Getting help (photo: Michael Appleton/Mayoral Photography Office)

Very often patients with serious issues such as active hallucinations, self-harm behavior, severe depression, and suicidality wait for days in common spaces or crowded hospital hallways for observation or the next available inpatient psychiatric bed. I’ve seen patients in need of hospitalization far exceed available beds in New York City.  For someone experiencing a mental health crisis, such an experience can be traumatic and triggering. It impacts quality of care and prolongs and complicates treatment. It shouldn’t happen.

Over the years, demand for psychiatric services has increased, while the number of psychiatric beds and services have decreased due to hospital closures and funding cuts from the state. Under Governor Hochul, the state has made up for some of this shortfall with recent historic investments in the mental health workforce, in new program models, in services, and a commitment to bring more beds online — but more must be done to improve our entire behavioral health care system, which is siloed and lacks the coordination to ensure appropriate care.

There is a good chance that the same patient who waited days to get a psychiatric bed will be discharged from the hospital with fragmented medical and psychiatric follow-up plans. They may have to wait a month, or more, after discharge to be seen in the community. This is why so many people cycle in and out of emergency rooms. 

The lack of coordination also leads to redundant services, which drive up costs and reduce quality of care. The United States has one of the most inefficient healthcare systems. Some of this inefficiency stems from redundant medical services costing an estimated $700 billion per year, according to the Congressional Budget Office.

We need real-time coordination between hospital systems, outpatient services, criminal justice systems, and substance use treatment programs, so that we can implement collaborative treatment plans that provide efficient, cost-effective, quality care.

Ensuring patients can access care in the community has also been a challenge. One key change that helped mental health professionals improve service delivery is the expansion of telehealth. When we began using telehealth at ICL at the start of the pandemic, the number of clients who kept medical appointments increased. Surveys of our clients indicated they enjoy the convenience of speaking with a provider over the phone or computer, rather than visiting a clinic.

With the COVID-19 public health emergency declaration that expedited the adoption of telehealth set to expire this year, New York State must make sure providers continue to have the flexibility to deliver various forms of therapy virtually at all levels of care.

Many clients don’t have the access or technological capability to use a computer for telehealth. For them, a phone call is the best way to get care. We need a telephone option in telehealth services so that these patients remain engaged in care, making it less likely that they’ll be back in an emergency room seeking treatment.

Our behavioral health care system is struggling, and fixing it is a public health imperative. To begin to meet the challenges of this crisis, we need the state to increase the number of psychiatric beds, break down silos and better coordinate services, and ensure providers have the flexibility to continue to provide telehealth services to their clients. This will help deliver life-saving care to New Yorkers in need.

***
Dr. Victoria Pham is Chief Medical Officer at Institute for Community Living (ICL). On Twitter @ICL_inc.

Manhattan traffic (photo: Marc A. Hermann/MTA)

Traffic pollutes, and air pollution results in poorer health. This means higher rates of asthma, lower birth weights, and a greater risk of maternal health problems.

As health and transportation policy experts, we see that congestion pricing in New York City will be a win for our region – not only for transportation flow, but also for air quality and public health.

Vehicle emissions are a major source of nitrogen oxides (NOx), volatile organic compounds (VOCs), and particulate matter in urban areas. In addition to polluting the air, these emissions also increase surface pollution, especially in the summertime. Reducing traffic will immediately improve air quality. That, it turns out, can also result in rapid improvements in health – a fundamental reason why we are eager to see the congestion pricing plan move forward.

Formally known as the Central Business District Tolling Program, congestion pricing places a fee on vehicles entering Manhattan south of 61st Street in order to reduce traffic and raise revenue for public transportation. The Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA) is holding public hearings on the proposal now.

Environmental studies predict clear traffic reduction benefits – estimates suggest that driving will decline by almost 10% in Manhattan south of 61st Street, and the number of vehicles entering Manhattan will drop 15-20%. Air quality will also be improved – Regional Plan Association estimates show a decline of 7.5% for particulate matter in the congestion zone and the MTA’s studies show about a 1.2% drop regionwide.

Only a few other major cities around the world have mounted congestion pricing policies, including London and Stockholm. These cities have reduced congestion, controlled emissions, and created funds for public transport systems.

Studies found substantial reductions in pollution levels after the policies were implemented. For example, shortly after the implementation of a congestion pricing policy across much of Stockholm, nitrogen dioxide (NO2) concentrations and particles with an aerodynamic diameter ≤ 10 μm (PM10) dropped by 15-20% and 10-20%, respectively. Such declines did not occur in parts of the country that had no congestion pricing policy.

​​The New York City congestion pricing policy may result in even greater air quality and health improvements than seen in Europe, in part because the city is more densely populated and has greater health inequality. But the extent of improvement depends greatly on how the policy is implemented, and those details are being worked out now.

For example, environmental documents suggest that traffic could rise on specific highway segments in the Bronx and Staten Island. The Governor, MTA, and city leaders should take this seriously and advance a series of proposals to reduce – or even eliminate — localized traffic concerns. These include transitioning the Hunts Point food hub to electric vehicles and facilities, focusing electric vehicle infrastructure dollars to the South Bronx, boosting bus service, and directing electric bus facilities. The State Department of Transportation has billions in federal infrastructure resources from the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act that could be used for these investments. Many of them should be made regardless of congestion pricing – for too long certain communities have been overburdened by polluting infrastructure.

Another issue to address is so-called “toll shopping.” This describes drivers who go out of their way for the cheapest route, or “shopping” for the cheapest toll sum. A smart toll credit policy that encourages drivers to use the most direct routes will have substantial local benefits – for example, our studies have found that 25% of morning rush hour traffic on the BQE bypasses the tolled Hugh Carey tunnel to use a free East River crossing.

