Suraj Patel on the campaign trail (photo: @surajpatelnyc)
This month, Suraj Patel is poised to lose his third consecutive New York congressional primary. Though I won’t be voting for him, as an Indian-American politico Patel’s candidacy this time around has meant more to me than I anticipated.
I first encountered Patel as part of a freelance project for The Juggernaut about “The South Asian Americans Claiming Political Capital.” For the assignment I cataloged and interviewed a new wave of South Asian Americans running for office across the country in the wake of Trumpism. Patel was running for a second time against New York political icon Rep. Carolyn Maloney.
At the time, Patel was one of the more polished candidates I spoke with. Still, his campaign reeked of a millennial emptiness. It was as though in a post-Obama, post-AOC, progressive landscape with an openly xenophobic president at the helm, Patel had decided the timing was right to run — ready or not.
For example, in one article I came across from his first race, in 2018, Patel appeared determined to paint Maloney as a white nationalist when she pointed out that his donors included “a huge amount of the name Patel” and people from Suraj’s home state of Indiana (where Patel’s family operates a successful hotel development business). Patel claimed the comment was a racist dog-whistle, while Maloney’s camp insisted it was merely a comment to point out Patel’s out-of-state family support. As no stranger to othering microaggressions, to me the episode appeared contrived to fit the zeitgeist.
Worse, looking further into Patel, most of the coverage of his campaigns seemed to paint him as somewhat off. With so few Indian Americans represented in mainstream politics, I’ll admit some borderline communal embarrassment. Patel was called out for a campaign tactic that used fake online dating profiles on platforms like Grindr and Tinder to recruit supporters. Maloney then ran an ad painting him as “creepy.” His critics seized on an inappropriate Facebook exchange from several years prior that he had with a friend about a young female athlete.
After an incredibly close race in 2020, Patel filed a lawsuit to challenge the vote count naming the Board of Elections and Maloney as defendants. It was an arguably noble effort, but appeared tone-deaf as the coronavirus pandemic raged on and national democracy hung in the balance. Perhaps an unfair perception, but Trump even weaponized the controversy to support his false claims about voter fraud.
When Patel unveiled failed New York City mayoral candidate Andrew Yang as an early high profile endorsement for this year’s bid, I was ready to expect more of the same. Yet, over the past few weeks, to my surprise, I’ve felt pride watching Patel make his case to voters.
Through my window I see his campaign poster on a vacant storefront across the street. “Change the vibes,” it reads with a floral pattern that mirrors the campaign’s new energy. It is clear Patel has found his own voice in this campaign. Instead of being called creepy, this go-around Patel has developed something of a fan-base. “Not that it matters but MY GOD is Suraj Patel hot,” tweeted one admirer. His voluminous hair became the subject of positive internet attention after the first primary debate. Media celebrated his recent Hallmark-esque engagement, bridge photoshoot and all.
Form aside, Patel’s substance has also shifted for the better.
He comes off less entitled to a congressional seat simply because he is young, brown, and worked for Obama and more genuine in his connection with the community. His Instagram story is an example. It constantly features Patel engaging local business owners with a vibrancy that is missing from the Maloney and Nadler campaigns. In one example, Patel hops into the ice cream truck of a struggling local vendor to make his campaign pitch.
He also interviewed with and earned the endorsement of popular Indian-American social media influencer Zarna Garg. Aligning with Garg, a New York City-based comedian billed by CNBC as “the zany, outspoken voice of the Indian-American woman,” reflects the agility of Patel’s latest campaign. No longer over-reliant on progressive buzzwords, Patel has also found a way to show why his representation would matter — instead of just telling.
“I grew up folding The New York Times at my family’s bodega, it was the honor of a lifetime to sit for this interview for the first time ever,” he tweeted, sharing the transcript of his meeting with the Times editorial board (which endorsed Nadler). Growing up on stories of how my grandparents, small business owners themselves, came here from India with just $25 in their pockets the sentiment struck a chord.
The Times editorial board interview came not long after a reported piece in the same paper that showcased Patel’s energy, enthusiasm, and work ethic.
Patel acknowledges that one benefit of his perennial candidacy is that he has been able to learn from experience. In a recent interview on Gotham Gazette’s Max Politics podcast he reflected, saying of past campaigns, “we took on all these issues that were in vogue at the time that perhaps weren’t actually my core issues…trying to run as this institutional sort-of progressive thing you’re not.” This time, he said, he’s running on his lived experience and his many substantive ideas for tackling problems faced by New Yorkers and Americans.
Patel also notes he has gained perspective from his past failures. “Losing is a remarkable teacher,” he told podcast host Ben Max, editor of Gotham Gazette, “...as a person who hasn’t really lost much in life up until that point, the humility-gain from that was instrumental.”
To those who might criticize Patel's live-and-learn approach to running for office, it's worth considering that candidates from underrepresented backgrounds like Patel's often lack the mentorship or institutional supports that white and well-connected candidates benefit from.
I’m not voting for Patel in this primary because I don’t agree with his ideas, nor do I think he has made the case for replacing both Nadler and Maloney, two members of Congress with seniority. Yet, it means a lot to me — and others who look like me — that this third time around he has run a campaign he can be proud of and charmed New York City.
***
Kaivan Shroff serves as senior advisor to the Institute for Education, a D.C. non-profit. He is a political commentator and alumnus of the Hillary for America Digital Team with degrees from Harvard Law School, Harvard Kennedy School, Yale School of Management, and Brown University.
