Voting (photo: Michael Appleton/Mayoral Photography Office)

With more than 100,000 absentee ballots yet to be counted, New York voters thus far appear to have approved two state constitutional amendments on the general election ballot and voted down three others. It is unlikely that the mail-in ballots will be enough to sway some or all of the outcomes, setting the stage for only two of the five ballot referendums to pass, though it is not impossible.

The statewide results lend traction to environmental advocates but deliver a major blow to election reformers seeking to continue the momentum of the last three years. They also settle the latest contentious chapter of the state's legislative redistricting reforms, which divided good government groups and elected officials this year -- just as they did in 2014 when another referendum made major changes to the state constitution.

Yorkers will now have a constitutional right "to clean air and water, and a healthful environment," something only a handful of other states have. The proposal, which was Question 2 on the ballot, received roughly 61% of the statewide in-person vote, according to the State Board of Elections' unofficial results.

A second successful amendment, what was Question 5, will broaden the jurisdiction of the New York City Civil Court, allowing claims to keep up with inflation and for cases to be more evenly distributed among the courts. It garnered about 54% of in-person votes from early voting and Election Day.

But the measures to allow for same-day voter registration and no-excuse absentee voting both appear to have failed. As does the amendment containing new rules for the decennial drawing of state legislative and Congressional district lines, which will be finalized by Albany lawmakers next year. It would have made changes related to population apportionment, including how prisoners and undocumented immigrants are counted, the size of the State Senate, and how district lines get approved.

"Tonight's results should remind us all not to take pro-democracy victories for granted," said Theo Oshiro, executive director of Make the Road New York, on election night. Ochiro was part of a coalition that supported the voting and redistricting amendments. He blamed a "a fear-mongering campaign from Trump conservatives" and the amendments' supporters who "remained complacent and did not invest the energy and resources needed to correct the record and win."

"The failure of props 1, 3, and 4 is a black eye for democracy," said Susan Lerner, executive director of Common Cause New York, another member of the coalition.

Just above half of all voters counted by the end of election night voted "No" on the elections amendments. For the redistricting proposal, 48.5% of voters were opposed and only 38.4% were for it.

In New York City, those dynamics were flipped with all ballot proposals receiving at least 58% of the vote, according to the City Board of Elections' unofficial results.

The unofficial results do not include many absentee and affidavit ballots, which have yet to be counted.

Each of the five proposed amendments were passed by the Democratic-controlled State Legislature twice in successive legislative sessions before going to voters. In most cases, they represented years of advocacy within and outside of government. But Democrats did little to push for voter approval of all the measures while Republicans pushed hard in opposition to all of them, especially those related to redistricting and voting, Questions 1, 3, and 4.

"For the party itself this was not something that we were taking as a priority," said State Democratic Party Chair Jay Jacobs in an interview on Capital Pressroom Thursday. "That might have been something where we should have paid more attention."

"I think there was an assumption they were gonna pass," he said.

The newly enshrined right to clean air and water for all New Yorkers could have significant implications for government and a number of industries, whose actors may be more liable for the pollution they spew. Still uncertain is how courts will view the new right, laying the groundwork for its impact to be contoured by case law.

Environmental advocates say the amendment may also influence how regulators like the State Department of Environmental Conservation and City Department of Environmental Protection view their mandate to protect the state's natural resources, how local governments ensure clean drinking water and air quality, and other issues. 

The narrowest amendment on the ballot expanded the New York City Civil Court's jurisdiction to include claims of up to $50,000, up from a previous limit of $25,000. It will apply only to New York City. The justification was simple: to keep up with inflation (the limit was similarly raised in 1983 from $10,000 to $25,000) and to reduce the backlog of civil cases in the State Supreme Court. A nearly identical referendum went before voters in the 1990s but failed.

The election night results constituted a mixed victory for the State Republican Party, which opposed each measure -- particularly the redistricting amendment, which would have done away with a number of tools used by Republicans for decades to control the line-drawing process and pack the State Senate with members of their party. Those machinations, often reached via deals with Democrats under a split government, will still become the province of Democrats now in power to craft district lines to their liking. 

The amendment would have made numerous changes to the process, ranging from the substantial to the technical. It would have frozen the number of State Senate seats at 63, the current level. And it would have required map-makers to count jailed New Yorkers as residents of their hometowns, as opposed to prison towns. It would also have required that all residents be counted, regardless of citizenship status.

In many of the redistricting processes over the last 100 years, Republicans have used an allowance in the State Constitution to add seats to the State Senate in areas likely to vote Republican (often after horse-trading with Democrats, who got their own advantages).

The GOP has also benefited from counting incarcerated individuals in the places they are imprisoned, rather than where they hail from, boosting populations in more conservative districts upstate. Both practices have helped Republicans control the State Senate for most of the last century. They were both targeted by Democrats once they took the Senate in 2019, matching a long-time majority in the Assembly (also bolstered by generous line-drawing) and were presented on the chopping block for voters this fall.

The amendment would also have made changes to how district lines are approved, first by the new state redistricting commission (itself established in a highly debated referendum in 2014) and finally by the State Legislature. It would eliminate certain partisan voting requirements of the commission, which must draw and pass proposed maps before advancing them to the Legislature, and adjust some of the deadlines for doing so to keep up with recent changes to the primary election calendar. It also lowered the necessary final vote threshold needed to pass new district maps in the State Legislature from a two-thirds supermajority to an easier 60% of each house.

Some good government groups, like NYPIRG and Common Cause New York, supported the new amendment, saying it helps fine-tune parts of the 2014 amendment (both opposed that referendum when it was on the ballot). Other groups, like Citizens Union and the League of Women Voters, opposed the new changes because they make it possible for lawmakers to draw lines with less cooperation across the aisle (they both supported the 2014 referendum).

The voting changes were relatively simple, if controversial. One would have eliminated a constitutional deadline to register to vote 10 days before polls close, making it possible for New Yorkers to register to vote and cast a ballot up to and on any election day.

The other would have made absentee ballots available to all voters in all elections, regardless of the circumstances by eliminated the need to provide a justification for requesting one. But that, for the time being remains the status quo: since the onset of the pandemic, the risk of spreading the coronavirus -- something that applies to all voters -- has been considered a valid reason.

Gov. Kathy Hochul (photo: Kevin P. Coughlin/Office of the Governor)

Governor Kathy Hochul is signing two bills Thursday to protect the personal information and finances of domestic violence survivors fleeing their abusers.

One bill allows survivors to shield their home address in public records when registering to vote with the Board of Elections. The second bill requires utility companies to release individuals from shared contracts without charge when they affirm that they are victims of domestic abuse. The latter makes it easier for individuals to leave abusive homes without the financial penalties often attached to seeking safety. State lawmakers passed the bills almost unanimously this spring.