Congestion pricing is a win for transportation, air quality, and health. If designed well, the policy could not only surpass air pollution reductions and health impacts of any other city to date, but it could also achieve important and tangible health equity impacts in underserved communities. All while raising significant sums to fund public transit improvements for the long-term.

Let’s do this right.

*** 
Kate Slevin is Executive Vice President at the Regional Plan Association. Lorna Thorpe, PhD, MPH is a Professor of Epidemiology and Director of the Division of Epidemiology at NYU Langone. Rachel Weinberger, PhD is the Peter Herman Chair for Transportation at Regional Plan Association. On Twitter @RegionalPlan & @nyulangone.

(l-r) Nathalia Fernandez, Gustavo Rivera, Kristen Gonzalez

Last week’s primary elections for New York State Senate and U.S. House of Representatives seats included a number of competitive races, some of them in Latino-majority districts. As in any election, the implications of this primary are varied and significant.

Here are several key takeaways from State Senate races in the five boroughs.

Latino Turnout, Where Art Thou?
Voter turnout at this primary was abysmal, as was widely predicted, but especially in Latino districts—as it had been in the June primaries for statewide and Assembly seats.

According to my estimates based on voter enrollment analysis, of the 802,433 Latino registered Democratic voters in New York City, only 67,871 voted in the June primary. Yes, a paltry 8% of all eligible Latino Democratic voters went to the polls in those primaries, including the race for the party’s Democratic nomination for Governor of New York. Granted, turnout was down across all racial and ethnic backgrounds from the 2018 jump. Yet, the most significant drop in voting participation is among Latinos, followed by Asian American and African American voters, respectively, when comparing the 2018 and 2022 Democratic primaries for Governor.

As yet we have only unofficial results from this month’s primary, with thousands of absentee ballots still being tallied. But these show that Latino turnout in the August primaries has decreased even more.

Take the 78th Assembly district in the Bronx as an example, where more than half of registered voters are Latinos. The district saw a highly-competitive Assembly Democratic primary in June, along with the statewide Democratic primaries for Governor and Lieutenant Governor

This month, that Assembly district largely overlapped with two competitive primaries at the State Senate level in the 31st and 33rd Senate districts. Combined, the two Senate districts include 49 of the 52 Election Districts that make up the 78th Assembly district. Both these Senate districts had competitive primaries.

The 78th Assembly district saw a turnout of 4,163 voters in the June primary, where longtime incumbent Assemblymember Jose Rivera was defeated by George Alvarez, and Governor Kathy Hochul and Lieutenant Governor Antonio Delgado each beat two Democratic opponents. Those 4,163 voters made for an almost 47% decline from the June 2021 New York City primary cycle, which featured the highly-competitive Democratic primaries for Mayor, Comptroller, and Bronx Borough President, as well as partially overlapping races in the 14th and 15th City Council Districts.

By my calculations, only 2,963 people turned out to vote this month in the 78th Assembly district in the Bronx (that number could increase very slightly with a small number of additional absentee ballots to be counted there).

Why are the numbers so abysmal? This year’s redistricting fiasco, including a judge’s decision to force an August primary, making for two primaries in the same cycle, contributes mightily to this decline. But there are other factors too, like an uninspiring gubernatorial primary, lack of Latino political leadership, rampant poverty, voter apathy, and more.

To understand these social and political realities among Latinos, I am launching a new think tank—The Institute for Latino Politics and Policy—during Hispanic Heritage Month, which is September 15-October 15. Stay tuned for more information.

The voting apathy in the 78th Assembly district is also found in other districts with large Latino voting populations. For the sake of all Latino communities, it is high time that Latino political and community leaders, community organizations, and others set aside their personal gripes and tribalism. Of course Latinos are not a monolithic community; we come from different countries, with nuances in our language, culture, politics, and ideologies. But surely there is more that connects us than divides us.

The Senate Races
A number of this year’s competitive New York State Senate races occurred in Latino-majority or Latino-plurality districts.

In the 31st Senate district, spanning parts of Upper Manhattan and the South Bronx, three insurgents  took on the incumbent senator, Robert Jackson. But Jackson’s toughest challenger was Angel Vasquez, who had the strong backing of Congressman Adriano Espaillat.

With the changes that resulted from the wacky redistricting process, the 31st Senate district experienced some radical shifts, and became much more Latino in the process. In fact, the Senate district was constructed in a way that resembles Rep. Espaillat’s own Congressional district. The new demographic reality of the district was one that on paper would give someone like Vasquez a fighting chance to defeat the incumbent.

Alas, not only did Jackson win, he won handily. In fact, Jackson’s performance was one of the most impressive of the night. He won all Assembly districts in the Senate district, except for one—the 86th Assembly district in the Bronx. And this is where it gets interesting.

Jackson defeated Vasquez in the 72nd Assembly district, which comprises 44% of the entire Senate district. In this district, 70% of all Democratic voters are Latino (overwhelmingly Dominican). And it is Espaillat’s home base.

According to the unofficial results, Jackson won 50% of the vote in the 72nd Assembly district, to Vasquez’s 42%. Jackson’s impressive victory testifies to the vast support he receives from voters of all ethnic backgrounds. He is likable, known to be thoughtful, and was a progressive before it became the political buzzword of the day.

The results of the race have major implications for Espaillat, who was not on the ballot for State Senate but for Congress. Much was said, including by me, about Espaillat’s ability to get his preferred candidates elected: Oswald Feliz and George Alvarez in the Bronx, Carmen De La Rosa and Manny De Los Santos in Manhattan, to name a few. Yet, in this case, Espaillat could not carry one of his own on his home turf. This fact alone makes Espaillat one of the night’s biggest losers. Interestingly enough, this comes on the heels of City and State listing him #1 on its “Manhattan Power 100” list. Of course, every great warrior lives to see another day. But this warrior has taken a major blow from another, Robert Jackson.

