Gotham Gazette

The Place for New York Policy and politics

Open Government

Smart Meters


In the aftermath of last summer’s blackout in northwest Queens, the one question many New Yorkers seemed to be asking was: How come nobody knew how many households were without power?

But a few weeks later, a similar situation was averted in Kips Bay in Manhattan, when Con Edison, the city’s leading utility, used its access to real-time information of energy use to go door-to-door to area businesses and encourage them to use their electricity sparingly.

If knowledge is power, knowledge of power is essential for Con Ed to maintain the city’s power supply. But now some public officials both nationwide and in New York City are asking a different question: What if residents of every apartment also had access to real-time information about their own electric consumption? Would it change their behavior – and benefit the city as a whole? This is the promise of what are being called smart meters.

The price of electric power is based on the price in effect at the time of peak demand. The typical bill from Con Ed contains a graph that shows how these prices fluctuated throughout the month. Standard meters closely track how many kilowatt-hours each consumer uses, and the peak points of use per day, but are not designed to convey this information to consumers. Smart meters -- “communication systems that can capture and transmit energy use information as it happens”, according to the New York State Energy Research and Development Authority -- allow consumers to keep much better track of their power usage. For example, if you discover that the peak period of energy use on a Tuesday usually comes around 3:30 PM, you can run the dishwasher Tuesday evening and save money. Some smart meters can even inform consumers when their energy bill is approaching a pre-selected amount.

Given these more robust functions, it is not surprising that smart meters cost more than standard meters. A standard meter retails for around $30, while smart meters can cost anywhere from $100 to $600. However, this greater initial investment should pay for itself in energy savings over time. Advocates of smart meters estimate that consumers will reduce energy consumption by 10 percent, thereby lowering their bills.

It is hard to argue with the benefits of reducing strain on the energy grid, while simultaneously reducing electric bills. But it is worth keeping in mind that smart meters are not a panacea for our energy challenges. After all, smart meters do not encourage reduction in energy usage so much as redistribution of energy usage. If every city apartment made use of the information available on smart meters, it is theoretically possible that the peak loads we experience today would come to be evenly distributed throughout the course of a 24 hour period. This would soften the peaks and save consumers money, but not reduce overall electric consumption very much.

This is a philosophical quibble; it is much more likely that peak load times will always exist, so that any shift away from usage during those times is positive. My larger concern is about the heavy focus on private apartments, given that the city’s largest consumers of energy are major corporations. Most office buildings leave their lights on after hours, and Times Square is not Times Square without the wasteful use of electricity.

While it is good to encourage individual conservation, a truly comprehensive conservation strategy would focus more heavily on the private sector. For a city expecting to add 1,000,000 residents over the next 20 years, smart meters will not solve our energy challenges.

On Nov. 14, 2006 the City Council’s Committee on Consumer Affairs considered a resolution sponsored by Councilmember Gale A. Brewer, which calls upon the New York State Public Services Commission “to allow individual apartments to access real-time energy pricing through the use of smart meters”.

In August 2006 the Public Services Commission issued an order directing all state utilities to “develop and deploy, to the extent feasible and cost effective, advanced metering systems for the benefit of all customers”. The state’s move followed passage of the federal Energy Policy Act of 2005, which established strong national incentives for the installation of smart meters .

Given this history, the City Council’s recent actions are an attempt to expedite the inevitable installation of smart meters. Thirty-one states have already experimented with smart meters, and some analysts expect a 20 percent increase in smart meter usage each year for the next decade .

Smart meters are not a bad way to encourage conservation. But we must be smart enough to recognize that installing a better meter is no substitute for developing a comprehensive conservation policy.

 

New Bills -- Nightlife Legislation, Tighter Agency Oversight, and Disclosure on Slavery


At each of the City Council's stated meetings, council members introduce bills, most of which will never become laws (for the process by which bills become laws, click here). As a regular feature, Gotham Gazette discusses some of the legislation proposed at each meeting.

At its most recent stated meeting on November 15, members of the City Council introduced more bills that would put more regulations on nightlife, tighten oversight of city agencies, and require disclosure from businesses who profited from slavery.

 

MORE ON DRINKING AND NIGHTLIFE

 

Members of the city council introduced two more bills in their three-month campaign to improve nightlife safety and curb underage drinking.

Councilmember Peter Vallone, Jr., who authored another nightlife bill last month, submitted Intro 479, which punishes those who knowingly allow minors to drink in their homes. Also, Councilmember Melinda Katz put forth Intro 475 to tighten restrictions against clubs that admit minors without their parents.

"Considering how everything has been going in the city of New York, it will make the nightclub establishment a better place," Katz said of her bill.

Councilmembers James Sanders, Jr. and Annabel Palma lashed out against the makers of the "Cocaine" energy drink, who market the product by comparing it to the drug. Resolution 610 calls on local stores to discontinue sales of the drink. The resolution is a request, not an actual ban on the product.

"The founder [of the drink] needs to be reminded that this plague has caused violence, death, and imprisonment in our community," Sanders said, referring the actual drug. "Is there nothing that we won't do for a dollar bill?"

 

OVERSIGHT ON CITY AGENCIES

 

Two councilmembers introduced bills aimed at increasing oversight of city agencies.

City council officials said there is a need for continued, long-term information about the health of first responders at the World Trade Center. Councilmember Joseph Addabbo proposed Intro 468, which would require the Department of Health and Mental Hygiene to issue an annual report on the World Trade Center Health Registry, detailing the health status and treatment of those who are registered.

In response to several high profile child deaths in the city this year, Councilmember Bill deBlasio proposed Intro 471, a bill that would create a seven-member commission to conduct a review the city's child welfare system. The commission's duties would include examining the Administration for Children's Services' policies and procedures, case files, and ability to conduct investigations and coordinate with other agencies. Within a year of the passage of the bill, the commission would submit a report to the mayor and the speaker of the council. DeBlasio said there ultimately needs to "be greater confidence in ACS and more reason for people to report [incidents of child abuse]."

