The first Democratic mayoral debate
Eight Democratic mayoral candidates took the virtual stage on Thursday for the first of three official televised debates leading up to the June primary. Over the course of two hours, the candidates offered thoughts and plans on public safety, reviving the city’s economy, school desegregation, housing, homelessness, and more. The debate was mostly civil, likely in part because of the virtual format, but candidates did occasionally lob pointed critiques at each other, previewing the direction the race may take over the next six weeks.
The debate, mandated by the Campaign Finance Board, was sponsored by Spectrum News NY1 and co-hosts WNYC/Gothamist, The CITY, Citizens Union, John Jay College of Criminal Justice, and Social Work Votes at the Columbia School of Social Work & Latino Leadership Institute. NY1 anchor Errol Louis moderated along with WNYC radio host Brian Lehrer and The CITY reporter Josefa Velázquez.
The eight candidates, running to replace term-limited Mayor Bill de Blasio, a Democrat, are former nonprofit executive Dianne Morales, entrepreneur Andrew Yang, former counsel to the mayor Maya Wiley, former sanitation commissioner Kathryn Garcia, Brooklyn Borough President Eric Adams, Comptroller Scott Stringer, former Citigroup executive Ray McGuire, and former federal housing secretary Shaun Donovan.
While the candidates covered a lot of ground and many interesting differences emerged, here are five key takeaways from the debate:
Sharp Differences in Policing Strategy
Policing and public safety took center stage for much of the debate and candidates expressed contrasting approaches, even as they all seemed to decry elements of the NYPD’s history of aggressive and racially-biased policing.
With homicides up 17% and shootings up by about 83% this year so far compared to last year, which itself saw big spikes in both categories, gun violence has become a major focal point of the campaign, but candidates have different plans for addressing it, with some more focused on policing and others on root causes like poverty, unemployment, and lack of education.
The more progressive candidates in the race such as Wiley, Donovan, Stringer, and Morales, have advocated for redirecting between $1 and $3 billion from the police department or the broader criminal justice system into underserved communities, responding to calls to “defund the NYPD” that crescendoed last year after the police killing of George Floyd. The more moderate contenders like Adams, McGuire, Garcia, and Yang mostly argue against cutting the police budget by any significant amount and want to beef up certain police roles and strategies, particularly in terms of units that go after guns.
Stringer spoke of expanding the violence interrupter program from 17 to all 77 precincts and investing in mental health professionals to respond to mental health-related 911 calls. “[W]e cannot, in this moment, simply go back to the Giuliani style of policing that impacted Black and brown children, that scarred them,” he said, while also saying he did not want to go back to the bad old days of high crime.
“[T]he reality of it is that safety is not synonymous with policing,” said Morales, pointing out that crime has been rising despite New York having the largest and most well-funded police department in the country. “The reality of it is that our communities are over-policed and under-resourced, so the violence that we're addressing or that we're witnessing is actually happening on the watch of the NYPD.”
Adams said he would reinstate a plain-clothes unit to get guns off the street and to tackle gang-related violence. “[T]he prerequisite to prosperity is public safety,” he said in using one of his campaign tag lines.
Yang was unequivocal in his support for the police. “The first thing I do as mayor is go to our police force and say that your city needs you, your city needs you to do your jobs professionally, responsibly and justly...And let me be clear, defund the police is the wrong approach for New York City,” he said.
When asked if they would send more police officers to patrol the subways, as the MTA has repeatedly called for in response to recent instances of violent crimes below ground, Stringer, Morales, and Wiley said they would not, while the others indicated they would. Several candidates, including Wiley and Garcia, noted that they would send more mental health professionals and homeless outreach workers to help New Yorkers in the subways who need services.
Education Differences
The candidates offered varying approaches to addressing inequities in New York City schools, with some focused on hiring more teachers and retaining teachers of color while others emphasized the need to address factors outside of school such as childcare and housing. Few directly answered the part of the question about desegregating the city’s highly segregated schools.
Donovan pointed to the disparity in teacher representation, noting that the city has fewer than 45% teachers of color in a system that's more than 85% students of color, as he spoke of his plan to hire and retain more teachers. But he also emphasized that the disparities exist because of the inequitable housing market. “We can't end segregation in our schools without ending segregation in our housing,” he said.