***
Have an op-ed idea or submission for Gotham Gazette? Email This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
Yuh-Line Niou & others at a Lunar New Year celebration (photo: Darren McGee/Governor's Office)
No one said it better than Congresswoman Grace Meng when, after the 2021 elections, she tweeted of Democrats, “our party better start giving more of a shit about #aapi [Asian-American and Pacific Islander] voters and communities. No other community turned out at a faster pace than AAPIs in 2020.”
Meng, the first Asian American elected to Congress from New York, was reacting to significant swings by Asian-American voters toward Republicans in the 2021 mayoral and other city elections. Even districts represented by an Asian Democrat, such as that of Queens Assemblymember Ron Kim, saw the shift.
In New York City alone, Asian Americans now make up 17.3% of the population, and New York State’s Asian population grew over 37.6% in the past decade. As reported by Asian American Federation, Asian voters also turned out in a record high (27.1%) in this past citywide election surpassing Black (26.5%) and Hispanic (17.4%) voter turnout. This is an 11-point increase from 2013, when Asian voters only turned out at 16.3%.
And while those who organize in Asian communities are well aware of this shift in voter turnout and power, it feels as if those in national and especially New York City politics are resisting fully recognizing this paradigm shift and failing to invest in Asian candidates and outreach strategies for this growing electorate.
This comes at a grave cost to the progressive and Democratic ability to foster what will become a new political force. To be a progressive Asian in New York City politics feels like being a canary in a coal mine right now: recognizing that there’s a window to capture AAPI voters but seeing Democratic Party leaders and other electeds miss the mark repeatedly. This is especially the case as a voter in the new 10th Congressional District of New York, which was drawn to include both of the city’s Chinatowns, in Lower Manhattan and Sunset Park.
It is paramount that with this new and open congressional seat, Democrats seize the opportunity to place an Asian American elected official with a strong record as an advocate at the top of political power for these under-served Asian-American communities. Right now, Meng is the only Asian in the New York congressional delegation and based on representative demographics alone, New York State should have at least two Asians as members of Congress.
Especially given how long elected officials often hold congressional seats, there might not be another window of time more critical than now for Asian voters. It’s why Democrats and the media cannot ignore Yuh-Line Niou and her campaign as the only viable Asian candidate in the NY-10 race.
While NY-10 unites both Chinatowns, Brooklyn’s quickly growing Chinatown, located in central Sunset Park, is on a different political trajectory than its Manhattan counterpart. Whereas Manhattan’s Chinatown overwhelmingly went for Democrat Eric Adams in the general election, Brooklyn’s Chinatown actually voted for Republican Curtis Sliwa over Adams. In fact, outside of Manhattan, Sliwa performed better in majority-Asian districts, especially in Brooklyn and Queens.
Even in the City Council race in Sunset Park and Red Hook, while Alexa Aviles won easily with both labor and progressive support, the runner-up was political newcomer Yu Lin, who won close to 35% of the vote. He was virtually unknown before his political campaign, and while rumblings in Chinatown showed many Asian community leaders were aware of his apparent lack of political education or acumen, he ran a pro-police, pro-safety, and pro-Asian messaging campaign to secure supporters and was backed by conservative business leaders in the neighborhood.
In February, Republican Reps. Nicole Malliotakis and Lee Zeldin, the GOP nominee for Governor in this year’s election, held a public safety rally in Sunset Park that was well-attended by Asian residents. This came at a time when there was a massive spike in hate crimes against AAPI communities and especially women and seniors were injured or killed.
Granted, it is important to note that Asian Americans in New York City also overwhelmingly voted for Democrat Joe Biden over Republican incumbent Donald Trump in the 2020 election. But some of those very same areas voted Republican in the following mayoral race.
Donald Trump’s sinophobia and “China virus” comments fueled anti-Asian attacks in New York City and across the nation, which likely soured even conservative Asian voters. It might also be true that Asian voter disillusionment with Democrats reflects unique frustrations around New York City politics, especially education policy under former Mayor Bill de Blasio, but certainly on public safety too.
It’s important to acknowledge that the conservative energy in Asian communities in New York City has been fueled and amplified by elected officials who have deep ties to white supremacist movements, such as Malliotakis and Zeldin. Often, these views and rhetoric work to fracture Asian communities away from Black and Latino ones. There’s also a growing movement of business leaders and conservative bloggers, many with ties to real estate interests and China, who are smartly organizing to seize power on the right while there is an opening. Building through fear is expeditious and, oftentimes, easily exploitable.
In order to begin to turn the tide, it’s just not enough to have sympathetic elected officials show up once a year at Lunar New Year and attempt to pronounce Gong Xi Fa Cai or Gong Het Fat Choy, or to employ one or two dedicated Asian staffers. We need Democrats and progressives fully throwing down for Asian candidates, Asian voter outreach, language justice and accessibility, and ensuring that we’re testing messaging and framing for Asian voters.
Someone like Yuh-Line Niou, who has been working incredibly hard in the trenches for Manhattan’s Chinatown, especially during the worst of the covid crisis, and has the experience of building and supporting an Asian district, can build trust far more quickly than a non-Asian elected official.
Perhaps most importantly and impressively, Niou has been able to organize Asian youth, many who come from Sunset Park. Her campaign has been one that invites and excites young Asians who come from across the city to make calls, knock on doors, and hang up posters. As someone who was raised by a conservative father, it wasn’t his friends of 40-plus years who convinced him to vote Democrat, but his very stubborn and effusive daughter instead.