Another of Espaillat’s endorsed candidates, Miguelina Camilo, lost her race to unseat State Senator Gustavo Rivera in the Bronx. Rivera’s victory is another of the night’s most impressive wins.

Not only was Rivera vastly outspent (outside groups alone spent over $1 million to defeat him), but other major forces were out to get him: the Bronx Democratic machine, the Dinowitz father-son elected tandem, Congressman Ritchie Torres, Bronx Borough President Vanessa Gibson, and other elected officials. Prominent labor unions DC37 and 32BJ also backed Camilo.

Despite these unusual odds for an incumbent, Rivera defeated Camilo, receiving 52% of the votes in the unofficial tally. As a result of Assemblymember Jose Rivera’s defeat in the June primary, Senator Gustavo Rivera is to become the second most senior Latino elected representative in the Bronx, after Senator Jose Serrano.

Rivera’s victory may also demonstrate further that the Bronx Democratic Party is more of a paper tiger than a machine. The fact is that over the years Democratic county organizations have lost much of the power they once had. They still have influence, but for the most part the victories of many insurgent candidates over machine-backed candidates in recent years demonstrate county organizations’ waning power. Senator Rivera’s victory continues to show that great candidates, with a strong and organized campaign operation to back them, and enough money to put it together, can defeat county organizations.

In the 34th Senate district, a district covering the Northeast Bronx and a sliver of Westchester, Assemblymember Nathalia Fernandez handily defeated two other candidates in an ‘open’ race to replace State Senator Alessandra Biaggi, who declined to run for reelection to unsuccessfully pursue a seat in Congress.

And in the 59th Senate district, which covers stretches of western Queens and Brooklyn and a chunk of Manhattan’s East Side, newcomer Kristen Gonzalez defeated Elizabeth Crowley. Gonzalez, backed by the Democratic Socialist of America - New York City (DSA), also had to contend with the vast spending of outside forces. Yet, she won with an impressive 58% of the vote in the unofficial tally.

Gonzalez now joins Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, State Senator Julia Salazar, Assemblymembers Jessica Gonzalez-Rojas and Marcela Mitaynes, and City Council Members Alexa Aviles and Tiffany Caban in the ranks of DSA-backed Latino elected representatives. While in some quarters the NYC DSA has been critiqued for its far-left positions on public safety and other topics, and questioned about the diversity in its leadership, it does overwhelmingly support candidates of color, particularly Latinos. Would it be a stretch to say that in some Latino-plurality districts there seems to be a return to electing Latino socialists? Or does this merely reflect the cyclical nature of politics? Maybe both. As I pointed out in a recent column, and will develop in a forthcoming piece, the very first Latino elected official in our state’s history was a socialist, Puerto Rican Oscar Garcia Rivera.

Lastly, despite abysmal turnout, the election of Latinas is a welcome breath of fresh air, and adds to overall Latino representation in the State Senate.

The new Fernandez and Gonzalez victories in their primaries (with an overwhelmingly Democratic electorate, both are all but assured of winning in the fall general election), combined with the virtually certain re-election of the other Latino senators — Jessica Ramos, Gustavo Rivera, Julia Salazar, Luis Sepulveda, Jose Serrano — will increase Latino representation in the Senate to at least seven.

A potential victory by Democratic nominee Monica Martinez on Long Island in November could increase Latino representation in the State Senate to eight in the 63-seat upper chamber of the Legislature. And five of the eight would be Latinas, with three of the five of Colombian descent — Nathalia Fernandez, Jessica Ramos, Julia Salazar. Now that’s worth celebrating!

***
Eli Valentin is a political analyst and author of the forthcoming book, Reinhold Niebuhr: A Political Life. On Twitter @EliValentinNY.

Mothers who have lost children to gun violence (photo: Michael Appleton/Mayor's Office)

When I lost my son Keondre to gun violence last year, my whole life came crashing down. At only 18, Keondre was senselessly shot multiple times. He went into the neighborhood deli, and he never came out.  

Though I didn’t give birth to him, I raised him. He was with me from the time he was four years old.  

My memories of Keondre replay over and over again. I remember his bright spirit. How he was always helping me with my bags, joining the community clean-up crew, tutoring his younger cousins, teaching kids how to play basketball. Keondre was a stellar student. He had no prior criminal trouble.  

Keondre was a light that brought joy to others. He was raised by a village of aunts, sisters, uncles, and family friends who loved him. Yet that could not keep him safe.  

And I am not alone in this. Far too many mothers and parents are losing their children to this numbing violence. Everyday there is another report of a fatal shooting of a young person. Of another bullet that has destroyed countless lives. 

The pain of these losses will stay with me for the rest of my life. But, with support, I have been able to find ways to cope.  

To talk through my feelings in-depth, I turned to Safe Horizon, the nation’s largest victim services agency, for grief counseling. I was introduced to a social worker, Grace, who I can call anytime. She has always been there whenever I need her. Grace’s genuine interest in me and my healing has built a relationship that makes me feel that she is here for me.  

Grief counseling has helped me so much that I find myself offering what I have learned to others. In addition to counseling, Grace helped me access victim services for help with funeral expenses and also helped with navigating many difficult processes. I want others who have lost loved ones to gun violence to know this kind of support is available, free of charge. 

I want people to know that it's OK to reach out for help when you are hurting. Especially for people of color, we have a stigma in our communities about counseling and therapy. Don’t let that stop you from getting the help you need.  