 

COMPANIES THAT PROFITED FROM SLAVERY

 

Councilmember Charles Barron submitted a bill that would require city contractors to disclose if they had ever engaged in or profited from slavery. Citing action by several major companies and similar legislation in other U.S. cities, Intro 469 calls for potential contractors "to search their past" and reveal the information as the country continues to revisit the history of slavery.

The City Council Votes Itself A Raise


Every two weeks the New York City Council holds its "Stated Meeting" to introduce and pass legislation. As a regular feature, Gotham Gazette covers these meetings.

Quote of the Day: "I am proud to be a member of the City Council, and if I could and I had to, I would do it for nothing. But I can't get Ithaca College to give my son room and board for nothing, I can't get Sunoco to give me free gas, and I can't get my mortgage company to waive my mortgage." – Lew Fiddler

PAY RAISES FOR PUBLIC OFFICIALS

The City Council approved a bill that would give its members a raise at its meeting on November 15. The legislation was based on recommendations recently made by a mayoral commission that considers pay raises for public officials every four years. It would also grant raises to the mayor, public advocate, city comptroller, district attorneys and borough presidents.

Mayor Bloomberg must still approve the measure; if he does, the raises will be retroactive to November 1, 2006.

The council chambers were spirited as many members argued that a pay increase was overdue.

"I am proud to be a member of the City Council, and if I could and I had to, I would do it for nothing," said Councilmember Lew Fiddler. "But I can't get Ithaca College to give my son room and board for nothing, I can't get Sunoco to give me free gas, and I can't get my mortgage company to waive my mortgage."

Public officials have not gotten a raise in seven years. The mayor did not convene a commission to recommend adjustments in pay in 2003, when he was last required to, citing of the weak financial state the city was in at that time. The council's base pay will rise 25 percent from $90,000 to $112,000. (Click here for an article giving details on the specific raises for various public officials).

Many agree that public officials should get a raise. Others think that public officials should not be able to give themselves raises without the explicit approval of the voters, and good government groups (including Citizens Union, whose sister organization publishes Gotham Gazette) wanted to tie pay raises to reform measures.

 

 

 

 

The Daily News argued that "serious legislatures respect the principle that lawmakers should hike salaries for future officeholders, not their own salaries."

The idea also had its opponents within the council itself.

Councilmember Tony Avella took the rare step of proposing an amendment for the entire council to consider, proposing the attachment of what he described as reform measures.

First off, Avella proposed eliminating so-called lulus, stipends given to members of the council who serve as chairs of committees. Avella says these stipends are a mechanism through which the council leadership can control the individual members, and already refuses to accept extra payment for his role as head of the subcommittee on zoning and franchises.

Avella also wanted to restrict council members from holding outside jobs, arguing that serving on the council is a full time position. At least 17 members of the council earn outside income, some of them making hundreds of thousands of dollars in addition to their $90,000 council salary.

To a certain extent, these proposals mirrored recommendations by the mayor's commission calling for council jobs to be officially designated as full-time, and describing committee stipends as an area that is "ripe for reform."

Avella's amendment also called for a measure not mentioned in the commission's report: moving the effective date of the legislation to 2010, so that the council would not be voting on its own raises.

"I firmly believe that it is unethical for this body to vote itself a raise, and no excuse, no reasoning can make it so," he said. "The only legitimate way to do this is to vote it for the next class of council members."

Avella's amendment was voted down, with 43 no votes, two yes votes (himself and Councilmember Diane Mealy), and one abstention (Councilmember Hiram Monserrate). The council then approved the original bill by a vote of 41 to 5, with Councilmembers Avella, Andrew Lanza, Michael McMahon, Mealy, and Monserrate voting no. Councilmembers Maria Baez, Annabel Palma, Yvette Clarke, Inez Dickens and Kendall Stewart were absent and did not vote.

Quinn said the issues raised by the mayor's commission and Councilmember Avella would be considered in the future, although she said she supported stipends for committee chairs and did not think it was unethical for the council to give itself a raise.

Quinn plans to spend some, but not all, of her newfound income on charity. Decisions about changes to her spending, she added, will come only after "complete and full consultation with [her] domestic partner."

ILLEGAL DEMOLITION

The council also passed two bills intended to toughen the city's response to illegal demolition work. Speaker Quinn argued that such action was needed to protect worker safety, especially after several high profile deaths at construction sites. The new bills will also protect the city from "willy nilly development" that destroys historic neighborhoods, she said. During the meeting, the bills' sponsors stressed their utility as enforcement measures to prevent illegal overdevelopment.

Councilmember Dominec Recchia of Brooklyn, who sponsored one of the bills, believes that the Buildings Department currently does not have the power to stop demolition companies from acting illegally. The fines the city can levy are far smaller than the profit to be had by ignoring the laws and proceeding without the proper permits, he said. Because of this, Recchia complained, he had no good course of action even in cases when he could show that demolition companies were taking down buildings illegally.

"The demolition companies were laughing in my face," said Recchia. "They just have a total disregard for the citizens of this city."

Recchia's bill would make it a misdemeanor to demolish a house with a proper permit; currently it is only a violation. If convicted, violators would face a fine of $5,000 to $10,000, six months in jail, or both. The current fine is $250.

The other bill, sponsored by Vincent Gentile, would take similar action against contractors who violate stop work orders. Both have to be signed by the mayor.

During the meeting, Councilmember James Vacca said that action should also be taken to tighten restrictions on people who improperly use alteration permits, claiming that developers in his Bronx district are filing for such permits and then illegally demolishing entire buildings.

"They often file for alterations when they can't meet new zoning [regulations]…. in order to be grandfathered in under old zoning that we successfully altered to change," he said.

 

What Does It Mean for New York?


