Gotham Gazette

The Place for New York Policy and politics

Open Government

Proposed Legislation by Council Member


Member
Total Bills
Number of Bills that Passed
Number of Bills that Received a Hearing
Number of Bills Sent to Committee
Peter F. Vallone, Jr.
54
14
4
36
David I. Weprin
48
20
4
24
James F. Gennaro
47
13
15
19
David Yassky
47
11
10
26
Michael E. McMahon
46
11
9
26
Alan Gerson
42
7
10
25
Gale A. Brewer
39
6
7
26
Tony Avella
39
4
9
26
Christine C. Quinn
37
28
5
4
Vincent Gentile
35
10
5
20
John C. Liu
33
8
10
15
Erik Martin Dilan
25
13
1
11
Joseph P. Addabbo
24
9
2
13
Rosie Mendez
23
8
6
9
G. Oliver Koppell
23
6
7
10
Eric N. Gioia
22
8
2
12
Miguel Martinez
22
5
0
17
Domenic M. Recchia Jr.
21
9
4
8
Michael C. Nelson
21
3
5
12
Letitia James
20
6
2
12
Melinda R. Katz
19
8
1
10
Leroy G. Comrie Jr.
18
8
4
6
James S. Oddo
18
7
0
11
Joel Rivera
17
5
3
9
James Vacca
16
8
2
6
Lewis Fidler
16
4
3
9
Daniel R. Garodnick
15
6
3
6
Bill de Blasio
15
5
4
6
Simcha Felder
14
7
1
6
Helen D. Foster
14
4
3
7
Inez E. Dickens
13
8
2
3
Robert Jackson
13
5
5
3
Helen Sears
12
6
2
4
Hiram Monserrate
12
5
3
4
Diana Reyna
11
8
3
0
Melissa Mark Viverito
11
5
2
4
Jessica A. Lappin
10
4
2
4
Charles Barron
10
2
0
8
Thomas White, Jr.
9
9
0
0
James Sanders
8
3
2
3
Kendall Stewart
7
4
1
2
Maria Baez
7
3
2
2
Sara M. Gonzalez
7
3
3
1
Annabel Palma
7
2
3
2
Maria del Carmen Arroyo
6
6
0
0
Albert Vann
6
3
2
1
Dennis P. Gallagher
5
3
0
2
Larry B. Seabrook
5
3
1
1
Darlene Mealy
3
0
2
1
Mathieu Eugene
0
0
0
0
Vincent Ignizio
0
0
0
0

 

A One in Five Shot: Passing City Council Bills


Under the dim lights of the City Council's chamber, council members stand up twice a month to pitch legislative proposals. Some, however, do this more often than others -- and no one has done it more frequently in the last 21 months than Councilmember Peter Vallone, Jr.

From regulating voyeurism (thought to be a preposterous proposal by the New York Times) to protecting the patrons of the city's nightclubs, the Queens councilmember has introduced more bills than any of his colleagues since Council Speaker Christine Quinn took her position at the front of the chamber in January 2006.

Not far behind him are Vallone’s fellow members from Queens, council members David Weprin and James Gennaro. All three men are second-term council members who happen to chair some of the body's most influential committees. Other council members, like Albert Vann and Larry Seabrook, also in their second terms, have not been as successful legislatively.

Hundreds of bills are introduced every year on the council floor. Many of them do not get any further than that. According to an analysis by Gotham Gazette of City Council legislation, 622 bills have been introduced since Quinn took the council's top position. The vast majority of introductions –68.3 percent – have never been heard of again. Approximately 17 percent, or 104 bills, have passed. Nearly a hundred, or 15 percent, have had hearings, but have not – at least yet – gone to the chamber floor for a vote.

The fate of a piece of legislation, according to city officials and political observers, may not depend on its merit or even its popularity. Instead it can hinge on a sponsor's seniority or position in the leadership. As just one member of the 51-person council, Quinn introduced 27 percent of the bills that have become law.

What’s The Process?

Member
Total Bills
Number of Bills that Passed
Number of Bills that Received a Hearing
Number of Bills Sent to Committee
Peter F. Vallone, Jr.
54
14
4
36
David I. Weprin
48
20
4
24
James F. Gennaro
47
13
15
19
David Yassky
47
11
10
26
Michael E. McMahon
46
11
9
26
Alan Gerson
42
7
10
25
Gale A. Brewer
39
6
7
26
Tony Avella
39
4
9
26
Christine C. Quinn
37
28
5
4
Vincent Gentile
35
10
5
20

Click here to see the complete list.

 

To calculate the amount of introductions per council member from January 2006 through September 10, 2007, Gotham Gazette counted a bill's sponsors at the time of its introduction using the council's stated meeting agendas.

The analysis includes all bills introduced at the City Council and does not include resolutions or land use items.

When a bill is introduced during the council's biweekly stated meetings, it usually has only one sponsor. That bill is then sent to a committee, the committee holds a hearing and, if the measure is approved in committee, it returns to the council floor for a final vote. During this process, as the legislation is debated and discussed, a bill can often accumulate more sponsors.

(To learn how a bill becomes a law click here.)

Legislation that has a major impact, such as the recently approved campaign finance reform, often is introduced with dozens of sponsors – meaning a consensus has been established before the legislative and public hearing process begins. Those bills are usually destined to become law.

For consistency, Gotham Gazette included this legislation in its calculations, giving each member an introduction "point." For example, 29 council members introduced the latest street naming bill (Intro 556). All of them received an introduction point in our tally.

One caveat: Our calculations do not gauge the impact or importance of legislation; therefore they provide at best an incomplete way to judge a council member's record.

Seniority Rules

Members Who Have Introduced the Most

1.Peter Vallone

2. David Weprin

3.James Gennaro

4. David Yassky

5. Michael McMahon

More than two-thirds of all the legislation proposed on the council floor disappears in the committee process. Some council members attribute the lack of movement to politics, while others say it can reflect the proposal's value. "I think a lot of it has to do with the merit of the laws that are introduced," said Vallone.

By and large, though, members who have introduced the most legislation chair the council's influential committees: Vallone oversees the Public Safety Committee, Weprin chairs the Finance Committee and Gennaro handles the Environmental Protection Committee.

These members recognize that they have a legislative advantage – if they introduce something under their purview of their respective committees, it at least gets a hearing.

" Seniority helps, (as does) knowing the process, and obviously if you're a head of the committee with jurisdictional measure," said Weprin. Part of that advantage, especially for Weprin, includes requests from the Bloomberg administration to introduce legislation on its behalf. Within the last 21 months, the mayor requested Weprin introduce 11 out of his 48 introductions.

But, Weprin added, "I don’t think we look at bills differently if it's sponsored by a freshman or somebody new."

For the most part, rookie members who joined the City Council in 2006, like Darlene Mealy, Melissa Mark Viverito and Daniel Garodnick, fall in the bottom half of our introduction chart.

Being a new member of council, Mealy said, involves becoming accustomed to City Hall's legislative ropes, even as she continues immersing herself in her community. "Being the new kid on the block," Mealy said, "I just learned how to (submit) the new legislation properly."

The Speaker's Influence

The bulk of the legislative control rests with the council's speaker. If the speaker does not support legislation, political observers said, it will never see the chamber floor. On the other hand, 76 percent of the legislation introduced by Quinn since she became speaker have passed.

To some council members, this is where politics comes into play.

Councilmember Tony Avella, a councilmember since 2002, introduced 39 bills since January 2006. But only four have become law, and all of those were introduced with council colleagues, not solely by Avella.

When asked why, the Queens councilmember has one answer: He is not in the favor of the council speaker.

" There are members of the City Council that fall in line no matter what," said Avella, who has established himself as a maverick of the council and is a declared mayoral candidate for 2009. Quinn, though not official yet, is expected to be one of his many opponents. "If you're independent and you speak your mind you get punished," Avella added.