You do not have to feel ashamed or embarrassed about asking for help. When we feel like we already take on the weight of the world, this cannot be another thing to handle on our own.  

And we have to take care of ourselves so that we can keep fighting for our community. Because I get the support I need, I have the strength to keep going. As long as there is breath in my body, I will use Keondre as a vessel to save other young men in this community. And I will keep reaching out for the help I need to do that. 

I will never get Keondre back, and that will never stop hurting. But, with help, I can regain some of the joy that he, and his memories, brought to my life. 

***
Heather Colbourne lost her son in November 2021. She lives on Staten Island and is a community advocate for survivors in the fight to eradicate gun violence. Safe Horizon is the nation’s largest victims service agency. If you have lost a loved one to gun violence in New York City, call 1-800-621-HOPE.

Vaccination (photo: Adam Schultz/Official White House)

In the earliest months of the COVID-19 pandemic, I wrote a column about Lessons from Two Plagues. Even then, it was apparent that there were sad parallels between it and the HIV/AIDS epidemic. COVID-19 has killed 70,000 people in New York and 6.4 million globally. More than 40 million people worldwide have died of HIV/AIDS and another 38 million are estimated to be living with HIV.

And now, New York is again the epicenter of an emerging epidemic: monkeypox. The U.S. has nearly 17,432 confirmed cases, with 3,124 in New York State.

We are already behind on combatting and containing this public health emergency, echoing our failures with both HIV/AIDS and COVID-19. History is repeating itself:

Fear. The early days of both HIV/AIDS and COVID-19 were terrifying. Every sneeze or cough was cause for worry – is this it? Will I die? Monkeypox isn’t fatal but it’s incredibly painful, and it’s eliciting the same fear, anxiety, and confusion. Now, among men who have sex with men – who have borne most of the infections so far – people are sharing horror stories; they are afraid to be in crowded social settings or to have sex.

Stigma. Everybody is vulnerable to HIV/AIDS, COVID-19, and monkeypox. But viral outbreaks hit some communities harder than others, and those communities are often on the margins. HIV/AIDS mainly affected gay men, people of color, and IV-drug users in the early days, and was derisively called the “gay cancer.” COVID-19 prompted a resurgence of racism and xenophobia, especially against Asian Americans (fueled in part by President Trump calling it “the China virus”), and it’s disproportionately affected communities of color. Today, monkeypox is most common among men who have sex with men, with particularly high rates among Black and Hispanic men. Gay men and people of color are again wondering whether anyone cares about them.

Government failures. The government has blood on its hands for both AIDS and COVID-19 deaths; it was slow to act and inept in its handling of those crises, and it seems like little has changed or been learned. Over the last two-and-a-half years, we’ve seen a lack of testing capacity, failures to track exposures, botched vaccine rollouts, an inadequate supply of treatments, and mixed and confusing public messaging. 

Here we go again. For monkeypox, we already have a proven and effective vaccine. But vaccination efforts have been deeply flawed. The federal government failed to stockpile enough doses and hundreds of thousands of doses were left in Denmark. Vaccine distribution has suffered from a lack of coordination between federal, state, and local officials. The federal government is now trying a risky strategy of splitting vaccine doses to stretch the limited supply it has. When New York City released its first online appointment system for vaccines, the site crashed within 30 minutes. Getting a vaccine has been compared to The Hunger Games.

And we’re again seeing poor communication leading to confusion and misinformation. Too many people don’t know the facts about how monkeypox is transmitted; they may underestimate or overestimate their risk as a result. Dangerous misinformation and intentional disinformation are spreading like a brushfire, fueled by social media, just as with COVID-19.

Let’s give credit where credit is due. The World Health Organization declared monkeypox a global health emergency, a rare designation that it hadn’t used since the emergence of COVID-19. President Biden declared the outbreak a national public health emergency. Federal action came on the heels of both New York State and New York City executive orders declaring local emergencies. These designations free up some funds and lift some bureaucratic hurdles.

Our lack of preparedness isn’t a surprise. For decades, we as a nation and as a state have disinvested in public health. In 2018, only 2.9% of total U.S. health spending went toward public health and preventive services.

In 1983, Larry Kramer published his landmark call to arms “1,112 and Counting,” referencing the fast-rising number of AIDS cases. We already have 16 times that number of monkeypox cases, and counting. Some experts think we’ve already missed the chance to stop monkeypox. We need to finally learn from our mistakes. And we need to act now before it’s too late.

***
David Sandman, Ph.D., is President and CEO of the New York Health Foundation. On Twitter @DavidSandman1 & @NYHFoundation.

An Upper West Side tree bed (photo: CM Brewer’s office)

Rat vigilantes on the Upper West Side are placing exposed rat poison in the tree beds, endangering children and pets. 

Two Upper West Side dogs, Waffles, a one-year-old rescue coon hound mix, and Beti, a six-year-old terrier mix, are the latest victims; upon ingestion, they were rushed to the vet for treatment and have both since made full recoveries.

While Upper West Siders have called on local government for a more aggressive response to rat sightings on streets, under restaurant sheds, and in street tree beds, those that take matters into their own hands and leave exposed poison in tree beds are putting their two- and four-footed neighbors at risk.

Rat poison poses an incredible danger to pets and children and should be containerized to avoid harm. Common rodenticides include warfarin, chlorophacinone, and Pival, which act as anticoagulants, intended to cause death by internal bleeding, according to the New York State Center for Environmental Health. If ingested by a pet, the animal should be taken to a veterinarian immediately to induce vomiting and apply other interventions to restore the animals’ homeostatic balance. (Vitamin K acts as an antidote; it can take up to 30 days for pets to completely rid themselves of the blood thinning toxin.)