And as population growth and redistricting of legislative maps continue to create Asian-plurarity seats in Brooklyn (including new State Senate District 17, which will hopefully see progressive Iwen Chu successful this fall) and other parts of the city, it’s critical that we do that work now while there’s still a large window of opportunity. In NY-10, both Chinatowns would benefit with an Asian representative in Congress — and would be able to provide real backing and support in fostering Asian candidates from the community to run on Democratic and progressive ideals up and down the ballot.
Asian voters are by no means a lost cause for Democrats, they are untapped potential. APIAVote did a national survey showing that the majority of Asian voters do support many popular policies long-held by Democrats, including on gun control, affordable child care, paid leave, and even affirmative action. It will take invested organizing and resources for this to also reflect locally in New York City.
But showing up for Niou’s field shift in Sunset Park on a sunny Sunday afternoon and seeing over 20 young Asian volunteers, many second and third generation Americans like me, made me hopeful.
***
Whitney Hu is the political director of Churches United for Fair Housing Action and organizer in Sunset Park. She is Asian American and a NY-10 voter. On Twitter @whitney_hu.
***
Have an op-ed idea or submission for Gotham Gazette? Email This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
Gov. Hochul makes an abortion access announcement (photo: Kevin P. Coughlin/Governor's Office)
Since March 2020, health-care workers in New York have been on the front lines. Resilience, service, and a fierce commitment to delivering high-quality care to our patients guided us through the darkest days of the pandemic.
Due to the heroism of my co-workers and with the support of Governor Kathy Hochul’s administration, two years later we now stand ready to continue providing abortion care and set an example for the nation after the Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade.
Today, women in America find themselves in a time of new crisis. In the aftermath of Dobbs v. Jackson, eight states have already massively rolled back women’s reproductive rights by banning abortion entirely, while several other states have severely restricted abortion access.
The public health consequences of this legislation are grave: Women undergoing high-risk pregnancies will be put in an untenable position where they will be forced to decide whether to seek illegal care or put their own lives in danger. Because of these draconian policies from the far right, New York providers will pick up the slack, and they deserve to be supported, not vilified by extremists like Lee Zeldin, the congressman and Republican nominee for governor. Democratic organizers, legislators, and voters across the country know this, and they are taking a stand.
A few weeks ago, Kansans voted in droves against removing the right to abortion from the state constitution. Their overwhelming rejection of this attempt to disenfranchise women should serve as a wake-up call for the nation: voters are ready to stand up against the ultra-conservatism of the Republican Party.
Here in New York, Governor Hochul announced a nation-leading $35 million investment to support abortion providers. In concert with Democratic state lawmakers, she has pushed to codify the right to abortion in our constitution, helping medical providers give the best care we can by budgeting for the recruitment and retention of nursing professionals while also allocating bonuses for frontline health-care workers.
Zeldin, on the other hand, is hostile to women’s autonomy and reproductive rights. He has said that if elected governor he will look to appoint an anti-abortion health commissioner and promised “open-door” access to anti-choice advocates. In Congress, Zeldin voted for abortion bans and co-sponsored legislation that would ban abortion without exceptions for rape, incest, or the life of the mother — placing him among the most extreme, fringe members of his party.
Voters in a swing state like Kansas flatly rejected these policies, proving that the national right-wing GOP and its acolytes like Zeldin are woefully out of touch with the American voter.
Abortion providers and health-care workers in New York will not be intimidated by Lee Zeldin and his extremist views on who can and cannot receive reproductive care in New York.
The right to choose abortion is a matter of basic bodily autonomy and health. As a frontline nurse, I see every day just how important it is for this right to be upheld and for reproductive services to be provided legally and safely.
With a woman’s right to make her own health-care decisions on the ballot, we must mobilize to protect New Yorkers and vote for Democratic candidates statewide.
***
Nordia Baxter Rivers is a nurse practitioner at a reproductive health center in New York City and a member of 1199SEIU United Healthcare Workers East.
***
Have an op-ed idea or submission for Gotham Gazette? Email This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
(photo: centralpark.com)
On the afternoon of Wednesday, August 10, a carriage horse named Ryder collapsed at 9th Avenue and 45th Street in the heavy traffic going to the Lincoln Tunnel. Images of this painfully thin horse struggling to get up, still tied to his carriage as his driver whipped him to comply, were picked up by the media and attracted a large, horrified crowd. Down for about an hour, Ryder finally managed to get up after being hosed down by the NYPD.
This appalling incident has reignited calls for banning the horse-carriage industry.
Will this finally be the proverbial straw?
Horse-drawn carriages are widely considered to be inherently inhumane and unsafe for both horses and people. Accidents involving urban carriage horses have been a public safety concern for decades, resulting in serious injuries and death to both people and horses. New York City is no exception. But working and living conditions are also quite bad.
For the owners, the drivers union, and their supporters to blindly assert that the stables are “state-of-the-art” does not make them so. The horse stalls are allowed by New York City law to be only 60 sq. ft., which is much too small. Standardbreds need 144 sq. ft, and larger draft horses 196 sq. ft. Horses receive no regular turn-out to pasture. A five-week requirement for time off is no substitute for essential daily pasture time.
The horses are allowed to work for nine hours each day, seven days a week, between the shafts of their carriages. And they continue to work in punishing hot weather. Even when carriage rides are suspended (mostly) during very hot weather, there is little relief for the horses who remain in their cramped stalls with at most a fan to help them cool.
There is no excusing these inhumanities.
It is time for the City of New York to grow a spine and make some real changes. Carriage horse accidents will continue to plague any mayor and cast the city in a bad light.
