Precious New York (photo: Carl Heilman/Governor's Office)

Warmer spring weather ushers in reminders of the natural beauty we have in New York, from the vibrant blooms of the dogwood and magnolia trees to the return of migratory birds singing. People swarm back to our local parks where picnic baskets and roller skates make a long-awaited resurgence. The Hudson River teems to life with the reappearance of kayakers who can be spotted from way above by hikers in the Catskills.

We enjoy some of the most marvelous landscapes the United States has to offer, and we must do more to protect them. We cannot afford to take our natural beauty for granted. 

Legislation recently passed in the State Assembly and currently pending in the State Senate would establish a goal for New York to conserve 30% of our land and water by 2030 to preserve the state’s natural wonders and ensure every generation can enjoy and benefit from our water, woods, and wildlife. Sponsored by Assemblymember Pat Fahy and Senator Todd Kaminsky, New York’s 30 by 30 legislation mirrors the goals of the federal “America the Beautiful” initiative to conserve at least 30% of our nation’s land and water by 2030, a goal developed by scientists alarmed by the rapid loss of plants and animals happening around the world.

If passed by the State Senate and signed into law by the Governor, this important measure would direct the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation and other state agencies to create a conservation plan to protect biodiversity and avoid the worst effects of global warming. The plan will prioritize conservation and restoration projects in disadvantaged communities, honor Tribal sovereignty, and preserve critical habitats and migratory corridors for wildlife.

The world is at a pivotal point, as we face dual crises from rapid habitat loss and climate change. The Nature Conservancy remains strongly committed to supporting legislation that protects people and wildlife for generations to come. The passage of 30 by 30 will be a momentous win for New York and will help address many pressing threats not only to our famous scenic landscapes, but to the health of our communities. A statewide goal would reinvigorate collaborative efforts to conserve the lakes and bays where we swim and fish; the farms that grow our food; the forests and wetlands that provide wildlife habitat; the sources of our clean drinking water; and the places New Yorkers rely on for jobs, adventure, and solace. 

The Nature Conservancy is proud of the hard work and extensive collaboration that went into advancing a 30 by 30 goal for New York State. We’re excited to see it passed in the Senate and signed by Governor Hochul and look forward to collaborating further to help the state achieve this critical goal. 

New Yorkers often set an example for how to usher in a better future. Last month, the New York Legislature and Governor prioritized environmental investments in the state budget including the $4.2 million Clean Water, Clean Air, and Green Jobs Bond Act that will go before voters this fall and a $400 million Environmental Protection Fund. This November, we all need to flip our ballots and vote yes to pass the Bond Act, a once-in-a-generation opportunity to protect clean drinking water, create jobs, reduce pollution, and build parks. 

We applaud our state leaders for recognizing the importance of conserving the natural resources we all depend on and look forward to celebrating the enactment of 30 by 30 legislation. Let’s continue to build on this momentum by supporting the Bond Act to protect clean water, create jobs, and improve quality of life in communities throughout New York.

***
Jessica Ottney Mahar is New York Policy and Strategy Director at The Nature Conservancy. On Twitter @jessicaottney & @nature_org.

Suraj Patel, the author, on the campaign trail (photo via Patel campaign)

Today, it’s hard not to be frustrated. The cost of everything – from rent to gas to groceries to clothes to even toys - is going up. At the same time inflation also has another nefarious side effect: wages - which were already stagnant - essentially went down as inflation went up. This is an inflationary pay cut and it means workers are being squeezed from both sides. Rather than putting our heads in the sand, or pointing to alternative data points to try and deflect people's pain, it’s time for real solutions.

I am running for Congress in New York’s 12th Congressional District and I have a plan to get costs under control; I call it “The Abundant Society.”

To start, we need to understand just why costs are going up. Unprecedented supply-demand imbalances driven by the pandemic and exacerbated by the war in Ukraine and covid zero policies in China have led to a spike in inflation not seen since the 1980s. This episode of inflation is layered on top of decades of escalating costs for essential parts of life such as housing, healthcare, education, and childcare.

At the same time, even though the economy is recovering, it’s still leaving lots of pain in its wake. This is not academic for me, I spent the last year dealing with covid-related foreclosures on our family business while making sure workers still had healthcare and benefits. So just because we are “recovering” does not mean we emerge without deep wounds. 

The United States has made an unprecedented labor market recovery coming out of covid but now we must turn our attention to expanding the long-run productive capacity of our economy – by making our supply chains more robust, building better and cheaper infrastructure, and lowering the ever-rising costs of childcare, healthcare, higher education, and housing. 

However, for too long, the reflexive response of politicians has been “No” and it’s caused a crisis of scarcity and staleness. We need new leaders who are ready to step up with bold, new, fresh ideas to help us not just recover but be the city we truly aspire to be. The Abundant Society plan has a single goal: to make New York and the country a better place to live for everyone, and that starts with getting the cost of living under control and making it easier to live, raise a family, and start a business. 

All of this begins with getting inflation under control, and to start, President Biden must suspend the Jones Act and Foreign Dredge Act. The Jones Act is an archaic maritime law that requires goods shipped between U.S. ports to be transported on ships that are built, owned, and operated by United States citizens or permanent residents while the Foreign Dredge Act requires dredging vessels to be built, owned, and operated by United States citizens or permanent residents.

The Jones Act has strangled Puerto Rico, especially during natural disasters, and makes it cheaper for Hawaii to import oil and gas from Russia than from domestic sources. Just a few weeks ago, a container ship was stuck in the Chesapeake Bay for over a month, something that could have been resolved in much less time if it weren’t for the Foreign Dredge Act. These antiquated laws have failed to produce a sizable domestic maritime fleet or a dredging fleet capable of meeting the demands of the 21st-century economy. 

President Biden must also suspend all non-Russia-related tariffs. A recent report from Hufbauer, Hogan, and Wang at the Peterson Institute for International Economics found that suspending tariffs would result in a one-time reduction of 1.3 percentage points on the consumer price index, a commonly cited indicator of inflation. Doing this would nearly halve the gap between inflation and wages. 