The World Is Now Perfect

By Angelo FalcĂłn

As a result of these past elections, peace will return to the world, poverty will disappear, everyone will be able to afford college, socialized medicine will be adopted, civil liberties will be totally restored, torture will cease, foreigners will love us once again, Latino immigrants will all be warmly welcomed, public school teachers will receive starting salaries of $100,000 and Michael Bloomberg will register once again as a Democrat. Our Congressional delegation – Charles Schumer, Hillary Clinton, Charles Rangel, Jerold Nadler, Anthony Weiner, Nydia Velazquez, Jose Serrano and others – will occupy powerful positions in the Congress that will bring billions more into New York City’s coffers. Socialism will finally come to America.

Yes, expectations resulting from this election may be a little out of control in some quarters, but I expect with a little time (perhaps a week) reality will once again set in. True, the Democrats will restore their place as players and agenda-setters in the Congress, but under our federal system of government, they still have to contend with executive and judicial branches that have eroded democracy in profound ways. It will take some time just to get the federal government back to a place where rational policymaking will be possible once again.

The power shift that we have just witnessed must be seen as a first step in a long-term strategy to undo the tremendous damage that the Bush Administration and extreme Republicans have done to the country on so many different levels. This moment must be seen as the beginning of a long fight to return democracy and competence to the federal government, but one whose outcome is not at all clear. Will the Democrats, with an eye toward the 2008 presidential elections, continue to present themselves as Republican Lights, or will they become more aggressive in making sure that this country realizes it promise of equality and fairness? Clearly, this election has raised expectations about what is possible. The question is: can we keep these expectations raised long enough to make the Democratic Party more daring and creative than it has been for far too long?

Angelo FalcĂłn is president and founder of the National Institute for Latino Policy

Congressional Clout

By Jerry Skurnik

With New York City being one of the most “blue” parts of one of the most “blue” states, the election results for 2006 are good news for the city. After 12 years in the minority, the city’s Democratic congressional delegation should have enough influence to be able deliver quite a bit.

The possible changes in national priorities will make the federal government more in line with the thinking of most New Yorkers. But it will be in the fairly obscure work done by Congress – an amendment to a banking bill, a slight change in the formula to fund some projects, a minor appropriation -- where the difference between being in the congressional majority and minority is greatest.

It is already well known that Representative Charles Rangel will become chairman of the most important House committee,Ways and Means; Representative Nydia Velazquez will chair the Small Business Committee; and Senator Charles Schumer deserves much of the credit for the Democratic wins because of his role as chairman of the Democratic Senate Campaign Committee.

But another reason why we will have clout is New York City’s representatives are all on committees that can benefit the city. I am old enough to remember when New York’s Congress members were criticized for caring more about foreign policy and wildlife in Alaska than they were in jobs for New Yorkers. If that was once true, it isn’t anymore.

Every New York City member of Congress is on a committee important to New York. Some are also on the International Relations and Armed Services committees, but we New Yorkers don’t want all our representatives to be too parochial.

Schumer is on the Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs Committee and Senator Hillary Clinton is on Health, Education, Labor and Pensions.

Representatives Gary Ackerman, Gregory Meeks, Joe Crowley, Vito Fosella, Carolyn Maloney and Velazquez are all on the Financial Services Committee.

Representatives Jerrold Nadler and Anthony Weiner are on Transportation and Infrastructure.

Representatives Ed Towns, Fosella and Eliot Engel are on the Energy and Commerce Committee.

Representative Jose Serrano is on the Appropriations Committee.

And some of these representatives now have enough seniority to become sub-committee chairs, which will only increase their power.

I’m sure Mayor Michael Bloomberg and Governor-elect Eliot Spitzer will not get too exuberant over all this. Having Democratic control of Congress is not a solution to the city’s problems – remember Democrats controlled both Houses of Congress from 1955 to 1981 and everything wasn’t great then. But I’m equally sure that both Bloomberg and Spitzer are happier than they would have been if the alternative had occurred and Republicans had increased their congressional control.

Jerry Skurnik, a partner in Prime New York, a political consulting firm, comments on politics for the Room 8 blog.

An Urban Agenda in Congress?

By Douglas Muzzio

The switch to Democratic control in Congress is a dramatic development, particularly for New Yorkers. The changes create limitless possibilities.

One is increased funding for discreet projects – which many call pork barrel – in the city and state. There could be a more urban-centered policy agenda in both houses of Congress. While I don’t know if this will be the case, it is certainly a more plausible possibility than it would have been if the Republicans had retained control.

There are a number of issues the New York delegation might be interested in pushing: immigration and gun control, to mention two. More equitable funding for mass transportation is another. Now, the formula that allocates money is skewed against the city very intentionally, even though we account for a substantial share of all mass transit riders in the country. Federal funding for schools presents a similar problem and another issue Congress could address.

Of course, the fact that Democrats have the majority in both houses does not guarantee any lock-step Democratic policy agenda. Democrats will agree on certain broad policy outlines, but they certainly will not be monolithic in the way that the Republicans have been monolithic. The Democratic camp is simply much larger, both in terms of constituencies as well as the elected representatives.

But despite that, the changes in Washington are really dramatic for New York. The state’s two senators, who were in the minority, now are in the majority, and the same holds true for every one of New York’s Democratic congress people. With Charles Rangel likely to be chairman of the Ways and Means Committee, the New York delegation gets the most powerful committee chair in the House – the one that deals with the House’s power of the purse.

Louise Slaughter from the Rochester area is in line to head the Rules Committee. This may well be the second most powerful committee in Congress because it is where all bills go. The priority given to those bills is determined by the Rules Committee. So, two of the premier committees in the House will be chaired by members of the New York State delegation.

Beyond this, the election gave the state’s delegation more power because the state added Democratic seats on Election Day. Before, the state’s delegation had 20 Democrats and nine Republicans; now there are 23 Democrats and only six Republicans.

On the flip side, there are New Yorkers who will suffer. Representative Vito Fossella, the lone Republican in the city’s congressional delegation, moves from the majority to the minority -- and he’s in an isolated minority. People used to talk about him as the person you had to go to in Congress because he was a member of the majority. Well, he isn’t the guy to go to anymore.

