New York City Council Stated Meeting Report
Every two weeks the New York City Council meets for its Stated Meeting to introduce and pass legislation. As a regular feature, Searchlight covers these meetings and posts a summary of the bills passed.
STATED MEETING - September 28, 2004
Quote of the Day:
"The more I look at this project the more I am convinced that it is insane. To dig an 80 foot hole, to alienate 48 acres of parkland, to build a plant that will have ancillary facilities around the community and a pipe to take sludge to the South Bronx... this is a project being built in the wrong place at the wrong time." - Councilmember Oliver Koppell speaking against a proposed filtration plant in Van Cortlandt Park in the Bronx.
Meeting Summary:
On September 28, the New York City Council passed a measure that will help initiate construction of a massive water filtration plant in Van Cortlandt Park in the Bronx. The underground plant, which will filter about 10 percent of the city's drinking water from the Croton Reservoir, will be placed under the Mosholu golf course.
For nearly a decade, the city has been trying to put a filtration plant in the park. Last year, Mayor Michael Bloomberg brokered a deal to invest $240 million in the borough and won the support of many local politicians. (Read more about controversy surrounding the filtration plant.)
Supporters of the project argue that the water filtration plant is needed to provide safe drinking water for city residents. They also say it will bring jobs to an area with some of the highest unemployment rates in the city and provide much needed funds to improve parks and other infrastructure in the Bronx.
But opponents argue the plant will have an adverse affect on the environment and advocate for building it in another location along the Harlem River or in Westchester. They also fear that promises of jobs for locals will not materialize.
After vigorous debate, the council passed a Memorandum of Understanding for the project by a vote of 44 to 6 with 1 abstention. (Councilmembers Oliver Koppell, Helen Foster, Alan Jennings, Bill Perkins, Charles Barron, and Tish James voted "No"; Councilmember Gale Brewer abstained.)
The city must now submit its plans to a federal court. Groups opposing the plant are considering legal action to stop the project.
The council also overrode two vetoes by Mayor Bloomberg.
One measure (Intro 81-A) bans car alarms that are not installed by a car manufacturer. Mayor Bloomberg argues that the bill will affectively ban all car alarms in New York City and could lead to more automobile theft, but the council argues the law is needed to curb noise.
"It makes no sense that in a full blown initiative on noise problems in this city the mayor and the administration failed to address blaring car alarms that wake up people at all hours of the night," said Councilmember John Liu.
The council overrode the mayor's veto by a vote of 49 to 2 (Councilmembers Tony Avella and Erik Dilan sided with the mayor.)
The council also overruled the mayor on a resolution (Res 502) regarding pay phone franchises. The measure requires that future pay phone contracts on city property run for 15 years, rather than 11 years. Telecommunications companies and their lobbyists requested the change that the mayor says will tie the city's hands in future negotiations.
The council also passed three new bills it hopes will make New York's streets and sidewalks safer.
One bill (Intro 205-A) was drafted in response to the death of a woman who was killed last January when she stepped on a metal plate electrified by a faulty underground cable. The legislation requires that companies like Con Edison conduct routine inspections of wires and electrical infrastructure and issue annual reports to the city. The Department of Transportation will conduct random tests to detect stray voltage.
Another measure (Intro 364-A) doubles the fines for people participating or being a spectator of street drag racing. Another piece of legislation (Intro 98) bans the sale of illegal motor scooters, often called "pocket rockets."
"We are moving toward a day when we can walk the streets without fear of drag racing, exploding manhole covers, or fear of electrocution," said Queens Councilmember Peter Vallone, Jr.
The next Stated Meeting is scheduled for October 13.
For an archive of past meetings and council votes, visit Gotham Gazette's Searchlight.
New York City's Department of Information Technology and Telecommunications (DoITT) announced a deal that could improve cell phone coverage and bring in over $20 million a year in municipal revnue. The agreement gives six wireless companies, including telecommunications providers T-Mobile and Nextel, the rights to install cell phone antennas and Internet transmitters on 18,000 of the city's 300,000 lampposts. The plan is scheduled to be put into effect by January.