Avella has accused Quinn of intentionally blocking his legislation, such as a 2006 bill that would have required the replacement of damaged stop signs within 48 hours. The council last week adopted similar legislation, which requires the replacement of all missing and damaged street signs within three days. The sponsor of that bill was Joseph Addabbo.

Avella is not alone. Many City Council members seem to have trouble getting their legislation passed, or even getting it a hearing. Civil rights advocates contend Quinn has stalled a bill mandating that co-op boards reveal reasons for an applicant's rejection, despite widespread support throughout the council.

Although Avella had the lowest record for percentage of bills passed – hovering at 10 percent – some of his veteran colleagues were not far behind. Councilmember Michael Nelson, who took office in 1999, has introduced 21 bills during Quinn's tenure, and only 14 percent have become law.

Unlike Avella, some members find it difficult to even introduce legislation. Mealy said she has attempted to submit several bills to the council's legislative office, which reviews and drafts all introductions. Some were rejected, including one that, Mealy said, would have made gun shop owners liable for crimes committed with weapons from their establishment. The response Mealy received: The Bloomberg administration was pursuing that issue.

" The City Council staff will let you know whether it's good legislation or bad legislation," said Mealy. "All I'm going to say is it's not what you know, it's who you know."

According to a City Council spokesman, Anthony Hogrebe, the council's legislative office – whose staff is hired by the speaker - drafts legislation and reviews requests for legal and jurisdictional issues. Some proposals lend themselves to legislation, like sanitation or public safety issues, while others, like education, can be a state matter.

Members Who Introduced the Least

1. Darlene Mealy

2. Dennis Gallagher

3. Larry B. Seabrook

4. Maria del Carmen Arroyo

5. Albert Vann

Reforming the Process

When Quinn took over as speaker, she promised to open up the legislative process. With that pledge, she implemented several regulations to ensure members had an opportunity to introduce legislation. One rule mandated a 60-day time limit for the council's legislative office to draft legislation after receiving a proposal from a member. Another reduced the number of members, from nine to seven, needed to bring a bill to the floor without the speaker's consent.

The rules were meant to do away with a longstanding perception that the speaker had complete control over what legislation went to the floor, strong arming members into supporting certain measures. This practice often resulted in unanimous votes, little debate and stalled legislation. Critics blamed Quinn's immediate predecessor, Gifford Miller, for holding up a lead paint initiative supported by the majority of the council because he hoped to avoid dealing with such a controversial issue while running for mayor.

Political observers and some members of council said that Quinn’s reforms have not made much difference.

" The bill doesn’t come to the floor without the speaker’s consent," said Douglas Muzzio, a professor of public affairs at Baruch College. "Whatever you're finding under Quinn, you're likely to find, if not the very same thing, something close under Gifford or Vallone’s tenure," he added, referring to former Speaker Peter Vallone Sr.

Councilmember Gale Brewer, who has been in office since 2002 and signed onto 39 bill introductions since Quinn took over as speaker, said she could not tell the difference between Quinn and Miller, who was speaker from 2002 to 2006, when it comes to allowing certain bills to come to the floor. A member has to "push hard" and brainstorm innovative ideas for legislation to move, Brewer said.

Although Brewer was within the top tier of council introductions, she has only seen six of her bills become law.

Getting legislation to the floor, according to Councilmember Vallone, is ultimately a combination of good ideas, not veering away from controversy and playing along with other members and the speaker. Out of the 54 bills Vallone has introduced, he has seen 26 percent become law.

" I think Christine (Quinn) and her staff take a more hands on approach to the crafting of legislation than Gifford's did," said Vallone, alluding to the speaker’s control of the legislative process.

 

Getting Credit

A number of the bills may serve their purpose as soon as they are proposed. "Some of them are introduced never with the purpose of having a hearing,” said Vallone. “They are introduced to have a message."

Although introducing bills with no intent of seeing them passed may seem pointless, some observers said the practice helps council members establish legislative records. Gene Russianoff of the New York Public Interest Research Group said some members propose legislation to put pressure on the city administration or the state, hoping the idea will eventually be incorporated into a departmental policy change.

For example, Councilmember James Vacca said he introduced legislation, which has been in committee since March, calling for stronger safety standards to protect children with disabilities riding school buses. Vacca said he is participating in discussions on this very issue with legislators in Albany.

Other introductions, City Hall observers said, are proposed with their constituents or the media in mind. In the era of term limits, where it may seem like an election for higher office is always on the horizon, members can show their constituents they at least tried to get something done downtown.

" The council members want their names on bills so they can then go back to their constituents and their institutions and other types of supporters and say they got this bill in," said Muzzio.

Council critics have often targeted members for introducing legislation for politics sake. Interestingly, many New Yorkers criticized the council's proposal to guarantee a student's right to carry a cell phone to and from school, calling it unenforceable and pointless. That same legislation, passed over a mayoral veto, may now spark a courtroom duel between the council and Mayor Michael Bloomberg.

Council members like Vacca say that it isn’t about getting credit, but that the problem – from the replacement of street signs to the regulation of city waste – gets resolved. After all, the City Council may be the city’s legislative body, but it’s also helping people in their districts.

“ Council members have two distinct functions,” said Muzzio. “One is the legislative function, is the passage of laws and the passage of resolutions as well.... The other is constituent service.” But, he added, “Those that get the bills passed, clearly, it’s kudos for them.” 

Brooklyn Judge's Battle Reaches Washington


A bruising political battle is moving from downtown Brooklyn to the nation’s capital. To the surprise of many observers, the Supreme Court of the United States has agreed to hear the case of Margarita Lopez Torres et al against New York State Board of Elections et al. Its decision will determine whether the present system of electing New York State Supreme Court justices is unconstitutional.

The case began in 2004, when Lopez Torres, then a Brooklyn Civil Court judge, claimed she had been blocked from becoming a state Supreme Court justice because of her independence and refusal to be influenced by local politicians. After several tries at moving up the judicial ladder, Lopez Torres concluded that she had been intentionally shut out and that, under the system for electing Supreme Court justices in New York state, she would never be able to get her name on the ballot before the general voting public.

In a challenge to the nomination process, her lawyers have successfully argued in two federal courtsthat the present method of selecting candidates is unconstitutional. They maintain that it violates the U.S. Constitution by having delegates to a convention – and not voters in a primary – determine who gets on the general election ballot. Although Lopez Torres has since been elected a judge of the Kings County (Brooklyn) Surrogate Court, and although the convention system is unique to New York, the battle has continued, reaching the highest court in the nation where arguments will be heard next week.

Becoming a State Supreme Court Justice

New York State Supreme Court justices, who preside over trials and have general jurisdiction, are nominated by judicial delegates. These are registered members of a particular party who are elected to attend a judicial convention by fellow party members in each Assembly district. At the convention, names of candidates seeking to fill available seats on the court are placed in nomination. Any New York judge or lawyer who has been a member of the bar for at least 10 years can be nominated. But Lopez Torres argues that no hopeful who lacks the support of local politicians and political clubs can organize sufficient delegates to become the designated candidate. She makes this argument even though she was nominated at one convention and received a large number of votes, but not enough to secure a place on the November ballot.

Winning the nomination is usually tantamount to winning the election. Opposing parties rarely present challenges. The candidate who appears on the Election Day ballot in New York City is usually the Democrat, who may or may not be endorsed by other parties but who almost always wins either way. Other parties may field their own candidates, but with little expectation of winning.

Opening the Primaries

Essentially, the Lopez Torres argument is that she or anyone not favored by the party in power cannot gain access to the November general election ballot. To remedy this, her lawsuit contends that New York State Supreme Court justices should be elected through a primary process. This is the way voters choose New York City Civil Court judges and other elected officials.