The COMPETES Act, which provides money for domestic manufacturing of semiconductors, equips the Commerce Department with an assistant secretary to oversee supply chains, and more, is still stuck in congressional conference. This bill, which has been in the works since 2020, should’ve been sent to President Biden’s desk within the first 100 days of his presidency.

While Congress passed a historic bipartisan infrastructure bill — a long-overdue necessity to increase our economic productivity and capacity — construction costs are so high that this investment won’t go nearly as far. Congress must get to work on a bill to drive down infrastructure costs so we can truly ramp up our capacity and build quicker, better, and more infrastructure.

Long before this current episode of inflation, the costs of childcare, healthcare, housing, and higher education have been prohibitively expensive for decades, squeezing the pockets of American families. We must bring these costs down so the pillars of middle-class life are far more attainable and affordable for more families. Self-imposed supply constraints and decades of stagnation have resulted in a crisis of scarcity, a high cost of living, and staleness that has broken the promise that led my parents to immigrate to this great nation: education, opportunity, and social mobility.

We can reverse this by enacting smart policies that tear down obstacles in these sectors and build up supply. When it comes to the modern essentials of American life, we must become a society of abundance. 

We can do this by eliminating supply constraints of our own making by getting rid of burdensome red tape, reinvigorating robust antitrust enforcement, and simply building more. More public colleges and universities, more housing, more hospitals and healthcare providers, and establish a federal grant program for school districts to create a public option for childcare similar to France’s crèches. 

Locally here in New York, the political culture of 'No' has led to a livability crisis. No to a blood center, no to upzoning high opportunity neighborhoods in the city, no to capping the FDR Drive, no to a living shoreline to save the East River waterfront. We need new leaders who are ready to say 'Yes.' 

We have the power and the tools to help people right now, and the Abundant Society will help make it happen. We don’t have a second to lose, too many are struggling.

***
Suraj Patel is a candidate for United States Congress in New York’s 12th district. On Twitter @surajpatelnyc.

Penn Station area rendering under current proposal (photo: MTA)

New York State’s plan to reconstruct and expand Penn Station through a complete redevelopment of the blocks surrounding the station will have one of the most transformational effects on our community for the next century. The current station is the result of one of the worst planning decisions ever made in this city: razing the architectural marvel that was the former Penn Station and replacing it with the claustrophobic underground maze we deal with today. It is critical we use this moment to be bold and commit to a new station that New Yorkers 100 years from now will be proud of.

More than a year after the announcement for a new Penn Station and the accompanying above ground redevelopment, we still do not have an actual transportation plan. What we have is a real estate plan that will completely reshape the area around Penn and not necessarily for the better. Our local elected officials, working with the community and other stakeholders, have won changes to the plan from Governor Hochul and Empire State Development but agree more must be done. While the new — but not yet final — plan includes new affordable housing, it is paltry in scale and is proposed for blocks that may not even be developed. 

The plan relies almost entirely on large new commercial towers to finance the project. A recent analysis by New York City’s Independent Budget Office shows that Empire State Development still has not provided details on how the financing for this massive project will be structured, how much revenue would be collected from the new development, and what will happen if revenue falls short of the project cost. It is appropriate for government to fund large infrastructure projects and we should be able to take pride in that. But they must be managed properly and result in a world class upgrade – something New York isn’t always great at. Creating an opportunity for private development to subsidize public infrastructure projects can be beneficial, but only when the public interest is prioritized and comes before real estate coffers are lined through the ability to build new buildings.

Over a year after the project was announced, details are still in short supply. While new development should factor in future commercial growth, a diversity of development that includes housing as well as Class B and C office space for small businesses will create a more secure financial deal for taxpayers while protecting the needs of the local community. Relying on private development to fund infrastructure projects is never ideal and New York State should also aggressively pursue the maximum amount of federal dollars and ensure New Jersey pays its fair share.

Streetscape improvements surrounding the station must be bold and progressive. They must incorporate global best practices for urban planning, create open space, prioritize pedestrians, and connect into the community. The city can make these changes to the streetscape today, and it should, with a robust community engagement process. 

The buildings around all of this must be cohesive and not only planned for the interior experience, but relate to the space outside, too. This must not be another Hudson Yards. But if nothing is done about the giant elephant sitting on top of all of this, Madison Square Garden, these public spaces will be obstructed by the logistical needs of the Garden just as they are today. That is not acceptable. A final plan can only claim to improve the surrounding area if ESD brings the Garden to the table and at minimum requires operational changes.

The plans to renovate and expand Penn Station will soon undergo review through the National Environmental Policy Act. NEPA requires the state to propose and examine alternative plans, and the plan to expand the station by razing the block south of Penn in order to add new platforms has an alternative that must be given a thorough examination. The state must pursue  a path to increase station capacity without using eminent domain that would displace local residents and businesses.

One alternative that will be examined is transforming Penn Station from a terminal where rail lines end to a “through-running” station, where trains coming from either direction would continue through Penn as if it was like any other station. This way, a rider heading to Queens from New Jersey would stay on their train through Penn rather than changing to a different train on a different network run by a different agency. Cities around the world from Philadelphia to Paris have transformed their transit networks to through-running with great success, and New York should follow their lead. Through-running would require fewer platforms and transit experts say Penn would not need to be expanded to the south under this plan. 

One of the challenges a through-running plan faces is the fractured nature of the transit agencies that utilize Penn Station. Between Amtrak, NJ Transit, the LIRR, and eventually Metro North, there are simply too many cooks in the kitchen. Penn needs a head chef. The dysfunction of having three disconnected commuter rail lines is an unacceptable situation for a 21st century city and region, and is holding us back from planning a new Penn Station and truly improving our transit system.

While it may be idealistic to think we can unite the rail lines under one agency, it is a conversation that needs to happen. Governor Hochul can break through the dysfunction facing the Penn Station renovation by appointing a singular head to coordinate and manage the entire project. This person will have the power to break through a singular agency’s self-interests and also be held accountable for promises made to riders and the local community, as was done for the rebuilding of Lower Manhattan and the World Trade Center via the Lower Manhattan Development Corporation.

