the voters didn't appreciate the finer points of constitutional law; they didn't particularly like having their wishes thrown out in court. And when Foley ran for re-election, he made the kind of history he wasn't counting on: he became only the second sitting House Speaker in history to lose a bid for re-election, and the first since the Civil War. (The very first was a young Congressman elected to the post as a proxy in a little known and largely forgettable back room deal).

Of course, this isn't 1800 or 1994, and Gifford Miller is neither a gullible proxy nor an over- privileged, entrenched, long-term incumbent. There is a very reasonable argument to be made that the council was merely trying to correct an unintended consequence of the law (a "quirk" was how Miller described it) and restore the true spirit of the referenda.

And at any rate, New York voters may be too overwhelmed and preoccupied to pay that kind of vindictive attention. And understandably so.

Although the suit to strike down Local Law 27 came from Republican plaintiffs, this isn't really a battle between Democratic and Republican interests. There are virtually no scenarios in which Republicans could gain even a sizable minority in the City Council, whether or not Miller and his five colleagues are allowed to run again. Rather, the forthcoming decision in the Court of Appeals could determine whether the Democratic Party will be ruled by the young enthusiasts, or the seasoned survivalists; it could determine whether the elections are widely competitive or largely perfunctory; and it could determine whether the Democratic mayoral nomination is an insider's battle to maintain power or an outsider's struggle to regain it.

And then, after the decision comes down, it will remain to be determined whether or not the voters wanted to be saved from their own mistakes.

Susan Reefer is a Republican pollster and media strategist. She is based in New York City.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Mayor Bloomberg's 2004 Budget


When Mayor Michael Bloomberg presented his plan to close a $3.8 billion deficit last week, he said that "there are no good answers, there are only choices."

For each and every choice, somebody is protesting. (See a budget breakdown below.)

The mayor has chosen to cut $600 million and lay off some 4,500 city workers. He plans to close 12 child health clinics, end take-home weekend meals for 7,500 seniors, padlock eight firehouses, and even shut down the zoos of Brooklyn and Queens.

And he is counting on the State Legislature and Governor Pataki in Albany to provide hundreds of millions of dollars in aid and a commuter tax.

That's his best-case scenario. If Albany doesn't come through, the mayor's "doomsday budget" has an additional $1 billion in cuts and another 10,000 layoffs.

Some agree with Bloomberg's approach.

Douglas Offerman of the Citizens Budget Commission supports the mayor's plan. He says it is time to ask three groups that have failed to help the city so far – commuters, politicians, and the labor unions – to do their part. (Read his article).

But others say the mayor is making the wrong choices.

Doug Turetsky of the Independent Budget Office says Bloomberg is resorting to scare tactics, grabbing headlines with the threat of closing zoos, when he should be exploring other, more substantial ways of saving money. (Read his article)

Glenn Pasanen says the City Council, which proposed a more palatable commuter tax, is being more realistic than the mayor. But he says, both the mayor and the City Council should be seeking an increase in the personal income tax, which is more likely to get through Albany. (Read his article)

While experts offer their analysis of the entire budget, advocates are focusing on the line-by-line cuts in areas like police, fire, education, parks, health, and transportation. Here are some of the specific cuts in the mayor's best-case scenario (his "doomsday" budget would be worse) and how New Yorkers are reacting.

CUTS IN MAYOR BLOOMERG'S BUDGET

Children And Youth

• Close 12 of 30 child health clinics
• Eliminate school-based health programs
• Lay off 100 school nurse assistants
• Eliminate hepatitis B immunization program in schools
• Cut $762,000 to youth programs
• Cut $6.3 million cut to child care and increasing parent fees
• Eliminate 600 beds in group homes for foster children

"It cuts out the nuts and bolts support that families need to live, work and raise their children," said Gail Nayowith, Citizens' Committee for Children of New York.

Education

• Eliminate 864 full time classroom aides
• Eliminate summer school for 29,500 students
• Cut $17 million from after-school programs
• Eliminate 300 of 500 full-time school lunch workers through attrition
• Cut 77 substance abuse workers
• Eliminate the entire $200 yearly allowance for each teacher to buy classroom supplies
• Fewer paid sabbaticals for teachers

"The programs that really help kids like after-school, like summer school, like school aides, like paraprofessionals, those are being cut," said Randi Weingarten, president of the United Federation of Teachers. "I suggested to the mayor that he put a hiring freeze on at Tweed [for the Department of Education]. Stop hiring these executives at $135,000 a pop."

Elderly

• End take-home weekend meals for 7,500 senior citizens
• Close two senior citizen centers
• Eliminate 9 information and referral services that serve immigrant communities
• Cut $7.5 million in discretionary money for elderly from borough presidents budgets

"We're just being let down," said Bobbie Sackman of the Council of Senior Centers and Services. "The people of New York City are being told to fend for themselves, and clearly frail senior citizens can't do that."

Fire

• Close eight firehouses
• Hire 300 firefighters to reduce overtime
• Lay off 75 full-time and 119 part-time civilian workers
• Reduce number of the Fire Marshal Program by 25 percent

"It makes about as much sense as cutting the 101st Airborne during the war in Iraq," said Peter Gorman, President of the Uniformed Fire Officers Association.

Health

• Cut 351 jobs from the Department of Health and Mental Hygiene
• Reduce city funding for six Communicare health clinics
• Lay off 20 people in the chief medical examiner's office

"If you mess with healthcare in an urban area this compact and tight, you're threatening every New Yorker," said David Jones of the Community Service Society. "I don't care how wealthy. We only have to look at the epidemic that's spreading through Asia now to recognize: Don't mess with healthcare."