There are about 693,000 trees lining the streets of New York City, which provide various environmental, economic, and health benefits. Currently, 22% of the city is covered by the urban canopy, which totals about 7 million trees, and advocates like Forest for All NYC are calling for 30% coverage by 2035, which I support. According to American Forests, New York City needs to add 1.5 million trees to the existing canopy to achieve equity in tree cover across the city. 

According to a volunteer survey of every street tree bed in City Council District 6 conducted by my office in the second quarter of 2022, about 255 street tree beds showed signs of rat burrows, 4.9% of the 5,248 tree beds surveyed. 

As New York City works to expand and protect the urban canopy, city leadership must establish clear guidelines for who is responsible for managing the tree beds, a critical piece of climate infrastructure.

Property owners are responsible for keeping the sidewalk adjacent to their property free of trash and debris; the city’s Department of Transportation (DOT) is charged with keeping sidewalks safe and accessible for all and ticketing offenders. The Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR) maintains tree beds it plants with trees for two years after planting, after which property owners become responsible for maintaining the bed. The Department of Health and Mental Hygiene (DOHMH) has a small budget for rat mitigation in tree beds, but mitigation in all tree beds is not in their purview. 

So when there is a hazard or pest in a tree bed, who is responsible for addressing it? 

The street tree bed ownership challenge is a bureaucratic quagmire. There’s no clear administrative body that handles the rat burrows in tree beds. That’s why I’ve written to the commissioners of DOHMH (responsible for rat mitigation overall), DOT, and DPR asking for clarity. It’s the first step toward attacking the rat problem holistically. In the meantime the vigilantes going after rats on the Upper West Side should stop taking matters into their own hands. 

When rat bait is placed out illegally by individuals who are not licensed to apply pesticides, it should be reported to the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation Police at 718-482-4885.

***
City Council Member Gale Brewer represents parts of Manhattan. On Twitter @galeabrewer.

Voters in the West Village (photo: Michael Appleton/Mayor's office)

In this week’s late August primary, the second primary this summer in New York, voter turnout barely cracked ten percent in New York City. The first primary of the summer, in June, saw turnout drop by nearly half from four years ago. At the same time, nationally, concern about the future of democracy in the United States is at fever pitch. In 2021, for the first time, the US was added to an annual list of “backsliding” democracies - compiled by the International IDEA think tank. If our democracy is in peril, why aren’t New Yorkers voting like their rights depended on it? 

In fact, within the seeming disconnect is a key part of the solution: building our democracy back up from the roots. From the block, to the neighborhood, to the city, and beyond.

GoVoteNYC, a collaborative of more than a dozen foundations and donors committed to nonpartisan activity to strengthen democracy in New York City, is an eager contributor to this work. GoVoteNYC supports nonprofit partners that are deploying both creative new ideas and  proven approaches to reach voters, many of whom have not voted in the past or are typically overlooked in the democratic process.

In 2021, GoVoteNYC provided $1 million in grants to nonprofit partners across New York City. These grantees, trusted messengers in their communities, engaged, informed, and mobilized their neighbors and communities to get out the vote. 

According to an analysis conducted for GoVoteNYC by Hester Street, an urban design and community development nonprofit, these activities conducted in eight languages reached over two million New Yorkers across all boroughs. Thanks in part to these efforts, turnout in the 2021 mayoral primary saw the highest voter turnout in any mayoral primary in the last several decades, but turnout slumped in the 2021 general election.

What did we learn from this work in 2021? Put simply, investments in three areas paid off:  the three V’s for voter engagement: validators, volunteers and visibility. 

First, validators.  The Hispanic Federation created a coalition of community-based organizations that met bi-weekly to discuss election information, coordinate activities, and promote their election events. Three hundred thousand Latino voters were reached with support from coalition members. Of note, sixty one percent  of people contacted by the Hispanic Federation had not voted in the last three primaries.

Second, volunteers. MinKwon Center, which organizes low-income Korean and Asian immigrant communities, mobilized a network of 527 volunteers to support their GoVoteNYC-funded outreach. The result was a sixty percent increase in Asian-American primary voters in 2021 from 2013 in the eight council districts targeted by MinKwon and the APA VOICE Coalition.

Third, visibility.  F.Y. Eye, a nonprofit media agency, created a Voting PSA Clearinghouse, a free, accessible, open-source library that aggregated content like flyers, explainers, posters and social media posts around voting in the primary and general elections. In 2021, the focus was explaining Ranked Choice Voting. GoVoteNYC grantees garnered 79 million impressions with their voter education ads. This year, as New Yorkers faced new districts, two summer primaries and 86,500 of us had our voting sites changed,  the need for nonpartisan accurate voter education remains significant. In 2023 we will see another set of boundary changes, this time for the City Council. 

The key is consistently deploying these tools in combination. As a result of our grantees’ work in 2021, and a new set of grants for 2022, we are hopeful, and we invite other civic, philanthropic and corporate leaders to join us. While our national system creaks and groans, our democracy is being reinforced and rebuilt by community groups working together in every neighborhood in New York City.  If New Yorkers cannot cultivate and sustain healthy democratic participation locally, how can we expect or entertain anything different nationally?

***
Martha King is a Senior Program Officer at the Charles H. Revson Foundation. Patricia A. Swann is the Program Director, Thriving Communities at the New York Community Trust. Neill Coleman is the Executive Director of Trinity Church Wall Street Philanthropies. Together they serve as the co-chairs of GoVoteNYC. On Twitter @Revson_Fdn & @NYCommTrust & @neillcoleman of @TrinityWallSt.