If we don’t seize this opportunity to rebuild the world class Penn Station that we deserve, we will have failed yet another generation of New Yorkers. They will look back on leaders of this time the way we view those who demolished the original Penn Station: with shame and disgust. 

City residents deserve a transportation hub that seamlessly connects them to the surrounding region. The local community deserves streetscapes that benefit them and new development that meets their needs. Commuters deserve not to spend every day in overcrowded and oppressive passageways and platforms. New York must deliver a better, bold vision for Penn Station, because the current plan can’t yet leave the station.

***
Tony Simone is a Hell’s Kitchen resident and candidate for State Assembly in the 75th District. On Twitter @tonysimone.

Bitcoin is a popular cryptocurrency (photo: Kanchanara)

Like time in Steve Miller’s classic-rock song, New York’s decarbonization targets keep slipping into the future.

Highway widenings are spurring more driving. Suburban resistance to upzoning is locking in energy-demanding sprawl. Electricity from the state’s wind turbines shrank last year¹, even as climate advocates, relying on dodgy U.S. Energy Department modeling, overstate future carbon reductions from “electrifying everything.”²

Promising developments like offshore wind leasing and new transmission to carry hydroelectricity from Quebec barely compensate, if at all, for carbon emissions unleashed by closing the Indian Point nuclear plant. As I have pointed out elsewhere, shutting existing zero-carbon power sources means that new ones don’t actually cut emissions; at best, they keep us running in place, punching huge holes in pledges to achieve a carbon-free power grid by 2040.

To this dreary picture, add crypto mining — enormous networks of electron-eating computers running 24-7 so that digital currencies like Bitcoin and Ethereum can maintain virtual “coins” or “tokens” in encrypted ledgers that bypass traditional third parties like banks.

From Buffalo and the Finger Lakes to the state’s northern tier, crypto entrepreneurs are building new generators or firing up retired ones to power their crypto mining operations. Other crypto sites draw on the grid. 

Self-sourced or not, the requisite electricity ends up forcing additional burning of fossil fuels, as Sierra Club researchers documented in extensive comments this week to the President’s Office of Science and Technology Policy, pushing the state’s ambitious decarbonization goals further out of reach. To what end?

In Uber’s Footsteps
Enigmatic, opaque, futuristic — crypto-currency cries out for historical analogues. Here’s one: Uber. 

Uber burst on the scene in the early 2010s not as a new form of transportation but a new kind of network enabling a reconfiguration of transportation. Its appeal was tailored around three promises: it would enhance traffic efficiency by eliminating cruising for fares; it would extend convenient for-hire vehicle service outside Manhattan; and it would end service refusals to people of color.

The packaging — sleek and app-enabled — augured a frictionless, digital future. With a few taps New Yorkers could summon a chariot.

The results were mixed. We now know that stockpiling of Ubers in Manhattan has wrought even more gridlock than taxi cruising. But Uber did broaden access to for-hire vehicles, even as it bled ridership from the MTA and, worse, rained economic ruin on the incumbent yellow-cab industry.

Bitcoin and other crypto-currencies come with their own glossy promises, though these are more chameleon-like. (Earlier this year New York Times columnist Paul Krugman disparaged them as “word salad.”) Among them, as Annie McDonough reported recently in City & State, is the prospect of liberation from ingrained discriminatory banking and lending by U.S. financial institutions.

“[Crypto backers] see the technology as an economic equalizer,” writes McDonough. “A tool not just for the rich to get richer, but for people who have been discriminated against by banking institutions or locked out of investment opportunities, including people of color and low-income communities.”

Really? In New York, and almost certainly anywhere else, unbanked households overwhelmingly lack the requisite credit history or liquid assets — bank accounts, debit cards, credit cards — to purchase cryptocurrency tokens. Moreover, scammers and grifters are finding crypto fertile territory for high-tech swindles, as New York Times columnist Farhad Manjoo noted this month. An arguably safer and more effective way to root out credit segregation would be to speed Biden administration rulemaking to add teeth to the Community Reinvestment Act — the 1977 law intended to repair decades of redlining.

The emergence of crypto-front groups like the National Policy Network of Women of Color in Blockchain demonstrates the industry’s readiness to exploit deep-seated bitterness over legacy redlining. So does the participation in crypto lobbying of Bradley Tusk, the one-time Mike Bloomberg consigliere who a decade ago deftly deployed Black fury over persistent taxi discrimination to help Uber eradicate cabbies’ exclusive right to pick up street hails in Manhattan and subsequently helped fend off serious regulation of the app-ride industry for several crucial years.

Let’s Burn Up The Grid
There is no registry of electricity consumed by crypto mining in New York State. Worldwide, though, crypto burns through an estimated 91,000 gigawatt-hours (or, 91 billion kilowatt-hours) of electricity annually, according to a New York Times survey of crypto last September. Some 16% of that, or 15,000 GWh, is said to be consumed in the United States. 

While New Yorkers are accustomed to thinking of our state as resource-poor, crypto miners are now exploiting half-a-dozen hydro power sites and formerly boarded-up fossil-fuel plants in northern and western New York. One industry source cited by City & State estimates that 13-14% of his company's U.S. crypto mining takes place in our state. Extrapolating that share across the industry, crypto is annually consuming 2,000 GWh of electricity in New York State — a figure that could grow not just with increased transactions but with ever-more complex digital encryption.

Even holding at 2,000 GWh, that’s a lot of juice: more than the electricity generated last year from all the solar panels on residential buildings in the state, or more than what will come from the first 100 promised offshore wind turbines once that industry launches (see graph below). And, though crypto in New York consumes less electricity than all current solar or wind, that comparison is of no comfort, as those renewable sources need to be displacing fossil fuels (primarily fracked gas) from the state’s grid — which they can’t do if their output is effectively being consumed mining Bitcoin.

The operative word, “effectively,” encompasses two distinct but complementary dynamics. Grid dynamics dictate that any new locus of demand such as Bitcoin forces utilities to draw more heavily on fossil-fuel generators, because the non-carbon sources — nukes as well as renewables — already run as flat-out as they can. The climate dynamic is that from a statewide perspective, additional use of fossil-fuel generators negates the carbon-reduction benefits that wind and solar and nuclear would otherwise provide. 