New York used a primary system to elect state judges at the beginning of the 20th century, but critics considered it cumbersome, expensive and a possible threat to judicial independence. The legislature replaced it with the present system.

Like other elected officials, lower court judges run for office by getting enough registered party voters in their district to sign their nominating petitions. Those who qualify appear on the ballot to face a possible primary and then, of course, the general election. Again, any New York City resident who is a registered voter and who has been admitted to the bar for at least 10 years may circulate petitions and launch a primary campaign. While difficult, this route is sometimes successful, whether for an open seat or to replace an incumbent judge.

The system Lopez Torres would like to see for Supreme Court justices was on view in three contests for lower court judges in Brooklyn last week. The races, for a seat on the Surrogate Court and two on Civil Court, were hotly contested, and in the Surrogate Court race, the candidate with the backing of the party leadership lost.

On to Washington

Those opposing the Lopez Torres position argue that it is up to the legislative branch to determine a method of electing statewide judges and that the present system is the one enacted by our legislature. Also, some of the legal briefs raise the issue that a delegate convention is not only constitutional but shares many characteristics with the American system of electing presidents. Depending up on the state, electors may be nominated at conventions and then cast votes through the Electoral College, which actually elects the president.

Dozens of lawyers from around the country, various bar associations and good government groups are weighing in with legal briefs on both sides of the Lopez Torres litigation. As the state’s top lawyer, the New York State attorney general is defending the present system.

The stakes are enormous. What the justices decide in Washington could have a staggering impact on New York electoral and judicial politics. If, after hearing oral arguments, a majority agree with the Federal District Court and the U.S. Court of Appeals that the system is constitutionally flawed, then it would have to be dismantled and the state legislature would have to enact a new method. The justices are unlikely to dictate what the alternative should be, although the mid-level federal court called for the primary model. On the other hand, the justices may find that the existing system should be upheld and that New York can continue with the judicial conventions it has held for the last 86 years.

They could do neither. Instead, the Supreme Court may decide that the case warrants further proceedings, evidence and a trial and return the issue to the federal court in Brooklyn. That could start the litigation process all over and keep the existing system in place – at least temporarily.

Lopez Torres is represented by the Brennan Center for Justice at NYU School of Law and Arnold & Porter. When the court hears the case, Frederic A.O. Schwarz Jr. will argue for them.

On the other side, Andrew Rossman of Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld will appear for the New York County Democratic Committee, and counsel for the New York Republican State Committee is Carter G. Phillips of Sidley Austin LLP. Both party committees also have counsel from firms in New York, Washington and Los Angeles. Lead counsel for the Associations of New York State Supreme Court Justices is Joseph Forstadt of Stroock & Stroock & Lavan. To present its case, the State of New York has retained Ted Olson, who argued the Bush side of Bush v Gore and was recently thought to be a leading contender for U.S. attorney general.

Watch for next week's report -- direct from Washington.

Emily Jane Goodman is a New York State Supreme Court Justice 

 

Next Round in the Cell Phone Fight


 

The long-running battle between the Department of Education and the City Council shows no sign of letting up. In fact, if rhetoric exchanged at an Education Committee hearing last week offer any indication, the fight could move to a new and even more acrimonious level and even wind up in court.

Earlier this month, the City Council overrode Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s veto of a bill -- Intro 351-A – that requires the city to allow public school students to have cell phones with them on their way to and from school every day. The next day, Department of Education safety agents set up their scanners at Forest Hills High School in Queens, which is “not a school that has a reputation for having students who carry weapons,” as the InsideSchools.org Blog put it. But agents predictably found lots of cell phones and confiscated them.

"The thing that is quite clear is that the City Council has decided to override the mayor's veto, so it's law now," City Councilmember Melinda Katz, whose district includes the school, told the Times Ledger. "Why they would [confiscate phones] is beyond me."

 

Setting the Boundaries

 

The administration, however, has made it clear it does not feel bound by the council’s action. When asked by the bill’s sponsor, Councilmember Lewis Fidler of Brooklyn, whether the council and administration could sit down and attempt to reach a compromise on this issue, Deputy Mayor Dennis Walcott was largely dismissive. While he “respects the override of the veto” and remains “open to dialogue,” Walcott told council members a meeting was unlikely to produce any results. Cell phones in schools represent an issue where the administration and the council “will always be at odds,” he said.

 

Since Mayor Michael Bloomberg won mayoral control of the schools, the administration has adamantly maintained that it – and it alone, not the City Council – has responsibility for what goes on inside school buildings. In addition, Walcott indicated the bill does not do anything since it does not address what goes on in school.

 

“They’ve read the first sentence and ignored the second,” Fidler said. While the bill does say students should be allowed to have phones going to and from school – ignoring what goes on in class – it also states, "No person shall interfere with the provision of such telephone to, or the use of such telephone by, such student.”

 

“They can collect every cell phone as kids come into school,” said Fidler, but school officials would then have to return the phone at the end of the day. "It will not permit them to confiscate a phone that is not being misused.”

The bill was worded this way precisely to address the issues of mayoral control. “We’ve gone to the very limits of our power,” Fidler said. “We’re not telling them what to do on school grounds.”

 

What’s Next?

 

Despite Walcott’s comments, a City Council spokesperson and Fidler expressed hope that the two sides could reach a compromise in the next 90 days.

 

"We at this point still remain very hopeful that the Department of Education and the administration will respect the cell phone legislation we passed into law," said the council spokesperson, Anthony Hogrebe.

But if that does not happen, the case could end up in court. The legislation specifically states that a person whose rights under the law are interfered with can go to court. This means, Fidler said, that a student whose cell phone was confiscated – or the parents of that child – could bring a legal challenge against the Department of Education. While saying he could not speak for his wife or son – a public school student who, on his parents’ instructions, carries a cell phone – “we would be wiling to be that plaintiff.”

The council might also challenge the Bloomberg administration – and it would not be the first time. In 2004, the council approved legislation, sponsored by Quinn, barring any city agency from entering into a contract for more than $100,000 with an entity that did not offer domestic partners the same benefits as spouses. In that case, the administration won in the State Court of Appeals, which stated Bloomberg did not have to enforce laws he deemed invalid.

During the Giuliani administration, legal battles, including lawsuits that accused the council of impeding on the mayor's executive power, were more common.

 

A Ringing Controversy

 

While cell phones had long been officially banned in city schools, the prohibition only affected students in so-called scanner schools, buildings where all students went through metal detectors every day. These tended to be schools that the education department considered unsafe. Some parents and students in those schools had balked at the city ban, claiming it unfairly discriminated against the predominantly low-income, black and Latino students who went to those schools.

 

But the issue gained prominence in spring 2006 when the administration announced it would begin random scanning with portable metal detectors throughout the city. The devices could be at any school at any time – without warning. Safety agents would confiscate any and all cell phones and generally not return them until a parent or guardian showed up to claim it.

 

The decision sparked an uproar. Parents contend cell phones are a necessity in a city where students, some as young as 11 or 12, travel long distances. The administration’s ban, many have said, shows how out of touch the department is with the challenges of raising children in New York and how it dismisses the concerns of parents.

 

For its part, department officials argue that students use cell phones to cheat on tests, take unauthorized pictures of their fellow students and disrupt classes. Students have even, officials say, used the phones to organize attacks on fellow students.

Last week’s City Council hearing showed that18 months have done nothing to dim the intensity of these arguments. The hearing was focused on the department’s efforts to engage and involve parents. But when Councilmember Peter Vallone, chair of the council Public Safety Committee, had an opportunity to question Walcott and Martine Guerrier, who is in charge of parent involvement for the department, he quickly brought up cell phones and criticized Guerrier for not challenging the department’s policy. “If parents are overwhelmingly against this ban, would it be part of Ms. Guerrier’s job to convey that?” he said.

