Gotham Gazette

The Place for New York Policy and politics

Open Government

Open Government

Community Board Reform


Like most 17-year-olds, Scott Stringer had a rebellious streak. But unlike most teenagers, Stringer's act of defiance was not to sneak into a bar, dye his hair blue, or ditch school: he wrote a letter to a politician asking if he could be on the local community board.

"My mother was elected to the City Council… and she said `You are crazy. This is nepotism. You can’t do this,’” Stringer recalled. “But I wrote a letter to Percy Sutton and he appointed me, much to her chagrin.”

While it is unclear what long-term effect his teenage efforts had on community board 12 in Washington Heights, Stringer says he learned two things: one, that community boards have the potential to be “Little City Halls,” places for residents to have their concerns addressed; and two, that they face a number of obstacles.

That is why in his race for Manhattan borough president last year, Stringer made a promise to increase their effectiveness and, now that he has taken office, launched an effort last month to “reform” the 12 community boards in his borough.

Scott Stringer

And that is why on a recent Saturday afternoon, one of Stringer's aides, Mary Cooley, met in the offices of the Cooper Square Committee on the Lower East Side with a dozen people from the neighborhood, trying to get them to volunteer to serve on the community board.

But before she could get through the first slide of her power-point presentation, Cooley was interrupted.

"Community boards don't have any real power," said one person.

"The acoustics in the meeting hall are terrible," said another.

"I've had members tell me to shut up and mind my own business," said a third.

But the main point of contention surrounded the current chair of community board 3, David McWater, who owns a number of bars in the area including Doc Holliday's, Nice Guy Eddie's, and The Library -- at the same time that one of the major complaints in the neighborhood is the noise and general disturbance from bars.

"It's hard for people to think that someone who owns nine bars can really address the issues facing the neighborhood," said Anne Sawaryn from the Coalition to Save the East Village.

That so many self-proclaimed community activists are so critical of the very bodies that are supposed to be giving them a voice in government brings up some questions: Are New York City’s community boards obsolete, or can they be retooled to give citizens a real voice in the future of the city?

GETTING COMMUNITY INTO GOVERNMENT

Established in 1963, New York City’s community boards were designed to be a place for local residents to interact with government, to report potholes or a broken streetlight. In 1975, the city charter gave the boards a vote on all land use and zoning issues. In 1990, boards were given the power to draft their own community development plans. (Read an article about the history and responsibilities of community boards.)

Today, the city’s 59 community boards, each comprised of 50 volunteers, serve in an advisory role on issues like:
- Long-term community planning
- Land use
- Liquor license and sidewalk café applications
- And the allocation of city funds in the neighborhood.

Even though their decisions are only advisory, members say that a well-run board can have an impact. For example:

- Carmen Angueira, district manager for community board 12 in the Wakefield area of the Bronx, credits the board's efforts for the clean-up of a toxic waste site in the area.

- Gerald Esposito of community board 1 in Brooklyn said that pressure from the board helped win affordable housing in the future development of Greenpoint and Williamsburg.

- Martin Collins, chair of community board 12 in Washington Heights, said the board helped prevent the Dyckman Job Center, which employs 300 people and provides social services to thousands, from moving out of the neighborhood.

- In the Throg’s Neck section of the Bronx, community board 10 led an effort to keep developers from knocking down one- and two-family homes, according to James Vacca, the former district manager who is now a City Council member.

But over time, the traditional role of community boards has changed, most dramatically in 2003 when the city implemented its 311 complaint line. Today, the number of calls to community boards has decreased dramatically, and the Bloomberg administration has also refused to share the data obtained from 311 calls with the boards.

“The city’s 59 community boards could soon become as obsolete as the telegraph,” wrote the New York Post.

Some also believe that the problems facing community boards point out a larger deficiency in government.

“We have erected an entire edifice of public participation… where only insiders are listened to,” wrote Larry Littlefield on a Gotham Gazette message board on the subject of community board reform.