This perspective casts a harsh light on claims that a particular crypto installation is being renewably sourced. Connecting crypto to a refurbished hydro dam or solar or wind farm may sound green, but all those whirring hard drives are really siphoning off carbon-free electricity that now “won’t be available to power a home, a factory or an electric car,” as the Times’ 2021 story put it. (One hopes that the irony of crypto adherents miscounting green electrons doesn’t carry over to their currency bookkeeping.)

Carbon Tax vs. Crypto?
A stiff New York State carbon tax could slow and even reverse the rise of cryptocurrency here (likewise nationwide).

The rise in electricity prices would undermine whatever competitive advantage Bitcoin miners gain from locating in New York. Some miners would leave, new ones would stay away, and those who stay would endeavor to blunt the impact of the tax by upgrading their efficiency.

Not only that, crypto miners seeking zero-carbon generation increasingly would find themselves competing with non-crypto businesses seeking to contain their power costs. Other businesses, less power-intensive per dollar of revenue, would be in position to outbid the crypto companies.

The prospective flight to other jurisdictions could help build momentum to tax carbon emissions there as well, as more states and countries come to conclude that crypto jobs and revenues aren’t worth straining their grids, not to mention trashing their air-sheds and stealing their quiet. 

This isn’t to hold out carbon taxing as a one-bullet crypto killer — we need many bullets for that, the bigger the better — but to illustrate its broad potential to stop frivolous (and in this case imbecilic) new uses of electricity before they can gain a foothold.

Why not regulate crypto away? That battle would consume years, tying down policy resources while emissions continued to spew. Worse, we have neither the time nor the ability to see around corners required to enact, piecemeal, restraints on each new locus of energy demand.

Even as energy-efficiencies continue to do wonders — total U.S. electricity use last year was just a few percent higher than in 2005³ — underpriced electricity elicits new hellspawns of needless use that undo much of that progress.

Carbon taxes by themselves can’t solve everything that ails climate. But they could, for a change, get the solutions out in front of the problems.

***
Charles Komanoff, long-time New York policy analyst and environmental activist, directs the Carbon Tax Center. On Twitter @Komanoff.

Note: The column has been corrected to reflect the fact that New York's estimated 13-14% share of U.S. crypto mining applies to a single crypto company rather than industry-wide. The extrapolation to other companies is the author's, not the source's.

¹US Energy Information Administration, "Electric Power Monthly," Table 1.14.B, “Utility Scale Facility Net Generation from Wind,” shows 4,522 GWh in New York State in 2020 and 4,387 GWh in 2021.

²To estimate future carbon reductions from the December 2021 New York City ban on gas heating and cooking in new buildings, the law’s proponents and the Dec. 15, 2021 New York Times story reporting on it both cited a Dec. 10, 2021 post, Stopping Gas Hookups in New Construction in NYC Would Cut Carbon and Costs, by the consultancy RMI. The RMI authors note that their calculations employed future electricity grid emission factors modeled by U.S. DOE’s National Renewable Energy Lab’s “Cambium” dataset. Examination of that dataset reveals, inter alia, that it assumes a non-existent five-fold increase in New York State on-shore wind-generated electricity from 2020 to 2022. 

³Figures from US Energy Information Administration, "Electric Power Monthly," Table 7.2a Electricity Net Generation: Total (All Sectors)” supplemented by Table 10.6 (“Electricity Net Generation from Distributed Solar”) indicate total U.S. electricity generation of 4,164,565 GWh in 2022 and 4,055,785 GWh in 2005. For those interested, the implied compound annual average growth rate over those 17 years is a minuscule 0.17 percent.

Gov. Hochul presents the budget (photo: Mike Groll/Office of Governor Kathy Hochul)

The State adopted its budget on April 9 with substantial investments across the board in helping New Yorkers, from big increases in school aid and child care to homeowner rebates, gas tax relief for motorists, more funding to avoid evictions, bonuses for health care workers, and relief for hospitals and the health care system. Governor Hochul and the Legislature based the revenue and spending assumptions on an update from the Governor in late February, modified by an early March agreement between the Legislature and Governor called the Consensus Revenue Forecast.

Notwithstanding all the healthy increases in spending,  from State Comptroller Thomas DiNapoli reported that $3.3 billion more than had been expected in February had flowed into the State Treasury by the closeout of the State fiscal year on March 31. 

There are now billions of dollars, unbudgeted and unappropriated, newly available for the state to utilize beyond those funds in the April 9 adopted budget for the fiscal year that began April 1. These funds don’t include $12 billion in federal aid from the American Rescue Plan already available to the state over the next several years, or $5 billion in surplus state funds already realized, saved, and budgeted as of March 31. The new funds are at least $2.1-$2.5 billion more than the Consensus Revenue Forecast had established as the finalized basis for the State’s budget, and that is even before the month of April 2022 started.

In California, which has not yet adopted its budget, Governor Newsom and legislative leaders are arguing about how to distribute their original $9 billion relief package of gas tax relief and transit aid, versus direct checks to the taxpayers, even as the state’s surpluses keep expanding. Other states across the nation are sending out tax rebates and other forms of relief.

The New York State Division of the Budget has until May 19 to produce the financial plan based on the adopted budget and provide all the baselines for revenue and spending. There are already other indicators, however, beyond the State Comptroller’s report, that the flow of unanticipated largesse will continue. The New York City Comptroller, Brad Lander, reported on May 2 that April is likely to be a record for New York City personal income tax collections.

The close linkage between the New York State and New York City personal income taxes suggests that April’s state tax collections would be comparably healthy, perhaps even billions of dollars more than anticipated. The State Comptroller also reported that local government sales tax collections rose 21% in the first quarter of 2022 compared to that period in 2021. The public should know very soon what the state’s April tax receipts were.

What should the state do with another $4 billion in tax receipts that have come in higher than anticipated, just in March and April? In addition to simply sending out checks, California is considering offering free mass transit. There is also another New York State gas tax that motorists don’t see listed at the pump, because it’s embedded as a wholesale price and is named the Petroleum Business Tax. These offer further avenues for relief before the Legislature leaves Albany in June.