Apparently not. Guerrier’s office is not responsible for cell phone policy

 

 

 

Stated Meeting: Rezoning Jamaica


With the exception of three Queens council members, the City Council overwhelmingly approved a rezoning plan for Jamaica, Queens on Monday.

Councilmember Thomas White, who represents part of Jamaica, did not attend the meeting. A staffer said White is out of town, and their office was unaware the vote was coming up.

As part of Mayor Michael Bloomberg's PlaNYC, Jamaica has been slated for a large scale rezoning aimed at creating a transit hub for New Yorkers and tourists traveling to John F. Kennedy International Airport. The rezoning is the largest in the city's history – a resounding 368 blocks.

At its stated meeting, the council also overrode a mayoral veto of legislation that guarantees a student's right to carry a cell phone to and from school and approved a bill that prohibits the Department of Sanitation from issuing violations during certain hours in the workday.

Revitalizing Jamaica

According to the city's Jamaica Plan, the rezoning will revitalize downtown Jamaica's business corridor, while protecting the neighborhood's residential character. In some areas, development will be limited to two stories, and in others buildings could climb to eight stories.

Supporters of the plan said the neighborhood's current zoning allows for out-of-scale development in residential areas while limiting density near its transportation hubs. The rezoning, administration officials said, would correct this by directing development around mass transportation stations and away from residential areas.

The plan is sure to change the scale and face of the neighborhood, but would right much of the limited zoning in place now, according to supporters . Beyond Jamaica's downtown, the plan also changes zoning in the neighborhoods of South Jamaica, Hollis and St. Albans, as well as the southern edges of Briarwood, Jamaica Hill and Jamaica Estates.

For years, the city has been drafting the Jamaica Plan. Because of its proximity to the AirTrain to John F. Kennedy Airport, the city saw potential for Jamaica to become a vibrant, commercial hub for both residents and those en route to the city's largest airport.

According to Land Use Committee Chair Melinda Katz, the rezoning would add millions of square feet of commercial space to Jamaica's downtown and create 9,500 jobs and 7,500 apartments, about 780 of which would be affordable housing.

"This rezoning effort will help transform and revitalize downtown Jamaica into a vibrant economic engine that will create much-needed jobs for the Southeast Queens community," said Councilmember Leroy Comrie, who represents part of the affected area.

Although the council, voting 45 to 3, overwhelmingly approved the proposal, it was not without opposition. Three Queens council members, James Gennaro, David Weprin and Tony Avella, oppose the rezoning and voted against the plan. The council members claim density slated for Hillside Avenue would overwhelm the neighborhood and that the area's current infrastructure, including the F train, could not handle the increased activity.

"The benefits of this plan are clouded by city planning's overaggressive up-zoning along some portions of the Hillside Avenue corridor," said Weprin, who represents Hollis, which is part of the rezoning area. "And it's because of this irresponsible up-zoning that unscrupulous developers have seized the chance to swoop in on local residents with dollar signs in their eyes."

When the plan was first introduced to the area, it called for higher density on Hillside Avenue, including 12-story buildings. A compromise led to an eight-story maximum height there, but that still did not satisfy some Queens council members.

Residents appear to be split on the rezoning, some hailing the possibility of economic development, big retailers and a large hotel, while others fear their neighborhood will be taken over and lose its mostly two-story character.

Cell Phones In Schools

In an unusual blow to the Bloomberg administration that promises to lead to further confrontation, the City Council overrode a mayoral veto on its cell phone legislation by a vote of 46 to 2. The veto was only the sixth in Council Speaker Christine Quinn's tenure.

The Department of Education prohibits students from possessing a cell phone while they are at school - much to the chagrin of some parents and the City Council - and officials are instructed to confiscate phones and return them only to a parent or guardian.

Both council members and parents have claimed students should be allowed to carry cell phones while en route as a safety precaution.

In July, the council approved legislation that allows students to carry a cell phone while going to or from school. Bloomberg has repeatedly criticized the bill and contended it would do nothing to change the current policy banning phones within school walls.

Quinn said the legislation (Intro 351-A) puts the onus on the Department of Education to establish a policy that would allow students to carry a cell phone to and from school. The legislation is supposed to take effect in 90 days, and council members said they would try to work with the Department of Education to ensure its implementation.

Councilmember Lewis Fidler, the bill's prime sponsor, said the Department of Education should allow students to carry cell phones as long as they are turned off and out of sight in school. In response to allegations that cell phones allow students to cheat, the councilmember said pens and paper are not confiscated because they can be used to cheat. Fidler said he would not rule out suing the administration if the legislation is not implemented.

Councilmember Oliver Koppell was one of two members – along with James Sanders – who voted against the legislation. Koppell said allowing students to carry cell phones would exacerbate disciplinary problems in schools and interfere with education.

Dirty Sidewalks

The council approved legislation by a vote of 48 to 0 that would have the Department of Sanitation issue sidewalk-cleaning tickets from 6 p.m. to 7 p.m. instead of from noon to 1 p.m. as it does currently. The department will continue to be able to issue violations between 8 a.m. and 9 a.m.

Sponsored by Councilmember Simcha Felder, the bill (Intro 548-A) enables residents to clear away litter from their properties after returning home from work, typically by 6 p.m. When the department issued violations during the workday, residents could face fines because trash was strewn on their property by a passerby or the wind while they were away from home.

Hunts Point Expansion

In order to comply with state and federal water regulations, the council approved an expansion and upgrade at the Hunts Point Water Pollution Control Plant in the Bronx. The expansion also includes additional park space for Barretto Point Park.

Because of the facility's expansion, the Department of Environmental Protection committed to expand the adjacent parkland and also study the odors coming from the area, which have caused concern in the community.  

A Fair Deal for The New Workforce


With Labor Day having just come and gone, a few moments’ of thought about labor in New York might bring to mind the workers struggles of the early 20th century, the powerful unions of the city’s history or a transit strike. But if we think about what labor in New York means today, we will recognize a new engine is driving this city’s economy: the independent workforce.

A January 2007 study from the City Comptroller Williams Thompson’s office suggests that self-employment has been driving job growth in New York City for the past 10 years. Over 30 percent of the American workforce is classified as independent, non-traditional or freelance workers. In New York City, there are approximately 1 million freelancers. These are the graphic designers, cab drivers, creative artists and nannies who pay taxes, vote and keep the city’s economy running.

Such findings are a wake-up call for policymakers and government officials, who can no longer afford to overlook the challenges faced by New Yorkers who do not work for a “traditional” employer. It is time that we develop ways to provide these productive, income-generating taxpayers with access to the things other workers take for granted: health insurance, retirement accounts, equitable taxation and workplace protections.

Health and Retirement

In a recent survey of 3,000 independent workers by the Freelancers Union (of which I am executive director) 39 percent of respondents said they lacked health insurance coverage at some time during the last year. Of those workers, 80 percent avoided seeking medical care when they were uninsured. When they did need care, many sought it in emergency rooms -- hardly a good solution, for the worker or the health-care system. This gaping inadequacy in the health insurance system has ramifications not only for uninsured individuals—the cost is being borne by the entire taxpaying population.

Even though independent workers often earn a good living, many do not save for retirement because they cannot take advantage of the simple, streamlined systems for funding their retirement accounts that traditional employees have. In addition, independent workers without an employer do not have access to many of the government’s social insurance programs and protections. The employer relationship lies at the core of a range of worker protection laws, including occupational health and safety regulations and anti-discrimination protections. This leaves independent workers vulnerable.

The Freelancers Union survey showed that 92 percent of respondents are registered to vote and 40 percent have donated money to political campaigns. Despite their growing numbers – and their potential political clout -- policymakers and politicians have largely ignored this important constituency.

A Tax on the Self-Employed

The discrimination against independent workers is particularly apparent in tax laws. For tax purposes the self-employed are variously considered individuals, businesses, employers and employees. Like all other workers, they must ante up for federal, state and city personal income taxes. They have multiple other tax burdens and penalties as well.