Abrasive confrontations go nowhere. It would be wise for the carriage horse owners to stop digging in their heels and at least come to the table for a discussion about electric carriages. In the last few years, two major cities that had carriage horses — Montreal and Chicago — did not offer an alternative to the drivers and simply shut their businesses down.
In late July, City Council Member Robert Holden introduced a bill to ban horse-drawn carriages and replace them with electric carriages. There is no evidence that he tried to work with the carriage owners or the union, a mistake that may well result in the bill’s failure. The bill offers no plan for what will happen to the horses other than to have the owners sign a commitment not to send horses to slaughter, showing a lack of understanding of how this despicable process works. And the electric carriage portion is mostly lacking.
In 2006, I worked with then-Council Member Tony Avella to introduce the first ever bill to ban horse-drawn carriages, then a state bill in 2011 when Avella went to the State Senate. Nothing came of these bills, but I was quickly learning an important lesson: an effective solution can only come about with all players willing to negotiate.
To that end, I put my organization on hold and joined forces with Susan Wagner, president of Equine Advocates, a horse sanctuary and advocacy organization. We undertook a trip to Guadalajara, Mexico in 2019 to see their successful electric carriages, and afterwards formed the Committee for Compassionate & Responsible Tourism.
It was an invaluable experience to learn from the people in Guadalajara – activists, drivers, owners, government officials, engineers, and tourists – who came together to solve the problem. Typically, animal activists and carriage horse drivers do not have good relationships. This was also true of Guadalajara. But things changed there because of collaboration and commitments to make something good happen. There was mutual respect – something that is very clear in the video on our website in interviews of these participants. We saw their success in action and wanted to bring the same thing to New York City.
The drivers in Guadalajara love the electric carriages. They make more money and don’t have to worry about costly vet care for their horses or losing business in bad weather. And they no longer need to worry about being called animal abusers in front of their families.
Perhaps the New York City drivers will never agree to give up their horse carriages. But the handwriting is on the wall. Besides Guadalajara, Several cities around the world have shifted to electric horseless carriages, including Berlin, Cologne, Dubai, Istanbul, Merida, Motul, Munster, Mumbai, and Santo Domingo. Atlanta is considering them. Maybe even Charleston.
Horse-drawn carriages are not a big tourist draw. Frommers.com, a noted tourist guide, describes a carriage-horse ride as one of the most overrated experiences to avoid in New York City. "Pity those poor beasts of burden," it states. "They get dragged out in the heat and cold with buggy attached..." just for tourists.
To acknowledge the issue of animal exploitation and the need to make changes is called compassionate and responsible tourism.
It is an awareness that is spreading around the world – one that touches on ethics and eco-tourism and a growing concern about the inhumane treatment of animals. We see it in Barcelona where bullfighting – a long tradition – has been shut down; in several cities in California where rodeos have been banned; and in countries that have banned wild animals in circuses. And many cities around the world have replaced horse-drawn carriages with horseless electric carriages for humane reasons.
Almost 200,000 people from all over the United States, Canada, South America, Europe, and Asia had previously signed our petition to end New York City’s carriage horse industry. It’s clear that introducing electric carriages in New York City can be a shot in the arm for tourism.
Pedro Aguilar, President of the Tourist Carriage Association in Guadalajara said it best in our video: “Cities evolve, cities change. And the people, as part of the city they live in, have to also change and adapt. Traditions don’t die. They live on because it’s not just the horse. The tradition is going on the ride, the tour we give, how we treat people, and getting in a vehicle like this, which is simply a carriage without a horse.”
***
Elizabeth Forel is co-founder, Committee for Responsible & Compassionate Tourism. On Twitter @CompassionNYC.
***
Have an op-ed idea or submission for Gotham Gazette? Email This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
On Rikers Island (photo: Michael Appleton/Mayor's Office)
July 15, 2022 marked the day that 34-year-old Michael Lopez died of an overdose in a mental observation unit at the Rikers Island jail, bringing the number of lives lost under New York City Department of Correction custody this year to 11. Mr. Lopez’s death and the broader public health and humanitarian crises at Rikers demand that we reimagine true public safety through a lens of community care, rather than more punishment.
An eight-jail complex standing on an island in the East River plagued by environmental hazards, Rikers has been described as a modern-day penal colony intended to isolate its mostly Black and Latino residents from society and networks of support.
The rampant violence, cramped conditions, corruption, and horrendous sanitation within its dilapidated walls are largely out of sight and out of mind for New Yorkers. The crisis is not out of sight for Jennie Rosario-Megibow, the mother of Michael Lopez, whose many questions about his death have yet to be answered.
Disturbing images released last year depicted 26 people occupying an intake cell filled with human excrement, where many had been held for days. Lack of basic services contributes to a culture of violence at Rikers leaving many vulnerable to attacks. It has been widely reported that the use of solitary confinement continues, where an individual can be isolated for 23 hours a day in a small cell deprived of any human interaction and essential medical care. Solitary confinement not only has immediate psychological impacts but also increases the risk of premature death.
Nearly half of the people incarcerated at Rikers require treatment for mental illnesses—a rate double that of the general population. On the heels of two deaths in one week, advocates are calling for a reduction in the Rikers population and an end to solitary confinement.
Thanks to the leadership of formerly-incarcerated advocates, Rikers is set to shut down by 2027. However, conditions are dire now and require urgent action, lest we watch as more preventable deaths occur behind bars. It is well-documented that incarceration negatively impacts health. Most immediately, incarceration is associated with dramatically increased risk for overdose deaths and spread of infectious disease.
Fortunately, there are steps that policymakers can take to address dangerous conditions at Rikers.