With such a dramatic power shift in Washington, it is too soon to know specifically what will happen. But regardless of how things work out, we have to do better than we have done for the past several years.

Douglas Muzzio is a professor at the Baruch College School of Public Affairs and a political analyst and on-air commentator for WABC-TV.

Mighty Wind of Change, or a Breeze?

By Julia Willebrand

As the Green Party candidate for comptroller, I was not surprised that Alan Hevesi won. But what does a victory mean, when the election system did not allow all the candidates a fair chance to reach the public?

The Democrats won a clear victory nationally as well. But what will it mean to New Yorkers? The proposed Democratic policy initiatives will surely disappoint the more than 60 percent of Americans who oppose the war and the nearly 70 percent who want a national health insurance system. With several years to plan for this day, what is the House and Senate Democratic leadership offering the American people, which gave them control of both houses of Congress?

Nancy Pelosi, soon to be Speaker of the House, smiles charmingly with vague promises of bipartisanship and a change of direction in the war. Harry Reid, likely Senate Majority Leader in January, unforcefully vows an increase in the minimum wage to $7.75. Instead of fighting for national health insurance, he tepidly plans to negotiate with drug companies over Medicare Part D prescription prices. His promises can generate little excitement in New York, where the state minimum wage increases in January to $7.10 and 28 percent of working age adults in NYC have no health insurance.

Is there something to inspire New Yorkers in the power shift within our state? Will winds of change prevail when Eliot Spitzer replaces Governor George Pataki in the triumvirate (with Senate Majority Leader Joseph Bruno and Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver) that is widely understood to call all the shots? Or will it be a mild sea-breeze?

The governor-elect is perceived by the electorate as a reformer. As a reformer he could respond to calls for change by shifting in a progressive direction.

For instance, statewide there is a near constant cry for tax relief. Unfortunately, elected officials and good-government groups usually treat tax relief as a zero sum game often framed as: The state can provide pensions to state employees; but these benefits will inordinately inflate state and local government budgets; therefore, in order to provide the benefit, we must increase taxes. The choice offered is cut pensions or increase taxes.

But, the frame could be changed and another choice offered. Every low interest loan, handout, tax subsidy, tax rebate, PILOT to a for-profit corporation is a budget expenditure that amounts to a tax increase on the rest of the citizens of the state. Rather than cut retiree pensions, we could cut developer handouts, and end tax rebates to mall owners. We could stop the blackmail of “pay us or we won't build” or “subsidize our stadium or we will move” by refusing these giveaways.

This week the Economic Development Corporation is preparing to give a $37 million tax subsidy for a new office building in the NYC diamond district to the Extell Development Corporation. Replacing Extell's unpaid taxes of $37 million will necessitate higher taxes for everyone else. Further, present diamond-district landlords stand to suffer severe loss of revenue when the new skyscraper offers its one-year free rent inducement. Why should one landlord be favored over many others? Governor-elect Spitzer could take a progressive lead by announcing his disapproval of private corporations that pay their way by dipping into the public pocket.

Changing the Albany culture of developer dependency requires information. Our new governor could establish a state level Independent Budget Office, modeled on the NYC IBO. Once established Spitzer or the Comptroller could require that new IBO to provide New Yorkers with quarterly statements on lost revenues resulting from developer handouts. This kind of information could be a first step to rational budgeting. With full information on giveaways and handouts, citizens would be able to make real choices. The public is being ripped off by its politicians who invite a small number of private concerns to dip into the cookie jar. This could be reversed. With full information on giveaways, citizens and their representatives would be able to make rational choices that would benefit the vast majority.

Governor Spitzer can continue present practice or he can bring big change “from day one” for all New York's citizens. Which will he do? I am hoping that he will change both the culture of Albany and the direction of public policy.

Another area that the new governor can improve greatly is the fairness of our election system. Given the landslide nature of the Mr. Spitzer’s win, the obscurity of the comptroller’s office, and the Democrat enrollment advantage in the state, Mr. Hevesi’s win was to be expected. However, the inevitability of the outcome might have been mitigated by televised debates. My vision, and Mr. Callaghan's, of what the office could and should do are dramatically different from the incumbent's. When I spoke at candidate forums, audiences were shocked to learn how unaccountable the comptroller is. For instance, Mr. Hevesi recently pushed through the legislature a change that allows him to use pension funds to buy anything a “prudent investor” would invest in. This means that there are no longer limitations that prevent the comptroller from investing in, say, a hedge fund such as Amaranth, which just lost $5 billion, or more than 50 percent of its total assets.

All three small-party comptroller candidates benefited from Mr. Hevesi's chauffergate scandal. But I believe that my surprising vote totals were partly due to something else. Every time I told the comptroller's office story, people would come up to me and say, “I'm going to vote for you.” Information is powerful. Getting it out is difficult.

Julia Willebrand received more than 100,000 votes as the Green Party candidate for New York State Comptroller.

Taking on Special Interests

By Nicole Gelinas

Governor Eliot Spitzer could do much for the City of New York by cutting through Albany’s firewall of special interests to tilt the balance of the Empire State’s taxing and spending toward the public interest. To do that, he will have to battle Albany’s self-serving culture.

Special-interest influence in Albany distorts not only the state’s priorities; it distorts the city’s priorities as well. Consider: New York City spends $5 billion annually on pension benefits for city employees and $2 billion annually on Medicaid services for the poor, comprising nearly 20 percent of the city’s taxpayer-funded budget. But the city has little direct control over this spending, as the State Legislature and the governor, not the City Council and the mayor, determine pension and Medicaid benefits.

To address this, Spitzer and Mayor Michael Bloomberg could sit down during the governor’s first term and work on a new pension plan for future employees, particularly for employees who work at desk jobs rather than at vital public-safety jobs. This would enable the city to better manage future pension costs. The two leaders could also work on slicing the bloat out of the state’s Medicaid program, which costs nearly twice as much per patient as the national average without providing twice as many public-health benefits.