Doreen Harris & Basil Seggos, the authors, at a climate conference (photo: NYS DEC)

One month ago, national progress on climate change collapsed on the heels of an adverse Supreme Court ruling, followed by apparent withdrawal of Congress from meeting this urgent moment. In a dramatic turn, however, President Biden, Majority Leader Schumer, Speaker Pelosi, and Democrats in Congress achieved the signing of the historic Inflation Reduction Act (IRA).

This game-changing new law, committing a record $369 billion in investments and tax credits to combat climate change, is by far the largest climate package in U.S. history. The IRA directs critical resources to just about every sector of the economy and restores American leadership at the forefront of this global challenge. What a difference a month makes. 

As leaders of New York’s clean energy and environmental protection agencies and co-chairs of the state’s Climate Action Council, we have known that the best chance for the state’s bold ambitions to succeed depend upon strong alignment with federal policy and support. Now, we have that.

The federal actions taken this year alone through the IRA, the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, and the CHIPS and Science Act collectively represent a $500 billion investment in a green economy, tripling the federal government’s average annual climate spending.

This breakthrough action not only establishes a national framework for the country to address the challenges of climate change, but it also provides a significant financial reinforcement to our efforts already underway in realizing the aggressive goals of the state’s Climate Act. New York, long recognized as a national leader in advancing clean energy solutions across all sectors of our economy, is uniquely poised to capitalize on these federal investments for the benefit of all New Yorkers. 

The climate crisis is already costing our nation with record droughts, severe weather damage, and impacts to the health of our people and economy. From Superstorm Sandy ten years ago to Hurricane Ida last August, severe weather events that are a result of the climate crisis are fueling nearly $100 billion in property damage in New York alone. Based on recent trends, every second we fail to act on climate comes with a $4,700 cost from extreme weather impacts. And we know that disadvantaged communities, those who have lower incomes, immigrant communities, people with underlying health conditions, and other vulnerable populations, are often impacted first and worst. Doing nothing is not an option. 

New York’s detailed analysis has revealed that the cost of inaction exceeds the cost of action by more than $90 billion. Thankfully, we’re among the national leaders on renewable energy development — first in offshore wind and first in community solar. Our renewable pipeline of projects will deliver over 14,200 megawatts of clean power to the grid, powering over 66% of New York’s electricity.

These investments are supporting nearly 158,000 clean energy jobs, with an expected 250,000 additional jobs created by 2030. Significant investments will be required to achieve the New York Climate Act’s greenhouse gas emission limits, but these investments are accompanied by even greater external benefits and the opportunity to create hundreds of thousands of good-paying, middle-class, and union jobs. Under the leadership of Governor Kathy Hochul and with support and partnership from the federal government, we can work to reduce potential challenges of this transition for New Yorkers.  

The alignment between the state’s Climate Act and the federal IRA will create even more leverage for the clean energy projects that are advanced here in New York. The IRA provides unprecedented funding to reduce consumer energy costs, slash carbon emissions and pollution, ensure energy security and resilience, increase energy innovation and domestic manufacturing, and expand the economy and advance environmental justice. 

There are so many sectors of the economy and society that stand to benefit from these federal dollars. The bill includes billions in financial incentives aimed at making clean energy options more affordable for consumers, with a particular focus on those who are lower- to middle-income, an important tenet of our Climate Act. The IRA includes tens of billions to support clean energy manufacturing in the U.S., with the goal of easing inflation and reducing the costs associated with clean energy options in the longer term while bringing forward parallel commitments to ensure we are creating good paying green jobs, also key priorities for New York.

And, critically, the IRA provides more than $60 billion for programs in disadvantaged communities. These investments will build upon similar frameworks in New York that are prioritizing and bringing forward investments in underserved communities. Importantly, New York’s commitment ensures that disadvantaged communities experience our goal of 40% of the benefits of our investments as part of the clean energy transition. 

The IRA represents a generational opportunity for New York to partner with the federal government on near-term actions that will reduce greenhouse gas emissions 40% by 2030. However, our collective efforts can’t stop there. In New York, we are focused on pushing even further with a goal of an 85% reduction in greenhouse gases by 2050. New York has a head start, and this is only the beginning. Together, we will make certain America does not miss the mark to preserve and protect our planet and our people. The future is clean, green, and bright.

***
Doreen M. Harris is President and CEO of the New York State Energy Research & Development Authority. Basil Seggos is Commissioner of the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation. They are the Co-Chairs of New York’s Climate Action Council. On Twitter @Doreen_M_Harris of @NYSERDA & @BasilSeggos of @NYSDEC.

Solar power in New York (photo: Mike Groll/Governor's Office)

When Joe Biden signed the climate bill known as the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) this past week, he obliterated the last feeble objection to expanding public ownership of renewable energy generation in New York State, a critical step to reducing fossil fuel emissions and making energy more affordable.

But the state authority tasked with implementing public power, the New York Power Authority (NYPA), must be rebuilt under new leadership to have the vision, capacity, and management excellence to rise to meet the existential threat of climate change and deliver the promise of public renewables.

At issue is the Build Public Renewables Act (BPRA), a bill to enable NYPA to build and own more clean, renewable energy generation. The legislation passed the State Senate in June and in July was the topic of an unusual post-session Assembly hearing at which the interim head of NYPA, Justin Driscoll, said the agency couldn’t handle what was being asked of it under the bill. Under his anemic leadership, that damning self-assessment is likely true; Governor Kathy Hochul must dump Driscoll and nominate instead a talented and ambitious NYPA President and CEO who is up to the task of bringing New York State’s power system into the twenty-first century.