As a member of the Campaign to Close Rikers and with a long history of investigating and promoting public health over punitive approaches to drug policy, the New York Academy of Medicine supports an approach that centers the humanity of individuals who are incarcerated and is based on the best available evidence.
Change must begin today to reduce harm by: 1) enforcing existing policy to decrease the current population and 2) improving access to housing, healthcare, and addiction services to prevent arrests and re-arrests.
There is precedent for decarceration as an effective and immediate strategy to save lives. Heeding warnings from public health experts (including the New York Academy of Medicine) and the New York City Board of Correction around the risk of COVID-19 transmission in jails and prisons, the city released 3,400 people from custody between March and May 2020, reducing the jail population to levels not seen since World War II.
The NYPD’s own data showed these releases did not impact public safety. The Department of Correction has stated that it would be better able to ensure adequate medical care if there were fewer people in their custody. Diverting the stream of individuals entering Rikers is essential to reducing harm to people on the island, while we work toward a closure date that cannot come soon enough.
Communities of color, disproportionately policed and arrested, need access to safe and affordable housing, healthcare, and addiction services. An estimated three out of every four people detained at Rikers experience addiction, yet evidence shows that a small minority of these individuals receive treatment for substance use disorder prior to incarceration. Evidence-based harm reduction services, such as overdose prevention centers, can more effectively address overdose risk and treatment access than jail.
Access to affordable and stable housing is known to reduce arrests and cycling through the criminal-legal system. In 2021, the annual cost per person incarcerated in New York City was $556,539, compared to the $33,276 spent per supportive housing unit. Thousands of people incarcerated at Rikers are experiencing chronic homelessness and have significant health needs that could be best addressed in community settings. One of the key Points of Agreement in the plan to Close Rikers – 380 supportive units for people who most often cycle between hospitals and jails – remains unfulfilled because the contracts offered to providers did not meet their costs. To date, zero units have been opened.
Ultimately, public safety is best served by equitable access to healthcare and social services rather than more incarceration. These are the kinds of upstream solutions our city needs. The time to advance them is now.
***
Gabriella Khawly is a Policy Intern and Michele Calvo, MPH, is a Program Officer at the New York Academy of Medicine. On Twitter @NYAMNYC.
***
Have an op-ed idea or submission for Gotham Gazette? Email This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
Scaffolding (photo: Demetrius Freeman/Mayor's Office)
The cost to build in New York can be 10 times more expensive than in neighboring New Jersey or Connecticut. It’s a reality that’s hurting our economy, especially Minority and Women-Owned Business Enterprises (MWBEs) in the construction sector, at the worst possible time.
The Empire State’s unaffordability factor begins with the massive, state-imposed cost-of-liability insurance, a result of the 137-year-old Scaffold Law.
To bid on any construction project in the public or private sector, a contracting firm in New York is held to a strict liability for whatever accident occurs for any reason—even if a worker jumps off a ladder. There is only one question: How much does the contractor pay?
The costs here are astronomical and out of line with the 49 other states. In New York, the cost of insurance is $41 per square foot compared to $3 in Connecticut and $4 in New Jersey. Is it any wonder why firms are moving there, or why there’s always such a housing shortage and affordability crisis in New York?
Now, with a market downturn looming, there’s well-meaning legislation on the desk of Governor Hochul that will, if not amended, worsen the problem considerably, especially for MWBEs and small businesses.
The idea behind “Carlos’ Law” is an honorable one. Named for Carlos Moncayo, a construction worker killed on the job in 2015, it raises the financial penalties employers face for workplace fatalities from a minimum of $5,000 and a maximum of $10,000 to a minimum of $300,000 and a maximum of $500,000. It also broadens the criteria of workers to whom these new rules apply.
In trying to solve the very real problem of having an ineffectual law on the books, legislators have gone too far in the other direction. If Carlos’ Law is signed by Governor Hochul without being adjusted, it will have a punitive effect on contractors in the state, putting New York, and its $40 billion per year construction trade, at further risk of a recession.
As the Building Trades Employers Association expressed in a June 30 letter to the Governor, there are easy ways to make Carlos’ Law workable for both employers and employees:
With some minor changes, Carlos’ Law would act as a deterrent against unscrupulous contractors without punishing the upstanding ones. Instead of keeping MWBEs at arm’s length, it would embrace them. It’s hard enough to build in New York. Let’s do it, together, the right way.
***
Louis Coletti of New York City is president of the New York Building Trades Employers Association. On Twitter @BTEANY.
***
Have an op-ed idea or submission for Gotham Gazette? Email This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
A push to increase faith in government (photo: Edwin J. Torres/Mayor's Office)
Of all the pressing problems facing New York City — increasing crime, economic stagnation, high taxes, rising homelessness, crumbling infrastructure, and poor sanitation — a fundamental issue is at the core: lack of faith in our government and institutions to address and solve these issues.
Trust has been broken because government appears corrupt, indecipherable, and motivated to benefit special interests, insiders, and their allies. New York’s future depends on restoring its ability to create and implement policy that truly serves the public’s needs. To restore public confidence and reduce the cynicism that has led to abysmally low voter turnout, we must have the will and commitment to enact long overdue reforms.
Here are several recommendations:
1) Effectuate Non-Partisan Redistricting:
In New York’s recent redistricting debacle, the State Supreme Court ruled the Democrats’ gerrymandering plan failed to follow constitutionally required procedures to ensure a non-partisan redistricting process.
Democrats drew maps in January 2022, after the new bipartisan Independent Redistricting Commission failed to complete its work. The Court threw out those maps and hired an independent third party to redraw districts.