One month’s current revenue from the riders of all MTA systems is a modest $400 million. I handled mass transit in budget negotiations for six years as Chair of the Assembly Committee on Corporations, Authorities, and Commissions, and MTA operations comprise as much as 90% of total mass transit statewide, meaning the rest of all the public bus systems’ revenue for one month in the state would be a mere $50 million. In order to avoid chaos from riders flowing through transit systems for free, each system could offer one free fare for every paid fare, and give all riders four months at a 50% discount for a cost that would not exceed $900 million. The state could advance the funds to the MTA and other mass transit systems and work on implementing two months of a 50% discount after Labor Day.

The state budget provided for 16 cents off the gas tax beginning June 1 for six months, by temporarily suspending the sales and motor fuel taxes on gasoline, providing $584 million in relief. Since the money from those taxes helps pay to cover road and bridge repairs, and some mass transit subsidies, the budget provided that the state’s General Fund cover those needed subsidies for the duration of the suspension.

The petroleum business tax, at the wholesale level, adds another 17 cents on a gallon of gas. The amount of money collected on gasoline sales from this tax is comparable to the amount suspended from the sales and motor fuel taxes ($600 million for six months), and the state could suspend this tax too. It might be too late to implement the suspension by June, but it is implementable by August. Together, the suspension of the three taxes would provide 33 cents a gallon in tax relief for the state’s motorists. The state’s General Fund would have to compensate for the lost subsidies for roads, bridges, and mass transit for the PBT, as it did for the other taxes.

Together, the two new forms of transportation relief would cost the state $1.5 billion, and leave about $2.5 billion of unbudgeted revenue already recognized to appropriate to assist New Yorkers.

What to do with that money? Some states across the nation are simply sending checks to people, with different schemes for assuring almost everybody gets something. The Governor, the Legislature, the Division of the Budget, and the State Department of Taxation and Finance ought to be able to devise a plan. New York full-time residents filed 9.5 million tax returns, and one-third of those filers had no tax liability. This year’s state budget is already delivering relief to many taxpayers in different kinds of ways, but the timing of this relief varies. 

In October homeowners making less than $250,000 a year will get a total of $2.2 billion in rebate checks from the state connected to the STAR program property tax relief system. Roughly 2.5 million homeowners are expected to get checks, from a few hundred dollars to up to $1,000, depending on their specific property taxes.

The state is accelerating an income tax reduction begun under former Governor Cuomo, called a middle-class tax cut, with most of the reduction taking place in calendar year 2023 because adjusting the state’s income tax tables and withholding from employers takes time to implement. The benefits might not be very noticeable, a saving of a few hundred dollars a year, spread out over 52 weeks of employer withholding a little less when you get paid.

The state is also increasing the child care tax credit and earned income tax credit benefits. These are good to do, but residents who benefit may have to wait until filing next year’s tax returns to see the additional savings. State taxpayers received the current benefits from these programs at the time they filed their taxes this year.

The state may want to send checks to help residents along very basic lines. For example:

Full-time residents who filed single taxpayer returns, who were not claimed as a dependent on another return, whose incomes are below $75,000 a year, could receive $250 in October. Those who are homeowners already receiving rebate checks could receive a more limited amount. Married couples filing jointly with incomes below $150,000 could receive one check for $400, with those getting homeowner rebates receiving less. Heads of household under $100,000 could receive $250, and all households claiming a dependent could receive $100 per dependent. The total value of the checks could not exceed $2.5 billion, so my template will surely need adjusting.

When it comes to spending money, there is no lack of ideas. The critical point is that there is much more money coming into the state treasury than previously anticipated, and a window to give more relief to New Yorkers before the Legislature leaves for the year in just a few weeks.

 
Welcome home (photo: Ed Reed/Mayoral Photography Office)

In 2021, the values of New York City's largest housing voucher program, known as CityFHEPS, were significantly raised. This victory, passed by the City Council and Mayor de Blasio, was accomplished thanks to the tireless efforts of housing advocates and opened up tens of thousands of new housing units for tenants holding these vouchers — among the most vulnerable New Yorkers.

We must now turn our attention to ensuring that the landlords and brokers of these newly-eligible units are not discriminating against CityFHEPS voucher holders, and that our housing enforcement agencies have the resources to combat voucher discrimination.

For context, the CityFHEPS program provides thousands of families who are experiencing homelessness or on the brink of eviction the opportunity to pay an affordable rent in the private market. In New York City and New York State it is illegal for landlords, owners, and real estate brokers to discriminate against prospective or current tenants based on their lawful source of income. Morally, these laws exist to protect families, seniors, people with disabilities, and other at-risk populations from homelessness and the trauma of housing instability. Fiscally, they reduce the enormous cost of homelessness, which manifests itself in our homeless shelter system, healthcare system, legal system, unemployment system, foster care system, and in many other ways. 

Our national housing watchdog group, Housing Rights Initiative, recently finished a six-month-long investigation into discrimination against CityFHEPS voucher holders. We began this investigation in response to reports we had received from housing advocates and tenants who experienced discrimination, and also inspired by previous investigations conducted by our organization. In fact, in March of 2021, our investigations in New York City led to one of the largest fair housing lawsuits since the enactment of the Fair Housing Act. This lawsuit was filed on behalf of Housing Rights Initiative by Legal Aid Society and Handley Farah & Anderson PLLC against 88 real estate companies for discriminating against Section 8 voucher holders.

In conducting our undercover investigation investigators like myself posed as CityFHEPS voucher holders and looked up apartments in the confines of the current voucher limits. While many brokers did accept CityFHEPS, many did not, outright refusing to rent to CityFHEPS voucher holders, as well as covertly discriminating, either through “ghosting” or setting exorbitant income requirements. Here is an example recording from one of our investigators. Our watchdog group found rampant discrimination at the hands of the New York City real estate industry, which illustrates the failures of our government to enforce its fair housing laws. 

City Limits reporting last summer highlighted how New York City voucher enforcement cannot keep up with the constant reports of voucher discrimination occurring, and the agencies are understaffed in handling such a large influx. The report called voucher enforcement “hollowed out.” 