Parks

• Eliminate subsidies to Queens and Prospect Park zoos
• Eliminate 152 full-time staff through attrition and early retirement
• Reduce seasonal workers by 1,000 part time and 3 full time positions
• Prune trees only in emergencies

"If a park is not cleaned and programmed, its not safe. We'll be tumbling back to the 1970s," said Rowena Daly of New Yorkers for Parks.

Police

• Reduce number of officers working on the streets each day by 290
• Eliminate Operation Condor – the narcotics enforcement initiative
• Eliminate $4 million in overtime for special events

"You cannot underestimate the safety factor and we are on the verge of losing that and we can't allow this to happen," said Patrick Lynch of the Patrolmen's Benevolent Association police union.

Sanitation

• Lay off 202 uniformed sanitation workers
• Eliminate 75 other positions through attrition and early retirement
• Reduce trash pickups in Queens and Staten Island from two to one time a week
• Reduce trash pickups in Brooklyn from three to two times a week
• Close centers where residents can dump trash too large for curbside collection

We fought that blizzard, turned it around," said Harry Nespoli of the Uniformed Sanitationmen's Association. "He should be pinning medals on the men, not laying them off."

Transportation

• Cut $200 million in city subsidies to Metropolitan Transportation Authority
• Reduce Staten Island Ferry service from 4 to 3 boats during rush hour
• Increase street parking from $1 to $1.50 an hour

"Cutting city aid will lead to another fare hike," said Gene Russianoff of the Straphangers Campaign. "Mayor Bloomberg is trying to balance the budget on the backs of the riding public."



RELATED ARTICLES:

• Evicting Bears Won't Balance the Budget by Doug Turetsky
• The Mayor Is Right to Go After Commuters, Albany, and Labor Unions by Douglas Offerman
• Stop the Rhetoric – Raise the Income Tax by Glenn Pasanen



 

Fraud Stalls Wireless Library Project


This month a new pilot project was to begin that would use wireless technology to turn New York libraries into high-speed Internet hubs for low-income neighborhoods. But it has been delayed, thanks to the controversy over a federal program known as E-rate.

Congress created E-Rate in 1996 in order to give schools and libraries -- especially the poorest ones -- substantial subsidies (up to 90 percent of the cost) to enable them to wire classrooms for Internet access. Hundreds of millions of dollars in E-rate funds have been distributed in New York City alone, out of a total fund of about $2.25 billion, paid for by consumers in taxes of about ten percent on their monthly telephone bills.

But in December 2002, according to the Times, a Staten Island Internet company, Connect2 Internet Networks Inc., was the focus of a criminal case accusing it of conspiring to enlist school officials in order to steal millions of dollars from the E-Rate program. Indeed, a recent report by The Center for Public Integrity found that the E-Rate program is riddled with fraud, and a report on the Universal Service Fund, the agency that oversees the E-Rate program, by the Federal Communications Commision's Inspector General's Office [pdf format] found "something wrong everywhere we have looked," according to FCC auditor Tom Cline. The United States House of Representatives launched an investigation of E-Rate, led by Congressman Billy Tauzin, a Republican who is chairman of the Committee on Energy and Commerce. Tauzin has opposed E-Rate from the beginning; there is already a bill pending to completely eliminate the E-Rate program.

"While there have always been attacks on E-Rate, the program's detractors are gaining momentum with the recent charges of waste, fraud and abuse," said New York City Councilmember Gale Brewer, who is the head of the select committee on technology in government. "Of course we have to investigate these serious charges; but this process should strengthen the program not lead to its dismantling, as some in the House are currently proposing."

New York's public schools cannot afford to lose the E-Rate funding. The city's Department of Education already faces a 25 percent cut to its capital budget, which deprived schools of $8 million in city telecommunications funding this year. As a result, the city will lose $24 million in leveraged federal dollars for E-Rate supported programs.

An immediate victim of the scandal is the experimental project that would have allowed libraries to share their Internet access beyond their walls with community-based organizations and small businesses within a ten block radius. In this way, libraries would have been able to serve as round-the-clock access points for free high-speed connectivity for students, community-based organizations and small businesses.

But just a few days after the city was given verbal approval to conduct a one-year experiment, Congress launched its investigation and the city was told it would have to go through a formal FCC waiver process which could take years.

"We are very proud of this project and I am very disappointed that there has been a delay," said Council Speaker Gifford Miller.

The total cost of the pilot project would have been just $30,000 for five pilot library sites. The necessary bandwidth is already paid for, through a mix of city and federal funds, and participants in the planning of the project have included NYCwireless and Cisco Systems Inc.

In all, the project could allow as many as 50 community organizations get access, and enable some 500 low-income New Yorkers to use the Internet for education and training, which could result in economic gains for their communities. Now the city must look elsewhere for funding in order to jumpstart this project.

CITYWIDE IT STRATEGY

In an effort to better coordinate information technology (IT) plans across city agencies, on April 9, Councilmember Brewer introduced two new bills: the first would require that all agencies produce annual IT plans which would be incorporated into a comprehensive strategy by the Department of Information Technology and Telecommunications , and the second requires that department to develop a five-year telecommunications plan every three years. Such annual strategies are badly needed since the city has not produced a comprehensive report for information technology since 1999. Furthermore, city agencies should seek out input from non-profit groups, academics from diverse fields including sociology and communications (not just engineers), and especially the public in drafting their information technology strategies so that the greatest number of creative ideas can be incorporated into the plans.

More On E-Rate

Top 25 Recipients of E-Rate Funds

NYC Schools that Received E-Rate Funds in 2002

Tauzin Letter to FCC

Universal Service Administrative Company

NYC Education E-Rate Office

Laura Forlano is a doctoral student studying communication technology policy at Columbia University.



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