Gotham Gazette

The Place for New York Policy and politics

State

Party Politics At Nexus Of Bribery Plot In Mayoral Race


cover

NEW YORK -- The arrest of state Sen. Malcolm Smith on allegations he orchestrated a scheme to bribe his way onto the ballot to run for mayor is bringing renewed attention to the role of party patronage in shaping elections.

The corruption allegations against Smith, detailed in a complaint unsealed in federal court yesterday after he was arrested, demonstrate the powerful if limited role that county party leaders continue to exercise in elections through their ability to reward access to their ballots.

“The road to elected local office in New York still often goes through county organizations,” said Doug Muzzio, a professor of political science at Baruch College.

This outsize role of parties even led Mayor Michael Bloomberg to weigh in on the Smith arrest by criticizing partisan elections.

“What happens is only people that can go through whatever the majority party is, whether it’s Democrats here or Republicans someplace else, they’re the only people that really can face the voters and have any meaningful chance of winning," he said at a press conference.

Each of New York City’s five counties has two party committees, one Republican and one Democratic. And each of those organizations has an executive committee led by a chairperson. During election years, candidates go to their parties’ respective county committees for an endorsement for the primaries, a move all the more important in a year with a crowded field of candidates.

That influence has played a role in New York City politics since the days of Tammany Hall, the infamous political organization that controlled Democratic politics in Manhattan for more than a century. Efforts to reform how elections are run by making them nonpartisan have failed in recent years.

Muzzio argued that today no one party leader has the same degree of city-wide influence as they did back in the days of Tammany Hall.

“Clearly, they are considerably weakened,” he said. “The bottom line, however, is that these county organizations still have juice.”

Among those remaining powers, Muzzio said, are a county party's ability to both nominate or prevent candidates from appearing on any number of ballot lines, as well as their political clout in local judicial races. Party bosses also lead the vote in nominating candidates in special elections.

Those vestigial powers are what attract candidates to jump political parties, especially whenever the field is particularly crowded — as it is this year. Bloomberg went this route in 2009, running on the Republican Party line when he was a registered independent. And Adolfo Carrion, and independent candidate running for mayor this year has also courted GOP leadership, hoping to secure access for a run on the Republican ticket.

Anyone running for a citywide office anyone running for a citywide office as a member of a party to which he or she does not belong is required to get consent from the party’s county committees by obtaining what are known as Wilson Pakula certificates, named for a 1947 law.

Federal prosecutors say Smith schemed to get Republican party officials to get him Wilson Pakula certificates in exchange for thousands of dollars in bribes. Prosecutors say two of the party officials who accepted money in the scheme, Joseph J. Savino, the Bronx Republican Party chairman, and Vincent Tabone, vice chairman of the Queens Republican Party, were arrested on charges they accepted $40,000 in exchange for agreeing to get their county committees to put Smith on the Republican ballot line.

Republican City Councilman Dan Halloran, of Queens, was also arrested and accused of accepting bribes.

Savino and Tabone were both brought into the bribery scheme by Halloran, who an undercover FBI agent and a confidential informant worked on to connect with party leaders from the five boroughs, federal prosecutors said.

Smith's attorney has said his client would fight the charges, and a spokesman for the senator said Smith would be "vindicated."

Late Tuesday, the Queens Republican party sent out a statement that called the allegations against Tabone and Halloran “sad,” and that the chair has “asked Tabone to resign from his position on the committee pending the outcome of the proceedings.”

Halloran’s own office sent out a statement to reporters on Tuesday evening fighting back against the allegations, including that he was willing to direct Council money that would have normally gone to organizations in his community as part of another scheme.

In the complaint, Halloran is quoted as saying to a confidential witness that he had no problem redirecting the funding.

"That's politics, that's politics, it's all about how much. Not about whether or will, it's about how much, and that's our politicians in New York, they're all like that, all like that," the complaint quotes him as saying. "And they get like that because of the drive that the money does for everything else."

Halloran's office sent out a statement denying the allegations. “When the full story comes out, [Halloran] is confident that he will be vindicated," the statement said.

City Council Speaker Christine Quinn’s office released a statement that called the allegations “a reprehensible abuse of the public's trust,” and that “if true, then the full weight of the legal system should be brought to bear on all parties implicated.” The Council will vote next week to strip Halloran of his committee assignments.

Smith, a member of the breakaway Independent Democratic Conference was also stripped of his chairmanship and committees. The leader of the IDC, state Sen. Jeff Klein, also sent out a statement implying that Smith might want to consider resigning from office. “Given the level of criminality alleged, I believe that Senator Smith should seriously consider whether or not he can continue to effectively serve his constituents,” he wrote.

The U.S. Attorney in Manhattan whose office is prosecuting the case, Preet Bharara, said the case was an example of how “a show-me-the-money culture seems to pervade every level of New York government.”

“Sen. Smith drew up the game plan and Republican Councilman Halloran essentially quarterbacked it by finding party chairmen who were wide open to receiving bribes,” he said at a press conference yesterday.

In the complaint against Smith and the other defendants, it appears that the senator was persisting with his goal of clinching a GOP ballot line even though party officials had already announced their support for or were working on behalf of other mayoral hopefuls.

Bronx chair Savino had announced his support for former Metropolitan Transportation Administration chief Joe Lhota. And Queens GOP chairman Phil Ragusa had already endorsed supermarket mogul John Catsimatidis, who had hired Tabone — Ragusa’s vice chair — as a campaign aide.

Catsimatidis told Politicker that the arrest of Tabone was "very, very sad."

Federal prosecutors say Smith worked with the undercover FBI officer posing as a real estate developer and a government informant to persuade party leaders to back his mayoral ambitions in spite of their endorsements. The leaders seemed ready and willing to commit for the right price.

“I run the Queens County Republican Party,” Tabone said to the agent after he was asked if he could secure a Wilson Pakula certificate as vice chair, according to the federal complaint. “Nobody else runs the party. I run the party.”

While Smith was prepared to spend thousands to get the Republican nomination, the apparent disarray and disorganization among the five county groups might inadvertently hurt the prospects of a Republican mayor and the party’s overall influence in City Hall.

Michael Krasner, a Queens College political science professor, predicted that the fallout from yesterday’s news could hamper citywide Republican campaigns for years to come. Krasner argued that New York Republicans have relied on Democrat scandals to portray themselves as an alternative to voters.

“This demonstrates that, despite all their protestations about being the party of virtue, the Republicans have demonstrated that they have all the same flaws and vices of the Democrats,” he said.

Muzzio also said that New York Republicans have ceded the moral high ground after yesterday's arrests, adding that it’s been a long-term decline.

“They are a rent-a-party,” Muzzio said. “So the fact that they’re caught in this web doesn’t surprise me, but at the same times it’s almost shocking in its hallucinatory qualities. I mean, what are they smoking?”

Keeping ‘Em Honest: Questions for the Mayoral Candidates


field mayoralforum3192013 audience

Last night's public safety mayoral forum featured citizen questions from six leaders with the Metro Industrial Areas Foundation, who were picked to represent the views of New Yorkers. After the program, we asked each questioner whether the candidates addressed their concerns and whether one of the mayoral hopefuls stood out on the crowded stage.

Blanche Romey

Member, Duncan Genns Senior Center, Brooklyn

field mayoralforum3192013 romey 

QUESTION:  New York is a much safer city than it was more than 20 years ago. In the last two years, I’ve worked with local precinct commanders to shut down two drug dens on my block. But there are still parts of the city that remain unsafe. My question is will you drive crime lower than it is  today and what would be your three most important strategies?

Did the candidates answer your question? Well I give them a “fair” because we’re going to keep our eyes on them. This is our city and not theirs. They could do better.

Which candidate gave the best answer? Quinn. I like her. She understands what we are going through and that the main thing is sitting down with police to stop crime in our communities.

Brandon Gibson

Member, Hope Christian Center, Brooklyn

field mayoralforum3192013 Gibson

QUESTION: I have a question for all of you. Just out of a show of hands, how many of you have been stopped and frisked? Well I have, at least 20 times. What is your best estimate for how important stop, question and frisk has been in reducing crime?

Did the candidates answer your question? They’re politicians so they emotionalize things to get a response out of the crowd. But I appreciate those candidates who got to the core of the issue.

Which candidate answered your question best? Honestly I liked Joe Lhota and I liked Bill Thompson. I liked Lhota because his answer was measured and there was no pandering. Although Thompson emotionalized his answer, he also raised a good point in talking about his son.

David Haberer

Pastor, Church For All Nations, Manhattan

field mayoralforum3192013 haberer

QUESTION: There’s no question that the city is safer now than when Commissioner Kelly came in. My question is simple. If you were elected mayor, would you keep Commissioner Kelly, yes or no?

Did the candidates answer your question? Some people did well. De Blasio had a point — do you teach an old dog new tricks? When do you bring in someone new to shake things up a bit? This question about an inspector general is a real question. This is New York City, it’s a mayor-centric town. That person has to be responsible for all things that happen to the city.

Which candidate answered your question best? I don’t know if there’s a best answer. At this point, it’s not an either/or, it’s you revealed your position, so how are you going to translate that into good government?

Kadeem Mullings

Sophomore, Andrew Jackson High School, Queens

field mayoralforum3192013 mullings

QUESTION: Two months ago, I was heading from school to a church program when I was mugged. Too many students are victims, and that has to stop. My question is will you commit to providing more safe corridors for students, and, if more control is needed, how will you do it?