Yang said he would create an Education Opportunity Fund to provide $1,000 grants for tutoring and speech therapy to families living below the poverty line or with a child who is an English language learner or has an Individualized Education Program.
Garcia wants to expand the number of specialized high schools and admit the top 10% of students from middle schools, which she said is “not only about racial integration but also economic integration.”
Wiley said she would immediately hire 2,500 new teachers to reduce overcrowding in classrooms and provide trauma-informed care in schools.
Morales said she would issue an executive order immediately aimed at desegregating schools by removing all admissions screenings, redrawing school districts, eliminating the Specialized High School Admissions Test from the schools the mayor has control over, removing police from schools, and more.
Stringer spoke of expanded child care and after-school programs. Adams insisted on universal testing for dyslexia and to ensure fair student funding also affects “conditions around the schools,” without offering specifics. McGuire pitched his “cradle to career” plan that would begin with ensuring that no student leaves third grade without learning to read.
The lightning round of brief answers to questions on education drew other distinctions.
Garcia, Stringer, Donovan, Yang, and Morales supported requiring covid vaccinations for students to return to school in the fall, as some colleges have begun to mandate, but none of the candidates were in favor of mandatory vaccinations for teachers and other school personnel.
Only Stringer and Adams supported providing a full-time remote learning option when the school year begins in September.
Asked if they would support retaining the Specialized High School Admissions Test (SHSAT) as the only criteria for admission to the city’s specialized high schools, only Garcia and Adams were in favor.
The Frontrunner Treatment
Yang and Adams have been the frontrunners in all the polling of the mayoral race and it was apparent at the debate, with the other candidates going after their records and attempting to undercut their momentum, though neither quite received the intense treatment that may come closer to primary day if the polls continue to show them toward the top (and Yang has mostly held a lead on Adams in the limited available polling).
Yang, more than Adams, was on the receiving end, but at times it was more oblique. For example, in his opening statement Stringer said the city “cannot afford a mayor on training wheels,” which could apply to Yang most prominently, but also political newcomers like McGuire and Morales.
Later, in the cross examination round where each candidate got to ask another one question, Stringer more directly took on Yang, while also taking a veiled shot at Wiley. Citing ethics issues that plagued Mayor de Blasio for much of his first term, stemming from special access to outside advisors and lobbyists, including the “agents of the city” that Wiley had designated as protected from public disclosure, Stringer pointed to Yang’s own campaign, which is being managed and staffed by lobbyists from Tusk Strategies. He asked Yang to commit to an ethical administration if elected, free of those influences, though he did not clearly outline why voters should be particularly concerned about Yang’s situation.
“[W]e need a mayor who's not beholden to special interests, who’ll just make decisions based upon what's best for the people and families of the city, and everyone watching this knows that I have my own vision, my own plans, my own agenda,” Yang responded.
McGuire called out Yang’s record at the nonprofit he founded, Venture for America, specifically pointing to reporting done by The New York Times, based off interviews with former VFA employees, that Yang “once offhandedly remarked that the nonprofit fellowship program, Venture for America, might simply not be the best fit for Black applicants.” McGuire asked Yang if he regretted saying that.
Yang offered a shaky defense of the episode. After talking about the racial inequities in the tech sector, Mcguire pressed the question again and Yang said, “It was like a hypothetical where I was posing it to my team in order to challenge our thinking. But if you look at the numbers, we were working in Detroit, New Orleans, Cleveland, cities that were majority Black and our fellow representation actually ended up increasing the diversity in the firms we worked with.”
McGuire asked Yang simply, “Do you regret saying that?”
“I actually don't even remember saying that,” Yang responded, “but I'm like if you say that, you know, it's documented somewhere I didn't want to come and say, ‘Hey I didn't say that.’ But I genuinely don't remember making that statement.”
Donovan jumped in to go at Yang. “As a member of the Obama administration, I'm offended to hear Andrew hide behind that [Champions] for Change award,” he said of recognition the administration had given Yang for VFA. “It was about promise and not results and I think so often we've seen promises from him but not results. This is not time for a rookie as mayor.”
Yang responded that he had been honored twice by the Obama administration – referring both to the “Champions for Change” award he received in 2012 and being named a “Presidential Ambassador for Global Entrepreneurship” in 2015.