But others argue that if given the right attention and resources, community boards could become a more vital part of the city.

“To believe that its only function is to ensure that potholes have been filled is to believe there is no value in a community guiding its own planning,” Javier Llano of community board 11 in East Harlem wrote in a letter to the New York Times in response to an article that said community boards “couldn’t be more toothless.”

So far, Stringer is the only borough president to undertake such an effort to overhaul the boards. But the City Council and groups like the Municipal Art Society and League of Women Voters among others, are also looking into how to address the major problems facing community boards.

1. Vacancies

A total of 2,950 people are needed to serve on the city's community boards; 50 members for each of the 59 boards.

However, nearly every community board across the city is seeking new members to fill empty positions. In Manhattan, only two of the 12 community boards have a full roster of 50 members; community board 9 in West Harlem, for example, has 10 vacancies.

Part of the issue is recruiting new people who are willing to put the time and effort into working on neighborhood issues – especially sitting through several long evening meetings a month.

Another issue is that some members don't want to give up power.

Last year, community board 4 in Corona, Queens became embroiled in a bitter internal dispute when new members accused long-time representatives of denying leadership opportunities.

The meetings became so intense that 15 police officers were called in to keep the peace.

To try to address the issue in Manhattan, the borough president's office conducted dozens of recruiting seminars in the past month like the one on the lower East Side that sparked lively debate over the proliferation of bars. They reached out to business owners, neighborhood activists, non-profit groups, and students in an effort to attract new members. Stringer hopes to get three applications for every opening and promises that each applicant will get an in-person interview with his staff.

2. Political Appointment Process

Madeline Wils, former chair of community board 1, Manhattan

All community board members are appointed by the borough president: half directly and half at the recommendation of City Council members that represent the area.

The appointment process can become highly contentious.

Last year, in her campaign for mayor C. Virginia Fields was criticized for using her community board appointments as a kind of political club, selecting people who supported her in her race and firing those who did not.

Fields fired two members of community board 2 on the West Side. City Councilmember Christine Quinn tried to have them reinstated, only to have Fields reject them again.

A few months later, Fields fired Madeline Wils, chair of community board 1 in lower Manhattan in the middle of her term, arguing that Wils had too many other commitments to do her job.

"The question is, 'Why was Virginia Fields so compelled and threatened that she felt she had to remove an effective leader?'" board member Bruce Ehrmann told the Downtown Express.

In an effort to take some of the personal calculations out of the appointment process, Stringer's office has created an independent screening panel made up of representatives from groups like League of Women Voters, the Municipal Art Society, New York Public Interest Research Group, and Citizens Union (the sister organization of Citizens Union Foundation, which publishes Gotham Gazette) to review and recommend applicants for the job.

3. Funding

Craig Hammerman, community board 6, Brooklyn

Each year the city allocates about $12 million for community board budgets, with each board receiving around $180,000. About 90 percent of the money is spent on personnel: each board hires a district manager and several staff members who do the administrative work, which leaves just $10,00 to $20,000 for everything else.

That is why Jeremy Laufer, the district manager of community board 7 in Sunset Park, Brooklyn, has been working without a computer for a year. "Simple things like paying for additional stamps are out of the question," said Laufer. "The biggest problem we face is a monetary problem."

Increasingly boards are doing independent fundraising to fill the gaps.

Faced with a lack of resources, Craig Hammerman, the district manager of Brooklyn's community board 6 in Park Slope, helped create "Friends of the Community Board," a non-profit dedicated solely to fundraising.

So far, the money has been spent on projects like an outdoor art installation and a survey to gather data on the needs of the community's young people.

While some community boards are trying to emulate the effort, others question why an official part of the city government must hold fundraisers to operate effectively.

"It is as if New York officials set up something called the Friends of the City Council," wrote Jake Mooney in the New York Times.