Did the candidates answer your question? They did, I thought. John Liu answered my question and so did Bill Thompson.

Which candidate answered your question best? Thompson. When he had referred to history, I felt he knows how hard it is.

Maribel Baez

Tenant, Melrose Houses, Bronx

field mayoralforum3192013 baez

QUESTION: These days crime is often indoors. It’s in the hallways, elevators and stairwells of NYCHA where 600,000 New Yorkers live. I’m tired of risking my safety and life when I go home. In your first year as mayor, will you make safety in NYCHA a priority and what are two or three specific things you will do?

Did the candidates answer your question? A little, not much. When one of them becomes mayor, we’ll see what happens.

Which candidate answered your question best? Thompson. He came straight out. But, then again, all of them said the same thing. I’m looking for someone that’s going to bring down crime in our buildings.

Richard Gibbs

Former police officer, Queens

field mayoralforum gibson

QUESTION: The NYPD is one of the largest purchasers of guns. As mayor, will you lead the NYPD and other law enforcement agencies to push firearm manufacturers to end sales to dealers whose guns are frequently used in crimes in New York City?

Did the candidates answer your question? They all want to do something about it, although nobody gave me an exact plan. There’ll be more interviews and open discussions like this, so if we don’t see that in their rhetoric then there’s a problem somewhere.

Which candidate answered your question best? They all basically commented that they would do something. I didn’t hear something specific, but they all agreed that it’s a concern. 

 

 

John Liu Is Favored At Mayoral Forum On Public Safety


john-liu-mayoral-candidates

NEW YORK — Comptroller John Liu appeared to win the popular vote for mayor at a candidate forum on public safety in Queens last night.

Liu, the latest Democratic candidate to officially announce his candidacy, got some of the loudest applause from the crowd as he reaffirmed his opposition to the New York Police Department’s stop-and-frisk crime reduction strategy.

Liu has said he would end the policy on day one, if elected mayor.

Stop-and-frisk is the focus of a federal trial that got underway earlier this week. In the class action lawsuit, the plaintiffs have argued that the NYPD unlawfully targets blacks and Hispanics with its policy of stopping, questioning and frisking people on the street.

Liu said stop-and-frisk should be abolished.

“There’s a cost in the humiliation that young black and brown men have to suffer,” he said at one point during the forum. “And, of course, there is a cost to taxpayers. We can do better and we will do better.”

Raheem Harley, 54, a local barber who works across the street from the church in Jamaica where the forum was held said he agreed with Liu. “You get much more in life by using honey rather than vinegar,” he said.

Sherri Kaughman, 49, who works for the Department of Social Services, also spoke well of Liu. “He’s on the line with the people in the community,” she said.

The latest in a round of mayoral forums, hundreds of New Yorkers packed First Presbyterian Church to hear seven top candidates including Council Speaker Christine Quinn and Republican nominee Joe Lhota discuss crime and public safety. But it was stop-and-frisk that got most of the attention.

While Liu took the most aggressive stance on stop-and-frisk, rival candidates stressed the importance that a good relationship between police and the community can have on improving policing tactics and lowering crime rates overall.

Though the majority of the audience Tuesday night appeared to favorite Liu, some still weren’t 100 percent sold on the candidate but said that the event helped move them closer towards a decision.

John Rodriguez, 49, said he cut his list down to four candidates — Public Advocate Bill de Blasio, former Comptroller Bill Thompson, Quinn and Liu — after attending the forum.

“These events are great because they give you an opportunity to actually see the candidates in person, candidates that you might have only heard or read about in the newspaper,” Rodriguez said.

Liu, who currently ranks last out of the four Democratic candidates, according to a recent Quinnipiac University poll, needs every vote he can get. A federal investigation into his campaign’s fundraising, including the arrest of two aides, may also have hobbled his prospects.

But Liu was the by-and-large the audience favorite of the night, and even some of the youngsters in the audience were cheering him on.

“I think tonight was a big deal at refreshing our mind of what’s going on in our community, but also all over the city,” said Jahkai Smith, 11, a fifth grader at P.S. 13 in Brooklyn who recently participated in a stop-and-frisk panel at his school with the Amsterdam News.

Sharron Kennedy Frost, a teacher at P.S. 13, said that even some of her fifth graders have been stopped and frisked. She brought Smith and two of her fellow fifth graders — Reinaldo Bermudez and Kayla Smith — to the forum “to be aware of the candidates and their positions.”

“These kids are going to make decisions for me later on in life so I want them to be in tune,” Frost said. “They wanted to speak and ask questions, too.”

__

Image of John Liu by Emily Field/CUNY. 

The Future Of Stop-And-Frisk Debated At Mayoral Forum


public-safety-mayoral-forum

NEW YORK — Whoever takes the reins from Mayor Michael Bloomberg will have to reconcile the city’s historically low crime rates under Police Commissioner Raymond Kelly and his department’s aggressive, often divisive tactics.

At a mayoral forum on public safety in Queens last night, seven candidates wrestled with the legacy of Kelly's department, answering questions from the public about stop-and-frisk tactics, the surveillance of Muslims and the creation of an inspector general to independently monitor the police.

City Council Speaker Christine Quinn was the only candidate to raise her hand when the moderator, Errrol Louis of NY1, asked if anyone would keep Kelly in his job. 

“I have often said Ray Kelly has been an outstanding police commissioner. He’s taken crimes to lower rates than we ever imagined possible,” she explained as the crowd booed her. She later added: “I don’t think for people to work together you have to agree on everything.”

Quinn said that she supported legislation before the City Council to create an inspector general who would monitor the NYPD and have subpoena power — a proposal that the police have flatly rejected as unnecessary because of various levels of oversight already in place.

Related: Questions For the Candidates

She said she is confident the Council will approve the measure, co-sponsored by Councilmen Jumaane Williams and Brad Lander of Brooklyn, next month.

“You can have a lot of entities, and if they’re not getting it done, then we need more agencies,” she said, emphasizing that “systemic change” at the NYPD is necessary.

Rival candidates Bill De Blasio, a Democrat, and Joe Lhota, a Republican, disagreed that the solution to policy challenges at the NYPD, particularly stop-and-frisk, was the creation of a new office.

“I think building another bureaucracy on top of this problem of stop-and-frisk is not the right answer,” said Lhota, a former deputy mayor under Rudy Giuliani who quit as chief of the Metropolitan Transportation Authority to run for office.

De Blasio said that stop-and-frisk could be reformed and that police shouldn't be making stops based on a quota system, which has been one allegation surrounding the policy.

"We need to send a message to every young man of color that they are beloved, they are valuable, they are our future," he said. "You can't do that if you're constantly treating people as suspects." 

The crowd at First Presbyterian Church in Jamaica, Queens, seemed to cheer loudest when candidate John Liu, the city’s comptroller, spoke out against the practice.

"This is the largest system of racial profiling going on anywhere in America," said Liu, the most recent Democrat to officially announce he’s running. He was the only candidate to say he would abolish stop-and-frisk if he were elected.

NYPD data shows that nine out of 10 people stopped in 2012 were black or Hispanic men, and that the vast majority — 89 percent — were innocent. A federal judge began hearing a case Monday that could lead to the reform of the NYPD’s stop-and-frisk policy and the appointment of a monitor to oversee changes. The NYPD has argued that the strategy saves lives and reduces crime.

Related: Liu The Most Popular At Forum?

Last night’s forum was the last of three mayoral forums hosted by the New York Daily News and Metro Industrial Areas Foundation, a network of religious institutions, schools, senior centers and homeowners assocations. 

Voters asked tough questions and said they would hold the eventual mayor accountable.

Moderators selected eight local voters to ask the candidates about their thoughts on crime and safety.

Brandon Gibson, 27, a leader with the Hope Christian Center of Brooklyn , claimed he had been stopped and frisked by police more than 20 times and asked the candidates if they had ever been stopped-and-frisked. The answer was a unanimous no.

Bill Thompson, the city’s former comptroller and one of the four Democratic candidates for mayor, told a story of how he explained stop-and-frisk to his 15-year-old son, but when Liu asked Thompson to join him in calling for an end to the practice, Thompson grew animated and pounded his fists on the table.

Thompson said he would be the one to worry about parenting his son.

Republican hopeful John Catsimatidis, a billionaire supermarket magnate, said he would keep stop-and-frisk as is, though the crowd snickered as he floundered on the topic. After the debate, he said an imaging device would help police tell if a person is carrying a gun, and stop-and-frisk will eventually be unnecessary.

Most of the candidates discussed a proactive strategy that changes the relationship between the police and the community.

“We need to restore a community policing model that gets police officers out of the SWAT cars and walking the residential streets in our city,” said Adolfo Carrion, the Independent Party candidate and former Bronx borough president. “That requires more police officers.”

Thompson suggested the city would be able to afford to hire more police officers if the NYPD would staff precinct desks with civilians.

Maribel Baez, a tenant of Melrose Houses in the Bronx, said she wanted more security in New York City Housing Authority buildings.

“These days, crime is often indoors,” Baez said. “I’m tired of risking my safety and life when I go home.”

Baez explained that elevators, lobbies and dark stairwells are common places for crimes now. The candidates said improving safety at public housing would need to be a priority of the next mayor.

“When something is broken and not working, like our education system, you need to turn it upside down and fix it,” Carrion said. “The New York City Housing Authority needs a makeover and I intend to do it.”