On a national level, freelancers cannot participate in programs such as the flexible spending accounts for health and child-care expenses that reduce the tax bills of conventional workers. The self-employed must pay a federal self-employment tax that amounts to a financial penalty on freelancers. It requires those who are self-employed to provide both the employee and the employer portion of the Social Security tax.

In addition, in New York City, many workers are hit with the Unincorporated Business Tax or UBT. Under this tax, the self-employed are the proverbial dolphins caught in the tuna net. The UBT was created in 1966 to collect tax revenue from businesses that had been structured specifically to sidestep corporate taxes. Unfortunately, once implemented, the tax unintentionally captured an additional segment of the workforce: the self-employed or independent worker.

The revenues from the unincorporated business tax go toward such programs as unemployment insurance, workers compensation or other state Department of Labor programs. Since the state does not consider freelancers employers, they are not eligible for these programs. And so, in paying the UBT, the self-employed are subject to a tax for which they receive little or no benefit.

In June, the City Council voted to allow taxpayers, including the self-employed, to take a $5,000 credit on their personal income tax for their Unincorporated Business Tax payments. This change represents a significant step toward addressing a major inequity in our tax system for independent workers. It is time for a more comprehensive solution, though. It is time to entirely exempt independent workers from the UBT, which drains millions of dollars a year from self-employed workers.

In a city where the middle class is struggling more than ever, we should re-focus the Unincorporated Business Tax on its original target: high-income partnerships and other businesses that are not subject to corporate taxes. Independent workers deserve a tax code that considers their unique characteristics and contributions, not a policy that is imprecise and onerous.

For much of the 20th century, the labor movement fought and won protections for working people and helped to safeguard them against destabilizing events such as illness, disability and temporary unemployment. These were their bedrock victories. Yet an increasing number of workers – workers who play a vital role in the city’s economy -- do not have access to those benefits. It is time for policymakers to correct this.Sara Horowitz is executive director of the Freelancers Union

 

A Fair Deal for The New Workforce


With Labor Day having just come and gone, a few moments’ of thought about labor in New York might bring to mind the workers struggles of the early 20th century, the powerful unions of the city’s history or a transit strike. But if we think about what labor in New York means today, we will recognize a new engine is driving this city’s economy: the independent workforce.

A January 2007 study from the City Comptroller Williams Thompson’s office suggests that self-employment has been driving job growth in New York City for the past 10 years. Over 30 percent of the American workforce is classified as independent, non-traditional or freelance workers. In New York City, there are approximately 1 million freelancers. These are the graphic designers, cab drivers, creative artists and nannies who pay taxes, vote and keep the city’s economy running.

Such findings are a wake-up call for policymakers and government officials, who can no longer afford to overlook the challenges faced by New Yorkers who do not work for a “traditional” employer. It is time that we develop ways to provide these productive, income-generating taxpayers with access to the things other workers take for granted: health insurance, retirement accounts, equitable taxation and workplace protections.

Health and Retirement

In a recent survey of 3,000 independent workers by the Freelancers Union (of which I am executive director) 39 percent of respondents said they lacked health insurance coverage at some time during the last year. Of those workers, 80 percent avoided seeking medical care when they were uninsured. When they did need care, many sought it in emergency rooms -- hardly a good solution, for the worker or the health-care system. This gaping inadequacy in the health insurance system has ramifications not only for uninsured individuals—the cost is being borne by the entire taxpaying population.

Even though independent workers often earn a good living, many do not save for retirement because they cannot take advantage of the simple, streamlined systems for funding their retirement accounts that traditional employees have. In addition, independent workers without an employer do not have access to many of the government’s social insurance programs and protections. The employer relationship lies at the core of a range of worker protection laws, including occupational health and safety regulations and anti-discrimination protections. This leaves independent workers vulnerable.

The Freelancers Union survey showed that 92 percent of respondents are registered to vote and 40 percent have donated money to political campaigns. Despite their growing numbers – and their potential political clout -- policymakers and politicians have largely ignored this important constituency.

A Tax on the Self-Employed

The discrimination against independent workers is particularly apparent in tax laws. For tax purposes the self-employed are variously considered individuals, businesses, employers and employees. Like all other workers, they must ante up for federal, state and city personal income taxes. They have multiple other tax burdens and penalties as well.

On a national level, freelancers cannot participate in programs such as the flexible spending accounts for health and child-care expenses that reduce the tax bills of conventional workers. The self-employed must pay a federal self-employment tax that amounts to a financial penalty on freelancers. It requires those who are self-employed to provide both the employee and the employer portion of the Social Security tax.

In addition, in New York City, many workers are hit with the Unincorporated Business Tax or UBT. Under this tax, the self-employed are the proverbial dolphins caught in the tuna net. The UBT was created in 1966 to collect tax revenue from businesses that had been structured specifically to sidestep corporate taxes. Unfortunately, once implemented, the tax unintentionally captured an additional segment of the workforce: the self-employed or independent worker.

The revenues from the unincorporated business tax go toward such programs as unemployment insurance, workers compensation or other state Department of Labor programs. Since the state does not consider freelancers employers, they are not eligible for these programs. And so, in paying the UBT, the self-employed are subject to a tax for which they receive little or no benefit.

In June, the City Council voted to allow taxpayers, including the self-employed, to take a $5,000 credit on their personal income tax for their Unincorporated Business Tax payments. This change represents a significant step toward addressing a major inequity in our tax system for independent workers. It is time for a more comprehensive solution, though. It is time to entirely exempt independent workers from the UBT, which drains millions of dollars a year from self-employed workers.

In a city where the middle class is struggling more than ever, we should re-focus the Unincorporated Business Tax on its original target: high-income partnerships and other businesses that are not subject to corporate taxes. Independent workers deserve a tax code that considers their unique characteristics and contributions, not a policy that is imprecise and onerous.

For much of the 20th century, the labor movement fought and won protections for working people and helped to safeguard them against destabilizing events such as illness, disability and temporary unemployment. These were their bedrock victories. Yet an increasing number of workers – workers who play a vital role in the city’s economy -- do not have access to those benefits. It is time for policymakers to correct this.

Sara Horowitz is executive director of the Freelancers Union

 

New Bills: Paralyzing Peeping and Blasting Explosive Regulations


There is no doubt the City Council is gearing up to say goodbye to summer and hello to its more hectic legislative schedule. To do that, members have recently introduced bills to regulate everything from Peeping Toms to construction companies.

While some of the bills claim to improve safety in the city, advocacy groups have criticized a number of the measures, calling some overreaching or utterly unenforceable. One organization described a piece of legislation as a threat to civil liberties.

Over the next several months, these bills may or may not come up for hearings. So here is a little preview of what could be in store at City Hall.

Regulation of Blasting

In mid-July, a retaining wall collapsed on the Upper West Side, forcing residents out of their homes. Although the cause of the wall's collapse has not yet been determined, some city officials and residents attribute it to blasting at an adjacent construction site on Columbus Avenue.

In response, the district's councilmember, Melissa Mark Viverito, proposed (Intro 613) legislation that would strengthen the city's blasting regulations, specifically reducing a blasting permit's validity from three years to three months. The applicant would, however, have an opportunity to request a one-year extension.

The legislation would also require a trained representative from the fire department or Department of Buildings to be on site during demolitions involving blasting and excavations on privately owned property.

" At a time when development appears to overrun our neighborhoods and inconvenience our lives, it is our responsibility as legislators to ensure that development is as responsible, safe and accountable as possible," said Viverito following the legislation's introduction.

 

The legislation also proposes to increase community notification in the area where blasting is occurring and coordinate communication between the departments that oversee this type of construction, such as the Department of Buildings and the fire department.