4. Conflict of Interest

David McWater, community board 3, Manhattan

For three and a half years, Robert Rinaolo, owner of the restaurants The Garage and Senior Swanky's, chaired the business committee for community board 2 in Greenwich Village, the group that makes recommendations on liquor license applications.

When an anonymous person accused Rinaolo of denying liquor license applications to his competitors, the city's Conflict of Interest Board recommended that he resign from the position.

Still, Rinaolo held onto the seat for another year and a half, until the local newspaper The Villager reported on the matter – and he was forced to resign.

Community Board members - just like elected officials - are subject to the city's ethics laws, which prohibit members from participating in decisions when their personal interests conflict with the board's actions.

But the rules are currently not enforced.

Stringer is currently working with the State Assembly to draft legislation to make it easier for community board chairs to fill out financial information forms that can be enforced by the city's Conflict of Interest Board.

But these steps won’t prevent David McWater, who is also a bar owner and former vice president of the New York Nightlife Association, from serving as the chair of community board 3 in the Lower East Side – and that is fine with Stringer, who defends McWater as “doing a good job.”

"Conflict of interest is not bad as long as you disclose it," said Stringer. "Nobody has said to me that there is any conflict, because he is very up front with what he does."

5. Lobbying

Community boards do not have the final power to approve or reject any development, liquor license, or street fair application; all of their decisions are simply recommendations to the other elected officials.

Still lobbyists take community boards seriously enough to try to influence their decisions.

In 2004, the second-largest payment to a lobbying firm in New York State came from Columbia University, who paid $692,783 to the lobbying firm of Kramer, Levin, Naftalis & Frankel. Columbia's lobbyists, who are working to expand the campus, regularly appear before community board 9.

"The developers have all the time, talent, and money," said Jorge Reyes-Montblanc, chair of community board 9 in Morningside Heights. "Community boards have to react in a short period of time to work done by experts over two or three years."

In an effort to allow community boards to at least know who lobbyists are and who they represent, the New City Council is considering legislation that will require lobbyists to register with an online database.

6. Training and Technology

Thomas Lowenhaupt, community board 3, Queens

Under the city charter, community boards must be consulted on new real estate developments or zoning changes that preserve manufacturing areas or make new residential neighborhoods. Community boards are also built into the city’s Unified Land Use Review Process so that residents can have a say in future building.

It is arguably a community board’s only source of real power and most important role.

But most members have little or no experience in how to navigate the complicated regulations. And even when they do take the initiative to try to learn, they do not have the resources to gain the expertise and information they need.

"Community boards should have access to planning tools and data," said Martin Collins, chair of community board 12 in Washington Heights. "We can't look at a hypothetical zoning layout. We don't have the technology to do that."

As a result, the rest of city government does not take the process seriously; only seven community based plans have been adopted by the city in the last 16 years.

Many community boards struggle with even more basic things: 19 of the city 59 boards, for example, don't even have a Web site, according to the directory on official New York City government Web site.

"I've been trying for 15 years to get the city to put resources into helping community boards communicate with each other and with residents," said Thomas Lowenhaupt, who serves on community board 3 in Jackson Heights, Queens. "We've had absolutely zero support."

To try to give community boards the tools they need, the Manhattan borough president is planning training sessions on land use, ethics, and even how to run a meeting. His office is also hiring three urban planners assigned to work with local boards on land use issues. In addition, 12 graduate student interns will be paired with each community board to help provide training and assistance.

Advocates for community-based planning believe that if given the right tools, New Yorkers can help shape a better future for the city.

“Cities across the nation and the world as diverse as Seattle, Washington and Porto Allegro, Brazil have embraced community-based planning as the way to do business,” wrote MicaĂ©la Birmingham and Eve Baron of the Municipal Art Society. “Although the process is never easy, a true commitment to a planning process beginning with local visions results in faster, less costly, and more innovative planning and development.”