"My mother worked with domestic violence survivors all her life, and I’m proud to continue the mission to put an end to abuse and support the needs of survivors and families,” Hochul said in a statement provided to Gotham Gazette. “Requiring utility companies to release survivors of domestic violence from their contracts freeing up funds for necessities as they get their feet on the ground in a new home and keeping those new homes’ addresses confidential ensures survivors can live there safely."

The legislations’ supporters say the laws will help individuals, especially women and youths, extricate themselves from abusive environments. Home addresses in Board of Elections records can be used by abusers to locate their victims and renew cycles of harm. And so-called "escape clauses" in utility contracts can mitigate the often great personal costs survivors sustain when they break free, the bill's sponsors said. The new provision only applies to contracts initiated after the law is signed.

“The unfortunate truth is that New York State needs to do more to ensure protection for victims of domestic violence," said State Senator Kevin Parker, a Brooklyn Democrat and one of the lead sponsors of the utility contract bill. "As survivors work to move forward with their lives they need [to] be able to break away from utility contracts without penalty."

Assemblymember Carmen De La Rosa, the Manhattan Democrat who carried the bill in the Assembly, noted that "intimate partner violence manifest itself in physical, verbal, and economic abuse."

The bills each require victims to submit affirmations in writing in order to opt-out of their respective obligations. In the case of voter registration, the documentation must be a signed statement expressing that the voter is a victim of domestic violence and "that because of the threat of physical or emotional harm to themself or to family or household members, [they wish] for their registration record to be kept confidential." The confidentiality exemption will last four years, after which the voter may reapply.

“No survivor should have to give up their right to vote in order to protect themselves from abuse," said Assemblymember Nily Rozic, a Queens Democrat who championed that bill.

Previously, registered voters would have to apply for a court order from the state supreme court in order to shield their address.

"We want all New Yorkers to play a role in our democracy," said State Senator Zellnor Myrie, a Democrat from Brooklyn who carried the bill in his chamber. "By removing a cause for fear, this law will hopefully make it easier for survivors to find and use their voices in our elections."

To break utility contracts, individuals will have to request to be removed from contracts in writing and submit some form of official documentation attesting to their status as a victim of abuse. Valid statements include an incident report, police report, order of protection, or a signed affidavit from a range of medical, social service, or legal professionals.

Hochul, a Democrat, has championed a number of initiatives to protect domestic violence survivors in her two months in office. Earlier this month she made the annual declaration of October as "Domestic Violence Awareness Month" and allocated $6.5 million to survivor support and domestic violence prevention programs. Roughly three-quarters of the funding went to organizations that provide housing for survivors.

In her first major address after being sworn in as governor -- the first woman to hold the position in the state's history -- Hochul said her mother grew up "in an abusive home" and imparted to her the value of social justice advocacy. "Together, we founded a home for survivors of domestic violence when she was 70 years old—she taught me empathy," Hochul said in the August 24 speech.

Hochul has committed to championing anti-sexual-harassment and discrimination issues and turning the page on a culture of sexism in state government. She came to power this summer after former Governor Andrew Cuomo resigned following a report from the Attorney General’s office showing he sexually harassed multiple women, including current and former staff members, and oversaw a toxic workplace.

The bills being signed Thursday appear to be the first anti-domestic violence legislation Hochul has enacted into law in her short time as governor.

Governor Hochul with her husband (photo: Kevin P. Coughlin/Office of the Governor)

UPDATE: The day after this article was published by Gotham Gazette (headlined "Hochul Pledges to Release 'Ironclad' Conflicts of Interest Policy"), Governor Hochul released the recusal policies she, Secretary to the Governor Karen P. Keogh, and Lieutenant Governor Brian Benjamin signed related to their private business interests. For Hochul and Keogh the recusals involved the work of their husbands at Delaware North and Bolton-St. Johns, respectively. Benjamin's policy involves recusal in certain matters related to NextPoint Acquisition, an investment firm he founded and directed and in which he still owns stock, and to his spouse's position at New York State Homes and Community Renewal, a state agency. The release was part of a larger announcement of new government transparency measures that included plans to improve agency information sharing, Freedom of Information Law compliance, and an executive order requiring in-person ethics training for state employees.

Here is the article published on October 27, 2021:

Before taking the state’s highest office, then-Lieutenant Governor Kathy Hochul promised to take big strides away from the corruption and impropriety that have characterized Albany politics for decades. ​​Among her commitments was to craft policies to prevent conflicts of interest related to the business dealings of her husband, a senior executive at an international gaming company, and the spouses of other high-ranking executive branch officials, especially Secretary to the Governor Karen Persichilli Keogh.

More than two months into her tenure as governor, no policy has been made public and government watchdogs continue to question what guardrails are in place during ongoing state decision-making.

In answering some of the persistent questions around whether a conflicts-of-interest policy exists and what it entails, Hochul’s administration is offering new details and a promise that the policy will be released publicly.

“Governor Hochul is committed to restoring trust in government, and she holds herself and her staff to the highest ethical standards," Avi Small, the governor's spokesperson, told Gotham Gazette. "Before the Hochul Administration began, the Governor and Secretary signed recusals to prevent even the appearance of conflicts of interest. We have been consulting with legal experts on these policies, and we are planning to release them publicly.”

Small said the policies include Hochul's recusal from matters that have an explicit impact on Delaware North and a commitment to abstain from using her office to benefit the company. Similarly, any state business related to the work of Keogh's husband, an influential New York lobbyist, is being delegated to other executive staff, Small said.

Hochul's husband, William Hochul, Jr., is a senior vice president and general counsel at Delaware North, an international concessions and entertainment company with stakes in numerous state contracts and decisions. It has a notable interest in a potential $1.4 billion deal to create a new stadium for the Buffalo Bills, which could involve generous state subsidies -- and which Hochul has said she is committed to seeing through.

Meanwhile, Mike Keogh is a partner at Bolton St.-Johns, a powerful Albany lobbying firm whose work touches a wide variety of issues and decisions.

In an August 11 interview, soon after scandal-mired Governor Andrew Cuomo announced his intention to resign, Hochul told the Buffalo News her husband "will continue to recuse himself from anything to do with state government​​." She said nothing of her own recusal in state negotiations. A few days later, and a week before her August 24 swearing-in as governor, she committed to working with outside experts to develop an "ironclad policy."

"I understand concerns and I have reached out to outside ethics experts to come up with an ironclad policy so no one will ever question that there's any involvement with my husband and anything pertaining to the state of New York," she said in an August 15 interview on CNN when asked about potential conflicts with Delaware North.

Good government advocates and other concerned parties say the governor should make her policy public and have it independently verified, either by the state Attorney General and Comptroller, or by the Joint Commission on Public Ethics (JCOPE), the state's ethics oversight body.

"It's never going to be perfect but having an independent eye on it from the Comptroller or the AG or both," said John Kaehny, executive director of Reinvent Albany, a government transparency advocacy group, "that would lend tremendously to the credibility, because otherwise it's just her or Delaware North saying, 'Trust us.'"