The city’s voucher enforcement is conducted by two agencies. The Department of Social Services (DSS) has a Fair Housing Litigation unit through the Human Resources Administration, which handles cases of housing discrimination ranging from race, disability, or source of income. Additionally, the New York City Commission on Human Rights (CCHR) has a Source of Income unit, which handles cases specifically pertaining solely to source of income. CCHR’s Source of Income unit went from three staffers in 2021 to zero employees as of April 1, City Limits reported. 

CityFHEPS vouchers are a benefit to those who live in shelters or those who are about to lose their homes — and they benefit the entire city. The vouchers are in high demand, and already difficult to obtain. Those who are able to obtain one shouldn’t have another roadblock to finding a home. 

Vouchers are one of the most powerful tools in combating homelessness. According to the Center on Policy and Budget Priority, vouchers cut homelessness by three quarters. Additionally, vouchers help with housing stability, reducing how many times a family moves in a five-year period by over one-third, and reducing overcrowding by half. They can be the difference between someone having a home or being homeless.

Yet, the city has chosen not to enforce its own laws and protect voucher holders as they search for apartments. According to a joint report published by Unlock NYC, Neighbors Together, the Anti-Eviction Mapping Project, and the Housing Data Coalition, 20% of CityFHEPS voucher holders were able to exit the shelter system and find a home in 2019, and the average stay for those in the system was roughly around 450 days. In short, one out of five CityFHEPS voucher holders was able to effectively use their voucher. This is an embarrassment.

Our organization will be making an announcement on the fair housing front in the next few weeks, and will continue to push our government to properly fund its source of income discrimination units and address our broken voucher enforcement system. As Neighbors Together and Unlock NYC recommended in their report, it is vital that we get at least $1 million funded to CCHR for voucher enforcement. People need these vouchers. People need homes.

***
Nick Peters is the Policy Associate for Housing Rights Initiative, a housing watchdog non-profit. On Twitter @HousingRightsUS.

Mayor Adams and Chancellor Banks (photo: Michael Appleton/Mayoral Photography Office)

Last week, community school districts across New York City submitted their plans for the schools chancellor’s new, unimaginative Gifted and Talented program. Last month, the Department of Education announced that superintendents would work with local Community Education Councils to determine the sites for third grade G&T programs in their districts. While Chancellor David Banks, with support from Mayor Eric Adams, who appointed him, has claimed to value “authentic parent, family, and community engagement,” the reality on the ground is quite different — a return to top-down, authoritarian education politics. 

G&T programs took root in New York City in the 1970s, largely to create a separate learning track for white, middle-class families. Lacking specialized curriculum, or specialty-trained teachers, the lure of most G&T programs is that students will be educated in more homogeneous classrooms — classrooms with few to no Black or Latino children, Black or Latino teachers, children in temporary housing, children with disabilities, English language learners, or children in foster care. Over the last several years, a number of schools and districts have phased out G&T programs in an effort to desegregate classrooms.

One of the highest-performing districts in New York CIty, Brooklyn’s District 15, began phasing out G&T programs in favor of the Schoolwide Enrichment Model several years ago following a large-scale community engagement process. Yet, Chancellor Banks does not seem to be allowing districts to opt out of third-grade G&T, undoing years of progress, and seemingly ignoring the role that G&T programs play in cementing racial segregation in our schools.

Since the State Legislature granted the New York City Mayor full control of our schools two decades ago, every mayor has tinkered with G&T policy. A political lightning rod issue, each administration attempts to make G&T a little less racist without antagonizing the white middle class families that the program was created to serve.

Mayor Bloomberg centralized G&T admissions, moving from admissions hinging on IQ tests and teacher recommendations to admissions being based on standardized test scores. At the time, the city was under investigation by the Civil Rights Office of the U.S. Department of Education, and data clearly indicated G&T programs did not enroll proportionate numbers of Black and Latino children. Not surprisingly, standardized test-based admissions reduced the number of Black and Latino students further and eventually led to some districts phasing out G&T programs completely due to lack of enrollment. 

Despite his rhetoric about undoing the tale of two cities, Mayor de Blasio continued testing four-year-olds for Kindergarten G&T (a practice not supported by education experts) and initiated new third-grade G&T programs in districts that did not offer them (Districts 7, 12, 16, and 23). These programs admitted students based on teachers’ evaluations of second-graders. His political anxiety about overhauling G&T ran so deep that he attempted to continue the testing of four-year-olds in the midst of the pandemic. This failed only because the City Board of Education (a.k.a. Panel for Educational Policy) voted down the contract for the testing company, citing the gross racial inequities that would have been exacerbated under his plan.

After the Panel for Educational Policy voted to reject the G&T testing contract in January 2021, Mayor de Blasio, in his last months in office, finally began the planning process for reimagining G&T.  After a series of community engagement events, the mayor and Department of Education unveiled “Brilliant NYC,” which would have replaced G&T programs with the school-wide enrichment model. We were relieved to see the DOE moving in the right direction. But this was short-lived. 

While the politicians tinker with G&T policy under the pretense of “education reform,” our children and our schools suffer. I am a father of four children, both former and current public school students. All my children have had or still have Individual Education Plans and the youngest has dyslexia, requiring a great deal of advocacy. I have been a community leader in Bedford-Stuyvesant for decades and have served on the Community Education Council District 16 since 2014.

In my district, Bloomberg’s G&T policies resulted in the loss of its lone program. Parents and community leaders advocated for years to bring back the program until in 2016 Schools Chancellor Carmen Fariña announced the creation of a third-grade G&T program in my district without parent input. This too failed, in large part because families were unwilling to uproot students to attend a new school in third grade, particularly when the school was farther away.  

As a community leader, I am angered by the detrimental effects of G&T in my community, and the unwillingness of political leaders to confront the problem head-on. We have been advocating for a high quality program in our district for years. When Chancellor Fariña implemented the third grade G&T program in my district, we urged the DOE to properly resource the program with teachers certified in G&T and professional development. Yet, resources did not come with the new program, which was one of the reasons for its failure.  We then began advocating for the school-wide enrichment model as well as more investment in our schools to right the historical disinvestment. To date, there is no indication that the DOE is making real investment in my community.  