Quinn also promised a shakeup in the leadership of NYCHA.

Kadeem Mullings, a sophomore at Andrew Jackson High School, said he was mugged recently on his walk home from school. He asked if candidates had plans to increase safety along the routes kids walk to and from schools.

The candidates were short on specific tactics, but said again that they would hire more police officers. De Blasio said children should have access to safe after-school programs.

“We should tax the wealthiest New Yorkers so we can have after-school programs for every middle school student who needs it,” he said.  

While the candidates disagreed on policy, they were unanimous in their commitment to reducing citywide crime.

“We can and must continue to drive crime down,” de Blasio said. “As we’ve gotten safer and safer, no one in this room, no one in the media, can pretend that that was evenly distributed.”

___

Image of candidates at debate by Emily Field/CUNY. 

GOP Mayoral Candidates Debate Paid Sick Leave, Income Inequality


GOP-Debate-Crains

NEW YORK — Five mayor hopefuls contending for the Republican nomination debated critical issues facing the city including paid sick leave and income inequality — as well as the legacy of Rudy Giuliani — at a forum yesterday.

Each of the candidates labored to distinguish themselves while also promoting their appeal to party stalwarts as well as the overwhelmingly Democratic electorate of the city.

The participants in what was billed as the first Republican-only debate included Joe Lhota, the former Metropolitan Transportation Authority chief; Tom Allon, owner of Manhattan Media; former Bronx Borough President Adolfo Carrion; supermarket magnate John Catsimatidis; and George McDonald, founder of the Doe Fund.

The event was hosted by Crain’s New York Business, and moderated by Greg David, a columnist for the publication.

At one point, David referred to Giuliani as a “jerk.” Lhota, who served as a deputy mayor under Giuliani, took umbrage with the comment, pointing out that Giuliani had elected at a time when the city was called “ungovernable” and “unmanageable.”

After the event, he told reporters: "Using a pejorative to describe Rudy Giuliani in a forum like this is unfortunate.”

Much of the debate, though, focused on economic issues including raising the minimum wage, the paid-sick leave bill that has been stalled in the Council and income inequality.

Lhota said he didn’t think it’s the job of city government to legislate a living wage or paid sick leave at a debate yesterday.

“Our children need to be properly trained so they can work in a global economy and pull themselves up the way we have done,” he said. “It’s not the role of the city government to determine that all private business should have an HR policy and that it should be determined by the City Council.”

And he didn’t think inequality in New York was noteworthy. “New York is not any different or any worse in inequality than what’s happening in the United States of America,” he said.

Carrion, who is technically unaffiliated with the Republican Party but has been promoting himself to their leadership as an independent-minded alternative to the current crop of contenders, said inequality was the result of “a failed education system.”

Allon and Catsimatidis both proposed a tiered minimum wage, with workers 23 and under earning the current minimum wage of $7.25 an hour, and a higher wage for workers 24 and up.

For Carrion, a minimum wage requirement is not a solution.

“The living wage bill became a killer for the Kingsbridge Armory,” he said, referring to the plan to turn the long-empty Bronx armory into a mall, which failed after developers refused to agree to a minimum wage requirement of $10 an hour.

He seemingly reversed himself later in the debate when talking about renegotiating contracts for city workers, which expired in 2010.

“We have to index raises and benefits packages to the cost of living,” he said. “You can’t have a city workforce that can’t afford to live here.”

McDonald drew on his experience as founder of the Doe Fund, which provides job training for the formerly homeless and incarcerated, to argue against raising the minimum wage and mandating a paid sick leave policy.

“If the minimum wage were $50 an hour it wouldn’t make a bit of difference to a man or woman who doesn’t have a job,” he said. “At the Doe Fund, we’ve always paid above minimum wage, and our graduates get jobs that pay over $11 an hour. Why do we need government to create an artificial wage?”

All the candidates agreed that the next mayor will need to fix the city’s education system.

Lhota, who left his job running the MTA to run for mayor, noted that the city’s education budget doubled in 10 years with little improvement in test scores.

Allon called for better teacher training and retention. “Fifty percent of teachers leave within five years,” he said. “We are committing educational malpractice by allowing our teachers to leave so quickly.”

Catsimatidis proposed vocational training for high-school students.

New York City property taxes drew universal condemnation.

Lhota said the biggest problem with the current tax system is lack of transparency.

“No one has any idea as to how the assessments are being done,” he said. “The Department of Finance is told how much they have to generate by the Office of Management and Budget, and then they back into the number.”

Allon and Carrion suggested that tax assessments were unfair to outer-borough property owners, but stopped short of calling for higher taxes.

“It’s not fair that people living in buildings on Park Avenue pay less than people in outer boroughs,” said Allon.

Carrion, who has a home on City Island in the Bronx, said his parents’ property taxes on their Rockland County home are six times his.

In closing, the moderator asked each candidate to explain his Republican credentials, but referred to former Mayor Giuliani as a “jerk.” In response, the candidates took turns praising Giuliani’s legacy.

Lhota said his experience in the private and public sector gave him an ideal background to build on “the transformation of New York City that started with Rudy Giuliani.”

“We need to be fiscally conservative, we need to try new ideas, we need to be socially progressive,” said Lhota. “It’s out of sync with the national Republican Party, but after all, we are New York City. We are always leading the charge forward.”

Allon, who changed his affiliation from Democrat to Republican in October 2012, touted his appeal as a “fusion candidate.” Allon, who has been endorsed by the Liberal Party, said Giuliani’s 1993 victory margin came from Liberal Party voters.

But he was not the only candidate promoting crossover appeal.

Catsimatidis also said he could appeal to constituencies from both parties, saying “a pure Republican cannot win in this city.”

“I’m probably one of the only candidates running for mayor that can sit down, put my arm around both sides and make a deal, he said.”

Carrion, who is running with the backing of the Independence Party which helped Michael Bloomberg to victory in the last election, said he was frustrated by the partisan gridlock on the federal and state level, and that his ideas square with the Republican platform.

“I am a social progressive, which makes a northeastern Republican. And I’m a fiscal conservative, which makes me a northeastern Republican,” Carrion said.

In an audience poll, 63 percent said Lhota would be most likely to win a general election. Catsimatidis came in second with 20 percent, and McDonald with 10.

___

Photos by Irina Ivanova. 

What A Court Ruling Against The Voting Rights Act Could Mean For NYC


 voter-supression-no

NEW YORK — A case brought before the U.S. Supreme Court by a small Alabama county could reshape future election law in New York City, and strip minority groups of federal protections against voter discrimination.

The case, Shelby County v. Holder, involves the landmark Voting Rights Act of 1965 — in particular Section 5, which was created to reverse systemic discrimination against blacks by requiring that all changes to voting laws be reviewed by the Department of Justice. The country’s highest court heard oral arguments in the case last week, and some observers believe Section 5 could be struck down by a majority of the justices in the months ahead.

In addition to a number of Southern states including Alabama, Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi, South Carolina, and Texas, the law also applies to three New York City counties: Manhattan, Brooklyn and the Bronx. As a result, most of the city’s election-related legislation is more or less guided by the Voting Rights Act.

Some of the law's defenders argue that the city's diversity — where its 8.2 million residents speak a myriad of languages and have varying levels of education — makes the statute all the more necessary and relevant.

“If the U.S. Supreme Court were to overturn it, the residents of these communities could be subject to discriminatory voting practices, such as race-based gerrymandering, without the protection of Department of Justice or federal court preclearance,” wrote Democratic U.S. Rep. Hakeem Jeffries, who represents a congressional district protected under the Voting Rights Act, in an e-mail Tuesday. “That outcome is unacceptable.”

While this year's local races are unlikely to be affected by where the Supreme Court lands on the case, the striking of Section 5 would dramatically alter how city officials handle elections in future years. Whereas the provision in question attempts to guarantee fair redistricting and ballot access for minorities, voters would have to rely on lawsuits and lawmakers to ensure the same without federal guidelines.

New York's Mayor Michael Bloomberg and City Council Speaker Christine Quinn aren't ready to get rid of those federal guidelines.

On this year’s Martin Luther King, Jr., Day, Bloomberg and Quinn filed an amicus brief filed in support of Section 5. They wrote that the city has obtained preclearance from the U.S. Department of Justice more than 2,000 times over the last 41 years since the three New York City counties became subject to Voting Rights Act.

"This King Day, we are reminded that all too often there are a handful of those who would rather ignore these rights by re-installing barriers, often on the basis of race, economics or political affiliation,” they wrote in the amicus brief. “We can’t allow the voting rights of our citizens to be eroded by such ignorance.”

The brief cites approved changes to voting practices including both the changing of polling sites for certain communities and the inclusion of new languages on election materials. For instance, the city plans to debut long-delayed Bengali ballots in 2013 in order to comply with the Act's language assistance requirement. The Act guarantees that minority groups that have more than 10,000 potential voters with less-than-average literacy levels must be guaranteed ballot access.

It's a far cry from the very case that pushed Manhattan, Brooklyn and the Bronx under Section 5 in the first place. New York was one of many jurisdictions to use literacy tests in the 1960s. It wasn't until the U.S. Congress passed a provision in the Voting Rights Act to protect English-illiterate voters their right to a ballot.