"That's policing yourself and policing yourself doesn't work so well," he added. Kaehny said there should also be a plan in place for the Hochul administration to regularly update those entities on the policy's implementation.

"Internal guidance, though helpful, isn't enough," said Blair Horner, executive director of the good government group NYPIRG. "The governor should request a formal opinion from JCOPE and then she should release that decision to the public."

In an editorial published Tuesday, the Albany Times Union editorial board took the same position. "She owes it to New Yorkers to get a credible second opinion, and to share it with the public," the board wrote, later adding, "It would give members of the public a chance to judge for themselves whether the finding and constraints are appropriate."

"We think the Comptroller or AG would be more credible than JCOPE as that second opinion," Kaehny said, an apparent reference to criticisms that the commission lacks independence and bite (Hochul and some legislators have said it is in need of a major overhaul). "That said, a public, unredacted JCOPE advisory opinion that clearly addressed public concerns about conflict of interest would be a heck of a lot better than nothing."

Family ties are a tradition in the State Capitol: Melissa DeRosa, Secretary to former Governor Andrew Cuomo, is the daughter of Bolton St.-Johns' chief Albany lobbyist, Giorgio DeRosa. When the younger DeRosa was appointed to the influential post in 2017 government watchdogs raised alarms about the potential conflicts her relations posed. Cuomo dismissed them. "Her father is a longtime, well-known lobbyist in Albany. Everybody knows that. So, I don’t see the issue whatsoever," he said at the time. DeRosa has said she complies with recusal rules of the state's Public Officers Law and consulted with JCOPE to avoid the appearance of conflicts.

New York's Public Officers Law does not explicitly mention conflicts of interest related to family members but does bar officials from having "any interest, financial or otherwise, direct or indirect," or "engag[ing] in any business or transaction or professional activity or incur[ring] any obligation of any nature" that would conflict with their official duties.

JCOPE generally recommends officials "recuse yourself from any personnel decisions that involve a family member or close personal friend." It is unclear what direct guidance DeRosa received from JCOPE because the body's advisory opinions do not contain identifying information. It is also unknown in what instances DeRosa recused herself, an especially complicated task in a state government where issues are often intertwined in large package deals during budget and end-of-session negotiations.

Gov. Hochul & other officials in Ida's aftermath (photo: Darren McGee/Governor's Office)

After the powerful remnants of Hurricane Ida hammered the Northeast and killed 16 New Yorkers, Governor Kathy Hochul promised a full review of the state's handling of the catastrophe. Nearly two months later, the governor has not released anything or provided any update about the assessment while questions remain about how the nascent Hochul administration dealt with the storm's approach and arrival. 

As the storm crossed into New York on September 1, only a week into Hochul’s tenure as governor, her office issued an advisory warning of heavy rain and "possible flooding." That morning she directed state agencies to take some precautionary action but did not declare a state of emergency, hold a press briefing, or announce any travel restrictions before the worst of the storm hit that evening.

That night and into the next morning, the downstate region saw torrents of water -- enough to submerge cars up to the windows and fill basement apartments, especially in parts of Queens where geography and infrastructure placed homes in the floodpath. Those basements are where most of the victims died.

Subway entrances resembled waterfalls and the rain erased the contours of streets and highways. It was not until after midnight that Hochul declared a state of emergency.

Within days the state assessed tens of millions of dollars in property damage.

"I'm going to be convening a task force of individuals who will do an after-action report to me," Hochul said at a briefing in Yonkers on September 3. "I've insisted on this already and I want to know exactly what we did right. If we did it right, we'll keep doing it right. If there were any areas that were shortcomings I want to know what they are and how we address them."

Without admitting fault, Hochul said the state needed to be better prepared for extreme weather events like Ida, which have been coming with more frequency in recent years.

"Some people called this a 500-year event. I don't buy it because I was up on Lake Ontario when in 2017 we had what was known as a 100-year event. It happened two years again later," she said at the September 3 briefing, surrounded by grieving families and other elected officials.

A day earlier, Hochul laid out the critical questions of her post-mortem.

"Did we have enough warning? Did we let people know? Should we shut down subways earlier? Was there a breakdown in communication with the weather systems? Were we prepared enough?" she asked at a press briefing on Long Island. "I am going to intensely ask those questions, get the answers, and when I get that, I will share that with the public because every crisis is an opportunity to learn and to improve and to be more prepared for the next one."

"The after-action report is in progress," said Avi Small, a spokesperson for Hochul, when asked about the review and any preliminary findings. 

On the morning of September 1, Hochul began issuing warnings and directing state agencies to deploy available emergency response resources. The state Department of Transportation was instructed to clear drain catches and dispatch generators, pumps, chainsaws, and emergency lighting. Plows, dump trucks, and other equipment from the Thruway Authority were placed on standby and MTA crews were called in to inspect "flood-prone areas" of the subway. At least ten state agencies and authorities were engaged in a last-minute rush to prepare the state.

While the review hasn't materialized, the administration has been active in the aftermath of the storm. Hochul secured a major disaster declaration from President Joe Biden, along with millions in federal aid. For immigrants excluded from FEMA relief, the administration established a $27 million fund that was applauded by advocacy groups. The governor visited devastated areas of New York City and other parts of the state -- including a visit to Queens with Biden and other elected officials -- and pledged to return.

On Monday, as another (less severe) deluge was expected to hit the state, Hochul issued a preemptive state of emergency declaration. The early order is a sign of the apparent lessons learned from getting caught flat-footed in the storm water two months prior.

"I am proactively declaring a State of Emergency to ensure we can provide the necessary resources to respond to this storm and protect lives and property in regions where the forecast is calling for significant rainfall," Hochul said in a statement accompanying agency directives that looked similar to what she issued the morning before Ida hit, though without the emergency declaration. "I am encouraging New Yorkers to prepare now for inclement weather expected over the coming days and urging commuters to take precaution ahead of heavy rainfall expected tomorrow morning."

On September 23, three weeks after Ida, Mayor Bill de Blasio issued a report from a city task force he convened in the aftermath of the storm with new protocols for responding to catastrophic weather events. The task force recommended $2.7 billion in new funding for resiliency projects, which de Blasio said he supported.

“Extreme weather is more common than ever, and more severe than ever. Business as usual is over. Keeping New Yorkers safe means profoundly changing the way we prepare for – and react to – this new normal,” the mayor said in a statement. “This new report charts a path forward for investing in vulnerable neighborhoods, shoring up our infrastructure, warning communities ahead of major weather events, and better tracking storms before they arrive."

Like Hochul, the mayor received significant scrutiny about the city's preparations for Ida and the fact that so many people died in basement apartments that were not up to code. The new plan includes developing the Office of Emergency Management's early warning systems -- a project that had been planned for 2023 but de Blasio said the city would expedite. Some have questioned why the system wasn't in place when Ida hit, given the city's knowledge of both flooding problems and widespread code violations for basement apartments.