Historically, G&T programs in less affluent neighborhoods, like Bed-Stuy and Brownsville, were thrown together to create the appearance of fairness, while never receiving the resources and support needed for successful implementation.

For over a year, I sat on the School Diversity Advisory Group convened by Mayor de Blasio, whose recommendations included replacing G&T with the school-wide enrichment model to give every student an enriched education. More than two years later, although flawed, the former mayor and his Department of Education announced the “Brilliant NYC” plan, which resulted in a lengthy set of recommendations to replace G&T with universal enrichment. But it was announced with so little time before the end of de Blasio’s tenure that he could not implement it and Mayor Adams scrapped it.

Seemingly ignoring the complexity of issues surrounding G&T, Mayor Adams and Chancellor Banks announced the program's expansion instead. Citywide, their grand vision will impact about three kindergarteners and about 30 third-graders in each district, continuing to build on the legacy of separate and unequal schools in New York City.

I question how this expansion can be promoted as ending “the era of scarcity” or aligns with any of the four pillars of Chancellor Bank’s educational framework. Labeling a small group of students “gifted and talented” does not “reimagine the student experience” (pillar one) for the remaining 95% of students and will continue to instill a sense of inferiority in those not selected for G&T. Expanding a program that has failed in District 16 is not “scaling, sustaining and restoring what works” (pillar two). We need resources for all our students in District 16 to address the traumas of the pandemic and increase in violence due to decades of disinvestment in my community exacerbated by all COVID-19 has wrought.

Expansion of G&T is not “prioritizing wellness and its link to student success” (pillar three). Finally, disrespecting my community’s position is not “empowering families to be our true partners” (pillar four). 

To my community, which has suffered from historical disinvestment, the G&T expansion is an example of yet another mayor claiming to know what is good for my community. It is another piece of evidence that mayoral control of the school system must end.

Central Brooklyn was the center of the movement to establish “community control” of schools in the 1960s. The movement was very much about empowering Black Brooklyners for self-determination in education. We will not settle for a few more crumbs thrown our way to quiet us and will continue to fight until every child has a whole loaf of bread. The State Legislature must create a school governance system that shares responsibilities and accountability with parents. We are tired of hearing empty promises that are nothing more than PR soundbites. Our children cannot wait any longer.

***
NeQuan C. McLean is President of the Community Education Council District 16 in Bedford-Stuyvesant and President of the Education Council Consortium, a non-profit organization to empower historically marginalized parents. On Twitter @NequanMclean.

A business strip in Queens (photo: NYCUrbanScape/FlickR)

New York’s leaders are pushing for an energy transition to get more from renewable sources but in the meantime it is imperative that people can heat and light their homes and businesses.  

A critical decision that will affect the supply of energy in New York City is sitting with the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) right now and has been delayed several times. 

National Grid’s Greenpoint Energy Center has supplied safe, reliable and affordable energy to New Yorkers throughout the city for more than 50 years. To meet customers’ energy needs in the winter, natural gas supplied to the facility is liquified on-site and stored during low-demand periods in two storage tanks. During the coldest days of the year or when other sources of fuel are disrupted by extreme weather, National Grid vaporizes the stored liquified natural gas (LNG) and distributes it to customers through its network. This does not happen often, in fact just a few days each of the last two years, but when it does it is critically important to keeping New Yorkers warm.

Currently, the combined output of the existing vaporizers at the Greenpoint Energy Center is insufficient to meet the forecasted peak demand for upcoming winters. National Grid is therefore seeking approval from the state to construct and operate two new LNG vaporizers that will increase efficiency, allowing reliable, affordable service to continue for all New Yorkers while also decreasing greenhouse gas emissions and pave the way to a fossil-free heating system.

The New York Public Service Commission (NYPSC) found that there are no other viable, short-term solutions that would take the place of the Greenpoint Energy Center, meaning it is essential for National Grid to maintain safe and reliable gas service. 

The new vaporizers will allow the facility to operate more efficiently and cleanly than the equipment currently being used. According to an independent analysis, this will allow National Grid to meet rising demand for heat while reducing greenhouse gas emissions in line with the state’s Climate Leadership and Community Protection Act (CLCPA). 

As New York recovers from the COVID-19 pandemic and our economy continues to grow, it is critical that our leaders work with our utilities to provide consistent, dependable service for residents and businesses. As we rebuild our businesses, we need infrastructure that can keep pace to support the development and expansion of small and large businesses across the region. The Greenpoint facility’s need is a key, common-sense solution to meet the demands of our economy and put us back on solid footing.   

A very small but vocal minority of New Yorkers say that we should avoid any further investment in our existing energy infrastructure, even if it does cut emissions. They would rather see moratoriums on new hook-ups and leave New Yorkers in the lurch in the middle of the cold winter until enough renewable energy supply comes online decades from now.  These voices are loud, but they do not represent the interests of the vast majority of New Yorkers.

Most New Yorkers understand that neglecting our infrastructure will put us at risk of dangerous outcomes that could disproportionately impact older people and disadvantaged communities. Instead, we should be taking smart steps to reduce emissions and ensure reliable service on our path to a clean energy future. 

On behalf of the Queens business owners and residents I represent in my role as Chamber of Commerce President, and the millions of other New Yorkers who believe in taking smart action to address climate change, I urge the DEC to approve National Grid’s applications for permits so that this critical project can move forward and we can continue down the path to a green and prosperous New York.

***
Thomas J. Grech is the President & CEO of the Queens Chamber of Commerce, which has over 1,400 members representing more than 150,000 Queens-based employees. On Twitter @QueensChamber.

Helping students recover (photo: Michael Appleton/Mayoral Photography Office)

“Have you been reading to your child and teaching them about letters daily? Ever since the pandemic, we have seen a delay in letter recognition and this is a very important skill for kindergarten children.”

This is what was conveyed to each of us individually when we brought our children to tutors to assess whether they were on track to learn to read. As working mothers who engage with schools on a daily basis, it was very difficult for us to admit that our kids were what are now called ‘pandemic babies.’ Unfortunately, their learning was gravely impacted by school closures, mask mandates, and the lack of basic normalcy over the past two years. 