It had a direct effect on the voting power of New York’s Puerto Ricans, who were previously limited by the literacy test. The lack of a test, however, angered a group of registered voters in New York City, who mobilized against the new law by arguing that it violated the Tenth Amendment. In 1966's Katzenbach v. Morgan, the Supreme Court overrode the states' right argument. Instead, the court under Chief Justice Earl Warren defended Congress' ability to protect voting rights beyond what the Court itself may have already recognized.

The Supreme Court under Chief Justice John Roberts faces a similar argument this year — that the federal government's requirement for preclearance is too onerous of a burden for local and state government. Shelby County's arguments have previously failed in the district courts and yet have made it to the country’s highest court, which heard arguments that left some local leaders worried about last week’s hearing of arguments.

While asking questions of the Solicitor General Donald Verrilli last week, Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia posited that continued Congressional support for the Voting Rights Act may be a “perpetuation of racial entitlement,” arguing that the federal government may have fallen complacent to such entitlements through the political process.

Voices from around the country immediately decried Scalia’s presumed argument.

“It was insensitive,” said City Councilwoman Letitia James of Brooklyn, in an interview with the Gotham Gazette on Tuesday. “It belies the facts.”

James said that the Voting Rights Act, especially Section 5, is responsible for ensuring fair and easy access to voting as recent as November’s general election. It was the Act, she said, that prevented maneuvering towards what some courts found to be excessive requirements for voter identification and protected language minorities’ right to vote.

Besides ensuring minorities’ access to the polls, James argued that the Act also helps to ensure that minorities are fairly represented in different levels of government by way of redistricting rules.

“It’s critically important that districts be apportioned to ensure minority representation in government,” she said. “Period.”

Minority groups around the city have made the case over the years for better representation in government, including during last year’s Congressional primaries. Residents and political advocates tried to secure a new Latino-majority Congressional district that would have included parts of Manhattan, the Bronx and Queens.

More recently, advocates in Queens argued for the creation of an Asian-majority city council district. The Asian-American Legal Defense and Education Fund was one of many organizations that joined with a coalition of groups to debate the merits of an empowered Asian voting bloc in Queens.

Jerry Vattamala, a staff attorney with AALDEF, said that the Voting Rights Act has been extremely beneficial to people of color — even to those who don’t live in the counties protected by Section 5. Its protection of minority voting rights, he said, were integral to the city electoral venture.

“At every stage of redistricting,” Vattamala said, referring to the process of redrawing district lines after every decennial census. “Section 5 was relevant.”

It even goes beyond maps. The statue was equally relevant in 1994, he added, when a proposed local law was nixed by the federal government after the city failed to provide candidate names in Chinese. And, in 2001, the DOJ found that the city’s Board of Elections didn’t give enough prior notice to the Chinese-speaking community about a poll site’s closure in Manhattan’s Chinatown, forcing it to open doors to voters.

Guidelines, as well as precedent, were formed as a result of incidents like those, Vattamala said, and aren’t limited to Manhattan, Brooklyn or the Bronx. The city has tried to use Section 5, he said, as a preventative measure to discriminatory policy that all five boroughs can benefit from.

Opponents of the Voting Rights Act’s provision against racial discrimination argue that the law is outdated and no longer appropriate in a diverse, modern-day America.

“For the federal government to intervene in state and local elections, there had better be a mighty good reason,” wrote Ben Boychuck of the Manhattan Institute in a column on Feb. 28. “In 1965 the reason was clear: the nine states of the Old Confederacy and parts of seven others had raised unconstitutional legal obstacles against black Americans registering and voting.”

Shelby County’s attorneys argue that certain provisions in the Voting Rights Act of 1965 are not only unnecessary but unconstitutional.

Not everyone agrees.

“Mr. Speaker, in America, certainly we have come a long way, but we still have a long, long way to go,” Rep. Jeffries said on the House floor on Feb. 25, invoking one of the most racially controversial episodes in America’s race relations. “Jim Crow may be dead, but he has still got some nieces and nephews who are alive and well.”

It’s too early to predict how the Supreme Court will decide the case. That hasn’t, however, put a stop to speculation. After Scalia’s comment on racial entitlements, pundits were quick to assume that the Voting Rights Act would soon be on its way out.

President and General Counsel of LatinoJustice Juan Cartagena said that there are a variety of options before the court. The justices could find middle ground or even send the case back down to a lower court, Cartagena said. Still, as a jurisdiction tied to Section 5, New York City will have to adapt if the anti-discrimination measures are stricken down — including through lawsuits involving other parts of the Voting Rights Act.

Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy alluded to as much during his questions to Shelby County counsel Bert Rein. The justice asked Rein if lawsuits brought about through Section 2 of the law are cost-effective and timely as opposed to Section 5’s preventative measures. Rein argued that Section 2 lawsuits don’t have the stigma for states that preclearance and prior restraint have.

Cartagena disagreed. “It would place the onus on organizations like ours to bring about expensive lawsuits,” he said, referring to the ability to bring about lawsuits based on Section 2 of the law. “The cost of preclearance is a lot less than lawsuits.”

While the public debate continues, and while the Supreme Court ponders its decision, jurisdictions haven’t stopped working on election law.

Cartagena said that this year’s shifting of the 51 city council districts could very well be the last time that the city requires preclearance from the federal government, given that the Supreme Court usually comes out with before the end of the term in late summer.

While New York waits for the DOJ to review the new district maps, a district court has already weighed in on a request from a New England state to review its compliance with the Voting Rights Act.

AALDEF’s Vattamala said the outcome of that case supports the law’s relevancy. “The statute itself has a mechanism to make sure it’s never outdated,” he said in reference to “bail-outs,” by which jurisdictions subject to the law can opt out if they can prove that they haven’t implemented any voting discrimination practices in the previous 10 years.

New Hampshire did just that on March 1 after a district court’s three-judge panel ruled that 10 of the state’s communities no longer have to request preclearance of its election laws.

Vattamala said New York City could do the same, if not for its record over the years. “New York has a long way to go,” he said.

___

Image courtesy flickr, used under Creative Commons license. 

Districting Commission Still Draws Criticism With Latest Proposed Council Lines


 

Randall's Island

This version includes important updates to clarify the differing views of a neighborhood in Queens with a growing Asian population — Editor. 

NEW YORK — For the many civic groups observing the decennial redrawing of City Council district lines, it has been an imperfect and sometimes frustrating endeavor.

Alleged back-room political deals. Incumbents who seem to have an oversized voice in the process. Murky decision-making by a supposedly independent commission.

Now, after three rounds of sometimes raucous public hearings, the redistricting process is near its bitter end.

The 15-member District Commission, tasked with redrawing the lines to reflect demographic changes in the city, released what is likely to be the final version of the district lines on Monday. They are expected to vote on them today.

If the Council approves the lines — and it is unlikely that they will reject them given the election calendar — they will become finalized for the next decade, angering minority and neighborhood advocacy organizations who realized that a bevy of their proposals would not be incorporated into the commission’s map.

For James Hong, a spokesman for the Asian American Community Coalition on Redistricting and Democracy, it was an expected yet agonizing outcome.

“Overall, the changes made to the map neither reflect the current population size nor the growth of the Asian-American community in the past 10 years,” Hong said.

ACCORD, a coalition of 14 Asian civic groups, grew increasingly agitated at each public hearing as it became clear the commission was going to divide a neighborhood with a growing Asian population from Councilman Dan Halloran's district. That neighborhood, referred to as being a larger part of Bayside by ACCORD and by others as Oakland Gardens, has its own separate zip code. 

The coalition argued, ultimately fruitlessly, that the southern portion of Bayside/Oakland Gardens should be naturally added to Halloran’s district. The councilman alleged that ACCORD was merely seeking to create an “Asian district” at the expense of everyone else. The southern boundary from the December plan was largely maintained in the new plan, satisfying Halloran. 

“We do not have proposals to create an Irish district, an Italian district, a Greek district, a district of green eyed people or a district of left handed people,” Halloran said at the Queens public hearing.

ACCORD sharply disagreed, penning a letter to the commission that contended their proposal would still make Halloran’s district less than 30 percent Asian. Tension between Halloran and Asian civic groups remains high over a tough, racially-charged 2009 general election that Halloran won against an Asian-American, Kevin Kim. That race cast a long shadow over the last Queens public hearing.

Jerry Vattamala, an attorney for the Asian American Legal Defense and Education Fund, said that AALDEF — which advanced their own redistricting proposal known as the Unity Map — was “evaluating all of our options," including  a possible lawsuit against the commission for an alleged violation of the City Charter over how the Asian population across New York City fared in the redistricting process.

“It really is a violation of the charter,” Vattamala said. “Asian-Americans are a protected group. According to the prioritized list, these groups, including Asian-Americans, must be ensured fair and effective representation.”

Bensonhurst, Brooklyn, a sprawling neighborhood with a burgeoning Asian population, is divided among four council districts, a perpetual concern for Asian civic groups. The commission’s latest map did little to create the sort of districts those groups desired.

In a Feb. 4 memorandum from Carl Hum, the commission’s executive director, to members of the commission, the reasoning behind how all districts were drawn in the city was made public.

The memorandum emphasizes that the commission followed closely the criteria laid out in the City Charter. Population size — ensuring no district is 10 percent larger or smaller than the average district size — and ensuring that racial and voting minority groups are fairly represented are two of the most important criteria in the charter. Not mentioned, but emphasized by Hum in public comments, is incumbency protection, which Hum argued was a legitimate factor to consider when redrawing district lines.