Governor Hochul at an addiction-prevention event (photo: governor's office)

A new state regulation on access to medication-assisted treatment for those with substance use disorders is causing confusion and threatening patients’ recovery, providers say as they call on Governor Kathy Hochul to use her executive authority to immediately fix the problem.

On October 1, the state Department of Health began implementing a new statewide formulary that outlines coverage parameters for Medicaid patients receiving medication-assisted treatment (MAT). The new rule was meant to provide consistency across the state in access to MAT drugs like suboxone and buprenorphine, which are clinically-proven treatments for people with substance use disorders. But providers say there is a crucial flaw with the formulary: that it continues to require prior authorization for pharmacies to dole out certain drugs and places limits on their dosage.

Ahead of the October 1 deadline when the new rule became effective, providers warned that it would create a two-tier treatment system. New York no longer requires prior authorization for MAT drugs for people on commercial insurance after then-Governor Andrew Cuomo signed a law repealing it at the end of 2019. But, at the same time, he vetoed a bill that would have done the same for Medicaid patients. Effectively, wealthier New Yorkers have easier access while low-income New Yorkers, many of them Black and Hispanic, struggling with the same conditions face a greater administrative hurdle.

[Read: Amid Rising Overdose Deaths, Hochul Urged to End Two-Tiered Addiction Treatment System in New York]

After the rule went into effect, treatment providers say they have seen their warnings become reality. In interviews, providers said the state failed to adequately inform patients or pharmacies of the rule change and that several of their patients faced trouble receiving their prescriptions. “Why would we do this when there's the pandemic and the epidemic both occurring at the same time?” said Dr. Justine Waldman, CEO of REACH Medical, an Ithaca-based harm reduction provider. “This was an easy fix.”

As Waldman pointed out, MAT drugs -- which block the effects of opioids and help prevent overdoses, hospitalizations and death -- can only be given out the day a prescription is written and, if a pharmacy lacks the correct drug or prior authorization, patients face the risk of having their treatment interrupted. “Everything that I feared is happening,” she said.

“It's being touted as something that's beneficial for our patients but all it's done is to destabilize patients who have been further destabilized by COVID and have less access to care to begin with,” she added. “And now here we are again at Ground Zero and it's just really disappointing.”

Providers and advocates have for years been calling for executive action to immediately repeal the need for prior authorization for Medicaid patients on MAT. Their calls have become all the more urgent as overdoses spiked nationally last year. Between March 2020 and March 2021, according to provisional CDC data, New York saw an estimated 5,437 overdose deaths, a number that could possibly increase once data is official, and a 32% increase from the prior year.

Advocates see some hope under Governor Hochul, who has spoken of her own family’s experience with the opioid crisis and who recently signed a package of legislation aimed at tackling the opioid epidemic. The new laws decriminalized possession of opioid antagonists such as naloxone that can prevent overdoses, decriminalized possession and sale of hypodermic needles and syringes, and established a MAT program for incarcerated individuals in state and local correctional facilities, among other measures.

“When the State of New York has the ability to take steps that can just minimize the stress that people are going through to make it easier on them and their families, to let them know that there should not be stigma associated with seeking medication assisted treatment or any other variation that you need to get yourself in order, we have to send a message,” Hochul said at the bill signing. “We are there with you.”

Last month, a spokesperson for Hochul said her office was “reviewing the legislation and will have more to say on this soon.​” Hochul’s office did not respond to a request for comment for this story.

But her administration did. A spokesperson for the state Department of Health said the new formulary expanded coverage compared to previous regulations. “Prior to October 1, 2021, when the New York State Department of Health implemented the statewide formulary for Medication Assisted Treatment (MAT) products, the Medicaid Managed Care (MMC) and Medicaid Fee for Service (FFS) Program plans covered only 64% of MAT products on their formularies as compared to the statewide formulary, which covers 100% of FDA approved products,” said Jeffrey Hammond, the spokesperson, in an email. “As a result of the change, all seven million Medicaid members now follow a single formulary, where preferred products and coverage parameters are consistent across the Medicaid Program, as opposed to a system where every managed care plan establishes their own formulary and coverage for these drugs.  The Department will continue to work with providers to make sure that Medicaid members’ treatment is not disrupted as a result of this expanded coverage.”

Hammond noted that in instances where prior authorization is required for a non-preferred product, it must be processed within 24 hours and if the preferred medication is out of stock or unavailable, pharmacies can provide a five-day emergency supply to patients. The Health Department also requires MMC insurance plans to issue overrides to pharmacies, allowing them to issue non-preferred drugs without prior authorization if a preferred drug is out of stock. 

In practice, providers say, those rules aren’t clear to pharmacies and are an unnecessary level of red tape that doesn’t apply to those on commercial insurance.

Dr. Sonia Lopez, a medical provider in the Bronx, said that receiving prior authorization can take a day or more, precious time for a person in MAT treatment, and that there seems to be a lack of coordination between pharmacies and insurance companies. “They seem to have this bureaucracy about, ‘This is how prior authorization is done,’” she said in a phone interview, as she described a patient’s hours-long ordeal to try to get a prescription filled after the new formulary took effect. “My patient can't afford that.” Even a temporary disruption with MAT could force patients to seek drugs on the street, she noted, which could also possibly be laced with Fentanyl and lead to deadly overdoses.

“I feel like people don't understand the patient, that the patient is not the first priority in this system,” she said. “There’s all this bureaucratic craziness and the patient falls through the cracks.”

Louis Jones nearly became one of those patients. Jones is a syringe exchange outreach worker with VOCAL-NY, a nonprofit advocacy and service group, and is also in a MAT program to recover from years of heroin use. Jones was transferring between medical providers when the formulary kicked in, and was unable to get his prescription filled because he lacked the prior authorization for it. “I took the suboxone that I had and I was cutting it,” he said, having to stretch his existing prescription for three days before getting a new one. “I wasn’t sure about this pharmacy getting it delivered, the prior authorization coming through.”

“It was very uncomfortable. My anxiety level was very...There was some depression, you know, there was withdrawals,” he said.

Jones emphasized the dangers of disruption to patients like him on MAT. “Continuity of care is critical to anybody in this process of any kind of medicated assisted therapy or treatment,” he said.

“Who knows how many people might have died or gotten an accidental overdose,” he added. “It caused some chaos, some confusion. I don’t believe that's their intention but I believe that's what came out of it. That's how I felt.”

“It's basically a fairness issue...but I think it's also a major public health issue,” said Allegra Schorr, president of the Coalition of Medication-Assisted Treatment Providers and Advocates (COMPA). Schorr said the added red tape of the formulary may also discourage doctors from treating Medicaid patients and instead only treat people on commercial insurance. “It's like segregating the system and the gap is gonna just keep getting wider and wider and wider,” she said. “When a state makes decisions like that, the repercussions, it's like a cascading effect.”

“It's just pennywise and pound foolish,” she added.