But if the new governor introduces even modest reforms, he will run right into Albany’s mass of self-interested parties. Albany is famous for backroom dealings and equally famous for bestowing rewards on the special-interest groups that provide the most money to maintain business as usual.

To wit: the state’s largest health-care workers’ union, Service Employees International Union 1199, is fearful of meaningful Medicaid reforms and the effect such reforms might have on its 250,000 members’ jobs and wages. The union wields great power over the two houses of the legislature, through its financial contributions and get-out-the-vote efforts. The unions that represent the city and state’s public sector employees, which fiercely protect their members’ pension benefits, wield similar power. These influential factions would protest vigorously against any proposed changes to the status-quo.

Spitzer’s renowned stubbornness, along with his reputation for integrity, could prove to be his best weapons in a battle with these forces. The governor-elect has already made a strong start in changing Albany’s tone. Last week, Spitzer set an example for above-board transparency in the executive office by announcing a Web site through which anyone can apply for top-level jobs in his administration. The governor-elect has promised that he will not hand out such jobs based on party affiliation, only on merit. Further, it is a good sign that that powerful local 1199 chief Dennis Rivera declined to endorse a candidate in the governor’s race. Because of that, Spitzer now owes him no favors.

If Spitzer can reform Albany, the rewards will be great for Gotham, for Gotham needs to realign its investments in its future. The city and state have both neglected the city’s essential public infrastructure, like subways and roads, as social-services and pension spending has consumed more of their budgets.

If the new governor can re-balance Albany away from the special interests and toward the public interest, more taxpayer dollars, both city and state, could support growth in the city’s private-sector economy rather than feed its public-sector economy.

Nicole Gelinas is a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute.

 

Gay Rights Moves Forward

By Christopher Murray

Members of the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) community in New York City seem uniformly optimistic after the rout of the Republican majority in Congress.

Many of New York City's leaders who are good friends of the gay community are likely to be moving into positions of significantly heightened influence. "Just having Congressman Charles Rangel, who is such an advocate for the gay community and on HIV/AIDS issues, as chair of Ways and Means is going to have an unbelievable impact locally," says Brooklyn's gay Democratic district leader Alan Fleishman. According to Fleishman, Congressman Anthony Weiner is very close to the Speaker-Elect Nancy Pelosi as well as to Congressman John Murtha who may well be the next Majority Leader. "Urban centers like New York tend to be where lesbian and gay power is concentrated," Fleishman said. "Now all our strong allies will be in the majority, like Congressmembers Nydia Velazquez, Joseph Crowley and Jose Serrano."

Gary Parker, founder of Greater Voices, the coalition of all the progressive gay political clubs in the city, points out that local LGBT organizations stand to benefit markedly from increased federal funding. "Places like the Gay & Lesbian Anti-Violence Project, or the LGBT Center, or the Ali Forney Center that helps homeless queer youth, now all may be able to better serve those who so need their help with more dollars in the pipe line from Washington."

The LGBT community expects an Eliot Spitzer-led administration in Albany to move the gay marriage issue forward. Spitzer, Lieutenant Governor-elect David Patterson, Attorney General-elect Andrew Cuomo and re-elected, if tarnished, Comptroller Alan Hevesi all campiagned as in support of gay marriage. While Senators Hillary Rodham Clinton and Charles Schumer remain opposed, gay leaders like Alan Van Capelle of the Empire State Pride Agenda, will be organizing New York City-based grass roots efforts and donors for a full-frontal assault on the state legislature on the issue come January. In an email following the election, Van Capelle said, "Some believed it would be difficult to run for statewide office and support us on our issues, especially marriage equality. Today we know that not only can you stand with our community and win statewide office, but you can also win in a very BIG way."

Still, some local groups remain wary of hitching the entire gay parade to the marriage issue. Queers for Economic Justice spearheaded a trenchant critique of gay marriage and Miriam Yeung, the Director of Public Policy at the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual & Transgender Community Center, cautions against gay marriage becoming the sole issue for this demographic slice of the electorate. "While we're excited about the prospect of having a governor who supports our issues," she said, "I'm hoping that same sex marriage doesn't become what the death penalty was in the eighties: the one thing that electeds could vaguely say they support and not have to do anything on."

Christopher Murray, a social worker, is co-president of Lambda Independent Democrats, Brooklyn's lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender political club.

Helping Small Businesses

By Jonathan Bowles

Democratic control of Congress and the elevation of New York City Congresswoman Nydia Velazquez to the head of the House's Small Business Committee has the potential to change Washington's dialogue about small business.

Small businesses are creating the majority of new jobs in New York and nationwide. Yet in the past several years, President Bush repeatedly tried to cut or eliminate critical financing and technical assistance programs for small businesses, from the Small Business Administration’s micro-loan program to the Treasury Department’s CDFI Fund. Meanwhile, some Republican members of Congress were even considering doing away with the Small Business Administration, an agency that has had its problems but has been wildly successful in helping address one of the biggest problems facing small firms: accessing capital. Congressional supporters recently have had to focus most of their energies on staving off these shortsighted proposals. Instead, legislators should look to expand federal support for programs that help entrepreneurs start and grow businesses.

Perhaps most important for New York are the programs that help small-scale entrepreneurs access micro-loans ranging from a few hundred dollars to $50,000 and receive assistance on everything from writing a business plan to complying with local regulations. Like so many other cities, New York is home to hordes of entrepreneurs who depend on these programs. Many are minorities and immigrants who either have no credit history or don’t meet standard criteria to access traditional bank loans. There are a number of well-respected community-based organizations in the five boroughs that provide micro-loans and technical assistance to these micro-businesses, but many of the groups have experienced funding cuts in recent years.

In New York City, 158 businesses received loans through the micro-loan program in 2005. Yet, federal support for this program dropped from $19 million in fiscal year 2000 to under $13 million in fiscal year 2006. Earlier this year, President Bush tried to eliminate the program entirely. The CDFI Fund and the PRIME program have also sustained cuts, while support for the SBA-funded Small Business Development Centers in New York has not expanded to meet the increased need.