It was Wiley who put Adams on the defensive repeatedly, questioning his praise for stop-and-frisk as an effective policing tool, asking him “how can New Yorkers trust you to protect us and to keep us safe from police misconduct?”
“Every time you raise that question, it really just shows your failure of understanding law enforcement,” Adams said.
“Having chaired the New York City Civilian Complaint Review Board, I certainly understand misconduct,” she retorted, to which Adams said the CCRB “was a failure under you.”
Adams touted his extensive record of criticizing abusive stop-and-frisk policing while also pressing Wiley on whether she, a civil rights lawyer with the ACLU, ever spoke out on the issue herself, but the exchange was cut off.
When the moderator asked Adams about his past affiliation with the Republican Party in the ‘90s, Wiley stepped in to critique him for being a self-proclaimed “conservative Republican” (a characterization Adams disrupted though he was a Republican and has recently acknowledge he’s always considered himself “conservative on crime”) and for praising former Mayor Rudy Giuliani, who oversaw rampant police abuses. “I think we all have our own opinions, but we don't have our own facts,” Adams said, casting doubts on reported characterizations.
In response, Wiley’s campaign pointed to an article in the New York Daily News from 1999, which quoted Adams as saying, “‘Look, Giuliani deserves tremendous credit for the falling crime rate. [Mayor David] Dinkins was way too soft on crime. And what Giuliani has done, was done despite serious critics who said it couldn't be done. But he had the will to do it, so it was done.’”
In the cross-examination round, Donovan too went after Adams, pressing him to explain his past comments that he would carry a gun as mayor. “As a New Yorker, but also as a parent, I'm deeply concerned about the idea of a mayor who carries a gun at a time where gun violence is spiking, and we're losing so many people in New York,” Donovan said.
Adams repeated the defense he has offered previously, that he has the right to carry a gun as a retired NYPD officer and he would only do so if the NYPD reports credible threats against him. “I think it is hypocritical to state that the city is safe, but we're walking around with five or six members of your detail,” he said of the police protection a mayor gets. “We could cut that down to two and put those officers to protect the public.”
Yang and Adams also sparred during the debate. When Yang sought to take credit for helping Democrats flip the two Senate seats in Georgia this past January, Adams quickly chimed in. “That is disrespectful and appalling to Stacey Abrams and those Black women who organized on the ground,” he said.
Yang said he “would give full credit” but noted that there is a not insignificant Asian population in Georgia that he may have helped to activate and that he had helped raise money to be used in the state. “So full credit to Stacey and everyone else who has been doing the work for years but it's okay for other people to contribute to their success,” he said.
And while both Yang and Adams were on the receiving end of questions and criticism, Yang continued to take his above-the-fray approach while Adams was happy to mix it up more. Along with Yang, Morales and Garcia, who was riding high after winning the coveted endorsement of the New York Times editorial board, both mostly or fully stayed positive, as all three have, almost without exception, throughout the campaign.
Wiley and Donovan Assert Themselves, Stringer Takes a Backseat
The most assertive candidates, trying to break through in a crowded field and debate, and looking to give their midling campaigns a jolt, were Wiley and Donovan. Both repeatedly took opportunities to talk about their campaign platforms rather than falling back on vague talking points, and both jumped into the discussion uninvited several times.
Wiley was by nearly all accounts more effective, making quick retorts focused on specific policies that she has advanced and critiquing opponents in sharp bursts, while Donovan repeatedly boasted of his work for President Barack Obama and came across at times as hectoring or condescending.
Stringer, who has been in the top three with Adams and Yang in most polls, seemed poorly suited for the virtual debate and occupied less air time than most if not all of the other candidates. His staid approach didn’t seem to make much of an impact in a debate where candidates were going after each other’s records and histories, and while he did take several opportunities to clearly outline some of his extensive policy plans on issues like housing, he mostly appeared on the sidelines other than one particular moment when he made many of the candidates, and perhaps viewers, laugh by rebuking Donovan, who had referenced Stringer in trying to excuse the fact that Donovan’s father is pumping millions of dollars into a Super PAC to support his son’s mayoral bid.