Praised by good government group Citizens Union (a sister organization of the Gotham Gazette), Hum's memorandum helped to deflect charges that the bipartisan commission, which includes former elected officials Tom Ognibene and Frank Padavan, lacked transparency.

But other civic leaders continued to be unimpressed by the proposed new lines.

Former Brooklyn District Leader Lincoln Restler accused the commission of “packing” Hasidic Jews in northern Bedford-Stuyvesant, a current part of Councilwoman Letitia James’ district, into southern Williamsburg, thus benefitting Councilman Stephen Levin, an ally of the Hasidic Jewish community and the former chief of staff to one of their fiercest allies in Albany, Assemblyman Vito Lopez.

“More than a year ago, individuals in consultation with Councilman Levin and Vito Lopez shared with me their plans to remake this district and cut out as much of brownstone Brooklyn as possible while packing in the Hasidic community,” Restler said. “This has been precisely the outcome more than 12 months later of a sham redistricting process designed to strengthen the incumbent council member at all costs.”

Restler, mulling a run against Levin, will see his election prospects plummet under the current proposal, though advocates of the alteration argued at the Brooklyn public hearing that the commission was rightfully uniting a community of common interest, which is another key criteria outlined in the City Charter. Levin himself argued this at the hearing, though James said that Jewish leaders in her district expressed concerns about losing a legislative representative.

The aforementioned Lopez factored into the redistricting process when it was reported last year that an ally in the Council requested his residence be drawn into term-limited Councilwoman Diana Reyna’s district to better facilitate a rumored run for that Council seat. Council Speaker Christine Quinn, who political insiders have said plays a large but unseen role in the redistricting process, was angered when the alteration was brought to her attention — and made public — and asked the commission to withdraw the council lines many believed were final, setting off a third round of public hearings in January.

One vocal critic of the districting process, Manhattan and Bronx Councilwoman Melissa Mark-Viverito, had criticized the commission for removing a section of East Harlem and Randall’s Island from her district. Both were restored in the latest proposed map, though Mark-Viverito found more of her district, currently Manhattan-based, drawn north into the Bronx. The district added enough Bronx residents to make the district slightly more of a Bronx district than a Manhattan one.

One of the Districting Commission's most detailed discussions of its decision-making, in the memorandum released on Monday, was reserved for Mark-Viverito's district.

While the commission said adding Bronx residents was done to reflect the “extreme” population growth in that county, Common Cause New York Executive Director Susan Lerner said she believed “political purposes” were behind the redrawing of Mark-Viverito’s district.

“We don’t see the justification of this district with 200,000 more people in Manhattan,” Lerner said. “It’s a pure gerrymander so the Bronx picks up an additional seat. It’s pure power politics.”

Mark-Viverito did not respond to requests for comment.

___

Image of Randall's Island by InSapphoWeTrust, used under Creative Commons license.

The Surprisingly Lively Special Election In Queens


far-rockaway

NEW YORK — Organize Now. Rebuild Now. Better Service.

These are not commandments from an overbearing mother; these are party lines in a surprisingly competitive and lively nonpartisan special election being held tomorrow to fill a Queens City Council seat.

What makes the race even more odd for being so sought after is that whomever wins the race will have to jump back on the campaign trail soon after delivering a victory speech. The next citywide elections are just around the corner, with the primary set (at least for now) for September. The Queens seat was vacated when James Sanders Jr., successfully moved up to the state Senate after defeating indicted incumbent Shirley Huntley.

A Liberian, a Jamaican, two Haitians, a disgraced former councilman and an Orthodox Jew are among the eight candidates battling for the Council seat.

The winner of the special election in the 31st district will also be faced with representing some of the neighborhoods hardest-hit by Hurricane Sandy, including Far Rockaway, where thousands were left without power and train service was knocked out for weeks.

The district, tucked into Queens' far-flung southeast corner, ropes in the neighborhoods of Rosedale, Laurelton, Springfield Gardens and an eastern chunk of the Rockaway Peninsula.

Local leaders expect that demographics will weigh heavily in the decision of who gets elected.

Bishop Charles Norris, the founder of a large church in Jamaica, Queens, is a political power broker of sorts in the area and a former resident of Far Rockaway.

He has made it absolutely clear that the old New York anomaly of a white elected official representing a majority black area is unacceptable to him and others. He said he fears that the majority black district will be deprived of social and economic services at the expensive of a vocal, and more politically-active, minority. “I would hope that the other people in that race would see the light and do the math. If all of them stay in the race, none of them are going to win,” he said.

THE LONG-SHOT

It was already a difficult year for the district when in late 2012 police say a driver drunkenly swerved off Brookville Boulevard, a single lane roadway near John F. Kennedy Airport, and plunged into marshland on Dec. 30, killing a pregnant woman who was a passenger in the vehicle.

That accident is what motivated Marie Adam-Ovide, the district manager of Queens Community Board 8 and a Haitian-born 41-year-old resident of Laurelton, to run for the seat. “How come no one ever thought there needed to be railing or protective barrier on that boulevard?” she asked. “A woman ended up dead. I realized then that Brookville Boulevard was something, among many things, that needed looking into.”

Adam-Ovide, a relative long-shot in the race who has spent most of the nearly $7,000 that she has raised in private funds, according to the website of the city's Campaign Finance Board.

There is a disparity, she explained, between neighborhoods like Jamaica Estates and Fresh Meadows and the minority areas of the district, which she said don’t receive the services and attention that they deserve. She lamented the trash lining large thoroughfare like Merrick Boulevard. In contrast, Community Board 8’s Union Turnpike last year received a thorough cleaning up from the DOE Fund, thanks to funding from the local councilman, James Gennaro.

The gregarious Sanders received mixed reviews from the candidates running to replace him. Adam-Ovide implied he neglected her community when he decided to run for State Senate, “concentrating instead on where he gets bigger bang for his buck.”

LIBERIAN-BORN

Saywalah Kesselly, the oldest candidate in the race at 52, was more direct, labeling Sanders “a dismal failure.” Kesselly, like Adam-Ovide, is not originally from the United States. Unlike Adam-Ovide, he hails from Liberia, and is running on a platform of bringing a “holistic” approach to local schools.

After Sandy, education may be the biggest stated priority among the candidates. P.S. 156 in Laurelton has been targeted for “truncation” by the Dept. of Education, meaning the DOE will be phasing out the middle school grades — six through eight — while keeping the others.

“I want to bring holistic learning centers here with extended days, weekend hours and after school programs that will help our young people,” said Kesselly who, with $12,330 raised, is near the bottom of the pack. “We have a high unemployment rate that needs to change. We need job training and business development. There are young people here who are drug dealers and if we redirect them, they will be the best businessmen and women in the country.”

Kesselly, a past member of various nonprofits, is the executive director of the African Center for Community Empowerment, a nonprofit founded in Far Rockaway to solve problems that have plagued the neighborhood like gun violence. Insisting, like many candidates do, that he is a “not a politician,” he said he would consider not running in the primary if he lost the special election.

THE PROTEGE

Donovan Richards, Sanders’ most recent chief of staff, is unlikely to step aside for anyone. Only 29, Richards entered politics when a friend of his was murdered in South Jamaica, Queens. At an anti-gun violence rally a week after his friend’s funeral, he met Sanders and, soon after, Richards became his protégé. In 2008, Richards ran an uphill race against incumbent Assemblywoman Michele Titus and lost.

Richards is in a stronger position for the Council race, counting the backing of the Working Families Party, the United Federation of Teachers and 1199 SEIU, which independently spent several thousand dollars in support of his campaign, according to filings. He is also the top fundraiser in the pack with almost $60,000 from private contributions.

Diving into the Sandy relief efforts in Far Rockaway, Richards said he noticed a difference between the aid and attention granted to the eastern, minority-heavy section of the peninsula and the white western portion, like Breezy Point.

“I slept in shelters with my constituents and on the ground on rocks and I can tell you there was no presence of FEMA, the Red Cross or LIPA for the first fifteen days after the storm,” he said. “I saw how people were left to fend on their own. I take nothing away from what’s happened to people in Breezy Point, the whole peninsula was hit hard, but resources should have been more equitable.”

Richards argued he is the best person to replace Sanders because he knows how to navigate the City Council bureaucracy. Lacking a learning curve, he will be able to immediately, he said, work with government agencies and relief groups to ensure the Rockaways fully recovers.

A SEASONED CAMPAIGNER

If Richards, with his raft of high profile endorsements, is the favorite, his biggest threat may be the man who ran and lost against Sanders in 2009: Jacques Leandre.

The 42-year-old native of Haiti is a charismatic presence in the community, an attorney who founded the aforementioned youth football program in Rosedale. According to campaign finance records, as of Feb. 17, Leandre has been able to raise about $32,000 in private funds — a far cry from Richards’ total of nearly $60,000.

But Leandre has the experience of a campaign under his belt and the community name recognition to make him a top contender for the seat.

“I think the most pressing issues for the district are education and elderly services, or lack thereof,” Leandre said, explaining his platform. “We also need to rebuild the Rockaways. For me, the task is moving the community forward and bringing some innovative vision and ingenuity to the job. I want to expand on the work that’s been done not only by him [Sanders] but by predecessors as well.”

Leandre’s candidacy might have been given a boost last week when he appeared on many local television stations as the impassioned attorney defending a 19-year-old black man who had been beaten by police in Flushing, Queens on Jan. 8. Police charged the man, Robert Jackson, with marijuana possession and resisting an arrest, among other charges, but civil rights leaders have alleged the police used unnecessary and brutal force.