Manhattan DA candidates Alvin Bragg, left, & Thomas Kenniff

The two candidates running for Manhattan District Attorney in the imminent fall election met recently for a spirited televised debate, with issues ranging from the bail system to gun violence and each aspirant’s record of public service.

Democratic nominee Alvin Bragg, a former prosecutor and top deputy New York Attorney General, and Republican nominee Thomas Kenniff, a former military judge and criminal defense attorney, sparred over their resumes and visions for the office in a debate hosted by Manhattan Neighborhood Network and moderated by Gotham Gazette’s Ben Max. [Watch the full 30-minute debate here.]

As he’s done throughout the campaign, which included his win in a crowded and competitive primary, Bragg talked of both his personal and professional experience and positioned himself as a reformer who will also ensure public safety. Kenniff, who did not have to face any primary opponent and is fighting the uphill battle in a very Democratic-leaning borough, stressed first and foremost taking on crime more aggressively and sought to paint Bragg as a threat to public safety.

As the top state-level prosecutor in Manhattan and a local and national leader on criminal justice issues given the high-profile nature of the position, the district attorney has enormous sway over issues of law and order, prosecution and punishment, freedom and incarceration, and policy-making with a focus on improving public safety. The DA leads a large office of attorneys, investigators, and other staff with a budget well over $100 million and has jurisdiction over aspects of Wall Street, City Hall, major portions of the subway system, and much more.

In his opening statement, Kenniff emphasized his background as an army veteran and a defense attorney who served in Iraq and in the Javits Center in New York City during the COVID-19 pandemic. He professed his anger at what he called misguided criminal justice policies that he said have led to an increase in violent crimes and a decrease in quality of life for city residents. He also attacked Bragg, particularly over Bragg’s positions on bail reform. 

“Having spent the majority of my career defending the rights of the accused, I understand fairness, but I also know that Manhattan needs a district attorney that will keep us safe,” Kenniff said.

Bragg argued he has the ability to understand policy issues from a variety of angles, both personal and professional. He discussed his upbringing in Harlem, where he had guns pointed at him on six occasions, three of them by police, his education at Harvard Law School, and his dedication to the New York criminal justice system as an attorney in several different roles. Bragg noted his work as a federal prosecutor and chief deputy under the New York Attorney General, and mentioned having led a number of high-profile and complex cases, including related to armed robbery, public corruption by the former State Senate majority leader, and the Trump Foundation’s misuse of charitable assets. 

“All of these experiences, personal and professional, lead me to a vision that marries fairness and public safety. This is my life. This is my life’s work. As a result of it, I have been endorsed by the New York Times, by [former U.S. Attorney] Preet Bharara, and so many others,” Bragg said, with reference to the Times editorial board’s pivotal endorsement in the primary.

On running the large office of Manhattan District Attorney and the charges they would give to their many deputies as DA, the two candidates both indicated they would seek to shift the culture and priorities of the office.

Kenniff stressed the importance of rebuilding it given departures of staff and the need to abandon what he has deemed failed policies. He criticized what he characterized as “far left, progressive” policies that he says have hurt the office and the borough. Kenniff also denounced Bragg’s intention to rebrand a bureau to review wrongful convictions, calling it the “Free the Wrongfully Convicted Unit,” saying that it sends a negative message to those working in the DA’s office and beyond. While he supports overturning wrongful convictions, Kenniff indicated he believes it must be done without insulting longtime professionals who have done no wrong. 

Bragg countered, pointing out his experience leading a large office and talking about his extensive “Day 1 memo,” which Kenniff had criticized regarding the newly-named office. Bragg touted being the candidate who has laid out in detail what he would do if elected, and discussed leading the office by reshaping the criminal justice system so that it prioritizes what he called cases that really do harm while going up the food chain to the most harmful actors.

“I have walked the walk. I have done the work. I have been with loved ones who have had violent acts happen to them, and I have also walked with those who are fighting the civil rights fights. I have managed an office like this, and I am ready to serve on day one,” Bragg said. 

He would not prioritize the types of cases that led to the deaths of Eric Garner and George Floyd, he said, but stressed he would focus on drug and gun trafficking as well as sex crimes in order to improve public safety.

Kenniff highlighted his 15 years as a criminal defense attorney in Manhattan (where he lived until moving to Long Island) and discussed the wide range of clients he represented, including those who were indigent. He attacked Bragg’s career, including specific cases where he said Bragg had pursued harsh prosecution for powerless individuals.

“Take a look at the electronic filing system. Take a look at PACER [Public Access to Court Electronic Records]. See the type of people that Alvin Bragg was seeking decade-long, life sentences for as a federal prosecutor, including opposing a motion to vacate a life sentence against a non-violent drug trafficker who was found mentally unfit. That was one of his first published cases,” Kenniff said. 

Bragg continued to point to his varied career and personal experience, saying he is proud of his record. 

On the contentious issue of bail reform, Bragg argued for the recent reforms made by the state and said that they should be kept as-is after sweeping changes were passed two years ago and slightly rolled back last year. Bragg said that bail has been a wealth test that disproportionately hurts and incarcerates poor people and people of color, while it is meant to simply ensure a return to court for those not yet convicted of any crimes. He noted that Kenniff has regularly asked for bail reductions during his legal career.

In terms of additional policies, Bragg mentioned pretrial services or accommodation for people’s ability to return to court, and pointed to a recent op-ed he wrote on bail reform.

Kenniff vehemently criticized the recent bail reforms, which went into effect on January 1, 2020, and argued that such reform led to the massive increases in gun violence that plagued New York City throughout much of 2020 and into 2021, before some recent declines, and argued those results disproportionately hurt people of color. 

“We know when there is an increase in violent crime, disproportionately Black and brown people are going to pay the price for it,” Kenniff said. “So, the very people Alvin Bragg talks about how he walks with everyday, the policies that he and his progressive friends have championed are terrorizing them the most.”

It was one of several comments from Kenniff that Bragg took offense to.

Kenniff also criticized Bragg’s support for bail reform and said he and others had weakened the criminal justice system. 

“Ask people on the streets in Manhattan, in the neighborhoods that he is talking about, in every neighborhood, whether they are feeling safer post-January 1, 2020, or feeling that they are less safe,” Kenniff said.

When asked if there is statistical evidence that the people being released by the new bail policies significantly contributed to the increase in gun violence, Kenniff replied by discussing a single case in which an individual was released on a gun charge and went on to kill a 17-year-old young person of color, but did not cite any data.

Bragg noted that Kenniff did not provide any data, saying there isn’t any to support the argument that the bail reforms had led to the spike in shootings and murders. He called Kenniff’s arguments out of touch with the neighborhoods, such as Harlem, that the new bail reforms actually impact.

Bragg spoke about taking a nuanced approach to prosecuting gun crimes, citing certain instances of illegal possession where individuals should not be prosecuted.

“My dad had a gun when I was young. It was unlawful, but it was to protect our home. I had him turn it in when he was 65. He was not a public safety risk. My position [on gun prosecution] are nuanced. They are born out of real experiences, both in the courtroom and personal that marry fairness and public safety,” Bragg said. 