Susan Sipprelle and Katie Redmon also contributed to this article.

RELATED ARTICLES:

Community Boards: The History and Powers (Gotham Gazette)

311, Noise and Community Boards (Gotham Gazette)

Summit Calls For Community Planning Reform (Gotham Gazette)

Tech Lags in Community Boards (Gotham Gazette)

RELATED LINKS:

Elevating Citizen Government: A Blueprint to Reform and Empower Manhattan's Community Boards (in pdf)
A report from Scott Stringer outlining problems and solutions.

List of NYC's Community Boards

 

Teen Curfew?


In a car with my boyfriend and some of our friends, I was listening to the loud bass of the song “Gasolina” by the reggaeton artist Daddy Yankee, when I looked at my watch. It was already 10:03 p.m. and we were just heading to a movie theater. “I’m having second thoughts,” I said. “Remember, I have to be home early.”

“Damn, Jen, you’re 18,” one of my friends complained from the back seat. “Why do you have to be home so early?” But I decided to go home. The last time I had stayed out past my curfew, my mother punished me by taking away my phone, and forbidding me from going out, for a week.

Now, parents like my mother are not the only New Yorkers who think a curfew is a good idea . Some members of the New York City Council would like a citywide curfew for teenagers. The curfew would keep anyone under the age of 18 off the streets and out of public places between midnight and 6 a.m. During those hours, police could stop anyone who looked like a minor and ask for proof of age. It would affect the 24 percent of the city’s residents who are under 18.

In 2004, two Republican members of the New York City Council, Dennis Gallagher of Queens and James Oddo of Staten Island, proposed the curfew for the city, and while nothing has come of it yet, Gallagher said he is going to try to get the council to vote on the proposal this year.

“It’s about helping children,” said Gallagher. “There are those who may be out past curfew.” Under this proposed law, “you could send them home. A large number of them may be getting in trouble.”

Teens caught after midnight could be required to perform up to 25 hours of community service for their first offense. A second offense could result in 50 hours of community service.

Parents May Be Fined, Businesses Held Liable

Their parents could be held responsible, too. If they let their children out past midnight, they could be fined up to $75 for the first offense.

Business owners and their employees would be held liable under the law if they knowingly allowed kids to hang out at their businesses after midnight. They could get fined up to $250 for a first offense.

There would be several exceptions to the proposed law. Minors could be out after midnight if accompanied by a parent, guardian or an adult age 21 or older, or if they were working or traveling directly to or from their workplace.

Would It Reduce Crime?

Several parents I interviewed are in favor of the citywide curfew. They argue that the curfews are necessary to keep young people out of trouble. They also say that teenagers are more likely to get in trouble late than they would during daylight. With a curfew, police wouldn’t have to wait for teens to commit crimes before moving young people indoors.

By keeping young people off the streets at night, parents say curfews will protect teens from becoming victims of crime.

After curfews were implemented in San Diego, California, violent crime by juveniles dropped by 20 percent and violent crime against juveniles dropped by 40 percent. In Dallas, Texas, and New Orleans, Louisiana, juvenile arrests dropped by about 20 percent after curfews were put in place.

But teens and others who argue against curfews say that the public is misinformed about the number of crimes committed by teens. A five-year-old report entitled “Off Balance: Youth, Race and Crime in the News” demonstrated this: 1998 was a year in which violent crime by youth was at its lowest point in 25 years. Nevertheless, 62 percent of that people surveyed in that year believed that juvenile crime was on the rise.

The study also found that when youth appear in the news it is frequently connected with violence, even though youth do not commit the majority of violent crimes. A close look at 840 newspaper stories and 109 network news segments that appeared across the nation in 1993 found that 40 percent of newspaper stories and 48 percent of television stories about young people were about violence. When it came to children, there was more overall coverage of crime and violence than of all other policy issues combined, the study found.