Although the fire department is charged with issuing an explosives permit, under the new legislation it must coordinate with the Department of Buildings and the Department of Environmental Protection, including noticing them on permit requests.

A spokesperson for the Department of Buildings said it is currently reviewing the legislation and "looks forward" to working with the council.

So far the bill has 13 sponsors, including Council Speaker Christine Quinn, who held a press conference announcing the measure. Quinn's support essentially guarantees the bill's approval.

Prohibiting Peeping in Pubic

When several women in his Queens district complained of a so-called "Peeping Tom" looking up their skirts while they climbed the steps to an elevated subway station, Councilmember Peter Vallone discovered the action wasn't a crime.

Now, he wants to make it a misdemeanor, which comes with a maximum 90-day jail sentence and a $500 fine.

" These perverts use their eyes to invade the privacy of people's bodies, leaving many feeling violated," Vallone said in a prepared statement. "Yet up until now, there has been a peephole loophole that gives anyone a license to gawk, leer and spy anywhere they please."

Vallone's voyeurism legislation (Intro 617) would make it illegal for an individual to repeatedly and deliberatively view another person's "intimate parts" without their knowledge or consent in public places, like at an elevated subway station. In private settings, the bill would apply to viewing another person without their knowledge or consent when that person has a reasonable expectation of privacy, such as drilling a hole in a private bathroom.

Although the councilmember said the bill is modeled after similar statutes in Washington, South Carolina and Arizona, others contend the legislation is unenforceable.

" The proposed law seeks to address behavior that is ambiguous and imprecise, and the language of the bill reflects that ambiguity and imprecision," said http://www.nyclu.org/ New York Civil Liberties Union Executive Director Donna Lieberman. "This lack of clarity confers a license for abuse on those empowered to enforce the law by leaving it up to the individual police officer to decide which kinds of viewing are lawful and which kinds are degrading and hence unlawful."

Others agree. A New York Times editorial contends Vallone's most recent crusade "feels like something akin to outlawing wolf whistles from a construction site and, then, banning the corresponding hand signal from the street."

Banning the B-Word

In yet another battle over semantics, the City Council could soon be rehashing a debate over common epithets. Earlier this year it was the n-word, now, thanks to Councilmember Darlene Mealy, it’s the b-word and the h-word.

While it is entirely symbolic, her resolution (Reso 960) would create a moratorium on the pejorative use of bitch and ho. The legislation reads like the guest list to the Grammy Awards, citing the words' usage by various hip hop artists and most other media outlets and calling it "insulting and cruel."

 

In February, the City Council garnered national attention when it passed a resolution banning the n-word. So far support for this resolution in the council seems promising, having accumulated nearly 20 sponsors.

Although the "b-word" is used as a term for a female dog, its pejorative use, first documented in 1811, is offensive and hateful, according to the resolution.

Singling Out Smokers

Soon cars carrying minors could become smoke-free zones under legislation introduced by Councilmember James Gennaro. In an attempt to blow away second hand smoke, known to contain 4,000 chemicals, 250 poisons and 43 carcinogens, the bill (Intro 611) would create civil penalties for smoking in a private vehicle with children under 18 years old. It would be enforced by the police department and apply to smoking passengers and drivers.

“ It is my belief that people’s right to privacy doesn’t extend to force-feeding their children cigarettes within the confines of the car,” Gennaro said in a prepared statement. “This legislation will act as a deterrent, will inform parents of the dangers of secondhand smoke and will help to de-normalize smoking.”

On the other hand, some smoking advocates have said the legislation is an invasion of privacy.

Under the bill, fines could be as much as $400 for a first violation and spike to $2,000 for three violations in one year. Rockland County has moved to ban smoking in cars with minors, and similar measures have been adopted in New Jersey, Maine, Puerto Rico, Arkansas and Louisiana.

Nixing Styrofoam in the City

 

Approximately 153 million Styrofoam trays are used by the Department of Education annually to serve lunch to the city's students. Because Styrofoam is not biodegradable, Councilmember Bill de Blasio is hoping to eradicate its use by all city agencies and city-run food establishments.

The legislation (Intro 609) would prohibit the use of Styrofoam, or Polystyrene, and it would apply primarily to city-operated delis or establishments that use the containers for "to-go" items.

Communities across the country, many in California, have adopted similar bans. The councilmember also introduced a companion resolution (Reso 996) urging the city's Department of Education, which is not controlled by the council, to adopt a similar policy.

“ It is mind boggling that our city, which is becoming a leader on environmental issues, is still using Styrofoam when we know it is extremely harmful to our environment and creating massive amounts of waste,” said de Blasio.

The legislation provides for several exemptions, such as when an establishment has exhausted all other alternatives and for "health or safety" reasons cannot find an alternative packing material.

Styrofoam contains the chemicals benzene, styrene and ethylene, which have all been flagged on the Environmental Protection Agency's hazardous substance list. According to the legislation, Styrofoam is also resistant to compacting and takes hundreds of years to decompose.

Fighting Dogs

With the Michael Vick dog fighting scandal as a backdrop, Councilmember Vallone also introduced legislation that would drastically increase fines for harboring or owning a fighting dog.

Under the bill, (Intro 616) maximum civil penalties would be raised from $5,000 to $25,000, while the minimum fine would jump from $500 to $10,000.

Parking Perks for the Blind

Councilmember Joseph Addabbo is attempting to stretch handicap parking to the blind by introducing legislation that (Intro 607) allows those transporting the visually impaired to acquire handicap parking permits. Both transportation and disability advocates have expressed support for the bill.

 

 

 

Citizens Grading Government


As you wait for the subway one morning in the next few weeks, a transit employee may stop you and ask your opinion of the subway you are about to take to work. This spring, the Department of Education and an advocacy group both vied to find out what you think of the school your child attends. And 311 operators tally your complaints to find out whether, like most New Yorkers, you want a little peace and quiet.

For decades, citizens had few opportunities to voice their complaints – or even praise. They could throw the rascals out at the voting both, write an irate letter or show up at a rare public hearing and hope to be called upon and, even less likely, listened to. But now the New York City government, various agencies and advocacy groups are asking citizens what they think and, with that information along with other data, are compiling report cards on everything from bathhouses at city beaches to the safety of city classrooms.

Leading this drive is an effort by the Bloomberg administration to conduct a “customer satisfaction” survey in the next several months to find out what New Yorkers think of their interactions with city agencies. “It’s something we should do,” said Jeffrey Kay, director of the mayor’s Office of Operations, who said the survey is part of a greater focus on customer satisfaction.

MEASURING PERFORMANCE

The surveys, by the government and others, represent a growing trend toward measuring and evaluating public services. This movement accelerated in the 1990s after Compstat, a program pinpointing crime and police efforts to combat it, was widely credited with playing a key role in reducing crime in New York. Since then, many cities have copied the idea – on crime and other issues as well. At the same time, advocacy groups, taking advantage of new technology, picked up on the trend, offering their own report cards and ratings.

The Bloomberg administration has already undertaken a number of steps to measure performance. Like previous administrations, it compiles a Mayor’s Management Report, grading government operations on a number of measures. Much of this information focuses on what social scientists call inputs – the amount of staff time or money spent on a service – and on outputs or easily quantified results. The data is far less likely to indicate the quality of the services offered. So a survey of a park might report that it has six working water fountains but it would not say that the water tastes funny.

The Office of Operations also tabulates the calls to the city’s 311 non-emergency hotline. That information, Kay said, is useful but, “it is complaint driven and not everyone calls.”

At the same time, various city agencies have embarked on their own measurement efforts (some of which are described below), and others distribute cards to New Yorkers who come into their offices, asking them how the visit went: Was the office clean, was the staff friendly and helpful and so on.