This could’ve been avoided if commission members were initially made up of independent members such as judges, law professors, retired public servants, and political scientists, rather than partisan political appointees. The word gerrymandering implies the system is rigged. A truly independent redistricting commission will secure voter trust that the system used to elect representatives is working and fair and not rigged to favor any political party or other special interest.
2) Expand Ranked Choice Voting (RCV):
RCV gives voters more say in who is elected. Efficient and more representative, it was introduced in New York City’s June 2022 municipal primary elections after 73% of city voters backed a 2019 ballot measure proposed by a city charter commission. It should be extended to all state elections.
Under the current “winner-take-all” system candidates often win with significantly less than a majority of votes. Voters are often faced with having to choose between their preferred candidate and a “safe” choice. Under RCV, even if one’s desired candidate loses, lower ranked choices still help decide the outcome. Winners reflect more broad consensus among the voters.
New York City provides an excellent template for broader implementation.
3) Implement Final Five Open Primaries:
Turnout in New York primaries is abysmally low. In the recent June 2022 primaries for Governor and State Assembly, less than 14% of those registered voted. In national elections, New York and other closed primary states have significantly lower turnout than states with open primaries.
An open primary system would franchise more than 2.7 million ‘independent’ voters in our state, including over 400,000 military veterans, and liberate parties from being tied down and beholden to their most extreme influences. Diversity of opinion and thought would be ignited within parties once more as voters are able to participate in the elections that matter. When confidence in the system itself is restored, we can expect to see significantly greater voter turnout.
New York is one of only 14 states in which at least one political party administers closed primaries for federal and state-level elections. To implement open primaries for these elections, state election law must be amended.
For New York City elections, we must go directly to voters with a ballot initiative. “Final Five” voting will combine ranked-choice voting with open primaries.
4) Expand Mechanisms for Ballot Initiatives and Referendums:
Ballot initiatives and referendums, allowed in 26 states, enable voters to bypass the state legislature by placing proposed statutes and constitutional amendments on the ballot. These measures reduce voter disengagement and can contribute to greater turnout by signaling to voters that their vote will directly affect the outcome of a particular issue.
In New York, voters do not have the power to initiate statewide referendums and initiatives. Several attempts to introduce voter referendums in New York have failed.
Additionally, 19 states have enacted recall mechanisms, which have been effective in holding elected officials accountable for doing the job they were elected to do.
5) Enact Effective Campaign Financing Reforms:
State and City Boards of Elections need independent oversight to assure transparency and trust.
“Doing business restrictions” must be enacted statewide to largely prohibit campaign donations from individuals or entities that do business with government. We must finally end the “pay-to-play” mindset in Albany and the potential for unrestricted donations to influence contracting, subsidy, and other government decisions.
Contribution levels should be reconsidered annually. State contribution levels are far too high, even in the new campaign finance system to be instituted in the next elections, allowing large donors to maintain outsized influence. These rules must be made based on the ethical challenges of today and lessons learned from the past.
New York must address the ill effects of the Supreme Court’s 2010 decision overturning 100 years of campaign finance restrictions in Citizens United v. FEC. We can heighten donor transparency requirements and expand matching funds and “democracy dollar” programs successful in other states. Programs to reward voters by providing matching dollar vouchers to
be donated to the political candidate of their choice can counter voter apathy, while expanding pools of candidates.
6) Empower Truly Independent Ethics Agencies:
Government watchdog groups like the League of Women Voters have been calling for city and state ethics reform for decades, but efforts always fall short. Truly independent commissions empowered to enact comprehensive integrity and conflicts of interest policies, along with mechanisms to enforce them, will restore institutional trust and confidence.
Governor Hochul and the State Legislature recently replaced the Joint Commission on Public Ethics (JCOPE), with the “Commission on Ethics and Lobbying in Government,” but their reforms fell short because this new entity is still populated by political appointees without the independence needed to hold elected officials to the highest standards. The governor’s own ethical questions regarding the Buffalo Bills stadium funding and Penn Station redevelopment deals haven’t helped engender trust in how she has gone about implementing reforms and leading the government.
New York City’s Conflicts of Interest Board (COIB) should be replaced by independent appointees with enforcement powers outside of political influence. Currently, its membership is nominated by elected officials including the mayor, comptroller, and public advocate.
Former Mayor Bill de Blasio famously disregarded the Board’s advice and admonishments on multiple occasions, including regarding his fundraising efforts, which created the “appearance of coercion and improper access.” Yet de Blasio faced no punishment from a Board full of his own appointees. The city’s comptroller, Brad Lander, recently sought guidance from the Board, including an appointee of his own, about whether he faces conflicts in his office’s approval of contracts between the city and members of a nonprofit umbrella group run by his wife. These actions and questions undercut the credibility of the Conflicts of Interest Board to act independently and fairly, and diminishes public confidence.
Good government groups have rightly suggested a firewall between elected officials and appointees of ethics commissions. Elected leaders simply should not have any say in who gets appointed to the entities that oversee them. A truly independent ethics panel should be appointed by a designating commission made up of trusted, qualified, and experienced third parties, such as law school deans, bar association presidents, and judges, vetted for independence.
This autonomous panel would be empowered to write and enforce protocols that follow best practices for rules compliance and conflicts of interest, with full public disclosure of every investigation.
This list is not exhaustive of all that needs to be done to restore faith and trust in government, but even these pragmatic and reasonable recommendations will take considerable will to implement.
Elected leaders have been fighting real reform for decades, and it’s time we elect candidates who are unafraid to demand comprehensive action. Government will be far more effective with more democratic elections and proper rules in place to assure it is operating with honesty and integrity.