Leandre also garnered headlines for challenging the petitions of six candidates in the race. All of the challenges failed and candidates who were sued banded together to blast Leandre.

THE SPOKESWOMAN

Selvena Brooks, a public relations specialist, was among the candidates who came together against Leandre, accusing him of “a cynical, anti-democratic exercise, and a waste of the court’s time and taxpayers’ money.”

Brooks, the former spokeswoman for Senate Democrats, is running on the Rebuild Now! party line. Brooks has called for a rebuilding of education that would restore cuts to vocation and technical training programs, investment in new infrastructure projects and a coordinated relief effort for Sandy-ravaged areas, including opposition to property tax hikes on afflicted homeowners.

“We would have liked to have seen more done in the community for recovery efforts,” the 29-year-old Brooks said. “We’ve been here in trenches working with local clergy and ensuring people in the Rockaways get the help that they need. There are many are still hurting. People are living in hotels across the city; it’s unacceptable to live in your own city and not get the services you need.”

THE ORTHODOX JEW

Pesach Osina, who did not respond to repeated requests for comment, is a former staffer of energetic Rockaways Assemblyman Phil Goldfeder who also happens to be Orthodox Jewish.

A native of Brooklyn, Osina has lived in Far Rockaway since 1999, according to his campaign biography. The neighborhood is home to a growing Orthodox Jewish enclave that is a revival of communities that had dwindled in the 1970s not far from the black and Hispanic sections of Far Rockaway.

Allies of Osina contend that his candidacy is desperately needed because funding for community programs and social services has been virtually denied to their institutions. Writing in 5 Towns Jewish Times newspaper, Osina’s campaign treasurer, Eli Shapiro, argued that their community programs received less than one percent of the money allocated to the district over the past five years.

A PTA VETERAN

Michael Duncan, a native of Jamaica (the country), served as Sanders’ chief of staff in the 2000’s but angered Sanders when he decided to challenge him in 2009. Duncan, like Leandre, was expecting Sanders to be term-limited, but a controversial and overwhelming vote by the City Council allowed elected officials to seek third terms.

A veteran of PTA boards and Rosedale resident, the 49-year-old Duncan said he led the successful fight against the arrival of a so-called “hot sheets” motel in Springfield Gardens. Residents feared it would attract prostitution and other illicit activity and now the property is being turned into a strip mall.

“I’ve had four more years to build more bridges and more relationships in the district,” Duncan said of his 2009 loss. “Based on my service to the people in this community, I’m the person to represent this district.”

THE CHRONIC CAMPAIGNER

The only former elected official in the race did not respond to requests for comment. Allan Jennings represented a Jamaica and Ozone Park-based district last decade and was a notorious presence in the City Council, having been censured for sexually harassing staffers. He has run for numerous offices sense. Jennings’ campaign committee is not registered in the district. He has raised a grand total of $25 for the race.

____

Image of Far Rockaway, Queens, by Kate Gardiner, used under Creative Commons license.

 

Mayoral Hopefuls Speak Out On Public Health


albanese2

NEW YORK — Public health under Mayor Michael Bloomberg has largely come to be equated with smoking and trans-fat bans, calorie counts on menus and a limit on the sale of large, sugary drinks.

Candidates who hope to succeed Bloomberg, however, will be challenged with helping to rehabilitate public hospitals following Superstorm Sandy, a looming $3 billion city budget gap the could curtail spending and questions over what federal health care reform will mean for the city.

At a forum on public health on Wednesday, four mayoral hopefuls spoke about what they see as the critical needs of the public health system, agreeing that too many of the neediest New Yorkers remain without proper health care.

Democrats John Liu, William Thompson and Sal Albanese, as well as Republican Tom Allon each took turns on the stage at Long Island University in Brooklyn. The two expected frontrunners for the party nominations for mayor, Democrat Christine Quinn and Republican Joe Lhota, did not attend.

Liu, the city's comptroller, said he wasn't optimistic that the city could make up for a reduction in federal dollars caused by the Affordable Care Act.  “There's a big question mark around Obamacare," he said.

There is money to be found in the system to pay for improvements, but it might well take more audits to find it, he said. Liu pointed to numerous cases of health care fraud over the past few years which found the misappropriation of hundreds of millions of dollars.

Attacking corruption was something of a refrain for each candidate. Tom Allon, the sole Republican candidate to speak at the forum and owner of Manhattan Media, referred to Pedro Espada Jr, a former state senator who was convicted of looting hundreds of thousands of dollars from the Bronx health care network he founded. “That kind of stealing is probably still going on elsewhere in the city,” added Allon.

Fixing the city's hospitals is "a question of management,” he said.

That means being “smarter about where our dollars are coming from,” said former New York City Comptroller Bill Thompson, who held the office from 2002 until 2010.

Thompson, who previously ran for mayor in 2009 but lost to Mayor Michael Bloomberg by about 4.5 percentage points, took aim at his former rival by saying the problem of finding money in the budget was exacerbated by unresolved labor disputes with city employees.

Calling it "irresponsible" not to have set aside funding to cover those projected expenses, and with the budget hole fix still unclear, paying for better public health would be an immense challenge, Thompson said. Still, public health remains a priority.

"There are ways of saving money without sacrificing care," he said, noting that the hospital's network system needed to be revised to create a more efficient model. He said that as comptroller, he took the "unusual" step of looking into waste in the public health system.

While the short-term fixes were unclear, the candidates pointed to a common long-term solution: a preventative approach to addressing illnesses. By better educating children and by identifying early warning signs of disease, candidate Sal Albanese, a former Councilman who held office until 1997, suggested the city could save money going forward.

"We need pediatric wellness clinics" for those who cannot afford a doctor's visit, as well as "nurses who can go into a person's home" to help care for newly-born children as young as three months, he said.

Albanese, who previously worked as a health education teacher in the New York City school system, said he received his masters degree in health education free of charge, courtesy of the state of New York in the 1970s, when the state needed to encourage more qualified educators in the field. This kind of future planning should be continued, he said.

A model for the integration of health services in a school system, added Thompson, could be Cincinnati, which incorporates medical education and check-ups. This, he says, helps catch mental illnesses and diseases like diabetes, which may go undetected by parents.

While candidates mostly lauded Mayor Michael Bloomberg's record on public health, Thompson tried to take the fizz out of the soda ban, saying it was "good P.R., but a missed opportunity to do more for public health." That would include addressing the unequal distribution of parks and recreation areas available to the neediest.

Further, nearly all the candidates agreed the mayor erred in moving away from community-based organizations to address health care needs. Having CBOs could eliminate cultural in-sensitivities and other onerous burdens that would be placed on the patient.

By consolidating in the hopes of saving money, said Thompson, Bloomberg's policy left many underserved communities behind. “Health services should be closer to a community,” he said to applause.

CBOs would mean easing language restrictions, which Liu said can result in the death of patients. “I have constituents come to me and say a loved one died because they couldn't explain their health problem,” he said. Liu said he fought for equal language access as a councilman.

Sponsored by 22 organizations, ranging from the Commission on the Public's Health System to New York Immigration Coalition and the New Yorkers for Accessible Health Coverage, the forum offered a handbook to the attendees and candidates that highlighted key public health issues facing the city.

“The answers to all your questions are probably in this book,” Liu joked.

Jackie Vimo, a representative of the New York Immigration Coalition and forum member, called the book a “to-do” list for the next mayor of the city.

Those needs include identifying focusing on immigrant access, chronic conditions, and helping individuals with disabilities. The group further highlighted social determinants that factor into health, such as poverty, nutrition, lack of exercise, and low paying, potentially dangerous jobs that can pose a challenge to finding the time to see a doctor, she said.

According to the Immigration Coalition, almost 2.5 million residents are designated as “medically underserved,” further underscoring the challenge to serving them.

Judy Wessler, director of the Commission on the Public's Health System, said the problem was complicated by a system operating on "fuzzy math."

Hospitals that serve many Medicaid patients do not see enough revenue to remain open without public assistance, she said, but that assistance, which comes from the state, is often misused.

The next mayor needs to help address this, she added.

Hurricane Sandy further exposed the consequences of limited hospital options in cases of emergency when a handful of hospitals were forced to evacaute. Maimonides Hospital took on about 100 more patients as a result of Coney Island Hospital's closure. New York University's failed generators forced the evacuation of hundreds of patients the night of the storm, with some 200 patients transported to five hospitals throughout the city. In addition, the Bellevue Hospital Center emergency room and the VA New York Harbor Healthcare system remained closed for weeks after the storm.

"We had no plan for Sandy," Albanese said. "We're a crisis oriented society."

___

Photo by Matt Hunger

 

What Is Going On With City Council Redistricting? A Primer


 


1906 Wood Harmon Map of New York City w- Staten Island Bronx Brooklyn  Queens - Geographicus - NewYork-woodharmon-1906

NEW YORK — The once-a-decade process of redrawing the City Council's district lines is downright confounding to most people. The process became even more confusing after the commission responsible for drawing the lines pulled its final draft plan from consideration in December. 

That set the schedule back by several weeks and led to new public hearings this month. The first is scheduled for tonight. To help you get caught up on what all of this means, we've put together this handy primer on Council districting. Take it to the meeting and share it with friends.

Why does redistricting matter?

When Council district lines are finalized in a few months, they will not change again for a decade.