A number of experts, in and out of government, have wanted the city to do more. In the 1990s the Fund for the City of New York conducted 15 focus groups, with 151 people from all five boroughs and 29 different communities to find out their concerns about city services. They listed the condition of city streets as a top issue – something that few so-called experts might put so high on the list. Their views sparked the fund’s street smoothness project.

More recently, the Office of the Public Advocate Betsy Gotbaum has been working on its own citizen satisfaction efforts. In fall 2006, her office and the Baruch College School of Public Affairs assembled a group of civic leaders to try to come up with topics and questions for a citizen survey. To get a sense of how such groups can fly in the face of conventional wisdom, they rated "safety from violent crime” only 24th on the “extremely important” list, far below other public safety issues such as police response times, drug abuse and drug dealing and police-community relations.

Now the city is moving forward on a project similar to that envisioned by Gotbaum. Although the administration has not yet worked out many of the details, it does promise that the survey will be part of a more comprehensive look at what citizens think. The idea, said Kay, is to come up with information that is useful to the agencies.

The city has put out a request for proposals, which Kay said was “pretty open” in terms of how the survey is conducted and other issues. For example the survey could be conducted on line, could be mailed or done by telephone.

In planning for a “citywide view of customer satisfaction,” Kay, said he has two key considerations. One, he said, is gathering information that will help agencies better serve their customers – the residents of New York City. And, he said, “we want to make sure we’re not doing anything political.” Partly to address that, he said he expects the public advocate’s office to play a continuing role in the surveys.

Once the survey results are available, sometime next year, the public will be able to learn what they themselves think. “It’s the public’s information,” Kay said.

Beyond the survey, the administration plans to step up the use of “comment cards” in city offices. Although some agencies already solicit feedback, Kay said the city has not had any uniform approach. That, he said, will change.

For its part, the public advocate’s office said it welcomes the opportunity to play a role in the survey. “We’re thrilled that there will finally be a citizens satisfaction survey in New York City being it’s an important tool for government,” said Gotbaum’s chief of staff, Anat Jacobson.

In addition, she said, the office will work with the Fund for the City of New York on another set of focus groups similar to what the fund did in the 1990s. Results of the satisfaction survey will help guide the topics of discussion for the focus groups. Then, Jacobson said, the groups will have discussions aimed at producing the kind of “information you need to make substantive policy recommendations.”

A ROUNDUP OF RATINGS

New Yorkers don’t have to wait until this winter’s results to get a sense of how some government agencies do their job. Already an array of government and advocacy groups are rating services and finding out what citizens think of them. Here is a guide to some of those surveys and ratings.

 
 
Who
What
Information
CITY SERVICES
 
 
Mayor’s Office Mayor’s Management Report
Statistical measure of the work done by every city agency
Mayor’s Office of Operations My Neighborhood Statistics Numbers on an array of issues from 311 complaints to fires – by address and community board
CLEANLINESS
Mayor’s Office of Operations Scorecard Street cleanliness ratings by community board
HEALTH
Health Department Community Health Profiles Health statistics on every neighborhood in the city
Health Department Take Care New York How well are New Yorkers doing on key health indicators
HOUSING
Furman Center for Real Estate and Urban Policy

 

State of New York Neighborhoods A guide to key housing and
demographic information
PARKS
 
 
Parks Department Parks Inspection Program Based on thousands of park inspections a year, rates parks on cleanliness, landscape and structures
New Yorkers for Parks 2007 Report Card on Parks Rates small neighborhood parks on eight service areas

New Yorker for Parks
Report Card on Beaches

A report on conditions at the seven beaches managed by the parks department
SCHOOLS
Department of Education School Report Cards Statistics on every school. New ones, including survey data, will be released next month
Inside Schools Guide to NYC Public Schools An independent group’s report, with statistics and narratives on every public school
TRANSPORTATION
Metropolitan Transportation Authority Rider Report Cards The system is asking riders to rate their lines and expects results shortly
Straphangers Campaign State of the Subway Report Card Looks at six measures for all lines and issues overall ratings

 

City Services

The city has a number of guides to overall services.

-- Mayor’s Management Report: This annual amalgam of statistics is required under the City Charter. Broken down agency by agency, it sets some standards for city services and reports how well the agency has done in meeting those standards. But while the report contains lots of facts, critics often cite what it leaves out.

Commenting on the 2005 report, Glenn Pasanen wrote in Gotham Gazette, “It includes too many insignificant indicators, lacks any overview or sense of priorities, and says little or nothing about such major (and problematic) policies as the reorganization of city schools, big changes in homeless services, the costs of school construction and high levels of overtime among the city’s uniformed services.”

Part of this has to do with the nature of the report, which tends to lean toward information that can be added subtracted, multiplied and divided. Using cultural affairs as an example, Diana Fortuna of the Citizens Budget Commission has written, “The Mayor's Management Report lists payments made to the cultural institutions group and new capital projects initiated. But from the citizens' perspective you could have questions about overall satisfaction with cultural arts programs and whether people feel the city supports a diverse range of cultural programs.”

-- My Neighborhood Statistics: This annual report lets New Yorkers type in their address (or intersection) and get a wealth of data about their neighborhood. This includes a breakdown of 311 complaints, some basic mortality information, a few facts about education, the state of streets and parks and crime information. While not an in depth report, it does provide some intriguing numbers and a kind of statistical thumbnail of any city neighborhood.

Crime

The Police Department issues crime statistics every week. Its report – with city wide, borough and precinct numbers – provides figures on seven major crimes, the number of reports in the past week and how they compare with similar periods in the past.

Education

Perhaps no part of city government is as obsessed with grades and ratings as the Department of Education. Students, of course, have long received grades from teachers, but now students also get marked on a whole battery of standardized tests. Those scores—along with other measures, such as graduation rates, discipline reports and attendance – go into general school report cards and count toward the letter grade that every school will receive.

Now, though, the department will add another measure: the opinions of parents, teachers and students in grades six and up. The department distributed its questionnaires last school year and hopes to have the results available – both on a system wide and school basis – around the time school opens next month. Although the department has not released any preliminary data, School Chancellor Joel Klein has said he is pleased with the response, said Andrews Jacobs, a department spokesman.

Beyond counting toward the grade, the idea, said Jacobs, is to give individual schools “really specific suggestions on how they can improve.” And he added, “We think the people closest to school know best how they can improve.”

Like everything in education, the survey has not been without controversy. Class Size Matters, an advocacy group, in conjunction with the National Center for Schools and Communities at Fordham University issued their own survey. The group has gotten close to 1,000 responses, according to Leonie Haimson, head of Class Size Matters.

Haimson said the group decided to send out its own questions after she and some other education advocates participated in focus groups to help the city shape its questionnaire. In those discussions, Haimson said, parents wanted the survey to include queries on class size, test prep and how responsive principals were to their concerns. But she said, those topics did not make it to the final form. “If it impacts on the quallity of education on the class level, it should be on the survey,” Haimson said.

The city, which has frequently clashed with parents and other advocates over class size, did not include class size, Andrews said, because the department wanted to “put everything in the context of a specific school” rather than confront broader educational policy issues.

Meanwhile, Inside Schools, a private non-profit group, provides reports on all public schools in the city. The group’s reports do not provide a letter grade but include some basic numbers – size, racial breakdown, indicators of test scores and the like – as well as a narrative based on a staff member’s visit to the school. The write-ups, a mainstay for parents looking for schools for their children, also include comments by parents and students.

 

Health

With Michael Bloomberg having made a push to improve public health as a hallmark of his administration, the Department of Health and Mental Hygiene offers a number of measures of New Yorkers’ well being and what the government is doing about it.

-- Take Care New York: This report outlines key health policy measures and reports on how well New Yorkers are meeting specific goals. Undergoing a colonoscopy screening is viewed as an important measure to improve health. So, the report lists how many New Yorkers have taken that step and finds that the number has increased by 44 percent in the last 10 years. Having a primary care physician also promotes health, the city believes, and it finds the number of New Yorkers with their own doctors has climbed slightly in recent years.