***
By Sal Albanese & Maria Danzilo. On Twitter @SalAlbaneseNYC & @Maria4Dist6.
***
Have an op-ed idea or submission for Gotham Gazette? Email This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
A rendering of The Lirio
The ongoing affordable housing crisis in New York City requires bold solutions. We must house more people, especially in vulnerable populations. In Hell’s Kitchen we have an opportunity to do just that with The Lirio, a newly proposed 112-unit affordable housing development, which will include affordable homes for long-term survivors of HIV/AIDS.
New York City has been in an immense housing crisis for decades. Although our population and job demand have grown, we haven’t built enough housing to keep up. Now we have a substantial deficit of affordable housing, and especially deeply affordable housing. The pandemic exacerbated the need for housing as labor and supply chain constraints have further slowed construction. Many families have been forced to leave their homes due to high rents, and scores more may be set to follow them when eviction protections expire.
This is especially true of more vulnerable populations, such as people living with HIV/AIDS, whose own position in their homes might already be tenuous. To fully recover, the city must build quality affordable housing to provide homes for families of all types who need them. That responsibility extends to all neighborhoods, especially wealthier enclaves in Manhattan like Hell’s Kitchen.
According to the latest data from the New York City Department of Health and Mental Hygiene, Chelsea-Clinton has the highest rate of reported persons living with HIV as a percent of its population of any neighborhood in New York City. It is also the neighborhood with the second-highest rate of HIV diagnoses in the city. As available services and medical care for this population have grown and improved, those afflicted are living longer, better lives, and need more services, including housing. It is our shared responsibility as a city to provide survivors of HIV/AIDS with affordable homes so that they can live full lives.
The Lirio will help combat the city’s housing crisis and serve as a model for the rest of the city. It is a newly-proposed mixed development by the city’s leading real estate development company Hudson Inc., and Housing Works. Located at the corner of 54th Street and 9th Avenue, the 112-unit Hell’s Kitchen project would include 59 units of supportive housing targeted at long-term survivors of HIV/AIDS, along with affordable housing, office space for the MTA, and neighborhood retail.
Housing Works, a well-respected social services organization founded by members of ACT UP focused on fighting AIDS and homelessness, will provide on-site services and access to HIV-specific primary and behavioral healthcare at a new Housing Works medical facility on West 48th Street. With the help of Housing Works, The Lirio is the right solution to bolster Hell’s Kitchen and protect affordability while providing the critical tools needed to fight HIV transmission and protect people living with HIV.
We must act quickly – each month that we delay this new housing is another month during which it doesn’t house the populations it can support.
We have the opportunity to make progress on the goal so many of us have been advocating over the years: to provide affordable housing for our most vulnerable populations in a neighborhood where rising rent makes it harder to live there every year. To make change in this community, we must do everything in our power to support The Lirio development and the people it will benefit.
People living with HIV are instrumental to the fabric of our community, and have made these communities what they are today. We let down people living with HIV in the ’80s, we must not repeat our mistake.
***
Moses Nakamura is a member of Open New York and a resident of Chelsea. On Twitter @OpenNYForAll.
***
Have an op-ed idea or submission for Gotham Gazette? Email This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
Eastern Parkway (photo: NYC Parks)
It’s another record-breaking hot summer in New York, and we can all agree that the climate crisis is already here. Sweltering days, terrifying flash floods, and increasingly poor air quality are putting all New Yorkers at risk, especially those living in historically underinvested communities. With no more time to waste, we can — and must — make major moves in the climate fight with our city’s streets.
Imagine what it would feel like to walk down a street in your neighborhood that’s climate resilient: shade from abundant trees protects you from the hot sun; colorful rain gardens attract bees and birds while also collecting stormwater; neighbors sit peacefully at a misting station in a plaza at the end of the block; water features connected to fire hydrants create a safe and cool game for kids nearby; and raised medians with lush plantings protect bikers from limited car traffic thanks to carefully designed streets.
This city is possible. So, how do we get there?
With over a quarter of New York City’s land area covered by streets, these dark, impervious surfaces can be the ticket to reducing emissions and creating new public spaces that fight climate change. Furthermore, climate investments on our streets are known to boost local economies and drive the recovery the city has set out for itself. With our streets completely government-controlled, we can act immediately to protect every neighborhood from the climate crisis.
If the administration of Mayor Eric Adams and the City Council want to leave a legacy in the climate action fight, they need to invest big in a swift overhaul of our streets. Here’s how we can accelerate the process:
1. Cut emissions to combat the public health emergency.
To reduce the number of cars and trucks on our streets, we should pilot low-emissions zones in every borough. We can look to cities around the world — like Medellin, London, Paris, and Madrid — that have restricted carbon-emitting vehicles at certain times of the day. In New York, let’s enact these in neighborhoods suffering from the worst air quality conditions and highest heat vulnerability, especially in the outer boroughs, and treat climate change like the public health emergency it is.
2. Set bold, citywide climate goals for every street project and stick to them.
The city should mandate that all new street projects are approached to counter the climate crisis. Every new street project in your neighborhood can be integrating resilient materials like cool and permeable pavements during routine streetscape upgrades, creating green roofs on bus shelters and other structures, and expanding street trees through a next Million Trees program.
An interagency Street Climate Action Task Force could set the vision for an evaluation framework to review every project within the public Right of Way to ensure it supports and prioritizes adaptation and decarbonization goals. There’s no reason every new Vision Zero project can’t also serve as a way to fight climate change.