Stringer may have been less willing to call out other candidates because he’s continuing to deal with a sexual harassment and assault allegation levelled against him by a volunteer on his 2001 campaign for public advocate, a topic that Louis raised when he went around to each candidate with a specific issue to challenge them on. Stringer reiterated his denials of the allegations, but it was a reminder that what had been an ascendent campaign has been wounded.
Other Shaky Statements
Along with Wiley's attacks on Adams and defenses offered by Yang and Donovan, there were a few other statements, or non-statements, from some of the candidates that strained credulity and bore further examination.
Morales, during the cross-examination, pressed Adams to explain his criticism of the “defund the NYPD” movement. He was quoted in New York Magazine last month, saying, “Now, this is really being led by a different demographic. There are a lot of young white affluent people who are coming in and setting the conversation.” Morales noted that many organizers calling for defunding the NYPD are Black and Latino and challenged Adams on what he would say to them.
Adams claimed at the debate that he was talking about the “disband” movement that seeks to dismantle police departments entirely. Indeed, in the New York Magazine article, he did cite a New York Times op-ed from June 2020 titled, “Yes, We Mean Literally Abolish the Police.” But his criticism of the ‘defund’ movement has been consistent and he has repeatedly said that it is Black and brown New Yorkers who are calling for more policing, which makes his defense somewhat muddled, if not completely false.
When asked if any of them had ever voted for a Republican, no candidate raised a hand. But there’s reason to believe some of the candidates may not have been telling the truth.
Donovan served as housing commissioner under former Mayor Michael Bloomberg, a record he often touts. But Bloomberg was a Republican from 2001, when he took office, to 2007, halfway through his second term. Donovan’s campaign confirmed on Friday that he voted for Bloomberg in 2005 on the Independence Party line, but that does not change the fact that Donovan voted for someone who was a Republican.
Adams, who was a registered Republican from 1995-2002, also claims to never have voted for a Republican, making his party-switch mysterious, though it came just after he had launched an aborted campaign to challenge Rep. Major Owens in 1994 and he has previously said he changed affiliations because he believed Democrats were too soft on crime. Asked to confirm Adams’ debate answer, his campaign insisted he had never voted for any Republican.
The candidates were also asked if they supported the turnover of some public housing developments to private management, under a federal program called Rental Assistance Demonstration (RAD), which Donovan helped design as HUD secretary. None of the candidates raised their hand when asked the question. But, Donovan, Garcia, and Adams have all expressed support for the policy in the past.
And Garcia, whose sister owns a catering hall in Brooklyn, claimed that "It really doesn't happen," when discussing people getting sick in New York City from eating at restaurants, in arguing that the Health Department should schedule visits instead of doing surprise check-ins, which she said hurt establishments' bottom lines. The New York Post looked into it and found that while there appears to be a fairly limited number of food poisoning incidents traced to New York City restaurants, at least reported ones and compared to how many meals are served throughout the city, there are pros and cons to the surprise inspections.
***
by Samar Khurshid, senior reporter, Gotham Gazette
@samarkhurshid @GothamGazette
Ben Max contributed to this story.
Adrienne Adams and Ruben Wills
City Council Member Adrienne Adams, a first-term Democrat, is among the several candidates seeking to become the next Speaker of the City Council. But her first hurdle will be defeating two challengers in the imminent June primary to win a second term representing Council District 28 in Southeast Queens. Among those challengers is her predecessor, Ruben Wills, who was expelled from the Council following a corruption conviction but was recently exonerated and is seeking a political comeback.
District 28 includes Jamaica, Richmond Hill, Rochdale Village and South Ozone Park, neighborhoods with a large Black population and diverse immigrant communities like much of the rest of the borough. The district is home to more than 240,000 residents, more than a third of whom speak a language other than English, including Spanish, French Creole, Hindi, Chinese, Urdu, French, and Tagalog. According to City Council data, the most requested constituent service in the district in 2018 was for assistance with citizenship applications.
Community District 12 in Queens, which is almost entirely residential and includes large parts of the Council district and other neighborhoods, has a population that is 42.4% foreign-born. Almost one in five residents live in poverty, about 47% are rent-burdened, and unemployment was almost 6% before the pandemic, higher than the citywide 4%. Richmond Hill, Jamaica, and South Ozone Park are among the neighborhoods that were hardest hit by the coronavirus and continue to suffer, and vaccination rates in Southeast Queens are lower than in the rest of the city overall.