Kenniff said he would take a far harder line on gun prosecutions and also called for bringing back a disbanded NYPD plainclothes unit that was focused on illegal guns but had been the subject of civil rights complaints. Pointing out that Eric Adams, the Democratic nominee for New York City mayor, holds a similar position, Kenniff said he is arguing for common sense positions. 

When asked to present one question to each other, Kenniff asked Bragg about his reaction to the case Kenniff has previously mentioned: “I have brought up that case that was in the paper the other day with the individual who shot a 17-year-old boy and had been arrested a few days before on a gun possession charge, released on the sort of bail reform policies that you support. What would you say to the mother of that child?” 

Bragg answered that it wasn’t really a hypothetical for him, since he has talked to families whose loved ones were killed by gun violence. He spoke about his own experience, having guns pointed at him by police officers and others. “I understand the pain and I understand that the misguided policies you are talking about, like bringing back stop-and-frisk, is not going to address that,” Bragg said.

Bragg asked Kenniff how he could serve Manhattan’s interests when he is registered to vote and resides on Long Island. Kenniff said that he lived and voted in Manhattan in the past, and served on the front line of the Javits Center as a legal officer during the COVID-19 pandemic. “If I take this office, as I expect I will, I will obviously reestablish my residency in Manhattan,” Kenniff said.

In his closing statement, Bragg emphasized how his personal upbringing inspired his career in public services and how he would utilize his experiences as a federal prosecutor and criminal defense attorney to represent Manhattan. Kenniff addressed the need for improving public safety, noting his outsider background to politics and his focus on moving away from reforms he believes have made New Yorkers less safe.

[WATCH the full 30-minute debate between Manhattan District Attorney Candidates Alving Bragg and Thomas Kenniff]

Voters at the voting booth (photo: Michael Appleton/Mayoral Photography Office)

There are five yes or no questions on the 2021 general election ballot across New York, asking voters to approve or disapprove changes to the state constitution. All the items on the ballot have been passed by two successive classes of the State Legislature and now go to the voters. They includes measures related to legislative redistricting, voting, clean air and water, and more.

Four experts joined host Ben Max for a Manhattan Neighborhood Network discussion of the five ballot questions. They are Melody Lopez, Executive Director of New York Civic Engagement Table; Eric Friedman of the NYC Campaign Finance Board and NYC Votes; Pamela Stewart-Martinez of WE ACT for Environmental Justice; and Jeffrey M. Wice of the NY Census & Redistricting Institute at New York Law School. Watch:

Alvin Bragg, left, & Thomas Kenniff

In the general election for Manhattan District Attorney, Democratic nominee Alvin Bragg and Republican nominee Thomas Kenniff met for a debate hosted by Manhattan Neighborhood Network and moderated by Gotham Gazette's Ben Max. Watch:

Governor Kathy Hochul (photo: Darren McGee/Office of the Governor)

Governor Kathy Hochul's self-imposed transition period ends Friday. Hochul has already made a number of changes to the executive chamber and state policy -- but with the end of the 45-day interval she may reveal some key remaining personnel and policy decisions she has promised over the first weeks of her governorship.

Hochul, a Democrat, asked the public for patience to build her administration over the seven-week window amid an ongoing purge of officials implicated in the scandal-marred regime of her predecessor, Andrew Cuomo. As questions about her policies and initial commitments proliferated in the first weeks of her administration, the new governor said she would also take that time to evaluate many existing and forthcoming positions while making some notable appointments and policy decisions throughout. After that she would make additional decisions about which policies would stay and which would go in a number of previously outlined areas.

"I've asked for a 45-day period to be able to assemble my team, and I'm not going to be replacing people when they're in the middle of a pandemic on this day because I have so much to do to protect New Yorkers," Hochul said in an interview on MSNBC the morning after being sworn in. "I'll be taking an approach that's very different," she added, referring to Cuomo, who oversaw a "toxic work environment" and "culture of fear and intimidation," according to administration members cited in a report by the New York State Attorney General's office.

"As part of the 45-day transition period, we are reviewing the matters raised by recent investigations and exploring all ways to ensure accountability and open, ethical governing that New Yorkers will trust,” said Hazel Crampton-Hays, the governor's press secretary, in a statement to Gotham Gazette.

Hochul has also spent her first 45 days moving ahead on urgent priorities, while taking time to stake out a path of reform that veers from the abuses of power that led to Cuomo's resignation. In her first major address, she vowed to return students safely to the classroom, boost vaccination rates, and expedite emergency relief to renters, landlords, and workers excluded from federal aid. She has advanced many of those through school mask mandates, preparations for booster shots, and hiring more staff to process rental assistance applications. She has imposed controversial vaccination mandates on workers in a number of industries and settings, several of which are being challenged in the courts.

"Your priorities are my priorities—and right now that means fighting the Delta variant," she said in her first address.

Now many stakeholders hope to see the substance of some of her other commitments to a more transparent and ethical government, the details of her sexual harassment policies, and the fate of Cuomo's longtime allies and aides who still hold positions of power in the administration.

One key matter relates to possible conflicts of interest around the governor’s husband, William Hochul, Jr., a senior executive at the gambling and concessions company Delaware North, which has millions of dollars in state contracts, and the husband of Karen Persichilli Keogh, the new Secretary to the Governor, who is a partner at the powerful Albany lobbying firm, Bolton-St. Johns. (The principal of that firm, Giorgio DeRosa, is the father of Melissa DeRosa, the last Secretary to the Governor under Cuomo.) Hochul has said she is soliciting outside experts to create an “ironclad policy” to avoid conflicts of interest, though none has been made public.

A spokesperson did not respond directly to Gotham Gazette questions about the status of the ethics policy.

One of Hochul’s first commitments was to get rid of any state official named in the Attorney General's investigation into Cuomo's sexual harassment, which led to his resignation. According to Crampton-Hays, that promise has been fulfilled. Several other members of Cuomo's inner circle appear to be staying on.

"We are retaining a number of public servants who have demonstrated a commitment to the Governor’s agenda, and we look forward to working with our top tier team to deliver results for New Yorkers," Crampton-Hays said in a statement this week.

In late September, Hochul announced the resignation of health commissioner Dr. Howard Zucker, a mainstay at Cuomo's daily pandemic press briefings last year who had come under fire for the state's handling of covid-positive nursing home residents, undercounting the covid death toll among nursing home residents, and under-reporting the overall statewide death toll. In his place, Hochul named Dr. Mary Bassett, a former New York City health commissioner, who has been widely lauded as a strong choice.

Around the same time, Hochul indicated another Cuomo stalwart, Budget Director Robert Mujica, would remain. 

"To date I am still evaluating positions, but he is working very hard with us to chart the future going forward, so I believe he’ll be with us for some time,” Politico reported her saying on September 24.