Here in New York City, where juvenile arrests accounted for only four percent of the total arrests in 1999, the New York City Youth Media Watch found that New York Times articles published between January and March 2000 over-represented youth crime and school violence. Moreover, reporters most frequently quoted police about youth crime, as opposed to teens themselves or the adults in their lives.

It’s hard to tell which came first – the media’s associating youth with violence or the public’s fear of youth in general. Either way, "In an environment in which fear of youth crime and actual crime are so out of sync,” writers of the Off-Balance report found, policies affecting young people, like teen curfews, “are bound to be influenced."

Would It Increase Safety?

Many parents, like my mother Arelis Morron, say they believe in curfews not because they think their kids are going to commit crime, but because they worry about their kids’ safety. “It’s very dangerous to be out in the streets so late at night, especially for young girls,” my mother told me. “There are many men out there who have perverted thoughts and will not let anything stand in their way to accomplish them.”

I worry about my safety too. Before I met my boyfriend who has a car, when I violated curfew in the past, I ended up walking the 15 minutes back home from public transportation by myself. I’d get scared and tried to watch for people who were walking behind me.

Even many teens I know understand that curfews might be a good idea, even if they don’t like them.

“Parents try to teach you good morals and they want everything that is best for you,” said my friend Michael Frankowski, 18, a recent graduate from Christ the King HS in Queens, who now attends Farmingdale University. “That’s why they give you curfews.”

Not the Government’s Job?

But even many of the teens who do believe in curfews say that setting them is a parent’s or guardian’s job, not the government’s. And some believe that curfew laws can violate teenagers’ constitutional rights, like freedom of association and freedom of speech. (I’m pretty sure my boyfriend isn’t thinking about my constitutional rights, though, when he’s pressuring me to hang out and break my curfew.)

Me, I’ve had the same curfew since I was 16. Even though the proposed curfew would allow teens over 18 to stay out past midnight, I’d still have to be home by midnight at the latest. My friends think my mother is way too strict.

“I believe 18 is the age you should not have a curfew, because you know what is right from wrong and you are mature enough,” said my friend Jennifer Fernandez, 17, a recent graduate of Grover Cleveland HS, who now attends New York City College of Technology.

Of course my mother doesn’t agree, and I’m not so sure myself. Although I envy most of my girlfriends who do not have to be home until 2 or 3 a.m., I often think about them and wonder, “Do their parents realize that their daughters are out that late?”

Jennifer Morron, a freshman at LaGuardia Community College, is a writer for Youth Communication, publishers of New Youth Connections.

Instant Incumbents


A dismal turnout and an undemocratic nominating process were not the most alarming aspects of the so-called Special Election on the last day of February, when voters in three State Assembly districts that represent roughly 375,000 people in New York City picked new legislators in what was nearly a foregone conclusion:

  • Linda Rosenthal won the Assembly seat from the West Side of Manhattan, replacing Scott Stringer, who has become Manhattan borough president
  • Sylvia Friedman won the Assembly seat from the East Side of Manhattan to replace Steve Sanders, who has retired
  • Alan Maisel took the Assembly seat from the Canarsie/Mill Basin/Flatlands etc. district in Brooklyn, replacing his former boss Frank Seddio, who has taken over the borough’s newly created second Surrogate’s Court judgeship.

 

What is most alarming is that these new members, though technically elected for only the next six months, have become instant incumbents -- which means they are likely to remain in office for the next 20 years. Yes, they have to run for re-election this fall, but as incumbents they will have the full power of their office and the support of their political party. And being an incumbent in New York means never having to say goodbye.

Staying Forever

State Senator John Marchi has been in office for 49 years. But more to the point, in the past 22 years, there have been only 30 instances when incumbents in the New York State legislature have been defeated in a general election, according to a report by the New York Public Interest Research Group. Since all 212 members are up for election every two years, this means there were only 30 incumbent defeats in more than 2,000 races.