Adams has the advantage of incumbency in the race. She won her seat in 2017 after a tight but low turnout primary where she received 3,499 votes out of 9,155 that were >cast, defeating two other candidates to become the first woman to represent the district. She faced nominal opposition in the general election, winning about 80% of the vote.
The district 28 seat was vacant at the time, after Wills was automatically expelled from the legislative body following a conviction on charges of misappropriating public funds. He was sentenced to six years in prison and served two before being released in 2019. In September last year, his conviction was overturned by an appeals court – which found that he was deprived of his due process right to present witnesses of his choosing – and just last month, he was fully exonerated in New York State Supreme Court.
Adams is not daunted by Wills’ return to politics. “I'm excited about my reelection. I am energized by it,” she said in a phone interview. “I love what I do. I know that I'm born to do this work and as I always say, I wake up every day on purpose with a purpose.”
Since December, Adams has chaired the Council’s high-profile public safety committee, which includes in its purview the NYPD, the city’s five district attorneys, the Civilian Complaint Review Board, the Mayor’s Office of Criminal Justice, courts, legal services, and the Office of the Special Narcotics Prosecutor. In her time in office, she has been the prime sponsor of only five bills, four of which have been passed into law, including one that requires the NYPD to issue quarterly reports on vehicle stops and another regulating employment and layoffs in the fast food industry. The bill she hasn’t been successful in passing would give the City Council advice and consent power over the appointment of the police commissioner. In all, she has been a sponsor on 29 bills before the Council, most of which have passed.
While she has pushed for more oversight over the NYPD and helped approve a recent package of police reforms by the Council, Adams was also one of the members who ardently argued against a major ‘defunding’ of the police department, saying that communities like hers want just but robust policing. Her voice on the matter, as a Black woman, was one that influenced the approach by City Council Speaker Corey Johnson and the final deal that was reached making limited cuts to the NYPD budget, despite intense calls by a number of Council members and thousands of activists who wanted to cut $1 billion from the NYPD’s nearly $6 billion operating budget.
Adams’ argument for reelection is that she has brought home more resources and investment for the district than previous members. “I have far superseded the work of any of my predecessors when it comes to bringing home the bacon to District 28,” she said. “I've allocated more funding to this district than any other Council member before me. I have funded more CEOs and nonprofits in my first term. Over 40 of them that have never received funding before have gotten funding through me, through my office, and through my fight for them.”
She also isn’t running on her bid for the speakership. “I'm not going out touting, ‘I'm running for speaker,’ even though I am,” she said. “I’m not touting that to my district as that being my priority. My priority is to make sure that my district is protected in leadership.”
It’s a clear pitch that, along with the name recognition that comes with incumbency, could convince voters. But Wills also has the advantage of name recognition and a history in the district. Adams will have to win broader support than her 2017 base given Wills’ presence and that the election features ranked-choice voting, where voters can rank candidates in order of preference. If one candidate gets more than 50% of the first-place votes, however, the rankings do not come into play.
Adams has raised concerns about the new voting system, which was overwhelmingly approved by city voters through referendum, even joining with several Council colleagues in an unsuccessful legal challenge to postpone its implementation. They worry that outreach and awareness efforts have not been sufficient and that voters, particularly people of color, will be disenfranchised if it is hastily executed. “The powers that be are playing catch up and trying to get everybody up to speed,” she said. “That is to the detriment of the voters across the board, across the city...When I go out and I speak to my constituents, they don't know rank choice voting from a hole in the wall.”
Adams has the clear advantage in fundraising, with nearly $176,000 in campaign cash as of March 11. She also has a slate of prominent endorsements including the backing of the Queens County Democratic Party, led by U.S. Rep. Gregory Meeks, powerful unions such as the United Federation of Teachers, New York City District Council of Carpenters, PSC CUNY and the LaborStrong2021 coalition which includes 32BJ SEIU, the Communications Workers of America, DC37, Hotel Trades Council and the New York State Nurses Association and other groups like NYIC Action, the New York League of Conservation Voters and the Stonewall Democrats.