Most New Yorkers would probably agree that mobile phone coverage in the city is in need of serious improvement. To be sure, the city's plan could minimize problems with mobile phone reception, particularly in midtown where the number of service complaints was reported to be highest in a citywide survey.
However, to date, there has been little public discussion of how this agreement might impact New Yorkers economically, technologically and politically, and only a few concerns expressed over potential negative health effects. "We have no idea what dangers are posed by the concentration of these devices," Councilmember Peter F. Vallone Jr. of Queens told the New York Times.
Will this deal be in the public interest?
The city says that the deployment of wireless antennas on lampposts will reduce the need for additional large, high-power cellular base stations on rooftops. Instead, the plan uses low-power universal antennas that can be used by all cell phone providers. As a result, fewer antennas are required overall to improve mobile phone coverage.
"There's no better way to figure out what is fair or unfair about a plan until you go ahead and launch it," commented Douglas Rushkoff, a tech author who teaches at New York University's Interactive Telecommunications Program.
However, the current plan allows for contracts up to 15 years, which doesn't seem to make sense given the rapid pace of technological change. Shorter contract terms may be necessary in order to insure that the city is not stuck with out-of-date technology, thus losing its competitiveness.
One of the six companies planning to sign contracts with the city, IDT Business Services, is planning to provide low-income communities with cheap Internet and telephone services and equipment. But, this service will only be offered in neighborhoods where more than five percent of residents do not have telephone service. Three other companies (ClearLinx Network, Crown Castle Solutions, Dianet Communications) plan to lease the lampposts to other carriers.
While some give the city credit for attempting to get private companies to offer service to underserved parts of the city, others say the effort is not ambitious enough. NYCwireless board member Dana Spiegel wonders whether the income to the city will be adequate and whether it will be used appropriately: "For example, some of the rental fees could be for earmarked public use such as providing low cost Internet access for the city, especially in underserved areas."
Spiegel also voiced concerns over which city agency would have jurisdiction in the event of technical interference or unfair competition with other wireless providers. While the Department of Transportation has official jurisdiction over lampposts, service providers are normally responsible for inspecting and guaranteeing the safety of their equipment. As the tragic accidents involving electrified wires protruding from lampposts earlier this year have shown, it is important to clarify any jurisdictional issues and private sector responsibilities with respect to the installation of antennas on public property.
With respect to technical interference, another NYCwireless board member Dustin Goodwin commented that, "By renting out lampposts, the city has put a commercial carrier right outside everyone's window. So, in essence, your unlicensed spectrum is no longer yours or your neighbor's but whomever can rent space on the side walk." This is because, under this deal, a private service provider could, theoretically, use all of the unlicensed spectrum inside a commercial or residential property, thereby slowing or shutting down a home or business wireless network.
Currently, the city's Department of Design and Construction, along with the Department of Transportation, is holding a competition to redesign its lampposts. One wonders how the current wireless lamppost plan will be coordinated with this redesign effort. The wireless antennas, the designs of which have been reviewed by the New York City art commission, are low-profile according to DoITT Commissioner Gino Menchini. In fact, they may be virtually unnoticeable from the street.
Following New York's announcement of the deal, other cities (including Philadelphia, Boston, Madison, Wisconsin and Culver City, California) made proclamations that they would turn their downtown areas into free Internet hotspots using wireless technology.
Philadelphia officials claim that they can turn their city into the world's largest wireless Internet hot spot for $10 million by placing hundreds of transmitters on lampposts. The service would either be free, or much cheaper than commercial providers.
New York City's technological competitiveness is of interest to all New Yorkers, and there should be more public discussion of this latest plan before antennas crop up on thousands of lampposts citywide.