In another survey, the National Conference of State Legislatures cited that in the 2002 elections only eight percent of the New York State Senate and 16 percent of the New York State Assembly were not returned to office -- one of the lowest turnover rates in the country.

The Incumbent Advantage

As Gotham Gazette has explained before in the online game, “Donkey Con (Elephant Evasion),” politicians are re-elected at staggering rates because of the state’s incumbent protection racket:

Access to the ballot: Incumbents have an easier time both getting on the ballot and assuring that any potential challengers stay off of it. Ballot-bumping is New York’s bloodsport – the process by which politicians hire election lawyers conversant with the state’s arcane election law to comb their rival’s nominating petitions to find the slightest errors, so that they can be stricken from the ballot. Incumbents are not alone in engaging in this practice, but they have the resources – the backing of their political party, the troops, and the money – to be the strikers rather than the stricken.

Name recognition: An unquantifiable advantage of incumbency is the name recognition it provides. Voters frequently head to the polls on Election Day armed with selections for big ticket offices such as president, governor or mayor. Local races do not garner as much interest, so voters tend to vote for familiar names.

Political Parties And Campaign Cash Incumbents use their party organizations to reach out to more voters.

Both the Republican and Democratic organizations in New York have extensive funding mechanisms to re-elect members of the Senate and Assembly. In the most recent election cycle, the Center for Public Integrity reported that the Democratic Assembly Campaign Committee spent $5.6 million while the minority Republican Assembly Campaign Committee contributed $2.1 million to Republican candidates. In the Senate, the Senate Republican Campaign Committee spent $9.5 million to hold on to their slim majority and the Democrats spent $1.4 million to fund their State Senators in office.

Powers of incumbency: As elected officials, members have the power to secure funding through member items for special neighborhood projects and provide various constituent services. During campaign season, they can “call in their chits” for having provided these services. Those who have been the beneficiaries of the legislator’s favors might fear the closing of the tap if they were to publicly support a challenger.

Others benefits of incumbency include:

  • Multiple district-wide mailings funded by tax payer dollars
  • Unparalleled access to the community through speeches and official legislative events
  • Fundraisers in Albany during legislative session that are well attended by lobbyists

Inadequacies of Incumbency

A permanent legislature doesn’t just hurt the cause of democracy, it goes directly against the interests of the voters. It deters qualified candidates from seeking office and thus stymies fresh ideas. Legislators are less accountable to the public, and more beholden to party leaders. It is no coincidence that the New York State legislature, with among the smallest turnovers in the nation, has been labeled the most dysfunctional in the nation, the legislators weak and non-responsive, deferring to the Assembly Speaker and the Senate Majority Leader.

For the voter, incumbency means there are no real choices on Election Day: In some races there are no challengers at all; in most, the results are a foregone conclusion. The lack of options diminishes voter participation and is reflected in turnout rates. No more than 30,000 voters participate in Assembly and State Senate races in each district where there is an incumbent, and it is often a lot less.

The lack of choices and the depressed voter turnout amount to voters rubberstamping party choices on Election Day – a kind of social promotion for elected officials.

Overcoming Incumbency

One solution that obliterates the problems of incumbency is term limits. A recent survey conducted by Sienna College Research Institute found that 68 percent of respondents support term limits for state legislators. In New York City, voters established through referendum term limits for citywide office, barring incumbents from seeking more than two terms. On a statewide level, the legislature would have to pass measures to limit the amount of time they can serve in office.

There are other ways of promoting competitive elections – through reform of the process of redistricting and by public financing of campaigns in a system similar to that set up by the New York City Campaign Finance Board. The Sienna College survey found 74 percent favored redistricting done by an independent non-partisan commission. Currently there is a bill in the Assembly (A6287) that proposes such reform.

Amy Ngai is program associate for Citizens Union Foundation, which publishes Gotham Gazette. 

 



Print Friendly and PDF

Editor's Choice


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