Since 2015, Mujica has been instrumental in Cuomo's dominance over the state budget, which he wielded to reward allies, exert pressure on adversaries, and push policy through the Legislature. Prior to that, Mujica worked for the Senate Republican conference, which Cuomo, a Democrat, had helped keep in power for a number of years.

"If I was governor I would not have kept Rob Mujica," said State Senator Liz Krueger, a Manhattan Democrat who chairs the Senate’s finance committee, in an interview with Gotham Gazette. "But I'm not governor," she added.

Mujica also holds a Cuomo-appointed spot on the MTA Board, a seat he was confirmed to only after the former governor pushed through a change to state law making Mujica eligible.

Observers have noted that to be successful, Hochul will need to retain cabinet and staff members with institutional knowledge even as she tries to break from the political culture cultivated by Cuomo and other Albany power-brokers.

"The strongest administrations tend to be those that, in terms of their personnel decision, have a balanced portfolio of people with varied experiences," said Bruce Gyory, a longtime political consultant at Manatt, Phelps & Phillips LLP. "Yes, they have fresh faces but they also have some experienced hands."

Keeping Mujica may be a strategic calculation by Hochul to ensure strong footing in her first -- and potentially only -- state budget presentation. That Executive Budget, due in January, will be part of what determines Hochul’s legacy and sets the tone for her performance in the June Democratic primary.

"The preparation, presentation, and negotiation of that first budget is always very key for any new administration, especially one that comes in like this one out of the trauma of a governor resigning," Gyory said.

Some in Cuomo's executive chamber left with him, including fixers like DeRosa, senior advisor Rich Azzopardi, and Department of Financial Services Superintendent Linda Lacewell, who was also an MTA Board appointee of Cuomo. Over the course of weeks, others left, announced their departures, or were replaced, like Director of State Operations Kelly Cummings, who was succeeded by Kathryn Garcia, the former New York City sanitation commissioner and recent mayoral candidate.

On Thursday, the Hochul administration announced the resignation of MTA board member Larry Schwartz, a one-time Secretary to the Governor and, more recently, voluntary "vaccine czar" who was named several times in the Attorney General's report. He will leave the board when a replacement is confirmed by the State Senate, which is not expected until January, when session resumes.

“Larry Schwartz will be resigning, effective when the Senate confirms his replacement, and the Governor is grateful for his public service,” Crampton-Hays said in a statement. “To ensure that the MTA Board is accountable to riders and represents the voices of New Yorkers, our administration will be soliciting input from advocates, impacted communities, and experts on candidates to fill the open seats on the board, and we look forward to working with the legislature to confirm those appointments at the next legislative session and deliver the modernization, reliability, and enhancements New Yorkers deserve.”

Other Cuomo administration officials set to depart include Michael Hein, commissioner of the Office of Temporary and Disability Assistance, sources told the New York Post last month. Hein was responsible for delivering $2.6 billion in federal rent relief, which the previous administration was criticized for not moving quickly enough. The governor's office confirmed Hein's resignation to City & State Thursday. Dr. Theodore Kastner, commissioner of the Office for People With Developmental Disabilities, Office of Addiction Services and Supports Commissioner Arlene González-Sánchez, and Licha Nyiendo, commissioner of the Division of Human Rights, will also step down, according to the Post.

Speculation remains over the fates of other Cuomo administration holdovers, especially those from his inner circle, like SUNY Chancellor Jim Malatras, who was previously Director of State Operations for Cuomo.

Beyond Personnel
Emergency orders were a hallmark of Cuomo's administration in his final 18 months as the pandemic invaded New York. On her first day in office, Hochul signed an executive order leaving remaining provisions in place for 45 days while her administration reviewed them.

"All Executive Orders issued by previous Governors which are currently in effect shall remain in full force and effect until October 8, 2021, unless otherwise revoked, superseded or modified," Hochul's first order states. During that time, her administration would assess whether "additional orders" should be removed or replaced.

"Today, I am directing an overhaul of State government's policies on sexual harassment and ethics, starting with requiring all training be done live, instead of allowing people to click their way through a class," Hochul said on her first day as governor, taking a jab at Cuomo whose training was completed online.

She also said she “will sign an executive order” mandating every state employee undergo ethics training, "which, shockingly, is not required across the board."

That hasn't happened yet. According to a spokesperson, it is part of the 45-day review before new executive actions are taken. That commitment hasn't stopped Hochul from making other changes, like extending pandemic-era exemptions to in-person government meetings under the state's Open Meetings Law.

Hochul also promised to direct state agencies "to review their compliance with state transparency laws, and provide a public report on their findings." She said her counsel was working on devising a system to fulfill requests under the state Freedom of Information law "as fast as possible." FOIL requests have been plagued by delays for years leading to a hefty backlog, something Cuomo has been accused of personally interfering in.

A month later, her office issued a memo to agency heads giving them until October 20 to present a plan for better transparency and FOIL compliance.

Transparency advocates and journalists have been pushing Hochul to release the sum of the state's Covid-19 data, which they say could include over 100 data sets and are subject to FOIL. In response to a Gotham Gazette inquiry for a prior story on that data transparency, a spokesperson said Hochul would take executive action to create a more open government following the 45-day review.

Many lawmakers have expressed the feeling that Hochul's early commitments and willingness to collaborate is a sign that she is invested in a more accountable and collegial government. "Speaking as a legislator, I've had more contacts from her administration on more issues in her first 45 days than I had with the Cuomo administration in his 11 years," Krueger said.

Watchers are also waiting to see the conflicts of interest policy Hochul promised surrounding the work of her husband at Delaware North. That has become more pressing with the revelation by the Associated Press that Hochul is involved in negotiations to subsidize a new stadium for the Buffalo Bills, for which Delaware North is the concessions vendor (and whose Buffalo tenancy Hochul, a native of the state's second largest city, has said is important to her personally). The deal could cost the state up to $1.1 billion, according to the Bills’ proposal.

"That document should be made public so that everybody can take a look at it and know what the rules of the road are," said Krueger, who commended Hochul's acknowledgement that such a policy was required.

John Kaehny, head of the good government group Reinvent Albany, has called for Hochul to get independent verification from the state Attorney General and Comptroller of her disclosure and recusal process.

"That would lend tremendously to the credibility, because otherwise it's just her or Delaware North saying, 'Trust us,'" he said. "That's policing yourself and policing yourself doesn't work so well."

NYCHA's Eastchester Garden Houses (photo: Michael Appleton/Mayoral Photography Office)

For decades, government officials, advocates, and residents have debated the best path forward for New York City public housing while conditions have deteriorated and the price tag for urgent capital repairs and operational costs has boomed.

The New York City Housing Authority (NYCHA) faces an estimated capital need of $40 billion to address mold, lead paint, broken boilers and elevators, and a host of other needs critical to stable and safe housing for more than 400,000 tenants. There is also an ongoing operating deficit exacerbated by the pandemic and the authority has been placed under the watch of a federal monitor.