Adams’ main competitor is Wills, who is seeking political redemption and wants voters to remember what he accomplished in the nearly seven years he served before being unceremoniously removed from the Council. “I can't be restored by the courts for something that a rogue prosecutor did, I can only be restored by the voters. And that's what I'm looking for,” he said in a phone interview.
He noted that as a member, he had taken efforts to digitize classrooms and was working to provide students with laptops and free WiFi in underserved parts of the district. “If that work had been continued, I believe that it would’ve mitigated a lot of the negative impact that our students faced during this pandemic having to be at home,” he said. He also led the Council’s legislation on banning synthetic marijuana, known as K2, in 2015 after use of the drug increased dramatically and landed thousands of people in hospitals.
Wills’ pitch is that he wants to continue the work that was interrupted four years ago, whether that’s expanding the K2 ban to other synthetics, finishing the work he was doing for schools or accelerating affordable housing projects that he proposed years ago and stalled. “Look at what we've done, what I'm going to continue to do, and how we did it,” he said.
He also explained that the one thing he was particularly known for in the Council, his chronic absence because of health issues, is no longer a problem. “My health is well enough for me to run and advocate and do the things I need to do for my community,” he said.
His experience with the criminal justice system, including time in jail on Rikers Island, has also prompted new policy priorities. He plans to advance wrongful conviction legislation named after retired NYPD Detective Louis Scarcella, who was investigated for framing several people later found to be innocent. Wills’ proposal would remove the statute of limitations for someone who has been wrongfully convicted to file a lawsuit in claims court.
With just $18,000 in campaign funds so far, Wills falls far short of Adams fundraising lead.
Japneet Singh, the third contender in the race, is a young, first-time candidate with no campaign cash as of March 11. The Sikh activist from South Ozone Park, who founded the New York Sikh Council community group, represents a growing South Asian population that has become more politically engaged, with several other candidates like him running for City Council and other offices this year.
“Almost since this district was made, there has been no voice from this side of the Van Wyck,” he said. “Two-thirds of the district actually feels like they are left out from a seat on the table.”
If he wins, Singh would be the first Sikh to represent any elected public office across the state. “I'm the first visibly turbaned man running for office,” he said. He’s hoping to get more members of his community engaged with city government, to give them a voice in everything from elections to land use decisions.
“I'm going to have constant dialogue with the people that live here, not just talking about community leaders, with the actual people...Why is it that we have 70,000 registered Democrats in our area and only 8,000 vote? Why is that? So we want to have a majority of those people come out and say what works for them and what doesn't, and that's how we're going to make decisions.”
Singh says the lack of representation means that community organizations and houses of worship are losing out on nonprofit funding awarded by the City Council, a seemingly direct criticism of the record that Council Member Adams boasts.
Singh’s top priorities are education and infrastructure. As a member, he would increase funding for public schools and after-school programs, he said, items always the first on the chopping block during times of fiscal uncertainty. His eventual goal is to make public college free as well. He was particularly concerned about adult education programs, which he said are essential for seniors in immigrant-heavy communities. “We would expand those and bring those back for sure and get them to a higher level,” he said. And he wants to fund a new community center for youth and elders. “It's sad that we have Lincoln Park which is a renowned park in all of sports, but at the same time we don’t have anything indoors.”
He also said he would establish a new office in the middle of the district, providing easier access to residents seeking constituent services.
>> >***
by Samar Khurshid, senior reporter, Gotham Gazette
@samarkhurshid @GothamGazette
Mayor de Blasio at Cornell Tech (photo: Edwin J. Torres/Mayor's Office)
A report released Wednesday provides technological solutions for some of the city’s myriad problems and examines the barriers to their adoption, with the hope of provoking intense debate about urban technology in this year’s municipal election.
The 124-page report, titled “Rebooting NYC: An Urban Tech Agenda for the Next Administration,” is a first draft released by Cornell Tech’s Urban Tech Hub, part of the Jacobs Technion-Cornell Institute located on Roosevelt Island. It provides the beginnings of a roadmap for utilizing existing technology to improve the city’s provision of services, optimizing the built environment, and expanding New Yorkers’ engagement in civic life, among other goals. The report was created after interviews with more than 100 technology and civic experts from New York and around the world, according to its publishers.