3. Empower New Yorkers to support the climate fight from the grassroots.
To shape equitable and community-led transformation, the city should replicate and expand the DOT’s Street Ambassador program to account for barriers to participation like language or childcare. The city can honor community knowledge by providing neighborhoods with the technical expertise to design and steward public spaces that combat the climate crisis. Let's learn from successful community-led projects like the Clean Air Green Corridor on 182nd Street. Provide pathways to envision what’s possible, and not just opportunities to strike down new plans.
4. Invest, invest, invest.
Lastly, ideas without funding support won’t get us very far. New York City government can learn from cities like Montreal that are climate-testing their budget so that every tax dollar spent is contributing to the fight against climate change.
We should reprioritize the city budget and explore dedicated funding strategies through congestion pricing, toll roads, city-run parking garages, paid parking, and curb space fees to deeply invest in more accessible, climate-resilient, and livable public spaces. We can get creative by mobilizing federal investment, like the Healthy Streets program from the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act or accessing Community Development Block Grants to fund climate projects on our streets.
A decade ago, we decided we could redesign our streets to protect us from cars. Let's use this decade to protect New Yorkers from climate change too.
***
Guillermo Gomez is program director and Martha Snow is associate program director at the Urban Design Forum, a nonprofit organization dedicated to mobilizing civic leaders to confront the defining issues in the built environment. They led the Streets Ahead initiative, a platform to imagine more vibrant, equitable streetscapes in New York City. On Twitter @UDFNYC.
***
Have an op-ed idea or submission for Gotham Gazette? Email This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.
NYCHA recovery and resiliency (photo: NYCHA)
Growing up in Section 8 housing on the Lower East Side in the ‘80s and ‘90s, I saw how large an impact the city’s infrastructure investments could have. From the restoration of Hamilton Fish pool across the street from my apartment that gave us a place to cool off in the summer, to the major renovation of the Williamsburg Bridge that made it easier for us to visit our relatives in Brooklyn, to the much-needed renovations at Bellevue Hospital that improved the quality of healthcare for our neighborhood.
Given the limited resources of our diverse, vibrant community, infrastructure improvements like these went a long way towards making New York a more livable city for us. Unfortunately, all too often, the city has a history of neglecting the infrastructure that serves low-income communities, and this disinvestment feeds vicious cycles of poverty and struggle.
Now, in the face of a changing climate, there is consensus that the city’s infrastructure must adapt quickly, and it is critical that we do this without leaving the most vulnerable behind. As we enter the midpoint of hurricane season this month, and remember the devastation and destruction from Superstorm Sandy ten years ago this October, it is time that we make a real plan to double down on the resiliency efforts and infrastructure improvements of the last decade and make investments in the future, not just in our buildings but also in the people who live here.
In New York’s 10th Congressional District, which I am running to represent, there are more than 18,000 families living in public housing, 96% of which is located in an Evacuation Flood Zone. These properties are home to tens of thousands of New Yorkers, all of whom are on the front line of the next major weather event and climate change more broadly. They will be the first to feel the destructive impacts of the next major storm whenever it arrives. The time is now for leadership at all levels of government to prioritize investing in at-risk NYCHA properties and their broader communities.
We must empower the New Yorkers who live in these low-lying areas and provide support to the strong community networks they’ve formed. We should be training individuals with the skills they need to create resilient neighborhoods and to ensure safety and security for themselves and their loved ones and neighbors in the event of a disaster. This means establishing and funding workforce training programs today that provide urgently needed skills such as retrofitting buildings and making other energy efficient improvements throughout neighborhoods.
We should put our young residents on a path of development to learn about the green building and construction jobs of tomorrow. By dedicating dollars to this pipeline now, we will begin to lay the foundation that future generations can build upon moving forward. We also need to invest in the backbone of our city, including our faith leaders, our teachers, our small business owners, and so many others who are grounded in our neighborhoods and are protectors of these communities. By supporting these local leaders and their institutions, we are ensuring safety for even our most vulnerable New Yorkers.
In addition to the individuals who will collectively grow together to make our neighborhoods stronger and more resilient, it's imperative that leadership at all levels of government join together to put real money into infrastructure investment. Last November, President Biden signed the $1.2 trillion Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, which includes significant funding to make our infrastructure resilient against the impacts of climate change. I applaud these efforts, but our leadership in Congress must ensure some of this funding goes to protecting our NYCHA residents on the front lines of the climate threat.
If coupled with meaningful action by New York City to center resilience in NYCHA’s capital improvements program, our efforts can do right by these communities that have historically been so wronged.
We must unlock NYCHA funding that was promised in the Build Back Better agenda, but Congress has not delivered. This funding is desperately needed for climate resilience as well as the $40 billion capital backlog for a wide variety of repairs in NYCHA, including water, heating, power, elevators, and more related to health, safety, and quality of life.
Critically, no New York City congressional representative currently sits on the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, where so many of these decisions are made. If elected, I will ask to sit on that committee to give NYCHA residents a voice in that process.
I understand that a true resiliency plan anchored around public housing in New York City will cost billions and take years to build, but the investment is unequivocally necessary. As climate change progresses, extreme weather events like Sandy and Ida will become more frequent and more dangerous to our communities, especially those on the front lines like NYCHA. Our future depends on our investments right now, and our leadership at the federal, state, and city levels must prioritize these efforts and work together to ensure a strong and stable future for this city.
***
Carlina Rivera is a City Council member and Democratic candidate for Congress in the 10th district. On Twitter @CarlinaRivera.
***
Have an op-ed idea or submission for Gotham Gazette? Email This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.