NYPA is the obvious vehicle for expanding renewable power in New York. Founded by FDR in 1931, it is a massive state agency – the largest public power entity in the U.S. – with almost $3 billion in annual operating revenues. NYPA currently generates a quarter of New York’s electricity, 88% of it from renewable hydropower, and owns a third of our transmission infrastructure. Though almost a century old, NYPA has a proud history of innovation and has put the transition to a carbon-free economy at the heart of its mission. But under current leadership, the agency has atrophied when it should grow stronger and shrunk from challenges rather than rising to them. 

Driscoll’s main argument against expanding NYPA’s renewable energy portfolio was that the finances didn’t pencil out: while private companies get incentives and tax breaks for building renewables, NYPA, as a not-for-profit state authority, does not. But the federal climate bill now extends comparable incentives to non-profit entities through the mechanism of direct pay, in addition to a raft of subsidies for efficiency upgrades and electrification.

And, because NYPA doesn’t extract profits from ratepayers’ bills to enrich shareholders, NYPA power is more affordable. The BPRA prioritizes delivering its cheap electricity to government-owned buildings, such as schools and affordable housing, reducing the operating costs of these public properties, saving taxpayer dollars. Low-income New Yorkers would also be able to access low-cost NYPA energy through a program modeled on the very successful ReCharge NY.

The Build Public Renewables Act is revenue neutral: New York Power Authority will raise capital for building new renewable power plants through bond sales – its bond rating is excellent – and revenues from selling the affordable electricity it generates.

Public ownership is essential to a just renewable energy system. Representatives of New York state agencies testified at the Assembly BPRA hearing that the private sector might be able to build sufficient renewable energy plants to meet the goals set by 2019’s Climate Leadership and Community Protection Act (CLCPA). But the development of privately-owned power plants depends on market conditions, the cost of capital, politically vulnerable tax breaks and incentives, and other unpredictable factors.

Even if every proposed renewable project now in the pipeline were built, which is unlikely at best, New York would fall short of the 70% renewables by 2030 mandated by   the CLCPA. To date only 4% of energy in New York is from wind and solar. Regardless of what is “in the pipeline,” private developers are simply not meeting the need, and they shouldn’t be rewarded for that failure with protection from public competition. The BPRA ensures that our state will meet or exceed the goals mandated by the climate law: if, after an annual review, private sector renewable developers are found to be underperforming, NYPA would step in and build the clean, renewable power needed to meet the state climate mandate, filling in the gaps left by private investor-driven projects. 

NYPA is unique in that it is both a generator and transmitter of energy. The two functions were separated in the U.S. in 1978 by PURPA, the Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act, in response to the oil crisis and U.S. reliance on imported fossil fuels for energy. The impact of Russia’s war on Ukraine on gas and oil prices underscores the economic risks inherent in international fossil fuel markets. But renewable energy generated on domestic land and coastal waters is free from those concerns.

NYPA’s Vision 2030 Plan outlines its goal to become the leading electricity transmission provider in New York State. Increasing NYPA’s renewable generation capacity as it expands its transmission infrastructure is the key to the rapid construction and transmission of reliable, affordable, renewable, and independent energy in New York.

We don’t just need to build public renewables: we need to rebuild NYPA with visionary leadership that has expertise in engineering and new energy technologies and a commitment to a just transition from fossil fuels. Union representatives at the hearing called by Assembly Speaker Carl Heastie described NYPA’s failure to work with unions in good faith, with years passing without labor contracts being signed. The agency has a reputation for a stifling internal culture that drives away talent. It needs a CEO with a commitment to growing NYPA, serving the public, and restoring both employee morale and public confidence in the Authority.

To meet the moment and to be competitive in the talent search and hiring surge that the Inflation Reduction Act and Build Public Renewables Act will trigger, NYPA needs to improve its employment practices with respect to compensation, benefits, culture, and equity, and revitalize the organizational culture and staff morale.

Despite the decent benefits offered to employees of state agencies, NYPA has trouble attracting talent and currently has over 100 openings. Salary tiers are typically lower than those of other employers in the field, and NYPA often loses candidates to investor-owned utilities like ConEd. Employees are required to go to the office at least some days, even for jobs that could be fully remote. Many employees report there isn’t enough growth potential, and that the authority doesn’t actively seek to diversify its staff through targeted outreach and training. 

Finally, justice must be at the center of efforts to meet the CLCPA mandates and slow the warming of the climate, and it is at the center of the BPRA. The legislation prioritizes disadvantaged communities, public housing, and public schools for the benefits of public power, which include low-cost electricity, comfortable and reliable heat pump heating and cooling, training and union apprenticeships, mold and lead remediation, and efficiency programs.

The bill was written in consultation with labor – Pat Guidice, business manager of IBEW local 1049 and head of the IBEW state utility labor council, said at the hearing that BPRA has “the best labor language he’s ever seen” in a piece of legislation. It requires all work projects, including contractors and subcontractors, to utilize project labor agreements and prioritize training for workers who have lost jobs in the fossil fuel industry.

The climate emergency is here, now, and getting worse faster than scientists anticipated. Limiting the most catastrophic effects demands serious action to reduce emissions of greenhouse gasses as rapidly and completely as possible. The necessary scale and speed of the infrastructural and technological transition requires leadership, coordination, financing, and management for the benefit of the people can only be achieved by government: we must demand that our legislators and governor rise to meet the moment.  

We cannot resolve the existential crisis facing us in the 21st century with 20th century infrastructure and ideas. The governor must replace Driscoll and rehabilitate NYPA so that New York can lead an energy moonshot, a World War II-level mobilization to end our reliance on fossil fuels and slow the burning of the planet. Though the Inflation Reduction Act is an important turning point, the federal government, hobbled by partisan politics and the influence of the fossil fuel industry, can’t do that now: New York can, and New York must lead.