Among the recommendations are approving new data privacy regulations, creating a Deputy Mayor for Technology, establishing an independent Emerging Technology Advisory Panel, and a Broadband Development Corporation, among several others.
This year’s New York City election is one of the most consequential in decades, as the city attempts to end and recover from the COVID-19 pandemic, which has cost tens of thousands of lives and hundreds of thousands of jobs while exposing and exacerbating long-standing problems. The next mayor, class of City Council members, and other elected officials will be tasked with leading the city’s recovery from the pandemic, ensuring equitable outcomes where there have been disproportionately unequal impacts. The Tech Hub’s report aims to aid those solutions, while also addressing some of the more anodyne functions of city government that can be improved with technology.
“This should really begin to inform a conversation around the role of technology in the city,” said Michael Samuelian, director of the Urban Tech Hub and formerly President and CEO of the Trust for Governors Island, among other roles in and out of government, in a phone interview. “I think there’s a lot of talk about tech and tech-enabled recovery but not a lot of details. So I think this provides the details...We're doing the research, we're doing the homework, we're kind of doing the hard work when it comes to what are the technologies that are available for the next administration to really take up.”
The report has five main areas of focus: protecting privacy; ensuring equal participation in the digital economy; improving the management of urban systems; easing access to government services; and anticipating the effect and implementation of future technology. It is, by no means, exhaustive and leaves open broad areas for discussion and feedback. “We didn't try to attack every problem. Tech isn’t the solution for everything,” said Samuelian.
But he noted that the next steps in the effort will expand the scope of the report. The Tech Hub has reached out to mayoral candidates to brief them on the report’s findings and will spend the next few months soliciting responses from civic tech groups, nonprofits, community organizations, and more before issuing a final >report by the end of the summer.
The report emphasizes that privacy and participation are the “necessary foundations” for the mass use of urban technology tools. It proposes a new law to regulate how city agencies (particularly the NYPD) collect and share data, and transparency and oversight measures for both the public and private sectors. It also addresses technology procurement by the city, proposing to consolidate technology-focused efforts under a new deputy mayor and a digital services team.
One of the more glaring issues that was brought to light by the pandemic is the digital divide across the city, with about 18% of New Yorkers lacking access to either a home or mobile internet connection. The Hub’s report proposes that the mayor and City Council establish a new Broadband Development Corporation to oversee the building of a citywide open-access fiber network. It also notes the need to address issues with electronic payments for those without bank account access and fixing difficulties in package deliveries.
Among the more immediate solutions proposed by the Hub are measures to improve how New Yorkers experience the built environment around them, particularly city streets and sidewalks. The report proposed technological remedies to traffic enforcement and management, expanding bike lanes to create wider New Mobility Lanes to accommodate new forms of mobility such as e-scooters, modernizing the design and construction industry, and testing the use of drones for building inspections to reduce the number of sidewalk sheds, also known as scaffolding.
One of the chief goals of the report is to ensure that New Yorkers have easier access to city services and can participate in local decision-making. It proposes creating secure “personal data lockers” that would store information about eligibility for city benefits, helping the city to streamline applications across agencies and allowing people to track their benefits — similar to what some mayoral candidates have been proposing. The report encourages the mayor and City Council to advocate for continuing virtual community board meetings (which would require a change in state law) and to provide community boards with technological support such as standardized webcasting kits, automatic transcription, captioning and translation services.
The report doesn’t just examine current problems, it is also forward looking. It urges the mayor to appoint an external body to develop regulations for emerging technologies and calls on the City Council to institute a permanent, independent Emerging Technology Advisory Panel that would issue reports every two years on those technologies and their potential impacts on the city.
The lead author on the report was Rohit Aggarwala, senior fellow at the Cornell Tech Urban Tech Hub. Among the experts consulted were Anusha Venkataram, the city’s Chief Service Officer; Department of Buildings Commissioner Melanie La Rocca; Albert Fox Cahn, founder and executive director of the Surveillance Technology Oversight Project; former city planning chief Carl Weisbrod; Elizabeth Goldstein, president of the Municipal Arts Society; Noel Hidalgo, cofounder of BetaNYC; Paul Steely White, a former transit advocate and now director of safety policy and advocacy for Bird scooters.
***
by Samar Khurshid, senior reporter, Gotham Gazette
@samarkhurshid @GothamGazette