--Individual reports: The department also issues papers on specific health problems in New York and the city’s progress in confronting them. One recent paper described the “large and growing toll” taken by diabetes, while another found that cases of childhood lead poisoning have dropped sharply since 1995.

-- Community Health Profiles: These provide in depth information on health in every neighborhood throughout the city, featuring information from how many people in a given community have health insurance to the frequency of binge drinking in a given neighborhood.

Housing

In a city where real estate is an obsession, there is always a hunger for numbers on housing. The City Planning Department offers a number of tools on its site, including Community District Profiles, which are essentially portraits, about 35 pages long, of each community district in the city, based on the 2000 census.

NYU’s Furman Center for Real Estate and Urban Policy analyzes data from the city government and other sources to compile its yearly report on the State of New York City's Housing and Neighborhoods. This book shows how each of the city's communities has been changing and compares community districts, by ranking them on a number of indicators. It also interprets the data in interesting ways, devising, for example, an indicator of racial diversity and of income diversity.

Parks

 

-- Parks Inspection Program: The parks department publishes the results of its inspection of city facilities, giving cleanliness, landscaping and structures a grade of acceptable or unacceptable.

--2007 Report Card on Parks: This annual report by New Yorkers for Parks focuses on small neighborhood parks, reporting on conditions in spaces from one to 20 acres. This year the report card found that, “despite some areas of improvement, overall the parks are in worse shape than last year,” Anne Schwartz wrote in Gotham Gazette. The report card concluded that parks that have access to private funds tend to score high, while maintenance remains a problem at many parks that rely exclusively on private funding.

The parks department disputed those findings. The report card "flies in the face of reality, which is that parks continue to get better," parks Commissioner Adrian Benepe has said.

-- Report Card on Beaches 2007: Another project of New Yorkers for Parks, this report card rates conditions at the seven beaches run by the city parks department. In general, the report finds room for improvement.

Street Cleanliness

This report, compiled by the Mayor’s Office of Operations, rates all community boards on the cleanliness of their streets and sidewalks on a scale of 1 to 3, with 1 being the cleanest, 3 the dirtiest and any place scoring above 1.5 not considered “acceptably clean.” The rating is based on public perception, inspection and looking at photographs. The ratings, though, are for an entire community board so if you cannot use it as ammunition against your slovenly neighbor.

This fall, though, the city will take this a step further, sending out teams on scooters to inspect every street in the city for potholes, litter and other irritants of life in the city.

 

Transit

 

The Metropolitan Transit Authority is going line by line, asking riders to grade their subways. Straphangers can award letter grades on 22 different measures, covering such areas as delays, cleanliness, announcements and graffiti. The report card form, issued in 14 different languages, is being distributed in subway stations on designated days (the MTA handed them out in Number 7 and L stations earlier this month) and can also be completed on line by clicking here. So far, the response has been larger than anticipated, according to the MTA.

“People are taking us up on the opportunity to open a dialogue,” said Paul Fleuranges, vice president for corporate communications for New York City Transit. “If you don’t vote, you can’t complain. It’s the same sentiment here.”

Fleuranges said the results will be released to the public. Perhaps more importantly to riders, though, the results of the survey will guide MTA decisions. “Asking riders what improvements they would like to see will allow us to invest scarce resources in areas that will contribute the most to an overall improvement in customer satisfaction,” NYC Transit President Howard H. Roberts, Jr. said in a written statement.

The private Straphangers Campaign has been rating subways for a number of years in its State of the Subways Report Card. Like the transit authority, Straphangers goes line by line, evaluating the trains on a variety of criteria. Much of this material comes from transit authority data and observations by Straphangers staff.  

Stated Meeting: Making Room in Litter Baskets


New Yorkers will have to keep their residential trash out of public litter baskets or face a fine of up to $400 under legislation unanimously approved by the City Council.

At its stated meeting on August 22, the City Council sharply increased fines for dumping residential or commercial waste in public litter baskets. The council also approved a Business Improvement District for Sunnyside, Queens, passed legislation requiring certain payments to city contractors be made electronically and made a technical correction to the Brooklyn Navy Yard/North Brooklyn Empire Zone.

Trash Cans for Public Use Only, Not Personal

The Department of Sanitation has long estimated that 20 percent of trash collected from public litter baskets is either residential or commercial waste. To deter businesses or residents from using these baskets as personal dumping grounds, Councilmember Michael McMahon introduced (Intro 110-A) legislation, which raises fines by approximately 30 to 300 percent.

Under the new legislation, the penalty for the first violation will increase to $100 to $300 from a range of $25 to $100; the second violation from $100 to $200 to between $250 and $350; and the third violation will be raised from $200 to $300 to $350 to $400. Higher fines would apply to subsequent violations that occur within a year of the first violation.

The increased fines, said McMahon, who is chair of the council's Committee on Sanitation and Solid Waste Management, will free up space in public wastebaskets and, in turn, keep New York City's streets cleaner.

" The problem we have is our public litter baskets become overfilled and the trash overflows," said McMahon "It's not only unsightly, but (the baskets) themselves become the source of litter."

McMahon said the Department of Sanitation will identify violators at its own "discretion," typically by finding addresses or names from bundled trash in a public basket and from observation of certain street corners. The legislation, which was approved by a vote of 43 to 0, also incorporates a presumption that any trash with identifying information, such as addresses or names, in fact belongs to the individual who committed the violation.

To fight this presumption, the individual would have to appear before the Environmental Control Board, officials said. McMahon estimates the Department of Sanitation issued approximately 2,500 violations for illegal dumping of this kind last year.

" The fines aren't being raised to generate revenue," said City Council Speaker Christine Quinn. "They are being raised as a deterrent."

Brightening Sunnyside

The City Council also unanimously approved a Business Improvement District in Sunnyside, Queens (Intro 585) to boost business in the area. The district will include 92 properties and 300 businesses.

According to a report from the council's Finance Committee, the district will receive $300,000 its first year, and the funding will be distributed to various projects aimed at cleaning up the neighborhood, such as graffiti removal, maintenance, sanitation and holiday lighting.

As of July, there were 56 business improvement districts throughout the five boroughs, which provide $83 million in services annually.

No More Checks for City Contractors

At the suggestion of Mayor Michael Bloomberg, the council also approved legislation (Intro 570-A) requiring all city contractors be paid electronically if their contract exceeds $25,000. The legislation aims to reduce bureaucracy and paperwork and save money on postage by mandating an electronic funds transfer for these payments, which will also help reduce the nearly 800,000 checks cut by the city annually.

" The elimination of postage, as well as unnecessary bank costs, is the logical next step in generating savings for the city," said Councilmember Letitia James, chair of the Contracts Committee. "This legislation is designed to help both the city of New York and contractors manage their funds more effectively."

Empire Zone

The council also made a minor change (Intro 603-A) to an Empire Zone in North Brooklyn and the Brooklyn Navy Yard after a parcel was inadvertently excluded from legislation approved last year. Overall, the Empire Zone entitles tenants in the area to certain business incentives and tax breaks.

 



Print Friendly and PDF

Editor's Choice


Gotham Gazette: New York Voters Approve $4.2 Billion Environmental Bond Act
New York Voters Approve $4.2 Billion Environmental Bond Act
Gotham Gazette: 
New York City Voters Approve Racial Justice Ballot Measures
New York City Voters Approve Racial Justice Ballot Measures
Gotham Gazette: 
Housing Development in New York City Slows to a Crawl as Officials Debate Tax Incentives
Housing Development in New York City Slows to a Crawl as Officials Debate Tax Incentives
Gotham Gazette: 
City Council Examines Low Voter Turnout, Moving Local Elections to Even Years City Council Examines Low Voter Turnout, Moving Local Elections to Even Years