***
Jeanne Bergman, PHD, is Senior Energy Policy Advisor with Sane Energy Project. Sarahana Shrestha is the Democratic Nominee for the 103rd Assembly District. On Twitter @jbergmannyc & @sarahana.

Suraj Patel on the campaign trail (photo: @surajpatelnyc)

This month, Suraj Patel is poised to lose his third consecutive New York congressional primary. Though I won’t be voting for him, as an Indian-American politico Patel’s candidacy this time around has meant more to me than I anticipated. 

I first encountered Patel as part of a freelance project for The Juggernaut about “The South Asian Americans Claiming Political Capital.” For the assignment I cataloged and interviewed a new wave of South Asian Americans running for office across the country in the wake of Trumpism. Patel was running for a second time against New York political icon Rep. Carolyn Maloney.

At the time, Patel was one of the more polished candidates I spoke with. Still, his campaign reeked of a millennial emptiness. It was as though in a post-Obama, post-AOC, progressive landscape with an openly xenophobic president at the helm, Patel had decided the timing was right to run — ready or not.

For example, in one article I came across from his first race, in 2018, Patel appeared determined to paint Maloney as a white nationalist when she pointed out that his donors included “a huge amount of the name Patel” and people from Suraj’s home state of Indiana (where Patel’s family operates a successful hotel development business). Patel claimed the comment was a racist dog-whistle, while Maloney’s camp insisted it was merely a comment to point out Patel’s out-of-state family support. As no stranger to othering microaggressions, to me the episode appeared contrived to fit the zeitgeist. 

Worse, looking further into Patel, most of the coverage of his campaigns seemed to paint him as somewhat off. With so few Indian Americans represented in mainstream politics, I’ll admit some borderline communal embarrassment. Patel was called out for a campaign tactic that used fake online dating profiles on platforms like Grindr and Tinder to recruit supporters. Maloney then ran an ad painting him as “creepy.” His critics seized on an inappropriate Facebook exchange from several years prior that he had with a friend about a young female athlete. 

After an incredibly close race in 2020, Patel filed a lawsuit to challenge the vote count naming the Board of Elections and Maloney as defendants. It was an arguably noble effort, but appeared tone-deaf as the coronavirus pandemic raged on and national democracy hung in the balance. Perhaps an unfair perception, but Trump even weaponized the controversy to support his false claims about voter fraud. 

When Patel unveiled failed New York City mayoral candidate Andrew Yang as an early high profile endorsement for this year’s bid, I was ready to expect more of the same. Yet, over the past few weeks, to my surprise, I’ve felt pride watching Patel make his case to voters.

Through my window I see his campaign poster on a vacant storefront across the street. “Change the vibes,” it reads with a floral pattern that mirrors the campaign’s new energy. It is clear Patel has found his own voice in this campaign. Instead of being called creepy, this go-around Patel has developed something of a fan-base. “Not that it matters but MY GOD is Suraj Patel hot,” tweeted one admirer. His voluminous hair became the subject of positive internet attention after the first primary debate. Media celebrated his recent Hallmark-esque engagement, bridge photoshoot and all. 

Form aside, Patel’s substance has also shifted for the better.

He comes off less entitled to a congressional seat simply because he is young, brown, and worked for Obama and more genuine in his connection with the community. His Instagram story is an example. It constantly features Patel engaging local business owners with a vibrancy that is missing from the Maloney and Nadler campaigns. In one example, Patel hops into the ice cream truck of a struggling local vendor to make his campaign pitch.

He also interviewed with and earned the endorsement of popular Indian-American social media influencer Zarna Garg. Aligning with Garg, a New York City-based comedian billed by CNBC as “the zany, outspoken voice of the Indian-American woman,” reflects the agility of Patel’s latest campaign. No longer over-reliant on progressive buzzwords, Patel has also found a way to show why his representation would matter — instead of just telling.

“I grew up folding The New York Times at my family’s bodega, it was the honor of a lifetime to sit for this interview for the first time ever,” he tweeted, sharing the transcript of his meeting with the Times editorial board (which endorsed Nadler). Growing up on stories of how my grandparents, small business owners themselves, came here from India with just $25 in their pockets the sentiment struck a chord.

The Times editorial board interview came not long after a reported piece in the same paper that showcased Patel’s energy, enthusiasm, and work ethic.

Patel acknowledges that one benefit of his perennial candidacy is that he has been able to learn from experience. In a recent interview on Gotham Gazette’s Max Politics podcast he reflected, saying of past campaigns, “we took on all these issues that were in vogue at the time that perhaps weren’t actually my core issues…trying to run as this institutional sort-of progressive thing you’re not.” This time, he said, he’s running on his lived experience and his many substantive ideas for tackling problems faced by New Yorkers and Americans.

Patel also notes he has gained perspective from his past failures. “Losing is a remarkable teacher,” he told podcast host Ben Max, editor of Gotham Gazette, “...as a person who hasn’t really lost much in life up until that point, the humility-gain from that was instrumental.”

To those who might criticize Patel's live-and-learn approach to running for office, it's worth considering that candidates from underrepresented backgrounds like Patel's often lack the mentorship or institutional supports that white and well-connected candidates benefit from.

I’m not voting for Patel in this primary because I don’t agree with his ideas, nor do I think he has made the case for replacing both Nadler and Maloney, two members of Congress with seniority. Yet, it means a lot to me — and others who look like me — that this third time around he has run a campaign he can be proud of and charmed New York City.

***
Kaivan Shroff serves as senior advisor to the Institute for Education, a D.C. non-profit. He is a political commentator and alumnus of the Hillary for America Digital Team with degrees from Harvard Law School, Harvard Kennedy School, Yale School of Management, and Brown University.