When it comes to these crucial small business programs, we've been playing defense. Hopefully with Democratic control of Congress and Representative Velazquez as the head of the House's small business committee we bolster support for this growing part of our economy.

Jonathan Bowles is the director of the Center for an Urban Future.

New Energy to Combat Predatory Lending?

 

By Mark Winston Griffith

At first blush, with the explosion of high cost financial products and predatory lending over the last ten years, it’s difficult for New Yorkers -– or anyone else in the country for that matter –- to be optimistic about the government’s willingness to reign in the banking and financial services industry. Even when you consider that New York State’s financial justice advocacy environment is more progressive than most, everything from credit cards to mortgage lending is largely –- but not exclusively -- regulated at the federal level.

Nonetheless, all eyes will be trained on Governor-elect Eliot Spitzer, who as attorney general proved to show less tolerance for predatory and exploitative financial practices than New Yorkers have seen in some time. Spitzer gained respect in advocacy corners for suing H & R block for steering customers to junk IRAs. He also recently said publicly that as governor he would curtail abusive debt collection and look into the practice of companies selling off their debt, even going as far as saying “There is a key link between sold-off debt and illegal and abusive practices.”

Spitzer’s choice for Superintendent of the State Banking department will, some hope, be less conciliatory to state-chartered banks. The current superintendent, Diana Taylor, has been perceived by some as too anxious to allow banks to indulge in questionable practices, like bounce protection, a high-cost, low quality alternative to a line of credit.

In fact, conditions may be ripe for a new era of consumer protection in the financial services industry, with New York helping to lead the way nationally. For instance, a law was recently passed in New York State that clamps down on an increasingly widespread form of real estate fraud called deed theft. Also, even as tax preparers like H&R block, Jackson Hewitt and Liberty Tax Services expand a particularly high cost form of lending called refund anticipation loans that is marketed heavily to low-income customers, there is mounting pressure to force companies to discontinue this product. There seems to be a growing chorus of advocates, elected officials and pissed-off consumers who are searching for ways to re-regulate the financial services industry. There are even two new documentaries that are highly critical of the banking and financial services industry ready to hit the screen, In Debt We Trust and Maxed Out.

Now, with a new sheriff in town, there just might finally be enough guns to run at least some of the bad guys out of town.

Mark Winston Griffith is co-director of the Neighborhood Economic Development Advocacy Project and a fellow at the Drum Major Institute.

Fewer Children Left Behind?

By Norm Fruchter

Democratic control of both the House and the Senate should result in changes in the No Child Left Behind program that will benefit New York City's schools and students.

Democratic control will likely result in changes to the rigid means of assessing schools, so that there will be more weight given to year-to-year student progress, rather than whether or not students meet specific standards.

Current rules harshly penalize students with disabilities and students whose first language is not English (and especially immigrant students), and the many New York City schools that serve them. Democrats will likely introduce changes that reduce the punitive effects of current policies affecting students with disabilities and English Language Learners.

The successful Democratic capture of what were once considered safe Republican House seats in upstate New York may create more flexibility in the New York Senate regarding a negotiated settlement of the Campaign for Fiscal Equity lawsuit to bring critically needed new funds to New York City schools.Ă‚ Republican control of the state Senate is approaching a razor-thin margin. This election's demonstration of upstate Republican vulnerability may prod the state Senate leadership to bi-partisan cooperation with a Democratic governor and Assembly.

Norm Fruchter is director of the Community Involvement Program of the Annenberg Institute for School Reform

Hope For Education and The Arts

By John Brademas

That Democrats will hold majorities in the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives after the November 7 elections is good news on a number of fronts but particularly encouraging for New Yorkers on measures to strengthen education and the arts. Institutions of learning and culture are so important to the people of New York City.

During my 22 years in Congress, during the administrations of six presidents, the bills to support early childhood programs, elementary and second education, college student aid, the arts and the humanities, libraries and museums won votes from both Democrats and Republicans. But during the administration of George W. Bush, with Republican majorities in Congress, these all have seen a decline in support.

I hope the election results will mean a return to bipartisan support in Washington, D.C. for education and the arts, including adequate funding for No Child Left Behind and for special education.

Another consequence of this month's elections is a renewed focus on Congress and its role in our separation-of-powers constitutional system.

John Brademas, a Democratic member of Congress from 1959 to 1981, is president emeritus of New York University, and connected to the John Brademas Center for the Study of Congress at NYU's Robert F. Wagner Graduate School of Public Service.

 

 

 

The Sheriff of State Street


Can the “Sheriff of Wall Street” become the “Sheriff of State Street”? Critics have long charged that Albany’s inability to resolve festering policy problems is rooted in the state’s dysfunctional politics, which are enabled by laws designed to protect and insulate those in power. Governor-elect Eliot Spitzer has pledged to reform the way state government conducts its political business, and if he succeeds it would have a big impact on New Yorkers.

Powerful special interests have long held sway over policymaking in Albany. The state’s campaign finance system allows for huge contributions. The state’s “pay to play” system allows policymakers to subtly – and often not so subtly – link contributions to the awarding of government contracts, legislation and regulatory favors. Weak ethics regulations allow lawmakers to spend campaign contributions on personal items, such as country club memberships, trips abroad, the leasing of luxury cars and even ice cream parties with clowns!

New York’s system also allows lawmakers to essentially rig elections. Despite a national political tsunami, little changed in the makeup of the state legislature. The reason is in large part due to the fact that Senate Republicans draw the legislative district lines for the Senate and Assembly Democrats the house, all with an eye toward reducing the number of competitive elections.

In response to these problems, Spitzer has stated clearly that he is going to take on Albany’s ethically-challenged political culture, fight for an independent redistricting commission and demand campaign finance reforms.