What residents of tightly-knit communities across New York City might not realize is that if they depend at all on public and private services, the Council members who represent them and the shapes of the districts they reside in matter far more than they think.

Unlike state representatives, Council members can dispense thousands of dollars in discretionary funds to community programs and capital upgrades like hospital and street repairs. The funding, often characterized as pork, can still allow local nonprofits to thrive. A Council member who is actively engaged in representing their community can stave off firehouse closures, help restore a crucial bus line or repair a library.

When neighborhoods or communities of common interest are united in a single district, a Council member is more likely to pay attention to them. If a neighborhood is carved up into several different districts, it becomes secondary or tertiary to multiple Council members. This means it can lose out on crucial funding.

For example, activists in the Queens neighborhood of Woodhaven are worried because the current map proposal divides Woodhaven in two districts and places residents with Council members they have not necessarily worked with before. Residents of Woodhaven are looking to avoid what was the decade-long fate of Richmond Hill, a neighboring community that was split among four different Council districts.

While Richmond Hill’s immigrant population continued to burgeon and reshape the area, it has lacked community centers, after school programs and even garbage cans on one busy avenue because there was never one Council member focused on their priorities. Even the most well-intentioned Council member is most likely to focus on the primary portion of their district and not a piece located on the outer edge. 

What is the Districting Commission?

The 15-member Districting Commission is the body appointed by the mayor as well as the majority and minority caucuses of the Council to redraw the City Council lines. Two members of the commission, Republicans Tom Ognibene and Frank Padavan —both from Queens — are former elected officials. The commission also has an executive director and staff.

After finalizing its plan, the commission must send it to the Council for a vote. The U.S. Dept. of Justice must ultimately approve the district lines that the commission draws.

Some have hailed the city’s Districting Commission as a vast improvement over other mechanisms for redistricting, like on the state level, where elected officials can draw their own districts to protect themselves from challengers. While the City Charter rigidly defines the boundaries of City Council districts, state Senate and Assembly districts can end up resembling bizarre puzzle pieces or Rorschach blots.

But good government groups and political insiders have questioned the independence of the city’s commission.

“What we’ve seen actually is that the commission acts as a layer that sort of clouds the transparency of the process,” said James Hong, a spokesman for the Asian American Community Coalition on Redistricting and Democracy, a coalition of 14 Asian-American advocacy organizations that have fought for fairer minority representation in city and state districts. “When you compare it to the state process, there it was heavily partisan and there was really a lot of conflict of interest — we don’t agree with it. However, it was very clear who was in control of the process.”

Hong said the Council redistricting process is “just as politicized,” but that “it’s hard to know exactly who is doing what. There’s an opaqueness from the involvement of the commission.”

One council member, who spoke on the condition of anonymity, said Carl Hum, the executive director of the commission, met with council members to ask them what proposals worked for themselves and the community. Members of Quinn’s staff contacted council members during the redistricting process to discuss their districts, the council member said. However, it is not unusual for elected officials to weigh in on districting matters. The commission allows elected officials to testify at public hearings.

At a meeting of the reform-oriented New Kings Democrats on Jan. 3, a representative of the commission, Jonathan Ettricks, defended the commission’s work.

“This is a process where anyone can have their voices heard,” Ettricks said. “Elected officials are people … If they want to try to have their own interests realized, certainly they are able to do that.”

An issue that the New Kings Democrats brought up was the lack of public recording of meetings between members of the Council and the commission. Testimonies at public hearings are readily accessible but individual meetings between commission members and Council members are not immediately available to the public. This information is available by Freedom of Information Law request.

Ettricks agreed that information on those kinds of meetings should be more readily available in the future.

“I think that’s an issue that has come up and there are some elected officials who have even raised that issue publicly and perhaps it’s something that should be done going forward but it’s not something that was incorporated into the process,” he said.

Lincoln Restler, a member of the New Kings Democrats and a possible candidate for City Council, said he had a lot of concerns about the fairness of the redistricting process.

“I think even the redistricting commission representative recognized opportunities to increase transparency and ensure a more fair outcome for neighborhood residents is very much possible and in fact needed,” Restler said. “This commission has primarily focused on protecting the interests of incumbents and that fails to meet our expectation for an independent redistricting process that represents the interests of New York City residents.”

Why new public hearings were called

The process for redrawing district lines was supposed to be done by now.

The Districting Commission had turned in its final draft to the City Council for consideration on Nov. 16, when news broke three days later that a change to the Brooklyn lines would have given disgraced Democratic powerbroker Vito Lopez a boost in a possible bid for a Council seat in the 34th District.  

A Lopez ally, term-limited Councilman Erik Dilan, allegedly requested the change. Outraged, Council Speaker Christine Quinnurged the commission to withdraw the map and move Lopez’s residence back out of the 34th District, though she was initially told on Nov. 16 that the panel had no power to tweak district lines without the City Council rejecting them first.

The reported ploy to boost Lopez’ chances was especially bizarre because a redistricting year has far more lenient residency requirements.

Hum admitted at a meeting in December that public opinion weighed on the commission’s decision to withdraw the maps.

“Certainly, there was a lot of public concern about that and we responded to that,” said Hum when asked if the press reports about Lopez’s residence being drawn into the 34th District influenced the commission’s decision. “The same way we responded to requests for additional hearings.”

New public hearings were something that good government groups were calling for long before the Lopez fallout. They had lamented that the public did not have a chance to comment on the revised version of the maps that were forwarded to the Council.

“I think that a third round is a good thing,” said Susan Lerner, executive director of Common Cause New York. “The timeframe did not allow the commissioner and the staff to put out their final recommendation for the public to make comments on. This third round will allow that to happen.”

Lerner admitted she was not “enthralled” with the procedure, but said she believed the outcome was the correct one.

Wait a minute, what is this about Lopez?

Lopez, a state Assemblyman representing the neighborhoods of Williamsburg and Bushwick, was accused of sexually harassing staffers earlier this year in a scandal that led most high-profile politicians in the city, including Quinn, to distance themselves from the longtime Brooklyn party leader. Lopez currently faces an ethics inquiry.

On Nov. 29, Council Speaker Christine Quinn sent a letter to the chair raising concerns about some of the lines, in particular a change that would have placed Lopez in the 34th District, where he was mulling a council bid.

While lauding the commission's work in her Nov. 29 letter to Chair Benito Romano, Quinn requested the lines be withdrawn and that a new series of public hearings be convened.

"Notwithstanding your efforts, there is still a need for more public participation," she wrote.

During the meeting in December, Romano agreed with Quinn that the best course was to withdraw the maps and hold a new round of hearings in January.

"I believe that we all agree that by maximizing public input, we will ensure the creation of a district plan that better reflects the complexity and diversity of our city," he said, according to a transcript of the hearing.

He said that the commissioners had communicated their interest in more public comment when they sent their plan to the Council on Nov. 19 for a vote, but also expressed concern that under the City Charter there was little legal recourse or time to do so.

The Council would have had to vote to reject or accept the lines by Dec. 10, or they would have lapsed into law, leaving little time in between to hold public forums.

Besides the interest in more public input, Romano said that Quinn's request "left open the possibility that the City Council would not vote to reject the plan" if it was not withdrawn before the Dec. 10 deadline. He added, "I believe that further underscored the need for action on the part of the commission."

Romano said he anticipated the next round of public hearings and meetings by the commission could be wrapped up by February 2013, with a new revised district plan delivered to the Council for a vote. The Council would then have three weeks to adopt or reject the plan.

"We would hope to have a final plan adopted prior to March 5, 2013," he said, according to a transcript.

To make matters even murkier, after withdrawing the map, the commission voted to agree to two changes to the plan that had been submitted to the Council and will now be the subject of a new round of public hearings.

At least one commissioner said he was concerned that the decision to withdraw the map and then vote to update it would lead to more confusion by the public rather than be seen as an effort to create more accountability of the process.

“It’s a question of perception I’m concerned about, misleading the general public who will not understand everything that was spoken here today," said Padavan, a former Republican state Senator, who voted for the withdrawal of the map but abstained from the vote on making public the two changes to the plan.

Was the process skewed to protect incumbents and what effect might it have on this year’s election?

Hum has said that “incumbency protection” is one of the factors the commission considers when drawing new districts.

And, as Gotham Gazette Demographics Columnist Andy Beveridge wrote in November after analyzing the final draft plan: “Overall the plan continues the time honored tradition of incumbency protection, but it is worth noting that such concern for incumbents has been found by the Supreme Court to be a legitimate basis for redistricting.”

The change in the schedule of when the districts will be voted on also benefits incumbents, because challengers will have less time to know which districts they will be running in, especially if a June primary date is scheduled.

All of this could have ripple effects for the city as a whole, said Rachael Fauss, policy and research manager for Citizens Union (the sister organization of Gotham Gazette).

“One concern is that a candidate who is not an incumbent may not know their district as well,” Fauss said. “It may be helpful to lessen the petition requirement and make it easier for the candidate to get on the ballot. The BOE (Board of Elections) is going to have to deal with everything more quickly — they have to draw new election districts … It’s still an open question if the BOE has enough time to do everything.”

But not all incumbents got everything they wanted. For instance, Republican Councilman Dan Halloran, saw his 19th District in eastern Queens altered at least somewhat to his liking.  But not northern Flushing, which was excised from his current district.  