A number of solutions have been suggested or launched but there has been only piecemeal follow-through from government officials and limited collaboration among city, state, and federal entities to solve the public housing crisis.

Some -- like Mayor Bill de Blasio and his likely successor, Brooklyn Borough President Eric Adams -- have embraced roadmaps that include privatizing public housing management at some developments and selling air rights while pushing for a variety of additional funding sources, including more state and federal aid. Others have rejected proposals that alter the management of NYCHA or allow new housing on NYCHA land in favor of full federal funding, which has been anemic for decades.

In his American Jobs Plan, a $2 trillion infrastructure bill, President Joe Biden has included $40 billion to restore public housing nationwide with much of it likely to go to NYCHA, the nation's largest public housing system. A counter proposal in Congress would double that funding to $80 billion, with half going to NYCHA -- enough to meet its capital needs. While Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, the senior senator from New York, promised in a recent op-ed in City & State "to use all of my power as majority leader" to pass the congressional plan, its fate remains uncertain.

Now, a new report from Community Preservation Corporation (CPC), a nonprofit affordable housing financing company, seeks to cut through some of the noise and offer a concrete roadmap to finally secure the funding that NYCHA and its residents need. The CPC white paper being released Tuesday, October 5, argues that officials at all levels of government will need to use multiple tools to solve NYCHA's myriad problems -- even if the federal package does include $40 billion for New York City's public housing.

The company, led by Rafael Cestero, former commissioner of the New York City Department of Housing Preservation and Development (HPD) under Mayor Michael Bloomberg, is pushing for the city, state, and federal governments to pursue a three-part solution in line with de Blasio's 2020 roadmap.

It includes converting 62,000 NYCHA units to private management (while remaining under NYCHA ownership), an idea that has received mixed reviews from tenant advocates and elected officials, and which CPC is currently a part of in 16 NYCHA properties in Manhattan; establishing a so-called "Public Housing Preservation Trust" at the state level to leverage funding for the remaining 110,000 units; and receiving a one-time federal infusion to address major capital needs.

For the plan to work, Community Preservation Corporation argues the city and state will each need to allocate an additional $1.5 billion annually for the "comprehensive modernization of whole developments." The nonprofit is urging the next mayoral administration, due into office January 1, to move aggressively on the programs and to work with the state to advance legislation to establish the public housing trust.

"What we tried to get across is we should stop making a false choice between doing the first way, the second way, or the third way," Cestero told Gotham Gazette. "The reality is that NYCHA is important enough, and the problems big enough, that we should do all three things."

While the $40 billion for capital repairs has become the marquee figure used by NYCHA leadership, the de Blasio administration, and others, CPC believes the needs are far greater.

Its assessment, previewed by Gotham Gazette, reasons that the authority needs closer to $48 billion in capital funding to address both the collapsing infrastructure and increasingly urgent environmental resilience updates. And none of that addresses NYCHA's operating cost deficit.

CPC estimates the city and federal governments' subsidies for operating costs were $45 million below expectations in 2020, including $34 million in city assistance below budget. Rent collection from NYCHA tenants, intended to make up roughly a third of the authority's operating budget, has been declining since 2016, according to CPC, and has gotten worse during the pandemic. The city's Independent Budget Office has reported rent collection was $64 million under budget by the end of 2020.

Unsurprisingly, CPC's recommendations have the support of NYCHA Chair Greg Russ, who helped author the de Blasio administration's "A Blueprint for Change," which includes many of the components in the new CPC white paper.

“NYCHA agrees with and supports the recommendations made by the Community Preservation Corporation, including receiving capital funding from the City and State to make comprehensive modernizations to our developments; passing the Public Housing Preservation Trust legislation and having HUD allocate 12,000 Tenant Protection Vouchers; and receiving funding through an infrastructure package while establishing a distribution formula that works for NYCHA," Russ wrote in a Monday statement to Gotham Gazette. "This is an exciting time for NYCHA and we look forward to working with residents to transform and improve public housing.”

Budget watchdogs like Citizens Budget Commission, which has been pushing for better management of NYCHA's finances and aggressive steps to bring in new revenue, say the most important action is action itself. "Without dramatic changes within 10 years nearly 90 percent of NYCHA’s housing units could be at risk of deteriorating past the point at which it is cost-effective to repair — a crisis from which NYCHA and the City might well not be able to recover," reads a 2018 Citizens Budget Commission report. There has been limited action in the years since.

The most controversial component of the plans from NYCHA, CPC, and others who favor it is Rental Assistance Demonstration (RAD), which allows public housing authorities to enter into new public-private partnerships wherein private companies like CPC manage public housing developments using federal Section 8 subsidies.

In New York City's version of the plan, developments are still owned by NYCHA, which preserves requirements that rent not exceed 30% of tenants' incomes. According to Erin Burns-Maine, CPC's vice president of policy, RAD developments are still subject to requirements under a 2019 agreement with the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). That same agreement, in response to a series of crises and scandals at the housing authority, including around lead paint, also established a federal monitor for NYCHA.

Some tenant groups have opposed RAD out of fear that private management companies would pursue evictions more vigorously and displace residents, calling it a clear step toward more full privatization of public housing. Opposition groups like Fight for NYCHA have organized protests against the de Blasio administration and Adams' campaign for their support of RAD, which have garnered some attention in the media and among some elected officials. If he becomes the next mayor, Adams has promised free legal services for tenants going through the RAD conversion process. Throughout the campaign Adams has stressed the importance of communication with tenants and said that in developments where he has seen RAD implemented the tenants have liked it.

According to Cestero, the current congressional proposal of $40 billion for NYCHA appears to come with the requirement that the authority use Section 9 subsidies, rather than Section 8, foreclosing the possibility of public-private partnerships under RAD. "That is just, in our opinion, a huge mistake," he said.

Under CPC's recommendations and NYCHA's Blueprint, a majority or repairs and operating costs should be covered by the Public Housing Preservation Trust, which if passed by state lawmakers would allow two-thirds of NYCHA units to transfer to a wholly public entity that can use more valuable federal Tenant Protection Vouchers. The vouchers would open the possibility for NYCHA "to leverage debt, deploy capital funds more quickly, and cut through a number of procurement challenges," according to the white paper. CPC is calling on Washington to allocate 12,000 vouchers to New York City and fund a study of the model.

While widely supported, legislation for the public housing trust has been met with delays. In June, the bill's sponsors, ​​State Senator Brian Kavanagh and Assemblymember Steven Cymbrowitz, said they were holding the proposal until the 2022 legislative session for "further conversation, outreach, and negotiation."

"The public housing trust shouldn't be controversial except it hasn't moved yet...and frankly should be the easiest thing because it is a fully public entity," Cestero said.

To raise additional revenue, CPC also advocates for the sale of NYCHA air rights, in line with the de Blasio Blueprint, as well as infill development -- the leasing of underutilized NYCHA land for private development.