It is now known that the average child lost four months of learning in math and reading during the pandemic. Schools across the country are now reporting with regularity children of all socioeconomic backgrounds who are emotionally immature and cognitively delayed and lacking in basic motor and behavioral skills. Even more disturbing are the learning gaps we are seeing: low-income kids and children of color lost more learning than their wealthier peers based on data already available from other states. 

Despite all this evidence, our elected officials have not admitted their mistake of implementing policies that did not prioritize our children. Nor have they explained how New York State will address this early literacy crisis going forward. Where is the plan and funding to bring the science of reading to every public school in our state? Why are we not seeing a big push for proper phonics instruction in every one of our school districts? Why is Mayor Eric Adams still masking toddlers (and only toddlers) at pre-schools, especially since in comparison to other populations they are consistently among the least vulnerable by considerable measure?

Our own kids will be fine. We’ve both arranged for weekly tutoring sessions (with masks optional) to teach them phonics. They have both made impressive progress in catching up and are learning new sounds and words at every session. That said, we are always greatly concerned with the ongoing struggle of children whose families do not enjoy the resources to have them so closely supported by instructors and caregivers retained outside the public education system.  

Our leaders have thus far lacked any and all creativity, and did not fight nearly hard enough to protect our children over the past two years. Instead, they've gone with the status quo, and the acquiescence to rudderless policy recommendations from unaccountable bureaucracies who are wholly detached from the working people they are entrusted to serve. Following is not leading, and leading is often not easy.

How do we help the families and children who can't afford literacy assessments and tutoring sessions? We need a statewide, bi-partisan, effort to ensure that the covid generation won't pay the price for our mistaken policies. We cannot lower our standards and just accept that the ‘pandemic babies’ will be forever delayed in their educational development.  

Our elected officials and the public should do whatever it takes to make sure our children and their learning are of utmost priority in the formation of every public policy decision in New York. That must start now.

***
Ashara Baker is Community Engagement Manager at the New York Charter Schools Association and Danyela Souza Egorov is a candidate for State Senate in New York’s 29th District. On Twitter @bakerashara & @danyela4ny.

Command center (photo: Michael Appleton/Mayoral Photography Office)

They had been planning for this moment for years, for decades, the moment terror took to the train and targeted the beating, rumbling heart of our city. Even prior to 9/11, but especially in its wake, NYPD officials called for billions in investment to prevent and respond to an attack on underground commuter arteries, and they got every penny they wanted. Money poured in to monitor, record, and remember seemingly every aspect of our commuting life, and when a gunman made the unthinkable carnage inescapable, unleashing a torrent of bullets on a packed subway car, the surveillance state failed.

All the sensors and social media monitoring in the world couldn’t stop a deranged man with easy access to a gun. Even worse, key cameras failed. After all the money wasted on facial recognition, cell-phone tracking technology, social media monitoring, and transit analytics, there’s no evidence the tech actually helped.

While the MTA has spent tens of millions on new camera systems for every subway station in recent years, the shooting wasn’t even recorded. And in the subsequent finger pointing between the MTA and NYPD over the attack, it became clear that we never needed the Orwellian dragnet to begin with. It was analog evidence, not high-tech tracking, that cracked the case, with officers quickly running the serial number and ownership history of the gun at the crime scene. But that was just the start.

NYPD cameras, license plate readers, and other tracking tools scoured the city for clues, hoping to find the fleeing gunman. But none of those systems helped. Instead, it was a wanted poster and a tip line that were his undoing. A neighbor and witnesses called in tips and police responded, that’s all.

But rather than acknowledge the systemic failure, state and local leaders promised to double down on the broken status quo. They told us that the safety solution was only more money for unproven and error-prone technology. In the face of troubling facts, we got only more magical thinking, with Mayor Adams saying, “We’re going to be introducing some new technology that we believe could assist us.”

That “new technology” is actually just a familiar one in high-tech clothes: metal detectors. Last week, the mayor confirmed that the city was considering weapons scanning systems from the Massachusetts-based vendor Evolv. While Evolv promises to be different from the metal detectors of the past, the reality is the core of the technology is no different, measuring the magnetic response of items inside. While the stale tech may be gussied up with a new artificial intelligence overlay, it still often can’t tell the difference between a laptop, umbrella, and handgun. The choice is setting the sensitivity high enough to constantly stop and frisk New Yorkers for everyday objects, or lower it to the point where most handguns get through.

We continue to be told the fairy tale that technology can somehow keep us safe, predicting who’s a threat to protect the innocent and punish villains. The policy may be dressed up in the rhetoric of science, but it is truly science fiction, pseudoscience salesmanship to promote products that make vendors billions while leaving millions of New Yorkers at risk. We want so desperately to believe it will work next time, even if it means ignoring the failure right before our eyes.

And the harms go far beyond surveillance’s failure in times of crisis, it also puts New Yorkers at risk; not simply an overblown, Orwellian response to low-level offenses, but a system ripe for abuse. The technology that has proven itself inept at stopping terror is quite effective at targeting the unhoused, creating an intelligence nerve center to monitor the movements of New York’s neediest. And this is hardly an exception. Technology that is rolled out in the name of combatting terrorists, stopping sexual abuse, and other grotesque acts is oftentimes retooled to promote politicians’ pet projects.

Soon, widespread use of metal detectors will be more than New York’s latest production of surveillance theater, they will tech wash the newest expansion of broken windows policing. Want to target a station used mostly by people of color, it’s easy, just change the detector settings. When metal detectors can be told to mislabel so many household objects  as a threat, police can gain a pretext to stop and frisk anyone they choose. And when people speak out, when they complain of the invasion, humiliation, and discrimination, we’ll be told “there’s nothing to complain about, we’re only listening to the machine.”

 *** 
Albert Fox Cahn is the founder and executive director of the Surveillance Technology Oversight Project (S.T.O.P.), a New York–based civil rights and privacy group, and a fellow at Yale Law School’s Information Society Project. On Twitter @FoxCahn & @StopSpyingNY.