Laura Forlano is a doctoral student studying communication technology policy at Columbia University.Â
Bronx
Brooklyn
Manhattan
Queens
Staten Island
Click here for Election Results beginning at 9:00 p.m. on Tuesday, September 14, 2004.
Senate District 28
Candidates:
Agustin Alamo Estrada (Dem)
Nelson A. Denis (Dem)
José M. Serrano (Dem)
Senate District 32
Candidates:
Enrique Diaz (Dem)
Ruben Diaz (Dem)
Pedro Espada, Jr. (Dem)
Senate District 34
Candidates:
Stephen Kaufman (Rep)
Jeffrey Klein (Dem)
John Fleming (Rep)
Egidio Sementilli (Dem)
Senate District 36
Candidates:
Ruth Hassell-Thompson (Dem)
Crystal Wade (Dem)
Assembly District 76
Candidates:
Elizabeth Bones (Dem)
Henry Pelayo (Dem)
Peter Rivera (Dem)
Assembly District 77
Candidates:
Anthony Curry (Dem)
Aurelia Greene (Dem)
Assembly District 79
Candidates:
Michael Benjamin (Dem)
Sigfredo Gonzalez (Dem)
Claudia Nisbett (Dem)
Eric Stevenson (Dem)
Assembly District 80
Candidates:
Anthony Friedman (Dem)
Naomi Rivera (Dem)
Joseph Thompson (Dem)
Assembly District 82
Candidates:
Michael Benedetto (Dem)
Jeannette Graves (Dem)
Rodney Saunders (Dem)
Assembly District 84
Candidates:
Agustin Alamo (Dem)
Carmen Arroyo (Dem)
David Rosado (Dem)
Assembly District 85
Candidates:
Ruben Diaz, Jr. (Dem)
Jerry Love (Dem)
Senate District 17
Candidates:
Ronald Clinton (Dem)
Martin Malave Dilan (Dem)
Senate 21
Candidates:
Noach Dear (Dem)
Kevin Parker (Dem)
Wellington Sharpe (Dem)
Senate District 23
Candidates:
Kelvin Alexander (Dem)
Cole Ettman (Dem)
Rodney Knight (Dem)
Diane Savino (Dem)
Assembly District 42
Candidates:
Michelle Adolphe (Dem)
Rhoda Jacobs (Dem)
Zacary Lareche (Dem)
Assembly District 43
Candidates:
Clarence Norman Jr. (Dem)
Edward Roberts (Dem)
Assembly District 46
Candidates:
Adele Cohen (Dem)
Inna Kaminsky (Dem)
Assembly District 54
Candidates:
Darryl Towns (Dem)
Heriberto Santiago (Dem)
Assembly District 55
Candidates:
Reginald Bowman (Dem)
William Boyland Jr. (Dem)
Assembly District 56
Candidates:
Annette Robinson (Dem)
Richard Taylor (Dem)
Senate District 28
Candidates:
Agustin Alamo Estrada (Dem)
Nelson A. Denis (Dem)
José M. Serrano (Dem)
Assembly District 68
Candidates:
Eddie Baca (Dem)
Adam Clayton Powell IV (Dem)
John Ruiz (Dem)
Senate District 13
Candidates:
Luis Rosero (Dem)
John D Sabini (Dem)
Senate District 22
Candidates:
Barry Grodenchick (Dem)
Jimmy Men (Dem)
Benjamin Singer (Dem)
Senate District 23
Candidates:
Kelvin Alexander (Dem)
Cole Ettman (Dem)
Rodney Knight (Dem)
Diane Savino (Dem)
Assembly District 61
Candidates:
Charles Mclean (Dem)
John Lavelle (Dem)
Assembly District 62
Candidates:
Mario Bruno, Jr. (Rep)
Vincent Ignizio (Rep)
Robert Straniere (Rep)
For Congressional Races, see individual districts on Focus on the Feds.
For articles about State Races, see Eye On Albany.
See a list of Judicial Candidates.