If this campaign is successful, it would dramatically change Albany. Lawmakers would be forced to be more sensitive to the needs of the public and less to the demands of powerful interest groups. For example, do you think the State Senate would side with the pharmaceutical companies and keep drug costs high if they knew that they could face voter retribution? That’s what they did last year. In a competitive environment, they’d think twice. Furthermore, this new Albany may also reduce voters’ cynicism about state government and may help engage the public in the debates over the issues of the day.

So how could this new reform movement unfold? Of course, no one knows for sure, but here are some ways the new governor could kick off his reform efforts:

• Issue a series of executive actions that would open up the executive branch. For example, on January 1, Spitzer could require agencies to follow spirit of Freedom of Information and Open Meetings Laws; he could require agencies to post FOIL-able records, in which there is “substantial public interest,” on the Internet; and he could require the release of agencies’ budget requests and substantive bases for proposed budget items.
• Use his first State of the State speech to issue a challenge to the legislature to take steps of its own. Spitzer's actions combined with the use of the bully pulpit would put tremendous pressure on legislators to reform legislative rules that are notoriously unfair and allow for far too much secrecy.
• Advance proposals to change the redistricting process, overhaul the ways elections are funded, open up the budget process and strengthen the state’s ethics. Use his power to convene “leaders meetings” to force a public debate on these and other important topics.

Blair Horner is the legislative director of good government group New York Public Interest Research Group  

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2006 New York Gubernatorial Candidates Grid


GOVERNOR

Candidates

 

Eliot Spitzer (D)

John Faso (R)


Whoever wins will have to confront Medicaid costs and fraud, court-ordered changes to school spending, gay marriage, and the dysfunction of Albany
What You Already Know:
Rivals Barack Obama as the darling of the Democratic Party.
Running against Spitzer.
Abortion: Supports abortion rights Would limit taxpayer spending on abortions; would increase notification laws for minors
Campaign Contribution Limits: For Against
Death Penalty Would support for terrorists and cop killers Would support for murderers
Economic Development: Would create incentives for commercial-related research; improve work force training, expand Empire State Development Corporation Would reduce corporate taxes, ease hostile business regulations
Gay Marriage: Would introduce gay marriage bill Would veto gay marriage bill, but permit civil unions
MTA: Would replace Peter Kalikow as chairman Would focus on productivity in union negotiations
Personal Taxes: Would institute tiered property tax cuts, with lower incomes getting larger
breaks
Would institute across the board cuts in property and income tax
Public Financing of Campaigns: For Against
Redistricting: Would create independent redistricting committee Would hold legislature to a stricter standard
Rent Stabilization: Would raise above $2,000 the rent at which apartments priced out of protection. Would leave program as is
School Funding: Would give $4 to $6 billion for NYC public schools, while requiring City Hall to contribute more as well Does not think more money is the solution

Click here to read more about this race.

 

 

 

2006 New York Attorney General Candidates Grid


ATTORNEY GENERAL

Candidates

 

Andrew Cuomo (D)

Jeanine Pirro (R)


Whoever wins will get to decide how to use the incredibly flexible job of attorney general
What You Already Know:
Wants a better job than attorney general.
Has a rocky marriage
Capital Punishment: For Against
Gay Marriage: Would push for state marriage equality law Favors civil unions
Medicaid Fraud: Would create financial incentives for whistleblowers Would improve enforcement through aggressive policing and computer technology.
Primary Targets: Albany dysfunction Sex offenders

Click here to read more about this race.

 

 

2006 New York Comptroller Candidates Grid


• COMPTROLLER •

Candidates

 

Alan Hevesi (D)

Christopher Callaghan (R)


Whoever wins will oversee the state's $140 billion pension fund, and serve as state's fiscal and budgetary watchdog.
What You Already Know:
Has been charged with illegally using taxpayer money to hire a chauffeur for his ailing wife.

Wears a bowtie.
Campaign Finance: Would create a system similar to the city's Opposes contribution limits and public campaign financing
Pensions: "Privatization" plan is too risky for employees. Change to a cheaper, 401 (k) style plan for new employees.
Public Authorities: Would give comptroller authority to review authority contracts Would dissolve irresponsible authorities
Should Effort be Made to Invest Pensions in a Socially Responsible
Way?
Yes, as long as it is still a good investment No, returns should be the only consideration.
Should there be an independent budget office in Albany? Yes No

Click here to read more about this race.

 

 

New Bills -- Pay Raises, Veterans and the Police Department, Bicycle Lanes


At each of the City Council's stated meetings, council members introduce bills, most of which will never become laws (for the process by which bills become laws, click here). As a regular feature, Gotham Gazette discusses some of the legislation proposed at each meeting.

At its most recent stated meeting on October 25, the City Council introduced several bills and proposed resolutions related to pay raises for elected officials, education, state services for children and families, military reservists’ eligibility for the NYPD, and bicycle lanes.

 

PAY RAISES

 

Speaker Christine Quinn joined with several other council members to introduce legislation that would result in a 25 percent increase in the council’s salaries, as recommended by a recent mayoral commission. The bill, Intro 458, also recommends pay raises for the mayor, public advocate, borough presidents, comptroller, and district attorneys.

 

EDUCATION AND CHILDREN AND FAMILY SERVICES

 

Councilmember Letitia James was active last week, proposing two bills related to education and three resolutions calling for reform of the state’s children and family services.

Intro 459 addresses a concern by James’ office that enrollment in the city’s elite specialized high schools is not reflective enough of diversity in the population. The bill would require the city’s Department of Education to report to the council on programs that prepare students for these schools, which include the Bronx High School of Science and Stuyvesant High School. These annual reports by the department would detail student enrollment, completion of the programs, and acceptance into specialized schools, all broken down by race and gender.

The councilmember’s office also expressed concern that many public school districts in the city aren’t up to speed with the condition of their science facilities. Intro 460 calls for the Department of Education to provide annual reports to the council on the laboratory equipment and facilities in public school district.