“The Commission took appropriate action by withdrawing the proposed lines from the Council,” said Halloran in a statement. The councilman had attended both public hearings in Queens and submitted written testimony. “I am hopeful that deliberations and the next public hearing will lead to the restoration of northern Flushing to the 19th District, so that the single-family homeowners in that area will continue to have a voice in the Council and not be disenfranchised.”

Civil rights organizations have been vociferously opposed to some of the commission's lines

The Asian American Community Coalition on Redistricting and Democracy, the Asian American Legal Defense and Education Fund and LatinoJustice PRLDEF were at the forefront of a push to ensure that the new district lines would increase the voting power of the burgeoning minority populations of New York City.

The groups, among others, put forward their own redistricting proposal, called the “Unity Map.” The Districting Commission must draw lines that comply with the Voting Rights Act of 1965, which was created to protect politically-cohesive minority groups from having their voting power diluted.

Section 5 of the act applies to jurisdictions in specific states with histories of discriminatory electoral practices. With its large minority populations, Brooklyn, Manhattan and the Bronx all fall under Section 5.

In Brooklyn, civil rights advocacy groups have argued Bensonhurst, with its booming Asian population, is unfairly cleaved into four different districts. ACCORD took further aim at Queens, arguing the neighborhood of Oakland Gardens, home to a growing Korean population, should be united with neighboring Bayside.

Briarwood, another Queens neighborhood home to a growing South Asian population, was split in two in the latest map proposal. ACCORD wants the Queens neighborhoods of South Ozone Park and Richmond Hill, also South Asian in make-up, united more fully into a single district.

Jerry Vattamala, a staff attorney with AALDEF, questioned why commission wasn’t being more fully responsive to these concerns.

“How many speakers said Oakland Gardens should be with the rest of Bayside? Where are those changes?” Vattamala asked. “I think there’s a lot of politics involved here with this, quote unquote, independent commission; there’s this sort of black hole. We don’t know what the real reasons are for why the maps are drawn, why changes are being made, who’s really calling the shots.”

He added, “One thing is clear, it isn’t the public.”

In Manhattan, Councilwoman Melissa Mark-Viverito slammed the commission for removing a chunk of East Harlem from her district and adding thousands of voters from the Bronx and move Randalls Island out of her district to one in Queens.

Mark-Viverito and residents have accused the commission of playing politics with their neighborhood. “They’re carving East Harlem up like a turkey, all for some other political end,” Mark-Viverito told Daily News columnist Juan Gonzalez in a story published over the weekend. But Hum has disputed those allegations.

____

Additional reporting by Cristian Salazar. Image of 1906 Wood Harmon Map of New York City courtesy Wikimedia Commons.

How Hurricane Sandy Upended Politics As Usual in Albany


Senate-Chamber

ALBANY, N.Y. — With the power in the State Senate hanging in the balance after last week's election and the impact of Superstorm Sandy overshadowing the civic debate, the political calculus in Albany has shifted.

Where only a few weeks ago lobbyists and policy makers were debating the possibility of a special session of the State Legislature that would address campaign financing, the minimum wage and marijuana possession laws, they are now talking about how the government can respond with smarter policies to lessen the impact of future super storms.

“Rebuilding becomes the focus now,” said Russ Haven, legislative counsel at the New York Public Interest Research Group, in an interview this week.

He added that legislative pay raises that had long been rumored as a focus of a special session will be “a lot harder to do” now that Sandy has added to the state’s budget shortfall.

Haven and other political observers are still eyeing the outcome of key races to see whether they shift the State Senate to the Democratic Party. The Senate is currently split 33-29 in favor of the Republicans.

Even if the Democrats do eke out a majority, it could be rendered almost meaningless. The Independent Democratic Conference, a rogue group of four Democrats led by Bronx State Sen. Jeffrey Klein, is in a position to play the spoiler and could decide to align with the current majority of Republicans. Newly elected Brooklyn State Sen. Simcha Felder has said he will caucus with the Republicans. And, perhaps most importantly, the Democrats have long fallen out of favor with the state's popular governor.

“The governor, given his popularity, institutional powers and demonstrated capacity for negotiating has the upper hand one way or another," Haven said, adding that Gov. Andrew Cuomo and the IDC are also politically aligned. “The IDC is in tune with the governor’s agenda. They are fiscally conservative and support more liberal social issues.”

Former Gov. David Paterson wrote in The Times Union this Sunday: “Rising above all this political uncertainty is one simple fact: No matter what happens come January, Gov. Andrew Cuomo will end up a winner either way.

If the Republicans return to power, the governor will still have an ally on his important economic agenda of job creation, low taxes and regulatory relief. If the Democrats win, Cuomo will be able to pass the social agenda that has been stymied by the Republicans: minimum wage, campaign finance reform and more intelligent marijuana possession laws.

Cuomo has tried to stay above the fray, instead focusing his political energy on the storm cleanup.

"The Assembly will pick a leader, and the Senate will pick a leader. And I have no intention of getting involved in either situation," Cuomo said at a press conference last week, while underscoring that he thought Democrats learned a lesson the last time they were in control of the Senate. "I think they learned the hard way. The Democrats were in power. The Democrats then lost power because of the dysfunction and I think they learned that lesson the hard way."

In 2008, Democrats took control of the Senate Majority, but first they had to win the support of the self-titled Four Amigos, comprised of Sens. Carl Krueger, Ruben Diaz, Pedro Espada and Hiram Monserrate. The four realized the Democrats needed their votes to elect a majority leader held out until they received the terms they wanted to support Sen. Malcolm Smith. The men won prominent committee seats, staffing and, according to some, received guarantees from Smith about what legislation he would introduce. In June 2009, Espada and Monserrate got a better offer from Sen. Dean Skelos and launched the coup that paralyzed the Legislature for months.

But while no one in Albany wants to see a repeat, those groups who have seen their agendas sidelined by the Republicans are hoping the Democrats gain the Majority.

Michael McKee, the treasurer of Tenants PAC, a political action committee dedicated to keeping apartments affordable for New Yorkers, had trouble sleeping on election night as he watched the results come in.

That's because the group he works for had poured thousands of dollars into the campaigns of Senate Democrats across the state: They had given $ 6,000 to Cecelia Tkaczyk in the 46th Senate Districtand held a fundraiser for her; another 10,300 had gone to George Latimer in eastern Westchester County; $7,000 to Queens Sen. Joe Addabbo; $4,000 to Justin Wagner; $6,000 to Nassau County's Ryan Cronin; and $2,000 to Ted Obrien.

One after another, McKee watched as the candidates they supported won their races or edged ahead as recounts loomed. "I was so excited, I couldn't sleep," McKee said.

But in the days since election night, McKee's fervor has turned to caution.

For years, Tenants PAC has worked with one goal in mind: Elect as many Democrats as possible to the State Senate who would be willing to help to pass legislation that protects housing for working class New Yorkers.

“We worked very hard to help the Democrats win the Senate. And we also helped upgrade the Senate. We are proud of that,” said McKee, who said he gave Tkacyzk a few hundred dollars or his own money. “We are proud of replacing Sen. Pedro Espada with Sen. Gustavo Rivera. But if the Republicans or Jeff Klein is in charge, we have no chance. I would rather see them remain in the minority for two years rather than make a deal like last time."

Business groups are worried about what the Senate Democrats might mean for their agenda.

"I didn't know whether to chuckle or cry," Michael Durant, New York state director of the National Federation of Independent Businesses, told Crains New York. "Unfortunately, it appears in some races that are essential to the Senate that economic development and jobs were not the central theme."

Brian Sampson of Unshackle Upstate, a conservative business group, told the newspaper that life would be a bit more difficult with a closely split Senate.  

"I don't care if you're the business community or the ultra-progressive left," he said. "Any bill that has any controversy to it is just going to take that much longer to get to the floor. And once it gets there, you're going to have to work that much harder to get it passed or get it defeated."

A number of Albany insiders say Senate Democrats realize that they have to appeal to businesses interests and upstaters — especially because the seats they gained this year and seem poised to gain are upstate and to keep those seats they will need to tend to their issues.

Sen. Michael Gianaris, head of the State Senate Democratic Campaign Committee, has said repeatedly that his conference is committed to promoting a “pro-business” agenda.

The United Federation of Teachers and New York State United Teachers also publicly backed a number of Senate Democrats and have a lot invested in the outcome of the battle for control of the Senate. NYSUT reportedly spent $500,000 to help Addabbo retain his seat.

Teacher unions are very interested in countering Gov. Andrew Cuomo’s plans for school reforms and his continued push for concessions from unions. Clearly they felt a Democratic Majority in the Senate would help blunt Cuomo’s agenda, but it isn’t clear if a coalition government would help them at all.

But it isn’t just those who gave money who are concerned with who will control the Senate when session starts next January.

Gene Russianoff, of The New York Public Interest Group’s Straphangers Campaign, says funding of the MTA is also very much at stake. If Senate Republicans get what they want, the mobility tax on areas served by the Metropolitan Transportation Authority would be completely repealed.

“It is widely perceived among Republicans that it is a highly unpopular tax. They eliminated it last year for some small business and it cost the budget$300,000 that Gov. Cuomo found the cash to replace,” he said. Russianoff noted that Democrats passed the tax by party line in 2009, so it is likely that the tax battle would split down party lines.

But Haven, of NYPIRG, said that post Sandy, the people will want to be sure their leaders are focused on fixing things quickly.

“From now on, I think we are going to look at everything the state does through the lens of how we deal with disasters," he said. "People want a smart government that is ready to deal with how we move forward.”



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