Resolution 579 urges the state legislature to pass the Safe Harbour for Exploited Youth Act, which would call for more sympathetic treatment and services for sexually exploited children. James also proposed Resolutions 580 and 581, which call for reform of the New York State Office of Children and Family Services. The first calls for the creation of the Office of the Child Advocate to oversee the agency, while the second asks for legislation that would prohibit discrimination and harassment in the facilities and require its administrators to become more conscious of such abuses.

 

MILITARY RESERVISTS ELIGIBILITY FOR THE NYPD

 

Councilmember Miguel Martinez proposed Intro 463, which responds to many frustrated military reservists who do not meet requirements to apply to the NYPD. Current city law requires applicants to have either a high school diploma with two years of full-time U.S. military service or to have completed 60 college credits. The proposed law would enable applicants with six years of honorable part-time service in the military reserves, with a high school diploma, to qualify for the NYPD.

 

BICYCLE LANES

 

Councilmember David Weprin proposed Resolution 587 to prevent what his office says are poorly planned and unsafe bicycle lanes in his and other districts. The resolution calls on the city to plan with significant input from community boards, which know best how bicycle lanes fit into the neighborhoods.

 

Legal Lexicon


This month’s column is devoted to a glossary of frequently used legal terms:

Abatement: Eliminate, reduce, e.g. abate a nuisance; abatement of rent.

Adjourn: Postpone.

Abscond: To leave unlawfully with the intent of not returning.

ACD: Adjourned in Contemplation of Dismissal. Possible disposition of violations or misdemeanors.

Affidavit: A statement signed and sworn to in the presence of a Notary Public.

Affidavit of Service: A sworn statement that documents were served (delivered).

Affirm: Appellate court decision agreeing with lower court. Also, an alternative to swearing to tell the truth, e.g. Do you swear or affirm?

Allocution: Questions and answers at end of court proceedings to establish certain facts, e.g. litigant understands when he/she is giving up a right.

Appeal: Seeking to have a higher court modify or overturn a court decision.

Arbitration: A forum for dispute resolution. A private justice system which is binding on the parties. Popular in credit card agreements, and employment contracts.

ATI: Alternative to Incarceration. Sentence in lieu of imprisonment, e.g. drug program.

Bail: Sum of money (or property) posted to insure a criminal defendant’s return to court.

Calendar: A court’s list of cases. Also, docket.

Civil: Law surrounding private issues; not criminal.

Contempt: Violation of a court order.

Contingent Fee: A fee charged for a lawyer’s service only if the lawsuit is successful.

Condominium, Condo: A building or complex containing a number of individually owned units.

Cooperative, Co-Op: Property run by its members who own shares in a corporation, but not the real estate itself.

Contract: An agreement between two or more competent parties creating promises and exchanges.

Damages: Money as compensation for injury or loss.

Deed: Written instrument of ownership, usually of real estate.

Default: An adversary’s failure to appear or participate in proceedings.

Deposition: Out of court sworn testimony. Also, known as EBT’s.

EBT’s: Examination before trial. See Deposition.

Equitable Distribution: Division of marital property.

Ex parte: One party, e.g. plaintiff confers with judge in absence of defendant.

Felony: Serious crime.

Franchise: The right to vote. Disenfranchise: Take away the right to vote.

Holdover: Remaining in possession of real estate after landlord has deemed the lease terminated by some act or conduct of the tenant.

Indictment: Grand Jury’s finding that a crime has been committed and that the accused is probable perpetrator.

Inquest: Mini trial conducted by plaintiff after defendant has defaulted.

Jail: Sentence of short term local incarceration (under one year) or in a local holding facility awaiting trial.

Judgment: Legal proceedings end with entry of judgment.

Jurisdiction: A defined place. Also, power over.

Mediation: Non-binding effort by a neutral person to resolve dispute.

Negligence: Breach of a duty of care which results in damage. Doing something or failing to do something which a reasonable person would do, and which causes injury.

Misdemeanor: Low level crime.

Notary Public: A person authorized to administer oath and witness signing of affidavit and legal documents. In the United States, a Notary cannot give legal advice.

Order to Show Cause: An order directing a party to appear in court and show why the court should not order certain action.

Parole: Supervised release from prison after serving most of a felony sentence. Also, released by judge without bail.

Plea: A formal statement by or on behalf of a defendant, stating “guilty” or “not guilty.”

Prison: State facility for incarcerating convicted felons.

Pro Se: Self-representation.

Probation: Supervision as an alternative to incarceration.

Remand: Incarcerate without bail. Also, returning a case to original court.

Rent Control: Regulations regarding rent and building services enacted in 1947 due to housing emergency.

Rent Stabilization: Regulations enacted in late 1960's in response to housing emergency.

Retainer: Written agreement to hire a lawyer. Also, the fee paid to hire a lawyer.

Reverse: Court or jury decision changed by appeals court.

ROR: Release on Own Recognizance. A criminal defendant released without bail or paroled.

Service: Delivery of legal documents in prescribed manner.

Settle: Agreeing on terms to end a case without trial.

Statute: Law enacted by legislature.

Statute of Limitations: The time at which the right to prosecute a civil or criminal action expires.

Stay: Order stopping action for a finite time.

Stipulation: An agreement between opposing parties.

Subpoena: An order to appear before the court and/or provide documents.

Summons: Notice that a lawsuit has been convened and an answer must be served. Also, notice to appear for jury duty.

TRO: Temporary Restraining Order. An order stopping (or demanding) an imminent action, e.g. an eviction.

Tort: A civil wrong in which damages are claimed.

Traverse: A hearing to contest or establish proper service of legal documents.

Violation: Unlawful act which can result in arrest and incarceration but is not considered a crime, e.g. disorderly conduct.

Waiver: Giving up a right, a legal position or argument.

Warrant: A written order directing or authorizing an act, e.g. arrest, search..

Youthful Offender, Y& O: Status of some criminal defendants under 19.

Emily Jane Goodman is a New York State Supreme Court Justice 



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